Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	body_n	bread_n	consecration_n	11,089	5	11.2647	5	true

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

a living Body Others a living Body Durand (a) Durand 4. Dist 10. q. 4. makes it a Body indeed bodyless without quantitie dimensions or parts Occham (b) Occham 4. Dist 10. q. 4. a body having quantitie without extention figure and order of parts Bellarmine (c) Bellarm. De Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 4. lib. 1. cap. 2. 14. a Body having dimensions without external relation to place or ubi a Body without matter like Angels and Spirits which he resembles by the image of man's face reflecting in a Glass A Body saith (d) Suarez in 3. partem Thomae Disp 52. Suarez having the stature of a man palpable contradiction and yet contained in every crumb of Bread Thus the Romists incurr that of the Poet. (e) Horat. Satyra 1. Dum vitant vitia in contraria currunt For to avoid one Figure or Metonymie in our Saviour's Words they are forced to forge innumerable Figures sixteen at the least as Bishop Jewel hath observed to make it a phantastical Body or rather Chimera or Ens fictum impossibile a Body bodyless Gent. But the antient Fathers and our Scholemen agree That this Conversion though mysterious and inscrutable is by Transubstantiation Minist Nothing less for Tonstal one of your own confesses (f) Deo modo quo id sicret satius erat curiosum quenquam relinquere suae conjecturae sicut liberum fuit ante Concilium Lateranum Tonstal De Euchar. lib. 1. pag. 46. That for the manner how this is Christ 's Body it were beter to leave everie curious Fellow to his own conjecture as it was free before the Lateran Council Lombard Master of the Sentences saith (g) Si autem quaeritur Qualis sit illa conversio an Formalis an Substantialis vel alterius generis definire non sufficio Lombard Sent. 4. Dist 11. That he is not able to define the manner of conversion in the Sacrament (h) Bandinus Sent. D. Sacr. pag. 367. Some affirm one way some another We say with Saint Augustine The Mysterie is safely believed but not with safety searched into Cyril of Alexandria saith (i) Cyril in Joan. lib. 4. cap. 13. We ought firmly to believe the Holy Mysterie but let us never in Matters thus sublime so much as imagine to utter the manner how the manner how this is done can neither be conceived by the mind nor expressed by the tongue Theophylact saith (k) Theophyl in Joan. vi when we hear these words of Christ unless ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man c. We ought firmly to believe the same and not to enquire after what manner According to that of Saint Chrysostome (l) Chrysost in 1 Cor. Homil. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is better to be soberly ignorant then naughtilie intelligent For this mysterie is of that nature that Athanasius testifies (m) Athanas Ad Serap 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The verie Cherubims veil their faces when it comes to this and yet the Romists with the Beth-shemites dare look into the Ark though Salvianus accounts it (n) Sacrilegae temeritatis auoddam genus est si plus scire cupias quam sinaris Salvian lib. De Provid a sacrilegious temeritie to covet to know that which we are not permitted Gent. But the Fathers although they mention not Transubstantiation or the manner of presence or conversion in the Sacrament yet they call it the very body and blood of Christ as Saint Cyril of Jerusalem in his book highly commended by (o) Whitakerus De Sacris Scripturis Doctour Whitaker saith (p) Cyril Hierosol Catech Mystag 4. Let us therefore with all certitude receive the Body and Blood of Christ Minist They call it the Body and Blood of Christ in conformity to out Saviour's Metonymical and mystical Expression but withall that no man mistake they unfold what they mean by Body and Blood for treating of the Sacramental signs the Antients (q) Chrysost in Matth. Hom. 83. Epist Hebr. Hom. 17. Gelas Cont. Eutych Theod. Dial. 2. Dionys Hierarch cap. 3. Gregor Nazianz. Apol. Macar Homil. 