Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	object_n	reason_n	use_v	10,092	5	11.0614	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47336	A second dialogue between a new Catholick convert and a Protestant shewing why he cannot believe the doctrine of transubstantiation, though he do firmly believe the doctrine of the Trinity.	Kidder, Richard, 1633-1703.	1687 (1687)	Wing K411; ESTC R17457	3,659	8

SECOND DIALO●●● Between a New Catholick Convert AND A PROTESTANT Shewing why he cannot believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Though he do firmly believe the Doctrine Of the Trinity LONDON Printed for B. Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1687. IMPRIMATUR Decemb. 3. 1686. Guil. Needham A Second Dialogue Between a new CATHOLICK CONVERT AND A Protestant c. A. SIR I much rejoyce to meet you thus happily and I hope I find you at leisure B. I am not onely at leisure but very much disposed to discourse with you farther of that matter which you commended to my consideration when we were last together A. And I hope you have duly considered it if you have done so I make no doubt but you are of my mind B. I do not find in my self any inclination so prevailing as that which I have towards truth and you will believe me when I tell you that in matters of this nature I am not likely to be drawn from it by any worldly interest I have the indifference of a Traveller and desire nothing but to find the right way to Heaven A. This perswasion I have had of you always and as this disposition to embrace the truth where ever it is well becomes an honest mind so I do not fear but you are by this time convinced that when you believe the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity you cannot reject the belief of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation For you remember that this is the question that we disputed on when we met last B. You are very right when you say that was the question between us And I do very well remember that you used these very words As these two Doctrines have equal ground from Scripture Pag. 2. Reason and Tradition so is there the same obligation of your receiving the one as well as the other I do freely own that I believe the H. Trinity and that I do not believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and therefore do not think my self obliged to believe the one because I believe the other And if you please to give me the hearing I will frankly tell you why I cannot believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation true and then I 'll give you my reasons why though I do believe the Holy Trinity I do not think my self obliged for the same reason to believe your Doctrine of Transubstantiation A. As to the first of these you may I conceive spare your pains I desire not to hear your reasons against that Doctrine of the Catholick Church 'T is the other matter you are most concerned in viz. to give good reason why you do not believe the one as well as the other But I give you liberty to proceed in your own way B. I shall be very brief as to the first of these and onely touch upon some things that do absolutely hinder me from believing this Doctrine of Transubstantiation Nothing is more certain than that this Doctrine destroys the evidence of Sense and consequently subverts our whole Religion We cannot be certain of the truth of the Miracles which Jesus did nor of his Resurrection if our senses are not to be credited even then when the object of them is at a due distance and the medium and organ rightly disposed and all other requisites in due order And by the very same r●●●●● I believe this Doctrine true I may suspect the rest 〈◊〉 Religion In a word it seems to me to be a 〈…〉 falshood and nothing can be more evidently 〈◊〉 ●●nifestly true than this is manifestly false And you will in vain attempt to prove any of your Doctrines from the Bible when according to this Doctrine I may not trust my Eyes and may as well deny that there is any such place of Scripture which you alledge as you can affirm the truth of this Doctrine against the evidence of sense Besides it labours with difficulties and absurdities that are insupportable A. But we are not to reject a Doctrine because it is attended with some considerable difficulties for then we may reject that of the Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation and Resurrection of our Bodies And there are great difficulties in the account of the genealogy of Jesus by St. Matthew and St. Luke and yet I presume you believe these Doctrines and do not question the truth of either Evangelist how inconsistent soever they may seem to be one with another B. Mistake me not Sir I am far from thinking that we are to reject those Doctrines which are attended with great difficulties But yet we are certain that Doctrine cannot be true which if it were allowed so to be would subvert the whole Religion and leave nothing certain or true but it self nor leave us any evidence that it self is true A. Let me intreat you to speak to the main point that is give me your reasons why when you