Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	according_a	act_v	action_n	52	3	6.4781	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A05555	The answer of John Bastvvick, Doctor of Phisicke, to the information of Sir Iohn Bancks Knight, Atturney universall In which there is a sufficient demonstration, that the prelats are invaders of the Kings prerogative royall, contemners and despisers of holy Scripture, advancers of poperie, superstition, idolatry and phophanesse: also that they abuse the Kings authoritie ...	Bastwick, John, 1593-1654.; England and Wales. Attorney-General.	1637 (1637)	STC 1568; ESTC R212826	58,859	30

eternall life they testifie of mee And in the 3. of the Acts ver 22 23. S. Peter brings all men unto Christ to be taught by him not in somethings onely but that Prophet must be heard in all things and no other in Gods matters must be listened unto the words are these For Moses truely sayd unto the Fathers a Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto mee him shall you heare in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you And it shal come te passe that every Soule which will not heare that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the people And in the 12. of Iohn vers 48. our Saviour sayth He that rejecteth mee and receiveth not my Words hath one that judgeth him the Word that I have spake the same shall judge him in the last day And therefore doth it not stand with all good reason that we should guide square our lives and actions by that word and rule onely by which we shall at the last day be judged Paul in the 2. of the Rom. ver 16. sayth That the secrets of mens hearts shall at that day be judged according to his Gospell shall not all our doctrines yea and our whole Religion be squared and regulated by the same all good reason vvould dictate so They have Moses the Prophets sayth Abraham● let them heare him saith he Luc. 16. ver 29. We have Christ and his Apostles we are onely to heare them in all things not the Fa●hers not the traditions of the Elder● not the use customes of former ages if they dissent from the holy Scriptures and vvritten word of God For the great Doctor of his Church telleth the Saduces saying Yee erre not knovving the Scriptures Matth. 12. vers 24. indeed from the ignorance of the Scriptures commeth all error they that follovv the Scripture for their guide can never stray or straggle from the right vvay neither have they need to borrovv the candle of the Fathers to be directed by so long as the glorious Sun of the vvord shineth so clearly and it was the eternall praise and commendations of the more noble Bereans that they did dayly search the Scriptures vvhether the things the Apostles taught vvere so or no. Acts 17 ver 11. and Paul is greatly honored vvith this applause in the 26. of the Acts ver 22. that he taught no other things then those vvhich the Prophets and Moses did say should come te passe And so Christ taught his Apostles Luc. 24 that all things ought to be fullfilled concerning him vvhich vvere vvrit in Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes So that the Scriptures alone are the Foundation of all our religion and to say that the meaning of the Scriptures can not be knowne without the Fathers is an unsufferable wickednes done unto that holy booke and an infinite contempt and disgrace of it to say it hath need of the ayde of man to support it Christ vanquished the Devill by the Scriptures Matth. 4. drove away the Saduces Matth. 22 and S. Iames by the Scriptures put an end unto the great controversy of the Churches at Ierusalem set the Churches of the Gentiles free for ever from all Ceremonyes vvhatsoever but those God himselfe had appoynted Acts 15. and onely by the Scriptures did Paul resolve all questions So that according to Gods ovvne instruction and direction vvhich must ever be obeyed and listened unto the Scriptures onely soly must bee the Iudge Law square rule of all our religion vvords actions Not the Autority of the Fathers not the traditions of men not the practice custome of the ancient and the name of Antiquity For they that shall preferre these things before the Word of God or at least affirme that these Holy Oracles and Divine records cannot be understood vvithout the Fathers do not only blasphemously disgrace and contemne the Holy Scriptures but neglect the great Prophet vvhom vve ought to heare in all things so that listening unto the voice of men before the vvords of this great Prophet accusing the Scriptures of obscurity and saying they are the refuge of all Schismaticks and Hereticks is great impiety contumacy against God most injurious to the Holy Scriptures All which the Prelats being so highly guilty of the Defendent will never be a frayd to charge them with it that they are disgracers contemners of Holy Scripture withall that they are very ungratefull to the King their master invaders of his Prerogative Royall all which he shall make also evidently appeare to this honorable Court and how unwor●hily yea prophanely they have abused not onely the King their now Soveraigne but his most excellent Father of pious memory And that they are invaders of his Prerogative it i● most certayne not onely by the Statuts