Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	best_a	everlasting_a	good_a	66	3	2.1545	3	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15733	An ansvvere to a popish pamphlet, of late newly forbished, and the second time printed, entituled: Certaine articles, or forcible reasons discouering the palpable absurdities, and most notorious errors of the Protestants religion. By Anthony Wotton	Wotton, Anthony, 1561?-1626.; Wright, Thomas, d. 1624. Certaine articles or forcible reasons.	1605 (1605)	STC 26002; ESTC S120304	112,048	194

Protestants account good works to bee sinnes which they acknowledge both to be commaunded and also accepted of God Yea more then that to be wrought in the faithfull by the spirit of God and to haue a reward prepared for them in heauen But that which the Protestants teach concerning sinne in good works is that our Corruption distaines the best works of Gods spirit in vs so that not only they cannot be meritorious to the obteining of euerlasting life but also deserue eternall damnation in the iust district and perfect iudgement of God in whose sight nothing that is any way vncleane can appeare to receaue allowance but onely by his mercifull goodnes that pardons the sinne for Christes sake and affords the worke acceptance Yet doth not this admixtion of our sinnefulnesse change the nature of the worke as if it made that dutie a sinne which is of it selfe obedience but takes from the particular act all power to iustifie and deserue at Gods hands which otherwise it hath vpon Couenant betwene God and vs. For example Praying geuing of Almes and such like are not made sinnes by any Corruption of ours but the actions of these vertues being performed by vs vnperfectly and sinfully as they alwayes are if they bee examined in the seueritie of Gods iustice wil be condemned as sinnefull not rewarded as righteous because we haue desiled them And this himselfe acknowledgeth afterwards for our opinion where he sayes that wee affirme the best works wee can do are infected with deadly sinne But it is not all one to say that Fasting praier almes deeds c. and all good works done by vs are infected with deadly Sin and to auouch that fasting prayer almesdeeds and all good works are deadly sinnes He that sayes the body is infected with some disease doth not say the body is that disease But concerning deadly sinne if thereby hee vnderstaÌ„d notorious and willfull breaking of the law of God by some greiuous transgression we deny that all good works are so much as infected with dead y sinne For we knowe and professe that in the whole course of our obedience to God wee are ordinarily free from such sinnes and that the Corruption which defiles our works proceeds rather from weakenes then willfullnes As for those actions of ours which haue such grosse sinnes adioyned to them wee deny that they can any way truely challenge so much as the bare name of good workes in the sight of God Such are those vaineglorious and hypocriticall deeds of the Pharisies Which our Sauiour condemnes and such to come neerer home are popish good works Because they are grounded vpon an euill intent namely a purpose and Conceit of iustifying the doers thereof deseruing Ex rigore iustitia in the rigor of iustice euerlasting glory of almighty God This I auouch generally of all their good workes whatsoeuer and particularly of all the. 3. here named I say further that in some part for the very substance of them they are no better nor other then sinnes Fasting is not of it selfe any good worke as if it made a man more acceptable to God then moderate eating doth but in 2. respects it is vpon iust occasion to bee vsed either for testifying of our humiliation by acknowledging our selues vnworthy so much as to taste of any of Gods creaturs or els for the better preparing of our selues to call vpon God by prayer But Popish fasting accounts the very absteining from meat a parte of holines and not simply from meat but from some kinds of meat So that a man may fully and truely keepe a popish fast though he neither be humbled in the sense of his sinne nor consideration of Gods wrath dâ—e thereunto nor performe any extraordinary dutie of praier nor haue any occasion of fasting but perhaps of the Contrary Yea though he gorge and glut himselfe with all kinds of dainties and fill his stomacke and head too with most delicate wines Alwaies proâ—ided that hee touch not any flesh or whit meat And hence it is that a Popish fast by way of a prouerb signifies as much as a costly delicious baÌ„quet No this kind of fast is so far from beeing a good worke that it is meerely a carnall and superst tious worke of the flesh haâ—ing not so much as the outward forme of a fast which consists in refraining all kind of sustenance not this or that only Prayer indeed is of another nature as being a duty by which in it selfe God is properly honored whether it be by petition or thanksgiuing But Popish prayer standeth in vaine repetition of Pater-nosters Aue-maryes Creeds whereof the two last also are nothing lesse then prayers and that many times for a penance And out of doubt they are not much deceaued therein for it is a grieuous punishment of blindnesse and senselesnesse to imagine that such toylesome lip-labour can please God Yet all this might haue the better shew of prayer if that which is babled ouer were vnderstood but for the most part the common people pray as Parrats speake altogether by rote without knowledge what they say Shall I adde herevnto that the prayers which ordinarily are made by poore ignorant soules are not made to God but to creatures insomuch that it hath bene held here in England and so no doubt is yet in Popish countries for a certaine marke of an heretick for a man to offer vp his owne prayers to God in Iesus Christ without the mediation of some Saint or other All which considered we truly auouch that this Popish praying is sinne And the like we affirme of some almesgiuing howsoeuer we gladly acknowledge that the duty of it selfe is one of those sacrifices with which God is highly pleased But Heb. 13. 