Selected quad for the lemma: master_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
master_n	aaron_n	church_n	distinct_a	24	3	10.4405	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A83437	The casting down of the last and strongest hold of Satan. Or, A treatise against toleration and pretended liberty of conscience: wherein by Scripture, sound reason, fathers, schoolmen, casuists, Protestant divines of all nations, confessions of faith of the Reformed Churches, ecclesiastical histories, and constant practice of the most pious and wisest emperours, princes, states, the best writers of politicks, the experience of all ages; yea, by divers principles, testimonies and proceedings of sectaries themselves, as Donatists, Anabaptists, Brownists, Independents, the unlawfulnesse and mischeif [sic] in Christian commonwealths and kingdoms both of a vniversal toleration of all religions and consciences, and of a limited and bounded of some sects only, are clearly proved and demonstrated, with all the materiall grounds and reasons brought for such tolerations fully answered. / By Thomas Edvvards, Minister of the Gospel. The first part.; Casting down of the last and strongest hold of Satan. Part 1	Edwards, Thomas, 1599-1647.	1647 (1647)	Wing E225; Thomason E394_6; ESTC R201621	211,214	231

very uncertain doubtfull other things absurd and untrue As first that to be a Type of Christ is a sufficient ground of a Politicall Civill power over the Church and that typicalnesse qua typicalnesse gives those perso●s a power who otherwise have none the contrary unto which is in severall Reasons proved by Doctor Stewart in the second part of his Duply to M. S. page 22. and never yet answered by M. S. or any other though M. S. and many of his Brethren have written upon that argument since Secondly that he who was Head of the State was Head also of the Church in a typicall way whereas many great Divines are of another judgement and show that the Kings of Judah and the civill judicatures were formally distinct from the Ecclesiasticall and that he who was cheif in the State over civill matters was not cheif Iudge and Officer in the Church in an Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall notion of which point Master R●●herford and Master Gil●espie having written so fully lately I shall spare to speak any thing and referre the Reader to their learned Books enti●uled The Divine Right of Church Government Aarons Rod Blossoming Thirdly that the people of the Iewes were interchangably a Church and a Nation so that whoever was a member of the Church was a member of the Common-wealth and vice versa of which see the Book entituled The Antient Bounds or Liberty of Conscience seated page 60. Now Master Gillespie in his Aarons Rod blossoming Book 1. chap. 2. proves strongly that the Iewish Church was formally distinct from the Iewish State and that in seven particulars as in respect of distinct Lawes distinct Acts distinct Officers so in respect of distinct Members there being Members of the Church among them who had the name of Proselyti Iustitiae and were initiated into the Iewish Religion by Circumcision Sacrifice c. that neverthelesse were restrained and secluded from Dignities Government and Preferment in the Iewish Common-wealth and from divers matriages which were free to the Israelites Master SELDEN also in that learned Book of his De Jure Natur. Gentium lib. 2. cap. 4. lib. 5. cap. 20. speaks as much of those Proselytes Proselytus justitiae utcunque novato patriae nomine Iudaeu● diceretur non tam quidem ci● is Iudaicus simpliciter censendus esset quam peregrinus sempe● cui jura quamplurima inter cives Secondly how do they prove that Iehu Ioash Manasseh Asa Hezekiah Iebosophat Iosiah were Types of Christ and did execu●e typically the kingly office of Christ in his Church were Kings in an Ecclesiasticall notion an extraordinary way not ruling only for the Church but in the Church and over it as they say Moses Ioshua David Solomon were in their persons places and actions expresse types of Iesus Christ as 't is evident in the New Testament Pen-men also of Scripture besides Prophets as well as Magistrates and so were extraordinary men that every thing they did in Religion is not a binding example to Magistrates now as many Reformed Divines have showen against the Arminians and Erastians but that Asa Iosiah Hezekiah Iehosaphat were is gratis dictum not yet proved neither were these Pen-men of holy Scripture or Prophets extraordinarily inspired but these foure great Reformers as Kings were stirred up enquiring after and directed by Prophets as the Reader may finde clearly in the stories of them in the Chronicles and Kings Besides I finde not among Divines who have written of the Types of Christ or who grant Moses David Solomon to be expresse Types that they make Asa Iosiah c. to be Types Again of Types of Christ as Divines distinguish there are particular persons types of him as Adam Noah Isaac Joseph Moses Joshua Samson