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
A70924	Romes destruction, or, Expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the word of God, for the condemning of the doctrine of the Roman church, and justifying of that of the reformed churches first written in French, by C.D.R., a French noble-man ; and now published in English, at the solicitation of divers religious men of this nation by Jam. Mountaine.	C. D. R.; Mountaine, James.	1641 (1641)	Wing R11; ESTC R10609	52,610	234

prove it by this expresse text out of Saint Paul And you saith he being dead in your sinnes and through the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickned together with him having forgiven you all trespasses Colos. 2. 13. Now even as a dead man cannot doe so much as to stir his fingers end unlesse he be raised againe So a man dead in sinne cannot doe any good work unlesse God raise him first and regenerate him inwardly by his spirit The same Apostle teacheth it plainly in another place saying That it is God which worketh in us both to will and to doe according to his good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. The holyest men though endued with the spirit of God and ordinarily accompanied with his grace have alwaies acknowledged themselves to be sinners and very unable to doe good works Saint Paul speaketh thus of himselfe and also of all others in his person For I was alive without the Law once but when the Commandement came sinne revived and I died I am carnall sould under sinne I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I finde not For the good that I would doe I doe not but the evill which I would not that I doe Rom. 7. 9. 14. 15. 18. 19. Is it not then a meere ridiculous foolery to teach that a man destitute of the Grace of God may doe any good work to obtain Grace seeing that these which have this Grace already doe not doe the good they would but doe the evill which they would not having alwaies some corruptions of the flesh opposing the desires of the spirit And therefore they must confesse that we doe good workes after we have received Grace whence it followeth that their Doctrine is false as I prove it by this argument If we doe good works after we are received into Grace Then it followeth that our works doe not dispose us to obtaine that Grace which we have already and without which we cannot apply our selves to good works But the Antecedent is true therefore the Consequent also CHAP. IV. That our Lord Jesus Christ hath fully and perfectly satisfied the justice of God for our sins both for the guilt and punishment thereof and consequently that it is a vain and unprofitable thing to desire to satisfie again unto the same by works THat which our Adversaries teach concerning satisfaction is That God releaseth unto the sinner all the guilt and forgiveth him the eternall punishment due unto it But that he will have it turn'd into a Temporal punishment alledging that if in our Justification nothing were found but the forgivenesse of sins it would be perfect mercy but that there is some other thing whereby the justice of God appeareth To be short The Doctrin of these Doctors is that God for the manifestation of his justice wil have the justified sinner to satisfie Gods justice for the Temporal punishment of his sinnes otherwise his justice is not satisfied Answer It is an old wile of Sathan which he hath alwaies practised by his false Prophets to smother and bury as much as in him lyeth the meanes whereby God is pacified with us and his justice fully satisfied Therefore I aske of them whether Christ hath satisfied to the justice of God or no If he hath not satisfied it he is not our Saviour and we are still in our sinnes lyable to the curse of the Law Galat. 3. 13. But if Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for sinne it followeth that it is satisfied and declared in this alone satisfaction of his and by consequent that it is a vain and an unprofitable thing to desire to satisfie the same again Now that Christ hath satisfied fully the justice of God for sinne these expresse texts shewe it clearly and plainly He hath born our griefes and carried our sorrowes He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities The chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed The Lord hath laid on him the iniquitie of us all Esay 53. 4. 5. 6. And the Apostle Saint Paul teacheth us That he hath reconciled all things unto himselfe having made peace through the blood of his Crosse whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven Colos. 1. 