Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	catholic_n	church_n	universal_a	1,773	5	9.0565	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A32204	Copies of two papers written by the late King Charles II together with a copy of a paper written by the late Duchess of York : to which is added an answer to the aforesaid papers all printed together.	Charles II, King of England, 1630-1685.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. Answer to some papers lately printed concerning the authority of the Catholick Church.; York, Anne Hyde, Duchess of, 1637-1671.	1686 (1686)	Wing C2946; ESTC R29952	29,168	42

MATTERS of FAITH and the REFORMATION of the CHURCH of ENGLAND DVBLIN Reprinted by Ios. Ray on Colledge Green for Rob Thornton at the Leather-Bottle in Skinner Row MDCLXXXVI AN ADVERTISEMENT IF the Papers here answered had not been so publickly dispersed through the Nation a due Respect to the Name they bear would have kept the Author from publishing any Answer to them But because they may now fall into many hands who without some assistance may not readily resolve some difficulties started by them He thought it not unbecoming his duty to God and the King to give a clearer light to the Things contained in them And it can be no reflection on the Authority of a Prince for a private Subject to examine a piece of Coyn as to its just value though it bears His Image and Superscription upon it In matters that concern Faith and Salvation we must prove all things and hold fast that which is good AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST PAPER IF all men could believe as they pleased I should not have fail'd of satisfaction in this First Paper the Design of it being to put an end to Particular Disputes to which I am so little a Friend that I could have been glad to have found as much reason in it to convince as I saw there was a fair appearance to deceive But there is a Law in our Minds distinct from that of our Inclinations and out of a just and due regard to That we must examine the most plausible Writings thô back'd with the greatest Authority before we yield our Assent unto them If particular Controversies about Matters of Faith could be ended by a Principle as visible as that the Scripture is in Print all men of sence would soon give over Disputing for none who dare believe what they see can call that in Question But what if the Church whose Authority it is said they must submit to will not allow them to believe what they see How then can this be a sufficient reason to perswade them to believe the Church because it is as visible as that the Scripture is in Print Unless we must only use our senses to find out the Church and renounce them assoon as we have done it Which is a very bad requital of them and no great Honour to the Church which requires it But with all due submission it is no more visible that the Roman Church is the Catholick Church than it is that a part is the whole and the most corrupt part that one Church which Christ hath here upon Earth It is agreed among all Christians That Christ can have but one Church upon Earth as there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism And this is that Church we profess to believe in the two Creeds But if those who made those Creeds for our direction had intended the Roman Catholick Church why was it not so expressed How came it to pass that such a limitation of the sense of Christs Catholick Church to the Roman should never be put to Persons to be Baptized in any Age of the Church For I do not find in the Office of Baptism even in the Roman Church that it is required that they believe the Roman Catholick Church or that they deny the validity of Baptism out of the Communion of the Roman Church From whence it is to me as visible as that the Scripture is in Print that the Church of Rome it self doth not believe that it is the one Catholick Church mentioned in the two Creeds For then it must void all Baptism out of its Communion which it hath never yet done And as long as Baptism doth enter Pe●sons into the Cathol●ck Church it is impossible that all who have the true form of Baptis● though out of the Communion of the Roman Church should be Members of the Catholick Church and yet the Communion of the Roman and Catholick be all one as it must be if the Roman Church be the Catholick and Apostolick Church professed in the Creeds If we had been so happy to have lived in those Blessed Times when the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul it had been no difficulty to have shewed that one visible Church which Christ had here upon Earth But they must be great strangers to the History of the Church who have not heard of the early and great Divisions in the Communion of it And there was a remarkable difference in the Nature of those Schisms which happened in the Church which being not considered hath been the occasion of great misapplication of the sayings of the Ancients about the One Catholick Church Some did so break off Communion with other parts of the Catholick Church as to challenge that Title wholly to themselves as was evident in the case of the Novatians and Donatists for they rebaptiz'd all that embraced their Communion Others were cast out of Communion upon particular differences which were not supposed to be of such a nature as to make them no members of the Catholick