Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	charity_n	faith_n	justification_n	4,801	5	9.5998	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A18933	The conuerted Iew or Certaine dialogues betweene Micheas a learned Iew and others, touching diuers points of religion, controuerted betweene the Catholicks and Protestants. Written by M. Iohn Clare a Catholicke priest, of the Society of Iesus. Dedicated to the two Vniuersities of Oxford and Cambridge ...	Clare, John, 1577-1628.; Anderton, Lawrence, attributed name.; Anderton, Roger, d. 1640?, attributed name.	1630 (1630)	STC 5351; ESTC S122560	323,604	470

deuills being far absent from their Witches southsayers and coniurers do neuerthelesse heare their inuocations and coniurations As is warranted by all Experience Shall any Man then thinke that the blessed Saincts of Heauen are depryued of hearing the prayers and intercessions which the faythfull heare vpon Earth do make vnto them since otherwyse it would follow that spirituall substances by their losing of Heauen I meane the deuills by their fall did obtayne greater prerogatiues and excellencye then the soules of the Saincts do by gayning and ascending vp to Heauen an absurdity incompatible with the goodnes wisdome and Charity of God And thus much touching the doctryne of Prayer to Saincts The Catholicke doctrine touching Iustification by works Merit of works and Works of Supererogation TOuching Iustification by Works the Catholicks teach as followeth Iustification wheareby a Man being afore wicked and the Sonne of Wrath is become the Sonne of God is wrought by the healpe of Gods grace without any meritte of works on our syde and by the spirit of fayth and Charity infused by God in vs in the very Act of our Iustification Thus our Aduersaries may see that we do not ascribe our first Iustification to any of our works at all though they most wrongfully traduce vs to the contrary For we willingly acknowledge those words of the Apostle It is not of the willer or of the runner but of God who sheweth Mercy Secondly the Catholicks teach that after a Man iustifyed being of wicked become good he may encrease his first iustification by works That is he being already made iust by Gods grace and mercy may by his works become more Iust Which works are not those which are performed by the force of Nature as the Pelagians did teach and the Protestants do falsly charge the Catholicks but as they are performed by the spirit and grace of God and as they receaue their force vertue from our Sauiours Passion Concerning the merit of Works more particularly the Catholicks teach as followeth whose doctrine herein for greater perspicuity I will set downe in certaine propositions Which propositions do contayne certaine condicions necessarily requyred that Works may merit The first proposition is this That works may merit it is requyred that the partye who worketh be in state of grace and an adopted Child of God Thus we exclude all works from meriting which are performed by one who is not in state of grace that is who wanteth true fayth true hope true charity for such Works are performed by force of Nature only not by force of Gods grace The second proposition That works do merit a free liber all promise or Couenant of God is necessary by which his promise of reward made vnto good Works God in a manner obligeth himselfe to reward good works according to his promises Heere our Aduersary may see that we willingly confesse that no works of ours of themselues can merit as we abstract from them the promisse of God for without this promisse and Couenant of God made out o● his most mercifull bounty to remunerate good works we do willingly say with the Apostle The passions of this life are not condigne to the glory to come that shal be reuealed vnto vs. The third proposition That Works do merit it is according to the most probable opinion necessarily requyred that they cheifly preceede from actually or virtually Charity loue towards God That is that they be vndertaken cheifly and primatiuely for the honour and loue we beare to God From whence it followeth that no works which are not seasoned with this condic●on of Charity in God but haue to themselues only peculiar and lesse principall ends c 〈…〉 merit The fourth and last proposition which is implicitly included in the former Propositions That Works do merit they must take their worth and dignity from the 〈…〉 ritis of our Sauiours Passion and from thence receaue as it were a new tincture and dye Thus we see that originally and principally