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	call_v	cup_n	7,350	5	10.0317	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50622	Papimus Lucifugus, or, A faithfull copie of the papers exchanged betwixt Mr. Iohn Menzeis, Professor of Divinity in the Marischal-Colledge of Aberdene, and Mr. Francis Demster Iesuit, otherwise sirnamed Rin or Logan wherein the Iesuit declines to have the truth of religion examined, either by Scripture or antiquity, though frequently appealed thereunto : as also, sundry of the chief points of the popish religion are demonstrated to be repugnant both to Scripture and antiquity, yea, to the ancient Romish-Church : to all which is premised in the dedication, a true narration of a verbal conference with the same Iesuit.	Menzeis, John, 1624-1684.; Dempster, Francis.	1668 (1668)	Wing M1725; ESTC R2395	219,186	308

Septenarie could be concluded Nay this very point concerning the number of Sacraments in which it seemes you thought to have triumphed furnishes me with a considerable Argument against your Religion from which you may try how you can exped your self I frame it thus A precise Septenarie of SACRAMENTS neither more nor fewer is an Essentiall of the Present Romish Religion But a precise Septenary of SACRAMENTS neither more nor fewer was not an Essential of the Ancient Christian Religion Ergo the Ancient Christian Religion and the Present Romish Religion differ in Essentials and consequently are not the same Religion The Major is clear from your Council of Trent sess 7. Can. 1. And from Pope Pius the fourth his Creed or Formula fidei As for the Assumption I appeale you if you can with the help of all your Associats to produce me one testimonie from any one Ancient Father from which a precise septenarie of Sacraments can be concluded For expresse testimonies all know that you have none Is it probable if the Ancient Church had been of your present Romish faith concerning the number of Sacraments that not one Testimonie for a precise Septenarie either direct or indirect should be found in any one Father I know the way of your Authors hath been to patch up testimonies out of several Authors whereof one may give the denomination of a Sacrament to one of your pretended Sacraments and another to another But not one Father have they produced that gives the Denomination of a Sacrament to All of them And as some Fathers give the name of a Sacrament to some of these so also they have honoured many other things with the same title which by the confession of your own Authors are no proper Sacraments concerning which you may be sufficiently informed by your own Suarez In his Preface to his Tom. 3. in 3. part And therefore from these generall Apellations nothing can be c●tt●inly concluded as to the definit number of Properly so called Sacraments else we might conclude more then twice seven Sacraments from the writings of the Ancients Your own Bonaventure in 4. sent dist 1. teaches that it was many time observed that the word Sacrament was exceeding variously taken Communiter proprie propri●ssime That is sometimes Commonlie sometimes Properly and sometimes most Properly When therefore the Denomination of a Sacrament is given by a Father to any thing beside Baptisme and the LORDS Supper before it can be concluded that they looked on that as a proper Sacrament it remaines to be proven that they tooke the word Sacrament in that discourse not Communiter but proprie or propriissime not in a large or common sense but strictly and properly Yea and further it concerns you to prove that they beleeved that there were precisely seven of these properly so termed Sacraments neither more nor fewer When you set seriously to this work you may readily finde it so hard a taske that it put you to repent that you should have pitched on this particular controversie concerning the number of Sacraments But because you desire it to be proven by scripture that there be two Sacraments only I shall present you with this one Argument If there be only two substantial visible signes instituted by GOD since the Incarnation recorded in the Gospel to seal the promises of salvation and to endure in the Church to the end of the World then are there only two Sarcraments of the new Testament But the first is true therefore also the last The consequence of the Major is clear For this only we meane by a proper Sacrament when we affirme that there be only two Though more should be proven in another sense it would be but a Sophisme ab ignoratione elenchi for the Conclusion would not be the contradictory of our Assertion The Assumption is easily proven from Scripture for it containes two branches first that there are two of that kinde of visible signet And secondly that there be only two and no more First then for the positive part that there be two you your self doe acknowledge and if it were needful it were easie to shew that all the parts of the foresaid Description doe agree to Baptisme and the Lords Supper For first they are substantial visible signes instituted by GOD since the Incarnation and their institution is recorded in the Gospel You have the Divine institution of baptizing with water Matthew 28.19 And of the Lords Supper 1. Cor. 11.23.24.25 Secondly that they are seals of the promises of salvation is no lesse clear and first of Baptisme Acts 2.38.39 and also of the Lords Supper in somuch that the Cup is called the New Testament which you must acknowledge to be no proper speach but it is only so called because it is Sigillum faederis hence also in the Institution mention is made of the Remission of sinnes and of the giving of the Body of CHRIST and shedding of his Blood for us holding forth that foregiveness of sinnes and all other blessings purchased by the Death of CHRIST and promised in the New Covenant are by this Ordinance sealed to the people of GOD. The third and last condition is no lesse manifest that these Ordinances are to continue to the end of World from Matth. 