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	faith_n	scripture_n	1,687	5	6.6095	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14357	M. le Hucher minister of Amyens in France compelled to fly from the pure word of holy write; strucke dumme; and made to runne away Vppon the subiect of the B. Sacrament of the altar. By F. Francis Veron of the Society of Iesus, encountring him with the Bible of Geneua only. In the presence of the Duke de Longueuille. VVith a briefe and easie meanes, by which each Catholike may, in like manner, put to flight any minister or sectarie. Sent from Sieur de la Tour one of the sayd Dukes gentlemen, to Sieur de Rotois, gentleman of the Kings game.; Adrian Hucher ministre d'Amyens, mis à l'inquisition des passages de la Bible de Genève. English	Véron, François, 1575-1649.; Catcher, Edward, 1584?-1624?	1616 (1616)	STC 24675.5; ESTC S107356	29,473	96

all truth and that all things must be examined ruled and reformed by the same For it is not the rule of this verity and that of greatest consequence to witt that the bookes of the old and new Testament are canonicall and writen by deuine reuelation Again to reiect any booke from the number of the Canonicall as for example you doe reiect that of Tobias and admitt the Ghospell of S. Mathew you guide not your selues by this rule of the pure word but as you giue it out of the inward persuasion of the holy Ghost See how your articles destroy each other Tell me farther Do you hold that one may and ought to baptize little infants That we must not rebaptize hereticques which haue been baptized in the name of the B. Trinity that we must keepe holy sunday and not saturday you beleeue that the Mother of God remayned alwayes a virgin Notwithstanding you finde not one text of Scripture to iustify any of these points why do you then contradict your selues and your article which teacheth that the written word is the rule of all truth Doth not S. Paul in the. 2. to the Thessalon 2. vers 15. exhort saying Stand and hold fast the instructions our translation reads traditions which you haue learned eyther by our word or by our epistle Note that he makes mention of the word besides that which is written in Scripture and in the 2. to Timothe 2. Vers 2. The things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses these commend to faythfull men which shall be fitt to teach others also Doe not you perceaue a diuine word taught not by writing but by word of mouth In the. 1. to the Cor. 11. Vers 34. Other things I will set in order when I come Such ordinances by word of mouth are they not as well deuine as those which are sett downe in writing I omit many other authorities to this purpose by the way only citing these for that it is not my intent to iustify and prooue vnto you in this treatise that which we beleeue My only scope is to shew vnto you that you are abused and that the pure word teacheth no such thing as your articles report This haue I performed in this article which I haue examined with the textes cited for the same for the Article saith that the written word is the rule of all truth and in the passages alledged we neyther read written word nor the rule of all truth Wherfore they haue not that which the article saith otherwise knowing to reade we should see it there For conclusion heereof the Caluinists in this article of greatest importance are therefore abused and by consequence in all the rest I before marked which are out of this deduced against vs which are in great number Reuew them and in so many points acknowledg your selues deceaued I haue at large examined this article aswell for that as hath been shewed it is of greatest importance as also for that the falshood therof being discouered the Ministers are bereaued of the most efficatious and ordinary meanes they had to defend themselues in these conflicts for they alwayes fly for refuge to this Proposition That nothing must be beleeued bus that which is in the Scripture Their custome is to question vs where finde you Purgatory in the Scripture or the reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the sacrament of the Altar c. For say they if it be not there it is superstition to beleeue it And by this meanes in lieu of reforming our pretended abuses by the pure word they cunningly engage vs to prooue our faith A wyly deuise Catholicks looke vnto their fingers and be sure that when they make you such questions you take not vppon you to be disputants but allthough you haue many authorities yett bring no place of Scripture to iustify your cause Marke well the wilines of the Aduersaries They are bound by their .31 article to reforme vs and by their 5 to do it by the pure word by this disguise and faire apparence drawing many to their part But their practise is after another fashion For knowing well that they are neuer able to performe that which they haue bound themselues vnto to disingage themselues from this obligation by a fine deuise they endeuour to make vs the plaintifs questioning vs after the fashion aforesaid And if in awnswere of their questions you bring some expresse textes for your self behold by this the Minister