Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
conscience_n	authority_n	church_n	ordain_v	1,218	5	9.9132	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79524	Catholike history, collected and gathered out of Scripture, councels, ancient Fathers, and modern authentick writers, both ecclesiastical and civil; for the satisfaction of such as doubt, and the confirmation of such as believe, the Reformed Church of England. Occasioned by a book written by Dr. Thomas Vane, intituled, The lost sheep returned home. / By Edward Chisenhale, Esquire.	Chisenhale, Edward, d. 1654.	1653 (1653)	Wing C3899; Thomason E1273_1; ESTC R210487	201,728	571

skill in Appelles Art that he drew that exquisite picture of Christ which Rome has representing unto us his posture whilst the Jews whipt him I must confess that for these matters of importance we must submit to the traditions of Rome But all things touching God and the means to attaine faith in him are plentifully therein to be found Chrysostome sayes in his 41 Hom. upon the 22 of Matth. Quicquid queritur ad salutem totum eam ademptum est in Scripturis and upon the 95 Psalm Si quid dicatus absque Scriptura c. If any thing be spoken without the Scripture the cogitation of the Auditors faile but so soon as the Testimony of Gods voice is heard out of the Scripture it confirmeth both the word of the speaker and the mind of the hearer Saint Hierom upon the 9 of Jeremy Nec parentum ne majorum error sequendus est sed author it as Scripturarum Dei docenti imperium Saint Cyprian who writ almost 1400 yeers ago would not yeeld to Stephanus Bishop of Rome but reproved him for leaning to tradition and demanded of him by what Scripture he could prove his tradition Cyprian Epist ad Pompeium 74. So then if in his time it was not enough to alleadge tradition for the proof of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome much less is it lawful to follow the Popes definitive sentence in matters of faith and doctrine When the Arrians would not admit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it could not be found in Scripture Athanasius did not plead tradition for it but said Although the express words be not found in the Scripture yet have the Scriptures that meaning and sense in them as every one that readeth the Scriptures may plainly understand and therefore by warrant th●eof that word might be maintained Saint Austine de unitat Eccl. cap. 10. Nemo mihi dicat quid dixit Donatus quid dixit Parmenianus quid Paulus aut quillibet illorum quid nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est sicubi forte falluntur ut contra canonicas Dei Scriptures aliquid sentiant Methinks the very word Canonical which the Church of Rome having approved Canonical Scripture disprove ●raditiods what Scriptures shall be Canonical what not is sufficient of it self to prove this point for signifies a rule and thereupon those books are called Canonical because they are the rules of our faith and consequently whatsoever is not consonant to the Scripture ought to be rejected as pernicious and swerving from the rules of our faith For as whatsoever is not of faith is sin and as faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God therefore whatsoever is extra Scripturam cum ex fide non sit peccatum est This was the saying of Basil one of the Church of Rome's Saints in his Ethicks difinit ult prope finem And for my part I shall not be so harsh with her as this St. was I should be willing to allow of her traditions if they do not impugne the Scriptures and not to be so rigid against her traditional power as upon Basil's rule utterly to reject all if not expresly contained in Scripture I say for my part I should allow of such and approve of them as to be cerdited for the matter of fact but if she enjoyn them as doctrinal and to be rules of faith then ●ith Cyprian I desire to examine them by this Touchstone of truth the Scriptures For if once she propound traditions to be rules of faith then with Hierome Cyprian and Austin I must examine the truth of them by the rule of Scripture and with Saint Chrysostome in his 13 Hom. upon the 2 Cor. 7. do pray and beseech the Church of Rome to reject what this or that man says and search the truth out of the Script●re that learning true riches we may follow them and so attain life everlasting neither let any Church be wedded with her own traditions or give her self to believe the traditions of other Churches unless saith he she can bring authority from these truths to a warrant her doctrine and not to receive for doctrine the commandments of men and with Saint Cyprian examine from whence such tradition came whether it descended from authority of our Lord Jesus Christ or his Gospel or whether it came from the Mandates of the Apostles or their Epistles If so saith he let such divine and holy tradition be observed if no let it be rejected especially any tradition that shall contradict the written verities of God for such certainly proceed from spirits of error Here is a cloud of witnesses all agreeing in one that no traditions are to be embraced that have not warrant from the word of God so that for the Church of Rome to put her traditions upon the people for rules of faith upon that score that it is the power and authority of the Church that awarrants those traditions is vain and not binding to the conscience of men unless she can justifie and maintaine them warrantable by the word according to Saint Pauls saying to the Galat. 