Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	blood_n	body_n	figure_n	2,133	5	8.7987	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42559	Status ecclesiæ gallicanæ, or, The ecclesiastical history of France from the first plantation of Christianity there, unto this time, describing the most notable church-matters : the several councils holden in France, with their principal canons : the most famous men, and most learned writers, and the books they have written, with many eminent French popes, cardinals, prelates, pastours, and lawyers : a description of their universities with their founders : an impartial account of the state of the Reformed chuches in France and the civil wars there for religion : with an exact succession of the French Kings / by the authour of the late history of the church of Great Britain.	Geaves, William.	1676 (1676)	Wing G442; ESTC R7931	417,076	474

the Catholick Church Then he appealeth to the testimony of Ambrose Augustine and Hierome who never taught the Doctrine of Transubstantiation He writeth also that the very Flesh and Blood of Christ was given unto the Apostles at the first Institution and are still given unto faithful Communicants Adelman enlarged much on this subject What answer Berengarius did return to him we find not But he wrote an Epistle to Lanfrank declaring the abuses of the Sacrament and commending the Book of John Scotus upon that question Occolampad Epist l. 3. And he wrote expresly that the Body of Christ is not in the Sacrament but as in a sign figure or mystery He spake also in his Preachings against the Romish Church in the Doctrine of Marriage and necessity of Baptism And Bellarmine witnesseth that Berengarius called the Church of Rome the malignant Church the Council of vanity and the seat of Satan and he called the Pope not Pontificem vel Episcopum sed pompificem Pulpificem It happened that Lanfrank was not at home and the Convent opened the Letter of Berengarius and sent it with a Clerk of Rhemes unto Pope Leo IX The Pope summoned a Synod at Verceles Berengarius was advised not to go himself to the Synod but send some Clerks in his name to answer for him The two Clerks were clapt in Prison Scotus was condemned 200 years after his death and the Doctrine of Berengarius was condemned yet nothing done against his Person at that time because many favoured him Lanfrank pleaded for him but he was commanded by the Pope to answer him under no less pain than to be reputed as great an Heretick as he Petries Ch. Hist Cent. 11. Lanfrank following the sway of the World for afterwards he was made Arch-Bishop of Canterbury by Willliam the Conquerour performed the charge Guitmund Bishop of Aversa wrote more bitterly and less truly against Berengarius Nevertheless Berengarius abode constant and was in great esteem both with the Nobility and People And therefore Pope Victor the second gave direction to the Bishops of France to take order with him The Pope's Ambassadours were present at the Council and Berengarius answered that he adhered to no particular opinion of his own but he followed the common Doctrine of the Universal Church that is saith he as the Fathers Primitive Church and Scriptures have taught This gentle answer mitigated the fury of his Adversaries yet he persisted in his own opinion and for this cause Lanfrank objected against him that he deluded the Council of Tours with general and doubtful words Du. Moul. Contr Perron li. 1. Afterwards Pope Nicholas the second hearing that he was honoured of many assembled a great Council against him at Rome of 113 Bishops where it was declared and pronounced That the Bread and Wine which is put upon the Altar after the Consecration is not only the Sacrament but also the true Body of our Lord Jesus Christ And that not only the Sacrament but the Body of the Lord is * It seems they meant sensibly sensually and in truth handled by the hands of the Priest broken and bruised by the teeth of the faithful When Berengarius with many Arguments defended that the Sacrament to speak properly was the figure of Christ 's body and Cardinal Albericus who was nominated to dispute against him could not by voice resist him Sigon de reg Ital li. 9. and neither of the two would yield unto the other Alhericus sought the space of seven days to answer in writing And at last when disputation could not prevail against him he was commanded to recant or else he must expect to be burnt They prescribed to him a form of Recantation of his errour as they called it Gratian de consecrat dist 2. The Recantation was penned by Cardinal Humbert and is registred by Gratian. Nevertheless the words of the Recantation are far from Transubstantiation These are the words so far as they concern our present purpose Massons Annal. Franc. li. 3. faithfully translated I Berengarius do consent to the Apostolick and Roman See and with my Mouth and Heart confess that the Bread and Wine laid on the Altar after the Consecration are not only the Sacrament but the very body and blood of our Lord Jesus and sensibly not only in Sacrament but in truth are handled with the hands of the Priest broken and chewed with the hands and Teeth of the faithful John Semeca the Glossator of the Decrees expresly condemneth