Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n apostle_n bishop_n church_n 1,878 5 4.2003 3 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
A41774 The Baptist against the papist, or, The Scripture and Rome in contention about the supream seat of judgment, in controversies of religion together with ten arguments or reasons, discovering the present papal church of Rome to be no true church of Christ : wherein it is also evinced that the present assemblies of baptized believers, are the true church of Jesus Christ / by Tho. Grantham ... Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. 1663 (1663) Wing G1527; ESTC R40005 55,798 108

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the Church And for their Holiness I have spoken to that before and surely it is but like their neighbours And for their Miracles I have given you a taste of them from Loreto and beside others do claim that mark as well as they Yea the Turks produce Miracles and the Protestants do the like and others as the Quakers the like and the Baptists can say of a truth that God hath done for and amongst them some things which have exceeded the course of Nature And so their Miracles will not more prove them a Church than the Miracles of others will prove the contrary unless they can prove the others to be Illusions And that they have not the mark of Unity is evident if History may be heeded for saith my Author there is an hundred Sects of Monks and Fryars amongst them and some of them so divided as they burnt one another for matters of Religion And for different Opinions there are no less than three hundred See Fox Act. and Monument p. 260. and Willit in his Book called Tetrastilon Papis I know the Papists do make a great deal of noise about their Pastoral Succession as if they could derive it from man to man up to the Apostle Peter But I find the learned Protestants making it a great Question whether ever Peter was Bishop of Rome or not And Jerom is said to have seen some old Books which shew that Narcissus ruled the Roman Church when Paul saluted him and his Family in his Epistle to the Romans No small contention is there likewise among the Learned Whether Linus or Clement were the second Bishop of Rome So that this Pastoral Succession the Papists pretend to meets with shrewd Objections in the very first and second person of that Line Against the uninterrupted continuance of their pretended Succession many things are objected as That there were sometimes three and sometimes two Popes and that for more than twenty years time together so that no man could tell where the true Pastoral Authority lay And then comes in that strange disaster of Joan the female Pope who for almost three years cut the chain of this pretended Succession This thing is famous in History Lastly Although the Papists could prove a continued Succession of persons claiming the Title of Universal Bishop yet this would not justifie them all to be the Pastors of Christ's Church For these two Rules are given us even by the Antients 1. That Peter left his Innocency hereditary as well as his Seat and that he which hath not the one as well as the other is not Peter's Successor 2. That it is not the Chair but the Doctrine that maketh a Bishop Now 3dly add but Paul's Rule in this matter 1 Tim. 3. and Titus 1. and then I am bold to affirm That many Popes of Rome were not the true Successors of Peter in Pastoral Authority For I find it laid to the charge of divers Popes that they were Drunken-Whoremongers Theeves given more to War than Christ rooted in all unspeakable sin furious men prophane Scoffers of Christ Incestuous persons Murderers Poysoners of their own Parents and Kindred open Sodomites or Buggerers Blasphemers incorrigible Hereticks Enchanters callers upon the Devil to help them to play at Dice Drinkers of the Devil's Health and Traitors to Princes These things are so notorious and evidently true of the Popes of Rome as that the Papists do not deny them T. B. End to Controvers and the Author of the Seven Queries as you may see in part before Yea Bernard was not a little moved with the wickedness of the Popes of Rome when he called them Tyrants Defrauders Raveners Traytors Darkness of the World Wolves and Devils And can we think that Succession to be good which is derived from Devils I need say no more See for the proof of all that I have said these Books Fox Act. Monument Willit Synops Prediaux's Introduct The Tenth Reason The present Assemblies of Baptized Believers and they only are the true visible Church of Jesus Christ Therefore the present Papal Church of Rome is not the Church of Christ The Explanation of this Reason or Argument THis Reason or Argument is not so to be understood as if we do shut all men out of Heaven who are not Members of our Church No verily This is the express Doctrine of the Papists for they say that out of the Church is no Salvation and by Church they mean only those that adhere to the Papal Church of Rome and hereupon they teach expresly and so do some Protestants also That without Baptism or the desire of Baptism c. none can be saved And therefore it is that they give power to Midwives to baptize Children sometimes between the Womb and the World That which we teach is this That the ordinary way appointed for men to receive Salvation in is The preaching of Repentance and Remission of sins