Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	according_a	church_n	doctrine_n	2,019	5	6.0761	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A05408	The vnmasking of the masse-priest vvith a due and diligent examination of their holy sacrifice. By C.A. Shewing how they partake with all the ancient heretiques, in their profane, impious, and idolatrous worship.; Melchizedech's anti-type	Lewis, John, b. 1595 or 6.	1624 (1624)	STC 15560; ESTC S103079	137,447	244

and his truth is not worthy of the name of a Christian seeing hee appeares rather to bee a louer of himselfe then of Christ preferring his owne temporall profit before spirituall gaine the fauour of men before the loue of God the satisfying of friends before the honour of his Sauiour the enioying of an earthly habitation before the purchasing of an earthly kingdome Wherefore it is better to loose these and win Christ then to attaine these by apostacie and Idolatry and loose Christ Yea What would it bene fit thee to gaine the whole world by going to Masse and to loose thine owne soule But albeit in the daies of persecution the Martyres of Christ haue beene so violently pursued with cruelty as that they were constrained to sacrifice 〈◊〉 to God in the fire because they would not forsake Christ Iesus and ioyne with the Romish Idolaters in their blasphemous Masse witnesse Cranmer Ridley Latimer Hooper Bradford Philpot Bilney with many moe yet thankes be to God in these our daies the Gospell flourisheth the Sacraments are purely administred according to Christs institution and there is freedome by the lawes of the Realme giuen to all sound Protestants to serue God according to the doctrine now established in the Church of England And if it bee not lawfull for a man to go to Masse by eompulsion but that he ought rather to suffer the spoyling of his goods the losse of friends or to lay downe his life for Christ and his truth then to participate with them in their blasphemous seruice and impious Sacrifice Then cursed shall that man be that being a Protestant a professor of the true Catholike faith howsoeuer our Aduersaries of Rome challenge the title shall voluntarily and without 〈◊〉 either for flattery fashion present gaine or future hopes or the fauour of great Personages be drawne to deny his Christ and to cleaue vnto Antichrist forsaking the Church of God and becomming one of the Synagogue of Satan forgoing Sion for Babylon Ierusalem for Bethel and Samaria refusing the waters of Siloam which run softly and cleauing vnto Resin and Remeliahs Sonne reiecting the Communion of Saints in the participation of the Word and Sacraments taught and administred in the Protestant Church now established in England and associating himselfe vnto the Sons of Belial participating with them in their abhominable sacrifice of the Masse He that shall thus doe is much more vnworthy of Christ then such as shall be constrained or by feare forced to consent vnto their Idolatry and doubtlesse shall finde such horrour in his conscience and feele such a hell in his soule as that if God make him not a spectacle of shame and misery in this world yet he shall surely doe it before men and Angells in the world to come Fourthly they plead the example of Daniel who say they was present and worshipped the golden Image which appeares by this that hee was not cast into the Furnace with the three Children his Companions I answer that either Daniel was not present which is most probable or else he was not accused vnto the King or if hee were accused it may be the King would not heare his accusation or put him to death for the great fauour and affection which he bare vnto him for the great seruice he did in his kingdome And doubtlesse Daniel that would rather bee a prey vnto the Lyons then not pray vnto his God had rather haue tryed the heat of the fiery Furnace then haue vouchsafed so much countenance to Idolatry as to worship the golden Image Fiftly they plead the example of Iehu who openly professed the religion of Baal yet hee dissembled and meant nothing lesse and the Lord commends him for his diligent Execution of that which was right in his eies Vers. 30. Our answer is Iehu is commended not for his dissembling but for his diligence in destroying Ahabs house with the Priests and religion of Baal and all thar belonged thereunto for in other matters belonging to the seruice of God he departed not from the sinnes of Ieroboam the Sonne of Nebat that made Israel to sinne wherefore this can be no excuse for going to Masse seeing God neuer approued of dissimulation Sixtly they plead the command of the Magistrate thus Wee are commanded to obey our