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	real_a	1,600	5	9.1674	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14212	A collection of certaine learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zachary Ursine; doctor and professor of divinitie in the noble and flourishing schools of Neustad. For explication of divers difficult points, laide downe by that author in his catechisme. Lately put in print in Latin by the last labour of D. David Parry: and now newlie translated into English, by I.H. for the benefit and behoofe of our Christian country-man	Ursinus, Zacharias, 1534-1583.; I. H., fl. 1600.; Pareus, David, 1548-1622. aut; Junius, Franciscus, 1545-1602. aut	1600 (1600)	STC 24527; ESTC S100227	171,130	346

signifie so much by confessing and solemnizing them but primarilie and principallie God signifieth so much vnto vs testifying and confirming by ceremonies of the sacraments For the ministers as well in administration of sacraments as preaching the word represent the person and office of God towardes his church Matthew the eighteenth and twentie nine Teach and baptise all nations Ioh. 1. 33. He that sent mee to baptise Iohn 3. 22. and 4. 2. Iesus is said to baptise when not himselfe but his disciples in his name did baptise So of the signe of inauguration to the kingdome 1. Sam. 10. 1. The Lord hath annointed thee when yet Samul was sent to annoint Saule The sacraments therefore doe strengthen our faith because the scripture witnesseth that they are signes of the mutual eternal covenāt betwixt God the faithfull because by them God signifieth vnto vs the bestowing of such benefites as are promised in the Gospell and we must as well beleeue God signifying vnto vs his will by signes as by wordes because in their lawfull vse they haue annexed vnto them a promise of grace not onely as they are sacrifices shew our obedience but also as they are signes of grace deliuered vnto vs by God as Hee that beleeueth and is baptised shall bee saued It shal be an acceptable sacrifice to make attonement for him Lastely because the scripture to confirme the receauing or depriuing of the things signified alleadgeth the receauinge or depriuing of the signes as Psal 51. Thou shalt sprinckle me with hysop I shall be clensed The L. shal circūcise thine heart Al we which are baptized into his death The bread which we breake is it not the communion of Christs bodie Herevpon are annexed other final causes They distinguish the church from other sectes this appeareth by effect and by testimonies as A stranger shall not eate therfore What thē availeth circumcisiō verie much For vnto them were committed the wordes of God Yee gentiles which in times past were called the vncircumcision because in that time yee were without Christ strangers from the covenant and common wealth of Israel hauinge no hope of the promise and without God in the world They are a confession publique thankesgiuing for Christes benefites It shall bee a signe of the covenant betweene me and you and it shall bee my covenante in your flesh As often as yee shall eate this bread shewe yee the Lords death They continew the memory of Gods benefites This day shall be vnto you for a remembrance It shall bee asigne vnto thee vpon thine hande a remembraunce betweene thine eies Doe this in remembrance of me They are a band of charitie for because they which vse them are in league with God they are also in league betweene thēselues One Lord one faith one baptisme c. We being manie are one bread one bodie For we are all partakers of one bread 3. Rites and ceremonies not commaunded by God to be signs of the promise are not sacramēts The proofe The signes can confirme nothinge but by his consent and promise from whom the thinge promised and signified is expected Therfore no creature cā ordaine and institute testimonies of Gods will 4. Two things are to be considered in al Sacraments 1. Visible earthly and corporal signes which are rites or ceremonies and visible or corporal things which God exhibiteth or offereth vnto vs by his ministers and we receaue corporally that is by the partes and senses of our bodie ● the things signifyed which are invisible heauenly and spiritual that is Christ himselfe and all his benefites which are through faith communicated vnto vs by God spiritually that is by power and vertue of the holy Ghost The proofe The distinction is manifest by an induction Also the receauing of the signes is corporall and externall but the thinges signifyed are receaued spiritually or by faith Because they are promised onely vnto such as beleeue but the signes are no other wise ratified then the promises whervnto they are annexed Also because the signes shew that vnto our eies which the promise declareth vnto our eares As therfore the promise is a vaine sound so also are the ceremonies vaine without faith Lastly because the thinges signified are the participating of Christ and all his benefits But this can noway be graunted to any man either in the vse of sacraments or without it but by faith alone 5. The signes or elements are not to be changed in nature or substance but only in respect of their vse The proofe This is cleere by induction and sense I baptize you with water The breade which wee breake is the communion of Christes bodie Here bread and water are named in the vse 6 The cōiunction of the signes the thing signified is not physical that is naturall and reall but relatiue that is to say this cōiunction is a diuine ordinance wherby things