Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	church_n	reason_n	1,519	5	4.9993	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75723	Fides Apostolica or a discourse asserting the received authors and authority of the Apostles Creed. Together with the grounds and ends of the composing thereof by the Apostles, the sufficiency thereof for the rule of faith, the reasons of the name symbolon in the originall Greeke, and the division or parts of it. Hereunto is added a double appendix, the first touching the Athanasian, the second touching the Nicene Creed. By Geo. Ashwell B.D.	Ashwell, George, 1612-1695.	1653 (1653)	Wing A3997; Thomason E1433_2; ESTC R208502	178,413	343

the Publick view Yet to excuse my selfe in part from Temerity and Presumption in this particular I ventured not on it before I had the approbation of some Learned Friends who were pleased not only to peruse the Worke but solicited me also to the Publication which if it shall awaken some more able Pen to perfect what I have thus rudely drawn I shall not a little applaud my selfe as the Instrument of presenting so fortunate an Occasion But I have almost seemed to have forgot your Lordship whilst I have been thus particular in relating to you the Occasion the Beginning the Progresse and the end of these imperfect labours of mine which I am now bold to offer unto your Patronage that so they may have the same Protection with the Author that presents them For as the many Favours and Civilities which I have received from your Lordships hands oblige me to a Publick acknowledgment so your approbation of the Work which hath had the Honour of your Perusall also in good part hath encouraged me to present that acknowledgement in this kind Besides not only Gratitude but strict Justice seems to require this oblation at my Hands the first-borne of my Pen and entitleth your Lordship more peculiarly unto it for though it were begotten elsewhere it was borne under your Roofe and so belongs unto you as to the Lord of the House and the Father of the Family There remaines nought else but that as I now present this Treatise to your Patronage so to present my Prayers to God for your Person for that of your Noble Lady together with all the Branches of your ancient Family that they may constantly Live and comfortably Dye in the true Christian Apostolick Faith which was once delivered unto the Saints This as it still hath so shall continue to be a constant part of the dayly Orisons of MY LORD Your Lordships Most Faithfull and Affectionate Servant to Command GEO ASHWELL The Contents of the CHAPTERS CAP. I. THE Dogmaticall part of Theologie most necessary to be established and in that most especially the Creed as the Foundation of the rest and this for three Reasons A double abuse of the Creed which occasioned this Treatise together with the abuse of Catechismes The five Heades of the ensuing Treatise The Creed conteines all and only Fundamentalls The Trinity and Incarnation of the Sonne of God cleared out of it CAP. II. The History of the Apostles Composing the Creed out of Ruffinus Five Reasons why the Apostles delivered it to the Church not in Writing but by an Orall Tradition An Objection against the preserving of it by Tradition Answered CAP. III. Testimonies of Scripture touching the Composure of the Apostles Creed especially out of S. Pauls Epistles as the places are accordingly interpreted by Diuines of good note both Ancient and Moderne Some Doubts against these Testimonies solved CAP. IV. Testimonies concerning the Creed and the Composure thereof by the Apost taken out of the Greek Fathers who beare witnesse for the Eastern Churches some Objections against these Authorities partly Answered partly Prevented CAP. V. Testimonies of the Creed and the Composure thereof by the Apostles taken out of the Latine Fathers who beare witnesse for the Western Churches Some Objections to the contrary Answered CAP. VI. Testimonies of the Authors and Authority of the Creed taken out of the Protestant Divines who have unanimously received and acknowledged this Creed of the Apostles together with the Nicene Creed and that of Athanasius CAP. VII Six Reasons evincing the Apostles to have been the Composers of the Creed which commonly bears their Name Some Objections against these Reasons Answered The place where the Creed was Made Of Fundamentalls and Traditions CAP. VIII Severall Objections which some have alleadged against the fore-assigned Authors of the Creed Answered at large Certaine Creeds compared together whereby their Conformity appears to one another and to that of the Apostles CAP. IX The second Head of this Discourse namely the Grounds on which and the ends for