particular because there is no appearance of the actual existing of those things into which the change was made at the instant the other were chang'd into them As little force shewn to be in the words This is my Body and This is my Blood to prove the actual change of the Sacramental Elements whether we consider the word This in the former words as denoting the Bread and Wine or The thing I now give you That supposed change farther impugned by such Scriptures as represent the Bread of the Eucharist as remaining after Consecration by the concurrent Testimony of Sense and the Doctrine of the Antient Fathers Enquiry next made into that Assertion which imports that the substances of the Sacramental Elements are so chang'd as to retain nothing of what they were before save only the Species thereof Where is shewn that if nothing of their respective Substances remain there must be an annihilation rather than a change and that there is as little ground for the remaining of the Species without them either from the nature of those Species the words of Consecration or the Testimony of Sense That the true Body and true Blood of Christ together with his Soul and Divinity are under the Species of the Sacramental Elements a third Capital Assertion in this Matter but hath as little ground in the words of Consecration as either of the former First because those words relate not to Christ's glorified Body and Blood which are the things affirmed to be contain'd under the Species of the Sacramental Elements but to Christ's Body as broken and to his Blood as shed at his Crucifixion Secondly because however they may import the being of that Body and Blood in the Eucharist yet they specifie nothing as to the modus of it and much less intimate any thing concerning their being under the Species thereof That that Body and Blood which is the fourth Capital Assertion in this Matter are truly really and substantially under the Sacramental Species shewn to be as groundless and Evidence made of the contrary by such Arguments from Sense and Reason as are moreover confirmed to us by the Authority of Revelation Some brief Reflections in the close upon the Worship of Christ in the Sacrament and more large ones upon what the Romanists advance concerning the real eating of him in it Where is shewn that that which they call a real eating is a very improper one that it is however of no necessity or use toward our spiritual nourishment by him and not only no way confirm'd by the discourse of our Saviour in the sixth of St. John's Gospel but abundantly confuted by it pag. 227. The Contents of the Eighth Part. Of Consubstantiation AN account of that Doctrine which is by us called Consubstantiation out of the Augustan Confession and Gerhard And as it is founded by him and other the Lutheran Doctors in the letter of the words This is my Body and This is my Blood so Enquiry thereupon made first whether those words ought to be taken in the literal sense Secondly whether if so taken Consubstantiation can be inferred from them That the former words ought to be taken in the literal sense is endeavour'd by the Lutherans to be prov'd by general and special Arguments and those Arguments therefore propos'd and answer'd What is alledg'd in the general concerning the literal sense of Scripture being for the most part to be preferr'd before the figurative willingly allow'd But that no exception ought to be made unless where the Scripture it self obligeth us to depart from the literal sense shewn to be neither true in it self nor pertinent to the present Texts because there is enough in the words that follow them to oblige us to preferr the figurative sense before it The Lutherans special Arguments next brought under Consideration and First that which is drawn from the supposed newness and strangeness of the Christian Sacraments at the first and which consequently requir'd that they should be deliver'd in proper and literal Expressions as without which otherwise there could have been no certain knowledge of them Where is shewn that the Christian Sacraments were neither such new and strange things at the first Institution of them as is pretended There having been the like under the Old Testament nor under any necessity if they had been such of being delivered in literal and proper Expressions because figurative Expressions with a Key to open them might have sufficiently declar'd the nature of them What is urg'd in the second place from the nature of a Testament under the form of which this Sacrament is thought from Luke 22.20 to have been instituted shewn to be of as little force Partly because it is justly questionable whether what we there render Testament ought not rather to be render'd a Covenant and partly because even Civil Testaments are shewn to admit of figurative Expressions A short Answer made to what is alledg'd in the third and fourth place from the Majesty of him that instituted this Sacrament and from the supposed Conformity there is between the several Evangelists and St. Paul in their accounts of the words in question And a more full one to what is offer'd in the fifth place to shew the absurdity of a figurative Sense from the no place there is for it either in the Subject Predicate or Copula The Copula or the word Is thereupon made choice of to place the Figure in and answer made to what is objected against it from the Rules of Logick and from the Scripture That the literal Sense is not as is pretended in the sixth Argument the only one that can quiet the Mind or secure the Conscience