Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	apostle_n	church_n	time_n	1,642	5	3.9468	3	false

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

v. 8. Rom. 16. vers 19. Your obedience is published into euery place But no maruaile to the vvise though he did not then make mention of her Supremacy for that did not belong to the Church or people of Rome but to S. Peter vvho vvhen S. Paul wrote that Epistle vvas scarse vvel setled there neither did that appertaine to the matter he created of Of pardons S. Paul teacheth in formal tearmes which both the Church of Corinth and he himselfe gaue vnto the incestuous Corinthian that then repented these be his wordes 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. And whom you haue pardoned any thing I also for my selfe also that which I haue pardoned if I haue pardoned any thing for you in the person of Christ that we be not circumuented of Sathan What can be more manifest then that the Apostle did release some part of the penance of that incestuous Corinthian at other mens request vvhich is properly to giue pardon and indulgence And if S. Paul in the person of Christ could so doe no doubt but S. Peter could doe as much and consequently other principal Pastours of Christes Church haue the same power and authority The last of M. Abbots instances is That S. Paul saith nothing of traditions wherein he sheweth himselfe not the least impudent for the Apostle speaketh of them very often He desireth the Romans to Rom. 16. vers 17. marke them that make dissentions and scandals contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and to auoide them but the doctrine that they had then learned before S. Paul sent them this Epistle vvas by vvord of mouth and tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written vvherefore the Apostle teacheth al men to be auoided that dissent from doctrine deliuered by tradition And in the Actes of the Apostles it is of record how S. Paul vvalking through Siria and Silicia confirming the Churches Act. 15. v. 41 Commanded them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients Item vvhen they passed through the citties they Act. 16. v. 4. deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in faith c. Where it also appeareth that those decrees vvere made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they vvere written He doth also charge his best beloued disciple Timothy 1. Tim. 6. vers 20. To keepe the depositum that is the vvhole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it auoiding the prophane nouelty of voices and oppositions of falsly called knowledge Againe he commandeth 2. Tim. 2. vers 2. him to commend to faithful men the thinges which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses Was not this to preach such doctrine as he had receiued by Apostolike tradition without writing And further vvhich suppresseth al the vaine cauils of the sectaries he saith 2. Thessal 2. vers 15. Therefore bretheren stand and hold the traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle where you see that some traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand aswel as some others were vvritten and vvere as wel to be holden and stood too as the written proceeding from the same fountaine of truth Gods spirit Thus much in answere vnto the instances proposed by M. Abbot vvhich he very ignorantly and insolently auoucheth to haue no proofe or sound of proofe out of S. Paul I could vvere it not to auoide tediousnesse adde the like confirmation of most controuersies out of the same blessed Apostle as that 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. the Church is the pillar and ground of truth vvherefore any man may most assuredly repose his faith vpon her declaration That Christ gaue Ephes 4. v. 11. 13. Pastors and Doctors to the edifying of that his mistical body vntil we meete al in the vnity of faith c. Therefore the Church shal not faile in faith vntil the day of judgement nor be inuisible that hath visible Pastors and teachers Also Hebr. 5. vers 1. that Priests are chosen from among men and appointed for men in those thinges that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne That Preachers and 1. Cor. 3. v. 9. Priests are Gods coadjutors and helpers and not only idle instruments That S. Paul and Timothy 1. Cor. 9. vers 23. 1. did saue other men and therefore no blasphemy to pray to Saints to helpe and saue vs. That S. Paul did Tim. 4. vers 16. accomplish those thinges that want to the passions of Christ in his flesh for Christes body which is the Church therefore Christes passion doth not take away our owne satisfaction That he a Colloss 1. vers 24. 