Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	bishop_n	church_n	succession_n	2,569	5	10.4652	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59860	The protestant resolution of faith being an answer to three questions : I. How far we must depend on the authority of the church for the true sense of Scripture? II. Whether a visible succession from Christ to this day makes a church, which has this succession, an infallible interpreter of Scripture, and whether no church, which has not this succession, can teach the true sense of Scripture? III. Whether the Church of England can make out such a visible succession?	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1683 (1683)	Wing S3332; ESTC R22228	24,360	46

Succession from Christ till our days Now if this visible uninterrupted Succession be the mark of such a true Church as is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then 1. The Greek Church is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture for she has as visible and uninterrupted a Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day as the Church of Rome has and so we have two infallible Churches not to instance in any more at present who have as good a Succession as either of them which are directly opposite to each other and what shall we do in this Case Must we believe Contradictions or must we dis-believe infallible Churches 2. If a visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles makes any Church an infallible Interpreter of Scripture then all the Churches which were planted by the Apostles were infallible All the Churches which were planted by the Apostles have an equally visible Succession from Christ those Churches which were planted by the Apostles may be presumed as infallible while the Apostles were present with them as they were afterwards and those Churches which succeeded these Apostolical Churches at the distance of an Age or two may be supposed as infallible as any Church of this Age is for if a visible Succession from Christ makes a Church infallible why should not a Succession of a hundred or two hundred years make them as infallible as a Succession of sixteen hundred years unless they think that Infallibility increases with the Age of the Church which I could wish true but we see very little sign of it Now according to these Principles all the Churches which were planted by the Apostles and have a continual visible Succession from Apostolical Churches through all Ages since the time of the Apostles must be infallible for if a continual visible Succession confers Infallibility and is the mark whereby we must know it then every Church which ever had or has to this day this vissible Succession must have Infallibility also which it seems is entailed on Succession And thus we have found out a World of infallibility and it is wonderful how any Apostolical Church came to be oover-run with so many Errors and Heresies and to grow so corrupt and degenerate as to provoke God to root them up if every Apostolical Church was infallible I cannot imagine how whole Churches which visibly succeeded the Apostles should be infected with Heresie for if Infallibility it self will not secure a Church from Heresie the Lord have mercy upon us 3. This mark he gives how to find out such a true Church as is an infallible Interpreter of Scripture viz. A continual visible Succession from Christ till this day includes another great mistake for it supposes that there is some Church now in being on whose Authority we must rely for the sense of Scripture for otherwise there can be no use of a visible Succession to this day in this Controversie if as I have already proved at large we must rely only on the Authority of the Primitive Church not of the Church of this present Age for the sense of Scripture and that not as an infallible Judge but as the most Authentick Witness of the Apostolical Doctrine and Practice then we cannot find out this Church by a visible Succession to this day but by examining the ancient Records of the Primitive Church where we shall find what the Faith and Practice of the Church in those days was which is the safest Rule to guide us in the Exposition of Scripture Though there were no Church in the World at this day which could prove a continual visible Succession from Christ and his Apostles yet while we have the Scriptures and the Records of the Primitive Church we have very sufficient means for the understanding the true meaning of Scripture So that of whatever use this talk of a continual visible Succession may be in other Cases it is wholly impertinent in this A Church which cannot prove such a continual visible Succession which was not founded by any Apostle or Apostolical men or has lost the Memory or Records of its first Plantation may yet have very certain means of knowing the true sense of Scripture from the Scripture it self and the Doctrine and Practice of Apostolical and Primitive Churches and a Church which has the most visible uninterrupted Succession from Christ and his Apostles may be so far from being an infallible Interpreter of Scripture that she may be very corrupt and erroneous her self if she forsake the Apostolical Tradition contained in the Writings of the new Testament and Expounded by the Catholick Faith and Practice of the first Churches as we know the Church of Rome has done which is so far from being an infallible Church that we believe her to be the most corrupt Church in the World And thus I think we are prepared to venture upon the last Clause of this Paper wherein the whole force of the Argument such as it is is turned upon the poor Protestant Churches But I doubt says the Author of this Paper whether or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed The sting of which Argument lies in this that we Protestants have no certain way of knowing the true sense and meaning of Scripture because we cannot prove the continual visible Succession of our Church from Christ unto this day and therefore we ought to go over to the Church of Rome who has this visible Succession and receive all her Dictates as infallible Oracles But for Answer to this consider 1. That suppose the Protestant Church could not make out such a continual visible Succession yet we may understand the Scriptures very well without it and need not go to the Church of Rome to Expound Scripture for us as I have already shewn at large Had he proved that we had been no Church for want of a visible Succession of Church Officers or that our Religion were a Novelty which was never heard of in the World before Luther this had been something more to the purpose but to pretend that we cannot understand the Scriptures for want of a visible Succession is such a loose and inconsequent way of reasoning as a poor fallible Protestant would be ashamed of 2. But pray why can't the Protestant Church of England prove her continual visible Succession from Christ till this day as well as the Church of Rome Here was a Christian Church planted in this Nation as very good Historians say as early as at Rome and it has continued here ever since to this day when Austin the Monk came over to England he found here a company of resolute Brittish Bishops and Monks who would not submit to the Usurpations of Rome and the English and Brittish Churches under several Changes and Alterations have continued to this day with a visible Succession of Christian Bishops and what better Succession can Rome shew than this I suppose no Roman Catholick will disown