Church So the Bishops of Rome excommunicated the Bishops of Asia for not keeping Easter when They did and the Bishops both of Asia and Africa for not allowing the B●ptism of Hereticks But is it reasonable to suppose that upon these Differences they shut out ●ll those Holy Bishops and Martyrs from the possiblility of Salvation by excluding them from their Communion If not then there may be d●fferent Communions among Christians which may still continue Parts of the Catholick Church and consequently no one Member of such a Division ought to assume to it self the Title and Authority of the One Catholick Church But if any One Port doth so though never so great and conspicuous it is guilty of the ●ame Presumption with the Novatians and Donatists and is as much cause of the Schisms which happen thereupon in the Church as they were For a long time before the Reformation there had been great and considerable breaches between the Eastern and Western Churches insomuch that they did renounce each others Communion And in these Differences four Patriarchal Churches joined together against the fifth viz. that of the Bishop of Rome But the Eastern Patriarchs siking in their Power by the horrible Invasio● of the Enemies of the Christian Faith and the Bishops of Rome advancing themselves to so much Authority by the advantages they took from the kindness of some Princes and the Weakness of others They would hear of no other terms of accommodation with the Eastern Churches but by an intire submission to the Pope as Head of the Catholick Church Which all the Churches of the East refused however different among themselves and to this day lock on the Pope's Supremacy as an Innovation in the Church and Usurpation on the Rights of the other Patriarchs and B●shops In all those Churches the Two Creeds are professed true Baptism administred and an undoubted Succession of Bishops from the Apostles How then come They to be excluded

from being Parts of the One Catholick and Apostolick Church And if they be not excluded how can the Roman Church assume to it self that glorious Title So that it seems to me as visible as that the Scripture is in Print that the Roman Church neither is nor can be that One Church which Christ left upon Earth And this Principle being removed which ought to be taken for granted since it can never be proved we must unavoidably enter into the Ocean of Particular Disputes And I know no reason any can have to be so afraid of it since we have so sure a Compass as the Holy Scripture to direct our passage But the reason of avoiding particular Disputes is because the evidence is too clear in them that the Church of Rome hath notoriously deviated from this infal●ible Rule And it is as impossible for a Church which hath erred to be Infallible as for a Church really Infallible to err But if a Church pretend to prove her Infallibility by Texts which are not so clear as those which prove her to have actually erred then we have greater reason to recede from her Errors than to be deceived with such a fallible pretence to Infallibili●y Well! But it is not left to every phantastical mans head to believe as be pleases but to the Church And is it indeed le●t to the Church to believe as it pleases But the meaning I suppose is that those who reject the Authority of the Roman Catholick Church do leave every man to believe according to his own fancy Certainly those of the Church of England cannot be liable to any imputation of this Nature For our Church receives the three Creeds and embraces the four General Councils and professes to hold nothing contrary to any Universal Tradition of the Church from the Apostles times And we have often offered to put the Controversies between Us and the Church of Rome upon that issue And do not those rather believe as they please who believe the Roman Church to be the Catholick Church without any colour from Scriptures Antiquity or Reason Do not those believe as they please who can believe against the most convincing evidence of their own senses Do not those believe as they please who can reconcile the lawfulness of the Worship of Images with Gods forbidding it the Communion in one kind with Christs Institution and the praying in an unknown Tongue with the 14 Ch. of the first Epistle to the Corinthians But all these and many other Absurdities may go down by vertue of the C●urches Authority to whom it is said Christ left the Power upon Earth to govern us in matters of Faith We do not deny that the Church hath Authority of declaring matters of Faith or else it never could have condemn'd the Antient H●re●ies But then we must consider the difference between the Universal Church in a General and free Council declaring the sense of Scripture in Articles of Faith generally received in the Christian Church from the Apostles Times as was done when the Nicene Creed was made and a Faction in the Church assuming to it self the Title of Catholick and proceeding by other rules than the first Councils did and imposing new Opinions and Practices as things necessary to the Communion of the Catholick Church And this is the true Point in difference between us and those of the Roman Church about the Churches Authority in matters of Faith since the Council of Trent For we think we have very great reason to complain when a Party in the Church the most corrupt and obnoxious takes upon it