Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	apostle_n	church_n	err_v	1,649	5	9.6490	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A20944	A defence of the Catholicke faith contained in the booke of the most mightie, and most gracious King Iames the first, King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, defender of the faith. Against the answere of N. Coeffeteau, Doctor of Diuinitie, and vicar generall of the Dominican preaching friars. / Written in French, by Pierre Du Moulin, minister of the word of God in the church of Paris. Translated into English according to his first coppie, by himselfe reuiewed and corrected.; Defense de la foy catholique. Book 1-2. English	Du Moulin, Pierre, 1568-1658.; Sanford, John, 1564 or 5-1629.	1610 (1610)	STC 7322; ESTC S111072	293,192	506

him be deposed Or if he be a Lay-man let him be excommunicated Would they thus haue spoken if they had beleeued the Pope to haue beene their Superiour or the Church of Rome cheefe ouer other Churches and that it could not erre That the Passages of the Fathers alleadged by Coeffeteau for the Primacy of S. Peter are partly false Fol. 77. 78. partly maymed and partly impertinent FRom this point Doctor Coeffeteau passeth ouer to the Primacy of S. Peter Fol. 76. howbeit before he commeth thereto he giueth in passing by a blow to his Holinesse affirming that he is not Lord ouer any Towne thus doth he dispute the Souerainty of the City of Rome Wee leaue themselues to cleare this doubt and end this Processe He alleadgeth then for the Primacy of S. Peter the 11. Homily of S. Chrysostome and that very falsely for in all the Homily there is no mention of S. Peter nor of his Primacy But Bellarmine did deceiue him out of whom Coeffeteau copied his allegations This other is like it S. Cyprian saith Coeffeteau affirmeth Hoc erant vtique caeteri Apostoli quod Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis sed exordium ab vn●tate profici● cit●r v●●●●●●sia vna monstretur that the other Apostles were certainly the same that S. Peter was fellowes and partners of his honour and of his power but the beginning proceedeth from Vnitie and therefore the Primacy was giuen to S. Peter the true reading is this the Apostles inde de were the same things that S. Peter was hauing ONE EQVALL SOCIETY In honour and in power but the beginning was made by one to shew the vnity of the Church Coeffeteau hath razed out the word EQVAL which troubled him and hath clapt on a Tayle of a sentence which is not in Cyprian and therefore the Primacy was giuen to S. Peter S Cyprian had said a little before that Iesus Christ after his resurrection gaue a like power to his Apostles and yet to shew the vnity of the Church he so disposed by his authority that the fountaine of this vnity should begin from one That is to say that he gaue to all his Apostles an equall power but to shew that the Church is one he gaue his power first vnto one namely to Peter and afterwards gaue equall power to the rest With like falshood he dealeth with S. Ierome Fol. 78. pag. 2. lib 1. against Iouinian whom he thus alleadgeth One is chosen among the twelue to the end that there being one head established all occasion of Schisme might be taken away At dicis super Petrū fundatur Ecclesia licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat cuncti claues regni coelorum accipiant ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur●sed vnus eligitur vt capite constituto seismatist ollatur occasio But he omitteth the wordes that went before thou tellest me that the Church is founded vpon S. Peter notwithstanding that the same is done vpon al the other Apostles and that all do receiue the keyes of the Kingdom of heauen and that vpon them the stability of the Church is EQVALLY grounded whence appeareth that the Head and cheefe of which he speaketh is nothing else but a superiority in ranke without any Iurisdiction and power ouer his fellowes seeing that they had all the Keyes alike and were alike the foundations of the Church VVhich may serue to the end we may not trouble our selues with examining the rest of his falsifications for solution of all the rest of Coeffeteaus quotations in which S. Peter is called head and first among the Apostles S. Austen indeede in the beginning of his second booke of Baptisme which place Coeffeteau alleadgeth calleth S. Peter the first of the Apostles but he saith also in the same place that for all that he did not presume that the new-commers Nee Petrus quē primum Dominus elegit super quem aedificauit Ecclesiā suam cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret postmodum vindicauit sibi aliquid insolenter aut arroganter assumpsit vt diceret se primatum tenere obtemperari à nouellis posteris sibi potius debcri and latter Apostles were to yeelde him obedience The same S. Austen as he is alleadged in the 24. Cause Quaest 1. Canon Quodcunque speaketh thus S. Peter when he receiued the Keyes represented the Church if then all the good were signified in the person of Peter so were all the wicked also signified in the person of Iudas Seeing then that S. Peter was the same among the faithful that Iudas was among the wicked it followeth that as Iudas was not the head of the wicked to haue power and Iurisdiction ouer them but onely was the most remarkeable among them so S. Peter should be such a one among the beleeuers He might haue had perhaps a priority eyther