Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	apostle_n	church_n	pillar_n	1,918	5	10.1330	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A29199	A just vindication of the Church of England, from the unjust aspersion of criminal schisme wherein the nature of criminal schisme, the divers sorts of schismaticks, the liberties and priviledges of national churches, the rights of sovereign magistrates, the tyranny, extortion and schisme of the Roman Communion of old, and at this very day, are manifested to the view of the world / by ... John Bramhall ...	Bramhall, John, 1594-1663.	1654 (1654)	Wing B4226; ESTC R18816	139,041	290

then we are whilest things continue in the same condition by so much we should render our selves lesse Catholique and plunge our selves deeper into Schisme whilest we seek to avoid it 3. For the clearer and fuller discussion and demonstration whereof I shall observe this method in the Ensuing discourse First to state the question and shew what is Schisme in the abstract who are Schismatiques in the Concrete and what we understand by the Church of England in this question Secondly I will lay down six grounds or propositions every one of which singly is sufficient to wipe away the stain and guilt of Schisme from the Church of England how much more when they are all joyned together My six grounds or Propositions are these First that Protestants were not the authors of the late great separation from Rome but Roman Catholicks themselves such as in all other points were chief Advocates and Pillars of the Roman Church and so many that the names of all the known dissenters might be written in a little ring Secondly that in abandoning the Court of Rome they did not make any new Law but onely declare and restore the old Law of the Land to its former Vigour And vindicate that liberty left them as an inheritance by their Ancestours from the incroachments and usurpations of the Court of Rome Thirdly that the ancient Brittish and Scottish or Irish Churches were evermore exempted from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops untill Rome thirsting after an universal unlawful Monarchy quitted their lawful Ecclesiastical power And so ought to continue free and exempted from all forrein Jurisdiction of any pretended Patriarch for evermore according to the famous Canon of the General Councel of Ephesus which G●egory the Great reverenced as one of the four Gospels Fourthly that though the Authors of that Separation had not themselves been Roman Catholicks and though the Acts or Statutes made for that end had not been meerly declarative but also operative And although Brittain had not been from the beginning both de jure and de facto exempted from Roman Jurisdiction yet the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience as they did Fifthly that all the Soveraign Princes and Republicks in Europe of the Roman Communion whensoever they have occasion to reduce the Pope to reason do either practise or plead for the same right or both Sixthly that the Papacy it self qua t●lis as it is now maintained by many with universality of Jurisdiction or rather sole Jurisdiction Iure divino with superiority above General Councels with infallibility of Judgment and temporal power over Princes is become by its rigid censures and new Creeds and Exorbitant decrees in a great part actually and altogether causally guilty both of this and all the greater Schismes in Christendome 3. Lastly I will give a satisfactory answer to those objections which those of the Roman Communion do bring against us to prove us Schismaticks CHAP. 2. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question EVery suddain passionate heat or misunderstanding or shaking of Charity amongst Christians though it were even between the principal Pastors of the Church is not presently Schisme As that between Saint Paul and Barnabas in the Acts of the Apostles who dare say that either of them were Schismaticks or that between Saint Hierome and Ruffinus who charged one another mutually with Heresie Or that between Saint Chrysostome and Epiphanius who refused to Joyn in prayers Saint Chrysostome wishing that Epiphanius might never return home alive And Epiphanius wishing that Saint Chrysostome might not dye a Bishop both which things by the just disposition of Almighty God fell out according to the passionate and uncharitable desires of these holy persons who had Christian Charity still radicated in their hearts though the violent torrent of sudden passion did for the time bear down all other respects before it These were but personal heats which reflected not upon the publick body of the Church to which they were all Ever ready to submit and in which none of them did ever attempt to make a party by gathering disciples to himself such a passionate heat is aptly stiled by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a paroxisme or a sharp fit of a feverish distemper which a little time without any other application will infallibly remedy Secondly every premeditated clashing of Bishops or Churches about points of doctrine or discipline long and resolutely maintained is not presently criminous Schisme so long as they forbear to censure and condemn one