Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	church_n	doctrine_n	rome_n	2,369	5	7.0297	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68658	A brief declaracion of the Lordes Supper, written by the syngular learned man, and most constaunt martir of Iesus Christ, Nicholas Ridley Bishop of London prisoner in Oxforde, a litel before he suffred deathe for the true testimonie of Christ	Ridley, Nicholas, 1500?-1555.	1555 (1555)	STC 21046; ESTC S115973	31,702	80

meat but not to open oysters This similitude serueth but for this purpose to declare y e nature of speche withall wher as the thing that is demonstrated and shewed is euidently perceaued and openly knowen to the eie But O good Loord what a wonderfull thing is it to see how som mē doo labour to teache what is demonstrated and shewed by the pronowne demonstratyue this in Christes wordes whan he sayeth This is my body This is my blood how they labour I saye to teache what that this was than in dede whā Christ spake in the begynnyng of the sentence the worde this before he hade pronounced the rest of the wordes that folowed in the same sentence so that their doctrine maye agree with their Transubstanciacion which in dede is the very foūdacion wherin al their erroneous doctrine dothe stande And here the Transubstanciatours doo not agree amōg them selues no more than they doo in the wordes which wrought the Transubstanciacion whan Christ did furst institute his Sacrament Wherin Innocentius a bishop of Rome of the later dayes and Duns as was noted before doo attribute the worke vnto the worde Benedixit Blessed but the rest for the most parte to Hoc est corpus meum This is my body c. Duns therfore w t his secte bicause he putteth the chaūge before must nedes saye y t this whan Christ spake it in the begynnyng of the sentence was in dede Christes body For in the chaunge the substaunce of bread did departe and the chaunge was now done in Benedixit sayeth he that went before and therfore after hym and his that this was than in dede Christes body though y e worde did not importe so much but only one thing in substaunce which substaunce after Duns the bread being gone must nedes be the substaunce of Christes body But they that put their Trāsubstanciacion to be wrought by these wordes of Christ This is my body and doo saye that whan the hole sentence was finished than this chaūge was perfected and not before they cānot saye but yet Christes this in the begynnyng of the sentence before the other wordes were fully pronounced was bread in dede But as yet y e chaunge was not done so long the bread must nedes remayne and so long w t the vniuersal cōsent of al transubstaūciatours the naturall substaunce of Christes body can not come and therfore must their this of necessite demōstrate shewe the substaunce which was as yet in the pronoūceing of the furst worde this byChrist but bread But how can they make and verifie Christes wordes to be true demonstrating the substaunce which in the demonstracion is but bread and saye therof This is my body y t is as they saye the natural substaunce of Christes body except they wold saye that y e verbe is signifieth is made or is chaunged in to And so thā if the same verbe is be of y e same effecte in Christes wordes spoken vpō the cuppe and rehearsed by Luke Paule the cuppe or the wyne in the cuppe must be made or turned in to the newe testamēt as was declared before Ther be som among the Transubstanciatours which walke so wylylie and so warely betwene these two aforesaid opiniones allowing them bothe and holding playnly nother of them bothe that me thynkes they may be called Neutralles Ambodexters or rather suche as can shifte on bothe sydes They plaie on bothe partes For with the later they do allowe the doctrine of the last sillable which is that transubstanciacion is done by myracle in an instaunt at y e sounde of the last sillable um in this sentence Hoc est corpus meum And they doo alowe also Duns his fantastical imaginaciō of Indiuiduum vagum that demōstrateth as he teacheth in Christes wordes one thing in substaunce than being after his mynde the substaunce of the body of Christ. A maruailous thing how any mā can agree with bothe these two they being so cōtrarie the one to the other For the one sayeth the worde this demonstrateth the substaūce of bread and the other sayeth no not so the bread is gone and it demonstrateth a substaunce which is Christes body Tushe sayeth this thrid man ye vnderstāde nothing at al. They agree wel ynough in the chief poynt which is the grounde of al that is bothe do agree and beare witnesse that ther is transubstanciacion They do agree in dede in that conclusion I graunt But their processe and doctrine therof do euē aswel agree together as did y e false witnesse before Annas and Caiphas agaīst Christ or the two wicked iudges against Susāna For against Christ the false witnesses did agre no doubt to speake all against hym And the wicked iudges were bothe agreed to condemne poore Susanna but in examinacion of their witnesses they dissented so farre that all was founde false y t they went about both y t wher in they agreed also those thinges which they brought for their proues Thus muche haue I spoken in searching out a solucion for this principal questiō which was what is the material substaunce of the holy Sacrament in the Lordes supper Now least I shoulde seme to set by myne owne conceate more than is mete or lesse to regarde the doctrine of the olde ecclesiastical wrytours than is conuenient for a man of my poore learning and simple wytte for to doo And bicause also I am in dede persuaded y t the olde ecclesiasticall wrytours vnderstode the true meanyng of Christ in this mater and haue bothe so truly and so playnly set it furthe in certayn places of their wrytinges that no mā which will vouchesafe to reade them and without preiudice of a corrupte iudgement wil indifferently weighe thē cōstrue their myndes non other wise than they declare