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	water_n	wine_n	8,430	5	7.9588	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16174	A reproofe of M. Doct. Abbots defence, of the Catholike deformed by M. W. Perkins Wherein his sundry abuses of Gods sacred word, and most manifold mangling, misaplying, and falsifying, the auncient Fathers sentences,be so plainely discouered, euen to the eye of euery indifferent reader, that whosoeuer hath any due care of his owne saluation, can neuer hereafter giue him more credit, in matter of faith and religion. The first part. Made by W.P.B. and Doct. in diuinty.	Bishop, William, 1554?-1624.	1608 (1608)	STC 3098; ESTC S114055	254,241	290

now by the Canon of the Masse the Priest must dippe the third part of the consecrated host into the Sacrament of the bloud and there praieth that this mixture may be heathful to himselfe and al the receiuers vnto euerlasting life WILLIAM BISHOP I Cannot easily judge whether this man were more fiercely bent to deceiue others or more foolishly set to shame himselfe vvith lying that durst aduenture vpon this Canon of the auncient and most learned Pope Iulius for besides that it hath nothing for the Protestants purpose it doth in sundry points notably confirme the Roman doctrine thus beginneth the Canon When euery crime and sinne is purged and blotted out by sacrifices offered vnto God what shal hereafter be giuen to God for the purgation of our sinnes when errour is committed in the oblation of the sacrifice it selfe note how often he repeateth and recommendeth the diuine sacrifice of the Masse For we haue heard of some men possessed with schismatical ambition who contrary to diuine order and the institution of the Apostles doe in the diuine sacrifice offer milke in steede of wine others also for a complement of communion doe giue the dipped Sacrament to the people c. Then confuting these opinions he saith When the Master of truth did commend to his Disciples the true sacrifice of our saluation he gaue to none of them milke c. let therefore milke be no more offered when we sacrifice Then come in the broken vvordes of M. Abbot thus But for that of the dipped Eucharist which for a complement of communion they deliuer to the people they haue not receiued any testimony brought out of the Gospel where our Lord commended to the Apostles his body and bloud for there the bread is mentioned apart and the commendation of the Chalice apart where M. Abbot first left out the commending of Christs body and bloud to his Disciples because those vvordes vvould haue scalded his tongue Secondly this Canon hath nothing against that vvhich is now done by the Priest in the Masse for the Priest doth not dippe any part of the Host into the Chalice to be afterwardes taken out and giuen to the people vvhich is that which Pope Iulius doth disproue Neither doe our Priests to speake properly dippe any part of the Sacrament into the Chalice for dipping in importeth as much as the putting in and taking foorth againe which we doe not but only for a holy signification we doe put into the Chalice one litle par●● of the Host there to lie and not to be taken out againe but to be receiued by the Priest together with the bloud and therefore we cal it not the dipping in but the mixture or mingling together of the body and bloud of Christ wherefore M. Abbot erreth in the maine point of his reprehension For Pope Iulius reproued only the giuing of the dipped Host vnto the people vvhich we doe not nor hold it any way necessary because vve teach them that the holy Host of Christs body containes in it selfe being a liuing body as wel Christes bloud as his flesh now vve doe only put a little peece of the sacred Host into the Chalice there to be receiued with the pretious bloud not of the people but by the Priest alone That this is no new deuise of the Church of Rome may be wel gathered out of the same distinction and in the very next leafe to that of Pope Iulius cited by M. Abbot in the Canon Triforme De consecrat distinct 2. vvhere Pope Sergius of more then 800. yeares standing doth expound this very ceremony of putting one part of the host into the Chalice It was then a knowne vsed ceremony of the Masse in his daies and no late inuention as M. Abbot dreameth I may not here forget that in the very Canon of Pope Iulius vvhich M. Abbot alleageth there is most expresse and very earnest cōmandement of mingling water with the vvine that is to be consecrated Because saith that blessed Pope our Lordes Chalice according vnto the precepts of the Canons must be offered the wine