it is Christs meri●ts which do merit for vs and that our works are but once of the meanes whereby we apply Christs merit●s vnto vs. That the doctrine here set downe touching merit of works is sutable to the doctrine of the Catholicke Roman Church is euident euen from the authority of the Councell of Trent where we thus reade To them who worke well to the end of their life and do hope in God eternall life is giuen both as a grace and fauour mercifully promised to the Sonns of God through the meritts of Christ Iesus as also as a reward proceeding from the promisse of the same God faythfully to be giuen to their good Works and Meritts c. Thus the Councell The certainty of this doctrine of merit of works receaueth it cheife proofe from the holy Scripture and this from the testimonyes of Scripture of seuerall kinds First then from those places where eternall life is called Merces a wage or reward As Mathew Reioyce for your reward is great in Heauen Againe Call the workemen and pay them their hyre besides diuers others of like nature Secondly from those places wherein a heauenly reward is promised to men according to the measure proportion of their Works as where it is said The Sonne of Man shall come in the glory of his Father and shall render to eueryone secundum opera sua according to his works In like sort it is said God will render to euery one according to his works besides many other like places here omitted Thirdly from those testimonyes of Scripture which expresse the reason that works are the cause why eternall life is giuen thus we read Come you blessed of my Father possesse the Kingdome prepared for you es 〈…〉 iui enim dedisti mihi manducare for I was hungry and you gaue me to eate Againe in the same place Quia in pauca fuisti c. Because thou hast been faithfull ouer few things I will place thee ouer many things enter into the ioy of thy ●ord And in the Apocalyps These are they which are come out of great tribulation c. ideo sunt ante thro●um Dei therefore they are before the throne of God In all which places the particles Enim Qui● Ideo are causases that is implying our shewing the reason and cause of a thing Fourthly from those texts in which a reward is promised to good Works euen by force of Iustice According hereto we reade God is not vniust that he should forget your worke As also that be thou faythfull euen vnto death and I will giue thee the Crowne of life See of this nature other texts quoted in the margent Fiftly and lastly from those passages wherein there is mention made of dignity or worth As where we reade The workeman is worthy his wage Agayne vt digni habeamini regno Dei c. That you may be had worthy the Kingdome of

most Blessed Trinity concerning which he thus speaketh The Diuinity is threefould as the three Persons be c. And from hence the reason may well be why Luther expungeth out of the Litany this verse Holy Trinity one very God haue mercy vpon vs. And hereupon he is not afraid to say that the word Trinity is but an humane inuention and soundeth coldly And finally he concludeth that his soule hateth the word Homousion or Consubstantiale For thus he writeth Anima me a odit Homousion Optimè exigerunt Ariani ne vocem illam prophanam nouam regulis fidei statu● liceret My very soule ha●eth the word Homousion or Consubstantiale And the Arians not without reason required that it should not be lawfull to put this prophane and new Word meaning Homousios or consubstantialis among the rules of fayth Luthers blasphemy against the B. Trinity was such and so odious that euen Zwinglius did purposely write against Luther touching this very point 2. Touching the euent of things Luther houldeth contrary to all Christian faith that all things come to passe through a certaine Stoical and Fatal necessity for he defending this Heresy thus writeth Nullius est in manu c. It is in no mans power to thinke good or euil but al things as Wicleffs article condemned at Constance did rightly teach proceed from absolute Necessity And againe fateor articulum c. I do confesse Wicleffs article of all things comming to passe by Necessi 〈◊〉 to haue 〈◊〉 falsly condemned in the conuenticle of Constance 3. To the dishonour of Christ his Passion who was cloathed with Essentiall Maiesty and as intimating the insufficiency of it for the redemption of mankinde he teacheth that Christ not only suffered in body but also his Diuinity suffered for thus he writeth Cùm credo quod sola humana Natura pro me passa est Christus vilis noc magni praetij saluator est c. If I beleiue that only the