Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	faith_n	reveal_v	5,457	5	8.8529	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79524	Catholike history, collected and gathered out of Scripture, councels, ancient Fathers, and modern authentick writers, both ecclesiastical and civil; for the satisfaction of such as doubt, and the confirmation of such as believe, the Reformed Church of England. Occasioned by a book written by Dr. Thomas Vane, intituled, The lost sheep returned home. / By Edward Chisenhale, Esquire.	Chisenhale, Edward, d. 1654.	1653 (1653)	Wing C3899; Thomason E1273_1; ESTC R210487	201,728	571

well as in matters of fact I Know I shall incur the grand displeasure of his Holiness and his pontificial tribe and not altogether please the Doctor in truly laying open some errors of Rome The one will tell me some truths are censured for treason against the triple crown the other will say according to the Proverb Sooth seems not at all times I fear not the censure of the one for I shall as much please him as displease him if I break his head I shall make a plaister of his blood I may displease him in laying open his errors but I shall be his darling whilst in so doing I make his Church visible As for the Doctor I presume when he seriously considers how much we are concerned in this point to lay open Romes errors he will not altogether condemne me for should we in silence pass by and tacitely consent that the church of Rome is infallible in what she maintaines Then it follows we are Hereticks because she sayes so I have partly cleared our selves from this aspersion already it rests now that I prove Rome to have faln into errors and if so according to the Doctors rule folio 210. if sayes he she err in any one point she cannot be prudentially sure of the least tittle she affirmes Mercurius gave the Egyptians laws Je. chall received as he said of the God Mena Licurgus to the Lacedemonians from Apollo Velphicus and Lactantius lib. 1. cap. 15. divinar Institut Minus to the Cretians from Jupiter the Lady Pallas directed the Tro●ans Caberius the Macedonians Vrania the Carthaginians Phaunus the Latines Juno the Samnites Venus the Paphites and all as they would make us believe proceed from some god or goddess The Turk affirms his Alcaron to have been received from heaven and the Ephesians de Diana sua cogitatarunt eam à Jove delapsam fore Even so doth Rome at this present boast of an infallible Church which to prove she must go to some Heathen Deity or other for as she is a Church militant here upon earth governed by humane flesh and blood and but a particular society or Church and so a member of the Catholique Church comprehensive of all the Elect and Saints of God which have been are or shall be and whereof Christ Jesus is the mystical head she is subject to fall into errors and though she were the See of Peter and that power which Peter received from Christ to be remaining with her which she would faine perswade the world to believe yet notwithstanding she may err For still she is but a particular Church and may err though the universal Church cannot err in respect of Christs Spirit given to her and his promise that she shall continue in her foundation till the end of the world Saint Peter did err after he had received the Holy Ghost Act. 10.34 Saint Peter did err he was of opinion that the Gospel pertained not at all unto the Gentiles untill he was informed by a vision that he should goe to Cornelius for saith he I perceive of a truth that God is no respecter of persons but in every Nation he that feares him whether Jew or Gentile and worketh righteousness is accepted with him so that there was a time whilst Peter was in error and Gal. 2.14 he walked not with a right foot according to the light of the Gospel Paul withstood him to his face and this was not for any smal fault or error of conversation as the Doct. would perswade us for Saint Austin against Saint Jerom doth Justifie the reprehension Besides to say it was an error of fact and not of faith were to charge Saint Peter with dissimulation either against his conscience or with it sure he did it not for any worldly respects against his conscience and if he did it because he thought it was his duty in so doing to bear with the weakness of the Jews and to think that a man may dissemble in such a case then it was matter of faith whether a man may in eo casu dissimulare or no therefore his error was a matter of faith not of fact only I need no other Argument to clear this then what the Doctor has himself framed against our proposed difference between fundamentals and not fundamentals in point of error for saith he fol. 88. There is no distinction of points of faith in regard of the object or motive for which we believe namely the truth of God revealed by his Church we being equally bound to believe all that is by her proposed to us whether the matter be great or small Upon this the Doctors argument I infer That the Church having proposed before That the Jews should