Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	faith_n	justify_v	papist_n	5,930	5	8.9109	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87879	An answer to the Marques of Worcester's last paper; to the late King. Representing in their true posture, and discussing briefly, the main controversies between the English and the Romish Church. Together with some considerations, upon Dr Bayly's parenthetical interlocution; relating to the Churches power in deciding controversies. To these is annext, Smectymnuo-Mastix : or, short animadversions upon Smectymnuus in the point of lyturgie. / By Hamon L'Estrange, Esqr.	L'Estrange, Hamon, 1605-1660.	1651 (1651)	Wing L1187; Wing L1191; Thomason E1218_2; ESTC R202717	68,906	120

opinion who was a married Presbyter 't was not so in the opinion of those Bishops Athanasius a speaks of who were married nor so in our Island b for near six hundred years Protestants deny Prayer for the Dead this they had from Aerius Aerius was not condemned for an Heretique by Saint Augustine for denying Prayer for the Dead he onely saith that Aerius fell into Arrius his Heresie Propria quoque dogmata addidisse nonnulla dicens orare pro mortuis non oportere and added some private opinions of his own saying that we ought not to pray for the Dead So Augustine and Dogmata opinions are not Heresies Protestants deny Invocation of Saints this they had from Vigilantius for which he is condemned by Saint Hierome To deny Invocation of Saints was no Heresie in Hieromes time for Augustine his Contemporary saith that the Martyrs whose names are celebrated at the Altar non tamen a sacerdote invocantur are not yet invocated by the Priest Protestants deny Reverence to Images this they had from Xenias 'T is well known Worshiping of Images came first into the Church by the second Councel of Nice and as well known that that Councel was condemned by the Councel of Frankford And the Fathers ancienter far than both enroll the Gnosticks and Garpocratians aamongst Heretiques for adoring of Images and if it be Heresie to adore them it is certainly none to deny them Adoration Protestants deny the Real presence this they had from the Capernaites The Capernaites were no more Heretiques than the Disciples themselves of Christ for as one said How can this man give us his flesh to eat John 6. 52. So the other This is an hard saying who can hear it v. 60. Protestants deny Confession of sins to a Priest so did the Novatian Heretiques and the Montanists Protestants deny not Confession Auricular Luther who saith it is not necessary nor to be exacted yet withall saith it is utilis non contemnenda Profitable and not to be slighted Bucer commends it and saith It is the duty of Ministers to exhort rich persons to it Our Church in some cases injoyns it Nor did Novatus deny it his Error was that they who in Times of persecution fell away to Idolatry and delivered up the sacred Scriptures to be burnt should never be admitted to communicate with the faithfull in the Congregation not excluding them from all hope of mercy with God but from Communion with the Church that the strictnesse of this Discipline might strike into men the terror of Apostatizing And the Catholique Church her self went but one degree but one step further in her Indulgence beyond Novatus for whereas he in Reconciliation thought once was too much she her self thought but once enough and this was done as Augustine said Ne medicina vilis minus utilis esset aegrotis Lest the cheapness of the medicine should hinder the cure Nor did Montanus though too rigid in this particular deny it wholly for his Excommunication was but ad omne pene delictum for almost every offence and almost is a word of qualification of abatement Protestants say we are justified by faith onely this they had from the Pseudo-Apostles Our Justification by faith onely we had from Saint Paul Rom. 3. 28. and we hope he was no Counterfeit no false Apostle The false Apostles Saint Augustine speaks of were they who held that justifying Faith might be severed from and without works such an Opinion the Church of Rome maintains to this day and Protestants undertake the Papists for it Lastly as I have shewed your Majesty that your Church as it stands in opposition to ours is but a Congeries of so many Heresies so you shall finde our Doctrine amongst your own Doctors At last the Marques is come to his Lastly and if his So here proves no better than his former As his Lordships shews will be but So So And first he begins with the Greek Church who he saith holds Invocation of Saints Adoration of Images Transubstantiation Communion in one kinde but his Lordship is clearly out in the last for they communicat under both kindes though received at once {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The Bread sopt in the Wine as Christophorus Angelus a Native of that place assures us And for Worshiping of Images he is half out there too for though they worship Images yet in their Churches they will not endure them as the Papists do In many points it cannot be deny'd they have confederacy with the Church of Rome they have their Errors and are censured for them by us and so they are by Bocardus a Monk with a Faxit Deus c. God grant there be no Fopperies crept into our Church meaning the Romish also His Lordship did toto coelo errare was Heaven wide when he reckon'd the Greek Church