Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	heaven_n	place_n	power_n	5,785	5	4.8077	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30650	A vindicaton of churches, commonly called Independent, or, A briefe answer to two books the one, intituled, Twelve considerable serious questions, touching church-government, the other, Independency examined, unmasked, refuted, &c. : both lately published by William Prinne ... / Henry Burton ...	Burton, Henry, 1578-1648.	1644 (1644)	Wing B6176; ESTC R20892	61,118	78

serve for Christ will not have his people to be wandring sheep when they may have a fold nor to be individua vaga when they may be reduced to order The ninth Interrogatory This Interrogatory lays a charge upon Independents for refusing to admit to the Lords Supper such as are not notoriously scandalous nor grossely ignorant but professe repentance c. which you say is a very uncharitable arrogant yea unchristian practise contrary to Christs own example in admitting Iudas to the Lords Supper Also to that of Paul 1 Cor. 11. you calling it also a transcendent straine of tyrannicall usurpation over soules and consciences and Gods Ordinances worse then our most domineering Lordly Prelates c. yea Lording over Christ himselfe and more then ever the Apostles did but onely by their extraordinary calling c. I answer in one word omitting your copious aggravations and sharp censures that we look further then to a generall profession and conversation namely to their faith in Christ that it be sound intire and whole and namely whether they hold him to be as the onely Prophet and High Priest so the onely Prince of his People the onely Lord and Lawgiver to every mans conscience and over every Congregation or Church of his Saints If they thus acknowledge not Christs kingly office as well as his other offices we doe not we dare not receive them And what have they to do with the seales that refuse by covenant to own Christ for their King As for Judas he received the sop not the supper for after the sop he went out * immediately saith John So as it appeares the other Evangelists relate some other passages by a hysteron proteron as is not unusuall in Scripture story And none of them saith that he received the Supper And suppose â—e did the Churches Censure had not yet past upon him onely John by a secret signe knew he was to be the traytor For that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 28. that was a true Church though now disordered and the Apostle refers the redressing of their abuses to themselves The case is otherwise here so as all your accumulated calumniations fall to ground And concerning the Apostles extraordinary calling if we must expect the like calling we must not in the meane time admit of any either to Baptisme or to the Lords Supper neither should there be any gathering of Churches at all as some from hence doe gather Besides what shall the authority be that Luther gathered the Churches by and those that followed him and what lawfull gathering then have the Reformed Churches For your marginall note of Moses David Solomon about setling Religion by Gods own direction herein you come home to that I said before alledged against your unlimited law But in that you now restraine by their example all Church-government to the Civil Magistrates you must make it out by holding close to the rule that is To settle Religion by Gods own direction as you here confesse and not to elect erect a forme of Religion and Church-government such as they shall conceive sutable c. as before you told us And Moses David Solomon were all types of Christ who put an end to all such And while you there exclude the Priests from having any thing to doe in Reforming or advising What will the Assembly say to you But they may advise you will say But the Priests might do nothing but according to Gods prescript law no more then Moses David Solomon And if the Priests as you say had no ruling votes then by this reckoning what votes do you allow the Assembly-men in their mixt Committees with the members of Parliament or in the Assembly it selfe Reconcile these I pray you The tenth Interrogatory This Interrogatory questions or rather as all the rest concludes that that Text Mat. 18. 15 16 17. is not meant of any Ecclesiasticall censure as of Excommunication but onely of the civill Court of Justice Brother if you did speake hereas a Divine and not meerly as a lawyer you would not have against the judgment of most learned Divines ancient and modern and not Papists c. so interpreted this place And what speak I of Divines The Text it selfe is its own clearest Interpreter For it is immediatly added v. 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heaven Which is without controversie spoken of Church-censure or of the power of the Keyes in exercising Church-discipline as that Matth. 16. 