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 |
|
A61870
|
A censure upon certaine passages contained in the history of the Royal Society as being destructive to the established religion and Church of England
|
Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676.
|
1670
(1670)
|
Wing S6033; ESTC R32736
|
43,471
|
70
|
do grant it Hart. They grant that the Pope may be an Heretick perhaps by a supposal as many things may be which never were nor are nor shall be For you cannot prove that any Pope ever was an Heretick actually though possibly they may be whereof I will not strive This point of the fallibility of the Pope and his subjection to a Council is so notorious with every man that is acquainted with the more ancient and modern Writers so known to any one that hath either read the determinations of Bishop Davenant qu. 5. or the defense of the Dissuasive of Bishop Taylour pag. 40. or the Review of the Council of Trent written by a French Catholick from whom the Disswader borrowed his allegations or that hath so much as read over the History of the Council of Trent that I need not insist on it any longer Notwithstanding the earnestnesse of the Iesuits under Laynez in the Council of Trent yet neither was the Pope's superiority over a Council nor the Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome defined there directly as appears out of the Review of that Council lib. 4. c. 1. and out of the English History pag. 721 722. Neither is there to this day amongst the Papists any thing enacted or determined in that Church which obligeth a man under pain of Excommunication to hold any such thing as the personal Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome the contrary being daily maintained there by more than the Iansenists much lesse is there any Sovereignty in matters of Faith ascribed unto them at this day All books of the Papists are subjected to the judgment of the Church not to the Arbitrement of the Pope The fides Carbonaria or Colliers faith so famed amongst the Papists was not established upon the infallibility or sovereignty of the Bishops of Rome no he told the Devil that He believed as the Church believed and the Church as He. And how necessary soever they make the communion with the particular Church of Rome how great influence soever they ascribe to the Pope over Councils yet the Decrees of the Council of Trent run in the name of the Holy Synod not Pope and there it is determined sess 4. that none dare interpret Holy Scripturs against the sense which our Holy Mother the Church hath held or does hold If you enquire in-the doctrines of M r White D r Holden Serenus Cressy and such others as endeavour at present and that with great shew of wit and artifices to seduce the English to that Apostaticall Church there is not one of them that I knowe of who attributes any infallibility to the Pope or submitteth his faith to the Sovereigne decisions of the Bishop of Rome As for Serenus Cressy he very judiciously deserts the School-terme of Infallibility for that of the Churches Authority and saith that the exceptions and advantages which the Protestants have against the Roman Church proceed only from their mis-understanding of her necessary doctrines or at most that all the efficacy they have is onely against particular opinions inferences made by particular Catholique writers He shews that D r Stapleton asserts that the infallible voyce and determination of the Church is included in the decree of the Church speaking in a Generall Council representatively In which the Church is infallible with this restriction viz in delivering the substance of faith in publique doctrines and things necessary to salvation Other Catholiques and namely Panormitan teach that the decrees of Generall Council are not absolutely and necessarily to be acknowledged infallible till they be received by all particular Catholique Churches because till then they cannot properly be called the faith of the universall Church or of the body of all faithfull Christians to which body the promise of infallibility is made And this was the Doctrine of Thomas Waldensis and some other Scholmen c. An opinion this is which though not commonly received yet I do not saith S. C. find it deeply censured by any yea the Gallican Churches reckoned this among their chiefest priviledges and liberties that they were not obliged to the decisions of a Generall Council till the whole body of the Gallican Clergy had by a speciall agreement consented to them and so proposed them to the severall Churches there And to this last opinion doth S. C. incline and his book was approved at Paris as consonant to the Catholique faith He guides himselfe by the Authority of received Councils he acknowledges that to be onely necessarily accounted an Article of Catholique faith which is actually acknowledged and received by Catholiques and since contradictions cannot be actually assented unto it will follow that whatsoever decisions of Councils may seem to oppose such articles are not necessarily to be accounted Catholique doctrines and by consequence not obligatory He denies that Generall Councils can make new articles of faith they are witnesses of what hath been delivered not Sovereigns to determine of new truths either by way of addition to the former or in opposition thereunto Their Infallibility is limited to Tradition and spiritually assisted in the faithfull reporting of what hath been delivered what ever reports or decrees they make of another nature they are to be received with a different assent from what is Catholique faith There is a double obligation from decisions of Generall Councils the first an obligation of Christian beliefe in respect of doctrines delivered by Generall Councils as of universall Tradition the second onely of Canonicall obedience to orders and constitutions for practice by which men are not bound to believe those are inforced as from Divine authority but onely to submit unto them as acts of a lawfull Ecclesiasticall power however not to censure them as unjust much lesse to oppose and contradict them Much more doth the same Author adde which give little countenance to that state of the controversie which our Author forms unto us No Soveraigne dominion over our faith is by him ascribed to the Bishop of Rome or Nationall or Generall Counâ—ills and as to Infailibility which Mr Chillingworth had impugned he thus acquits himselfe I may in generall say of all his Objections that since they proceed only against the word Infallibility and that word extended to the utmost heighth and latitude that it possibly can beare Catholiques as such are not at all concerned in them seeing neither is that expression to be found in any received Council nor did ever the Church enlarge her authority to so vast a widenesse as Mr Chillingworth either conceived or at least for his particular advantage against his adversary thought good to make show as if he conceived so As to the subject wherein Infallibility or Authority is to be placed since Catholiques vary as to that point he sayes 't is evident thereby that they are not obliged to any one part of the Question only they are to agree in this Tridentine decision Ecclesiae est judicare de vero sensu Sacrae
