Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n apostle_n receive_v tradition_n 2,537 5 8.9791 5 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
A60249 An answer to Doctor Piercie's sermon preached before His Majesty at White-Hall, Feb. 1, 1663 by J.S. Simons, Joseph, 1593-1671. 1663 (1663) Wing S3805; ESTC R34245 67,126 128

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

against the whole Church is most insolent m●…dnesse saith S. Austin Ep. 118. 18. You erre no lesse absurdly when you say that in the fourth Session of the Council of Trent the Roman Church is made to differ as well from her ancient and purer self as from all other Churches besides her self This is meerly begg'd and not prov'd Might not all former Hereticks have said the same of all Generall Councils that condemn'd them Did either the Council of the Apostles Act. 15. or the first four Generall ones make the Church differ from her self by reason of their Definitions or Decrees why then the Council of Trent in particular Because say you that Council defin'd many meerly humane writings and many unwritten Traditions to be of equall authority with the Scripture anathemat zing all that should not receive them The Council of Trent defined no writings to be of equall authority with the Scriptures but such as those Orthodox Fathers by the assistance of the Holy Ghost confirming ancient Tradition judged to be the Word of God nor any unwritten Traditions but such as were either immediately received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself or inspired to the Apostles by the Holy Ghost and so handed down in a perpetuall succession unto them Of such Traditions the Apostle speaks 2 Thes. 2. Hold the Traditions which you have been taught whether by word or Epistle Hence it is clear saith S. Chrysostome that the Apostles delivered not all things by writing but many things also unwritten both which are worthy of equall belief Is not this the very Definition of the Council of Trent And might not all the Hereticks that ever deni'd any part of Scripture as the Cerinthians deni'd the whole New Testament but S. Matthew's Gospel the Marcionists Gnosticks Manichees all the old Testament as Luther the Epistle to the Hebrews S. Iames and the Apocalyps and all that ever den●…'d Apostolicall Traditions as Arius Nestorius Eutyches and other Novellers did might not I say all these have used the same plea against the Church or Councils that defined Canonicall Books or Apostolicall Traditions against them A strange objection and stranger reformation that justifies all Hereticks in the world As for the anathema hath it not ever been the Style of all Generall Councils to lay a curse upon the refusers of their Definitions And if the point of Infallibility was both believed and virtually defined by the first Generall Councils justly imposing upon mens consciences an inward assent to their Decrees of Faith upon pain of Anathema why not as well by the Council of Trent 19. But I wonder what you mean in saying that the Roman Church was made to differ from all other Churches besides her self If by the Roman Church you mean not onely the City and Diocesse of Rome but all other Churches united with that particular Church whose Bishops sate voted in the Council of Trent then you speak a Chymera there being but one true Catholick Church in the world which is the Roman that never differ'd from her self in matters of faith except you intend a Heterogenial Church patcht up of all condemn'd Sects in the world opposite one to anothre 20. Upon the premises your Reformers say you met together and concluded a Secession As if Protestants revolted not from the Pope long before the Council of Trent or the pretended new Creed as you call it But let us see the quality of those Reformers to wit your Kings your Cler●…y and your Layty too What Kings I pray Hen. the 8. the first broacher of the Schisme with Dalila in his ●…ap Edward the 6. a young Child and Q●… Elizabeth a woman fit heads to consult of Religion Yet were they all successively by Acts of Parliament either created or declar'd Supreame heads of the Church of England a Prerogative never ch●…lleng'd by any Christian Prince before The following Kings found the breach made and the Schisme completed What Clergy but Cranmer that Arch-Sycophant who according to H●…story by his whispers in the Kings car was the first au thour of the Secession from the Pope and as ●…e pretended Bishop Bramhill confesses struck the nail home What Clergy but intruders when under Edward the 6. Protestantisme was establish●…t in England contrary to the liking of most of the true Bishops of that time And when under Q●…een Elizabeth all the Bishops but one were deposed and by Cambdens confession eighty Curates fifty Prebendarics fifteen Presidents of Colledges twelve Arch-Deacons and six Abbots lost their places when also the inferiour Clergy in a Convocation appointed by that very Queen protested against the Reformation What the Laiety too have they against all Antiquity power to define matters of Religion When Theodosius the younger sent his Ambassadour to the Council of Ephesus which was the third Generall one he writ to the Council that he sent him Ea Lege upon that condition that in questions of Religion he should have nothing to doe giving this reason It is not lawfull for him that is not a Bishop to meddle in businesses and consultations of the Church The same said Basil the Emperour to the Laiety in the