Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	bread_n	flesh_n	wine_n	23,090	5	8.1231	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10444	The third booke, declaring by examples out of auncient councels, fathers, and later writers, that it is time to beware of M. Iewel by Iohn Rastel ...	Rastell, John, 1532-1577.	1566 (1566)	STC 20728.5; ESTC S105743	190,636	502

sacrifice with him But how After the order of Melchisedech Or by their own Act Priesthood as M. Iewel gathereth Surely except Guerricus him selfe had made it plaine in what sense the Priest and the People do offer no doubt but M. Iewel in this place would outface vs that this Abbat meant that men and women were Priestes after the order of Melchisedech Notwithstanding that it is not saied the cūpani of the faithful do cōsecrate as though they might do it by themselues but they consecrate with him the Priest signifieng the Office to be singular And it foloweth in the Sermon Neither the Carpenter alone doth make a house but one bringeth roddes an other rafters an other postes or beames and other things By which Similitude it is manifest that the people consecrate in this sense that they bring sumwhat to that end And what is that By this that foloweth it wil be vnderstanded For thus he concludeth Therefore the standers by ought to haue of their owne euen as the Priest ought What A Cope trow you M. Iewel vpon their backes or a Surplesse like Ministers or power and Authoritie of Priesthod No. but a sure faith a pure prayer a godly deuoti●n Where then is the Breade and Wine or the Order of Melchisedech which you would proue to per●eine to the common people with Therfore S. Bernard saith or Otherwise called Guerricus Here is a Conclusion without Premisses And a comparison without any likelyhoode And A falsification without truth or honestie Alexander of Hales abused The people taking but one kind only receiueth iniurie as M. Harding may see by Alexander de Hales and Durandus other of his owne Doctours Alexanders wordes be these Licèt illa Sumptio c. Although that Order of Receiuing the Sacr●ment ▪ which is vnder one kinde be sufficient yet the other which is vnder both kindes is of greater merite Al this M. Iewel is true but this proueth not that the people haue any iniury done vnto them For to Receiue ●nder one kinde it is sufficient by Alexanders expresse wordes but vndoubtedly if any thing lacked of that which were d●e ▪ there wer not sufficiēcy Ergo how proue you by Alexander that the people are I●iuried in receiuing vnder one kinde You wil Replie out of him that it is of greater merite to receiue in both kinds than one And what of ●hat It is a greater merite to Celebrate thrise a day as at Christmasse then once as Ordinarily Priestes do vse Do ye thinke then that any Priestes haue Iniury don vnto them because the Order is otherwise that they say but one Masse in one daie except one daie onely in the yeare Againe I say that Alexander noteth a greater merite to be in Receiuing vnder both than one kind not in respect of the Sacramente which is as perfite in one as both and in the least part of one as the whole but in respect of the Receiuers because their deuotion is encreased and their Faith dilated by longer cōtinuing in th● Act of Receiuing and their Receiuing is more Complete as being ministred in both kindes And as the causes on the behalfe of the Receiuer do make it to a person so disposed more effectual to Receiue in both than one So other causes there be which doe make y ● Receiuing vnder one kinde to be to the party so affected more fruietful and meritorious than if he tooke both For he that would say vnto him self I wil content my selfe with the common Order of the Church I wil not make any Sturre about both kindes knowing y ● as much is vnder one as both vndoubtedly such a man should both for his Humilitie and for his Faith deserue more a great deale then if he should Receiue in both kindes and find a certaine sense and tast of Denotion The strength therefore and efficatie which Alexander speaketh of depending vpon the Act of the Receiuer and not vpon the Uertue of y ● Sacrament which is al one in effect whether it be ministred in one or both kindes M. Iewel doth very iniuriously to put a fault herein y ● they Receiue not vnder both to make Alexander of this opinion that to minister in one kinde were an Iniurie vnto the people For this I would aske further of him whether the simple and deuout people are not more stirred vp to remember the Death and Blo●d of Christe if they should Receiue in Claret or Red Wine than in White No doubt but the imaginatiō would be more affected and moued by seeing a like colour vnto y ● which it would conceiue than a contrary or diuerse colour How then Would M. Iewel thinke it an Iniury to minister in white wine vnto the people though thei would be desirous of Red He should not thinke it if he be wise And why so Mary because they haue as much in the White as the Red and to receiue in Red hangeth