Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	drink_v	fruit_n	vine_n	2,742	5	10.7149	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11445	The supper of our Lord set foorth according to the truth of the Gospell and Catholike faith. By Nicolas Saunder, Doctor of Diuinitie. With a confutation of such false doctrine as the Apologie of the Churche of England, M. Nowels chalenge, or M. Iuels Replie haue vttered, touching the reall presence of Christe in the Sacrament; Supper of our Lord set foorth in six bookes	Sander, Nicholas, 1530?-1581.	1566 (1566)	STC 21695; ESTC S116428	661,473	882

Augustine when he sayeth He will not geue his body in that maner as you thinke As who should say he will geue it one way but not that way as you Capharnaites imagine He will not geue a shoulder to one and a leg to an other But the supper sheweth the maner of the geuing Where bread was taken and after blessing and the words pronounced Christes body was geuen to the mouthes of the Apostles Iuel This is the table for Egles and not for Iayes sayth Chrysostom San. I haue answered your iangling talk of Iayes in my i●… booke the. xxvi●… Chapiter And haue tur●…ed it vppon your own head Iuel S. 〈◊〉 let vs goe vp with the Lord into heauen into that greatparlar and receaue of him aboue the cup of the new ●…estament ▪ San. Certein men had imagined that Christ should reign corporally in earth a thousand yeres together drinke a new kind of wine who grounded their heresie vpon these words of Christ I say vnto you I will not drinke from hencefoorth of this frute of the vine vntill the day when I will drink it new with you in the Kingdome of my Father S. Hierom calling that 〈◊〉 Iudaicas fabulas Iewish tales therwith declareth what kind of wine we must drink in the Kingdome of God which is the Church saying Si ergo panis qui de coelo caet If then the bread which came down from heauen be the body of our Lord and the wine which he gaue to the Disciples be his blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of synnes let vs repell Iewish fables let vs ascend with our Lord vnto y● great parlar spread and made cleane and let vs take of him aboue the cup of the new Testament Hitherto S. Hierom. whose auth●… ritie M. Iuel hath abused diuerse ways First you adde to S. Hierom these two words into heauen without cause For it folowed in S. Hierom whither we should ascend coenaculum magnum vnto the great parlar there to take of Christ the bloo●… of the new Testament aboue that is to say not in the stalenes of the letter but in the newnes of the spirit as it foloweth afterward And yet againe more plainly in regno Ecclesiae in the Kingdome of the Church And last of all Impleamus opus eius Christus nobiscum bibet in regno Ecclesiae sanguinem suum Let vs fulfill his work and Christ will drinke with vs in the Kingdome of the Church his blood Thus it is plaiue that S. Hierome spake not of going into heauen by faith to drink the cup of the new Testament but o●… going vp into the great parlar which is the Church and Kingdome of God S. Hierom alluded to the Historie of Christes last supper which was kept in a parlar spread and strawed as it is thought in the mount Syon Let vs goe thither sayth S. Hierom there let vs receane the new wine whereof Christ spake S. Chrysostom also alluded to the same parlar saying y● Christ maketh this supper which now his Priests doe consecrate as well as he made that wherein he deliuered his owne banket Hoc est illud coenaculum caet This is that parlar wherein Christ was then with his Disciples Hence he went to y● mount of Oliues ▪ which sith it is so it was very euill done of M. Iuel to diuide the verb from his accusatiue case and to put an other ●…oun betwene against all reason grammar and honestie S. Hierom sayd ascendamus cum Domino coenaculum 〈◊〉 vs goe vp with our Lord to the parlar M. Iuel putteth the noun in coelum into heauen betwene As if when a man sayd let vs goe vp to the chamber he wold put an other word be●… and say let vs goe vp into the sliple into that chamber For after he had conueyed into S. Hierom his words into he●… uen he secondly turned coenaculum that parlar where is that in S. Hierom M. Iuel That was of your putting in to make vs beleue that heauen is the parlar whereof S. Hierom spake Thirdly M. Iuel left out these ▪ words which went immediatly before and shew in what respect S. Hierom spake of going vp Iudaicas fabulas repellamus Let vs put away Iewish fables and so let vs goc vp with our Lord to the great parlar by keping that which Christ instituted and by leauing other fables Fourthly whereas in the same very question it foloweth that not Moyses but our Lord Iesus gaue vs the true bread himself eating and being he that is eaten How can M. Iuel find in his hart to allege this place of S. Hierom against the reall presence For how is our bread more true then the bread of Moyses if at Christes