1. Cor. 9. vers 16. gloried in preaching the Gospel of free cost which was a worke of supererogation That b Ephes 5. vers 32. Marriage is a great Sacrament That c 1. Tim. 4. vers 23. grace was giuen to Timothy by the imposition of the handes of Priest-hood vvhence it followeth that Matrimony and holy Orders be true and perfect Sacraments But vvhat doe I I should be too long if I would prosecute al that which the Apostle hath left in vvriting in fauour defence of the Roman faith This I doubt not wil suffice to confront his shamelesse impudency that blushed not to affirme there vvas not a vvord in S. Paul that sounded for the Catholike but al in shew at least for the Protestant As for S. Peter I vvil wholy omit him because the Protestants haue smal confidence in him Here I may be bold I hope to turne vpon M. Abbot this dilemma and forked argument vvhich S. Augustine framed against the Manichean Adimantus Lib. 1. cont Adimant Hoc si imprudens fecit nihil caecius si autem sciens nihil sceleratius If M. Abbot did ignorantly affirme S. Paul to haue said nothing for the Roman Catholikes what could be more blind then not to be able to discerne any thing in such cleare light if he said it vvittingly knowing the contrary then did he it most vvickedly so to lie against his owne conscience to draw after him selfe other men into errour and perdition ROBERT ABBOT WEL M. Bishop let vs leaue Peter and Paul for heretikes let vs see vvhether those that succeeded did al teach the same doctrine that the Church of Rome now teacheth Hollinshead descript of Britan. ca. 7. Eleutherius the bishop of Rome being sent vnto by Lucius king of this realme for a copy of the Roman constitutions for the gouernement of this new conuerted Church and of the imperial lawes for the better ordering of his common wealth about 150. yeares after the death of Christ for answere writeth vnto him Annals of England by Iohn Stow. That hauing receiued in his Kingdome the law and

Finally he doth absurdly apply S. Augustines wordes spoken against the Donatists to vs they vvil much better fit the Protestants vvho imitate their errours in most points as I haue proued already who also may be more aptly resembled to children that stand in neede of a rodde because their religion is euery vvay childish as being young and of late borne phantastical and without any sound ground of mature judgement as changeable also as children according to the diuers humour of the state and time SECT 4. W. BISHOP VERY many vrgent and forcible reasons might be produced in fauour and defence of the Catholike Roman religion whereof diuers haue beene already in most learned Treatises tendered to your Majesty wherefore I wil only touch three two chosen out of the subject of this booke the third selected from a sentence of your Majesty recorded in the aforesaid conference And because that argument is as most sensible so best assured which proceedeth from a principle either euident in it selfe or else granted and confessed to be true my first proofe shal be grounded vpon that your Highnesse resolute and constant opinion recorded in the said conference Page 75. to wit That no Church ought to separate it selfe further from the Church of Rome either in doctrine or ceremony then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her most flourishing and best estate from whence I deduce this reason The principal pillars of the Roman Church in her most flourishing estate taught in al points of religion the same doctrine that shee n●w holdeth and teacheth and in expresse tearmes condemneth for errour and heresie most of the articles which the Protestants esteeme as chiefe partes of their reformed Gospel therefore if your Majesty wil resolutely embrace and constantly defend that doctrine which the Roman Church maintained in her most flourishing estate you must forsake the Protestant and take the Catholike into your Princely and Roial protection ROBERT ABBOT YOV talke M. Bishop of many vrgent and forcible reasons but you talke as your fellowes doe like mount-bankes and juglers You haue much prating and many wordes but your reasons vvhen they are duly examined are as light as feathers before the vvinde neither vvould they seeme other to your owne followers but that you bewitch them with this principle that they must read nothing written on our part for answere to them we see your vrgent and forcible reasons in this booke vvhich you tel vs is the marrow and pith of many volumes I doubt not but by that time I haue examined the same your owne pupils and schollers if they reade the answere wil account you a meere seducer a cosener and abuser of them and wil detest you accordingly But to beginne withal you offer three reasons to his Majesty in this your Epistle for the justifying of your Romish religion for the impeaching of ours Two chosen out of the subject of this booke the third selected from a sentence of his Majesty Now if these reasons proue reasonlesse then your reason M. Bishop should haue taught you more manners and duty then thus to trouble his Majesty vvith your reasonlesse reasons To examine them in order the first reason is grounded vpon a principle most judiciously soundly affirmed by his Majesty That no Church ought further to seperate it selfe from the Church of Rome in doctrine or ceremony then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing best estate and which is subtilly left out by M. Bishop from Christ her Lord and head For seeing it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome vvas once sound and vpright in faith the Apostle bearing witnesse Rom. 1. That their faith was published throughout the world it must needes follow that vvhat shee hath not since that time altered is stil vpright and sound and therefore to be embraced Now from thence M. Bishop argueth thus The principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in al points the same doctrine that shee now teacheth and in expresse tearmes did condemne of heresie most of the articles of our religion ergo c. but soft and faire M. Bishop there is no hast c. WILLIAM BISHOP TRVE there is no hast indeede for M. Abbot comes faire and soft to the matter What a number of idle vaunting wordes and vaine repetitions be here as though any juditious man vvere to be perswaded by bare wordes and voluntary supposals before he see any proofe S ir I doubt not but the indifferent reader vvil suspend his judgement and deeme nere the worse of my vvriting for your empty censure til he see good reason to the contrary Sure I am that some Catholikes hauing read your booke doe like much the better of mine and esteeme yours a very fond peece of worke ful of babble lies and foule wordes void of found proofes and farre from common ciuility Who are more circumspect then you your selues to keepe your followers from reading our bookes vvho first imprison any that wil helpe to print them then set fines on al their heades that shal keepe them and make very diligent search after them so that al these common wordes may most truly be returned vpon your selfe Mutato nomine de te narratur fabula You note that I subtilly left out of his Majesties speech from Christ her Lord and head but shew no cause why and no maruaile for none indeede can be shewed they are needlesse wordes as being comprehended in the former For if the Church of Rome departed not from her selfe vvhen shee was in her most flourishing and best estate shee cannot depart from Christ her Lord and head vvherefore to note this for a subtle tricke giueth the reader cause to note you for a wrangler and one that is very captious where no cause is offered M. Abbot comes at length to my first reason and goeth about to disproue it thus ROBERT ABBOT WE hope you wil not deny but the Apostle S. Paul was one principal pillar of the Church of Rome vvho there shed his bloud He vvrote an Epistle to that Church vvhen the faith thereof was most renowmed throughout the world He vvrote at large comprehending therein as * Theodor. in praefat epist Pat. li. Theodoret saith doctrine of al sortes or al kinde of doctrine Et accuratam copiosamue dogmatum pertractationem An exact and plentiful handling of al points thereof Now in al that Epistle what doth he say either for you or against vs nay what doth he not say for vs against you he condemneth the Rom. 1. v. 23. changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the Image of a corruptible man and worshipping the creature in steede of the creatour It is for vs against you for you by your schoole-trickes doubt not to teach men by the Image of a man to worship God and by religious deuotion of praiers and offerings to worship Saints and Saints Images

now by the Canon of the Masse the Priest must dippe the third part of the consecrated host into the Sacrament of the bloud and there praieth that this mixture may be heathful to himselfe and al the receiuers vnto euerlasting life WILLIAM BISHOP I Cannot easily judge whether this man were more fiercely bent to deceiue others or more foolishly set to shame himselfe vvith lying that durst aduenture vpon this Canon of the auncient and most learned Pope Iulius for besides that it hath nothing for the Protestants purpose it doth in sundry points notably confirme the Roman doctrine thus beginneth the Canon When euery crime and sinne is purged and blotted out by sacrifices offered vnto God what shal hereafter be giuen to God for the purgation of our sinnes when errour is committed in the oblation of the sacrifice it selfe note how often he repeateth and recommendeth the diuine sacrifice of the Masse For we haue heard of some men possessed with schismatical ambition who contrary to diuine order and the institution of the Apostles doe in the diuine sacrifice offer milke in steede of wine others also for a complement of communion doe giue the dipped Sacrament to the people c. Then confuting these opinions he saith When the Master of truth did commend to his Disciples the true sacrifice of our saluation he gaue to none of them milke c. let therefore milke be no more offered when we sacrifice Then come in the broken vvordes of M. Abbot thus But for that of the dipped Eucharist which for a complement of communion they deliuer to the people they haue not receiued any testimony brought out of the Gospel where our Lord commended to the Apostles his body and bloud for there the bread is