Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	apostle_n	heaven_n	loose_v	2,492	5	10.3143	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79524	Catholike history, collected and gathered out of Scripture, councels, ancient Fathers, and modern authentick writers, both ecclesiastical and civil; for the satisfaction of such as doubt, and the confirmation of such as believe, the Reformed Church of England. Occasioned by a book written by Dr. Thomas Vane, intituled, The lost sheep returned home. / By Edward Chisenhale, Esquire.	Chisenhale, Edward, d. 1654.	1653 (1653)	Wing C3899; Thomason E1273_1; ESTC R210487	201,728	571

against him As for Saul he was not cast out by Samuel Samuel onely denounced Gods will which was to him revealed how that Saul should be cast from his kingdom and he did therefore by divine appointment anoint David in his steed But notwithstanding it appears by the Scripture that although Saul stood excommunicate as being rejected of God yet he continued still king and both David and the Israelites did obey him David calling him his Lord and Anointed 1 Sam. 24.7 God forbid saith he that I should lay hands upon him for who shall smite the Lords anointed and be guiltless 1 Sam. 26.9 And the like was of Jeroboam the Priest did not impose the punishment onely denounce the judgement that was to come upon him by way of Prophecie And whereas Azariah was shut from men being a leper and his son Jotham set up to rule in his stead this doth not prove that Excommunication which the Jesuites would perswade to be the figure of the spiritual leper doth ipso facto dethrone a King Azariah continued King till his death he was called King in the 22 yeer of his Raign which was the last yeer of his Raign 2 Kin. 15. So that Jotham was not King but Vice-gerent during his fathers leprosie and then his father dying he claimed an absolute power in his own right not by vertue of his fathers seclusion And whereas Athaliah was deprived of her kingdom by Jehoiada the Priest that was by vertue of Joash whom the Priest preserved in the Temple he being the right heir and Athaliah an Usurper and murderer of old Azariahs children onely Joash escaped her bloody treachery and after that the people did adhere to make Joash their king and did promise to put themselves under his Government whereupon the high-Priest did command Athaliah the usurper to be put from the throne for that Joash was both heir in blood and had the general approbation of the people 2 King 11. They clapped their hands and said God save the king And for Elijahs withstanding King Ahab it was because of his Baalitish Prophets whom by a miracle he demonstrated to Ahab to be the cause of the famine and the drought which he shewed by prayer for rain and Ahab being herewith convinced gave consent that the Baalitesh Priests should be delivered up which by consent of the people by a publike Decree were put to death by Elijahs hands But none of these examples do prove that Priests have a right to depose Kings though the contrary may be proved that Kings deposed Priests as Saul slew Abimelech for taking part with David Joash commanded Jehoiadahs sons to be put to death and Solomon displaced Abiathar the high-Priest from his primacy and dignity for following Adonijahs faction The Scripture recites nineteen Kings of Israel and fourteen of Judah who brake the Covenant made with the Lord and followed strange gods and drave the people to apostacie yet was not one of them deposed by a Priest or a Prophet for they knew that they ●eld their authority from God not from them and therefore with David all agreed to subscribe Who can lay his hand upon the Lords anointed and be guiltless Now as there can be no proof produced from the Old Testament so much less from the New but positively and plainly to the contrary Christ himself commanding tribute to Caesar and Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers and 1 Tim. 2. Let prayers and supplications be made for princes and 1 Pet. 2. Submit your selves for the Lords sake whether to the king as supreme or unto governours sent by him Again Christ said to his Apostles The kings of the Gentiles bear rule and exercise dominion Vos autem non sic Luke 22.25 There must be no strivings amongst them who should be the greatest which Christ manifesteth by setting a childe amongst them Matth. 