Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	body_n	lord_n	soul_n	2,562	5	4.9092	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79660	The Catholick doctrine of transubtantiation proued to be ancient and orthodoxall against the sclanderous tongue of D. Iohn Cozens a Protestants minister auouching the sayd doctrine neuer to haue been knowne, in the Church before the Councels of Latteran and of Trent.	Campion, William, 1599-1665.	1657 (1657)	Wing C410; ESTC R42675	41,340	187

souls The externall formes of bread wine are a signe of Christs true body blood contayned by way of foode vnder them It is a figure and remembrance of Christs death passion but to inferre from hence as Protestant Ministers do ergo Christ is not there really present is as idle as this Herod made a supper in rembrance of his birth day to the Chief of Gelilee ergo he was not present at it We therefore say that Christ as being in a different manner in the Sacrament is a figure type of himselfe as offered on the Crosse for our Redemption What opposition Protestants heere make against the truth of Christs being present in the Sacrament the same did Apollinaris Marcion Make against the truth of our sauiours Humanity because forsooth the scriptures auouch him to be made according to the similitudi●e shape likenesse of man and the same did other ancient hereticks vrge against his diuinity because S. Paul intitleth him the image of God the Caracter figure of his fathers substance And as the fathers then replyed to both those sortes of hereticks that Christ had the likenesse of a man was a true perfect man was the image of God yet true God the figure of his fathers substance the substance it selfe so we say to these new Capharnaites the Eucharist is a commemoration a signe à figure of Christs body also his true naturall body and that not only the outward formes but the very body of Christ as vnder them without extension in a manner impassible is a sacrament signe figure remenbrance of his body as offered on the Crosse for though it be the same in substance yet not in shew appearance nor indued with the same qualities of extension circumscription passibility and the like Wherefore these manner of speekes rightly vnderstood do no wayes preiudice or exclude the truth of Chtists being really present in the Eucharist vnder the formes of bread and wine §. 7. LAstly we must obserue that there are three sortes of eating Christ insinuated by the fathers of the Primitiue Church One is Sacramentally only as when euil men receiue the Sacrament vnworthily For these though they receiue the very Sacrament and in it the true body and blood of Christ yet do they not receiue the true spirituall effect and fruict thereof which is grace nourishment of their soules §. 8. ANother manner of eating Christ is spiritually only for that without Sacracramentall receiuing good men by faith and grace do communicate with Christ participate the fruit of his passion In this sense S. Austin saies crede manducasti beleeue thou hast eaten which māner of speech in the fathers hath no relation at all to the Orall manducation of Christ in the Eucharist Wherefore when your Ministers do apply such like sayings of the fathers where they treate of this spirituall eating Christ the bread of life by faith beleefe only to the eating of Christ by the Sacrament they do wrong the fathers in peruerting their meaning that so vnder the shadow of their authority they may freely vent their prophane Hereticall doctrine abusing thereby the fathers as all Heretiks euer haue done the holy scriptures §. 9. THe third manner of eating Christ mentioned by the Fathers is both Sacramentally and spiritually as all good Christians do when with due preparation and dispositiō they receiue both the outward Sacrament the inward grace and fruit of it To which manner of eating Christ by faith in the Sacrament the sathers do frequently exhort vs and for that end to cleanse the soul prepare the hart c. And therefore they call it spirituall food the bread of the minde the proper nourishmēt of the spirit because indeed the spirituall repast and refection of the minde is the chief and most souueraigne effect of this diuine Bāquet Neuerthelesse it excludeth not as S. Cyril notheth but presupposeth the corporall eating from which 20. in Ioan. cap. 13. as from the fountaine and sea of grace the spirituall is deriued Hence Tertullian saith the flesh is fed with the body and blood of Christ that the soul may be fattened with God ●●de Resu●rect carn ca. p. §. 10. APplying these obseruations respectiuely to the places obiected against vs you will easily vnderstand the true meaning of the ancient fathers and finde a solid answer to all that your ministers do most cl●amourously and most impertinently vrge against vs. The first place where Austin saies That which you see is bread c. you will find answered § 5. And therefore the argument which Protestants vrge from this notiō of bread and which fox relates as a kilcow tow it Fox pag 1258. col 2. n. 80. that which he tooke blessed that which he blessed he brake that which he brake he gaue but he tooke bread ergo he gaue bread This argument I say is no wiser then this that which Good tooke out of Adams syde Gen. 2. was a ribb but what he tooke that he brought deliuered to Adam for his wife ergo 〈◊〉 deliuered Him a ribb for his wife §. 11. TO the second place what dost thou prepare thy teeth belly beleeue thou hast eaten you haue an answer § 8. for S. Austin speakes non there of the Sacrament of the Eucharist nor of those who receiue it but of the incredulous Iewes who had now giuen an expresse commandment to lay hold on our Sauiour for he expounds the 56. verse of S. Iohn cap. 11. he exhorts them to apprehend him by faith that is to beleeue in him and receiue him for the Messias Sauiour §. 12. When S. Austin sayes he that feedeth with the hart not he that grindeth with the teeth c. He doth not denye the latter that is Sacramentall receiuing the true body and blood of our Sauiour but only signifyes that not he that grindeth with the teeth only can partake of the fruit of the Sacrament that he that feedeth with the hart without Orall eating may benefit himselfe by it §. 13. IN like sorte I answer to the third place obiected out of S. Austin for he only denyeth the wicked to eate of the bread of our Lord c. because they are not incorporated in his mysticall body or els because they do it not fruitfully to the benefit of their soules Psal 1.5 as Dauid saies The wiked shall not rise in iudgement because they shall nat rise to saluation but to damnation Otherwise S. Austin doth in many places grant that the wicked do truly eate the body of Christ in the Sacrament though as S. Paul sayes to their iudgment §. 14. ALl the other places that are or may be alleadged out of S. Austin or any other ancient Father may in like manner be easily answered by applying some one of the premitted obseruations to them if the sayd places be faithfully and fully without deprauation corruption

