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	true_a	2,752	5	4.8734	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26461	Advice to the confuter of Bellarmin with some considerations upon the antiquity of the Church of England.		1687 (1687)	Wing A653; ESTC R21463	8,401	13

ADVICE TO THE Confuter of Bellarmin With some Considerations upon the Antiquity OF THE Church of England With Allowance LONDON Printed by Henry Hills Printer to the King 's Most Excellent Majesty for His Houshold and Chappel 1687. Advice to the Confuter of Bellarmin with some Considerations upon the Antiquity of the Church of England I Apprehend 't is much easier Confuting Bellarmin over a Pot than by taking Pen in hand and Writing an Answer And yet I fear 't is possible by the Powerful Influence of an Ill Habit that a Man may have so often knock'd down that Roman Champion with a Bellarmin thou Liest under a Bush that he may be blown up with a Vanity of being as Able to meet and overthrow him in the Field of Controversie I don't pretend that this is the case of him who has undertaken to Answer Bellarmin's Marks of the Church but because I am sensible he has engag'd himself in a Task of some Difficulty I presume he would willingly so discharge himself as not to be thus censur'd by Adversaries and upon this score I make bold to present him with a short Advice which are some Observations upon his Second Paper wherein he Examins the Second Note of the Church viz. Antiquity for the First I had not the luck to see If they prove serviceable in his Undertaking he 'l be oblig'd to an Unknown Friend if not there 's only a little Good Will lost and half a Sheet of Paper My First Remark and Advice is that when he is upon Confuting Bellarmin he would take care that what he engages to disprove should be something that Bellarmin asserts otherwise 't will be almost impossible to Confute him And therefore I apprehend the Papists will be apt to think that in the First of the Three things he undertakes to demonstrate viz. That the Plea of bare Antiquity is not proper to the Church he has not at all Confuted Bellarmin because Bellarmin no where asserts that it is He says indeed that whoever at this time will find out the Catholic Church profess'd in the Creed amongst so many Pretenders must not apply himself to any Vpstart Congregation which was never Visible in the World but of late Years but to such a Church which has been of as long standing as ever since Christ and the Apostles days and consequently such a Church to which Antiquity of necessity at this time belongs This Bellarmin asserts but he no were says that Bare Antiquity is a Note of Truth And so the Confuting of this will be thought only a knocking down of an Imaginary Principle of the Answerers own raising but no Confuting of Bellarmin And this leads me to my 2. Advice That when he Confutes Bellarmin he would not say the same thing as Bellarmin do's Which yet he seems unluckily to do in this Paper p. 45. where having own'd that Bellarmin by the Antiquity of the Church means that the True Church must necessarily be Ancienter than the False as God was before the Devil he takes pains to explicate and prove the very same thing and thus strangely seems to Answer Bellarmin by shewing from Reason and the Fathers that what Bellarmin says is true and that Antiquity as by him explicated must of necessity belong to the True Catholic Church 3. That he would be Cautious not to Fight against himself while he 's earnest upon Confuting Bellarmin And therefore when he thinks he has made it out p. 42. That Antiquity is not a Note proper to the Church because there was a time when the Church was New He do's not do prudently within three pages after p. 45. to assert That the Scriptures are the True Antiquity Because every one of his Fresh Men in Learning will begin to argue That if with this Man Antiquity cannot belong to the Church because there was a time when the Church was New How can he say it truly belongs to the Scriptures since there was a time when the Scriptures were New as well as the Church This will not seem proper Arguing for a Confuter of Bellarmin especially since every body knows that the Church was before the Scripture or Written Word and that if Antiquity do's not belong to what was First 't will be very difficult to make it belong to the Latter which was not in being till some years after 4. That he would be careful not to Contradict himself And therefore methinks when he has asserted absolutely p. 42. That Antiquity is not a Note proper to the Church it does not make good Music with p. 45. where he has found out an Antiquity which is proper to the Church This last sort of Antiquity says he is the same with what is First Vnto which we are desirous to go to which we are willing to stand and by which we would be judged Is not this something like saying Antiquity IS and IS NOT proper to the Church 5. That in Quoting Fathers he would only make choice of such as seem to be against his Adversaries and not Those which Favor them And therefore when he is drawing up his Plea against Antiquity p. 47. he might very well have omitted one which Supports his Adversaries and is the very ground of what they maintain and he opposes The words are these There is a short way for Religious and Simple Minds to find out what is Truth For if we return to the Beginning and Original of Divine Tradition Human Error ceases Thither let us return to our Lord 's Original the Evangelical Beginning the Apostolical Tradition And hence let the Reason of our Act arise from whence Order and the Beginning arose Is not this pleading for Antiquity instead of writing against it Is not this the very Doctrin of Bellarmin and the setting up the very Tradition which Catholics appeal to whilst the way to find out the Truth according to the Fathers is by following Divine and Apostolical Tradition What 's this against Bellarmin or his Antiquity Now I come to the Second thing he intends to prove viz. That the present Church of Rome vainly pretends to True Antiquity i. e. to Ancient Truth And in the Perusal of this I must advise him First That when he treats of any Church or Body of Men he would not forget Good manners and Ordinary Civility As he seems to have done p. 49. where he is not contented to charge the Church of Rome with Errors only but in plain English with LIES too As if he thought an Argument would not sound well in Controversie unless 't were put in the Billings-gate-phrase But he proves the whole Charge thus Ib. That Church has not the Mark of True Antiquity which does not hold the same Christian Doctrin it did at the beginning but has introduc'd Errors and Lies under the pretence of Ancient Truth But this is the case of the present Church of Rome as is evident by that Alteration they have made in the Antient Creed Unto which they have added as