Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
soul_n	heart_n	spirit_n	word_n	12,735	5	4.2755	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65695	The absurdity and idolatry of host-worship proved, by shewing how it answers what is said in scripture and the writtings of the fathers, to shew the folly and idolatry committed in the worship of heathen deities : also a full answer to all those pleas by which papists would wipe off the charge of idolatry, and an appendix against transubstantiation, with some reflexions on a late popish book called The guide in controversies / by Daniel Whitby ...	Whitby, Daniel, 1638-1726.	1679 (1679)	Wing W1719; ESTC R39040	107,837	157

blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord for this is also said before the Consecration by the Priest M. Chrysost p. 994. Ib. p. 997. and Deacon at the Completion of the greater ingress of the hallowed Gifts and by the people before the Consecration Nor 6. From the Priests saying when he Elevates the Consecrated Bread Holy things to Holy persons to which the Quire answers there is one Holy one Lord Jesus Christ for though R. H. conceives this is so spoken in relation to the Elevated Host and is a confession that the Host is that Lord Jesus Christ they speak of yet Symeon Thessalonicensis will inform him Apud Goar p. 228. that it is only an unanimous confession of the Incarnation of the Son of God who reigneth over all and that it is as if they should have said Who of us is pure who holy there is one only holy Jesus Christ who lovingly doth sanctifie us Nor 7. From what the Priest saith when he breaks the Consecrated Bread into four pieces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Miss p. 1001. Goar in Not M. Chrysost p. 163. viz. the Lamb of God is broken and divided into parts the Son of the Father who is broken and not divided eaten and not consumed but sanctifieth those that partake of him For the Consecrated Bread being broken in memory and imitation of Christs Passion it being broken the Lamb of God and the Son of God may be said to be broken it being distributed and eaten the Lamb of God may well be said to be so as also to be cut into four parts though I suppose R. H. will not allow such a dissection of the true natural body of our Lord and not only of the Consecrated Bread they say break him Sir c. but of the Unconsecrated Bread pierce him Sir Miss Chrysost p. 985. Sacrifice him Sir and when the Priest hath pierced the Gifts he saith One of the Souldiers pierced his side when he sacrificeth them he saith The Lamb of God which taketh away the sms of the world is sacrificed will therefore R. H. hence infer that they believe the Vnconsecrated Bread and Wine to be naturally and properly the Lamb of God and truely sacrificed if not he cannot make the like inference from the like words used after Consecration Nor 8. Is this proved from that Confession and Prayer which the Priest makes when he prepares himself for the reception of the Holy sacrament viz. I believe Lord and confess that thou art Christ the Son of the living God and again Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my sordid roof For 1. The Priest indeed confesseth that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God Matth. xvi 16. in the words of St. Peter but not that the Sacrament is so he now makes that Confession for himself which a little before the people had made for themselves which was to do what every tongue at the last day should confess saith Thess alonicensis Apud Goar p. 228. viz. that Jesus was the Christ to the glory of God the Father 2. The Prayer which follows this Confession is that this Jesus would make him partaker of his precious body and blood wherefore the Priest doth not direct his Prayer to the body and blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Min. Bas apud Goar p. 173. but only to Christ for them 3. The Priest sollicites Christ to enter not only into his body but his Soul into which Christs Body cannot enter that he would united them to the holy body and blood of Christ that worthily receiving the holy Mysteries they may have Christ dwelling in their hearts and be made the Temple of the Holy Ghost not surely Christ as to his body but his word and Spirit and so they do themselves expound themselves praying that they partaking of the sanctified things and being enlivened by them may be united to Christ their true God who saith Miss Myst Ante consecrat apud Goar p. 197 198. he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him that his word dwelling and walking in them they way be made the Temple of the Holy Spirit Nor lastly will this follow from the Deacons saying when he is called to receive the Sacrament behold I come to the immortal King For 1. He doth not say the Sacrament is that immortal King but only that Christ present or in the midst of them assembled is so Christ being therefore invisibly present as they assure us and he himself hath promised in all his Ordinances and more especially in this by which he spiritually dwelleth in and is united to the due Communicant well may be say when he receives those Elements with which such blessings are conveighed behold I come to the immortal King Goar in Miss Chrys n. 110. 