Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	body_n	heaven_n	soul_n	16,244	5	5.2792	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16174	A reproofe of M. Doct. Abbots defence, of the Catholike deformed by M. W. Perkins Wherein his sundry abuses of Gods sacred word, and most manifold mangling, misaplying, and falsifying, the auncient Fathers sentences,be so plainely discouered, euen to the eye of euery indifferent reader, that whosoeuer hath any due care of his owne saluation, can neuer hereafter giue him more credit, in matter of faith and religion. The first part. Made by W.P.B. and Doct. in diuinty.	Bishop, William, 1554?-1624.	1608 (1608)	STC 3098; ESTC S114055	254,241	290

vvhom S. Augustine alleageth stiling him a Saint and ranking him with S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose in these wordes August lib. 1. cont Iulianū cap. 4. Cùm hijs etiam ipse considet etsi posterior tempore prior loco In time somewhat after some of them but in dignity of place before them This holy and learned Bishop of Rome I say vvho flourished in S. Hieromes daies or else S. Augustine vvho was in manner his equal Epist. 3. ad Exuper cap. vltimo could not haue cited his testimony doth expresly declare those very bookes to be Canonical Scripture I trust his declaration that ruled that See of Rome wil rather be taken for the doctrine of the Church of Rome then any other mans besides Againe Pope Gelasius the first who liued not long after him which also is one of M. Abbots chosen patrons did in publike assembly In Decret de Libris sacris in 2. tomo Cōciliorum assisted also vvith 80. other Bishops define the same bookes to be Canonical Scripture who can then doubt but that the Church of Rome in S. Hieromes and Ruffinus daies tooke those bookes to be Canonical Scripture wherefore it was but M. Abbots addition to the text to affirme that Hierome and Ruffinus according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome did so say Besides the third Councel of Carthage holden at the felfe-same time Cōcil 3. Carthag cap. 47. doth declare the said bookes of Tobias Ecclesiasticus c. to be Canonical Scripture affirming also that therein they followed the sound judgement of their Ancestours Lib. 2. de Doctrina Christ cap. 8. Lib. 18. de Ciuitat cap. 36. S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes doth by name declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias Iudith and the two bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and seemeth to expound S. Hieromes sentence in these wordes The bookes of the Machabees the Iewes indeede doe not receiue but the Church of God taketh them for Canonical Scriptures Whence we after the auncient Lib. 7. Etimolog cap. ● learned and holy Bishop Isidorus doe collect this distinction The Canon of the Scriptures is twofold the one of the Hebrewes the other of the Christians that of the Hebrewes vvas compounded long before Christes daies in which these bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus c. are not comprehended because they vvere written in later times and not in the Hebrew tongue Prolog Galiator Of this Hebrew Canon speaketh S. Hierome in that Prologue as it wil be manifest to al that shal but reade it for he saith first That the Hebrewes haue but 22. letters and according to the same number but 22. bookes in their Canon then reckoning them vp by name inferreth therefore the booke of Wisdome c. be not in the Canon to wit that Canon of the Hebrewes whereof he there spake vvhich also appeareth more euidently by his answere to Ruffinus vvho objected against him as a shameful reproach that he rejected certaine Chapters of Daniël because they were not in the Hebrew though they were in the Septuaginta S. Hierome excuseth himselfe saying Lib. 2. cont Ruffinū versus finem That therein be shewed the opinion of the Hebrewes but did not deliuer his owne sentence And as he there saith That he who would calumniate that his doing should shew himselfe a sycophant so he doth thereby giue al others to vnderstand that he vvho would after that faire warning build any Catholike conclusion vpon his relation of the Hebrewes opinion should proue him selfe a foole in trusting to so sandy and slippery a foundation And yet further in his Preface vpon the booke of Iudith he teacheth That the Hebrewes did not take that booke of Iudith for Canonical yet the first Nicene Councel vvhich is the most authentike of al general Councels did account it in the number of holy Scripture so that in S. Hieromes opinion also though these bookes were not in the Canon of the Hebrewes yet they may be very sincere Canonical Scripture with the Christians vvho haue the spirit of discerning and judging of such Canonical bookes as wel as the ancient Hebrewes had But S. Hierome saith in the later place That the Church doth not vse them to establish Ecclesiastical doctrine I answere that the Churches of Afrike did vse them euen in his owne time and the Church of Rome which is the principal of al Europe at the least as hath beene proued before so that his vvordes must needes be restrained vnto some Churches in Asia where he liued for the most part or it may be said that the Church had not then when S. Hierome so wrote generally declared them to be Canonical though very shortly after euen before his dying day they were in the most principal places of the Church both declared and receiued for Canonical That the Church had sufficient author●ty by declaration to make bookes of Scripture Canonical that before were not generally taken for such the Protestants themselues must needes confesse because they take for Canonical the Epistle to the Hebrewes and diuers others with the Reuelation of S. Iohn which vvere doubted off by many of the learned Christians in the primitiue Church Lib. 3. Hist. Eccles c. 10. 