Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	bear_v	good_a	tree_n	8,220	5	10.2554	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A06106	A retractiue from the Romish religion contayning thirteene forcible motiues, disswading from the communion with the Church of Rome: wherein is demonstratiuely proued, that the now Romish religion (so farre forth as it is Romish) is not the true Catholike religion of Christ, but the seduction of Antichrist: by Tho. Beard ...	Beard, Thomas, d. 1632.	1616 (1616)	STC 1658; ESTC S101599	473,468	560

not iustify and yet faith alone doth iustify If they say that they speake of one kinde of faith and we of another they say nothing to the purpose for euen that any faith alone should iustify is contrary to their owne positions who affirme that the former cause of our iustification is the inherent righteousnes of works and not the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith And thus I leaue the Article of iustification at farre with it selfe to be atoned by their best wits if it be possible 37. Let vs come to their doctrine of workes and see how that agreeth with it selfe and here first they hold that works done before faith and regeneration are not good workes but sinnes This is proued by them out of Saint Augustine who affirmeth that the workes of vnbeleeuers are sinnes and if the workes of vnbeleeuers then of all other wicked men which bee not regenerate seeing as the same Father else-where speaketh Impij cogitant non credunt the wicked doe not beleeue but thinke they haue but a shadow of faith without substance It may be prooued also by that generall and infallible axiome of the holy Scripture Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne but the workes of wicked men are all voyd of faith and therefore are no better then sinnes in the sight of God be they neuer so glorious and beautifull in the eyes of men Or as Gregorie Nazianzene saith As faith without workes is dead so workes without faith are dead and dead workes are sinnes as appeares Heb. 9. 41. Besides Bellarmine confirmeth the same by reason because they want a good intention to direct their workes to the glory of the true God whome they are ignorant of To which I adde another reason drawne from our Sauiours owne mouth Mat. 7. Because an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruit but euery man til he be ingrafted into Christ is no better then an euill tree and therefore cannot doe a good worke 38. This is their doctrine and it is sound diuinitie but see how they crosse it ouer the face with a contrary falshood for the same men that teach this notwithstanding affirme that the workes of Infidels are good suo genere in their kind so they are good and not good sinnes and yet good works but this is in their kind say they that is Morally and not Theologically I but morall vertues in the vnregenerate are by their owne principles sinnes how then can they be good any waies Can sinne which is a transgression of Gods law and simply in it owne nature euill be in any respect good as it is sinne But to take cleare away this scruple another of them auoucheth that they are not onely morally but euen Theologically good for he saith that such works as are done by the light of nature onely without grace doe dispose and make a man in some sort fit to iustification though it be longè valdèremotè remotely and a farre off for he that yeeldeth obedience to morall lawes is thereby lesse vndisposed and repugnant to diuine grace Now how can sinnes dispose or prepare a man for iustification is God delighted with sinnes Either therefore they are not sinnes or they doe not dispose to iustification neither farre nor neere or which is the present contradiction they are sinnes and not sinnes good and not good at one time and in one and the same respect And to put the contradiction out of all question the Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon of the sixt Session enacteth as much and denounceth Anathema to all that say the contrarie the words are these If any man shall say that all the works which are done before iustification by what meanes soeuer they are done are truely sinnes or deserue the hatred of God let him be Anathema And Andradius the interpretor of that Councill authorised by the Fathers of the same doth more perspicuously explaine the meaning of that Canon when hee saith that men without faith destitute of the spirit of regeneration may doe workes which are voyde of all filthinesse free from all fault and defiled with no sinne and by which they may obtaine saluation then which what can be more contradictory to that which before was deliuered that all the workes of Infidels and vnbeleeuers are sinnes be they neuer so glistering with morall vertue or more agreeable to the olde condemned errors of Iustine Clemens and Epiphanius who affirmed that Socrates and Her aclitus were Christians because they liued according to the rule of reason and that the Grecians were iustified by Philosophie and that many were saued onely by the law of nature without the lawe of Moses or Gospell of Christ 39. Againe their doctrine of doubel merit the one of Congruity the other of Condignity as they terme them is not onely contrary to the truth but to it selfe For this they teach that the merit of congruity which the Councill of Trent calleth the preparations and dispositions to iustification is grounded vpon the dignity of the worke and not vpon the promise of God but the merit of condignity requireth both a dignity of the worke and the promise of God to bee grounded vpon or else it is no merit This is Bellarmines plaine doctrine and is consonant to the residue of their Doctours both Schoole diuines and others for thus they define the merit of congruity It is that by which the subiect is disposed that it may receiue grace according to the reason of Gods iustice Here is onely iustice required and not any promise to the merit of congruity though I must confesse Gabriel Biel somewhat crosseth this definition when ●e saith that when a man doth what in him lyeth then God accepteth his worke and powreth in grace not by the due of Iustice but of his liberalitie And Aquinas who affirmeth that when a man vseth well the power of free-will God worketh in him according to the excellencie of his mercy But yet they all agree in this that the merit of congruity is not grounded vpon any promise as the merit of condignity is but onely vpon the worthin●s of the worke done Now here lurketh a flat contradiction for by this it should follow that the merit of congruity should bee more properly a merit then that of condignity Which Bellarmine denyeth in the same Chapter because this dependeth vpon it owne dignity and hath no neede of a promise as the other hath and so should bee also more meritorious and excellent then the other being neuerthelesse but a preparation and beginning to iustification and the other the matter of iustification it selfe And that a man that hath no grace dwelling in him but onely outwardly mouing him nor is yet iustified should haue more power to deserue and merite then he that is fulfilled with grace and fully iustified Thus error like a Strumpet bringeth foorth a monstrous brood of absurdities but let vs proceede 40. Their

