made the Sacrament of the blood of Christ and breade the Sacrament of his bodie and wine also of his blood 38. Question But thou a little before diddest cal these partes Answeare I did so and not without cause For these twoo which are causes by themselues are also essentiall partes of the thinges as the Logicians doe very well teach 39. Question Nowe what are the endes of these Sacramentes Answeare Some chiefe endes to wit that Christ as I haue said with all his gifts may more more be sealed in vs othersome not so special as that by this badge also we shoulde bee distinguished from others that make not profession of the Christian faith should bee knit together more and more amongst our selues in mutuall loue 40. Question And is there no more Answeare Yes this also is to be added That the Sacraments are also remēbraunces of thinges past as in the ceremonies of baptisme the powring out of water doth set before our eyes as present the shedding forth of Christes blood the putting into water the cōming out his death burial resurrection also the breaking of bread in the Supper doth after a sort represēt vnto vs Christ crucified for vs. 41. Question These thinges being expounded I woulde gladly learne of thee what the knitting together of the signes the thinges signified is For thou art not ignorant that this controuersie is specially handled nowadaies Whether the body and blood of the Lord be really present yea or no that is in the same place where that bread and that wine is or whether the signes remain as some think or be abolished the accidēts onely remaining as they teache which consent with the Pope Answeare This controuersy is growen so whot and come so farre that for the deciding thereof we neede rather conscience then knowledge but the Lorde alone either by some wonderfull iudgement or some notable example of his mercie will decide it notwithstanding I will endeuour too make it playne when I shall come too speake of the Lordes Supper Now that I may answeare to that which is demanded I say that forasmuche as the thinges signified both in the simple woorde and in the Sacramentes be partly things not subsisting or standing by themselues as the forgiuenesse of sinnes the gift of sanctification the encrease of faith incorporation into Christ and suche like that the questiō of the real presence of the things signified must necessarily bee restrayned to some real beyng Now as I suppose no other can bee put but Christe himselfe And when they with whom wee agree not concerning this matter doe not themselues as I suppose think that Christ should bee deuided as those that complaine notwithstanding vndeseruedly that the same is done of vs because that we denie the reall presence of Christes bodie Doest thou thinke that the state of this question is so too bee taken Whether Christe GOD and man bee present in those places themselues where the Sacramentes are ministred Question So I haue read in some of theyr wrytinges who notwithstanding affirme this not generally of all Sacramentes but onely of the Lordes Supper Answeare I woulde not doubte too affirme the same both of the supper of the Lord and of Baptisme and also after a certayne manner of those Sacramentes which were before the comming of Christ into the Earth neither woulde I think my selfe a Christian if I should denie this 42. Question I am glad that we agree amongest our selues Answere God graunt that at length we may agree Therfore heare I pray thee It cannot be denied but that Christ according too his Godhead is euery where This likewise is without all controuersie that forasmuch as mans nature is so taken of the Woorde that GOD and Man are one reall beeyng it must needes followe if thou consider Christe as some one and singular thing that whole Christ is also euery where present and yet not as in the Sacramentes in which vndoubtedly there must be appoynted some peculiar and special manner of presence as I may so speak that they may be distinguished from other common thinges in which also hee is present The other thing that I would haue wel weighed of thee is this that which is spoken of the whole is not yet spoken of the singular parts being amōgst themselues of a diuerse kinde As for example All the whole that we call man we define to be partaker of reasō which yet thou wilte not say of no essentiall parte of man considered in it selfe And yet there is somewhat in this definition too witte reason which is attributed to that other parte of man euen to the soule Doest thou not see then that whole Christ that is Christ considered as a certaine whole and absolute thing is another thing then all belonging to Christ that is Christ whō thou shalt way particularly by his partes For in this case let it be lawful for me to atttribute also the name of a part to the Godhead 43. Question I see it very well but is there any more Answeare Yea I woulde haue this farther to be marked of thee that certain thinges doo so fitly serue for the establishing of some singuler thing that that which by no meanes can agree by it selfe to some one may yet be attributed vntoo it as it cleaueth is conioyned with another the which thing is so farre foorth true that it may also be sayde of those which yet but accidentally onely and for a time are ioyned together as for example when a King is crowned and is honored in his robes the crowne and his robes are also reuerenced but yet in respect of another thing to witte of his kingly dignitie wherof they are ornamentes not in respect of them selues For heereby it plainely appeareth that the honour and reuerence is not referred too those things because when the king hath put them off no man can endure to reuerēce them vnlesse he bee out of his wits but they are reuerenced for another to wit for the Kinges sake of whom they are worne Neither euer doth the crown or robes grow vp into one real being with the king Much more therefore shall some thing be said in respect of another which is ioyned personally with another which yet can by no meanes in respect of it selfe be attributed vnto it So there is attributed to the worde taking mans nature that which is peculiar to mans nature as when it is sayd that God suffered as also to maas nature Actes 20. 28. that which is peculiar to the woorde taking vpon it mans nature as when in mās nature at what time he talked with Nichodemus in the earth he sayd that Iohn 3. 13. he was in heauen Question These thinges thou hast handled before But thou diddest adde that this was spoken of certaine distinct woordes to witte of God and man But of the abstract to witte of the Godhead and manhoode not so Answeare Vnlesse this be so the confusion of the naturall
the same Rocke But what will they doe with these wordes of Saint Augustine in his 45. Treatise vppon Iohn Loe the signes changed Fayth remaining there Christ is the Rocke to vs Christ is that same that is set foorth vpon the Altar and if thou looke vppon the visible fourme it is another thing but if vpon the sensible signification they dranke the same spiritual drinke And in the 102. Epistle some tyme the thyng which signifieth taketh the name of that thing which it signifieth For so the rocke was Christ because it signifieth Christ To conclude the same interpreteth the spiritual Rocke mentioned in the 77. Psalme not Christ him selfe as they doe but suche a Rocke as shoulde signifie some spiritual thing Question Therefore proceede on Answeare So to conclude that bread is sayde to bee the body giuen for vs and that same cuppe to be the blood shead for vs. Question But who doth so expound this Answeare Amongest the rest Theodoret in his Eranista by expresse wordes wherof we shall entreate more at large in his proper place 81. Question And is there any more Answeare The third kinde of figuratiue sacramentall speache is that whereby the effect of the thing signified is attributed to the outwarde signes or instrumentes So it is sayde that the tree of life was planted in Paradise and the tree of the knowledge both of good and euill And yet was neyther life nor knowledge in those same trees as if thou shouldest cal a tree the Ague which either causeth an Ague or els driueth it away but those same trees were onely the effectuall signes of these same effectes By the same figure Circumcision is called the couenant whereof onely it was a signe as God him self expoundeth it Gen. 17. 11. 14. And that same cupp is called the newe Testament in his blood Luke 22. 20. So Baptisme is called the washing of regeneration Tit. 3. 5. So the Church is sayde to bee purged by the washing of water Ephes 5. 26. So the outward worde which being onely the Chariot as it were of the diuine power is in many places sayd to be the word of life and the incorruptible seede and to it is attributed both clensing and sanctification So the sacrifices are in many places called attonements when notwithstanding the very blood of Goates and Oxen cannot sanctifie any So also the priests themselues are sayde to sanctifie and to make an attonement for sinnes Leuit. 16. 30. When as it onely belongeth vnto God to forgiue sinnes and to make cleane So the Ministers of the Gospell are sayde to binde and to lose Matth. 18. 18. And to forgiue sinnes Iohn 20. 25. yea also to saue them selues to saue others 1. Tim. 4. 16. Of which matter if it please thee thou mayest see Augustine in his booke of questions vppon Leuiticus Chapter 84. 82. Question Is there yet remayning any other kinde of sacramentall figures Answeare There remayneth the fourth quyte contrary to that same third kynde wherby it is brought to passe on the contrary that that which is proper vnto the fignes is drawen vnto the thing signified And hereof commeth that same inwarde Circumcision or of the hearte So the fleshe or the bodie of the sonne of man is said to be eaten and his blood to be dronke which beyng bodily actions can not bee vnderstoode otherwyse then improperly of the thing signified that is to say of Christ him selfe offered either in the simple worde or in the Sacramentes least as Saint Augustine very well sayeth a foule and haynous thyng to wyt the sauadge and barbarous eatyng of mans fleshe seeme to bee commaunded And heereof come these same vsuall maner of speeches so often in the Fathers wherein it is sayd that the body of our Lorde lyeth vppon the Altar yea also that it is seene handled goeth into the mouth is made falleth vpon the grounde is consumed 83. Question Therefore makest thou it a metaphoricall bodie and a metaphoricall Supper Answeare In deede suche are the filthy slaunders of certaine men which we wil confute in their proper place For nowe I entreate generally of the Sacraments In meane tyme knowe this that wee neyther fayne any other bodie to Christ then that same true body giuen for vs nor transforme that same most holy action into those same monstrous Chimeres but onely wee say this followyng the proportion of Fayth that that same very partakyng of Christ him selfe which is altogether of the mynd and of Faith for this is the meate of the mynd not of the belly is not properly but metaphorically declared by those same bodily actions of eating and drinking 84. Question Then is it all one with thee to beleeue and spiritually to eate Christ Answeare Thou causest me yet againe to stray from my purpose If thou take to beleeue for the very action of fayth it self I consent vnto thee But if thou take it for the very habite of fayth then euen like as thou doest distinguish the teethe the instrument of eating from the eating it selfe so it must needes bee that thou discerne fayth it selfe from that apprehension of Christ through fayth which is the spirituall eating Question Proceede on Answeare I haue nowe finished those thinges which belong vnto those same Sacramentall fourmes of speaking aswell those that are proper as those that are figuratiue 85. Question But when thou shalt say that the Sacramentes were added vnto the simple word to the end the more plainly to shew foorth the promises many men meruaile that these figuratiue speeches are vsed in the Sacramentes in which the speech ought rather to be most proper and most plaine least any should be deceiued Answeare Here I pray thee marke what bold rashnesse the spirite of error hath in sclaundering and what power it hath when it pleaseth God in perswading For these men affirme that the figuratiue speeches are more obscure then those that are proper but contrarywise they themselues also teach giue manie preceptes concerning this matter that Oratours doe verie well vse figures not too darken but to set out and make more playne their speeche Now they are verie well vsed when they both adorne that that wee woulde haue spoken with a certaine dignitie and grace and better infixe it in the mindes of the hearers then if any man should vse a plaine and simple speeche Now forasmuch as the Sacraments are therefore instituted that they may leade our vnderstanding too an other thing which by Gods ordinance they signifie from that which they are by nature or rather that I may vse the words of S. Augustine against Maximinus Lib. 3. cap 18. that wee marke not what they are but what they set out and shewe because they are signes of thinges shewing one thing and signifying another who seeth not that the nature and vse of the Sacramentes is much better fixed in the minde of the hearer when the signes are sayd to bee the thing it selfe that they signifie Let vs set