20. Again The Mediator is one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus who gave himselfe a ransome for all 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. Now the Jesuits and other Doctors of the Roman Church to avoid this use to make a distinction of guilt and punishment saying that Christ hath satisfied for the guilt and eternall punishment but not for that Temporal punishment reserved for the sinner justified for which he is bound to satisfie the justice of God But this is brought in to no purpose For I will stop up this passage upon them in producing expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the Word of God that shew plainely the contrary First of all the Prophet Esay hath told us in the forenamed place that Christ hath not onely borne our griefes but our sorrowes also which are not the guilt but the punishment of our sinnes And to say that this is true as touching the eternall and not the Temporall punishment is to no purpose For S. Paul saith That there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. But what punishment soever is imposed for the satisfying of Gods justice is a condemnation Therefore there is no punishment imposed to satisfie the justice of God Secondly The same Apostle teacheth us That by Grace we are saved through Faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of God not of works least any man should boast Saint Paul teacheth us That he hath reconciled all things unto himselfe having made peace through the blood of his Crosse whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven Colos. 1. 20. Again The Mediator is one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus who gave himselfe a ransome for all 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. Now the Jesuits and other Doctors of the Roman Church to avoid this use to make a distinction of guilt and punishment saying that Christ hath satisfied for the guilt and eternall punishment but not for that Temporal punishment reserved for the sinner justified for which he is bound to satisfie the justice of God But this is brought in to no purpose For I will stop up this passage upon them in producing expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the Word of God that shew plainely the contrary First of all the Prophet Esay hath told us in the forenamed place that Christ hath not onely borne our griefes but our sorrowes also which are not the guilt but the punishment of our sinnes And to say that this is true as touching the eternall and not the Temporall punishment is to no purpose For S. Paul saith That there

is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. But what punishment soever is imposed for the satisfying of Gods justice is a condemnation Therefore there is no punishment imposed to satisfie the justice of God Secondly The same Apostle teacheth us That by Grace we are saved through Faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of God not of works least any man should boast Ephes. 2. 8. 9. And in the Epistle to the Romans he saith All have sinned and come short of the glory of God being justified freely by his Grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus Rom. 3. 23. 24. It is not therefore by paying on our part for the punishment of our sins it being altogether incompatible freely to acquit and discharge a debt and yet desire to be satisfied for it to the uttermost farthing 3 Again if God doe forgive the sinnes of his children in such sort as he will remember them no more it followeth that he will not be satisfied with temporall punishments But the first proposition is true I will forgive their iniquity saith the Lord and I will remember their sinne no more Jerem. 31. 34. Esay 43. 25. Heb. 10. 27. Ergo the last also and therefore there remains no punishment for the justified sinner 4 Moreover Jesus Christ our Lord hath satisfied the justice of God for us either fully and perfectly or imperfectly and in part onely yea or no If fully and perfectly then it followeth that he hath satisfied it aswel for the guilt as for the punishment of sinne and by consequent that we ought neither to satisfie it for the one nor for the other If inperfectly and in part onely it followeth that he is our Saviour but in part for he is not our Saviour unlesse he hath fully satisfied the Justice of God for us 5 Again Whatsoever is done by ones selfe is not done by an other But Jesus Christ our Lord hath purged our sinnes by himselfe Christ saith Saint Paul having by himselfe purged our sinnes sate downe on the right hand of the Majesty on high Heb. 1. 3. It is not done therfore but by Christ And if the purgation of sinnes be not but by Christ it followeth that it is not done by Temporall punishment and Humane satisfactions But the Antecedent is true Ergo the Consequent also And therefore to desire to satisfie again the Justice of God is to debase too much the worth and merits of the blood of Christ and to esteeme his satisfaction as a thing of nought For it is he only that was able to satisfie the same for them that have obtained free mercy And to alledge as they doe that the Physicke is prepared but that we must drink it That it is true that we receive all good things from the blood of Christ but we must apply it is to no purpose For our penall works are not the means wherby we may apply unto our selves the vertue and efficacy of the blood of Christ It is by faith that he is apprehended and applyed unto us For as the body is fed and nourished by means of the corporall mouth that receiveth and