Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	blood_n	body_n	shed_v	6,344	5	10.0254	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15061	An answere to a certeine booke, written by Maister William Rainolds student of diuinitie in the English colledge at Rhemes, and entituled, A refutation of sundrie reprehensions, cauils, etc. by William Whitaker ...	Whitaker, William, 1548-1595.	1585 (1585)	STC 25364A; ESTC S4474	210,264	485

the blood of the new testament and this blood is the new testament in my blood If it may be lawfull for you to alter and expound the words at your pleasure then can you help your selfes wel enough but your exposition must be squared according to the wordes not the words framed to your exposition Againe pag. 240. you say where Beza correcteth Saint Luke in the latter part of the sentence I raile at the first so that betweene Beza and me S. Luke hath neuer a word right wisely considered doubties The words are right your exposition is fond and wicked The cupp you make to be the blood of Christ whoe as yet was not crucified nor his blood shed If your doctrine be true Christes blood was shed alreadie and that reallie els it could not be in the cup reallie The papists teache that Christs blood was reallie in the cup before his passion But if Christs blood was shed sitting at the table whoe was he M.R. that shed it whoe made the wound whoe opened his side who thrust his weapon in his heart whoe pearced his hands and feete This must you tell if you maintaine that his blood was then reallie shed and powred forth into the cuppe But by the cuppe M.R. is ment the wine in the cuppe which is the newe testament that is a sacrament of the newe testament in Christs blood shed for vs on the crosse This is a true and plaine sense agreeable to all analogie of faith standing with the words themselues followed of the auncient fathers When at length will you make an end of this railing it is to vnseemelie to lothsome pag. 241. to odious Indeed M.R. it must needes appeare a great absurditie to all learned godly Christians whoe know rightlie esteeme the price of our redemption that to be shed for our sinnes which was in the cup. Christs blood was shed for our sinnes which neuer came in the cup but remained in his bodie vntil the time of his death And if Christs blood was in the cuppe when he gaue the cuppe to his Apostles then must it follow necessarilie that his bodie then was without blood it being shedde already and contained in the cup. In the cuppe was onelie wine a sacrament of his blood which he gaue in the same to his Apostles to drincke whereof he drancke him selfe and so the scriptures expressely call it wine If this were the thing that was shedde for your sinnes then was true and naturall wine the price of your redemption then are you saued by wine then haue you no part in Christs blood But the true Church beleeueth her sinnes to be washed away not by that which was really contained in the cuppe but by the true blood of Christ which issued out of his body nailed on the crosse and wounded with a speare Your absurditie therefore needeth not to be further discouered it is so openlie blasphemous against the blood of Iesus Christ which was shed once not in the cup but on the crosse for our redemption If you vrge S. Lukes words as they stand in grammaticall construction I answere that as the cup is called Christs blood Christs testament that is by a figure the sacrament of his blood and testament so is it also said to be shed for vs by a figure sacramentallie But all men of skill and iudgement maie soone see that in these wordes there is some change of grammaticall disposition vsuall in the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists Your discourse about Tautologies in the scriptures is altogether vaine and friuolous To S. Basils testimonie you aunswere much in words and nothing in matter pag. 244. For what cause haue you thus to reproch Beza for his translation of these words seing you cannot denie but S. Basil hath reported that text of S. Luke euen as Beza hath translated the same and you confesse that Saint Basil hath truelie deliuered the sense thereof so all that you haue said or can say spitefullie against Beza must appertaine to Saint Basil no lesse Basil in Ethic. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whome yet you will not seeme to touch But the thing truelie and indifferentlie considered Beza is no more to be accused then S. Basil you tell vs of heretikes a long tale which is no better then waste paper Vse it your selfe or bestowe it at your pleasure Of such badde stuffe base account is to be made Whereas I spake a fewe words concerning figuratiue speaches pag. 251. which the aduersaries cannot abide to heare of in the sacrament I haue as it were opened at vnawares a flood-gate to M. Rainolds flowing vtterance Quâ data porta ruit The streame is so strong and runneth so violentlie carying all manner of baggage with it that vaine it were to resist it Let it therefore passe downe and doe what mischiefe it can great harme I trust it shall not doe Thus much you must