16. to giue almes first to be prayed for after death secondly to the singing of Masses and Diâ—â—ges thirdly to the mainteinance of idle bellies fourthly to the impouerishing and many times vndoing of the poore wife and children is no better then infidelitie if the Apostle truely say that he 1. Tim. 5. 8. which hath not care of his owne especially of his domesticals is worse then an Infidell Therefore if we speake of these workes as they are done and allowed by the Papists we say that they are deadly sinnes not only faulty by reason of infirmitie which for the most part is the estate of those good workes that the faithfull in weaknesse performe Yet are they not by reason thereof deadly sinnes nor infected with deadly sinne but only as all sinnes how light account soeuer the Papists make of them deserue eternall death Neither doth it follow vpon the graunt of this infection and desert that therefore they are to be avoyded no more then that a sicke man is bound to starue himselfe by fasting as Pomponius Atticus absurdly did because his feeding continued his disease and that as Hippocrates says the more you nourish some sycke bodyes the more you corrupt them The sinne indeed which

to God for deliuerance from the punishment make me to heare ioy c. It is manifest that this can no way v. â—1 aduantage the Papists because he intreats onely for the assurance of forgiuenes which was to be testified vnto his soule by the feeling of Gods loue and his owne reioycing therein but what makes this for popish Purgatory after death or proud satisfaction in this life for Dauid promised noe satisfaction but a contrite spirit and a broken heart which is no more then the first entrance into popish absolution neither by praying for the ioy of the spirit doth hee beg any exemption from purgatory because a man may haue that after diuers sinnes committed in some good measure and yet be lyable to the fire of purgatory by omitting some duties which he is enioyned by his ghostly father to performe Now the 32. psalme runs in the same maner Blessed is the man c. here is mention of hauing wickednes forgiuen sinne couered iniquity not imputed of punishmeÌ„t not releast not a word or letter Let vs go forward whence Psa 32. 1. v. 2. v 3. proceeded his roaring euen froÌ„ the guilt of his sinne not felt to be pardoned I acknowledged my sin c. I coÌ„fest my wickednes vnto thee thou forgauest the punishment of my sinne What punishment No doubt that which Dauid entreated for But the teÌ„porall punishmeÌ„ts were not forgiueÌ„ I cal theÌ„ as the Papists do for both the Child dyed and Absolon was raised vp out of Dauids owne house lay with his fathers wiues in the sight of the sonne What question can there be then whether Dauid 2. Sam. 12. 14. 18. 2. Sam. 12. 11. 16. 22. prayed for the forgiuenesse of his sinnes euen in respect of the eternall punishment for al he did beleeue that it was granted him according to the word of God by the prophet Nathan Whereupon it necessarily ensues that the proposition is vntrue which condemns euery one of sinning grieuously against God that askes forgiuenes of his sins being assured by faith that they are forgiuen But for the better cleering of this point let vs also shape a direct answer to his proofes and afterwards set downe what we maintaine concerning praying for pardoÌ„ of our sinnes His first proofe is taken from an argument of parity or equality in this sort or forme If none but an Infidell or a mad maÌ„ would demaund of God the creation of the world the incarnation of Christ the institution of the Sacraments all which he is assured by faith are performed already then none but such an one will demaund pardon of his synnes which he beleeues already by faith God hath forgiuen The consequence of this proposition is feeble because it presumes an equalitie where there is none For we haue not the like measure of assurance for the forgiuenesse of our sinnes as we haue of these other points here signified as I haue shewed already and must say againe by and by in answere to the assumption Therefore though we should sinne greeuously in crauing those things of God which without all doubt we are assured he hath already done because we should but mocke him yet do we not sinne in like sort by desiring that wherof our weake faith must needs make some question I graunt we sinne by doubting through the weaknesse of our faith but I deny we sinne by praying because of that doubting Further we are to consider that there is a great difference betwixt these things euen in respect of their being past for the three former are absolutely dispatcht the later after a sort is euery day a doing because howsoeuer in the euerlasting purpose of God the sinnes of all the elect are already from all eternitie forgiuen yet they are in