amongst our Doctors though true it is they hold indeed with us in the weightiest with the Papists in the most points And to little better purpose was it that he urgeth against us Luther the Hussites Wickliff and the Waldenses we own them not for our predecessors they had their Errors the Rancidity of Rome was not wholly out of them nor could it be expected otherwise For Illumination is not in Divinity as in Philosophy an instantaneous action we blesse God for the light they had though umbrageous and clouded yet was it such as discovered the nakednesse and shame of the Church of Rome And since the Marques hath begun to us we will requite him with shewing the Romanists our Tenets amongst their own Doctors whom they do and always account undoubted Catholiques and because he begins with Transubstantiation we will follow him in his own Order And first take notice when this opinion began to be an Article of Faith and for that hear Scotus Transubstantiation was not a point of Faith till the Lateran Councel And Tonstal Of the manner how Christs body is in the Bread it were better to leave every man to his own opinion as it was free before the Lateran Councel This Councel was celebrated as Bellarmine holds Anno 1215. And yet her decision hath not passed very currant neither For Scotus saith it doth not seem to be deduced out of Scripture that the substance of the Bread is not in the Eucharist Petrus de Alliaco That the substance of the Bread ceaseth to be there is not evidently imply'd out of Scripture Durandus T is rashnesse to affirm the body of Christ cannot be in the Sacrament but by conversion of the Bread into it Cajetan There appeareth not in the Gospel any coercive Argument that these words This is my Body are to be understood properly Walfridus Strabo After the celebration of the passe-over Christ delivered the Sacrament of his body and bloud in the Substance of bread and wine Ferus Since certain

Commandments we hold it impossible for any man in what state soever to observe any one much less all should God be extreme to mark what is done amiss yet we hold too that in some sort the whole Law may be fulfilled and that is in Saint Augustines sense a All the Commandments are then accounted observed when what is defective in our obedience is forgiven The Scripture Luke 1. 6. urged by his Lordship was produced long since by Pelagius and Augustines Answer shall be mine b Zachary was a man of singular sanctity yet was it necessary for him to offer sacrifice first for his own sins Hebr. 7. 28. So then if Zachary had sins he kept not all the Commandments for sin is but the transgression of the Law But it is said 1 John 5. 3. His Commandments are not grievous nor are they but are his Commandments there spoken of the Moral Law assuredly No Saint John will tell you clearly what they are chap 3. v. 23. That we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ And love one another Nor can we fulfill these Commandments but we must first be born of God v. 1. chap. 4. 7. So that an unregenerat person will not be able to set a step forward to that performance nor can our new birth render us so perfect as to say we have not sinned for that were to make God a Lyar 1 John 1. 10. The Marques saith the Fathers are for us But if they be why then did he not cite their words as well as vouch the places but I fear 't is otherwise for I cannot make out no not by conjecture what either Origen or Cyril or Hillary hath to his advantage Hierome indeed saith a It is in our power either to sin or not to sin but it is with this caution and Salvo pro conditione fragilitatis humanae as far as human frailty will admit And how little Hierome is for them his Commentary upon the Galatians ch. 3. will inform us where he saith b No man can fulfill the Law and perform all things which are commanded M. We say Faith cannot justifie without Works you say good Works are not absolutely necessary to salvation Here the Marques slides from the point and wilfully leaves his old wont of challenging our opposition for whereas he should have said You say Faith alone can justifie he tells us here we say good Works are not absolutely necessary to salvation Necessary to salvation is one thing necessary to justification another salvation and justification are different things one is the cause the other the effect We hold good Works are necessary to salvation but not absolutely The Thief upon the Cross was saved without them thousands who believe and are prevented by Death before their Faith can shew it self in Works are saved without them Infants dying are saved without them so they are not absolutely necessary no not to salvation but to justification they are not so much as necessary for as our Church saith We are justified by faith onely this will appear first by considering what things are required to justification and those are three first God's great mercy and grace secondly Christ's Justice in satisfying and paying our ransome and fulfilling the Law for us lastly by a true and lively faith in Gods free grace and Christ's merits So that good works are clearly outed Secondly faith alone justifieth without works because we are justified by faith before we can do good works and works are not good till justifying faith makes them so But though faith alone justifieth without works yet it cannot be alone and without them for impossible it is for any man to believe God will be gratious to him and that Christ's righteousness and merits shall be ever imputed to him who at that instant of believing doth not seriously and unfainedly resolve to obey and observe to his uttermost all God's Commandments The places of Scripture alleadged by the Marques against our Faith alone without Works are first 1 Cor. 13. 