Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	daughter_n	marry_v	son_n	44,819	5	5.8094	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10753	A friendly caveat to Irelands Catholickes, concerning the daungerous dreame of Christs corporall (yet invisible) presence in the sacrament of the Lords Supper Grounded vpon a letter pretended to be sent by some well minded Catholickes: who doubted, and therefore desired satisfaction in certaine points of religion, with the aunswere and proofes of the Romane Catholicke priests, to satisfie and confirme them in the same. Perused and allowed for apostolicall and Catholicke, by the subscription of maister Henry Fitzsimon Iesuit, now prisoner in the Castle of Dublin. With a true, diligent, and charitable examination of the same prooffes: wherein the Catholickes may see this nevv Romane doctrine to bee neither apostolicall nor Catholicke, but cleane contarie to the old Romane religion, and therefore to bee shunned of all true auncient Romane Catholickes, vnlesse they vvill be new Romish heretickes. By Iohn Rider Deane of Saint Patrickes Dublin.	Rider, John, 1562-1632.	1602 (1602)	STC 21031; ESTC S102958	114,489	172

which time there was neither prieste standinge by the Altar misteries vpon the Altar nor he (a) The Pixe was inuented by Innocentius 3 1214. Gregorie Naz. write Anno. 567. Ioh. 4.20 Exod. 3.12 pixe hanging over the Altar and therefore she worshipped Christ that was called vpon at the Altar in the celebration of the misteries not that hee was inclosed vnder the formes of those misteries no more then the mountaine wherein the father 's worshipped was either God substantiallie or that God was inclosed in that mountaine vnder the formes and shapes of the mountaine But the mountaine was the place where God was worshipped And so the Altar was the place where Christ was called vppon and worshipped not that Christ was there locallie by a corporall descention but that he was worshipped there being called vpon and served with a spirituall ascention And if you had read Gregorie Nazianzen a litle after you should haue read that Gorgonia his sister caried about her still some peeces of the figure of the sacred bodie and bloud of Christ as it was the custome of that age and with her repentant teares shee bedewed the same not that she externallie honoured the same Here Gregorie calleth the Sacrament but a figure of the sacred bodie and bloud of Christ Esaia 42. ●● therefore it had been ydolatrie to haue worshipped it Yet notwithstanding your missaleadging and misvnderstanding of the premisses as also your dissenting from Scriptures Fathers and auncient Popes irreligious dangerous ●arres amonge your selues you easily disburden your braines from further answere thinking you haue confuted the protestants satisfied the Catholicks and so strike vp your victorious plaudite in this maner So that the br●●d beeing of such agreement vvee haue the lesse occasion to embusie our braines to confute them Here Gentlemen you call vs a brood we will take it in the best sence for we confesse wee are Christ his brood hatcht vnder the warmth of his mercifull wings comming vnto him like hungrie chickens at the heavenlie clocke and call of his preaching ministerie to receiue that promised meat which indureth vnto everlasting life math 23.37 Ioh. 6.27 And as for your pleasant Rhetoricall conceit expressed vnder this word agreement it sheweth that in a merrie mood you haue not forgot all your verball tropes and figures But when you can shew plainlie wherein the Protestants iarre amongst themselues Antiphrasis or dissent from the Scriptures and primitiue Church in matter of faith then bestow vpon them these biting figures In the mean time your iarres amongst your selues nay your revoult from scriptures and all primitiue practise being made now so manifest to the Catholicks it stands you vpon for the discharge of a good conscience to confesse and recant them for cure them you cannot And thus much concerning your vnfortunate successe in alleadging some of our chiefe Protestants Fox page 586 Acts monuments as you terme them And now to that which followeth The sixe Articles established by act of Parliament Anno 1540. at the planting of the Protestants faith Catho Priests 1 That there is the reall presence of Christs naturall bodie and bloud in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and vvine 2 That the communion vnder both kinds is not necessarie 3 That Priests by the lavv of God may not marrie 4 That vovves of chastitie ought to be observed 5 That Masses are agreable to Gods lavv and most fruitfull 6 That confession is necessarie The foresaid