Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A00535
|
A briefe refutation of Iohn Traskes iudaical and nouel fancyes Stiling himselfe Minister of Gods Word, imprisoned for the lawes eternall perfection, or God's lawes perfect eternity. By B. D. Catholike Deuine.
|
Falconer, John, 1577-1656.
|
1618
(1618)
|
STC 10675; ESTC S114688
|
42,875
|
106
|
one beleeueth that he may eate all thinges But he that is weake to wit the scrupulous Iew that will neither eate meates prohibited in Moyses Law nor sacrificed by the Gentils let him eate hearbes Let not him that eateth dispise him that eateth not he that eateth not let him not iudge him that eateth to wit all sortes of meates for God hath assumed him to himself c. and he eateth to our Lord vers 6. for he giueth thinkes to God c. Why iudgest thou thy brother speaking to the Iew vers 10. for his liberty of eating all thinges And speaking to the Gentills why despisest thou thy brother for his weaknesse in putting a differnce betwene meates I know saith he vers 14. and am persuaded in our Lord Christ that nothing is common or vncleane of it selfe But to him that supposeth any thing to be como or vncleane to him it is common to wit for the errour of his conscience making it-seeme so All things indeed are cleane vers 20 but it is ill for the man that eateth with offence c. to wit of his weake brother concluding thus his advice to Iew and Gentill Hast thou faith that is to say arâ—… 〈◊〉 firmely persuaded of the lawfulnes of al meates haue it with thy selfe befor God c. But he that discerneth or maketh a difference of meates is damned or coÌ„mitteth a damnable sinne if hee â—ie because 〈◊〉 of faith or because he is not fully persuaded of the lawfulnes of that meate which he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all that is not of faith is sinne to wit euery thing that a man doth against his owne knowledg and conscience is sinne Which discourse of S. Paul is so cleare in selfe for refutation of Traskes doctrine and so vnâ—â—â—â—â—…lly vnderstood by ancient Fathers and mâ—de â—â—e Expositours aswell Protestantes as Catholikes that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 deuises wherby some of Traskes difciples haue sought to delude so many playne passages of this Chapter may well seeme to learned men not iudiciously imbraced but in an hereticall pride and a desire of nouelty and singularity purposely affected by them In so much as one of them being pressed with the litterall plaines of so many texts concluding in expresse termes directly against his contrary doctrine first he ridiculously deuised a new argument of this ChaÌ„pter and pretended that S. Paul endeauoured therein to instruct such Christians as being inuited to mourning and lamentation might thinke it vnlawfull to eate any meates at all idly citing many Propheticall textes commendingâ—… such tiâ—â— abstinence from nourishing and delightful meates Whereas S. Paul speaketh no one word in that Chapter of inuiting Christians to mourning and lamentation but only endeauoureth to compose controuersies and occasions of offence betweene Iewes and Gentills and to make their ordinary conuersation particulerly about meates and festiuall dayes peacefully and charitably togeather They seeme also to haue sundry other fancies to auoyd the pressing authority of these textes but so grossly as I hold them not wâ—â—â—â—… to be heere recited much lesse particulerly refuted whippes being the best answere to such arguments Bedlamâ— or Bridewell the fittest schoole for such a Sectmaister and disciples to dispute in QVESTION V. VVherein is proued that Bloud and strangled meates may be lawfully now eaten by Christians MY purpose in this Question is not so much to refute Iohn Traske in his Iewish and absurd doctrine of meates sufficiently already in my former Questions discussed as particulerly to ouerthrow the Puritanicall abstinence of some percise people who wholy grounding their faith vpon he authority of Scripturs litle crediting any Christian practise or doctrine not expressed in them are in many places knowne strictly to obserue the Apostolicall decree Act. 15. commaunding Christians to abstaine from strangled meates bloud c. Which say they was a precept expresly giuen by God in the law of nature Genes 9. and renewed by the Apostles a a law necessary to be obserued by the Gentills conuerted and is not found to haue beene repealed as was the like prohibition of meates offered to Idolls 1. ad Corin. cap. 8 10. by any latter doctrine or practise of the Apostles But contrarily it may be by many ancient and authenticall testimonies of antiquity certainely proued that many hundred yeares togeather after Christ holy people obserued this abstinence from stragled meats and bloud as a