David Solomon Jonah and there are such rancks and orders of men as the First-born Kings Prophets c. Now though all of the first sort are speciall particular Types of him so that the speciall things done by them do typifie and set forth Christ in many particulars of his person actions and sufferings yet the rancks and orders of men as the First-born Kings Prophets may not be typicall in all the particular persons of those ranks and orders at least to the particular acts they do in those ranks and orders but 't is enough for many in those orders to agree in common as in being Kings and Prophets as Christ was there being some in all those orders and ranks appointed of God especially and peculiarly to be the Types which others are not and for whose sakes in those orders and ranks such orders of men were instituted by God to be Types of which many instances might be given with the Reasons thereof in some of the First-born Kings c. but I shall reserve the further handling of that to a second part upon this Subject Lastly supposing Asa Josiah and those godly Kings to be Types of Christ may it not be doubted whether Jehu Ieboash Ammon Ieroboam c. were Types of Christ and did execute his kingly office who yet were commended viz. the two fir●t for destroying false worship and reproved for not doing it constantly besides could those Kings of Israel and Iudah who yet were lawfull Kings that apostatised from all the whole worship of God the Ceremoniall Law that ordained the Types that destroyed Gods service and the Priesthood made Priests of the lowest of the people be Types of Christ and I desire to be resolved or M. S. the Author of the Antient bounds of Liberty of Conscience stated whether any wicked men were speciall Types of Christ and whether all persons who were Types of Christ were not saved Thirdly suppose these Kings of Iudah were Types of Christ in setting on the Thron of David and ruling over Iudah in Christ the King of his Church coming out of their loines yet they were temporall Kings had Civill authority Now how does it appear that what they did in punishing idolatrous Priests comm●nding their subjects to the true worship of God they did only as Types by vertue of that Notion and not as they were temporall Kings which must be proved before their examples can be made null and I am sure the Scripture no where faith that the Kings of Iudah and Israel in what they commanded in matters of Religion they did as Types of Christ and not as Civill Magistrates 'T is one thing to be a Type and another thing to doe such things meerly qua Types and what if Christian Magistrates leaning upon this broken staffe suffering all Herefies Blasphemies and Idolatries in their Kingdomes Christ at the last day when they stand before the judgement feat they objecting for themselves the Kings of Israel and Iudah were Types of Christ and all they did was by vertue of their typicall notion shal tell them no but as Magistrates entrusted by God with a power and authority how will they be then confounded will this distinction and notion

of that knowne axiome A particulari ad universale non valet consequentia and therefore though that particular reason be ceased although I haue fully shown that never was any reason of those Laws under the old Testament for punishing of false Prophets but a meer device and a fancie t is no good consequence all the other reasons yea and the commands themselves should cease also Seventhly to that Hagiomastix saith that the punishments enjoyned by God then under the Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents were more bodily and afflictive to the outward man then the punishments enjoyned under the Gospel and consequently were not only carnall or bodily but typicall also and prefignificative of those greater and more spirituall under the Gospel cutting off from his people then as of casting out from his people now cutting off under the Gospel being no where found to be used but in a metaphorical and allusive sense also to what Minus Celsus Senensis writes that that corporall punishment in Deut. 13. was a Type of eternall damnation and therefore that Law with all the rest given for the future signification of things by the comming of Christ ceased I answer as followes First I deny the punishments enjoyned by God under the Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents to be bodily or afflictive at all to the outward man as by donfiscation of goods or by death but they were spirituall and inflicted upon the soules by suspension excommunication and such like spirituall censures as well as now under the Gospel T is true there were bodily outward punishments in the Civill Iudicatories inflicted then on the bodies of false Prophets Idolaters c but by the Magistrates the Civil Governors and not by the Priests the Ecclesiastical Governors in the Church of the Iewes For under the Law the Jewish Church and Common-wealth the Civil Government and Ecclesiastical the censures and punishments of Church and State were formally distinct as Master Gillespie hath fully and excellently proved in his Aarons rod blossoming in many places particularly 1. Book cap. 2. 