Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	bishop_n	church_n	presbyter_n	1,708	5	10.0860	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59903	A vindication of the Brief discourse concerning the notes of the church in answer to a late pamphlet entituled, The use and great moment of the notes of the church, as delivered by Cardinal Bellarmin, De notis ecclesiae, justified ...; De notis ecclesiae	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1687 (1687)	Wing S3374; ESTC R18869	41,299	72

speaking nothing else But and if he does not understand English I cannot help that But CHRISTIAN PASTORS for a need will take in Presbyters who renounce Episcopacy nay Congregational who renounce Presbytery It takes in indeed all Christian Pastors be they what they will. Whether Presbyterian and Independent Ministers are Christian Pastors the Discourser was not concerned to determine for he did not undertake to tell in particular which are true Christian Churches but what is the general Notion of a Christian Church who are true Pastors but that the Union of Christians under true Christian Pastors makes a Church Tho the Pastores Ecclesiae in the ancient Language signified only Bishops who had the care of the Flock and the government of the inferiour Presbyters Thus the Worship of Christ he says may signify with Liturgy or without it with the Apostles Creed or without it c. And so it may if both with and without be the true Worship of Christ. What a long Definition must the Discourser have given of a Christian Church had he been directed by this Author and stated all the Controversies about Episcopacy and Presbytery and the several Kinds and Modes of Worship in his Definition which when he had done it had been nothing at all to his purpose The Discourser proceeds All such particular or National Churches all the World over make up the whole Christian Church or Universal Church of Christ. Yes says the Justifier pag. 6. and all such Churches of Christ if they could meet would be like the Men in the Market-place one crying out one thing and another another and no Authority could send them home peaceably to their Dwellings I confess I am of another Mind that could all the Churches in the World meet how much soever they differ at a distance they would agree better before they parted and this I think all those should believe who have any Reverence for General Councils which certainly such a Meeting as this would be in a proper sense Well! But there is Schism lies in the Word National Church How so good Sir as if Nations here were at their own disposal And pray why may not all the Churches in a Nation unite into one National Communion And how is this a Schism if they maintain Brotherly Communion with other Christian Churches Or as if Christ begged leave of the Potentates of the Earth to plant his Truth among them Why so Cannot there be a National Church without Christ's begging leave of Potentates to plant his Gospel among them Suppose there be Churches planted in a Nation without the leave of the Potentates may not all these Churches unite into a National Communion without the leave of Potentates too And is not such a National Union of Churches a National Church Suppose Princes voluntarily submit their Scepters to Christ and encourage and protect the Christian Churches in their Dominions and unite them all into one National Church is there any need of Christ's asking leave of such Potentates who willingly devote themselves to his Service But he says the greater Mistake is that these Churches all put together make up the Universal Church of Christ. But are not all the Churches the Universal Church What then is the Universal Church but All Yes he says Universal enough I confess but where is the Unity Why is it impossible that all Churches should be united in one Communion If it be then Unity is not necessary or the Universal Church does not include all Churches If it be not then all Churches may be the Universal the One Catholick Church of Christ. We says he look for Unity they shew us Multitude and Division Is Multitude and Division the same thing Or is Unity inconsistent with Multitude How then could the Churches of Ierusalem of Antioch of Corinth of Ephesus of Rome be one Church We desire Unity they shew us Universality As if there could not be Unity in Universality I wish this Author would first learn Grammar and Logick or which I fear is harder to teach him common sense before he pretends again to dispute in Divinity but now we have him we must make the best of him we can And here the Answerer spends several Pages in proving that the Church must be One which no body that I know of denies and which he may find truly stated in answer to Cardinal Bellarmine's seventh Note But what is this to the Discourser who was not concerned to state this Point He gives such a Definition of a Church as belongs to all true particular Churches as every Man ought to do who gives the Definition of a Church for a particular Church has the entire Nature and Essence of a Church and there can be no