Selected quad for the lemma: water_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
water_n	air_n	body_n	element_n	5,315	5	9.9100	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34012	Missa triumphans, or, The triumph of the mass wherein all the sophistical and wily arguments of Mr de Rodon against that thrice venerable sacrifice in his funestuous tract by him called, The funeral of the Mass, are fully, formally, and clearly answered : together with an appendix by way of answer to the translators preface / by F.P.M.O.P. Hib.	Collins, William, 17th cent.; F. P. M. O. P.	1675 (1675)	Wing C5389; ESTC R5065	231,046	593

the Romish heresies and I leave the decision and arbitration of our contest to the verdict of any judicious and 〈◊〉 Reader But lo here he comes with his first keen arrow Rodon 2. If a thing be created in a place either it must be produced there or it must come or be brought thither from some other place for it is impossible to finde out a third way of putting any thing in a place And the Romish Doctors have hitherto been able to invent but one of these two waies of putting Christs body in the host The Jacobins telling us that it is brought thither from some other place and the Iesui●…s that it is produced there But the body of Christ can neither come nor be brought thither into the host nor can it be produced there Therefore the body of Christ is not in the host Answ. To this argument I answer denying Mr. de Rodons supposition viz. that Christ body is created in the Sacrament but only the bread and wine Transubstantiated or converted into his body and bloud at which conversion one substance succeedeth another so that Christs body is in the Sacrament immediatly and formally by reason of its substance and not by reason of its quantitative dimensions But all Philosophers agree in this that a thousand substances can be altogether in one point without taking up any proper place And yet we confess that where his substance or body is that there his quantity is also by concomitance though not with its quantitative dimensions in order to its parts as they are extended in a place for extension of parts in order to a place is but a property of quantity or of a quantitative body and the essence of quantity consists in the extension of the parts of a quantitative body as they are in order to themselves and if the Mounsieur ask us how this is feasable or how can a body be without being in a place we will ask him how Sydrach Mysach and Abednego could be in the Babilonian furnace without feeling the heat of the great fire that was put under it and if he sayes as he ought to say that God supplied or hindred the heat notwithstanding the fire remayned because heat is only a property and not essential to fire the same thing say we also of quantity or of a quantitative body and of its parts as they are extended in order to a place Therefore since Christs body is really in the Sacrament by reason of a substantial conversion and no substance is properly in a place by reason of its own self but only by reason of its quantitative dimensions since Christ hinders or obstructs the quantitative dimentions of his body in the Sacrament as he did obstruct the heat of the fire of the Babilonian furnace it follows evidently that Christs body in the Sacrament is there without being in any proper place Rodon 3. The body of Christ cannot come or be brought into the host from any other place because it can come from no place but heaven being no where but in heaven But Christs body neither comes nor is brought from heaven into the host which I prove thus when a body comes or is carried from one place to another it must leave its first place for example if a man would go from Paris to Rome he must leave Paris but the body of Iesus Christ never leaves heaven for the heavens must contain him until the time of the restitution of all things Acts. 3. Therefore Christs body neither comes nor is brought from heaven into the host Besides it is impossible that Christs body should come or be brought into the host without passing through the space that is between heaven and earth where the consecrated hosts are because a man cannot pass from one extream to another without passing through the space that is between them But the space between heaven and earth is too vast to be passed through in a moment for these doctors will have it that immediatly after pronouncing these words This is my body the body of Christ is brought into the host Moreover it must in a moment be in all the heavens and in all he Aires between the highest heavens and this earth where the hosts are because a man cannot pass through a place without being there and then it would have three sorts of existences at once viz. one natural and glorious existence in heaven one Sacramental existence in the hoji and one ayery existence in the Ayr But s●…ing all th●…se things are absurd we must conclude that Iesus Christs body neither comes nor is brought into the host Answ. I told you just now Mounsieur that Christs body is not in the Sacrament as in its proper place for the reason all Philosophers give viz. that no substance is in a place but by reason of its quantitative dimensions which dimensions we say Christs body has not in the Sacrament but is in it immediatly by reason of the substantial conversion wherein one substance immediatly succeeds the other and so according to this answer we deny that Christs body is either brought from another