Selected quad for the lemma: mercy_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
mercy_n	day_n	holy_a	lord_n	5,913	5	4.1120	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00916	An adioynder to the supplement of Father Robert Persons his discussion of M. Doctor Barlowes ansvvere &c. Contayning a discouery, and confutation of very many foule absurdityes, falsities, and lyes in M. D. Andrewes his Latin booke intituled, Responsio ad apologiam Cardinalis Bellarmini &c. An answere to the apology of Card. Bellarmine. Written by F.T. ... Also an appendix touching a register alleaged by M. Franc. Mason for the lawfull ordayning of Protestant bishops in Q. Elizabeths raigne.	Fitzherbert, Thomas, 1552-1640.	1613 (1613)	STC 11022; ESTC S102269	348,102	542

nothing is to be belieued or practiced in the Church whereof there is no cōmandment or example in Scripture which you haue heard already confuted as well by the authority of Scripture and Fathers as also by our aduersaryes owne doctrine approuing the practice of things not cōmanded any where in Scripture as the baptisme of infants the vse of the signe of the Crosse Godfathers and Godmothers in baptisme whereto I may add the tradition of keeping Sunday holy day in memory of the Resurrection of our Sauiour with abstinence from seruile works Also the obseruation of Easter Pentecost and such feasts and diuers other things consisting in matters of practice 56. If then they approue and practice these things although they be not commanded or ordeyned in Scripture what reason haue they to reiect prayer to Saynts because there is no commandement or example of it in Scripture when neuertheles it is most conforme thereto and deduced from it as I haue partly shewed already by an inafallible rule of S. Augustine seeing it is approued by that Church which the Scripture commandeth vs to heare belieue and obay besydes that it being euident in Scripture that Charity which moueth and obligeth men to pray one for another in this lyfe nunquam excidit as the Apostle teacheth neuer decayeth but is more perfect in the next lyfe it followeth not only that the Saynts do pray for vs which M. Andrews granteth but also that we may craue their prayers for it were most absurd to thinke that we may not request them to do that which is most correspondent to their Charity and they will most willingly performe 57. Furthermore seeing that the Scripture doth teach vs to craue the prayers and help of our brethren liuing there can be no reason imagined why we should not also do the same when they are glorifyed in heauen but eyther because they do not heare or vnderstand our prayers or because they are not willing or not able to helpe vs but that they heare vs I haue sufficiently proued already and haue also answered M. Andrews his cauils concerning the same and he neyther denyeth nor seemeth to doubt eyther that they are willing to succour vs considering the perfection of their Charity or yet that they are able to do it seeing he granteth they do pray for vs if he should deny it or that their prayers may auayle vs as Vigilantius his followers did in tymes past and Zuinglius with other sectaries haue done in these our dayes he might easily be conuinced by the holy Scriptures which witnesse that God granteth the petitions of his seruants euen when they are heere subiect to sinne and misery and hath mercy on sinners for the merits of the iust as well dead as liuing and therefore the Prophet prayed ne auferas misericordiam tuam c. do not take away thy mercy from vs O Lord for thy beloued Abraham and thy seruant Isaac and thy holy Israell And we read in the booke of Kings that for Dauids sake God did mitigate his wrath towards Salomon and saued also the Kingdome of Iuda from destruction in the reygne of Ioram and Ezechias 58. In lyke manner God pardoned Iobs friends for his sake and directed them vnto him to craue his prayers for them Also for the prayers of Moyses he had mercy on the people and the lyke we read in the new testament Whereupon S. Hierome sayd to Vigilantius thus Si Apostoli Martyres c. If the Apostles and Martyrs beeing heere in body could pray for others whiles they ought to be carefull for themselues how much more may they do it after their crounes victoryes and tryumphs one Moyses obtayned of God pardon for six hundred thousand armed men and Steuen the follower of his Lord and first Martyr in Christ craued pardon for his persecutours and shall they now be able to doe lesse when they are with Christ Paul the Apostle sayth that 276. mens liues were giuen him in the ship and therefore now when he is dissolued and with Christ will he hold his peace and shall he not be able so much as to open his mouth for those which haue belieued by his preaching throughout the world and shall Vigilantius a liuing dog be better then a dead lyon Thus argueth S. Hierome by an argument a fortiori grounded on the Scripture to shew the extreame absurdity of Vigilantius the heretike who denyed that the Saynts in heauen do pray for vs and are able to helpe vs. 59. And this ability