the words of this Recantation and saith If thou understandest not the words of Berengarius soundly thou shalt fall into a greater Heresie than he did for we break not Christ 's body into pieces nisi in speciebus Usser de success Eccles Berengarius returning home returned also to his former Doctrine and wrote in defence of it Some have written that Berengarius denyed the Baptism of Infants But Arch-Bishop Vsher saith that in so many Synods held against him we never find any such thing laid to his charge Illyricus gives this Character of him Tempore Leonis noni circa 1049. Berengarius Vir pietate eruditione Clarus Andegavensis Ecclesiae Diaconus quum videret Pontificios Doctores quam plurimos ingenti fastu Transubstantiationis fundamenta sternere quod mentem Augustini aliorum Veterum non intelligerent Vid. Thevet vies des hommes Illustres li. 3. sed Sacramentales Hyperbolicas nonnullas locutiones ad novum sensum inducendum detorquerent veram sententiam ex Orthodoxo consensu repetitam his corruptelis opposuit verbo Dei Testimoniisque Veterum Theologorum refellere conatus est scriptis etiam evulgatis libris ut pii in vera Doctrinâ confirmarentur Catal. Test Verit. lib. 22. Berengarius dyed holding his first Doctrine at Tours in the Isle of St. Cosina and was buried at St. Martins where his Tomb was reared and Hildebert Bishop of Caenoman and then of Tours and made his Epitaph which William of Malmesbury hath set down And this is a part of it Quem modò miratur semper mirabitur orbis Ille Berengarius non obiturus obit Guil. Malmsb. de Gest Anglor li. 3. Quem sacrae fidei vestigia summa tenentem Huic jam quinta dies abstulit ausa nefas Illa dies damnosa dies perfida mundo Quâ dolor rerum summa ruina fuit Quâ Status Ecclesiae quâ spes quâ gloria Cleri Quâ cultor juris jure ruente ruit Post obitum secum vivam precor ac requiescam Nec fiat melior sors mea sorte suâ Platina calleth Berengarius famous for learning and holiness He was a great friend to learning Platin. in vit Joann 15. and bred many Students of Divinity at his proper charge and by means of them his Doctrine was sowed through all France and the Countries adjacent This was matter unto his adversaries to envy him the more Albeit he did waver as

the King hath Armed his enemies with his own forces and Authority against his Estate his blood and himself He layes open by a publick Declaration the causes which made the League to take Arms the vanity of their pretexts the fruit which all France may expect by the Treaty of Nemours c. He protesteth by a Lawful and necessary defence to maintain the fundamental Laws of Families and the Estate and liberty of the King and the Queen his Mother Gregory XIII being dead Pope Sixtus V. his Successour casts out his lightning against the King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde he Excommunicates them degrades them from all Dignities especially their pretensions to the Crown of France exposeth their Persons and Countries as a prey to such as should first seize on them The Court of Parliament declares the Pope's Bull to be void The Princes likewise protest against it and appeal from it as abusive and scandalous unto the next free and General Council The King of Navarre causeth the Pope's Bull to be answered and his appeal to be posted up in Rome it self on November 6. in the night He writes to all the States of the Kingdom of France exhorting them not to suffer the rights of the Succession of the Crown of France to be decided in the Consistory of Rome Many Volumes were written against and in favour of this Bull by the chiefest Wits of Europe King Henry the third caused some Orders to be cried down in the City of Paris because he was certified of the Conspiracies which they made against the State it being notoriously known that the League was sworn in Tholouse by the black Penitents and that as many of these Orders as are in France did all conspire to the like ends The French Exiles who dwelt at Mompelgart in the Dutchy of Wortemberg did in the year 1586. first sollicite the Divines there and then the Duke Frederick That there might be a publick Conference between the German and French Divines about some Controversies between them They assemble in March the Duke was present all the time On the one side was Jacob Andrewes Chancellour of Tubing Luke Osiander of Wortemberg Osiand Epit. Eccles Hist C●nt 16. lib. 4. cap. 23. and two Civilians from the Duke And on the other side were Theodore Beza and Anthony Faius from Geneva Abraham Musculus and two Civilians from Bern and Claudius Alberius from Lausanna Many were the Hearers The Articles of which they were to Dispute were 1. Of the Supper of the Lord. 2. Of the Person of Christ 3. Of Images Temples and such like things 4. Concerning Baptism 5. Of Predestination The first day viz. on March 21. Those of Wortemberg gave in writing Theses of the Lord's Supper shewing that all do agree that All do eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood spiritually all do condemn the renting of Christ's flesh with mens teeth as also Transubstantiation and Physical or Local presence So that the only Question is whether in the Supper the very body and blood of Christ be verily and substantially present and