respect of vs and the actuall being of them day by day actually remitted and therefore we may without grieuous sinne and must vnlesse we will sinne greeuously daily craue pardon of God because we haue new sinnes dayly to be forgiuen The point will be made more plaine in the explication of our opinion But none but a mad man or Infidell will demaund of God the creation of the world the incarnation of Christ the institution of the Sacraments all which he is assured by faith are already giueÌ„ If a man be fully assured that these things are already accomplisht he cannot without sinne demaund of God the accomplishing of them but if there arise in his minde some doubt concerning the certainety thereof he may and must entreate the Lord to reueale the truth vnto him and to confirme vnto him the assurance of it though his doubting indeed is sinne yet haue we no iust cause nor sufficient warrant to condemne this doubting faith of flatte infidelitie as this rigorous Papist doth who neuer felt it should seeme what conflicts there are betwixt faith and frailty Now the Proposition and assumption being both faulty how can the conclusion be without fault Therefore this former proofe not being able to abide the proofe let vs trie the latter which must thus be applyed to the Authors purpose for the proofe of the first proposition Whosoeuer demaunds that which he hopes not to obtaine sinnes grieuously in demaunding it By not hoping to obtaine that which is demanded there D. is no reproofe implyed of praying without hope as if it were his meaning to exhort vs to trust or hope in God for that indeed concernes not this reason but he signifies that a man ought not to pray for that of the obteyning whereof there can be no hope because we are already in possession of it which proposition of his is onely so farre true as it belongs to him that knowes he hath the thing he prayes for And that appeares by his proofe for that which a man sees wherefore doth he hope it That is a man hath no reason to hope for that which he is sure he hath For hope is of things to Rom. 8. 24 come as also the words immediatly before plainely shew Hope that is seene is not hope Therefore he onely sinnes grieuously in praying for that he possesses who knowes he doth possesse that he prayes for But he that stands in doubt whether he haue the thing or no which he is desirous of may without this blame make meanes to get it though he haue it already because he is not certaine that he hath it howsoeuer it may be he hath some perswasion of the possession thereof But whosoeuer is assured by faith that his sinnes are forgiuâ—â— him in asking God pardon demaunds that which he hath no hope to obtaine The former answer of the measure of the assurance argues this assumption of falshood because a man may by faith truly beleeue that his sinnes are forgiuen and yet not fully or certainly be resolued thereof in regarde whereof he may and ought to sue for pardon But all true Protestants are assured by faith that their sinnes Principall assumptioÌ„ are

euen of as many as are indeed true Christians according to the practise of our doctrine But to come neerer to the point we are to vnderstand that the Protestants Doctrine of free wil is that no man hath power by nature either without the grace of Gods spirit to do any thing acceptable vnto God or to procure this grace to himselfe or to receaue it when it is offered For our present purpose it shal be ynough to speake a word or two of the last point not by way of proofe but declaration Whereas then we deny a man poâ—er to receaue the grace of God being offred we do not meane that this grace workes vpon him as on a stone or block but as on a reasonable creature No man beleeues but willingly onely the question is how it comes to pasle that when two men haue grace offred them the one beleeues the other doth nâ—t The Papist in this case fetcheth the difference frâ— the good vse of his free will that beleeues we ascribe it to the diuers working of Gods spirit in his heart not denying that he vseth his free will to speake as they doe better then the other but acknowledging that therefore he so vseth it because the spirit of God teacheth and inclines and ineuitably brings him so to vse it that the difference may be from God and not from man To what end saith he tends this doctrine If it be possible that any man should be so blinde as not to see I will venture the losse of so much time and labour as may serue to shew him You aske vs why we say that men are saued by Gods grace not by their owne freewill Forsooth because we would haue God reape the glory of their saluation the pride of mans nature beaten down theÌ„ more beholding to God then to themselues None of which can be if a man by his owne free will make difference betwixt himselfe and another to the receauing of faith For he may truly say to God that he is no more beholding to him then many a one that is euerlastingly damned nay then euery one might haue bene if he would For what did God for him that he was not as ready to doe for another how many haue had as much grace offred them as he and yet are not iustified No more had he bene if he had not by his owne free-will helpt himselfe in speciall maner wheras God failed him leauing all to his choise to be saued or not to be saued Is this to teach carnall libertie you will say yea because it maketh a man negligent in disposing and preparing his soule How so for the difference is made by God What then to what purpose is it forme to prepare my selfe I maruell you aske not to what purpose it is for you to beleeue Are you yet to learne that although the cause of all goodnesse be grace yet God requires our endeuours as meanes to the receauing of this grace Did you neuer heare that we holde it for a monstrous absurditie to promise our selues any thing from God without vsing the meanes to obtaine it The same also I answere to the doing of good workes after sanctification the successe and euent proceeds onely and certainly from the spirit of God who Phil. 2. 