supper we must goe vp into heauen to eate it Might not Moyses eating Manna doe the same How is Christ the maker of the feast and the meate it selfe if common bread be eaten and not his flesh Is common bread the maker of the feast If not the maker of the seast neither is it the meate for al is one saith S. Hierom. Iuel Cyrillus saith our Sacrament anoucheth not the eating of a man leauing the minds of the vnfaithfull in vngodly maner to grosse or flesh cogitations Sand. A man would scant beleue how wickedly this place is abused First these are not the words of S. Cyrill ▪ next he neuer meāt not so much as by dreame any such thing as M. Iuel doth father vppon him His own words are spoken vpon such occasion Nestorius the Heretike sayd that Christ had two persons and that his ●…hod was not ●…nited 〈◊〉 one person to the sonne of God Against whom S. Cyrill saith in that place proprium ●…orpus dicimus factum esse verbi non hominis alicuius seorsum separatim we say the body of Christ to be made proper of the word that is to say to be the words own body and not to be the body of any man apart or separated Nestorius replied out of Christes words He that eateth my flesh tarieth in me what eate we sayd the heretike the Godhead or the flesh meaning therby to conclude that seing the Godhead can not be eaten with our mouth yet the flesh was really eaten that there was one person of the Godhead an other of the flesh Cyrillus answereth Doest thou then affirm that there is an other sonne and Christ besyde the word coming from God the which hath appered to whō alone the matter of Apostleship may be cōmitted Now follow y● words corrupted by M. Iuel Num hominis comestionem nostrum hoc sacramentū pronuncias doest thou pronounce this our Sacrament to be the eating of a man M. Iuel turneth these words as though S. Cyrillus had set foorth a doctrine of his own without any respect to the heresie of Nestorius but the

play with Gods word to elude the scriptures and to destroy the whole writen Gospell ¶ What the new Testament is whereof the holy Scripture speaketh FOr as much as in consecrating of the blood S. Mathew S. Mark S. Luke and S. Paule make mention of the new Testament it is necessarie for the vnderstanding of the circumstances which folow ▪ to declare what the new Testamēt is A Testament is the solemne ordeining of a thing by words which is wont to be confirmed by naturall or violeut death For neither the last will of any man is of strength and force vntil the testatour dye Nor any truse or 〈◊〉 is perfit vntil it be dedicated with sacrifice wherein some liuing creature is wont to be offered vnto God bloodily Of Testaments one is old an other new For it was of old tyme couenanted with the Iewes that in case they kept the law of Moyses they should haue a temporall inheritance for keping it Christ made a new truse that if we kept his law we should haue forgeuenes of synnes and enioye the euerlasting inheritāce of God The old truse was dedicated as S. Paule speaketh by the blood of calues or oxen which were offered for the confirmation thereof The new truse is dedicated by Christes own blood which was shed for the confirmation of his new law and promise The blood of the old truse was put into bas●…s and so sprinckled with hysope vpon the people The blood of the new truse is put into a cup or chalice and thence it is drunk by the people of God They that kept the old truse enioyed the land of promise and they that kepe the new truse enioye the kingdom of heauen Now because there are many things requisite to a Testamēt first a law couenant or promise next a bloodshedding to confirm the promise thirdly an application of the blood that was shed for to be as a witnesse and a remembrance to all them who bound them selues to kepe the conditions agreed vpon it may so be that either all these things or some one of them alone may be called the new Testament When God sayeth by Jeremie consummabo Testamentum nouum he meaneth all together For he will as well publish his true law as confirm it by blood and distribute the blood wherewith it is confirmed to the faithfull when Christ sayeth This is my blood of the new Testament he meaneth the first part of the new Testament which is the law and promise it self of forgeuing sy●…s And therefore it foloweth the which shal be shed for many for the remission o●… synnes In which words he sheweth how this is the blood of the new Testament Uerily because it is the blood which shall obtein and merite the forgeuenesse of those synnes which the new law promiseth to take away ●…e called it sayth S. Chrysostom the blood of y● promise of y● new law And again Testamentum nouum hoc ipso confirmatur The new Testament is confirmed with this very blood Tertullian sayeth of Chr●… Testamentum constituens sanguine suo obsignatum He establisheth the Testament that is to say the law sealed with his own blood But when S. Luke and