A09365:681
The Whole Treatise of the Cases of Conscience
The whole treatise of the cases of conscience distinguished into three books: the first whereof is revised and corrected in sundry places, and the other two annexed. Taught and delivered by M. W. Perkins in his holy-day lectures, carefully examined by his own briefs, and now published together for the common good, by T. Pickering Bachelor of Divinity. Whereunto is adjoined a twofold table: one of the heads and number of the questions propounded and resolved; another of the principal texts of Scripture which are either explained, or vindicated from corrupt interpretation.The whole treatise of the cases of conscience distinguished into three bookes: the first whereof is revised and corrected in sundrie places, and the other two annexed. Taught and deliuered by M. W. Perkins in his holy-day lectures, carefully examined by his owne briefes, and now published together for the common good, by T. Pickering Bachelour of Diuinitie. Whereunto is adioyned a twofold table: one of the heads and number of the questions propounded and resolued; another of the principall texts of Scripture vvhich are either explaned, or vindicated from corrupt interpretation.
Cambridge: printed by John Legat, 1606Cambridge: printed by Iohn Legat, 1606
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
I. Question. How God is to be conceived in our minds, when we perform any service or worship unto him?
I. Question. How God is to be conceiued in our mindes, when wee performe any seruice or worship vnto him?
For answer hereunto, this ground is first to be laid, that we must not, neither can possibly know or conceive God as he is in himself. For God in himself is infinite, and therefore incomprehensible in regard of us. But we are to conceive him so, as he hath & doth reveal himself to us in his creatures, principally in his word. The truth hereof may ⟨p. 253⟩appear in this one example, (to allege no more) when Moses desired to see the glory & Majesty of God, for a further confirmation and assurance of his calling, answer was made him by God, that he could not see his face, but he should see his back parts, as he passed by him. The meaning of this answer is, that God would manifest his glory unto him by his effects, by which as by a glimpse or imperfect representation, he might discern some part of his Majesty, so far forth as he was able in the infirmity of flesh and blood, to behold the same. But the perfect and full sight thereof, no creature was ever able to attain unto, it being reserved for the life to come; when (& not before) they shall see him as he is in himself face to face.
FOr answer hereunto, this ground is first to be laid, that we must not, neither can possibly knowe or conceiue God as he is in himselfe. For God in himselfe is infinite, and therefore incomprehensible in regard of vs. But we are to conceiue him so, as he hath & doth reveale himselfe to vs in his creatures, principally in his word. The truth herof may ⟨p. 253⟩appeare in this one example, (to alleadge no more) when Moses desired to see the glory & Maiestie of God, for a further confirmation and assurance of his calling, answer was made him by God, that he could not see his face, but he should see his back parts, as he passed by him. The meaning of this answer is, that God would manifest his glorie vnto him by his effects, by which as by a glympse or imperfect representation, he might discern some part of his Maiestie, so farre forth as he was able in the infirmitie of flesh and blood, to behold the same. But the perfect and full sight thereof, no creature was euer able to attain vnto, it beeing reserued for the life to come; when (& not before) they shall see him as he is in himselfe face to face.