Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	bind_v	law_n	nature_n	1,568	5	5.4669	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A02464	Against Ierome Osorius Byshopp of Siluane in Portingall and against his slaunderous inuectiues An aunswere apologeticall: for the necessary defence of the euangelicall doctrine and veritie. First taken in hand by M. Walter Haddon, then undertaken and continued by M. Iohn Foxe, and now Englished by Iames Bell.; Contra Hieron. Osorium, eiusque odiosas infectationes pro evangelicae veritatis necessaria defensione, responsio apologetica. English	Haddon, Walter, 1516-1572.; Foxe, John, 1516-1587. aut; Bell, James, fl. 1551-1596.	1581 (1581)	STC 12594; ESTC S103608	892,364	1,076

man hath Freewill that may not bee founde either to bee geuen of Gods liberalitie or required to set forth the assistaunce of his grace This much Augustine Briefly to knitte vp the matter in a word or two if you will know to what end commaundementes couenaunts and exhortations are deliuered by God Learne this out of S. Paule if Augustine cānot satisfie you That is to say Bycause after the knowledge of good euill is once receaued we are therfore vnder the law of Necessitie bycause also we are vnder the law whether we be able or not able to performe the law speaketh vnto vs of Necessitie that if we be able to performe them we should ly●e by them and that if we despise them euery mouth should be stopped and all the world be culpable before God And withall that such as are not yet regenerate in Christ vnderstandyng how much is cōmaunded beyond their habilitie power may fleé to prayer and seéke for the Mediatour and call vpon him for assistaunce of Grace on the other side such as the holy Ghost hath endued with more bountyfull giftes of his gracious liberalitie may with more earnest bent affection yeld them selues thankefull to God who hath geuen them strength to be able to walke in his wayes Whereby it is come to passe that neither the Necessitie of the commaundement is made frustrate by our imbecillitie nor mans endeuour any thyng weakened by the Necessitie of infallible certeintie nor yet freédome or will disabled by Gods prouidence all which you do most falsely reporte to ensue vpon the doctrine of Luther I come now at the last to that great and most haynous matter the very chief and well-spryng of all the other absurdities To witte Wherein Luther maketh God to be the Authour of all mischief and chargeth him with vnrighteous dealyng in this Argumēt for sooth For where as Luther doth attribute the successes of all things be they good be they euill to God as to the chief and principall originall and doth conclude all thynges vnder the absolute Necessitie of prouidence hereupon the aduersary doth gather threé moustruous inconueniences The first that by this meanes men haue not freédome vpon their owne willes The second that men are not Authours of their owne sinne The thyrd that God doth execute his Iudgementes vpon men vniustly for the Sinnes whereof they be not the Authours but God Whereupon Simme Suttle argueth from destruction of the consequent on this wise Osorius Argument God doth not take away freedome from mans will nor is Authour of euill but euery man is Authour of his owne euill Neither is God iniurious to any man in executyng his punishment vpon him for his offence Ergo Luthers doctrine is wicked and haynous whiche teacheth absolute Necessitie of doyng good or euill by the foreknowlede of God and whereby he imagineth God to be the Authour of wickednesse There are extant in the Scriptures many famous and notable testimonies touchyng the truth of Gods Praedestination and foreknowledge of thynges to come which neither Osorius nor all Portingall are able to gaynsay Whereupon Necessitie of al the actions which we do must neédes ensue in respect of the Hypothesis as Schoolemē tearme it But as touchyng his glorious assumption of the haynous inconueniences concurraunt withall that is most false For first neither doth the freédome of mans will perish so but that men may alwayes willyngly voluntaryly chuse that whiche they will Neither is any man charged with such Necessitie as the force of cōstraint may compell him to doe that whiche he would not And it may come to passe as is mentioned before that the thinges which be Necessary vpō the Hypothesis beyng done without the same Hypothesis may seéme to be chaūceable and not Necessary And by what meanes then is will bereft of freédome vnlesse paraduenture bycause God seyng mans wil inclinable to all wickednesse doth not restrayne it when he may for this cause he may be