A CENSVRE UPON CERTAINE PASSAGES Contained in the HISTORY OF THE Royal Society As being Destructive to the ESTABLISHED RELIGION and CHURCH of ENGLAND Parque novum fortuna videt concurrere Bellum Atque virum Oxford Printed for Ric. Davis A. D. 1670. TO THE REVEREND Dr IOHN FELL D. D. Dean of Christ-Church SIR I Offer these Papers unto you not to implore your Patronage but to acknowledge your Favours Had my leasure or abilities qualified me for a greater performance it had been tendered unto you with the same readiness This veneration I bear not to the Ranke you hold in the Church or University but to your Merit and in you I at once honour a Learning above this age and a Piety becoming the best Permit me to be just to so real worth and grateful for your constant civilities to me and I shall no way Interest your Person in this Quarrel 'T is enough that I defend Truth and the Church of England and that whatever else I have atchieved I intermedled with nothing but what 't was necessary to be undertook by some body This none can dispute who understands the Politicks of our Nation upon what foundations the publick Tranquillity is suspended Let them that will question the prudence of this action I am satisfied in the profession of a Wisdome that is first pure and then peaceable I am perfectly Your humble Servant HENRY STUBBE Warwick Feb. 16. 1669. A Censure on certain passages in the History of the Royall Society It is Naturall to mens minds when they perceive others to arrogate more to themselves then is their share to deny them even that which else they would confesse to be their right And of the truth of this we have an instance of farre greater concernment then that which is before us And that is in Religion it selfe For while the Bishops of Rome did assume an Infallibility and a Sovereigne Dominion over our Faith the Reformed Churches did not only justly refuse to grant them that but some of them thought themselves obliged to forbear all communion with them and would not give them that respect which possibly might belong to so ancient and so famous a Church and which might still have been allowed it without any danger of Superstition BEfore I come to resolve and parcell out this impious and pernicious paragraph into severall Propositions it is requisite that I premise two Observations the first is that by Communion here is not meant Civill commerce and the performance of those mutuall offices by which societies in generall or Trading is carried on or Humanity alone is relieved no Reformed Church ever denyed this to the Romanists But the Communion here treated of is Ecclesiasticall and consists not only in the acknowledging of such as are communicated with to be members of the universall Church of Christ built upon a right foundation and holding either no errours or such as do not overthrow the fundamentals but in resorting to the same Church assemblies and celebrating devoutly the same offices or Prayers Ceremonies and Sacraments and this is to be done interchangeably so that each upon occasion resort unto the Churches of the other joyn in the celebration of the same Liturgies or publike prayers participatiō of the same Sacrament of the Lords Supper which is more particularly termed the Cōmunion was alwaies accounted the tessera or mark of Church-fellowship The truth of this Observation appeares from that notion which all ages have had of Church-communion which is agreeable hereunto To owne any number or association of men to be a part of the Church Catholique and yet not to resort to the same religious offices amounts not to Church-Communion since All Excommunication cuts not off from the body of Christ but from outward or exteriour Communion with a visible Church thus when Chrysostome separated himselfe from the followers of Meletius and of Paulinus though he did acknowledge both Churches to be Orthodox yet is it said that He communicated with neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither doth it amount to an Ecclesiasticall communion if a man be present at the religious Assemblies and offices of another Church if so be he do it not upon a religious account nor devoutly joyne therewith thus when Elijah was present at the Sacrifice and worship of Baal he did not communicate with those Idolaters 1 Kings 18.26 27. Thus Lyranus Cajetanus and other Casuists excuse Naaman for bowing upon a Civill account in the house of Rimmon and allow the case of a Christian slave which waited on her Mistresse to the Sarracen worship and bore up her traine but did not joyne in the Mahometan Service thus the Protestant Divines as Sleidan and the History of the Council of Trent informe us resolved that it was lawfull for the Protestant Princes to pay a civill attendance on the German Emperour even at Masse in the Royall Chappell These things therefore amount not unto Church-communion But the joyning religiously in the same Church-worship and particularly in celebrating the Lords Supper together and this is to be done interchangeably for otherwise onely the one side can be said to communicate with the other not vice versâ Thus when the Papists did resort to our Churches in the beginning of the Reigne of Qu. Elizabeth and joyned in the same prayers and participation of Sacraments with the Church of England it might justly be said that they did hold communion with us but since the Lawes then in force did prohibit the Protestants to be present at or joyne in any publique Service or administration of Sacraments where other ceremonies then what were inacted by the Church of England should be used it is manifest that the Church of England did not communicate with the Papists The second Observation is that our Historian in this Paragraph doth make use of the words communion and respect as equipollent and Synonymous otherwise there is no apodosis no sense in the saying Some of them thought themselves obliged to forbear all communion with them and would not give them that respect which possibly might belong to so ancient so famous a Church If respect be a terme of a lesser import then communion then might those Reformed Churches decline all Exteriour communion with the Church of Rome justly and without blame and yet retain a respect and kindnesse such as Christians may and ought to beare to the excommunicate to the Heathens and Publicans and in which there is no danger of Superstition though in this Exteriour communion there be evident perill not only of Superstition but Idolatry 1. These things being premised my first Animadversion shall be That the Comparison betwixt men denying to such as usurp too much even their due rights and those that separate in case of religious usurpations is so carryed on by the Historian that to forbeare all communion with the Church and Bishops of Rome is represented as an extreame opinion and consequently as