Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	blood_n	body_n	bread_n	1,966	5	8.1709	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46941	The absolute impossibility of transubstantiation demonstrated	Johnson, Samuel, 1649-1703.; Johnson, Samuel, 1649-1703. Second five year's struggle against popery and tyranny.	1688 (1688)	Wing J820; ESTC R28745	40,536	74

Christ's Body having been in Heaven these 1600 Years if in that Space of Time it has been upon Altars here on Earth then it has not been at the same time where it has been but it has broken the Rule of Concomitancy and has strangely straggled from it self which is Impossible Q. E. D. I have studied with all the Application of Mind of which I am capable to forecast in my thoughts what fault the Papists would find with any of the former Reasonings or with this last in particular and cannot foresee nor imagine any For though we should allow Christ's Body to be Independent of Place or to have any other Impossible Prerogatives which they list to Invent yet still this Body must be subject to the Rule of Concomitancy because they themselves are forced to make use of it to prove that the Body of Christ is under the Species of Wine and that the Blood of Christ is under the Species of Bread and it is the only Proof they have Now if of Necessity the Body must be by Concomitancy where the Blood is then by an antecedent Necessity the Blood must be where the Blood is for the Blood 's being there is the cause of the Bodies being there likewise So the Body being under the Form of Bread is the reason that the Blood is there also but then to be sure the Body must be there From whence as I shewed before it undeniably follows That Christ's Body is only in Heaven or else it is not where it is which overthrows the very Foundation of Concomitancy 2. The Second Argument shall be drawn from their Form of Consecration For this is my Body being the words of our Saviour from whence they have wrested the Doctrine of Transubstantiation Now to give them a Samplar of their own and to shew them how they themselves interpret Scripture I say that it appears by the very words of Consecration That the Priest himself is also Transubstantiated for the Body is Christ's and yet the Priest says it is My Body which cannot be True unless the Priest and Christ be the same And that cannot be but by an admirable Change and Conversion which the Holy Catholick Church has conveniently and properly named Transubstantiation No say the Papists in great anger There is no such Change at all for the Priest only stands for Christ and sustains his Person he only Represents him in that Action and is in Christ's stead so that we are not to look upon the Priest in that solemn Action as Friar John but as Christ himself And therefore the Priest may say with Truth this is My Body tho Literally and Properly and in strictness of Speech it is Christ's Body and not His. To which I again reply Why this is the very Exposition of these words of our Saviour for which the Hereticks have all along been Burnt namely This Bread stands for my Body and Represents it in this Action it is instead of my Body and bears the Character of it and you are not so much to consider it as Bread but to look upon it as the Representation of my Body which is given for you And therefore with Truth I can say it is my Body though Literally and Properly and in strictnefs of Speech it is Bread and not my Natural Body Now therefore let the Papists give or take Either the Bread is not Transubstantiated or if it be by virtue of the self-same words the Priest is Transubstantiated too For every word in the Prolation with one Breath except the word Enim Sect. 20. does Operate as well as Signifie and Does what it Says and therefore if the word Corpus be effectual to make it a Body then the word Meum makes it the Priests Body The Wit of Man cannot find an Evasion and I doubt not but I am able to maintain this Argument against all the Popish Priests in the world For all the Advantage lies clearly on the Protestant Side For our Saviour visibly took Bread and gave it the office of Representing him and made it the Figure of his Body as Tertullian's word is He erected it as a standing Memorial to be used in Remembrance or Commemoration of him as S. Luke's word is To shew forth his Death till he come as S. Paul speaks 'T is true he commanded his Disciples to repeat the same Action and to do as he had done But where did he bid the Priest to personate him That he gave us the Bread by the Name of his Body Three of the Four Gospels witness and by the Name of his Broken Body S. Paul witnesses But where did he ever say That He himself would always Sacrifice himself by the Priests Hands and say Hoc est Corpus meum to the end of the world by the Priests Mouth And further There is not one word which the Papists have said in behalf of the Bread being Transubstantiated but holds as strongly for the Priests being Transubstantiated which makes full as much for the Dignity and Majesty of the Sacrament for the abasing and mortifying of our Deceivable Senses and for the improving and exalting our Faith and making it Meritorious as the other can We have gained such considerable Advantages by the foregoing part of our Discourse that now we are able unalterably to renounce the Doctrine of Transubstantiation For having demonstrated the Impossibility of it We have thereby Demonstrated that though Heaven and Earth should pass away yet that Doctrine can never be True. We have likewise at the same time Demonstrated the Protestant Exposition of those words of our Saviour This is my Body to be the true and necessary Sense of them for either there is a Change of the Bread into the Body of Christ or there is not But because such a Change is an utter Impossibility as we have abundantly proved therefore it remains That the Protestant Doctrine which asserts there is no such Change is Demonstrably True. We have also made it as clear as the Light That neither the Letter of a Divine Revelation nor the pretence of an Infinite Power nor any thing in the World can support one single Contradiction because if one single Contradiction could stand it would destroy the very Being of God himself and deprive the World of the Adorable Object of all Religion For supposing it Impossible for a Being of Necessary Existence to Exist which is but supposing a Contradiction and we have immediately lost the Author of all Divine Revelation And not only so but the whole Universe likewise must presently sink into Nothing or rather indeed it could never have been at all But more particularly we shall find the Benefit of the former Demonstrations in the short remainder of our present Discourse for they will add to what we have further to say against Transubstantiation all the force and strength which Demonstration can give Costerus the Jesuit acknowledges and I suppose all Papists with him that If the Bread be not changed