in age or in vertue or in zeale or in eloquence or in preseance and taking the first place but yet without Dominion or power of Iurisdiction As touching that which somtimes he saith that the Church is founded vpon S. Peter we shall see hereafter that he retracted that ouer sight afterwards and we haue heard before S. Ierome to haue said that the Church is Equally founded vpon all the Apostles As for that which he saith that he that is without the Communion of the Church is to be accounted prophane and that he that is without the Arke shall perish in the floud the same may be said of euery other Church which holdeth the true Orthodox Doctrine yea of the least of the faithfull for that a man cannot separate and withdraw himselfe from him but by renouncing the truth Now in the quarrell which then was in debate Damasus maintained the truth and sounder opinion Whether the Pope may erre in faith or no. TO that which the King of great Britaine denieth that there is any Monarch of the Church on earth whose wordes ought to be held for laws who hath the gift to be able not to erre Fol. 80. Coeffeteau thus answereth We know that the Pope is a sinfull man as another man is and therefore may erre in Doctrine and Manners if we consider him in particular but in the quality of S. Peters Successour hee cannot teach any thing contrary to piety This is it which is commonly said that the Pope indeede may erre as he is a man and a particular Doctor but not as he is Pope Or that he may erre in manners but not in faith Cap. licet titulo 2 de Constitutioni in 6. They say also that he may erre in the question de facto but not in the question de Iure For as Boniface the eighth saith the Pope hath all law and right in the chest of his breast A man had neede of a good stomach to digest this And I doe not see how all this can agree For

Peter pascere oues and also what a cloude of witnesses there is both of Auncients and euen of late Popish writers yea diuers Cardinals that doe all agree that both these speeches vsed to Peter were meant to all the Apostles represented in his person Otherwise how could Paul di●ect the Church of Corinth 1. Cor. 5.4 to excommunicate the incestuous person cu spiritum suo whereas he should then haue said cumspiritu Petri And how could all the Apostles haue otherwise vsed all their censures onely in Christs name and neuer a word of his Vicar Peter wee reade did in all the Apostles meetings sit amongst them as one of their number And when chosen men were sent to Antiochia from that great Apostolike Councell at Ierusalem Acts 15. The text saith Act. 15.22 23. It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send chosen men but no mention made of the Head thereof and so in their Letters no mention is made of Peter but onely of the Apostles Elders and Brethren And it is a wonder why Paul rebuketh the Church of Corinth for making exceptions of persons because some followed Paul some Apollos some Cephas if Peter was their visible Head 1. Cor. 1.12 for then those that followed not Peter or Cephas renounced the Catholik faith But it appeareth well that Paul knew little of our new doctrine Galat. 2. since he handleth Peter so rudely as he not only compareth but preferreth himselfe vnto him But our Cardinall prooues Peters superiority Gal. 1.18 by Pauls going to visite him Indeede Paul saith he went to Ierusalem to visite Peter and conferre with him but he should haue added and to kisse his feete To conclude then The truth is that Peter was both in age and in the time of Christs calling him one of the first of the Apostles in order the principall of the first twelue and one of the three whom Christ for order sake preferred to all the rest And no further did the Bishop of Rome claime for three hundreth years after Christ subiect they were to the generall Councels and euen but of late did the Councell of Constance depose three Popes and set vp the fourth And vntill Phocas dayes that murthered his master were they subiect to Emperours But how they are now come to be Christs Vicars nay Gods on earth triple crowned Kings of Heauen earth and hell Iudges of all the world and none to iudge them Heads of the faith Absolute deciders of all Controuersies by the infallibility of their spirite hauing all power both Spirituall and Temporall in their handes the high Bishoppes Monarches of the whole earth Superiours to all Emperours and Kings yea Supreame Vice-gods who whether they will or not cannot erre how they are now become I say to that toppe of greatnes I know not but sure I am Wee that are Kings haue greatest neede to looke vnto it As for me Paul and Peter I know but these men I know not And yet to doubt of this is to denie the Catholique faith Nay the world it selfe must bee turned vpside downe and the order of Nature inuerted making the left hand to haue the place before the right Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 17. and the last named to be the first in honour that this primacy may be maintained Thus haue I now made a free Confession of my Faith And J hope I haue fully cleared my selfe from being an Apostate and as farre from being an Hereticke as one may be that beleeueth the Scriptures and the three Creedes and acknowledgeth the foure first generall Councels If J be loath to beleeue too much especially of Nouelties men of greater knowledge may well pitie my weakenesse but J am sure none will condemne me for an