Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n ceremony_n church_n ordain_v 3,759 5 9.3766 5 true
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
A86302 Respondet Petrus: or, The answer of Peter Heylyn D.D. to so much of Dr. Bernard's book entituled, The judgement of the late Primate of Ireland, &c. as he is made a party to by the said Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath, and by the said doctor in some others. To which is added an appendix in answer to certain passages in Mr Sandersons History of the life and reign of K· Charles, relating to the Lord Primate, the articles of Ireland, and the Earl of Strafford, in which the respondent is concerned. Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662. 1658 (1658) Wing H1732; Thomason E938_4; Thomason E938_5; ESTC R6988 109,756 140

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Illud totum à Chrysostomo repetitum repudiari necesse est Quem trahit volentem trahit So he in the second Book of his Institutions Cap. 3. Upon which Dictate of their Master the Calvinists or Contra-Remonstrants whom the Lord Primate in compiling the Articles of Ireland followeth point per point affirmed expresly in the Conference holden at the Hague Sicut ad Nativitatem suam nemo de suo quicquam confert neque ad sui excitationem à mortuis quicquam confert de suo Ita etiam ad Conversionem suam nemo homo quicquam confert That is to say that as a man contributes nothing either towards his natural Generation or Resurrection from the dead so doth he not contribute any thing towards his Conversion and Regeneration Ninthly the twentieth Article of England ascribes unto the Church a power in determining Controversies of the faith of which the Articles of Ireland are utterly silent as if the Church were vested with no such authority contrary to Acts 15. v. 6 c. Tenthly it is declared in the 34. Article of the Church of England That whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the word of God and be ordained and approved by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak Brethren But of this there is nothing said in the Articles of Ireland and thereby a wide gap laid open to all private men either out of singularity faction or perverseness of spirit to oppose the Ceremonies of the Church and deny conformity thereunto at their will and pleasure Eleventhly the 36. Article of England approves the Book of the Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. of which Consecration we find nothing in the Articles of Ireland as if such Consecrations had something in them which of it selfe is superstitious and ungodly or that the calling of Bishops was not warranted by the word of God Twelfthly it is declared in the 38. Article of England That the riches and goods of Christians are not common as touching the right title and possession of the same as certain Anabaptists do falsly boast Of which the Articles of Ireland are as silent as in the point of Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops the dangerous consequence whereof may be felt too soon I know that these two last passages may rather argue some deficiency in the Articles of Ireland then any contrariety unto those of England But I have cause enough to think that many of those who willingly subscribe the Articles of Ireland as being totally Genevian both in the matter and method will be apt to boggle at these two the first as being contrary to the common Principles of the Presbyterians the second as being no less opposite to that levelling humour which doth affect as great a Parity in the Civil State as the others have contended for in the Ecclesiastical And thus far I have gone along with Doctor Bernard in answering all the several Charges which are laid upon me and freeing my selfe from all such opposition to the publick Doctrine of this Church as I stand accused for A crime for which I could not easily acquit my self and not take notice by the way how much the Doctrine Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England were opposed by him who laid that heavy charge upon me In the pursuit of which particulars I have not gone much further though somewhat further I have gone then I am warranted and instructed by Doctor Bernard himself and possibly had not gone so far but that I knew how speedily the examples of some men may be drawn into practice their practice made exemplary and the Obliquities of their judgement taken up as a Rule for others if warning of the danger be not given in convenient time Magnos errores magnorum virorum authoritate transmitti as was well observed by Vadianus is a thing too ordinary It is my wish that the business may rest here though I fear it will not the Doctors Book being such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an occasion of creating new contentions and reviving the old as if it had been publisht and intended to no other end then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to put the whole State of Greece into fresh combustions Others there are who either are concerned by name or interessed in the defence of that which they have formerly written in the Churches cause who may conceive themselves obliged to the like engagements as well to do themselves right in the eyes of the world as to maintain the dignity of the Episcopal calling in behalfe of the Church And to these last I shall refer the further prosecuting of the point of Episcopacy as it relates to Doctor Bernards actings in it who by furnishing the Lord Primates naked Affirmation with some Armour of Proof and citing many Forraign and Domestick Authors of the same opinion hath made himself a second party in the Quarrel and consequently stands bound by the Laws of Duel to abide the Combat If in that part which I have done I have done any thing amiss as I hope I have not I shall crave pardon for my errors though I may say with truth and modesty enough Si fuit errandum causas habet error honestas in the Poets language if well in any thing I shall expect no thanks for it from the hands of men considering that when I have done the best I can I am but an unprofitable servant in the Church of Christ a Tacit. in vit Agric. b In Epist ad Aenae c 2 Kings 23. 