Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	church_n	doctrine_n	homily_n	2,580	5	12.0475	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10188	Lame Giles his haultings. Or, A briefe survey of Giles Widdovves his confutation of an appendix, concerning bowing at the name of Iesus Together with a short relation of the popish originall and progresse of this groundlesse novell ceremony: wherein Mr. Widdovves his manifold forgeries, oversights, and absurdities are in part detected; and the point, of bowing at the name of Iesus, together with that, of cringing to altars and communion-tables, is now more largely discussed. By VVilliam Prynne, an vtter-barrester of Lincolnes Inne.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1630 (1630)	STC 20465; ESTC S120668	62,965	69

Bowings and such like idolatrous superstitious ridiculous Rites which get ground apace upon us the reformed Church of England with all her faithfull Bishops Ministers Members especially since the prodigious unparalleld hellish Powder-plot should stand at everlasting defiance for feare God give us over to strong delusions to beleeve her impious lies to our damnation and then showre downe his long-threatned judgements on us of which the late revived Plague and feared Famine should now in time admonish us to our eternall ruine What therefore Tertullian writes of Stage-playes which had the very Divell himselfe for their originall Authour as he with others largely proves which should cause all Christians who in their very baptisme have renounced the Divell and all his workes c. for ever to abandon them Facit ad originis maculam ne bonum existimes quod initium à malo accepit the same shall be my conclusion in the point in question Bowing at the name of Iesus had its originall growth and progresse from the Antichristian Popes and Church of Rome who propagated it by their Indulgences to justifie their idolatrous bowing to Images Crucifixes Hosts and Altars as I have fully manifested in the premises therefore proceeding from such a putr●d fountaine such an impure Parentage no pious Protestant I dare say can repute it good much lesse praise-worthy Oderis itaque Christiane cujus auctores non poteris non odisse FINIS Errata and Omissions COurteous Reader I thought good to admonish thee of one grosse omission which through the Printers carelesnesse hath happened in the 36. page line 1. betweene idolatrous too and Francis de Croy c. which because it interrupts the Discourse I shall request thee instead of Francis de Croy c. to reade as followeth Bowing at to or before Altars how highly soever some men esteeme it had its originall from idolatrous Pagans who as they danced and stood round about their Altars when they sacrificed in which on which or at leastwise by and over which the Images of their Idols were placed or ingraven in imitation of which most Popish glittering Altars have their gaudy Crucifixes Saints or Images standing on them neare them over them to intice the people to bow downe unto them when as God commanded all his Altars to be made of nought but earth or of unhewen stones not polished graven marble golde or silver without any images or curious sculptures the better to keepe the people from bowing to them or before them to which more rich materialls of silver gold and pearles set out by art might easily induce them so they likewise honoured their Altars with cappe and knee bowing downe unto them yea war shipping praying at them and before them Whence God enjoynes the Israelites Exod. 34. 13. Deutr. 7. 5. c 12 3. Iudg. 6. 25 26 28 30. 2 Kings 11. 18. 2 Chron 14 3 c. 30. 14 c. 32 12. c. 33 15 34 4 5 7. Isay 36 7. Hosea 8 11 10. 1 2. to throw downe and quite demolish the Altars and Images of these Idolaters which the good Kings of Israel did accordingly not onely because they sacrificed on them but because they also worshipped and bowed to them and before them As Exod. 20 4 5 23 24 25. c 23 24 c 34 13. Levit. 26. 1. Deutr. 7. 5. cap 12 2 3. 2 Kings 11 18 c 18. 22. 2 Chron 14 3 5. c 28. 24. 25. c 30 14. c 32 12. c 34 4 5 7. Isay 2. 8 9. c 17 8. c 36 7. Hosea 10. 1 2. Acts 17 23. 2 Chron 25 14. compared together incomparable Dr. Rainolds De Roman●e Ecclesi● Idololatria l 2 c 3 sect 46 p 431 432 Francis De Cr●y in his first Conformity cap 24 with others testifie Then reade as in the Copy Other materiall Omissions and Errataes there are which because they are already corrected I here passe by informing thee onely of one thing worth thy observation To wit that it appeares expresly by Levit 1 11 16. Exod 20 26. c 26 35 c 40 6 7. 