Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	according_a	church_n	prove_v	2,572	5	5.9942	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48362	A reply to the Answer made upon the three royal papers	Dryden, John, 1631-1700.; Leyburn, John, 1620-1702.	1686 (1686)	Wing L1941; ESTC R9204	29,581	64

with truth cast it in the Teeth of the Church of England that she disobey'd her Mother Church whether she were Infallible or not the Church of England can never justly charge them with any disobedience to her But some Heads of the Roman Church have been not barely suspected of Heresie for one of them stands condemned for it in three General Councils But what 's this to the King's Reason who in neither of his Papers as I can see defends any Man from the possibility of falling into Heresie Not to multiply Disputes nor to recede from the King's Papers I shall not dive deeper into the Question Whether the Church of England be a true Church or no since the King did not Yet I could reply to this brisk Gentleman as St. Austin by me already cited did to the Donatists That all that he has raked together if it should be allowed to be in the Church of England yet something would be wanting to make her a true Church Well then what is the Church of England charged with 'T is thus says the King She would fain have it thought that they are Judges in matters spiritual yet dare not say positively there is no Appeal from them His Reply is from a Parity Betwixt Inferiour and Superiour Courts where both are truly Judges yet there lyes an Appeal from an Inferiour to a Superiour Court and he instances in Courts both Spiritual and Temporal But the Parity is very lame for the Church of England supposes her self nor inferiour to any other Church nor will she submit to any others Dictamen as things stand consequently as things stand she is the last Tribunal of Spiritual Doctrine In the next Paragraph the King argues thus What Country can subsist in quiet where there is not a Supreme Judge from whence there can be no Appeal From hence this Gentleman infers that every National Church ought to have the Supreme Power within its self This is no good Illation unless it be in reference to the Church of England which will have no such Superiour to it for the King speaks of a Country over which there is no Jurisdiction out of its self consequently there must be in that Country a Supreme Judge in all Temporal Causes but one Church which is subordinate to another Church and owns her self but a Member of an universal Church in Being cannot be said to be the last Tribunal from whence there can be no Appeal The rest of this Paragraph is a running division upon certain Abuses complain'd of by some Saints which because they may happen in the best of Ages and to the best of Men without prejudice to the lawful Authority of the Church I pass them by and shall make my Observation upon the next Paragraph that whereas the King's Expostulation is We have had these Hundred Years past the sad Effects of denying to the Church that Power in matters Spiritual without Appeal By which Expression as also by the antecedent and consequent Discourses is meant an Appeal to the Universal Church in matters Spiritual as Interpretation of Scripture Delivery of Doctrine Decisions of Faith c. He applies the Context against Personal Appeals to the Pope and then declaims against abuses of those Appeals of which both our own and neighbour Princes have complained and have been forced for the preserving of their own Dignity to set Bounds and Limits to Appeal to Rome But admit the king had intended Appeals to Rome does not this Gentleman by this reply That Princes have limited or bounded these Appeals to Rome own that Princes have believed that Appeals do of Right belong to Rome provided that Power be not abused And if the King himself was likely to suffer the most by them the more was his Integrity in preferring his Conscience before his Interest This Paragraph then is a Counterfeit of the Royal Stamp and so is the next by which the king is also misrepresented for which Reason I shall make no remark upon it Here begins the Kings application of his former Discourse by which this Gentleman may see his Error This is our Case here in England in matters Spiritual for the Protestants are not of the Church of England as it is the true Church from whence there can be no Appeal but because the Discipline of that Church is conformable at the present to their fancies c. He returns thus What Security can be greater than that of our Judgments For he will not have it to be Fancy I Answer That to submit our Judgments to that of the Catholic Church which God has appointed to direct us is the greatest Security we can have and in competition with this all is but Fancy And since he appeals to the whole World whether we have not made it appear that 't is not Fancy but Judgment which hath made us firm to the Church of England He is already cast by as many Votes as there are Men out of the Church of England Their adherence to the Crown of which he speaks is so principal a part of the Church of England as it is established by Law that without it that Church cannot subsist but when the Fancy shall move to change that Religion into Presbytery or any thing else Loyalty is out of Doors Now against those of the Church of Rome the Argument will not have that force for they and their Ancestors ever professing that Church to be their Infallible Mistress and that upon such Motives that nothing would be found more powerful their Judgment is fix't upon such a Basis that for want of it all other Churches which own themselves Fallible that is both apt to deceive and be deceived are but in a Tottering state What follows in this Paragraph is a Recrimination barely censuring without proving some Tenets of the Catholic Church as pure Fancy The Thread of the king's Discourse being still the same He concludes So that according to this Doctrine there is no other Church nor Interpreter of Scripture but which lies in every mans giddy Brain By which he may be assured the king calls that only a giddy Brain which stands in opposition to the great Authority of the Church interpreting Scripture But says the Answerer Let mens Brains be as giddy as they are said to be they are the best Faculties they can make use of for the understanding of Scriptures or any thing else Undoubtedly they are with that Assistance of an infallible Church which God has given them since many things to be understood there are out of the reach of Man's private Reason which he makes use of to find out his Guide being as visible as a City upon a Hill or a Light on a Candlestick and then submits to her Interpretation of Scriptures so that the infallible Church lies not in every Man 's giddy Brain but is as visible as the Sun Upon the winding up of this Discourse the king desires to know of every Serious Considerer of these things whether