sayd to take away freédome from will But this withstandeth our disputation of Necessitie nothyng at all For although this freédome be holpen to good yet remayneth the same neuerthelesse freé to wickednesse in the sense spoken of before But he might haue holpen you say In deéde nothyng was more easie For what cā not his omnipotēcie bryng to passe wtout any difficultie but what then I pray you Ergo God is vnrighteous bycause whē he could geue grace he would not Truth in deéde if god did owe this grace to any mā of duety but by what law will you auerre that God was boūde to geue this grace of duetie First God did at the first creatiō endue the whole nature of mankynd with Freewill So also if he did suffer mankynd aftewardes to be directed by the same Freewill I pray you what vnrighteousnesse was there in him hitherto as yet But ye will say that this Freewill is spoiled and vneffectuall to worke spirituall good thynges through whose default I pray you through Gods default or mans default If it were mās default for what cause then is God accused as either vniust for not geuyng assitaūce or cruell for punishyng the Sinne which euery of vs doe committe of no coaction but of our owne voluntary will But besides this he chargeth GOD to be the originall cause of all mischief If that be true then must this needes follow whiche were execrable to be spoken that wicked mē are vnrighteously damned as whom him selfe had created to the end they should be damned and so doth punish them for the offences whereof him selfe was Authour and procurer at the first For this is Osorius obiection For remedy whereof I perceaue that I had neéde to goe circumspectly to worke least God be disabled in any thyng that is due to his omnipotencie or that more be ascribed to his power then is agreable with his Iustice. Moreouer as there want not testimonies in the Scriptures which in vtter apparaunce may seéme very well inclinable to either part so I thinke it not amysse to vse herein some ayde for the better discouerie thereof Besides this must be had no small consideration of the simple and vnlettered multitude who once hearyng God to bee named the Authour of wickednesse and not vnderstandyng the matter aright will forthwith interprete thereof as though it might bee lawfull for them forthwith to rush into all disorder whatsoeuer that they are vniustly punished if they doe the euill which God doth both will and cause to be done Whiche kynde of people I wishe to be aduertized when they heare the direction and orderyng of all thynges good or euill to be ascribed vnto God that they Imagine not these wordes to be so spoken as though God were willyng to haue iniquitie committed That is to say as though GOD were either delighted with wickednesse or as though wicked men when they do wickedly did therein accomplishe Gods will simply

but by the Mediatour the Sonne through whom righteousnesse is Imputed not purchased by workes neither to him that worketh saith hee but to him that beleeueth in Christ that Iustifieth the wicked And yet you seémyng not to bee so much as acquainted with this righteousnes by Imputation as that ye dare not once name this worde Imputation doe notwithstandyng stand so much in your owne conceite as though Christ at his commyng should finde all fayth in Osorius but no fayth at all in Luther If a man might be so bold with you it were no vneasie matter to pike out diuers other sentences out of Scripture whiche would quickly cracke the credite of your fayth As where the Apostle writyng vnto Timothe doth so manifestly Prophecie That it should come come to passe before the end of the world That many should departe from the faith beleeuing lyeng Spirites and doctrines of Deuilles forbidding Marriadge and the eating of meates which the Lord hath prepared to be receaued with thankes geuing These doctrines of Deuils for as much as the lying spirite of Osorius doth so stoutely mainteine bende all his force to vphold in this latter age of the world as besides him no man more obstinately what may be thoughe els but that either he is departed from the fayth or that the Apostle is an open lyar Agayne Where the same Apostle writeth touchyng Antichrist paintyng him out in his colours as it were so liuely expressing him to the apparasit view of the world his Throne his wickednesse his iuggling his lyes his pride his immesurable arrogancie vauntyng him selfe beyond all hautynesse of mans Nature What may a man Iudge of these sentences the meanyng of the whiche can by no meanes possible be applyed to any thyng els thē to the Romish Sée 2. Thess. 