Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
soul_n	blood_n	body_n	precious_a	3,677	5	8.0318	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68090	An apology or defence for the Christians of Frau[n]ce which are of the eua[n]gelicall or reformed religion for the satisfiing of such as wil not liue in peace and concord with them. Whereby the purenes of the same religion in the chiefe poyntes that are in variance, is euidently shewed, not onely by the holy scriptures, and by reason: but also by the Popes owne canons. Written to the king of Nauarre and translated out of french into English by Sir Iherom Bowes Knight.; Apologie ou défense pour les chretiens de France de la religion reformée. English	Gentillet, Innocent, ca. 1535-ca. 1595.; Bowes, Jerome, Sir, d. 1616.	1579 (1579)	STC 11742; ESTC S103023	118,829	284

their mouthes doe crash and crush betweene their teeth the very naturall body of our Sauiour And vpon this doctrine they conclude that we ought to worshippe the bread of the supper which they tearm the holy hoast Because say they it is the very body of our Lord Iesus Christ. But the Protestants allow not this Transubstantiation of the bread into flesh nor of the wine into bloud nor consequently the worshipping of thē as though Iesus Christ were personally enclosed within the compasse of the boast For they say that euery Sacrament is called a Sacrament because it is a signe of a holy thing In so much that the outward signe is to be conceiued by the eye and the thing signifyed which is inward and spirituall is to be conceiued by the mind And that therfore in the holy supper the bread and the wine are the signes which we see with our eyes receue with our mouthes but the body and the bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ be the thinges signifyed the which we comprehend and receue by the mind as true spirituall foode ordayned to feede the soule and not the body Now to receaue and eate this spirituall meate and to cause it so to disgest in our soules which are spirites as it may geue them such nourishmēt as may make them liue euerlastingly like as the food it self and our soules that receaue it are spirituall thinges so must the eating therof be spirituall also And to make this spirituall eating to become effectual we must not imagine that our soules are remoued from hence and conueyed vp to heauen nor that God leaueth his place in heauen to come downe to vs heare below for the minde of man doth wel execute his workes though the thing that it worketh vpon be farre distant from it As for example we see how it doth truely and effectually vnderstand the thinges that are farre from it by distance of place by meanes of the habilitie or power of reasoning which serueth it as an Instrument to ioyne it to the thing that it worketh vpon how farre of so euer it be by distance of place And euen as reason serueth the minde as an Instrument to couple it to the thing that it ameth at in vnderstanding euen so likewise doth faith serue the minde for an Instrument to receaue and take hold of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ in the spirituall meate drinke notwithstanding that he be in heauē on the right hand of his father from whence he will not come vntill the last day This māner of eating then which is done spiritually by the meanes of faith is no lesse reall than if it were done carnally by the mouth of the fleshly body because the spirituall actions of the minde bee no lesse reall and true than the corporall and fleshly actions of the body which are perceyued by the eyes The third difference touching the supper doth consist in the manner of receiuing it For the Catholicques I alwayes meane the scholedeuines do hold opinion that the lay people that is to saye those whiche are no priestes ought not to communicate but only with the sacrament of bread And that the priestes as beyng more worthy ought to communicate both with bread and wine And yet least the lay people should be difcontented with this partage they say that the body of Christ is not without bloud but that the bloud doth alwayes accompany the body and that so by consoquence the lay people in receiuing the sacrament of the body receiue also the sacrament of the bloud They hold opinion also that the priest ought to receiue this holy sacramēt euery day And that it is sufficiēt for the lay people to receiue it once a yeare and that it is not sufferable that they shoulde touche the sacrament with their bare handes But the Protestantes do in no wise allow such parting of it nor yet their fond shift of consequency but hold opinion that the holy sacrament as wel of the bloud as of the body of Christ ought to be distributed vnto all the faythfull without any distinction of lay people or priestes because that otherwise the supper of the Lord should not be celebrated whol but by halfedeales And therfore that it is good and necessary to receiue it as often as they may that men may be the oftner put in minde of the excellent misterye of our redemption and be made partakers of the heauenly foode whiche geueth euerlasting lyfe to our soules Likewise they say that in asmuch as Christ sayd Take ye which is referred to the hand and Eate ye which is referred to the mouth the faythful ought to receiue the Sacrament into their owne handes and the custome of the Primitiue Church was to receiue the sacrament with their owne hands as witnesseth Eusebius Thus you see