Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	church_n	scripture_n	3,566	5	6.5669	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89317	Coena quasi koinē: the new-inclosures broken down, and the Lords Supper laid forth in common for all Church-members, having a dogmatical faith, and not being scandalous: in a diatribe, and defence thereof: against the apology of some ministers, and godly people, (as their owne mouth praiseth them) asserting the lawfulness of their administring the Lords Supper in a select company: lately set forth by their prolocutor, Mr. Humphrey Saunders. / Written by William Morice of Werrington, in Devon, Esq;	Morice, William, Sir, 1602-1676.	1657 (1657)	Wing M2762; Thomason E895_1	613,130	518

upon whose intercession alone we can rely with faith therefore 't is vain and fruitless to seek or regard the help and assistance of the prayers of the godly To the antient Church I think most authority to be ascribed and greatest reverence to be attributed since streams run purest neer the Fountain and if that which is first be truest what is next to the first is next to truth and ●herefore Sānctorum Patrum constitutiones qui proximiores fuerant Christo ●●●●scames said Nazianzen and those Orders be most pure that come most neer to the example of the Primitive Church said the holy Martyr Sanders Fox Act. ●●on p. ●494 yet the at restation of that Church I grant is but an humane testimony nor perfectly ●●vine but in part as it faithfully testifieth what the Apostles did and said Divine in regard of the matter and thing testified Human in regard of the quality of the Witnesses and manner of testification and therefore formally as such being but an humane testimony can beget but an acquisite faith for no conclusion can be of higher nature than the premises as no water can be made to rise higher than the Spring Picus Mirandula Canus and I grant that Fidei acquisitae quae fulcitur homine proponente non Deo revelante subesse potest falsum and therefore Nunquam hominem quemvis per fidem acquisitam ità existimamus esse veracem quin formidemus cum vel falli posse vel fallere Yet notwithstanding fides acquisita●se habet ad fidem gratuitam sicut praeambula dispositio ad formam disponit animam ad receptionem luminis Alexander Hales all as cited by Dr. F. White 's answer to Fish p. 14. 22. quo assentitur primae veritati propter se dicitur ipsam introducere sicut seta filum and though divine revelation in Scripture be therefore the sole principle immediate motive and formal reason and object of beleeving and last resolution of Faith yet the authority and external testimony of the Church may produce the same as an adjuvant instrumental administring moral cause and subordinate help Prae omnibus si aperta fuerit Scriptura eam ipsam amplector saith St. Augustine and therefore he that will not beleeve Moses and the Prophets it will be in vain to raise any of the dead to perswade him when the Scripture shines out in full brightness omnes Perstringit stellas exortus ut aethereus Sol But when that Sun shines not so clearly as to convince and satisfie contenders who have bad eyes the Fathers as Stars that receive their light from that Sun may reflect some illumination upon us as the Stars are to be seen by day in dark pits and obscure places and though I consent to Augustine Epist. 19. ad Hieron that let the Learning and Holiness of other Writers be never so eminent I will not think it true because they have thought so but because they are able to perswade me either by other Canonical Writers or probable Reason yet I add that I am more confirmed in my perswasion that I rightly hit the sense of Canonical Writers and apprehend the Dictates of true Reason when I conceive the same which I finde that they thought though they are not principles of infallible verity to command beleef yet they are grounds of credibility to sacilitate assent Non domini sed duces to use Seneca's words And I shall more easily embrace that which hath their witness and be more apt to doubt of that which wants their testimony Sola argumenta ex Scripturis esse necessaria Cathol Orthedox Tract 1. q. 10. p. 121. è Patribus autem probabilia saith learned Rivet Their consent I esteem not ut fidei mensuram sed ut testem temporis argumentum historicum which makes certain the matter of fact that such was the doctrine and practice of the first and purer times being registred to us by those that cannot be imagined not to know being so neer nor be suspected to combine falsly to impose upon us being so pious