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	church_n	doctrine_n	4,717	5	6.8021	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A64002	The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessells of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entituled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two bookes, the first being a refutation of the said booke, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hords discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceales his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twisse ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twisse from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeanes ...	Twisse, William, 1578?-1646.; Jeanes, Henry, 1611-1662. Vindication of Dr. Twisse.; Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1653 (1653)	Wing T3423; ESTC R12334	968,546	592

his trust in himself with Gods concurrence as if otherwise a mans condition were uncomfortable and the way were open to desperation But what doth Austin answer to such like discourses of old de Predest sanct cap 22. An vero timendum est ne nunc de se homo desperet quando spes ejus demonstratur ponenda in Deo non autem desperaret si eam in se ipso superbissimus infelicissimus poneret Is it to be feared least a man despaire when it is proved that a mans hope is to be placed in God and that he is free from despaire in case he place his hope in himselfe most proudly and most unhappily As for that which he cites out of Melancthon it is every way as much to the purpose as that which he cited out of Calvin in the first Section Melancthon sayeth we must judge of Gods will by his Word so saith Calvin his words are these Qui recte atque ordine electionem investigant qualiter in verbo continetur eximium inde referunt consolationis fructum To enquire after a mans election in the Word is the way to reape singular consolation But they that enquire after the eternall counsell of God without the Word in exitialem abyssum se ingurgitant they plung themselves into a gulfe of perdition Yet when Melancthon sayeth multa disput antur durius the comparative there is not to be rendred as this Authour renders it more harshly but rather thus somwhat harshly And of Melancthons concurrence with Calvin in the doctrine of predestination as touching the substance of the doctrine I have formerly shewed out of his owne Epistle who professeth that he differeth only tradendi ratione in the manner of delivering it and of his owne professeth that they are of a popular nature thus Mea sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adusum accommodata as it were woven with a thicker thred and fited to use and practise No man doubts but that as Melanchton saith it is Gods immutable commandement to heare the Son and to assent to the promise and the promise is universall to wit that whosoever believeth shall be saved Therefore let us not seeke election besides the Word it is a grave counsell and well becomming Melancthon and Calvin gives the very same councell in the very Booke Chapter and Section last related by this Author But he saw it fitter for his turne to represent Melancthon professing as much rather then Calvin We nothing doubt but God will performe that he hath promised and therefore whosoever believeth shall be saved according to our doctrine not so according to the doctrine of Arminians who maintaine that a man may totally and finally fall away from faith Rogers upon the Articles of the Church of England Art 17. Not only acknowledgeth this universality of Gods promises according to the Tenor of that Article but concludeth herehence That they are not to be heard that say that the number of the elect is but small and seeing we are uncertaine whether we be of that company or no we will proceed in our course as we have begunne and accompts all such adversaries of this truth touching the universality of Gods promises and let every sober man judge whether this Author doth not justify this their discourse whom he accompts adversaries to the truth of that Article in that particular The same Rogers in his 8 proposition as touching the comfortable nature of predestination writs thus This doctrine of predestination is to the Godly ful sweet pleasant and comfortable because it greatly confirmeth their faith in Christ and encreaseth their love towards God But saith he to the wicked and reprobate the consideration hereof is very sower unsavory and most uncomfortable as that which they think though very untruly and sinfully causeth them either to despaire of his mercy being without faith or not to feare his justice being extreamely wicked whereas neither from the Word of God nor any confession of the Church can man gather that he is a vessell of wrath prepared to damnation What more contradictions to this Authors discourse of the uncomfortable condition of predestination according to our way yet who was this Authour was he at any time accompted an innovatour in this Church His books dedicated to Arch-Bishop Bancroft writing upon the Articles of the Church of England perused and by the lawfull authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick And because some choosing to play at small game rather then sit out may say that he speakes not a word of absolute election or absolute reprobation let his 5. Proposition be observed which is this Of the meere pleasure of God some men in Christ Jesus are elected and not others unto salvation this he prooves by that Rom. 9. 11. That the purpose of God might remaine according to election And that Eph. 1. 