Selected quad for the lemma: faith_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
faith_n	build_v	peter_n	rock_n	5,754	5	9.5900	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33078	The Church of Rome unmask'd, or her false principles briefly detected with some reasons of so many retaining or returning to communion with her, and the great danger of everlasting destruction, that such persons, especially after separations from her, return to her communion, do run themselves on / written by a learned divine, by way of letter to a friend in the country.	Learned divine.	1679 (1679)	Wing C4196; ESTC R18501	78,331	77

5. And St. Paul tells us other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid which he saith not is St. Peter not Petrus but Petra is Jesus Christ the true Rock who is the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets both that upon which they themselves were built and stood and that upon which they as God's Builders built his Church 1 Cor. 3.11 Ephes 2.20 And surely no man can stand more strongly by being built upon St. Peter than by being built upon Christ Nor find we either Christ himself or any of his Apostles to say or signify any such thing as that the place or Church where Peter should reside or praeside should be more Infallible than any other Church or Churches founded resided in or praesided over by any other of his Apostles Nor that such as should succeed him as Bishops in any place much less in Rome praesided in by him should be more Infallible than other Bishops If the praesidency of St. Peter in Rome can secure that Church or it's Bishop from failing or falling into Errour how comes it to pass that his sitting at Antioch did not also secure that place Church Yea those Churches of Judaea of the Circumcision whereof he was the Prime and immediate Apostle Gal. 2.9 Surely they ought rather to have had this Privilege and Praerogative from him than Rome a Gentile Church which was rather under S. Paul's Barnabas's Jurisdiction as being the Apostles of the Gentiles It 's strange that none of the Churches more certainly planted by him should have this Privilege but only Rome which it is not certain that he planted or ever came into for some of no small learning have made a question of that that I say not have positively denied it Surely none but simple persons and such as are easy and willing to be deceived and therefore look not well to their goings will believe such groundless praetexts imposed upon them True it is that some of the Ancient Councels gave a Patriarchal power to the Bishop of Rome subjecting these Western Churches thereunto but that was but an humane constitution for order and unities sake and gave him no more Infallibility than the like constitutions gave to the Bishops of Jerusalem or Antioch or Alexandria or Constantinople whom they made Patriarchs also in their respective Jurisdictions Nor yet did that make Rome or it's Church the whole Catholique Church or the Bishop thereof the Head of it as is evident by the 6th Councel of Carthage where Faustinus the Popes Legate challenging for his Master a power to order all great matters in all places pretending for it a Decree of the Nicene Councel was upon diligent search into the Records of the said Councel found a falsifyer thereof and thereupon was decreed an equality in power with the other Patriarchs But beside all this against the plea of that Church's Infallibility it is evident 2. That she hath in Fact erred and can there be a clearer and better demonstration of the possibility of her Erring deceiving and being deceiv'd than that she hath actually Erred For though à posse ad esse non valet consequentia yet ab esse ad posse est validissima Now that she hath actually Erred is evident not only in her members and different parties but also in her conjunct consideration and in her Head As for her having erred and yet erring in her parties and members it 's demonstrable in this that contradictoria non possunt esse simul vera of two contradictory positions maintained by different parties the one must needs be false Now in the Church of Rome there are contradictory positions maintained by several parties witness the Dominicans and Franciscans the one contradicting the other in the matter of the immaculateness of the conception of the Virgin Mary the one denying and the other asserting it if the Virgin Mary was conceaved in her Mothers womb without sin then the Dominican Party of the Roman Church errs and if otherwise then the Franc●scan Party errs The like may be said of the Jansenists and Jesuites in the five Articles wherein they differ But I say not only their members but their Head and Bishop may erre also even in Cathedrâ or in his solemn Determinations and doings yea in matters of Faith as is made manifest in Liberius subscribing to Arrianisme and Vigilius who both condemned and commanded the same things to be believed as in the three Chapters condemned by a Councel as favouring Nestorianisme and in Honorius who was condemned by a Councel for a Monothelite And surely if a Pope may contradict himself and say and unsay a thing as Pope and Head of their Church and both condemn and command the belief of the same thing as in that case of Pope Vigilius he must needs be Fallible and erre in the one of them And there is no way to avoid it but that either some of their Popes have erred or some of their General Councels which is the Church representative and were some time also declared and held to be about the Pope and were usually consented to and confirmed by their Popes have been deceived in condemning them as having erred either of which supposals mightily infringes the Infallibility of their Church Nay and it is believed that the Jansenists would they speak out do not look upon the late Pope Innocent as Infallible in his condemnation of the five Articles maintained by them Nay did not St. Peter himself greatly erre in a main matter of Faith and that too after our Saviour had said to him Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church when he preaches such doctrine to his Master as that he should not suffer death for which our Saviour rebuking him cal'd him Sathan Mat. 16.22 23. But not only have and do great Parties in her and branches of her erre and even their Popes themselves but She herself in her whole Authoratative Constitution and Catholique complex consideration and that very grosly too if we look upon her Doctrines and determinations in the light of the infallible testimony of God and of his holy Spirit speaking in the holy Scriptures which is the Touch-stone to which the Prophet Isaiah or the Lord himself by him in Isai 8.20 and Christ himself in Joh. 5.39 directs us and to which the noble Boereans brought the Apostle Paul's preaching with commendation for their so doing Act. 17.12 yea and the Apostle St. Peter himself directs the Churches and the believers therein to that in 2 Pet. 1.19 and 3.1 2. and the Apostle Paul commends Timothy for that from a child he knew the holy Scriptures they being able to make men wise unto Salvation 2 Tim. 3.15 implying therein that even Children if they will mind the holy Scriptures and set themselves to seek the knowledge of them may as they grow up in some good measure obtain it to their great benefit and salvation Now contrary to these holy Scriptures

