Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n father_n life_n way_n 6,604 5 5.4332 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A14406 Actes of conference in religion, holden at Paris, betweene two papist doctours of Sorbone, and two godlie ministers of the Church. Dravven out of French into English, by Geffraie Fenton; Actes de la dispute & conference tenue à Paris. English. Fenton, Geoffrey, Sir, 1539?-1608.; Vigor, Simon, d. 1575.; Sainctes, Claude de, 1525-1591.; Du Rosier, Hugues Sureau.; L'Espine, Jean de, ca. 1506-1597. 1571 (1571) STC 24726.5; ESTC S112583 180,168 252

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

It is easie to iudge whether the ende of the doctrine which is propownded stretch to establishe and exalt the honor and glorie of God as if the same mooue exhortations to men to withdrawe whollie their trust from creatures and reappose and lay it altogyther vpon God to haue recourse to hym in their necessities to depende vpon his prouidence in all their transitorie affayres and lastly to prayse hym with thankesgyuing for all the benefits they haue which being presupposed there is no doubt that the doctrine including this purpose and ende is not good and to be receyued touching the obiection that our former aunswere fell from the boundes of the first proposition it séemes not so bicause the first matter propownded tended to knowe what was the grounde of our religion to the which it was aunswered that it was the wrytings of the Prophets and Apostles Question This aunswere is common to the Lutherans and Anabaptistes yea and to the Deistes who aboue the reast professe to searche the glorie of God and what else the aunswere conteynes and generally all men vsing this spéech coulde not but erre in all the articles of the Créede except the first But to cut of this circumstance of spéeche and returne to the point we thinke it not lawfull to vse a foundation of the scripture afore it be knowne and assured that it is the holye scripture and that there is difference betwéene the bookes of the same and also afore it be manifest that I haue a particuler inspiration of the holye spirite and that such a priuate breathing of the holy ghost be a sufficient ground of religion Aunswere The Deistes or other heretikes can not serue their turne with the sayde aunswere for the confirmation of their errors bicause the Deistes denying Iesus Christ can not glorifie God seing that to glorifie the father it is néedefull first to knowe and glorifie the sonne and euen so the other heretikes who notknowing the truth nor by consequent Iesus Christ whichis the waye the lyfe and the truth muste néedes be ignoraunt of God and howe to glorifie hym And where our aunswere is noted superfluous or to wander indecently we lay our selues to be measured and iudged by the conference of the demaunde and aunswere And touching the last point of the obiection that the reuelation which a priuate man sayth he hath of the spirite of God is to hym as a grounde of religion that is without the sense wordes of our aunswere which stretched onely to laye the foundation of true religion vpon the doctrine of the Prophetes and Apostles of whose truth all the church generally and euerie particuler member of the same are assured by the testimonie and inwarde reuelation of the spirite of God. Question All that is here spoken must be added to the other aunswere afore it be good and it séemes that the aunswere contaynes but matter of mockerie For it is most certaine that when all truth is in the doctrine of one man he is no more wicked or an heretike But we search still the beginning of truth and what it ought to be And touching the replye denying that the particuler reuelation is the ground of religion there is no great difference For if the particuler reuelation be a sufficient grounde for euery one to know that which is of the Apostles and Prophets it is by consequent the foundation of religion as being the grounde to know vpon what euerie particuler man knoweth and sayth his religion is founded Aunswere We framed our aunsweres according to the nature and maner of the demaunds by which appeares no likelihoode of disposition to scoffe or iest séeing that in such a conference as this is where is question to searche the honor and glory of God mockerie could not be without impietie But touching reuelation to be like to the scripture which is the grounde of religion we denie it and affirme them to be things different notwithstanding their coniunction as following one an other according as it is written in Esay Beholde my allyance with them sayth the Lorde my spirite which is in thee the wordes which I haue breathed into thy mouth shall not depart out of thy lippes nor from the mouth of thy seede and so as followeth by which maye be iudged the distinction that the Prophet vseth betwéene the reuelation of the holy spirite and the worde Question I leaue for conclusion of this conference euerye one to iudge of the conueniencie or agréement of the aunsweres and obiections And touching the wordes alledged out of Esay of the vnitie of the worde and holy spirite they be but spéeches without purpose and newe matter neyther ought we to compare the reuelation of euerye particuler man which was the question with that of the Prophet Esay who had the other proofes that the holy ghost spake by him and made demonstration thereof many times Lastly what soeuer is alledged I leaue to the iudgement of euerye christian Aunswere Euen so also we referre