Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n canon_n holy_a scripture_n 2,464 5 5.7522 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
A34439 Motives of conversion to the Catholick faith, as it is professed in the reformed Church of England by Neal Carolan ... Carolan, Neal. 1688 (1688) Wing C605; ESTC R15923 53,424 72

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

France which makes the Bishop of Rome inferiour to a Council and decrees against his Priviledge of not erring in Faith and Manners and contrariwise adjudges it only to the Church and to a Council the Representative thereof Here we have seen this learned Sorbon Doctor directly opposite to the Italian Divines concerning this affair which is under debate It is likewise very well known that Richerius another Doctor of Sorbon and as good a Roman Catholick as the best of them has written his History of General Councils on set purpose therein to run down and demolish the Personal Infallibility and other pretended Priviledges of the Pope But above all Monsieur Maimbourg a most inveterate Enemy to the Protestant Religion has composed a Book designedly to confute the vain pretence of Papal Infallibility and in the sixth Chapter of that Book above-mentioned he alledges all manner of Authorities in order to convince mankind that the Pope is not infallible and he clearly makes out his Allegations i● 10 Chapters of the Book aforesaid concerning the Prerogatives of Rome and her Bishop That which is very pleasant is that Maimbourg finds several Popes who thought their Predecessors fallible and some though but a few who thought themselves so too Among these Adrian VI. like a modest and honest man when he was actually Pope continued to own in general and without exception that the Bishop of Rome might fall into Error Maimbourgs words are these Adrian VI. in his Commentaries upon the 4th of the Sentences says positively and in a most decisive manner That he is certain Cortum est quod Pontifex possit errare etiam in iis quae tangunt fidem Haeresin per suam determinationem aut Decretalem asserendo cap. 15. pag. 183. the Pope may err even in matters belonging to Faith teaching and establishing a Heresie by his Definition or by his Decretal Hence it manifestly appears that the French Catholicks are in this regard opposite to the Italian Papists Therefore Bellarmin will not let this French Doctrine pass it being very prejudicial to the Interest of the papal Chair at Rome but he contradicts it lib. 4. cap. 2. de Romano Pontifice and that very severely saying videtur erronea Haeresi proxima it seems to be wholly erroneous and next in the world to Heresie Here let the Reader consider how those Doctors of the Popish Perswasion disagree and contradict each other about their pretended infallible Judge or Guide in matters of Religion The French Divines and Pope Adrian VI hold that the Pope is not infallible and they say that the diffusive Church and a General Council is so Then comes Cardinal Bellarm with others like him and gives them the lye and then they of the other side not willing to dye in this debt do the like to him and his associates If it be said that both parties had more manners than to tax one another with the lye in express terms that is true indeed but yet they do the same in effect Finding this great discord amongst them I set aside the whole Italian Sect at once and could have been content if the French party had been able to advance a model of an infallible Guide with any concord amongst themselves and without contradicting one another But alas they also are full of Disputes and Dissentions and the best model they devise is liable to very great exceptions As for Disputes and Controversy the matter is thus Some hold that a General Council is the only infallible Guide and Judge in things appertaining to Religion but they allow the Pope many great priviledges in the Council For example a General Council say one party cannot be called but by the Popes Authority or by his Consent And the opinion of these men is to be found in Petrus de Marca the late famous Archbishop of Paris lib. 4. de Concordia Sacerdotii Imperii cap. 5. parag 4. Others affirm again that the Civil Magistrate may call an extraordinary Council which was the Judgment of the University of Paris publickly declared by the Command of King Charles VIII as may be seen in the 4th Book of the History of General Councils set forth by Richerius above mentioned C. 2. and the same was likewise the judgment of the late Famous Archbishop of Paris Lib. 6. C. 17.4 de concordia Sacerdotii Imperii A third sort hold it not to be absolutely necessary that the Pope should have any hand in constituting a General Council or in presiding in it or in ratifying the Decrees of it And this is the Opinion of Monsieur Maimbourg in his Book concerning the Prerogatives of Rome and her Bishop Chap. 16. Pag. 188 189. The same Opinion is likewise maintained by Richerius Historia Concil General lib. 1. c. 5. For in two General Councils that is the second and fifth the Pope neither presided by himself nor by his Delegates and the same Richerius disproves the colours and pretences found out by Baronius and Binius in order to make the World believe that the Pope had some presidency in the Councils above named Hitherto we find nothing in pursuit of this Infallible Guide but uncertainty and confusion everlasting Disputes and endless Quarrels This I considered and was exceedingly troubled to find my self so mightily deceived in my expectation But let us proceed farther and see whether any thing in the World be consistent and credible in this French Doctrin concerning their model of an Infallible Guide I am content to set aside the manifold Disputes concerning the nature and constitution of a Council on condition I may find them well agreed for the rest Notwithstanding if they were perfectly agreed and as harmonious as Musick yet there lies very many exceptions against their Opinion for if a General Council be the only thing incapable of Error then it follows inevitably that there has been no visible Infallible Guide upon earth for these 120 years last past For it is so long since any thing pretending to be a General Council was in being Therefore when the French Papists falsly charge the Protestants for having no certain ground-work or foundation of their Faith they do not consider that the Protestants may return the charge and ask those Papists where their Infallible Directors is since the Council of Trent was dissolved above 120 years ago If it be said that althô there is no Council now sitting yet Records and Writings which contain the Canons and Decrees of Councils are yet extant and may be consulted This makes a Writing capable of being a Guide or Director of our Faith which is a thing the Romanists will not admit of For when the Protestants affirm the written Word of God is only the Infallible Director then they except against all Writings as incapable of being any certain Directors because they may be wrested by Interpretation to bear many Senses And upon this account they call the Holy Scripture a Leaden Rule and a Nose of Wax Now for my part I cannot perceive but that the Canons and Decrees of dead Councils are liable to wresting and misinterpretation as well as the Holy Scripture Methinks the Bishop of Condom's Book is
