Selected quad for the lemma: hand_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
hand_n	father_n	holy_a	lord_n	5,731	5	3.8503	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86378	A dissertation with Dr. Heylyn: touching the pretended sacrifice in the Eucharist, by George Hakewill, Doctor in Divinity, and Archdeacon of Surrey. Published by Authority.	Hakewill, George, 1578-1649.	1641 (1641)	Wing H208; Thomason E157_5; ESTC R19900	30,122	57

thus epitomizeth him So that we see saith he that in this Sacrifice prescribed the Christian Church by our Lord and Saviour there were two proper and distinct actions the first is to celebrate the memoriall of our Saviours Sacrifice which he intituleth the commemoration of his Body and Bloud once offred or the memory of that his Sacrifice that is as he doth clearly expound himself that we should offer {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} This our Commemoration for a Sacrifice The second that we should offer to him the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving which is the reasonable Sacrifice of a Christian man and to him most acceptable finally he joynes both together in the conclusion of that Book and therein doth at full describe the nature of this Sacrifice which is this as followeth Therefore saith he we Sacrifice and offer as it were with incense the memory of that great Sacrifice celebrating the same according to the mysteries by him given unto us and giving thanks to him for our salvation with godly Hymnes and Prayers to the Lord our God as also offering our whole selves both soul and body and to his High Priest which is the Word S●e here saith the Doctor Eusebius doth not call it onely the memory or Commemoration of Christs Sacrifice but makes the very memory and Commemoration in and of it self to be a Sacrifice which instar omnium for and in the place of all other Sacrifices we are to offer to our God and offer with the incense of our Prayers and praises In this discourse out of Eusebius the Doctor foreseeing that what he had alleaged did not reach home to his purpose endeavours to make it up by the addition of this last clause as if Eusebius made the memory or commemoration of the Sacrifice of Christ to be in and of it felf a Sacrifice and this he would collect from these words of his {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which he translates for and as a Sacrifice whereas both Bishop Bilson and Doctor Raynolds and others of our best learned Divines translate it insteed of a Sacrifice Now that which is insteed of a Sacrifice cannot be indeed and of it self properly so called And besides how we should be said to offer up our Commemoration for a Sacrifice as the Doctor affirmeth I cannot understand since k Commemoration is an action and being so it cannot as I conceive in propriety of speech be the thing Sacrificed which must of necessity be a substance as it stands in opposition to accidents so that if neither the sanctification of the Creature nor the Commemoration of the Sacrifice of Christ nor the offering up of our selves or praise and thanksgiving can amount to a Sacrifice properly so called surely the Doctor hath not yet found it in the Fathers but will be forced to make a new search for the finding of it CHAP. V. Whether the Eucharist be a Sacrifice properly so called by the Doctrine and practise of the Church of England and first by the Book of Ordination THis the Doctor undertakes to prove from the Book of Ordination from the Book of Articles from the Book of Homilies and lastly from the Common-prayer Book His proof from the Book of Ordination is that he who is admitted to holy orders is there cal'd a Priest as also in the Liturgy and Rubricks of it For answer whereunto we grant that he is so called indeed but had it been intended that he were properly so called no doubt but in the same Book we should have found a power of Sacrificing conferred upon him And in very truth a stronger argument there cannot be that our Church admits not of any Sacrifice or Priesthood properly so called for that we finde not in tha● Book any power of sacrificing conferred upon him who receives the order of Priesthood no nor so much as the name of any Sacrifice in any sense therein once mentioned Read t●orow the admonition the interrogations the prayers the benediction but above all the form it self in the collation of that sacred order and not a word is there to be seen of Sacrificing or Offring or Altar or any such matter The form it self of Ordination runnes thus Receive the holy Ghost whose sinnes thou doest forgive they are forgiven and whose sinnes thou doest retain they are retained and be thou a faithfull dispencer of the Word of God and his holy Sacraments In the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost Amen Then the Bishop shall deliver to every one of them the Bible in his hand saying Take thou authority to preach the Word of God and to Minister the holy Sacraments in the Congregation where thou shalt be appointed Here we have a power given him of forgiving and retaining of sinnes of preaching of the Word and administring the holy Sacraments but of any Sacrificing power not so much as the least syllable which had been a very strange and unpardonable ne●lect had the Church intended by the form expressed in that Book to make them Priests properly so called This indeed the Romanists quarrell at as being a main defect in our Church but the learned Champion of it and our holy orders hath in my judgement fully answered that crimination of theirs and withall clearly opened the point in what sense we are in that Book of Ordination called Priests If you mean saith he no more by Priest then the holy Ghost doth by Presbyter that is a Minister of the New Testament then we professe and are ready to prove that we are Priests as we are called in the Book of Common-prayer and the form of ordering because we receive in our ordination authority to preach the Word of God and to Minister his holy Sacraments Secondly if by Priests you mean Sacrificing Priests and would expound your selves of spirituall Sacrifices then as this name belongeth to all Christians so it may be applyed by an excellency to the Ministers of the Gospel Thirdly although in this name you have relation to bodily Sacrifices yet even so we be called Priests by way of allusion For as Deacons are not of the Tribe of Levi yet the ancient Fathers do commonly call them Levites alluding to their office because they come in place of Levites so the Ministers of the New Testament may be called Sacrificers because they succeed the sonnes of Aaron and come in place of Sacrificers Fourthly for as much as we have authority to Minister the Sacraments and consequently the Eucharist which is a representation of the Sacrifice of Christ therefore we may be said to offer Christ in a Mystery and to Sacrifice him objectively by way of Commemoration In all these respects we may rightly and truely be called Priests as also because to us it belongeth and to us alone to consecrate the Bread and Wine to holy uses to offer up the prayers of the people and to blesse them yet in all these respects the speech is but

