Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	answer_v	faith_n	true_a	5,103	5	4.8933	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10699	A Catholicke conference betvveene Syr Tady Mac. Mareall a popish priest of VVaterforde, and Patricke Plaine a young student in Trinity Colledge by Dublin in Ireland VVherein is deliuered the certayne maner of execution that was vsed vpon a popish bishop, and a popish priest, that for seueral matters of treason were executed at Dublin the first of February, now last past. 16ll. Strange to be related, credible to be beleeued, and pleasant to bee perused. By Barnabe Rych, Gent. seruant to the Kinges most excellent Maiestie.	Rich, Barnabe, 1540?-1617.	1612 (1612)	STC 20981; ESTC S115901	41,203	61

Church of God what meant he by the Church the priests or the people Ta. Perhaps hee ment them both aswell the people as the priestes Pa. Canne you finde in any one text of Scripture where the Church is taken for the priestes without the people Ta. But yet the priestes are onely called Churchmen Pa. Why now you haue answered the matter soundly hereafter when they tell vs that the Church doth consist in the whole congregation of the faithfull we may then answer them that the priestes onely were called churchmen and therefore they must commande Kinges and Princes what they must doe and what religion they must establish Ta. It is very true for who should iudge of religion but the Priest Pa. Why then the priest must iudge of truth but the Prince you say may commande for truth and then we are all this while out of our reckoning for if it bee in the princes power to command for truth they will say that our gratious king commaundeth nothing here in Ireland but what Christ hath already commanded and what is established by the word of God and thus we haue brought our hogges to a faire market Ta. But that princes should haue power to compell mens consciences I say is a thing most vnreasonable Pa. And that euery ignorant and obstinate person shoulde make a conscience of euery popish fantazy is a thing most intollerable Ta. Doe you terme it to bee fantasticall that our progenitors haue professed and that we our selues were baptized in Pa. This is your common inchantment wherewith you bewitch a number of seely soules bearing them beleeue that in bap tisme they haue vowed themselues to your Romish religion but in whose name were you baptized was itin the popes or in Peters or in Paules if in no other then in the nameof Christ alone then are you made the sonnes of God and not the slaues and vassels of Rome and as in baptisme you receiued no mans marke but his so you stand bound to regard no mans voyce but his Ta. Yet I say still that it standes with no reason that a prince may forcibly compell any man against his conscience Pa. But I say still that a Prince may forcibly compell his subiectes from Idolatry and heresie to the sincere seruice of God the scriptures doe furnish vs with sundry presidents tending to that purpose amongst the rest take this one Iosiah was highly commended for making the people of Ierusalem all that were ●ound in Israell to serue the Lorde Ta. Iosiah compelled the people to serue the Lorde according to the truth but doth it therefore follow that euery prince may inforce a religion that is but fitting to his owne will and fancie Pa. It doth therefore followe and by the circumstance of the whole chapter it doth appeare that euery christian Prince throughout his realmes and dominions may roote out heresie Idolatry superstition and hauing againe restablished the true and sincere worship of God may compell and inforce his subiects both to obey and submit themselues vnto it Ta. But the religion which we professe is the true auncient Apostolicke religion first deliuered by Christ himselfe vnto Peter and by Peter himselfe to his successors the Bishops of Rome Pa. Indeede your Pope in his doctrine dooth as rightly succeede Saint Peter at Rome as the Turke doth succeed Saint Iames at Ierusalem and as the Scribes and Pharises did Moses in whose chayre they sate when they crucified the Sonne of God Ta. I hope you make no doubt but that the Pope is Saint Peters successor and that the chayre wheron he now sitteth at Rome was first Saint Peters seate Pa. I vnderstand not what you meane by the Popes chayre by Saint Peters seate whether you meane it by any Throne or Tabernacle or by some other Tribunall or what manner of stoole it should be that you call Saint Peters seate Ta. I beleeue you well for Protestants God knowes are not onely ignorant but they are likewise blind and senfeles in those thinges that doth appertaine to the misteryes of the Catholicke