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
A64381	A true account of a conference held about religion at London, Septemb. 29, 1687 between A. Pulton, Jesuit, and Tho. Tenison, D.D. as also of that which led to it, and followed after it / by Tho. Tenison.	Tenison, Thomas, 1636-1715.	1687 (1687)	Wing T723; ESTC R18602	49,387	102

U. and Mrs. U. declared by themselves and the rather upon their taking notice of certain Arts of Lying not so much before observed by them she own'd that the aforesaid Stories were us'd by a Roman as Arguments to turn her I believe there might be false Stories to the prejudice of Mr. P. and his Friends but to the end that false Reports may not on either hand prevail this Account is written by D. T. which Mr. P. wheresoever he thinks it is faulty may please to correct Tho. Tenison A Pursuit of that which was said in the Conference about the three first Quotations viz. out of S. Ambrose de Sacramentis S. Cyril of Hierusalem in his Catechism and Justin Martyr in his Apology c. 1. FOR the Book de Sacramentis as not genuine it may suffice at present to say That though there was a Book written by S. Ambrose under that Title this is not it there not being found in this the Places which S. Austin cited out of that That the style is plainly more moderen and rude than that of S. Ambrose and his Age That the version of the places of Scripture mention'd in this Book is not the same with that which S. Ambrose uses in his genuine Works That this Book is taken notice of by the Writers of the 8th and 9th Age the time of the introducing of the Corporeal Presence The very eminent Cardinal Bona whose credit is greater than that of Alexander Natalis do's own all this the last words excepted Haec Ambrosius si tamen ipse horum librorum qui de Sacramentis inscribuntur Auctor est Testatur quidem Augustinus scripsisse Ambrosium libros de Sacramentis sive de Philosophia adverfus l'latonem quorum meminit lib. 2. Retract cap. 4. doctrina Christiana lib. 2. cap. 28. eosque pe●iit sibi mitti à S. Paulino Ep. 34. sed illi vel perierunt vel alicubi latent longè diversi sunt ab his qui nunc extant ut patet ex sententiis quas ex illis citat idem August lib. 2. primi operis adversus Julianum cap. 5. tribus sequentibus De his verò quos hodiè habemus fecit primò ut dubitarem styli diversitas cùm enim opera Ambrosii ante aliquot annos haud perfunctoriè percurrerem 〈◊〉 ad hoc pervent visus sum mihi alterius lingue hominem ab Ambrosio prorsus diversum loquentem audire Tum animadverti loca scripturae in his citata non esse ejus versionis quâ in aliis libris Ambrosius uti consuevit Quaedam etiam in his reperi quae seculo Ambrosii minùs convenire visa sunt Nihilominùs à Scriptoribus octavi nani seculi laudantur saepiùs tanquam Ambrosii legitimus foetus quorum auctoritati cedens eos deinceps sub ejus nomine cujus est possessio semper cit abo It is true he says at the end of his Discourse that notwithstanding his Reasons before alledged he yields to the Authority of the Writers of the 8th and 9th Age and that seeing they are in possession he will henceforth cite this Book under the name of S. Ambrose But considering the Time and the Doctrine then preparing for the papal stamp who wants the fagacity of understanding to what purpose this Book was forg'd and then brought forth as out of its antient mouldiness And for the humility of the Cardinal's deference to such late Authority against his solid reasons and judgment all know what that means in the Roman Communion where Writers after knowing that they have said things against the genius of that Church do in the end submit all at her feet So did Des-Cartes whose principles are utterly inconsistent with Transubstantiation So did Molinos the Father of the numberless off-spring of the present Quietists For this is the Conclusion of his first amply licensed and then rigidly condemned Guida spirituale Il tutto sottoponga humilimente prostrato alla Correttione della Santa Chiesa Catolica Romana After all this I do allow that Mr. P. was the less to be blamed in this Quotation considered as a Romanist because he cited it out of his Breviary and believ'd as his Church believed Of this spurious S. Ambrose and of the doctrine of the Eucharist in the true S. Ambrose I will say more when more is required I will add only at this time these two things First The Author cited out of the Breviary suppose him S. Ambrose is inconsistent with himself if Transubstantiation be an Article of his Faith. For he saith in another place non iste panis est qui vadit in Corpus sed ille panis vitae aeternae qui animae nostrae Substantiam fulcit That is it is not that Bread which goes into the Body but the Bread of Life eternal which sustains the substance of the Soul. Now what a Judge has Mr. P. chosen toward the deciding of a Controversie in which he is not reconcil'd to himself Secondly This Author in all probability has been further tamper'd with for he would scarce have said that in the Breviary seeing he own'd the Canon of the Mass in his time to run otherwise than now it does in the Roman Missal and to assert that the Elements were the Figure of Christ's Body Sècondly For the Testimony of S. Cyril it was not that cited thus in the Speculum S. Cyril Alexandrinus c. For Mr. P. spake of S. Cyril of Jerusalem and tho' he did not produce the words yet he said they were those in his fourth Mystagogical Catechism I say now as I then did That the place was long ago fully answered The place of S. Cyril is by a Romanist M. W. thus rendered Tho' you see it to be Bread yet believe it is the Flesh and the Blood of the Lord Jesus Doubt it not since he had said This is my Body And for a proof instances Christ's changing Water into Wine The Answer is this and it is a true one We acknowledge that the words of S. Cyril of Jerusalem were truly cited but for clearing of them we shall neither alledge any thing to the lessening the Authority of that Father tho' we find but a slender Character given of him by Epiphanius and others Nor shall we say any thing to lessen the Authority of these Catechisms tho' much might be said But it is plain S. Cyril's design in these Catechisms was only to possess his Neophytes with a just and deep sense of these holy Symbols But even in his fourth Catechism he bids them not to consider it as meer Bread and Wine for it is the Body and Blood of Christ. By which it appears he thought it was Bread still tho' not meer Bread. And he gives elsewhere a very formal account in what sense he thought it Christ's Body and Blood which he also insinuates in his Fourth Catechism for in his first Mystical Catechism when he exhorts his young Christians to avoid

