Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	catholic_n	church_n	communion_n	3,075	5	9.3276	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33770	Theophilus and Philodoxus, or, Several conferences between two friends the one a true son of the Church of England, the other faln off to the Church of Rome, concerning 1. praier in an unknown tongue, 2. the half communion, 3. the worshipping of images, 4. the invocation of saints / by Gilbert Coles.	Coles, Gilbert, 1617-1676.	1674 (1674)	Wing C5085; ESTC R27900	233,018	224

own party have done so Phil. But his second Argument is very considerable out of the Acts of the Apostles cap. 2. ver 42 They continued stedfasily in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of Bread and in Prayer Here saith he by breaking of Bread is meant receiving the Sacrament a Nemo ratione utens negare potest panem hoc loco esse Eucharistiam c. every one that hath reason must acknowledg it b Si cibus esset communis non jungeretur medio loco cum doctrina oratione otherwise had it bin common bread and refection it would not have bin put between the Apostles Doctrine and Praier Theoph. Altho I do not fear the Cardinals censure if I should deny it neither can he or any other make it more then probable that in that place by breaking of Bread is understood a Sacramental Action yet because it is probable both in this Text and in the 20 th Chapter of the Acts ver 7. Vpon the first day of the week when the Disciples came together to break Bread Paul preached Therefore some of our Divines do allow your Interpretation yet your Doctors conclusion will not hold That they received the Sacrament only in one kind altho the Bread only is express'd for here a part is put for the whole action of Communicating for mark you breaking of Bread was the Apostles or Priests act so to distribute it to the People and many other actions must concur to make up the Sacrament as Blessing and Consecrating and the like and you sind these are not express'd but implied and so also must consecrating the Cup be implied also for otherwise if the Apostles did Consecrate the Bread and not the Cup the Sacrament was null by the acknowledgment of your own Doctors They conclude the Consecration of both kinds necessary insomuch that c Part. 3. q. 74. art 1. ad 2. Nec propter desectum alterius est unum sine altere consecrandum Aquinas holds If one part of the Sacrament cannot be procur'd suppose it Wine the other part ought not to be Consecrated And he gives the reason Because the Sacrament would be imperfect And d Dispui 123. c. 30. Necessarium jure divinout ex disp Pentif c. Vasquez holds it necessary jure divino so that by the Popes Dispensation the Sacrament cannot be consecrated in one kind both in respect of the Sacrifice and the Sacrament We conclude therefore that the Apostles who did break Bread in these Texts to the People did before Bless and Consecrate it and after Consecrate the Cup and you cannot say they did not altho these things are not express'd Phil. I grant all this But how will you prove they gave the Cup to the People Theoph. It is your part to shew they did not otherwise you do not make good that the Sacrament was given only in one kind Now all your proof is because the Cup is not express'd as the breaking of Bread is And you know that it is a weak negative Argument and if allow'd it would over-throw your first Postulatum that by breaking of Bread is understood the Sacrament seeing many necessary actions to complete a Sacrament as you have heard are not express'd but only implied altho it is not express'd yet you take it for granted That when the Bread was broken it was bless'd and distributed and that the Cup likewise was consecrated And why will you not give me leave to take it likewise for granted that the Cup was given to them altho it be not express'd Doth the Expression of breaking the Bread exclude giving the Cup Phil. No but being express'd and the other not we may suppose the one without the other Theoph. What you may suppose I know not but this I am sure neither the Cardinal nor you can prove any thing against us out of these Texts And before I leave this passage I cannot but observe a contradiction of your practice unto this Expression of breaking of Bread which you make very much of as the denomination of the whole Sacramental Action and in some places we do not gain-say it and yet when you administer the Sacrament you do not break Bread you omit that significant Action which is express'd in our Blessed Saviors Institution and you give unto the People Wafers whole and single which cannot represent Christs Body bruisd and broken or the Peoples Communion of the same Loaf which S t Paul insists upon 1 Cor. 10. 