Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	believe_v	faith_n	rule_n	12,199	5	7.5465	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01532	A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by the confession of their owne writers, to haue no necessary ground in Gods Word: as also it is further demonstrated to be against Scripture, nature, sense, reason, religion, and the iudgement of t5xxauncients, and the faith of our auncestours: written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. and pastor of Rotherhith.	Gataker, Thomas, 1574-1654.	1624 (1624)	STC 11657; ESTC S102914	225,336	244

A DISCVSSION OF THE POPISH DOCTRINE OF Transubstantiation Wherein the same is declared by the Confession of their owne Writers to haue no necessary ground in Gods Word As also it is further demonstrated to be against Scripture Nature Sense Reason Religion the Iudgement of the Auncients and the Faith of our Auncestours Written by THOMAS GATAKER B. of D. and Pastor of Rotherhith LONDON Printed by I. L. for William Sheffard and are to bee sold at his shoppe at the entring in of Popes-head Alley out of Lombard-streete 1624. This Treatise consisteth of two parts 1. A briefe Discourse containing diuers Arguments against the Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation 2. A Iust Defence of the same Discourse and Arguments against the Answer of a namelesse Popish Priest thereunto To the Reader BE pleased I pray thee to vnderstand in a word as the occasion of vndertaking so the motiue of publishing this Controuersie Hauing had some Conference with an Honourable Lady nobly descended whom some Factors for Rome had endeauoured to peruert about the Point of Transubstantiation and Christs corporall presence in the Eucharist I was by her requested to deliuer her in writing the summe of that that had passed then by word of mouth from me as well in way of Answere to the exceptions taken to our Doctrine as in way of opposition to the Romane tenet therein Whereupon within a few daies after hauing digested it as well as streights of time would permit and added some further enforcements of the generall heads then insisted on I deliuered it verbatim as here thou now hast it Which writing being imparted to one of those Factors a speedy answere was promised and after long expectation of it at length performed such as here it is exhibited vnder the letters of N. P. put for a Namelesse Popish Priest without word or syllable detracted added or altred Vnto which I soone after dispeeded a Reply which was to the same Honourable Personage also not long after represented Now hauing hitherto heard of nothing returned further thereunto albeit some yeeres be past since the exhibition of it I haue thought good by the aduice of some iudicious Friends to publish all together my Reply onely in some few places enlarged as well thereby the more fully to cleere some obiections vrged commonly to the simpler sort especially against our Faith and Doctrine concerning that Sacrament and our exposition of some passages of holy writ either concerning or supposed to concerne the same as also further to discouer to such especially as are not so well acquainted therewith the grosse and palpable frauds and falshoods with such Popish Factours too frequent which in the aduised reading and perusing hereof may easily and euidently be descried And this is all that not listing to detaine thee long from the discourse it selfe I was desirous by way of Preface to fore-acquaint thee withall The Lord vouchsafe thee and vs all true vnderstanding sound iudgement and a loue of the truth both in this and in all other things Thine in our common Sauiour THO GATAKER Errata IN the Text. page 31. line 21. for said reade say p. 33. lin 10 for these r. those l. 20. for a mans r. mans l. 23. for difficultie r. difficulties p. 39. l. 3. for confimeth r. confirmeth l. 12. for maine r. maime l. 27. for commodioas r. commodious p. 40. lin 5. for to passe r so passe p. 41. l. 11. for and r. with p. 42. l. 8. for is r. is not p. 47. l 7. for Crosse r. Grosse p. 51. l. 24. put out simply and p. 53. l. 7. for these r. in those p. 54. l. 17. for to conclude r. concluded p. 56. l. 25. after Christs put in body p. 60. l. vlt. for things r. thing p. 64. l. 30. for Catechising r. Catechisings p. 65. l. 5. for one r. of one p. 66. l. 17. for Glosse r. Gospell p. 74. l. 9. for this r. this is p. 75. l. 30. for their r. that their p. 87. l. 34. for either r. either p. 99. l. 24 26 36. put out 1. 