Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A00601
|
A second parallel together with a vvrit of error sued against the appealer.
|
Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645.
|
1626
(1626)
|
STC 10737; ESTC S101878
|
92,465
|
302
|
vtterly forsaken the catholike faith Therefore the present church of Rome is vndoubtedly diuerse from the ancient true church of Christ. The first proposition is most euident the second proposition is verbatim in the Apology of the Church of England part 5. ch 16. Diu. 1. and part 6. ch 22. Diuis 2. This Apology of the Church of England as it beareth the name so it hath euer beene accounted the Doctrine of the Church of England When it was first printed in the daies of Queene Elizabeth it was commanded to bee had in all Churches and since was reprinted with the like command to be had in euery Parish Church in this Kingdome in the yeare of our Lord 1611. by our late Soueraigne King Iames who gaue a most singular testimony and approbation of Bishop Iewels workes for the most rare and admirable that haue beene written in this last age of the world and also gaue speciall direction to the late Archbishop of Canterbury Bishop Bancroft to appoint some one to write his the said Bishops life in English and prefixe it to his workes which accordingly is done in the last edition Secondly I proue it thus Whatsoeuer Church is fallen away from Christ his Kingdome and Doctrine is not the same with but diuerse from the ancient vndoubted church of Christ. The present church of Rome is fallen away from Christ his Kingdome and Doctrine Therefore the present church of Rome is not the same with but diuerse from the ancient vndoubted church of Christ. The first proposition cannot bee denied the assumption is the Appealers Appeale pag. 149. In Apostasie the Turke and Pope are both interessed both are departed away whether wee take that apostacie to bee a departing away from Christ and his Kingdome and his Doctrine or whether wee vnderstand apostacie and defection from the Romane Empire c. page 150. Thirdly I proue it thus No Church maintaining practising Idolatry can be the same with the ancient Church that worshipped God in spirit and truth The present Church of Rome maintaineth and practiseth idolatry Therefore the present Church of Rome cannot be the same with the ancient Church that worshipped God in spirit and truth The first proposition is the Apostles 2 Cor. 6. 16. what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols The assumption is proued at large in the Homily against the perill of Idolatry confirmed to bee the Doctrine of the Church of England Artic. 35. The Homilies and by name the Homily the second against perill of idolatry containeth godly and wholesome doctrine If godly and wholesome Doctrine then certainely true Fourthly it is a dangerous error to affirme as the Appealer doth Answer to Gagge page 50. That the present Church of Rome remaineth Christi Ecclesia et Sponsa Christs Church and Spouse That God hath his Church euen in Rome we doe not deny but that the present Romane Church specially since the Councell of Trent holding the cursing and accursed Canons of that Conuenticle or that the Papacy that is the Pope with his Clergy and their adherents are Christs Church and Spouse the Appealer is the first Protestant that euer for ought I know affirmed it Iunius whom he alleadgeth Appeale pag. 113. to this purpose in his booke De Ecclesiâ is so farre from supporting his assertion that in the same booke hee quite ouerthroweth it his words are pag. 60. 61. Ecclesiamultis seculis fuit cùm Papatus non esset accessit ei Papatus contingenter sic ab ea separabilis ut hoc etiam tempore Ecclesiae sint ubi Papatus non est sine Papatu deinceps futurae sint Papatus igitur non est Ecclesia sed in Ecclesiâ est adnatum malu◠pestis hydrops gangraena in corpore vitae atque saluti ejus insidians ideoque succum vitalem salutarémque Ecclesiae depascens quà m infestissimè The Church of God was many ages when there was no Papacy at all as at this day also there are Churches where there is no Papacy and will be hereafter without the Papacy The Papacy therefore is not the Church but a disease or botch growne to or in the Church a plague a dropsy a gangreene in the body indangering the health feeding vpon and infesting the healthfull moisture and vitall blood of the Church And within a few lines after in the same page follow the words on which the Appealer wholly relyeth Appeale page 113. The