Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	bread_n	eat_v	show_v	5,537	5	5.6290	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07801	A defence of the innocencie of the three ceremonies of the Church of England viz. the surplice, crosse after baptisme, and kneeling at the receiuing of the blessed Sacrament. Diuided into two parts: in the former whereof the generall arguments vrged by the non-conformists; and, in the second part, their particular accusations, against these III. ceremonies seuerally, are answered, and refuted. Published by authoritie.	Morton, Thomas, 1564-1659.	1618 (1618)	STC 18179; ESTC S112905	183,877	338

essentiall and necessarily to be performed in this Sacrament are all vnder that expresse commandement of Christ saying Do this c. beginning first at these words Christ tooke bread and when he had blessed it he brake c. All which circumstances deliuered by Precept the Church is tyed to obserue Vpon this occasion it were no great difficulty to shew how the Church of Rome at this day hath degenerated from ancient Rome by transgressing the commandement of Christ who said Do this c. and by doing contrarily in diuers weighty obseruable points and circumstances there commanded by Christ as namely first Christ tooke bread gaue thankes and blessed it Ergo the consecration that Christ vsed was in prayer and not in these foure words This is my body Secondly Christ taking bread brake it and as is confessed took diuerse parts out of one loafe and set not before them as it were so many breads diuers wafers Thirdly Christ gaue it vnto them saying c. Ergo they heard what he said and his words were not vttered or rather muttered in an vnaudible voice Fourthly Christ commanded them saying Take Ergo he spake vnto them in a knowne tongue and not in a language they could not vnderstand Fiftly Christ gaue saying Take Ergo doubtlesse for the point is confessed from the light of Antiquity so they tooke it as he gaue it namely with their hands and had it not put into their mouthes Sixtly Christ that said to them all present Take said also Eate Ergo the vse of the Sacrament was propounded to be eaten and not to be onely gazed vpon and persons present were Actors and not Spectators onely Seuenthly Christ likewise tooke the Cup giuing it vnto them saying Drinke you all of this Ergo the Communicants did equally participate of both the Elements as being the pledges of both the Body and bloud of Christ not dismembring the Seale of the Couenant nor defrauding the faithfull of their complementall right Lastly Christ expressed the speciall end of the Eucharist Do it in remembrance of me which is as S. Paul doth interprete it Shewing the Lords death Ergo it is vnproperly called a Sacrifice Propitiatory seeing that the death of Christ is thereby onely Commemoratiuely shewne and not operatiuely and corporally executed herein Thus we finde that how many actions haue bene mentioned concerning the Institution of Christ so many preuarications and transgressions haue bene committed by the now Church of Rome which the ancient mother Romane Church would haue condemned as sacrilegious if they had bene practised by any Church in her time But you call vpon vs to consider your next Exception SECT XI The second Accusation vsed by the Non-conformists against Kneeling is from the Intention of Christ by foure pretences Their first pretence is from the nature of a Banquet Christ ordained this for a banquet whereat we are to act the part of the Guests of Christ in imitation to resemble our Coheirship with him in his Kingdome now it suteth not with a Coheire or Guest with Christ to kneele at the Table and it is contrarie to the Law of Nature to Kneele at a Banque twhich is a Gesture of inferiority and abasement and we may not lose our fellowship with Christ to sit thereat whereby Christ would represent vnto vs our Banquet in heauen Our Answer We acknowledge this Sacrament to be the most gratious Banquet that euer was ordained for the sonnes of men But how As a bodily Banquet trow yee No for if our Sauiour had meant to haue furnished out a bodily Banquet he would haue bene more plentifull in other varieties than in Bread and Wine But it is a mysticall Banquet for the replenishing of our soules spiritually with the body and bloud of Christ which we feed vpon Non dente sed mente non per fauces sed per fidem that is Rather with the minde than with the mouth as the Fathers speake And therefore you are not to require or expect therin the very forme and fashion of an ordinary banquet where it will become men to talke eat and drinke to inuite and pledge one another and how then can you exact of vs the manner of Sitting And for any of you so to speake of familiaritie and holding it vndecent for adopted Coheires with Christ to kneele as the receiuing of this Sacrament I thinke it can hardly be heard euen of some of your owne fellowship without some horror of mind For seeing that the Right of our adoption is the same in vs without the Sacrament which it is in the receiuing thereof then by your Argumēt it must be held an Indecorum in any Christian to be seene praying any where vnto Christ the Son of God vpon his knees SECT X. Their Reply It is one thing to be a Coheire and another thing to act the person of a Coheire at other times when we present