to all Nations in the Name of Jesus Christ and the administration of Baptism as a pledge thereof to all that give acceptance to these Glad-tydings and upon this account this Ministration is called The Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins And we do teach as a most infallible Doctrine That without profession of Faith manifestation of Repentance and being baptized with Water in the Name of Jesus Christ c. no person can be orderly admitted into the Church or Kingdom of God on Earth And that therefore it concerns every man living to years of understanding and having the Gospel tendred to him only to look for Salvation this way as he will answer it before the Lord for contemning God's ordinary way and presuming to challenge the Grace of Eternal Life in a way of his own devising Nevertheless we do not hence conclude That all persons shall be damned that seek not Life in this way For first No Infant can seek for it in the way which the Gospel proposeth Life to men of years Yet surely it is a most cruel Doctrine to say that any Infants dying in their infancy shall be damned in Hell because as one very well said God will not damn any persons for that which they cannot help Again in Rom. 1st and 2d chapters Paul teacheth That if the sons of men act forth themselves in a way of Love Fear Obedience and Reverence to their Creator according to the means of Light vouchsafed to them that this shall be as much as shall be required of them in the day when God shall judge the secrets of all men by Jesus Christ for God will not gather where he hath not strewed at which time God will not judge them by the Law that never had it Howbeit let all that have it I mean his written Law expect to be judged by it And therefore though we will not presume to judge of the final state of this or that Society of men professing conscionably this or that Form of Worship but leave that wholly to the
with it I am sure that work is so clearly for us in this very point that our Adversaries the Calvinists and Calvin denies it to be his St. Aug. and Tertull. are as clear for us and what you bring out of them clearly answered by Bellarm. de Euchar. And you are to know that it is a general rule amongst the Learned that we are to explicate obscure places by those that are clear if we mean to know the Opinion of any Author it being impossible for any man to write so warily but that sometbing may be objected out of him especially if he have writ much as it is our case which may seem contrary to what he expresly teaches And you had need observe this rule in expounding the Scriptures themselves or otherwise you will meet with a thousand absurdities and contradictions Against the Councils you produce that of Constantinople under Constant Copron. as crying down Transubstantiation But this was a factious Meeting never owned for a Council neither by the Greek nor Latine Fathers and expresly condemned in the Nicene Council and the jest is this Mock-Council was so far from condemning Transubstantiation as you affirm that they swore by the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist to abolish the Worship of Images Something should here have been said concerning Bertram who is said to have opposed Transubstantiation but in the transcription of my Third Paper there was an Errata and the Instance is not material so that what is said about him I will expunge in both Papers You say further against the Authority of Councils That they have contradicted each other in their Decrees about the Laityes communicating in one or both kinds But we grant that the Church may vary in Customs of this nature which being indifferent may be altered as she shall think fit according to several circumstances What we deny is that the Church or General Councils ever made contrary Decrees about the belief of any point of Faith It is no wonder that you have a fling against the Pope after you have been so bold with Holy Fathers and General Councils but I must tell you Though many of our Divines hold him infallible when he speaks ex Cathedra as they call it yet is it not the Opinion of all and consequently no Article of our Faith Only we agree in this That for preserving peace in the Church all are bound so far to submit to the Popes Decrees as not to oppose them until a General Council be called from whose Judgment we admit no Appeal What you say of the wicked Lives of some of them is nothing to the purpose for as wicked Caiphas play'd the Prophet so might the Bishops of Rome with the assistance of the Holy Ghost be true interpreters of God's Word for all their wicked lives such Gratia gratis date which are given for the good of others do not argue his Sanctity that hath them To make you a true Prophet I will here cry out What is become of the living voice of the Church since you have done what you can to discredit her by casting all the dirt you can in her face as it is evident unless you will throw out the Holy Fathers and General Councils the Churches Representatives out of the Church BAPTIST I perceive our Judgments differ concerning the living voice of the Church what it is I have told you That I take it for the present Church and her Pastours in those particular Ages wherein they live You take this living voice to be the Decrees of Councils and Books of the antient Fathers And here I cannot but marvel why you should be