to iudgement what hath béene inferred mutuallie of the one other part And touching the place of Esay which we produced there is no question at all of the reuelation of the Prophet nor the spirite that was communicated to hym but onely of the spirite and wordes which God promised to all his people with whome he entred his alliance For the other proofes pretended that the Prophete had of his vocation we make no doubt at all of them onely we protest that to be principall and most assured which he had by the testimonie of Gods spirite as appeareth in the sixt Chapter of his prophecie Question Be it that he spake to his people by the person of Esay yet it followes not but that he spake first to Esay neyther doe I denie that he promised not his spirite to his people meaning to his vniuersall Church not that he would that euery one yea being in thys church might vsurpe or vaunt to haue this spirite promised particulerly And touching the particuler inspiration of Esay it was not founded onely on his fancie and presumption but in the assuraunce which God gaue him in supernaturall woorkes as is witnessed in hys sixt chapter Besides it was not sufficiently grounded to be beléeued as to haue an inspiration if he had not declared it by other effects and prophesies which hapned as belonges to euerie Prophete to doe afore he beléeued But referring all these things as matters fetched from farre and out of the first proposition I leaue the iudgement as before Aunswere There is not one of the church if he be a true member of the same to whome the spirite of God is not communicated according to the testimonie of the Apostle Paule and also the Euangelist Iohn in his first Catholike For the presumption pretended there is great difference betwéene presumption and the imaginations of the spirite of man which is but darknesse and of himselfe knoweth nothing in the things of God and the
conference to the ende it dissolue afore this matter be cleared In which respect to conclude and resolue in all the conference we are determined with Gods grace to set downe in writing no lesse briefly than as clearly as we can all that which God hath taught vs and we learned by his word of these matters as wel to satisfie our duty to God and his honor our obedience to the Lorde of Neuers and the Lady of Buyllon as also to content in the end and edifye the church A conclusion and resolution of the pointes aswell of the supper as of the Masse contayning that which the Ministers beleue and teach therof in their churches by the woord of God. THe ende soueraigne felicitie of men is to be knit with God dwel in him for that it is the onely meane by which their desires may be contented and satisfied and their harts and mindes fully deliuered from the hard and cruell seruitude of sinne and al other passions lustes feares distrusts which oppresse thē the same being the occasion that S. Paule placed perfect blessednesse and euerlasting rest of the happy in that the God is in them all things But bicause mē are naturally corrupt and vicious and of the contrary God is pure and holy in all perfection the difficulty is how to chuse the meane by which they may approche vnto him seing there is no societie betwene light and darknes nor any cōmunion betwene iustice and iniquity This meane cannot be found in them bicause that of them selues they are altogether inable and incapable to be raysed from the miserie and malediction whereunto they are falne headlong in such sorte as being blynde of vnderstanding they cannot knowe what is good for them and muche lesse séeke for it being frowarde and of hardened heartes And therfore it is necessary to forsake and come out of themselues and searche the meane aforesaid in Iesus Christ who was giuen vnto them of the father to be their iustice wysedome sanctification redemption way lyfe and truth Onely there restes now to know how they may be vnited and conioyned with him The Apostle teacheth vs it is done by faith by which Iesus Christ dwelleth in our heartes and restes in vs so that he and we are made all one as he is one wyth his father There be two principall causes of this fayth the one is outward and the other inwarde The inwarde is the holy spirite which is called a spirite of faith bicause he is the author thereof and hath created and produced it in the hearts of men inclining and disposing them to receiue in all obedience the worde and promise of God preached vnto them by the faithfull Executors and Ministers of the same whiche word is the externall cause of faith And as this faith increaseth and riseth by degrées so doth also the vnitie wée haue with Iesus Christ and by this meane with God vntyll as S. Paule saith that we concurre and méete all together in the vnitie of the faith and knowledge of the sonne of God in perfect man in the maner of a perfect stature of Christ This encrease of faith comes by the operation and vertue of the holy spirite which was the originall and first author of it And then after by the continuance of the worde purely preached and pronounced And lastly by the lawfull vse of the Sacramentes prouided as seales for the certaintye and confirmation of the fayth and assurance which we haue of the sayde coniunction with God by Iesus Christ together with participation of all the benefites grauntes giftes graces and blessinges which are purchased for vs by his fauour as remission of synnes our regeneration and mortification of the flesh with his concupiscence For the better signification of which