seventh Generall Council 'T is not lawfull for you to treat in Ecclesiasticall Causes And long before that Iustinian If the businesse be Ecclesiasticall let no Civil Magistrate deale in such questions c. But in fine what Laiety was it but a Cromwell and such like flatterers It was generally conceived and truly as I think saith Weaver in his Monuments pag. 101. that those politick wayes for taking away the Pope's authority and suppressing religious Houses were principally devised by Cromwell And Bishop Gardner in Fox pag. 1344. saith The Parliament was with much cruelty constrained to abolish and put away the Primacy from the Bishop of Rome 21. Yea but these Reformers did not consult flesh and bloud O no! King Henry consulted the spirit when lusting after Anne Bolen he tore himself from the Pope for refusing him the grant of a Divorce and to satisfie his avarice he seized upon all the goods of Monasteries What spirit the Protectour and Parliament under Edward the Sixth consulted whether God or Mammon let Baker tell you There you may read how divers Bishops were committed to prison for misliking the Reformation and all of them dispossessed of their Bishopricks and that which is worse the Bishopricks themselves were dispossessed of their revenues A Parliament was held wherein divers Chantries Colledges Free Chappels Fraternities and Guilds with all their Lands and goods were given to the King which being sould at a low rate enriched many and enobled some and thereby made them firm in maintaining the change thus Baker Queen Elizabeth bred up a Catholick and by a Catholick Bishop consecrated Q●…een consulted Eternity when to buy a Crown she sold her Religion Or expect the Church of Rome should have been their Physician which was
So that to receive either unworthily is to be guilty of both because in either you receive both Hence the Apostle addes presently He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgement to himself not discerning our Lords Body Why but because that in receiving the Body under the form of Bread alone you receive also the Blood which is not separated from Christs living Body It was therefore so from the beginning For Christ our Lord Ioan. 6. five times promiseth life everlasting to the Bread of life not mentioning the Cup in those Texts Himself according to divers Fathers gave the Sacrament in one kind to the two Disciples in Emaus The Apostles practis'd the same in breaking Bread without naming the Cup and in your principles a negative argument from Scripture is valid The Primitive Church communicated the Sick under the form of Bread alone S. Ambrose dying received in one kind The Eremits carried the Sacrament to the Desart in clean Corporalls or Linnen called Dominicalia there to receive it fasting the Christians of AEgypt kept it in their Houses Satyrus Saint Ambrose his Brother took an Hoste with him in a Box about his neck to receive it at Sea To sucking Children the Cup was onely given in S. Cyprian's dayes And in the Greek Church they were wont to consecrate the Eucharist onely upon Saturdayes and Sundayes to be received the other dayes in the week during Lent Now in those hot Countreys the consecrated Wine could not be kept so long And it is most evident from Antiquity that the Eucharist was kept under the form of Bread to be distributed as occasion served Insomuch that we find amongst the Lawes of Charles the great 800. yeares ago Presbyter semper Eucharistiam habeat paratam c. Let the Priest alwayes have the Eucharist ready that if any be sick or a Child infirm he may give them the Sacrament that they may not die without Communion Well then seeing neither Christ our Lord in the Institution of the Eucharist nor S. Paul in declaring it excepted any sort of persons as Sick Ermits Children Sea-passengers or Christians in persecution yet the Church from all antiquity had power to administer it to such in one kinde and it was ever thought sufficient to salvation that is a whole Sacrament not a Half-Communion as you tearm it You must then either demonstrate out of Scripture the Churches restraint to these alone or confesse her practice towards all to be justifiable Finally Luther himself confesseth that Christus hac de re nihil unquam praecepit Christ never commanded any thing in this matter And Melanchthon held it a thing indifferent Against restraining the holy Scriptures from the common people The seventeenth Demonstration Page 26. 88. If Hebrew to the Iewes was the mother tongue and in that 't was read weekly before the people If the new Testament was first written in Greek because a tongue most known to the Eastern world and if after some hundreds of years it was translated into a few other tongues for the use of the common people then the restraining it from the common people was not from the beginning But the Antecedent supposition is true Therefore the Consequent 89. Yea but in our Saviours time Syriack was and had been 14. Generations before the mother tongue of the Iewes who lost the Hebrew in the long captivity of Babylon in so much that Esdras reading the Law to them was forced to use interpreters The New Testament was in Greck and as S. Ierome sayes read only in Greek all the East over though most of the Eastern Nations had a different Language as it appears by the Acts of the Apostles Ch. 2. How have we heard each man in our own language wherein we were born Parthians and Medians and Elamites and those that inhabit Mesopotamia Iewry and