Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	aaron_n	christian_a	place_n	18	3	5.8052	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34012	Missa triumphans, or, The triumph of the mass wherein all the sophistical and wily arguments of Mr de Rodon against that thrice venerable sacrifice in his funestuous tract by him called, The funeral of the Mass, are fully, formally, and clearly answered : together with an appendix by way of answer to the translators preface / by F.P.M.O.P. Hib.	Collins, William, 17th cent.; F. P. M. O. P.	1675 (1675)	Wing C5389; ESTC R5065	231,046	593

famed through the whole world for sanctity learning and Prowess wheresore dost thou not consider what Religion made thee so glorious and renowned S. Austin the monk and his forty blessed companions were the first that brought the light of the Gospel from Rome to the Angles or english men from whom thou hast thy denomination this Austin and his fellow-Missioners were all Dianaists or Masse-Priests and received holy orders This much thy own Protestant Chronicles can tell thee To this Austin Bake●… sayes king E●…helbert gave his chief city of ●…anterbury and his own Royal Palace there made sinc●… the Cathedral of that See withdrawing himself to Reculver in the I le of Thanet where he erected a Palace for himself and his successors He gave him also an old Temple standing without the Eastwall of the citty which he honoured with the name of S. Pa●…cras And then added a Monastery to it and dedicated it to S. Peter and Paul appointing it to be the place of the Kentish kings sepul●…hres But in regard of S. Austin the procurer both Pan●…ras Pet●…r and Paul were soon forgotten and it was and is to this day called S. Austins which Abbey S. Austin enriched with divers Reliques which he brought with him from Rome which was a part of Christs seameless coat and of Aarons Rodd thus farr Baker Where you may plainly see out of one of your own Protestant Authors how Christian Religion was first brought into England and planted here by Mass-Priests Here you may see how those that brought it in did dedicate Churches unto them with this intention that the Saints should patronize and protect all those that should frequent their Churches with prayers Here you may also see how in those dayes sacred Reliques were held in esteem and veneration by the Propagators of Christian Religion Finally any body may clearly see by the very notions or names of the festi●…al tymes viz. of Christ-Masse Candle-Mass Lamb-Mass Mi●…hael-Mass Martle-Mass that the Masse was used and held in great veneration by our devout Ancestors ever since England was converted to the Christian saith For it is certain these denominations of the holy times came first from Christians and not from Pagans It is also sure that sanctity and Christian learning could never have been attributed to our heathenish Ancestors Therefore if they were attributed to our primitive Christian forefathers why do we swerve from their pious wayes and Religion which is well known and granted by all Historiographers both Catholicks and Protestants to have been the self same which was and is now in communion with the Church of Rome and consequently that of the Masse Or with what Religion and conscience can the Reformists of our time censure all the Primitive Christians of England since Austin the Monks time to be guilty of the horrid crimes of superstition Phanaticisme and Idolatrie and yet by branding us with those crimes they do it for we hold but the same doctrine of the Masse which they practised taught us and delivered unto us so that by attaching us with those horrid crimes they involve them with us in them also But who could not rather think that any man of reason and understanding any man that hath any spark of belief of the love or feare of God in him or that hath any sense or feeling of the hour of his death of the immortallity of his soul of eternity a●…d of the terrible judgment of God Who I say would not think but he ought rather to ponder well and consider with himself how dangerous a thing it is and of what weight and concernment to his soul and eternal salvation not to shake of all antiquity and the old lyturgy which hath been used and practised by all the orthodox Christians of all ages since Christs time untill now and which is now also in use amongst the most universal Professors of Christianity a lyturgy so well grounded upon many clear and express texts of Scripture backt and seconded by the unanimous interpretations and definitions of all the General Councils and holy fathers of Gods Church in a word a liturgy so well cohering and agreeing with the infinit goodness charity and mercy of God to us whereby he demonstrated his love to us in the highest degree imaginable that could be in this life This mistical liturgy to reject abandon c●…shiere and contemn upon the bare words of some self interessed calumnious opiniators who in comparison with the Roman Catholicks of all ages with the General Couneils and with the whole torrent of holy fathers are for fanctity of life for learning and for veneration of antiquity but like a handfull o●… wilde rude illiterate cow heards to compare with an innumerable multitude of grave Councellors or Judges What man I trow that has any belief or care of his soul if he were not starkmadd would cl●…ave to such kinde of fellows and swerve from all the grand heroes of Gods Church what thing else is this but openly and manifestly to turn ones back to Christ and to contradict his express commandement where he bids us hear his Church or he will count us but for heathens and publicans Did not the Apostle forsooth prophecy unto Titus 2. Tit. 4. thus for there shall be a time when they will not hear sound doctrine but according to their own desires they will heap to themselves masters having itching ears and from the truth certes they will avert their hearing c. These words can in no wise be alluded to the Roman Catholick nor to their doctrin of the Mass which is of as old a standing as Popery is for our adversaries say that the Mass and Popery are convertible terms But all Ecclesiastical histories do attest that there have been Popes or Bishops of Rome ever since the Apostles time therefore if Popery and the Mass be convertible terms the Mass has been immediately from the Apostles time and consequently it cannot be that unsound doctrine the Apostle prophecied or spoke of to Titus Neither do we finde in the Acts of the Apostles or elsewhere that the Apostles ever opposed the Mass or Popery either which if it were a Phanatick superstitious or Idolatrous doctrine and liturgy as the good translator stiles it to be doub●…less they would have done tooth and nail and would never have suffered it to have ●…rept into Christs Church and so venemously to have infected her S. Pauls faith and the Romans was the same when he wrote these words unto them for I desire to see you that I may impart unto you some spiritual grace to confirm you that is to say to be comforted together in you by that which is common to us both your faith and mine Rom. 1. did the Romans differ then in Religion and Lyturgy from their first Bishop or Pope no certainly therefore it is much to be seared nay in all reason and probability if it be not a theological demonstration that the opposers of the Mass be those pe●…ple the