17. We being many are one Bread and one Body for we all are partakers of that one Bread If you had not studied to go against Christs Institution you could not have omitted breaking of Bread and giving the Cup unto the People in the Sacrament Phil. You have an Art to amplifie and aggravate and to lay heavy things to our charge Theoph. I am solicirous for your sake that you may recover out of the snare and be timely sensible of your Error Tolet hath other Arguments as weak as Water to make good his impudent Assertion That in the Apostolic and Primitive Times the Church administred the Sacrament indifferently either in one or both kinds as she thought fit I shall meet with them in due place For I now proceed as I propos'd to shew the practice of the Church for many Ages both from the restimony of the Fathers and the Learn'd in every Age and from the acknowledgment of your own Doctors to give the Communion in both kinds unto the People according to the Institution of Christ and the Tradition of the Apostles Phil. You love to take that for granted which is the Question Whether Christs Institution and Apostolical Tradition be on your side For altho our Savior gave the Sacrament in both kinds to the Apostles it doth not appear he appointed them to administer it so unto the People as a rule unto succeeding Generations Theoph. The practice of the Church will best interpret the commands of Christ and duty of Christians If the Church Catholic for 1200 Years gave the Communion in both kinds thereby they declare the mind of Christ and our obligation to follow them Phil. We reverence the Autority of the Church and desire nothing more then your submission thereunto Theoph. I speak of Church Practice and you divert unto Church Autority As tho the Holy Fathers who gave the Sacrament in both kinds unto their Congregations did therein follow the Canons of the Church and not rather the Institutions and Command of Christ Phil. The Essential parts of the Sacrament we remit to Christ and his Institution but do believe the Church alwaies had power to appoint and alter Circumstances Theoph. Where Christ hath left them undetermin'd But more-over we account the Elements of Bread and Wine to be material and substantial parts of the Sacrament Instituted by Christ and therefore not to be accounted Circumstances and left to the determination of the Church But I perceive while you contend

Holy Scripture or Fathers speak of receiving Christs pretious Body and Blood for remission of Sins and the nurishment of our Souls you answer In one kind whole Christ is received and all his Benefits by a Concomitancy If we go further and prove the Elements were receiv'd distinctly by the People in the Apostles time and for so many Ages after You answer Vsu non praecepto they receiv'd it so by Custom and not by Precept Phil. Yes And upon this account we are not troubled with all your proofs of both kinds administred to the People so many Ages of the Church seeing afterwards that Custom generally ceas'd in the Western Church and the contrary Custom was introduc'd and confirm'd by three General Councils Constance Basil and Trent Theoph. 'T is truth in the 13 th Century giving the Cup unto the Laity began to grow out of use a Part. 3. Quaest 80. Art 12. Ex parte Sacramenti convenit ut utrumque sumutur c. Aquinas moves the Question Whether it be lawful to receive Christs Body without the Blood And concludes That in regard unto the Sacrament it self it was convenient that both kinds should be received because the perfection of the Sacrament consists in both but in regard unto the Receivers reverence and caution was required and that therefore in some Churches it was well observ'd not to give the Cup unto the People And yet before the same Aquinas had determin'd b Quaest 74. Art 1. Quantum ad effect in unoquoque sumentium Sae●●mentum hoc vales ad tuicionem c. As to the effect of every Receiver the Sacrament secures both Body and Soul and therefore the Body of Christ is offer'd for the salvation of the Body and the Blood under the Species of Wine for the Soul Phil. He saith 't is offer'd to wit by the Priest but not communicated to the People Theoph. Put the Proposition together it is this Bread and Wine are the Materials of the Sacrament requir'd in regard of the benefit and effect in every Communicate for the preservation of his Body and Soul by the Body and Blood of Christ Well Aquinas he starts the Question Whether it was lawful to receive in one kind and determins the Point very tenderly But after this Angelical Doctor as they call him the School-men follow the Cry with full Mouth That there is no Precept to receive in both and no prohibition to receive in one kind That upon many Considerations it is expedient to with-hold the Cup from the Laity That the Church hath power to order things of this nature and That after the express determination of the Church in some General Councils it is even become necessary to with-hold the Cup and an Heresie to dispute against it Now to prepare the World for this new practice of receiving only in one kind that so it might be entertain'd in some places and get ground and afford some plea of a Custom in the Church the School-men started some preliminary Questions and concluded That whole Christ was received under each kind and he that received only the Body of Christ received likewise his Blood and Soul and Divinity by a concomitancy 2 sy That the whole intent of the Sacrament as to the People all the Essentials thereof were communicated under the Species of Bread with the Body of Christ. 