2. Though I have all Faith and have no Charity I am nothing There is faith indeed but no justifying faith 't is the faith of miracles Saint Paul tells us so chap. 12. v. 9. The faith mentioned Luke 17. 8. of removing mountains and so the Apostle would have told us in this very Text had not his Lordship by what faith I know not removed those mountains those words out of his way Secondly James 2. v. 24. By works a man is justified and not by faith onely This I confesse is an eminent place and hath exercised the wits of all Expositors how to reconcile it to that of Saint Paul Rom. 3. 28. A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law Many have gone several ways and some not the right Luther having beaten his brains about it a good while at last threw the whole Epistle of Saint James out of the Volume of Canonical Scripture Hugo Grotius that great Scholar of the latter Age hath taken it to task by it self and hath indeed shewn great Reading but I confesse as to the elucidation and clearing of the difficulty he makes me no wiser than I was before and indeed after all hath been said Aquinas his sense will I think have most voices that good works justifie declarative by declaring our faith before men not offective by making us just before God M. This opinion of yours Saint Augustine saith l. de fid. op. c. 14. was an old Heresie Augustine mentions it not as an Heresie but onely saith that in the Apostles time some misunderstanding that place of Paul Rom. 5. Where sin abounded there grace superaboundeth thought faith onely necessary to salvation and therefore neglected moral duties and sanctity of life and this we call the high way to Hell as well as Augustine Hillary in his 7. chapter or canon upon Matth. hath nothing tending to justification either solitary without or associated with works but can. 8. he is expresly at Fides sola justificat Faith alone justifieth Ambrose saith Eternal rest belongeth to those who have that faith Quae per dilectionem operatur which worketh together by charity So Ambrose and so say we M. We hold good works to be meritorious you deny it we have Scripture for it Our Church saith All the good works that we can do be imperfect and therefore not able to deserve our justification His Lordship produceth out of Scripture Matth. 16. 27. He shall reward every man according to his works Answer I confesse our Translation gives it so but the word in the original is not He will reward but {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} He will render But though reward be not there yet Matth. 5. 12. 't is said Great is your reward in Heaven and there is reward and great reward too and the Marques inferreth that Reward in the end presupposeth merit in the work but sure it is

much the odds of Rome M. We hold that every Minister of the Church especially the supreme Minister or Head thereof should be in a capacity of fungifying his Office in preaching the Gospel c. you deny it How his Lordship makes the Church do Penance and puts her head and heels together for how the supreme Head can properly be a Minister of that Church whereof it is Head passeth my understanding what our Church denieth is this It is not lawfull for any man to take upon him the Office of publique Preaching or ministring the Sacraments in the Congregation before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same And this is all his Lordship's Text urgeth M. Nor we onely deny it saith the Marques but so as that our Church hath maintained and practised it a long time for a Woman to be Head or supreme Moderatrix in the Church and many have been hanged drawn and quartered for not acknowledging of it I have read indeed of some such Women as his Lordship speaks of one in Revel. 17. 1. and by her fine cloaths vers. 4. she should be a Queen and as a Queen I am told she sits chap. 18. vers. 7. I will not say what that Queen is for fear I procure my self ill will Another who first made Rome the Mother-church And another in England called Qu. Mary who used that Title of Head of the Church and no offence taken at it having been conferr'd upon her Father by Act of Parlament in the time of Popery but her Sister Elisabeth thought it enough to be called supreme Governess who were martyr'd for not acknowledging her so neither can I nor doth his Lordship tell I shall say little to his Lordship's points of Absolution and Confession their practise is very antient and commendable and as in other cases our Church leaves them arbitrary so in some she injoyns them For Absolution you may see her form prescribed in the Liturgy in the Visitation of the Sick for Confession the Rubrick Paragraph 2. before the Communion M. We hold men may do Works of Supererogation this you deny Had not Supererogation or Superarrogancy rather been a saucy and malepert Tenet it might have given in good manners the Possibility of keeping the Commandments to have been before it for sure we should in reason be out of Gods debt before we bring him into ours But we must take