26 to 34. Iosh 22 10 11 2 Sam 24 18 25. 1 Kings 6 22. c 8 64 c 18 32 35. 2 Kings 11 11 c 12 9. c 16 14 c 1 5. c 23 12 2 Chron 1 6. c 5 12. c 15 8. c 33 4 5. Psal 26 6. Isay 19 19. Ier 11 13. c 17 2. Ez●ch 6 4 5. c 8 5. c 9 2. c 40 47. Ioel 2 17. Matth 23 35 that both religious and idolatrous Altars heretofore did not stand Eastward nor yet at the east and of their Temples against a wall at Popish Altars and some Communion-tables turned Altar-wise now doe 〈◊〉 Northward or Southward either before the d●●●es or in the Court the porch the entrance the body or middest of their Temples and that in such a manner as men might have space enough either to stand or walke even round about them And hence I suppose our Common-Prayer-Booke our Canons Qu. Elizabeths Injunctions expresly order That all our Communion Tables when the Sacrament is administred shall stand not in the East end of the Chancel Altarwise with one side against the wall where some unconformable over-Conformists have lately hedged them in for which an Inditement lies against them upon the Statute of 1. Eliz. cap. 2. besides other Ecclesiasticall Censures by their Ordinary but in the body of the Church or Chancell so as the Communicants may place themselves round about them Men usually sit round about their Tables at meales yea Christ himself Apostles sate round the Table when he instituted this his holy Sacrament as all the Evangelists witnesse and so should we doe too VVhich I observe the rather to controll the irregular practise of some ignorant Popish Innovatours who against the expresse command both of our Common-prayer-booke Canons Injunctions yea the very practise of Christ his Apostles and of the Church before since their time dare turn Communion-tables into Altars though we have now none else but spirituall Priests and Sacrifices and so no Altars but one spirituall Altar which is Christ or at leastwise place thē Altarwise against the wall and East-end of the Church even when the Communion is administred VVhich uncanonicall practises I hope they will now reforme or else I trust our Bishops in their Consistories or in their default our Iudges and ●ustices in their Sessions will legally proceede against them and against those who set up Images and Saints Pictures in our Churches contrary to the express Statute of 3. E. 6. c. 10. the Homelies against the perill of 〈◊〉 ●●●●blished by the 22. and 35. Articles of our Church and by the Statute of 13 Eliz. c. 12. which confirmes our Articles as the undoubted Doctrine of the Church of England and so by consequent our Homilies 〈◊〉 contrary to Qu. Eliz. Injunctions Injunct 2 3 23 25. and the Articles to be enquired

lib 13 for lib 12 Thesauri Gaiae Papae for Gaij Leo Epist Decret Ep. 14 81 95 for 15 83 97. Aelredus Sermo 1 for Sermo 3 Koming stein for Koneigstein the chapters and pages of all which are truly vouched I shall remember you onely of these his following grosse mistakes Page 44 he quotes Origen on Philip 2 there being no such booke of his now extant Page 67 he taxeth me for quoting Ambrosij Hexaëmeron ô the ridiculousnesse of this learned Critique for Hexameroon VVhen as the printed Titles both of Ambrose and the Latine Basil are Hexaëmeron as I have quoted them not Hexameroon there being no such Latine word in any Latine Dictionary or Authour that I have ever met with Ibid page 67 he writes that St. Cyrils 5 lib in Hesai●●● cap 55 p 362 is a Non ens when as in the verie Edition of my Cyril Parisijs 1608 which himselfe doth follow it is both Ens and Verum too Ibidem he averres that Primasius saith nothing on Rom 14. yet he hath a Commentary on that chapter and on the 11 verse he writes thus Omnes enim stabimus ante tribunal Dei Deum esse Christum qui judicaturus est non dubites Scriptum est enim Vivo ego dicit Dominus quoniam mihi flectetur et genu omenis lingua confitebitur c. VVhere this bowing of every knee to Christ is referred by this Father to the day of judgement Ibidē to shew himselfe more than an ordinary Ignoramus he writes that neither Luther nor Ferus hath a Postil on Palm-sunday VVhen as Luther as you may find in his Editiō of Postils Argētorati 1533 fol 229 c. hath 3 several Postils on Palm-sunday Ferus hath no lesse then 10 Postills