Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n authority_n new_a testament_n 2,897 5 7.9529 4 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
A15508 Charity mistaken, with the want whereof, Catholickes are vniustly charged for affirming, as they do with grief, that Protestancy vnrepented destroies salvation. Knott, Edward, 1582-1656.; Matthew, Tobie, Sir, 1577-1655, attributed author.; Potter, Christopher, 1591-1646.; Potter, Christopher, 1591-1646. Want of charitie justly charged. 1630 (1630) STC 25774; ESTC S102197 54,556 140

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

extreamely confused what the Church of England in most things belieues so is it as true that they are very carefull that they be not too clearely vnderstood And therefore in many cōtrouersies whereof that booke speakes it comes not at all to the maine difficulty of the question betweene them and vs and especially in those of the Church and Free will For whereas there are two maine Controuersies concerning the Church namely whether the Catholicke Church of our Lord must not euer be visible to the eyes of men though at some times more gloriously then at others and whether the said Church be infallible in the definitiōs of Faith in both which points we hold the affirmatiue and they the negatiue they dare not declare in this publique manner what they hold therein And so also in that of Free Wil Art 10. they only affirme thereof in haec verba The condition of mā after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turne prepare himselfe by his owne naturall strength good workes to faith calling vpō God wherfore we haue no power to do good workes pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God preuenting vs that we may haue a good will and working with vs whē we haue that goodwil Now this is true Catholick Doctrine which we belieue better them they But they declare not the while whether or no a man haue freedome of will to do a good worke or not to do it when first he is inspired and moued to it by God Almighties grace which we affirme they deny which is the only knott of our question the point vpō which so many other Catholicke Doctrines depend Soe also do they play at fast and ●oose when in the sixt Article of holy Scripture they enumerate al those books of the old Testament which they allow to be Canonicall wherein by the way they are rather Iewes then Christians for not admitting the bookes of Iudith the Machabees diuers others into the Canon And they trifle also when they tell vs that they vnderstand those only bookes both of the old and newe Testament to be Canonicall of whose authority there was neuer any doubt in the Church For they know as well as we that the Apocalips the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude and one of S. Peters were not acknowledged till prooffes were made during the space of three or fower hundred yeares after Christ our Lord. And yet these mē haue beene pleased out of their great grace to admit them though the Machabees must be reiected because they speake of prayer for the dead But obserue in the meane time what this booke of Articles sayeth concerning the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament It saith only this All the bookes of new Testament as they are commonly receaued we doe receaue and account them for Canonicall But why doe they not particularly enumerate all the bookes which they acknowledge to be of the new Testament as they had done them of the old but only because they must so haue named those bookes of S. Iames and others for Canonicall which the Lutherans haue cast out of their Canon A mad peece of vnity God wot when these reformers of the Church according forsooth to Scripture if you will take their word cannot so much as agree about the very Canon it selfe of the Scripture But abstracting from all these insincerities wherewith that booke of Articles is full fraught they doe not so much as say that the Articles of Doctrine which they deliuer are fundamentall either all or halfe or any one thereof or that they are necessarily to be belieued by them or the contrary damnable if it be belieued by vs but they are glad to walke in a cloude for the reasons which haue beene already toucht Maister Rogers indeede in the Analysis which he makes of those nyne and thirty Articles speakes lowd inough by way of taxing the doctrine of the Church of Rome as being contrary to that of the Church of England and he giues it as many ill names as his impure spirit can deuise affirmes amongst other things that many Papists and namely the Franciscans blush not to affirme that S. Francis is the holy Ghost Fol. 23. And that Christ is the Sauiour of men but one Mother Iane is the Sauiour of woemen a most execrable of Postellus the Iesuit Fol. 14. with a great deale of such base trash as this And yet his booke is declared to haue beene pervsed and by the lawfull authority of the Church of England permitted to be publicke But yet euen Maister Rogers himselfe is not so valiant as to tell vs in particular which point of their Doctrine is fundamentall to saluation and which is not Much lesse is there any apparance that euer the Church of England should doe it since euen now we haue seene that it dares not in diuerse points soe much as declare in publicke manner that it professes the expresse contrary of what we held Nay we are not likely to see the fūdamental points of Faith whereof they talke so lowd to be auowed by so much as either of the Vniuersities yea or yet by any one Colledge or society of learned men amongst them And the reason of their reseruation in this kind is playne For if when they write ioyntly and in a body they should be conuinced of any absurdity or errour by the testimony either of the ancient Fathers on the one side or the Lutherans on the other their maine cause would receaue a mortall wounde because so their Church o● Vniuersities or Colledges would plainly appeare to be controlled and confuted eitheir by the Fathers or their fellow ghospellers whereas now when they speake or write but in the name or persons of particular men one of them will not thinke that himselfe or his cause is much preiudiced if any other of them be found guylty of errour and in such cases it is vsuall for them to say what care I if Doctour Morton say this or Doctour White say that and the like For this reason it is that I haue heard some Catholickes affirme and that to my thinking with great reason that they would hold it to be no ill worke for them if the pretended Colledge of Chelsy or any other were founded by Protestants expresly for writing bookes of controuersie by common consent But I belieue I shall not see them halt vpon that leg for feare least they should be found to be lame of both On the otherside at times they make eager inuectiues against vs for declaring so many yea and all the Doctrines of our Church to be Fundamentall so far forth as that whosoeuer refuses obstinatly to belieue any one of them doth forfette the saluation of his soule And in the strength of this zeale of theirs Doctour Dunne in a sermon made before his Maiesty at his first happy coming to this Crowne doth bitterly exclame against the Catholicke Romane Church as