briefly shewn And Enquiry next made whether though the literal Sense of the words should be allow'd consubstantiation could be inferred from them Which that it cannot is made appear from there being nothing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or This to denote that complexum quid which Consubstantiation advanceth p. 249. The Contents of the Ninth Part. Of the foundation of that relation which is between the outward and inward parts of the Lord's Supper THE foundation of that relation which is between the outward and inward parts of this Sacrament shewn from some former Discourses to be the Institution of Christ not so much as delivered by him as applied to those Elements that are to put it on by the Minister's executing the Commands of it and Christ's fulfilling the Promises thereof What is the foundation of this relation on the part of the former the subject of the present Enquiry and his pronouncing the words Hoc est corpus meum and Hic est calix c. shewn not to be it from the insufficiency of those grounds on which it is built What is urg'd in the behalf of those words more particularly considered and evidence made that as there wants not in the Prayers and Praises of the Communion-Office that which may tend to the founding of this
necessity nor ever was of any Man 's receiving the Cup whether he be Priest or private Person Consecrater of the Bread and it or only a simple Communicant Then every one too that heretofore did or now doth receive in both kinds doth in one and the same Eucharist receive the Blood twice once in the Species of Bread and again in the Species of Wine In fine by the same Rule and their affirming whole Christ to be contained under either Species Hoc est corpus meum may be as proper to make a Transubstantiation of the Cup as it is a Transubstantiation of the Bread The two former whereof render our Saviour's injunction concerning the receit of the Cup perfectly unnecessary The last gives us occasion to wonder why our Saviour who to be sure affected no change of Phrase did not make use of the same Hoc est corpus meum to make an alteration of the Cup especially when if he had it might have so aptly hinted to us the sufficiency of one only Species to possess us of his Body and Blood These I take to be the natural Consequences of making Hoc est corpus meum to signifie at all times This is my Body and Blood and by vertue thereof to possess the Receivers of that over which they are pronounc'd of whole and entire Christ And if on the other side they with whom we have to do make those words to signifie so only where the Sacrament is administred but in one kind and only to those to whom it is so administred they must consequently make the very same words Hoc est corpus meum to signifie one thing to the Lay-man who receives but in one kind and another to the Priest that consecrates and receives in both Which beside that it will make the signification of those words to be arbitrary and according as the Priest shall intend them will make them vary from the signification they had in the Institution of Christ which is and ought to be the Pattern of all Our Saviour as he both instituted and distributed the Sacrament in both kinds so to be sure making the words Hoc est corpus meum to signifie only This is my Body apart from my Blood as which latter he both appointed a distinct Element for and as they love to speak converted that distinct Element into by words equally fitted for such a Conversion I think I shall not need to say much to shew the Bread of the Sacrament not to be converted into Christ's Body and Blood by the force of the words This is my Body and This is my Blood as if the latter extended to the Species of the former as well as to its own proper Sacrament even the Liquor of the Cup Both because those words are not appli'd even by themselves to the Bread but to the Cup and cannot therefore in reason be thought to have any operation upon the former And because our Saviour in that Eucharist which he consecrated for his Disciples gave them the Bread of it to eat before he proceeded to the Consecration of the Cup and before therefore it could be suppos'd to receive any influence from those words This is my Blood as which were not till some time after pronounced by him One only Device remains to bring Christ's Blood as well as Body under the Species of Bread called by the Schoolmen Concomitancy but ought rather by the Romanists explication of it and indeed by the words natural connexion before us'd by the Council of Trent to be termed a real Vnion By vertue of which if Christ's Blood and Body are brought together under the Species of Bread Christ's Body in the Sacrament even that which the words Hoc est corpus meum produc'd is no more that Body which was broken upon the Cross at least consider'd as such for that to be sure was separated from his Blood but his Body entire and perfect And then farewell not only to the natural signification of Hoc est corpus meum and quod pro vobis frangitur but to the Sacrifice of Christ's Body in the Eucharist which yet they have hitherto so contended for as not to think it to be such only by a Figure or Memorial of it Such reason is there to believe how confidently soever the contrary is affirm'd that Christ's Body and Blood are not contain'd under the single Species of Bread And yet if that could be prov'd it would not therefore follow that it were an indifferent thing whether we receiv'd the Cup or no. For the design of the several Species and our receit of them (u) 1 Cor. 