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	rule_n	scripture_n	1,767	5	5.9499	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A74667	An answer to Monsieur de la Militiere his impertinent dedication of his imaginary triumph, to the king of Great Britain to invite him to embrace the Roman Catholick religion. / By John Bramhall D.D. and Lord Bishop of London-Derry.	Bramhall, John, 1594-1663.; La Milletière, Théophile Brachet, sieur de, ca. 1596-1665. Victory of truth for the peace of the Church.	1653 (1653)	Thomason E1542_1	53,892	235

insolent forms of prayer conteined in your books even ultimate prayers if we take the words as they sound directed to the Creatures that they would protect you at the hour of death and deliver you from the devill and confer spirituall graces upon you and admit you into Heaven precibus meritisque by their prayers and merias You know what merit signifies in your language a Condignity or at least a Congruity of defer● The exposition of your Doctors is that they should do all this for you by their prayers as improper a form of speech as if a suppliant intending only to move an ordinary Courtier to mediate for him unto the King should fall down upon his Knees before the Courtier and beseech him to make him an Earl or a Knight or to bestow such an Office or such a Pardon upon him or to do some other Grace for him properly belonging to the Prerogative Royall How agrees this with the words Precibus meritisque A begger doth not deserve an Alms by asking it This is a snare to ignorant persons who take the words to signifie as they sound And it is to be feared doe commit down-right Idolatry by their Pastors faults who prescribe such improper forms unto them The Roman Court most Tyrannicall Concerning Tyranny which makes up the arriere of the first supposed Maxim Wee do not accuse the Roman Church of Tyranny but the Roman Court If either the unjust usurpation of Sovereign power or the extending thereof to the destruction of the Laws and Canons of the Church yea even to give a Non obstante either to the Institution of Christ or at least to the uniform practise of the Primitive Ages or to them both If the swallowing up of all Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction and the arrogating of a supercivill power paramont If the causing of poor people to trot to Rome from all the Quarters of Europe to wast their livelihoods there If the trampling upon Emperours and the disciplining of Monarchs be Tyrannicall either the Court of Rome hath been Tyrannicall or there never was Tyranny in the world I doubt not but some great persons when they have had bloody Tragedies to act for their own particular ends have sometimes made the Roman Church a stalking horse and the pretence of Catholick Religion a blind to keep their Policies undiscerned But if we consider seriously what cruelties have been really acted throughout Europe either by the Inquisitors Generall or by persons specially delegated for that purpose against the Waldenses of old and against the Protestants of later dayes against poor ignorant persons against women and children against mad-men against dead carkasses as Bucer c. upon pretence of Religion not onely by Ordinary forms of punishment and of death but by fire and faggots by strange new devised tortures we shall quickly find that the Court of Rome hath died it self red in Christian blood and equalled the most Tyrannicall persecutions of the Heathen Emperours Our second supposed Maxim The other Maxim whereupon you say that our Reformation was grounded was this That the onely way to reform the Faith and Liturgy P. 21. and government of the Church was to conform them to the dictates of holy Scripture of the sense whereof every private Christian ought to be the Judge by the light of the Spirit excluding Tradition and the publick Judgement of the Church You add P. 26. that We cannot prove Episcopacy by Scripture without the Help of Tradition And if we do admit of Tradition we must acknowledge the Papacy for the Government of the Catholick Church as founded in the Primacy of St. Peter Your second supposed ground is no truer than the former Much mistaken we are as far from Anarchy as from Tyranny As we would not have humane Authority like Medusa's head to transform reasonable men into sensless stones So we do not put the reigns of Goverment into the hands of each or any private person to reform according to their phantasies And that we may not deal like blunderers or deceitfull persons to wrap up on involve our selves on purpose in confused Generalities I will set down our sense distinctly When you understand it I hope you will repent of your rash censuring of us of whom you had so little knowledge The Scripture the rule of supernatural truths Three things offer themselves to be considered first concerning the Rule of Scripture Secondly the proper Expounders thereof and thirdly the manner of Exposition Concerning Scripture we believe That it was impossible for humane reason without the help of divine Revevelation to find out those supernaturall truths which are necessary to Salvation 2. That to supply this defect of naturall reason God out of his abundant goodness hath given us the holy