Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	abbot_n	bishop_n	king_n	2,571	5	3.6334	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40639	Missale romanum vindicatum, or, The mass vindicated from D. Daniel Brevents calumnious and scandalous tract	R. F. (Robert Fuller), 17th cent.	1674 (1674)	Wing F2395; ESTC R6099	83,944	185

as partly will be more manifest in the next Chapter CHAP. XIII Transubstantiation proved in all the ages of the Church THis terrible word Transubstantiation is much baited at by this learned Doctor even as the word homousion declared and determined by two General Councils was impugned by the Arians because it was new and not found in the Scripture even so this word approved by two general Councils was rayled at by hereticks when they could not disprove what was specified thereby I will not contend for the word but for what is signified thereby the Councils of Trent indeed approves the word sess 13. cap. 4. and explicates it to be the Conversion of the whole substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the body and bloud of Christ so also defines it can 2. In this sence I shall produce Fathers and Doctors of all ages and times since Christ and so confirm what the Doctor jeeringly yet most ignorantly affirms when he says that the Masse began with Transubstantiation as indeed it did for the Mass was never without it when the conversion of bread and wine is the essential part of the Masse as it has been fully declared I let passe his plain contradiction when forgetful of what he had said before admitting the Masse to have been in the Roman Church for near 1200. years past he now says that it began with Transubstantiation which he will have to have been begun from the Lateran Council held in the year 1215. where this matter was declared to be of Faith not as if it was then newly invented but as the common Faith of the Church wherein the whole Christian world agreed for there were present besides the Pope Innocent the 3d 412 Bishops the two Patriarchs of Constantinople and Jerusalem the Legates of Antioch and Alexandria Archbishops Primates and Metropolitans 75. Abbots and Priors 800. Legats and Procurators of Bishops and others without number The Embassadours of both the Emperours Roman and Grecian of the King of France England Hungary Jerusalem Cyprus Aragon and many other Princes who all consented to this declaration in opposition to some heresies of those times Now that such was the doctrine of the Roman Church before that Council is manifest by the opposition that was made against Berengarius who for the contrary opinion was condemned in three several provincial Councils several learned men of those times did write against him as Lanfransus Archbishop of Canterbury I. de sacram Eucharist The Church spread in the whole world acknowledges bread and wine set on the Altar to be consecrated and in the consecration to be changed incomprehensibly and ineffably into the substance of the flesh and bloud of Christ In like manner Algerus Guitmans and Petrus Cluniacen who lib. 1. Epist 2. Let them see what foolish incredulity what blinde doubting it is either not to see or doubt that bread is changed into the flesh of Christ and wine into his bloud by divine power when by the same many things are changed into another even in the nature of things which he proves by many examples and concludes It is far more as the holy Fathers of the Church say to create things that have no being than to form other and other things of those things which have a being all these above a 100. years before that Council But nothing more clearly convinces it then the Recantation which Berengarius made in a Roman synod held anno 1079. above a 130. years before the same Council in this form I Berengarius do from my heart believe and by mouth professe the bread and wine placed on the Altar by the Mystery of prayers and words of our Redeemer to be substantially converted into the true and proper and life-giving flesh and bloud of Jesus Christ our Lord and to be the true Body which was born of the Virgin which offered for the worlds salvation did hang on the Crosse which sits at the right hand of the Father and Christs true bloud which did flow from his side not only by signe and vertue of the sacrament but in propriety of Nature and verity of substance In this faith and belief he died A little before this time lived Theophilact Archbishop of Bulgary a Grecian in Joan. 6. Bread by the sacred words and Mystical benediction with the comming of the holy Ghost is transformed into our Lords flesh He has the same in Marc. 14. adding Our merciful God condescending to our infirmity did keep the species of bread and wine but trans-elementated it into the vertue of flesh and bloud And in cap. 26. Mat. He said not This is a figure but This is my body for it is by an ineffable operation transformed as bread in appearance but in very deed flesh Of the Latins about the year 730. Venerable Bede in 6. Joan. Christ dayly washes us from our sins in his bloud when the memory of his Passion is represented on the Altar when the Creatures of bread and wine are by the sanctification of the ineffable spirit transformed into the sacred Meat of his flesh and bloud and about the same time the famous Grecian Father S. John Damascene l. 4. de fide Orthod c. 24. As the holy Ghost working all things whatsoever were made so what then shall hinder but that of bread he may make his body and of wine and water his bloud and even as whatsoever God did make that he did by the work of the holy Ghost in the same manner now also the operation of the holy Ghost does that which exceeds nature and which tannot be taken or understood unless it be by faith only And a little after Verily the body is truly united to the divinity that body which came from the holy Virgin not that the body assumed descends from heaven but because the bread and wine it self is changed into Christs body and bloud If thou ask how is this done it is enough for thee to hear that it is done by the holy Ghost even as from the holy Mother of God our Lord by the holy Ghost did make to himself and in himself flesh there is nothing more manifest or perceptible to us then that the word of God is truly efficacious and omnipotent for the manner of it is such that it cannot be searched or found out by any reason A little after Bread and wine are not figures of Christs body far be it but the very body of our Lord joyned to the Divinity for sith our Lord himself said this is not a signe of body but body nor the sign of bloud but bloud And again If some have called the bread and wine the figure of our Lords body and bloud they did not say it after the Consecration but usurped this word before the oblation was consecrated to be brief In that place the Saint uses these phrases Christ made his body of bread and wine he made these things his body and bloud the bread and wine are changed into

