Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	body_n	bread_n	consecration_n	9,959	5	11.0641	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A02628	A recantation sermon preached in the gate-house at VVestminster the 30. day of Iuly 1620 In the presence of many worshipfull persons, by Iohn Harding, late Priest and Dominican Fryar. Wherein he hath declared his iust motiues which haue moued him to leaue the Church of Rome, and to vnite himselfe with the reformed Church of England, whose faith and doctrine, the ancient fathers and holy martyrs haue confirmed both by bloud and writing. Shewing herein the grose errors of Rome, in matters of faith, their corrupting the Fathers, and their present declining to some strange and future ruine.	Harding, John, fl. 1620.	1620 (1620)	STC 12756; ESTC S115165	15,923	28

faith So the same Author saith in the same Treatise that if a man in the departing hence doth sincerely acknowledge his sinnes and truly imbrace Gods Word thus confessing and thus beleeuing he hath free pardon and forgiuenesse granted him of all his sinnes by Gods goodnesse and free mercy and at that very instant passeth to immortality Euen in the last moment of his life God refuseth not Repentance and whatsoeuer is truely done is not to late done And Saint Ambrose in his Booke Debono Mortis saith that he that in this life receiueth not remission of his sinnes shall not haue remission in the world to come Now if their sinnes be forgiuen in this world likewise the punishment due to the same is also forgiuen in this world and so there can remaine no Purgatorie to torment them in the next life But certaine it is that the bloud of Christ doth clense vs from all our sinnes as Saint Iohn saith and is the onely Purgatory that a Christian man should hold which doth deliuer his people as well from the punishment due to sins as from the sinne it selfe for as the Prophes Esay saith our punishment was laid vpon him and with his stripes wee are healed Saint August in his Sermon De tempore 232. saith there are but 2. places hee that reigneth not with Christ at his departure hence shall perish with the Diuell without end so that in what stare the last day of our life shall find vs in the same state the last day of our life shall iudge vs. Now if this be true as most true it is then the propitiatory Masse so much esteemed in the Romish seruice is but a forgery For first it cannot be propitiatory for the dead for as the Tree falleth so it lyeth and as man is found in his departing so goeth he to Hell or to Heauen A third place is not mentioned now if any be in Heauen Masses cannot auaile them for they enjoy all blisse possibly already if they be in Hell we read ab inferno non est redemptio out of Hell there is no redemption for as the Prophet Dauid saith a man can by no means redeeme his brother he cannot pay his ransome to God so precious is the redemption of soules and the continuance for euer And so it is cleare that for the dead it cannot be propitiatory and as for the liuing it cannot benefite them for then were it derogatory to the Passion of Christ once offered for all vpon the Crosse whose Oblation was absolute and perfect as Saint Paul in the 5. to the Hebrewes 6.7 speaketh and therefore needeth not Masse or any thing else to helpe it yea it were grosse and damnable to suppose any imperfection in that Sacrifice and Oblation of our Sauiour once offred on the Crosse seeing that God the Father twise spake from Heauen with a loud voyce saying this is my beloved Sonne in whom I am well pleased The fourth Reason that moued mee to renounce my former profession with the Romanists is that they quite contrary to the words of our Sauiour and the whole vse of the ancient Christians abuse the Sacrament of the Lords Supper partly by adding and partly by diminishing from the same when our Sauiour spake these words hoc est corpus meum This is my Body hee expounded himselfe presently saying it is the Spirit that giueth life the Flesh profiteth nothing These words are spoken spiritually therefore you must vnderstand them spiritually Saint Augustine in his Commentaries vpon the 98. Psalme saith you shall not eate this Body that you see neither shall you drinke that Bloud which vpon the Crosse was once shed for our Sauior recommended vnto vs a Sacrament to wit that which you see on the Table is Bread and that which you see in the Cup is wine but touching that wherein your faith is to be instructed is the Body and Bloud of Christ For as Baptisme doth change a man according to grace yet notwithstanding he remaines the selfesame man according to visible measure as he did before