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	bread_n	consecration_n	4,106	5	10.7048	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80756	The royal prerogative vindicated in the converted recusant convinced by Scripture, reasons, fathers, and councils, that the oath of abjuration (compared with those of allegiance, and supremacy) containeth nothing, but what may be lawfully taken by every pious Christian, and loyal subject; and that the known doctrine, and discipline of the Church of England, in opposition to Popery on the one hand, and all sects, and schisms on the other, is the safest way to peace and loyalty here, and salvation hereafter. To which is annexed The King's supremacy in all causes, ecclesiastical, and civil, asserted in a sermon preached at the assises at Monmouth before Sir Robert Hide, one of his Majestie's judges, March 30. 1661. / By John Cragge, M.A.	Cragge, John, M.A.	1661 (1661)	Wing C6790; Wing C6786; Thomason E2261_1; Thomason E2261_2; ESTC R210148	173,676	266

2. De Eucharist cap. 5. confesses but it will not infer Transubstantiation or a corporal presence when the the thing signified is in the natural substance thereof contained under the outward and visible signs this is the Transubstantiation which we denie And the Presence acknowledged by us though expressed by figurative Speeches is as real (e) Figuratio locutionis veritatem rei non perimit Rupert in Joann lib. 6. pag. 131. as theirs For first a Mystical Head is really present to the Mystical Body which is taught in Scripture by Tropical Expressions Psalm xlv Canticles Ephes v. John xv Secondly our Saviour's words about the other part of the Sacrament to wit This Cup is the new Testament in my Blood Luke xxii 20. is confessed by the Romists (f) Non negamus in verbo Calix Tropum esse Bel. larm De Eucharist lib. 1. cap. 11. themselves to be figurative why may not this as well Gent. But our Catholick Writers have taught that Transubstantiation may be gathered from those words of Consecration and that they are not figurative Minist Here you affirm two things First That your Catholick Writers taught that Transubstantiation may be gathered from the words of Consecration Secondly That they are not figurative For the former your Doctour Fisher once Bishop of Rochester ingenuously confesses that (g) Hactenus Matthaeus qui solus Testamenti Novi meminit neque ullum hic verbum positum est quo probetur in nostra Missa veram fieri carnis sangiuins Christi praesentiam Fisher Contra Captivit Babylon There is not somuch as one word there whereby the real bodily presence of the flesh and blood of Christ can be proved in the Mass no nor in any Scripture else these are his words Non potest per ullam Scripturam probari So you see it is acknowledged that your Popish Transubstantiation is Scriptureless For the latter That the words of Christ This is my Body are not taken figuratively but (h) Substantia panis nunquam est corpus Christi quamvis convertatur in ipsum Richard 4. Dist 11. in sine Art qu. 9. 6. properly consider these Arguments First If the Elements of Bread and Wine remain in their specifical Nature without alteration even after Consecration as before then the Words must needs be figurative for one individual substance cannot be predicated of another property but I shall prove anon by Scriptures and Fathers That the Elements of Bread and Wine remain in their specifical Nature without alteration even after Consecration as before Secondly The Body and Blood of Christ would be delivered and received without the Soul and Deitie of Christ For in propriety of Speech the Body is distinguished from the Blood and Soul If the Body be onely received as the letter purports then Christ is dead his Soul and Blood separated from his Body If by Body Blood and Soul be also meant it is a Synecdochical and so a figurative Expression the part put for the whole This Dilemma is not easilie answered Thirdly That which Christ delivered to be participated by his Disciples he did Sacramentally eat and drink himself Luke xxii 15. as (i) Hieron Ad Hedib Qu. 2. Saint Hierom (k) Chrysost in Matth. Hom. 83. Saint Chrysostom (l) Euthym. in Matth. xxvi cap. 64. Euthymius with (m) Aquin. 3. Quaest 81. Art 1. Vasques in 3. Disp 2. Conclusio est affirmans in qua omnes Catholici quos ego legerim plane conveniunt Sic. Vasquez many Schole-men affirm but if the words be literally interpreted then he did eat his own Flesh and drink his own Blood which the Cannibals abhor Fourthly If the Words be understood literally then Christ gave his passible and mortal Body to his Disciples but a passible and mortal Body could not be received of several Communicants and so be in several places at once could not wholly be contained in a piece of Bread be divided into parts without sensible effusion of Blood But Bellarmine avers (n) Corpus exhibitum Apostolis sumptum ab ipso Christo Domino vereerat passibile Bellarm. De Eucharist lib. 2. cap. 14. That The Body Christ gave his Disciples and they received was a passible Body Fifthly If our Saviour's Words be literally expounded then (o) Verum corpus Christi manet adhuc sub speciebus à Brutorum ore acceptis Turre-Cremata Dogs and Swine may eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of the Son of man but all that eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of the Son of man have everlasting life John vi 49 50. Sixthly If our Saviour's Words were literal and plain they themselves could not be so distracted and divided about the sence thereof but they are notoriously divided as Vasques confesses p Ingens q Vasques in 3. Thom. Tom. 3. inter Catholicos de horum verborum sensu est controversia There is a great Controversie amongst the Catholicks of the sence of these words And Suarez saith (q) Catholici in tanta opinionum varietate sunt constituti ut singulatim eas recensere nimis molesiū esset Suarez in 3. part Thomae Catholicks are in such variety of opinions that to reckon them severally were too troublesom Gent. What varietie of Opinions I had thought that there had been summa pax a compleat Harmonie Minist No for in every word their different Conceipts outstrip the number of Letters First For the subject of the Proposition Turre-Cremata saith (r) Turre-Cremata De Consecrat Dist 2. That The Pronoun This signifieth nothing so the sense would be Nothing is my Body Alexander of Hales saith (s) Alexander Hales 4. q. 10. m. 4. Artic. 2. Sect. 3. Hoc id est Panis transubstantiandus in corpus meum est corpus meum This that is the Bread to be transubstantiated into my Body is my Body Bonaventure saith (t) Pronomen demonstrat Panis substantiam sub Accidentibus quae oculis conspici potest Bonavent 4. Dist 8. Art 1. It signifies the Accidents and Forms of Bread Others say (u) Suarez in 3. partem Thomae Disp. 58. It signifies the Body of Christ Others say It signifieth confusedly that which is couched under the Forms And all of these have their Daedalian Windings Labyrinths and Limitations Secondly For the Copula or Verb Substantive Est Is Aquinas (x) Aquinas 3. q. 75. Art 8. Art qu. 78. expounds it by Continetur Under these forms my Body is contained Bellarmine (y) Bellarm. De Euchar lib 1. cap. 11. interprets it by Erit This shall be my Body Marsilius (z) Marsil 4. qu. 6. Art 1. by Transmutatur It is changed and converted into my Body Thirdly For the Predicate corpus meum My Body some make it materia prima the first matter of Christ's Body and that is common with the Bread and needs no Transubstantiation Others Corpus materiatum the materiate Body with the reasonable Soul Others an organized Body without reference to

instance interpreteth himself for when he had said The nature of Bread and Wine were changed in the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ he adds (f) Sacramenta habere nomina earum rerum quas significant Cypr. Serm. De Chrismate Sacraments have the names of those things they signifie which agrees with Chrysostom's Saying (g) Quod est Symbolum tribuit rei significatae maximè quoad fidem mentis cogitationem Chrysost The Signe hath the Attribute of the thing signed or signified especially by Faith and cogitation of the minde And whereas Saint Augustine averrs the Body of our Lord enters our Mouth he means by Faith for so he vindicates himself We cannot saith (h) Nos Christum in coelis sedentem manu contrectare non possumus sed Christum fide contingere possumus In Epist in Joanem Aug. Tract 1. he touch with hand Christ sitting in heaven but we can lay hold on Christ by Faith and again (i) Ascendit in coelum corpus Christi quaerat aliquis quomodo in coelum manus mittam fidem mitte tenuisti Aug. Tract in Joh. The Body of Christ is ascended into heaven some may enquire How shall I lay hold on him being absent how shall I send up my hand into heaven that there I may apprehend him sitting fidem mitte tenuisti Stretch but out the hand of Faith and thou hast layd hold on Christ And descanting upon the Seventy third Psalm he saith Christ did carrie himself in his own hands quodammodo in a manner how quia gestabat in manibus suis corporis sui Sacramentum because he carried the Sacrament of his body in his hands Sacraments have the names of those things they signifie and are sublimed to an higher condition then before hence Scripture calls the Supper the Supper of the Lord and the Cup the Cup of the Lord and 1 Cor. x. 4. the Rock of which the Israelites did drink a Spiritual Rock I will conclude this with that of Theodoret which methinks is more then satisfactorie (k) Dominus quae videntur symbolae corporis sanguinis sui appellatione honoravit non equidem naturam ipsam transmutans sid gratiam naturae adjicions Theodoret. Dialog 1. cap. 8. The Lord hath honoured the Sacramental Symbols with the appellation of his Body and Blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not changing Nature it self but adding Grace to Nature Gent. But our Church hath defined That After Consecration the substance of Bread and Wine is abolished and the Shapes Accidents and Quantitie thereof onely remain Minist Your Church it is true hath defined it but without testimonie both of Scripture and Antiquitie as your own Authours confess Cajetan evidences that secluding the authoritie of the Romane Church there is (l) Non apparet ex Euangelio coactitium aliquod ad intelligendum haec verba proprié Cajetan 3. quaest 75. art 1. impress anno 1528. nothing