the Succession of the Church of England till the Reformation and I pray how came we to lose our Succession then Did the Reformation of those Abuses and Corruptions which had crept into the Church unchurch us Just as much as a man ceases to be the same man when he is cured of some mortal Disease Did not the Church of England consist of the same Persons before the Reformation and after A great many indeed disowned the Reformation but were not at all those Persons who were so active and zealous in the Reformation formerly of the Roman Communion And did they lose their Succession too when they became Reformers When a Church consists of the same Bishops Priests and People which she had before though she have not all the same that she had when she retains the same ancient Catholick and Apostolick Faith which she did before only renounces some Errors and Innovations which she owned before how does this forfeit her Succession The Church of England is the very same Church now since the Reformation which she was before and therefore has the very same Succession though not the same Errors to this day that ever she had and that I think is as good a Succession as the Church of Rome has There are but two things to be considered in the case of Succession Either a Succession of Church Officers or a Succession of the Faith and Doctrines of the Church 1. As for a Succession of Church Officers we have the same that the Church of Rome has Those English Bishops who embraced the Reformation received their Orders in the Communion of the Church of Rome and therefore they had as good Orders as any are in the Church of Rome and these were the Persons who Consecrated other Bishops and so in Succession to this day For as for the story of the Nags-head Ordination that is so transparent a Forgery invented many years after to reproach the Reformation that I presume no sober Roman Catholick will insist on it But we are Hereticks and Schismaticks and this forseits our Orders and our Succession together But 1. This charge ought first to be proved against us that we are Hereticks and Schismaticks we deny and abhor both the name and thing and if we be not Hereticks and Schismaticks as we are sure we are not and as the Church of Rome can never prove us to be then according to their own Confession our Orders must be good 2. However be we Hereticks or Schismaticks or whatever they please to call us how does this destroy our Orders and Succession The Catholick Church would not allow in former Ages that Heresie or Schism destroyed the validity of Orders St. Jerome disputes against this at large in his Book Contra Luciferianos And St. Austin allows the Donatists Bishops to have valid Orders though they were Schismaticsk and therefore that the Sacraments administred by them were valid And indeed if Heresie will destroy Orders and Succession the Church of Rome will be as much to seek for their Orders and Succession as we are which by their own Confession have had several Heretical Popes and no body knows how many Bishops Ordained by them 2. As for Succession of Doctrine which is as considerable to the full as Succession of Orders the great Articles of our Faith are not only plainly contained in Scripture but have been delivered down to us through all ages of the Church by an uninterrupted Succession The Church of Rome her self in her greatest Degeneracy did own all that we do in pure matters of Faith When we reformed the Church we did not make a new Religion but only separated the old Faith from new and corrupt Additions and therefore the quarrel of the Church of Rome with us is not that we believe any thing which they do not believe but that we do not believe all that they would have us The Doctrine of the Church of England is truly Primitive and Catholick taught by Christ and his Apostles owned by the Primitive Church and excepting the Dispute between the Latin and Greek Church about the Filioque or the Holy Spirits proceeding from the Father and the Son received by all Catholick Churches to this day which is as compleat and perfect Succession as any Doctrine can have therefore when the Church of Rome asks us Where was our Religion before Luther we tell them it was all the World over all Catholick Churches believed what we do though we do not believe all that they do they themselves did and do to this Day own our Creeds and Articles of Faith excepting such of them as are directly opposed to their Innovations So that we are on a sure Foundation our Faith has been received in the Catholick Church in all Ages But now the Church of Rome cannot shew such a Succession for her new Doctrines and Articles of Faith which were unknown to the Primitive Church for many Ages which were rejected by many flourishing Churches since the first appearance of them which never had a quiet possession in her own Communion and were never formed into Articles of Faith till the packt Conventicle of Trent This I think is a sufficient Answer to this Paper and it pities me to see so many well-meaning Persons abused with such transparent Sophistry FINIS Books Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stilling fleet 's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. L●b c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger Resulting from the Change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which Respect Church Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God Proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience Resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to separate from a Church upon the Account of promiscuous Congregations and Mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service Prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The Second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about Conformity Recommended to the Present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union c. 15. The Case of Kneeling c. The Second Part. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be Rejected 3. The Difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England

