Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	body_n	bread_n	transubstantiation_n	2,166	5	10.9952	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14721	Theologicall questions, dogmaticall observations, and evangelicall essays, vpon the Gospel of Jesus Christ, according to St. Matthew Wherein, about two thousand six hundred and fifty necessary, and profitable questions are discussed; and five hundred and eighty speciall points of doctrine noted; and five hundred and fifty errours confuted, or objections answered: together with divers arguments, whereby divers truths, and true tenents are confirmed. By Richard VVard, sometimes student in the famous vniversities of Cambridge in England: St. Andrews in Scotland: and Master of Arts of both the kingdoms; and now a preacher in the famous city of London.	Ward, Richard, 1601 or 2-1684.	1640 (1640)	STC 25024; ESTC S118017	1,792,298	907

Sacrament and the thing whereof it is a Sacrament and consequently betweene the Sacramentall and Reall eating of the body of Christ is briefely and excellently expressed by St. Augustine in Ioh. 6. tract 26. in these words Hujus rei sacramentum de mensa Dominica sumitur quibusdam ad vitam quibusdam ad exitium Res vero ipsa cujus sacramentum est omni homini ad vitam nulli ad exitium quicunque ejus particeps fuerit That is the Sacrament of the Lords supper is received by some unto life and by some unto death but whosoever is made partaker of that thing whereof it is a Sacrament is made partaker of life and not of death From hence we draw this conclusion The body and blood of Christ is received by all unto life and by none unto condemnation But that substance which is outwardly delivered in the Sacrament is not received by all unto life but by many unto condemnation Therefore that substance which is outwardly delivered in the Sacrament is not really the bodie and blood of Christ The Major is proved out of Augustines forenamed place and out of the true exposition of those verses of Iohn 6. viz. verses 27 33 35 48 50 51 53 54 55 56 57 58 63. The Minor is manifest both by common experience and the testimony of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11.17 27 29. We may therefore conclude that the 6. of Iohn is so farre from giving any furtherance to the doctrine of the Romanists concerning Transsubstantiation that it utterly overthroweth their fond opinion who imagine the body and blood of CHRIST to be in such a sort present under the visible formes of bread and wine that who soever receiveth the one must of force also really be made partaker of the other And thus we see that both this distinction of the outward receiving of the signes and the inward receiving of the thing signified is grounded upon Scripture and also that it is overthrowne by this doctrine of Transubstantion every one by that doctrine being truely made partaker of the very flesh and blood of Christ and the bread the Lord whereof who so eates shall live for ever Iohn 6.50 c. And therefore this opinion as contrary to Scripture is to be detested Secondly this doctrine is to be rejected because Answ 2 the maintainers thereof are inforced to support and uphold it with Fabulous narrations and grosse untruthes As for example Paschasius Raabertus who was one of the first setters forward of this doctrine of Transsubstantiation in the West spendeth a whole Chapter to prove that the body and blood of Christ is in such a sort present under the visible formes of bread and wine that whosoever receiveth the one must of force also really be made partaker of the other Paschas de corp sang dom Cap. 14. And in the same place for the further confirmation hereof telleth us that Christ in the Sacrament did shew himselfe oftentimes in a visible shape but especially he insisteth upon a narration which he found In gestis Anglorum but deserved well for the goodnesse of it to be put into Gesta Romanorum of one Plegilus a Priest to whom an Angell shewed Christ in the forme of a child upon the Altar whom first the Priest tooke in his armes and kissed but ate him up afterwards when he was returned to his former shape of bread againe Such another story Iohannes Diaconus reporteth in the life of Gregory the first of a Romane Matron who found a peece of the Sacramentall bread turned into the fashion of a finger all bloody which afterwards upon the prayers of St. Gregory was converted to his former shape againe Jt is likewise credibly related and on their side faithfully beleeved and still is to be read in the Legend of Simeon Metaphrastes in the life of Arsenius how that a little child was seene vpon the Altar and an Angell cutting him into small peeces with a knife and receiving his blood into the Chalice as long as the Priest was breaking the bread into little parts Answ 3 Thirdly this corporall presence overturnes an Article of our faith For we beleeve that the body of Christ was made of the pure substance of the Virgin Mary and that but once namely when he was conceived by the holy Ghost and borne But this cannot stand if the body of CHRIST be made of bread and his blood of wine as they must needs be if there be no succession nor annihilation but a reall conversion of substances in the Sacrament unlesse we must beleeve contrarieties that his body was made of the substance of the Virgin and not of the Virgin made once and not once but often Answ 4 Fourthly this bodily presence overturnes the nature of a true bodie whose common nature or essentiall