another and to expel one another from their Communion and are ready to submit to the determinations of a general Councel Such were the contentions of the Roman and African Bishops about rebaptization and appeals It were hard to say that those two blessed Saints Cyprian and Austine and all those pious Prelates who joyned with them lived and dyed Schismaticks With this general truth agrees that of Doctor Holden fully that when there is a mutual division of two parts or members of the mystical body of the Church one from the other yet both retein Communion with the Vniversal Church which for the most part springs from some doubtful opinion or lesse necessary part of divine worship quamcunque partem amplexus fueris Schismaticus non audies quippe quod universa ecclesia neutram damnarit whatsoever part one take he is no Schismatick because the universal Church hath condemned neither part Whether he hold himself to this principle or desert it it is not my purpose here to discusse But this is much sounder doctrine then that of Mr. Knott that the parts of the Church cannot be divided one from another except they be divided from the whole because these things which are united to one third are united also between themselves Which errour he would seem to have sucked from Doctor Potter whom he either would not or at least did not understand That whosoever professeth himself to forsake the Communion of any one member of the body of Christ must confesse himself consequently to forsake the whole Of which he makes this use That Protestants forsake the Communion of the Church of Rome And yet do confesse it to be a member of the body of Christ therefore they forsake the Communion of the whole Church The answer is easie that whosoever doth separate himself from any part of the Catholique Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church doth separate himself from every part of the Catholick Church and consequently from the Universal Church which hath no existence but in its parts But if one part of the Universal Church do separate it self from another part not absolutely or in Essentials but respectively in abuses and innovations not as it is a part of the Universal Church but only so far as it is

the reformation and the Church of England after the reformation are as much the same Church as a garden before it is weeded and after it is weeded is the same garden or a vine before it be pruned and after it is pruned and freed from the Luxuriant branches is one and the same vine yet because the Roman Catholiques do not object Schisme to the Popish Church of England but to the reformed Church Therefore in this question by the Church of England we understand that Church which was derived by lineal succession from the Brittish English and Scottish Bishops by mixt ordination as it was legally established in the daies of King Edward the sixth and flourished in the raigns of Queen Elizabeth King Iames and King Charles of blessed memory and now groanes under the heavy yoke of persecution whether this Church be Schismatical by reason of its secession and separation from the Church of Rome and the supposed withdrawing of its obedience from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop As for other aspersions of Schisme of lesser moment we shall me●● with them in our answers to their Objections CHAP. III. That the separation from Rome was not made by Protestants but by Roman Catholicks themselves THis being the state of the Question I proceed to examine the first ground or proposition That the English Protestants were not the first authors of the separation but principall Roman Catholiques great Advocates in their dayes and Pillars of the Roman Church Whether the Act or Statute of Separation were operative or declarative creating new right or manifesting or restoring old right whether the power of the Roman Court in England was just or usurped absolute and immutable or conditional and changeable whether the possession thereof was certain and settled or controverted and unquiet though no man throughly versed in our Lawes and Histories can reasonably doubt of these things This is undeniably true that the secession and substraction of obedience was not made by our reformers or by any of their friends or favourers but by their capital Enemies and persecutors by Zelots of the Roman Religion And this was not done secretly in a corner but openly in the sight of the Sun disputed publickly and determined before-hand in both our Universities which after long deliberation and much disputation done with all diligence zeal and conscience made this final resolution and profession Tandem in hanc sententiam unanimiter convenimus ac concordes fuimus videlicet Romanum Episcopum majorem aliquam Iurisdictionem non habere sibi à deo collatam in sacra Scriptura in hoc Regno Angliae quam alium quemvis externum Episcopum That the Roman Bishop had no greater Iurisdiction within the Kingdome of England confe●red upon him by God in holy Scripture then any other forrein Bishop After this the same was voted and decreed in our National Synods and lastly after all this received and established in full Parliament by the free consent of all the Orders of the Kingdom with the concurrence