Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
sense_n bishop_n title_n universal_a 1,836 5 10.0429 5 false
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
A65197 A lost sheep returned home, or, The motives of the conversion to the Catholike faith of Thomas Vane ... Vane, Thomas, fl. 1652. 1648 (1648) Wing V84; ESTC R37184 182,330 460

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

one another to this end That the office of a Pastor is alwaies needfull our Saviour implies in calling his people his sheep and sheep without a shepherd are like to be but il provided for and as they are alwaies sheep so they ought alwaies to have a shepherd which office in ordinary being given to S. Peter first ought to continue out of the necessity of the cause thereof so long as the sheep continue which will be to the end of the world Which S. Peter not being now able to doe in person reason requires that it should be done by his Successors The Apostle 1 Cor. 12.21 compares the Church to a body and saith The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you which cannot be understood of Christ our head for he may truly say to us all that he hath no need of us it must therefore be meant of some Head here on earth which must continue as long as the Church continues a body and that is to the worlds end And that the successors of S. Peter are this Head S. Chrysostome doubts not to affirm who demanding why Christ shed his blood De Saterdot l. 2. initio Leo Serm. 2. de Annivers assump sua ad Pontific answers It was to gaine that flock the care whereof he committed to Peter to Peters successors And S. Leo Peter continues and lives in his Successors And that his successors are the Bishops of Rome is out of doubt none but they ever assuming it to themselves or having it granted by others For the Bishop of Antioch succeeded not S. Peter in the government of the whole Church but of that diocesse for succession to any in his whole right is not but to him that leaves his place either by naturall death deposition or voluntary resignation now S. Peter living and ruling left the Church of Antioch and placed his Sea at Rome where he also died so that he that succeeds him in that Sea must succeed him both as he was Bishop thereof and likewise as he was Head of the whole Church as for the Bishop of Antioch he did never either possesse or pretend to higher than the third place amongst the Patriarchs Cone Nic. Can. 6. Gelasius In decret cum 70. Episcopis affirmes that the Roman Church is preferred before other Churches not by any constitutions of Councells but she obtained Primacy by the Evangelicall voice of our Lord saying thou art 〈◊〉 upon this rock I will build m●… 〈◊〉 And S. Hierome in his 59. Epistle 〈…〉 to Pope Dam●sus saith To 〈◊〉 she 〈◊〉 require from the Priest the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●●●tion and from the Pastor 〈…〉 I speak with the successor of th● 〈◊〉 sho●● c. I following none but Christ in 〈◊〉 joyned in Communion to your holyn sse that is to the chaire of Peter upon that rock I know the Church to be builded 3. whosoever out of this house eates the lamb is prophane whosoever shall not be in the Ark of Noe shall perish in the deluge And S. Aug. writing to Pope Innocentius Epist 92. saith wee think that by the Authority of your Holynesse derived from the authority of Holy Scriptures they will more easily yeeld who believe such perverse and pernicious things Wherein he derives the Popes authority from the Scriptures And S Bernard writing to Pope Eugenius saith thus Thou alone art not only the Pastor of sheep De consider l. 3 cap. 8. Epist 190. ad Innoc. PP but also of Pastors Thou demandest how I prove this Out of the word of our Lord. For to whom I do not say Bishops but also of the Apostles were all the sheep so absolutely and indeterminately committed Peter if thou lovest me feed my sheep which the people of this or that city country or Kingdome Hee saith my sheep To whom is it not plain that hee did not assigne some but all Nothing is excepted where nothing is distinguished c. To conclude James who seemed a pillar for the Church was content with Jerusalem onely yeelding the universality to Peter And with the Fathers apart doe concur the Fathers united in Councell by whom in many Councells this truth hath been declared as in the Councell of a Sess 14. c. 7. Trent the Councell of Florence b Sess ult the Councell of c Respons Synod de authoritat Conc. general Basil the Councell of d Part. 2. Act. 3. Ephesus the Councell of e Sub. Innoc. 3. e. 5. Lateran the second Councell of f Act. 2. Nice the Councell of g Conc. Chal. Act. 1. Act. 3. tom 2. p. 252 edit Venet. Chalcedon as is easy to shew at large if need required § 3. As for the attempt of the Bishop of Constantinople against the Pope it was not for the Primacy and headship of the Church Catholique but only of the Churches of the East And the title of universall Bishop which he claimed was not with intent of superiority over the Pope but over the other Patriarchs who were all of the Easterne Empire and in association with the Pope for those parts yet with subjection to the Pope acknowledging him the root and stock of the universality even as Menas Patriarch of Constantinople in the time of this contention acknowledges saying Concil Constant sub Men. Act. 4. we will in all things follow and obey the sea Apostolique And as the Emperour and Patriarch both