Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
doctrine_n apostle_n church_n primitive_a 4,139 5 9.1134 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45460 A reply to the Catholick gentlemans answer to the most materiall parts of the booke Of schisme whereto is annexed, an account of H.T. his appendix to his Manual of controversies, concerning the Abbot of Bangors answer to Augustine / by H. Hammond. Hammond, Henry, 1605-1660. 1654 (1654) Wing H598; ESTC R9274 139,505 188

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Elizabeths reformation To which head of discourse it is not amisse to adde the resolution of Cudsemius the Jesuite de desper Calvini causà cap. 11. that the English Nation are not Hereticks because they remain in a perpetual succession of Bishops Num. 4 Which being the onely thing that in that Sect. 16. I purposed to conclude from Mr. Masons worke and the Records by him produced it lyes not on me to prove that they which ordained those Queen Eilzabeth-Bishops gave them order to preach the Doctrine they after did or to examine the truth of his suggestion that this is the true meaning and effect of Mission It may suffice that they which consecrated them gave them the same power which themselves derived by succession from the Apostles and that was sufficient to authorize them to preach all Apostolical doctrine and if they preacht any other let it appeare and I shall never justifie their preaching But that is not attempted here and therefore I have herein no farther matter that exacts reply from me Num. 5 For as to his parting blow which he cannot omit in reply to Sect 20. certainly it hath little impression on my discourse in that place which doth not inquire what is unlawful or criminous Universally for then sure I should have acknowledged that the bringing in Turcisme or violating fundamental points of Religion had been such but peculiarly and precisely this what is Schisme in that one notion of Schisme as that is a voluntary separation from our Ecclesiastical Superiours of which that we are not or cannot be guilty when we act in perfect concord compliance and subordination to all those to whom the right of superiority legally belonged is I suppose so manifest that it can need no farther proof Num. 6 As for any such act of lawful Superiors in bringing in Turcisme or violating fundamental points I should not be apt to style that Schisme any more than I would call perjury lying or incest simple fornication it being in the first part of the instance Apostasie and total defection from Christ which I hope is a little more than denying the Popes Vniversal Pastorship or Infallibility of the Church in which consists his grand species of Schisme and in the second Heresie and the grossest sort of Schisme together that of departing from the unity of the Faith which being by me Chap. 8. distinctly handled as a second species of schisme all that I need here say to this Gentleman's exception is that I indevoured to speak as distinctly and not as confusedly as I could and therefore did not mix things that were distant and therefore did not speak of that second kinde of schisme at the same time when I proposed to speak of the first onely and upon this account onely said nothing to it in that Chapter And I hope this was but my duty to doe agreeably to all rules of method and so that he might very well have spared that animadversion which he saith he could not end without noting CHAP. VIII An Answer to the Exceptions made to the eighth Chapter Sect. I. The Division of Schisme An Answer to many Questions about Schism A retortion Num. 1 IN proceeding to the view of Chap. 8. this Gentleman without any cause is pleased to change the division of the second sort of schisme there handled into another which it seems was more sutable to his understanding and then to make two light skirmishes against the discourse of that Chapter He begins thus Num. 2 In his 8th Chapter as farre as I understand he divideth Schisme into formal that is breach of unity and material that is breach of Doctrine or Customes in which the Church was united the former he brancheth into subordination to the Pope of which enough hath been said and breach of the way provided by Christ for maintaining the unity of faith the which he puts in many subordinations without any effect For let us ask if inferior Clergie-men dissent from their own Bishops but not from their Metropolitan in matter of faith is it Schisme he will answer No If a Metropolitan dissent from his Primate but agree with the rest of the Patriarchs is it schisme I think he must say No If a Patriarch dissent from the first but agree with the rest is it schisme No If a Nation or a Bishop dissent from the rest of the General Councel is it schism still I believe he will answer No Where then is schisme provided against or where truly is there any subordination in Faith if none of these are subject and bound to their Superiors or Vniversals in matters of faith Num. 3 What my division there is will be obvious enough to any man's understanding In the third Chap the foundation had been laid in the opposition betwixt Schisme and Ecclesiastical Vnity and as the unity was the conserving all due relations whether of subordination or equality wherein each member of Christ's Church is concerned one toward another so there were two prime branches of schisme the one against the subordination which Christ setled in his Church the second