Selected quad for the lemma: mercy_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
mercy_n faith_n grace_n repentance_n 2,335 5 7.5639 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45138 The middle-way in one paper of election & redemption, with indifferency between the Arminian & Calvinist / by Jo. H. Humfrey, John, 1621-1719. 1673 (1673) Wing H3689; ESTC R20384 34,415 44

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

THE Middle-Way In One Paper of ELECTION REDEMPTION With Indifferency between the ARMINIAN CALVINIST By J H Doing nothing by Partiality 1 Tim. 5.21 LONDON Printed for T. Parkhurst at the Three Bibles in Cheap-side 1673. OF Election or Predestination THe designe of these Papers is to offer to such as will consider and can tend to receive or cultivate what is offered some Notices of truth which lye upon my mind about severall matters that by the Communication of the little light I have I may fetch in more to my own understanding from others and also by the Partiality that appeares so often in the doctrine of the Orthodox I may promote some generall kind of condescension in all persons to a more favourable opinion of one another the proper consciousness of our own most miserable palpable blindness in most things and several points of Religion wherein many times we are indeed but the more blind because wee think we see being enough methinks to make every mortall even with shame and confusion to be ready either to have a little higher estimation of his Brother that differ from him or a little less indignation at any such difference or distance in his way and judgment I will begin with these heads Of Election and of Redemption It is the generall opinion of Divines that God from all eternity fore knows all things and That there are a certain number of persons determined by Him that shall be infallibly brought to glory For declaring this Decree they do go severall wayes In the generall they may be reduced to two the way of Absolute and the way of Conditionall Election Of either way there are two sorts In the Conditional way The first sort do conceive that God foresees who they be that will live godlily and keep his commandements and them he chooses to salvation while those he foresees will be wicked he decrees to damnation Vnde Apostolus say they Quos praescivit hos praedestinavit From whence the Apostle Whom he did foreknow them he also did praedestinate The second sort perceiving this to be contrary to Scripture with makes Election to be of grace not of works do say thus That God foresees who they be will beleeve and so choosing them as being in Christ through faith decrees to give them grace which will lead them to salvation and those that he foresees will not believe he decrees to leave them as out of Christ to Condemnation Non elegit Deus opera cujusque in praescientia quoe ipse daturus est sed fidem elegit in praescientia ut quem sibi crediturum praescivit Ipsum elegerit ut Spiritum sanctum daret ut bona operando etiam vitam aeternam consequerentur God did not choose the works of any in his foresight which himself was to give but he chose faith in his foresight that whom he foreknew would beleeve he might choose them to give the holy Spirit unto that by doing good works they might obtain eternall salvation Augustine in libro expositionis quarundum propositionum ex epistola ad Romanos Again Quos Deus suos fidei opere futuros esse praenovit hos praedestin̄avit ad gloriam Those who God foreknew would become his through their beleeving he elected unto glory De praedestinatione Dei c. 5. The former opinion is the way of the Pelagian the latter of the Arminian Which yet I set not down after the more subtle times of Arminius himself but those of Augustine according to these cited passages the one of which he afterwards expresly retracted and the book it self out of which I fetch the other I beleeve either to be spurious or to have got abroad from him unawares before he had reveiwed it The Orthodox therefore such as we account the Synod of Dort do declare for the Absolute way in opposition to both these To wit that God without consideration either of mans faith or good works but meerly according to the counsell of his own will not rendring his reason to us hath determined to give that grace to some persons whereby they shall effectually be saved and to leave others to the freedome of their own wills that they may be judged at the last Day according to their deserts In this way there are likewise two sorts of Doctors The one teach that God looks on men without any consideration of sin at all in their state before the Fall in this decree of his grace to some and not to others The other teach that God looks indeed on men all alike without consideration of desert but not without consideration of sin to wit in their faln estate and so decrees his mercy to some and justice to others Note here that our Divines of the former sort do not say that God decrees damnation to any without consideration of sin nor salvation indeed without consideration of faith and repentance but Decree's the giving or not giving saving grace to keep them from sin and damnation to whom he pleases without any consideration in man whatsoever For Predestination say they being an immanent and eternall act of the Divine understanding will cannot be conceived as dependent upon any foreseen temporall acts of mans free-will Note also that St. Augustine who was the first set up for the Absolute way and yet not till his latter writings doth declare for the second sort of this way Caeteri autem ubi nisi in massa perditionis justo divino judicio relinquantur The rest that are not elect are left according to Gods just judgment in the masse of those that are faln unto perdition De bono perseverantiae c. 14. The one of these opinions is called the Supralapsarian doctrine the other the Sublapsarian Which are names indeed may make a rumbling to many that know not what they signify but so long as they come into one and the same Consequent which alone is to be regarded the difference is not of moment to disturb any And what is the Consequent then of these Doctrines which is fit to be enquired The Consequent of the first doctrine that Election is ex praevisis operibus of works foreseen must be this that the good life or good works of men therefore do arise from their own free wills and that the grace of God is given according to their merits This was the main opinion doubtless which the Church condemned in Pelagius From whence indeed those two other followed that Man may therefore choose whether he will ever commit any sin and That he must be free from original corruption Tria sunt quae maxime adversus eos catholica defendit ecclesia Vnum est Gratiam Dei non secundum merita dari quoniam Dei dona sunt Alterum est in quantacunque justitia sine qualibuscunque peccatis neminem vivere Tertium est nasci homines peccato primi homnis obnoxios There are three things especially which the Catholick Church defends against the Pelagians One is that