Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	earth_n	holy_a	son_n	6,849	5	4.8446	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30977	The genuine remains of that learned prelate Dr. Thomas Barlow, late Lord Bishop of Lincoln containing divers discourses theological, philosophical, historical, &c., in letters to several persons of honour and quality : to which is added the resolution of many abstruse points published from Dr. Barlow's original papers.	Barlow, Thomas, 1607-1691.	1693 (1693)	Wing B832; ESTC R3532	293,515	707

he may make Laws to oblige them to do such and such particular things as Christ hath Commanded them Thirdly As he may punish them for not doing so Thus much of the potestas ordinis in Ecclesiastical Persons But Secondly there may be considered in them the Power of Jurisdiction and that 1. In foro interno and this Power they have from Christ and not from Magistrates 2. In foro externo and Coactive and this Jurisdiction is wholly borrowed from the Civil Power and is directly subject to it Sacro fungi Ministerio nisi legitimè vocatus nullus jure potest IN the explaining the terms of the Question in order to the stating of it we shall First Take notice that the mentioning of the word Ministerium makes it obvious to us to distinguish it by Civile and Sacrum The Civil Ministry is generally taken for a publick Office or Trust committed to any by a Prince or State And so you may find it in the Imperial Laws l. 1. ff ad L. Jul. Repetund And this name of Ministers was given to the most Honourable Officers in the Roman Common-wealth But the Ministerium Sacrum is Munus alicui a Deo demandatum quo ipsi immediatius famulamur and which doth not look so much at the Political and External good of a State as Mens Ecclesiastical and inward concerns and at the Glory of God and at the Eternal Salvation of the Souls of Men. But Secondly This Ministry is not said to be Sacred in respect of its Principium a quo namely God Because although absolute loquendo the Ecclesiastical Ministry may be call'd Sacred respectu principii a quo namely God yet Comparative loquendo it is not more Sacred in order to God as the Principium a quo than the Civil Ministry for both of them do meet in this that they are a Deo And so they are both Sacred on this account For Kings in respect of their Authority delivered from God are Sacred Persons and were so called in all Ages and by all People So Sacra Majestas Caesarea Sacra Majestas Regia are the most known Epitheti of Supream Power But the Ecclesiastical Ministry is said to be Sacred in respect of its object and the matter in which it Converseth of the Management of Holy things Committed to a Man by God whereas the Civil Ministry handles not things Sacred but Civil This Sacred Ministry we affirm to have been committed by God to some certain Persons And that First Immediately in the time of the Gospel as when Christ chose the Apostles and 70. Disciples and employ'd them in the Ministry of the Gospel Secondly Mediately Thus the Apostles and their Successours did commit this Ministry to others by them chosen and ordain'd For this see S. Mathew 28.18 19 20. Jesus came and spake to them saying All power is given to me in Heaven and Earth go ye therefore and teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost c. There he committs to them the Authority given him by his Father And this is more clear out of St. John c. 20. 21. As my Father hath sent me so send I you Christ was sent by his Father they by Christ and others by them you may further consult Acts 20.28 Take heed therefore to your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers c. The Spirit of God did make them Bishops but not immediately for we know they were Constituted mediately by Man The Question therefore is whether any may perform the acts of this Ministry who are not Lawfully call'd to it We deny it and do distinguish of a double calling First Extraordinary when God doth call some Men immediately and having endow'd them with gifts sends them into the Vineyard So we know the Prophets and Apostles were call'd to the work of the Ministry and we believe that others by them were in ipsis nascentis Ecclesiae primordiis so call'd Secondly I do not doubt but that God by his infinite power may sometime call Men thus to it even at this Day But that he hath actually call'd any Men so extraordinarily and immediately the Church having been settled for so many years I deny Nor shall I believe it unless by manifest criterions they make it appear to us to be so But suppose it that Sempronius comes to me and Preacheth to me many new unheard of things and tells me that he was sent from God to declare them to me I say in this Case no Man is bound to believe Sempronius unless by some cogent demonstration he proves himself to have been thus sent by God But Secondly This calling is ordinary to wit that which is not immediately from God but mediately by the intervention of mens will and authority deriv'd from God and this calling is twofold First Internal which