in the divine operation of Christs bedy and bloud And c. 8. putting a distinction between Priest and Deacon he says The one consecrates and the other disposes or distributes the one sanctifies the things offered the other distributes the things sanctified S. Cyprian Epist 54. ad Cornel. says Priests do daily celebrate sacrifices to God And Epist 66. ad Furnesses Each one honoured with divine Priest-hood and constituted in Clerical Ministery ought only to serve the Altar and sacrifices and attend to prayers S. Hierome Dialogo cum Lucifer c. 8. Hilarius a Deacon only could not make the Eucharist not having Bishops nor Preists for it is not a Church which has no Priests This is more manifest in the Priests ordination as it is expresly declared in the Florentine Councel the form whereof is Receive the Power of offering sacrifice to God for the living and dead whence we may note this is no new constitution but a declaration to the Armenians of the Roman use and manner of Ordination for which the Roman Pontifical is alledged which was long before this Councel and was in use in all the Western parts and Ordo Romanus made by Pope Gelasius in the year 496. which as Alcuinus notes in 2. par de divinis officiis has the same form which also S. Ambrose insinuates in 1 Epist ad Tim. c. 4. where he speaks of himself saying when I was ordained Priest whereby I was designed for the work and received Authority that I durst in our Lords stead to offer sacrifice to God S. Clement lib. constit Apost cap. 24. Look down upon thy servant elected and fill him with the holy Ghost that he may perform the immaculate sacrifice for thy people but what is more our Saviour himself in his last Supper ordained his Disciples in the same form Do this in my remembrance whereby our Saviour gave power to his Disciples to do that is to make or offer the same sacrifice as he had done as I have declared in the first chapter § 3. Our Reformers have mainly endeavoured to take away the true and proper sacrifice of the Masse and consequently to take away the Evangelicall Priesthood which by continuall succession even from the Apostles times yea from Christ himself hath always continued in the Catholick Church and to this end the Parliament of England in the nonage of King Edward the 6. invented a new form or ordination and commanded that none should give any Orders but in the form prescribed which was repealed by Queen Mary and again renewed by Queen Elizabeth in the 8. yeare of her Reign To speak only of Priesthood which principally makes to our present purpose our Catholick Doctors and Controvertists did oppose against their Ordination of Priesthood by several reasons and first that they had no lawful Ministers of their order that is no proper and true Bishops and consequently no true ordination which is clearly proved by Erastus senior in his Scholasticall Demonstration printed in the year 1662. which I wave and go to the second Reason Which is that the form of Ordination newly invented is no true form nor ever used in the Church nor no essentiall part necessarily required in the act of giving or ministring holy orders to make this more clear we may note that in the Sacrament of Orders there is required a sensible sign which Divines call the materiall part and the application of this sensible sign to the signification of what is signed which is the formal part To our purpose the Imposition of hands by the Bishop may well be said to be the materiall part of the Sacrament for of it self it is indifferent to Episcopacy Priesthood or Deacon-ship nay to other spiritual effects as of Confirmation yea of remission and absolution and is necessarily determined and appropriated to this or that effect by certain words expressing the power and nature of this or that Order In this all Catholicks do agree and some of your Learned Protestants acknowledge M. Mason one who hath written purposely of this Subject lib. 2. cap. 16. Impositionem manuum ut signum ordinis sensibile amplectimur forma sensibilis sita est in verbis quae preferuntur dum signum sensibile exhibetur We embrace Imposition of hands as the sensible signe of order The essential form consists in words which are spoken whilst the sensible signe is used in which also those who reformed the Roman Ordination did agree when retaining the imposition of hands they invented a new form never used before in Gods Church nor yet coming home to the purpose for no words can be said to be the true form of any Sacrament which does not determine the sensible signe to its proper effect or office In the Ordination of Priesthood it must signifie the grace and power which is given to him that receives the Order of Priesthood so the foresaid Mr Mason Istius modo verba quatenus de notant datam potestatem sunt illius forma essentialis The learned Bishop of Derry in Ireland in his book of the Consecration and succession of Protestant Bishops page 226. comes more home saying The form or words whereby men are made Priests must express power to consecrate or make present Christs body and bloud c. for we have no difference with the Romanists in this particular They who are ordained priests ought to have power to consecrate the Sacraments of Christs body and bloud that is to make it present Doctour Sparrow is of the same opinion as is noted in the said Liturgicall Discourse part 1. cap. 26. and Doctour Thorndike in his book of Just weights and measures cap. 21. All Ordination tends to the celebration and communion of the Eucharist as well that of Bishops to the end that they may ordain the other Orders and that of Deacons that they may wait upon the celebration of it As that of Priests that receiving the power of the keyes to warrant the effect of it they may therefore have power to celebrate it Surely the present English Church must be of the same judgment when only those who are ordained Priests have authority to consecrate the Eucharist which is their peculiar proper and principall office belonging to none other the Power and authority to them in this cannot be from any humane authority but divine which comes unto us by the work of the Holy Ghost in the Sacrament Now in the Form of Ordination invented by order of Parliament in the time of King Edward the 6. and used since in Queen Elizabeths time no such power is expressed for all the words savour more of jurisdiction or execution of what follows the nature of the order of Priesthood without which the rest is of no Force for without the power ex vi ordinis no actions ex vi officii are authentical or valuable for as Mr Mason well says l. 2. c. 16. Non verba quaelibet huic instituto inserviunt sed quae ad ordinis conferendi potestatem