Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A56075
|
Protestancy destitute of Scripture-proofs
|
|
1687
(1687)
|
Wing P3817; ESTC R217047
|
5,943
|
12
|
Wine remains after c. But literally understood this Text is express that the Substance of Bread c. does not remain at all after Consecration For the Eucharist is Christ's Body and Blood which if substantially Bread and Wine it cannot really be A change less than that of the substance of the Elements is insufficient to render them really and truly what the Text says they are after Consecration V. Our Lord's Presence in the Eucharist is meerly gracious and influential and if more only to the Faithful If He learn'd from his Church what he Writes then this Tenet is Her 's For does not this Answerer assert our Lord's Eucharistical Presence not to be substantial therefore unless entirely absent our Lord must be present in the Eucharist by Grace and Influence only What is there besides Substance and Efficacy belonging to our Saviour's Body and Blood No Colour of Scripture is produced for this Zuinglian Proposition VI. Adoration of the Eucharist i. e. of our Saviour under the Species of Bread and Wine is Idolatry This blasphemous Tenet is taught by the Answerer's Church for did not the Majority of it's pretended Bishops vote for the Test Do not all of them take it Is not that Test a Canon of their General Council The Parliament But this Test declares our Adoration of the Eucharist which is the Adoration of nothing but Jesus Christ to be Idolatry Not one jot of Scripture does this Author produce in defence of this their Test and Doctrine VII All Christians whenever they Communicate are obliged to receive in both Kinds Nor for this point can a Scripture Command be discovered in the Answer tho the Thirtieth Article affirms that both parts of the Lord's Sacrament by Christ's Ordinance and Commandment ought to be ministred to all Christian Men alike VIII Chastity deliberately vow'd may be inoffensively violated This Proposition is a Doctrine of the Answerer's Church except His be not the same Church with Edward the Sixths or the thirty Second Article have now another sense than when composed by Cranmer For all Bishops and Priests then in the Western Church had deliberately vow'd Chastity and the Article says 't is lawful for them to Marry which certainly violates their Vow No Scripture is alledged justifying a Tenet so impure so perfidious IX All Christian Excellencies are Commanded Phil. 4.8 Is quoted as comprehending all Christian Excellencies If it do so yet unless besides comprehending it command them that Scripture will not prove the Tenet Nor can the Answerer conclude from the Mode of it's expression that It does command them because 't is common to an Exhortation as well as Precept as Protestants must confess who affirm Pasce Oves to be One The same Answer will serve for Be ye perfect And for to whom much is given of them much shall be required This imports that proportion not equality must be in our Accounts to our Abilities But how does this Scripture accord with this Author's Doctrine that we must always reckon the Heights and perfections of Vertues are commanded The Account corresponds to our Abilities so sure does the Command but all Abilities are not the same in all how then can God's Commands be so to all as they are if He always injoyns the Heights and perfections of Vertues unless perfections and Heights may have degrees which also makes little for this Author If to supererogate did signifie with Catholics to profit God then the Fourteenth Article condemning the Teachers of Works of Supererogation of Arrogance and Impiety had been solidly founded on when you have done all that are commanded to you say we are unprofitable Servants But we meaning no such thing the Article perverts Scripture X. Every Soul as soon as expired is convey'd to Heaven or Hell. The Parable of Dives and Lazarus and St. Paul's desire to be dissolv'd c. Our Author says look fairly towards this Tenet So they do if three Souls be All or All Souls expire in either Dive's fitness for Hell or Lazarus's and St. Paul's for Heaven XI Desiring the Intercessions of the Blessed is more Superstitious and Derogatory to our Lord's Mediator ship than intreating the Prayers of Holy Men Militant It is not at all in Scripture that our Saviour is our only Mediator of Intercession therefore this Proposition is not plain there If such an only Mediatorship of Intercession be plain in Scripture it had been easie and kind to have named such a plain Scripture Yet none is brought unless the Answerer meant Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God