apprehendeth the food So the soule is nourished and sustained by Faith that receiveth and apprehendeth our Lord Jesus Christ and his merits by which onely means Christ is applied unto it for it's spirituall food In a word I maintain that it is altogether impossible for a man to satisfie the Justice of God Yea even for all men put together to satisfie it for the least sinne whether for the guilt or for the punishment For God is infinite he therefore that offends him deserves an infinite and an Eternall punishment Punishments ought to be according to the offences And the offences according to the quality of the persons offended And to alledge that Eternall punishments are turned into Temporall is as vain and ridiculous For Gods Justice being infinite cannot be satisfied but by an infinite punishment And if God through his mercy remits any thing unto the sinner he will not doe it by halfes Therefore they consider the Justice of God and the desert of sinne very ill when as they think to be able to satisfie the same and that by such means as should open the gates of Heaven to the rich rather than to the poore For the principall means they appoint unto man to satisfie Gods Justice withall for the punishment of sins is to buy pardons and indulgences of the Pope and give to the Churh the which indeed the rich may do but not the poore Wherupon it will follow that we must say quite contrary to that which Christ saith Blessed are the poore for to such is the kingdome of Heaven Math. 5. 3. Our Adversaries doe bring in some places of Scripture to prove their pretended satisfactions but against their true sence as that of the Apostle to the Hebrews Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth and scourgeth every sonne whom he receiveth Heb. 12. 6. Again they say that David having confessed his sin to Nathan did neverthelesse bear the punishment of his sin it being said unto him The childe that is borne unto thee shall surely die 2. Sam. 12. 14. and divers other places where it is said that God chastiseth his children I answer That in all these places there is not a word spoken of satisfying Gods Justice who indeed tryeth his children and fatherly chastiseth them not to satisfie his Justice but to correct them and make them wiser for the time to come shewing them and making them feele how much sin is displeasing unto him There is two sorts of Judgements of God the one of revenge the other of correction by the one God punisheth his enemies confounding them in his wrath David prayeth he might not be punished in this kind Lord saith he rebuke me not in thine anger neither chastise me in thy hot displeasure Psal. 6. 2. By the other of correction God doth not chasten to cast away and to destroy but to admonish his children and make thē to profit unto repentance He chastened David fatherly when he took away his childe and Saul in Justice in taking away his kingdome from him The Faithfull are also called to suffer in this life for to follow the steps of our Lord Jesus Christ For even hereunto were yee called saith S. Peter because Christ also suffered for you leaving us an example that yee should follow his steps 1. Epist. 2. 21. All saith S. Paul that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution 2. Tim. 3. 12. In the World yee shall have tribulation saith our Lord to his Disciples John 16. 33. And in another place Whosoever taketh not his crosse and followes after me he is not worthy of me Math. 10. 38. Therefore the pains and afflictions that befall the Faithfull are not to satisfie the Justice of God neither for the guilt nor for the punishment of sinnes but to follow the steps of Jesus

head For it is still to make a monster of the Church in giving her two heads Moreover if S. Peter was ministeriall head of the Church and Prince of the Apostles It must be by the institution of Christ and if it be by Christs institution this institution is to be found in the word of God Moreover S. Peter must needs have exercised that office or else it would have brought a confusion in the Church But on the contrary the word of God sheweth us That Christ did not appoint Peter to bee head of the Church nor Prince of the Apostles Item That S. Peter did never exercise that office as I shall prove by these texts and reasons following As for the first point S. Paul teacheth us That our Lord for the gathering of the Saints for the work of the Ministery and for the edification of his body hath given some Apostles and some Prophets and some Pastors and Teachers Ephes. 4. 11. And in another place God hath set some in the Church First Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Teachers 1. Cor. 12. 