in the Scripture which may compell one to understand the words properly or the Elements to be transubstantiated Scotus saith (m) Scotus 4. D. 11. quasi 3. lit 13. There is no Scripture that proveth the substance of Bread doth not remain Alphonsus a Castro saith (n) De Transubstantiationo panis in corpus Domini rara est in antiquis Scriptoribus mentio Alphonsus à Castro Contra Haeres lib. 8. There is seldome any mention in ancient Writers of Transubstantiation of the Bread into the Body of our Lord he might have said Never seeing purer ages know no Doctrine but that of Macarius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bread and Wine presents in the Church an Antitype of his Christ 's flesh and blood and those that partake of the apparent bread do eat the flesh of the Lord spiritually And of Theodoret (o) Signa mystica post Consecrationem no● recedunt à sua natura The odor Dialog inconfusus The mystical signes after Consecration depart not from their nature And of Gelasius (p) Non desinit substantia vel natura panis vini Gelasius De duabus naturis Adv. Eutych It ceases not to be the substance or nature of Bread and Wine Gent. But if the Ancients be against Transubstantiation and Scriptures countenance it not is there any Scriptures against it Minist Quod non dicit Scriptura id contradicit in matters of Faith that which the Scriptures countenance not they discountenance because as Augustine proclaims (q) Aperte in Scriptura inveniuntur omnia illa quae continent fidem moresque vivendi spem scilicet atque charitatem August De Doctr Christian lib. 2. cap. 6. Therein are found all things plainly which contain Faith and Moralitie of life Hope and Charitie with this Weapon onely Tertullian fights against Hermogenes saying (r) Scriptum est doceat Hermogenis officium si non est scriptum ●●meat Vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahemibus destinatum Tertull. Contra Hermog pag. 373. Let the shop or Schole of Hermogenes make it appear that that which he pretends as a Plea against me is written If it be not written let him fear that Wo that is denounced against them that add or diminish This Wo the Romists incurr seeing by their own confession there is no Scripture extant for Transubstantiation nay there are apparent Scriptures against it First Matth. xxvi Mark xiv Luk. xxii 1 Cor. xi it is said Christ took Bread blessed Bread brake Bread gave Bread to his Disciples Paul saith let a man examine himself and so let him eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup whosoever shall eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup unworthily c. But Christ brake not his own Body it was the Souldiers that Crucified him This Tertullian clears saying (s) Acceptum panem et distributum Discipulis corpus suum illum fecit Hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est figura corporis mei Tertull. contra Adamant cap. 12. contra Marc. lib. 4. He made the Bread taken and distributed to his Disciples that his body by saying This is my Body that is a Figure of my Body Secondly The Body of Christ was delivered up for us Rom. viii 32. but the Bread that Sacramentally is called his Body was not delivered up for us Therefore the Bread is not properly Christ's Body Thirdly Christ saith not as the Transubstantiatours wrest it My body is contained under these forms of Bread and wine but this The very bread is my Body (t) Antitypum sancti corporis sanguinis tui Basil in Liturg. (u) Antitypa pretiosi sanguinis corporis Christi Greg. Nazianz. Oratione De Pasch symbolically that is as Saint Ambrose tells us (x) Ambros in 1 Cor. xi De Sacrament lib. 4. cap. 5. In edendo potando sanguinē carnem Domini quae pro nobis oblata sunt significamus In eating and drinking we signifie the flesh and blood of the Lord which were offered forus Fourthly Christ saith

not This shall be made my Body therefore the words of Christ do not convert Bread into the substance of the Body of Christ but onely declare the Bread in this use to be the Body of Christ that is Sacramentally as Saint Chrysostom evidences (y) Antequam sanctificetur panis panem nominamus divinâ autem illum sanctificante gratiâ mediante Sacerdote liberatus est ab appellatione panis dignus autem habitus est Dominici corporis appellatione etsi natura panis in ipso permansit Chrysost ad Caes Monach. Before the Bread be sanctified we call it Bread but Divine Grace sanctifying it by the ministerie of the Priest it is freed from the appellation of Bread and is accounted worthy of the style of the Lord's Body Et si natura panis in ipso mansit although the nature of Bread remains in it Fifthly If the Bread should be transubstantiated it would destroy the nature of a Sacrament which is defined by Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. iv 11. a seal of the righteousness of Faith and by Saint Augustine (z) Ista ideo dicuntur Sacramenta quod in eis aliud videtur aliud intelligitur quop videtur speciem habet corporalem uod intelligitur fructum habet spiritualem August Serm. Ad Infant a visible signe of invisible grace now nothing can be imagined but the Bread to be this visible signe this seal that (a) Signum res prater speciem quam ingerit sensibus aliud