Magistrates though they be wicked and therefore if they enioyn vs to goe to Masse we see not how we can doe otherwise for feare of contempt and disobedience We are bound indeed to obey wicked gouernours but so long onely as they command nothing contrary to Gods word their wickednesse cannot release vs or giue a dispensation for disobedience but if they command any thing contrary to Gods word especially to partake in the Masse a superstitious seruice so directly blaspheming Christ and his seruice so plainely opposing the doctrine of the Gospell and so fundamentally euerting the institution of the Lords Supper in this case obedience is a sinne for what say the Apostles of Iesus their answer is Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken vnto you more then vnto God iudge yee And our Sauiour teacheth vs to Giue vnto Caesar that which is Caesars and vnto God that which is Gods As wee performe our lawfull duties to men so must we not for their sakes neglect our duties to God or doe any thing whereby he is dishonoured Seuenthly and lastly they plead the example of Naman the Syrian who being conuerted to the true worship of the God of Israel desired to bee dispenced with when he should goe with the King his Master into the house of Rimon an Idoll and bow himselfe there and that herein God would be mercifull vnto him vnto whom the Prophet Elisha answered Goe in peace as liking of his motion and yeelding to it Wee answer the opinions of Diuines touching this thing are diuers some thinke he spake onely of ciuill and politike presence that his Master the King might leane vpon him before his Idoll and not of Religious for he makes open protestation that hee would neuer worship other God then the God of Israel to the which the Prophet condescendeth But howsoeuer the gesture it selfe is indifferent to stand when the King stands or bow when the King boweth yet this gesture being clothed with such circumstances seemes not to be approoued That he should do this First in a Temple Secondly before an Idoll Thirdly in the time of publike seruice Fourthly by one professing the true God This seemes not so probable And both those famous Diuines departed from this answer cleauing vnto that which was more sound in their latter workes Others thinke he speaketh of the time past as if he should say Herein that I haue bowed iu the house of Rimmon c. The Lord be mercifull vnto me vsing the future for the time past Others and that more truly expound the words of Naaman thus That Naaman professed it a sinne

Scripture yet it is effectually proued by the tradition of the Church Which may make vs iustly admire the vaine 〈◊〉 of our aduersaries who boasting of nothing more then Scripture are yet faine wholy to relinquish it and to build vpon the tradition of the Church but an answere 〈◊〉 this 〈◊〉 afore And for these words Is giuen broken shed for you they interpret to be a present giuing in the Eucharist by way of sacrifice but this is sufficiently answered in the former 〈◊〉 Now seeing the words of Christs institution doe make their sacrifice to be a meere non Ens let ve examine his actions and see if any of them will breath any life into this their sacrifice The actions of Christ the Scripture mentions to be foure Hee tooke bread He blessed it He brake it He gaue it Not any one of these can seeme to import a sacrifice And whereas our aduersaries haue divided their sacrifice into fix actions in the which of them this sacrifice should consist Suarez makes it doubtfull The first action is the taking of the bread before consecration and the heauing it vp which they call the Eleuation of the host this is not essentiall to the sacrifice by the Iesuites owne confession because it cannot be prooued neither by Scripture nor the tradition of the Church that Christ did vse it Albeit herein he dissents from Sotus a learned Doctor who with others thought it to be vsed by Christ and in some sort to 〈◊〉 to the substance of this sacrifice The second action is the Consecration of the Host in the words of Christ Hoc est corpus meum This is my body This Suarez 〈◊〉 to be intrinsecall and essentiall to this sacrifice and to be the sacrificing action and yet tels vs that it was the opinion of many learned men That consecration was but only an antecedent vnto the sacrifice but properly neither to be of the essence nor yet any part of this sacrifice And how can the Papists confidently build their sacrifice vpon those words This is my body when their owne Bishop hath prooued from the testimonies of the most ancient Fathers that those are not the words of consecration but that the words of consecration were before