28.20 and 1. Cor. 11.26 All the Question then betwixt you and me must be concerning the other Branch of the Assumption viz. that there be only two of these signes or two and no more and this seemes no lesse certaine then the other For first to use your way of argueing in Negative cases if there be any more substantial visible signes instituted by GOD since the Incarnation recorded in the Gospel to Seal the Promises of Salvation to endure in the Church to the end of the World then they may be produced but more cannot be produced as shall be proven solutione objectionum Produce them therefore if you can and shew that the premised conditions of a Sacrament doe compet to them This way of arg●ing in this case is the su●er because the Scripture as I have held out before and proved against you is a perfect Canon of Faith and Manners therefore if no more such signes can be held out from the Scriptures it followes there are none May I not here make use of Hieroms Quia non legimus non credimus This may suffice for a Scriptural demonstration that there be only two properly so called Sacraments For if the Scriptures teach upon the one hand that the Scriptures are a compleat Canon of Faith and upon the other hold out no more but two of these Ordinances to which the name of a Sacrament in the strict and proper Notion thereof is applicable then surely it followes that according to the Scriptures there be only two proper Sacraments Excellently said Cyrill of Hierus in Catech 4. or who ever be the Author thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is Of the divine and holy Sacraments of faith nothing ought to be

c. It is also noted by Doctor Ieremy Taylor in his little Treatise of Confirmation sect 1. pag. 10. that your Missionary Iesuits who come hither to traffique in BRITAINE doe generally teach the same Doctrine to serve their own ends Is this one of your Mysteries of Iesuitisme to cry up and downe to magnify and vilify the same thing as it serves your interest The second pretended Sacrament which I shall examine is your Pennance The necessity of the Grace and Duety of Repentance we PROTESTANTS doe unanimously acknowledge and that much more then you Romanists as I shewed in my eight paper But the proper Sacramentality of it we justly deny and are hereunto induced upon many accounts For first you Romanists cannot agree among your selves concerning the matter and forme or the outward signe of this pretended Sacrament For albeit your Bellarmine is bold to affirme lib. 1. de paenitentia cap. 18. that your Authors doe agree summo consensu with a full harmony that the Sacrament of Pennance doth consist both in the Sacerdotal absolution and in the confession contrition and satisfaction of the delinquent Yet your Cardinal de Lugo tract de paenitentia disp 12. sect 2. num 11. reckons forth six different opinions among you I touch but some few Your Durand in 4 sent distinct 16. qu. 1. n. 4. mantaines the Sacrament of Pennance to consist only in the delinquents confession and the Priests absolution excluding contrition and satisfaction Scotus Major and Gabriel cited by Carleton tom 2. theol schol disp 85. sect 1. num 1. exclude not only contrition and satisfaction but also confession and hold the Sacrament only to consist in the Priests absolution But Soto a● cited by the same Carleton in the same place excludes the Sacerdotal absolution from being a part of the Sacrament Yea your own Councils both of Florence and Trent when they speake of contrition confession and satisfaction as the matter of this Sacrament seeme to speake very dubiously for they say only that they are quasi materia as is were the matter thereof And your own Authors use this as an argument for Scotus his opinion that none of these three are truely parts of this Sacrament as you will find in Conink tom 2. de sacram disp 4. dub 4. num 31. Ought you not to agreee among your selves before you so rigidly censure and anathematize others for not receiving your Pennance as a proper Gospel Sacrament Secondly I cannot find assigned by any of your Authors in this Sacrament a substantial visible signe instituted by GOD in the Gospel For neither confession of the delinquent nor absolution of the Priest are either substantial or visible but audible signes And as for satisfaction sure I am many of the things which your Church prescribe as satisfactions were never of CHRISTS institution and none of them were appointed to be satisfactorie to divine justice for