S. Paule report Christ to haue said This cup is the new Testament in my blood they seme to take the word Testament for the substance of the thing which doth confirm the new Testament or witnesse it to be confirmed and not properly for the new truse and promise thereof For this that is in the chalice is not the promise of remitting synnes but it is the new Testament in Christes blood that is to say it is the thing that confirmeth the new law or that witn●…h it to be confirmed So doth Sedulius very well expound the words of S. Paule saying Ideo autem calix Testamentum vocatur for so I think the true reading to be and not Testamenti quia testatus est pòst paululum passionem futuram nunc testificatur factam The chalice is therefore called the new Testament because it did beare witnesse at Christes supper that the passion should be a litle after and now it doth beare witnesse that y● passion is made or done Thus we see that whereas a Testament hath a law a confirmation and a witnesse of the confirmation the blood of Christ is not the law it self but it is both the thing which confirmed the law and the thing which doth witnesse it to be confirmed The which if it be well remembred I trust the circumstances of greatest importance whereof I shall speake hereafter wil be the better vnderstanded ¶ The. xxiiij circumstance of the blood of the new Testament THis is my blood of the new Testament sayth Christ that is to say the blood wherewith the new Testament is con firmed and sealed as S. Chrysostom Tertullian Theophilact and the other auncient Fathers declare But the blood of Christes new Testament was reall and true Therefore this which Christ doth point vnto is the true reall blood of Christ and not the substance of wine which the Sacramentaries imagine to be a figure of this blood And so cons●… the words this is the sigue of my blood of the new Testament But their interpretation is proued false by conferring the old Testament with the new For as the old Testament had none other thing to signifie the blood thereof besyde y● self same blood of the calues which was shed to confirm the old couenant so much more the new Testament must haue no●…e other thing to signifie the blood thereof besyde the self same blood of Christ which was shed to confirm the new law For if it be a perfection not only to haue the tru●…e and law confirmed by blood but also to haue the confirmation thereof witnessed by sprinkling y● blood which was shed vpon the people it is not possible that the old law should in that point passe the new For as S. Chrysostom sayth the figure neither is cleane different from the truth yet if it kepe the condition of a shadow minor erat veritate it was lesse then the truth And yet the basin of calues blood were more then the truth if the substance of common wine were set to shew that the new truse is confirmed Again S. Paule and S. Luke so euidently expound these very words by reciting them otherwise that no reasonable man cō●…ing the words together will say that in these words blood may stand for a figure of blood They write thus Hic calix nouum Testamentum est in meo sanguine This cup is the new Testament in my blood but the new Testamēt is not in the figure of Christes blood but in his true blood Therefore the name of blood which Christ vsed in consecrating the liquor in the chalice is not vsed figuratiuely For the same blood whereof S. Matthew S. Mark do speak is also meant of S. Luke and

voice and command●…mēt of Christ and to be subiect to him as the wife is to her husband As therefore the parties maried come to the third vnitie of being made both one fleshe is no lawfull imp●…diment stay them so doth Christ present him self in the Sacrament of his body and blood to make perfite and to cōs●…ate his mariage in the last degree And as in adultery S. Paul graunteth a place of reconciliation be●…wene the man and wife so if any mā after he is maried to Christ folow the world the fleshe or the deuill he may be absolued by the Priests and so come to be ioyned with the body and blood of Christ in vnion of true flesh If now the naturall and the whole mysticall body of Christe haue so great affinitie with the state of mariage that in all degrees they be described by like termes in the worde of God seing the last and chefe coniunction whiche is in mariage can not be made without the real presence of the two bodies which are ioyned no more can the last vnion of Christ and of his Churche be made in his last supper vnlesse both his and our bodies come really together If Christ sit only in heauen not hauing his body made present at his holy table and our bodies be yet still in the earth what coniunction of bodies is made betwene Christ vs If the vnitie which is betwene two persons in mariage be a signe of the vnitie whiche is betwene Christ and the Church as S. Paul pro●…eth it is not possible that the vnity can be lesse real in