Humane Nature of Christ suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base and small worth and himselfe nedeth a Sauiour And Luther speaking of this point in an other place thus reprehendeth the Zwinglians The Zwinglians did contend against me most pertinaciously that the Diuinity of Christ could not suffer A doctrine so blasphemous as that it was not refuted only by the Zwinglians in Luthers dayes as himselfe confesseth but also euen by Beza such chaynes you see of blasphemies one stil following an other are wouen in Luthers faith and Religion 4. Touching the Administration of the Word and Sacraments Luther teacheth that al men and women also haue authority power to administer them These be his owne words The first office of a Priest is to preach the Word c. But this is common to al Next to baptize and this also al may do euen women c. The third office is to consecrate bread and wine But this also is common to al no lesse then Priests And this I auouch by the authoritie of Christ himselfe saying do this in remembrance of me This Christ speake to al then present and to come afterwards If then that which is greater then al be giuen indifferently to al Men and Women I meane the word and Baptisme then that which is lesse I meane to consecrate the supper is also giuen to them Thus Luther Yea Luther proceeded so farre herein as that as D. Couell witnesseth he was not afraid to affirme that the Sacraments were effectual though administred by Satan himselfe With D. Couell agreeth the Protestant Hospintan thus writing Lutherus ●o vsque progreditur c. Luther proceedeth so farre herein that he maintained the Sacrament to be a true Sacrament ●●iamsi a Diabolo conficeretur though it were to be consecrated by the Deuil 5. For absolute deniall of tempor all Magistrats an Heresy indifferently condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants we finde Luther thus to write Among Christians no man can or ought to be a Magistrate But euery one is to other equally subiect c. And agayne As Christ cannot suffer himselfe to be tyed bound by lawes c. So also ought not the Conscience of a Christian to suffer them 6. Touching Luthers deniall of certayne parcels of Scripture And first the Epistle of S. Iames is called by Luther Contentious swelling strawy and vnworthy an Apostolicall spirit The booke of the Apocalyps is also reiected by Luther by the acknowledgment of Bullenger thus writing hereof Doctour Martin Luther hah as it were sticked this booke with a sharpe preface set before his first Edition in Duch for which his iudgment good and learned Men were offended with him Hereunto I will adde Luthers contempt of Moyses and some of the Apostles Against Moyses he thus writeth Habuit Moyses labia in faecunda irata c. And againe Moyses habuit labia diffusa felle ira Touching the Apostles he thus controuleth S. Peter S. Peter did liue and teach extra verbum Dei besides the word of God Thus we may see how no wynde was able to weigh downe the eares of Luthers pryde 7. Luther also taught an Heresy whereby the Propagation of Christian Religion is much endangered to wit That it was not lawfall to wage warre against the Turke an errour which enen the greatest Idolatours of Luther haue mainly condemned Luthers words are these Praeliari contra Turcas est repugnare Deo visitanti iniquitates nostras per illos To wage warre against the Turke is to resist God visiting our sinn●s by thē A point so confessed that Erasmus thus writeth of the consequence and effects of Luthers doctrine Many of the Saxons following herein that firct doctrine of Luther denyed to Caesar and King Ferdinand ayde against the Turke c. And said they had rather fight for a Turke not Baptized then for a Turke Baptized meaninge the Emperour Thus Erasmus 8. Touching Fayth and good workes Luther taught an Heresy disallowed by all learned Protestants For Luther teacheth as followeth It is impiety to affirme that fayth without Charity iustifyeth not Nay Luther proceedeth further thus writing Fides nisi sit sine c. Except fayth be without the least good works it doth not iustify nay it is not fayth And thereupon the more to debase good works he thus saith Works take their goodnes of the Worker Aud no worke is disallowed of God vnlesse the authour thereof be disallowed before Here now I end touching Luther Where you may perceaue Neuserus that this your Sunne of which you afore vaunted prooues to be but a fading Comet the fyery zeale you spoake of but a turbulent combustion se● on flame by Luther in subiects minds against all Christian Magistracy and the reflux which Luther as you pretend caused in the Church of Rome was instantly attended on with a flux and

