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	life_n	separation_n	4,198	5	9.8832	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96477	Six sermons lately preached in the parish church of Gouahurst in Kent. And afterwards, most maliciously charged with the titles of odious, blasphemous, Popish, and superstitious, preaching. / Now published by the author, I. W.	Wilcock, James, d. 1662.	1641 (1641)	Wing W2118; Thomason E172_30; ESTC R16426	70,070	78

divels verse 20 21. Neither indeed can there be any communion between Christ and Belial now they might possibly except Though they did eat of things sacrificed to Idols yet they did not beleeve they had any communion with divels or that they were in so doing made partakers of the table of divels The Apostle answers that reply by a double argument The one taken from Israel after the flesh which did still observe the ceremonies of the Law and the legall sacrifices are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the Altar verse 18. and if of the Altar then of the Idol which is over the Altar and though the Idol be nothing yet of the Divell to whom the Gentiles sacrifice in the Idol verse 19. The other argument taken from the Christians which are after the spirit which have an Altar too Heb. 13. 10. though only mysticall and far superiour to theirs because more spirituall of which they which are partakers all worthy receivers have a communion with the things signified upon the Altar The Corinthians themselves were not ignorant of that the Apostle speaketh unto them as men that understood it was so verse 15. he carries it not out upon his own authority bu● with their knowledge and assent The cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the Communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which we breake is it not the Communion of the body of Christ and if there be communion in these there is communion in those if with God and Christ in his Altars then with the Idoll and the Devill in his Altars This is the coherence and the inference of the Text. This being already affirmed by the Apostle and acknowledged by the Corinthians for his interrogation is it not is Emphatica affirmatio the whole argument is grounded upon an Hypothesis which must not be denied we ma●e no more work to prove it but waite upon the Holy Ghosts further illustration of it as he shall enable me and your patience permit There is one word for the most part praedominant in every Text in this the word Communion is it it is the chief veine in the body of it and runs through every line and part and it is very fit for the season Communion now especially to be spoken of when there is so much need of Communion when faction and division have made the thoughts of our hearts otherwise too great there to have some thoughts of communion That you may know what it is the better you may consider three Communions in the Text they make each of 3 Communions them a severall part The first is Sacramentall between the signs and the things signed 1 Calicis The Cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the Communion of the bloud of Christ The second is the Spirituall between the things signed and the 2 Capitis receivers We are all partakers of one bread which though last in the Text is the second to be inserted because by the Apostle it is made the cause of The third Communion which is mysticall between the receivers 3 Corporis and themselves one with another for we that are many are one bread and one body or to read the words more agreeable to the originall and therein I have the judgement of Beza Because there is but one bread we that are many are one body The first of these is peculiar to the season the Sacrament at the solemnity of the Sacrament and the ground of the other two For first there is Communio Calicis and from thence springs the second our Communion with Christ which is Capitis and the third our communion one with another which is Co●poris Saint Austine affirms them all Sacramentum Pietatis vinculum charitatis signum unitatis in Johan Tract 27. I call them all Communions because they are all cum unione and where there is union there needs must be communion Though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the originall be sayd only of the first which is Sacramentall and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the other which is mysticall yet they are made to differ but as the effect and the cause the ancient translations know no difference between them these last ought to have as full and as firm communion as the first the end of that being to effect these the Sacramentall Communion for our spirituall which is with Christ our head and for our mysticall which is with one another our body Ideo institutum ut corpus in terris capiti quod est in Coelis coadunetur Aug. Ser. 28. in Erem I begin with the first Communio Calicis the Sacramentall Communion and that because it is the seale of all the rest the cement of all our 2 Calicis Communions the Union of Communion The Cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ The Bread which we break c. Now a Communioni●s rightly defined a relation between two or 2 Paci● union of two or more in one thing which is common In the sacrament are two things 1 The signes 2 The things figned These two by the 1 Outward signe vertue of Divine operation are made one and thence is the Sacrament rightly styled A Communion untill this Union come there is no Communion at all res terrena Coelestis which Iraeneus makes the parts of the Sacrament never come together they are at distance look how high the heaven is from the earth nec verit as signo nec virtus Sacramento saith Cyprian till they meet in one conjunction no truth there 2 I ward grac● in the signe no mercy here from the things signed till mercy and truth both meet all the vertue in the Sacrament is in the Union of the parts and when that Union is there is then a Communion Take we a view of the parts we must know them first before we can say any thing of their Union or of the Communion of them The first is res terrena the outward and visible signe which is in 1 Ou●wa●d fight effect but one though in number two even as the thing signed one invisible grace or as St. Bern saith rather unus Christus in quo est omnis gratia formally the signes and the things figned are but one but materially two saith the School They are two in number so delivered by Christ at the first Institution so exhibited by the Apostle at the reinstauration and so received by our Church and all places where rightly received at the Solemnization and these two severally considered and not joyntly the Bread asunder from the Wine the better to illustrate the death and passion of our Saviour which was in the separation of his Blood which is the life from the Body but after they are received they come together again as they did this day the Resurrection Christ now dying no more The Commemoration is of Christs death butthe Communion of

