Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	ancient_a	church_n	council_n	2,300	5	6.8190	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A37484	Truth defended. or, A triple answer to the late triumvirates opposition in their three pamphlets viz. Mr. Baxter's review, Mr. Wills his censure, Mr. Whiston's postscript to his essay, &c. With Mr. Hutchinson's letter to Mr. Baxter a little before his death. And a postscript in answer to Mr. William Walker's modest plea for infants baptism. By Tho. DeLaune.	De Laune, Thomas, d. 1685.	1677 (1677)	Wing D897; ESTC R213236	99,906	139

can furnish him with which gaudy paint makes it often cheat and pass for the truth with vulgar eyes who gazing on its superficial dress seldom discern Counterfeit from Current Hence it happens that such become Heterodox few receiving the naked and unadorn'd Truth when rival'd with asplended and specious error Sophistry is but perverted logick and that person that in his Disputations borrows his keenest weapons from it is to be suspected as being scarce sound I have often found the Advocates of a bad cause as Ribera expresses ●it Curam habent nitoris cultusque verborum venustatis numerositatis sententiarum carefull of their Cadencies and the Handsomness of their stile that what 's wanting of Native Beauty may be made out with a supplement of Paint How far Mr. Wills has contracted the guilt of playing the Sophister let his discerning Readers determine For my part I think his greatest Excellency lyes there as far as appears to me in his published Treatises And that he is a meer Word-pecker is very obvious For if he finds one misplac'd misinserted or by chance misapply'd as oft happens with the most accurate through the Transcriber or Printers fault he gloryes and insults as if he had gain'd an Olympick prize Though his own Writings are obnoxious to the same Correction as I could abundantly shew if needful It is worth notice that the main thing in Controversy viz. the Antiquity of Infant Baptism is quite given up and forsaken by Mr. Wills it being evident by Mr. Danvers c. That for the first 300 years The Baptism of grown persons professing faith was universally owned and practiced and no Record of credit that assures us that Infant Baptism was at all owned as Christs ordinance The most that can be said is that it was Creeping in in the third Century when Tertullian opposed it and got some small footing by degrees from the opinion of its necessity to salvation and that from a fatal mistake of John 3.5 And in the year 416. received its instalment by humane Authority being imposed by a dreadful Anathema at the Milevitan Council Certainly had it been the practice of the universal Church Tertullian the ancientest Latine Father could not have oppos'd it uncontradicted And it is past doubt that it was dislik't and cry'd down by many when that Council sate else their Canon was ridiculous and vain The Eclcesiastical Empire was then upon its erection and Paedobaptism was thought a necessary pillar to support it therefore was the opposite party from time to time crush't with these terrifying Canons and Curses Now Mr. Wills having lost his Garrison with incorrigible obstinacy mans his Outworks and Approaches pouring out Contempt and Appeals as if he would carry all by noise but how such a re-attack shall prevail is easy to be conjectured Had Mr. Wills accepted of Mr. Danvers's modest endeavours to give him satisfaction in a private way with promised assurance that he would publickly recant any mistakes which the closest scrutinie of indifferent persons mutually chosen could bring to light it had been a strong argument that he had sought to clear and defend Truth not purchase Applause c. And had saved a great deal of labour and trouble But in Print he must be yet has not the ingenuity and common honesty to retract or repent for his own Noterious mistakes and falsehoods so fully detected and enumerated by Mr. Danvers in his Writings particularly in his Rejoynd from p. 49. to 77. whilst he has the confidence not to say impudence with so much severity to take by the throat and exact from him the utmost mite yea and that for mistakes of his own making too which he so unjustly Fathers upon him Discovering hereby his folly and shamful partiality that whilst as concerning his own errors he can overlook Beams swallow Camels and leap over Mountains He can with such an Eagle eye discover the Motes strain at the Gnats magnify the Male-hills of others The notority whereof you will find further Exemplified in the following pages by Tho. Delaune April 20. 1676. A just Reproof to Mr. Obed Will 's c. IN p. 14 of our Answer to Mr. Will 's Appeal after we had as mildly treated him and with as much impartiality as was possible we made a motion to him that if he thought himself concern'd to appear any further in the Controversy he would be perswaded that things may be transacted in an amicable and friendly way which we hop'd may tend to our mutual satisfaction in the clearing up of truth and to cherish that love that all that fear the Lord should bear each other though differing in some things Yet notwithstanding he comes forth in such a Contemptuous Sarcastical and Insulting spirit as if that mode of writing were the very Sinews of his undertaking and of the essence of his faculty Which I shall mention only once for all and betake my self more immediatly to the matter of his Censure having neither leasure nor will to strive with him for mastery in such Rhetorick 1st He sayes p. 5. That we accuse him for what was never brought to our Bar. But if he must needs call us forth without any seeking of ours and invest us with a power to Judge his Appeal he must give us leave also which is not deny'd to any in that Capacity as appealed unto to hint unto him what Circumstances we found that made his grievance not so notirious as he pretended and the antecedent passages that argued him precipitant and the Defendent far from Contumacious 2ly He sayes we borrow our accusations from Mr. Danvers Preface But suppose we had that 's no excuse sufficient for him For he should have disprov'd the things if untrue We noted them from our own knowledge of the truth of them and not meerly because Mr. Danvers said so His talk that we gave Mr. Danvers's Judgment not our own and that the things brought to our Bar we carry'd back to his is utterly untrue For we consulted with him no more then the nature of the matter before us required Nor did we hold any Intelligence with him but what consisted with Justice and Impartiality We were obliged in equity to hear him before we could proceed to a determination For Alteram andire partem is allowed in every Law And that our answer was à capite ad Calcem of Mr. Danvers forming as Mr. Will 's has the confidence to publish p. 8 is a gross falshood and his Inference of our Collusion unrighteous His very parallels confute him VVe must needs have the same matter as far as we treat upon the same thing yet our expressions are not of Mr. Danvers's framing VVhether Mr. Will 's hath done such great service as he boasts of p. 6. in detecting Mr. Danvers his mistakes any further then what are acknowledg'd is left to understanding Readers to determine VVhat we found fault with in Mr. Will 's his appeal deserves a smarter reprehension then we