Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n authority_n church_n infallible_a 2,088 5 9.4927 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A61590 The reformation justify'd in a sermon preached at Guild-Hall Chappel Septemb. 21, 1673, before the Lord Major and Aldermen, &c. / by Edw. Stillingfleet ... Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. 1674 (1674) Wing S5626; ESTC R14334 23,407 58

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

he did against St. Paul they charge us with bringing in new Sects under the pretence of Reformation or with rejecting the Authority of the present Church which we were bound to obey and thereby laying the Foundation of Faction ●nd Schism These are heavy charges but they are no other than those the High Priest and the Elders made against St. Paul and thanks be to God his Defence and Vindication is ours too for we appeal to Scripture and the best and purest Antiquity and desire to be judged according to these These three things therefore I shall speak to before I conclude 1. That the same reasons which they produce against the Reformation would have held against the spreading of Christianity at first 2. That the same Defence which St. Paul made for Christianity will justifie the Reformation 3. That we have all reason to follow the courage of St. Paul in owning and defending our Religion not with standing the imputations which are cast upon it 1. That the same reasons which they produce against the Reformation would have held against Christianity at first What have all the clamours of our Adversaries for above a hundred years come to but the very same which I have already mentioned as the Jews Objections against Christianity viz. Novelty and Faction Where was your Church before the Reformation produce your succession in all Ages of persons who agreed in all things with you Where were those distinct bodies of men who found fault with those corruptions that you pretend to reform Our Church hath had a constant and glorious succession of Bishops and Martyrs and Consessors and Religious Orders of Men Virgins and Widows But supposing such a distinct succession were not necessary yet shew how it was possible for so many errors and corruptions to come into the Church and no one take notice of them and discover them Where was the watchfull eye of Providence over the Church all this while What all the Pastors asleep at once or all conspiring together to deceive their posterity Besides how can the Protestants ever answer their rejecting the Authority of the present Church which they lived under and to whom God had promised his infallible Spirit how can they clear themselves from faction and disturbing the peace of the Christian world which lived in so great unity and peace before This is the summ of their Objections against the Reformation which are the very same we have mention'd before as produced by the Jews against Christianity If the arguments are good now they were so then if they were good then for all that I can see the High Priest and Elders were in the right and St. Paul in the wrong if they were not good then but are now some remarkable disparity must be shewed between their case and ours and that must lye in shewing these three things 1. That the Christian Church hath greater infallibility promised than the Jewish had 2. That the first Christians had greater reason to reject the Authority of that Church than the Reformers had as to the Church of Rome 3 That the Causes of corruptions in the Jewish Church could not hold in the Christian But if none of these can be made good then the case will appear to be the very same 1. It cannot be proved that the Christian Church hath greater infallibility promised than the Jewish had Of which we have this plain evidence that one of the strongest arguments produced for the infallibility of the Christian Church is taken from the Promises made to the Jewish How often hath Deut. 17. 8 9 10. been made Use of to prove infallibility in the Christian Church If they had any better arguments in the New Testament would they ever run so far back to a Command that most evidently relates to the Jewish constitution Where hath ever God promised that he would dwell in St. Peters at Rome as he did that he would dwell in his Temple at Hierusalem What boastings and triumphs would there have been if any such words had been in the Gospel concerning Rome as there were of old concerning Hierusalem viz. that God had sanctified it that his Name might be there for ever and his eyes and his heart should be there perpetually What pittiful proofs in comparison of this are all those brought out of the New Testament for the Authority and Infallibility of the Roman Church What are all the promises of the Spirit made to the Apostles and remarkably accomplished in them to this plain promise of Gods particular presence in that place for ever Suppose St. Peter had priviledges above the rest of the Apostles how comes the entail to be made to all his successors and only at Rome and no where else Where are the Deeds kept that contain this gift Why are they not produced during all this contest And yet we see in the Jewish Church where such a promise was made to a particular place no such thing as Infallibility was implyed in it 2. It cannot be shewed that the first Christians had greater reason to reject the Authority of the Jewish Church than our Reformers had to reject that of the Church of Rome I know here it will be presently said That the Apostles saw the Miracles of Christ and wrought many themselves and received an immediate Commission from Jesus Christ in whom the Churches Infallibility was then seated All which I grant to be true in it self but cannot be pleaded by them who contend for absolute obedience to the present Churches Authority as infallible My reason is because upon this principle they could not believe Christ to be the true Messias for his being the true Messias depended upon two things viz. the fulfilling of Prophecies and the truth of his Miracles now according to their principles no man could be certain of either of these without the Authority of the Church for the fulfilling of Prophecies depended upon the sense of many obscure places of Scripture about which they say there is a necessity of an infallible Judge and for Miracles they tell us that there is no certain way of judging true and false but by the Authority of the Church Now if these things be so what ground could the first Christians have to believe Christ to be the true Messias when in both these they must oppose the Authority of the present Church 3. They can never prove that the same causes of corruptions do not hold as to the Christian which did as to the Jewish Church For the Christian Church in those Ages which we charge with introducing the corruptions was degenerated into greater Ignorance Barbarism Luxury and Superstition than the Jewish Church in the time of its darkness from the cessation of Prophecy till the coming of Christ. Our Adversaries themselves confess that for a long time there was nothing either of Learning or Humanity among them nothing but ease and luxury and ambition and all manner of Wickedness among the Chief Rulers among them nay
