Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n ancient_a church_n pope_n 2,079 5 6.4952 4 false
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
A41774 The Baptist against the papist, or, The Scripture and Rome in contention about the supream seat of judgment, in controversies of religion together with ten arguments or reasons, discovering the present papal church of Rome to be no true church of Christ : wherein it is also evinced that the present assemblies of baptized believers, are the true church of Jesus Christ / by Tho. Grantham ... Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. 1663 (1663) Wing G1527; ESTC R40005 55,798 108

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Truth together with the help of right Reason in a way of subserviency to those divine directions Or if the word Controversies shall relate only to all such Controversies as fall within the compass of the Church that then to the former means we are to joyn the living Voice and Authority of the Church in present being assembled with her Pastours as the ordinary means appointed of God to terminate strife in the Churches But if the Division in the Church be so great as that it be not this way decissive or the Doubt so secret as not this way to be resolved there is not then a better way than for both Parties to reason it out till Truth and Innocency do prevail as the two Tribes and an half did with the other Tribes of Israel and prevailed Joshua 22. or in some doubtful cases the use of Lots may be admitted for the resolution of them Acts 1. PAPIST It is worth observing how many windings and turnings you have to avoid the difficulty of this Query Whether we are to resolve all differences in point of Religion only out of the written Word of God First you leave out the word only in which lay the very knot of the difficulty 2. Then you give me a piece of an Answer and keep in the living voice of the Church as a reserve for your Second Paper 3. When you are shewed how you for sake your old fort the sole sufficiency of Scripture as if you were afraid to come too near us you give back again and do your worst to discredit this living voice of the Church so that in effect it stands but for a meer cipher as I foresaw it would when it came once to the scanning 4. Upon second thoughts finding your error by putting the Query What is become of the living voice of the Church you shuffle again and would gladly make something of it but this something in the end falls to just nothing as I shall make it further appear by ripping up the particulars of this your last Answer BAPTIST I have used no windings to avoid the difficulty of the first Query but you are to know that when I first answered it I took the word Controversie to relate only to such Controversies as depend between such persons as deny each other to have any present right to either the Name or Priviledges of the Church And indeed I do not see how any other sense can be made of this Query for under that word WE I suppose you included no more but your self and Church on the one party and us to whom you sent the Queries on the other party and we well know that you account us no members of the Church and you likewise know that we have the same opinion of you but when your Observations or Second Paper took into the Query all Controversies which fall within the compass of the Church as such I could do no less than tell you that my Answer did not exclude the living voice of the Church in such cases but that my Answer doth only exclude every such voice as exalteth it self above the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures And whereas in your Third Paper you told me That to appeal to Councils and Fathers is a clear way to agree all our differences I told you that this is a very cloudy way and that because they are contrary to themselves and one another 2. Till they be agreed they cannot agree us 3. And sith you take not the Scripture as being of any authority till they as the Church give it you I demanded by what you would agree them in their divisions 4. And to shew you how they are divided I gave you divers Instances concerning their divisions as also touching the corruption which hath been found in divers Popes PAPIST 1. I had no reason to take notice of your excluding from the living voice of the Church every voice exalting it self above the voice of Scripture because it was a very needless Exception since the Church arrogates no such power but only to interpret the voice of Scripture 2. Why this way of taking the sense of Scripture from the living voice of the Church should be so cloudy as you say it is I do no more understand than that the living voice of a Judge should be a cloudy way to understand the Law by As for your Riddles how we are to reconcile the Fathers and Councils when they seem to clash with their own Assertions but by having recourse to Scripture I Answer briefly That General Councils have no such contradictions as you speak of And as for the holy Fathers when there is any such difficulty in any one