Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	church_n	peter_n	successor_n	2,942	5	9.2143	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41618	Papists protesting against Protestant-popery in answer to a discourse entituled, A papist not mis-represented by Protestants : being a vindication of The papist mis-represented and represented, and the reflections upon the answer.	Gother, John, d. 1704.	1686 (1686)	Wing G1340; ESTC R227532	21,123	40

obligation from their Church of assenting to such Doctrines And for thus delivering a matter of Fact he has the Authority again of this Great Prelate who having declar'd the Primacy of St. Peter and acknowledg'd the same in his Successors in the See of Rome immediately adds As for those things which we know are disputed of in the Schools tho the Ministers continually alledge them to render this Power odious it is not necessary we speak of them here seeing they are not Articles of the Catholick Faith It is sufficient we acknowledge a Head establish'd by God to conduct his whole Flock in his Paths which those who love Concord amongst Brethren and Ecclesiastical Vnanimity will most willingly acknowledge And is not this a sufficient discharge of the Representer from all the exceptions of his Adversaries For if this learned Author having propos'd the Primacy of St. Peters Chair to be acknowledg'd as the common Center of all Catholick Union do's purposely wave all other Points relating to the Authority of that Chair as being no part of the Catholick Faith And his Book in this form is own'd and approv'd by the Pope himself by the most eminent of the Cardinals and other great Prelates of the Churh after a most strict examination what ground of quarrel with the Representer in his following this so Authentick a Rule 'T was the main design of the Bishop of Condom in that Treatise to separate the opinions of Divines and School Debates from the Doctrine of the Catholick Faith And since he omitted to expound those Points of the Popes Personal Infallibility and the Deposing Power as not belonging to the Catholick Faith with so full and Authentick an approbation as has been declared where is the crime of the Representer in not allowing them a place in that List And here I cannot but run the venture of another smile from the Replier upon the reinforcement of my former Proposal I desir'd that the decision of the quarrel with the Representer might depend upon the experiment of any ones being judg'd capable of being receiv'd into the Catholick Church upon his assenting to matters of Faith in that form as deliver'd by the Representer The Replier having smil'd first thought it not fit to put it to that issue but chose rather to own that the Faith as declar'd by the Representer was really the Faith of a Papist excepting the Deposing Doctrine and some other few Points Here then let him make the Proposed Trial if he pleases or any friend for him and if notwithstanding his refusal to admit the Deposing Doctrine and the Popes Infallibility but as Stated by the Representer that is not as Articles of Catholick Faith he be not judg'd sufficiently qualified as to those points to be receiv'd into the Communion of the Roman Catholicks I will grant he has reason to charge the Representer not to have done his part in those Particulars This will be a much shorter and surer Conviction then twenty Answers and Replies fit only to cast a mist before the Readers eyes and which such a tryal as this will quickly dissipate And this now is all that is requisite for a full Vindication of the Representer For it being franckly own'd by the Replier himself that he has made a true Representation of the Faith of a Papist with the exception only of some few Points And it being here made evident that what the Representer deliver'd as to those very Points is according to the sense of the See Apostolick of the greatest Prelates nay I may say of the whole Church The Papist Mis-represented and Represented stands untouch'd And all that has been said against it have been nothing more then so many artificial endeavours to perswade the World that the Protestant understands better what the Faith of a Papist is then the Papist do's himself which will be easily answer'd after his manner with a smile What the Replier adds after this belongs not to the Representer who being to Represent and not to Dispute is not concern'd with those tedious arguments however not to be uncivil we 'l go so far with him tho it be out of our way 1. He proves at large that all Definitions of Faith declar'd in General Councils are not concluded with Anathema's and in this we willingly agree with him But this do's not at all prove that whatsoever is declar'd in such a Council without an Anathema is an Article of Faith and therefore nothing against us deserving any farther answer 2. He endeavours to prove the Deposing Power not to be a matter of Discipline and Government but to be a Point of Doctrine and this from a Principle lately published in the vindication of Dr. Sherlock's Sermon viz. that To decree what shall be done includs a virtual definition of that Doctrine on which that Decree is founded And this he says as we have been lately told But what respect can I possibly have for what has been lately told us by another hand since the Replier himself however he urges it in one page plainly undervalues it and contradicts it in his very next where he tells us that in the Council of the Apostles at Jerusalem there was a Decree of Manners yet it contain'd no Definition of Faith And for my part I think the Replier in the right and must needs stand with him against the Vindicator of the Sermon that to decree what shall be done do's not include a virtual Definition of Doctrine And the example produc'd by the Replier evidently shews it For tho the Apostles in their Council Acts 15. decreed abstinence from blood and strangl'd meats Yet this Decree of what was to be done did not include a virtual Definition of that Doctrine on which the Decree was founded For if it had then the Doctrine of abstaining from blood and strangled meats had been an Article of Faith which I am sure is not agreeable either to the Principles or Practices of either of our Churches And the reason of this may be because Decrees of what shall be done are often made with relation to particular circumstances of time persons place c. and not built upon Definitions of Faith but upon Prudential Motives upon Probable Opinions upon the Testimonies and Informations of Men and so may be suspended or quite abrogated as also confirm'd a new or wholly chang'd according to the alteration of Circumstances Nothing of all which can stand with Articles of Faith which being the indispensable Doctrine of Jesus Christ are not subject to change or alteration 3. But suppose this Decree to be rank'd only among the Decreta Morum which concern only the Discipline and Government of the Church yet our Adversary here urges out of Canus and Bellarmine that General Councils cannot err even in such Decrees when they relate to things necessary to Salvation and concern the whole Church And when the Replier has prov'd the Deposing Decree to be of this Nature and