be distributed and received with the Bread and Wine by the mouth of all them who receive the Sacrament whether worthy or unworthy believers or not believers yet so that the believers only receive comfort and the unbelievers do eat to their own damnation We hold the affirmative say they that is by those Words In with and under the Bread Petr. Eccles Hist Cent. 16. part 3. we understand nothing but that they who eat that Bread and drink that Wine do receive Christ's body and blood with the Bread and Wine 2. By the words Substantially Essentially Really and Orally we mean no other but the very eating and presence of his body and blood 3. They argue from the truth of Christ's words This is my body and the Almighty power of Christ seeing his words declare his will and by his power he can give his body unto all Receivers 4. The manner how the worthy and unworthy receive Christ's body is not expressed in Scripture and we say it is supernatural and incomprehensible by the wit of men and should not be disputed nor curiously searched These Theses were given unto Beza as it was appointed and the next day he brought his answer and Propositions The Summ is 1. A Sacrament in the strict sense is a sensible thing appointed by Divine institution to be separated from common use to signifie spiritual and holy things and this signification consists not in a bare representation whereby the mind is admonished to conceive the thing signified this is the use of Pictures but on God's part with the signs is also a very giving of those things which are signified and offered unto our souls 2. We teach that according to Christ's Institution by the Bread is signified Christ's body by the Wine his blood by brea●ing of the Bread and pouring out of the Wine are signified those grievous torments which he suffered for us in his body and soul by outward giving the Bread and Wine the spiritual giving the things signified by Christ unto our souls by outward taking the signs is signified the spiritual receiving of Christ by Faith Sacramentally and truly 3. The Sacramental union of the signs and things signified consists in a mutual relation as is now said for the verity of Christ's body which is local and circumscribed both before and after his glorification cannot consist otherwise Again many passages of Scripture that shew the true and Physical ascending of Christ from the Earth and his returning from Heaven unto judgement do confute the Doctrine of Consubstantiation 4. When the word Sacrament is t●ken in a more large sense it consists of two things one Earthly another Heavenly We teach That Earthly things are received by Earthly Instruments viz. the Hand and Mouth but the Heavenly things are apprehended only Spiritually by Faith because albeit Christ's body is a truly Organical body yet analogy requires That such as the nourishment and end thereof is such also must be the manner of receiving it But the nourishment and end thereof is spiritual that is they concern our spiritual union with Christ and eternal life through him Therefore the manner of receiving those must also be spiritual by the proper Instrument of the soul which is Faith And therefore seeing the bodily receiving of the signs is a pledge of the spiritual receiving these words Eat and Drink as they are properly spoken of receiving the signs so are they spoken figuratively of the thing signified viz. by a Sacramental Metonymy whereby that which agreeth unto the signs is spoken of the things signified and so both those receivings cannot be by the mouth Again if the substance of Christ's body were received bodily it should remain in the faithful at least and they should become the substantial or bodily members of Christ and so the Church were not his mystical body but a body verily and substantially consisting of the substance

of his body and of the bodies of all Believers 5. The proper effect of the Supper is the salvation of the worthy Communicants by confirming their spiritual union in Christ and another effect but by accident is the condemnation of them who come unworthily that is ignorant of this mystery or meerly incredulous and without repentance and this condemnation proceeds not from the Supper but from the unworthy using of it Then unto the question as it was propounded Beza answered negatively not denying that the body of Christ is truly offered unto all that come but to be received by Faith and not by the Mouth and albeit the whole Sacrament be tendered unto all that come yet unbelievers receive only the signs and they are guilty of Christ's body and blood not which they have received but which they have contemned Unto the two arguments he answered we deny not the truth of Christ's words but we expound them according to the Analogy of Faith contained in the Creed unto which Faith Consubstantiation is contrary And although Christ as he is God is Almighty yet his Manhood is not Almighty and as he is God he cannot do what he hath not decreed to do or what is contrary unto his decree not because he is not Almighty but because to change his Will and so to be mutable is not a power but an infirmity But God hath ordained that Christ's body should be local and circumscribed c. On this Article the Disputation continued