Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	body_n	bread_n	transubstantiation_n	2,166	5	10.9952	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62596	A sermon preached at White-hall, April the 4th, 1679 by John Tillotson ...	Tillotson, John, 1630-1694.	1679 (1679)	Wing T1233; ESTC R10423	16,980	46

the Sacrament is not bread but the body of Christ he hath only the evidence of his senses and he hath the very same evidence to prove that what he sees in the Sacrament is not the body of Christ but bread So that here ariseth a new controversy whether a man should believe his senses giving testimony against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation or bearing testimony to the Miracle which is wrought to confirm that Doctrine For there is just the same evidence against the truth of the Doctrine which there is for the truth of the Miracle So that the Argument for Transubstantiation and the Objection against it do just ballance one another and where the weights in both Scales are equal it is impossible that the one should weigh down the other and consequently Transubstantiation is not to be proved by a Miracle for that would be to prove to a man by something that he sees that he does not see what he sees And thus I have endeavoured as briefly and clearly as I could to give satisfaction to the first Enquiry I propounded viz. How we may discern between true and counterfeit Revelations and Doctrines I proceed now to the II. To whom this judgment of Discerning does appertain Whether to Christians in general or to some particular Person or Persons authorised by God to judge for the rest of mankind by whose judgment all men are concluded and bound up And this is an enquiry of no small Importance because it is one of the most fundamental Points in difference between Us and the Church of Rome And however in many particular Controversies as concerning Transubstantiation the Communion in one kind the Service of God in an unknown Tongue the business of Indulgences the Invocation of Saints the Worship of Images they are not able to offer any thing that is fit to move a reasonable and considerate man yet in this Controversy concerning the Judge of Controversies they are not destitute of some specious appearance of Reason which deserves to be weighed and considered Therefore that we may examine this matter to the bottom I shall do these three things 1. Lay down some Cautions and Limitations whereby we may understand how far the generality of Christians are allowed to judg in matters of Religion 2. I shall represent the grounds of this Principle 3. Endeavour to satisfy the main Objection of our Adversaries against it And likewise to shew that there is no such reason and necessity for an universal infallible Judg as they pretend I. I shall lay down some Cautions and Limitations by which we may understand how far the generality of Christians are allowed to judg in matters of Religion First Private Persons are only to judg for themselves and not to impose their Judgment upon others as if they had any Authority over them And this is reasonable because if it were otherwise a Man would deprive others of that liberty which he assumes to himself and which he can claim upon no other account but because it belongs to others equally with himself Secondly This liberty of judging is not so to be understood as to take away the necessity and use of Guides and Teachers in Religion Nor can this be denied to be a reasonable limitation because the knowledge of revealed Religion is not a thing born with us nor ordinarily supernaturally infused into men but is to be learned as other things are And if it be to be learned there must be some to teach and instruct others And they that will learn must be modest and humble and in those things of which they are no competent Judges they must give credit to their Teachers and trust their skill For instance every unlearned man is to take it upon the credit of those who are skilful That the Scriptures are truly and faithfully translated and for the understanding of obscure Texts of Scripture and more difficult points in Religion he is to rely upon those whose proper business and employment it is to apply themselves to the understanding of these things For in these cases every man is not capable of judging himself and therefore he must necessarily trust others And in all other things he ought to be modest and unless it be in plain matters which every man can judg of he ought rather to distrust himself than his Teacher And this respect may be given to a Teacher without either supposing him to be infallible or making an absolute resignation of my judgment to him A man may be a very able Teacher suppose of the Mathematicks and fit to have the respect which is due to a Teacher though he be not infallible in those Sciences and because Infallibility is not necessary to such a Teacher it is neither necessary nor convenient that I should absolutely resign up my Judgment to him For though I have reason to credit him within the compass of his Art in things which I do not know I am not therefore bound to believe him in things plain contrary to what I and all mankind do certainly know For example if upon pretence of his skill in Arithmetick which I am learning of him he should tell me That twice two do not make four but five though I believed him to be the best Mathematician in the World yet I cannot believe him in this thing Nor is there reason I should because I did not come to learn this of him but knew as much of that before as he or any man else could tell me The case is the same in matters of Religion in which there are some things so plain and lie so level to all capacities that every man is almost equally judg of them As I shall have occasion farther to shew by and by Thirdly Neither does this liberty of judging exempt men from a due submission and obedience to their Teachers and Governours Every man is bound to obey the lawful Commands of his Governours and what by publick consent and Authority is determined and established ought not to be gainsaid by private Persons but upon very clear evidence of the falshood or unlawfulness of it And this is every mans duty for the maintaining of Order and out of regard to the Peace and Unity of the Church which is not to be violated upon every scruple and frivolous pretence And when men are perverse and disobedient Authority is Judg and may restrain and punish them Fourthly Nor do I so far extend this Liberty of judging in Religion as to think every man fit to dispute the Controversies of Religion A great part of people are ignorant and of so mean capacity as not to be able to judg of the force of a very good Argument much less of the issue of a long Dispute and such persons ought not to engage in disputes of Religion but to beg God's direction and to rely upon their Teachers and above all to live up to the plain dictates of natural Light and the clear Commands of God's Word and this will