11.26 being to shew forth to others the Lord's Death as well as to possess our selves of his Body and Blood If that be not to be compass'd without the receit of the Cup it will make the use of it to be so far necessary what ever we may gain by the Bread alone He satisfying not his Duty who complies with one end of any thing to the neglect of another as that too which tends apparently to the Honour of the Institutor as to be sure the Commemoration of our Saviour's Death and Passion doth Now that the Death of our Saviour cannot be otherwise shewn forth or at least not as he himself represented it without the receit of the Cup as well as Bread may appear from his own representing his Death as a thing effected by the shedding or pouring out of his Blood For so it is in the several Evangelists as well as by the breaking of his Body Blood shed or poured out of a Body being not to be represented in a Sacrament but by a Species at least distinct from the Species of that Body nor we therefore in a capacity so to represent or shew it forth by our receiving but by the receit of such a distinct one Add hereunto that as it is agreed among all Men that the Death which we are to represent or shew forth hath the nature of a Sacrifice and the Eucharist it self for that reason represented by the Romanists as such So it is alike certain and agreed that there is nothing more considerable in the Sacrifice of Christ's Death than the shedding of his Blood as to which he himself peculiarly attributes the Remission of Sins Which Sacrifice therefore whosoever will shew forth as to that particular by the receit of the Sacrament of it he must do it by the receit of such a Symbol as may represent the Blood of Christ as separated from his Body which nothing but a Symbol distinct from that of the Body can and therefore neither because there is no other here but that Cup whereof we speak I may not forget to represent as a fourth Pretence because suggested by the Council of Trent (w) Sess 21. cap. 2. that the receit of the Cup is not of the substance of the Sacrament and may therefore by the Church be either granted or deny'd as it shall seem most expedient to
receiving God's Creatures of Bread and Wine according to his Son and our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy Institution may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood In fine it gives us to understand * Art of Rel. 28. which is yet more express that to such as rightly worthily and with a true Faith receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper the Bread which we break is the partaking of the Body of Christ and likewise the Cup of Blessing a partaking of the Blood of Christ For what more could have been said unless it had made use of that particular Expression which yet it doth use where it declares the general nature of a Sacrament what more I say could have been said to shew that this Sacrament is no naked or ineffectual Sign of the Body and Blood of Christ but such a Sign as is also ordained as a Means whereby we receive the same and so sure and certain a one that if we rightly and worthily receive that Sign we do as verily receive the Body and Blood of Christ as we do the Sacrament thereof How well the Scripture agrees with the Doctrine of our Church in this Particular will not be difficult to shew whether we do consider its making use of the most emphatical Phrase which our Church doth concerning this Sacrament or the Effects which it attributeth to it For it is St. Paul (a) 1 Cor. 10.16 as well as our Church that affirms that the Bread which we break is the Communion of the Body of Christ and that the Cup which we bless is the Communion of his Blood Words which considering the place they have in that Chapter from whence they are borrowed cannot admit of a lower sense than that the elements of this Sacrament are at least a Means of that Communion because alledged by him as a proof or at least as an illustration of their really having fellowship with Devils that partook of the Sacrifices that were offer'd to them For if the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament were not a Means as well as a sign of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ Neither could the Gentiles Sacrifices be a Means of their or other Men's Communion with those Devils to whom they were offer'd and therefore neither charge them with any real fellowship with Devils but only with a sign or semblance of it Which how it agrees with St. Paul's charging the partakers of those Sacrifices with having fellowship with Devils as that too upon the account of the Gentiles Sacrificing to Devils and not to God I shall leave all sober Men to judge Such evidence there is from that one place of St. Paul concerning the Lords Supper being a Means as well as a Sign whereby we come to partake of the Body and Blood of Christ And we shall find it no less confirm'd by an effect which the Scripture attributes to one of its Symbols and which is in that place by an usual Synecdoche set to denote the whole Sacrament That I mean where St. Paul affirms (b) 1 Cor. 12.13 that we have been all made to drink into one Spirit For as the foregoing mention of Baptism makes it reasonable to believe that these words ought to be understood of the Cup or Wine of the Lord's Supper So we cannot without great violence to the words understand less by being made to drink into one Spirit than our partaking by Means of that Cup of the Blood of Christ and the Benefits thereof of which the Spirit of God is no doubt one of