Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	book_n	scripture_n	word_n	3,471	5	4.4436	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39389	To en archy: or, An exercitation upon a momentous question in divinity, and case of conscience viz. whether it be lawfull for any person to act contrary to the opinion of his own consicence, formed from arguments that to him appear very probable, though not necessary or demonstrative. Where the opinions of the papists, Vasquez, Sanches, Azonius, &c. are shewed, as also the opinions of some Protestants, viz. Mr. Hooker, Bp Sanderson, Dr. Fulwood, &c. and compared with the opinions of others; the negative part of the question maintained; the unreasonableness of the popish opinions, and some Protestants, for blind obedience, detected; and many other things discoursed. By a Protestant.	Protestant.; Collinges, John, 1623-1690, attributed name.	1675 (1675)	Wing E718; Wing C5314_CANCELLED; ESTC R214929	62,722	96

Understanding affirmeth neither part we wonder how it should Opine then § 10. This is a great point in Popery Jesuitisme especially and of no small gain to them for by this mea●● they can resolve Cases as they list absolve Mens Consciences as they please and Interpret the Law of God into a very pleasing consi●tency with the Lusts and Passions of all Men If it were admitted for true it would open a wide door for Men to do what they listed without any check or controul of Conscience There being but few things in practice which one Doctor or other under one Circumstance or other hath not judged Lawful There are few actions but are disputable saith Mr. Freeman in his Reasonableness of Divine Service p. 33. And if one or more Doctors affirm it lawful say the Popish Casuists the private Christian may assent to it as probably Lawful though at the same time from Artificial Intrinsick Arguments formed in his own Breast he judgeth it probably unlawful And we wish some professing themselves Protestant Divines did not cant after this Tune though it may be they will not as the Papists rest it upon the Opinion of one Doctor but many Learned Men if they did not a little linger after this we cannot tell what means their constant choaking of us with the bare Opinions of others contrary to ours in which surely we are no further concerned than as quickned by them to re-examine our own Intrinsecal Arguments more strictly § 11. We must declare our selves in the Negative of this Question and do affirm That it is Naturally impossible for a Rational Soul in a practical proposition to Judge that part from Extrinsecal in-artificial Arguments Probably Lawful which at the same time from Intrinsecal artificial Arguments formed in its own Breast it judgeth Probably Vnlawful and in this Judgment we are confirmed § 12. Because it is contrary to the innate Principles of a reasonable Soul 1. We suppose every one will without difficulty grant it a Principle of a Reasonble Soul To Conclude nothing but from Rational Foundations Reason is a Power within us Discoursing Conclusions from Principles It acknowledged there is a God and that he hath revealed his will in those Books which we call The Holy Scriptures and must acknowledge it the most reasonable thing imaginable that he should be acknowledged true in his word Hence it concludes many Propositions of Faith upon the bare Authority of God revealing them and exerciseth it self no further than to compare Spiritual things with Spiritual But having not that Evidence for other things it maketh use of inbred Notions and from those Principles raiseth Conclusions Now let us consider from what Principle it is possible that Reason should infer such a Conclusion as this That is probably Lawful for me to do which such or such Divines be they more or fewer more or less Learned think is Lawful or which Superiours require under that Notion notwithstanding any Artificial Intrinsick Arguments which make my own Conscience Judge it very probably unlawful It must be this Those Doctors or those Superiours know better than I. Doth Reason in a man allow any such conclusion Modesty indeed upon such an Account may make a reasonable Soul Jealous and Suspitious and to issue out a Writ for a better enquiry upon its Arguments but it is impossible that it should rest in such a Conclusion to guide its Practice where the hazard of the Eternal Felicity of a Soul is concerned Reason speaketh in the Language of Job to his Friends Job 12.3 I have Vnderstanding as well as you and be it what it will gradually compared with all the Doctors reason it is the Candle of the Lord set up in my Soul according to the Light of which I must walk Or in the words of Elihu Job 32.8 There is a Spirit in Man and the Inspiration of the Almighty gives him Vnderstanding Reason