consists in this that he who desires to be chosen or admitted into this Holy and Religious Negotiation should seriously and sincerely examine himself and his Talents and look into the most inward recesses of his mind and at last determine himself to have this inward aptitude all things consider'd for the work of the Ministry so that he may Spontaneously offer himself up to God for no Man ought to be admitted into Holy Orders against his will Secondly This calling is external made by those who preside over the Church which consists in this First That the Overseers of the Church should approve the Mans gifts and qualifications for the work publickly Secondly After they have according to the Apostolical Canons and Rules delivered in the Scripture known and approved such a Man to be fit for the Ministry that they then impose hands on him in a Solemn manner initiate him in Holy Orders and Communicate to him the Spiritual Authority first given them by Christ For we say that without such a calling as this no Man can be a Lawful Minister And as for the necessity of this calling none of the Ancient Hereticks of the Primitive Church ever deny'd it and the Anabaptists born in High Germany were the first who deny'd it as is clear out of Sleidans Commentarys And for this you may see the Gangraena Theologiae Anabaptisticae per Johan Cl●ppenburgium This opinion of theirs was afterward own'd by Socinus as appears out of his Epistola tertia ad Math. Raderium where he saith p. 126. Jam vero verbi Dei Administratio quae ad Ecclesiam Colligendam Constituendamque requiritur nulli certae Familiae nulli eligendi rationi aut Successioni alligata e●t And he giveth his judgment in the like manner concerning the Lords Supper that it is not necessary to be given by a Minister But many Arguments might be brought from the Scripture to support the contrary truth I shall here refer to the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews c. 5. v. 4. And no Man taketh this honour to him but he that is called

Art Octavo Creed wherein we say and should believe that there is but one Eternal And if we had no Scripture yet Nature and the undoubted principles of our natural Reason tell us and efficaciously demonstrate that there can be but one Eternal For whatever is eternal of it self and without all beginning must of necessity be infinite for nothing can give finitude or bounds to it self and whatever is eternal cannot possibly have any thing before it to give it bounds and 't is more impossible that what is after it and temporal should give bounds to an Eternal Being so that if those Atoms be Eternal and Infinite as they must be if they be Eternal then they must be so many Deities or Gods for nothing but God can be Eternal and Infinite and then consider how many Gods we shall have even as many as there are of those Atomes Now he tells us p. 124. that perhaps a * In minimo corpusculo continentur multae Atomorum Myriades vid. Philosophiam Epicuri per Gassendum cap. 6. p. 39. Edit Londini Anno. 1660. Million of those Atomes do not make one corpusculum or visible body and then how many Millions must go to make up all the Corpuscula and corpora in the World will be a hard work for him or any body else to number He then who saith those Atomes are Eternal brings in a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a multiplicity of Gods and so denies the onely true God for more than one true God there cannot be 2. He says those Atomes have magnitude and motion pag. 17 18. which no Eternal and infinite thing is capable of as (b) Aristotle Metaphysicorum lib. 14. cap. 6. Natural Auscult lib. 8. cap. 15. Aristotle from natural principles has evidently proved But if he say and nothing else can be said that these Atomes are Temporary and had a beginning I ask when and by whom did they begin 1. It is said by him p. 17. that they were the FIRST MATTER of the World Ergo they must be before the World as the matter of an House must be before a House can be made of it but if Moses say true Gen. 1.1 In the beginning God Created the Heaven and the Earth c no mention of Atomes Heaven and Earth were created says Moses and all Jews and Christians say that was ex nihilo non ex Atomis aut materià ullâ praexistenti Sed apage nugas quae Christianum Philosophum non sapiunt sed Atheum aut Epicurum qui creationem ne virtute quidam divinâ (c) Vid. notam Gassendi ad calcem cap. 5. Syntagmatis Philosophiae Epicuri pag. 37. supra citat possibilem esse negabat sunt Apinae tricaeque si quid vilius istis quas referre pudet piget refellere I am troubled nor can I without some sorrow and impatience speak or think of it to see the Scepticism to say no worse which now securely reigns in our miserable Nation while some dare profess and publish irrational and wild Notions in Philosophy and Divinity too to the great prejudice of our Church and Truth and gratification of our adversaries especially those of the Roman faction whose work we foolishly do for them quod Ithacus Velit and without hope of reward or thanks ruine our