thinges and to assure vs of the exhibition and vse of the same Baptisme was ordayned of God to the ende that in the water sprinkled vpon our bodies and in the promise of God added therewith we may behold as wyth our eyes the inuisible grace which God doth to vs to wash vs and make vs cleane of our spirituall ordures and so to sanctifie vs and make vs new creatures as also to assure vs continuallye of the eternall lyfe and make vs encrease in the hope we haue by our participatiō of the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified for our redemption and of his bloud shed for the remission of our synnes The bread and wyne are distributed to vs in the supper by the ordinance of Iesus Christ But as we acknowledge an vnitie and sacramentall coniunction betwene the exterior signe and the thing signified by it so we saye of the other side that betwene them both there is such a distinction that the one ought not to be confused with the other neither the spirituall thing so tyed to the corporall which representes it that either the one without the other cannot be receiued or by necessity they both bée alwayes indeuidablye knyt together Whereof it followeth that such are in errour who hold that in the supper the bread is transnatured into the substāce of the body of Iesus Christ And likewise those that say it is there knit and vnited corporally so that who soeuer receiues takes those signes be he faithfull or infidel takes and receiues immediately the thing signified by them Which errour wyth the moste part of others crept in vpon this matter hath proceeded in that men haue not well comprehended what it is to eate the body and drinke the bloud of Iesus Christ which ought not to be vnderstand as a maner that corporal meates are taken eaten but onely of a spirituall fashion as is declared in the sixt of S. Iohn which consistes in that that Iesus Christ dwelles in vs and we in him the same being done by the faith we haue in him As S. Augustine teacheth in his .25 treatise vpon S. Iohn saying why doest thou prepare thy belly and thy teeth beleue and thou hast eaten it Likewise in his third booke of Christian doctrine chap. 16. as followeth whē Iesus Christ saith if you eate not the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall not haue lyfe in you It seemes he commaundes to commit a great crime so that it is a figure by the which we ought not vnderstand other thing but that we must communicate with the passion of the Lord and kepe in memorie that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. Then the eating of the flesh and body of Iesus Christ is no other thyng than a straight coniunction and vnitie wée haue with hym which is wrought by the fayth we repose in his promises euen as by the mutuall promises made and receiued betwene a man and his wyfe the mariage concludes and is established betwene them wherein albeit being so knit they happen by any occasion to be seperate and farre of one from the other touching their bodies yet are they
shoulde remaine a Virgine and that a thing done shuld not be done that being vnderstand as the Theologians say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 u c●●posito which is the things being suche and so done it is true and the reason is that otherwise it woulde implie contradiction But in the Question proposed there is nothing like which only Demaundes if God by his power can alter and chaunge the Nature and qualitie of things created as if he could bring to passe that a heauie thing abiding in his qualitie of heauinesse waighte which naturally weighes downewarde shoulde remaine by the onely vertue of God hanging on high as we reade in the holy Scripture that the fire which naturally ascendes and stretches on heigthe discendes downewarde by the vertue of God and also that fire of his proper nature ardente and burning makes cold his owne qualitie that is the heat reasting in the substance as also that two bodyes may be in one place as appeareth when our Lord entred where the Apostles were the doores being shut or that a great and large bodie remaining in his grosenesse and bignesse passeth thorow a place inequall to his greatnesse and largenesse as the Camell thorow the eie of a needell All which Examples as they are taken of the scripture so if it muste be that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places he can no more doe the things aforesaide by the reasons which shall be deduced héereafter to that ende And as it wil neuer be found to enter into the brain of an interpreter to denie such power so the first that hath denied it openly was Peter Martyr and after him Beza The Doctoures say further that the fourme of arguing which the Ministers vse impugnes and reuerseth that which God obserueth in the holy scripture and the Angel speaking to the virgin for God ordinarily when he assureth any thing impossible to nature that men cannot cōprehend alleageth generally his power like as also the Angel laying a foūdation of the Incarnation of our Lord saith generally there is nothing impossible to God as touching his creatures But is it so that the generalitie of an argument is deserued by particular exceptions and made vnprofitable and without force by that meane When God then alleageth generally that his power can doe it it may be doubted of and thought that the things proponed of God may be of those that are impossible to him aswel as the exceptions alleaged of the ministers And that also should be false which the Aungell saithe that there