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
A18690	A mirrour of Popish subtilties discouering sundry wretched and miserable euasions and shifts which a secret cauilling Papist in the behalfe of one Paul Spence priest, yet liuing and lately prisoner in the castle of Worcester, hath gathered out of Sanders, Bellarmine, and others, for the auoyding and discrediting of sundrie allegations of scriptures and fathers, against the doctrine of the Church of Rome, concerning sacraments, the sacrifice of the masse, transubstantiation, iustification, &c. Written by Rob. Abbot, minister of the word of God in the citie of Worcester. The contents see in the next page after the preface to the reader. Perused and allowed.	Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618.	1594 (1594)	STC 52; ESTC S108344	245,389	257

enough against a naked and bare collection from a point of doubtfull construction Which séeing they haue diuers of them béen alleaged by maister Fulke and others directly against the Answrers demaund and yet haue not receiued any tollerable answere it was but a scape of his wit to say that maister Fulke doth steale away from the state of the question and medleth not with it His other cauill out of the wordes of S. Luke that Christ before the sacrament said l Luc. 22. 17. he woulde drinke no more of the fruite of the vine till in his kindome and yet dranke after in the Sacrament whereby he would prooue the sacrament to be no wine was long agoe preuented by S. Austen who affirmeth that S. Luke m August de consen Euangeli lib. 3. ca. 1. according to his maner setteth downe the former mention of the cup by way of anticipation putting that before which is to be referred to somewhat following after and therfore vnderstandeth it of the cup of the new testament by and by after instituted and so reconcileth him to the other two Euangelistes Mathew and Marke But to helpe this argument the Answ is faine to varie from his good maisters of Rhemes For he expoundeth the kingdome of God to be after the resurrection but they vnderstand it n Rhem Annot Luc. 22. 17 of the celebration of the Sacrament of Christes bloud Whereof it followeth that Christ in the Sacrament dranke of the fruite of the vine as both Mathew and Marke set it downe and the auncient fathers doe expound it Let him go and be agréed with his fellowes before he vrge this argument againe P. Spence Sect. 32. IN the end you giue me councell how to behaue my selfe in these controuersies In all Christian charitie I thanke you and loue you for the same for you aduise me no worse then your selfe followe and in good faith I accept of it as proceeding from your great good will towards me and therefore againe and againe I thanke you And I will follow you in genere that is to haue care of my poore soule to feede it with the trueth of Gods word but expounded by his Catholique Church I must tell you plainly and therefore in specie in the particulars of the points of our beliefe I will not followe you You and I endeuour both to come to one resting place at night but in our daies iourney wee goe two sundrie waies I pray God send vs merily to meet in heauen Amen R. Abbot 32. MY councell M. Spence must stand for a witnesse against you at that day if you go on forward still to walke in the counsel of the vngodly In the meane time I againe aduise and counsell both you and your maister to cease to rebell fight against God or to say when he offereth himselfe vnto you we will none of thy waies I councell you indéede as you say to no other thing but that which I follow my selfe and I most humbly thank almightie God who hath giuen me his grace to follow the same and hath preserued me from that daunger wherein I haue béen oft falling away from him You will followe me you say in generall to haue a care to féed your soule with the trueth of Gods word Do so M. Spence doe so that is the foode of life that is the riuer of the water of life the heauenly Manna he that féedeth there shal surely finde life b August de pastor Feede there saith S. Austen that yee may feede safely and securely But you marre and poison this good foode with that which you adde You will feede your soule you say with the word of God but expounded by his Catholicke Church you meane the Church of Roome Which is as much as if you should say you wil not follow the word of God it selfe but that which it pleaseth the Church of Roome to make of the word of God Take héede of M. Spence Assure your selfe that though the Church of Roome doe maintaine c 2. Pet 2. ● damnable heresies and d 1. Tim. 4. 