Scriptures which have not their authority from the writing which is humane but from the Revelation which is divine from the holy Ghost Thirdly that this being the purpose of the Holy Ghost it is blasphemy to say he would not or could not attain unto it And that therefore the holy Scriptures do comprehend all necessary supernaturall truths So much is confessed by Bellarmine that All things which are necessary to be believed L. 4. de verbo Dei cap. 11. and to be done by all Christians were preached to all by the Apostles and were all written 4. That the Scripture is more properly to be called a Rule of supernaturall truths than a Judge or if it be sometimes called a Judge it is no otherwise than the Law is called a Judge of civill Controversies between man and man that is the rule of judging what is right and what is wrong That which sheweth what is streight sheweth likewise what is crooked Secondly Who are the proper expounders of Scripture and ho●… far concerning the proper Expounders of Scripture we do believe that the Gospell doth not consist in the words but in the sense non in superficie sed in medullâ And therefore that though this infallible rule be given for the common benefit of all yet every one is not an able or fit Artist to make application of this Rule in all particular cases To preserve the common right and yet prevent particular abuses we distinguish Judgement into three kinds Judgement of Discretion Judgement of Direction and Judgement of Jurisdiction As in the former Instance of the Law the ignorance whereof excuseth no man every subject hath Judgement of Discretion to apply it particularly to the preservation of himself his estate and interest The Advocates and those who are skilfull in the Law have moreover a Judgement of Direction to advise others of less knowledge and experience But those who are Constituted by the Soveraign power to determine emergent difficulties and differences and to distribute and administer justice to the whole body of a Province or Kingdom have moreover a Judgement of Jurisdiction which is not onely discretionary or directive but authoritative to impose an Obligation

Umbertus a Cardinall Exact Syn. Rom. sub Nich. 2. approved by Pope Nicholas and a Councill Ego Berengarius c. I Berengarius do consent to the holy Roman Apostolick See and profess with my mouth and heart to hold the same faith of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper with Pope Nicholas and this holy Synod c. And what the faith of Pope Nicholas and this Synod was follows in the next words That the Bread and Wine which are set upon the Altar after Consecration are not onely the Sacrament but the very body and blood of Christ. This seems to favour Consubstantiation rather than Transubstantiation if the Bread and Wine be the body and blood of Christ then they remain Bread and Wine still if the bread be not onely the Sacrament but also the thing of the Sacrament if it be both the Sign and the thing signified how is it now to be made nothing It follows in the Retraction That the body and blood of Christ is sensibly not onely in the Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the hands of the Priest and bruised by the teeth of the faithfull If it be even so there needs no more but feel and be satisfied To this they made Berengarius sweat By the consubstantiall Trinity and the Holy Gospels and accurse and anathematize all those who held the contrary yet these words did so much scandalize and offend the Glosser upon Gratian that he could not forbear to admonish the Reader De Cons dist 2 cap. Ego Ber. that unless he understood those words in a sound sense he would fall into a greater heresie than that of Berengarius Not without reason for the most favourable of the Schoolmen do confess that these words are not properly and literally true but figuratively and metanimically understanding the thing conteining by the thing conteined as to say the body of Christ is broken or bruised because the quantity or Species of bread are broken or bruised they might as well say that the body and blood of Christ becomes fusty and sowr as often as the Species of Bread and Wine before their corruption become fusty and sowr But the Retractation of Berongarius can admit no such figurative sense that the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament are d●vided and bruised sensibly not onely in the Sacrament that is in the Spec●es but also in truth A most ignorant Capernaiticall assertion for the body of Christ being not in the Sacrament modo Quantitativo according to their own Tenet but indivisibly after a Spirituall manner without extrinsecall extension of parts cannot in it self or in truth be either divided or bruised Therefore others of the School-men goe more roundly and ingenuously to work Alex. Gab. Bonav c. and confess that it is an abusive and excessive expression not to be held or defended that it happened to Berengarius they should have said to Pope Nicholas and Cardinall Umbertus as it doth with those who cut of a detestation of one error encline to another Neither will it a vail them any thing at all that the Fathers have sometimes used such expressions of seeing Christ of touching Christ in the Sacrament