They are not moved to hear men count and call good ways new and the Adversaries of true Doctrine have always loaded it with this Title which confirms them to see the ways of their government have the same lot and therefore this principle of Antiquity yeelds but a popular and fallacious Argument But few I suppose will be moved with this argumentation as not fallacious enough to impose upon popular judgements For First implicitly and interpretatively those good ways are their ways wherein is involved Petitio Principii Secondly if so small a matter confirm their judgement it is suspitious that as small a weight of reason might first settle it Talia sunt alimenta qualia sunt Elementa Thirdly If that be a popular and fallacious argument which is derived from a principle made use of commonly by Hereticks or others thereby to give a specious lustre to their own Opinions and cast an odium on their opposites then Scripture it self may be sentenced to be a principle yeelding onely popular and fallacious arguments for who knows not that most Hereticks have sought to fortifie their Opinions with pretence of Scripture and have upbraided their adversaries with want thereof Fourthly when any pretend antiquity to give countenance to novel and unwarrantable Opinions or Institutions by turning the wrong end of the Prospective to make things at hand seem to be far off the fallacy is not in the principle but the men that abuse and falsly apply it nor lies it in the proposition but the assumption Fifthly seeing as Hierom tells us Mendacium semper imitatur veritatem the argument is the more specious and like to carry more force because subtil falsifiers have assumed it for they being wiser in their Generations would not lay on those colours that had no beauty or lustre nor would they set that stamp on their counterfeit Coyn did they not know it would make it pass more currant Hierom say they is condemned for desiring leave of Augustine to erre with seven Fathers but they dare not nor are willing to give this liberty but yet they take as much when in the question whether Judas communicated of the Lords Supper they mention twelve late Writers and not all of them aut magni aut bonì nominis asserting the negative and ask who would not erre with such as those are But we say though we would not erre with the Fathers yet we less distrust our selves to erre with them or when they are on our side and probably suppose our selves farthest from erring when neerest to them As the Scripture bids us to remember Lots wife so they say to the Pretenders of Antiquity Remember the Gibeonites Had this Memento been limited to false Pretenders of Antiquity it might have been plausible but if themselves had not forgotten to take some of the salt of that Pillar whereinto she was turned to have seasoned their discretions they

COENA quasi ΚΟΙΝΗ The New-INCLOSVRES broken down AND THE LORDS SUPPER Laid forth in common for all Church-members having a Dogmatical Faith and not being Scandalous In a Diatribe and Defence thereof AGAINST The Apology of some Ministers and Godly People as their owne Mouth praiseth them asserting the lawfulness of their administring the LORDS SUPPER in a select Company Lately set forth by their Prolocutor Mr. HUMPHREY SAUNDERS Written by WILLIAM MORICE of Werrington in DEVON Esq LONDON Printed by W. Godbid for Richard Thrale and are to be sold at the Cross-Keyes at Paul's gate entring into Cheap-side M. DC LVII Augustin in Psal 48. Concio 1. Tom. 8. Pag. 93. EXigitur a manducante quod manducat non prohibeatur à dispensatore sed moveatur timere exactorem Chrysostom in 1. ad Cor. 11. Hom. 27. Tom. 4. Pag. 110. Quoniam Dominica coena hoc est Domini debet esse communis quaeenim Domini sunt non sunt hujus servi aut alterius sed omnibus communia quod enim Dominicum est idem commune nam si Domini tui est quemadmodum est non debes tanquam propria tibi assumere sed tanquam res Domini communiter omnibus proponere siquidem hoc est Dominicum nunc autem non sinis esse Dominicum cum non sinis esse commune sed tibi comedis Bullinger adversus Anabaptist l. 6. c. 9. p. 229. 