place into the Sacrament or produced in it as in its propor place but rather that it exists in it without any local dimensions as all other substances if they were without their quantitative dimensions would exist in and by themselves without taking up any place yet since you are so acute a Philosopher or at least taken by your party to be so and do make use of Philosophical principles against us I think it not amiss for the clearer understanding of my answer first to set down the common definition which all philosophers give of a place as also to let the Reader know how many manner of ways all divines and Christian Philosophers do acknowledg a thing may be in a place As to the first they unanimously own a proper place to be defined thus Ultima superficies corporis continentis immobilis primi The last superfice or overmost part of the first immovable containing body for example my proper place is the next hollow superfice of the air surrounding my body and the proper place of water in a vessel is the next hollow superfice of the vessel not the exterior but the interiour superfice Where note that according to Philosophers a proper place hath also these two properties or faculties in order to the thing that it contains first it circumscribes and environs the thing placed of all sides and round about Secondly a proper place is a preservative of the body which it contains and therefore it is that every corporal thing hath a natural inclination to tend to its own proper place and center So we see fire hath a natural inclination to ascend towards its own Element and when it is there in its proper center and place it rests and is quiet Water also tends naturally towards the sea and until it be in its Element center is never at rest so is it also

ignominy to Christs glorified body for Xaintes his meaning was this that if any man should with pretence of devotion and of being a Christian come to receive the B. Sacrament although he were in himself a Turk an Infidel an Atheist an Hypocrite or devil incarnate the Church will not bar him from taking the Sacrament and the reason is because the Church doth judge of exteriour things only and not of interiour But if a Christian and Catholick also were convinced of a publick and notorious crime or were known to be under an Ecclesiastical consure until he were reconsiled to the Church absolved from his sins and did satisfactory pennance for them he may be sure he shall not be admitted to this Sacrament what ignominy is this I pray to Gods glorified body That the Sacrament was stoln away at Paris and the theif executed for it was wickedly done by the theif and he was justly punished for it and the Priest that took the Sacrament out of his pocket did very well to go in his sacerdotal ornaments kneel and take it out reverently and in all this the Priest did but his duty But where is the ignominy done to Chr●…sts glorified body all this while or did it suffer any prejudice by the Theif or by the Priest and when the sacramental species were disasterously burnt with the kings Palace at Paris did that fire work upon Christs glorified body or can a glorified body be subject to fire water sword gun or any kind of sublunary body or element In this my thinks the Mounsieur shews what an excellent Divine and Philosopher he is That the host the God of the Mass hath been seen in the hands of one possest I do not believe the Mounsieur because no body may handle our Sacrament lawfully but a Priest or a deacon unless it were through extream necessity for saving it from fire or from the hands of infidels But that the Priest might lay the Sacrament upon a possest bodies head or hold it before him I questi●…ion not and yet if the Sacrament were put into the hands of a person possest I deny it would be in the Devils power therefore more then it was when Christ himself gave it to Iudas the traytour but will de Rodon say that Christ did a horrible and prodigious act for giving himself to Iudas That the Romish Priests do use exorcisms composed by the Church which are no charms as the Mounsieur slanderously term them to compel the devil to obedience and sometimes make use of the B. Sacrament too as of her most es●…icatious means in order to that effect is no ignominy at all to Christs glorified bodie but it rather shews manifestly that the Romish Priests are the true successors of the Apostles unto whom Christ gave power to tread upon the infernal serpents and scorpio●…s and upon all the power of the enemy Luke 10. 19. a thing which de Rodon nor any of his ever as yet did dare practise or when ever they did or do they never come off with better luck then the seven sons of Sceva the Jewish high Priest did Act. 19. 