Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	apostle_n	bring_v	sin_n	4,680	5	5.1414	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A84086	The eating of the body of Christ, considered in its principles. By John Despagne minister of the gospel. Translated out of French into English, by John Rivers of Chaford in Sussex, Esquire.	Espagne, Jean d', 1591-1659.; Rivers, John, of Chaford in Sussex.; Beau, Wil.	1652 (1652)	Wing E3257; Thomason E1309_2; ESTC R209023	55,931	203

Jesus Christ in the Supper SINCE Jesus Christ speaks of a Testament whose last seal is the Eucharist a Christian ought to learn what this Testament is for to know the importance of the seal which we see put to it and principally it is necessary to have regard to that which Jesus Christ said thereof when he instituted the Supper For he advertiseth us that this Testament is New that is to say succeeds another which is abolished by this latter Moreover that this Testament is with the Blood of the Testator that is to say that he died in this last Will. Now I omit to shew why he would make a second Testament and if there wanted any thing in the first it will suffice to observe thence that the first Testament was of no force in comparison of the second For a Testament hath no vertue during the life of the Testator nor can it send forth its effect unless the death of the Testator intervene Hebrews 9. v. 16 17. So that the Old Testament had no force in its time because that Jesus Christ was not yet dead But the Testament which we have at this day hath been made efficatious by the death of the Testator Some Jew who cannot perswade himself that God would abolish the first Covenant by a second that which nevertheless he ought to have learned of Jeremiah 31. v. 31 c. will tell us that this will make us doubt whether or no there shall be yet a third But this is no reason For the Covenant of God was conceived in form of a Testament or of a donation by reason of Death Now the Testator being once dead there is no place for another Testament The last Will wherein he died remaines irrevocable for ever Finally there is this thing extraordinary that death permitting none to be executor of his own Testament Jesus Christ contrarily is come from death to life for to execute his forasmuch as none was capable of this charge For he is risen again for our justification Rom. 4. v. 25. CHAP. XIIII The sixth Consideration upon the words of Jesus Christ MY Blood saith he is shed for the remission of sins We know that his death ought to be bloody according to the Maxime which says that there is no remission of sins made without effusion of blood Hebrewes 9. Now we demand not here why this remission could not be obtained otherwise that is to say why it behoved that the death of our Saviour should not onely be violent but also be marked with blood Nevertheless that which I have to observe thereupon deserves to be considered Death which is the wages of sin began by effusion of blood The first that ever died which was Abel died of a bloody death As then the blood of man hath been the first fruits of death so also was it the conclusion and destruction of it Death began by blood and ended by blood Between this first blood which was shed upon the Earth and the Blood of the Son of God there is a very remarkable opposition touched by the Apostle to the Hebrewes Chapter 12. to wit that the Blood of Sprinkling which is that of Jesus Christ speaks better things then that of Abel For this cried out for the the punishment of sin but the other cries for the remission of sins It is also observable that the same man who died first of all is also the first in the holy History who had sacrificed with blood For he was the first that offered the flesh and fat of living Creatures Genesis 4. 4. So the first who felt death brought forth by sin is also the first who offered the bloody Oblation whereby we should be delivered from sin which is the sting of death Finally The Jews who think it strange that the Blood of a Man is our Expiation have nevertheless an imagination which cannot subsist but upon this principle That there must be an humane Sacrifice to wipe away the sins of man They beleeve that God will give them grace in contemplation of the obedience of Isaac who exposed himself voluntarily to be sacrificed And they have prayers wherein they alledge the merit of this Sacrifice as a foundation of the Redemption which they expect Now as for the offering of this Patriarch if it had been capable to expiate the sins of his Off-spring even of those who live at this day why after this Sacrifice of Isaac should there be yet need of so many expiatory Sacrifices To what purpose hath the Law which is since given imposed upon them Sacrifices for the obtaining of pardon But to speak no more of it Isaac was not sacrificed in effect and his blood was not shed in this Oblation Which shews that it is not expiatory For without an actual effusion of blood no remission of sins at all is made The Law tells them that it is blood which makes expiation for the Soul Lev. 17. CHAP. XV. The seventh Consideration upon the words of Jesus Christ THE Institution of this Sacrament is comprised in few words whereof not one is vain For Jesus Christ hath said nothing which contains not some great point Now above all things he shewes what is the vertue and dignity of the Blood which he presents unto us