Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
nature_n ghost_n holy_a trinity_n 3,214 5 9.7060 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A02635 A reioindre to M. Iewels replie against the sacrifice of the Masse. In which the doctrine of the answere to the .xvij. article of his Chalenge is defended, and further proued, and al that his replie conteineth against the sacrifice, is clearely confuted, and disproued. By Thomas Harding Doctor of Diuinitie. Harding, Thomas, 1516-1572. 1567 (1567) STC 12761; ESTC S115168 401,516 660

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

of the Father onely with the Faith of him that wel beleueth the whole Trinitie is honoured and when the intention of him that sacrificeth is directed vnto the Father the gifte of the Sacrifice with one and the same dewtie of the offerer is offered vnto the whole Trinitie Thus Fulgentius When Christe the Sonne of God is offered vp according to his body and bloude that is to say according to his humaine nature according to whiche he is lesse then the Father then him selfe then the holy Ghost he is consecrated vnto the holy Trinitie And so much doth the Churche in the lesser Canon and specially in the ende of the Masse professe August de Ciuit. Dei li. 10. c. 20 with expresse wordes naming the Trinitie it selfe Therefore S. Augustine saith● that whereas Christe Iesus in the forme of God taketh sacrifice with the Father Christe is sacrificed in the forme of a seruaūt● with whome he is one God yet in the forme of a seruaunt he had rather be a Sacrifice then take Sacrifice least by this occasion some man should thinke that Sacrifice were to be done to any creature By this he is a Priest him selfe both the offerer and him selfe also the offering Of which thing he willed the daily Sacrifice of the Churche to be a Sacrament which Church whereas it is the body of him selfe the head is taught through him to offer vp it selfe Masses in honour and memorie of Sanctes Although sometime the Churche do celebrate certaine Masses in the honour and memorie of Saintes yet it doth not offer Sacrifice vnto them but vnto the Trinitie only that hath crowned them and geuing thankes vnto God for their victories sueth for their aides and desireth to be holpen by their merites and prayers Wherof S. Augustine treateth Lib. 8. De Ciuitate Dei cap. v●t lib. 20. Contrà Faustum cap. 21. Concerning the second point which is by whom this Oblation and Sacrifice is made By vvhō is this Sacrifice made among some men there is some doubte thereof For some say that Christe offereth not but that we only do offer Others there be that wil Christe here also to be the Priest who wil seme to leane to the authoritie of S. Ambrose Ambr. lib. 1. Officiorum c. 48. De Sūma Trinit fide Cath. cap. firmiter and of the Laterane Councel Now Christ is offered saith S. Ambrose but he is offred as man as receiuing passion and he offereth him selfe as a Priest to forgeue our sinnes The Councel hath thus There is one vniuersal Churche of the faithful in which the selfe same Priest is the Sacrifice Iesus Christe If our Lorde bicause he is a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedeck haue an euerlasting Priesthode Heb. 7. as S. Paul saith although he offered him selfe vnto the Father with death in the Aulter of the Crosse to pay the price of mannes redemption yet his Priesthode was not extinquished by death Wherefore as in the Epistle to the Hebrewes S. Paule concludeth Heb. ● it is necessary that he haue also that which he may offer But whereas it is not Christe him selfe in his owne person but a man Priest that standeth at the Aulter who with the wordes of Christ doth consecrat and offer this Sacrifice as to this purpose he is assumpted the learned Fathers of the Councel of Trent Concil Trident. Sessi 22. cap. 2. haue discussed this controuersie with three wordes For the Hoste say they is one and the selfe same He the same now offereth by the ministerie of Priestes that offered himselfe vpon the Crosse with a diuers way onely of offering Whereof it foloweth that both Christe and also we here are Priestes he bicause he consecrateth by our ministerie we bicause we consecrate in his person and with his woordes For whereas he said to his Apostles Luc. 22. Doo ye this in my remembrance after that he had offered him selfe vnbloudily at the Supper as he is now offered in the Aulter the Apostles so vnderstoode him the Holy Ghost geuing them suche sense or Christe by expresse wordes so teaching them that they should consummate and make perfite this Mysterie in the person of him and with his wordes Which of an assured tradition of the Churche that can not be deceiued the auncient Fathers haue alwaies taught and the Churche to this day obserueth This doctrine S Chrysostome confirmeth with these wordes Chrysost. homil De prodi●ione Iudae Now the time inuiteth vs to come vnto that dreadful Table with due reuerence and agreable watchefulnes Let no Iudas there be found let no euil disposed person thither come For it is not man that of the Cōsecratiō of our Lordes Table maketh the