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	prove_v	true_a	11,261	5	5.6436	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80765	The disputes between Mr. Cranford, and Dr. Chamberlen. At the house of Mr. William Webb, at the end of Bartholomew Lane, by the Old Exchange: on March 1. 1652, and April 1. 6. 13. / Published for the satisfaction of all that love the truth.	Cranford, James, d. 1657.; Chamberlen, Peter, 1601-1683.	1652 (1652)	Wing C6822; Thomason E666_6; ESTC R206920	19,015	40

are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Conclusion Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mr. Cranf denyed the Minor to wit That the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Dr. Chamb. proved it Ma. They that are not formed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not formed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are transformed as the Ministers of Righteousnesse The Minor was denyed which was thus proved Ma. They that are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist are not formed as the Ministers of Jesus Christ Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist Conclus Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are not formed as the Ministers of Jesus Christ The Minor was againe to be proved Ma. They that are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are formed as the Ministers of Antichrist The Mi. was againe denyed and thus proved Ma. They that are Ordained in the manner succession and power of Antichrist are Ordained as the ministers of Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained in the manner succession and power of Antichrist Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained as the Ministers of Antichrist Mr. Cranf denyed the Mi. Which containeth three Particulars and therefore three severall Series of Sylogismes First for the manner this Syllogisme was prepared Ma. They that are commonly required to have had their Education in Schooles to be furnished with Antichristian Titles to have Approbation from men of such Titles and sent from them to be over a flock oftentimes whether the flock will or no are Ordained in the manner of Antichrist For the Pope likewise dispenseth sometimes with Education and Titles and some flocks are not unwilling to receive Antichristians Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are commonly required to have had their education in Schooles to be furnished with Antichristian Titles and approved by men of such Titles and by them sent out to be over a flock oftentimes whether the flock will or no. Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained in the manner of Antichrist But the Succession was desired to be proved and therefore the Syllogismes for that followeth Ma. They that have their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist are Ordained in Succession of Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Presbiterian-Ministers have their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Con. Therefore the Ministers of London Presbyterian-Ministers are Ordained in the Succession of Antichrist The Mi. was denyed and thus proved Ma. If they have it by Succession and there were no other Succession but from Antichrist then they have it by Succession from Antichrist Mi. But they had it by Succession and there was no other Succession but from Antichrist Con. Therefore they had their Ordination by succession from Antichrist Here Dr. Chamb. desired to expresse that by Succession he meant publick Succession allowed of by the Powers of the Nation which Mr. Cranf assented to and denyed the Mi. Which was thus proved Ma. They that had their Ordination from the Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Mi. But the Ministers of London Prsbyterian-Ministers had their Ordination from the Bishops Con. Therefore they had it by Succession from Antichrist Here the Dispute grew into some disorder but the thing to be proved was they that had their Ordination from Bishops had it from Antichrist As thus Ma. If Bishops themselves had their Ordination from Antichrist then they that had their Ordination from Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Mi. But Bishops themselves had their Ordination from Antichrist Con. Therefore they that had their Ordination from Bishops had their Ordination by Succession from Antichrist Mr. Cranf Minor Dr. Chamb. If from Rome then from Antichrist But from Rome Therefore from Antichrist Mr. Cranf deny the Consequence Dr. Chamb. replyed If from Rome since Antichrist was Antichrist then if from Rome then from Antichrist But from Rome since Antichrist was Antichrist Therefore if from Rome then from Antichrist Here Mr. Cranf made a long digression concerning the Church of Rome and a Church in Rom● and said That 1 The Church of Rome was a true Church till our separation from it 2 The Pope of Rome was Antichrist these thousand yeares 3 A true Church in Rome till this day Which when Dr. Chamb. read over there were exceptions taken that he had not read as Mr Cranf spake For they affirmed he said there might be a true Church in Rome till this day Nempe Fidelium So Dr. Chamb. formed a Syllogisme against it Ma. That Church which hath not the true Signes and seales of a true Church is no true Church Mi. But the Church of Rome hath not the true signes and seales of a true Church Con. Therefore it is no true Church Mr Cranf said you would faine draw me to believe it but you shall not draw me to it with Horses The Church of Rome might be a true Church though full of Errours as a man may be a true man though full of sores and Ulcers And though the Church were Erroneous yet the Ordination might be true As many other things may be true which the Church of Rome did hold And that Ordination was not Antichristian till Protestants separated from them Dr. Chamb. then said they separated from a true Church and so the separation made it false Mr. Cranf said they separated from them when they began to be false Dr. Chamb. offered to prove they were not yet separated from them Ma. If you did separate then either you did separate from their Doctrine or their Power Mi. But you did separate from neither Con. Therefore you did not separate The complaint was that now the Question was lost and they were gone to new Questions So Dr. Chamb. returned to the Question thus Ma. If no other publick Ordination but from the Pope since separation then from Antichrist by your own confession Mi. But no Ordination but from the Pope Con. Therefore from Antichrist Mr. Cranf said The Church of Rome was a true Church still But because Mr. Cranf in his discourse did either let fall sometimes what he would not owne or Dr. Chamb. was supposed to mistake what Mr. Cranf spake it was desired that Mr. Cranf woud write down his own Words and Positions which he did as followeth 1 The Church of Rome was once a true Church of Christ 2 In the Church of Rome there happened many corruptions in Doctrine 3 The Bishop of Rome sometimes a true Minister of the Church usurping