Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	authority_n	scripture_n	tradition_n	2,708	5	9.1860	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79473	Chillingworthi novissima. Or, The sicknesse, heresy, death and buriall of William Chillingworth. (In his own phrase) Clerk of Oxford, and in the conceit of his fellow souldiers, the Queens arch-engineer, and grand-intelligencer. Set forth in a letter to his eminent and learned friends, a relation of his apprehension at Arundell, a discovery of his errours in a briefe catechism, and a shorr [sic] oration at the buriall of his hereticall book. By Francis Cheynell, late fellow of Merton Colledge. Published by authority.	Cheynell, Francis, 1608-1665.	1644 (1644)	Wing C3810; Thomason E36_7; ESTC R13256	46,148	66

Reason in the chaire in stead of Antichrist is dead and gone publish it not in the streets of Askelon that he who did at once batter Rome and undermine England the Reforming Church of England that he might prevent a Reformation is dead lest if you publish it you puzzle all the Conclave and put them to consider whether they should mourne or triumph If any man enquire whether he hath a Tombe-stone as well as an Elegy let him know that we plundered an old Friar of his Tombe-stone and there is roome enough for an Epitaph if they please to send one from Oxford if not give us leave to say we have provided a Sepulchre and it is your fault if you doe not provide a Monument for as Laurentius Valla the master of Elegances observes a Monument is nothing else but a speaking Sepulchre Vixque Monumentum dixerim nisi literae aut alii tituli appareant quae si desint magis sepulchrum quàm monumentum erit Laur. Vall. Elegant lib. 4. cap. 75. If there be any man yet unsatisfied that this great Philosopher Mathematician Oratour and any thing but what he pretended to be a Divine hath had no more honour at his death then a plaine Tombe-stone and such a song of lamentation as was taken up for Saul let him read this following Catechisme and if he be either Papist or Protestant he will be satisfied if he be true to his owne principles A Prophane Catechisme collected out of Mr Chillingworths Works Question HOw shall I be able to prove to an Atheist that there is a God and that the Books of the Old and New Testament are the word of God Answ. When Protestants affirme against Papists that Scripture is a perfect rule of Faith their meaning is not that by Scripture all things Absolutely may be proved which are to be beléeved for it can never bée proved by Scripture to a gain sayer that there is a God or that the Book called Scripture is the word of God for as he saith a little before nothing is proved true by being said or written in a Book but only by Tradition which is a Thing credible of it selfe chap. 1. p. 55. Sect. 8. the first Edition approved at Oxford Doubtlesse the Atheists and Papists will give him hearty thanks for this answer which doth preferre Tradition which the Atheist vilifies before Scripture which the Papists vilifie he hath pleased them both The Papists will bee well pleased to see this doctrine licensed by the Protestants of the University of Oxford that Tradition is more credible then Scripture for Tradition is credible for it selfe but the Scripture when it is to be proved a perfect Rule to us is credible only by Tradition in Mr Chillingworths conceit pag. 96. and where shall we meet with this universall Tradition 2. But I finde another answer pag. 53. Tradition may be helped out by naturall Reason Controversies wherein the Scripture it selfe is the subject of the question cannot be determined saith Mr Chillingworth but by Naturall Reason the only principle beside Scripture which is common to Christians cap. 2. sect. 3. And in his marginall observations on a passage of Mr Hookers he layes downe this as a Rule Naturall Reason then built on principles common to all men is the last Resolution pag. 65. Nay Reason is in some sort Gods word see his answer to the Preface pag. 21. How then will the Atheist say is Reason credible for it selfe since Mr Chillingworth saith that Gods word is not credible for it selfe Surely these answers will never bring a man to divine faith for to rely upon Tradition is but to rely upon Humane testimony and such as the testimony is such is the faith if the testimony which is the ground of faith be humane then the faith cannot be divine Againe naturall Reason is not infallible nor is it able to judge of truths which are above Reason now it is cleare that supernaturall truths are above naturall Reason Finally faith is not grounded upon Reason but upon Authority He gives a third answer chap. 1. pag. 36. God hath