on that very day VVitnesse his Postillae pars 2. Antwerpiae 1554 fol 156 to 184 Lugduni 1554 fol 849 to 896. That Ferus nor Luther then have no Postills on Palme-Sunday when as they have 13 at the least is a part of the Antipuritans Legend worthy to be registred in St. Whetstones workes in which Mr. Widdowes as it seemes by this is too well read Ibidem he records that Mr. Tyndall hath nothing but a Prologue on the Philippians whereas in his English Bible which the statute of 34 35 H. 8 c 1 doth mention he hath Notes upon this very Text of Phil 2 9 10 which Mr. Widdowes it seemes hath never read where hee makes the subjection of all things unto Christ at last the onely bowing at the name of Iesus intended in that Text. Ibidem he concludes that because Petrus Mattheus writes the 〈◊〉 of the Popes Constitutions and Philip Matthaeus writes civil law ergo there is no such booke as Matthaeus his Postills which I have quoted VVhereas if he had but viewed the very two first lines of the selfe-same pag. of the Oxford Catalogue out of which he hath quoted Petr and Phil Matthaeus hee might have found Iohannes Matthaeus his Postills in Epistolas Dominicales Viteburgae 1581 reimprinted Viteburgae 1584 where there is at p 173 to 179 if Mr. Widdowes understands what Dominica Palmarum is in English a Postill on Palme-Sunday Besides him there is one M. Matthaeus Iudex who hath written Postills on all the Dominicall Epistles and on the Epistle on Palme-Sunday too printed islebij 1578 both these interpret this text of the Philippians as I have vouched them For this learned Metaphysicall Divine then to conclude that there is no such booke as Matthaeus his postils because Phil and Petr Matthaeus have writ none such is but the grosse Nonsequel of a silly Ignoramus who should have known more and written lesse Ibidem he writes that Chytraeus hath no Postills for he takes no holde that I can finde of Chrytaeus for Chytraeus which was but the Printers transposition of one letter Indeede there are no such Postils of his in the Oxford Catalogue and thence grew this errour with that of Luthers and Ferus not having Postils too But Mr. Widdowes must know that all printed bookes are not in the Oxford Catalogue I have at least 50 my selfe which the Oxford Catalogue increased much since the last Impression never mentions and among the rest David Chytraeus his Postils on the Dominicall Epistles printed Vitebergae 1576. is one where p 156 to 169 there is a Postill on Palme-Sunday where he interprets the text of Phil 2. 9● 10. as I in my Appendix doe Ibidem he writes That Mr. Charke was but a Kentish puritan When as he was a reverend learned Divine appointed by the State to dispute with Campian the Iesuite in the Tower and if any man will be pleased to peruse his Conference he shall finde him the acutest Disputant of all those learned men that conferred with him These 8 last grosse oversights worthy to be registred in the next new Impression of Ignoramus or the shippe of Fooles are included within the circumference of 15 lines And how many such like may you then expect throughout the Booke But I passe from these to worser Errours Page 72 73 he writes thus That the ring in marriage is necessarily deduced from Matth 19 v 4 5 6. The signe of the Crosse from Matth 16 24. Kneeling at the Lords Supper from Psal 95 6. Procession from Mat 28 19. The Surplesse from Rev. 19 8. Standing at the Creed from Ephes. 6. 14. The 4 cornered Cappe Risum teneatis from Ephes 4. 11 12 13 14. The penitentiall sheet which me thinkes he should never have ranked in equipage with the surplesse from Matth 11 21. And then hee concludes thus though Durandus out of whom he hath stolne it dares not doe it These signes which are expresse Scripture ô the monstrous Metaphisicall Divinity of this fanaticke Professour who dares make these thing● any thing Scripture are universall and so necessary Ceremonies of the Catholicke Church And is it not time for you good Mother to packe away this Sonne of yours not to Amsterdam or new-New-England but to Bedlam for this his mad Divinity Page 25 26. He argues that bowing at the name of Iesus is a duty of the Text and why Spell and then it 's thus by articulation At the name of Iesus every knee shall bow c. An Argumēt much like to that of the Papists Hoc est corpus meum Mat 26 26. Ergo the bread is the very reall body of Christ. Tu es Petrus c. Mat 16 18. Ergo Peter is the head they should rather say the foote because the foundation of the Church This is all he hath written to prove it a duty of the Text And this all is nothing as I have largely proved in my Appendix Page 28. Hee writes that In nomine ad nomen In the name or at the name of Iesus are both one And why so Because in Grammar In a place or at a place viz. in

