Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n book_n church_n tradition_n 5,140 5 9.1021 5 true
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
A71013 Origo protestantium, or, An answer to a popish manuscript (of N.N.'s.) that would fain make the Protestant Catholick religion bear date at the very time when the Roman popish commenced in the world wherein Protestancy is demonstrated to be elder than popery : to which is added, a Jesuits letter with the answer thereunto annexed / by John Shaw ... Shaw, John, 1614-1689.; N. N. 1677 (1677) Wing S3032C; ESTC R20039 119,193 138

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

time by (e) Marsil Petav. def part 2. c. 18. the Nicene Council But because N. N. stands so much upon his points of Prudence it may be neither an imprudent nor impertient digression to compare the Romish Principles and Practices with the Protestant and by discussing one of them more largely to judg of the rest more clearly It is universally acknowledged that the Doctrine of all Apostolical Churches disseminated over the whole Christian World is Infallibly certain because attested by Vniversal Tradition which in it self is so but it is generally confessed that the Tradition of an Apostolical Church of one denomination may prudently be traversed because often found certainly False Now Protestants rely upon Vniversal Tradition truly such for Time Place and Persons and the Authority of all Apostolical Churches Papists content themselves and sit down in security with the Tradition and Authority of the Roman Church and which is worse of the present Romish Church of this age Protestants prescribe for Sixteen hundred years there is no Law nor Custom to destroy or over-rule a Prescription of so long standing Papists plead as N. N. doth the acknowledgment of the sixteenth Century over-leaping all the rest and that but in our parts of the World Protestants believe the Scripture to be the adequate Rule of Faith as to the essentials thereof Papists hold unwritten Traditions are to be received with the same reverence and respect Protestants esteem those Books to be Canonical Scripture which the Catholick Church hath so adjudged Papists singularly superadd others to the Canon Protestants believe the Truths they profess to be Divine Revelation because God by his Son Jesus Christ hath delivered and promulgated them to Mankind Papists believe their supernumerary Articles which they assume to themselves because defined by an Infallible Pope with the advice and consent of a presumed General Council Protestants assert the Pope is not Infallible for Pope Honorius was a Convicted Heretick as before hath been proved The Catholick Church hath always resolved against his Infallibility and the Doctors of that Church cannot agree about it and some of them oppose it neither was that Council General say the Protestants because no Southern nor Eastern Bishops was there nor any Northern but one titular only Olaus magnus the Goth who for that time passed as an Arch-Bishop of Sweethland no English Bishops nor Irish save another blind Sir Robert the Scot who for that time being was reputed the Primate of Ireland only two French Bishops six Spanish the rest were Italians who when they came to be arrayed were mustered but to Forty three in all This was a Plot of the Pope to keep what his Predecessor Leo the tenth had got by the Lateran Assemblers and after him others still maintained but he was for all this contrivance possessed with fears and jealousies the Council would be tampering with his Jurisdiction as other Councils had done and therefore was very careful to have fresh supplies in readiness for a reserve and according as the Pope suspected it hapned for the Council began to form Canons for the redress and reformation of several abuses and to abridg the Popes unlimited Power in granting Dispensations of which design he received early intelligence from his Legates and thereupon moved the Council to desist from any further progress therein for six weeks which being accepted and condescended to he dispatched his new recruits of Auxiliaries forty Italian and Sicilian Bishops who within the time limited ariving at Trent over-voted the reformers in the Council and quite quashed their attempts which made the Apulean Bishops cry out in open Council O we are the Popes Creatures we are the Popes (f) Carol. Malin l. de ton Frid. n. 21. Slaves Protestants rely only upon the Mercy of God and Merits of Christ for their Salvation This Bellarm. saith is the safest way and therefore it is the most Prudential Papists will join in their own Merits of Works done by Grace which Bellarm. confesseth is a more uncertain way and therefore less Prudential Protestants ascribe all Religious Worship to God and to God only Papists give it to Images and the Consecrated Host Protestants know it is an indispensable duty to Pray to God for all things necessary both for Soul and Body and direct their Prayers only to God the Father through and for the Merits and Mediation of Jesus Christ alone Papists Pray to God by Jesus Christ for which Duty Zanchee entertains a charitable opinion of them but withall they invocate Angels and Saints departed as Conductors