18. By all which texts of Scripture it is plain that Ministers of the Gospel and successors of the Apostles are to submit to pray for but not oppose kings neither are they to look after worldly power and lordship Christ himself denying to meddle with the dividing of the land betwixt the two brethren Luke 12. For this was praeter his business he came about Now if the Pope would be thought to be Peters successor let him follow Peters precept and let him imitate Christ who commanded Peter to follow him let him do his Masters business Let him never think to intangle himself with the temporal affairs of this world let him never think of disposing of earthly Crowns but seed his flock and instruct them in the ways of godliness that they may with meekness temperance patience and snffering attain to a crown of glory being strengthned through the might of Christ his glorious power unto all patience and long suffering with joyfulness Col. 1.11 For such is the will of God that by well doing they may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men 1 Pet. 2.15 Let him not think to turn Peters keys into Hercules club and when a Prince will not hearken to him he may dethrone him for he hath no warrant for his so doing And the power of the keys given to Peter did not extend to this nor may the Pope claim any such priviledge by vertue thereof When Christ said to Peter The power of the keys doth not warrant the Popes deposing of Kings Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven He did not thereby give him power to pull down kings for that after he enjoyned Cesars tribute and Peter himself after submitted and taught rules of obedience Nor was this power given to Peter alone of binding and loosing but to the rest of the Apostles also John James Bartholomew c. had the like power as I have shewed in the second Chapter And admit Kings be so included under the power of the Keys yet that doth not prove any power in the Priest to dethrone him onely to denounce Gods judgements against his sin and to admonish him and to pray for him but he must not meddle with his Temporal Regiment nor so far extend his Ecclesiastical power as to dis-engage Subjects from their Allegiance to such a Prince for that is against the practice of the Apostles and against the precepts of Christ And certainly if the Apostles or Peter had had any such power by vertue of the Keys they would never have suffered it to have been depressed without giving testimony to the world of the injury done unto them Peter if he suffered at Rome and Paul whom all stories agree to have suffered under Domitius Nero never so much as denouncing him Ethnick or uncapable to rule because a persecutor of Christs Saints nay they were so far from this that they commanded others for conscience sake to obey Heathen Princes and that because of their power which is from God which power as

and therefore I have adventured to lay open the E●ors of his choyce which if he please to consider seriously I may win him again to his proper Sheepfold from whence he is gone astray how ever I hope I shall by the blessing of God hinder others from wandering after him and shall be a means to make up that gap which the Doctor hath made in the pale of our Church which whilest it lay open administred occasion for some to escape into the Wilderness Wherefore I will not hold the Reader longer in suspence with a dilatory Introduction but will briefly shew that the Doctor is not gone to the Catholique Church which is the main thing he perswades though it be obscurely wrapt in general terms in his first Chapter but that he has forsaken the faith once given to the Saints he has gone away from the pu●e Fountain of Verity to the puddle of Error he has forsaken the living water and chosen the Romish cisterns digged by mens hands which hold no water CHAP. II. That the Roman Church is not the Catholique Church either in respect of the Vniversality of her Doctrine or any Jurisdiction she can claim from Peter or by the consent of the Primitive Churches and that the Pope is not the governing Head of the Catholique Church THe Church is called Catholique in several respects 1. In respect of places as being spread universally through the whole world and is not tyed to any place or Kingdom 2. In respect of Times because but one Church of all Times it having ever been from the beginning of the World and shall continue on Earth till the end thereof Isai 59.21 and Matth. 28. the Church of both Testaments being one and the same 3. In respect of the Collective Body thereof the Catholique Church being gathered of men of both Testaments and the Communion of Saints being the union and coherence of all the Saints in Christ their Head according to that of Paul Ephes 1.10 That he might gather together in one all things both which are in Heaven and which are in Earth even into Christ who is and ever shall be King and Head thereof And generally when we speak of the Catholique Church this Collective Church is to be understood which appellation Catholique was used by the Apostles before ever Rome was a Church So that neither in respect of Place Time or Catholiqueness may Rome justly challenge the onely Title of Catholique she being but a particular part or member of this Catholique Church we the Saints being the Body and Members for our part Eph. 1.22 But for the better illustration of this Point I will examine the Doctors Arguments in particular concerning Romes Catholiqueship and I shall in so doing more plainly disprove her Title thereunto The word Catholique as it is defined by the Doctor is not a word of Belief onely but of Communion also So that that Church which holds the same Belief with the ancient Church and yet doth not communicate with her may not rightly be called Catholique I shall retort this Argument which he