hereticke saue such as make the Pope their God and thinke him such a speaking Scripture as they can define heresie no otherwise but to be whatsoeuer Opinion is maintained against the Popes definition of faith And I will sincerely promise that when euer any point of the Religion I professe shall be proued to be new and not Auncient Catholike and Apostolike I meane for matter of Faith I will as soone renounce it closing vp this head with the maxime of Vincentius Lirinensis Libello aduersus haereses that I will neuer refuse to imbrace any opinion in Diuinity necessary to saluation which the whole Catholike Church with an vnanim consent haue constantly taught and beleeued euen from the Apostles daies for the space of many ages thereafter without interruption This discourse beeing nothing else Fol. 74. but a rich piece of tyssue wrought full of Demonstrations and the very language of truth in the mouth of a King deserued an exact answer But M. Coeffeteau not daring to confront the King to his face doth treacherously assaile ●im side-wise for in stead of satisfying his proofes drawne out of holy Scripture hee entrencheth himselfe in his hold of custome and produceth some testimonies of men He saith then that Basil writing to Athanasius aduiseth him to aduertise the Church of Rome of certaine schismes that happened in his countrey Epist 32. to the end that hee by interposing his authority might send learned and able men to extinguish those diuisions which troubled the East But withal he should haue added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Basil doth not intreat him to shew forth his power in punishing the obstinate and refractarie but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to reprehend and admonish the froward men of our countrey For as touching the title of Head of the Church S. Basil in the same Epistle doth so qualifie not the Bishop of Rome but Athanasius Patriarcke of Alexandria in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we thought that we could not better giue entrance to our affaires then by hauing recourse to your perfection as to him who is the vniuersall Head and by winning you to be counsellour and conductour of our Actions Now he thus speaketh not because Alexandria was the first Sea but because there was not then any Bishop who did not willingly giue precedence to Athanasius because of his vertue As for the priority of the Bishops-sea it appeareth by his 50. Epistle that S. Basill thought it due to Antioch when he exhorteth Athanasius to adioyne himselfe to Miletius Patriarcke of Antioch of whome hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is he who as we may so say sitteth as ruler ouer the whole Church And saith also He so calleth the Bishop of Rome that the Bishops of the West giue consent thereunto it is a thing remarke-able aboue the rest that S. Basill purposing to addresse himselfe to the Bishop of Rome that he should lend his helpe to pacifie some differences stirred vp in Asia confesseth in one of his Epistles that men are deceiued to hope for any succour from thence and taking offence at his pride he accounteth all such deputations idle and

first if the Pope may erre in the question of fact it followeth also that he may erre in the question of Right seeing that the one dependeth vpon the other if he may be ignorant whether Iesus Christ came into the world or whether hee died for vs he may also be ignorant whether we ought to beleeue in him or no. So likewise if he may erre in maners it followeth that he may teach false doctrine for to lie and to speake against his conscience is certainly a defaillance in manners If then the Pope cannot be ignorant of the true doctrine and yet through malitiousnesse will bury the truth wilfully to deceiue to what end serueth this truth hidden in the Popes vnderstanding if the people in the meane time be fed with lies But this is an absurdity aboue the rest to thinke that the Pope may erre as man or as a particular Doctor but not as Pope for why doth not the Pope correct the doctor Or when Pope Boniface or Clement doe erre as Boniface but not as Pope why doth not Boniface aske counsell of the Pope why dooth hee not consult himselfe why doth he not betake himselfe from his priuate chaire to the Popes Seate to the end to change his opinion If the Popes diuine knowledge be tyed to his Chaire or Papall habite it followeth that when he riseth from his seat or putteth off his Robes Titulo 2. de Constitutionib cap. licet in 6. that withall he strippeth himselfe out of his knowledge And that Boniface the eight was to blame to inclose the Popes knowledge in his breast Shall we thinke that these men haue a desire to be credited and that by these pleasant distinctions they do not mocke the Pope Put the case that all this may be reconciled and that the Pope may be contrary to himselfe and worse then himselfe and at one instant both Hereticke and an Orthodox what doth all this auaile the people seeing that in what sort soeuer the Pope teacheth whether as Pope or as Doctor he will alwayes be beleeued Neyther can the people discerne these subtle Distinctions Neyther may wee omit that the Pope vpon Maundy Thursday doth excommunicate all Heretickes whence it should follow that if himselfe be an hereticke as man he is also excommunicate and consequently is out of the Church and so it should come to passe that the man may be out of the Church