inuisible and spirituall are represented by thinges visible and corporall as it were by certaine visible wordes and are in the right vse offered receaued togeather with the signes The proofe Such is the cōnexion of all signes with the things signified that they represent the things signified and confirme the receauing of them for they are as it were testifying pleadges and seals although they be not in the same place with the signs The reasō is because to make something a signe of an other thing is not to include or tie the same thinge to the signe but to order the signe to signifie the thing● whether it be in the same place with the signe or in some other Also the nature of the things signified by sacraments doth not admit this For some of them are spiritual substances as the holie Ghost some accidents not in the sacramental signes and elements but in the heartes of men as the giftes of the holy Ghost some are diuine actions as remission of sinnes some are corporall and locally in one only place not wheresoeuer the sacraments are vsed as the flesh and bloud of Christ The names and proprieties of the things signified are attributed to the signes and contrarie the names and proprieties of the signes to the things because of the similitude and likenesse betweene both or for significatiō of the things by the signs or for the ioyned offeringe and receauinge of the thinges togeaher with the signes in the lawful vse of the sacraments The proofe The scripture speaketh this of sacraments Gen. 17. 10. Act. 7. 8. Circumcisiō is the league or couenant Exod. 12. 11. the eatinge of the lambe is the Passouer Exod. 31. 7. the sabbaoth is the eternal couenant Exod. 24. 8. The bloud of the sacrifice is the bloud of the couenant And Levit. 17. 5. The attonement of our soules Heb. 9. 5. Over the arke was a cover shadowing the mercie-seat Ephes 2. 26. The baptisme of water is the washinge that clenseth vs

God forgiuenes of their sinnes for that Christs sake whome they beare in their handes which is nought els but the Popish oblation of Christ 4 They of force admit the mangling or abridging one part of the Sacrament For they reteine the foundation on which the Papistes builde this errour For wheras they hold a corporal presence of Christ in with vnder or to the bread they must necessarilie either withholde the cuppe from the Communicantes because in their doctrine and opinion the bloud of CHRIST is in his body or else they must separate CHRISTES bloud from his body then which nothing can be more absurd Wee offend not as they charge vs in the defect but keepe the meane For wee teach the spirituall presence and participation that is to say that all the faithfull which eate and drinke the breade and wine are truelie made partakers of Christ himselfe and al his benefites and so made one with him that they become flesh of his flesh bone of his bones But ther as it hath beene already demonstrated offende as doe the Papists in the excesse Yea but say they these are the errours of the Sacramentaries to say that Obiect 1. The Sacraments are only bare signes and tokens Ans We teach no such doctrine but we teach that the Thinges signified are exhibited and received togither with the Signes although not corporallie yet in such manner as fitteth Sacraments Obiect 2. CHRIST is present onlie according to his working Ans Neyther is this our doctrine but we teach that Christ is present and vnited vnto vs by the holy Ghost howsoever his body be farre remooued and absent from vs in like sorte as he is wholy cōuersant with vs by his ministery although it be otherwise in respect of his other nature Obiect 3. In the Sacrament is only an imaginarie figuratiue and spirituall bodie of CHRIST not an essentiall bodie Aunsw Touching the imaginarie bodie obiected wee neuer made mention thereof but our whole doctrine is concerning the true flesh of CHRIST vvhich is presente vvith vs yea though hee remaine still in heaven Father we say that we receiue the bread and the body but both in their proper manner Ob. 4. The true body of Christ which hung on the crosse and the true bloud which was shed for vs is distributed but spiritually that it is receiued of them only which are worthy Cōmunicants and the vnworthy receiue nothing but the bare signes to their iudgement and condē●ation Ans This obiection is indeed the very doctrine we preach and therfore we grant the whole as being consonant and agreeable with the word of God the nature of the Sacramentes the Analogie of faith and the communion of the faithfull with Christ II. The arguments whereby the Consubstantials labor to 〈◊〉 ●hrow our doctrine touching the Lords Supper togither with their Confutation and Answeres Arg. 1. The words of Christs institution are plaine evident THIS is my bodie THIS is my bloud Auns The words they cite are swords to cut their owne throats For they say that 〈◊〉 vnder or with the bread Christs bodie is reallie receiued whereas Christ saith that the bread it selfe is his bodie Therfore they do the Church a double wrong One in that they thrust on her their owne words insteed of Christs Another in that they think her so blind that shee cānot see the diversity of these two sayings The bread is in the bodie and The bread is the body Moreover they make Christ a lier For they deny that the bread is his body and say that his body is in the bread Let them looke what answere they wil make vnto Christ in the last day of iudgment concerning this despightfull and reproachfull blasphemy The Papists