Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	body_n	soul_n	whole_a	1,465	5	5.4082	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A58130	A dialogue betwixt two Protestants in answer to a popish catechism called A short catechism against all sectaries : plainly shewing that the members of the Church of England are no sectaries but true Catholicks and that our Church is a found part of Christ's holy Catholick Church in whose communion therefore the people of this nation are most strictly bound in conscience to remain : in two parts.	Rawlet, John, 1642-1686.	1685 (1685)	Wing R352; ESTC R11422	171,932	286

probable are the wicked till then thrown into the sorest punishment And so far the condition of both may be said to be a middle state betwixt what it is now on earth and what it will be after the day of Judgment But in this state we know of nothing to be done either by the persons themselves or by any on earth for them to mend their condition The souls of the righteous are in the hand of the Lord in rest and peace chearfully expecting the perfection of their glory and joy and the condition of the wicked may seem most like that of the faln Angels as it 's described Jude v. 6. in everlasting chains of darkness reserved to the Judgment of the great day And betwixt these already is the great gulf fixt that there is no passing from one to the other to find or give relief Much less can the prayers or alms of surviving friends afford any refreshment to miserable souls And some there are even of the Church of Rome so modest and ingenuous that they have discoursed much at this rate concerning the middle state of souls departed and have exprest their opinion that it was not so much the prayers said for the dead that gave them relief as the charitable temper they died in when they left money for pious uses But for the freedom such Writers have taken both they and their writings have been severely censured and condemned at Rome L. What makes them so zealous in the case T. You need not go far for a reason when you consider how much gain is hereby brought in to the Crafts masters what vast summs of money are given to the Church by dying men frightned with the dreadful stories of Purgatory What will they not then give for a speedy deliverancé thence And this they are taught not to hope for without good store of Masses for which the Priests that say them expect to be well paid So that there is a great deal of truth in that common blunt saying that Purgatory-fire keeps the Popes Kitchin warm No wonder then if they are so angry with those that go about to quench it This Doctrine moreover it is that chiefly keeps up the market for Indulgences which whatever they do now were heretofore wont to bring in vast treasures to the Popes Coffers by several arts which he used in putting them off L. On what pretence do they give out these Indulgences T. Sell them you should rather have said for so they have used to do and did it at such a shameful rate in Germany as gave the first occasion for the Reformation there But to answer your question their pretence is that there is a vast treasure of merits in the Church and that not only of Christ's but of the Saints too who have done and suffered much more than was necessary for themselves so that they can spare somewhat for others And this treasure you must know is in the Popes keeping who can by the fulness of his power dispense it as he pleases and apply it to particular persons in what measure and upon what terms he thinks fit And the benefit of these is said to be the freeing them from temporary punishments due for faults already pardoned and this freedom they are to enjoy not only upon earth in being eased of long penances but also in Purgatory from whence they shall sooner be delivered by virtue of these Indulgences L. I do not well understand how there is a punishment still due after the fault 's pardoned T. Nor any body else I think for a fault is then said to be pardoned when the punishment is remitted Indeed God may so far pardon a Penitent as not to punish him with eternal misery and yet he may inflict bodily punishments in this life as a malefactor may have a pardon for his life and yet may be burnt in the hand or the like but so far as a man is punished so far he was not pardoned L. Do not these Indulgences then free men from bodily punishments which otherwise they must undergo T. That indeed would be somewhat if they could free men from Gout and Stone and all such diseases as do either naturally flow from their vices or are inflicted by God as punishments for them then I say a man would not grudg to purchase Indulgences at a dear rate for besides his ease and health it might save all the money spent upon Physicians But this alas the great Champions for Indulgences dare not pretend to and full easily they might be confuted if they did Wherefore Bellarmine confesses they do not free men from natural evils diseases or the like which are the fruits of sin nor yet from such fines and penalties as may in Courts be inflicted for their offences What then is left besides the imaginary pains of Purgatory But by the little force their Indulgences have in this world a man has cause to suspect they will be no more effectual in the other But the best on 't is no body comes thence to tell tales how they are cheated and so the trade goes on smoothly And were it mony only that the poor people are cheated of by these vile arts the matter were not much but alas we have great cause to fear that many are hereby deluded to the loss of their immortal souls of more value than the whole world instead of a temporary Purgatory from which they hoped to be secured at easier rates than a timely repentance and thorough reformation how many fall into that eternal misery which is threatned to the wicked and impenitent from whence no money nor Masses no prayers nor tears can ever release them L. Yet they say we Protestants are strangely unkind to our friends departed that we will not so much as put up a prayer to God for them but seem quite to neglect and forget them T. They have little reason to accuse us for this since of all the instances of charity any where recommended in Scripture we never find this mentioned that we should pray for our friends after they are dead Why then should we pretend to such a piece of charity as neither God hath commanded nor any the most holy charitable persons of old ever practised If it were fit for us to give way to our own fancies why might it not look like a piece of charity to pray for those in Hell that their pains may be mitigated or shortned But have we any warrant from God so to do Or dare Papists themselves presume to do it Such as these we look on out of the reach of prayers And for those in Heaven they surely are past the need of them farther than what was before mentioned that whilst we pray for the coming of Christ we therein comprehend the consummation of their felicity How little reason then have we to pray for our friends departed The greatest kindness that I know we can shew them is to preserve a grateful remembrance of their

