Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	church_n	holy_a	word_n	6,560	5	4.2187	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45143	A modest and peaceable inquiry into the design and nature of some of those historical mistakes that are found in Dr. Stillingfleet's preface to his Unreasonableness of separation wherein the innocency of Protestant dissenters is cleared up and vindicated from the indecent censures of the doctor / by N. B.	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.; Lobb, Stephen, d. 1699.	1681 (1681)	Wing H3694; ESTC R8947	41,612	54

matter would permit any such expression as might be judg'd by the Dr's own intimates Indecent humbly apprehending that the Dr's Mistakes are but evincements of the emotions of that Corruption which in part is in the best of Saints on Earth which calls rather for our Compassion than Triumph knowing that we our selves are but men of like passions For which reason I will draw to a close in speaking to the Fourth thing 4. That to the end the Dr. may do himself and the Protestant Religion but right 't is necessary that he be either more distinct and full in a further explication of his sentiments if he be misapprehended or that he will be so Candid as to go on in following Bellarmine in one thing more namely in that it deserves due esteem and regard by a second Retractation if these mistakes appears to be such as they are by me represented 1. If the Dr. hath not wrong'd the Dissenter nor clos'd with the Jesuit in his arguings against Dissenters 't is most apparent that his words need an Exposition for whatsoever unprejudiced Person considers what hath been said in the foregoing Discourse may easily perceive that if we must judge of his meaning by his writing 't is as I have said But if not so I beseech the Dr. to exercise his Candour in inlightning us assuring him as soon as I can understand that I have in any respect misrepresented him I will be so Just as to acknowledge so much and do my utmost for the clearing him and in order thereunto have this onely to add That I do not say the Doctor hath consulted the Jesuits for what he asserts so agreeably unto their writings God forbid I should assert what I do not know But this I say that the Agreement is as great in those instances I have mentioned as if he had and that if he hath not consult'd them I know not what can be assigned as the true Reason of this strange agreement unless it be that sometime great Wits jump or that such is the State of the Controversie between Him and Dissenters that there is no way so effectual for the confuting us but by proceeding on Jesuitical Principles and using Popish Arguments But 2. If I have neither mistaken nor misrepresented the Dr. as I verily believe I have not seeing the Dr. is fallible and may see cause to alter his Sentiments unto these particulars as well as he hath done with reference unto some others the He would be so Self-denying on his receiving Convictions as to intimate so much unto the World 1. That the Dr. changeth his judgement concerning some Notions relating to Religion is neither a wonder to the World nor should it be a Reproach unto him or any other Person that for sufficient Reasons doth so Yet 2. Whenever any considerable Tract is with the shew and seeming strength of much Reason published to the World through the Varnish of which in process of time the Author espies Mistakes and Errour as the Author acts ingenuously in Publishing so much unto the World even so he ought to do the World that piece of Justice as to be at the pleasing Trouble of confuting it himself seeing otherwise much mischief may be done the poor weak Reader who thinks the discourse to contain the same Reasons since a a Retractation which it did before may through the Influence of of those Arguments that are in it be oblig'd to adhere unto Errour Moreover as to the Dr's Case 't is presum'd he doth not retract the whole and every part of his Irenicum and therefore 't would be necessary somewhat be done to shew what needs Explication what a Retractation and for what Reasons a Retractation and the like as to this present great Book a part of whose Prefaced I have Animadverted on which Animadversions are of such a Nature as cannot but engage the Dr. to do somewhat of this kind even as † Bellarm. Recog Scripsi Deo teste quod verum esse existimavi non gratiam hominum vel propriam utilitatem sed Honorem Dei Ecclesiae Commodum respiciens Neque in scriptis meis aliquid a divinis literis ●aut sanctorum Patrum Regulis alienum sciens posui Quin tamen scriptumest Prov. 10. in multiloquio non deerit Peccatum quod etiam de multa scriptione dei posse non dubito S. Augustinum imitatus c. Bellarmine himself in a like Case hath done who in the End of his Disputations hath his particular Recognitions prefacing it in these words God is my VVitness that what I have written is no more than what I judg●d to be the Truth which I wrote not on any unworthy design of pleasing others or profiting my self but with an Aim at Gods Glory and the Churches Benefit Nor have I knowingly receeded either from the Rule of the Scriptures or Holy Fathers However since 't is said Prov. 10.19 In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin which I Question not but may be said of much writing I will therefore imitate St. Austin i. e. in his Retractations c. That we may exercise the Charity in hoping that the Dr. doth not at any time publish That to be a Truth which he believeth to be an Errour and with all finding the Dr. to mistake yea sometimes sensible of his Mistakes I have presum'd to recommend unto him not onely St. Austin but also the great Bellarmine as a Pattern for his Imitation it being an Honour to follow him in what is Right when no way so as to those particulars wherein he is an Enemy unto the Churches of Jesus Christ and the True Protestant Religion FINIS