19. as witnesseth Eusebius ROBERT ABBOT VIGILIVS borne at Rome and Bishop of Trent according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that then was affirmeth That the body of Christ when it was vpon the earth Vigil cōt Eutich lib. 4. was not in heauen and that now because it is in heauen it is not vpon the earth But now the Councel of Trent and Church of Rome perswade vs that the very body of Christ though it be in heauen yet is really and substantially here vpon earth also vpon the Altar and in the Pix and in the Priests belly and in the bellies of as many as are partakers of the Sacrament WILLIAM BISHOP In vita S. Sisinnij THIS large amplification is shortly answered Vigilius though a holy Catholike Bishop as his praying to Saints doth demonstrate yet was none of S. Peters successours neither doth he speake any thing against Christs real substantial presence in the Bles Sacramēt if his wordes be taken in his owne meaning to wit that Christ since his ascention is not here in that māner and fashion as he did conuerse vpon the earth with his Disciples that is in the forme of man Which I gather out of Vigilius his owne wordes for he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant and so according vnto that forme of a seruant in the habit and likenesse of a man he is not present with vs but the very same body vnder the forme of bread is in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is consecrated See for this more in the question of the Real presence ROBERT ABBOT Hier. in Catalogo TERTVLLIAN being for enuy of

purpose for the Apostle saith not that he taught any one article which the cōmon sort of the Iewes did beleeue but such things as the Prophets said should come to passe Who knowes not that they fore-saw and fore-told many thinges that were no articles of faith in their daies and touching these very particulars how many of the Iewes did beleeue that their Messias should die so shameful a death or that M●ises law should be abrogated by their Messias and that the Gospel of Christ should be preached vnto al nations al these vvere great nouels and exceeding scandalous to the body of the Iewes wherefore though some better learned among them and more religiously affected might vnderstand the Prophets speaking of those points yet vvere they farre from the common reach perswasion of that people of the Iewes from these points that the Iewes beleeued al that Christ taught and al that he cōmanded his Apostles to deliuer to al nations M. Abbot runneth like a vvandering Planet to a third that al which the Apostles taught they committed to writing vvhich is notwithstanding as false as any of the former for many of them vvho neuer ceassed to preach left not one sentence in vvriting behinde them and he that wrote most did not write the hundreth part of that which he taught by word of mouth We know vvel that they left the Gospel in writing and many other most diuine and rare instructions in their Epistles vvherefore he needed not cite Ireneus to witnesse that which no man is ignorant off but that they wrote al which they preached or al thinges necessary to saluation Ireneus saith not a word but plainly signifieth the contrary vvhere he most sagely counsaileth al men Euseb hist Eccles lib. 5. cap. 19. when any controuersie in religion ariseth to make their recourse to the most ancient Churches where the Apostles had conuersed amongst which he commendeth the Roman for principal of al the rest and from them to take their resolution he then was of opinion that the decision of al controuersies vvere not to be searched out of the vvritten word but rather to be taken from the resolution of the Church De Praescriptionibus Oh but Tertullian saith That beleeuing this we desire to beleeue no more because we first beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue Beleeuing this beleeuing what the vvritten word only nothing lesse for in that very Treatise his principal drift is to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted out of the written word but by ancient customes traditions which he calleth Praescriptions but saith he when we beleeue the whole doctrine of Christ both written and deliuered by Apostolical tradition then we desire to beleeue no more of any vpstart Heretikes new deuises To S. Augustine I answere first that those be not his formal wordes which he citeth Secondly admitting the sence if it be rightly taken I say that these wordes Gallat 1. If any man or Angel shal preach any thing besides that which is writen vvhere he alludeth to the Apostles like vvordes are to be vnderstood as S. Augustine himselfe expoundeth those of the Apostle that is If any man shal preach contrary to that which is written For this is his owne interpretation Aug. lib. 17. cont Faust. cap. 3. The Apostle saith not more then you haue receiued but otherwise then you haue receiued for if he had so said he had prejudiced himselfe who desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply what was wanting to their faith He that supplies addeth