a very strong proof of this and many instances of the like I could give but I shall omit them because it is notorious that the sense of many Canons is exceedingly disputable Thus I plainly perceive upon the whole matter that either Records of Councils are no infallible or sufficient Guide or if they be so the Holy Scripture is much more such Whence it follows that the Protestants are in the right by relying mainly upon the Scripture Certainly if a Writing can afford infallible direction the written Word of God has the best pretence in the World to that office Therefore the Reformed Church hath reason in some respect to thank the French Papists for althô their pretended unerring Director is not sufficient yet it suggests to them where they may find out one that is very sufficient Such will be the consequence of that model of an Infallible Guide which is advanced and defended by the Gallican Church and by others that follow their method But there are yet farther Inconveniences in it enough to dissatisfie any considerative person whatsoever I was content as you have heard to pass by the great Controversie above mentioned between the Italian and French men I could have prevailed with my self to have connived at the many dissentions under which the Gallican Divines do labour concerning the nature and constitution of a General Council Yet after all I perceive it is impossible to get to an end of their Controversies in so much that I am affraid I shall incumber the Reader with a tedious and long account of them The thing that at present I shall consider is their dissention concerning the extent of that Infallibility which they attribute to General Councils For some extend the supposed Infallibility attending the Councils aforesaid to all sorts of Decrees whether they concern Faith or Practice and this was the current sense of the University of Paris 145 years ago as appears by their conclusions concerning this affair publickly agreed upon and declared Anno Dom. 1542. by the Theological Faculty of that University Articulo 22. It is certain say they that General Councils lawfully assembled Certum est Concilium Generale legitime Congregatam universalem representans Ecclesiam in Fidei Morum determinationibus errare non posse and representing the Universal Church cannot err in Decrees concerning Faith and the Church But of late the Gallican Doctors sing a new song they have departed from this Opinion of their Predecessors and restrained their imagined Infallibility of Councils only to matters of Faith. And an account of this one may find p. 9. of the Reflections made upon the first Answer given to the Papist Misrepresented and Represented Besides it is in every bodies mouth that has been educated in France that in matters of Practice Discipline or Government General Councils are not Infallible Thus at one stroke the French Doctors of these last ages have cut off at least in nine or ten parts from the extent of that Infallibility which their Predecessors 145 years ago did ascribe to the Decrees of Councils For most certain it is the Rules of Practice appertaining to Christianity are to speak within compass nine or ten times as many as the matters of Faith. So the modern French Clergy do hold a much less extended Infallibility then what was heretofore held and taught by the Theological Faculty of Paris above mentioned and according to the modern Position or Doctrin we are deserted by the unerring Guide in much the greater part of Christianity and may err and wander in all practical Points and scatter as much as any Hereticks whatever Hereupon some perhaps will say that although the Office of an infallible Conductor be reduced to a very small compass yet notwithstanding it is better to have his help and assistance as little as it is than to want it Truly there was a time when I thought so too but then I considered that most of those Points controverted between Protestants and Papists are matters of practice Therefore if the unerring direction of the Guide does not extend to practical Decrees it follows that most of the points aforesaid have not hitherto been infallibly determined in savour of the Church of Rome The Worship of Images the Adoration of the Gross the Worship of Angels and Saints the half Communion the Adoration of the Host and several other things are points of practice and not properly matters of Faith. If it be said that the Decrees made by the Council of Trent concerning those things do virtually and implicitly contain a point of Faith by obliging us to believe the lawfulness or expediency of doing them I answer that the case of other Decrees about matters of Practice Discipline or Government is just the same In so much that either all practical Decrees must for this reason be reducible to matters of Faith or else the Decrees concerning Image Worship half Communion and the rest abovementioned cannot be reduced to that kind but must be rank'd among matters of Practice and so are not capable of any infallible Determination if the Description of the Guide given by the French Divines be true But if any man will maintain that all practical Decrees are reducible to matters of Faith for the reason aforesaid then the deposing Canon of the Lateran Council is reducible to the same kind and is consequently established in the Roman Church by an infallible Decree which makes it an essential part of the Romish Church Now this is that great inconvenience which the French Clergy do endeavour to avoid by restraining the unerring priviledge of the Councils to matters of Faith alone They are sensible that several Constitutions and Decrees of Councils are prejudicial to Rights of Sovereign Princes and injurious to the Libertis of the Gallican Church they are aware of the great mischief which those Canons and Decrees made for deposing Kings might bring upon them if their potent Monarch should perceive that such Doctrines are judged essential to the Religion of Rome and for that reason they warily restrain the supposed Infallibility of Councils to matters of Faith alone and so give themselves room and scope enough to run down the deposing Canons Doctrines and yet to pretend that they have an infallible Guide still left in store But this design will be quite ruined if practical Decrees are therefore esteemed to be infallible because they include or suppose a speculative Doctrine concerning the lawfulness or expediency of things they enjoyn For if such Decrees and Constitutions are infallible then they are essential parts of the Roman Catholick Religion even the deposing Canons among the rest So that I plainly see the Frenchmen will be necessitated by trusting to the Conduct of their infallible Guide either to own that