self to define many new Doctrines as necessary Points of Faith which have neither Scripture nor Universal Tradition for them It were a very irrational thing we are told to make Laws for a Countrey and leave it to the Inhabitants to be Interpreters and Iudges of those Laws for then every Man will be his own Iudge and by consequence no such thing as either Right or Wrong But is it not as irrational to allow an Usurper to interpret the Laws to his own advantage against the just Title of the Prince and the true Interest of the People And if it be not Reasonable for any private Person to be his own Iudg why should a publick Invader be so But we hope it will be allowed to the Loyal Inhabitants of a Country so far to interpret the Laws as to be able to understand the Duty they owe to their King and to justifie his Right against all the Pretences of Usurpers And this is as much as we plead for in this case Can we therefore suppose That God Almighty would leave us at those uncertainties as to give us a Rule to go by and leave every Man to be his own Iudge And can we reasonably suppose That God Almighty should give us a Rule not capable of being understood by those to whom it was given in order to the great End of it viz. the saving of their Souls For this was the main end of the Rule to direct us in the way to Heaven and not meerly to determine Controversies The Staff which a Man uses may serve to measure things by but the principal design is to walk with it So it is with the Holy Scripture if Controversies arise It is fit to examine and compare them with this Infallible Rule but when that is done to help us in our way to Heaven is that which it was chi●fly intended for And no M●n can think it of equal consequence to him not to be mistaken and not to be damned In matters of Good and Evil every mans Conscience is his immediate judge and why not in matters of Truth and Falshood Unless we suppose mens ●nvoluntary mistakes to be more dangerous than their w●l●ul sins But after all We do not leave every Man to be his own Iudge any further than it concerns his own Salvation which depends upon his particular Care and Sincerity For to prevent any dangerous Mistakes by the Artifice of Seducers we do allow the Assistance of those Spiritual Guides which God hath appointed in his Church for the better instructing and governing private Persons We embrace the Ancient Creeds as a summary comprehension of the Articles of Faith and think no Man ought to follow his own particular Fancy against Doctrines so universally received in the Christian Church from the Apostles Times I do ask any Ingenuous Man whether it be not the same thing to follow our own Fancy or to interpret Scripture by it If we allowed no Creeds no Fathers no Councils there might have been some colour for such a Question But do we permit Men to interpret Scripture according to their own Fancy who live in a Church which owns the Doctrine of the Primitive Church more frankly and ingenuously than any Church in the World besides without setting up any private Spirit against it or the present Roman Church to be the Interpreter of it And now I hope I may have leave

to ask some Questions of any ingenuous Man as whether it be not the same thing for the Church of Rome to make the Rule as to assume to it self the sole Power of giving the sense of it For what can a Rule signify without the sense And if this were the intention of Almighty God had it not been as necessary to have told us to whom he had given the Power of Interpreting the Rule as to have given the Rule it self Whether it be reasonable for the Church of Rome to interpret those Texts wherein this Power of Interpreting is to be containes For this is to make it Iudge in its own Cause which was thought an Absurdity before And whether it be not as mischievous to allow a Prosperous Usurp●r the Power of Interpreting Laws according to his own Interest as any private Person according to his own Fancy Wheth●r it be possible to reform Disorders in the Church when the Person principally accused is Supream Judge Whether those can be indifferent Judges in Councils who beforehand take an Oath to defend that Authority which is to be Debated Whether Tradition be not as uncertain a Rule as Fancy when Men judge of Tradition according to their Fancy I would have any Man shew me where the Power of deciding mattees of Faith is given to every particular Man If by deciding Matters of Faith be understood the determining them in such a manner as to oblige others I do not know where it is given to every particular Man nor how it should be For then every particular Man would have a Power over every particular Man and there would want a new D●cision whose should take p●ace But if by deciding Matters of Faith no more be meant but every mans being ●atisfied of th● Reasons why he believes one thing to be true and not another that belongs to every Man as he is bound to take care of his Soul and must give an account bot● to God and Man of the Reason of his Faith And what can be meant in Scripture by Proving all things and holding fast that which is good 1 Thess 5. 21. By trying the Spirits whether they be of God ● John 4. 1. By judging of themselves what is right Luke 12. 