being first mingled with water Finally we haue in this Canon alleaged by M. Abbot a confirmation of a propitiatory sacrifice of the real presence of Christs body and bloud two principal points of our doctrine and of mingling water with wine in the offertory and not one direct word for the Protestants And because this resolution of Iulius seemeth to be taken almost vvord for word out of Pope Alexanders first letter vvho was but the fift Pope from S. Peter I wil acquaint the reader vvith his wordes these they be Alexand. in epist omnibus orthodoxis De consecrat dist 2. Can. 1. In the oblations of Sacraments which are offered vnto our Lord at the solemne time of Masse the passion of our Lord is to be blended that his passion may be celebrated whose body and bloud is made and consecrated so that superstitious opinions being banished bread alone and wine mingled with water be offered in the sacrifice For as we haue receiued from the Fathers and very reason doth teach in the cuppe of our Lord only water or only wine ought not to be offered but both of them mixed togither And a little after Crimes and sinnes are blotted out when these sacrifices are offered therefore the passion of our Lord whereby we were redeemed is to be remembred with such sacrifices our Lord is delighted and shal be appeased and wil pardon huge offences For among sacrifices nothing can be greater then the body and bloud of Christ Neither is there any oblation better then this but this surpasseth them al c. Where you see the present Roman religion deliuered in as formal tearmes as may be There is also much more to the same purpose but I am the briefer in these authorities and doe alleage them more sparingly because Protestants seing them to be beyond al other exceptions doe flatly deny almost al the Epistles and Decretals of the most ancient Popes neuerthelesse they must needes be effectual and haue good place against M. Abbot that doth take vpon him to establish their doctrine put downe ours by the testimony of these the lawful heires and successours vnto the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul alleaging many testimonies out of the very same Epistles Wherefore seing he hath appealed to them he must needes stand to them for this sentence of the President Festus hath his ground in very reason it selfe Act. 25. v. 12. Hast thou appealed to Caesar to Caesar shalt thou goe M. Abbot judged those Popes sentences of sound authority for confirmation of their religion he may not therefore deny them being brought in against him The same Pope Iulius to omit many other cleare testimonies taken out of his owne letters because the Protestants doe cauil at them doth most euidently confirme the soueraigne power of the See of Rome ouer al the East Church euen by the vvitnesse of most approued authours For vpon the

sute of diuers Bishops of the East he did solemnely summon S. Athanasius that most learned and valiant Patriarke of Alexandria to appeare at Rome before him there to answere vnto such crimes as were indeede most vvrongfully objected against him Lib. 4. hist Tripart c. 6. Nicephor lib. 9. cap. 6. thus saith the holy History The Pope following the law of the Church commanded them also to come vnto Rome and according to the rule of the Canons cited the venerable Athanasius to judgement Athanasius obediently appeared but his aduersaries knowing that their lies in that place vvould soone be discouered durst not appeare vvhereupon Athanasius was purged of those imputations Ibid. cap. 12. and restored to his Bishoprick Vnto the same Iulius not long after Athanasius being pittifully abused by the Arrians repaired the second time for aide vvhere he found diuers other Bishops of the East namely Paulus Bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancony Asclopas Bishop of Gaya and Lucianus Bishop of Adrianople al Easterne Bishops and yet appealing to Iulius Pope of Rome for remedy of the wrongs done them by the Arrian Heretikes which doth most manifestly testifie that in the primitiue Church al other Bishops acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for the supreme Pastour of Christes Church vvhich also Zozomenus doth confirme shewing how Iulius restored them al Tanquam omnium curam gerens Zozom l. 3. hist. cap. 8. propter propriae sedis dignitatem As one that had care ouer them al for the dignity of his owne See And Iulius his owne wordes recorded by no meaner a man then S. Athanasius doe declare the same for blaming the Bishops of the East he saith Athanas in Apolog. 