Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	israel_n	king_n	write_v	2,457	5	6.4199	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12213	A reply to an ansvvere, made by a popish adversarie, to the two chapters in the first part of that booke, which is intituled a Friendly advertisement to the pretended Catholickes in Ireland Wherein, those two points; concerning his Majejesties [sic] supremacie, and the religion, established by the lawes and statutes of the kingdome, be further justified and defended against the vaine cavils and exceptions of that adversarie: by Christopher Sibthorp, Knight, one of His Majesties iustices of his Court of Chiefe Place within the same realme.	Sibthorp, Christopher, Sir, d. 1632.	1625 (1625)	STC 22524; ESTC S117400	88,953	134

courtesie in the Pope as Gratian most ungratiously would perswade but a matter of bounden duetie Ibidem Cap. Petrus and without all dissembling and seriously meant and intended by him in such manner and sort as he by those his words plainely declareth And consequently you now perceive verie fully I hope that for the space of eight hundred yeares and more after CHRIST the Bishops of Rome were subject to the Emperors and that the Christian Emperors also had Authoritie in matters Ecclesiasticall aswell as Civill within their Empyres But here now doe some Papists take exception and answere as touching Salomon his displacing of Abiathar the high Priest and putting Sadoc in his place that Salomon did this as he was a Prophet not as hee was a King But first this is but a meere supposition and conceit not found warranted in the Text. Yea the untruth of it may appeare if you please but to reade the Chapter For the offence which Abiathar 1. King 2.22.23.24 25.26.27.28 29 c. the high Priest had committed was High Treason in joyning with Adoniah against King Salomon for the kingdome Ioah also was in the same Treason and Conspiracie The King therefore caused Adoniah to be put to death he caused also Ioab to be put to death touching Abiathar the high Priest hee was also as worthy of death as the rest although for some causes and respects he was spared for that time Thou art worthie of death 1. King 2 26.27 saith the King but I will not this day kill thee because thou barest the Arke of the Lord God before David my Father and because thou hast suffered in all wherein my Father hath beene afflicted So Salomon cast out Abiathar from being Priest unto the Lord. And the King put Benaiah in the roome of Ioab over the Hoste and the King set Sadoc the priest Vers 35. in the roome of Abiathar In which words you see that Salomon doing these things is not styled or called by the name of a Prophet but expressely by the name of a King thereby signifying and declaring that what Salomon did touching the removing of Abiathar and putting Sadoc in his place he did it as a King aswell as when he put Benaiah in the place of Ioab Secondly you see that the offence which Abiathar had committed was treason and that therefore he deserved to die aswell as Adoniah or Ioab or any other of the conspirators But yet for the reasons and respects before mentioned hee would not then put him to death though he had deserved it but was content in lieu thereof for that time to inflict this punishment upon him to have him removed from his Priest-hood Now to deale in cases of Treason and to be a Iudge of matters concerning life and death and to award execution of death or in mercie to mitigate and alter the severitie of that punishment and in lieu thereof to have a milder or not so severe a punishment as death to be inflicted be things not properly belonging to the office of a Prophet but to the office of a King they doe rightly and properly enough belong And therefore what Salomon did herein it is evident that he did it as a King not as a Prophet And consequently it still remayneth firme and sure even by this example of King Salomon as also by other examples mentioned in my former Booke whereto my adversarie is still pleased to answere nothing that Kings as Kings have power to place Bishops and againe to displace them when there is cause and to put others in their roome And as touching Moses some Papists doe also answere that he was a Priest the high Priest Bellar. de verb. Dei lib 3. cap. 4● for so saith Bellarmine and therefore that Aaron performed that reverence obedience and subjection to him that hee did as being high Priest My Adversarie likewise saith the same that God Almightie made