1. doctrines of deuils contrarie to Gods word yet being wise as she is according to this worlde she will neuer expound the word of God against her selfe if it be in her to make the meaning of it When she expoundeth the Scriptures to make her selfe the Catholike Church and no such thing is to be found in the words of the scripture will you beléeue her in her owne cause It shal then be verified of you which Salomon saith e Prou. 1● 15. The foole will beleeue euerie thing Take the simplicitie of the word of God it self and be directed thereby f Prou. 8 9. The waies of God are plaine to him that will vnderstand God g Hiere in psal 8● hath not written as Plato did that few should vnderstand but for the vnderstanding of all saith S. Hierome So that although there be depth enough in the word of God for the best learned to bestow his studie and labour in yet as Chrysostome and Austen teach vs h Chrysost in 2. Thess 2. August ep 3. Whatsoeuer things are necessarie they are manifest and i Aug. de doct Christ li. 2. c. 9. in those things which are manifestly set downe in the Scriptures are contained all things that pertaine to faith and conuersation of life Lay before you therefore those things which néed not the exposition of the Church of Roome When the scripture saith There is now no offering for sinne wil you take her exposition to say that there is When the scripture saith no man liuing shal be found iust in the sight of God shal she by her exposition make you beléeue that it is not so When the scripture saith Thou shalt not bow downe to or worship a carued or grauen image will you be perswaded by her expositions that you may I passe ouer the rest Iustly doe they deserue to be giuen ouer to errour and to be deluded with lies and lewd expositions which will not yéeld vnto God when he speaketh vnto them so plainly as néedeth no exposition It were worth the while to set downe héere a Catalogue of Romish expositions but that the conscience of you all that way appeareth sufficiently in this whole discourse You pray that we both going sundry wayes may méete in heauen But maister Spence it will not be in that way wherein you go Either you must say that there is no heauen or els that your way is not the way to heauen because the God of heauen hath gainsaid it God open your eyes that you may sée the right way that so we may ioyfully méete in heauen P. Spence Sect. 33. AS touching the escape of our Rhemistes in the account of our Ladies assumption The matter is verie sleight not tending any way to our saluation I meane to erre in that computation especially when they haue a The more impudēt they that hauing no certaine

matter but reason and trueth see the answere at large to steale scrappes out of the fathers and not to care for their drift and purposes but onely to patch vp matter for a shew and to the sale The figures be of the old testament in the newe testament Christ fulfilleth them It followeth But it had been no figure except there were a true bodie Surelie an emptie thing as is a phantasie can take no figure The Marcionites said Christ had a phantastical body that saith Tertullian could not haue a figure No can Doe not the phantasticall bodies of spirites exhibite to the eies a certaine figure or shape it is too well knowen to the verie Negromancers and the Apostles feared the like of Christ But he meaneth if Christ had no body at all but a phantasticall body Melchisedech in the old testament had vsed no figure of that in bread wine For of c Vntrueth for he talketh not of it and though hee had yet doth it not stand the Answ in any steed as shall appeare it he talketh so that that is a figure of my bodie must needs be interpreted thus This that is this figure of the old testament of bread and wine vsed by Melchisedech which I now fulfill est corpus meum is nowe become my bodie by my fulfilling in this my new testament in veritie a figure of the olde testament in a mysterie It followeth Or if therefore he made the bread his bodie because he wanted a true bodie then he should haue giuen the bread for vs. This illation of Tertullian can haue no wit nor sense if he meant not Christ to be really in his verie true bodie in the Sacrament It made for the vanitie of Marcion that bread should be crucified If Christ had giuen his Apostles bread onely and not his verie flesh then by Tertullians minde he must haue giuen a bready body or a body of bread to be also crucified so sure he was that the thing he gaue his Disciples was the same that was also afterward crucified What say you to this maister Abbot Marcion said that Christ had in steed of a heart a kind of fruit called a Pepon Why saith Tertullian did he not call a Pepon his bodie as well as the bread or rather after Marcions opinion his reason is because Marcion vnderstood not that bread was an olde figure of the bodie of Christ Lo your id est figura is by Tertullian as much as id est vetus figura an old figure Then by your minde Christ fulfilled not the old figure in veritie although Tertullian saith neuer so plainly he made the bread his bodie But gaue them the old figure therefore to end this testimonie of Tertullian I answere you that the premisses considered you must needes graunt that the same id est is not referred to corpus meum but to hoc That which in the old testament was a figure of my bodie is now being made so by my speaking dicendo omnipotentia verbi by the almightie power of the word as S. Cyprian de caena domini vttereth my bodie Note these points whereby it so appeareth by Tertullian to be meant First the scope of his fourth booke to prooue the figures of the old lawe and the fulfilling of the new Secondly Tertullian hath figura non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus If hee had meant a figure then in the new testament he had not said fuisset sed esset figura Thirdly when hee saith Christ called bread his bodie and not a Pepon as Marcions follie would haue him to haue spoken hee telleth that Marcion vnderstood not that bread was an ancient figure of his bodie so that Tertullian meaneth not the bread to be a new figure of his bodie instituted by