Selected quad for the lemma: water_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
water_n baptism_n holy_a word_n 4,975 5 4.5408 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A79524 Catholike history, collected and gathered out of Scripture, councels, ancient Fathers, and modern authentick writers, both ecclesiastical and civil; for the satisfaction of such as doubt, and the confirmation of such as believe, the Reformed Church of England. Occasioned by a book written by Dr. Thomas Vane, intituled, The lost sheep returned home. / By Edward Chisenhale, Esquire. Chisenhale, Edward, d. 1654. 1653 (1653) Wing C3899; Thomason E1273_1; ESTC R210487 201,728 571

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

significantly there present then they agree with us but if really in the bread then we do not concur in opinion with them for the reasons afore in pare rehearsed and for other reasons hereafter following I might instance many particular reasons against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation as that 1. Nothing was broken eaten drunken and chawed but the accidents of the body because they deny the bread and wine to be the visible elements which is against Reason and all authority or else if they will have a body there That it is without accidents and so they must either make accidents without substances or substances without accidents 2. When the bread mouldeth and turneth into worms or the wine sowreth or turneth into vinegar it is the bread mouldeth and the wine that sowreth Christ is the same yesterday to day and for ever Therefore are the bread and wine substantially there and if they were but accidents then no body could be made thereof as worms or material vinegar 3. Let a dog or cat c. eat of that bread and he is nourished thereby which could not be if the substance remained not 4. The Scripture calleth them bread and wine after consecration which are names of substance not of accidents which if substance remained not it were a meer illusion of our senses and so we with the Jews make Christ a Jugler making things appear to our outward senses which are not 5. The Sacrament had a beginning and hath an end put to it it is to be received in remembrance of Christs death till he come and then to cease Wherefore there can be no real transubstantiated presence of Christ for he is from eternity to eternity 6. If there be a transubstantiated body of Christ then is Christ every day new made and as many Wafers as many Christs which is impossible for his substantial body to be in several places either in the several Wafers or the several places of consecration at one and the same instant of time 7. This doctrine doth impugn the consent of the ancient Catholike Church which de fide professeth and believeth Christ to be made of the nature and substance of his blessed mother and therefore not every day to be made anew of the substance of bread and wine for if it were so then the same body that was crucified is not eaten or else that body which was crucified was made of bread and wine which is flat blasphemy against the holy Ghost by whose operation Christ was made and born of the flesh of his mother and suffered upon the Cross for the salvation of all believers Which Christ is no otherwise joyned to the elements in this Sacrament but Sacramentally as the holy Ghost in Baptism is joyned to the water not that the holy Spirit is made of the substance of the water or the water turned into the holy Ghost 8. It is against the express Scripture and Symbole of Faith grounded upon that Scripture which teaches that Christ concerning his body and humane nature is in heaven We believe that he was conceived of the holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead buried that he descended into hell the third day he rose again from the dead and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead Christ said to his disciples I leave the world Joh. 16. and Mat. 26. Ye shall ever have poor folks with you but me ye shall not have always Mark 16. He was taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of his Father Col. 1.3 Heb. 8. and Heb. 10. He sits continually at the right hand of God And Saint Peter Act. 3. faith that the heavens shall contain him until the time that all things shall be restored And Christ himself gave warning of this errour aforehand in Matth. 24. saying The time will come when there shall be many deceivers in the world which shall say Here is Christ and there is Christ but believe them not Thus the whole current of the Scripture makes against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation And because the Papists may not object against us that it is a novel interpretation or our mis-understanding of Scripture in this point I will make it manifest that the Primitive Church never taught this doctrine of Transubstantiation but were utterly against it as may appear by the testimony of these ancient Fathers Origen upon Matthew Tract 33. The Fathers against Transubstantiation saith Christ hath two natures God and Man as God he is with us always unto the end of the world as man he is not He is gone hence and absent in his Humanity but is always present in his