5. Who doth predestinate us according to the good pleasure of his will And that 2 Tim. 1. 9. Not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace And that Exod. 33. 19. And Rom. 9. 15. I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy And as touching the other part of not choosing others that of Solomon Prov. 16. 4. The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea even the wicked against the day of evill And Rom. 9. 21. Hath not the Potter power over the clay to make of the same lumpe one vessell unto honour and an other unto dishonour And comming unto the Errours and adversaries of this truth Hereby saith he is discovered the impiety of those men which think that 1. Man doth make himselfe elegible for the Kingdome of Heaven by his owne good workes and merits so teach the Papists 2. God beheld in every man whether he would use his grace well and believe the Gospell or no and as he saw man so he did predestinate choose or refuse him 3. Besides his will there was some other cause in God why he chose one man and cast off another but this cause is hidden from us 4. God is partiall and unjust for choosing some and refusing others calling many and electing but few The other place alleadged by this Author of Melancthon partly repeates the same matter concerning the universality of the promises no mention at all with him either of the universality of Gods love or of the universality of Christs death or of the universality of the Covenant of grace partly opposeth it to dangerous imaginations of predestination what are these but such as proceed without the word For without doubt it is to be understood in opposition to that which he formerly delivered advising us to judge of the will of God by his expresse Word and all one with seeking election extra verbum formerly specified of both which Calvin speakes more at large in that very place aleadged by this Author in the first Section of this last sort of Arguments And there Calvin commends the one as a

Tossanus makes relation of Hunnius his exposition of that place Acts 13. 48. Et crediderunt quotquot ordinati erant ad vitam thus id est qui sese ordinarant disposuerant ad audiendum Dei verbum Hunnius in his refutation of Tossanus his Theses cites Tossanus to appear before the tribunall seat of the Judge both of quick and dead and to shew in what place of his writings this is to be found professing that such doctrine is the very Pelagian Heresy and that himselfe never approved it but disproved it rather and most constantly impugned it What Lutheran was ever known so absurd as to say that God worketh in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velle credere modò Velimus Yet this doctrine I can shew in expresse termes delivered by an Arminian But come to the consideration of the instances proposed by him The first is the Relation of Sir Edwin Sands And I remember well to have read in him somewhat concerning the Predestinary Pestilence so called by some And I might wonder at this Authors wisdome in pretermitting that passage but upon search finding it about Fol. 59. though my Book hath no quotation at all of pages I ceased to wonder at his concealing of it I have rather cause to commend his wisdome therein although it expresseth that whereupon this Author formerly touched as concerning the Lutherans readinesse to returne to the Papacy rather then to admit that Predestinary Pestilence For predestinary pestilence goeth not here alone but is joyned with the Sacramentary pestilence For these two poynts saith he are the ground of the quarrell but he addes I confesse that the Predestinary pestilence was more scandalous at that day then the former Yet the same Author professeth Fol. 73. of the Lutherans that if he fetch an elle forwards one way for an elle he looseth another way it is only by a kind of boysterous force and violence against the Calvinists as in Strasborough of late And the reason hereof he takes to be in part the Absurdities of the Ubiquitary Chimaera And as for the passage here alleaged I find it about Fol. 86. Wherein I consider First that the speculative opinions he speaks of are not about the eternall decrees of God only or especially above all others as here by cunning carriage it is pretended For the words runne thus It can be no blemish to them to revise their Doctrine and to abate the rigour of certain speculative opinions especially touching the eternall decrees of God the quality of mans nature the use of works wherein some of their chiefe Authors have come to such an utter opposition c So that the poynts of rigorous doctrine which were to be qualified in this Gentlemans judgement are many but especially three The first whereof is touching the eternall decrees of God The second concerning the quality of mans nature The third concerning the use of Works So that the doctrine of Gods eternall decrees is not the poynt alone the rigour whereof especially is to be qualified in this Authors judgement but this especiall care of qualification is by him referred to the three poynts formerly mentioned and that indifferently Secondly Whereas this Author relates that this is delivered not as out of the relators judgement only but as out of the judgement of men whom he commends for singular learning and Piety I find no such matter in the Relation that I have though I have searched after it both by considering what went before and what comes after as farre as he treats of the same matter Whether this comes in a second Edition I know not in mine I find no such thing So that the weight of this motive hitherto lies