secondary and subordinate Mediators for which Practice Protestants aver there is no warranty in Scripture no Authority from Primitive Antiquity nor any rule in Reason to approve it either a necessary lawful or an expedient Duty But because some eminent Protestants have declared that Papists have more to say for this particular than in any of their other eleven additional new forged Articles if this Principle and Practice of theirs be cogently proved unscriptural unpractical and irrational the same may be concluded of the rest CHAP. VI. SECT I. IT is Vnscriptural The Scripture teacheth us and commands us to ask the Father in the name of his Son Jesus Christ it prescribeth no rule to ask in any other name but declareth against it For it proposeth Christ to us as our only Mediator and Intercessor there is one God to whom we are to make our requests known by Prayer and Supplication and there is one Mediator between God and Man 1 Tim. 2.5 the God-man Jesus Christ by whom we have boldness of access to the Throne of Grace The Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is emphatical importing thus much as there is one God only and no more even so there is one Mediator betwixt God and Man in reference to our Prayers Supplications Intercessions and Thanksgivings ver 2. one God and no other besides him even so one Mediator and none but he who is our Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous 1 Joh. 2.1 who as he performed all Righteousness for us so the virtue and value thereof qualifies and capacitates him for the Office of being Advocate for us viz. to recommend open and plead our Cause for us and procure our Prayers to be granted none can effectually Mediate for us but he who did Redeem us he only can be our Advocate who is the Propitiation for our Sins which was Jesus only who for the more effectual execution of his Office of Advocate after he had offered himself a Propitiatory Sacrifice for our Sins was advanced to sit on the right hand of God the Father Rom. 8.34 where it may be observed that it is the same Person that died for us and therefore as Jesus alone died for our Sins and rose again for our Justisication so for the application of these Benefits and Priviledges to us he only sits at God's Right-hand and makes Intercession for us this Office being as proper and
the Roman Enclosure and so he fairly begged the Question and what he affirms he proves not for Dr. Harding he was taken with the same beloved fallacy which they always make use of when they are put to a pinch Thus their Argument proceeds they were not Ordained by Romish Bishops nor after the Rite then used in the Romish Church therefore they were not lawful Bishops which is all one with this Dr. Stapleton and Dr. Harding did not Commence Doctors at Oxon. or Cambridg therefore they were not lawful Doctors The Antecedent is granted and for this reason it vvas improper and impertinent to produce the Records for to what purpose is it to produce them in proof of that vvhich is confessed no more than for to produce the Registeries of Oxon. for a Doctor 's taking his Degree at Lovain but the Consequence is denied being impossible to be proved for there have been and there are novv lawful Bishops in the Christian World vvho vvere neither Ordained by Roman Bishops nor according to the Prescript of the Roman Church as confessedly the novv Bishops of the Greek Church are vvhom they all acknovvledg for lawful Bishops 2. Whereas he saith Bishop Jewel answered not a word to the main Point it vvill be found he searched the Point to the quick both in relation to his Priesthood being Ordained Priest the same time Mr. Harding vvas def fol. 125 and 129 and in relation to his Episcopacy saying Our Bishops succeed the Bishops that have been ever before our days being Elected Confirmed and Consecrated c. as they have been Further adding that Mr. Harding himself was one of his Electors none of this Mr. Harding could deny and therefore he fell to the old Game of Tergiversation turning his back from the main Question and starts a nevv one for a desperate shift having nothing else to say but this they vvere not forsooth Confirmed by the Bishop of Rome which is an implicit confession that all those recited Acts were performed only they wanted the Pope's Confirmation which yet the Bishop with great evidence of Reason and Primitive Authority proved to be unnecessary and is contrary to all Antiquity and the Practice of the Greek Church and withal told Dr. Harding in civil terms he would never give over that idle trade of begging Thus this Bishop Jewel maintained both the Regularity and the Legality both of his Priesthood and Episcopacy though not with express reference to the Records themselves yet implicitly to the Subject-matter thereof particularly Election Confirmation and Consecration to his Episcopal Dignity and Office and also propugned the Validity of both Orders from Scriptures and the perpetual Tradition of the Catholick Church pursuing Dr. Harding in all his shifts from Post to Pen till he drives him to his Non ultra 3. All that N. N. durst conclude from Dr. Harding is only that by his sharp Reply he directly affirmed the Nullity of Dr. Parker 's Consecration but Protestants