Divinity S. Austin in his Epist 55. ad Dardanium Christ as concerning his Manhood is now there from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead and as he ascended so shall he come in the self-same form and substance to the which he gave immortality but thereby did not change the nature Now saith he after this form we must not say that he is everywhere for we must take heed saith he that we do not so stablish his Divinity that we take away the verity of his body Cyril upon S. John lib. 6. cap. 14. Christ took away from hence the presence of his body but in the majesty of his Godhead he is everywhere he according to his promise is with his disciples even unto the end of the world S. Ambrose upon Luke lib. 10. cap. 24. We must not seek Christ upon earth but in heaven where he sits at the right hand of God And S. Gregory in Hom. Pasch saith Christ is not here in the presence of his flesh and yet as he is God he is absent nowhere by the presence of his majestie all unanimously and Apostolike being of one consent in this that Christ as touching his humanity is onely in heaven at the right hand of God And particularly these Fathers following are absolutely against this very point of Transubstantiation Justinus The Fathers against Transubstantiation an ancient Writer and holy Martyr who wrote about an hundred yeers after Christ in his second Apologie saith that the bread and wine in the Sacrament are not to be taken as other meats and drinks be they being purposely ordained to give thanks to God in and therefore be called Eucharistia and be called the body and blood of Christ and yet the same meat and drink be changed into our flesh and blood and nourish our bodies By which it is plain that the substance of the elements remain because saith he they are changed into flesh and blood and nourish our bodies Irenaeus contr Valent. lib. 1. c. 4. who wrote about 150 yeers after Christ and was a disciple of Polycarpus who was a disciple of John the Evangelist says The bread wherein we give thanks to God hath two things
I return to search a little further into the Councels The sixt general Councel the Councell of Carthage in which S. Austin was present did confirm the Cannons of the former Councells No ●ppeals to Rome infra chap. 11. declaring the powers of the Patriarks to be equall and the right of appealing to Rome by such as were condemned by the Arch bishop of their own Province was declared unnecessary S. Austin after that who was Bishop of Hippo opposing three Bishops of Rome Zozimus Boniface and Celestine in this so just a cause common to all provinciall Sees as appears by the ensuing report One Apiarius an African Priest being excommunicated and flying to Rome and being absolved by Zozimus the then Bishop of Rome Aurelins the Metropolitan of Afrie with the Councell wrote to Celestine the succeeding Bishop stiling him Dominus Frater and acquainting him that by the sixth Canon of the Councell of Nice ecclesiastick persons are to be committed to the charge of their Metropolitans appealing to provincials or generall Churches but not to any forraign See and reproving the absolving of Apiarius exhorted Celestine Nè induceret fumosum typum in Ecclesiam Christi quae lucem simplicitatis humilitatis praefert iis qui Deum diligunt did afterwards proceed against Apiarius enjoyning him penance notwithstanding the Bishop of Romes former absolving of him and this was acknowledged received of all Churches as an Evangelical truth acknowledged by the succeeding Bishop of Rome Gregory I. who lived An. Chri. 590. reputing the decrees of these first Councells equall with the Evangelists as proceeding from the same holy Spirit of God which he had promised to his Church Se suscipere quatuor prima concilia sicu● sancti Evangelii quatuor libros venerari fatetur and thus did the Church of o me continue in brotherly fellowship with the other Patriarks not claiming any Jurisdiction over the rest till Phocas the Emperours time which change was occasioned through a vvicked murder and having by that means acquired a superintendency over the other provincialls the succeeding Bishops have since practised Navigation in the Red See her universall Ark not knovving hovv to ansvver its helm in any clear and pure vvaters the brief of vvhich history follovvs in these fevv vvords Mauritius the Emperour having made John of Constantinople universall Patriark Gregory the Great John of Constantinople universall Patriarch Bishop of Rome writ against that and maintained that whosoever took upon him that stile was the forerunner of Antichrist and did in opposition of that stile assume to himself the title of servus servorum Gregory did not oppose that title in that sense the Doctor would have us to rake it folio 293. to wit that none should be universall Bishop thereby excluding others but to be Bishop of the universall Church it was in Gregories opinion lawfull a pittifull shift to excuse the unjust usurpations of Gregories Successors by this means he will tie universality to Rome in respect of the place not as Peter was universall Bishop and this distinction has destroyed all Bellarmines Arguments who would have the Church built upon Peter and all power of