sin in your Romish sense Doth not your Rushworth in his Dial 3. sect 3. reckon these as your chief satisfactions viz praying to Saincts and for the Dead keeping and reverencing pictures of Christ and his Saincts and above all the presence of GOD in the B. Sacrament Neither you nor any of your Party shall be able to prove a divine institution of any of these not to speak now of other Foppry's which in your Church are imposed as satisfactions But to prevent your cavills concerning the last of these I advertise you that PROTESTANTS doe not deny the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist as your Romanists doe calumniou sly traduce them They acknowledge him to be most really present to the hearts of Believers They only deny against you Romanists a substitution of CHRISTS Body and Blood under the Accidents of Bread so as his Body and Blood may be received into the mouthes and stomaches not only of Vngodly men but also of Rats and other beasts This therefore is it which you have to prove to be warranted by a divine testimony and that religious reverence to that transubstantiated presence was instituted by GOD as a satisfaction for sione to Divine justice Which I suppose you will find to be a hard task Yea according to many of the chief Doctors of your Communion satisfaction is so farre from being of the essence of this pretended Sacrament of Pennance that your Sacrament of Pennance may be in many cases without any Injunction of Satisfaction at all So teacheth your Jesuit Escobar lib. 17. Theol. Moral Sect. 1. cap. 4. num 30. c. Where he also cites for it Suarez Cajetan Coninck Fagundez Whether then shall you runne to finde a visible signe Except you take the sinnes confessed which ordinarly your Authors make to be the remote matter of this Sacrament But were ever sins signes of divine institution to seal the promises of salvation Sure sins are rather the Divels sacraments then GODS These of your men that speake most Philosophically say that sins are signified by this Sacrament but in obliquo and therefore they cannot be that signe which is predicated of the Sacrament in recto Thirdly is Repentance any peculiar Gospel institution since the Incarnation Doe you not finde in David contrition and confession Did he not also receive absolution by Nathan the Prophet Instance if you can an institution of CHRIST for your secret auricular confession that pick-lock of Consciences Where did ever CHRIST or his Apostles impose a necessity of confessing all mortal sins as your Romanists terme them how secret so ever to a Priest under the paine of eternal damnation as your Council of Trent defynes sess 14. c●in 6. 7 Is not the jus divinum of the necessity of this confession questioned by your own Authors particularly by B●rnesius in his Cath l●co-Romanus P●cisicus sect 8. de paenit confess s●t●●fact Where speaking of this confession which the Ch●re●o Rome ●mpoie●h he sayeth Now constat adhuc an ju●e divino debeat fieri That is it is not yet certaine if the necessity of this confession be warranted by a divine institution He cites also many other Romish Doctors as mantaining the same Know you not how your Authors altercat about these w●●'s of absolution which are pretended to be the forme of this Sacrament according to your Council of Trent sess 14 caep 3. Ego to absolvo c. Whether to the forme of this Sacrament there be a necessity of the pronowne Ego Or of the pronowne Te Or of the particle ab omnibus Or of the words à peccatis tuis Or of the Invocation of the Trinitie in uo●tiue Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti Or whether the words may not be pronounced in deprecatory termes thus absolvat te DEUS c. Let GOD absolve or pardone thee Are you not thrown upon these and many more perplexityes of which I leave you to receive a brief sūme from Escobar lib. 14 Theol. Moral cap. 6. probl 41. c. by your coyning Sacraments without a divine Institution

to the Scriptures might be demonstrated by many Arguments if by digressing to that Controversie I should not be longer entangled then at present is convenient Fourthly you will find it hard to prove that Ordination is a seal of the promi●es of eternal Salvation It is indeed a Seal of vocation to such an office not of a right to eternal life Fifthly Ordination is peculiar to one Ranke of men in the Church But when our Divines deny it to be a proper Sacrament of the Gospel they require to the nature of a proper Sacrament as Doctor FORBES holds forth in his Instruct. Historico-Theol lib. 9. cap. 1. § 27. That it be Commune omnibus faederatis quos neque aetas neque exiguus in gratia progressus vel aliqua Physica incongruitas vel nondum peracta paenitentia impedit That is That it be commone to all within the bond of the Covenant who are not impeded either by age or by guiltnesse or some Physical incongruity Therefore Ordination from which the greater part of believing Christians are excluded though upon none of these accounts can be no Sacrament in that sense in which it is denyed by PROTESTANTS Sixtly by Ordination with you men are rendered uncapable of Marriage which also according to you is another Sacrament Strange Sacraments whereof the one doeth incapacitat to partake of the other