Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	bishop_n	call_v	rome_n	3,637	5	6.8247	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47629	A treatise of divinity consisting of three bookes : The first of which handling the Scripture or Word of God, treateth of its divine authority, the canonicall bookes, the authenticall edition, and severall versions, the end, properties, and interpretation of Scripture : The second handling God sheweth that there is a God, and what he is, in his essence and several attributes, and likewise the distinction of persons in the divine essence : The third handleth the three principall works of God, decree, creation and providence / by Edward Leigh ...	Leigh, Edward, 1602-1671.	1646 (1646)	Wing L1011; ESTC R39008	467,641	520

Florentine councell and that of Trent doe approve the said Bookes to be Canonicall as also Augustine and Innocentius To which it may be answered 1. That the Councell of Carthage was but a Provinciall Councell and therefore it cannot binde the whole world Moreover in that Councell there are divers things which the Papists will not endure as in the 26 Canon there is a decree that no Bishop shall be called chiefe or universall Bishop no not the Bishop of Rome how should the Papists binde us with the authority of that Councell with which they will not binde themselves 2. The Latine Fathers judged these bookes fit to be read for example of life and instruction of manners but not for confirmation of faith or establishing any doctrine 3. These Bookes are not Proto Canonicall truely and properly Canonicall inspired by God containing the immediate and unchangeable truth of God sanctified by him and given to the Church to be a perfect rule of sound doctrine and good life but Deutero-canonicall or rather Ecclesiasticall as they are stiled In this sence Augustine and Innocentius are to be taken when they reckon these Bookes among the Canonicall 4. No Councell hath authority to define what Bookes are Canonicall what not seeing Bookes truely Divine receive authority from God himselfe and are to be esteemed of undoubted truth although all the world should barke against them These two Councels are of too late standing to oppose against the other ancient Councels which reject these Bookes The co●ncell of Trent was gathered and kept against all Civill and Ecclesiasticall right neither was there any forme of justice observed in it 1. It was not kept in a lawfull place for whereas it was intended against the Protestants and the Germans were the parties accused it ought to have been kept in Germany according to the request exhibited by the body of the States of Germany assembled at Noremberg this equity was not observed the parties accused being called into Italy 2. In that Councell matters were concluded and the sentence passed the adversary not being heard speake nor so much as present for the Protestants might not be admitted to hearing neither could they obtaine to propound their opinion in the Councell muchlesse to avouch it by lawfull reasoning Sleidan fol. 29. and yet were condemned against divine and humane law for they both forbid the condemning of any before he have lawfull liberty granted him to plead for himselfe 3. In that Councell the accuser and Judge were the same for the Pope did accuse the Protestants of heresie he did convocate the Coucell he by his Delegates was President and Moderator in it and so together was Accuser Judge and Witnesse whereas the reformation of the Pope was the thing in question Lastly all Councels ought to be free but in this Protestants might not propound their cause nor defend it neither might any thing be proposed but according to the mind of the Legates or otherwise then they approved no man had any voyce in the Councell but such as were sworne to the Pope nothing was there determined which was not first concluded of at Rome by the Pope in the Colledge of Cardinals and sent from Rome to Trent whereupon this Proverbe arose Spiritum Sanctum Roma p●r peram mitti Tridentum The Holy Ghost came to Trent packt up in a Cloke-bag We hope therefore since the Apocrypha are justly rejected out of the Canon that hereafter they will neither have the honour to be bound with our Bibles nor read in our Churches The Apocrypha was never received by the Church of the Israelites before Christ his comming nor of the Apostolicke and Primitive Church for more then 300 yeeres after as both Eusebius out of Origen and the Councell of Laodicea Can. 59. confirmed afterward by the sixth generall councell of Constantinople sheweth for the Greeke Church and St Jerome for the Latine CHAP. VI. Of the Authenticall edition of the Scripture NOw we must enquire which is the Authenticall edition of holy Scriptures it being necessary that this heavenly truth committed to writing should be delivered in some forme of words and in some language which may be understood Lawyers from whom the use of the word Authentique seemeth borrowed doe call those instruments and writings authentique which have a certaine and just authority in themselves A booke or writing is authentique either by divine or humane institution those are by Divine appointment and institution authenticall which have from God sufficient and absolute authority to command and approve themselves worthy credit and faith in as much as God himselfe doth approve thtm by humane institution such writings are held authenticall which by the opinion and sentence of learned men in their severall professions may be esteemed worthy credit