Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	drink_v	eat_v	lord_n	9,664	5	4.7498	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25225	The additional articles in Pope Pius's creed, no articles of the Christian faith being an answer to a late pamphlet intituled, Pope Pius his profession of faith vindicated from novelty in additional articles, and the prospect of popery, taken from that authentick record, with short notes thereupon, defended.	Altham, Michael, 1633-1705.; Altham, Michael, 1633-1705. Creed of Pope Pius IV, or, A prospect of popery taken from that authentick record.	1688 (1688)	Wing A2931; ESTC R18073	87,445	96

of Sins Mark i. 4. And so likewise is Baptism and Repentance Acts ij 38. And yet I suppose the Vindicator will not say That either Baptism or Preaching or Repentance are propitiatory Sacrifices But perhaps he will say That all shedding of Blood made for Remission of Sins is a propitiatory Sacrifice I cannot consent to him in this neither for there is a shedding of Blood sacramental and not real which is made to represent the shedding of Christ's Blood upon the Cross and that is no propitiatory Sacrifice But what if it be real Though it be yet will not the proposition be universally true for the Blood of our Lord was really shed and for Remissions of Sins too at his Circumcision and yet Circumcision was no Sacrifice In a true propitiatory Sacrifice three Things are required 1. There must be a real Effusion of Blood. 2. That real Effusion of Blood must be for the Remission of Sins 3. That Effusion of Blood must be by the Death of the thing offered None of which are to be found in this Action of our Blessed Saviour at his last Supper and therefore it could not be a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice But if we should grant which we cannot do that this were a Sacrifice and a propitiatory Sacrifice too will it by a necessary Consequence follow that every Mass-Priest at this day doth in the Mass offer a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and the Dead Yes saith the Vindicator For though Christ was offered but once upon the Cross of which St. Paul speaketh Hebr. vij 27. yet in this manner as Christ offered himself at his last Supper we believe that the Apostles and their Successors were commanded to repeat it in a perpetual memory and representation of his Death and Passion by Christ's own Institution when he said to them Do this in remembrance of me in which words he gave them power of doing the same that he had done To this I answer That in the same manner as Christ offered himself at his last Supper he is offered still i. e. Sacramentally and that by the command of Christ we are obliged often to celebrate or repeat this Sacrament in memory of his Death and Passion upon the Cross And that by virtue of those Words Do this in remembrance of me Power was give to the Apostles and their Successors to do the same thing he did i. e. to celebrate this Sacrament in memory of his Death and Passion on the Cross All this we readily grant but what is all this to the Priest's Offering in the Mass a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and the Dead Those of the Roman Communion do indeed lay great stress upon these words Do this in remembrance of me pretending to find therein a power given to every Mass-Priest to offer up the Son of God as a true proper and propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and the Dead But if they would but consult St. Paul he would better inform them what the importance of these words is For after he had recited the words of Institution and in the close thereof these very words Do this in Remembrance of me in the very next words he tells them what it was they were to do in remembrance of him saying As often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come 1 Cor. xi 26. 2. Having gone as far as he can with his Scripture proofs he calls in the assistance of Antiquity telling us with sufficient confidence That this i. e. the matter contained in this Article is the Sence of the Primitive Fathers Whether it be or no is the thing we are now to consider and for that purpose I shall examine his Quotations out of them His first Witness is St. Chrysost Hom. 7. I suppose he means 17. in Ep. ad Hebr. where it is said We still offer the same Sacrifice c. To this I answer What St. Chrysostom meant by those words I know no body can better inform us than St. Chrysostom himself who immediately subjoins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or to speak more properly we make a commemoration of the same Sacrifice And in the same Homily had the Vindicator carefully perused it of been so honest as to have noted it he might have found such Expressions as these We offer indeed but it is in remembrance of his Death This Sacrifice is an Example of that Sacrifice This which we now do is in commemoration of that which hath been done But that which the Vindicator seems to lay the great stress upon is That St. Chrysostom in this Homily and likewise l. 6. de Sacerd. calls the Eucharist a Sacrifice We