Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	worthy_a	write_v	writing_n	26	3	8.4819	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49183	An apology for the ministers who subscribed only unto the stating of the truths and errours in Mr. William's book shewing, that the Gospel which they preach, is the old everlasting Gospel of Christ, and vindicating them from the calumnies, wherewith they (especially the younger sort of them) have been unjustly aspersed by the letter from a minister in the city, to a minister in the countrey.	Lorimer, William, d. 1721.	1694 (1694)	Wing L3073; ESTC R22599	321,667	222

to the end And then he proceeds saying This is the way Beloved wherein we find Jesus Christ our saving health the High Priest of our Offerings the Guardian and Helper of our weakness Lastly In Page 102 105 106. He that hath Love in Christ let him keep the Commandments of Christ c. Blessed are we Beloved if we have done the Commandments of God in the Concord of Love 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that through Love our Sins may be forgiven us For it is written Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered Blessed is the Man unto whom the Lord imputeth not sin neither is there guile in his mouth This Blessedness hath been unto those who were chosen by God through Jesus Christ our Lord to whom be Glory for ever and ever Amen Thus Clement who was Paul's Fellow-Labourer Phil. 4.3 and who may well be presumed to know his Mind as to these Matters and we see evidently by his Words that he held as we do that Faith and Repentance are both antecedently necessary to Justification and pardon of sin and further that sincere Obedience to Christ's Commandments in a course of holy living is indispensably necessary to the obtaining of Eternal Life and Glory in the Everlasting Kingdome of our most Glorious God and Saviour But some may possibly say what did Clement mean by writing as he doth that our sins are forgiven us through Love Is that an Orthodox Expression We Answer What did our Saviour mean by saying Mat. 6.14 15. If ye forgive men their trespasses your heavenly Father will also forgive you but if ye forgive not men their trespasses neither will your Father forgive your trespasses And again what did our Saviour mean by saying Mark 11.25 When ye stand praying forgive if ye have ought against any that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive you your trespasses Were these Orthodox Expressions If they were Orthodox as doubtless they were and it were Blasphemy to think otherwise then so is the expression of Clement Orthodox for the Expressions are alike upon the matter and the meaning is the same Clement by saying that our sins are forgiven through Love meant no more but that our forgiving our Neighbour his Trespasses against us which is an Act of Love is a Means of God's appointment whereby we obtain the forgiveness of our sins from God through Christ We do not doubt but this was Clement's meaning and we are sure it was our Saviours When he said Mark 11.25 If ye have ought against any forgive that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive you Our blessed Lord who is the faithful Witness makes God's forgiving us to be the End and our forgiving our Neighbour to be a Means indispensably necessary to be used by us for obtaining that End So that we obtain the forgiveness of our sins through Love in a very sound and Orthodox sense even as sound and Orthodox as Christ's Gospel is In the second place we bring the foresaid Testimony of Origen to prove that the real change which is wrought in the Soul by a sincere Repentance is antecedently necessary to dispose and prepare us for obtaining the promised Blessing of Pardon of sin which is an essential part of Justification It is in his Third Book against Celsus of the Cambridge Edition pag. 154. The Passage in Origen begins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Which we will give the sense of in English for the use of our Authour After these things viz. which had been objected and answered before he Celsus takes upon him to charge us with that which is not granted by the more rational judicious Believers though perhaps it may be thought so by some foolish or ignorant Christians that as some Men are overcome by and under the Dominion of a tender compassionate natural frame and temper of Mind so God being overcome by and under the power of a merciful compassionate nature towards them that are in misery he relieves and pardons miserable Men though they be wicked if withal they be of a pitiful merciful nature● But though they be otherwise good men yet God rejects them if they be not of such a pitiful compassionate Nature Which is most unjust For according to our Faith God doth not relieve so as to pardon and receive into his Favour any wicked Man unless he be first turned unto virtue that is converted like as he doth not reject any that is now become a good Man But neither doth he relieve or shew mercy unto any Man of a merciful Nature meerly because he is of a merciful Nature taking the word Mercy in the