and this in four divers respects to wit 1. That it is his own Blood the Blood of the Son of God 2. That it is the Blood of the New Covenant 3. That this Blood purchases unto us remission of sins 4. That this Blood is shed for many As for this last amongst many other matters therein contained I think that our Lord would yet touch upon a difference also between the Blood of the Old Testament and that of the New In the Old Testament the Blood of the Sacrifice was sometimes employed only for the expiation of one man among the people who had need of a particular sacrifice Now this Sacrifice which was offred but for one man alone was many wayes inferiour to that which was offred for many that is to say for the Multitude or for all the Church Principally in this that the Blood shed in Sacrifice for one man alone never came into the Holy Place But that did which was shed for the multitude Jesus Christ therefore advertiseth us that his Blood was shed for many for the Multitude to the end that we might know that his Blood hath penetrated the Holy Places and hath opened them Hebr. 9. v. 12. And in this also is the New Testament more excellent than the Old For the Blood of the Old Testament did not alwayes enter within the Holy Place Moreover the Blood of the Old Testament which was shed for one man alone was not sufficient even to Expiate legally all the sins of such a man but onely a particular offence for which by name there wholly needed a Sacrifice On the contrary the Blood of the New Testament was not onely shed for many men but hath also Expiated universally all the sins of

the first Tabernacle was standing Heb. 9. 8. because none of the people were suffered to enter in so the Holy Ghost declared that the Communion of the body of Christ actually sacrificed for sins was a benefit which we should not enjoy during the subsistance of the first Testament which permitted not sinners to communicate of the flesh sacrificed for their sins Moreover it was an infallable consequence that their attonement was not yet made whilst they were excluded from the Communion of the expiatory Sacrifice For why should they not have been admitted unto it if by it their transgressions had been already expiated The Law then taught that they should not have the true Expiatory Sacrifice whilst the Communion of Oblations which represented it remained forbidden This prohibition which hindered them to participate of it was a kinde of excommunication making a part of the Legal Oeconomy whose severity accompanied the Old Testament to the end they might desire a new one From all this it appears That the Communion which we have with Jesus Christ is more compleat and entire then that under the Old Testament and the application of it more efficatious That we are at this day nearer to God having communion with his Son exhibited in the flesh That the certainty of the Remission of sins is now more clear and distinct then before the death of Iesus Christ That the Law knew it not for it shewed afar of the flesh of the propitiatory sacrifice as a most wholsom food and yet all this while declared to sinners who had need of this remedy that they should abstain from it That they who will yet practise the Ceremonial Law cannot pertake of Christ sith by the rules of it it is not permitted unto them to eat of that flesh the blood whereof was carried into the holy place for the remission of sins Heb. 13. v. 10. Thus the New Testament established under better promises and having more favourable clauses gives us this advantage above the ancient Fathers This is the New Rite which abrogates the Old Law This is the difference by which our Lord in the institution of the Supper distinguisheth the two Testaments When we ask the modern Iewes from whence it comes that their calamity hath no end and why they are not restored to their perfection after so long expectation They answer that they have no sacrifice the onely means to appease Gods wrath It is fourteen hundred yeers as Origen reports since they used this Language our sins remain in us forasmuch as we have no Sacrifice to expiate them for want of a Lawful place But if they could look through the vayle which covers the face of Moses they should finde that he himself refusing to make them part of such oblations would advertise them to aspire both to another Testament and to another Sacrifice whereof they should have power to eat For whilst that Sinners were put by the Table of the Expiatory Sacrifice it was a most evident sign that their Expiation was not yet made For to lead Sinners back to Christ the Law had expresly frustrated them of many benefits necessary to their perfection The Communion of the propitiatory Sacrifice was one of the principal point which they wanted and a grace whose dispensation was reserved for the New Testament CHAP. X. The Clearing of the third Consideration IN the Old Testament the Priest did eat the offering which he had presented for the sin of another whereas now Sinners themselves for whom it was offered are charged to eat it What is the secret of so great a diversity It is a principle not to be doubted that none can Expiate the sins of another unless he charge himself with them and bear the pain of them which is death Now none can dye for the sin of man but man himself It was then necessary that the Priest himself who was to expiate the sins of others should sacrifice