that wanted but doth not take away any thing that was before so that you see when he faith that nothing is to be preached besides that vvhich is vvritten his meaning is nothing vvhich is contrary to it allowing withal that much more conformable to it may be added for a supply to make it ful and perfect M. Abbot hauing in few lines run ouer 4. large questions to wit first That the Prophets and Patriarkes beleeued no principal points of the Roman faith secondly that Christ deliuered nothing but what the Iewes before hand beleeued thirdly that the Apostles preached the same and no other to the Gentiles fourthly that whatsoeuer they preached they afterwardes wrote he fiftly addeth that the Protestants receiue and beleeue al the written word Whence he wil haue it to follow finally that the Protestants are very good Iewes and doe jumpe just with them in al articles of faith and consequently are true Catholikes so that in M. Abbots reckoning before you can be a true Protestant Catholike you must first become a good honest Iewe. Behold what a round this man is driuen to walke how many brakes of thornes he is forced to breake through ere he can come to make any shew of proofe that the Protestants are Catholikes the matter is so improbable I haue already declared how false euery one of his former foure propositions be the fift is as vntrue and more if more may be then any of the other and he plaies the sophister in it egregiously to begge that which is principally in question How proues he that Protestants receiue and beleeue al the writen word hath he so litle wit and judgement as to thinke that we would freely graunt him that for to omit that they receiue not but reject diuers bookes of the old Testament because they vvere not in the Canon of the Iewes or doubted off by some in the primitiue Church by which reason they might refuse as many of the new doe they rightly vnderstand and beleeue truly al that is vvritten in that blessed booke of Gods vvord nothing lesse Doe they giue credit to our Sauiour IESVS Christ himselfe telling them a Math. 26. v. 27. 28. This is my BODY that shal be broken for you this is my BLOVD that shal be shedde for you b Iohan. 20. vers 23. Whose sinnes yee shal forgiue on earth shal be forgiuen in heauen c Math. 16. vers 18. Thou art PETER and vpon this Rocke wil I build my Church c. and the gates of hel shal not preuaile against it d Math. 20. vers 8. Cal the worke-men that had laboured in his vine-yearde and pay them their hire e Iacob 2. vers 24. Doe you see that by workes a man is justified and not by faith only f Iacob 5. vers 14. Is any man sicke among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with OILE in the name of our LORD c. g Ibidem 16. Confesse therefore your sinnes one to another these and an hundred more plaine texts recorded in that fountaine of life vvherein our Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse tearmes to wit The Real presence of Christes body in the Sacrament That Priests haue power to pardon sinnes That Christ built his Church vpon S. Peter That good workes doe in justice deserue eternal life That

we are justified not by faith alone but also by good workes That in extremity of sicknesse we must cal for the Priest to anoile vs with holy Oile That we must confesse our sinnes not to God alone but also vnto men these and diuers such like heades of our Catholike faith formally set downe in holy Scripture the Protestants wil not beleeue though they be written in Gods vvord neuer so expresly but doe ransacke al the corners of their wits to deuise some odde shift or other how to flie from the euidence of them Whereupon I conclude that they doe not receiue al the written word though they professe neuer so much to allow of al the bookes of Canonical Scripture Lib. 2. de Trinitate ad Const For the written word of God consisteth not in the reading but in the vnderstāding as S. Hierome testifieth that is it doth not consist in the bare letter of it but in the letter and true sence and meaning joined togither the letter being as the body of Scripture and the right vnderstanding of it the soule spirit and life thereof he therefore that taketh not the written word in the true sence but swarneth from the sincere interpretation of it cannot be truly said to receiue the written word as a good Christian ought to doe Seing then that the Protestants and al other sectaries doe not receiue the holy Scriptures according vnto the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition they may most justly be denied to receiue the sacred vvritten word of God at al though they seeme neuer so much to approue al the Bookes Verses and Letters of it vvhich is plainly proued by S. Hierome vpon the first Chapter to the Galathians Now to draw towardes the end of this clause not only neuer a one of M. Abbots assertions whereby he went about to proue them selues and their Church to be Catholike is true as hath beene shewed before but ouer and besides his very conclusion conuinceth himselfe euen by the verdict of himselfe to fal into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists Our faith saith he because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proue to be an Apostolical Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike Page 16. Line 5. Ex perfectione doctrinae By perfectnesse of their doctrine vvhich was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donatistical tricke reproued