Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n word_n work_v wrath_n 216 3 7.4006 4 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
A20679 An aduertisement to the English seminaries, amd [sic] Iesuites shewing their loose kind of writing, and negligent handling the cause of religion, in the whole course of their workes. By Iohn Doue Doctor in Diuinity. Dove, John, 1560 or 61-1618.; Walsingham, Francis, 1577-1647. 1610 (1610) STC 7077; ESTC S115461 57,105 88

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

of the Saints is expressed Heb. 9. to be our Sauiour Christ the mediator of the new Testament which maketh his appearance in our behalfe Heb. 13. through him we offer our sacrifices of praiers to God Againe to the Angels God reuealeth so much concerning the affaires of men on earth as appertaineth to the ministery of those Angels and they haue the charge of men committed vnto them But it cannot be proued that the like charge is committed to Saints departed neither can the argument follow which is drawne from Angels to men That Saints departed are like the Angels in heauen is ment there onely concerning single life that they marry not as it appeareth by the text And this is not onely the exposition of Kemnitius but also of the English Seminaries themselues in their notes vpon the same place printed at Rhemes And whereas Bellarmine alledgeth for proofe that Saints departed haue the regiment of whole Prouinces because it is written Apoc. 2. He that ouer commeth shall haue power ouer nations It is to be vnderstood of the discipline and doctrine of the Church in this life whereby nations shall be conuerted but not of any gouernment of theirs after they be deceased Bellarm. The Fathers make for vs. Kemnit The Fathers were falsified by the Papists See Kemnitius at large how he satisfieth the obiections out of the Fathers Bellarm. It is also proued by many apparitions of Saints which appearing to men in dreames haue testified that particularly they did pray for vs. Kemnit This can be no proofe without testimony out of the word of God For Moses saith Deut. 13. 5. Thou shalt not hearken to the words of the Prophet or vnto the dreamer of dreames for the Lord your God proueth you to know whether yee loue the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soule c. Heb. 1. In times past God spake many waies to our Fathers by the Prophets but in these last dayes he hath spoken to vs by his Sonne And post illam postremam patefactionem non est expectanda reuelatio alterius noui dogmatis After God hath deliuered his will vnto vs this last time by his Sonne we must not looke for any latter reuelation by which any new doctrine should be reuealed vnto vs. That Saints are to be inuocated BEllarm Iob. 5. 1. Call now if any will answer thee and to which of the Saints wilt thou turne Kemnit The meaning is not that Iob in his calamity should flye to the Saints for succour but that instance could not be giuen in any Saint whom euer God punished without iust cause Bellarm. Iob. 33. 23. If there be an Angell with him one of a thousand to declare vnto man his righteousnesse then will hee haue mercy vpon him and say Deliuer him that he go not downe into the pit for I haue receiued a reconciliation Kemnit If there be present a minister of Gods word for ministers are called Angels and out of the word of God he shall shew vnto man what is right and iust and so the ministery of the word shall be applyed for comfort to the terrified and distressed conscience God will worke by this ministery repentance vnto saluation Bellarm. Exod. 32. 13. Moses praieth for the people in these words Lord remember Abraham Isaac and Israël thy seruants c. In which is to be noted that when Moses thought not himselfe sufficient to pacifie the wrath of God he was glad to flye to the helpe of the Patriarkes which Patriarkes because then being in Limbus did not ordinarily vnderstand or conceiue the praiers of the liuing therefore it was not the custome in the old Testament to say O holy Abram pray for me but onely in those daies men praied vnto God but in their praiers they alledged the merits of Saints departed that by the merits of those Saints their praiers might more easily be heard So Dauid Psalm 131. Lord remember Dauid with all his troubles And many other places are parallell vnto these Kemnit In the praiers which are recited in the old Testament oftentimes the good workes of the Patriarkes and Saints are mentioned to shew that they which so praied relyed vpon the promises and couenants which God made with the Patriarkes and Saints departed while they liued That they flye not vnto them for helpe it is plaine by their doctrine which they professe Esay 63. 16. Abraham is ignorant of vs Israel knoweth vs not yet thou ô Lord art our Father Neither doe they mention the workes of the Patriarkes in this sense as if they should say Heare vs ô Lord for their sakes because they haue deserued it at thy hands but heare vs Lord for thy promise which thou diddest make for thy oathes sake which thou diddest sweare vnto them when they beleeued thee obeyed thee and did those workes Bellarm. In the Scriptures as 1. King chap. 7. Rom. 15. c. They do pray to the lining Saints that they would pray for them Much more then is it lawfull to inuocate the dead Saints whose soules do reigne with Iesus Christ If it be not lawfull then either because they will not or because they cannot heare vs or because they vnderstand vs not or else because it is derogatory to God or to our Sauiour Christ But it cannot be said that they will not because being in heauen their charity is greater then whē they were on earth neither that they cannot because if they could being strangers and pilgrims vpon earth much more can they in heauen which is their natiue country neither that they vnderstand not forasmuch as the Angels Luk. 15. vnderstand when a sinner is conuerted but the Saints are like to the Angels as before it was proued neither that it is a dishonour vnto God or to our Sauiour Christ for then had it bene a dishonour to them to inuocate the Saints liuing Kemnit An argument cannot be drawne from those things which are done vpon earth to proue what is done in heauen without some testimony of the Scriptures For the eye hath not seene nor the care hath not heard neither can the heart of man conceiue the things which are in heauen further then by the Scriptures they are reuealed Secondly if any man should desire them which are liuing to pray for him in that manner as the Papists pray to dead Saints that by their intercession merits they may bee heard the praiers vnto the liuing were also derogatory to the Priest-hood of Iesus Christ To the other parts contained in that diuision is answered before An Answere to the Booke intituled PROTESTANT PROOFES OF CATHOLICKE RELIGION IT pleased God I published a short Treatise of perswasion to the ignorant Recusants to reconcile themselues to our Church I might happily haue perswaded them at the least to be halfe Conuerts as Saint Paul did King Agrippa to bee halfe a Christian had they not beene as a plot of ground vnapt to receiue good seed and like those
