Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	believe_v	divine_a	revelation_n	3,649	5	9.8192	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56393	Reasons for abrogating the test imposed upon all members of Parliament, anno 1678, Octob. 30 in these words, I A.B. do solemnly and sincerely, in the presence of God, profess, testifie, and declare, that I do believe that in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper there is not any transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, at, or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever, and that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary, or any other saint, and the sacrifice of the mass, as they are now used in the Church of Rome, are superstitious and idolatrous : first written for the author's own satisfaction, and now published for the benefit of all others whom it may concern.	Parker, Samuel, 1640-1688.	1688 (1688)	Wing P467; ESTC R5001	62,716	138

enough in the Cause by making a Noise upon these Two loud Engines they could at pleasure drown the Dispute Now ever since this Alteration of the State of the War between the Two Churches we hear little or nothing at all of the real Presence in the Cause but it is become as great a Stranger to the i.e. their Church of England as Transubstantiation it self but the whole matter is resolved into a meer Sacramental Figure and Representation and a Participation only of the Benefits of the Body and Blood of Christ by Faith. I know not any one Writer of that Party of Men that hath ever own'd any higher Mystery but on the contrary they state all the Disputes about the Eucharist upon Sacramentarian Principles and with them to assert the true reality of the Presence of our Saviour's Body and Blood in the Sacrament as naturally resolves it self into Transubstantiation as that does into Idolatry And the main Argument insisted upon by them is the natural Impossibility of the thing it self to the Divine Omnipotence which beside the prophane Boldness of prescribing Measures to God's Attributes in a Mystery that they do not comprehend 't is as appears by the Premises a Defiance to the Practice of all Churches who have ever acknowledged an incomprehensible Mystery not subject to the Examination of Humane Reason but to be imbraced purely upon the Authority of a Divine Revelation And therefore that ought to be the only matter of Dispute For if it be a Divine Revelation as all Christendom hath hitherto believed that determines the Case without any further Enquiry and if any Man will not be satisfied with that Authority he makes very Bold with his Maker And Men of those Principles would no doubt make admirable Work with the Definitions of Articles of Faith by the Four first general Councils But to let their new way of Arguing pass it is these Men that first set up Sacramentarian Principles in this Church and then blew them into the Parliament House raising there every Session continual Tumults about Religion and it is to their Caballing with the Members that we owe these new and unpresidented TESTS Perhaps to have their own Decrees and Writings established by Law and imposed upon the whole Nation as Gospel In short if they own a real Presence we see from the Premises how little the Controversie is between that and Transubstantiation as it is truly and ingeniously understood by all reformed Churches If they do not they disown the Doctrine both of the Church of England and the Church Catholick and then if they own only a figurative Presence and it is plain they own no other they stand condemned of Heresie by almost all Churches in the Christian World and if this be the thing intended to be set up as it certainly is by the Authors and Contrivers of it by renouncing Transubstantiation then the Result and Bottom of the Law is under this Pretence to bring a new Heresy by Law into the Church of England And yet upon this Foot I find the Controversie stands at this present Day between the Bishop of Rome or the Bishop of Condom on one part and little Iulian in the Back-shop with his Dragoons on the other part The Bishop establishes the Real Presence in Opposition to the Figurative His Answerer turns the whole Mystery into meer Type and Figure by seting up a figurative Interpretation of the Words of Institution and yet confesses it at the same time to be somewhat more than a Figure To this it is reply'd I would gladly know what that is which is not the thing it self but yet is more than a meer Figure of it To this it is answered That the Presence is Spiritual but yet Real but how a Corporeal Substance should have a real Spiritual Presence is a thing that requires more Philosophy to clear it up than Transubstantiation or in the Words of the Author himself We suppose it to be a plain Contradiction that Body should have any Existence but what alone is proper to a Body that is Corporeal This is their last Resolution of this Controversie that a true real Presence is a Contradiction and so I think is a real spiritual Presence of a bodily Substance This Scent the whole Chace follows and unanimously agree in this Cry That there is no Presence but either meerly Figurative and that shuts out all Reality and is universally condemned by all the Reformation or meerly Spiritual i.e. the present Effects and Benefits of the absent Body and Blood of Christ which hath been all along equally cashiered by all other Reformed Churches as the other grand Scandal of Zuinglianism Thus the London Answerer to the Oxford Discourses There can be no real Presence but either Figuratively in the Elements or Spiritually in the