not eat with the Gentiles Peter did offend against this injunction which he ought to have believed as the truth of God and therefore it was in him an error of faith Before the vision in the 10. of the Acts Peter was not to preach to the Gentiles he was not to communicate to the Gentiles and would not go to Cornelius before that and therefore in the 2 of the Acts when there were men of all Nations and strangers from Rome at Jerusalem and when they every one heard their own language and therefore mocked the Apostles saying They were full of new wine Peter lifted up his voice and corrected the men of Judea that was only them of the circumcision and did not intermeddle with the Gentiles they not belonging to his charge and therefore did Paul reprove him for eating with them Dissoluteness in manners argues unsoundness in opinion though it be in things wherein the Church has not interposed her decree But if she have injoyned a thing to be done or not done though it were indifferent in it self yet her command takes away the indifferency upon the Doctors own rule and therefore Peters offence against the Churches rule was error of faith Shall Peter the blessed Apostle of Jesus Christ be taxed of errors he being here by Saint Paul and in several other places of Scripture reprehended by our Saviour for his failings before he received the Holy Ghost shewing hereby he was a man and after he had received the Holy Ghost doubting to whom the Gospel was to be preached and offending against the injunctions of the Church shewing hereby he was no God and shall the wicked Popes of Rome think much to be taxed of their errors and daily failings I might easily be reprehended for injustice should I bury their errors in silence and publish to the world Saint Peters failings wherefore I must lay open their aberrations to the publique view In prosecution whereof I will not as a private man chalenge them of error but only put them in minde what councels the ancient fathers of the Church and their own latter writers have given them to understand What is the Pope The Pope may err he is no Samuel under the Ephod no Moses on the Mount no Aaron with

the standard of the cross and an army of horsmen in glittering armor appeared whose harness did dazle the eyes and whose number struck terror into the hearts of the adverse party But here in England they could do no such feats It may be that where people give up themselves to believe in them deceivable wonders their priests as having a power from Hildebrand Gregory the sixth Silvester and the old Magician Popes may do strange wonders as the Doctor confesses folio 253. wonders may be done by the power of Antichrist but certainly such cannot before the eys of true believers in Christ shew any wonders at all And here I desire to remember a story of a Vestal Nun in Spaine which was cryed up for miracles insomuch that when the late King of England King Charles was there he was over-intreated by the Infanta to go to see her it was reported to the King that sometimes she would be lifted up in the aire and be as fresh as a Rose though she was furrowed with age The King came with the Infanta to her but she could not do any one feat before the King though she could never have shewen her miracles in a better time The King was of too strong a faith for her spirit to work upon and therefore could she shew none then crede quod habes habes All the answer I can give to the supposed mark of miracles is that no good Catholique can well deny to credit them for if he believe the Church of Rome to be the only Catholique Church and the Pope the head of the universal Church and sticks to believe these stories strives at a gnat and swallows a Camel let him never leap at blocks and stumble at strawes Yet lest the Doctor should think that I have given up my self to hardness of heart because I am so hard of belief in this point I will shew him my reasons for it I know many of her miracles are false and the Church of Rome hand over head has recorded the false ones with the true ones and as the proverb is We know not how to believe a lyar when he speaks truth The Doctor confesses fol. 253. that all her miracles are not true and if she have Cataloguised the false ones together with the true ones we know not how to distinguish them if I had not the Doctors own confession that some are false yet I should not seem rash to any indifferent man in that I taxe the Church of Rome of false miracles for that her teachery and cozenage in this point hath been detected in this particular it being but held forth to the blind people that they being struck into admiration of their wonderful power might with fear and reverence become devotaries to their miraculous instruments offering freely to those Antique Gods by which cheat the Clergy obtained no small riches Infra 13. ch 113. For proof hereof be pleased to take a veiw of her miraculous images here and hereafter in the chappel of Radcaeus There is a marble Image at the Castle of Saint Angelo in Rome