hath gott his neck out of the coller and hauing before hand quitt himself of all Anquity Fathers Miracles c. he will turne of the Scripture at his owne pleasure and in fine delude you though you haue ten cleere textes for your purpose Of this we haue dayly experience Handle him in an other fashion You must neuer lett him change his coate He is obliged by the Confession of his faith to shew you by the pure word your errours hold him to it there to his testimonies of the pure word which must sett downe your pretended errours Doe but this and I warrant you the Minister will quickly be brought vpon his knees and haue a care you release him not but keepe him downe But how vrge him still with this that he shew you some expresse text of Scripture which sayth That there is no Purgatory or That the body of Iesus Christ is not in the Eucharist It is his charge to do it who hath pawned his word to shew vs by the pure word our errours But if he hope to scape the torture by this sleight saying that he sufficiently sheweth our errour in that as he sayth we cannot shew by the Scripture Purgatory or the reall presence Haue a care that though you haue many cleere textes on your side bring none make not your selues Plaintifs for so he will be deliuered from the rack but presse him eagrely that he shw you that he promised or at least that nothing must be beleeued but that which is in the Scripture for by this maxime alone doth he argue you of errour And then that after he hath donne this you will produce your places Not being able to shew this proposition in the whole Scripture as by the precedent examen I haue shewd he cannot he is driuen to a non plus nor hath he any meanes to scape away Thus shall you shew breefly euidently that their 31. and 5. articles ar false which promised to reforme our pretended abuses by the pure word and cannot do it And that the Mimisters are egregious impostours which vnder such a faire pretext haue seduced so many thowsands of soules And you of the pretended religion put but your Ministers to this triall and you will see them presently fall speechles and your selues apparently abused Before we passe any farther I cannot omitt to examine breeflie one clause of the 24. article which I before let passe for that for it there is cited in the margent a texte which is not

it belongs to Aristotle to iudge if the consequence be good or no the Minister building vpon consequence must admitt for his iudge in the controuersies of our fayth not the pure Scripture but Aristotle or els at least choose for vmpyre in this cause the word of God together with Aristotle 3. You must demaund of the Minister if the Scripture do teach that one must beleeue as an article of faith not only that which the Scripture saith but also that which by necessary consequence followeth therevpon or no if he say so make him shew the text which without doubt he cannot throughout the whole bible if no such be founde then doth the Minister build his articles of fayth vpon a proposition which is not in the pure word to witt vpon this That that which followeth out of Scripture by necessary consequence must be beleeued as an article of saith Howbeit the Scripture frames no such article but the Minister only and that not by the pure Scripture but by humane reason from which notwithstanding in his 5. Article he disclaimed wholy For he wold haue vs take at his handes for an article of faith that proposition which by consequence followeth out of the Scripture though the termes of that proposition deduced out of Scripture for an article of fayth be not there sett downe Hence is it that all the articles of the Confession of these sectaries which are founded vpon a consequence are not articles of fayth being that they haue not for them theyr only rule of truth the sole Scripture Heere againe you must hold him They will say perauenture that IESVS Christ and the Apostles proued many thinges by consequence I graunt it But in so doing they themselues made new Scriptures or holy write which priuiledge I thinke the Minister haue not But they neuer taught that the Scripture which they alledged was the singular and sole rule of all truth and that they spake not but by the mouth of the Scripture as these Pretenders professe and thyr poore flocke which thinke they are as good as theyr wordes persuade themselues 3. If he that buckle with the Minister be learned and will after he hath often driuen the deere from his fortresse of the pure worde course him alonge the plaine champion of humane and philosophicall reasons though according to my aduise it be ordinarily more expedient to content our selues with that before sett downe for to cure him if it be possible after the aboue said he may passe to the examen of the truth or falshod of his consequence whether the propositions from which it is deduced be they taken from philosophy or holy writt be true or false and whether the forme of the argument be according to the rules of Philosophy and so deny that which the Minister assumed falsly Still hauing in minde that the Minister is putt to the proofe not the Catholick who beares the personne of the party instructed be