and beliefe for themselves and for the truth in them There is a great diversity of editions of holy Scripture all cannot be simply and perpetually authenticall in of and for themselves without reference unto another no more then many draughts of the same Lease or Deed or copy of one pardon can be Some amongst many are authentique whence the others are transcribed yea it cannot be that there should be many but although there may be many counterpanes of the deed yet there is but one or two principall Deeds so amongst this great variety of editions one or more ought to be as principall and authenticall Thrre is a question betwixt the Church of Rome and the reformed Churches about the authentique edition of Scripture they say that the edition of the Bible in Hebrew and Greeke i● not authenticall but rather the vulgar Latine We hold that the vulgar Latine is very corrupt and false that the Hebrew for the old Testament and the Greeke for the new is the sincere and authenticall writing of God therefore that all things are to be determined by them and that the other versions are so far to be approved of as they agree with these fountaines The Tridentine Councell thus decreeth that in all sermons readings disputations controversies the vulgar Latine Translation should be taken for authentique before the Hebrew or Greeke and that no man should presume upon any occasion to reject it or to appeale from it When the Councell of Trent saith the vulgar Latine is authenticall it compares it with other Latine Translations not with the Hebrew Muis. Andradius the chiefest of the Divines at the Councell of Trent thinketh that the Councell of Trent did not meane either to condemne the Hebrew truth as he calleth it or to acquit the Latine Translation from all errour when they called it Authenticall but onely that the Latine hath no such errour by which any pestilent opinion in faith and manners may be gathered This saith Rainolds against Hart. ch 6. p. 202. Chamier tomo 1. l. 12. c. 2. The Rhemists in their preface to the new Testament translated by them prolixly

Church 2. We grant that the Apost●es living and preaching and the Canon of the New Testament being not yet sealed their Gospell delivered viva voce was no lesse a rule of faith and worship then the writings of Moses and the Prophets 3. We doe not reject all the traditions of the Church for we embrace certaine Historicall and Ceremoniall ones but we deny that opinions of faith or precepts of worship can be confirmed by unwritten traditions 4. We call that an opinion of faith to speake properly and strictly when a Proposition is revealed by God which exceeds the capacity of nature and is propounded to be beleeved as necessary to be knowne to salvation Fundamentall opinions are those which by a usuall and proper name are called Articles of faith 5. What is not in respect of the matter an Article of saith may be a Proposition to be beleeved with a Theologicall faith if you looke to the manner of revealing as that the Sunne is a great light the Moone a lesse Gen. 1. 16. that Rachel was beautifull Leah bleare-eyed The Papists doe not cease to accuse the Scripture of imperfection and insufficiency as not containing all things necessary to salvation The Councell of Trent sess 4. decret 1. Saith that the truth and discipline is contained in libris scriptis sine scripto traditionibus The Papists generally divide the word of God into the word written and traditions They affirme that there are many things belonging to Christian faith which are neither contained in the Scriptures openly nor secretly This opinion is maintained by the Papists but it was not first invented by them The Jewish Fathers did use the traditions of the Elders and it hath been said of old Marke 7. 5. Matth. 5. 21. for their errours and superstitions yea at length they affirmed firmed that God gave to Moses in mount Sinai the Scripture and the Cabala or a double Law the one written the other unwritten The Tridentine Fathers session 4th doe command Traditions to be received with the same reverend affection and piety with which we embrace the Scripture and because one Bishop in the Councell of Trent refused this he was excluded In the meane space they explaine not what those traditions are which must be so regarded none of them would ever give us a list and Catalogue of those Ordinances which are to be defended by the authority of unwritten traditions not of the word committed to writing onely they affirme in generall whatsoever they teach or doe which is not in the Scripture that it is to be put into the number of Traditions unwritten The cause of it selfe is manifest that at their pleasure they might thrust what they would upon the Church under the name of Traditions Vide Whitak de Script controviae quaest Sexta c. 5. See also Moulins Buckler of Faith p. 51. Lindan the Papist was not ashamed to say that it had been better for the Church if there had been no Scripture at all but onely Traditions For saith he we may doe well enough with Traditions though we had no Scripture but could not doe well enough with Scripture though we had no Traditions Baldwin saith a Testament may be either scriptum or nuncupativum set downe in writing or uttered by word of mouth But a nuncupative Testament or Will made by word of mouth without writing must be proved by solemne witnesses The solemne witnesses of Christs Testament are the Prophets and Apostles Let Papists if they can prove by them that part of the Testament of Christ is unwritten Because our Adversaries doe contend for Traditions not written hotly and zealously against the totall perfection of the Scripture that they might thrust upon us many points by their owne confession not contained in Scripture and usurpe to themselves irrefragable authority in the Church it shall not be amisse largely to consider of this matter And 1. to enquire of the signification of the words Greek and Latine which are translated Tradition and then to come to the matter which is controverted between us and the Papists The Greeke word signifying Tradition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the new Testament is used only in these places Matth. 