of Saynts to helpe men is to be ascribed not only to the effect of their prayers but also to their power authority and dignity seeing that Christ who is the King of Kings Lord of Lords hath all power in heauen and earth giuen him by his Father doth in the Apocalips promise to his Saynts a communication and participation of his owne Kingdome dominion and power ouer men qui vicerit sayth he dabo sedere mecum c. he that shall ouercome I will giue vnto him to sit with me in my throne as I also haue ouercome and sitten with my father in his throne dabo ei potestatem super gentes c. I will giue him power ouer nations and he shall rule them c. and according to this promise of our Sauiour the Saynts also sayd to him in the Apocalips Redimisti nos Deo in sanguine tuo c. thou hast redeemed vs to God in thy blood and hast made vs to our God a Kingdome and Priests and we shall reygne vpon the earth and this may be confirmed out of the booke of wisdome which sayth that the iust when they shal be glorified iudicabunt Nationes dominabuntur populis c. shall iudge Nations and shall haue dominion ouer people and in like manner the Psalmist saith speaking of the glory of Gods Saynts exultabunt Sancti in gloria c. the Saynts shall exult and reioyce in glory c. they shall haue two edged swoords in their hands to take reuenge vpon nations and to chastise people to tye their Kings in fetters and their noble men in iron manicles c. Thus saith the royall Prophet 60. And albeit this shal be specially and most manifestly fulfilled at the day of Iudgement when the Saynts of God shall assist our Sauiour in the Iudgment and condemnation of the wicked yet it cannot be denyed but that also in the meane tyme it is verifyed in the power and dominion that God imparteth to his Saynts giuing them the protection of Cittyes Countryes and men as it appeareth euidently by innumerable examples which might be alledged of Kingdomes and Cytties defended Gods seruants relieued and his enemies destroyed by them for which cause the ancient Fathers do worthily call them the keepers of human kind gouernours of

Baptisme 44. Lastly seeing that he vseth the signe of the Crosse without a precept because it is consonant to Scripture for so sayth the Canon and reiecteth prayer to Saynts for want of a precept it is reason that he shew vs eyther some prohibitiō of prayer to Saynts in Scripture or at least how it is repugnant to Scripture which he shall neuer be able to do as it appeareth suffciently by those texts of Scripture that he and his fellowes are wont to alledge agaynst it as for example they obiect that Christ is the only mediatour betwixt God and man that he is our aduocate with his Father and that he commandeth all men that labour and are loaden to come to him promising to refresh them and such lyke places as signify vnto vs the bounty and mercy of our Sauiour Christ and his facility and readines to heare and helpe vs all which places being vnderstood as our aduersaries take them do no lesse ouerthrow our mutuall prayers one for another then our prayers to Saynts whereby they may vnderstand their absurdity 45. For if Christ be our only mediatour and aduocate in such sort as they take it to wit that we may not craue the prayers of Saynts without iniury to Christ because he is our only mediatour how then doth the Scripture teach vs to craue one anothers prayers is i● lesse iniury to Christ to craue the prayers of sinners thē of Angels and Saynts who are free from sinne and most acceptable to God And againe if it be lawfull to come to God by the mediation and prayers of men can it be vnlawfull to come to him by the intercession of Angels and Saynts But that thou mayst good Reader see how substantially M. Andrews argueth against prayer to Saynts out of these places of Scripture thou shalt heare an eloquent discourse of his thus then he sayth 46. Cùm Venite ad me dixerit c. seeing that Christ sayd come to me come all and I will refresh you that is to say by my selfe and not by mynisters why do we not go to himselfe directly without an interpreter and sue to him but do go out of the way to Saynts and sue to them that they may vouchsafe to be suters for vs Do we treate with any of the holy Spirits more safely or sweetly then with our Iesus haue they more easy accesse or better commodity to speake to God or is any elder amongst the Iewes more gratefull to Christ then the faithfull Centurian do the Saynts better know our needs or are they more compassionate or more mercifull or yet more affectionat towards vs then he whereby we may haue more confidence in them then in him ought we to make more account of any fauour of theirs then of Christs promisse I will refresh you or of his precept come to me But when you do so inuocate Saynts you giue them the place of Christ for if you come to them you haue in Christs place those that may refresh you insteed of him you haue mediatours to God who may pray for your sinnes such mediatours as Paul and Iohn did not make themselues and if they had the faithfull Christians would not haue suffered it