1.9 Though an Angel from heaven come and teach any other doctrine then what we have preached let him be accursed For the Testimony of no Church whatsoever is to be received if it be contrary to the Scripture S●riptures above the Church Ante 73. Chapter 9. according to that of Saint Austin upon that text The Scriptures are not true because the Church sayes they are the word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the word of God and should Rome or any other Church teach contrary to the holy Scripture it is to be rejected as that which hath nothing of verity in it Now sith the Scriptures are the onely rules of our faith The vanity and falseness of the traditions of the Church of Rome and do containe in themselves the necessary points of our faith what shall we think of the traditions of the Church of Rome which have no warrant from the holy Scriptures but many of them being repugnant and utterly contrary to those Scriptures which therefore by the rule of Christ himself in the 7 of Matthew and by the general consent of the fathers of the primitive Church are to be rejected yet notwithstanding are by her enjoyned upon her pretended authority of universality and infallibility to be rules of faith unto others And lest any should think me injurious to the Church of Rome in this particular I wi●l give you a smal taste for I delight not to lay open her infirmities thereby to draw a scandal upon her of such of her traditions as are not warranted by the holy word of God only maintained out of self interest and to warrant her claim of universal power Spiritual and Temporal by these ensuing examples and further refer you to the 7 Chapter The Church of Rome that she might perswade the world of Peters being Bishop of Rome by

promising the same But generally in all other Countries the Covenant between the king and the people is so personal that it is onely restrained to the parties so promising and no further For were the son to obey by reason of his fathers promise it were needless to have the fealty of the succeeding generations And therefore was it that in England there was a view of Frank-Pledge where every man of twelve yeers of age shall take the Oath of Allegaince and it is declared that every one 21 E. 3.12 ought to be attendant to some view of Frank-pledge or other to take an Oath to be true and faithful to the King Which was a very politick constitution for should any difference after arise between the king and people concerning his mis-government none should judge thereof but such as stood bound by Oath to obey the king according to the Laws whereby the king might be confident the people would not wrongfully tax the king lest they should pull Perjury upon themselves and the king was likewise hereby to take heed that he did govern according to that Law lest the succeeding generations would not subject themselves to have him over them and for that without their voluntary and personal consents they were not thereunto bound As for the term of Natural Allegiance Natural Allegiance considered it is in respect of a mans being born of parents which have right and priviledge in the Laws of the Nation and Country of which they are for that they are thereby naturalized endenized and made free to receive protection from those Laws For those Laws proceeding from the people of such Nation or Country and being by king and people confirmed to posterity they are onely proper to the natural people of such Nation or Country which Laws are to be a guide to such people and for that they are annexed in point of protection to the off-spring of such people such off-spring is said a● natural subject as having birth-right to those Laws which are to protect and govern them For as they are onely to receive correction from the Rule of that Law they may more properly be said local subjects then natural every stranger being with them in that respect during residence in such Nation or Country equally obnoxious to them and therefore being onely born of natural parents of that Country they are said natural subjects to that Law Natural Allegiance For as to the personal subjection of any man to be governed by such a king of that Country he is not by naturality absolutely concluded under that power before a personal engagement onely it is a perswasive motive to make him subject himself to such a king or power but no positive tye the obligation that thereby accrues to king and people onely arising upon the mutual stipulation personally conditioned and agreed upon by king and people Sith then it is plain that kings are by the people instituted into their Regal power whether absolute and so upon no terms to be questioned by the people engaged God onely being to punish such for their mis-government by raising some strange power to scourge them when and as he pleases or qualified and so to govern according to the Articles of Stipulation The Pope upon no terms is to intermeddle to depose them for after they are once invested in this power over the people whether Absolute or Conditional yet whilst they are so over the people and to go in and out before the people their power is from God by whom they reign and therefore not to be questioned by his Holiness who is neither the party without which they were not set up nor yet having any authority above their power And should any Prince or Potentate once acquire this Regal power