liued before the fourth Age and consequently before the aboue mentioned 160. yeares were Professours of your Protestant or our Roman Faith D. WHITAKERS I make no doubt but all of them professed with a generall consent our Protestant Fayth knew not the present Doctrine and Faith of Rome CARD BELLARM. See how fowly you are mistaken M. Doctour And therefore seeing the discouery of errours is an establishment of the Truth for the fuller manifesting of your ouer sight herein I will insist for greater breuity only in six chiefe Articles of the Catholicke Faith for a tast of the rest which euen by your owne Brethrens Confessions were mantained by the Fathers liuing in the fourth age frō whence we may necessarily inferre that not any change touching those points was brought into the Church of Rome within the compasse of the said 160. years And first I will beginne with the doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Masse where as also in other Articles following I will discerpe here there out of the great abundance thereof some few acknowledgments of the Protestants Now here you cannot deny M. Doctour but that touching Cyprian who liued Anno 240. your Centurists thus affirme Sacerdotē Cyprianus in quit vice Christi furgi et Deo Patri Sacrificium offerre for this very point they condemne him of Superstition In like sort they thus reprehend Ambrose who liued anno 370. Ambrose did vse certaine speaches c. as to say Masse to offer vp Sacrifice Yea D. Fulke conspireth openly with the former Protestants thus speaking of these Fathers following Tertullian Cyprian Augustine Hierome of which some liued within the said 160. yeares others long afore them do witnesse that Sacrifice for il●e dead is a Tradition of the Apostles To be short Sebastianus Francus no obscure Protestant among you thus writeth statim post Apostolo omnia inuersa surt c. Caena Domini in Sacrificium transformata est Touching the Primacy of the Bis●op of Rome your Centurists do reprehend Nazianzen Cyprian Origen and Tertullian for their teaching of Peters Primacy In like sort Pope Victor who liued in the yeare 160. after Christ did actually challenge and practise this kind of Supremacy as D. Fulke acknowledgeth Concerning praier for the dead D. Fulke thus writeth Praier for the dead preuailed within three hundred years after Christ And another of your owne Br●●hren thus confesseth Praier for the dead was in the Church long before Augustins daies as appeareth in Cyprian Tertullian But D. Fulke and Kempnitius do confesse that Prayer for the dead is taught in the writings of Dionysius Areopagita who is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles whose writing in which Praier for the dead is taught are acknowledged by D. Fulke supposing them not to be written by the said Dionysius as some Protestants are not ashamed to auerre to be writen about thirteen hundred yeares since Touching Inuocation of Saints D. Fulke confesseth that in B●●sill Nazia●zen and Chrysos●ome is ●nuocatio● of Saints The Centurists thus write of Cypriā Cypriā doth not obscurely signify that Martyrs dead Saints did may for the liuing Yea they further charge Origen Who liued in no 2●0 with praying himselfe to holy Iob saying O beate Iob ora prouobis in seris They further charge him with inuocation of Angels They further thus concluding of that third age after Christ videas in Doctorum huius seculi scriptis non obscura vestigta inuocationis Sanctorum Touching Free-will The foresaid Centurists do reprehend Irenaeus who liued in the second age in that he admitteth as they say Free-well in spirituall actions And Osiander the Protestant thus saith of iustine who liued in the age of Irenaeus Iustine extolled too much the liberty of mans will in obseruing the Commandements of God To be short another of your brethren doth thus couple the ancient Fathers of those ages saying Cyprian Tertullian Origen Clemens Alexandrinus Iustine Irenaeus c. erred in the doctrine of Free-will Lastly touching the doctrine of Merit of workes Luther stileth Hierome Ambrose Augustine Iusticiarios Iustice-workers In like sort the Centurists thus charge Origen saying Origen made workes the Cause of our Iustification To conclude D. Humfrey thus confesseth of Irenaeus Clemens the one liuing in the first age the other in the second age after Christ It may not be denyed but that Irenaeus Clemens and others called Apostolicall