Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	america_n	asia_n	europe_n	2,462	5	15.3336	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A03334	The first motiue of T.H. Maister of Arts, and lately minister, to suspect the integrity of his religion which was detection of falsehood in D. Humfrey, D. Field, & other learned protestants, touching the question of purgatory, and prayer for the dead. VVith his particular considerations perswading him to embrace the Catholick doctrine in theis, and other points. An appendix intituled, try before you trust. Wherein some notable vntruths of D. Field, and D. Morton are discouered.	Higgons, Theophilus, 1578?-1659.	1609 (1609)	STC 13454; ESTC S104083	165,029	276

and other hereticks 8. And here you may perceiue the singular falsehood of M. † in apolog Iewell pretending that they whom Papists do contumeliously call Lutherans and Zwinglians are truly FRIENDS and BRETHREN For as S. Luther himself would by no meanes permitt the name of BRETHREN vnto the Zwinglian but repelled them for hereticks as he testifieth in a certain * cited by Brentius in Recognit c. pag. 276. epistle so † ibid. pag. 282. Brentius and Melancthon resolued that they could not acknowledge them to be their brethren in regard of their impious and vayn opinions And though the judgement of Melancthon chandged as the moone whence his name is * See the examen of Fox his calendar chap. 16. num 72. 7● c. odious vnto the truest disciples of Luther yet the Lutheran part of the Synod holden at Maulbrune 1564. make this declaration Whereas the Zwinglians haue deliuered abroad that we agnize them to be our BRETHREN this is fayned by them so impudently that we cannot sufficiently admire their impudency herein For as we grant them no place in the Church so we do not take them to be our brethren whom we haue found to be caried with the spiritt of lies and to be contumelious against the Sonne of man 9. Theis things are very playn and therefore I referr the decision of this whole matter vnto your self let your owne heart be the oracle whence you may assume a faithfull resolution And if your conscience shall assure you that the LIKE differences were not betwixt the ancients as are and were betwixt the primitiue fathers and brethren of your ghospell then iudge of your Doctours fidelity wherein you haue formerly had such a firme repose 10. I come vnto a SECOND pretense of your learned Doctour saying that the Papists themselues haue diuisions and differences pag. 168. c. and that therefore nothing can be concluded against the Protestants or for the Papists from the note of Vnity or from diuision which is opposite thereunto 11. But this poore recrimination can yeald you no defence For if the ey may be a iudge in this case we see a comfortable harmony in the Catholick Church the same doctrine preached the same Sacraments administred the same gouernment established But as your Ecclesiasticall gouerment in England in Scotland in Heluetia in Saxony is distinct so the doctrines betwixt your sayd Churches conspire not in some essentiall poynts In a word The Catholicks in Asia Africk Europe America haue a iust correspondency in faith but the Protestants in Europe for in it and some part of it alone are they confined haue great diuersity in faith and one faction doth prosecute the other with Vatinian hatred 12. Wherefore a THIRD pretense which your learned Doctour doth affect against the certainty of our experience will easily refute itself VVe want not a most certayn rule sayth * D. Field pag. 169. he whereby to iudge of all matters of controuersy and difference to witt the Scripture or written word of God expounded according to the rule of faith practise of the Saints and the due † Ad alium scripturae locum recurrendum est non expectanda hominis sententia ad litē dirimendam sayth Zwingl tom 2. in respons●ad epist Eckij comparing of one part of it with an other in the publick confessions of faith published by the Churches of our confession In all which there is a full consent whatsoeuer our malicious aduersaries clamorously pretend to the contrary c. 13. If this rule be most certayn how commeth it to passe that the difference betwixt Lutherans and Caluinists standeth vncōposed at this day Why did * See loc cō Luth. part 5. pag. 52. Luther pronounce so seuerely that the Anabaptists and Sacramentaries contemne the WORD howsoeuer they make a shew of religion Why did Zwinglius so peremptorily affirme that Luther oppressed the Euangelicall truth Why did M. Cartwright so constantly protest that the Church of England is destitute of one moity of the word Finally why do all your sects as well the supreame of Lutherans and Caluinists as the subordinate factious in each cry out continually the word the word and yet no rule hath drawen them vnto a conformity of sense therein 14. Giue me leaue therefore to except against the pretended rule of D. Field for three respects FIRST because the Principle of your religion excludeth the meanes of reconciliation viz. the grauity of Councells the dignity of Fathers the authority of the Church For though D. Field in his epistle vnto the Archb. of Cant. doth iudiciously aduise all men to rest in the iudgement of the Church and sayth elswhere that you admitt a triall by the Fathers yet your ghospellers haue not accepted nor practised this direction It is not accepted by you for Clebitius to name one amongst many setting downe the lawes of a Synod betwixt the Lutherans and Zwinglians sayth precisely Solum Dei verbum sit iudex let the word of God be the onely iudge Likewise Zwinglius deliuereth this assertion against the Catholicks we will endure no other iudge but the word alone Now where is the meanes to define the questions of religion See F. Cam● piās fourth reason and compare it with the assertion of D. Field pag. 168. viz. the authority of a Councell is not the if the Church of God represented in a lawfull Councell hath not authority to iudge of the sense of Scripture and to oblige men to rest in hir decision But this prescription is not practised by you for you receiue the ancient Oecumenicall Councells with this restriction as farr as they agree with the scripture and so euery man is left vnto his owne choyce to determine whether this or that particular in the Councell be agreable vnto the scripture or not Notwithstanding this liberty is not permitted by your Bishopps vnto their owne inferiours for they know what inconuenience would follow by leauing the * Ministers vnto that vncertayn limitation and so they presume to require more duty of their children then they dare yeald vnto their Fathers but with what equity and indifferency your wisedome may easily conceiue as also how the vnity such as it is in your Church proceedeth onely from the vigour of law and not from the principles of Religion 15. My SECOND exception against D. Fields pretended rule is taken from a consideration of your persons which haue not that subordination which is requisite in this behalf For lib. 1. ep 3. whereas S. Cyprian doth excellently obserue that heresies arise from no other cause then that the Priest of God is not obayed and that men think not of one Priest and Iuge in stead of Christ it is most euident that heresies will increase daily in your Churches and no conclusion of peace can possibly ensue because there is not submission of judgement nor subjection of spirit nor vnion of members vnto their head Lutherans seeke