the truth then it is in the signe But in mariage whiche is the signe the persons maried are one flesh during the tym●… of their being together and they are both present bodily Thersore Christ is present in his own substance to be ioyned in that most cha●…e and vnspotted bed of matrimony with his own spouse whiche ioyuing is made in a Sacrament the which Sacramēt is ministred in those knowē forms of bread wine Therfore vnderthose forms the substance of Christes body and blood is really present This is that which S. Hilarie saith Verè verbum carnē cibo dominico sumimus We take truly the word made flesh in the meat of our ●…ord ▪ we take y● word made flesh y● is to say y● who le substance of Christ we take it truly that in the meate whiche our Lord geueth It is writen that he gaue saying Take eate Therefore in that meate we take truly the word made flesh but seing that meat semeth bread vnder that which semeth bread we take the whole substance of Christ. Again he saith Naturam carnis suae sub sactamento nobis admiscuit he hath mixed the nature of his flesh to vs vnder a sacrament That same word sub vnder sheweth what he meaneth for the form of bread is called a signe or sacrament alone as the body vnder it is called a sacrament or signe and also the thing or substance of the Sacrament S. Chriostom saith vt non solum per dilectionem sed reipsa in illam carnem conuertamur per cibum id efficitur quem nobis largitus est It is brought to passe by y● meate which Christ hath geuen vs that we may be cōuerted into that flesh not only by loue but in the thing it self If bread and wine be not the thing it selfe but only Christes owne flesh and yet we are connerted in very dede into y●●…lesh of Christ through the meat which he gaue seing he gaue al that he gaue vnder the form of bread and wine vnder those formes we receaue in dede and truth that flesh according to which we are reformed Which place of many shall I bring out of S. Cyrill He sayth one where Cûm mystica benedictio in nobis fiat nónne corporaliter quoque facit cōmunicatione carnis Christi For as much as the mysticall blessing is made in vs doth it not make Christe to ●…wel in vs corporally also through the cōmunicating of Christes flesh Can the mysticall blessing make Christ dwell corporally in vs if it self haue not Christes flesh corporally in it Cur membra fidelium membra Christi sunt Nescitis inquit quia membra vestra membra sunt Christi Membra igitur Christi meretricis faciam membra Absit Why are the mēbers of y● faithfull the members of Christ Know ye not saith S. Paule that your members are the members of Christ Shall I then make y● members of Christ the members of a harlot God forbid Here S. Cyril doth manifestly allude to the kind of vnitie which is betwen man and wife in lawfull mariage and betwene foruicatours in vnlawful coniunction In e●…he place two are made one but in mariage lawfully in whoredom vnlawfully The Sacramēt of Christes supper is like to lawful mariage And therefore S. Cyrill concludeth Non habitudine solum quae per charitatē intelligitur Christum in nobis hab●…are sed participatione naturali That Christ dwelleth in vs not only by affection or deuotion or efficacy which is vnderstanded by charitie but by natural partaking It is therefore an heresy to defend as the Sacramentaries do that we are ioyned to Christes flesh in his supper by faith and spirite only as though Christ being so long maried neuer came bodily to make vp that most chast knot of vnion betwene him and his Church But if the Sacramentarie doctrine were true it should haue lesse for asmuch as it should not be present really with vs it should not be offered externally vnto God by the Pri●…ts of the new lawe it should not be vppon the table it should not be in the mouthes of them who receaue y● same it should not be made naturally one with our bodies nor we one with it S. Paule by the reall vnitie which is made betwene the meat of Christ and of his faithfull people doth proue an vnitie in lesse degree but yet an vnitie betwene those who did eate together of meates offered to ydoles But y● meat of Christes supper whereby we should be ioyned as well to it as among our selues our new brethern take cleane away from the visible table and altar S. Paule sayeth Ye can not be partakers of the table of our Lord and of the deuils table Our new brethern graunting the deuils a reall table will not allow any such to Christ. They must con●…esse a table as well inuisible as corporall of the Iewes and Gentils for eche of them had their faith and their God albeit not good and true but to Christes body and blood which is the altar and table of the new Testament they will not allow any externall or visible altar or table I neede not insult at them for it ●…●…ithens the day will come when Christ will not allow them any table to eate or drink with him in the kingdom of heauen They that haue brought all