saith Bring forth your strong arguments and I will answer them or hear mine and do you answer me § 13. Besides Reason saith If this were belonging to all Doctors or all Superiours that Wisdom as Job saith must dye with them how is it they are not agreed amongst themselves Such and such are on my side if it doth not agree to all Superiours and all Doctors how shall I be assured that it more agrees to those on the adverse side than to those on my fide to Dr. Vasquez more than to Pope Adrian S. 14 Further saith Reason do not know and see that there are many Doctores who are not Docti and that many Learned men in all Ages have been in Factions doth not Dr. Vasquez himself tell me in 12. disp 62. Cap. 4. That he cannot deny but a whole rout of Doctors may embrace an Opinion without any Reason against whom saith he another Doctor of great Authority may bring into the Schools an Opinion maturely deliberated Vasquez need not be Credited if we did not upon Experience find daily that not one of many Doctors examines things but follows some Leader as diligently as Sheep do one another over an Hedge that many either understand not the true Question about which they will be Writing in this Age or of choice mistake it write far more passion than Divinity or Reason which made Vasquez some others of his Brethren deliver their Opinion That a Learned Man may act according to his own Opinion though contrary to the Opinions of other Doctors §. 15 Reason tells a Man that Reason is not entailed to the Relation of a Superiour or the Degree of a Doctor Animae rationales sunt aequales in perfectione Substantiali and Superiority or Doctorship make no difference Experience teacheth us that improvement by Study makes not a difference as to the Exercise of Reason between all Superiours and Inferiours nor between all those who are Doctors and no Doctors It remaineth therefore that the particular Reason of every Soul must stand up in defence of it self especially in matters of Practice as to which Eternal Salvation or Damnation are concerned so as it is not Naturally possible that a Reasonable Soul should from Forreign Authority conclude a thing probably Lawful which from its own Rational conclusions it judgeth probably Vnlawful § 16 But further yet certainly it is repugnant to the connate Principles of Reasonable Souls to assert contraries both at the same time to be true because it is of the Nature of contraries to destroy one another Now the Understanding which shall thus assert must at the same time speak these two things which are manifest contradictions This is Lawful This is not Lawful I think and Judge it Lawful because A B C D c. say so I think it Vnlawful because my own Reason comparing things Spiritual with Spiritual or concluding from confessed Principles tells me it is so Must not this be a very odd Soul that can Discourse after this rate Vasquez was aware of this and thought to avoid it by

in Case the thing Commanded us be by us Judged Lawful for that he beggs all along we ought not to forbear doing it because some of our Brethren would be grieved and teachy at it provided our doing of it laid no stumbling-block before them to give them Occasion to sin against God We would fain know what Non-Conformist ever said the contrary Thus Men Exercise themselves in Combates with fancied Enemies for really the Doctor hath none in this Case that ever we heard of The Second Part of his Book comes nearer what we last said and notwithstanding all he saith we do think That it is at least a Mute Case as they say in Law Whether the forcing any to Suffer because he cannot or dare not Act contrary to the Opinion of his Conscience guided by Arguments which to him appear probable be not Persecuting To pass by his other impertinencies allowing him to use a very true Method to try the issue in fixing the Notion of Persecution we there joyn Issue with him § 8. In his 44 p. he tells us Persecution is an Inflicting of outward temporal Evils for the Exercise of true Religion The Genus we agree and think he might have shortned the Description by leaving out Outward and Temporal because no Man can Inflict any other Evils upon his Brother The difference he makes to lye in those words For the Exercise of the True Religion But why might not our Saviours terms have been taken for Righteousness sake Yet if Religion be taken in the larger Notion of it for doing any part of our Duty in which we bounden to towards God we cannot fault the Description but this Description makes but the Major Proposition The Minor must be this But the Outward Temporal Evils Imprisonments Deprivation of Ecclesiastical preferments pecuniary mulcts Slanderings Revilings Reproachful speeches Inflicted upon Non-Conformists are not inflicted upon them for doing any part