which the Apostles framed the Creed The Sufficiency also of the Creed for the Rule of Faith is proved by the Testimonies of Divines as well Moderne as Ancient and those both Romish and Reformed CAP. X. The third Head of this Discourse namely the severall reasons or significations of the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Creed beares in the Originall Greeke CAP. XI The fourth Head of this Discourse namely the Division or Parts of the Creed CAP XII The fift Head of this Discourse touched in Generall viz. the supplementall or exegetticall Creeds framed in succeeding Ages The Grounds whereon they were Framed and their use Some Copies of Creeds set downe as well of the Hereticks as Orthodox both consonant to this of the Apostles Appendix the first of the Athan. Creed CAP. I. Two Reasons why this Creed hath been more oppugned than the rest It s Authority and Author are vindicated in generall more especially touching the severity of the Preface CAP. II. Severall Testimonies concerning the Author and Authority of the Athan. Creed CAP. III. The Time and Place wherein Athanasius wrote his Creed together with the Person to whom The Cause wherefore he wrote it and the Language wherein CAP IV. Some Objections against what hath been laid downe Answered Especially Nazianzens Testimony concerning the Athanasian Creed is farther cleared and vindicated Appendix the second of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creed CAP. I. The Reason of the double name of this Creed The Composure thereof The Additionall or Exegeticall Particles inserted into it When and by Whom it was conveied to other Churches and brought into Divine Service CAP. II. When and by whom the Particle Filioque was added to the Nicene Creed is historically delivered and at large Severall other causes of the breach betweene the Churches of Greece and Rome To the Christian and Catholick Reader OUR Blessed Saviour speaking of his second Comming maketh this question or complaint when the Sonne of man commeth shall he find faith on the Earth Luke 18. 8. Now he puts this question to put it out of question for this seeming doubt is a strong Affirmation and amounts to a vehement Complaint that when he shall come to Judgement he shall find little or no faith amongst men No faith in matter of Practise each man will be false to his Brother Homo homini Vulpes as well as lupus the wisdome of the world so generally counted and esteemed being nought else but overreaching the ancient Christian simplicity will be quite lost and the Serpent expell the Dove nothing but insinuating Complements and faire speeches like those of the Serpent to our Grandmother Eve will every where practise to deceive under pretence of friendship Nor on the other side will there be faith found in matter of Doctrine Religion shall be lamentably torne and mangled by intestine Combats of the Tongue and Pen New opinions shall be in Credit as new fashions till faith of one by

succeeding Creeds which the whole Church hath for many Ages imbraced they were Framed in generall Councels or confirmed by Generall Practise Now the Catholick Church which received the Creed from the Apostles and preserved ●t as an inviolable Depositum may justly be presumed best to know the meaning of it the Common Mother of Christians can best informe us which is the true sence of the Common Faith and hath sufficien● authority to impose it upon Her Children Reas 4. Those Fathers who wrote since the Nicene Councell set downe and explaine that Creed which beareth the Apostles name not that which was framed in the Councell of Nice as appeares by the fore-cited Testimonies Now this they would not nor could have done if the Nicene Creed had been the first The first Father whom we find to meddle with or handle the Nicene Creed is St Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria who flourished an whole Century after the making of it Doth not this plainly shew that the Church had still the prime if not the sole respect to that Symbole or Rule of Faith which the Apostles left her as the maine Basis on which the Faith of her Children was built the Root whereout other Creeds as so many Branches sprung the Fathers who since the celebration of that Councell have explained and commented on the Apostles Creed I have already mentioned viz. Chrysostome Augustine Chrysologus Venantius Eusebius c. Reason 5th It is a received Rule which S. Augustine laies downe lib. 4. De Baptismo cont Donat. cap. 24. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditum rectissimè creditur That is That which the universall Church holdeth and hath alwaies retained not being ordained by a Councell is most justly believed to have been derived unto us by the Authority of the Apostles And this rule is grounded upon good Reason besides the Authority of the deliverer for a generall effect must have as generall a cause they must be both of the same latitude and extent now there is no Generall cause imagineable of a publiquely received Doctrine Goverment Ceremony or Discipline in the Catholicke Church such especially as is derived to it from hand to hand time out of mind but the Authority of a Generall Councell which is the Church Representative or the concordant preaching of the Apostles who first planted Christianity in the Churches of the whole world So then to apply this Rule unto our present purpose That the whole Church holds the Apostles Creed experience demonstrates that it hath been alwayes reteined in the Church the Testimonies of the fore-aleadged Fathers shew and that it was not Framed in any Genenerall Councell sufficienty appears both by the copies of those Creeds which were framed in them found varying from that of the Apostles as also by the writing of those Fathers who lived before the first General Councel held at Nice wherein they make mention of a Rule of Faith derived downe to them from the Apostles which some of them also set downe as Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Reason 6th Before the Nicene Creed was framed both the Easterne and Westerne Churches had an Ancient Symbole or Creede Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 6. Which could be no other than that of the Apostles since no other is assigned or mentioned by any good Author First That the Westerne or Romane Church had such an Ancient Symble appeares 1. By the words of Vigilius Byshop of Rome lib. 4. De Eutiche Roma antequam Nicena Synodus conveniret a temporibus Apostolorum usque all nunc ita fidelibus Symbolum tradidit viz. in Jesum Christum Filium ejus Dominum nostrum leaving out the Particle Vnicum That is The Church of Rome even before the Nicene Councell from the very Apostles times till this present in these termes delivered the Creed unto Believers And in Jesus Christ his Sonne our Lord leaving out the Particle Only 2. By Ruffinus in his Tract on the Creed who compares the Aquilean Creed with the Romane and withall tells us that the Creed was believed so ancient in his time that it was then held for an Apostolicall Tradition Now this Ruffinus was a man of note in the Church nine yeares before the first Councell of Constantinople viz. in the yeare 372. when he went with Melama from Rome to Alexandria about which time also S. Ierome wrote letters to him namely his Epist 5. 41. Secondly that the Easterne Churches had an ancient Creed too before the Nicene Councell appears by the same Ruffinus who compares the Aquilean Creed with that of the East as well as with the Romane The same appears by Cyril of Ierusalem who explaines it at large in his Catecheses and this Creed of his explaining we shall find much consonant to that which we now call the Apostolicall only cutting off some few exegeticall Particles which were added to fore-arme his Auditors and other orthodox Christians against succrescent Heresies to which Creed of his he adjoynes also some practicall Grounds for the more compleat instruction and Preparation of them against the time of Baptisme This Cyril was first Catechist then Patriarch of Ierusalem and sate afterwards in the first Councell held at Constantinople where the Easterne Bishops were only present and composed a Creed almost in the same termes with this of Cyril He composed these Catecheses in his youth about the yeare 350 and died in the yeare 386 five years after the celebration of that Councell as the learned Vossius demonstrates out of Leo and S. Jerome compared with a passage in his sixt Catechesis Now as the Fathers of the first Councell at Constantinople laboured not to frame a new Creed but were contented to enlarge the Article concerning the Holy Ghost against Macedonius who perverted it so we may justly suppose that the Nicene Fathers retained the words of that Creed which had been of old received in the East least they might otherwise seeme to have framed a new Faith amplifying only the Article concerning the Divinity of our Saviour which was then called in question by Arius that so it might appeare to the World quaedam tantummodo explicatius dici as the same Vossius rightly conceives Cut off therefore from the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed or from that of Cyril which much symbolizeth with it the Additionals unto those two Articles and you have the whole Creed of the Apostles for the Communion of Saints is not a distinct Article but a part or Paraphrase of what goes before Saints being implyed in in Holy and Communion in Church or Congregation Ecclesia which is an Assembly of selected People and Christs descent into Hell is presupposed to the Article of his Resurrection Therefore to think that Cyril in his old Age or Iohn the Patriarch his Successor added all that to the Jerosolymitan Creed which followes the Articles of the Holy Ghost is nothing probable because Cyril doth not barely