15. 2. 3. 6. Marke 7. 3. 5. 8. 9. 13. 1 Cor. 11. 2. Gal. 1. 14. Col. 2. 8. 2 Thess. 2. 15. and 3. 6. and in the vulgar Latine is rendred Traditio Matth. 15. 2. 3. 6. Marke 7. 3. 5. 8. 9. 13. Gal. 1. 14. Col. 2. 6. 2 Thess. 2. 15. and 3. 6. and praecepta 1 Cor. 11. 2. Whereto the Rhemists translation which seemeth to be but a bare translation of the vulgar Latine doth wholly agree using the word Tradition every where excepting 1 Cor. 11. 2. where they use the word precepts but set in the margent the word Tradition Arias Montanus in his Interlineall translation doth render it traditio Beza doth commonly expresse it by the word traditio In the English Geneva Bible we translate it by the word instruction tradition calling mens precepts traditions the Apostles doctrine Ordinances or instructions not that we feared the word tradition but because we would not have the simple deceived as though the unwritten verities of the papists were thereby commended or as though we had some honourable conceite of them and what we did herein the signification of the word doth give us free liberty to doe in our last English Translation we use the word tradition as often as the vulgar Latine or the Rhemists have done not that we were driven by feare or shame to alter what was done before but because we would cut off all occasion of carping at our translation though never so unjust First we contend not about the name tradition the word may lawfully be used if the sense affixed thereto be lawfull 2. All traditions unwritten are not simply condemned by us 3. The Apostles delivered by lively voyce many observations dispensable and alterable according to the circumstances of time and persons appertaining to order and comelinesse onely we say that they were not of the substance of Religion that they were not generall concerning all Churches 4. We receive the number and names of the authors of Books Divine and Canonicall as delivered by tradition but the Divine truth of those Books is in it self clear and evident unto us not depending on the Churches authority The Books of Scripture have not their authority quoad nos from the approbation of the Church but winne credit of themselves and yeeld sufficient satisfaction to all men of their divine truth whence we judge the Church that receiveth them to be led by the Spirit of God yet the number authors and integrity of the parts of those Books we receive as delivered by tradition 5. The continued practise of such things as are neither expressely contained in Scripture nor the example of such practise expressely there delivered though the grounds reasons and cause of the necessity of such practise be

this Subject 1. In that description which they make of the literall sense 2. In that they hold there are divers literall sences of one place 3. In their division of the mysticall sense into Allegoricall Tropologicall Anagogicall First that is false which Bellarmine saith Literalis sensus est quem verba immediatè prae se ferunt What then shall the literall sense of those words be Psal. 91. 13. Let them shew the Lion which Christ did tread o● and what shall be the literall sense of those places Esay 11. 6 7 8. and 65. ult And what literall sense shall those words of Christ have Matth 5. 29. Origen though otherwise he allegorized much interpreted that place according to the letter but foolishly That therefore is rather the literall sen●e which ariseth from the words whether properly or figuratively taken as for example this is the literall sense of those words the Seed of the woman shall breake the Serpents head viz. Christ shall over come Satan and subdue all his force and power although the Devill neither be a Serpent nor hath a head 2. We hold that there is but one true proper and genuine sense of Scripture viz. the literall or Grammaticall whether it arise from the words properly taken or figuratively understood or both For that there should be divers literall sences of one and the same place is against the truth the Text and reason 1. The truth because of one and an Individuall thing there is one constant truth and not various verum unum convertuntur 2. The Text because it draweth away from its one true sense 3. And lastly reason because this is the chiefest reason in explaining the Text that the true literall sense of it may be found out The literall sense then can be but one in one place though a man may draw sundry consequences à contrarijs à similibus 3. We doe not altogether reject the third for we hold there are Allegories Anagogies and Tropologies in the Scriptures yet these are not many and divers senses of the Scripture but divers collections from one sense or divers applications and accommodations of one sense Besides the Tropologies and Anagogies are unfitly opposed to an Allegory since they are certaine kindes of it Haec nominum curiosa distinctio ex Scholarum potius morosiuscula diligentia quam ex ulla eorum vocabulorum necessitate Itaque Salmero agnoscit esse quid novum à p●sterioribus patribus tr●ditum Chamierus tomo de Sensu Literali mystico l. 15. C. 1. Galat. 