Souls of those who worthily receive them So Dr. St. All which the Doctrine of our Church implies by this Phrase is only a real Presence of Christ's invisible Power and Grace so in and with the Elements as by the faithful receiving of them to convey real and spiritual Effects to the Souls of Men. The Oxford Answerer to the Oxford Discourses allows no other real Presence but the virtual Presence that is the meer Effect So the popular Author of the Discourse against Transubstantiation makes no Medium between the meer figurative Presence and Transubstantiation so that all other Presence that is not meerly Figurative comes under the Notion of Transubstantiation Now the gentlest Character he is pleased to give of this Monsieur is this That the Business of Transubstantiation is not a Controversie of Scripture against Scripture or of Reason against Reason but of downright Impudence against the plain meaning of the Scripture and all the Sence and Reason of all Mankind But besides the intolerable Rudeness of the Charge against all the Learned Men of the Church of Rome as the worst of Sots and Ideots if there be no middle real Presence between Transubstantiation and the Figure he hath cast all the Protestant Churches into the same Condemnation of Sots and Fools But howsoever rash and preposterous it may be for Presons that believe the real Presence to abjure the Word Transubstantiation ye to determine any part of Divine Worship in the Christian Church to be in its own Nature Idolatry is inhumane and barbarous IDOLATRY is a Stabbing and Cut-throat Word its least Punishment is the greatest that can be both Death and Damnation and good Reason too when the Crime is no less than renouncing the true God that made Heaven and Earth Thus Exod. 22. 20. He that sacrificeth unto any God save unto the Lord or Iehovah only he shall be utterly destroyed Deut. 13. 6. If thy Brother the Son of thy Mother or thy Son or thy Daughter or the Wife of thy Bosom or thy Friend which is as thine own Soul entice thee secretly saying Let us go and serve other Gods which thou hast not known thou nor thy Fathers namely

Fathers of the Council believed the Reality of the New substantial Presence under the Old Accidents yet they had more Temper and Discretion than to Authorise it by conciliar Determination and therefore use only the Word Species and no other Word is used by Nicolas II Gregory VII and Innocent III that are thought the Three great Innovators in the Argument of the Real Presence that properly signifies Appearance but nothing of Physical or Natural Reality so that tho the Presence under the Species be real yet as the Council hath defined it it is not Natural but Sacramental which Sacramental Real Presence they express by the Word Transubstantiation and recommend the Propriety of the Word to the Acceptance of Christendom This is the short History of the Real Presence in the Church of Rome where as far as I can discern the thing it self hath been owned in all Ages of the Church the Modus of it never defined but in the Schools and tho they have fansied Thousand Definitions to themselves their Metaphysicks were never admitted into the Church And so I proceed to give an Account of it as it hath been defin'd in the Protestant Churches where we shall find much the same Harmony of Faith and Discord of Philosophy as in the Church of Rome And first we must begin with the famous Confession of Ausburg that was drawn up by Melancthon and in the Year 1530 presented to Charles the Fifth by several Princes of Germany as a Declaration of the Faith of the first Reformers and as the only true standard of the Ancient Protestant Religion The Confesion consists of Two parts I. What Doctrines themselves taught II. What Abuses they desired to be reformed As to the later the Emperor undertook to procure a General Council As to the former particularly this Article of the Presence in the Sacrament they have published it in two several forms In the Latin Edition it is worded thus Concerning the Lords Supper we teach That the Body and Blood of Christ are there present indeed and are distributed to the Receivers at the Lords Supper and condemn those that teach otherwise In the German Edition it is worded thus Concerning the Lords Supper we teach That the true Body and Blood of Christ are truly present in the Supper under the species of Bread and Wine and are there distributed and received And in an Apology written by the same hand and published the Year following it is thus expressed We believe That in the Supper of our Lord the Body and Blood of Christ are really and substantially present and are Exhibited indeed with those things that are seen the Bread and Wine This belief our Divines constantly maintain and we find not only the Church of Rome hath asserted the Corporeal Presence but that the Greek Church hath anciently as well as at this time asserted the same as appears by their Canon Missae The same Author Explains himself more at large in his Epistle to Fredericus Myconius I send you says he the passages out of the Ancients concerning the Lord's Supper to prove that they held the same with us namely That the Body and Blood of our Lord are there present indeed And after divers Citations he concludes That seeing this is the express Doctrine of the Scriptures and constant Tradition of the Church I cannot conceive how by the name of the Body of Christ should only be understood the sign of an absent Body for though the Word of God frequently makes use of Metaphors yet there is a great difference to be made between Historical Relations and Divine Institutions In the first