Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
heaven_n earth_n power_n principality_n 1,975 5 10.5828 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
A10352 A refutation of sundry reprehensions, cauils, and false sleightes, by which M. Whitaker laboureth to deface the late English translation, and Catholike annotations of the new Testament, and the booke of Discouery of heretical corruptions. By William Rainolds, student of diuinitie in the English Colledge at Rhemes Rainolds, William, 1544?-1594. 1583 (1583) STC 20632; ESTC S115551 320,416 688

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

affirmeth that no one euer so taught but euerie one taught the contrarie Thus he writeth in the same booke This truly is maruelous that no one of the fathers vvhereof the number is infinite euer spake of the Sacrament as do the Sacramentaries For none of them vseth such vvordes there is only bread and vvine or the body bloud of Christ is not there Surely it is not credible nay it is not possible vvhere as they talke againe and againe of these things but at some time at the lest once these vvordes vvould haue slipt out of their pen it is only bread or the body of Christ is not there corporally or such like But they al speake so precisely as though none doubted but that there vvere present the body bloud of Christ They al agreably and constantly vvith one mouth auouch the affirmatiue that it is there But our Sacramentaries can do nothing els but proclayme the negatiue that it is not there So Luther prince and father of this Gospel and so that Luther whose iudgmēt M.VV. preferreth before a thousand Austines a thousand Ciprians and as many churches and so at the leste more to be estemed then one M. Iewel though M.W. stand by him to helpe out the matter But this field is so large that the farther I go the farther I may therefore to breake of omitting S. Chrisostome who made 6. bookes of priesthode and neuer a one of ministerhode and therefore is not lyke to be an enemy to the sacrifice which in one part of that work he setteth forth so excellētly referring M. W. for the sacrifice to that which hath bene sayde before for the real presence to that which may by occasion be touched hereafter I wil end this matter wishinge the reader to carie in memorie M. Iewels challēge as an eternal example of his inexplicable impudency and rashnes thereby that he learne not to be moued with the bold coūtenāces of his aftercommers whose fashion is verie commonly to looke biglie when in deede settinge a syde the Tower racke Tiburne they can do nothing and then to crake vnmeasurably when besydes words and crakes and lyes they haue nothing to say which to haue bene the fashion of heretikes in his time S. Austin of old noted and we in our time finde true by experience And in this present quarel it can not be auoyded but ether Caluin Luther Beza Peter Martir Zuinglius Illyricus Bale principal Euāgelists gospellers be egregious lyers who tel vs that the fathers thus taught and thus beleeued of the Popes primacy of the sacrifice and real presence or els M. Iewel must take that to him selfe vnto whom in deede that qualitie was in a verie high degree an inseparable accidēt For in that propertie I beleeue verely he passed any one heretike that euer wrote since Christs tyme. CHAP. VIII Of Beza corruptly translating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the real presence WHEREFORE leauing M. Iewel proceede we on in order to that which foloweth that is to Bezaes trāslatiō of the wordes of S. Peter Act. 3. in defending whereof you draw neere to the vayne I looke for and shew your selfe to be a scholer of him whose challenge you aduaūce so much For you do nothing els but dally in ambiguitie of words without any regarde of truth deceauing both your reader your self You say vvhē Beza trāslated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by this quē oportet quidē coelo capi vvho must be receaued in heauen he did it onely to auoide ambiguitie of speach vvhich is found in the other quē oportet coelū capere and the sense stil remaineth one For vvhereas Peter vvil say and teach that necessarily heauen must receaue Christ vntill the times that all things be restored this sense Beza deliuered most faithfullie in most conuenient vvordes For if heauen shal receaue Christ then necessarie it is that Christ be receaued of heauen vvhich thing cōmon sense might haue taught you For tel me I pray you M. Martin if the schole receaue and conteyne you are you not receaued conteyned of the schole Hauing obteyned thus much you fal into an idle talke that actiues or deponents may be rendered by passiues by example of Cicero whereof no man doubteth then cōclude that S. Gregorie Nazianzene doth affirme Christū 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This being the entier summe of your discourse gladly would I now learne of the reader whether he vnderstandeth hereby what you would say or what you go about to proue and reproue forsooth that the sense in a Greke writer is not hindered if a verbe deponent or actiue making the sentence doubtful and applicable to diuerse senses for playner vnderstanding in Latin be turned into a verbe passiue For so did Cicero in translating a sentence of Plato and so might you do in translating a sentence of S. Paule animalis homo non percipit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ea