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	visible_a	3,379	5	9.5057	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19220	The Catholike moderator: or A moderate examination of the doctrine of the Protestants Prouing against the too rigid Catholikes of these times, and against the arguments especially, of that booke called, The answer to the Catholike apologie, that we, who are members of the Catholike, apostolike, & Roman Church, ought not to condeme the Protestants for heretikes, vntill further proofe be made. First written in French by a Catholike gentleman, and now faithfully translated. See the occasion of the name of Huguenots, after the translaters epistle.; Examen pacifique de la doctrine des Huguenots. English	Constable, Henry, 1562-1613.; W. W., fl. 1623.	1623 (1623)	STC 5636.2; ESTC S109401	62,312	88

and nation With which definition the Fathers iointly consent All they saith Saint Augustine which are holy and sanctified which are haue beene and shall be are Citizens of the heauenly Ierusalem And S. Gregory the Pope that my proofe may be the more authenticall saith That all the Elect are embraced in the bosome of the Church and all the Reprobates are without And yet was poore Iohn Husse burnt for an Heretike for affirming the very same O wicked Catholikes that haue made a man to be burnt for an Heretike for affirming no more then what a Saint had done and which is more then a Pope had said before him So then in this signification neither the Church of Rome nor that which themselues call the Reformed Church can properly be called the Catholike Church but only parts of it Nay we cannot truly affirme that they be parts of the Catholike Church but that God hath both in the Romane Church and in the Reformed some that be members of the Catholike Church Which is as much to say as that diuers shall be saued in both Churches Like as there were many amongst the Iewes at the comming of Iesus Christ and at this day be in the Greeke Church and in Prester Iohns Country which doe embrace the Christian faith without acknowledging the Pope So that if we appropriate the title of Catholike to the Romane Church only taking it in this signification it must needs so low that either all the Catholikes are elected though the Catholikes themselues write that diuers Popes haue beene damned or else that no Iew was euer saued before Christs comming and that God hath not had his Church at all times or that no Greeke nor Affrican can be saued in our time and then God should not haue his Church in all places Againe if we attribute not this title of Catholike only to the Church of Rome I can see no reason why the reformed Church should be more excluded then the rest To be briefe when we passe our censure vpon any man whether he be of the Catholike Church or not we must speake either according to Faith or according to Charitie If according to Faith we cannot say that such or such a man is a Catholike because it is God that knoweth who are his saith S. Paul But if wee passe our iudgment according to charity this will haue vs esteeme all those to bee of the true Catholike Church which bee of the visible of which I will next speake and shew how it may bee termed Catholike 2 The Church as I haue proued already comprehends all the Elect those as well that be already in heauen as those that are yet on earth and remaine mingled among the wicked which last though generally more in number yet the Elect beare the name of the better part So that both good and bad which make an outward profession of the true faith are reputed members of the true Church According to the Parable of the net which held the bad fishes as well as the good This Church was separated from the rest of the Gentiles with a partition wall as it were and before the comming of Christ pend vp in one country and restrained to the Family of Israel But since Christs comming This partition wall is as S. Paul saith broken downe so that neither Iew nor Greeke are excluded And by reason of this difference that the Iewes in those dayes had onely this priuiledge and that now no one particular country hath it more then another the Church is called Catholike that is to say Spread all the world ouer And for that shee is so vniuersall shee is diuided into particular Churches As in Saint Pauls time into the Church of Ephesus of Rome of Galatia of Corinth c. and no one of these Churches hauing any priuiledge more then another they were all together called The Church Catholike not that it is alwayes euery-where but for that no country is excluded and no place priuiledged So then no place being excluded there may be other Churches besides that of Rome and no place being priuiledged euen Rome it selfe may be cut off from the Church 3 Thirdly the Church is called Catholike in respect of the Donatists who denied the Church to bee dispersed all ouer the world but held it to be coopt vp in Affrica wherevpon it came to passe that those Churches which held the contrary were called the Catholike Churches Euen as at this day these Churches that hold the Church to haue need of reformation are called The Reformed Churches Which is the reason why the more ancient Fathers neuer vsed this terme Catholike to distinguish the pure Churches from the hereticall but called them Orthodoxall But in processe of time by reason that the Orthodoxe Churches held that the Church was Catholike or Vniuersall these two words Catholike and Orthodoxall were taken in one and the same signification so that at last this title of Catholike