the principal ones To be made to drink into that Blood or the Spirit of God importing somewhat more even in common understanding than to receive a naked sign of them And though I know that some of the Reformed Churches and particularly those of Zuinglius and Oecolampadius's institution have been charg'd with meaner thoughts concerning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Yet whosoever shall take the pains to peruse what our Cosins (c) Hist Transubstant Papal cap. 2. hath collected upon this Argument and particularly what he quotes from Bucer (d) ibid. will find that they always thought or at least now do that Christ's true Body and Blood are truly exhibited given and taken together with the visible signs of Bread and Wine as well as signified by them But because the question is not so much at present concerning this Sacrament's being a Means whereby we receive the Body and Blood of Christ as what kind of Means it is how it conveys to us the Body and Blood of Christ and how we receive them by it Therefore enquire we so far as we may what our Church delivers in these particulars and what evidence there is from the Scripture of our Churches Orthodoxy therein Now though we may not perhaps find in any Monument of our Church a distinct and particular Answer to the questions before propos'd Yet we may find that in the eight and twentieth Article of our Church which may serve for a general Answer to them all and for a particular answer too to the last of them The Doctrine thereof being that the Body of Christ and the same mutatis mutandis must be said of his Blood is given taken and eaten in the Supper after an heavenly and spiritual manner only and again that the mean whereby the Body of Christ is receiv'd and taken in the Supper is Faith For if the Body and Blood of Christ be given taken and eaten or drunken in the Supper after a heavenly and spiritual manner only that Supper must so far forth be a means purely heavenly and Spiritual the conveyance thereof of the same heavenly and spiritual nature and the reception of it also And if again the Mean whereby the Body and Blood of Christ are receiv'd and taken in the Supper is Faith then do we in the opinion of our Church receive them by Faith which will serve for a particular answer to the last of the questions propos'd To all which if we add our Churches teaching us to pray to God even in the prayer of Consecration that we receiving the Creatures of Bread and Wine according to our Saviour Jesus Christ's Holy Institution may be partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood so we shall be able to make out a more particular answer to the questions propos'd and such as we shall find reason enough to allow For it appears from the premisses and particularly from the prayer of Consecration that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is such a spiritual Mean as depends for the force of it not upon any vertue that is infus'd into it and much less upon any natural union there is between that and the Body and Blood of Christ but upon our receiving it on the one hand according to our Saviours Holy Institution and God's bestowing on the other hand Christ's Body and Blood upon such a reception of it It appears therefore that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper
that strengthening and refreshing of the Soul which it is said to receive by the Body and Blood of Christ Enquire we in the next place what Evidence there is of their being intended for it Which will soon appear from their being intended by Christ as the Meat and Drink of the Soul and particularly as such Meat and Drink as Bread and Wine are to the Body For Meat and Drink being intended for the strengthening and refreshing of Men's Bodies and particularly such Meat and Drink as are the outward part of the present Sacrament If the Body and Blood of Christ were intended as such to the Soul they must be consequently intended for its strengthening and refreshing Now that the Body and Blood of Christ were intended as Meat and Drink to the Soul and particularly as such Meat and Drink as Bread and Wine are to the Body is evident for the former of these from several passages of the sixth of St. John's Gospel * See Part 3. where it is so declar'd in express terms and for the latter from our Saviour's making use of Bread and Wine to represent them and which is more calling upon us to eat and drink of them in remembrance of Christ's giving that Body and Blood of his for us This as it farther shews them to have been intended as our Spiritual Meat and Drink so to have been intended too in a Spiritual manner to be eaten and drunken by us and so made yet more subservient to our strengthening and refreshment 3. Now this the Body and Blood of Christ effect first and chiefly as the meritorious cause of that Grace by which that strengthening and refreshing is immediately produc'd Or secondly as stirring up the Minds of the Faithful to contemplate the meritoriousness thereof and in the strength of that to grapple with all Difficulties and bear up under all Troubles and Disquiets For beside that the Body and Blood of Christ as was before observ'd (m) Part 5. are to be consider'd in this Sacrament under the Notion of a propitiatory Sacrifice and which as such doth rather dispose God to grant us that strength and refreshment which we desire than actually collate them on us There is nothing more evident from the Scriptures than that it is the Spirit of God (n) Eph. 3.15 and his Graces by which we must be immediately