vpon their priuate deuotion not vpon any precept of the Churche or doctrine of the Apostles or Institution of Christe to which onely the Priest is bound and which if he obserue he doth his duety Be it so then that many good ●olke for diuerse causes should be exceedingly moued and edified by drinking of the Chalice and contemplating of more then is Ordinarie in their minde should they haue any Iniurie done vnto them if they receiued afterwardes when the Priest should iudge it expedient vnder y ● forme of bread only Neyther doth Alexander de Hales so say neither any reason doth make for it But let vs see an other place of Alexander which M. Iewel hath abused The same Alexander againe saith Totus Christus c. Whole Christ is not conteined vnder ech kind by way of Sacramēt but the fleash onely vnder the fourme of bread and the bloud vnder the fourme of wine The woordes can not be denied to be Alexanders but what se●se gathereth M. Iewel of them Here M. Hardinges owne Doctours confesse that the people Receiuing vnder one kinde receiueth not the ful Sacramēt nor the bloud of Christe by way of Sacrament You vnderstand not Alexander or you wil not For whereas he saith Christ is not conteined vnder ech kinde Sacramentally he meaneth not that the people Receiue not the Ful Sacrament and their owne Maker Godde and Manne vnder eche kinde but by this woorde Sacramentally he meaneth that concerning the forme of wordes by which consecration is perfited in eche kinde and by external forme of the Signes vnder which Christ is exhibited the flesh only is conteined vnder the forme of Breade and the bloud vnder the forme of Vvine As when Christ said This is my bloud the woordes which we heare doe signify no more than Bloude to be there present And y ● external Signe and liquor of wine doth represent a presence of bloud onely And this is that ●hich Alexander meaneth by the worde Sacramentally when he

euen the Religion it selfe which corrupte persons professed Whome faire Promises of Gospellers that they would shewe you a ready and shorte way vnto Heauen in which you should haue no cariage of Ceremonie Tradition Lentes Fast Penaunce Feare of Purgatorie c. And that you should haue al things ministred vnto you in like order and manner as they were vsed emong the faithful in the Primitiue Churche you I say whom these faire promis●● haue made to forsake the Olde and Catholique Religion vpon hope to finde a more Auncient and Receiued Religiō which y ● new Masters holy Doctors councels would teach you BEWARE you of M. Iewel For wheras you would not haue forsaken y ● r●ligion in which you were baptized which al Christians then in al the world professed opēly ex●●pt you had beleued y ● as it was told you so you should ●e reduced to the perfite state of A true Religion euen as it was to be found in the Primitiue Church how mis●rably are ye nowe deceaued where your M●sters doe not in deede regarde the Example and practise of the same Churche for loue and des●er of which you folowed them leading you quite awaie from the Obedience of the present Church How wel maie euerie one of you whome M. Iewel hath peruerted ●aie vnto hym Syr haue you put me in this hope that in folowing of you I should goe in the safe waie of the primitiue Church of holy Fathers of Auncient Councels And my mynde geauing me that al was not wel in this present Church in which you and I both were baptised and that the neerer one might come to the beginninges of the Christian Faith he should find it the more surer and purer ha●e you serued my humour therein and promising to reforme al thinges according to the paterne of the Auncient Catholike Church are you proued in the e●d to neglect those selfe same orders which were obserued in the most best and most Auncient tymes Spake you faire vnto me vntil I was come vnto you from the Cumpanie where I lyned and doe ye not 〈◊〉 those thinges vnto me for hop● of whiche I brake from my 〈…〉 cosse I know or a curtaine Or A 〈◊〉 in the Church are not essential an● without them we maie be saued But yet if in the pure and Primitiue Churche such thinges were alowed you haue not done wel to make me contemne the Pax or vestmentes or distinction of places such as were vsed in the Church from which I departed And yet If these thinges be bu● light and Ragges as some wil saie of the 〈◊〉 Religion was the building of Monasteries a light mater in the primitiue Church And that Rule of lyfe which Monkes then folowed was it of smal importance by the Iudgement of that worlde so nigh to Christ You haue made me beleue that to lyue in such Order should be a derogation to the merites of Christe A trusting to our owne workes A ●ondage of conscience a promise of thinges impossible A Superstitio●s and 〈◊〉 fashion and at one worde that Monkerie should be Trumperie And yet doth it appeare by our owne allegations that Monkes and Abbates were in the Primitiue Church and that they were also in greate rep●●ation What shal I saie of the most highe and dreadful