Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	body_n	heaven_n	soul_n	16,244	5	5.2792	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00580	The theater of honour and knight-hood. Or A compendious chronicle and historie of the whole Christian vvorld Containing the originall of all monarchies, kingdomes, and estates, with their emperours, kings, princes, and gouernours; their beginnings, continuance, and successions, to this present time. The first institution of armes, emblazons, kings, heralds, and pursuiuants of armes: with all the ancient and moderne military orders of knight-hood in euery kingdome. Of duelloes or single combates ... Likewise of ioustes, tourneyes, and tournaments, and orders belonging to them. Lastly of funerall pompe, for emperours, kings, princes, and meaner persons, with all the rites and ceremonies fitting for them. VVritten in French, by Andrew Fauine, Parisian: and aduocate in the High Court of Parliament. M.DC.XX.; Le théâtre d'honneur et de chevalerie. English	Favyn, André.; Munday, Anthony, 1553-1633, attributed name.	1623 (1623)	STC 10717; ESTC S121368	185,925	1,158

the forme of bread which we deny and consequently this argument from concomitancie is of no force The words This is my body being rightly expounded by Austine Tertullian Theodoret and many other of the ancients to be no other then this bread is a signe a figure or a sacrament of my body not this bread is turned substantially into my body or vnder this is contained my very body flesh bones Where Christs naturall humane body is there wee grant his blood and soule and diuinitie are But That his body is now in heauen Acts 3. not in any place vpon the earth much lesse in euery place where the Masse is celebrated Secondly although we grant that the body of Christ cannot really bee seuered from his blood yet the signes of his body and blood are really seuered if wee speake of sacramentall Communion the Apostle teacheth vs that the bread which wee break is the Communion of Christs body and the Cup which wee blesse is the Communion of his blood neither can wee truly and properly say the Bread is the Communion of his blood And therefore they that communicate in bread onely doe not sacramentally communicate his blood Thirdly should we liberally grant vnto our aduersaries that by the receiuing the body of Christ in the bread we consequently receiue the blood also which since his Passion was neuer seuered from his body yet will it not hence follow that we drinke the blood of Christ in eating the bread but Christ commanded vs expresly to drinke his blood which cannot possibly be done by communicating in bread only no though we should admit of the carnall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament and the doctrine of concomitancie also Retortion Lastly this Argument may bee retorted vpon our aduersaries in this manner Whosoeuer receiueth Christ in the Sacrament ought to receiue whole Christ to wit his body and blood But the body and blood of Christ cannot be receiued but by communicating in both kinds Therefore all that receiue Christ in the Sacrament ought to communicate in both kinds The Proposition is our aduersaries the Assumption also is inferred from their owne Tenets They deliuer this rule that the Sacraments effect and exhibit that and that onely which they signifie But the bread signifieth onely the body of Christ and the wine his blood hee therefore that will receiue whole Christ as he is exhibited vnto vs in the Sacrament must necessarily communicate in both kinds SECT III. The second reason is this If the whole nature and essence of a Sacrament be found in one kinde the Romanists Communion in bread onely is not a maimed or imperfect but an entire Sacrament But the whole nature and essence of a Sacrament is found in one kinde Therefore the Romanists communicating in bread onely is not a mained or imperfect but an entire Sacrament That the whole nature and essence of a Sacrament is found in either kind by it selfe Bellarmine endeauoreth thus to make euident There are but two things required essentially to a Sacrament a signe and a thing signified both which are found in one kind first a signe to wit bread secondly the thing signified to wit the inward nourishment of the soule and the representation of the vnion of the faithful with Christ and among themselues The answer First there is a double essence of the sacrament the generall essence which makes it a sacrament in generall and the specificall essence which makes it in speciall Baptisme or the Lords Supper To bee a visible and effectuall signe of inuisible sanctifying grace is sufficient to proue a sacrament in generall but not to proue the Lords Supper the entire definition