Selected quad for the lemma: love_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
love_n	john_n	love_v	true_a	4,911	5	5.7716	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09274	Vindiciae fidei, or A treatise of iustification by faith wherein that point is fully cleared, and vindicated from the cauils of it's aduersaries. Deliuered in certaine lectures at Magdalen Hall in Oxford, by William Pemble, Master of Arts of the same house: and now published since his death for the publique benefit.	Pemble, William, 1592?-1623.; Capel, Richard, 1586-1656.	1625 (1625)	STC 19589; ESTC S114368	167,454	232

inoncency or the Saints haue in glory Touching the third sense of the words we grant indeed that to Loue God with all the heart is to loue him super omnia that is aboue all Creatures But the Iesuites take here but one part of true loue of God T is a singular part of Diuine loue when the heart is so fixed on God that neither the loue nor feare of any earthly thing can draw it from obeying of God Which we say is a matter wherein euery one failes in some kinde or other more or lesse though in the end may Martyrs and other holy men haue herein by faith ouercome the world But this is not enough vnto perfect loue to preferre God before all Temporall paines and pleasures profits or discommodities He loues God with all his heart not onely who loues him aboue all but also obeies God in all This is the loue of God that we keepe his Commandements He that for Gods loue will not obey Gods Law he loues his sinnes more then God Offend but in the least thing there 's presently want of loue for hee that will not doe as God bids him then is voyde of that loue which moues him to obey at other times He then that keepeth Gods word in him is the loue of God perfect indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Iohn 2. 5. Perfect obedience and perfect loue are inseparable Now seeing the former cannot be found in mortall men we cannot in them seeke for the latter And therefore this Commandement Loue God aboue all things cannot be kept in this life 2 That a man may loue his neighbour as himselfe For which purpose they turne vs vnto Rom. 13. 8. Hee that loueth another hath fulfilled the Law Because the Law is comprehended in this saying Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe v. 9. and loue doth not euill to his neighbour therefore is loue the fulfilling of the Law vers 10. And they bid vs looke Gal. 5. 14. Where we reade For all the Law is fulfilled in one Word Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thyselfe Hereto we answere That there 's in these places nothing that needs answering We grant that the loue of our neighbour as of our selues is the fulfilling of the Law that is of the second Table of the Law touching our duty vnto man and so much these places witnesse commanding vs also so to doe But now how doe our Aduersaries prooue out of these places that men can perfectly ob●serue this Law We yeeld the Regenerate loue their neighboars as themselues but that perfection of loue which in euery point fulfils the Law doing our neighbour no hurt but all good in all our thoughts words and deeds this we cannot grant them vnlesse vpon better proofes Let vs goe to the tenth Commandement which they say may be kept that is 3 Thou shalt not couet This tenth Commandement of the Decalogue is say they possible to be fulfilled by a Regenerate man For three things must be obserued touching this concupiscence or coueting forbidden in the tenth Commandement 1 The vitious pro●enesse and inclination of Nature vnto baddesires which is styled concupiscence in actu primo As to haue a theeuish minde 2 The inordinate motions of the heart immediately arising from that corrupt disposition which preuent reason and goe before consent as to desire another mans money but sodenly vanisheth of it selfe or vpon deliberation t is checkt 3 The consent of the will when either it takes 〈◊〉 mediate delight in such desires themselues as speculatiue f●rnication c. or when it resolues to put in execution what the heart imagined as to lay a plot to spoyle another of his goods The two former the vitious disposition of Nature and the inordinate desires that goe before consent these be no sinnes say the Romanists and so not forbidden in the tenne Commandements The last viz. Euill desires with consent they be the very sins which are forbidden in that Commandement Whence they conclude that a Regenerate man may auoid the breach of this commandment seeing it is in the power of his will whether he will consent vnto such motions of the heart or no and if he doe not consent then hee sinnes not Herevnto wee answere That whereas they of Rome teach that the Habituall vitiousnesse of Nature and the disorderly motions of the Heart which goe before Consent are no Sinnes they therein erre grossily against Scriptures and sound Reason This the gift of these Men alwayes to iudge flatteringly and fauourably on Natures side they concipt to themselues a God in Heauen like their God in Rome Facilem Deum one that will wincke at small faults and graunt Indulgence by the Dozen Looke what they iudge a small Matter God must be of there mind or else they are not pleased His Loue must fit there Humors what they thinke they can doe that God shall haue leaue to command or forbid but if otherwise they 'le tell him to his face that he is a foole ct a Tyrant to command them that which now they