Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	article_n	church_n	true_a	3,598	5	5.1162	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49107	An answer to a Socinian treatise, call'd The naked Gospel, which was decreed by the University of Oxford, in convocation, August 19, Anno Dom. 1690 to be publickly burnt, as containing divers heretical propositions with a postscript, in answer to what is added by Dr. Bury, in the edition just published / by Thomas Long ...	Long, Thomas, 1621-1707.	1691 (1691)	Wing L2958; ESTC R9878	172,486	179

omits that the Word was God that it was in the bosom of the Father ought to be explained with respect to this express Declaration of the Saviour of the World so that if he said he was the Son of God it was because the Father had sanctified him and sent him into the World and according to this Passage I may says he lawfully explain any other Passage wherein Christ is called God or Son of God for they are all taken from the Economy or Ministry of Christ We shall meet this Gentleman again anon in the mean time we must not be uncivil to the Doctor who hath been so civil as to grant That Christ was first sanctified and afterward sent whereas others were first sent into the World the common way and afterward sanctified To them God sent his Word by their Betters but it is not sent to me by my Betters but by me to my Inferiors Now if Christ were first sanctified and then sent into the World then he had a Being before he came into the World and that Being must be as a Creator or a Creature or a middle Nature a made God as the Arians call him the Arians say more That he was God's Instrument or Agent in creating the World which is so evident in the Scripture that no Man of sence can deny that diligently reads John 1. Colos 1. and Heb. 1. Now if God to qualify him for so great a Work as that of the Creation did communicate to him the great Attributes of Divine Wisdom Omnipotence and Omnissience which are Infinite why might he not communicate to him also that other Attribute of his Eternity in his Generation But to come to the Doctor 's Argument viz. That Christ spake nothing to the Jews of what he was from Eternity in himself but what he was in relation to the World Doth not the Doctor grant he was first sanctified and then sent into the World And what is that Sanctification but his being ordained by God to be the Redeemer and Saviour of the World So Crellius says l. 1. sect 2. c. 31. To sanctify signifieth in Scripture to separate one and choose him to a singular Office Now Christ by an everlasting Decree was set apart to be the Lamb slain as an All sufficient Sacrifice for the Sins of all Mankind his Sanctification or Ordination to the Office of a Redeemer was by that Decree of which the Psalmist gives us a Copy Psal 2. I will declare the decree the Lord hath said to me Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee which the ancient Jews affirm to be spoken of the Messias And the Hodie the day was from all Eternity for the Redemption of Mankind could not be effected but by an Infinite Price as Scripture teacheth The Argument urged by our Doctor and the Socinians is That our Saviour on so pressing an occasion ought to assert his Right yet spake nothing of what he was from Eternity So Crellius and our Doctor But we affirm that our Saviour was not obliged so to do on this occasion it was sufficient for him to clear himself from the Accusation of being a Blasphemer which he doth by an Argument out of their own Law which may be thus illustrated The Doctor stiles himself A true Son of the Church of England to which it may be said that he being an Arian or Socinian doth blaspheme i. e. speaks evil of the Church of England in making himself who is a Socinian a true Son of that Church which owns no such for her Sons that are of that Belief Now how will the Doctor vindicate himself from this Accusation will he say I was baptized into the Faith of that Church in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost I was for Twenty five Years a Professor of Divinity in that Church a Rector of Exeter-Colledge This would be an impertinent Argument for there have been many of that Church which are gone from it some to the Church of Rome others to Socinian Conventicles the most proper Argument would have been to shew that in our Law the Articles of our Religion our Litany and Homilies the Arrian Religion or Socinian Religion asserted or that neither in his Writings or Sermons he hath affirmed any other Doctrine than what is established in that Church for the Question is not concerning the Dignity of his Person or his Birth or Qualifications but whether he be a true Son of that Church and can shew the consonancy of his Faith to that of the Church of England This was our Saviour's Argument to vindicate himself from the Jews Accusation who accounted him a Blasphemer in that he being a Man made himself the Son of God he doth not argue from his being the Son of God or from his doing such Works as no other Man did but proves from their Law wherein the Title of God is given to