confesse that in the sacrament figures are found and yet when we oppose against your monster of reall presence a most true and euident answere that the wordes were figuratiuelie spoken and must figuratiuelie be expounded you rage aboue all measure But quiet your selfe Master Rainolds and somewhat staie your intemperate affection neuer shall you prooue while papistrie hath a man liuing to speake in defense of it either by scripture or auncient writer that these words must figuratiuelie be vnderstoode This is my blood this cuppe is the new Testament in my blood more then these This cup is shed for you Leaue your babling Figuratiue speaches in the verie words of the supper by the Aduersaries confession and speake to purpose prooue this if you can Wherefore finding in the Euangelistes wordes such manifest figures what reason haue you to condemne vs for vsing the same being a moste common and familiar kinde of speach Because it standeth not with your reall presence Let your reall presence hardlie shift for it selfe we are not bound for cause and respect thereof to wrest the scriptures to forge monstrous interpretations to change the sacrament into a reall sacrifice of Christ which heathenish kinde of doctrine neuer anie but Antichrist and his ministers maintained The scriptures the olde fathers the auncient Church of Christ taught and beleeued otherwise as hath bene shewed and prooued inuinciblie to your faces Your pages following filled with rouing testimonies I pretermitt your contumelies being no lawfull arguments require no answere CHAP. 11. Concerning the translation of the English Bibles MAster Martins boke of Discouerie is aunswered long since from head to foote in euerie part pag. 262. you haue the answere amongst you saie to it what you can with truth and learning To bragge of your fellowes booke which being throughlie and soundlie disprooued you cannot with all your skill maintaine is a childish vanitie to acknowledge no Replie which you cannot but knowe or to make light account of it whereunto you cannot truelie reioine is wilfulnes and

other and say if you can otherwise That you aske whether he amplifie a lie or truth I answere his amplification is true as he meant it and as it must of necessitie be expounded Of Priests and sacrifice enoughe hath bene spoken before Such priests as Chrysostome after the common manner of speach speaketh of we acknowledged which were the Bishops and Pastours of the Church And concerning the amplification which you say it is impossible to interprete of our communion if you had wil this thing is possible and easie enough We say therefore with Saint Chrysostome we see Christ that is we see a sacrament of Christ For Christ him selfe I thinke you wil not say is seene We see Christ sacrificed that is we see the sacrament of Christs sacrifice administred wherein Christs sacrifice is recorded according to his cōmaundement The Priest is bent to the sacrifice that is the minister of Christ ministreth the sacrament of the sacrifice offereth the sacrifice of prayers and thanks giuing The people receiue the precious blood nay M.R.S. Chrysostomes words are more vehement then so he saith the people are sprinckled imbrued with his blood belike S. Chrysostome was here somewhat too vehement in your iudgement The exposition I leaue to your selfe tell vs withal how the people are thus sprinckled in your Church that come not once neere the cuppe Holy water sprinckling you haue enough amongst you but this sprinckling of blood whereof S. Chrisost speaketh you must needes confesse cannot belong to the people amongst you Christ sitting in heauen is receiued in the Church who seeth not the meaning that Christ sitting in heauen as touching his bodilie presence is in the sacrament spirituallie receiued This Doctrine is the Doctrine of our Church and for this no man amongst vs needeth to feare the controlement of anie cōmissioner so his meaning be sound as Chrysostomes was to declare a true spirituall presence and communication of Christ in the sacrament not to ●●si●●ate a ca●nal being and receiuing of Christ therein which Saint Chrysostome in manie places moste plainly confuteth and which he neuer thought anie man once so fond to imagine That Chrysostome compareth this sacrifice with the Leuiticall sacrifices 〈◊〉 ●29 and that of Elias prooueth not yet a Reall sacrifice of Christ in the sacrament An●ther 〈◊〉 argument of M.R. Let your reason thus be framed according to your minde Chrysostome compareth and preferreth the sacrament of Christs supper wherein the sacrament of Christs death is represented and re●orded to the sacrifices of the L●uiticall Priests and of Elias therefore as they offered some Real sacrifice of a beast so the Priest nowe offereth a Reall sacrifice of Christ This conclusion holdeth not Master Rainolds it is too weake Were you not at Rhemes you might see the force of Saint Chrysostomes comparison to lie herein that the olde Priests were appointed to sacrifice onelie a lambe or goate or kowe or some other brute beast but now the sonne of God himselfe is moste liuely yet spirituallie not reallie sacrificed in the Church when the sacrament of this sacrifice according to his institution is receiued Your eloquence in the end is nothing els but childish rayling necessarie for such a cause as you haue taken in hand to maintaine which cannot otherwise be vpholden or continue in anie reasonable account CHAP. 10. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospell which Beza is charged to haue corrupted BEfore you come to the matter pag. 23● it pleaseth you a litle to whet your eloquence in rayling at Beza a man though much hated of Papists who loue none that loueth not their Pope be he neuer so learned or godly yet knowen to all men euen his enemies to be indued with excellent graces of Gods spirit which haue shined in him notablie to the glorie of God and profit of the Church Your spitefull reproches cast against him others are now of all esteemed as they are in truth fained slaunderous vnworthie of anie regard or credit His skill in the bible hath sufficiently appeered to your griefe and if you Master Rainolds would herein compare your selfe with him it were a token of your singular boldnes and arrogancie His skill in murthering men you saie was better which argueth you haue no conscience to deuise to speake to write moste vntrulie But say your pleasure your reward with God and men is certaine Many I knowe haue written against him much you may knowe that he hath fully answered them al. But of your Remish or Romish colledge of English students I knowe not anie that hath written ought against him in that tongue which he could read and vnderstand The words are in Luke 22. v. 20. which in the Greeke that Beza translated by construction indeed require tha the cuppe which is called the new Testament should be shed for vs. In which respect Beza translateth them otherwise For further knowledge hereof you referre your reader to M. Martin and so doe I for answere to M.D. Fulke And here you might as well haue cut of this long taile of your treatise which hath not in it one drop of learning or profit you rayle at me you raile at Beza you rayle at the holie communion pag. 235. which you cal profane bakerlie but reason scripture or proofe you bring not anie for your sayings I see you are a resolute man continew thus a while and I nothing doubt but he whose ordinance and sacrament you haue thus boldelie and wickedly blasphemed wil be auenged vpon that profane heart and tongue of yours But let vs heare what you saie First pag. 239. whereas I said if they vnderstand by the cuppe the bloode in the cuppe as they doe then is there mention made of double bloode you tell me I lie groslie and intollerablie such curteous speaches I haue no cause to thanke you for but let all men of wisdome be iudges whether I haue not saied the truth Thus you make S. Luke to speake this cup that is this bloode is the new Testament in my blood which is shed for you Is not here by your construction mentioned first one blood then an other your reply is pitifull M. R. For to say This Christ is Christ the sonne of God this God is God of heauen and earth as it signifieth not a double Christ or God so is it nothing like this saying of yours concerning the blood in the sacrament For you cannot make the construction as you pretend this blood is the blood of the new Testament the wordsstand otherwise vnles you wil commit a greater fault then that wherewith you charge Beza so hainously S. Luke speaketh not as you make him this blood is the blood of the new testament but this cup is the new testament in my blood If by cup he meant blood as you affirme then our sauiour Christ his blood was the new Testament in his blood And is it all one to say This blood is

against murtherers that he whoe sheddeth the blood of man his blood shal be shedde by man these laste words by man establishing the Magistrats authoritie Baadam are not expressed in your traslation This to be a fault of great importance anie man may easilie vnderstand To proceede a litle further in this firste booke of holie scripture and to discouer some moe grosse corruptions of your latin translation therein committed for I may not stand to note euerie petie fault in the 36. Gen. 36.24 Chap. v. 24. the Prophet writeth that Ana the sonne of Zibeon found mules in the wildernes but your translator telleth vs he found warme waters Haijemim aquas calidas and so by his great cunning hath turned mules into water It maie be said there is great likenes between the wordes in Hebrew which I graunt to be so But this dischargeth not the translation from a faulte And howsoeuer those words are like yet from whence did your translator fetch his other worde Warme For though we suppose the word may signifie water yet to cal it warme water is more then can be warranted In the 41. Chap. v. 54. there passed in the former editions of your translation a notablefault Gen. 41.54 which yet of late for verie shame hath bene amended by Hentenius of Louaine For where the Prophet speaking of the generall famine that was ouer all countries saith that in all the land of Egypt was breade your bookes cleane contrarie to