property it is to have length breadth and thicknesse which being taken away a body is no more a body And by reason of these three dimensions a body can occupy but one place at once as Aristotle de Categor quant said The property of a body is to be seated in some place so as a man may say where it is They therefore that hold the body of CHRIST to be in many places at once doe make it no body at all but rather a spirit and that infinite Answ 5 Fifthly Transsubstantiation overturnes the very supper of the Lord. For in every Sacrament there must be a signe a thing signified and a proportion or relation betweene them both Now Transsubstantiation takes away all for when the bread is really turned into Christs body and the wine into his blood then the signe is abolished and there remaines nothing but the outward formes or appearance of bread and wine And the signe being abolished the thing signified fals to the ground they being Relata Answ 6 Sixthly Christ in saying this is my body did demonstrate or shew something in sight for a thing absent and invisible cannot be demonstrated but Christs body which they imagine was hid under the formes was not seene Therefore it could not be shewed And consequently these words doe not signifie any substantiall change neither are to be taken properly and literally but figuratively and tropologically Seventhly as Christ saith here pointing to the Answ 7 bread This is my body so he saith Iohn 6.35 I am the bread of life but in this place he was not changed into bread why then in the other place should the bread be turned into his body for the speech is all one Answ 8 Eightly when Christ spake these words This is my body the bread was transsubstantiated before or after or the while these words were spoken Before they will not say for the elements were not then consecrated Nor after for then Christs words This is my body had not beene true in that instant when they were spoken Neither was the Transsubstantiation wrought in the while of speaking for then should it not have beene done all at once but successively and one

part after another as the words were spoken one after another But this is also contrary to the opinion of the Papists for they would have it done altogether Ninthly we may not credit this Tenet of Transsubstantiation Answ 9 because the holy Scriptures call the element bread still after the consecration 1 Cor. 10.17 and 11.26 27 28. Tenthly the judgement of the ancient Church Answ 10 doth oppose this Novelty of Transsubstantiation If the Reader would see how the Ancients expounded this phrase and how it appeares they held not this doctrine Let him reade Perkins reformed Catholike of the reall presence Pag. 196 197 198 And thus we have seene the reasons why we must not beleeve this fancie of Transsubstan●iation Doe any absurdities follow this doctrine Quest 22 This Tenet of Transsubstantiation doth bring along with it foure absurdities Answ namely First if the bread and wine should be turned into the body and blood of JESUS CHRIST there should be no signe in the supper and so there should be no Sacrament which cannot be without a visible signe Secondly if the bread and wine should be turned into the body and blood of Christ then the blood must needs be separated from the body which is absurd and impossible Thirdly if this doctrine of Transsubstantiation were true then it would follow that Christ should have a body infinite and by consequent he should not be true man nor truely ascended into heaven which would overthrow the principall Articles of our faith Fourthly if this opinion be true then it will follow that infidels and hypocrites comming to the Lords supper should truely participate the body and blood of Christ and so it must needs follow that God and the devill should be lodged together Many are the absurdities which follow Transsubstantiation which our adversaries w●pe easily off with telling us that they are not incongruities but Miracles For the proofe hereof observe That Iohan. de Combis comp Theolog. lib. 6. Cap. 14. makes nine wonders in this Sacrament viz. First that Christs body is in the Eucharist in as large a quantity as he was upon the crosse and is now in heaven and yet exceeds not the quantity of the bread Secondly that in this sacrament there be accidents without a subject Thirdly that the bread is turned into the body of Christ and yet is not the matter of the body nor resolved to nothing Fourthly that the body increaseth not by consecration of many hosts neither is diminished by often receiving Fifthly that the body of Christ is under many consecrated hosts Sixthly that when the host is divided the body of Christ is not divided but under every part thereof is whole Christ Seventhly that when the Priest holds the host in his hand the body of Christ is not felt by him nor seene but onely the formes of the bread and wine Eighthly that when the formes of bread and wine cease the body and blood of Christ ceaseth also to be there Ninthly that the accidents of bread and wine have the same effects with the bread and wine it selfe which are to nourish and to fill Antoninus part 3. Tit. 13. Cap. 6. § 16 reckons up twelve Miracles and strange ones that are in this Sacrament and he hath them from Iohan. de sancto Geminiano in s●rmone quodam I conclude this question thus That on this manner it shall be easie for any man to defend the most absurd opinion that is or can be if he may have liberty to answer the arguments alleadged