19 is spoken of doctrine as the learned Calvin well observeth So as this very context cleareth the former to bee meant of Church-censure as it was among the Jewes You alledge on the contrary that learned Lawyer whom wee all honour for his learning Good brother I could wish that all this zeale of yours against Independents might not arise from any jealousie as if Church-censures should prejudicate or trench upon your pleadings at the Barre of civill justice Farre be it that we should have our motion beyond our own Spheare Content your self with your own Orb and we shall confine our selves to ours I dare warrant you Again to what purpose do you urge this interpretation of this Text against us Do not all the Presbyterians expound it so And if this Text which is made the great pillar of Presbyterian excommunication be taken off you leave no more to a Classis then we scil. to consult and advise And with this foot you have dashed all the milk you gave them The eleventh Interrogatory This Interrogatory is to perswadeus that in that Assembly or Evangelicall Synod as you call it Acts 15. the Apostles voted not as they were Apostles infallibly guided by the holy Ghost but rather as they were in their ordinary capacitie as Elders and chiefe members of it Whereupon producing your six reasons for it you peremptorily conclude that this is an undeniable Scripture-authority for the lawfulnesse use of Parliaments Councels Synods under the Gospel upon all like necessary occasions and for their power to determine controversies of Religion to make Canons in things necessary for the Churches peace and concernment maugre all evasions exceptions of Independents to elude it But let us examine your six reasons why the Apostles sate not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders c. Where first we lay this ground for the contrary scil. that they sate as Apostles because not ordinary Elders as Elders can say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us But the Apostles as Apostles might say so because in any doctrinall point they had the promise of the Spirit to bee led into all truth as upon whom the Church was to bee built Eph. 2. 20. Secondly if they sate as ordinary Elders then their decrees did no further bind then as they might appeare to agree with Scripture otherwise Elders as Elders may bind the conscience let the decree bee

That the maintaining of such a liberty as you assume here is so we have in part shewed already from the Scripture whence you are not able to bring the least shadow of reason to maintain it Nay we need go no further for the disfranchising of this your liberty but your own words Your words are asistata they cannot cohere in any true Theologicall sense For first we ought not to assume or pretend a liberty as left us of God when we want our evidence and are not able to produce our Charter out of the Magna Charta the Scripture And this brother not you nor any man can do Again nothing is more presumptuous then to attempt to mingle heaven earth together that is to mingle Christs Kingdom with the kingdoms of the world or to these to frame and fashion that which what is it else but to set up a Babylonish Church-government Did the Apostles thus Did they frame Christs Kingdom Church-government to the laws and customes of the Romance Empire Or did they vary their orders for Church-government Discipline according to the different manners and customes of those Nations countreys or Provinces where they planted their Churches Had they one order for the Church of Corinth and another for the Churches of Galatia and a third for the Churches of Asia and the rest No But so ordain I in all Churches saith the Apostle And concerning the collection for the Saints as I have given order to the Churches of Galatia even so do ye So also for making of Ministers and other Church-officers Act. 1. 14. 23. Again Your Church-government must be conceived to be consonant to Gods Word yet with this restriction or limitation that it be also consonant to the Laws and Government under which we live You speak indeed like a pure Lawyer one that will stand for your Profession were this the way to uphold it But cannot your Law and our Gospel cotton together unlesse the Gospel weare the Laws livery like to your Serjeants gown made up of two severall colours ' or unlesse Law and Gospel be woven together into a linsey woolsey garment But what if your Law present stand still in force for Church-government without being repealed Must the Gospel be brought again under your Prelaticall Church-government Or rather why should not a generall law to use your words be enacted to inhibite all formes of Church-government and Discipline which are not every way consonant to Gods Word without this addition And to the Laws and Government under which we live For certainely if the Lawes and Government of the State under which we live be good and just there is no need why you should put upon Christs kingly Government in his Church such hard conditions as not to be admitted but so farre as it is consonant to mans Laws As Tertullian said when upon the Emperour Tiberius his motion to the Romane Senate that Christ might be admitted and enrowled among Romes gods and the Senate refused because they had made a Law that none should be chosen for a god unlesse first propounded by the Senate Ergo nisi homini placuerit Deus non erit Deus Therefore if it please not man God shall not be God So let it be lawfull for me to say If it please not man not the Senate Christ shall not be King his kingdome shall have no place in this or that Nation As if the good Laws of a civill State and the good Laws of Christs kingdome could not ought not to stand together in their distinct forms unmixed when certainly a State stands strongest while most consonant to Gods Word and to the Church-government and Discipline of Christ and not when Christs kingdome and Government is made sutable to the Laws and customes of the State Famous was that Answer of Eleutherius Bishop of Rome to Lucius King of Britaine when this Countrey of