2. Agayne in the Reuelatiō of S. Iohn where the same Antichrist is set in open stage hauing the shape and countenaunce of a meeke Lambe whiche vnder the visour of false hornes should resemble the true Lambe and restore the Image of the wounded beast to lyfe and speache Whiche place of Scripture bycause can not be wrested any other wayes then to that Romishe Ierarchie whiche bendyng to ruine at the first was restored by that great Archeprelate of Rome yet in this most apparaunt Text of Scripture if Osorius faith he demaūded whether it may be applyable to the Bishop of Rome we shall finde him as farre dissentyng from the purpose of this Prophecie as if he were demaunded the way to Canterbury he might aunswere a poake full of Plummes We haue hitherto sufficiently enough declared I suppose that Osorius for all his bragges is voyde of all ayde to defende his Fayth And so for this tyme I will commit the cēfure of those gay workes which flowe so plentyfully out of that glorious Fayth to that Iudge which shall display the hidden corners of darkenesse and to the consideration of them who by the view of his bookes haue skill to discerne a Lyon by his pawes or rather an Asse by his lolieeares Now remayneth at length to discouer briefly that which he barketh agaynst Luthers fayth Now let vs see Luthers fayth sayth hee whether it can bryng forth any liuely fruite It cā not by any meanes c. Lye on yet more a Gods name First of all bycause hee teacheth that all workes appeare they neuer so godly are desiled with sinne Nay rather but that you were by nature of so corrupt a Iudgement that ye can not frame your selfe so much as to speake the truth you would neuer haue patched this lye amōgest the ragges of your leasings Luthers disputation cōcerning faith good workes tendeth to nothyng els but that which the Scriptures euery where the sacred spirite of truth and S. Paule inspired with the holy Ghost doe by all meanes and reasons confirme which we all ought of very duetie to embrace For Luther endeuouryng to make euidēt the doctrine of Iustification comparyng our good workes with the lawe of God is enforced to confesse the very truth of the matter that is to say That there is nothing so holy in workes but beyng of it owne nature in some respect vncleane and defiled must néedes be vnsauorie in the sight of God if without Christ it bee racked with exact scrutyne of Gods seuere Iudgement And hereof quarell is pyked forthwith agaynst Luther as though he should affirme that whatsoeuer workes the very regenerated engraffed in Christ them selues did worke were nothyng els but méere sinnes and wickednesse And bycause he doth abbridge good workes in that part onely wherein they be falsely adiudged to be of valew to Iustifie before God Osorius doth argue agaynst him in this wise as though he did vtterly roote out of mans lyfe all Ciuill and Morall vertues and vertuous conuersation Wherein a mā can not easilye determine whether he doth shewe him selfe more iniurious to Luther or bewray rather his owne blockish grosenesse No man euer taught more soundly no man more highly commended good workes then Luther did beyng separated a part from the doctrine of Iustification And whereas he doth extenuate the force of workes in the treatize of Iustification he doth not therein so altogether derogate from workes as rather frendly aduertize them whiche through vayne Confidence of workes doe challenge to them selues righteousnesse in the sight of God and do depende so much vpon the deseruynges of workes as though there were none other foūteine from whence our Saluation might be deriued Luther therfore vsing Argumēt agaynst those persons doth boldly auow that all our workes are defiled yet not simply but in respect of their application beyng considered without the fayth of the Mediatour Whiche beyng most truely spoken by Luther is as sinisterly wrested by Osorius as though he had spoken it simply that there is no good or commendable thyng in workes nothyng in them acceptable to God though neuer so duetyfully or vertuously performed And for this cause hee concludeth at last as with an vnuanquishable Argument That by no meanes possible Luthers fayth could bryng forth any frutefull workes like as that barren figge tree growyng neare vnto the high way whereupon grewe nothyng but leaues But this is Osorius his owne conclusion not Luthers a Sophisticall cauill concludyng falsely If S. Paule doubted nothing at all to esteeme all thinges sinnefull which were done without faith Rom. 4. If it were lawfull for Augustine to write in this wise Thy workes are examined sayth he and are foūde all defiled Why doth he rage so furiously agaynst Luther bycause he doth professe that the déedes which we call good are in none other respect to be daémed for good thē as they bee valued by the fayth of the Mediatour The consideration of this doctrine as is of it selfe most assured so doth it not tende to that end that Osorius imagineth to discourage godly myndes from vertuous endeuour Rather well disposed