Men that were inferiour to him viz. to Princes Priests and Prophets he was not concern'd to tell them whether he was the Son of God by distinguishing between a Son of God by Nature and a Son by Office he doth not deny but still asserts the first both before v. 30. I and my Father are one and after ver 38. The Father is in me and I in him And his being sanctified and sent into the World proves the same viz. that he was the Son of God for otherwise God sent not his Son and sanctified him before he came into the World but first sent him into the World and then sanctified him to be his Son which though contrary to what the Doctor grants from the Text yet the Socinians generally deny and ascribe his Sonship to his Birth his Baptism Unction to his Office his Resurrection and Exaltation on any thing but his Eternal Generation and Ordination to be the Saviour and Redeemer of the World for which Office all the Angels of God were not sufficient And now we return to the thoughtful Gentleman This Gentleman thinks to thrust home this Argument to the Ruin of the Catholick Doctrine For he says it is written with the Finger of Truth and unanswerable p. 3. col 2. But that the Orthodox are wont to swallow all sorts of Contradictions and to cast dust in the eyes of the simple This Reproach notwithstanding we will go hand in hand with him in search of that Truth which this Scripture propounds for we are agreed that our Saviour delivers his Doctrine in profound Wisdom having regard to the Circumstances of Place Time and Person by these Particulars we shall examine the Text laying down this general Observation That St. John was desired by the Church of Ephesus who were pestered with the Heresies of the Gnosticks Ebion and Cerinthus who denied the Deity of the Son of God and ascribed the Creation to certain Aeones or Angels denying it to be ascribed to Christ both which Errors he particularly refutes 1. Then consider the Persons with whom he had to

Imprimatur March 30 1691. Z. Isham R. P. D. Hen. Episc Lond. à Sacris AN ANSWER TO A Socinian Treatise CALL'D The Naked Gospel WHICH WAS Decreed by the University of Oxford in Convocation August 19 Anno Dom. 1690. to be Publickly Burnt as containing divers Heretical Propositions WITH A POSTSCRIPT in Answer to what is added by Dr. Bury in the Edition just Published By THOMAS LONG B. D. One of the Prebendaries of St. Peter's Exon Contra rationem nemo Sobrius contra Scripturam nemo Christianus contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit August de Trinitate l. 4. c. 6. Sanctius reverentius visum est de actis Deorum credere quam Scire Tacitus London Printed by Freeman Collins and are to be Sold by Randal Taylor near Stationers-Hall 1691. TO THE Right Reverend Father in GOD JONATHAN By Divine Permission Lord Bishop of EXON I May justly fear that in the Dedication of these Exercitations I have done as some inconsiderate Persons who seek to excuse a less by committing of a greater Offence It was I confess a great Presumption that I prefixt your Lordship's Name to a Hasty Scrible against the Crime of Persecution charged on the Church of England and now I presume upon your Lordship's Patience and Patronage in a Case of greater Importance it is not a Scandalum Magnatum nor any of the Plea's of a Temporal Crown but a Crime Laesae Majestatis an Overt Attempt to overthrow the Crown and Kingdom of our Blessed Saviour as if he also were a King de Facto and not de Jure which I now lay before your Lordship it is the Crown and Dignity of him in whose Person and Due Worship and Honour our common Salvation is wrapt up The Sanction of our Law viz. de Heretico comburendo was I confess too severe but if there be not some Powerful Restraint laid on such Damnable Heresies as deny the LORD that bought them the Sons of Belial will not forbear to deny him on Earth with a Non Obstante to our Saviour's threatning Him will I deny before my Father which is in heaven The Ecclesiastical Laws are but as Bruta Fulmina to such as wilfully Excommunicate themselves and unless the Temporal Power supply the Defects of the Spiritual we are like to run into a worse Confusion than hitherto we have this sort of Men being as great Enemies to the one as to the other Ruarus who incurred a Banishment for his Socinianism though as modest as any of them in a Tract of Magistracy printed with his Epistles p. 461. says The times may be such and if we consider the state of all Ages and Nations they have been and still are such that it is more hard for a Christian to discharge the Office of a Magistrate especially of a Supreme than for a rich Man to enter into the kingdom of heaven They are for an Independent Ministry no Friends to either of our Lord's Institutions the Sacraments of Infant Baptism and the Eucharist and though while they are under the Power of the Civil Magistrate they plead for an enlarged Charity yet if at any time they get the Sword to hang at their sides their Cruelty will be much more extensive This I speak the more positively because First Their Principles lead them to it for if the Papists with