Mysterie the Sacrament of the bodie and Bloud of Christ whereas the witnesses that yo● bring in for other purposes doe testifie vnto me that the Cuppe of the Lord was mingled with wine and water can I take in good part and with a quiet Conscience that you put no water at al in the Cup of the Lord If you had not chalenged if you had not prouoked if you had not geauen most infallible tokens as me thought that al Antiquitie had gone smothe with you or if you had refused at y ● beginning al other Authoritie bysides the Expresse Scriptures I might haue deliberated whether I would haue folowed you or no But now making so large goodly promises that you would not take my Religion awaie from me but that you would only reforme it that you would not denie the Faith whiche the whole world professeth bu● require it to be reduced vnto the order of the Primitiu● Church I yelded quickly therein vnto you and thought that these surely be the men of God whiche shall purge the Church of al Superfluites and leaue it in as good health constitution as euer it was in her florisshing tyme. And are you not ashamed that the very printes and steppes of papistry are found euen within that age which you warranted vnto me to be altogether for the Gospel And that in those selfsame testimonies which your selfe vpon occasion doe bring out against the Papistes what were not they themselues lykely to shew if they might be suffered to vtter what diuersitie there is betwixt this Late welfauored Gospel and the Catholike old Religion seeing that you can not so order the mater in reciting of Auncient Fathers Councels but it must be straite wayes perceaued that your procedings are not conformable vnto the Primitiue Church O wretched and vile Glorie to fill the margine of a Booke with the Councels of Nice Carthage Chalcedon Constantinople Ephesus c. and with the testimonies of Anacletus Felix Soter Calixtus Chrysostom Basile Ambrose Augustine c. as though that it were not M. Iewel that made any thing of his owne but as though in al that he concluded he folowed most exactly the holy Councels and Fathers ▪ and before all be knowen to be conuin●●● most cleerly and euidently that his doeinges are not lyke the holy Fathers Religion what a confusion is it vnto that Glorie and what a Detriment to right meaning and wel willing consciencies In this sort might an honeste and graue man complaine and say lesse than M. Iewel deserueth For now I will shew vnto thee Indifferēt Reader that he allegeth and that very sadly and solemly the testimonies of Heretikes as though it were no mater at al how wel it would be admitted emong the lerned so that the common Reader be perswaded that M. Iewel speaketh not without his Authorities For proufe thereof let this be one Example The Bishopes of the East part of the vvorlde being Arians vvriting vnto Iulius the Bishope of Rome tooke it gree●ously that he vvould presume to ouer rule them And shevved him that it vvas not lavvful for him by any sleight or colour of appeale to vndoe that thing that they had done This is one of M. Iewels testimonies to proue against the Bishoppe of Romes Supremacie In alleaging of which although he lacked a point of discretion in bringing of their sentencies furth whom al the worlde hath condemned for starcke Heretikes yet he hath not forgoten al conscience and charity in that he confesseth to his Reader that these Bishoppes of the East whose doinges he thinketh worthie to be consydered were Arians Which I praie thee Indifferent Reader to

saith Vvhole Christ is not conteined vnder ech kind Sacramentally For he speaketh of the representation only which is made to our senses by exter●al words Signes and not of y ● thing it selfe and substance of the Sacrament which is apprehended by Faith Now that Alexander was not of this mind which M. Iew. would make him to be of that whole Christ should not be receaued vnder ech kind though whole Christ were not signified by the sound of the wordes of Consecration in ech kind it is manifest by the next article in him where he concludeth that Christus integer Deus homo est sub specie Panis Vvhole Christ God and Man is vnder the forme of Bread And both sayinges are true that vvhole Christ is not vnder ech kind ▪ if ye consider only the Signe of the wordes that are spoken or the thinges that are shewed for in saying this is my bodie no mention is made of bloud And againe that vvhole Christ God and man is vnder the forme of Bread if ye consider the mater Really Alexander therfore speaketh no otherwise in this point then it becummeth A faithful and Catholike man to do And M. Iewel doth no otherwise than he is wont to do but otherwise surely than becumneth an honest and lerned man specially hauinge no neede to alleage any Scholemen and lesse neede to corrupt them when he allegeth them Polidorus Uergilius abused S. Cyprian calleth the Church of Rome Ecclesiam principalem vnde vnit as Sacerdet alis exorta est the principal Church from vvhence the Vnitie of Priestes