Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	canonical_a	scripture_n	time_n	1,859	5	3.8770	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12215	A surreplication to the reioynder of a popish adversarie VVherein, the spirituall supremacy of Christ Iesus in his church; and the civill or temporall supremacie of emperours, kings, and princes within their owne dominions, over persons ecclesiastical, & in causes also ecclesiasticall (as well as civill and temporall) be yet further declared defended and maintayned against him. By Christopher Sibthorp, knight, one of his majesties iustices of his court of Chiefe-place in Ireland.	Sibthorp, Christopher, Sir, d. 1632.	1637 (1637)	STC 22525; ESTC S102608	74,151	92

A SVRREPLICATION TO THE REIOYNDER OF A POPISH ADVERSARIE VVherein THE SPIRITVALL SVPREMACY of Christ Iesus in his Church and the Civill or Temporall Supremacie of Emperours Kings and Princes within their owne Dominions over Persons Ecclesiasticall in causes also Ecclesiasticall aswell as Civill and Temporall be yet further declared defended and maintayned against him By CHRISTOPHER SIBTHORP Knight one of his Majesties Iustices of his Court of Chiefe-place in IRELAND Give therefore unto Cesar the things that bee Cesars and unto God the things that be Gods Matth. 22.21 He that is not with mee saith Christ is against me And he that gathereth not with me scattereth Luke 11.23 Imprinted at DVBLIN by the Societie of Stationers Anno Domini M.DC.XXVII To the Reader I Did expect Courteous Reader that before I had written any word in these matters both my first Booke and my second also which is my Reply should first have beene answered and that in such sort as in the Postscript annexed at the end of the same my Reply is declared but therein I perceive mine expectation is deceaved and that my Adversarie without any regard had to that which I desired hath taken his owne course and put forth a Rejoynder to that my Reply In which his Rejoynder I am sorry to see how much he debating the point of Supremacie wrongeth not onely Me and his Reader and the auncient Christian Emperours and auncient Fathers but even CHRIST IESVS also himselfe and all Kings and Princes generally in respect of their severall rights to them belonging Wherfore I thought it not meete or seemely for me in this case to be silent or to desist but being thus provoked to proceede and to make and publish a Surreplication to that Rejoynder And this I doe the rather that so a third book being added to my two former they all three together might serve so much the more strongly to perswade him and the rest of the pretended Catholickes to the truth in this cause for vis unita fortior a threefold corde is not easily broken If by all or any of my labours I shall bee a meane or helpe to worke their conformitie or reformation I shall be glad of it for it is the maine thing I seeke after but if they hate to be reformed and will in contempt and scorne of all admonitions live die in their errors which were a case most fearefull desperate and lamentable whom can they blame therein but themselves and their Popish teachers by whom they are so much misled and abused My Adversarie when he tooke upon him to answer the two Chapters in my first Booke did not prefixe those two Chapters of mine to his answer neyther when hee answered my Reply did he prefixe my Reply to his Rejoynder And therefore also neyther did I prefixe his answere to my Reply nor his Rejoynder to this my Surreplication Whereat neyther he nor any other for him hath cause to be offended or to take exception in asmuch as I doe therein but follow his owne president and example which himselfe first used and wherein hee began unto mee The substance neverthelesse marrow pith and strength of all his Bookes and of his reasons and arguments therein contayned I omit not but mention and that usually or rather evermore in his owne words and doe also make answere thereunto But I am loth any longer to detaine you and therefore I here leave you to the reading of that which followeth and that which followeth to your owne judicious just and equall censure Beseeching God to guide us all unto his truth to keepe establish us therein continually after that wee once see and know it Amen A SVRREPLICATION TO THE REIOYNDER OF A POPISH ADVERSARIE To my Adversarie SIR As you throughout your Rejoynder addressed your speech to me in particular so doe I in like sort here direct my speech unto you in this worke of mine For although I neyther purposed nor promised it nor others I suppose expected it yet that which you have of late published against my Reply hath provoked me once more to set penne to paper in defence of that cause which you so much strive against in vaine In the beginning of that your Rejoynder you say that although wee bee different in religion yet you desire much that wee be united in affection This speech of yours I dislike not because it savoureth as I conceive it of that humanitie and charitie which is to be entertayned and continued amongst us notwithstanding these differences in points of religion as also of some good affection