Church but for your better satisfaction and to giue you true weeting of Peters Seate what it is you that are so full of scripture cannot be ignorant where Christ in the 23. of Mathewe tolde his Disciples that the Scribes and Pharises did sit on Moses chayre willed them therefore in respect of their place both to heare and beleeue them being as they were successors vnto Moses then the like of Rome where Peter was sometimes Bishop and where he constantly preached Christ crucified must therefore necessarily be the Seate of Peter and this holy Sea of Rome is it which Peter hath left to his successors and we may as truly say that the Pope doth now sit on Peters Seate as Christ told his Disciples that the Scribes and Pharises did sit on Moses Chayre Pa. There haue beene many papistes that haue taken great paynes to proue that Peter was Bishop of Rome but there was yet neuer any one of them coulde make it so apparant but that wee might deny that by good authority that peter was euer at Rome at all but let it be granted that Peter were at Rome doth it therefore follow that the Sea of Rome must be Peters Seate Peter preached in many places before hee came to Rome if euer hee were there at all as it appeareth in the Actes of the Apostles and by the testimonie of your owne Legende Peter was a long time at Antioche and why should not Antioche or any other place where Peter taught and preached challenge a superioritie as far foorth as Rome Ta. I see I must render you a reason for the matter will it please you now to vnderstand that besides Peters being at Rome Peter likewise dyed at Rome and suffered vnder Nero therfore the place more holy and worthy of authoritie Pa. May it please you now to heare me to render you the like reason our Sauiour Iesus Christ was crucified and dyed at Ierusalem for the sinnes of the worlde and therefore in the worke of our redemption his power is more ●ull and ample at the citie of Ierusalem then it is in any other place where he hadde formerly taught and preached You say Protestants are blinded but if papisteswere not both blind and out of their wits besides they would neuer gather such conclusions whereby to vpholde the pride of their pope that be cause Peter was at Rome therefore the Sea of Rome must be Saint Peters seate but how hangeth this together where Christ in the 23. of Mathew tolde his Disciples that the Scribes and Pharises did sit on Moses Chayre what was ment by Moses chayre in this place it could not be meant by the citie of Ierasalem as the papistes would haue Rome to be the Seate of Peter because as they surmise Peter was at Rome but Moses was neuer at Ierusalem neither in the Synagogue neither in the Temple nor in any part of

the country that was neare about it why then the Chayre of Moses which Christ here spake of was nothing else but the doctrine of Moses which hee hadde formerly taught and left vnto them and which Christ in this place willed his Disciples to heare and likewise to followe what the Scribes and Pharises sayd and taught but not to doe as they did to followe their sayinges but not their doinges euen so likewise Peters Seate Peters Keyes and Peters doctrine are all one and the selfe same thing but this doctrine of the preaching of the Gospell your Pope hath abolished at Rome and in the place thereof hee hath set vp the preaching of his owne lawes of his owne decrees and of his owne traditions and therefore he sitteth not on the seat of Peter but in the Seate of Antichrist in the Chayre of pestilence and for Peters comming to Rome it can doe your Pope no good at all he may well bragge a little of the matter but it will not serue his turne Ta. Thus you would conclude that Saint Peters seate consisted in nothing more then in the preaching of the Gospell And by this you woulde depriue him not onely of his Patrimony but also of his Dignity Saint Peter is little beholding to Protestants for of him that was called the Prince of the Apostles they would make him to be but Minimus Apostolorum but if to preach the Gospell be to sit in Peters Seate was it not Peter to whom Christ especially recommended the feeding of his flocke And what is meant by the feeding of the sheepe but the preaching of the word and ministring of the sacraments which as it was commended to Peter especially so it remaineth a precept for euer to the Popes that are his successors And was it not to Peter againe to whom Christ sayd I haue prayd for thee Peter that thy faith might not fayle what malitious impietie then in Protestantes to spurne against that Principality that Christ himselfe hath confirmed not onely to Peter himselfe but to the rest that bee his successors in the holy