by S. Augustine whom in that point he then approued What doating folly is this in the same short discourse so to forget himselfe as to take that for a sound proofe which he himselfe had before confuted as heretical we like wel of Tertullians obseruation That our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine but that is not the question at this time but vvhether our doctrine or the Protestant be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in al nations ouer the world that is to be proued in this place M. Abbot if he had meant to deale plainly and soundly should not haue gone so about the bush and haue fetched such vvide and vvilde windlesses from old father Abrahams daies but should haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiastical Histories or of ancient Fathers vvho were in the pure times of the Church the most Godly and approued Pastours thereof that the Protestāts religion had flourished since the Apostles daies ouer al Europe Afrike and Asia or at least had beene visibly extant in some one country or other naming some certaine Churches in particular which had held in al points their faith and religion vvhich he seing impossible for any man to doe fel into that extrauagant and rouing discourse which you haue heard concluding without any premises sauing his owne bare word that in the written word There is no mention made of the Pope or his Supremacy nor of his Pardons c. Belike there is no mention made of S. Peter nor aught said of his singular prerogatiues It hath not peraduenture That whatsoeuer be should loose on earth should be loosed in heauen The other points were touched before and shal be shortly againe But I would in the meane season be glad to heare where the written word teacheth vs that Kinges and temporal Magistrates are ordained by Christ to be vnder him supreme Gouernours of Ecclesiastical affaires because M. Abbot made choice of this head-article of theirs for an instance that the written word was plaine on their ●ide he should therefore at least haue pointed at some one text or other in the new Testament where it is registred that Princes are supreme gouernours of the Church Nay are temporal Magistrates any Ecclesiastical persons at al or can one that is no member of the Ecclesiastical body be head of al the rest of the Ecclesiastical members or is the state Secular higher and more worthy then the Ecclesiastical and therefore meete to rule ouer it though they be not of it to say so is to preferre the body before the soule nature before grace earth before heauen or is it meete and decent that the lesse worthy-member should haue the supreme command ouer the more honourable vvhere the Christian vvorld is turned topsy-turuy that may be thought meete and expedient but in other places that wil not be admitted for currant vvhich in it selfe is so disorderly and inconuenient without it had better warrant in the word of God then that new position of theirs hath ROBERT ABBOT NOw vvhereas he alleageth that al his Majesties most roial Progenitours haue liued and died in that vvhich he calleth the Catholike and Apostolike faith Ambros lib. 5. epist. he plaieth the part of Symmachus the Pagan sophister who by like argument vvould haue perswaded Valentinian the Emperour to restore their Heathenish Idolatry and abhominations We are to follow our Fathers saith he who with happinesse and felicity followed their Fathers Aug. psal 54. Thus men haue hardned themselues in their heresies saying What my parents were before me the same wil I be But his Majesty wel knoweth that in matter of religion the example of parents is no band to the children L. 2. epist 3. but the trial thereof is to returne to the roote and original of the Lordes tradition as Ciprian speaketh not regarding what any before vs hath thought fit to be done but what Christ hath done who is before al. It is not vnknowne to his Majesty that there should be a time when Apocal. 17. vers 13. the Kinges of the earth shal giue their power and kingdome to the beast vntil the word of God be fulfilled and with the whoore sitting vpon many waters Vers 14. should bende themselues to fight against the Lambe Wherein if any of his Progenitours

that their roial estate cannot giue lustre and dignity to those that serue and obey them for Soueraigne and Subjects be correlatiues and the splendour of the one doth dignifie and ennoble the other And to derogate from the subject in that he is a subject is to disparage and to blemish greatly the Soueraignes Majesty M. Abbot then shewed himselfe a jolly wise-man and very acute when he would remoue the cause of basenesse from my degree and cast it vpon the respect of my subjection vvhich is common to me with al other his Majesties subjects euen of the highest dignity and most honourable calling I doe not here forget that there is incomparable difference betweene one subject and another both in degree and quality yet am I bold to say that he vvho debaseth any one subject considered as a subject as M. Abbot speaketh doth jointly offer great wrong and disgrace not only to al the rest of the subjects but euen to the Soueraigne himselfe Here I hope the courteous Reader vvil giue me leaue to say some-thing of the birth and degree of some Roman Priests being by M. Abbot so often vpbraided with beggarly basenesse neither vvil I report aught else then that vvhich by some honest men of great intelligence is recorded for very true