2. It is their custom in their Liturgies to speak of that which representeth any thing as if it were the thing it self Goar in Miss Chrys n. 74. Sym. Thess ib. p. 222. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Goar p. 478.510 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. They speak of the Holy Bible as if it were Christ himself when it is carried by the Priest they say come let us worship Christ when the Priest enters with it into the Chancel they add lift up the gates viz. that the King of Glory may come in Because this Gospel bears some representation of the Son of God thus also in the Office of the little Habit and the Angelick Habit the Superior tells the Monk when he stretcheth forth his hand unto the Gospel behold Christ is invisibly present here when the Monk takes the Sizzers out of the Gospel thou takest them saith he from the hand of Christ and why may not the Sacrament be styled the Immortal King by the same Metaphor by which the Gospel is here styled Christ v. Dallaeum de Cult lat l. 7. cap. 11. without intending to perform any higher worship to it than what they pay unto the Gospel What R. H. further urgeth from Cabasilas is only from a false Translation and so deserveth no consideration To conclude Sacramentum debito cultu tractet religiose colat Humiliter adorent Genuflexus adorat Rit p. 63 64. Missal saepius vide ibid. Rythmum S. Thomae ad S. Eucharistiam there be two signal differences betwixt the worship of the Host prescribed in the Roman Church and that which is observed in the Greek that whereas in the Mass and Ritual of the Roman Church we find frequent injunctions Religiously to worship and humbly to adore the very Sacrament and frequent intimations of worship due unto it whereas they pray unto the Sacrament and frequently acknowledg it to be their God there is not any thing of this nature to be found in any of the Eastern Liturgies 2. Whereas the Roman Host is by them worshipped as God not only during the Celebration of

the extremity of madness and stupidity for any man to worship what he eats or eat what he doth Worship i.e. to worship as the Church of Rome commands all men to worship under the highest penalties and therefore it is plain Phrensie to imagine the determination of the Trent Council and the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to be agreeable to truth When we call Wine Bacchus saith Cicero and our Fruits Ceres we use the a Cum frug●s Cererem vinum Liberum dicimus genere nos quidem Sermanis uti●ur usitato Sed e●quam t●m amentem esse putas qui illad quo v●scatur Deum credat esse Cicero Nat. De●r Lib. 3. common mode of speaking but do you think any of us so mad as to imagin that which he eats to be his God Averroes was a learned Heathen who flourished about the XL Century when this portentous Doctrine first obtained in the Christian World which he could not forbear to brand in this sort b Apad Person E●●● l. 3. cap. 29. p. 973. Vide etiam 12. Metaph. I have enquired into all Religions and have found none more foolish than the Christians because that very God they worship they with their teeth devour and thus he concludes because the Christians eat what they do worship let my soul go to Philosophers Lib. 2. de Euch. Cap. 12. § 2. And Bellarmin himself confesseth that this amongst the Infidels was always judged to be stuliissimum paradoxum as from the words saith he of Averroes doth appear Hence as the highest calumny which the Mahumetans can cast upon us we are by them reproached as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Devourers of our God And Mounsieur La Boulay informs us that being angry with him Voyag Part. 1 cap. 10. p. 21. Armed Ben. Edris apud Hosing Hist Eccles Sec. 16. par 2. p. 160. they amongst other names of infamy did call him Infidel and Mange Dieu i. e. an Eater of his God Nay they affirm that by thus eating of his flesh the Christians use him worse than did the Jews that crucified him because say they it is more salvage to eat his flesh and drink his blood than only to procure his death Baruch vi 72. the Prophet Jeremy in his Epistle to the Captive Jews informs them that what the Babylonians worshipped should afterwards be eaten and by this saith he you may know they are no Gods Why therefore should not the same argument suffice to shew the vanity of the supposed Godhead of the Host If as it follows there these Gods which shall be eaten be a reproach unto the Country where they are adored this Romish God must be a great reproach to all those Christian Countrys where he is eaten and adored Some of the Antient Fathers do represent this as the extremity of folly that men should worship that which other Nations eat If it be pious for all the worship God saith Origen ●Contra Celsum 5. p. 249. according to the custom of their Country as Celsus pleads then must some worship that which