Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
word_n catholic_a church_n universal_a 4,187 5 9.3971 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
A00791 An answer to a pamphlet, intituled: The Fisher catched in his owne net In vvhich, by the vvay, is shevved, that the Protestant Church was not so visible, in al ages, as the true Church ought to be: and consequently, is not the true Church. Of which, men may learne infallible faith, necessarie to saluation. By A.C. A. C.; Champney, Anthony, 1569?-1643?, attributed name.; Sweet, John, 1570-1632, attributed name.; Floyd, John, 1572-1649, attributed name.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641, attributed name. 1623 (1623) STC 10910.4; ESTC S107710 44,806 106

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

About this time M. Sweet propounded these Conditions to be obserued 1. That al bitter speeches should be forborne 2. That nothing should be spoken or heard but to the purpose Which second he did propound to preuent impertinent digressions Neuerthelesse after this D. Featly made a long digression altogether impertinent to the Question which he was to dispute of for in stead of prouing a Protestant visible Church and naming visible Protestant in al ages he made a vaine and vnseasonable bragging offer to disp●oue the Roman Church in diuers particular points as are rehearsed by the Protestant Relator which he read out of a Paper Whereunto as he was speaking M. Sweet according to the second Condition before propounded answered That th●se things were then impertinent and nothing to the purpose But M. Sweet did not say as the Relator reporteth They are Scholastical points not Fundamental Neyther was there any such Syllogisme then made as the Relator annexeth D. Featly hauing ended his long digression M. Fisher said as the Protestant Relator telleth After you haue proued your Church visible in al ages and named the Professors thereof I wil satisfie you in your particulars D. Featly In the meane while name but one Father but one Writer of note who held the particulars aboue named for fiue hundred yeeres after Christ. To which instant demand of D. Featly saith the Relator nothing was answered But neyther was this said neyther was it needful to answer First for that M. Fisher formerly answered That he would satisfie al particulars after the visibilitie of the Protestant Church in al ages was shewed as the present Question required Secondly because to dispute of these particulars was vnseasonable and not to the present purpose as likewise was that other motion made by Sir Humfrey Lynd to M. Sweet to dispute of Transubstantiation out of S. Augustine To which motion being as I said vnseasonable M. Sweet answered wel according to his second Prouiso saying That is not now to the Question Then D. Featly said saith the Protestant Relator there are two meanes onely to proue any thing by necessarie inference to wit a Syllogisme and an Induction other formes of Argument haue no force but as they are reducible to these I proue the visibilitie of our Church by both and first by a Syllogisme No saith M. Fisher you must not onely proue it to be visible but so visible as the names of Protestant Professors in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors To this D. Featly said There are two Qu●res in your Question First Whether the Protestants Church were in al ages visible And secondly Whether the names of such visible Protestants can be shewed No said M. Fisher my Question is meant to be but one entire Question and so to cut off al needlesse wrangling made by D. White and D. Featly about the Aduerbe Vtrum Whether and the Copulatiue Et And as if Grammar Schollers had beene disputing rather then graue Diuines who were not to stand vpon rigor of Grammar especially in this case where the sence of the Speaker is plaine and may wel stand with Grammar M. Fisher said The Question being mine it pertaineth to me to tel the meaning and my meaning was onely to make it one Question viz. Whether the Protestants Church were so visible as the names of visible Protestants in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Wherefore if you wil dispute you must dispute in my sense and must conclude the Affirmatiue viz. The Protestant Church was so visible as the names of the Professors in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Proue this or proue nothing D. Featly That Church which is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be is so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be produced and shewed in al ages out of good Authors But the Protestant Church is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popish Church is pretended to be Ergo M. Fisher. I denie the Minor Minorem probate D. Featly That Church whose Faith is eternal and perpetual and vnchanged is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be But the Faith of the Protestant Church is eternal perpetual and vnchanged Ergo To this M. Fisher answered first excepting against the Word Eternal saying Faith is not eternal or ab aeterno It is true said a Minister who sate by Faith is not eternal but euiternal Neyther so said M. Fisher for it is not to be for euer in Heauen It is eternal said D. White in Predestination So said M. Sweet D. White himselfe may be said to be eternal and he