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	church_n	rome_n	17,242	5	7.2290	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46995	An exact collection of the works of Doctor Jackson ... such as were not published before : Christ exercising his everlasting priesthood ... or, a treatise of that knowledge of Christ which consists in the true estimate or experimental valuation of his death, resurrection, and exercise of his everlasting sacerdotal function ... : this estimate cannot rightly be made without a right understanding of the primeval state of Adam ...; Works. Selections. 1654	Jackson, Thomas, 1579-1640.; Oley, Barnabas, 1602-1686.	1654 (1654)	Wing J89; ESTC R33614	442,514	358

VIII CHAP. LIV. Three Errors Disparaging Christs Priest-hood 1. The Novatian denying the Reception of some Sort of Sinners 2. A Late Contrary Error affirming That every Sin which some sort of men Committ is pardoned before it be Committed 3. The Romish Doctrine of the Masse giving scandal to the Jew All of them Respectively derogating from the Infinite value or Continual Efficacie of Christs Everlasting Priesthood THe First Error in this kind which did grow into an Heresie was that of Novatus Qui negavit lapsis poenitenti●m who would not have Backsliders or Revolters from Christianitie Of Novatus See Euseb L. 6. c. 42. Socrates Lib. 4. ch 23. to be upon any Terms or testifications of repentance re-admitted into the Church or made partakers of Absolution This Heresi● as all others took its Original from a plausi●le Truth or practise of former times The Truth is that in those times wherein men professing Christianitie were every day called unto the Fierie Tryal This Backsliding or Relapse unto Idolatrie or outward Profession of Idolatrie even after Baptism was so rife that the Church would not admitt any such as had thus revolted unto the Estate or Condition of Penitentiaries nor give them Absolution upon private testifications of sorrow for their Revolt Now if Novatus did only deny that unto such backssiders or Revolters which the Church in her purest times would not Grant them why was he condemned by the Church in Ages following for an Heretick If his Opinion were an Heresie why was not the Practise of the Antient Church Heretical Some Grave and Learned late Writers would have the Novatas Heresie not precisely to consist in that he denyed Absolution or Communion with the Church unto Revolters but in that he maintained That the Church had no right or Power to grant Absolution unto such Backsliders as Cornelius then Bishop of Rome with the Advice and consent of his Clergie did grant unto but that this was a Case reserved to God himself That such Backsliders or Revolters might at the point of death be Absolved Novatian himself had once solemnly profest But after Cornelius his Competitioner for the Bishoprick of Rome being preferred to that Dignitie had authorized this Practise he begun to set abroach his Error whatsoever that were and to accuse Cornelius and his adherents as Authors of Heresie and Novelties in the Church Had this Novatian been constant to his former Tenets and Profession made before Cornelius was chosen Bishop of Rome against him he could not have denyed either of these Two Points of Truth Either that God had mercie in store for Revolters from Christianitie when they did repent or the Churches Power to grant Absolution or other comfort spiritual unto those to whom she might out of charitable discretion presume God was merciful or to whom God had not forbid her to shew mercy or compassion For Christ had commanded her to be merciful as her Heavenly Father is merciful But it were too much Charitie to presume that a man of such a proud and turbulent Spirit as Novatian was in the depth of such discontent as took possession of his spirit upon Cornelius his Preferment to so great a dignitie as the Bishoprick of Rome unto his prejudice would be constant to his former Principles either in whole or in part As either to grant that God had mercy in store for Revolters or that the Church had power to Absolve them upon such significations of repentance as belonged unto her Cognizance Nor can we without breach of Charitie think that either Novatian or any other Heretick in those times would be so gross as to deny the Churches Power to Absolve men from any sinne from which they were perswaded God had or would absolve them And it is a clear Case that the Novatians did ground their Errour or Contradiction to the Church wherein they lived upon that place of the Apostle Heb. 6. 4 5 6. It is impossible for those who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the holy Ghost And have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come if they fall away to renue them again unto repentance seeing they crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame and grounding their Error or maintaining it by this place it is evident that they held Lapsos or Revolters from Christianitie unto Heathenism to be in the same estate Which modern Divines conceive all such to b● in as sin against the Holy Ghost But of the true meaning or extent of the Apostles words in the forecited place or how the absolute unpardonablness of sin against the holy Ghost may be thence concluded I have nothing for the present to say It sufficeth to know that this Error of the Novatians was by the Ancient Church wherein they lived Condemned for an Heresie Yet hence it will not follow that their Heresie in the Judgment of them which condemned it did properly or precisely consist in denying the Churches authoritie to absolve sinnes of what kind soever but rather in avouching this particular sin of Apostasie or revolting from Christianitie to be in it self unpardonable or uncapable of Repentance If it had been in it self unpardonable or so adjudged by the Primitive Church Navatian had been no Heretick in withstanding Cornelius Bishop of Rome and the particular Churches which consented with him or in denying to admit the Revolters from Christianitie unto the estate or Condition of Penitentiaries in the Church or in refusing to give them Absolution or to hold Communion with them after they had voluntarily or otherwise observed such a course of Life as the Church had appointed for Penitentiaries That the Antient Church did neither admit open Revolters to enter into this Course or Rule of life nor Absolve them after they had Uoluntarily though most strictly to the eyes of men observed it doth no way argue that the Church in which Cornelius lived or which lived after him did erre much lesse incurre the Censure of heresie which Novatian objected unto them in admitting open Revolters unto the estate and Condition of Penitentiaries or in absolving them from their sinnes after performance of such religious duties as were by the Church required of men admitted into that estate or Condition 2. The Primitive Church did hold both to be lawfull but not expedien for the present Times The Primitive Church did deny unto Revolters Both these Favours 1. Admission to the state of Penitentiaries 2. Absolution upon their good behaviour after testification of repentance onely de Facto not de Jure The Church in later times did onely alter the Practise or discipline as is to be presumed upon good cause or consideration And to conclude or limit the Authoritie of the present Church onely by Matter of fact or practise of the Church in former times is matter of Heresie at least of Schism And this it may be