18. d Tertul. Apolog. 1 Sam. 28. 15. Deut. 18. 11. Andriant 12. Tom. 6. Contra Judaeos Dial. cum Try●hone Lib. 1. Epist 2. Tostatus in Exod. 12. a Tract in Joan. b De 10. Cordis cap. 3. In Psal 91. c In Psal 23. Answ to Sir Tho. More p. 287. Declarat of Baptism p. 96. Contra Valent. Gentil Tom. 1. p. 254. Catech. qu. 103. Simner in Exod 20. Gomarus de orig Sabbati Bound Editio 2. p. 10. In Ezek. c. 20. In Rom. 3 In Orthod fide l. 24. c. 4. In Luk. 19. In Exod. 2. qu. 11. Hosp in de Fest Ethn. Jud. l. 3. c. 3. Annal. d. 7. De creat hominis l. 1. ad finem Hebr. 7. 10. Chap. 16. 29. In Decalogo Opera dies Dies Geniales l. 3. c. 18. Hospin De orig Fest c. 5. 2 Edit p. 65. Joseph adversus Apion l. 2. De Abrahamo Problem loc 55 Apud Euseb a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Purch pilgr. l. 1. c. 4. Emend Temp. l. 3. Id. l. 4. Id. l. 1. Ed. 2. In Levit. 13. qu. 3. Hist l. 36. Marlorat 7. a Illic secundâ feriâ populus terrae cum flamine regulo convenire solebant propter judicia Helmold Chron. Sclav l. 1. c. 24. Page 80. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. De doctr temp l. 7. c. 3. Emend temp l. 2. Epist Oenon. ad Parid. Isych l. 6. in Levit. c. 23. In Psal 47. De coronâ mil. c. 3. Can. 16. Can. 49. Can. 52. De Castigatione Epist 289. Expos fidei Cath. 24. Injunct 20. In Exod. 20. qu. 12. Ibid. In Can. Con. Laod. In Can. Sol. Hom. 30. I● omnes cap. de seriis Ad Eustochian In Num. Hom. 2. Hom. 5. in Mat. 1. Conc. Matiscon Can. 1. Collat. doct Cathol Protestant cap. 68. Synod Dordra Sess 14. Resp ad Cal. Gent. Consil redeundi Artic. 35. 36. Carthag 4 Can. 3. Ibid. Can. 4. Can. 2. Concil Antioch Can. 19. True subject p. 779. Mont. Gag cap. 11. p. 78. * Tacit. in● Agric.
Mr. Ley accused by the Lord Primate for being too cold and waterish in the point of the Sabbath That by the Declaration of the three Estates convened in Parliament 5. 6. of Edw. 6. the times of publick worship are left to the liberty of the Church and that by the Doctrine of the Homilies the keeping of the Lords day hath no other ground then the consent of godly Christian people in the Primitive times No more of the fourth commandment to be now retained by the Book of Homilies then what belongs to the Law of Nature Working in Harvest and doing other necessary business permitted on the Lords day both by that Act of Parliament and the Queens Iniunctions No restraint made from Recreations on the Lords day till the first of King James The Sundaies and other Festivals made equal in a manner by the publick Liturgy and equal altogether by two Acts of Parliament The Answer to the Lord Primates Obiection from the Book of Homilies with reference to the grounds before laid down The difference between the Homilies of England and the Articles of Ireland in the present case Several strong Arguments to prove the Homily to mean no otherwise then as laid down in the said Answer Doctor Bounds Sabbath Doctrines lookt on as a general grievance and the care taken to suppress them WE are now come unto the third most material charge of all the rest by which the Historian stands accused for opposing the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies to which he had formerly subscribed and that too in so gross a manner that all the Sophistry he had could neither save him harmless for it nor defend him in it This is an heavy charge indeed and that it may appear the greater the Lord Primate layes it down with all those aggravations which might render the Historian the less able either to traverse the Indictment or plead not guilty to the Bill I wonder saith he in his Letter to an Honourable Person pag. 110. how Doctor Heylyn having himself subscribed to the Articles of Religion agreed upon in the Synod held at London Anno 1562. can oppose the conclusion which he findeth directly laid down in the Homily of the time and place of Prayer viz. God hath given express charge to all men in the fourth Commandment that upon the Sabbath day which is now our Sunday they shall cease from all weekly and week-day labour to the intent that like as God himself wrought six dayes and rested the seventh and blessed and consecrated it to quietness and rest from labour even so Gods obedient people should use the Sunday holily and rest from their common and dayly business and also give themselves wholly to the heavenly exercise of Gods true Religion and service This is the charge which the Historian suffers under wherewith the Lord Primate as it seems did so please himself that like a crambe his cocta it is served in again in his Letter unto Mr. Ley but ushered in with greater preparation then before it was For whereas Mr. Ley had hammered a Discourse about the Sabbath which he communicated to the Lord Primate