Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
church_n according_a scripture_n sense_n 4,218 5 6.6103 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
B00820 A briefe replie of Thomas Udall, Gent. to a short memorandum, or shew of answere against his booke intituled: A briefe view of the weake grounds of poperie: by B.C. student in diuinitie. Udall, Thomas. 1609 (1609) STC 24508.3; ESTC S95630 21,665 59

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Boniface the Arch-bishop of Mentz Hosius Eckius and others Against which Master B. C. reasoneth thus If Cardinall Cusanus neuer writ any such booke then there is no such blasphemie But Cardinall Cusanus neuer writ any such booke Ergo there is no such blasphemie I denie the consequence of the proposition though Master B. C. would insinuate by the question and answere That there had béene no other proofe to iustifie my accusation but that of the Cardinals saying But where is this blasphemie conteined In a Booke as he telleth vs of Cardinall Cusanus which is intituled De Authoritate c. Of the Authoritie c. What In that booke onely And not also in diuers other places and authors Why are all those omitted Why is this one singled out of the heard Surely because this seemed likely to admit some cauill they were out of daunger But is it a iust difference whether the blasphemie be in the Title of the Booke or in the booke it selfe For albeit it were not in the title of the booke as both Bishop Iewell and Doctor Downam affirme it is yet it is in the booke of his Epistles as I haue shewed in the Preface And to conuince euidently this blasphemie of the Cardinals I will shew once againe The Blasphemie mainteined is that they were to receiue the Communion in both kindes according to the Scriptures against which the Cardinall opposeth himselfe in diuers places of his Epistles and for the iustifying of his assertion he vrgeth these words as I haue set them downe in the Preface It is no maruaile saith he though the practise of the Church Nicola Cusa ad Bohem Epist 7 expound the Scriptures at one time one way and at another time another way For the vnderstanding or sense of the Scriptures runneth with the practise and that sense agreeing with the practise is the quickning spirit And a litle after he concludes And therefore the Scriptures follow the Church but contrariwise the Church followeth not the Scriptures Now that which precedes in authoritie is aboue that which followes and so the Church by their diuinity is auouched to bee aboue the Scriptures And if the Church follow not the Scriptures it is euident if God and his word be both one That he that is not with the Scripture is against it And so the matter of the Epistle is all one with that title of the authoritie of the Church and Councel aboue and against the Scriptures though the Epistle it selfe be not so intituled And that you may know this opinion or blasphemie is not peculiar to the Cardinall or to one Papist onely Eckius in his Enchiridion of the authoritie of the Church Answ the third hath set down that this position The Scripture is greater then the authoritie of the Church is to bee reputed amongst hereticall assertions and that the contrary proposition is Catholique And this blasphemie of theirs is so generall that you shall find this sentence often inserted in the Common Law The Church is aboue the Scriptures The other place of the Cardinals there noted is this This is the iudgement saith he of all them that thinke rightly that they found the authoritie Ad Bohem. Epist 2. and vnderstanding of the Scriptures in the allowance of the Church and not contrariwise lay the foundation of the Church in the authoritie of the Scriptures Now if this bee sound diuinitie then may your proud Clergie assume vnto themselues to bee Lords of the Scriptures For how directly so euer the Scriptures be against them as in this instance of the communion to be had in both kinds it is most directly they may giue it what sense they list yea expound it to day after one fashion and to morrow after another as shall please the Pope and his Clergie which can no way agree with the spirit of God who is alwayes one and the same And if this conuince not the Cardinals blasphemie See the 3. Epistle of the same booke pag. 838. where hee saith When the Church chaungeth her iudgement God also chaungeth his But admit I had failed in this proofe yet had the other testimonies bene sufficient to approoue the truth of my accusation if these and such like may iustly be tearmed blasphemies a Syluest Prier cont Lutheri conclusiones de potest Pap. That indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authoritie of the Scriptures but by the authoritie of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater b Dist 40. C. Si Papa That they rather desire the ancient institution of Christian Religion from the Pope then from the holy Scripture c Eckius de Eccles That the Scripture is not authenticall but by the authoritie of the Church d Henric. Magist Sacr Pa●atii Romae ad legat Bohem sub Felice pap 1447. That the Pope may change the holy Gospell c. e Vid. Kempnit exam part 1. pag. 47. That the Scripture without the authority of the church is of no better worth then Esopes Fables And because I will bee as charitable to Master B. C. and as full of good wishes though I haue no hope of his conuersion as he is to me I could wish that he would not imploy his time so badly as to colour or iustifie such open and palpable blasphemie And surely would such as read both Popish and Protestants bookes Trie the spirits whether they be of God or no would not the Popish Priests prohibite the reading of our bookes would the Papists therin hold any indifferencie it were not possible that they could be so sedused with Popery B. C. Sect. 3. IN his fourth page thus he writeth Yea Arias Montanus a chiefe Papist in his Hebrew Bible writeth in the forefront and principall leafe of the booke There are addded saith he in this edition the bookes written in Greeke which the Catholike Church following the Canon of the Hebrews reckneth amongst the Apocrypha The true sense of Arias Montanus words is corrupted either by Master Vdall or some other from whom he had them by foysting in diuers of their owne That learned man in the edition of the Hebrew Bible Arituerplae ex officin● Christoph Plaut 1584. with the Latin interlineall interpretation in the Title page saith There are adioyned to this edition the bookes written in Greeke which are called Apocrypha Hee saith not they bee Apocrypha but that they are so called by some that is the Iewes who exclude them from their Hebrew Canon which he had there set foorth That other addition viz. which the Catholike Church following the Canon of the Hebrewes reckoneth amongst the Apocrypha vpon which the force of his charge dependeth are not in Arias Montanus where Master Vdall had them himselfe best knoweth T. V. IT is true that in the fourth page I haue shewed how the Papists dissent from the Fathers both auncient and moderne The reason there may thus be deduced That Church which dissents from the Fathers both antient