acknowledge as S. Gregory lib. 7. indict 2. ep 93. reports in these words Who is it that doubts but that the Church of Constantinople is subject to the Sea Apostolique which the most religious Lord the Emperour and our brother Bishop of the same city continually protest And if it were true as Protestants imagine that the Bishop of Constantinople contended with the Pope for the absolute Primacy over the Christian world this doth no more prove his right than Perkin Warbecks pretention in the daies of King Henry the seventh did prove his right to the crown of England And certain it is that neither the one nor the other did obtain that which he aspired to but were rejected by the voice of mankind which is an argument that their claim was unjust § 4. Another great objection of Protestants against the Popes Primacy is fetched from S. Gregory who was Pope himselfe and is this That he that intitled himselfe universall Bishop exalted himselfe like Lucifer above his brethren and was a forerunner of Antichrist To the understanding of which words I found that the word universall hath two meanings the one proper literall and grammaticall whereby it signifies Only Bishops excluding all others the other transferred and Metaphoricall whereby it signifies the supreme over all Bishops and S. Gregory censured this title in the first sense because that from hence it would have ensued that there had been but one Bishop only and that all the rest had been but his Deputies and not true Bishops and true Officers of Christ as
he saith l. 7. ind 2. Ep. 96. If there be one that is universall Bishop all the rest are no more Bishops Now S. Gregory maintained that all Bishops were true Bishops Ministers and officers of Christ although concerning jurisdiction they were subordinate the one to the other He therefore that usurps that title wholely to himselfe exalts himselfe with relation to the Episcopall order above his brethren denying him the essence and propriety of Bishops and officers of Christ and makes them only Commissioners to him as if they had the originall of that office from him and not from God And in this sense S. Gregory withstood the title of universall Bishop and not to deny in case of jurisdiction the superiority of one Bishop over another and the Bishop of Rome over all For that he maintaines Lib. 7. ind 2. Ep. 62. saying If there be any crime found in Bishops I know no Bishop but is subject to the Sea Apostolique He also addes for explication of the matter in hand Lib. 4. ind 13. Ep. 32. that The care of the Church hath been committed to the holy Apostle and Prince of all the Apostles S. Peter the care and Principality hath been committed to him and yet he is not called universall Apostle In which words hee ascribes the Primacy and headship of the Church to S. Peter yet denies the universality it must therfore needs be that the word universal in S. Gregories sense in this case is not the deniall of the Primacy of Jurisdiction over the whole Church but of his being the only Apostle as if there were none but he such as should derive their authority originally from him not from God And with application to the Pope it is the denyall of his being the only Bishop as if there were no Bishop in the world but he or such as he should constitute his deputies as from himself and not by command from God and as the Officers of God Moreover the Histories of all ages beat record that the Bishop of Rome hath exercised authority over all other Bishops in the world even in all Forraign Nations both before S. Gregory and after and even in his person and therefore he cannot mean the universall Government when he reproves the title of universall Bishop as by creating them himself by confirming them created by others by deposing them by restoring them being deposed by others by appointing them his Vicars by finall deciding their controversies by accepting their Appeales by making Lawes over all the Church by dispensing with them by inflicting his censures by being President in Generall Councells by calling of Councells so far as concerned the Ecclesiasticall authority which is the chiefest though the Emperours concurred therein in regard of temporall authority and of that only to make them obligatory to the secular tribunall and executory by the Ministry of the Officers of the Emperour as witnesseth the sixt Generall Councell Act 18. speaking of the first Generall Councell of Nice which saith The most sacred Constantine and the Praise-worthy Sylvester called the famous Councell of Nice which may also be proved of all the rest And by the saying of Athanasius ad solit That an Emperour presiding in Ecclesiasticall judgements is the Abomination of Desolation fore-told by Daniel And of Osius the Bishop of Cordua in an Epistle of his to Constantius the Emperour Go not about to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affairs and command not us in such matters but rather learne of us God hath committed the Empire to thee and the government of the Church to us And by the Protestation of the Emperour Constantine Pogonat sent to Rome for the holding of the sixth Generall Councell I will not sit as Emperour amongst them I will not speak imperiously In Epist Greg. 2. ad Leon. Imp. Ep. 1. but as one of them and what the Prelates shal ordain I will execute All which do undoubtedly prove the Pope of Rome both by divine and humane Law and by the right of prescription in all