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	pillar_n	3,742	5	10.1590	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88669	The ancient doctrine of the Church of England maintained in its primitive purity. Containing a justification of the XXXIX. articles of the Church of England, against papists and schismaticks The similitude and harmony betwixt the Romane Catholick, and the heretick, with a discovery of their abuses of the fathers, in the first XVI ages, and the many heresies introduced by the Roman Church. Together with a vindication of the antiquity and universality of the ancient Protestant faith. Written long since by that eminent and learned divine Daniel Featly D.D. Seasonable for these times.	Lynde, Humphrey, Sir.; Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645.	1660 (1660)	Wing L3564B; ESTC R230720	398,492	686

to shew the visibilitie of the Church by persons in all ages Then you demand of me where the Church was which S. Paul called the house of God and pillar of truth and thus you prescribe mee my weapons and teach mee how to fight Touching the visibilitie of the Church it is not to be confined within the narrow compasse of an Epistle and therefore I will answer you and your Jesuites challenge at large in place convenient and as touching your demand where the Church was which is called the pillar of truth I answer in briefe not in Rome but in Ephesus for otherwise it might seeme incongruous that the Apostle should exhort Timothy to walke circumspectly in the Church of God because the Church of Rome was the pillar and firmament of truth And therefore the Turke may better alledge this place to prove Mah mets religion being now subject to his power than you to justifie the Romish religion because Ephesus was the pillar of truth You proceed and by way of prevention you tell me the controversie is not so much of the doctrine as of the persons and then you conclude simply in the very same page The question is not of the doctrine but of the persons Oportet esse memorem I will but let you see your contradiction I quarrell it not onely I pray you tell mee in the words of sobernesse and truth did ever any wise man except your selfe undertake to prove the true Church by the visibilitie of the persons May not Jewes and Heretiques by the same reason claime a true Church because they had visible persons in all ages But say you this hath beene the way which the holy Fathers have taken either in proving the Catholique faith or disproving of heresies and for your Assertion you cite Tertullian Irenaeus Cyprian Optatus and Augustine give me leave to examine your Authors for as yet you have produced but one ancient Father and him you have falsified in the Frontispice of your booke Touching your first Author Tertull. prescript c. 32. lib. 3. Car. advers Marcion Tertullian in the first place cited by you hee demonstrates two wayes how to discerne the Church first by shewing some Apostle or Apostolicall person to have founded it next by the conformity of the doctrine to the Apostles and in his third book against Marcion which is your second citation hee hath nothing at all for your purpose Touching your second Author Iren. l. 3. c. 1 2 3. l. 4. c. 43 45 46. Irenaeus hee is expressely against you for in the first chapter and third booke cited by you he saith By the will of God they have delivered the Gospel to bee the pillar and foundation of truth In the second hee saith that when Heretiques are convinced by the Scriptures they fall to accuse them as if they were not right or of authoritie and that they are ambiguous and doubtfull In the third hee proveth the truth of the Church by the conformitie of doctrine to the Apostles not by the visibilitie as you pretend In his fourth booke cited by you he shewes that bare succession is no note of the Church and in his 45. chapter which you quote there is nothing that maketh for your question And lastly in the 46. chapter he proveth that the New Testament is as severe against fornication as the Old or rather more and this may touch the free-hold of that Church which dispenseth with Stewes but of the point in question he speakes nothing at all Touching your third Author S. Cyprian Cypr. Ep. 52. 76. in the 52. Epistle cited by you he perswades Antonianus rather to adhere to Cornelius than Novatianus and in his 76. Epistle alledged by you hee shewes that Novatianus succeeding none in that See was ordained by himselfe and therefore could bee no true Bishop but as touching the controversie in question Ne gry quidem Touching your fourth Author Optatus Optat. advers Parmen lib. 2. he handleth not the question neither maketh any thing at all for you Lastly August Psal 2. part Don. Ep. 165. de Utilit credendi c. 7. touching S. Austin you cite the second Psalme and there is nothing handled of the question you cite likewise his 165. Epistle wherein hee declares a succession of Bishops from the Apostles time to Anastasius Si ordo Episcoporum succedentium considerandus est Ep. 165. p. 751. Preculdubio ab Ecclesiâ Catholicâ sumendum exordium De Utilit credendi c. 7. Idem contr Cresc l. 1. c. 33. If saith he an orderly succession of Bishops is to be considered Yea but S. Austin say you particularly proves the question where he tels his friend Honoratus he must begin his enquirie from the Catholique Church Hee that told the Manichees wee must take our Exordium from the Church told the Donatists likewise wee must resort to that Church for the