from the alacrity and free consent of people and afterwards submit that right to the Pope's will I dare affirm he betrays the peoples interest to a stranger and is utterly injurious to his own Crown for that he being once invested in the Regal Throne is by Gods power and authority to go in and out before the people and having this power under so heavenly a Master he must not become tenant at will to the Pope who is belowe him as to question his Power and Government And whereas Bellarmine de Pontif l. 1. cap. 7. would exalt Bishops above Kings for that they administer Sacraments c. and Kings onely administer Justice in Civil matters that doth not subject Kingship to Episcopacie for the credit of the Bishops actions must serve the glory of God not the Bishop onely the spiritual work is of God the bodily service is of the Minister Now the honour that is to be given him is in respect of his Officiating not his Person and in his respect every man in his own Trade or Calling may be said excellent before the King The Bishop is a better Bishop then the King but the King is a more excellent man then the Bishop The honour due to the King is in respect of his person Who shall lift his hand against the Lords anointed and be guiltless 1 Sam. 26.9 His person is sacred and above the reach of Violence his hand bears the Sword and the obedience thereunto is annexed to his person But the honour and respect to be given to the Bishops is in respect of their Ministerial function as they are men they are subject and as they are Ministers or successors to the Apostles which Office let it in it self be more noble and to be honoured for Bellarmine's reason yet if they rightly dispense the sacred Oracles of Truth they must by that not onely teach others but convince themselves that they are to obey the Civil Magistracie not out of conveniencie for order sake but out of necessity for conscience sake Christ ordained both Powers Bishops to rule the Church Acts 20. and Kings to rule the men and to guide and dispose Temporal affairs though both have Government annexed to them yet that of Kings is in his own right that of Bishops in Christs stead to perswade to rules of Faith and Discipline not to compel the power of the one is Absolute of the other but Effective the one may compel the other onely perswade Whereupon Chrysostome upon Rom. 13. The weapons of Bishops are spiritual those of Kings material Bishops are to admonish reprove and exhort Kings are to restrain the disobedient by loss of life limbs estate or liberty the King is to be conversant about holy things not in the administring and execution thereof as was Vzziah but in appointing and ordering them as was Hezekiah and is to overlook the Bishops in their exercising the spiritual Function He is to make Laws and he is to see the execution of those Laws and therefore he is to look into the conversation of the Bishops that they walk according to those Laws otherwise to punish them But if the King be given over to hardness of heart and will not hearken

Joseph of Arimathea is not certainly known to have come whether from Rome from Paul or from Philip out of France or immediately from the East it is no great matter for by the confession of the Church of Rome we had the true faith amongst us before Eleutherius time and had Pastors then and since have continued a lawfull succession of governing Bishops Succession of Bishops in England even to the last late reverend father William of Cant. and whereas the Dr. twits against our succession of Bishops that we cannot maintain it unlesse we fetch it from Rnme I answer that we being a distinct Province the Bishop of Rome hath no power of Ordination here for by the Councell of Nice the 22. Can. a Bishop is not to ordain in anothers Diocesse Et si quis tale facere tentaverit irrita sit ejus ordinatio and though we be different of late from Rome and that it were time we had our order of Episcopacie from thence yet the late Bishops which were so different from Rome might ordain others within their own Province though Hereticks for that as I said before Haereticus est pars Ecclesiae Moreover it is decreed in the Councell of Florens that ordo imprimit characterem indelebilem therefore children baptized by an heretick are not to be rebaptized which the Councell of Trent hath decreed against the opinion of Cyprian Nam licet male utuntur potestate ministri sibi tradita prosint aliis non sibi Sicut enim per asinam Balaam loquutus est Deus ita per malos ministros Sacramenta praestat And Sum. Sacr. Rom. eccl Sect. 136. Episcopi haeretici veros ordines conferent vera praestant Sacramenta So that by the rules of the Papists themselves we notwithstanding we be hereticks or Schismaticks yet having once lawfull orders which gave an indelible character and in that a power of conferring the same upon others as long as we remain Christians and believe in the holy and blessed Trinity though we differ in other points yet we remain still members in the Catholick Church and have a power of conferring orders and I much wonder the Doctour should be so harsh against our Hierarchy unlesse he sometimes made a bait to fly at a Bishoprick and being canvassed in Peters net it stirred up some atra bilis which since would never be allayed he is so much incensed against it that he utterly denyes our succession upon the interruption of Romane Bishops in H. 8. and Queen Eliz. time for my part his allegations