Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	body_n	bread_n	figure_n	1,915	5	9.0793	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26615	Protestancy to be embrac'd, or, A new and infallible method to reduce Romanists from popery to Protestancy a treatise of great use to all His Majesties subjects, and necessary to prevent error and popery / by David Abercromby, D., lately converted, after he had profess'd near nineteen years Jesuitism and popery.	Abercromby, David, d. 1701 or 2.	1682 (1682)	Wing A86; ESTC R6382	30,832	174

the Marcionists denying he had ever a true and real body I shall say yet something more surprizing but no less true than what I have said before This Doctrine of Transubstantiation 1. Establisheth that old and odd fancy of some doting Philosophers who doubted of all things how evident soever 2. 'T is evidently destructive to the whole body of Christian Religion In order to prove apodictically these two Propositions I must suppose a Third one as a self-evident Principle and whence they both flow as from their only source That our Senses in the Eucharist are deceiv'd in and about their proper object which I think can be denyed by no Romanists since they confess though they see all the appearances of true Bread that nevertheless there is no such substance in the Eucharist but the Body and Blood of Christ under the veils of Bread and Wine I see nothing I tast nothing I touch nothing in a Consecrated Wafer but what my senses are sensible of in an unconsecrated one but saith the Romanist I must not stand in this case to the judgment of my senses what I see touch and tast after the Consecration is no more in reality Bread what-ever the constant and experimental knowledge of our Senses teach us to the contrary they will grant then I hope they are deceiv'd and mistake their own proper object but perhaps because they foresee the dangerous consequence of such a Concession some will be apt to run to a School-distinction in aim to defend with a show of reason this self-evident falshood that our Senses in the case here handled are not deceived as to their proper Object They may distinguish I fancy two sort of Objects a Mediate one and another Immediate the Immediate one is the colour shape quantity and other accidents or appearances of Bread the Mediate one is the substance it self our Senses say they mistake not the former because the accidents are the same both before and after the Consecration but sure I am they mistake the latter it being now by their Principles invisibly changed into the Body of Christ This distinction then cannot serve their turn Let them torture their discursive faculty never so much they shall never be able to prove that our Senses are not truly deceiv'd representing to us as Bread what really if we believe the Romanists is not Bread I come now to the Conclusions springing naturally from this granted Principle If I mind to play the Pyrrhonian and doubt of every thing I have from the Romish Transubstantiation a ground whereon to build this extravagancy whither-soever I direct my sight I can ascertain you of nothing that my eye sees I enter into a Garden and there I behold here Lillies and there Roses I smell them I touch them and yet I may question the truth of this and doubt if I see any such thing what if the red of the Roses and the white of the Lillies be now by an Eucharistick-like Miracle the covertures of some other substances that are neither Roses nor Lillies so perhaps 't is not a Rose that I smell a Lilly that I see Fire that I feel an Apple that I tast a Trumpet that I hear but some other substances in their shape and cloath'd with their Garments As 't is not Bread that I see in the Eucharist but another substance to wit Christ's Body and Blood under the accidental parts of Bread and Wine what do we know but the whole visible Mass of this World and all the Objects of our Senses are nothing else but meer accidents and Superficial Representations of things that perhaps were and now have no foundation in being or never were but have ever been supplied by God's infinite power Thus the Pyrrhonian Triumphs upon the same ground whereon the Romanist settles that strange Doctrine of Transubstantiation while the whole Body of Christian Religion is as it were a flote and carried too and fro by the wind of this uncertain Doctrine For if our Senses may mistake their own proper object as confessedly the Romanist sayes they do in the Eucharist our Faith is nothing else but fancy and uncertainty Comes it not by hearing Fides exauditu if than one sence may be deceiv'd why may not likewise the other What I see in the Eucharist is not Bread though it appears to be such perhaps what I hear is not the true Word of God though it shine with all the Characters thereof In fine since our Senses are capable of an errour relating to their proper object an eye-witness now can be no witness at all or at least no Conviction To what purpose then did our Saviour show himself after his Resurrection so often and to so many in the day of his glorious Ascension In promptu causa est the Answer is at hand to no purpose if our Senses could mistake their proper object and what so many eye-witnesses saw and judg'd to be Christ could have been his meer shape and figure as the Marcionist pretends with a clear advantage over and from the Romanists whose Doctrine he may easily make use of in defence of his error and Heresie To conclude if what appears to the eyes of all men to be Bread is no such thing what has been sounded in the ears of all the World from Father to Son as a truth may prove a falshood Our ears being no less apt to be impos'd upon than our eyes Which looks like a mortal blow to all tradition of equal authority with Divine Scriptures and I discover not yet how the Romanist can shun it For since he grants we may all and have been from the Cradle of the Church mistaken in what we see may not we likewise be deceiv'd in what we have heard from our Fathers and they in what they have heard from their Fore-runners c. And the rather that an ear-witness is not so much to be credited as he that has seen You judge by this discourse what extreams these are forc'd into who deny on so slight grounds the greatest and most sensible evidence which is that of our senses But Christ's Word sayes the Romanist is my security he assures us the Bread is chang'd into his body I enquire no more Who speaks so forgets or knows not what is said elsewhere litera occidit the letter killeth and the literal Sense is an occasion to several of gross errors and pitiful mistakes Christ is called a Door a Rock a Wine Tree a Lyon c. We would be look'd upon as besides our selves if we assented to all this as interpreted in the literal sence and according to the bare sound of the words For as the literal sence of such and the like expressions involves not only obvious implicancys and manifest absurdities but moreover was constantly contradicted by the experimental knowledge of such as were so happy as to see Christ even so in our case these words this is my Body if understood conformably to the mute Letter both represent to

