Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	age_n	church_n	true_a	1,952	5	4.9061	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86290	Historia quinqu-articularis: or, A declaration of the judgement of the Western Churches, and more particularly of the Church of England, in the five controverted points, reproched in these last times by the name of Arminianism. Collected in the way of an historicall narration, out of the publick acts and monuments, and most approved authors of those severall churches. By Peter Heylyn.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.	1660 (1660)	Wing H1721; Thomason E1020_1; Thomason E1020_2; Thomason E1020_3; Thomason E1020_4; ESTC R202407	247,220	357

any point of Calvinisme in the Schooles of Oxon. from the year 1596. to the year 1616. and yet to make that number also he is fain to take in Dr. George Abbot and Dr. Benfield on no other account but for maintaining deum non esse authorem peccati that God is not the Author of sin which any Papist Lutheran or Arminian might have maintained as well as they 8. And yet it cannot be denyed but that by errour of these times the reputation which Calvin had attained to in both universities and the extreame diligence of his followers for the better carrying on of their own designes their was a generall tendency unto his opinions in the present controversies so that it is no marvell if many men of good affection to that Church in goverment and formes of worship might unawares be seasoned with his Principles in point of Doctrine his book of Institutes being for the most part the foundation on which the young Divines of those times did build their studies and having built their studies on a wrong foundation did publickly maintaine some point or other of his Doctrines which gave least offence and ou● of which no dangerous consequence could be drawne as they thought and hoped to the dishonor of God the disgrace of Religion the scandall of the Church or subversion of godliness amongst which if Judicious Mr. Hooker be named for one as for one I finde him to be named yet is he named only for maintaining one of the five points that namely of the not total or final falling away of Gods Elect as Dr. Overald also did in the Schools of Cambridge though neither of them can be challenged for maintaining any other point of Calvins Doctrine touching the absolute decree of Reprobation Election unto life without Reference to faith in Christ the unresistable workings of Grace the want of freedom in the will to concur therewith and the determining of all mens actions unto good or evill without leaving any power in men to do the contrary And therefore secondly Mr. Hookers discourse of Justification as it now comes into our hands might either be altered in some points after his discease by him that had the publishing of it or might be written by him as an essay of his younger years before he had confuted the booke of Homilies and perused every clause in the publick Liturgie as he after did or had so carefully examined every text of Scripture upon which he lays the weight of his judgment in it as might encourage him to have it printed when he was alive 9. Of any men who publickly opposed the Calvinian tenents in this Univesity till after the beginning of King James his raigne I must confesse that I have hitherto found no good assurance though some their were who spared not to declare their dislike thereof and secretly traind up their scholars in other principles An argument whereof may be that when Dr. Baroe dyed in London which was about three or four yeares after he had left his place in Cambridge his funerall was attended by most of the Divines then living in and about the City Dr. Bancroft then Bishop of London giving order in it which plainly showes that there were many of both Universities which openly favoured Baroes doctrines and did as openly dislike those of the Calvinians though we finde but few presented to us by their names Amongst which few I first reckon Dr. John Buckridge President of St. Johns Colledge and Tutor to Archbishop Laud who carried his Anti-Calvinian doctrins with him to the See of Rochester and publickly maintained them at a conference in York house An. 1626. And secondly Dr. John Houson one of the Cannons of Christ Church and Vice-Chancellor of the University An. 1602. so known an enemy to Calvin his opinions that he incurred a suspension by Dr. Robert Abbots then Vice-Chancellor And afterwards being Bishop of Oxon subscribed the letter amongst others to the Duke of Buckingham in favour of Mountague and his Book called Apello Cesarem as before was said And though we finde but these two named for Anti-Calvinist in the five controverted points yet might there be many houses perhaps some hundreds who held the same opinions with them though they discovered not themselves or break out in any open opposition as they did at Cambridge God had 7000. servants in the Realm of Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal though we find the name of none but the Prophet Eliah the residue keeping themselves so close for fear of danger that the Prophet himself complained to God that he alone was left to serve him A parallel case to which may be that the Christians during the power and prevalency of the Arian Hereticks St. Jerome giving us the names of no more them three who had stood up stoutly in defence of the Nicene councell and the points of Doctrine there established viz. 1. St. Athanasius Patriark of Alexandria in Egypt St. Hillarie Bishop of Poictious in France and St. Eusebius Bishop of Vevelli in Italy of which thus the Father Siquidem Arianis victis triumphatorem Athanasium suum Egyptus excepit Hillarium e prelio revertentem galliarum ecclesiia complexa est ad reditum Eusebii sui lugubres vestes Italia mutavit that is to say upon the overthrow of the Arians Egypt received her Athanasius now returned in triumph the Church of France embraced her Hillary coming home with victory from the battle and on the returne of Eusebius Italy changed her mourning garments By which it is most clear even to vulgar eys that not these Bishops only did defend the truth but that it was preserved by many others as well of the Clergy as of the people in their several Countreys who otherwise never had received them with such joy and triumph if a great part of them had not been of the same opinions though no more of them occur by name in the records of that age 10. But then againe If none but the three Bishops had stood unto the truth in the points disputed at that time between the Orthodox Christians and the Arian Hereticks yet had that been sufficient to preserve the Church from falling universally from the faith of Christ or deviating from the truth in those particulars the word of truth being established as say both Law and Gospel if there be only two or three witnesses to attest unto it two or three members of the Church may keep possession of a truth in all the rest and thereby save the whole from errour even as a King invaded by a foraign enemy doth keep possession of his Realme by some principall forrtesse the standing out whereof may in time regaine all the rest which I returne for answer to another objection touching the paucity of those Authors whom we have produced in Maintenance of the Anti-Calvinian or old English doctrines since the resetling of the Church under Queen Elizabeth for though they be but few in number