sense that the vulgar or common People use it in but those that greatly condemn themselves for their sins so as thereupon to mourn and bewail themselves as lost and undone by reason of the evil they have done and withal give evidence of a signal change such as becomes true Penitents God grants to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Grace of Repentance that is the Gracious Fruit and Benefit promised to Repentance even to them who have changed their most wicked course For unto such is given as by Act of Oblivion a pardon of their past sins through the vertue that comes to dwell in their Souls and casts out the vice and corruption that possessed them before Or if at first they attain not unto a confirmed habit of vertue yet there is a notable change in the Soul which proceeds so far as that it is sufficient according to the proportion of it to purge out and take away the great abundance of wickedness that was in it before so as it can hardly ever get into the Soul again Thus far Origen In which Testimony of his there are several things worthy of our observation 1. Origen did not write this meerly as a private Christian or Teacher of the Church declaring what was his own private Opinion but as the great and famous Apologist in his time for Christ the Christian Church and for the Truth of the Christian Religion against the Heatheus particularly against Celsus a very learned Heathen who had written learnedly and spitefully against Christ and against Christians and the Christian Religion 2. Whereas Celsus had charged Christians with an absurd impious Opinion as that they believed That God pardoneth wicked Mens sins and receives them into his Favour if they be of a good Nature of a soft pitiful compassionate Temper before there pass a real change upon them before they repent before they turn from sin and return unto God in Heart and Affection Origen deuyed the Charge and affirmed that no rational intelligent judicious Christian believed any such thing that if any Christian did at all believe that God justified and pardoned a wicked Man before he had repented of his sins and returned unto the Lord they must be some foolish simple ignorant People and yet he would not absolutely grant to his Adversary that there

if he be ignorant of this matter of fact let not his ignorance make him boldly deny it before he know what evidence there is for the Truth of it We give him these two Arguments to prove the Truth of this matter of fact that Pelagius denyed universal Redemption 1. It is known and acknowledged by all who have any understanding of these matters and our Author himself knows it That Pelagius denyed Original sin from whence it follows by necessary Consequence that he must needs also deny Universal Redemption of all Mankind For Infants that dye in their Infancy before they commit any actual sin are a considerable part of Mankind the Infants who from the beginning of the World have dyed and who daily do dy and hereafter will be dying to the Worlds end and that both within and without the Church before they commit any actual sin will make up a vast number even many Millions of the race of Mankind But Pelagius denyed that these Infants who so dye in their Infancy have any sin either Original or Actual to be redeemed from and therefore he must needs deny also that they were Redeemed and consequently he must needs deny universal Redemption of all Mankind Where there is no manner of sin there is no manner of punishment due for sin and consequently no room for Redemption by the Blood and Death of Christ either from sin or punishment But Pelagius denied that Infants who dy in their Infancy have any manner of sin or that any manner of punishment is due to them for their sin Therefore Pelagius denyed that such Infants are Redeemed by the Blood and Death of Christ either from sin or punishment and consequently he denied universal Redemption 2. Our Second Argument to prove the truth of this matter of Fact is from the testimony of Augustin who is a very competent witness because he lived at the same time with Pelagius and wrote against him and confuted his Errors and Heresies Now Augustin in his writings against Pelagius and his Disciples testifies plainly that they denyed universal Redemption on the account aforesaid For thus he writes Contra duas Epistolas Pelagianorum lib. 2. ad Bonifacium cap. 2. Manichaei dicunt Deum bonum non omnium naturarum esse creatorem Pelagiani dicunt Deum non esse omnium aetatum in hominibus mundatorem salvatorem liberatorem Catholica utrosque redarguit c. The Manicheans say That the good God is not the Creator of all natures The Pelagians say That God is not the Purifier the Saviour the Deliverer or Redeemer of all Ages among men But the Catholick Church refutes them both defending both against the Manichaeans the Creature of God least any nature should be denyed to be made by him and also against the Pelagians that the human nature which is lost in all Ages might be sought out and saved Again the same Augustin in several other of his Books proves against the Pelagians from 2 Cor. 5.14 both