against the mutual charity which he left as his Legacy among Christians And the former of these being discussed at large in order to the present debate in the 8. Chapter the method led me to the latter of them to consider Schisme as it is an offence against the mutual unity Peace and Charity which Christ left and prescribed among Christians And that I might be sure not to streighten the bounds of this sort of Schism or omit any thing that can by any rule of discourse be placed in the borders or confines of it by the meanes either to lay charge on us or render our Vindication the clearer I distributed it into as many parts as in my opinion the matter could by any be thought to beare i. e. into three species 1. A breach in the Doctrines or Traditions together with the institutions of Christ his Apostles and the Primitive Church whether in government or observances 2. An offence against external peace or communion Ecclesiastical 3. The want of that Charity which is due from every Christian to every Christian The first of these againe subdivided and considered 1. in the grosse as it is a departing from the rules appointed by Christ for the founding and upholding unity of Doctrine c. 2. in particular the asserting of any particular doctrine contrary to Christ's and the Apostolical pure Churches establishment Num. 4 The Scheme being thus laid as regular and as comprehensive as I could devise 1. here is not one word said to expresse any cause of dislike or exception to it and yet 2. it is quite laid aside and another of formal and material Schisme c. substituted instead of it upon what temptation or designe save onely a willingnesse to gaine somewhat by the shuffle and confusion more than the distinctnesse of discourse could yeild him I cannot divine Num. 5 As it is I yet discern not
to give Lawes and those Lawes oblige Subjects to obedience and yet that Prince never be imagined infallible in making Lawes And natural reason cannot conclude it impossible that a Church should have a proportionable power given it by God to binde belief c. Num. 12 As for the Catholick or Roman Church 1. that is a misprision the Catholick is not the single Roman Church nor the Roman the Catholick 2. There no where appears any such definition either of the Catholick i. e. Vniversall Church of God or particularly of the Roman Church no act of Councell representative of that Church no known affirmation of that diffused body under the Bishop of Rome's Pastorage that all authority to oblige belief is founded in Infallibility 3. If any such definition did appear it could no way be foundation of belief to us who doe not believe that Church or any definition thereof as such to be infallible Num. 13 2. If we shall but distinguish and limit the termes 1. what is meant by can lie 2. By knowing or not knowing whether it lie or no 3. By power to binde 4 By belief as every of these have a latitude of signification and may be easily mistaken till they are duly limited It will then soon appear that there is no unlimited truth in that which he saith is the whole Churches affirmation nor prejudice to our pretensions from that limited truth which shall be found in it Num. 14 1. The phrase can lie may denote no more than such a possibility of erring as yet is joyned neither with actuall error nor with any principle whether of deficiency on one side nor of malignity on the other which shall be sure to betray it into error Thus that particular Church that is at the present in the right in all matters of faith and hath before it the Scripture to guide it in all its decisions together with the traditions and doctrines of the antient and Primitive Church and having skill in all those knowledges which are usefull to fetch out the true meaning of Scripture and ability to inquire into the antient path and to compare her self with all other considerable parts of the Vniversall Church and then is diligent and faithfull to make use of all these succours and in uprightness of heart seeks the truth and applies it self to God in humble and ardent and continuall prayer for his guidance to lead into all truth This Church I say is yet fallible may affirm and teach false i. e. this is naturally possible that it may but it is not strongly probable that it will as long as it is thus assisted and disposed to make use of these assistances and means of true defining Num. 15 2. That Churches knowledge whether it define truly or no in any proposition may signifie no more than a full perswasion or belief cui non subest dubium wherein they neither doubt nor apprehend reason of doubting that what they define is the very truth though for knowledge properly so called or assurance cui non potest subesse falsum which is unerrable or infallible in strictness of speech it may not have attained or pretend to have attained to it Num. 16 3. By power to binde may be meant no more than authority derived to them from the Apostles of Christ to make decisions when difficulties arise to prescribe rules for ceremonies or government such as shall oblige inferiors to due observance and obedience by force of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his precept to obey the rulers set over us in the Church which we may doe without thinking them simply or by any promise of God inerrable or infallible as the obedience which is due to civil Magistrates which supposes in them a power of binding subjects to obey doth yet no way suppose or imply them