matters transacted among Men and visible to the Sence are related and here we are allow'd and often forced to speak figuratively But if in Divine Precepts or Revelations concerning the Nature or the Will of God we should take the same liberty wise Men cannot but fore-see the Mischiefs that would unavoidably follow There would be no certainty of any Article of Faith. And he gives an instance in the Precept of Circumcision to Abraham That upon those Terms the good Patriarch might have argued with himself That God never intended to impose a thing so seemingly absurd as the words sound and that therefore the Precept is to be understood only of a Figurative or Metaphorical Circumcision the Circumcision of our Lusts. So far this Learned Reformer Now the Authority of Melancthon weighs more with us of the Church of England as the learned Dr. St. very well observes that in the settlement of our Reformation there was no such regard had to Luther or Calvin as to Erasmus and Melancthon whose Learning and Moderation were in greater Esteem here than the fiery spirits of the other and yet few Writers have asserted the Substantial and Corporeal Presence in higher terms than this moderate Reformer and though he may sometimes have varied in Forms of Speech he continued constant and immovable in the substance of the same Doctrine For in the Confession of the Saxon Churches at the Compiling of which he was chief Assistant drawn up in the Year 1551 to have been presented to the Council of Trent a true and substantial Presence is asserted during the time of Ministration We teach say they That Sacraments are Divine Institutions and that the things themselves out of the use desing'd are no Sacraments but in the use Christ is verily and substantially present and the Body and Blood of Christ are indeed taken by the Receivers There seems to have been one singular Notion in this Confession That the Real and Substantial Presence lasts no longer than the Ministration but that is nothing to our Argument as long as a substantial Presence is asserted In the Year 1536 an Assembly of the Divines of the Ausburg Confession on one side and the Divines of Vpper Germany on the other conven'd at Wirtemberg by the procurement and mediation of Bucer who undertook to moderate between both parties where they agreed in this form of Confession We believe according to the words of Irenaeus That the Eucharist consists of two things one Earthly the other Heavenly and therefore believe and teach That the Body and Blood of Christ are truly and substantially exhibited and received with the Bread and Wine This is subscribed by the chief Divines of both Parties and approved by the Helvetian Ministers themselves The Bohemian Waldenses in their Confession of Faith presented to Ferdinand King of the Romans and Bohemia declare expressly That the Bread and Wine are the very Body and Blood of Christ and that Christ is in the Sacrament with his Natural Body but by another way of Existence than at the Right-hand of God. In the Greek Form of Consecration this Prayer was used Make this Bread the precious Body of thy Christ and that which is in this Cup the precious Blood of thy Christ changing them by thy Holy Spirit which words are taken out of the Liturgies of St. Chrysostom and St. Basil. And Ieremias

the Learned Patriarch of Constantinople in his Declaration of the Faith of the Greek Church in Answer to the Lutheran Divines affirms That the Catholick Church believes that after the Consecration the Bread is changed into the very Body of Christ and the Wine into the very Blood by the Holy Spirit In the Year 1570. was held a Council in Poland of the Divines of the Ausburg the Helvetian and the Bohemian Confessions in which they agreed in this Declaration As to that unhappy Controversie of the Supper of our Lord We agree in the Sence of the Words as they are rightly understood by the Fathers particularly by Irenaeus who affirms that the Mystery consists of two things one Earthly and another Heavenly Neither do we affirm that the Elements and Signs are meer naked and empty Things signified to Believers But to speak more clearly and distinctly we agree that we believe and confess the substantial Presence of Christ is not only signified to Believers but is really held forth distributed and exhibited the Symbols being joined with the thing it self and not meerly naked according to the nature of Sacraments This Confession was confirmed at several times by several following Synods in the same Kingdom at Cracow 1573. at Peterkaw 1578. at Walhoff 1583. The First Man that opposed the real and substantial Presence was Carolostadius Archdeacon of Wirtenberg of whom the candid and ingenious Melancthon gives this Character That he was a furious Man void both of Wit Learning and common Sence not capable of any Act of Civility or good Manners so far from any appearances of Piety that there are most manifest Footsteps of his Wickedness He condemns all the Civil Laws of the heathen Nations as Unlawful and would now have all Nations governed by the judicial Law of Moses and embrac'd the whole Doctrine of the Anabaptists He sets up the Controversie about the Sacraments against Luther meerly out of Envy and Emulation not out of any Sence of Religion and much more to the same Purpose The Truth of all which he says a great part of Germany both can and will attest Tho the greatest Proof of his Levity is his own Writing when all that Disorder and Schism that he made in the Church of which he profess'd himself a Member was founded upon no better Bottom than this slender Nicety That when our Saviour