Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	ancient_a	church_n	true_a	2,421	5	5.1957	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

many more Articles as there were at first Ergo. Upon the Consideration of which Proof I advise him 2. Not to be so blindly earnest in kicking down the Church of Rome as to overthrow his own at the same Blow For if the Addition of Articles to the Ancient Creed takes off all claim to the Ancient Truth what becomes of the Church of England which besides the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds has another of a latter date of Nine and Thirty Articles besides another Plot-Creed call'd the Test Can she be the Ancient Church which had only one Creed and but Twelve Articles 3. That he would not advance Absurdities whilst he pretends to shew Bellarmin's Ratiocination to be but Sophistry Bellarmin shews that in all great changes of Religion the Authors of the change may be assign'd the New Doctrin that was brought in the Time when it began c. That therefore since these cannot be shewn in any change pretendedly charg'd upon the Church of Rome there was never any such change This the Confuter undertakes to prove Notoriously False because says he the Body Spiritual is like the Body Natural and therefore as a Man may be worn away with a Consumption to Skin and Bone tho' no body can tell the precise time when or where his Blood began to be tainted So the whole Body of the Church may be corrupted with Error and Heresie tho' it crept in so secretly at first and so indiscernably that 't was not suspected And what 's this to the purpose This shews indeed that a Great Change of Religion may be unknown as to it 's beginning while as yet 't is working in Secret and Indiscernable for what wonder for things while Indiscernable not to be seen But dos it prove that when the Change or Alteration began publickly to be Abetted Maintain'd Propagated appearing in open Contradiction and Defiance to the True Church condemning it's Doctrin and opposing the Articles of her Faith as Erroneous and Heretical that then such an Alteration in Religion could spread it self over the whole Christian World and yet the Authors Promoters Abetters and Embracers of it not to be known or taken Notice of Let him prove but this and he 'll come to the Point We don't doubt but the Seeds of Innovation may like the Tares in the Gospel lie for some time under ground and not be taken notice of while in all outward appearance they are not discernable from the Good Corn. But that they should grow up choke the Wheat every where break it down and consume it and yet not be seen or discern'd this he 'll never prove out of the Gospel What kind of Servants must the Housholder have to suppose this Absurdity And yet upon this ground stands our Confuter and his Whole Church of England She to wipe off the soul guilt of Schism crys out The Church of Rome has Err'd and made Innovations therefore we left her And what Errors and Innovations are these Why She has brought in an Idolatry worse than that of the Heathens Infinite Superstitions Abominations coyn'd New Articles of Faith contrary to all Sense and Reason Stupid Doctrins Absurd and Senseless Doctrins Foolish Doctrins Monstrous Doctrins c. This is a very severe Charge and the Crimes of which she stands Endicted are obvious to every Ordinary Reason and Weak Christian Well but how long has she been polluted with these Doctrins With some Six hundred years with others Nine hundred Eleven hundred Thirteen hundred years And these Errors she propagated over the whole Christian World and with them infected all the Kings of the Earth Well but did not the True Church of Christ stand up against the Church of Rome while she thus left the Faith and corrupted the Faithful Where was the Church of England all this time Did not she withstand these Abominations Preach and make Laws against them and the Abetters Did she assemble no Councils Synods or Convocations to Censure and Condemn them No there was no Church visibly appear'd to oppose the Growth of Popery it spread Invisbly it infected all Christians Insensibly and so came down all over Christendom Imperceptibly to the days of Luther who oppos'd it vigorously tho' neither He nor the Church of England as many are apt to think have so prosecuted those Errors but they continue infected with a great many of them still and don't know it or perceive it Strange and Wonderful News What 's the Forty thousand Pilgrims and the Army in Incognito to this Relation Oates's Narrative is not half so big with Absurdities as this Wonderful Story of Changes and Alterations over the whole Christian World and yet Invisible and Insensible The Errors it seems brought in and propagated by Papists in those Alterations of Religion are now so Palpable so Evident so Clear that 't is not only every Beardless Divine can disprove them and shew them to be Ridiculous but every Smatterer in Controversie every Tinker and Cobler sees them to be against Sense and Reason forsooth and undertakes to prove them Absurd and Foolish And yet these so Palpable so Plain and Evident Errors were receiv'd over the whole Christian World without the Opposition of the True Church of Christ for above a Thousand Years What! Never a Church of England Disputant never a Cobler Tinker never a Divine all this time to shew and Confute these Errors Where was this Pure Church of England all this while This Church which our Confuter of Bellarmin is sure is the True Ancient Church where was she when these Errors were every where taught publikly profess'd and propogated Could she not then See Errors so Plain and Obvious But how should she See when her Nine days were not out till a Thousand years after But the Confuter has found out Changes in Religion which grew insensibly as the Communion in one kind And concerning this 4. I advise him in his next to prove that a Diversity of Practice is an Alteration in Religion And especially of such a Practice which Christ left indifferent in respect of the Laity and without any Positive Command of their receiving it in both kinds as Luther owns who says that in this Point Christ has left no Necessary Precept In Ep. ad Bohem. And in his Book de Vtraque specie If you come says he to a place where the Sacrament is given only in One kind receive it in one The like Indifferency is acknowledg'd by Melancthon Centur. Ep. Theol. p. 252. Spalatensis too for whom I presume the Confuter has some respect l. 5. c. 6. de Repub. Eccles has these words I affirm that the Receiving the Sacrament in Both kinds is not so under a Precept but upon a considerable cause tho' Private and of Private Persons it may profitably and lawfully be receiv'd under the Species of Bread alone And certainly what Private Persons may lawfully do when they judge convenient as this Author Ib. says Exempla Antiqua docent is evident from the