intended against the Protestants and prove it to be their Justification and the Church of Romes own Condemnation Catholique as I said in a general sence comprehendeth all the Elect and is the full Body of Christ that filleth all things in all things Eph. 4. And when we in our Creed say We beleeve in the Holy Catholique Church it is understood of all the Elect of God which have been are or shall be of which the Church-Militant on Earth is but part But because I suppose the Doctor means onely of a Church upon Earth I will therefore insist upon his own definition and treat of the Church upon Earth which as it is universally spred over the Earth by the Apostles who had equal commission to teach all Nations no one particular Church can or ought to claim to be the Catholique or Universal Church upon Earth As for the Distinction which the Doctor makes betwixt Doctrine and Discipline thereby to excuse the unproper stile of Roman Catholique That is says he Catholique in respect of Doctrine Roman in respect of Discipline That will no ways strengthen her claim or clear her incongruous Title He doth but thereby shew the World how distinct her Discipline is from her Doctrine and thereby give occasion to the world to suspect both And upon this score may the Presbyterian Church of Geneva be called the Geneva Catholique Church that is Geneva for Discipline Catholique for Doctrine she professing the Catholique Faith of the holy and blessed Trinity and yet the Church of Rome I perswade my self would think much that such a glorious appellation should be given to such an upstart Youngling that wind-egg of a Tumult Geneva Church which being braddened under a Toad of France is become a staring Cockatrice and thinks to center the World within the compass of his contagious Den darting poyson upon whom he first espies as experience tells us how he glancing upon the poor Scot has given him such a deadly wound that he will scarce ever recover it teaching those that have escaped that plague with the Wesel each morning to bite on Rue which says Avicen secures her against the toxicating of that venomous Basilisk I say if the Church of Rome think much that the Geneva Church should arrogate such a glorious stile let her never stand upon her own Title which is equally weak to challenge the same The Doctor proceeds further upon Romes Ti●le to her Catholiqueship and gives a further explication of the same Catholique says the Doctor imports both the vast extention of Doctrine to Persons and Places and the union of all these places in communion It cannot be denyed but that there were other Churches of ancienter and more reverend setlement then the Church of Rome as the Churches in the East as Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus c. and in after-times the Gospel was to be carryed before Kings and to the Gentiles by S. Paul being by Jesus ordained a Minister and an Apostle of the Gentiles amongst whom Rome was then a chief City which as she received the Faith by S. Paul or S. Peter cannot properly be called a Mother Church but as a babe and suckling received the sincere milk of the Word She was one of the places to which the Doctrine of the Catholique Church of Christ was extended but no extender of that Doctrine So that by the Doctors own definition she cannot properly be called the Catholique Church she being in her Institution but a private particular Member of the Catholique Church as Englands or any other Church planted by the Embassadors of Christ And if since by the indulgent favors of her nursing Fathers the Christian Princes she has grown to that maturity that she has many Daughter Churches of her own plantation in the dark corners of the old known and the new discovered parts of the World yet she cannot by reason thereof assume to her self any

Creed we whilst we say we believe the holy Catholique Church mean thereby the whole Elect of God as well Saints in heaven as the Church upon earth which is the full body of Christ Ephes 4. and Rom. 12. but they thereby will have Rome understood which as I said was not in being before the Creed was composed and it seems strange to some that the Church of Rome should admit of the following Article to wit the Communion of Saints to extend to the Saints in heaven and will exclude them from the Catholique Church but the reason 's plain for it stands not with the Majesty of the Pope for in admitting the first he loses his headship we being all members of the Catholike Church but by the other his honor is not diminished in respect none are to be reputed Saints but such as are of his own making But if the Doctor will not admit of our definition I hope he will not be against our embracing of his which is this A Church is a Society of those whom God hath called to salvation by the profession of the true Faith and sincere administration of the Sacraments and the adherence to lawful Pastors I wonder what the Doctor means by the society of those that God hath called to salvation by the profession of the true Faith sure he will not deny but that those Societies which were