Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A15691
|
A godly and learned answer, to a lewd and vnlearned pamphlet intituled, A few, plaine and forcible reasons for the Catholike faith, against the religion of the Protestants. By Richard Woodcoke Batchellor of Diuinitie.
|
Woodcoke, Richard.
|
1608
(1608)
|
STC 25965; ESTC S104839
|
92,243
|
124
|
the Angels we hold them neither for patrons nor protectors Which honor we giue onely to the Sonne of God the head of Angels Neither doubt we but as farre as their ministerie extendeth toward vs so far they know our necessities and prayers But infinit knowledge which is proper to the Deity we ascribe not vnto them Neither is such limited knowledge in them any sufficient ground to leade vs to pray vnto them The Angel that was sent to informe Iohn the Euangelist in the visions reuealed notwithstanding the wonderfull counsell of God whereof he was then a minister an interpreter yet would not suffer Iohn to fall downe to him which is much lesse Apoc. 19. 10. then to pray to him For to whom we pray to him very religiously and lawfully we may fall downe Many reuelations of things secret remote were granted to the Prophets in old time and namely to Elisaeus yet read we not that any man did euer pray to them though some in reuerence to their ministerie the power of God administred by them did fall downe to them And yet how finely or rather grosly you can assume without proofe or shew of proofe that we may pray to our mortall brethren haue you either precept or example for it in all the Scripture Indeed we request and receiue one from another the helpe of our mutuall prayers call you this praying to our mortall brethren thus can you proue one paradoxe by another These be your forcible and plaine reasons for your falsly named Catholike faith PAPIST Seuenthly in the Geneua Psalmes annexed to the Communion Limbus Patrum booke and vsually sung in their churches they confesse that Christs soule descended to the Fathers that were in Limbo For this article of the Creed He descended into hel they turne into Meetor after this manner His soule did after this discend Into the lower parts To them that long in darknesse were the true light of their harts PROTESTANT First you corrupt the Meeter changing for your purpose Spirit into Soule The meeter hath Spirit not Soule Secondly what the translator meant by Spirit and by the lower parts it is not easie to define vnlesse himselfe had left some glosse vpon his owne meeter and considering that the lawe of meeter restrained him from libertie of plaine speech it were an iniury to him to wrest his words coÌ„trary to his meaning That by lower parts he meant your Limbus you haue nothing to perswade you but your owne preiudice that caries you so to vnderstand it It may be that by Spirit hee meant the power of his eternall Spirit which in his suffering and after his suffering wrought both in heauen vpon earth and vnder the earth euen vpon the bodies of the dead who were in the lower parts and lay in darknes as generally the dead do Hilarie speaketh to like effect Monetur terra capax enim mortus huius esse non poterat c. The earth Hilar. in Matth. Can. 33. Potestas aeternae virtutis was moued for it could not conteine him that was dead The rocks were clouen for the piercing word of God and the power of his eternall vertue had broken into all places how strong and well fenced soeuer And the graues were opened for the prisons of death were vnlocked And many bodies of the Saints that slept arose for he inlightning the darknes and shining into the obscuritie of the lower places for the preseÌ„t raising of the saints asleep took away the spoiles of death it selfe What is the power of his eternall vertue but his eternal spirit Whereby he brake into the holds of death the darknesse of death the obscurity of the lower parts caried away the spoiles of death did inlighten with the brightnes of his power the whole region of darknes to the coÌ„fort of all that waited for his coÌ„ming All which Hilarie saieth were done not by his soule but that nature which he calleth PenetraÌ„s Dei vertuÌ„ potestas aeternae vertutis that is his Deity And the scripture speaking of the faithful departed although the soule body by dissolution be in diuerse regions yet speaketh of the whole person together So saith the Apostle Peter of Dauid the patriake He is both dead and buried his sepulchre remaineth with vs. And the like in many Acts. 2. 