Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n king_n pope_n time_n 2,835 5 3.9877 3 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
A56600 An answer to a book, spread abroad by the Romish priests, intituled, The touchstone of the reformed Gospel wherein the true doctrine of the Church of England, and many texts of the Holy Scripture are faithfully explained / by the Right Reverend Father in God, Symon, Lord Bishop of Ely. Patrick, Simon, 1626-1707. 1692 (1692) Wing P745; ESTC R10288 116,883 290

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Chapter to that which he pretends to prove in the beginning That there is one Infallible Rule for understanding the Holy Scripture Which if he would have spoken sense he should have shown is Tradition But not a syllable of this He only endeavours to lose his Reader in a mist of Words He knew if he understood any thing there is no Traditive Interpretation of Scripture For if there be Why is there such difference among their own Interpreters in the Exposition of it Nay Why do they reject Ancient Interpretations of Scripture for which there is some Tradition As Maldonate a famous Jesuite doth upon XIX Matt. 11. Where he confesses XIX Mat. 11. that almost all expound those words as if the sense of them was that all men cannot live single because all have not the gift of continency And among these almost all he himself mentions Origen Greg. Nazianzene St. Ambrose But I cannot persuade my self saith he to follow this Interpretation A most remarkable instance of the partiality of these men who would tie us to receive the sense of One or Two and miscall us if we will not be bound up by them but take the Liberty to themselves of rejecting almost all when it serves their Interest II. The Protestants he saith affirm That in matters of Faith we must not rely upon the Judgment of the Church and Her Pastors but only upon the Written Word Answer OUR Doctrine is That the Written Word is the only Rule of our Faith And therefore we cannot rely barely upon the Judgment of the Church and of Her Pastors as Papists do but must have what they deliver proved out of the Word of God This is not contrary to our Bibles but conformable to them For they call us to the law and to the testimony VIII Isa 20. And the Apostles themselves we find nay our Blessed Lord and Saviour did not desire to be believed unless they spake according to the Scriptures unto which they appealed XXIV Luke 27.44 1 Cor. XV. 3 4. Whose express words if we contradict we are void of all sense but if we do not it must be confessed he is void of all shame in charging us with affirming that which is contrary to the express words of our own Bibles particularly XXIII XXIII Mat. v. 2 3. Mat. 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do Let the Reader here seriously consider what a Front this Man hath who talks of express words when there is not an express Syllable in this place either of Church or of Pastors or of their Judgment or of Faith O! but he speaks of Scribes and Pharisees which is the same But doth this answer his Pretensions of giving us express Words and not words Tantamount And if Scribes and Pharises be equivalent to Church and Pastors it must be his own Church and Pastors for they are not our Paterns which is not much for their Honour to be the Successors of the Scribes and Pharisees Whose Authority sure was not such that our Saviour here required his Disciples to rely upon it in matters of Faith For if they had they must have rejected their Lord and Master and denied him to be the Christ Into this Ditch those blind Guides at last plunged those who blindly followed them Therefore all that our Saviour here meant is as wiser Men than this and Jesuits too acknowledg that they should obey them being Teachers in all things not repugnant to the Law and the Divine Commandments So the before-named Menochius upon the place to say nothing of the Ancients who would have thrust out of the Church such a Man as this who maintains that Christ taught his Disciples to obey those Pastors not only in some principal Matters but in all whatsoever without Distinction or Limitation Which I may truly say is a Doctrine of the Devil Nor is there any thing express in the next place and therefore he only makes his Inference from it X. Luke 16. which should have been this if he had known how to discourse That the Apostles were the Legats and Interpreters of Christ as Christ was of God Therefore he that despised the Apostles despised Christ as he that despised Christ despised God But what then Truly nothing to this Man's purpose For the Church and the Pastors now have not the Authority of Apostles If they had they would not desire no more than the Apostles did to be believed without proof from the Scriptures Upon the next place XVI Matth. 