Images to delude the people which when Gregory came in procession with the painted image of the Virgin Mary which he carryed in procession that marble image bowed it self to the image of the Virgin in the presence of the people sung out a loud Allelujah regina caeli letare and thereupon S. Infra 113.13 chap. Gregory made the prayer Ora pro nobis Deum allelujah c. For my part I believe this for belike that image was made like to the image of Saint Grimbald in the Abby of Boxley in Kent which was fastened to a pillar by a private pin and a man stood privately behind the pillar and by plucking out of the pin it might be lifted up by a boy which posture they exercised to any that freely offered and if one came niggardly offering it was immoveable by which trick the people were made believe when the Image would yeeld to be taken up that their sins was pardoned by reason of satisfaction made by their offering There was another Image in the said Abbey which is more neerly comparative with the marble Image of Saint Angelo which was made of such curious contrivings that by certaine wyers a man standing within it might make it frown simile bow nod the head c. by which postures those which came to offer knew when they had made satisfaction for their sin by the pleasantness and acceptance of that carved god or if they were penurious and sparing in their offerings that nimble contrivance of foolery gave them some denotement of his displeasure and the priests were ready to interpret heavy judgements to befall them or by the similes of that image which onely a golden Wyer procured to assure them of Gods mercy towards them and that God signified that to them by his Saint there standing by which Cheat they got no little advantage The like cheating and Idolatry was exercised by means of a Rood at Ashhyrst in Kent and in several other places of this Kingdom of England By which it is evident that the use of Images was not as the Doctor would perswade us onely to put us in mind of the things by them represented but rather to perswade the people they were the very immediat instruments of God to signifie his will unto us did thereby perswade the people into adoration of them And yet lest the Doctor 's Arguments for their retaining in the Church might seem with some to be unanswerable by me should I pass this point so slightly and overly condemning the use of them because they were abused and lest I should run into an errour with those which upon that score cry down Bishops which if as they ought to be are both a shelter and ornament to the Church and in my poor judgement they may as well deny the Apostleship because there was a Judas amongst them I will not therefore from the abuse of any thing utterly condemn all use thereof It rests therefore to examine how far the use of them may be lawful The Science of Painting and Carving is an Art profitable for mans life and is the gift of God Images how far lawful It is profitable to the memorial of things done and to that purpose have the Pictures and Monuments of Noble-men been used through all ages being a grateful memory of those they represent And this Art and Curiosity of Workmanship being an adorning and graceful beautifying of any buildings the Temples in old time were made sumptuous therewith which by the Heathen Persecutors were as the Psalmist witnesses broke down with axes and hammers by the enemies of the Church Yet that amongst those curious Pieces there were any representations of the Godhead it doth not appear but rather the contrary For it is impossible for humane flesh to draw any thing that shall represent God by any corporeal or finite image who is

if it be hid it is hid unto them that are lost whom the God of this world hath blinded ●hat the light of the Gospel of the glory of Jesus Christ should not shine unto them 2 Cor. 4. For it is plain by the Scripture that Jesus was the Christ Acts 18.28 And Joh. 5. The Father hath sent the Son and his works bear witness of him and the Scriptures testifie of him God the Father God the Son and God the holy Ghost the Comforter his Passion Resurrection Ascension and the coming of the holy Ghost being so plainly preached and set down that a man may read them running and this Word endureth for ever and this Word is preached unto us 1 Pet. 1.25 And Joh. 