Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A62589
|
A sermon lately preached on I Corinth. 3.15. By a reverend divine of the Church of England
|
Tillotson, John, 1630-1694.
|
1685
(1685)
|
Wing T1226; ESTC R219312
|
14,236
|
17
|
be saved though with great difficulty and as it were out of the fire But now among those Builders with hay and stubble there were those who denied the possibility of St. Paul's Salvation and of those who were of his mind We are told of some who built the Jewish Ceremonies and Observances upon the Foundation of Christianity and said that unless men were Circumcised and kept the law of Moses they could not be saved So that by this argument St. Paul and his followers ought to have gone over to those Judaizing Christians because it was acknowledged on both sides that they might be saved But these Judaizing Christians were as uncharitable to St. Paul and other Christians as the Church of Rome is now to us for they said positively that they could not be saved But can any man think that St. Paul would have been moved by this argument to leave a safe and certain way of Salvation for that which was only possible and that with great difficulty and hazard The argument you see is the very same and yet it concludes the wrong way which plainly shews that it is a contingent argument and concludes uncertainly and by chance and therefore no man ought to be moved by it 3. I shall take notice of some gross Absurdities that follow from it I shall mention but these two 1. According to this Principle it is always safest to be on the uncharitable side And yet uncharitableness is as bad an evidence either of a true Christian or a true Church as a man would wish Charity is one of the most essential marks of Christianity and what the Apostle saith of particular Christians is as true of whole Churches that though they have all Faith yet if they have not Charity they are nothing I grant that no Charity teacheth men to see others damned and not to tell them the danger of their condition But it is to be considered that the damning of men is a very hard thing and therefore when ever we do it the case must be wonderfully plain And is it so in this case They of the Church of Rome cannot deny but that we embrace all the Doctrines of our Saviour and his Apostles Creed and determined by the four first General Councils and yet they will not allow this and a good life to put us within a possibility of Salvation because we will not submit to all the Innovasions they would impose upon us And yet I think there is scarce any Doctrine or Practice in difference between them and us which some or other of their most learned Writers have not acknowledged either not to be sufficiently contained in Scripture or not to have been held and practised by the Primitive Church so that nothing can excuse their uncharitableness towards us And they pay dear for the little advantage they get by this argument for they do what in them lies to make themselves no Christians that they may prove themselves the truer Church A medium which we do not desire to make use of 2. If this argument were good then by this trick a man may bring over all the world to agree with him in an Error which another does not account damnable whatever it be provided he do but damn all those that do not hold it and there wants nothing but confidence and uncharitableness to do this But is there any sense that another mans boldness and want of Charity should be an argument to move me to be of his opinion I cannot illustrate this better than by the difference between a skilful Physitian and a Mountebank A learned and skilful Physitian is modest and speaks justly of things He says that such a method of Cure which he hath directed is safe and withal that that which the Mountebank prescribes may possibly do the work but there is great hazard and danger in it But the Mountebank who never talks of any thing less than Infallible Cures and always the more Mountebank the stronger pretence to Infallibility he is positive that that method which the Physitian prescribes will destroy the Patient but his Receipt is Infallible and never fails Is there any reason in this case that this man should carry it meerly by his confidence And yet if this argument be good the safest way is to reject the Physicians advice and to stick to the Mountebanks For both sides are agreed that there is a possibility of Cure in the Mountebanks method but not in the Physitians and so the whole force of the argument lies in the confidence of an ignorant man 4. This Argument is very unfit to work upon those to whom it is propounded for either they believe we say true in this or not If they think we do not they have no reason to be moved by what we say If they think we do why do they not take in all that we say in this matter Namely that though it be possible for some in the Communion of the Roman Church to be saved yet it is very hazardous and that they are in a safe condition already in our Church and why then should a bare Possibility accompanied with infinite and apparent hazard be an Argument to any man to run into that danger Lastly This Argument is very improper to be urged by those who make use of it Part of the strength of it lies in this that we Protestants acknowledge that it is possible a Papist may be saved But why should they lay any stress upon this what matter is it what we Hereticks say who are so damnably mistaken in all other things Methinks if there were no other reason yet because we say it it should seem to them to be unlikely to be true But I perceive when it serves for their purpose we have some little credit and authority among them By this time I hope every one is in some measure satisfied of the weakness of this Argument which is so transparent that no wise man can honestly use it and he must have a very odd understanding that can be cheated by it The truth is it is a casual and contingent Argument and sometimes it concludes right and oftner wrong and therefore no prudent man can be moved by it except only in one case when all things are so equal on both sides that there is nothing else in the whole world to dermine him which surely can never happen in matters of Religion necessarily to be believed No man is so weak as not to consider in the change of his Religion the merits of the Cause it self to examine the Doctrines and Practices of the Churches on both sides to take notice of the confidence and charity of both parties together with all other things which ought to move a conscientious and a prudent man And if upon enquiry there appear to be a clear advantage on either side then this Argument is needless and comes too late because the work is already done without it Besides that the great hazard of
