Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	apostle_n	grace_n	justification_n	6,159	5	8.9380	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19428	Father Cotton a Iesuite, the Kings confessour, his two and thirtie demands, to the ministers of France with the answeres added at the end of euerie demand. Also threescore and foure demands proposed to Father Cotton, by way of counter-change. By Peter Moulin, minister of the word of God in the church of Paris. Printed according to the French copie, printed in Paris. Also a new late chalenge, by a learned diuine, to all Papists, in 24. other Popish articles.; Trente-deux demandes proposées par le P. Cotton. English	Du Moulin, Pierre, 1568-1658.; Coton, Pierre, 1564-1626.; Barnes, John, fl. 1600-1621.	1614 (1614)	STC 5857; ESTC S116356	39,158	65

But that wee must confesse our faults one to another that is reciprocally as saith S. Iames. Whereof it followeth forsooth that if a woman prostituting her selfe to her Curate confesseth her sinne vnto him her Curate ought reciprocally to confesse his sin to her and so to obey the commandement of S. Iames who in this place speaketh not of the peoples confessing in the eare of the Priest but of that confession that euery man ought to make to his neighbour after he hath offended him And this is euident by that which he hath added Confesse saith he your offences one to another and pray ye one for another For as we are not to pray for the Priests onely but for euery one that standeth in neede so must we not confesse our selues to the Priests onely but to euery one of the people whom we haue offended Thus is the commandement of S. Iames equall as well for Prayer as for Confession XV. DEMAND That faith onely iustifieth ANSVVERE THis demand is fraudulent and doubtfull or ambiguous First he ought to haue expounded whether he meaneth of iustification before God or before men for we doe not denie but that in the sight of men we are iustified by workes but before God hauing but two meanes to be iustified eyther by our owne righteousnesse which is Iustification by the workes of the Law or by the righteousnes of another namely by the righteousnesse of Iesus Christ which is by faith we finde in the Apostle S. Paul Ephes 2. vers 8. and 9. That we are saued by grace through faith not by workes And Galat. 2. vers 9. That we are iustified by faith in Iesus Christ and not by the workes of the Law Now that by the works of the 1 Law he also vnderstandeth the works of the morrall Law the whole course of the Epistle doth shew for in the next Chapter he saith Cursed is he that continueth not in the words of this Law which is a passage alledged out of the end of the 27. Chapter of Deuteromie wherein we haue no mention but of the transgressions against the Morrall Law And in the fift Chapter he saith that the whole Law is fulfilled in this onely word Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe Some Iesuites doe say that faith iustifieth because it is the beginning of our regeneration as if I should say that a mans knowledge consisteth in knowing an A. and a B. because he beginneth by them But S. Paul Phil. 3.9 and in many other places opposing the righteousnesse by the Law to the righteousnesse by faith cutteth off this shift for as the righteousnesse by the Law is the same which consisteth wholly in the obedience to the Law euen so the righteousnesse by faith is the same which consisteth wholly in faith otherwise there were no opposition And in the fourth to the Romanes he maintaineth that Abraham and Dauid were not iustified by workes yet he speaketh of them not as when they began or before they began to be regenerate but when they were well forward in godlinesse namely when Abraham offered his Sonne and when Dauid writ the 32. Psalme In which Psalme Dauid saith S. Paul declareth that mans beatitude consisteth in this that God imputeth vnto him righteousnesse without workes Faith therefore cannot be without workes yet doth it iustifie alone and without workes as our eyes are not without our eares yet doe they onely see and that without any helpe of the eares XVI DEMAND That when the fault of sinne is taken away the punishment also is taken away ANSVVERE THis is likewise slanderous for we doe not say that when God hath pardoned the fault all punishment is necessarily taken away but onely that punishment which is satisfactorie to Gods iustice For there be punishments which serue to amend man yet not to pay God to correct our vniustice yet not to satisfie Gods iustice and these are Exercises and Trials not Payments which cannot be made after the fault is forgiuen and this do we proue 1. Because God is no mocker neither doth he contradict himselfe But it is a mockery to forgiue a man his sin and not the punishment of his sinne to tell him I forgiue thee thy debt not the payment of thy debt our sins are debts as it is said in the Lords Prayer the payment whereof is punishment 2. Againe because Iesus Christ paid not otherwise for our fault but by bearing the paine he therefore payed for the paine and there was but one payment for both It is therefore the forging of a new Gospell to imagine that he paid more for the one then for the other for if he hath fully paid for the fault then also for the paine And if he hath fully paid for our paine the same was for our acquittall and to discharge vs. 3. Likewise because God is iust it were iniustice to punish a man with satisfactory paine that hath no fault so consequently is not faulty The fault therefore being taken away the paine is also taken away XVII DEMAND That God created not all men to a like estate but that he created some to be saued some to be perpetually damned ANSVVERE THese words thus rawly propounded may be mistaken and otherwise vnderstood then we do beleeue In this sense they be true That God hath predestinate some to saluation in his sonne and others he hath preordained to damnation for their sinnes which he fore-saw for God damneth none but for their sinnes neither doth he delight in the destruction of his creature as also he hath not chosen some rather then other some in regard they are better but to the end to make them better neither doth he fore-see any other goodnesse in that creature then the same which he will infuse into him For he is the spring of all the goodnesse that is in the creature The Apostle S. Paul is expresly of our minds in the ninth of his Epistle to the Romanes and in the first to the Ephesians vers 4. as also the Iesuites do confesse the same hauing of late herein ranked themselues with vs as being forced by the truth For whereas the common opinion of others is That God elected to saluation these whom he fore-saw should be good men and that should doe good workes so to merit saluation Bellarmine on the other side disputeth tooth naile against it in the tenth Chapter of the second Booke of Grace and Free-will saying God chose not men because they should bring forth the fruits of good workes and perseuere in good workes but he chose them to make them doers of good works and perseuerers in goodnesse toward the end of the 12. Chap. he saith thus If God predestinated men because he foresaw that they should make good vse of free-will why did he not predestinate the Tyrians and Sidonians of whom Iesus Christ spake Matth. 11. and of whom the truth doth testifie that they could well haue vsed their free-will and yet saith