was not onely giuen to the Church to distinguish the Orthodox from the Donatists but also from all other Heretikes For a Catholike in proper speech is not opposite to all sorts of Heretikes but to the Iewes onely and the Donatists But for as much as custome is the matter of words as we see in this word Tyrant anciently taken in good part for a King and now onely for a bad King this word Catholike is taken contrary to his nature in the signification of a pure Church in such a sense as that a particular Church may be called a Catholike Church and more or lesse Catholike proportionably as it is more or lesse pure So that the question betweene the Catholikes and the Huguenots lies not in this point viz. Which of the Churches is the Church Catholike but whether of them is most Catholike and which most corrupted for in some degree both of them may be Catholike so long as they hold the substance of faith as I shewed in the first Chapter and both of them in some sort may be corrupt it being a thing most certaine That euery visible Church may haue errors more or lesse The Church saith Saint Bernard as long as shee is in the tabernacle of this body hath not attained vnto the perfection of beauty and is not therefore absolutely faire For it is the priuiledge of the Church Triumphant onely to be faire and as S. Paul saith without spot or wrinckle True it is indeed that the Church is sometime called faire but this is euer comparatiuely wherefore the Bridegroome in the Canticles saith of his Spouse which is the Church that shee is the fairest of women that is not simply faire saith S. Bernard but the fairest among women And for that selfe same reason is she in one and the same verse styled both blacke and faire I am blacke saith the Spouse but I am comely I am not ignorant how that the Ancients also did vse this word Catholike for a distinction from an Heretike in another signification which in truth was according to the proper interpretation of the word taking Catholike or Vniuersall for a marke of the true Church For which reason in the ancient Church when as the whole visible Church

yet retained the faith receiued from the Apostles and that some part of it became corrupted for the exact discerning vnto whether side we ought to leane Vincentius Lyrinensis gaue this Rule What else should we doe saith he but prefer the safety of the body before a rotten member And therefore for that the body of the Church was at that time sound all the Church was called Catholike for so much this word Body as well as that word Catholike implies an vniuersality so that the distinction of Catholike and Heretike serues but to distinguish the sound body from a corrupted member But so soone as the body it selfe became corrupted then this rule and distinction failed For which reason Vincentius makes a difference betweene a Catholike in place and a Catholike in time And euer when a Catholike in place is not a sure marke he hath recourse vnto a Catholike in time But saith he if any new infection goes on not onely to corrupt a part but the whole Church then must we cleaue to antiquity So that the difference between the Catholikes and the Huguenots lying in this point Whether the body of the Church be corrupted or no wee must not speake of the Church which is Catholike according to place but according to time And that Church is Catholike saith Vincentius which holds that religion which hath beene euer hitherto embraced And to discerne which Religion hath beene alwayes embraced when as the body of the Church or the visible Church as saith the same Vincentius is corrupted we must still haue recourse vnto Antiquity and say with Tertullian Illudverum quod primum That is truest which is ancientest So as that is the Catholike Church which agrees in faith with the more Primitiue Church So that if wee would discusse it whether the Catholikes or the Huguenots be most properly the right Catholikes wee must consider first whether of them best holds of the faith of the Apostles and next of that of the ancient Doctors and Councels of the Church As for the Title Apostolike The Church may bee called Apostolike as well in regard of the Writings as of the Preaching of the Apostles As for their Writings those Churches which imbrace the doctrine deliuered in them are intituled Apostolike yea and more or lesse Apostolike as they do more or lesse agree or disagree to or from the said doctrine So that the word Apostolike is all one with the word Orthodox or with Catholike taken in the last signification And if the Church of the Huguenots may bee intituled Catholike or Orthodox they may also by the same reason be called Apostolike nay and more properly Apostolike then Catholike For the visible Church being as I haue shewed not absolutely but comparatiuely more or lesse Catholike or Apostolike the Huguenots though they may offend in default and so be lesse Catholike rather yet in this they offend rather in the excesse and are too Apostolike as being so strict that they will readily beleeue nothing but what the Apostles haue written Secondly those Churches were called Apostolike which were instructed by the liuely voice of the Apostles and where the Apostles haue had their seats as Ierusalem Antioch Ephesus Alexandria c. where the Apostles Peter Iames Iohn and Marke the Euangelist sate and are therefore from all Antiquity styled Apostolicall Seaes as well as Rome howbeit that this signification is rather an ornament then a mark of a pure Church For Antioch Alexandria and other Churches of Greece