in effect what the doctrine aswell of the protestantes as of the catholiques is concerning these three poyntes of the supper of our Lord whiche are in controuersie amongest them And now may a man easely iudge by comparing the one doctrine with the other which of thē doth best yeld god his due honor For if the bread were changed or transubstantiated as the Catholickes tearme it into the very body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ it should follow by their doctrine that he should come euery day down from heauen to be handled and eaten of a Million of Priestes and to be bruised and crushed betwixt their teeth yea and that he might also be eaten of mise and gnawen with wormes which are thinges to much against reason and too too intollerable to be heard For it were a thing very vnbeseeming the maiestie of the sonne of God to be so cōmonly conueid through the hands Mouthes and Bellies of so many Priestes full often foule and filthy both in body and soule And that his precious body should be subiect to be eaten of mice and gnawn with worms And therfore the Protestants doe best yeald Christ his due honor for that they vphold that his body is gone vp into heauen and there sitteth at the right hand of his father and that frō thence he neither doth nor will remoue vntill the last day when he shal come to iudge both the quick and the dead And therfore that our worshiping of him must be in heauen and we must lift vp ovr hartes on high and not worship him in the priests hands or in the pix Likewise they much more honor the supper of the Lord than doe the Catholicks because they doe so often celebrate the same that not by half deales but wholly vtterly abhorring the broosing and crushing of the flesh and bones of our Sauiour betwixt their teeth as a doctrine more meete for the barbarous people of America and the Canibals than for Christians Neither will they say they beleeue the contrary of that which naturall sence doth teach vs that is to say that the things which we see with our

eyes and tast with our mouthes to be bread and wine should be flesh and bloud No nor that neither which is contrary to the order of Nature namely that accidents should haue an abyding without a substance fitte and conuenient for them to be in or that a naturall body of a man may be inclosed in so small roome as the bignes or roundnes of an hoast for these things are contrary to nature And if the Catholicks reply that God is almighty and able to doe these things the Protestants doe answere that doutlesse he is of power to doe whatsoeuer he listeth In so much that because God will neither sinne nor lie we say he can neither lie nor sin But our Lord meant so litle that his body after his glorification should receaue vnnaturall qualities that cleane contrarywise he would haue his Apostles to iudge by the sence of their sight and feeling that his body was a true and perfect naturall body and not an imagined body And although the effects of the Sacrament be thinges diuine and supernaturall yet are they not contrary to nature as those are which depend vpon the doctrine of Transubstantiation Neither can it be proued by the word of God that the Sacraments or any other of the ordinances of God conteine any thing contrary to nature This doctrine of the Protestantes touching this Sacrament is also euidently grounded vpon the word of god For first of all we doe say and beleue according to the articles of our faith that Iesus Christ is ascended into heauen from whence he shall come not ten thousand times a dry but only once at the last day when he shall come to iudge both the quick and the dead Which thing S. Peter declareth very openly when in speaking of the last comming of our Lord he sayth thus Whom the heauens shall contein vntill the full setting of all things in perfecte state which God hath foretold by the mouthes of all his holy Prophetes that haue beene since the beginning of the world And Iesus Christ himselfe also did wel geue vs to vnderstand that we should not beleue that his body after his ascention should euery day return hither on the earth nor remayne shut vp in boxes when he said to his disciples which found themselues greeued at the shedding of a little ointmēt vpon his body You shall not haue me alwayes with you And yet notwithstanding we must beleeue that by the efficacie of his grace he will alway be with vs as he declared to his Apostles in sending them throughout the world to preach the doctrine of his grace saying vnto them Behold I am alwayes with you euen vnto the end of the world And we must furthermore consider that the body of Christ was made in all points like vnto the bodies of other men except sinne as the scriptures do witnes In so much that it hath euer had and still hath at this present a certain measure of greatnes and thicknes as the bodies of other men haue Wherupon it followeth of consequence that his body neither is nor euer hath been in any mo places than one at one time And therefore when he celebrated hys holy supper with hys Disciples the day before he suffered hys death passion his body which sate at the table was not in the bread which he gaue thē for the nature of a true body doth not permit it to be in any moe places than one at one tyme And if they reply that a glorified body may be in many places at one instaunt the aunswere thereunto is that the body of Christ was not thē glorified but mortall at the tyme when hee