Selected quad for the lemma: body_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
body_n	church_n	head_n	visible_a	10,670	5	9.6541	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A73011	Looke beyond Luther: or An ansvvere to that question, so often and so insultingly proposed by our aduersaries, asking vs; where this our religion was before Luthers time? VVhereto are added sound props to beare vp honest-hearted Protestants, that they fall not from their sauing-faith. By Richard Bernard, of Batcombe in Sommersetshire.	Bernard, Richard, 1568-1641.	1623 (1623)	STC 1956.3; ESTC S123041	43,757	64

to true Councels Can an ordinarie man then iudge of these things And if he cannot let him not be deceiued by pretence of them II. Touching the ancient Fathers this they must know that they are found to be of differing opinions and had contentions among themselues that they held not their owne iudgements infallible nor submitted to one another otherwise then men godly and learned doe now but onely as by good reason and authoritie they were ouercome that they haue erred and this is acknowledged by most learned men on both sides that our aduersaries of the greatest note do often shake off their authoritie when they are against them that of the Fathers writings some are doubted of some are corrupted and many counterfeites are put out vnder their names that the iudgement of all the Fathers cannot be had for all our controuersies These things being so how idle is it then for ordinarie men to be talking of Fathers of the opinion of all the Fathers or for any such men to be carried away with such a sound which is not possible for them to vnderstand seeing our aduersaries alleage them for their selues and we more truly for our selues III. Concerning the Churches custome and path in euerie age let them consider that this is very vncertaine Historians haue not alwaies in euery relation bin found faithfull that euerie Age hath not had in it such as haue truly written of the Church that a man may spend his whole life in seeking out the whole Churches course and yet not be able to find it out I suppose I erre not if I say that all men now liuing cannot do it exactly in euery Age. And therefore it s but a gulling flourish of our aduersaries to boast of the whole Church in euery Age and yet withall so boasting fraudulently to meane their owne particular Romane Church By alleaging then these arguments to wit Councels Fathers and the generall custome of the whole Church the conscience of an ordinarie Christian cannot bee throughly satisfied his knowledge cannot herein bee certaine to conuince his iudgement these are beyond his reach and capacitie Be aduised therefore not to be drawne with these reasons which are to thee so vncertaine but rest vpon the other which be plaine and easie within thy capacitie and certaine vnto thee by which thou mayst through Gods helpe maintaine that which thou professest and confute the aduersaries vntruths or at least gather thence such strength as they shall not easily draw thee to beleeue them as for instance in some particulars I wil shew thee They say that the Pope is the head of the Catholike Church There is no plaine Scripture for this We find Iesus Christ to be called the Head of the Church but no other It s no Article of our Creed therefore thou art not bound to beleeue it But I adde this that what we beleeue is inuisible Heb. 11.1 and not seene 2. Cor. 5.7 If therefore the Pope be the Head there must be a visible head of an inuisible body Againe the head immediately giues life motion and direction to its true body which the Pope cannot doe to Christs Church It s also vnreasonable to thinke two heads to bee for one body whether one besides another or one vnder another it is a monstrousity Common experience testifieth against the Popes inabilitie to performe the true office of the true Head to Gods Church They say that he cannot erre Let it be taken in the best sense they can conceiue it there is no plaine Scripture which giueth this to any one particular person It s no Article of our Creed to beleeue it experience hath found him to haue erred foully They say that after the words of consecration the bread is turned into the very body of Christ and the wine into his bloud so as Iesus Christ is there corporally as he was borne of the Virgin Marie vnder the accidents of bread and wine In holy Scripture there is no such thing taught there is a sacramentall phrase This is my Body and the like vsed in the Sacraments of the old Testament This is my Couenant Gen. 17.10 This is the Lords Passeouer Exo. 12.11 The Rocke was Christ 1. Cor. 10.4 but yet no turning one substance into another The Creed teacheth vs to belieue him to be in heauen and thence to expect his comming when hee shall appeare to iudge the quicke and the dead This transubstantiation therefore is no part of our Faith It s against reason for a true body and continued quantitie to be in two places yea in a thousand mouthes at once The Angels reason vnto Marie Mat. 28.6 confuteth this grosse opinion for he said to her when she with the other Marie came to seeke Christ He is not here for hee is risen that is He is not in this place because he is