Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n bishop_n church_n succession_n 2,569 5 10.4652 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A07782 A Christian dialogue, betweene Theophilus a deformed Catholike in Rome, and Remigius a reformed Catholike in the Church of England Conteining. a plaine and succinct resolution, of sundry very intricate and important points of religion, which doe mightily assaile the weake consciences of the vulgar sort of people; penned ... for the vtter confusion of all seditious Iesuites and Iesuited popelings in England ... Bell, Thomas, fl. 1593-1610. 1609 (1609) STC 1816; ESTC S101425 103,932 148

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

vs that Constantine the great at his departure from Rome to Constantinople gaue the Bishop of Rome and his successors his crowne and all his royall dignitie both in the Citie of Rome and in Italie and in all the west parts which goodly story inuented for the Popes aduancement we sée by the constant verdit of these foure learned Papists to be nothing else indéede but a lying fable for the the Bishops of Rome were stil subiect to the Emperors receiued their authoritie and iurisdiction by their letters patents aboue 340. yeares euen vntill Benedict the second to which I adde that manie of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esops fables Remig. This is a point of great consequence which I should neuer haue espied but by your relation Theoph. I would wish you likewise to obserue that the Emperours Constantinus Iustinianus and others yéelding vp their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome vpon a fond zeale without knowledge opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie for in short time after the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly that they tooke vpon them to dispose Royall scepters and to translate them to their pleasures Theoph. It is a memorable obseruation I shall keep it in remembrance but let me still reason for the Papists as if I were one of them for when all difficulties are answered I shall be the stronger in the truth The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests as the Apostle recordeth and your selfe graunteth but so it is that when he first reformed the Church as you terme it yee neither had any Bishops nor any Priests of your owne neither could ye finde any in any other place but onely with vs and in our Church when Martin Luther went out from vs our Church therefore and none but ours is the true Church of God as which onely hath the true succession Apostolicall Remig. I answere first that our succession in the Church of England is farre better then theirs of Rome for theirs of Rome as we haue heard and séene is most doubtfull and vncertain but ours of England so constant and so assured as no deniall can be made thereof I proue it because in Anno 596. Gregory the great sent Augustine the Monke with Iustus Melitus and others as our approued Cronicles do relate to preach the Gospell to the Saxons who were kindly receiued of King Ethelbert and he conuerted to the Christian faith gaue to the same Austen the City of Canterbury since which time our Church of England is able to proue her perpetuall succession of Bishops without schisme or interruption at all albeit the Church of Rome as is already proued is not able to performe hal●e so much Secondly that though the visible Churches were euery where greatly stained and polluted with many grosse errors superstitions and abuses at such time as M. Luther began a Christian reformation yet for all that the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling albeit otherwise very wicked men and consequently that our Bishops and Priests though descended created and made of such deformed popish Prelats are true Bishops and Prists indéede Theoph. If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs then must either theirs bee good or ours as bad as theirs and so we shall haue no true Bishops at all Remig. Marke well what I say that yée may vnderstand the saint The Philosopher saith that one may bée a good Citizen though a bad man Euen so say I that though the Papists were wicked men and the Popish Bishops that created our Bishops foully polluted both in life and doctrine yet were they still true Christians true Bishops and consequently true members of the visible Church for they still professed held and maintained the chiefe fundamentall points of religion of God of the blessed Trinity of Christ and his two natures of his death passion of his resurrection and assention of the generall doome of all the rest comprised in the summe of religion which we call the Apostles Créede and therefore though they grieuously wounded and in a manner killed themselues by their errours corruptions superstitions and abuses yet in regard of the truth which they kept cōstantly there remained in them some life of Christianity They wanted legges and armes and had their bodies and soules corrupted with many pestilent diseases but they did still draw breath and were not wholy dead We read in the Apostolicall history that there were some that beléeued who being of the heresie of the Pharisées did still hold the ceremonies of the law and vrged others to be circumcised The Prophet Dauid was sore wounded with adultery and murther but yet he still continued the child of God and Peter cursed and sware that hée knew not Christ who for all that still beleeued in Christ to the end Theoph. How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once it