19. XVI Mat. 19. which is as impertinent he passes a very wise Note That our Saviour doth not say whosoever but whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth c. Whereby he shuts out St. Peter and his Successors to whom they commonly apply this Text from all Jurisdiction over Persons and confine it unto things only Let his Church reward him for this Service for we are not at all concerned in his Note but rather note how far he is still from bringing express Texts to his purpose here being as little express mention of Faith and of Pastors and of the Church and their Judgment as in the former places And if you will believe Menochius a better Interpreter than this our Saviour speaks of the Supreme Power of remitting or retaining Sins of excommunicating and absolving not a word that he could see of untying Knots and Difficulties in Matters of Faith He bids us see more places in XVII Deut. 8. c. But I would advise the Reader not to trouble himself to turn to them For the first and two last are nothing to his purpose and the second is directly against him For the Prophet doth not bid them go and ask the Priests their Opinion but ask them what the Law of God was in the case propounded And there is as little to be found in the Fathers the last of which is no Father For he lived in the time of our King Henry 1. and was a stickler for his Master Pope Vrban who in this Man's Logick is become the Church and her Pastors upon whose Judgment we must rely In good time they will be Judges in their own Cause and then the business is done III. His next Charge is that we affirm The Scriptures are easy to be understood and that therefore none ought to be restrained from reading of them Answer THIS is neither our Position nor is the contrary theirs For no Protestant will say That all Scriptures are easy to be understood Nor will any Papist say They are all hard to be understood Some are easy as much that is as is necessary to our Salvation Which is the express affirmation of St. Chrysostome in many places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things necessary are manifest Hom. 3. in 2 Thess Now let us see what there is expresly contrary to this in our Bible First St. Peter doth not say 2 Pet. III. 16. That the
this was become his name as much as Simon before this time for at their first meeting Christ gave him this name of Peter I. John 43. 1 Cor. III. 4.22 From that which follows 1 Cor. III. 4 22. there is a wonderful fetch For as before he argues Peter's Supremacy from his being named first so now he argues it from his being named last whereas in his first observation it was an argument of Judas being the unworthiest because named last When he thinks again perhaps he will prove his Supremacy because in II. Gal. 9. he is named neither first nor last but in the middle between James and John And according to his wise note That the Apostle ascends from those he would have esteemed lesser to those whom he would have esteemed greater we must look upon Apollos as greater than Paul because he ascends here from Paul to him and so to Peter Whither will not the Folly of these men lead them XXII Luke 31 32. His Reasoning for we are not to expect Express Texts whatsoever he vainly b●ags upon the next place XXII Luke 31 32. is still more strange For who ever heard that to strengthen or confirm his brethren can be nothing but to practice and exercise his greatness over them This Greatness of his runs so in their heads that they fancy they see it every where even where there is not a shadow of it For none before him sure ever thought that to strengthen others is an exercise of Greatness but rather of Goodness It implies indeed that he who establishes another is in that greater than he but it doth not follow he is so in any thing else nor doth it imply any thing of Jurisdiction over others Tho if it did they are not the Apostles who are here intended to be strengthned for they were as strong as himself but the Converted Jews who might be in the same danger wherein he had been And therefore our Lord bids him learn to pity their weakness by the remembrance of his own and to establish them in that Faith which he had denied From hence he leads us back to v. 26. XXII Luke 26. of the same Chapter and from the vain ambition which was in the Apostles who strove which of them should be accounted the greatest v. 24. concludes That really some of them was greater than others viz. in Power and Authority over the rest or else he concludes nothing But this vanity our Saviour checks and therefore it is far from truth that one of them was accounted greater than another even by Christ himself No such matter he only shows them that if in any quality one excelled another it should make him more humble and subservient to his Brethren not swell him and make him perk up above them And thus Theophylact understands it not of any Superiority in Power but in other things For the occasion of their contention Who should be esteemed greatest he thinks was this That there being an enquiry among them which of them should be so wicked as to betray their Master v. 23. and one perhaps saying Thou art likely to