Parliament and everie one saying publishing preaching teaching disputing or holding opinion against the first of these Articles is adiudged a manifest (a) (a) was burnt loste his Lands goods as in case of highe Treason hereticke and misbeleevers in the (b) (b) They but loste life goods as in case of Felonie which was then a favour rest rigorouslie punished GEntlemen I expected that your proofes should haue ascended to the first fiue hundred years after Christs ascention now they descend so low that there is small hope either of your recall or recoverie I might iustlie take exceptions against this your Parliament proofe because it is manie hundred yeares too young to prooue our matter in question yet in respect it is an Act done by all the Nobles and learned of the land and least the Catholickes should thinke it vnaunswerable I am content to admit it yet still keeping my ordinarie course in examination of the proofes by Scriptures Fathers and the auncient Bishops and Church of Rome 1 The first Article is sufficientlie confuted in the Article 1 premisses alreadie handled 2 The second Article crosseth Christs blessed institution Article 2 and therefore is abhominable And your Parliament saith it is not necessarie to salvation to minister or receiue in both kinds as Christ and his Apostles did Reuel 22.19 But you know there is a wofull curse pronounced by Gods spirit against such as adde or detract to or from Christs Testament Dist. 2. de consec canon Comperimus fol. 430. And your owne Pope Gelasius saith flat sacriledge to their and your charge for this your halfe communion contrarie to Christs institution saying Aut integra sacramenta percipeant aut ab integris arceantur quia divisio vnius eius demque mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest pervenire Either let them receiue the whole sacraments or else let them bee kept backe from the whole because the parting of one and the same misterie cannot be done without great sacriledge The beginning of your Canon calleth this halfe communion superstition and the later part calleth it sacriledge Yet saieth your parliamēt proofe the receiving in both kinds is not necessarie to salvation Then I say if it be not necessarie why did Christ vse it if we should not practise it why did he command it Now if either Christs commaundement Hoc facite Doe this or the Popes law can prevaile with you follow Christ his institution If you care for neither Christ nor Pope then the Catholicks may see that you are Antichrists and Antipopes and denie Christs written trueth the primitiue practise of the Church of Rome and the best that you can make of your selues is not ancient Romane Catholickes but new vpstart Romish heretickes And so to your third Article Article 3 3 The third That priests by the lavv of God may not marrie I may not here make anie stay onelie touch a point or two and so away This Article is contrarie to holie Scriptures auncient fathers the practise of the primitiue Church and the Canons of the Popes In the old Testament the marriage of the priests is recorded and commended Ierem. 1.1 Exod. 18. The holie Prophet Jeremie was the sonne of a priest Zapp●ra was the priest of Midians daughter married to Moses the Lords Maiestrate Luke 1.8.9 Againe in the new Testament John Baptist was the sonne of Zaoharie a priest And the Scriptures touching marriage giue rules

true they need no interpretation Christ is not a lyer And if a man aske a confirmation and say how prooue you this proposition of Christ to be true litterallie in deed as Christ spake it This is a lo●se kinde of Logique You bring in for confirmation of the proposition the proposition it selfe and say Ecce mater tua Behold thy mother Thus when the Catholiques demaund of you to prooue your proposition of Hoc est corpus meum whether it must be taken corporallie or spiritualite grammaticallie or misticallie then you bring the proposition it selfe and say Hoc est corpus meum to prooue Hoc est corpus meum Jn Schools it is called Petit●o principi● so you would prooue idem per idem which is verie childish and a begging of that as graunted which is yet in question betwixt 〈◊〉 and vndetermined But you should haue prooved by other places of Scriptures that Hoc est corpus meum changeth the nature and substance of bread and wine and you should h● e proved by the Scriptures Esay 7.14 that the Prophets foreshewed th s strange conception of Christ to be conceaved of bread as well as they did foreshew his conception of the virgin And you should haue prooved by the Scriptures that it is not onelie a Sacrament but a sacrifice not onely Eucharisticall but as well propitiatorie and