action in the congregation eyther of some whole church or of some particular finally not to bee celebrated of any one priuatly but in common whereof we shall speake afterwardes when we shall dispute agaynst the abuses of the holie Supper 171. Question What callest thou the elementes Answeare That same bread that wine 172. Question Why doest thou adde that same bread and that wine Answeare That I may distinguish holy things from common things For so also Paule speaketh 1. Cor. 11. 16. 17. Question But in what thing consisteth this difference Answeare Not in the substance but in the qualitie and vse For common bread common wine are sette before vs that they may nourishe this life but that same bread and that same wine are therefore giuen vs that they might be both signes seales of the communicating of that body geuen for vs and of the blood shed for vs and that into euerlasting life 173. Question And what are those same rites belonging vnto the Sacrament Answeare Touching that that belongeth vnto the minister to blesse too breake too powre out to geue concerning that that belongeth to the guestes too take too eate to drinke 174. Question And what is signified aswel by these elementes as by those ceremonies sacramētally Answeare Surely that bread is the sacramētall signe of that body geuen for vs and that wine of that blood shedde for vs finally both two of whole Christ as of our euer lasting meate The blessyng was appoynted not so muche to signifie some mysterie as partly to confirme those which came to the Lordes Table partly to perfect that same Sacrament and partly to celebrate some solempne action of thankes giuing Of which matter it shall be meete to entreate apart Now the breaking of the bread is a signe of the passion of Christ 175. Question Whence doest thou geather this For there are which referre this specially to the vse of vnleauened or sweet breades which it is manifest was not very thick and for the cutting wherof there needed no knyfe Moreouer they say also that to breake bread by the Hebrew phrase signifieth as much as to distribute plentifully to giue bread Answeare Both the things that these men say is very true but this same last is by no means agreeable to those things which the Lord did commaunded to be done For it is written he brake he gaue wereby there can not be vnderstood by the name of breaking the distributiō of bread Now I graunt that some other and I adde further that housholders were wont yea besides the vse of vnleauened bread to breake bread to the vse of their housholde But the Apostle manifestly sheweth that this ryte albeit it was common yet it became sacramentall and that by reason of those same mentioned punishments which the lord suffered for our cause for so much as hee wrote in steed of these wordes that is giuen that is broken 176. Question Yea but one bone was not broken in him Answeare I graunt it but yet verely hee was torne and rent both with the tormentes of minde and body and there is nothing more vsuall in the woorde of God then this Metaphor whereby it is also sayd that the heart is brused broken Nowe this giuing or outwarde offring of the signes is to be taken as if Christe himselfe should giue him selfe vnto vs with his owne hande to be vsed and enioyed and shoulde insinuate himselfe wholy vnto vs which thing also in verie deede he perfourmeth inwardly by the power of his holy spirite vnles that our vnbeliefe hinder it Now the outward receiuing wherby we lay holde vpon the elements as with the hand it answereth the inward receiuing by fayth that betwixt vs and Christ there may be perfected and concluded as it were a certaine bargayne Christ demaunding Wilt thou receiue me inwardly by fayth euen as I doe outwardly deliuer thee these same seales of my promise by my minister into thy handes And fayth answering I wil Lord and by fayth I receiue thee euen as this hand receiueth these seales giuen vnto it Nowe the eating of that breade and the drinking of that wine declareth the applying of Christe layde holde vpon by fayth whereby it is brought to passe that being truely made partakers of him we more and more drawe out of him whatsoeuer belongeth to our saluation 177. Question But what is the proportion and the analogie of these signes with the thinges signified Answeare This analogie or proportion is manifest in it selfe For seeing that breadeand wine is most fit aboue other meats for the nourishing of our bodies they do most fitly set forth him vnto vs in whō onely euerlasting life resteth But the breaking of breade and the pouring foorth of wine doeth as it were set before our eyes those infinit torments that the Lord suffered for our sakes that wee might in a maner looke vpon him with our very eyes hanging bloodie vpon the Crosse and instilling into vs out of his pierced side euerlasting life Hitherto belongeth that same saying De consec dist 2. When the offering is taken whiles the blood is poured out of the cuppe into the mouthes of the faythful what other thing is set foorth thē the offering vp of the Lords body vpon the crosse and the pouring foorth of his blood from his side Finally the eating and drinking doeth so expresly and in a manner so liuely declare as it were our transformation into Christe him selfe and his insinuation againe into vs whereby he him selfe liueth in vs and we againe in him that nothing can be more euident For what can be more nearely ioyned vnto vs then that which we eate and drynke as that which is transformed chaunged into our selues 178. Question But yet thou hast saide nothing of our mutuall consociation into one body Answeare That also appeareth by the whole ceremony For seeyng that we take one and the selfe same meat from one and the self same table wee professe that wee are of one and the selfe same Housholde and wee promyse eche too others our mutuall helpes by this solempne ceremony Hitherto also belongeth that same analogie and proportion of bread wyne made of many graines into one body which liuely setteth as it were before our eyes our mutuall knitting and growing vp together as mēbers vnder one heade Wherefore also Augustine calleth this mysterie the bonde of loue which is expounded plainely by the Apostle 1. Cor. 10. 17. 179. Question But why are there two Elementes giuen in the Supper and but one in Baptisme Answeare Because Christ in Baptisme is set forth vnto vs as a Lauer water also onely suffiseth to washe away filthines But in the Lords supper forasmuch as Christ is set forth vnto vs as that heauenly nourishment and this life needeth not onely eating but also drinking not without cause not onely bread but also wine is giuē in the supper of the Lorde that we might knowe that wee ought to seeke our
the Elementes and the things signified are ministred to all 200. Question Thou saydest also in the beginning that the simple worde doth consist in two thinges to wit in the woordes themselues and in the thinges signified by the woordes and that there fore the Sacramentes are so farre off from the simple and naked woorde that they also are set before our eyes therefore are called of Augustine visible words And therfore it may bee yea that the most wicked doe vnderstand aswell the outward word it selfe as the thinges signified by it to wit this by the sounde but those by the vnderstanding Why therefore doest thou not thinke the like also in the Sacramentes too witte that both the Sacramentes and the thing signified the Bread and the Wine yea and Christe too bee receiued of all of some too witte of of the beleeuers too life but of others too witte of the vnwoorthie to damnation Answeare First that which thou sayest too wit that of whomsoeuer the outward woord is hearde that they shoulde also perceiue that which is signified by it thou knowest is not alwaies true For it hath no place in them who speaking in a strange tongue so heare that they doe not vnderstand which falleth out to most men vnder the papacie Yea how manie doe heare those that speake vntoo them in a knowne tongue who yet notwithstanding vnderstande not the very meaning of those things that are spoken For therefore we goe to schooles and to Schoolemaisters not onely too learne the tongues but especially that wee may vnderstande in deede those things whose soundes we perceiue wel ynough Now this thing is much more to be acknowledged in diuine then in common matters and by their owne nature more agreeable to this our vnderstanding But goe to let vs graunt that that in the simple woorde and in the Sacrament there is hearde and also vnderstoode of all that which is signified by both yet for all that I will not graunt that the thing signified that is to say Christ is receiued of any others then of those that receiue him woorthily that is to say that come vnto him with fayth For this receiuing which by a Sacramental figure as we haue sayde before in the woords of eating drinking is signified by the effect is called of the Apostle the communion or spiritual vnion doth not only respect the hearing of our eares nor our vnderstanding onely but declareth that which is the onely propertye of fayth alone to witte the spirituall application of Christ himselfe 201. Question Is not this the selfe same thing that some say to wit that aswell the bread the wine as also the very bodie of Christ and his blood is receiued both of woorthy and vnwoorthy but that the fruite of Christ is onely receiued of them which are indewed with faith Answeare No not so the which I shall easily shewe thee by a fitte similitude For let vs put the case that there is not onely declared by woordes to some sicke man of some learned Phisitiō in an vnkowne tongue but also in very deed some such medicines set foorth which are required to the curing of him and that the sicke man doeth neyther vnderstande what the Phisition sayeth nor what is offered vnto him And the Phisition hath doone his parte who notwithstanding hath done that hee hath doone in vayne Suche are they who come altogether vnwoorthie too the Lordes Table beeyng altogether ignoraunte of those thinges that are there sayde and ministred too whome neuerthelesse the whole Sacramentes are sette foorth Yea lette vs put the case in the seconde place that the sicke man in deede heareth what the Phisition sayeth yet vnderstandeth not the meaning of his sayinges eyther because hee is not attentiue or else because hee is not skilfull of those thinges whereof hee heareth the Phisition entreating Suche are they also who come themselues vnwoorthely too the Lordes table too witte with a mynde not rightly prepared to vnderstande those things which are doone there Let vs further put the case that the sicke man doeth well vnderstande both his Speeches and whatsoeuer the Phisition geueth him but yet notwithstanding despyseth the thinges hee hath both hearde and well vnderstoode Nowe I demaunde of thee whether thou canst rightly say that suche tyme of sicke men eyther of the first or second or thirde sorte doe receyue the medicines that are offered them Question No not so For the firste sorte neither receyue the woorde nor the thinges the other onely vnderstand the woorde finally the thirde sort though they vnderstand both yet in verye deede they neglecte bothe the woorde and the thinges Answeare Thou thinkest rightly For it is one thinge too vnderstande that whiche is sayde another to apply that to thy selfe which thou vnderstandest This Phisition of whome I speake is hee that rightly administreth the Sacramentes the Elementes and Sacramentall Ceremonies rightlye set forth is the talke of this Phisition The medecine that is offered is Christ him selfe with his giftes the onely remedie against death only to be applyed vnto vs by the iustrument of faith as al the scripture witnesseth Herupō gather how greatly they are deceiued which deceyue both themselues and others who reason so that they saye when the whole sacraments that is as well the signes as the very body and blood of Christ himself are ministred to al commers that it is also receiued of al albeit the fruites of the Sacrament are receiued of the faithful alone as though forsooth Christ could otherwise be receyued then to euerlasting life 202. Question Yea but doth not Christ also iudge as he dooth saue that is to say is hee not set foorth aswell to iudgement of vnbeleeuers as for the saluation of beleeuers Answeare Yes verely But being receiued he saueth but beeing neglected he iudgeth Therfore it is not truely said that he is receiued of some to life but of other some to death albeit indeede hee be the sauiour of life vnto some to wit to them of whom hee is receiued by fayth but to other some a sauour of death to witte too them of whome hee is not receiued For deathe is not of Christ who is alwayes life but of the contempt of Christe 203. Question I pray thee let vs come at the length too that of whose exposition this controuersie seemeth chiefely to depend to witte to the verie true and natiue exposition of the woords of the institution Answeare And which doest thou thinke too bee that same institution Question Too witte this is my bodye that is giuen for you and this is my bloode of the newe Testament which is shedde for many for the forgiuenesse of sinnes Answeare But I say that the institution dooth comprehend not onely what is geuen But also what is prescribed both too the minister and too those which come to these mysteries For all these thinges must concurre in this action Question That I may admitte this yet notwithstanding I thinke that there is