3 4 5 and the Church of the Iewes proceeded then against false Prophets only with the sword of the Spirit and spirituall weapons and the State with the materiall Sword and bodily punishments Which truth is fully acknowledged also by Master Cotton however differing from Presbyterians about a National Church in his Answer to Master Williams Bloudy Tenet saying I should think mine eye not only obscured but the fight of it utterly put out if I should conceave as he doth that the National Church State of the Jewes did necessarily call for such weapons a speaking of a Sword of Iron or Steel to punish Hereticks more then the Congregetional State of particular Churches doth call for the same now in the dayes of the new Testament For was not the National Church of the Iewes as compleatly furnished with spirituall Armor to defend it selfe and to offend men and Divels as the particular Churches of the new Testament be Had they not power to convince false Prophets as Eliah did the Prophets of Baal Had they not power to seperate all evil doers from the fellowship of the Congregation what power have our particular Churches now which their National Church wanted or what efficacie is there found in the exercise of our power which was wanting to them It is therefore a Sophistical imagination of mans Braine to make a mans selfe or the world believe that the National Church State of the Iewes required a Civil Sword whereas the particular State of the Gospel needs no such helpe And was not the National Church of Israel as powerfully able by the same spirit to doe the same surely it was both spoken and meant of the National Church of the Jewes not by might nor by Power but my Spirit saith the Lord of Hosts Zach. 4. 6. So that by what I have already said Hagiomastix must either I suppose recall what he hath written of carnal bodily punishments enjoyned by God then to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents or else must joyne with the Erastians in holding the Iewish Church and Common-wealth their Governement and Censures all one and the same Secondly The foundation upon which Hagiomastix rears this building of outward punishments under the old Testament being typical of spiritual under the new viz the Land of Canaan with the external happinesse and peace there being typical and therefore reasons a compara●is and from the Analogie is sandie and unsound for the Land of Canaan with the external happinesse and long life in it whatsoever it was typical of was from what God had put into the Land being a Land healthful pleasant flowing with milke and honey abounding in excellent precious fruits the immediate blessings of God upon it and not from what came to it by the Magistrates Laws and their good Government for further satisfaction of which I wish Master Goodwin to resolve me this question whether the Land of Canaan were not typical as well in times of wars and troubles and under bad Princes as in dayes of peace and under good Princes and so to reason a comparatis to use his owne Phrase and adidem if temporall threatnings and bodily punishments inflicted upon delinquents under the old Testament were typicall and Praesignificative of greater under the Gospel they must be threatnings and bodily punishments inflicted from God upon false Prophets c not thoe executed by the Magistrates on them Thirdly Granting both Hagiomastixs foundation and the building reared upon it to be good yet they no whit prove bodily and outward punishments to be wholly taken away under the new Testament for suppose the temporal happinesse and the temporal punishments had typified more spiritual happinesse and lesse of the earth more spiritual judgements and lesse of outward or bodily sufferings under the Gospel yet it followes not they take away all outward happinesse and blessings and all outward bodily punishments there may be greater or lesser degrees of things under the old and new Testament suitable to some difference in the manner of Administration betweene the old and the new and yet not the substance of the things taken away These are knowne axioms Gradus non tollunt substantiam Magis Minus non variant speciem T is apparent by sense and experience that how much soever spirituall blessings and spiritual judgements in the dayes of the Gospel abound above the times under the Law yet they take not away all temporal outward blessings nor all temporal outward judgements but God for all that gives many outward blessings and sends many temporal judgements on the earth So supposing God should inflict more spiritual judgements on the soules of men under the new Testament and the Church greater spiritual censures then under the old it no way followes the Magistrates may inflict none at all especially when all spiritual judgements on the soule are slited and with a high hand