Capadocia Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Phamphilia Egypt and the parts of Lybia that is about Cyrene and strangers of Rome Iewes also and Proselytes Cretensians and Arabians We have heard them speak in our own tongue 90. Moreover S. Matthew writ his Gospel for the Iewes in Hebrew or in Greek not Syriack their vulgar tongue nor is it known that ever the old Testament was by order of the Iewish Church turn'd into Syriack S. Mark writ in Greek at Rome and for the Romans whose vulgar language was Latin so did S. Paul his Epistle to the Romans in Greek also to the Galathians and yet their vulgar was a kind of German Language they have a proper tongue almost the same as those of Trevers saith S. Hierome upon that Epistle lib. 2. in his Preface And if the new Testament 400. years after was translated into some very few other tongues what is that to the beginning were not the common people from the beginning restrained from it at least those 400. years and in those Nations where Hebrew Greek or Latine were not the vulgar tongues And was it then translated by order of the Churches into Hebrew Greek or Latine or put into the hands of the common people as of necessary use or commanded to be read in those new traductions upon that score 91. Neither is it true that the Roman Church keeps the Scripture from the People 'T is at this day extant in all vulgar Languages of Europe and permitted to be read by the Layety with leave of their Pastours who are to judge into whose hands the sword of the Scripture which is the wo●…d of God is fit to be put Which rule had it been observed in England when after fifteen hundred years the Bible except perhaps the Psalmes was under Henry the 8th translated into English out of Latine so many mad Sects would never have risen in it Against publick Prayers in an unknown Tongue The eighteenth Demonstration Page 27. 92. What is scandalously opposite to the plain sense of Scripture was not from the beginning But the use of publick Prayers in a tongue unknown to the common people is scandalously opposite to the plaine sense of Scripture 1 Cor. 14. Therefore the use of publick Prayers in a tongue unknown to the Common people was not from the beginning 93. The Minor is undenyable because you as●…rt it but not a word of proofe which to make good you must demonstrate first that the Apostle by preferring the gift of prophecy before unknown tongues in the Church the only intent of that Chapter speakes of tongues in the publick service and administration of Sacraments proper to Pastours and not rather and solely of tongues in mutual conferences when the first Christians met for edification to communicate with one another their miraculous gifts as inspired Canticles Prophecies Tongues and other graces imparted above Nature both to men and women in those dayes In which assemblies the Corinthians seem to have committed some disorders turning Gods gifts especially that of tongues which was the least
●…n at Ierusalem 'T is a noto●…ious vanity in yo●…●…-men to be alway●…s pecking ar●… gr●…ones Who denies that m●… m●…y of time other Churches might prevent 〈◊〉 Roman and in that sense p●…ecisely be either M●…hers o●… S●…sters her as you please The Motherhood of the Roman Church consists in her prio●…ity nor ●…f time but of Dignity and Jurisdict●…on grounded ●…pon S. Peters P●…imacy who as he was Father an●… Head of all Bishops so the Roman Church in which by his Successours he still l●…veth and governeth saith S. Chrysologus is the Mother and Head of all Churches or with S. Cyprian The root and originall of the Catholick Church The Church of Caesarea began after that of Ierusalem and yet was made her Metropolitan as the first Council of Nice declared and Antioch was her Primate Even so Antioch Ierusalem and all other Churches founded before the Roman were afterwards made subject unto her For which reason Iuvenal the Bishop of Ierusalem said publickly in the Council of Ephesus that the ancient Custome and Apostolicall Tradition was that the Church of Antioch is to be ruled and judged by the Roman 33. You falsifie Gildas egregiously and by misplacing his words make him say what he never dreamt of namely that Christian Religion was planted in Britany in the dayes of Tiberius Caesar about seven yeares before S. Peter came to Rome But Gildas having spoken of the extreame desolation of his Countrey caused by the Warres with the Romans which Warres beginning not under Tiberius or Caius who never Warred with the Britains but under Claudius lasted 40. yeares Interea saith he In the mean time to wit during those Warres there appeared and imparted it self to this cold Island more remote from the visible Sun then other N●…tions the true and invisible Sun which in the time of Tiberius Caesar had manifested himself to the whole world I mean Christ vouchsafed to impart his Precepts c. Here Gildas onely sayes that during the Warres with Claudius the Sun of justice that manifested himself to the world by his Preaching in Ierusalem under Tiberius appeared at length to the Britains that is in the dayes of Claudius in whose second year S. Peter comming to Rome was entertained by a noble British Lady named Claudia Ruf●…ina But when all the Jewes were banisht from Rome he took that occasion to go Preaching into France and from thence into Britany where he planted the Gospel founded Churches and ordained Priests and Deacons as Metaphrastes recounts and S. Peter himself in the time of S. Edward the