3 sy That he who received in both kinds had no advantage of those who receiv'd only in one kind Altho we find this last Thesis not so generally admitted among themselves yet such as oppose must not be peremtory least the People should be sensible of some injury don them in being depriv'd of that benefit which should be exhibited more in both kinds then in one Phil. By your own relation you give us opportunity to observe how they proceeded upon good grounds and in a rational way to make good their Thesis and their practice of the Communion in one kind Theoph. It was necessary they should say somthing to endere the People unto a compliance designing to cheat them of one half of the Sacrament they would impose upon their credulity and tell them the other half which they receiv'd was as beneficial as the whole Phil. You are not ignorant how they shew many good Causes and Considerations for their with-holding the Cup and notwithstanding your pretensions and claim to the practice of the Church for so many Ages on your side our Doctors shew it was always free to communicate in one kind or in both and shew the early practice of the Church for this half Communion as you call it and I hope you will now give me leave to put in their Plea Theoph. Content And if you can ballance those Autorities which I have brought I will yield the Cause Phil. I am glad to see in you some hopes of Moderation and that you will be rul'd by Reason and Autority Theoph. Taking Christs Institution and the Holy Scripture along with us Phil. 'T is suppos'd there is no express Precept of Christ to determine the Church in all Ages to give the Communion in both kinds and where the Church is left free she may use her liberty and determin as occasion serves Theoph. You beg the Question and we have urg'd Christs Institution and Example in giving the Sacrament in both kinds and his Command to them to do likewise We have urg'd the Traditions of St. Paul the practice of the Apostolical Tunes Phil. You have urged and we have answered and let the impartial Reader judg between us but besides these Instances of the Sacrament in one kind out of the Holy Scripture Luke 24. Acts 2. 42. and 20. 7. we have also Testimonies of the Primitive Church which speak on our side Theoph. We have prov'd our way abundantly by the practice of so many Ages do you so yours and then I will grant we are left free in this case every one to do as seemeth good in his eyes Phil. Not so neither when the Church hath restrain'd this liberty and forbid the Cup. Theoph. Whether your Church hath done better in the restraint then the Church for so many Ages before in allowing that Christian Liberty which you pretend for to receive in one or both kinds let the World judg but we deny any such liberty taken by the Church or allow'd by Christ to communicate in one or both kinds as the Church should please and we desire your proof Phil. First Bellarmin proves it lawful to communicate in one kind because the Church never condemn'd it Theoph. You should prove that they allow'd it But how should they condemn that which was not practic'd Could they divine a new Generation of Monks and Fryars should arise and perswade the People by subtlety and craft to lose their Spiritual Birth-right half the Legacy of Christ or rather the whole in a maim'd and undue Administration And moreover you have heard when the Manichees and other Heretics would have brought up this

not doubt but stedfastly believe That whole Christ his Body and Blood is contain'd under either Species of the Sacrament And therefore such a custom of giving the Sacrament in one kind introduc'd by the Church and the Holy Fathers and observ'd for a most long time let it be taken for a Law Theoph. The first part is warily penn'd c Tam sub Specie panis quam sub specie vini veraciter contineri We must stedfastly believe that whole Christ is verily contain'd as well under one Species as the other So it may be if it be in neither and so we hold Christ is contain'd in neither singly but he is signified and Sacramentally represented and really and spiritually exhibited by the Sacrament in both kinds unto the Faithful Receiver His Body that was broken for us is signified by breaking of Bread and his Blood shed by the Wine poured out of the Cup and separated from the Bread in the Sacrament and therefore at present we will dismiss this School nicety and by the Councils leave not take it for granted That whole Christ Body and Soul is in either Species Quod nullus Presbyter sub poena Excommunicat communicet Populum sub utraque Specie But the principal motive follows Seeing such a custom of giving the Sacrament in one kind hath been introduc'd and most long observ'd by the Church and Fathers we Decree it shall be taken for a Law which shall not be changed or reprobated without the Autority of the Church b Bin. Tom. 8. Concil Basil Sess 30. Sub qualibet Specie est integer totus Christus landab quoque consuet commun Laices c. The Council of Basil makes and confirms the same Decree upon the same Motives Whole and intire Christ is under either kind and the laudable custom of Communicating the Laity under one kind induc'd by Church and Fathers and hither to most long observ'd and approv'd by Doctors skilful in Gods Law and in the Holy Scripture and in Church Canons long since Let it be a Law c. Phil. Yes The Custom and Practice of the Church should prevail with sober Men not given to Faction especially when confirm'd by General Conncils Theoph. Why should not then the Custom and Practice of the Church which we have prov'd for so many Ages prevail for administring the Sacrament in both kinds especially being exactly conformable unto Christs Institution and Command and Apostolical Tradition Phil. Stay there We absolutely deny any command of Christ or of his Apostles or of the Church representative in a General Council to administer the Sacrament in both kinds and we shew two Councils forbidding it Theoph. You deny but