and inclination in you unto Gods trueth wherein chiefely it is that wee are to be united For as touching any other kindes of unitie namely that which is in error and falsehood I hope you desire it not because it is as S. Augustine rightly calleth it Error is conspiratio a conspiracie of error against the truth The unitie which is joyned with divine veritie is it which S. Paul calleth The unitie of the spirit and which hee would have all Christians to be evermore verie carefull to observe saying Ephes 4.3 Endevour to keepe the unitie of the spirit in the bond of peace and hee saith againe thus Ephes 4.15 Let us follow the truth in love and in all things grow up into him which is the head that is Chirist This truth if we did all earnestly seeke after and follow and that in love and in a charitable manner as here we are required to doe all our controversies would the better and the sooner be ended and determined which have now so long disquieted many mens mindes and doe so much hinder that which is indeede most requisite namely the good and due practise of true religion in the world For how can any practise religion aright before they know which is the right religion which they are to practise and to walke in Or how can they know which is the right religion they are to walke in so long as they be doubtfull of it by reason of questions and controversies that doe perplexe and distract them The first thing then which men desirous to live good and godly lives are to seeke after is in the middest of all these controversies to get obtain within themselves a resolution of a right religion which resolution they can never certainely have or attaine unto but by meanes of the sacred and Canonicall Scriptures which be the onely infallible rule of all divine truth as I have shewed in my first Booke So that the purpose and intention of that my first Booke as likewise of the second which is my Reply and of this also was not nor is to have men to dwell continually and everlastingly in controversies but cleane contrariwise to have them all ended and determined and that as speedily as might bee in every mans conscience by diligent searching of those holy Scriptures and finding out thereby what is the undoubted trueth in them that men being

You know how to make the application And yet neyther was I when I made that my Booke contracting or bargaining with you or with any other man in particular For I then neyther did nor could possibly know before hand who was to be the Answerer of it with whom I might so contract nor did I take upon me the person of a Challenger as you affirme For I knew of no duell that was in the case And as for my defending of Protestancie against Poperie it no more proveth me to be a challenger then your defending of Poperie against Protestancie proveth you to be the challenger Yea in the conclusion of that my first booke Pag. 417. it appeareth that I was so farre from taking upon me the person or using the words of a challenger that cleane contrariwise I used onely the peaceable and friendly words of Desiring and Requesting For there I desire of him whosoever hee were that would take upon him to answere that booke of mine that hee would in that his answere be pleased to observe and performe those three requests or three conditions before mentioned which I there propounded All which were reasonable conditions and such as if you well consider them were not as you say disadvantageable but much advantageable rather to the cause of the answerer if hee had performed them But here by the way you tell me of a verie compendious course how that my whole first booke is answered and confuted For you say that he which fayleth in one point of faith fayleth in all and that a refutation or disproofe of any one particular in my booke is a refutation and disproofe of all And for proofe hereof you cite S. Iames cap. 2. Iam. 2.10 This you also cited and alledged in your first booke This is a verie speedy course and briefe manner of answering and confuting whole bookes and volumes if it might be allowed Howbeit touching that text of S. Iames which you somuch abuse and touching that your Paradoxe and strange opinion you have been before sufficiently answered in my Reply Chap. 2. pag. 110. 111. 112. Whereunto you in your Reioynder have said nothing But admit your Maior proposition were true which is indeede utterly untrue yet how doe you prove your Minor that is to say how doe you prove any one point or position of mine contayned in that booke to be false Shew or name that one which you have disproved or confuted if you can but you are not able to doe it From henceforth therefore bee not so prodigall of your words But yet further to derogate from the credite of that my first booke you say that it is onely a collection out of Protestant authors and that you can discover the Bookes Chapters and Pages of Master Fulke Master Whitakers Master Downam of others whence I have borrowed verbatim whatsoever is expressed in it This is too overlavish a speech and more then you will bee ever able to prove Indeede as touching the substance of the matter and doctrine