our selues in supplication then take we vpō vs the persons of suters so we humble our soules in prayer but at this Banquet we represent the persons of Coheires as we shall be at the great Supper in heauen and now it is our office to giue resemblance hereof Our Answer We haue indeed such kind of Similitudes in Scripture to shadow out vnto vs the happie fellowship of the Communion of Saints in heauen as the calling it a great Supper wherein All things are prepared namely that either the infinit loue of God would or the omnipotencie of the same loue could prouide for the eternall enioyment of the faithfull in Christ Iesus who talketh furthermore of Sitting eating and drinking in his Kingdome But to tell vs that this Supper of the Eucharist was propounded to be an expresse and proper Type and Similitude of the heauenly is more than I thinke any Ancient learning euer taught For the immediate mysticall obiect of this Supper is the body and blood of Christ the words of Christ pointing it out This is my body and This is the new Testament in my blood But how Of his bodie and blood as glorified in heauen No but as Crucified and shed on the Crosse which is expressed sufficiently by Christ calling it blood shed for you And the end of this Sacrament is set downe thus In remembrance of me Now Remembrance is not of things to come but only of things past to wit the worke of Redemption by his Passion in his body and blood whereof Saint Paul hath made a plaine Comment As often as you eate of this bread and drinke of this Cup you shew the Lords death till he come Which Comment was taken from the Analogie of the Sacrament with the thing signified thereby for the bread broken betokeneth his bodie Crucified for vs the wine powred out resembleth his blood shed and separated from his bodie Can you find in all these any one Type of the Celestiall ioy which is signified else-where by the promise of eating and drinking in the

and cannot the like alteration be had of Abuses in actions which otherwise in themselues are indifferent Thirdly in naturall and artificiall Obiects both Art and Nature seeme to exclaime against your Consequences For as the Orator speaketh Solem è mundo tollere videtur qui vsum propter abusum tollit He seemes to pull the Sunne out of the firmament that taketh away the vse of each thing for the abuse thereof For we may see there is a kind of sinne which may be called Daemon meridianus a deuill that danceth at noone-day whereby is meant that the glorious light of the Sunne is notably abused by some most impudent Transgressors for the acting of their sinnes in pompe and iollitie And is not the vniversalitie of creatures said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to groane and trauell in birth as desirous to be deliuered Surely from the tyrannie of mens Abuses In briefe to professe to reforme abuses onely by vtter abolishing of the things abused is as much as to teach the Chirurgion to professe no cure of mens diseased limmes but onely Abscision The Barber no Art but shauing to the quicke and euen flaying away the skinne The Magistrates no Rule of punishing but according to Draco his Lawes Sanguine scriptas onely by death SECT XXVII Our third Proofe from Reason is by shewing other meanes for reforming the abuses of things than by abolishing the things themselues The meanes which are to be vsed in reforming of things abused are three Abrogation Translation and Correction Our Non-conformists allow and practise onelie the first kinde vrging and pressing the necessitie of Abrogation Abolition and vtter extirpation of Ceremonies which haue once beene superstitiously abused But our Church in her singular wisedome as she hath most religiously dealt with the number of superfluous and Idolatrous Rites in the Romish Church which she hath abandoned so hath she discreetlie ordered those Ceremonies which she thought good to retaine by remouing onelie the abuses and superstitions and reforming them either by Translation or else by Correction I will giue an Instance in either of them First the Crosse about the celebration of Baptisme which was vsed of the Papists before the act of Baptizing in a superstitious opinion for a kinde of Adiuration for the auoiding whereof our Church hath translated the signe of the Crosse to haue place after the Sacramentall act as attending the Sacrament and making vp the retinue of ornaments about it As therefore M. Caluin speaking of the change of the Saboth day of the creation into the day of Christs Resurrection and as I may so say recreation of mankinde saith Dies Sabbati non sublatus sed translatus est that It is not quite remoued but translated So may we deale in alteration of Ceremonies as hath bene alreadie exemplified in the diuerse customes of ancient Churches And iudge I pray you whether our Churches alteration of a Ceremonie from a false and superstitious into a true and religious signification be not an excellent kinde of Translation Secondlie although Translation be a kinde of Correction yet seeing that euerie Correction is not a Translation we proceed to speake concerning that kinde of reformation of Ceremonies so abused which is by Correction whereof Chemnitius hath considered right well speaking of Ceremonies which haue degenerated from their truly wholesome vse Tales vel corrigendi