wholly upon the authority of this Gentleman And surely I should think it were nothing hard to counterballance this authority to the full And it may be he speaks herein no other thing then wherein he was endoctrinated by his Tutor as lately an ingenious and grave divine differing from us in the poynt of reprobation most ingeniously acknowledged that he was brought into that opinion of his by his Tutor who was a Lutheran And I doubt we have too many such amongst us Of late I have heard that one of good place spared not openly to professe saying Call us as we ought to be called for we are Lutherans I would wee had not too many Popish-hearted amongst us Thirdly whereas this Gentleman adviseth us to revise the Doctrines and this Author accommodates it only to Gods eternall decrees I have already performed this and qualified the rigour of some mens opinions thereabouts For whereas some have subordinated Gods decree of permitting sinne to the decree of damnation I have taken another course and doe maintain that in no moment of nature is the decree of damnation before the decree of permitting finall perseverance in sinne Again I presume this Gentlemans meaning is not that the doctrine of the Church of England is rigorous as touching Gods eternall decrees I willingly professe I desire no better triall of the truth of the Doctrine I maintain hereabouts next unto the Word of God then to be tried by the 17 th Article of the Church of England and by the Articles of the Church of Ireland set forth in the daies of King James Thirdly I would it were put unto this Gentleman if he be living Whether in his Opinion God of his free grace doth bestow faith and repentance on some thereby to cure that naturall infidelity and hardnesse of heart which is originally found in all and of his meer pleasure he denies it unto other Or whether finding some morall difference or preparation in one more then in another is hereupon moved to give faith and repentance unto them and deny it unto others If he shall acknowledge that God doth shew his mercy to whom he will that is of his meer pleasure and denies it to whom he will I am ready to professe that let him state Gods eternall decrees after what manner he will I shall willingly subscribe thereunto provided it be suitable unto the former ground and as for the unsuitable nature thereof if in case it so fall out let the proofe and evident demonstration thereof lye on mee But if his opinion be that God bestowes faith and repentance on man moved thereunto by some morall preparation which he finds in one rather then in another I appeale to the Lutherans themselves whether this be not in plain termes no better then Pelagianisme As for his calling their opinions in this poynt speculative opinions as this Author would have us observe I am willing to observe it and withall I think he doth it with better judgement then this Author doth in calling them practicall And whereas it is pretended that our Divines have been carried into these opinions of theirs in opposition to Popish Doctrine This is so out of season in these daies notwithstanding the raw judgement of this Author that our Arminians spare not to

both Utenbogard on the one side and Festus Hommius on the other side to consider of a course how these stirres might be pacified To which motion Festus Hommius makes answer that in case the Remonstrants differed from the Churches only in five Articles he could think of a course whereby some peace might be made in the interim untill a Nationall Synod were gathered This is the more observeable because this Author layeth all the cause of those uproares as he calls them upon Reprobation But he professeth they had great cause to suspect the Remonstrants differed from them in greater points of moment And these are afterwards declared to be these Fol. 14. pag. 1. De perfectâ Christi pro peccatis Satisfactione de Justificatione hominis coràm Deo de Fide Salvificâ de Peccato Originali de Certitudine salutis de Perfectione hominis in hâc vitâ And whereas they desired the Remonstrants would deale clearly and make known what their opinion was in those poynts Utenbogard having laboured to have a hearing before the States alone There traduceth the actions of his Brethren in demanding the Declaration of their minds hereupon as if this were to bring in a new kind of Inquisition amongst them not to be endured And hereupon obtaines of the States that no such Declaration should be required at their hands And more then that finding the Deputies of the Synode by their continuall sollicitations with the States as it well became them in their places to be most prejudiciall to their proceedings they brought it so to passe that like as formerly their Annuall Synods were hindered so now it was forbidden to the Deputies themselves thenceforth to take any such stile unto them or performe any such office as whereabout they were then imployed And so the Relator proceeds in setting downe their insolent courses untill at length perceiving that by the mediation of the King of Great Brittaine all for the most part inclined to the convocation of a Nationall Synod they fell plainly on upon these desperate Counsells openly professing that the calling of a Nationall Councell would prove prejudiciall to the Majesty and Liberty of the Provinces manifesting themselves hereby utterly averse from such a course which yet hath been most in use in the Church of God and that of ancient times for the pacifying of contentions arising in matter of Religion I professe I nothing affect to spend time in such searches and