gathered by other Apostles were true Churches as well as those which were gathered by Peter He himself fol. 192. confesses the true Church visible in Ethiopia where the Eunuch which Philip baptized preached the Faith and it is hard he should d●ny this to his own mother County which he allowes to Ethiopians especially considering wee as is believed by some received the Faith by the same Apostle Philip. But 't is no great matter we need not stand to the Doctors courtesie herein we have a better warrant then his Concession Act. 20.28 the flocks whereof the holy Ghost made the Elders over-seers is called the Church of G●d Paul ordained Elders and committed charge of Flocks unto them A Christian Society makes a Church c. That the distinct Societies of Christians are called Churches is likewise manifest by severall other places of Scripture 1 Cor. 1. Paul writ to the Church that was at Corinth and to all that call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Gal. 1. to the Churches at Galatia Grace c. 1 Thes to the Church of the Thessalonians Col. 1.4 salute the brethren which are of Laodicea and Nymphas and the Church which is in his house Rev. 1.11 there were seven Churches in Asia Ephesus Smyrna Pergamos c. In the same manner Rome may be called a Church if she have a Soci●ty of the faithful calling upon the name of Christ Jesus wherefore Peter writing his Epistle from Babylon which the Papists interpret Rome s●●es The Church that is at B●bylon elected together with you saluteth you that is the Saints which dwell here and there dispersed through Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia the society of the Saints of Babylon saluteth the several societies of the Saints of those parts which were severall respective Churches members of the Catholike Church elected together in Christ Jesus So that from these places it is evident that the name of Church is applicable to all Christian Societies whether they be of Peters or any other of the Apostles gathering For the Apostles had equal commission from Christ for the gathering together of the Saints for the work of the Ministry and for the edification of the Body of Christ though in the Church were men of different Gifts as Apostles Teachers Evangelists c. yet the Apostles amongst themselves were equall and their severall plantations coordinate and equal as to any power or Jurisdiction If then we be in the faith of Jesus and have Societies of Christian believers in him we may properly be called a Church and that especially because we are of Apostolical plantation and are not beholding to Rome for that Plantation as coming from Eleutherius successour as they pretend to Peter But if we had our Faith from Rome it came by the means of Paul and certainly we had that Faith long before Eleutherius time as I have already proved in the precedent chapter wherefore we may properly both according to our own and the Doctors definition of a Church assume that title to our selves we being a Society of Christians calling upon the name of Jesus which is called a Church 1 Cor. 1.2 Rome a particular Church and for Rome or any other Church to arrogate more then to be a particular member of the Catholike Church whereof Christ is the Head and Hierusalem which is above free and the mother of us all is Antichristian and abominable especially for Rome that she should stile her self the onely Catholike Church when as Ephesus the See of John and John the surviving Apostle in whom alone survived the Apostleship calls that Church but one of the seven in Asia Rev. 1. Were John Peter or any of the Apostles alive to see to what a lofty pitch ambition has hurried the aspiring Prelates of Rome they would blush to behold such iniquity and reprove any that should call Rome the Catholike Church For alas The Pride of Rome how little doth she resemble Christs Spouse his Church Christs Church was planted in humility Romes Church lords it in Soveraignty Christs Church had her White vest of Innocency Romes Church is clad in her purple of bloud and cruelty how little doth the Scarlet tribe resemble the train of Christ were Peter or any of Christs disciples now at Rome and should see the Pope they would rather take him for Pilate an Officer or Judge of Cesars then for Peter a fisher-man and servant of Jesus and would think his Cardinalls to be rather the Embassadors of Bozra then the Messengers of the Gospel and servants of Christ and should any but assume that Christian boldnes to tel them that their Scarlet Robes did cover and make invisible the Seamlesse coat of Jesus he were in danger of a Councell To such a height of Majesty are they of late aspired that they exercise dominion without restraint little regarding Christs precept to his Apostles the Kings of the Gentiles bear Rule and exercise dominion Vos autem non sic And here by the way I will insert a story of Peter and Simon Magus incertainty of Peter being at Rome Aegesippus lib. 2. de excidio Hierusal cap. 2. reports that Peter came to Rome to withstand Simon Magus 44 Christi Eusebius says he was crucified 36 Christi others that Paul and he together others that Paul was crucified a yeer after and on the same day Prudentius that Paul followed Peter to Rome from which contradictions no certainty of his being there is to be concluded but I return to my story It is said that Simon Magus taking some offence with the Citizens threatned to leave

