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 faith_n sense_n 2,308 5 6.2377 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A37245 A letter to friend concerning his changing his religion Davies, Rowland, 1649-1721. 1692 (1692) Wing D412; ESTC R5643 30,321 32

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Pope Stephen must contradict the Principles of the Christian Religion and deny Salvation unto Penitent Believers For if no Man can be a Christian but he that is in the Communion of the Catholick Church and Baptism is not Sacramental nor Beneficial to Salvation where the Person is excluded from the Society of Cristians Such Baptism then must be necessary to Salvation as doth make a Man a Christian and a Member of that Society If any Person therefore that is Baptized by one whom you call Heretick and with whose Church you will not Communicate be notwithstanding this so much a Christian as that he is to be Baptized no more but if he shall change his Religion and become a Convert to the Church of Rome they will receive him into their Communion but never permit him to be Baptized again I say then this is a fair Concession from themselves that they Believe that he was a Christian and consequently a Member of the Body of Christ before he was actually of their Communion For the Scripture tells us that every Branch although it is unfruitful yet it abideth in the Vine until it is cut off viz. by an Apostacie from the Faith nor can any new Branch be grafted in but by that Sacrament of Baptism which Christ ordained for it And therefore it is evident that those Antient Fathers did not believe that all Men were Apostates who differed from them in Opinion as to Religion but acknowledged that they were still Christians though Erroneous and therefore would not repeat their Baptism which was compleat before but received them Charitably by the Imposition of Hands Which is a sufficient Evidence that the Catholick Church of Christ is more extensive than the Church of Rome and that a Christian may be a Member of the one although he is not actually in the Communion of the other And therefore it is observable even at this day that in the Administration of Baptism in the Church of Rome no Man is obliged by his Baptismal Vow to believe their own Articles or Constitutions but only to Profess the Christian Faith as it is in common with all other Christians and which is not sufficient in a state of Maturity to qualifie any Person to be of their Communion And consequently then those Articles are not necessary in order to be a Christian although the proper Standard of the Church of Rome But a Man may be a Member of the Catholick Church that is not precisely one of her Communion There is a Famous Act Recorded of the Donatists in Africa that is exactly parallel with our present case They being scarce a National or particular Church but rather a broken part or fraction of one yet positively decreed themselves to be the Catholick Church of Christ and in a Synod of their own party formally Excommunicated all other Christians that would not submit unto their determinations But certainly no Rational Man will say that that Decree so made was True and Authentick or that all the Christian Church was obliged to submit unto it and to be concluded by it because it was boldly delivered as a Truth and confidently asserted with over-great assurance by a company of Men that called themselves a Council But rather on the contary such an Act is to be derided and the Censure laught at as contrary to Reason and all Humane Constitutions which leave all Persons in their perfect Liberty until by themselves it is submitted And therefore St. Augustine's Argument against them is as fully unanswerable in respect of us who make the same Plea against the Church of Rome For if you confess that I am a Christian although I am no Papist you declare then that the Christian Faith is openly profest without the Communion of the Church of Rome And whosoever will endeavour to reduce the Catholick Church to such a narrow compass must be Guilty of the Schism that is occasioned by it in excluding so many Christians from the Communion of Saints § 3. But that the Church of Rome might render it self more a particular Church and less the Catholick if possible than any other is she hath of late years streightned her own extent extreamly by setting such new limits and restraints on her Communion as former Ages never heard of nor the Catholick Church ever prescribed or exacted Thus Purgatory was far from being an Article of Faith and necessary to Salvation in the days of St. Augustine Or the Worshiping of Images from being a Duty in Religion before the second Council of Nice So that without believing things that are incredible viz. Transubstantiation the Infallibility of the Pope c. And doing things that are unpracticable viz. Worshiping the Host and the Virgin Mary c. no Man can be admitted now into her Communion but a Man that is a real and most faithful Christian that believeth in and conformeth himself to the Holy Scriptures and