Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n according_a church_n doctrine_n 2,019 5 6.0761 4 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
A45152 A plea for the non-conformists tending to justifie them against the clamorous charge of schisme. By a Dr. of Divinity. With two sheets on the same subject by another Hand and Judgement. Humfrey, John, 1621-1719. 1674 (1674) Wing H3703A; ESTC R217013 46,853 129

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

not the Laws of England once tye us to them Were we not United to the Governours Worship Members and Assemblies of that Church Did not our Fore-fathers shew their consent by ordinary attendance upon their Devotions c. This is all our Author saith for our Vnion to the National and Parochial Church or Churches of England § 68. Again they have proved it he saith that Communion in that Church is corrupt How Because we cannot communicate with it without sin How have they proved it Demonstratively so as the Adversaries cannot deny it Nothing less they do deny it and yet dispute it but so as we probably judg it sinful We grant this is proved and so we think we have proved it too though it may be more sinful to communicate with the Romish Church But we know Magis minus non variant speciem But we think we ought not to do the least sin § 69. But we do not say it is sinful to communicate with them in all Ordinances Why do we not communicate with them so far as we can without sin Presbyterians indeed do generally acknowledg so much But Communion is either stated and fixed or Occasional They conceive themselves obliged statedly and fixedly if they can to communicate to their proper Congregations where they can enjoy all the Ordinances of God For occasional Communion they neither have denied it nor shall deny it to their Brethren in such actions wherein their Consciences will allow them so to communicate without sin as occasion offers it self they acknowledg many of their Ministers and of their Churches true Churches true Ministerial Churches they many of them hear them Preach and Pray and bring their Children to them to be Baptized especially if any of them will abate what in that administration none judgeth by Divine precept Originally necessary and they judg sinful what would the Author have more unless a perfect communion § 70. As to which though I do not much value Arguments from Authority of men because they never touch the Conscience nor ad homines because they are single Bullets and hit but one person yet once let me use one Because our Author in his Doctrine of Schisme p. 28. assures us he is much of Mr. Fulwoods mind I know not that Reverend Person but I take him to be the same Mr. Fulwood that was sometimes Minister at Staple Fitzpane in Somerset-shire and anno 1652. published a Book called The Churches and Ministry of England true Churches and a true Ministry if he be not the man intended I beg his pardon if it be he he saith thus of the Church of England For matters of Government indeed of late we were under Episcopacy all whose appurtenances savoured of Antichrist and in the same page a little after our Episcopal Courts Service Tyranny c. were very gross This was Mr. Fulwoods judgment I think we may easily argue according to his principles It is Mr. Fulwoods assertion not ours From a Church all whose appurtenances as to Government savour of Antichrist Fulwoods Churches Ministry of England true c. p. 12. and whose service is very gross Christians may and ought to separate so far as to that Government all whose appurtenances so savour and whose service is gross But saith Mr. Fulwood Ergo. When the Reverend Author hath found out an answer for his Friend Mr. Fulwood we will further examin it But there is no end of these things § 71. In the mean time I must mind the Author of too little candor as to his Adversary who wrote the Reflexions in saying the sum of what he offered was reducible to these two propositions 1. That the Conformists held the Church of Rome to be a true Church yet did separate 2. That our Parochial Churches are no true Churches when as he never said the latter at all but the clean contrary and had acknowledged 1. All of them true Churches that is true parts of the Catholick Church 2. Many of them true Ministerial Churches 3. Some of them true Organical Churches Besides this He that reads the Authors chap. 1. will see these two things were not the sum of what he said and that how little soever Reason was in those Reflections there was yet more then this Author in his Remarques was pleased to take notice of for that Author had then insisted on their not being united to Parochial Churches § 72. To shut up this discourse I from my Soul wish all the Lords Ministers and People of England were of one heart and mind I am not of Gravity or Learning sufficient to Advise either Conformists or Non-conformists but shall only propose my own thoughts and not mine alone The Reverend and Learned Dr. Hornbeck 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Dissertations de Episcopatu hath these passages which I shall translate The learned may read them in the Printed Copies If men were every where as sollicitous for forming and reforming men and fitting them for the sacred Ministry to which they profess to give up themselves the disputation about the form of Sacred Order and Government would be more easie and less evil need be feared from that which we judge not so good Here saith he We must begin that men may be made worthy for the work and Parag. 4. Here we must lay on our help We see the Apostles in their Writings were more sollicitous about the Vertues than the degrees of Ministers Parag. 9. Before saith he we divide into parties about other things we should joyntly agree about these things A confession of common Doctrine according to truth and piety should be either set forth or confirmed then exact Canons should be made about the whole life and manners of Ministers and then a disputation about the form of Church Government should follow Thus far he § 73. I shall conclude with delivering my Opinion That if 1. All the ancient Canons of Councils were executed which concern Ministers Lives and Office And the Doctrine of the 39 Articles as expounded by King James and the Parliament of England were avowed and those men might have nothing to do in the debate Who are dead in Law according to those Canons that is such as ought to be Excommunicated or deprived and who had declared or should declare themselves contrary to the Doctrine so expound●d and declared The remaining part would quickly so well agree with other things as we should be no more troubled with clamours of Schisme and Separation and tell somthing of that Nature be I see no medium but either Dissenters must be indulged and Schisme clamour'd and never proved or suffering for Conscience-sake must be imposed and patiently endured Fiat Voluntas Dei ERRATA PAge 2. l. 23. f. curare r. curaes p. 32. l. 14. f. Arminians r. Arminius p. 33. l. 4. f. 130. r. 13th p. 36. l. 12. f. generatibus r. Generalibus p. 42. l. 12. f. Jundical r. Juridical p. 70. l. 2. r. one Ministers parts p. 74.