Emes tels us Hom. 1. in Symb. which appellation agrees to those who lived in latter Times So Canones Apostolorum are called by the Apostles Names though not compiled by them but by Clemens as the Title of those Canons witneseth Yea both Greeke and Latine Fathers have communicated the name Apostle to others to any Bishop the Church of Rome keepe the old stile still The Apostolick See The Apostolick Bulles Our Saxon Predecessours gave the Bishop of Rome the Title of Apostle and Apostolicall Pope Bed hist lib. 2. c. 2 11. Austin the Monke is called Anglorum Apostolus Philip the Deacon is called an Apostle by Tertullian and Epaphroditus by St Paul Phil. 2. 25. So many others besides the Twelve whom St Chrysostome by way of Distinction calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostles by way of Eminency were called Apostles who might give name to the Creed as well as the Twelve therefore it is no concluding or necessary Argument It is called the Apostle Creeds Ergo it was made by the Twelve Then for the Title Symbolum that doth not signify such a Collation or Feast in Common but rhe word Symbola and therefore cannot imply or allude to any such composing of the Creed by the joynt concurrence of the Apostles Besides Cajetan ad 2am 2ae qu. 1. art 8. Tels us that Aquinas thinking fit to number the Articles ex parte rei creditae with relation to the matter not the makers of the Creed for this cause passed by that famous distribution of them according to the number of the Apostles because it is accidental to the Articles of Faith whether they be gathered by many or by one as that of Athanasius Answ Good Authors indeed assigne that for the reason and etymology of the Apostolick Symbole that it was an Apostolicall Collation or Collection of the Fundamentall Points of Beliefe by the twelve Apostoles yet not as the principall argument but by way of Appendix and Congruity unto the forementioned Tradition But this distinction saith the objectour or Collation of severall Articles might be made by Apostolick Men and their Disciples out of the holy Scripture and from thence obtaine the name of the Apostolick Symbole But it might be so and it was so are two things If it might be so it might be otherwise sure this private groundles conjecture may well give place to the constant assertion of so many Ancient and learned Authors who affirme the Apostles to have been the Composers of the Creed and give that for the reason of the name which it beares As for the Testimony of Eusebius Hom. 1. in Symb. who is there produced to say that the Creed was written not by the Apostles but by the Fathers of the Churches he hath no such exclusive words as non ab Apostolis quidem but saith that the Fathers of the Churches whom a litle after he calls Magistri the Masters of the sayd Churches Composed the Creed Now who be these but the Apostles exprest by way of Periphrasis for they and they only may properly be called the Fathers or Masters not of this or that Church in particular but of all the Churches in the World their Comission Being generall Goe and Teach all Nations Math. 29. 19. Whereas others were limited to this or that Church as the Apostles pleased to dispose of them and were the Sonnes or Disciples of the Apostles as St Paul termes Timothy and Titus in his Epistles which he wrote unto them 1 Tim. 1. 2. Tit. 1. 4. Hence also it is that St Paul tels his Corinthians 1 Cor. 4. 15. Though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ yet have ye not many Fathers for in Christ Jesus I have Begotten you through the Gospell And St James in his Epistle to the dispersed Jewes secretly taxing the proud-conceited Rabbins who affected the highest seats in the Synagogues the office of teaching their Brethren My Brethren saith he Be not many Masters Jam. 3. 