quae sunt spiritus spiritual things are not perceaued of a carnall man vvhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a verbe deponent in Greke is vvell expressed in English by a verbe passiue You say wel and like a good scholer But is this al that M. Martin wēt about to shew and for which he found fault with Beza Certes it is al for ought I can cōceaue by your maner of defence but the thing it selfe is far otherwise For first although in common prophane writers where ordinarily in wordes and phrases there lieth no hid secrets or misteries to expresse doubtful Greke by vndoubtful Latin when if there be committed an error it importeth not greatly this is not so material yet in the word of God where ambiguous speaking yeldeth diuers senses and perhaps bothe or not that one which is taken principallie entended there for any mā of purpose to restraine that which the holy Ghost hath leaft at large it is to saucy and malapert if it be not wicked and impious For what if the meaning of Sainte Peter be here not that heauen should take Christ but that Christ should take heauen to rule and gouerne it euen to the end of the world according as els-where it is sayde Al things are deliuered me of my father to me is geuen al povver in heauen in earth againe thou hast put al things vnder his feete setting him on thy right hād aboue all principalitie and potestate and povver and domination and euery thinge that is named not onely in this vvorld but also in that to come But you wil say this is a false sense Suppose it be as perhaps it is not wil you take vpon you by Ciceroes authority as Beza doth oftētimes by Homers and Ouids to limite that which the Euangelist hath leaft at at large And see by this rash audacitie what confusion you bring and what a hotchpoch you make of the scriptures Suppose some other be
apostasie from Christ these later hundred yeres vpon which as I haue said dependeth the verie substance of this his booke is an absurditie in Christian religion so foule monstruous and abominable that it can not be defended of any man except he first of al deny the very incarnation of Christ his preaching his death and passion his eternal kingdome priesthod the sending of the holy Ghost the entier summe of all whatsoeuer hath bene written by the Apostles or foretold by the prophetes For to what end was Christes incarnation but to ioyne him selfe vnto a Church from which he would neuer be separated To what end was his preaching but to erect and instruct such a Church To what end his death and passion but to redeeme sanctifie such a Church leaue vnto it an euerlasting remedie to blot out her sinnes and offences How is he an eternal king who hath not an eternal people obeyng him and obseruing his lawes how an eternal priest whose priesthod and sacrifice for so many hundred yeres was applied to none auailed for none and to what pu●pose was the holy Ghost sent but to remayne vvith the church for euer and leade her into al truth And vvhat is the summe of the gospels but a declaration that Christ by him self by the holy Ghost by his Apostles founded such a church in vvhich his wil should euermore be openly preached his sacramentes rightly euermore ministred true faith and religion alvvaies preserued a certain vvay for conuerting infidels to the faith for cōfuting errors and heresies be continued and al true Christiās maintained by lawful past●rs in vnitie of his true faith against al blastes of vaine doctrine euen vntil his coming to the general iudgement Finally that such a citie and common welth it should be so cōstant so strōg so vnmoueable that it should vpholde the glorie and name of Christ ● gainst Princes against Potentates against Kings and Emperours against al the force of the world the deuil though they al with might and mayne applyed their whole power to the suppressing and rooting out of it And the self same is the effect of al the auncient Prophetes that the preachers of Christes catholike church should neuer cease day nor night to preach the truth that howsoeuer darknes couered al other nations yet the light there of should neuer be extinguished that the spirite of God and truth of doctrine should neuer depart from it but remayne in it frō one generation to an other euen for euer that it should neuer be brought in to a narow roume as was the synagoge of the Iewes but should be diffunded thorough al prouīces of the earth that the course of heauen of the sunne of day and night should rather faile then priests and preachers of the new testament that albeit other monarchies had an end were altered as the Assyrians the Persians the Macedonians the Romanes yet this should neuer suffer any such a teration but should stand vnchange●ble for euer Wherefore to affirme that this Church hath failed is to affirme that Christ his Apostles Prophetes are al liers that what soeuer is written in the old and new testamēt is all vaine and fabulous For touch●ng the straunge deuise of an inuisible church which some of them haue of late imagined it is nothing els but a mere poetical fansie a fansie vvhich consisteth only vpō their ovvne vvord and credite for profe vvhereof they neuer yet brought any scripture coūcel father doctor chronicler or writer nor euer shal be able a fansie by which any sect neuer so horrible may defend them selues to be a Church as wel as they a fansie framed and