strengthened with might in the inner Man and that it is by him (o) Acts 9.31 that we receive comfort and consolation For which cause our Saviour gives him the title of the Comforter and professeth to send him to supply his own place in that as well as in other particulars From whence as it will follow that it is to the Spirit of God and his Graces that we are immediately to ascribe that strength and refreshment which we expect So that we ought therefore to look upon Christ's Body and Blood as conferring to it not so much by any immediate influence thereof upon the Soul as by their disposing God to grant that Spirit by which both the one and the other are produc'd Upon which account we find St. Paul where he attributes the several Graces of a Christian to the immediate Influences of that Spirit affirming those that partake of this Cup to be made to drink into the same Spirit as that which is the immediate Author of them This I take to be in an especial manner that strengthning and refreshing which our Catechism and the Scripture prompts us to ascribe to the Body and Blood of Christ Neither can I think of any other than what the contemplation of the meritoriousness thereof may infuse into the Soul of him who seriously reflects upon it That I mean whereby the Soul becomes so confident of the Divine Assistance and Favour as neither to doubt of his enabling it to do what he requires nor despair of his delivering it from all its fears and troubles I will close this Discourse when I have added that as the Sign of this Sacrament hath the relation of a Means whereby God conveys and we receive the Body and Blood of Christ So it hath also the Relation of a Pledge to assure us thereof or as our Church elsewhere expresseth it (p) Art 19. a certain sure Witness of it A Relation which is not more generally acknowledg'd than easie to make out from the former one For what is ordained by Christ as a Mean for the conveying of his Body and Blood being as sure to have its effect if it be received as it ought to be He who so receives what Christ hath thus ordain'd will need no other Proof than that of his receiving that Body and Blood of Christ which it was so ordained to convey PART VII Of Transubstantiation The Contents The Doctrine of Transubstantiation briefly deduc'd from the Council of Trent and digested into four capital Assertions Whereof the first is that the whole substance of the Bread is chang'd into the substance of Christ's Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the substance of his Blood The grounds of this Assertion examin'd both as to the possibility and actual being of such a change What is alledg'd for the former of these from the substantial changes mention'd in the Scripture of no force in this particular because there is no appearance of the actual existing of those things into which the change was made at the instant the other were chang'd into them As little force shewn to be in the words This is my Body and This is my Blood to prove the actual change of the Sacramental Elements whether we consider the word This in the former words as denoting the Bread and Wine or The thing I now give you That supposed change farther impugned by such Scriptures as represent the Bread of the Eucharist as remaining after Consecration by the concurrent Testimony of Sense and the Doctrine of the Antient Fathers Enquiry next made into that Assertion which imports that the substances of the Sacramental Elements are so chang'd as to retain nothing of what they were before save only the Species thereof Where is shewn that if nothing of their respective Substances remain there must be an annihilation rather than a change and that there is as little ground for the remaining of the Species without them either from the nature of those Species the words of Consecration or the Testimony of Sense That the true Body and true Blood of Christ together with his Soul and Divinity are under the Species of the Sacramental Elements a third Capital Assertion in this Matter but hath as little ground in the words of Consecration as either of the former First because those words relate not to Christ's glorified Body and Blood which are the things affirmed to be contain'd under the Species of the Sacramental Elements but to Christ's Body as broken and to his Blood as shed at his Crucifixion Secondly because however they may import the being of that Body and Blood
that Assertion of theirs in This is my Body and This is my Blood For though those words may assure me that the Body and Blood of Christ are there where I discern the species of the Sacramental Elements to be and consequently that naturally speaking the substances of those Elements cannot Yet as they do not so much as hint that the substances of those Elements neither are nor can be there by the extraordinary power of God so they say nothing to let us understand by what means they are convey'd away if they do not remain there But because this Assertion imports as well the remaining of the species or accidents of the Sacramental Elements as the not remaining of the substances thereof Therefore enquire we so far as we may what the grounds of that part of the Assertion are and if there be any need of it after such an enquiry oppose proper Arguments to it For the truth is that as those accidents are forc'd to subsist without a subject so they seem to have no other support save what the necessity of a bad cause and a confident asseveration can give them For is there any thing in the nature of an accident to persuade us