Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	enter_v	holy_a	place_n	7,917	5	5.5648	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56750	The three grand corruptions of the Eucharist in the Church of Rome Viz. the adoration of the Host, communion in one kind, sacrifice of the Mass. In three discourses.	Payne, William, 1650-1696.; Payne, William, 1650-1696. Discourse concerning the adoration of the Host. aut; Payne, William, 1650-1696. Discourse of the communion in one kind. aut; Payne, William, 1650-1696. Discourse of the sacrifice of the Mass. aut	1688 (1688)	Wing P911A; ESTC R220353	239,325	320

the same sacrifice and continuing daily to offer it shows that it was not sufficient nor did do the business at once offering as the frequent using the same medicine shows that it has not fully cured the wound nor yet perfectly done its work Secondly The sacrifice of the Mass they say is only to apply the vertue and merit of the sacrifice of the Cross for though the sacrifice of the Cross like a powerful medicament have sufficient vertue in it yet what does that signifie unless it be applyed to us which it is by the sacrifice of the Mass But is there not another way to apply that to us Is it not applied to us by Faith and by the common means of Christs own institution the Christian Sacraments and especially by the Worthy Receiving of the Lords Supper wherein as the Apostle says The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of Christ and the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 We do hereby communicate and are made partakers of Christs Body as it was sacrificed for us that is of all the vertues and benefits of his sacrifice by being as the Apostle adds verse 17. Made partakers of that One bread that is surely by eating it sacramentally and religiously as Christ has appointed for it would sound very hard and be a very odd expression to say we are partakers of that one bread by the sacrificing or offering up of that bread when they will not own that the bread is sacrificed or if it were could we well be thereby partakers of it but 't is the eating of that bread which makes us partakers of it and 't is the eating Christs Body and drinking his Blood in the blessed Sacrament that communicates and applies the vertue of his sacrifice of the Cross to us and not the sacrificing of that again as the Apostle goes on verse 18. Are not they who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the Altar 't is eating and communicating that makes us partakers of Christs sacrifice We do then eat of the sacrifice and so partake of it as the Jews did of their sacrifices the communion is a feasting upon a true oblatum the body and blood of Christ as is excellently made out by a Learned man of our own we do not there sacrifice Christs body but only sacramentally eat of it as being already sacrificed and offered once for all by Christ himself upon the Cross It is not at all necessary that it should be sacrificed again by us to make us become partakers of it for cannot a sacrifice be applyed without being sacrificed again It seems a very strange and uncouth way to sacrifice the same thing over and over in order to applying the vertue of it as if the Jews when they had slain the Paschal Lamb must have slain another Lamb in order to the partaking the vertue of it no they were to eat of it for that purpose and so are we of Christs sacrifice and this is the way whereby we do communicate of it and have its full vertue applyed to us It was the weakness and insufficiency of their sacrifices that made them so often repeat them and sacrifice them anew but Christs sacrifice being perfect is to be but once offered though it be often to be eaten and partaken of by us which it may be without being again sacrificed Thirdly The Authour of this Epistle makes not the least mention of Christs sacrifice being offered again upon Earth or of its being repeated in the sacrifice of the Mass but after he himself had once offered it upon the Cross he immediately speaks of his presenting it to God in Heaven and there by vertue of it interceeding and mediating with him for us that by his own blood he entered into the holy place having obtained eternal Redemption for us chap. 9. ver 12. as the Jewish high priest on the great day of expiation after he had offered the sacrifice of atonement for the whole Congregation upon the Altar carried the blood of it into the Holy of Holies and there sprinkled it before the mercy-seat Levit. 16.15 This great Anniversary sacrifice for the whole Congregation was the great Type and Figure of Christs sacrifice for all mankind and the Holy of Holies was the Type of Heaven and the High Priest of Christ as is confessed by all Christ therefore our great High Priest to whom alone it belonged to offer this sacrifice of Atonement and Expiation for the whole World having done this upon the Cross he entred not into the holy places made with hands which are the figures of the true but into heaven it self now to appear in the presence of God for us chap 9. ver 24. To appear there as our Advocate and Mediator and by vertue of his own blood there presented to his Father to make a very powerful intercession for us Now from this discourse of the Apostle we have a full account of Christs sacrifice that it was to be once offered upon the cross and