Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
work_n evil_a good_a tree_n 33,809 5 11.7409 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A65422 Popery anatomized, or, A learned, pious, and elaborat treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of controversie, between us and papists, are handled, and the truth of our doctrine clearly proved : and the falshood of their religion and doctrine anatomized, and laid open, and most evidently convicted and confuted by Scripture, fathers, and also by some of their own popes, doctors, cardinals, and of their own writers : in answer to M. Gilbert Brown, priest / by that learned, singularly pious, and eminently faithful servant of Jesus Christ M. John Welsch ...; Reply against Mr. Gilbert Browne, priest Welch, John, 1568?-1622.; Craford, Matthew. Brief discovery of the bloody, rebellious and treasonable principles and practises of papists. 1672 (1672) Wing W1312; ESTC R38526 397,536 586

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Church for calling the marriage of infidels a Sacrament For as we deny marriage to be a Sacrament at all properly so doth your Church deny the marriage of infidels to be a Sacrament properly But to let this pass I say because I will not deceive the Reader as ye do with appearances of contradictions through the ambiguity of the words Alphonsus de Castro lib. contra haeres verbo nuptiae haeres 3. Petrus a Soto lectio 2. de matrimonio two of your Doctors and sundry others say That marriage is not a proper Sacrament of the New Testament And yet the Council of Florence and Trent and sundry others of your Church say the contrary 2. Durandus a great Doctor of your Church saith in 4. dist 26. quaest 3. That marriage is not a Sacrament properly 3. Some of your Church held that carnal copulation in marriage is a part of the Sacrament some the contrary that it is neither a Sacrament nor a part of the Sacrament so Bellarmin testifies lib. 1. de sacram matrim c. 5. pag. 88. 4. Durandus and your Canonists hold That the Sacrament of marriage doth not confer grace unto them that receive it And yet our common doctrine is contrary this as Bellarmin grants ibidem Last of all Canus a learned Papist affirms That every marriage lawfully contracted among Christians is not a Sacrament but only that which is made by the Minister in a certain form of words the which Bellarmin and sundry others deny And you are of great diversity concerning the matter of that Sacrament among your selves These are not now shows of disorders and contradictions but they are so true and manifest that Bellarmin your chief campion hath confessed them de sacram matrim lib. 1. Judge thou now Christian Reader whither is it we or they that is at variance among our selves And this for the ninth point of your doctrine SECTION XVII Concerning Merit of Good Works M. Gilbert Brown ELeventhly our doctrine is that a man in the estat of grace doing good works merits or deserves a reward which is the doctrine of the Prophets Christ and his Apostles as may be perceived in these places and many the like a Gen. 15.1 2. Kings 15.7 Eccles 16.15 and 10.31 Psal 118.112 Prov. 11.18 Sap. 5.16 and ●10 17 Isai 3.10 Jer. 31.16 Fear not Abraham saith God I am thy protector and thy exceeding great reward In another place Therefore be ye of comfort and let not your hands be dissolved there shal be a reward for your work And in the Book Ecclesiasticus All mercy shal make place to every one according to the merit of his works With many more in the Old Testament then I am able to let down here But some of them I have noted And our Savior saith b Matth. 5.12 John 5.29 Matth. 10.42 and 16.1 and 16.27 and 25.34 and 20. Mark 9.41 Luke 6.35 Rejoyce and be glad for your reward is great in heaven And again They that have done good things shal come forth to the resurrection of life but they that have done evil to the resurrection of judgement And whosoever shal give drink to one of these little ones one cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple truly I say unto you he shal not lose his reward And c 1. Cor. 3.8.14 and 9.17.18 Eph. 6.8 S Paul saith Every one shal receive his own reward according to his labor And d 2. John 8. Rev. 22.12 S John saith Look to your selves that ye lose not the things which ye have wrought but that ye may receive a full reward And in his Revelation Behold I come quickly and my reward is with me to render to every man according to his works With many more the like in the Word of God What can our new men say against this doctrine of Christ his Apostles and Prophets seeing that there is no reward without merit because merces and meritum have relation together For there is no reward promised in the Word of God but for doing and working And albeit God hath promised to reward all our good deeds yet this promise is not without a cause that is to them that will labor and work and to do according to his will For he hath promised no reward to them that will not work but to such as deserves the same by their doings as I have noted before in the book called Ecclesiasticus the 16. chapter Maister John Welsch his Reply As for your doctrine of merits of works wherein you say That a man in the estat of grace doth merit eternal life and glory and that as well in respect of the work it self as of the covenant and promise made unto it So