Moses an high Priest and citeth for proofe of it Num. 27. but there is no such thing written in that Chapter nor in any other Chapter of the whole Bible beside Deut. 33.5 I reade that Moses was as a King or Prince in Israell but I no where reade throughout the whole Booke of God that God constituted Moses to be the high Priest yea it is well knowne that in Moses time Aaron was the high Priest what necessitie then was there for Moses also to be an high Priest But that Moses was no Priest properly so called much lesse an high Priest is thus made manifest For if Moses were a Priest it must be eyther before the consecration of Aaron or after But after the consecration of Aaron and his Sonnes to the Priest-hood it is cleare that not Moses but Aaron and his Sonnes were the Priests as having the Priest-hood appointed and specially given unto them by Gods owne direction Thou saith God to Moses Numb 3.10 shalt appoint Aaron and his Sonnes to execute their Priests offices and the stranger that commeth here shall be slaine So that none but Aaron and those that were of his seede might execute the Priests office For which cause Moses neyther did not durst execute the Priests office Num. 16.46.47 but commanded Aaron to burne Incense and to make an attonement for the people Wherefore it is very apparant that after the consecration of Aaron Moses was not a Priest And that Moses was also no Priest before the consecration of Aaron is likewise very evident because before that time the priest-hood was annexed to the birth-right and did belong to the first borne in whose place the Levites afterward came Numb 3.12.41.45 Lyra in Num. 3.12 Ibidem and were appointed So sai●h Lyra reporting the received judgements of the best interpreters that Ante legem datam ad Primogenitos pertinebat offerre sacrificia Before the Law given it belonged to the first-borne to offer sacrifices Againe hee saith expressely that Levitae successerunt loco eorum The Levites succeded in their place And againe he saith Lyra. in Gen. 14. Sacerdotium fuit annexum Primogeniturae usque ad legem datā per Mosem The Priest-hood was annexed to the first borne untill the Law given by Moses Now of these two brothers Moses Aaron the Sonnes of Amram it is manifest that not Moses but Aaron was the eldest and first borne For we reade in Num. 33. Num. 33.39 That Aaron was one hunded twentie and three yeares old when he died But Moses outliving Aaron Deut. 34.7 was but one hundred and twentie yeares old when he died So that Aaron appeareth questionlesse and undoubtedly to be the elder brother and the first borne and consequently even by the right of Primogeniture did the Priest-hood belong to Aaron and not to Moses If any say that the birthright was sometime taken from the eldest by a speciall appointment of God and given to the younger it hath no place here For no such especiall appointment from

the younger the first Ephesine Councell was assembled Liberat. in hist de Concil Ephes Liberatus likewise writeth That the Emperor wrote to all Bishops that they should assemble at Ephesus to judge of the Bookes of Nestorius and Cyrillus Epist Synod And in their Epistle to all the Bishops thus writeth the Councell it selfe Cum essemus Ephesi secundum pias Imperatoris literas congregati When we were at Ephesus assembled according to the pious letters of the Emperor Socrates also saith that Imperatoris mandato Episcopi ex omnibus locis Ephesum conveniunt Socrat. li. 7. c 33 in the lat ca. 34. in the greeke The Bishops of all places came together to Ephesus by the commandement of the Emperor Zonaras saith These things being knowne Caelestinus Bishop of Rome Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria Iohn Bishop of Antioch and Iuvenall Bishop of Ierusalem relate the matter to Theodosius the Emperor and to Pulcheria the Empresse desiring that he would summon a Councell Niceph. lib. 14. cap 34. c. Nicephorus also saith Theodosius Imperialibus literis in Metropoli Epheso locorum omnium Episcopos convenire jussit That Theodosius by his Imperiall letters commanded the Bishops of all places to meete together at Ephesus the Metropolitan Citie The fourth generall Councell was the Councell of Chalcedon and this also was summoned not by authoritie and commandement of Leo the first Bishop of Rome as my Adversarie affirmeth but the Emperors Authority and commandement This may appeare even by Leo himselfe Epist. 