the text and storie reade that the famine also was in all Egypt And thus hath it gone maine hundred yeares in your Latine Bibles Nowe at length you haue bene content to acknowledge a fault in this place and whie not as well also in others wherein as euident faults may be found as this And seeing you can be brought to acknowledgement of some corruptions in your latine Bibles by like reason you maie be induced also to confesse moe faults where moe faults may be founde as there maie full many throughout your whole translation In the 49. of Genes v. 22. Gen. 49.22 Iacob compareth Ioseph his sonne to a fruitfull bough by the well side which wordes in your latine translation are otherwise set downe thus and he is comelie to beholde If you saie that in the sense is no difference yet you make no sufficient answere bhalei bhaijn Et decorus aspectu forasmuch as translating the text of scripture we must retaine the verie words as well as we may and not take libertie of leauing the wordes because we thinke we swarue not from the sense For the wordes may haue some other or farther meaning then we suppose euen in such places as seeme to be most easie And if you impute this as a fault to vs in translating why may not we likewise blame your translator for the same who hath so much offended therein But let vs go on In the 24. verse of this Chap. Iacob saith of Ioseph that his armes were strengthned in your translation it is as contrarie as may be that they were weakned or loosed Againe in the end of this Chapter a wholl verse together is omitted by your tranflators The purchase of the field and the caue that is therein of the children of Heth of which wordes not one is found in your translation and so where the Chapter contained 33. verses your translation hath 32. Tell vs by what reason it was lawful for the author of your translation to put so much our of the text or for you to allow him in so doing It were a worke of great labour and length to go through euerie book of scripture in this order and therfore it shal be for our purpose sufficient of infinite faultes that might be noted booke by booke Chapter by Chapter verse by verse to discouer onelie certaine as they come to my hand such as by reading and conference euerie one may obserue In Exodus the. 15 Chapter 19. verse your translator hath committed a double faulte first in translating a word second in pointing amisse The Prophet saith that Pharoes Horse went with his Charet and Horsemen into the Sea Sus Parbho And so is it in the Septuagintes translation truelie according to the Hebrew veritie But thus it standeth in your translation The Horseman went in In●ressus est eques c. Pharoe with his Charets and Horsemen agreeing neither with Greeke nor Hebrew nor the right sense In the 21. of Exodus 3. verse Exod. 21.3 a law is set downe for hebrew seruants that they should be released of their seruice at the end of six yeares and then is further added in what sorte they should be sent awaie namelie that if the seruant bring with him nothing but his owne bodie Begappo that is if he come alone as the 70. haue interpreted the text hauing no wife then he should go out himselfe alone and not his wife with him as is in the verse following expressed Your translator hath misconstrued the law and marred the sense in turning the hebrew thus Cum quali veste intrauerit cum taliexeat with what manner of garment he entred with such let him go out And so also in the 10. verse following where God commaundeth that if one hath betrothed his maid to his sonne and after take him another wife he shall not diminish the foode of the former your translator hath made aother law for this that he shall prouide a mariage for the maide-seruant Prouidebit puellae nuptias which is vtterlie from the meaning of the law And in the seauenth verse of this Chapter before he hath also mistaken a plaine lawe concerning maide seruants wherein God forbiddeth to send them awaie after their yeares were out haehhabadim as the menseruants are sent away but your translator saith she shall not goe out as the maide seruants are accustomed to goe out Sicut ancillae exere consueuerunt then which nothing almoste can be deuised more contrarie to the Lawe in the. 24. Chapter 11. verse the Prophet speaking of the chosen men of Israel that went vp into the mount and sawe the Lord saith that God laid not his hand vpon them which thing he noteth for a speciall rememberaunce that althouh they sawe God yet because they presumed not but obeied the commaundement of God therefore ●o harme befel vnto them This in your translation is otherwise reported in these wordes Neither laid he his hand vpon them of the children of Isaell that had gone backe a farre of Qui procul recesserant Who seeeth not a manifest difference betweene the true text and this translation In Leuiticus Chap. 4. v. 8. Leuit. 4.8 Where is commaunded that the Priest shall take awaie all the fat of the bullocke that is offered for sinne your translator hath thus mistranslated the wordes and the fat of the calfe he shall offer for sinne Et adipem vituli offeret pro peccato and