cannot performe For God say they to require of a Man a freedome from all vitious Inclinations and euill desires this were as mad an injunction as for a master to command his seruant neuer to be hungry or thirsty hot or cold and to threaten him that hee should looke through a halter in case it bee otherwise with him This errour wee shall more conueniently speake of in the refutation of common and generall exceptions which they make against all those proofes that doe demonstrate the impossibility of keeping the Law whereof this is one that Concupiscence in the first and second act is not Sinne. But now whereas they affirme that it is in a Regenerate Mans power not to yeeld consent to the motions of Sin and that therefore he may fulfill the Law which sayed thou shalt not lust we graunt them that the Spirit may many times get the victory ouermastring such vuruly motions of the heart but this is not perpetuall For who is there except extreamely ignorant of Grace and Nature but will confesse that many times these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 affections of Sinne as the Apostle cals them do work in them so strongly vpon such circumstances and aduantages that they doe not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 combate and fight against the powers of grace but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vanquish them and euen leade a Man regenerate captiue vnto the Law or command of sinne The Apostle confesseth so much of himselfe Rom. 7. 23. Who yet was able to doe as much as he that thinkes himselfe best And therefore what euer power we may seeme to haue not to yeeld consent yet 't is certaine that we shall often faile in in our practise This of the second Argument touching the obseruation of the obseruation of the hardest precepts of the Law The third followes 3 If a Man may doe more then the Law requires he may certainely doe as much

coinquinatum intrare potest Now sure this is admirable that such acts as these should defile a man deserue hell offend God in a word be sinnes and yet for all this neither commanded nor forbidden in any Law of God Was there euer such a toy heard of as this as Sinnes beside the Law T is a most ridiculous contradiction Peccatum praeter Legem He that doth any thing beside the Law not mentioned nor include ● therein by way of prohibition or command t is most apparent he sinnes not nor offends not at all For whom doth he offend or who can challenge him of Sinne Doth God the Law-giuer No for t was not his intention to command or forbid such an act and ergo be it done or not done it crosseth not his will nor hath he any reason to finde fault or be displeased at it Satan or Man cannot accuse him For let them then shew the Law that prooues him an offender If they cannot alleadge a Law against which he hath transgressed they wrongfully accuse him of a fault Were it not absurd accusation against a prisoner at the Barre to say that he hath indeed done nothing against the Lawes of the Land but many things besides the Law not forbidden nor commanded in the Law those hee hath done and deserues to be punished for it as an offender But now if those veniall sinnes bee mentioned in Gods Law then are such actions either commanded or forbidden If commanded then the not doing of such a thing is plainely contrary to the Law As for example To steale a penny or some other small matter to please an idle word to tell an officious lie these be veniall sinnes say our Aduersaries But how hnow they they be sinnes who told them so The Scriptures they will say Where In the 8 and 9 Commandement Aske them now Did God intend in those Commandements to forbid those actions of stealing and lying Yea or No If he intended it not then t is no sinne at all to doe them seeing it cro●seth not Gods will nor offends him If he did intend to forbid vs those things then to doe them is a sinne manifestly contrary to the holy will of God the Lawgiuer Wherfore let vs here remēber that excellent rule of Bernard Non iussa quïdem licitè vtrumlibet vel admittuntur vel omittuntur iussa vero sine culpa non negleguntur sine crimine non ●ontemnuntur For things not commanded we may either lawfully doe them or leaue them but for things commanded to neglect them is a sinne to contemne them is a haynous crime Wherefore this distinction of sins against and sinnes beside the Law falleth to dust and our Minor Proposition stands firme That he who committeth veniall Sinne transgresseth the Law of God and therefore is vnrighteous for his so doing Becanus here forsakes the Cardinall in this distinction and helpes him by an other deuis● He grants that Veniall Sinnes be against the Law and proues it because euery Veniall Sinne is moraliter malum and Ergo contra rectam rationemet Legem aeternam But here 's now the distinction It is one thing to be contra Legem another contra finem Legis All Veniall sinnes be against the Law but no veniall sinne is properly against the end of the Law that is against Charity the Loue of God or our Neighbour Is not this a superfine Inuention As if a Subiect that hath in many things broken the Law should say True my faults be against the Law of the Land but yet they are not against the end of those Lawes viz. obedience to my Prince and Loue to the good of him and my Country Though I break the Lawes yet I would not haue you thinke but I loue and honour my Prince and Country well enough Iust so the Iesuits A man may commit many sinnes against Gods Law and yet obserue the end of the Law in louing God with all his heart and his Neighbour as himselfe Then which nothing can be more senselesse that a man should offend God in breaking of his Law and yet not withstanding loue God with his whole heart That a man should wrong his Neighbour doing that to him which he would not haue done to himselfe and yet for all that loue his Neighbour as himselfe If ye loue mee keepe my Commandem●nts saith Christ. Iohn 14. 