it as we finde it nor am I ashamed to own what our Church holds viz. Voluntary Works besides over and above God's Commandments which they call Works of Supererogation cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety and she reasons from Christ saying plainly When ye have done all that are commanded to you say We are unprofitable Servants His Lordship voucheth onely one single Text and that of the Vow as he takes it of single life But I observe All hear not that saying but they to whom it is given so then it is a gift if we return no more than was given where 's the Supererogation and whereas the Marques tells us it is no Commandment had he consulted with the Greek Grammar he would have found {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} let him receive it in the Imperative Mood and therefore Athanasius calleth it Caeleste aeternae virginitatis mandatum the heavenly commandment of perpetual virginity The Fathers were I grant much enamored with the vow of continency as a condition of life more agreeable to the service of God than the coupled state usually is but they never thought it a work meritorious much less able to supererogate at God's hand If they held any such opinion the Marques should have told us their words for the places urged and quoted demonstrate no such thing M. We say we have free will you deny it Our Church saith We have no power to do goodworks pleasant and acceptable to God without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will So then we deny not all free will not a free will to evil but to good for the Apostle speaking of us in an unregenerate state saith When we were dead in sin God hath quickened us together with Christ so that there is death first a total disability in us to good then there is the new birth quickned with Christ without this we live neither the life of faith nor of works not of faith for Whosoever believes is born of God 1 John 5. 1. not of works for Whosoever loveth is born of God also 1 John 4. 7. His Lordship's three Texts oppose not what we say 1 Cor. 7. 37. The Apostle speaks of a thing in its own nature indifferent and in such things free will we deny not Deut. 30. 11. Though Life and Death be there propounded to our choice yet doth it not follow that the power of chusing Life and Death is our own and if any say with Pelagius a God would not command what he knew we could not perform my Answer is with Augustine q God commands some things more than we can do to teach us what we are to crave at his hands Matth. 23. 37. We reade that the children of Jerusalem would not be gathered together which argueth a perversity and freeness of will to disobey Christ to obey him no power at all of our selves But there might saith his Lordship have been a willingness as well as an unwillingness else Christ had wept in vain True and there had been a willingness no doubt had God will'd their gathering by his secret and efficacious as well as by his revealed wil To his Fathers A folly it is to deny they many of them exprest themselves somewhat loosly in this point having to deal with those Philosophers who held the fatal necessity of all things went so far on the other side in advancing free will as they were in the ditch of error before they minded it yea Austin himself was a while in it till Pelagius with his Heresie roused him to look up and discover where he was Austin being awake first cals up the Church who upon serious consideration finding her Doctrine in this particular warped somewhat from the Truth by the heat of Disputation sets all those right in two eminent Councels first of Milevis where she saith a God saith not it is harder for you to do without me John 15. 5. but without me ye can do nothing at all Then that of Orange b It is the gift of God when we turn away our steps from wickedness We hold it possible to keep the Commandments you hold it impossible We do not hold it impossible to keep the Commandments we have kept them all we hold it is possible for some of them by some to be lost for we miss the second out of the first Table in the Popish Bibles but as touching observing the

the Pope as a common Father Adviser and Conductor to them all whereas the Protestants being not united under one Prince nor Patriarch are as severed and scattered Troops c. His Lordship might have remembred that but ten pages before Sir Edwin saith speaking of France The Catholiques are here divided into as different Opinions and in as principal matters of their Religion as they esteem them as the Protestants in any place that ever I heard of By which it is evident both that the Catholiques have jarrs and no small jarrs neither From Divisions the Marques dislodgeth and proceeds next to the bad Lives of Protestants I confesse by the little I have searched I see a great deal of false play in his Lordships Instances to lay all open were time mis-spent I will neither admit all his Accusations for true nor affirm them all false enough I conceive it is for us in this particular to say The best is the Triple Crown it self is able to match them and over-match them too chuse what vice what sin you please for it hath afforded conjurating Popes who have made private Contracts with the Devil Alexander the sixth Paul the third Sylvester the second Benedict the ninth John the thirteenth Gregory the seventh for it hath afforded an idolatrous Pope as