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life and what need we any more This is eternal life to know the Father and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Joh. 17.3 He is the Way the Truth and the Life We believe that thou art Christ the Son of the ever-living God and thou hast the words of eeternal life Joh. 5.68 Hence S. Austin lib. de doctr Christianae cap. 9. did affirm that all things pertaining to mans salvation are plain and easie to be understood And Chrysostome upon 2 Thessal 2. Hom. 3. Omnia plana sunt sunt ēx divinis Scripturis quaecunque necessaria sunt manifesta sunt It is not therefore an idle and presumptuous doctrine in the Church of England to maintain this since we have both authority of Scripture and the Fathers for the same Nor do we hereby rob the Church of her authority to judge of and determine controversies and those things that are doubtful in the Scriptures There are some things of Discipline and pertaining to Manners in which the Scriptures may be doubtful or not easie for every capacity to understand and for those it is fit the Church should determine them and having determined them to impose them by the Princes authority as Rules of faith upon the people and so teaches the Church of England in the twentieth Article Lay-men to read Scripture But the main things necessary to our salvation concerning our faith to be grounded upon Jesus the Son of the ever-living God the author and finisher of our faith those as I said before are clear and manifest and though Angels from heaven should teach any other doctrine they are to be accursed Gal. 1. Wherefore sith this is plain and manifest in Scripture that Jesus gave himself for our sins and whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life and for that this faith is given by the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 12. Phil. 1.29 2 Pet. 1.3 and Matth. 16.17 and is the gift of God and no man hath it of himself for flesh and blood doth not reveal it and for that Christ has prescribed the way how and by what means we shall obtain this gift even by searching the Scriptures Rom. 10 It must needs be a grievous and intolerable sin in the Church of Rome to debar the people of this means to attain this precious jewel the salvation of their souls Upon these grounds do we allow the Laytie to read the Scripture but we do not hereby give them liberty to interpret it according to their will and humour They may in them finde Jesus to be the life everlasting the Spirit giving them faith and therefore must not be debarred the means But they are not allowed in points of difficulties to be their own interpreter but to repair to the Fathers of the Church to declare the meaning of those Oracles of God to whom it is given by the power of the holy Ghost to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God Matth. 13.11 For which end Christ has commended the Scriptures to the Church that she may discern keep and publish them Christ opened the Scriptures to his disciples Luke 24. and they preached it to all nations The Apostle Paul 1 Tim. 3. calls the Truth the fountain of the Church and the Church the pillar of Truth as Solomon made his Chariots to have a golden axletree and pillars of silver understanding by the axletree says one sound doctrine by the pillars the faithful teachers of the same The Scripture is the truth of God and the Church the house of God the Scripture the foundation the Church the pillar and the foundation is not sustained by the pillar but the pillar supported of the foundation Truth makes the Church not the Church the Truth We are to observe the Scripture as it were the Candle the Church as the Candlestick according as S. Austin upon Gal. 1. says Church how to interpret The Scriptures are not true because the Church says they are the Word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the Word of God Now as we ascribe to our Church this priviledge of interpretation of difficult and obscure places Scriptures above Councels ●nte Chap. 9. we do not either deprive Rome of her right or too much extol our own Church Nor do we hereby make void the Laytie's reading of Scripture The Laytie may read it because the main points are easie and it is the means to obtain faith as well as by hearing the Church in those points that are easie and it is the way enjoyned by God to attain faith as well as by preaching and he has promised his Spirit to those that seek him earnestly and with unfeigned lips And when it shall please God by their reading to give them of his holy Spirit that Spirit will guide them to come to the Church to be informed in those things they understand not or shall the Church understand that through weakness they misunderstand any point in those Scriptures and she shall reprove them the same Spirit guiding them into the way of Truth will lead them to hearken to the dispensers of the sacred Oracles And if the Church shall deliver any thing which to other Churches may seem strange and not satisfactory she as I said before in the precedent Chapter will call a Synod and if there the business receive not an absolute and satisfactory resolution to submit the business to a General Council rightly constituted and free in it self And in the mean time if our Church offend the Church of Rome for that she differs from her in any particular let her make her self capable to reform by a General Councel by taking off the slavery that lies upon it by the Popes Canonical Law and we shall submit our Church to the free debate in a perfect Council to decide the points wherein we differ otherwise the Church of Rome might seem to have just cause to accuse us for that we cast off the discipline of the Primitive Churches as to that particular but in the mean time upon the former recited texts of Scripture upon the authority of