Lawes of the Kingdome but by this very information For by the Lawes Statuts specified before with many others it is solemnly inacted That whatsoever Autority is here exercised under the King in his Dominions whether it be Spirituall or Temporall whether by Archbishops Bishops or any Ecclesiasticall men it is meerly in by and from the King and so ought to be acknowledged and that all jurisdictions superiorities all privileges and preeminencies spirituall and Ecclesiasticall are annexed unto the Imperiall Crowne so to be acknowledged And whosoever doth not acknowledge that all jurisdiction and Autoritie both Spirituall and Temporall is derived and doth flow immediatly from the Kings Majest● as supreme head under Christ in these Churches and in his Kingdomes as the Statutes declare at large is ipso facto in a praemunire and under his Majest high displeasure For it is the Prerogative of Princes and the priviledge that onely agrees to Kings and Potentates to be absolute in their Dominions and that all other jurisdictions superiorityes exercised by any other in their Kingdomes are derived from them and that of themselves they have none but as from the Kings So that it is arbitrary and in the Princes power to have or not to have such jurisdictions and preeminencies under them And that they may abdicat or annihilate them when they please And whosoever shall deny this or clayme any right of Government to themselves in Princes Dominions jure Divino are delinquents against their Kings and Masters and by our Lawes and Statutes they are proclaymed enimyes of the King and his Prerogative Royall that is true the mouth of the Law hath spake it And therefore the Defendents booke cannot be called a Libell without the Lawes first be proclamed such for the lawes say That all such persons as shall challenge any Autority unto themselves in his Majest Dominions but from the King are delinquents against his Majest and invaders of his prerogative Royall his Highnesses enimyes and so they are Now that the Prelats are such they sufficiently declared it in the censure of the Defendent For he reading

there at the Barr as a Delinquent for mayntayning the Religion established by publick Autority the honour of the King and the glory of his Majestie and that one Chouny a Sussex man a laick as vvell as himselfe should vvrite a Booke and set it forth by publicke autoritie mayntayning the Church of Rome to be a true Church and never to have had so much in her as the suspition of error in fundamentall poynts and that this booke should be dedicated to the Prelate of Canterbury patrionized by him vvhich Book● the Def●ndent both read and exhibited in Court by vvhich notwithstandig the King himselfe and all his Subiects were made Schismaticks and hereticks to the infinit dishonour of God our Gratio●s King and King Iames of blessed memorie and our most holie profession and religion This as the defendent told the Lord of Dorset struck an amazement in him especially vvhen the author of it must be favoured and co●ntenanced by Canterburie and for the defending of the honour and dignitie of our Church and the honour of the King the Defendent should stand as an evill doer Novv vvhen the defendent vvas come thus farre and vvas then approaching more closely unto them all intending more fullie in the pleading of his cause to have set forth their unjust dealing they tolde him that he rayled and imperiouslie commanded him to hold his peace vvhich vvas the reason of his Apologeticus ad Praesules Anglicanos vvhere he tooke libertie to vvrite that and publish it to the vievv of all the vvorld vvhich he vvould have then spoke But after that they had silenced him they then fell a thundering against him everie one as he pleased all of them joyning in this one onely excepted that they censured him onely for his Booke and in their censure they unanimously agreed that the Defendent should pay the costs of suite a thousand pounds unto the King for a fine be debarred of his practice that his booke should be burnt and that the Defendent should lye in prison till recantation and in the meane time be delivered unto Satan And thus did the Sublime Court deale with the Defendent for doing his duty But here the Defendent craveth favour againe of the honorable Court that he may briefly letting the puny Iudges and their nonsen●e dye in silence say something of the Prelats haranges because they onely were the men that found themselves aggreeved a● his writing to say the trueth all the other are Officiers under them and are the Prelats hangbyes he meanes the Doctors to doe what they would have thē as hourely experience teache●h all men And so much the more earnestly he desireth this liberty because it will make much for the demōstration of the justice of his accusation against the Prelats both in respect of the dishonor they have don unto God by it the dishonour of the King their Master King Iames of precious memory and the wrong done to himself in particular Now the first that entred this combat was Francis White Bishop of Ely who in the first place most blasphemously and with many contumelyes reproached the holy Scriptures making nothing of their divine Autority as all the standers by can witnes for he