on the Papists work for them that they hold such Principles as by evident consequences from them do overthrow the Justice and Equity of the Reformation preface p. 6. and out of Bishop Sanderson 't is asserted That the Dissenting Brethren though not intentionally and purposely yet really and eventually have been the great Promoters of the Roman Inte rest among us I do not say adds the Dr. that such men namely the Dissenters are set on by the Jesuits But I say they do their work as effectually in blasting the Credit of the Reformation as if they were p. 10 But if we trace the footsteps of their Separation as far as we can we may find strong probabilities that the Jesuitical Party had a very great influence on the very first beginnings of it And the Papists could not but please themselves to see that other men did their work so effectually for them p. 16. The Papists could not have met with better Proctors i. e. then the Dissenters they did the Pope very good service and he would not miss them for any thing The Pope could not have fitter and apter instruments for his Purpose The Dissenters were made the Engines of the Roman Conclave Thus t is evident that the great end of the Drs. History if not of the whole Book it self is to represent Dissenting Protestants to be but the Jesuits Instruments that is to be men not worthy of any favour from a Protestant Prince for surely such are the Jesuits Engines But as no suggestion can be more untrue even so nothing could proceed from the Drs. Pen more unseasonably what should provoke him to be so invective and satyrical in this juncture of affairs is not easie to determine or what was his end is as difficult to imagine whether it was to cast contempt on the Wisdom of the Parliament who entertain other sentiments concerning the Dissenters or whether to gratifie the Roman Faction by acting so sutably to the Jesuits measures as discovered by Mr. Dugdale and some others which is to revile the Dissenters as the Dr. hath done to the end the common People may be prepared to believe that whatever horrid Plots the Papists are carrying on are but Presbyterian The which can no sooner be believed but his Maiesties most Loyal Subjects are exposed to the merciless cruelty of the bloody Papists who will not boggle at false Oaths to accuse them of the worst of Treasons under the Name of Presbyterians or Dissenting Protestants Or whether it be to cast a Bone of contention into the Parliament House thereby to prevent the uniting and strengthening the Protestant Interest as well as for diverting the House from such other Methods as are most necessary for the impeding the Future growth of Popery or whether to raise one of the severest Persecutions against that Loyal and truly Protestant Party which cannot be weakned or impoverished but to the advancing the Papal design whether any one or all of these particulars have been aimed at by the Dr. the Searcher of Hearts and his own Conscience doth best know But whatever was the Authors end 't is most uncontroulably true that if these several Mischiefs do not proceed from the Discourse it must be considered as a signal Providence to which alone we are owing for such preventing Grace But 2. To Exercise the Charity of collecting such Arguments as are subtly Insinuated for the ensnaring the Credulity of some of his Readers The which I will with the greatest fairness set forth in their strength and then descend to a detecting the Mistakes 1. To give the Dr. the greater advantage we 'l consider his Arguments to be as numerous as is possible after this following method 1. The Dissenters have embrac'd the Jesuits Principles about Spiritual Prayer and a more pure way of worship 2. They have blasted the Reputation and Honour of the first Reformation 3. They oppose Episcopacy and innocent Ceremonies notwithstanding their Antiquity 4. They have separated from the Church of England and have caus'd great Divisions 5. They accepted of his Majesties gracious Toleration given them 7 or 8 years ago 6. They have since the discovery of the Plot closed with the people in an over fierce opposing the papists Ergo the Dissenters are the Jesuits Instruments designing the Destruction of the Protestant Religion This is the Drs. Conclusion drawn from these six weighty considerations 2. To inquire into the strength or rather the mistakes of these weighty considerations 1. The first Argument 'T is not improbable that the Jesuits were the first setters up of Spiritual Prayer in England saith the Dr. as appears from the sutableness of the Dissenters pretences about Spiritual Prayer to the Doctrine and practice of the Jesuits This is evinced from the Jesuits admiring Spiritual Prayer as may be seen in their writings preface p. 14.15.16 I answer 1. The whole the Dr. doth suggest is but a Probability not a certainty but why the Dr. should hint his probables in a matter of this moment I leave to his own Conscience 2 'T is most undoubtedly true whether the Dr. knows so much or not That Spiritual Prayer and free prayer was many an hundred years observ'd and practised before there were any Jesuits in the World whence to assert Spiritual Prayer to be one of the Jesuits Arcana is an argument of too much ignorance for who knoweth not that the Christian dispensation is the dispensation of the Spirit 1 Cor. 3.6 7 8. c 't is the Spirit that was promised as a teaching Spirit on Christs departure John 14.16 15 26.16.7 8 9. which Spirit as it doth convince of Sin of righteousness and of judgment even so doth it teach and enable the Children of God to cry Abba Father that is to pray Gal. 4.5 6. Rom. 8.26 Thus Free Prayer or Spiritual Prayer is clearly revealed in Scripture Unto whom then are we owing for the Knowledge of this Truth unto the Word of God contained in Scripture or unto the Disciples of Ignatius Loyola what must the Honour of the Discovery be ascribed to the Jesuits although thereby the Primitive Christians and the Ancient Fathers are most unjustly reproached Or because this Gospel Doctrine shines forth so Gloriously that such as are envelop'd with the Cloud of Popery cannot but espie some of its Rayes must we therefore conclude that it hath its Rise and Origen from thence What do the Papists know nothing besides those Notions of which they were the first Inventors What think you of the Doctrine of the Trinity c. is that also a Jesuits Fiction Really I am not a little surprized at the Indecent manner after which the Dr. treats the Holy Spirit the third Person in the ever blessed Trinity by ascribing its work Namely spiritual Prayer unto the Jesuits as though such are the works of the Spirit that they cannot be distinguished from the Inventions of the Jesuite and that the Dr. should thus expose himself the honour of his