vel mutandi vel exemplo Aenei serpentis prorsus tollendi sunt Such Ceremonies saith he are either to be corrected or altered or else according to the example of the Brazen Serpent they are to be quite taken away To which purpose Zanchius requireth them that retaine The feast daies which had beene superstitiously polluted vt ea superstitionibus defaecata sanctificentur that is That they being purged from the lees of superstition may be sanctified namely to an holie vse So that euen as where the snuffe of Torches or Candles doth grow so bigge and so blacke that it hindreth the light we do not therefore take away the light but rather do cleanse or cut off the snuffe it selfe In like manner such hath bene the wisedome of our Church and State in this Land in reforming of the Popish Abuses in our Ceremonies that she hath purged the superstitious doctrines which is their opinion of Efficacious holinesse and Idolatrous ●pplication of Diuine honour but yet hath she preserued the light of Morall significations which are Sanctity in the Minister Constancy in euerie Christian baptized into the faith of Christ and Humilitie in all faithfull Communicants at the receiuing of the sacred Mysteries of Christs death SECT XXVIII Our fourth Proofe from Reason against their last Generall Argument especially in their Assumption wherein they argued from the extirpation of the Ceremonies of Pagans for the abolishing of the Ceremonies of Papists Wee owe a right euen vnto our enemies and therefore must acknowledge that it is a like errour to affirme that there ought to be the same difference of Religion in case of Ceremonies betweene Protestants and Papists which should be betweene Papists and Pagans as it is to require the same distance betweene England and Calecute which is betweene Rome and England especially considering that the gods of the Gentiles were all deuils For among the innumerable Altars that were vsed of the Heathen we reade not of any one that had any truth of Religion in it but onely that one at Athens which had this inscription vpon it To the vnknowne God Which notwithstanding was alas but a glympse of true light for still God was vnto them but as vnknowne As for the Papist his Creed is the same with ours in beleeuing the Onely omnipotent God Maker of heauen and earth vnto whom he cōmendeth his prayers although sometimes Recto sometimes but Obliquo modo and together with vs he professeth the Lord Iesus and beleeueth to haue propitiation in his Bloud So that the furniture of Habites and Vestiments which that Church vsed being primarily consecrated to that supr●eme end to wit the worship of God in Iesus Christ may not be esteemed of equall abhomination with the Habits of Paynims which were dedicated vnto diuels Besides there are betweene Vs and the Papists certaine other Communia principia Common Principles of Religion whereupon we vse to ground our Christian conclusions to wit Holy Scriptures Ecclesiasticall Stories Writings of ancient Fathers together with common Axiomes receiued of all Christian Schooles by reason whereof we can confute their errours and more easily reforme the Abuses of their Ceremonies by Correction But betweene Vs and Pagans the case is farre different For in that their Ceremonies are properly and immediately directed to false gods we haue none or but very few common axiomes whereby to reduce them from their Heathenish and Idolatrous opinions whence it is that the superstition of their Ceremonies is best refuted by onely remouing them SECT XXIX The fourth generall ground of Confutation of their former Argument is from the

do make men transgressors of Gods Law or depraue the truth of Gods worship or depriue the worshippers of grace and saluation Nay but which doth make your Calumniation most apparent shee hath plainly professed the contrary both in iudging her owne Ceremonies Alterable and in not condemning the different Ceremonies of other reformed Churches as hereafter will plainly appeare SECT V. Their second place of Scripture This is a speciall part of the libertie which Christ hath purchased for vs by his death and which all Christians are bound to stand for Gal. 5.1 Stand fast saith the Apostle vnto the liberty vnto which Christ hath made vs free and be not intangled with the yoake of bondage Shewing that the seruice which we are now to do vnto God is not mysticall Ceremoniall and carnall as it was then but plaine and spirituall Our Answer The Assembly of Non-conformists who made this Obiection from that Text of the Apostle Gal. 5.1 did as it may seeme neuer consult with the Context both because they expound this Scripture as spoken of all mysticall Ceremonies which the Apostle deliuereth onely of Iewish Rites as also for that they vnderstand those words to be spoken meerely of Ceremonies as if they had beene vnlawfull in themselues which the Apostle speaketh mixtly as implying thereby that doctrine of necessitie which false Apostles had attributed vnto them namely an opinion of necessitie whereby the whole Gospel of Christ concerning iustification by remission of sinnes was consequently ouerthrowne according as the Apostle concludeth saying Stand in the Libertie wherewith Christ hath made you free c. And againe Behold I Paul say that if you be circumcised Christ can profit you nothing Why but