believe the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity you should reject this of Transubstantiation for if this be attended with great difficulties so is the other B. This I will readily do but must tell you again that I do not reject any Doctrine because of the difficulties attending on it A. Assign then the reasons why when you do believe the Trinity you deny that Doctrin● which hath Equal Ground for it from Scripture Reason and Tradition B. I can by no means grant that it hath Equal Ground And I will therefore give you the reasons which you demand And First The Doctrine of the Trinity is revealed in the Scripture in this both sides are agreed The other Doctrine is not revealed so the Protestants with one consent affirm Salmeron To. 9. tract 16. And indeed those of your Church grant that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not evidently revealed in Holy Writ Bellarmin de Euchar. l. 3. cap. 23. Scotus affirms as Bellarmin confesseth and thinks his opinion not altogether improbable that Transubstantiation cannot be evidently proved from any express Scripture Now the Fathers of the Council of Nice urge the Text of H. Writ against the Arians But the Church of Rome maintains their Doctrine upon another bottom and that is the authority and declaration of the Church A. But do we not bring Texts of Scripture for the proof of this Doctrine B. That you do frequently but then the greater and wiser of your Divines will not lay the stress of the cause upon Scripture I except out of this number Mr. Sclater of Putney Consens vet pag. 20. who is for the literal sense of those words This is my Body because the nature of a last Will and Testament requires it should be so But alas he considers not what follows where 't is said in these words of this last Will and Testament that the Cup is the New Testament of his Bloud where he will be forced to acknowledge a figure or two But he that can prove Transubstantiation from the Rabbias may be allowed a greater liberty than other men think fit to take A. Have you a●y other rea●on to alledge why you do not when you believe the Trinity bel●●●● 〈◊〉 Doctrine also B. I have and having shewed that your Doctrine hath not equal ground from Scripture I add Secondly That it hath not equal ground from Reason 'T is certain and hath been abundantly made good that your Doctrine contradicts right Reason It involves a heap of contradictions it supposeth a change of substance when the accidents remain that these accidents should nourish or destroy That the same body should be in many places at once broken and whole at the same time that a whole body should be in a point that every wafer should be the whole body and yet the body be but one That a thing can be divided into wholes I forbear to name much more to the same purpose The Doctrine of the Trinity is indeed above our reason and comprehension but you will not say 't is against it Besides 't is revealed and 't is reasonable to believe what God says Besides we are better able to judge the nature of bodies upon which account we reject your Doctrine as manifestly false than of the spiritual and incomprehensible nature of God. We reject not what our reason does not comprehend But shall we therefore believe what is a contradiction to all the reason of mankind And because we do not comprehend the sublime nature of God may we not rely upon our senses when they are employed on their proper objects A. Have you any other reason why you reject Transubstantiation when you believe the Trinity B. Having shewed that your Doctrine hath not Equal Ground from Scripture and Reason I add that it hath not Thirdly Equal grou●d from Authority Indeed you produced none at all and therefore I need not cite any 〈…〉 th●t 〈…〉 the 〈…〉 in the Doctri●e of Transubstantiation as they are in … M●●●ery of the Holy Trinity It will be hard to re … e this concession with what you affirmed a little above that these two Doctrines have Equal ground from Tradition But he that believes the Doctrine it self need n●● … ggle to say that not half so much is yet Eq●al ground 'T is true you pretend to give a good reason why the Fathers are not half so ex●ress in the one as in the other Because Transubstantiation hath not been a Doctrine so long in dispute and 't is not Customary for men to argue unquestionable truths I do easily believe it hath not been so long in dispute no such thing being heard of in the primitive and best times And 't is easier to suppose it an unquestionable truth than to prove it to have been professed at all But this is to beg and not to prove the question I will add no more reasons though I might easily do it because I am for brevity as well as you I have abundantly shewed that these two Doctrines have not Equal ground from Scripture Reason and Tradition and that there is not the same obligation to receive one as the other And thus Sir though I cannot acquiesce in what you say yet I heartily thank you for your good Prayer and beg you wou'd joyn with me in repeating it in behalf of all Christians God give us his Holy Spirit to instruct us FINIS