Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	john_n	spirit_n	worshipper_n	1,614	5	12.0333	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A18981	The true ancient Roman Catholike Being an apology or counterproofe against Doctor Bishops Reproofe of the defence of the Reformed Catholike. The first part. Wherein the name of Catholikes is vindicated from popish abuse, and thence is shewed that the faith of the Church of Rome as now it is, is not the Catholike faith ... By Robert Abbot ...	Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618.	1611 (1611)	STC 54; ESTC S100548	363,303	424

a Genes 14. 18. hee brought forth bread and wine and that as Ambrose and Hierome say out of the Hebrew writers b Ambros ad Hebr. cap. 7. Hieron ad Euagr Nec mirum si Melch●zedec victori Abraham obuiam processerit in rese●●ion em tam ipsius quam pugnatorum eius panes●●mumque protulerit For the refreshing of him and his souldiers in which meaning c Ioseph An●iq Iudaic. l. 1. ● 11. Milites Iosephus namely Abrahami hospitalitèr habuit nihil ●is ad victum decsse passus doth vnderstand it And if M. Bishop will needes haue it translated by the word of offering as his fellowes are wont greatly to wrangle to that intent yet Ambrose so also applyeth it that d Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Occurrit illi Mel●lnsedec Sac●rdos ●btulit ei pa●●e vinii he offered to Abraham bread and wine thereby excluding all necessity of construction of sacrifice to God But if yet we shall perforce take it of offering to God we conceiue of it according to that which Cyprian saith that● e Cyprian l. 2. Ep. 3. Domi●u● noster Iesus Christus Sacrificium D●o Patri obtulit obtulit hoc id●m quod Melchisedec obtul●rat id est panem vinii su●● scilicet corpus sanguinē our Lord Iesus Christ offering a sacrifice to God the Father offered the very same that Melchisedec had offered that is bread and wine euen his owne body and bloud If the sacrifice of Christ and Melchisedecke be the very same and Melchisedecke also offered the body and bloud of Christ as these words import then cannot our sacrifice be a true and real sacrifice of Christs body and bloud because Melchisedecks was not so Christ as yet not hauing taken his body and bloud and therefore must both that and this be vnderstood to be only the mysterie and signification thereof And this interpretation of the sacrifice on both sides Hierome confirmeth when of our Sauiour Christs institution of the Sacrament he saith f Hieron in Mat. 26. Assumit panem ad verum Paschae trāsgreditur Sacramentum v● quomodo in praefiguratione eius Melchisedec sūmi Dei Sacerdos panem vinii offerens fecerat ipse quoque veritatem sui corp●ris sanguini● repraesentaret Christ taketh bread and goeth to the true Sacrament of the Passeouer that as Melchisedec the Priest of the high God in prefiguring of him offering bread and wine had done so he himselfe also might represent the truth of his body and bloud There is therefore both in the one and in the other not the very truth of the body and bloud of Christ but only a representation of the truth thereof euen as Chrysostome on the one side expresseth when he saith that g Chrys Op. imperfec hom 11 Haec vasa sactificata inquibus non ●st verii co●pus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur in the holy vessels is contained not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body And vnlesse it be thus it cannot stand which Ambrose concerning this offering of Melchisedec saith that h Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Intellige Sacramenta qu● accipis anteri●ra esse quàm sint Moysi Sacramenta c. the Sacraments which we receiue are more ancient then the Sacraments of Moses for how can that be if our Sacraments be truly and really the body and bloud of Christ which Melchisedecks were not Againe where God by Malachy saith i Mat. 1. 11. In euery place incense shall be offered vnto me and a pure offering whose eyes are so sharpe as that in those words he can discerne the Popish sacrifice of the Masse We reade here of incense and a pure offering but this roome is too little for the building of so large a house their Masse cannot stand within the compasse of this ground And when we consider how the Fathers expound the same Tertullian one where generally of k Tertul. adu ludaeos Desacrisicijs spiritualibus addit dicens In omni loco sacrificia munda offer●tur spirituall sacrifices another where of l Idem cont Marc. l. 4. Sacrificium mundum scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura sincere prayer out of a pure censcience Hierome of m Hieron in Zacha. c 8. Sacrificium mundum nequaquam in victimis veteris Testamenti sed in sanctuate Euangelica puritatis the sanctity and holinesse of Euangelicall purity Eusebius of n Euseb de demonstrat Euang lib. 1. c 6. Sacrificium quod appellaturpurum facimus per puras actiones pure and godly doings Austin of o Aug. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 86. Viuum Sacrificium de quo dictum est Immola Deo sacrificium laudis the liuely sacrifices of praise and thanks-giuing Theodoret of p Theodoret. in Mal. c. 1. Debitum honorem praestabūt accomodatum cultum adhibebunt the due honour and conuenient worship of God exemplifying the same by the words of Christ q John 4. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth and by the words of the Apostle r 1. Tim. 2. 8. Let men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doubting and Hierome by the words of the Psalme ſ Psal 141. 2. Let my prayer be set forth in thy sight as the incense and the lifting vp of my hands as an euening sacrifice these things I say considered may we not be thought to be out of our wits if we shall beleeue them that the place must needes be vnderstood of their monstrous sacrifice That Manna was a type of the body of Christ no Christian man doubteth but that it was a type of Christs body as really in the Sacrament no wise man beleeueth and the reason wherby t Answere to M. Perkins Aduertisement sect 56. See the Confutation elsewhere he goeth about to proue it is there declared to be vaine So haue I also u Of Traditions sect 21. formerly shewed that the example of the high Priest amongst the Iewes giueth no manner warrant to the supreme authority of one head ouer the whole Christian Church that the high Priest amongst the Iewes had no such supremacy as they claime to the Pope that reason teacheth such a supremacy to be the manifest and certaine danger of the Church and experience hath found it to be the very ruine and desolation thereof As for their according with the Iewish ceremonies in consecrating of Priests and hallowing of Churches and Altars and Vestments c. it is a slender proofe for the finding of their religion amongst the Iewes because they haue borrowed many ceremonies from the Pagans also and yet they will not say that their religion was amongst the Pagans Their emu●a●●on of those ceremonies we iustly cry out against as preposterous and absurd because they being as M. Bishop saith types and figures of the law of

set his owne marke vpon the Church to call it the Catholike Roman Church and the members thereof Roman Catholikes that none should thenceforth bee called Catholikes but such as would bee called Roman Catholikes And hereof M. Bishop very rightly saith that hereby they separate those Catholikes that ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome from other sectaries as importing them also to bee Sectaries that ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome and that by this marke they are to bee knowen from other Sectaries For certaine it is that the name of Roman Catholike is a name of Sect and Schisme and an open proclaiming of a rent and diuision of the Catholike Church of Christ Now for conclusion of this passage hee telleth vs that out of the premises may bee gathered that the Roman Church may well signifie any Church holding the same faith which the Roman doth But what premises may wee thinke hee meaneth here Surely if this bee his conclusion wee finde here nothing but conclusion premises to proue it wee finde none Hee hath told vs before that it may bee so and here full wisely hee repeateth the same againe but neither before nor here doth hee say any thing whereof it should bee gathered that it may bee so And though it may be so yet it auaileth him nothing as hath beene said because it is but a part of the Church that ioyneth in faith with the Church of Rome and therefore the Roman Church cannot bee said to bee the whole Catholike Church so that my proposition still standeth good the Church of Rome is a particular Church and Master Bishop though hee bee a Doctor that sometimes vnderstandeth what hee speaketh yet is not so great a Doctor in this point as that hee can giue vs any reason why hee ought otherwise to vnderstand W. BISHOP §. 