then to be carried into the Holy of Holies in Heaven and no more to be offered upon Earth for this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever sat down on the right hand of God chap. 10. ver 12. The Apostle speaks not one tittle nor gives the least hint or intimation of this sacrifice being offered again by others upon Earth this lyes cross to the whole tenour of his discourse and the similitude and agreement which he represents between the Jewish sacrifice of Atonement and Christs is quite altered and destroyed by it for besides the High Priests offering this sacrifice this makes every lesser Priest to be still offering the same sacrifice upon the Altar when the High Priest is entred with the blood of it into the Holy of Holies and though he cannot go in there upon which the vertue and the perfection of the sacrifice does in great measure depend yet still to offer the same sacrifice and besides it makes this sacrifice like to the Jewish where every priest standeth daily ministring and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices which for the reason shewed they could never take away sins chap. 10. ver 12. in opposition to which he says this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever sat down on the right hand of God verse 13. that is Christs sacrifice was never to be repeated as the Jewish were for if it had been to be offered by others though not by Christ himself and the Christian Priests were to stand daily ministring and offering the same sacrifice both they and their sacrifice would have been the same upon this account with the Jewish and there had not been that difference between them which the Apostle does there plainly mean and declare Further it cannot but seem very strange that when this Divine Author does so largely and copiously and designedly treat of

to be thus And is not this to explain away the true meaning of the word and to give up the Controversie The true notion of a propitiatory sacrifice is this that it suffers a vicarious punishment in anothers stead that by it the punishment is transferr'd from the offender to that and so he is discharged from it and God is pleased for the sake of that not to be angry but kind and propitious to him this I think cannot be denyed and let us see if this will fit to the Eucharist If Christ be really present there yet does he suffer any punishment there in our stead does he pay any price there for our sins If not there cannot be any true propitiation then made nor can the sacrifice be truly propitiatory Christ did once upon the Cross where he suffered as our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a vicarious punishment for our sins by his one oblation of himself once offered make a full perfect and sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the whole World * Prayer of Consecrat in Commun Serv. and Bellarmine is forced to own That 't is the sacrifice of the Cross is properly meritorious and satisfactory because Christ when he was then mortal could merit and satisfie but the sacrifice of the Mass is properly only impetratory for Christ being now immortal can neither merit nor satisfie * Nam sacificium crucis fait meritorium satisfactorium impetratorium verè propriè quia Christus tunc mortalis erat mereri ac satisfacere poterat sacrificium Missae propriè solum est Impetratorium quia Christus nunc immortalis nec mereri nec satisfacere potest Bellarm. de Missa l. 2. c. 4. C. Thus truth will out at last though there be never so much art used to stifle and conceal it and this is very fairly to give up the question and surrender the cause for he owns it is not properly propitiatory and gives a very good reason for it because Christ in his immortal state cannot merit or satisfie or be a true propitiation for us the Bishop of Meaux was aware of this and therefore he makes Christs presence upon the Altar to be not a propitiation but a powerful Intercession before God for all mankind according to the saying of the Apostle that Jesus Christ presents himself and appears for us before the face of God Heb. 9.24 So that Christ being present upon the holy Table under this figure of death intercedes for us and represents continually to his Father that death which he has suffered for his Church † Exposition of the Doctrine of the Catholick Church But how comes this Intercession of Christ to be upon Earth Is it not to be in heaven and is not Christ there to appear in the presence of God for us Is not Christ entered into the heavens for that purpose as the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies with the blood of the great sacrifice of Atonement after that was offered upon the Altar Does not the Apostle thus represent it in that place in allusion and with relation to that Jewish Oeconomy and could any but Monsieur de Meaux have brought that place to show that Christ intercedes for us by being present upon the Altar when the Apostles discourse is as directly contrary to that as can be and makes him to appear only in Heaven or in the presence of God for us and there present himself and his sacrifice to God as the Jewish High Priest carried the blood of the Anniversary sacrifice of Expiation into the Holy of Holies and there sprinkled it before the Mercy-seat Christ is not entred into the holy place made with hands which are the figures