of that Duty wherein they are bounden to God There are very many Non-Conformists will put the Doctor to prove this and tell him It is a piece of Righteousness a part of true Religion and every Mans bounden Duty toward God not to Act contrary to what his Conscience Gods Vice-gerent in him tells him and that upon Arguments which appear very probable to him is Lawful And in Matters of Gods Worship also to do According to what his Conscience tells him is the Will of God he should do And we take Notice too of an Excellent passage in the Doctors Book p. 45. l. ult penult That God hath as much Right to appoint the way of his Worship as to be Worshipped A passage we are so much in Love with that it is one of our greatest Topicks to prove many things Commanded us probably unlawful Prayer is Worship Praying by Forms or by words formed first in our own Hearts is a way of Worship Now say we God hath as much right to prescribe the way as the Worship and hath done it As every Man hath received the gift saith the Apostle so let him Minister 1. Pet. 4.10 Praying and Preaching are Worship The doing these Acts in a peculiar Habit appropriated to these Actions is a way of Worship And God saith the Doctor hath as much right to appoint the way of his Worship as the Worship The like might be said of the other Ceremonies § 9. But suppose we allow the Doctors Description of Persection The next Question is how we shall know what is True Religion Who shall be the Judge Shall the Scriptures But who shall Interpret the Scriptures as to a Christians private Practice Shall the Superiours Then certainly there was never any Persecution in the World For it were very uncharitable to presume that any Superiour should punish another for the Exercise of what himself owned to be the true Religion We have more Charity for Bonner himself Shall the Inferiour be Judge what is true Religion Then I fear the Doctor will be cast many of them will say they are mischievously and violently Prosecuted Imprisoned Punished Reviled for what they Judge the Exercise of the True Religion § 10. The upshot of this Discourse is that who they be who are truly guilty of Persecuting will not be determined till the Day of Judgment when God shall determine which was the True Religion and whether Men truly ran those hazards because they were afraid of sinning against God In the mean time as to us he is Persecuted who can truly say That he suffers for doing any thing which he thinks he should sin against God if he did not do and for forbearing any thing which he truly ●●●n●s he should sin against God if he should do And we believe that those who thus Suffer though another day they shall be adjudged by God to have been in a mistake and so not Persecuted yet as to what they have done will be Judged guilty of no more than an Humane Infirmity §. 11 We have so much Charity as to believe that that Popish Priest who suffers according to the Law for Seducing If he can truly say that he did believe Gods Word Obliged him to do what he did may properly enough say he is Persecuted but we also believe that God will not Judge so another day and that the Magistrate doth but his Duty because by Gods Law none ought to be endured that entice others to Idolatry But whoso makes another to Suffer because he durst not sin against God Acting contrary to what his Conscience judgeth unlawful from probable Arguments we believe far less excusable because there 's no necessity upon him to lay any such Commands and enforce them by any such penalties But there does lye a necessity of suffering in this Case upon the Inferiour to avoid sinning against his Conscience whether his Conscience be in the right or in the wrong will be determined another day In the mean time he should sin if he should not hearken to it to avoid which he suffers which is so far as he can possibly Judge to suffer for Righteousness sake After the saying of which we think little more need be said to the Doctor 's Book § 12. To Conclude our Discourse upon this Question we have observed in all those almost who have wrote for Conformity great insisting upon the Authority of former and present Churches and the Testimonies of many Divines dead or alive some of which they tell us were Old Non-Conformists And this hath been the general Method of all late Writers almost to pass over all our and our Fore-Fathers Arguments and in Order to make us as odious to the World as they would have us to represent us as singular and differing from the Church in all Ages yea from our selves and our Fore-Fathers c. To what better purpose than this these in artificial Arguments are used we cannot tell unless those that bring them have a little tincture of the Jesuites Doctrine we before shewed at large That extrinsick Arguments may make