Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	church_n	particular_a	universal_a	5,727	5	9.3530	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03271	Three positions concerning the 1 Authoritie of the Lords day. 2 State of the Church of Rome. 3 Execution of priests. All written vpon speciall occasions by Iames Balmford minister	Balmford, James, b. 1556.; Balmford, James, b. 1556. Position maintained by I.B. before the late Earle of Huntingdon: viz. Priests are executed not for religion, but for treason. aut	1607 (1607)	STC 1339; ESTC S120365	24,959	67

member of the body It is therfore conuenient that Peter being but a member should be builded vpon the body considered together with the head 10 Surely Augustine had reason to fly 1. Pet. 2. 6. to the true Rocke of saluation For howsoeuer the succession of the Bishops of Rome till his time was an excellent testimony to the truth because they successiuely maintained the faith touching the fundamentall points therof yet he might well consider that Personall succession without succession in faith is not a sufficient confirmation or authenticall note of a true Church For at Cōstantinople there hath bin an interrupted succession of Bishops til this day And yet the Papists wil deny that to bee any part of Christ his Church because it reteineth not the true faith of Christ 11 But because there is such adoe about the succeeding of Peter and it is made a matter of so great importance it is necessary to bee proued that the Bishops of Rome bee Peters successors Which how possibly Papists can performe I cannot see sith there is such a disagreement about his supposed immediate successor the Decrees affirming Clement and writers of good regard as Ireneus and other placing Linus next after Peter 12 That this doubt whether the Bishops of Rome be Peters successors may be put out of all doubt the Papists must necessarily proue foure things 1. That Peter was at Rome 2. That he sate Bishop there 25. yeeres 3. That he was vniuersal Bishop And 4. That his vniuersal authoritie was sufficiently conueyed ouer to all that should lawfully succeed him in that See In any of which if they faile the Popes authority falleth to the ground For if Peter were neuer at Rome how could he be Bishop there If not Bishop at all how vniuersall Bishop If he had no such authority himselfe how could it be conueyed ouer to his pretended successors And if there were not sufficient conueyance how frustrate is the Popes claime But that there be such doubts in euery of these points as the Papists cannot cleerely resolue consider well the foure next articles 13 None doth simply deny but that Peter might haue been at Rome as a passenger or for some short abode although so much be not manifest But that he sate Bishop there and that so many yeeres is altogether vnlikely For it not very likely that Paul saluting so many by name as he doth in his Epistle to the Romans but that hee would make some honorable mention of Peter And wheras sixe of his Epistles were dated at Rome Is it not likly but that in some of them hee would speake of Peter if he had been there so long and in such authority as he doth of Timothy whose authoritie was lesse that thereby his exhortations and reprouings might better preuaile To say nothing that the Scriptures doe not in any place signify that Peter was at Rome Which in likelihood should haue bin done if God had seene succession of Bishops at Rome from Peter to be a matter of so great importance as now it is made 14 But say that he was at Rome it will helpe the Papists nothing except they can proue that hee was also Bishop of Rome Whereof there is small likelihood if wee take this word Bishop not in the large sense which comprehendeth Apostles and all Ministers hauing authoritie but in the strict sense which signifieth a Minister intituled to a certaine place For is it likely that Peter descended from the highest degree in the Church of which al Apostles were next to Christ the head to the inferiour degree of a Bishop or Is Matth. 18. 18. 28. 18. 19. 20. it likely that hee who had authoritie throughout the whole world as hee was an Apostle was tied to a particular charge as he was Bishop 15 But they say He was Vniuersall Bishop and therefore his authority was not restreined They must needs say so for else his supposed being Bishop at Rome will stand them in no stead But was his authoritie inlarged hereby If no for how could hee haue a larger iurisdiction thā Apostolical authority throughout the world what reason then can they giue why he should enioy that Vniuersall authoritie rather by the name of a Bishop and that of a particular place than by the name of an Apostle Againe Is it not strange that they cannot by any Scripture proue this point sith it is of such consequence with them as that it bindeth their consciences to the See of Rome Nay rather the Scriptures shew the contrarie For it is recorded in holy Writ That the Apostleship of the circumcision Gal. 2. 