232. Probationem Ministri aut Ecclesiae judicio non relinquimus ut tum demum aliquis ad coenam Domini accedat cum Ministri vel Ecclesia satis dignum fidelem sanctum judicaverit Probet homo seipsum non debet ab alio probari Musculus in 1 Cor. 11.28 Pag. 438 439. Apparet necessarium utile esse eorum studium qui neminem ad coenam Domini admittant quem ipsi antea non probaverunt si modus discretio adhibeatur nec velut universali lege indiscriminatim omnes etiam qui inculpate se gerunt in Ecclesia ad hujusmodi examen constringantur verum juxta timendum est ne institutum hoc quàm nunc magni aestimatur tam olim in priscam servitutem Ecclesiam Christi reducat noxium reddatur Sane Apostolica institutio nihil hujus requirit sed hortatur unumquemque ut seipsum probet sed quid si Minister Ecclesiae hac Apostoli sententia nolit esse contentus nec admittat nisiquos ipse explorat item quid si fidelis ad panis tantum non poculi Dominici communicationem admittatur sicut in Papatu fieri videmus Respondeo ubi nec Domini ea institutio nec Apostolica Doctrina servatur ibi non est ut communicet fidelis sinat Magistratus illos regnare in Ecclesia donec visum fuerit Domino modum imponere illorum Dominio Chamier Panstrat Tom. 4. l. 7. c. 19. S. 17. Pag. 196. Non sunt digne praeparati Scelus hominis cur indignos Sacramento dicis quos indignos negas pace Ecclesiae Itane tibi videatur qui censeantur in corpore Christi ut indignos pronuncies qui vescantur Christo at Chrysostomus negabat dignos esse qui vel precibus interessent quodnam quaeso ingenium tuum est Chrysostomi certe Catholicum vide ne tuum non Christianum Casaubon exercit ad annal Baron exercit 16. S. 31. Pag. 366. Coena Domini privatae epulae non sunt natura sua sed publica fidelium omnium invitatio The Summe of the Dissertation DIATRIBE SECT I. OF Antiquity and Innovation the Character of their Discipline the state of the question p. 29. DEFENCE SECT I. What Authority the Diatribe ascribed to the Fathers and ancient Church Why the Apologists derogate from them p. 32. SECT II. Of Antiquity Custome sad consequences of Independency the novelty thereof the Fathers not without errors yet not to be sleighted What may be called the Primitive Church Protestants alwayes honoured their Fathers and never declined their Testimony p. 33. SECT III. How the Apologists have suited their Discipline to comply with several-Parties and Interests the odious Blots of their Pen. p. 42. SECT IV. Whether the Diatribe were guilty of Petitio Principii 44. SECT V. Whether their Discipline advance Godlinesse The Sacraments are Seales of the Conditionall Covenant which Doctrine hath no affinity with semi-Pelagianisme Whether the exhibiting the Sacrament make men Saints Whether the giving thereof without discrimination upon tryal blind men in their sins or be the setting of the Seal to Blanks Whether the Sacraments are privileges of the Godly 1 Cor. 10. argumentative for a free Communion 46. SECT VI. Independent Bookes and Arguments Of Rhetorique what Builders the Apologists are 62. SECT VII The Apologists causlesly irritated by an Allegory 67. SECT VIII In whom the School vesteth the Power of Church-Censures Whether the Apologists may de jure or do de facto censure alone How they have restored the Sacrament 68. SECT IX The state of the Question the model of their Church Whether their way smack of Donatus his schisme Ecclesiastical Communion consists principally in Communion of Sacraments Of Examination precedent to the partaking of the Eucharist Whether and how necessary What knowledge may be competent What profession of Faith the antient Church required before admission to Sacraments Of Excommunication Suspension Presbytery the Apologists no friends thereunto 71. DIATRIBE SECT II. The Lord Jesus examined not his Disciples antecedently to his Supper He admitted Judas to the participation as the Fathers consentiently assert and the Scripture evinceth Luke 22.21 Joh. 13.2.26 27 30. discussed 96. DEFENCE SECT X. How we know Christ examined not the Apostles The force of Arguments from the Authority negative of Scripture Of the washing of the Apostles feet VVhether any did partake the last Supper save the 12. Apostles The Apologists conceit of the 70. Disciples Of Confession of Faith how and when necessary Examination is a virtual and interpretative diffamation VVhether it be a small thing they require VVhether Examination if it be necessary ought to be made but once 111. SECT XI Judas did communicate at the Lords Supper What is thereby inferred The Attestation of the Fathers in that matter the consent of later Divines The weight of the testimonies on either side the Apologists confess there was no visible cause to exclude him VVhether Christ in admitting him acted onely as a man His not condemning the adulterous woman 122. DIATRIBE SECT III. The sufficiency of Scripture whereupon Negative Arguments are grounded the Argument deduced from 1 Cor. 11.28 it is difficult and unsafe to judge of other mens estate Of temerarious judgment Of judging men to be wicked or irregenerate With what difficulty and what a Pedegree of consequences their proofs are derived from Scripture Generall Rules for satisfaction of doubting Consciences perswade the contrary to their way Of Christs admitting onely Disciples Heb. 13.17 Mat. 18.16 Rev. 2.2 1 Pet. 3.15 1 Cor. 5.11 explained and vindicated 134. DEFENCE SECT 12. 1