confirmed the doctrine of the Scripture by miracles but then he saith we have nothing to assure us of the truth of those miracles but Tradition and therefore we are not got one steppe nearer faith or Heaven by that shift and if he flie back to Reason then consider what he saith pag. 117. God hath no where commanded men to beleeve all that Reason induceth them to beleeve Qu. But if this great point must be tried by Reason what Reason can you produce to prove the Scripture to be the word of God An. There is as good reason for it as there is to beléeve other stories or matters of Tradition He requires men to yeeld just such a kinde or degree of assent to the Gospel of Christ as they yeeld to other stories or matters of Tradition chap. 1. pag. 37. for God desires us only to beleeve the conclusion as much as the premises deserve ib. sect. 8. p. 36. And the Chronicle of England joyned with the generall tradition of our acquaintance deserves as much credit in Mr Chillingworths conceit as the Gospel of Christ for his words are these chap. 2. sect. 159. p. 116. 117. Wee have I beleeve as great reason to beleeve there was such a man as Henry the eighth King of England as the Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate The Lord rebuke that spirit of errour which moved the great men of Oxford to license this blasphemy What have I no more reason to beleeve the three persons in the holy Trinity speaking in their glorious Gospel to my heart and conscience then I have to beleeve Stowes Chronicle or the generall tradition of my owne acquaintance or some such other fallible testimony Qu. But what if I cannot be assured that any part of the Scripture is the word of God may I be saved without beleeving this weighty point An. Yes saith Mr. Chillingworth chap. 2. sect. 159. if a man should beléeve Christian Religion wholly and entirely and live according to it such a man though he should not know or not beléeve the Scripture to be a Rule of faith no nor to be the word of God my opinion is he may be saved Excellent Divinity indeed what is not this a principle of Christianity that Scripture is the word of God and rule of faith and if it be how then is it possible for a man to beleeve the Christian Religion wholly and entirely and yet not beleeve this principle Yes I may beléeve the Scripture as I doe Augustins works pag. 114. Qu. But if I am assured that some Scripture is the word of God how shall I know what books are Canonicall and what not An. By universall Tradition I must receive those books for Canonicall of whose Authority there was never any doubt or question in the Church pag. 148. I may then it seems doubt of the Epistle of James the second of Peter

the second and third Epistles of John the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of Jude the book of the Revelation the books of Job Esther Ecclesiastes c. He saith he cannot in reason so undoubtedly beleeve those books to be Canonicall which have beene questioned as those which were never questioned At least I have no warrant to damne any man that shall deny them now having the example of Saints in Heaven either to justifie or excuse such their deniall chap. 2. sect. 38. pag. 67. Surely here is a pretty tempting excuse for if not a justification of those Libertines who question these books and may upon Mr Chillingworths principles question all the rest if they acknowledge one of the Gospels that containes as much as all the rest Ergo that is sufficient pag. 93. 101. But if they beleeve no booke to be Canonicall and therefore will not assent to any book of Scripture they doe not commit a sinne of derogation from Gods perfect and pure veracity for he onely gives God the lye who denies some book or point which he himselfe knowes or beleeves to be revealed by God chap. 3. sect. 15 16 17. Now it is impossible that a man should know one thing to be true and beleeve the contrary or know it and not beleeve it sect. 18. Whither these and the like principles which frequently occurre in his writings tend let the most sober and charitable men judge The only Fundamentall Errour in Mr Chillingworths judgement is to deny something which the party himselfe knowes or beleeves to be revealed by God and therefore in his judgement none but downe-right Atheists erre fundamentally cap. 2. p. 135. 