skill in Appelles Art that he drew that exquisite picture of Christ which Rome has representing unto us his posture whilst the Jews whipt him I must confess that for these matters of importance we must submit to the traditions of Rome But all things touching God and the means to attaine faith in him are plentifully therein to be found Chrysostome sayes in his 41 Hom. upon the 22 of Matth. Quicquid queritur ad salutem totum eam ademptum est in Scripturis and upon the 95 Psalm Si quid dicatus absque Scriptura c. If any thing be spoken without the Scripture the cogitation of the Auditors faile but so soon as the Testimony of Gods voice is heard out of the Scripture it confirmeth both the word of the speaker and the mind of the hearer Saint Hierom upon the 9 of Jeremy Nec parentum ne majorum error sequendus est sed author it as Scripturarum Dei docenti imperium Saint Cyprian who writ almost 1400 yeers ago would not yeeld to Stephanus Bishop of Rome but reproved him for leaning to tradition and demanded of him by what Scripture he could prove his tradition Cyprian Epist ad Pompeium 74. So then if in his time it was not enough to alleadge tradition for the proof of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome much less is it lawful to follow the Popes definitive sentence in matters of faith and doctrine When the Arrians would not admit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it could not be found in Scripture Athanasius did not plead tradition for it but said Although the express words be not found in the Scripture yet have the Scriptures that meaning and sense in them as every one that readeth the Scriptures may plainly understand and therefore by warrant th●eof that word might be maintained Saint Austine de unitat Eccl. cap. 10. Nemo mihi dicat quid dixit Donatus quid dixit Parmenianus quid Paulus aut quillibet illorum quid nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est sicubi forte falluntur ut contra canonicas Dei Scriptures aliquid sentiant Methinks the very word Canonical which the Church of Rome having approved Canonical Scripture disprove ●raditiods what Scriptures shall be Canonical what not is sufficient of it self to prove this point for signifies a rule and thereupon those books are called Canonical because they are the rules of our faith and consequently whatsoever is not consonant to the Scripture ought to be rejected as pernicious and swerving from the rules of our faith For as whatsoever is not of faith is sin and as faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God therefore whatsoever is extra Scripturam cum ex fide non sit peccatum est This was the saying of Basil one of the Church of Rome's Saints in his Ethicks difinit ult prope finem And for my part I shall not be so harsh with her as this St. was I should be willing to allow of her traditions if they do not impugne the Scriptures and not to be so rigid against her traditional power as upon Basil's rule utterly to reject all if not expresly contained in Scripture I say for my part I should allow of such and approve of them as to be cerdited for the matter of fact but if she enjoyn them as doctrinal and to be rules of faith then ●ith Cyprian I desire to examine them by this Touchstone of truth the Scriptures For if once she propound traditions to be rules of faith then with Hierome Cyprian and Austin I must examine the truth of them by the rule of Scripture and with Saint Chrysostome in his 13 Hom. upon the 2 Cor. 7. do pray and beseech the Church of Rome to reject what this or that man says and search the truth out of the Script●re that learning true riches we may follow them and so attain life everlasting neither let any Church be wedded with her own traditions or give her self to believe the traditions of other Churches unless saith he she can bring authority from these truths to a warrant her doctrine and not to receive for doctrine the commandments of men and with Saint Cyprian examine from whence such tradition came whether it descended from authority of our Lord Jesus Christ or his Gospel or whether it came from the Mandates of the Apostles or their Epistles If so saith he let such divine and holy tradition be observed if no let it be rejected especially any tradition that shall contradict the written verities of God for such certainly proceed from spirits of error Here is a cloud of witnesses all agreeing in one that no traditions are to be embraced that have not warrant from the word of God so that for the Church of Rome to put her traditions upon the people for rules of faith upon that score that it is the power and authority of the Church that awarrants those traditions is vain and not binding to the conscience of men unless she can justifie and maintaine them warrantable by the word according to Saint Pauls saying to the Galat. 