43.53 and sundrie other of his Epistles But we neede not to cite other testimonies For the verie Councell of Chalcedon it selfe Conc. Chalcedon Actione prima doth testifie that it was summoned by the Emperors and that the Bishop of Rome was also called thither who because he could not be there in person sent others in his steade Yea that Leo Bishop of Rome did not summon this Councell nor any other generall Councell in those dayes but acknowledged it to be a right belonging to the Emperors is further verie manifest by the Epistle he writeth to the Emperor wherein he saith thus unto him Pietas vestra suggestioni ac supplicationi nostrae dignetur annuere Leo Epist 9 ut intra Italiam jubeatis haberi Episcopale Concilium Let your pietie vouchsafe to yeld to our suggestion and supplication in this that you command a Councell of Bishops to be held within Italy Againe hee saith thus Leo Epist. 24. Lovan 1575. Omnes partium nostrarum Ecclesiae omnes mansuetudini vestrae cum gemitibus lachrimus supplicant sacerdotes ut generalem Synodum jubeatis infra Italiam celebrari All the Churches that take part with us and all the Priests with sighes and teares doe humbly beseech your mansuetude that you will command a generall Councell to be celebrated within Italy He also sollicited the Princesse Pulcheria Leo Epist. 26. 23. and the Nobles Cleargie and people of Constantinople for a Councell to be held in Italie But neyther in his first suite nor in this last did he prevaile all this notwithstanding For as touching his former suite which was in the time of the Emperor Theodosius the younger that Emperor as before appeareth assembled the Councel not within Italie as Leo desired but at Ephesus And as touching the latter it is also apparant that by the Emperors appointment and commandement the Councell was assembled not in Italie as the Pope would have had it but at Chalcedon I might proceede further and shew that beside these first foure generall Councells other Councells were likewise summoned and assembled by the Authoritie and commandement of the Emperors and not of the Bishops of Rome For there was also a fift generall Councell summoned or called Mandato Iustiniani By the commandement of the Emperor Iustinian as Evagrius witnesseth And so likewise saith Nicephorus that Imperator Iustinianus Evagr. lib 4 c. 11. N●●ph libr. 17. cap. 27. sanctam quiatam Oecumenicam Synodum Episcopis omnium Ecclesiarum convocatis coegit The Emperor Iustinian assembled the fift holy generall Councell by calling the Bishops of all Churches together The Councell of Sardica also Socrat. lib. 2 cap. 20 in the g●eek cap. ●6 in the ●a in Theo●oret l●b 2. cap. ● S●crat lib. 〈…〉 greeke cap. ●9 in the 〈◊〉 Cusa● de 〈◊〉 lib. 2 ●ap 25. was called by the Emperors Authoritie and commandement as Socrates and Theodoret declare And so were also those Councells of Selencia and A●imi●●● called by the Emperors Authoritie and commandement Yea what generall Councell was there called in those ancient times but by the Emperors In somuch that Cardinall Cusanus himselfe ingenuously confesseth and affirmeth that The first eight generall Councells were called by the Emperors Is there then any credite at all to be given to those Papists in these dayes who doe and dare denie this so cleare manifest and evident a truth Wherefore it being a thing most apparant that in ancient times the Emperors by their Authoritie and commandement called the generall Councells it followeth necessarily thereupon that the Emperors thereby commanded aswell the Bishop of Rome as the other Bishops and consequently had the Supremacie aswell over the one as over the other 9 But yet further to prove the Supremacie of the Emperors I alledged that the Emperors in ancient time banished imprisoned and otherwise also punished by their Authoritie even some of the Bishops of Rome themselves aswell as other Bishops Whereunto mine Adversarie answereth that These things they did de facto but not warrantable de jure But why were they not warrantable de jure I grant that a banishment or imprisonment may possibly be sometimes wrongfull and unjust in respect of the man and the matter that deserveth it not but this is no impeachment or argument therefore against the lawfulnesse of the authoritie As if an Emperor or King doe banish or committe a man to prison for professing any point of true Religion this banishment and imprisonment is wrongfull and unjust in respect of the cause which deserveth no punishment at all Yet it cannot be denied but he hath power Authoritie good and lawfull