Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
work_n good_a merit_n merit_v 6,691 5 10.7705 5 false
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
A55978 The rights and liberties of the church asserted and vindicated, against the pretended right and usurpation of patronage. Park, Robert, d. 1689? 1689 (1689) Wing P363; ESTC R22377 75,800 180

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

uni ex minmis hisce meis fratribus fecistis mihi fecistis c. That is a man seems to design Jesus Christ for his Heir when he ordains his goods to be distribute to the poor for when a beggar receives Almes Christ himself stands by and stretcheth forth his own hand with him for in as much says he as you did it to the least of my Brethren you did it to me c. XIII But to clear this yet farther it may be observed that any Right a Patron can pretend to give a Pastor to his maintenance is quoad the Pastor but a groundless pretence and so a super vacaneous and useless grant the Pastors Right to his maintenance being fully established in his person by his lawful Call to the Ministry and his faithful discharge of it So that unless the Patron will pretend that he can put a Minister in a spiritual capacity and so claim the power of Ordination which is indeed Christ's Power committed to his Ministers as well as that of Election he can give him no right to his maintenance but such as will be superfluous For as abundantia non vitiat so neither does it strengthen or confirm a right And tho' what the Patron gives should be granted to be a confirmation yet it can give no new right confirneatio enim nihil novi juris addit sed antiquum jus tantum roborat it being the Pastors spiritual capacity Mat. 10.10 Gal. 6.6 1 Tim. 5.18 and faithful discharge of his duty and that only which gives him a full and unquestionable Title to his Wages XIV Next it may be observed very Naturally that if what a man hath once given away and devoted to the Lord for pious uses be no more his that gave it then certainly the founder of a benefice cannot expect to retain to himself and much less to his heirs and successors a negative Interest in the maintenance of the Ministers of the Gospel with so little use and advantage and so much prejudice to the Church And therefore tho' such Acts of Favour and Charity as are freely and gratuitously bestowed on the Church seem to plead more for the Rights of Patronage than such as are done per modum debiti or for satisfyng of a Moral duty and obligation to which the Donor or Founder was previously engaged yet there is none who perform such Acts out of the singleness of their Heart and from a true principle of advancing the Glory of God and a sincere motive of Compassion to their poor Brethren that will sciens volens witting and willingly desire or expect a Priviledge so useless and yet so hurtful to the interest of the Church and the good of Souls This were indeed a Flie in the Appothecaries Oyntment XV. The thrid sort of Benefactors to wit those who confer Favours on the Church partly per modum debiti and partly per modum Eleemosynae partly by way of debt and partly by way of almes and free Charity are such persons as have some civil interest and estate within the bounds where the Kirk lyes but not the whole And therefore their building or doting of a Kirk is neither wholly Duty nor wholly Charity but part of both They being indeed previously oblidged thereto but are not oblidged to do it alone and without the Concurrence of the rest of that bounds for bearing their share of the common Burden seing he that so dots or builds is but one of many having interest And those Benefactors can as little as the former expect to be gratified with the Priviledge of Patronage for the Reasons already mentioned For if neither he who acts in such matters wholly per modum debiti nor he who acts wholly and intirely per modum Eleemosynae can with any reason assume or expect such a priviledge Then also by a necessary consequence he who Acts in bestowing such favours on the Church partly the one way and partly the other hath as little if not less ground than either of them to expect or assume the same XVI There is a fourth fort of Benefactors if they deserve the Name and those are such as do their good deeds meerly out of ostentation and from a Pharisaical principle of Va●h glory to be seen of Men to gain the applause of the World and not to advance the Glory of God or the good of his Church And for the most part those Men bestow their Favours where there is little or no need seldom or never consulting how or where they may place them with most advantage for the publick good but satisfie themselves if they can place them in such a way as they may bear most bulk in the eyes of the World. This is a truth so undenyable that it was certainly from this vanity that the Monastries Nunneries Abbacies Pryories Cloysters c. both in this and other Nations before the Reformation from Popery and in other Popish Countries to this day were endowed with so many rich livings that in some places they possest near or above a third of the whole Land in others near a full half as the devotion as it was then termed or rather the superstitious folly of a simple and ignorant People and the influence and interest of a cheating and idle Clergy inclined them Thus many Church-men turned in effect to be Temporal Princes And generally the interest of the Clergy in the Legislative Power and Exercise of the Government of these Nations became very large upon the account of the great Interest and Authority they enjoyed by such ample Revenues and Possessions which was the true Criginal of making the Clergy the third Est●te in the Conventions and Geveral Councils of St●te both in these Lands and else where Lut those Benefactors if they may be so named are so fully exposed by our Blessed Lord in that 6. of Matth. and elsewhere Matth. 6. that it will be needless to insist any farther upon them And certainly this sort of men less than any of the former deserve any trust or priviledge in the Church of God Their vanity and self-seeking which is the principal or rather the only Motive and Design of all their Actions deserves much rather the Censures of the Church than any encouragment by trusting them with a power that they are utterly incapable to manage with any measure of Wisdom or Discretion which are Qualities that men of such a vain and ostentive humor are seldom or never blessed with XVII As for the last sort of Benefactors To wit such as from an opinion of Merit confer such good Offices on the Church thinking thereby to deserve life and happiness at the hands of God and going about to establish their own righteousness by the works of the Law it is little wonder that such men who do so highly injure and rob our blessed Lord and only Saviour of the honour of that compleat ransom and satisfaction payed by him to divine Justice for the sins of his
