Selected quad for the lemma: enemy_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A20474
|
A probleme propounded by Francis Dillingham, in which is plainely shewed, that the holy scriptures haue met with popish arguments and opinions.
|
Dillingham, Francis, d. 1625.
|
1616
(1616)
|
STC 6887; ESTC S117462
|
12,729
|
50
|
not to be fathers and shepheards to their subiects The speech of Cyrus in Xenophon in his eighth booke is excellent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the workes of a good shepheard and good King are very like And I am sure a King in Homer is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the shepheard of the people Let vs heare Langius a Papist concerning the Popes temporall dominion Eodem anno saith he The same yeare namely 1407. the Romanes offered to Innocentius the Pope the keyes of the Citie with branches of Palmes and granted him all the temporall dominion of the citie of Rome but vniustly and vncommendably for the store of temporall things doe no little hurt to spirituall With many moe words to the same purpose Secondly saith Bellarmine Christ forbiddeth tyrannie for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer S. Luke hath met with this cauill for he vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any composition yea the compound is with force and power to rule men whether they will or no not with wrong and iniurie to oppresse them But let vs heare Bernard lib. 2. de consid ad Eugen. Planum est Apostolis interdicitur dominatus i ergo tu tibi vsurpare aude aut dominans apostolatum aut apostolicus dominatum plane ab alterutro prohiberis It is euident that rule is prohibited the Apostles go thou therfore and vsurpe if thou darest being a ruler the Apostleship or being an Apostle rule thou art plainly forbidden one of them Againe in his first booke he hath these words In criminibus non in possessionibns potestas vesâ—ra Your power is in crimes not in possessions for them and not for these you haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen excluding sinners not possessors of lands In his third book thus boldly speaketh he Pro libitu agere quid tam bestiale To do all things after his owne pleasure what is so beastly as this To conclude in his fourth booke saith he In his successisti non Petro sed Constantino In these things thou hast not succeeded Peter but Constantine But it may be the Popes authoritie will preuaile let Gelasius therfore speake tom 2. Concil pag. 442. Some were before the coming of Christ Kings and Priests typically but when the true King and high Priest came then neither doth the Emperour take to himself the name of an high Priest neither doth the high Priest challenge royall authoritie Many mo words he hath to the same purpose The same thing in effect hath Pope Nicolas the first in his Epistle to Michael the Emperor Cassiodore vpon the fiftieth Psalme thus writeth Si quis de populo errauerit Deo peccat Regi nam quando Rex delinquit soli Deo reus est quia hominem non habet qui eius facta diiudicatâ— merito ergo Rex Deo tantum se dicit peccasse qui solus erat qui eius potuisset admissa discutere If any of the people erre he sinneth against God and the King when the King sinneth he is guiltie onely to God for he hath no man that may iudge his deeds worthily therefore doth the King say that he sinned onely against God because he alone could discusse his offences To conclude That which the Apostles requested is forbidden them But they requested teÌ„poral dominion Ergo it was forbidden them I do not denie but they were somewhat ambitious in asking temporall dominion but meere ambition was not forbidden them but temporall rule as I haue made manifest and plaine Of sinning necessarily THus do the Papists dispute touching sinne Aut peccatum est necessarium aut voluntarium sinne is either necessarie or voluntarie if it be necessarie then it is no sinne The Apostle Paul Rom. 9.19 hath cut the sinewes of this argument Thou wilt say then Why doth he yet complain for who hath resisted his will The Apostle answereth But O man who art thou that pleadest against God To lay open the obiection thus it standeth He that cannot resist the will of God is not to be blamed But a hardened heart cannot resist the will of God Ergo a hardened heart cannot be blamed The Apostle denieth the propositioÌ„ by a reprehension O man who art thou that pleadest against God And here by the way Christian Reader iudge of their argument who thus dispute touching Adams fall If God decreed Adams fall then he fell necessarily and so God was the cause thereof O man what art thou that disputest with God I beseech thee Christian Reader adore the mysteries of election and reprobation search them not curiously but lay thy hand vpon thy mouth and be silent be not a querist but let God be righteous and let the whole world perish wonder that God should chuse any one to saluation wonder not if thousands be damned better farre is faithfull ignorance then rash knowledge Paul calleth them vnsearchable wayes of God and wilt thou search them Whosoeuer is not satisfied with this answer let him seek for one better learned then I am but let him take need that he finde not a more presumer Thus much may suffice for this argument of sinning necessarily Here I might enter into the question of Freewill but I say with Augustine concerning this point Ser. 2. de verbis Apostoli Worke your saluation saith the Apostle Now lest they should attribute any thing to themselues it followeth It is God which worketh in you both the will and the deed of his good pleasure Of Iustification THus doth the Apostle reasoÌ„ touching Iustification If Abraham were iustified by works he hath therein to reioyce but not with God The Papists answer that S. Paul speaketh of the first iustification This answer the Apostle taketh away in the next words Abraham beleeued in God and it was imputed or counted to him for righteousnesse This testimonie is alledged out of the fifteenth chapter of Genesis And if there were any second iustification it must needs be vnderstood of the same for Abraham was iustified before In the 12 13 and 14 chapters the notable works of Abraham are recorded as that he obeyed God in going out of his countrey that he built an altar that he talked familiarly with God besides Heb. 11. the Apostle putteth this amongst the praises of Abraham that by faith he went into a place which he knew not And if S. Iames speake of a second iustification then doth S. Paul likewise for S. Iames alledgeth the same text chap. 2. ver 23. But this vaine distinction is also preuented by S. Iames who alledgeth the example of Rachab vers 25. Likewise was not Rachab the harlot iustified through workes when she receiued the messengers and sent them out another way It is certaine that Rachab was an infidell vntill that time that she receiued the spies wherefore by her example it is euident that S. Iames nor S. Paul knew any second iustification I conclude with Bellarmine his speech lib. 2. de iustif cap. 7. Si solum vellent nobis imputari Christi merita quia nobis donata sunt et possumus ea Deo Patri offerre pro peccatis nostris quoniam Christus suscepit super se onus satisfaciendi pro nobis nosque Deo Patri reconciliandi recta esset corum sententia If they meant onely this that Christ his merits were imputed to vs because they were giuen vs and because we may offer them to God the Father for our sins seeing Christ tooke vpon him the burden to satisfie for vs and to reconcile vs to God the Father their opinion was right Thus farre Bellarmine Now let vs marke how the Apostle reasoneth Rom. 5. v. 10. For if when we were enemyes we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne much more being reconciled we shal be saved by his life Excellently writeth Bernard Fateor non suum dignus nec propriis possum meritis regnum obtinere caelorum ceterum Dominus meus duplici iure illud possidens haereditate patris et merito passionis altero ipse contentus alterum mihi donat I confesse and acknowledge that I am not worthy neither can I obteyne by my merits the kingdome of heaven but my Lord possessing it by a double right by his Fathers inheritaÌ„ce by the merit of his passion being content with the one himselfe giveth me the other Thus Christian reader I haue shewed thee how the holy scriptures meet with popish cavills in the weightiest controuersies betwixt them and vs. God almighty open mens hearts to see the cleere truth which in great brevitie simplicity I haue heere propounded I doubt not but other learned men may add much vnto this small Treatise which I haue written to excite men to studie the Scriptures and eschue popery And as I haue written it with this minde so I doubt not but that God will giue a blessing to it Amen Lord Iesus FINIS