Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
soul_n	body_n	call_v	death_n	12,105	5	5.7391	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94173	Ten lectures on the obligation of humane conscience Read in the divinity school at Oxford, in the year, 1647. By that most learned and reverend father in God, Doctor Robert Sanderson, Bishop of Lincoln. &c. Translated by Robert Codrington, Master of Arts.	Sanderson, Robert, 1587-1663.; Codrington, Robert, 1601-1665.	1660 (1660)	Wing S631; ESTC R227569	227,297	402

From hence there doe arise diverse effects in the Soul from the Conscience reproving accusing and condemning a great sadnesse and trouble of mind remorses terrours and torments and on the other side from the excusing defending and absolving Conscience there proceeds an extraordinary peace and tranquility an unspeakable joy and solace an erected hope an unstartling confidence and a most stedfast and unshaken constancy of mind The third application of Conscience doth look on things future that are to be done in which the Conscience doth proceed as a Law-giver Schoolmaster and Admonisher or a Counsellour And in this manner of proceeding the offices and Acts of Conscience are to dictate to oblige to incite to retract these are the principle Acts of Conscience to whose voice incouraging to righteousness whosoever shall give ear he shall not fear her as a witnesse or as a Judge XXVIII I have now finished what I conceived necessary to be spoken concerning the nature of Conscience in which I have been longer I fear but certainly more obscure then either I would or ought to be if the Subject could otherwise have born it or then I hope I shall be in the following Lectures concerning the use of Conscience But truly all disputation concerning the faculties and Potentia's of the Intellective soul is intricate and perplexed as most grave and learned men have already complained of it both because the things themselves are something more remote from sensible matter and motion as also by reason of their mutual relation and connexion But peradventure you will say unto me by your Definition you have rather obscured then any ways illustrated a thing that is manifest and vulgarly known which is in the daily use and in the mouth of all men truly in this I cannot deny the objection so empty are the studies and cogitations of men and so weak are all our endeavours Those things which are before our feet and eyes which of themselves do jump into our thoughts and sences those things which are not unknown to the Cobler and the Weaver things which the most illiterate men do think they understand Odi ego in quit definire facilius est mihi videre in alterius definitione quid non prob m quàm quicquam be●è definiendo 〈…〉 August 2. de Ord. 2 and indeed in some measure do understand them the same things are not understood by the greatest of the Philosophers and the most refined wits are here at a stand VVhat Clown almost is there that thinks himself so wretchedly sil●y as not to give you a perfect account of what is Time or Place or Motion and the like into the diving into and the unfolding of the Nature whereof Profound Accute Angelick Seraphick Doctors have for many ages past exercised and are still exerciseing themselves and after so much sweat and labour have not yet attained their desired Gole In time I am and of time I speak and yet I know not what time is saith St. Augustine of time In which I cannot sufficiently admire the infinite wisdome of the Almighty by this means beating down all humane pride Gal. 6. 3. and presenting to mortals as in a miror that empty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seeming wisdom by which they would appear to be something when they are indeed nothing Hor. 1. Epist miserably deceiveing their own hearts that so men might learn metiri se modulo 7. Rom. 12. 30 ac pede suo to measure themselves by their own Last their own Module not to be wiser than it becommeth them but to be wise unto sobriety acknowledging their own foolishness that to God alone may be the glory of his wisdome THE SECOND LECTURE In which it is declared that in the Conscience of a good Intention there is not such a Protection that a man might safely rest therein ROM 3. 8. And as we are blamed and as some affirme that we say why do we not evil that good may come thereof whose damnation is just THat the mind of man doth contain something in it of Divinity is with a great consent confessed by the wisdome of the An●ients Horat. 