Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	authority_n	church_n	infallible_a	12,744	5	10.2258	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65695	The absurdity and idolatry of host-worship proved, by shewing how it answers what is said in scripture and the writtings of the fathers, to shew the folly and idolatry committed in the worship of heathen deities : also a full answer to all those pleas by which papists would wipe off the charge of idolatry, and an appendix against transubstantiation, with some reflexions on a late popish book called The guide in controversies / by Daniel Whitby ...	Whitby, Daniel, 1638-1726.	1679 (1679)	Wing W1719; ESTC R39040	107,837	157

because they seemed to be pleased with the blood and fat of beasts he very honestly confesseth that Heathens might plausibly object the like against the God of Israel Contra Julian l. 4. p. 125. D. because he also did require such Sacrifices to be offered to him The very same objection is taken notice of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril contra Jul. l. 1. p. 9. A. and answered by Cyril of Alexandria Again the Fathers frequently object unto the Heathens that diversity of Sects and of opinions which was to be found among their Philosophers but then they spare not to acknowledge that this objection may be retorted against them and then proceed to give what answer they think fit unto it And when Tertullian had argued that the Heathen Gods must be unjust Hot utique in Deum vestrum repercutere est Apol. c. 41. if they by reason of the faults of Christians were induced to hurt their own Votaries he adds that Heathens might retort this argument upon the Christians God and then proceeds to vindicate his God from that objection And yet if in his days the Romish Sacramental God had by all Christians been acknowledged and adored not only this particular but almost all that he and the forementioned Fathers had offered against the Heathen Deities might have been evidently retorted as we have seen already on the Christians God Why therefore did they not confess ingenuously in all those cases hoc in Deum nostrum repercutere est that they might be retorted on the Christians God and spend some time in vindication of their Sacramental God from these retorts § XIV 3. From what hath been discoursed Gorol II. we have as great assurance as sense and reason and the concurrent judgment of mankind can tender that the Host cannot be truly God and consequently that the Trent Council doth oblige all Christians as much as in them lyes to worship that as God which is not truly so and that the Members of the Roman Church are guilty of Idolatry by giving to it that worship which is due to God alone This charge I know doth very much afflict the Romanists because they clearly see that if it be made good against them our Church is justified in her refusal of communion with them seeing without consenting to and frequent practice of Idolatry we cannot be admitted to communion with them whence it will naturally follow that their Church must be as truly guilty of a wretched Schism as Jeroboam and his ten tribes were and consequently that the Major part of the Western Church may be Schismaticks by virtue of these impositions and that no persons separating on the account of the Idolatry required by the Church of Rome from the external communion of that Church can incur the guilt of Schism that the Roman and other Western Churches united with it and the supposed head thereof St. Peter's imaginary Successor is not that true Church-guide to which we are obliged to submit that a reformation may be lawful against the definitions of that Church that abuses in Doctrine and practice may be reformed by a National Church against and then much more without that Authority that National Churches and Councils are not absolutely subject to Patriarchal Hence doth it plainly follow that the doctrine of Transubstantiation the Sacrifice of the Mass the half Communion must be false hence also it is evident that we cannot safely acquiesce in the judgment of the Major part of our Church Governours concerning either the sense of Scripture the Doctrine of the ancient Church or the consent of Fathers or any article of faith defined by them nor safely practise all they do impose and consequently we may rest assured they are not infallible and therefore that there is no necessity for preservation of the Church from Sects and Heresies that they should be infallible nor is there any promise of an infallible assistance in their definitions in the Holy Scripture nor can it possibly be necessary to Salvation to believe the determinations of those Councils which by the Romanists are styled general Hence also it is evident that there can lye upon us no obligation to believe or yield assent to any Doctrines defined by them and consequently that this submission is not the only means of suppressing Heresies and Sects that to dissent from any Doctrine received or defined by them can be no mark of Heresie that there may be great hazard to the vulgar in adhering to the decisions of that Church that a right judgment may be assured that these Church Governours have erred in making this decision that Christians without this infallibility may be sufficiently secure in points of faith that certainty from sense and reason may rationally be pleaded for some Doctrines against the definitions of that Church and her supposed General Councils that all that R. H. hath said for confirmation of any of these propositions must be false And lastly that if a Church committing and teaching Idolatry is no true member of the Catholick Church the Church of Rome must cease to be so CHAP. III. The Contents The objections of the Romanists against the charge of Idolatry are considered and answered as 1. The Objection that the Prophets have foretold that all Idolatry should be extirpated by the preaching of Christ and his Apostles is answered § I. Obj. 2. That if the Church of Rome be guilty o Idolatry then the whole Church of Christ for many Ages before Luther must be charged with the same guilt answered first in general § II. In particular by shewing 1. That Image Worship was not then received in the greatest part of the Western and in some part of the Eastern Church § III. 2. That the worship of Saints departed with mental prayer or upon supposition of their acquaintance with the secret desires of the supplicant was then no article of faith in the Western Church nor is it yet received in the Eastern Church as such § IV. 3. That many in the Western Churches did not then and that the Eastern Churches do not yet give Latria to the Host § V. That this practice is no necessary consequent of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation nor is it necessary that they who do maintain a Doctrine must practise every thing which follows from it ibid. A large account of the Greek Mass § VI. A full answer to all that R. H. offers from that Mass to prove the Host is worshipped with Latria by the Greeks § VII In the times of Arianism Idolatry prevailed over the major part of the Church Catholick and both the Fathers and the Romish Doctors teach that in the time of Antichrist it will prevail much more § VIII § I THESE being therefore unavoidably the consequences of this crime of which they are accused not only by the Church of England but all other Protestants they do with all their wit and subtilty endeavour to demonstrate the falseness of this accusation and muster

