Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	worship_v	write_v	yield_v	28	3	6.8906	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10345	The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points, of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministerie of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the masse, with other controuerises of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouernment ... Penned by Iohn Rainoldes, according to the notes set downe in writing by them both: perused by Iohn Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise intitled, Six conclusions touching the Holie Scripture and the Church, writen by Iohn Rainoldes. With a defence of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein.	Rainolds, John, 1549-1607.; Hart, John, d. 1586. aut; Rainolds, John, 1549-1607. Sex theses de Sacra Scriptura, et Ecclesia. English. aut	1584 (1584)	STC 20626; ESTC S115546	763,703	768

not begotten or borne Hart. Hée séemeth to haue meant it And Torrensis who gathered S. Austins Confession out of all his workes alleageth these places to proue that Christians ought to belieue manie things which haue come to vs from the Apostles themselues deliuered as it were by hand although they bee not written expresly in scriptures Rainoldes The Iesuit Torrensis dooth great wrong herein to the truth of God to S. Austins credit and to you who reade him And yet with such a sophisme in the word expresly that if it should be laid vnto his charge he would wash his handes of it as Pilate did of Christes blood For he alleageth those places of S. Austin thereby to proue Traditions as though we had receiued that doctrine touching God by tradition vnwritten not by the written word S. Austin no such matter But dealing with an Arian who required the verie word consubstantiall to be shewed in scripture doth tell him that the thing it selfe is there founde though not that word perhaps Wherevpon he presseth him in like sort with the word vnbegotten which the Arian hauing giuen to God the Father and defending it S. Austin replieth that as he had termed the Father vnbegotten well although the word not written so might the Sonne also be termed consubstantiall sith the scripture proueth the thing meant therby And as with this Arian so with their bishop Maximinus Who hauing himself termed God the Father vnbegotten or vnborne denied the holie Ghost to be equall to the Sonne because it is not written that he is worshipped To the which cauill of his S. Austin answereth that although it be not written in flat termes yet is it gathered by necessarie consequence of that which is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God the holy Ghost is God therefore to bee worshipped Thus S. Austins meaning was of these pointes that the scripture teacheth them Whereby you may perceiue the fraude of Torrensis Who saying that they are not expresly written in the scriptures left him selfe this refuge that hee might say they are not in expresse wordes though for sense and substance they are in the scriptures And yet by referring that title to traditions induceth his reader to thinke that they are taught by tradition not by scripture A doctrine which Arians will clappe their handes at that the Sonne of God is not by scripture of one substance with the Father But let it be far from you M. Hart to thinke so prophanely of the word of God And if you rest so much on Doctors of your owne side rest here on Thomas of Aquine rather who saith that concerning God wee must say nothing but that which is founde in the holie scripture either in words or in sense Which as he confirfirmeth by Denys and Damascen so was it the common iudgement of the Fathers of S. Austin chiefly as his bookes touching the Trinitie doo shew And in the conclusion thereof for euident proofe of that which you denied he giueth the name of the rule of faith to that which is plainly set downe in scripture of the Trinitie Wherfore the scripture cōpriseth the rule of faith for that point And as for that point so for all the rest which in that very booke whereof we spake S. Austin noteth It remaineth therfore that S. Austin meant not by the authoritie of the church more then he signified by plainer places of the scriptures Hart. Yes his own words in that verie sentence doo yéeld sufficient proofe me thinkes that he did For if he signified by plainer places of the scriptures as much as he meant by the authoritie of the church then was it idle when he had named the one to adde the other to it chiefly in such sort as that is added by S. Austin For both the coniunction the places of scriptures and the authoritie of the church should import thinges different and I may say of wordes as the Philosopher saith of things That is done in vaine by more that may be done by fewer Rainoldes Nothing is done in vaine that is done to edifie The church might well be mentioned as an interpreter of the worde though it teach not any thing beside the word of God The people of Israel did beleeue the Lord and his seruaunt Moses yet Moses did nothing but that the Lorde commaunded him The wise man doth charge his sonne to hearken to the instruction of his father and forsake not the doctrine of his mother yet they both the father and mother teach one lesson the chiefest wisedome the feare of God The same is fulfilled in this Moses and the Lord or rather in this mother and our