not spend more breath to dissipate them onely I shall confess that Chrysostome saith not If they will not submit to tryal you have freed your soule for he could not say any thing of that which was not and which he dreamed not of for I shall desire them better to quote me where he speakes of any such tryal which they ought to make or submission which we should yeeld In the same Homily indeed he explains himself to intend all this of notorious offenders and so Peter Martyr understands him saying Quòd si quis venerit cum sordibus Loc. com part 4. p. 63. ignoranter nulla vestra culpa est nam haec mihi de notis manifestis disputata sunt and means it of such as had been formerly censured and were under penance He that partakes not saith he is a Penitent such as the Deacons might take notice of by a precedent publike sentence against them it is to them he speakes In Matth. Homil. 82. You deserve no little punishment if conscious of notorious crimes in any of the Communicants you connive at them to partake of that Holy Table They were the Deacons who as they proclaimed Sancta sanctis so themselves were cryed unto to look to the doors and they shouted out three severall times to them to go out that were not to receive in the Leturgies of Basil Chrysostome and the Ethiopick and yet they will not say that the Deacon had power to examine De sacro participat myster Tom. 5. p. 328. Homil. 28. in 1. Cor. 11. Tom. 4. p. 112. or authority to cast out any not formerly censured Besides Chrysostome notwithstanding all his thunderings here against admission of persons unworthy by his lightnings else-where it often appears that he himself took notice of many that came unworthily and participated as Licèt sit aliquid à vobis patratum acceditis and also non quemadmodum nunc facimus temporis gratiâ accedentes magìs quam animi studio neque ut praeparati ad vitia nostra expurganda compunctionis pleni accedimus sed ut in solennitatibus simus quando omnes adsint and again multos video temerè quomodocunque consuetudine magìs quàm legitimè aut consideratione mente de corpore Christi participantes Serm. 3. in c. 3. ad Ephes Chrysostome well knew such ought not perchance in respect of their proper Consciences to have come yet he was not ignorant that in the judgment of the Church they ought not to be repelled unless notorious and scandalous they being different questions as some conceive Who may come and Who may be admitted and that he may have a right in foro Ecclesiae which cannot approve it in foro Coeli Chrysostome resolved Judas did participate and yet saith Homil. 51. in 14. Math. Tom. 2. p. 115. Nullus Judas hanc mensam adeat If they have not been formerly duly censured at the instant of their approach how can they be regularly rejected where neither any degrees of admonition nor judicial process which regularly ought to precede can at that suddenness be complied with and in charity it may be not irrationally supposed that he that offers himself after admonition usually previous to the administration that none unworthy adventure to come Advers Anabap l. 6. c. 9. p. 230. hath repented of his former sins and comes with Vows of amendment Quomodo ergo fideles Ministri saith Bullinger adeò facilè ut Anabaptistae volunt à coena Domini excluderent homines peccatores sed tamen petentes gratiam Dei qui hoc testantur eo ipso quòd accedunt ad coenam The Fathers generally not onely Chrysostome doe pathetically perswade men to come prepared and emphatically threaten such as come without due preparation not in order to excluding of all such as upon tryal were not found to have such preparatory qualifications but to excite their solicitude and quicken their care to fit and dispose themselves and try their hearts how they were disposed their Exhortations looked to make them come worthily not to suspend them lest possibly they might be unworthy as St. Paul menaceth damnation to him that eateth and drinketh unworthily yet forbids not to come but commands Self-probation and I could instance in these Divines who assert a free admission of all Church-members yet doe with as much efficacy press and insist upon a coming with