2. 3. l. 35. for receiue r. receiuing p. 103. l. 5. after they put out was p. 199. l. 9. for Galathians r. Galatians p. 148. l. 10. for conuersion r. conuersion l 33. for it r. it p. 149. l. 35. for here read how l. 37. for before r. before p. 1●0 l. 25. for body r. bodies p. 151 l. 20. for therefore r. thereof p. 152. l. 4. for to as r. as to l. 26. for bread r. bred p. 154. l. 31. for what r. what this p. 155. l. 31. for like like r like nature p. 158. l. 28. for whinch r. which l. 34. for those r. that those p. 169. l. 8. for Christ r. Christs p. 171. l. 3 for places r. place p. 187. l. 16 for seemed r. seeme p. 189. l. 27. for assumped r. assumpted p. 197. l. 31. for canot r. can not p. 199. l. 24. for in r. is in l. 33. for that is r. that which is p. 202. l. 21. for prooe r. proue p. 212. l. 13. place the before The contrary p 219. l. 20. for tempored r. tempered p 222. l. 29. after not put out he p. 226. l. 19. for Emissemus r. Emissenus In the Margent page 13. letter z. for signifitatiuè r. significatiuè p 17. l. e. for Videt r. Vide p. 20. * for dentis r. dentibus p. 21. * for mittar r. mittam p. 33. l. vst for est et r. esset p. 64 l. m. for Lenserus r Leu●aeus p. 66. l. k for Greg. 8 r. Graec. 82. p. 98. l q. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 100. * for hom r. nom p. 118. l. f. for ducatur iestis r. ducaturi estis p. 131 l. b. sor oniensis r. omensis p. 138. l. s remoue Gal 4. 3. to p. 139. p. 140. l. f. for l. 8. r. l. 1. p 165. l. b. for Sticorum r. Stoicorum p. 173. l. c. for Gerob r. Gorol p. 177. l. l. for pa●is r. panis p. 192. l. x. for and r. ad l. a. for frantur r. frangitur l. b for sacerdotes r sacerdos p. 199. l x. for Christum r. Christi p. 219. l. u for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 220 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Briefe Discourse conteining diuers Arguments against the Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation THE Question is whither Christ be corporally present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist by vertue of a Transubstantiation or a reall conuersion of the Bread and Wine into the naturall Body and Blood of Christ. This those of the Church of Rome affirme we deny refuse to yeeld to for these Reasons 1. That which no Scripture enforceth vpon vs that in matter of Faith wee are not bound to beleeue For the Scripture is the Rule of our Faith In it saith August are found all those things Which concerne faith and good life And That which hath not authoritie from it saith Ierome may as

easily be reiected as it is auerred And Of that saith Tertullian there is no certaintie that the Scripture hath not But that Christ is present corporally in the Sacrament of the Eucharist by vertue of any such Transubstantiation or reall conversion of the Creatures into the naturall Body and Blood of Christ no Scripture enforceth vs to beleeue Nor are we therefore bound to beleeue it That no Scripture enforceth vs to beleeue it shall appeare by examination of those places that are alleadged commonly to prooue it The places vsually produced are principally two The former place is out of the Institution it selfe those words of our Sauiour This is my Body Matth. 26. 26. Marke 14. vers 22. Luke 22. vers 19. 1. Corinth 11. vers 24. That these words enforce vs not to beleeue any such thing is thus prooued If these words may well be taken figuratiuely as well as some other speeches of the like kinde in Scripture and other the like phrases vsuall in ordinary speech then these words enforce vs not to beleeue any such thing But these words This is my Body may well be taken figuratiuely as well as other speeches of the like kinde in Scripture to wit The seauen kine and the seauen eares are seauen yeeres The ten hornes are ten Kings The Rocke was Christ and as other phrases vsuall in ordinary speech as when pointing to the pictures of Alexander Caesar William the Conquerour Virgil Liuie and the like we say This is Alexander that conquered Asia This is Caesar that conquered France This is King William that conquered England This is Virgil that wrote of Aeneas This is Liuie that wrote the Romane storie and the like These words therefore enforce vs not to beleeue that Christ is corporally present in the Sacrament by vertue of any such Transubstantiation The truth hereof is acknowledged euen by our Aduersaries themselues Cardinal Bellarmine granteth that these words This is my Body may imply either such a