by other Nations is destroyed or eaten and consumed at meals for some esteem it pious to worship a Crocodile and to devour that which is adored by others some count it piety to adore a Calf and others to Deifie a Goat and would not these things introduce a great confusion into the Laws of Justice Piety Contra Gentes p. 25 26. and Religion This Athanasius reckons as an instance of the abominable and the repugnant worship of the Aegyptians that the same Fish which some of them did Consecrate as a God was made the food of others The Aegyptians saith he do adore a Calf the Lybians worship Sheep both which in other Nations are sacrificed and fed upon this saith he is a certain indication of the folly of the Heathen worship can we then possibly conceive these very Christians did dayly worship as their God what they themselves and others who participated with them did continually eat Moreover some of the Fathers do represent this as the most evident conviction of the folly of the Heathen Worship and Religion that they devoured what they themselves adored Do you not worship Nonne Apim bovem cum Aegyptiis adoratis pascitis p. 32. and also feed upon an Ox which you call Apis saith Minutius and is not this as great a folly as the worship of an Asses-head which without shew of reason you object against us Christians They saith Theodoret who changed the image of the incorruptible God into the likeness of Birds and beasts and creeping things should have considered that some of those beasts were eaten by them and should not they by parity of reason who adore the Host as their Creator and their incorruptible God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Com. in Rom. i. 23. consider that this Host is eaten by them but they saith he through the extremity of madness and stupidity did Deifie the Images of that God which themselves have eaten and if the Host which they themselves confess to be truly stiled the Image of our Lord be worshipped as a God and eaten by them must not the Romanists betruly charged with like stupidity and madness 3. Some of the Fathers do expresly say that 't is the extremity of madness to worship what we eat and that God by the prohibition of unclean beasts and by permitting his own people to eat the clean designed to preserve them from the irrational folly of the Heathens who worshipped birds and beasts c. God saith Theodoret seeing that men would fall to such extremity of madness as to worship beasts as Gods the better to restrain that wickedness permitted that they should be eaten which in the judgment of Theodoret was the most natural preservative against this mad Idolatry because saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qa 55. in Genes it is the highest folly or stupidity to worship what is eaten God therefore doth pronounce some living creatures clean and some unclean that abborring the unclean they might not Deifie them Again he adds that God pronouncing some beasts unclean and others clean persuades us not to think that any of them could be Gods for how can any man of sense think that to be a God which he abominates as unclean Quest XI in Levit. p. 104. D. or which is offered to the true God and eaten by himself He farther saith that God enjoyned the Jews to eat those Creatures which the Aegyptians worshipped as Gods Ser. 7. ad Graecos Infideles p. 150. ed. Sylb. that they might be induced to despise what they did eat For knowing that they were superstitious and yet were lovers of their Guts he cures one Disease by another and to their supperstition he doth oppose their appetites for causing them to abstain from Swines flesh as unclean which was the only flesh the Aegyptians fed upon and by his Law permitting them to eat of other creatures as

not follow as some Romanists conceive that they do worship with Latria this most Holy Sacrament For our Lords Body is no due object of Latria and that his Soul and his Divinity is there united to his body they do not affirm nor can it be collected from these words this is my body broken and my blood shed for you his body broken and his blood shed being his body and his blood disunited or in a state of actual separation from his soul if you collect from reason that if his body be there present his Divinity must be there also because it is united hypostatically to the body and therefore never separated from the body as R. H. Frequently insinuates I answer 1. That if we must not be permitted to use our reason to confute this Doctrine neither are you to use your reason to establish it for why a demonstration against a Doctrine should not as well destroy the supposed truth of that Doctrine as a demon stration for it should confirm its truth I am not able to conceive Besides is it a contradiction to assert that Christs Almighty power may reproduce his body not thus united to his soul and his Divinity or not If it be not then may his body be thus extant in the Holy Sacrament If you say it is a contradiction to assert that the same body should be united to the word and not united I Answer if the