Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	ancient_a	church_n	doctrine_n	1,896	5	6.2759	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A37245	A letter to friend concerning his changing his religion	Davies, Rowland, 1649-1721.	1692 (1692)	Wing D412; ESTC R5643	30,321	32

understand it Mystically or reject those expressions as false and incongruous And it is also observable in other places when some of them fly higher in their Rhetorical expressions and to enflame the Zeal or to raise the Devotion of their Auditors who were apt to think too grosly of this Sacred Ordinance seem to express this change which you desire I say it is observable that they often speak not only beyond the truth and all that we believe but even the very utmost that you your selves will own and consequently there is no reliance upon such expressions as shew not the Faith but the Fancy of their Author Nay although it is apparent that the Roman Missal hath been alter'd since the days of St. Ambrose to make it more conformable to your present Doctrin Yet there is a memorable expression still retained in it in the very Prayer of Consecration wherein the Ancient Doctrin is sufficiently apparent For it is certain that no Man wou'd ever pray to God to grant him less than he expected to receive and yet it is obvious that although they pretend to a Transubstantiation yet they desire no more there than what we Pray for who do not believe it Their words are these Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quaesumus ut benedictam c. Facere digneris ut nobis corpus sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui c. Which Oblation we beseech thee O God to vouchsafe to render blessed c. that it may become to us the Body and Blood of thy most Beloved Son c. Since then the difference on debate is this whether the Elements in the Sacrament are changed as to their substance and so really made the Body and Blood of Christ in se in themselves as the Church of Rome asserteth or whether without any such Change or Alteration of their Substance they become Spiritually or Sacramentally so Nobis to us who do Receive by Faith the Body and Blood of Christ in them as the Church of England doth express it I say it is sufficiently apparent that the Composers of the Roman Missal have delivered their Opinion for us to be the same with that of the Church of England and not with the present Church of Rome So that the Ancient Doctrin of that Church is evidently for us and whatever is profest in point of Faith upon other occasions yet the truth in this place so far prevaileth as to be openly asserted whenever Mass is Celebrated among you § 13. But lastly this is not only the voice of Men but agreeable to the Declaration of Christ himself who directs all Christians not to understand him on this subject in a Literal Sense but to expound his words Spiritually as containing a Mystery For in the sixth Chapter of St. John's Gospel he is very express as to the nature and design of this his Holy Institution as most of the Ancient Doctors have always understood him though Bellarmine for special Reasons is of another Opinion insomuch that if any Text of Scripture soundeth fair for Transubstantiation it is to be lookt for in that Chapter But we find in the conclusion that this was never intended by our Saviour For when his Disciples were offended at his Doctrin apprehending foolishly as St. Augustine observes that they must be Canibals in order to be Christians as if the eating of humane flesh was to be a Rite in their Religion he rectifies their thoughts and explains his meaning fully v 63. saying it is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing The words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are Life that is as St. Augustine expounds it they are spiritually to be understood by you as containing a Mystery that will hereafter be apparent in the Institution of a Sacrament that will explain them And therefore it is observable that St. Paul calls the Eucharist Bread and not the Body of Christ but as it is received The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ For me being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all Partakers of that one Bread 1 Cor. x. 16 17. and in the following Chapter v. 26 27 28. even after an account given of the Consecration of it yet he is still express in calling it Bread and if words are to be understood always in a literal sense when no absurdity doth follow the Missal saith the same thing in the Prayer after Consecration calling it Panem sanctum vitae aeternae the Holy Bread of Eternal Life All which would strangely derogate from the nature of the thing if it were Christ's Body and not Bread which they discourse of But this is confirmed beyond all disputation by that expression of our Saviour at the Institution of it Do this in remembrance of me For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death 'till come 1 Cor. xi 26. Since first it contradicts the common form of speaking to remember a present Object that stands before us when we cannot make Reflections thus but upon absent things And secondly if Christ should actually come whenever the Sacrament is Administred then that Holy Institution is no longer to continue being to determine on our Saviour's coming especially when we know that it is no ravity even in the Scripture for a thing that represents or signifies another to bear the name or title of the thing represented § 14. If then Sir there is no advantage to a Christian in the Carnal Manducation of the Body of Christ as I suppose you will confess and it is ●vident to all Men that in point of Faith and as a Sacrifice the Body and Blood of Christ are as really and truly received by the Faithful in the Church of England as in the Church of Rome You must needs acknowledge then that in this Point of Faith and Worship you have gotten no advantage by the change of your Religion but rather on the contrary in the Rules of your Devotion you hazard your Salvation upon an Opinion that may be false and more than probably is so for none not the least advantage if it should be true For if those Elements should not be changed by their Consecration according to your Fancy and you know that besides all the reasons that can be offered against it there are a multitude of Circumstances that may obstruct their Change grosser Idolatry cannot be committed than Men are daily guilty of in Worshiping the Host And if you will believe C●nsterus in his judgement on the Case and it is reasonable to allow him well acquainted with your Doctrin you will find that your Publick Devotion in this point of Worship doth exceed the very Heathens in their greatest Idolatry And yet on the other hand if those Elements should ●e changed as you unreasonably believe but no Man can prove by solid Argument it is