seemeth to me a thing impossible Remig. I answere first that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once as the same man may be both a father and a sonne at once and yet do all Logicians grant that this latter may be effected with all facility For one and the same man may at one and the same time be both a father in respect of his own child a sonne in respect of his father who is Grandfather to the sayd child Secondly that there is as great disparity betwéene a true Bishop and a good Bishop as there is betwéene a true man and a good man but as he is a true man that hath the nature of a true man how bad soeuer he be in faith life conuersation as Turkes Iewes Traitors Heretickes Apostataes euen so are they true Bishops of the visible Church who haue their calling places iurisdiction allotted them by the same Church how bad soeuer they be in other respects Theoph. Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne ordeyned and consecrated them after another manner then they are this day and euer haue beene since that time ergo either must their Bishops or else all our Bishops the first onely excepted who were created after the popish manner be false counterfeit and no true Bishops indeed Remig. Neither their Bishops nor ours are false and conterfeit but both true and perfect Bishops in euery essentiall and necessary poynt pertaining to a Bishop Theoph. Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope yours by the authority royall of your gracious Princesse of famous memory Theirs with Oyle and Chrisme and many other ceremonies which yours doe not vse at all Remig. All the things by you named are méere extrinsecall and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop or of a Priest Theoph. Either must they sinne in vsing Oyle Chrisme and other ceremonies or you in reiecting
handle the holy Mysteries S. Hierome in like manner saith of Hilarius the heretike that he could neither baptize nor administer the Eucharist because he was but a Deacon whē he went out of the church and what are you but Deacons nay what are you but meere Lay-men for you are neither consecrated after the old manner nor confirmed by the Pope as the Iesuits beare the world in hand Remig. I answere first that if méere Lay-men should presume in our Churches either to preach teach or handle the holy mysteries they could not escape condig●e punishment according to their demerites Secondly that the want of your greasing and other begge●ly Ceremonies wherewith the primitiue Church was neuer acquainted as holy writ teacheth vs cannot make the consecration of our Bishops vnlawfull Thirdly y● our Bishops are consecrated confirmed according to the ancient manner of the primitiue Church for three things onely are necessary all which God be thanked for it are this day practised in our Church of England to wit election of the whole Congregation confirmation of the Prince and consecration with godly praiers and imposition of hands Of the last of these thrée that is of the imposition of hands with praier mention is made to Timothie and else where For the confirmatiō of the Prince and not of the Pope which is the second point this is enough for the tryall viz. that these thrée Popes Pelagius the second Se●erinus and Benedictus the second and all other Bishops of Rome till the sayd Benedict inclusiuè were euer elected and confirmed by the Emperours commandement which verity is freely confessed in expresse termes by foure famous Popish writers who therefore are and ought to be of more credit and force against the Papists then any other authors whatsoeuer The names of the popish Doctors are these Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranxa Anastatius Bibliothecarius and Onuphrius Panuinius Piatina hath these words Ni● enim tum in eligendo Pontifice actū erat nisi eius electionem Imperator approbasset for at that time which was about the yeere of our Lord God ●●0 nothing was done effectually concerning the election of the Bishop of Rome vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same Touching the creation of Seuerinus for the other testimony was of Pelagius the same Platina writeth in this manner Vana enim tunc habebatur Cleri ac populi electio nisi Imperatores aut eorum Exarchi confirmassent For the election of the Clergie and the people was of no force at all in those dayes vnlesse the Emperours or their Lieutenants had confirmed the same this was done about the yéere 637. Concerning the creation or making of Benedict Platina hath these words ad hunc Constantius Imperator sanctionem misit vt deinceps quem Clerus populus Exercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegislet eundem statim verum Christi Vicarium esse omnes crederent nulla aut Constantinopolitani Principis aut Italiae Exarchi expectat authoritate vt antea fieri cōsueuerat id enim ratum erat in creando Pontifice quod Princeps confirmaslet vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat The Emperour Constantine sent a decrée to this Pope that whomsoeuer the Clergy people and Romaine Souldiers should henceforth choose for their Bishop all people should by and by beléeue him to be the U●car of Christ scilicet if they would This was done in anno 68● Bartholomaeus Carranza a famous Dominican Frier hath the very same assertion ad verbum Anastasius and Onuphrius haue these expresse words Pontifices qui deinde fuerant creati con●ecrati sunt sine Constantinopolitani Imperatoris iussione The Popes or Bishops of Rome that liued afterward were made and consecrated without