14. In short whereas our Saviour himself gave the Sacrament to Iudas who was not much better then a devil incarnate and since he gave it him while his body was as yet patible and consequently more subject to be hurt and annoyed then it is now being glorified and impatible sure it is that although those who receive his body unworthily will as Iudas did reap unto themselves ignominy harm and misery yet Christs glorified body by reason of its spiritual dowries is and will always remain glorious and hurtless in it self and so will our diana also for ought this arrow can do against her his twelfth arrow is miraculous that 's to say drawn from miracles thus Rodon 15. God doth no Miracles without necessity But what necessity is there that he should do so many miracles in this Sacrament viz. that accidents should be without a subject that the bread should be converted into Christs body which is already that Christs body should be in a point and in a hundred thousand places at once what necessity is there that it should be eaten by wicked men by beasts or by devils incarnate what necessity is there that it should be carried away by the devil that it should be stoln or burnt c. Can it be said that it is for the salvation of the soul of him that eateth it But Reprobates as our Adversaries confess eat it too and the faithful under the old Testament did not eat it nor do the little children of the believers under the new and yet they are saved for all that Can it be said with Bellarmin and Peron that the host being eaten serves as an incorruptible seed for a glorious Resurrection but the faithful of the old Law and the little children of the believers of the new will rise ag●…in gloriously though they never participated of the Eucharist And S. Paul tels us Rom. 8. that this seed of the Resurrection of our bodies is not Christs flesh but his spirit in these words If the spirit of him that raised up Iesus from the dead dwell in you he shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit that dwelleth in you Answ. That God doth no miracles without necessity or some great cause I confess and to each Quaere of this interrogative argument I shall answer first presupposing this Gods own saying and my delight 's to be with the children of men Prov. 8. for this reason Christ ascending into heaven in his corporal shape and sitting at the right hand of his heavenly father to feed all the celestial spirits with the sight of his glory for their chief felitity consists in contemplating and beholding of it where he is to remain until the time of the restitution of all things yet he was also gratiously pleased to remain with us in his Church militant after an ineffable sacramental manner to feed our souls upon earth with his graces that flow from this Sacrament as also for to forti●…e and strengthen us against our common Enemies viz. the devil the world and our own proper flesh with his divine presence lest otherwise they should prove too hard for his poor fighting Church Lastly he was pleased so to do that we should know and be encouraged thereby that we have a Mediatour to interpose himself betwixt his father and us which father when he sees the rememorative unbloudy sacrifice we offer him in remembrance of the bloudy Passion of his mo●…t dearly beloved son in satisfaction for our hainous sins committed against his divine Majesty for the worthiness and purity of the oblation or sacrifice if we offer it him with due devotion and while we are in the ●…tate of Grace he is presently reconciled unto us for his sons sake and ready to bestow upon us more of his new favours and Graces Christ then who is the wisdom of his heavenly father

form thus By the Sacramental being is understood an accidental Predicable being which Predicable being is a substantial mode or manner of Christs being present in the Sacrament I confess By the Sacramental being is understood an accidental Predicamental being of him in the Sacrament I deny and the reason I gave just now which is that because his body is not circumscriptively in the Sacrament but only sacramentally his ubication or presence in it cannot be a predicamental one belonging to any of the nine series of accidents for all predicamental ubications or presences must necessarily result from univocal and proper places as the received definition of a Predicamental ubi which Gilbertus Porretanus in opusc de sex Principiis viz. Ubi est circumscriptio corporis a circumscriptione loci proveniens an Ubi ubication or presence is a circumscription of a body proceeding from the circumscription of a Place doth evidently shew Then replyes the Mounsieur again If Christs being in the Sacrament be a substantial being since his substantial being is nothing else but his substance and nature then it follows that if Christs being be destroyed in the Sacrament of the Eucharist in respect of his substantial being there he must be also destroyed in respect of his natural being I deny the sequel for although Christs entity be in the Sacrament by vertue of the words of consecration yet it is there but modally by vertue of the words and he remains still essentially and in his proper humane shape in heaven so that his essence or entity remains still as it was although his modality or manner of being so and so in the Sacrament which we say is a substantial and not an accidental manner of being for the reason alledged be destroyed or ceaseth to be there If we should say that Christs body is circumscriptively and in his proper human shape in the Sacrament by vertue of the words of consecration then something may be said in the matter but we hold no such thing we only say that by vertue of the words of consecration his substance is really in the Sacramental species which are no proper place at all because he is in them immediatly by reason of his substance and no substance can immediatly by reason of its own self possess any proper place but only by reason of its quantity and all Philosophers I know not what the great Mounsieur holds do hold that ten thousand substances may be contained in a point without being in any proper place So that the sacramental species being destroyed it follows only that Christs substantial presence which was modally in them