if Augustine in his bookes agaynst Parmenian do vnderstand the matter aright 47. Thus farre M. Andrewes which I haue layd downe the more amply to the end it may appeare how seriously he tryfleth in this important matter which thou wilt euidently see good Reader if thou do but note well his discourse and what followeth thereof if his construction of those places of Scripture which he alledgeth be true for as well might he argue thus following his owne grounds and changing only the word Saynts into men Cùm Venite ad me dixerit c. seeing that Christ sayd Come to me and I will refresh you by my selfe and not by my Ministers why do we not go to him directly without any interpreter but sue to men that they may be suters for vs Do we conferre more safely or sweetly with any man then with our Iesus haue we more easy accesse or better opportunity to speake to any man then to him do men know our necessityes better then he or are they more compassionate mercifull or more affectionate towards vs then he whereby we may haue more confidence in them then in him ought we not much more to esteeme Christs promise to wit I will refresh you and his precept Come vnto me then any fauour of men But you when you craue the prayers of men do giue them the place of Christ for if you come to them you haue in Christs place those which may refresh you insteed of him you haue mediatours to God which may pray for your sinnes such mediatours as Paul and Iohn did not make themselues c. 48. Loe then how substantially he hath argued against prayer to Saynts seeing that his arguments if they haue any force at all do as directly ouerthrow that which he himselfe approueth as that which he impugneth I meane as well our mutuall prayer one for another which I am sure he will not disallow as eyther the prayers of Saynts for vs or our intercession to them and is it possible that so great a Clarke and subtill Logician as he did not see this or that he is ignorant in what sense the Scripture teacheth that our Sauiour is our only mediatour and aduocat seeing that the Apostle hauing sayd that there is one mediatour of God and men Iesus Christ addeth immediatly qui dedit redemptionem semetipsum pro omnibus who gaue himselfe a redemption for all as who would say he is the only mediator because he only being both God and man is that eternall Priest and Redeemer who by the Sacrifice of himselfe vpon the Crosse hath reconcyled vs to God and payed our ransome hauing himselfe no need of redemption in which sense also he is our singuler aduocat and patron 49. And therefore Iohn hauing sayd that we haue an aduocate with the Father Iesus Christ addeth presently ipse est propitiatio c. and he is the propitiation for our sinnes and not only for ours but also for the sinnes of the whole world giuing to vnderstand that he is our aduocate and prayeth for vs in a very peculiar and singuler manner for that he by himselfe alone and by his owne merits procureth all grace and mercy to mankind in the sight of his Father accedens per semetipsum ad Deum comming sayth the Apostle to God by himselfe whereas all other Aduocats or Patrons be they Angels Saynts or men do no otherwyse obtayne grace or mercy but by him and by his merits in which respect the Church endeth her prayers to Saints with per Christum Dominum nostrum by Christ our Lord and in this sense I say our Sauiour Christ is truly called our only mediatour not only by the way of

conclude this Chapter and matter not doubting● good Reader but thou hast noted throughout the whole that he hath neyther sufficiētly answered any one place of the Fathers alledged by the Cardinall or any argument of his neyther yet hath obiected any thing himselfe to any purpose but hath eyther notably tryfled and paltred in his answeres and obiections or egregiously peruerted corupted or falsifyed such Fathers and authors as he hath had occasion to alledge 76. So as I hope I haue now performed that which I vndertooke in these 3. Chapters which was to defend the Cardinall and to proue M. Andrews to be a true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is an egregious wrangler iangler iuggler and tryfler in the hyghest degree and by the same occasion I haue also fully debated with him an important point of Catholike religion concerning the inuocation of Saynts which I haue euidently proued to be most consonant to holy Scripture practised by the primitiue Church approued by the vniforme consent of the anciēt Fathers most acceptable to God honorable to him and his Saynts and finally very behouefull and beneficiall to man Whereby it may appeare that M. Andrews and his fellowes who so eagerly impugne it are no other then the instruments and proctors of the Diuell who out of his extreme malice and enuy to Angels Saynts and all mankind seeketh by all the meanes he may to depriue the Angels and Saynts of their honour and man of the inestimable benefits that he may reape both spiritually and temporally by their intercession to which purpose he hath retayned and feyed M. Andrews as it seemeth by his diligent and eloquent