Selected quad for the lemma: water_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
water_n	body_n	bread_n	wine_n	10,358	5	8.3741	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41614	A papist mis-represented and represented, or, A twofold character of popery the one containing a sum of the superstitions, idolatries, cruelties, treacheries, and wicked principles of the popery which hath disturb'd this nation above an hundred and fifty years, fill'd it with fears and jealousies, and deserves the hatred of all good Christians : the other laying open that popery which the papists own and profess, with the chief articles of their faith, and some of the principle grounds and reasons, which hold them in that religion / by J.L. one of the Church of Rome ; to which is added, a book entituled, The doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome, truly represented, in answer to the aforesaid book by a Prote	Gother, John, d. 1704.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.	1686 (1686)	Wing G1336; ESTC R21204	180,124	215

hearkning to his Senses in a matter where God speaks he unfeignedly confesses That he that made the World of nothing by his sole word That cured Diseases by his Word That raised the Dead by his Word That expell'd Devils That commanded the Winds and Seas That multiplied Bread That changed Water into Wine by his Word and Sinners into Just Men cannot want Power to change Bread and Wine into his own Body and Blood by his sole Word And this without danger of multiplying his Body of making as many Christs as Altars or leaving the right hand of his Father But only by giving to his Body a supernatural manner of Existence by which being left without extension of parts and rendred independent of place it may be one and the same in many places at once and whole in every part of the Symbols and not obnoxious to any corporeal Contingencies And this kind of Existence is no more than what in a manner he bestows upon every Glorified Body Than what his own Body had when born without the least violation of his Mothers Virginal Integrity When he arose from the Dead out of the Sepulchre without removing the Stone When he entred amongst his Disciples the Doors being shot And though he cannot understand how this is done yet he undoubtedly believes That God is able to do more than He is able to understand V. Of the Eucharist THere are two material Points under this Head which are to be examined because he endeavours to set them off with all the advantage he can viz. Adoration of the Host and Transubstan●iation I. Of the Adoration of the Host. 1. The Question is far enough from being Whether it be lawful to commit Idolatry as our Representer puts it For the Misrepresenter saith That a Papist believes it lawful to commit Idolatry and to clear this our Author gravely saith He believes it unlawful to commit Idolatry pag. 9. As though any Men ever owned it to be lawful Which is as if the Question were Whether such a Man committed Adultery and he should think to clear himself by saying he believed it unlawful to commit Adultery 2. The Question is not Whether Christ may be lawfully adored by us in the Celebration of the Eucharist which we are so far from denying that our Church requires our receiving it in the posture of Adoration 3. The true Question is Whether the Body of Christ being supposed to be present in the Host by Transubstantiation be a sufficient ground to give the same Adoration to the Host which they would do to the Person of Christ. And that this is the true state of the Question will appear by these things 1. The Council of Trent first defined Transubstantiation and from thence inferrred Adoration of the Host as is most evident to any one that will read the fourth and fifth Decrees of the Thirteenth Session Nullus itaque dub●tandi locus c. i.e. If Transubstantiation be true then Adoration follows It 's true the sixth Canon only speaks of Christ being there worshipped but that ought to be compared with the first second and fourth Canons where the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is fully set down as the Foundation of that Adoration 2. The Adoration is not fixed on the Person of Christ as separate from the Host but as making one Object of Worship together with it And so the Council of Trent declares in the sixth Decree when it saith The Sacrament is nevertheless to be adored because it was instituted to be received This cannot be otherwise understood than as relating to the Sacrament and so that whatever it be must be granted to be the Object of Adoration By the Sacrament saith Cardinal Pallavicini is understood the Object made up of the Body of Christ and the Accidents The Worship then being confessed to be Adoration which is due to God alone and that Adoration directed to the Sacrament as its proper Object the Question now is Whether such a Supposition in the Sacrament doth justifie that Adoration Our Author saith He accounteth it most damnable to worship or adore any Breaden God or to give Divine Honour to any Elements of Bread and Wine Then I say by his own confession if it be only Bread he commits Idolatry for the Adoration he cannot deny But our Representer loves ambiguous Expressions which to the People sound very well but have no sincere meaning for what is it he understands by his Breaden God If it be that he worships a God which himself supposes to be nothing but Bread we do not charge him with it but if it be what we believe it to be the Substance of Bread but himself believes to be turned into the Body of Christ then he cannot deny his Adoration to be given to it All that can excuse them is the Supposition and whether that will or not is now to be consider'd 1. If it be not true themselves grant it to be Idolatry The Testimonies of Bishop Fisher and Costerus are so well known to this purpose that I shall not repeat them And Catharinus a Divine of Note in the Council of Trent confesses it is Idolatry to worship an unconsecrated Host although the Person through a Mistake believes it consecrated And he quotes Saint Thomas and Paludanus for his Opinion and gives this Reason for it Because Christ is not worshipped simply in the Sacrament but as he is under the Species and therefore if he be not so present a Creature hath Divine Worship given it As those were guilty of Idolatry who worshipped any Creatures of old supposing God to be there as that he was the Soul of the World They were not excused saith he that they thought they worshipped but one God because they worshipped him as present in such a manner as he was not And this Book of hi● he saith in the Review of it was seen and approved by the Pope's Order by their Divines at Paris 2. If the Bread were taken to be God our Author doth not deny it would be Idolatry for that were to worship a Breaden God Yet here would be a Mistake and a gross one yet this Mistake would not excuse the Persons committing it from most damnable Idolatry as he confesses Why then should the other Mistake excuse them when they suppose the Substance of the Bread not to be there but the Body of Christ to be under the Species Yes say they then no Creature is supposed to be the Object of Worship But when the Bread is supposed to be God it must be supposed not to be a Creature There is no Answer to be given in this Case but that the Bread really is a Creature whatsoever they imagined and if this Mistake did not excuse neither can the other II. Of Transubstantiation Three things our Author goes upon with respect to this 1. He supposes Christ's words to be clear for it 2. He shews the possibility of it from Gods Omnipotency 3. He argues against