THE PROTESTANT RESOLUTION OF FAITH Being an Answer to Three Questions I. How far we must depend on the Authority of the Church for the true sense of Scripture II. Whether a visible Succession from Christ to this day makes a Church which has this Succession an infallible Interpreter of Scripture and whether no Church which has not this Succession can teach the true sense of Scripture III. Whether the Church of England can make out such a visible Succession LONDON Printed for F. Gardiner at the White-horse in Ludgate-street 1683. THE PREFACE TO THE READER THese Papers which are here presented to thee were writ for the use of a private Person and by the Advice of some Friends are now made Publick We find how busie the Romish Emissaries are to corrupt our People and think our selves equally concerned to Antidote them against Popery and Fanaticism Two extreams equally dangerous to the Government of Church and State in these Kingdoms both in their Principles and Practices and both of them very great Corruptions of the Christian Religion and very dangerous to mens Souls Some of our Clergy have already been so charitable to our Dissenters as to warn them of their danger and by the Strength and Evidence of Scripture and Reason to Convince them of their mistakes and I pray God forgive those men and turn their Hearts who will not contribute so much to their own Conviction and Satisfaction as diligently and impartially to read and consider what is so charitably offered to them Ignorance and mistake may excuse men who have no opportunities of knowing better but such willful and resolved Ignorance which bars up mens minds against all means of better Information will as soon damn them as sins against knowledge And now it might justly be thought want of Charity to those of the Roman Communion should we take no care at all of them nay want of Charity to those of our own Communion and to Dissenters themselves who are daily assaulted by the busie Factors for Rome For the Disputes against the Church of Rome as well as against Dissenters are for the most part too Learned and too Voluminous for the instruction of ordinary People and therefore some short and plain Discourses about the principal Matters in dispute between us is the most effectual way we can take to confirm men in their Religion and preserve them from the crafty Insinuations of such as lie in wait to deceive Some few Attempts which have been already made of that kind give me some hope that several other Tracts will follow that the ruine of the Church of England if God shall please ever to permit such a thing whether by Popery or Fanaticism may not be charged upon our neglect to instruct People better Some Persons it seems whose Talent lies more in censuring what others do than in doing any good themselves are pleased to put some sinister Constructions on this Design as it is impossible to design any thing so well but men of ill minds who know not what it means to do good for goods sake shall be able to find some bad name for it Some guess that we now write against Popery only to play an after-Game and to regain the Favour and good Opinion of Dissenters which we have lost by writing against them But I know not that any man has lost their Favour by it nor that any man values their Favour for any other reason than to have the greater advantage of doing them good If so good a work as confuting the Errors of the Church of Rome will give the Dissenters such a good Opinion of us as to make them more impartially consider what has been writ to perswade them to Communion with the Church of England I know no reason any man has to be ashamed to own it though it were part of his design but whether it is or not is more than I know I dare undertake for those Persons I am acquainted with that they neither value the favour nor fear the displeasure either of Fanaticks or Papists but yet heartily desire to do good to them both But there is a more mischievous suggestion than this that the design of such Papers is only to raise a new cry and noise about Popery and to alarm the People and disturb the Government with new Fears and Jealousies Truly if I thought this would be the effect of it I would burn my Papers presently for I am sure the Church of England will get nothing by a Tumultuary and Clamorous Zeal against the Church of Rome and I had much rather suffer under Popery than contribute any thing towards raising a Popular Fury to keep it out We profess our selves as irreconcileable Enemies to Popery as we are to Fanaticism and desire that all the World may know it but we will never Rebell nor countenance any Rebellion against our lawful Soveraign to keep out either we leave such Principles and Practices to Papists and Fanaticks But when we find our People Assaulted by the Agents of Rome and do not think our selves secure from Popish Designs we think it our Duty to give them the best instructions we can to preserve them from such Errors as we believe will destroy their Souls and cannot but wonder that any men who are as much concerned to take care of Souls as we are should think this a needless or a scandalous undertaking I wish such men would speak out and tell us plainly what they think of Popery themselves If they think this Design not well managed by those who undertake it it would more become them to commend the Design and do it better themselves I know no man but would very gladly be excused as having other work enough to imploy his time but yet I had rather spend my vacant minutes this way than in censuring the good that other men do while I do none my self The Words of the Paper which was sent to me are these IT is my Opinion that the infinite Goodness of our Legislator has left to us a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures which is the Church Now I judge this Church must be known to be the true Church by its continual visible Succession from Christ till our Days But I doubt whether or no the Protestant Church can make out this continual visible Succession and desire to be informed ANSWER THAT Christ has left a means of knowing the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scriptures I readily grant or else it had been to no purpose to have left us the Scriptures But the latter Clause is very ambiguous for the meaning may either be that we may understand by the Scriptures which is the Church or that the Church is the means whereby we must understand the true sense and meaning of the Scripture The first is a true Protestant Principle and therefore I presume not intended by this Objector For how we should know that there is any Church without