ages to be the supreme Pastor and Head of the Church And all the objections urged by Calvin all other invaders of this Sea are but like water furiously beating against a Rock broken into drops and forced creepingly to recoile and to foame and cry through shame and indignation at their vaine and impossible attempts impossible indeed unlesse they have more force then the gates of hell for they shall never prevaile against this Rock CHAP. XXI That English Protestants do much mistake Catholique Doctrine being abused by the malice or ignorance of many of their Ministers And that upon their owne grounds they are obliged to inform themselves more exactly of the truth § 1. AFter all these fore-going considerations for my more explicite satisfaction I descended to the examination of all the particular Doctrines in controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants whom I found in all things to be exceedingly over-weighed both by Scripture Councells Fathers and reason Of which I will say no more than I have done but onely to shew in some few particulars how our poore English people are abused by their ordinary Preachers and made to believe monstrous things of the Doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome who for the most part stating the question false and laying to the Catholiques charge the things that they do not teach raise an error out of their own fancy and then fight against it most couragiously under the title of Popery And every young Minister is so valiant herein that he thinks he baffles the most learned Cardinall Bellarmine as Goliah thought he could have done David and in this case for the most part the most ignorant and imprudent are the forwardest And this I add to rectifie the opinions of the lesse learned and to reconcile them so far to the Catholique doctrines as to believe they are not so monstrous as they are vulgarly imagined First then they tell the people that the Papists as they call them are Idolaters in that they worship Images stockes and stones little painted babies and puppets with many such like titles wherewith they make themselves merry and then alledge all the places of the Scripture or Fathers wherein the Idolatry of the Heathen is reproved Now it is most certain that this is an unjust charge against Catholiques first because the worship of Images and Idolls is not all one seeing the words are of different signification as is manifest by those places where it is said Let us make man after our Image Gen. 1.26 And a man ought not to cover his head because he is the image and glory of God 1 Cor. 11.7 with many the like wherein if they say that Image Idoll were all one they must say also that when God made Adam hee made to himselfe an Idoll Secondly Catholiques doe not worship Images as God which the Heathen and Jewes when they had committed Idolatry did as appears by Elias who saith
higher then the fountain from whence it springs if therefore particular reason be the governour of our faith which reason is a humane and fallible thing it cannot rise to nor support a divine faith But divine faith is that which God requires of us in the businesse of Religion and that which is not such is none And it is convenient that as God ordained man to a supernaturall end namely the blissefull vision of himselfe which is a thing far above all excellencies of nature so he should bring him to this blisse by believing things above the reach of reason which in man is his nature and to beget this faith by Miracles his owne acts which are above the power of nature and by the testimony of those that do those supernaturall acts to whom if he have given his deeds it cannot be doubted but he hath given his word of any part whereof to make any doubt is to call the credit of all into question the house of Faith being like some artificiall buildings whereof if you pull out one pin you loosen the whole frame So if a man disbelieve any one point delivered him by the Catholique Church he unjoynts the whole frame of faith and virtually denies it all and that because they have all the same height of proof to wit the testimony of the Church which if she can lie in one thing she may for ought wee know in another and so in all and thus bring a man to doubt of all and then to denie all And that those men that doe denie some one point of Catholique Tradition though unwritten doe not denie all is not for that they have any faith but out of secular ends and deceiptfull reason § 4. Indeed some Protestants grant that if Tradition be universall and perfectly Catholique it doth oblige to the belief thereof but not otherwise by which universall Tradition they meane such as never any one gainsaid But if such onely are to be called Catholique Traditions there is scarce any thing left for Christians to believe and indeed to that passe have many brought it for some have denied the distinction of Persons in the Trinity others the Divinity of our Saviour others his humanity others the Deity of the Holy Ghost and a hundred more now if no Tradition be to be called Catholique but such as was never denied by any one or some number of Christians then a man may deny the fore-mentioned and many other points and Articles of faith because their Tradition hath not been so universall but that some have denied it yea some books of the Scripture it self were not universally received till about four hundred years after Christ By Catholique or universall