Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n according_a bishop_n church_n 2,848 5 4.3599 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A13169 The examination and confutation of a certaine scurrilous treatise entituled, The suruey of the newe religion, published by Matthew Kellison, in disgrace of true religion professed in the Church of England Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629. 1606 (1606) STC 23464; ESTC S117977 107,346 141

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

to his clouen feete And lastly how it hapned that speaking of the Deuill in the first part of the period he forgot himselfe in the second speaketh of some member of the Deuill and of an Hereticke what are Heretikes discerned by their staring eyes and forked feete and such like partes he telleth vs also of the pecking of Birdes and the counterfeting of alchymistes grauers and Heretickes putting grauers of idolatrous images nere to Heretikes as they doe well deserue But what is that to vs if heretikes be such as counterfet religion and yet are gone out of the Church then concerneth it vs nothing For with our mouth we professe and with our hart we beleeue all the Christian and Apostolike faith and dissent not from the Apostolike church in any one article of faith professed publikelye for a thousand yeares after Christ Nay wee doe onely relinquish the Papists as Christians in old time left the Arians and Donatists and as some now leaue the Mahometans wherein they haue forsaken Christ and his truth Either then must this K. shew that as former heretikes haue done we broach some doctrine contrarye to the ancient faith or else hee talketh idelye of going out of the Church Maister Luther he left the Papists hauing once folowed their opinions but not in any point of faith but rather where they taught contrary to the faith Secondly neuer shall he prooue either that the professors of our Religion are of a later standing then the moderne Papistes or that our religion embraceth nouelties For Luther is not our founder nor any of late time but the Apostles of Christ Iesus whose doctrine left in deposte to the church we embrace detesting all prophane nouelties of Papistes Neither doe we bring in any new faith but reiect the popish later Heresies and corruptions though to some they seeme olde But saith Kellison the faith hath neuer increased in substāce but onely in explicatiō as if their Doctrine of traditions of Romish interpretations of the latin vulgar translation of the 7. sacramēts of iustificatiō by orders and extreme vnction of transubstantiation of the carnall eating chāping with the teeth of Christes flesh of the sacrifice of Christes body blood in the Masse vnder the accidentes of breade wine for quicke and dead and the Popes vniuersall Monarchie were matters of no substance or else as if the substance of these Articles had beene euer beleeued in the Church This he would insinuate but the noueltie of them is so apparent that his consorts are much puzled when they come to search them in auncient writers Thirdly we neither call our selues Lutherians Caluinistes Zuinglians nor any such particular names Neither is it materiall that the Papistes doe call vs in scorne by these names For who doth credite the malicious tearmes of enemies nay in this point we are more cléere then the papistes that call themselues some Franciscans some Dominicans some by other names which we doe not Fourthly wee renounce all old Heresies condemned by auncient Councels and pronounce Florinus that held God to bee the author of sinne Anathema The like we say of Eunomius Pelagius and their consortes Neither was Caluin of other opinion but that his malicious enemies doe falsely impute vnto him that he should teach that God is the author of sinne Wee doe not say with Iouinian that all sins are equall nor denie to the bodies of Christians decent buriall Nor did Hierome writing against Vigilantius allowe prayers to Saints departed or the merits of Monkery or teach as the Papistes doe of vigils or lightes set vp in churches at noone time But suppose he shold holde opinions cōtrary to the truth yet are not his wordes a rule of Heresie The second synod at Nice allowed a certaine reuerence doone to images but nothing so much as the Papistes now giue to them But whatsoeuer that synode decreed in that point the same was reprooued in a synod at Frank-ford and neuer generallye receiued eyther in the East or West Churches Aerius was reputed an Hereticke for Arianisme and not for finding fault with superstitious oblations for the dead Whatsoeuer his opinion was it toucheth vs nothing that doe allow the orders of the Church established among vs. Finally we anathematize the Heresies of the Simonians Menandrians and others whome he ridiculously surmiseth to haue bene condemned for denying the real presence of the Messalians and Caians whome he imagineth to haue beene accounted Heretikes for denying the sacramentes to conteine grace as the Papistes hold it of the Nouatians that denyed repentance to publike sinners of the Gnostikes Manichees and Encratites whome hee ignorantlye surmiseth to haue beene condemned for denying marryage to bee a Sacrament of Heluidius Rhetorius and all other auncient condemned Heretikes If then this Hereticke will obiect Heresies to vs hee must both set downe the