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

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61434	Of prayers for the dead whether the practice and tradition thereof in the Church be truly Catholick, and a competent evidence of apostolick original and authority? : humbly tendred to the consideration of ...	Stephens, Edward, d. 1706.	1699 (1699)	Wing S5432; ESTC R24617	43,790	52

undermine partly by raising real Scandals and Offences and partly by strongly representing Imaginary ones But against all this Humility and Charity will fortifie us and the Grace special Guidance and Mercy of God will preserve us if we be careful to continue in those Graces It was Pride and Arrogance and Discontent in Aerius which gave the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiphan p. 905. a. Devil Advantage to instigate him to the first Opposition of such a Catholick Practice It was Pride Vanity and Ostentation of Parts by which he set Gobarus to work to shew his Learning and Acuteness in finding out Differences of Opinions among them who perhaps in many of those things differed no more than the Writers of the Sacred Scriptures seem to do For I do not find that he made any special Opposition against this Practice But I doubt it was not imaginary but real Scandal and gross Abuses of a good Practice by which Waldo and his Followers and the Albigenses were moved to oppose all without Distinction tho' there seems to have been in him with a Zeal for God but without Knowledge a Mixture of Pride and Conceitedness And it was real and not imaginary Scandal by which Luther was at first moved to oppose Indulgencies and his Followers at first to oppose even this innocent and commendable Practice But in such Men as Vsher and Bucer it was the Reputation of the Cause they had espoused in gross and Compliances with the Times and their particular Interests by which they were moved But let us but carefully follow our Saviour's Admonitions and Directions wisely distinguish the Ingredients of the Composition of Truth and Falsehood and honestly imbrace hold fast and own the Truth when we have the Opportunity and we shall not want sufficient Light and Evidence to find it The specious Appearances set up against this Catholick Practice of the Church of Christ are these 1. That there is no Scripture Authority for it 2. That the Ancient Practice was to Pray for all such as were at Rest 3. That the Ancients were not agreed in their Opinions concerning the State of Separate Souls or the general Intention of the Church in those Prayers To detect the Fallacy Falsity and Impertinence of these Allegations as briefly as may be To the first I say it is a meer Fallacy and grounded upon a false Supposition that nothing is to be admitted in Doctrine or Worship but what there is Scripture Authority for if it be understood of a special Authority and their usual Pretences of not Adding or Diminishing are to be understood of those particular Parts or Books of the Scripture as is plain by the Additional Writings and Practices of Holy Men afterwards 2. It is inconsistent with the Tradition of the Doctrine and Institutions of the Gospel and of the Ordinances of the Apostles which were all by Word and Deed without Writing as the Common Laws of this Nation were at first settled and much of what was written was written upon special Occasions and much with that Brevity and Conciseness by the special Providence of God as was sufficient for them for whom it was intended and yet so as should need an Authentick Explication to preserve the Authority of the Catholick Church 3. It is contrary to the express Directions of the Scripture to contend for the Doctrine once delivered to the Saints in general and to hold the Traditions they had received whether by Word or Epistle c. And if it be understood of a general Authority the Allegation it self is false For it is contrary to all those Scriptures which declare the Authority of the Church and require Obedience to Superiors And either way it is contrary to the Sentiments Testimony and Practice of the Ancient Christians who in Questions of Difficulty and Contests with Hereticks always inquired not only what was written by the Apostles but also or principally what was delivered by them to the Churches which they founded in all Parts of the World of which the Catholick Church doth consist which the Scripture it self stiles the Pillar and Basis of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 v. Grot. not only for the Sense and Meaning of the Scripture as Lawyers with good reason do when in doubts about the Construction of Writings they inquire how the Usage hath gone for in that case the Writing is the Principal Evidence but in this case what was delivered to the Churches which were compleatly and plainly instructed and ordered by the Apostles was the principal Inquiry and the Scriptures but an accessory Evidence as our Year-Books are of the Common Law in Questions concerning the Common Law But I doubt not but there was a special Providence in it that so much was written and no more and that it was written in such a manner Lastly This hath been the Practice and Pretence of Hereticks and Schismaticks in all Ages to the intent with the better colour to set aside the Authority of the Catholick Church that they might so make way to set up their own private Opinions and Conceits in the Place thereof but never more grossly nauciously and scandalously than by some of the Principal of the late Reformers Calvin especially on the one side inculcating and crying up The Pure Word of God The Pure Word of God and on the other abusing it by straining wresting it to serve their own turns and eluding and evading what is plainly contrary to them which is now past all doubt not only by the Confessions of Mr. Baxter and Le Blank but the many of all Parties who have deserted divers of those Assertions which were so hotly contended for under that specious Pretence a plain Evidence and Demonstration that they were no better than their Predecessors in that Pretence But besides all this what I am now doing if I be not much mistaken will be a particular demonstration of the Truth of what I say To the other two Allegations I say they are both impertinent to the Question under consideration here which is only concerning the Matter of Fact and Practice I do not say that they are impertinent to the Subject in general to be considered upon other Occasions but to this special Question and therefore to insist upon them in this Case instead of directly answering to the Question is fallacious captious and an abuse to the Reader to impose upon him distract him and withdraw him from the proper Question There might be Difference in Forms and various Intendments and all consistent Certainly there was no such Difference or Variety either of Forms or Intendment as there is this day amongst Protestants of both in their greatest Solemnity of the Sacrament But if the matter of Fact be certain it may be in the Power of the Church to order the Form and at Liberty for every one to construe the Intention or make his Inferences or Observations for his own Use as well as of the Scripture And the Matter of Fact is