Bellarmin lib. 5. de justific cap. 17. yea that the works are in vertue equal and of as great valor as the reward of eternal life is so that there is an equal proportion between the works and eternal life And there are some of your Church and those of the learned among you who have gone further and affirm That the good works of the righteous merits life eternal in respect of the worthiness and excellency of the work it self suppose the Lord had never made a promise or covenant as Cajetanus a Cardinal and Dominicus à Soto as Bellarmin reports of them lib. 5. de justif cap. 19. And M. Reynold saith pag. 105. That good works and evil are laid in different ballance that good works are the cause of heaven as evil works are the cause of hell And Andreas Vega saith in 5 quaest de justific That the reward of glory shal not be greater then our good works have deserved What blasphemy is this your doctrine And surely if in any one point of your doctrine you show your selves to be men who not only knows not the holiness of God the unspeakableness of that other life the perfection and infinit vertue of Christs merits the perfection of his Law and mans infirmity and weakness especially you manifest it in this point For if ye knew any of these things ye would never profess such damnable doctrine For that our works may merit eternal life as ye say and that not only in respect of the covenant but in respect of the work it self there are five things required 1. That the work be perfect according to that measure of perfection which the Law of God requires and the whole Law must be fulfilled and that perfectly and continually 2. The works must not be debt that is such works as we are bound before to do For the paying of that duty which we ow already cannot merit properly a reward For will you say that for the paying of that which you ow already you deserve a reward 3. There must be a proportion and equality between the work wrought and the reward it self For if the work be less and the reward greater then that which is more then the work is not of merit but of liberality 4.
The persons to whom the work is done must be obliged and bound by right to render and recompense the worker for the worthiness of the work so that he is not just if he do it not And last of all the work must be our own and not anothers and the power our own whereby it is done and not anothers ere we can be said properly to merit by the same But all these conditions will fail in our works therefore they cannot be meritorious of eternal life For as to the first the Prophet saith That all our righteousness is as a menstrous cloth And James saith We all offend in many things and none there is that have contained in doing all things written in the Law in that perfection which it craves of us as hath been proved before therefore our works cannot be meritorious of eternal life And as to the second all that we can do or is able to do we are bound to do it already by the vertue of our creation and redemption and his other blessings already bestowed yea they oblige us to more then we are ever able to pay according to that saying of our Savior Luke 17.10 Even so ye when ye have done all that is commanded you say We are unprofitable servants because we have done that which was our duty to do Since therefore it is duty it cannot be meritorious of eternal life And as to the third there is no proportion between eternal life and our works the reward by infinit degrees surpassing the work and therefore the Apostle saith The afflictions of this life are not worthy of the glory which shal be revealed Rom. 8 18. Everlasting life being only the just reward of the sufferings of the Son of God Bernard saith What are all our merits to so great a glory serm 1. de annum And Athanasius saith in vita Antonij Not suppose we would renounce the whole world yet are we not able to do any thing worthy of these heavenly habitations As to the fourth the Lord is debtor to no creature For as the Apostle saith Who hath given him first and he shal be recompensed Rom. 11.35 The Lord is all-sufficient in himself and so needs none of your labors and so our works cannot oblige him And therefore Augustin saith serm 16. de verbis Apostoli God is made a debter unto us not by receiving any thing from our hands but because it pleased him to promise And to the last the Apostle saith What hast thou that thou didst not receive now if thou didst receive it why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it 1. Cor. 4.7 Seeing therefore all our works are imperfect and seeing we are not able to fulfill the Law and seeing all that we can do is but our duty and there is no proportion betwixt eternal life and our works and that the Lord is debtor to no man and all our ability of doing is from the Lord only therefore our works cannot be meritorious of eternal life Hear further what the Fathers say in this point Augustin saith in manuali c. 22. All my hope is in the death of my Lord his death is my merit my refuge salvation life and resurrection my merit is the compassion of the Lord I shal not be void of a merit so long as the Lord of mercies shal not want Origen who lived two hundred years before him saith in Epist ad Rom. cap. 4. lib. 4. I scarcely believe that there can be any work which may of due demand the reward of God forsomuch as even the same that we can do think