of the true but into Heaven it self now to appear in the presence of God for us Christ therefore making Intercession for us only in heaven and propitiation only upon the Cross how the sacrifice of the Mass should be either Intercessory which is a new way of de Meaux's or propitiatory as the Council of Trent has determined it I cannot understand Some of them tell us it is propitiatory only relatively and by application as it relates and applyes to us the propitiatory vertue of the sacrifice of the Cross but this it may do as a Sacrament and then it is not propitiatory in it self for sins for punishments and for satisfactions as the Council declares it and as propitiatory sacrifices used to be which were in themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 satisfactory payments and prices for sins and for the punishments due to them Bellarmin having owned it not to be properly propitiatory he says * Cum autem dicitur propitiatorium vel satisfactorium id est intelligendum ratione rei quae impetratur dicitur enim propitiatorium quia impetrat remissionem culpae satisfactorium quia impetrat remissionem poenae Bellarm. de Miss l. 2. c. 4. C. When it is called propitiatory or satisfactory this is to be understood by reason of the thing which is impetrated by it for it is said to be Propitiatory because it impetrates Remission of sin Satisfactory because it impetrates Remission of punishment But thus our Prayers may be said to be propitiatory because by them we beg and obtain Mercy and Pardon at the hands of God but a propitiatory sacrifice is to do this not only by way of petition and impetration but by way of price and payment and satisfaction so that after all this improper sacrifice of the Mass is but very improperly propitiatory and when they come closely to consider it they are forced to confess so and cannot tell how to make out their Councils Doctrine that 't is truly propitiatory for sins and for punishments 5. Let us consider next how it is impetratory if they mean only that it is so upon the account of those Prayers which are there made and which are more efficacious in that solemn office of Religion as the Eucharist has relation to the Cross and the sacrifice of Christ upon it which is the foundation of all our Prayers and by vertue of which we hope to have them heard and answered by God so in that solemn Religious and express memorial of it we may suppose them to have a greater vertue and efficacy if this be all they mean who will deny it and why may not this be without the Eucharist's being a sacrifice 't is only Christs sacrifice and offering upon the Cross that gives vertue and power to our prayers at that time when we are devoutly celebrating the remembrance of it and 't is not any offering of him up then any otherwise then by Faith and the inward devotion of our Mind that makes our prayers the more powerful either for our selves or others We are to make Prayers and Supplications for all men and for theirs and our own wants and necessities in this solemn and publick office of our Religion and so did the first Christians pray then for Kings and all that

of Christ to which we immediately and particularly owe them and which we may truly call our Saviour St. Ambrose and St. Austin h August Enar. in Ps 98. his Scholar after him supposing that there was a great difficulty in that passage of the Psalms worship his footstool for so it is in the Latin i Adorate scabellum pedum ejus without the Preposition at his footstool they laboured to reconcile this with that command of Worshipping and Serving God alone and to give an account how the Earth which was Gods footstool could be worshipt and the way they take was this to make Christs Flesh which he took of the Earth to be meant by that Earth which was Gods footstool k Invenio quomodo sine Impietate adoretur terra scabellum pedum ejus suscepit enim de terra terram quia caro de terra est de carne Mariae carnem accepit August Ib. and this say they we ought to worship his Apostles did so whilst he was upon Earth and we do so now whilst he is in Heaven We worship the Flesh of Christ which was crucified for us and by the benefit of which we hope for Pardon and Salvation we worship that tho it be now in Heaven we worship it in the Solemn Offices of our Religion l Ipsam carnem nobis manducandam ad falutem dedit nemo autem illam carnem manducat nisi prius adoraverit Aug. Ib. that Flesh which he gave to be eaten by us for our Salvation that we worship for none eates that Flesh but he first worships Worships that if they please tho St. Austin do not expresly say that but we will own and we will be always ready to Worship the Flesh of Christ by which we are saved and we will do this especially at the Sacrament and that more truly and properly than they themselves will own that we eat and manducate it as St. Austin says not with our Teeth as we do the Bread but eat it and worship it too as it is Heaven St Hierome m Epist ad Marcel Ibant Christiani Hierosolymam ut Christum in illis adorarent locis in quibus primum Evangelium de patibulo coruscaverat says of some devout Christians That they went to Hierusalem that they might adore Christ in those places where the Gospel first shone from the Cross They went that they might adore Christ in those places not that they believed him to be corporally present in