name of Iesus in hell but by some speciall revelation frō the Divel or those spirit raised up from thence which long since frayed him out of his little wits To passe by his grosse falsification of Origen on Rom 14 whom he brings in writing page 54 that we must bow at the name of Iesus because he is humble when as Bishop Andrewes and himselfe confesse in the very selfe-same page and page 21 90 that Origen of all the other Fathers is against them together with his corrupting of Chrysostome page 62 line 16 17 18 and of Athanasius and the Councell of Ephesus page 76 77 in the very selfe-same manner when as neither of them writes one word of bowing at the name of Iesus in the alledged places as the perusall of them in their workes and the Survey of the Councell of Ephesus which anathematizeth those onely which did co●dore the humanity of our Saviour with his Deity and not rather Emmanuel God and man with one adoration there being neither the name Iesus nor one word of bowing much lesse of bowing at the name of Iesus in the 8. Canon of that Councell which he voucheth will fully evide●ce Nor yet to remem●er his strange Divinity page 40 That Iesus his name was given him twice once till death afterwards for ever and that the Disciples for saking and Peters denying of Christ was a death of his name Iesus Or page 59 l 10 11 12 That we must bow at the name of Iesus more then is required by Phil 2 Isay 45 or Rom 14 the chiefe texts on which this duty is though absurdly grounded which to recite alone is to confute I shall request you to take notice of 21 Scriptures which he hath mangled falsified and grossely misapplyed that so I may meet with him for his notorious slander That I have falsified 15 nay 36 Texts of Scripture and above 80 Authours which he onely writes but prove not in any one particular Page 9 l 27 he misrecites the 1 Cor 16 22 omitting the name Christ to adde more reverence to the name Iesus Page 16 l 12 13 hee writes That bowing at the name of Iesus is a duty required at Psal 95 6 O come let us worship and bow downe and kneele before the Lord our Maker As if the name Iesus which was given to our Saviour many hundred yeares after the penning of this Psalme were our Lord and Maker intended in this verse Page 27 l 17 18 he brings in the 24 Elders Rev 5 12 13 bowing at the name of Iesus in time of this life when as the text records onely that they worshipped the Lambe c. not Iesus or his name and that in heaven not on earth for ought that there appeares to contradict it Page 31 l. 18. he argues thus from Acts 3 15. Ye killed the Prince of life Ergo no name was ever so abused as the name of Iesus and therefore wee must bow at it more than at any other name Page 37 l 34 35 he falsifieth Gal 3 13 1 Cor 13 4 foysting in Iesus into them in stead of Christ when as the name Iesus is not mentioned in these texts but Christ alone Page 38 l 18 he concludes out of Acts 4 12 That Iesus is the onely name by which we are saved as if the bare name of Iesus onely not the person power or merits of Iesus the only name intended in this verse as all Expositours on it accord were our onely Saviour Yet the name Iesus is not mentioned in this verse and verse 10 doth joyne the name of Christ and Iesus together Iesus Christ of Nazareth c adding no more vertue to the one than to the other Page 38 l. 31 32 he falsifieth the 2 Cor 5 19 God was in Iesus reconciling the world to himselfe whereas the text is God was in Christ not Iesus Page 48 he misrecites 6 Scriptures together viz. Eph 1 10 19 20 21 where he reads Iesus for Christ the text being Christ not Iesus Matth 7 23 24 where the text is Lord not Iesus the 1 Cor 15 25 where the name Iesus is not once mentioned but Christ alone from verse 12 to 26 yet hee reades it Iesus c. not Christ Eph 4 7 8 Col 2 15 where he forgeth in Iesus for Christ And all to prove Iesus qua Iesus a confirming Iesus to Angels a commanding Iesus to Divels and an exalted and triumphing Iesus over Divells out of these texts which no wayes warrant his collection and stile