enough both to banish and to committe to prison notwithstanding when there is a just cause For that which is but an abuse of Authoritie doth not take away the lawfull use of it So that if any Bishop of Rome or any Bishop whosoever within the Dominions of the Empyre did offend so farre as to deserve banishment imprisonment or other Temporall and Civill punishment it was a thing lawfull and just for the Emperor to inflict those punishments upon them aswell as upon any other For it is indeede to these Higher Powers namely to Emperors Rom. 13.1.2.3.4 Kings and Princes that God hath committed the Civill and Temporall sword for the encouragement and prayse of them that doe well for the discouragement terror punishment of those that doe evill And these

S. Cyprian lived no true Church Euseb lib. 7. cap. 5. in t●e greeke and cap. 5. latin or was S. Cyprian no true Christian or had he no true Religion in him because he held the error of Rebaptization Or were none of those true Churches nor had any of them any true Religion in them which held the Chiliasticke error or error of the Millenaries Or were S. Augustine S. Ierome or any of the rest of the ancient Fathers therefore no true Christians or had they onely an imaginarie and no true Religion in them because of some error they held Yea he may aswell conclude out of this Text if he make no care nor conscience to abuse it that everie one whosoever that erreth fayleth in any point eyther of doctrine 1. Iohn 1.8 or manners or that sinneth in any sort by breaking any one of Gods Commandements is onely an imaginarie and no true Christian at all Whereupon would follow this grosse absurditie and untruth that there were then no true Christians at all in the whole world because there be none but have some sinne or other in them It is true Ephes 4.3.4.5 c. that there is but one true Faith and right Religion and that we should all endevour to observe and keepe it as likewise we ought all to endevour so much as is possible to keepe all everie one of Gods Cōmandements but if by reason of the frayltie and imperfection that is in all men any Church doe erre in some one thing or any man doe erre sinne or offend in some one point you see by the premisses that no such inference can be made that therefore it is no true Church or therefore he is no true Christian or hath no good nor true Religion in him because of that one sinne or error committed All which neverthelesse I speake not to justifie or defend any errors in any Church or any sinne transgression or fault in any person nor yet as though he could justly taxe our true Christian Church with any error in Faith or doctrine but onely to shew him his owne error and the fault of his owne idle brainesicke opinion Whereunto also may be adjoyned another Paradoxe or strange opinion of his and not onely his for it is the opinion also of the Rhemists and other Papists where they hold that the blasphemie or sinne against the holy Ghost is remissible may be forgiven which is directly and cleane contratie to the expresse words of Christ Iesus himselfe declaring that the sinne against the Father and the Sonne is remissible Math. 12 31.32 Luk 12.10 Mark 3.28 29. and may be forgiven But the sinne against the holy Ghost saith he shall not be forgiven neyther in this world nor in the world to come And S. Marke relateth it thus That he which committeth that sinne shall never have forgivenesse but is culpable of eternall damnation Now then let all men judge whether of these we should beleeve namely whether Christ or the Papists in this case Lastly he falleth into a consideration what sinne it is that I committed in making and setting forth my Booke distinguishing sinne into three sorts viz. some of Frailtie some of Ignorance some of Malice he freeth me of that of frailty and of that of malice and therefore concludeth that it was a sinne of ignorance Thus out of his ignorance for I hope there is no malice in him he argueth ex non concessis For how doth hee prove it to be any sinne at all to penne such a Booke and to set it forth Ipse dixit is all his proofe What Is it a sinne to speake or write in defence of Gods truth religion Yea is it not cleane contrariewise a sinne and a very great most fearefull sin for my Adversary to write as he doth against God his truth religion against his Church people against the King also in the point of his Supremacie against the Lawes Statutes of the Realme also which establish those two points for which I write and