Selected quad for the lemma: heart_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heart_n	believe_v	love_n	see_v	2,286	5	3.2960	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33363	The practical divinity of the papists discovered to be destructive of Christianity and mens souls	Clarkson, David, 1622-1686.	1676 (1676)	Wing C4575; ESTC R12489	482,472	463

n. 9. Non tamen ad id tenemur quoties administramus aut accipimus Sacramenta quia non tenemur tunc habere contritionem ibid. n. 8. it is false saith Navarre that we are bound to fulfil this Command when we receive any Sacrament for it is enough that we be not in mortal sin or that we probably believe so although no such actual Love be conceived in the heart We are not bound to that Love saith he when we minister or receive the Sacraments because we are not then bound to have contrition Those that make such hard shifts to discharge themselves from the obligation of loving God when ever occasion is offered will scarce think it needful to love him upon no occasion and what occasion can we think of upon which it will be counted requisite if not on these already specified if not after sin if not upon the receipt of mercy if not on any day of worship if not in any part of worship if these be not occasions for it who can hope they will ever meet with any if an act of Love be not requisite once a week or once a year on such an account as would make it so if any imaginable could do it it will not be a duty in any week or any year in a whole life those that discharge themselves of it in such circumstances do plainly enough discharge it for ever But since they would make a shew of finding some time for it though their determinations all along are pregnant with a denyal of any let us proceed with them a little further If an act of Love be not due to God once a year yet may it be a duty once in four or five years Soto and Ledesma in Filliutius ventur'd to think it may be requisite once in five years and he gives this reason for it (b) Quia cum determinatum tempus non sit relinquitur arbitrio sapientum Sic autem sapientes theologi arbitrati sunt ut Soto Ledesma c. tr 22. l. 9. n. 290. aliqui p●tant satisfieri praecepto si semel in anno eliciatur actus amoris Dei alij si tertio quoque anno alij si non differatur ultra quinquennium Petr. a S. Joseph Sum. de 1. praecept art 4. Because the time is not determined but left to the judgment of the wise but saith he thus wise Divines have thought Thus Love to God the greatest duty that we owe the Divine Majesty and that which is the sum of all the rest is left to mens arbitrement and if two or three reputed wise shall judge that God is to have no love at all or but one act of Love in a whole life that must be the rule God and man must be determined by it Man will owe no more and the Lord must have no more Those of their Divines have had the repute of wise who thought it enough to love God once in a life time as well as such who conceive it probable that he should have an act of love once in five years or once in seven for thither it may be adjourned by our Authors leave The Jansenists charge this opinion upon the late Jesuits and would have all the odium cast upon them but they go about to lead us into a mistake if they would have us believe that these and other horrid conceits concerning an actual love to God are confined to that Society they are too common amongst those Doctors who are of greatest repute and judged free from extravagancies in their morality and more tenacious of what they would have accounted the genuine doctrine of their Church c Tr. 6. n. 208. There were many in the time of the Council of Trent when Jesuitisme was but in its Infancy who held it enough to love God actually but once in a life time One act of love (d) Semel in vita quod quidam satis arbitrantur de nat grat l. 1. c. 22. p. 58. once in a life which some count enough saith Soto and these some he tells us afterwards were very many In the time of Francis de Victoria who lived till the Council of Trent had sate a year this was the common doctrine that a man is but obliged to love God once in his life For upon the question when the Precept for love obligeth he says Nec videtur sufficiens solutio communis quod tenetur semel in vita Relect. part 3. n. 11. The common answer that one is bound to it once in a life seems not sufficient he speaks modestly as one loth to dissent from the common doctrine that Council who if it had been concerned for God and mens souls as it was for other things would have appear'd in all its thunder against such an error mends this as it did other matters by establishing a doctrine which makes it needless to love God so much as once in a life of which hereafter But when is that once They leave us at liberty for the time so it be but before we dye Suarez was not alone in this as he wants not followers so he had many that went before him in this conclusion and those not Jesuits only for it is grounded upon the notion which the Romish Doctors have of affirmative precepts when the time for their accomplishment is not expressed They teach that such divine commands divers of them are fulfilled and have sufficient observance if they be but obeyed semel in vita once in a life-time Those that are very cautious express it with a saltem once at least in a whole life intimating that though more may be better yet once is as much as is precisely needful and this they extend to such things as by the Lords constitution are means necessary to salvation (e) Alia vero praecepta sunt sine determinatione temporis quae videlicet nos obligant ut aliquando impleantur saltem semel in vita ut sunt media ad salutem necessaria pars 4. relect de paenit p. 968. There are Precepts saith Canus without determination of time which oblige us to observe them some times at least once in our life such as are the means necessary to salvation But in what part of our life must it be that the Lord must have this act of Love from us which is enough once in the whole Why since neither the Scripture nor the Church say they hath determined the time there is no reason for one time more than another it is left to a mans own discretion (*) Sed quaeras tandem quodnam sit tempus illud quo divina charitas obligat ante mortem ad babendam Dei dilectionem hoc est enim quod oppositum sentientes maxime movet nos etiam plurimum torquet quia non possumus tempus hoc in particulari certo definite designa●e Illud vero tempus si non sit positiva lege praescriptum prudenti arbitrio ipsius hominis vel