him onely by the name of Christ or Lord not Iesus and so make quite against him Page 55 l. 10 he applies Rev 21 24 to Iesus which the text with all Interpreters expresly apply to the City the Church and new Ierusalem in the precedent verses and can be applied to no other Page 55 l 21 hee againe corrupts Ephes 1 20 21 exchanging Iesus for Christ and page 73 hee perverts no lesse than 7 severall texts together as grossely as Papistically as Durandus or any other Papist ever did Which Scriptures I shall here passe over because I have touched them before These severall Scriptures with sundry others hath this monstrously learned Divine corrupted falsified and wilfully perverted to draw on capping bowing at the name of Iesus a duty which the primitive Church and Fathers never heard of and which most Protestant Churches quite disclaime and so are Arrians Puritans Schismatickes Nonconformists Disputers against the holy Ghost yea rebels traytors enemies to Iesus and to our Soveraigne his Vice-gerent and I know not what besides if Mr. Widdowes Divinity or * Confutation may be credited which makes bowing at the names of Iesus not the adoration of our Saviour Iesus God and man to whom we yeeld all the divine honour and worship that himself requires as our prayers to him our whole dependance on him our publike and private worship of him c. testifie though we bow not superstitiously at his name a morall command a necessary an universall Ceremony which God requires in all Churches not onely for a day or a yeare but for ever c. Page 74. though few but Papists and Popish Churches ever practised it and these but lately as I shall prove anon This Sonne of yours is not only thus absurd but Popish too To omit his ridiculous Popish trash p 71 72 73 Page 34 he hath this Romish passage The Church is the place of Gods presence c. where his Priests sacrifice their owne and the militant Churches prayers and the Lords Supper to reconcile us to God offended with our daily sins ●rgo the Priests of the Church of England especially those who erect adore and cringe to Altars are sacrificing Priests and the Lords Supper is a propitiatory sacrifice sacrificed by these Priests for mens daily sins And is this your Doctrine or our Churches Mother Page 36 to 42 he often harpes on this Popish string That

large Tom 1 Prolegomenon 24. De Dignit et Majest Evang p. 387 388 writes thus That certaine Popes of Rome and among the rest Pope Iohn the 22. who granted an Indulgence for 200 dayes to all who should either bow their knees or incline their heads or knocke their breasts at the name of Iesus have taught that men are to bow their heads or knees at the naming of Iesus to represent the great humiliation and ex●●inition of Christ and that a certaine Monke was cuffed by the Divell for omitting this bowing c. And Operum Tom 3 Tract 37. Vccatum est nomen ejus Iesus p 335 he records That the name of Iesus is worthy all worship genuflection and adoration in which name Paul would have every knee to bow both of things in heaven and things in earth and things under the earth For this name whether it be pronounced with the mouth or heard with the eare or where ever it is written painted or ingraven is worthy divine worship not for the bare word writing or picture it selfe but for the signification of it as the Crosse and Image of Christ are deservedly adored with the worship of Latria for the type and mystery represented in them c. The same Doctrine we shall finde in Comelius a Lapide a Iesuite in his Commentary on Phil. 2. 9 10. and in Carolus Stengelius De SS Nomine Iesu cap 23. where he quotes this text of Phil. 2. 9 10. and the Decree of Pope Gregory the 10. informing Protestants ibid p 125 126. that Papists honor not the Letters syllables or sound of the name Iesus but the thing contained and signified together with the sound and syllables But some saith he may say Why doe we bow at the name of Iesus rather than at the name of Christ I answer because Christ is not a proper name but a declaration of Christs kingdome and power But Iesus is a proper name which he hath bought with his great paine and hath received as a reward of his labour For although this name were imposed on him in his very Circumcision and promised to him in his conception yet both these were done because he ought to doe that in his time which the name doth signiie to wit to save his people Paul therefore affirmes