Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	believe_v	faith_n	reason_n	4,345	5	5.9961	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78957	The papers which passed at Nevv-Castle betwixt His Sacred Majestie and Mr Al: Henderson: concerning the change of church-government. Anno Dom. 1646.	Charles I, King of England, 1600-1649.; Henderson, Alexander, 1583?-1646.; Marshall, William, fl. 1617-1650, engraver.	1649 (1649)	Wing C2535; Thomason E1243_3; ESTC R209178	25,946	63

Victory 3. When I was commanded to come hither no such thing was proposed to me nor expected by me I never judged so meanly of the Cause nor so highly of my selfe as to venture it upon such weaknesse Much more might be spoken to this purpose but I forbeare 2. I will not further trouble your Majesty with that which is contained in the second Section hoping that your Majesty will no more insist upon Education prescription of Time c. which are sufficient to prevent Admiration but which your Majesty acknowledges must give place to Reason and are no sure ground of resolution of our Faith in any point to be believed although it be true that the most part of men make these the like to be the ground and rule of their Faith an Evidence that their Faith is not a Divine faith but an humane Credulity 3. Concerning Reformation of Religion in the third Section I had need of a Preface to so thorny a Theame as your Majesty hath brought me upon 1. For the Reforming power it is conceived when a Generall Defection like a deluge hath covered the whole face of the Church so that scarcely the tops of the Mountains doe appeare a Generall Councell is necessary but because that can hardly be obtained severall Kingdomes which we see was done at the time of the Reformation are to reforme themselves and that by the Authority of their Prince and Magistrates if the Prince or supreme Magistrate be unwilling then may be inferior Magistrate and the People being before rightly informed in the grounds of Religion lawfully Reforme within their owne Sphere and if the light shine upon all or the major part they may after all other means assayed make a Publique Reformation This before this time I never wrote or spoke yet the Maintainers of this Doctrine conceive that they are able to make it good But Sir were I worthy to give advice to Your Majesty or to the Kings and supreme Powers on Earth may humble Opinion would be that they should draw the minds tongues and pens of the learned to dispute about other matter then the power or Prerogative of Kings and Princes and in this kind your Majesty hath suffered and lost more then will easily be restored to your selfe or your Posterity for a long time It is not denied but the prime Reforming power is in Kings and Princes Quibus deficientibus it comes to the inferior Magistrate Quibus Deficientibus it descendeth to the Body of the People supposing that there is a necessity of Reformation and that by no meanes it can be obtained of their Superiors It is true that such a Reformation is more imperfect in respect of the Instruments and manner of Procedure yet for the most part more pure and perfect in relation to the effect and product And for this end did I cite the Examples of old of Reformation by Regall Authority of which none was perfect in the second way of perfection except that of Josiah Concerning the saying of Grostead whom the Cardinals at Rome confest to be a more Godly man than any of themselves it was his Complaint and Prediction of what was likely to ensue not his desire or Election if Reformation could have been obtained in the ordinary way I might bring two unpartiall Witnesses Jewell and Bilson both famous English Bishops to prove that the tumults and troubles raised in Scotland at the time of Reformation were to be imputed to the Papists opposing of the Reformation both of Doctrine and Discipline as an Hereticall Innovation and note to be ascribed to the Nobility or People who under God were the Instruments of it intending and seeking nothing but the purging out of Errour and setling of the Truth 2. Concerning the Reformation of the Church of England I conceive whether it was begun or not in K. Henry the 8. time it was not finished by Q. Elizabeth the Father stirred the humors of the diseased Church but neither the Sonne nor the Daughter although we have great reason to blesse God for both did purge them out perfectly This Perfection is yet reserved for your Majesty Where it is said that all this time I bring no Reasons for a further Change the fourth Section of may last Paper hath many hints of Reasons against Episcopall Government with an offer of more or clearing of those which your Majesty hath not thought fit to take notice of And learned men have observed many Defects in that Reformation As that the Government of the Church of England for about this is the Question now is not builded upon the foundation of Christ and the Apostles which they at least cannot deny who professe Church-Government to be Mutable and Ambulatory and such were the greater part of Archbishops and Bishops in England contenting themselves with the Constitutions of the Church and the Authority and Munificence of Princes till of late that some few have pleaded it to be Jure Divino That the English Reformation hath not perfectly purged out the Roman Leaven which is one of the Reasons that have given ground to the comparing of this Church to be Church of Laodicaea as being neither hot nor cold neither Popish nor Reformed but of a lukewarme temper betwixt the two That it hath depraved the Discipline of the Church by conforming of it to the Civill Policy That is hath added many Church Offices higher and lower unto those instituted by the Sonne of God which is as unlawfull as to take away Offices warranted by the Divine Institution And other the like which have moved some to apply this saying to the Church of England Multi ad perfectionem pervenirent nisi jam se pervenisse crederent 4. In my Answer to the first of your Majesties many Arguments I brought a Breviate of some Reasons to prove that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same in Scripture from which by necessary consequence I did inferre the negative Therefore no differences in Scripture between a Bishop and a Presbyter the one name signifying Industriam Curae Pastoralis the other Sapientiae Maturitatem saith Beda And whereas your Majesty averres that Presbyterian Government was never practised before Calvin's time your Majesty knowes the common objection of the Papists against the Reformed Churches where as your Church your Reformation your Doctrine before Luther's time One part of the common Answer is that is was from the beginning and is to be found in Scripture The same I affirme of Presbyterian-Government And for proving of this the Assembly of Divines at Westminster have made manifest that the Primitive Christian Church at Jerusalem was governed by a Presbytery while they shew 1. That the Church of Jerusalem consisted of more Congregations then one from the multitude of Believers from the many Apostles and other Preachers in that Church and from the diversity of Languages among the Believers 2. That all these Congregations were under one Presbyteriall Government because they were for Government one Church

