Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	speak_v	true_a	word_n	8,834	5	4.4618	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41330	The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner, The friendly debate &c., examined and answered : together with a discourse about separation, and some animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's book entituled, The unreasonableness of separation : observations upon Dr. Templers sermon preached at a visitation in Cambridge : a brief vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal.	Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697.	1681 (1681)	Wing F962; ESTC R16085	105,802	120

which have come to my hand but all were not written with the same Spirit As they came to hand so I perused them to see if I could find any thing to convince me And whereas there are five things imposed upon us 1. The Liturgy with stinted forms of prayer 2. Mystical Ceremonies 3. Subjection to such Episcopacy 4. Re-ordination 5. Renouncing the Covenant I applied my self to the three first Questions chiefly For if it can be proved that these are agreeable with and conformable to the Laws of God as the Friendly Debate and Dr. Templer would perswade their Readers then Re-ordination may be admitted and the Covenant renounced As to the two first Quest Mr. Carre was the first man I met with that argued for them after him I met with the Friendly Debate next with the Serious and compassionate Enquiry c. Dr. Goodman the Author as I hear Nemine contradicente but last of Mr. Falkner a man of an excellent spirit whom I shall honour and one that hath said more than all before Before he came forth I had drawn up my answer to all the former and was loth to throw away all I had done because I saw there were some things in these Authors which Mr. Falkner had not else I would wholly have attended him but where I saw they all agreed there I considered them conjunct where one had what the other had not there severally As to the third Quest something I found in a piece Entituled Samaritanism As to the Learned Dr. Stilling fleet by throwing down the Jus Divinum of any form of Church Government he prepared the way for our subjection to such Episcopacy if his principle be sound For the serious and compassionate Enquiry I found little in that piece as to our questions unless a man were so simple to take fine words for strong arguments and Rhetorick for Logick For his Discourse about schism I shall consider it in its place But the chief things I observed in him were his odious comparisons between the Conformist and Nonconformist begun at p. 21. and continued some pages His slighting that worthy Father blessed Austin the contempt he throws upon the Synod of Dort which I did never expect from the pen of a Son of the Church of England But I see this Church of England and the famons Church of England are not the same I need not say any thing there is an acute pen hath given him so full and solid an answer that I ver expect to read his Reply To what he saith pag. 3. That the Nonconformists blame the Doctrine of the Church viz. the 39 Articles are not so punctual in defining the five points debated at the Synod of Dort c. I think I may say I have been in the company of as many Nonconformists as that Author but I have not heard them blame the Articles therefore But this fault I have heard found and do find that we are commanded to affent to the 34 35 36. Articles with the same faith we do to the fundamental Articles of our Faith and Salvation therein contained I thought among the Confessions of Faith these 39 Articles were looked upon as the Confession of the Faith of the Church of England but I find it otherwise now for Dr. Stillingfleet in his defence of Bishop Laud p. 54. being pinched by the Jesuit who in this point is not answered tells us The Church of England makes no Articles of Faith but such as have the Testimony of the whole Christian world in all Ages acknowledged to be such by Rome it self And in other things she requires subscription to them not as Articles of Faith but inferiour truths which she expects a submission to in order to her peace and tranquility Afterwards p 82 104. He distinguisheth between the internal assent of the mind and the external act the Church doth not require the first but the latter To confirm his saying he quotes Archbishop Bramhall often expressing the sense of the Church of England as to her 39 Articles thus Neither doth the Church of England define any of these questions as necessary to be believed either necessitate medii vel praecepti which is much less but only bindeth her Sons for peace sake not to oppose them And in another place more fully We do not suffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of England at his pleasure neither do we look on them as essentials of saving Faith or Legacies of Christ and his Apostles but in a mean as pious opinions fitted for the preservation of unity neither do we oblige any man to believe them but only not to contradict them Thus the Archbishop And this is not his opinion alone but generally of the Grandees of this Church as an intelligent and sober Conformist tells me When I read these lines first I read them again and again to see if I were not mistaken they were so strange unto me at the first reading when I saw I was not mistaken I turned to the beginning to see who did License it and was amazed when I saw the name According to this Cerinthus Pelagius Arius Socinus Turks Jews yea Vaninus may all subscribe the Articles and be Sons of the Church of England if they can but keep their tongues from contradicting them though they do not believe one of them Though I am a Nonconformist yet I am such a friend to the Church of England as to her Doctrine that I abhor these lines and charge that Bishop Bramhall with doing wrong to the Church It seems when other Churches abroad read these 39 Articles as the Confession of the Faith of the Church of England and suppose we do believe them to be true they are grosly mistaken it may be we believe not one the Church do not oblige her Sons to it but only not to contradict them They are deluded the Church reproached and God is mocked Several things I could say to the disproving of this sense but to what worthy Dr. Stilling fleet hath said I should desire him to name that Book of publick authority to warrant what he saith 1. The Kings Declaration prefixed for the confirmation of them and with that I question not but the Bishops did agree * The Declaration expressed With the advice of so many of our Bishops c. makes no such distinction of superiour and inferiour Truths but speaking of all the 39 Articles jointly taken together thus declareth The Articles of the Church of England do contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods word c. requiring all our subjects to continue in the Vniform profession thereof Again requires all Clergy men to submit to every Article in the plain and full meaning thereof and shall not put their own sense and comment to be the meaning of the Article but shall take it in the literal and Grammatical sense Again doth not the fifth Canon say Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that