against it do not much trouble me nor I hope will they find entertainment with many sith they carry with them no more weight then the bare opinion of himself he positively affirming upon his own authority that our ministers are not in legal Orders insomuch that if one of our Priests came to Rome he must be ordained a new which if it be true it is contrary to the decrees of Popish Councells and will be a sufficient testimony to the world to convince them of falshood and jugling with the world that they should profess one thing and practise another to declare in Councells that a Heretick confers true and perfect orders and yet will not in their practice allow of it however for them to affirm us Hereticks is to beg the question and therefore we may safely within our own province continue a succession of Orders without any approbation of theirs at all nor is this any more then of right is due to us as may appear by the 1 Councell of Nice Provincial Ordination of Bishops 4 Can. a Bishop ought to be ordained by the severall Bishops of the Province but if they cannot conviently all meet to this purpose then three shall serve to perform the ordination which is also confirmed by the Councell of Antioch 19 Can. and the Councell of Carthage 13 Can. and it is the opinion of some learned Divines that in case of necessity the Ministers may Ordain where Bishops are wanting for that the Presbytery or Ministry have right to impose hands and the Keyes are said to be Claves ecclesiae non claves episcoporum seu presbyterorum Infra 43.5 chap. yet God be blessed England was never put to this strait we still had a continuing succession of Bishops notwithstanding the deprivation of the Popish Prelates and so according to that Canon did ordain in our own Precincts which as it is of right our due and belonging to us so it is likewise practised and hath been the antient Custom of other Provinces as wel as this as the Eastern Provinces ordain without the assistance of Rome and in these Western parts even in France and Germany and other places which right of Ordination being thus by decrees of the Generall Councels annexed to distinct Provinces I much wonder the moderate Papists of France and Germany should suffer themselves to be trampled upon by the Ignatian tribe sworn Servants to the imperious Pope who dayly exercises strange dominion over them making no other use of them then the Turk doth of his slaves to wit to do his drudgery whilst he himself reaps the fruits of their labours It argues a cowardly spirit to be afraid to right themselves herein because some of their Princes have fallen in the attempt amongst whom the 4th Henries of both Countries were sacrificed to the ambition and rapine of the encroaching Popes such horrid attempts as these should rather stir up their noble spirits to a just revenge upon the bloudied conclave for putting into act such cursed designes then through the base treachery of an ignoble nature slavishly to submit themselves to the Antichristian yoke of Rome when as if they would noblely withstand his unjust intrusions upon them they might restore to themselves a Church free from such Babylonish bondage and in some commendable measure imitate the heavenly Hierusalem which is above free and the Mother of us all For though their Consciences be not convinced of Romes Errours yet they may having distinct Provinces within themselves hold Councels ordain Bishops and performe other ecclesiastical rights and duties without being appointed thereunto from Rome or being commanded to give an account thither of their proceedings therein The Bishop of Rome being onely equal to other Sees in a Pastorall institution and lockt up within certain provinciall precincts by decrees of the primitive Councels and let them be sure of this as long as they continue themselves Saints to the Church of Rome they shall be sure to be fed with step-mothers shives whereas if th y would put their Churches under natural and proper heads of their own they might be sure to find more indulgent cherishing and tender care whereby they would in the eyes of their husband look more comely and the French Lillies would more neerly represent Christ his Spouse But I return to the Doctor The Doctor urges that our succession of Bishops in England was last for that it was interrupted by

after Christ and hereupon he has quite spoyled the Doctor for by this means he has hudwinkt his marks of Romes truth to wit Antiquity Universality Unity in Doctrine c. But my Cardinal thinks to salve up this errour by another trick and that almost as gross as this onely this reflects upon the Divinity that upon the Apostles personally He takes upon him to make known to us what was the secret opinion of Peter and Paul c. which have suffered for Religion to wit that they suffered because they wanted power to resist not that it was the will of God they should do so and so he makes the blessed Apostles and holy Martyrs dissemblers speaking one thing and thinking another For saith he as soon as a Prince begins to appear heretical ipso facto though Excommunication be not denounced he shall be put from his Kingdom for as Fame so Heresie gathers strength by going forward Which Axiome of his is verified in this for that since he wrote Bellarmine plows with his heifer and perswades the same Doctrine So that hereby S. Paul is accused of dissimulation That he should bid the Romanes obey for fashion-sake to please the