of them we must look upon the rest what they say and to follow their unanimous consent for if we take them singly no doubt they have erred and these errors we know by their dissenting from the rest for otherwise certainly the authority of any one of the antient Fathers when he expounds Scripture or relates the Christian practice of his time and is not censured or contradicted by the rest or condemned by the Church in a General Council is of greater authority to decide Controversies in point of Religion or to know the true meaning of Scripture than any thing you have alledged as we shall see by and by when I have first examined what you bring to discredit the Fathers and Councils Against the Fathers you first bring St. Aug. retract 21. contradicting himself by saying that Matth. 16. Christ built not his Church upon Peter but upon Peter 's Faith sure you read not St. Aug. for he there expounds that place of Christ himself and not of the Faith of St. Peter nor doth he recal his expounding it elsewhere of St. Peter but leaves both Expositions as probable concluding thus Hunc autem sententiam quae sit probalitur eligat lector Is this fair dealing Again you bring in St. Aug. contra Petil. c. 2 3 4. as contrary to himself and me because he teaches That the Church is to be found out by the words of Christ But though I doubt you cannot make this appear in any of these three Chapters yet were it nothing to the purpose for we deny not but the Church is to be found out by these clear marks whereby the holy Scripture hath deciphered her Next you alledge St. Chrysost in Psal 22. and St. Ambrose de Sacrament calling the Blessed Sacrament a similitude or figure of Christ's Body and Blood I Answer 1. That it is the Opinion of the Learned that neither St. Chrysost nor indeed any Grecian could be Author of that work 2. I say the Sacrament may be truly called the similitude of Christ's Body and Blood because it is not given in the form of flesh and blood of which men would have a horror as the same St. Amb. observes but under the Forms of Bread and Wine The next is St. Dinis Eccl. Herarch but quoting no place I have not yet met
the necessity of Circumcision Act. 15. did they not assemble the Church and so pronounce Sentence conciliariter with a visum est Spiritui sancto nobis BAPTIST It is here worth noting how you dispute beyond the due bounds of the Query which as it concerns you Papists and us Baptists hath no relation to the Differences which arise in the Church as such and indeed you go amiss in this matter throughout the whole Discourse Here you seem to acknowledge that the Church ought to rule according to Scripture but you will allow me to judge whether she do so or not But I answer that there is a Judgment of Science as well as a Judgment Authoritative the latter I know cannot be exercised by me nor any other Member of the Church because this Power lyeth in the Church as imbodied together but the former to wit a Judgment of Science or Knowledge is particular to each individual and so my self if a Member of the Church am allowed the exercise thereof even in matters of Religion 1 Cor. 10. 15. I speak to wise men judge ye what I say The Apostle doth not here give any wise man at Corinth leave to judge of that which he said so as to censure what he had delivered yet he must exercise his understanding to judge of what Paul had said thereby to find out the verity of what was spoken But yet I do confess that our case and the case of Christians then do differ for Paul was a Foundation-layer a Master-builder so that the Members might not so well judge then as now yet the Church now is to build upon the Foundation which is laid already and you know that I have in my Rejoynder acknowledged that it very nearly concerns particular Members of the Church to have great regard to the Judgment of the Church when after serious debate they deliver their Sentence in any point disputable And further as touching your Church you tell me anon that even a Heathen may judge of the holiness of your Church by the Law of Conscience and then why may he not by the same Law judge your Church concerning her unholiness nay verily he must be able to speak both wayes or else he hath no Judgment And if a Heathen have this priviledge and ability then why not a man professing Christianity who hath not only the Conscience-Law but also the written Law of God by which he understands things more excellent Rom. 2. From all this I only conclude that each particular ought to have the free exercise of his Judgment in what he chuseth or refuseth sith without this he cannot chuse or refuse any thing with confidence nor to his comfort And concerning Controversies in the Church I do not see that in these dayes we are bound to follow the sentence of a multitude though assembled in Council SO as to hold their Sentence absolutely infallible for the promise of infallibility is not made to a certain select number of Bishops but to the Church taken collectively and we may remember that a great Assembly of Prophets in the old Church erred