himself to the end he might dye for them Now the Levitical Priest did not Sacrifice himself in this action but a goat or a Sheep died in his stead But to the end that the death of the Sacrifice should be thought and said to be the death of the Priest himself the Priest became one with it For eating of it and incorporating of it into himself he transported to his proper person the name and the effect of the death which the Sacrifice had suffered In doing this he bare the iniquity of the people and made propitiation for them Lev. 10. v. 17. This eating then tended to the uniting of the Priest with the Offering because they were two divers individuals whereas now the Priest and the Offering are but one and the same person to wit Iesus Christ But at this day the attonement being made another union is necessary to wit of Sinners with the Sacrifice to the end that having incorporated it within themselves the vertue of its death and passion might be imputed to them for righteousness even as if they had suffered in their proper persons It is from hence that we are enjoyned to eat the body by which our sins are expiated whereas the sinners in the time of the Law could not eat it so sith their expiation was yet to come CHAP. XI An entrance to the Clearing of the fourth Consideration NOw I must shew the reason of this Phrase which seems to sound so ill in mens ears For to feed on the flesh and on the blood of a man is an action whose name alone brings horror and thus as it seems improper to represent this sacred Communion of the body of Christ Behold then what we ought to consider It is true that the Holy Ghost to make himself understood most times speaks in termes conformable to the rules which common sense and natural prudence hath been accustomed to observe For besides the propriety of tongues wherein he hath bin pleased to express himself there are certain universal Laws which reason dictates unto men and regulateth their expressions and the wisdom of God would conform his thereunto From thence it comes that to expound the Scripture we take our measures From arts which shew the congruity of language the accord of figures the nerves and sinews of discourse But sometimes the spirit of God hath speeches and purposes altoghether entire whose form answers not to ordinary rules Thus the holy Bible begins with these words that the Elohim which are the Persons of the most blessed Trinity created the Heaven and the Earth Tearms whose construction is not Gramatical but which express as excellently as briefly the unity of the Divine Essence in the Plurality of persons Such a Solecism surpasseth all Elegance So among many discourses which Jesus Christ hath uttered there are found such whose parts seem to be ranged without order it being as it were impossible to see what agreement there is of one with the other in the prosecution of the same purpose and to finde their joyntings and connexions

every one of them So that if one of my sins hath been Expiated in this Blood all my other sins have there their Expiation also for it is generall and entire So then the termes of the Institution if wee know how to weigh them cause us to know that Jesus Christ hath sounded all the profundities of the Old Testament and drawes from thence those points which shew the excellency and advantages of the New by comparing them together CHAP. XVI The eighth Consideration upon the words of the holy Supper I Intend not to reiterate that which hath been so much written how the Bread is the Body of Christ but onely to observe something upon a question which is common enough viz. Why our Lord did not ordain Flesh rather than Bread for to represent his Body For it seems that this Symbole should be more analogick and significative According to the saying of many it is forasmuch as Flesh hath served in old time in the Sacrifices and in the Passeover and that it behoves that the Sacraments of the Christian Church should be of other Elements than those that have served under the Law But this answer is ill grounded for 1. The Bread and Wine were also used in Sacrifices There was by name an Oblation of Bread and Wine Numb 15. not to speak of the Shew-bread and of the Offerings of Cakes 2. The Element of Water served for Legall purifications Under the Law there was nothing so ordinary as the washing with Water to signifie the clensing of the Soul Yet neverthelesse God would that Baptism should be with Water 3. The contrary is rather true and this is that also which some ancient Fathers say of it That in this action Jesus Christ useth Bread and Wine because that these Elements had already been used under the Law to represent his Body and his Blood And this to the end we should know that it is the same Christ represented by the same signes But why then hath not the Flesh of living Creatures as well place in the Sacrament of the Eucharist sith it hath represented Christ in that of the Passeover and in so many kinds of Sacrifices We say indeed that Christ hath rather chosen Bread because it is the most common and the most nourishing food and so most proper to represent his Body But this excludes not other reasons which we may give thereof Moreover the Eucharist represents not the Body of Jesus Christ simply as nourishment but also as dead Now some may say which neverthelesse is not without contradiction that the Death of Christ was in Old time more ocularly