reviling the Defendent sayd That he had nothing in his booke but Scripture which was as he tearmed it the refuge of all Hereticks and Schismaticks openly averring withall That the Scrip●ures could not be knowne to be the Word of God but by the Fathers and Saint Augustin would not have beleeved the Scriptures to be the Word of God had not the Church told him so Further he sayd That the Scripture could not be knowne distinguished from ●he Apocrypha but by the Fa●hers nor the meaning of the Scripture found out but by the Fathers that all the Fa●hers from all Antiquity which is most false as the defendent in a speciall booke hath sufficiently shewed made and proved a vast difference between Bishops and Presbyters and that there was ever a greater excellency and Autority in the Bishop then in Presbyters And this with an unan●mous cōsent they all agreed in till a base fellow Calvin for so he tearmed that ever to be honoured Divine rose up in an obscure corner of the World vi●lated and overtrew all order Autority in the Church and would allso have demolished the Autority of the Magistrates And then turning his speech to the Defendent unhumanly he called him Base fellow Brasen faced Fellow Base Dunce and sayd in the face of the Court That if he could not mayntayne his Episcopall Autority to be Iure Divino he would fling away his Rotchet And so concluding with those that had gone before him in his censure he sat downe in a very great fu●y and passion Af●er him came forth the Bishop of Yorke and in that numerous Assembly proclaymes That Iesus Christ made him a Bishop and the holy Ghost consecrated him and that he had not his Autority from the King for Bishops were before Kings and that Bishops held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and so peremptorily averring that the Defendent ought to be knockt downe with club-Law for his ignorance assenting with the rest in their Censure he fell a sleep In the third place the Bishop of London advanced forwards speaking very loud and temerarious words against the Holy Scriptures saying That he had thought to have found some great Matters in the Defendents booke seeing him so confident and so peremptory but diligently reading of it he met with nothing in it but Scripture which as he sayd was the refuge of all Schismeticks Hereticks so according with his predecessors in their opinion and censure he concluded his part of speech But last of all came forth the Prelat of Canterbury who with a frontlesse boldnes avouched his Episcopall Autority preeminency over his bre●hren to be onely from God very much blaming Calvin for his fa●tious Spirit saying That their Ecclesiasticall Autority the power they exercised was from Christ Iesus and produced Timothy and Titus to prove● the same assertion and that Bishops were before Christian Kings and they held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads For no Bishop no King those that would have no Bishops sought to overthrow all Government in his censure he jumped in all things with the rest saving in the Fine which as he sayd hee thought too little and therefore ought of meere conscience as he told the other Iudges hee fined the Defendent a Thousand pounds more But he had one thing more to speake as he sayd concerning the Ch●rch of Rome and about that he resolved publickly there to declare himself in regard the Defendent had cast Chounyes book unto him in open Court and of the Synagogue of Rome he spake verie honorably affirming That shee was a true Church and that shee did not erre in fundamentall poynts and all this hee spake in that publick Sessions All which the Defendent hath

that the spring hath ever the precedency and is of greatest autority and without all controversy as it overthrowe●h all reason so it is exceedingly impious against our great God the fountayne of all good and the giver of every good and perfect gift and they that shall speake so contumeliously as the ●i●●●ps doe of these Fountaynes of living waters ●he holy Scriptures as they did the Defendent w●ll euer mayntaine they are contemners and despisers of the holy Scriptures and in this opinion he will live and die Nei●her did they lesse offend in saying that the Scriptures could not be knowne from the Apocry●ha without the help and au●hority of the Fathers which poynt also the Defendent desireth this honorable Court to heare a little discussed it being a thing of so high nature concerning not onely the glory of God bu● the good of every mans Soule the peace of the Church and the tranquillity of the whole Kingdom And therefore he humbly craveth favour that he may agitate it here a little for the furthe● Demonstration of the iustnes of his accusa●ion hee chargeth the Prelats with viz That they are disgracers and contemners of the holy Scriptures They say that the Scriptures can not be distinguished from the Apocrypha but by the Fathers which assertion is against sense and reason it self too impious for Prelats to speake Is not this an essentiall property of the Scriptures of the old Testament that they were written in the Hebrew tongue and that they did give witnes of Christ and received autority from him and that they were put into the hands keeping of the elect chosen people of