that the thing is so much as possible and that though the substance of the Sacramental Elements remains not yet the species or accidents thereof may On the contrary they who believe any such thing as an accident make the inhering thereof in a subject to be of the very essence of it and that at the same time it ceaseth to inhere as it must do when the subject thereof is remov'd it also ceaseth to be Is it then that those separate species or accidents have any thing in the words This is my Body and This is my Blood to afford them any support But alas as the words my Body and my Blood are so far from giving any countenance to them that they rather bid defiance to them because professing to contain nothing less in them than the August Body and Blood of Christ So the word This is as much afraid of owning them for fear it should injure the substances thereof and instead of betokening the conversion of those into the substances of Christ's Body and Blood proclaim the conversion of the species or accidents thereof into them and so bid a far greater defiance to our already too much offended Senses Shall we then which is all we have to trust to at the last appeal to the testimony of our Senses for them But beside that no wise Transubstantiator ought to give any belief to his Senses as which will tell him farther if he listen to them that there is the substance of Bread and Wine under them Those Senses of ours do never represent those species as things distinct from their proper substances and much less as separate from them but as inherent in them and proper characters of them and so leading us more to the contemplation of their respective substances than to that of their own particular natures So little reason is there to believe the being of such Species or Accidents after their proper Substances are remov'd And there is this substantial Reason against it that the admission of such Species or Accidents in the Sacrament would render the Testimony of our Senses uncertain in other things Because whatever Pretence there may be from Revelation for the being of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament yet there is no Pretence at all from that for the being of any such separate Species or Accidents and we therefore as much at liberty to believe them elsewhere as there and so boggle at any farther notice that may be suppos'd to come to us by the Species of any thing whatsoever 3. The third Assertion on which the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is founded is that the true Body and true Blood of Christ together with his Soul and Divinity are under the Species of the Sacramental Elements An Assertion which the Romanists seem to be so confident of from the words This is my Body and This is my Blood that they make no end of inculcating it and think all Men either blind or obstinate who will not as readily assent to it But with how little reason and how much against it also will soon appear if we compare them together whether as to that Body and Blood of Christ which they both profess to intreat of or as to the being of them in the Sacrament There being a manifest difference in each of these between the Assertion I am now upon and those words from which they profess to deduce it For first whereas the Body and Blood of Christ in the words of our Saviour are his Body and Blood as broken and shed at his Crucifixion and not as they were at the time of our Saviour's uttering those words or since his resurrection from the Dead The Body and Blood of Christ affirmed to be contain'd under the Species of Bread and Wine are the Body and Blood of Christ in that glorious estate wherein they now are now no more to fall under those Accidents which they sometime underwent For it is no way repugnant saith the Council of Trent (s) Sess 13. cap. 1. that our Saviour himself should alway sit at the right hand of the Father in Heaven according to a natural manner of existing and yet nevertheless be Sacramentally present to us by his substance in other places after that way of existing which though we can scarce express in words yet we believe to be possible to God And again (t) Ib. cap. 3. which shews it yet more to speak of Christ's glorified Body the Faith of the Church hath always been that presently after the Consecration the true Body and true Blood of Christ together with his Soul and Divinity are under the Species of Bread and Wine But the Body indeed under the Species of Bread and the Blood under the Species of Wine by vertue of the words but the Body it self under the Species of Wine and the Blood under the Species of Bread and the Soul under both by vertue of that natural Connexion and Concomitancy by which the parts of Christ our Lord who is now risen from the Dead now no more to die are coupled among themselves Than which what can be more plain that it is the Body and Blood of Christ as they now are which they affirm to be contained under the Species of those Elements and not as broken and shed for us It is true indeed that when the same Tridentine Fathers come to entreat of the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Propriety of that Sacrifice they may seem to sing another Song because as was before * Part 5. observed representing it as the very same Sacrifice with that which he offer'd up upon the Cross But as they sufficiently unsay it again when they represent it as an unbloody Sacrifice and as an Oblation that is made of Christ's Body and Blood