hath spronge Out of which testimonie M. Iewel gathereth A force as it were of two Argumentes that might be made the one in that it is called Ecclesia principalis the principal or chief Churche the other because it foloweth vnde vnitas Sacordotalis exorta est whiche words D. Harding doth interpret thus from vvhence the vnitie of Priestes is spronge M. Iewel thus frō whence the vnitie of the Priesthood first began In which his Interpretation there is a plaine falsehod and craftines For in repeting the wordes and in writing of them so as if they were D. Hardings it becummed hym to deliuer them furth in the same forme as he ●ound them in D. Harding Then whereas it is not al one to say the vnitie of Priesthood sprange from Rome and the vnitie of Priesthod began first at Rome for there may be springs two or three in one place and although the water issue not out first at the lowest yet the lowest of the three maie be the chiefe head vnto al the riuers beneth M. Iewels intent was not simple to cast in this word first into the sentence as though the question were not whether the Chife Prieste in all the world were at Rome but whether the first Priest in al the world began at Rome Betwene which two propositions there is a great difference But what sayth M. Iewel to these wordes Vnde vnitas Sacerdotalis exorta est from whence the vnitie of Priesthoode first begā as he englisheth it for a vātage For that these words seme for to weigh much I thinke it good herein to heare the Iudgement of some other man that may seeme Indifferent Why should Polidore Uergile be Indifferent He lyued not fiftie yeres sens he was a Collectour to y ● Bishop of Rome and therefore to you not Indifferent And to vs on the other side not Indifferent because this very booke de Inuen●or●●●s rerum is condemned by the General Councel at Trent But you ha●e foūd somewhat in him by likelihod which maketh for you that you esteeme of hym so wel And what is that I praie you We aske you for the Answer to S. Cyprians words you bring in Polidore to expound them but what wil ye conclude of Polidore That This commendation of which S. Cypriā speaketh was geauen by S. Cyprian to the Church of Rome in respect of Italie and not in respect of the whole world Whether this be so or no Polidors owne wordes shal trie it In his fourth booke the s●xth Chapiter his purpose was to shew of whom first the Order of Priesthood was Instituted And he proueth that Christ hym selfe was the first maker of Priestes Then both it folowe in hym A● pos● Chris●um Petrus in Sacerdotio praer●gatiua● habuis●e dicitur quòd primus in Apostolorum ordine eius Sacrosancti Collegij Caput fuisset ▪ Quapropter D. Cyprianus epist. 3. a● Corneliū Cathedram Petri Principalē vocat But after Christ Peter is said to haue had the prerog●●iue in priesthood because he vvas the first in the revv of the Apostles and head of that holy College ●herefore S. Cyprian in his third epistle to Cornelius calleth the Chaire or Sec of S. Peter the 〈◊〉 or principal 〈◊〉 then this touching any wo●ds of S. C●prian if any man can there find i● Polidore I wil le●se my right hand for 〈◊〉 and neuer write hereafter against any hereti●e but the Booke is common the place is intelligible and my eyes and vnderstanding serueth me so wel that I am sure Polidore in that place expoundeth not these wordes of S. Cyprian ●nde ●nitas Sacerdot alis exorta est What Impudencie then is it in M. Iewel for that these words seme to weigh much to bring furth the Iudgement of Polidore a man that may seme to be Indifferent whereas they are not at all in Polidore Polidorus Virgilius saieth he expoūdeth the same words of S. Cyprian Dare ye say he expoundeth them whereas he hath not them He bringeth in S. Cyprian to proue that the See of S. Peter was principal but of Vnitas Sacerdotalis the vnitie of Priesthood Upon which wordes you made hast to shewe his exposition he maketh no mention He saieth in his owne wordes not in S. Cyprians that the order of Priesthood can not be sated to haue grovven first from the Bishope of Rome onlesse vve vnderstand it only by Italie for Priesthood was rightly instituted at Hierusalem but that the Commendation geauen by S. Cyprian to the Church of Rome was geauen in respect only of Italy and not in respect of the whole world he saied it not nor intended it The Order also of Priesthood and vnitie of Priesthood are two thinges In the Order is considered the Author and effect of that Sacrament In the Unitie is considered the preseruation and Gouernement of that Order Of the Order it selfe and where Priesthod first began Polidore doth speake Of the vnity and of the Relation which all Priestes should haue to their chiefe head and Gouernour S. Cyprian doth speake and Polidore saieth nothing The Order began at Dierusalem and not at Rome The vnity I wil not say begā at Rome but after y ● s. Peter had by his martyrdō there takē ful possession of that See then was it seen where the Principal Church in al the world was and to