willing to Appeal to the Books of the Antients and their written Decrees as a living voice and clear way to decide our Controversies and yet appeal from the Books of the Prophets and Apostles as being but dead Letters and senceless Characters Certainly if any Writings now extant may be called the Churches living voice the Holy Scripture doth better deserve that title than any other Nor will it suffice here to object as it is the Papists usual way that our difference is about the Scripture and the Sense thereof c. for the same difference is found amongst us touching the Books and Sense of Councils and Fathers yea I think I may be bold to say That even the Learned are so much divided concerning them in both respects as that they can never be therein reconciled But is it so that the voice of the Fathers c. who only speak in their Writings is a means or way of equal clearing to decide our differences as the voice of a living Judge in a Case of Law amongst men Then what reasonable man can render a reason that the voices of the Prophets and Apostles though only speaking to us in their Books and Decrees may not be appealed to as a clear way to decide our differences Sith all men professing Christianity must confess that the Prophets and Apostles speak with as much Life and Power Certainty and Authority as any that ever writ since their time No-whither now can you turn your selves but to your selves as I have formerly noted and take upon you to be the only living voice that must without controul interpret Fathers Councils and Scriptures too and when you have done sit down as Judge to give Sentence for your selves and against your opposers Well you have assigned us a Judge of Controversies To wit the Fathers and Councils of the Church long ago deceased and this is a clear way you say to agree all But I have noted that it 's a very cloudy way and that because they could not yet agree themselves for they are opposite each to other to this day insomuch as you are utterly unable to reconcile them since as I have shewed you must not make use of the Scripture to that purpose because before the Scripture can have any authority to any purpose according to your Judgment your Councils must deliver it to us as the Word of God which they cannot do till they be found First holy Fathers and Councils of the Church And secondly at unity among themselves and each with himself And I have asked you How you will effect this difficult work To which you Answer First That General Councils have no such Controversies as I talk of Secondly That when there is such difficulty in any one of the Fathers we must look upon the rest what they say and so follow their unanimous consent for say you if we take them singly no doubt they have erred and these errors we know by their dissenting from the rest I answer first That General Councils have erred and that in matters of Faith is undeniable if Records may be credited rather than you As first The Council of Arimi did err so as to conclude for the Arrian Heresie namely That there was a time when Christ was not the Son of God and sure you account that an errour in
point of Faith Secondly The Council of Ephesus did err so as to conclude for the Eutichian Heresie namely That the Body of Christ was not of one Substance with ours and is not this an errour in point of Faith Or will you say that these things were never contradicted and censured by other Councils These things are not denied by your eminent Disputant See the Book intituled Certamen Religiosum So then it appears that General Councils have erred and contradicted each another in very high points of Faith Moreover as to the things whereof I chiefly spake in my last Paper it is manifest that Councils have contradicted one another about the Sacraments for the Council of Constance confirmed by Pope Martin the Fifth doth curse the Laity or excommunicate such as receive the Sacrament in both kinds And yet by the Council of Basil the Laity are allowed to receive it in both which Council was also confirmed by a Pope namely Felix the Fifth Sure one of these Councils must needs err But you have a way to salve this errour such as it is and that is to tell me That the Church may vary in customs of this nature Sure this is a corrupt opinion by which it will follow That we have no certainty of nor constancy in any Ordinance of Christ for if the Church have power to take the Cup away she hath power also to take the Bread away for certainly she hath as much to do with the one as the other But truly this your variation as it is clear beside the Institution of Christ and the Doctrine of Paul so it hath in a manner destroyed both Baptism and the Supper of the Lord as is evident by the practice used in divers of your Masses where the People partake neither of the Bread nor Cup. As also your Peda-Rantism hath in a great measure defrauded the Sons of men of the Baptism of Repentance But be pleased to consider that this your sacrilegious division of this Sacrament is condemned by Cyprian Gelasius and others First Cyprian saith How can we exhort the People to shed their blood for Christ if we deny them the Blood of him The division of this Mystery cannot be without great Sacriledge saith Gelasius Again you cannot be ignorant how the Council of Carthage decreed the Books of Tobit Judith Ecclesiasticus Sapience and Maccabees should be