57. unless God had given to Mankind a Faculty of discerning truth and falshood in Matters of Faith But if every Man hath not such a Power how comes h● to be satisfied about the Churches Authority Is not that a Matter of Faith And where ever any Person will shew me that every Man hath a Power to determine his Faith in that matter I 'le undertake to shew him the rest Christ left his Power to his Church even to forgive Sins in Heaven and left his Spirit with them which they exercised after his Resurrection But where then was the Roman Catholick Church And how can it be hence inferred That these Powers are now in the Church of Rome exclusive to all others unless it be made appear that it was Heir-General to all the Apostles I suppose it will be granted that the Apostles had some gifts of the Spirit which the Church of Rome will not in Modesty pretend to such as the Gift of Tongues the Spirit of Discerning Prophesie Miraculous Cures and Punishments Now here lies the difficulty to shew what part of the Promise of the Infallible Spirit for the ordinary Power of the Keys relates not to this matter was to expire with the Apostles and what was to be continued to the Church in all Ages A Promise of Divine Assistance is denied by none but Pelagians But how far that extends is the Question In the Souls of good Men it is so as to keep them in the way to Heaven but not to prevent any lapse into sin and it were worth our knowing where God hath ever promised to keep any Men more from Error than from Sin Doth he hate one more than the other Is one more disagreeing to the Christian Doct●ine than the other How came then so much to be said for the keeping Men from Error when at the same time they confess they may not only commit great sins but err very dangerously in the most Solemn manner in what relates to the Doctrine of Manners Would any have believed the Apostles Infallible if they had known them to be Persons of ill Lives or that they had notoriously erred in some Rules of great Consequence to the Welfare of Mankind Now all this is freely yielded as to the Pretence of Infallibility in the Church of Rome It is granted that the Guides of that Church have been very bad Men and that in Councils they have frequently erred about the Dep●sing Power being only a Matter of Practice and not of Faith Whether it be so or not I now dispute not but it is granted that notwithstanding this Infallible Spirit the Roman Church may grosly err in a matter of mighty Consequence to the Peace of Christendom and yet it cannot err in decreeing the least Matters of Faith As for Instance it can by no means err about the seven Sacraments or the Intention of the Priest about them but it may err about Deposing Princes and Absolving Subjects from their Allegiance Which in easier terms is They can never err about their own Interest but they may about any other whatsoever I pass over the next Paragraph the sense being in perfect and what is material about the Creeds hath been spoken to already That which next deserves Consideration is That the Church was the Iudge even of the Scripture it self many years after the Apostles which Books were Canonical and which were not We have a distinction among us of Judges of the Law and Iudges of the Fact The One declares what the Law is the Fact being supposed the Other gives judgment upon the Fact as it appears before them Now in this Case about the Canonical Books the Church is not judge of the Law For they are not to declare whether a Book appearing to be Canonical ought by it to be received for Canonical which is taken for granted among all Christians but all they have to do is to give judgment upon the Matter of Fact i.e. whether it appear upon sufficient Evidence to have been a Book written by Divine Inspiration And the Church of Rome hath no particular Priviledge in this matter but gives its Judgment as other parts of the Christian World do And if it takes upon it to judge contrary to the general sense of the Christian Church we are not to be concluded by it but an Appeal lyes to a greater Tribunal of the Universal Church And if they had this Power then I desire to know how they came to lose it Who are meant by They And what is understood by this Power It is one thing for a Part of the Church to give Testimony to a matter of Fact and another to assume the Power of making Books Canonical which were not so This latter no Church in

her That if any Writing were put into her Hands by those of the Chu●ch of Rome that she would send it either to him or the then Bishop of Oxford whom he le●t in Attendance upon her After which he saith She was many Days with him at Farnham in all which time she spake not one word to him of any Doubt she had about her Religion And yet this Paper bears Date Aug. 20. that Year wherein she declares her self ch●nged in her Rel●gion So that it is evident she did not make use of the ordinary Means for her own Satisfaction at least a to th●se Bishops who had known her longest But she saith That she spoke severally to two of the best Bishops we have in England who both told her there were many ●hings in the Roman Church which it were much to be wished we had kept As Confession which was no doubt commanded of God that Praying for the Dead was one of the Ancient Things in Christianity that for their parts they did it daily though they would not own it And afterwards pressing one of them very much upon the other Points he told her That if he had been bred a Catholick he would not change his Religion but that