wordes of the Heresie condemned by the Catholike Church and prooue that wee holde such an Heresie Fiftly wee want no proofe of our Religion which may be drawne from true succession For we do not only communicate in matters of faith with the Apostles but also with the auncient Bishops of Hierusalem Antioche Alexandria and Rome almost for a thousand yeares Wee succeede also to the Bishops of England before Bishop Cranmer in al things which they taught well and according to the Catholike fayth But could we shew no line of succession yet if we agree in doctrine with the Apostles and first Bishops of the Christian Church it is sufficient Ad hanc formam prouocabuntur ab illis ecclesiis saith Tertullian de praescript aduers haeret quae licet nullum ex apostolis vel apostolicis authorem suum proferant vt multo posteriores quae denique quotidie instituuntur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non minus apostolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae He telleth vs playnly that they are Apostolike Churches that teach the same Doctrine albeit they were not founded by the Apostles or Apostolike men nor had any succession of Bishops Likewise hee sheweth that they are the Apostles heires that hold that fayth which is conteined in their Testament Seeing then we do only publish Apostolicall Doctrine and purge away Popish errors our Churches are most truly Apostolicall But sayth K. pag. 196. This is to make bare Scripture judge of our Doctrine and as much as if we should say that the Church of God fayled and that the Synagogue of the Diuell possessed the world many yeares Hee telleth also how Luther in his preface before the disputation of Lipsia vanted that he had first published Christ But first this is a common abuse of Heretikes to call Scriptures bare Secondly false do clearely disperse this cloud of slaunder But his foolish attempt may giue cause to vs to touch both him and his consortes for their manifold and blasphemous impietyes In the beginning of his third Booke he sayth that as the Stoickes commend Zeno the Platonickes Plato the Peripatetickes Aristotle the
should any deny them to be truly the Apostles successors Finally the defection of ordinary Priestes in the Romish Church being extraordinary we may not imagine that all ordinary rites and formes were to be obserued in the vocation of such as by the instinct of Gods holy spirit were stirred vp extraordinarily to restore the decayed partes and ruines of Gods Temple But sayth Kellison pag. 9. If their Preachers be sent by an ordinary mission let them shewe their succession And heere hee alleageth Tertullians wordes lib. de praescript aduers haeret concerning the orders of Bishops and succession from the Apostles And two places out of S. Augustine in Psal contr part Donati And contr epist fund where he speaketh of the succession of Bishops Againe he vrgeth vs if any thing were extraordinary in those which first reformed the Church to prooue their mission by miracles and runneth into a long discourse of the visibilitie of the Church of miracles and prophesies To which wee answere first that if the succession of Bishops were the onelye proofe of an ordinarie mission the Papists themselues were in bad tearmes hauing no proofes of their succession of popes so much bragged of but the testimony of Anastasius Platina Naucler Sabellicus Onuphrius Genebrard Baronius such like hungrie parasites of the Pope iarring and contending one against another like mastye Curres about a bone Secondly the Greekes Antiochians and Aegiptians pretend to this day succession of Bishops and yet are grossely fallen frō the faith want true Bishops Thirdly Tertullian S. Augustine speak of successiō of Bishops but neither of thē denyeth thē to bee Bishops or pastors that are not ordeined by a Bishop who was not ordered with al solēnities Fourthly we shew such a succession of Bishops as the Papists thēselues cannot controle deriuing thē cōcerning order externall formes from Bishops allowed by our aduersaries and concerning succession of Doctrine from the Apostles Fathers and auncient Bishops of the primitiue Church Fiftly the question concerning the visibilitie of the Church is diuers from that which concerneth succession For I hope K. will not say that hee euer saw the succession of Romish Bishops or that any Apostle saw his successors Lastly wee alleage that the old Prophets were sent extraordinarily and yet wrought no miracles Diuers apostolicall men likewise haue beene raysed vp by God at diuers times and yet wee reade not that eyther all of them prophecied or wrought miracles This being our answere of which Kellison could not be ignorant but that hee is eyther ignorant of matters in question or else voide of honesty and good dealing what is it I pray you that hee is able to alleadge against the vocation and mission of Gods ministers in our Churches First saith he Page 11. They say that the Apostles which were the first Bishops and Pastors had for a time their lawfull successors but that at the length the church fayled and the Pastors with it But while he talketh of mission he lyeth shamefully and without all commission For first wee distinguish both Bishops and ordinarie pastors from Apostles So doth the Apostle also Ephe. 4. Secondly we deny that Christs Church euer hath fayled Thirdly wee teach that the