celebrated hys holy supper was put to death the day after and that the wordes of the holy supper cānot as now be true in any other sort than they were whē he spake them and instituted the Sacrament And therefore this replication is impertinent and besides that it is vntrue for the body of Christ hath not through his glorification lost the qualities of a perfect body whiche is to be felt to haue flesh and bones and to be contayned within the compasse of certayne bowndes And therefore when hee celebrated the holy supper hys body was not in the bread which he gaue to hys Disciples and much les was the bread transubstantiated into hys body Whereof it followeth that these words of Iesus Christ This is my body This is my bloud ought to be vnderstood sacramētally as if he had said This is the sacrament of my body of my bloud because that as is aforesayd the nature of a very true body in deede permitteth vs not to vnderstand that euery morsell of the bread which he gaue to his disciples was his owne natural body Also the words which S. Luke and S. Paul vse in speaking of the Sacrament of his bloud do well declare that it is so to bee vnderstood For they say not that Christ sayd This is my bloud but rather this cup is the newe couenaunt in my bloud Neuerthelesse wee must thinke it all one with the other speach where it is sayd this is my bloud or els should S. Luke and S. Paule be contrary to S. Mathew and S. Marke which were vngodly to beleue So that if it be graūted as truth is that to say this is my bloud is asmuch as to say this cup is the couenant in my bloud It followeth playnely that this manner of speaking ought to be vnderstoode of the sacrament of his bloud or of the sacrament of the new couenant of his bloud which is all one and commeth all to one sense For the bread and the wine of the supper are the sacramentes of the body and bloud of our Sauiour Iesus Christe and of the newe couenaunt which he maketh with vs because that in receiuing this sacrament with our mouthes our soules do also participate and receiue spiritually and really the thing signified which is the body and bloud of Christ in whiche participation consisteth the couenant which he maketh with vs. And in very deed Iesus Christ him selfe in speaking to his disciples of the eating of his flesh and of the drinking of his bloud yea and of the supper it selfe as the Catholickes expound it perceiuing them to be offended thereat tolde them that it ought to be vnderstood of a spirituall feeding and not of a crusshing of his flesh and hys bones betwixt their teeth nor of a cāniballike kinde of drinking of mans bloud as the catholicke scholemen of these dayes do vnderstand it Neither ought it to seeme a more straunge interpretation of these wordes this is my body to say this is the sacrament of my body thā to make the same interpretation of a great sort of other figuratiue speaches conteined in the scripture As for example where Christ sayth I am the vine and my Father is the husbandman I am the gate And agayne it is sayd the rocke was

part of this sentēce seemeth to forbidde a good deed for it sayth receyue not the sinner Vnderstand therefore that this is spoken by a figure taking the sinner for the sin to the ende that thou admit not any sinne Thus haue you heard the very wordes of S. Augustine which doe very well declare vnto vs as well by the rule as by the first example which he setteth downe that the eating of the flesh and bloud of christ in his supper ought to be vnderstoode spiritually sacramentally and not after the manner of the cannibals which is vtterly voyd of all humanity and good manners as those transubstantiatiers would make vs beleue And whereas the catholickes vphold that this sacramēt ought not to be distributed vnto the lay people but by halfes which they doe terme vnder one kinde the same is expresly cōdemned by their owne canons as hie treason towardes god For you shall here what a canon sayth which is taken out of the decrees of Pope Gelasius It is done vs to vnderstand that some hauing receyued the holy sacrament of the body do abstayne from the cup of the holy bloud which thing they ought not to do for in asmuch as it is euident that in so doing they entangle themselues in I wot not what a kind of superstition they ought to receyue the sacrament whole togither or els to abstayne from it altogither For the deuiding a sunder of one selfe same mistery can not be done without great trechery And furthermore where as the most part of the lay catholikes do content themselues with the receyuing of the sacrament onely once a yeare which is at Easter they are condemned by the canons which declare that those are not to be taken for catholikes which receyue not three times in a yeare These be the very wordes of a cannon taken out of the councell of Agatha The laye people which receyue not the Lordes supper at Christmas at Easter and at whitsontide let them not bee taken ne reputed for Catholikes Thus may all men perceyue iudge with what manner of passion these catholikes are caried away which do so boldly condemne the Protestants as heretiques for their doctrine concerning this poynt of the supper of the Lord and so do spitefully name them Sacramentaries as though they denied this sacramēt For in so doing they do also vnawares condemne their owne cānons which otherwise they esteme so greatly that many of them do attribute more authority vnto those Cannons than to the holy