that all mankind even Infants who dy in their Infancy Lib. 20. de Civit. dei cap. 6. contra Julian lib. 6. cap. 4. are guilty of Original sin and also that in some sense all are Redeemed by the death of Christ In the Second Book of his imperfect Work against Julian a Pelagian Bishop Chap. 28. having alledged 2 Cor. 5.14 15. We thus judge that if one died for all then were all dead And that he died for all c. He adds Unde colligitur quod dicit Apostolus ergo omnes mortui sunt pro omnibus mortuus est Dic apertè mortui parvuli non sunt qui peccatum nullum habem morte pro se Christi in quâ baptizentur non opus habent Jam dic evidenter quod latenter sentis quoniam sa●is prodis tuâ disputatione quod sentis From which words we gather or inferr for what the Apostle saith Therefore all are dead and he Christ died for them all say plainly Infan●s are not dead who have no sin They have no need of the death of Christ for them into which they should be baptized Now speak out evidently that which thou thinkest secretly for thou do'st sufficiently discover by thy Disputation what it is that thou thinkest By this and the forgoing passage of Augustin it is very evident that the Pelagians first denied that Infants had any Original sin Secondly That Christ died for Infants to Redeem them either from sin or punishment of sin For though they declined to speak out and say plainly that Christ died not for Infants yet they really believed and held it for a truth that he did not dy for Infants to Redeem them because they were not guilty of any evil either of sin or punishment from which they could be Redeemed By these two Arguments our Author and others may plainly see that the Pelagians denied universal Redemption by the blood-shedding and death of Christ And this being so how is it possible that we should be middle-way-men who hold universal Redemption and yet that our cause should be Coincident with that of Pelagius who denied universal Redemption Surely our Author cannot think both these things to be true of us without supposing us to believe both parts of a contradiction at once But whatever he himself may be able to do as to believing of contradictions he is greatly mistaken if he think that we have so strong a Faith or so wide a Swallow For we that know our selves much better than he doth declare sincerely that we were never Masters of such a Faith as can believe known contradictions and that we could never make both ends of a contradiction meet so as to be able to swallow them down both at once Either then our Author knew that the Pelagians deny Original sin and universal Redemption or he knew it not if he knew that they deny both how can he be excused from lying against his Conscience in telling the World in Print such a known untruth and contradictious falshood that we are Middle-way-men and that our cause is Coincident with that of Pelagius that is that we are for the middle-way and the extreme way for the middle-way and not for the middle-way at the same time But if he knew not what the cause of Pelagius was and is with what Faith and Conscience could he say that our cause is Coincident or is the same with the cause of Pelagius Is it lawful for him and his judicious Observers to defame the Ministers of Christ and to charge them with Pelagian Heresie and Confederacy with Pelagian Hereticks when they do not well know what the Pelagian Heresie was Hath our Author a priviledge boldly to affirm what he doth not know nor understand And is he fit to inform the people of that which he is ignorant of and wherein he needs to be informed himself We expect the People for whose Information he pretends to write will be more just and reasonable than to believe the Calumnies

this Father Why even God for none is so much a Father as he none so affectionate as he Thorefore he shall receive thee his Son although thou hast prodigally spent that which thou hadst received from him although thou returnest naked yet he will receive thee because thou art returned And he will rejoyce more in thy return than in another mans sobriety Sed si poeniteat ex animo but it is on condition that thou repent from thy heart that thou compare thy hunger-starved condition with the plenty of thy Fathers hired Servants that thou forsake the swine those unclean beasts that thou come back to thy Father though he be offended with thee saying Father I have sinned nor am I worthy to be now called thine By this we plainly see that Tertullian preached the necessity of sincere Repentance antecedently to the obtaining pardon of sin Next to Tertullian we alledge blessed Cyprian for a Witness of the same Truth Thus then he writes Dominus loquitur c. Operum Cypr. Tom. 1. Epist 18. edit Colon. Agrip. An. 1617. The Lord speaketh and saith to whom shall I look but to him that is humble and still and trembleth at my words Seeing we ought to be all such they then much more ought to be such whose Duty it is to endeavour that after a grievous fall they may obtain God's favour and mercy by true Repentance and great humility In his 52 Epistle to Antonianus page 59. Dominus in Evangelio