themselues rather reteine Christs words then our Consubstantials For they teach that the bread is so the body of Christ that for sooth it is chāged into the body of Christ But these men keepe not the word but follow as they say the sence and meaning Wherefore wee must search diligētly whether of vs ●s in the truth Our doctrine shall be proved in the end Repl. In the same place this expositiō is added which is given for you and which is shed for you Ans 1. Thu● to argue is to begge that which is in controversie For they take this as granted that the bread to properly tearmed the body which remaines yet to be proved Ans 2. We answere by retorting the argumēt thus That which we properlie call the bodie of Christ was given for vs But the bread was not giuen for vs. Ergo c. Auns 3. As the bread is the bodie broken so the breaking of the bread is the breaking of the body But the breaking of the bread is improperly and mysticallie the breaking of the bodie of Christ For the breaking of the body is the crucifying ther of Th●refore the bread brokē is in a mystical sence the bodie broken Arg. 2. The second argument is drawne from the author Christ himselfe which is true Ans This argument takes that for a groūd which is in controuersie for they must proue that Christ said his body was in vnder or with the breade Nay one may speake figuratiuely yet plainely to Replie 1. He is omnipotent Ergo he can be everie where yea even in the bread Ans 1. Though he could make two contradictories at once true yet he will not 2. God cannot do thinges contradictorie because he is truth But to will thinges contradictorie is the part of a lier We do not therfore deny the truth and omnipotencie of God but their lyes nay we defēd it saying that God doth what he speaketh But they oppugne it by teachinge that in God are contrarie willes Repl. 2. Christes bodie hath manie prerogatiues wherby it differeth frō our bodies as namely that it was born of a virgin walked on the sea was at one time in the graue in bell and in paradise passed through dores shut Auns These examples are partly improper or vnlike partely false Vnlike 1 Because they may also be incident to treatures as walking on the water to Peter passinge through shut doores to spirites 2. Because they imploy a contradiction for when he is said to bee borne of a virgin he is not at the same time said not to bee borne of a Virgin But at once to be finite and infinite implieth acontradiction False 1 For he passed not through closed doores wheras they might yeeld and giue backe to him 2 For neyther did he passe through the dore of the sepulcher wheras that is said to haue ben opened by the Angell 3 For neyther was Christes body at one and the same instante in manie places which they seeme to haue taken from Augustin But he saide that his body was in the graue his soule in hel his Deity everie where Arg. 2. The third argument is taken from the circumstance of time thus No man Speaking seriously speaketh figuratiuely Christ appointing his

is called the Lords supper not because it must needs be solemnised onlie in the evening or at supper time but because it was instituted by Christ in the last supper that he made with his disciples before his death The Lords table it is called because therin the Lord feedeth vs. The sacramēt of the bodie and bloud of Christ because therein are these thing● communicated vnto vs. The Eucharist because therein are solemne thanks giuen vnto Christ for his death and benefits towardes vs. Synaxis or assemb●● because it must be celebrated in assemblies and meetings of the church It is also amongst ancient wrighters named a sacrifice because it is a representation of that propitiatorie sacrifice which Christ perfourmed on the crosse with an Eucharisticall sacrifice or sacrifice of thāksgiuing therefore 2 The Lords supper is a sacrament of the newe testament wherein by commandement of Christ the bread and wine is in companie of the faithful distributed and receiued in remebrance of Christ that is that Christ maie witnesse vnto vs that hee feedeth vs vnto etern●ll life with his bodie and bloud giuen and shed for vs and we render vnto him solemne thankes for these benefits 3 The first principal end vse of the Lords supper is that Christ may thereby witnesse vnto vs that he died for vs and with his body and bloude feedeth vs vnto eternal life that by this witnessing he may cherish and increase in vs our faith by consequent this spiritual feeding The second is a thanks-giving for these benefit of Christ with a publique solemne profession of them and our duty towards Christ The thirde is a distinction of the Church from other sectes The fourth that it may be a bond of mutuall charitie amongst Christians seeing they are all made members of one bodie The fite that it may bee a bonde and occasion of frequent assemblies of the church seeing Christ would haue one bread and one cup to be distributed amongst many 4 Hence hath the Lordes supper that first vse which is a confirmation of our faith in CHRIST because CHRIST himselfe by the hand of his Ministers reacheth dealeth vnto vs this bread and cuppe in remembraunce of himselfe that is that by this token and signe as by a visible word hee may admonish vs that he died for vs and that he is vnto vs the meate of eternal life whilest hee maketh vs his members and because he annexeth a promise vnto this rite that he will feede with his owne bodie and bloud such as eate this bread in remembrāce of him when he said This is my bodie