Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	heaven_n	pass_v	word_n	8,433	5	5.0308	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59405	The case of interest or usury as to the common practice, stated and examined in a private letter to a person of quality who desired satisfaction in that point / by T.S.	T. S. (Thomas Seymour)	1673 (1673)	Wing S2830; ESTC R37381	32,949	43

that is to say any thing more than our own or what we Lent For our Saviour speaks not here of Giving which is an entire quitting of all Right and Dominion to the thing bestowed and that for ever but of Lending which necessarily involves both a Right of demanding and an Obligation of repaying what was disbursed So that by Lending and hopeing for nothing thereby cannot be understood an Evangelical Counsel or matter of indifferency as if we should Lend and expect nothing again not so much as the Principal for this would not be Lending but pure Guift but a Precept of Charity to supply the wants of our Neighbour for a time when we cannot conveniently for good and all if it may be done without eminent prejudice to our selves for all the Commands of assisting the Poor oblige no further and not so much as hope have an eye or the least regard and respect to self-Interest which may accrue upon the score of Lending which is properly to hope for nothing thereby namely by the act of Lending but only the satisfaction to have done our Neighbour a Courtesie which I confess by the Law of Gratitude he is bound to acknowledge and if his Improvements have been notable in some measure to repay but by the Law of God I can neither bargain for nor exact upon the bare account of Lending To close this Argument I think this Dilemma is unanswerable Either our Lord and Saviour when he bids us do good and Lend hoping for nothing thereby imposes some duty upon us or his words were to no purpose and signifie nothing To affirm the latter is little better than Blasphemy since he himself so solemnly proclaimes that Heaven and Earth shall pass away but one Iota or Tittle of his Words shall not pass If he layes any Obligation upon us then either it is that we should lend and hope for nothing not so much as the Principal and this is more than I urge or the Defenders of Interest will willingly hearken to or else we must lend and hope for nothing by way of Augmentation or Overplus over and above what was delivered One of these Interpretations must be fastened upon these words or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing will be Terminus Impertinens as the School speaks and stand for as much as the Advice just nothing at all And now I leave the Usurer to his choyce let him take which Exposition he pleases one of them he cannot avoyd This for the Doctrine of the Blessed Jesus to which his practice was conformable though with some difference that what he only disswaded in words he severely punished in his actions as may be Collected from the 2 of St. John's Gospel v. 14. where we read that Jesus finding in the Temple them who sold Oxen Sheep and Doves and the Bankers Numularios 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is St. Matthew's word Those who sat with ready Money for such who would Borrow sitting he made a whip of small Cords and cast them all out of the Temple c. and the Money of the Bankers he poured out and the Tables he overthrew St. John indeed reports that he said only to the Sellers of Oxen Sheep and Doves Take away these things from hence and make not the House of my Father a House of Merchandize But St. Matthew chap. 21. 13. recounting the same History adds that he threw them out of the Temple with this smart sarcasme My House shall be called the House of Prayer but you have made it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Den of Thieves Now those who bought and sold could not properly be stiled Thieves since in it self buying or selling is an honest Vocation and therefore it is more than probable that St. John only mentions what he said to the Buyers and Sellers of Oxen c. but St. Matthew adjoyns what was particularly addressed to the Bankers or Usurers and shews that our Saviour made no distinction between their Profession and that of common Rogues And yet as we may discover from the Hebrew Antiquities these Bankers only accepted of some small present as fruits or some such like Commodity for the use of their Money far less considerable and indeed nothing in respect of what is demanded now adays It would not be besides the purpose to reflect here with many Holy Fathers and great Doctors how our Saviour by driving Usurers out of the material Temple did leave a sufficient Authority for the succeeding Prelates of his Church to exclude them from the Communion of Saints by Excommunication as is to this day and hath for many hundred years been practised in Catholick Countries by Ecclesiastical Canons Let me deal ingeniously with you either our Blessed Saviour in these two places so much insisted on did absolutely forbid the practice of Usury or we must confess that at least in this point the Gospel falls short of the Law and Charity which yet breaths in every line of the Gospel is more coldly pressed in This than That which in effect is to make Christians worse than Jews and affirm that Christians are allowed more unconscionable Exactions from one another than was ever permitted in the Mosaical Occonomie which assertion how offensive it would prove to pious Ears and discreditable to our Religion both with Jews and Heathens I leave it to your good judgment Madam to conceive more amply than I can represent Before I dismiss this Motive of the Divine Prohibition it will be worth the while to prevent a double Objection one is produced out of the Old Testament the other out of the New The former is from Deut. 23.19 Thou shalt not lend thy Brother Money to Vsury c. sed Alieno but to a stranger So that it seems Usury is not intrinsecally or in its own Nature Evil for then the exercise of it would have been indifferently denied towards All the Stranger as well as the Native or Inhabitant But to this the Answer is Obvious for I. This favours not at all our Modern Money-Merchants who take all fish that comes to Net not distinguishing between Strangers and their own Brethren 2. Since the coming of the Messias or the Blessed Jesus the Wall of Partition between Jews and Gentiles or Brethren and Strangers is now pulled down and both are made one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as St. Paul speaks Ephes 2.14 fecit utraque unum medium parietom maceriae solvens we are now all one Flock under that great Shepherd of our Souls and so all men are our Brethren and the By-word of Strangers is wholly Antiquated and consequently Universally Interdicted 3. By this Argument stretch'd to the utmost we could only take Use of Jews Turks and Insidels which I presume our Bankers will not be content with 4. I may speak in this matter as our Saviour himself did in the point of Divorce Math. 19.6 7. He had told the Pharises that Man and Wife were not two but one flesh and therefore what God had joyned