Selected quad for the lemma: city_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
city_n	antichrist_n	babylon_n	zion_n	23	3	9.4019	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A08329	The pseudo-scripturist. Or A treatise wherein is proued, that the wrytten Word of God (though most sacred, reuerend, and diuine) is not the sole iudge of controuersies, in fayth and religion Agaynst the prime sectaries of these tymes, who contend to maintayne the contrary. Written by N.S. Priest, and Doctour of Diuinity. Deuided into two parts. And dedicated to the right honorable, and reuerned iudges of England, and the other graue sages of the law.	S. N. (Sylvester Norris), 1572-1630.	1623 (1623)	STC 18660; ESTC S120360	119,132	166

(h) Ibidem c. 11. all which seuerall descriptions thereof being taken literally as they expound them do precisely make vp three yeares and a halfe and consequently cannot be applyed to the Pope And therfore our Aduersaries in answere to the sayd places are glad to say that in all those textes an vncertaine tyme is figuratiuely to be vnderstood though it be expressed diuersly by one and the same continuance of tyme. To proue that the Pope is Antichrist they commonly vrge that of the Apocalyps (i) cap. 17. where it is sayd that the whore of Babylon doth sit vpon that Citty which hath seauen hils meaning Rome Which wordes do not directly touch Antichrist but only by their supposed inference that by the whore of Babylon is meant Antichrist which they are neuer able to proue since therby is vnderstood Rome in the tyme of the heathen Emperours who then worshiped Idols and was drunke with the bloud of Gods Saintes In confirmation of the Reall Presence we vrge the sentence of our Sauiour recorded by all the Euangelistes to wit This is my body c. Which text being literally taken doth containe expresly the very conclusion maintayned by vs not by circuitions or ambages but directly plainly immediatly So as it cannot be conceaued how our Sauiour could speake more perspicuously in this poynt 6. Now against the Reall presence our Sacramentaries do chiefly obiect that saying of Christ (k) Ioan. 6. It is the spirit which quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing Which wordes do not fall directly vpon the question of Christ his Reall Presence in the Sacrament Neyther is so much as Christ his flesh vnderstood hereby as they would seeme to inferre since then it would follow that his Incarnation and death auayled vs nothing but only the carnall conceite of the Iewes is cheked hereby who thought that Christ would deliuer his body to be eaten fleshly corporally and carnally as other common meates are eaten 7. To the same end they o●●●ct those words of Christ Do this in remembrance of me which place by no necessary or probable illation can include the true absence of himselfe which is the poynt in question since they haue a referēce only to a circumstance of himselfe to wit of his death passion which as being past is absent in remembrance wherof he commandeth vs in the former wordes to receaue his sacred body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist conformably to that speach of S. Paul (l) 1. Cor. 11. mortem Domini annunciabitis do nec veniat You shall shew the death of our Lord vntill he come the Apostle so interpreting Christs former words 8. To proue that Priests in the Sacrament of Pennance where by putting God in remembrance of our sinnes he soonest forgetteth them and in acknowledging our selues to be sinners we cease to be sinners haue power to remit or retaine sinnes we alledge the playne wordes of our Sauiour to them (m) Math. 18. whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shal be loosed in heauen as also those words recorded by S. Iohn (n) 20. Whose sins you forgine they are forgiuen them and whose sinnes you retaine they are retained Both which places in plaine direct immediate construction containe in themselues the very touch and poynt of this controuersy without any inference or circuition at all since they giue a direct and streight proofe of the conclusion it selfe to wit that Priestes haue power to remit or retaine sinnes For denyall of Priests authority in remitting or retayning of sinnes our Sectaties are accustomed to produce that text of the Psalmist (2) Psalm 50. Tibi soli peccauimus we haue sinned only against thee inferring herby that because we sinne only against God therfore only God can remit sinne which inference if it were true then should it by the same reason take away the vertue of Baptisme for remitting of Originall sin They likewise obiect certaine places of (3) Psalm 18. 