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
A09101	A discouerie of I. Nicols minister, misreported a Iesuite, latelye recanted in the Tower of London Wherin besides the declaration of the man, is contayned a ful answere to his recantation, with a confutation of his slaunders, and proofe of the contraries, in the Pope, cardinals, clergie, students, and priuate men of Rome. There is also added a reproofe of an oratiuon and sermon, falsely presented by the sayd Nicols to be made in Rome, and presented to the Pope in his consistorye. Wherto is annexed a late information from Rome touchng [sic] the aute[n]tical copie of Nicols recantation.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.	1581 (1581)	STC 19402; ESTC S120349	83,096	196

noted before I will bréeflye shew one example here in stéed of many which I omit He citeth a place out of S. Austen against prayer to Saints where he sayeth his words are these talking of Saintes departed Aug. lib. de spiritu anima ca. 29. Such is their care for the liuinge that they know not what we doe euen as our care is for the dead that we know not what they doe By which words Nicols would haue men thincke that S. Austē disalowed praier to saints which is contrary to Fulks opiniō In his booke against Purgatory pag. 315. 316.317 who confesseth Austē to haue defēded this superstition as he termeth it rayleth on him for it but we shal easely recōcile the matter for S. Austen is not contrarie to him selfe though he be cōtrary to Fulke and Nicolls The occasiō of S. Austēs words was this he had saied immediatly before that Saints in heauē did not vnderstād or sée our state here of their owne power or absolutelye of them selues but by other meanes which he putteth downe a●t●r yet lest vpon this his sayinge some man might take occasiō to dout whether they had any care of vs or were to be prayed vnto or no he preuenteth the matter thus Compare this with Nicols translation Ita tamen ect eis cura de viuis quanquā quid agant omnino nesciant quemadmodū cura est nobis de mortuis quamuis quid agant vtique nesciamus nesciunt quidem mortui quid hic agatur sed dum hic agitur postea audire possunt ab eis qui hinc moriendo ad eos pergunt c. ab angelis qui hic nobis presto sunt c. spiritu etiam dei reuelante c. Which is truly translated thus Albeit the saintes departed know not at all what the liuinge doe yet haue they care of them in such sort as we haue care of the dead albeit wee knowe not what they doe The dead knowe not in deede what is donne heere but yet whē it is donne heere they maye heare it after Howe Saintes know our neces●ities from those which departe hence to them by death or from Angels whoe are preseent heere among vs or by the spirite of God reueling it vnto them Now by this litle considder our aduersaries dealinges I pray you Against Purgatorie pag. 306.315.316 349.78 279.435 247.194 whoe albeit at other times beinge prest doe confesse al the ould Fathers to be of our side and to haue erred with vs as Fulke dothe of S. Ambrose Austen Tertulian Origen Chrisostōe Gregorie Beade by name with most reprochful and contemptuous wordes against them for the same yet when any thing passeth from thē to the simple people they are so gredy to colour it with sōe credit of the ould Fathers assent New Doctor● desirous of antiquitie in shewe● as they wil rather venture to corrupt some place or other then to lack some litle shewe of antiquitie So they are not ashamed holding the heresie of Uigilantius about inuocation of Saintes to cite S. Ierome in defence of it whoe wrot aganist Uigilātius for holding the same Soe houlding the heresies of Aerius about prayer for the dead and of Iouinian aboute fasting virginitie and mariage of Uotaries they blushe not to cite Epiphanius Austen and Ierom whoe are open enemies to them for the saide heresies But yet Iohn Nicols hath one gift-more which is also an vsual talent amōgest his compagnions that is to enter fréely vpon a place manifestly directly against him selfe And perforce to rente therhence some litle doutful spéech or oother sounding towardes his purpose to set it forth for the authores own meaning without all scruple of conscience in the world as though our writinge in cōtrouersies were iugling only to deceue the reader and not to instruct him for his saluation Good Lord into what desperat times are we come this cannot be but obstinat wilfulnes and full determinat resolute malice but let vs sée an example of this I may not stand to recite much for that I hasten and sumwhat maye be gathered by that whiche