them selues to haue ment I am persuaded I saye that in reading of them thus no man can be ignoraunt in this mater but he that will shutte vp his owne eies and blyndfelde hym selfe Whan I speake of ecclesiastical wrytours I meane of suche as were before the wicked vsurpaciō of the sea of Rome was growē so vnmeasurably great that not only with tyrannical power but also with corrupte doctrine it beganne to subuerte Christes gospel to turne the state that Christ his apostles set in y e church vpside downe For the causes aforesaid I wil rehearse certayn of their sayenges and yet bicause I take them but for wytnesses and expoūders of this doctrine and not as the autors of the same and also for that now I wil not be tedious I will rehearse but fewe y t is three olde writours of the Greke churche and other three of the Latine churche which doo seme vnto me to be in this mater most playne The Greke autors are Origene Chrisostome and Theodoret. The Latyne are Tertulliane S. Augustine and Gelasius I knowe ther can be nothing spoken so playnly but y e craftye witte furnished with eloquence can

shall not euer haue me with you For as cōcernyng the presēce of his fleshe the churche hade hym but a fewe dayes now it holdeth hym by faithe though it see hym not Thus muche S. Augustine speaketh repeting one thing so often and al to declare and teache how we should vnderstande the maner of Christes being here with vs which is by his grace by his prouidence by his diuine nature and how he is absent by his natural body which was borne of the virgin Mary died and roose for vs is ascended in to heauen and ther sitteth as is in the articles of our faithe on the right hande of God thence from non other place sayeth S. Augustine he shall com on the later daye to iudge y e quycke the dead At y e which daye the righteous shall than lifte vp their heades and the light of Goddes truthe shall so shyne that falshead and errours shalbe put in to perpetual confusion righteousnesse shal haue the vpperhande and truthe that daye shal beare awaye y e victorie al thenemies therof quyte ouerthrowne to be troden vnder foote for euermore O Lorde Lorde I beseche the hasten this daye than shalt thow be glorified with the glorie due vnto thy holy name and vnto thy diuine maiestie and we shal syng vnto thee in al ioye and felicitie laude and praise for euer more Amen Here now wold I make an ende For me thinkes S. Augustine is in this mater so full and playne and of that autoritie that it should not nede after this his declaracion being so firmely grounded vpon Goddes worde and so well agreing with the other auncient autors to bring in for the cōfirmacion of this mater any moo and yet I sayed I wolde allege three of the latin churche to testifie the truthe in this cause Now therfore y e last of all shalbe Gelasius which was a bishop of Rome but one that was bishop of that sea before y e wicked vsurpacion and tyrannye therof spredde burst out abrode in to all the worlde For this man was before Bonifacius yea and Gregorie the furst in whose dayes bothe corruption of doctrine and tirannical vsurpacion did chiefly growe and hade the vpperhande Gelasius in an epistle of the twoo natures of Christ Contra Eutichen writeth thus The sacramentes of the body and blood of Christ which we receaue are godly thinges wherby and by the same we are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet neuerthelesse the substaunce or nature of the bread wyne dothe not departe nor go awaye Note these wordes I beseche you and considre whether any thing can be more playnly spoken than these wordes be agaynst the errour of trāsubstanciacion which is the groūde and bitter roote wherupon spring all the horrible errours before rehearsed Wherfore seing that y e falshead dothe appeare so manifestly and by so many wayes so playnly so clearlye and so fully that no mā nedeth to be deceaued but he that will not see or will not vnderstande Let vs all that doo loue the truthe embrace it forsake the falsehead For he that loueth the truthe is of God and the lacke of the loue therof is the cause why God suffreth men to fall in to errours and to perishe therin yea and as S. Paule sayeth why he sēdeth vnto them illusiones y t they beleue lies vnto their owne condemnacion bicause sayeth he they loued not the truthe This truthe no doubt is Goddes worde For Christ hym selfe sayeth vnto his father Thy worde is truthe The loue and light wher of almightie God our heauenly father geue vs lyghten it in our heartes by his holy spirite through Iesus Christ our Lorde Amen Vincit Veritas The. blessed martirs prayer Note Math. 2● Mar. 14. Luce. 22. ● Cor. 11. Note what it is to lye The slaūderous lies of the papistes wherin the controuersy consisteth Answer to the chief question Argumēt Ma● ▪ Antho. const Gardiner Act. 2.20 The. 2. reason The. 3. Argumēt The papistes affirme they wotte not what Gardiner to the 48. obiection Petre and Paule had no such priesthode as the papistes haue Note well the Papistes errour confuted Aug. De Doc. christiana li. 3. ca. 16. Gardiner in his answers to the 161. 22● obiection Note The Lordes cuppe as the priestes say 2. Thess. 2. Prayer Psal. 67. The masse sacrifice iniurious to Christes passiō Hebr. 9.10 Gardiner in the answer to the. 15. obiection Gard. to the. 13. obiection God makers agree not among them selues Gardiner a Neutral or Iacke of bothe Sydes Gard. to the. 84 obiection Godmakers agree against the truthe Note The consent of the olde autors Origene Eccl. Hist. Li. 6. ca. 3 The papistes obiection against Origene An other obiection Gard. to the. 166 ▪ Gard. in the same place Li. 3. ca. ●6 Chrisosto In opere imperfecto ho. 11. in Matth. Gardi to the ●98 obiection Gard. in the same place Gard. to the 201. obiection Theodores Dial ● D. More man in the conuocacion house Distinc. ca 4. Statuimus Tertullian ▪ Gard. to the .16 obiection Augustine Question ▪ 57. Cap. 13. Contra Maximinum li. ca. 2● Gelasius Io. 17.