Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	rule_n	scripture_n	tradition_n	4,192	5	9.5355	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

that of the Pope is a priuate quarrell wherein the dignitie of his person is questioned Againe Cyril was not President of the Councell so as that hee could allow or anull the Decrees as hee thought good but sate only first in order hauing otherwise but his single voyce whereas the Pope now a dayes hath his negatiue voice to disanull a whole Councell though generall yea and to make his Decretalls vpon what hee lists without a Councell As for Alexander he sate neither as Iudge nor President but only as a priuate Bishop amongst the rest To conclude Leo came not at all to the Councell of Chalcedon and Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople sate President in it His concluding reason why the Pope may bee Iudge is because as hee saith hee is not Iudge alone but hath diuers Assistants I answer That in the latter Councells hee hath beene sole Iudge and that the rest of the Bishops haue not beene so much his Assistants as his Vassalls For whatsoeuer the Councell decrees is voyde without the confirmation of the Pope bee to it witnesse his abrogation of the Councells of Frankford Basil and Constance Contrariwise whensoeuer the Pope makes a Decree without a Councell it is of as much vertue as the definitions of the most holy Councell that euer was or can bee For the Popes Aduocates maintaine that hee cannot erre in a matter of faith though hee should giue iudgement without a Councell and that a Councell may erre if not confirmed by him To what purpose then serue the other Bishops ioined with him as companions when as he may doe all without them and they nothing without him The second Obiection of the Catholike Apologie viz. That the Huguenots had not fayre audience is first saith he confuted by that very booke which the Protestants set forth intituled Causacur Electores For they confesse in that booke that they were summoned to the Councell And wee may read moreouer of many ample safe Conducts whereby full liberty was giuen to the Protestants to come to the Councell And this briefly is his answer to which I reply First that the booke which hee mentions deliuers no reason why they came not to the Councell but why they iudged that the forme of proceeding in that Councell was like to bee such as that their comming thither would haue beene to no purpose But to what end answers hee that they were summoned The Apologie affirmes not that they were not called but that they were not heard For it is not enough for a Iudge to call both the parties before him if hee suffers but one of them to speake and iust thus fell it out at that Councell of Trent for Brentius and other Diuines of Sweuia were sent thither by the Duke of Wittenberge but might not be suffered to dispute when they came there Melancthon also and other Ministers of Saxony were vpon the way but turned back againe hauing receiued intelligence from Mauritius the Electors Ambassador there that they could not be heard Secondly I reply that admit that they had beene suffered to dispute and had been heard yet were the Conditions altogether vnequal for they requiring to haue a deciding voice with the rest of the Councel according to the form of the safe Conduct graunted to the Bohemians by the Councell of Basil. But the Tridentine Fathers would none of that refusing to admit of any to haue decisiue voices but only the Catholike Diuines Thirdly the Huguenots had good cause to suspect the safe conduct for Iohn Hus had also a safe conduct from the Emperour Sigismund to come to the Councell of Constance and yet comming thither was there burnt To the third Obiection viz That the Apostle commands vs to trie the Spirits whether they be of God or no he answers That the Apostle there speakes not of such things as be already certaine and defined in the Church but of matters rather vp-start ambiguous as are those of our trecherous Aduersaries Soft and faire not too fast there is no man affirms that we must try a thing that is certaine but that we are not to settle our beleef vpon it without proofs that it is certain For a thing may be certaine in it selfe neuerthelesse if it does not appeare to be certaine vnto vs we may well make triall of it for that without trying we cannot vnderstand the certaintie But it is saith he lawfull to try the Huguenots opinions because they be new and ambiguous If then it be lawfull to try the new t is also lawfull say I to try the old for two opposite Opinions are Relatiues so that we cannot make demonstration that the new are false but we must proue withall that the old are true And as for the ambiguitie of the Hugnenots doctrine if it be ambiguous then is it not certainly false and if their doctrine be not certainly false then is not the Catholikes certainly true and consequently euen by the iudgement of our Aduersarie himselfe it is lawfull to trie it But let vs now examine his reasons vpon which he concludes that it is not lawfull to try the Spirits of the Councell First saith he if we ought to try them all then were it lawfull to try the Spirits of the Councell of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon Whereupon it must follow that we ought to discusse againe the wicked heresies of Arrius Macedonius Nestorius and Eutiches and examine againe the sacred Scriptures themselues the Oracles of the Prophets the History of Moses and finally the holy Gospell At length he concludes That if things which be determined by the holy Councels ought to be held for certaine there is no reason to suffer the Decrees of the Councell of Trent to be called againe into question I answer That we ought to hold the Decrees of the former Councels for most certaine and yet is it lawfull neuerthelesse to make question of the determinations of the Councell of Trent to which purpose diuers reasons might be alledged how be it this one may suffice for the present For that in euery Councell we ought to deliberate and measure things before we iudge and after this the iudgement of a Councell which hath duly examined and iudged according to the right measure ought not to be called againe in question But to know now whether a man hath truly measured we must take consideration of the size and manner of measuring by it Now will the Huguenots say that the Rule which the Conncell of Nice did measure by was only the Scripture or the written Word as the words of Constantine doe testifie which be these All seditious contention set aside let vs discusse the things in controuersie by the testimonie of the Scriptures diuinely inspired The manner of measuring then was to apply the Doctrine to the said Rule or Scripture and accordingly to receiue or reiect it as it was conformable or varying to or from the said Rule But now hath the Councell of Trent will

