Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	church_n	council_n	trent_n	4,509	5	10.5965	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65697	Considerations humbly offered for taking the oath of allegiance to King William and Queen Mary	Whitby, Daniel, 1638-1726.	1689 (1689)	Wing W1720; ESTC R30191	59,750	73

saith That no person or persons shall take any benefit or advantage by this Act which shall hereafter decline from his or their said Allegiance So can they from our Doctrine have no advantage so to do Lastly Our Principles do not concern themselves either with the supposed Title of the Prince of Wales or the supposed defect of Title in King William for do but grant what is plain matter of Fact that neither King James nor the Prince of Wales are in Possession of the Crown of England and that King William and Queen Mary are in Possession of it by the consent and approbation of the Parliament and Faith and true Allegiance for the time being must by our Principles be due unto the latter whatsoever Right or Title may being unto the former FINIS ERRATA PAge 18. line 16. for displeased read displaced p. 31. l. 32. dele of p. 46. l. 5. add resist Books lately Printed for Awnsham Churchill at the Black Swan at Amen-Corner THE Late Lord Russel's Case with Observations upon it Written by the Right Honourable Henry Lord De la Mere. fol. An Historical Account of Making the Penal Laws by the Papists against the Protestants and by the Protestants against the Papists Wherein the true Ground and Reason of Making the Laws is given the Papists most barbarous Usage of the Protestants here in England under a Colour of Law set forth and the Reformation Vindicated from the Imputation of being Cruel and Bloody unjustly cast upon it by those of the Romish Communion By Samuel Blackerby Barrister of Grays-Inn fol. Obedience Due to the Present King notwithstanding our Oaths to the Former Written by a Divine of the Church of England 4º A modest Enquiry Whether St. Peter were ever at Rome and Bishop of that Church wherein I. The Arguments of Cardinal Bellarmine and others for the Affirmative are considered II. Some Considerations taken Notice of that render the Negative higstly Probable 4º The Spirit of France and the Politick Maxims of Lewis XIV laid open to the World. 4º Memorials of the Method and Manner of Proceedings in Parliament in Passing Bills Together with several Rules and Customs which by long and constant Practice have obtained the Name of Orders of the House Gathered by Observation and out of the Journal Books from the time of Edward VI. 8º Dr. Burnet's Tracts in Two Volumes Vol. I. Containing 1. His Travels into Switzerland Italy and Germany with an Appendix 2. Animadversions on the Reflections upon the Travels 3. Three Letters of the Quietists Inquisuion and State of Italy Vol. II. 4. His Translations of Lactantius of the Death of Persecutors 5. His Answers to Mr. Varillas In Three Parts 12º A Collection of Texts of Scripture with short Notes upon them And some other Observations against the Principal Popish Errors 12º The Fallibility of the Roman Church Demonstrated from the manifest Error of the Second Nicene and Trent Councils which Assert That the Veneration and Honorary Worship of Images is a Tradition Primitive and Apostolical 4º A Demonstration that the Church of Rome and her Councils have Erred by shewing That the Councils of Constance Basil and Trent have in all their Decrees touching Communion in one Kind contradicted the Received Doctrine of the Church of Christ with an Appendix in Answer to the XXI Chapter of the Author of A Papist Misrepresented and Represented 4º A Treatise of Traditions Part I. Wherein it is proved That we have Evidence sufficient from Tradition 1. That the Scriptures are the Word of God. 2. That the Church of England owns the true Canon of the Books of the Old Testament 3. That the Copies of the Scripture have not been corrupted 4. That the Romanists have no such Evidence for their Traditions 5. That the Testimony of the present Church of Rome can be no sure Evidence of Apostolical Tradition 6. What Traditions may securely be relied upon and what not 4º A Treatise of Traditions Part II. Shewing the Novelty of the pretended traditions of the Church of Rome as being 1. Not mentioned by the Ancients of their Discourses of Traditions Apostolical truly so called or so esteemed by them Nor 2. In their Avowed Rule or Symbol of Faith. Nor 3. In the Instructions given to the Clergy concerning all those things they were to teach the People Nor 4. In the Examination of a Bishop at his Ordination Nor 5. In the Ancient Treatises designed to instruct Christians in all the Articles of their Faith. 6. From the Confessions of Romish Doctor with an Answer to the Arguments of Mr. Mumford for Traditions and a Demonstration That the Heathens made the same Plea from Tradition as the Romanists do and that the Answer of the Fathers to it doth fully justifie the Protestants 4º All these four Books Written by the Reverend D. Whitby D.D. An Exhortation to Charity and a Word of Comfort to the Irish Protestants Being a Sermon Preached at Steeple in Dorsetshire upon occasion of the Collection for Relief of the Poor Protestants in this Kingdom lately fled from Ireland By Samuel Bold Rector of Steeple 4º THE END