might haue added this present Disputation may be said to be Eternal D. Featly You haue a purpose M. Fisher to cauil you know my meaning wel enough by the terme Perpetual to wit that Christian Faith which hath continued from Christs first publishing it til this present and shal continue vntil his second comming c. If this were said by D. Featly which is doubted he should haue considered how he and D. White cauilled vpon the word Whether and And when they knew M. Fishers meaning wel enough yea after they had heard him plainely explicate his meaning Whereas M. Fisher onely put them in minde to speake properly like Scholers and did not cauil or reply after D. Featly did explicate his meaning But to returne to the argument D. Featly That Church which holdeth this Faith you beleeue shal be so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be shewed in al ages But the Protestant Church holdeth this perpetual Faith Ergo M. Fisher. Your argument is a fallacie called Petitio principij D. Featly A demonstration a causa or a priori is not Petitio principij But such is my argument Ergo Is it not a sounder argument to proue the visibilitie of the Professors from the truth of their Faith then as you the truth of your Faith from the visibilitie of Professors Visible Pastors argue not a right Faith Heretikes Mahumetans and Gentiles haue visible Professors of their Impieties yet will it not hence sollow that they haue a right beleese On the contrarie we know by the Promises of God in the Scripture That the Church which maintayneth the true Faith shal haue alwayes Professors more or lesse visible M. Sweet You ought to prooue the truth of your Church a posteriori for that is to the Question and not a priori D. Fealty Shal you prescribe me my Weapons Is not an argument a priori better then an argument a posteriori c. To this M. Fisher said A proofe a posteriori is more demonstratiue then a priori Thus farre the Relator who hath here added much more then was said and in particular those formal words which he reporteth M. Fisher to haue said viz. A proofe a
true bookes of Scripture and Fathers which be true translations and which be right interpretations for both about Scriptures Fathers such Questions may arise and cannot be well decided whout the Iudgement of the true present visible Church in regard Scriptures and Fathers do not alwaies sufficiently expresse what is to be held in the aforesaid Questions neither will one priuate man in such cases follow anothers opinion when ech man will be easily inclined to thinke that he hath as good Scriptures or Fathers or Reasons or all these togeather to plead for the truth of his opinion as another hath for his This reason may be confirmed out of Tertullian who in his golden booke of Prescriptions giueth diuers reasons why Heretikes who reiect the authority of the Church should not be admitted to dispute out of Scriptures First for that by their disputations they weary those that be fame they ouercome those which be weake and those which be in a middle disposition they dism●sse with scruple or doubt Another reason Tertullian giueth because this Heresy doth not receaue some Scriptures or if a receaue it peruerteth them to their owne purpose with additions and detractions and if it receaue some yet not whole or if whole in some sort yet by false expositions it turneth them from the right to a peruerse sense And a peruerse or corrupt sense sayth he is as contrary to truth as is a peruerted or corrupted Text. Tertullian therefore for these reasons iudged best not to make the combat in Scriptures but that this gappe should be stopt and that Heretikes should not be admitted to any disputation of Scriptures and he telleth how this may be done saying It must be examined to whome the possession of Scripture doth belong to the intent that he who hath no right vnto them may not be admitted vnto them And further he sheweth That the right order of thinges requireth that first it only be disputed to whom the Fayth belongeth As if he should say which is the true visible Church VVhose are the Scriptures From whome by whome when and to whome was deliuered that discipliae by which they are made Christians for where there shall appeare the truth of Christian sayth and discipline to be as doubtles it is in the true visible Church of Christ there shal be truth of Scriptures and expositions and al Christian Traditions And hauing shewed how Christ did promulgate his doctrine by the Apostles he further prescribeth That what Christ and his Apostles did preach must be learned no otherwise then by the Churches which they founded so as euery doctrine agreeing with those Apostolicall Mother-Churches that is to be deemed true and what doth not agree to be iudged false And therefore to make it apparent that the Heretikes opinions although pretended by themselues to be cc̄formable to Scriptures and such as may be proued out of Scriptures are not Apostolicall nor true he vrgeth them as M. Fisher vrged D. Featly to shew the beginning of their Churches and to vnfould the order of their Bishops so from the beginning running downe by succession as that their first Bishop had some of the Apostles or some Apostolicall man who perseuered with the Apostles for his Author and Predecessour and hauing giuen examples of the Catholike Churches who can thus vnfould