haue in their writings the opinion of Merit of workes Aud thus farre M. Doctour of some chiefe points of the present Roman Religion taught by the Fathers of whō some liued in the fourth age and so within the compasse of the afore mentioned 160. yeares though most of them liued in the first second third age of Christ from whence we necessarily euict that no change of the Faith of Rome in the said poynts was made within the compasse of the sayd 120. yeares which time was aboue set downe betweene the confessed period of the Churches Purity and the acknowledged generally 〈…〉 ceiued doctrine of the now Church of Rome And here but that I am willing to auoid all prolixity I do assure you I could auerre iustify the like touching all other Catholicke doctrines taught by the Fathers of the former ages and accordingly beleeued at this day by the Church of Rome Yet before I end this point I will adioyne to the former proofs this ensuing consideration touching the fore said ●60 yeares It is this if we consider either the plurallity of our Catholiche Articles or the incompatibility which diuers of them beare partly to the outward sense partly to mans naturall propension or the diuersity of Countries Nations in Christendome most remote one from another all which cur said Catholicke Religion is acknowledged wholy to possesse at the later end of the sixt Age or Century I say if we consider all these different Circumstances the time of the said ●60 yeares within which most Protestants do teach this supposed change did happen is infinitely too litle and wholy disproportionable as that within the cōpasse thereof so great 〈◊〉 change and alteration should be wrought especially in such an admirable manner that whereas in the beginning of the said 160. yeares it is auerred by the Protestants that not any one point of our Catholicke Religion was then taught yet at the end of the said 160. yeares it should so ouerflow all Christendome with such a violent streame as that no sparke of Protestancy supposing afore it were professed or any other Religion did remaine in any one Country or other but that all was wholy extinct and as I may say annihilated Such an imaginary change and alteration I say as this is more then stupendious and wonderfull and such as since the creation of the world neuer afore hapned But M. Doctour giue me leaue by the way to aske

God for which you suffer See the like texts noted in the margent That the auncient Fathers mantayned the doctrine of merit of works see for greater breuity Ignatius Ireneus Basill Chrysostome Nazianz Nyssene Cyprian Ambrose Austin Ierome The iudgment of the auncient Fathers touching merit of works is discouered besides by their owne testimonyes euen from the acknowledgment of the Protestants For first we find D Humfrey to confesse in this s 〈…〉 rt Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolicall haue in their wrytings merit of Works In like sort the Centurists thus charge Chrysostome Chrysostome handleth impurely the doctrine of iustification and attributeth merit to works They also t 〈…〉 censure Origen Origen made works the cause of our iustification Brentius in like sort saith that Austin taught assiance in mans merits towards remission of Sinns Luther styleth Ierome Ambrose Austin and others Iustice Workers of the old Papacy D. Whitakers thus wryteth of the age of Cyprian Not only Cyprian but almost all the most holy Fathers of that tyme were in that errour as thinking so to ●ay the payne due to sinne and to satisfy Gods iustice D. Whitguift as afore of praying to Saincts so of merit of works thus confesseth Almost all the Bishopps and Wryters of the greeke Church and Latin also were spotted with doctrine of merit Bullenger confesseth the great antiquity of the doctrine of merit in these words The doctrine of Merit satisfaction and iustification of works did incontinently after the Apostles tyme lay their first foundation To conclude this point M. Wotton no obscure Protestant reiecteth the authority of Ignetius the Apostles scholar touching merit of works in this sort I say plainly this Mans testimony is nothing worth because he was of little iudgment in Diuinity Thus farre touching our Aduersary acknowledgments of the Fathers iudgment herein Now that some learned Protestants do teach and beleiue the doctrine of Merit of Works to be true and Orthodoxall doctrine is no lesse euident then the former point For it is taught as true doctrine by the Publike Confessions in their Harmony by M. Hooker by Melanct●on and by Spandeburge the