to the end it might be approved by him the Lord Primate finds some fault with the modesty of the man as if he came not home enough in his Propositions to the point in hand Your second Proposition saith he p. 105. is too waterish viz. That this Doctrine rather then the contrary is to be held the Doctrine of the Church of England and may well be gathered out of her publick Liturgy and the first part of the Homily concerning the place and time of prayer Whereas you should have said that this is to be held undoubtedly the Doctrine of the Church of England For if there could be any reasonable doubt made of the meaning of the Church of England in her Liturgy who should better declare her meaning then her self in her Homily where she peremptorily declareth her mind That in the fourth Commandment God hath given express charge to all men c. as before we had it Assuredly a man that reads these passages cannot chuse but think that the Lord Primate was a very zealous Champion for the Doctrine of the Church of England but upon better consideration we shall find it otherwise that he only advocateth for the Sabbatarians not onely contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England but the practise also which that we may the better see I shall lay down plainly and without any sophistry at all upon what grounds the Lords day stood in the Church of England at the time of the making of this Homily both absolutely in it self and relatively in respect of the other Holy dayes And first we are to understand that by the joint Declaration of the Lords Spiritual Temporal and the Commons assembled in Parliament in the 5. 6. years of King Edw. 6. the Lords day stands on no other ground then the Authority of the Church not as enjoyned by Christ or ordained by any of his Apostles For in that Parliament to the honour of Almighty God it was thus declared viz. Forasmuch as men be not at all times so mindful to laud and praise God so ready to resort to hear Gods holy word and to come to the holy Communion c. as their bounden duty doth require therefore to call men to remembrance of their duty and to help their infirmities it hath been wholsomly provided that there should be some certain times and dayes appointed wherein Christians should cease from all kind of labour and apply themselves onely and wholly unto the aforesaid holy works properly pertaining to true Religion c. which works as they may well be called Gods service so the times especially appointed for the same are called holy dayes Not for the matter or the nature either of the time or day c. for so all dayes and times are of like holiness but for the nature and condition of such holy works c. whereunto such dayes and times are sanctified and hallowed that is to say separated from all profane uses and dedicated not unto any Saint or Creature but onely unto God and his service dayes●rescribed ●rescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word unto the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Country by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth of Gods glory and edification of their people Which Statute being repealed in the Reign of Queen Mary was revived again in the first year of Queen Elizabeth and did not stand in force at the time of the making of this Homily which the Lord Primate so much builds on but at such time also as he wrote his Letter to Mr. Ley and to that Honourable Person whosoever he was
we next proceed unto the Confirmation which he hath in hand And therein also pretermitting his whole Narrative touching the carriage of the business in the Convocation of the year 1634. we will pitch only on the examination of this point viz. whether the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England were not a virtual repealing of the Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the better proceeding in it I think it not unnecessary to produce that Canon which is the ground of the Dispute The Title of it this viz. Of the Agreement of the Church of England and Ireland in the profession of the same Christian faith The Body of it this viz. For the manifestation of our Agreement with the Church of England in the Confession of the same Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments We do receive and approve the Book of Articles of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops and the whole Clergy in the whole convocation holden at London Anno Dom. 1562. for avoiding of the diversities of opinions and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion And therefore if any hereafter shall affirm that any of those Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe unto Let him be excommunicated and not absolved before he make a publick revocation of his error These are the very words of the Canon it selfe and from these words the Observator did conclude that the Articles of England were received in stead of the other but Doctor Bernard makes this construction of the Canon That there was not a reception of the one in stead of the other but the one with the other p. 119. That in the Canon the Articles of England are received not in stead but with those of Ireland p. 120. But which of the two is in the right will be best seen by the Arguments produced on both sides and by the Answers which are made to those several Arguments And first the Observator takes notice of some scandal given unto the Papists and the occasion of some derisions which they had thereby that in the