whom we agree in the chiefest Articles of Religion be such implacable Enemies as to design the utter Extirpation of our Church how much more will the Socinians who condemn us as Polytheists and Idolators for worshipping those whom they account meer Creatures execute their Fury on us But 2ly their Practices have abundantly declared their Inveterate Malice for when one Arian Presbyter had drawn Constantius to be of his Opinion I tremble to relate what Havock was made in the Church and before that time under Dioclesian having gotten the Donatists and other Hereticks to strengthen their Party they committed more Outrages on the Catholicks than Dioclesian himself though that was the fluctus Decumanus the most impetuous Wave that overflowed the Church I shall give a brief Account from a Witness above all Exceptions Vincent Lirinensis Ch. 6. Contr. Her with whom St. Augustine agrees in his Discourses against the Arians Vol. 7. and Socrates l. 2. c. 10. l. 4. c. 13. and Sozomen l. 3. c. 6. the words of Vincentius are these Cùm prophana ipsa Arrianorum Novitas velut quaedam bellona aut furia Capto prius omnium Imperatore cuncta deinde Palatii culmina legibus novis subjugasset nequaquam deinceps destitit Universa Miserere atque vexare privata publica sacra prophanaque omnia nullum boni veri genere descrimen sed quoscunque collibuisset tanquam deloco superiore percutere tunc temeratae conjuges depopulatae viduae prophanatae Virgines monasteria demolita desturbate clerici verberati Levitae acti in exilium sacerdotes oppleta sanctis ergastula carceres Metalla quorum pars Maxima interdictis urbibus protrusi atque extorres inter deserta spleluncas feras saxa nuditate fame siti affecti contrite tabe facti sunt Atque haec omnia nunquid ullam aliam ob causam nisi utique dum pro caelesti dogmate humanae superstitiones introducuntur dum bene fundata antiquitas scelesta novitate subruitur dum superiorum instituta violantur dum rescinduntur scita patrum dum convelluntur definita Majorum dum sese intra sacratae atque incorruptae veritatis castissimos limites prophanae ac novellae curiositatis libido non continet This one Testimony of so good an Author is enough to make us abhor the Authors of the Arian and much more of the Socinian Heresie which is more Impious and guilty of the greater Blasphemy the more sacrilegious Novelty and of such intollerable Pride and Contempt of all Mankind but themselves even while they are under severe Laws that I believe if their Power were equal it would be as well for our Temporal as Spiritual Condition to live under the Roman as the Racovian Harrows The Statute 29 Car. 2. which abrogated that De Heretico Comburendo declares That it doth not take away or abridge any Iurisdiction of Protestant Archbishops Bishops or other Iudges of his Majesty's Ecclesiastical Courts in Causes of Atheism Blasphemy Heresie Schism or other Damnable Doctrines or Opinions but they may proceed to punish the same according to the Ecclesiastical Laws by Excommunication Deprivation Degradation and other Ecclesiastical Censures not extending to Death So as before the Act the Learned Judge Hales in the beginning of his Plea's of the Crown gives an Account of the manner of Conviction of Hereticks which he says is First By the Common Law Whereof he gives some Instances Secondly By Archbishops and Bishops in a General Synod Thirdly By the Bishop in his Diocess The Common Law he says inflicts no Forfeiture neither indeed doth the Ecclesiastical if the Criminal abjure his Opinions being pro salute Animae but if he

baptized shall be saved And this Covenant Dat quod Jubet it assists us in willing and doing what is required Heb. 8.6 'T is a better Covenant established on better Promises And Heb. 8.10 and Rom. 16. This is my Covenant I will put my Law into their hearts and write them in their minds and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a People and I will be merciful to their unrighteousness and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more But he commends especially the Character of the Gospel as a Message and so makes our Saviour only an eminent Prophet that came to advance the Natural Religion a little higher than other Prophets had done his design being no other than to advance Natural Religion to a higher perfection by nobler Precepts and richer Promises as he says This is no more than what the Turks will grant in Honour of our Saviour But there is another Notion of the Gospel more common than the other two though purposely omitted by the Doctor which is as we render it the New Testament of our Saviour who was not only as Socinus saith a Witness of that Testament but the Testator himself that Testament whereby Christ makes us Heirs of all that he hath purchased for us that Testament which was sealed by his Blood and took effect by his Death and Resurrection for the Salvation of all that believe in him and obey his Commandments Grotius on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 makes it parallel with the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he says