holy and suitable affections as those that are so closehanded and tenacious of the Sacrament So that sure Chrysostome is not as full as they can wish unless as Porus when Alexander asked him How he would be dealt with answered As a King and that was enough so it be sufficient that the authority of the Minister it seems alone be greater than the Kings but whether they have cause to continue their wonder that Chrysostome is brought in by us to give witness on our part we shall manifest in due place In the interim we shall give them this corollary That because the ancient Church repelled notorious sinners for them to argue that therefore they admitted none without examination and tryal of their Sanctity is as if I should conclude that because the Laws of this Common-wealth punish Theeves that are judicially attainted therefore they put every man under a restraint untill he approve himself a true man SECT XIV Sending the Eucharist to Strangers and persons absent whether a Corruption Whether the Fathers were prodigal of Christs blood Of admitting to the Eucharist presently after Baptisme Of the Literae Formatae and Communicatoriae THe Paper to make some Dialectick proof that there was no such scrupulous examination of men taken previously to communicating in the ancient Church alleaged that then the consecrated Elements which being received became the Sacrament were sometimes sent to persons absent and to strangers coming to Rome c. The Apologists Quorum vis animusque ferox contingit Olympum take this for a corruption smelling of rank superstition the Paper fetching it from Rome bidding us prove it to be an ancient practice and they will prove it to be an ancient errour Sternent Adversas acies quales cum montibus altis Volvitur amnis humi But I have already verified the practice Tom. 4. l. 1. c. 9. S. 32. and need not farther confirm it for Chamier prevents me by affirming negari nequit adeò frequentia sunt testimonia exempla but they have not yet convinced the errour for it is not sufficient to prove it erroneous to say it came from Rome yet it was onely the sending it to strangers which was said to be used not instituted at Rome in token of peace and communion for this was done when Rome was in her Virgin-purity and before she turned Whore when all those glorious Eulogies were given her by the consentiens laus bonorum incorrupta vox benè judicantium and to suppose she merited them not then because now she doth not is an error as wide

circumstance but the action it self and which properly comes not within the list or rank of things of order decency unless perhaps in a general acception as whatsoever is agreeable to rule is orderly what is contrary thereunto is out of order Ordini contrariatur quicquid inordinatè agitur as Tully long since said Et quicquid peccatur perturbatione ordinis peccatur accordingly Quod decet honestum est et quod honestū est decet justa omnja decora sunt injusta contra but taking order and decency in this notion the Church hath no power to make Lawes in things of such concernment but Order in this place of the Apostle comprehendeth the circumstances of season time and place and comliness includes that gravity and modesty in the performance of the works of Gods service which beseems actions of that nature Field Vbi supra and such Rites as may cause respect unto the things performed and thereby excite men to greater devotion or express such spiritual affections and motions as are or should be in them but the pretended order and course of the Apologists is of a far different kind and nature 3. The ancient church held not forth that manner and degrees of pennance as a Divine Institution nor necessarily implicating the conscience but as an act of Discipline of a medious and indifferent nature when abstracted from their positive Constitution and therefore it was transitory in respect of time and ambulatory in regard of place not alwayes nor every where observed But as their Discipline hath no Ecclesiastical Constitution like a great sum to obtain its freedom in the Church so they pretend it was free born and is of divine not humane Establishment and therefore they prevaricate and betray their Cause when they compare it to that Model of Discipline for the Paeniten's and do interpretatively and virtually acknowledge it hath only a like foundation with that which also they confess had no particular warrant from the Scripture save this general rule of doing things in order and decency which was no special or immediate command for the same but only a Praecept