1.9 Though an Angel from heaven come and teach any other doctrine then what we have preached let him be accursed For the Testimony of no Church whatsoever is to be received if it be contrary to the Scripture S●riptures above the Church Ante 73. Chapter 9. according to that of Saint Austin upon that text The Scriptures are not true because the Church sayes they are the word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the word of God and should Rome or any other Church teach contrary to the holy Scripture it is to be rejected as that which hath nothing of verity in it Now sith the Scriptures are the onely rules of our faith The vanity and falseness of the traditions of the Church of Rome and do containe in themselves the necessary points of our faith what shall we think of the traditions of the Church of Rome which have no warrant from the holy Scriptures but many of them being repugnant and utterly contrary to those Scriptures which therefore by the rule of Christ himself in the 7 of Matthew and by the general consent of the fathers of the primitive Church are to be rejected yet notwithstanding are by her enjoyned upon her pretended authority of universality and infallibility to be rules of faith unto others And lest any should think me injurious to the Church of Rome in this particular I wi●l give you a smal taste for I delight not to lay open her infirmities thereby to draw a scandal upon her of such of her traditions as are not warranted by the holy word of God only maintained out of self interest and to warrant her claim of universal power Spiritual and Temporal by these ensuing examples and further refer you to the 7 Chapter The Church of Rome that she might perswade the world of Peters being Bishop of Rome by

his One and twentieth Chapter fol. 323. calls the Protestants startling at the Romish doctrine concerning the Sacrament of the Lords Supper a Prodigie of Opinions And he musters up several Tenents concerning the same which being various in themselves and contradictory each to other I wonder he should offer them against any particular Church especially the Church of England against whom I suppose his darts are by this intended for that elsewhere fol. 259. he speaking of Protestants offers grounds of converting to them again which must needs be intended to the Church of England from whence he is gone which he in this particular goes about to tax her of Error Wherefore I made bold to recapitulate these ensuing Truths professed by her and which she assumes to maintain against the Errours and Innovations of Rome touching this Sacrament wherein my desire is rather to clear her from all malicious dirt by Satans instruments thrown upon her then that I should by this means lay open the failings of the Doctor or his ingratitude to his Mother-Church The Church of England doth maintain That Christs body is given received and eaten after an heavenly and spiritual not after a carnal and corporal manner and doth utterly disallow of the new doctrine of Romes Transubstantiation not condemning it as new in respect of the Word but as it is a doctrine and practice in it self varying from what Christ his Apostles or the Primitive Churches taught and contrary to what the Church of Rome has formerly maintained for that it is a meer novelty through the corruption of later times and by covetous and ambitious Popes for self-interest obtruded upon the people making them believe a real transubstantiated presence by the Priests consecration and by him offered up for the sins of the people that so the people giving money to the Clergie they may buy Masses and Sacrifices for their sins and for the sins of others as well quick as dead Against which impious practice and vain assertions I will for the satisfying of some doubting and others deluded in opinion offer these professions of the English Church to their serious consideration The Church of England teacheth 1. Christ is spiritually eaten That Christ is not in the bread and wine but onely to such as worthily eat drink them That as Christ is a spiritual meat so he is spiritually eaten and digested with the spiritual part of us by faith And for this her doctrine she has warrant from Christ himself who speaking of the bread of life which came down from heaven and the bread which he would give them which was his flesh Joh. 6.51 the Jews and many of his disciples were offended saying How can he give us his flesh to eat and his blood to drink Christ perceiving their murmuring that they should not remain in ignorance explains it to them saying What if you see the Son of man ascend up where he was before It is the Spirit that giveth life and flesh availeth nothing The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life Which is a manifest clearing how the flesh is to be eaten and how the blood to be drunk that is after a spiritual manner and so Abraham and many others did eat him many yeers before he was born of the Virgin according as S. Paul witnesses 1 Cor. 10. They did eat the same spiritual meat and drank the same spiritual drink that is to say Christ For to eat that meat and drink that drink is to have Christ dwelling in us The wicked do not eat the body and we in Christ which must needs be understood of worthy receivers and not of the ungodly in whom Christ cannot be said to dwell it must needs be understood of one that truly believing feeds upon Christ in his heart and the wicked unbelieving sinner he receiveth onely the bread and wine not discerning the Lords body Saint Paul witnesseth this truth 1 Cor. 11. He that eateth of this bread and drinketh of this cup unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of Christ He saith not He that eateth and drinketh the body and blood for none but a worthy receiver doth that Nor doth this doctrine deny any to receive unworthily as the Doctor fol. 328. would perswade us because saith he such onely receive bread and wine and not the Lords body But it rather serveth to condemn their errours who would perswade that the wicked receive very Christ and so none should be guilty because whoso verily eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood hath everlasting life Therefore the Church of England is careful to avoid this error and maintains according to Christ his explanation that Christ is onely spiritually given received and eaten and that those onely that believe in Christ eat him and live by him and that every one eating that bread according to Christs institution and Ordinance is assured by Christs own promise and testament that he is a member of his body and receives the benefit of his passion and likewise be that drinks of that cup according to Christs institution is certified that he is made partaker of Christ his legacie his blood which was shed for remission of sins Whereas the unworthy receiver coming to this divine Ordinance without due reverence and a lively faith eateth and drinketh his own damnation for that he receiveth that bread and that wine unworthily which ought with faith to have been received believing that as that bread and wine nourish the outward man so Christ is thereby conveyed to the nourishment of the inner man and so Christ is in him and he in Christ And by thus receiving is the saying of Christ in Joh. 6. My flesh is very meat and my blood is very drink to be understood for none but the faithful are partakers of this heavenly banquet Christ is the bread of life he that eateth that bread shall live for ever which must be by faith in the Son of God Gal. 2. It must needs be understood of a mystical and not a real eating that even as the bread and wine which we receive is turned into our flesh and blood and is so joyned and mixed together with our flesh and blood that they be made one body together so be all faithful Christians spiritually turned into the body of Christ and be so joyned unto Christ and also together amongst themselves that they do but make one mystical body of Christ as S. Paul 1 Cor. 10. We be one bread and one body as many as be partakers of one bread and one cup. The wicked are not partakers of this banquet but onely the members of Christ therefore none verily eat the flesh and drink the blood but the believers It is not like the eating of Manna both good and bad ate that saith our Saviour Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness and are dead but he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever which must be by faith and in heart believing unto

the Evangelists who witness with one consent that Christ took the Bread and also or after the same manner he took the Cup we must not say that he took the Bread or the Cup for so we destroy the Sacrament as being of incertainty and having no certain ground either for its institution or the precept for the administring thereof Wherefore for the Doctor here to construe and or is to multiply contradictions and so his reason is become invalid in respect that the general scope of the Scripture is that this Sacrament is to be administred under both kinds therefore it is more safe to construe those few places where Sacramental Bread alone is mentioned without the Cup to be understood of the whole Sacrament rather then in many places to wrest and into or For the mentioning of Bread onely doth not exclude the Cup negatively but rather according to Cyprians speech by the naming of part of the action the whole is to be understood and herewith agreeth Saint Paul 1 Cor. 10.17 And we that are many are one bread and one body because we are all partakers of one bread We must not think that because here Saint Paul names bread onely that therefore the Corinthians did not communicate in the cup for that is against the precedent verse where he saies The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of Christ and the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ Besides in the ensuing Chapter he enjoyns both to be received and that to the people so that where the breaking of Sacramental bread is onely mentioned we are not thereby to exclude the cup for the Hebrew phrase is under the breaking of bread to