is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to kill or cut down But as he observes the Gospel is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Covenant in a strict sence wherein two Parties do mutually Covenant but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Will or Testament of a Superiour who adds Rewards to the performance of his Will and it is called the New Testament being a Covenant of Grace not of Debt upon our Works but Mercy upon our Faith So that Grotius concludes the most proper Notion of the Gospel is that of a Testament by which the Heir is obliged under certain Conditions and by way of a Trust reposed in him and he defines it to be the Will of Christ confirmed to us by his Death whereby we have a Right to all his Promises on performance of his Commandments But the Doctor carefully avoids any word that might imply the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction and therefore as he wholly suppresseth that of a Testament which hath its effect from the Death of the Testator as our Saviour often calls it the New Testament in his Blood Luke 22.20 1 Cor. 11.25 so he slights that of a Covenant as being wont to be confirmed by the Death of the Sacrifice for in all Languages Hebrew Greek and Latin as well as in English to strike a Covenant imported the Sanction of it by shedding of Blood and prefers the Notion of a Message as if Christ had done no more for us than Moses or any of the Prophets i. e. only declared the Precepts of God which is pure Socinianism Chap. 1. p. 1. Col. 2. he says The design of the Gospel is no other than the advancement of Primitive Natural Religion to a higher perfection for which he alledgeth those words of St. John 1 Joh. 1.3 These things we write unto you that you may have fellowship with us c. The Patriarchs knew only the Father but our Fellowship is with the Father and the Son as therefore in the face of Jesus Christ we see more of the Father's goodness so are we thereby obliged to higher strains of love to him and one another which is the sum of Natural Religion And again p. 2. Col. 1. The design of the Gospel is to exalt us to the highest perfection of the Natural Law by making us perfect as our Father which is in heaven is perfect This is the Authentick General Test says he whereby every Doctrine must be tried that claimeth our entertainment as a Gospel truth And thus he equalleth Moral Vertue with Cristian Faith and teacheth Pelagianism which makes the strength of Natural Endeavours sufficient to Salvation without the special Grace of Christ as if that were not necessary to humble us in the sense of our Sins to mortifie our Lusts inlighten our Minds subdue our perverse Wills and purifie our Hearts they may be good Moral Men that conform to the Rules of Reason but no good Christians unless they are assisted by the Grace of the Holy Spirit they may have a form of Godliness but not the power thereof He greatly extols Natural Religion affirming That the Faith which the Gospel requires had its Foundation in Natural Religion Natural Faith as he says is proposed as the Mother of Evangelical p. 14. c. 2. p. 14. Col. 2. I have proved saith he that Faith in God is a Duty of Natural Religion a Moral Vertue a participation of the Divine Nature in one of God's Attributes his Justice to be valued as self-good c. P. 1. Col. 2. He makes the Law of Nature the Foundation on which the New Covenant so leaneth as to be kept firm in its place I fear that the Reason of his thus extolling Natural Religion is because that in its highest perfection it can attain only to the knowledge of the Unity of the Godhead though in the depraved State of Nature Men generally worshipped many False instead of the One true God but this Natural Religion suits better with the design of Arius than of the Gospel and therefore the Author espouseth and magnifies it He adds That as Abraham is proposed as the Father of the faithful Natural Faith is also proposed as the Mother of Evangelical Here therefore we must enquire whether the Faith of Abraham were meerly a Natural Faith and he had no Revelations that begat and strengthened his Faith The Arians grant that as our Saviour says Before Abraham was I am that Christ was before the Creation of the World the Lamb slain from the beginning that by him the World was made yet the Doctor declareth his opinion that the Patriarchs had the knowledge of God the Father only but it is like that of Abailardus contrary to the opinion of all other Doctors of the Church and the tenor of the Scriptures for how then is it said that Abraham rejoyced to see my day and saw it the day of his Incarnation in Isaac's wonderful Conception his Death and Resurrection in Abraham's readiness to sacrifice him and God's delivering him from death from whence Abraham received him in a Figure or Type of Christ Hebr. 11.19 Tertullian thus expounds that place That as Christ being a man was after Abraham so as God he was before Abraham and as being a man he was the son of David but as God he was David 's Lord as man he was born into the world as God he made the world Tertul. de