where the Apostles preached haue either altogether forsaken the name of Christ or are at the least according to the Catholikes Tenet quite cut off for Schisme and Heresie from the communion of the true Church and France Spaine Poland Germany England and Denmarke where the Apostles neuer had any Bishopricks haue sithence beene the true Churches So that in this signification a Church may bee pure and yet not bee Apostolike and a Church which is Apostolike may be impure The last title though first in estimation with the Catholiques is that of Roman which I haue obserued to haue beene taken in three seuerall sorts First the Roman Church is only taken for the Diocesse of Rome and was in the beginning for the Citie of Rome alone As in S. Pauls time who inscribed an Epistle seuerally to Rome alone as he did likewise to those Churches of Corinth Ephesus Galatia c. For had the Church of Rome beene euery where at that time spread abroad he had not needed to haue written to other Churches seuerally because that in writing to that of Rome he had then written to them all And yet would our people needs make vse of this Epistle to proue by it The Roman church to be the catholique Church because that in it S. Paul saies Your faith is spread abroad in all the world as if S. Paul had not said the same to the Church of Thessalonica Your faith which you haue to God-ward is spread abroad But had the Church of Rome beene as they would haue it esteemed by S. Paul as all one with the Catholique without all doubt his Epistle to the Romans had beene intituled Catholique as well as those of S. Iohn S. Peter S. Iames and S. Iude which are therefore stiled Catholique for that they were written to the Catholique Church Now taking the Roman Church in this signification I confes that not the Huguenots Churches alone are separated from the Roman Church but all other catholique Churches besides so that to this day they in France make a distinction of sundry customes of the Roman Church and of the Church Gallicane Secondly the Church of Rome is taken for the Westerne Church insomuch that the Roman Latine and Occidental Church doth signifie one and the same thing to distinguish it from the Greeke and Easterne Church iust as the Empire of the East and the Empire of the West were called the Empires of Rome and of Constantinople because that these two Cities were the chiefe seats of the Empire and so by reason of the dignitie of the Citie of Rome which was the seat of the Emperours that reigned in the West all this Westerne part was called the Roman Empire and all the Westerne Church the Roman Church that is to say The Church contained vnder the Roman Empire So then if we call it the Roman Church for distinguishing it from the Greeke and Easterne Churches then also may the Huguenots Churches be members likewise of the Roman Church for that they be Westerne and not Greeke nor Easterne Churches If in respect of the Roman Empire taking the Roman Empire largely as it was they also be vnder the Empire and by consequence vnder the Church But

Catholikes and Huguenots thus farre forth agree in Doctrine that they are both of the same Faith and Religion IT is most cleare that men of the same Church and Religion may differ neuerthelesse about some opinions in Diuinitie Austen accords not to Hierome nor Epiphanius to Chrysostome nor Cyprian to Cornelius nor Irenaeus to Victor and questionlesse one of them was in the errour yet were they all Doctors approued by the Church and Saints euery one of them Euery errour doth not separate a man from the Church nor should we regard so much the number as the qualitie of them Arrius accorded with the Catholikes in all points but one insomuch as the change of a word yea of one bare letter would haue compounded the controuersie and yet was he the greatest Heretike that euer the Church was troubled with Origen on the other side dissented in infinite Tenents from the other old Doctors and was yet neuerthelesse esteemed a member of the Church To see then whether the Huguenots be of another Religion than wee neither their errors nor their numbers is the thing which is so much to be regarded but the nature of them only is it That is to say what Errors are to be reputed for Heresies and whether theirs be of that nature There be two things which according to the opinion of the Catholikes make Errors to proue Heresies The one when the Errour is of it selfe so enormous that he is at all times an Heretike that holds it So that euen before the Nicene Councell had decided it Ebion Paulus Samosetanus and Arrius stood then as Heretikes for that they denied the eternall Diuinitie of the Sonne of God The second thing which according to our opinion makes an Errour to become an Heresie is when any man maintains an opinion in point of Doctrine contrary to the Decrees of a Generall Councell So then the Heresie lies not so much in the mischieuousnesse of the opinion as in the resistance made against the ordinance of the Church For example The opinion of S. Cyprian touching Rebaptization was not Heresie in him because there was not as then any Decree of Councell made against it But since that say we this opinion is condemned legally it were flat Heresie in any other that should hold it Of this second Species of Heresie I will intreat in my third Chapter In this only of the former which is Whether the errors of the Huguenots be in themselues so enormous that they destroy the very foundation of Faith and by consequence keepe them off from being of the same Religion with