Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A23611
|
A defence of true Protestants, abused for the service of popery, under the name of Presbyterians in a dialogue between A. and L. two sons of the church : where it is debated, whether discenting Presbyterians be as bad or worse than papists : and other popish assertions are detected.
|
|
1680
(1680)
|
Wing A1; ESTC R21360
|
17,633
|
34
|
not to believe the Pope hath this Power is Madness and damned Heresy That not one Catholick Author can be brought who denies it That Christ had not been sufficiently careful of the Church if he had not given the Pope this Power over Kings That he had not sufficiently provided for our Salvation if Kings might not be thus deprived That the Popes only have not this Power but even Inferiour Prelate may throw down Kings Bishops how poor and weak so ever have this Authority for Kings are but their Subjects and a Priest is as much above a King as a Man is above a Beast L. Do their approved Authors publish such things as these A. Yes And I will shew you their own Words for it in their own Language when you please Indeed they have made the Proof of such a Charge very easy by their other Principles We need not trouble our selves to shew that this or that Practical Assertion is decreed by a General Council or entertained by their whole Church it will be evident enough if it be made appear to be the Judgement of some of their Grave Doctors for it is a received Maxim That in Matters of Morality a Probable Opinion may be followed with a safe Conscience and an Opinion is made probable by the Authority of the Doctors who deliver it Caramuel assures us four Doctors will do it currently In Father (a) Abbot Antilog Cap. 13. P. 191. Garnet's Judgement two or three will be sufficient but many hold that one Grave Doctor is enough Verricelli (b) Opuse Pag. 56. as Guimenius tells us quotes twenty four of their Authors that maintain this I suppose he might have made them up Forty by what I have seen And those that require the Concurrence of four in an Opinion to make it probable must grant that one will suffice unless they will contradict themselves since there are more than Twenty Four who hold that One Doctor is sufficient Now there is not the most extravagant Assertion among all these forementioned but the Authority of One grave Doctor at lest may be produced for it and this is enough to make it lawful in practice past all scruple So that there needs no more but the Opinion of any one grave Casuist or Confessor to assure the lawfulness of the most Horrid Villany that ever was or can be acted Be it the Killing ef a King or all the Princes on Earth that are Hereticks The Life of Queen Elizabeth was divers times atrempted with an assurance the Attempt was Lawful upon no better Authority Or the Burning of such a City as London though 't is like there was a Concurrence of more in this Or the blowing up a Parliament the Opinion of Harry Garnet alone satisfyed the most scrupulous of the Conspirators that the Fact was both Lawfull and Meritorious L. I think these last Maxims upon which they raise their Doctrine of Probability will prove as pernicious as any before mentioned since they are virtually all that is wicked And Papists must be more dangerous Persons than I was willing to suspect since a Priest can make any thing Lawfull for them The Opinion of One Doctor is as good for this purpose as a Popes Bull or the Decree of a General Council A. True These might make it more Certain but there 's no need of Certainty in the case a meer Probability makes their Practice safe enough in Conscience And though a constitution of a Pope or Council might make it more Certain and more Safe they are not Concerned for that but may Lawfully act according to an Opinion that is both less Probable and less Safe that 's their common Doctrine and so follow the Opinion of One though a weaker Doctor rather than the Judgment of many how eminent so ever For Instance suppose Forty or an Hundred of their best Divines determine that it is unlawfull to suborn Witnesses by false Oaths to take away the Reputation Estate or Life of a Protestant and Two or Three or but One Priest of repute among them conclude that this is Lawfull a Villian bribed to do it may be secured in Conscience of the lawfulness of it by his sole Authority And thus the Just or more Specious Determinations of the better sort of their Divines will signify nothing and we shall be deluded if we rely on them one obscure Doctor or Confessor of whom we have no notice may carry it against them all for the Lawfullness of a Design or Attempt to Ruin Particular Persons or a whole Countrey Prince and People L. God bless us from Men of such Principles A. I have given you a tast of the Priests Principles can you shew me any owned by the Priesbyterians like to these L. It may be their are not so many nor quite so bad but they are bad enough A. Be it so But that will not make them worse nor so Bad as Papists as you declared them to be before No nor worse than your self and those that Symbolize with you in this Censure of your Fellow Protestants For you will not Presume that you are better than the best on Earth and even those are bad enough But pray where may we see those Principles of theirs which you count bad enough For I have reason to believe that it is either Passion or Malice that manages this charge and neither of these are to be trusted further than we can see L. I will not send you far for this You may see it in a late Print Intituled The Cloak in ' its Colours where ' its Demonstrated from the Writings of Calvin Beza Knox and Buchanan A. I have seen that Pamphlet some Moneths since and find these four Authors cited whose Sayings alledged right or wrong must pass for a Demonstration against the whole Party and yet they are the very same Persons whose words the Jesuit Parsons long fince abused to prove that the Protestants Principles are in this Particular worse than the Papists By which we may discern whose Disciple this Scribler is and what Difference they make between Protestants and Presbyterians Both must fall under the same Reproach as they intend both shall Fall by the same Execution if their Plot Succeed There needs no other Vindication of the Presbyterians but Doctor afterwards Bishop Morton's Answer to the Jesuit in behalfe of the Protestants for they must stand or fall together and he that runs at those Wounds those through their sides and forgets if he be a Protestant his Duty to the Common Interest to serve his Particular Passions Parsons and his (c) Pag. 7. Second towave the Foolish and nauseous language with which he ushers it in make Calvin Speak thus Earthly Princes do deprive themselves of all Power when they Oppose God nay they are not worthy to be held in the number of Men we must therefore rather Spit in their Faces than Obey them To this Dr. Morton Answers haveing shew'd the Jesuits Ignorance in abusing Calvins words at