and because the holy Ghost by this visible testimony moueth our minds and harts with more certainety to beleeue the promise of the gospell 5 There is then in the Lords supper a twofold kinde of food and drinke one externall visible and earthly namely the bread and wine the other internall invisible heavenly namely the body and bloud of Christ there is also a twofolde eating and receiving the one externall visible and signifying which is the corporall receiving of bread wine that is such a receiving as is perfourmed by the handes mouth and corporall senses the other internall invisible and signified which is the fruition of the death of Christ and a spirituall engraffing vs into the bodie of Christ that is such an eating as is not performed with the hands and mouth of the bodie but by spirit and faith Lastly there is a twofold minister of this foode and cup one externall of the externall foode and cup which is the minister of the church deliuering to vs with his hand the bread wine the other an internal minister of the internal food and cup which is Christ himselfe feeding vs with his owne body and bloud 6 The signes and elements serving for cōfirmatiō of our faith are not the body bloud of Christ but the bread and wine for the body bloud of Christ are receiued that we may liue for euer but the bread and wine are receiued that we may bee confirmed in the certaintie of that celestiall food and more and more enioy it 7 Neither is the bread changed into the body and the wine into the bloud of Christ neither are the bread and wine abolished that so the bodie bloud of Christ may succeede in their places neither is the very body of Christ substantially present in the bread or vnder the bread or where the bread is but in the lawfull vse of the LORDS supper the holy Ghost vseth this signe and Sacrament as an instrumente to stirre vppe faith in vs whereby he dwelleth in vs more and more and ingraffeth vs into Christ making vs become iust for him and by him to gaine everlasting life 8 But when Christ saith This that is this bread is my bodie and this cup is my bloud it is a sacramental or metonymicall kinde of speech whereby is attributed to the signe the name of the thing signified that is we are taught that the bread is the Sacrament or signe of Christs bodie that is doth represent and witnesse that Christs body was offered for vs on the crosse and giuen to vs for foode of eternal life and is therefore an instrument of the holy Ghost to continue increase this foode in vs as Paule saith The bread is the communion of Christs body that is that thing whereby we are made partakers of Christs body and else where We haue al dr●nke of one drinke into one spirit The same is meant whē it is said that the bread is called the body of Christ by similitude which is betweene the thing signified and the signe namely because the body of Christ nourisheth our spirituall life as the bread the corporall life and because of the sure connexion of receiving the thing and the signe in the lawfull vse of a sacrament And this is that sacramentall vnion of the bread the body of Christ which is expressed by the sacramentall speech not that local coniunction which by some is devised 9 As therefore there is one body of Christ properly so called and an other sacramental which is the bread in the Eucharist or Lordes supper so also the feeding on Christs body is of two sortes the first sacramentall which is an external corporal receiving of the signe namely the bread wine the second real or spirituall which is the receiving of the body of Christ and it is to beleeue in Christ and by faith dwelling in vs by his spirit to be engraffed into his body as members ioyned to the head and branches to the vine so to be made partakers of the life death of Christ Wherby it appeareth that they which teach thus are falsely accused as if in the Lords supper they did admit nothing besides the bare and naked signes or participation of the death of Christ or his benefits or the holy Ghost alone excluding

of the mighty to pride and vaine glory to couetousnesse and luxurie But much more perniciouse is that plague which at this day with applause of the multitude consumeth the very bowelles of the church namely the decay of ecclesiasticall iudgment whereas in the meane time through ambition auarice enuy desire of attempting any thing as euery one is of face most brazē of tongue most intēperate so much the rather he affecteth by fauour of the multitude obteineth the most eminent places of dignity in the church Hence proceede those infortunate broils betweene gouerners of the church who for the most part studying strife not quietnesse plotting quarrell vpon quarrell labour by all meanes possible that ecclesiasticall controverfies by which they study to advance themselues to a rich and glorious estate may neuer come to the lawfull hearing debating or quieting Hence also haue proceeded so many pestilent pernicious wrightings neuer spiced with any spirit of mildenesse charity but seasoned with the vnsauoury salt of vnulence malice tainted with the poisoned s●inges of harefull slanders wherwith for sooth at this day Diuinity is thought to bee beautified and our doctrine of holinesse shall be presented vnto posteritie This is the head of the mischeife which that it may the better be cōceiued I speake of two sortes of wrightings now published The first is meerely slanderous wherein the memory of Christes faithfull seruantes deseruing passing wel of the church namely Zwinglius