after Christ and hereupon he has quite spoyled the Doctor for by this means he has hudwinkt his marks of Romes truth to wit Antiquity Universality Unity in Doctrine c. But my Cardinal thinks to salve up this errour by another trick and that almost as gross as this onely this reflects upon the Divinity that upon the Apostles personally He takes upon him to make known to us what was the secret opinion of Peter and Paul c. which have suffered for Religion to wit that they suffered because they wanted power to resist not that it was the will of God they should do so and so he makes the blessed Apostles and holy Martyrs dissemblers speaking one thing and thinking another For saith he as soon as a Prince begins to appear heretical ipso facto though Excommunication be not denounced he shall be put from his Kingdom for as Fame so Heresie gathers strength by going forward Which Axiome of his is verified in this for that since he wrote Bellarmine plows with his heifer and perswades the same Doctrine So that hereby S. Paul is accused of dissimulation That he should bid the Romanes obey for fashion-sake to please the times and so he makes the blessed Apostle an object of scorn not pity That he should be a time-server and yet play his cards so badly that he could not humour Domitius Nero better Is it likely that the Apostles would have commanded others to pray for them if they would have taken their blood if they could Unless these Cardinals would have them like the Presbyters of England who prayed for King Charles whilst their Armies kept him in prison or like Charles the fifth who commanded prayers to be made for Clement the seventh his deliverance and suffered his own Bands to confine him Is it likely S. Peter preaching the Word would bid them submit which Word he said should endure for ever 1 Pet. 1.25 even that Word which was preached amongst them if he knew that it was lawful for them to resist if they had power This were to ascribe want of faith to Peter that God would never deliver his Church out of the hands of Persecutors but suffer her to be always under Tyrants or else that Peter taught one thing and thought another And why should both Peter and Paul press this duty of obedience and submission and that not for wrath but for conscience sake were it lawful to resist This affertion of the Cardinal is therefore gross and impious It is plain by the Scripture that this duty of submission to the Civil power was a precept enjoyned by God not proceeding from any fear the production of a base nature And whenas Paul and Peter did practise and recommend this duty to others it was to give a testimony of their faith in Jesus who as he had laid down his life for them who wanted no power to have withstood the Jews he might have commanded legions of Angels to have come and rescued him out of their hands in obedience to the will of the Father so they as obedient sons of Christ Jesus whom he had in his blood adopted would according to his precepts and example lay down their lives for the testimony of the Gospel Solomon forbade that any should curse the King secretly in his conscience which sure he never would have done if it had been lawful having power to cast him off Saint Jude calls them filthy dreamers that speak evil of Government and despise such as be in Authority I wonder what he would think of those two Cardinals were he alive who would have the Pope drive Kings out of their Kingdomes if he can There are some Roman Catholicks who being with Agrippa half perswaded to be Christians and being touched in Conscience decline these gross absudities of Allen and Bellarmine as being pernitious and tending to the injury of Christ and his A postles and the holy Scripture and in that injurious to the holy Ghost Scripture being nothing else but the dictates of that holy Spirit But yet for all that they are so bewitched to the Roman Faith out of a blind conceit of its Antiquity and therefore of its truth that they will not leave her but strive to justifie her in all things and to excuse this point for that it is a point controverted by some of their owne Church and not yet decreed by any publique Councel nor ever must it be decided may the Pope chuse Besides should it be referred to a Councel there is no credit to be given to the result of that Councel for that none must sit there but such as first must swear to maintain the Pope in the very point to be controverted and so it would be coram non judice or if it should be decreed against his holiness yet by the prerogatives Spiritual of his late Laterane and Trent-assemblies he might notwithstanding repeal that Decree or chuse to obey it for that he is by them declared to be above Councels And till this be rectified this error can receive no reformation from a Councel nor can any satisfaction from thence redound to clear the scruples of any mans conscience in this particular In the mean time Popery is like the Religion of the Pharisees Councels declare one thing de fide the Pope is found contrary de facto so that as our Saviour said of the Pharisees Matth. 