mentioned apart and the commendation of the Chalice apart where M. Abbot first left out the commending of Christs body and bloud to his Disciples because those vvordes vvould haue scalded his tongue Secondly this Canon hath nothing against that vvhich is now done by the Priest in the Masse for the Priest doth not dippe any part of the Host into the Chalice to be afterwardes taken out and giuen to the people vvhich is that which Pope Iulius doth disproue Neither doe our Priests to speake properly dippe any part of the Sacrament into the Chalice for dipping in importeth as much as the putting in and taking foorth againe which we doe not but only for a holy signification we doe put into the Chalice one litle par●● of the Host there to lie and not to be taken out againe but to be receiued by the Priest together with the bloud and therefore we cal it not the dipping in but the mixture or mingling together of the body and bloud of Christ wherefore M. Abbot erreth in the maine point of his reprehension For Pope Iulius reproued only the giuing of the dipped Host vnto the people vvhich we doe not nor hold it any way necessary because vve teach them that the holy Host of Christs body containes in it selfe being a liuing body as wel Christes bloud as his flesh now vve doe only put a little peece of the sacred Host into the Chalice there to be receiued with the pretious bloud not of the people but by the Priest alone That this is no new deuise of the Church of Rome may be wel gathered out of the same distinction and in the very next leafe to that of Pope Iulius cited by M. Abbot in the Canon Triforme De consecrat distinct 2. vvhere Pope Sergius of more then 800. yeares standing doth expound this very ceremony of putting one part of the host into the Chalice It was then a knowne vsed ceremony of the Masse in his daies and no late inuention as M. Abbot dreameth I may not here forget that in the very Canon of Pope Iulius vvhich M. Abbot alleageth there is most expresse and very earnest cōmandement of mingling water with the vvine that is to be consecrated Because saith that blessed Pope our Lordes Chalice according vnto the precepts of the Canons must be offered the wine being first mingled with water Finally we haue in this Canon alleaged by M. Abbot a confirmation of a propitiatory sacrifice of the real presence of Christs body and bloud two principal points of our doctrine and of mingling water with wine in the offertory and not one direct word for the Protestants And because this resolution of Iulius seemeth to be taken almost vvord for word out of Pope Alexanders first letter vvho was but the fift Pope from S. Peter I wil acquaint the reader vvith his wordes these they be Alexand. in epist omnibus orthodoxis De consecrat dist 2. Can. 1. In the oblations of Sacraments which are offered vnto our Lord at the solemne time of Masse the passion of our Lord is to be blended that his passion may be celebrated whose body and bloud is made and consecrated so that superstitious opinions being banished bread alone and wine mingled with water be offered in the sacrifice For as we haue receiued from the Fathers and very reason doth teach in the cuppe of our Lord only water or only wine ought not to be offered but both of them mixed togither And a little after Crimes and sinnes are blotted out when these sacrifices are offered therefore the passion of our Lord whereby we were redeemed is to be remembred with such sacrifices our Lord is delighted and shal be appeased and wil pardon huge offences For among sacrifices nothing can be greater then the body and bloud of Christ Neither is there any oblation better then this but this surpasseth them al c. Where you see the present Roman religion deliuered in as formal tearmes as may be There is also much more to the same purpose but I am the briefer in these authorities and doe alleage them more sparingly because Protestants seing them to be beyond al other exceptions doe flatly deny almost al the Epistles and Decretals of the most ancient Popes neuerthelesse they must needes be effectual and haue good place against M. Abbot that doth take vpon him to establish their doctrine put downe ours by the testimony of these the lawful heires and successours vnto the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul alleaging many testimonies out of the very same Epistles Wherefore seing he hath appealed to them he must needes stand to them for this sentence of the President Festus hath his ground in very reason it selfe Act. 25. v. 12. Hast thou appealed to Caesar to Caesar shalt thou goe M. Abbot judged those Popes sentences of sound authority for confirmation of their religion he may not therefore deny them being brought in against him The same Pope Iulius to omit many other cleare testimonies taken out of his owne letters because the Protestants doe cauil at them doth most euidently confirme the soueraigne power of the See of Rome ouer al the East Church euen by the vvitnesse of most approued authours For vpon the