37. Scripture which shew that we are not able to number all our sinnes and consequently not able to confesse them to the Priest which illatiō is most weake since it maketh as must against the Confession of ous sins to God as to the Priest 9. For confirming the Doctrine of Freewil the Catholikes do alledge among other authorities these following In arbitrio (p) Num. 30. viri erit siue faciat siue non faciat that is It is in the choice or will of a man whether he will do or not doe As also Optio (q) Iosue 24. vobis datur eligite hodie quod vobis places Choice is giuen to you chuse that to day which pleaseth you And againe Quoties (r) Math. 23. volui congregare c. How often would I gather togeather thy children as the hen gathereth her chickens and thou wouldst not All which places directly and flatly teach that we haue frewill to do and not to do Now our Aduersaries for denyall of this Doctrine are accustomed to alledge chiefly such places where it is sayd that all things are done according to the will and counsell of God As for example that of Christ as if the eternall Word of the Father came downe to destroy that former wrytten word of God Vnus passer (s) Math. 9. c. Not one sparrow shall fall vpon the ground without your Fathers will And againe Qui (t) Ephes 8. operatur omnia c. Who worketh all thinges according to the Counsell of his will Both which texts besides diuers others of the same nature conclude nothing except first they be able to proue that the Will Counsell and Foreknowledge of God cannot stand with mans freewill The contrary wherof is most cleare as appeareth by the example of Adam who by our Aduersaries (u) Caluin 1. l. Instit c. 15. §. 8. Luther in comment in Gen. acknowledgment had freewill to stand or fall and yet his fall was neyther meerely contrary to Gods will since he permitted the same nor to his foreknowledge and prouidence since he foreseeth all things 10. Concerning Iustification by works the Catholikes Conclusion and Position is found literally and euē in those words wherin they vsually expresse this theyr Doctrine since we read in S. (x) c. 2. Iames That ex operibus iustificatur homo c. A man is iustifyed by workes and not by fayth only In like sort where our Aduersaries doe obiect any place against vs the very distinction sometymes such is their scarsity and dearth of pertinent texts which the Catholikes do vse to auoyde their argument is literally expresly set downe in the words of those texts Thus we fynd that they vrge to this end those words of the Apostle Arbitramur (y) Rom. 3. hominem c. we account a man to be iustified by fayth without the workes of the law as also that other vz. Scientes (z) Galat. 2. c. Knowing that man is not iustifyed

1. Ambrose (x) Hom. 35. in Gen. Chrysostome (y) Epist ad Marcel Ierome (z) Epist. 95. ad Innocent Pap. Austin (a) Dialog cū Tripho and others 29. A second conuincing testimony in proofe of the sacrifice of the Masse is takē out of Malachy in these words Non est mihi voluntas in vobis dicit Dominus Exercituum c. I haue not a mynd or will in you sayth the Lord of hostes and I will not take any guift from your hand for from the rising of the sunne vnto the setting therof my name is great among the Gentles and in euery place is sacrified and offered to my name a cleane oblation because my name is great among the Gentils saith the Lord of hostes Which text containeth a prophesy of the sacrifice which shal be offered to God by the Gentils after their conuersion to Christian religion And because thus far the Protestants do acknowledge they therfore interprete this (b) l. 4. c. 32. place of spirituall sacrifices to wit prayers thankesgiuings and such like which the elect and faythfull offer vp to God But the Catholikes do expound this sayd place of Malachy of a Sacrifice as it is truly and properly taken to wit of the sacrifice of the Eucharist And in this particular sense they find this prophesy expounded by Iustinus (c) l. 3. contra Marc. Martyr who thus plainly saith De nostris gentium c. Of our sacrifices of Gentils that is of the bread and Cup of the Eucharist Malachias did then speake c. By Ireneus (d) l. cont Iudaeos c. c. 16. by Tertullian (e) In Cōment Psal 95. by Cypriā by Chrysostome by Ierome (h) In Cōment Malach finally by S. Austin (i) l. 1. contra aduers leg prophet c. 20. l. 18. de Ciuit. Dei c. 36. al which Fathers do directly in plaine words expoūd this prophesy of Malachy of the sacrifice of the masse 30. I could exemplify in many more textes both of these articles and of others the Fathers like agrement with the Catholiks in expounding such passages of Scripture as we at this day do alledge in warrant of our religion But the seformer examples being of the chiefest cōtrouersies and of the most markable textes obiected by vs may seeme as a scantling wherby to measure the Fathers mynd and inclination in interpreting of all such others And now by this which hath bene already set downe we may gather how much our Aduersaries are en dangered by seking to determine all controuersies betwene vs and them only by the wrytten Word if therein they would stand to the iugdgment of the auncient Fathers whose great distāce of a thousād yeares at least is the reasō belike why they appeare so litle in the eyes of these our Sectaries who we see do not only beleeue the Doctrine answerable to the Catholikes expositions of the former texts but thēselues do expound the sayd