Protestant To the former doctrine of merit of Works I will adioyne the doctryne touching works of Supererogation Which doctrine is greatly exagirated and depraued by many Protestants who are not ashamed to traduce the Catholicks and to diuulge both by penne and in Pulpit that the Catholicks do hould that their works can do more then merit Heauen But this is the Protestant● 〈…〉 lumny since the Catholicks do not hould or beleiue any such thing Therefore I will sette downe the true definition of an Euangelical Counsell distinguished from a Precept seing vpon Euangelicall Counsells works of Supererogation are grounded An Euangelicall Counsell of Perfection is called any good Worke Which is not commanded by Christ but only commended by him and poynted on to vs by hym As the Vowe of Chastity of Pouerty of Obedience and diuers other good Works not commanded by God It differeth from a Precept First because the subiect of a Precept is more facill and easy then that of a Councell Secondly in that a Counsel doth include in it the Performance of a Precept and something more then a Precept Thirdly in that Precepts are common to all Men to performe Counsells are not so Fourthly Precepts of their owne nature do oblige Men to their performance Counsells are in the choyce of one to performe or not performe Lastly Precepts being obserued are rewarded being not obserued the transgression is punished Whereas Counsells being obserued and kept haue a greater reward being not kept no punishment followeth Thus far touching the definition of an Euangelicall Counsell Which in other words may be also thus defined An Euangelical Counsell is any such good Worke of high Perfection to the performance whereof we are not bownd as that we sinne in not doing of it Now whereas it is commonly obiected against the doctrine of Euangelicall Councells That we are so obbliged to God as that we cannot euer do more then we ought to do It is therefore heare to be conceaued that if we consider Gods benefitts bestowed vpon vs we willingly acknowledge that Man can not do more good then he ought no not the thousand part of that he ought to do in that Man cannot render or retaliate any thing of equall valew and worth to Gods benefitts Neuerthelesse Yf we consider the Law and Commande imposed by God vpon vs then man may be sayd to do more then indeede he is obliged by Gods Law to do For although Man cannot exceede or equall Gods benefits with his owne works yet he is not become guilty hearby seing Men is not obliged to performe more then that only which God commaundeth Euangelicall Councells take the cheife and first proufe from sacred Scripture As wheare it is said There are certaine Eunuchs who haue gelded themselfs for the Kyngdome of Heauen Which place is expounded of the Euangelicall Counsell of Chastity by Cyprian Chrysostome Austin and others A second text to omit diuers others for breuity is that where our Sauiour sayth to the yong Man Yf thou wilt be perfect go and sell all that thou hast and giue it to the poore and thou shalt haue treasure in heauen Which text is interpreted of the Euangelicall Counsell of pouerty by S. Ambrose S. Ierome and S Austin The foresayd doctrine is further confirmed by the authority of the auncient Fathers For b 〈…〉 es their expositions of the foresaid places of Scripture this doctrine is further taught by Origen Athanasius Basil Chrysostome Nazianzene Cyprian Ambrose Ierome and finally by Austin who speaking of Precepts and Counsells vseth the very Word Supererogation thus saying of precepts and Counsells Dominus debitum imperat nobis in his autem si quid amplius supererogaueritis in reddendo reddet nobis The doctrine of Euangelicall Councells is warranted and taught besydes by the former auncient fathers of the Primatiue Church euen by diuers learned Protestants According hearto we find it is mantayned for true doctryne by M. Hooker by D. Co●ell and by Bucer And thus f●r breifly of Iustification by Works of merit of Works and of works of Supererogation The Catholicke Doctrine touching Indulgences THe Vi●ulency of Protestants against the doctrine of Indulgences is most remarkable Wherefore for their better conceauing of the state of this Question or Indulgences this following in the Catholicke Doctrine First that Mortall sinne is remitted by the Sacrament of Confession so far forth only as concerneth the guilt or offence of God and the punishment of eternall damnation yet so that this eternall punishment by Gods Mercy is turned into temporall punishment as appeareth by the example