then these which is not to be forgot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word for benevolence and charity The Sacrament it self was wont by the Ancients to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Collection a Gathering because there used ever at such gathering of the people to receive to be a gathering for the poor withall Let not this slip call it a Cup of blessing from thence let the poor receive a blessing from you that you may from God Calix 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Gods benevolence and charity to you of yours to his poor members for him The first of these belongs only unto us which have the ministeriall power of consecration We blesse the Apostle speaks it in our persons but the other belongs to you as well as us to blesse God for it to pray for his blessing upon it but then you must remember that your blessing is not operativè but only optativè a wish not a work that belongs to God as I said before but this to us so the words cui benedicimus may be said of all and that is all needs be said of it The first signe the Cup of blessing I passe to the second the Bread which we break Th●se signes are The b●ead one as Joseph said of Pharoabs dreams one in nature yet two in number they make both but one part of the Sacrament one thing is in effect signified by both yet one was not thought sufficient for usby our Saviour either to shew his death which is the end of the Sacrament or to seal to our faith which is the use of it and by two signes as by twowitnesses will be an end of strife We may yeeld three reasons for it why these and why both these are exhibited by our Saviour First in both these consists the chief maintenance of our life they are the principall supporters of it Bread alone will not serve Man li●eth not by bread only nor yet wine alone there is no living alone by the Cup though some make a shift to stay by it long enough yet they cannot live by it man is made of flesh and bloud and needs both to feed him Bread and Wine and in our spirituall food Christ would have no want he takes them both they are the best the cleanest food of our life and so fittest to represent the food of the soul Secondly There are no such things to shew the death of Christ by as these mark how the Bread is thrashed and ground and sifted and baked before it can be fit good And the wine stript and trodden and p●essed pressum antequam expressum before it is made fit to drink So was Christs body The Plowers plowed upon his back the souldiers thrashed him the Jews fifted him the teeth of the Lyons to Ignatius the teeth of death to him ground him small enough the grave was the Oven to bake him So was his bloud the Crosse was the presse The Prophet might well ask him why are his Garments red So many thorns and nails such a wound in his side were windows enough to let out all his bloud The Bread and the Wine very aptly intimate all this and this is even all the end of the Sacrament Thirdly The naturall body of Christ is not only signified by the Sacrament but also his mysticall which is his Church which is one made up of many beleevers and is not the Bread one made of many grains and the Cup one made of many grapes no such Symbolls of Vnion as these are So are the faithfull kneaded and knit together so incorporated into one and therefore saith Saint Austine Christ commends unto us his body and bloud in those things quae ex multis redigunt in unum that so the Sacrament might be signum unitatis a very Communion as it shall appear after and to be this is another end of the Sacrament The signes then are both fit other reasons might be given but these are the chief but yet a reason would be given why the Apostle calls not this signe the Bread of blessing as well as he did the other the Cup of blessing it is to be observed besides that in the 11 to the Corinthians Verse 24. where the Apostle fals upon this matter again there he mentions blessing only of the Bread and not of the Cup at all belike he thought once naming it in both was enough for both and that his saying of it once was enough to send us to his quod accepi à D●mina to the first institution of it and there we finde them both blessed a like Matth. 26. 26 27. and it is worth the marking that the word which the Apostle useth for the blessing of the Cup is the same that the Evangelist useth there for the blessing of the Bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both and the word which the Apostle useth in the other for the blessing of the Bread is the same that the Evangelist useth for the blessing of the Cup it is Eucharistia in both to shew that the words are both of one sence and that the signes were both alike blessed But besides he speaks not here of the blessing of the Bread because he was to mention a necessary Ceremony belonging to the signe being indeed a part of it which may not be left out and that is the breaking of the Bread and that alone made the words of the Text full The Bread which we break and of this minde is Pareus Breaking of the Bread is a most significant Ceremony annexed to the signe it doth best shew the Lords death of any not that any such thing was done to Christs body a bone of him could not be broken I will not say with Saint Chrysostome he suffereth that to be done in the Sacrament which he could not suffer to be done him upon the Crosse we may not think that he doth suffer any thing there neither doth that Father think so but it is broken to shew his many sufferings of what nature of what number soever they were breaking is a Metaphor to expresse them and the Prophet Isaiah hath it of his passion He was broken for our iniquities Isai 53. and the Apostle speaks it fully Hoc est Corpus meum quod pro vobis frangitur This Ceremony our Saviour himself used at the institution He brake the Bread to shew indeed that he was not only broken in his passion but he was willingly broken that he did break himself for indeed the nails and the thorns and the spear could not have broken him not so much as his skin no more then the souldiers could break his legs had not he been willing to have it done to be broken had not he been principall agent in it as well as sole Patient of it and broke himself As he used it then from his institution we use it still The Bread which we break and indeed the rather to shew that we our selves were chief act ours in his breaking