also doth expound them in hard places according to the Faith and Practice of the Primitive Christians Yet notwithstanding all this he is excluded by her as being an In●idel and as far as in her lyeth is deprived of the common Benefits and the Priviledges of a Christian Whereas the Church which you Deserted is evidently in this Case conformable to the Catholick in that any faithful Christian of any other particular Communion if he doth believe the Scriptures and understand them in the Sense of the Universal Church as it is delivered by the four General Councils which you must also own to be the Catholick Faith if your Opinion differs not from that of Athanasius If this Man I say doth make it his business to live up unto those Rules he is freely admitted into her Communion and may publickly enjoy all the common Rights and Benefits of a Christian without any other Injunction or Imposition on his Conscience For none of her Articles are propounded with Anathema's nor is there so much as a bar from her Communion inflicted on those Persons that do not Subscribe them but as their Title shews us they were composed for Peace for the avoiding of diversity of Opinions and for the Establishing of consent touching True Religion For the never did believe that any Society on Earth as the Church of Rome asserts it of her self had power either to alter or to add unto the Faith or to contradict the Institution of our Saviour and the practice of the Primitive Christians with a bold tamen or non obstante to them or ever to impose now Articles of Faith upon the People as absolutely necessary unto their Salvation which the Primitive Christians for some hundreds of years were never known to have thought or heard of So that according to your own Notion if to be Catholick is to be of no Party nor Faction in Religious Matters but a Christian in full latitude and in respect of the Church in general since every Member of the Universal Church must adjoin
so no Action whatsoever can be justly lyable to Censure that is either founded on that motive or even tends to that design But it is very unreasonable to find fault with him that shall change his Sentiments of Religion and consequently make an open Profession of it provided that he acts directly upon truly Christian Motives according to a real apprehension of the Truth and a serious Conviction of the Conscience The only thing that in this Case is liable to Censure being a base compliance with the thoughts of other Men or a change of the True Religion upon false inducements since neither God nor Man can be secure of his Fidelity whom Interest can bribe to act against his Conscience It is therefore no small Satisfaction unto me and I believe also to the rest of all your Friends that being well acquainted with your former Conversation we believe your sincerity in all that you have done and that no Temporal advantage the too common spur of mean and fickle Spirits could ever incline your thoughts to entertain a Notion but as you were perswaded of and confided in its Truth So that either the want of a due Consideration in respect of your Motives to believe or some great mistake in your Notion of Religion and that as well in respect of the Faith which you deserted as of that which you embrace have ever appeared to me as the reason of your Change that you should quit those Principles wherein you were Bred for such as upon enquiry can never appear unto you either so Rational or so Christian As it is the duty of every Christian therefore to endeavour the satisfaction of his offended Brother and to rectifie those Errors that have seduc'd him from the Faith so I think my self obliged by the special tyes of Friendship to be peculiarly concerned in your Restitution and not only to discover to you the Sophistry of those Arguments that have imposed upon you but also to explain those Truths wherewith you seem unacquainted For if the account be true which I have had of your Desertion your Motives to leave the Church of England and Embrace the Communion of the Church of Rome were these A desire to live more truly in the Communion of the Catholick Church and to become more Orthodox in your Faith and Worship If then I can make it evident that you were mistaken in both these great Proposals and that a contrary event in both is the sure result of this your undertaking It will be reasonable to expect your Repentance for what you have done and a Reconciliation to that Mother whom you have forsaken § 1. How the first of these Proposals could ever influence your Practice is a very hard thing to be imagined or why you should phansie now that you are more in the Communion of the Catholick Church than you were among us before your Change is really a Conceit that I cannot find the ground of Since the common imposition by the Name of Catholick must be too slight to move a Man of Learning When the Name of Roman Catholick is but an usurpt Title that carries little less than a contradiction in the terms I know indeed there is an Error in the Notion of Church-Government that is too