uncapable of erring and sinning and giving unreasonable commands and such as wherein it is unlawfull to yeild obedience to them Num. 17 Beside this there may farther be meant by it a generall obligation that lies on all men to believe what is with due grounds of conviction proposed to them such as the disbelieving or doubting of it shall be in them inseparable from obstinacy and this obligation is again the greater when that which is thus convincingly proposed is proposed by our superiors from whose mouth it is regular to seek and receive Gods will Num. 18 Lastly Believing may signifie not an implicite irrational blinde but a well-grounded rationall explicite belief of that which as the truth of God is duely proposed to us or again where there is not that degree of manifestation yet a consent to that which is proposed as most probable on the grounds afforded to judge by or when the person is not competent to search grounds a bare yeilding to the judgment of superiours and deeming it better to adhere to them than to attribute any thing to their own judgment a believing so farre as not to disbelieve And this again may rationally be yeilded to a Church or the Rulers and Governors of it without deeming them inerrable or infallible Num. 19 Nay where the proposition defined is such that every member of that Church cannot without violence to his understanding yeild any such degree of belief unto it yet he that believes it not may behave himself peaceably and reverently either duely representing his grounds why he cannot consent to it or if his subscription or consent be neither formally nor interpretatively required of him quietly enjoy his contrary opinion And this may tend as much to the peace and unity of a Church as the perswasion of the inerrability thereof can be supposed to doe Num. 20 By this view of the latitude of these terms and the limitations they are capable of it is now not so difficult to discern in what sense the proposition under consideration is false and in what sense it is true and by us acknowledged to be so Num. 21 A congregation that is fallible and hath no knowledge or assurance cui non potest subesse falsum that it is not deceived in any particular proposition may yet have authority to make decisions c. and to require inferiors so farre to acquiesce to their determinations as not to disquiet the peace of that Church with their contrary opinions Num. 22 But for any absolute infallible belief or consent that no Church which is not it self absolutely infallible and which doth not infallibly know that it is infallible hath power to require of any Num. 23 By this it appears in the next place in what sense it is true which in the following words is suggested of Protestants that they binde men to a Profession of Faith and how injustly it is added that supposing them not to be infallibe it is unjust tyrannical and self-condemnation to the binders The contrary whereto is most evident understanding the obligation with that temper and the infallibity in that notion wherein it is evident we understand
the fift Age these lovers of truth will stand to it but not to the fourth Age precedent or that very Age in which it was held so humble they are to submit to any authority that toucheth not the questions in present controversie but where doe they finde Christ's Church shall be judge in three Ages and fail in the fourth or that the Councels in the fift Age shall be sound but not the Fathers Num. 3 It is very hard it seems to please this Gentleman Our humility is one while by him censured as really too great another while the want of it is our crime and we equally to be scoffed at on both accounts Num. 4 It is a criminous excesse of humility forsooth to submit to those of whom we first professe not to know that they are infallible But as long as we doe verily believe they doe actually affirm truth why may we not submit to them though we know not that they are infallible For certainly I may submit to my natural or civil parent in this manner obey him in all his commands supposing as now I doe that none of his commands are by me apprehended to be unlawful as none of these Councels definitions as by us believed to be contrary to the Word and Will of God though yet I neither account him inerrable nor impeccable But of this I have spoken already Chap I. Sect. 3. Num. 5 What he adds of holding under pain of damnation what they say is in this place an insertion of this Gentleman's no word being said of it in that section to which his words are confronted and having elsewhere spoken to that I abstain from adding more at this time Num. 6 In the next place it seems our humility is too scanty for when I have submitted to be judged by the scriptures the consent of the first 300 years or the four General Councels whether we have departed from the Apostolical doctrines or traditions this saith he is submitting to Ages where very few witnesses can be found c. But I desire it may be remembred what there I speak of for perhaps this Gentleman's haste hath not permitted him to advert to it the contesting or innocence in this that we of the Church of England have not departed from the Apostolick doctrine and traditions And for this whether could the appeal more properly be directed than to the scriptures the Conservatorie of the Apostles written doctrine and the three first Centuries the conservatorie of their traditions It being unimaginable that any thing should be so per