Selected quad for the lemma: water_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A27380
|
Tradidi vobis, or, The traditionary conveyance of faith cleer'd in the rational way against the exceptions of a learned opponent / by J.B., Esquire.
|
J. B. (John Belson), fl. 1688.
|
1662
(1662)
|
Wing B1861; ESTC R4578
|
124,753
|
322
|
suo antevertit arcano sacrificii genere quod ab hominibus cerni non poterat seipsum pro nobis hostiam offert victimam immolat sacerdos simul existens agnus Dei ille qui mundi peccatum tollit Quando id praestitit cum corpus suum discipulis congregatis edendum sanguinem bibendum praebuit tunc aperte declaravit agni sacrificium jam esse perfectum For he who by his power disposes all things doth not expect the necessity now neerly approaching from his betraying expects not to be set upon by the Jews like Theeves expects not I say the sentence of Pilate that their malice may be the beginning and cause of the common safetie of mankind but by his providence prevents them and by a hidden kinde of sacrifice which could not be discerned by men offers himself an Host for us and immolates a Victim being himself both Priest and Lamb of God that Lamb which takes away the sin of the world When did he perform this when he gave his bodie to be eaten and blood to be drunk to his Disciples gathered together then he openly declared the Sacrifice of the Lamb to be now accomplished S. Hierom. ep ad Hedib q. 2. Nec Moyses dedit nobis panem verum sed Dominus Jesus ipse conviva convivium ipse comedens qui comeditur Neither did Moses give us the true bread but our Lord Jesus himself both guest and banquet himself both eating and eaten Cyril Al. l. 10. in Joan. c. 13. Non tamen negamus recta nos fide charitateque syncera Christo spiritualiter conjungi sed nullam nobis conjunctionis rationem secundum carnem ejus illo esse id profecto pernegamus idque à divinis scripturis omnino alienum dicimus An fortassis putat ignotam nobis mysticae benedictionis virtutem esse quae quum in nobis fiat nonne corporaliter quoque facit communicatione carnis Christi Christum in nobis hahitare Vnde considerandum est non babitudine solum quae per charitatem intelligitur Christum in nobis esse verum etiam participatione naturali Non credis mihi haec dicenti Christo te obsecro fidem praebe Nevertheless we do not deny that we are joyned spiritually to Christ by a righs faith and sincere charity but that we are not at all joyned to him according to the flesh that we utterly deny and affirm it to be altogether against the Divine Scriptures Does he think we are ignorant of the efficacie of the mystical blessing which when it is performed in us doth it not make Christ dwell in us even corporally too by communication of the flesh of Christ Whence is to be considered that Christ is in us not habitually onely that is by charity but also by a natural participation too You beleeve not me in these matters I beseech you beleeve Christ Cyril Hier cat myst 4. Cum igitur Christus ipse sic affirmet atque dicat de pane hoc est corpus meum Quis deinceps audeat dubitare ac eodem quoque confirmante dicente hic est sanguis meus Quis inquam dubitet dicat non esse illius sanguinem aquam aliquando mutavit in vinum quod est sanguini propinquum in Cana Galileae sola voluntaâ—e non erit dignus cui credamus quod vinum in sanguinem transmutasset Ne ergo consideres tanquam panem nudum vinum nudum Corpus enim est sanguis Christi secundum ipsius Domini verba quamvis enim sensus hoc tibi suggerit tamen fides te confirmet ne ex gustu rem judices quin potius habeas ex fide pro certissimo ita ut nulla subeat dubitatio esse tibi donata corpus sanguinem Hoc sciens pro certissimo habens panem hunc qui videtur non esse panem etiamsi gustus panem esse sentiat sed esse corpus Christi vinum quod à nobis conspicitur tametsi senâ—ui gustus vinum esse videatur non tamen vinum sed sanguinem esse Christi Since therefore Christ himself affirms it says of Bread This is my body who dares from thenceforth doubt it himself also confirming and saying This is my bloud who I say is there can doubt and say it is not his bloud In Cana of Galilee he did heretofore by his onely will change water into wine which approaches to bloud and will he become not worthy to be beleeved that he has changed wine into bloud Do not therefore consider it as bare bread and bare wine for according to the words of our Lord himself it is the body and bloud of Christ for although sense do suggest this unto thee yet let faith confirm thee that thou do do not judge of the thing by thy taste but rather hold by faith for most certain so that there be no place for doubt that what is given thee is body and bloud Knowing this and holding for most certrin that this Bread which is seen is not Bread although the taste judge it to be so but the Body of Christ and the Wine which is seen by us although to the sense of taste it seem Wine yet is not Wine but the bloud of Christ S. Aug. Ep. 162. Tolerat ipse Dominus Judam Diabolum sunem venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes discipulos quod fideles noverunt pretium nostrum And in Psal 33. con 1. Ferebatur in manibus suis Hoc vero fratres quomodo posset fieri in homine quis intelligat Quis enim portatur manibus suis manibus aliorum potest portari homo manibus suis nemo portatur Quomodo intelligatur in ipso David secundum literam non invenimus in Christo autem invenimus ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis quando commendamus ipsum corpus suum ait hoc est corpus meum Our Lord himself endures Judas a Devil a Thief who sold him he suffers him to receive amongst his innocent Disciples that which the faithful know to be our price Again upon these words of Psal 33. And he was carried in his own hands But this brethren how it may be verified in man who can understand for who is carried in his own hands in the hands of another a man may be carried no man is carried in his own How this may literally be understood of David we do not find of Christ we do for Christ was carried in his own handâ— when recommending his own very body he said This is my body S. Chrys in Matth. 26. Hom. 83. Credamus itaque ubique Deo nec repugnemus ei etiamsi sensui cogitationi nostrae absurdum esse videatur quod dicit superet sensum rationem nostram sermo ipsius quod in omnibus praecipue in mysteriis faciaâ—us non illa quae ante nos jacent solummodo aspicientes sed verba quoque ejus tenentes nam verbis ejus defraudari