2. Satyr 2. who have termed it to be Divinae particulam aurae a particle of the Divine Ayre ●pictetus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and have affirmed that our minds have been taken from the immortal Gods and are pure as Heaven it self Nay some of them rising higher and speaking more boldly have not been afraid to say that the mind is God himself and have raised Temples to it as to a Diety 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Menander in Plutarch and Ovid Mens quoque Numen habet Menti aed●s in Cop● tolio vid. Cic 2. de nat deor Liv. lib. 23. and Seneca Quid aliud voces animam quam Deum inhumano corpore hospitantem What else will you call the mind but a God lodging in a humane body In which words as some of them seem to have most reference to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the substance of the soul which being void of matter and bulk and free from Death and Corruption Plutarch in quaest platon Ovid. 2. Fast Senec. Epist 31. and endued with understanding and the liberty of will doth seem rather to come nearer to the nature of immortal Gods then of corporal things so the others do reflect upon that Power and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against energetical Virtue which we call the Conscience And from hence it is of Menanders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Xenocrat apud Aristot 2. Top. 6. To mortals every ones Conscience is a God And in this sence the Lord said that he had placed Moses as a God to Pharoah because he did inculcate into Pharoah the will of God he did excite Pharoah to the performance of it M● min●rit Deum se ad ibere testem id est ut arbit●o méntem suam Cic. 3. Offic. and for not obeying it he did prosecute him with continual plagues and in the same sence it may be said that God hath given to every particular man a proper Conscience to be as a God unto him which in Gods steed as the Preacher of his eternal Law should dictate to him what he ought to do and what to avoid and which sollicitously should importune him to the performance of these duties which are commanded Exod. 8. 1. and severely should call unto him for an account of his actions good or evil which should extort from the most wicked an acknowledgement of the Divine Justice as a most just Judge should discern and assign unto every one either rewards or punishments according to their deserts for by nature the state of Conscience is placed as it were in the middle betwixt both beneath God but above Man subject unto God as a Hand-maid but set over man as a Mistresse II. From hence it is that Conscience is taken into a double consideration as

exclusively that is to say one and but one only The Apostle otherwise had made use of a very uneffectual argument to prove what he had propounded For he rebuketh those who unadvisedly did pass their judgments either on the persons or the deeds of other men as the invaders of their Rights Who art thou saith he who Dost judge another As if he should have said dost thou know thy self what thou art and what thou dost It doth not belong to thee to thrust thy sawcy Sicle into the harvest of another man much less boldly to fling thy self into the Throne of Almighty God If already thou are ignorant of it then know that it belongeth to him alone to judge of the Consciences of men to whom alone it doth belong to impose Laws upon the Consciences of men which none can do but God alone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is but one Law-giver It is observable that the Apostle doth ascribe unto God alone the power of saving and destroying from whence we frame the second Argument He only hath power over the Consciences of men either for command or prohibition who hath power with unmerited Rewards to crown the well-doers and with just punishments to torment the transgressors but it is in the power of God alone the onely Law-giver to give Rewards and Punishments according to the quality of every conscience Therefore he alone hath a right and privilege over the Consciences of men X. It is thus proved again in the second place He who alone knoweth the internal motions of the Conscience he only hath the power of prescribing a Law unto them for the Law doth neither determine or judge of things unknown But unto God alone the searcher of the heart the internal motions of hearts and Consciences are discovered Therefore he alone hath the power of imposing a Law upon the Consciences which may oblige them From hence it is that the Laws of men do only bind the external motions of the body to an external Conformity from the knowledge and command whereof all internal motions and several hammers that strike upon the clocks of the mind and Conscience are altogether to be exempted And upon this account it was that not only holy men and endued with the knowledge of the true God such as were the three Captive young men amongst the Babylonians in the third of Daniel and the seven brethren of Maccabeus but many wise men amongst the Heathens did deride the threatnings and torments of Tyrants as exercising their violence not so much upon themselves as upon the outsides only and on the subburbs of them But let us consider what our Saviour Jesus Christ did think himself of these thing● and what Counsels he prescribed to his Disciples concerning them Fear not them saith he that kill the body and after that have no more that they can do upon you but fear him who after he hath killed hath power to cast into Hell yea I say unto you fear him Luke 12. 