Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	damnation_n	drink_v	eat_v	10,899	5	8.2264	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75805	The Catholiques plea, or An explanation of the Roman Catholick belief. Concerning their [brace] church, manner of worship, justification, civill governement. : Together with a catalogue of all the pœnall statutes against popish recusants. : All which is humbly submitted to serious consideration. / By a Catholick gentleman.	Birchley, William, 1613-1669.	1659 (1659)	Wing A4242B; ESTC R42676	68,166	129

GRAVEN IMAGE Thus in my judgement doth that learned Protestant absolutely clear the Papists of Idolatry though perhaps he had more precisely exprest this last way of transgressing the second Commandement if he had call'd it will-worship rather than Idolatry because there is onely a want of Commission no excess in the degree of reverence And though afterwards he condemn praying to Saints departed as Idolatry yet it is only upon a particular supposition of his own that there is yet no such thing as Saints in Heaven When I had read this passage of so famous an Author to the Recusant he to requite my civility immediately shewed me the words of the Council of Trent which he said differed nothing at all from Mr. Hobs and very little from me For as I thought that the exhibition of some inferior kind of reverence towards Churches and other Instruments of piety was probably unforbidden so that Council decrees the absolute lawfulnesse thereof in the 25. Session where to the Canon concerning Images are added these words of explanation Not that there is believed any divinity or vertue in them for which they ought to be worshipped or that they are to be petitioned for any thing or any confidence ought to be reposed in Images as of old was done by the Gentiles who placed their hope in Idols but because the honour exhibited to them is referred to the Prototypes they represent that so through the Images which we kisse and before which we bare our heads and kneel down we may adore Christ and venerate his Saints Upon occasion of which words the Papist assured me that in no Council is used the phrase of Religious worship when they treat of these questions nor any thing concerning them commanded as necessary but only their lawfulnesse declared that such as find benefit by their assisting the memory or exciting the affections may safely use them the rest may let them alone provided they censure not the practice of others over whom they have no jurisdiction nor condemn the judgement of the Church who has jurisdiction over them And hereupon we both agreed in this collaterall observation That if all modern Controvertists would restrain their disputes to positions generally received as of Faith in the Church of which they are members attending only to her expressions and not to the terms of particular Writers the differences amongst Christians so fatal to the peace of Europe would be both lesse numerous and far more reconcilable Whether Papists be guilty of Idolatry in the Eucharist BEfore we could proceed to the second part of this Question the Recusant upon some occasions was obliged to go into the Countrey whence he sent me this following paper Since it is concluded between us that Probability exempts from persecution I shall endeavour to prove that the Real presence of our Saviour in the Eucharist is at least a probable Opinon and in order thereunto cite the most expresse and direct terms of the holy Scripture as first the promise of our SAVIOVR Joh. 6. 5. The bread that I will give is my Flesh which I will give for the life of the world and ver. 55. My Flesh is meat indeed and my Bloud is drink indeed Secondly The performance of that promise in the words of Institution Take eat this is my Body punctually repeated by the other three Evangelists Mat. 26. 26. Mar. 14. 22. Luk. 22. 19. And thirdly the places declaring the use of this Sacrament in the Apostles time 1 Cor. 10. 16. The Cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ and the bread which we break is it not the participation of the Body of the Lord 1 Cor. 11. 29. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Thus the great Apostle S. Paul and all the four Evangelists unanimously teach the Doctrine of the Real Presence not one single place produceable that in direct terms calls the Eucharist a signe or figure of Christs Body notwithstanding maintainers thereof admit no proof as authentical but the precise text of Scripture yet in this so important controversie they flie to Logical inferences and Philosophical discourses so make their own reason the Iudge and not the Word of God rendring by their new and private iuterpretations this great Sacrament inferiour in dignity not only to the Paschal Lamb a type of Christ but even to Manna which was but a figure of this very mystery Surely if we shall add to so many and evident texts of Scripture the constant judgment of the Fathers and the universal practice of the whole Christian world for above a thousand years since so long is acknowledged the absolute Reign of our Religion we may safely conclude the Doctrine of our Saviours presence in the Eucharist to be at least probable and consequently Catholikes in no wise accusable of rashnesse or obstinacy in believing a Position so efficaciously recommended unto them But admitting the Doctrine of non-reality to be true said the Letter of the Recusant yet ought not Catholikes to be judged guilty of the sinne of Idolatry because their adoration is not intentionally directed to any creature but to the Person of Christ our Lord and if He be not there their worship is mistaken in the place not in the object and therefore a● most an errour of fact and no formal Idolatry which no temperate Judge will impute unto sin much lesse our mercifull Redeemer who came to save not to destroy who accepts of the good meaning of his servants though mingled with humane infirmities as when Abimelech mis-took Sara from her husband being informed by Abraham that she was his Sister the sincere and conscientious King received absolution from God himself upon this account that he did it saith the text in the simplicity of his heart Gen 20. 6. which seems an expresse and infallible decision of this Controve●sie that men may be unhappy by being deceived but are not guil●y unlesse they deceive themselves This kind of reasoning prevailed somewhat the more with me because the Apology of the reformed Chu●ches of France expressly approves it saying if an Apostle had by mistake adored some other man res●mbling Christ when he lived on earth his errour would have excused him Daille chap. 11. As on the other side Mary Magdalens not adoring Christ when he appeared to her in the habit of a Gardener John 20. 15. was never accused as a defect of devotion wherefore since the Papists all professe not to terminate their adoration in the species of Bread and Wine nor any other creature but in the blessed person of our Lord I conclude them erroneous in their Doct●ine but not Idolatrous in their practice to be pittied as Soules misled not persecuted as malicious Nor can I satisfie my conscience since to this point the Opinion of the Papists is no more opposite to us than that of the Lutherans why we should freely allow

persecute them whether Protestants or Papists he will soon find that as he may violently force their complyance he can never prudently rest upon their affections But I must here beg leave to be dispenced with in my promise of ending this period till I have added this observation how many Modern Authors of good account amongst us have positively held forth to the people as an unquestionable truth that the Papists by their principles are not obliged to keep faith with Hereticks and I must acknowledge I was once of the same opinion concerning them principally relying upon the credit of Mr. Iames Howell an ingenious traveller in most of the Popish Countries which makes me the more wonder that he should take such an erroneous opinion upon trust and assert it in print neer the end of his first part of Dodona's Grove where he sayes That one of the Canons of the last great Council which must needs be the Council of Trent was that HAERETICIS NON EST TENENDA FIDES The esteem I had entertained of that Authors ingenuity permitted me not to acquiesce to some Recusants verball denyall of this assertion but for more ample satisfaction in this so important a point I took the pains to peruse some of their best writers and found them unanimously agree that Faith is not only to be kept with Hereticks but even with Turks Iews and Infidells that indispensably neither could I find one tittle to that purpose in any Canon or Session of that last great Council as he calls it but to the contrary For both in the 15 and 18 Session the Council sayes expresly that whosoever shall violate the least point of the Publick Faith given for the security of all Protestants that should repair to that Council should be subject to those penalties QUAS IURE DIVINO ET HUMANO AUT CONSUETUDINE HUJUSMODI SALVORUM CONDUCTUUM VIOLATORES INCURRERE POSSUNT ABSQUE OMNI EXCUSATIONE AUT QUAVIS IN HAC PARTE CONTRADICTIONE By which it evidently appeares that the Councill supposed as a thing known and certain that whosoever should violate his faith promised to Heretiques was not onely punishable by Humane Laws but even by the