grant it but if he will let him explain himself he will tell him upon what account he so calleth it in this Homily Because it representeth the Sacrifice of our Lord's Death and therein we commemorate the same till his coming again And in the other place Because we pray unto God that he would receive the Sacrifice of his Death as a satisfaction for our Sins His next Evidence is St. Ambrose sup Ps 38. Where he speaks of the Priest's offering Sacrifice for the People and of Christ's being offered up upon Earth when his Body is offered St. Ambrose in the same place explains himself saying The Shadow went before the Image followed the Truth shall be The Shadow in the Law the Image in the Gospel the Truth in the Heavens O Man go up into Heaven and thou shalt see those things whereof here was an Image and a Shadow Where he plainly tells us that what is done here upon Earth is only an Image or Representation And in another place he saith In Luc. l. 5. c. 7. We have seen him and look'd upon him with our Eyes and we have thrust our Fingers into the print of his Nails For we seem to see him that we read of and to have beheld him hanging upon the Cross and with the feeling Spirit of the Church to have searched his Wounds Now as St. Ambrose here saith We see him hanging on the Cross c. In like manner doth he say He is offered up upon Earth when his Body is offered For as their own Gloss upon the Sentences of Prosper saith Christ is Sacrificed i. e. his Sacrifice is represented and a commemoration is made of his Passion His next Authority is Cyril Alex. Anath 11. We celebrate in our Churches an Holy Life-giving and Vnbloody Sacrifice What St. Cyril meant by this Unbloody Sacrifice he himself will best inform us if we consult him about it for in another place he saith Cyril contr Julian l. 10. We having left the gross Ministery of the Jews have a commandment to make a fine thin and spiritual Sacrifice And therefore we offer unto God for a sweet smelling savour all manner of Vertues Faith Hope Charity And in the same sence that he calls these Sacrifices doth he call

one kind after Consecration the Body of Christ is signified And in his Book of Sacraments he hath these expressions In eating and drinking we signifie that Flesh and Blood which were offered for us Ambr. de Sacram. l. 4. c. 4 5. And l. 6. 1. Thou receivest the Sacrament in a similitude It is the Figure of the Body and Blood of our Lord. Thou drinkest the likeness of his precious Blood. And again Bread and Wine remain still the same thing they were before and yet are changed into another thing i. e. They are the same things really and in substance but another thing Sacramentally and in signification As to his last Authority taken from St. Cyril Alex. Ep. ad Coloss Though there be some Rhetorical aggravations the like whereunto may be found in other of the Fathers some of which I have given you an account of yet do I not see that any thing more is design'd by St. Cyril in this place than only to assure us of Christ's real but Spiritual presence in this Sacrament For that he never dreamt of any real and substantial change of the Elements therein is plain from his own words in another place where he saith * Cyril in Johan l. 4. c. 24. Christ gave to his believing Disciples pieces of Bread not pieces of his Body And again † Id. Ad Object Theodor. Our Sacrament doth not assert the eating of a Man i. e. Flesh and Blood that were to draw the minds of the Believers in an irreligious manner to gross cogitations I confess also That under one kind alone is received Christ whole and entire that being a true Sacrament THIS he tells us is a consequence of what is declared above and if so then must they stand and fall together If the foundation be defective the Superstructure is in danger If the Antecedent be false the Consequence can scarce be true Having therefore throughly sifted and examined the preceeding Article and found no Foundation upon which to build our Faith that there is any such real and substantial change wrought in the Elements of the sacred Eucharist after Consecration as is there pretended nor any reason to receive their monstrous and new invented Article of Transubstantiation into the Articles of our Creed we may justly reject this which he calls a consequence thereof But to shew that we have other reasons besides the inconsequence thereof to reject this Article as a Sacrilegious robbing of the People of one half of the sacred Eucharist let us consider the Institution of it and the constant practice of the Church thereupon If we consider the Institution we shall there find that our blessed Saviour in words as plain as possible did institute his Holy Supper under both kinds we may also find that as he did institute it so likewise he did administer it under both kinds we may also observe that He who said to his Disciples Take eat did also say unto them Drink ye all of this and in the close of all he leaves this word of command with them This do in remembrance of me as if he should have said what you have seen me do the same do ye And it is evident by