true Definition of a Church but what belongs to a particular Church He says indeed that the Universal Church consists of all true particular Churches and so most certainly it does No says the Answerer all particular Churches are not at Unity and therefore they cannot be the One Catholick or Universal Church But suppose this is there any other Notion of the Universal Church but that it is made up of all true particular Churches which is all that the Discourser asserted without considering how all particular Churches must be united to make the One Catholick Church which was nothing to his purpose In such a divided State of Christendom as this meer external Unity and Communion cannot be the Mark of a true Church because all Churches are divided from each other If we are not at Unity with the Church of Rome no more is the Church of Rome at Unity with us and if meer Unity be the Mark of the true Church neither part of the Division can pretend to it And therefore either some Churches may be true Churches which are not at Unity with all others or there is no true Church in the World. And therefore though Cardinal Bellarmine makes Unity the Mark of a true Church yet not the Unity of all Churches with each other for he knew there was no such thing in his Days in the World and I fear is not likely to be again in haste but the Unity of Churches to the Bishop of Rome who is the visible Head of the Church And thus the Catholick Church signifies all those Churches which are united to the Bishop of Rome as the Center of Unity But this is such an Unity as the Scripture says nothing of and which Protestants disown and which this Answerer has not said one word to prove for this is the Unity of Subjection not the Unity of Love and Charity which Christ and his Apostles so vehemently press us to Now if the Unity of the Catholick Church does not consist in Subjection to a visible Head and all other external Communion is broken and divided we must content our selves to know what it is that makes a particular National Church a true sound and pure Church for whatever Divisions there are in the World every true

both as in such a divided State of Christendom we have great reason to hope he will. But let us hear what our Author says is the Catholick Church 'T is only a Comprehension of all those Churches which keep to the Unity of the Faith and persist in their first undivided Estate in the Bond of Universal Peace By the Unity of the Faith I hope he means that one Faith in which as he tells us Christ and his Apostles planted the Church and then I doubt this will fall hard upon the Church of Rome which rejects all other Churches who do retain this One Apostolick Faith if they disown the new Articles of the Trent Creed and the first undivided Estate of the Church was settled in an Equality and Brotherly Association of Bishops and Churches not in the Empire of one over all the rest and then this is more severe upon the Church of Rome than Protestants desire for she has destroyed this first undivided State by challenging such a Supremacy as enslaves all other Churches to her and therefore is so far from being the One Catholick Church that if this Definition be true she is no part of it And as for the Bond of Universal Peace what Claim she can lay to that let the cruel Persecutions of those innocent Christians whom she calls Hereticks the Excommunication of whole Churches the deposing of Princes and all the Blood that has been shed in Christendom under the Banners of Holy Church witness for her And thus we come to the Notion of a Note or Mark which he says is clear by its Definition page 3. and therefore I hope he will give us such a Definition as is self-evident or which all Mankind agree in for a Definition which the contending Parties do not agree in can clear nothing Let us then hear his Definition That it is a most sensible Appearance in or about the Subject enquired after whereby we are led toward the Knowledg of the present Existence or Essence of the said Subject And from hence he concludes 'T is manifest then that a Note of a Thing must be extra-essential of it self because by it and the Light from thence we arrive to the Knowledg of the Essence And he adds upon which Grounds you see the reasonable Demands of those who challenge first That a distinctive Mark or Note must be more known than the Thing notified Secondly That a Note must be in Conjunction at least in some measure proper not common or indifferent to many singulars much less to contraries Now all that I can pick out of this is 1. That the Existence or Essence of things must be known by Notes 2. That such Notes whereby we discover the Existence or Essence of things must be extra-essential or not belong to the Essence of it And yet 3. That these Notes must not be common but proper to the thing of which it is a Note Which are as pretty Notions as a Man shall ordinarily meet with and therefore I shall briefly examine them First That the Existence or Essence of things must be known by Notes For if the Existence and Essence of things may be