Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	new_a	testament_n	word_n	5,021	5	4.1195	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10233	Two very lerned sermons of M. Beza, togither with a short sum of the sacrament of the Lordes Supper: Wherevnto is added a treatise of the substance of the Lords Supper, wherin is breflie and soundlie discussed the p[r]incipall points in controuersie, concerning that question. By T.W.	Bèze, Théodore de, 1519-1605.; T. W. (Thomas Wilcox), 1549?-1608. Treatise of the Lords Supper. aut	1588 (1588)	STC 2051; ESTC S109031	114,878	260

is effectuallie made ours whilest we apprehend and lay holde of it by a sound and sure faith applieng the same also vnto our owne hearts and euen in like sort is Christ God and man togither withall his merits not onelie offered but laid holde of in the word and sacraments yea and comfortablie felt likewise to the spirituall sustentaion and nourishment of our soules whereof also this is a good reason that of like thinges there is alwaies and so should be continuallie a like consideration The second place obiected is that sentence reported by the three euangelists Matthew Marke and Luke and Saint Paule himselfe also reciting the institution of the supper which our sauior Christ vsed saieng This is my bodie Matth. 26.26 Marke 14.22 Luke 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 which they vrge in the letter after this sort Hath not Christ said it in plaine termes and shall not I beleeue it though that my carnall vnderstanding can not conceiue the same To all which I answer first that the question is not of the bare woordes or letter for we as well as they confes the same and what man hath there beene that euer doubted thereof yea what heretike euer was there that would not or did not allege the letter of the text for the mainetenance vpholding of his heresie or error but of the true sence and right meaning thereof which whether they or we haue gaine shall I hope appeare anon to the vpright reader Secondlie we confesse also that we are bound to beleeue all such things as are cōprehended in gods word yea though our sensuall reason cannot in deed comprehend the same for be it farre from vs to labor to bring the incomprehēsible truth of the eternall maiestie within the strait bounds and limits of mans vnderstanding no though he were regenerated and had receiued a great measure of the graces of Gods holie spirit and yet in such sort must we beleeue them all that to such ends also as the lord himselfe hath appointed at no hand stretching thē further than the Lord would haue vs for that is to be wise in our owne eies to make our selues more sharpe sighted than God nor yet restreining them to narrower purposes than the Lord hath laied them out for for that were at the least great vnfaithfulnesse both towards the Lord himselfe and men also neither yet failing in the allegation of them either in the matter maner or ende for if wee do so we doo nothing else therby but heape vp iust condemnation against our owne soules but reuerently receiuing them and faithfully alleadging them in that iuste measure weight and proportion that the Lorde himselfe hath left them vnto vs euen as his onlie lawful and currant coine which we can not clip imbase or impaire anie manner of waye without high treason against his eternall maiestie Nowe concerning the wordes and the plainenesse of them I say that other wordes both in the old and new Testament are as plaine as they which yet notwithstanding must be otherwise interpreted than the woords themselues seeme to import or else not onelye absurdities in reason but errors in religion will insue therevpon For example in the booke of Exodus the paschal lambe with the ceremonies belonging thereto is called The Lords passeouer Exod. 12.11 whereas nowe we knowe and no manne can choose but confesse that it was not the Lordes passeouer in deede but signified and sette out the same rather For the Lordes passeouer was his ouer-passing or passing by the Israelites houses marked wyth the bloud of the Lambe to the Egyptians there to destroy the first borne So likewise in the newe Testament Iohn 15.5 Christ sayth of hym selfe I am the vine than the which what can bee more plaine And yet wee acknowledge wyth our mouthes and beleeue in our heartes that Christ was no naturall vine but rather that hee calleth himselfe so in a certaine resemblaunce because looke what propertie the fruit of the vine hath in respect of our bodies to witte to comforte menne and to make them glad heartes the same hath Christ and the fruites of his grace receiued by Fayth in respect of our soules namelie to replenishe our heartes wyth all Spirituall ioye and gladnesse both of this life and of the life to come And as the braunches of the vine haue nothing of themselues but all that they haue they haue it from the vine it selfe so none whosoeuer they be can bring foorth fruit but by abiding in him and beeing made fruitefull thorow hys grace And euen in like manner is the bread of the Lordes Supper called hys bodie because as wee haue saide before looke what proper and peculiar office the bread hath or yeeldeth to our naturall bodies namely to nourish and strengthen the same the like dooth Iesus Christes bodie broken taken hold of by Faith Spirituallie communicate vnto our soules namelie it feedeth and strengtheneth them to the assured hope and feeling of eternall life And this maner of speech attributing that to the signe which is proper and peculiar to the thing signified is very vsuall in the Scripture as a man meanely conuersant in the same may plainelie perceiue the cause whereof is the straight analogy proportion agreement which is between the signe the thing signified and not anie other respect of consubstantiation transubstantiation or any such like fantasticall dotage Besides all these thinges the very circumstaunces of time place person and manner of dooing doo sufficientlie sette out the vanitie and vntrueth of this grosse interpretation For this Sacrament beeing instituted by Christ him selfe a little before his death in the presence o● the Apostles who had all their senses satisfied in the beholding hearing and feeling of the naturall bodie of our Sauiour Christ in the visible elements of bread and wine he himselfe sitting at the tabl● with them and not onely in their hearing speaking these woordes but also in their sight and presence actuallie breaking the bread it coulde not be that that bread offered vnto them as the pledge of his bodie shoulde be his naturall bodie or bodie of flesh vnlesse you will saye that Christ had two bodies one sitting at the Table instituting the action of the Supper and administring the same in his own person and an other borne in his handes and deliuered vnto the Apostles than the which what can be not onely more absurde and blasphemous in respect of our Sauiour Christ himselfe he being by this means made a monster and not become man but also more vnprofitable or vncertain to vs as which might iustly prouoke vs to dout whether of his bodies were crucified for our transgressions And thus as wee doo for good causes before specified as you see reiect this grose sense so for the instruction of the ignoraunt and strengthening of the weake we wil in a fewe lines putte downe the true meaning of these wordes For the better performaunce whereof I woulde haue this to