sea of Rome Pa. First for this prioritie that papistes would so faine ascribe to Peter aboue the rest of the Apostles I say our Sauiour Christ hath long sithens determined when in the 10. of Saint Markes Gospell hee told them that there shoulde bee no precedencie amongst them nor the one to bee accounted more worthy then the other and therefore flatly decreed betweene them that hee that would aspire to be greatest the same should be least now for Saint Peter esteeme him as you please choose how you will account him to be either Maximus or Minimus But what blockishnes is in papists to thinke that because Christ commanded Peter to feede his flocke that this precept therefore was giuen but to Peter himselfe as though that commandement to feede the flocke of Christ did not belong as farre foorth to all the Apostles as it did to Peter I will tell you Syr Tady there is not so simple a minister in the Church of God that hath cure of soules but according to his measure is as straightly tyed to the feeding of Christes flocke as euer was any Pope of Rome or as Peter or as Paul or as any other of the twelue Apostles And now for your Popes that you say are successours vnto Peter if wee shoulde looke into the foode what it is they haue distributed and consider of the diligence they haue vsed in performing this precept thus left vnto Peter we should find that in feeding the sheepe they haue poysoned the pasture they haue infected corrupted it with the venemous leauen of their owne lawes and traditions and in stead of giuing foode they haue fleeced the flocke they haue made a shambles of the sheepe haue murthered and massacred the innocent lambes such hauocke your Popes haue kept amongst the Saintes of God and yet they would be accounted to be Peters successors but what a counterfeit Hypocrite is your Pope that vnder a shew of humility will professe himselfe to be Seruus seruorum and yet will take vpon him to controule and dominere ouer Emperours and Kinges and because Christ hath sayd I haue prayd for thee Peter that thy faith shoulde not fayle therefore say the papistes the Pope cannot erre thus they doe wrest and wrythe holy scriptures to serue their fleshly appetites and as for Saint Peters Patrimonie Saint Peters Seate Saint Peters Keyes Saint Peters Power Saint Peters Authoritie yea and Saint Peter himselfe they are all made props and supporters to vphold the Popes pride Ta. Why how now Patricke what art thou out of thy wittes wilt thou impugne saint Peters authority or wilt thou denie that he hath absolute power both to bind and to loose either in heauen or in earth as Christ himselfe hath giuen and warranted vnto him Pa. I denie him nothing but that he had full power and authority by the preaching of the Gospel both to bind to loose to open and to shut and to doe all thinges in as large and ample maner as eyther Iames or Iohn Philip or Bartholomew or any other of the Apostles whom our Sauiour himselfe after his resurrection armed with equall authority when in the 20. of Iohn he sent them into the world to preach to all nations Ta. Thus I perceiue you can be contented that Peter shoulde march with the rest of the Apostles in equall ranke but you will not admit him any supreame authority Pa. If you can alleadge but any one place of scripture that doth giue vnto Peter any more then the rest you shall finde me apt enough to acknowledge it Ta. Is not this confirmation enough when Peter is the rocke whereon Christ himselfe said he would build his Church Pa. I wonder papistes are not ashamed to vrge that place of scripture so grossely Peter acknowledging Christ to be the sonne of God our Sauiour answered Vppon thisrocke I will builde my Church the Pope would haue the rocke to bee Peter himselfe whereon Christ promised to build his Church when indeede it was the faith of Peter confessing Christ to bee the sonne of God for faith is the rocke whereon Christes Church is built for who is of Christes Church but he onely that beleeueth Christ to bee the sonne of God this faith is it against which the gates of Hel cannot preuaile Ta. What malicious despight is this to depriue Saint Peter of his principalitie giue him some preheminence for shame if it be but because he was the first amongst the Apostles that confessed Christ to be the sonne of God Pa. It is truth Peter was the first amongst the Apostles that confessed Christ to be the sonne of God and so he was the first againe that denyed his master neither doe wee seeke to depryue that blessed Apostle of any pryoritie that the word of God doth allowe him but rather to curtall your Idolatrous Pope who by magnifiyng of Peter woulde thereby exalt himselfe Peters