else-where in another If Christ could haue been in two places at once the Angels argument had been of no force remember that this is an Angell-reason which know wee how to reason truly This opinion is against our sences we see not feele not nor taste not flesh and blood Now God neuer deluded mans sences whensoeuer he turned one substance into another Moses staffe was made a Serpent dust was Lice the water blood and water was wine and all these sensible No Scripture nor any other approued testimony can be produced to shew vndoubtedly the contrarie Yea this is certaine that the true body of Christ is discernable by sense to be a true bodie wheresoeuer it is therefore when the Disciples doubted at his sudden appearing he said It is I my selfe And to proue this he willeth them to vse their senses saying Handle me and see that so they might discerne his true body flesh and bones and so might it be in the Sacrament if indeed and truth he were there corporally It hath been witnessed against by the blood or many Martyrs but where be so many in defence of our aduersaries grosse opinion Which of them haue euer hitherto or dare to suffer for this their opinion as ours haue done against it This opinion of our aduersaries is to be detested for first the falshood thereof secondly for the grosse idolatry committed through it euen a piece of bread adored for Almightie Iesus Christ himselfe Thirdly for the bloodie crueltie which for the vpholding of it hath been done with furious rage vpon the bodies of Gods Saints because they would not beleeue this false doctrine nor commit this abominable idolatrie Fourthly all such as thus beleeue sinne not only in the act damnably for Idolaters perish euerlastingly Reuel 21.8 but also irrepentantly because they be perswaded that in so beleeuing and worshipping they doe not onely not sin but doe a most excellent worke and meritorious seruice to God They teach that there is a Purgatorie a place of torment In holy Scriptures we find plainely Heauen Earth Hell Sea but no

Romish Bishops Yea the Centurists and other Protestants haue obserued out of Galfridus that before Austines comming there was here amongst the Britaines the profession of more pure Christianity then that which Austine brought from Rome Its babbled out by our aduersaries that this Austin conuerted this Iland but this is most vntrue for Saint Aidan and Saint Finan were the Lords instruments to gaine many here to Christ Saint Aidan recouered from Paganisme the Kingdome of Northumberland whereunto belonged besides Northumberland it selfe the Lands beyond it vnto Edenborow Frith these Countries Cumberland Westmerland Lancashire Yorkeshire and the Bishopricke of Durham Saint Finan regained not onely Essex and Middlesex but also the large Kingdome of Mercia conuerted first vnto Christianitie which Kingdome did comprehend vnder it these Countries Glostershire Herefordshire Worcestershire Warwickshire Leicestershire Rutlandshire Northamptonshire Lincolneshire Huntingtonshire Bedfordshire Buckingamshire Oxfordshire Staffordshire Darbyshire Shropshire Nottingamshire Cheshire and halfe Hertfordshire These holy men are they which vnder God are to haue the prayse and not Austin who brought some but few in comparison of these to the profession of Christ but withall besmeared them with Romish superstitions And such others as were already Christians hee endeuoured to loade with humane inuentions and vnnecessary ceremonies and was if not the cause yet the occasion of the destruction of many and of the miserable and mercilesse slaughter of the godly Monkes at Bangor to the number of 1200. for that these poore Monkes would not submit to him whom they saw to be too proud and not so humble a man as a man of God ought to haue been V. That this our Religion was here before Austin it may appeare by that publike doctrine of the Church which was taught about the time of Gregory who sent in hither this Austin concerning the blessed Sacrament altogether agreeing with our present doctrine and plainely opposite to the doctrine of the now Church of Rome For in an Homily of the Saxon Tongue appointed to be preached on Easter day throughout euery Church the bread is acknowledged to be naturally corruptible bread and corruptible wine truly Christs body and blood yet not so bodily but spiritually and nothing therein to be vnderstood bodily but all spiritually If this was the publike doctrine so fully herein agreeing with vs so contrary now to the Romish beliefe in their transubstantiated bread for deniall whereof they haue murthered so many and now hold it still so maine an article of their Romane beliefe how can it be otherwise imagined all things also before considered withall but that the Religion then was our religion now and not this of the Church of Rome VI. It cannot be denied if our Religion bee the same which was planted by the Apostles in the Easterne Churches from which our Religion was brought hither as is afore deliuered but that then this our Religion was before Austines time But that ours is the same the Apostles writings written to the Churches shew Secondly an Apostle or some Apostolicall men here taught it Thirdly the writings of the Greeke Fathers for 