4. NOw to this his second sophistication The Roman Church by our rule is the head and all other Churches are members to it but the Catholike comprehendeth all ergo to say the Roman Church is the Catholike is to say the head is the whole body Here is first a mish●pen argument by which one may proue or disproue any thing for example I will proue by the like that the Church of England is not Catholike thus The Church of England by their crooked rule is a member of the Catholike Church but the Catholike church comprehendeth all wherefore to say the English Church is the Catholike Church is to say a member is the whole body Besides the counterfaite fashion of the argument there is a great fallacy in it for to omit Fellacia accidentis that wee say not the Church of Rome but the Bishop of Rome to be the head of the Church it is a soule fault in arguing as all Logitians doe vnderstand when one thing is said to be another by a metaphore to attribute all the properties of the metaphore to the other thing For example Christ our Sauiour is metaphorically said to bee a Lyon Vicit Leo de tribu Iuda now if therehence Apocal. 5. v. 5. any man would inferre that a Lyon hath foure legges and is no reasonable creature ergo Christ hath as many or is not indued with reason he might himselfe therefore bee well taken for an vnreasonable and blasphemous creature Euen so must M. Abbot bee who shifteth from that propriety of the metaphore Head which was to purpose vnto others that are cleane besides the purpose For as Christ was called a Lyon for his inuincible fortitude so the Bishop of Rome is called the head of the Church for his authority to direct gouerne the same but to take any other propriety of either Lyon or Head when they be vsed metaphorically and to argue out of that is plainly to play the Sophister Wherefore to conclude this passage M. Abbot hath greatly discouered his insufficiency in arguing by propounding arguments that offend and be very vitious both in matter and for me and that so palpably that if young Logitians should stand vpon such in the paruies they would be hissed o●t of the Schooles it must needs be then an exceeding great shame for a Diuine to vse them to deceiue good Christian people in matter of saluation And if after so great vaunts of giuing full satisfaction to the Reader and of stopping his aduersaries mouth that he should not haue a word to reply he be not ashamed to put such bables as these into print he cannot choose but make himselfe a mocking-stocke to the world surely his writings are more meete to stop mustard-pots if I mistake not much then like to stop any meane Schollars mouth R. ABBOT HEre it may well be doubted whether M. Bishop were such a Doctor as to vnderstand himselfe because it should not seeme likely if hee had so done that hee would haue giuen such a brainlesse and stupide answere The first part thereof serueth to shew that when hee hath plaid the wise-man once he cannot be quiet vntill he haue done the like againe Of the shape of the argument I neede say no more then hath beene said of the former being of the same kinde and let him propound as he should that by the like it may be proued that the Church of England is not the Catholike Church and we acknowledge so much and doe take his argument as he hath set it downe The Church of England is only a member of the Catholike church but the Catholike church comprehendeth all wher●●●re to s●y the English Church is the Catholike Church is to say a member is the whole body Wee confesse it to be true and therefore we are not so absurd as to say that the Church of England is the Catholike Church wee affirme it to bee only a member and part thereof and may we not then thinke that this man hath made a doughty fray But beside the counterfait fashion of the argument there is saith he a great fallacy in it And how Marry first wee say not saith he that the Church of Rome but the Bishop of Rome is the head of the Church True it is M. Bishop that when yee compare togither the Church and the Bishop of Rome yee say that the Bishop of Rome is the head of the Church but is it not true also that when yee compare Church with Church yee say the Church of Rome is the head of all Churches Your Master a Bellarm. d● Rom. Pont. lib. 2. cap. 13. c● Synod Nicen. 2. Act. 2. Capu● om●●ium Eccles● arum De● Bellarmine hath cited this title as a matter of great moment out of the second Nicene Councel approuing the Epistle of Adrian where it is so called b Ibid. cap. 14. out of S●ricius Innocentius Iohn the second Pelagius the second Gregory the Great Bishops of Rome out of c Ibid. cap 16. Prosper and Victor Vticensis and doe you come now with your slecu●les●c tale and tell vs that you say not so The truth is that