13. workes in vs both to will and to doe Yet are we bound to vse all good meanes for the stirring our selues vp to holynesse and freely and willingly doe we whatsoeuer good worke we do by the grace of Gods spirit Therefore this similitude of the sicke Asse sheweth the Authors dangerous sicknesse eyther of ignorance if he know not the truth we holde or of malice if against this knowledge he wilfully peruert it They defend say you that men are iustified by faith alone That is we defend that God requireth nothing of man to his iustification but only that by faith he rest vpon Iesus Christ to be iustified by his suffrings The generall ground of this opinion is the end of all things created viz. the glory of God that man may haue nothing to boast of but simply ascribe the praise of his iustification to God that iustified him Neither doth this doctrine scorne God in reiecting it as much as you list eyther flatly ouerthrow or in any part diminish true repentance sorrowe for sinnes mortification of passions and all other vertues which will plainely appeare both before and after iustification for what though we be iustified onely by faith who knowes not that it is vnpossible for any man ordinarily to cast of this naturall and Popish confidence which he hath in his owne righteousnesse and to feele necessitie of being iustified by Christ If first he discerne not his damnable estate and being moued with horror thereof she from himselfe to Christ for iustification by pardon of sinne Now after a man is iustified can the knowledge of the meanes by which he is iustified kill these vertues in him Let the meanes and cause of his iustification be what you will If he may beleeue he is iustified and the Papists graunt some men haue knowne and more may know it at least by reuelation by your reason this effect must ensue So that it ariseth not from the doctrine of the meanes but from that of knowledge or assurance But how should these vertues be abolisht by iustification by faith only when as euerie man that is iustified is also sanctified Whosoeuer hath his sinnes forgiuen him hath withall the power of sinne abated in him How shall we that are dead Rom. 6. 2. to sinne liue any longer therein No man hath any incouragement by free iustification through faith to continue in sinne For if he be not sanctified he is not iustified If he be sanctified he is dead to sinne and aliue to righteousnesse True it is that prophane wretches will obiect against the Gospell now as they did in the Apostles time But this was not then nor is now any sufficient reason why the truth of God should be denyed or supprest for wicked mens abusing it to their owne damnation Yet perhaps you will reply that it is a more likly meanes to stir meÌ„ vp to repentance mortification and the practise of all vertues to teach them that they must deserue the first iustification of congruitie by their good preparation and fully make vp the measure of their second iustification by deseruing of condignitie for their good workes euerlasting life First let vs suppose it be likely in our corrupt iudgment yet may we not gratifie God with a lye nor doe euill that good may come of it And why should not we follow the practise of the Apostles whose course is in all their Epistles still to vrge grace in iustification and good workes for thankfulnesse not for merit yet we deny not but it is both warranted by the Scriptures and most conuenient to adde an edge to the workes of sanctification by threatning condemnation to sinners and promising reward to the

righteous But we deny that eyther of these enforcements of such exhortation in any part weakens the doctrine of free iustification by onely resting vpon Iesus Christ Which he may easily conceaue that hath a sincere purpose to glorifie God by the saluation of his chosen For he knowes that as much as is giuen to man for iustifying himselfe is taken from God God and man after this reckoning may part stakes God may haue glory for affording meanes of saluation and abilitie to vse those meanes man may be proud of the well vsing of that abilitie and iustifying of himselfe by the meanes afforded Yet if all men that are inabled did so helpe themselues there were lesse cause of boasting more reason to giue God the glory of iustification For it might well seeme to proceed from the grace that God imparts to them that they are iustified But when some vse it well some ill and this difference of well or ill vsing it flowes from the free-will of men by their owne power what a small part of glory is left to God in the seuerall iustification of those that are saued Hence it follows that the doctrine of iustification by workes preparatorie before a man is at all iustified by workes meritorious after he is begun to be iustified is dishonorable to God the death of all goodnesse in those very