hath béene saide before but yet one place I can not let passe wherby you maye easely iudge of the reste Ihon Nicols was fighting against the blessed sacrament of the aulter and lacking furniture was so bould as to lay hādes on holy S. Ambrose and by violence to borow some argument from him and finding him in déed very pore for that purpose was faine to be contente with two doutful lynes which might be wrested to his opinion amongest more then two hūdred plaine and euidently against him The wordes aledged by Nicols are thes A notable ex●mple of abusinge the Fathers As thow hast receaued the similitude of his deathe soe doest thou drinke the similitude of his precious bloode By whiche wordes simple people muste beléeue that S. Ambrose heald not the real presence Christ his very body and bloode in the sacrament but only the similitude forsooth Which how true it is and what consciences these men haue which alleage thes thinges for deceauing the people shal appeare by the rest of S. Ambrose his wordes in the same place whiche are these First making the question Thou perhappes wilte say of the sacrament it is my vsual bread Amb. li. 4. de sacr ca. 4. To which he answereth This bread is bread before the Sacramental wordes but after the cōsecratiō is added vnto it of bread is made the fleshe of Christ. This therfore let vs proue how can bread become the bodye of Christ by Consecration The consecration by wbat wordes and by whose wordes is it made By the wordes of our Lord Iesus the speech of Christ maketh this sacrament But what spech of Christ that forsooth wherby al things wer made God gaue his commandement the firmament was made God gaue his commandement the earth was made How bread b● cummeth the flesh of Christ God gaue his cōmandement and the seas were made God gaue his cōmandement all creaturs wer made Seest thou thē how powerful the speech of Christ is why thē if the speech of Christ had so much force as to make things be that wer not befor how how much more powerfull shal it be to make those things bee that were before and to be chaunged into other The firmamente was not The sea was not the earth was not but heare him speake Psal. 148. He spake the word and they were made He commaunded and they were created Therefore now to answere thee I say It was not the body of Christ before consecration but after consecratiō I tell thee that now it is the body of Christ. He hath spoken the worde and it is made his bodye he hath commaūded and it is created Thus farre are S. Ambrose his owne wordes After this he vseth many examples to proue the same especially fower The firste that Christ against all reason and

nature was borne of a woman without hurte of her virginitie The second that Christ against natural reason made the redde sea deuide it selfe at the touch onely of Moyses rod. The thyrd that Christ with putting a péece of woode into a bitter well chaunged the nature of it The fourthe 4. Reg. 6. that Christe caused Elizeus to make iron to swyme vpon the water agaynst his owne nature Of al which examples he inferreth that we ought not to doubte of this miracle in the Sacrament For thus he sayeth Of all these thinges thow seest what the heuenlye speach of Christ is able ●o worke soe that thow hast learned now that of bred is made the body of Christ water wine in the chalice that wine and water is putt into the chalice but by the consecration of God his word it is made bludde And after this follow imm●diatelye the wordes alleaged by Nicols and they followe by way of obiection as from one which sayeth that he séeeth not the forme of bloode but of wyne For these are the words But parhappes thow wilte saye I see not the foorme of blood to which he answereth The forme of wine hath the similitude of bloode in the Sacrament But yet it hath the similitude for as thow hast receaued the similitude of death soe also doest thow drinck the similitude of precio●s blood to the end that their should be noe horrour of raw blood and yet it may worke the price of redēptiō Thow hast learned therefore that that which thow receaueste is the bodye of Christe Thus farre S. Ambrose In which words he yeldeth a reason why though in the Sacrament be true bloode there doth remayne the forme of wine and the reason is as he sayth for the auoyding of horror which men wold haue conceaued if they should drinke his bloode in natural forme Wherfore séeing the forme of wine hath the similitude of blood it was apointed that that shape or forme should remaine stil. And so albeit in the sacrament we drinke very bloode yet in externall forme we drinke but the similitud of blood for auoiding of horror euen as in baptisme we receaue but a fimilitud of death Rom. 6. Colos. 