but the Pope be within it which is as if I should say that the King at the same instant is within his Palace as King but without it as man or that Coeffeteau is at the same time in the Refectory or dyning-hall as Fryer and without as man so that a man shall finde him in two places at once It was then a great vnhappinesse to the auncient Fathers to haue beene ignorant of this Distinction and to haue assembled so many Councels so long and so painful for the deciding of differents in Religion seing that they needed only to haue addressed themselues to the Bishop of Rome and to intreate him not as man or as Doctor but as Pope to pronounce the sentence giue decision of the Controuersie Whence also it followeth that then the Popes had but small zeale to the publique good of the Church seeing that they refused to be present at generall Councels which were the speciall places in which they ought to haue put on this their Infallibility As also when the Romane Bishop had giuen his aduise by his Deputies the Councels did not forbeare for all that to sound and examine the matter to the bottome and to heare the opinions of others Howbeit Coeffeteau produceth this Scripture to shew that the Pope cannot erre he saith that our Lord said to S. Peter I haue prayed for thee that thy faith should not faile Whence he concludeth that the Pope cannot erre in faith Surely wee haue no greater proofe of the patience of God then that he suffreth his holy word thus to be abused for first is there any mention here of the Pope Is all that that was spoken to S. Peter spoken also to the Bishop of Rome If that be so then must we needes say that that which our Sauiour said to Peter Mat. 16. he said also to the Pope Get thee behinde me Sathan Secondly adde that which wee will hereafter shew that the Pope is not the Successour of S. Peter vnlesse it be as sickenesse succeedeth health Thirdly and albeit this had beene spoken to the Pope yet by these words Christ doth not promise to S. Peter that he should not erre at all in faith for it is one thing not to faile another thing not vtterly to fall away There be many that misse and faile but yet doe they not wholly miscarrie whence ensueth that though Christ should haue prayed for the Pope that his faith should not vtterly faile yet can he not for all that be exempted from power of erring Fourthly if the Successors of S. Peter enter also vpon this vertue of his neuer to erre then should the Bishop of Antioch who stileth himselfe Peters Successor be exempted also from erring Fiftly seeing that Saint Iohn S Paul S. Iames c. were no lesse exempted from this power of erring then was S. Peter why should not their Successours inherite the infallibility of the rest of the Apostles as well as the Successors of S. Peter Sixtly but without any more adoe let vs looke vpon the place and reade with one breath the verses following and we shall finde that Christ in that place did foretell to S. Peter his fall and deniall and promiseth that his faith should not vtterly be vanquished in that temptation that was then personall and peculiar to S. Peter yet so that our Sauiour would haue his fall and rising againe to serue to confirme his brethrē Here by the way the Reader may note that this Passage and Text of Scripture is the onely foundation that the Church of Rome can finde to prop vp the Popes infallibility which is as if a man would plant and reare vp an huge Colossus vpon Reedes or from a thing of nothing to make a long chaine of Consequences to depend Wherefore Coeffeteau being put off from Scripture he hath recourse to the Fathers and saith that S. Cyprian is bold to say that the Church of Rome is that to which treachery and false hood can haue no accesse Cyprian thereby vnderstands that it cannot be the refuge of perfidious men neyther can they be receiued there to finde shelter which is true of euery Orthodox Church for Cyprian varied from the Bishop of Rome vpon the poynt of Rebaptization of heretickes which is an euident proofe that he did not beleeue that the Bishop of Rome could not erre and indeede in the Epistle to Pompeius written after that which Coeffeteau alleadgeth he saith that Stephen Bishop of Rome was in an errour Stephani errorē denotabis inter caetera vel superuacanea vel ad rem

vnto the 15. verse of the 21. chapter Seauen dayes after his arriuall he is taken and to auoyd the violence of the Iewes he appealeth vnto Caesar when he came to Rome he preached there two yeares Acts 28.30 and there suffered Martyrdome as we may easily gather out of the 2. Timothy Chapter 4. verse 6. and by the subscription of the Epistle From whence it appeareth that the Epistle to the Romanes could not be written aboue three yeares before his death and not to be too strict let vs admit that it might be 4. yeares let vs now shew that S. Peter had not beene at Rome when S. Paul wrote this Epistle for that is prooued by the fifteenth chapter of the said Epistle to the Romanes where Saint Paul saith that he is resolued to goe to Rome whereof he rendreth this reason to wit I study to set forth the Gospell not in those places where mention hath beene already made of Iesus Christ to the end faith he that I build not vpon another mans foundation He presupposeth then that neyther S. Peter nor any Apostle had till that time laid nay foundation in the Church of Rome otherwise S. Paul going thither soone after should haue built vpon anothers