Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A75279
|
A vindication of the Church of England from the foul aspersions of schism and heresie unjustly cast upon her by the Church of Rome. In two parts
|
Altham, Michael, 1633-1705.
|
1687
(1687)
|
Wing A2935A; ESTC R229441
|
47,990
|
70
|
upon that rock We are well satisfied how dangerous and destructive Heresie is It withdraws men from the way of Truth and makes them enemies and blasphemers of it Gal 5.20 21. It excludes men from the Kingdom of God and makes them become men of corrupt minds 2 Tim. 3.8 and reprobate concerning the Faith. Nor is it only hurtfull to those that are guilty of it but to others also For It doth grievously disturb and trouble the peace of God's Church by stirring up strife contention emulation and division among the members thereof It seduceth unwary Souls and betrays them to their own ruine and destruction It weakens the authority of Holy Scriptures and deprives men of the profit and advantage thereof by perverting sometimes the sense and sometimes the letter of those Sacred Writings In a word it makes the Christian Religion to be evil spoken of among those who are without Bishop Jewel gives us a short but full description of it Defens Apolog c. part 1. chap. 7. divis 2. p. 43. when he tells us Heresie is a forsaking of salvation a renouncing of God's grace a departing from the body and spirit of Christ These are our Sentiments of the sin of Heresie and if our Adversaries can draw a Character more black we solemnly promise and seriously declare that so far as it is true we are ready to joyn with them And after all this can any one suspect that we should be in love with Heresie But whether we be or no it matters not so long as the Church of Rome which thinks her self infallible is pleased to charge us therewith to fix that title upon us and as such to represent us to the World. How justly or unjustly rather this foul aspersion is cast upon us will be enquired into in the following discourse the design of the Authour therein being to vindicate the Church of England therefrom which if he shall be so happy as to doe then will it appear that the Church of Rome was mightily mistaken in her Censure and that will be no small flaw in her Infallibility but if upon a fair and full debate it shall plainly appear that they who so rashly pronounce and call us Hereticks be themselves the guilty persons then will it highly concern them if they have any care of their Souls to consider how deeply they are wounded with their own dart and how low they are fallen into that Pit which they had digged for us that so by a true and timely repentance they may rise again SECT I. Of Heresie IN order to a right stating of the true and genuine Notion of Heresie it will be requisite to consider both the Importance of the Name and the Nature of the Thing The word Heresie is a Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and admits of many and those different significations as Scapula informs us out of several Authours To reckon them all up would wast too much time and paper and conduce but little to the design in hand I shall therefore onely mention three 1. I find it sometimes rendered conquering or subduing thus it is used by Herodot and Thucyd. in whom we meet with these expressions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to subdue a City In Epit. Basilii and thus it is used by Greg. Naz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt not overcome us 2. It is sometimes rendered Election or Option as appears by these expressions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make choice of friends 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I choose my way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to choose a Judge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erring in the very choice of things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Election or Creation of an Emperour In Epist ad Galat. And thus St. Hier. useth it where he saith Heresie in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Election because every one chooseth to himself that discipline which he thinks best 3. Sometimes it denotes a Sect or sort of men who having espoused an opinion different from the received opinion of all others do tenaciously hold the same Thus is the word usually taken by Philosophers and Divines Galen meeting with some of his own profession who both in their opinions and practice dissered from him and the whole body of Physicians at that time yet used some method and did not altogether swerve from the rules of Art calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Methodical Heresie And finding others who observed no method nor pretended to understand the reason of things or the natural causes of Distempers but practised by some receipts which they had got and which by use and experience they had found in some cases to be very advantagious and therefore boldly though blindly went on in so doing this he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Emperical Heresie or the Heresie of Quacks and Empericks in that profession And in this sense we find the word used by Ecclesiastical Writers who by Heresie do generally understand an Opinion which is not agreeable to the Orthodox Faith and whosoever doth espouse such an Opinion boldly teaching and obstinately defending the same is by them always reputed an Heretick Thus have I shown you the importance of the Word and in what sense it is used by Ecclesiastical Writers and now I come to consider the nature of the thing imported thereby which we may partly learn from such as have written upon that Subject but best from the Holy Scriptures When Men entertain Opinions contrary to those which the Catholick Church holds and believes That is Heresie saith St. Augustine Aug. contra Faust And whosoever Aug. de Definit for the sake of any temporal profit and especially for the advancement of his own Glory and Grandeur doth forge and follow false and new Opinions he is an Heretick saith the same Holy Father And whosoever doth obstinately defend that new Errour which he hath embraced Idem ibid. he is an Heretick Heresie is a kind of Infidelity Th. Aq. 22. qu. 11. art 1. c. belonging to them who profess the Faith of Christ and corrupt the Doctrines thereof saith their Angelical Doctour Heresie is conversant about those things which are of Faith Idem ibid. art 2. c. viz. the Articles of Faith and such things as follow upon them and consists in an obstinate dissent therefrom saith the same Doctour He that obstinately believes what is contrary to the holy Catholick Faith In Enchirid c. 11. p. 141. n. 2. is an Heretick if he be baptized saith their Navar. Doctour Whosoever neglecting the authority of the Church Catech. ad Parochos part 1. in expos art 9. Symbol p. 76. n. 2. doth defend wicked opinions with a wilfull and obstinate mind is to be called an Heretick saith the Trent Catechism And what we are to understand by the name of Church the same Catechism afterwards informs us and quotes St.