whereof is a Sacrament of the new Testament sealing vnto vs the perfect nourishment of our soules by the participation of the sacred elements of bread and wine Secondly there are two sorts or parts essentiall or integrall For example the essentiall parts of a man are animal rationale the integrall parts are legges and armes and other members In like manner in the Sacrament besides the essentiall parts which Bellarmine will haue to bee the signe and the thing signified there are integrall parts to wit the elements of bread and wine of which if either be wanting the sacrament may be as truly called a maimed or vnperfect Sacrament as a man that wants an arme or legge is truly called a maimed or vnperfect man though he haue in him the essentiall parts of a man intirely to wit animal his Genus and rationale his difference Thirdly although in the Romane halfe Communion there be a signe and a thing signified yet neither is there the whole signe nor the whole signification not the whole signe because bread is but a part of the signe representing Christs body and not his blood not the whole signification which is such an entire refection and nourishment of the soule as bread and wine are of the body Retortion Lastly this Argument as the former may be retorted vpon the aduersary The Lords Supper is the Sacrament of Christs body and blood The bread is not the Sacrament of Christs body and blood Therefore bread alone is not the Lords Supper Or in this wise The Lords Supper essentially includeth and signifieth such a perfect refection and nourishment of the soule as bread and wine are of the body Communicating in one kind neither includeth nor signifieth such refection Therefore communicating in one kind is not the Lords Supper nor containeth in it the whole nature and essence of this Sacrament SECT IIII. The third Argument of our aduersaries drawne from reason is an off-spring of the two former If the faithfull receiue as much benefit by communicating in one kind as in both they haue no cause to complaine of the Church for the restraining of them from the Cup But the faithfull receiue as much benefit by communicating in one kind as in both Therefore they haue no cause to complaine of the Church for the restraining of them from the Cup That they receiue as much benefit by communicating in one kind as in both it seemes to follow necessarily vpon the two former supposalls that whole Christ is in each kind and that the whole essence of the Sacrament is found in either The answer First the two props of this Argument being before taken away it must needes fall to the ground neither is whole Christ contained vnder one kind neither in it is preserued the whole essence of the Sacrament Therefore questionlesse the fruit of the halfe Communion if it be any at all cannot bee equall to the fruit of the whole Secondly the consequence of this Argument is not found For neither the onely nor the principle thing to be regarded in the Sacrament is our benefit but Gods glorie and the testification of our obedience to his Ordinance Therefore albeit it were granted that the people lost nothing by the taking away the Cup from them yet they haue iust

Alexandriae per totam Aegyptum si●…desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter August ex vtroque Test. mixt quaest 101. D. Mort. Apol. Cathole 21. Presbyter alter alteram ordinare potest non in Ecclesia bene composita sed in statu collapso deplorato maximè in casu necessitatis * * False vid. Vntruth 3. in the Appendix to this Conference * * Infrain Appendice D. Field of the Church lib. 3. cap. 29. Howsoeuer we dislike the Popish manner of praying for the dead which is to deliuer them out of their feigned Purgatory yet wee doe not reprehend the Primitiue Church nor the Pastors nor guides of it for naming them in their publike prayers thereby to nourish their hope of the resurrection and to expresse their longing desire of the consummation of their owne and their happinesse that are come before them in the faith of Christ. * * See the place of Bellarmine cited in the Appendix g Can. 6. Si quis dixerit in Ecclesia cathol Non esse Hierarchiam diuinâ ordinatione constitutam quae constat ex Episcopis presbyteris ministris anathema sit Can. 7. Si quis dixerit Episco pos presbyteris non esse superiores anathemasit See the history of the Councell of Trent lib. 7. p. 478. 