being of another Church wherein he was sure were all things necessary to Salvation he thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave that Church wherein he received his Baptism Which Discourses she ●aid did but add more to the desire she had to be a Catholick This I confess seems to be to the purpose if there were not some Circumstances and Expressions very much mistaken in the Representation of it But yet suppose the utmost to be allow'd there could be no Argument from hence drawn for leaving the Communion of our Church if this Bishop's Authority or Example did signi●y any thing with her For supposing he did say That if he had been bred in the Communio● of the Church of Rome he would not change his Religion Yet he added That being of another Church wherein were all things necessary to Salvation he thought it very ill to give that Scandal as to leave that Church wherein he had received his Baptism Now why should not the last words have greater force to have kept her in the Communion of our Church than the former to have drawn her from it For why should any Person forsake the Communion of our Church unless it appears necessary to Salvation so to do And yet this yielding Bishop did affirm that all things necessary to Salvation were certainly in our Church and that it was an ill thing to leave it How could this add to her desire of leaving our Church unless there were some other Motive to draw her thither and then such small Inducements would serve to inflame such a Desire But it is evident from her own words afterwards that these Concessions of the B●shop could have no Influence upon her for she declares and calls God to witness that she would never have changed her Religion if she had thought it possible to save her Soul otherwise Now what could the Bishop's words signi●y towards her Turning when he declares just contrary viz. not only that it was possible for her to be saved without turning but that he was sure we had all things necessary to Salvation and that it was a very ill thing to leave our Church There must therefore have been some more secret Reason which encreased her Desire to be a Catholick after these Discourses unless the Advantage were taken from the B●shop's calling the Church of Rome the Catholick Religion If he had been bred a Catholick he would not have chang'd his Religion But if we take these words so strictly he must have contradicted himself for how could he be sure we had all things necessary to Salvotion if we were out of the Catholick Church Was a B●shop of our Church and one of the best Bishops of our Church as she said so weak as to yeild That he was sure all things necessary to Salvation were to be had out of the Communion of the Catholick Church But again there is an inconsistency in his saying ●hat he thought it very ill to leave our Church which no Man of common sense would have s●id if he had believed the Roman Church to be the Catholick exclusive of all others that do not join in Communion with it The utmost then that can be made of all this is That there was a certain Bishop of this Church who held both Churches to be so far Parts of the Catholick Church that there was no necessity of going from one Church to another But if he asserted that he must overthrow the necessity of the Reformation and consequen●ly not believe our Articles and Homilies and so could not be any true Member of the Church of England But the late Bishop of Winchester hath made a shorter Answer to all this For he first doubts Whether there ever were any such Bishops who made such Answers And afterwards he affirms That he believes there never was in Rerum Naturâ such a Discourse as is pretended to have been between this Great Person and two of the most Learned Bishops of England But God be thanked the Cause of our Church doth not depend upon the singular Opinion of one or two Bishops in it wherein they apparently recede from the establish'd Doctrine of it And I am sure those of the Church of Rome take it ill from us to be charged with the Opinion of Particular Divines against the known Sentiments of their Church Therefore supposing the Matter of Fact true it ought not to have moved her to any Inclination to leave the Church of England But after all She protests in the Presence of Almighty God that no Person Man or Woman directly or indirectly ever said any thing to her since she came into England or used the least Endeavour to make her change her Religion and that it is a Blessing she wholly owes to Almighty God So that the Bishops are acquitted from having any hand in it by her own words and as far as we can understand her meaning she thought her self converted by immediate Divine Illumination We had thought the pretence to a private Spirit had not been at this time allowed in the Church of Rome But I observe that many things are allowed to bring Persons to the Church of Rome which they will not permit in those who go from it As the use of Reason in the Choice of a Church the Judgment of Sense and here that which they would severely condemn in others as a Private Spirit or Enthusiasm will pass well enough if it doth but lead one to their Communion Any Motive or Method is good enough which tends to that end and none can be sufficient against it But why may not others set up for the Change as to other Opinions upon the same Grounds as well as this Great Person