said this is my Body he pointed not to the Bread but to himself But in this he is vehemently opposed by his Master Luther in behalf of a true Corporeal Presence especially in his Book Contra Coelestes Prophetas seu Fanaticos wherein he lays down this Assertion That by the Demonstrative Pronoun hoc Christ is declared to be Truly and carnally present with his Body in the Supper and that the Communication of the Body of Christ of which St. Paul speaks is to eat the Body of Christ in the Bread neither is that Communication Spiritual only but Corporeal as it is in the personal Vnion of Christ So we are to conceive of the Sacrament in which the Bread and the Body make up one thing and after an incomprehensible manner which no Reason can Fathom become one Essence or Mass from whence as Man becomes God so the Bread becomes the Body And in a Sermon preached by him the same Year at Wirtemberg against the Sacramentarian Hereticks as he calls them The Devil opposes us by his Fanatick Emissaries in the Blaspheming the Supper of our Lord that dream the Bread and Wine are there only given as a Sign or Symbol of our Christian Profession nor will allow that the Body and Blood of Christ are there present themselves tho the Words are express and perspicuous Take eat this is my Body In this Controversie he was engaged all his Life against Carolostadius and other Apostates from the Ausburg Confession giving them no better Titles than of Fanaticks Hereticks Betrayers of Christ Blasphemers of the Holy Ghost and Seducers of the World. And in his last Book against the Divines of Lovain in the Year 1545 the Year before his Death he makes this solemn Declaration We seriously believe the Zuinglians and all Sacramentarians that deny the Body and Blood of Christ to be received Ore carnali in the Blessed Sacrament to be Hereticks and no Members of the Church of Christ So that hitherto it is evident That the whole Body of the true Old Protestants both in their publick Confessions and private Writings unanimously asserted the Corporeal and Substantial Presence as they use the Words promiscuously As for the Calvinian Churches Grotius hath observed very truly That the Calvinists express themselves in a quite different Language in their Confessions from what they do in their Disputations where they declare themselves more frankly In their Confessions they tell you That the Body and Blood of Christ are taken Really Substantially Essentially but when you come to Discourse'em closer the whole Business is Spiritual without Substance only with a signifying Mystery and all the reality is turned into a receiving by Faith which says he is a perfect contradiction to the Doctrine of the whole Catholick Church So they declare in the Conference at Presburg with the Lutherans That in the Sacrament Christ indeed gives the Substance of his Body and Blood by the working of the Holy Ghost And when Luther signify'd to Bucer his Jealously of the Divines of Strasburgh and Bazil as if they believed nothing to be present in the Sacrament but the Bread and Wine Bucer returns this Answer in the name and with the consent of all his Brethren This is their Faith and Doctrine concerning the Sacrament That in it by the Institution and Power of our Lord his true Body and his true Blood are indeed exhibited given and taken together with the visible Signs of Bread and Wine as his own Words declare This is the Doctrine not only of Zuinglius and Oecolampadius but the Divines of Upper Germany have declared the same in their publick Confessions and Writings So that the Difference is rather about the manner of the Absence and Presence than about the Presence or Absence themselves And the Reformed French Church in the year 1557. declare themselves much after the same manner to a Synod of Reform'd German Divines held at Wormes We confess that in the Supper of our Lord not only all the Benefits of Christ but the very Substance of the Son of Man the very Flesh and the very Blood that he shed for us to be there not meerly signify'd or Symbolically Typically or Figuratively as a Memorial of a thing absent but truly held forth exhibited and offered to be received together with the Symbols that are by no means to be thought naked which by virtue of God's Promise always have the thing it self truly and certainly conjoin'd with them whether they are given to the good or to the bad But what need of more Witnesses when Calvin himself the very Vrim and Thummim of the Calvinian

principal Authors may be seen in the late Bishop of Durham's Historia Transubstantiationis Iohn Poinet Bishop of Winchester who wrote a very learned Book upon the Argument entituled Diallacticon to explain the Sence of the Church of England about it Iohn Iewel Bishop of Salisbury the learned Bishops Andrews and Bilson Isaac Casaubon in the Name and by the Command of King Iames the First in his Answer to Cardinal Perron Mr. Hooker Iohn Bishop of Rochester Montague Bishop of Norwich Iames Primate of Armagh Francis Bishop of Ely Archbishop Laud Bishop Overal and the Archbishop of Spalato To this Catalogue variety of other Writers might be added but either here are Witnesses enough or there never can be Neither need I produce their Testimonies when they are so vugarly known and have been so frequently recited I shall content my self with the Two principal the most learned and reverend Prelates Poinet and Andrews The First wrote his Diallacticon concerning the Truth Nature and Substance of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist A Book much approved and often commended by Grotius tho he knew not the Author as the