Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	authority_n	church_n	infallible_a	2,008	5	9.8493	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48362	A reply to the Answer made upon the three royal papers	Dryden, John, 1631-1700.; Leyburn, John, 1620-1702.	1686 (1686)	Wing L1941; ESTC R9204	29,581	64

of her Champions out of meer condescension to Protestants have fought them with their own weapons in which way of combating the Church is not engaged the judgment of the victory must be from the arbitration not of any private Man but of the Learned World The king's next position is That it is not left to every phantastical Man's head to believe as he pleases but to the Church Beware here of counterfeit Coin 't was out but he called it in again and replies The Church of England cannot be liable to any imputation of this nature for our Church receives the three Creeds embraces the four General Councils and professes to hold nothing contrary to any universal Tradition of the Church from the Apostles time Had he been pleased to have given in security for the Church of England that notwithstanding this glorious profession she could never err against the Creeds nor the four Councils nor universal Tradition he had well merited of that Church For we do not charge her for not professing these things at least upon a pinch but for erring against her own profession and deserting that Church to which all these Authorities bear testimony and of which her Progenitors and first Reformers had been Members and from whose hands she received whatsoever she had either of Scripture Creeds Councils or Tradition consequently whose judgment she was bound to follow for the Eastern Churches even by the profession of Protestants being lapsed into Heresies there was then no visible Church in Being but such as was in Communion with the Church of Rome which never went out of any elder than her self and out of whom the Church of England sprang It seems he would have the Controversie betwixt us put upon this issue that is the three Creeds four Councils and Tradition But who shall be Umpire the instructing or instructed Party This discourse in the mouth of a Protestant against Presbyterian Anabaptist or Quaker would be sound though at the same time a self-condemnation in the Church of England The rest of this Paragraph is made up of voluntary assumptions without proof and which are already answered as to the main only I cannot let slip this concession we do not deny that the Church hath Authority of declaring matters of Faith but this must be the universal Church in a General and free Council as when the Nicene Creed was made not when a party in the Church the most corrupt takes upon it self to define many now Doctrines This plea if it be good justifies the Arians and condemns the Nicene Fathers vindicates the Eutichians Nestorians and Donatists and confounds all General Councils for there is nothing of this but was as fully charged against them by the Heretics of those days The following Paragraph is adulterated Coin for whereas the King by the inhabitants of a Country means Subjects instituting the comparison betwixt them and their Lawful Judges of the same Country he stretches those words to signifie the People of one Society and Judges of another The King's discourse is home and to the purpose God would not leave us at those uncertainties as to give us a Rule to go by and leave every Man to be his own Judge He answers We cannot reasonably suppose God should give us a Rule not capable of being understood by those to whom it was given to save their Souls As if there were no way to render a Man capable of understanding Scripture to the saving of his Soul but to leave him to be his own Judge Is there no Church No Pastors to instruct him He that is blind or dim-sighted and will not use a Guide merits to fall Not to be wilfully mistaken in matters of Faith and not to be damn'd is of one and the same consequence The knowledge of good and evil truth and falshood I confess in some sense is to Man's conscience of the same concern but he that willingly shuns light and gropes for either of them in the dark is an Enemy to his Soul and equally culpable There follows We do not leave every Màn to be his own Judge any farther then concerns his own Salvation which depends upon his particular care and sincerity But if the judgment of his own Salvation be in his own hands I think he is made his own Judge of the Rule And notwithstanding all his care and sincerity though they should protect him from the Artifices of foreign Seducers which is not possible but by accident without an inerrable Guide yet the corruption of his own heart may be his own most powerful Seducer and God if he will hath provided a guide even against that As to his refuge to the Ancient Creeds of how little concern it is may appear by this that if I should allow they followed exactly what they pretend to embrace which I never can yet if he denies it to be in the power of the Church to make new decisions of Faith upon any new exigence of Heresie or the like the sequel will be that every Man is left to be his own Judge To the question started by the King Whether it be not the same thing to follow our own phansie or to interpret Scripture by it His reply is That if we allowed no Creeds no Fathers no Councils there might have been some colour for such a question And is that colour vanish'd I believe not for if those Creeds those Fathers and Councils have no infallible Authority to oblige the Church of England why should not the King's question be still in force For neither is that Church obliged to follow those Rights which may deceive it nor is there any rational Authority in the Church of England to force any of her Members to embrace them But the truth is that Church neither stands to Creeds Fathers or Councils otherwise she had never deserted her Mother Church who ever regarded those Authorities as Oracles infallible and sent from Heaven to direct us and to whom she owes whatever is Sacred of that nature To his first question of the Church of Rome assuming to it self the sole power of giving the sense of the Scripture I answer she gives no sense but what she received from former Tradition of the foregoing Church and consequently makes not any Rule to her self but follows that Apostolical Tradition which God hath given her as the best interpreter of holy Scriptures To his second question the answer is the same The third question stands upon a false bottom for it supposes the Pope to be the sole interpreter of Scripture whereas neither he nor the Church do pretend to any other way but by Tradition The fourth question is also grounded upon Errour as if the publick disorders which happen in the Church were not to be reformed by General Councils The fifth question is also built upon Sand for it pretends that the Papal Authority is to be debated in Councils whereas no General Council did ever dispute it The sixth question is as strange

