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	reject_v	2,895	5	9.0049	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34082	The right of tythes asserted & proved, from divine institution, primitive practice, voluntary donations, and positive laws with a just vindication of that sacred maintenance from the cavils of Thomas Elwood, in his pretended answer to the friendly conference.	Comber, Thomas, 1645-1699.	1677 (1677)	Wing C5488; ESTC R39378	85,062	252

For Charles the Great of France saith the Historian sent the Constitutions of a Synod which he had received from Constantinople into Britain in which alas were many inconvenient things and contrary to the Catholick Faith especially that Images ought to be worshipped which is altogether accursed by the Church of God against which Alcuinus writ an Epistle wonderfully proved by the Authority of Divine Scripture which in the name of our Princes and Bishops he carried with the Constitutions back to the King of France (c) Hoveden Annal. p. 232 Sim. Dunel Col. 111. Math. West An. 793. And upon this a Synod was called at Frankfort wherein by the Gallican English and German Churches the worship of Images was condemned and a Book written in the Name of Charles the Great against the second Council of Nice (d) Vid. Eiginharti Annal An. 794. and that this opinion continued long after may be seen in Dr. Stillingfleet pag. 832. who instances in Famous Authors that in the name of the Gallican Church opposed all Image-worship such as Jonas Aurelianensis Anno 842. and Agobardus Bishop of Lyens An. 850. Hincmarus Bishop of Rhemes An. 880. c. And that the English remained free from this Idolatry a long time after is shewed by Sir Roger Twysden (e) Histor Vindic. c. 9. p. 184. Thirdly He instances in Miracles and Intercession of Saints taxing Bede with these points of Popery and the Saxons of his time I reply That if the beliefe of Miracles make Men Papists then T. E. and his Quakers are all Papists for they believe they are immediately taught which is a stranger and greater Miracle than any they can find in all Bede's History Again It is not unlikely but some extraordinary Miracles might be wrought at the first Conversion of the Saxons the more easily to convince that rugged People and the want of Humane Learning in that Age might occasion the credulous reception of more than was true and yet we must not condemn them presently for Papists they might be credulous and apt to be imposed upon but that was their infirmity and amounts but to Superstition not to Popery I add That in Eusebius and other old Church-Histories there are many Miracles recorded which yet doth not prove either the Authors relating them or the People believing them to be Papists As for Intercession of Saints if he mean that the Saxons prayed to the Saints as their Intercessors with God he doth egregiously wrong them for the old Saxon Psalters in which are their Private Devotions have no mention of any Saints at all as is attested by Spelman and Twysden who had perused several Originals and Bishop Vsher affirms the like of a Prayer Book which he had seen as old as K. Athelstan's time An. 940. Nor were the Saints Names added in their Litanies with Ora pro nobis till about the time of K. Canutus almost 200 years after K. Ethelwolph's time So that neither in this matter were our Tythe-givers Idolaters nor Papists neither There is but one thing more wherein the present Church of Rome is charged with Idolatry and that is in Adoring the Host or Body of Christ which they say is transubstantiate in the Sacrament but neither in this were the Saxons guilty for they did not believe Transubstantiation no not in King Edgar's dayes An. 975. as appears by the Saxon Paschal Homily which Aelfricus then translated into Saxon being appointed to be publickly read There is saith he much difference between the Body of Christ which suffered for us and that which is consecrated in the Eucharist that was born of the Virgins flesh but his Spiritual Body which we call the Host is composed of many grains without blood or bones or any member or any Soul This Mystery is a pledge and sigure but the Body of Christ is Truth it self (f) Homil● Pasch Sax. And another Discourse of his to a Saxon Bishop of those Times saith The Host is the Body of Christ not corporally but spiritually (g) B. Ushe● de Success 〈◊〉 Eccles c. 〈◊〉 §. 