Calvin Bucer Martir 〈◊〉 Zanchius Bizi Grynaeus others as well liuing as dead who teach that the fleshly feeding on Christes body with our mouthes is contrary to the truth of the Gospell is fowly wronged their fame rent razed their wrightings whence notwithstanding those foxers after their preaching cā be cōtent in their priuate studies to borrow most of ther skill are spightfully taxed their true sense peruerted their wordes wrongfully wrested lastly themselues proclaimed authors of most damnable heresies In this kinde next vnto Schmi●line that Arch-Vbiquitar●e excelled lately one Selneccer and now Hunnius and Heilbrunner wherof the former hath not long since put in printe twelue chiefe heades mischievously compiled the later hath in maner afore-saide lately published fifteene chapters of Calvines errors the middlemost being a Questionist burdeneth Calvin with A●●●●sme ●iting certaine places which by the Fathers were interpreted of Christ but by him somewhat otherwise vnderstood But no ingratitude more spightfull then to slaunder them by whose paines thou haste reaped profitte and the Church in generall so greate a benefite no presumption more intollerable then to bite and beate sellow-servaunts and to revile the deale and 〈◊〉 nothinge lesse sutable to the dignity of a Divine then to play the sycophant or false accufer Let vs for examples sake instance in that one place of Genesis the 3. concerning the seede of the vvoman that shoulde breake the serpentes heade which they complaine to bee horribly corrupred by Calvin because hee interpreteth the seeat of the vvoman not particularly of Christ alone but generally of the whole Church and posterity of the woman But were they not shameless● in mangling that interpretation of Calvines which should be wholy cited they would s●ne be shamed of so grosse a cavil For to let passe that many ancient Fathers before Calvin and amongst them Chrysostome doeth so interpret that place First they never date deny that the seede of the serpent wherevnto the seede of the vvoman is opposed must by right in this place be generally vnderstood Secondlie the vntruth of this cauill is hereby descried in that they wright that Calvine should restraine this enmity to men and externall that is common and visible serpentes whereas Calvine expresseley addeth that GOD in this place vnder the name of the serpent doth especially 〈◊〉 at Sathan against whom he thundereth out this iudgement Lastly that hee so interpreteth the womans seede of the Church that withall especially he includeth CHRIST the head of the Church his very wordes doe witnesse which they wickedly dismember when he addeth VVhereas experience teacheth that all the so●●es of Ad●m are farie from vanquishing the divell vvee must therefore needes haue recourse vnto one heade that so wee may learne to vvhome especially this victorie doeth pertan●e So Paule leadeth vs from the seede of Abraham vnto Christ c. But is this to make slay vpon the externall enmity betwixt men and serpents to restraine the victory vnto men to exclude Christ All this not withstanding Hunnius proceedeth yet father chardging Calvin with the shifting of many most evident oracles concerning Christs protecting and p●tronaging the blasphemies of the lovnes furthering that damned heresie of Arrianis●e weakening the grounds and argumentes of the Church and disanulling the authoritye of aunciente Fathers These indeede are grieuous crimes whereof notwithstanding I coulde casilie cleare him were it not for mispendinge too much time and talke But by the two first slaunders wee may easily iudge of all the rest And is it indeed so euident an oracle when Moses saith Bara El●him that a verbe singular ioyned with anoune plurall must needes signifie the vnity of the diuine essence trinity of persons This Caluin tooke for none of the sufficient rest proofes of so great a matter But if it bee so strong and evident an argument of the Trinity wh● did not you Master Hannius place it with the 〈◊〉 in your tracte vpon the Trinity why did you quite over slip it The words of Eue Gen. 4. Canuhiis● hath Iehovah Calvin thus translated I haue obtained a man to the Lord Hunn●us exclaimeth against him for corrupting a most evidēt testimony of the God head of the M●suas because in his opinion Eue ●aith I haue obtained a man he Lorde for a●h in Hebrew is a perpetuall note of the accusatiue case But if this be true why then did the 70. Interpreters trāslate it by the Lord the Tha●gum before the Lord the ancient Latin 〈◊〉 through the Lord the Dutch translation of Luther 45. yeares since of the Lord doe all these play the lewes with Calvin I instance no farther Well then shall Calvin therefore be an heretique for n●t simply approving these and other such like argumentes vsed by the Fathers against heretiques must he needs therefore be an Arrian and a lew too hard a slander of so excellent a servant of God For what man is there that with greater courage and learning hath maintained against all heretiques the reverend mistery of the sacred Trinity or Christes eternall Deity who hath euermore sharpely reproved and repressed those mad dogges Servetus Gentilis with their confederates in villany Alciat B●andrat and the rest And if he observed some proofes not plaine or pregnant enough vsed by the ancient fathers in their conflictes against heretiques what of that for al this he hath resolutely avouched an hūdred other thinges concerning the eternall Deity of Christ against all fallacies and forgeries