patched together of mere contrarieties and contradictions a fantastical opiniō which being long since abandoned of the learned protestants in other countries as most vvicked and pestilēt is novv I knovv not vpon vvhat miserie and necessitie receaued of our English Diuines VVhensoeuer vve thinke of the church saith Melanchthon let vs beholde the company of such men as are gathered together vvhich is the visible church nether let vs dreame that the elect of God are to be found in any other place then in this visible societie For nether vvil God be called vpon or acknovvledged othervvise then he hath reuealed him self nether hath he reuealed him self els vvhere saue only in the visible church in vvhich only the voice of the gospel soundeth Nether let vs imagine of any other inuisible church but let vs knovv that the voice of the gospel must sound openly amongst men according as it is vvritten Psal 18 Their sound is gone forth in to al the earth Let vs knovv that the ministery of the gospel must be publike and haue publike assemblies as it is sayd Ephes 4. Let vs ioyne our selues to this company let vs be citizens and members of this visible congregation as vve are commaunded in the 25. and 83. Psalme VVhich places and other the like speake not of Platoes Idea but of a visible church c. And in sundry other places refelling this mad fansie he euer concludeth Necesse est fateri esse visibilem Ecclesiam de qua filius Dei c. It is of necessitie that vve confesse a visible church whereof the sonne of God saith Matth. 18 Dic ecclesiae Tel the church vvhereof Paule saith 1. Cor. 4 VVe are made a spectacle to the vvhole vvorld to angels and to men VVhat a spectacle I beseech you is that vvhich is not seene and whereunto tendeth this monstruous speach vvhich denieth the visible church Delet omnia testimonia antiquitatis abolet iudicia facit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infinitam illam Cyclopum politiā in qua● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vt est apud Euripidem It abolisheth al testimonies of antiquitie it taketh avvay al iudgementes it causeth an endles confusion and induceth a common vvelth of vnruly ruffians or Atheists vvherein no one careth for an other And Caluin interpreteth the article of our creede Credo Ecclesiam Catholicā of the Catholike visible Church saith furthermore that the knowledge therof is so necessary that there is no hope of life by grace in this world except we be conceaued brought forth nourished a●d ruled by her so long as we liue Adde quod extra eius gremium nullae est sp●randa peccatorū remissio neque vlla salus teste Iesai c. 37. vers 32. Ioel. ca. 2. v. 32. Ezechiel ca. 13. v. 9. psal 106. v. 4. Adde here vnto that out of the lap of this visible church no pardon of synnes is to be hoped for nor any saluation as vvitnesse Isaie Ioel Ezechiel and the Prophete Dauid And Oecolāpadius writing vpō the Prophete Isaie and those wordes ca. 2. Fluent ad eum omnes gentes Create is the dignitie saith he of the Christian church aboue the synagoge of the Ievves in that it shal
bloud of the holy virgin framed him selfe flesh vvithout the seede of man can not he in the sacrament make of bread his ovvne body and of vvine vvater his bloud No mary can he not saith M.W. for that is against reason and so he should haue tvvo bodies one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But S. Damascene contēning such ethnical ioyes proceedeth cōcludeth that as god in the beginning said let the earth bring forth greene hearbes and hetherto being holpen and strengthened by that precept it so doth so god said this is my body and this is my bloud and doe this in commemoration of me and by his omnipotent cōmaundement it is vvrought vvhich thing onely faith can conceaue Hovv shal this be done saith the B. Virgin the Archangel Gabriel ansvvered the holy Ghost shal come vpon thee and the povver of the most high shal ouershadovv thee And novv demaūdest thou hovv bread is made the body of Christ and vvine and vvater his bloud I ansvvere in like maner that the holy Ghost commeth vpon it vvorketh that vvhich passeth the capacitie of reason and reach of vnderstanding Whereby you see that hovv soeuer circumscript remained circumscript and visible visible S. Damascene neuer intended by such visible folies so to circumscribe our f●●th or subiecte our religion to humaine reason that Christes presence should be excluded out of the sacrament or the sacramēt should be esteemed a Zuinglian figure vvhich to induce you take much paine but to very smale effect CHAP. IX VVherein is refelled M. VV. ansvvere to certaine places of S. Chrysostome touching the real presence and sacrifice IN the last chapter vve had an example hovv sufficiently you are vvont to cōfirme your ovvne faith by scripture reason fathers here you geue vs an example hovv substantially you ansvvere the fathers vvhich vve vse for confirmation of our faith Tvvo places M. Martin obiected out of S. Chrysostom against your geometrical opinion of Christes body in one place you auoyde them so as you geue out plaine demonstration that you neuer cōsidered them in the author him selfe but only tooke the answere at deliuery from M. Iewel without any farther search Thus you write To Chrysostom teaching that Christ both leaft his flesh vvith vs and ascended hauing the same vvith him I ansvvere that Christ placed his flesh