three daies the one pressing the truth of the words This is my body and Beza urging the Analogy of Faith and the like phrase of other Sacraments Neither of the two would yield Then they passed unto the Article of the Person of Christ Those of Wortemberg agreed that the Son of God hath assumed the nature of man and became like unto us in all things except sin that he hath assumed this nature into the unity of his Person and he is one person so that the two natures are most strictly united not by confusion or commission or absorption or transmutation of either of these natures before nor after his ascension for unto the perfect Person of the Mediatour both natures are required neither can the properties of the one nature be the properties of the other for then would follow an abolition of one of these natures Also the properties of the humane nature are the gifts that were given unto him without measure by which he excelleth all men and Angels In the Person of Christ is a Communication of properties whereby the properties of both natures are spoken of his person and the properties of the one nature are given unto the other by that Doctrine which is called Doctrina idiomatum So when it is said the Son of God communicates his properties unto the assumed nature viz. his Omnipotence or Omnipresence it is not meant as if he poured into the assumed nature as a thing is poured from one Vessel into another his properties as if humane nature by it self or of it self or considered in abstracto without his pe●son had proper Omnipotency neither may we think that his humane nature is made an infinite substance or uncircumscribed or extended unto all places c. When we speak of the real communication of properties we mean not that one nature passeth into another but we oppose real unto verbal communication which makes only names common unto the natures Then the question is whether for the Personal union there be a real communication of properties between the two natures in his Person or that the one nature communicates its properties unto the other and how far this communication is extended We believe said they that upon the Personal union follows so real a communication of properties whereby the Son of God communicates unto the assumed nature his omnipotence omnipresence c. by which communication the Godhead becomes not weaker but his humane nature is exalted and not abolished as is the union of the body and soul and the fire and iron They said that the humane nature is Almighty because the Scripture ascribes to him as he is Man all Power c. They added This our Mediatour is to be adored with all Religious worship according to both natures for we have not two Christs but of whole Christ it is said Let all the Angels worship him On the morrow Beza answered thus There is ambiguity in the word Communication it signifies the Personal union and also the effects of it We believe saith he a real communication that is an union of natures in which union both natures remain distinct both in their own properties and therefore that communication is not so much as verbal but is as false as if you would say his Humanity is become his Deity Although all the properties of the Deity may be attributed unto Christ-man that is unto his Person even named by his Manhood or in concreto as we say The Man Christ is Almighty and eternal but neither may the natures be spoken one of another neither the properties of the one be given to the other For this is a sure rule In the Personal union both natures remain distinct and they both distinctly do what is proper unto them Briefly as there are two natures in Christ distinct in number and not separated one from the another so there are two wills and two workings or operations but one work as there is but one Person We profess also that Christ reigneth now and hath all Power both in Heaven and in Earth according to both natures but not praesenter in respect of his flesh for now as the Apostle saith we are strangers from Christ and he desired to be out of the body that he might be with Christ And it is said he will come again viz. bodily and visibly Lastly in that one adoration of our one and only Mediatour according to both natures we divide not the Person but we distinguish the natures for the Word is the true and absolute object of our adoration and adoration is due unto God only But we exclude not that flesh from our adoration lest with Nestorius we divide his Person yet so that we worship that flesh not in it self but respectively as it is the flesh of the Son of God They disputed on this Article other three daies but no agreement On March 27. Those of Wortemberg gave their Propositions of Popish Churches Images in Churches c. They agreed That these are in themselves indifferent if the abuses be shunned Then they gave Theses of Baptism whether Baptism is the Laver of Regeneration in the holy spirit or whether it be only a sign signifying and sealing adoption The Wortembergers said It not only signifieth and sealeth adoption but it is the very Laver of Regeneration They enlarged hereupon Beza gave his answer in writing viz. That the Sacraments are not bare signs but the efficacy of the Holy Ghost should be distinguished from the power of the