ouerwhelmed the glorious Maiestie of the Grace of the Gospell did of an incomparable shamelesse excessiue Impudencie extoll aboue Moone and Starres yea beyond all compasse of reason the force of mans Freewill in such wise that nothyng might beare palme besides mans merites onely and the workes of Freewill the mercy of God beyng vtterly banished and exiled Or if they did at any tyme admitte Grace to be cape marchaunt as it were with Freewill least they might seéme vtterly to exclude Grace Yet did they so admitte her as they dyd the Article of Iustification Wherein as they did with most vayne practize enforce this one point cōtinually to witte That fayth onely without workes could not Iustifie euen so and in lyk● maner in this question of Freewill they would neédes haue this to bee graunted that the Grace of God was not the onely foundresse of good workes and of our Electiō but a seruaūt rather or at the most a companion of Freewill Whose vnmeasurable errour forced Martin Luther to that vehemet sharpnesse of speach and not without good cause And yet in all that his heate of wordes what can any man I pray you finde beyng not otherwise lead by corrupt affection that is cōtrary to the naturall truth of thyngs or that is not in all respectes faithfully agreable with the very spirite wordes of Gods Scriptures Freewill is denyed to be of any value not bycause it is of it selfe nothyng if you respect the substaunce of it but in respect of the operation therof it is sayd to be altogether vneffectuall to that worke whereunto it is supposed to be conducible not much vnlike to that figuratiue phrase of speach wherewith Paule doth esteéme of Circumcision and Uncircumcision to be nothyng worth wherewith Esay the Prophet doth tearme Idolles and Idollmakers to be nothyng and wherewith Ieremy beholdyng the earth with open eyes was sayd hee saw nought Or as a man might say that Osorius doth say nothyng at all when as otherwise he is ouer lauishe of toung if you regard his wordes and sillables but nothyng at all to the purpose if ye cōsider his Argumentes Semblably Freewill is called a fayned deuise amongest thynges or a tittle without substaunce from whence ariseth no preiudice to mās nature onely the corruption of nature is discouered hereby For it is vndoubted as Augustine truly teacheth that we do will when we will and that we doe worke when we worke But to be able to will and to be able to worke bee bringeth to passe in vs of whom it is sayd God is hee that worketh in vs both to will and to doe geuing most effectuall power to our will whiche sayd I will bring to passe that you shall doe Aud agayne in other place Thinking sayth he we do beleue thinking we doe speake thinking we doe all whatsoeuer we doe c. Loe here you haue the tittle of Freewill And forthwith in the same Chap. But to the attaining the way of righteousnesse and the true worshipping of God we are altogether of our selues insufficient for all our sufficiencie herein proceedeth frō God c. Where you may easily conceaue the substaūce it selfe which Augustine acknowledgeth to be none at all in Freewill but affirmeth boldly to cōsiste wholy in God Albeit neither doth Luther him selfe when he tearmeth Freewill to be a fantasie or deuise in thyngs simply and barely affirme the same to be so but annexeth thereunto an addition namely Post peccatum ante gratiam That is to say After Sinne and before Grace Whereby the godly Reader may vnderstand that those persones are not noted here whom either the Grace of Christ hath vouchsafed into Freédome or whō after Grace receaued Christ will crowne in glory to come For there be certeine distinct differences of tymes and persons if you know them not Osorius whiche ought chiefly to be obserued wherein if you be as yet vnskillfull ye may repayre to your M. Lumbard who will lead you to a descriptiō of Free-will deuidyng it into foure braunches as it were Wherof the first is The same that was created ioyntly with mans nature at mans first creation sounde and perfect The second whiche after mans fall was throwen downe in them that were not regenerated The third whiche is proper and peculiar to the godly after their conuersion vnto Grace The last which shal be accomplished in those that