Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A30359
|
The infallibility of the Church of Rome examined and confuted in a letter to a Roman priest / by Gilbert Burnet.
|
Burnet, Gilbert, 1643-1715.
|
1680
(1680)
|
Wing B5805; ESTC R15581
|
20,586
|
38
|
on vice but that the Church wants a main and necessary complement without which she cannot be perfect and well secured and you know St. Paul reckons Heresies among the works of the Flesh. Now what reason is it that of all the works of the flesh provision should only be against Heresie Therefore I freely acknowledge that as God has left the Will at liberty that so the glory of his Saints might be the greater serving him not by constraint but willingly so he hath also left our Reasons free to judge of things proposed to us whether they be true or false Nor indeed can we believe but as our Reasons are convinced for we cannot put a force on our perswasion And since our Saviour told us it was impossible but that Offences must come so I allow it impossible but that Errors should come for the greater trial of sound and true Believers And I must add that Religion consists in a few plain things in which if a man bring along with him a sincere and pure mind he is sure not to err mortally He may be mistaken in some particular opinions which though they pass for matters of Religion yet are as extrinsick to it as the various Hypatheses in Philosophy are I acknowledge every body ought to have that humble mistrust of themselves and reverence to the Church wherein they were born as not to be easily engaged in new opinions and ought to be very well assured both of the truth and importance of any new Doctrine before they receive it and much more before they broach and vent it to the disturbance of the peace of the Society they live in And who so without a very clear assurance after the diligent application of his thoughts having purified his mind in the exercise of mortification and self denial doth obtrude new Doctrines on the World is highly guilty in the sight of God for renting the body and breaking the unity of the Church But if one after a severe inquiry and all due preparation be clearly convinced of any truth how generally soever it be either unknown or derived he may nay cannot chuse but must believe it But though this assurance may warrant his private departing from the received opinion yet his assurance must be full and his Call clear before he offer his opinion to others But in that case I acknowledge the Guides of the Church may and ought to consider such opinions and pass a Censure on them according to the Scriptures which flowing from persons whose Character makes them both more particularly devoted to God and more conversant in Sacred Writings and as it is to be supposed are by the purity of their minds qualified for a higher sense of divine truth and by their exemplary lives are possessed of the esteem of those over whom they are set will undoubtedly have great influence on all serious and sober persons yet such as are convinced that their decisions are contrary to the Scriptures must still believe God rather than man But in that case the Magistrate may secure the peace of the Society by obliging them either to rest quiet with their Opinions or to go out of his Dominions The Church may also by excommunicating them preserve others from being infected by their misperswasions And thus except you give me better proof I am not convinced there is a necessity of any Infallible Iudge for deciding Controversies and neither for the salvation of souls nor for the peace of the Society of Christians Not for the first since no Proposition is clearer than this That every Christian who studies to be well informed in divine matters and sincerely follows his Conscience shall certainly be saved Nor is this Infallible Iudge necessary for the Society since those who have the Legislative Power whether Civil or Ecclesiastick may govern a Society well though they be not Infallible so that the Church may have an Authority though not infallible and yet sufficient to secure her peace 2. My second Question shall be Whether there be really such an Infallible Iudge on Earth For though this be not necessary yet I shall not deny but our Saviour according to that overflowing love he bears his Church may have provided Her with this security against Error But herein I must crave your pardon to tell you I am very apt to think there is no such Court on Earth for in all extraordinary things to which our assent is craved the means of conveying or rather imposing such belief since no man of a strong mind will easily credit an extraordinary thing especially that which subjects to it the very freedom of his thoughts must have an Evidence and Authority proportioned to the Greatness and Importance of that they recommend to our Faith And therefore when God sent Moses to deliver his People and be their Guide he gave him a power of working such mighty Works which being done in the sight of both Egyptians and Israelites might convince both one and t'other that there was an extraordinary Authority communicated to him he also told the Israelites to demand a Sign or Wonder from every pretender to Prophesie or Divine Mission And because the power of evil Spirits is undoubtedly far beyond ours so that many extraordinary things may be performed by Magick and evil Arts therefore Moses Deut. xiii allows even the People of Israel a previous judgment of the Doctrine of any Pretender to Prophesie before they acknowledged his Authority or were wrought on by his Sign or Wonder We find also the Prophets either by Miracles or Predictions proving their Divine Authority And though the History of all the Prophets is not so full as to give us an account of the Signs or Wonders of each of them yet we have no reason to doubt but they did follow the Rule prescribed by Moses which indeed natural Religion teacheth all men Therefore when our Saviour appeared as he proved himself the Messias by the completion of the Prophesies in his Person he made it also appear by the purity of his Doctrine and the Authority of his Miracles wrought in the sight of his Enemies as well as Followers The same Method was observed by the Apostles as appeared from their Acts and Epistles And it is certain that as no man can be witness in his own cause so no mans or company of mens pretence to an infallible Jurisdiction must engage me to believe it otherwise there were no end of Impostors Therefore I must conclude That except you can shew me a Succession of men who by some clear demonstrations of an unerring Spirit and divine Authority prove themselves Infallibly directed and uncontroulably assisted by God I am not obliged to submit my self to any as such Nor is it to any good purpose to say That because there was a Succession of High Priests under Moses Law who by the Oracle in the Pectoral did authoritatively decide all Controversies therefore we may be well assured that under the clearer illumination