4. the Apostle saith not that there is a double sense but that it may be Allegorically applied which is Historically set downe There is then but one sense of the place part whereof consisteth in the Story part in the Allegory So that the whole sense is contained in them both So for the second example of the Tropologicall there is not a twofold sense of that place but one generall sense that as the mouth of the Oxe was not to be muzled so the Minister of the Gospell must be provided for Likewise of the Anagogicall kinde it is not one sense to understand the rest of C●naan another the Kindome of God but there is one whole sense that as they for their Idolatry were deprived of the Land of promise so we should take heed least by our disobedience we lose the hope of the Kingdome of heaven So we conclude that those are not divers sences but one sense diversly applyed The literall sense is the onely sense of the place because out of that sense only may an argument strongly be framed wherefore seeing Allegories and Tropes doe no conclude they are not the sences of the place and Allegories devised beside the sense prove not though they may illustrate It is manifest that is alwayes the sense of the holy Ghost which is drawne from the very words But we are not so certaine concerning any mysticall sense unlesse when the holy Ghost himselfe teacheth us as for example it is written 11. Hosea 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Sonne and Exod. 12. 46. Ye shall not breake a bone of him It is evident that the first place is understood of the people of Israel the latter of the Paschall Lamb. Who durst have applyed those things to Christ unlesse the Holy Ghost had first done it and declared his minde and meaning to us viz. that sonne in the first place doth not onely signifie the people of Israel but Christ also and by bone in the latter place not onely the bone of that Lambe but of Christ also is understood Secondly To whom the chiefe authority to expound Scripture is committed It was decreed in the Councell of Trent that Scripture should be expounded as the Church expoundeth it and according to the common and unanimous consent of the Fathers If the Fathers agree not the matter is referred to a generall Councell if there it be not determined we must have recourse to the Pope and his Cardinals We say also that the Church is the interpreter of Scripture and that this gift of interpreting resides onely in the Church but we deny that it belongs to certaine men or is tyed to a certaine place or succession of men The Ministry of judgement the Lord hath given to his Church 1 Cor. 2. 15. and 10. 15. 1 John 4. 1. Act. 15 16 2 Cor. 14. 29. 31. 32. but the Soveraignty of judgement he hath reserved to himselfe The Holy Ghost is the Judge and the Scripture is the sentence or definitive decree We acknowledge no publike Judge except the Scripture and the holy Ghost teaching us in the Scripture He that made the Law should interpret the same 1 Cor. 1. 12. 1 John 2. 27. Arguments brought by the Papists for their opinion Ob. 1. They object that place Exod. 18. 13. 26. Sol. Moses was a Prophet indued with singular wisdome adorned by God with extraordinary gifts sent immediately by him and commended by divine Testimonies to the people the Pope is not so He had chiefest authority from God over all the Israelites but the Pope hath not so over all Christians Moses his authority was extraordinary no man succeeded in his place I●shua was a Captaine onely or Judge in Civill things Aaron onely a Priest to administer in things sacred But Moses exercised both functions Ob. 2. They urge that place Deut. 17. 9. Sol. Here the Civill Magistrate and the Judge are joyned together as v. 12. If it will follow hence that the Pope must be Supreme Judge in all Ecclesiasticall matters the Emperour ought to be as well in Civill 2. The Pope doth not hold the same place among Christians that the High-Priest did among the Jewes For he was the chiefest having all the rest of the Priests subject to him but the Pope is one amongst all having Collegues many Bishops as at first or a few Patriarkes as after Ob. 3. Eccles. 12. 11. If the chiefe

Pastor in the Old Testament had such authority much more the chiefe Priest in the New Sol. This one pastor signifieth neither the High Priest in the old Law nor the Pope in the New but Jesus Christ the High Shepheard for our soules Ob. Matth. 16. 19. Christ saith to Peter to the● will I give the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven therefore the Pope hath authority to expound Scripture Sol. First by the Keyes here is meant Commission to preach the Gospell not authority of interpreting the Scriptures When the Gospell is preached the Kingdome of heaven is opened to the beleevers and shut to the unbeleevers 2. That authority of the Keyes was not committed to Peter onely but to the other Apostles also Matth. 28. 18. 19. There is a twofold judgement 1. Of discretion 1 Cor. 10. 15. 