vs. Let vs see then how our Antagonist takes vpon him to proue the contrary In the first place saith he both parties as well the Catholikes as their Aduersaries repute one another for Heretikes I answer that I finde no impossibilitie why they may not be both deceiued For two brothers being in choler may well renounce one another and yet they leaue not for all that to continue true brothers alwaies Cyrill and Theodoret accused one another for Heretiques and yet neither of them was so So that this reason is only drawne from the passion of men when Reason hath abandoned them But how doth he proue that the Catholikes repute the Huguenots for Heretikes The Catholike Church saith he hath by the Councell of Trent condemned diuers of the Lutheran opinions I answer according to my first distinction that it is one thing to returne an opinion for an heresie by condemnation and another thing to repute it so of its owne nature Now whether or no the Huguenots be hereticks by condemnation we will argue it hereafter in our third fourth and fifth Chapters But here we dispute only of the nature of their errour wherein his proofes are nothing to his purpose But saith he At Rome euerie holy Thursday the Pope pronounces them excommunicate and prohibits all Chatholikes to reade their Bookes In like manner the same day also he excommunicats all sinners of whom hee dares not denie but that many are of the Church else should he himselfe be condemned for an hereticke by the Councell of Constance which gaue sentence against Iohn Huz That the Church consists as well of the bad as of the good And whereas the Huguenots Bookes be prohibited so are also the Bookes of Machiauel Aretine and diuers other Catholikes Let vs next see the opinion which the Huguenots haue of the Catholike Doctrine Caluine saith he writes that the principall points of Doctrine in the Church of Rome are almost vtterly abolished and the right vse of the Sacraments in many fashions corrupted He needs but little explication the words themselues answer him Caluin saies not that the Sacraments are vtterly taken away but the right vse of them many waies corrupted Nor that the principall points of Religion are vtterly destroied but almost abolished A man may be almost kild and yet liue Secondly to proue how their Religion differs from ours he produces the controuersies of Originall sinne Free-will Iustification Merits and diuers others which he iudges of most consequence It is the greatest pittie in the world to heare how the most of the Preachers in both Religions commonly fight with their owne shadowes not vnderstanding what it is that their aduersarie holds which comes only of the subtleties of words inuented by the Deuill to disturbe the Peace of the Church One partie vnderstanding the word Iustification in one sense and another in another one Faith one way and another in another one Grace in one fashion another after another and so of the rest that which we say being true in our acception of the word and that which they say being likewise true as they take it So that if the desire of contention were once taken away we should soone finde that the most of these disputes wherewith peoples eares are filled are onely the subtelties of the Schoole vpon the Etimologies and Definitions of words only Whence it came to passe that in the conference at Regenspurg the Catholikes and the Protestants fell to some agreement in the question of Originall sinne of Predestination Free-will and diuers other points which is also confessed by Bishop Lindanus one of the tartest enemies that the Huguenots euer had Neue●thelesse the Authour of this answer is so ill aduised as to chuse out these questions principally to shew the differences betweene them and vs. For mine owne part I will not take vpon me to reconcile the said questions neither know I well to confesse mine owne ignorance freely whether it be possible to be done or no only thus much I assure my selfe that the difference is not so great as it is iudged to be Nor will I too exactly search out the point in controuersie because I well hope some other man may more happily performe it hereafter Only I will discourse vpon the said questions as they are commonly vnderstood by the best Doctors in each Religion In which sense I

not himselfe greatly to know whether they doe or no. But should any of them denie it where is the danger Bellarmine that great Master of Controuersies affirms That the soules in Heauen doe pray for the soules in Purgatory and they in Purgatory for those on earth And yet notwithstanding confesseth that Dominicus à Soto denieth the first and S. Thomas Aquinas the second Wherefore seeing that Purgatory is more beneficiall to the Pope than Paradice I can perceiue no reason wherefore the Huguentos should rather be Heretiques for disagreeing with the Catholikes about the Intercession of the Saints in Heauen than the Catholikes are for differing amongst themselues about the Intercession both of the soules and for the soules in Purgatory The last point wherein the Huguenots are departed from the Roman faith is touching the Sacraments wherein the number nature and particular Sacraments are to be considered of And they first miscount themselues in the number reckoning but two whereas the Councell of Trent hath concluded it that there are seuen Which obiection of his is but friuolous insomuch as the difference lies more in the words than in the thing For taking the word Sacrament properly S. Austin saith that there be but two that is to say Baptisme