Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n apostle_n scripture_n tradition_n 2,272 5 9.2110 5 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
A29039 A brief enquiry into the grounds and reasons, whereupon the infallibility of the Pope and the Church of Rome is said to be founded by Edward Bagshawe ... Bagshaw, Edward, 1629-1671. 1662 (1662) Wing B404; ESTC R9275 31,865 56

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

lay hid in Obscurity is cleared up and brought to Light As if a Pipe that formerly conveyed a great Quantity of Water should suddenly fail we would the a have recourse unto the Fountain to learn the true Conse of such a Stop and Intercision that if the fault was in the Pipe it might be repaited and fitted to receive the Streams of Water in the same Abundance and Purity that they issue from the Fountain so likewise ought all the Ministers of God in their Observance of Divine Commands to do that if the Truth seems wavering and uncertain in any Point Ad Originem Dominicam Evangelicam Apostolicam Traditionem we may have recourse unto the Originall to wit the Tradition of our Lord in his Gospel and by his Apostles that so the Ground of our Acting may proceed thence whence the Order and Originall of it did first arise I have at large quoted these words out of Cyprian both to shew how little the Bishop of Rome's Authority was then valued and likewise to manifest what that Holy and Learned Man thought to be the only way whereby all Controversies in Religion ought to be decided not to depend upon Uncertain Traditions which at the best are but the Inventions of Men but to have Immediate recourse unto the Scriptures and to go no further in any part of Divine Worship than as their Rule doth guid us And this Testimony of his the Papists cannot in Justice refuse since Cyprian is a Saint in their Calender and yet died without ever retracting his Judgement 3. My Third and Last Instance shall be that notable Speech of Pope Gregory about six hundred years after our Saviours time who having had great contests for Superiority with John the Patriarch of Constantinople when at sast John having the Emperour on his side did endeavour to gain the Title of Universall Bishop Greg. lib. 4. Ep. 32 33. Gregory did fiercely oppose him in it and in many of his Epistles affirms that whoever should Assume that Stile he was the Forerunner of Antichrist a Child of the Devil an Apostate from the Faith with many other sharp but true sayings to the same Purpose It pleased God that within few years after An. 606 Pope Boniface little minding the Predictions of his Predecessour did not only claim but likewise actually take to himself that Name which as a Badge of Antichrist and an Infallible Mark to know him by he hath ever since transmitted to his Successours Now I ask whether Pope Gregory was Infallible in that Opinion of his which he doth so often and so earnestly insist upon If they tell me he was then we need not dispute any farther Whether the Pope be Antichrist for we have Gregorie's own Confession that whoever would arrogate to himself the Name of Universall Bishop was undoubtedly so but if they say he was not then their Conceit of Infallibility vanisheth as amounting to no more than this that the Pope is Infallible when he Speaks and Acts for the Advantage of his See but very Fallible when he speaks any thing though never so deliberately which in after Ages may make against it I have forebore to Urge that many of the Popes have actually fallen into Heresie as Honorius by Name who by the sixth Synod was condemned for an Heretick and his Epistles commanded to be burnt and the very express words of some of their Canons are That the Pope cannot be judged by any unless he be found to have crred from the Faith which doth suppose even in the Judgement of his own Canonists that there is a Possibility of his Erring Neither do I insist upon the Decrees of the Councels of Basil and Constance which were both assembled for the deposing of two Popes that were unduely Chosen and in them it was Enacted that A Councell was above the Pope which they strictly command all to believe as an Article of Faith Which Instances though they strike sufficiently at the Pope's Infallibility and Paramount Authority yet because the Answer of some of the most Moderate and Ingenuous Papists is that Though the Pope be not Infallible in himself yet in and with a Councell he is I shall therefore speak a little to this Conceit and then conclude I demand therefore of those who maintain the Infallibility of the Pope and a Councell conjunctim what Divine Warrant have they for such an Opinion and where hath God promised Infallible Assistance unto a Councell of the Pope's Calling For those Texts that are commonly made use of as Hear the Church and The Spirit shall lead you into all Truth and It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and to us with some few others to the same sense are as impertinently alleadged in behalf of a Councell as those fore-mentioned are in behalf of the Pope For 1. That Command Tell the Church doth not signifie an Appeal unto a Synod of Bishops ●at 18. who are all of the Pope's Creation and therefore must needs be Partiall for him but Church there signifies that particular Congregation to which we relate as Members neither do our Saviour's words concern Articles of Faith and Matters of Opinion but meerly Civil Injuries as is plain from the Context for our Saviour having commanded them to forgive one another he then goes on to tell them what course they should take in case a Brother should offend them first to reprove him privately and if that prevailed not then to take two or three as witnesses of their proceedings But if notwithstanding this the Injurious Person still continued Obstinate then to tell it Caetui or to the Congregation 1 Cor. 5. as the Apostle Paul adviseth the Corinthians that being all met together they should proceed to censure 1 Tim. 5.20 and to Timothy Them that sin rebuke before all i. e. all of that Church or Congregation to which they belong that others also may fear And this sense besides that it is the proper meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church which often in Scripture signifies the Congregation distinct from their Officers but never the contrary it likewise fully agrees with our Saviours Scope who as the Offence ariseth would have the Remedy to arise proportionably and therefore he useth this Gradation that first one should reprove an Offending Brother then two or three then the Church or more according to what we find practised in the Church of Corinth who it seems had agreed to censure the Incestuous Person according as the Apostle had commanded them 2 Cor. 2.9 and therefore he tells them Sufficient to such a one is the Reprehension by many i. e. even by all the Members of that Christian Assembly to which he did relate and if the Offender would not hearken to them then he was to be thrown out of Communion and to be accounted as a Stranger to the Church even as an Heathen and a Publican And such Determinations of every particular Church our