all that belonged to the Heathenish Idolatry he tells That on the Solemnities of their Idols they had Flesh and Bread which by the Invocation of the Devils were defil'd as the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist before the Holy Invocation of the blessed Trinity was bare Bread and Wine but the Invocation being made the Bread becomes the Body of Christ. In like manner says he those Victuals of the Pomp of Satan which of their own nature are common or bare Victuals by the Invocation of the Devils become prophane From this illustration which he borrowed from Justin Martyr his second Apology it appears that he thought the Consecration of the Eucharist was of a like sort or manner with the prophanation of the Idolatrous Feasts so that as the substance of the one remained still unchanged so also according to him must the substance of the other remain Or if this will not suffice them let us see to what else he compares this change of Elements by the Consecration In his Third Mystag Catech. treating of the consecrated Oil he says As the Bread of the Eucharist after the Invocation of the Holy Ghost is no more common Bread but the Body of Christ so this Holy Oyntment is no more bare Oyntment nor as some say common but it is a gift of Christ and the presence of the Holy Ghost and becomes energetical of his Divinity And from these places let it be gathered what can be drawn from S. Cyril's Testimony And thus we have performed likewise what we promised and have given a clear account of S. Cyril's meaning from himself from whose own words and from these things which he compares with the Sanctification of the Elements in the Eucharist it appears he could not think of Transubstantiation otherwise he had neither compared it with the Idol-Feasts nor the consecrated Oyl in neither of which there can be supposed any Transubstantiation I will at present add only three or four Notes about this place of St. Cyril First that the Romish Translator Grodecius has as should seem to help this matter in his way render'd the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by sub specie panis sub specie vini under the shew of Bread and under the shew of Wine instead of in the Type or Figure of Bread and in the Type or Figure of Wine Secondly that just before the words cited in favour of Transubstantiation he uses these But in the new not Law as the Translator has it but Covenant the heavenly Bread and the Cup of Salvation sanctifie Soul and Body as the Bread agrees to the Body so the Word to the Soul. It should hence seem that the Body of Christ meant by St. Cyril was the Word and that both Bread and the Word were received by the Communicant Thirdly that St. Cyril's Third Catechise of the Illuminate or baptized opens the Sense of the Fourth Mystagogical Catechise for there he speaks in a very high strain of Consecrated Water and advises the Persons to be baptiz'd to come not as to common Water but as to the spiritual Grace given together with the Water Fourthly It is much to be doubted whether this be the Book of St. Cyril of Jerusalem for besides that Gesner saies he saw that Book in the Ausburg Library under the Name of John of Constantinople the Author forbids his Hearers to be Frequenters of Spectacles in Theaters or of Horse-races in Hippodromes for this there was no occasion at Jerusalem since it had become Christian there being especially in his time no such Sports and Places there that I have ever read of So in three Quotations the two first are taken out of suspected Authors yet I will allow the Catechisms to be ancient and to be ascrib'd to St. Cyril by Sophronius and St. Hierom yet they note that he compos'd them in his youth 3. Touching the Quotation out of Justin Martyr it was this in English and read out of the abovesaid Sheets called Speculum Ecclesiasticum by Mr. P. S. Justin. c. I suppose in Charity that Antonio for Antonino is the mistake of the Printer but'tis a mistake of some body else when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated As the Word of God Jesus Christ our Redeemer being made man c. instead of by the Word of God or the Divine Spirit Jesus Christ being made flesh c. But to pass to something more material I observe first That the foregoing words of Justin which are very considerable are omitted viz. That at the end of the Eucharist the Ministers distribute to every one present that he may partake of the consecrated Bread and Wine and Water c. Justin calls it Bread after Consecration as St. Paul did before him I observe secondly that Justin interprets himself whilst he saies It is not common-Common-Bread as if he had said It is Bread in its Nature but being consecrated and made the Figure and Pledge of Christ's Body it deserves a higher Name and indeed this is a Key to the Expressions of most of the Fathers and particularly to St. Cyril as has been already shown and it is plain to those who read the Fathers with Attention that they use such Language in relation to the Water in Baptism as they do in reference to the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist without teaching a Substantial change so Greg. Nyssen despise not the Divine Washing nor make light of it as Commmon I note thirdly that Justin affirms of the consecrated Bread and Wine that they nourish the Body and that therefore he is no Teacher of Transubstantiation which removes the Substances which nourish the Body And now how far is it from the true Art of Thinking and the sincere love of Truth to draw a Proof for a pretended Article of Faith from the high and hyperbolical Phrases of the Ancients by the same reason if the World should last 14 or 1500 years men might conclude that the Church of England taught the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence as well as the Church of Rome she having used these words in the Office of the Communion at the Consecration of the Elements Grant that we receiving these thy Creatures of Bread and Wine according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christs Holy Institution in remembrance of his Death and Passion may be Partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood. An Account of Doctor Tenison 's and Doctor Celgat 's going to the Savoy to Mr. Pulton UPon October the 3d. 87. Dr. Tenison and Dr. Claget went to the Savoy about Five at Night After having found Mr. Pulton the Jesuit in his Lodgings there Dr. Tenison desired him to call to them any one of his Friends that he might hear the Discourse which he was about to offer After being twice or thrice pressed to it by Dr. Tenison he call'd one in the Habit of a Jesuit a Grave and Civil Person his Name was not asked Then Dr. Tenison apply'd himself to Mr.