represented by the killing of a Lamb than at this day by the breaking of Bread So it is this is the point I am to handle that Jesus Christ instituting signs of his Dead Body and of his Blood shed did choose things without life and Elements wherein there was no Blood Whereby he would shew that after him no creature should any more lose his life for the sins of man and that no other Blood should be shed in Expiation For the Sacraments of the Old Testament were Bloody to denote the Blood which was to be shed by the death of Christ But this effusion being made the Sacraments which represent it as done and accomplished are without effusion of Blood to shew that there shall be no more Blood shed for sins Hence it is wee have no more a Sacrament which requires the killing of any creature but Signes wherein death doth not intervene as being of themselves without life and of another substance than of Flesh and Blood CHAP. XVII The ninth Consideration upon the words of Jesus Christ MEn principally the common people do naturally love Similitudes because they are drawn from things perceptible to the senses or otherwise common and easie to be conceived But similitudes represent not the essence of a subject and doe not say what a thing is but what it resembles So our Lord would not tell us simply that his Body had resemblance unto Bread nor onely that the Bread is a Seal unto us of the Communion of his Body but also hath shewed us the causes and qualities of this Communion These words To eat the Body of Jesus Christ signifie not onely to take it for the Sustenance of our Souls as we take food for the nourishment of our Bodyes This Similitude if we specifie no more teacheth us but very generally the nature of this Communion and doth not set forth the entire sense of the words of Jesus Christ For in the Eucharist our Lord doth not propound himself as Flesh in generall but as Flesh sacrifised for our sins which is a point of great consequence in this matter I have already said that the word Eating is attributed to the Cōmunion of the body of Christ which is as much as to say that this Communion is in substance that which was in Figure the eating of Sacrifices of the Manna of the Passeover c. And namely that in this Communion we have that which the Law forbad us to wit the eating of the Flesh offred for our sins They who content themselves with the generall similitudes between the Food of the Body and the nourishment of the Soul attain not unto the specifick difference of the subject of the Eucharist But I have yet somewhat to say of an abuse which is committed in the deduction of this Similitude For as many omit that which is contained in the words of the holy Supper so there are some I speak even of Orthodox Divines who adde thereto something of their own CHAP. XVIII The tenth Consideration upon the words of Jesus Christ in the Supper WEe know that wee ought not to carry a Similitude beyond its end For when two divers things are compared to one another it is never in all and through all but onely in some regard When for example our Lord in St. Matth. 13. v. 46. compares the kingdome of Heaven to a Pearl of great price his intention is but to express the greatness of the value and richness of the Gospell Now he that would under pretence of this word Pearl dispute philosophically of all the kinds and proprieties of Pearls search of what matter they are made and how they are formed and subtilly fit all this to the kingdome of Heaven would surpasse the bounds wherein Jesus Christ hath confined the similitude For he doth not in all qualities compare the kingdome of Heaven to a Pearl but onely in the price or esteem which men have of it Notwithstanding there are few found among those who expound the Scriptures who keep themselves within these limits There are even of those who regard no measure when they handle a comparison If our Saviour say that he is a Vine they will name all sorts of Vines and their differences and tell you what territory is proper to them when they are to bee planted how they are to be pruned and kept Also what are the parts of

small fault And we ought not to flatter our selves with this pernicious Maxim of the vulgar viz. wee have no need of so much knowledge But on the other side a Christian who strives to instruct himself more and more ought not to think that these omissions which he is forced to make up doe deprive him of the saving Communion of the Sacrament Not without cause doth the scripture give us to know that even the Apostles themselves when Jesus Christ gave them the Eucharist with his own hands were defiled with notable errours Luke 22. v. 24. And it is certain that we know more of the mystery of this Sacrament and understand better the grounds of this doctrine and the causes of the death of Christ Jesus than his disciples did when they were admitted to that first supper CHAP. II. Why doth not the reading of the Passion of Jesus Christ move us so much as the reading of many other histories of the Scripture WEE know that the Remembrance of the death of Jesus Christ which wee declare in the Supper ought not to be naked and idle or to remain in the Brain It must descend into the heart and stir up the affections Now there is nothing which ought to move us equally with the Passion of the son of God and the least of his anguishes ought to be more sensible unto us than those of all men