to wit that since these times of persecution more Gentlemen borne haue beene made Roman Priests then are to be found in al the English Ministery though for euery one Priest there be more then an hundreth Ministers And touching M. Abbot himselfe I am credibly informed that he is by birth but a meane Tanners Sonne of Gilford in Surrey and was at his first comming to Oxford but a poore Scholler gladde to sweepe and dresse vp chambers and to play the drudge for a slender pittance Which I doe not vvrite as in contempt of such base beginnings from vvhich many haue proued profound Clarkes and growne to great promotion but only to admonish M. Abbot out of the remembrance of his owne condition not to carry himselfe so contemptuously towardes others vvho vvere borne his betters farre and not brought vp so beggarly but that they had as good maintainance in the Vniuersity as those vvhose shoes he was gladde to wipe and to sweepe their chambers other wise that graue sentence of the wise Poët must needes be verified in him Nil est asperius humili cum surgit in altum None carry themselues more rough currish and hawty Then these base companions once raised to dignity But setting aside both right of birth and degree of study the very sacred order of Priest-hood vnto which albeit most vnworthy vve are by the meere goodnesse of God called doth by the stile of holy Canons exempt vs from the vulgar sort and by vertue of that sacred calling adorne and dignifie vs Distinct. 5. Can. den●que Deniue Sacerdotes c. quos dignitas Ecclesiastici gradus exornat Againe the most ancient and reuerend Fathers haue alwaies had the holy vocation of Priest-hood in so high and singular estimation that they haue not feared to paraleel and compare it vvith the greatest temporal Majesty on earth The ground of their reason is this Priests receiue power from IESVS Christ ouer the soules of men and that in supernatural courses tēding to the most high end of euerlasting blisse and glory vvhereas the Princes of this world how puisant soeuer they be haue dominion only ouer our goodes and bodies in ciuil causes to the quiet peacible gouernement of the affaires of this life Priests then honoured vvith such high gifts vvhich were neuer bestowed vpon Angels to vse S. Chrysostomes wordes that is that had * Lib. 3. de Sacerdot f●om Christ authority and power to a Ioh. 20. forgiue sinnes to consecrate his blessed b Math. 26. body that are briefly c 1. Cor. 4. the dispensours of Gods holy word and Sacraments d Hebr. 5. ve●s 1. 2. taken from among men and appointed for men in those thinges that appertaine vnto God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices as for their owne so for the sinnes of the rest of Gods people to vse the Apostles wordes if these mens heauenly function be base beggarly and contemptible it is in the conceit only of blinded worldlings e 1. Cor. 2. vers 14. That perceiue not the thinges which are of the spirit of God nor can judge of them because they be spiritually to be examined And M. Abbot the best floure of whose garland is his Ecclesiastical calling should haue left the vilifying of the order of Priest-hood to some other of the laity And so no doubt he would haue done had he beene a true Clergy-man in deede and not so called by meere vsurpation for as you know it is the part of an vncleane bird to defile her owne nest But the wel-nurtured man would perhaps out of his little good manners haue made exception of this also as he did of my degree if he had remembred it Now to that vvhich followeth to shew that he had some cause to burst out into those bigge wordes he saies That I did vpbraide my Prince with misfortune in his bringing vp which is false for I mentioned it with compassion as King Priamus calamities are by many remembred vvith sorrow yet with great affection to his person I did not write a sillable that sounded to his Majesties disgrace but did rather excuse his failing in religion laying the fault of it vpon them who in his tender yeares vvhen he was not able to judge misinstructed him signifying that if it had beene his blessed hap to haue escaped their seducing speeches til he had come to riper age he would rather haue controled and corrected them then haue giuen eare to their errours and follies I vvillingly acknowledge a most rare readinesse of wit in his Majesty and firmenesse of memory both to attaine to high litterature and to deliuer it most eloquently so much the more sorry I am that these goodly and faire gifts of nature wanted such supernatural aides and ornamēts as education in the Catholike Church and among the best sort of Catholikes might and would most willingly haue afforded him for then no doubt he would haue farre out-gone himself in al good litterature and proued most singular Let the considerate reader to judge the better of our spirits compare my speeches to my Soueraigne vvith M. Abbots of the supreme Pastour of the Church as we beleeue vvhom the Protestants doe not denie to be one of the chiefest Patriarkes of the Christian world I meane the Bishop of Rome vvhom M. Abbot doth cōmonly raile vpon in most vile and reprochful tearmes stiling him ordinarily nothing else but The man of sinne and perdition the whoore of Babilon Antichrist himselfe and such like betweene whose supereminent dignity and M. Abbots meane place there is no lesse difference then betweene a temporal Prince and his subject of any good sort If I then be rightly