15. Nay say the Romanists we loue him and yet breake his Commandements Loue doth none eu●l to his Neighbour saith the Apostle Romans 13. 10 Nay say the Iesuits Loue may doe euill to his Ne●ghbour and yet keepe the name of loue A man may be angry with another without cause reuile him and call him Racha hee may defraude him in small matters for these they make veniall sinnes and yet in the meane time all this without breath of Charity Himselfe would not willingly be so vsed but hee will vse another in this sort and yet looke to bee thanked for his loue too Such grosse absurdities doe our Aduersaries runne in to by coyning such senselesse distinctions of Sinnes not against but besides the Law of sinnes not against the end of the Law though against the Law it selfe Our Consciences cannot be satisfied with such silly shiftes and therefore we leaue them vnto those that can content themselues and choake vp their Consciences with a little sophistry Men who make a pastime of sinne and take liberty to qualifie and dispence with Gods Law as they thinke agreeable to their Conscience hoping by tricks of wit and dodging Distinctions to a void the accusations of Conscience and to elude the seuerity of Gods Iudgement SECT 4. CHAP I Iustification by workes makes void the couenant of grace of the difference between the law the Gospel of the vse of the Law of the erroneous conceit of our Aduersaries in this point THus much of these three Exceptions of our ●econd Arg●ment prouing the impossibili●y of our Iustification by the workes of the Law because we cannot perfectly fulfill the ●aw We goe now forward vnto two Arguments more taken the one from the difference of the two Couenants God hath made with man First of works the other of grace and the other from the Nature of true Christian Lib●rty obtained for vs by Christs death Argument That which makes voide the Couenant of Grace is a false and haereticall doctrine But Iustification of workes of the Law makes void the Couenant of Grace Ergo T is false and haeriticall so to teach For confirmation of the minor in this Argument wee must briefly shew 1 What the Couenant of Grace what the Couenant of workes is 2 What opposition their is betweene these two By the Couenant of Grace we vnderstand in one word the Gospell i. e. the gratious appointment of God to bring man to Saluation by Iesus Christ. In the administration of this gratious purpose of God we must obserue foure periods of time where in God hath diuersly ordered this meanes

Hope If it be true viz. That which makes not ashamed Which is the Anchor of the Soule sure and stedfast that entereth within the Vaile It would bee knowne what difference the Iesuite will put betweene that Hope which is in a man before and that which is in him after his Sanctification If he say It differs onely in degree then hee grants t is the same in substance whence wee haue a faire position That man sanctified and vnsanctified is alike capable of the sauing graces of Gods Spirit The like we say for Loue of God if it be sincere and without dissimulation bred in the heart Vpon those spirituall considerations not onely of Gods Mercy in Christ but also of his Iustice and infinite Righteousnesse For so the Trent Fathers will haue this Loue to respect God vt fontem Iustitiae then we affirme this spirituall Loue is not to bee found but onely in those Hearts that are in some measure Regenerate and made spirituall In whom this Loue of God is shed abroad by the Holy Ghost that is giuen to them as the Apostle speaketh This Bellarmine is so●ne forced to grant yet he puts it off with a distinction No man can loue God perfectly with all his heart without the Holy Ghost but loue him he may imperfectly without the Holy Ghost dwelling in him though not without the speciall aide of God Whereto we answere 't is one thing to loue God perfectly and another to loue him truely To loue him perfectly is to loue him with all the heart all the soule all the minde all the strength which we grant no man can doe without the Holy Ghost but we also affirme that no man did or shall euer doe it in this life so long as there is lustfull corruption in him causing any the least auersion of his soule from God in any motion thereof So that if none haue the Holy Ghost abiding in them but such in whom Loue is thus perfected he must be confined with the Saints in heauen and not haue his dwelling with the faithfull on earth But if imperfect Loue of God be also from the Holy Ghost dwelling in the hearts of the Godly who loue God truely in vnfeigned vprightnesse of heart though in much imperfection by reason of sinne which diuerts the heart vnto other pleasures then it must be knowne of the Iesuite what he meanes by imperfect Loue. Is it false Loue such a meere naturall Man may conceiue vpon generall grounds That God is good the chiefest good iust holy and full of all excellency He will not say for shame this is a true preparatiue vnto Iustification Is it true loue but in its degree imperfect not so vigorous so vehement so hot as coales of Iuniper yet such as hath some strength and warmth of spirituall affection Then we require that these men will draw vs out a line by the Rule of the Scriptures and to tell vs how farre the true Loue of God may come without the grace of the Holy Ghost sanctifying the heart But after t is past such a degree then there is required the sanctifying grace of the Holy Ghost for it T will trouble their Mathematickes to describe vnto vs in what degree of Perfection that Womans loue was situated whose example they alleadge for a proofe of this point out of Luke 7. 