and approbation of four and twenty Bishops and nine and twenty Abbats then and there present To passe by many other Statutes take the very words of one of the main Acts it self That England is an Empire and that the King as Head of the body politick consisting of the spirituality and temporalty hath plenary power to render final Iustice for all matters c. First England is that is originally not shall be by vertue of this Act what is it an Empire If it be an Empire then the Soveraignes thereof have the same priviledges and prerogatives within their own Dominions which the old Emperours had in theirs If the King be head of the body politick consisting of the spi●ituality and temporalty then in England the King is the political head of the Clergy as well as of the Laity So he ought to be and not he onely but all the Soveraign Princes throughout the World by the very Law of Nature What becomes now of that grand exception against Protestants for making their King the Head or Soveraign Governour for these two are convertible terms of the English Church or Clergy A title first introduced by Roman Catholicks and since waved and laid aside by Protestants not so much for any malignity that was in it as for the ill sounds sake because it seemed to intrench too much upon the just right of our Saviour and being subject to be misunderstood gave offence to many well affected Christians And what doth this Law say more then a great Cardinal said not long after One that was as near the Papacy as any that ever mist it and was thought to merit the Papacy as well as any that had it in his daies I mean Cardinal Pool in his Book de concilio Hoc munus Imperatoribus Christi fidem professis Deus ipse Pater assignavit at Christi filii dei vica●ias partes gerant God the Father hath assigned this office to Christian Emperours that they should act the part of Christ the Son of God in General Councels And yet more fully in his answer to the next question Pontifex Romanus ut caput sacerdotale Vicarias Christi veri capitis partes gerit at Caesar ut caput regale c. The Pope as a Priestly head doth execute the Office of Christ the true Head but we may also truly say that the Emperour doth execute the office of Christ as a Kingly Head And so he concludeth Christ said of himself All power is given me both in heaven and earth In utraque ergo potestate c. Therefore we cannot doubt but Christ hath his Deputies for both these powers The Pope in the Church the Emperour in the Common-Wealth Thus writes the Popes own Legate to his Brother Legates in the Tridentine Councel when he desired to favour his Master as much as he could But I proceed to our Statute The King of England hath that is already in present by the fundamental constitution of the Monarchy not shall have from henceforth plenary power without the License or help or concurrence of any forrain Prelate or Potentate ple●ary not solitary To render final Iustice that is to receive the last appeales of his own Subjects without fear of any review from Rome or at Rome for all matters Ecclesiastical and temporal Ecclesiastical by his Bishops Temporal by his Judges There is great difference between a Kings administring Justice in Ecclesiastical causes by himself and by his Bishops Listen to the Canon of the Milevitan Councel It hath pleased the Synod that what Bishop soever shall request of the Emperour the cognisance of publick judgment in some cases he be deprived of his honour But if he petition to the Emperour fo● Episcopal judgment that is to make Bishops his Deputies or Commissioners to hear it it should ●not prejudice him They forbid a Bishop of his own accord in these daies and in some cases to make his first

spare for Britain In the whole term of three hundred years there were few above two hundred Bishops Ordained at Rome Italy alone may brag well near of as many Bishops at one time as many succeeding Popes did ordain in all their ages Let them not tell us of the scarcity of Christians in those dayes The writings of Tertullian and Saint Cyprian and the Councels held within the time limited do evince the contrary No the first badge of their Patriarchal authority in Britain was sending of the Pall as the onely badge during the times of the Britons and Saxons And the first Pall that came into Britain was after six hundred years But this doth yet appear much more clearly from the answer of Dionothus the Reverend and learned Abbot of Bangor which according to the manner of those times was an University or Seminary of Learning and piety among the Britons and he the well deserving Rector of it made in his own name and in the name of the Britons when they pressed him to submit to the Romaen Bishop as his Patriarch that he knew no obedience due to him whom they called the Pope but the obedience of love And that under God they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon Observe first what strangers the Britons were to the Papacy That man whom you call the Pope Secondly that they acknowledged no subjection or subordination no obedience whatsoever due from them to Rome but onely the reciprocal duty of love that was just the same that Rome did owe to them Thirdly that under God that is immediatly without any