Papall Church saith Franciscus Iunius neither Papist nor Arminian quâ id habet in se quod ad Ecclesiae definitionem pertinet est Ecclesia As it hath that in it which belongs to the definition of a Church is a Church Why doth the Appealer stop in the middle of a sentence why doth he not goe on to the full period the sentence is yet but lame he hath put out but the left legge I will put out the right legge for him wherewith Iunius giues Popery a kicke and trips vp the Appealers heeles Qud vero habet in se adnatum malum quod Papalitatem dicimus eo respectu Ecclesia non est sed vitiata atque corrupta Ecclesia ad interitum tendens But the Church of Rome as it hath a disease or euill growne to it which we call the Papacy in that respect it is not the Church but a vitiate and corrupt church and tending to ruine Note here Reader in the Appealers defence of Popery a tricke of Popery to cite sentences by halfes alleadging onely that which in shew makes for them and concealing that which in truth makes against them The meaning of the whole sentence of Iunius is cleare enough for vs and against the Appealer to wit that the Church of Rome so farre as it is Protestant and holdeth some fundamentall truths agreeable to the Scriptures is a Church but as it is Popish and addeth many errors to those truths consequently subuerting those very truths it holdeth it is no Church Which I thus proue No Spouse or true church of Christ is in part or in whole that Antichrist or whore of Babylon The present church of Rome as it is taken for the Papacy or Popish state thereof is in part as the Appealer confesseth Appeale pag. 149. or in whole as many Pillars of our Church haue taught that Antichrist or whore of Babylon Therefore the present church of Rome as it is taken for the Papacy or popish state thereof is no Spouse nor true church of christ I haue heard that the Appealer in a late conference wherein this passage on which I haue so long insisted was obiected against him should stand at this ward answering for himselfe that these words praesens Ecclesia Romana eodem fundamento doctrinae Sacramentorum firma semper constitit c. manet enim Christi Ecclesia Sponsa Answ. to Gag page 50. were not his owne words but the words of Cassander This his ward will not keepe off the blow For first
eternall life and that the terrifying threats vsed by the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures are to this end to stirre vp the elect to watchfulnesse and diligence motiues they are to and meanes of perseuerance not arguments at all to proue the Saints Apostasie u To the place of Matth. 12. 44. we answer First we ought not to ground any doctrine of faith vpon a meere parable or allegory because as Saint Augustine in his booke de Doctrinâ Christianâ deliuereth it All those points which belong to faith and manners are plainly deliuered in the Scriptures Secondly we cannot aâ—gue strongly from corporall possession or dispossession to spirituall as a Lunaticke man so a man possessed with the Deuill in body may be yet in the state of grace in his soule and in like manner as a man that is cured of his frensie or lunacie may be yet an vnsanctified man so a man out of whom the Deuill is cast from tormenting or possessing the body may be yet an vnregenerate man although I grant our Sauiour seldome or neuer cured any mans body but first he healed the soule as some Interpreters haue obserued yet no necessary consequence can be drawn from the health or sicknesse of the body to the health or sicknesse of the soule Neither is it said here that the vncleane spirit was cast out by Christ nor by any other but that he went out of himselfe and returned againe and therefore this possessed person can be no fit embleme of a truly regenerated and iustified man out of whom the Deuil is powerfully cast out and the party is no way vnder him or in his power but led by the spirit of God Rom. 8. and wholly deliuered from the power of Satan Thirdly the meaning of the Parable is as appeareth by our Sauiours application that as the latter state of that man out of whom the Deuill first departed and afterward returned with seuen worse than himselfe was worse than the former so it should be with the wicked Iewes out of whom the vncleane spirit had gone out for feare of the Law but now was returned againe vnto them through their refusall of the Gospell and despiting the Spirit of Grace Thus Saint Hilary Ierome and Bede expound the Parable and their Exposition is euidently grounded