not onelie profitable to the quicke but also to the dead nay not onelie for plagues among men but murren and diseases also among beasts Cum multis alijs qua nunc c. Now shew by the Scriptures that Hoc est corpus meum hath such a sence that the simple people may repose themselues more securely vpon your opinion and proofes But till you prooue it which you can never doe they must know you haue and doe deceiue them with false expositions against veritie antiquitie authoritie yea consent of the old church of Rome And heere I am sorie I must tell you so plainelie that you wrong greatly and grievously Gods truth and the Queenes Subiects in thus misalleadging this 〈◊〉 1 First by Addition of a word 2 Secondly by misvnderstanding and misapplication of another word 3 Thirdly by omission nay plaine subtraction of a whole verse For the first which is Addition Addition you adde this particle a which is neither in the Greeke nor in your Romane Lattine Bible no nor in your Rhemish Testament nor ever seen in anie Doctor of antiquitie and this ●●llable altereth the sence and perverteth C●●●●s meaning and is added by you to maintaine that which the Text otherwise could not haue anie shew to beare Secondlie you misvnderstand and misapplie this word Blesss M●●lapplication for we say it signifieth to giue thanks with the mou●h and you say to make crosses with the fingers wee say it was spoken by Christ to his Father you say it was spoken to over or vpon the bread and chastice ●he ●ost 1. Cor. ● Sect. 9. and that hee vsed power actiue words vpon them we contrarie will shew out of the word it selfe that it hath no such signification One part of the originall word in Greeke signifieth in English Speech vttered with the mouth not a magicall crossing of or with fingers And the other Greeke word which must be iudge betwixt vs doth signifie to lande to praise and to blesse blessing praising and thanksgiving are all one as anone you shall beere Christ himselfe so to expound it and all the Evangelists Paul agree in one congruence touching this matter against you How blesse bl●ssing are vsed in Scrip●●res But first I will shew the simple how diversly this word Blesse is vsed in the Scriptures To blesse God is to praise him and giue him thankes for all his mercies as you haue in Luke and the disciples continued in the Temple landing blessing God Luk 24.53 I hope you will not say they crost God with their fingers or consecrated him to make him more holie b●t praised him with their mouths For if you take ble●●ing of God in that fingered sence then see the absu●●●●es you fall into Joh. ● 18. ●oh 4.84 First aganst Scriptures you must hold that God the Father is not a Spirit but hath a bodielie share that may bee touched and crost with our corporall forget● if this you hold you ioyne with those auncie●● heretickes of Egypt Anthrop●morphita who held that God had a bodie and members as man had And the second absurditie nay blasphemie is this that you should make GOD who is holi●esse it selfe the holier by your crossing but I hope you will not take blessing in this sence but joy●e with the Disciples and vs that blessing of GOD signifieth praysing of GOD or praying to GOD What it is for one man to blesse another Cen. ● 27 Genes 48. Numb 6.23 for one man to blesse another is nothing else but to praye for them and to beseech God that he would blesse them that is defend them protect them and be mercifull vnto them Let your High-priests of Rome and you low Priestes of ●●cland learne of Aaron Gods High-Priest hovv to blesse Gods people so cease to deceiue them anie more So Isaack blessed Iacob and Iacob the sonnes of Ioseph And so the LORD commaunded Moses to speake to Aaron and to his Sonnes saying Thus shall yee blesse the children of Israel and say vnto them The Lord blesse the and ●eepe thee the Lord make hi● face to shine v●on thee and be merc●full vnto thee c. A Christian patterne not onelie for Priests but also for P●st●urs and Parents dailie to practise the one for his flocke the other for his familie yet both in the Lord. from the Lord. Which blessings are derived from Gods mercies hang not on the ends of Priests fingers Again you see blessing is praying with the mouth not crossing with the fingers as you vainlie and foolishlie make your Ghostlie ch●●dren beleeue that if you crosse them with your two fingers and a thumbe they are pardoned for their sinnes post and preserved that day from future daungers and evill spirits Which fingered blessing of yours is as powerfull to pardon sinne and feare away spirits as three sups of the Challice is to cure the chinne-cough This blessing was commaunded by God to be practised by Aaron the High-Priest and the rest of the Priests vpon Gods children but how far your blessing differs from this the simplest may iudge For first God commaunded this blessing the Pope your blessings This was by mouth onely yours with some mumbling wordes and charming crosses with your fingers This blessing was a praier to desire God to blesse and you teach that in your breath fingers there is a power a certain working or impression of some blessing vpon them by meanes of your said mumbling and crossing But your Priests agree with Gods Priests and your blessing with fingers with