not differ in the Rites and Ceremonies the publick Liturgy the Discipline and Government of the Church A. Call you these Points of the Protestant Relgion L. Why not I pray Are not these considerable Parts of the Religion of this Church as it is established by Law A. These are no Parts of the Religion established by Law for they are no points of Religion at all but matters of Indifferency as the Church of England declares them to be and no Religion is to be placed in things Indifferent And the Reason is obvious For Religion if it be True must be Authorized by God or Instituted by Christ but things Indifferent are neither commanded nor forbiden L. This is true of the Ceremonies the Church signifies that they are in their own nature Indifferent and declares withal that no Religion is to be placed in things Indifferent But will you have the Sacred Liturgy to be a thing of this Nature and of no more value than that which in it self is neither Bad nor Good A. I pay all due Reverence to our Liturgy but no Veneration should blind us or hinder us from discerning the true Nature of things Prayer in general is an eminent Part of Religion and Divine Worship and necessary both by the Light of Nature and Revelation but this or that Form of Prayer how exact soever is in it self no other than Indifferent This all acknowledge who understand any thing concerning these Matters L. But what Religion do you then leave those who by their Heats for these things and their Indifferency as to others shew that these only are their Religion or the Principal part of it A. I leave them all they had if they had lest themselves any but indeed those who place all their Religion herein have no Religion at all and those who make these the Principal Part of their Religion make less of that which is Religion indeed than of an Indifferent thing and so indeed are Indifferent as to this or that Religion Protestantism or Popery or which is worse indifferent as to any Religion or none And those that have any Love for the Souls of People should endeavour to undeceive them therein and not leave them under such Conceits as make them too easy a Prey to Popish Seducers who need desire no more than that we should value the whole Protestant Religion less than some matters of Indifferency L. But must our Church Government pass under the same Account A. So far as it is not of divine Institution it is in it self no better than Matter of Indifferency and of the very many branches of our Government there is but one that pretends to an higher Original And about that one viz. The Power and Superiority of Bishops they themselves are divided some asserting the Divine Right of Prelacy others denying it It is denyed to be of divine Institution by Arch-Bishop Cranmer and our first Reformers in Henry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth's Times by Arch-Bishop Whitgift Bishop Bridges and others in Queen Elizabeth's Time by King James (a) See these with many more in Ed. Stillingfleet Iren. Pag. 393. 394. himself c. Now you cannot well conclude that they differ from us in any point of Religion on this account till we be agreed amongst our selves that this is a point of Religion Or-if you will have it concluded by a major Part take Episcopacy as it is now stated for a distinct Office invested with the sole Power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and of those Bishops who have writ most in defence of Prelacy among us it will be carried against you by two for one that such Prelacy is not of divine Authority and so no part of Religion And those that plead for the highest Title make it a point of very small Moment (b) Peace-Maker pag. 46. 47. Bishop Hall one of the most Zealous Asserters of Episcopacy by Divine right declares it as the Sence of all Protestants Episcopal as well as others (c) B. Gawden Pres to Hooker's Eccl. Policy that they can see no reason why so poor a Diversity should work an Alienation of Affection in us towards one another Another of our Bishops tell you the things forementioned are no Fixed Parts of our Religion but Circumstantials and Ornaments A third will have them the Skin of an Apple which must not be pared of if you would have it keep Not to mention others as not worthy of regard who will have them more like the Core of an Apple when it hath been kept too long So that what Stress soever Interest layes upon these and such like points Religion layes little or none thereon L. But there are many who will lay the greatest Stress upon this and are greatly concerned to do it they are sensible and you may easily apprehend how much depends on it A. I know their Wealth and Grandeur may seem a little concerned in it but if they will count those who are of the same Religion worse than Papists because they think them not friendly enough to their worldly Interest they will be suspected to value the World more than Religion L. But which I had almost forgot they differ from us in the Doctrine of Predestination and other Points that depend thereon A. You mean I suppose the Oppinions of Arminius and his Followers concerning Conditional Election the equal Redemption of all Free-will the indifferent operation of Grace and Falling-away from the state of Grace L. Yes these I understand and these you cannot deny to be Points of Faith and matters of Religion A. They are no parts of the Protestants Religion nor of the Doctrine of the Church of England being not contained in the Confessions of any of the Protestant Churches nor in the Articles of the Church of England but rather the contrary So that herein they differ not from the Church who never owned these Opinions but from some particular Persons in it and differ no more from them then many other Sons of the Church do at this day and all in a manner did for many Years after the Reformation In all Queen Elizabeths Reign I find not above three of any note among all the Clergy and in both Universities that maintain'd these Doctrines and two of them censured for it Afterwards King James promoted the Condemnation of the Arminian Tenets by the Synod of Dort sending Eminent Divines from hence who concurred with others from the Reformed Churches in the censure of them He himself declared (d) K. James Declaration Arminius to be an Enemy to God and his followers to be Atheistcal Sectaries In the late Kings time several Parliaments declared against Armianism as an Innovation of pernicious consequence And those who most loved it and had the greatest advantages to influence the Clergy in favour of it durst not venture it to the Test of a Convocation as one (e) Heyl. Life of A.L. pag. 153. who had a passionate Fondness for it confesses So it