those words when Christ prayed and blessed the bread and the cup and therefore hee alleadgeth the perpetuall practise of the Church from the age of the Apostles whose custome was to consecrate by prayer or benediction as also the Liturgies of St. Iames Clement Basil Chrysostome do declare the same being backed with the iudgement of many learned Schoole-men to whom hee adioynes the Diuines of Colein all agreeing consecration rather to be in the prayer or blessing of Christ then in these words This is my body which hee rather accounts to be the institution then the consecration of the Sacrament The third action after the words of consecration is the Oblation vsed by the lifting vp of the Host in these words Be mindfull ô Lord c. Concerning which there is great 〈◊〉 some great Doctors haue placed the whole essence of this sacrifice in this Oblation or Eleuation as Ecchius 〈◊〉 Ruardus Others say it is of the essence but not the whole essence as Scotus Gabriel Biel Soto Canus these Suarez quoteth but differing from them all for he affirmes it to be no essentiall part of the sacrifice with whom agrees Bellarmine because say they it is not expressed in the Scripture neither yet is it probable other wayes that this kinde of eleuation or lifting vp was vsed by Christ in the institution onely herein these Iesuites differ Suirez will haue this eleuation to be an Ecclesiasticall rite but Bellarmine to be Apostolicall The fourth action is the dipping of the consecrated Host into the cup which Canus makes to bee of the substance of this sacrifice which Suarez againe one the same ground disanulls because that it appeares not that Christ did vse any such action The fift action is the distribution of the 〈◊〉 according vnto the example of Christ who gaue it vnto his Disciples which saith the Iesuite some Catholike Doctours haue iudged to be the full complement and perfection of this sacrifice But as learned Morton obserues first they must shew vnto vs where the essence of this sacrifice is to bee found least they tell vs of the perfection of a sacrifice before their sacrifice appeare to be Ens or to haue any beeing The last action is the Priests consuming the consecrated formes by eating and drinking some make this to be the substance of the sacrifice and the very essence of it as the Moderne Thomists Ledesima Canus and Bellarmine who are againe contradicted by other great Doctours of the Roman Church as Thomas Aquinas 〈◊〉 Maior Alan Cassalus Catharinus Turrianus Palacius with whom Salmeron doth consent all which doe deny that this consumption of the Host doth belong to the essence of this sacrifice Thus haue you seene what 〈◊〉 warre our aduersaries doe maintaine among themselues 〈◊〉 against Manasses and Manasses against Ephraim but both against Iudah 〈◊〉 war in their owne campe yet they all conspire against the truth Now let the Reader iudge where is vnity or consent in doctrine when their greatest Doctours in the maine point of religion are at variance directly contradicting one another with est non est it is and it is not They vniustly vpbraid vs with dissentions when alas ours is no dissention if compared with theirs we onely differing in the fringe they in the garment wee alone in the ceremonies they in the substance and very soule of religion Thus haue we largely and sufficiently prooued by the testimonies of our aduersaries that the sacrifice of the Masse was not instituted by Christ and therefore by the confession of their owne Iesuites not to be admitted into the Church Argument 12. The twelfth argument is grounded vpon Bellarmines owne ssertion which is this Ad verum sacrificium requiritur vt quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in sacrificium plane destruatur id 〈◊〉 ita mutetur vt desinat esse id quod erat To a true sacrifice is required that that which is offered vnto God in sacrifice be wholy destroyed that is be so changed that it cease to be that which it was And againe Verum reale sacrificium veram realem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A true and a reall sacrifice requireth a true and reall death or destruction of the thing sacrificed Which assertion is true in all Propitiatory sacrifices wherein there was alwayes a destruction of the offering or sacrifice and that by death and shedding of blood that therein they might bee perfect figures of the great sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse wherein his body did shed blood suffered death sustained destruction though not totall and perpetuall yet partiall and for a season in so much that although hee was not consumed yet there was in him for a time a cessation or