29. other places wherfore the Power of Christ piercing to the dead was a coÌ„fort to all the faithfull departed If this were his meaning as by comparisoÌ„ of the former place of Hilarie we may very well iudge what seruice I pray you can this meeter do to your Limbus But whatsoeuer his mening were his priuate interpretation is no principle of our religioÌ„ neither can you be ignoraÌ„t that there be that hold some locall discent of Christ yet be far from holding your Limbus so might the author of that meeter likewise do Albeit we hold that article for a principle of our religion yet are not the sundry expositions thereof according as seuerall men haue conceiued so many principles of our religion you must therefore seeke further for principles to serue your turne PAPIST Lastly Martin Luther taught the Real preseuce maintained Real presence it against the Zwinglians as others of our Aduersaries caÌ„not denie and yet doth the Apologie of England penned by M. Iewel call him a most excellent man sent of God to giue light to the world How then can it be contrarie to the scripture for if it were so then surelie could he not be a man sent of God for the matter of the Sacrament is no small point but such as themselues will say that a wrong beliefe thereof bringeth damnation PROTESTANT Did Martin Luther teach Popish Reall prefence did he teach Transubstantiation of the bread into the body of Christ Did he teach carnall eating of Christs flesh In the Act. 10. Augustane confessioÌ„ wherein he was a chiefe part thus they coÌ„fesse Of the supper of the Lord they teach that the body bloud of Christ are truely present distributed to them that eate in the Lords supper We say the same in the Articles agreed vpon at Marpurg Octob. 3. 1529. Whereunto Martin Luther first subscribed we all beleeue and thinke that the Sacrament of the Altar is the Sacrament of the true Histor August Confess Spiritual eating body and bloud of Iesus Christ that the spirituall eating of this body bloud is chiefly necessary for euery ChristiaÌ„ man We say the same In certaine articles setting the state of the controuersie betweene Luther and Pâ—â—cer and the rest of the Cinglians as they are called Although we say that the bodie Artic. 2. In aliqua mole of Christ is really present yet Luther sayth not that it is present locally to wit in any bignes circumscriptiuely but after that maner whereby Christs person or whole Christ is present to his whole Church and to all creatures Luther saith not that Christs
thing so coÌ„trary to our proud nature had not the Son of God himselfe planted the doctrine no power could haue brought it into the Church Is it not contrary to the high estate of Kings that are in Gods steed vpon earth to submit their scepters to the Pope of Rome to lie downe for him to treade on their neckes to kisse his foote and his Legates knee to hold his stirrope to leade his horse by the bridle and go on foote by him to suffer him to pill and poll their countries by his prouisions dismes annates and such other exactions and to sequâ—ster out of their hands spiritual causes and persons and to draw them to the Court of Rome The tyranny of the Pope of Rome hath brought these wonders to passe will you thereof conclude that the sonne of God hath planted these tyraÌ„niesâ— so may you conclude for 1 King 18. 18. Baals Priests it is a thing so contrary to the tender nature of man for men to gash and launce their owne flesh that no power could haue brought it into vse if God himselfe had not planted it So may you conclude for those that caused 2 King 23. 10. their sons and daughters to passe through the fire vnto Moâ—ech that no power could haue brought them to it it being so contrary to naturall piety if God himselfe had not planted it The scripture hath told vs what Antichrist shal do He shal make all both smal and great rich and poore free Apoc. 1â— 1â— Apoc. 17. 3. and bond to receiue his marke in their right hand or in their foreheads and the Kings of the earth shall giue thier power and authoritie to the beast In a word superstitioÌ„ hath caried idolaters to crueltie against their owne bodies and flesh foolish prodigality of their owne substance base seruility in their owne persons and extreame fury in their minds and senses as the idolatries of the Gentiles do aboundantly proue Now to that which Caluine saith in old time it was free when you cannot deny it which is sufficient to conuince the tyranny of your Romish torturing shrift you say Do we not know that the communion was so in old time you may know that the Church in old