3 4. As if he should have said Tyrants by the permission of God have power upon the Bodies but upon the Souls and Consciences of men they have no power no right at all the Laws can neither ordain nor afflict any punishment which doth belong to the inward man God hath only the prerogative of the Soul and Body and for the neglect of their duties can afflict punishments on both and condemn the whole man to everlasting torment XI In the third place it is proved by the condition and natural estate of the Conscience it self which as before I have expressed is so placed as it were in the middle betwixt God the Will of man as that which is usually and truly spoken of Kings and Emperours may as truly be verified of the Consciences of every man Solo Deo minores esse nec aliquem in terris superiorem agnoscere They are lesse than God only and on Earth do acknowledge no Superior That speech of the Emperour Maximilian the first is very memorable Conscientiis dominari velle est arcem coeli invadere To exercise a domination over Consciences is to invade the Tower of Heaven He is a plunderer of the glory of God and a nefarious invader of the power that is due unto him whosoever he is that shall claim a right to the Consciences of men or practice an usurpation over them Let the Bishops of Rome and the Canonists and the Jesuits who do flatter and cringe unto him all others take heed that they be not guilty of this so great a Sacrilege I would also have those admonished who do so submit their Consciences to the power of any creature which ought only to be subjected to God himself to be carefull lest whiles they conferre the Honour of that service to the creature which is due unto God alone they make a God of the Creature which at least is interpreted to be Idolatry From this first Conclusion thus proved there followeth this remarkable position That the proper Rule of Conscience is that which God the supreme Law-giver hath prescribed to it and besides that Rule there ought no other to be admitted XII The second Conclusion followeth which is That the next and most immediate Rule of Conscience although it be neither the Adaequate or the supreme Rule is that light with which the mind at that instant is endued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socrat ap Stob. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 1. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazian Orat 15. And this is the same light which some do call the light of Reason others the Law of the mind and which the Schoolmen following the Philosophers do call right or rectified Reason This is first proved by some places out of the word of God as Luke 12. 57. Wherefore even of your selves do you not judge that which is right They are the words of our Saviour as if he should have said You have the light within you infused into your minds from that true light which enlightneth every man comming into this world by the help whereof unlesse you will be wanting to your selves you can distinguish what is straight from what is crooked and what is just from that which is unjust The Text Rom. 2. verse 14. and 15. is very remarkable Quum Gentes quae legem scriptam scilicet non habent naturâ ea quae sunt legis faciunt Seeing the Gentiles who have not the Law viz. the written Law do by natue perform those things which are of the Law to wit they practice the Acts of Justice Prudence Fortitude and Temperance and of all other Virtues These men having not the Law are a Law unto themselves for they show the works of the Law written in their hearts their Consciences giveing witnesse thereunto and their thoughts either accusing or defending them By which words it is manifest that in the particular Acts of Testifying accusing and defending and in whatsoever Acts that already are committed by any

sincerely and openly but with all due reverence to present their just grievances to their Prince and faithfully to lay before him with what present remedies they may cure those evils that oppress them and humbly to beseech him that he would be pleased to condescend to the petions of his Subjects as he shall judge it to be most safe and advantagious to the Commonwealth and confirm the grant of them with his Royal hand And if he being thus petitioned to shall refuse they are to desist for that time from their purposes and to be content with their present affairs and Laws and that without all murmuring or the least sign of force until their Prince being throughly perswaded by his Council and Intreaties of some friends or induced by the arguments of Reasons shall renounce that pertinaciousnesse of his Spirit and give an open Ear to the desires of his Subjects XV. The Fifth Doubt Seeing that the Common good is not only the End of the Laws but of the whole politick Government Is it lawful out of any foresight or pretence of the Common good to change the present form of Government or to attempt the change thereof and how far and to whom is it lawful For Examples sake Is it lawful for the people to change a Monarchical Government into an Aristocratical or into a Democratical or on the contrary A Question of great difficulty concernment especially in these times manners in which we live For my part I will faithfully represent unto you what I think of