2. Of authority as the Parllament judgeth Capitall crimes If the Papists understand the word Judge to ●ignifie Discerning as when we judge of meates by the taste every faithfull person ought to pray unto God for grace to judge to discerne and to know the true sense of the Scripture But if by judging they understand to pronounce decrees definitive and infallible judgements touching the sence of the Scriptures thereby to bind other mens consciences there is no man in the world that hath that power See Moulin● Buckler of Faith We have a more compendious way to come to the understanding of the Scripture It were too long when we doubt of any place to stay till we have the generall consent of the Pastors of the Church or to expect a generall counsell or to goe up to Rome But the word of God is amongst us the Scriptures themselves and the Spirit of God opening our hearts doe teach us how to understand them And yet we say not as the Papists falsely charge us that we allow every private mans interpretation of Scripture refusing the judgement of the Pastors of the Church Panoruitan saith the opinion of one godly man ought to be preferred before the Popes if it be grounded upon better authority of the Old and New Testament 2 Pet. 1. 20. No prophesie of the Scripture is of any private interpretation Stapleton saith interpretation is private either ratione personae when the man is private or ratione medij when it is not taken out of the context and circumstances or ratione finis when it is for a false end Now private interpretation in regard of the person if it be publike in regard of the meanes is not forbidden for it is lawfull for one man with Scripture toti resistere mundo saith the Glosse of the Canon-Law the meaning of this place is that the Prophets were no Interpreters or Messengers of their own minds but Gods The Catholickes hold saith Chamier meaning still by that Title the Protestants that the Scripture is to be interpreted by private labour and industry viz. of Augustine Jerome Chrysostome but not in a private sense that is in a sense arising from the braine of the Interpreter It is true saith Cartwright against the Rhemists that the Scriptures cannot be expounded of every private Spirit nor which is more of any private spirit nor yet of all private spirits together but onely of those which are inspired of God viz. the Prophets and Apostles which are here opposed unto private Interpretation And therefore it is evident that the exposition of the Scripture ought not to be fetched from Ecclesiasticall either Fathers or Councels which speake not by inspiration but from the Scriptures themselves what he meaneth he declareth in the next verse where he sheweth the reason of his saying namely that it must be interpreted as it was written and by as high authority Seeing therefore it was first spoken by holy men which spake as they were led by the holy Spirit and were inspired of God it followeth that it must be interpreted by the same authority The interpretation therefore that is brought but of the Apostles and Prophets is not private although it be avowed by one man onely On the other side that interpretation which is not brought from thence although it have the allowance of whole Generall Counsels is but private This is a principall meaning of our Saviour Christ when he willeth that we should call no man father or Master in the earth that is in matter of doctrine we should depend upon the authority of no man nor of all men in the earth but onely upon Christ and upon God Our reasons by which we prove that the chiefest judgement and authority of interpreting Scriptures is to be given not to the Church but to the Scriptures themselves and the Holy Ghost 1. That which onely hath power to beget faith that onely hath the chiefest authority of interpreting Scripture and of determining all controversies concerning faith and religion but the Scriptures onely and the Holy Ghost have this force Rom. 10. 17. the Holy Ghost onely can infuse saving faith into our hearts which is called by the Schoolemen infusa fides The faith which we have from the Church is acquired and sufficeth not to a certaine perswasion 2. The Scriptures cannot be interpreted but by the same Spirit wherewith they were written that spirit is found no where but in the Scripture whosoever have promises from God to understand the Scripture may interpret it but so have all the faithfull 3. Christ himselfe makes the Scripture a Judge John 12. 48. and still appealed to it 4. Although the Fathers were men indued of God with excellent gifts and brought no small light to understanding of the Scriptures yet learned men in our dayes may give a right sense of sundry places thereof which the Fathers saw not yea against the which perhaps they consent Hath any man living read all the Fathers nay have all the men living read them nay can they shew them can they get them I had almost said can they name them In the exposition of those words Tu es Petrus supra hanc petram almost every one of the Fathers at least the most part of them and the best expound it of Peters faith yet the Papists understand it non de fide sed de persona Petri. Here they dis-agree themselves from the Fathers John 10. 16. by the title of one Shepheard Augustine Chrysostome Jerome Cyrill Theodoret Theophylact Euthimius Rupertus Cyprian and other Fathers agree that Christ is there designed but Stapleton saith the Pope is there meant In the division of the Law they goe cleane contrary to the greatest part of the Fathers For they divide the Commandements as we doe but the Papists make the two first one and the tenth two 2. They have no Father to countenance them in this but Augustine There were no writings of the Fathers for a time many of them wrote 400 yeares after Christ but some 500 and 600 yeares after Christ what rule had they before that time of interpreting