Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	confirm_v	new_a	testament_n	8,389	5	9.6949	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69095	The third part of the Defence of the Reformed Catholike against Doct. Bishops Second part of the Reformation of a Catholike, as the same was first guilefully published vnder that name, conteining only a large and most malicious preface to the reader, and an answer to M. Perkins his aduertisement to Romane Catholicks, &c. Whereunto is added an aduertisement for the time concerning the said Doct. Bishops reproofe, lately published against a little piece of the answer to his epistle to the King, with an answer to some few exceptions taken against the same, by M. T. Higgons latley become a proselyte of the Church of Rome. By R. Abbot Doctor of Diuinitie.; Defence of the Reformed Catholicke of M. W. Perkins. Part 3	Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618.	1609 (1609)	STC 50.5; ESTC S100538	452,861	494

heere continueth still the same what the substance is that is conteined vnder the formes The body of Christ they say is not there till o Tho. Aquin. summ p. 3. q. 75. art 7. ad 2 vltimuminstans prolationis verborum est primum instans in quo est in sacramento corpus Christs in toto autem tempore praecedente est ihi substantia panis the last instant of the words of consecration and till then the substance of bread is there The sustance then demonstrated by This must necessarilie be granted to be bread as wee expoundit because as yet there is no other Much adoe they make about this matter and can resolue nothing and whilest they will not submit themselues to the truth they are so intangled in their owne errour that they know not which way to quit themselues 49. W. BISHOP Thirdly Per. 3. Bread was not giuen for vs but onely the bodie of Christ and in the first institution the body of Christ was not then really giuen to death Ans This maketh nothing at all against the reall presence but doth greatly fortifie it For Christ gaue vs in the Sacrament that which should be put to death for vs this is my body that shall be giuen for you Now not bread but Christs true body was giuen to death for vs ergo Christ gaue vs to eate not bread but his true reall body R. ABBOT If M. Bishops argument be good against vs we will returne it to himselfe againe Christ gaue vs in the Sacrament that which should be put to death for vs but not the forme of bread but Christs true body was giuen to death for vs therefore Christ gaue vs to eate not the forme of bread but his true reall body And doth M. Bishop beleeue so If he doe not then let him answer his owne argument and wee shall thereby finde a way to answer him It is true that Christ in the Sacrament giueth his body but he giueth not onely his body but also the Sacrament of his body He giueth the Sacrament of his body externally and corporally to be receiued by the mouth hee giueth-his true bodie internally and spiritually to be receiued by faith He giueth vs then that bodie that was giuen to death for vs but hee doth not giue it to the swallowing of the throat but to the meditation of the heart And this S. Austin notably declareth when for exposition of the words of Christ Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud c. he saith or rather maketh Christ to say a August in Psal 98. spiritualiter intelligite quod locutus sum Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis bibituri illum sanguinem quem fusuri sunt qui me crucifigent sacramencum aliquod comn endani vohi● spiritualitèr intellectum viuificabit v●s Vnderstand spiritually that which I haue said Yee shall not eat this bodie which yee see nor drinke that bloud which they shall shead that crucifie me I haue commended vnto you a Sacrament which vnderstand spiritually and it shall giue you life Where vnderstanding eating and drinking properly with the mouth hee denieth the very body and bloud of Christ to this eating and drinking and leaueth onely the Sacrament to be appertaining thereto Now in this meane while M. Bishop hath slipped M. Perkins argument and let it goe without answer that the Sacrament is not simpl●e the body of Christ but onely as it is giuen to death for vs and because the body of Christ neither was in the first institution nor now is in the Sacrament really giuen to death for vs therefore the Sacrament is not really the body of Christ 50. W. BISHOP Fourthly Per. 4. The cup is the new Testament by a figure why not then the bread the body of Christ by a figure Answ A goodly reason if there bee one figure there must needs be two How followeth this if those words of S. Paul be obscure why did he not rather cleare them by conferring them with S. Matthew and S. Marke who deliuer it plainely thus this is my bloud of the new Testament that shall be shedde c But hee that delighteth in cauilling must seeke darknesse R. ABBOT M. Bishop anone a Sect. 63. after telleth vs that no good Christian may thinke but that our Sauiour Christ Iesus very well foreseeing all such inconueniences as he hath there expressed did deliuer the Sacrament in such termes as he would haue to bee taken properly and not bee construed at mens pleasures figuratiuely If this be true how doth hee heere thinke of himselfe that doth admit that Christ in the deliuering of the Sacrament namely of the cup