received for Canonical notwithstanding they were rejected out of the sacred Canon by the Council of Laodicea and here by the way I may take notice how you would have me walk by such a rule as you your self do not observe for you propose the Judgment of those who lived nearest to the Apostles times as my safest rule to walk by supposing they knew the Mind of God or Christ better than those that came after but then why do you reject the Judgment of the Laodicean Council which is more antient than that of Carthage which yet you follow in receiving the Books of Maccabees into your Canon of holy Scripture Secondly It is marvellous to see what work you make in reconciling the Fathers without the Scriptures And seeing you are so hardy as to undertake this task without Scripture as undoubtedly you see you must or else grant that the Scripture must be that whereby we must decide all Controversies in Religion for certainly if we must decide all the Fathers Controversies in Religion with or by the Scripture it is not then very likely that either we or they should decide ours without them but I say sith you have undertaken to decide the Fathers Differences without Scripture pray tell me before you meddle with their Differences how you know them to be holy Fathers of the Church can you prove them Church-members without Scripture I believe this is as hard a task as to reconcile their Differences without Scripture and yet this also must you do before you can look upon the Scripture as any Rule for either them or your self You tell me if I take the Fathers singly no doubt they have erred yet you say I must follow their unanimous Consent a pretty Paradox Follow their Consent in what why say you in their Interpretation of Scripture Of Scripture Why there is no such thing as yet for them to interpret for you know that by your own direction we have laid by the Scripture and must reconcile these Fathers by themselves Miserable Guide hast thou not led me into a Labyrinth and run thy self into a sufficient Maze I 'le back again and see how these Fathers themselves direct me in this difficult point And first I meet with famous Augustine who tels me how he took notice of the Fathers that were before him Saith he My consent without exception I owe not to any Father were he never so well learned but only to the Canonical Scripture For whereas the Lord hath not spoken who of us can say it is this or that and if he do say so how can he prove it Yea saith he I require the voice of the Shepherd reade me this matter out of the Prophets Psalms the Gospel or the Apostles Epistles Neither saith he ought we to take the dispensations OF ALL MEN how CATHOLICK SOEVER they be or be they never so commendable as we take the canonical Scriptures as though we may not saving the honour that 's due to such men reprove or refuse any thing of their Writings if we find they meant otherwise than the Verity doth allow by the help of God found by us or by others Again he saith I am not moved with Cyprian's Epistles for I do not take the Letters of Cyp. as the Canonical Scripture but I do try his Writings BY THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURE and whatsoever in them doth agree with the Authority of the holy Scripture I do receive it with his Commendation and whatsoever doth not I do by his good leave refuse it And for further testimony of Augustine's integrity hear what he saith of himself Trust not me saith he nor credit my Writings as if they were Canonical Scripture but whatsoever THOU findest in the Word although thou didst not believe it before yet ground thy Faith on it now and whatsoever thou readest of mine unless thou know it certainly to be true give no certain assent unto it Again he thus teacheth We must be partakers of other mens Writings wholly after the manner of Bees for they flie not alike to all Flowers nor where they sit do they snatch all quite away but snatching so much as may serve to their honey-making they take their leave of the rest Even so we if we be wise having gotten so much of others as is sound and agreeable to Truth we will leap over the rest Which rule if we keep in reading and alledging the Fathers words we shall not swerve from our Profession the Scriptures shall have the sovereign place and yet the Doctors of the Church shall lose no part of
cause why the Church requireth chastity in the Clergie and forbiddeth not only fornication but all carnal copulation even in lawful wedlock is to the end that God's Priests be not divided from him by the clogs of Marriage but be clean and pure from all the fleshly acts of copulation And this doctrine they teach from 1 Cor. 7. where if you reade the 4 5 6 7. verses you may easily learn the quite contrary Doctrine Again They teach from 1 Tim. 3. 