as in no proper place ceaseth to be in them after they are consumed or destroyed and yet ceaseth not because they are destroyed to be at all or to be in his proper natural shape in heaven Moreover as all Philosophers do commonly say corporal things do depend of their proper places in order to their conservation and are in statu violento as they call it that is they have an inclination to tend towards their center and are not at rest and quiet until they be there but suffer some kinde of violence and force from such bodies as obstruct their passage so we see fire tends always upwards towards its Element which is its proper place and all the waters tends towards their own Element But Christs glorified body has no natural inclination or tendency towards the sacramental species which is a signe that it is not there in its connatural place and consequently that it hath no dependency from them from whence followeth evidently that when they are destroyed although his substance ceaseth to be in them that his substance is not at all annoyed or destroyed by the destruction of them for it never depended of them This formal distinction of both kinds of accidents Praedicamental and Predicable obstructs all de Rodons rushing absurdities which he saith would ensue from the doctrine of the Mass. It obstructs the first because according to this distinction the sacrifice of the Mass is not a sacrifice of an accident only but of a substantial mode or manner of presence accidentally predicated of an essence and nature which hath and always will have its natural being in its proper place in heaven until the restitution of all things Acts. 3. It obstructs the second because the holy fathers above mentioned and especially S. Ambrose and S. Chrisostome whose authorities are of far more worth and rather to be believed then de Rodons simple bare word is do expresly affirm that the sacrifice of the Mass and that of the Cross are but one and the self same sacrifice essentially though not in manner or mode the one being bloudy and the other unbloudy It obstructs the third because the same thing which was produced viz. Christs substantial ubication or presence in the Sacrament is only that which is destroyed at the destruction of the sacramental species and not his nature essence or substantial being for after the consumation of the sacramental species Christ ceaseth to be personally present in them any more but he ceaseth not to be in his own humane shape in heaven for their being destroyed It obstructs the fourth because we hold with Bellarmine that the sacrifice of the Mass consists chiefly and essentially in the words of consecration which are not uttered in the Priests stomack and not in any oblations of the host before or after neither in the consumpsion also though at the consumpsion of the host we confess the sacrifice is integrated and compleated and consequently no more to be offered in the Priests stomack for when the accidents are consumed and dessended into the Priests stomack they are out of our sight and sphear of offering them and they are then altered in fieri as schoolmen call it that 's to say in the way of being altered or destroyed And since we know not how long they remain undestroyed there there is no reason why we should offer them in his stomack for they were offered already both as to the essential and integral oblation at the words of consecration and ceremonies following unto the consumption inclusively It obstructs the last because it being the self same sacrifice with that of the Cross as all the holy fathers and doctors of Christs Church do unanimously assert its vertue force and satisfaction is totally derived from the Justice and satisfaction of the cruent or bloudy sacrifice of the Cross for this sacrifice is nothing else but an express Idea and perfect memorial nay to speak more properly it is but the self same sacrifice with the bloudy one reiterated after an incruent manner and consequently it is propitiatory for the sinns of the living and dead His first milstone being thus split and shattered into small pieces we need not fear his second because one Milstone alone cannot grinde yet fearing left the Mounsieur or his party should think that its weight should crush or destroy us I let it

with all other Elementary and mixt bodies As to the second all Philosophers agree in this that a thing may be in a place two manner of ways viz. circumscriptively and definitively corporal things circumscriptively and spiritual things as an Angel or mans soul definitively that is to say they are not in every place as God is but in some finite or limited place wherein they operate and yet they are not circumscribed by the place wherein they are because they are no bodies nor have any superfice nor also depend of their places in order to their conservation as corporal things do Besides these two manner of ways of being in a place which all Philosophers own the divines hold of a third way viz. to be Sacramentally in a place from whence we have from both divines Philosophers that a thing may be in a place 3 manner of ways viz. circumscriptively definitively sacramentally what is in a place circumscriptively is properly in its place because the superfice of the place touches surrounds the superfice of the body which it contains so the hollow superfice of the vessel touches and surrounds the water which is within the vessel What is in a place definitively or Sacramentally is not properly in