c. The Lord in the Gospel setting forth the goodness and kind affection of God the Father saith What man is there of you who if his Son ask of him bread will give him a stone Or if he ask a fish will give him a Serpent If ye then who are evil know how to give good gifts unto your Children how much more shall your heavenly Father give good things to them that ask him The Lord here makes a comparison between a Carnal Father or a Father of the Flesh and the Eternal and large goodness and kindness of God the Father Now if it be so that this evil sinful Father upon Earth who hath been grievously offended by his sinful and wicked Son yet if afterwards he see him reformed and having forsaken the sins of his former Life and being by the sorrow of Repentance amended and changed to sober and good manners and to the Discipline of Innocency or to a Holy course of Life he both rejoyceth and is glad and having received him whom he formerly had cast off he embraces him with the desire of a Fatherly Joy How much-more doth that One and True Father who is Good Merciful and Kind yea Goodness Mercy and Kindness it self rejoyce in the Repentance of his Children neither doth he threaten wrath to the penitent nor punishment to them that mourn and lament But he rather promiseth them pardon and favour Whence the Lord in the Gospel saith They are blessed who mourn for he that mourns moves compassion Whereas he that is stubborn and proud heaps up to himself the wrath and punishment of the judgment to come And in the same Epistle page 60. Scim●s juxtd Divinar●m Scripturdrum fidem ductore hortatore ipso Deo ad agendum poenitentiam peccatores redigi veniam atque indulgentiam poenitentibus non denegari We know according to the Faith of the Holy Scriptures God himself being both the Author and Exhorter that Sinners are brought to Repentance and also that forgiveness and favour is not denyed them when they do repent And in his eighth Epistle to the Clergy and People after he had told them that according as it had been revealed and foretold by prophecy the Enemy had got power over them and had raised a terrible Persecution against them because of their Divisions and Contentions their breaking the Lords Commandments and sleepy way of Prayer and after he had most passionately exhorted them to give themselves much to Watching and prayer to earnest frequent fervent Prayer Night and Day and had pressed them thereunto both by precept and example of Christ and his Apostles who spent Days and Nights in Prayer and had likewise encouraged them thereunto by telling them that Christ prayed not for himself and his own sins but for them and for their sins he added as it is in pag. 16. of that Book Quod si pro nobis c. i. e. which if it be so that he the Lord Jesus labours and watches and prays for us and for the pardon of our sins how much the more should we continue in Prayer and Supplication We have Jesus Christ our Lord and God to be Advocate and Intercessour for our Sins if so be or on condition that we repent of our sins past and confessing and being sensible of our Faults whereby we now at this present time offend the Lord we promise that for time to come we will walk in his ways and fear his Commandments By this that we have cited and by much more that we could cite out of Cyprian it may evidently appear that that blessed Martyr of Jesus was far from being of Opinion that God pardons the sins of his People before they repent Indeed to tell People that God pardons their sins before they repent it is falsa misericordia false or deceitful Mercy it is not curare sed si dicere verum volumus occidere the way to cure but if we will speak the Truth to kill Souls in the Judgment of those Ancient Elders and Deacons who wrote the 31. Epistle to Cyprian page 37. and Cyprians himself was of the same Judgment for thus he writes in the same Book pag. 143. Qui peccantem c. That is De lapsis Tom. 2. He who flatters a sinner with sweet and pleasant words gives him occasionto sin and doth not restrain but nourish his sinful lusts Whereas he who at once both reproves● and instructs his brother by giving him more solid and firm counsel he helps him forward in the way to Salvation Whom I love saith the Lord I rebuke and chasten So the Minister of God ought not to deceive the People by cunning and cousening compliances but to provide sound and saving Remedies for their Souls He an ignorant unskilful Chirurgion who is afraid to feel with his hand the swelling is hollowness of wounds and whilst he keeps the corrupt humour close shut up in the secret recesses of the bowels he increases it and makes the wound more dangerous The wound must be opened and incisions must be made and the Malady must be cured with a stronger and sharper Remedy even by cutting off and taking away the flesh that is corrupted and putrified Let the sick Person cry out and complain as he will by reason of the pain which he hath not patience to endure yet afterwards he will thank the Chirurgion when he finds that he is cured Thus Cyprian and sure this is sufficient to shew that he would never have said that it