same body of our Lord may be both eaten and not eaten eaten by them who have received the Host and not eaten by them who have not yet received eaten in the Host received not eaten in the Host reserved if it may be under the species of bread and not under the species of bread under the species of bread as it is in the Holy Sacrament and not under the species of bread as it is in Heaven why may it not be united to the word and not united to the word united to the word as it is in Heaven but not united to the word as it lies sensless on the Altar When therefore R. H. doth so often mind us that Christ body was never separated from the divinity I Answer that this is a most certain truth when it is spoken of his Natural and Glorified body but is not so when it is spoken of his Sacramental body of which ten thousand things may be asserted which agree not to his Celestial body 3. As it is certain that the Lutherans do hold the Consecrated Elements to be Christs real body and blood and yet do never tender the worship of Latria to them so may the Eastern Churches also do nay it is certain that they do not tender the worship of Latria to them as the Papists do and are obliged to do by the custom and command of their Church Sacranus doth inform us of the Russians that they do not adore the Consecrated Elements Neither the Greeks nor Russians do perform any worship to them saith the Jesuit Scarga L. 3. de Sacr. Euch. c. 21. The Greeks aster the Consecration of the Elements exhibit none or very little reverence to them saith Arcadius moreover the Cophti and the Habassines do not so much as elevate the Confecrated Host nor afterwards reserve it as doth the Church of Rome Brievw p. 158 167. which is a farther evidence that they do not adore it with the worship of Latria But saith R.H. this adoration is a necessary consequent of the belief of the real presence Galde disc 3. ch 8. §. 82. n. 3. to this I Answer 1. by denying that this is any necessary consequence of the belief of Transubstantiation and if it were so we have hence reason to presume the doctrine of Transubstantiation cannot be antient seeing this necessary consequence of it was not observed in the Western Church before the XI or XII Century this adoration being not practised and much less enjoyned by the Church till then De Cub Lat. l. 7. cap. 44. l. 3. cap. 19. as Mr. Dally hath demonstrated 2. I Answer that nothing is more frequent than for Churches and persons to maintain a doctrine and yet in practice to disclaim the necessary consequences of that doctrine I hope R. H. doth urge against us nothing but what he thinks will necessarily follow from our doctrine and yet he knows we do disclaim his inferences and may in due time shew him we have sufficient reason so to do Ibid. p. 265 266. § IV And whereas R.H. doth endeavour to prove that the Greek Church agree with them in giving of this adoration to the Consecrated Host from certain passages of the Mass used among them that the disingenuity and weakness of his pleas may be more evident Which are all taken from the Author of the Tract styled Perpet de la Foy c. and answered by Mr. Dally de cult Lat. c. 3. c. 19. Chrysost To. 6. p. 983. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 9.4 Ib. l. 29 30. Ib. l. 35 40. I shall at large relate their manner of proceeding in the performance of their Mass and then return a satisfactory Answer to what he offers from these passages for confirmation of his vain presumption First then the Greeks begin this Mass with worshipping or bowing thrice towards the East before the Image of our Saviour and of the Blessed Virgin Soon after they bow thrice before the Table on which the Sacred Gifts that is the Bread and Wine is placed though yet they be not laid upon the Altar to be Consecrated Then the Priest saith O God be propitious to me a sumer and have mercy on me and again O our Saviour thou being nailed to the Cross and pierced with a Spear hast redeemed us from the Curse of the law and opened the fountain of eternal life glory be given to thee then taking the Oblation i.e. the Bread which hath the figure of a Gross impressed upon it called Sigillum into his left hand and the spear into his right hand he fastneth the Lance into the right side of the Cross upon the Bread Ib. l. 39. Ib. l. 41. and saith he was brought as a sheep to the slaughter then fastning it in the left side he adds that as an innocent lamb which is dumb before the shearer L. 43. he openeth not his mouth then fastning it in the upper part of the Cross he adds P. 985 l. 1. in his humiliation his judgment was taken away then he fasteneth it in the lower part and adds who can declare his Generation L. 8. his life was taken away or lift up from the earth Then the Deacon saith sacrifice Sir L. 10. and the Priest sacrisiceth him N. B. saying L. 13. The lamb of God which taketh away the sms of the world is facrifieed for the life and salvation of the world Then the Deacon saith pierce him Sir L. 14. and the Priest pierceth him with the Spear saying one of the Soldiers