the order of their Pastours and namely Rome for one he sayth afterwardes Confingant tale quid Haeretici Let Heretiques euen feigne some such like thing Thus we see what Tertullian did say to Heretikes of his tyme by which we may learne what we may say to the Nouellists of our tyme whome offering to dispute with vs about Scriptures we may altogeather debarre from Scripture and may examine them as Tertullian did those of his tyme saying VVho are you VVhen and whence came you VVhat haue you to do in my ground you that are not myne By what right dost thou O Marcion we may say O Martin Luther cut down my woods By what licence dost thou O Valentine O Caluin diuert or turne aside my fountaynes By what power dost thou O Apelles O Anabaptist remoue my limits VVhy do you O the rest of Heretikes sow and feed according to your owne will vpon my Land and pasture It is my possession I am the ancient possessour I haue the firme Originalls from the Authors themselues to whome the propriety did first belong I am the heyre of the Apostles as they did ordaine in their Testament and last will as they did commit it to my faythfull Trust as they did adiure me so I hold it But you they haue disinherited and cast out as strangers and enemyes c. So as by this prescription of Tertullian vntill D. Featly or some other can by other markes then by alleadging wordes of Scripture as by perpetuall visibility and interrupted succession of Bishops c. proue Protestants not to be Heretikes but the true Church of Christ and the right heyre of the Apostles to whome cōsequently belongeth the most ancient first possession of Scriptures M. Fisher had good reason and right to deferre disputing with him out of Scripture of Christ and his Apostles vntill he had made his full Induction of Names of Protestant Church-men and vnfoulded the orders of their Prostant Bishops so running downe from the beginning by succession as that their first Protestant Bishop had some of the Apostles or some Apostolicall man who perseuered with the Apostles for his Author Predecessour The which I accompt to be so impossible for him to doe as I dare and do challenge him saying with Tertullian Confingant tale quid Haeretici Let D. Featly or any of his fellow Protestants at least feigne because I am sure they cannot find Names of Protestant Bishops and Pastors whome they do imagine for proue they cannot out of good Authors to haue beene in all ages Which whiles they do not al sorts of people haue iust cause to thinke that neither D. Featly nor D. VVhite can performe that taske which they did tooto boldly vndertake of naming prouing and defending visible Ptotestants in al ages therupon al men may as I do conclude That the Protestant Church hath not beene so visible in all ages as the Cathelike Church ought to be and consequently the Protestant Church is not the true Catholique Church which we prosesse to beleeue in our Creed Neither consequently are their I'astours and Doctours and Preachers lawfully sent or sufficiently authorized to teach and expound Gods word nor consequently are people securely warranted to learne of them what is and what is not to be belieued by infallible diuine fa●th necessary to saluation nor indeed ought they to beleeue or heare them at all but ought to vnite themselues to that One Holy Catholike Apostolike perpetually visible Roman Church hearing beleeuing obeying the Pastors thereof whereby they may haue infallible iustruction in all matters of fayth secure direction for all matters concerning good life in such sort as they may attaine remission of their sinnes and saluation of their soules the grace of God in this life and endles heauenly happines in the next Vnto which I beseech sweet Iesus to bring vs all Amen FINIS Eudaimon Iohannes in defens p. H. Garn. D. Bishop against Rob. Abbots A very weake and Insufficient satisfaction as is showed hereafter Eph. 4. Heb. 11. Rom. 10. v. 14 15. Eph. 4. 11. Ose. 2. v. 19 20. Isa. 59. 20. Matth. 18. 20. Eph. 4. v. 11. 〈…〉 M. Fisher. D. Field in his Epistle Dedicatone Aug. lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae a This great Lady did expresly say that the conferēce did make against Protestants euen as it was related by you Protestant relator And another Lady who was present at the conferēce did protest to one that asked her how it moued her that she was by it confirmed in Catholique religion Lib. 1. Inst. c. 1. Sect. 4. Eph. 4. v. 11. c. Rom. 10. v. 14. c. 1 Luth. ep ad Argentin anno 1525. 2 Conradus Schushelb in Theol. Calu. lib. 2. fol. 130. B. versus finé 3 Geo. Mylli in Augustanae Confessionis explie art 7. de Eccl. pag. 137. 4 Benedict Morgést trac de Eccl pag. 145. 5 Calu. in I. epist. ep 141. 6 Bucer ep ad Epis. Hereford 7 Beza in Theol. ep epi. 5. 8 Iewell in his Apolog. of the Church 4 c. diuis 2. in his defence 42. 9 Perkins in exposit of the Creed † See the booke intituled The Author and substance of Protestant religiō Isa. 59. v. 21. Isa. 61 9 Isa. 60 11 Matth. 5 14 Matth. 18 17 Matth. 28 19 20 Coccius in thesauro Cōtrouersiarum tomo 1. lib. 8. art 1. Aug. in psal 47. lib. de vnit Eccles. cap. 16. 25. Isa. 59. v. 21. 60. v. 11. 61. v. 9. 1. Tim. 3. v. 15. Ephes. 4. v. 4. 11. 12. 13. 14. Tertul. lib. de praescript Luc. 10. v. 16. Matth. 18. v. 17 Tertull. de praescrip c. 15. Cap. 19. Cap. 20. 21. 22 sequent Cap. 32.