the Emperour of Constantinople his cōmaund as if they had said in the old time and auncient Church no Bishop of Rome could haue bin admitted at any time vnles he had brought letters patents frō the Emperour though now y● practise be farre otherwise Now M. Theophilus tell me what you gather out of this discourse Theoph. Out of this doctrine of this famous papists I gather to the confusion of the late Bishops of Rome their Iesuits and all Iesuited papists these three euidents golden and most necessary corollaries First that the vulgar and common sort of people are grosly deceiued when they terme popery the old religion and repute them for the auncient Catholikes for we are indeede the true and auncient Catholikes I put my selfe in the number because God now hath made me a true reformed Catholike and the papists are become flat heretiques in many points of the true faith though not apostataes from the whole For this Benedict the second could not be made Bishop of Rome 684. yeeres after Christs sacred aduent without the Emperours letters Patents so then the Emperours had the soueraignty ouer the Bishops of Rome for the space almost of seuen hundren yeeres after Christ so long the Popes acknowledged the Emperours for their soueraigne Lords as without whose letters Patents they could haue no iurisdiction in the Church I adde as consectary hereunto that as in ciuill causes many are debarred from their lawfull inheritance through the violent dealing of mighty men euen so we the true reformed Catholikes haue beene many yeeres excluded from the free vse of our owne Church and Sacraments by the force violence and tyrannie of the blood-thirsty Romish Bishops and partly by remissenes of sundry Emperours who vpon a blind zeale not grounded vpon Gods word yeelded vp their soueraigne rights vnto them and as temporal men are in time restored to their auncient right by zealous and godly Magistrates euen so were we and are we God make vs thankefull for it by the goodnesse of God and most Christian Princes King Henry the eight King Edward the sixt Queene Elizabeth and King IAMES our most gratious soueraigne now happily regnant ouer vs restored to the old Christian Catholike and Apostolike religion and with all Christian freedome placed again in our owne Churches the spirituall birth-right of our selues and our ancestors Secondly thath our Bishops in England are made and consecrated according to the auncient Christian Catholike Apostolike and old Roman maner that is to say by the letters Patents of the Prince Thirdly that the Emperours of Constantinople for the space of 200. yeares and odde after the dissolution of the Empire in the west had still the soueraignty ouer the Bishop of Rome for the west Empire was dissolued in Anno 471 and Benedict the second obteined of the Emperour Constantine in Anno 684 that the Bishops of Rome might from thenceforth be chosen confirmed and enioy their iurisdiction without the commandement and letters Patents of the Emperour Remig. You haue marked well the discourse and for all that haue not obserued one point of great consequence Theophilus What is that I beseech you heartily Remig. The late Popes or Bishops of Rome tel
the truth of Popish mangled materiall succession that you wil loath and detest the same for euer The famous Papist Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth vp thirty Schismes in the Church of Rome But I for the present content my self with two whereof their owne déere Fryer Bartholomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently The former Schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares during which time their godly Popedome was at a vnion in France not one day at Rome albeit as yée know your Pope Cardinals and Iesuited Popelings beare the world in hand that God placed their holy s● supposed seate at Rome In the latter Schisme of the twaine thrée of their holy Bishops were Popes at one and the selfe same time to wit Iohn the 24 of that name Bennet the 13. and Gregory the 12. Out of which discourse two things of great moment are to bée obserued First that it is a méere foolery to chalenge any singular prerogatiue by Saint Peters death at Rome Againe that that succession cannot but bée vncertaine which is deriued from thrée Bishops striuing and grinning for the Popedome as dogges do for a bone Theoph. The Popes or Bishops of Rome chalenge S. Peters priuiledges because he died at Rome Remig. What must Bishops liuing 64. yeares in France be priuiledged at Rome because S. Peter dyed there better reason it were to grant the chéekest prerogatiue to the Bishops of Hierusalem because Christ our Lord and maister dyed there Theoph. Although three did striue at once for the Popedome yet could there be but one Pope at one and the same time Remig. Two no small absurdities doe perforce arise from hence The one that the succession of the Popes of Rome whereof they glory somuch is very doubtfull and vncertaine The other that the Church of Rome was many yeares without a head and so by popish doctrine without an infalible iudge in matters of their faith But I will tell you a greater mystery A woman is not capable of holy orders as Christs Apostle assureth vs nor of any Ecclesiasticall function in the Church and consequently the Popish succession which is deriued from our holy mistresse Pope Iohn cannot possibly bée of force Here the Church of Rome hath vtterly forsaken her succession and is not comparable to our Church of England in that behalfe Theoph. If it were possible for a woman to bee