known without Notes this Dispute about Notes is to no purpose And yet how many things are there whose Existence and Essence are known without Notes Who desires any Note to know the Sun by to know what Light or Taste or Sounds Pain or Pleasure is The Presence of these Objects and the notice our Senses give us of them that is the things themselves are the onely Notes of themselves The use of Signs or Notes is only to discover the Existence of such things as are absent visible or future but what is present and visible exposed to the notice of Sense or Reason is best known by it self and can be rightly known no other way and therefore since all the dispute is about Marks of the Church he ought to prove that the Church is such a Society as can be known only by Notes and then it must either be absent invisible or future for all other things may be known by themselves without Notes Secondly Especially since he will allow nothing to be a Note but what is extra-essential or does not belong to the essence of the thing which seems to me a very extraordinary way of finding out the Existence or Essence of things by such Notes as do not belong to their Essence and then I think they cannot prove their Existence For how can I find out any thing without knowing in some measure what it is I find or how can I know what the Essence of any thing is by such Notes as are not essential There are but two sorts of Notes or Signs that I know of natural or instituted and they both suppose that we know the thing and the Note and Sign of it before we can find it out by Signs or Notes As for Natural Signs the most certain Signs we have are Causes and Effects but we must know both the Causes and Effects before the one can be a Sign of the other Thus Smoke is a Sign of Fire but it is no Sign of Fire to any Man who does not know what Fire is and that it will cause a Smoak when it seises on combustible Matter and that nothing else can cause a Smoak but Fire Thus in univocal Effects the Effect declares the Nature of the Cause as we know that a Man had a Man to his Father but then we must first know what a Man is and that a Man begets in his own Likeness But this I suppose is not our Author's meaning that the Notes of the Church are Natural Causes and Effects or Natural Concomitants or Adjuncts because the Church is not a Natural but a Mystical Body and therefore can have no Natural Notes Let us then consider instituted Signs and they we grant must be extra-essential but then there never was and never can be an instituted Sign to discover the Essence and Existence of what we did not know before The Use of such Signs is to distinguish Places or Persons by different Names or Habits or Colours c. or to serve instead of Words as the Sound of the Trumpet or the Beat of the Drum or to be for Legal Contracts and Securities and the like but instituted Signs are no Signs till we know the thing of which they are Signs which shews how ridiculous it is to talk of such extra-essential Notes as shall discover the Existence and Essence of things which we knew not before for if we must first know the Church before we can find it out by Notes these extra-essential Notes may be spared To be sure this shews how far this Definition of a Note is from being clear since it does not suit any kind of Notes which Mankind are acquainted with and if the Notes of the Church are a peculiar sort of Notes by themselves he should not have appealed to the common Notion and Definition of Signs and

how old is the Council of Trent which is the true Antiquity of many Popish Articles of Faith. 3dly Perpetual Duration out-lasting all earthly Empires and Kingdoms For it plucks them down as fast as it can 4thly Amplitude being a great Body according to Prophecy But not so big as Paganism yet 5thly Succession Apostolical the very Iews confessing it as they do Transubstantiation How strong invincible clear and undeniable by Gainsayers Then I suppose it has no Gain-sayers if they do not deny it 6thly Primitive consent how great and how manifest to those good Men who enquire Yea how great indeed for no Body can find it but the Vicar of Putney Witness the Multitudes that return to the Catholick Church upon that account Monsieur de Meaux's French Converts I suppose who never heard of the Dragoons 7thly Intimate Union with their Head Christ and with one another But Bellarmin's visible Head of Unity is the Pope not Christ so that this is a new Note and it seems the Churches Union with Christ is extra-essential also or else it could be no Note 8thly Sanctity of Doctrine as revealed by God in whom is Light and no Darkness at all In teaching Men to break Faith with Hereticks to depose Heretical Princes and absolve their Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance and arm them against their Leige Lord to prefer the Caelibacy of Priests tho the manifest Cause of so many Adulteries and Fornications as a more Holy State than Matrimony and such like Doctrines wherein is Darkness but no Light at all 9thly Efficacy upon Infidels Witness the Spanish