7. 8. that is of the Iewes was committed to Peter and the Apostleship of the vncircumcision that is of the Gentiles such were the Romans was committed to Paul Againe Is it likely that Paul who Rom. 15. 20. inforced himselfe to preach the Gospell not where Christ was named lest hee should haue built on another mans foundation would so intrude himselfe into Peters office as to meddle with the affaires of so many Churches as he doth and that with all authoritie in his Epistle to the Romans and other his Epistles from Rome and al this without any mention of Peter if Peter had been at Rome and had such an Vniuersal authoritie Sith Paul as is said ioyned with himselfe for the more authorie of some of his Epistles Timothy one of lesse authority than Peter and writeth to the Philippians That he Phil. 2. 20. had none like minded to Timothy that would faithfully care for their matters Lastly It is vtterly vnlikely That Paul Gal. 2. 11. c. would haue reproued Peter to his face and that openly for withdrawing himselfe from the Gentiles if Peter had had such authoritie as the Papists dreame of 16 But suppose that Peter was at Rome and had such authoritie what is the Pope better for it if it were not made ouer to Peters successors by sufficient conueyance But in this poynt which chiefely concernes the Pope the Papists seeme vtterly to faile For Gregorie the first reprooued Iohn Bishop of Constantinople for indeuouring to obtaine the title of Vniuersall Bishop and to haue his Church called the head of all Churches telling him that none of the Bishops of Rome durst take such a title though the Emperours began in Rome were wont to abide there only and did then intitle themselues Emperours of Rome Nay he told him yet more plainely That whosoeuer aspired to bee Vniuersall Bishop was a fore-runner of Antichrist Whereby it is euident that in Gregories time there was no knowledge of any conueyance of Peters supposed authority made ouer to the Bishops of Rome But for al this peremptory iudgement of Gregory surnamed The Great within few yeeres after about anno 607. Boniface 3. obtained that title with much suite and bribery of Phocas an adulterer and murtherer of his master that Christian Emperour Mauritius with his wife and children But succeeding Popes

daies after his resurrection When as it is written x Act. 1. 2. 3 in expresse words he gaue through the Holy Ghost Commandements vnto the Apostles whom he had chosen and spake of those things which appertaine to the Kingdome of God Now doth it not especially appertaine to the kingdome of God that Christians should sanctifie their Lords day wherein y 1. Cor. 1. 23. 24. Christ crucified z 1. Tim. 3. 16. The mystery of godlines and a Mat. 1. 21. Sauiour of the world should be * Act. 10. 42. 43. preached as well as the Iewes had their Sabbath on which Moses A schoole master b Gal. 3. 24 to Christ and A minister of the Letter c 2. Cor. 3. 6. which killeth was d Act. 15. 21. preached Againe If in those 40. daies Christ e Eph. 4. 8. 10. 11. appointed what Ministers should teach his Church for euer how can it be but that thē also he appointed some Sabbath wheron they should ordinarily performe the worke of their ministerie as hee was wont f Luk. 4. 16. to do himselfe Seeing it is prophecied g Psal 110. 2. 3. That the power of his rod should be such that His people should come willingly at the time of assembling his army in holy beauty Seeing his Father whose works * Ioh. 5. 19. he imitateth appointed h Leuit. 16. 2. 29. as an high Priest so a time when once in a yeere he should enter into the Most holy place and as other Priests i Exod. 29. 44. 38. so morning and euening sacrifices and considering it is written k Eccles 3. 1. To euery purpose vnder heauen there is an appointed time Lastly If the Sonne be like his Father as in teaching his Apostles 40. daies for so long l Exod. 24. 12. 18. 39. 42. was Moses with the Father vpon the mount so in speaking those things which appertaine to the kingdome of God as his Father taught Moses al things belonging to the furnishing of the Tabernacle and If the Sonne be like his Father in sanctifying a day to his owne honor as hath been declared Why may not Christians beleeue that Christ sanctified The Lords day within those 40. daies as the Father m Deut. 9. 