inthronized into Peters chaire at Rome then as you say popish succession were ouerthrowne indeede it cannot be gainsaid But such a thing neither hath beene neither is neither euer can be till the worlds end Remig. What doe you thinke it a thing impossible to be done an huge number of famous popish writers doe resolutelie contest it for a constant truth Theoph. If you be able this to proue indeede henceforth popish succession shall neuer come with in my creed Remig. Sigebertus Geniblasēsis Marianus Scotus Matthaeus Palmerius Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranza Iohānes Nauclerus are my substantial witnesses in this weighty point of Popery viz that Pope Iohn was a woman who by the familiar help of her beloued companion brought forth publikely the homely fruits of her Popedome Theoph. These writers which you name were indeede Papists of high esteeme in the Church of Rome but they liued long after Pope Iohn and therefore knew nothing of that matter but by report of others Remig. I answere first that these eight Historiographers liued longer one after another then Sigebertus Geniblasensis and Marianus Scotus liued after Pope Iohn Secondly that all Historiographers write for the most part by the report of others Thirdly that so many writers otherwise of good credit with your Pope may well be credited of vs in a matter against your Pope especially since sundry of them be your owne holy popish Fryers Fourthly that this story of Pope Iohn is publikely painted and is this day to bée séene in your Cathedrall Church of Syenna which painting our politike newly hatched Iesuites sought earnestly to haue had it defaced in the late repairing of that Church but the Bishop of the place digitus Dei est hic would not suffer them to preuaile Fifthly that these eight writers who were all the Popes owne vassals and liued long one after another would neuer for shame haue published one and the selfe same story to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the centrary to be the truth Theoph. They say onely and barely vt ferunt as the report and fame goes and other graue writers that liued before them all and neerer the time of Pope Iohn make no mention thereof at all Remig. I answere first that an argument ab authoritate negatiué is not holden good in your Schooles and yourselues do roundly condemne in others that manner of dispute Secondly that if these famous writers had not béene fully perswaded of the truth of the story they would neuer haue published it to the world and hereof this double reason may be yéelded First for that the Popes déere friends were no doubt very loathto reueale the shame and turpitude of their holy fathers saue onely then and so much when and how much the very force of truth compelled them to do Againe because they being very learned could not be ignorant that it was a great damnable sinne to defame so great a man Thirdly that the sayd Authors write of this matter euen as they do of other things Palmerius and Sigibertus both haue these expresse words Fama est hunc Iohannem faeminam fuis●e vnisoli familiari tantum cognitam qui eam complexus est grauis facta peperit Papa existens quare eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam The fame goes that this Iohn was a woman and not knowne but to her familiar friend by whose familiarity she became with child and was deliuered euen whiles she was Pope for which respect some do not reckon her among the Popes Marianus Polonus Bergomensis Platina and Carranza whom I haue already named teach flatly and plainely the selfe same doctrine writing vpon the same woman Pope and here must I put you in minde of this mackeable poynt viz. that Marianus Scotus affirmeth the story constantly flatly and simply without all ands or iffs Yea Martinus Polonus the Popes owne Penitentiary singeth the selfe same song Fourthly that some Historiographers fauouring the Pope more then the truth haue of purpose so to couer the Popes shame concealed the truth of the story To these I may fitly adde that which their famous Abbot saith the beast saith my L. Abbot Bernardus y● best Abbot that euer I heard or read of mentioned in the Reuelation to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warres with the Saints fitteth in Peters chaire Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and I hope I may giue credit to your reports your protestation hath assured me thereof
to God I could soundly answere this reason Remig. Listen well to my discourse and you shall God willing be able to confute it with all facility this is the answere First that our nation first receiued the faith i● the time of Vespasian Emperour of Rome about 70● yeeres after Christs sacred Incarnation by the preaching of Christs holy Apostle Symon Zelotes Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth the Brutans had receiued the faith of Christ about the yéere 6● by the preaching of those twelue which Philip the Apostle sent into this land whereof Ioseph of Aramath●a was the chiefe Thirdly that about the yéere 1●9 Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the sonne of Co●lis sent Faganus and Deruuianus into Britaine to baptise the said King and his people and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. Fourthly that séeing the Brutanes had béene subiects and tributaries to the Romans aboue 600. yéeres it is no rare thing that Gregory the chiefe Bishop of the Romans should send preachers into England with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent for it is euery Christians duty to