Confessour revealed to a holy man so hath Alredus Rhieuallis left upon R●…ord 500. yeares since Whence it appeares that not S. Ioseph of Arimathea in the time of Tiberius but S. Peter in the time of Claudius founded the British Church after he had founded the Church of Rome and fixt his Seat there 34. But let us suppose Christianity to have been in Britany before St. Peter came to Rome was it then planted in the Soil upon the hills and dales of the Land or in the hearts of the Britains if in the hearts then I ask were those Britains English men or did the Saxons receive their Christianity from them Had not England as England the first newes of Christ from Rome by St. Austin the Monk whom blessed St. Gregory di●…ected to our Conversion And are not all English Protestants now living who call themseves a Christian Church the off-spring of those first converted Saxons what hideous ingratitude is it then to smother the memory of so incomparable a benefit by still prating of old Britany whose faith whencesoever it sprung up first lasted not but Paganisme overgrowing it perisht in a short space root and branch till Pope Eleutherius replanted it durably yet so as it never spread thence to us English so great was the Britains hatred to the Saxons for usurping their Kingdome I conclude therefore with the two Ro●…al testimonies of our Kings the first of Henry the 8. professing that all the Churches of the Faithful much more England acknowledge and reverence the most holy See of Rome for their Mother The second of King Iames of glo●…ous memory in the summe of the Conference before Majestie affirming that the Roman Church was once the Mother Churche let Sir Edward Cook ●…e the Appendix We do not de●…y saith he but that Rome was the Mother Church and had thirty two Virginal Martyrs of her Popes a row 35. Thus having gone over the undemonstrable principles of your Sermon asserting much and proving nothing I come now to your pretended demonstrations But first I must mind you that in case you should demonstrate as you promise the Novelty of our pretentions and evince the antiquity of your own yet to the ma●… truth or falsity of Religion by your own confession 't were but a Topick reaching no farther then a mere probability which may in it self be as well false as true For in your third page you cite and approve the principle of Vincentius Lirinensis who say you to prove the truth of any Doctrine argues the case from a threefold Topick the universality the consent and the antiquity of tradition wherefore in your opinion not only universality of place wherein a Doctrine is believed or the consent of Fathers that believe and teach the same but also antiquity of time though from the beginning when it is believed is but a bare Topick And yet God knows this very Rule is your open condemnation Since it is impossible for you or all the Protestants in the world to shew that any one point of Doctrine wherein you differ from the Roman Church was ever believed not only in all places at all times or by all the Fathers but not so much as any one place at any one time or by any one Father nay or by any one person before Luther except perhaps by some such as were noted and condemned for Hereticks Doctor Pierce's Engagement to domonstrate the Novelties of the Roman Church Page 6. and 7. We cannot better put them to shame then by demonstrating the Novelties of their pretensions whil'st at the same time we evince the sacred antiquity of our own Thus you 36. Who can but wonder that a Doctor understanding what a demonstration is should esteem the flourishes of a Pulpit demonstrations and then blunder out nothing but old arguments which have been answered a hundred times over If you say the sence of Scripture on your side is evident Our men ten to one more in number equall in Learning not to say more and as upright in conscience doe averre the contrary And the con●…st it self destroyes your assertion For whence I pray arises this very controversie amongst men of equall abilities to judge a right but from the obscurity of Scripture Did ever men in their right wits having their eyes open dispute whether the Sun shin'd at mid-day To Demonstrations from universall
Tradition you pretend no●… as well because such discourses in your opinion are but Topicks as because you are able to bring nothing against our positive Doctrines but empty Negatives the silence of the Fathers in two or three ages who writ little or nothing of our present debates And I hope you will not so much as pretend that a few inconsiderable speeches of some Catholick Writers make up Demonstrations against that Church in which they lived and died But 't is now high time to ponder your Demonstrations Against the Pope's Supreamacy The first Demonstration Page 16. 37. Phocas the Emperour in the year 606. saith Baronius as you quote him being angry with Cyriacus Bishop of Constantinople adjudged the Title of Universall to the Roman Bishop alone to whom it had been given in a Nationall Council of Constantinople under Menas seventy yeares before and in the Council of Chalcedon one of the four fi●…st Generall Synods more then two hundred yeares past Therefore not onely the Title which was the precise question but also the prima●…y of jurisdiction and universall Pastorship whereof there was no question at all began under Phocas and so was a Novelty according to our Saviours words 'T was not so from the beginning A very robustious Demonstration 39. This is confirmed because Phocas was the greatest Villain in the world besides Cromwell and Pontius Pilate Therefore the Pope's Supreamacy must of necessity have begun under Phocas let never so many precedent exercises of that power holy Fathers and Councils shew the Contrary 40. 