was able to make of nothing that which was not cannot he change the things that haue being into that which they were not it is not a lesse matter to giue new natures then t●o change them Thus S. Ambrose by all which it is cleere that he speakes not heere of an accidentall Morall change in vse and office not of an externall deputation of the bread and wine corporall foode to signify spirituall nourishment butt of a Physicall change of a change in nature of such a change as none but omnipotent power of the Creator can make in his Creatures §. 38. S. Gregory Nyssen Orat. Cathec cap. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. ic transmade into the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 WE do rightly and with good reason beleeue that the bread being sanctifyed by Gods word is changed into the body of God the word Christ through the dispensation of his grace entreth by his flesh into all the faithfull and mingleth himselfe with their bodyes which haue their consistence from bread and wine to the end that man being vnited to that which is immortall may attaine to be made partaker of incorruption And these things he bestoweth transelementing by the vertue of his benediction the nature of the things that are seene into it Now to change bread into the body of Christ to trāselement the nature of bread into the flesh of Christ really and substantially vnder the remayning signes and outward forme of bread is to Change and conuert the Elements of bread that is the primordiall and fundamentall entities the matter and the forme whereof the nature of bread is compounded and doth consist into the body and flesh of our Sauiour which is the expresse doctrine of Transubstantiation §. 39. S. Cyril of Hierus●lem Cathec 4. HE our Sauiour changed once water into wine and is he not worthy to be beleeued of vs that he hath changed wine into bloud Cathec 1. The bread and wine of the Eucharist before the sacred inuocation of the adored Trinity were simple bread wine but the inuocation being once done the bread indeed is made the flesh of Christ and the wine his bloud And Cathec 4. with assurance let vs receiue the body and bloud of Christ for in the forme of bread the body is giuen to thee and in the forme of wine the bloud knowing and beleeuing most assuredly that that which appeareth bread is not bread though it seeme so to the tast but it is the body of Christ and that which appeareth wine is not wine as the tast doth iudge it to be but the bloud of Christ Conceaue it not as bare bread and bare wine for it is the holy body bloud of Christ for though the sense doth suggest this vnto thee yet let faith confirme thee that thou iudge not according to the tast but rather take it as of faith most certaine without doubting in the least degree that the body bloud is giuen thee Doth the Councel of Ttent it selfe speake plainer and deliuer in cleerer words the doctrine of Transubstantiation then the fathers of this age haue done almost 1300 yeares agoe do they not acknowledge a substantiall Conuersion of the bread and Wine into the body and bloud of our Lord do they not acknowledge it to be an obiect of faith a great and vnsearchable mystery a worke wrought by the omnipotent Power and word of God How vnexcusable are then your ministers who would make you beleeue the doctrine of Transubstantiation to be no ancienter then the Councel of Latteran In the 3. Age. §. 40. The Author of the serm de Coena Domini Which Caluin and Peter Mattyr acknowledge and cite for S. Cyprians That bread which our Lord gaue vnto his Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature is by the omnipotency of the word made flesh as in the person of Christ the Humanity did appeare the Diuinity lay hid so heere a Diuine essence doth vnspeakably poure it selfe into a visible Sacrament Heere this Author doth teach that as in Christ some thing was visible something invisible so heere in the Sacrament the species are visible the Deifyed flesh is inuisible the nature of bread is changed by Gods omnipotence into flesh therefore is no more heere in the Sacrament §. 41. Origen Homil. 5. in Diuers Lec Eu. When thou receiuest the incorruptible banquet when thou enioyest the bread cup of life eatest drinkest the body bloud of our Lord then our Lord enters vnder thy roofe Do thou therefore humbling thy selfe imitate the Centurion and say Lord I am not worthy thou shouldst enter vnder my roofe c. for where he enters vnworthily there he enters to iudgment to the receiuer Heere according to Origen we have that in the Eucharist there is one that may be spoken vnto called Lord that this Lord enters into those also that receiue him vnworthyly into the wicked but not into their soules therefore into their bodyes at the mouth into that house which we carry about vs. §. 41. Tertullian l. 4. cont Marc cap. 40. THE bread taken distributed to his Disciples he made it his body saying This is my body In these few words Tertullian deliuers three things First the r●all presence of Christs body in the Eucharist 2. The Change of one substance into another substance to wit of the bread into the body of Christ 3. the Power efficacy of his words fecit dicendo Hoc est corpus meum He made it his body saying this is my body In the 2. Age. §. 42. S. Irenaeus l. 5. c. 32. HE Christ took bread which is of the Creature gaue tanckes saying Thi● is my body likewise he confessed the Chalice which is of the creature to be his bloud taught the new oblotion of the new Testamēt which the Church receiuing from the Apostles doth offer to God in all the world Againe l. 4. cap. 34. How can they those Hereticks who denyed our Sauiour to be true God yet beleeued the Eucharist be assured that the bread in which tankes is giuen that is the consecrated bread is the body bloud of their Lord the Chalice his bloud if they do not acknowledge him to be the sonne of the maker of the world by whom wod doth fructisy fountaines flow the earth bringeth forth grasse c. And cap. 37. How if our Lord be the sonne not of God but of another father did he rightly taking bread of the condition of the Creature which is according to vs confesse it to be his body how hath he confirmed the mixture of Chalice to be his bloud Heere S. Irenaeus doth proue establish the article of out Saviours being the sonne of God true God by the omnipotent power he doth exercise in the Eucharist by making the bread the wine his body bloud for his Confessing the bread to be his body his Confirming the wine to be