Macellinus for it hath afforded incestuous Popes as Paul the third Alexander the sixth and John the thirteenth for it hath afforded bloudy and truculent Popes as Boniface the seventh Paschal the second Vrban the sixth And lastly it hath afforded Whore-masters an innumerable Crue so that Bellarmine himself is so hard put to it to salve the matter of the dissolutenesse of Popes as he hath nothing else to say but Quot numerari possunt qui rectissime credunt tamen perditissime vivunt How many may be reckoned up who are of sound belief yet of wretched lives His Lordship having as he conceives given sufficient caveat what it is to rely upon such mens judgements as Luther Calvin Beza c. Next takes notice of an Objection his Majesty made That the Church of Rome hath fallen from her first Love and old Principles and undertakes to prove an Identity and samenesse of Doctrine in the now Church of Rome and in the Primitive Church during Saint Augustine's time for which Father's worth he produceth the great esteem he hath amongst Protestants themselves and indeed he deserves all the good can be said of him being of all the Fathers the chiefest Florist fullest of Elegancy and therefore most delightfull and also the most judicious and solid and therefore most edifying but yet for all that Saint Augustine himself had his Re●●ctations and he calls it himself a necessary work In this Parallel and comparing both Churches together the Marques spends many pages which I shall answer in as few lines And first I might demand were his Lordship living as David did of the Widow of Tekoah Is not the hand of Joab or Cardinal Peron with thee in all this Could he or durst he deny it Undoubtedly no there being no other difference than between French and English and the Reply of a Cardinal to the Father of a Marques to the Son But as the Cardinal saved the Marques a great deal of labor in penning his eighteenth Chapter of his Reply to King James so a very reverend and learned Bishop hath saved me as much in already answering that eighteenth Chapter of the Cardinal's Reply and he hath done it so full so home that never as yet durst any Jesuit or other of the Romish perswasion take him to task for it to that excellent Piece I shall transmit the Reader with this onely cautionary hint that what the Bishop page 7. citeth out of Saint Augustine de Civit. Dei l. 17. c. 20. is no where to be found in that Tome or Tract but is in his sixth Tome contra Faust Manich. l. 20. c. 21. and instead of Post Adventum in the Bishops reade Post Ascensum for so it is and so it must be I wonder much that his own Manuscript he being so diligently precise should have it so and that the Error should escape also those judicious and exact Supervisors who published those posthume Works After all these borrowed or rather stollen Comparisons the Marques makes no doubt but his Majesties judgement will tell him that the Church of Rome hath not changed her countenance nor the Papists fled from their Colours but that they do antiquum obtinere True indeed the Romish Catholiques do still antiquum obtinere keep their old wont the old wont of the ancient Hereticks and what that was Tertullian can inform us Adjectionibus by foisting in as This is my body which is given for you not to you detractionibus by lopping and laming as leaving out Do this in remembrance of me Scripturas ad dispositionem instituti intervertere wresting the Scriptures to serve their own turns This is all the Antiquity his Majesties judgement could tell him of in the Romish Church where differing from ours Nor is it enough his Lordship proves as he would perswade us the Romish Antiquity but he will also shew the Protestants theirs in the condemned heresies of the ancient Church as for Example the Protestants hold that the Church may err this they had from the Donatists But I would gladly know from whence the Marques had his Information concerning this opinion of the Donatists he quoteth Augustine for it I confesse and with a passion as if every where you might finde it in him where he undertaketh Donatus but sure it is his Lordships every where will come to no where for the opinion of Donatus was clearly this that all Churches but his own were erroneous his own onely infallible and out of which hold he did that none could be saved which I conceive is the very Tenet of the Romish Catholiques and so the Donatists and they are nearest ally'd Protestants deny unwritten Tradit ions this they had from the Arrians I deny that Deny Traditions we hold and grant in Ceremonies and matters not fundamental and we oppose to the Romish party their own comparison of Traditions to a nuncupative will which cannot by the Rule of our Law convey a free-hold and Estate in Fee So it is with Traditions in Divinity they cannot constitute any Articles of Faith or impose any thing of the necessity of salvation for which recourse must be had to the written Word and to that only Though Arrius is branded for an Heretick yet neither Augustine nor Epiphanius so far as I am able to understand them have discovered any such Heresie in him as a Recusant to unwritten Traditions Protestants teach that Priests may marry this they had from Vigilantius This is Heresie now adays but ab initio non fuit sic 't was not so in Saint Paul's opinion who appointed a Bishop should be the Husband of one Wife 't was not so in Tertullian's