in eo adesse credimus quem pater aeternus introducens in orbem terrarum dicit Et adorent eum omnes Augeli Dei c. speak of the very same God being present in it than that the Tridentine Fathers meant by the former words the Sacrament properly so stil'd even those species under which they elsewhere affirm Christ to be and that accordingly they requir'd divine worship to be given to them And if that was their meaning that they thereby requir'd divine worship to be given to Creatures yea the most imperfect ones and such too as because not inhering in that Body of Christ which is said to be under them cannot be suppos'd to be personally united to him Than which what can be said that doth more entrench upon the divine honour yea upon the honour of that Christ whom they pretend to worship in this Sacrament Those species though no part at all of him being yet joyn'd in equal honour with him that which is in effect but the shadow of a meer Creature with the great Creatour and Redeemer of the World But let us suppose that those Fathers meant no more by the word Sacrament than Jesus Christ in it and consequently that so far forth there is no pretence for the charge of Idolatry in this affair Yet how will the Romanists acquit themselves from it supposing as we often may that the Elements are not rightly consecrated and no real presence therefore of Christ's Body and Blood under the species of them For in that case their worship must be terminated on the Bread because there is nothing else to receive it Now that the supposition I before made is no way unreasonable will appear from their affirming that the intention of the Minister to do at least what the Church enjoyns (c) Sess 17. can 11. is requir'd to the making of a Sacrament For what if the intention of the Minister when he comes to the words of Consecration wander from the matter in hand Or if not so yet doth not aim to do what the Church doth as they that believe not Transubstantiation certainly cannot of which number (d) See Pref. to the Discourse of the Holy Euch. c. there are not a few Or which is worst of all as a Priest is sometime said to have directed his (e) Meric Casaub Necess of Res p. 75. for seven or eight years together be set upon doing honour to the Devil rather than to our Lord Jesus Christ In each of these cases certainly there can be no real conversion of the Elements into the Body and Blood of Christ and therefore they that pay adoration to them rather worshippers of the Creature than of him who was the Institutor of this Sacrament And I know not of any tolerable evasion in this affair save what is said to have been suggested by Gerson even by worshipping the host conditionally and upon supposition of its being the Body of Christ But as that is a sort of worshipping which few of the unlearned are acquainted with and which can do no great good to those that are Such an uncertainty as that being as likely to take off the edge of their devotions as to help them in the directing of their intentions So that cannot however hinder the external act from being fixed upon the Creature and consequently cannot but make the door of that external act guilty of material Idolatry though not of any formal one Which material Idolatry though it may not perhaps reflect upon the worshipper because of his invincible ignorance in this affair Yet which is worse will if suppos'd reflect upon God for not providing against it in so many cases as may happen Especially if the like intention be either wanting or perverted in the person that baptiz'd or ordained the Consecrater because then all he doth at any time will be null For how is it consistent with the honour or goodness of that God who was in their opinion so gracious to his Church as to furnish it with an infallible guide not to provide against so many members of it paying their external adoration to a piece of Bread at the same time they desir'd and intended to address it to his Son I will conclude my discourse of this assertion when I have taken notice of one piece of Sophistry which is employ'd by the Romanists to save themselves from the imputation of Idolatry though there should be no such thing as Transubstantiation in the World That I mean which they alledge and our Taylour (f) Liberty of Proph. Sect. 20. num 16. in their behalf concerning their directing their worship not to Bread which they believe not to be present but to the Body and Blood of Christ or rather to Christ in person whom they conceive to be corporally present in it But as they do not I confess intentionally direct their worship to Bread or at least not to Bread as such because they believe it not to continue where they direct their worship So I do not see how that hinders their directing it indeed and in truth to Bread supposing that not to be transubstantiated into Christ's Body Because as their outward worship is manifestly directed to that substance which is under the species of Bread So believing as they do that that Substance is Christ's Body they must consequently be thought to direct their inward worship also to it and if therefore there be nothing else there to simple Bread And I know of nothing that can excuse them in this point unless it be their own mistake which how far it will avail them in this particular I for my part shall not take upon me to determine But as that mistake of theirs will not however change the nature of the action or make it cease to be the adoration of a Creature So it will not change it in the sight of God if the mistake be gross and affected which they have just cause to look after who have so little ground from Scripture