sure not to change that personne For the drift of all the Ministers fetches is to vnload himself of that obligation to prooue his consequence which he will bring to passe by this sleight if he can make him that defends the disputant For example In the argument proposed That body which is in heauen is not on the earth The body of Iesus Christ is in heauen Therfore it is not on the earth You shall deny the first proposition and lett the Minister prooue it If that his proofes come on to long he enter to farre into Philosophicall quiddities lett the Catholicke note that it is in his free choice to curbe the Minister short when he listeth demaunding him if all the propositions which he hath brought to prooue his consequence be in the Scripture or no. If they be lett him bring them forth Many of them questionles are drawne out of Philosophy or grounded vpon humane reasons If they be not the Minister which out of them inferres his consequence doth not deduce it out of the pure word or which is all one prooues not by consequence deduced out of the pure and only word that the Catholicke erreth which was that he vndertooke and moreouer denieth his Cōfession of faith for he drawes his cōsequence ioyntly out of the word of God and out of diuers propositions which are not in holie write Is not this to flinch from their worde and to renounce their articles of faith or rather do not the Minister his confession of faith abuse people in promising that which they neither do nor canne performe Behold a breefe and easy methode to encounter all Ministers and Sectaries Is it not obuious euen for those who are not students in deuinity to putt it in practise There needs no more but eyes to see and to vnderstande English to know if the pure word without additions interpretations or consequences of others do say such a thing or no. Do you not by this meanes euidently perceaue that all the Ministers are abusers and how the whole troope of Sectaries is misledde Yea I dare say double abusers For first the Minister abuseth men in that he promiseth by the pure word to shew them that which he would haue them beleeue next that he will by the pure word lay open their errours pretended and yett performeth neither the one nor the other Wherfore the Ministers promising in their 31. and 5. articles to performe them both and yet effecting neither as by the forsaid practise is made euident are impostours and double impostours as this methode which euery Catholick may vse doth apparently declare And so I haue fulfilled my promise which was to lay downe a short and easie methode by which all Catholiques may euidently shew that each Minister in all and euery point of his pretended religion is an abuser consequently that all their followers are abused This therfore is my aduice to all Sectaries to those especially which seeke sincerly theyr Saluation Your Confession promiseth you the pure word of God and you suppose that according to that promise there is nothing in your articles of fayth which is not in the pure word Practise this methode and you shall euidently and easily perceaue how you are abused Place on the one syde the Principall articles of your faith which I haue cited before That original sinne remaines after Baptisme as it is a fault That Iesus Christ is our only Aduocate That faith alone iustifieth and which is cheefe of all That the B. Sacrament is a figure of the body of our Sauiour which is eaten by faith Then ouer against each of these articles set downe the textes which are cited in the margent for eache of them doubtles if you had any plaine text of Scripture which taught that which is in that articles it wold haue been coated in the margent you shall cleerly see that the pure word setting aside interpretations and Ministeriall consequences hath not that which is in your article neither is there required ought

clause you cite two textes 1. Texte I am the liuing bread that came dovvne from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer and the bread vvhich I vvill giue is my flesh vvhich I vvill giue for the life of the vvorld Iohn 6. Vers 51. Examen First I reade not in this text signes which testify but this expressely that Christ is the liuing bread not comon bread made of flowre and baked but which is his flesh which sayth he I will giue for the life of the world As also in the geuing of it he sayd Take This is my body which shal be giuen for you Was it a signe or figure of his body which was nayled one the crosse was it not his proper body This clause then is false 2. The ministers whoe haue promised to propose nothing but the pure Scripture how doe they thrust vppon vs this clause so weighty The body of IESVS Christ is not contained and included within the bread nor the blood c. Without any written word see theyr fraude and how well they keepe theyr word in a matter of greatest moment 2. Texte IESVS tooke bread and hauing giuen thankes brake it and said take eate This is my bodie vvhich is broken for you do this in commemoration of me In like manner after supper he tooke the cuppe saying this cuppe is the nevv testament in my blood this do ye as often as you shall drinke therof