eaten at the same time for it would be eaten in the host by the Priest and at the same time it would not be eaten in heaven Also it would be in a point and not in a point at the same time for in the host it would be in a point and in heaven it would not be in a ●…oint at the same time Therefore seeing it is impossible that one and the same body at one and the same time should be eaten and not eaten should be in a point and not in a point It is also impossible that Christs body should be both in heaven and in the host at the same time Answ. Before I answer this argument I presuppose with all Philosophers that a thing may move or be moved two manner of ways viz. by a motio per se that is its own proper motion and by a motio per accidens that is by its accidental motion by reason of the motion of another thing wherein it is contained sor example when a man is in a ship his own proper motion or motio per se is when he goes up and down the ship and his motio per accidens or accidental motion is his being carried by the ship towards his intended voyage and this is the difference between these two motions that what moves or is moved by a motio per se is never at quiet or rest while it is in that motion But that which is moved only by a motio per accidens although it be carried from one place to another yet it may be at rest and quiet in it self and without any proper moving or stirring so may a block or a stone be accidentally moved in a cart and yet not moved at all in it self but quiet and still i●… it s own proper place Likewise the self same thing viz. the same man may at the same time move two contrary ways at once he may move westwards towards his journey by his accidental motion in the ship wherein he is carried that way and yet at the same time he may walk from the west part of the ship to the east part of it by his own proper m●…tion and so the same thing may at the same time move and yet be quiet and also move two contrary wayes by these different motions This doctrine which very experience shews us to be true being presupposed I answer the Mounsieurs argument thus first by denying his supposition viz. that Christs body is movable in the Sacrament because it is in it by reason of its substance and all substances secundum se as schoolmen call it that is in themselves are immovable for all things that are properly moved from one place to another are moved by reason of their quantities and not of their substances and therefore because Christs body is in the Sacrament immediatly by reason of its substance or of the substantial conversion of the bread and wine immediatly into his substance it follows evidently that it is immovable in it I answer secondly and distinguish his major thus to move and not to move at the same time with a motio per se his own proper motion is contradictorie I confess the major to move and not to move at the same time but an accidental motion that is to say if a body be at the same time moved by reason of the motion of another thing wherein it is contained as in its improper place I deny the major and the reason is clear for then only is a true and formal contradiction betwixt opposit things or propositions when there is an affirmation and negation of the same thing at the same time and after the same manner but no●… if the thing time o●… manner be different as for example There is no contradiction in this viz. that Peter should speak and Paul should hold his peace at the same time because they are not one and the same man Nor in this that Peter should be a Bachelour now a married man next year because although he be the same Peter yet it is not at the same time Nor also in this that Peter should be at the same time an Embassadour in France no Embassador in England because though he be the same Peter and at the same time yet he is not after the same manner Even so we say of Christs body in heaven and in the Sacrament for it is in heaven in its proper shape and place and may remain there quiet and still without any motion and yet it may be in the Sacrament in another manner viz. Sacramentally and move there per accidens by the motion of the Sacramental species in which it is contained and which is but its improper and equivocal place Just as we now said that a man may go eastwards in a ship and yet at the same time be carried westwards by the same ship at the same time or as a stone or block may be moved p●…r accidens by the motion of a cart or ship and yet remain unmoved in its own proper place all which we know by experience doth often happen without any contradiction because the manner of moving is not the same the one being a motio per se or proper motion and the other being but an accidental improper motion of the body that is in the cart or ship although their motions are proper and per se unto them This solution concerning motion may serve also concerning been eaten being in a point in a place because Christs body in the Sacrament is in a quite other manner then as it is in heaven in its own proper natural humane shape for it is in heaven with its quantitative dimensions and in its proper univocal place but it is in the Sacrament by the dimensions of the Sacramental species only and in its improper and equivocal place which in rigour is no place at all and though the Sacramental species may be said to be in their proper place by reason of their quantitative dimensions yet Christs body cannot be said to be so in them because it is in them Immediately by reason of its substance and consequently as in a point for substances per se that is as they are in themselves possess no place from hence is seen that all the Mounsieurs examples are to no purpose for their force is only bent against a natural and circumscriptive being and place and not against a Sacramental being or place Since this arrow had no better luck he outs with his fourth Rodon 8. Two relatives are allwaies different as the father and the son the husband and the wife c. and relation is alwaies between two things that really differ as the equality between two ells the resemblance between two crows c. In a word nothing can have relation to it self but whatsoever hath relation must necessarily have it to some thing else as appears by the definition of relation But to be distant is a relative and not