the business but brake out many times into such open heats and violences as are not to be parallel'd in the like Assemblies the Provincial Divines banding against the Foreiners and the Foreiners falling foul upon one another for so it hapned that Martinius one of the Divines of Breme a moderate and learned man being desired to speak his minde in the Points last mentioned signified to the Synod ' That he made some scruple touching the Doctrine Passant about the manner of Christs being Fundamentum electionis and that he thought Christ not only the Effector of our Election but also the Author and Procurer of it Gomarus presently as soon as Martinius had spoken starts up and tells the Synod Ego hanc rem in me recipio and therewithall casts his Glove and challenges Martinius with this Proverb Ecce Rhodum ecce Sullum and required the Synod to grant them a Duel adding That he knew Martinius could say nothing in Refutation of that Doctrine ' So my dear Friend Mr. Hales of Eaton relates the story of this passage in a Letter to Sir Dudly Carleton bearing date Jan. 25. 1618. according to the style of the Church of England and where he endeth Dr. Belcanquall shall begin relating in his Letters to the sayd Ambassadour the story of a greater Fray between the sayd Martinius and Sibrandus Lubberius above mentioned upon this occasion Martinius had affirmed God to be Causa Physica Conversionis and for the truth thereof appealed to Goclenius a great Philosopher being then present in the Synod who thereupon discoursed upon it out of Th●mistinus Averores Alexander Aphrodisaeus and many more affirming it to be true in Philosophy although he would not have it to prescribe in Divinity Sibrandus Lubbert taking fire at this falls upon them both but the Fray parted at the present by the care of Boyerman Gomarus within few dayes after picks a new Quarrel with Martinius and the rest of the Divines of Breme for running a more moderate course then the rest of the Synod many other of the Provincials seconding Gomarus in the Quarrel and carrying themselves so uncivilly in the prosecution that Martinius was upon the Point of returning homewards But this Quarrel being also taken up the former is revived by Sibrandus in the following Session concerning which Belcanquall writes to Sr Dudley Carleton this ensuing Letter which for the rarity and variety of the passages contained in it and the great light which it affords to the present business I shall crave leave to add it here Dr. BELCANQUALLS LETTER TO Sir Dudley Carleton My very good Lord VIII SInce my last Letters to your Lordship there hath been no business of any great Note in the Synod but that which I am sure your Lordship will be very sorry to hear Contention like to come to some head if it be not prevented in time for there hath been such a Plot layd ex compositò for disgracing of the Bremenses as I think the Synod shall receive small grace by it D. Gomarus being he at whom the last Disquisition of the third and fourth Articles ended was entreated by the President to speak his minde of the sayd Articles but Sibrandus desireth the President first to give him leave to add some few things to that he had spoken the day before Now what he added was nothing but a renewing of the strife which was between him and Martinius in the last Session two things ●e alledged First That he had been at Goclenius his Lodging conferring with him about that Proposition whether God might be called Causa Physica of humane Actions and delivered certain Affirmations pronounced by Goclenius tending to the Negative for the truth of his relation he appealed to Goclenius there present who testified that it was so next Martinius had alledged a place out of Paraeus for the Affirmative in opere conversionis Sibrandus read a great many places out of Paraeus tending to the contrary and no question it being pleaded before he entreateth some of the Pallatines naming them all severally who were Paraeus his Colleagues would speak what they did know of Paraeus his minde concerning the sayd Proposition Scultetus beginneth with a set Speech which he had writ lying before him but such a Speech it was as I and I think all the Exteri were exceedingly grieved it should have come from a man of so much worth the summ of it was this That he did know upon his own knowledge that Paraeus did hold the contrary of that which had been fasly fathered on him in the Synod that he could not endure to hear his dearest Colleague so much abused as he had been by some men in the Synod Moreover he could not now dissemble the great grief he had conceived that some in the Synod went about to trouble sound Divinity with bringing in Tricas Scholasticas such as was to make God Causam Physicam Conversionis that was for Martinius such portenta vocabulorum as determinare and non determinare voluntatem that some men durst say that there were some doubts in the Fourth Article which Calvin himself had not throughly satisfied nor other Learned Reformed Doctors that it was to be feared that they intended to bring in Jesuits Divinity in the Reformed Churches and to corrupt the Youth committed to their Charge with a strange kind of Divinity This last Speech concerned D. Grotius Scultetus delivered his minde in exceeding bitter and disgraceful words and repeated his bitterest sentences twice over he having ended Martinius with great modesty answered first That he would read Paraeus his own words which he did next that for Sibrandus he wondred that he would now in publick bring these things up since out of his love to Peace that very day he had sent his Colleague Grotius to Sibrandus with a large explication in that sense in which he had delivered the Proposition with which explication Sibrandus himself had sent him word he was fully satisfied and so he made account that that business had been peaceably transacted all this while Grotius spake nothing Gomarus beginneth to go on in the Disquisition but I think he delivered a Speech against the Bremenses which none but a mad man would have uttered First Whereas Martinius had sayd that he did desire the resolution of this doubt Qui Deus possit ab homine cujus potentia est finita fidem quae est opus omnipotentiae exigere and that neither Calvin nor any of the Divines had yet plainly enough untyed the Knot he replyed first That he that sayd so was not Dignus qui solveret Calvino Corrigiam and that for the doubt it self it was such a silly one that ipsi pueri in trivio could ipsius solutionem decantare at which Speech every body smiled Moreover whereas Martinius in his Answer to Scultetus had not spoken one word against him but only this That he was sorry that one who had now been 25 years a Professor of Divinity