texts authorities as we do and from their owne such constructions do deryue and iustify their faith and Doctrine equally maintayned by vs both so as those wordes of Tertullian (p) lib. de pudicitia doe rightly concerne the Fathers and vs Concorporauit nos scriptura diuina literae ipsae glutina nostra sunt So hard indeed so impossible it is to deuyde the thred euenly betwene the Fathers and vs but that we both must ioyntly participate eyther of interpreting the Scripture according to the intended sense of the holy Ghost or else of most fowly deprauing and adulterating the same since if we Catholikes erre therein we see how iustly we may insimulate the Fathers within our sayd errour And yet our Aduersaries see the subtilty of Heresy do peremptory call the sayd poynts of fayth and Doctrine deduced out of the former constructions of Scripture Antichristian and damnable heresies as they are maintayned by vs Catholikes which in the Fathers they allieuate and gentle by tearming them but Naeuos and Naeuia idle and inconsiderate eyther heresies in both or but spots and blemishes in both for it is the Doctrine which denominates the person not the person the Doctrine Yet neyther dare they iustify since the one would discouer their open dangerous breach with the Fathers the other an ouer fauorable extenuation of our religion both an acknowledmēt of their ouer sight in retracting that in the end which hitherto they haue so pertinaciously auerred But to recall my selfe and to hastō to the next Chapter That the textes of Scripture obiected by the Protestantes in disprouall of our Religion are otherwise expounded by the Fathers then in that sense wherin our Aduersaries do vrge them And that their expositions of them do commonly agree with ours CHAP. X. NOw after we haue shewed that the Fathers do ioyne with vs Catholikes in their expositions of the chiefest and most conuincing textes which we are accustomed to alledge for warrant of our Doctrine it followeth according to our former designe that we in like sort do demonstrate that the Fathers do deliuer farre differēt cōstructions and for the most part the same with vs Catholikes of the principall and mayne passages of Scripture obiected against vs from that sense and meaning wherin our Aduersaries do vrge them so as it is most euident that in the sayd Fathers iudgment which in all reason is to ouerballance the priuate spirit of any Sectary whatsoeuer no one such text doth preiudice our Catholike faith at all 2. And to begin The Protestantes greatest argument against the Supremacy of S. Peter is taken frō S. Pauls cōtradicting of him as we read in the Epistle to the Galathians (a) cap. 2. and as it is aboue touched yet we fynd that the Fathers in the exposition of this place do so prayse the humility of S. Peter therein as that they take occasion therby to intimate his superiority ouer all the other Apostles See S. Cyprian (b) Epist. ad Quintū S. Gregory (c) Hom. 18. in Ezech S. Austin (d) Epist 19. ad Hieronym who thus wryteth of this point Rarius sanctius exemplum Petrus c. Peter hath left a more rare and holy example to his successours then Paul hath done since by that of Peters they are taught not to disdaine to be corrected by their inferiours wheras by the other of Paules the inferiours are emboldned to resist their superiours in a charitable manner for the defence of truth Thus farre S. Austin who we see by the commenting of this place doth strengthen and fortify the Doctrine of Peters Primacy 3. To proue that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist they obiect those words in the Apocalips where it is said that the whore of Babylon shall sit on that Citty which hath seauen hils to wit Rome Now we find that such Fathers as do interprete this place of Rome doe meane therby Rome in the tyme of the heathen Emperours then worshipping Idols

epist 59. q. 4. doth expound with vs Catholikes to wit that our Lord spake only of our readines and preparation of mynd for the renouncing of all which he requireth at our hands when iust occasion is giuen therof which exposition no doubt is true because a little before in the sayd Chapter our Sauiour did reckon our wyues and our owne bodyes among those thinges which we are to renounce 16. To iustify the Inuisibility of the Church they rack and tenter those words of our Sauiour Venit (u) ●ohn 4. horae nunc est c. The houre commeth and now is when the true worshipper shall worship the Father in spirit and truth Where they labour to proue the words in spiritu in spirit to imply the Inuisibility of the Church because such cannot be certainly knowne and seene who serue God only in spirit wheras Cyril (x) In hunc locum Chrysostome (y) Ibid. and Euthymius (z) Ibid. doe oppose the wordes In spirit to the ceremonies of the Iewes as they were corporall externall the words in Truth to the same ceremonies as they were figures of thinges to come 17. They in like sort do obiect to iustify the sayd Heresy the wordes of the Apostle who sayth Non (a) Hebr. 12. accessistis