2. Why did you not write vnto vs especially you of Alexandria are you ignorant that the custome is that we should first be written vnto that from hence it might be defined what was right therefore if you haue any quarrel against any Bishop you ought to haue referred it hither to our Church c. And shortly after I signifie to you such thinges as were receiued from the blessed Apostle S. Peter c. vvhere M. Abbot may see that one of S. Peters successours of great worth and authority doth tel the Bishops of the East Church that by order set downe by S. Peter himselfe Bishops causes of al countries ought to be referred vnto the definition of the Bishop of Rome he therefore is their superiour I adde hereunto because it belongeth both vnto Pope Iulius and this present purpose of their supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes this sentence taken out of the Ecclesiastical history The Councel holden at Antioch was not good Hist Tripart lib. 4. cap. 9. for that Iulius Bishop of Rome was not there present nor sent any Legate in his place because the Ecclesiastical Canons doe command that Councels ought not to be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome ROBERT ABBOT GELASIVS Bishop of Rome saith as we say Gelas cont Eutich Nestor That in the Sa●rament is celebrated the Image or resemblance of the body and bloud of Christ and that there ceasse●h not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine But now the Romish religion maketh them Heretikes that say the Sacrament is the Image or resemblance of the body bloud of Christ and not the body and bloud of Christ it selfe or wil not beleeue that the bread and wine are substantially and really turned into the same body and bloud Albeit they beleeue with the same Gelasius that the Sacrament is a diuine thing and that thereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature euen of Christ himselfe really and substantially but yet spiritually vvith al his riches becomming ours and being eaten of vs not by our teeth into our bellies but by faith into our harts vnto life euerlasting WILLIAM BISHOP FIRST I say that M. Abbot hauing his eie-sight sore troubled with a grosse defluxion of salt rhewme taketh a Rowland for an Oliuer that is one Gelasius an vnknowne Grecian for Gelasius an African borne yet Bishop of Rome That he was not Gelasius the Bishop of Rome appeareth plainly out of that very treatise cited by M. Abbot for that Gelasius professeth to alleage the testimony of al the learned Fathers who wrote before him yet he maketh no mention of the most renowmed authours in the Latin Church as of S. Hillary S. Augustine S. Hierome and of Pope Leo al vvhich wrote before Gelasius the Bishop of Rome and were had in very great estimation by him as may be seene by his declaration of the Canonical Scriptures of the most approued fathers workes Dist 15. Sācta Romana Ecclesia Ibidem Againe that Gelasius citeth often and relieth much vpon the authority of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea vvhereas Gelasius the Pope hath noted his vvorkes for little better then Apocryphal so that nothing is more like then that the good man hath mistaken his marke and is fallen from the successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon I cannot tel whom yet because he is an old writer though of what credit it be vncertaine I wil not refuse him And to the former part of his sentence that in the Sacrament there is an Image or resemblance of Christes body I answere that vve Catholikes doe say as much in effect for euery Sacrament is a visible signe of an inuisible and holy thing and so Christs body vnder the forme of bread and wine is a resemblance of his body parted from his bloud on the Crosse and the body of Christ vnder the formes of bread and vvine as it is in the Sacrament is a picture also or resemblance of the vnion of his mistical body in faith and charity euen as the bread is made of many graines of corne and the vvine pressed out of many clusters of grapes The later part of his sentence may also haue a good meaning and stand wel with our doctrine for the nature of bread doth not wholy ceasse to be in the blessed Sacrament because the forme sauour and tast of bread which be natural qualities thereof doe stil remaine though the whole inward substance be turned into the body of Christ which that Gelasius doth in the same place signifie when he there saith The same bread to be changed into the diuine substance that is into the substance of Christ by the operation of the holy Ghost whereby the receiuers are made partakers of the diuine nature And M. Abbots glosse vpon these later wordes is very extrauagant for we cannot in property of speech be said to be partakers of Christs nature really by being made partakers of his riches for it is one thing to be partaker of a mans nature really another farre different to be partaker of his goodes and benefits And as for the receiuing of Christ spiritually by faith that may be done vvithout receiuing any Sacrament at al but Gelasius either speaketh of receiuing Christ in the