in heauen and neuerthelesse leaft vs a sacrament of that flesh And our fayth enioyeth the same euermore present For the verie substance of his flesh Christ no more leaft in earth then Elias leaft his body vvhen he ascended in to heauen For so Chrisostom vvrote a litle before that Elias vvas aftervvardes double there vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath Tell me I pray you M. Martyn vvas that Elias body in earth vvhen he leaft his cloke to Elizeus you vvill not say so So true it is vvhich Chrisostome vvriteth that Christ hath left his flesh vnto vs symbolically and yet hath caried the same in to heauen corporally This is your answere which I say you rather allow vs as may be thought because Maister Iewell applieth the same to the selfe same place albeit in my opinion els-where he geueth you a better For labouring to answere the place of S. Ciprian de caena Domini Panis iste quem dominus c. This bread vvhich our lord gaue to his disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the almightie povver of the vvord of Christ is made flesh after a number of phrases alleaged against the other partes of this sentēce cōming to the last is made flesh he sheweth that nether this proueth the real presēce that hystore of lyke phrases For S. Aust saith nos Christi facti sumus vve are made Christes Leo saith Corpus regenerati fit caro crucifixi the body of the man that is regenerate is made the flesh of Christ that vvas crucified Beda saith nos ipsi corpus Christi effecti sumus vve our selues are made the body of Christ Origen saith in like maner of speach spiritus sanctus non in turturem vertitur sed colūba fit the holy ghost is not changed into a turtell but is made a doue Thus if you had answered that Christ departing tooke his flesh with him really leaft his flesh behinde him allegorically that is the Christian people his church which S. Paul many times calleth his bodye that had bene more probable more to S. Chrisostoms discourse you see what doctors you might alleage for it thē to say that Christ tooke away with him his flesh really leaft the same with vs symbolically that is bread and wyne which when we receaue at the supper we remember perhaps that Christe had flesh But because it was ether your chaunce or choise to geue vs the other let vs see how handsomly you frame it vnto S. Chrisostoms text The summe of your answere is that as Helias ascendinge leaft his cloke which for certeine reasons was called Elias so our Sauiour ascending leaft vs bread wyne which is a signe of his body for some reasōs is likewise called by the name of his body but was no more his body thē the cloke was Elias And are ye not ashamed thus to dally abuse the reader Or can your ignorāce be so grosse as to thinke that this is S. Chrisost meaning Or cā your reader otherwise deeme of you then as of a man altogether rechlesse what you say if euer he reade the place in S. Chrisostome him self For so far of is it that S. Chrisostome hath any such thing that contrarywise he ouerthroweth most strōgly this your folly and vehemently vrgeth the cleane contrary First touching Elias he hath some of those wordes which you alleage As a great inheretance saith he Elizeus receaued the cloke and truly it vvas a verie great inheritance And aftervvardes that Elias vvas double There vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath meaning as it is plaine that he was taken vp in body soule and remained beneath in power and operation for so much as by the cloke Elizeus wrought strange myracles such as Elias him selfe did before And so S. Chrisostome saith expresly propterea in coelum ascendens nihil aliud quā melotem discipulo reliquit Therefore Elias ascending in to heauē leaft to his disciple nothing els but his cloke And would he make a like comparison and say the same of our Sauiour Let vs heare his wordes Thus he cōmeth to speake of Christ quid igitur si vobis demonstrauero quid aliud quod illo multo maius c. vvhat then vvil you say if I shevv you an other maner of thing much greater thē that vvh●ch al vve haue receaued vvho so euer haue bene made partakers of the holy misteryes Elias in deed leaft his cloke
question Elizeus might haue and had no doubt his minde in heauen with Elias by your commentarie and sense far greater was the facte of Elias then that of Christ For the cloke was a far better and more liuely figure of Elias then youre bread and wine is of Christ By it Elizeus receaued greate grace strength as writeth S. Chrisostome as by the which he fought agaynst the deuill and vanquished him That your bread should geue any grace it is agaynst your whole doctrine and Zuinglius laboureth to proue it at large in sundrie places callinge it papisticall to say that any sacrament euen baptisme doth aliquid momenti conferre ad sanctificationem aut remissionem peccatorum profite any iote to sanctifie or take avvay synne Elizeus by that cloke wrought straunge miracles so did you by your figuratiue bread neuer nor neuer shall so longe as the worlde standeth Briefly whereas Elizeus cloke cariynge with it such vertue and power was a thing surmounting the abilitie and reach of man and could not be done but by the omnipotencie of god your bread being nothing but a signe or banner as it were a may-pole or token of a tauerne by Zuinglius his owne confession the king of Fraunce or Spaine can make ten thousande as