Christs minde and bewray your errours Let me but reason with you out of the first part of the verse from the propertie of this bread heere spoken of by Christ First it is living bread giues eternall life to the receivers yours doth not This came from heaven yours did not Who so eates of this cannot be damned but manie eat of yours and die eternally and therefore the very properties of this bread shew plainely that it cannot be meant of your singing-cakes as hath beene prooved before vnto you Because they haue no life in themselues and therefore can neither giue life nor preserue life vnto others The later part of the verse concerneth Christs flesh which is this true bread And thus out of Christs words I prooue that the flesh of CHRIST spoken of in this place cannot bee the flesh of CHRIST which you would haue given in the Sacrament Christs flesh promised in the sixth of Iohn was onely given on the crosse but the Sacrament was not the crosse Therfore in the Sacrament the flesh of Christ was not given So that these arguments grounded vpon Christs owne words which you concealed confute you your carnall presence in the Sacrament For your sacramental bread neither came form heaven not your imagined flesh of Christ made by the Priest cannot be this flesh here spoken of For it was offered once not often as you teach and that by himselfe not by the Priests vpon the crosse not in your Masse and that for the plenarie remission of the sinnes of all beleevers no for the temporall benefit of some perticuler person quick or dead as the Priest pleaseth The third proofe of the Catholique Priests out of the six●h of Iohn to prooue Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament Catho Priests Vers 55. My flesh is meate truelie and my bloud is drinke trulie Rider IF you should aske your boy in his Grammer rules a question if he aunswered not in the same case or by the same sense of a verbe that the question i● asked by you will count him a filte Grammatist But if you aske your Sophister a question in quid and hee aunswere in quale you wil taxe h●● for an improper and impertinent aunswere But most of all if a great Divine be asked a question to prooue the manner of a thing and he neglecting or ommiting that as t●o hard or impossible for him prooues the matter that was never demaunded or doubted of what wil the Reader thinke of this matter this man this proofe surelie he must say either hee vnderstandeth not the state of the question or else he is not able to prooue the question and so vseth this shamefull sh●ft in steed of a sufficient proofe All the Catholiques in this kingdome expected to be satisfied by your a●nswere touching the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament whether it be carnall or spirituall and whether he must be eaten by faith spirituallie or the teeth carnally And your aunswere is as improper and impertinent as tither Grammatist or Sophister for you leaue the maner of Christs presence which you should prooue and bring the matter of his presence which was never in question saying My flesh is meat truly c. How this your aunswere doeth relish of learning let the learned iudge When all the Catholiques in the kingdome hang their soules on your saying Are these your contentments you giue them If they aske you how they must eate Christs flesh drinke Christs bloud then you tell them my flesh is meate in deed and my bloud is drinke in deed Doe you aunswere their question or satisfie their conscience or resolue their doubts alasse no. Thus you haue dealt dallied and deceived a long time Christs people with these your improper impertinent vnprofitable nay vntrue aunsweres and yet you will be called Fathers Doctours and what not But I pray you tell me why you added not the next words of Christ you thought they were against you But if you had dealt as men having Gods feare before your eies you would not haue staied there for the next verse plainely discovers your bad dealing with the simple people for that aunswereth their question that would satisfie all good Catholiques