did speake figurariuely Or if he be a good Christian notwithstanding that contrary to his owne rule he admit a figure in Christs deliuering of the Sacrament must we be no good Christiās if we admit two Surely there is the same reason of the one part of the Sacrament as there is of the other and sich there is a necessity to vnderstand a figure in the one either hee must giue vs sound reason to the contrary or else he must leaue vs to our own reasons to conceiue the like of the other also Though it be not a goodly reason to say if there be one figure there must needs be two yet it is a good reasō to say if there may be one figure nothing hindreth but there may be two If Christ might say by a figure a Luk. 22.20 1. Cor. 11.25 This cup is the new Testament in my bloud as S. Luke and S. Paul haue set downe then hee might say also by a figure This is my bodie this bread is my body But saith he if those words of S. Paul bee obscure why did he not rather cleere them by conferring them with S. Mathew and S. Marke So then there may be here somewhat obscure but it must bee onely what pleaseth them who notwithstanding of that that is most cleere as we haue seene in the former section saue one doe by their exposition make a matter most intricate and darke But what cleering doth S. Paul receiue from S. Mathew and S. Marke Forsooth they deliuer it plainly thus This is my bloud of the new testament that shall be shed c. Hee setteth downe the words but what cleering it is that he meaneth he sheweth not And indeed the words on both sides are alike S. Luke and S. Paul speake by a figure and so doe also S. Mathew and S. Mark S. Mathew saith b Mat. 26.28 This is my bloud of the new testament but what meaneth he by This Surely This hath heere the nature of a relatiue and must be referred to his antecedent before set downe And what is the antecedent but the cup Iesus tooke the cup and gaue it to them saying Drinke yee all of this of what but of this cup for this that is this cup is my bloud

of the new testament c. The words of c Mark 24.23.24 S. Marke doe beare also the same sense which as it is the very Grammaticall construction of the words so it is also fully confirmed in that S. Luke and S. Paul doe expresly deliuer it in that sort So then by all three Euangelists and S. Paul there is a figure in one part of the Sacrament let vs then aske M. Bishop againe why may there not be so in the other also But hee doth not loue to be troubled with too many questions He cannot tell as yet what answer to giue vs and therefore we must be content to giue him further time till he may better bethinke himselfe 51. W. BISHOP Fiftly Christ did eat that supper but not himselfe Per. 5. Answ A Protestant cannot say that Christ did eat of that Sacrament as M. PERK doth because hee hath no warrant for it in the written word yet we doe grant that he did so and hold him most worthy to taste of that heauenly food R. ABBOT If the written word doe not warrant that Christ did eat of the Sacrament I maruell why M. Bishop citeth to that purpose out of S. Luke those words which a Sect 62. ex Luc 22.15 anon he doth that he maruellously desired to eat this last banquet with his disciples Whether hee cite it truely or falsly let himselfe looke to that but either hee must confesse that hee hath cited amisse there or else that he hath spoken rashly here But if Christ did eat of the Sacrament will M. Bishop haue vs to beleeue that he did eat himselfe or dranke the bloud of his owne bodie May we be perswaded that one and the same Christ at one and the same time was both wholly within himselfe and wholly also without himselfe that hee sate visible by his Apostles and yet was then wholly conteined within the compasse of his owne bowels or that in his owne bowels hee at that time caried his owne bloud or that moreouer hee was then by the Sacrament in the bellies of all the Apostles euen of the traitour Iudas Surely what Christ did eat the same Iudas did eat also But of Iudas S. Austin teacheth that b Aug. in Ioan. tract 59. Non est ex eis iste c. Illi manducabant panem dominum ille panem domini contra dominū hee did eat of the Lords bread but not of the bread which is the Lord. Therefore although Christ did eat the Sacrament yet may wee not imagine that hee did eat himselfe These are horrible and vnchristian fancies but out of the schoole of Transubstantiation they come and they that maintaine the one must necessarily maintaine the other also 52. W. BISHOP Sixtly We are bid to doe it till he come Christ then is not bodily present Answ Wee are bid by S. Paul to shew the death of our Lord till he come to iudgement which we may very well doe 1. Cor. 11. v. 26. his body being present as certaine noble Matrons preserued of their husbands blood to represent more freshly vnto their children the slaughter of their fathers R. ABBOT It is true that his comming shall bee to iudgement but what shall he need to come if he be here already It was not questioned whereto he should come nor whether we may shew the death of the Lord his body being present if it were present but why the Apostle should say till he come if he be intended to be here already present His body being present saith he as though he meant that Christ were not wholly present whereas they tell vs that whole Christ is in the Sacrament both God and