Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	concern_v	faith_n	justification_n	2,843	5	9.2516	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A06531	A defence of the Roman Church VVherin is treated, vvhether the said Church of Rome hath fallen in faith, or no? Written in Latin by the R. F. Martinus Becanus of the Society of Iesus, Professour in Diuinity: and now translated into English.	Becanus, Martinus, 1563-1624.; Wright, William, 1563-1639.	1612 (1612)	STC 1700; ESTC S115571	18,025	50

of Bishops and now consenteth or hath consented with the primitiue Church in doctrine of faith Ergo the Roman Church now is alwaies hath byn the visible Church of Christ on earth Both which points are now to be explicated The explication of the former Argument 2. THE former argument conteineth in it two parts the one touching the doctrine of faith the other cocerning the successiō of Bishops Our Aduersaries graūt that the succession of Bishops remaineth yet in the Church of Rome because they se they cānot deny it but they deny the selfe same doctrine to remaine which was in the first 500. yeares This is the thing therfore which we are to demonstrate But it cānot be demōstrated more certainly then by a collation or comparing of the old ancient doctrine with that of ours which I do in this manner 3. Whatsoeuer the Roman Church now teacheth concerning the principall mysteries of our Faith to wit of Christs reall Presence in the Eucharist of the necessitie of baptizing Infants of the sacrifice of the Masse of Iustificatiō of the necessity merit of good works touching inuocation of Saintes single life of Priests fasting satisfaction and Traditions this was taught heretofore by the primitiue Church which florished in the first 500. yeares Ergo the Roman Church hath not fallen from the primitiue Church in matters of faith The Antecedent may be proued two wayes 1. By an induction through ech part or member 2. By the concession or graunt of Caluin himselfe Both which I will performe in that which followeth The explication of the later Argument 4. THE later Argument hath diuers parts only two wherof haue need of proofe One is that there is no visible Church on earth at this time besides the Roman which can haue a lawfull succession of Bishops or consent in doctrine of faith with the primitiue Church which was in the first 500. yeares The other is that neither for a 1000. yeares from Pope Gregories time vntil Martin Luther was there any such Church besides the Church of Rome 5. The former part I thus proue If there were at this time any such Church on earth besides the Church of Rome without all doubt it should be the Caluinists Church But this is not Ergo there is none but the Roman The Maior the Caluinists against whome I dispute do willingly graunt The Minor I proue two waies First because the Caluinists Church which is now extant neither hath any lawfull Priests or Bishops or if it haue any it cānot deduce their succession any further thē Luthers time Ergo it hath failed in the continued successiō of Bishops But the true Church ought to haue a continued and not an interrupted successiō of Bishops as we haue before proued out of Caluin himself Secondly because the Caluinists Church cōsenteth not in doctrine of faith with the primitiue Church which was in the first 500. yeares This againe I will shew two waies First by the graunt of Galuin himselfe For he plainely confesseth that he dissenteth from the anciēt Church in these points following 1. Touching Freewill l. 2. Inst c. 2. § 4. 2. Concerning the cooperation of Free-wil with the grace of God l. 2. c. 3. § 7. 3. Touching Iustification l. 3. c. 11. § 15. Nec Augustini quide sententia recipieda est c. Neither verily is the opinion of Augustine to be receiued c. 4. Touching the person of the Mediator l. 2. c. 14. § 3. And here the errour of the Aneiēts cannot be excused c. 5. Touching Concupiscence l. 3. c. 3. § 10. Neque opus est multū inuestigando laborare quid hic veteres senscrint Neither need we labour much in searching out what the old writers haue thought heerin 6. Concerning Satisfactiō l 2. c. 4. § 38. But litle do these things moue me which do euery where occurre in the books of the old VVriters 7. Cōcerning Praier for the dead l. 3. c. 5. § 10. VVhē the aduersaries obiect vnto me that it hath byn receiued by custome aboue 1300. years to pray for the dead c. And a litle after he saith that although they saw they should not haue don so yet they did so But the very old Fathers thēselues saith Caluin that prayed for the dead did see that heerin they wanted both commandement of God lawfull example But who vpō Caluins words wil belieue that these Blessed Saints of God would do that which they yet saw was offensiue vnto God 8. Touching Merit l. 3. c. 15. § 2. The old writers of the Church I confesse cōmonly vsed the word Merit c. 9. Touching Traditions l. 4. c. 12. § 23. But this prohibition doth clearly shew how pestiferous all traditions are 10. Touching solemne Pennance l. 4. c. 12. § 8. In which behalfe the immeasurable austerity of the ancient Fathers cannot be excused 11. Concerning Lent l. 4. c. 12. § 20. At that time the superstitious obseruation of Lent was growne in vse euery where c. 12. Touching Laickes baptizing in time of necessity l. 4. c. 15. § 20. And that it hath byn for many ages past yea in a manner at the very beginning of the Church receiued in vse that in perill of death Laicks might baptize I see not with how strong a reason it may be defended 6. Thus haue I shewed you by Caluins own grant that the Caluinists Church dissenteth in doctrine from the Primitiue Church Now I will declare the same by this briefe induction The Caluinists do teach 1. THAT God is the author of sinne Caluin l. 1. Inst. c. 18. § 3. And now I haue shewed plainely inough that God is to be called the author of all those things which these Censurers wil haue to happen only 〈◊〉 his idle sufferance § 4. Man by Gods iust impulsion doth that which is not lawfull for him to do And § 1. Absolom defiling his Fathers bed with incestuous adultery committed detestable wickednes yet doth God pronounce this to be his And in the same place VVhatsoeuer men or Sathan himselfe do attēpt yet doth God hould the sterne And § 2. Sathā is said to blind the minds of the vnsaithfull But whence is this but that the effectuall working of errour cōmeth from God himselfe And l. 3. c. 23. § 9. The reprobate would be thought excusable because they cannot escape the necessity of sinning especially since by the ordināce of God such necessity is cast vpon them 2. That God by his only will did predestinate men to eternall death without any fault or theirs Cal. l. 3. c. 21. § 1. It is euident that it is wrought by the will of God that to some saluation is freely offered And other some are debarred for comming to it Et infra I his as many thinke is a combersome question because they thinke nothing to be lesse reasonable then out of the common multitude of men̄ some to be predestinated vnto saluation and other some to destruction And §