Selected quad for the lemma: heart_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heart_n	behold_v	lord_n	servant_n	3,008	5	7.4746	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A08426	A true report of the disputation or rather priuate conference had in the Tower of London, with Ed. Campion Iesuite, the last of August. 1581. Set downe by the reuerend learned men them selues that dealt therein. VVhereunto is ioyned also a true report of the other three dayes conferences had there with the same Iesuite. Which nowe are thought meete to be published in print by authoritie	Nowell, Alexander, 1507?-1602.; Day, William, 1529-1596. aut; Fielde, John, d. 1588.; Fulke, William, 1538-1589. aut; Goad, Roger, 1538-1610. aut; Campion, Edmund, Saint, 1540-1581. aut; Walker, John, d. 1588. aut; Charke, William, d. 1617. aut	1583 (1583)	STC 18744; ESTC S113389	169,017	230

away our sinnes and heale all our diseases through the righteousnesse of Iesus Christ our onely saluation Open our eyes we beseech thee that wee may at this time beholde and so frame our hearts that we may gladly embrace thy most holy trueth as thou hast left it vnto vs by thy holy seruants the Prophets and Apostles Graunt this knowledge and loue of the trueth with dayly increase not onely to vs O Lorde who through thy grace alreadie make profession thereof but also vnto all those that yet set them selues against the same that they acknowledging the trueth of thy word may cleaue to it forsaking all superstitious vanities and seeing the all sufficient righteousnes sacrifice of thy only sonne may lay hold of it denying them selues renouncing their own merites falsly named righteousnes Graunt vs these things O heauenly Father for thine onely sonnes sake Iesus Christ our alone sauiour redeemer in whose name we aske the praying as he hath taught vs Our Father c. Walker We haue in the forenoone entreated of the Canonicall scriptures and of their sufficiencie Now we haue to entreate of fayth God graunt vs grace that we may see the trueth and hauing fayth may rest in it to our endelesse comfort Let vs before we enter into the matter declare somewhat concerning the state of the question We holde therefore that we are iustified by fayth onely and that freely no other woorkes concurring for that purpose And yet we set not downe a bare and naked fayth as our aduersaries charge vs. For we confesse that fayth hope and charitie are coupled and lincked together and that loue is the greatest But we affirme that fayth onely is that instrument whereby we lay holde vpon the loue of God which is the onely foundation of our saluation By that title therefore wee exclude all mens workes and vertues as meritorious and onely looke to the merits of Christ. Camp I will declare to you my meaning also Wee are agreed that God doeth iustifie and for Christs sake onely through his grace and through his mercie alone through his Sacraments and through baptisme Thus farre we agree but herein we disagree For we say that when God doth iustifie he doth giue vs of his grace three distinct giftes fayth hope and charitie and these are as three causes of iustification and charitie a principall cause which frameth the first act in vs. We say therefore that as grace is put in vs in iustification so also our righteousnesse is enlarged through good workes and is inherent in vs. Therefore it is not true that God doeth iustifie by fayth onely Charke Campion you are not to vse your old sleight in running from the matter and loading one thing vpon an other The question is whether we be iustified by faith onely that is now that which is in question to be decided 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and you are not to change the state of the question Walker Well let your declaration stande for defence although we agree not For there are sundry causes of iustification finall and middle But faith is the first thing in vs that receiueth iustification and yet it is not of vs. Camp I grant that there are mo causes then one Walker Well though I be an olde man and haue bene long from the vniuersitie I meane yet to examine you in the grounds of these things and to go with you from poynt to poynt and so we shall find out our disagreement best I pray you what is the Etymon of fayth Camp It is called fayth Quia fit quod dictum est Because it is performed that is spoken as I take it Walker That is true Dicitur a fiendo quia Dominus fidelis est Because the Lorde is faythfull standing to his worde and keeping his promise with vs. But in vs fayth is a certaintie or sure perswasion and therefore it is called by the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or elenchus foundation or argument It is therefore the ground and before all other things that come after it as the foundation is before the building Camp I grant it But what inferre you hereof Walker This I inferre Fayth is the grounde and before all things that come after it Ergo it is before hope and charitie Camp In nature it is before them but it doth not iustifie before they do come Walker Prius and posterius First and last bee taken diuers wayes It is not before Tempore but Dignitate ordine Not in time but in dignitie and order Camp That is contrarie to S. Paul For he sayth Charitas est maior Loue is greater Walker You must vnderstand what Paul meaneth therby It is Maior duplici respectu It is greater in a double respect In respect of God and in respect of men and so extendeth further Camp Uery well I like your causes well but it is simplie greater and more excellent Walker Let me proceede then It is greater in that it is more necessarie to the life of man and also in diuturnitie because it neuer dieth nor hath any ende Camp I grant you all this But what are those to the matter of iustification But let me adde a thirde also that it is dig●…ior because faith and all good workes are nothing without loue But let vs heare your argument Walker The ground is before that which is grounded vpon it and in all good order we vse to set the most worthie first Thus therefore I reason Faith is the foundation ergo before the other Camp If you meane in dignitie it is not true It is before in order but not in dignitie For the roote is not more worthie then the tree though it be afore it Walker Paul sayth Fundati radicati in fide speaking of the assurāce they had in their saluation And it was necessarie they should be thus grounded and rooted in the faith before they could bring forth the fruits of faith The fruits were good works which were not the cause of their iustification but the effects of men engraffed in Christ iustified already this root was before the fruit Camp I grant as before In order but not in worthinesse For the fruit is more worthie then the roote Walker Omnis causa efficiens est dignior effectu Euerie efficient cause is more worthie then the effect Camp I deny that faith is the efficient cause of good works It is a cause antecedent but not efficient But we are agreed vpon this Let vs go to another argument Walk Uerie well it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sure argument of things that are not seene a thing vndoubted Camp Where is the place It is called the foundation of euerlasting life and an argument of things not seene because I knowe it is by no other argument but by fayth But what inferre you Walker You shall heare anon What is Subiectum fidei the subiect of fayth and what is Obiectum fidei the obiect of fayth In quo