heauenly Father of whom it hath bene said well He cannot haue God to be his Father who hath not the church to be his mother For God hauing purposed to make vs his children and heires of life eternall as he prepared his word to be first the séede the immortall seed of which we are begotten a new afterward the milke the sincere milke whereby wee béeing borne grow so he ordeined the church by her ministerie to teach it as it were a mother first to conceaue and bring foorth the children afterward to nourish them as babes new borne with her milke Which appeareth as by others so chiefly by S. Paul who traueiled of them in childbirth whom he sought to conuert and when they were new borne he nourished them with milke to set before our eyes the duetie of the church and all the churches Ministers in bearing children vnto Christ. Now the milke which the church giueth to her children shée giueth it out of her brestes and her two brestes are the two testaments of the holie scriptures by S. Austins iudgement the old Testament and the new S. Austin therefore saying the rule of faith is receiued of the authoritie of the church meant not that the church should deliuer any thing but onely what shee draweth out of the holie scriptures Hart. Not for milke perhaps which babes are to sucke but for strong meate wherewith men are nourished For mothers féede not their children being growne with mylke out of theyr brestes Rainoldes But S. Austin addeth that the holy scriptures haue both milke for babes and strong meat for men milke in plainer thinges and easier to be vnderstood strong meate in harder and greater mysteries Yea where Christ said that euerye Scribe which is taught vnto the kingdome of heauen is lyke vnto an housholder who bringeth foorth out of his treasure thinges both newe and olde S. Austin iudgeth that hée meant by newe thinges and olde the olde and newe testament Wherefore sith euery pastor and teacher of the church is meant you graunt by this Scribe it foloweth by S. Austin that the meate which he is to fetch out of his storehouse for the

should now be subiect to him who raigned in the imperiall citie as it had béene afore time to the Emperour In this consideration he moued warre against Stephen the successour of Zacharie Pope Stephen remembring his predecessors benefite bestowed on king Pipine went to him into France and putting him in minde of Zacharies good turne prayed him to vndertake the quarell of S. Peter and of the common wealth of Rome against the Lombards Yea in an assemblie of the Nobles of France whom Pipine called together to know what they would say thereto the Pope did not on●ly exhort them to warre that they might recouer Rauenna and the Emperours land from the Lombards but also was importu●●te with them that they should not restore it to the Emperour For he said the Emperour was vnworthie of it because hee had forsaken the defense of Italie and was an enimie to the Church But if that king Pipine would either doo the dutie of a thankfull man or prouide for his soule health or rewarde the Popes labour he should bestow Rauenna and the dominion of it with the rest of that dition by way of gift vpon S. Peter This sermon as soone as Pope Stephen had made the French men agréed to warre against the Lombards Pipine protested that if he conquered them he would for obteining the forgiuenesse of his sinnes giue Rauenna with the dominion and dition ioyning to it vnto S. Peter his successou●s According to which vow when he was come into Italy and the Emperour sent him Embassadours with presents desiring him if he recouered that dition and dominion to graunt it vnto him and not vnto the Pope he answered that being moued thereunto not with humane rewardes but with desire of meriting the fauour of God he had receyued the church of Rome into protection because he was perswaded that it would be auailable to the saluation of his soule and the forgiuenes of his sinnes and sith hee had sworne that he would graunt giue it vnto S. Peter and his successours therefore he must performe it Which as he saide so he did Neither did he geue it vnto them more willingly then his sonne Charles the great confirmed the gift and added more to it when he had made a full conquest of the Lombards brought into subiection the kingdom of Italy Howbeit though the Popes were now become mightie with spoyles of the Emperour and had cast off his yoke from them yet were they still subiect to Charles the great king of Italie and France whom afterwarde they called the Emperour of the Romanes as the other the Greeke Emperour For though Charles gaue the countries to the Pope yet hee reserued the right soueraintie and roialtie thereof to him selfe And when his race decaying Otho the great had gotten the Italian kingdome Rome and the rest of the Popes dominions regarded the Pope as Prince of the common wealth but the king or Emperour as their soueraine Lord and did yéeld tributes and seruices to him So that the Pope was but a vasall to the Emperour and held of him in fée The chiefest meanes whereby they cast of this yoke also was excommunication not Christian but Papall excommunication such as they had practized against the Gréeke Emperour Pope Gregorie the seuenth was the beast that did it The occasion was the giuing of Bishoprickes and church-liuings which the Popes themselues had graunted to the Emperours Charles and Otho yea the giuing of the Bishopricke