to the nature of Man or to the justice of God especially if he should punish us for being so deceived I refer to any Man of reason to determine I will not trouble you with the recital of any of those Arguments which demonstrate this Change to be impossible and that the Doctrin doth imply so many contradictions that it is no proper Object for Almighty Power But this I must desire you to observe that if a substantial change were made of the Elements by the words of Consecration then the act of the Apostles was manifestly different from the command of Christ whereon it was founded For nothing can be clearer from the Text than that our Saviour gave the Bread and commanded them to take and eat that is Bread the words of its Consecration being not yet pronounced If then they did eat another substance and not Bread who can truly say that they fulfilled the Commandment of the Lord or Received the Sacrament according to his order § 10. As to the Design in this most Sacred Institution it appears to be the same in relation unto Christians as that of the Passover was unto the Jews That as they did believe in a Messias that was to come and of whom their Sacrifices were but Types and Shadows and so were partakers of the Sacrifice that he was to offer by eating of those Sacrifices that did Typically represent it So we that now believe in a Messias already come should in a parallel manner become Partakers of the same Oblation and by an external act like unto what they did in every Circumstance we should obtain the benefit of that propitiatory Sacrifice and really and truly be made Partakers of it And therefore our Saviour Christ appointed that Bread and Wine should be received by his Disciples in the place and stead of his Body and Blood which were the real Sacrifice that he offered unto God for Man and very improper things to be actually eaten or drank by Christians and therefore he calls the Bread his Body and the Wine his Blood not as being really the things themselves but as Instituted by him to represent them to us So that by a due participation of these Creatures according unto Christ's appointment it is certain that all Christians are partakers of that Sacrifice which he offer'd to God for them and the Bread and Wine being duly Consecrated and Received in the nature of a Sacrament the Body and Blood of Christ is really and truly received by the Faithful in them not that the Elements are changed in themselves or that there is any real alteration of their substance but the act is Spiritual in respect of the Receivers who take them not for Food but as a Mystery in Religion and therefore they do not receive them in their common notion as they are Bread and Wine that is proper Food to nourish or sustain the Body but as they represent the Body and Blood of Christ and are appropriated by Faith to nourish and support the Soul And since then this Sacrament was ordained to become a Sacrifice to Christians as St. Augustin● tell us and that those Patriarchs of old who believed in a Messias that was to come were as actual Partakers of that Sacrifice which he hath offered as we can be For they all eat the same spiritual Meat and they all drank the same spiritual Drink 1 Cor. x. 3. Neither is there Salvation in any other Acts iv 12. And yet it was impossible that they should eat the Flesh of Christ and drink his Blood according to the Letter because his Body was not framed yet nor actually born It is therefore rational to conclude that we are still Partakers of the Body and Blood of Christ in the same manner that they were not in a Literal but a Spiritual participation Since the reception of them by Faith only was fully sufficient to the Salvation of the one and therefore is all that is necessary to the Salvation of the other § 11. And this gives us a fair light into the reason or occasion of this Figurative Expression in that the Sacrament of the Eucharist being Instituted by our Saviour in the place of the Jewish Passover which was now to be abolished many of the External Rites were still retained to shew that all those Types are now compleated And therefore as it was usual at the introduction of the Paschal Lamb for the Priest or some other of the Company to tell the People that this is the Lamb that was slain in Egypt when the Lord passed over the houses of our Fathers and slew the Egyptians And again after Supper was ended distributing Bread and Wine to every one in order was wont to tell them This is the Bread of Sorrow which our Fathers eat in Egypt Whereas all Men know that it could not possibly be that very Lamb that was slain nor that very Bread that was eaten in Egypt but another Lamb and other Bread Instituted by God's order in the stead or commemoration of it So our Saviour likewise at the Institution of the Sacrament using the same Phrase upon the like occasion ought to be understood in the same manner of expression And since it was in conformity to their constant way of speaking that when he Instituted Bread and Wine to be Received by Christians in the Commemoration of his own death as that Lamb was of the Passover he said of the Bread This is my Body and of the Wine This is my Blood we are to understand by it no more than if he had told us that they are Elements Sacramentally to be Received in the stead and commemoration of his Body and Blood So that although there is nothing Corporeally upon the Table after the Co●●e●ration but the same things that were there before nor eat●● by the Receivers but very Bread with the very same substance that it always had Yet in the notion of a Sacrament and as a Religious Mystery it is not to be received as meer or common Bread by any true or faithful Christian But we verily believe that the Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ is actually and truly partaken of in those Elements and as the Church of England Emphatically expresses it The Body and Blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and Received by the Faithful in the Lord's-Supper § 12. This you cannot but know to be the Doctrin of the Sacrament as it is received in the Church of England and if you will consult Antiquity you shall find that it hath not only been the general Doctrin of the Universal Church but particularly of the Church of Rome in former Ages For the Antient Fathers generally speak of the Spiritual and Figurative Being of Christ's Body in the Sacrament and do expresly call the same thing at the same time both Bread and the Body of Christ which is impossible to be a truth in the Literal sense and therefore it is necessary to