to the contrary by wonders and miracles Object 6 But they object here that God is Almighty and therefore nothing is unpossible unto him he can doe all these things which are above rehearsed and change bread and wine into the body and blood of CHRIST Answ 1 First true it is that God is Almightie but in this and like matters we must not dispute what God can doe but what he will Answ 2 Secondly because God is Omnipotent therefore there be some things which he cannot or rather will not doe as for him to deny himselfe to lye and to make the parts of a contradiction to be both true at the same time Thirdly if God should make the very body of Answ 3 CHRIST to be in many places at once he should make it to be no body while it remaines a body and to be circumscribed in some one place and not circumscribed because it is in many places at the same time yea he should make the very body of Christ to be visible in heaven and invisible in the Sacrament And thus should he make contradictions to be true which to doe is against his nature and argues rather impotencie then power vide August de symb ad Catech. lib. 1. Cap. 1. Object 7 They object againe CHRIST hath a glorified body and therefore he may be visible in heaven and invisible in many places at once upon earth Answ 1 First this argument is vaine because CHRIST had no such body when he instituted the Supper and said these words This is my bodie Answ 2 Secondly Christs glorification doth not any way diminish the nature of a true body And therefore it is said Acts. 3.21 That the heavens should containe him untill the day of judgement when he shall visibly descend as he was seene to ascend Quest 23 Is the Eucharist of necessity to be received of all men of discretion Answ Yea it is the Sacrament of Christs flesh whereby all men must be saved Reade verse 27. of this Chapter and Iohn 6.53 and 1 Cor. 10.17 As Baptisme is sometimes compared or resembled unto a begetting so the Lords Supper is to food and therefore as food is necessary for the body so is this Sacrament of the Lords body necessary for the soule Wherefore three sorts of people are much to blame namely First those who care not at all for comming to the Lords Supper Secondly those who will never come but at Easter Thirdly those w●o omit and forbeare comming either I. Because they are so taken up with worldly imployments that they have no leisure to fit and prepare themselves Or II. Because they are at Law with some or have beene injured by some whom they will not forgive but rather forbeare comming to the Lords Table How oft must we receive this Sacrament Quest 24 With an ordinary continuance Answ as oft as we can conveniently Act. 2.42 and 20.7 and 1 Cor. 11.25 This Sacrament must not be once celebrated as Baptisme is but often First because we are once borne but often fed and nourished Secōdly because as often as we worthily celebrate this Supper so often we honour our Christ And hence it was that the Ancients did celebrate this Sacrament every Lords day What is inwardly signified by these Elements Quest 25 of bread and wine Our communicating in the body and blood of Christ by faith Answ For First bread signifies the body of CHRIST Iohn 6.35 55. And in this verse he tooke the bread and

which is very likely hee would have done if hee had writ in Hebrew but into Greeke words as Emmanuel i. e. God with us Eli Eli lammasabachthani i. e. my God my God why hast thou forsaken me Golgotha i. e. the place of a skull Abba which is my Father c Pareus s I adde a sixt and last reason which is taken from these words d Math. 5.18 one jot or iota of the law shall not passe away c. Now Iota is the least letter the Greekes have and Iod the least of Hebrew letters and therefore it being sayd there not the least Iod but the least Iota seemes if not a convincing yet a probable argument that this Gospell was written in Greeke not in Hebrew These reasons considered I had rather thinke and conclude that this Gospell was written by Saint Matthew in Greeke and not at all in Hebrew Thus much may suffice to bee spoken concerning the Authour Saint Matthew Concerning the name of this second volume Quest 11 of holy writ it may be questioned why these Bookes are called by the name of a Testament Answer For the understanding and better resolving Answ 1 of this question it is requisite to know that this word Testament hath a divers signification viz. I. First it signifies a Covenant so with the Hebrewes Berith which signifies a Covenant derived from Barath which signifies to conclude or make a Covenant is taken for a Testament So also the Greekes for this word Testament have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as Aquila hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies an Agreement or Covenant so the Latines they either call it Testamentum or Pactum a Testament or Covenant indifferently II. Secondly this word Testament signifies sometimes the will of the dead where a Testament is there must of necessitie be the death of the Testator e Heb. 9.16 Sometimes againe it signifies the covenant of the living and in this latter sence the Scripture is called a Testament because it is a Covenant of mercie and grace which God made with Adam Noah Abram Moses David and all his elect people III. Thirdly this word Testament doth ordinarily signifie a body of Bookes containing the Historie of those people who were received by God into Covenant that is principally the Bookes of the Law and of the Prophets