contayned in that my first booke and in my second and in this also I thinke it no shame but contrarywise I thinke it honour and reputation freely to confesse that I have learned it of those and of such other learned and reverend Protestant Divines Yea I hold it a part of dutie in me not onely ingenuously but thankefully also to acknowledge those my teachers especially considering that what they have taught mee herein appeareth to bee certainely and irrefutably true This therefore doth rather adde credite to the matter and doctrine contayned in those my bookes then derogate or take any from them But was there ever any reader of other mens workes that was not allowed to take collections out of thē to make use of thē as occasion requireth yea if that were an exception sufficient I might also say that as touching the matter all that you have spoken eyther in yovr first answer or in your Reioy●der is likewise but a collection out of Popish authors and that the Bookes Chapters Pages of Bellarmine Stapleton Suarez and of others might be shewed whence you have borrowed and taken them all But to what end were this For the question is not what I have learned or collected out of the one or you out of the other but whether of those doctrines and religions which wee have severally learned of those our severall teachers bee the truer and which of them is approved of God and by his word namely whether Protestancie or Poperie Heere then as touching the substance of the matter delivered in all my bookes you might have spared your labour for you have therein tould no newes nor any more then my selfe had before affirmed confessed and acknowledged But you proceede and say that although you for your part have answeted but onely to two Chapters of that my first booke the force of which your answer I have also overthrowne in my Reply that the whole booke is neverthelesse answered and compleatly finished and extant any time these two yeares and a halfe past and yet not divulged for want of meanes and opportunitie for the impression And for that cause doe you desire of mee that I would bee a meane to procure it to bee Printed by the Protestant Presse here in Dublin A verie bold unbeseeming and strange request to be demaunded especially at my hands But if it be as you say it is fully answered and compleatly finished so long since why is not printed all this while For whereas you pretend want of meanes and opportunitie for the impression It is well knowne that the Papists as sundrie other their workes printed sufficiently declare doe if they list want neyther meanes nor opportunitie for the impression And I have tould you heretofore that if your workes and bookes bee so excellent and so worthy the printing as you make shew for you might got them to bee Printed eyther at Doway or at Rhemes or at some other place beyond the Seas And therefore it was altogether idle for you to give me this election eyther to receive it in a Manuscript or to procure the printing of it for it is needlesse to receive it in a Manuscript when it may be Printed And for the printing of it not I but your selfe must procure it if you will have it done So that as touching that choyce or offer you make mee I hold my selfe free and not necessarily tyed or bound to doe eyther the one or the other Yea the very name of a Protestant Presse if there were no more might have beene sufficient to tell you that it were utterly unmeete for Popish workes to come into it especially those that bee purposely and directly made and contrived against such cleere high and important points as bee also by law established Now then to come to my second request I trust you likewise finde nothing in it unreasonable for I therein desired no more of the answerer but to answer not superficially or

Cohanim that is Princes or great Rulers so it is explayned 2. Sam 20.26 and declared in 1 Chron. 18.17 And so it is likewise said of Ira the Iairite that hee was Cohen le David that is a Prince or chiefe Ruler about David For to conster these to be Priests in the proper and usuall signification of the word they not being of the Tribe of Levi were verie absurd And to these thus formerly alledged in my Reply you have answered nothing in your Rejoynder Yea S. Ierome himselfe in his owne observation sheweth that the Hebrew word though he translate it Sacerdotes in the one case and Sacerdos in the other case yet signifieth as I before affirmed For saith he Ira Iairites erat sacerdos David Hier. tradit Hebr. in libros Regum to 3 id est Magister sicut alibi scriptum est Filij autem David erant sacerdotes idest Magistri fratrum suorum But because you also object S. Augustine as the Iesuites likewise did object both S. Ierome and S. Augustine in this case writing upon this Psalm 99. to prove Moses to bee a Priest I had rather you should take your Answer thereunto from the wordes of that reverend and learned Bishop Doctor Bilson then from me who answereth the Iesuites and consequently you in this sort In his Booke called the difference betweene Christian subiection unchristian rebellion part 3. pag. 102.103 Hier. in Psal 98. Aug. in