the great work of our Salvation ought to depend upon such a Sandy Foundation as this Upon this Proposal of the king's he runs out into an airy Excursion against the Church of Rome under a pretence of a new Faith hatch'd in the Council of Trent which being an assertion as voluntary as 't is Sandy it leaves the Church unattack't and still standing upon a Rock But I appeal says he to any ingenious Man whether he doth not as much build upon his own Judgment who chooseth the Church as he who chooseth the Scripture for his Rule The answer is easy for certainly a Man hath more reason to rely upon his own Judgment in finding out the Church than the Scripture since the one is a Noon-day Light and may be discovered by every one the other is in the dark and so might continue if not discovered by the Light of the Church He advances for the Church can never be a Rule without the Scriptures but the Scriptures may without the Church It seems this Gentleman has forgot there was a Church before the Scriptures were written and consequently a Rule nay some Ages passed before a Collection of the Books of Scripture was made and owned by the Catholic Church for certainly the Apostles and Apostolick Men did not when they went to convert the World by Preaching bring about Waggons laden with Bibles to every Parish and even in St. Irenaeus his time there were many barbarous Nations Converted that could neither Write nor Read the Church then was the only Rule without the Scripture but without light from the Church there could be no certainty of Scripture either as to the Book it self or to the Copy or the Translation or Sence of it He pushes farther it is no such easy matter to find the Churches Infallibillity in the Scripture I answer there is no absolute necessity of finding it in the Scripture since the Church was found out before the new Testament was in Being and if God's special good Providence had not given us the Scriptures to our great Comfort yet the Church notwithstanding would have still been visible to the World's End and therefore when we cite those texts of Scripture about Christ's being with his Church to the end of the World about the Power to forgive Sins about God's Labourers Husbandry and the like t is only ad abundantiam and to shew the advantages the Church hath over her Enemies even at their own Weapons But in his opinion these Texts of Scripture do as effectually prove the infallibility of the Church of England as of the Church of Rome But I beseech him how can a Church but of yesterday and whose Negative Articles of Faith were lately Coined dure from Christ to the World's end The last thing the King charges upon those who resist the truth and will not submit to this Church is that they draw their arguments from implications and far fetch'd interpretation at the same time that they deny plain and positive words which is so great a disingenuity that 't is not almost to be thought that they can believe themselves This I perceive touches to the quick but truth though she cuts must still be amiable Is it says the Answerer to deny truth to argue from implications and to deny plain and positive words of Scripture to say we must not worship Images we must make God alone the Object of holy Worship I reply it is for nothing of this is to be found in Scripture and if the word Image had been in the Commandments as it is not the Original signifying a graven thing yet it would be an implication or far-fetch'd interpretation because it is singled out and snatch't from the context which gives life to the words importing Divine Worship Nor is it any where expressed That God alone is the Object of holy Worship Though it may be deduced thence that worship to holy things is refer'd to God alone as the only final Object of all such Worship Again to say that Christ's Institution of the Eucharist in both kinds is a Command to the Lay-people to receive it in both kinds is an implication confounding Institution with a Command which are very different For Matrimony was Instituted by God yet I know no Man by virtue of the Institution commanded to Marry Lastly The discourse of St. Paul touching the understanding of our Prayers meddles not with the publick or settled Liturgy of the Church as may be evinced from the Chapter it self So that for any of those Examples there is neither plain nor positive words of Scripture on their side Let us now change sides and see how it squares with the Catholic Party They affirm Bread to be changed into the Body of Christ because of these plain and positive words This is my Body this is true because the words are so plain that they import no implication of Impossibility or Absurdity a Rule observed by the Fathers in the understanding of Scriptures literally but against this there lyes an Objection That it is as plain and positive in Scripture that God has Eyes Ears Hands and Feet My reply is That there is an Implication of Impossibility which appears not in the plain Sense of these words This is my Body He presses to know the difference betwixt these two Propositions A Rock is Christ and This is my Body I answer That had it been thus Bread is my Body there had been none for then both Propositions would have imply'd an Impossibility But the words being This is my Body the words are plain as to their Sense that they inferr neither Impossibility nor Absurdity since by these omnipotent words the Bread is changed into the Body of Christ which neither is impossible to God nor absurd to do and therefore in those places where Christ is said to be Bread 't is always with some Emphasis as the Bread of Life this Bread or the Bread which clearly imports an Analogy The Conclusion of this Royal Paper is That if the Civil Magistrate pleases he may turn the Protestant Church either to Presbytery or Independency or indeed to what he pleases for this was the way of our pretended Reformation in England and by the same Rule c. This he tells the King is an unkind requital to the Church of England for her Zeal in asserting his Majesties power against a foreign Jurisdiction But Truth methinks when uttered with design of publick good ought never to be taken unkindly especially from the Pen of a King and if it seems an ill requital I am sure it is a worse complement to palliate one Errour with another The King's reason is to the purpose for as our Princes lately notwithstanding all Laws Divine and Humane did by their Regal Power cancel a Religion which came into this Nation with Christianity and was Established by more strong and forcing Laws than ever gave Being or Preservation to the Church of England For besides a thousand years Prescription and the