or speak we do it by his gift or bounty Then how can he ow us any thing whose grace did preveen us And he saith afterward That the Apostle assigns eternal life to grace only Ambrose saith de bono mor. cap. 1. Everlasting life is forgiveness of sins so then it is not merit Jerome saith adversus Pelag. That before God no man is just therefore no man can merit And again he saith The only perfection of man is if they know themselves to be imperfect and our justice consisteth not of our own merit but of Gods mercy I omit the rest for ●●ortness Now to your testimonies and reason to prove your merit of works which you shamefuly abuse bringing forth Scripture to cloke your damnable doctrine unto the which I answer shortly That there is a reward laid up with God for the works of every one be they good be they evil and according to their works shal they be tryed and every man shal be judged and recompensed accordingly as the Scripture plainly testifieth But that this reward of eternal life promised is of debt and not of grace and that our works are the meritorious cause of the same that the Scripture never affirms For the Lord freely and of his meer grace crowneth his own works in us and that not for the excellency of the work it self but of mercy freely for his Christs sake as both I have proved and the Fathers have testified So these Scriptures serve you to no purpose For the controversie betwixt us is not whither there is a reward promised and whither it shal be rendred accordingly to the same for that we grant but whither this reward is of merit or of grace The Apostle saith plainly in the 6 of the Romans The wages of sin is death but everlasting life is the free gift of God And in the 8 of the Romans it is called an inheritance Now if it be heritage to them that are in Christ and they heirs of it through him then it is not their merit As for the 16. of Ecclesiasticus it is Apocrypha and the text hath not that word merit as the old Interpreter whom ye follow translates it but according to his work As for the 118. Psalm and the 16 of Matthew ye are over seen in the quoting of them for they have no such thing As for your reason that a reward hath ever a relation to a merit that is false For the Apostle in the 4. of the Romans speaks of a reward that is imputed freely not to him who worketh but to him that believeth in him who justifieth the ungodly vers 5. And in this sense the reward of eternal life promised and fulfilled in his Saints is taken in the Scriptures And whereas you say that there is no reward promised but to doing and working that is false also for there is a reward of eternal life promised to the believer vers 5. And as for the promises of reward made to good works it is true it is made to them but not as though our works were meritorious causes of that reward but only that they are effects to testifie of our faith in the merit of Jesus Christ in whom only the promises are made to us and our works and for whose sake only they are fulfilled in his Saints For these causes therefore is the promise of reward made unto works first
not himself of his own righteousness but knows himself to be misterful of true righteousness sola autem fide in Christum justificatum and to be justified only by faith in Christ Ambrose in cap. 3. ad Rom. cap. 4. 9. saith They are justified by faith only through the gift of God And in the 4. chapter he hath thrise by faith only sola fides And in the 9. chapter also Sola fides posita est ad salutem that is only faith is appointed for salvation Chrysostome in homil de fide lege naturae saith The thief believed only and was justified And in homil 3. ad Tit. If thou gives credit to thy faith wherefore brings thou in other things as though faith only were not sufficient to justifie Augustin it is a known saying of his lib. 1. contra duas Epistolas Pelag. cap. 21. Works go not before justification but follow him who is already justified And in another place How vertuous soever ye report the ancient righteous to have been yet their vertue saved them not but the faith of the Mediator August de fide operib cap. 14. Cyrillus Alexandrinus lib. 10. in Joan. cap. 18. saith Man by faith only sticks in Christ inhaeret Christo Theophylactus in comment ad Galat. cap. 3. saith Only faith hath in it's self the vertue of justifying Bernard serm 22. in Cantic in the 1200. age saith Man being justified by faith only shal have peace towards thee What more plain now could the Fathers speak of Justification by faith only which you will not deny The Reader may learn how much credit is to be given to you who so boldly affirmed that neither Scriptures nor Fathers said with us against you I hope they will try you before they trust you in time to come For dare you say M. Gilbert that I have fained here ought of these Fathers and have not brought in their own words speaking Deny it if ye dare Be not so impudent and shameless M. Gilbert in your untruths and lies again for by this ye will both discredit your self and your Religion As for the 2. of James which ye quote here that by works a man is justified and not by faith only I answer This word to be justified is taken in the Scripture two manner of ways First to be accounted righteous before the tribunal of God and in this sense only a lively faith apprehending the death and righteousness of Christ justifies us and of this