controuersie about these which I haue rehearsed Answeare Yea and of others also For thou knowest that there is question also what is broken and the worde doe you is taken of some for sacrifice you and againe for make you the body blood of Christ of bread as of late Santesius was not ashamed to write But God willing we will weigh all these things in their proper place 204. Question Nowe I pray thee proceede to the expounding of those things which I haue spoken of and first of all saye thou howe thou thinkest that same This is my body is to bee interpreted Answeare I say that this same proposition dooth consist of a subiecte a Predicate and a coupling Verbe as they speake in Schooles The subiect is declared by the pronoune This they attribute by the tearme of the Body the copulatiue is the verbe substantiue is 205. Question But what is the subiect Answeare Too witte the same that Christe reached foorth taken and broken to witte that same breade as the Euangelistes doe expresse Therefore the woord This can declare nothing els but This Breade too witte the element of this action 206. Question Nowe what is the attribute Answeare That same veryt bodye of Christe giuen and that same bloode shedde for vs. And therefore those same determinations are added that is is giuen and that is shedde 207. Question And howe are these so ioyned togeather that the one may be sayde of the other Answeare To wit this is the nature of thinges which be desparate or sundrie that when they altogeather disagree in kinde the one can not properly bee sayde of the other by no reason because otherwise thinges should not bee discerned from thinges by their specificall fourme Therefore if thou take this proposition properly it shall bee no lesse false that bread is the body of Christ then that a gourde is a man Therefore it must needes be a figuratiue speach Question But thou art not ignorant that the very letter is toughly mainteyned as wel of the defenders of transubstantiation as of consubstantiation Answeare So they say But of them we shall say afterwardes Nowe it is ynough for me to declare the doctrine of our Churches and to shewe vpon what reason it standeth vntill that we shall confute the contrarie opinions 208. Question In what thing then placest thou the figure what in the Subiect Answeare No not so For that same true bread taken broken and giuen is properly shewed in that pronoune Question What onely the bread Answere Yea onely For as we shall say in his place it is not meete here in any case to set the figure Synechdoche This notwithstanding is true that so is shewed not simplie common bread but Sacramentall bread that is bread appoynted to a Sacramentall vse 209. Question What doest thou place a figure in the predicate Answeare I knowe that certaine men doe charge vs so and that not in one kinde of sclaunder For some doe accuse vs as though we should heere vnderstād by the bodie of Christ the Church as though forsooth wee should bee so madde not to marke that those wordes which is giuē for you can not bee vnderstoode of the mysticall bodie or as though in the other member there should be ment some mysticall blood But others because we interprete the bodie the Sacrament or the signe of the bodie by and by they cōclude that wee make a double bodyed Christ or els that we attribute I cānot tel what phantastical bodie of which notwithstanding God be thanked neyther of both is admitted of vs. For wee are so far of frō that that we should say that another then that true and onely bodie of Christ giuen for vs is to be said of that bread that we contrariwise contend that whole Christ God man is there denominated of another nature to wyt the bodily and that for that cause which we haue shewed before 210. Question But if the figure be neither in the Subiecte nor in the Predicate it is no where Answeare Thou gatherest not rightly For thou omittest the third that is to say the copulatyue which knitteth the subiect with the attribute I say then that the figure is in the very kynde of attribution that is that in very deede the true bodie and properly taken is sayde also of the true bread properly taken but figuratiuely not properly So if wee say that Circumcision is the couenaunt or the Scepter is the kingdome or that the Paschall Lambe was Christe it must needes be that the figure be placed neither in the Subiect nor in the Attribute but in the Copulatiue or kinde of attribution 211. Question Why therefore doe you interprete the body the Sacrament or the signe or figure of the body Answeare It is all one to say that that bread is the bodye of Christe but not properly but not as it signifyeth the same Sacramentally and to say that the bread is not that body but onely the Sacrament of that body Therefore that difference that our aduersaries obiect here vnto vs is most vayne and foolish That the fathers aswel Greeks as Latines haue spoken both wayes it is more often shewed of our men then that we ought so often to repeate their sayings 212. Question But nowe what manner of figure sayest thou that this is Answeare I say that it is a Sacramental Metonymia whereby is brought to passe that the name of the thing Sacramentally signified is giuen to the signe or whereby the signe is said to be the thing it selfe to the signifying whereof it is giuen the which thing I haue prooued before by many like examples Question Why doest thou so often beate that same word Sacramentally into our heades Answeare That I may alwayes meete with that same shamefull sclaunder of theirs who as often as they heare the name of signe and signification they crye out that we make the Supper of the Lorde of none effect and as it were transfourme it into an idle picture Vnderstande therefore a Sacramentall Metonymia to be that figure whereby is brought to passe that the signe is sayde to be that thing for the signifying whereof it is so offered to the outwarde senses by a fitte analogie and proportion and by the will of God that therewithall is offered to the vnderstanding and to fayth that same thing signified to bee receyued and sealed truely and in very deede 213. Question But it is harde that some thing should be sayd to be that that onely it signifyeth to the minde Answeare Naye rather as I haue before taught this same figuratiue kinde of speaking is much more fitte and expresse and therfore also more vsual then if by proper speaking the signes shoulde be saide to signifie some thing For when they are said to be the thing it selfe that they signifie they altogether leade the mynde of the beholder from the visible thing to behold the inuisible and to lay holde vppon it by Fayth which is the ende of Sacramentes Question
Notwithstanding I would haue this confirmed vnto me by plaine euident reasons to wit that these propositions This is my body c This is my blood c are to bee taken figuraliuely Answeare I will doe it and that gladly For what can be more acceptable vnto mee then so to open this trueth that all coulour and sleight being remooued it may be seene of all men euen as it is Now I will so order my proofes that in the first place I will bryng myne argumentes from these very woordes of the institution This is my bodie and secondly of the reason which is takē from the affirmation of the Subiect Nowe that that wee shall say of the bodie I woulde also to bee vnderstoode of the blood 214. Question Nowe then what is thy first argument Answeare That which he tooke brake and reached the Lord commaunded to bee taken and eaten This same hee sayde to be his bodie But he tooke that very same breade brake it and deliuered it c. the Euangelistes witnessing the same Therefore hee sayde that that same bread was his bodie But thinges that are vnlyke contrary in nature can not be spoken properly of them selues But bread and the bodie of Christ are things disagreeing by nature Therefore they can not properly be sayde the one of the other It remayneth therefore that forasmuche as this speeche of Christe is true it bee vnderstoode figuratyuely 215. Question But what now is the other argumēt Answeare In euery proper and reguler affirmation of the Subiect eyther the generall worde or the worde of propertie or the worde of accident is affirmed of the speciall or the speciall of the singular but the body of Christ is neyther the generall worde nor the worde of differencie nor the worde of propertie nor the worde of accident nor the speciall in respect of the bread Therfore it can by no maner of meanes be sayd of the bread Notwithstanding it is said and that truely when it is spoken of Christ Therefore figuratiuely 216. Question Shewe also the thirde Answeare If the body of Christ be spoken properly and regularly of this bread then the things that agree to the body agree to the bread and contrariwise But to be borne of the virgine Marie to bee hungrie to die for vs to be crucified to rise againe c agree to the bodye of Christ but not vnto bread And contrariwise to bee sowen reaped threshed kneded baked agree in deed to bread but by no meanes to the body therefore by a reguler and common vsuall maner of speach the bread can not be sayd to be the body of Christ 217. Question Shewe the fourth Answeare If that be a naturall proposition eyther the same is sayd of it selfe or els not the same but a contrarie But neyther of both is true Therefore it can not be a naturall proposition That the same can not be said of it selfe it appeareth plainely by these reasons First because in any identicall proposition that is where the same thing is affirmed of the selfe same the Subiect the predicate must not differ in the thing but in the name onely as when I say a blade is a sworde as a target is a shield the sonne of the virgin is Christ but bread and the body of Christ are not words of the same signification but thinges altogeather diuers therefore they make not an identicall Proposition But if nowe An identicall proposition is a proposition affirmatiue of it selfe some froward person will haue one and the same substance too bee declared in these two words first ye must shew that neither bread ceaseth to be bread nor the the bodie ceaseth to be a bodie Furthermore in a proposition Identical the subiect and predicate are conuertible or standing one for an other Therefore if this proposition were identicall or one the bodie of Christ might as truely bee said to be baked in an Ouen as it is truly saide that bread is the body giuen for vs. Therfore it is not as the schoolemen speake an identicall proposition Now againe that nothing diuers is herein naturally said is thus prooued by a necessary consequence If the body as some thing diuers should bee regulerly spoken of bread surely eyther it should be spoken essentially or as the cause or as accidentary We haue shewed in the seconde argument that it is not spoken essentially as neither being vnto breade as the general or as the difference nor as the special in respect of the singular Now it can much lesse be the causal affirmation For neither hath a bodie the reason in respect of bread of the efficient cause nor of the end but the inward causes to wyt the matter and fourme are referred to the essential affirmation Finally it can not bee any accidentall affirmation for as much as the body is no accident yea and though it were yet it can not be an accident to bread It remaineth therefore that by neyther of both wayes that same can be either a naturall or a proper Proposition 218. Question Tell the fift Answeare If that same bread were properly the bodie of Christe it shoulde also be personally vnited to the Sonne of God Of which should folow those same three most absurd and false thinges that the sacramentall personall vnion are one and the same that Christ in this Sacrament should consist of three natures personally essentially vnited knit togeather to be short that the bread and the wine should be aduaunced into a condition infinitely better then the Church it selfe For so the bread should properly be the very body of Christ but the Church should be the body of Christ but figuratiuely or mystically neyther is there any faythfull man that is very Christ but onely a partaker of Christ 219. Question I pray thee adde also the sixt Answeare If that same bread bee properly the body of Christ that same wine properly the blood of Christ as they are distinct signes so also the body shal be separated from the blood or either signe shal be properly whole Christ Nowe if this later be true the letter shal not simplie be kept but a synechdoche must be placed as for example it must haue bene sayde properly This bread is my body and my blood and this cup is my blood and my body And to what purpose I pray you had there needed a double element 220. Question And wilt thou adde as so the seuēth Answeare That which is sayde to be with another thing or in an other or vnder an other without commixtion beeyng also ioyned with a most neere knitting together cannot properly be sayde too bee that thing it selfe As for example sake although the soule and the bodie be ioyned togeather personally and inseparably yet notwithstāding no man wil say the the bodie is the soule or the soule is the bodie Much lesse therefore the sacramental coniunctiō shal bring this thing to passe that the bread shall properly be the very body of