governing given to him which Gregory by the Doctors own distinction confessed calls Antichristian so that I would fain know how Rome can be a Universall Church since no Bishop can be a Universall Bishop for certainly it was not the Universall See before Peters coming and if he was not Universall Bishop how could he make it a Universall See I send this riddle back to the Doctor and desire he will recommend it to the Ignatian tribe to varnish over with a new paint For if this must passe for current that the Bishop of Rome is universall in respect of his See and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against locall Rome the world knows they maintain a lie as will appeare more at large in the fourteenth chapter of this Book ●t is plain to any judgement not aleady forestalled with a preoccupated conceit of Romes sophisticall delusions that Gregory writ against John of Constantinople his being universall Patriark for that it was an injury to Alexandria Rome Antioch c. that any should take upon them that title when both by the holy Scriptures and the judgements and decrees of the reverend Fathers of the holy Church the powers and Jurisdictions of Patriarks were declared to be alike The same Gregory when he was by Eulogius Patriarch of Al●xandria stiled universall refused the stile as derogatory to his Brethren and writing an Epistle to the said Eulogius he calls that stile new foolish perverse wicked and prophane and whosoever shall arrogate that stile he does the work of Satan to whom it was not sufficient to be alike and equall to other Angells Phocas made the Bi hop of Rome universall and did tax John of Constantinople for the same It hapned so that not long after this affront done to Alexandria Rome and the other Provinces that Mauritius was murdered by the means of Phocas who no sooner had perpetrated so vile and hainous an offence but his guilty conscience contracted many dark jealousies upon his soul and presented to his phansie many sad and fearfull apprehensions one amongst the rest was that Italy would certainly shake off all Faith and Allegiance to such a Monster of mankind who had justly provoked their dissents to obey him who had forfeited all their loves and affections by his bloudy violation of the Bonds of Nature and Civility by this his barbarous assassination of his Liege Lord and Soveraign and thereupon he casts upon all essaies which way to preserve his Western Territories the garden of his new acquired Empire and calling to mind the respect the inhabitants thereof bore to their Metropolitans and that the affront done to him by setting the Constantinopolitan above him was thorn in his side and had bred in him a grudge towards the then murdered prince Mauritius He to engratiate with the people of those parts and to engage a pragmaticall Orator to blandish his foul murder did resolve with himself to make the then Bishop of Rome Universall Bishop which he accordingly did by vertue of which Donation and by their own strengths and policies since the present Bishop thereof claim this title and Jurisdiction which their Predecessors did condemn in another from which bloudy founder they took this Prerogative and in a full measure of tyranny and against all divine Right Ecclesiasticall and against the doctrine of that See whilest any other had that Prerogative will needs perswade the world that the present Church of Rome is the only Catholique Church Yet blessed be God the light of the Gospell having shined in several Nations of this Western world by the means of S. Paul who God ordained by his grace hereunto hath taken such root in many Churches of the same that they will not admit of this Antichristian usurpation of the Romish See according to
in that service as it is made manifest in the ensuing Chapter The humble confession of all penitent hearts their acknowledging of Christs benefits their thanksgiving for the same their faith and consolation in Christ their humble submission to his will is a sacrifice of laud and prayse acceptable unto God no less then the sacrifice of the Priest Christ did not ordain this Sacrament that any one might receive it for another but that every one for himself is to be made partaker of this mystery of his salvation For as one may not be baptized for another for the Godfathers answering for the child say he hath faith because he hath the Sacrament of faith by the outward element of water which as it self cleanseth so the childe thereby is born again of water and of the Spirit to newness of life Baptism the infant spiritually receiving regeneration by the outward element of the water according to the effectual working of the holy Spirit unto newness of life the infant being thereby made a member of Christ by faith in Jesus given unto him in that Sacrament of Baptism So may not one receive this holy Sacrament for another Let every man be baptized Act. 2. here is spiritual regeneration to every man by himself And Mat. 26. Christ said to the multitude Take and eat and drink ye all of this and here is spiritual growth and living in Christ every man by himself and by this means we that are many branches become one Vine being baptized into one Spirit and all made