be the man and another No it will be thy self They proceed from hence to say I am better than you and I am greater and such like things Which our Saviour expresses in the following words The Kings of the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them c. but it shall not be so among you c Which is a pretty plain denial of any Authority they were to have one over another And indeed when he comes to speak of Power in the following Verses v. 29 30. he saith indifferently to them all I appoint unto you a kingdom as my Father hath appointed unto me c. It was divided among them and none had an higher Throne given him than his fellows We are at last come to the main prop of this Cause which is as weak as all the rest XXI Joh. 15 16 17. XXI John 15 16 17. For who told him that the word used the second time by our Saviour which we Translate Feed † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must interpret the other two which are used at first and last Why may not they being used twice rather interpret that which is used but once And how doth he prove that it signifies to govern and rule rather than feed Or if it do signifie Government what 's this to his governing the Apostles who had as much Power to Feed and Rule both Lambs and Sheep as himself And thus the Ancients understood this to be spoken unto all the Apostles as well as unto him and even his own Companions who have more Wit and less Impudence by Lambs and Sheep understand not the Apostles but weaker and stronger Christians I will mention only Menochius whose words are these in his Notes upon this place By Lambs he signifies as the very name sh●ws those that were newly converted to the Faith and were weaker in the Faith whose number was very great when the Apostles began to preach and therefore needed greater care for which cause Christ repeats this twice FEED MY LAMBS and but once FEED MY SHEEP who are those that are stronger in the Faith and therefore needed less pains to preserve them This is spoken like a man of sound sense And with the like Judgment and Integrity he interprets the rest directly contrary to the silly Reasonings of this Trifler who says Peter loved Christ more than the rest and therefore it follows necessarily he received more Power to feed than all the rest did This is more than Peter himself durst say That he loved Christ more than the rest No says Menochius He dares not answer that he loved more than others but only that he loved for his fall had made him more modest He had preferred himself to others when he said XXVI Matth. 33. Though all be offended because of thee yet will I never be offended and after this he fell more fouly than others therefore now he speaks of himself what he thinks to be true but he doth not prefer himself before others whose hearts he did not see Now I thought we had done when like a man out of his wits or rather possessed he flies to the Devil to help him at a dead lift and thus argues for express Scriptures have failed him long ago from XII XII Matt. 24. Matth. 24. Satan therefore hath a kingdom whereof he is chief And what then One would think he should have concluded Therefore so hath our Lord Christ But he was afraid of that for he saw it would not do his business but ours rather who own Christ for the only Head of the Church He tells us therefore as if he had found it in the Text There is but one visible Head even in Hell as there is one visible Head of the Church Triumphant in Heaven and therefore why not a visible Head on earth He might as well have ask'd Why not one
Vniversal M●narch over all the Earth Which is as reasonable from these Principles as one visible Head of the Church But to answer his question plainly There is no one visible Head here because Christ the Head of the Church both Triumphant and Militant hath ordered it otherwise Having placed saith St. Paul 1 Cor. XII 28. in the Church first Apostles not Peter or any one alone over the rest but the Apopostles were left by Christ the Supreme Power in the Church Here I cannot but conclude as that great and good Man Dr. Jackson * L. III Chap ● doth upon such an occasion Reader Consult with thy own heart and give sentence as in the sight of God and judge of the whole Frame of their Religion by the Foundation and of the Foundation which is this Supremacy of Peter by the wretched Arguments whereby they support it For from the other Scriptures which follow in this Writer their Arguments stand thus David was made Head of the Heathen XVIII Psal 43. therefore Peter was made Head of the Church Instead of the Fathers shall be thy Children whom thou mayst make Princes in all lands XLV Psal 16. therefore Peter ruled over all the rest as a Prince Simon he sirnamed Peter III. Mark 16. therefore he had authority over all because named first The same is gathered from I. Act 13 merely from the order of precedence which must be granted to one or other in a Body where all are equal Finally Christ's kingdom shall have no end I. Luke 