the Scriptures affirm And the reason why no General Council determin'd the Sacrament to be in both kinds was because the Institution of Christ and the Tradition of the Apostles and the practice of the whole Church was so full and express for it It was never put to the Question as I can find until the 13 th Century and from that time when the School-men began to swarm most of them being sworn Champions of the See of Rome The laudable Custom as the Council speaks approv'd by Holy Fathers viz. Monks and Friers crept insensibly into the Church And this must be made a ground of Canons to establish the Communion in one kind and forbid the Cup and declare a Curse upon all those that shall dispute it And now when I shall declare the reason I hope your goodness will excuse that great trouble to my self and you in those numerous Quotations and Testimonies I have brought to prove the practice of the Church for 1200 Years in giving the Sacrament unto the People in both kinds It was chiefly upon this design to manifest the gross absurdity of those two Councils Constance and Basil who as you have heard do ground their Decree for one kind upon the laudable custom of the Church taken up not above 100 Years before against the Institution of Christ and the conformable practice of the Church for 1200 Years And withal to manifest their impudence in calling that a custom rationally introduc'd when such a Diutissime obs trifling Motives are brought to establish it And in saying it was diutissime observata for a long time observ'd when they cannot shew one clear Instance save in the Age immediatly before That the Sacrament was administred in public in one kind in any Christian Church Phil. It doth not become your Prudence and Moderation so to undervalue General Councils Theoph. Alass Those two pitiful Councils of Constance and Easil you may call them Oecumenical but you give no more Autority to them then you think fit As far as their Decrees suit the Genius of the Court of Rome they are confirm'd and no farther a Part. 2. Tom. 7. pag. 1134. Exparte Approbatum in iis quae consra Wicclesum c. Binius in his Notes upon the Council of Constance tells us It was approv'd in part in those Decrees against Wicliff Husse and Jerome of Prague But in the determination of the Autority of a General Council above the Pope it was abrogated by two General Councils of Florence and the Lateran b Bin. Tom. 8. S●ss 34. C●n● Basil Tan suum Sim●niacum perjurum incorig Scismaticum fide devium injurium bonarum Ecclesi●e p●●ditor●m So the Council of Basil deposing Eugenius the 4 th from his Papacy As a Simoniacal and per● jur'd Man an incorrigible Schismatic erring from the Faith injurious and betraying the Goods of the Church And choosing Amadeus Duke of Savoy Pope called Felix the fifth and Declaring That a Council is above the Pope and hath its Power immediatly from Christ Alas for these things this poor Council is hist off the Stage of the World c Sess 11. Bin in notis in Concil ●asil p. 526. Conciliabulum Schismat c. And in the Lateran General Council under Leo the 10 th It is call'd a Schismatical and Seditious Conventicle and altogether of no Autority And yet these are the Councils upon whose Aurority you so much depend to establish your half Communion and pronounce us all Heretical and Contumacious for not submitting our Reason and our Consciences thereunto even against the Scripture and against the Fathers of the Church Phil. But the General Council of Trent hath no Exception being held 18 years and confirm'd by Pope Pius the fourth and subscrib'd by his Cardinals as appears by the Bull of Confirmation See the Council of Trent set forth in Latin by John Gallemart D. D. and Professor at Douey Theoph. Of the Council of Trent read the History of Father Paul a Frier at Venice a Man of Learning Judgment and Piety beyond compare and there you will find what just cause the World ●ath to decline the Autority and Decrees of that Cabal That great Ecclesiastical Body whose Soul and Spirit was at Rome receiving day by day Orders and Directions and

Determinations from thence in a Portmantle The Bishops and Fathers of the Council were acted more by Reasons of State and Principles of Policy then of Piety and consulted the Pope and the Conclave at Rome more then the Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church And withal you have no reason to urge us of England with the Autority of the Trent Council when none of our Bishops were there except only one fugitive And as I take it our Potent Neighbors of France have not yet accepted that Council and withal the Council is of too late an Edition to bear up its Autority against the consent and practice of so many Ages of the Church And therefore being now grown weary of the Controversie be pleas'd to answer this Question and we will conclude Why doth the Church persist so stifly to maintain the Communion in one kind against so many advantages we have shew'd and you must acknowledg on the other side especially seeing in the Council of Trent it was so much desir'd by the Emperor Charles the Fifth and by the Princes and People of Germany well affected so to make up the breach and keep many from falling away from the Church of Rome that the Council of Trent would allow the Communion in both kinds yet we find it was not granted but referr'd wholly to the Popes determination who never had leisure to take his infallible Chair and