That the Church should do what seemed orderly and decent and in this very particular what seemed so in one age and place did not in another 4. There is yet a greater difference between their Discipline and that of the old Paenitents this being only in a thing not specially determined by Scripture and theirs is against what the Scripture hath determined as we conceave we have sufficiently evidenced They have now distilled the Spirits of this Argument into a Syllogisme and we must tast the strength thereof Where is no due order in Sacramental Administrations there Gods Will is not observed but where all are admitted there is no Order Ergo. If we grant the whole we part with nothing nor get they any thing we shall only make them a Magicians Feast which costs no●hing to prepare nor will any way strengthen them to take for where are all admitted de facto infants madmen excommunicate c. or who saith all are to be so de jur● It is only Church-members who have a Dogmatical Faith which have neither torn the Evidence of their Title by being cut off nor bloted it by any such scandal as merits cutting off whose admission we plead for The Minor and their Arguments are all minors they prove Where there is mixture and confusion of good and bad fit and unfit there is no Order but where all are admitted is this mixture They do not well see what can be denied here and least we should disparage their eye-sight we shall deny nothing thereof but they may put all their gain in their eyes according to the proverb but least as bad eyes infect one the other so some others also be like Tychonius of whom Augustine speaks Statim quippe amore sententiae suae contra veritatem oculum claufit and may seem to see this Argument to be unanswerable also as it looks with an opposite aspect and adverse influence upon our Thesis and that to admit all in that qualified and restrained sense is in consistent also with order and comliness therefore to undeceive them advertant ea quae oculos etiam caecos seriant intueantur ● Let them borrow the same Proposition and advance it to a Major Where there is mixture and confusion of good bad there is no order and then yoak it with a Minor where the subject onely is changed and render it thus Where all are admitted to Church-membership to the Word and Prayer there is such mixture c. And then see what a conclusion it wil draw after it and if they be not now as mute as a Fish but have any piece of answer found in their mouthes let them give it for me and them Let them remind what we have often mentioned out of Augustine Mixtus reis obnoxiis nifi per conscientiae maculatam consensionem nullus recte dici potest and that bonus malis nullo modo misceripotest so as then first here can be no mixture of good and bad Thirdly men may be said to be bad and unfit simply and absolutely or respectively according to their sense and construction if simply and absolutely such as are guilty of grosse palpable ignorance of the very principles of the faith or of notorious crimes scandals obstinately persisted in though we should grant them their conclusion we yeeld nothing of the cause but if they understand all those to be bad and unfit who though Church-members and Dogmaticall believers have not approved by tryall their sound knowledge and sincere holinesse unto them we shall deny what they have not proved and we have now had proof that they cannot prove hat such are bad or unfit or that where all in this accommodate sense are admitted there is no order all such are relatively though not really holy and fit and many of those to whom they give admission are not really worthy If they are worthy to partake of the prayers Quoted before they are not unworthy to communicate of the S●crament in the judgment of Chrysostom And if they are not unworthy saith Chamier of the peace of the Church they are not unworthy of the Sacrament and if worthy to be reckoned to be of the body of Christ ●hat is members of his Church th●y are not unworthy to feed on him Besides although simply the casting out or non-admission of persons criminous may be consonant to order yet resp●ctively to the procuring or conserving a greater good or avoiding a more mischievous evill it may not be orderly Although we may not doe evill that good may ensue yet we may and must passe over or omit a l●sser good to acquire a greater And since malus bonum vehementiùs excitat movet impellit voluntatem therefore regularly non potest voluntas inserius bonum eligere quia electio non est nisi ex consultatione rationis consultatio vero non fit