man soule and body flesh blood and bone as hee was borne of the virgin and nailed afterwards to the Crosse And if Christ be wholly present what reason had the Apostle to say till he come He telleth vs a ridiculous and impertinent tale of certaine noble Matrones who preserued of their husbands blood to represent more freshly to their children the slaughter of their fathers But what is this to the matter here in hand If those noble matrones had had their husbands with them and in the presence of their children then let him tell vs whether it had not been a witlesse thing to bid them expect their fathers till they come But hee stealeth away from the point and though he doe but gull his Reader with an idle iest yet he would haue it thought that hee hath giuen a worthy answer As touching the truth of this matter our Sauiour informeth vs when he telleth his disciples a Iohn 12.8 The poore ye shall haue alwaies with you but me ye shall not haue alwaies S. Austin giueth a reason of those word b August in Ioan tract 50. Quoniam conuersatus est secundum corporis praesentiam quadraginta diel us cum discipulis suis eis deducentibus videndo non sequendo a scondit in caeiu● non est hic because according to the presence of his body he was conuersant forty daies with his disciples and then they bringing him on the way by seeing but not by following he ascended into heauen and is not here Christ then according to the presence of his body is not here yea c Acts 3.21 the heauen must containe him saith S. Peter vntill the time that all things be restored and therefore d Phil. 3.20 from heauen wee looke for him saith S. Paul euen as in our Creed we professe to beleeue that from thence hee shall come to iudge both the quicke and the dead Now because we beleeue according to the scripture that Christ as touching his body is in heauen and not here and that from heauen we are to looke for him at the last day we are able to giue a iust reason why the Apostle should say vntill he come which M. Bishop out of his learning cannot doe 53. W. BISHOP Seuenthly Christ bid vs to doe it in remembrance of him but signes of remembrance are of things absent Answ We see one thing and remember another By Christs body really present we remember the same to haue been nailed on the Crosse for our redemption as Goliaths sword was kept in the tabernacle in remembrance of the cutting-off of Goliaths head with the same sword and the women before rehearsed kept their husbands blood might much easier haue prescrued their bodies embalmed to keepe the better their deaths in fresh memory R. ABBOT We see one thing saith M. Bishop and remember another But a Aug. serm ad infantes apud Bedam in 1. Cor. 10 Quod videtis panis est calix quod vobis esiam oculi renunti●nt that which you see saith S. Austin is bread as your very eies tell you If then our remembrance be by our sight it is by bread that we remember the body of Christ M. Bishop I hope will not say that we see the body of Christ really present and

calum vtique integrum Cum vid eritis filium hominis c. certè vel tunc videbitis quia nō eo modo quo putatis erogat corpus suum certè vel tunc videbitis quia gratia eius non consumitur morsibus They thought saith Austin that he would impart to them his very body but he telleth them that he will goe vp to heauen euen whole When ye shall see the sonne of man ascend where he was before surely then ye shall see that he doth not impart his body in that maner as you thinke ye shall then vnderstand that his grace is not deuoured by morsells Now if the ascending of Christ into heauen were an argument for the reforming of their fancy and correcting of their error then it must needs be a misconstruction of eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ whereby the same is said to be done by his being really present vpon the earth And that it might not be so vnderstood he further saith k vers 63. The words which I speake vnto you are spirit and life it is the spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing thereby aduertising them as S. Austin giueth to vnderstand that l Aug ibi Quomodo quidem edatur quisnam sit manducandi modus ignoratis they knew not in what sort his flesh was eaten or what the maner thereof is and that they should spiritually conceiue the doing of it in such maner as was before expressed out of Austin And hereof Origen saith m Ori. in Leuit. hom 7. Est in nouo testamēto litera quae occidit eum qui non spiritualiter aduertit Nam si secundū literamsequaris id quod dictum est Nisi manducaueritis carnem c. litera illa occidit There is in the new Testament a letter which killeth him that doth not spiritually listen to it for if thou folow according to the letter that which is written Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood that letter killeth Therefore S. Austin deliuering certaine rules whereby figuratiue speeches are to be knowen doth by his rule find that this speech of Christ is not properly or literally to be vnderstood but by a figure n Aug. de doct Christ l. 3. c. 16. si flagitium aut facinus videtur iubere aut vtilitatem beneficentiā vitare figurata est Nisi manduca●eritis carnem filij hominis c. facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere figura ergò est praecipiens passioni domini esse cōmunicandum suauitèr atque vtiliter recondendum