scripture saying that they be the determinations of the holy mother church wherunto they ought to sticke bicause the scripture is to obscure and may be taken both wayes But indede it is nothing so for the scripture hath but one sence which is easy to be found out of a man that is willing to learne by conferring one text with another But the cannons are in many cases quite contrary one to another I know full well that too shift off these contrarieties the schole men say that we must always hold vs to those that were last made But I answer them that that is asmuch to say as we must alwayes hold vs to the worst For euery man of sound iudgement may always easely perceyue that the ancient cannons are better than those of latter tyme. And further to abate the authority of their canōs by their canōs thēselues I say that the cannons do will vs to serch the vnderstāding of the obscure textes of the scripture in the scripture it selfe And those which seeke it elsewhere are the very scholemasters of errour These are the very wordes of a cannon What is more vngodly than to hold an vngodly doctrine and not to beleue those that are most wise and learned But all such do fall into this kind of ignorance as make not their recourse to the wordes of the Prophets to the writing of the Apostles and to the authority of the Euangelistes to learne the knowledge of the truth in any obscure poynt but will needes trust to their own wit And therefore they become scholemaisters of errour because they list not to be disciples of the truth Which cannon in very deede doth deeply in few wordes condemne the scholedeuines that make more accompt of the authority of the Cannons and doctors of the church than of the very text of the scripture which they accompt to be to obscure And true it is that some textes of the scripture are in some places very darke howbeit there is no text so obscure but it may be made playne by other textes of the same scripture Specially if they resort not to the cannons and decretalls but to the Hebrue text for the the olde testament and to the Greeke text for the new testament as S. Augustine doth teach vs who sayth in this wise Such as vnderstand the latine tongue must for the better vnderstanding of the whole Scriptures haue the knowledge of two other languages more that is to wit of the Hebrue and of the Greek to the end they may haue recourse to the very fountayne of the originall coppies when the diuersitye of the Latin rranslations doth breede any doubte And hereto accordeth a Canon which sayth thus Like as the trueth of the things that are contayned in the old Testament ought to be examined by the Hebrue books Euen so the truth which is written in the new Testament ought to be made playne and cleere by the Greek bookes I besech you what can be braied aagaynst this Canon by the whole herd of these Asses which are so bold as to say that the Hebrue and Greeke tongues be the Languages of Heritickes and therefore doe vtterly reiect and condemne them Do they not by the same meanes condemne the canons and auncient doctors And if they condemne them Are they to bee holden for good Catholickes Well let vs come now to speake of the Masse Of the Masse The viii Chapter THe difference betwixt the Masse and the Supper of our Lord is great For the Catholick schoolemen which vnderstand what the masse is for all of them vnderstand it not doe say that it is a Sacrifice whereby the Priest offereth vp the body and the bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ vnto God for the soule health both of the quick and of the dead Which Sacrifice is accompanied with diuers other parcels as accessaries that is to say with diuers prayers and diuers texts taken out of the gospels and epistles of the new Testament and with divers verses taken out of the Psalmes of Dauid and other bookes of the olde Testament and interlarded throughout with many and diuers Ceremonies And this goodly omnigatherū hath bene patched together at many Sondry tymes by dyuers Popes And that is the cause why the Catholickes do put the masse among the cōmaundementes of their holy mother Church For this commaundement Thou shalt heare masse vpō the Sondayes and vpon other feastfull dayes inioyned is the first

whoredome and bawdry which is amongst the most parte of Priests And moreouer the Canons denounce those persons to be Idolaters which heare the Masse of any Priest or Deacon that is a Fornicator For thus saith a Canon taken out of S. Gregory If any Priest Deacon or Subdeacon be stayned with the sinne of fornication we in the name of the father almighty by the authoritie of S. Peter doe vtterly forbid bim to come into the Church vntill he haue done penance and made amendes And if they continue in their sinne let no mā presume to heare their diuine seruice for their blessings shall be turned into cursings their prayer into sinne And this doth the Lord himselfe witnesse where he saith by his Prophet I will curse your blessings And as many as disobay this holesome commaundement shall fall into the sinne of Idolatry Were this Canon wel vnderstood of the infinite number of pore ignorant soules that hold of the Romish Religion and doe ordinarily hear the Masses and other Church seruices of lecherous priestes I beleeue they would rather forbeare it vtterly than defile themselues so wretchedly with Idolatrie And as saith this Canon receiue the curse of God in receiuing the blessing of such a