28. He maketh no mention at all of any head of the Church nor or Prince of the Apostles and yet these are the places where this principality should have appeared being very likely that if Christ had established Peter for head of the Universall Church and Prince of the Apostles he would not have omitted to set down this principality in the first ranke But having left it out it appeareth That Christ did not ordaine any one for head of the Church and Prince of the Apostles But let us learn of S. Peter himselfe whether there should be in the Church a Prince among the Apostles or no I exhort saith he he doth not say I command the Elders that are among you I that am an Elder with you he doth not say above them and a witnesse of the sufferings of Christ Feed the flocke of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly not for filthy lucre but of a ready minde neither as being Lords marke as being Lords over Gods heritage but being ensamples to the Flocke 1. Pet. 5. 1. 2. 3. S. Petertherefore did not beleeve that any Bishop should be Prince among the Apostles and have speciall lordship in the Church as the Pope and his disciples do suppose Upon the strife which arose twice among the Apostles about primacy Christ decided their controversie saying unto them Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they that are great exercise authority upon them Bus it shall not be so among you Mat. 20. 25. 26. The word of God also in divers places recommendeth humility unto us to become as little children to be poore Christ proposeth himselfe for an example thereof unto his Apostles and will have his Apostles to be for an example unto all the World That the son of man saith he is not come to be ministred unto but to minister Mat. 18. 1. 2. 3. and chap. 20. 28. When the Apostles were sent to preach they were sent as fellows the which excludeth superiority Math. 10. Moreover Christ promiseth unto them That they shall sit upon twelve Thrones Judging the twelve Tribes of Israel Luk. 22. 30. But he giveth not unto Peter a more eminent place for to preside than to the rest When the holy Ghost descended upon them It was when they were all in one place and without any prerogative Acts 2. 1. 4. S. Paul saith That there is no difference between him and them who seemed to be most eminent Galat. 2. 6. He did not then acknowledge any of the Apostles to be above him as head of the Universall Church and Prince of the Apostles Again he saith That the Gospel of the Uncircumcision was committed unto him as the Gospel of the Circumcision was unto Peter Galat. 2. 7. Behold then they are equall in the labor and ministery of the Gospel The Apostles that were at Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the word of God they sent them Peter and John Acts 8. 14. Now to be sent shewes no superiority but at most equality of them that sendeth and of him that is sent For the inferiour never sendeth the superiour I doe verily beleeve that the Pope would not approve of them that should send him to preach in England S. Peter was rebuked by S. Paul who withstood him to the face The which hee doth after such a manner as he shewes well enough that he did not esteem him as head of the Church nor Prince of the Apostles Gal. 2. 11. 14. It appears therefore by these places that S. Peter was not head of the Universall Church nor Prince of the Apostles It remains now to see whether he did exercise that place and whether the rest of the Apostles have yeelded him the preheminence At the Councell of Jerusalem S. Peter propounded his opinion but James Bishop of the same place made the conclusion as President thereof Acts 15. 7. 13. 19. and the Letters were not dispatched in Peters name but in the name of the whole Assembly Neverthelesse this was the place where S. Peter should have exercised this office of Head and Prince among the Apostles Item He is accused by the Disciples for conversing with the Gentiles He maketh his defence and excuse Act. 11. He was then accountable to his brethren for what he did In summe He calleth himselfe a fellow Elder with the Elders of the Church and exhorteth them lovingly as his equals 1. Pet. 5. 1. Therefore he did not think himself Head and Prince amongst them But let us heare a pleasant objection which the Popes disciples do make for to prove that S. Peter was Head and Prince of the Apostles S. Peter say they is the first named in the Scripture He was the first whose feet Christ did wash The first that spake at the Councell of Jerusalem The first after Christ to whom the Angels did speak all which prerogatives doe shew that he was Head and Prince of the Apostles This Argument deserves not an answer For if the first-named in the holy Scriptures is for that cause the superiour the last named shall be the least and the abjectest Now if that be true Christ and Peter shall sit in the lowest ranke in the Church For Christ himselfe is postposed to S. Peter by S. Paul Now this I say that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas and I of Christ 1. Cor. 1. 12. S. John also names Peter the last Philip saith he was of Bethsaida the City of Andrew and Peter John 1. 44. S. Paul also placeth S. James before James Cephas and John who seemed to be pillars Galat. 2. 9. Therefore this is but a meere foppery brought in a desperate cause for lacke of better reasons S. Peter might be among the Apostles the first in age or in zeale or in eloquence or in vertue and miracles but