relations I had rather imploy it another way but you see I am driven unto it to represent the unshamefased condition of this Narration 4. And whereas he saith It was accused with open mouth and challenged of falshood it is apparent that the Remonstrants would very well have rested contented with a mutuall toleration of one another in their severall waies For when Utenbogard and Festus Hommius were to meet together and treat upon some faire course of composition Utenbogard together with those of his side professed they knew no other course for setling peace but my mutually tolerating one the other Festus Hommius and others with him on the other side professed they knew no better course then convocation of a Nationall Synode and in the interim to tolerate one another provided they would declare themselves to differ from the received doctrine in the Church in no other points then in the five Articles But how they carried themselves herein refusing to declare themselves I have formerly shewed And farther in the pursuit of this their practice to enjoy toleration it is farther storied by what means they procured a Letter from King James to farther them therein and after that an Edict to that purpose from some of the States And consider farther If any amongst us should rise up and confederate themselves and impugne any five Articles of the Church of England and accuse us for maintaining erronious doctrine therein and challenge us for falshood if they doe it with never so open mouth shall this be sufficient to justify them and condemne us if wee doe not come to a tryall with them to dispute the case though Wee are the Possessours They the Intruders and Innovators Wee maintaining no other Doctrine then that which is by Authority established amongst us and They which impugne the doctrine received are they not usually judged amongst us as such who are rather to be censured then disputed with And withall consider that this mutua tolerantia which the Remonstrants so much pressed and were so glad to enjoy was with greatest instance stood for long after the Conference at the Hague Lastly how often was Arminius himselfe questioned and called upon to give satisfaction for his Heterodoxies and how often did he decline it When at the first Motion was made for his surrogation into the place of Iunius beind deceased then the suspicions of his Heterodox breaking forth and they of Amsterdam not well likeing to let him goe from them amongst whom at that time he exercised his Ministry and that because they observed his luxuriant and novelizing Wit which was like to breed dangerous effects in an University at length upon the great instance both of Utenbogard and Arminius himselfe way was made for him unto the Chayre upon condition he should conferre with Gomarus upon some chief heads of Doctrine and by a round declaration of his mind thereon remove all suspicion of Heterodoxy having formerly by a solemne Protestation given his word that in case he had any singular opinion of his own he would not spread it Hereupon he made open profession that he condemned the chiefe Pelagian opinions concerning grace naturall the strength of Free-will Originall sinne the perfection of man in this life and Predestination and that he approved all those disputes which Austin and other Fathers had written against them and that in his judgement the Pelagian errours were rightly refuted by those Fathers and withall promised that he would teach nothing that differed from the received Doctrine of the Churches and hereupon he was admitted to a Professors place in the University In the beginning whereof he laboured by all means to quench all suspicion of Heterodoxy in himselfe and maintained the doctrine of the Reformed Churches De satisfactione Christi de Fide justificante de justificatione per fidem de Perseverantiâ verè fidelium de Certitudine salutis de Perfectione hominis in hac vitâ c. all which he afterwards contradicted as also did his Followers This I say he then at the first maintained publiquely contrà sententiam suam which let every man judge whether it be not as much as to say against his own Conscience and Corvinus is alleaged as in a certain Writing of his set forth in Low-Dutch ingeniously professing as much Praefat in Synod Dordracen Authoritate Ordinum Fol. 2. p. 1. But after he had been a yeare or two in the place he begins to unmaske himselfe and by his Publique Lectures and chiefly by his dealing with his Schollers in private his heterodoxy

professe as formerly mentioned and charge us to our face that we have learned this doctrine of ours out of the Writings of Papists And Grevincovius against Amesius spares not to pronounce that They may with better credit follow the Jesuits then Wee the Dominicans considering that the Dominicans are the great Administrators of the Inquisition in Spaine This is delivered as touching the poynt of grace and Free-will but as touching the poynt of election and reprobation absolute I can shew under the hand of an Arminian that herein there is no materiall difference between the Dominicans and most part of the Jesuits so little difference there is between the Gratia Praedeterminans of the one and the Gratia Congrua of the other So that if this be true it is not probable that hereby we scandalize the judicious and learned Papists and what those other Churches are which we scandalize excepting Churches Lutheran either this Author knows not or is well content to dissemble it to wit the Churches of Socinians and Anabaptists And how doe we more scandalize the Churches Lutheran herein then they