his Answer is 1. That the Presbyterians do not acknowledg it so to whom he spake 2. This was a current Argument of the Presbyterians against the Independents 3. He meant such true Churches as our Parochial Congregations 4. They prove the Communion of Rome is corrupt we only say theirs is 5. Many do hold the Church of Rome truely a Church not a true Church true as to the Essence but not Morally true as to her Doctrine and Worship 6. We did not separate from Rome for we really were never of them we reformed our selves without separating from Rome Notwithstanding all these Answers except the last which I shall shew weak enough Thus much we have gained That it is Lawful in some cases to separate from a body that is Metaphysically a true Church that is truly a Church which is all was intended to be gained That the general Notion of the Truth of a Church should be no more a Medium to prove us Schismaticks now let us examine his particular Answers § 62. The Presbyterians do not acknowledg Rome a true Church and therefore he argued ad homines Indeed I find Mr. Caudry to his Adversary granting something of the Truth of a Church to Rome crying Viderit ipse but he is not the mouth of all Presbyterians did ever any know a Presbyterian Ordaining a Minister the second time because he was the first time Ordained by the Church of Rome yet he was there ordained to offer Sacrifice but also to Preach the Gospel which makes them afraid of it or Baptizing any that turn'd Protestants from Papists Till he had known this he should have forborne this Answer it may be that many of them will grant she hath something of the Metaphysical Verity of a Church A rotten House and falling but yet an House still and we think Christians from such a Church may with-draw § 63. But this was an Argument against the Independents Produce a place where they ever said It was unlawful for Christians to depart from a Church that had the least of truth in it But he says he meant such as our Parochial Congregations this is a general what doth he mean by such 4. They prove the Communion of the Church of Rome corrupt we only say it of theirs And he only says that we only say it We think that many have proved that we cannot Communicate or Minister in it under some present circumstances without what we judge sin Who shall determine betwixt us as to our practice Hath this Author made or can he shew us a strict Answer to Calderwood Gillespy and Dr. Ames and yet much more is to be said in our case then they could speak § 64. Many do say that the Church of Rome is Vere but not Vera Ecclesia that will not do we can shew him vera that is true as well as Vere Truly but his meaning is True in Essence not Morally True what is the meaning of that Not true in her Doctrine and Worship This kind of truth admitts many degrees We would fain know of our Author to what degree of moral truth that Church must be arrived from which he judgeth it sinful to separate for we shall find that divers of his Brethren and Fathers have acknowledged a great degree of moral truth in the Church of Rome from which yet they separated and we believe died in their separation from it Died they as Fools dyed Let me shew this a little Was not the Church of Rome morally true because an Antichristian-Church and the Seat of the Antichrist So indeed Bishop Downame Bishop Abbot and many Bishops were wont to say but since that time Bishop Mountagne hath called their Arguments Apocaliptycal phrenzies Dow saith it is doubtful Dr. Heylin saith it cannot be for Antichrist must be a single man a Jew that must kill Enoch and Elias Star Chamber Speech p. 32. Bishop Laud confesseth therefore he hath raced out of the Liturgy the scandalous term Antichristian Sect. § 65. Is the fault in the Doctrine of the Church of Rome it may be some of us think there is fault enough there I trust our Author himself thinks so but neither all former Conformists nor present Conformists believe that she differs from us in any Fundamentals I my self have been told so within few years the Author could not but know that Bishop Laud Dr. Heylin Bishop Potter and many others have thus far asserted her Moral truth again and again as to Doctrine Now may not that be put for a Problem amongst those who are so Zealous in this point Whither it be not Schismatical to separate from a Church upon the account of Doctrine which errs in no fundamentals Yet those great men confessed the latter and did the former If we loose this stand I know not where we shall find a boundary to stop us from separation from a true Church for any one false Proposition of Doctrine maintained in it But what Doctrine is there as to which we cannot shew them that some or other our conforming Fathers or Brethren have not either acknowledged true in their terms or so far true as would make separation for it dangerous yet all these separated from it and died many of them in that black Schisme if it were so Let the Author instance and he shall hear what we can say to it he will I hope spare the Arminian points The Doctrine of Faith as an assent only to the Proposition Justification by Works c. but let him instance § 66. But it may be the business is they have acknowledged and proved her Communion unlawful as to Worship we indeed do so think it sufficiently sinful But have all those Conformists separated from her thought so we think so because we judge her idolatrous in her Adoration of the Eucharist The Saints departed Reliques Images Altars c. and we know that many of our conforming Brethren are of the same mind with us Dr. Brewynt Dr. Stillingfleet and many others have sufficiently told us so but the question is whether all our conforming Brethren who have separated thus judged her thus morally not a true Church What meant Dr. Heylins four bowings at his taking up and setting down the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist Heylins moderate Answer p. 137. What saith the Author of Weights and Measures as to the point of Veneration of Images What saith Bishop Mountague Antig. p. 318. and in his Antid p. 30. and in his Orig. p. 40. he says the Ancient Church did Venerate Reliques Antid p. 44. but I will enlarge no further till I have particular instances given § 67. We see it was the judgment of these men and they were learned men that we may separate from a Church that hath a great degree of moral truth But it may be they thought they did not separate because they and their Fore-fathers were really never of them but reformed themselves But were not our Fore-fathers Baptized into that Church Did