the Apostles practice hereupon that they understood this to be the meaning of their Master And that this was not to remain a duty only during their time but in all after Ages of the Church St. Paul is very plain saying As often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup 1 Cor. xi 26. ye shew forth the Lords death till he come And as for the practice of the Church thereupon it is very evident that for above a thousand years after Christ the Eucharist was always administred in both kinds So that if we have any regard either to the Institution or Example or Command of Christ or to the Practice of the Apostles or of the Church of Christ for so many Ages we have great reason to reject this Article as a great Novelty And indeed so it is for the first Foundation of it as a thing necessary to be believed and practised is laid in a Decree of the Council of Constance in the year of our Lord 1416. But the Vindicator will tell us that we are mistaken here for he pretends to find some footsteps of it in the Scriptures and for this alledgeth certain passages out of the sixth Chapter of St. John where our Saviour speaks sometimes both of Eating and Drinking and sometimes of Eating only To this I answer That our Blessed Saviour in that place doth not speak any thing of the Sacrament of his Body and Blood but only of a Spiritual feeding upon him by Faith. For when he held that conference with the Capernaitan Jews this Sacrament was not then instituted nor of two years after and therefore no conclusive Argument can be built thereupon But he urgeth us with the Authority of St. Basil in his Epistle ad Caesar Patr. where he saith he finds these words It hath the same efficacy whether a person receives from the Priest one part or more Whether these be the words of St. Basil or how truly they are transcrib'd I have not the opportunity now to examine but admitting for the present that they are what is all this to the denying of the Cup to the Laity and forbidding the Administration of the Sacrament in both kinds under so severe a penalty But I find St. Basil cited by Johannes Gerhardus for a quite different purpose Johan Gerhard de Sacra Coena c 9. §. 43. Basil l. 1. de Bapt. c. 3. for he brings him in speaking on this wise If he who by eating offends his Brother be void of Charity what shall be said of him who dares idly and unprofitably both eat the Body and drink the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ And again What is the duty of a Christian Id. in Moralib sub finem Let him cleanse himself from all filthiness of Flesh and Spirit and so let him eat the Body and drink the Blood of Christ But at last he urgeth us with the opinion of Luther Melancthon and Spalatensis That in this point Christ hath left no necessary precept but that it may profitably and lawfully be received under one or both kinds To this I answer 1. That our Faith is not founded upon Luther's or any other Man's assertion but upon the Institution of Jesus Christ 2. That Luther wrote his Epistle to the Bohemians before he was fully grounded in the truth and that afterwards he did retract according to the example of St. Austin many things that he had written To this end you may find him begging and beseeching his Reader to read his former writings with pity and commiseration In praefat Tom. 1. Before all things I pray and beseech the godly Reader and I beseech him for our Lord Jesus Christ's sake that he would read these my writings with judgment yea and with great pity remembring

that I was sometimes a Monk a mad Papist so drunk so drown'd in Popery that I was ready to kill every one or assist and consent to their death if in any things they differed therefrom c. I hold That there is a Purgatory and that the Souls there detain'd are help'd by the Prayers of the Faithful THE Vindicator here tells us that he doth verily believe and is fully satisfied that there is a Purgatory but where it is or whether there be a true and proper Fire there or how long that punishment lasts these are no Articles of his Faith. He might have added Or what it is For the Council of Trent upon which he builds his Faith doth not tell him that So that to subscribe to this Article is in effect to subscribe to he knows not What nor Where nor Whether nor How long nor indeed Why. It may not be amiss therefore to acquaint you what the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is concerning Purgatory which I shall do out of their most Authentick Record viz. The Council of Trent Sess 25. Decret de Purgator Wherein it is declared That there is a Purgatory and that the Souls detain'd there do receive assistance from the suffrages of the Faithful but especially from the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar And all who do not believe the same are by that Council anathematized which makes it a necessary Article of Faith. For thus the Council determineth If any one shall say that after a Man hath received the Grace of Justification the guilt of his Sin Sess 6. Can. 30. and the eternal punishment due thereto is so remitted that there