Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	blood_n	body_n	bread_n	35,000	5	8.1520	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61213	The unreasonableness of the Romanists, requiring our communion with present Romish church, or, A discourse drawn from the perplexity and uncertainty of the principles, and from the contradictions betwixt the prayers and doctrine of the present Romish church to prove that 'tis unreasonable to require us to joyn in commmunion with it.	Squire, William, d. 1677.	1670 (1670)	Wing S5102; ESTC R15456	70,903	210

* Plat. in vita John 18. When we thus see some owned for Popes who have never been duly elected and do know how much tirannical compulsion may force an outward compliance we cannot judge the submission and silence of the Church as Suarez holds Can be any certain ground that the election was lawful The sum of this argument is this if it be uncertain whether the essentialls of a just and true election be performed then it is vncertain whether this be a true Pope and ex consequenti it cannot be de fide that this Pope is the true sucessor of Saint Peter secondly we cannot be certain absolutely that the things essentially required in the consecration of the Pope are duly performed I do not mean of such things in the consecration which are only required by the cannon but I speak of those things which they account essential that there can be no consecration without them first I instance in the qualification of the person to be consecrated without baptisme there is no ordination and pro. who have not been baptized cannot be ordained nor consecrated and are jure divino uncapable of orders but we cannot be absolutly certain that this person hath been baptized pro. we cannot be absolutly certain that some thing essential to his consecration is not wanting Secondly In the intention of the consecrators for that is essentially necessary in conferring of orders by the Councells of Florence * Decret de Sacram. and the council of Trent * Sess de Sacram. Can. 2. requires an intention of doing that which the Church doth but it may fall out that the consecrators have no intention of doing any such things either through negligence or malice either they may intend to do nothing or not to do that which the church doth i. e. to consecrate or they may intend to do this outward act in sport or merriment or if then they cannot be certain that there is either an actuall or virtuall intention in the consecrators then they cannot be certain absolutly that the essentialls of consecration are duly performed Thirdly Without intention in the person to be consecrated there is no true consecration so Innocent the third determines * C. majore Extra de Baptisms and Suarez call's it the common opinion of Divines that to the value of a sacrament is required intentio suscipientis but no man can be absolutly certain that the Pope either in any moment foregoing or during the act of consecration did any way intend to receive it for ti 's not the bare outward performing or doing or receving which are required but the intending in the mind to do or receive and of that inward intention in the mind we cannot be certain Many more things might be added concerning the consecrators whether they were baptized whether they were Priests whether there is no defect in any thing essentially required to their baptisme or ordination whether the intention in the consecration was directed to that present person for that Filliucius * Cas Consc tract 1. c. 5. n. 79. requires now in these things since ti 's Possible some essential may be wanting it follows no man can be certain absolutly that this is the true Pope and if he cannot be so absolutly certain that this is the true Pope because ti 's possible some essential has been wanting then he cannot own it to be so de fide nor swear that the Church of Rome is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches because of its Union with him Secondly I instance in the Article of Trausubstantiation according to the Creed of Pius 4th they swear that in the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly really and substantially the body and blood with the Soul and Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ and there is a conversion of the whole substance of bread into the body and of the whole substance of wine into the blood which Conversion the Catholick Church calls Transubstantiation and in the Council of Trent there is an Anathema pronounced against those who shall deny that wonderfull and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood the Species of bread and wine onely remaining which Conversion the Catholick Church most fitly calls Transubstantiation now though according to the Letter the Decree seems plain and they will all cry up this wonderfull miracle this August mistery yet in the explication of it and of the grounds whereupon they believe it they are perplexed For First although they pretend to derive this Doctrine from Scripture yet it is not certain that there is any place of Scripture which necessarily infers this doctrine so Scotus * In 4. lib. sent dist 11. q. 3. saies and how the body of Christ is there whether by Conversion of something into it or without Conversion the substance and accidents of bread remaining non invenitur in Canone Bibliae saies Gabriel Biel † In Canone miss lect 40. and notwithstanding that they usually insist on the 6th of St. John and the words of Institution this is my body yet others of great note among them conclude that it is not exprest in Scripture so Canus * Loc. Com. l. 3. c. 3. fund 2. holds and Cajetane maintains † the 6th of St. John no way pertains to a Sacramental * In 3. part q. 80. art vet eating the same is held by Jansenius Tapperus and others cited by Suarez and first some of them confess they should not have believed it unless the Church had declared it to be de fide for the Church by the spirit of truth did explain those things which were obscure in Scripture * Canus Loc. Com. l. 3. c. 3. fundam 2. but then it would be still in vain to endeavour to prove this conversion from Scripture because there is no argument from thence which can sufficiently convince and to argue with us from those Texts which they think are not sufficiently cogent without their Churches explanation is altogether impertinent for we are as uncertain of the infallibility of their Church in explaining those Texts as we are whether those Doctrines be contained there 't is first as to us uncertain whether this Doctrine be delivered in Scripture Secondly though they affirm that by the words of institution the bread is turned into the body and the wine into the blood yet they are perplexed about the meaning of them First As whether there be any figure in the words or no For if they be construed figuratively then they cannot certainly infer any transubstantiation and first sometimes they tell us there is no figure or trope yea there ought to be none in the words of Institution but then how can the Cup be the New Testament there the Cup must be put for Wine in the Cup. Again How can the Cup be the New Testament properly For a Testament is the Testators