God as a Treasury Now the Apocrypha had none of all this honour Neith●r did ever the Jews account of them as Scripture yea to this day they reject them Neither for these reasons onely are they distinguished from the Apocrypha but for many others the divinity purity● sublimity appeares in the Canonicall Scriptures the futility folly and falsity in the Apocrypha are too too manifest and is there any man so stupid blockish to thinke that this age wherein we live cannot distinguish or discerne gold from lead without the autority of the Fathers There is a vaster difference between the Apocrypha and the Canonicall Scriptures then is between gold and lead Every mans reason will tell him an apparent difference between brasse beanes But if any be desirous of autority to distinguish them will not Christs and the Apostles suffice The very Papists that have not abiured all honesty goodnes● do freely acknovvledge and confesse that those onely are Canonicall Scriptures which the Apostles did ei●her write or approve of But th●y did never approve of the Apocrypha The Canonicall Scriptures of the old Testament did in sh●dows and fig●res sett f●rth that which th● new Testament cle●rly speaks They did ad●m●rate the new Testament expresseth in lively colours one an● the same thing They consent one with an other and yeild each other mutuall ayde and help Now the Apocrypha do neither foretell the new nor are by their autority and approbation illustrated and declared Christ commends Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes as books without all exception Luc. 24. and grounds his doctrine upon them but never honours nor graceth the Apocrypha with his Commendations or wi●nes How then can the Prela●s without great con●umely un●o the sacred Scriptures say they cannot be distinguished and knowne from ●he Apocrypha but by the Fathers especially after the judgment of Christ himself is given and hath passed upon the Scriptures for the autorizing of them to be ●he word and will of God The Fathers as the learned acknowledge were for their times many of them worthy of honour but yet they vvere subject not to a fevv errors and often agreed not vvith themselves and are ever at variance vvith others and have been indeed the originall and cause of allmost all the co●troversies vvith vvhich the Churches are novv tormented And therefore to conclude this poynt the Defendent sayth that the Prelats are disgracers and contemners of holy Scripture vvhen against so much light of reason and Divine autority they say they cannot be distinguished and knovvne from the Apocrypha but by the Fathers Neither ●s the third Thesis Position freer from impudency and outrage against the Scriptures then the tvvo former In that they say the meaning of the Scripture could not be knovvne but by the Fathers For in this they doe as much as playnly affirme there is an other vvay to heaven then by ●he Scriptures vvhich if it be not a contemning and disgracing of holy Scripture then there never vvas any Nay if it be not blasphemy the Defendent knovveth not vvhat blasphemy is● and therefore all those that desire salvation and to goe to heaven must come to the Schoole of the Fathers and not to the Doctrine of the Scriptures And hovv then vvill the poore people doe to be saved that never knevv vvhat a Father vvas Nay hovv did all those goe to heaven that dyed before the Fathers For the Prelats say that the meaning of the Scripture cannot be knovvn vvithout the Fathers vvithout the knovvledge of the Scripture there is no salvation It is most manifest by these expressions of the Prelats that they vvith their untempered morter vvould put out the light of the Scriptures● make them not onely inferior to all mens vvritings but a very pack of Non-sense for vvheresoever th●re is any sense there can something be gathered out of it especially if it be so large a Booke And hovvsoever there bee many depths in Scripture there is also great perspicuity so that according to the ancient saying as an eliphant may svvimme a lamb may vvade th●re also But if it should be so as the Prelats say that without the autority and interpretation of the Fathers the meaning of them could not be knowne found out then the D●fendent affirmeth they should be inferior to all other writings yea to every Letter and Epistle that men penn with understanding for they ever carry their owne sense and meaning along with them or to what end are they otherwise writ If the letter that discovered the gunpouder treason had not had a match and light of understanding in it that Popish plot had never been discovered● till by its cruell flames it had declared it self and by the funerall of the vvhole Kingdome had been made knovvne and left those that survived and lived in perpetuall mourning If every Letter-vvriting and booke then that is penned vvith judgment carry its ovvne sense and meaning in it and the books for vvhich the Defendent is novv questioned and if all Proclamations Lettres and Edicts of Princes are easily to be understood and carry their ovvne interpretation vvith them so that none after their publication may pretend ignorance dare any man be so bold and audacious as to say that the Letters and Proclamations of the King of heaven and