are not so lame as to take every Affirmation of Mr. Hardings for a proof they expect he should make his bold Affirmation good by good Authority or Reason neither by N. N's good leave did any thing that he affirms affirm a Nullity what he alledged if it were true and home would only have rendred those Ordinations Irregular or Illegal but not Null his no lawful Consecration respected only the manner of the Catholick Church that is theirs in their usual restriction and such as they had used 4. Whether the Records were extant N. N. cannot affirm but in his indifferent judgment if they were then they were forged which in the judgment of all indifferent men will certainly pass for a desperate shift Just such a work Dr. Harding made about the (k) From his counterfeit Athanasius Bishop Jewel's Reply fol. 157. Nicene Canons they were burnt yet falsified they were falsified yet burnt c. Such a Blunder also Baronius made concerning a pretended Edict of the Emperor Justinian it was an Edict and it was not an Edict it was (l) Baron an 564. n. 3. an Edict put out by the Emperor in favour of the Aphthardokites who denied the Body of Christ to be subject to Passions and Death for these two Reasons the (m) Id. an 564. n. 1. Orthodox contemned it and the Emperor persecuted all those (n) Id. ib. n. 3. an 563. n. 12. vid. n. 3.8 9. who did oppose it and it was not an Edict it was only a Cabinet-paper for this Reason the Emperor indeed writ it but never (o) Id. an 565. n. 4. so Evagr. l. 4. Hist Eccl. c. 40. published it if so then no Edict the Popes as bad as they are make a Publication of their Decrees But this is all meer impostures for his Edict oppugned that Heresy of the Aphthardokites Edict Justin p. 492 495. which Pope Agatho witnesseth in his Epistle directed to the Emperor Constant Pogonat as it is to be seen Act. 4. Conc. gen 6th p. 21. which Baron himself confesseth An. 681. n. 21 24. n. 25. to be approved of the whole Roman Synod consisting of 125 Bishops 5. But N. N's Catholicks triumphed c. Did they so that is an old trick of their Men of War to do as Agesilaus commanded his Souldiers still to shout Victoria to brag when they are worsted which they must do to keep up their Credit with their deluded Partisans and Proselytes But who triumphed when his Grave and Learned Divines pitched a Field time place and order of Battel contrary to the rules of all Combatants yet like the Children of Ephraim who being harnessed and carrying Bows as if they would do strange seats of Chivalry who but they turned their backs in the day of Battel For did not your old Friends both challenge and order a Disputation 1 Eliz. upon the Points in Controversy and did not they upon the approach of the Enemy after a Pickeer or two face about and dastardly forsake the field How often have the Protestants triumphed over you with the story of Madam Donna Seamore Pope Joan Bishop Goodwin hath produced thirty several well-known Authors to attest the Story and it is not much above an hundred years since her Picture was standing in the Church of Sienna in Italy where (q) Papir Massin de Episc Vrbis l. 6. in Pio. 3. the Pictures of the Popes were set up which so moved Baronius his patience that he sollicited the Pope and Duke of Florence to take it down which accordingly at his intercession they caused (r) Florimund Fab. Joan. c. 22. n. 2. to be done Such an ancient Picture in confirmation of other reports is as good an evidence that there was such a Madam Pope as Baronius his ancient Coin in contradiction to all former Histories was to prove the determinate time of Maxentius his birth and had N. N. and his Narrators such a proof for their dusty weather-beaten Nags-head they would do wonders with
he had been a Rebel and a Traitor and therefore deserved not the Honour of Martyrdom whereupon they procured the Kings Injunction to blot out his name out of all Publick Prayers Hours and Missals to demolish his Shrine and Picture Erected at Canterbury and strictly forbad any to call him (h) Hist Conc. Trent fol. 87. Saint and Martyr Other Pontificians there be who although they resolve the Pope may err in matters of Fact yet will not endure to hear that he can err in his Canonizations which is very strange because the inerrability of his Canonizations depends wholly or chiefly on matters of Fact but their Reason is remarkable which is this for (i) Particularly Catherinus advers nova dogm Cajet p. 125. say they if any one Saint Canonized by the Pope may be called in question then all the Saints which have been or shall be Canonized by the Pope may be doubted of and then no man can invocate or worship them without peril of Idolatry Then let Cajetan and Canus be taken at their words that the Popes Canonization is subject to Error and thank we Catherinus and Bell for their inference and conclude from both laid together that because many Canonized by the Pope have been doubted of as Tho. Becket St. Francis St. Dominick St. Ignatius Loiola and Father Henry Garnet c. therefore all the Pope hath Canonized may be doubted of and therefore none of them can be Invocated without peril of Idolatry But then how comes the Invocation of a doubted Saint to be Idolatry this cannot be unless the