in Judgment with unanimous consent when yet the Lord had one Micaiah at home which understood the truth of his Will Wherefore I here conclude although the Members of the Church ought to weigh with great respect the things concluded of by their Pastors yet so may it be that they may swerve from the Truth whilst God clears it up by some particular rather than by such an Assembly And to this agrees very well a saying of Gerson If it should so happen that there should be a General Council assembled in which such a man were present as is well instructed If the greatest part should decline through Malice or IGNORANCE to the opposition of the Gospel such a LAY-Man may be objected against the said General Council And saith Panormitan In matters WHICH CONCERN FAITH the saying of a LAY-Man ought to be preferred before that of the Pope if his saying be more probable by better authority of Scripture than that of the Pope You often tell me that to appeal to the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures c. is not a sufficient way to decide OUR Controversies and that because you may challenge them to be for you c. To which I answer by retorting your Argument thus That which you call the living Voice of the Church to wit Volumns of Fathers and Decrees of Councils is therefore insufficient to decide OUR Controversies because your opposites do say they are for them and against you and now you must answer your own Query viz. Who must take up this Quarrel You answer that we must explicate them one by another the places which are obscure by such as are plain And then I still ask you why we may not as well agree our selves this way by the Volumns of the Prophets and Apostles I shewed before how you misapply that Text Matth. 18. and though the case is so plain as that you cannot defend your self yet you seem loth to decline your error and would fasten a very gross passage upon me namely that I should say That the Church is no Rule for those that are out of her Communion as not to be a light for such as grope in the dark A manifest wrong I only say and prove That those that are not of the Church are not within the power of her Discipline nor can she reasonably desire unconverted ones to appeal to her Judgment-seat in Controversies between them and her And I asked you If you would not scorn us if we should call upon you to appeal unto us as your Judges Whether we or you be the Church and not doubting but you would I concluded that it is equally absurd for you to desire us to appeal to you as our Judges But you may find it plain enough in my Papers That I do believe the Church SO to be a Rule to the world as to shew them the way of Life and so a good means for their Illumination and Conversion As for your three Texts 1 Tim. 3. Deut. 17. 8 9. Malachi 2. 7. As they do your cause no good so they do mine no harm I grant the Church is the pillar and ground of the Truth and that she hath Power to hear and determine all Controversies among her Members as aforesaid and that it is the duty of the Members to enquire of their Pastors what is the way of God concerning them But what of all this Ergo The Papal Church of Rome is the only infallible Judge and Moderatrix of all Contention about Religion Ergo we must all appeal to the Papal Church of Rome as our Judge in this Question Whether we be of the Church or not though we be in doubt Whether she her self be a true Church or not yea though we are satisfied she is not Are not these Monstrous Consequences Be it here observed That I do believe the Church of
the Church And for their Holiness I have spoken to that before and surely it is but like their neighbours And for their Miracles I have given you a taste of them from Loreto and beside others do claim that mark as well as they Yea the Turks produce Miracles and the Protestants do the like and others as the Quakers the like and the Baptists can say of a truth that God hath done for and amongst them some things which have exceeded the course of Nature And so their Miracles will not more prove them a Church than the Miracles of others will prove the contrary unless they can prove the others to be Illusions And that they have not the mark of Unity is evident if History may be heeded for saith my Author there is an hundred Sects of Monks and Fryars amongst them and some of them so divided as they burnt one another for matters of Religion And for different Opinions there are no less than three hundred See Fox Act. and Monument p. 260. and Willit in his Book called Tetrastilon Papis I know the Papists do make a great deal of noise about their Pastoral Succession as if they could derive it from man to man up to the Apostle Peter But I find the learned Protestants making it a great Question whether ever Peter was Bishop of Rome or not And Jerom is said to have seen some old Books which shew that Narcissus ruled the Roman Church when Paul saluted him and his Family in his Epistle to the Romans No small contention is there likewise among the Learned Whether Linus or Clement were the second Bishop