is nothing impossible to god by that that many things are alleaged and proponed to the contrarie So that to the ende God and his Aungelles be mainteined true in their woordes we muste not doubte that he can not chaunge and transforme his creatures and al their qualities muche more easily than a potter is able to worke his clay and fourme at his pleasure any vessell thereof Further if we limite the power of God towards his creatures there is daunger that we fal not to deny him his Empire and dominion ouer them for to be Lord ouer a creature is no other thing than to haue power to chaunge and alter him and giue him suche a nature and qualitie as he thinkes good as hauing him altogether in his power And therefore God in Ieremie to shewe that he had power to reuerse and destroy Ierusalem according to his pleasure begins to say I am Lorde ouer all fleshe is there any thing impossible to me and therfore the Doctoures conclude that there is daunger if this question be mainteined as impossible to God that euery one will doe as muche alleaging the selfe examples that the ministers do to exempt from Gods power al things that displease him And when suche matter shall be produced out of Scripture he may interprete the Scripture in other sense saying that suche a thing shal be impossible to God in the naturall sense of the woordes of the Scripture euen as the ministers chaunge the Scripture which saithe that the body of Iesus Christe is in two places that is the woorde of the Supper compared with the woorde of the Ascention and they say that that spéeche of the Supper oughte not to be vnderstanded literally bicause it is impossible to God that one Body be in twoo places And so the Doctours saie that euery one woulde corrupte the Literall sense of the Scripture holding that the thing is impossible to God and therefore the Scripture muste be otherwayes vnderstande and yet it maye so happen that it is only bicause it doth displease him producing notwithstanding the same reasons and allegations whiche the Ministers doo to declare that all things are not impossible to God. The Doctors conclude eftsoones that it is better to mainteine the Scripture in his truthe albeit shée propose things incomprehensible and impossible to our iudgement than to giue way to euery one to depraue Goddes woorde applying it to his owne will and fansie vnder shadowe to saie that it is impossible to God and so to alleage other examples Lastely they will not omitte that the Ministers who haue so déepely protested to rest stay vpon the pure woord of God allege not against Gods power but the ancient doctours aiding themselues with their authorities against the expresse woord of God which beares that nothing is impossible to him generally without some exception Aunsvvere The Ministers aunswere that the Doctoures proue not their consequence but leaue it as in a distruste not to be able to confirme it as is moste likely They make no mention but of the Antecedent of their consequence to the confession of whiche it will neuer be possible to them to bring the Ministers by the reasons and authorities by them alleadged so strengthen theire saide consequence bicause of a Particulare they inferre a Generall whiche is againste the Rules of Dialectice where they saye that the authorities alleaged by the Ministers apperteine nothing to reproue their consequence and to shewe that God forbeares not to be almighty notwithstanding that he cannot doo any thing which derogates his nature They referre themselues for that to the ancient authours aforesaid who for the same and reason of the ministers alleage the saide exceptions Where they pretende that the Authorities and Sentences alleaged of the Auncientes doo nothing apperteine to the presente question as denying that they oughte to be vnderstand of other things excepte suche as conteine in themselues contradiction The Ministers aunswere that euen so doothe that whiche they propone of a Body that in one instante he maye he in diuerse places the same being asmuch as if they had saide that a Bodye is and is not at one time and that a Body is one and not one And lastely that a Creature maye be incircumscript and not enclosed in certaine limittes whiche if it were so he shoulde be no more a Creature but a God as maye be gathered of the saying of S. Basile in his
the Hebrues By meane wherof it is no lesse blasphemie matter contrary to the doctrine and meaning of the Apostle to approue the repeticion and reitteration of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ than the plurality of sacrifices for sin And if the Doctors would as hath beene their custome to disguise and colour such an abuse preferre their distinction betwene the sacrifice propiciatory and applicatorie as to say the Priestes pretende not in their Masses to sacrifice Iesus Christ for other ende than to apply the merite of hys death to those by whom they celebrate them We answer that in doyng thus they would attribute more than they do to Iesus Christ bicause all the fruite of hys sacrifice comes to vs by the application of the same euen as the healing our cure comes not so much of the confection and preparation of the medecine as by applying the same Besides we make this question to our Masters by what meanes the benefit of the death of Iesus Christ was applyed to the fathers afore his cōming seeing at that time ther was no Masse soong All men of any spirit iudgemēt may perceiue that those distinctions are friuolous suborned onely to darken the truth