together Neverthelesse if wee read that sad preparation of Abraham going to sacrifize his son or the pitifull words of Jacob when they told him that some beast had devoured Joseph or the sacking of Jerusalem by the Babylonians yea how they handled that miserable King Zedekias wee are touched more lively and these stories will draw more teares from our eyes than the history of the suffrings of Jesus Christ And as there are tears of joy they will sooner fall from our eyes in reading how Joseph met with his brothers and of the cry which he cast forth when he made himself known unto them than in hearing of Christ comming forth of the sepulchre and the joy which his Disciples had to see him risen again Yet so it is that neither the knife which was to cut Jsaacks throat nor the bloody coat of Joseph nor the desolations and crying in the streets of Jerusalem are not to us of such importance as the suffrings of the son of God And his Resurrection is more considerable to us than the exaltation of Joseph For to resolve this question wee have divers things to consider First the suffrings of those who were but men doe easily move us because there is nothing more naturall than to have a fellow-feeling in the Calamities of those who are like us but the griefes of Jesus Christ present themselves unto us in a person which cannot be the object of any commiseration or naturall commotion For wee think of God himself suffring in form of a servant This is the reason wherefore he forbad the tears of those who bewailed him as a man whose affliction is pittied or the losse of whom is much lamented Luke 23. v. 28. Whereupon it is that the history of the Passion is not written in a pittifull and pathetick style as the Lamentations of Jeremiah or the complaint of David over Saul and Jonathan or the ulcers of Job or the sad solitude of the Jsraelites by the Rivers of Babylon For the Gospell doth not propound unto us a spectacle of human calamity but a point of higher consideration Moreover this condoling which hath place in other subjects is found either excluded or swallowed up in this here by more noble and more spirituall motions as are the horrour of our sins which have crucified the Prince of glory the terrour of that dreadfull severity which God hath displayed upon his own Son the admiration of his incomparable wisedome who could joyn his Mercy with his Justice the unspeakable joy of salvation which is derived from thence unto us and the ardent Love which wee bear towards the Father who hath given his Son and towards the Son who hath given himself to death for us For these are the true resentments which wee ought to have of the suffrings of Jesus Christ Now the subject of the spirituall resentments is not naturally perceptible of our affections but is a stranger unto them Therefore it is that they are not moved towards it but as they are drawn unto it by the finger of God And even this is the cause they are not carried thither with so full a vigour and so much readiness as towards those objects whereto they are enclineable of themselves Moreover the spirituall affections although they are strong and vehement are not so easy to be moved and to be felt For forasmuch as they lodge as it were in the center of the Soul they are far from the sensitive faculty which is the source of tears so that they come not thither so soon nor so easily That which I have yet to say belongs to the question following CHAP. III. From whence comes it that the Superstitious are sometimes more moved with the Death of Jesus Christ than true Christians WEE see sometimes Idolaters who having but very little understanding in the mysteries of redemption will weep at the reciting of the Passion of Jesus Christ And neverthelesse a well-instructed Christian and who prizes the Suffrings of his Saviour a great deal more than they that are ignorant will very hardly be moved with it This difference proceeds hence that the Superstitious have before their faces the Passion of Jesus Christ as a tragicall accident which doth easily touch those hearts that are endued with any humanity But the Christian contemplates it with another eye than that wherewith we regard the Calamities of other men The one brings thereunto an humane Commiseration which tears doe naturally follow But the other finds there the subject of many spirituall affections whereof our heart is not so easily susceptible because they proceed not from flesh and blood And the means of framing them to it consist rather in instructions and doctrines whereby wee must handle this matter than in the oratoricall representations of those who reduce it into a Tragedy Moreover it is not an assured proof that he bears most Love towards Jesus Christ that shal have shed most tears for him For oftentimes they proceed as soon frō a tender-heartednes which is more naturall to some than others as from the abundance of piety Many who never wept for the love of Christ nevertheless suffered Martyrdome for the love of him Such a one could not give him so much as one Tear who gave him all his Blood CHAP. IV. Off the vehemency of the thoughts and of the attention required in the action of the Communion And of the weaknesse of the humane spirit herein I doe not here refute those who for want of well understanding our Doctrine think that the spirituall Communion of the Body or Christ consists onely in thought of imagination