Christ 221. Question Wilt thou also rehearse the eight Answeare If that same bread be properly the bodie of Christe then it shoulde sease to bee bread forasmuch as these twoo thinges are wholly in kinde vnlike But if it cease to be bread now the sacrament shall not consist of these two thinges one earthly and the other heauenly vnlesse thou call the earthly shadowes that is to say accidences without a subiect But these being ouerthrowne the proportion of substances shal be also ouerthrowne therefore the whole reason of a sacramēt shal be ouerthrowne It must needes bee therefore that that breade be called the body of Christ figuratiuely But now I come to the other ranke of argumentes to witte drawen from those wordes which goe before and followe those former This is my bodie and from the circumstaunces and conferences of other places of the Scrypture 222. Question Tell the first Answeare I say out of the former woordes too wit he tooke and brake that this is playne that that which he tooke coulde not properly of Christe hee called his owne bodie as of whom it coulde not bee sayde that hee tooke helde and brake himselfe to himselfe but as one that gaue and brake the breade of hys body receiued in too his handes to his Disciples manifestly beholding him Therfore August that he might mollisie that same sacramental Metonymia he sayde that Christ did after a certaine sort beare himselfe in his owne handes namely least it shoulde seeme to bee a vayn Sacrament the name of the thing signified is geuen vntoo the signe The same also is to be thought of the cup as wee shall shew in his proper place into which vndoubtedly Christ had neuer yet powred foorth that same blood of his conteyned in his body 223. Question Tell the other Answeare If the body should properly be spokē of the bread and the blood of the wine then the words folowing should properly also be spoken of the bread which is geuen for you which is shedde for you both which is most false 224. Question Rehearse the thirde Answeare By that that is added Do this in the remembrance of me it is playne that the body is not properly so called of the bread nor the blood of the wine because they were there present together in the same place whereas bread wine were Nowe remembrance is not of thinges present but of thinges absent Therfore Bernard in his 33. sermō vppon the Canticles disputing of the selfe same thing opposeth Faith and the shewe that is that that is seene with the eyes and also remembrance and presence 225. Question Shew the fourth argument Answeare The same appeareth playnely by those woordes that are added 1. Cor. 11. 16. As often as yee shall doe this yee shall shewe foorth the Lordes death till hee come Verily hee that shall come is not yet come or if hee bee nowe properly come these mysteries are no longer to be celebrated Now all these thinges followe not onely if the bread be properly the bodie but also if within or vnder the Bread and Wyne hee bee present in the selfe same place where there is bread and wine 226. Question Declare the fift Answeare So I gather it from the Circumstaunce of the time At what time the Lorde sayde of that wine This is my blood which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes as yet it was not shedde foorth out of the vessell of the bodie of Christ neyther euer after is it read to be gathered in any vessel Therfore in that cuppe then there was not properly that blood of Christ shedde for vs betweene the handes of the tormentours neither nowe also is it Muche lesse therfore was that wine thē or now is that same blood properly shed for vs. But that same proposition is figuratiue which testifieth vnto vs that wee truely and spiritually through faith are partakers of Christ himselfe and of his passion and of all other his giftes 227. Question Declare the sixth Answeare I gather also by that that Chrysostome hath written that Christ hymselfe was a Partaker of those signes Hom. in Matth. 83. But if his body shoulde be spoken properly of that bread which Christ did eate and his blood of that Wine which Christ dranke then shoulde Christ properly eate and drinke himselfe 228. Question Shew the seuenth Answeare I geather out of other places of the scripture that this is not a proper proposition For as often thinges vnlike are attributed to the same subiect it must needes be that some of these be taken properly and some figuratiuely which I set foorth by examples thus The Gospell is called the power of God to saluation Rom. 1. 16. And in the beginning of the same chapter it is called the doctrine reuealed from aboue concerning the Sonne of God which two forasmuche as they are diuerse it must needes bee vnderstoode that one bee spoken properly and the other figuratiuely It is geathered not darkely out of Iohn the 17. 3. that Fayth is the knowledge of the true God of Iesus Christ whereby we are saued The same is defined also to be the groūd of those things which are not Therefore one of these Heb. 11. 1. must needs be spoken poperly the other figuratiuely Iohn is not Elias Iohn 1. 21. And he is that Elias that shal come Mat. 11. 14. Therfore in one of those we must needs grant that there is a figure It is playne that Herode was properly a man The same also is called a Foxe one of these therefore must be vnderstoode to be spoken figuratiuely Of which infinit examples might be alleaged yet notwithstāding these are not alleaged by me as though they were to be expounded by the same figure but to shew that that I haue sayd is true to wit as often as vnlike thinges are spoken of the same Subiect the one of them must bee a proper attribution the other figuratiue But the cup that is to say the wyne conteyned in the cup is sometime saide to be blood sometime saide to bee the Testament in blood and yet notwithstanding it is plaine that the selfe same is properly the licoure of the Wine as it is called of Christe It is not therefore properly mans blood and much lesse also it is properly the last Testament of ones wyll that shall dye but it is called blood because it is the Sacrament of his blood whereby that same couenaunt or Testament of the remission of sinnes and of euerlasting life is stricken with vs the same also is the Testament in blood because it is the pleadge of his Testament which is sealed and ratified by the blood of the Lord As the Lorde also in Moses in the same place when had called Circumcision the couenant himselfe doeth afterwardes interprete it too bee the signe of the couenant 229. Question Shew the eight Answeare The conference of that place the 1. Cor. 10. 16. with the wordes of Christ in which he calleth
that same bread his bodie that same cup his blood where that same bread is called the communion of his body that same cup the communion of his blood doeth altogether shewe that bothe these sayinges are figuratiue or at least wise one of them too witte eyther that of Paule or that of Christ Question To wit that of Paule is to bee expounded out of the proper saying of Christ Answeare Therefore at the length thou arte brought too confesse that whosoeuer doeth mainteine and defende figures in the controuersie of the Sacraments doe not ouerthrowe the Testament of the Sonne of GOD. But to the matter It is easie too shewe out of our seuenth Argument and out of that that went next before that both these were figuratiue whether thou doe interprete that out of this or this out of that as for example both these Propositions This cup for this Wine is my blood and this wine is the communion of my bloode nowe the like is too bee thought of breade it is diuers from this this wine is the licour of the vine which notwithstanding thou must needes say is most proper and therefore so stoutly to bee maintened because as we haue saide ouerthrowing or taking away the substaunce of the signe the foundation of the analogy or proportion shoulde also bee taken away and ouerthrowen Question I would answeare that both Christ and Paule passed this ouer as a thing sufficiently knowen For to what purpose shoulde he haue taught his Disciples that that bread which he held in his handes was breade and that wine But vndoubtedly it behooued him to teach them that which otherwise they woulde neuer haue beleeued too witte that those thinges also which hee helde in his handes and gaue them in vnder or with Bread and Wyne was his body and his blood Answeare Therefore thou must needes determine that the figure Synecdoche is in these woordes This breade and this cuppe and therefore whilest thou studiest to auoyde figures thou fallest into a figure But we will way this Synecdoche in his place to wit when we shal come too the confutation But thou in the meane time shalt not so escape For with what manner and with how great coniunction soeuer thou shalte couple those two vnlike thinges in themselues indeede togeather suche as are the bread and the body wine and the blood yet notwithstanding thou shalte neuer bring to passe that the one may properly be sayd to be the other No neyther in the coniunction can one be sayde to be the other but eyther of them must bee made a certayne thirde thing Therefore this at the least must bee a proper proposition in or vnder or with this bread and wine is my body blood It remayneth therefore that thou confesse that both this saying of Christe and that of Paule whether thou interprete this out of that or that out of this be figuratiue 230. Question Howe therefore doest thou thinke this place of Paule shoulde bee expounded Answeare First of all they are to be confuted who take the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth common for distribution which the matter it selfe cryeth out too be most absurd forasmuch as bread and wine are substances but distribution is an action and Paule himselfe expounding that vseth a woorde that signifieth to participat and the scope it selfe of the Apostle requireth that it declare a communion and not a distribution Moreouer it is woonder that they who allowe no trope in the matter of the Sacramēt that they can in this place interpret the cōmunicating of the body for the bodie communicated or distributed that is cā confound the action with the effect For neither in good sooth doe they this well because they referre this distribution to the word of breaking as though Paule had written the bread which we distribute is the body cōmunicated For the word of breking ought to be taken properly in this action as wee haue shewed before and it appeareth by the word he gaue which is added to the woorde hee brake in the narration of the Euangelist Question What therefore thinkest thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be called Answeare Commmunion and felowship which is the true signification of his word it differeth somwhat frō 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Chrysost noteth although Paule vseth the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indifferently one for the other Such as the Communion is therefore that is to say the naturall societie of all men in the common nature of flesh blood as between themselues with Christ himselfe such is the communion by the goodnesse of God betwixt al the faithful Christ into whom they are engraffed and incorporated Question But by what maner of speach may that breade bee said to be that same felowship and communion Answeare With the Logitians it is called a causall affirmation whereby the proper effect is attributed to the proper cause whether it bee materiall or efficient which manner or fashion is to be referred to the fourth maner of affirming by it selfe as they speake in the schooles Now a figuratiue speach is when the effect is put for the cause or else forsooth for the very efficient cause as for example when Christ is called the resurrection the life for the rayser and giuer of life or the cause of resurrection life or for the materiall cause as when Paule sayeth You are my glory or reioycing the is to say the matter of my glory or reioycing or for the instrumental which also is it self efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say being as it were an vnder seruer as when the Gospel is said to be the power of God to saluation that is to say the instrument that God vseth effectually too saue vs. So also in this place that same Breade and that same wine are sayde to be that communion that is to say the instrumentes whereby that same consociation and felowship of ours is wrought and ratified in vs. Now this same instrument is sacramentall or rather symbolicall and not the verye efficient cause which is the holy Ghost Therefore as that same figuratiue proposition of Christe This bread is my body is expoūded by this This bread is sacramental my bodie so also this saying of Paul This bread is the communication of my bodie is to be expounded by this proper This bread is the Sacramental instrument of our consociation and felowship with the bodie of Christ For there the figure is onely in the Copulatiue that knitteth the matter together to wit a Sacramental Metonymie or translation but heere also in the attribute is a figure which they call Metalepsis too witte putting the effecte for the cause 231. Question But canst thou besides bring forth any other argumentes Answeare Yea that can I. And first of all that same from the essentiall and constituting fourme of all the Sacramentes which is in summ that they may consist of the