vpon our Sauiours words vers 45. Euen so shall it be also vnto this wicked generation As it is particularly applied by our Sauiour to the Iewes so it may be to any Nation out of which the vncleane spirit departeth for a while or is driuen away by the preaching of the Gospell if it be empty of good workes and giuen to the pleasures of this world like the lodging of the vncleane spirit which he found empty swept and garnished The vncleane spirit will enter with seuen worse that is the Gospell shall be taken away from them and the Kingdome of Grace for the abuse of it and they shall be brought into worse bondage of the Deuill then before according to Saint Peter 2 Epist. 2. 20. If after they haue escaped the pollution of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ they are againe intangled therein and ouercome the latter end shall be worse with them than the beginning for it had beene better for them not to haue knowne the way of righteousnesse than after they haue knowne it to turne away from the holy commandement deliuered vnto them This was the case of the Kingdome of Congo which for a time embraced the Gospell but afterwards perceiuing that it restrained their carnall libertie and no way permitted pluralitie of wiues they cast off the yoke of Christ and enthralled themselues againe to Satan But it is not so with those that are truly regenerate for to them his yoke is easie and his burthen light Lastly this obiection may be retorted against the Aduersaries thus This Parable is meant of a wicked generation Matth. 12. 45. an euill and adulterous generation vers 39. a generation of vipers vers 34. such as the Scribes and Pharises were who in this Parable are reproued by our Sauiour But the regenerate children of God are not a wicked adulterous or viperous generation but a chosen generation a royall Priest-hood an holy nation a peculiar people 1 Pet. 2. 9. Therefore this Parable is not meant of the regenerate children of God * To the place of Saint Luke 8. 13. and Mat. 13. 20. we answer First the heart of a man truly regenerated is not compared to a stony ground for God by regenerating grace takes away our stony heart and giues vs an heart of flesh Ezek. 36. 26. Secondly a temporary faith is not of the same nature with a iustifying faith a temporary faith hath no root Matth. 13. 22. and Luke 8. 13. a iustifying faith hath a temporary faith beareth no fruit but a iustifying faith beareth fruit Matth. 13. 23. and Luke 8. 15. Those who beleeue the Gospell meerely out of temporary hopes because godlinesse hath the promise of this life they receiue the word with ioy while they thriue and gaine by it but when there ariseth trouble and persecution for the Word they are offended and fall away but those who ground their faith vpon the promises of a better life their faith like gold 1 Pet. 1. 7. being tried in the fire is made much more precious and found vnto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Iesus Christ beleeuing with ioy vnspeakable and full of glory receiuing the end of their faith the saluation of their soules vers 8. Their faith differeth from the faith of Hypocrites and Temporizers in the cause and kinde their ioy in the degree and both in the continuance Lastly this obiection may be retorted against the Aduersarie First thus They who are compared vnto the good ground are not meant here by stony ground But truely regenerate Christians and beleeuers Luke 8. 15. and Matth. 13. 23. are compared to good ground Therefore they are not here meant by stony ground Secondly thus That faith which is distinguished from a iustifying faith in this Parable cannot be taken for the faith of a true regenerate Christian But the temporary faith is distinguished in this Parable from a iustifying faith Therefore the temporary faith cannot be taken for the faith of a true regenerate Christian and consequently the Appealer and Arminians are in this their allegation mistaken Of Falling away from Grace ARMINIANS BERTIVS of the Apostasie of Saints pag. 26. Apostasie is described by the phrase to wax cold Mat. 24. 12. And because iniquitie shall abound the loue of many shall x wax cold Bertius pag. 34. The Apostle fore-seeing that the conuerted Gentiles might be bewitched with that opinion That they could not be cut off from the Church warneth them that they wax not proud against the Iewes but that they learne by their example that it may come to passe that they also may bee cast away Rom. 11. 19. They were broken off