17. call them Figures Representations Memorials Anti-Types but that which is a Figure Similitude Type and Representation of a thing is not properly the same Saint Augustine saith (r) August De Doctr. Christian lib. 3. cap. 16. It is a figurative speech commanding us to be partakers of the Lord's Passion and sweetly and profitably to keep in mind that his flesh was Crucified and wounded for us (s) Dominus non dubitavit dicere Hoc est corpus meum quando dedit signum sui corporis August in Psalm 98. The Lord did not stick to say This is my Body when he gave a sign of his Body Origen speaking of the consecrated Element of Bread saith (t) Origen in cap. xv Matth. This I speak of the Typical and Figurative Body Saint Ambrose (u) Ambros De Sacr. lib. 4. cap. 5. calls it figuram corporis sanguinis the figure of the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Saint Chrysostome saith (x) Chrysost Opus imperfect in Matth. Homil. 11. In the sanctified Vessel there is not the true Body of Christ but a Mystery of his body is there contained Gratian's Gloss confirms this The Divine Bread saith (y) Gratian. De Consecrat Dist 2. he which representeth the flesh of Christ is called the Body of Christ but improperly Beda saith (z) Beda in Lucam 22. Christ substituted his Flesh and Blood in the figure of Bread and Wine Druthmarus (a) Druthmar supra Matth. cap. 26. The Blood of Christ is aptly figured thereby Bertram (b) Bertram lib. De corp sang Domini Bread and Wine is Figuratively the Body and Blood of Christ And Tertullian who lived nearer the Apostolick Times saith (c) Tertull. contra Marcion lib. 1. cap. 14. that Bread representeth the Body of Christ calling it in two places The figure of Christ 's Body By all these it is most evident that the Ancients taught That the body of Christ was not essentially and substantially in the Sacrament but onely figuratively and Typically Gent. But the Orthodox Fathers teach that The Bread our Saviour gave his Disciples was changed not in shape but in nature and by the omnipotence of the word was made Flesh Amongst whom Cyprian saith (d) Cyprian Serm. De Chrismate Epist 102. ad Eudoxium Christ carried himself in his own hands and Saint Augustine affirms (e) Augustin De Civitate Dei lib. 13. cap. 20. Serm. De Coena Domini that The Body of our Lord enters into our mouth and that Our tongues are cruentated with the Blood of Christ is not this an essential and substantial Conversion Minist The Orthodox Fathers never taught that Bread and Wine were changed in Essence and Substance though hyperbolically sometimes they affirmed them to be changed in nature meaning in their signification representation and exhibition So Cyprian in your own

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

tanta inter recentiores aliquos Scholasticos de natura illius exorta fuit controversia utquó magis se extricare conati sunt eo seipsos majoribus difficultatibus implicârunt Vasques in 3. Thom. Tom. 3. Disp. 183. cap. 1. such is the Doctrine of Romish Transubstantiation Therefore it ought not to be believed to be effected by any man whatsoever but rather abjured and renounced Gent. Well by that which you have delivered I am convinced to be of Doctour Andrews judgment (m) De Hoc est firmâ fide tenemus quòd sit de hoc modo est nempe Transubstantiato in corpus pane de modo quo fiat ut sit sive per in sive con sive sub sive trans nullū inibi verbum est quia verbum nullum merito à fide ablegamus procul inter scita Scholae fortasse inter fidei Articulos non pronimus Doctour Andrews Bishop of Winchester Contra Apol Bellarm. cap. 1. pag. 11 believing firmly that the words of Christ are true and in the sence he meant it to be his body but for the manner how it is his body seeing there is not one express word I dare not make it a matter of faith rank it we may amongst the Nicities of Scholes but not amongst the Articles of our Creed Therefore you may proceed to the fourth Article The Fourth Article And I do also believe that there is not any Purgatorie Minist THIS is symbolical and concentrick with the two and twentieth Article of our English Confession wherein it is said that The Romish Doctrine of Purgatorie is a vain Fiction (a) Quòd fuerit divina institutio non possit manifestè probari quia non constat ex Sacris Literis neque ex Conciliis Nugnus Addit in 3. part Thom. q. 20. Art 3. Dif 1. grounded upon no Testimonies of Scripture but contrarie to the word of God and the Apologie of the Church of England which saith That It is no better then a blockish and old wife's device Gent. Here me thinks that I may cope with you with better success then formerly for Purgatorie is so far from being a vain fiction and old wife's device that it mounteth high upon the Wings