in it selfe doth not deserue a iust reproofe 64. In the other place obiected hee writeth thus Qui seriò tanquam sub conspectu Dei c. i. They which shall earnestly as in the sight of God seeke the true rule of iustice shall finde for certainty all the words of men if they be censured by their owne dignity to be nothing but pollution and filthines and that which is commonly called righteousnesse to be before God meere iniquity that which is counted integrity to be impurity and that which is esteemed glory to be ignominie Let the Reader now iudge what notorious lyars these bee to fasten this opinion vpon Caluin whose wordes I haue sincerely and fully set downe that euery one may see their false dealing for in what one place nameth hee mortall sinne or what one word tendeth to that end The worse termes he● giueth to good workes in the first place are these That they are sprinkled with imperfection mixed with the dregs of the slesh stained with corruption and in the second that they are filthines iniquity pollution and ignominy but how first if they bee examined by the strict rule of Gods iustice secondly if they bee compared to Gods righteousnesse and thirdly if they bee considered in their owne merite and worth without the merite of Christ whereby both their staines and imperfections are couered and an excellent dignity giuen vnto them 65. And indeed what I pray you doth Caluine say herein but that which the Fathers said before I will propound two or three vnto you in stead of al the rest Woe be to our righteousnesse sayth Saint Augustine if God remouing his mercy should search into it and againe All our righteousnes standeth rather in the remission of our sinnes then in any perfection of iustice Our best righteousnes sayth Saint Bernard if it be any is right perhaps but not pure vnlesse happily we thinke our selues better then our Fathers who no lesse truely then humbly said All our righteousnes is as a defiled cloth The holy man Iob sayth Saint Gregory because he saw all the merite of our vertue to be in vice if it be strictly iudged by the eternall Iudge did rightly adde in If I will contend with him I shall not be able to answere him one of a thousand Lastly all beauty sayth Arnobius in Gods presence is but deformity all righteousnes is but vnrighteousness all strength but weakenes all riches but beggery These Fathers with all the rest say no lesse then Caluine nor Caluine no more then they and therefore they must either bee condemned with him or bee iustified with them Now if any man should say that they affirmed that our best works were deadly sinnes all men would condemne him for a liar so may we iustly say of our malicious aduersaries in imputing that opinion to Caluine which hee neuer meant nor yet the words will beare and also which in all his writings hee directly crosseth 66. That which hath beene spoken concerning Caluine may bee applyed to the iustification of Luther and Melancthon who are so farre from esteeming good workes to bee mortall sinnes that they extoll them hyperbolically as hath beene already manifested Luther indeed sayth thus That a good worke done after the best manner that can be yet is a veniall sinne according to the mercy of God and a mortall sinne according to the iustice of God but what of this doth he therefore say that it is a mortall sinne simply as they would haue him no in no case for first hee calleth it a good worke which hee would neuer haue done if hee had iudged it no better then a sinne secondly hee sayth that it is mortall according to the iustice of God and veniall by the mercy of God which is the very same that all the Fathers affirmed before intending by mortall not that which is a high degree of sinne but that which in it owne nature deserueth death Thirdly Luther himselfe sheweth what his intendment is in the article going before where he sayth that not the good worke it selfe but the defect in the worke is truely sinne because it is an omission of that precept Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart By all which it is cleare that Luther doth not condemne a good worke but the euil in the worke and that though God doth in mercy pardon the euill for the goods sake being a fruit of faith so he might iustly condemne the good for the euill sake that cleaueth vnto it being a fruit of originall sinne so that Luther standeth cleare and innocent from this crime layd to his charge in all true iudgement and they stand guilty of a most foule slander imputed vnto him by their malice 67. Thirdly they slaunder vs that we slaunder God by making him the author of sinne This accusation Bellarmine Campion Stapleton Vasques Feuardentius and all the Iesuiticall rabble lay to our charge And they accuse Caluine Luther Peter Martir and all other Protestant-writers as guilty thereof but vpon what ground and with what shew of reason let them declare vnto vs for it passeth the reach of our capacities to finde out any such doctrine either direct in plaine words or indirect by logicall consequence in any of them direct doctrine I am sure Caluine thus writeth The cause of sinne is not to be sought out of mans will out of which the roote of euill ariseth and in the which sinne resideth And in his Comment vpon the Epistle of Saint Iames more plainely he affirmeth that God is not the author of sinne and that euils doe not proceed from any other roote but from the euill concupiscence of euery mans owne heart And this doctrine he iterateth againe and againe many score of times in his bookes Peter Martyr in like maner is most direct against this blasphemous doctrine for thus he saith That opinion of the Libertines which maketh God the author of sinne is a most detestable opinion then which nothing can be imagined more wicked nor a more compendious way to hell And in the same place he concludeth that though nothing in the world no not sinnes themselues come to passe besides Gods will and prouidence yet he is not truly to be called the cause of sinne but all that can be sayd is that he is such a cause which is tearmed by the Logicians the remoouing or hindering cause that is not efficient but deficient rather which in truth is no cause at all Luther is as direct for he auoucheth this proposition in many places God is not the author of sinne And this same is the constant affirmation of all our Diuines What a shamelesse forehead then haue our malicious aduersaries that dare lay vnto our charge this blasphemy which we all detest and abhorre 68. I but say they though in word you say so yet by consequence from your doctrine it may be necessarily gathered that you hold the contrary for you all teach that God concurreth with