reall change of the Bread as the Catholikes hold or such a figuratiue change as the Caluinists hold but will not beare that sense that the Lutherans giue them And Cardinal Caietan acknowledgeth and freely confesseth that there appeareth not any thing out of the Gospel that may enforce vs to vnderstand those words properly This is my body And he addeth that nothing in the text hindreth but that those words This is my body may as well be taken in a metaphoricall sense as those words of the Apostle The Rocke was Christ and that the words of either proposition may well be true though the thing there spoken be not vnderstood in a proper sense but in a metaphorical sense onely And I finde alleadged out of Bishop Fisher in a worke of his against Luther for the booke I haue not these words There is not one word in S. Mathewes Gospel from which the true presence of Christs flesh blood in our Masse may be prooued Out of Scripture it cannot be prooued Thus by the Confession of our Aduersaries themselues our Sauiours words may well beare that meaning that we giue them and there is nothing in the Text that may enforce vs to expound or vnderstand them otherwise It is absurd therefore for any to reason thus as many yet are wont to doe Christ saith This is my Body and we are bound to beleeue Christ and therefore we must needs beleeue that Christ is corporally present in the Sacrament Since that the words of Christ by our Aduersaries their owne confession may be most true and yet no such thing at all be meant by them or intended in them And the same may well be shewed as Caietan pointeth vs to it by the like For must we not beleeue the Apostle as well as Christ or must we not beleeue Christ as well in one place as in an other But the Apostle saith that The Rocke was Christ And yet no man beleeueth therefore that the rocke was turned into Christ though he beleeue the Apostles words in that place Yea our Sauiour himselfe saith This Cup is the new Testament and This Cup is my Blood And yet is no man so senselesse as therefore to beleeue that the Cuppe which our Sauiour then held was turned either into the New Testament or into Christs blood As well therefore may a man prooue that the Rocke was turned into Christ because the Apostle saith not The Rocke signified Christ but expressely The Rocke was Christ or that the communicants themselues are turned into bread because the Apostle saith We are all one Bread or that the Cup was turned either into the New Testament or into Blood because our Sauiour saith This Cup is the New Testament and This Cup is my Blood as that the bread is turned into the Body of Christ because our Sauiour saith of it This is my Body The Rocke was Christ onely symbolically and sacramentally by representation and resemblance and the Cup that is the wine in the Cup for so our Sauiour saith it was the fruite of the vine was the New Testament as Circumcision the Couenant as a signe and a seale of it And in like manner is the bread said to be the Body of Christ as the Paschal Lambe is called the Passeouer not really or essentially but typically and sacramentally as a type and signe of the same Yea so the Ancient Fathers expound the words The Bread saith Tertullian that Christ tooke and distributed to his Disciples he made his Body saying This is my Body that is a figure of my Body And The Lord saith Augustine doubted not to say This is my Body when he deliuered the signe of his Body And he giueth else-where a reason of such manner of speech to wit because Signes are wont to be called by the names of the things by them signified and Sacraments by the names of those things whereof they are Sacraments in regard of the similitude that they haue of them And so saith he the Sacrament of the body of Christ is in some sort the Body of Christ and the Sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ. Yea you shall finde that which wee herein maintaine euidently confessed and confirmed by the Glosse vpon Augustine in the Popes owne Canons Augustines words inserted into the Corps of the Canon Law are these As the heauenly Bread which is the Flesh of Christ is in it owne manner called the bodie of Christ when as in deede and truth it is a sacrament of that body of Christ which being visible palpable and mortall was placed on the Crosse and that immolation of Christs flesh which is done with the Priests hands is called Christs passion death and crucifying not in the truth of the thing but in a mystery signifying it so the Sacrament of faith whereby we vnderstand Baptisme is faith And the Popish Glosse vpon that