doctrine taught them by the Apostles Tertullian for example in Apologia cap. 9. expresly affirmeth Christians not to 〈◊〉 bloud at all but to abstaine for that cause from beasts dying of themselues or strangled least they should be defiled with bloud c. Blandina also in her Martyrdome mentioned by Eusebius lib. 5. hist cap. 1. telleth the Gentils that they did much erre in thinking Christians to eate the bloud of infants who sayd she vse not the bloud of beasts which is testifyed also of Christians by Minutius Felix in Octauio by Origen contra Celsum lib. 8. sundry later Councells haue vnder great penalties forbidden the eating of such meates Apostolically prohibited to all Christians So that their doctrine and practise is not Iewishly grounded as Iohn Traskes opinions are on a cerimonious precept of the old law certainly abrogated as is already proued but they obserue it as a precept giuen to Noah by God himselfe in the law of nature repeated in Moyses law and renewed by the Apostles The difficulty also of this question is increased and made more hard and vneasy to be solued by reason that the Aduersaries against whome I am to dispute admit no infallible authority of any ancient or moderne Church guided by Christs holy Spirit and lead into all truth so that faithfull people may securely and without danger of erring imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her iudgment as the supporting pillar foundation of Truth according to the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. They admit no Apostolicall Tradition or certayne rule to know any vnwritten doctrin to haue byn held and practised since Christ successiuely and vniuersally by Christians Finally they little regard any reasonable discourse or Theologicall deduction not litterally and playnely expressed in Scripture the only Rule of their faith and Iudge of controuersies betweene vs. According to which their vsuall and vnreasonable manner I cannot more forcibly endeauour to disproue this their Puritanicall abstinence from bloud and strangled meates then by orderly prouing three thinges 1. That this precept giueÌ„ to Noah Gen. 9. vers 4. was mysterious and not morall in it selfe 2. That it was not but for a time only and for ends now wholy ceased decreed by the Apostles Act. 15. vers 20. 28. 3. That it hath beene since by a holy and lawfull practise of Christs Church generally repealed so as it is a singular fancy for Christians now againe to renew the obseruance thereof And that this abstinence from bloud and strangled meates was not a morall precept I proue first by the
in Moyses declaration of that precept instancing against those captious accusers of himselfe his disciples the exercises of Priests labouring about sacrifices in the Temple yet not violating the Sabaoth the practise of Circumcision on the eight day albeit it happened on the Sabaoth their vsuall custome of leading out their cattle to water and drawing them out of pittes and places of daunger on the Sabaoth day without any sinfull breach thereof as may be gathered out of our Sauiours manner of speach Luke 13. 14. importing no reprehension of them for such facts but produced rather by him as fit examples apt to authorize his miraculous workes done with lesse labour and more charity and vtility to such as were by his voice or a touch of his hand or garment in soule and body perfectly cured So that Iohn Traske and other Puritanes in their cerimoniall and precise manner of obseruing the Sabaoth are rather superstirious imitators of the Iewes our Sauiours aduersaries then humble and faithfull members of Christs Catholike Church euer knowne to haue practised a morall and not the Iewish and cerimonial obseruance of the Sunday QVESTION III. Concerning the abrogation of the Iewes Sabaoth IOHN Traske adhering more constantly and consequently then other Protestants do to their dangerous ground of beleeuing nothing not expresly mentioned in Scriptures or thence necessarily deduced hath of late vpon conference with others and more diligent search then he had made before of many texts in the old and new Testament like a weather-cocke turned with euery blast of his owne ignorant fancy and iudgment hath determined himselfe and drawne his disciples to a most strict keeping of Saturday the Iewish Sabaoth comaunded saith he by God out of fire and written with his owne finger in the first Table of the Decalogue holily likewise by Christ and his disciples afterwards obserued as a sacred memoriall of Gods rest on the 7. day and therfore now also as a morall and diuine precept still to continue Presse him with the vniuersall practise of Christs Church present past since the Apostles certainely knowne to haue reiected the Iewish Sabaoth and insteed thereof to haue obserued the first day of the weeke in continuall memory of our Sauiours Resurection and he will in horrible pride and pertinacity of iudgment affirme it to haue ben a corrupt and abusiue practise little by him regarded as not being at al grounded in Scripture but repugnant vnto it Vrge him with Christs promises of being present with his Church to the worlds end Matth. 