last as as common as for any of the rest About 50 years before this was S. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage a Person of great Worth and most deserved Reputation in the Church and at last a Holy Martyr He in his LXVI Epistle with his Collegues in Council tells the Clergy and People to whom he wrote that their Predecessors upon religious Consideration as a necessary Provision had decreed That no Christian Brother at his Departure should name a Clergy-Man for Guardian or Executor and that if any one should do this there should be * Si quis hoc fecisset non offeretur pro ●o nec sacrificium pro Do●mitione ejas celebretur Neque enim c. no Offering for him nor Sacrifice celebrated for his Departure for he doth not deserve to be named at the Altar of God in the Prayer of the Priests who would call away the Priests and Ministers from the Altar And therefore since one Victor † Contra formam nuper in Concilio à sacerdotibus datam contrary to the Order lately made in Council by the Priests had presumed to constitute a certain Presbyter for a Guardian ‖ Non est quod pro Dormitione ejas apud vos fiat Oblatio aut Deprecatio aliqua nomine ejus in Ecclesia frequentetur there should no Oblation be made among them for his Departure or any Deprecation commonly used in the Church in his Name that the Decree of the Bishops religiously and necessarily made might be observed by them and Example given to others c. This Prohibition of those things to be done by way of Punishment is a plain Evidence of what was accustomed and should have been done if there had been no Prohibition and an Evidence not of a single Person but of a Council and not of Matter of Opinion but of plain Matter of Fact and that so notorious as was well known to all and of such Importance in the Opinion of all as the Prohibition was adjudged a competent Punishment for such a Crime as they all thought no little one It was a kind of Excommunication Another fifty years before this lived Tertullian a Man of very great and universal Learning very acute Parts and very strict for Discipline and for the Orders of the Church He mentions this Practice in divers of his Writings not only as common and usual but also as delivered by Tradition and so well known and unquestionable as to be it self an undeniable Instance and Proof of unwritten Traditions This he doth in his Book de Corona Militis § 3. where amongst the Instances which he alleadgeth for proof of the Authority of unwritten Traditions this is one Oblationes pro Defunctis pro Natalitiis annua die facimus We make Oblations for the Dead upon the Annual day of their Departure which the Ancient Christians called their Natalitiae or Birth-Days And after all concludes * Harum aliarum ejusmodi discipiinarum si Legem expostules Scripturarum nullam invenies Traditio tibi praetenditue auctrix Consuetudo confirmatrix Fides observatrix If of these and other Matters of Discipline you seek for a Rule of Scriptures you shall find none Tradition is alleadged for the Author Custom for the Confirmer and Faith for the Observer But of Traditions in general he hath other Discourses elsewhere and of this particular Tradition which he does but only mention here as an instance of Fact not to be denied we have farther mention in other of his Writings In his Book de Monogamia against second Marriages speaking of the Custom of the Widow's praying for her deceased Husband he says * Et pro anima ejus orat Refrigerium interim adpostulat ei in prima Resurrectione Consortium offert annuis diebus dormitionis ejus § 10. She prays for his Soul and intreats for Refreshment for him in the interim and Consort in the first Resurrection and offers for him on the Annual days of his Departure Again in his Book de Exhortatione Castitatis he thus upbraids him who had had several Wives † Et jam repete apud Deum pro cujus Spiritu postules pro qua Oblationes Annuas reddas Stabis ergo ad Deum cum tot Uxoribus quot illa oratione commemoras offeres pro duabus commemoras illas duas per sacerdotem de Monogamia ob pristinum de virginitate sanctitum circumdatum virginibus univiris ascendet sacrificium tuum iibera fronte inter cete ras voluntates bonae mentis postulabis tibi uxori castiatem● § 11 Say before God for whose Spirit thou dost pray for which thou dost make thy Annual Oblations Wilt thou therefore stand before God with so many Wives as thou dost in that Prayer remember and offer for two and commemorate those two by a Priest once married by reason of the ancient Sanction of Virginity incompassed with Virgins and once married Women And will thy Sacrifice ascend with Confidence and amongst other Habits of a good Soul wilt thou pray for Chastity for thy self and thy Wife This I think is plain and full for the common Practice both in private and in publick by the Priest at the Altar and for the Tradition But it is objected that Tertullian when he wrote these Books was a Montanist and wrote them against the Church And it is as easily answered that it is not Matter of Opinion but Matter of Fact for which they are here alleadged and it is certain he was no Fool which he must have been if this had been the Practice of the Montanists and not of the Church But for the Readers better Information and more ample Satisfaction that the Objection is a meer Scarecrow and serves only to discover the Disingenuity and Inconsiderateness of the Objectors he must know That Montanus and his Companions Alcibiades and Theodotus were at first looked upon in the Opinion of most Men as Prophets For very many Miracles of Divine Grace at that time wrought in many Churches made most Men believe that they also were Prophets Euseb 5. Hist 3. So that if Tertullian did believe this it was no more than what most others did But what more specially inclined him to favour Montanus was this He was a Man of great Austerity and Strictness in Matters of Discipline Penance Fasting Chastity Suffering c. which were things which Montanus asserted and highly pretended to And that which fixed him in his Opinion of Montanus was some unhappy Contests which arose between him and the Roman Clergy about some of these things which gave him that Offence that he not only reflects upon them in his de Corona Militis Novi Pastores eorum c. but afterwards in his other Writings frequently calls them Psychici Animal or Sensual Man And this which is observable in his Writings is also affirmed by S. Hierom. This was his * For as to what relates to the Rule of Faith that is