c. for such a one Truly I see not how he can deduce from it any thing to his purpose till it appear that all Prayer is divine Worship Or that we pray to Saints just as we do to God. XII Honouring the Cross the Reliques and Representations of our Lord and his Saints with that degree of Reverence as we do the Gospels commonly kiss'd and sworn by Altar and other Utensils is Idolatry Our General Councils tell Protestants we pay no other Honour to any Creature their Test and Homily call the Honour we pay to sacred Persons and Things Idolatry We must then either challenge Protestants to prove this Proposition or conclude them Calumniators We know what we profess and practise to be as the Catholic Church teaches We hear our Doctrine and Practice confidently said and solemnly subscribed to be Idolatry Sure then we may conclude that Protestants believe the Proposition and decent it is they give a Reason of a Faith so injurious to the Catholic Church or henceforward renounce it XIII The Pope is Antichrist Do only some Protestants and no Homily subscribed as containing a Godly and Wholesome Doctrine necessary for these times Article the Fifty Fifth affirm the Pope to be Antichrist Yet we meet with no Scripture brought to prove this Godly Necessary Doctrine XIV Every Prayer used in Divine Offices must be in a Language Vulgar and intelligible to every Auditor 1 Cor. 14. Is pretended to prove this Tenet when as the Apostle's mind is that whosoever had the Gift of a Tongue strange to all the Auditory should forbear to dictate therein Extempore Sermons Prayers c. containing Matter as well as the Tongue inspired into the Speaker I say this Gift of no use but used for ostentation in such a Case was to be reserved till either the Speaker or some Auditor could and did interpret that the rest might edifie Now will it follow from hence that all the setled Forms of Divine Offices to many of which there is no necessity that all specially joyn and intend be in the vulgar or intelligible to every Auditor It is enough to comply with the Apostles Doctrine that all new Extempore Prayers and instructive or exhortatory Discourses by actions ceremonies or circumstances or other way not interpretable be as they are in the vulgar But for the fixt Forms of Divine Offices that they be in a Language the most certain and the most
PROTESTANCY DESTITUTE OF Scripture-Proofs A Request was some time ago made to Protestants to produce for sixteen of their positive Tenets plain Scriptures Scriptures but so plain to Us for their Doctrines as they require to be yielded them by the Catholic Church for Her 's An Answer was return'd disclaiming some how consistently with their imposed Doctrines will be examined in due place and evading other of the Propositions alledging also Scriptures so perversely for such as are own'd that the Requester concluded the Pamphlet unworthy a public or special notice and expected if not more pertinent yet at least more plausible Replies to follow except Protestants who have hitherto boasted that Scripture is the Rule of their Faith meant their Profession should be exposed by silence or a silly Defence and for the future esteemed destitute of any Divine Evidence But since the Requester hears no better of the Matter and to prevent an Imagination that he acquiesces in the Answer as satisfactory He thinks it expedient to draw up a brief Remark upon it Those of the Thirty nine Articles which are opposed to Catholic Religion contain Affirmative Propositions or may be resolved into equivalent Affirmatives whereupon the Pretence of Negative Articles is a Subterfuge to escapâ— proving their Tenets But if it were true that their Faith contradictory to ours were concerning Negatives only yet this Plea seems insufficient to exempt Protestants from that Duty because tho for a Negative or every Non-Assent or Suspence of Assent a Reason may not be given or required yet for Belief a deliberate Act of the Mind for a solemn Profession Subscription and Swearing of that Belief whether it be of Negatives or Affirmatives a Reason may be assign'd and required Unless Belief may be without ground and motive unless Subscriptions and Oaths may be exacted of such as have neither Why nor Wherefore besides Authority for their compliance which Protestants explode as blind Obedience or unless that no Man be obliged to render a Reason of the Faith that is in him if he can convert his Opinions into equivalent Negatives As what Doctrine may not But does the Artifice of Negative Articles affect the Request proposing Affirmatives only If Protestants could prove their Doctrines this fencing