Britaine first received the faith being the first Province that received it where the Gospel began freely to be preached without impeachment or inhibition of the Prince as the * Story saith and that without any ceremonies at all King Lucius sending to Eâ—eutherius for some modell or form of Church-Government and Discipline he received this Answer That Christ had left sufficient Order in the Scripture for the Government of the Church and not onely for that but also for the regiment of his whole Realme if he would submit himself to follow that Rule You require of us saith he the Romane Ordinances with the Imperiall Statutes also to be sent unto you which you desire to practise The Romane Laws we may find to be faulty but Gods Laws never You have received of late through Gods mercy in the Realme of Britaine the law and faith of Christ you have with you both volumes of the Scriptures Out of them therefore by Gods grace and the counsell of your Realm take you a law and by that law through Gods sufferance rule your kingdome Now this Eleutherius being the 14th Bishop of Rome by Platina's account it shews unto us the great difference between that and after-times wherein the Mystery of Iniquity grew up to its height in assuming such an unlimited liberty to set up such a Church-Government and ceremonies of humane invention as were haled in by the head and shoulders But brother Prinne you see here how in those purer primitive times even the Bishop of Rome himselfe was so farre from admitting a Church-Government sutable to the severall lawes and customes of every Nation as you would have it as he tels King Lucius he hath both the Testaments by the rule whereof he should not onely see the Church to be governed but his own Realme also Ergo the Kingly government of Christ in his Church is not to be fashioned and moulded according to the lawes and customes of temporall and civill States but contrarily the lawes of Civill States are to be reduced to the rule of Gods Word But you adde also And manners of their people that is in their severall Countries and Common-weales Surely this reflects mine eye upon that Reformation begun in King Edwards reigne But now what Church-Government and Discipline was to be set up Why the manners of the people must be the line and plummet to regulate this building by The people of England had beene so long rooted in a superstitious Egyptian soyle but because fat and filling their flesh-pots with Onions and Garlick they could the better brook the burthens which their Taskmaâ—â—ers the Prelates inured their shoulders withall And withall they must have their Masse-Service though translated out of the Roman into the English language This in King Edward his letter to the Cornishmen standing up for their Masse-book stilled the babes when they understood the English Service-booke was no other then the Romish Masse clad in an English weed though since it hath put off many of those ragges but not all it should So much it importeth to have

ANSVVER To Mr. PRYNNES second Book MY deare Brother to your twelve new Interrogatories I present you with a new Answer I call it new because I shall cull out such passages as I find new or not so much insisted on in your former twelve Which as they are fewer so I shall be the shorter for as much as in the former I have been the larger But brother I find not that in your Book which you pretend in your Title to wit the Unmasking of Independency Nor can we expect it of you for in your Proeme you say that the Independents have not dogmatically and in direct termes discovered the full truth of what they assert If not what kind of visage will you discover when you have taken off the mask Surely by your handling of the matter you mean to unmask some hags face such as pleased the Painter Which when you have done it will appeare to all the wise-hearted that it is not the face of Independency as wherein there shines forth such a beauty as it seemeth you yet never saw In your Preface to the Courteous Râ—â—der you say We politickly conceale the principall grounds and more deformed parts of our Church-Platforme for feare of miscarrying Good brother who told you soâ— Remember your own lesson before Judge not But indeed had you reproved us yet in love and meeknesse for not setting forth more fully a compleat Modell of this fabrick or spirituall house it had been something Which yet if it were done you would not impute it to policy that it was not sooner done But when it is exactly done you will find no deformed parts at all in it but contrariwise a greater beauty then in that famous Temple that Solomon built as being the spirituall Temple of Jesus Christ so as I am sorry you are put to the paines of pumping out our determinations as you say by your Questions When as you should rather find it as a fountaine flowing forth in the streets But brother how doe you write by Question not decision as you say when your Questions prove to be decisions as your former twelve are And what doe you els but refute upon bare conjectures Andabatarum more pugnando as those at blind-man-buff For your Charges upon us are very sore and as many doe say bitter so farre beyond reason as you are not able truly to say Wherefore For your first Question Whether the Independent forme of Church-government be anywhere to be found in the Old or New Testament this we have resolved in your former Twelve Questions so as this is no new Interrogatory unlesse you put the greater