thinges set forth the body and bloude of Christ● The wordes be vttered with the Priestes mouth and with the power of God and his grace they are consecrated This is my body saith Christ with this worde the thinges set forth be consecrated And as that worde Gen. 1. which saith Grow ye and be ye multiplied and fil the earth was once spokē but at al time feeleth his effect nature working vnto generation Euē so that worde was once spoken but it geueth strength vnto the Sacrifice through al the Tables of the Church vntil this day and vntil his comming Againe he saith in an other Homilie Idem Homil 2. I wil tel you further of a maruelous thing and woonder not at it let it not trouble you In 2. ad Timoth. What is that The holy Oblation it selfe be it Peter be it Paule or of what so euer merite the Priest be that offereth it is the very same that Christ him selfe gaue vnto his Disciples and that Priestes now also do consecrate This hath no whit lesse then that Why so Bicause they be not men that sanctifie this but Christe which consecrated that before For as the wordes that Christe spake be the same which the Priestes now also do pronounce● so the Oblation is the same Chrysost. Homil. 60 ad popul Antioch Therefore he saith in an other place Ministrorum nos ordinem tenemus qui verò ipsa sanctificat transmutat ipse est We are but in the order of Ministers but he that sanctifieth the thinges brought forth and changeth them into the body and bloude of Christe is he him selfe that is to say Christe Concil Florentinum Hereunto agreeth the Councel of Florence The Priest say those learned Fathers doth consecrate this Sacrament speaking in the person of Christe in the person of Christe they meane sitting and offering vp him selfe at his Supper For the Church● teacheth not that the woordes of consecration be spoken by way of rehersal only and that the body and bloude of Christe is made at euery pronounciation of them as by a couenaunt made by Christe with vs. But as the brothers of Ioseph in Egypte fearing least he would beare in minde the iniuries which he
the Sacramentes of the Olde Testament promised the Sauiour Suche signes as geue saluation be meete Sacramentes of the Newe Testament of such kinde of signe or figure speaketh S. Dionyse where he vseth the terme Symbolical speaking of the Sacrifice of the Body and Bloude of Christe Ansvver to Pachymeres As for that M. Iewel allegeth out of Prchymeres the Paraphraste who saith The Priest commeth to the Bread and the Cuppe whereof he would faine conclude that the inuisible substance of the Sacrifice is not the body and bloude of Christe it standeth him in litle stede For in deede it is bread and wine when the Priest first commeth vnto them to celebrate the Sacrifice But when the wordes of Christe be comme vnto them as S. Ambrose saith that is to say Ambros. de Sacramēt lib. 4 cap 5 when the Priest hath duely pronounced the wordes of Consecration then are they made the body and bloude of Christe and so the Sacrifice of Christe And that Pachymeres was of this beleefe it is cleare by his owne woordes whiche M. Iewel either knewe not and so speaketh ignorantly or knewe wel yenough yet dissembled and so doth maliciously Bicause for some credite of his purpose he cited his woordes in Greke though by casting in one woorde of his owne which he founde not in the texte after his common woonte he hath some deale falsified the sentence I wil also here truely cite the woordes in Greke by which Pachymeres sheweth him selfe to be Catholique in this point and quite contrary to M. Iewels Sacramentarie doctrine They be these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pachymee in Dionys. Eccles. Hierarch cap. 3. pag. 136. As muche to say in English There be many that cast their eye vpon the holy signes onely as they who are not hable to conceiue any higher thing But the Bishop him silfe is caried vp vnto those first samplers or natural thinges to wit the pretious body and bloude it selfe of our Lorde beleuing that the thinges which are set forth that is to say the bread and wine be changed into them by the holy and almighty Ghoste Lo M. Iewel here haue you the cleare testimonie of Pachymeres him selfe for his true and Catholique beleefe touching the truth of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament Which beleefe is not onely that the pretious body and bloude of our Lorde are of a right beleeuer beholden and conceiued in the Sacrament verely present which the Lutherans do acknowledge but also that the bread and wine are by the power of the holy Ghoste Transubstātiation into the same conuerted and changed whiche neither ye nor Luthers scholers doo beleeue and so by Pachymeres transubstantion is auouched After al this M. Iewel disposeth him selfe to dally at an Argument of his owne mery heads forging M. Ievvel forgeth Argumēt● bearing the Reader in hand it is myne And this Argument forsooth is such and so vnskilful as a yong Sophister saith he would neuer haue framed it What any yong Sophister would doo I knowe not But now certaine it is that be it wel or otherwise it is framed