own the Doctrines and Practices which they charge us with And how could this possibly be otherwise if they charge us with none but what we expresly profess to own 3. That in some cases I disown that to be the Doctrine and Belief of our Church which manifestly is so and has been prov'd on them Then for all his word to the contrary we are in some cases charg'd with more than we expresly profess to Believe As for his manifestly and his proving let that go for no more than what it is his Opinion 'T is none of mine and I think 't will be no bodies else when the matter comes to a Trial. And here now we must turn over so many Leaves till we meet with some other matter in the Reply And the first that occurs are some exceptions against the Rule observ'd by the Representer in declaring the Faith of a Papist who to clear himself from the Scandal of Interpreting the Council of Trent by his own private sense and opinion alledges the Catechism ad Parochos which he had follow'd in delivering the sense of the Council This the Replier could not pass by without an Answer and therefore gives a satisfactory one And is he sure says he that all his Representations are conformable to the sense of this Catechism May he not play tricks with the Catechism and expound that by a private Spirit as well as the Council Thus a Question or two is a full Confutation of the Reflecter He alledg'd again the Bishop of Condom's Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church which being approv'd and attested by the Pope himself by several Cardinals and Bishops brought along with it the Authority of the See Apostolick But this it seems works nothing upon the Replier Canus has put a scruple in his head and because he finds in this Author that That is not to be accounted the judgment of the Apostolick See which is given only by the Bishop of Rome privately maliciously a word slipt over by the Replier and inconsiderately or with the advice only of some few of his own mind he cannot therefore think but that the Bishop of Condom's Exposition comes short of the Authority of the Apostolick See and that the Reflecter is out in taking shelter under one whose Authority is nothing as he says downright pag. 46. This is Answering I confess with a witness thus to endeavour to overthrow so considerable and Reverend an Authority without any Authority at all besides that of an ungrounded and ill-turn'd consequence viz. Because that is not to be accounted the Judgment of the Apostolick See which is given only by the Pope privately maliciously and inconsiderately or with the advice only of some few of his own mind therefore this Learned Prelate's Exposition of the Catholick Faith is to be thrown by as of no Authority So that our Replier has here concluded without any more adoe that the approbation of this Book was only given privately maliciously inconsiderately or else with the advice only of some few of the Popes own mind otherwise the Consequence will not hold But to shew how little the Replier has weighed this matter and with how little pains he can undervalue any thing when he pleases I need only remit the Reader to the perusal of the Book it self which is lately published in English the Advertisements affixt to it will satisfie him that there has not a Book appear'd in this Age supported by greater Authority than This. He 'l find it examin'd with all due deliberation approv'd with all solennity imaginable by Men of known Integrity Piety and Learning by Abbots Cardinals Bishops and by this present Pope himself and recommended by his Holiness to be Read by all the Faithful He 'l find it not only thus approv'd but even twice Printed at Rome it self and in the Press of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide Translated out of the Original French into divers Languages as Latin Italian English Irish Flemish High-Dutch and this done by eminent Men of these Nations So that besides the Attestations of those great Men there specified it may be said to have the General Approbation of all these Catholick Prelates who in proposing it to their Flock sufficiently recommend it for a True Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church And yet notwithstanding all this with the Replier it has not the Authority of the Apostolick See nay its Authority is just nothing Now methinks I would willingly here know of the Replier whether Those Great and Good Authorities above mention'd who pretend to make a Survey of the Faith and Doctrines of Catholicks have better Authority and Grounds for what they assert and charge than this Reverend Prelate for the Exposition which he gives And whether it be not a great Mystery that every Divine of the Reformation shall be thought to have Authority sufficient for defaming the Church of Rome with whatsoever extravagant Opinions he can but find in one or two Writers of what condition soever And yet a Catholick Prelate Eminent in the Church for his great Vertue and Learning in expounding the Faith of his Church with the Consent Approbation and Authority of the Greatest Men of his Communion and even of his Supream Pastor shall be slighted and thrown by as of no Authority at all For my part I cannot understand this uneven kind of justice and reasoning Or why those who profess a Religion and depend on it as to their Salvation shall be thought less to understand it than others who protest against it and look no farther into 't than to render it Ridiculous But it must be so in an Age in which a Papist is not to pass for a Christian and must not be believ'd we 'l therefore go on to the other points And for the clearing the most material of them we need not look beyond the Exposition deliver'd by this Prelate 1st As to the Invocation of Saints he declares expresly that They have no other capacity of assisting us but only by their Prayers And tho the Replier pretends there 's no such limitation found in this Author yet methinks he should not have been so popositive in a case in which he 's so easily disprov'd The French Edition Printed at Paris 1681. has it expresly pag. 32. The First English Edition Printed likewise in Paris 1672. pag. 29. And now this last Correct Edition which came forth the last Week pag. 9. So that tho the Answerer has made some little objection yet the Representer is sufficiently vindicated in thus declaring the Faith of a Papist since what he said is founded not upon his own private sense but upon an Authority beyond all exception besides that of meer Cavil 2ly And 3ly As to the Popes personal Infallibility and the Deposing Power the Representer declar'd that tho there were Men of his Communion maintaining these Points by way of Opinion yet that they were no part of the Catholick Faith and that Papists had no