priest But ignorance accompanied with error which hath been long bred and rooted in the Romain Church doe cause the poore people to be content to heare the masses of these Fornicators But if a maryed Priest should sing them a Mas they would stone him to death and not allow his masse to be good Behold what power long forgrowen error hath ouer poore ignorant people and how strangely the tirany therof causeth their wretched consciences to goe astray For by the auncient Canons it is a cursed thing to shun the offering of a maryed priest or to beleeue that the same is to be despised because he is marryed These be the very words of a Canon taken out of the councell of Gangra If any man make difference of a marryed Priest in forbearing to come to his offering as though he might not doe it because he is marryed Cursed be he And there is yet another Canon which saith that no Priest hath power to consecrate singingcakes except he be a man of good life Which thing should make the Romish Catholicks to thinke that they put them selues in great danger of Idolatry when they worship the singing cake although it were admitted that their doctrine of Transubstantiation were true which thing the Protestants doe still deny For questionles by this Canon all be Idolaters which worship the singing bread that is consecrated by priests of euill life as the most part of them be These be the very wordes of the Canon The priestes which minister the body and bloud of the Lord vnto the people doe wickedly in beleeuing that by the law of Christ it is the wordes which the priest speaketh and not his good life which make the consecration of the Sacrament And that to doe the same there nedeth but only the solemne pronouncing of the prayer without any merit of the priest for it is written that the Prieste which hath any blemish in him may not approch to the Lord to offer any Sacrifice vnto him So then by this Canon it may be well said that in these dayes there are very few Priestes which haue power to consecrate Moreouer in these dayes they obserue no parte of the Ceremonies appointed by the Canons in the saying of their Masse For they ought to sing the Masse in single linnen cloth and not in silks of colors These are the expresse words of the Canon By the opinion of vs all we ordain that no man presume to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Altar in cloth of silke nor in any other cloth of color but in linnen cloth only consecrated by the Bishop That is to say made and wouen of flax which groweth vpon the earth Euen in such like sorte as the bodye of our Lord Iesus Christ was buried and wrapped in a simple white sheete made of flax Neither ought they to sing or say Masse without two assistantes least they should offend in the congruity of Grammer in hauing but one when they said Dominus vobiscum and Orate pro me fratres speaking in the plurall number But yet this notwithstanding the most part of Masses are said nowadayes but with one Clarke to accompany the priest yea and often times the Priest is constrayned to answere himselfe as it is sayd by a common prouerbe of a priest named Martin These be the very wordes of the Canō It is also ordayned that no priest shal presume to say masse except he haue two assistants so as he himselfe may be the third For when he saith in the plurall number the Lord be with you these words of the Memento Brethren pray for me it is very conuenient that other folks should answere of themselues to his salutation So as if all these Canons be well considered euery man may well perceiue that the Romish Catholicks haue no great reason to make so great account of their Mas or to thinke the Protestants to be in error in that they will neither come at it nor allow of it Of Maryage The ix Chapter AS cōcering marriage the doctrine of the Protestauntes differeth not much from the doctrine of the romish catholickes In deed the Catholickes do terme it a sacrament and the protestantes say it is a holy institution of God but not a sacrament because that in euery sacramēt there must be an outward signe to bee discerned with the eie and an inward thing signified which is inuisible as I haue sayed of Baptisme heretofore shewing that in that sacrament the water is the outward signe and the washing of the soule is the inward inuisible thing signified And in the supper of our lord the bread and the wine are the outward signes and the body and the bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ bee the things signified which our soules do receiue inwardly and spiritually But it cannot be sayd that in marriage ther is an outward visible signe and an inward inuisible thing signified And therfore it is not a Sacrament Agayne the Protestants affirm that marriage is honorable amongst all sorts of people be they lay men or men of the church noble or vnnoble rich or poore because God hath instituted it and hath permitted the vse thereof to all persons of what quality soeuer they be and to celebrate the same at all seasons And that to make gloses and limitations or restrayntes of the which God hath set at liberty is to goe about to be wiser than God which in deede is starke foolishnesse beastly presumption and heddy trayterousnesse Contrarywise the romish Catholickes holde opinion that it is not lawfull for men of the church to be married at all nor to celebrate any marriage in Lent in Aduent and in the foure ember weeks And the reason whereupon they haue