signe and the thing signified or as Irenaeus speaketh of an earthly and heauenly thing But nowe neyther can that that is signified be spoken of the signe nor the signe of the thing signified but by the figure of Metonymie and therefore the propositions of the first kinde are declared by the verbe signifieth vnderstand of the sacramental signification to which also the giuing or ministration is alwayes adioyned but the latter by the Verbe Passiue as this breade is my bodye that is This breade sacramentally signifieth my bodie my bodie is this breade that is my bodie sacramentally is signified by this bread Now that this is the essentiall fourme of all sacramēts it appeareth by the verie name of sacramentes as witnesseth Augustine in these woordes in his 5. Epistle It were ouerlong saith hee to dispute of the varietie of signes which when they belong to holy thinges are called sacraments It appeareth also by this that that is common to all sacraments As in the tree of life in that it is a sacrament there is considered the outward thing and the signe the visible plant the spiritual heauenly thing Iesus Christ life In the tree of the knowledge both of good and euell a naturall plant also and the experience of good and euill in Circumcision the cutting off the foreskinne and the taking away of sinne the imputation of righteousnes and regeneration in the passeouer the Lambe and Christ in the rock of the desert the rocke and Christ pouring out bloode in the Baptisme of the cloude the cloudes and the sea and the blood of Christ in Manna breade giuen by miracle and the flesh of Christ In the Sabboth the seauenth day with ceasing from woorke and the mortification of the flesh and euerlasting life In the Sacrifices the offering slayne and the oblation of Christ made by himselfe in the Sanctuarie the entrance intoo into the Temple and heauen in the Tabernacle the woorke made with hand and the bodie of Christ in the Cherub in the Images ouer the Arke and the Angelles in the propitiatory or mercie seate the gilded couering and Iesus Christ So in the appearing of the doue the doue and the holy Ghost in baptisme water with washing and the blood of Christ washing vs in the fierie tongues the naturall fire and the holy Ghost Finally euen so in the Supper of the Lorde breade and wine the signes and the body and bloode our Lorde the thinges Sacramentally signified Question But manie of these are rather types then Sacramentes Answeare Admitte it be so yet this notwithstanding is the fourme of all symbolicall speeches concerning God Therefore in the verie writings of the Apostles they are called Signes Seales Types Figures parables shapes resemblances And of the Fathers also besides that they are called figures they are called mysteries types significations similitudes darke speeches and mysticall Symbolles and by suche like names Question What doest thou therefore conclude of all these Answeare That neyther the thing signified can be sayde of the signe nor the signe of the thing signified otherwyse then by translation and that that is so vsuall in the scriptures as that they neuer in a maner speake otherwise 232. Question But the Supper of the Lorde hath a certaine proper and speciall fourme which maketh that the same is not too bee thought of that whiche is to bee thought of the other Sacraments Answeare Albeit that this specially belong vnto those confutations which I woulde differ to their proper place notwithstanding that the force of the former argument may appeare more clearely go too let vs speake somewhat also nowe cōcerning this matter Indeede I graūt that the Supper of the Lorde hath his peculiar fourme whereby it differeth from the rest aswell olde as newe Sacramentes But to what ende is this For these fourmes which are called discerning fourmes because they doe discerne the specials of the same generall they doe not take away the constituting in which of necessitie all the specialls must be constituted that they may bee referred to the common general So for example sake a liuing creature is the common essential fourme and substance of all fourmes perteyning to that gender Now reason is the fourme whereby man is sundred from all other kindes of liuing creatures Nowe wilt thou say that this same speciall fourme doth bring to passe that that same generall to wit liuing creature should not be layde altogether by the same reason of man and of other liuing creatures And I pray thee how if that which is called differentia or proprium for nowe I doe not distinguish betwixt these should altogether take away the same attribution of gender should the distinction consist of gender and difference Therfore that same speciall difference of the lords Supper whatsoeuer it be can not bring to passe that that same common reason which maketh a Sacrament altogether by the same meane should lesse be spoken of the Lords Supper then of other Sacramentes Nowe that same common reason as we haue shewed is that the outwarde signe should signifie another thing sacramentally Nowe nothing is a signe of it selfe forasmuch as a signe is in the kynde of those thinges which are conferred with another therfore that same remaineth common without exception to all Sacraments that the thing signified is not the signe because these two must bee in very deede and therefore the thing signified can not be sayde of the signe but transitiuely But furthermore here I will demaund of thee what manner of difference thou makest this to be Question One in the Subiect an other in the attribute the third in the very meanes of the attribution Answeare And what in the Subiect Question Because the Elements of the Supper of the Lorde are diuers from the Element of Baptisme Answere Be it so But what in the Attribute Question Because the bodie and blood of our Lord are the signified thinges of the Supper of the Lord. Answeare Thou art deceyued For in Baptisme also the blood of the Lorde is the thing signified But what in the attribution Question Because onely the Elements of the Lordes Supper are sayde in the words of the institution to be the very body and the very blood of our Lord. Answeare And what wylt thou conclude thereof Question Forsooth that in Baptisme the very blood of Christ is not present and giuē but onely the fruit of the blood shead but that in the Supper the body it self and the blood it selfe is present and offered to the mouth it selfe Answeare Whether these thinges are truely sayde or no we will see in theyr place But I pray thee doest thou not marke that thou playest the Sophister Question Why so Answeare Because thou chaungest the questions For wee did not demaund whether the matter of the Lordes Supper and of other Sacramentes were one and the same but whether in another kynde of attribution that same matter of the Lordes Supper whether it bee onely the fruite or it be Christ himselfe
be sayde otherwyse of the bread wyne then the matter whether it bee the same or another is sayde of other signes Admit then that I graunt that which thou hast sayde yet notwithstanding there shall not bee diuers kindes of attributions but also onely diuers thinges shal be attributed And surely vnlesse it were so that is if the thing signified were otherwise sayde of the signe in the Supper of the Lorde then in other Sacramentes and also in other types they should not be referred to the same kynd for that same generall fourme shuld not be the essentiall fourme of all euen lyke as if a liuing creature shoulde bee sayde of a man in any other respect then of a horse a liuing creature shoulde not be the common genus or kynd of a man and a Horse 233. Question Wilt thou therefore that there shal bee no speciall fourme of the Lordes Supper Answeare God forbid But I saye that the speciall fourme is partly in the proper Elementes and rytes partly not in the attribute it selfe but in the qualitie of that attribute that is to say because Christe is the matter of both Sacraments in Baptisme verely he is set out to vs as the lauer and sealing vp of our entraunce into the Churche but in the Supper as the heauenly nourishment of those that are entred in 234. Question I meane this that the very body of Christ his very blood in very deede is present in or vnder or with that bread and that wyne in the Lordes Supper but not so in the water of Baptisme Answeare Thou resistest therefore their doctrine who teache that the humanitie of Christ also is euery where present according to the very substaunce But nowe let vs leaue this Doest thou not see that the question is agayne chaunged of thee For neyther dyd wee indeede seeke that whether the thing signified were present in the selfe same place where that breade and that wine was or whether it were absent but this we demaunded in what kinde of attribution the thing signified eyther present or absent might be saide of the signe properly or figuratiuely and whether it might be said in an other kinde of attribution of the elemēts of the Lords supper then of the elementes of other Sacraments The question therfore of presēce or absēce maketh nothing to the matter neither cā by any maner of meanes bring to passe that that which is or is giuen in vnder or with somewhat eyther present or absent shoulde there fore be sayde properly too bee that verye thing in vnder or with which it is 235. Question Let vs goe forewarde then to other arguments Answeare I set downe therefore first of all that which is most true that the bodie of Christ is truely an organicall and a naturall bodie the which nature hee had neyther then put of when he instituted the supper neither afterwardes did his glorie take it away frō him I set down also this that Christ properly is saide according to the flesh too bee ascended that is gone out of the earth vpwardes aboue the heauens hauing chaunged the situation of his place I sette downe also this thirde thing too witte that he shall not returne from thence whether hee ascended before that day wherein hee is looked for too come againe These groundes beeing thus layde so I gather If that breade bee properlye that verye bodye and that Wyne properly that verye blood Yea further if the Bodie and Bloode be properly in vnder or with the breade and wine they are then in the same beeing and occupying of a roome and in verye deede are also present togeather and in the selfe same moment there is present in as many places that same body and that same blood as that same bread and that same wyne are present But this thing and they holde not in any fourme of argument or reason But they are most certayne Both these opinions therefore seeing they are agaynst the analogy of Fayth are false Notwithstanding both are witnessed in the holy scriptures both therefore of necessitie must be true But two contradictoryes if they be properly taken can not bee true Of these therefore of necessitie one must bee taken properly the other figuratiuely Question But who will agree vntoo these groundes Answeare Surely whosoeuer is a Christian For he that denyeth that the body taken of the sonne of God was a true therfore an organicall body he is a Martionite and not a Christian Hee that denyeth that Christe came according to his fleshe thither whether hee came went away whence hee went and therefore was not truely absent and present in certaine places he is refelled by the hystory of the Gospell He that taketh away the proprietie of a naturall body that is to say which is not in any other place then wherein it is limited eyther from the tyme of that substantiall vnyon or from the tyme of his ascention hee is an Eutichyan and not a Christian They also that interprete the ascentiō of Christ after the mutation of qualitie and not of place and interprete the heauens into which hee ascended allegorically they are refelled also by the hystorie it selfe and by the analogie and proportion of Fayth and that they may deny one vsuall type figure and altogether agreeable to the proportion of Fayth they bring in innumerable figures disagreeing from the proportion of Fayth Finally they that thinke that the proprietie of the woordes in the hystorie of the ascention can stande with that reall presence eyther by consubstantiō or by trāsubstātiatiō they maintein two cōtradictiōs at once to which contradictiō that there is no place neither in nature nor in the mysteries of faith we wil shewe in his place This collection therfore standeth sure is inuincible Christ according to the flesh properly is gone frō vs aboue the heauens not to come againe from thence before that he shal come to iudge both the quicke and the deade Therefore neyther the breade which is in the earth is properly the very fleshe of Christ neyther the fleshe of Christ is properly in or with or vnder the breade Question Yea but this same proposition Bread this is my bodie is no other wise true nowe then when Christe spake it yea therefore nowe it is true because then it was true to witte by the vertue of the same institution But then was hee himselfe present Therfore now also the same presence is required Answeare Of this we shal see afterwards Now I saye agayne whether the bodie of Christ be determined to bee present or absent yet notwithstanding that that cannot stand that that breade shoulde be properly sayd to be the very body of the Lord. Now I proceede to those argumentes which are taken from the true properties of mannes fleshe 236. Question Say on therefore Answeare He that ouerthroweth the essentiall propertie of any thing ouerthroweth the thing it selfe because the definition being ouerthrowen the thing defined is ouerthrowen But to
