Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	body_n	drink_v	eat_v	5,781	5	7.4332	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54011	A plain representation of transubstantiation, as it is received in the Church of Rome with the sandy foundations it is built upon, and the arguments that do clearly evert and overturn it / by a countrey divine.	Pendlebury, Henry, 1626-1695.	1687 (1687)	Wing P1141; ESTC R15015	70,794	77

and whereof he that eateth shall live for ever If it be said this cannot be his Meaning for he delivered this Sermon before his Passion yet speaks of an eating and drinking that was a present Duty so that he could not have this Meaning I say it is true Passiō Christi profuit antequam fuit Beneficia Christi valent tam antrorsum quam retrorsum Ex eo tempore valet ad servandum genus humanum ex quo in Adam est vitiatum Aug. both that Christ spake this before his Passion and the eating he speaks of was a present Duty But what then distinguish between the Time of his Death and the Merit of his Death and the Difficulty is solved He is the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World. Rev. 13.8 i. e. In regard of the Merit Fruits and Efficacy of his Death and the Faith of Believers Not only before his Passion but before his Incarnation the Fathers did all eat the same Spiritual Meat and did all drink the same Spiritual Drink For they drank of that Spiritual Rock that followed them And that Rock was Christ 1. Cor. 10.3 4. Abraham saw his Day Joh. 8.56 And the Apostle giveth this Account of him Jesus Christ the same yesterday to day and for ever Heb. 13.8 3. In what Respect he here calls them by the Names of Bread Meat and Drink 1. Not in regard of their Nature and Substance As if the very Flesh and Blood of Christ were according to the bare sound of the Words very Meat and Drink such as our Corporeal Food is But 2. In regard of their Effect the saving Benefits of his Flesh and Blood or Passion nourish the Souls of the Faithful and preserve them unto Eternal Life even as Corporal Meat that we eat doth minister Aliment to our Bodies and preserve our Natural Lives And thus as it is the Property of Meat and Drink to maintain the Lives of them that eat and drink thereof and as whatsoever being eaten and drunk doth maintain Life is therefore called Meat and drink So it is the proper Nature of the Fruits and Effects of his Body and Blood to nourish the Souls of them that partake thereof to Eternal Life And therefore for their performing that to Souls which Meat and Drink do to Bodies he calls them by the Names of Meat and Drink 4. What kind of eating and drinking this is that he speaks of Or what our Saviour means by eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood What this Manducation of this Spiritual Meat is Per manducationem nihil aliud intelligit quam actum fidei qui consistit in apprehensione applicatione beneficiorum Christi And this is only Spiritual eating by Faith extra Sacramentum without the use of the Sacramental Signs The Romanists confess that he speaks of this kind of eating in this Chapter from the 32d to the 50th verse but then from ver 50. to 59. of eating Orally and Corporally But we say he speaketh only of Spiritual Manducation in this Chapter which doth consist in a partataking by Faith of the Merit and Virtue of his Death the Fruits and Effects of his Passion for us And thus a true Believer eats the Flesh and drinks the Blood of Christ Spiritually when he 1. Believes that Christ's Body was Crucified and his Blood shed for him for the Remission of Sins And 2. Believeth that by this Passion Jesus Christ hath obtained Remission of Sins and Eternal Life for them that do unfeignedly believe in him And when 3. By this true and lively Faith he doth embrace and close with Jesus Christ apply him to himself and from him thus received or manducated receiveth a daily Confirmation and Increase of Spiritual Life and Growth Thus then 1. The Meat our Lord speaketh of is Spiritual Meat 2. This Spiritual Meat is the saving Good prepared for us by the Body and Blood of Christ crucified for us 3. He calls these Fruits of his Passion his Body and Blood because they are obtained by and rise out of his Flesh and Blood sacrificed on the Cross 4. This eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood which he calls by the Names of Bread Meat and Drink is a Spiritual manducating or eating by Faith. This is our Saviour's Sense which is embraced by the true Protestants or Calvinists as Bellarmine calls them Secondly The Popish Sense of this Sermon This is hinted before And in short 1. They confess that the kind of Meat he speaketh of is Spiritual Meat But then they affirm 1. That this Meat is truly and properly the true and proper Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ And 2. That this eating is an Oral and Corporal eating of his true and proper Flesh and Blood. A Manducation that is performed by Mouth 3. That the Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ is thus eaten orally and corporally by the Communicants in the Eucharist This is their constant Tenet that in the blessed Sacrament of the Altar under the Forms of Bread and Wine the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are received orally and corporally and that is eaten this is drunk 4. That this Bodily eating and drinking in the Sacrament is the eating and drinking that is properly and primarily meant by our Lord in this Sermon Et de quâ agitur This is the Mind of the Romanists Now in the next Place I am to shew Thirdly That our Lord Jesus Christ in this Sermon is not treating properly of the Sacrament and Sacramental eating and drinking of his Flesh and Blood much less is he here teaching the Popish Doctrine of Oral and Bodily eating and drinking his true and proper Flesh and Blood in the Sacrament In this Point we have the Consent of the Lutherans Hoc caput non proprie per se ad doctrictrinam de Coena pertinet Chemn Harm p. 1134. De spirituali comestione Dominus ait nisi manducaveritis carnem filii hominis biberitis ejus sanguineni non habebitis vitam in vobis De Myst Missae l. 4. c. 14. yea we have the Suffrage of divers learned Papists who quit this Argument and positively affirm That our Saviour in this Chapter doth not treat of the Sacrament As Biel in Can. Missae Card. Cajetan in Thom. par 3. q. 80. Art. 8. Card Cusan Ep. 7. ad Bohemos and many others Insomuch that Maldonatus on John 6.53 complains sadly that some Catholicks chose to think and speak in this Controversy as Hereticks rather than as the Orthodox and tho he forbear to name them yet he gives their Character in these Words Scio Catholicos scio Doctos scio Religiosos ac Probos Viros esse So that by the Jesuits own Confession we have Catholicks and Catholicks that are Learned and Religious and Honest good Men on our side Yet if this be nothing we have not only learned Men but an Infallible Pope voting for us and expounding our Lord's Words as we do viz. Innocent the