Churches of three Kingdoms professing the same Religion being under the patronage of one soveraign Prince there should be three distinct and in some points contrary confessions and that for the avoiding of this scandal it was thought fit there should be one Confession or one Book of Articles onely for the Churches of England and Ireland not without hope that Scotland would soon follow after And thereupon he doth infer that if the superinducing or receiving of a new Confession be not a repealing of the old there must be two Confessions in the same Church differing in many points from one another Which would have been so far from creating an uniformity of belief between the Churches and taking away thereby the matter of derision which was given the Papists in two distinct and in some points contrary Confessions yet both pretending unto one and the same Religion that it would rather have increased their scorn and made a greater disagreement in Ireland it selfe then was before between the Churches of both Kingdoms The second Argument is taken from these words of Saint Paul Heb. 8. 13. viz. Dicendo novum veteravit prius c. that is to say in that he saith a new Covenant he hath made the first old as our English reads it and then it followeth that that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away that is to say the old being disanulled by the new there must necessarily follow the abolishment of its use and practice So that unless it may be thought that Saint Paul was out in his Logick as I think it may not the superinducing of a new Covenant must be the abrogating of the old His third Argument is taken from the Abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath by superinducing of the Lords day for the day of Worship By means whereof the Sabbath was lessened in authority and reputation by little and little and in short time vvas absolutely laid aside in the Church of Christ the fourth Commandment by vvhich it vvas at first ordained being still in force His fourth and last Argument vvas that the first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth confirmed in Parliament vvith several penalties to those vvho should refuse to officiate by it or should not diligently resort and repair unto it as appears by the Statute 2 3. Edw. 6. c. 1. vvas actually repealed by the authorizing of the second Liturgy of the 5 6. of King Edw. 6. vvhich vvas forthvvith received into use and practice in all parts of the Kingdom the former Liturgy being no otherwise suppressed and called in then by the superinducing of this the Statute upon which it stood continuing unrepealed in full force and virtue and many Clauses of the same related to in the Statute which confirmed the second Upon which Ground it was inferred that the Articles of Ireland were virtually though not formally abrogated by the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England Of the first and last of these four Arguments Doctor Bernard takes no notice at all and returns but one Answer to the second and third which notwithstanding may serve also for the first and last just as an Almanack calculated for the Meridian of London may generally serve for the use of all Great Britain The Answer is That the Apostles speech of making void the old Covenant by speaking of a new or taking in the first day of the Week to be the Sabbath instead of the last when but one of the seven was to be kept doth not fit the Case for in these there was a Superinduction and reception of the one for the other but in the Canon the Articles of England are received not instead but with those of Ireland which by his leave is not so much an Answer to the Observators Arguments as a plain begging of the Question For if this Answer will hold good in Ireland it might have held good also in the Land of Judaea and the Parts adjoyning where both the Lords-day and the Sabbath the old Law and the Gospel did for a time remain together As for the Doctors Arguments That the Reception of the Articles of the Church of England doth no more argue an Abrogation of the Articles of Ireland than that the Apostles Creed was abrogated by the reception of the Nicene and Athanasian p. 118. it is easily answered For as the Doctor well observes the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds are but Enlargements of the other and that in some particular Points onely in which the Hereticks of those times had disturbed the peace of the Church So that those Creeds are but the Explanations of the other in the Points disputed and were received by the Church with reference onely to the condemnation of some Heresies and the Explication of some Orthodox or Catholick Doctrines which had been opposed by