and tergiversation about Negative Articles would not be imploy'd nor could They be kept from divulging their Plea. As trifling and defective is the Answerer's Definition of the Protestants Belief of Negatives for they believe if their Faith may be Collected from the Thirty nine Articles not only that the opposite Affirmatives are not in Scripture for they may not be there and yet be true but also that they are * Article 14.22.24.28 rather and plainly repugnant to Scripture and the Teachers of them arrogant impious c. which if they be they are false and Anti-christian Now to characterize Doctrines so ignominiously and when importuned to prove the slander by Scripture to shift off the Charge by saying Their belief of Negatives is only believing such a Doctrine is not in Scripture will not serve our turn that expect satisfaction by their either proving themselves no Calumniators or retracting their Calumnies Having said this to shew Protestants obliged to give Scripture Reasons for their Belief of Negatives had the Requester demanded them We pass to examine the Answers to the Propositions where we shall find no Scriptures produced for some of them and for the Rest none that conclude and prove that for which they are quoted The Propositions that Protestants should prove by Scriture are I. Scripture is clear in all Necessaries to every sober Enquirer Ps 119.105 and 1. it should be 2. Tim. 3.15 are brought to justifie this Tenet but had these Texts been truly quoted they do not reach the Proposition to be proved for if the Word of God were a Light to the Prophet David 's feet If all Scripture be given that the Man of God may be perfect yet a perspicuity of Scripture in all necessaries to every sober Enquirer cannot be deduced thence except every sober Enquirer be a Prophet or a Man of God or at least subject to such But this Notion of sober Enquiry involves the Catholic Doctrine of Submission of Judgment to Church Guides which would have prevented and quite overthrows all Protestancy And sure this Author intends not by sober Enquiry what spoils his Profession II. The Secular Prince hath all Spiritual Jurisdiction and Authority immediately from and under God. The Answerer behaves himself as if He were in apprehensions and durst neither own nor reject this Tenet The Reasons are obvious Yet at length He inclines towards it and thinks Rom. 13.1 proves it Indeed that Scripture either sounds too much or signifies nothing at all to his purpose If it proves what He thinks it proves more than He grants It proves ministring the Word and Sacraments to belong to the higher Powers It leaves this Author's Church no Rights independent no Jurisdiction inherent no Power inalienable unless ministring the Word and Sacraments be not a Soul-affair be no act of Power Pag. 18. in short it will invest every Prince with Spiritual Jurisdiction properly so call'd tho this Author says the Head of his Church has it not III. Justification by Faith alone viz. a Persuasion that we are justified is a wholesome Doctrine The Answerer says his Church does not teach this Tenet and we know some of his Communion have condemned it What then Are we any more bound to conclude thence his Church does not teach it than Protestants are from the Decrees of our General Councils and our constant Profession against a Doctrine they impute to us and to the Catholic Church that we and the Catholic Church hold not as they accuse us and Her to do Besides we must suppose His Church to teach now as She was taught and did teach in Edward the Sixths time when the Articles were devised by Cranmer But that Worthy and his Complices were constant Disciples of Luther in Crede fortiter c. Tho in Consubstantiation they deserted Him. Again not only the Antinomians plead the Doctrine of the Eleventh Article as the Parent of their Irreligion but the strictest Adherers to the Primitive Reformers in Doctrine the Puritans assert this Solifidian Parenthesis as the genuine and literal Sense of Justification by Faith alone and of the Eleventh Article The very same Doctrine was the first new Light bestow'd on the Apostle of the Reformation by the Prince of Darkness But this Author might have given us a Text asserting what He confesses his Church to teach viz. that Justification by Faith only is a most wholesome Doctrine and very full of comfort which intimates no necessity of Repentance to Justification none of the Sacraments c. IV. The Substance of Bread and Wine remains after what it was before Sacerdotal Consecration This is my Body is an express proof or the Answerer brings no Scripture proof That the Substance of Bread and