in remembrance of me 1. Corinth 11. Vers 24. Examen Who can finde out in this texte Signes which testify figure signe of the body of IESVS Christ which is not in the bread nor the bloud in the chalice all which the article teacheth The text then helpes them nothing nay how could the text more cleerly reiect the aduersaries beleefe which is that the body is not vnder the bread nor the bloud within the chalice Let the Caluinistes consider if they be abused or no The Ministers haue entred bondes to shew by the pure word That the supper is a signe which tesstifieth a figure of the body of our sauiour which is not vnder the bread and of the bloud which is not within the chalice and to cancell theyr obligations they bring for paiment this texte of Scripture in which being it is written downe if you reade it not eyther you want your sight or they deceaue you Rather see you not the contrary then say they are doubled iuglers An other clause of that Article After affirming that IESVS Christ doth nourish and quicken vs with the substance of his body and of his bloud that which the Catholickes beleeue also they add in which we disagree without aledging any texte for the same wherefore put vnderneath for proofe a cypher as before 1. VVe hold notvvithstanding that this is donne spiritually Proofe o. 2. The supper is a figure of the body or In the supper is figured the bodie of IESVS Christ Proofe o. 3. Because the misterie of this supper is celestiall it cannot be taken but by faith or to vse their vulgar phrase by the mouth of faith Those vvhich bring vvith them a pure faith as a vessell receaue trulie that vvhich the signes testifie commonlie they say That in the supper is eaten the bodie of IESVS Christ by the mouth of faith and in the 53. Sunday of their Catechisme it is said to haue the veritie of the Sacrament vve must lift vp our hartes to heauen vvhere it is Proofe o. Behold many articles and of greate consequence proued by a Cypher Behold how you are abused The Ministers make you beleeue all this not being able to shew for it any texte of Scripture The consequence will be that your supper is purely their owne inuention This by your principles I shew For you haue no pure textes which say that which you affirmatiuely beleeue of the supper of which you hold those three thinges aforesayd principally It is figure c. that by the mouthe of fayth the body eateh c. you should distinctly sett downe that which of our fayth you deny in this matter from that which therein you positiuely beleeue for how be it that we did erre of which I haue shewed the contrary and that your negatiue propositions IESVS Christ is not in the Eucharist and the like were true it followeth not that that which you affirmatiuely beleeue most needes be true and that you erre not therein Because one goeth wrong one way is he which takes an other certaine to goe right may not both be out of their way Examine therfore your assertions and you finde not any shew of textes that teache that the supper is a figure of the body c. nor which speake of the mouth of faith Consequently your whole supper is a humane inuention Which being so in my opinion in the eating a good capō or a cock you may more easely remember the death of the sonne of God for that therein is made mention of the crowing of a cock then in eating a bit of bread For which cause you shall do more prudently to make of them a figure memorie then of a peece of bread which is no more holie then that you eate commonlie at your table It may be that some Caluiniste thinking himselfe better skilled in the Scriptures then the Ministers which composed the Confession of faith and cited for proofe therof those sacred textes they iudged most fauourable will vrge to prooue the supper to be a figure that which our Sauiour said Iohn 6. Vers 63. It is the spirit which quickeneth the flesh proffiteth nothing the words which I speake vnto you are spirit and life For awnswere 1. You must vnderstand that your Ministers are at variance whether in the 6. of S. Iohn anie thing be spoken of the supper Caluin in the fourth booke of his Instit cap. 17. § 33. Kemnicius and Zuinglius deny it How then will you establish this firme article of your faith vpon so weake a foundation doubted of by these of your owne faction How can you serue your selues of that passage against vs either for your figure or for your Spiritually 2. I reade not in this text figure and if anie one say that spiritt and figure is all one I may not beleeue him without his proofe and that by the pure Scripture And who perceaues not how ridiculous this deuise is the diuells are spirites are they figures the Angells and our soules are spirittes are they also figures God himself is he not a most pure spiritt is he a figure it belongs not to me to explicate this place I only shew that the pure word saith not that which the article conteineth consequently the Ministers mock vs. Yet by the way knowe that the sense of this texte is that our Sauiour would not giue vs to eate his flesh dead and in peeces as we eate of the ordinarie flesh as the Capharnaites imagined to eate of flesh in this manner proffitteth nothing