the first Nicene Councell will vs in this diuine table not to regard onely bread and wine proposed but to eleuate our minde by faith and behold on this table the Lambe of God taking away the sinnes of the world by Priests vnbloodily sacrificed and receiuing his body and blood to beleeue them to bee symboles and pledges of our resurrection c. O holy Ephrem renowned so for thy great learning and singular sanctitie as Saint Ierome testifieth thy writings to haue beene read in the Church after the holy Scriptures why doest thou will vs not to search after these inscrutable mysteries c. but to receiue with a full assurance of faith the immaculate body of the Lord and the Lambe himselfe entirely adding those wordes which cannot agree to such a communion of bare bread and wine as this Minister teacheth The mysteries of Christ are an immortall fire search them not curiously least in the search thou become burned c. telling vs that this Sacrament doth exceed all admiration and speech which Christ our Sauiour the onely begotten Sonne of God hath instituted for vs. Finally why doe other ancient ●nd chiefe Fathers of the Greeke and Latine Church call the consecrated bread and wine on the Altar dreadfull mysteries the food of life and immortality hidden Manna and infinitely excelling it a heauenly banquet the bread of Angels humbly present while it is offered and deuoutly adoring it c. If there bee no more but bare bread and wine therein receiued in memorie of our Sauiours passion as my Aduersarie affirmeth of his Protestanticall Sacrament THe next Diuisi●● hee maketh entrance into with a grosse and shamelesse deprauation and thereupon prosecuteth it to the end with an impertinent digression Hauing cited the forenamed Testimenies of Theodoret and Gelasius in mine Answer to that Obiection brought commonly against vs as if by a deniall of such a reall presence as Papists maintaine wee should make the Sacrament to be nothing but bare bread I conclude both mine Answer and the Allegation of those two Authors in these wordes Thus they to wit Gelasius and Theodoret and thus we and yet neither doe they nor we therefore make the Sacraments of Christs body and blood NOthing but bare bread and wine Now this shamelesse wretch wanting matter to be dealing with turneth me NOthing into ANY thing a man able indeed with his shamelesse senselesse shifts to picke any thing out of nothing and relateth my wordes in this manner to a cleane contrary sense Thus they and thus we and yet neither doe they nor wee therefore make the Sacraments of Christs body and blood ANY thing but bare bread and wine Had either I or my Transcriber for the truth is it was not mine owne hand-writing that hee had I write a worse hand I confesse then he is aware of that accounteth that so bad an one If either I or hee I say had slipt heere with the pen as I suspected hee might haue done till I saw the copie againe that this Answerer had yet the whole tenour of my speech wherein I shew that the bread and wine in the Eucharist are no more bare bread or bare wine then the water vsed in the Sacrament of Baptisme is bare water would sufficiently haue shewed my meaning But when the copie that was deliuered him remaining in the custodie of that Noble Personage for whom at first it was written is found apparantly to haue the wordes in the very same manner as I haue before cited them I cannot deuise what colour this audacious wretch can bring to salue his owne credite with and excuse his corrupt carriage It argueth not a bad but a desperate cause that without such senselesse and shamelesse shifts cannot bee vpheld And I beseech your Ladiship well to consider what credite is to be giuen to these men alleadging Authors Fathers Councels c. which they know you cannot your selfe peruse and examine when they dare thus palpably falsifie a writing that you haue in your owne hands and may haue recourse to when you will § 2. Now hauing thus laid a lewd and loud vntruth for the ground of his ensuing Discourse 1. Hee falleth into an Inuectiue against our Protestanticall Communion as acknowledged by me to haue nothing holy heauenly and diuinely for so it pleaseth him to speak therein contained but bare bread and wine c. adding withall that neuer C●ietan neuer Bellarmine neuer Gratian neuer Father or other Catholique Diuine beleeued or taught this sacrilegious doctrine a lye he meaneth of his owne forging