Divin● Law it self And certainly if it had been my unhappiness to have done any sort of Christians so much wrong in publique my conscience comming afterwards to be better inform'd would oblige me to a publique reparation for though wee use no such confession as the Papists practise yet the Law of naturall reason binds us to as punctuall an observance of restitution as any Papists whatsoever and that even to Papists themselves when we do them any injury But for a finall dispatch of this point concerning the Papists indispensable obligation of performing their promises it was my fortune to light upon a book of one Paul Layman a German Iesuit and an Author of great esteem amongst the Casuists who treating of dispensations lib. 2. tract. 3. cap. 12 sets down these very words DICO QUARTO SI CATHOLICI CUM HAERETICIS PUBLICUM FOEDUS INEANT NON POTEST PER AUTHORITATEM PONTIFICIAM SOLVI AUT RELAXARI If Catholicks enter into any publick contract with Hereticks it cannot be dissolved or dispensed with by the Popes power And some few lines after proceeding upon the same question h● pronounces down-right ABSOLUTE NEGARI DEBET ID viz. REMISSIONEM FOEDERIS A SUMMO PONTIFICE FIERI POSSE It ought absolutely to be denied that it is in the Power of the Pope to obsolve from such contracts And again FIDES PUBLICA HAERETICIS DATA INVIOLABILITER ET SINE ULLO DISPENSATIONIS REMEDIO SERVANDA EST QUAMDIU IPSI SERVARE PARATI SUNT Publique Faith given to Hereticks ought inviolably and indispensably to be observed so long as they are ready to perform their part And concludes that even Jesuits as well as other Doctors hold the Popes power to be limitable and not so Almighty as the World usually believes concerning them The same Doctrine is repeated in the Abridgment of Laymans book entituled Compendium Moralis Theologiae Pauli Layman folio 265. The Papists having given so much satisfaction by their Petition and other Paper but much more by their submission to and peaceable demeanor in this Common-wealth as it stands now establisht I must appeal not only to the Parliament and that great Instrument of our freedom my L. G. Cromwell but to all conscientious men whether these Papists may not reasonably hope so much mercy as not to be by penalties debarred the private exercise of their Consciences with their doors shut and such other cautions and circumstances as the State shall be pleased to ordain for Regulation of Soul-freedome since it is evident that Christian liberty may be lawfully governed though it be also as evident that it cannot lawfully be taken away so that every peaceable spirit have liberty enough and yet the licentions Liver not have too much Such moderate and orderly freedome might charitably be allowed to the quiet Papist from persons that afford far more advantages to far more dangerous enemies the Scotch or rigid K●rki●●s who have severall times engaged against us in open field and by many plots and secret contrivements endeavoured as much as in them lay to subvert the present Government yet after so many victories obtained against them the reducing of the greatest part of their Country to the obedience of this State The Ministers as saies a letter the 21th of Febr. 1651 from an Officer of our Army at Edenborough are violently bent their own way and preach damnation to all Complyers with us in any thing And let any indifferent person read the strange proceedings of the Presbytery of Aberden against Sir Alexander Irvin Lord of Drum published in the Diurnall 26 Ian. 1651 he will I am confident highly applaud that ingenious letter from an eminent Officer of our Army dated at Edenborough the 21th of the same moneth and published in the next weeks Politicus which hath these very words You would wonder to observe the strange Pride and proceedings of the kirk-Clergy the ingredients of whose constitution admit of many more grains of gun-powder than you shall find in any Jesuits in Christendome so that if they be not closely look'd unto they will set all on fire again And in an other letter dated 12th of April 1652 from Dalkeith in Scotland and printed in the next weeks Diurnall is this excellent observation Believe it all our other Enemies are tame beasts to the high Presbyter and yet with the winding and turning of a religious pretence and an artificial zeal against Heresie he will like a tame snake if not warily avoided get into your bosome c. Continually every week come still fresh and loud complaints from our friends and Officers in Scotland of the stubbornesse of a certain froward and resty party in that Nation Yet notwithstanding the pertinacy and malice of these Kirkists such of them as have not appeared in actuall armes against us