in memoria quod car● eius pro nobis crucifixa vulnerata sit If any speeche seem to command a hainous or wicked act or to forbid well doing or any profitable thing it is a figuratiue speech Where Christ saith Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood c. he seemeth to command a hainous thing It is therefore a figure instructing that we are to communicate of the passion of the Lord and sweetly and profitably to lay vp in minde that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. In which sort S. Bernard also expoundeth that o Bernar de verb. Habac. super custodiā c. sub edendi corporis sus mysterio discipulos ad commun●● andum passionibus suis aumonens vnder the mystery of eating his body Christ admonisheth his disciples to communicate of his passions Here is therefore no other but a spirituall action of the heart and soule which requireth no reall presence because the spirit of man by faith climbeth vp to heauen and looketh backe vnto the crosse of Christ and there receiueth nourishment and strength of him to liue by him for euer 58. W. BISHOP Thirdly Christ said in most cleere tearmes this is my body this is my blood What could be more certaine or more perspicuous R. ABBOT The words as wee expound them out of the circumstance of the text and the consent of ancient fathers are indeed perspicuous and cleere yeelding this meaning This bread is my body this wine is my blood that is the signe the sacrament the participation of my body and blood But M. Bishop for his life cannot make any certaine and definite meaning of them whereby their transubstantiation and reall presence may be made good If the words be so perspicuous and cleere for them how commeth it about that they haue so tossed and tumbled them and yet there is no certaine meaning thereof concluded amongst them till this day I need not stand hereupon hauing before said what is sufficient for this purpose in the eight and fortieth section 59. W. BISHOP Fourthly These words of the institution are recorded by three Euangelists and by S. Paul and they all vniformely deliuer it to be not the figure of Christs body but his body and that his body which should be giuen for our redemption on the crosse ergo it was that his true reall body which was nailed to the crosse for vs. R. ABBOT Euen so three Euangelists and S. Paul doe vniformely deliuer that the cup is the bloud of Christ or the new testament in his bloud as hath been a Sect. 50. before said and yet M. Bishop will not say I hope that the cup is really the bloud or testament of Christ That the Sacrament is the figure of Christs body is no new speech S. Austin saith that b Aug in Psal 3. Conuinium in quo corporu sanguinis sui figuram discipu●usuis co●mendauit tradidit Christ commended and deliuered to his disciples the figure of his bodie and bloud Tertullian expoundeth thus c Tertul. cont Marcion ●● 4. Ac●eptum panem corpus suum fecit dic●●do hoc est corsus meum id est figura corporis mei This is my body that is to say a figure of my body Gelasius the Bishop of Rome saith that d Gelas cont Eutych Nest. Et certo imago similitudo corporis sanguinis domini in actione mysteriorum celebratur an image and semblance of the body and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the administration of the Sacraments Chrysostome saith that e Chrysost Opimperf in Mat. hom 11. In quibus non verum corpus Christi sed myst●rium corporu eius continetur in the sacred vessels not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body is conteined The ancient Liturgies doe vsually call the Sacraments f Constit Clem. l. 7. c. 26. Antitypa corporis c. Iacob● Liturg Typus corporis sanguinis Christi tui the signes of the body and bloud of Christ and so g Carol. Magn. epist. ad A cuin Panem fregit calic●m pa●iter dedit eis in figuram corporis sanguinis sui Charles the great stileth them in his epistle to Alcuinus It should not therefore seeme strange to M. Bishop that wee also should expound the sacrament to

as he rightly speaketh he would not vnderstand it to be receiued by the body And thus Christ sealing vnto vs in the Lords supper all the fruits of his passion and giuing himselfe vnto vs spiritually to become one with vs and to make vs one with him hee hath without reall presence bestowed as M. Bishop saith an inestimable gift vpon vs such a one as neuer any other did or possibly could doe 63. W. BISHOP Moreouer the institution of a religious rite and ceremonie to be vsed in the whole Church vnto the worlds end and to be receiued of all Christian people of age and discretion did necessarily require that it should bee done in most certaine and cleare tearmes otherwise there might arise great strife and contention about it and be the ruine of thousands And specially great perspicuitie is required in this holy Sacrament where the mistaking of it must needs breeed either idolatrie if wee worship for Christ that which is not Christ or impietie if on the other side we should not giue to it being Christ God and man diuine honour Wherefore no good Christian may thinke but that our prouident Sauiour Christ Iesus who verie well foresaw all these inconueniences did deliuer it in such tearmes as he would haue to be taken properly and not be construed at mens pleasures figuratiuely Adde that hee spake those words to the twelue Apostles