600. yeres space after Christ which is all the space from Christ to this Austin giue testimonie to our Religion in the maine points thereof as is prooued before in the third argument Fourthly it is euident euen by those things which yet the Churches at this day in those parts doe hold with vs and wherein wee and they agree against the now Romish Religion For the Greekes denie the Popes Supremacie Purgatorie and Prayer for the deliuerance of soules out of it the necessitie of Auricular Confession Meritorious satisfaction of the iustice of God Transubstantiation carued Images and Statues They deny that Saints departed heare our Prayers They administer the Sacraments in both kinds and allow Ministers marriage They mixe not water with wine they vse not vnleauened bread They admit not priuate Masses nor the Circumgestation or Adoration of the Sacrament nor the publike seruice in an vnknowne tongue They teach the assurance of saluation in Christ and renounce the merit of workes All which are opposite to the now Romish Religion and are the truths of our Religion taught by the Apostles and holy ancient Fathers from the beginning in the Easterne Churches wherein they are not falne from that which at first they receiued as they be in some other things which they teach and practise VII The Religion which we professe is the same which was at Rome at the time of the three conuersions of England as they call them and therefore was this our Religion before Austines comming and here professed when hee came in The first conuersion was in the Apostles dayes but in their daies was our religion at Rome as Saint Pauls Epistle written to the Saints there and other of his Epistles declare as also the Epistles of Saint Peter whom they would faine haue to haue been at Rome to which our Religion agreeth wholy and fully wherein soeuer wee now differ from the present doctrine of the Church of Rome Let their writings be Iudge from which our aduersaries haue greatly erred as is euidently prooued in all the maine poynts of the Christian Faith And therefore was it our Religion then professed at Rome and not this new Romish Faith The second Conuersion they make to bee in Eleutherius dayes who wrote as they acknowledge vnto our King here called Lucius If here was any conuersion wrought it was to our Religion and not to the present Romish Trentisme as may be clearely gathered out of that Epistle of Eleutherius and which they doe approue of as written to the same Lucius First Eleutherius there telleth the King that he had receiued the Law and Faith of Christ Secondly as hereby shewing him where this Law and Faith was to bee found he telleth him againe immediatly vpon these former words that he had receiued both the parts of the scriptures Thirdly he so commendeth the Scriptures to the King and his Councell that thence by Gods grace they themselues might take a Law to rule the Kingdome This Bishop did not take vpon him to prescribe them Lawes hee alloweth them being Lay persons as they now speake to meddle with the holy Scriptures and from thence and not from him nor from his Lawes nor from the Lawes of the Romanes to take a Law to liue by This Bishop therefore held the Scripture sufficient for a direction and guide to a whole Kingdome hee held them not so obscure but that the King and his Councell by Gods grace though but young Christians might learne out of them the wil of God how hee would haue a Christian Kingdome gouerned Fourthly this godly Bishop calleth Lucius Gods Vicar in his owne Kingdome and alleageth Scripture to prooue it hee was not then swolne vp with the pride of Antichristian Supremacy nor conceited any temporall power ouer kings as now the Popes doe Lastly hee puts wholly the care of

lawfull and free generall Councell which the Conuenticle of Trent was not till then we are not to be condemned of obstinacy and so as yet no Heretikes Thirdly we neither haue neglected nor yet doe neglect the true Catholike Churches authority into which wee are receiued by Baptisme For we very willingly desire to heare her sentence but where can that bee except in a generall Councels determination therein to heare the Catholike Church speaking to vs from the Scriptures we greatly long for we readily submit vnto Let her thus speak that we may know her Iudgement and we will hearken thereunto As for the Church of Romes authoritie we doe not acknowledge it ouer vs because it is not nor euer was in her best estate the Catholike Church but onely a particular Church which now also is a party questioned And therfore her authoritie for her selfe against vs is no more of vs to be regarded then by them our Churches authority for her selfe against them Seeing then that by their definition wee are not conuinced of heresie wee are not out of the Church as Heretikes II. Not as Schismatikes For albeit we haue no departed from this Romish Church yet are we no Schismatikes First for that we keepe communion with the Catholike Church into which we by Baptisme were admitted which is the body of Christ and wee truly members thereof in faith and loue through the worke of Gods Spirit being built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the Corner-stone Secondly because