A SERMON LATELY PREACHED ON 1 CORINTH 3.15 BY A Reverend Divine OF THE Church of England DVBLIN Reprinted for Joseph Howes Bookseller at the Kings-Arms in Castle-street 1685. 1 CORINTH 3.15 But he himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire THE Context runs thus According to the Grace of God which is given unto me as a wise Master-builder I have laid the Foundation and another buildeth thereon But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon For other Foundation can no man lay than that which is laid Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this Foundation Gold Silver precious Stones Wood Hay Stubble every man's work shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it but it shall be revealed by Fire and the Fire shall try every mans work of what sort it is If any mans work abide which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a Reward If any mans work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss But he himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire In these Words the Apostle speaks of a sort of persons who held indeed the Foundation of Christianity but built upon it such Doctrines or Practices as would not bear the trial which he expresseth to us by Wood Hay and Stubble which are not proof against the Fire Such a person the Apostle tells us hath brought himself into a very dangerous state though he would not absolutely deny the possibility of his Salvation He himself shall be saved yet so as by Fire That by Fire here is not meant the Fire of Purgatory as some pretend who would be glad of any shadow of a Text of Scripture to countenance their own dreams I shall neither trouble you nor my self to manifest It is very well known that this is a Proverbial phrase used not only in Scripture but in prophane Authors to signifie a narrow escape out of a great danger He shall be saved yet so as by Fire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the Fire Just as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used 1 Pet. 3.20 where the Apostle speaking of the eight persons of Noah's Family who escap'd the Flood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they escaped out of the Water So here this phrase is to be rendred in the Text He himself shall escape yet so as out of Fire The like expression you have Amos 4.11 I have pluckt them as a firebrand out of the fire And Jude 23. Others save with fear plucking them out of the fire All which expressions signifie the greatness of the danger and the difficulty of escaping it And so the Roman Orator who it is likely did not think of Purgatory useth this phrase Quo ex judicio velut ex incendio nudus effugit From which Judgment or Sentence he escaped naked as it were out of a burning And one of the Greek Orators tells us that to save a man out of the fire was a common proverbial speech And thus St. Chrysostom interprets this very place He shall escape as one that escapes out of the fire that is saith he as one who when his house at midnight is set on fire wakes and leaps out of his Bed and runs naked out of the doors taking nothing that is within along with him but imploying his whole care to save his body from the flames From the words thus explained the Observation that naturally ariseth is this That men may hold all the Fundamentals of Christian Religion and yet may super add other things whereby they may greatly endanger their salvation What those things were which some among the Corinthians built upon the foundation of Christianity whereby they endangered their Salvation we may probably conjecture by what the Apostle reproves in this Epistle as the tolerating of Incestuous Marriages communicating in Idol Feasts c. And especially by the Doctrine of the false Apostles who at that time did so much disturb the peace of most Christian Churches and who are so often and so severely reflected upon in this Epistle And what their Doctrine was we have an account Acts 15. viz. that they impose upon the Gentile Christians Circumcision and the Observation of the Jewish Law teaching that unless they were Circumcised and kept the Law of Moses they could not be saved So that they did not only build these Doctrines upon Christianity but they made them equal with the Foundation saying That unless men believed and practised such things they could not be saved I shall at this time take occasion from this passage of the Apostles to consider these two things 1. Some Doctrines and Practices which have been built upon the foundation of Christianity to the great hazard and danger of mens Salvation And to be plain I mean particularly by the Church of Rome 2. Whether our granting a possibility of Salvation though with great hazard to those in the communion of the Roman Church and their denying it to us be a reasonable argument and encouragement to any man to betake himself to that Church And there is the more reason to consider these things when so many seducing Spirits are so active and busy â—o pervert men from the Truth and when we see every day so many persons and their Religion so easily parted For this reason these two Considerations shall be the subject of the following Discourse I. First we will consider some Doctrines and Practices which the Church of Rome hath built upon the Foundation of Christianity to the great hazard and danger of mens Salvation It is not denied by the most judicious Protestant but that the Church of Rome do hold all the Articles of the Christian Faith which are necessary to Salvation But that which we charge upon them as a just ground of our separation from them is the imposing of new Doctrines and Practices upon Christians as necessary to Salvation which were never taught by our Saviour or his Apostles and which are either directly contrary to the Doctrine of Christianity or too apparently destructive of a good Life And I begin 1. With their Doctrines And because I have no mind to aggravate lesser matters I will single out four or five points of Doctrine which they have added to the Christian Religion and which were neither taught by our Saviour and his Apostles nor own'd in the first ages of Christianity And the First which I shall mention and which being once admitted makes way for as many Errors as they please to bring in is this their Doctrine of Infallibility And this they are stiff and peremptory in though they are not agreed among themselves where this Infallibility is seated whether in the Pope alone or a Council alone or in both together or in the diffusive body of Christians But they are sure they have it though they know not where it is And is this no prejudice against it can any man think that this priviledge was at first conferred upon the Church of Rome and that Christians in all ages did believe