sense is not Schism but Apostasie and it will be impossible for any man to find a sufficient reason for that But if it be considered as a separation from the communion of some particular Church then it is implied that possibly there may be such cause given as may justifie the Separation and if so then the guilt of Schism will lie at the door of that Church which gives such cause and not at his or theirs who separate therefrom Now I have already told you that I know no cause which can justifie such a Separation save onely this when a Church makes the terms of her Communion such as cannot be complied withall without sin And in this case methinks it is very plain That it cannot be sin to separate when it is sin to communicate for no Laws of Men can abrogate or dissolve the obligation of the express Laws of God. But if there be no such cause then to break communion with any Christian Church upon any other account will amount to a Causeless Separation and consequently incur the guilt of Schism If therefore the Church of England ever did or now doth forsake the communion of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church or if she ever did or now doth voluntarily and causelesly break communion with any particular Christian Church then may there be some colour to charge her with the sin of Schism but if none of all this can be made appear against her then ought she to be acquitted of that charge Now whether any such thing can be made out against her or whether the whole charge will not fall heavy upon the Church of Rome will appear in the sequel of this Discourse SECT XI V. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of that Church of which we are Members THis is the last part of our Definition and I add these words of which we are Members because Schism imports a Division of some united and well compacted Body or a making two of that which before was but one On this score is it that we cannot charge Turks Pagans and Jews with Schism because they never were of the Christian Church nor joyned with her in any Religious Society And here the Church will be at a great loss how to fix the guilt of Schism upon the Church of England for if we neither are nor ever of right ought to have been under the Government of that Church then hath she no Jurisdiction over us nor do we owe her any subjection and obedience and consequently cannot be guilty of Schism towards her nor hath she any power to censure us for it We own her to be a Sister-Church and a true though unsound Member of the Catholick Church and so far as she holds the Catholick Faith and Worship we are ready and willing to hold Communion with her But we cannot submit to her Usurpations nor communicate with her in those Errours Abuses Superstitions Additions Subtractions and Alterations by which she hath so grosly corrupted the pure and primitive Faith and Worship of God's Church SECT XII The Church of England acquitted from the Scandal of Schism IF this Definition of Schism be allowed as I see no cause why they should disown it and not applicable to the Church of England then is she unjustly charged with the guilt of Schism by the Church of Rome Now whether it be applicable to the Church of England will appear by taking a review of the several parts of it 1. Schism is a Separation i. e. a breach of Unity or a dividing of some well compacted Body And here we are charged for breaking the Unity and dividing the Body of the Roman Catholick Church as they call it To which I answer if that Church were truly Catholick either in respect of place or Doctrine this charge would lie heavy upon us but being neither we shall be able with less difficulty to answer this Objection It must be acknowledged that the Church of Rome at the time of the Reformation and some long time before that had usurped a certain Power and Dominion over us and had exerted the same in such extravagant impositions as at last became too heavy for us to bear That Church had indeed by a long custome gained such an ascendent over our Fore fathers that she had enslaved their Judgments and obtruded what she pleased upon them she had unawares led them into many Errours in Doctrine many Superstitions in Worship and almost swallowed up their Liberty in Point of Government At length it pleased God to open the Eyes of our Fore-fathers to see the slavery and bondage they were in and how far they were gone from the Unity of the Catholick Church both in Faith in Worship and in Government To retrieve themselves many Efforts were made and great Endeavours used for a Reformation But none of those prevailing they at last bethought themselves of casting off the Roman yoke which by the assistance of the Civil Authority not in tumultuary but in a regular way was effected and when that was done then upon mature deliberation they reform those other abuses which were crept in among them Whether this broke Catholick Unity or no let the World judge If this be a Schism we must own our selves guilty of it but we see no reason to own it to be so yet for in all this we have done nothing but what we are able to justifie before all the World. For even our Adversaries themselves will not deny but that a National Church hath power in it self to reform abuses within it self But it may be they will tell us that we are not a Church but a faction or party made up of Schismaticks and Hereticks broke loose from the Church If this were true we should have little to say for our selves but a bare accusation is no proof They may do well therefore to recollect themselves and consider that before Austin the Monk set his Foot in England there was a Christian Church settled here under lawfull Governours which Church opposed the proceeding of that proud Monk and denyed obedience to the See of Rome for which they severely suffered If notwithstanding all this our Adversaries shall as they frequently do revive that old thred-bare question so often baffled Where was your Church before the Reformation Our answer is ready it was where it is the same for substance now that it was then It is indeed reformed and repaired but not made new There is not one stone of a new foundation laid by us the old Walls stand still only the overcasting of those ancient stones with the untempered Mortar of new inventions displeased us and that we washed off Durand Ration l. 1. What their own Durandus saith of material Churches is very applicable to the Spiritual If the wall be decayed not at once but successively it is judged still the same Church and upon reparation not to be reconsecrated but only reconciled If therefore our Church be the same for