workes that are done Because the intent which our Papists magnifie so much is directly derogatorie froÌ„ the glory of God without the true and sincere purpose whereof no workes of any man baptised are one iott better then the morall actions of heathen men But the sonnes of the bond-woman being of a seruile nature respecting themselues either only or principally being ignorant and without feeling of the affection of childreÌ„ can neuer be perswaded that any sonne of God will performe duties of kindnesse and thankfulnesse to his father but must needs doe that he doth like a hireling for loue of wages And by such meanes our Papists would procure and deserue the perfect reconciliation of their soules with God as if we were not perfectly reconciled in Christ in whom God reconciled the world to himselfe not imputing their sinnes What is it to be reconciled to God but to haue Gods displeasure remoued his fauor fatherly loue vouchsafed to vs This hath Christ procured by his death and bloud-shedding the increase of our sanctification in vs by the dayly dying vnto sinne and rising againe vnto newnesse of life restores more perfectly the image of God decayed in vs by naturall corruption and manifold actuall transgressions but reconciles vs neuer awhit the more to God When the Prodigall sonne Luc. 15. 20 came home to his father starued and euill coloured in his body ragged and torne in his apparrell who can doubt for all this but he was fully reconciled to his father when he fell on his neck kissed embraced and entertained him but as his flesh euery day came better and better as his colour mended and waxed more fresh when he was arrayed according to his estate he did more liuely represent the sonne of such a father The same is our case in Christ by his suffrings are we wholy reconciled vnto God For we are made his Children but we begin dayly more and more to resemble him as we Ioa. 1. 12. Gal. 4. 4. 5. growe in holinesse of nature and conuersation Therefore let the Papists imagine that they reconcile themselues to God by mortification of passions and I know not what supposed vertues It is sufficient for vs that Christ hath by his bloud made our peace and put vs in possession of his fathers loue and fauour If this be a false fantasticall apprehension of Christs death and passion to relie wholy vpon him for reconcilation with God by his bloud and propitiation then his dying the Apostles preaching and our beleeuing is all in vaine How then doth this Doctrine tend to loosenesse especially if it be remembred that we shut al men out from iustificatioÌ„ that are not sanctified by the spirit of Christ They tell vs saith hee that faith anâ— good workes can not be seuered Would you knowe what faith he meanes only a perswasion of the truth of the Scripture euen such an one as the Diuil is said to haue and that with a Popish preparatorie good worke namely Feare The diuills beleeue and tremble Iac. 2. 19. But if they would speake any thing to the purpose they should proue these 3. things 1. that to beleeue in Iesus Christ iâ— nothing els but to be perswaded that these points that the Scriptures teach of Christ are true Which will neuer be done as long as that famous distinction is retemed Credere Deum deo in deum To beleeue there is a God to beleeue that all that God sayes is true to beleeue or trust in God or to rest vpon him and as our Nor theme men speake very plainely and significantly to beleeue on God Secondly that a man thus relying vpon Christ to be saued by him for al this beleuing is not iustified contrary to the whole course of the Gospell Thirdly they must shew vs that a man may be iustified and yet not sanctified then which nothing is more repugnant to popery For the popish Doctors teach vs that to be iustified is To haue sinne abolisht and grace infused into vs whereby and for which wee are as they say truely and habitually iust in the sight of God If they answere that these maâ—ters haue bin already proued by their Diuins we reply that ours haue shewed the insufficiency of their proofes and that if either this accuser or any other Papist will vrge those scriptures that haue bin aledged to this end any further or bring any that yet haue not bin brought he shall receaue by the grace of God true and sufficient satisfaction if truth will satisfie him In the meane while it shall suffice to put this Author in minde that his experience failes him beeing made not of those that beleeue in Christ but of them that beleeue Christ or at the most geue credit to those things which are spoken of him in the Gospell Whereunto I ad that neither faith which hath force to remoue mountaines is so noble as that which makes a man heire of heauen nor because that faith can be without Charitie Therefore either he that beleeues in Christ can bee without iustification or he that is iustifyed without sanctification They assure vs saith he that faith once had can neuer be lost What then This vaine securitie saith he opens the gap to all libertine sensuality If he speake of the euent all experience refuts him because no men liue more soberly and Christianly then they that haue the greatest measure of this perswasion And indeed it cannot bee otherwise For this is no where but where the spirit of God is and where he is there only is true sanctification If he blame the doctrine in respect of

Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Text snippets containing the quad