this Church of Rome hath falne from the faith and obedience commended by S. Paul to be in the Church at Rome in his time as appeareth in many particulars before named which the Church first planted at Rome neuer taught neuer beleeued nor practised Therefore are we no Schismatikes for leauing her in those things wherein she hath left the true and Apostolike Church at the beginning Thirdly for that wee doe not breake off from her simply but in some respect that is as farre foorth as she hath forsaken her former selfe so that if shee would returne to the Catholike Faith and Religion and forsake her Trentisme Iesuitisme and Popery the inuentions of her owne added to that which first she did professe wee want not charitie towards her to vnite our selues vnto her againe For otherwise neither our true loue to God nor true loue to his Church will suffer vs to liue with her so defiled as she is in the spirituall bond of sacred loue which knits the true members of Christ one to another Heauenly charity which maketh this vnitie admitteth not of such things into the vnitie of faith as bee taught and practised in that Church both sinfull against God and pernicious to mens soules yea vtter destruction to them without hearty repentance Fourthly wee haue a warrant yea a commandement from God to separate our selues from her for that she is become the great Whore and spirituall Babylon Reuel 18.4 This charge of God freeth vs from Schisme for there is no sin no Schisme in that which God commandeth to be done Fifthly we by leauing this Romish Church doe not deuide our selues from the true Catholike and Apostolike Church but by this separation doe we indeed returne to the vnitie of it and to our first blessed estate therein when first the Gospell was here planted in this Iland by Apostles or Apostolicall men which came hither not from Rome but from Ierusalem our Mother Church where the Lord and his blessed Apostles first began to teach and erect a Church which is the Church we returne vnto in doctrine and worship of God from which Holy Catholike and Apostolike Church wee were drawne by the vsurping and tyrannical power and iurisdiction of the Pope and his faction and the generall backsliding of this his Church So as this which they call Schisme is no Schisme in vs but a forsaking of schisme in them and is only a returning vnto and a recouerie of our selues againe to our former vnion with Christs true Church beginning at Ierusalem and planted here many hundred yeeres before the Monke Austin euer came into England Sixthly They are properly called Schismatikes saith Aquinas which of their owne accord and will separate themselues from the vnitie of the Church If this be true in the iudgement of this their owne so greatly honoured Doctor then certainely wee are no Schismatikes First of our owne accord and will we make not a separation but are inforced therto by the power of Gods commandement to come out of this Babylon to auoyde her sinnes to escape thereby her punishments She her selfe hath caused deuision and offences contrary to the doctrine which shee once receiued as the Epistles of S. Paul and S. Peter do in many particulars witnesse against her The Apostle S. Paul therefore wils vs to auoyde her and such as cause deuision and offences contrary to the Apostles doctrine Rom. 16.17 It may seeme from hence that a faction begun euen then among you Secondly we doe not separate from the Church that is from the vniuersall Catholike Church but from a Church that is the particular Church of Rome for Thomas doth not say He is a Schismatike which separateth from a Church but from the vnitie of the Church to wit the Church vniuersall which is but one For indeed no reason can bee giuen why any should deuide themselues from the true Catholike Church but good reasons may be giuen why a particular Church may be and ought to bee forsaken as wee doe giue for our departing from the Church of Rome for we are commanded to forsake Idolaters 1. Cor. 5.11 Heretikes Tit. 3.10 such as bring not the doctrine of Christ and doe not abide therein 2. Ioh. 10. and her that is called Babylon Reuel 18.4 Thirdly before we can be Schismatikes we must forsake the vnitie of the Church Now wherein stands this vnitie Standeth it only in affection of loue or also in the faith of the truth For both these graces the Apostle commendeth the Churches Ephes 1.15 2. Thes 1.3 and faith is preferred to the first place in both Scriptures We haue not forsaken the vnitie of the Faith of which S. Paul speakes Eph 4.13 For we teach the doctrine of the Apostles and no other in any thing when we differ from this present Church of Rome which hath lost her first faith of truth in many things Now can true diuine loue be there kept where faith is lost or can there be charitie to vnite where doctrine doth deuide Can light and darkenesse truth and falsehood cohabite in loue Truth and loue onely dwell together and for truths sake loue separateth from falshood wheresoeuer she finds it And therefore except they can proue that we haue lost the vnitie of faith wee haue not forsaken the vnitie of the Church in loue as the former reasons shew To conclude were the Priests and Leuites Schismatikes which left