is the controversie Next it is taken for a declaration of ones righteousness as in the 3. of the Romans vers 4. That thou may he justified in thy words that is declared to be just when thou judges And in this sense it is taken in this place So that this is the meaning of it Ye see then by works man is justified that is declared by his works to be just and not by faith only that is by the profession of his faith in Christ So then James speaks not of our Justification before God which is by faith only but of the declaration of our righteousness before men which he calls Justification and that for these reasons 1. Otherwise James should be contrary to Paul who saith That a man is justified by faith without works which is blasphemous to think therefore James speaks of our Justification before men whereby our Justification before God is declared and made manifest 2. The scope of the whole chapter and whole Epistle testifies the same For his purpose is to cast down the arrogancy and presumption of such who bragged of their Faith as though the bare profession that they believed in Christ were sufficient to save them suppose they did not bring forth the fruits thereof Therefore the Apostle takes this in hand to prove that they are not justified by a dead faith but only by that faith which brings forth the effects thereof And therefore he saith in the 14. verse What availeth it my brethren when a man saith he hath faith when he hath no works can that faith save him And in the 18. verse Show me thy faith out of thy works and I will show thee my faith by my works And because it may be ye say this is my commentary therefore hear how one of your own great and chief pillers Thomas of Aquin in Jacob. 2. expones the same from whose judgement I hope ye will not appeal Here he speaks saith he of works that follows faith not according to that sense wherein Justification is said to be the infusion of righteousness but according to that sense that Justification is called exercitatio justitiae the practise or declaration and confirmation of righteousness So if ye will believe him Justification here is taken not for our justification before God but for the declaration of our righteousness And so the ordinary Gloss in Jacob. 2. exponing that place writes Abraham was justified without works by faith only but nevertheless the offering up of his son was a testification of his faith and righteousness What can be more clearly spoken by any Would you have more then this So then this place of James speaks not of our Justification before God and therefore serves not to prove this your doctrine As to the 2 of the Romans v. 13. It is true it is not the hearers of the Law but the doers of it which are justified if rhere were any who had fulfilled it But the Apostle concluds in the 3. chapter all under sin both Jew and Gentil and therefore gathers that by the works of the Law no flesh is justified And so we will leave this to you to do that also in the 19. of Matthew spoken to the young man Do the commands c. And as for the rest of the testimonies I wonder to what purpose ye have quoted them except for to make a show of Scripture and testimonies For they speak only of the necessity of good works which as they cannot be separat from true faith so no man can attain to salvation without them because where ever Christ dwels by true Faith not only he justifies them but also sanctifies them and makes them fruitful in good works The which we grant and therefore do urge the same continually knowing for a truth that without holiness no man shal see God Heb. 12.14 and that the ax is laid to the root of the tree and that every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit shal be hewen down and cast in an unquencheable fire Matth. 3.10 They speak not therefore of the efficient or formal or instrumental cause of our Justification but of our sanctification with the fruits thereof and therefore serves not to prove the controversie that is in hand As for Augustin his testimony as you corrupt the Scriptures so do ye his testimony also for this was the opinion which was risen up in the Apostles days as he testifies there for these are his words That some thought that faith only was
time and the relicks of Martyrs Julian the Apostat was of the same opinion as Cyrillus contra Julian declares The same Julian despised the image of Christ and his Saints as the fore-said Cyrillus lib. 9. contra Julian makes mention Master John Welsch his Reply As to this fourth heresie they took away all the liberty and freedom of the will in man but this is not our doctrine For we affirm that man hath a liberty and freedom in his will in natural moral and sinful actions but not in these things which pleaseth God before he be renewed This is your fourth calumnie As for the fifth Jovinian taught as Augustin haeres 82. and Jerome in his 8. Epist. in his defence of his Books against Jovinian set it down and Bellarmin de Ecclesia militant lib. 4. cap. 9 reports that the married estat was equal with virginity Unto the which we answer That true and undefiled virginity we prefer always as the more noble and excellent gift in them to whom it is given but we doubt not to say but that marriage is better in them that cannot contain And generally we dare prefer the honest marriage of Christians before the proud and fained virginity of many Monastical