controversia jura Majestatis habent per se singulis civibus nec universis fas est summi principis vitam famam aut fortunas in discrimen vocare sive vi sive judicio constituto id fiat Their Kings have all the Rights of Majesty within themselves and 't is not lawful for any of or all their Subjects to bring their Lives Fame or Fortunes into jeopardy either by force or way of justice But as for the Emperor of Germany Charles the Fifth Tyrannide cives ad Rempublicam oppressit cum jura Majestatis non haberet Divin Dial. par 2. p. 81. He by his Tyranny over his Subjects when he had not the Rights of Majesty forced them to resolve themselves into a Common-wealth And from that of Dr. More That * Lutherus semper docuerat Magistratui non esse resi stendum extabat ejus de hac re libellus cum autem in hac deliberatione periti juris docerent legibus esse permissum resistere nonnunquam nunc in eum asum de quo leges inter alia mentionem faciant rem esse deductam ostenderent Lutherus ingenuè profitetur se nescivisse hoc licere Sleid. Comment l. 8. p. 195. Luther would never assent to the Consederacy of defensive Wars at Smalcald till he was throughly instructed by the learned in the Law touching the Constitution of the Empire of Germany that by the Magna Charta of that Empire the Princes of the Empire are invested with such Rights as if they be violated by the Emperor it is lawful for them to take Arms and resist Sine Rebellionis insidelitatis crimine Without the Crime of Rebellion and Vnfaithfulness and that the Emperor had viovated those Rights Much less are we constrained to fly to such Assertions as these viz. The Homilies of Obedience do no where teach Submission to lawless Violence Mr. J. p. 73. but only to lawful Authority and the Homilies against Rebellin speak not one word of submitting to mauthoritative or lawless Violence Serm. of Obed. Par. 2. p. 72. of Reb. p. 277. Whence it must follow that Princes have lawful Authority to be sharp and rigorous and wrong doers to abuse their power Pag. 74 75. Hom. of Rebel p. 287 288. to do all wrongs and injuries to them who will not obey them against God's Commandments to be mortal Enemies seeking the Lives of their Subjects to be naughty cruel Princes Princes that be to their good Subjects mortal Enemies Princes that are hurtful or like to be hurtful to the Common-wealth For whosoever reads those Homilies honestly and carefully will find in them almost as many Passages as Pages requiring Obedience to such Princes 4. n. 5. We may still with our Forefathers condemn those Romish Doctrines which ascribe unto the Pope a power of crubing the deposing Princes Bish Morton's discovery of the Rom. Doctrine in the Case of Conspiracy and Rebellion p 9 15 19 37. in case of Heresie perverting of Faith and persecution of their Catholick Subjects which pronounce it lawful for Catholioks to break Faith with Hereticks to do evil that good may come to use fraud falshood and injustice treachery and dissimulation for the benefit of holy Church we may as they have done before us condemn those Principles as Rebellious which set up a Democratical or Monarchical Power of People or of Pope over Princes which dissolve the Oath of Obedience to Princes which countenance the violating Faith with men of divers Religions which allow the Doctrine of forcible Deposing of Princes from their Thrones I say We may still do all this without fear of having that of the Apostle retorted on us Thou art inexcusable O Man Rom. ij 1 3. whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self for thou that judgest dost the same things And thinkest thou this O Man that judgest them who do such things and dost the same that thou shalt escape the judgment of God. For we by taking of the Oath of Fidelity and Allegiance to King William and Queen Mary upon this Principle approve of no Democratical Power over our Sovereign Lord the King No forcible deposing of Princes from their Thrones but without farther enquiry after their Right if we find them setled by the Naitons Representatives in quiet Possession of the Throne give them Faith and that Allegiance which our Laws have made due to every King in the Possession of the Realm And lastly we allow of no other Absolution from our former Oaths than that which Casuists of all Perswasions do admit of viz. By the Cessation of the matter of our Oath King James now ceasing to be King in Possession and so in the Law Sence to be our King. 5thly n. 6. We may also retain our old Sence and Exposition of St. Paul and Peter viz. That the present Powers which by the Law are such be they such as duly use or do abuse the Power committed to them such as according to their Duty are the Ministers of God for good Or such as prove eventually the Encouragers of evil Doers are still the Ordinance of God and therefore he that doth resist them shall receive to himself Damnation and are not by our Principles obliged to restrain their words unto such Princes as are in Fact as well as Duty the Ministers of God for good but only to such Princes as by the Tenor of our Law become our Sovereign Lords however they demean themselves in the Exercise of the Government and so we are not concerned in these Objections against the other Interpretation 1. That it rather seems to make the Discourse of these Apostles an Exemption from Subjection and Obedience to the then present Powers and an allowance to them than any Obligation to be subject and obedient to them they being not in Fact as well as Duty the Ministers of God for good but most unnaturally and barbarously Cruel of a most savage bloody Temper as is recorded in the Roman Histories touching Tiberius Claudius Caligula and Nero or if such persons were to be obeyed without Resistance as being the Ministers of God for good who then may be resisted for not being so 2. It plainly seems to lay upon the Blessed Apostles the imputation of Dissimulation and acting not according to that Simplicity and Plainness as might have reasonably been expected from the Discpensers of the Gospel for without any limitation or exception they require every Christian Soul to be subject to the Higher Powers for Conscience sake and upon pain of Damnation never to resist them They declared to the Heathen World That Christianity required all its Professors how ill soever they were treated how cruelly soever they were persecuted how wrongfully soever they did suffer from them to suffer with the greatest patience and never to take up the Sword for their Defence against them but after the Example of their Lord when they thus suffer not to revile