prevalent with many Christians and may possibly seduce them from the Truth of their Religion to submit unto those Laws that can't oblige them And that is That the Government of the Catholick Church on Earth is Originally Monarchical and consequently that the Unity thereof consists in the due subjection of all the Members unto the Dominion of one Universal Bishop So that no Man can be a Christian or in the Communion of the Catholick Church but he that will submit unto the Pope's Authority But in Truth it is fully evident from the Scriptures from the Constitution of the Church and from the practice of all Christians in the Primitive Ages that the Government of the Church on Earth is Aristocratical and that the Unity thereof doth eminently consist in the Communion of all its Members So that every Person that makes Profession of the Christian Faith and lives in the Communion of any particular Church or Society of Christians he is certainly in the Communion of the Catholick Church of Christ and according to the sincerity of his Profession he hath an undoubted Right unto all her Promises For first the Scriptures do expresly tell us that Christ Selected not one alone but twelve Apostles and that he gave them all but one Commission jointly as well as made them by it all equal in Authority That he was so far from constituting one as his Vicar upon Earth with an Absolute Dominion over all his Brethren that he forbad such Ambition as disagreeable with his Laws and Ordained Humility to be their way of Government Ye know saith he Mat. XX. 25. that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they that are great exercise authority upon them But it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your Minister And whosoever will be chief among you let him be your Servant Intimating clearly that Ecclesiastical Authority is not like the Dominion of the Gentils which was altogether managed in a Despotical way of Government But as he himself was a pattern of Humility and submitted unto Death for the good of his People so their joint Power should consist in serving others without any pretence unto a Temporal Dominion St. Paul therefore most evidently refers the building of the Body of Christ which is certainly the Catholick Church not to any one but unto the Apostles in the plural number Ephes iv 11 12. and although he was himself the last of all that Order being as he saith 1 Cor. xv 8 9. the least of the Apostles as one that was born out of due time Yet he assures the Galatians Galat. ii 7. that in point of Authority in the Church of Christ he was inferior unto no Man in that the Gospel of the Uncircumcision was committed unto him as that of the Circumcision was to Peter And consequently then St. Peter's Principality if he had any was limited to the Jews that were Converted to the Faith and not extended to the Gentils over whom he ne're presided So that in this pretence of a Succession from the Prince of the Apostles the Pope can have no claim to a Jurisdiction in our Countries except he can derive our Pedigree from those of the Circumcision But to manifest more clearly that the Church of Rome is not the whole Tree or Body of Christians no nor so much as the Root thereof St. Paul not only reckons her among the Branches Rom. xi 17. but doth expresly admonish her not to usurp Dominion as if he were suspicious of her future greatness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Do not boast against or rather do not insult over the Branches But if thou
briefly and compare our Faith and Practice in relation to the Sacrament which is the most Solemn branch of our Devotion For I shall ever acknowledge it as an obligation from you if you will be fair in this particular and communicate your own Thoughts freely without prevarication whether you can submit your Reason in this particular to that Doctrin of your Church that is so much against it Whither you can believe in your Conscience as it is openly profest that a Priest by Consecrating Bread and Wine according to the Missal can change their substance into that of God Or so Establish the Divinity in those Creatures or under the covert of their Accidents as really to make them or what you see upon the Table in their Shape to become a proper Object to be Worshipt and Adored For since nothing can be more absurd nor indeed more criminal in Religion than to apply God's Worship to any thing that is not God there is nothing less than a belief of this particular that can be pleaded by you to justifie your Practice when you Worship and Adore the Consecrated Host in the constant Exercise of your Publick Devotion Let us enquire therefore I beseech you into the foundation of this Faith and how this Notion which appears impossible to Mankind should come to have that Credit in the Church as to be made a Principle of the Christian Religion and not only be received as an Article of Faith but to be made the ground-work also of such a dangerous Practice § 8. The Church of Rome dogmatically tells us that our Blessed Saviour at the Institution of his Holy