Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	dead_a	life_n	raise_v	9,308	5	6.9695	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33215	A paraphrase with notes upon the sixth chapter of St. John with a discourse on humanity and charity / by W. Claget.	Clagett, William, 1646-1688.	1693 (1693)	Wing C4389; ESTC R24224	72,589	201

shall be to him a means of that Eternal Life to which I shall raise him at the last day and this as certainly as if he were now in actual possession of it V. 54. Because our Lord continues in his Speech to make a separate mention of his Flesh and Blood it follows that he still speaks of his Death and the particular Doctrine concerning his Death which would be entertained with the greatest difficulty viz. that he was a Sacrifice for the Sins of the World and therefore a Saviour because crucified c. The lively belief whereof is that which our Lord means by eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood and not eating and drinking the Sacrament of his Body and Blood which a Man may do to his Condemnation And therefore although St. Austin sometimes understood these words of the Eucharist yet he did not so understand them as if every one who partakes of the Eucharist does also Eat the Flesh and Drink the Blood of Christ for he manifestly denied that the Wicked were partakers of the very Body of Christ though they partook of the Sacrament of his Body And yet 't is impossible but they must do the one as well as the other if it be true that the proper Substance of the Body of Christ is in the Sacrament as the Church of Rome pretends And by consequence if this corporal eating be intended it seems clearly to follow that no Man who partakes of the Eucharist can be damned which is certainly very false and therefore corporal eating cannot be meant here but only spiritual eating And so St. Austin understood it although he applied these Words sometimes to the Eucharist inasmuch as he denied that the Wicked do eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of Christ although with their Mouths they take the Sacrament of his Body and Blood But because this spiritual eating which is necessary to Salvation is by no means confined to the participation of the Eucharist and because many do not partake spiritually in the Body and Blood of Christ that yet do partake of the Sacrament I cannot understand why our Saviour should speak here directly and properly of the Eucharist and therefore I adhere to the sence of those Fathers who interpret this place and those that follow of spiritual Actions only 55. So that the Doctrine concerning my Sufferings and Death which will give the greatest offence to Unbelievers is the most excellent Meat and Drink because it is the Food of Souls when 't is received with a firm and efficacious Faith and will secure also the Resurrection of the Body to everlasting Life V. 55. He continues to distinguish the Flesh from the Blood and therefore still speaks of his Passion giving some kind of preeminence to Faith in his Death above the belief of other particular Doctrines though that would be admitted with greatest difficulty 56. And therefore he that believeth my Death to be a Sacrifice for the Sins of the World and does thereby learn that Duty which it teacheth and receive that Comfort which it affordeth he will love me and devote himself entirely to my Service because I have thus humbled my self though that be the reason for which such as you will be violently prejudiced against me And on the other side he shall be peculiarly beloved and cared for by me For though in love to Mankind I am to be made an Offering for Sin yet 't is a particular care I shall express towards those who have a true sense of my Sufferings in their behalf who make a right use of them and return that thankfulness and obedience which their Faith requires 1 Tim. 4.10 V. 56. His pursuance of the same Expression still shews that he speaks of the same thing viz. believing his death to be a Sacrifice c. And here he intimates that his Sufferings which would be a Stumbling block to Unbelievers would be an effectual Engagement to all good Men to love him and that their fervent Love and humble Gratitude would be rewarded with his especial Love For as God's dwelling in Men signifies his gracious Presence amongst them and his delight in doing them good so their dwelling in him signifies their Love to him and constant attendance upon the doing of his Will and the delight they have in knowing themselves to be always in his Presence 57. And one remarkable Expression and that of weight enough to make you consider what I say of my peculiar love to every such Believer is what I have told you already and I do earnestly repeat it again As sure as the Father who sent me will raise me from the Dead so surely will I raise up every one to everlasting Life that believeth my Doctrine and liveth by his Faith V. 57. Here our Lord seems to leave the special consideration of his Sufferings and Death and to speak now of his whole Doctrine as he had done before for as by eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood we are to understand believing the merit and instruction of his Death c. so by eating Him we are taught before V. 35 47 50. to understand believing him in general that is believing all his Doctrine 58. Mark therefore what I say to you V. 33 35. at first That I am that true Bread from Heaven wherewith the Manna that your Fathers ate and the Bread which you ate yesterday are not to be compared for they were good for nothing but to preserve a mortal Life for a short time whereas he that feedeth upon the Word and Doctrine which God hath sent you from Heaven shall be raised from the Dead to ascend thither and to live there for ever V. 58. Here he concludes all with returning to the same thing and using the very Expressions that he began withal V. 32 35.50 than which we need not a clearer proof that he all along spake in the same style and in those Expressions of eating and drinking perpetually alluded to the Manna and the Loaves in the Wilderness which gave occasion to all this Discourse 59. These things he said publickly in the Synagogue at Capernaum where the People whom he had fed in the Wilderness found him V. 24 25. and gave him the occasion of discoursing in this manner by following him for the Loaves V. 26. and when they found themselves disappointed by setting the Manna which Moses gave their Fathers against the feeding so many thousands the day before V. 31. And the great end of his Discourse upon this occasion was to draw their Minds from worldly to heavenly Things and to make them more desirous of the Spiritual and Heavenly Benefits of his Miracles than of the bodily relief which they had found by them 60. But because he expressed his Mind in this figurative way and was by many understood as if he had commended to them the eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood in the literal sence therefore many even of those that had for some time followed him