uncivilized nations from acts flowing from the light of nature such as he makes the use of Sacrificing to be unlesse withall he will exclude them from the use of reason And surely were the use of Sacrifices grounded upon the light of nature not upon Divine precept I do not see why the Jews should be tyed to offer them onely at Ierusalem nor yet why the Mahometans who farre exceed the Christians in number and in civility are little inferiour to many of them should use no Sacrifice at all Lastly for the Grecians Romans and other nations who used Sacrifices as the principall act of their religion it may well be that they borrowed it from the Church of God by an apish imitation or that they received by tradition from their predecessors who were sometimes of the Church of God which are the conjectures of the Doctor himself either of which might serve without deriving it from the light of nature CHAP. III. Of the institution of the Eucharist whether it imply a Sacrifice and of the Altar mentioned by St Paul Hebrews 13. THe Doctor bears us in hand that our Saviour instituted a Sacrifice perpetually to remain in his Church and a new Priesthood properly so called when he ordained the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and to this purpose he brings the words of Irenaeus Novi Testamenti novam docuit oblat●onem But that Irenaeus intended not a Sacrifice properly so called the learned Zanchius in his first Book de cultu Dei externo hath made it as clear as the noon-day and to him I referre both the Doctor and the Reader who desires satisfaction therein From the testimony of Irenaeus the Doctor comes to the words of institution recorded by Saint Paul 1 Cor. 11. And indeed here should in all likelyhood have been the place to lay the foundation for a new Sacrifice and Priesthood if any such properly so called had been intended by our Saviour under the Gospell but neither there nor in the Evangelists do we finde any mention at all of either of these which the Doctor perceiving well enough goes on from the words of institution Vers 23 24 25. and tels us that if they expresse not plain enough the nature of this Sacrifice to be commemorative we may take those that follow by way of commentary Vers 26. For as often as ye cate this bread and drink this cup ye do shew the Lords death till he come Which words are doubtlesse directed to all the faithfull in the Church of Corinth and in them to all Christians so as the Doctor will be forced either to prove his Sacrificing from eating and drinking and withall to admit all Christians to do Sacrifice against both which in the same leaf he solemnly protests or to seek out some other place to prove it But for the Priesthood he pretends to have found that in the words of our Saviour Hoc faite for the Apostles saith he and their Successours in the Priesthood there is an edite and bibite as private men of no orders in the Church but there is an Hoc facite belonging to them onely as they are Priests under and of the Gospell Hoc faecite is for the Priest who hath power to consecrate Hoc edite both for the Priest and people who are admitted to communicate And again within a while after The people being prepared may edere and bibere but they must not facere that belongs onely to the Priests who claim that power from the Apostles on them conferred by their redeemer Thus he as if facere and Sacrificare were all one which indeed some of the Romanists endeavour to prove but so vainly so ridiculously so injuriously to the text as my Lord of Duresme hath learnedly shewed as it appears to be a foundation too sandy to lay such a building upon it But will the Doctor be pleased to hear Bishop Iewells opinion of these words whom he seemeth in some places to reverence That incomparable Bishop then in his defence of his 17●h Article thus writes thereof Neither did Christ by these words Do ye this in remembrance of me erect any new succession of Sacrificers to offer him up really unto his Father nor ever did any ancient learned Father so expound it Christs meaning is clear by the words that follow for he saith not onely do ye this but he addeth also in my remembrance which doing pertaineth not onely to the Apostles and their Successors as Mr Harding imagineth but to the whole congregation of Corinth As often as ye shall eat this bread and drink this cup ye shew forth the Lords death untill he come Likewise Saint Chrysostome saith he applyeth the same not onely to the Clergy but also to the whole people of his Church at Antioch And truely I think this Doctor is the first of the reformed Churches that ever restrained those words of our Saviour to the Clergy alone or grounded the Priesthood upon them Nay the Romanists themselves finde this ground to be so feeble as by the evidence of truth it self they are beaten from it and even forced to forsake it Iansenius Bishop of Gant in his Commentaries on the Gospels Cap. 131. Sunt qui Sacramentum illud esse Sacrificium ostendere conantur ex verbo Facite quia illud aliquando accipitur pro Sacrificare at hoc argumentum parum est firmum Alanas Cardinalis lib. de Eucharistia c. 10. p. 255. Hoc facite pertinet ad totam actionem Eucharisticam à Christo factam tam a Presbyteris quam à plebe faciendam Hoc probat ex Cyril lib. 12. in Ioh. ca. 58. ex Basilio lib. regularum moralium regul. 21. cap. 3. Maldonatus l. 7. de Sacram. tom. 1. part 3. de Eucharistia Non quod contendam illud verbum facere illo loco sign ficare idem quod Sacrificare Estius Comment in 2. ad Cor. 11. v. 24. Non quod verbum facere sit idem quod Sacrificare quomodo nonnulli interpretati sunt praeter mentem Scripturae And howsoever Bellarmine where it makes for his purpose come in with his certum est It is certain that upon the word Facite is grounded the Priesthood and power of Sacrificing yet in another place when it made not so much for his purpose he tels us another tale Videtur sententia Iohannis à Lovanio valde probabilis qui docet verba domini apud Lucam ad omnia referri id est ad id quod fecit Christus id quod fecerunt Apostoli ut sensus sit Id quod nunc agimus ego dum consecro porrigo vos dum accipitis comeditis frequentate deinceps usque ad mundi consummationem And within a while after Paulum autem idem Author docet potissimum referre ad actionem discipulorum id quod ex verbis sequentibus colligitur Quotiescunque enim manducabitis panem hunc calicem bibetis mortem domini annuntiabetis Thus farre the words