any place because the superfice of the place and of the thing contained touch not one another immediatly as all proper places ought to touch immediatly all the things properly contained in them for an Angel and a soul have no superfices wherewith to touch the superfices of the place wherein they are contained for they are pure spirits and only corporal things have superfices however they are said to be in a place improperly because they are contained within some limits of bounds where they operate or else they would be in all places as God is like unto corporal things which are contained strictly within the immediat limits of their proper places yet with this distinction still that spiritual things never touch the superfice of their proper places and consequently are not circumscribed by them as corporal things touch and are circumscribed by their proper places All proper places are called by divines and Philosophers univocal or circumscriptive Places and all improper places they call Equivocal places such as are definitive and sacramental one●… for properly and in rigour they are no places at all because the definition of a proper place agree not with them for want of a superficial manner of containing the things that are said to be within them This received doctrine of all divines and Philosophers presupposed I answer the Mounsieurs major with this distinction the body of Christ cannot come or be brought into the host circumscriptively as into its proper and univocal place I confess the major sacramentally as into its equivocal place I deny the major Therefore I say that Christs body is really in the host but not as in any proper place for to be in an equivocal place is as much in a manner as to say in no place at all and certain it is that an equivocal place is no more a proper place then an equivocal or painted man is a proper and reall man so that the substance of the bread and wine is converted into the body and bloud of Christ without any circumscriptive motion or bringing it circumscriptively from one proper place to another as our circumscriptive bodies move from one place to another but by vertue of the effective words of consecration and omnipotent power of God his substance succeeds the substance of the bread and wine in the consecrated host without any proper local motion for he is there by reason of his substance and substances are incapable of any proper motion and although his quantity be where his substance is by concomitance yet it is not there with its quantitative dimensions for these are hindred in the Sacrament as I sayd before the heat of the Babilonian fire or surnace was hindred supernaturally and being Christs body is in the host as we say by reason of its substance it is in it in one respect like as our souls are in our bodies that is to say totus in toto totus in qualibet parte all Christ in the whole host and all Christ in every point and particle of the host as all Philosophers say the whole soul is in the whole body and the whole soul in every part and point of the body yet the manner of Christs body being in the host differs from the manner of the souls being in the body in this viz. that the soul is in the body but as in one definitive or limited improper place but Christs body is in the Sacrament as in its improper place not definitively or limited to one host as the soul is to one body but Sacramentally that is to say in all places where the words of consecration are uttered upon the bread and wine and this Sacramental existence Christs body hath by reason of its hypostatical union to the divinity which is in all places and yet the Sacramental ubication or existence differs from the the divine general ubication in this that the Sacramental ubication is but where the words of consecration are uttered and the general divine ubication is in all places for without it the creatures would desist to be But here the Mounsieur may object that there is a great difference betwixt Christs body and an Angel or mans soul for an Angel and a soul are pure spirits and therefore be not capable of an univocal place but only of an equivocal one But Christs body is a true real body and therefore it can have but an univocal circumscriptive place To this I answer and confess that Christs body is a true real body no spirit yet I deny but that it may have an equivocal place in the host because it is now a glorified body and as it were spiritualized with spiritual qualities which redound into it from his glorified soul which spiritual qualities the Divines call dotes corporis gloriosi the dowries of a glorified body as are subtility impassibilitie Agility and clarity By reason of the all manner of subjection a glorified body hath to its soul in so far that it neither cloggs nor burthens her as our lumpish bodies do our souls here the body may move in an instant by the instantanean motion of its soul or of her minde and by reason of the Hypostatical union betwixt the divinity and soul of Christ and of his glorified body it may accompany them into ten million of equivocal places at once according to the Apostles saying 1. Cor. 15. It is sown a natural body it shall rise a spiritual body that is to say a real body endowed with spiritual qualities such as those of the soul are not with a spiritual entity or substance because the substance of a spirit and the substance of a body are two different entities essentially differing the one from the other so that if Christs body