good And the truth is they can make much better because theirs do no harme wheras yours leade men the hye way to damnatiō Wherefore youre answere to this place of S. Chrisostome is to to fond and childish And hereby we may haue a gesse how substanciallye you are like to deale with the next which is taken out of the same father I must needes write it doune somewhat at large for the readers better vnderstanding of vs both It is in his thirde booke de sacerdotio where he setteth forth the high estate of the priestes of the new Testament and that acte wherein priesthode especiallye consisteth that is the sacrifice thus he writeth This priesthode it selfe is exercised in earth but is to be referred to the order and revv of thinges celestiall and that for good reason because no mortall man no angell no archangell no creature but the holy Ghost him self framed this order Terrible vvere the thinges dreadfull vvhich vvere before the tyme of grace in the lavv of Moyses as vvere the litle bells pomegranats pretious stones in the breast of the prieste the mitre golden plate sancta sanctorum c. But if a man consider these thinges vvhich the tyme of grace hath brought to vs he vvil iudge all those thinges vvhich I called terrible and dreadfull to be but light and though glorious yet not comparable vvith the glorie of the nevv testament as S. Paule saith This being laide before as it were a preface or preparatiue to that which foloweth he then cōmeth to that place out of which M. W. culleth certaine wordes For sayth he vvhen thou seest our Lord sacrificed and the prieste earnestlie intent to the sacrifice and pouring out his prayers and the people about him imparted and made red vvith that pretious bloud thinkest thou thy self to conuerse amongest mortall men and remaine on the earth And immediatly ô miraculum ô Dei benignitatem ô miracle ô singular goodnes of God he that sitteth vvith his father aboue at the self same moment of tyme is handled vvith all mens handes and deliuereth him self to those that vvill receaue and imbrace him and this is done playnlie in the sight of all men vvithout any deceate or illusion Of this place M. Martin inferreth that M.W. reasoning Christ is in heauen ergo not in the Sacramet is wicked refuted by the old fathers But M.W. replyeth no. And I vvil geue you your ansvvere sayth he out of the same place for here Chrysostome affirmeth that vve see our Lord sacrificed in the supper and the people imparted and made red vvith the bloud and that this is done in the open sight of all that are presente But vvho seeth ether our Lord tru●y sacrificed or one droppe of bloud vvith vvhich the people are made red so as all see it as Chrisostome vvriteth Therefore as vve see Christ sacrificed and the people embrued vvith his bloud so vve receaue him in our handes In these vvordes Chrysostome vvould both amplifie the dignitie of priestes vnto vvhom Christ gaue povver to minister the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud and make the people afrayde that they vvhich come to this supper should bring vvith them godlie and religious myndes as though they should take Christ him selfe in their handes The substance of the answere is this Chrysostome in the same place sayth we see Christ offered which in truth is not so but by a figuratiue speach therefore when he saith Christ is in heauen and in the Sacrament it is not simplie true but by like phrase and figure But whereunto then tende al these great wordes and perswasions of this father to honour the priests office and make the people afrayed and were there priestes in the church in those days No. but by priestes you must vnderstand m●nisters and then a simili by the sacrifice he speaketh of that is the masse you must vnderstand the Communiō that is by Catholike rel●gion you must vnderstande heresie and by light dark●es But I wil go thorough the branches of this answere in order First whereas you make that a thing most assured and certaine that no man seeth Christ offered except you meane in your English supper you are greatly deceaued For in the church Catholike we see Christ offered and that not in phrase of speach only as the protestāts may be said to do iniurie to Christ when they abuse his image but in veritie and truth of doctrine And S. Chrysostome with the rest of the fathers neuer thought or spake otherwise How oft hath S. Chrisostome qu●d summo honore dignum est id tibi ●n terra ●stendam That vvhich deserueth most honor that vvil I shevv thee on earth and in the same place The royal body of Christ is in heauē vvhich novv in earth is set before thee to be seene I shevv vnto thee not angels not archangels not heauens not heauen of heauens but I shevv thee the verie Lord him selfe of al these Perceauest thou not hovv not only thou seest in earth and touchest but receauest also the soueraine and principall thing that is And in the same place This body vvhich thou seest on the altar the vvise men adored in the manger But it were tedious to note out such places which are common in euery booke This rather I would wishe M. W. to vnderstand that where it hath pleased God in certaine creatures to exhibite his presence after a more special and singular sort there in a more special and singular maner truely we may ought to beleeue that we see our Lord. God is by essence power and operation present in euerie creature yet in seing a