Thought does in a Man's Mind yet it were impossible for it to be in many Places at once So that if we should grant Matter to be Immaterial and a Body to be a Spirit yet the Papists are so intangled in the Absurdity of this Doctrine that it would do them no good to allow them half a score Contradictions neither would it any way relieve them or free them from the rest Whereas on the other hand a Body is known to fill and possess the Place in which it is and is circumscribed by the bounds and limits of the Place which is commensurate to the Magnitude and Figure of the Body So that if a Body should be in many Places at once it might not only have quite contrary Situations and be East West North and South of it self be above it self and below it self all at once but also it would be Circumscribed and not Circumscribed at the same time which is a very plain and open Contradiction 2. The Second Head of Contradictions are those which attend the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in point of Time. Every thing that has now a Being either always had a Being and is Eternal which only God is or else it had a beginning of its Being in which it has continued ever since which is the condition of all Creatures and this Continuance of a Creature in Being we call the Duration of it which is so essential to all Substances whether Material or Immaterial that it is absolutely inseparable from them For when their Being began their Duration began and when their Duration ceases their Being ceases This Duration is counted by Days Months and Years and such like greater or lesser portions of Time which Time is nothing else but the measure of Duration whereby we reckon how long a Substance has continued or persevered in Being And now we have a Test in our hands to try whether it be not absolutely impossible for the Transubstantiation-Body in the Sacrament to be the very Body of Christ which was born of the Virgin Mary The Body which was born of the Virgin Mary has continued in Being 1688 years whereas the Body which the Priest made yesterday has continued in Being but one Day but the Duration of one Day only cannot be the Duration of 1688 years And the Duration of 1688 years is now inseparable from the Body of Christ born of the Virgin Mary for the Duration of a Substance is inseparable from the Substance therefore the Body which the Priest made yesterday cannot be the Body which was born of the Virgin Mary Which was to be Demonstrated Again If the Body in the Sacrament which was made that is began to be yesterday is the same Body which has continued 1688 Years then the same Body continued 1687 Years and upwards before it began to be but before it began to be it was not in Being and consequently in every Minute during that 1687 Years the same Body was in Being and was not in Being Which amounts to Millions of Contradictions Once more It must be granted That the Cause is in Being before the Effect and it would be a double Repugnancy to say the contrary for then the Effect would be both before it self for it is not an Effect till it be Caused and also before its Cause and so would be Caused by that which is not Now the Causes of the transubstantiation-Transubstantiation-Body are these amongst others 1. The Bread out of which it is produced which is so necessary that this Change cannot be wrought out of any other Substance in the World Flesh nor Fish Pillar nor Post nor any thing else that can be named and therefore this is the necessary Matter of the Transubstantiation Body or the Cause out of which it is made 2ly The Baker by whom the Bread was made for he that is a Cause of the Cause is a Cause of the thing Caused 3ly The Marvellous Operator the Priest who makes the Body together with his Intention 4ly Which seems to be an Instrumental Cause his Pronouncing these words Hoc enim est Corpus meum in one Breath 5ly The Consideration which moved him to say a Mass at that time But neither the Bread nor the Baker nor the Priest nor his Intention nor his Voice nor his Breath nor the Proposal suppose of Twelve-pence to him to say a Mass neither all nor any of these which were the Causes of that Transubstantiation-Body which was made yesterday and did contribute more or less to the producing of it I say none of these Causes were in Being an Hundred years ago and if the Causes were not in Being much less was the Effect in Being otherwise the Effect must be before the Cause which is impossible But the Body of Christ born of the Virgin Mary was in Being 1600 Years ago which is more than One hundred Years ago and this is impossible for the Transubstantiation-Body which was made yesterday therefore it is impossible for the Transubstantiation-Body to be the Body of Christ born of the Virgin Mary Q. E. D. I wonder that when the Representer's hand was in and he had made Christ's Body Independent of Place he had not likewise made it Independent of Time for that was full as necessary to be done as the other 3. The Third Head of Contradictions are those which relate to Quantity under which Head I was going to Demonstrate That the same Body cannot at the same time be Bigger and Less than it self That it cannot be an Organized Humane Body Five Foot and an half long and at the same time bestowed within the Compass of a Wafer no bigger than a Six-pence nay within the compass of every Crumb of that Wafer though not so big as a Pins-head But I am interrupted from proceeding any further in this Attempt for by a slight Conveyance the very Subject-Matter of my Demonstration is taken away and instead of a Solid Body with Figure and Dimensions with different and distinct parts divisible and measurable they have left me only the Appearance of a Body which no Demonstration can fasten upon For they say That this Body is induced with a Supernatural manner of Existence by which being left without Extension of Parts it may be whole in every part of the Symbols and not obuoxious to any Corporeal Contingencies Now though we cannot demonstrate any Property of such an incomprehensible Body as this is no more than we can draw the Picture of a Non-entity or weigh it in a Pair of Scales for it scorns and tramples upon all the Principles and Axioms of Euclid yet we may a little consider the Terms of Art by which it is exprest 1. It is a Body without Extension of Parts So that it is a whole which has Parts though those Parts are without Extension and accordingly as it follows It may be whole in every Part of the Symbols But if the Parts be without Extension so is the Whole for the Whole is nothing else but all