it it was not bread onlie but his bodie also Wherefore they must of necessity confes that these words This is my bodie these againe This bread is my bodie meane and signifie all one thing which not onlie all the ancient fathers do affirme in innumerable places Luther Brentius but Luther in manie places and Brentius also both in his booke called Syntagma and in his catechisme likewise Seluerieus Eberus yea Seluericus Eberus doo as it were in so many words testifie also this truth If yet notwithstanding they will haue euen the bodie vnited to the bread to be shewed out thereby I answer they must of necessitie then admit the trope or figure Synecdoche and that therefore the institution of Christ or the words of the institution can not be vnderstood without a trope or figure He proueth the aduersaries to fall into that which they dislike in others And what man that is in his right wits shall they persuade that the word bodie can at one the selfe same time be spoken of the bread of the bodie without an other Synedoche also And this you see what they haue gained who thinke it and publish it in others to be a horrible heresie by a trope or figure to vnderstand the words of the supper wheras they themselues are inforced and found out to make a double trope or figure Now let vs come to the word Est The word Est is expounded that is to say Is. Seeing that whatsoeuer is is not after one sort for to be hath place in all the predicaments when these men from hense gather thus or doo after this sort expound these words This bread is Christs bodie therfore it is essentiallie Christes bodie doo they not I beseech you speake as if they should say This is a liuing creature therfore it is a man And againe doo they reason lesse fondlie when they gather thus This bread is Christs bodie therfore this bread is Christs bodie not absent but present Now whereas they say that the word bodie because it is a substance cannot be otherwise spoken or vttered than substantiallie I say they should haue left this to the papists who are therefore inforced to bring in their transubstantiation of the bread because they say that things sundered or separated one of them from another could not be spoken one of another that therfore also this propositiō was false the bread is the bodie except they granted either that the bread it selfe became nothing or by changing were tourned into a substance of another sort to wit Vbiquitaries in vrging the ba●e letter as absurd as Papists at the least the substance of his body Therfore these men alone do keep or vrge that most fondlie the bare worde or letter But these men of whom I now speake though in outward shewe and speech they refuse all tropes and figures in the exposition of these words of the institution doo yet notwithstanding ouer and besides the two tropes aboue mentioned that is to say The aduersaries by power of trueth constrained to fall into three tropes in the exposition of a fewe words though otherwise the name be odious to them the figure Synecdoche diuersly vsed in deede bring in an other and that same very strange and woonderfull when they will haue this speech this bread is my bodie to signifie and meane as much as if Christ shoulde haue saide my bodie is verily present wyth or in or vnder this bread Concerning which this is my minde that whosoeuer hee is that vseth this last forme or manner of speaking dooth not shew what the bodie it selfe is but rather declareth where the body is and therefore vseth the worde is not in the predicament of substance but in the predicament of Site as they call it Nowe I come to speake of that worde Body The word Body handled The thing that about this matter is laide vnto our charge The aduersaries charge is this that instead of the true bodie of Christ deliuered to death for vs wee substitute and place I can not tell what typicall or figuratiue or as it pleaseth them to call it fantasticall bodie when wee affirme that the bodie is spoken of the bread not that the bread is the very bodie it selfe but because it is as a signe and pledge of that true body of his which was giuen for vs. The answere thereto But is this to ascribe vnto Christ a fained body as these men slaunder vs Or is it not rather rightly to declare and shew in what sense that true and onelie bodie may bee saide or spoken of the bread to wit not as it is bread but in as much as it is a sacrament of that his bodie Therfore all these interpretations following which that stincking slanderer Illyricus tosseth too and fro Illyricus and his slaunders as if they were contrary one of them to an other that is to saye This bread sacramentally signifieth or sacramentallye is Christes bodie or againe This bread is the sacrament of Christes bodie doo in deede and trueth and altogether expresse but one and the selfe-same iudgement and matter Now that the worde bodie is in many places vsed by all the old right beleeuing writers for the verie signe of the bodie All the auntient Fathers vse the worde bodie for the signe of the bodie our aduersaries must of necessitie whether they will or no confesse sith that they feare not to affirme that Christes bodye is made broken consumed and why shoulde it not bee so likewise when it is saide to enter into the mouth To be short what strife and stubbornenesse is this of theirs They dare not denie the bread to be the sacrament of Christes body and why then will they not allowe of this interpretation Heere is the reason forsooth because they woulde haue it called the Sacrament of the bodie present Then the controuersie shal not be The state of the controuersie or question is not about the interpretation of the wordes of institution but about the presence of Christs bodie yet touching the interpretation and meaning of these wordes of the institution in which there is no mention at all neither of presence nor absence but herein onelie shall they consist whether that bodie of which that bread is saide to be the Sacrament be absent or present which controuersie I can not so much as suppose howe these men should determine out of these wordes This is my bodie The second part of the Lords supper to wit the institution of the cup and what is meant thereby Hitherto wee haue spoken of the first part of the Lords supper to wit the bread but now let vs come to the other part to wit the cuppe But tell vs I pray you what wee must vnderstande by the woord cup Verily by their confession euen that which is contained in the cuppe that is to say the wine and yet ouer and besides that the bloud