1. This conjecture therefore deserves as litle faith as it hath foundation that is none at all for the Fathers constantly say it was called The Apostles Creed because Framed by and derived to the Christian Church from the Apostles of Christ and this may justly sway us in this Case for the Title prefixt doth not only beare this construction but more directly points out and inclines us to this meaning Titles being therefore given that they may designe the Authors or Composers of that worke unto which they are prefixt and the Fathers living in the first Ages should best know the Tradition the Title then of the Apostles Creed is not nakedly produced as a convincing Argument but as backt and seconded with the Attestation of Antiquity As for the contrary Instance of the Canons of the Apostles although they beare the name of Clemens in the Inscription who first gatherd them into one Body yet they may well challenge the Apostles for the Authors who first instituted and put them in Practise Then as to the promiscuous use of the name Apostle and Apostolick and the applying of them to the Ancient Bishops it will not hurt at all or prejudice the Title of the Creed Because the Fathers entitle it to the Apostles so cal'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of Eminency some of them expresly naming the Twelve as Ambrose Ruffine and Augustine others decyphering them by such circumstances as can agree to none other than The Apostles who left the Srciptures to us so Irenaeus Such Apostles who received this Rule from Christ their Master at the very begining of the Gospell and before the rise of any Heresy so Tertullian Such who left us the Faith per successionis Ordinem by a continued line of Episcopall successours so Origen And all the rest name the Apostles indefinitly not limited to a particular See charge or place by any determining circomstance now it is a knowne Rule in Logick concerning ambiguons Termes Analogum per se positum stat pro famosiori Analogato Neither indeed do the instances alleadged shew that the Name was commonly given to every Bishop at large but either to some Episcopall See which the Apostles had personally founded as to that of Rome founded by Peter and Paul or to some speciall Person who planted a New Church or converted a whole Nation to Christianity which is a worke properly Apostolicall as to Epaphroditus of Collosse and Augustin of our Saxon nation in his sense did our Saxō Kings probably give the Title of Apostolick to the Bishop of Rome as well as for the former reason because Gregory the Great sent over Augustine hither with certaine coadjutors to convert our Ancestours from Paganisme The like may be said in proportion of Philip the Deacon who was sent by the holy Ghost with a speciall Commission to convert the Eunuch of Queene Candace and by his meanes the whole Nation of Ethiopia as Church-story tels us But to the criticall quarrell against the word Symbolum that not it but Symbola

and so rather the Mouth than the Head of the Apostles but there appears no Primacy of order or Jurisdiction over his fellow-Apostles But suppose we should grant said they that Peter had such an unerring paramount privilege yet this might well be personall and annext to his Apostleship not derivable to any Episcopall successour and if derivable why should the Bishop of Rome rather arrogate it to himselfe than the Bishop of Antioch in which City S. Peter first sate Or the Bishop of Alexandria a See instituted by the same Apostle under S. Marke before he ever appointed any Bishop at Rome As for the Grounding of this priviledge on S. Peters martyrdome at Rome where appears any such Dependance or legacy bequeathed by S. Peter that his Infallibility and Supremacy should be annexed to that Chaire alone as to the place of his Death and Buriall 'T is true they confest that the Bishop of Rome was of old accounted Primae Sedis Episcopus The Bishop of the Principall See but withall they said that there was a vast difference between Primacy and Power for if by this pretence he should challenge any Authority or Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Constantinople the Second See Why should not he of Constantinople likewise claime the same Power over the Bishop of Alexandria which is the third And so in like manner Alexandria over Antioch Antioch over Ierusalem An opinion never heard of or entertained in the Church of God The Bishop of Rome therefore had this primacy not by divine right but by humane or Ecclesiasticall that is not from any Apostolicall Priviledge derived from S. Peter but by the graunt of Emperours and Decrees of Councells It was fit that one Bishop should be chiefe for order sake this Honour was given to the Bishop of Rome for the Dignity of his Seat Rome beeing the Head of the Roman Empire For which cause Alexandria had of old the Second place as beeing Praefectura Augustalis the Peculiar of the Romane Emperour so ennobled by Augustus Caesar Antioch the third as the Metropolis of Syria and the Eastern Countryes adjoyning whereas if the preeminency of Sees had been derived from S. Peter the City of Antioch where he sate seven years in person