doe what in him lieth in such a case Fifthly that the name Pope is a Gréeke word which signifieth father and in the auncient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome which you may finde proued at large in a little booke intituled the triall of the new religion Sixthly that in the time of this Gregory and long after the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome was in good case though in some part steined with some corruptions neither is it blame worthy either in Bishop Gregory that sent it or in King Ethelbert that receiued it that our nation had then the Church seruice in the Latin tongue for as the prouerbe saith necessity hath no law besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue and so to them their vulgar tongue and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation for of old time as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Frier telleth vs euery Church had diuine seruice in her mother and vulgar tongue of which subiect I haue written at large in the suruey of popery and no maruell if our Church receiuing the Church seruice in the Latin tongue though vpon necessity for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language did a long time reteine the same for though it were a fault comparatiuely a small one would to God our Church had neuer béene steined with greater corruptions one thousand yéere are fully expired since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome since which time most intollerable abuses superstitions errors and flat heresies haue crept into the Church of Rome which is all that our Church hath abolished still constantly reteining as pure and inuiolable the old Roman faith and religion Theoph. You told me that the visible Church both may erre and de facto hath erred and the same as you haue soundly proued by the testimonies of best approued popish writers may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome but how any Church can be inuisible which is the Church say you that cannot erre I doe not yet vnderstand I pray you take some paine for my better instruction in that behalfe Remig. True it is that euery particular Chuch is visible in it selfe for all men women and children euery one in his corporall consistence are visible as experience teacheth vs and for all that this is a true and most constant position that that Church which cannot erre inuisible for the true a●d exact knowledge whereof you must distinguish in man two things his externall corporeity or corporall consistence and his internall election in Christ Iesus Man considered the former way is visible indéed euery child can discypher the case but the latter way he is inuisible and knowne onely vnto God or to those to whom he reuealeth it Theoph. I seeme now to haue a glimmering of the question though no perfect insight into the same I pray you vnfold the case distinctly and declare it by some familiar examples if it may be Remig. At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria that he onely was left alone an Oracle from heauen answered him in this maner I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men which haue not bowed the knée to Baal By which diuine Oracle it is euident y● seuen thousand persons were inuisible to Elias and all the same visible in themselues at one and y● same time Do yée now vnderstand the case Theoph. I seeme to conceiue it by vertue of your former distinction They were visible as men but inuisible as the children of God for that Elias knew not their faith and election in Iesus Christ. Remig. You conceiue it aright Iudas Iscariot as he was a man was visible both to the rest of the Apostles and to others who for all that as he was a traytor was visible to God alone for which cause the Apostles were astonished when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Maister The Apostle confirmeth the same when he saith the foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale the Lord knoweth who are his the faith and conscience of the elect to God-ward is vnknowne to men and so to them they are inuisible though visible in their owne persons Theoph. I must needes yeeld to this as to a manifest truth but are not all members of the which Church beleeue in Christ and hold the catholike faith as we do Remig. All that professe externally the Catholike faith are members of the visible Church and must be reputed for such so long as they are not cut off from the Church by the iust censure of excommunication But Gods elect onely are the true Church that is to say that mysticall body whereof Christ Iesus is the mysticall head Gods elect onely are that Church to which Christ promised his inuisible presence to the worlds end Gods elect only are that Church which is the pillar of truth and cannot erre But the reprobates neither are nor can bee that mysticall body whereof Christ is the head for our Lord Iesus is so farre from being their head that he hateth all those that worke wickednesse and wil put them from him with a sharp ve vobis at the generall doome Gods elect onely are the bride betrothed to our Lord Iesus the Bride-grome betwéene whom there is such an inseparable vnion as no power create vpon earth or in heauen is able to dissolue the same Theoph. God reward you for your great paines which you haue taken herein for his names sake and my good you haue so resolued me in these most intricate difficulties of christian religion that I stand at vtter defiance with the late start-vp Romish faith and doctrine highly reuerencing the old Roman