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
A70152	An ansvver to a popish pamphlet called the touch-stone of the reformed gospell. made speciallie out of themselves. By William Guild, D.D. and preacher of Gods word.	Guild, William, 1586-1657.	1656 (1656)	Wing G2202; ESTC R221580	101,567	372

as Lombard and Carthusian forecited showeth for many children amongst the Isra●lits dyed in the womb some in the birth and others after before the eight day aswell as the children of Christians do and it were a cruell doctrine to say that all such were damned as also during fourty years in the wildernes there was no circumcision used and yet wee must not yeeld that therefore all infants who died then without it were damned and cut off from their people As for Fathers he citeth only Augustin Pope Leo Ireneus Cypriā but setteth not down their words But he may remember as Maldonat witnesseth on Iohn 6. 53. that Augustin and Pope Innocent 1. were as much for the necessity of infants receiving the Eucharist which opinion sayth he generallie continued in the Church 600. years 38 THat the sacrament of confirmation is not necessarie nor to be used VVHich he sayeth is contrarie to Act. 8. 14. wher it is said That Peter John having laid hands on them that were baptised they received the Holie Ghost To which I answere 1. Wee deny that confirmation is a sacrament at all seing that the Councell of Trent sess 7. can 1. affirmeth That all the Sacraments of the new Testament were instituted by Christ that the Romanists themselves as Alensis Bonaventure and Marsilius affirme that confirmation was not instituted by Christ as Bellarmin testifieth lib. de sacramentis in genere c. 23. 2. Suarez and Bellar. likewise granteth that the imposition of hands Act. 8. was not sacramentall Suarez disp 33. sect 3. and Bellarmin lib. 2. de confirm cap. 9. 3. Neither will Romanists themselves say that everie one that is confirmed by popish confirmation receiveth the Holie Ghost especiallie the miraculous gifts thereof which are here meaned nor that their confirmation produceth any such effect as the laying on of the Apostles hands did on them that were baptised Beside that there is neither the matter as anointing with Chrisme nor form as signing with the Crosse which in popish confirmation is used Neither doth that place Heb. 6. 1. prove any further than that of Act. 8. 14. which speaketh of Baptisme and the laying on of hands And as for Cyprians testimonie it speaks onlie of two sacraments but mentioneth not that popish confirmation was one of these two and giving that it were yet Bellarmin lib. 2. de effectu sacram cap. 24. and Cassander consult art 13. confesseth that both in scripture other Authours the name of sacrament is given to many things which by consent of all are not sacraments properlie and indeed 39 THat the bread in the Lords supper is but a figure or remembrance of the bodie of Christ received by faith and not his true bodie VVHich he sayeth is contrarie to Luke 22. 15. where hee sayeth with desire I haue desired to eat this passover with you To which I answere 1. in generall that we never did hold that the bread in the supper of the Lord is but a bare figure or remembrance of Christs bodie and therfore sayeth the confession of our faith anno 1581. art 21. Wee utterlie damne the vanitie of these that affirme sacraments to be nothing but bare naked signes and in our late Confession anno 1647. fitted for the whole three kingdoms positivelie we say Wherin as reallie but spirituallie the Bodie and blood of Christ are present to the faith of Believers as the Elements themselves are to the outward senses and so speaketh Calvin in 1. Cor. 11. 24. but that in this sacrament wherein the soule is spirituallis fed the bread is transubstantiated into Christs bodie and received by the bodilie mouth this we deny as most erronius and hereticall 2. As to that place of Luke which hee bringeth to prove the same 1. the mans ignorance and impertinencie is to be admired wherin Christ only expresseth his great desire to eat the typicall passover with his disciples wherof himself was the substance 1. Cor. 5. 7. And which lamb being called the passover it being but a signe and memoriall of the Lords passing over the houses of the Isralits as we see Exod. 12. 13. and 13. 9. maketh against papists who will not admitt in the Eucharist such a sacramentall speech The second place which he bringeth is Luke 22. 16. wher Christ sayeth That he wil not drink any more of the fruit of the vine till it be fulfilled in the kingdome of God Which words sayeth he cannot be understood figurativelie more nor the former of eating the passover To whom we answere 1. That never any of us said any such thing that the words of eating the Passover were to bee understood figurativelie nor yet that these words are to be understood figurativelie but properlie which Christ speakes heer of drinking the fruit of the vine which pope Innocent the 3. declareth to be spokē of the sacramentall cup de mysteriis Missae lib. 4. cap. 27. As also their own Iensenius cap. 131. p. 162. and Alfonsus a Castro lib 6. Tit. de Euchar. § sexta haeresis beside fathers as Origen tract 301. in Math. Chrisost Hom. 6● in Math. Cyprian epist 68. ad Cecil and Beda in Luc. 22. Next these words are so farre from proving Transsubstantiation as that they quyte overthrow the same seing that which out Saviour drank at his last supper he calles it the fruit of the vine that is Wine in substance and not blood as what is eaten after consecration is likewise called by the Apostle bread not flesh 1. Cor. 11. 26. Therefore sayeth Chrisostome hom 83. in Math. speaking against some who used water in this sacrament in place of wine When our Saviour celebrated this mystery sayeth he he gaue unto his disciples wine calling it the fruit of the vine which produceth not water For as Theodoret sayeth dial 2. The mysticall signes departeth not after consecration frō their owne nature but remaineth in their former substance forme and figure and may be seen and touched as they were before The third place is Iohn 6. 51. wher Christ sayeth I am the living bread which came down from heaven being granted to bee living what else is it but his bodie sayth he To whom I answere 1 as Bellarmin witnesseth lib. 1. de Euch. cap. 5. all these Romanists to wit Gabriel Biel Cardinall Cusanus Thomas Aquinas Cardinall Cajetan Ruardus Tapperus Joannes Hesselius affirmes and Cornelius Jansenius especiallie concord cap. 59. unanswerablie proveth p. 387. 389. That this chapter medleth nowise with any sacramentall eating of Christs bodie or drinking his blood 2. This Text maketh rather against Transubstantion for tho Christ sayeth I am the living bread yet it followeth not that therfore his flesh was transsubstantiated into bread consequentlie no more doth it follow that when Christ said of the bread This is my bodie that therefore bread was transsubstantiated into His bodie The fourth and maine place is Math. 26. 26. Take eate This is my bodie To which I answere