2. by putting water vppon vs albeit our soule doth dye in very déede from the state and common wealth of the diuel sinn and bondage wherin it liued before as a subiecte This reasone of the formes of wine and bread remaining after consecration in the very body and blood of Christe S. Ambrose in diuers other places expoundeth diligently as namely after in the same worke Lib. de sacr cap. 1. Euen as sayth he our Lorde God Iesus Christ is the true sonne of God not by grace only as men are but as his sonne of the substance of his father Marke this r●●son comparison o● S. Ambrose soe is it true fleshe which we receaue according to his sayeinge And his true blood is our drinke But perhapes thou wilt say as some times his desciples saide when they hearde him say Except ye eate my fleshe c. Ioh. 6. Howe are thes things true I see the similitud but not the verytie of blood First I haue toulde thee howe Christe his speeche is able to change and conuert the kindes of nature Secondly when Christ his desciples could not beare his speeche but departed hearinge that he would geue his flesh to eate and his blood to drinke c. Least more should saye the same because of the horror of rawe bloode c. therfore thou doest receaue this sacramente in ●imilytude cet Now I appeale to the consciences of all Christians which read controuersies for desire of truth and not of contention whether it be likely that Nicols coulde picke out thos two lines amongest al the rest in S. Ambrose and not to sée or read the other especially that long discourse which followe the imediatly● vppon the same matter in the chapter followinge where hauing handled the verye wordes of institution of this sacrament both out of the gospel also of Paul he addeth Ambr. li. 4. de sacr ca. 5 Vide singula c. Consider al before consecration it is bread but after the wordes of Christ ended it is Christ his bodye So Soe before the wordes of Christ the chalice is full of wyne and water but when Christ his wordes haue wrought their effect there is made that blood which redemed the people Is it possible I say that Nicols and his felowes did not sée th●se thinges in Ambrose or if they did what graceles impudencie is this to make a shew as though S. Ambrose made for thē whom they saw so euedently so abundātly soe earnestly against them These thinges and the like as I sayde before haue discoraged me from following Ihō Nicols any further in thes cōtrouersies wherfore I wil leaue him héere only adding two or thrée words to a few places of Fathers which maye séeme to the vnlearned to make some what against vs. About the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome he aleageth one Nilius Of the Supremacie de primatu Ponti Roma who should say that the bishop of Rome hath no more authoritie ouer other Patriarches then they ouer him But I finde not this authore and I think he erreth for Hanmer out of whōe he tooke the most part of this matter alegeth him by the name of Nilus and sumwhat other wise in wordes then Nicols reporteth But nether finde I any suche worke vnder the name of Nilus For of that name I know but two of any antiquitie they both martirs the one mentioned in Eusebius li. 8. ca. 22. * This Nilus workes the 2. Nicen coūcell affirmeth to be corrupted in that time by heretiques the other in Nicephorus li. 14. ca. 14. nether which haue any such worke reported Wherfor when we shal haue better intelligence of the authore our answere shall be more particuler Secondly he allegeth confusely out of Ciprian two places together as one text which are in diuers bokes and in diuers matters Lib. de sim. Prel But the last is only of any importance for the first is against him selfe directly which last is ●aken out of the bishopes sentences gathered in the prouincial Coūcel at Carthage wher S. Cipriā saith Vide Ciprian Li. 1. ●p 3. ad Cornel. That noe bishop in that Councell made him selfe bishop of bishopes or did by tirannical feare compel others to his opiniō but that it was lawful for euery bishope there to think and speake what he wold Which he saith ●or that the Nouatiōs had geuen out the contrarye of him that is that he compelled men to his opinion played the tirā ouer other which was false but yet that he denyed not by this the Bishop of Rome to be Primate and to haue authoritie ouer them all it appeareth both by that he sente all their determinations in this Councel to be admitted or reiected