times and so he makes the blessed Apostle an object of scorn not pity That he should be a time-server and yet play his cards so badly that he could not humour Domitius Nero better Is it likely that the Apostles would have commanded others to pray for them if they would have taken their blood if they could Unless these Cardinals would have them like the Presbyters of England who prayed for King Charles whilst their Armies kept him in prison or like Charles the fifth who commanded prayers to be made for Clement the seventh his deliverance and suffered his own Bands to confine him Is it likely S. Peter preaching the Word would bid them submit which Word he said should endure for ever 1 Pet. 1.25 even that Word which was preached amongst them if he knew that it was lawful for them to resist if they had power This were to ascribe want of faith to Peter that God would never deliver his Church out of the hands of Persecutors but suffer her to be always under Tyrants or else that Peter taught one thing and thought another And why should both Peter and Paul press this duty of obedience and submission and that not for wrath but for conscience sake were it lawful to resist This affertion of the Cardinal is therefore gross and impious It is plain by the Scripture that this duty of submission to the Civil power was a precept enjoyned by God not proceeding from any fear the production of a base nature And whenas Paul and Peter did practise and recommend this duty to others it was to give a testimony of their faith in Jesus who as he had laid down his life for them who wanted no power to have withstood the Jews he might have commanded legions of Angels to have come and rescued him out of their hands in obedience to the will of the Father so they as obedient sons of Christ Jesus whom he had in his blood adopted would according to his precepts and example lay down their lives for the testimony of the Gospel Solomon forbade that any should curse the King secretly in his conscience which sure he never would have done if it had been lawful having power to cast him off Saint Jude calls them filthy dreamers that speak evil of Government and despise such as be in Authority I wonder what he would think of those two Cardinals were he alive who would have the Pope drive Kings out of their Kingdomes if he can There are some Roman Catholicks who being with Agrippa half perswaded to be Christians and being touched in Conscience decline these gross absudities of Allen and Bellarmine as being pernitious and tending to the injury of Christ and his A postles and the holy Scripture and in that injurious to the holy Ghost Scripture being nothing else but the dictates of that holy Spirit But yet for all that they are so bewitched to the Roman Faith out of a blind conceit of its Antiquity and therefore of its truth that they will not leave her but strive to justifie her in all things and to excuse this point for that it is a point controverted by some of their owne Church and not yet decreed by any publique Councel nor ever must it be decided may the Pope chuse Besides should it be referred to a Councel there is no credit to be given to the result of that Councel for that none must sit there but such as first must swear to maintain the Pope in the very point to be controverted and so it would be coram non judice or if it should be decreed against his holiness yet by the prerogatives Spiritual of his late Laterane and Trent-assemblies he might notwithstanding repeal that Decree or chuse to obey it for that he is by them declared to be above Councels And till this be rectified this error can receive no reformation from a Councel nor can any satisfaction from thence redound to clear the scruples of any mans conscience in this particular In the mean time Popery is like the Religion of the Pharisees Councels declare one thing de fide the Pope is found contrary de facto so that as our Saviour said of the Pharisees Matth. 23.3 so say I of these Roman Catholicks All that such a Councel should so decree observe and keep but after their works do not for they say and do not The last shift that the Jesuites have to maintain this point of Papal prerogative is The Pope 〈◊〉 a temporal Prince that the Pope is more then the Apostles having acquired a Principality on earth and so by Jus belli he may pull downe one Prince and set up another for say they the Apostles had no charge but onely to preach the Gospel but his holiness the Pope has other fish to fry then what Saint Peter left him he is a temporal Prince he weares a triple Crown he disposes of Kingdomes Crowns Emperours Grants Dispensations sends Indulgences receives Appeals answers Ambassadours takes Homages releases Oaths dissolves Leagues interposes in the Election of Princes has an Emperour to hold his stirrop bring up his first dish a King to serve him at Dinner and many a glorious matter more which Saint Peter never dreamed on so that for him to depose Kings he being more then ever Peter was is no such a strange thing To which I answer 'T is strange so great a Potentate should be thrust up into so little a Corner of the Earth as the Territories of the Papacie are and yet that his Jurisdiction over other Princes should be of such vast latitude I perswade my self that as our Saviour said a Prophet is nothing worth in his owne Country so the Popes power is made more glorious afar off then it is in Italy taken to be whence it is that