Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	abandon_v	popery_n	save_a	26	3	12.3381	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43220	The speech of Nicholas Heath Lord Chancellor of England, Lord President of Wales, Bishop of Worcester, and afterward Archbishop of York and ambassadour into Germany / delivered in the Upper House of Parliament in the year 1555 ; proofs from Scripture that Christ left a true church and that there is no salvation but in the Catholick and Apostolick Church ; proofs from the Fathers that there is no salvation to be expected out of the true Catholick and Apostolick Church ; certain principles of the first authors of the Reformation not so well known to many of their followers ; the principle of the Catholick Apostolick Church ; testimony of the Fathers concerning the real presence.	Heath, Nicholas, 1501?-1578.	1688 (1688)	Wing H1337; ESTC R35988	79,776	181

deny all the Tenets they now believe l In replic ad Hardingum we may and it will be a pious Godly action to belive them and make as many Acts of Parliament for them as now we have against them This is an evident sequel out of that Principle and whereas there is not one Tenet of all those which I rehearsed whether they concern Doctrin or Manners but was judged by the Doctors which I cited for it to be the Doctrine of Scripture it follows unavoidably that there is not one Tenet of them but is the Doctrine of the Reformation Therefore you must be forced to either of these two either to say that our Rule of Faith by which such Doctrines are warranted is naught wicked and scandalous of all those I rehearsed you cannot deny but that it was taught by the Author I quoted for it and judged by him to be the Doctrin of Scripture And if no Doctor hitherto had believed you or I or some other person of sound judgement may judge it to be the Doctrine of Scripture either of both then you must be constrained to grant Or that the Doctrine of the Reformation is not what each person of sound judgement understands to be the doctrine and sense of Scripture which is as much as to say that our Rule of Faith must not be Scripture as we understand it but that we must believe against our Judgement and Conscience what others say is the doctrine and sense of Scripture Or you must grant that all and each of those Tenets I rehearsed is the doctrine of the Reformation though you or this or that Man may judge them to be blasphemies and scandals I confess our Rule of Faith in the Reformation is Scripture as each person understands it for all our Reformed Churches do gives us this Rule of Faith. And in case the Church of England France or Germany judge a doctrine to bo blasphemous and against Scripture and Luther or Calvin or I or another judge it is good doctrine and conformable to Scripture to which judgement must I stand Must I believe what I judge in my Conscience to be Scripture and not what others judge if they judge the contrary When Luther began the Reformation did not almost all Christians and the whole Church believe Purgatory and Prayers to Saints to be the doctrine of Scripture And did not he very commendably deny it against them all because he judged by Scripture it was not Will a Presbyterian believe Episcopacy because the Church of England says it is the doctrine of Scripture No but deny it because himself judges It is not For let a Man be ever so leared and Godly if he gives an Interptetation of Scripture which is denied by all the Church he must not be followed Since when is it commendable to constrain Mons Judgements to believe not what each one thinks best but what the Church thinks may be safely believed Was this Commenble in the beginning of our Reformation when our blessed Reformers began to teach their private Judgements against the Church then establish'd If it was then the Church of Rome is to be commended for persecuting and Excommunicating our first Reformers and if this was not nor is not commendable in the Church of Rome why is it commendable in the Church of England This is a piece of Popery whereof the Church of England is guilty and for which all our Congregations are jealous of her I confess other Congregations will admit no such Curb or Bridle on their Judgements but follow Scripture as they understood it but the Church of England has a reverent regard for the sense and Interpretation of it given by Primitive Ages Fathers and Councils and that we prefer before the private Interpretations of particular Persons The Sense and Interpretation of primitive Ages Church and Fathers must be preferred before the Interpretation of any private person or Congregation and what think you of our whole Reformation which allowes no other Rule of Faith but Scripture as each person of sound Judgement understands it What say you of Luther Calvin Beza and the rest of our Reformers who preferred their own private sense and Interpretation of Scripture before that of the whole Church What say you to the Presbyterians who prefer their own sense and Interpretation of the Bible before that of the Church of England I grant there ought to be a respect for the judgement and Interpretation of the Text given by the Primitive Church and Fathers but if a Doctor or a Man of sound Judgement replenisht with Gods Spirit read Scripture with an humble Heart and pure Intention and judges by it that Bigamy is lawful that there is no Mystery of three persons is one divine Nature or that Christ despaired on the Cross c. Tho these doctrines be quite against the Judgments of Fathers Church and Councils he may believe them and be still a true Reformed Child because he follows our Rule of Faith if he must deny these Articles because others decry them then he must go against his own Judgement and Conscience for to conform himself to them and his Rule of Faith must not be Scripture as each Man of sound judgement understands it but as the Primitive Ages Church and Councils understand it and this is Popery Is it not generally believed in our Reformation and most strongly proved of late by that incomparable Wit and Pen-man Doctor Stillingfleet that Popery has as much Idolatry as Paganism Our Land therefore had in Paganism as good a Religion as it received by Austin in Popery does not this our noble Champion and most of the Scribes of the Church of England teach That Popery is a saving Religion that we may be saved in the Church of Rome if Popery notwithstanding it be Idolatry as they say by a saving Religion how can they deny but that Paganism is also a saving Religion what need therefore had our Fore-fathers to abandon Paganism why was it not left in the Land If England had been as well informed of the merit of Paganism when first Christianity was Preached it had never exchanged the one Idolatry for the other Dr. Stillingfleet in his Charge against the Church of Rome pag. 40. and 41. says plainly That the Pagans are charged with more than they are guilty of pag 7. says that Jupiter adored by the Pagans was so far from being an Arch-devil in the opinion of St. Paul that he was the true God Blessed for evermore that the Pagans adored but one Supream and Omnipotent God which they called Jupiter and which they did believe to be neither a Devil nor a Man but a true and the first and chiefest of the Gods and that the rest of the Gods which they adored they looked upon them as Inferiour deities and gave them no other Adoration Dr. Stillingfleet and Dr. Burnet and other Reformed Writers prove convincingly as to their Sentiment that Paganism is no more Idolatry than Popery and