Apostles haue alwaies had some successors albeit neither in one place nor without all interruption If then he haue not fayled in true dealing let him set downe the authors names that haue affirmed this which hee reporteth and relate their words sincerely age 13. he addeth that Luther disobeyed the Pope and the Church and deuised a new Religion to cloake his villany But first the Pope and the Church are euill yoaked together For Christs sheepe heare not the voice of strangers Secondly these words of villany come out of his shop of mallice Lastly neuer shall this K. prooue that Luther deuised any new Religion For he onely impugned late errors and sought to bring Christians backe to the auncient Catholike faith Thirdly he shapeth an other answere for vs Page 14. maketh vs to say that wee had predecessors but they were inuisible But this abuse with he offereth vs is too grosse palpable for neither doe we make our predecessors inuisible Nor doe we denie that the ancient fathers holy Bishops of old time as they taught the Catholicke and apostolike faith and no more were out predecessors Fourthly hee telleth vs that such as pretend extraordinarie sending runne vnsent But he taketh vppon him too too arrogantlye to limit Gods power and seemeth plainely to contradict Gods word S. Paul Ephes 4 mencioneth Euangelists without limitation either of times or places and Saint Iohn Apocaly 11 foresheweth that God will giue power to his two witnesses preaching against the Kingdome of Antichrist and the abuses of their times Neither doth either Optatus or Cypriā or the Apostle speake any word against vs herein Optatus L●b 2. contra parmen speaketh of some intruding donatists Cyprian of certaine presūptuous Nouatians which as the Arch-priests Iesuites and Masse-priests doe in Englād thrust thēselues into the ministerie in Africk without warrant The Apostle Eph. 4. leaueth out the Pope therefore ouerthroweth our aduersaries cause But hee saith not one word why Pastors and teachers may not sometime either hee sent extraordinarily or furnished with extraordinarie power Finally albeit the Church be built vpon a Rocke yet particular Churches Citties may fall into errors and hardly can bee reformed without some extraordinarie helpes Fiftly he affirmeth Page 19. that extraordinarie mission is alwaies to be prooued by extraordinarie signes and tokens of Prophecies or miracles And to this purpose hee feyneth that both Luther and Caluin endeuoured to prophecy and to worke miracles But the first is disprooued by the examples of the prophets and Apostles For neither doe we reade that all the prophets wrought miracles nor that all the Apostles prophesied Furthermore the Godly Martyrs of old time and the auncient Bishops were often indued with extraordinarie graces yet did they not all worke wonders and prophecy The second is disprooued both by our Doctrine and practise For neither doe wee now practise miracles or stand vpon prophecies nor doe wée teach that the Doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles or prophecies To conuince vs this K. produceth the testimonye of Cochleus Surius Staphylus Genebrard Fontanus Bolsec and such like fellowes But their testimonies are not worth a Nut-shell being hired to speake shame of the popes aduersaries Hee is verie light of beleefe that giueth credit to the wordes eyther of enemies or hired parasites Finally he concludeth Page 28. that we haue no assurance of our Religion by the authoritie of our Preachers being able to say no more then false Apostles for proofe of their authoritie Hee doubteth not also to affirme that both Brownists and those of the family of Loue may as well alleadge Scriptures and pretend to bee sent of God as Caluin and Luther But first he sheweth himselfe a simple Doctor of Diuinitie
and Sodomites teach rebellion murder of Princes periurie equiuocations and diuers other pointes of Doctrine repugnant both to Religion and ciuill pollicy In the first Chapter of his 8. Booke hee affirmeth Kellisons calumniatitions as if our doctrine sauored of Atheisme refuted that certaine poyntes of our Doctrine open a gappe to a deniall of the diuine Majesty But when hee commeth to particulars hee powreth out of his wide mouth a streame of impudent slaunders First hee saith wee are not afrayd to auouch that God is the author of all sinne and wickednesse and that he hath ordained vs to sinne from all eternitie that wee sinne by Gods will and commaundement and that he vrgeth vs to sinne And concludeth that wee make God cruell and tyrannicall as commaunding vs that which wee cannot performe wanting free-will and punishing vs for faultes which wee cannot auoyde But first hee doth not so much as offer to prooue his charge eyther out of the Doctrine of the Chuch of England or out of any mans wrightinges whose name is of any note in our Church Nay hee knoweth wee teach contrarie to that which he imputeth vnto vs. May he not then be ashamed to charge his aduersaries with matters so false and improbable Secondly hee is neither able to conuince Maister Caluin of any such impious Doctrine nor hath he reason to make so greate clamours if anye one priuate man of our teachers should hold any point of erroneous Doctrine Lastly before hee come at his conclusion hee must make better proofe of his premisses if he meane to haue the particulars of