of Rome and choosing Popes But when they had gotten of them that they sought and were growne lustie and fatt by their meanes they saw that the giuing of Bishoprickes and church-liuings did abate that power to which they aspired Wherefore vnder colour that the Emperours gaue them not fréely but for mony they taught that lay men ought not to giue them at all and cursed both the giuers and receiuers of them Hereupon there arose great strife betwéene the Pope and the Emperour Henrie the third in the flames whereof Pope Gregorie the seuenth did by the right of S. Peters authoritie depriue him of his whole Empire discharge his subiects of their oth and forbidde them to obey him The Princes of Germanie not knowing the boundes either of S. Peters authoritie or of the Popes thought them selues bound to disobey their Emperour and so rebelled against him Pitifull and lamentable were the griefes and contumelies which the poore Emperour was faine to endure betweene the Pope and Papistes while sundrie waies he sought to retaine his state But in fine Rodulph a Duke one of his subiectes was chosen Emperour against him The Pope to strengthen Rodulph sent him a kingly crowne and pricking him forward to defend valiantly the Church against Henrie did graunt in the name of Peter and Paule a pardon and forgiuenes of all sinnes both in this life and in the life to come to all that were obedient and faithfull vnto him When that would not s●rue for the newe Emperour was staine by Henrie in the field his owne naturall children were raised against their father first Conrade the eldest then Henrie the next Which Henrie spoiled him at last of the Empire and brought him to such miserie that he was faine to begge meat and drinke of the Bishop of Spier in a Church which him selfe had built promising to earne it by doing there a clerkes duetie for hee could serue the quire And not obteining that he pined away and died for sorow This dreadfull example of Henrie the third aduaunced much the credit of the Popes authoritie The more because that when Vecilo the chiefest Bishop of the Germanes had denyed in the time of those sturres and troubles that the Emperour might be depriued of his crowne and kingdom by the Pope there was a Councel gathered in which the Popes legate being present at it Vecilo was condemned of heresie for that opinion For when the doctrine also was receiued besids the practise that the Pope might lawfully depose kings and Emperours it made the tallest cedars of Libanus to shake and to feare the bramble least fyre should come out from him and consume them Which appeered in Henrie the fourth the next Emperour Who though he began to tread his fathers steppes and tooke Pope Paschal prisoner whereby they grewe to composition confirmed by the Popes othe that Bishops and Abbats chosen by free voices should be inuested with ring and staf●e by the Emperour without Simonie and being so inuested might lawfully receiue consecration of their archbishop but he who were chosen by the clergie and people and not inuested by the Emperour should be consecrated of no man yet when he was set at libertie againe and breaking his couenants 〈…〉 with open periurie condemned both the graunt which he had made to the Emperour and the Emperour himselfe and that with the consent of many Bishops of sundrie prou●●●es

which they did gather of those wordes then might we know the times whereof our Sauiour saith that it is not for man to knowe them And vpon this reason S. Austin doth reproue that fansie of sixe thousand yeares as rash and presumptuous Hart. So doo we also For Lindan and Prateolus doo note it in Luthers and Melanchthons Chronicles as a Iewish heresie Rainoldes Good reason when Luther and Melanchthon write it But when Irenaeus Hilarie Lactantius and other Fathers write it what doo they note it then Hart. Suppose it were an ouersight But what néedes all this As who say you douted that we would maintaine the Fathers in those things in which they are conuicted of error by the scriptures Rainoldes I haue cause to dout it For though there be no man lightly so profane as to professe that he will doo so yet such is the blindnes o● mens deuotion to Saintes there haue béene heretofore who haue so done and are still There is a famous fable touching the assumption of the blessed virgin that when the time of her death approched the Apostles then dispersed throughout the world to preach the gospell were taken vp in cloudes and brought miraculously to Ierusalem to be present at her funerall This tale in olde time was writen in a booke which bare the name of Melito an auncient learned Bishop of Asia though he wrote it not be like But whosoeuer wrote it he wrote a lye saith Bede because his words gaine say the wordes of S. Luke in the actes of the Apostles Which Bede hauing shewed in sundrie pointes of his tale he saith that he reherseth these thinges because he knoweth that some beleeue that booke with vnaduised rashnesse against S. Lukes autoritie So you sée there haue béene who haue beléeued a Father yea perhaps a rascall not a Father against the scriptures And that there are such still I sée by our countrymen your diuines of Rhemes who vouch the same fable vpon greater credit of Fathers then the other but with no greater truth Hart. Doo you call the assumption of our Ladie a fable What impietie is this against the mother of our Lord that excellent vessell of grace