of Antiquitie Saint Augustine who lived in the fourth Centurie and may be stiled The Standard-bearer of the Fathers makes (b) August Enchirid. ad Laurent cap. 6● cap. 68. ad Dulcitium Quaest 1. De fide openbus cap. 16. De Civitate Dei lib. 12. cap. 26. often mention of it Minist Your Argument in form is this That which Augustine makes often mention of is no vain fiction but a creditable veritie Augustine makes often mention of Purgatorie I first deny your Proposition for all that Augustine makes frequent mention off is not creditable veritie and void of fiction he insists often upon Infants damnation that dy without Baptism of the Eucharist to be given to Babes that (c) Sine fide etiam quae videntur bona opera in peccatum vertuntur August De fide operibus all Works of Infidels are sins which the (d) Concilium Tridentinum meritò damnavit Omnia Infidelium opera esse peccata etiamsi gravem habeat authorem Augustinum Maldonat Comment in Matth. vii 18. Romists deny In the Bull of Pius Quartus by the Oath their fore-man hath taken all Priests and Jesuites are sworn not to receive or interpret the Scriptures but according to the uniform consent of Fathers Saint Augustine is but one (e) Aristoteles Ethic. lib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly to your Assumption Saint Augustine in the pretended places mentions Purgatory not as a creditable veritie but as a doubtfull opinion for thus he writes to Laurentius (f) August ad Laurent cap. 67. Tale aliquid etiam post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est utrum ita sit quaeri potest Some such thing as Purgatorie to be after this life is not incredible and whether it be so or no it may be a Question And to Dulcitius (g) Quòd spiritus defunctorum ignem transitoriae tribulationis inveniant non redarguo quia forsitan verum est August in 8. Quaest ad Dulcitium That the spirits of the dead finde a fire of transitorie tribulation I reprove it not for perhaps it is true And in his Civitate Dei (h) Quis sit ille modus aut quae sint illa peccata quae ità impediunt perventionem ad regnum Dei ut tamen sanctorum amicorum meritis impetrent indulgentiam difficilimum est invenire pericalesissimū definire ego certè usque ad hoc tempus cùm indè satagerem ad eorum indaginem perventre non potut Aug. De civitate Dei lib. 21. cap. 27. The manner how and what sins they be which so let a man from coming to the Kingdom of God that they not withstanding obtain pardon by the merits of holy friends it is very hard to finde and very dangerous to determine certainly I my self not withstanding my Study and Travail taken in this behalf could never attain to the knowledg of it Thus you see how Saint Augustine is pendulous These crochets and quavers Whether there be any such thing as Purgatorie after this life or no it may be a Question Perhaps it is true As much as I think I cannot tell I could never attain to the knowledge of it make no full consent or perfect Musick in matters of Faith But what if these Sentences be forged and interfoisted into Augustine's Works Ludovicus Vives a Romish Rabbie and therefore not partial on our behalf confesses that in antient Manuscripts of several Vniversities and Monasteries he could not finde them and it is no wonder seeing Erasmus Melancthon Oecolampadius (i) Possevinus in Select Bibl. lib. 1. cap. 19. Possevinus (k) Crastov in Bello Jesuit Crastovius (l) Rainolds in lib. De Idolol Roman Doctour Rainolds Doctour James and Felkmanus have discovered so many Forgeries in this one Father who unless Saint Augustine contradicteth himself there is no probability those Sentences ever dropped from his pen for in his Hypognosticks he maintaineth there are but two places after bodily Dissolution The first place saith he the Catholick faith by Divine authority believeth to be the Kingdom of Heaven The second place the same Catholick Faith believeth to be Hell where all Apostates and whosoever is without faith of Christ shall tast everlasting punishment as (m) Tertium locum penitùs ignoramus imò nec in Seripturis sacris invenimus August Hypognost lib. 5. for any third place we are utterly ignorant neither shall we finde in holy Scriptures that there is any such And again (n) Non est ullus locus medius ut possit esse nisi cum Diabolo qui non est cum Christo August De peoca merit remiss cap. 28. There is no middle place for any to be else-where then with the Devil who