their not discerning the Lords body vers 29. And to receive these Holy Elements without reverence thankfulness and true devotion was to be guilty of dishonouring the Body and Blood of Christ which were here represented and exhibited to Believers But all this while we have no reason hence to fancy that the natural substance of Christ's Body and Blood are present in the Sacrament Had the Apostle thought of any such thing surely he would have exprest himself in another manner and have said somewhat to explain so Mysterious a Doctrine And had he and his Brethren taught the same as the Church of Rome now does surely the unbelieving Iews or Gentiles would have poured forth their Objections against it whereas we hear not a word of that nature neither in the Apostles Days or the next Ages after In all the Apologies that the first Christian Writers set forth in defence of our Religion we find nothing said in vindication of any such Opinion as this whilst they give large Answers to many other Objections for which there was nothing like so good a pretence Nor do we read of any controversy amongst Christians themselves about this matter for many Ages whereas in latter times since this Opinion was first broached there have been many Volumes written for and against it L. But they pretend that this was the Ancient Opinion of the Fathers and first Christians T. Pretend it they do but as in other points of Controversy betwixt them and us so here it is a very vain and false pretence For we read nothing of it in the old Creeds or the Canons of General Councils or in the genuine works of any Father for many hundred years after our Saviour L. Yet they alledge that the Fathers commonly stile the Holy Elements the Body and Blood of Christ and will frequently quote places to that purpose T. No doubt but they may easily do that though without any advantage to their Cause since its plain enough in what sense those expressions are to be understood from other places of the same Fathers For they themselves do sometimes tell us that Christ's Words of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood are to be taken Spiritually that in the Communion there is a commemoration of his Death and a representation of his Body and Blood yea sometimes they expresly call the Bread and Wine the Figures thereof Now these and such like sayings cannot possibly be reconciled with the Popish opinion of Transubstantiation Therefore when they speak of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament we may most reasonably understand them in the very same sense that I have told you our Church frequently uses the like expressions So do our Writers very commonly in their Books of devotion and in practical discourses on the Communion speak at the same rate whilst they intend nothing more but that these Holy Elements are made Christ's Body and Blood Mystically and Spiritually But how far this opinion of Transubstantiation is from being an Ancient Doctrine of the Christian Church hath been made sufficiently evident amongst many others by the Learned Bishop Cozens who in his History of it gives us an account about what time it was first publickly taught what opposition was then made to it by sundry Learned men of that Age and how long it was before it could be established by any Council even amongst Papists themselves or could obtain to be the general avowed Doctrine of their Church Nay to this very day their chief Writers are strangely divided in the accounts they give of it setting their Wits upon the rack to explain and defend it some this way and some that having so very little help from Holy Scripture in the Case as some of them are so ingenuous as to acknowledg L. Methinks its strange that they should with so much eagerness maintain and with so much violence impose a Doctrine which to me seems impossible to be understood or firmly believed T. Strange it is and very unreasonable but yet some account may be given of it for beside that natural pride which inclines men to defend the opinion which they have once espoused especially a Church which boasts of Infallibility besides this I say we may consider how mightily the admitting of this opinion makes for the Honour of the Priest who can thus with four words speaking work one of the most wonderful Miracles that ever was known in the World indeed such a one as can neither be seen felt nor understood But the people who can be perswaded to believe it must needs have a mighty veneration for the Priest that works it and be almost ready to make a god of him who can so easily make a god for them by turning the Bread into the very person of our Saviour his Divinity and Humanity whom therefore they worship and adore as God though after that they eat him L. This may seem indeed to make for the Honour of the Priest that he can work such wonders but surely it makes little for the honour either of Priest or people to be guilty of such false and absurd opinions and of such corrupt practices which are the natural consequence of them For are they not guilty of Idolatry in Worshipping the Bread as God though I know they say there is no Bread there after Consecration pray let me know your judgement because I find my Author endeavouring to vindicate their Church from this heavy censure T. I do not see how they can possibly excuse themselves from this charge if the Bread still remains Bread in its natural substance as we may most certainly conclude it does from what hath been alledged both from Scripture Reason and our Senses Wherefore whilst they worship that for God which is not God giving to the creature what is due alone to the Creator they may justly be reckoned guilty of Idolatry L. But will it not serve to excuse them that they worship that which they take to be God and therefore do design and direct their Worship to God and not to the Bread which they believe not to be there after Consecration though they see it before them T. What allowances it may please our good God to make for the ignorance and mistakes of honest well-meaning men I still say it doth not beseem us to determine But as to the thing it self for my own part I cannot see how this pretence will any more excuse a Papist from Idolatry than it would excuse an Heathen for his Worship of the Sun that he did verily believe the Sun to be God or that God did in some extraordinary manner dwell in the Sun the substance of it being turned into God whilst only the accidents of Light and Heat and the like do still remain Nay one would think the Heathen in some respect more excusable of the two since the Sun looks much liker a God than does a Wafer or bit of Bread But ' there is no great need of disputing against them in this