Tradition then must be understood that which the Catholique Church hath alwaies taught not which all Christians for then we must look for Tradition in the mouths of Heretiques whose property it is to deny some Tradition or other under pretence that it is opposite to Scripture And if any have taught contrary the Catholique Church hath condemned them for Heretiques which is a sufficient proof that untill such Hereticall Spirits opposed some one or more Traditions of the Church they were universally believed As for example the Doctrine of Christs consubstantiality or being of the same substance with the Father no reasonable man will deny but that it was generally believed in the Church before the daies of the Arch-heretique Arrius and that the Councel of Nice condemning of him was a sufficient proof that the doctrine he opposed was the universall Tradition of the Church by force whereof he was overthrowne and not by Scripture only there being no place of Scripture so plaine but he would give some answer to it and likewise alledge plenty of Scripture in the proof of his own Heresie while he took upon him to interpret it himself forfaking the traditionall sense thereof and would receive no answer to it And if Arrius his denyall of that point of Faith will make it universall for place or the doctrine it self new and so universall for time as some in other instances do alledge because it was then first declared by reason of that opposition then it may be lawfull under the same pretence for men to deny all the Traditions of the Church all the decrees of Generall Councells of the Church and to revive all the Heresies that were in the Church § 5. Moreover to attribute conditionall infallibility to the Church and not absolute in all that she delivers * Chillingworth pag. 118. Pet. Martyr loc Com. clas 4. c 4. sect 21. Confess Helvet c. 17. as some Protestants doe making her infallible onely while she followes the Scripture and Vniversall Tradition is to give her no more priviledge than to a child or fool who are also infallible while they affirm nothing but what is agreeable to Scripture and universall Tradition But if we know not Scripture nor Tradition but by the Churches direction how shall we know in her exposition of Scripture and deciding of controversies that she doth erre unlesse we know it from her also seeing her authority in the one is as good as in the other and by those reasons that we may deny the truth of the one we may deny the other And if she say she have expounded Scripture truly and decided controversies aright by the rule of Scripture and Tradition who shall gainesay her Can any man be so foolish as to think his word is of more credit than the whole Churches Or that his reason is better then hers Or that if she may erre from her rule he may not do so also And if their infallibilities be both of the same strength who in his right mind would not believe millions affirming the same thing rather than one or some few affirming the contrary If there were a rule so plaine and clear that all men understood it and none could pervert it then there were no need of a judge or directer but if the rule be obscure or liable to misinterpretation as all words are let them be expressed never so plainly then it is meet that there should not onely be a Judge but that this Judge should be infallible seeing the businesse concerns the salvation of mankind and not be subject to the petty after-examinations of proud and discontented people as if one or more of them did know the meaning of the rule better than the Judge when that Judge is the universall Church And that which these men affirm in this matter amounts to this wise Maxime That the Church is infallible while she is infallible and so is the Devill § 6. Frivolous then and without foundation is that late started distinction of points fundamentall and not fundamentall and the assertion built thereon That the Church may erre in the one and not in the other and so by consequence we are not bound to believe her in all things Indeed in regard of the materiall object or thing to be believed some points
English translates it thus whosoever shall eat this bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily putting and for or thereby making the Apostle speak of the receiving of the bread and wine unworthily in an united sense whereas he speakes of them in a divided sense Thus in very many places do they deal with the Scripture like the Elephant when he goes to drink who troubles the cleer water with his feet because he will not see the deformity of his face So they trouble and defile the sense of Scripture either in words or exposition because they would not see the deformity of their Errors Many falsifications also and corruptions of Catholique Authors by the Protestant writers I have met with as where they speaking something by way of supposition they alledge them as if they speak it positively and absolutely where they bring the objections of Heretiques they alledge them as speaking the words in their owne names where they relate with reprehension the sayings of wicked men they alledge them as saying those words themselves which is as if they should charge S. Mathew himselfe with the words of the Pharisees against our Saviour Behold a glutton and a drinker of wine Math. 11.19 But I will not be particular in this matter because many that have been guilty in this case have been called to a