but inuisibly by grace is made another man outwardly nothing is added but inwardly all is changed So in the blessed Sacrament outwardly nothing is changed but there remaineth true Bread and true Wine but inwardly by faith we apprehend the Body and Bloud of Christ But these words which our Sauiour spake figuratiuely the Papists expounds them literally and thereby they cause the people to commit Idolatry by adoring Bread as God for they hold that after the words of Consecration there remaineth no longer Bread nor Wine but there is really and Transubstantially the Body and Bloud of Christ But Saint Peter saith that the Heauens must containe the Body of Christ vntill the end of the World Now if Christs Body bee in Heauen then it cannot bee in the Earth at once and the same time for as Saint Augustine Tractatu 3. in Iohannem Corpus Domini in quo resurrexit vno tantum in loco esse potest If they say that it is done by miracle in the Sacrament then it should be visible to the outward eye and sences When Christ turned water into Wine it was visible Wine When Moses Rod was turned into a Serpent it was a visible Serpent and so if the Bread be turned into the Body and the Wine into the Bloud of Christ it must also be a visible body But if they expound these words of our Sauiour hoc est corpus meum literally to belong vnto all why should they not also expound the words following literally that when he tooke the Cup he said This is my bloud should be appertayning to all aswel as the Bread In the old Law Circumcision was called the Lords Couenant when it was not the Couenant but a Signe thereof For the Couenant was this to Abraham Ego ero Deus tuus Deus seminis tui Likewise the Pascall Lambe was called the Passeouer of the Lord when it was but the signe of the Passeouer as passing ouer the red Sea so that it may stand with good Reason that Christ called the Bread his Body as hee called the Pascall Lambe his Passeouer and yet was but a signe thereof so the Bread is called his Body and is but a signe or remembrance of the same and therefore it is called a Sacrament because that in it one thing is seene and another thing vnderstood that which is seene is Bread and Wine and hath a visible apparance or forme but that which is vnderstood hath a spirituall vse and profit So that the thing which signifieth is oft-times called by the name of the thing which it signifieth as Saint Paul calleth the Rocke Christ yet it was not Christ by substance but by signification euen so our Sauiour said This is my Body when he gaue Bread the sigue of his Body and the Apostle said the Rock was Christ for that the Rocke which they spake of signified Christ The Gospell standeth not in the words of the

Scripture but in the meaning Therefore Saint Paul saith that the Communicant doth eate Bread after Consecration for if the Bread were wholy and truly Transubstantiated into the Body of Christ hence it followeth that euery one that doth receiue the sacrament doth also eate the Body of Christ and consequently cannot be damned For our Sauiour saith He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Bloud hath eternall life so by this rule the wicked shall be saued as well as the godly Moreouer if Christ be present according to his humane Nature then is it no Sacrament for euery Sacrament is a signe inanis est signi visus vbi resipsa presens est the signe is to no effect where the thing it selfe is present And it is to be noted likewise that the signe must haue some Analogie with the thing that it signifieth Now the thing signified is the Body and Bloud of Christ which is true meate true drinke as our Sauiour himselfe witnesseth in St. Iohns Gospell but the species or accidents of Bread and Wine are not true meate nor true drinke by that meanes cannot giue any fit proportion with the thing signified by them Further it is an Axiome in Phylosophy that accidentis esse est in esse that the being of an accident is to be in some subiect But these accidents as colour sauour and roundnesse they cannot bee in any subiect and so by consequence they cannot exist in the Sacrament For they cannot be in the body of Christ because it is glorified but the accidents are subiect to corruption and therfore they must either exist without a subiect which is contrary to Phylosophy or else to bee seated in the Body of Christ which is now glorified and this is impossible It is further to be noted that the Church of Rome doth mutilate and curtall this Sacrament for they take the bloud of our Sauiour which is our redemption from the lay-people yet certaine it is that our Sauiour did institute this Sacrament vnder both kinds and