136. Atheisme then as the Jesuites and Arminians conceive is the formality of an Heretick p. 100. for it is down-right Atheisme for any man to deny that to be true which he acknowledges to be spoken by the God of truth Qu. But if I doe beleeve the Scripture to be Gods word is it necessary to beleeve that controversies are to be decided by that Word An. No saith Mr Chillingworth this is no Fundamentall point his words are full I say that this position Scripture alone is the rule whereby they which beleeve it to bee Gods word are to judge all controversies in faith is no Fundamentall point chap. 2. pag. 115. His intent is by this assertion to make good a dreame of his that some controversies in faith need not be judged or determined at all Mr Chillingworth pretends that he holds the Scripture to be a perfect rule of faith and yet he saith it is not necessary to judge all controversies and those no small ones because they are controversies in faith by that perfect rule It is a perfect rule but we need not be ruled by it in all points of faith Qu. But is there then any other way to decide controversies which hath any colour of probability from the Scripture An. Yes nine or ten severall meanes of agreement offered themselves to Mr Chillingworth upon the sudden and haply more might have beene thought on if he had had time and these that are offered have as much probability from Scripture as that which Papists obtrude upon us And truly he was such a ready blasphemer that he could vent extemporary blasphemies yet such as the Licentious men at Oxford approved chap. 3. pag. 130. 131. First he saith we could if we would try it by lots whose Doctrine is true and whose false for which he cites Prov. 16. 33. It may be this Sophister did cast lots for his Religion and it was his hard lot to draw Popery first then Arminianisme and then his doctrine run lower and lower till it came almost to the very dregs of Socinianisme Secondly we could referre it to the King Prov 16. 10. and 21. 1. Mr Chillingworth might make merry with his owne prophane doctrine but I admire that he should dare to sport himselfe with the Majesty of Scripture and the Majesty of the King But truly I am afraid that some are so indifferent in point of Religion that they are content not only to referre it to the King but to the Queene It were proper for them to vent such Doctrine who have as the old Tradition and proverbe hath it taken an oath to be of the Kings Religion Thirdly to an Assembly of Christians assembled in the name of Christ Math. 18. 20. Let them not then blame the Parliament for consulting an Assembly of learned and pious Christians and most of them Ministers of the Gospel assembled in the name of Christ Fourthly to any Priest Malach. 2. 7. This makes well of the Queens side Fifthly to any Preacher of the Gospel Pastour or Doctour Math. 28. 20. Sure Mr Chillingworth was more independent then they that are commonly so called Sixthly to any Bishop or Prelate why not then to the Bishop of Rome for it is written Obey your Prelates Heb. 13. 17. Mr Chillingworth since his pretended conversion was very apt to be seduced by the vulgar or Rhemish translation or some version received at Saint Omers but this was a voluntary and devised meanes as he saith in the same page Seventhly to any particular Church of Christians seeing it is a particular Church which is called the house of God a pillar and ground of truth 1 Tim. 3. 15. and seeing of any particular Church it is written He that heareth not the Church let him be unto thee an Heathen Matth. 18. Mr Chillingworth is sometimes Prelaticall and sometimes Congregationall Eighthly we might referre it to any man that prayes for Gods spirit for it is written every one that asketh receives this is one steppe beyond the Brownists Matth. 7. 8. James 1. 5. Lastly we might referre it to the Jewes for without all doubt of them it is written My spirit that is in thee c. Isaiah 59. 21. And why not to the Socinians they have naturall reason a very competent Judge in Mr Chillingworths conceit What wonder is it that so many blasphemies and quibbles for every quibble upon Scripture is a blasphemy should be licensed by grave and learned Professours of Divinity what if Papists take liberty to blaspheme and put the Scripture upon the rack to force it to confesse what makes for their turn must Protestants or such a one who undertakes the common Cause of Protestants though he was no Protestant bee permitted to blaspheme by the Licence of an University Repent deare Doctors once more repent and I will proceed Qu. But how shall I know the true sense of Scripture there being such variety of conceits which passe for Interpretations Answ Here help mee Reason again and Implicit Faith For the last Resolution of my Faith in his conceit must be into Reason page 65. 96. and still he labours to prove that Reason is Judge and he frequently jeares at Knot for accounting it an absurdity for every man and woman to rely upon their Reason in the interpreting of Scripture p. 98. Reasons drawn