but even the Wollenbergii lately confess that the abuses therein have not only been offensive to us but to themselves too But what saith our Representer to them He believes it damnable to think there 's any Divinity in the Reliques of Saints or to adore them with Divine Honour But what is this adoring them with Divine Honour A true Representer ought to have told us what he meant by it when the whole Controversie depends upon it Is it only saying Mass to Reliques or believing them to be Gods Is there no giving Divine Honour by Prostration burning of Incense c. Nothing in expecting help from them Yes If it be from any hidden Power of their own But here is a very hard Question If a Man doth not believe it to be an intrinsick Power in the Reliques may a Man safely go to them Opis impetrandae causâ as the Council of Trent saith in hopes of Relief from them Is it not possible for the Devil to appear with Samuel's true Body and make use of the Relique of a Saint to a very bad end Then say I no Reliques can secure Men against the Imposture of Evil Spirits who by God's Permission may do strange things with the very Reliques of Saints But God hath visibly worked by them saith our Author by making them Instruments of many Miracles and it is as easie for him to do it now This is the force of all he saith To which I answer 1. It is a very bold thing to call in God's Omnipotency where God himself hath never declared he will use his Power for it is under his own Command and not ours But there is no Reason to deduce the Consequence of using it now because he hath done it formerly And that they may not think this is cavilling in us I desire them to read Pere Anna●'s Answer to the Jansenists pretended Miracle at Port Poyal viz. of the Cure wrought by one of our Saviour's Thorns There he gives another account of such Miracles than would be taken from us But where he saith It is as much for the Honour of God's Name to work such Miracles now their own Authors will tell him the contrary and that there is no such Reason now as in former times when Religion was to be confirmed by them and when Martyrs suffered upon the sole account of the Truth of it and therefore their Reputation had a greater Influence upon converting the unbelieving World 2. Suppose it be granted yet it proves not any Religious Worship to be given to them For I shall seriously ask an important Question Whether they do really believe any greater Miracles have ever been done by Reliques than were done by the Brazen Serpent And yet although that was set up by God's own Appointment when it began to be worshorshipped after an undue manner it was thought fit by Hezekiah to be broken in pieces What now was the undue Worship they gave to it Did they believe the Serpent which could neither move nor understand was it self a God But they did burn Incense to it And did that make a God of it Suppose Men burn Incense to Reliques What then are they made Gods presently Suppose they do not but place them upon Altars carry them in Procession fall down before them with intention to shew the Honour they do them are not these as much as burning a little Incense which could not signify so much Honour as the other do and it is hard then to make the one unlawful and not the other V. Of the EUCHARIST HE believes it lawful to commit Idolatry and makes it his daily practice to Worship and adore a Breaden God giving Divine Honour to those poor empty Elements of Bread and Wine Of these he asks Pardon for his sins of these he desires Grace and Salvation these he acknowledges to have been his Redeemer and Saviour and hopes for no good but what is to come to him by means of these household Goods And then for his Apology he alledges such gross contradictions contrary to all sense and reason that whosoever will be a Papist must be no Man Fondly believing that what he adores is no Bread or Wine but Christ really present under those appearances and thus makes as many Christs as many Redeemers as there are Churches Altars or Priests When according to Gods Infallible Word there is but one Christ and He not on Earth but at the right hand of his Father in Heaven HE believes it unlawful to commit Idolatry and most damnable to Worship or Adore any Breaden God or to give Divine Honour to any Elements of Bread and Wine He worships only one God who made Heaven and Earth and his only Son Jesus Christ our Redeemer who being in all things equal to his Father in Truth and Omnipotency he believes made his words good pronounc'd at his last Supper really giving his Body and Blood to his Apostles the Substance of Bread and Wine being by his powerful Words chang'd into his own Body and Blood the Species or Accidents of the Bread and Wine remaining as before The same he believes of the most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist consecrated now by Priests That it really contains the Body of Christ which was deliver'd for us and his Blood which was shed for the remission of sins Which being there united with the Divinity he confesses Whole Christ to be present And him he adores and acknowledges his Redeemer and not any Bread or Wine And for the believing of this Mystery he does not at all think it meet for any Christian to appeal from Christ's Words to his own Senses or Reason for the examining the truth of what he has said but rather to submit his Senses and Reason to Christ's Words in the obsequiousness of Faith And that being a Son of Abraham 't is more becoming him to believe as Abraham did promptly with a Faith superiour to all Sense or Reason and whither these could never lead him With this Faith it is he believes every Mystery of his Religion the Trinity Incarnation c. With this Faith he believes that what descended upon our Saviour at his Baptism in Iordan was really the Holy Ghost though Senses or Reason could discover it to be nothing but a Dove With this Faith he believes That the Man that Ioshua saw standing over against him with his Sword drawn Iosh. 5.13 and the three Men that Abraham entertain'd in the Plains of Mambre Gen. 18. were really and substantially no Men and that notwithstanding all the information and evidence of Sense from their Colour Features Proportion Talking Eating and many others of their being Men yet without any discredit to his Senses he really believes they were no such thing because God's Word has assured him of the contrary And with this Faith he believes Christ's Body and Blood to be really present in the Blessed Sacrament though to all appearance there 's nothing more than Bread and Wine Thus not at all