480 The Legates consulting among themselues answer that there were cause to declare that a Bishop is superiour to a Priest verum quo iure declarato non esse opus But by what right the Councell need not determine A little after the Doctors in the Councel were diuided about the Hierarchy some placing it in Orders only naming the Orders of Deacons Priests and Bishops and others following For Aerius placed it in iurisdiction a third sort placed it in both and the reasons of their direct opinions are there to be seene The contrary to this assertion is maintained by the learned in the Romish Church vid. Pagn In praef in suam ver sionem Ariam Montanum praef Bibl. Reg. Ignatium Leuitam contra Lindanum alios Pontificios prae omnibus Hieron apologiam pro Hebraicâ Veritate in Prologis Comm. in Zach. cap. 8. vid. Decret 1. part dist 9. ca. vt veteres citat Bellar. plures alios in hanc sententiam de verbo Dei lib. 2. cap. 11. 10. Benedict Parisiensis theologus aliquot millia locorum in lat vulg versione correxit ad veritatem hebraicam graecam edit Paris an 1552. 1558. sed postea prodijt noua editio ibid. 1573. omissis omnibus illis emendationibus cui praefixa est satis insulsa praefatio Iacobi fabri Sorbonici D. h h Certe vix dubitari potest quin sicut Latina Ecclesia constantior fuit in fide retinenda quàm Graeca●…ita etiam vigilantior fuerit in suis codicibus à corruptione defendendis Bell. de Verb. Deil. 2. c. 11. h h This Bellarmine must needs say vnlesse he contradict himselfe For a little after in the same chapter he confess●…th that in foure cases we may correct and mend the vulgar Latine Translation by the Greeke and Hebrew Fountaines De Verb. Dei lib. 2. cap. 11. sect 17. See Hieron Apolog. ad Pam. Interpretum v●…tio quae apud suos puriss●…o orationis cursu labuntur apud nos vitijs scate●…t ●…dem cont Heluid cap. 6. Multo purior manare credenda est sontis vnda quàm riui * * In hunc locum Ignat. exceptioni Bellarm. primae An Ignatius hoc loco corruptus item secundae ac tertiae Item Baronij deprauationi fraudi respondet Nic. Vedelius exercit 2. in epist. ad Philadelph Morn de Eucharist lib. 1. c. 10. 11. vbi de hoc toto argum agit plenissimè k k Quomodo ad Martyrij poculū idoneos faciemus si non eos primùm in Ecclesia ad Bibendum poculum Domini iure communicationis admittimus Cypr. epist. 54. ad Cornet l l Cur quidam in calice sanctificando plebi ministrando non faciunt quod Dom fecit docuit m m Ad bibendum sanguinem omnes exhortantur qui volunt habere vitam n n Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur Quia diuisio vnius eius demque mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest prouenire o o Quid sit sanguis non iam audiendo sed bibendo didicistis p p Sanguis non in manus fidelium sed in ora funditur These books of Gregory are cited by Papists against vs vnder his name though they be iustly suspected to be counte feit in learned Diuines iudgement * * See an answer to these pretended ancient Rites supra c. 14. l l It is now two yeeres and more since Master Euerard hath had this Scedule in his hand vnto which he hath been sundry times importuned to answer but hath not performed * * M. Euerard should haue taken notice that the Apostles were not at this time fully ordained Priests though they had been once sent to preach For after his resurrection Ioh. 20. Christ breathed on them the holy Ghost and said Whose soeuer sinnes yee remit c. whereby hee fully indued them with Priestly power Secondly the Apostles at this Supper were Communicants not Ministers of the Sacrament Christ was then the Priest and Minister onely in that action and therefore the Apostles supplying the place of meere Communicants it followeth that whatsoeuer Christ then commanded them he commanded all Receiuers after them * * If neither precept of eating or drinking belong to the Laiety the Laiety are not at all bound to receiue this Sacrament * * Shamefull vntruth and notorious ignorance See the Appendix num 〈◊〉 item Chamierum de Euch. lib. 8. cap. 〈◊〉 de panis distributione quaestio nulla est nec dubitatur omnibus esse fidelibus distribuendum si qui se bene praeparatos offerant * * Waldensis tom 2. cap. 91. fol. 162. edit Salmant 1557. Prolixe probat ex August Cypriano Bernando bibere spiritualitur intelligendum Caietanusin 3. partem Thom. q. 80. verba Christi Ioh. 6. ad literam intelliguntur ad Manducationem spiritualem * * This answer he contradicteth in his last answer infra vid. A. * * From the proper acception of the obiect onely and not the act the corporall and substantiall presence of Christ in the Sacrament cannot be inferred For spiritually and figuratiuely a man may feed vpon Christs body by faith though his body be not present on earth * * See this answer refelled by Vasquez tom 3. in 3. partem disp 116. Nisi manducaueritis c. Haec verba non tantum reseruntur ad rem ipsam sumptam sed ad modum sumendi cam nam manducate bibite si verba propriè vsur●…entur cuiuis speciei conuenire non possunt Neque enim sanguis sub specie panis bibi dicitur sicut neque corpus sub specie vinimanducari vt optimè