Supper changed the substance of the Bread and Wine into the substance of his own Body and Blood For saying of the Bread This is my Body and of the Wine This is my Blood and in both Expressions being literally to be understood by all Men his Expressions cannot be true except this change be really effected It being impossible in a literal Sense that the same thing at the same time can be real Bread and also the Body of Christ and therefore they believe that after the words of Consecration are pronounced Christ himself with his Body and Blood his Soul and his Divinity and not any longer Bread and Wine do really remain upon the Table and so they Adore the Consecrated Host as being really then the Person of Christ who is the Saviour God and Judge of all the World Now Sir if you will but seriously consider all those words which our Saviour Christ hath spoken on this Subject together with the end design and occasion of his speaking them it will not appear difficult to prove clearly to you First that those words of Christ are not thus literally to be interpreted but directly contrary to this Doctrin their true Sense is altogether Spiritual and Mystical And 2 ●ly That if they were literally to be understood by all Men even in the utmost Sense those words can bear yet they will neither assert what the Council of Trent Decrees nor justifie your Practice in Worshiping the Host § 9. First I say that the Words of our Saviour Christ in the Institution of this Sacrament cannot be understood in a literal Sense but must have a sigurative or mystical signification And this doth appear fully from the Nature of the thing the Design of the Institution the Occasion of the Expression and our Saviour's own Judgment as to their Interpretation As to the Nature of the thing it is a sufficient proof that any Text of Scripture is not literally to be understood by Christians if its common reading contradicts the Rules of Sense and Principles of Philosophy or destroys the ground-work of all certainty and knowledge and so roots up the foundation of Religion in general And if a Man by being a Christian is to take those words of Christ in a literal Sense and to believe that that is Flesh which by his sight touch tast and smell he fully and clearly discovers to be Bread all those recited mischiefs are the necessary consequence and there can be no Rule of any certainty in Religion In so much that no Man can be sure that there is a Bible or that any such words as these we treat of are Recorded in it or indeed that any thing else is written in order to his Salvation if he must not trust his Senses being rightly disposed in relation to a proper Object with a fit Medium If you say that this is an improper Object because it is a Substance when Accidents alone do incur the Senses I say that there is no other way to know a Substance but by the Accidents that are proper to it and if it were possible for all the Accidents that are proper to one Subject to inhere another it would be impossible to determine which is which or ever truly to distinguish any one thing from another But it is also evident that a Humane Body is the real thing we here treat of and that this is a proper Object for our Senses appears plainly to us from the practice of our Saviour in that he recurr'd unto them even after his Resurrection and made them the only Judges of his Bodily Substance Behold saies he Luke xxiv 39. my hands and my feet that it is I my self handle and see for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have So that either this Body of Christ supposed in the Sacrament must be a proper Object for our Senses or it is not that Body of Christ wherewith he arose from the Dead And the Priest must create another Body such as our Saviour never had before he can adapt it to this Doctrin of the Sacrament It is therefore evidently a device of the School-Men to impose upon the Vulgar that they generally discourse thus of the Object of one Science in terms and notions that are peculiar to another and instead of Matter and Form wherein the Essence of a Body doth consist and which do evidently demonstrate that every Humane Body doth consist of Limbs hath Flesh and Bones with that Extent Shape and Dimensions that are proper to it and whereof all Mankind are equally sure and certain All their Disputations are about its Substance and its Accidents which are Metaphysical terms and may agree with a Spirit with whose Nature and Parts the wisest Men are unacquainted And therefore abstracting from the Senses wherein the least intelligent are sufficient Judges they confound our Understanding in such intricacies and quillets that even they themselves cannot explain their meaning And therefore I say that either our Senses must be Judges in this case as well as other Bodies or else that the Body of Christ is not a proper Body as Nestorius heretofore did Heretically assert it or else that God hath appointed here an irresistible deception of all Mankind continually in that which is most evident and sure to be relyed on and how agreeable these are