be limited and conteyned in a place is the essētial property of a body Therefore he that taketh away the limitation of place from the bodie of Christe hee abolisheth the very body it selfe The proposition needeth no proofe The assumption is playne by the definition of the bodie because it is sayd to be a diuisible quantitie according to a threefold measure length bredth and thicknes and whose partes are bounded with one common bounde that is to say the superficies Also from the diffinition of a place For a place is that through which a touch is made both of that which conceineth of that which is conteined 237. Question But I did thinke that a place was not the essence or substance of the bodie Answeare So the Sophisters trifle Neyther doe we say that a place is the matter of the bodie but placing as I may say necessarily and in it selfe is proper too bodies Neither doe we then consider the body as the matter but as the quantitie Therefore Augustine speaking very wel of the glorified bodie of Christ it selfe If it be a bodie sayth he then is it in a place And take away spaces from the bodyes and they shall bee no bodies But let vs proceede Hee taketh away the limitation of place which contendeth that one and the selfe same body can be euerie where and in manie places at once properly This euerie one doeth which teacheth eyther that this bread is proper by the bodie of our Lorde or in verie deed wil haue it to be present in with or vnder the breade and to be giuen too the outwarde senses in as many places as the Supper of the Lorde is celebrated Therefore c. I knowe that manie flee vnto the distinction of a bodie supernaturall certaine also vnto that common starting-hole of the omnipotencie of God But to what endeserues this For the natural generall and essentiall fourme by which euerie bodie is a bodie being taken away it shall follow that that body ceaseth to be a body from which that same essentiall fourme of a body is taken away they play the Sophisters which reason from the accidentall properties to the essential of which matter wee will speake in his place 238. Question Hast thou any other argument that thou canst alleadge Answeare Yea that I haue and that of great waight For the proper perpetual and necessary effect being taken away the antecedent also of the cause is taken away I say therfore out of Saint Iohns verse 51. Who so euer is a partaker of Christ hee is a partaker of euerlastyng lyfe But it is playne that many doe receyue the Elements of the Lords Supper to iudgement Therefore none of these are partakers of Christ him selfe But if properly and in very deede the bread were the body of Christ and that wyne the blood of Christe eyther by transubstantiation or by reall consubstantiation who so euer should receyue the Element shoulde receyue also properly and in very deede the thing it self Therefore c. Question Thou art not ignorant what is answeared vnto the proposition of this argument to wit that that saying of Iohn and such other like is to be vnderstoode of those that come vnto it rightly and worthily Answeare I knowe it and I trust I shall easily confute this as also that same threefolde or rather fourefold eating Question What therefore doest thou conclude of all these Answeare Surely that those propositions this is my body which is giuen for you and this is my blood which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes are necessarily to be interpreted figuratiuely to wit by a sacramentall metonimy and yet neyther for al that is any thing withdrawen from the trueth of the Sacrament or from the true participation of Christ himselfe 239. Question I would gladly also that that were declared vnto me at what time thou thinkest the supper of the Lord ought to be celebrated For wee heare that the Christians are laughed to skorne of the Iewes who suppe so earely yea and that against the manner of the most old and Apostolicall church of Christ it selfe Answeare Christ did celebrate these mysteries at night for twoo causes For hee woulde compare this newe Sacrament which he instituted with the figure answering vnto it Now the passeouer was slaine betwixt twoo euenings And furthemore it is playne that this was the manner of the ancient that they should sit downe once that is too say in the eueninges For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Latines I thinke called Prandium that is a dinner as if a man shoulde say the leauings of the former meales because that that very same day nothing in a manner was sodden but somewhat was taken of the remnantes of the former dayes meale in a maner they not sitting down neither was it of all nor of full prouision and iunquettes It is no meruayle therfore forasmuche as Christ differred these same mysteries as it were the sealing vp of his Testament into his last banquet that hee rather instituted this ryte in the Euening then in the Morning Nowe it ought not too seeme any wonder that the olde Churche whiles that those loue feastes by little and little were taken away that they did end their banquetes with the celebration of this Supper the which thing notwithstanding that it was not euery where kept it appeareth not onely by the last Apology of Iustine but also by other testimonies of the ancient fathers But it cannot be geathered of any cir cumstance of time out of the wordes of the institution that Christ commaunded any thing concerning the circumstance of time Therefore custome hath very wel preuayled that the Supper of the Lorde shoulde be celebrated rather in the morning meeting of those that are fasting then of those that haue dyned that they may come to the hearing of Gods word and to this same heauenly mystery which is to be executed with great attention and highe reuerence with the redier and better prepared myndes 240. Question But hath the Lord appoynted nothing concerning the place Answeare He appoynted the place to wit of the publike congregation of the Churche whenas he ordained it amongest his disciples neyther saide be Doe this euery one but doe yee this And Paule sayeth plainely When ye come together the which thing also the very name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 al the old Liturgies or formes of administring the Sacramentes doe shew also the very scope of these mysteries in whith our natural felowship consotiation in Christ is ratified doth require Nowe to appoint some certayne place with a kinde of religion as it was not lawfull in times past too celebrate the Passeouer other where then in that place the Lorde had chosen it were a Iewish superstition 241. Question What therefore doest thou thinke of the supper of the Lord administred in priuate houses Answeare I passe nothing at all of priuate houses if the church that is
shal I speak of that which swallowed vp Helice and Bura twoo notable Cities as Eusebius Eutropius diuers other Authors witnesse Iosephus in his Booke de Iudaico Bello maketh mention of an Earthquake in Iudea wherin there perished thirtie thousand people And Cornelius Tacitus in his second booke saith that twelue of the most notable Citties in all Asia were swallowed vpp in one night In the 21. yeare after Christ Eusebius affyrmeth that these thirteene Cities fell with an Earthquake Ephesus Magnesia Sardis Mosthene Mechiero Caesarea Philodelphia Himulus Tenus Cumae Mirthina Apollonia and Diahircania What should I recken all before that warre of the Parthians when Carbulus was Proconsul of Syria before the destruction of cruell Nero at the death of Titus H. Vespasians sonne there were terrible Earthquakes and three famous Cities of Cyprus were swallowed vpp foure of Asia also in the tyme of Traian further two of Grecia and three of Galatia Oros lib. 7. Cap. 12. Eutrop. Antiochia was so shaken that scarsely Traian the Emperour escaped read Dion Nicomedian and a great peece of the Citie of Nice in the time of Adrian fell by an earthquake so did Nicopôlis and Caesarea two famous Cities after which followed wonderful calamities in the time of Gordian Tyre Sydon was by the same meanes ouerthrowen so was many Cities of the East before the heresies of the Arrians tooke footing in the worlde when good Athanasius and other faithful Bishops and Pastours were so cruelly persecuted I wil say nothing of Antiochia of Neocaesarea of Dyrachiū of Rome and Ierusalem it selfe Neither will I speak of nearer tymes For it were impossible to recken all I referre al godly men to the latter wryters alreadie published cōcerning our late Earthquake This is most certaine that it is an vndoubted token of gods displeasure towarde vs to draw vs to speedy repentaunce It setteth foorth vnto vs the groning of all creatures of the earth it selfe for that restauration which the Sonne of God Iesus Christ our Sauiour shall perfourme at his comming And I beseeche God that our heartes may bee so shaken from the highest to the lowest that we may call our selues to a reckoning of our dayes paste to shake of our former sinnes that wee may mourne before he strike that he may haue pitie vpon vs that hee may molifie our stony affections to make vs tremble at his presence to loue his Gospell with a more feruēt loue and to couch down with al obediēce This good Lady is the desire of my heart both towards your grace and towards all the Israell of God In which state I assure my self if we be foūd though the foundation of the earth bee shaken and the sea make a noyse yet God will keepe Syon and the Apple of his eye shall not be touched The Lorde Iesus keepe vs in this protection that wee and ours may liue and dye in the hope comfort hereof to which I most humbly commende your Grace this first of May. 1580. Your Graces most humble in the Lord Ioh. Field ¶ A Table of the questions expounded in this other part according to the number of the figures noted in the margine Of the Sacraments in generall and first of the name Sacrament 1 THat which the Hebrewes call Sud the Chaldeans Razo the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latines haue turned Sacramēt is not any where spoken of the ancient or of those same newe ceremonyes in the holy scriptures to which notwithstanding there is not any thing added 2 Why the Grecians called these rytes mysteries 3 Why the Latines called the same Sacraments The groundes of the definition of a Sacrament 4 That the Sacraments are therefore added to the simple plaine word that wee also might bee instructed by the eyes and yet that hearing excelleth the fight for the atteyning of the knowledge of things 5 After what manner the eyes serue to the knowledge of spirituall things 6 God giueth all the opinions of Christian religiō to euery sort of men though not with the sinne and a lyke maner of teaching 7 By the Sacramentes although otherwyse yet nothing more is taught in the Church then in the plaine and simple worde 8 The manner of teaching by the Sacramentes because of the worde adioyned to it is playner then the other neyther is it without cause therevnto added 9 Why and howe farre foorth Types Ceremonyes Images and parables are obscurer and darker then the Sacracraments 10 Some signes are naturall some monstruous othersome voluntary 11 The Sacramentes are neyther natural nor monstruous but meerely voluntary 12 Of voluntary signes some are onely for memory others are simply significatiue furthermore by others both some thing past is signified and some thing present is giuen and then that nowe giuen and also to be giuen is sealed The definition of a Sacrament for the signe 13 What a Sacrament is being simply tataken for a signe 14 What the working worde is and generally what is the vse of wordes 15 Sacraments without vse haue not the effect of a Sacrament 16 Christ him selfe not onely that which we obtayne in him is the thing signified both by the simple worde and also by the Sacraments The definition of a Sacrament for the whole mystical action 17 What a Sacrament is being taken for the whole mysticall holy action 18 In what sense the Sacramentes may be sayd to be actions and how they differ properly from sacrifices The peculiar exposition of the definition of Sacraments 19 What are the signes in the Sacraments 20 What analogie or argument is in the Sacraments 21 What the things signified are 22 Why there is sayde to bee a spirituall sealing 23 Why the word of Fayth is to bee expressed in the definition of a Sacrament 24 The obiect in the Sacraments is both the things past and also to come 25 What the sealing or assurance is 26 What that same natural establishment is of our consociation or fellowshyp in Christ 27 What the efficient cause is of Sacraments 28 What the matter of the sacraments is 29 The spirituall and heauenly matter in the Sacraments is threefold 30 Christ is not called the heauenly matter of the Sacraments in respect of the Godhead or for the soule 31 In what sense the body and blood of Christ may be called the spirituall and heauenly matter 32 These mysteries are not mysteries in imagination 33 What the benefit of washing declareth 34 What may be vnderstoode by the benefite of nourishment 35 What it is to apply the benefites of Christ vnto vs in the Sacramentes 36 What the forme of Sacraments is 37 What alteration or chaunge there is in Sacraments 38 The outwarde and inward matter are also essential parts of the Sacraments 39 What are the endes of Sacramentes 40 Of what things past the Sacramentes are remembrances Of the copulation or knitting together of the signes of the things signified in the Sacraments 41 Whether Christ be presēt