selves gratis whilst others by Authority and Duty oblig'd to suppress such opinions and punish their Authors betray their trust and truth and either knowingly License which I am loath to think or negligently permit such Apocryphal and Erroneous positions to be publish'd in veritatis damnum Ecclesiae Anglicanae scandalum God Almighty be merciful to this bleeding Church and Nation and to every true Member of either of them to your self and Sir Your faithful Servant T. B Another Letter to Sir J. B. Sir I received yours and return a thousand thanks I am glad that neither you nor that excellent person to whom you did innocently and prudently communicate what sub sigillo I communicated to you do condemn my censure of the Book I mention'd I confess I am and a long time have been not a little troubled to see Protestants nay Clergy-men and Bishops approve and propagate that which they miscall New-Philosophy so that our Universities begin to be infected with it little considering the Cause or Consequences of it or how it tends evidently to the advantage of Rome and the ruine of our Religion 1. It is certain this New-Philosophy as they call it was set on foot and has been carried on by the Arts of Rome and those (a) Vid. Juramentum Professionis fidei which all her Ecclesiasticks take in Concilio Trident Sess 24. De Reformatione in calce cap. 12. whose Oath and Interest it is to maintain all her superstitions Campanella de Monarchia Hispaniae I have lent out my Book and cannot cite you the page gives this advice to the King of Spain to give large stipends to some persons of great parts and wit who may in Flanders propagate some new opinions in Philosophy tells him that the Hereticks such as you and I he means are greedy of novelty and will be apt to receive such New opinions in Philosophy whence divisions and new opinions in Divinity will arise By which divisions so set on foot and well managed the Hereticks may with much more ease be rooted out and ruin'd Since which time Papists especially the Jesuites have promoted this New-Philosophy and their new design to ruine us by it for the great Writers and Promoters of it are of the Roman Religion such as Des Cartes Gassendus Du Hamel Maurus Mersennus De Mellos c. and what divisions this new Philosophy has caused amongst Protestants in Holland and England cannot be unknown to any considering person When I was though unworthy Library-Keeper and seeing the Jesuites and Popish party cry up their New-Philosophy I did by friends send to Paris Venice Florence Rome Alcala de Henares Academia Complutensis in Spain c. to inquire whether the Jesuites in their Colledges train'd up their young men in the New-Philosophy or whether in all their Disputations they kept them to strict form and Aristotle's way of ratiocination and the return I had from all places was That none were more strict than they in keeping all their young men to the old principles and forms of Disputation For they well know that all their School-men Casuists and Controversy-Writers have so mix'd Aristotle's Philosophy with their Divinity that he who has not a comprehension of Aristotles Principles and the use of them in all Scholastick Disputes and Controversies of Religion will never be able rationally to defend or confute any controverted position in the Roman or Reformed Religion Now while they keep close to the old way of disputing on the old received Principles if they can persuade us to spend our time about novel Whimsies and not well understood Experiments and neglect the severer Studies of the old Philosophy and Scholastical

words and deeds exhort us to kill Hereticks Whereas 1. There is not one word in Cyprian or the Texts of Scripture he cites which any way concerns Hereticks or Heresie but only concerning Idolaters and Idolatry which are things of a far different nature 2. Had Gratian consider'd and understood what immedia●ely follows there in Cyprian which he cunningly and knavishly leaves out he might have clearly seen that Cyprian neither said nor meant that our blessed Saviour did by deeds and words exhort to kill Hereticks but that which Cyprian truly says our blessed Saviour did by words and deeds exhort to was that Christians should patiently suffer and by no means renounce the Gospel by serving Idols and Idolatry For after these words with which Gratian ends his Canon Christus veniens non verbis tantum nos hortatus est sed factis there should be only a comma after factis though Gratian does make a full point as if it concluded the sentence It immediately follows in Cyprian thus Non verbis tantum nos hortatus sit sed factis post omnes injurias contumelias passus crucifixus ut nos PATI ET MORI EXEMPLOSVO DOCERET ut nulla sit homini excusatio PRO SE pro Christo non patienti cum ILLE passus sit PRO NOBIS c. That which Cyprian says Christ taught us with words and deeds was not that we should kill Hereticks as Gratian would have it but that we should willingly suffer in defence of the Gospel against Idolaters And it is a signal place to this purpose