as this does tacitely involve a contradiction because upon such a supposition to despise God would be to obey him and yet to obey him is certainly to honour him So that in this case to honour God and to despise him would be the same thing and equal contempts of him In like manner it would be vain to pretend any Revelation from God That there is no life after this nor rewards and punishments in another World because this is contrary to those natural apprehensions which have generally possest mankind and would take away the main force and sanction of the divine Laws The like may be said concerning any pretended Revelation from God which evidently contradicts those natural Notions which men have of good and evil as That God should command or allow Sedition and Rebellion Perfidiousness and Perjury because the practise of these would be apparently destructive of the peace and happiness of Mankind and would naturally bring confusion into the World But God is not the God of Confusion but of Order which St. Paul appeals to as a Principle naturally known Upon the same account nothing ought to be entertained as a Divine Revelation which overthrows the Principles of natural Religion because that would take away the certainty of Divine Revelation it self which supposeth the truth of those Principles For instance whoever pretends any Revelation that brings the Providence of God into question does by that very thing make such a Revelation questionable For if God take no care of the World have no concernment for humane affairs why should we believe that he makes any Revelation of his Will to men And by this Principle Moses will have false Prophets to be tried Deut. 13.1 If there arise among you a Prophet and giveth thee a sign or wonder and the sign or the wonder come to pass whereof he spake unto thee saying Let us go after other Gods and let us serve them thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet And he gives the reason of this ver 5. because he hath spoken unto you to turn you away from the Lord your God which brought you out of the Land of Egypt Here is a case wherein a false Prophet is supposed to work a true Miracle to give credit to his Doctrine which in other cases the Scripture makes the sign of a true Prophet but yet in this case he is to be rejected as an Impostor Because the Doctrine he teacheth would draw men off from the worship of the true God who is naturally known and had manifested himself to the people of Israel in so miraculous a manner by bringing them out of the Land of Egypt So that a Miracle is not enough to give credit to a Prophet who teacheth any thing contrary to that natural Notion which men have That there is but one God who only ought to be worshipped 5. Nothing ought to be received as a Divine Doctrine and Revelation without good evidence that it is so that is without some Argument sufficient to satisfy a prudent and considerate man Now supposing there be nothing in the matter of the Revelation that is evidently contrary to the Principles of Natural Religion nor to any former Revelation which hath already received a greater and more solemn attestation from God Miracles are owned by all Mankind to be a sufficient Testimony to any Person or Doctrine that they are from God This was the Testimony which God gave to Moses to satisfy the people of Israel that he had sent him Exod. 4.1 2. Moses said They will not believe me nor hearken unto my voice for they will say The Lord hath not appeared unto thee Upon this God endues him with a power of Miracles to be an evidence to them that they may believe that the God of their Fathers Abraham Isaac and Jacob hath appeared unto thee And all along in the Old Testament when God sent his Prophets to make a new Revelation or upon any strange and extraordinary message he always gave credit to them by some Sign or Wonder which they foretold or wrought And when he sent his Son into the World he gave Testimony to him by innumerable great and unquestionable Miracles more and greater than Moses and all the Prophets had wrought And there was great Reason for this because our Saviour came not only to publish a new Religion to the World but to put an end to that Religion which God had instituted before And now that the Gospel hath had the confirmation of such Miracles as never were wrought upon any other occasion no Evidence inferior to this can in reason controul this Revelation or give credit to any thing contrary to it And therefore though the false Prophets and Antichrists foretold by our Saviour did really work Miracles yet they were so inconsiderable in comparison of our Saviours that they deserve no credit in opposition to that Revelation which had so clear a Testimony given to it from Heaven by Miracles besides all other concurring Arguments to confirm it 6. And Lastly No Argument is sufficient to prove a Doctrine or Revelation to be from God which is not clearer and stronger than the Difficulties and Objections against it Because all Assent is grounded upon Evidence and the strongest and clearest evidence always carries it But where the evidence is equal on both sides that can produce nothing but a suspence and doubt in the mind whether the thing be true or not If Moses had not confuted Pharaoh's Magicians by working Miracles which they could not work they might reasonably have disputed it with him who had been the true Prophet But when he did works plainly above the power of their Magick and the Devil to do then they submitted and acknowledged that there was the Finger of God So likewise though a person work a Miracle which ordinarily is a good evidence that he is sent by God yet if the Doctrine he brings be plainly contrary to those natural Notions which we have of God this is a better objection aginst the truth of his Doctrine than the other is a proof of it as is plain in the case which Moses puts Deut. 13. which I mentioned before Upon the same account no man can reasonably believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation to be revealed by God because every man hath as great evidence that Transubstantiation is false as any man can pretend to have that God hath revealed any such thing Suppose Transubstantiation to be part of the Christian Doctrine it must have the same confirmation with the whole and that is Miracles But of all Doctrines in the world it is peculiarly incapable of being proved by a Miracle For if a Miracle were wrought for the proof of it the very same assurance which a man hath of the truth of the Miracle he hath of the falshood of the Doctrine that is the clear evidence of his senses for both For that there is a Miracle wrought to prove that what he sees in