Israelites d Genes 48. vers 16. God c. and the Angel that hath deliuered me from al euil blesse these children The example of so religious a person is our sufficient vvarrant to pray to Angels and Saints for e Luc. 22. Saints in heauen are equal to Angels as our Sauiour himselfe assureth vs and Iob was counsailed to pray and cal for aide vnto some of the Saints f Iob. 5. vers 1. Ad aliquem Sanctorum conuerte Thirdly they of the old Testament knew good vvorkes to merit life euerlasting and had by Gods grace free-wil to doe them which I adde because by the same sentences I wil proue both togither God said vnto Cain Genes 4. vers 7. If thou doe wel shalt thou not receiue if euil thy sinne wil be at the dore but the appetite or pange of it shal be vnder thee and thou shalt haue dominion ouer it see both power giuen to the wicked to doe wel if they wil and recompence promised therefore Againe in the law Moises hauing propounded to the Israelites Gods commandements exhorting them thereunto saith Deuter. 30. vers 15. Consider that I set before you life and good and contrariwise death and euil if you loue God and wil walke in his commandements life or else death c. Vers 19. choose therefore life c. Must they not be very dul that hence cannot gather the keeping of Gods commandements to deserue and merit life euerlasting and that man hath by the aide of Gods grace free-wil to performe them Fourthly they that were skilful in the law of Moises could not be ignorant of vvorkes of supererogation that is that there vvere many good workes which men were not bound to doe yet if they did them they might thereby aduance themselues in Gods fauour because there is Numer 6. special order taken for the sanctification of any man or woman that would be a Nazarite that is any one that of deuotion would withdraw himselfe from secular affaires and for some certaine time serue God more religiously yet no man was bound therevnto Further they were allowed and encouraged to make vowes which is also a worke of supererogation against M. Abbot fift instance For not only Dauid saith Psalm 75. vers 12. Vow and render it to our Lord but in the law it is written * Deuter. 23. vers 21. When thou doest vow a vow vnto the Lord thy God slacke not to performe it because the Lord thy God doth require it c. but if thou wilt not promise thou shalt be without sinne And to leaue the word Monkery as fitter for a Monkey then for an Abbot Iosephus a graue authour among the Iewes vvitnesseth That there liued in the time of the law many thousandes called Esseni Antiquitat Iudaic. lib. 18. cap. 2. who were contemners of riches liued in common hauing neither wiues nor seruants What other thing doe Monkes professe then such pouerty and chastity sauing obedience vvhich must needes also in some degree be among the others who liued no doubt in orderly society Sixtly neither they nor vve either buy or sel pardons yet had great mercy and pardon shewed them for their fore-fathers sake as God test fieth in the first commandement And that they were on the other side to endure temporal punishment for sinne after the guilt of the sinne the eternal paine was forgiuen them is most clearely recorded both of al the people of Israel Numer 14. Whose murmuration against God was at the earnest intercession of Moises pardoned and yet were they therefore depriued of entring into the land of promise Yea Numer 20. vers 24. Moises and Aaron themselues were in like manner both pardoned for their diffidence that they did not glorifie God at the waters of contradiction and yet neuerthelesse Deuter. 