Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A41388
|
Firmianus and Dubitantius, or, Certain dialogues concerning atheism, infidelity, popery, and other heresies and schisme's that trouble the peace of the church and are destructive of primitive piety written in a plain and easie method for the satisfaction of doubting Christians / by Tho. Good.
|
Good, Thomas, 1609-1678.
|
1674
(1674)
|
Wing G1029; ESTC R23950
|
83,883
|
174
|
to the Sight the Smell the Tast shall we think that the God of truth Gave to mâ—n five Scences to deceive 4 of them by one pretended miracle or that 't is his method to informe the mind by Impostures if one or two or three Senses may be deceived why not all then what will become of Romes orall Tradition for may not the eare be deceived as well as the eye the nose the tast the touch here are 4 Sences to one against that tradition and then how are the papists certain of what they have received from the present Church or how is shee certaine of what shee received from the Church immediatly before her is not the doctrine of Transubstantiation which teaches men not to believe their eyes and other of their Sences a ready way to Atheism and infidelity for if four of the five Sences may be deceived then farewell all tradition and if these inferiour faculties may be thus bafled what satisfaction could it have been to St. Thomas that Christ was truly risen from the dead by putting his finger into the print of the nailes or his hand into his side But beside what sence and reason witness against this monstrous opinion the Scripture is clearely opposite unto it for Christ at the institution of this Sacrament did not take his own Body into his handâ— but Bread he brake not his owne Body but Bread he did not eat his own Body he did not drinke his owne Blood but he drank of the fruit of the Vine Mat. 26.29 for so he called it after Consecration and Distribution I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the Vine c. in like manner St. Paul 'T is stil this bread and this cup. 1. Cor. 11.26 When our Saviour saies Hoc est corpus meum what doth hoc stand for either it must signify this thing in my hand i. e. the bread or else his own body which body he holding in his hand utters these words hoc est corpus meum that is corpus meum est corpus meum a mere Identical trifleing proposition which according to all Logick is most absurd and destroys the very nature of a Sacrament which consists of two essential parts the sign and the thing signified besides they of Rome conâ—ess that the Body of Christ is not present under the species of Bread and Wine when the Preist begins to pronounce hoc nor till he hath uttered the last sillable um hoc est corpus meum such poore shifts these men are forced to use As for antiquity so much boasted of by those of Rome I know that some of the fathers to draw mens minds from the earthly elements to heavenly misteries used now and then high Rhetoricall expressions never dreaming of any substantiall change of the elements into the Body and Bloud of Christ as is evident from Iraeneus Panis Communis post consecrationem non est amplius panis communis sed efficitur Eucharistia quae constat ex duabus naturis terrenâ caelâ—sti haec oblatio â—st figura corporis sanguinis Christi Ambrose 1. ad Cor. Cap. 11. lib. 4. de Sacram. Non dubitavit dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum cum dedit fignum sui corporis Aug Epist 23. ad Bonifa 12. Cap. contra Adiman Hoc est corpus meum i. e. typus corporis mei Terâ—ull Panem vinum Appellatione corporis sanguinis honoravit non naturam quidem mutans sed naturae gratiam adjiciens Theod. dial 1. 2. In a word the ancient fathers who opposed the Eutychian haeresy did make use of the sacramentall union of Bread and Wine to the body and blood of Christ shewing that the humane nature of Christ is not more changed into the divine then the Sacramentall Bread and Wine is into the very Body and Blood of Christ therefore they believed no such thing as that monstrous Popish transubstantiation So that we see the falsity and absurdity of it by Scripture antiquity common sence and reason besides the great danger of Idolatry in worshipping a piece of bread if there be no transubstantiation as some of the papists themselves confesse and they also acknowledge that if the Priest that consecrates were not rightly ordained or that he did not actually intend to consecrate or that he omitted any one Ceremony which they call necessary at the time of consecration that the Bread and Wine are not duely Consecrated and consequently no transubstantiation and therefore great probability that the Papists in worshipping the host do frequently comitt the very great Sin of Idolatry which was to me one great reason of forsaking their Communion Firm. Truely 't was a substantiall reason and such an one that has wrought upon others beside your selfe however I desire to hear from you what further reasons you had to leave the Church of Rome Dub. The next which I shall acquaint you with is the half Communion so manifestly against scripture and antiquity Our Blessed Saviour at the instituition of the Sacrament commands drinke yee all of this whereas at the giveing of the bread he said only take Eate foreseeing and obviating this grand error of the Church of Rome 't is true the persons then communicating were only his disciples which had received their Commissioâ— to preach the Gospell before that time but not in that ample and full manner as they received it after his Resurection as is plain from Iohn 20 22 23. and Mâ—t. 28 29. but be it granted that they were all in full orders and upon that account the Cup was given them otherwise they should not have received it by the same reason the bread might be denyed to the people because none but Priests did then Communicate but we know that a Priest when he doth not consecrate is in the place of a Lay-man and consequently the disciples not consecrating at the Supper were no better and therefore according to the doctrine and practise of the Church of Rome should not have received the Cup. But what will they thinke of the whole Church of Corinth to whom St. Paul sent a first and second Epistle they cannot imagine they were all Priests observe then how â—e â—xhorts all of them to examine themselves in order to the receiving of the holy Eucharist under both kinds 1. Cor 11. this is so eviâ—ent that our adveâ—saries have nothing to Reply As for Antiquity the practise of the Câ—urch of Rome is clearly against it as Iam able to demonstrate from express testimonies of the fathers but our learned writers have â—aved me that trouble those that please may peruse Chamiâ—re Châ—mnitius Iewell Cracanthorp The confeâ—sion of the Councell of Coâ—stance stands as a lasting Monument against the Popish innovation in this particular the words are these we decree in like manner that though in the Primitive Church the holy Eucharist was received under both kinds by the faithfull yet this Custome to avoid some dangers and scandals is reasonably