saltum conveyed to us from the Apostles as to leap over those three Centuries next to them without leaving any footstep discernible among them Num. 7 For let the witnesses of those times the authors that remain to us be never so few yet unlesse by some of their hands we be directed what the Apostles delivered to them how can we know what was delivered It being all one in this respect not to be as not to appear Tradition even Apostolical being no more than an empty name unlesse we suppose our selves able to avouch some competent testifiers of the Tradition Num. 8 And if to these two I have added the four General Councels because they were held against the great disturbers of the unity of the Faith and they maintained the true faith by these two special weapons the Scriptures and Tradition testified by the first Writers and our Church hath taken in their Creed● into our Liturgies and their definitions into our Articles of religion and so I have by that appeal so farre testified our non departure from the Faith I hope there is no offence in this no degree of defect in our humility Num. 9 As for the little occasion these first had to speak of the present controversies that sure cannot be objected against our procedure any more than the paucity of the Authors could for if the Romanist doe but grant this one thing it will be found a real prejudice to his pretensions if which was the point in hand the question be whether the Church of England have departed from the unity of the Apostolick Faith denied any Apost●lick Doctrine or Tradition Num. 10 For in this Controversie how shall it be proved that we have departed unlesse that Doctrine or Tradition being specified what it is it be evidenced also that it was delivered by the Apostles and how can that be evidenced but by those which within some competent distance of their time affirm that from them and how can they be pretended to affirm that if it be granted of them that they had no occasion to speak of it and so are utterly silent in it Num. 11 To his last note of humility i. e. the next expression of his scoptical humor there can be no need of applying any answer it being no where intimated in that Treatise that we are not ready to stand to the fourth Age or that wherein the fourth Councel was held All that was said was that the three first Ages and the four General Councels were competent witnesses of the Apostolical doctrines and traditions and I desire any man to name any other that were more competent to this purpose i. e. to testifie what the Apostles taught It being certain that whosoever doth not by inspiration tell us any thing of that kinde must assume to tell it from them and as evident that all those things that even now were spoken of which the Apostles resolved on as heads of special force to form religion and Christian life were by this means conveyed to us Num. 12 Mean while other matters there are which we look on as additaments to the doctrines of Faith and so are the subject of a double question 1. whether they be parts of that faith which was once or at once delivered to the saints 2. whether not appearing to be so there be any other just reason to believe though but by an humane Faith that they have any truth in them Num. 13 Now of these two questions as the resolution of the former depends upon those Ages which alone can conveigh Tradition to the succeeding and so still for that we referre our selves to the former Vmpirage so of the second I did not then because I had not occasion to speak in that place Num. 14 And if my answer be required now I shall readily give it that in matters of this nature the Opinions of the Fathers of the Church in the most flourishing Ages of it wherein their writings are most voluminous and their Learning in Theologie most venerable are with us of great weight and consideration we doe and shall upon all occasions demonstrate our selves to allow them as full an authority pay as great and true a reverence to their judgments indevour as uniformly to conform our selves to the declarations of their sense as any sober Romanists are by us discerned to doe or as it can be their interest to doe in respect of the controversies
matter still divolves as it did in the tract of Schisme to that one question whether the Bishop of Rome had at that time any real authority here which the King might not lawfully remove from him to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and must be decided as there it is by the view of Evidences whether that pretended from Peters Vniversal Pastorship or that from Augustines planting Christianity here or that from the voluntary con●ession of some Kings and each of them is so disproved there that till some competent answer be rendered to those particulars which certainly is not yet done by this Gentleman who onely here tells us the manner how he relyes on each of these and the possession they had of the beliefe that the Pope was head of the Vniversal Church 't is perfectly unnecessary farther to consider what is here added onely to inflame passions but not to satisfie Conscience to exasperate not to argue Num. 9 For what if moderate Protestants should truly curse the day c. or in a more Christian dialect expresse their dislike to the great Sacrilege and some other enormities which were committed in that Princes reigne what prejudice will this be to any lawful exercise of that regal power 'T is certaine that all the Acts of a bad Prince are not