remember what he said rather than that they should understand it presently But neither to the Multitude nor to his Disciples did he clearly signifie the Reasons and Ends of his Passion this seeming to be one of those things that they could not bear now but which the Comforter should reveal to them afterward It may therefore be said That our Lord did not deliver the Doctrine concerning the Death he was to suffer and the blessed Fruits thereof to all Believers in such-like plain words and expressions as I have endeavoured to use in the Paraphrase because he used to conceal the former from the People and reserve the clear manifestation of the latter till after his Resurrection and Ascension when these Sayings would be brought to remembrance and better understood than they were at first But one may ask Why did he not at least tell these Men that these were still but Expressions of spiritual things by way of allusion to things sensible To which I answer That he did thus explain himself to his Disciples presently after and that upon occasion of this gross Mistake see V. 62 63. and nothing appears to the contrary but that this Explication was made in the Synagogue in the Hearing of all But whether it was so or not 't is sufficient for us that he explained himself as he did to the Disciples In the mean time Cardinal Cajetan's Argument that this place cannot be understood of the Eucharist because then it would infer a necessity of the Peoples receiving the Cup is an Argument ad Homines plain and strong Neither is it to be avoided by pretending that Christ does not speak of the Species either of Bread or Wine but of the Things contained under them and therefore that because whole Christ is contained under one kind the Condition of Eternal Life is fulfilled by receiving him under either kind For they that receive him under the Species of a Wafer or a morsel of Bread only which is to be eaten cannot with any Modesty be said to drink his Blood which is yet made as necessary as eating his Flesh We grant that eating and drinking being taken as figurative Expressions do signifie the same thing viz. believing and we say that believing when 't is expressed by eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood refers to that particular Object of Faith the Death of Christ signified by the separate mention of his Body and Blood But eating and drinking being taken properly do not signify the same thing If therefore our Saviour is to be understood properly of receiving him in the Eucharist by eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood The words are plain beyond all dispute that he is to be received by drinking his Blood there as well as by eating his Flesh Which since the Church of Rome denies to the Laity the Cardinal had good reason not to understand these words of the Eucharist being concerned as he was to make the best of all those Usages which he found in his Church And yet I doubt this great Man hath not quite delivered that Church from all the Reproof this very Text has for their half Communion For although these words are not to be understood properly of the Eucharist yet I think what Grotius says cannot be reasonably denied viz. that here is a Tacit Allusion to the Eucharist And if that be true the Text even thus taken will condemn their witholding the Cup from the Laity For the Allusion must consist in this that as according to the Institution of the Eucharist the Holy Bread and Cup were separately taken to shew forth the violent Death of Christ so in these words of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood the believing of his meritorious Death and following the Example of his Patience c. is expressed by the separate mention of his Flesh and Blood and therefore of eating the one and drinking the other Which allusion is so apt that I should not wonder if it inclines those that enquire no further to believe that our Saviour here speaks of the Eucharist But since the separate taking of the Holy Bread and the Holy Cup in the Eucharist on the one side and the separate mention of his Flesh and Blood on the other is that in which the Allusion consists it is utterly destroyed by the pretended Concomitance i. e. by giving the Body and Blood not as separated but as united or by giving the Body and Blood to be eaten not the Flesh to be eaten and the Blood to be drunk In short as our Saviour did Sacramentally represent his Death by taking the Holy Bread and the Holy Cup separately and giving them separately so he did in Words alluding to that Sacrament represent the same Death i. e. by the distinct mention of his Flesh and Blood and he represented also the necessity of Faith in his Death under the distinct Expressions of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood And therefore they who in the Eucharist pretend to give both Kinds in one destroy the reason why these words allude to the Eucharist But if they say that our Saviour here speaks properly of the Eucharist nothing can be more evident than that they openly condemn themselves in denying that to the People which as they say he required in proper and express Terms and that is the drinking of his Blood And in truth they destroy the significancy of the Sacrament which is no otherwise a representation of our Lord's Death than as it represents the separation of his Flesh and Blood And then I desire them to tell me how they can be said to commemorate the Death of Christ by receiving a Sacrament that shews forth the separation of his Body and Blood who do not receive them separated but united St. Paul concluding the End of the Sacrament from the Institution of it said As often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come The Reason whereof is exceeding plain viz. Because the separation of the Blood from the Body is shewn by the distinct taking of the Bread and the Cup to eat the one and drink the other But this Reason is so confounded by the Half-Communion and the Doctrine of Concomitance that the Institution is not only contradicted but I fear the Sacrament is denied to them that receive one Kind only and that they have not so much as an Half-Communion inasmuch as they do not receive a Sacrament that shews the Death of Christ 54. But he that is so far from rejecting me and being offended at me because of that painful Death which I am to suffer that he doth on the other hand receive all that Divine Instruction which it does afford and turns it into spiritual Nourishment by learning the high displeasure of God against Sin and his infinite Love to Mankind and the Vanity of this World and the worth of his own Soul and the necessity of Repentance and of a Godly Life my Death