resolution of our faith which the sacred Scriptures undoubtedly demonstrate to be the true Church for in them saith he we have knowne Christ Idem Ep. 166. in them wee have knowne the Church If you can derive your succession in person and doctrine from Christ and his Apostles we will answer you as sometimes S. Austin answered Petilian the Donatist Idem contr l. Petil. l. 2. c. 85. Whether of us be Schismatiques we or you aske you not mee I will not aske you let Christ bee asked that hee may shew us his owne Church After these severall passages you returne againe to your first Author Tertullian Tertull. prescript c. 19. and with him you conclude where it shall appeare that there is the truth of Christian discipline and faith there shall bee the truth of Scriptures and Expositions And from hence you inferre that we are first to seeke the persons that professe the faith that is the Church Whereas in truth his testimony doth rather prove the persons by the doctrine than the doctrine by the persons and this is most agreeable to his owne Assertion in the third chapter Idem c. 3. Ex personis probamus fidem an ex fide personas As if hee should say wee plainly prove the persons by the doctrine not the doctrine by the persons Now put on your Spectacles and take a review of your Authors The first maketh nothing for you the second is expressely against you the third speakes not to the point in question the fourth and fifth handle the question but not at all to your advantage or our prejudice and thus you have produced foureteene severall places out of the ancient Fathers in one page and all either impertinently or falsly or directly against your selfe by which the Reader may conjecture what is like to bee the issue of your whole worke who have so grossely falsified so many authorities in your Epistle and before the entrance into the body of your booke From your lame proofes of the Churches authoritie you proceed to the justification of your maimed commandements

advers Valent. c. 3. and in thrusting himselfe into dark and blinde holes Such is the nature of false teachers they seeke nothing more saith the same Author than to hide that which they preach Idem c. 1. if yet they may be said to preach that they hide But good Physicians say you use to enquire of the causes effects and circumstances Pag. 73. for upon these circumstances dependeth the knowledge whether it be a disease or no. It is most true that Physicians will enquire of the causes of the disease but will they deny the Patient to be sicke or refuse to minister Physicke to him unlesse he tell them precisely how or when he first tooke his disease or infection For this is our case and the point in question touching a reformation Neither doth the knowledge of the disease of the body depend upon the circumstances of time place and person I thinke you never read such Aphorismes either in Gallen or Hyppocrates neither doth your knowledge of errors and heresie in your Church depend on the circumstances of time place and persons For some Authors at the same time and in the same place might have broached truth when another set his heresie abroach as namely Saint Austin precisely in the time and place delivered the Orthodox Doctrine of grace when and where Pelagius spread his heresie From your Rules of Physicke you returne to the Rules of Divinity and tell us from Saint Austin that * Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditū rectissimè creditur De Baptis contr Donat. l. 5. c 24. in initio Tom. 7. p. mihi 433. whatsoever the Catholike Church doth generally beleeve or practise so as there can be no time assigned when it began it is to be taken for an Apostolicall tradition This place of Austin you neither quoted in your Answer neither have you recited his words faithfully for hee speakes not of assigning the time when the Doctrine begins but whatsoever the universall Church doth hold not being ordained by Councels but hath beene ever held that is most rightly beleeved for an Apostolicall tradition This is his Tenet and this is ours but you have put in the word Catholike in your sense for universall you have added generall beleefe and practise you have thrust in these words so as no time can be assigned when it began and you have omitted the principall verb that hath been ever held which makes me suspect you omitted the citing of this place lest your fraud should be descried But I pardon you let us heare the rest P. 73. But such say you are all those things which you are pleased to call errors If this were as easily proved as spoken you should not neede to put us to the search of times and Authors for the first Founder of your Faith For if your Popish Doctrines were alwayes held by the universall Church and not ordained by Councels we should not need to looke into your Councell of Lateran for your Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor into your Councell of Constance for Communion in both kindes nor into your Councell of Florence for your seven Sacraments nor into your second Councell of Nice for your worship of Images for these and many such traditions were first ordained by Councels and were not the generall beliefe and practice of the Church Againe if the universall Church had alwayes held your Doctrines from the Apostles times why doe you your selfe confesse that your prayer in an unknowne tongue Pag. praecedenti your private Masse your halfe Communion were taught otherwise in the primitive Churches Nay if they be Apostolicall