Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
heaven_n church_n key_n peter_n 5,807 5 7.9067 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A85314 Separation examined: or, a treatise vvherein the grounds for separation from the ministry and churches of England are weighed, and found too light. The practise proved to be not onely unwarrantable, but likewise so hurtful to the churches, that church-reformation cannot with any comfort go forward, so long as such separation is tolerated. Also an humble request presented to the congregational divines, that since the differences between them and the classical-divines are very small they would please to strike in with the classical-divines in carrying on the worke of reformation, before the inundation of these corrupt opinions, have destroyed both ordinances and religion. / By Gi. Firmin minister to the church in Shalford in essex. Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697. 1652 (1652) Wing F964; Thomason E656_12; ESTC R206624 107,263 123

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

witty speech of him Let the Elders keep the keyes and the people the keyclog it proves so too often What our Divines have said about it is well knowne I thinke they have battered this notion pretty well Augustine sometime is quoted for this opinion but I am confident it was never in Augustines thoughts In Evan. Joan. Tract 50. Tract 124. I am mistaken if he be not rather for the Catholick Church by his words especially in the latter place quoted not mentioning what other Divines have spoken there are two or three things that have made me doubt of this so as I never did throughly close with this notion when I was but a private member of a Church 1. That which is the primum subjectum is the proprium subjectum none doubt of this Proprium subjectum est quod cum suo accidente reciprocatur Animal est proprium subjectum sensus homo risus hence we say omnis homo est risibilis omne risibile est homo this is Axioma 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but every Axiome that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth include in it the rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the predicate is true de omni subjecto omni loco omni tempore this is true of animal sensus So it must be true of the power of the keyes and the Fraternity Omni tempore but if we finde the power of the keyes exercised before there was a Fraternity then there was some other subject before the Fraternity When Paul came to Corinth he preached Authoritativè Ergo there was the power of the keyes in some subject but the Fratemity was Non-ens at this time how then could they be the subject Those who are the effect of the power of the keyes are not the first subject that is clear But the Fraternity is the effect it was so in all the Churches which the Apostles gathered and is indeed to this day This was one Argument troubled me So that which is primum is immediatum subjectum but how can this be since Mediantibus Apostolis and so now Mediantibus Ministris the Fraternity is made The elector is before the elected its true of Christ who elected the Apostles and gave to them the keyes from whom by a continued succession of Ministers still the Fratemity was made but had not the power of the keyes had some effect there had not been a Fraternity to choose an Officer though they are now in time before him whom they now elect yet they were not before him or them quâ fratres who by the power of the keyes in the ministry made them capable to choose an Officer therefore the power of the keyes was in some subject before them Besides election is no part of the power of the keyes Doma log p. 461. Keckes syst log l. 2. c. 20. therefore to argue the people elect ergo they are the first subject c. is fallacia non causae procansâ causae nomen hic usurpat ur pro quo vis argumento taking that to be a part of the power which is not 2 If so that which is primum est absolutum subjectum cui accidens absolutè sint ulla limitatione partis inharet sic animal est absolutum subjectum sensus adeoque visus auditus ideoque tantum animal dicitur rectê videre audire oculus non videt propriè quia non est Animal quando ergo oculus dicitur videre id non subjectivè intelligendum est sed instrumentaliter quod animal videat per oculum To apply this to our case the power of the keyes is in the whole body so the power of preaching c. there is the power subjectivè propriè so that if we aske who preached to day we must answer properly and subjectively the people preached but instrumentally only the Pastor preached so for the administration of the Sacraments this is very harsh hence againe because animal videt if a man dye or beast the eye which was the instrument of seeing excepting it may be the dissipation of the animal spirits else as an Organ it remains intire in the coates humors and optick nerves but yet it sees not So it seemes a Minister in case his body the people should dye he being but the instrument of their preaching he can preach no more this is strange how doe they preach out of their own bodies ordinatily If the men dye and only women and children be left the officer hath lost his preaching and cannot preach to them authoritatively because the Fraternity in whom the power was subjectivè is dead 3 I have observed that seven have been esteemed enough to make a Church suppose now one of these should offend another of the seven he must deale with him if he will not heare he must take two more here are four of the seven if he will not hear them tell the Church that is the three left the rest are parties Some to prove that Mat. 16. To thee I give the Keyes must be meant the Fraternity say that To Thee here is the same with Mat. 18. But this is somewhat doubted for that in Mat. 18. may well bee meant of a particular Church The visible Church is here meant saith Mr. Hoober Sur. p. 278. but in this place the Church must bee meant of the Catholike visible Church for it must be such a Church as must not faile But particular Churches may this or that particular Church I meane 2 But suppose i the so yet why must that Mat. 18. be meant only of the Fraternity Tell the Church i. e. the Fraternity if hee will not heare the Church i. e. the Fraternity where are the Officers are they no body one in New England would needs know of me why they should tell the Ministers of it when as it is Tell the Church not the Ministers this indeed would confirme it and here we should have brave order Mr. Vind. vin p. 6. Cawdry upon that Text seemes to have a good Argument since that the Kingdome of Heaven is there meant the Church the keyes are given to Peter as distinguished from the Church It is not a reasonable construction saith he of the Text to say I give to thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven that is of the Church and to mean I give to the Church the keyes of the Church whence he concludes they were given to Peter and so to the Officers for the Church as the keyes are given to the Steward for the family This Argument is worth the Answering Object The strongest Objection to mee is this the first subject takes up the whole adjunct for there is a reciprocation therefore the Presbytery cannot be the first subject for the keyes are not reciprocated with them instance is given in Election Admission of Members Discipline which cannot be performed without the Fraternity Answ If reciprocation be so required c. then this will as well deny the people to bee first