in this point For if you aske there the holy Ghost this question how must Gods children eate Christes flesh and drinke Christs bloud he will aunswere you that whosoever dwels in Christ and Christ in him eates Christs flesh and drinkes Christs bloud but the faithfull onely dwell in Christ and Christ in them therefore the faithfull onely eat Christs flesh drinke Christs bloud whether it be in hearing the word in baptisme or in the Lords Supper as you haue heard before Jf you had added this verse it had overthrown your carnall presence in the Sacrament your orall eating of Christ with your mouth teeth c But as you wrong the Catholiques with an impertinent answere and as you abuse them by keeping backe the next words of Christ which expounds his owne meaning So heere you abuse your holie Father the Pope and your deare mother the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 expounding this text contrarie to the Romane sence for you take this flesh of Christ which is our tree meat to be the flesh which was borne of the virg●● and suffered on the crosse but the Popes church of Rome say contrarie for these be the wordes of the Canon Dist. 2. de consec pag 4●4 canon dupliciter Col. 4. Read the glosse and you may see your errour at in a glasse Dupliciter intelligitur caro sanguis Christi vel spiritualis illa atque diuina de qua ipse ait Caro mea vere est cibus sanguis meus vere est potu●● nisi meam ca●nem c. Vel caro mea ea quae crucifi●a est c. The flesh and bloud of Christ saith your own Church of Rome must be considered two manner of waies either for the spirituall and divine flesh spoken of by Christ my flesh is meat in deed c. and except you drinke his bloud c. or else for that his flesh which was crucified and that his bloud shed by the sharp launce of a cruell souldiour so that heere you forsake your Romane Catholique faith and become Apostates from the Church of Rome Thus you abuse the Catholiques in making them beleeue you teach as the Pope teacheth and you doe not therefore either the Pope or you must erre grosly teaching contraries But that all men may see that not onely this Pope Jnnocenti ●●●tertiu● lib 4. cap 14. de ●a●●amento Altars page 179. but also other Popes haue held the contrarie opinion to your new broched heresie I will all●●dge him that you dare not contradict that is Innocentiu● t●rtius that first begat your abortiue Transubstan●●tion De spirituali commestione Do●●nus a●● N●●i m●nducatveritis c. The Lord Christ when hee s●●ke of the spirituall ●aring said Except yee eat the

flesh of the sonne of man c. Loe heere is another Pope against you For you late Iesuites Semynaries Rhemists and Priests take this as ●poken of Christs flesh in the sacrament and they take it for ●●at spirituall and divine flesh of Christ whereon all the faithfull fed by faith as well before Christs incarnation as since his ascention I would bring more witnesses against your vn●●ue expositions and allegations The Pope your Father and Rome your mother witnes against you Priestes the rest of their degenerat children but that I thinke it sufficient that the Parentes Testimonie is the strongest Evidence against their degenerat children And after the Pope alleadgeth Augustine and the Canon Quid parat deutem ventrem crede ●●●●acasti and then concludes against your carnall eating of Christes flesh most strongly Qui credit 〈◊〉 Deum comedit ipsum Caro Christi nisi spiritualiter comedatur non ad salutem sed ad iudicium mandutatur Why saieth your Pope preparest thou thy teeth to eate and thy bellie to be filled beleeue thou hast eaten hee that beleeues eates For the flesh of Christ is not eaten to salvation but to destruction vnlesse it be eaten spirituallie And there in the next chapter the Pope giues this marginall note Christus est spiritualis Eucharistia Pag. 180. Christ is our spiritual Euchariste not our carnall food in the Sacrament And in the same page he saith Cibus est non corporis sed animae this is not meat for the bodie but for the soule And if it bee meate for the soule then it must bee received by faith not the mouth spirituallie not carnallie You see now the Scriptures Fathers Popes olde and new the Text and glosse of your deare mother the Church of Rome against you And least you should cavil I haue alleadged the Bookes Chapters Distinctions and Pages And if you will still tel the Cathol●ques that these places by mee all●●dged be not true then I tell you all your owne Authors and prin s be false for I alleadge Father Pope and Canons of your owne print and if you doubt looke vnto your owne bookes and prints and you shal find them so verb●●●● Printed Anno. 1599. Imp●●sis