sana fieri tradit Danata daries dardaries astararies c. Polyd. Virgil. de prodigijs lib. 1 were used in a charm for curing members out of joynt or the name Abraham which though the Conjurers in other Countreys used yet they knew not what it meant (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. lib. 1. p. 17. sayes Origen They are tyed to the same syllables as Conjurers are in their charms and that they may not vary must as the Persian Magician (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pausan ibid. vid. Soto de Justit lib. 10. q. 5. art 3. read all out of a Book yea though they have it by heart It is not requisite by their Doctrine as we saw before to mind the God of Heaven in their prayers more than the Prince of darkness The meer muttering of the words they count effectual as in charms and inchauntments yet have they no promise from God that the bare recital of their forms without any inward Devotion or Attention shall prevail more than a Magician has that such a pronouncing of the words he uses in Conjuring will be prevalent or more than that the words of a prayer which one carries in his pocket (e) Vid. Horae B. Virg. Paris edit an 1526. p. 63. another charm in use amongst the Papists will be effectual So that Salmeron had more reason than he expressed to say that their prayers were like the words of a charmer They had need first excuse their prayers from this crime before this will serve to excuse their Sacramentals Sect. 7. There is another crime no less hainous than the former and yet in their account it is a necessary duty and a most excellent service and that is the destroying of Christ which by their doctrine and Laws of their Church they are to do daily in the Mass To clear this take notice of these severals They teach that Christ is really in the Mass not only as he is God and so every where but as he is Man Soul and Body Flesh and Blood and there not only mystically in signes and representations or spiritually in vertue and efficacy but as to the very substance of his body some say Corporally others after t●e manner of a Spirit but all say the true substance of his Flesh and Blood is as really on the Altar as his Body was on the Cross when nailed to it yea that it is there visibly and may be though it be not ordinarily seen 2. They hold that Christ is truly and properly Sacrificed in the Mass and his Body and Blood there offered as much as any Bullock or Lamb was Sacrificed under the Law The Council of Treat (f) Sess 6. cap. 2. declares that the Sacrifice in the Mass and that offered on the Cross is the very same for substance and differs only in the manner of Offering and denounces a Curse against any that shall say (g) Can. 1. 2. that it is not a true and proper Sacrifice or that Christ in these words do this did not command the Disciples and Priests after them to Sacrifice the Body and Blood of Christ 3. They maintain that in every true and proper Sacrifice that which is Sacrificed is really destroyed So Bellarmine to a true Sacrifice it is required (h) Et omnia omnino quae in Scriptura dicuntur sacrificia necessario destruenda er●… si viventia per occisi nem c. De Miss lib. 1. c. 2. p. 685. ad verum sacrificium requiritur ut id quod offertur Deo in sacrificium plane destruatur ibid. p. 688. vid. lib. 1. cap. 27. p. 760. that what is offered to God in Sacrifice should be plainly destroyed And if it be a live thing that is offered that it may be a true and real Sacrifice it must of necessity be slain and deprived of Life A true and real Sacrifice says he requires the true and real killing of it since in the killing of it the essence of the Sacrifice consists Hence it clearly follows and it is their own inference that Christ being truly and properly Sacrificed in the M●se he is there really consumed killed or destroyed he is as really consumed in the Mass as Incense when it was burnt for an Oblation (k) Christi corpus ad Dei honorem super mensam ponitur ut consumetur The Body of Christ says the Cardinal for the honour of God is laid upon the Table that it may he consumed He is as really destroyed as the whole burnt offering was destroyed when it was totally burnt The consumption of the Sacrament says the same Author as it is done by a Sacrificing Priest is an essential part of the Sacrifice for it is a real destruction of the Sacrifice (l) Consumptio quae fit a sacerdote sacrificante proprie combustioni holocausti respondere censetur ibid. p. 759. and is counted correspondent to the burning of the Holocaust He is as really killed in the Mass by their doctrine as a Bullock that was slain for a Sacrifice If in the Mass says he (m) Vel in missa fit vera realis Christi mactatio occisio vel non Si non sit non est verum reale sacrisicium Sacrificium enim verum reale veram realem occesionem exigit quando in occisione ponitur essentia sacrificij ibid. p. 760. Sect. denique there be not a true and real killing and slaying of Christ it is not a true and real Sacrifice adding this reason because the essence of a Sacrifice consists in the killing of it So also Doctor Allen (n) De Euchar. Sacrific c. 10 11 12. says Christ is killed there indeed and sacrificed to God And Vegad (o) De miss Thes 22 23. Christis as truly slain and offered in the Sacrament of the Eucharist as he is truly in the Sacrament and they think him to be as truly there as they believe him to be in Heaven (p) In Suarez Tom. 3. in 3. Thom. disp 75 Sect. 5. ratio praecip●a hujus sententiae est quia de essentia sacrificij est praesertim holocausti at tota victima consum●tur nam hoc sacrificium est holocaustum in quo victima debet perfecte consumi c. Aquinas favours this Opinion and Gabriel insinuates it Soto Ledesma Canus and the modern Thomists do plainly deliver it besides Bellarmine and other Jesuits Canus says (q) Loc. Theol lib. 12. p. 675 676. they believe that to the perfect sacrificing of an Animal it ought to be destroyed and slain if it be truly Sacrificed He says also that the Body of Christ in the Mass is a living and breathing Body even the very same that is in Heaven and that it is truly Sacrificed What then can follow from hence but that the living and breathing Body of Christ in the Mass is truly killed This is not denyed only they say it is an unbloody death And this indeed is their doctrine Christ is put