persona Episcoporum principum nostrorum Regi Francorum attulit Hoveden Annal. Part. 1. ad A. D. 792. Simeon Dunelm ad A. D. 793. M. Weslmonast A. D. 793. Alcuinus Tutor to Charles the Great and Scholar of Venerable Bede who wrote an Epistle against the Synodal Book of the Second Nicene Council wherein it was asserted that Images ought to be worshipped which Epistle being marvelously confirmed by the Authority of the Holy Scriptures he carried to the French King in the name of the English Bishops and Princes This Image-worship was condemned also by the Church of England in the XII and XIII Centuries For Simon Dunelmensis an Oxonian Doctor and Roger Hoveden their chief Professor and Matthew Westmonasteriensis do all concurr in this assertion that in the Second Nicene Synod are many things contained which are inconvenient and contrary to the true faith and that in that Council was established a Decree that Images should be worshipped which thing the Church of God wholly abhors Where note that in these Writers we find not the least hint of a distinction betwixt due and undue worship of an holy Image or betwixt worship which the Church of Christ allows and worship which the Church abhors nor do they say the Nicene Council doth assert eam adorationem Imaginibus deberi quam Ecclesia Dei execratur P. 146. as T. G. in his translation of these words doth very fraudulently insinuate but they say only that the second Nicene Council had declared Imagines adorari debere quod Ecclesia Dei execratur that Images were to be worshipped and that this was the Doctrine which Gods Church abhorred It was condemned in the XIV Century by Robert Holcot one of our Country men and Professor in Oxford Com. in lib. Sap. Cap. 13. voce Infelices who plainly doth assert That no adoration is to be given to any Image nor is it lawful for any man to worship Images It was condemned in the XV. Century by Gabriel Biel In canone Missae lect 49. an Oxonian Doctor who determines that to be the truest Sentence which holds That any Image is not to be worshipped either for it self considered as it is wood or stone or metal nor yet considered as a sign er Image And that the Christian faith permits them to be reserved in the Church non ut ipsae adorentur not that they should be worshipped but that the minds of faithful men might be excited to give reverence to them whose Images they are It was condemned in the same Century by Cornelius Agrippa De vanit scientiarum cap. de Imagin who saith That the corrupt custom and false Religion of the Heathens hath infected our Religion and hath introduced into our Church Images and Idols and many barren pompous Cereonies none of which were found or practised among the primitive professors of Christianity It was condemned by Polydore Virgil De invent rerum l. 6. c. 13. who doth acknowledge that it is testified St. Jerom that almost all the antient Fathers did condemn Image-worship for fear of Idolatry It was condemned in the XVI Century by the excellent Cassander who saith Consult cap. de Imagin P. 205. It was to be desired that our predecessors had stood firm in the opinion of their Forefathers viz. that I mages were neither to be worshipped nor to be broken down And page 210 It seemeth fit saith he to be advised if matters could be thus contrived that things should be reduced to that moderation which they obtained in the more antient Church of Rome and Germany and France ut rerum gerendarum monumenta non cultus instrumenta habeantur that is that Images be used or retained as monuments of things past but not as instruments of worship It was condemned in the same Century Com. in Act. Apost cap. 7. by Ferus a very Learned Person who Preached at Mentz for the expresly saith that Images are to lerated in the Church that they may admonish not that they may be worshipped for otherwise they can admit of no excuse And to assure us that his private judgment was very sutable to the prevailing judgment of those times we find the same determination made by a Council held at Mentz A.D. C. 14. 1549. during the Session of the Trent Council which speaks thus Let our Pastors accurately teach the people that Images are not propouuded to be worshipped or adored but that we may by them be brought to the remembrance of those things which we ought profitably to call to mind It was condemned also by the Church of Cologn In Antididag Colon. cap. de Imag. which saith thus We Christians when we bend our knees before the Image of the Holy Cross do not adore the very wood but him who died upon it for our sins and doth conclude with Gregory the Great that it is not lawful in any wise to worship any thing that is the work of our own hand Moreover from the XII Century to the Reformation it was condemned by the Waldenses the Albigenses and the Hussites who spread themselves throughout the greatest part of Europe and propagated their Doctrine through France Spain England Scotland Italy Germany Bohemia Saxony Polonia Lithuanid and other Nations Lastly Dr. Still defence p. 837.838 This Image-worship was condemned by the Armenians from the VI. Century to this present time For they having begun their Schism before this practice found any countenance in the Church of Christ not only do refuse to worship Images but roundly do pronounce Anathema on them that do so § IV 2. We say the Roman Church is guilty of Idolatry in worshipping the Saints departed because they worship them with mental prayer believing that they understand the secrets or inward motions of the hearts of them who put up to them mental prayers Now this we say was never any Article of Faith Sess 25. p. 527 528. even in the Latine Church till the Trent Council had determined that they who said it was a foolish thing to put up mental prayers to Saints departed were guilty of impiety and did pronounce Anathema On all that held or thought the contrary till then I say it was no Article of Faith even in the Western Church For in the XII Century this Question was moved by the Master of the Sentences whether the Saints do hear the prayers of suppliants and the desire of petitioners do come unto their notice and this Answer is returned to it that it is not incredible that the souls of the Saints Lomb. Sent. l. 4. Dist 45. which in the secret of Gods presence are joyed with the illustration of the true light do in the contemplation of it understand the thing that we done abroad as much as appertaineth either to them for jay or to us for help Anselmus Landunensis who lived in the same Century notes this that Ausim saith Glass inter● i● Esa lxiii that the dead even the Saints do