tender consciences and the occasions of many shâ—rp contentions amongst Christians agreeing in the substantials of Religion and seing that Conformists themselves confess them not to be in their own nature necessary but only expedient for order and decency were it not better they were laid aside then continued is they are the perpetual causes of discord and dissention amongst us Firm. And are order decency and uniformity without which there wiâ—l be neither â—ove Peace or Unity suâ—h inconsiderable nothings that a few innocent Ceâ—emonies must be utterly abollished to gratifie the dogmatizing humors of those men who esteem things in themselves indifferent to be sinful and unlawful which is sâ—â—t Superstition 'T is indeed much to be lamented that we should quarrel about Mint and Cummin to the prejudice of more weighty and material duties and the scandal of our Religion But by reason of our innâ—te and acquited corruptions 't is necessary that offences should come yet wo be unto that man by whom they come I know weakness and renderness of conscience is much pretended and we ought to take heed how we offend any of Christs little ones but how can these men be reckon'd in the number of weak or little ones who seem to themselves so great so strong and able in the things of Religion and for their tendernesse of conscienâ—e we appeal to their bloody civil Warrs 't is well known by whom and how they were began and carryâ—d on till at length they came up to the death of the King tho I believe very much against the intentions and designs of the most grave and sober men of that Party Dub. But really Sir were it not more beseeming Christian prudence so far to condescend to our dissenting Brethren who agree with us in the Doctrine of our Church in taking away at least some of those Ceremonies which are more liable to exception then to comply with the Superstitious Papists in the use of them Firm. I confess some moderate men have thought so especially since we are frustrated of of one main end for which our first reformers retained them which was to draw over the Papists into the Communion of our Church which they did adhere unto for the Ten first years of Queen Elizabeth until they were interdicted by the Popes bull But seeing we are deprived of all hopes of that much desired issue and that by the cunning of Priests and Jesuits stirring up and animating the Conformists and Non-conformists against each other about these Ceremonies Our differences amongst our selves do daily increase and multiply some wise and peaceable men have desired that the use of certain of those Ceremonies might be forborn at least for a time which not withstanding they are still continued These peaceable men abhor the great sin of Separation do continue their conformity to the rites of our Church daily begging at the throne of Grace that the God of truth and peace would for his mercy â—ake so assist those powers which he has ordained that they may be instrumental for the establishing of truth and peace amongst us Dub. I like well of the temper of these men and wish that their moderation were not only known unto but practised by all men for certainly if the Spirit of love peace and meekness did rule more in our peevish and froward hearts we should enjoy a greater measure of Peace Love and Christian Charity then these angry times have hither to been happy with I return you my hearty thanks for that satisâ—action which you have given me in those scruples which have much troubled me about the Goverment Liturgie and Ceremonies of the Church of England there is yet one thing behind at which I have somwhat been scandalliz'd 't is this Your Church does receive persons who are notoriously proâ—hâ—ne in their lives and grossly ignorant in the principls of Religion to the Holy Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ besides she tollerates at least Ministers that are scandalous in their conveâ—sâ—tion frequenters of Alâ—-houses not at all serious in Religion shew little sence of it in their discourses Preaching or practises men of little conscience and of as little learning Firm. This accusation is most fals whether it springs from spite or malice or extream ignorance I know not sure I am our Church orders that no suâ—h persons be admitted to the Holy Sacrament thâ—t no such Ministers be permitted to officiate that they are to be suspended once and again and if they do no not reform they are to be deprived for the first you may see the Rubrick before the Communion and the 26. Canon For the Second see Artic 26. and Canon the 74. and 75. and Canon 10. made 1640. which are so clear against the admitting of profane persons to to the Communion or tollerating of scandalous Ministers without due Punishment that whosoever chargeth these abuses upon our Church must be grosly ignorant or very malitious Dub. Yet we see that such prophane persons are admitted to the Sacrament as members of your Church and such unworthy Minsters are allowed to officiate Firm. Such persons are no members of out Church but rather the Synagoge of Satan and that Minister who does admit such persons natoriously prophane to the Holy Sacrament is a greater Non-conâ—ormist to the orders of the Church then he that scruples at a Surplice and those Church-wardens who neglect to present them are guilty of Perjury and ought to be debar'd themselves from the Communion Can. 26. Dub. 'T is evident that such Ministers are not Punished either by Admonition Suspensition or Deprivation Firm. This is not true in all places to my knowledge where such Ministers or people escape unpunished 't is mostly by the fault of the Church-wardens and Sides-men in not presenting them for what Judge either Ecclesiastical or Civil can punish offences that are not brought before him Dub. But many times offences and scandalâ— have been presented and the offender not punisâ—â—d yea your Ecclesiastical Judges are more severe against those who are Non-conformists to the laws oâ— the Church â—hen agâ—inst those that are Non-conformists to the laws of God as profane irreligeous wretches Firm. No mâ—n câ—n excuse the personal abuses that are committed in any Court Civil or Ecclesiastical all Court Officers never yet were nor ever will be men of integrity â—nd of unbias'd judgments no question that many abuses which are committed by the Officers of Ecclesiastical Courts might be prevented if the Bishops would be somtimes personally present in their respective consistoâ—ies as was intimated they ought to be Canon 11. made 1640. If we must seperate from a Church that enjoyns no Intollerable conditions for Communion with her because of some personal â—aulâ—s of those who are entrusted with her Goverment we must turn Seekers for where shall we find a Church whose Officers are alwaies all of them impartially just and upright Dub. I confess there is no good reason we should seperate from a Church