remains no temporary pain to be satisfied for by him either in this World or in Purgatory before he can enter into the Kingdom of Heaven let him be Anathema And in another place the same Council tells us Sess 22. cap. 2. That the Sacrifice of the Mass is a truly propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and for the Dead who are not yet throughly purged And to confirm this there is a Canon of that Council in the same Session in these words Can. 3. If any one shall say that the Sacrifice of the Mass is only a Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving or a bare Commemoration of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross and not a propitiatory Sacrifice Or that it is profitable only to him that receives it and ought not to be offered up for the sins pains satisfactions and other necessities both of the quick and the dead let him be Anathema And the Catechism ad Parochos which always speaks the sence of that Council teacheth the same Doctrine telling us Part. 1. Art. 2. n. 5. That there is a Purgatory Fire wherein the Souls of the Godly being tormented for a certain time are expiated that so the Gates of the eternal Country may be opened unto them into which nothing defiled can enter This is the Doctrine of the Romish Church touching Purgatory which we are required to subscribe unto in this Article wherein we are taught and it is expected that we should steadfastly believe 1. That there is a middle state for the reception of Souls departed which is neither Heaven nor Hell. 2. That this state is a state of pain and punishment 3. That in this state they are to satisfie for some temporary punishments which were not accomplished nor accounted for in this life 4. That those tormented Souls may be assisted and relieved by the Prayers and Alms-deeds of their Friends here but especially by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar Now this Doctrine we cannot subscribe to having as we think great reason to reject it For 1. We do not find in holy Scripture any mention made of any other place for the reception of Souls departed besides Heaven and Hell and therefore we look upon it as a fond thing vainly invented 2. Nor do we find any the least footsteps of a Popish Purgatory among the Primitive Fathers nor for many hundred years after Christ In lib. advers Luther There own Martyr Roffensis deals plainly with us telling us That so long as there was no care of Purgatory which fairly implies that there was a time when Purgatory was either not known or not much cared for no Man sought after Indulgences for upon that depends all the opinion of Pardons If you take away Purgatory wherefore should we need Pardons Since therefore Purgatory was so lately known and received of the whole Church viz. not till the time of Boniface VIII about the Year 1300. who can wonder that there was no use of Indulgences in the beginning of the Church But though there was not then there is great use made of them now and would you know for what reason Erasmus in a witty Expression of his will give you a true account They do wonderfully affect the Fire of Purgatory because it is so profitable for their Kitchins But the Vindicator will tell us That both Roffensis and we are mightily out in our Calculation for he hath found very plain Footsteps of this Purgatory both in Scripture and Antiquity Which whether he hath or no is the thing now to be examined He produceth only one Scripture viz. Matth. xij 32. where it is said Whosoever shall speak against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this World nor in the World to come Whence he thinks it follows by a necessary consequence That there are some Sins which shall be forgiven in the next World though not in this To this I answer 1. That if we should allow him this Exposition yet will it not thence follow that there must of necessity be a Purgatory Fire in which the Souls departed must be purged and have their sins pardoned For 1st Whether there be any true and proper Fire there this Gentleman knows not it is no Article of his Faith. 2. The Purgatory they speak of is not a place of pardon but of pain and punishment For according to their Doctrine Sin is already pardoned before the Souls enter into Purgatory only they are to remain there for some time to make up some satisfaction which was not completed in this Life But 2dly We cannot allow him this Exposition for it is so far from being a necessary consequence from these words that a contrary one seems to be plainly designed therein It shall not be forgiven neither in this World nor in the World to come i. e. It shall never be forgiven but shall certainly be punished both in this Life and in that to come So that whether we allow or disallow of this his Exposition this Scripture will not serve his purpose His Argument from Antiquity makes indeed a greater shew which is built upon these Foundations 1. That the ancient Fathers did frequently speak of an Intermediate State between Death and Judgment 2. That they did often make mention of a Purgatory and a Purgatory Fire which was to be