9 confirmed The seuenth day in those 40. daies that Moses was with him on the mount And the rather because it is te be obserued That the Disciples n Ioh. 20. 19. 26. assembled the two first daies of the two weeks immediatly following Christ his resurrection and that our Lord not only of purpose sanctified both those assemblies with his holy and miraculous presence but also immediatly before his Ascension commanded his Apostles o Act. 1. 4. 5. 7. 9. to wait a few daies for the promise of the Father Which by his prouidence in whose power bee times and seasons as Christ affirmed euen in this case was fulfilled p Mark 16. 1. 2. Leuit. 23. 15. 16. Act. 2. 1. 4. 14. vpon a Sonday and at the same time the Apostles first began the execution of their ministery and preached Christ publiquely But publique preaching q Num. 10. 7. 8. Isa 58. 1. Ezech. 44. 23. 24. Act. 23. 14. 42. is a speciall worke of the Sabbath day It may therefore bee gathered That Christ appointed his Apostles to sanctifie Sonday whereon he would manifest himselfe r 1. 6. 7. 8 to be King of Israel as his Father instituted A seuenth day as on which he was manifested to bee GOD of heauen and earth To conclude If Saturday were made common not by man but by God himselfe and that not for a Ceremony but for some other cause If God sanctified a Sabbath as well to Christians as to Iewes If euery ordinance of Christ were an ordinance of God If Christ were as faithfull in all his owne house as Moses about the Tabernacle If Christ came to fulfill the fourth Commandement which prescribeth one day of seuen If the Church of God bee not easily to bee condemned as neglecting the ordinance of God in sanctifying Sonday for many hūdred yeeres If Christ were like his Father in sanctifying that day to his owne honor whereon he was declared to be the Sonne of God and King of Israel to wit Sonday If the day be so appointed that the Creator is glorified with the Redeemer If it appeare by the Word that the first day of the week was confirmed by the Apostles practise and preceptiue exhortation If by the first day of the week be meant that day wheron Christ did rise againe and that was Sonday If in the Word Sonday be called The Lords day to the honour of Christ our Lord If the warrant of Sonday consisteth not in the ordinarie authoritie of the Church because it was established by the Apostles If euery spirituall man be to acknowledge the ordinances of the Apostles to bee the ordinances of the Lord and If the Apostles were informed by Christ touching the Lords day within those 40. daies after his resurrection I may safely hold this my Position The Lords day commonly called Sonday is an ordinance of God THE SECOND POSITION THE CHVRCH OF ROME IS not the Catholike Church neither yet hath continued an apparant member of the same euer since the Apostles time 1 THe Church is said to be Catholike in regard of the vniuersality thereof for this word Catholike signifieth Vniuerfall The Vniuersalitie thereof consisteth in Times Persons and Places For there is no age of the world no nation on the earth and no sort of people that can be exempted from the same And therefore it is called The celestial Hierusalem and said to be the congregation Heb. 12. 22. 23. of the first borne which are written in heauen So that we are to beleeue That as there hath been euer an head to wit Christ so there hath been also a body to wit the Church some where or other but the Church of Rome is a particular Church confined within a certaine compasse and hath not been a Church but since Christ his comming in the flesh therfore it is not the Catholique Church 2 The Catholique Church is an obiect of faith according to the Apostles Creed and therefore inuisible howsoeuer the members thereof called by Peter Liuely 1. Pet. 2. 5. Heb. 11. 1. stones be visible as they be men For faith is the euidence of things not seene But the Church of Rome is visible therefore not the Catholique Church 3 I grant that as one man so one particular Church may be called Catholike but it is only in regard of the Catholique faith as being one the same throughout the Catholique Church which that one man or that one Church professeth But the Church of Rome professeth not indeed the Catholike faith as shal be in part shewed hereafter therefore in no sense it can be truly called Catholique But suppose it held the Catholique faith yet were