those places much less that they worshipt the places themselves but they made a more lively impression of Christ upon them and made them remember him with more Passion and Devotion and so does the blessed Sacrament upon us and we therefore worship Christ whom we believe to be in Heaven in the Sacrament as they worshipt him in those places where they were especially put in mind of him Thus St. Hierome says He worshipped Christ in the Grave and that Paula worshipped him in the Stall n Ad Paul. Eustoch and so we may be said to worship him on the Cross or on the Altar or in the Sacrament and yet not to worship the Cross or the Altar or the Sacrament it self 3. Other places out of the Fathers brought by him for the Adoration of the Host mean only that the Sacrament is to be had in great reverence and esteem by us as all things sacred and set apart to religious uses are that a singular Veneration is due to the Eucharist as St. Austin says o Eucharistiae deberi singularem venerationem Epist 118. c. 3. and as is to Baptism also of which he uses the same word We venerate Baptism p Baptismum ubicunque est veneramur Id Epist 146. as we ought to do all the Rites and Ordinances of our Religion this is meant by Origen in that first place of him produced by Boileau q De Euch. Ador. p. 10. ex Orig. Homil 13. Nostis qui Divinis mysteriis interesse consuestis quomodo cum suscipitis corpus Domini cum omni cautela veneratione servatis ne ex eo parum quid decidat ne consecrati muneris aliquid dilabatur Reos enim vos creditis recte creditis siquid inde per negligentiam decidat Ye that are wont to be present at the Divine Mysteries know how when ye receive the Body of Christ ye keep it with all Caution and Veneration that no part of the consecrated gift be let fall for ye think and that rightly that ye should be guilty of a fault if any of it should be let fall through your negligence And Christans have this Care and Veneration of those consecrated Symbols of the Body and Blood of their Saviour of these wonderful Pledges of his Love that they would not willingly spill them or let them fall to the ground through their carelesness and neglect they that have that due regard to the Holy Bible which they ought would not trample it under their feet or show any such disrespect to it it was this which Origen was recommending in that place from that example of their care and respect to the Sacrament Elements that they should give it also to the Word of God r Quod si circa corpus ejus tanta urimini cantela merito utimini quomodo putatis minoris esse piaculi Verbum Dei neglexisse quam Corpus ejus Ib. But if ye use such care and that very deservedly about keeping his Body how do ye think it to be a less fault to neglect the word of God than to neglect his Body The Comparison here made between the Word of God and the Sacrament so plainly shows that he no way meant its Adoration that I wonder this Person was not ashamed to pretend just before it that he ſ Alienum esse ab institutis meis ullum in medium adducere patrem quin conceptis verbis propitium Boil p. 10. would bring no Authority but what was expresly for his Opinion and use none but t Animo decreverim argumenta invictissima concludere invincible Arguments but Roman Faith must be defended with Roman courage and confidence which is the only invincible thing they have The words of Theodoret are a great deal more plausible and seem at the first glance to look more fairly than any for their purpose The Elements are understood to be what they are made and they are believed and reverenced as those things which they are believed v 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Dialog 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Boil p. 64. Here our Faith makes the Sacrament to be what it signifies to become to us the res Sacramenti as well as a sign and Representation of it and that thing is to be adored by us in the use of the Sacrament which is the true sense of Theodorets words and that he cannot mean in the Roman sense that the Elements are converted into another substance the

and to the belief of Lies as most Idolaters generally were but may it please him who is the God of Truth to bring into the way of Truth all such as have erred and are deceived in this or any other matter in which charitable and constant Prayer of our Church which is much better than Cursing and Anathematizing its Adversaries I hope as well as its Friends will not refuse to joyn with it FINIS ADVERTISEMENT THere are several mistakes of the Press but most of them are so Plain and Obvious that it is hoped that every Reader will immediately see and correct them without any trouble and without any particular account of them Five Sermons of Contentment one of Patience and one of Resignation to the Will of God By Isaac Barrow D. D. late Master of Trinity Colledg in Cambridg Never Published before in Octavo Printed for Brabazon Aylmer Licensed Aug. 3. 