Christ in his Supper of the new testament but an auncient figure of the olde testament vsed by Melchisedech Fourthly a little after this place he saith that Christ the reuealer of aniquities did sufficiently d●clare what hee would haue the bread to haue signified calling bread his bodie Wherby d Tertullians minde i● that the name of bread had bin vsed to import the body of Ch 〈…〉 ●● prefigur●●●at bread indeede should be appointed to signifie the ●●me body This he say●h Ch 〈…〉 ful 〈…〉 〈◊〉 he took bread ind 〈…〉 and called it hi● body his mind is that Christ would haue the bread in the old testamēt to haue signified his body to come not now instituting a new figure in bread Fifthly he saith a litle after thou maiest acknowledge the olde figure of bloud in the wine Lo the wine in the old testament was an ancient figure of his bloud What can plainlier vtter or expresse his meaning Lastly it followeth Now saith he it is at his maundy he consecrated his bloud in wine who then that is speaking certain words of Iacob the Patriarche euen by the said Iacob figured wine by bloud he attributeth e A Figure to the name of wine consecration to wine it selfe a figure to wine consecration to his bloud in wine a figure to the old law consecration to the new a figure to the olde lawe fulfilling thereof to the newe what meane you then maister Abbot to charge vs with guilefull concealing clipping and paring of Tertullian who deliuer him vnto you so roundly and so wholly wee play not with you as maister Iewell did who brought out of Opus imperfectum sermo 11. in Chrisostomes name in almost an hundreth places of his booke as putting great trust in the same these wordes against the Sacrament and against Chrisostome for that verie point in a notable Sermon of his made for that purpose In the vessels of the church is not contained the true body and bloud of Christ but a figure of his body and bloud Whereas the f An answere altogether vain and senslesse as the very wordes shew authour meaneth it of the vessels taken out of the temple of Ierusalem by Nabuchodonosor which point he guilefully suppressed For the authours wordes are these For if it be a sinne and dangerous to transferre holy vessels to priuate vses as Balthazar teacheth vs who drinking in the holy cups was therfore deposed from his kingdome and bereaued of his life if then it be thus dangerous to transferre these holie vessels to priuate vses in which is not the true body of Christ but a mysterie of his bodie is conteined c. You may see howe Balthazar was stolne out of the text to make those olde Churches vessels to be the vessels of our Christian temples Vpon those words of Tertullian how crossely you inferre your conclusion vppon your owne supposed sense of id est figura it may I hope appeare vnto you vpon the consideration of that which I haue discoursed concerning his testimonie except you could wage Tertullian to say that he made no comparison betweene a figure of the old testament and the veritie of the new answering the same and that he

instituting of bread to be the figure of his bodie Let him consider better whether this stand not with good construction to say Christ tooke bread and said therof This is my bodie that is to say a figure of my bodie But it had not bene or it should not haue bene a figure except there were a true bodie But yet he goeth farther Tertullian saith thus If Christ did therefore make bread his bodie because he wanted a true bodie then he should haue giuen the bread for vs. It made for the vanitie of Marcion that bread should be crucified These words saith he haue neither wit nor sense except it be supposed that Christs bodie is really in the Sacrament nay otherwise it must be bread that was crucified for vs. But except his wit and his sense did faile him he might find somwhat els in Tertullians words For stil he calleth the sacramēt bread putteth differēce betwixt the bread that is called y● body and the true body it self so reasoneth against Marcion y● if Christ had not a true body indéed which he represented by bread in respect thereof called the same bread his body then the bread itselfe must be his bodie and consequently it was bread which was giuen and crucified for vs. But Marcion himselfe would not say that bread was crucified for vs Therefore he must néedes confesse that Christ had a true bodie figured by the bread And thus Tertullians reason against Marcion setteth downe bread in the Sacrament as a figure of Christes body and razeth the foundation of Popish Transubstantiation And this is yet againe plaine by these wordes to which he asketh me what I say that Christ called not a Pepon his body as he should haue done by Marcions opinion who held that Christ had in stéede of a heart a kinde of fruite called a Pepon but hee called bread his body because of the olde Figure namely because the Prophet vsing the name of bread to import the bodie of Christ did thereby prefigure that bread indéed should be appointed to be the figure and signe of the same bodie So that Christ did not renew an olde figure by consecrating or sanctifying the bread to be a figure of his bodie but fulfilled that in the trueth and substance of bread which Tertullian saith was foreshewed by the name of bread Thus much of Tertullians roundly wholly deliuered words where the Answ hath shewed as great folly in enlarging