whom all generations ought to call blessed But you can not abide her prayses and honours Nay you haue abolished not onely her greatest feast of her assumption but of her conception and natiuitie too So as it may bee thought the diuell beareth a special malice to this woman whose seede brake his head Rainoldes It may be thought that the diuell when he did striue with Michael about the bodie of Moses whom the Lord buried the Iewes knew not where did striue that his bodie might bee reuealed to the Iewes to the entent that they might worship it and commit idolatrie But it is out of doubt that when he moued the people of Lystra to sacrifice vnto Paul and Barnabas and to call them Gods he meant to deface the glory of God by the too much honouring and praysing of his Saintes We can abide the prayses of Barnabas and Paule but not to haue them called Gods We can abide their honours but not to sacrifice vnto them Wee know that the diuell doth beare a speciall malice both to the woman and to the womans seed But whether he doth wreake it more vpon the séede by your sacrificing of prayses and prayers to the woman or by our not sacrificing let them define who know his policies The Christians of old time were charged with impietie because they had no Gods but one This is our impietie For whatsoeuer honour and prayse may bee giuen to the Saintes of God as holy creatures but creatures we doo gladly giue it We thinke of them all and namely of the blessed virgin reuerently honourably We desire our selues and wish others to folow her godly faith and vertuous life We estéeme her as an excellent vessell of grace We call her as the scripture teacheth vs blessed yea the most blessed of all women But you would haue her to be named and thought not onely blessed her selfe but also a giuer of blessednesse to others not a vessell but a fountaine or as you entitle her a mother of grace and mercy And in your solemne prayers you doo her that honour which is onely due to our creator and redeemer For you call on her to defend you from the enimie and receiue you in the houre of death Thus although in semblance of wordes you deny it yet in déede you make her equall to Christ as him our Lord so her our Ladie as him our God so her our Goddesse as him our King so her our Queene as him our mediator so her our mediatresse as him in all thinges tempted like vs sinne excepted so her deuoide of all sinne as him the onely name whereby we must be saued so her our life our ioy our hope a very mother of orphans an aide to the oppressed a medicine to the diseased and to be short all to all Which impious worship of a Sainte because you haue aduanced by keping holy dayes vnto her the feastes of her conception natiuitie assumption therefore are they abolished by the reformed Churches iustly For the vse of holy dayes is not to worship Saintes but to worship God the sanctifier of Saintes As the Lorde ordeined them that men might meete together to serue him and heare his worde Hart. Why keepe you then still the feastes of the Apostles Euangelists other Saintes and not abolish them also As some of your reformed or rather your deformed Churches haue doon Rainoldes Our deformed Churches are glorious in his sight who requireth men to worship him in spirite truth though you besotted with the hoorish beauty of your synagogues doo scorne at their simplenesse as the proude spirite of Mical did at Dauid when he was vile before the Lord. The Churches of Scotland Flanders France and others allow not holy dayes of Saintes because no day may be kept holy but to the honour of God Of the same iudgement is the Church of England for the vse of holy dayes Wherefore although by kéeping the names of Saintes dayes we may séeme to kéepe them to the honour of Saintes yet in déede we kéepe them holy to God onely to prayse his name for those benefits which he hath bestowed on vs by the ministerie of his Saintes And so haue the Churches of Flanders and Fraunce expounded well our meaning in that they haue noted that some Churches submit them selues to their weakenesse with whome they are conuersant so farre foorth that they keepe the holy dayes of Saintes though in an other sorte nay in a cleane contrarie then the Papists doo Hart. But if you kéepe the feastes of other Saintes in that sorte why not

of Constantinople to haue bene meant by Gregorie it is now declared in your Gratian too The Patriarke was too loftie to confesse himselfe subiect to the Pope he sought to make the Pope his subiect Hart. Perhaps he had sought it before but not then For certainely S. Gregorie saying that the Church of Constantinople is subiect to the See of Rome addeth that Eusebius the Bishop of the same citie doth confesse it still Rainoldes There was no Eusebius Bishop of that citie in all Gregories time And they who were Bishops first Iohn then Cyriacus did vsurpe the title of vniuersall Patriarke as Gregorie himselfe declareth Wherefore either Gregorie wrote more then was true to chéere vp his subiects or some hath chopt into him that which he wrote not to aduaunce the credit of the See of Rome But howsoeuer he thought all Bishops subiect to it if any fault be found in them perhaps as S. Peter was subiect to S. Paule and Christians are one to an other to be reproued by their brethren when they do offend but if he meant more as perhaps he did of a good wil to his See yet he meant not that which toucheth the point