how comes it that they are flat contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles And thus much of your two rules of Physicke and Divinity let us he are the rest of your authorities Tertullian say you hath this Rule for discerning heresie from truth Tertul. praescrip 31. p. mihi 78. That which goeth before is truth and that which commeth after is errour This Rule is most true but these words you cite by the halves for hee saith expresly Id autem extraneum falsum quod sit posterius immissum Id Dominicum verum quod sit prius traditum That was first delivered which was true and came from the God of truth and this was the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles for that which commeth after saith he is sarre different where hee shewes likewise in these words following that after Christs time and in the dayes of the Apostles there might be heresies Ut aliquem ex Apostolicis viris qui tamen cum illis persever averint habent authorem Ibid. for the mystery of iniquitie began then to worke and therefore hee will not have it enough to derive a Doctrine from a man which lived with the Apostles unlesse it can be proved that he continued with them and the reason as I conceive was given by Nicephorus After the sacred company of the Apostles was come to an end Niceph. l. 3. c. 16. and that their generation was wholly spent which had heard with their eares the heavenly wisdome of the Sonne of God then that conspiracie of detestable errour through the deceipt of such as delivered strange Doctrine tooke rooting and because that none of the Apostles survived they published boldly with all might possible the doctrine of falshood and impugned the manifest and knowne truth But wee plead say you prescription from the beginning It is not sufficient to plead it you must prove it The Mahometists at this day assume the name of Saracens as your men doe the name of Catholikes as if they came from Sara the free woman Abrahams true and lawfull wife when in truth they tooke their first beginning from Agar the bond-woman neither can there be any prescription against the ancient Records and Evidences of the Word written by Christ and his Apostles Indeed you have found a right and easie way to claime a prescription from the time of the Apostles for you have razed many prime Evidences of the Fathers for the first 800. yeeres which make for our Doctrine and you have proscribed many learned Authors and their Records as I have shewed before for the last 800. yeeres which testified against your errors And now I come to your Churches apostacie or falling from the truth which occasioned these errors Apostacie say you is a defection or forsaking of the Name of Christ and profession of Christianity as all men understand it I shewed in this Section that in the primitive Church when any heresie did arise that indangered the foundation such as was the heresie of the Arrians of the Pelagians and the like the Authors were observed the times were knowne the place was pointed at and forthwith letters of Premonition were sent to all the sound members of the Catholike Church by which publike advertisement the steale-truth

without intermission 3. That Protestants have no shaddow of succession in person or doctrine 4. That Papists have a most cleare personall succession being able to shew 200. and odde Popes succeeding the other in place and office 5. That personall succession is a firme argument of succession in faith IT is my promise in my seventh Section to shew a descent of both Religions as namely that the Romish faith was derived from antient Haeretiks and the Protestant faith was drawne downe from Christ and his Apostles But say you It is one thing to prove a thing to have beene anciently taught another to have beene successively taught It is true Antiquity and Succession differ neither did I undertake to prove that those Haeretikes or your Church had a perpetuall succession in person and doctrine but for the truths sake I have acknowledged the antiquity of your Trent faith although descended from ancient Haeretikes and I made the first instance in Latin Service and prayer in a strange tongue brought in by Pope Vitolian as is witnessed by Wolphius but you cry out It is a most strange absurdity to averre fuch a knowne falsehood upon no other authority pag. 87. then a professed Haeretike And is he an Haeretike that speaketh the truth of your Religion What say you to your prime Champion Mr. Harding He saith expresly About nine hundred yeares past it is certaine the people in some Countries had their service in an unknowne tongue Iuel in his 3. Article Divis 1. as it shall be proved of our owne Country of England Now observe the difference Wolphius said the Latin Service came in after Christ about the yeare 666. Mr. Harding who wrote these 67. yeares since as appeares by Bishop Iuels Epistle tells us it came in 900. yeares past compute Wolphius 666. with Mr. Hardings time of 967. and you shall finde that they agree about one and the same time and therefore it was neither absurd nor false which Wolphius uttered Neither doe you disprove the reason of Wolphius but you make a qu●ere upon his assertion During his 600. and odd yeares what other Lyturgies were there in the Latin Church but Latin And I may aswell say what were there in the Greeke Church but Greeke But this demand maketh against your Service in an unknowne tongue not against Wolphius who affirmeth not that the Latin Service was not in the Latin