signifie the whole feast as in the Prophet Esay Frangere esurientis panem is as well to give drink as bread Besides should we admit of any other construction as that when bread is mentioned alone thereby to understand communion in one kind we should in that change Saint Luke in Act. 2. to teach contrary to the practice of Christ and the rest of the Apostles which did both receive and deliver to the people under both kinds which were an impious and presumptuous charge Wherefore let the Church of Rome for shame confess her errors herein and let her not longer wrest mangle and misconstrue Scripture contrary to Christs rules herein contrary to the sense of the Primitive Church and contrary to the judgement and practice of the antient Fathers and her own antient Bishops and that but for self-interest to maintain a new doctrine of her own framing taken up upon a light score and never heard of or believed in the Church for a thousand years after Christ and let her confess the truth with us herein by which means she shall neither alter the sense nor wrest any particular word to maintain her doctrine herein and if she will not for unitie sake and for communion with us yet for avoiding an absurdity against her own principles let her never construe that place of Luke to signifie an entire Sacrament for then she makes the whole Sacrament onely breaking of bread and destroyes Transubstantiation As for the Doctor if he be not herewith satisfied but that he will persist notwithstanding that it must be understood of communion in one kind and furthermore to maintain that opinion will here construe and for or I must tell him that he has hereby wiped off one error which he elswhere fol. 337. taxed our Translators with 1 Cor. 11.27 which if it be mis-translated it makes nothing for communion in one kind but whether we receive the one or the other that we should take heed to receive with due reverence so Heavenly a banquet and it doth further illustrate to us that though we receive the bread worthily yet if we receive the cup unworthily we are guilty of the body and blood which is an argument and indeed an absolute proof that they both make but a perfect Sacrament of the body and blood therefore I encline to think with the Doctor that it is a corruption in our printed Bibles rendring and for or I find it various from the old copies and I will not presume upon the Doctors rule to justifie it however it is something excusable for that in the very same Chapter 26 28 and 29. verses eating the bread and drinking the cup is expressed and not eating the bread or drinking the cup which upon the Doctors rule for avoiding contradiction should be construed or but whether it be taken or or and yet notwithstanding it makes nothing for the Popish communion in one kind The Doctor layes down for the Priests receiving in both kinds Of the sacrifice offered upon the Altar by the Priest because he offers up a sacrifice I will therefore a little consider of that I hope I shall give satisfaction to any reasonable soul that the Priest and the people offer up one and the same sacrifice and if so then by the Doctors rule they are to receive in both kinds because saith he Christs sacrifice upon the Cross is not perfectly represented but by both kinds as it was prefigured in Melchizedek's sacrifice of bread and wine For the better explaining of this point it is to be understood that there are two kinds of sacrifices one is a perpetual sacrifice pacifying Gods wrath whereby mercy and forgiveness of sins is obtained which is onely the death of Christ prefigured by the sacrifices under the Law The other is a sacrifice of laud and thanksgiving which doth not reconcile us unto God but is offered up of such as be already reconciled unto him by faith in him which is the reconciliation for our sins even Christ Jesus By the first Christ offered us unto the Father by the second we offer our selves and all that we have unto him and his Father according as David sayes Psal 50. A sacrifice to God is a contrite heart and Hebr. 13. Alwaies we offer up to God a sacrifice of laud and praise by Jesus Christ and Saint Peter saith of all people that they are A holy Priest-hood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ The Papists object that saying of Saint Paul Heb. 9. Every High-priest is ordained to offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins To prove thereby their sacrifice of the Altar offered up in their Mass which who please to read may plainly discover that that saying is meant of the Priests under the Law who did offer Bullocks and Goats for the sins of the people and therefore in the old Testament such sacrifices are sometimes called Propitiatory sacrifices being indeed but shaddows and types of Christs sacrifice which was to come which was the true and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the whole world wherefore in the very same Chapter S. Paul saith it were impossible our sins should be taken away by the blood of Oxen and Goats verse 1● By