as my Aduersarie in these wordes They and wee falsly pretendeth In which wordes first for hee cannot forbeare f●lsifying for his life no not then and there where he chargeth others with falshood he intimateth that in those words Thus they I should haue reference to Caietan Bellarmine and Gratian whereas my wordes euidently point at Gelasius and Theodoret whose owne wordes in precise tearmes I had next before cited 2. He chargeth me falsely to say that of the Eucharish that neither I nor any of our Diuines euer said yea which being by way of Obiection before produced I not onely disauow and disprooue approouing freely and at large proouing the contrary but in this place in plaine tearmes conclude the direct contrary vnto in the very wordes by him fowly falfified 3. Hee runneth out to giue vs some taste of his rowling Rhetoricke as well as his loose Logicke into a solemn inuocation of his forged S. Dionyse together with some of the Ancients as if hee were raising of Spirits with some magicall inchantment to fight with a shadow and to skirmish with a man of straw of his owne making to testifie in that against vs that hee would faine put vpon vs but none of vs by his owne confession euer said or doe say Thus hee hath nibled here and there cauilled at by-matters coined lies forged and faced but giuen no direct Answer to the Argument whereunto hee should haue answered and whereby it was prooued that these wordes of our Sauiour This my body may well beare a figuratiue sense so expounded by the Ancient Fathers and confessed by their owne writers not so much as attempted to prooue the contrary thereunto § 3. Now howsoeuer I might very well let passe as impertinent those citations and sayings of the Authors here summoned to giue in either testimony or sentence against that that none of vs auoweth and which therfore though all that either they doe say or hee would haue them say were true did no way crosse vs or once touch vs in ought that is heerein affirmed of vs and I had sometime therefore determined wholy to passe by them for feare of ouercharging this Discourse yet considering that some weake ones peraduenture may stumble at some passages in them especially as they are vnfaithfully by this alleadger of them here translated I haue thought good now ere wee part with them to examinine what they say that

heauenly effects which Christs promises there import in the soules of such as worthily receiue it and such centrarily as come vnworthily thereunto receiue death and iudgement to themselues by it As for those few Catholike writers who haue denied Christs words in that 6. Chap. of Saint Iohn to haue beene vnderstood at all of Sacramentall manducation I answer that their number is not great and their authoritie of no weight at all against a numberlesse multitude of ancient Fathers and moderne Doctors of better note contrarily vnderstanding them yeelding better reasons for that their literall true explication and easily soluing all hereticall Obiections gathered from the literall sense of our Sauiours words in that Chapter against our communion vnder one kinde and other points of Catholike doctrine And sithence my Aduersaerie will not sticke to contemne these very Authors in their other knowne Catholike doctrines why doth he so highly value and mainely vrge them in this opinion wherein without any hereticall intention or obstinacie of Iudgement they differ from vs § 6. AT length he commeth to refute mine Arguments which he saith are topicall and prooue nothing My first Argument is this None are saued but such as so feede on Christ as is there spoken of But many are saued that neuer fed on Christ in the Eucharist as the Fathers before Christ the children of the faithfull that die infants c. Ergò it is not spoken of the Eucharist To this he answereth 1. That I barely affirme that the Iewes before Christ did sacramentally receiue Christ as well as we but I prooue it not It is true I say obiter that they fed on Christs flesh spiritually as well as we now doe though that be no part of mine Argument And I adde a place or two of Augustine for the proofe of it grounded on the Apostles words 1. Cor. 10. 