Vpon what condition the children of Papistes are to bee baptized also of Iewes and Turkes 135 The children of all sortes of Heretikes not to be baptized 136 The office of baptizing is commanded too the Ministers of the worde 137 Why Paule denieth himselfe to be sent to baptize 138 The Ecclesiasticall callinges of the Papistes are vnlawfull by theyr owne Canons 139 The papistes doe vainely boast of the laying on of hands 140 Baptisme administred of meere priuate men is to bee accompted no Baptisme 141 The beginning of our saluation is not deryued from Baptisme 142 Priuate men doe muche differ from those which not beyng lawfully called doe yet exercise the ministery 143 The Baptisme of the Papistes although defiled yet it is a baptisme 144 A faulte in the essentiall forme of Baptisme doeth make Baptisme of none effect but a faulte in the doctrine doeth not so 145 They are not without sinne and blame which offer their children to be baptized of sacrificing popish priestes 146 The children of the Saintes beyng dead before they can obtain baptisme are not therefore depriued of the kingdome of God 147 149 The putting off of baptisme to be reproued 148 Why circumcision was appoynted the eight day at the furthest 150 151 What is too bee determined concerning the time and place of administring baptisme 152 Concerning the rytes of baptisme and chiefly of the sprinkling and threefolde dipping 153 c. Howe the forme of baptisme is to be obserued 157 The force of baptisme is extended to the whole life of a man 158 161 Why baptisme is not iterated and often vsed and yet the supper of the Lorde is 159 Euery one that sinneth doeth not shut himselfe frō the kingdō of God 160 Howe farre foorth those which be excommunicate and shutte out of the kingdome of God Of the Supper of the Lorde and first of the sundry names of it 862 The names of the Supper of the Lorde vsed in the holy Scriptures 163 The names of the Supper of the Lorde vsed of the Fathers 164 165 Why the Supper of the Lorde is called a thanksgeuing and how farre foorth it is like vntoo a Sacrifice 166 Howe greatly Sathan hath abused it by the name of the Sacrament of the Aultar 167 Of the name of the Masse Of the Supper of the Lord it selfe 168 c. A definitiō of the Supper of the Lorde and so a certayne short declaration of the parts thereof 172 Howe that breade and that wine differ from common breade and wine 173 874 What the Sacramentall rytes are in generall and of what thinges they are signes 175 176 182 The breaking of bread is a Sacramentall ryte in the supper of the Lord which ought to be kept 177 178 The proportion and agreement of the signes with the thinges signified 179 Why there is a double Element vsed in the Supper of the Lorde 180 The vse of the cuppe is necessary in the Supper of the Lorde 181 Expedient that the Elements of the supper of the Lorde be receiued rather by the Hande than by the mouth 183 Horrible abuses put in place of the true rytes 184. What the blessing of the Supper of the Lorde is 185 Some certayne partes of the blessing are free in the Church 186 187. A certaine forme of that Sacramētal blessing is prescribed by Christ 188 The variety of certaine voyces in this forme doth not cause it to be diuerse 189 In what sense the words of the institution may be called woorking wordes to such as haue vertue in them 190 The institution of the supper of the Lord is to be recited expoūded plainly in a knowne tongue 191 The proouing of a mannes selfe in what thinges it consisteth 192 True and Perfect doe differ 193 A fault in the blessing howe farre foorth it hurteth the supper of the Lorde 194 The ouerpassing of the breaking of breade doeth not make voyde the action of the supper of the Lorde 195 196 The geuing of the signes the taking eating and drinking ouerpassed there is no supper of the Lorde 197 A fault in the person or in the doctrine or in the intention of the minister doeth not hinder to make the action lesse lawfull 198 The vnworthinesse of the commer doeth withdraw nothing from the trueth of the Sacrament 199 This conclusion is of no force The whole Sacrament is offered too euery one therefore whosoeuer receiueth the signes receiueth also Christ 200 201 Euery one heareth not the worde and vnderstandeth the mysteries neither euery one that vnderstandeth them applieth them to himselfe 202 Christ being receiued doth alwaies saue but being refused iudgeth Of the expounding of the wordes This is my bodie and this is my blood 203 That the institution of the Sacrament consisteth not onely in these wordes 204 The distribution of these propositions into their partes 205 Which is the subiect in the former proposition or sentence 206 Which is the Predicate or matter following 207 Of what sort the Attribute is 208 c. There is no Trope neither in the Subiect or in the Predicate but in the kynde of Attribution 211 Breade sacramentally signifieth the bodie and bread is the Sacrament of the bodie declare one thing 212 What the force of this sacramental Metonymie or putting of one name for another is 213 A Metonymical propositiō is more plaine and euident then a simple proposition 214 c. That these propositions are figuratiue is proued by arguments taken from the woordes themselues of the propositions and of the reason of the proposition 222 c. Other argumentes taken from the things going before and comming after also from the circumstāces and conference of other places of the scripture 231 An argument taken from the cōmon and substantiall forme of all Sacramentes 232. c. What the specifiall fourme of the Supper of the Lorde is and what the force thereof is 235 An argument from the ascention and remayning of the bodye of Christ in heauen 236. 237 An argument from the locall limitation and essentiall propertie of the glorified bodye of Christ 238 An argument from a necessary consequent Sundry questions of the Supper of the Lorde 239 At what tyme the Supper is to bee celebrated 240 In what place 241 Of the night meetings of the Christians 242 Of the celebration of the Supper of the Lord in priuate houses besides the time of the Ecclesiastical meeting 243 Common bread rather to bee vsed then sweete bread 244 245 Of that shewe carying about and worshipping vsed in the Eucharist 249 Whether all commers are to be admitted to the Supper 247 There may be a church where there is not the vse of excommunicating from the supper of the Lord. 247 The Supper of the Lorde is not to be abstained from of those which are pure because of some that bee impure 249 Euerie one is willed to come worthily to the supper 250 A preparation to a refutation here after
euerlasting life 21. Question And what are those same thinges signified Answeare Christ himselfe as I haue sayde before with all his benefites necessary to the saluatiō of the particular members of the Church 22. Question And why doest thou adde that worde spiritually Answeare That I may shew the sealing of these thinges to depende vppon the heauenly power and mysticall vertue of the holy Ghost and not vpon the bodily vnderstanding or outwarde senses or vpon that naturall and sensitiue vnderstanding 23. Question Why dost thou adde by faith Answeare First that I may teach that indeede the signes are set forth vnto the outward senses and are receiued of them but the thinges themselues are offered too the minde and yet notwithstanding are not receiued of euery minde albeit they be offred to the mind of al that come to the Sacraments but onely are receaued of that minde that is indued with fayth because faith is the onely instrument of receiuing Christ 24. Question But why doest thou make mention of things past Answeare Because our faith looketh partely too those thinges which Christ for our sake hath performed partly it beholdeth the promises which are not yet fulfilled in vs. 25. Question What callest thou Healing Answeare A more effectuall application by the increase of faith For the greater Faith is the more excellent is the effect therof that Christ with his gifts may be as it were more and more engrauen in vs whereto the Apostle hauing regarde he saith that Christ groweth vp in vs we againe in him 26. Question But what is that same naturall establishment of our felowship in Christ Answeare So I cal that same spiritual knotte of loue whose bond is in the right vse of the Sacramentes strongly tyed as it were of members knit vntoo the same head quickened by the same spirit aswell by outward profession as by the accesse of the inward affection 27. Question Say therefore what is the efficient cause of our Sacraments Answeare Christ God man according to his own good wil power which he testifieth in prescript wordes by the mouth of the minister 28. Question And what is the matter Answeare The matter of the Sacramentes is two fold one earthly the other heauenly as Ieremias witnesseth which a man may also cal essētial parts For in very deede whatsoeueuer is in the Sacrament either it offereth it selfe to the outward sēses so is considered as a signe or els it is a spirituall or a heauenly thing and so is signified by that outward 29. Question What thou diddest meane by the name of signe thou hast saide before but what doest thou call the spiritual and heauenly thing Answeare I call the heauenly thing chiefly Christ himselfe then his benefites and last of all the application both of himselfe and of them vnto vs. Question Goe to then let vs speake of these three seuerally wilte thou not as I suppose vnderstande by the name of Christ the alone power and operatiō of Christ flowing intoo vs and much more also that his only righteousnes which by imputation is made ours Answeare Thou iudgest aright for Christ himselfe must become ours and must bee ioyned vnto vs as in whom are al these things that we may draw those things from him that are in him and that appeareth plainly by the proportion For thou canst not be washed vnlesse water be applyed and thou canst not be fedde but by taking meate and drinke Question But as I gesse thou vnderstandest Christ wholly and not eyther his Diuinitie alone or his soule alone or his body alone Answeare I vnderstand whole Christe and all that belongeth to Christ For Christ beyng diuided cannot be a Sauiour 30. Question And is there any difference in these Answeare Yea indeed that there is whereof we will speake afterwardes Question Goe to let vs leaue this nowe But if the matter be so why dost thou vnderstande Christ by the name of that spirituall and heauenly matter Doest thou it in respect of his Diuinitie or Soule Answeare No not so For thou seest in the Sacraments mētion to be made expressely of the blood and of the body and againe of the blood which as they are of a bodily nature so also they are represented by bodily signes to wit by water bread and wine 31. Question And why dost thou cal that thing spirituall and heauenly Answeare Not because they are of a spirituall inuisible substance or bicause they are now endued with heauenly glory as the Apostle saith that our bodies shal be spirituall heauenly to wit in glory not in substance but because they are sette foorth in these mysteries not to our bodily senses after a bodily maner For neither can our bodily senses doe otherwise but as the words teach to be beholden in minde and to be laid hold vppon by the hand of fayth 32. Question These are then but mysteries in imagination Answeare So I see some gather but howe vndeseruedly they so conclude I will then shewe when I shall come to that question How we may be partakers of those thinges signified Question Therfore let vs come to that other part to wit to the benefits of Christ which therefore are they Answeare These are declared of vs in the former treatise But they both may and ought keping the Analogie or proportion of the signes and thinges signified be brought to two certayne heades too wit to washing away and too nourishment whereof that is established in the mysterie of Baptisme and this in the mysterie of the Lordes Supper 33. Question And what callest thou washing away Answeare The forgiuenesse of sinnes in place wherof succedeth the obediēce of Christ and the abolishing that is begon of the corruption of nature to which sanctification now begon in vs is opposed 34. Question And what callest thou nourishing Answeare The growth as it were and increase of these 35. Question Now there remaineth the thirde which thou diddest call the applying of these benefites Answeare So I call that same as it were a certayne insinuation which is by the power of the holy Ghoste woorking in vs but is signified by Sacramentall not vaine and vnprofitable rites to wit by the bodily washing through the putting into the water and comming out agayne and also as well by the bodily both eating of breade and drinking of wine 36. Question But what is the forme of the sacraments Answeare Euen that same outwarde action duely and lawfully obserued and also that inwarde action of the holy Ghost 37. Question But doeth this forme change the substance of the signes Answeare No not so For they should cease too be signes if they were changed into any other substaunce because the Analogie or proportion wherein consisteth the whole consideration of the Sacramēts shoulde perishe There is therefore a Sacramentall chaunge but not a substantiall that is not consisting in the chaunge of the thing it selfe but in the vse thereof changed as when water is