Converts in the Golden Indies But why not upon Hereticks as well as Infidels I fear the Conversions in England are so slow that he dares not yet make that a Mark of the Church 10thly The Holiness of the Fathers Whose Lives we wish to be Legends though unquestionably true when we see how far they have out-done us Ay! that makes Hereticks call them Legends 11thly The Glory of Miracles which a Man would be wary of contradicting for fear of Blasphemy and sinning against the Holy Ghost Especially when they are such Miracles as no Body ever saw but the Monk who relates them or Miracles to prove both parts of a Contradiction to be true as for Instance that the Virgin Mary was and was not conceived in Original Sin. But if ever they had suffered poor Ietzer's Fate they would rather hereafter believe than feel such Miracles Still continued and denied by none but Scepticks in dispossession of Devils I suppose he means the Boy of Bilson and curing the Struma the Kings-Evil but this is a Protestant as well as Popish Miracle and is a better proof that the King than that the Pope is the Head of the Church 12. The Gift of Prophecy Witness the Maid of Kent To say nothing concerning the Confession of Adversaries and unhappy Exit of the Churches Enemies Which may very well be spared for there have been Confessions and unhappy Exits on both sides Tho Hen. 8. Queen Elizabeth and King Iames 1. were no Examples of such unhappy Exits These These are the Notes which like a Bill in Parliament deserve a second Reading and then to be thrown out though I hope they will never come in there The way being thus prepared the Court fat and the Jury of Notes empannell'd which I suppose is the reason why he calls but 12 of Bellarmin's 15 the rest being Supernumeraries the Discourser is summoned to make his Appearance Enter Discourser Which I can assure you put him into a fright on the sudden fearing it might be the Inquisition but he recollected himself and thus began his Plea. Is not the Catholick Church visible And if we can see which is the Church what need we guess at it by Marks and Signs and that by such Marks and Signs too as are matter of dispute themselves cannot we distinguish between the Christian Church and a Turkish Mosque and a Iewish Synagogue cannot we without all this adoe distinguish a Christian from a Turk or a Iew or a Pagan And it will be as easy to find out a Christian Church as it will be to find out Christians And what now is the hurt of this Oh! says the Justifier What Spirit is that which envies the Christian the Felicity of finding the true Church and casts an evil Eye upon the Notes conducing to it let any Christian judg A very Evil Spirit doubtless But does the Discourser do this Who says that the Church is visible and may be known without disputable Notes for Notes are only to discover things absent and invisible but what is visible is best known by it self Yes for whereas he pretends 't is visible besides that he flatly denies it after p. 14. Nay say I not among Counterfeits Is it visible at Sea which is the Royal Navy when the Enemy puts up the English Colours First then let us reconcile the Discourser with himself He asks whether the Church be not visible and therein appeals to the Confession of his Adversaries that the Church is visible and wonders what need there is of Notes of disputable Notes to find out a visible Church in Pag. 14. He desires to know How they will prove that there is a Church without the Scripture He answers for them that the Church is visible for we see a Christian Church in the World but says he What is it I see I see a Company of Men who call themselves a Church and this is all that I can see and is this seeing a Church A Church must have a divine Original and Institution and therefore there is no seeing a Church without seeing its Charter and is this to deny the Visibility of the Church because it cannot be seen or known without its Charter when it Charter is as visible as the Society which calls its self the Church And surely that Church is visible enough whose Society and Charter are both visible tho the Church cannot be known without its Charter But now the Answerer will not allow the Church to be visible among Counterfeits and then it has not been visible this hundred Years at least and then what becomes of Bellarmin's Notes which are none if the Church be not visible for they are Notes not of an invisible but of a visible Church But the Comparison whereby he proves this is an eternal Confutation of such extra-essential Notes Is it visible at Sea which is the Royal Navy when the Enemy puts up the English Colours Which shows how fallible Notes are for Colours are Notes of the Royal Navy and these may deceive us but if you go aboard and see the Ships and the Company and their Commissions you cannot be mistaken The Natures of things cannot be counterfeited but Notes may The Discourser says A Christian Church is nothing else but a Society of Christians united under Christian Pastors for the Worship of Christ. This the Justifier thinks a very slight way of