Psal 98. All that S. Ierome saith is this that Moses had the rule of the Law and Aaron of the Priesthood and that eyther of them did foreshew the comming of Christ with a Priestly kinde of Proclamation Moses with the sound of the Law and Aaron with the Bels of his garments Where S. Hierome calleth the Propheticall function of Moses to teach the people the lawes of God a Priestly kinde of Proclamation foreshewing that the Son of God should come in the flesh to teach us the will of his Father S. Augustine useth the word in the like sence for that sacred service which Moses yeelded to God in reporting his lawes and precepts to the people And therefore in the same place he saith of Samuel also that hee was made high Priest which is expressely against the Scriptures if you take the Priest for him that was annointed to offer sacrifice unto God For Samuel was but a Levite and no Priest much lesse an high Priest The sons of Samuel 1. Chron. 6. are reckoned in the Scripture it selfe among the Levites apart from the Priests office and linage And the high Priesthood was long before given to Phinees and his house Num. 25.13 1. Sam. 14. 1. Chron. 6. by covenant from Gods owne mouth and in the dayes of Samuel was held by Abiah the sonne of Ahitub who was directly of the discent of Phinees S. Augustine elsewhere debating this question of Moses and Aaron resolveth in doubtfull manner Moses and Aaron were both high Priests or rather Moses the chiefe and Aaron under him or else Aaron chiefe for the Pontificall attire and Moses for a more excellent Ministerie And in that sence Moses may be called a Priest if you meane as S. Augustine doth an interpreter of Gods will to Aaron others which is the right vocation of all Prophets that were no Priests common to them all save that by a more excellent prerogative then any other Prophet of the Olde Testament Numb 12. Exod. 33. had God spake to Moses mouth to mouth and face to face as a man speaketh to his friend But this doth not hinder his civill power which was to bee chiefe Iudge and soveraigne executor of Iustice amongst them and by vertue thereof to put them to death that were offenders against the Law of God And in his stead succeeded not Eleazar nor Phinees the sonnes of Aaron but Ioshuah and Iudah the Captaines and leaders of Israel So farre hee Thus then you see in what sence it is that both S. Ierome and S. Augustine did or might call Moses a Priest and yet not bee such a Priest strictly and properly taken as you fancie him Yea you see that S. Augustine likewise affirmeth Samuel to be a Priest who neverthelesse revera Bellarmin de verb. Dei lib. 3. cap. 4. and properly was not a Priest as before is shewed And Bellarmine also himselfe confesseth somuch of Samuel saying expressely Samulem non fuisse sacerdotem sed Iudicem tantum Non enim descendit ex familia Aaron sed Core consobrini ejus 1. Paralip 6. That Samuel was not a Priest but onely a Iudge for he descended not of the family of Aaron but of Core And he saith further that S. Hierome likewise libr. 1. in Iovinianum ostendit Samuelem non fuisse Sacerdotem shewed that Samuel was not a Priest As for those two Chapters of Exodus 28. and 29. cited by Bellarmine whereby he will prove Moses to be truely and properly a Priest If you reade those Chapters you shall finde no such matter but rather the contrary namely that not Moses but Aaron and his sonnes Exod. 28 1.2 3.4 were the Priests For God saith there to Moses Take Aaron thy Brother and his Sonnes with him from amongst the children of Israel that he may minister unto me in the Priests Office even Aaron Nadab and Abibu Eleazar and Ithamar Aarons sonnes It is true that there you may reade that Moses made holy Garments Exod. 29.1.2.3.4 c. and offered certaine Sacrifices But observe withall that all this was done by Gods owne expresse and speciall commaundement and to no other end but this viz for the conseruating of Aaron and his Sonnes to the Priesthood So that by those two Chapters it further appeareth that not Moses but Aaron onely and his Sonnes were the Priests But as the Iesuites In his booke before named part 3. pag. 103. 104. in time past would have proved Samuel to be a Priest because it is said that he Sacrificed so you say the same of King Saul that he also sacrificed and thereby would likewise prove him to be a priest Howbeit the former reverēd learned Bishop D. Bilson doth againe shew both them and you how much you deceave your selves by such phrazes and maner of speeches and that when they are rightly vnderstood they inferre no such conclusion as you and they would deduce out of them My collection saith he is grounded upon the law of God Samuel was none of the Sonnes of Aaron Ergo 1. Sam. 7. Samuel was no Priest It is true that the Scripture saith He tooke a sucking lambe and offered it for a burnt offering unto the Lord. So Iephta said Iudg. 11. That thing which first cometh out of the Dores of my house to me I will offer it for a burnt offering And yet Iephtah was neither Priest nor Levite So the Angell said to Manoah Iudg. 13. If thou wilt make a burnt offering offer it unto the