speake and all for defence of the whore of Babylon of that man of sinne the grand Antichrist Is not this a sinne meete for him to repent of This his great sinne therefore all other wicked workes wayes of blind Poperie I would wish him to forsake in time Ephes 5 8. to become walke As one of the children of light which if he desire to doe as I trust he doth he must then with the Psalmist make not his owne Psalm 119.105 or other mens pleasures but Gods will word to be the Lanterne unto his feete and the light unto his path thereby must he be directed Esa 8.20 both for points of doctrine for life conversation also For if any doe not or speake not according to this word 1. Io. 1.5.6 it is because as the Scriptures teach they have not that light in thē which they should have It is true which he saith That Christ the supreme Iudge of Heaven Earth will most certainely come to judgement and will judge most justly But it were good he would remember withall how Iohn 12 48. Rom. 2.16 by what rule he will judge namely that he will judge according to his owne word Gospell For according to that his Word Gospell it is that hee will judge us all in the last day as himselfe his true faithfull Apostle S. Paul doe both assure us In the meane time then can there be any better course taken or any better wisedome shewed then for both him me for us al humbly willingly to submitte our selves our lives conversations all our positions opinions to be controlled reformed over-ruled judged by that word Gospell according whereunto we shall all be judged in that last day This grace wisedome therefore God of his mercie grant unto us all if it be his will to his honour and glorie and to our owne everlasting comforts through Iesus Christ our whole and onely Mediator Saviour and Redeemer Amen FINIS Post scriptum LEt none hereafter expect any more from mee touching these matters untill my former Booke which by this my Adversarie is promised to be answered according to the three conditions required by me be first accordingly answered and that this Reply be also therewithall Answered and all this to be done in Print and not in Manuscripts with the Answerers right and true name also thereunto subscribed ERRATA CORRECTA IN the Epistle Dedicat. pag. 1. line 12 this word first blotte out In the Epist to the Reader pag. 1 l 2● for satisfactory satisfactorily p. 8. l 5. for suffertus suffenus p 9. lin 33 for scripturiam scripturam p. 10. l. 14. for ingeniosly ingenuously In the first Chapter of the Booke p 2 l. 5. for will soule p. 13 23. this word secondly blotte out in stead thereof put this figure 2 to note it to be the second section of that Chapter so reade on forward thus It being then a thing very demonstratively evident c p. 13. l. 32. for Ministers Ministery p. 15. l 6. for writeth citeth p. 17. l 6. for makinde mankinde p. 24. in the margent for 2. Sam 20 17 put 2. Sam. 20 26. In p. 24 l. 31. 32 reade it thus Aaron and his sonnes were appointed to the office of priesthood p. 26. l. 31 this word Thirdly blotte out in lieu thereof put the figure of 3. to note it to be the Third section of that Chap p 26. l. 33. for wisheth wished p. 34 l. 10. for youg young p. 38. l 12. for divert direct p. 39. l. 19. reade as unto the chiefe p. 42. l 6. 7. for Iohn 9 11 Iohn 19 11 p. 44 l. 17. for yea yet p. 44 l 18 for construed considered p 45. l. 26 for advantagement advantage p. 51 l. 23 for ingeniously ingenuously p 52. l 10 for Aquinus Aquinas p. 52. 32. for cause clause p. 13. l. 19. betweene as and other Bishops put this word over pag 38. l 16. for worth worthy p 40 l. 5 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 43. l. 33. this word as blotte out p 57 l. 3 this word and blotte out p. 66. l 2. for shall should p 70 l 24 for States seates p. 79. l 24. for under made p 82 l 18 for how now p 83 l 7 for Episcopus Episcopos p 84 l 12 after but reade by pag 15 against l 24 in the margent for Novel const 123 Novel const 133 p 19 l 22 for hignesse highnesse pag 100 l vlt for proferant vel Apo pag 88 l 26 for Airam Hira●● in margine for 1 Sam 5 1● reade 2 Sam 5 11 p 88. l 8 for use used p 94 l 3 for could would p 96 l 19 betweene neverthelesse admit put this word to p 97 l 16 for one on p 97 ly the first onely blotte out pag 93 l 9 for grant reade perceave p. 102 l 22 after their reade dayes p 102 l 21 for make made p. 82 l 11 for Bithinijs Bithiniae And if any other faults have escaped in the Printing I desire the Reader to correct them with his pen.