of fastning our teeth in his flesh and making our tongues red in his blood There is a great difference between a Sermon to the people and a solemn Retractation before a Judge The Fathers do not say that such expressions are true not only Sacramentally or figuratively as they made Berengarius both say and accurse all others that held otherwise but also properly and in the things themselves The Fathers never meant by these forms of speech to determine the manner of the presence which was not dreamed of in their dayes but to raise the devotion of their hearers and readers to advertise the people of God that they should not rest in the externall symbols or signs but principa●ly be intent upon the invisible grace which was both lawfull and commendable for them to do Leave us their primitive liberty and we will not refrain from the like expressions I urge this to shew that the new doctrine of Transubstantiation is so far from being an old Article of faith that it was not well digested not rightly understood in any tollerable measure by the greatest Clerks and most concerned above a thousand years after Christ The first definition or determination of this manner of the presence was yet later in the Councill of Lateran in the dayes of Innocent the third Scot. in 4. sent dist 11. q. 3. T. 3 q. 75. d. 81. c. 1. The determination of the manner of the presence opened a floodgate to a deluge of Controversies after the year 1200. Ante Lateranense Concilium Transubstantiatio non fuit dogma fidei And what the fruit of it was let Vasques bear witness Audito nomine Transubstantiationis c. The very name of Transubstantiation being but heard so great a Controversie d●d arise among the later School-men concerning the nature thereof that the more they endevoured to wind themselves out the more they wrapped themselves in greater difficulties whereby the mysterie of faith became more difficult both to be explained and to be understood and more exposed to the Cavils of its Adversaries He adds that the name of Conversion and Transubstantiation gave occasion to these Controversies No sooner was this Bell rung out no sooner was this fatall sentence given but as if Pandora's box had been newly set wide open whole swarms of noisome Questions and debates did fill the Schools Then it began to be disputed by what means this change comes whether by the Benediction of the Elements or by the Repetition of these words of Christ This is my body The common current of your Schools is for the later Lib. de Corr. Theol. Schol. But your judicious Arch-Bishops of Caesaria since the Councill of Trent in a Book dedicated to Sixtus the Fifth produceth great reasons to the contrary Then was the Question started what the demonstrative Pronoun Hoc signifies in these words This is my Body whether this thing or this Substance or this Bread or this Body or this Meat or these Accidents or that which is conteined under these Species Gloss de Con●… d. 2. cap. timorem or this Individuum vagum or lastly which seems stranger than all the rest this Nothing Then it began to be argued whether the Elements were annihilated whether the matter and form of them being destroyed their essence did yet remain or the essence being Converted the existence remained whether the Sacramentall existence of the body and blood of Christ do depend upon its naturall existence whether the whole Host were Transubstantiated or onely some parts of it that is such parts as should be distributed to worthy Communicants or whether in those parts of the Host which were distributed unto unworthy Communicants the matter of Bread and Wine did not return Guidmend l. 1. de ver Whether the

a Church nor that Church any privileges unless the Court of Rome might have the Monopoly of them There is a vast difference between the Catholick Church and a Patriarchall Church The Ca-Catholick Church can never fail any Patriarchall Church may Apostate and fail We have a promise that the Candle shall not be put out we have no promise that the Candlesticks shall not be removed Rev. 2.5 The Roman Church it self not absolutely faln to ruin But suppossing that which wee can never grant the Catholick Church and Roman Church were Convertibles yet still you do us wrong First we do not maintain that the Roman Church it self is faln to ruin and desolation we grant to it a true metaphysicall being though not a true morall being we hope their errors are rather in superstructures than in fundamentals wee doe not say that the Plants of saving truth which are common to you and us are plucked up by the roots in the Roman Church but we say that they are over-grown with weeds and in danger to be choked Next for Idolatry Whether the Roman Church be guilty of Idolatry whether and why and how far we accuse your Church of it deserves further Consideration First you agree with us That God alone is the Object of Religion and consequently that all Religious worship is due terminatively only to him that God alone is to be invocated absolutely or ultimately that is so as to grant our requests and fulfill our desires by himself and that the Saints are not the objects of our prayers but joynt petitioners with us and intercessors for us to the throne of Grace