Omnipotency will make the one as possible as the other Or that the same thing that is shut and hung up in the Pix being a Consecrated Host is the same numerical body that is glorified and gloriously appears in Heaven also what was eaten by the people in their receiving eating what of it was given them But we may see how these men straining the words of Christ where they please as they do also some expressions of the Ancient Fathers make the word of God subject to their wills and pleasures and where they please they will grant a Figure and where they please they shall be properly and literally understood yea and strained beyond their litteral expression for Christ said no such thing as this is transubstantiated into or is the substance of my very body as they say though the like absurdities following upon the litteral sence of or collection from it as would from taking the other expressions litterally makes it necessary to understand them figuratively and sacramentally in the one place as well as in the other It 's true that in this Supper Christ would have us and it 's necessary for us to abstract or withdraw our minds from the consideration of the bread and wine in their own proper substances and to fix them only upon the body and blood of Christ whereof they are a communion or communication 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so to have no more to do with those Elements in our thoughts in a manner than as if there were no such matters only as they may occasion us to meditate and consider that his flesh is meat indeed the true bread and everlasting nourishment of our Souls and his blood or the New Testament confirmed by it Drink indeed a most comfortable matter of refreshing for the Soul to take into it's believing consideration and so spiritually and sacramentally to feed upon his flesh and blood But to impose upon peoples Faith that the things which they see with their eyes to be very bread and wine are very Christ his very flesh and blood yea God-man their Saviour and to cause them to worship them is a very gross departure from and abuse of Christ's institution and of his command for our observation of it And why may they not as well impose upon mens faith that St. Peter after he Confessed Christ was transubstantiated into a hard stone and his flesh blood and bones yea his Soul and body and all was metamorphiz'd into a Rock For our Saviour said unto him Tues Petrus in the Syriac Cephas which in our English Language signifies a stone Mat. 16.18 with Jo. 1.42 here is Christs assertion as plainly of Peter as there of the bread And if the word Est is imply the substantial change of the bread in the one why may not the word Es thou art imply the substantial change of Simon Bar-Jonah in the other And why may it not be as rationally believed that his flesh and bones yea Soul and body were immediately and substantially turned into stone living stone as that the bread was changed into the body of Christ substantially seeing the Omnipotency of God was as well able to do the one as the other And that is pleaded as sufficient for our Faith to believe this And so St. Peter was a living walking Stone that had not the substance of either flesh or blood or bones in him though the appearance of them all to the sences Yea and why may it not be as well imposed upon mens Faith that Christ himself is so changed in his substance into stone too For he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the living stone 1 Pet. 2.4 and that the Altar that Jacob built at Shechem was transubstantiated into the Essence of God because Jacob Consecrating it called it El Elohe Israel God the God of Israel Gen. 33.20 Surely they are strangely infatuated or obstinately wilful that cannot or will not see the absurdity of this Doctrine of theirs so contrary both to sence and reason and so void of any solid ground for it in the Holy Scriptures Object Oh but they will say they are the Church and their judgment is to be taken as the infallible truth and therefore if they did assert the like changes and transubstantiations in other things then they were to be believed too For our Faith is to be resolved into their sayings as our Saviour tells us that they that hear not the Church are to be accounted as Heathens and Publicans Ans But to that it 's said and shewed before that they are not the Church Catholique but only a part of the Church and a very corrupt part too To which I add that I find it injoyned to us that we should hear Christ the great Prophet of God in all things which he shall say unto us but I find it no where injoyned us that we should hear the Church in all that she shall say unto us And that the Scripture here quoted by them to serve their design is perverted by them from it's true and genuine intent rnd scope For our Saviour did not there intend nor speak any thing as signifying an intent to teach us to build our Faith or belief of the Scripture-sayings or the Exposition of the Scripture upon the Authority of the Church or it's sayings much less of any uppermost party that unduely challenge to themselves the title and appellation of the whole Church much less the Church of Rome But his discourse is evidently about offences given by any sinning Brother which being evident in themselves might by any particular person against whom they were committed be reprehended and faulted and in case the party offending would not hear a private admonition then it should be reproved by the same person again taking one or two persons as witnesses with him who might also join in reproving or admonishing him And if still he harden his heart and retain his offensive or evil way or practice then they should declare it to the Church who might all testifie their dislike or give him a joint admonition of the same fault And if he hear not them in such joint admonition given them by the Church then the offended Brother might disclaim communion with him and leave him as no more to be owned by him than an Heathen man or a Publican Here is nothing of the Church's giving the object of faith to be believed or of her being to be heard in whatsoever she shall say though never so contrary to sence or reason or to the Scripture sayings or to the commands of God and Christ but of the Chuch's admonishing an offending Brother who being admonished by her ought to hear the Church therein But that 's in no other thing than in what he ought to have heard first the offended Brother in upon his own private admonition or the offended Brother with one or two joining with him upon his slighting the admonition given by the offended Brother alone But