IV. Fourthly Testament sometimes signifies the bare promises which God made unto Abraham and thus Saint Paul seemes to understand the word a Gal. 3.15.16 V. Fiftly and lastly most commonly this word Testament signifies the body of all Canonicall Bookes wherein is contained the Doctrine concerning Christ who was exhibited and given for a Redeemer of Mankinde b Aretius s I answer againe these Bookes are called by Answ 2 the name of a Testament for this cause I. First because they describe unto us a Covenant whereby we are reconciled unto God which is not a legall covenant of workes but an Evangelicall covenant of faith in Christ II. Secondly because in these bookes are truely expressed the last Will and Testament of the Sonne of God which hee would have us to performe after his death and which is plainly expressed totidem verbis in the institution of the Lords Supper Eate and drinke yee all of this for this is my bloud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the New testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes c Mat. 26.27.18 III. Thirdly because all things which are required in a solemne Will and Testament are here in these books to be found for the clearing whereof observe A Will is either written by the hand or direction of the Testator in his life time or it is unwritten and is called by the Lawyers Testamentum nuncupativum a Will declarative and such is the Will and Testament of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ wherein there are principally these foure things First a Testator which is Christ the Sonne of God the author of this New Testament Secondly an Heire or joint-heires which are all the elect of all ages and hence the Scripture often calleth the Saints Heires and Coheires of Christ d Tit. 3.7 Rom. 8.17 1 Pet. 3.7 Thirdly Legacies or goods given to the Heires by the Testator which are life eternall remission of sinnes the gifts and graces of the Holy Ghost whereby we are enabled to performe in some good measure the Will of Christ as to live holily to adorne our profession to be liberall towards the poore to love one another to beleeve in God faithfully and to call upon him fervently and the like Fourthly witnesses of the Will and these were I. First the Apostles and Disciples of Chrst who are by Christ called his Witnesses and they themselves are not ashamed to bee so called e Luk. 24.48 Act. 1.8 2.32 II. The holy Martyrs are Christ witnesses also because they suffered their blood to be shed for the confession of this Testament III. Thirdly all good Ministers who are interpreters of this Testament and propound the excellencies thereof unto the world are likewise Christs witnesses IV. Fourthly and lastly all the Godly who labour to performe and fulfil the contents of this Will in their lives and conversations are witnesses also of this New Testament Quest 12 Concerning the addition one question more may be propounded and that is why are these Bookes called New Answ The new Testament seeing that the substance of this volume is contained in the other commonly called the Old Testament I answer these bookes are called New for these reasons I. First in regard of the time wherein they were written because in time they were later written then those of the other Testament so we call those things new which in tyme are nearer unto us and those things old which are further distant from our memorie and age II. Secondly they are called New in regad of the promises of a new kingdome which they containe for in the Old Testament almost f I say almost not altogether 1. because the promises of the New Testament are in the Old and those of the Old in the New though the old hath them satis involutè in Typis but the New revelate satis 2 Because this Almost serves to escape the foule error of the Sadduces apud Hugonem Gro●ium de verit Relig Christ pag. 64. And of Servetus apud Calvin Instit lib. 2. cap. 10. pag. 102. 105. 172. And of some other Pseudo-Theologues in these times domi forsan for as all the promises respect the kingdome of the earthly Canaan and that upon these conditions that they should dwell safely securely and prosperously in that land so long as they lived holily before the Lord but the land should spue them out if they forsake the Lord. But this New Testament hath the promise of a new kingdome the kingdome of heaven as also of the abolishing of death of eternall life of bestowing righteousnesse upon us and renewing our humane

pueros Antipa Iohanem Agrippa Iacobum clauditque in carcere Petrum Vers 2 VERS 2. And said unto his Servants This is Iohn the Baptist hee is risen from the dead and therefore mighty workes doe shew forth themselves in him Sect. 1 § 1. This is Iohn the Baptist Quest 1 What is the sense and meaning of these words Answ This is Iohn Baptist that is this Christ which teacheth so powerfully and worketh such great Miracles seems to me to be no other then Iohn the Baptist Now this may be two manner of waies understood namely First thus this is Iohn Baptist that is in both of them there is the like pietie the like Doctrine the like freedome liberty in reproving of vices and their manner of life is not much unlike and therefore in Christ Iohn may bee lively seene But Secondly it seemes rather that Herod by these words was of Pythagoras his opinion who held the transmigration of the soule or that the soules of the dead did passe into new bodies This Doctrine is ascribed to Pythagoras but Volaterranus shewes that it had other authors before him from whom Plato learned it as hee chanced to Travell along with them Now it is evident Plato held this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from many places of his workes For Ad finem lib. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee tels us That through the hatred of a woman the soule of Orpheus went into a Swan and the soule of Thamyrus went into a Nightingall and the soul of Ajax into a Lyon and the soule of Agamemnon into an Eagle with divers other examples So againe In fine Timai Dialogi he tels us that the soules of unjust men passe into women and the soule of those who contemne Philosophy into Cattell and the souls of men who are wholly given to the world and worldly things into Fishes Many examples more hee hath in Phaedro which I omit Quest 2 Whether is this opinion to be embraced received or not And if not then why not Answ 1 First it is to be exploded because to the production of any creature whether man or beast there is necessarily required a Conjunction or copulation of the Male and Female of the same kind or Species that that is of which is produced according to the old principle Omne simile gignit suum simile Every creature begets his like And therfore how can the soule of a man goe out of a man into the body of a Beast Answ 2 Secondly this Doctrine is to be rejected because they themselves cannot tell what or whose soule passeth into the body of a Monster seeing by reason of the uncouth deformitie thereof no certaine Species can be defined No living creature say they can live without a soule nor no soule can animate any Body but the soule of an Individuum which hath a Species And therfore seeing there are many monstrous births unlike to al the several Species of living creatures in the world this must needs be an errour and as grosly false forsaken and avoided Answ 3 Thirdly this opinion is not to bee received for the absurdity of it For if a soule passe from one body to another then I demand whether it enter into a body already perfect and absolute or into some little Particle from which the body begins to be formed and fashioned The first the Pythagoreans dare not avouch because they know that I. A body cannot come unto maturity and perfection without a soule neither II. That two soules can live in one body Nor III. Can they tell how that soule which first is in the body doth depart out of it when the body is perfect that so a strange soule may come in because when the soule departs from any body the body dies Now if they say the second that the soule passeth into the body when the body is but small and newly begun to be fashioned then I would know how the soule which was even now most ample in an ample and large body can be contracted in so small a roome Fourthly it were a most absurd thing to embrace Answ 4 such an absurd opinion as this is or to say that of onebody are begot many bodies of divers Species and that one and the same soule can passe into many bodies of divers species Fifthly if the soule of a wise man and great Answ 5 learned Scholler passe into another man it neither reveales to him into whom it is entred nor remembers any thing it self of those things which it knew so well before which is most stra●ge that the soule should be so forgetfull and therefore as a Tenet false and absurd is utterly to be rejected Now against this it will be objected Object that Christ himself Matth. 11 14. saith of Iohn Baptist This is Elias the same soule which of old was in Elias is now in Iohn Baptist First Iohn being asked whether he were Elias Answ or not answers no h● is not And therefore from the Scripture this exp●si●ion is f●lse Secondly the meaning of our Saviours wor●s Answ may be gathered from the An els speech 〈◊〉 ●●chary Hee shall saith he convert many of the Ch●●●●●● of Israel to the Lord their God and he shall goe before 〈◊〉 Messiah in the Spirit and power of Elias that he m●● turne the hearts of the Fathers to the Children Luke 1.16.17 Now it is one thing to have the soul of Elias and another to come into the Spirit and power of Elias Yea it is worth observing that the Ang●ll doth not onely say that he shall come in the Spirit of Elias lest some by Spirit had understood the soul but also in the Spirit and power Pamphylus martyr ex Orig. lib. 7. in Evang. Matth. Thirdly our Saviour in the place objected Answ 3 saith that Iohn was the Elias which was to come And therefore there was one Elias who of old preached in Achabs time another which was to come in the time of Christ and which was foretold by the Prophet Malachi Fourthly how can the soule of Elias be imagined Answ 4 to passe into the body of Iohn Baptist when the Scripture witnesseth that he laid not aside his soule at all neither died but was translated both with his body and soule into heaven that so to succeeding ages he might be in example or proof of the immortality of the soule and of a better yea an Eternall life VERS 3.4 Vers 3.4 For Herod had laid hold on Iohn and bound him and put him in prison for Herodias sake his brother Philips wife For Iohn said unto him It is not lawfull for thee to have her Many great causes the Baptist had to reprove Herod because many sins did concur in this one fact of his in taking his Brothers wife namely First Adultery in lying with another mans wife Secondly Injustice in rejecting and casting off an innocent wife for he was married when he fell in love with his brother Philips wife and then cast his