which all this Babel is built that our Saviour did confer any Preeminence of Power and Authority upon Peter above the rest of the Apostles because 1. These words Upon this Rock will I build my Church cannot without blasphemy be affirmed of the Person of Peter who himself was built upon the Rock Christ and was not the Foundation but only a Workman at the Building Indeed in the Figurative Description of New Jerusalem Rev. 21.14 which John makes in his Vision he compares it to a City which had twelve Foundations upon which were written the Names of the twelve Apostles Rev. 21. So that if the Papists will needs call Peter a Foundation I hope they will take in the rest of the Apostles to be sharers with him in that Title But since the whole Description in John City and all is only Figurative and Metaphoricall the Foundation there mentioned must be like the City i. e. so called not in a Reall but only Metaphoricall Acception For to speak properly as Paul doth No other Foundation can any man lay 1 Cor. 3.11 than what is already laid and that is Eph. 2. that Jesus is the Christ And therefore when we are said to be built upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles the meaning is not that we are built upon their Persons but upon their Doctrine the summe of which is contained in Peter's confession upon which Rock our Saviour hath so built his Church that the Gates or Powers of Hell however they may rage and strive to ruine it yet they shall never be able finally to prevail against it but Christ will have a Church in some place or other unto the end of the world 2. If Peter was the Rock so as all Christians even the Apostles themselves were to depend upon his guidance what a wretched and tottering condition would the Church have been in when this Rock so soon after was shaken and almost removed out of his place For within some few minutes he is rebuked by our Saviour in no milder language than this Get thee behind me Satan The Story of his denying and that with Oaths his Master is too notorious to be palliated and too sad to be insisted on Even after our Saviours Resurrection when they pretend this promise of Infallibility was inseparably annexed to him Act. 10. we find him unresolved in that part of his Commission which concerned his preaching the Gospel unto the Gentiles and therefore had the assistance of a particular Visiton more fully to inform him of it and afterwards at Antioch we read that he was of so inconstant and unequall a carriage in that great point of Christian Liberty complying herein more than he ought Gal. 2. with the Jewish rigour and austerity that Paul was forced openly to reprove him for it and so prevent the contagion of his ill example So that if he who in the Court of Rome's stile is called Prince of the Apostles in matters of so great moment was thus subject to Errour and Fallibility I wonder with what face the Pope upon the account of being Peter's Suceessour can plead any exemption 3. These words I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven do not denote any peculiar power that Peter had over the rest of the Apostles for then how came it to pass afterwards that there were so many and so fierce contentions amongst them Who should be greatest Which our Saviour at two severall times silences not by commanding them to obey Peter as their Chief but by utter prohibiting any desire of Soveraignty If they answer us as Bellarmine doth that the Apostles did not clearly understand that Peter was to be Supream Head till after our Saviour's Resurrection which by the way is nothing else but a bold playing with sacred Scripture Then I demand farther when there was a new Apostle to be chosen into the room of Judas why did not Peter by his sole Authority Act. 1. design him or at least when the multitude of Disciples for so we read that all of them were concerned in the choice had appointed two why did they not present them both unto Peter that he might choose one rather than suffer the matter to be decided by Lot sure had Peter had any paramount and extraordinary Power and withall a peculiar infallible spirit he could not have better exerted it than in that emergency For the Head of the Church in so concerning a business first to permit all the multitude to have a voice in choosing an Apostle for if our modern Arguments are good he might justly fear that they being for the greatest part unlearned would choose one like themselves and so prejudice the reputation of Apostolicall Authority and afterwards to leave the matter unto the uncertain casualty of a Lot whereas the choice seemed properly to belong to Peter's Jurisdiction this argues either that his Power or his care of the Church was very little of which last I hope the Papists do not doubt and therefore must needs deny the former For what is it else but to tempt God to have recourse unto casting of Lots when a way of choice more prudent and Infallible by referring the business to Peter's single Decision was opened for them But it seemes the Apostles understood nothing of Peter's Supremacy either then or afterwards when they went to choose Deacons which by all the Apostles Peter not being so much as particularly mentioned was committed to the Mulitude and after the choice Imposition of hands was performed not by Peter alone but as the Text expressely saies by all the Apostles Will they tell us that this was a thing below him Act. 6. and that it did not become Peter's Authority to interesse himself in a matter of so petty concernment This plea is taken from them because we read that the Twelve and among them sure Peter was one did not think it below them and besides it will appeare a strange kind of conceated and uselesse Authority which they ascribe to Peter which in maters neither of the greatest such as was the choice of an Apostle nor of the least moment such as was the choice of a Deacon would ever so particularly exert it self that we might once take notice of his Prerogative But what kind of Equality Peter stood in to the rest of the Apostles he shewed Act. 8. in submitting to be sent with John unto Samaria to finish that worke of the Gospell which Philip had begun there for sure our Saviours Argument is Infallible Joh 15. that He who is sent is not greater then he who sends him And it would have been a strange boldnesse I believe the Pope would call it by a worse name in his Cardinalls should the Apostles have thus presumed to send their Prince had he indeed been so constituted over them Yet further when there was a Question started about the use of Jewish Ceremonies and a Synod convened about