Church before the yeare 666. but that the Pope obtruded it upon all Churches even there where the Latin was not understood as in England saith Mr. Harding and elsewhere For Origen tells us before that time Orig contrd Celsum lib. 8. the Greekes call upon God in the Greeke tongue and the Latins in the Latin tongue and all severall Nations pray unto God and praise him in their owne natur all and mother tongues for he that is the Lord of all tongues heareth men praying in all tongues none otherwise then if it were one voice pronounced by divers tongues for God that ruleth the whole world is not as some one man that hath gotten the Greeke or Latin and knoweth none-other The ancient Primitive Churches therefore taught the Doctrine in a knowne tongue agreeable to the profession at this day But the truth is A. 30.666 A. 1.666 T. 300.666 E. 5.666 I. 10.666 N. 50.666 O. 70.666 M. 200.666 Sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nomen sexcentinum sexagiata sex numerū habens valde verisimile est quonlam verissimum nomen hobet vocabulum Latini enim sunt qui nunc regnāt sed non in hoc nos gloriabimur Irenae l 5. cap 25. p mihi 355. the Latin Service and the name of the Latin Church is one of the most essentiall markes of the Roman Hierarchie And I know not whether it were by conjecture or by inspiration that Irenaeus above foureteene hundred yeares agoe in the word Lateinos found out the name of Antichrist and the number of 666. The name Lateinos saith he conteining the number of six hundred sixty six is very likely because the truest kingdome hath that name for they are the Latines that now raigne but saith he we will not glory in this You proceede to the Haeretikes Ossem and you say first I am notably mistaken in placing them towards the Apostles time and withall you have read the Chapter there twice over and the second time more attentively then the first and yet you find not any such word so cited by mee First Trajan Anno 100. Bel. de script Eccles pag. mihi this Sect continued till Trajans time not an hundred yeares after the Apostles and therefore it was no errour in me to place them towards the Apostles time and if you please to peruse the place a third time with your Spectacles you shall find these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph heres 19 Nemo quaerat interpretationem sed solum in oratione haec dicat and there hee repeats a Prayer which if you peruse the Greeke text is more expresse Let no man inquire after the meaning only in his Prayer Let him say such words viz. such Hebrew words which Epiphanius there setteth downe Are not these Heretikes thinke you neere kinne to them who say Heare Latine Masse and say after the Priest it mattereth not whether you understand what hee saith or not From Epiphanius you flie to Saint Ambrose and there you make a great complaint that I put in words of my owne in the same Character with Saint Ambrose which are none of his as namely There were certaine Iewes amongst the Graecians Ambr. in 1 Cor. 14. as namely the Corinthians who did celebrate the Divine Service and Sacraments which the common people understood not I confesse ingenuously it is an errour in the print and I shall willingly alter the letter but not the words at the next impression But I confidently professe it is agreeable to the true sense and meaning of the Author and the strength of the argument is not in the words but in the sense and therfore I may truly answer you with S. Austine What folly is it to contend about words Aug. Ep. 174. when there is the certainty of the thing it selfe It cannot be denied that Ambrose taxeth the Hebrewes who amongst the Corinthians in Tractatibus oblationibus used sometimes the Syriack and sometimes the Hebrew tongue which without doubt the Greeks understood not And therefore in his Commentarie on this place hee gives the Hebrew to understand If you meet together to edifie the Church Ambr. in 1 Cor. 14. those things must be delivered which the hearers understand for to what purpose or profit is it that any one speake a tongue which hee himselfe onely understands and whereof hee that heareth can reape no fruit And a little after The Apostle saith I had rather speake five words in the Church according to the Law that I may edifie others than any long and large discourse in obscuritie Againe by

Supper without the words shew forth or as he speaketh announce the death of our Lord for Bread is broken and Wine poured out at common meales yet our Lords death is not thereby declared both must concurre mysterious rites and sacred formes of words lively to present Christs death The Knights argument therefore standeth firme The Sacraments ought so to bee celebrated that by them the Lords death might bee shewed forth but it cannot be shewed forth unlesse the Evangelicall storie and especially the words of the Institution be pronounced in a language that may be understood For to speake Latine to the people that understand it not is surdo narrare fabulam to tell a tale to a deafe man or to set a beautifull picture before him that is blind or in the Knights phrase to speake to a wall at which notwithstanding the Iesuit ridiculously carpeth saying I never heard before that it was all one to speake Latine and to speake to a wall were hee according to our English proverbe as wise as a wall hee could not but understand what was the Knights meaning to wit that to speake Latine prayers and exhortations as Papists doe at their Masse to those who