them as some other of his fellowes haue shewed falshood in clipping and paring them But to fill vp the measure of this follie he taketh vpon him by the way to censure Maister Iewell about a place alleaged out of the vnperfect worke vpon Math. Serm. 11. Which he doth in that péeuish and vaine sorte as that he sheweth himselfe to be led wholly with malice without any iudgment or discretion First he misliketh that he did alleage it in Chrisostomes name But why so Is it not as lawfull for maister Iewell or for the Church of England to doe so as it is for the Church of Roome and her followers k Sixt. S●n●n● b●●l●ot san●● 4 in l●●n C●rys●st The Church of Rome readeth diuers homilies in their diuine seruice from thence vnder the name of Chrysostome Many sentences and propositions are brought thence vnder his name in the ordinarie gloses in the chaines of the explanations of the Gospels in the decrees of the Bistops of Roome in the Summaries of Diuinitie set forth by Diuines of great name as Sixtus Senensis himselfe a Papist giueth vs to vnderstand Why then should maister Iewell be blamed for alleaging that worke vnder Chrysostomes name when the Church of Roome by her example warranted him so to doe But yet hee will further make vs beléeue that the wordes doe not prooue that for which they are alleaged The wordes are these If l Chrysost in ope imperf hom 11. it be a dangerous matter to transferre holy vessels to priuate vses as Baltasar teacheth vs who drinking in the sacred cups was depriued of his kingdome and his life if then I say it be so dangerous to transferre to priuate vses these sanctified vessels in which is not the true body of Christ but a mysterie of his body is conteined c. Out of which wordes maister Iewell proueth y● in the sacred vessels there is not the true body of Christ as the Papistes dreame but onely a mysterie of his body The place is so plaine as nothing can be more plaine Now therefore what sayth the Answ to it Forsooth the authour meant these words of the vessels of the temple of Hierusalem which Nabuchodonosor tooke from thence and not of the vessels of our Christian Churches But what vessels I maruell were those in the temple of Hierusalem which conteined the mysterie of Christes body where did hee euer read or heare of any such Or if he can vnshamefastly face out such a matter how can he imagine that Chrysostome or the author whosoeuer would admonish his auditours that it was daungerous for them to abuse the vessels of the temple of Hierusalem which they neither had nor could haue to abuse Againe he saith not those holy vessels as pointing to the vessels of the temple but expresly these holy vessels vnderstanding them which he had then to vse Againe he saith not wherein was not but wherin is not the true body of Christ nor wherein was conteined but wherein is conteined the mysterie of his bodie All which being referred to the present time do plainly enough shew that hee spake of the vessels that then were present and therefore his wordes are a verie direct and substantiall proofe that in the vessels of Christian temples there is not the true body of Christ but onely a mysterie of his body Yea but there is mention of Baltazar there And what then Surely Baltasar is there brought in to teach vs as the authour speaketh Now what doth the example of Baltasar teach vs not to abuse the vessels of the temple of Hierusalem A senselesse conceite He teacheth vs not to abuse the vessels of our temples and Churches least offending as he did we be punished as he was For there is alwaies the same reason of the vse or abuse of holy thinges and particular examples are alwaies alleaged for confirmation and proofe of generall doctrines Surely the Answ was sodainly awaked out of his dreame when he conceiued this and set his handes to write before he was well aduised what he should write P. Spence Sect. 19. AS I haue dilated at large the meaning of Gelasius so I cannot but wonder at your repeating of him in this place so contr●●ie to his meaning euen by your owne confession You woulde before haue Gelasius drift to be this that as in heauen Christ is in his two natures seuerall the godhead and the manhood so in the Sacrament with his body remaineth the bread thereby to haue hoth in heauen and here two seuerall natures Yet now

himselfe to be chaunged by the water and not by faith Héereby it is plaine that Baptisme hath his force not of the verie worke done but of true and vnfayned faith working in the heart good conscience towards God So as touching the other Sacrament S. Austen referreth the vertue and effect thereof h August in Ioh. tr 26. de ciuit dei li. 21. cap. 25. to our eating inwardly and in the heart and this eating inwardly hée expoundeth to be our beleeuing in Christ and resolueth that hée that by this beleeuing in Christ abideth not in Christ and Christ in him he doth not spiritually eate and drinke the flesh and bloud of Christ though he receiue the sacrament thereof Therefore neither doth this Sacrament auaile by the worke wrough● but onely by faith whereby we abide in Christ and Christ in vs. A miserable doctrine it is whereby men are borne in hand that comming without faith voyd of knowledge without repentance or any good motion yet they may receiue the effect of the sacraments whereas the Scripture so plainly affirmeth that i Rom 14. 23. whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and that k Heb. 11. 6. without faith it is vnpossible to please God and therfore precisely chargeth euery man before he come to the Lords table l 1. cor 11. 28. to examine himselfe m 2 Cor. 13. 5. in that behalf But for disproofe of this assertion it is reason enough that there can be no reason nor probable shew of reason giuen whereby to prooue it Of the difference of the Iewes sacraments and ours I haue spoken before We abase neither but lift both verie high The consent of the Euangelists auaileth with me to make me yéeld to that which can be soundly prooued thereby not to euerie thing that froward and peruerse men will péeuishly fancie thereof P. Spence Sect. 31. YOu tell me a matter out of S. Luke 22. but in good sooth to what purpose I cannot imagine Who euer denied but it was Metonymia when he said this cup is the new testament or rather two tropes in one sentence For the cup is taken for Christes bloud in the cup and to be the new testament is to be the seale establishment promulgation and consecration of the newe testament Who euer denied it but because we say that the true body and bloud of Christ is contained in the sacramentall formes and that Christ saying This is my body spake plainly a Be like whē you list there is a figure and when you list there is none You might vnderstand the one by a Figure as well as the other without a figure therefore must we meane so grosly that no where the scripture speaking of this matter vseth a figure O● would you conclude thus in these wordes This cup is the new testament there is a figure ergo in these words This is my body Logick will be good cheape if this may go for currant But good sir let me be bold a little with you to put you in minde of this place of S. Luke that b A popish pee●ish brag See the aunswere Qui calix so troubled Beza that he wist not what to say to it but he imagined that either some sorie fellow had foysted it into the text or els that S. Luke spake false greeke so sure he was that the text was awry it made so sore against him For setting it downe by the participle as it is in greeke thus it soundeth hic calix nouum testamentum in sanguine meo pro vobis effusus Which must needes respect Calix for his substantiue and then the cup that is the liquor in the cup was shed for them and vs all which if it were wine let euerie good christian man iudge I hope he shed for our saluation a farre more pretious liquor then wine And doctor Fulke to salue this sore telleth vs that in many places of the greeke text of other Scriptures there is incongruitie Very true I confesse but it is smally to the purpose For where no sense will helpe the syntaxis there we must needs graunt incongr●itie But how c There are reasons enough to proue it See the answere prooued doctor Fulke that the sense wherein this place is congrue and according to grammer is not the true sense Or why should he not allow it for congrue being indeede congrue Or why should Beza imagine and he allovv of a sense that is not congrue when the text was congrue enough This point being the state of the question Doctor Fulke stealeth away from and medleth not vvith it because it vvas too plain for vs and against his sacramentarie doctrine As likevvise vvas that place of S. Luke vvhere drinking at his Supper in vvine to his Disciples before hee instituted the Sacrament he told them hee vvould drinke vvine no more till in his kingdome vvhich vvas after his resurrection and yet a litle after he d VVhat did Christ drinke his owne bloud we can not beleue it drank to them in the Sacrament vvhich if it had beene vvine hee had contraried his former speech an absurditie I thinke not to be admitted R. Abbot 31. FOr further answere as touching the conformitie vsed in these wordes This is my body I shewed how S. Luke and S. Paul varie from S. Mathew and S. Marke as touching the other part of the sacrament For whereas these say this is my bloud of the new testament c. The other say This cup is the new testament in my bloud c. And these latter wordes I shewed to ●e the ouerthrow of transubstantiation But the Answ in good sooth telleth me that he cannot sée to what purpose this is alleaged I pray you therefore M. Spence put him in minde of his headlesse reason which he hath vsed before Christ saith he will call nothing by a wrong name If he should call fire water earth by the names of ayre stones or bread they would sooner become ayre stones bread then he would misname any thing He did not lie to his Disciples he did not ●eguile them Therefore when he said This cup is the new Testament without doubt the cup was substantially turned into a Testament Nay not so saith he there is a figure here Yea and may a thing be called by a wrong name by a figure is there now a figure in these words Why then is the man so straight laced that he cannot yéeld a figure in the other words especially séeing the auncient Fathers so expresly expounde them by way of figure and neither he nor his can make any certaine exposition of them but by a figure But it followeth not he saith that because there is a figure in the one spéech therfore there is so also in y● other Yet say I if it follow not that because Christ taking the cup said thereof This cup is the new Testament therefore the cup was turned into the testament then it followeth