it and will leave unto every man the liberty to think what he pleaseth I suppose only what is already granted by many and what cannot easily be denye dviz that a Monarchy by Inheritance or a successive Kingdom is absolutely the best amongst all the forms of Common-wealth and highly to be preferred above the other two This being granted I think in the first place that the people if they please may change a Democratical into an Aristocratical or into an Monarchical Government First because it seemeth to be a change for the better moreover in Democracy the chief Command is in the Power of the people so that they may determine of themselves as they themselves please provided that no Injury be done to any man Now it is most certain that by this Change no Injury is done by the people unto any one It cannot be to any other for no Injury can be done to any man in any thing to which he hath no Right neither can any Injury be done herein to themselves who of their own accord do make this Change for no Injury can be ever done to a willing Person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think in the second place that for all these reasons the Peers of a Land also may turn their Aristocratical Government Arist 5. into a Monarchical one For it is a change into the better Ethic. 〈◊〉 and by so doing no injury is done to any man But I cannot so easily resolve you this doubt whether it be as lawful for them to convert an Aristocracy into a Democracy for although they have power to do it and it may be done by them without any injury yet it seems not to be a Commutation into a better State Thirdly I believe that the Monarchy of an elective Kingdom may be changed peradventure into any form of Government but especially into an hereditary and a successive Kingdom and that for almost the same Reasons above alleged nevertheless this ought not to be done unlesse the Kingdom by the death of him that last Reigned be vacant for otherwise it would be an injury to the present King And Secondly it ought not to be done unlesse by the joynt consent of the Peers of the Kingdom and People and of those persons who have the right of electing I think fourthly that a Monarchy by inheritance cannot lawfully be changed into an Elective Kingdom or into any other form of Government either by the people alone or by the joynt consent of People Peers and King which is the whole people in their greatest latitude unlesse peradventure there shall be such a defect in the Royal Progeny that there is not one of them remaining to challenge the Kingdom due by inheritance to him The Reasons of this opinion are First Because according to our former supposition it were a change from a better to a worse Secondly Because by reason of that exchange an apparent injury would be done to the lawful Heir Thirdly Because that not only the Exchange but because such a desire and indeavour doth seem to be quite contrary to the words of Salomon Prov. 24. 21. My Son fear God and the King and have nothing to do with them who affect new things What before I said I must in this place again repeat viz. I do not urge this as too confidently to affirm it or to cause a disputation with any man in the proof of this particular if he be of another judgment XVI The sixth doubt How may that be understood which so commonly is spoken Salus p●puli est suprema Lex The safety of the People is the supreme Law The reason of the doubt doth proceed from that which we propounded and proved in the beginning viz. That the End of Laws is the publick good From hence on one side it seems to follow that the safety of the Common-wealth doth depend on the strict observance of the Laws and on the other side that all observancy of the Laws ought to give place to the safety of the Commonwealth And from hence some who within these few years have brought a new Divinity and a new policy into the Church and Common-wealth have no lesse confidently than perversely collected and suggested that the Liberty which they call the Right of the Subjects for so they interpret the Safety of the People is to be preferred above the prerogatives of Kings or the enacting or establishing of Laws and therefore all Regal Power and Authority of the Laws is to stoop unto it For the resolution of this doubt you are to know that all the deceit almost on this vulgar Axiom doth arise from the Equivocation which lyeth hid in the Terms especially in that word People For the people being a kind of a Metaphorical Body may be taken two wayes as the word Body may it self Collectively as it signifies the whole Commonalty of the Republick that is both King and Subjects and Discretively as it signifies the Subjects precisely by themselves and severed from the King As when we say the King and the people So in the word Body sometimes the other Members are to be understood with the Head as when we say the Soul and the Body And sometimes the Members only are precisely to be understood the Head to be taken by its self as when we say the Head and the Body XVII First therefore I say that most precisely and by a very evil Counsel that is wrested