my purpose is to finde their falshood by their footing to shew how they enter in at the false doore and go not the right way to detect their sleights and iuggling casts whereby they aduance errour and falshood but stand in opposition against the truth Forasmuch therefore as if the Gospell be yet hidden it is hidden to them which are lost the Lord of his mercy take away from their disciples and followers that veile or couering which vntill this time hath continued vntaken away and remoue from them the spirit of slumber that hereafter seeing they may see The Lord of his goodnesse endue the teachers themselues with his grace that henceforth as sincere Pastors and faithfull Stewards of his word they may walke in simplicity and handle his word plainly in the declaration of the truth that they may approue themselues to euery mans conscience in the sight of God that when the chiefe Sheepheard and Archbishop of our soules shall appeare they may receiue an incorruptible crowne of glory through Iesus Christ our Lord Amen CHAP. 1. Of the Head of the Church ANd that I may first with Saint Iohn the Baptist lay the axe to the roote of the tree because the Cardinall deriueth the Popes supremacy from S. Peter let vs therefore examine by what right he entituleth S. Peter to that supremacy For his supremacy being shaken the Popes authority which is grounded vpon it cannot stand Our Sauiour vpon Saint Peter his confession where he saith Thou art the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God answered Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church It is as impossible to reduce these words into a true syllogisme or forme of argumentation as it was for the Oracles to speake when the Sonne of God had enioyned them silence or for the Aegyptians to make lice when the finger of God was against them Euery lawfull syllogisme must consist onely of three parts or termes as they call them but here are fower Petrus Petra persona Petri structura Ecclesiae the person of him that made the confession his name his confession it selfe which is called the rocke or foundation stone and the building of the Church His person and his name where it is said Tues Petrus thou art Peter the confession or foundation stone vpon this rocke the aedifice or building it selfe will I build my Church The medius terminus or argument whereby euery conclusion ought to be proued must bee one and the selfe same as well in the Minor proposition as in the Maior but here it cannot be so for it is Petra in Maiori Petrus in Minors the rocke in the Maior and Peter in the Minor as if they should conclude in this manner The rocke is the foundation of the Church but the Apostle which made this confession is Peter therefore the Apostle which made this confession is the foundation of the Church But this is not in Moode and Figure the medius terminus being not the same in both propositions Therefore if they will correct it and reduce it into a true forme they must conclude in this manner Whosoeuer is the rocke he is the foundation of the Church But the Apostle which made this confession meaning Peter is the rocke therefore the Apostle which made this confession is the foundation of the Church And then besides that they do confound the confession and the confessor S. Peters person and his doctrine which are two seuerall and distinct things the Minor is vntrue and contrary to the assertion of our Sauiour Christ For he doth not say Tues Petra thou art the rocke but tues Petrus thou art Peter nor super hunc Petrum sed super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam vpon this Peter but vpon this rocke will I build my Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So then where he saith THOV he speaketh of his person and mentioning PETER he telleth what is his name speaking of the ROCKE he iustifieth his religion being three seuerall points besides the aedifice and building of the Church whereof that religion is the foundation stone Now before we proceed any further in this argument let vs auoyde such exceptions as the aduersary bringeth against the analysing of this text First Bellarmine obiecteth that our Sauiour spake in the Syrian tongue and in that language this one word CEPHAS is nomen proprium viri commune saxi the proper name of a man and a name common to all stones as also in the Greeke tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both Peter and a stone and it is plaine in the Syriac text he said Thou art Cephas and vpon this Cephas will I build my Church And thereupon he concludeth that Cephas in the first place should not signifie his name and in the second the rocke as I deliuered in my Analysis but in both places the rocke so that there may be tres tantùm termini onely three termes or parts to make a true syllogisme and consequently that Peter is the rocke To which I reply there can be no good argument drawne from the authority of the Syriac text not onely because of the ambiguity of the word which maketh the matter doubtfull according to the grammaticall construction and very vncertaine but also because that text is disalowed by the Church of Rome whereas the Latine text out of which I made this Analysis maketh for me and is vpon paine of anathema to be receiued as authenticall and so I touch him to the quicke and slay him with his owne sword As Cephas according to Grammer signifieth both the name of a man a stone yet in this place it cannot signifie both of them because it is otherwise in the Greeke which is the originall without exception and in the vulgar Latinetranslation which do make that very plaine where the first Cephas is Peter and the second a stone and so that which is or might seeme to be ambiguous and yeeld matter of controuersie in the Syriac is cleared in these editions and all ambiguity is taken away there is no starting-hole left for the Sophister to cauell vpon Concerning the Syriac text Bellarmine maketh doubt where he writeth thus De testamento nouo maior est dubitatio Of the whole edition of the Syriac new testament there is a greater doubt whether it were written in that tongue by the Authors themselues or no Againe hee deliuereth his owne iudgement in these words Quod si editio Syriaca aetate horū patrum posterior est vt ego quidem mihi certè persuadeo non potest eius authoritas tanta esse vt cum editione Graecâ aut Latinâ meritò comparari possit vt interim illud non omittam quod non desunt etiam quaedam in eâ editione quae viris doctis pijs non admodum placeant If the Syriac edition be of lesse antiquity then these Fathers meaning Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Eusebius Athanasius others of whom there he