Charke I do not onely thinke but knowe of a certeintie that you are deceiued and will shewe you the booke Camp Note this obiection This is myne answere to it Hermogenes the Heretike did alleadge a bastard tradition and Tertullian doth call him to proue his opinion by true scriptures For Tertullians argument is not to say It is not written Therfore it is not true but to call him to proue the Scripture true which he alledged for him Charke And note this answere He that euen now knewe no such booke taketh presently vpon him to discourse of the argument thereof What great boldnes is this From what present reuelation doth it come Beside your boldnes your error is great in affirming that Hermogenes brought a bastard tradition For there is no such thing as may appeare to any man that for triall hereof wil reade the booke Hermogenes is cōfuted for saying as an Aristotelian Philosopher the God made al things of materia prima Againe of your answere I conclude that of necessitie the proofe of euery particular tradition must be by a true scripture And it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a generall position Tertullian would haue Hermogenes proue all that he helde by scripture Camp I say it is not to shewe a bastard writing for his tradition but that which is true scripture Charke And that is all I aske for what do I seeke more but to proue that euery tradition must be proued by true Scripture when therefore you Iesuites bring in vnwritten traditions concerning your Candles your vnholy graines your Agnus deis and such beggerly stuffe wherewith you abuse and pester the world Tertullian sayth you bring a Vae vpon your selues except you can proue the vse of them by Scriptures Camp Why I say it must needes be proued there or els it is not to be receaued Charke Remember what you graunt I aske no more To leaue Tertullian with you to aduise better of I alledge also a place of Basill out of his treatises called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 capite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This place doth clearely establish the sufficiencie of scripture and banisheth all vnwritten and selfe will worshippings Consider the place for it is worthy of consideration as making against you in this question and charging you with pride and apostasie for bringing in things not written Camp Well let these your speaches passe Reade the place S. Basill is not against vs. Charke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It is a manifest Apostasie or falling away from the faith and a fault of high pride eyther to dissalowe any thing written in the Scriptures or to bring in any thing not written seeing the Lorde hath sayde My sheepe heare my voyce with other arguments to that purpose Camp I will not trouble the auditorie with this place For Basill declareth that in some things we must be referred to tradition he speaketh onely for the alleadging of false scriptures and hath nothing against me Charke Then nothing can make against errour if this make not agaynst you But you abuse the auditorie and knowe not the drift of Basill in this place and that I will make euident to all the companie Take the booke and reade it if you can the place is easie Greeke and the sentence but short Camp I had rather reade it in Latine then in Greeke I vnderstande the Latine better I maruell you are so much in your Greeke Charke If I shoulde not haue brought it in Greeke but in Latine then you woulde haue taken exception against the interpreter I bring not the interpretour but Basill him selfe in the tongue wherein hee wrote Here Campion being long in turning the Latine booke coulde not finde the treatise but desired Master Charke to finde it who answered I haue it readie in Basill him selfe If you flee to the interpretour turne your owne booke Camp I haue answered you Saint Basills meaning is as it was then a common doctrine that it is a great fault to disalow true scriptures or to bring in false scriptures and to father a false writing vpon the Apostles Charke I protest that hauing perused the circumstaunces of the place I finde no such generall or particular drifte of the father as you misreport but a playne doctrine and sundrie argumentes to proue it that nothing is to be receiued or brought into the Church that is not written Camp Your protestation is no argument I am acquaynted with this dealing since the other day But the scope of Saint Basill is as I haue saide Charke My true protestation doeth ouerway your misconstruing as wel of Basill nowe as of Tertullian before and therein I referre my selfe to the examination of both places If you will or can read but twentie lines further your owne eyes shal see and giue sentence against your selfe Camp I haue giuen you the sense of the Doctours wordes and neede not reade the place Charke Reade first and then answere What Authour or what place can make against you if you will of your selfe frame an interpretation after your owne purpose without reading the wordes or making conscience what construction you giue Campion Saint Basill in other places is of a contrary iudgement and I am sure he is not contrary to him selfe The Apostles had fayth before they wrote and therefore it must needes be the scope Charke What kinde of answere is this Speake to the purpose or confesse your insufficiencie Basills owne woordes in this place doe euidently proue that hee is against you answere them or acknowledge your selfe not able to satisfie the Doctour Campion Was all written when the Apostles first taught Charke Is this any answere to Basill Propounde no newe questions but answere the former place so full against you Camp You see mine answere Charke I see and all men may see your vntrueth to shift off the matter Basills wordes are too strong against you To your newe question I answere that since the worde of God was first written that which hath bene written conteyned sufficient matter to saluation Campion Then what needed so many additions since of the Prophets and Apostles writings if we had sufficient before Charke The most honourable addition of the Prophetes and Apostles serued to a clearer manifestation of Christ of whome Moses had written before but added nothing to the substance In the after noone The Question Whether faith onely iustifieth M. Charkes prayer OUr helpe is in the name of the Lorde c. Almightie God merciful Father we acknowledge against our selues that we were conceiued and borne in sinne and corruption that wee remaine vnprofitable to any thing that is good and most prone and ready to that which is euill in thy fight Ignorance doeth possesse our mindes and dulnesse ruleth in our vnderstanding so that of our selues wee can not see into thy glorious and excellent trueth and in our selues wee finde no health nor hope of health Therefore according to thy riche mercie O Lord take