Early English Books Online 2
 All Digital Collections  spacer  Login  
 
Add to bookbag
Author: Rushworth, William.
Title: The dialogues of William Richworth or The iudgmend [sic] of common sense in the choise of religion.
Print source: The dialogues of William Richworth or The iudgmend [sic] of common sense in the choise of religion.
Rushworth, William.
Printed at Paris: By Iohn Mestais, 1640.
Alternate titles: Dialogues Dialogues of William Richworth or The iudgmend of common sense in the choise of religion. Dialogues of William Richworth or The judgmend of common sense in the choise of religion. Dialogues of William Richworth or The judgment of common sense in the choise of religion. Judgment of common sense in the choise of religion.
Notes:
William Richworth = William Rushworth.
The first leaf is blank.
Reproduction of the original in the Bodleian Library.
Subject terms:
Religion -- Philosophy -- Early works to 1800.
Faith -- Early works to 1800.
URL: https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A11187.0001.001
How to cite: For suggestions on citing this text, please see Citing the TCP on the Text Creation Partnership website.

Table of Contents
View entire text
title page
TO THE READER.
THE APPROBATION.
The Printer's ignorance of the English tongue hath caused manie errors in the print, amongst others these
THE FIRST DIALOGVE. What pointes of controuersie in matters of Religion are to be Knowne of necessitie?
This Dialogue containeth 12. parts or paragraphes.
THE INTRODVCTION.
Whence proceedeth and depen∣deth the necessitie of kno∣wing pointes of Religion?
That the pointes wherein the Arrians and other Antient Heretikes differed from Ca∣tholikes are pointes of ne∣cessitie to be knowne and be∣lieued.
The beliefe af the Hierarchie established by Christ in his church likewise of necessitie.
That the administration of the sacraments by the Hierar∣chie is of such great necessitie?
The resolutions of Generall Councells be sufficient to deci∣de controuersies of faith, both in pointes of necssitie, and of indifferencie
That the maintenance of the vnitie of the church is of extreme great necessitie?
Whether some pointes may not be of necessitie in a lower de∣gree, as in particular the vse of pictures or Images?
The honnoring of Saincts, their Canonization, and of the in∣stitution of Religious orders, are they likewise necessarie in this same degree?
That the Sacraments of order and Matrimonie, the Gene∣ralitie of Ceremonies, or the opinion of miracles are neces∣sarie?
Praying for the dead, Extreme vnction, and Confession are necessarie?
That good institutions are not to be giuen ouer for smale incon∣ueniences, that the abuses are to be mended not the things taken awaie, and therefore that the partie which broke communion is to returne to the other.
Whether scripture alone is fit and able to decide controuersies in Re∣ligion?
table of contents
The Introduction.
Whether tradition for scripture be of as great force as it is for pointes of doctrine?
That tradition for scripture is more vniuersall then traditiō for doctrine.
The text of scripture can haue remained incorrupted or no.
What vncertaintie the errours of writers and copists hath bredd in scripture?
What vncertaintie the multipli∣citie of translations haue bread in scripture.
Whether the verie rehearsing and citing of an others words doe not breede varietie and vncertaintie?
The vncertaintie of equiuocatiō which of necessitie is incident in all writings.
That there riseth an vncertain∣tie out of this that the scripture was written in lan∣guages now ceassed.
What vncertaintie followeth the two particular languages of Hebrew and Greeke whe∣rein the scripture was writ∣ten.
That the verie nature of the bookes of scripture is not fit∣ting to decide controuersies.
Which be the wayes or manners of iudging pointes of Religiō out of the scripture.
How scripture doth determine controuersies?
What laws are requisite for dis∣putation out of scripture?
An other manner of disputing out of scripture.
THE THIRD DIALOGVE. By what meanes Controuersies in Reli∣gion may be ended.
This Dialogue containeth 15. parts or paragraphes.
The Introduction.
What force the arguments of Protestants against Catholi∣kes in this question ought to haue?
Standing in likelyhood the partie be greater, more learned, and more ver∣tuous.
The force and efficacitie of these your discourses and persuasiōs.
That it is no hard matter that Christ's law should haue des∣cended entire vnto vs.
That if Chrest's law could haue beene conserued it hath beene conserued.
That noe great errour could cre∣epe into the church of God.
That the truth of Christian do∣ctrine hath actually conti∣nued in the church.
That the dissention of Catholike Doctor concerning the rule of faith doth not hurt the cer∣taintie of Tradition.
The teaching of Christian do∣ctrine without determining what is of necessitie to be be∣lieued what not, hurte's not the progresse of tradition.
Why no errour can passe vniuer∣sally through the church of God.
Of what qualitie you thinke the∣se your reasons and discourses be, and whether you conceiue them to beare an absolute cer∣taintie?
Some cheefe and short obiections may be solued.
The examples of Tradition which seeme to haue failed.
The cōclusion of all our discourse.