votaries as Augustin in Psal 99. saith Lowly and humble marriage is better then proud and hauty virginity As to the second point he affirmed indeed that the choise of meats and fasting was no merit and this is no heresie But if this be heresie then the doctrine of the Scripture is heresie For it teacheth us That life everlasting is the free gift of God Rom. 6 23. as hath been proved before This is your fifth calumny As for the sixth of Vigilantius heresies if the denying of prayer to be made to Saints be an heresie then it is an old heresie for it is the Lords who is the ancient of days for this is his doctrine Call upon me in the day of thy trouble and I will deliver thee Psal 50.15 Isa 42.8 And let Augustin also go for an heretick who saith That the Saints are not called upon Aug. de civitate Dei lib. 22. cap. 20. As for the despising of the burning of lights and candles in the Churches in the day time I know not to what use it serves except to be a sign that ye are blinded of the Lord who in the midst of the day light your candles Did Jesus Christ or his Apostles so And this was the custom of Pagans which you have taken from them Irenaeus lib. 6 cap. 2. As for the despising of the relicks of Martyrs if he despised these then he erred for we both teach and practise that the bodies of the Saints should be honorably buried and we do not despise them But if he taught that they should not be worshipped then I say he is not an heretick in this but you are hereticks and idolaters who express contrary the Commandment of God do worship the creature Matth 4.10 Deut. 6 13. And Vigilantius was no heretick nor his opinions condemned as heresies only there was a hot contention between him and Jerome And as for Julian he calumniated the Christians that they adored dead men for Gods and the tree of the cross Unto whom Cyrillus answered That they adored not the sign of the cross but God only So this was but Julians calumny against them But if he had lived in your dayes he might justly have objected it unto you Master Gilbert Brown 7. Valentinus the heretick denyed the very body of Christ to be in the Sacrament as Irenaeus saith lib 4 cap. 34. 8. Simon Magus Marcion and the Manichees held that God compelled man both to do evil and good as S. Augustin haeres 46. Vincentius Lirinensis S. Clement of Rome in recognit and Epiphanius haeres 42. have in their works which is the doct●ine of the most learned of the Protestants as Melancthon Calvin Beza in lib. de praedest contra Calv. sycophant and others 9. The Novatians denyed pennance as S. Augustin haeres 38. affirms 10. The Manichees denyed the necessity of Baptism as the same S. Augustin haeres 46. reports 11. Aërius Eustathius and the Manichees condemned fasting days ordained by the Church as Leo Epist 93 cap 4. Epiphanius haeres 75. the Council of Gangr in praefat as S. Augustin lib. 10. cap. 3. cont Faust Manich. records 12. The Manichees used to fast on the Sunday only as S. Augustin haeres and S. Leo ser 4. de qua witness Read for this also Concil Gang. cap. 13. de consecrat dist 3. ne quis Ignatius ad Philip. de cons●crat distinct 3. jejunium 13. The Pepusians and Collyridians denyed holy Orders and made it no Sacrament as S. Augustin haeres 4.24 and Epiphanius haeres 44.79 write 14. The Pelagians denyed that confession should be made to a Priest as our Chronicle writer testifies Hect. Boet. lib. 9 cap. 19. They deny also that Baptism was needful to children or infants as S. Augustin reports haeres 88. 15. The Donatists den●ed the order of Monks and other religious persons as S. Augustin in Psal 132. and S Chrysostome write Tom. 5. against the dispraiser of the monastical life Master John Welsch his Reply Whether Valentinus taught so or not I contend not but the question is of this doctrine of the real presence whether it be contrary to Gods Word or not the which I have proved sufficiently before in the fourth point of doctrine and so the denying of it is no heresie But yet it appears not by this testimony of Irenaeus which ye cite here that he taught such doctrine As for the 8. heresie it is a calumny to ascribe it to us for Melancthon Calvin and Beza have no such doctrine You are not ashamed M. Gilbert of impudent lying As for the 9. of Novatus heresie that is a calumny to ascribe it to us For Novatus denyed that there was any place of repentance to these who after they were baptized fell from the faith by any infirmity or violence of persecution as Epiphanius testifies of him that he said No man who hath fallen after Baptism can any more obtain mercy But our doctrine is contrare to this for we teach that there is place to repentance for any sin except the sin against the holy Ghost which is ever punished with final impenitency As for the 10. of the Manichees heresie their doctrine was as Augustin saith there That Baptism served nothing for salvation to any and that none who followed their sect should be baptized and therefore they brought in a contempt of Baptism which is contrary to our doctrine For we teach that Christians and their children is to be baptized and that the contempt of it is damnable suppose not the want of it As for the 11. and 12 heresies we contemn not fastings that are appointed by the Church for lawful causes but we deny that they should be tyed to certain and prefixed dayes as your Church doth and we think