should have beene preferd before Alexandria whether he only sent an other viz S. Marke and appointed him for the first Bishop And for this cause Caesarea too was made the Metropoliticall See of Palestine because it was the seat of the Roman Governor untill the Fathers of the Nicene Councel in honour of Jerusalem where S. James was made the first Bishop of the Christian world and whence the Gospell spread into the whole earth gave the Bishop therof a Patriarchall title that rather of dignity thē Authority for thus runs the seventh Canon of that Councell Quoniam mos antiquus obtinuit vetusta Traditio ut Aeliae id est Hierosolimorum Episcopo honor Deferatur habeat consequenter honorem manente tamen Metropolitanae Civitatis Caesareae propriâ Dignitate that is Because from an old Custome and Tradition honuor hath been given to the Bishop of Aelia that is of Jerusalem let him have Honour accordingly provided that the Dignity of the metropolitan City Cesarea remaine entire For the same cause also when Constantinople was reedifyed made the seat of the Empire and called new Rome by Constantine the Great it was thought fit by the Emperours and succeeding Councells that the Bishop of Alexandria should no longer have the Second but the third Place Constantinople now succeeding in that honour for thus runs the fift Canon of the first Councell of Constantinople Constantinopolitanae Civitatis Episcopum habere oportet Primatus honorem post Romanum Episcopum propter quod sit nova Roma that is The Bishop of Constantinople ought to have the next place of honour after the Bishop of Rome because his City is new Rome And because there could not be two Sedes primae two first or chief Sees the same Councell ordeined that the Bishop of Constantinople should be styled the second Patriarch but in all other things should be of equall Dignity and Authority with the Bishop of Rome So in all the rest whosoever will please to compare the Prelates Sees with the Notitia Imperii shall find that the Church still accommodated her Hierarchy of Mertropolitās Archbishops Bishops unto the state of the Empire the distinction of Provinces and the Dignity of the Cityes according to that ancient Rule Ecclesia est in Republicâ non Respublica in Ecclesiâ The Church is in the Commonwealth not the Common-wealth in the Church 2. The second cause of the Schisme was the Deposition and Excomunication of the Patriarch Photius and of the other Prelats and Abbots his adherents in a great Synod at Constantinople held under the Emperour Basiliu● and the Patriarch Ignatius in the yeare 869 which businesse was mainly urged and furthered by two Bishops of Rome successively viz. Nicolas the first and Adrian the second 3. The third cause was the Rash and Inconsiderate Zeale of the said Patriarch Photius who first dared to accuse the Romane Church of Heresy because it held that the holy Ghost proceeded from the Sonne as well as from the Father whereas in all former disputes between the Greeks and the Latines whether by word or writing neither party accused his Adversary of Heresy for holding either opinion Yea the Latines Demōstrated that some of the Greeke Fathers spake as they did neither could the Greekes deny it And since this precipitate Censure of Photius not a few of the Romane Divines have in requitall accused the Greeke Church of the same Crime for holding the Contrary 4. The fourth cause was the contention about the Primacy between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople For Iohn surnamed Iejunator and Cyriacus his successour Patriarchs of Constantinople were very earnest with the emperour Mauritius to obteine the Title Authority of Oecumenicall Patriarchs thereby challenging a Superiority over the Bishops of the whole Christian World from the Dignity of their City which was then the Head of the Romane Empire that of the West being utterly broken and Rome the Ancient Seate thereof for that Cause loosing its former Dignity Now against these their endeavours Gregory the great then Bishop of Rome publickly opposed himselfe and taxed them in expresse Termes of Antichristian ambition saying withall that Dato uni Episcopi universalis Titulo reliquos Sacerdotes honore debito privari The giving of the Title of Universall Bishop unto one doth deprive the other Bishops of their due Honour Yet with in lesse than two years after his Death Boniface the Third his Successour abtained the same Title of the Emperour Phocas which Gregory had so much Decried But the Greeke Prelates would never yeeld to it 5. The fift cause was the busines of Images which brake out after this contention about the Primacy For the Emperour Leo Isaurus and his sonne Constantinus Copronymus