aliquid faeciens in cogitationem venire August lib. 2. De Doctr. Christ cap. 1. presents it self to the senses and something besides it self to the understanding In every Sacrament saith Irenaeus there is a thing terrestrial which is visible a thing celestial which is invisible the Terrestrial visible thing in the Eucharist is the Bread and Wine the Celestial and invisible is the body of Christ that was broke and his Blood that was shed upon the Cross but Transubstantiation takes away one part therefore the whole Sacrament which is Duorum unio a relative Vnion of two Sixthly If the Bread and Wine were Transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of Christ then there were nothing left that could nourish the body but there ought to be something in the Sacrament to feed our body seeing our Faith is confirmed by the proportion between the Bodilie and Spiritual Alimonie as the material Bread feeds the body so Christ by Faith feeds the Soul as Euthymius saith (b) Naturalis cibus potus est panis vini quae proponuntur supernaturalis verò efficax eorum operatio Euthym. in Matth. xxiii cap. 64. It is the Natural meat and drink of Bread and Wine which are proposed but the efficacious operation of them is supernatural The Accidents of Bread and Wine void of matter and form cannot nourish as being not capable to be (c) Nutritio est adjecti alimenti in corporis substantiam conversio perfecta assimilatio Fuchsius Institut Medicinae lib. 1. Sect. 7. chilified sanguified agglutinated or assimulated to our bodies for Whatsoever nourisheth saith the Philosopher must be simile genere like in kind with that which is nourished but dissimile specie specifically different but Accidents differ from Bodies which are substances toto genere and have nothing common with Flesh and Blood that from power can be reduced into act Seventhly If every crumb of Bread and drop of Wine were transubstantiated into the entire humane Nature of Christ as the Romists maintain then in receiving one Element we should receive the whole mystery and commit no Sacrilege in detaining the Cup from the Laitie but the Antients judged otherwise as Gelasius Divisio unius ejusdem mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio pervenire non potest The division of one and the same mysterie cannot be without great Sacrilege And Ignatius (d) Vnus panis omnibus confractus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unum poculum omnibus distributum Ignatius in Epistol Ad Philadelph One Bread was broke for all and one Cup was distributed to all And Saint Chrysostom It is not with us as in the old law where some parts of the sacrifice was given to the Priests others fell to e Non est apud nos ut in Lege veteri ubi aliae partes ex Victimis dabantur Sacerdotibus ali●e veró cedebant offerentibus sed nobis omnibus idem Christi corpus proponitur atque idem poculum Chrysost Homil. in 1. Cor. xxv them that offered but to us all the same body of Christ is given and the same cup here you see he distinguishes the Body from the Cup where according to thir Tenet the Cup is as well the Body as the Bread Gent. How then if not by Transubstantiation is the Bread Christ 's Body or what manner of praedication or enunciation is this This is my Body Minist Not identical where the same thing is praedicated of the same as This my Body is my Body not proper and regular for so one disparate as the Body of Christ cannot be praedicated of the Bread but it is an analogical Enunciation where Tropically or Figuratively the thing signified is affirmed of the sign (f) Ex similitudine Sacramenti signa ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt August Epist 23. ad Bonifacium From the similitude saith Saint Augustine the signes of the Sacraments take the very names of the things themselves for (g) Dominus non dubitavit dicere Hoc est corpus meum cùm signum daret corporis sui August contra Adamant cap. 12. The Lord doubted not to say This is my Body when he gave a signe of his Body Which manner of expression is familiar in Scripture Circumcision is the Covenant Gen. xvii the Lamb is the Passover of Jehovah Exod. xii the Sabbath is the Covenant of God Exod. xxxi the seven Kine are seven Years Genes xli 26. I am the Vine John xv 1. the Field is the World Matth. xiii 38. Herod is a Fox Luk. xiii 32. John is Elias Matth. xi 4. Christ was the Rock 1 Cor. x. 4. the Way the Door the Bread John vi 35. yet Christ was not transubstantiated into a Rock or Way or Door or Bread And (h) Duae potissimùm causae sunt cur Spiritus sanctus ipse Christus taelibus praedicationibus Phrasibus sit usus quarū prima est Analogia arctissima unio Sacramentalis inter signa et ros signatas altera est summa certitudo obsignationis spiritualium bonorum eorundem in usu legitimo exhibitionis Kec kerman Logic. lib. 2. pag. 395. there are two reasons why the Holy-Ghost and Christ himself hath used such enunciations and manners of expression whereof the first is the Analogie and most strict Sacramental Union betwixt the signes and things signed The other is the infallible certaintie of the obsignation and exhibition of spiritual good things in the right use of the Seals Gent. All this I acknowledg seems very