Secondly we profess as well as you that there is a proportionable degree of honour and respect due to every creature in Heaven and Earth according to the dignity of it and therefore more honour due to a glorified Spirit than to a mortall man But withall we adde that this honour is not servitutis but charitatis not of service as to our Lords and Masters but of love and charity as to our friends and fellow servants of the same kind and nature with that Honour which we give to holy men on Earth And herein we are confident that we shall have your consent Thirdly we agree in this also that abundant love and duty doth extend an honourable respect from the person of a dear friend or noble benefactor to his Posterity to his memory to his Monument to his Image to his Reliques to every thing that he loved or that pertained to him even to the Earth which he did tread upon for his sake Put a Liefhebber or Virtueso among a company of rare Pictures and he will pick out the best pieces for their proper value But a friend or a child will more esteem the Picture of a Benefactor or Ancestor for its relation The respect of the one is terminated in the Picture that of the other is radicated in the exemplar Yet still an Image is but an Image and the kinds of respect must not be confounded The respect given to an Image must be respect proper for an Image not Courtship not Worship not Adoration More respect is due to the person of the meanest beggar than to all the Images of Christ and his Apostles and a 1000. Primitive Saints or Progenitors Hitherto there is neither difference nor perill either of Idolatry or superstition Wherein then did consist this guilt of Idolatry contracted by the Roman Church I am willing for the present to pass by the private abuses of particular persons which seem to me no otherwise chargeable upon the whole Church than for Connivence As the making Images to counterfeit tears and words and gestures and complements for advantage to induce silly people to believe that there was something of divinity in them and the multitude of fictitious Relicks and suppositious Saints which credulity first introduced since covetousness hath nourished I take no notice now of those remote suspitions or suppositions of the possibility of want of intention either in the Priest that consecrates the Sacrament or in him that Baptised or in the Bishop that ordeined him or in any one through the whole line of succession in all which cases according to your own principles you give divine worship to corporeall Elements which is at least materiall Idolatry I will not stand now to examine the truth of your distinctions of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet you know well enough that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no religious worship and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is coin lately minted that will not pass for current in the Catholick Church Whilst your common people understand not these distinctions of degrees of honour what holds them from falling downright into Idolatry Neither do I urge how you have distributed the Patronage of particular Countries the Cure of severall Diseases the protection of all distinct professions of men and all kinds of creatures among the Saints just as the Heathen did among their Tutelary Gods nor how little warrant you have for this practise from experience nor lastly how you build more Churches erect more Altars offer more presents powr out more prayers make more vows perform more offices to the Mother than to the Son Yet though we should hold our peace methinks you should ponder these things seriously and either for your own satisfaction or ours take away such unnecessary occasions of scandall and disunion But I cannot omit that the Councill of Trent is not contented to enjoyn the Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament which we never deny but of the Sacrament it self that is according to the common current of your Schoolmen the Accidents or Species of Bread and Wine because it conteins Christ Why do they not adde upon the same grounds that the pix is to be adored with divine worship because it conteins the Sacrament Divine honour is not due to the very Humanity of Christ as it is abstracted from the Deity but to the whole person Deity and Humanity hypostatically united Neither the Grace of Union nor the Grace of Unction can confer more upon the Humanity than the Humanity is capable of There is no such Union between the Deity and the Sacrament neither immediatly nor yet mediately mediante corpore Neither do you ordinarily ascribe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or divine worship to a Crucifix or to the Image of Christ indeed not Terminatively but transeuntly so as not to rest in the Image or Crucifix but to pass to the exemplar or person crucified But why a piece of Wood should be made partaker of divine honours even in Transitu or in the passage passeth my understanding The Heathens wanted not the same pretext for all their gross Idolatry Let them plead for themselves Non ego c. I do not worship that stone which I see but I serve him whom I do not see Lastly whilst you are pleased to use them I may not forget those strange