not of old by the will of man 2 Pet. 1.20 22. Nisi homini Deus placuerit Deus non erit Homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit saith Tertullian 2. That Scripture cannot be Authentically interpreted but by Scripture is manifest from Scripture The Levites gave the sense of the Law by no other means but by Scripture it self Neh. 8.8 Our Saviour for example to us gave the true sense of Scripture against the depravations of Satan by comparing Scripture with Scripture and not by alleaging any Testimonies out of the Rabbins Mat. 4. And the Apostles in their Epistles used no other help but the diligent comparing of Propheticall writings like as the Apostle Peter will have us to compare the clearer light of the Apostles with the more obscure light of the Prophets 2 Pet. 1.19 And when we betake our selves to the Fathers we have need to take heed that with the Papists we accuse not the Scriptures of obscurity or imperfection 3. The Fathers themselves as they are cited by Protestant Writers hold this Conclusion that Scripture is not to be interpreted but by Scripture in selfe To this purpose amongst many other Testimonies they bring the saying of Tertullian Surge veritas ipsa Scripturas tuas interpretare quam Consuetudo non novit nam si noscet non esset if it knew Scripture it would be ashamed of it selfe and cease to be any more 4. That some Errors have been received and continued for a long time in the Church The Error of Free will beginning at Justin Martyr continued till the time of Reformation although it was rejected by Augustine as the Divine Right of Episcopacy was opposed by others The Error about the Vision of God That the Souls of the Saints departed see not the face of God till the Judgment of the Great Day was held by Universall Consent the same may be said of the error of the Millenaryes and which more nearly toucheth upon the present Question the Auncients erred grosly about the Antichrist and Mystery of Iniquity which did begin to worke in the dayes of the Apostles Many other Instances might be brought to prove the universall practise of the Church as were not warranted by the Apostles as in the Rites of Baptisme and Prayer and the forming up and drawing together of the Articles of that Creed that is called Symbolum Apostolicum the observation of many Feasts and Fasts both Aniversary and Weekly 5. That it is not a matter so incredible or impossible as some would have it appeare to be for the Primitive Church to have made a sudden defection from the Apostolicall purity The people of Israel in the short time of Moses his absence on the Mount turned aside quickly and fell into horrible Idolatry Exod. 32. soone after the death of Josuah and the Elders that had seen the great works which the Lord had done for Israel there arose another Generation after them which did evill in the sight of the Lord Judg. 2. 7. soone after the building of the Temple and setling of Religion by David and Salomon the worship of God was defiled with Idolatry when Rehoboam had established the Kingdome he forsook the Law of the Lord and all Israel with him 2 Chron. 12.1 And the Apostle sayes to the Galatians Gal. 1.6 I marvell that you are so soone removed unto another Gospel why then shall we thinke it strange that in the matter of Discipline there should be a sudden defection especially it being begun in the time of the Apostles I know it is a common Opinion but I believe there be no strong reasons for it that the Church which was nearest the times of the Apostles was the most pure and perfect Church 6. That it is impossible to come to the knowledge of the Universall Consent and Practice of the Primitive Church for many of the Fathers wrote nothing at all many of their writings are perished it may be that both of these have dissented from the rest many of the Writings which we have under their names are supposititius counterfeit especially about Episcopacy which was the foundation of Papall Primacy The Rule of Augustine afore-mentioned doth two much favour Traditions and is not to be admitted without cautions and exceptions Many the like Considerations may be added but these may be sufficient to prove that the unanimous Consent of the Fathers and the universall practice of the Primitive Church is no sure ground of Authenticall interpretation of Scripture I remember of a grave Divine in Scotland much honoured by K. James of happy memory who did often professe that he did learne more of one Page of John Calvin then of a whole Treatise of Augustine nor can there be any good reason many there be against it why the Ancients should be so farre preferred to the Moderne Doctors of the Reformed Churches and the one in a manner Deified and the other vilified It is but a poor Reason that some give Fama miratrix senioris aevi and is abundantly answered by the Apologist for Divine Providence If your Majesty the still unsatisfied concerning the Rule I know not to what purpose I should proceed or trouble your Majesty any more Newcastle July 2. 1646. For Mr. Alex Henderson July 3. 1646. His MAJESTIES fourth Paper I Shall very willing follow the method you have begun in your third Paper but I doe not conceive that My last Paper multiplies more Controversies than My first gave occasion for having been so far from augmenting the Heads of our Disputation that I have omitted the answering many things in both your Papers expresly to avoid raising of new and needlesse Questions desiring to have only so many debated as are simply necessary to shew whether or not I may with a safe conscience give way to the alteration of Church-Government in England and indeed I like very well to begin with the setling of the Rule by which We are to proceed and determine the present Controversie to which purpose as I conceive My third Paper shewes you an excellent way for there I offer you a Judge between us or desire you to find out a better which to My judgement you have not yet done though you have sought to invalidate Mine For if you understand to have offered the Scripture though no Man shall pay more reverence nor submit more humbly to it than My self yet We must find some rule to judge betwixt us when you and I differ upon the interpretation of the selfe-same Text or it can never determine our Questions as for example I say you misapply that of 2 Cor. 1.24 to Me let others answer for themselves for I know not how I make other Men to have dominion over My Faith when I make them onely serve to approve My reason nor doe I conceive how 1 Cor. 2.5 can be applied to this purpose For there Saint Paul onely shewes the difference between Divine and Humane Eloquence making no mention of any kind of