23.3 so say I of these Roman Catholicks All that such a Councel should so decree observe and keep but after their works do not for they say and do not The last shift that the Jesuites have to maintain this point of Papal prerogative is The Pope 〈◊〉 a temporal Prince that the Pope is more then the Apostles having acquired a Principality on earth and so by Jus belli he may pull downe one Prince and set up another for say they the Apostles had no charge but onely to preach the Gospel but his holiness the Pope has other fish to fry then what Saint Peter left him he is a temporal Prince he weares a triple Crown he disposes of Kingdomes Crowns Emperours Grants Dispensations sends Indulgences receives Appeals answers Ambassadours takes Homages releases Oaths dissolves Leagues interposes in the Election of Princes has an Emperour to hold his stirrop bring up his first dish a King to serve him at Dinner and many a glorious matter more which Saint Peter never dreamed on so that for him to depose Kings he being more then ever Peter was is no such a strange thing To which I answer 'T is strange so great a Potentate should be thrust up into so little a Corner of the Earth as the Territories of the Papacie are and yet that his Jurisdiction over other Princes should be of such vast latitude I perswade my self that as our Saviour said a Prophet is nothing worth in his owne Country so the Popes power is made more glorious afar off then it is in Italy taken to be whence it is that

in that service as it is made manifest in the ensuing Chapter The humble confession of all penitent hearts their acknowledging of Christs benefits their thanksgiving for the same their faith and consolation in Christ their humble submission to his will is a sacrifice of laud and prayse acceptable unto God no less then the sacrifice of the Priest Christ did not ordain this Sacrament that any one might receive it for another but that every one for himself is to be made partaker of this mystery of his salvation For as one may not be baptized for another for the Godfathers answering for the child say he hath faith because he hath the Sacrament of faith by the outward element of water which as it self cleanseth so the childe thereby is born again of water and of the Spirit to newness of life Baptism the infant spiritually receiving regeneration by the outward element of the water according to the effectual working of the holy Spirit unto newness of life the infant being thereby made a member of Christ by faith in Jesus given unto him in that Sacrament of Baptism So may not one receive this holy Sacrament for another Let every man be baptized Act. 2. here is spiritual regeneration to every man by himself And Mat. 26. Christ said to the multitude Take and eat and drink ye all of this and here is spiritual growth and living in Christ every man by himself and by this means we that are many branches become one Vine being baptized into one Spirit and all made to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.13 Whereas the Doctor urges that those words Drink ye all of this were spoken to the Apostles and that therefore the cup is not to be given to the people He might as well conclude they shall not have the bread because Christ gave that to his Apostles whereas all Divines agree that what was spoken to them was thereby meant of the whole Church upon earth which are all the Saints of God upon earth of particular Churches whensoever assembled into a Society which is manifest by S. Paul who delivered to the Corinthians that which he had received formerly of the Lord Jesus to wit both the bread and the cup enjoyning every one to examine himself and so let him eat and so let him drink By which it is plain that it was to be delivered to the people in both kindes And if one kinde had been sufficiently significant of Christs flesh and blood offered by himself upon the Cross for our redemption sure Christ would never have added the cup as part of that Sacrament thereby to signifie his blood if already it had been sufficiently signified in the bread Wherefore unless the Papists will charge Christ to be superfluous in his institution of this Sacrament they must allow the cup unto the people as well as bread and both as well as one Lastly the Doctor would justifie the change of the Church of Rome in this particular upon the authority of the Church given by Christ to his Apostles so to do And for this he urges S. Austin who was dead five hundred and fifty yeers before ever this doctrine of Rome was heard of S. Austin stood much for the significancie of the bread and wine that this Sacrifice was but a representation of Christs Sacrifice and that which you see on the Altar or Table is the bread and the cup which your eyes shew you is the wine