Church for at that very time the High-Priests and Elders came down to accuse him and he takes not the least notice of their judgement in this matter I shall therefore now shew that St. Paul had very great reason so to do and to appeal only to Scripture 1. Because the Authority of the present Church was more lyable to error and mistake than the Rule of Scripture was 2. Because it was lyable to more partiality than that was 1. Because it was more lyable to error and mistake than the Rule of Scripture was It was agreed on both sides that the Law was from God and that the Prophets spake by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost all that was now left was only to find out the true meaning of them and to compare Prophecies with events As in the case of the Messias if the circumstances foretold by the Prophets had their exact accomplishment in Christ as might appear to those who carefully compared them If he were born at Bethlehem of the Tribe of Judah when the Scepter was departed from it and during the second Temple and all other circumstances agreeing then though the ordinary judgement concerning true Prophets belonged to the Sanhedrin yet it was far more reasonable to believe that they were mistaken than that all the Prophecies should be accomplished in a person that was not the true Messias For those Prophecies were not intended only for the Priests and Rulers but for directions to the People that they might be able to judge of the accomplishment of them otherwise when the Authority of the Jewish Church condemned our Saviour the People could have no reason to believe him to be the Messias if they were bound in the sense of Scripture to submit their judgement wholly to the Churches Authority It is plain then that the sense of Scripture may be so evident to private capacities that they are not to submit in it to the present Authority of a Church For notwithstanding all the promises made to the Jewish Church and the command of submitting to the sentence of their Priests and Rulers in a matter of the highest concernment viz. concerning the true Messias men were bound to believe directly contrary to the present Authority in the Church For the people were bound to believe Christ to be the true Messias although the High Priest and Elders had condemned him for a deceiver and malefactor But besides this particular case there may be several others wherein men may lawfully reject the Authority of the present Church and those are when that Authority shall go about to overthrow those things which must be supposed antecedent to the belief of any such Authority as 1. The common sense of mankind 2. The force of a divine Law 3. The liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood All these must necessarily be supposed before any Authority of a Church but if any Church goes about to overthrow these it thereby forfeits its own Authority over men 1. If it requires things contrary to common sense as in that instance wherein some of the Jewish Rabbies required submission to their Authority viz. in believing the right hand to be the left or the left to be the right if they determined so or supposing the Jews to have required the people to deny that they ever saw any Miracle wrought by Christ or in the Miracle of the Loaves that what they saw and handled and tasted to be bread was true bread or to say that the same individual body might be in a thousand places at once or that things whose nature it is to be in another can subsist without their proper subject what Church soever requires such things as these from its members to be believed gives them just reason to reject its Authority 2. If it requires things contrary to the force and reason of a divine Law as the Jews themselves would have acknowledged if any Authority among them had gone about either to have left out the second Commandment or made it lawful to give Religious worship to Images under any distinctions whatsoever or if the Priests had taken away from the people their share in the sacrifices under pretence of the unsanctified teeth or the long beards of the Laity which were not fit to touch what had been offered in sacrifice to God But we need not put cases among them for our Saviour therefore bids men have a care of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees because by their traditions they made the Commandment of God of none effect as in their Corban if they made a vow to God they thought themselves excused from relieving their Parents and in this way our Saviour generally deals with them shewing that though they pretended to keep the letter of the Law yet by their corrupt additions and false glosses they overthrew the scope and design of it which he thought sufficient reason to reject their Authority and therefore when he bids his Disciples observe and do what soever the Scribes and Pharisees bid them it must be supposed to be only while they keep to the letter and reason of the Law for if he had intended an absolute obedience he would never elsewhere bid his Disciples beware of their Doctrine 3. If it takes away all liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood in Religion For this is a natural right which every man hath to judge for himself and they that take this away may as well command all men to put out their eyes that they may better follow their Guides But the other is so much worse because it is an assault upon our understandings it is a robbing us of the greatest talent God hath committed to our management it is a rape upon our best faculties and prostituting them to the lusts of Spiritual Tyrants it is not captivating our understandings to the obedience of faith but enslaving them to the proud and domineering usurpations of men wherein they would do by us as the Philistins did by Sampson they would put out our eyes that we might grind in their prison and make them sport I would not be mistaken it is the liberty of judgement I plead for and not of practice that may be justly restrained by the Laws of the Church where the other is allowed because the obligations to peace and unity are different from those to faith and inward assent And that no absolute submission of judgement could be required by the Law of Moses notwithstanding the command of outward obedience in the cases mention'd Deut. 17. 8 9 c. is most evident from hence because that Law makes provision for a sin-offering in case the whole Congregation of Israel sin through ignorance and the thing be hid from the eyes of the Assembly or Supream Council and they have done something against the commandment of the Lord which had been a Law made to no purpose if it had been impossible for their chief Authority to have erred or been mistaken