of Rome of whom they were once a part at Liberty betook themselves to the Examination of the Popes Supremacy and other Articles of the Council of Trent by Scriptures Fathers and Councils but could find nothing in any of them to make out that Supremacy or any Article now in dispute But still the King's Questions pressed upon them who shall be Judge Is not this a President for all Rebellion either in Church or State They have neither Scripture Tradition Councils nor Fathers but what they had from the Roman Church and at the first Breach they were in number very Inconsiderable and yet by a strange Presumption they pretend to have a clearer Sight into those Principles than that Church who gave them their very Being in Christianity I believe were this Gentleman to argue against those Sects that have spawn'd from the Church of England he would not suffer a pride so intollerable as to prefer their own sense in Scriptures or the Rule of Faith before that Church that gave them the Rule Well but having finished this inquiry What did they do He goes on thus Articles of Religion were drawn up wherein the Sense of our Church was delivered agreable to Scripture and Antiquity not the private sense of particular Men. If they be Articles of Religion then they are Articles of Faith if so they must come by Divine Revelation either by the way of Holy Scripture Tradition or otherwise Now I beseech him to declare in which of these principles are all or any of these negative Articles contained as no praying to Saints no Purgatory no reverencing of Images no Transubstantiation and the like with which the nine and thirty Articles are stuft Clearly this is a new Creed which neither the Eastern nor Western Churches did ever profess to hold Nor will it avail to reply that nothing of praying to Saints Purgatory or the like is to be found in the Scriptures or Antiquity which notwithstanding is a manifest illusion for if they be Articles of Religion or of Faith he must bring positive Texts to assert them by which all persons should be obliged to believe them and so to Sacrifice their Lives for them if occasion should be otherwise the Creed-makers will be lookt upon as Cheats and their new Creeds as the deluding Fancies of particular Men. As to the advantages of the Clergy in the Church of Rome I must needs confess they are very considerable and therefore not likely to be lost by any Reformation in Religion since if an Angel from Heaven should bring it they are caution'd not to receive him But that the Clergy should be against and Princes for the Church of Rome is as surprizing as that a Clergy may be byast and a Prince unbyast a Blessing so signally fallen from Heaven upon the Prince who now reigns and his blessed Brother that no advantage under Heaven can be thought so powerful as to have byast them in their Choice THE SECOND Royal Paper VINDICATED HIS late Majesty out of Paternal commiseration and his Princely care for the safety of this Nation breaks out into this complaint It is a sad thing to consider what a world of Heresies are crept into this Nation And this Assailant is much concerned that no distinction should be made between the Religion establish'd by Law and the Parties disowned by it and dissenting from it As if an establishment of a Religion by Law could protect it from being an Heresie or as if Error fix'd by a Law were not more to be pityed than what is vagrant and unsetled He need not trouble himself to vindicate other Sects from Heresie against the four or six General Councils let him defend his own and his work is done But how comes the Church of England to bear the blame of so many Heresies The reason is obvious to any one who reflects upon the breach she made from the Church of Rome and by that example opened a Gate for all Heresies to enter nay the truth is she is a fruitful Womb of Heresies of which Time has and will still deliver her for by throwing the Rule of Obedience and Government over-board the Presbyterians revolted from her from them the Anabaptists the Quakers and how many links more there will or may be God alone can tell since 't is not in the power of that Church but by the Sword to suppress them which if she should use against them nothing would be more unreasonable than to persecute them for adhering too closely to a Rule or Example which she first gave them To his Question How came the Church of Rome to have this power of defining or declaring what 's Heresie I answer By the same way the Church had power in her General Councils to make Creeds and Anathmatize Hereticks and as the Church then did not make any new Articles of Faith when she defined that the Son was Consubstantial to the Father and that Christ had two Wills and one Person so the Church of Rome in her definitions never pretends to make new Articles of Faith but to declare the old ones When the King had pronounced That every Man thinks himself as competent a Judge of Scripture as the Apostles themselves He answers by a Counter-questio Does every one amongst us pretend to an infallible Spirit Yes for by this Gentleman's Position no Man of them will believe but what he sees or understands in the Scriptures and in what they see or understand he conceives they cannot be deceived consequently their Spirit is infallible To use a Man's understanding about Scripture is not to be Judge of Scripture For a Man that so uses his understanding as to submit it to the Tradition of the Church makes the Church the Judge and not himself And whoever uses his understanding in opposition to the Churches Tradition makes himself judge indeed but not to his Salvation We says he own the Authority of Guides in the Church and a due submission to them What 's this Is that submission so due that Heaven will be lost without it If so his Church is as competent a Judge as the Apostles for that is the only punishment due to those who hear not them if otherwise the submission is ad pompam and in the sense of the King every Man thinks himself as competent a Judge of Scripture as the very Apostles themselves The King gives here a Reason for his foregoing Assertion and the sum of it is that the Church of England dares not press her Authority upon other Sects in giving the sense of Scriptures for fear they should confound her for having cast off the Authority of that Church of which she was once a Member and to whom she was equally bound to submit To this he replys That the Church of England pretends to no Infallibility but this is to disguise the Royal Coin for the King abstracts from all Infallibility and his Argument is as forceable without it as with it for if the Sectaries can