Invocation of all Saints be Latria for Doulia as it is by the Romanists contradistinguished to Latria is not contradictorily opposed to Idolatry Latria is for as Latria imports the Honour proper to God only so Idolatry consists in the exhibition of that Honour to that which is not God but Doulia according to them is not part of Religious Worship due only to God and therefore the erroneous Supplicant who pays this Homage of Doulia to a doubted Saint instead of an undoubted one which doubted Saint he believes a real one may fall under the censure of Folly Rashness or Errour but the well meaning Petitioner in this case who makes his addresses to a mistaken Advocate and with relative Worship only according to their Principles cannot lie under the guilt of Idolatry because in their account the conception and intention abates it and to attribute Doulia or Relative Worship is not Idolatry if it be the Sin lies at their doors who confessedly Practice it To Conclude It is therefore the most prudent and profitable course to follow the advice which the Holy Martyr St. (k) Ep. ad Philadelph Ignatius gave to the Virgins of his time and by consequence to all who profess the name of Christ viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O ye Virgins have Christ alone in your eyes and his Father in your Prayers being enlightned by the Spirit which in effect is an exhortation to all who are Baptized according to the form of the Institution for being enlightned and being Baptized are still Synonyma's both in Scripture and Primitive Antiquity and therefore the advice concerns all Christians as well as those Virgins and so Epiph. 79 Haeres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore Glory be to God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost three Persons one God For thine is the Kingdom and the Power and the Glory for ever and ever AMEN Lact. lib. 4. de Vir. Sap. c. 22. Quanquam apud bonos Judices satis habeant firmitatis vel Testimonia sine Argumentis vel Argumenta sine Testimoniis nos tamen non contenti alterutro sumus cum suppeditet nobis utrumque nè cui perversè ingenioso aut non intelligendi aut contra disserendi locum relinquamus Aug. de Trin. l. 4. c. 6 Contra rationem nemo sobrius contra Scripturas nemo Christianus contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit THE JESUITS LETTER Hon. c. THere have been many Discourses betwixt us for matter of Religion wherein little profit did accrue in regard of my inabilities having to deal with a person of your Knowledg and Parts so fully accomplished and fraught with Arguments But seeing the true Religion is the sole mark we ought to aim at the disquisition thereof cannot be too much searched and I am confident you wish and desire my eternal good and in the integrity of my heart I wish the same to you wherefore I shall only desire to receive solution to two Questions and I shall totally decline to scruple all others the Questions are these 1. To nominate the Professors of the Protestant Faith successively since the Apostles 2. To evidence that the English Clergy hath a lawful Mission for it is said No man taketh this Honour upon him but he that was called and Faith cometh by hearing The holy Scripture doth fully express that upon the Walls of Jerusalem Watch-men should be day and night for ever that the Word should not depart out of the mouth of his Seed for ever our Blessed Saviour saith Go tell the Church and that he would be with them to the end of the World which is not verified unless there were such persons in the World Answer to the first Question 1. IS it not sufficient Protestants prove their Faith Apostolical from the Monuments and Records of the Apostles were not the Apostles assisted by the HOLY SPIRIT in an higher manner and measure than any of their Successors can pretend to did not they deliver the whole will of GOD by their Preaching while they lived and by their Writings for ever and are not their Writings as clear and comprehensive and more authentical than any of those of the following Pastors and Doctors are not the Decrees of Councils and Works of the Fathers as liable if not more to fraud and forgery to misinterpretations and wrestings as the holy Scriptures Is there any Record or Writing extant which can equally pretend to Apostolical and Original Tradition or hath such an universal and constant attestation as the HOLY BIBLE I conceive the Apostolical Writings are the best evidences of Apostolical Doctrine and in causes of Religion judg them Criminals who decline a Trial by them but since this way of Probation will not please you a shrewd suspition all is not right with you I add further 2. Supposing not granting Protestants were not able to nominate the successive Professors of their Faith since the Apostles would this conclude them Hereticks and their Faith not Apostolical no sure for suppose we one Philosopher to hold all the opinions of Plato another those of Aristotle would you determine the one not to be a Platonist the other not an Aristotelian because neither of them could present you with a list and line of successive Academicks and Peripateticks this among Philosophers would be adjudged irrational But where hath Christ or his Apostles