But lastly what should I here insist upon the facundity of this pretended Sacrament of Ordination how it hath begotten to you as learned Calvine expresseth it lib. 4. institut cap. 19. § 22. septem Sacramentula seven other petty Sacraments Doe you not subdivide your Ordination into seven kinds viz Ordination of Priests Deacons Subdeacons Exorcists Door-keepers Readers Acolythes Yea doe not some of you reckon out eight kinde of orders some nine some ten as testifyes your Iesuit Fornarius de sacram ordinis cap. 1. num 3. If all these be Sacraments have you not a goodly number of Sacraments Where have you a divyne institution for all these yea for the first seven or eight Or for the Symbols you use in conferring these orders Are you agreed among your selves how many of these are Sacraments and whether any of these or how many of them be proper species of the Sacramēt of Order If these of them be proper species which your Coninck supposes disp 20. dub 7. num 51. will not the number of your Sacramēts be much encreased above a septonarie if you divide them into species specialissimas But a more full account of the Vertigo wherewith your Authours are smitten in this matter may be had in Chamier lib. 4. de sacram N. T. cap. 23. and in Doctor FORBES his Instruct historico-thcol lib. 9. cap. 7. Perhaps I have expatiated on these particulars too farre I shall now leave you to examine seven other Sacraments as a learned Authour termes them or rather Mysteries of iniquity which Doctor Beard in his Retractive from Poperie hath charged upon your Church viz Turpitudinem Impietatem Falsitatem Novitatem Idololatriam Scripturarum Vituperationem Ignorantiae Defensionem That is Turpitude Impiety Falshood Novelty Idolatrie Reproaching of the Scriptures and Patrociny of Ignorance How justly these are charged upon your Church I leave you to receive an account from the learned Authour throughout the forecited Tractat. I shut up this whole discourse concerning the number of Sacraments with two testimonies from your famous Cassander in Consult art 13. de Numero Sacramentorum which I suppose may stop the mouths of your Romanists and if you would lay aside a contending Humor might doe much to put a period to this Question His first testimony is this In hoe certè controversia nulla est duo esse praecipua salutis nostrae Sacramenta quomode lequuntur Rupertus Tuitien sis Hugo de Sancto Victore nempe sacrum Baptisma Sacramentū Corporis Sanguinis Domini That is There is no controversie concerning this that there be two chief Sacraments of our Salvation as Rupertus Tuitiensis and Hugo de Sancto Victore doe speake namely holy Baptisme and the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the LORD The other testimony of Cassander followes a little after thus Et de his quoque septem Sacramentis certum est ne ipses quidem scholasticos existimasse omnia aeque proprie Sacramenta vocari That is Concerning the seven much talked of Sacraments it is certaine sayeth Cassander that the school-men themselves never esteemed them all alike properly so called Sacraments What can I or an indifferent Reader conclude from these testimonies of Cassander but that you Romanists are convinced in your own consciences that there are no other ordinances which may be termed Sacraments in that strict notion wherein Baptisme and the Lords Supper may which is that which PROTESTANTS affirme Yet that you may remember that you are not liberated from your old task but remain where ye were at the transmission of your first Paper to me I subioyne againe the confutation of all your ten Papers in these two words Nego Minerem Or Nego Conclusionem Iohn Menzeis Augustin lib. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat. cap. 5. Aliquid aliter sapere quam se res habet humana tentatio est Nimis autem amande sententiam suam vel invidendo melioribus usque ad pracidendae communionis condendi Schismatis vel Haeresis Sacrilegium pervenire Diabolica praesumptio est In nullo autem aliter sapere quam se res habet Angelica perfectio est Qui igitur homines sumus spe Augeli sumus quibus aequales in Resurrectione futuri sumus quamdiu perfectionem Angeli non habemus praesumptionem Diaboli non habeamus FINIS ERRATA Page 5. Lin. 24. Read Heretick page 8. lin 11. R. Negative pag. 10. lin 1. R. Ecclesiam pag. 51. lin 32. r. would pag. 55. lin 34. r. Ecclesiae pag. 91. lin 11. r. necessity pag. 100. lin 13. r. supernatural pag. 129. lin 24. r. figment pag. 135. lin 8. adde to be pag. 142. lin 9. r. onely pag. 145. lin 26. r. young Boyes and pag. 182. lin 19. r. for pag. 183. lin 21. r. edition pag. 200. lin 23. adde it ibid. lin 33. r. virulent pag. 215. lin 11. r. conformity pag. 227. lin 4. r. yet pag. 230. lin 22. r. nefariae pag. 241. lin 11. r. our pag. 248. lin 27. r. in his time for many time pag. 251. lin 27. r. Signo pag. 256. lin 25. r. jure pag. 260. lin 1. r. fancy pag. 262. lin 13. r. suite The rest of the Escap's are humbly referred to the correction of the discreet READER As for the Jesuits papers the Original Copies transmitted by him to me were so full of grosse-errours that I could nor undertake the correction of them But of his papers a further account may be had in the Epistle to the READER