47. Her sinnes which were many are forgiuen her for she loued much Can Bellarmine tell vs how much this was that so by that patterne we may know how farre men goe in the true Loue of God before they bee at all sanctified by inherent Grace For such wonders they would make vs beleeue concerning this penitent Sinner that when her soule was full of Faith and Loue to Christ her heart full of sorrow her eyes full of teares for her sinnes yet for all that she was a gracelesse vnholy person whose Loue and Faith and Sorrow came not from the sanctifying grace of the Holy Ghost but onely from free-will helped with some kinde of externall aide of God We haue not Faith to beleeue such Mysteries as these Nor yet in the last place can we conceiue how there should be true repentance with a sincere purpose of Reformation and obedience where the Heart is not changed and renued by the Holy Ghost That Godly sorrow and Hatred of sinne should spring out of a gracelesse heart that so holy a Resolution of Amendment of Life should be in an vnholy person be Assertions so contradictory and iarring that no Christian Eare can with patience endure to heare them We conclude then touching these dispositions vnto Sanctification that if these Graces be true they are parts and chiefe Branches of inherent Righteousnesse But if they be false and counterfeit they are not so much as Preparations therevnto So much of this first Argument wherein yet one of these 7 dispositions first reckoned vp is omitted viz. a Desire of receauing the Sacrament of Baptisme that is A Man that 's baptised in his youth afterward before he be Iustified must haue a desire to be Rebaptised For what is it for one baptised to desire to receaue that Sacrament againe This conceit is so absured that howeuer Bellarmine reckon it vp among the other Dispositions because of the Authority of the councell of Trent yet Becanus giues it ouer in plaine Feild numbring these fore naming sixe graces onely choosing rather to venter the Councells credit then his owne by defending an vnreasonable position 2 Argument If Faith alone doe iustifie vs then it may d●e●t when other graces are absent as well as when they are present For seeing the Vertue of Iustifing vs depends vpon Faith alone and that in this act it receaues no aide from any other grace It followeth that it needs not the cōpany of any other grace as in the law of sense If the whole force of Burning proceed onely from Heat then where Heat is though there be no other Qualities yet there will be burning yea if Faith only haue force to Iustifie it will follow that it may iustifie not onely in the absence of other graces but in the presence of the coutrary vices For as the absence of other graces doth not hinder so the presence of other vices will not hinder Faith one jot in it office of Iustifying But t were absurd to affirme that Faith can Iustifie without other vertues with other vices Ergo The force of Iustifying is not in Faith alone To this we answere That this sophisme is fashioned vpon the same Block with the former that to Iustifie and Sanctifie are all one In which sense we confesse the Consequence is vnauoydable If Faith alone by it owne vertue and force did sanctifie then it would effect this not onely in the absence of other graces but in the presence of their contrary Corruptions and the similitude which we bring to illustrate our assertion would confirme that of the Aduersaries T is

workes and faith are two Coordinate causes by their ioynt-force-working our Iustification but the Apostle vtterly excludes Faith onely from Iustification and attributes it wholy vnto workes For by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith onely he vnderstands faith alone that faith which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 17. alone solitary by itselfe without workes And such a dead faith whereof these hypocrites boasted S. Iames excludes wholly from justifying of a man I say then that he is not iustified by faith onely but that he is iustified by workes That is a working faith that is fruitfull in Obedience The Apostle goes forward from the Example of Abraham vnto that of Rahab verse 25. Likewise was not Rahab the Harlot iustified by workes That is in the same manner as Abraham so also Rahab was iustified by a working saith Which appeared to be so by that which shee did when she receaued the messengers entertained the two spies which were sent to search the land lodged them in her house without discouering them And when by accident they were made knowne hid them secretly vpon the roofe and afterwards sent them out another way conveied them away priuily not by the vsuall but by another way that is through the window letting them downe ouer the wall by a Cord as the story hath it Ios. 2. In this dangerous enterprise wherein this weake woman ventured her life in succouring the Enemies of her King and Country it appeares plainly that she had a strong and liuely Faith in the God of Israel and that the confession which she made with her mouth to the spies The Lord your God he is the God in Heauen aboue and in the Earth beneath Iosh. 2. 