strict account by their Catholique answerers And when they are pressed by Catholiques with plaine and direct proofes O what serpentine wriglings and windings to escape the assaulters doe they make O what perverse ridiculous contradictory answers and evasions do some of them make in which they doe at once shew both much wit and much folly for fooles could not speak as they doe and wise men would not In so much that a Answer to a Jesuites challenge chapt of limb Patrum Bishop Vsher Primat of Armagh a very learned man to avoid the confession of Christs descent into hell according to the Article of the Creed in the plaine sense thereof doth so turn it and winde it that he makes the sense of the words He descended into hell to be He ascended into heaven to such pittifull refuges doth the weaknesse of a bad cause drive them And thus they that have the most learning amongst them being by unhappy accident bred up in an erroneous Religion and thereby presuming it to be true do bend all the endeavours of their learning to the maintenance of their errors and the obscuring of the truth which learning if it were directed to the right end might by just title claime a place in the first file of desert even like a torch which turned downward is extinguished with that wax which held upward would make it bright and glorious But though their learning were a hundred times doubled yet as Aarons serpent devoured the Magicians serpents Exod. 7.12 so the wisedome of God which is in his Church will confound the sensuall wisdome of all her opposers seeing there is no wisdome nor prudence nor councell against God Prov. 21.30 § 3. I further observed that the arguments of Protestants for themselves were very fallacious most frequently in that which the Logicians call FALLACIA CONSEqUENCIA which is when the consequence is not justly inferred for example they argue thus the Sacrament is called a figure of Christs body therefore it is not his true and reall body which is a false Consequence for it may be both even as Christ is called a figure of the substance of his father Heb. 1.3 and yet is also the same substance Christ saith come unto me therefore we may go to no body else which is false for we may go to him and others also The Apostle saith that we are Justified by faith therefore say they not by works whereas we are justified by both We must confesse our sinnes to God therefore not to a Priest whereas wee must do both Christ is the head of the Church therefore the Pope is not whereas both are in severall capacities The like might be said in many others by which kind of arguing unlearned people are exceedingly deluded think that while one thing must be done that must be done only the veine of that word only invented by Luther in the matter of justification by faith running through the whole body of their Religion § 4. Moreover I found this contradiction amongst the Patrons of Protestancy that some of them reject the Fathers and accuse them of being infected with the errors which prevailed in their times and what were their errors even all that they taught contrary to their Protestant doctrines so making themselves the rule to judge the Fathers by and not the Fathers which any wise man would think more fit a rule to themselves who no doubt knew the Scriptures also and what was agreable or contrary to them better than they Protestants being herein like carpenters who wear their rule at their backs casting behind them neglecting those that should guide their belief But other Protestants ashamed of this insolency pretend for the credit of their cause that the Fathers are altogether on their side and then with much labour hunt out some obscure passages most liable to be wrested and triumph therein as if they had found a demonstration which when they are sifted either they make nothing for them or else quite against them who in this case are like to a man ready to be drowned who to save himselfe will catch hold on a naked sword with which he cuts his fingers So Protestants sunk into the despaire of their cause think to save themselves by that which serves but to encrease their overthrow They pretend also to answer many plaes of the Fathers alledged by Catholiques and to give their words a Protestant meaning and thereby run the Fathers into manifest contradiction of themselves in regard that the Fathers have but some oblique passages which seem and but seem to make for them as whoever spake so exactly nay who can possibly speak so exactly as that his words may not be made to seem different from his meaning but they have whole Bookes Sermons Tractates and a world of dispersed places of purpose in the maintenance of Catholique truths And though they say that the Fathers taught Protestant doctrine and they give a Protestant sense though very incongruous to many of the places of the Fathers alledged by Catholiques yet they dare not use those words and Phrases of the Fathers as of the Masse the Altar the Sacrifice concerning reall presence prayers to Saints and for the dead merits satisfaction and Purgatory with the like in their prayers Sermons and books which if they speak Protestant Doctrine in the true sense of the Fathers as they say they do why do they not with the sense make use of the words and speeches also I can conceive no other reason but for fear the peoples understandings not so fraught with prejudice nor acquainted with their uncouth evasions should carry them