'T is farther confirm'd by the abuse offered to Baronius whose words are partly alter'd partly conceal'd His words rightly quoted are these Phocas therefore incenst against Cyriacus enacted by an Imperiall Edict that such a Title of universall Bishop did become the Roman Church alone and that it agreed onely to the Roman Bishop to be styled Universall and not to the Bishop of Constantinople And why but because the Bishop of Rome as S. Peter's Successour was known to be the supreame Pastor of all Churches 41. The words quite concealed clearly shewing Baronius his judgement are these What then did Phocas by his Edict conferre upon the Roman Church Nothing but that by his sentence he declared the Title of Universall to be unduly usurped by the Bishop of Constantinople which was due to the Roman Church alone since that even her adversaries the Bishops of Constantinople contradicted not that the Roman Church had alwayes held the Primacy over all Churches as above in due place hath been most largely demonstrated Had all these words been fairly cited your proof out of Baronius that the Pope's Supreamacy began under ●…hocas would have appeared in its proper colours it being evident that Phocas did not first conferre even the Title in question much lesse the Jurisdiction but onely declare that of right it belonged to the Popes of Rome who notwithstanding never used it as the Bishops of Constantinople presumed to doe The second Demonstration Page 17. 42. Looking back to the beginning we find that the Wall of Gods City had twelve Foundations and in them were the Names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb. Revel 21. 24. But all foundations of the same wall in which mens Names are written be equall in every respect Therefore the twelve Apostles signified by those twelve foundations were all equall in every respect Nay more the ancient Prophets upon this account were all equall every way as well amongst themselves though some were Kings and Governours of the rest as with the Apostles because we are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes. 2. 20. And why not the Apostles equal to Christ who is also a foundation of the wall of Gods City Other foundation can no man lay then that that is laid which is Iesus Christ. 2 Cor. 3. Therefore S. Peter was onely equall to the other Apostles and could in no respect have a primacy over them though you your self grant him a primacy of order before them all and by consequence a step above equality A gallant conviction To back this Demonstration let us adde another taken out of the same Chapter of the Revel v. 12. where it is likewise said that the City of God had twelve Gates and at the Gates twelve Angels and Names written thereon which are the Names of the twelve Tribes of the Children of Israel Now if one should argue thus to prove that the Tribe of Iuda had not the Scepter or primacy of Civil power over the rest but was equall in all regards The City of God had twelve Gates with twelve Angels and on them the Names of the twelve Tribes of Israel But all Gates and Angels who have mens names written upon them are equall in every respect Therefore the twelve Tribes of Israel signified by those twelve Gates and Angels were equall in every respect Would not he argue like a stout Logician The third Demonstration Page 17. 43. Whosoever withstands another to his face because through inadvertency or frailty he do's amisse and so speaks to him in the presence of others out of pure charity and zeale of the common good is at least his equall if not superiour But S. Paul did so to S. Peter Galat. 2. 11 12 13 14. Therefore he was at least his equall if not his superiour 44. Blind S. Cyprian that saw not this light of evidence when he said Neither Peter whom our Lord chose the first and upon whom he built his Church when Paul disputed with him about Circumcision challenged insolently or took arrogantly any thing to himself saying that he had the Primacy and therefore the later Disciples ought rather to obey him Blind S. Chr●…sostome admiring S. Peter's virtue Paul reproves and Peter heares to the end that whil'st the Master reproved holds his peace the Schollars may learn to change their opinion Blind S. Austin That which was done of S. Paul profitably by the liberty of charity Peter took in good part by holy and benigne godlinesse of humility and thereby gave a more rare example to posterity if at any time they doe amisse to be content to be corrected by their Iuniors then Paul gave to be confidently bold even Inferiours to resist their betters for defending the truth of the Gospel brotherly charity alwayes preserved Blind S. Gregory when he said Peter was silent that he who was on the top of the Apostleship might be the first in humility 45. Sir good D●…vinity teacheth us that there are two kinds of Correction the one of justice that belongs to Superiours in regard of their Subjects the other of Charity which concerns all men For as we are obliged to love our Neighbours so charity bindes us in due circumstances to use fraternall correction to all even Superiours As Iethro did to Moses Ioab to David and S. Bernard to Pope Eugenius In a word S. Peter's authority over S. Paul was so acknowledged by