ad tractabilem mōtem c. You are not come vnto the moūt that may be touched c. but vnto the mount Sion and vnto the Citty of the liuing God the celestiall Ierusalem c. Where by the wordes Mount Sion and the Citty of God they teach that the militant Church is vnderstood which because it is spirituall is opposed in this text to the mount Sinai which is visible But S. Chrysostome (e) ●n hunc locum Theophilact (f) ibidem and others do expound with the Catholikes that by spirituall Sion and the Citty of God in this place is not vnderstood the Church militant but triumphant which doth consist of the blessed spirits and therfore it followeth immediatly (g) c 9. after But you are come to the company of many thousand Angells and to the spirits of the iust Which words cannot haue a direct reference to the militant Church 18. To proue in like manner that the Church of God may vtterly faile and decay they vsually obiect that prophesy of Daniel Deficiet hostia sacrificium the sacrifice shall cease wheras those wordes are not vnderstood of the time of Antichrist but of the ouerthrow of Ierusalem and of the ceasing of the Iewish sacrifices and thus is this prophesy expounded by Chrysostome (h) in cap. 24. Math. Ierome (i) ibidem Austin (k) Epist 80. ad Hesichium Eusebius (l) l. 8. Euang demonst c. 2. Clemens (m) lib. 1. stromat Alexandrinns and Tertullian (n) l. contra Iudaeos cap. 5. 19. They also obiect to the same purpose those words of Christ Cùm (o) Luc. 28 venerit c. When the sonne of man shall come dost thou thinke he shal find fayth vpon the earth Which is not vnderstood that at Christ his cōming the Church of God shal be extinct but only that markable and eximious fayth which is so much commended shal be found but in few at those later dayes And thus doth S. Ierome (p) Dialog contra Lucifer S. Austin (q) de Vnitat Eccles cap. 1● expound this text To the short they among other textes do bring forth the words of the Apostle (r) 2. Thessal 2. Nisi venerit discessio primùm c. Except there come a departing first that man of sinne be disclosed c. Out of which wordes they labour to proue that there must be a general departure from the true fayth at the comming of Antichrist And the contrary to this sense and meaning diuers of the Fathers to wit Chrysostome (s) In hunc locum Theodoret (t) Ibidem Theophilact (u) Ibidem and Austin (x) l 20. de Ciuit. Dei cap. 19. do by the word discessio or departure in this place vnderstand Antichrist himselfe by the figure Metonymia as being the cause that diuers shall depart from the fayth Others of them to wit Ambrose (y) In hūc loum Sedulius (z) Ibidem do vnderstand therby a departure from the Roman Empire neyther of which expositions do fauour our Aduersaries at all 20. To obscure the Doctrine of Traditions they peruert the sense and meaning of the Apostle (a) Galat. 1 who sayth Sed licetnos vel Angelus decaelo euāgelizat vobis praeterquā quod euangelizauimus c. But though we or a Angell from heauen preach vnto you contrary to that which hath bene preached let him be accursed Where they deduce that al Traditions are herby condemned But notwithstanding the Fathers doe expound this place only of such Doctrines as are contrary and opposite to the Doctrine there already preached And therfore S. Ambrose (b) In hūc locum doth expound this place by these wordes si contra in like sort S. Austin (c) l. 17. cōtra Eaustum c. 3. si contra S. Ierome (d) In hūc locum si aliter meaning therby if not agreable but repugnant to the former Doctrine In like sort they produce certaine places (e) Math. 1● Col. 2 aboue touched where our Sauiour and his Apostles do disproue and reprehend Traditions in generall Which words being spoken only of certaine friuolous and wicked traditions of the Iewes do nothing at all impugne the Traditions of the Catholike Church thus we find those texts expounded by Ireneus (f) l. 4. cap. 25. Epiphanius (g) In haeres Ptolome● S. Ierome (h) In c. 8. Isa in c. 3. ad Titū 21. Wheras we hould the vnlawfulnes of mariage in some persons and of meates at some tymes our Aduersaries to impugne our Doctrine herein do vsually alledge that place of the Apostle where he sayth (i) 1. Timoth c. 4. In nouissimis diebus discedent quidam à fide c. prohibentes nubere abstinere à cibis In the later dayes certaine shall depart from the fayth c forbidding to marry and commanding to abstaine from meates Wheras the Apostle in this place speaketh of such who absolutly forbeare mariage and meates as things altogether vnlawful which cannot in any sort be applyed to the Catholikes And these were the Tatians Marcionites and the Manichees Thus is this text expounded by Austin (k) l. 30. cōtra Faustum Ierome (l) l. 1. in Iouinian Ambrose (m) In hūc locum and Chrysostome (n) In hūc locum 22. Concerning our Sauiour they teach seuerall errours first that he increased in wisedome and knowledge (o) cap. 2. as other men do and that he was not filled with grace and knowledge from his mothers wombe To proue this their Heresy they bring those words of S.