understand them not is no better then to speake to so many walls when the Apostle touching upon the same string the Knight doth 1 Cor. 14.9 tearmeth the uttering words in an unknowne tongue as speaking into the ayre This Iesuit in the spirit of Lucian might in like manner have jeared at the Apostle saying I never heard that to speake in an unknowne tongue bee it Greeke Latine or Hebrew is to speake to the ayre The meaning of both phrases to speake to a wall and to speake into the ayre is all one to lose a mans breath to speake idlely and unprofitably or to no end and purpose when no man is the better for it as the Iesuit afterwards confesseth saying The other reason from the Apostle is that those which heare a prayer in a strange language are nothing the better for it nor can say Amen unto it What then can the common people bee the better for hearing popish Mattens or even-song which are chaunted in Latine a language which they understand not To the seventh Admit the Apostle in that place spake not of publike prayers but rather of private extemporarie devotion yet the reasons he there useth against prayer in an unknowne tongue are as forcible against publike as private ptayers For if wee may not pray without understanding or speake into the ayre in our private devotions much lesse in our publike But the truth is the Apostle speaketh evidently of publike prayers and all the parts thereof first of petitions v. 15. secondly of giving of thanks v. 17. thirdly of prophecying and interpreting of Scriptutes v. 4. fourthly of singing Psalmes v. 15. and all this when the whole Church bee come together in one place v. 23. Moreover he speaketh of prayers made in the Church v. 19. of the edification of others v. 12.26 and of blessings also wherein the people are to joyne with the Priest v. 16. and what can such prayers benedictions hymnes and thankes-givings bee other then parte of the publike Liturgie in the Church in those dayes Yea but saith the Iesuit hee cannot speake of the publike prayers of the Church which no man can doubt either for the truth or goodnesse of them and therefore hee may confidently say Amen to them though they bee uttered in an unknowne tongue I answer that the Apostle here speaketh not of confidently saying Amen but understandingly saying it which no man can doe who is utterly ignorant of the tongue in which the Priest prayeth Hos de verb Dei I beleeve what the Church beleeveth the Church beleeveth what I beleeve And howsoever none of the coliers implicite circnlar faith can make any doubt of the truth or goodnesse of the prayers said in the Masse yet those whose eyes are not put out with the Romish coale dust may very well doubt of them first they may well doubt whether the Church of Rome which appointeth them may not erre as other Churches have done especially considering what the Apostle speaketh expresly of that Church Rom. 11.22 Vid. Bull. praefix breviar Rom. Melcbior loc theol l. 11. c. 5. nec enim animus est meri omnes historias quae passim in ecclcsiâ loctitantur Claudius Espen in 2. ad Tim. c. 4. digres 2. nostri quantum me pigeant falsa in ecclesia Dei cantica canentes quantae nugae canore mihi audibiles in uno hymno praeter ineptitudinem sententiarum mendacia ad minus 24. reperi Petrus Pictau ep 31. conqueritur inepta ac falsa in laudem Sancti Mauri super aquas currentis afficta that if shee continued not in her goodnesse shee should be cut off Secondly hee may doubt whether all those corruptions and abuses which the Fathers in the Councell of Trent complaine to have crept into their Masse are reformed Thirdly he may doubt whether the Priests booke may not bee some-where false printed Lastly he may doubt whether the Priest alwayes reades true surely that Priest who baptized a child in nomine patria filia spiritua sancta and another who read in the Doxologie glia pni flo spui sco scutrat in primpo scla sclorum Amen said Masse by rote and could not have skill of brachygraphy nor well spell Latine and can no man then doubt of the truth and goodnesse of any of the prayers that are said by your Masse-priests To the eighth The shaft which the Knight draweth out of Haymo his quiver flieth home For first he expresly teacheth that S. Paul speaketh of publike prayers 1 Cor. 14. and among other reasons used by the Apostle against the conceiving of prayers in an unknowne tongue hee insisteth upon that v. 16. when thou shalt blesse with the spirit how shall hee that occupieth the Roome of the unlearned say Amen at the giving of thankes seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest adding if one knoweth that onely tongue wherein hee was borne and bred if such an one stand by thee whilest thou dost solemnly celebrate the mysterie of the Masse or make a Sermon or give a blessing how shall hee say Amen at thy blessing when hee knoweth not what thou sayest for asmuch as hee understanding none but his mothers tengue hee cannot tell what thou speakest in that strange and barbarous tongue Hereunto the Iesuit answereth that if wee take Haymo altogether wee shall find hee doth not require that all that are by shall understand but that hee that supplieth the place of the idiot or laye-man in answering for the people shall understand An answer befitting an idiot indeed for doth not S. Paul 1 Cor. 14.16 and after him Haymo speake indefinitly of any that occupie the place of the unlearned or standeth by at Service or Sermon in an unknowne tongue or is it lesse absurd for any