est de Consecr and said indeed to be taken out of him These now affirm the consecrated Bread to be truly the flesh of Christ and yet a Sacrament also or sign of his Body How observe illius viz. quod visibile palpabile mortale in cruce positum est that is this body now immortal now invisible signifies or brings into our mind this same body as mortal as visible c. being it self in a different form a sign of it self Vocaturque ipsa immolatio carnis the sacrifice mark you of what Of flesh quae sacerdotis manibus fit that is the Mass Christi passio c. non rei veritate sed significante mysterio for the Priest does not truly crucifie truly kill our Saviour but mistically represent to us by sacrificing his now impassible body that great and onely once performed Sacrifice offered upon the Cross in the same body when passible Both actions truly Sacrifice both Victims truly body and the same body but one under one form a Sacrament or sign of it self under another Now that the same thing in a different relation may be a sign or figure or image of it self I hope will not appear strange to you if you reflect that God the Son is the image of his Fathers substance and the same substance was made into the likeness of man and yet truly man c. And your Argument 't is a sign or figure therefore not substance is common to you with the Marcionites who argued Christ because in Image therefore not in truth a servant no man because in likeness a man and because in figure therefore not in substance a man for which they are reprehended and confuted by Tertullian lib. 5. cont Marc. c. 20. So that your Argument were it good proves more then you intended and perhaps imagined and not onely takes away our Saviours bodie from the blessed Eucharist but leaves him none to take away for certainly the same Argument is the same whether in Marcions mouth or in yours and there is no remedy but you must either relinquish it or cannot relinquish him In short what wonder that it is called a sign when it cannot be a Sacrament without being so all our Question is Whether it be a meer sign This the Testimonies should express and not leave to the Readers gloss There remains Theodoret saying the nature is not changed but grace added to it But what is meant by nature then which a more equivocal word seldom accurs is the Question In our ordinary speech very often and in the Fathers most frequently the proper qualities of a thing use to be called natural and nature and that Theodoret meant no more by the word here viz. that the nature that is the taste colour shape c. of bread was not changed I am induced to beleeve both from this very place which tells us we are not to look to the nature or outward appearances of what is seen but for the change of names to beleeve the change made by grace which change I conceive to be a real not moral onely change of substance not office since then the Bread by consecration should become a sign of Christs body which if you will beleeve Tertullian it was before is no such mysterie as to deserve a change of names to require our faith and be manifest onely mysteriis initiatis But more by what he says in his second Dialogue where he plainly tells us the mystical signs are understood to be that which they are made and are beleeved and adored as being the things which they are beleeved Now what think you was Theodoret of your opinion that maintains such a change by vertue of consecration as brings in adoration with it May bread be adored let it signifie what it will unquestionably therefore he held such a change as made the bread to be no longer bread but a fit object of adoration And that it may appear the rest of the Fathers were of his mind and the interpretation I make of their sayings not obtruded upon them but purely their own true sentiments I shall present you with a short taste of their judgment leaving you in case it stir your appetite to desire it for a fuller meal to the large store of their own writings which if you please to fall upon I am confident you cannot bring a hunger which will not meet with full satietie S. Ambros de iis qui myst init c. 9. Quantis igitur utimur exemplis ut probemus non hoc esse quod natura formavit sed quod benedictio consecravit majoremque esse vim benedictionis quam naturae How many examples therefore do we use to prove it is not what nature framed but what the blessing has consecrated and that the force of the blessing is greater then that of nature And in his Treatise de Sacram. l. 4. cap. 5. Antequam consecretur panis est ubi autem verba Christi accesserint corpus est Christi Again ante verba Christi calix est vini aquae plenus ubi verba Christi operata fuerint ibi sanguis efficitur qui plebem redemit Ergo videte quantis generibus potens est sermo Christi universa convertere Deinde ipse Dominus Jesus testificatur nobis quod corpus suum accipiamus sanguinem nunquid debemus de ejus fide testificatione dubitare Before consecrated it is bread as soon as the words of Christ are added it is the body of Christ Again and before the words of Christ it is a Chalice full of Wine and Water as soon as the words of Christ have operated bloud is made there that bloud which redeemed the people Behold therefore how many ways powerful the speech of Christ is to change all things Moreover our Lord Jesus himself testifies to us that we do receive his body and bloud is it for us to doubt of his credit and witness S. Greg. Nyss orat Catec cap 37. Oportet considerare quomodo fieri potuerit ut unum illud corpus quod tam multis fidelium millibus in universo orbe terrarum semper distribuitur totum per partem sit in unâ—quoque ipsum in se totum maneat Which having discoursed he concludes Haec autem dat virtute benedictionis in illud transelementata eorumquae apparent natura We are to consider how it could come to pass that that one body which is perpetually distributed to so many thousands of faithful through the whole world is whole in every one in particular and remains whole in it self But these things he gives by vertue of the blessing having trans-elemented the nature of those things which appear unto it And Orat. 1. de Resur Qui enim potestate sua cuncta disponit non ex proditione sibi impendentem necessitatem non Judaeorum quasi praedonum impetuus non inquam Pilati sententiam expectat ut eorum malitia sit communis hominum salutis principium causa sed consilio