scandalize us Was it ever known that by meer differing in Opinion from other Churches Christian men were said to scandalize them Or if it were so must not the scandall in this case be equall on both sides As for the leaving many of our own very ill satisfied why should that seem strange What doth Carryer write of many well known to him in this our Church of England of the same mind with himselfe some Papists some Lutherans And may there not be as many amongst the Lutherans as ill satisfied with the doctrine commonly received amongst them save that they are farre more forward to excommunicate all such as soon as they appeare then Wee Besides all this The poynt of scandall is brought in very unseasonably For if it be a truth that we maintain and professe if any are scandalized by it it is a scandall taken not given God forbid we should grow so profane as to account it a scandalous thing to make profession of Gods truth especially this truth we maintain being so neere to a cleare opposition to Pelagianisme a Heresy condemned by the Church above 1200 years agoe When Frederick Duke of Woortenberg exhorted his Divines to acknowledge Beza and his Company for Brethren and to declare it by giving them their hands The answer of refusall was made by Jacobus Andreas a most bitter enimy and one whom Beza describes tanquam virum sanguinarium and his carriage throughout was most imperious And it becomes an Arminian spirit well to make the rancour of his malicious heart a rule wherebyto cry down the doctrine which he abhorred With a farre better grace might a Papist cry down our faith opposite to the doctrine of the Church of Rome by the Popes abhorring it and damning of it to the pit of hell For surely it is fit he should be of farre more authority then Jacobus Andreas not to speak of the Anathematization of it in the Councell of Trent nor of the common argument of Papists in that they deny that we can be saved many amongst us are of opinion that a Papist can be saved therefore better to be a Papist then a Protestant yet surely it is in the power of our corruption to requite malice with malice and as much to scorne with our heeles their Brotherhood as they ours But if through the grace of God we doe not give our selves leave to requite their malice if that be no scandall to themselves there is no cause why it should be any scandall unto us In Sir Edwin Sands about Fol. 59. there is such a relation as this Though the Princes and Heads of the weaker sides in those parts both of Palsgrave and Landsgrave have with great wisdome and judgement to aslack those flames imposed silence on that poynt to the Ministers of the one Party hoping that the charity and discretion of the other sort would have done the like yet it falleth out otherwise that Lutheran Preachers rage hitherto in their Pulpits Now let Arminians if they think good conclude herehence that seeing there was so little charity and discretion in the Lutheran Preachers it becomes them in their writings and Conclusions to shew as little charity and discretion as they for their hearts and that grace of God which they fashion to themselves will bear them out in this it beeing meerely the power of their own free-wills But this is not all I have to say in answer hereunto The phrase in Osiander is not errorum teterrimorum but haerescωn teterrimarum of which this Author saith they reckoned this for one And let him speak out and tell us what were the others Was not the denyall of Consubstantiation another As also the denyall of the lawfulnesse of that Baptisme which was administred by Woemen the practice whereof King James reformed in our Book of Common-Prayer As also their not concurrence with them in opinion about the Person of Christ which by their Ubiquitary Chimaera as Sir Edwin Sands call it they doe miserably deforme These and other such like were the errours whereof this Author saith Beza and his Fellowes were proved to be guilty of in this Conference for so I take his meaning pronouncing thereby sentence tanquam ex Cathedra Judicis or the Lutheran Party throughout in that Conference which Conference was not of Predestination alone but de Caenâ Domini de Personâ Christi de Imaginibus de Baptismo and last of all de Praedestinatione Yet I have not done with this For I beseech you consider whether this Author or his Oracle be not miserably deceived in all this and that these teterrimae Haereses are not such as Iacobus Andreas with his Lutheran party laid to the charge of Beza and his Brethren but rather such as Beza and his Brethren laid to the charge of the Lutherans and that not in this Conference but in their Writings in Scriptis so goeth the relation Whereas this Conference was not by writing but only by word of mouth Iacobus Andreas not enduring to give way to Beza's motion as touching the consigning of that which they delivered in writing under their hands For the relation in Osiander runs thus Ad haec D. Iacobus respondit Woortenbergicos Theologos Deum oraturos ut Bezae ipsius Collegis oculos mentis aperiat Ut autem illis dextram fraternitatis praebeant non ignor are illos quàm horribilium errorum teterrimarum haereseω● in suis Scriptis coram Fcclesiâ ipsos reos egerint Ideoque se mirari quomodo eos pro fratribus agnoscere possint aut velint aut corum fraternitatem expetant si pro talibus agnoscant qui damnatas Haereses ab Orco revocent ut Ecclesiae Dei obtendant Now these words though at first sight they may seem to be referred either to the Woortenbergers as accusing Beza and his Brethren of such errours and heresies yet the words following