the Huguenots say much failed in all these circumstances For first it decided before it measured for as much as euen before their comming to the Councell they were euery man of them resolued to condemne the Huguenots Secondly in examining and measuring of the questions it measured not by the written Word only but by Traditions also as it was agreed vpon at the fourth Session of the said Councell So that it measured sometimes either without a Rule or at least by a Rule very contrary to that of the Councell of Nice Thirdly admit that it had measured by a true Rule yet did it not so much apply the doctrine to the Rule as bend the Rule to make it fit to the doctrine viz peruerted the Scripture by an interpretation forced to their owne opinion For in the fourth Session it was decreed That no man should giue any other interpretation then that which was consonant to the doctrine of the Church of Rome So that in stead of measuring their doctrine by the Rule they measured the Rule by their doctrine But he followes it further against the triall of the Spirits that if we should try all then should we call againe into question the very Bookes of the holy Scripture it selfe I answer no and that it followes not that we should call in question againe the bookes approued by ancient Councels because they reiect some which are approued by the Councell of Trent seeing that in this particular the iudgement of that Councell is suspected euen by Catholikes themselues For Sixtus Senensis a great Catholike yea euen since the Councell of Trent hath reiected for Apocryphall the seuen last Chapters of the booke of Hester which were approued by the Councell of Trent which doubtlesse he would neuer haue done had he held it vnlawfull to try the Spirit of the said Councell Thirdly he argueth that if matters already determined and defined may be brought in question againe what end then would there be of Controuersies I answer that this reason is not sufficient to stay the triall of Councels because that this is the way to set an end to Controuersies for that it is not enough to dispatch Controuersies vnlesse we be sure that this dispatching is a well ending of them And so the Arrians might euen as well haue perswaded vs to rely vpon their packt Councell of Ariminum to giue an end to Controuersies To which our Aduersarie can shape no other answer but that their Councell was not lawfull and that the Councell of Trent was Well then say I that though wee may not examine the Decrees of a Councell yet may we try whether the Councell were lawfull or not and for this once we desire no more aduantage then this and thus much must be granted vs in despite of the world For if we ought simply to rely vpon the Authoritie of Councels which commonly passe for lawfull amongst our Doctors without any further enquirie there is no reason wherefore the Graecians should rather assent to the second Councell of Nice which allowed of Images then to that of Constantinople made vp of 300. of their owne Bishops which condemned them The fourth Reason for which he takes away the libertie of trying their doctrine from the people is quoted out of the 17. Chapter of Deuteronomie where it is commanded That men should enquire of the Priests and Leuie●s and the Iudge appointed for the time in cases of difficultie And Moses saith our Aduersarie addeth not Try the Spirits of the Priests and Iudges But if any grow proud and will not obey the command of the Priests that man shall die by the sentence of the Iudges Nor is this much different from that which our Lord saith in the Gospell of Saint Mathew The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chaire whatsoeuer therefore they say vnto you that obserue and doe As for Moses Commandement it was giuen vnto the Iewes whereupon Rabbi Salomon Iarchi concludes That we are to beleeue whatsoeuer the Iewish Priests say Since then that their Priests interpreted the Prophecies euen of Christ himselfe otherwise then we Christians doe A Iew will say that Christ is not yet come because their Priests deny it and if according to our Aduersaries saying we ought not to trie the Spirits of their Priests I demand then how he will answer the Iewes and I will answer him as he does them namely that in the text this clause is inserted According to Law that is to say we are to obey their Commandements so farre forth ay they are agreeable to the Law which how can we know vnlesse we examine it So that let our Aduersarie take his choice either to confesse that we are not in this place forbidden to try the Spirits of the Priests or else to acknowledge himselfe to be a Iew. To the place of Saint Mathew because he saith how that it is not much vnlike our answer shall likewise be the same For our Sauiour hath not commanded vs to obey the Pharisees in all things simply but not to take such scandall at their liues as that we should refuse to obey them when they speake well For should we simply giue credit to what they bid vs without tryall of it why should we beleeue that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God when as the high Priest said that hee blasphemed in calling himselfe so His last reason is drawne from the Councell of the Apostles mentioned Acts 15. It seemed good vnto the holy Ghost and to vs Whence he concludes That Gods Spirit is so infallibly tyed vnto a lawfull Councell that we ought not to call the definitions of it into question nor would Saint Paul himselfe saith our Aduersary examine the instructions of the Councell of the Apostles as Saint Luke saith Acts 16. Hee gaue them that to obserue which was ordained by the Apostles and the Elders which were at Ierusalem I would faine aske one of our Catholike Doctors to what purpose are there so many disputations and consultations at our Councels if so be that the holy Ghost doth so infallibly direct them His answer will be That Gods ordinary prouidence is such as that hee still assists them with his Spirit when they for their parts apply that diligence which they ought and not otherwise Iust as hee makes not the ground fruitfull but when the husbandman tills and sowes his corne in it and applyes such labour as the soyle requires And thus much is cleare by this passage namely That the Apostles did apply all industry and the aptest meanes for the resoluing of the doubts proposed for it is said That after a long disputation Peter stood vp whence a man may conclude That the holy Ghost is no otherwise promised to a Councell then conditionally viz. when the Councell doth apply all the meanes and industry on their parts for the finding out of the truth and that otherwise it may be destitute of Gods Spirit namely when it doth not apply

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