contrary to the New which is denied in the first clause of this Article and secondly this Article must be contradicted by the Book of Homilies which in another of these Articles is approved as before was said As Adversaries to which truth the Author of the Book entitled The Faith Doctrine and Religion professed and protected in the Realm of England c. being a Commentary on the 39. Articles Perused and by the lawful Authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick doth account all such as have taught and published first that whereas all other things were so changed that they were clean taken away as the Priesthood the Sacrifice and Sacraments this day that is the Sabbath day was so changd that it yet remaineth and secondly that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual If so then no such thing required of Christians as to dedicate the first day of the week wholly to the service of God or to rest thereon from our common and dayly business as it is positively determined in this Article of the Church of Ireland Adde here those desperate consequences which have been raised by some men from these Sabbath-Doctrines It having been preacht in some of the Pulpits in this Kingdom as Mr. Rogers tells us in his Preface to the Book above mentioned that to do any servile work or business on the Lords day is as great a sin as to kill a man or commit adultery that to throw a Bowle to make a Feast or dress a VVedding Dinner on the Lords day is as great a sin as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat and that to ring more Bells then one on the Lords day is as great a sin as to commit a wilful murder Most desperate consequents indeed but such as naturally do arise from such dangerous premises Fifthly it is declared Num. 71. that we ought to judg those Ministers to be lawfully called and sent which be called and chosen to the work of the Ministry by men who have publick Authority given them in the Church This serves to countenance the Ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas ordained if I may so call it by the imposition of the hands of two Lay-Elders for each single Presbyter without the assistance or benediction of the Bishop and is directly contrary to the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons according to which Book justified and approved by the 36. Article of the Church of England no Priest or Presbyter can be otherwise ordained then by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop Sixthly it is declared Num. 74. That God hath given power to his Ministers not simply to forgive sins which prerogative he hath reserved onely to himselfe but in his name to declare and pronounce unto such as truly repent and unfainedly believe his Holy Gospel the absolution and forgiveness of sins VVhich Doctrine how contrary it is to the Doctrine of the Church of England hath been shewed at large in the tenth Section of this Book To which I shall now onely adde that for the better encouragement of the penitent party to make a true and sincere confession of his sins that so the Priest may proceed to Absolution on the better grounds it is ordered by the 113. Canon of the year 1603. That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister for the unburthening of his conscience and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him the said Minister shall not at any time reveale and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same under pain of Irregularity By incurring of which pain of Irregularity he doth not onely actually forfeit all those spiritual promotions of which he is at that time possessed but is rendered utterly uncapable of receiving any other for the time to come Seventhly it is declared Num. 80. That the Bishop of Rome is so far from being the Supreme head of the Universal Church of Christ that his works and Doctrine do plainly discover him to be that man of sin foretold in the holy Scriptures whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and abolish with the brightness of his coming Of which opinion the Lord Primate also was as is affirmed by Doctor Bernard p. 162. where he telleth that the Lord Primate had in two learned Sermons given his judgement at large that the Papacy was meant by Babylon in the seventeenth and eighteenth of the Revelation But there is no such Doctrine concerning Antichrist in the Book of Articles or in any other publick Monument or Record of the Church of England but the contrary rather And this appeareth by a prayer at the end of the second Homily for Whitsunday viz. That by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truly preached truly received and truly followed in all places to the beating down of Sin Death the Pope the Devil and all the Kingdom of Antichrist In which words the Pope the Devil and the Kingdom of Antichrist being reckoned as the three great enemies of the Church of Christ it must needs be by the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies that the Pope and Antichrist are as much distinguished as either the Devil and the Pope or the Devil and Antichrist which no man of reason can conceive to be one and the same Eighthly the Church of England in the tenth Article speaks very favourably of the will of man in the act of Conversion and all the other Acts of Piety which depend upon it viz. That we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will according to that memorable saying of Saint Augustine the greatest Champion of Gods grace against the Pelagian Heresies Praevenit nos gratia Dei ut velimus subsequitur ne frustra velimus Whereas it is declared in the Articles of Ireland that man is meerly passive in the work of his own Conversion velut inanimatum quiddam as was said by Luther the Article affirming Num. 32. That no man can come unto Christ unless the Father draw him that is to say unless the Father doth so draw him that nothing be ascribed to mans will either in receiving of Grace preventing or working any thing by the assistance of Grace subsequent or Grace concurring no other kind of drawing by our Heavenly Father being allowed of in this Act in the Schools of Calvin For on this ground Calvin dislikes that saying of Saint Chrysostome that God draws none but such as are willing to come