determine that Controversie Phil. To speak freely The Fathers of that Council and the Pope with his Cardinals at Rome in their Wisdom did well perceive that such as moved for the Communion in both kinds were dis-affected to the Church and made this a specious bait to catch the People They saw their Concessions in this plausible case would but make way for many complaints more and grievances to be redress'd You know not long before the Germans publish'd in Print their first a Centum gravamina Century of Grievances every Article being as a Libel against the Church Hereupon they thought it the wisest course to justifie the former Councils and stand upon their Autority and require subjection from the true Sons of the Church and as for Heretics and Schismatics either to subdue them by subtlety and force or else to slight them Theoph. This Observation of yours confirms many Passages we read of Bishops b Joannes Baptistà Hosius Episcopus Rbeatinus Lib. 4. Gonc Trid. Sess 2. Ecclesia nunquam consueverit vel minimum indulg heriticis c. in that Council giving their Vote upon the Question who mightily oppos'd the allowance of the Cup and urg'd That the Church was never observed to give the least Indulgence unto Heretics but to establish that which was diametrically opposite to their Positions c Andreas Cu●sta Episcopus Legionensis Another Bishop seconds this Opinion with the Example of the first General Council of Nice wherein those 318. Holy Fathers would not yield one tittle to the Arrians altho Constantine desired moderation and the Controversie had well nigh set in a flame the whole World d A verbis commoda interpretatione molliendis ex composito abstinuerunt Nay saith he they studiously rejected many Words and Expressions of the Arrians which were capable of a convenient Interpretation And thus you see with what intolerable Impudence they accounted their Christian Brethren as Heretics for following the plain Institution of Christ The Arrians found no favor in the Council of Nice from those Orthodox and Godly Fathers nor the least degree of complyance neither must the Protestants in Germany from the Council of Trent But there was somthing more in the Wind that hindred the Reformation of the See of Rome namely this That if upon the complaint of Nations and People the Pope should reform abuses especially such as had been Decreed in Councils It would be a tacite acknowledgment that the Church of Rome had solemnly erred in making such unjustifiable Decrees and so the jealous People would begin to suspect and examine all her Determinations and be easily perswaded by their Schismatical Guides that in many things the Church had miscarried and Bills of exceptions and complaint would be put up one after another as the interest and malice of her Adversaries should contrive them and therefore the safest way was ever found for the Church of Rome to stand upon her Justification against the clamors of the whole World and to put Princes in mind of their Obedience to the Church and the Obligation that lies upon them by force of Arms to subdue their contumacious Subject's and make them submit unto Rules and Disciplines of the Churches This was the sum of that smart Council which Cardinal Soderine gave unto Pope Adrian when the good old Man was much perplex'd with the Complaints and Demands of the German Princes and their People against the corruptions chiefly of the Court of Rome His Piety and Simpllcity and good Nature being not well vers'd in the Politics of Rome promted him to endeavor satisfaction and reform all such Abuses as might give just occasion of offence and grievance to their Adversaries About this great Work of Reforming he consults the Conclave and the necessity of the Times and the public Scandal of Abuses induc'd many of the Cardinals to advise a Reformation of many things which were in question But at last the subtle and experienc'd Cardinal Soderinus who had been vers'd in the Affairs of Christendom under three active Po●ds Alexander and Julius and Leo the 10 th turns the Scale of their Votes and absolutly disswades any appearance or attemt of a Reformation He rolls them That ne●er any Pope with his Cardinals before thought that a co●●enient way but rather by the Interest of Princes and the power of the Sword to suppress and extirpate unquiet and schismatical Spirits That no Pope cut off Heresies by a Reformation a Sed cruciatis quas vocant excitatis contra 〈◊〉 Princibus Populis Crucis simbolo in signitis but by the ●rucrats as they are call'd the Princes and People being stirr'd up against them wearing the badge of the Cross upon their Coat of Arms. Phil. I must confess Experience hath found this way the surest for so Pope Innocent the 3 d supprest the Albigenses in France and Charles the fifth the German Protestant Princes Theoph. But thro the Providence of God you find the Lutherans are yet alive in Germany and several Princes together with their Subjects reform'd themselves in spight of all opposition protesting against those Errors which the Church of Rome intends to justifie only by the Sword and by the Inquisition and the lower you draw your Observation the more success you will find God hath given unto many Kingdoms and People against the Tyranny and Innovations of Rome Phil. The Judgments of God are a great deep and you may not enter into his Secrets and judg of Truths by the Success Theoph. No my design only was to confute