a Child should be before and beget his own Father c. We may not argue from the Divine Power to the Being of Things that are impossible any of these ways But Transubstantiation is impossible all these ways 1. Simply It is a thing contrary unto Potenter non potest efficere ut corpus Christi fit simul actu corpus non corpus simul actu circumscriptum non circumscriptum quia sunt ista contradictoria Aug. and inconsistent with the Nature of God who cannot lie 2. From a supposition of his Will manifested in his Word So it is a thing most contrary unto and inconsistent with his immutable Truth 3. As implying a Contradiction and not only so but big with many Contradictions and those as gross obvious and notorious as can be imagined as hath been shewed When Bonner had affirmed to Philpot That God by his Omnipotence may make himself a Carpet Philpot answered God is able to do whatsoever he willeth but he willeth nothing which is not agreeable to his Word Non potest Deus facere quae sunt naturae suae contraria It is contrary to the Nature of God to be a Carpet for the Creator to be a Creature 4thly We say Arguments taken from the Omnipotent Power of God to prove the being of a thing are only conclusive and cogent or valid when we have a Signification of his Will to do such a thing In this case they conclude For whatsoever he will do that he can do and what he hath signified that he will do we may firmly build upon it that it shall be done whatsoever Difficulties or Impediments may lie in the way Omnipotence can easily level the highest Mountains roll away the greatest Stones dry up deepest Seas It was Tertullian's saying Credo quia impossibile I believe because it is impossible a strange Expression as one would think Yet thus must we says Dr. Stillingfleet taking Impossibility as relating to Second Causes when the thing exceeds all probabilities and possibilities of Second Causes and the ground of Faith to be some Divine Prediction Orig. Sacr. p. 184. But where we want this Evidence of his Will we shall but unwarrantably and without ground expect the Effect in respect of his Power For he can do many things that he will not do He could have made many Worlds at once when this was made he could have made many Suns as well as one he could have prevented the Fall of Man recovered the lapsed Angels but he hath done none of these nor of Miriads of other things easy to have been done in regard of his Power He can maintain our Lives without the use of Meat or Drink give us Bread-corn without sowing and reaping and make our Bodies immortal never to see Death but he doth none of these And that Man would be thought to reason very weakly and absurdly who should argue on this manner God is Omnipotent therefore I shall live without eating or reap without sowing or be immortal and live for ever Arguments from the Power of God only conclude the Being of those things which he hath declared it to be his Will to give a Being unto But here in this matter of Transubstantiation we do not only want the Evidence of his Will for it but have most evident Indications and Manifestations of his Will against it I add 5thly That if we would grant this to them that must never be granted that is That Transubstantiation is no way impossible nor doth imply any Contradiction yet it would rest on them to prove that Jesus Christ doth exert and put forth his Almighty and Infinite Power in changing a bit of Bread into his very Body Blood and Bones as born of the Virgin For we can in no wise on no fashion see it Bernard was wont to say that there are tria mirabilia mirabilissima 1. Deus homo 2. Virgo Mater 3. Fides Cor Hominis This if true might well be added as a fourth being as great and far greater than any of the three If there be such a Transmutation we must say that it is a very strange Change nay a miraculous Change A Miracle a great Miracle as great if not much greater than his Incarnation That God should become Man was a great wonder as all confess and we cannot but think it a greater wonder and more strange that a piece of Bread should become God that that which was Bread in the Baker's Hand half an hour before is now very God our Creator Redeemer and Saviour in the Priest's hand But we cannot for our Hearts believe this that there is any such a wonderful and miraculous Transmutation For 1. It is contrary to the nature of all Miracles that ever were known to be done It was never known that any Miracle did at once destroy and take away the Substance or natural Properties of the Subject whereupon it was wrought and also leave them remaining When Moses's Rod was turned into a Serpent it was not both a Rod and a Serpent at once assuming the form of a Serpent yet keeping the perfect form of a Rod. When the Water was turned into Wine it was not both Wine and Water or Wine under the Accidents of Water But this new Miracle both destroys the whole Substance of the Bread and at the same time preserves and continues in their former place all the Properties and Accidents of Bread without the least change one way or other 2. In true and real Miracles where a Change is made from one thing to another the Change is obvious to the Eye and manifest to the other Senses striking Men ordinarily with great wonder and amazement The Miracles of our Lord Jesus Christ were very visible and conspicuous as when he raised the Dead dispossessed the Devils cleansed the Lepers stopped the Flux healed the Palsie restored Sight to the Blind Hearing to the Deaf Speech to the Dumb Legs to the Lame c. they were all very conspicuous evident and plain to be seen Both they upon whom the Miracles of healing were wrought and others who were Spectators saw them and were taken with great wonder at the beholding of them Mat. 15.30 31. Great Multitudes came unto him having with them those that were lame blind dumb maimed and many others and cast them down at Jesus feet and he healed them Insomuch that the Multitude wondred when they saw the dumb to speak the mained to be whole the lame to walk and the blind to see and they glorified the God of Israel John 6.2 A great Multitude followed him because they saw his Miracles which he did on them that were diseased When he wrought that Miracle on the Fig-tree the Disciples saw it and marvelled Mat 21.19 20. Yea his Miracles were so open and evident that his greatest Adversaries could not deny them John 11.47 the Council that was called against him gave in this Testimony This Man doth many Miracles But now here