where our blessed Saviour himself tells us That when the Samaritans would not receive him who were Hereticks and Idolaters too and James and John would have had Fire from Heaven to consume them our blessed Saviour rebuked them and said (a) Luc. 9.5 That the Son of Man was not come to destroy Mens lives but to save them How his pretended Vicar and his Canonists will justifie their Murthering Hereticks and Burning their Cities Ipsi viderint One place I confess they have in the Epistle to Titus which if the ridiculous Monk may interpret it will do their business This place is Titus 3.10 where the words in their vulgar Latine being these Haereticum devita which we render Reject or avoid an Heretick But the honest Monk who understood no Greek and little Latine by making two words of one proves from that Text that Hereticks must be kill'd For says he it must be read thus Haereticum de Vita tolle c. I am Sir Your affectionate Friend and faithful Servant T. L. A Letter to the Earl of Anglesey of the Council of Trent not being receiv'd in France Right Honourable and my very good Lord. I Understand by a Letter from my Ancient and Worthy Friend Sir Peter Pett that your Lordship who may command desires me to give you satisfaction as to this Question Whether the Trent Council be received in France And though I dare not undertake to give your Lordship satisfaction yet in obedience to your Lordship's Command I shall venture to say a few things My great Age and Infirmities and my little time disabling me to say more I say then 1. That Father Paul of Venice that great Scholar and Statesman who had intimate familiarity with the most eminent French Statesmen and Scholars both at Venice and Paris Father Paul I say tells us in (a) Vide Interdicti Veneti Historiam per Paulum Sarpium pas 4. 58. Print That the Trent Council was not receiv'd in France in the Year 1616. 2. The famous Peter de Marca Archbishop of Paris (b) Marca de Concordia Sacerdotii Imperii lib. 2. cap. 17. §. 6. pag. 133. Col. 7. tells us That in the time the Trent Council sate when it evidently appear'd that by the Treaty of the Trent Council the Liberty of the Gallican Church was in quam (c) Pet. de Marca ibidem plurimis capitibus in very many particulars destroyed The Ambassadors of Henry II. and Charles the IX left the Synod being call'd home by their Kings and so did the French Bishops too as Father Paul in the Hist of that Council tells us and complaining in the Council that the Liberty of the Gallican Church regia dignitas erant imminutae their recess from and leaving the Council help'd the French Pretences and was a good reason as Marca there proves non admittendae Synodi why they did not receive the Council 3. The same Marca in the same places tells us (d) Marca ibidem pag. 133. col 1. Totius cleri Gallicani comventus Concilii Tridentini promulgationem à Regibus nostris supplicibus libellis postulaverit ea lege ut ea capita exciperent quae libertatibus Ecclesiae adversarentur Quorum desideriis principes toto hoc negotio saepe in consilium prudentissimorum relato se accommodare non potuerunt That the whole Clergy of France in their Synods did most frequently petition their Kings that they would publish and receive the Trent Council excepting those things which were repugnant to the Liberties of the Gallican can Church yet their Kings tho they consulted the wisest of men about that business would never grant their Petition nor publish or receive the Trent Council with the exception whence it is evident if that great Arch-bishop say true that the Kings of France would never receive any of the Trent Council no not that part of it which was not against the Liberties of their Church or their King's Regality 4. And hence it evidently appears that the Learned Marca does contradict himself For in the same (e) Pag. 133. Col. 1. Concilii Tridentini Definitiones fidei ad missae sunt Edicto publico quod ea de relatum est Anno 1579. page and Column and the two first lines of it he says That the Definitions of the Council of Trent concerning Faith were admitted in France by a publick Edict Anno 1579. which must be in the 6th year of Henry the III. of France and yet he tells us in the same page and Column That altho the whole Clergy of France did most frequently petition their Kings to promulgate and admit only that part of the Trent Council which was not against the Liberties of the Gallican Church if these Words mean any thing they must mean the Definitions of Faith which Marca says were received by the Edict 1579. Yet their Kings would never admit any of it And if their Kings would never admit any of it tho the whole Clergy did petition them to do it then it was not admitted by any publick Edict in the 6th year of Henry the III that is in the year 1579. 5. And that which makes this more certain and evident that the Trent Council was not received in France Anno 1579. which Marca says appears by Thuanus a Witness beyond all exception who assures us that the Trent Council was not receiv'd in France Anno Dom. 1588.