the Eucharist Further it is an ordinarie phrase amongst vs Catholikes to say That all the Sacraments issued out of our Sauiours side whereas there issued nothing frō thence saue water and bloud which according as Chrysostome Cyril and other Ancients interpret it represent the two Sacraments that is Baptisme by the water and the Cup of the Lords Supper by the bloud To which our Catholike Doctors giue no other answer than this That the two Sacraments haue some kinde of dignity aboue the rest which comes to no more than to say that there be two principall Sacraments and fiue more inferiour to those two Which is all one with the Huguenots opinion though in diuers termes They say that there be but two properly we say that there be but two principally We againe that there be fiue more of an inferiour order they confesse that there may be more if we meane of Sacraments in the generall signification For Caluin yeelds that Order is a Sacrament but not common to all men nor will our Catholike Doctors say otherwise Againe they will confesse with S. Paul that Mariage is also a Sacrament taking it in that generall signification wherein the Ancients haue translated the Greeke word Briefely they will yeeld that there be seuen but not barely seuen And in truth there was none of the Ancient Fathers that euer light vpon this number of seuen So that though the Huguenots cannot so euenly iumpe vpon the number seeing the Primitiue Church could not doe it wee may perchance condemne them of ignorance in Arithmeticke but their errour in Theologie cannot be so great But he may argue that they are mistaken in the very nature of the Sacraments because they deny them to be distinguished in force and vertue from the Sacraments of the old Law or that they confer grace I answer That this is a meere slander for the Huguenots doe distinguish them from the Sacraments of the old Testament and doe affirme that they doe also confer grace What would you desire more of them But not saith he ex opere operato The difference then is not in the matter whether our Sacraments confer more grace or are of more efficacie than those of the old Law but in the manner only by what meanes this grace is conferred As for the manner we should not me thinks too narrowly prie into it as Bellarmine very sagely aduiseth vs. Like as in Christs miracles saith he the parties that were healed needed not to inquire in what manner the garment of Christ did cure them it being sufficient to them to beleeue only that the touch of it wrought the cure iust so is it not necessarie saith he that the Ministers or the Receiuers of the Sacraments should be curious to know in what manner they become the causes of our Iustification We come next to the particular Sacraments whereof hee makes mention but of three only That is to say Baptisme the Sacrament of the Altar and Penance Touching Baptisme they affirme saith he That Originall sin sticks so close to man that neither by Baptisme nor any other remedie can it be gotten off I answer That euen the Huguenots confesse as freely as the Catholikes that a man is washed from Originall sinne by Baptisme which is enough for a Christian to beleeue in this point so that the difference lies meerely in the nicity of the word whether it should rightliest be called Sinne or no Sinne The Catholikes holding that the Sinne is so farre remitted that the concupiscence which remaines ought not to be called Sinne The Huguenots affirming that the remaining Concupiscence may very well be called Sinne although they herein consent to the Catholikes That a man is so clearely absolued and discharged of it that it is not reputed as a Sinne. For which cause in no other sense doe they deny the grace receiued in Baptisme though they still esteeme themselues sinners altogether than the Debtor doth his Creditors mercy who confessing that he hath receiued the fauour of him to haue his debts forgiuen doth neuerthelesse acknowledge himselfe his debtor Which way soeuer it be taken the sinner is pardoned and the debtor discharged and what need haue we to desire more Hee may say perchance againe That the Huguenots erre not so much in acknowledging the benefits receiued in Baptisme because they are not so well aware of the danger that followes the want of it For they affirme saith he that the children of Christians may be esteemed righteous and haue admittance into the kingdome of heauen without Baptisme notwithstanding that Iesus Christ hath said That whosoeuer is not borne againe of water and of the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen I answer that the Huguenots affirme not that euery childe borne of Christian Parents dying without Baptisme is saued but those only whom God in his eternall counsell hath elected So that the question is not so much about Baptisme as about Gods electiō wherin there can be no danger to confesse our ignorance referring still Gods owne decrees to his owne good pleasure as the Huguenots doe For they instance not in what children are elected but forbeare to presse into Gods cabinet and out of that to pronounce that such and such children shall be saued And if he replies againe That the Election of God is neuer destitute of these secondarie meanes and that Baptisme is the means by which he saues those that are elected and that it is a most manifest signe that those who are depriued of this Baptisme are also depriued of that election I answer That there be Catholikes who teach that a man may be saued without these secondarie meanes S. Damascene S. Brigid and