3 4. Which seeing that this shifter ouerslippeth let him heare Bishop Iansenius himselfe not to goe any further relate a little more at large to wit that the good Iewes in the old Testament were quickned by eating of Manna because vnder that visible foode they also spiritually did eate the true Bread of Life by Manna signified Or if Iansenius will not serue let him heare their great Albert There is saith he a three-fold eating of Christ sacramentally onely spiritually onely or sacramentally and spiritually both In the first sort all that euer were saued did eate in the second sort euill Christians eate him in the Sacrament in the third sort good communicants onely And againe alleadging those words of the Apostle All those good Auncients in the Manna vnderstood beleeued and tasted Christ himselfe and were thereby saued And this no Papist I suppose will be so absurd as to deny But this is but a by-matter no part of the maine Argument and therefore I forbeare here to insist further on it 2. That is as impossible for children to eate Christ by faith spiritually as to receiue him sacramentally in the Eucharist Not to runne out into more Questions then needs must at the present I answer 1. Many yong ones die though at yeeres of discretion when in ordinary course they may well haue faith and beleeue actually yet ere they be admitted to the Eucharist and yet is not their saluation at all thereby preindiced 2. By the doctrine of their Church euen Infants haue an habite of faith infused into them in Baptisme 3. Neither is it a thing impossible for the Spirit of God by an extraordinary manner to worke faith in such infants as are to be saued dying before yeeres of discretion no more then it was to regenerate Iohn Baptist in his mothers wombe of whom Gregorie therefore saith that he was new bred yet vnborne 4. The speech is of the same latitude and extent at least with those other whosoeuer beleeueth in me hath life eternall And Whosoeuer beleeueth not in the Sonne of God shall neuer liue but shall be damned and the like which comprehend those onely to whom it appertaineth actually to come vnto Christ and to beleeue in him saith Iansenius And that is enough for my purpose § 7. My second Argument was thus framed All that so feede on Christ are eternally saued our Sauiour so saith But many feede on the Eucharist that are eternally damned Ergò Christ speaketh not there of orall eating in the Eucharist Now this Argument saith he if I had wit to discerne the force of it maketh more against vs then against them And why so Forsooth because all are not saued that spiritually and by faith feede on Christ. This is like B●llarmines bold assertion that some that beleeue in Christ perish eternally because they die before they can haue a Priest to assoile them And what is this but to say that all that doe truly beleeue in Christ are not saued Yea what is this not to repeate all the allegations both of Scripture and Fathers produced for the proofe of the Proposition which he purposely passeth ouer not being able to answere but to giue our Sauiour himselfe and the holy Ghost the lye who so oft say Whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall be saued Nor is it sufficient as he addeth for to verifie our Sauiours speeches that the Sacrament is ordained to produce such effects in the Soules of such as worthily receiue it though the contrary befall those that doe vnworthily rēceiue it For to answer them againe in the words of one of their owne Authors our Sauiours words imply manifestly a certaine effect as he speaketh not a matter that may be as Augustine and Cyril also in the places cited by me there shew whereupon also he concludeth that it is apparent thence that all are not there said to eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood that receiue the Sacraments of Christs body and blood § 8. To their owne Authors Cardinals Schoelemen Canonists publike Professors or Readers of Diuinity in their Vniuersities Friers I might haue said too and in steed of Iesuites being better informed by him I now say Bishops which will not much mend the matter 1. Hee answereth that they bee but few in number and their authoritie of no great weight in regard of those that hold the contrarie Yet one of their owne Bishops though of an other mind himselfe confesseth that there are very many of them that are of this iudgement But had there beene but one or two of them especially of note as some of them were of some one sort it might well haue weighed much on our side For the witnesse of an aduersarie is of no small weight How much more when so many of all sorts of so speciall repute shall so vniformely speake for vs and herein accord with vs 2. He demandeth of his Aduersarie why he doth so highly value them and mainely vrge them herein when in other points he will not