best Discourse upon the Argument and the most proper Method to restore the Peace of the Christian Church in that Point which he further says was for that purpose translated into French by a reformed Divine by the Advice of his Brethren I have not the Book by me but the Design and fundamental Assertion is to prove as Dr. Cosins recites it that the Eucharist is not only a Figure of the Body of our Lord but contains in it the Verity Nature and Substance and therefore that these Terms ought not to be exploded because the Ancients generally used them in their Discourses upon this Argument But Bishop Andrews his Passage though grown Vulgar and Thread-bare by being so continually quoted best deserves our Observation because by that means it is made not only a Declaration of his own Sence but of all that followed him in it and that is of almost all the learned Men of the Church of England that have succeeded from that time The Passage is in his Answer to Bellarmine in these Words The Cardinal is not ignorant except wilfully that Christ hath said This is my Body Now about the Object we are both agreed all the Controversy is about the Modus We firmly believe that it is the Body of Christ but after what manner it is made to be so there is not a Word extant in the Gospel and therefore we reject it from being a Matter of Faith. We will if you please place it among the Decrees of the Schools but by no means among the Articles of Religion What Durandus said of old we approve of We hear the Word feel the Effect know not the Manner believe the Presence And so we believe the Presence too and that real no less than your selves Only we define nothing rashly of its Modus neither do we curiously inquire into it no more than how the Blood of Christ cleanseth us in our Baptism no more than how in the Incarnation of Christ the Humane Nature is united to the Divine We rank it in the Order of Mysteries and indeed the whole Eucharist it self is nothing but Mystery what remains beside ought to be consumed by Fire that is as the Fathers elegantly express it to be ador'd by Faith not examined by Reason This was his State of the Controversie that was then perus'd and approv'd of by King Iames and ever after retained by the Divines of the Church of England down to the Rebellion and Subversion of Church and State and then it was carried into Banishment with its Confessors For whilst his late Majesty resided at Cologn it was there commonly objected in his own Presence by the Roman Divines against the Church of England That all its Members were meer Zuinglians and Sacramentarians that believed only an imaginary Presence Upon this Dr. Cosins who was then Dean of the Chapel Royal by his Majesties Command writes a Discourse to vindicate the Church of England from that Calumny and to give an Account of its Sence concerning the true and real Presence in which he declares himself to the same purpose with all the forementioned Authors all along vehemently asserting the true reality of the Presence and still declaring the Modus to be ineffable unsearchable above our Senses and above our Reason So that still all Parties are agreed in the thing it self were it not for that one mistaken Supposition That the Church of Rome hath not only defin'd the Matter but the Manner which she is so far from pretending to attempt that before she proceeded to decree any thing about it she declar'd that it was so incomprehensible that it was not capable of being defin'd as we see all Christendom hath done beside Now after all this I leave it to the common Sence and Ingenuity of Mankind whether any thing can be more barbarous and profane than to make the renouncing of a Mystery so unanimously receiv'd a State TEST And that is my present Concernment about it not as a Point of Divinity but as turned into a Point of State. Thus far proceeded the Old Church of England which as it was banished so it was restored with the Crown But by reason of the long Interval of Twenty Years between the Rebellion and Restitution there arose a new Generation of Divines that knew not Joseph These Men underhand deserted and undermined the Old Church as it stood upon Divine Right and Catholick Principles and instead of it crected a New Church of their own Contrivance consisting partly of Independency partly of Erastianism with the Independent leaving no standing Authority in the Christian Church over private Christians but leaving every Man to the arbitrary Choice of his own Communion with Erastus allowing no Jurisdiction to the Christian Church but what is derived from the Civil Magistrate These Principles being Pleasing to the Wantonness of the People these Men soon grew popular and soon had the Confidence to call themselves the Church of England But the principal Object of their Zeal was the Destruction of Popery and the only Measure of Truth with them was Opposition to the Church of Rome And therefore they assum'd to themselves the Management of that great and glorious War. And as they managed it upon new Principles or indeed none at all never writing for our Church but only against that Church so they advanced new Arguments to represent the Church of Rome as Odious as possible to the People Among these the Two most frightful Topicks were Transubstantiation and Idolatry One was a very hard Word and the other a very ugly one These Two Words they made the Two great Kettle-drums to the Protestant Guards They were continually beating upon them with all their Force and whenever they found themselves at any Disadvantage with an Enemy as they often were by pressing too far for they never thought they did