difference between Questions and Interrogatories And though it were in no antiquitie which yet we have shewen before neverthelesse if it be found in the Scripture as there it is whatsoever clouds of the mastery of iniquitie have darkened the lustre of it for so many hundred yeares yet this cannot plead prescription against it For if Nullum tempus occurrit Regi then surely no tract of time can prescribe against the law of Christs kingdome which we finde upon sacred record But where say you Why brother this House of God wherein Christ rules as King stands upon so many Principles as so many maine pillars not to be shaken As 1. It is a spirituall house whose onely builder and governour is Christ and not man 2. It is a spirituall kingdome whose onely King is Christ and not man 3. It is a spirituall Republick whose onely Law-giver is Christ and not man 4. It is a spiritual Corporation or body whose onely head is Christ and not man 5. It is a Communion of Saints governed by Christs Spirit not man's 6. Christs Church is a Congregation called and gathered out of the world by Christs Spirit and Word and not by man These Principles are such as the Adversaries themselves of this kingdome of Christ cannot dare not deny And out of these Principles doe issue these Conclusions 1. That no man is the builder of this spirituall house 2. That no man nor power on earth hath a kingly power over this kingdome 3. That no earthly Law-givers may give Lawes for the government of this Republick 4. That no man may claime or exercise a headship over this Body 5. That no man can or ought to undertake the Government of this Communion of Saints Item That none are of this Communion but visible Saints Ergo a true visible Church of Christ cannot be defined or confined to a parochiall multitude Item â—hat that Government of this Communion is not extrinsecall but intrinsecall by the Spirit of the Word and by the Word of the Spirit 6. That men may not appoint limit constitute what Congregations of all sorts they please to be Churches of Christ as Nations and Parishes But you confesse in generall Christ to be the Builder the King the Law-giver the Head the Governour the Caller the Gatherer of his Churches If you doe you must approve of those Churches you call Independent as whereof Christ is the onely Builder King Law-giver Head Governour Caller and Gatherer If you doe not in denying Christ in these relations you deny Christ in his absolute Regalitie But in your Answer to your Antiquerist pag. 6. you doe in part grant Christ to be King internally in the soule which you say may passe for tolerable O brother No more but may passe for tolerÃ¡ble You that are so lâ—rge-â—earred to your friends are you so strait-laced to Christ Surely Brother Christ is the full and sole King raigning in the heart and conscience of every true beleever It were intolerable not to grant this in its full latitude But you absolutely deny Christs sole kingly Government externall over his Churches Brother this is no lesse Christs kingly Prerogative then the former Hee that is King over every part of the body must needs be King over the whole body It therefore Christ be the only King over every mans conscience so as no man nor power on earth may sit with him in this his Throne then consequently by the seâ—f-same reason must he by the Word of the kingdome as the only Law thereof exercise his kingly office over his Churches so as no humane power or law may intermeddle to prescribe rules for the government or forms of this spirituall House and Kingdome For otherwise if man should set up a form of Government over the Church of Christ to which all must conforme then of necessitie should man bâ— Lord over the couscience which is the highest presumption against the most High And then what mischiefs would followâ— What intolerable tyrannie over the conscience Then must your words ibid. come to passe If a moderated or regulated Epâ—scopacie the same with Presbyterio should by the Synods advice be unanimâ—usly established in Parliament as most consonant to the Scriptures and most agrerable to the Civill Government I shall readily submit unto it

without opposition and why not you and alâ— others So you O Brother I stand amazed But I go on Then againe the Scripture as it sets downe the qualifications of the members of this body so the forming of them in the body in the parts thereof more principall and lesse superiour and inferiour for order and well-being As Pastors and Teachers Teaching and Ruling Elders Helpes Governments Bishops and Deacons or by what other means soever they are diversified in Scripture And this is one uniforme forme of Government which Christ hath fixed in his Churches without any difference at all but secundumâ—magis minus as before as lesser Churches have fewer Officers greater moe So as brother if the old Wine be better old Presbyâ—erie old unlordly Episcâ—pâ—cy surel the Independents do justly challenge it Which had you once truly tasted of you would never have desired to drink other The Lord remove that aguish humor * Vexatus fâ—bre recusâ—t â—ptima Your second Interrogatory is about the lawfull poweâ— of Civill Magistrates in all matters of Church-government wherein you tax some Independents for extraordinary eclipsing the same Some what some may say is one thing must therfore the Independent Church-government say it too You alledge for this a passage in the Answer of two of the brethren to A. S. for wch one of