observe the 11. and 13. ver going before we may well guess 3. If you refer it to his Office as you do and would thence infer the perpetuity of his Office to the Worlds end I deny that to be the meaning For when the Apostle charges him 2 Tim. 4.5 do the work of an Evangelist c. there the word Evangelist is taken in the same sense with Eph. 4 11. not only Calvin and Gerhard but Scultetus though an Episcopal man yieldeth and it were absurd to think otherwise But that Timothy in the 1. Epistle Chap. 1.3 should be ordained a Bishop as you say and long after this charged to do the work of an Evangelist they must have dull Intellects indeed that know nothing of an Evangelist and a Bishop who beelieve it The Evangelist being one fixed to no place and had the power of Miracles as Eusebius and the Scriptures testifie This was a Commandment so incumbent upon Timothy that his Salvation or miscarrying was concerned in it as he performed it and so it is true of all Ministers but for an Evangelist the French Church the Low Countries Scotland New-England where Mr. Eliot hath more right of Superiority over the Churches of the Indians than any Prelate in the World yet would detest your Doctrine nor any Churches that I know of own an Evangelist As yet then the proof fails Thus we find in Clemens Epistle to the Corinthians a Metropolitan Church forsooth there is no mention made of any such Prelate But pag. 2.62 69. and 73. especially he mentions only Elders without any distinction A Bishop being but Primus Presbyter Primi Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur Ambros in 4 Eph. as Ambrose calls him it may stand with Episcopus Praeses Thus Polycarpus in his Epistle to the Church in Philippi another Metropolis saith Dr. Hammond there is no menion of any such Prelate but pag. 18. he exhorts them to be subject to the Elders and Deacons answering to Paul Phil. 1.1 For Timothy's being twice ordained and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned 1 Tim. 4.14 which you would have understood of Prophets c p. 45 46. What you aim at in Timothy's twice Ordination I know not whether that we may be twice ordained though first by Presbyters let it first be proved that Timothy was twice ordained to the same Office Timothy first ordained by the Apostle himself you say 2 Tim. 1.6 I pray Sir to what Office say and prove from Divine Writ If the second time ordained not to an inferiour Office I hope the first Ordination by an Apostle the second to a higher Office by Inferiour Officers I pray when was he ordained an Evangelist Nor does your notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 take to be meant of any other Prophets different from Paul for we know that Paul excelled in all gifts 1 Cor. 14.18 as of Tongues so no question of Prophesie Why therefore Paul might not be He to whom the Spirit revealed this concerning Timothy as yet so young and so to take him along for his Companion give us a Reason for it seems there was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given 1 Tim. 4.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in 2 Tim. 1.6 he bids him stir up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Apostles did convey gifts we know by their imposing of hands though the Presbitery joyned with the Apostle in his Ordination and so I know not above One Ordination that ever Timothy had and that to an Evangelist His third and last Topick to prove the Superiority of this Prelate is the practise of the universal Church pag. 42. To which add his saying pag. 53. As for Prelacy the Essence whereof lyes in a Superiority of an Ecclesiastical person over Elders in a certain precinct it was ever owned by the Church as agreeable to the Canon of Scripture Sir did you deliver this in the Pulpit for a Truth where be sure no man ought to speak any thing but Truth Have not you read Austins Epistle to Hierom Epistle 18. in which Austin writes thus to him Quanquam enim secundum honorum Vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio major est c. Surely you have read Hieroms Comment upon Tit. 1. Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam Dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores To which A. B. Anselm subscribes in his Comment on the same Chapter What Sir is Ecclesiae usus and Consuetudo the same with Canon of Scripture Have not you read Estius Sent. l. 4. d. 24. calling those Hereticks that are not of your Opinion and undertaking to prove the jus Divinum of Prelacy as you do he saith thus Quod autem jure Divino sint Episcopi Presbyteris Superiores si non ita clarum este sacris Scripturis aliunde tamen satis efficaciter probari potest Have you not read what Medina saith of the Fathers in this point and what our Bishop Jewel naming the same Fathers that Medina did adds Paul himself must be a Heretick if Bishop and Presbyter be not the same according to the Scriptures Much more I might add that I wonder you could write such a line And what Sir will you exclude all those Churches from being parts of the Catholick Church that have not nor do own your Prelacy or what Church do you mean when you say the Church hath owned That so many of the Church were of your Opinion this with your Metropolitan Arch-Bishop brought that Whore in Apoc. 17. to her Chair without which that Prophecy had not been fulfilled to this day so that though it is not true what you say yet if it had been true it had not much prevailed with me but God hath left Testimony against it both in his Word and in the Church As for your notion p. 51. The reason why the Apostles wrote to the Churches that were in the cities which were Metropoles was to shew that all the Churches which were in that Province did depend upon that Metropolis Government and this Bishop was an Archbishop p. 50. I pray Sir which of the Apostles told you this was their reason or where do you find this written The Apostle mentions but but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 5.4 This notion I see you are so taken with that p. 51. you tell us this Hypothesis gives the most intelligible account why all the Churches in Asia are reduced to Seven An Intelligible account then we have of that which I had a desire to know but because the Lord had hidden it it became not me to inquire after his secrets but now we have a reason why all the Churches in Asia are reduced to Seven 1. I pray Sir give us since you are so acquainted with Christs secrets an Intelligible account why since there were so many Churches in Europe and those Churches in the Metropoles yet the Lord writes not to one of