Church in al ages then M. F. or his friends wil in a like proportionable sort and sense shew proue and defend a visible Romane Church in al ages This Paper was deliuered to the old Gentleman and was confessed to haue beene receiued by the Doctors before the disputation and before the meeting The time and manner of which meeting is set downe by the Protestant Relator in manner following The 27. of Iune 1623. M. Fisher M. Sweet Iesuits and some others with them came to Sir H. Lynds house in a little dyning roome where they found the aforesaid M. Buggs his wife and children and others of Sir H. friends that had then dined with him together with some others also whose comming in as the said Sir H. did not expect so he could not with ciuilitie put them forth his house but did instantly cause his doores to bee locked vp that no more might enter notwithstanding which his command some others also came in scattering after the conference began In this parcel it is to bee considered how great care M. Fisher had to haue the meeting secret and how wel he obserued the fore-appointed conditions in which he was so punctual that after he had his number of one Assistant and foure Witnesses and a Writer he would not so much as tel a Gentleman of his acquaintance who had by other meanes vnderstood of the meeting and the place of meeting at what houre the meeting should be whereas on the contrary part so much speech was made of it by some of the Protestant side that beside the number appointed to bee Auditors many Protestant Gentlemen and Gentlewomen and some Noblemen and many Ministers did repaire to Sir Humfrey his house which M. Fisher found to be so filled as he complained to Sir Humfrey of the inequalitie of that Audience compared with the few he brought which Sir H. could not denie but excused himselfe in such manner as he could saying He could not helpe it c. CHAP. II. About that which passed in the Conference it selfe DOctor White and Doctor Featly being inuited to dinner saith the Protestant Relator by Sir Humfrey Lynd and staying a while after had notice giuen them that M. Fisher and M. Sweet Iesuits were in the next roome ready to conferre with them touching a Question set downe by M. Fisher vnder his owne hand in these words viz. Whether the Protestants Church was in al ages visible and especially in the ages going before Luther 2. And whether the names of such visible Protestants in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors This Question being deliuered to the parties aboue named and it being notified vnto them that there were certaine persons who had beene sollicited and remaining doubtful in Religion desired satisfaction especially in this point they were perswaded to haue some speech with the Iesuites touching this point the rather because the Priests and Iesuites doe dayly cast out Papers and disperse them in secret in which they vaunt That no Protestant Minister dare encounter with them in this point Any man reading this parcel would be induced to thinke that D. White and D. Featly had neuer had notice before for what end they were inuited to Dinner or for what end they were to meet with the Iesuites but that they were on the suddaine summoned to this Conference without any preparation or knowledge of the Question Which not to be so is euidently conuinced partly by that which is alreadie said partly by that which I am after to say 2. This Relator would make his Reader beleeue that M. Fisher vnder his owne hand had set downe the words of the Question distinguished with the expresse figure of 2. Which is not so for M. Fisher did not write any such figure of 2. in the middle of the Question nor did not meane to make any more then one only entire Question as Sir Humfrey himselfe had desired 3. He seemeth willing to perswade that Priests and Iesuites doe dayly cast out Papers which is not true At the beginning of this meeting when the Disputants were set saith the Protestant Relator D. Featly drew out the Paper in which the Question aboue rehearsed was written with these words in the Margent viz. I wil answer that it was not and demanded of M. Fisher Whether this were his owne hand which after he had acknowledged D. Featly began as followeth D. Featly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this vniuersal demand requiring rather an Historical large Volume then a Syllogistical briefe dispute we answer And then he read out of a Paper which this Relator would make men beleeue to haue beene said memoriter the same in effect which was written before the meeting to M. Fisher. 1. That although diuine infallible Faith is not built vpon deduction out of humane Historie but vpon diuine reuelation as is confessed by your owne Schoole-men and expressely by Cardinal Bellarmine Historiae humanae faciunt tantum fidem humanam cui subesse potest falsum Humane Stories and Records beget onely an humane Faith or rather Credulitie subiect to error not a diuine and infallible Beleefe which must be built vpon surer ground 2. Although this Question be grounded vpon vncertaine and false supposals for a Church may haue beene visible yet not the names of al visible Professors thereof now to be shewed and proued out of good Authors there might be millions of Professors yet no particular and authentical Record of them by name Records there might be many in ancient time yet not now extant at least for vs to come by Yet we wil not refuse to deale with you in your owne Question if you in like manner wil vndertake the like Taske in your owne defence and maintaine the Affirmatiue in the like Question which we now propound vnto you here in writing Whether the Romish Church that is a Church holding the particular entire doctrine of the new Romanists as it is comprised in the Councel of Trent was in al ages visible especially in the first 600. yeeres and whether the names of such visible or legible Romanists in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors Here the Relator omitteth to tel how M. Fisher caused the two Papers written and giuen the old Gentleman as is aboue said to be publiquely read by the first whereof it appeared why he had propounded such a Question by the second the true sence and meaning of the Question was explicated and a conuenient Method of proceeding was prescribed with due proportion to be obserued on both sides Then D. Featly beginning to argue in this place and not in the end of the Disputation where the Protestant Relator placeth it did say M. Fisher I wish I warne I command I coniure you to answere truely and sincerely in the sight of God and as you wil answere it at the Day of Iudgement To this M. Fisher said I willingly accept your warning and I wish you to obserue the like