fruites which flowe vntoo vs out of the fleshe of Christe or out of Christe accordyng to the fleshe shutting out that same pertaking of Christe himselfe and of those thinges which he afterwardes suffered for our sake thou doest euen as if reasoning of this same bodily life thou wouldest haue them too bee nourished with meate who notwithstanding doe not in any sort receiue the substance of meats 76. Question What therefore in summe sayest thou is to be determined concerning this matter Answeare To witte that both before God himselfe promising and before the eyes of our fayth Iesus Christe was alwayes present and also the whole mysterye of performing our saluatiō the which he in very deed bestowed vpon all beleeuers al beleeuers as wel in the simple word as in the Sacramēts added to the word truely and effectually embraced For Iohn 8. 56. Abraham with the eyes of faith saw the day of the Lorde which is a subsisting of thinges which yet were not that is to which now after a certayne sort those thinges existe which in verie deede are not Notwithstanding I graunt the thing it selfe that is to say that Christ himselfe was not in act geuē vnto them according too the fleshe or as they speake indeed but by right onely Question But what meaneth this thing Answere I wil speake therefore more plainly and now I say in deede that Christ geuen with all his giftes was both signified by the simple worde and in the sacramentes of the new Testament and offered vnto vs to be spiritually by faith as wee haue sayde layde holde vppon too righteousnesse sanctification and euerlasting life that the Fathers had right to the selfe same Christ that was to be borne and to all his giftes bothe by the simple word also by the promises added to the same word that therefore the fathers were euē then truely accompted the mēbers of Christ that was to bee borne through the power of the same spirite by the same faith likewise were indeed truely iustified sanctified in him to come to conclude that theyr condition differeth from ours not indeed but as they speak in the scholes according to more and lesse For Christ is one the same things which he hath doone for our sake are the same which wee looke for from him and our faith is the same whether it respect things to come or those things that yet are not or those thinges that are already past 77. Question When I consider the maner of speeches which belong vntoo the Sacraments mee thinkes that I find somewhat to obiect against thee touching those things that thou hast spoken of the signification of the signes of the thing signified and also as touching that which thou hast intreated of our partaking with Christ Answeare Those Phrases of speech not onely Sacramentall but also figuratiue are partly proper and partly borrowes 78. Question Which are proper Answeare Those be proper which distinctly attribute that too the signe which belongeth to the signe and that to the thing which belongeth to the thing as when Circumcision is called the signe of the couenant Gen. 17. 11. Also the signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith Ro. 4. 11. And the blood of the Lambe the signe Exo. 12. 13. And the sabboth the signe of calling too memory the creation of the world sealing the peculiar cōsecration of the people of Israel Exod. 31. 13. 17. And those same twoo censures a signe calling intoo their remembraunce that same conspiracie of Dathan Abiron Num. 16 38. So the outward ministery of man considered a parte from the inwarde is said to be nothing 1. Cor. 3. 7. So the outwarde baptisme of water is properly distinguished frō the inwarde efficacie of the spirit 1. Pet. 3. 21. Question But I finde in no place that this same worde Signe is attributed too Baptisme or too the Lordes supper Answeare Why then denye them too bee Sacramentes For Sacramentes vndoubtedly are signes Yea and the Papists themselues do grant that the substance of water and the Sacramentall rites of Baptisme are signes in that same Sacrament of theirs of the Aultar they do at least appoynt the formes for signes Further the thing it selfe is most euident that that is true which Irenaeus witnesseth that I may passe ouer the other fathers that they consist of one earthly of an heauenly mater whereof it must needes bee that that be the signe of this 79. Question And what are those same Sacramentall or figuratiue formes Answeare First of all they are those thinges to which the name of the Element is attributed too the thing signified as when the Lambe is said to be the passeouer Exod. 12. 11. Question And yet there be some which say that the Pesach or Passeouer is properly spoken of the passing it selfe Answeare Go to be it so But yet verely the passyng it selfe can not be eaten therefore they must in that place at the least graunt that the Lambe it selfe is called the passeouer where the passeouer is sayde to be prepared eaten So Christ is called of Iohn the Lambe of GOD and is sayde of Saint Paule to bee the passeouer 1. Cor. 5. 7. Christians are one bread 1. Cor. 10. 17. 80. Question These thinges verely satisfie mee Go forwarde I pray thee declare vnto me the other sortes of sacramental speeches Answeare The other sorte is directly contrary to this whereby the name of the thing it selfe is attributed to the Element So the stone set vp by Iacob is called Bethel Gen. 28. 22. So the seuen kyne and the seuen eares are seuen yeares Gen. 41. 27. So the name of Iehouah in innumerable places is attributed to the Arke of the couenaunt yea and to the very Altar of Moses Exod. 17. 15. So by the name of the tongue of Canaan is vnderstoode the profession of pure religion Esai 19. 18. So the name of the holy Ghost is attributed to the Doue Iohn 1. 33. To bee shorte so the Rocke was Christ Question Yea but that same bodily Rocke was not saide to bee Christe but that same spirituall Rocke Answeare I knowe very well that same sophisticall startinghole as though forsooth this were spoken of the thing it selfe and not of the signe But what will these foolishe Sophisters answeare if I shoulde aske them whether Paul yet ment not that same Rocke whereout that ryuer of waters flowed Surely they coulde answeare nothing whereby their sophistrie should not be easily conuinced For they must needes come to this poynte that they must confesse that the name of spirituall Rocke was in respecte of that very naturall Rocke attributed to Christ in respect of the bodily Rocke that is as they them selues interprete it considered spiritually and so far forth as it was a figure Therfore they snarle them selues in their owne snares or els they must graunt that Christe was called the Rocke because he was shadowed by a spiritual significatiō taken from
force too woorke some secrete thing effectually For that which I had sayde before now I say againe that there is no other vse of those woordes then to declare his minde that speaketh But if thou call them woorking woorks whereby is declared both what is doone of the Pastor and what ought to be doone of the flocke and also what God him selfe dooth then I will say that they are all woorking woordes For those woordes He tooke he brake and gaue to his disciples shew what Pastors ought to do Againe those woordes take yee eate yee drinke yee shewe what the flocke ought to-doe For it foloweth Do you this Finally those woordes This is my bodie which is giuen for you and this is my bloode of the newe testament which is shed for you signifie what himselfe woorketh and perfourmethin the minds of the hearers in this action by his own power alone For neither are these things rehearsed in that action of the minister of the woorde historically but that al may vnderstand that then these thinges are done which our Lord commaunded to be done 190. Question Wilt thou therefore that the institution of our Lorde bee playnely rehearsed Answeare Yea not onely playnely but in that tongue also which may bee vnderstoode of the Hearers aswell adding the exposition thereof as also exhortation that the minister bee no lette but that euery man may perceiue that which is done there himselfe For why are all those thinges sayde vnlesse it bee that they may bee vnderstoode of all the commers vnto it And why must they bee vnderstood vnlesse beeing vnderstoode they may be beleeued For this cause the Apostle requireth that euery one examine himselfe 191. Question But in what thinges consisteth this same proouing of a mans selfe Answeare First in the knowledge of Christiā doctrine especially of this mystery then the full persuasion of faith thirdly to be short in true repentance 192. Question But who hath these thinges Answeare Whosoeuer is truely a Christian forasmuche as these are the effectes of the spirite of adoption But it is one thing to haue these thinges truely another too haue them in euery thing perfect Yea if these things were perfect in vs we should neyther neede the worde nor the Sacramentes seeyng that wee vse them too the ende that they beeyng begonne in vs might bee daylie encreased 193. Question I haue hearde what thou hast saide ought to be done aswel of the Minister himselfe as of those which come to the Lordes table I aske thee therefore seeyng that the formall cause it selfe of the Sacramentes dependeth of the vse of the institution of our Lorde if any fault bee in them whether for that cause the making of the Sacrament be hindered Let vs see this therfore by parts The Benediction is principally put in the faythfull rehearsall of the institution of the Lord as I may say in a certain applying of the same vnto the signes moreouer in the exposition thereof adding exhortations and all other things wherby euery one may bee stirred vp to the vnderstanding and lawfull vse of these mysteries Therefore the ouerpassing or rather peruerting of this institution doeth so corrupt the act that it neither can nor ought to be deemed the Lordes Supper But other thinges not doone so rightly no not if there be a false exposition vsed doe not yet corrupt the action as which wholly dependeth vpon the wil and institution of the Lord. 194. Question But what thinkest thou nowe of the breaking of the breade Answeare I thinke that the ouerpassing of that doth not corrupt the act it selfe because it pertayneth not too the verie making of the Sacrament but onely belongeth too the true and altogether lawfull vse thereof as a spotte in a fayre face doth indeede hurt the beauty but yet notwithstanding it doeth not vtterly abolish the forme it selfe 195. Question And what thinkest thou of the geuing of the Sacrament Answeare Surely that the ouerpassing of the Sacrament it selfe doeth make that that which was a Sacrament doeth cease too haue the reason of a Sacrament forasmuche as the Sacraments were instituted to be vsed like as waxe sealed with a common seale doeth differ verie muche from priuate Waxe and not sealed but vnlesse it bee applied vnto an instrument it is accompted as priuate Waxe 196. Question What thinkest thou of taking eating and drinking Answeare Euen the very same 197. Question But what if there bee any faulte in the person of him that maketh the Sacrament Answeare Surely this that if hee bee a meere Priuate person the whole action is in vayne as wee haue sayde in Baptisme but if hee sitte in the chayre of the Ministerie albeeit hee bee vnlawfully called if hee keepe the institution of the Lorde wee must thinke otherwise as before we haue aunsweared concerning Baptisme For the reason is one and the like of both in this behalfe Question What if hee teache falsely or ouerflowe with vices or thinketh or beleeueth nothing lesse then that hee doeth is it therefore no Sacrament Answeare No not so Whatsoeuer the Sophisters babble of the intention as they speake of him that cōsecrateth For the making and perfecting of the Sacrament dependeth wholly vpon the institution of God by whatsoeuer Minister he doeth it 198. Question Doest thou thinke the like of their faulte or of any vnwoorthinesse of those which do come vnto the Lords Table Answeare Yea altogether like And by these it is easie to vnderstande what corruptions haue bene brought into the Churche of God substituting in the place of the true blessing a magicall mumbling in the place of geuing and receiuing an oblation for the quicke and the dead breaking of bread being altogether taken away and geuing of thankes changed into that same horrible carriyng about and woorshipping of a most prophane peece of bread whereof we will speake in their proper place 199. Question Therefore vnworthy Ministers doe also minister the whole sacrament Answeare I graunt it Question Therefore they also that come vnwoorthily doe receyue the whole Sacrament seeyng they receiue that that is ministred Answeare I haue oftentimes greatly meruayled at the efficacie of the spirite of error in this playne Sophisticall conclusion But one errour hath brought foorth an other For this beeing graunted that both two that is to say aswel the Elementes as the thing signified that is that Christ is geuen with his giftes to the bodie and too all they haue concluded that he that receiueth the Elements receiueth also the thing But this ground of theyrs is most false For neyther the matter of the Sacrament that is to say Christ himselfe is offered to the handes and to the mouth but to the minde and fayth to wit too bee layde holde vppon spiritually as the bodily signes doe witnesse to the outward senses Question What then doest thou determine concerning this matter Answeare Forsooth that the Elementes are receiued of al but the thing signified onelie of the faithfull albeit that both