32. vers 51. debarred from entring into the land of promise for the same offence so that after the mortal guilt of sinne is remitted there remaineth either some temporal satisfaction to be made on our parties or else to be forgiuen and pardoned vs by God and his Ministers Seauenthly that they made praiers and offered sacrifice for the soules in Purgatory is manifest by the fact of 2. Mach. 12. Iudas Machabeus who was a most noble vertuous and faithful Israelite as al Christians doe confesse Neither is there any neede for this purpose to auerre and proue the bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture when it serueth this turne that they be taken for a graue History and that the Protestants allow them to be of sufficient authority for instruction of manners Further al the Iewes euen to this day doe pray for the soules in Purgatory Titulo 1. Sect. 4. see the Catholike Apology out of Protestant Authours Eightly the Iewes of the male-kinde by their law vvere bound to goe as it were in pilgrimage at three solemne feasts in the yeare vnto one special place that God should choose for his seruice And King Salomon encouraged al strangers to goe on pilgrimage to the Temple builded by him vvhen he praied Deuter. 16. vers 16 that what stranger soeuer should come thither to pray he might obtaine his sute And the ¶ * 3. Reg. 8. vers 21. bones of the Prophet Elizeus giuing life by their touch vnto a dead man doth sufficiently instruct al true beleeuers that it is very profitable to goe on pilgrimage vnto the sacred bones and holy Relikes of Gods faithful seruants departed Lastly they were not wholy vnacquainted with a kinde of shrift and absolution for 4. Reg. 13. vers 21. Numer 5. Leuit. 5. they were charged to confesse the sinnes they had committed and to bring with them vnto the Priest a prescribed sacrifice to be offered by them for their pardon and absolution And as the lepers by that law were bound to present themselues to the Priests and were by them declared such or purged from that imputation so in the law of grace men infected with the soules leprosie that is mortal sinne are either to be bound and declared obstinate by the Priests if they vvil not repent or repenting and confessing the same are to be cleansed there-from by the Priests absolution Chrisost li. 3. de Sacerdot Hieron in ca. 16. Math. as both S. Chrisostome and S. Hierome doe argue This in briefe wil suffice I hope for answere vnto M. Abbots particulars I might easily adde how the sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine were both prefigured by Melchisedechs Host in bread and vvine and foretold by the Genes 14. Malach. 10. Prophet Malachy and vvhat a liuely type Manna that Angelical and delicate foode was of Christs body in the Sacrament And how the supreme authority of one head ouer al the whole Church and that to belong to a Bishop not to the lay Magistrate was not obscurely shadowed but liuely represented by the

be referred vnto the See Apostolike Because the Apostles by the commandement of our Sauiour haue ordained that questions of greater difficulty shal alwaies be referred vnto the Apostolike See vpon which Christ built the whole Church saying vnto blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles thou art Peter vpon this rocke wil I build my Church c. Anacletus his immediate successor Euaristus Pope Martir writing vnto the Bishops of Africke Epistola 1. ad Eccles Africanam speaketh thus Truly your charity following the rule of the wise hath chosen rather to referre vnto the See Apostolike as to the head what ought to be obserued in doubtful matters then to presume your selues by vsurpation and writing to the brethren in Aegipt Epistola 2. doth command certaine Bishops whom he resembleth to adulterers because they had intruded into other Bishops Citties to be cast out of those places and to be made infamous and depriued of al Ecclesiastical honours adjoining That if after these thinges so dispatched they should haue further complaint against them that matter were to be enquired out and to be determined by the authority of this holy See Note how these holy Popes that vvere so nigh vnto the Apostles taught it to belong vnto the See of Rome to determine of the causes of the Bishops of Afrike and Aegipt most remote from them And because the Apostle S. Paul willeth 2. Cor. 13. vers 2. euery word to stand in the mouth of two or three witnesses I vvil take for the third Alexander the first Pope and Martir who succeeded vnto Euaristus he is as plaine and formal in this cause as any of the rest these be his wordes Epist 1. omnibus orthodoxis It is related vnto the primacy of this holy and Ap●stolike See vnto which the disposition of the highest cases and the affaires of al Churches are by our Lord committed as to the head c. and a little after Our Lord here appointed this holy See the head of the whole Church I omit here the verdict of al others herein because this very matter must be spoken off hereafter againe and againe these three most ancient graue and Godly Martirs al successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon whose authority M. Abbot here only insisteth vvil suffice to certifie the indifferent reader that euen from the Apostles daies the Bishop of Rome hath beene taken for supreme judge in al Ecclesiastical causes aswel in the East as West Church To finish this passage thou maist gentle reader by this little see what shamelesse shifts M. Abbot is forced to vse to make any coulourable shew out of antiquity for the lay Magistrates superiority in spiritual causes He is first driuen to cite an vnlearned an vnlikely and an Apocriphal letter of 1400. yeares old vpon the credit of men of our owne age and those most partial too on his owne side the letter bearing date also many yeares after the death of him that is supposed to be the authour of it and when al is done in the same vvorshipful letter there is not one pregnant proofe for any part of their doctrine lastly that his owne chosen witnesses doe deliuer vp most cleare euidence against himselfe he therefore that vvil giue judgement on his side must needes shew himselfe exceeding partial ROBERT ABBOT ANACLETVS Bishop of Rome Dist 1. Episcopus 2. peracta and after him Calixtus ordained that consecration being done al should communicate or else be excommunicated For so say they the Apostles did set downe and the holy Church of Rome obserueth But the Church of Rome that now is maketh it lawful for the Priest to receiue alone the people in the meane time standing gazing and looking on and the fight only must suffice them WILLIAM BISHOP HERE is nothing in manner worth the answering only the cosening deceitfulnesse of the man is to be displaied First Anacletus hath only De consecrat dist 1. Can. Episcopus that Deacons Subdeacons and other Ministers that in solemne feasts attend in holy vestiments vpon the Bishop whiles he doth sacrifice vnto God should in the same solemne feasts communicate or else be debarred of their Ecclesiastical places where is not one word of the lay peoples communicating And therefore that Canon is wholy besides the purpose sauing that it doth teach that then Bishops vsed to offer sacrifice vnto God and that the Clarkes did in holy vestiments serue them at Masse See the Canon and vvonder at the folly of the man In like manner doth the second Canon of Calixtus speake of Ecclesiastical persons that serue at Masse for so saith the Collector De consecrat dist 2. Can. peracta Ecclesiasticis liminibus careat Minister Let the Minister or he that serueth want Ecclesiastical place With which agreeth the glosse vpon the same Canon vvhich also is euident by the very Text for the punishment set downe is Ecclesiasticis carere liminibus To be shut out of the Ecclesiastical mens seates and places vvhich vvere no punishment to a lay man that was not before admitted into any such roome And as it may be seene in the said distinction Cap. Etsi non frequentius De consecrat dist 1. and Cap. Secularis Lay men were commanded about those times to communicate but thrife in the yeare at Easter Whitsontide and Christmasse Briefly here is nothing against the moderne practise of the Church of Rome for both they that solemnely serue at Masse on festiual daies doe receiue and no lay man is denied to communicate on any day either on those feasts or at any time else vvhen he vvil prepare himselfe thereto But to debarre Priests from seruing God in that most high degree be their deuotion and preparation neuer so good vntil they can get some company of the laity to communicate with them is without just cause to robbe God of his soueraigne honour to extinguish the working of his holy spirit in deuout soules and to defraude the whole flocke of the benefit of many most holy and effectual praiers not only of the Priests but also of the people vvho doe not with vs stand gazing on at the time of communion as M. Abbot prophanely conceiteth but humbly kneeling doe then pray most deuoutly and doe in spirit and desire communicate also Briefly there is not one sillable in those Canons sounding to the Protestant sence that Priests should not cōmunicate if the Clarke or people joine not vvith them but only that the indeuout and slugglish Clarkes should be depriued of their places if vpon high feasts they did neglect to communicate with the Bishop or Pastor ROBERT ABBOT IVLIVS the Bishop of Rome disallowed intinctam Eucharistiam De consecrat 2. cum omne the dipping of the Eucharist the Sacrament of Christs body in the cuppe Because no witnesse thereof was brought out of the Gospel but there is mentioned the commending of the bread by it selfe and the cuppe by it selfe but