1686. A DISCOURSE OF THE Communion in One Kind IN ANSWER TO A TREATISE OF THE BISHOP of MEAVX's OF Communion under both Species Lately Translated into English LONDON Printed for Brabazon Aylmer at the three Pidgeons over against the Royal Exchange in Cornhil MDCLXXXVII AN ANSWER TO THE PREFACE of the Publisher THe Translatour of the Bishop of Meaux's Book of Communion under both Species having told us why he made choice of this Author whom he stiles The Treasury of Wisdom the Fountain of Eloquence the Oracle of his Age and in brief to speak all in a word the Great James formerly Bishop of Condom now of Meaux Having thus brought forth this great Champion of the Roman Church he makes a plain Challenge with him to us of the Church of England in these words If this Author write Reason he deserves to be believed if otherwise he deserves to be confuted By this I perceived he expected that we should be so civil as to take notice of so great a Man as the Bishop of Meaux or any thing that bears his Name and not let it pass unregarded by us after it was for our benefit as he tells us made English and besides I did not know but some unwary persons among us might believe the reason he writes however bad and therefore I thought he deserved to be confuted and ought by no means to go without the civility and complement of an English Answer This I doubt not might have been very well spared had the Publisher been pleased to have gone on a little further with his Work of Translating and obliged us who are strangers to the French Tongue with one of those Answers which are made to de Meaux's Book in that Language but since he has not thought fit to do that I must desire him to accept of such Entertainment as our Country will afford him though it is something hard that we must not only treat our Friends at home but have as many Strangers as they please put upon us But we who cannot Translate so well as others which is a much easier part than to Write at ones own charge must beg leave of our French Adversaries if we sometimes speak to them in plain English and the Bishop of Meaux must excuse me if Truth has sometimes made me otherwise answer him then if I were a Curé in his own Diocess Whoever has so great an opinion of the Bishop of Meaux's Vertue and Learning as to take matter of Fact upon his word which the Translatour's mighty Commendations were designed no doubt to beget in his Reader must believe the Communion in One Kind was the Practice of the Primitive and the Catholic Church which if it were true would be a very great if not sufficient excuse for the Roman This the Bishop asserts with all the confidence in the World and this his Book is designed to make out and whoever will not believe it must necessarily question either the Learning of this great Man or else his Sincerity I shall not dare to do the former but his late Pastoral Letter has given too much reason to suspect the latter He that can now tell the World That there has been no Persecution in France and that none has suffered violence either in their Persons or their Estates there for their Religion may be allowed to say That the Primitive Church had the Communion but in one Kind a great while ago But the one of these matters of Fact deserves more I think to be confuted than the other I suppose it was for the sake of the Author that the Translatour chose this subject of Communion in One kind though he says It is a point peradventure of higher concern than any other now in debate between Papists and Protestants this being the main Stone of Offence and Rock of Scandal and it having been always regarded since the Reformation as a mighty eye-sore and alledged as one sufficient Cause of a voluntary departure and separation from the Pre-existent Church of Rome When this Pre-existent Church of Rome fell into her Corrupt Terrestrial and Vnchristian State among other Corruptions this was one that gave just offence and was together with many more the Cause of our separating from it That it gave the Eucharist but in one kind contrary to Christ's Institution and took away the Cup of Christ's precious Bloud from the People But yet this point of highest concern is in the judgement of the Translatour but a bare Ceremony and upon the whole matter the difference herein between the Church of England and the Roman seems to him reducible in great measure to meer Form and Ceremony If it be then I hope it may be easily compromized and agreed for I assure him I am as little as he for making wider Divisions already too great nor do I approve of the Spirit of those who tear Christ's seamless Garment for a meer Form and Ceremony but we who are sometimes thought fit to be called Heretics and to be Censured and Anathematized as differing in Essential matters from the Church of Rome at other times are made such good Friends to it that we differ but very little and there is nothing but Form and Ceremony between us But what is to Accomodate this matter and Reconcile this difference between the two Churches Why the Doctrine of the Real Presence in which Both Churches he says agree that Christ our Saviour is truly really wholly yea and substantially present in the Sacrament This is to close up the difference not onely of Communion in one kind but of the Adoration of the Sacrament and the Sacrifice of Mass too in the Translatour's judgement But does the Church of England then agree with the Roman in the Real Presence of Christ's natural Body and Bloud in the Sacrament Does it not expresly say the contrary namely That the natural Body and Bloud of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven and not here and that it is against the truth of Christ's natural Body to be at one time in more places than one * Rubric after Office