28. vers 20. of establishing it so surely on a rocke that hell gates shall neuer preuaile against it Matth. 16. vers 18. of comforting it with his spirit of loue leading it into all truth Iob 14. vers 16. 17. 26. which fitly therfore is said to be Columâ—â— firmameÌ„tum veritatis the suporting pillar and foundation of true faith 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. to whose holy obedience all Christians are tied vnder paine of being by their brethreÌ„ accounted as Ethnickes and Publicans Matth. 18. v. 17. he will ridiculously tell you as he did to one of his fellow prisoners conferring with him on this very point that the true Church of which these and the like texts were written is knowne to very few consisting of 2. or 3. gathered togeather in Christs name himselfe promising to be in the midst of them Matth. 18. vers 20. that is to say a small number of such little ones as haue truly repented and are made sure of their election in Christ hated and persecuted by men but beloued by God guarded by Angells seeing the face of their Heauenly Father Matth. ibid. vers 10. And examining him further on this point he will in processe of speach tell such as he will be confident with all that himselfe and his brethren are those little ones the only Gnostiks illuminated members of Christs Church others belonging therunto no further then true faith repentance and morality of life shall lead them and ignorance with all excuse them for not actually professing his singular doctrines So he foolishly seeketh with Ebion and other ancient Heretikes to breath life and spirit into the ceremonious carcasse and buried rites of the Iewish law feeding his grosse children with such vnsauery excrements for so the Apostle tearmeth them ad Philip. 3. vers 8. as Christ long since in the ending of that Law hath cast out of the mystical body of his church as not conteining any true norishment of soules in them vainely endeauoureth to illuminate those which obserue shadows who haue happily since Christs time liued in the cleere sunshine of heauenly graces planting like a foolish builder such new points of his faith on the sandy fleeting foundation of the Iewish law and seeking to set vp againe medium parietem maceriae that parting wall of ceremonies which distinguished Iewes and Gentills subuerted and quite ouerthrowne by Christ ad Eph. 2. vers 14. 15. euacuating al such legall decres and ceremonial comandements that he might build on himselfe the foundation and corner stone both people in a Holy Temple and habitation of God c. purifiyng alike their hares by faith Act. 15. vers 9. And that amongest other cerimoniall precepts and decrees of Moyses Law abrogated by Christ the Sabaoth was one holily rraÌ„slated by the Apostles themselues into our Sunday as shall bee proued in my next Question is by S. Paul ad Coloss 2. vers 16. 17. expresly affirmed willing his disciples not to be iudged or discouered in their faithfull profession in meate or drinke or new moones or any part of a festiuall day or Sabaoth which are shadowes of future good thinges By which Sabaoth cannot be meant the feasts of Trumpets Tabernacles Expiation and other such ceremoniall and Iewish festiuities as Traske heretically coÌ„menteth For albeit those feasts be called indeed Leuit. 23. Sabboths or daies of rest because all externall workes were alike forbidden in them as on the seauenth day yet the Apostle rest rayneth the word Sabaoth in this place to signifie the weekly Sabaoths of the Iewes as appeareth first in that hee numbreth such Iewish festiual daies distinctly from the Sabaoth equally forbiding the obseruance of them both His second reason why he prohibiteth them conteyned in that part of the text quae sunt vmbra c. which are shaldowes of future good thinges equally agreeth to them both for as those feasts were shaddows and types so were the weekly Sabaoths also Wherfore Ebion and his disciples the first hereticall obseruers of our Lords day and the Iewish Sabaoths togeather as witnesseth S. Epiphanius haers 30. S. Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 26. pressed with the authority of this place and perceauing the vnanswerablenes therof rather then they would therunto conforme their doctrines absolutly reiected all S. Paules Epistles and accounted him an Apostata from the Iewish faith The which Iohn Traske seemeth not yet to do albeit hee dared once to say of