by as olde a Sophister as your selfe are M. Iewel If it be vnskilfully framed the blame is yours for yours it is not myne Here that you be so ful of your Argumentes which vntruely you father vpon me and so busy with your Logique I answer you as S. Augustine answered Iulian the Pelagian Heretique dealing with him as you doo with me not onely in this place but in manner in your whole booke Quantùm tibi places tantùm grauibus Lectoribus displices Augustin contra Iulian lib. 3. cap. 7. quod peius est fingis me dicere quod non dico concludere sicut non concludo caet Looke saith he how much you stande in your owne conceite so muche you are out of conceite with the graue Readers and which is worse you feine me to say that which I say not to conclude so as I conclude not If you would needes shewe your cunning in Logique and dispute after the rules of that arte why rehersed you not the whole Antecedent Though in this place I frame no Argume at al but onely recite the saying of S. Dionyse applying it to my purpose yet if the whole should be disposed in fourme of an Argument this is the Argument that thereof might be concluded the circumstance of the place considered The Bishop or Priest by reporte of S. Dionyse standing at the holy Aulter An Argument gathered out of S. Dionyse for the Sacrifice after he hath geuen praises to God for his Diuine workes commeth vnto the mystical Sacrifice excusing him selfe for that he taketh vpon him to offer vp the healthful hoste or Sacrifice that is farre aboue his worthinesse whereof Christe at his last Supper hauing consecrated his body and bloude said by way of commaundement and commission Luc. 22. Doo ye this in my Remembrance But this healthful Sacrifice whereof Christ so said and which he required to be offered is the Sacrifice of his body and bloude vnder the formes of bread and wine Ergo by witnesse of that Auncient and most worthy Father the Bishop or Priest offereth vp Christes body and bloude and consequently Christ him selfe For where the body of Christe is there also is whole Christe bicause of the inseparable vnitie of both natures And if Christe be thus offered to whom is he offred but to the Father Albeit I confesse that Christe is offered to him selfe also as being God and to the holy Ghoste to the whole most blessed Trinitie If you had thus set forth the Argument M. Iewel and dealt simply and truly you should not haue needed to trouble the reader with so much Sophistrie and Logique as here for confutation of your owne forged reason you haue bestowed Bicause you knewe your selfe not hable to auoide the force of the whole Antecedent slyly you answer to that parte of it onely where it is said the Priest excuseth him selfe as though I had layd the chiefe grounde of the authoritie in that clause onely And thereof you take occasion to enter into a needelesse common place proouing by certaine testimonies which no man euer denied that sundry holy thinges are to be done not presumptuously and rashly but reuerently and with feare and trembling as namely when we offer vp the Sacrifice of Praise when we baptise when we preache or heare Gods holy worde when we pray and cal God our Father For the reuerent and hūble demeanour that we ought to shewe in doing these holy thinges you allege S. Basil S. Dionyse S. Paule S. Cyprian But what of al this wil it thereof folowe Ergo though the Priest standing at the Aulter and comming to offer the Mystical Sacrifice excuse him selfe not for praying preaching praising or baptizing but for offering the healthful hoste that farre passeth his degree euen the same that Christe offered at his laste Supper whereof he said This is my Body
Cyprianus De vnctio ne Chrismatis vera synceritas exponeret Gentibus quomodo vinū panis caro esset sanguis et quib● rōibus causae effectibus cōuenirēt et diuersa noīa vel species ad vnā reducerētur essentiā et significātia et significata eisdē nacabulis cēserentur That the sincere truth and true sinceritie being secretly imprinted in th'Apostles might expoūd vnto the Gētils how wine and bread should be his flesh and bloud and by what meanes the causes should be agreable to the effectes and diuers names and kindes should be brought vnto one substance and the thinges signifying and the thinges signified should be called by the same names Lo here it is declared what bread and wine it was as much to say the flesh and bloud of Christe which S. Cyprian saith he gaue at his last Supper vnto his Apostles This cleare and syncere truth or true synceritie so he calleth either the true doctrine of this Sacrifice or the Sacrifice it self in respect of the sundry impure and typical sacrifices of Moses Lawe he would secretly that is with th' inward knowledge of these secret mysteries to be imprinted and digested in th'Apostles to thintēt they should expound vnto the Gentils the Iewes with their olde sacrifices being now reiected how at this heauenly banket the bread and wine is flesh and bloud how the causes and effectes be agreable that is to say how the wordes of Cōsecratiō duely pronoūced by the Priest and the power of the holy