but saith he faith sheweth that that bread is the body and that cup is the blood of Jesus Christ It was the practice of the Church in his time to administer in both kindes he when he lived taught the necessity of wine against those that mingled water and so did Cyprian and others and now that they are dead the Doctor will have them teach another doctrine S. Austin might say that Christ left authority to his Apostles to make such appointments in what order this Sacrament should be received as whether sitting kneeling how often or the like but not that they should institute a new Sacrament Christ gave both Elements Saint Paul delivered both according as he had received and it was to be done in remembrance of Christ and they were commanded to be imitators of him Ephes 5.1 Christ left this as a Legacy to his Church and he made the Apostles Executors of this his last Will and Testament which they were to discharge by dispensing that Legacy to Christs faithful Saints and People Wherefore for them to withhold part of the thing bequeathed to wit the participation of the cup which is by S. Paul called The Communion of his blood is to forfeit that trust Christ has reposed in them and to forget his precept he enjoyned them commanding to teach all Nations whatsoever he had commanded them We are bound to hold fast the traditions we have learned If then the Scripture tell us that Christ with his Apostles did communicate in both kinds and Saint Paul administring to the Corinthians said Traditi vobis quod accepi a Domini how comes the Church of Rome to forsake this tradition which Christ himself taught and practised and the Primitive Church for a thousand yeers held for faith if it ought to be reduced to one kind how came it to pass to be let alone so long and by what Authority doth Rome claim this power sith the ancient Fathers and the Primitive Church did not onely use to administer to the people in both kinds but maintained and defended the necessity of Bread and Wine the outward elements of this Sacrament as may appear by the Testimony of the afore-cited Fathers and particularly it was the profession of the Church of Rome as Gelasius Bishop thereof witnesseth Shall but the Church of Rome prescribe any new rule of faith or manmers and shall any disobey he is straightwaies anathematized for casting off the Tradition of the Church and the Catholick Church upon earth communicated in both k nds and shall the late Popes of Rome alter this and escape the censures Were there nothing for it but the bare usage of the Primitive Churches it were enough to convince the Church of Rome but whenas there is Christs precept and institution for it how doth the Church of Rome justly incur the condemnation of the Pharisees teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and laying aside the commandments of God follow their own traditions Mark 7. But such was the transcendent wickedness of the Church of Rome in these dayes that scarce any Apostolick Rule but has suffered some alteration by his Holiness and his Legislative conclave of Cardinals who being soared to a height above Councels Princes and all other Powers on earth stick not to wrestle against these commandments of the God of Heaven witness their additions to the Baptisme as if the Baptisme wherewith Christ was Baptized were not sufficient without the Romish spittle and salt and as if this Sacrament of Bread and Wine were

the case stands with the Eastern Churches they I am perswaded would not bogle to condescend hereunto but by no means let her ever hope to have a supremacy of Iurisdiction she may force it but never by argument evince it and so according to its first beginning prosecute to rear up her tower of Universality with the cement of bloud which whilst she prosecutes she forges her Keys into a two-edged sword and when she has done she like a Heathen Roman destroys her self by cutting off some of her fellow-members robbing them of what belongs to their office and makes them uselesse pieces of the mysticall body Christ Jesus of which all the Churches upon earth are fellow-members and though many yet make but one body being all baptized into one body by one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.12 Let us therefore follow the truth in love and in all things grow up unto him which is the Head that is Christ by whom all the body being compleat and knit together by every joynt for the forniture thereof according to the effectuall power which is in the measure of every part receiveth encrease of the body unto the edification of it self in love Ephes 4. The Doctor confesses that Christ is the Head originally but the Pope is the Head derivatively for sayes he with as much reason may we deny a King to be Head of his Kingdome because the Scripture saith God is King over all the earth as deny the Pope to be Head of the Church because Christ is so To which I answer Christ is the Head of the Catholike Church that is comprehensive of all the Elect Pope not Universall Head Saints Angells and men of which the particular Churches on earth are but members