ground-worke The renowne and credite and the mutual conference and conuersation of the Christian strangers with the Romanes had sowen the Christian Religion at Rome but before S. Pauls comming thither there was not any forme of a Church gouerned S. Paul laid the first foundation as is manifest by the place alleadged This being thus gained let vs end the rest of the combat The Kings Maiesty of England hath aduisedly noted that the Apostle S. Paul did excommunicate the incestuous person of his owne authority the spirit of the Corinthians ioyning with his spirit without making or medling with S. Peters spirit Coeffeteau here answereth that by the spirit S. Paul meant not authority but knowledge and declaration of will as Beza expoundeth it I aunswere that this declaration of will was done by vertue of the power and authority which he had as he addeth in the wordes following In the name of our Lord Iesus and by his power so calleth he that power which Christ had giuen him and which hee denieth to haue receiued from any man Gal. 1. v. 1. and chap. 2. v. 6. n = * They which were the cheef brought nothing vnto it But saith Coeffe●eau it is not necessary at all times to expresse all the functions of the Church nor the Primacy of S. Peter it being sufficient to beleeue it Then say I if he omitted it in this place and neuer thelesse beleeued it you must then shew vs some other place wherehe confesseth that he beleeued it Coeffoteau goeth further and saith Coeff fol. 89. That in the Letters of the Councell of Ierusalem the decision was made by the authority of the whole Assembly without speaking of Peter Acts 15.23 because the Letters were sent in the name of all the company n = * The apostles and the Elders brethren to the brethren that are of the Gentils in Antiochia Besides it is sufficient that elsewhere S. Peter is called cheefe by the Oracle of truth and that Peter himselfe speaketh first To this I say that if in these dayes a Councell where the Pope were present should write Letters to decide a Controuersie it would be thought very strange if in those Letters there were no mention made of the Pope Againe we cannot finde that the Oracle of truth did euer giue vnto S. Peter any power or Iurisdiction ouer the other Apostles Furthermore in this Councell Peter spake as a man that gaue his aduise or iudgement but it was Iames that spake last and pronounced the finall decision as President in the action But among all the reasons alleadged by the King of great Britaine that is most witty and forcible which is drawne from the first chapter of the first to the Corinthes which hath not beene yet noted by any other S. Paul had founded the Church of Corinth and had laboured mightily but after his departure from them they fell to faction and partaking one saying I am of Paul another of Apollo and another of Peter Those that said they were of Paul had a desire rather to become his followers then Peters it appeareth then that S. Paul had not taught them to acknowledge S. Peter to be his Superior and to be the head of the vniuersall Church for if he had so taught them they would neuer haue resisted and withstood that his instruction Neyther is it possible that any man would oppose himselfe herein against S. Paul thinking in so doing to become his Disciple or that he would not beleeue him to the end he might become his follower This is not onely absurde but it is also impossible from this argument so aptly collected Coeffeteau being vnable to comprehend the force thereof is driuen to shifts and querkes cleane from the purpose To as little purpose is it when he saith that Caluine speaking of the Controuersie betweene Paul and Peter Coeff fol. 90. Gal. 2. did not inferre a Preference of S. Paul before S. Peter but onely an equalitie for his Maiestie doth not intend a preheminence of S. Paul aboue S. Peter in generall but onely in this particular action Forasmuch as iustly to reprehend is a thing more noble then to be reprehended and to teach better then to learne I also adde that it is very likely that if S. Peter had had his Cardinals about him or a guard of Swyssers and Light Horsemen See Crysostome vpon chap. 1. to the Galathians he would not haue suffered S. Paul to haue withstood him to his face But follow on the line and leauell of S. Pauls purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and it will lead you directly to the truth that S. Pauls drift was to meete with and to preuent the mis-regard which some had of his Apostleship which some held to be of an inferior ranck because he was none of the twelue but came after them Against this opinion of theirs he iustly armeth himselfe and saith in the very beginning of his Epistle that he is an Apostle not of men nor by man but by Iesus Christ where he teacheth vs sufficiently that hee had no commission from S. Peter And chap. 2. verse 6. he saith that they that seemed to be in estimation added nothing vnto him He saith that the charge was diuided betweene him and Peter to him were the Gentiles committed euen as to Peter those of the circumcision that Iames Peter and Iohn who were accounted the Pillars gaue him the right hand of Fellowship that he withstood Peter to his face when he came to Antioch Petrum solum nominant sibi comparat quia primatum ipse accepit ad fundandam Ecclesiam se quoque pari modo electum vt primatum haberet in fundandis gentis um Ecclesijs and went not the right