it was for us for our sakes he was content to be broken we did sit our sins all of us had an hand in breaking him and in sign of that it is sti●l The Bread which we break But the chief cause of our breaking of it is that which Saint Chrysostome gives patitur frangi ut omnes impleat every one could not take a little if Christ did not suffer himself to be made so little and to shew he gave his body to be crucified for all he appoints his signe to be broken for all This Ceremony and no other he appointed for this signe we may not so well away with that of the Papists which use round Wafers and give to every one one no breaking at all nor yet so properly allow of that of ours in some places cutting and mangling of the Bread and not any signe of breaking Christ was known at first in the miracle of five Loaves and there was breaking of Bread after the Resurrection he was made known unto the Disciples by breaking of bread The Apostles practice in the Primitive Church was breaking of Bread and in the Sacrament he makes it his Ceremony He brake the bread all Authority all Antiquity makes especially for this Ceremony and being it self of such use it behoves us to make much of it too and so much to be spoken of it and of the first part of the Sacrament The outward signe We be come now to the second part of the Sacrament Res caelestis 1 part The inward Grace The inward and spirituall grace which answers to the signes in number yet is in nature but one Vnus Christus in quo omnis gratia saith Bernard yet Christ gave both His body to be crucified and his bloud to be shed his body to be meat indeed his bloud to be drink indeed and in the Sacrament he instituted signes of both The Cup which we blesse the Bread which we break they are both as yet to be considered severally till we come to the Communion to their coming into one the joyning of them both together As yet we take the Text in parts the second part is now to be taken notice of and in that according to the order of the Apostle 1 The Bloud of Christ Some take it Metaphorically for the soul 1 The bloud of Christ so in the Law Sanguis est anima Christ indeed gave himself and he did consist of soul and body both he had not took upon hi● our nature else if he had not had a perfect humane soul neither had he redeemed any soul at all if he had not had a soul himself Tolle animam Christi Praesta quid Deus redemit saith Tertullian to Marcion And in his soul he suffered more then in his body the fears the sorrows the wounds of it are past any mans expression witnesse his heavy complaining Anima mea tristis est his strong crying Pater si possibile est his bloudy sweating his fear his whole Agony none but he could ever feel such wounds the guilt of a world of sin the sence of the wrath of God none but his soul could carry such sorrows Something it is meet should be to remember them as well as those of his body the soul cannot be resembled by any thing the bloud carries the neerest resemblance Sanguis est anima or at least in loco animae we may allow of that If not that then take it literally his naturall bloud the very substance of it that which he gave so liberally to be shed upon the Crosse the Bloud of the Paschall Lamb the bloud of all the Jewish sacrifices were but Commonstratives of that that is not now to be had not to be shown again Christ suffered once for all his offering of himself was but once substantially to be made and made by himself his flesh and bloud are now glorified with his Godhead and become impatible Care sanguis usurpàrunt regnum Dei in Christo saith Tertullian only we remember that and the Wine in the Cup is the nearest resemblance of it not Commonstrative as the Type but Commemorative of the Truth of his Bloud That We may adde to it the Bloud of Christ Metonimically the merit of his Bloud that which he effected by shedding of his Bloud the remission of sins our reconcilement and peace with God our Righteousnesse Sanctification Redemption 1 Cor. 1. 30. All these through his Bloud through Faith in his Bloud His Bloud which speaketh better things then the Bloud of Abel this cryed for vengeance his was Sanguis clamans too but it spake Father forgive them it cryed for mercy and reconcilement The benefit is specially intended by the Bloud the purging of sin and purchasing of peace this is chiefly to be remembred and we do this when we say the Bloud of Christ For it is not the substance of his Bloud that cleanseth it comes not to all it comes not at all but the merit of it by the efficacy and vertue of it this was the end of our shewing it and this is the summe of what may be said of the first The Bloud of Christ The next is the Body of Christ we consider that also two wayes 2 The Body and both of them are intensive in my Text First Substantiam Corporis Secondly Efficaciam meritum both are to be remembred in this part First The Body the substance of it The same Body which was crucified Corpus quod pro vobis traditum est are the words of the institution The Syrian interpreter renders it Pagra which saith Beza is properly Corpus mortuum it is to shew his death and it cannot be shewed plainer then by such a word which signifies his dead Body That we must shew the Bread which is broken is his signe Corporis quod frangitur which is broken for you 1 Cor. 11. 24. And when we shew that we shew his w●unds and stripes his beating and brusing and bearing all that he did suffer on his body the Commemoration is to be of his passion Secondly we remember the merit of his passion that for which he gave his Body to be crucified the purchase for which he paid such a price the remission of sins they were all laid upon his Body Davids sin upon Davids son Dominus transtulit peccata tua are the words of Nathan to him not abstulit but transtulit from thee upon him and not only his but ours he bare our sins faith Isaiah 53. He bare them on his Body on the Tree 1 Pet. 2. 24. we were sold to sin to death our body to the grave our soul to hell To corruption to torment he gave himself for us both body and soul ut redimeret saith Saint Paul Tit. 2. 14. Remission Redemption are the main effects of his passion we cannot remember his death but we must remember the desert and merit of it So I have done with the parts severally the outward signe the inward grace