and the people the Saints of God assembled together to worship God and call upon him in his Sacraments make a Church Christ being their Head and as they are a people not convened to that purpose their severall Princes and Magistracy is to rule over them which I judge to be the principall reason of the Law of Sanctuaries Now for the Pope to claim an universall headship over them is either to rob Christ of his office or to deny Caesar his due for as Head of the whole Catholike Church he candot be and to be Head of the Universall Church upon earth is not consistent with the plantations of the other Apostles nor was any such universall headship delegated to any one of the Apostles Christ sent out his Apostles to all Nations and they ordained spirituall heads and Governors over their severall plantations none being to intrude upon anothers foundation and ever since Christ there have been superintendents over the severall Churches yet those superintendents were equal amongst themselves none lording it over another but only within their distinct territories did equally exercise the authori y of their headship and every one within his own Province being representative in point of order of Christ the mysticall Head without ascribing a single universality to any one of them although by this means there be many headships over the severall plantations yet it doth no more destroy the representative headship of Christ here on earth then the Spanish French c. acknowledging obedience to their distinct Princes are against Monarchy because the Turk claims to be Soveraign Lord of the Universe Wherefore if the Church of Rome wil needs have the Catholike Church to be understood only of a Universall Church upon earth and some one Bishop to be the governing head thereof I must tell her that she can lay no just claim hereto because if Peter had any power above the other Apostles it doth not appear to succeed to the Bishop of Rome for that it is not proved Peter to have been Bishop there and if he was Bishop there yet there wants a cleare and perfect deraigning of succession from him some affirming Linus some Clemens some Anacletus to succeed him and some Bishops of Rome claiming as Successors to Paul some to Peter or if they could perfect their Succession yet it is not evident that Peters power did succeed to them in respect it was Apostolically in him and either died in him or survived to Iohn besides they cannot agree in the manner how this power of supremacy should be in them for if they have it as universall Bishops Gregory declares it and the Doctor confesses it to be Antichristian for that hereby they deny others to be Bishops and so rob them of their divine order and Ecclesiastique Jurisdiction granted by consent of Councells to Metropolitans to govern within their provinciall precincts without appealing to Rome and if they will have it in respect of Rome see how they make Rome the Rock not Peter and go against the Symbole of our faith The Apostles who composed the Creed as the Doctor confesses 148. and professing faith in the Catholike Church did publish that Creed at Jerusalem before ever the faith was preached at Rome and when her Church was invisible or not in rerum natura and did not therefore intend Rome for the Catholique Church Wherefore for these reasons I hope I may without incurring a censure of presumption with confidence affirm that Rome is not the Catholique Church nor the Pope the universall Head of the Catholike Church either in respect of any Jurisdiction derived from Peter or by the consent of Councells lawfully deraigning any title thereto CHAP. III. That the name Church is proper to England as well as to Rome THe Doctor is pleased in his fifth and thirteenth chapters to take notice of severall definitions of a Church which are distinctions of severall Sectaries that are in England and elswhere but never glanced upon that which is maintained and professed in the Church of England which belike he omitted on purpose to make people believe that we had no Church at all properly distinguished by her self apart from those Sectaries and therefore he fled to Rome to find one if he have forgotten I will put him in mind of it The Church of God is a company of men chosen by him to call upon his name and therefore did the Apostles term it Ecclesia alluding to the custome of Arkens to call together the people to hear the promulgation of any Law or any publike Oration and not Synagogue that is an inordinately met assembly without a lawfull calling together wherefore we say that Ecclesia in the most proper and genuine signification is Vniversitas fidelium credentium invocantium nomen Christi By which interpretation if we be in the faith of Jesus and have our solemn assemblies to worship and call upon his name we may properly be called a Church and a member of the Catholique Church which as I said before is comprehensive of all the Elect of God which have been are or shall be The Doctor cannot deny but that we maintain the Apostles Creed and I may say so doth not Rome The Church of Rome abuses the Apostles