time did celebrate the Lords supper on euery Lords day as for the people they did not require them all of necessity to receiue euery day yet appointed them to receiue at least at the Natiuity of our Lord at Easter and Pentecost as appeareth in Concil Agatheâ—s alleadged De Consecrat dist 2. cap. seculares Not thereby exempting them to receiue no oftner but exhorting them to receiue often and yet prouiding that at least they should receiue at some times What sopln strie is this because at other times of the yeare they were free to chuse at what time besides the three named they would communicate so they did all communicate then therefore the communion was in old time free as if the Church required no man at any time to receiue the communion Thus wily you are to beguile your selfe and those that will be led by you Christ left it not free for Christians to communicate or not to communicate neither did the Church of old time so obserue it Christ left it free for men to confesse in the eare of a Priest or not to confesse and the Church of old time so obserued it Will any man now say that the communion in old time was so free as auricular confession was wherefore although the Church of England treading in the steps of the ancient Church may make a lawe to bind men to the communion three times in the yeare yet may not any Church make the like lawe for your auricular confession vnlesse they can shewe as good warrant for the institution thereof as they can for the institution of the Lords supper By the way let be here obserued that you thus wrangling against Caluine to make a shew as if Christ himselfe and his Apostles had planted â—urioular confession bring not one worde of Scripture to proue it PAPIST Concerning also the sacrifice of the Altar and the Real presence no small pointr we haue antiquitre on our side For Sâ—int Austen is therein so plaine in his Manuel that one Thomas Rogers an English man who hath translated that booke is inforced to alter one whole Chapter to make the holy Doctor against his wil Chapter 11. Printed by Peter Short 15 97. to agree with their doctrine Another chapter there is quoth he though not clean left out yet applied froÌ„ an ill to a good purpose as the 11. chapter where that which was spoken of the sacrifice of the Altar is applied vnto our sacrifice of thankesgiuing or of the Real carâ—â—lpresence of Christ vnto his spiritual being at the coÌ„munion Thus we bâ—â—e S. Austen of our opinioÌ„ â— our enemie coÌ„feseth and so consequentlie the rest of the Fathers For no reason â—â—â—one vs to thinke that he did in so important a matter dissent from all other of his time Manie more questions might he touched vvherein they grant vs venerable antiquitie but these few being verie weightie may suffice for all such as he desirous of truth and saluation of their soules PROTESTANT What Maister Rogers hath done in translating Augustines Manuell and namely the eleuenth chapter I know not because I haue not his booke but sure I am he needed not alter or decline one worde there writen by Augustine for feare to giue any countenance to Popish sacrifice or carnall presence All that Augustine hath here in shew to serue your turne is that he calleth the Lords supper Mirabile caleste sacrificium a wonderfull and heauenlie sacrifice But what meaneth he by the terme sacrifice himselfe there interpreteth namely that Christ ordeined it to be offered in commemorationem mortis passionis for a remembrance not for a repetition of his death and passion Likewise in other places he speaketh to the same purpose as cont Faust lib. 20. cap. 21. Huius sacrificis caro sanguis c. The flesh and bloud of this sacrifice before the comming of Christ was promised by sacrifices of resemblance in his passion it was deliuered or rendred by the truth it selfe but after the ascention of Christ it is celebrated by the sacrament of remembrance and Epist 23. he saith that Christ is offered vp in the sacrament for the similitude betweene the sacrament and the thing whereof it is a sacrament that is the offering of Christ and generally of euery sacrifice else where he saith The visible sacrifice is asacrament that is an holie signe of the invisible De Ciu. Dei lib. 10 cap. 5. sacrifice And as he is aleaged De Consecra Dist 2. cap. Hoc est The offering of the flesh which is done by the Priests hands is called Christs passion death crucifying not in truth of the thing but in a signifying mystoris And the glosse vpon that chapter in the word Calestis Heauonlic that