different substance from the Father how shall I know to which of these Decisions I must submit my self The Histories give account of these Councils as called by the same Authority for all were summoned by the Emperors Writ all are represented to have been General Councils and we are told of a greater appearance of Bishops in some of them than were at Nice which of these must therefore determin my faith 12. What reason have I to believe any Council is general from which all the Greek and Eastern Bishops are excluded upon so slight a pretence as that they believe the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Son and not from the Father and the Son and that in their rooms then are substituted a great many mock Bishops who are neither Canonically elected for these places nor perform any part of the Pastoral charge in their pretended Diocesses but are onely named by the Popes and brought to Councils to make so many Votes 13. Suppose the Pope give out a general summons for all Bishops can this be more than a Meeting of all within his Patriarchate for on what grounds can he pretend a right to summon his fellow Patriarchs who by the Councils of Nice Constantinople and Chalcedon are declared equal to him and therefore since the Emperors in the primitive times summoned their whole Empire to a General Council they did it by their own Authority as appears by all the Acts and Synodal Epistles of the first General Councils What power then hath the Pope to call this great Meeting of the Church And even these General Councils the Emperors called seem onely to have been the Councils of the Roman Empire called Oecumeneal as the Romans called their Empire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Christians of India and the more remote parts of Asia were called to none of these Councils nor could the Emperours Writ reach them 14. Suppose the Popes Writ goes over all Christendom must all the Bishops come to the Council or not Or what number is necessary If we examine the Subscriptions of the first Councils what ever reverence we justly have for their decisions we cannot call them Oecumenical since there were so few Bishops from the Western Churches in them Nor do I see a reason to convince me that a whole Province or Nation can depute a few to represent them such Plenipotentiaries may do well in Political matters but in a Judicatory that pretends to Infallibility you must give me a good Warrant before I believe such a deputation can inspire one with more degrees of Infallibility The Bishops of a Province can indeed send their decisions by any of their number but this is not the method of Councils where every Bishop hath but one suffrage though but one from a Nation though another Method was used at Basil. But in the case that a Prince is so dissatisfied with the Pope that he will suffer none of his Bishops to appear at the Council as it was in the Translation of the Council of Trent to Bologna to which the Emperour would suffer none of his Bishops to go and after that in the next Session at Trent to which the French King would permit none of his Bishops to go Whether can such a meeting be called a general Council or not No man can be obliged to that which is not in his power and he cannot forfeit his right because of a force on his Person Nor can it be a free Council to which all have not free access Those also who live at a great distance from the place where the Council sits and either through Infirmity or Poverty cannot perform the Journey are in a hard case For that which is morally impossible cannot be overcome If then the meeting must be of all the Bishops I do not see such a Constitution is practicable or how all the Bishops can be brought together And if the Infallibility be spread among all no reason can perswade me that a packt Meeting can have the power of the whole because the Writ was general 15. The Bishops in their decisions either go upon immediate Inspiration or judge as men according to the Premises laid before them I know you do not pretend to the former but if you did I would ask you what grounds there were to believe this For if you gave any good ones I should submit to the suffrage of every single Bishop since every person Inspired must be Master of my belief And why should this Inspiration rest on some and not on all since all bear the same Character But I insist no longer on this because I know you reject it If then they judge as rational men from the reasons that are laid before them why may not other persons examine those Reasons as well as they If an Inspired person speak to me in the name of God I must submit to him but if he speak not by Commandment but by permission then it is not the Lord but he that speaks And though I owe great reverence to him as to one that has obtained grace to be faithful yet I may examine what he says in that stile Therefore if they proceed according to the Rules of Discourse and Reason I presume I may make bold to examine both the truth of the Premises and the Conclusions they drew from them Since as there can be no more strength in the Conclusion than was in the Premises so the light of Nature and Reason directs me to know what is a well deduced Conclusion 16. Whether can that be called a free Council where the Bishops have sworn obedience to the Bishops of Rome contrary to their Liberties and the Primitive practice In which time all the Bishops pretended an equality in their Character and called the Bishops of Rome their Colleagues their Brethren and fellow-Bishops and treated them as Equals in their freedom with them as appears from the Instances of Irenius Cyprian and the Contest of the Affrican Bishops concerning Appeals to the See of Rome Nor did they yield him any other subjection but what practice had brought in by reason of the eminence of that City which was then Mistris of the World and because they also believed St. Peter and St. Paul had founded it with their Labours and Bloud But these Bishops who have so sordidly and meanly given up their rights to that high Pretender and have sworn obedience to him cannot be the proper Judges and Representatives of a Church whose Liberties they have abandoned I had almost said betrayed 17. Whether must I believe the Decrees of a General Council before they are approved by the Pope or not If the Council be infallible in her Decrees then I am bound to submit to them for all the Popes rejecting them But if the Council be fallible then the Popes ratification cannot make the Decrees of the Council Infallible For things cannot change their natures and if the Vote of the Council was by an Infallible direction then