33. therefore St. Peter must reign for ever in his Successors St. Paul was not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles 2 Corinth XI 5. therefore what common Reason would have concluded therefore there were more chief Apostles besides Peter and St. Paul was not inferior to the greatest of them not to Peter himself These are his Scripture-Arguments for their Supremacy And his Fathers affirm nothing at all of Peter which is not said of other Apostles Particularly St. Chrysostom who says no such thing of Peter as he makes him in his 55th Hom. upon Matthew expresly says St. Paul governed the whole World as one Ship Hom. 25. upon 2 Corinth and frequently calls him as well as Peter Prince of the Apostles and calls them all the Pastors and Rectors of the whole World in his 2d Hom. upon Titus And to be short the Author of the imperfect Work upon St. Matthew commonly ascribed to St. Chrysost calls all Bishops the Vicars of Christ Hom 17. Finally there is no Title so great which is not given to others as well as Peter by ancient Writers even the Title of Bishop of Bishops the name of Pope Holiness Blessed and such like XII We hold he saith That a Woman may be Head or Supream Governess of the Church in all Causes as the late Queen Elizabeth was Answer NOne of us ever called Queen Elizabeth the Head of the Church unless as it signifies Supream Governour And that indeed we assert she was and all our Kings are of all persons whatsoever in all Causes But because some leud People perverted the meaning of this our Church took care to explain it in one of the Articles of Religion that no man might mistake in the matter unless he would wilfully as this Writer doth who could not but understand that it is expresly declared Article XXXVII that when we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief Government we do not give to our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or the Sacraments c. but that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himself That is that they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers This is our avowed Doctrine Now what do our Bibles say against this Nothing but a woman may not teach 1 Tim. II. 12. c. 1 Tim. II. 12. And do not we say the same that our Princes may not minister the Word or Sacraments What a shameless sort of People have we to deal withal who face us down that we affirm what we flatly deny And when he pretends faithfully to recite the words of our Bible after the New Translation as he doth in his Preface here he gives us another Translation in the second Text he alledges 1 Cor. XIV 34. But take it as it is it proves nothing but his folly and impudence unless he could shew that Queen Elizabeth preached publickly in any of our Churches But see the Childishness of this Writer in alledging these Texts against the Queen which make nothing against our Kings who are not Women sure And we ascribe the same power to them which we did to her and no more to her than belongs to them From Scripture he betakes himself to Reasoning which proceeds upon the same wilful Mistake we cannot call it but Calumny against our express Declaration to the contrary That we give our Kings such an Headship or Supream Power as makes them capable to minister the Word and Sacraments From whence he draws this new Slander That many hundreds of them have been hang'd drawn and quarter'd for denying this Power VVhereas every one knows the Oath of Supremacy is nothing else but a solemn declaration of our belief that our Kings are the Supream Governors of these Realms in all Spiritual things or Causes as well as Temporal and that no Foreign Prince or Prelate hath any Jurisdiction Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual in these Realms c. Now what can he find in his Fathers to oppose this There were none of them for above 800 years who did not believe this that Emperors and Kings are next to God and the Pope himself ought to be subject to them L. II. 1. The words of Optatus speak the sense of them all There is none above the Emperor but God alone who made him Emperor And none can deny the Ancient Custom to have been that the Clergy and People of Rome having chosen the Pope the Emperor confirmed or invalidated the Election as he pleased Adrian indeed would fain have changed this Custom Anno 811. but still it continued a long time that the Election was not accounted valid till the Emperor's Confirmation And he cannot but know if he have read his own Authors that after Adrian's attempt above forty Popes from John IX to Leo IX were all created by the Emperors who frequently also deposed Popes And Popes were so far from having any such Authority over the Emperors that when Pope Gregory VII adventured upon it it was esteemed a Novity not to say an Heresy as Sigebert's words are ad Anno 1088. which had not sprung up in the World before But the Reader may here observe how well skill'd this Man is in the Fathers who places John Damascen in the very front of them