onely because Circumcision being the Seale of the Couenant of the Morall Law doth exact of euery one that holdeth Circumcision necessary to saluation an absolute performance of euery minim and iot of the same Law therfore it followeth whosoeuer wil be iustified by the Law becometh a Debter to the whole Law and consequently Christ is become of none effect vnto you Next concerning Iustification by the Law of the old Testament whereof Circumcision was the Seale the Apostle teacheth that the difference of the Old and the New Testament in respect of Iustification is as much as betweene Agar the seruant ingendring vnto bondage and Sarah the Mistris and free-woman that bringeth foorth the heire of promise so that whosoeuer will be heire of saluation must first become a noble Sarasin and not remaine a base Agaren that is he must be such an one as seeketh perfect iustification by the Gospel which worketh obedience in loue and not by the exact and strict Righteousnesse of the Law which driueth men into a slauish obedience through an hellish feare This your owne Witnesses could not but vnderstand and know that that Yoake condemned in this Scripture doth not signifie the vse or yet so much as the mysticall signification of Circumcision because the Apostle Saint Paul himselfe did circumcise Timothy but by it is vnderstood that opinion of the necessitie of this Ceremonie to saluation which the false apostles had taught among the Galatians which is so vndoubtedly there condemned that M. Caluin sticketh not to call them Insulsos Interpretes Absurd or vnsauory Interpreters who teach that the Apostle in this Epistle contendeth onely for the Libertie of Circumcision in regard of the vse and not rather against the necessitie of that vse for the obtaining of Iustification and saluation thereby Which necessitie howsoeuer it may be found in Popish doctrine of Mysticall Rites yet shall you as soone prooue Rome to be England as find the Popish superstition in our English profession concerning the vse of Ceremonies Thirdly in your obiection you vnsoundly and vnsauorily confound these two termes Mysticall and Carnall as though euery Mysticall Ceremonie were consequently Carnall Know you not that the Sacraments of the new Testament are the most Mysticall Ceremonies of all others neuerthelesse none but an vnchristian or rather Antichristian spirit would call them Carnall For albeit the Iewish Ceremonies deserued that name because they signified first and primarily outward and carnall promises as the cleansings of the flesh and the enioyments of earthly blessings but remission of sins and heauenly blessednesse they shadowed onely remotely and vnder a second veile yet the Sacraments of the Gospell are immediate Signes and Seales of the spirituall things themselues such as are remission of sins redemption from death diuell and hell and a full interest in the promises of an eternall inheritance So likewise it sauoreth of the flesh and not of the Spirit to call our Ceremonies to wit Surplice Signe of the Crosse and Kneeling Carnall except you can finde any Carnality in Sanctity Constancie in the faith of Christ or in religious Humility which are the immediate and Morall significations that these three Ceremonies do represent SECT VI. Their second Obiection is taken from Reason Their first Reason If these Ceremonies do not take away our Christian liberty and insuare the consciences of men by their imposition how shall not the Popish Ceremonies be excusable and free from accusation in this behalfe Our Answer from their owne Witnesses To question How in this case must needs be a note of inexcusable ignorance for what more impardonable ignorance can there be than not to reade that which our Church hath set downe in capitall letters wherein she auoucheth her owne integritie professing to vse but a few Ceremonies and those also without opinion of Necessity and not this onely but furthermore doth often condemne the Church of Rome for infringing of Christian liberty by her Ceremoniall constitutions both in respect of the nature and number of her Rites First I say in regard of their Nature by attributing vnto them such an opinion of Necessity which taketh away all Indifferencie which is done as well by holding and exercising them as necessarie meanes of attaining vnto eternall life as also by placing in them the chiefest and most essentiall part of Gods worship Secondly in respect of their number and multitude which is become importable These two exceptions against the Church of Rome which we haue onely pointed at are particularly and largely acknowledged and set downe by that golden quill of M. Caluin throughout his fourth booke of Institutions cap. 10. where he inueigheth against as he calleth it Barbarum imperium the Barbarous Thraldome of Popish Ceremonies But why Euen because if we respect the nature of them they affirme saith he their Lawes to be spirituall and properly belonging vnto the soule and necessarie for eternall life whereby the Kingdome of Christ is inuaded and Christian liberty of mens consciences is altogether ouerthrowne seeing that they seeke iustification and saluation in their owne obseruations wherein they place Ipsis simum Dei cultum vt ità loquar in ipsis contineri the summe of all Religion and piety meaning the essentiall worship of