shal be glorified As touchyng the first and last whereof the Deuines make no question at all as I suppose Agayne if you will assigne Freewill to the thyrd braunche Luther will nothyng gaynsay you whose disputation concerneth those persons chiefly who after Sinne before their conuersion beyng wounded with originall Sinne haue not as yet recouered health in Christ Iesu through the triacle of better Grace In which sort of people if you be of opinion that the state of Freewill ought by any meanes to be defended I would fayne learne of you first whether ye will inueste those persons with Freewill playnly perfectly whole and not diminished or otherwise If you will attribute such a freédome vnto them it remayneth then that by way of definition ye expounde the difference betwixt the state and condition of the first man before his fall and this latter state and condition after his fall But if you will dismember it and will graunt vnto them certeine vnperfect dregges thereof onely neither will Luther vary much from you herein so that ye will yeld some distinctiō thereunto and vtter playnly and distinctly what kynde of libertie you meane in what thynges you settle it and how it ought to be taken what this word Freewill emporteth and to what actions of mans lyfe it ought to be referred and withall will vnlose those crabbed knottes of equiuocatiōs wherewith ye seéke to entrappe the truth For whereas the actions of mans lyfe are not all of one sort or kynde some wherof proceédyng from nature it selfe be naturall others altogether faultie and corrupt others politique and apperteinyng to maners are morall called good Agayne some other spirituall and consiste in the worshyppyng of God It behoued you here to make manifest vnto vs whiche of those actions you do meane If you speake of the first kynde certes euē vnto these by the very law of cōmon nature it selfe we are all fastened boūde of necessitie wherby we are bereft of the greatest part of our freédome For what freédome can bee so mighty in mans wil as to preserue mā so that he neuer neéde to sleépe but be alwayes watchfull that he neuer be sicke but alwayes healthy neuer receaue sustenaūce not to disgest the foode receaued not to prouide for his houshold not to be carefull for him selfe his family not to be busied abroad not to rest at home not to enioy the commō ayre not to lyue not to dye not to performe the other dueties apperteinyng to mans lyfe whereunto we are forcibly drawen by course of

nature not so much by allurement of will as by very constrainte of necessitie I come now to the vse and handlyng of Ciuill trades and forreine disciplines and to other dutiefull actions and considerations of the same kynde which are dayly frequented in mans lyfe In the whiche albeit Luther will confesse many thynges to be conteined that are subiect vnto Freewill yet will he not otherwise graunt thereunto but that euen in the selfe same the vnderstandyng mynde is many tymes deceaued will defrauded and freédome altogether ouerthrowen And yet doe we not for that cause vtterly extinguishe will or freédome nor wrappe vp and entangle the mynde nor spoyle reason of coūsell nor dispossesse mā frō his aunciēt inheritaunce of choyse or will howsoeuer the cruell outrage of Sinne hath weakened and wasted the sinewes and strength of nature beyng well created at the first yet remayneth neuerthelesse that naturall power of the soule not onely in those that are renewed in spirite but in them also that are not regenerate in respect of those actions especially wherof I made mention before But if the question be remoued to those actions which do not belong to the naturall and common conuersation of life but apperteine to the spirituall worshyppyng of God and concerne the kyngdome of Christ who can not here easily discerne that Freewill before it receaueth Grace though it be garnished with neuer so gorgeous a tittle hath besides a glorious tittle onely nothyng els whereby it may defende it selfe from seruile bondage or rayse it selfe vp to attaine the true freéedome of Saluation I doe not speake here of that freédome Osorius which is properly opposite to constrainte and compulsary violēce wherof we vaunte all in vayne nor of that naturall power of the reasonable soule whiche we seéke not to shake of ne yet of mans will beyng regenerated which we do not disable finally nor yet of those actions wherewith this sensible lyfe is beautified but I speake of those affections which are ascribed to the spirituall lyfe of the person that is regenerate in Christ. Whereupon accordyng to those fiue distinctions afore mentioned as many seuerall