bleare the eyes of the simple and ignorat For Iesus Christ who hath offered the sacrifice is the selfe same which he applies to vs by his spirite his woord and his sacramentes And now to returne to the matter of our beginning to declare to what ende the auncients haue called the Supper all the action of the same sacrifice there is to be noted that in the supper ther be many sortes of sacrifices as the sacrifice of a contcite hart which is offred by publik confession of sins done there After the sacrifice of our bodies which is there offred by open praier following the said confession thirdly the sacrifice of praise and thanks giuing there offered when after the confession prayers they sing Psalmes The preaching of the gospel which is called a sacrifice Rom. 15. comes after as when the confession praiers being done the Minister presents himselfe to the people to reueale the woorde of god Almes which is an other kinde of sacrifice were in times past layd to the supper by the faythfull who by thys meane would testifie not onely the memorie they had of the graces and benefits of God but also their charity and des●re they had to relieue the necessities of their poore neighbours Ouer and besides all these kindes of sacrifices there bée two particular in the Supper whereof is mention made in the writinges of the auncientes the breade and wine which were chosen and taken of the almes brought thether for the poore and were consecrated that is to say assigned and deputed to the holy sacred vse of the supper The other kinde is the memorie of the death and sacrifice of Iesus Christ celebrated and repeated in all the action of the Supper which for this reason is called sacrifice by S. Iohn Chrisostome vpon the Epistle to the Hebrues his wordes be these We do euery day no other sacrifice than that of Iesus Christ no rather saith he in correcting him selfe we make the memorie of the same sacrifice S. Ambrose cals it the memorie of our redemption to the ende that we remembring our Redéemer may obtaine of him to multiply his graces vpon vs S. Augustine propones it also more cleare vnder a comparison of the daies of the passion resurrection of Iesus Christ which he applies in this maner Often times whē the feast of Easter approcheth we vse this maner of speaking to morow or within two daies we haue the passion or the resurrection of Iesus Christ It cannot be properly vnderstand of the daye that Christ suffered death which is past long since but onely of the memory of his death the which is solemnised and celebrated as vpon that day euery yeare A litle after he addeth to apropriate his comparison hath not Iesus Christe bene offered in himselfe one onely time and yet in the Sacrament of the Supper not onely the day of Easter but euery day he is offered to the people In an other place the flesh and bloud of this sacrifice afore the comming of Iesus Christ were promised by the figures of sacrifices in the passion of Iesus Christ they were deliuered vp and offered in truth And since Iesus Christ ascended into heauen they are celebrated by the sacrament of memorie By these places and many other like we maye deduce that the fathers haue often called the supper sacrifice bicause in it the memory of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ is restored and celebrated The name of sacrifice is also often times applyed by the auncientes to the almes brought by the faithfull in the supper as by Iustine Martyr in the second Apologie by S. Augustine in his .20 boke chap. 20. against Faustus by S. Ciprian in his booke of the almes by S. Chrisostome hom 46. vpon S. Mathew which may also be verified euen by the canon of the Masse where it is sayd we offer to thy maiestie part of thy giftes and benefites the same to be referred to the almes of the faithfull offered by the Minister to God in the name of all the church Sometimes the prayers which were made there were called sacrifices as Cyprian vpon the dominicall prayer and Eusebius in the .vij. of the Ecclesiasticall history Tertullian in the third booke against Marcion where alledging the place of Malachie of the cleane offring which ought to be made to God from the sunne rising tyll the settyng of the same saith it ought to be vnderstand of the Hymnes and prayses to God which S. Ierome also confirmes in hys exposition vpon the sayd place For conclusion of this matter we say that all the places of the bookes of the auncientes wherein touching the matter of the supper is mencion made of the sacrifice ought to be referred to one of the sayd kindes neither can it be found that either they haue sayd written or thought that there was other sacrifice propiciatorie than onelye that whiche Iesus Christ hath once offered on the crosse in his proper body for our redemption by which meane it is sure that he ought to be acknowledged in the Christian church sacrificator of the new testament And touching the other sacrifices as that of a contrite hart mortification of the flesh of thankes geuyng and almes and the pronouncement and memory of the death of Iesus Christ we saye that generallye it belonges to the church to offer them and that there is neither faithfull nor any member in all the body of the Church who for this respect is not sacrificature as S. Peter saith in his first Epistle chap. 2. and S. Iohn in the Apocalips chap. 1. and that for that reason we ought to offer in the Supper such sacrifices vnto God as appeares euen by the canon of their Masse by them euill vnderstanded applied