to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.13 Whereas the Doctor urges that those words Drink ye all of this were spoken to the Apostles and that therefore the cup is not to be given to the people He might as well conclude they shall not have the bread because Christ gave that to his Apostles whereas all Divines agree that what was spoken to them was thereby meant of the whole Church upon earth which are all the Saints of God upon earth of particular Churches whensoever assembled into a Society which is manifest by S. Paul who delivered to the Corinthians that which he had received formerly of the Lord Jesus to wit both the bread and the cup enjoyning every one to examine himself and so let him eat and so let him drink By which it is plain that it was to be delivered to the people in both kindes And if one kinde had been sufficiently significant of Christs flesh and blood offered by himself upon the Cross for our redemption sure Christ would never have added the cup as part of that Sacrament thereby to signifie his blood if already it had been sufficiently signified in the bread Wherefore unless the Papists will charge Christ to be superfluous in his institution of this Sacrament they must allow the cup unto the people as well as bread and both as well as one Lastly the Doctor would justifie the change of the Church of Rome in this particular upon the authority of the Church given by Christ to his Apostles so to do And for this he urges S. Austin who was dead five hundred and fifty yeers before ever this doctrine of Rome was heard of S. Austin stood much for the significancie of the bread and wine that this Sacrifice was but a representation of Christs Sacrifice and that which you see on the Altar or Table is the bread and the cup which your eyes shew you is the wine but saith he faith sheweth that that bread is the body and that cup is the blood of Jesus Christ It was the practice of the Church in his time to administer in both kindes he when he lived taught the necessity of wine against those that mingled water and so did Cyprian and others and now that they are dead the Doctor will have them teach another doctrine S. Austin might say that Christ left authority to his Apostles to make such appointments in what order this Sacrament should be received as whether sitting kneeling how often or the like but not that they should institute a new Sacrament Christ gave both Elements Saint Paul delivered both according as he had received and it was to be done in remembrance of Christ and they were commanded to be imitators of him Ephes 5.1 Christ left this as a Legacy to his Church and he made the Apostles Executors of this his last Will and Testament which they were to discharge by dispensing that Legacy to Christs faithful Saints and People Wherefore for them to withhold part of the thing bequeathed to wit the participation of the cup which is by S. Paul called The Communion of his blood is to forfeit that trust Christ has reposed in them and to forget his precept he enjoyned them commanding to teach all Nations whatsoever he had commanded them We are bound to hold fast the traditions we have learned If then the Scripture tell us that Christ with his Apostles did communicate in both kinds and Saint Paul administring to the Corinthians said Traditi vobis quod accepi a Domini how comes the Church of Rome to forsake this tradition which Christ himself taught and practised and the Primitive Church for a thousand yeers held for faith if it ought to be reduced to one kind how came it to pass to be let alone so long and by what Authority doth Rome claim this power sith the ancient Fathers and the Primitive Church did not onely use to administer to the people in both kinds but maintained and defended the necessity of Bread and Wine the outward elements of this Sacrament as may appear by the Testimony of the afore-cited Fathers and particularly it was the profession of the Church of Rome as Gelasius Bishop thereof witnesseth Shall but the Church of Rome prescribe any new rule of faith or manmers and shall any disobey he is straightwaies anathematized for casting off the Tradition of the Church and the Catholick Church upon earth communicated in both k nds and shall the late Popes of Rome alter this and escape the censures Were there nothing for it but the bare usage of the Primitive Churches it were enough to convince the Church of Rome but whenas there is Christs precept and institution for it how doth the Church of Rome justly incur the condemnation of the Pharisees teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and laying aside the commandments of God follow their own traditions Mark 7. But such was the transcendent wickedness of the Church of Rome in these dayes that scarce any Apostolick Rule but has suffered some alteration by his Holiness and his Legislative conclave of Cardinals who being soared to a height above Councels Princes and all other Powers on earth stick not to wrestle against these commandments of the God of Heaven witness their additions to the Baptisme as if the Baptisme wherewith Christ was Baptized were not sufficient without the Romish spittle and salt and as if this Sacrament of Bread and Wine were