pleading the cause and will I feare me one day pay him his fee in other money then he wil be willing to receaue except he open his eyes in tyme to see his danger which I beseech God of his infinit mercy to giue him grace to do THE CONCLVSION OF THIS ADIOYNDER DEVIDED INTO TWO CHAPTERS IN THIS are detected diuers fraudes and shifts common to M. Andrews with M. Barlow as to change the state of the question to dissemble that which most importeth in the Cardinalls text and arguments to abuse wrest bely and falsefy not only the Cardinall but also the ancient Fathers Councells and holy Scriptures and finally to face out matters impudētly for lack of proofs CHAP. IX THERE remaine good Reader diuers other thinges in M. Andrews to be examined which I haue touched in my Supplement but being now called on by my printer to furnish his presse I am forced not only to send away that which I haue already written but also to interrupt my designement in the prosecution of the rest and therefore for as much as I am now to draw to an end I think good for the conclusion of the whole to lay before thee sundrie sorts of shifts cosenages corruptions frauds which he hath vsed throughout his whole worke and to the end I may performe it with more breuity and better method I will follow the same course that I held with M. Barlow That is draw them to certaine ●eades and giue thee some few examples of euery one which being added to those that haue already occurred in this Adioynder may suffice I hope to shew ●hee with what kind of stuffe he hath patched vp his Latin volume what a miserable cause he and his fellowes haue to defend seing it driueth them to such shamefull shifts as thou hast partly seene already and shalt further see by that which ensueth 2. The first point which I reproued in M. Barlow was his cōmon custome to change the state of the question and so to answere nothing to the purpose which is no lesse frequent and ordinarie in M. Andrews as for example whereas the true state of the controuersy betwixt vs and them concerning the primacy of the Pope is Whether he be supreme head of the Church in all spirituall and Ecclesiasticall causes and may in some cases extend his power to temporall thinges that is to say Whether being the supreme spirituall Pastor he may for the publik benefit of the Church and the good of soules punish his disobedient children namely temporall Princes in their temporall states which I haue shewed in my Supplement to be a necessary consequent of his supreme spirituall power M. Andrews will needes make vs hould and teach that the Popes primacy is a temporall primacy in which respect he calleth our doctrine and beliefe touching that point illustrem fidei articulum de Primatu Petri temporali The notable Article of Faith concerning the temporall Primacy of Peter and as you heard before distinguishing the name of Peters primacy which he granteth from the thing signified by that name which he denyeth he tearmeth it terrestrem Monarchiam an earthly Monarchy and therefore he vrgeth the Cardinall to proue this temporall primacy and earthly Monarchy and so impugneth no opinion of ours nor any thing els but his owne fond fiction as I haue shewed before and more amply in the first Chapter of this Adioynder and therfore I shall not need to stand any longer vpon this point heere but will passe to another 3. Amongst other questions much controuersed concerning good works one is whether there be any works of supererogation which the Catholyks vnderstand to be such as being lawfull and good of their owne nature are not commanded by any precept as for example the Euangelicall Councells in which sense Cardinall Bellarmine and all other Catholikes do vse the word supererogation as signifying a work done supra praeceptum that is to say more then the precept cōmandeth But M. Andrewes impugneth it in another sense and so changeth the state of the question For he will needs haue workes of Supererogation to be such good works only as are done after or besids the full accomplishment of the Commandment so that before a man can do a worke of supererogation he must fullfill and fully obserue all the precepts whereupon he also inferreth that no man can do any such works no not the Apostles themselues because they could not fullfill the Commandments hauing allwayes occasion to to say Dimitte nobis debita nostra forgiue vs Lord our offences 4. Wherein M. Andrews expressely impugneth not so much the Cardinall and other Catholiks as S. Augustine and other ancient Fathers from whome they take both the terme and the sense thereof For whereas our Sauiour saith in the Ghospell that the good Samaritan brought the wounded man into the Inne and leauing two pence with the Host told him quodcumque supererogaueris reddam tibi whatsoeuer thou shalt lay out more I will render it vnto thee S. Augustine alluding to the same place and words of our Sauiour teacheth euidently that those things which are lawfull id est sayth he nullo praecepto Domini prohibentur that is to say which are not forbidden by any precept of our Lord