as he said to all take eate this is my Body So did he likewise speake vnto all when he deliuered the Cup saying drinke ye all of this and Saint Paul writing to the Corinthians sayth As often as ye eate of this Bread and drinke of this Cup ye shew forth the Lords death vntill he come For as Alexander of Hailes saith whole Christ is not conteyned vnder each kind but the Flesh only vnder the forme of Bread and the Bloud vnder the forme of Wine And heere vpon Gelasius Pope made a Decree that they should either receiue the whole vnder both kinds or receiue none at all vnder any kinde For there can bee no deuision of this one Sacrament and high mistery without great Sacriledge so that by their owne Doctors it is euident that they commit great Sacriledge in deuiding this Sacrament and do much abuse the people of God in deceiuing them of the precious Bloud of our Sauiour The 5. Motiue which mooued mee to persist in this my enterprise is that the Pope challengeth authority vnto himselfe to forgiue sinnes and thereupon sendeth forth his Bulls Pardons and Indulgences pardoning whom he list and as he list as if he were God himselfe hauing absolute power to do what he list insomuch as Traytors and Rebels against God and their lawfull Prince hee will not only pardon without exception but he will enable them in their damnable courses to the ouerthrowing of themselues and their Princes What the Religion of Rome is it may easily appeare by this that a man may haue for money a Licence or dispensation for any sinne a Popes pardon is sufficient for all but to what end serueth pardons when as there is no Purgatorie for neither the ancient Fathers make mention of it and the Grecians vntill this day beleeue it not Siluester Prierias in his Booke against Luther saith that Pardons are not knowne vnto vs by any authority of the Scriptures but by authorie of the Pope which is greater then the authority of the Scriptures Vox bouis non hominis It is the voice or saying of some Beast and not of any Christian man Certaine I am that the Pope cannot justifie an vnrighteous man whom God abhorreth neither can he condemn the faithfull whō God doth much tender and fauour therfore his Pardons are rather pernitious then any whit commodious to the persons that buy them bearing them in peace and security when indeede they are in much perill and misery VVhere doe they find that the Pope hath any superiority ouer Kings Princes or Emperours that hee hath any authority to depose them from their Crownes and dignities and to absolue their subiects from their Oath and Allegeance which they haue sworne vnto their Princes That vpon his Excommunication it is lawfull for them to rebell against them and so practise all Hostility to depose them There is not one word sentence or place out of the Scripture to proue it no precept or example of antiquity to warrant it and yet they commend it for a chiefe point and ground of Catholike and Christian faith By what right doth he claime this supreme authority if he clayme it as a successor of St. Peter it is impossible for that Saint Peter neuer had any such Title or preeminence ouer the rest of the Apostles It is true that Christ said to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church These words hitherto giue no superiority to Peter aboue the rest Only they shew that the Church is built non super petrum sed super Petram not vpon the person of Peter but vpon the Rocke Of which Saint Paul saith Petra autem erat Christus the Rock was Christ whom Saint Peter confessed to be the Sonne of the euerliuing God This confession of Saint Peter is that Christ is the Rock wherevpon the Church is builded aliud fundamentum nemo potest ponere nisi id quod positum est Christus Iesus Other Foundation can no man lay but that which is laid already namely Christ Iesus Where then shall wee find that Peter was made Prince of the Apostles to rule ouer all the rest as our Popes doe now But what hath the Pope to doe with Peter or what doth the Pope doe as Saint Peter did Saint Peter did conuert soules plant Churches and preach the Word of God vnto all Nations but in what Pulpit hath our Popes euer set foote where haue they preached the Gospell or expounded the Word The first Lesson that Saint Peter teacheth vs is to feare God the next is to Honour the King Quis haec est voluntas Dei for this is the will of God But the Popes say that they are Princes aboue Nations and Kingdomes they can depose Kings and pull downe Emperours they haue authority ouer their subiects to discharge them from their Oathes they haue the right and clayme vnto both swords as well temporall as spirituall And that