Lazari Zet●●ter● vnlesse your late Index expurgatorius hath blotted out the trueth as in manie things it hath But I will of these your former improper and impertinent testimonies out of the sixth of Iohn conclude and vrge no further but this one argument against you and them and then let the indifferent Reader iudge whether you haue not deceived Gods people by misvnderstanding the holie Scriptures or no Whosoever teacheth that there is a carnall reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament before consecration is a lyer a depraver of the truth and a deceiver of the people But some late Popes the new church of Rome with the colledge of Cardinals new creat●d Iesuits Semynaries and all the Romish Priests now in Ireland ●●●ch This is vnaunswerable that there is a carnall reall presen●● of Christ in the Sacrament before consecration Therefore some late Popes the new Church of Rome with the colledge of Cardinals new created Iesuits Semynaries and all the Romane Priests now in Ireland be lyers depravers of the trueth and deceivers of the people The maior or first proposition is your owne doctrine for you teach that before Hoc est corpus meum be pronounced there is no consecration The assumption or later proposition is as cleere for your perswade the simple people to beleeue that these texts out of the sixth of Iohn prooue a carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament a yeare before Hoc est corpus meum was by Christ pronounced or the Sacrament by Christ instituted Therefore the conclusion that you be lyers and deceivers of the people is inevitable Thus the Catholiques of this kingdome by the rules of your owne religion you haue deceived in teaching Christes carnall presence in the Sacrament a yeare before either Sacrament or consecration in the Sacrament were instituted And that your leaden divinitie without care or conscience you thrust vppon the simple people a● sound doctrine But if there were no other errour or heresie held and taught by you but this one point it were sufficient to make all the Catholicks in this kingdome nay in Christendome to forsake your opinion considering your ignorance or malice presuming to iustifie that which holie scriptures auncient Fathers Gods Church yea and the perticuler Church of Rome with their Bishops Archbishops Popes for a thousand yeares after Christs ascention never spake or heard of and therefore it is no olde faith taught by them but a new heresie invented by you But now to the rest of your proofe Math. 26.26 Christ tooke bread did blesse it Catho brake it and gaue it to his disciples and said Priests take and eate this is my bodie This is my bloud of the new Testament which shal bee shed for ●●ame for remission of sinnes GEntlemen this is your proofe out of Christs owne words Rider this was delivered by Christ owne mouth at the time of the institution o● the Supper and the night before his blessed passion and either this must helpe you or else you are helplesse but Christ willing I will plainlie shew this your proofe to be your reproofe and I pray God for Christ his sake that the eies of your vnderstanding may be opened to see the truth your hearts toucht to receiue and confesse the truth and renounce your errors and so cease to deceiue Gods people and the Queenes subiects least a worse thing come vnto you All the doubt and controversie of this question betwixt vs dependes on this Text which you say must bee taken properlie and litterallie wee say Sacramentallie improperlie figuratiuelie and misticallie And our opinion God willing shall be proved by Scriptures auncient Fathers and Popes and the olde Church of Rome But this is straunge that men of your great learning as the Catholiques take you to be wil deale so child shlie and weaklie in so weightie a matter Bee not offended that I say you handle this childishlie for in Schooles he that alleadgeth for the probation of a proposition the proposition it selfe for the probation of a text the text it selfe is counted childish and it is a childish point of Sophistrie and a fallacie to be vsed among young schollers not to be practised among simple Catholiques The Catholiques demand of you how you prooue Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament and you bring in Hoc est corpus meum which is the proposition wherevpon all this disputation and contention dependeth Ioh. 19. ●7 After the same manner a man may prooue the blessed virgin Marie to be Iohn the Evangelists mother and say still notwithstanding any text brought against him as Christ said Ecce mater tua Behold thy mother say what yee will the words be Christs words therefore they must be