Ghoste which are the causes doo produce and make the body and bloud of our Lord which be the effectes how thinges of diuers names and diuers in nature and therfore diuers kindes be brought vnto one essence or substāce to wit bread and wine vnto the substance of Christes flesh and bloude Transubstantiatiō● whereby Transubstantiation is wrought briefly to conclude how wheras bread signifieth the body and wine the bloud the thinges signifiyng and the thinges signified be called by the same names Which thus appeareth to be true bicause that which before Cōsecration was and afterward semeth to be bread is called the flesh and in like case wine is called the bloud and so cōtrariwise sometimes the flesh is called the bread and the bloud is called the wine What can be said more directly against M. Iewels Sacramentarie Heresie and more piththily for cōfirmation of the Catholike doctrine touching this point And al this M. Iewel hath leaft out The same very thing S. Cyprian doth vtter more plainely in other places Cyprianus De coena Domini In his Treatise of the Supper of our Lorde he hath these most euident wordes Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus Omnipotentia Verbi factus est Caro. This bread Lib. 2. Epi●stola 3. which our Lorde gaue vnto his Disciples at his supper being changed not in shape but in nature by the almighty power of the Worde was made flesh Againe writing to Ca●ilius he saith Qui magis sacerdos ● Dominus noster Iesus Christus qui sacrificiū obtulit et obtulit hoc idē quod Melchisedech id est panē et vinum suū scilicet corpus et sanguinē Who is more a Priest then our Lorde Iesus Christ who offred vp a Sacrifice and offred the very same that Melchisedech did that is to say bread and wine as much to say his owne body and bloude By these places S. Cyprian declareth his minde plainely what he meaneth by the bread and wine that Christe either gaue at the Supper vnto his Disciples or offered vnto his Father to render thankes for the great benefite of his passion soothly none other bread and wine then that which was made by the almighty power of the Woorde his body and bloude And behold Reader how vniforme his vtterance is and how he agreeth with him selfe In the Sermon De vnctione Chrismatis by M. Iewel with false leauing out that whiche made for the truth alleged he saith that diuers kindes are reduced into one substance in his Sermon De coena Domini he saith the bread by the omnipotencie of the Woorde is made flesh so bread and flesh being diuers kindes are brought to one substance There the thinges signifying and the thinges signified saith he be called with the same names as how I haue before declared In his Epistle to Cecilius naming bread and wine he expoundeth him selfe thus suum scilicet corpus sanguinem as much to say his owne body and bloude Where the body and bloude beare the names of bread and wine By this it is clearly seene what an impudent and wicked glose is that which M. Iewel incloseth in his parenthesis added by way of exposition vnto the maimed sentence of S. Cyprian wherewith to exclude the body and bloude of Christe the true bread and wine What haue you wonne here by S. Cyprian M. Iewel Who cutteth and maimeth the Doctours Who is now to be asked whether he haue the chynecoffe M. Ievvels Coffe which in a place of your Reply with out cause you twite me of What kinde of coffe I shal cal this I wote not I feare me the il mater of it lyeth not in your chyne a place so farre from the harte but in the harte it selfe For were not the same by Satans worke festred with the corruption of heresie you had not ben letted as with a coffe from bringing forth the later parte of S. Cyprians saying whose beginning you falsly abuse to obscure the cleare truthe Who so euer thus coffeth I wil not say he hath the chynecoffe as you ieast but verely sauing my charitie that he coffeth as like an heretique as a rotten yew cof●eth like a sheepe Laste of al whereas he saith that I am reprooued of vntruth and folie by S. Paule for saying Three lyes made by M. Iewel within three lines that Christe really sacrificed him selfe at two seueral times and twise really shed his bloude only vpon myne owne warrant he maketh no lesse then three lyes within three lines For neither said I in this place that Christe twise really shed his bloude nor onely vpon myne owne warrant said I that Christe sacrificed his body and bloud twise bicause I had the authoritie of Hesychius here as the authoritie of other Fathers before namely Gregorie Nyssen and Theophylacte for my warrant Nor for so saying am I reproued of any vntruth or folie by S. Paule For my assertion is true notwithstanding any thing that S. Paule saith What though S. Paule say Heb. 9. M. Iewel Christus semel oblatus est ad multorū exhauriend● peccata Christ was once offered Heb. 10● to take away the synn●s of Many Againe with one Sacrifice he hath made per●ite for euer them that be sanctified Bicause in these twoo sayinges you finde the termes one and once therefore suppose you that needes they must reprooue my assertion auouching that Christ was twise really