21. Which proves they were of the same opinion with Protestants in this main point and could be no Idolaters at all I could give more Instances to prove that the Saxons were like the Protestants in the most fundamental matters but two Instances more shall suffice at present 1. As to the merit of Good works The Lord teacheth us saith V. Bede that no Man is sufficiently able to save himself either by his own Free-will or his own merits (h) Bed in Psal 31. And by the Righteousness of his deeds shall no Man be saved but only by the Righteousness of Faith (i) Id. in Psal 77. By the mercy of God in the Name of our Saviour and not by our merits we obtain Life saith Alcuinus An. 800. (k) In Psal 142. And long after even in Anselm's time this was the opinion of the Church of England as we have proved before so that in this point the Quakers with their Perfection are more Popish than the Saxons were I shall conclude with the Canon of Scripture which the Saxons kept entire as we have it rejecting the Apocrypha from being of Divine Authority even as the present Protestants Church doth see of old Beda (l) Comm in Apoc. c. 4. Alcuinus (m) Advers Elipantum Gislebertus Westmonast (n) Alterc inter Synag Eccl. c. 1. An. 1090. and since that Johannes Sarisburiensis (o) Ep. 172. An. 1180. and Guliel Occam (p) Dial. part 3. tract 1. l. 3. c. 16. An. 1330. to name no more Finally then if T. E. have either shame or grace let him repent of this foul slander which he hath as falsly as maliciously cast upon our Fore-Fathers the pious Saxons who were more Orthodox in some Points than Rome it self then was and differred from the present Papists in all the most material Articles of Faith being nearer in opinion to the Protestant Church of England And although they were in some lesser matter inclining to Superstition yet they were very devout according to their knowledge and may shame the present Age who do not so many good things though they have more Understanding But if T. E. will not recant I shall leave it to the Reader to judge of his Ignorance and Impudence in saying Tythes were given by Papists and Idolaters to Idolaters for Idolatrous uses and in supposing the Church so much corrupted with Popery then that their very Donations were not fit to stand good or be enjoyed no not by a Protestant Ministry § 22. To manifest that the Donation of Tythes is not Popery we have already proved they were given to the Church before Popery came in and now we shall shew they were allowed received and confirmed after Popery was turned out and that as you noted in the Conference even by those who were Martyrs for the Protestant Faith Cranmer Hooper Ridley Latimer Taylor and

Word to manifest Gods Will Thus the way of honouring God by Oblation of Sacrifice is believed to have been first revealed to Adam although the particular Command for it be not recorded The like we may believe also concerning this of Dedicating a Tenth part especially if we consider how it was propagated by Tradition among the Heathens of whose Practices we have any Histories to inform us The Tyrians gave the Tenth Part to their Gods And by their Example the Carthaginians a Colony of Tyrians sent their Tythes yearly to Hercules Tyrius and finding themselves unfortunate when they for a while had omitted it they restor'd the Tythes as before (d) Diodor. Sicul. Dydimus the Grammarian saith It was the custom of the Greeks to consecrate the Tenth of their Gains to the Gods And the Inhabitants of the Island Syphnus are remembred by Pausanias to have had their Mines swallowed up by the Sea upon their neglect of paying the Tythes to them as formerly to Apollo (e) Pausanias Histor Graec. For the Romans it is well known they vowed the Tenth of their Fruits to Hercules And Lucullus was believed to grow rich by his punctual payment of these Dues (f) Alexand. ab Alexand. lib. 3. cap. 22. And that this was not done onely by them of extraordinary Devotion we learn from Plutarch who saith The careful Father of a Family divides his Years Profits into Ten parts Six to be spent on his Houshold Two to be laid up One for the Seed of the next Year and the Tenth is the Tribute of the Gods (g) Apud Episc Winton Theol. Determ And Paulus Diaconus speaks generally of all Heathens Of old they offered all the Tenth to their Gods And Alexander ab Alexandro The Tenth part of the Fruits were every where vowed to Hercules (h) Alex. ab Alexand. lib. 3. cap. 22. There are more Proofs of this kind in Sir Henry Spelman's larger Work of Tythes But these may suffice to shew that the most distant Nations did consent in giving this Tenth part to their Gods which therefore we must believe