elect as to think that they can merit eternal felicity by their own works which is to say in effect that they will be their own Saviours and that Christ died in vain I say it is but little wonder that such men should expect to be gratified with a power to encroach upon the rights of the Church and to rob the members of Christ of their spiritual liberties and priviledges as well as they have robbed the Glorious head of his due honour But sure I am there is no sincere Christian in the Church of God but will think a priviledge of this nature worse bestowed upon those than upon the worst of the former sort of Benefactors And therefore I shall say no farther as to them XVIII Last of all as this pretence of a Reservation is of no weight in favours of the first Founders or Donors themselves whether they confer such good offices gratuitously or otherways to give them the acclaimed rights of Patronage in Retribution and recompence so it hath much less force to continue the same in favours of their heirs or others who succeed them on a singular title of Donation Sale Permutation c. For as those may be very far from being indowed with the merits and qualifications of the first Donor so for the most part they are so far from tracing his footsteps and example by gratifying the Church that with all their hearts they would be content if it were in their power to void and nullifie their Predecessors deeds And as in civil offices it is or ought to be the merits or qualifications of the Office bearer himself that is respected in giving him the trust nam in officits Personae industria respicitur which also is the main reason why regularly a Judge or Magistrat transmits not his office to his Heirs after him nor substitutes another in his place So much less in Ecclesiastical offices such as the Canonists pretend the power of Patronage to be and trusts that concern the Spiritual interests of the Kingdom of Christ and the good of Souls ought the same to descend to heirs or others acquiring right upon a singular title SECT VI. The Reservation pretended can be no ground for the Jus Utile of Patronage I. AS to what may be alledged from this pretended Reservation for founding of the Jus Vtile of Patronage or rather the utilitas hujus Juris whereby the Canonists pretend that if the Patron or his Children become poor so as they cannot live another way they must be alimented out of the Rents of the Benefice as some sort of a Retribution for their having gratifyed the Church when they were in power tho' this may be sufficiently cleared by application of the Grounds already mentioned yet I shall desire the Reader farther to consider these things II. First that if this Jus utile be a right to which the Patron will needs pretend a valid and legal Title so as he may pursue for it by an ordinar action at Law before the civil Magistrat as he may do for other interests that fall within his privat patrimony I do not see how any such right can be allowed For tha which is once consecrat and devoted to God for pious uses is no more his that gave it as we have cleared from the fore cited instance of Ananias Saphira c. And therfore no man can retain any privat interest in it III. Next if the Patron or his Children be really in necessity and restrict the right pretended to a claim in point of Charity I think no man will deny but there lyes an obligation upon the Church to extend their Charity to them in giving them a portion of these goods that belong to the poor as far as she can without prejudging of others who may deserve her Charity as well and perhaps better tho' on a different account But in such a case this Claim must not be allowed so far as to exhaust what was given at first for this were indeed to drain the fountain of Charity which would be a misericordia crudelis so to speak an unjust and cruel mercy It is a general rule in the disposal of Charity to do good to all men in need Galat 6 10 but still with a preference in favours of such as are of the houshold of Faith one part of duty must not shoulder out an other Christian prudence must be adhibit as much in this as in other matters And as the Canonists them selves do grant that the Patron is not to be alimented except when he is truly in necessity so many of them acknowledge that even then he is only to be entertained out of such goods as are destinate for the use of the poor and so as his part of Charity do not prejudge others Patronus non est alendus niside residuis duntaxat quae alias sunt pauperum IV. Lastly this is a right so personal to the Patron himself and his family that it can never be bought and sold or be transmitted to others who acquire right upon a singular Title And so many of the Canonists determine this Jus utile to be a right meerly personal et adeo Iuhaerens ossibus Patroni ut in alium transferri nequeat for otherwise the Church upon this account might be oblidged many times to aliment both the Patron himself and those who acquire right from him if both should happen to fall poor at the same time SECT VII The denyal of Patronage can be no discouragement in gratifying of the Church something obiter of the Dilapidation of the Church's Patrimony I. AS to the latter part of the Ground proposed for a Foundation to the Rights of Patronage to wit that the denyal of the Priviledges acclaimed will prove discouraging for any to gratify the Church for the future tho' by what is already said it be sufficiently answered yet I shall add First That it is most certain that such as look for no higher reward and encouragment than what a Priviledge within time can give them and set not their Hearts on the promises of God for the reward of a more enduring Substance than what a present World can furnish them with will never be capable to perform the least Act of pure and cleanly Charity which those only who betake themselves to the true grounds of encouragment in the promises and word of God and are free of low and selfish ends can practise II. Next the assuming of such a priviledge as this over the Church will be so far from being an encouragment that upon a serious and considerat Reflection we shall find that as such an usurpation does highly injure the interests of the Church so it will much more endamage those that are guilty of it by making a Forfeiture of the rewards that the Lord hath promised to true Acts of Love and Charity flowing from sincere principles and motives and for single and honest ends and may provock the divine Justice to pour out