them is lately questioned but I hope he wil clear himself But the weight of this whole Interrogatory lies in your Marginall note where you peremptorily conclude That the chief Government and ordering of the Church and power of making Ecclesiasticall Lawes or Canons to bind it before the Law belonged to the Patriarks and others was not as they were Priests but Rulers and Fathers of their Families under the Law say you it belonged to Moses to the Kings of Iudah Israel and the morall Assemblies or Congregations of the Princes Nobles chiefe Captains Heads and Elders of the people Therefore under the Gospel by like reason and equity and because it is a part of Christs kingly not Priestly or Propheticall Office it must needs belong to Christian Princes Magistrates Parliaments to whom Christ hath delegated his kingly Office not to Ministers to whom he hath given onely his Propheticall or Priestly Authoritie not the Royall as the Scriptures at large relate nor yet to particular Congregations who are not Magistrates nor higher Powers invested with Christs royall Authoritie So you where you tell us many strange things but prove nothing But brother in such a weighty Argument as this your {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} will not serve the turne yea you here overthrow those Principles forementioned That Christ is the onely King so the onely Priest the onely Prophet of his Church which his three offices are incommunicable to any creature as they are proper and peculiar onely to him He is the onely King c. Now to be solus {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The onely Potentate the King of Kings and Lord of Lords this is Christs Regall prerogative which is in communicable to any or to all the powers on earth It is no lesse incommunicable then his omnipotencie his omniscience his omnipresence and the rest of his incommunicable Attributes no lesse then his Mediatorship Those Patriarchs and Princes of Israel before the Law and under the Law from Adam to Christ never had this power or prerogative to make Ecclesiasticall Lawes or binding Canons no nor yet Moses noâ— Kings of Iudah Israel and Generall Assemblies Princes Nobles chiefe Captaines and Elders of the people as you muster them up together in your marginall note A seeming goodly Army indeed but so many shadowes of men for any such power they had as you would with your penfull of ink paint cut unto us And first for those before the Law was given in Sinai had they this power you speak of Cain and Abel brought their Sacrifices What Was it a * will-worship of their own election If so God had regarded Abels sacrifice no more then Cains How then Their Sacrifice was of Gods own appointment Adam had it from God and his children from him For as God revealed to Adam Christ so those Sacrifices types of Christ Whence the learned Interpreter Calvin saith Tenendum est c. We are to hold that the manner of sacrificing was not unadvisedly devised by them but delivered to them from God For seeing the Apostle resâ—â—res the dignity of Abels sacrifice as attributed to faith it followes he offered it not without Gods commandement So as it could not have pleased God had it not been according to his commandement So Calvin Nor is all here expressed no doubt they had an Altar also whereon to offer for the sanctifying and accepting the offering which Altar was a type of Christ the true * Altar to whom Abels faith had respect Though we read not of Altar before Gen. 8. 28. We read also of difference of beasts clean unclean Gen. 7. By all which it is evident that God gave a law to Adam and his off-spring sutable to that in Mount Sinai for a rule of divine worship so also for Church-government And this further appeareth by the Law in Sinai afterwards where Moses is expresly charged to do all things both for worship and Church-government according to the patern shewed him in the Mount as before we noted And when the Temple was to be built God gave to David an exact patern of all things yea of every particular both in writing and by his Spirit not onely for worship but for the whole ministration about the Temple a type of Christs Church under the Gospell so as neither Moses nor Kings of Iudah had the least power to devise any other forme then that prescribed of God The keeping of the Passover once in the second month by Ezechiah was extraordinary upon a case of necessity And for the Kings of Israel will you equall them with the Kings of Judah Had they lawfull power as Jerobam to set up his two golden â—â—lvs and so to change the form of worship Church-government When that King Aâ—as set up his Damascen Altar was it by a Regall power invested in him from God So of other Kings of Juda good or bad they had no lawfull power at all to alter the form prescribed of God one jor And therefore brother you are wondred at that being a man of much reading and mightie parts you should utter such strange things ne quid dicam durius as these are and that so confidently when you neither doe nor ever can bring the least proofe yea or colour of what you affirm And therefore your inference upon such empty premises that therefore under the Gospel by like reason and equity it must needs belong to Christian Princes Magistrates Parliaments to whom Christ hath delegated his Kingly office c. is no consequence Whence I note two things 1. Like reason and

Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Text snippets containing the quad