they had by Tradition from the first Patriarchs who received it by Revelation from God This is a sufficient account by what Authority Abraham might proceed in the choyce of the Tenth part And it is not necessary since the Scripture is silent I should determine whether Abraham was immediately directed to it or whether he learned it from Melchisedec who St. Paul saith Tythed Abraham or whether they did not both learn it from the first Patriarchs which is most likely it being sufficient that God hath Recorded it with approbation and afterwards Ratified it by following this Example Even as in the Case of putting an Adulteress to death Judah proceeds upon that as being a just Punishment And though we read of no Command before to enact it into a Law yet we believe Judah received that Law by Tradition from the Patriarchs who were taught it by God Gen. xxxviii 35. And we are the more confirmed this Law came from God at first because he approved it and writ it down afterwards Levit. xx 10. And when T. E. shews me a Command before Judah's time to put an Adulteress to death I may shew him a Command for Tythes before Abraham § 4. But our Quaker goes on pag. 278. Moses saith expresly he gave him Tythes he doth not say he paid him Tythes And the Apostle saith Abraham gave the Tenth Heb. vii 4. To give is one thing to pay another I answer To give and to pay is all one in this case or else the Apostle was overseen who not onely saith he gave the Tenth ver 4. but which T. E. concealed ver 9. Levi paid Tythes in Abraham the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intimating that Melchisedec Tythed him Nor will the Quakers critical distinction between to give and to pay hold in other cases for it is very proper to say we give a Man that which is his due I hope he will not accuse David of improper speaking when he saith Give unto the Lord the honour due unto his Name Psal xxxix 2. But however T. E. will grant Tythes were due to be paid under the Law and yet we read Hezekiah commanded the People to give the Priests their Portion c. 2 Chron. xxxi 4. So that the word give in Gen. xiv doth no more prove Tythes were not due to Melchisedec Jure Divino than the same in Chron. proves they were not due to the Levites Jure Divino Yet if the Quakers like this Criticism of T. E. I hope it will persuade them to give us our Tythes though they will not pay them § 5. His next Objection pag. 279. is If they were due to Melchisedec then Abraham must have paid him Tythes of all his Substance and not onely of the Spoils Hebr. vii 4. This was an extraordinary Occasion wherein Abraham having got a Victory by Gods Blessing did give to God the Tenth of all he had now gotten as in all probability he was wont ordinarily to do of all that he got by Gods ordinary Blessing onely this as more especially remarkable is recorded in this short History So that T. E's saying he doth not read in Genesis that Abraham paid his Tythes constantly is no Argument unless all that Abraham ordinarily did were recorded there And I may ask him where he reads there that Abraham did not pay them His Negative arguing is of no more force than it would be if he should say Those Ante-diluvian Patriarchs did nothing else while they lived but beget Sons and Daughters because no more is recorded of many of them Gen. v. T. E. therefore cannot prove Abraham did not pay Tythes ordinarily and I can make it appear very probable he did For first It is very probable Melchisedec was the same with Sem the Son of Noah so the ancient Hebrew Traditions said (i) Hieron ad Evagrium Epist 126. Quest Hebr. in Gen. and so Lyra Tostatus and others do prove Epiphanius indeed thought Sem must be dead before but he was led into this mistake by following the Chronology of the LXX And S. Hierom computing according to the Hebrew Account makes it appear that Sem did live 35 years after Abraham's death (k) Id. Epist ad Evagr. And concerning the Occasion of his coming to Salem there is a very notable Account in Saidas Batricides who yet makes Melchisedec not Sem himself but one of his Family and allied to Abraham's Ancestors viz. That Noah being about to die commanded his Son Sem to take Adam's Body which his Father Lamech had ordered him to bury in the middle of the Earth and to take with him Bread and Wine for his Journey and also to take Melchisedec the Son of Phaleg along with him and go to the place where that Body was to be buried which the Angel saith Noah will shew you and command Melchisedec that he shall place his Seat