our mind a World of illegal absur'd and irrational inferences and are besides contradicted through all Ages by the constant experience of all seeing and feeling men Let no Man nevertheless imagine we ground our mysteries on the Testimony of our Senses we only say nothing can be suppos'd as a mystery that is point blank against the evidence of sence and infallible experience which cannot be retorted against the mystery of the Trinity for though we neither see it nor feel it yet our Senses shew nothing to us evidently destructive to it and on this account this mystery is not against but above the reach both of Sense and Reason Secondly This Doctrine inclineth the meaner capacities to idolatry and the sharper wits to Hypocrisie and Dissimulation The common People because incapable to distinguish the appearance of Bread they see from the Body of Christ they see not and being taught to adore him hidden thus under the veils of Bread and Wine are apt to and no doubt do frequently adore the accidents they see which they call sometimes blasphemously God yea say commonly when the Wafer is lifted up by the Priest in the midst of the Mass on leve Dieu God is lifted their understanding finding no passage through the Consecrated Wafer to Christ's Body 9. As for the sharper sort of Romanists when they reflect 1. On what is said in Scripture that the Heavens must receive Christ until the times of restitution of all things 2. That a Body can no more be without its due extension for example of five or six foot than water without humidity fire without heat a stone without hardness 3. That the Bread cannot be miraculously chang'd into Christ's Body because all miracles are of necessity visible as is clear by all those we ever heard or read of But here the substance into which the Bread is converted is not visible This visibility nevertheless is necessary in a change really miraculous as it appears by that of water into wine of Moses Rod into a Serpent c. 4. That 't is inconsistent with reason to say Christ's Body is at the same time in Heaven and Earth yea and in as many places as there be all the World over Consecrated Wafers Who-ever understands these absurdities will never I am confident believe a true Transubstantiation though he profess otherwise outwardly through Hypocrisie and Dissimulation The Trinity I confess and Hypostatical Union or the Incarnation are far beyond the reach of our reason yet because they are not the Objects of our Senses we believe them with less reluctancy and more easily upon authority but that which hath ever been and still is evidently repugnant to the experimental knowledge of all our Senses as the Transubstantiation confessedly is can scarce ever be looked upon as a truth by such as make use of their discerning faculty The Romanists instance commonly these Words of Christ This is my Body as the ground of this Doctrine which they say must not be taken in a figurative sence because they are Christ's last Will and Testament and no man neither ignorant nor malicious expresseth his last Will by Figures and Metaphors But here lies their mistake that these words This is my Body are a true and real Testament or Christ's Legacy to his Apostles For he says not I leave you my Body which is the usual manner of uttering our selves in Testaments but This is my Body 'T is no Testament than as they imagine or at least not a proper one 10. Their Doctrine relating to the mediation of the Virgin Mary and other Saints withdraws them from rendering to Christ our only Redeemer due Honour and Glory For though there is no other Name under Heaven whereby we must be saved but that of Christ yet many of them pretend to Eternal Happiness by the merits of the Saints and the Virgin Mary whom they joyn still with Jesus in their Visits to the Sick either crying aloud to them or exhorting the sick to pronounce Jesus Maria as if they judg'd Christ's merits insufficient or that some other Name than that of Christ our Advocate with the Father could be a propitiation for our Sins hence 't is they extol so much their meritorious works that we have reason to say they ground thereon their best hopes of the other Life at least 't is certain the simple undiscerning sort relys more on what they do than on what Christ did for them I mean more upon their good works than on his infinite merits and mercys SECT II. Their Divine Worship and Ecclesiastical Discipline 1. THeir manner of Divine Worship is not unlike that of the ancient Heathens and on this account is far from the purity of the Primitive Church They adore God in Pictures and Images as he was adored by the Heathens in the Sun Moon and other less noble Creatures or rather to speak in their own terms they worship those Images as representations of that invisible and Soveraign Being we call God Though this was severely punished in the Israelites worshipping the Golden Calf as a representation of God for I cannot imagine they ador'd it as a true God unless you suppose they were as void of reason as it was if then this Worship of theirs be looked upon by all as Idolatry what may we judge of that Romish Image Worship the very same or at least in nothing material differing from it 2. Images are commonly called the Books of Ignorants but in my judgment they deserve rather to be denominated the Books of Ignorance because they occasion often mistakes and errors As for instance an Old Man representing God the Father a Dove the Holy Ghost are apt to make the ignorant sort believe they have indeed some such shape I shall not contest here about this point because it hath been discuss'd so often by others One thing only I shall say which I think is undeniable that Protestants serve God more in spirit and truth than Romanists do Because they make their Addresses to him immediately without having recourse to Images or imploring the help of Saints as Mediators I know they answer this by distinguishing a relative and Soveraign Worship The former they allow to Images the latter to God only But First This relative Worship was condemn'd and punish'd in the Israelites as I have insinuated above And Secondly They adore confessedly the Cross cultu latriae with that Soveraign cult belonging to God only What then can they instance in defence of their innocency I must as yet tell them in this place 3. They fall short of the end they aim at in covering the inside of their Churches with rare Pictures and Images of exquisite Artifice their aim is as I charitably suppose to stir up the people thereby to greater devotion But we find by experience a quite contrary effect they are diverted from Prayer by that great variety of alluring objects they have before their eyes you may see them in their Churches more gazing for