kyndes of questions do arise which for auoydyng confusion must be seuerally distinguished First if a question be moued of the freédome of nature being pure and sounde as was before the fall of Adam who doth not know that the state of that will was most pure and freé And it is not to bee doubted that mans Freewill was absolutely perfect in his first creation But that man by sinne lost the same freedome altogether August Secundarely if the question bee remoued ouer to the substaunce and to that part of man wherewith the mynde is endued with vnderstandyng and appetite as if this be the questiō whether mans will which is called freé were after the fall of Adam vtterly extinct and of no substaunce we do aunswere here with Ambrose that the Iudgemēt of will was corrupted in deede but not vtterly taken away And agayne The deuill did not spoyle man of his will vtterly but bereft him of the soundenesse and integritie of will For although mans will and the vnderstandyng parte of his soule was miserably corrupted through originall Sinne yet was it not so altogether abolished but that there remayneth some freédome to doe freé I call it in respect of those thynges which are either naturally carryed to motion without Iudgement as brute beastes or whiche are forced by coaction agaynst nature as stones By this therefore that is spoken it appeareth that will wherewith we are naturally endued in respect of the essentiall and naturall disposition thereof doth alwayes remayne in mans nature how corrupt soeuer it be yea and remayneth in such wise as hauyng alwayes a freé and voluntary operation in naturall causes without all forreine coaction vnlesse it be hindered and a naturall sensibilitie also and capacitie as Iustine tearmeth it in heauenly thynges if it be holpē And this is it that Augustines wordes seéme to emporte to my Iudgement where speakyng in the defence of Freewill vseth these wordes Beleeue sayth hee the holy Scriptures and that will is will and the grace of God without helpe whereof man can neither turne vnto God nor profite in God Agayne in his secōd Epistle to Valentin The Catholicke faith doth neither deny Freewill applyable to good life or badd life nor doth esteeme therof so highly as though it were of any value without the grace of God either to turne frō euill to good or to perseuer stedfast in good or to attaine to euerlasting goodnes whereas it feareth not now left it may fainte and decay c. And agayne in an other place I confesse sayth hee that will is alwayes free in vs but it is not alwayes good But the maner how it is sayd to bee alwayes freé must be learned of the same Augustine It is either free from righteousnesse sayth he when it is the bondslaue of sinne and than is it euill or it is free from Sinne when it is handmayd to righteousnesse and then is it good c. It appeareth therefore by this twofold freédome of Augustine that mans will is alwayes freé both in good thynges and in euill thynges But we ought to conceaue of this freédome in this wise not that she hath power of her owne strength to make choyse of good or euill namely in spirituall matters as our aduersaries doe dreame But accordyng to Augustines interpretation whē will is naught it is of her owne disposition naught when it is good then is it guided by grace not vnwillyngly but voluntaryly without compulsion yet freé notwithstandyng alwayes whether it be good or bad bycause it is alwayes voluntary neuer constrained And this much touchyng the propertie naturall disposition of mās will which who so will deny seemeth in my conceite to do euen all one as if he should deny that man is a reasonable creature for I seé no cause why reason may be more sequestred from man then will ought to be seuered from reason Which two thynges are so vnited together with a certeine naturall affinitie are so mutually linked together with an inseparable knot in the reasonable soule that Reason cā neither performe any exployte without will nor will enterprise any thyng aduisedly without the guidyng of Reason Therefore as Iudgement belongeth properly to Reason so to will and to worke apperteineth properly to will whether it be to good or to euil The one wherof respecteth the substaūce of will the other is peculiar to the disposition therof But as this liuely Reason being enclosed within her certeine limittes boūdes hath her proper peculiar obiectes so that she is vnable to rayse it selfe beyond the cōpasse of naturall vitall causes vnles it be enlightened euē so will beyng straighted wtin the same limittes boūdes of naturall causes hath no power at all in it selfe either to attēpt or to