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
A75807	The Christian moderator: or, Persecution for religion condemned, by the light of nature. Law of God. Evidence of our own principles.	Birchley, William, 1613-1669.	1651 (1651)	Wing A4243; Thomason E640_1; ESTC R206658	32,813	31

or set up by private authority and not by the authority of them that are our soveraigne Pastors is idolatry for the Commandement is THOU SHALT NOT MAKE TO THY SELF ANY GRAVEN IMAGE Thus in my judgment 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 then idolatry because there is only a want of commission no excesse in the degree of reverence And though afterwards he condemne 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 Councell 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 Councell 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 Idolls but because the honor exhibited to them is referred to the Prototypes they represent that so thorough 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 Councell is used the phrase of Religious worship when they treat of these questions nor any thing concerning them commanded as necessary but only their lawfullnesse 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 practise of others over whom they have no Jurisdiction nor condemn the judgment 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 termes of particular Writers the differences amongst Christians so fatall to the peace of Europe would be both lesse numerous and far more reconcileable 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 reall presence of our Saviour in the Eucharist is at least a probable Opinion and in order thereunto cite the most expresse and direct termes of the holy Scripture as first the promise of our SAVIOUR John 6. 5. The bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world and verse 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. Luke 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 foure Evangelists unanimously teach the Doctrine of the Reall Presence and not one single place produceable that in direct termes calls the Eucharist a signe or figure of Christs Body notwithstanding the maintainers thereof admit no proof as authenticall but the precise text of Scripture yet in this so important controversie they flie to logicall inferences and Philosophicall discourses and so make their own reason the Judge and not the Word of God rendring by their now and private interpretations this great Sacrament inferior in dignity not only to the Paschall Lamb a type of Christ but even to Manna which was but a figure of this very mystery Surely if we shal add to so many evident texts of Scripture the constant iudgment of the Fathers and the universall practice of the whole Christian world for above a thousand years since so long is acknowledged the absolute reigne 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 iudged guilty of the sin 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 obiect and therefore at most an error of fact and no formall 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 Controversie that men may be unhappy by being deceived but are not guilty unlesse they deceive themselves This kind of reasoning prevailed somewhat the more with me because the Apology of the reformed Churches of France expressely approves it saying if an Apostle had by mistake adored some other man resembling Christ when he lived on earth his error would have excused him Daillé 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 Doctrine but not Idolatrous in their practise to be pitied as souls misled not