Forrein Prelate or Patriarch intervening they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon as their onely Primate and Patriarch Which priviledge continued to the succeeding Bishops of that See for many ages afterwards saving that the Archiepiscopal Chair was removed from Caerleon to St. Davids in the Raign of King Arthur And lastly observe the time when this answer was made after the first six hundred years were expired So it is a full demonstrative convincing proof for the whole term prefixed But lest any man should cavil and say that Dionothus was but one man and that the body of the British Clergy might be of another mind that which followes strikes the question dead That Austin Saint Gregories Legate proposing three things to the Britons First that they should submit to the Roman Bishop Secondly that they should conforme to the customes of the Roman Province about the observation of Easter and the administration of Baptisme And Lastly that they should joyn with him in Preaching to the Saxons all the British Clergy assembled themselves together Bishops and Priests in two several Synods one after another to deliberate hereupon and after mature consideration they rejected all his propositions Synodically and refused flatly and unanimously to have any thing to do with him upon those terms Insomuch as St. Austin was necessitated to return over the Seas to obtain his own consecration and after his return to consecrate the Saxon Bishops alone without the assistance of any other Bishops They refused indeed to their own cost twelve hundred innocent Monks of Bangor shortly after lost their lives for it Rome was ever builded in blood Howsoever these words quamvis Augustino prius mortuo have since been forged and inserted into venerable Bede to palliate the matter which are wanting in the Saxon Copy The concurring Testimonies of all our Historiographers witnessing the absolute and unanimous refusal of the Britons to submit to Rome and the matter of fact it self do confirm this for an undoubted truth beyond all exception So clear a truth it is that the British Churches for the first three hundred years neither ought nor paid any subjection to Rome Whence might well proceed that answer of Elutherius to King Lucius if that Epistle be not counterfeit when he desired him to send over a Copy of the Roman Lawes That he should chuse a Law Ecclesiastical out of holy writ by the Councel of his Kingdom that is principally of his Bishops for saith he you are the Vicar of Christ in your Kingdom The same in effect which is conteined in the Lawes of Edward the Confessor Hence it is that both our Histories and our Lawes do stile our Archbishops Pri●ates which in the Language of the Primitive times signifies as much as Patriarchs And sometimes call them expresly by the very name of Patriarchs it self Hence Vrban the second intertained and welcomed Anselm our Archbishop of Canterbury into the Councel of Barre tanquam alterius orbis Papam as the Pope of another world Or as others relate the passage as the Apostle of another world and a Patriarch worthy to be reverenced CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome and did it with due moderation SO from the persons who made the separation from the Lawes and Statutes of our Realm which warranted the separation and from the ancient Liberties and priviledges of the Britannick Churches I proceed to my fourth ground drawn from the Imperial prerogatives of our Soveraign Princes That though we should wave all the other advantages yet they had power to alter in the external discipline and regiment of the Church whatsoever was of humane institution for the benefit and advantage of the body politick Doctor Holden proposeth the case right by way of Objection But peradventure the Protestants will say that the King or supream Senate of every Kingdome or Common-Wealth have power to make Lawes and statutes by which either directly or at least indirectly as well the Clergy as the Laity of that Kingdom or Common-Wealth are bound to reject all forrain Iurisdiction superiority and dependance And that his Legislative power is essentially annexed to every Kingdom and Commonwealth seeing that otherwise they cannot prevent those dangers which may spring and issue from that fountain to their destruction and ruine The Protestants do say indeed without all peradventure upon that very ground which is alledged in the objection Neither do the Protestants want the suffrage of Roman Catholicks therein Because humane nature saith one cannot be destitute of necessary remedies to its own preservation And another To whom a Kingdome is granted of necessity all things are esteemed to be granted without which a Kingdome cannot be governed And a Kingdom cannot be governed unlesse the King enjoy this power even over Clerks c. Necessary remedies are no remedies unlesse they be just but worse then the disease And being just the Subject is obliged to active obedience But let us see what the Doctour pleads in answer to his own objection First he passeth by the native power of civil Soveraign Empire which ought not to have been omitted for therein consists the main force of the argument But as to the Ecclesiastical part he saith he could