of the Popes supremacie geuen you to proue to wéete that Bishops causes through the whole world must be referred to him And hereof himselfe is a sufficient witnesse in that he ouerruleth the case by the law of Iustinian the Emperour For if any man sayth he accuse a Bishop for whatsoeuer cause let the cause bee iudged by his Metropolitan If any man gainsay the Metropolitans iudgemēt let it be referred to the Archbishop and Patriarke of that diocese and let him end it according to the canons and lawes Hart. The causes of Bishops I grant must first be heard of their Metropolitans and next of their Patriarkes Yet if the Patriarkes iudgement be misliked too then may the partie gréeued appeale to the Pope and so they come to him last Rainoldes Gregorie meant not so but that the last iudge thereof should be the Patriarke as did Iustinian also Which they shew playnely by saying Let him end it according to the canons and lawes For both the canons of that Councell which referred the causes of Bishops to the Patriarkes did mētion thē as the last Iudges the lawes of Emperours which granted appeales from Metropolitans to them granted no appeale from them to any other nay for bad expressely al appealing from them Hart. Yet euen there S. Gregorie giueth a speciall priuilege and preeminence to the Pope aboue other Patriarkes For he addeth that if a Bishop haue no Metropolitan nor Patriarke at all then is his cause to be heard and determined by the See Apostolike which is the head of all Churches Rainoldes True he addeth that beyond the canons of Councels and the lawes of Emperours But in the meane season he yéeldeth that the causes of Bishops who were subiecte to any other Patriarke must not be referred to the Popes See Whereby it is euident that not all their causes through the whole world were claimed by S. Gregorie And herewithal by this place it may be noted too that when he nameth the See and Church of Rome the head of all Churches he meaneth it of excellencie for sundrie giftes aboue them not of the supremacie for power to gouerne them Which answereth the question that you made before vpō the same title If the Church of Rome be the head of all Churches why not the Bishop of Rome the head of all Bishops For the name of head is geuen to that Church in respect of others as if the citie of London shoulde bée called in England the head of all cities The Lord Mayor of London might chaūce to haue a fauourer who would aske thereon If the citie of London be the head of all cities why not the Mayor of London the head of all Mayors But I knowe no Mayor so simple in England that vpon this sophisme would yéelde himselfe a subiect to the Lord Mayor of London Hart. Yet your selues grant y● Zosimus Boniface Caelestinus did claime the right of appeales to be made to thē in the causes of Bishops through the whole world Who being Popes before Gregorie almost two hundred yeares it followeth that they of the second sort did auouch as much for the Popes supremacie in iudging Church-causes as their successours of the last doe which you denied Rainoldes And I denie it still neither doth that proue it For the last sort claimeth al the greater causes of the church Wherein they comprehend not only the causes of Bishops and the Clergie but of all estates as many as doe fall within the reserued cases as they call them And because these cases by the ancient Councels should be all determined within their own● Prouinces not referred to Rome therefore no Councel may prescribe a law they say to bind them But the other whom you named of the second sort did neither take vpon them such power ouer Councels nor claime appeales in causes of any but of Bishops or Clergie at the most As for the cases which Popes reserue now from ordinarie Iudges to their owne Eschequer the seconde sort of Popes was so farre from doing it that they were in their graues many hundred yeares before the sent thereof was felt Wherefore you ouerreach●d your selfe M. Hart when you sayde that the Bishop of Rome hath alwayes vsed the practise of the supremacie For it is apparant by this which I haue shewed that not one of them for the space of sixe hundred yeares after Christ did euer either vse it or claime it as his right Hart. Yes they hearde the causes of Clergie-men appealing to them and held that they might doe so Wherefore they claimed the supremacie and vsed it too Rainoldes Which reason is as good as if a Kentish Gentleman should say that all the Countie of Kent is his own because he hath a Lordship in the Weald of Kent Hart. What doe you accounte it so small a matter that Clergie-men yea Bishops shoulde appeale to them out of all prouinces through the whole world Rainoldes A goodly Lordship and large But nothing so large as the Weald of Kent much lesse as all Kent There are many Lordships mo within the Countie which the auncient Popes neither had nor claimed One Lordship of being subiecte to no man no not to the Emperour An other of hauing power ouer Princes to excommunicate and depose them An other of binding Bishops Metropolitanes and Patriarkes with an oth to be their faythful subiects An other of giuing Church-liuings and offices vnto whom they list An other of breaking the bandes of al Councels with dispensations and decrées An other of reseruing cases to their Sée Whereof to passe the rest which you may finde recorded in their Rolles and Chancerie sith they neither chalenged nor