11. proceeded from a truely beleeuing heart insomuch as her words were made good by works that followed them Wherefore the Apostle iustly parallels these 2 examples of Abraham offering his sonne and Rahab in the kind vsage of the Spies because both those facts were singular trialls of a liuely faith which was able in that sorte to ouercome what was hardest to be conquered viz. Naturall affection In Abraham both fatherly affection to the life of a deere and only sonne and in Rahab the Naturall loue to ones Country and a mans owne Life did all stoope and giue way when once true Faith commands Obedience Here againe our adversaries trouble themselues and the Text with needlesse speculations telling vs that now the Apostle hath altered his cliffe and gone from the second Iustification in Abrahams example to the first Iustification in this of Rahab That Rahab was conuerted at this time of receauing the spies being made a beleeuer of an infidell a good woeman of a bad That she by this good worke did expiate her former sinnes and merited the grace and fauour of God notwithstanding that she committed a venial sinne in handling of the businesse telling a downe-right lie which though she should not haue done yet it hindred not the meritoriousnes of the worke with such other fond imaginations peruerting the simplicity of the Trueth But first they are not agreed among themselues whether the Apostle doe in that sort shift from one Iustification to another Bellarmine affirmes it and many moe But others deny it as may be seene in Lorinus his exposition of the. 21. v. of this Chapter And were they agreed vpon it sure I am they should disagree from the Apostle who makes this second instance of the same nature with the former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In like manner saieth he was Rahab iustified viz. as Abraham was Againe when they say Rahab became a true beleeuer at that time of receauing the spies not before 't is more then they can proue By the circumstances of the story it appeares plainely that she beleeued before they came by the relation of the great workes which God had done for his people and the promises that were made vnto them that they should possesse Rahabs countrey This bred feare in others but faith in her by the secret working of the holy Ghost See Ioshua 2. 9. c. And certainly had she not had Faith before the spies came who can thinke she would haue giuen entertainment to such dangerous persons But she knew them to be the Seruants of the God of Israel in whom shee beleeued and therefore by this Faith she receaued them peaceably though Enemies of her Countrey Lastly to that of the Merit●riousnes of the worke of Rahab to deserue Grace and Life aeternall we reiect it not only as a vaine but an impious conceit which neuer entred into the humble hearts of the S● of old but hath bin set on foote in the last corrupt ages of the world by men drunken with self-selfe-Loue and admiration of their owne Righteousnes Thus we haue these 2 Examples whereby the Apostle hath proued sufficiently that the Faith which is separated from Obedience will not justifie a Man therefore that it is a dead Faith and not a true liuing Faith according as was proposed v. 20. Now for a close of this whole dispute he againe repeates that conclusion adding thereto anew similitude to illustrate it by in the last verse of the Chapter For as the Body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead that is As the Body without the Spirit i. e. the Souls or the Breath and other Motion is dead vnable to performe any liuing action whatsoeuer So Faith without workes is dead that is vtterly vnable to performe these liuing actions which belong vnto it What are those Two 1. To repose it stedfastly vpon the promise of life in Christ which is the proper immediate liuing Action of Faith 2. To justifie a Man in the sight of God which by a speciall priuiledge is the consequent of the former These liuing actions cannot be performed by that Faith which is dead being destitute of good workes That Faith which hath not power to bring forth Obedience is thereby declared to be a dead Faith deuoide of all power to embrace the promise with confidence and relyance as also to justifie A Man would thinke this were plaine enough and needed not to be troubled with any further C●villations But 't is strange what a coile our Adversaries make with this similitude writhing and straining it to such Conclusions as the Apostle neuer intende● Hence they gather 1. That as the Soule giues life to the Body as the ●●rme of the Body so Workes giue life to Faith as the forme of it 2 That as the Body is the same true Body without the Soule with it so Faith is one and the same true Faith without workes and with them which are nothing but sophisticall speculati●●● besides the purpose of the Text. The Apostle intends nothing but to shew the Necessity of the Copulation of a liuing Faith and Obedience together by the similitude of the like Necessitie of the vnion of a liuing Body and the Soule But his purpose is not to shew that the