onely whom hee was accustomed to instruct plainly and not in parable darkely and who were woont also to aske for the interpretation of obscure speeches who here made no question about this high mysterie because they were sufficiently forewarned that they should eat Christs flesh Ioh. 6. and that his body was truly meat and therefore beleeued Christs words without further question R. ABBOT The institution of a religious rite and ceremonie for the vse of the Christian Church required such termes as had beene formerly accustomed in the institution of such religious rites wherein as hath beene a Sect 48. before noted out of Austin Sacraments commonly beare the names of those things whereof they are Sacraments So is circumcision called b Gen. 17.13 the couenant of the Lord being but the signe and seale of his couenant So is the lambe called c Exod. 12.11 the Lords Passeouer though it were but a signification and remembrance thereof So were the sacrifices of the law called d Leuit. 1.4 4.20 c. attonements or reconciliations for sinne which yet they were not in themselues because e Heb. 10.4 it was vnpossible that the bloud of calues and goats should take away sins but were onely signes and figures of the attonement that should be made by the bloud of Iesus Christ And thus Cyprian saith expresly of the Lords supper that therein f Cyprian de Vnct. Chrismat significantia significata eis dem nomenibus censentur the signes and the things signified are reckoned by the same names being both termed the body bloud of Christ And herein is no occasion of contention but to them only that are contentious will prefer their own absurd fancies before the light and truth of the word of God Who as they do peruersly and wilfully mistake so doe wilfully by mistaking runne into idolatrie g Rom. 1.25 worshiping the creature insteed of the creatour giuing to the signe or sacrament that diuine honour which belongeth properly to Christ himselfe And if it be idolatrie as heere he telleth vs to worship for Christ that which is not Christ then hee hath told vs amisse before that men doe not commit idolatrie though they worship the Host when the Priest hath had no intention of consecration In a word our Sauiour Christ though he spake by a figure yet spake so as that not at mens pleasures but according to the course of Gods word he might easely be vnderstood And as for the Apostles we cannot doubt but that they were so well instructed in those other signes and sacraments wherewith they had beene before acquainted as that they could not make any scruple or question what his meaning was in the institution of this Therefore no cause was there for them to be troubled or to aske interpretation heere as of some darke and obscure matter but there had beene cause for them to haue questioned many things in the words of Christ according to that interpretation which the Church of Rome hath made thereof For though Christ spake to them before of the eating of his flesh and that his flesh was truely meate yet had hee said nothing vnto them that they should eate a whole body in the likenesse of a peece of bread Yea though hee spake to them of eating his flesh and drinking his bloud yet withall he spake enough wherby to giue them instruction how that should bee vnderstood as h Sect. 49. 57. before hath been declared 64. W. BISHOP Finally this holy Sacrament is a principall part of the new Testament and one of the chiefest legacies by Christ bequeathed vnto vs Christians Now what law or conscience will permit that any legacie should be interpreted figuratiuely to wit that for a house goods or lands bequeathed and giuen by last will and testament you should vnderstand a figure of a house to be giuen or the signification and representation of some goods or lands If this be most absurd and ridiculous in the testament of any ordinary man about temporall goods how much more pernicious and intollerable is it to suffer this in the eternall Testament of the Sonne of God and that in his diuine and inestimable treasures And thus at length by the grace of God I come to the end of this booke wherein good Christian Reader if thou finde any thing that may confirme thee in the true Catholike faith or further thy knowledge therein giue God the Father of lights from whom all good gifts descend the whole praise If any thing be amisse impute it partly to my slender skill ouersight or negligence and partly to the want of a conuenient resting-place commoditie of bookes and conference all which these times of persecution doe depriue vs of R. ABBOT He that maketh his last will and testament and giueth thereby great legacies of lands and goods and putteth to his seale for confirmation of the legacies that he hath giuen shall he be said in giuing his seale to bequeath only a peece of waxe or a figure and representation of landes and goods The seale indeed is but wax it is but a signe and token of somewhat but yet it serueth to giue assurance of the legacies for confirmation whereof it is appointed The new testament of Christ is the couenant and promise of forgiuenesse of sinnes purchased by his bloud This hath he published by the Gospell to all that repent and beleeue in him For confirmation heereof he hath put to his Sacrament as a seale thereby to deliuer after a sort and to put into our hands the thing which