his suruey to passe without censure He must also vnderstand that albeit we haue not freewil or liberium arbitrium in discerning the thinges of God and dooing thinges pleasing to his diuine Maiestie it followeth not that God is therefore cruell or tyrannicall because by our owne default we became vnable to performe the Lawe and blinde in discerning matters tending to eternall life The rest of the first Chapter containeth a long inuectiue against Atheistes and certaine weake arguments brought to prooue that there is a God But as in the first hée toucheth his owne fellowes so in the second hee confirmeth them in their Atheisme being able to bring no better arguments to confute them and in the whole behaueth himselfe fondly and vnlearnedly First hee saith that neither reason nor faith nor both together are able to discouer what God is But therein hee discouereth by his owne confession that hee is a poore Surueyor of Religion not knowing what God is and a silly Doctor of Diuinitie if hee deny that Scriptures teach vs what God is as farre as is necessarie for vs to know Pag. 642. he saith that creatures in God are increate infinite perfect and that all of them in God are God Which assertion first taketh away the distinction betwixt God and creatures Next aduanceth creatures to a diuine being And thirdly commeth neere to Seruetus his impiety For if a creature in God is God why may not Kellison also say that God in a stone is a stone and in Iron Iron as Seruetus did if Bellarmine in praefat ante tom 1. disput say truly Neither can it excuse him that God foresawe and foreknew all thinges and as Philosophers say had ideaes in him For this deuise of ideaes is a Philosophical fancy and yet cannot make Kellisons assertion good seeing the platonicall philosophers distinguish ideaes from the thinges them-selues and make them separate from them Pag. 645. he talketh of conuincing a God-head and sayth that the world by Philosophers is called Alle. But the first speech is impious seeming to import that he meaneth to ouercome God and to confute him as hee hath alredy endeuored to confute his truth The second proceedeth of ignorance For hardly will hee bee able to shew in what tongue Philosophers call the world Alle. Pag. 648. he belyeth Caesar where hee maketh him say that the first inhabitants of England sprang out of the earth as herbes or Toad-stooles Caesar in his commentaryes talketh neyther of hearbes nor Toad-stooles and vtterly reiecteth this falshood Pag. 649. he would gladly prooue that there is a God by the conuulsions of men possessed And pag. 650. by Witches Hee sayth also that such as are possessed by Deuils somtimes howle like Dogges somtime yell like Wolfes But his argumentes from Witches and possessed with Deuils prooue the Deuill rather then God Secondly his proofes are weake being drawne rather from illusions and counterfet trickes then from matters euidently true Lastly it is hard to be beleeued that he hath heard any that eyther howled like Dogges or yelled like Wolfes These proofes therfore are liker to draw men to infidelitye then otherwise Afterward he talketh idlely of the heauy and lumpish nature of the earth an element as it seemeth predominant in him of the Common-wealth of Bees so well ordered that a Statist may learne policy from it as he beleeueth of the leapes of Hares of Foxes and Fearne bushes of Spiders and spider-webs and such like vaine and idle similitudes But what should I follow or runne after him that runneth so farre not onely from his argument but from himselfe also In the second chapters rubrike he affirmeth that our Doctrine ruineth al Religiō But in the Chapter it selfe there is no ground brought for proofe of his assertiō Only in the latter end he doth afresh charge vs with holding that God is the author of all sinne And thereof concludeth that those which beleeue this must needes haue cold hearts in Religion But we haue declared his antecedent to be false and fantasticall What then shall we need to beat downe his ruinous consequent The rest of this Chapter containeth diuers poyntes of popish Doctrine cōcerning Gods true worshippe Heretikes and their markes Christes honor Priestes an sacrifices succession vnity vniuersality here idelye repeated and formerly refuted Pag. 671. he beareth vs in hand that the moderne Romish Religion is most conformable to the Doctrine planted by the Apostles But he shall not be able to prooue all his life halfe of that which he hath affirmed in one line He saith he hath prooued it in his commentaries in secunda secūda But his proofes are weake and therefore dare not abide the light If he come forth with his proofes of his Religion heerafter we will pray him also to shew that the Romish Doctrine of blowing vp Princes and Parliament-houses with Gun-powder of breaking of oathes of lying and equiuocating of the Popes vniuersall Monarchye of kissing the Popes Pantoufle of iustification by confirmation extreme vnction Mariage and orders ex opere operato of taking Christ with the teeth of transubstantiation halfe communions priuate Masses prayer in a tongue not vnderstoode worship of Saintes and Angels and the rest of those Popish Heresies which we refuse are conformable to that Religion which was first planted by the Apostles In the third Chapter hee affirmeth that in contempt of the Churches authority