2. That none shall Marry that come into holy Orders And that if any of the Clergie in other Countries had been permitted in times past to enjoy their Wives yet they now declare it to be against the Apostles Rule And this they say is the Sentence of the Council of Nice But surely Paul's words are clear contrary for he saith A Bishop must be the Husband of one Wife having his Children in subjection c. In further proof of this matter it is upon Record That Greg. 7. An. 1070. did enforce Ministers by Excommunication to leave their Wives And Vrban 2. Anno. 1066. Decreed That it might be lawful to make the Ministers Wives bond-women And Fox recordeth That it was made Felony by the Act of the Six Articles for Ministers to marry Wives Fox p. 1135. And this cruelty Bellarmine defends by a saying of Jerome That a Bishop begetting Children shall be condemned as an Adulterer Now whereas I say they forbid Meats c. I do not mean that it is not meet for the Church to Fast and Pray and in such a sense to forbid meat But for their Church to forbid one kind of meat above another as that we may not eat Eggs in Lent and divers other creatures which God hath created to be received of such as believe For the true way of Fasting is a total fasting for the time unless necessity deny And truly the Papal Fast of Lent is in a manner no Fast which allows the drinking of Wines and the eating to the full of such delicacies as do inflame the flesh as much as Eggs c. which yet the Papists by no means will permit men to eat For my Author tells me That they make the eating of Eggs in Lent a damnable sin Fox p. 1043. I might fill much Paper about their forbidding meats But to proceed The Eighth Reason The present Papal Church of Rome is Mystery Babylon Therefore she is not the Church of Christ The Eighth Reason maintained 1. I Know that generally all that dissent from Rome do account her as in her present state to be Mystery Babylon And truly for my part I have considered of this matter and I find it is so clearly meant of Rome that even the Papists do not wholly exempt her from this Name Yet they deny that Rome as now considered is Mystery Babylon only say they it is to be referred to Rome in her Heathenish estate But thus I reason 2. If the present Papal Church of Rome be not Mystery Babylon then either the Papists or some body else can shew us a People which better deserves that title But this no man can do so far as yet I have learned and therefore as yet I must say The present Papal Church of Rome together with her Daughter Churches is Mystery Babylon And for further proof in this Point I thus reason 3. The present Papal Church hath the Marks of Mystery Babylon therefore she is Mystery Babylon I prove it thus One Mark of Mystery Babylon is a Regiment over the Kings of the Earth Rev. 17. The Woman which thou sawest is that great City which reigneth over the Kings of the Earth This Mark the present Papal Church of Rome hath above all other Witness the Papists own Books T. B. End to Controv. chap. 26 27. where he sets up the Pope above all Kings and Emperors and plainly calls the Popes Kings and Monarchs and the Papal Church he terms an invincible Empress c. Another Mark of Mystery Babylon is great Riches and wordly Pomp. That Rome in her present Church-state hath this Mark her Doctor T. B. is my witness So is Helen Geog. p. 192 193. and Napier Rev. 9. which Authors shew her Riches even of the Clergy only to be quite out of the reach of the best Arithmaticks to pass an Entrado upon it Add to all other witnesses that of Expeperience and it will shew us That when their Church had her domination in this Land they knew where the best Ground lay as the Ruins of their Abbeys do evince Compare all these with Rev. 18. and see if they do not agree Another Mark of Mystery Babylon is She sits upon Nations Tongues and Peoples Rome hath this Mark T. B. in his End to Controversies chap. 26 27. Another Mark of Mystery Babylon is She enslaves the Souls of men and is drunk with blood Now that the Papal Church of Rome hath this Mark I need only to refer my Readers to those large Histories of Sleidan Fox and Benzo the Italian Lastly As I noted it is confessed by the Papists That Mystery Babylon Rev. 17. 18. chapters is meant of Rome only they think to free themselves from the force of that blow by telling us That it 's meant of Rome in her Heathenism and under the persecuting Emperors But this is but a poor shift as may appear by shewing That the Antients do write against Rome as Mystery Babylon after the persecuting Emperors were down for the Papists say That Constatine put an end to the Persecution when he was converted which was about the year 300 and a few odd years at which time the Papists say That Rome was given up to the Pope 1. Jeroms who lived about the fourth hundred writing to Eustoch Marcelus doth apply these words to Rome viz. Fly out of Babylon let every man save his own Soul for Babylon is fallen and is become the Habitation of Devils Yea he saith further as he is quoted by the Protestants That Rome IS the Babylonical Harlot according to the Revelation of St. John appointed for the birth of Antichrist which there should arise and exercise all tyranny and from thence should deceive the whole world with his wicked Wiles And Augustine is most clear in this matter in his Book of the City of God where he calls Rome another Babylon in the West And Babylon in the East first Rome and Rome of Italy second Babylon Willing men to consider That in the beginning of the City of God which was in Abraham's time the first Rome that was Eastern Babylon was builded in Chaldea And about what the first Babylon was destroyed lest the City of God should want her Enemy the second Babylon which is Rome in Italy was erected Chrysostome saith Antichrist shall invade the vacant Empire of Rome and assay to draw unto himself the Empires both of God and man Thus it seems that Rome was accounted Mystery Babylon four or five