invalid or null and much more evident still that he that hath not offended in assuming the power which really belongs to him may by being denyed that be inraged and laid open to importune Temptations and if he be not a through Christian constant and masterly fall and that foulely under those temptations And if Henry VIII did so still this is very extrinsecall to the present inquiry whether he as King had power to remove a Patriarchy and by that to remove all forraigne jurisdiction or authority out of this Church Num. 10 All that remaines in this Section farther to be spoken to is the possession that is here pleaded not in the power it selfe if it were that hath formerly been spoken to but in the beliefe that the Pope as successor to S. Peter is head and Governour of the Vniversal Church This beliefe saith he they have been in possession of ever since the Conversion of our English Ancestors till King Henry and for this beside his own bare affirmation he brings no other proofe than one testimony of Na●ier on the Revelation confessing that the Church of Rome hath borne a sway over the Christian world above 1200. yeares Num. 11 And 1. for this kinde of Possession possession in the beliefe of any thing any farther than that which is believed is true and that appeare some other way than by our having so long believed it certainly this is no matter of any deep consideration to us If it still appeare to be true upon grounds of reason those grounds are the considerable and not the beliefe And if the grounds be discovered to be fallacious and the contrary to be more reasonable to be believed then sure this hath but the advantage of an Antient error and the older it is the fitter not to be longer continued in it must be immediately deposited And against this or instead of doing thus to talke of possession is unnatural and irrational the same plea that may serve for any sinne that hath had the luck to get the first hold in us the same that would certainly have held for all the Idolatry of the Heathens when Christ came into the world And he that hath long lived in obscurity and misery he and his Ancestors for many years together and were now offered an advancement out of that sad condition would he ever be so unkinde to himselfe as to refuse that offer upon this one account because it is the turning him out of a possession This prescribing for Error and prescribing for Sin and prescribing for Misery are in effect the same equally unnatural and irrational supposing it to be truly Error and Sinne and Misery which we treat of Num. 13 But then secondly waving this and applying our selves to the particular before us how doth it appeare that the Romanist hath been in possession in this beliefe so long as he pretends He here brings but one Testimony to confirme it that of Napier But for this testimony the answer is easie that the affirmations or confessions of such as Napier was and is by this Gentleman acknowledged to be in their arguing against the credit of Antiquity or to make good other hypotheses of theirs are of as little authority with us as I suppose they will be with them when they are contrary to their pretensions or interests Secondly that the Popes bearing a sway over the Christian world is not interpretable to signifie his Vniversal Pastorship The Bishop of the Prime imperial See may justly be very considerable and so beare a sway but it follows not thence that his ordinary jurisdiction hath been thus extended to the whole Christian world Num. 14 Nay thirdly the contrary to this hath been sufficiently evidenced Chap 4. and 5. both as concernes Saint Peter himselfe and the Bishop of Rome as successor to Saint Peter and till those evidences are refuted the affirmation of Napier being so imperfect and infirme both in respect of the testifier and the matter of the testimony will be very unfit to bear sway with any rational man Num. 15 And so the whole weight of this argument prest with so much confidence is resolved into the bare authority of the Speaker this Gentleman who saith it that ever since the conversion of the English Nation the Romanists have had possession of this beliefe that the Pope as successor to Saint Peter is Governour of the Vniversal Church Num. 16 And that I may apply some answer yet more particularly to this I shall premise one thing that if indeed this were granted which is suggested it would not be of any great force toward the inducing of this conclusion that the Pope really was and is Vniversal Pastor For supposing the Pope to have assumed that authority at the time of Augustine the Monke his coming into England and making his plantation and supposing him to have preacht this to King Ethelbert and the rest of his Proselites with the same gravity and confidence that he used in imparting all the Doctrines of Christian Faith in the same manner as Xaverius the Apostle of the Indics imparted to them two Gospels the one of Christ the other of Saint Peter I shall not doubt but upon these grounds it would be very consequent that all that willingly imbraced the preaching of Augustine and had no other Doctrine to compare it with or examine it by should probably receive this branch of beliefe and so all others from and after them that insisted firmely and punctually on Augustine's way and thus 't is possible the possession of that belief might be continued till the dayes of Hen. VIII Num. 17 But then this is no proofe that what in this particular Augustine