of Rome So that this Pastoral Succession the Papists pretend to meets with shrewd Objections in the very first and second person of that Line Against the uninterrupted continuance of their pretended Succession many things are objected as That there were sometimes three and sometimes two Popes and that for more than twenty years time together so that no man could tell where the true Pastoral Authority lay And then comes in that strange disaster of Joan the female Pope who for almost three years cut the chain of this pretended Succession This thing is famous in History Lastly Although the Papists could prove a continued Succession of persons claiming the Title of Universal Bishop yet this would not justifie them all to be the Pastors of Christ's Church For these two Rules are given us even by the Antients 1. That Peter left his Innocency hereditary as well as his Seat and that he which hath not the one as well as the other is not Peter's Successor 2. That it is not the Chair but the Doctrine that maketh a Bishop Now 3dly add but Paul's Rule in this matter 1 Tim. 3. and Titus 1. and then I am bold to affirm That many Popes of Rome were not the true Successors of Peter in Pastoral Authority For I find it laid to the charge of divers Popes that they were Drunken-Whoremongers Theeves given more to War than Christ rooted in all unspeakable sin furious men prophane Scoffers of Christ Incestuous persons Murderers Poysoners of their own Parents and Kindred open Sodomites or Buggerers Blasphemers incorrigible Hereticks Enchanters callers upon the Devil to help them to play at Dice Drinkers of the Devil's Health and Traitors to Princes These things are so notorious and evidently true of the Popes of Rome as that the Papists do not deny them T. B. End to Controvers and the Author of the Seven Queries as you may see in part before Yea Bernard was not a little moved with the wickedness of the Popes of Rome when he called them Tyrants Defrauders Raveners Traytors Darkness of the World Wolves and Devils And can we think that Succession to be good which is derived from Devils I need say no more See for the proof of all that I have said these Books Fox Act. Monument Willit Synops Prediaux's Introduct The Tenth Reason The present Assemblies of Baptized Believers and they only are the true visible Church of Jesus Christ Therefore the present Papal Church of Rome is not the Church of Christ The Explanation of this Reason or Argument THis Reason or Argument is not so to be understood as if we do shut all men out of Heaven who are not Members of our Church No verily This is the express Doctrine of the Papists for they say that out of the Church is no Salvation and by Church they mean only those that adhere to the Papal Church of Rome and hereupon they teach expresly and so do some Protestants also That without Baptism or the desire of Baptism c. none can be saved And therefore it is that they give power to Midwives to baptize Children sometimes between the Womb and the World That which we teach is this That the ordinary way appointed for men to receive Salvation in is The preaching of Repentance and Remission of sins to all Nations in the Name of Jesus Christ and the administration of Baptism as a pledge thereof to all that give acceptance to these Glad-tydings and upon this account this Ministration is called The Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins And we do teach as a most infallible Doctrine That without profession of Faith manifestation of Repentance and being baptized with Water in the Name of Jesus Christ c. no person can be orderly admitted into the Church or Kingdom of God on Earth And that therefore it concerns every man living to years of understanding and having the Gospel tendred to him only to look for Salvation this way as he will answer it before the Lord for contemning God's ordinary way and presuming to challenge the Grace of Eternal Life in a way of his own devising Nevertheless we do not hence conclude That all persons shall be damned that seek not Life in this way For first No Infant can seek for it in the way which the Gospel proposeth Life to men of years Yet surely it is a most cruel Doctrine to say that any Infants dying in their infancy shall be damned in Hell because as one very well said God will not damn any persons for that which they cannot help Again in Rom. 1st and 2d chapters Paul teacheth That if the sons of men act forth themselves in a way of Love Fear Obedience and Reverence to their Creator according to the means of Light vouchsafed to them that this shall be as much as shall be required of them in the day when God shall judge the secrets of all men by Jesus Christ for God will not gather where he hath not strewed at which time God will not judge them by the Law that never had it Howbeit let all that have it I mean his written Law expect to be judged by it And therefore though we will not presume to judge of the final state of this or that Society of men professing conscionably this or that Form of Worship but leave that wholly to the