that this name was given to him because he actually performed this with his great paine Phil 2. He humbled himselfe therefore God hath highly exalt●d him and given him a name above every name that in the name of Iesus every knee should 〈◊〉 c. Therefore this most honourable name is given because he merited it The name it selfe is thus honoured because bee hath merited it As oft therefore as we Catholickes honour the name of Iesus by bowing the knee so oft we give unto him due and deserved honour which he hath merited with a great price so oft wee doe that we might and are bound to doe not onely 〈◊〉 of cong●●ity for the greatnesse of the benefit conferred upon us but also out of debt by reason of the will and precept of the eternall Father who hath therefore given this name unto his Sonne that in this name every knee should ●ow that all should worship this name and in worshipping should confesse that Iesus is in the glory of his Father But as oft as the heretiques who utter and heare this name without any reverence because they have not the holy Ghost doe not worship this name as oft as they refuse to bow and worship as oft as they decide others who worship and bow the knee unto it so oft they violate the precept and will of God the Father so oft they doe injury to God the Some and deny him his due honour so oft they contradict the Apostle so oft they scandalize or rather decide the Church of God Finally so oft they d●e acceptable service to the Divell who hath in an especiall manner taught them this and by them doth 〈◊〉 this impiety unto others This 〈◊〉 much more to this purpose doth this Benedictine Fr●er Stengeli●s write which I thought good in part to transcribe because its verbati●● the same with Mr. Widdowes and other late Protestants writings and Sermons to this purpose betweene whom and these there is now no difference at all in this point of ●●●ing 〈◊〉 the ●●●ing of Iesus for ought that I can finde and so they are both accorded Finally ●●●sseby Richardus Hampole his Booke De 〈◊〉 nominis Iesu with ●●●dry other Popish Authours who have written largely of this subject and found out many absurd ridiculous cabalisticall conceits and mysteries in the very letters of the name Iesus to draw more reverence and bowing to it The Popes the Church and Priests of Rome to advance this Ceremony the more have inserted this notable prayer for the bowers at the name of Iesus into the Masse of the name Iesus for which very name they have a particular Masse and Psalter as they have a Feast God who hast made the most glorious name of Iesus Christ thy onely Sonne amiable with the chiefe affection of sweetnesse to thy faithfull ones and dreadfull and terrible to evill spirits mercifully grant that all those who devoutly worship this name of Iesus on earth may receive the sweetnesse of its holy consolation in this present world and in the world to come may obtaine the joy of endlesse exultation and blisse in heaven by the same our Lord Iesus Christ thy Sonne The benefit of which Masse-prayer our moderne Advocates for bowing at the name of Iesus with all their zealous Proselites may doe well to claime This is the onely true gennine Pedegree and progresse of this much pressed Duty and admired Ceremony of bowing at the name of Iesus that I in my poore reading can finde in all antiquity If better graver or more learned Heraulds can derive its Parentage higher as some have vainly endeavoured to deduce it from the Fathers and the constantpractise of the Primitive Church when as I am confident upon good inquiry that there is no one Father no ancient Writer extant to prove or warrant what they write as the examination of their alledged testimonies will at first discover I shall be willing to be corrected and instructed by them But if they must needes concurre with mee in this its Popish Discent which I have here set downe as I presume they must since Popish Priests and Iesuites who have beene most inquisitive in discovering its originall have raised it no higher than the Popes I have recited let them now at last for very shame unlesse they intend to turne professed Iesuites and open Champions for the Romish whore contend no more for such a Duty such a Ceremony which had no other Father but the forenamed Popes no other Mother Nurse or Midwife but the Antichristiā Church of Rome with whose Popish Ceremonies Reliques Altars Images Crucifixes Genuflections