for the belief of that Transubstantiation which is the foundation of it and so much against it from the same Scripture and Antiquity and Sense and Reason which are all the Topicks we can argue from Next to the worshipping of Christ as present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist consider we our really eating him in it as well as either spiritually or sacramentally A thing as the Romanists themselves confess which depends upon his being substantially there and must therefore fall of course with that substantial presence which I have before destroy'd But as this Assertion is not without weakness of its own and would therefore be considered apart So I think it therefore but reasonable to be more particular in the handling of it than would otherwise be necessary for me to be And here in the first place I cannot but observe that where the Council of Trent intreats of this affair it opposeth real as well as sacramental manducation to that which
the truth of that Observation of his either as to the variety of mens conceits concerning a Sacrament or that mixt nature of a Sacrament to which he entitles the variety of the other But neither the one nor the other will hinder us from discovering under what head of things to place it which is that we are first of all to intend For whether we consider a Sacrament as to Christ or to our selves as a means in his hands to profit us or in ours to declare our piety toward him Whether again we consider it in the hands of Christ as a means whereby he signifies and seals his own graces or as a means whereby he conveys as well as either signifies or seals them Yet still it will be found to be in the number of relative things or such whose very being consists in the respect they bear unto another Because whatever it may be in it self yet it is not considered as such but with respect to that Grace of Christ which it so signifies or seals or exhibits or with respect to that piety which it is intended on our part to declare But so the Scriptures themselves will oblige us to consider a Sacrament as is evident from what they teach concerning Baptism and the Lord's Supper which are if not the only yet the most undoubted Sacraments of our Religion For agreeably thereto they prompt us to consider the water of Baptism (b) 1 Pet. 3.21 not as putting away the filth of the Flesh which is the proper consideration of water as such but as washing us from (c) Act. 22.16 our sins and purifying those consciences (d) 1 Pet. 3.21 wherein they are As on the other fide the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper not as intended to satisfie (e) 1 Cor. 11.34 our hunger but as (f) Matt. 26.26 c. the body and blood of Christ or rather the communication (g) 1 Cor. 10.16 of it For well may we look upon those things as relative ones which we are not only forbidden to consider in their natural properties but prompted to attribute to them the properties of others yea to consider in the same notion with them I say secondly that as a Sacrament is a relative thing and that therefore to be reputed as the remote Genus of it so it is of the number of those relative ones which are signs or representations of what they so relate unto As is evident in part from what we were before taught concerning the water of Baptism and will be yet more when I come to shew the Analogy there is between the elements of each Sacrament and that to which they do relate For if the water of Baptism though not to be considered as to any proper purification yet is to be considered under the notion of a Laver (h) Tit. 3 5. and accordingly as washing (i) Act. 22.16 those who are sprinkled with it from their sins then ought it to be look'd upon under the notion of a sign of that to which it doth so relate Because whatever force the Baptismal water may have toward the doing away our sins yet it cannot be supposed because sin is no corporal spot to wash us from them And that term of washing therefore attributed to it upon the account of the Analogy there is between the property of water considered in its own nature and that of the same water as consecrated into a Sacrament Which will consequently make the water of Baptism and by proportion thereto the elements of other Sacraments not only to have a relation to something of another nature but also to be a sign or representation of it I say nothing at present of a Sacrament's being a means of conveying something to us as well as a sign of it and a pledge to assure us of it as well as either Partly because that which hath the nature of a sign may also be made use of as a means of conveyance and a pledge And partly because the first intention of a Sacrament is to signifie that of which it is so and that therefore by which it comes to do so more commodiously assigned as the Genus of it And I shall only add that forasmuch as a sign is nothing else than that which offers it self to the senses and that of which it is a sign to the understanding Forasmuch therefore as it must be subjected in some sensible being and if it be also a formal sign or that which represents the thing of which it is so in such a being as is apparent to the eyes Forasmuch lastly as Baptism and the Lord's Supper which are at least the most considerable Sacraments of our Religion are subjected in such sensible yea visible beings It cannot but be deemed reasonable for the more clear declaring of the nature of a Sacrament to represent it as our Catechism doth as an outward and visible one That therefore being to be looked upon as the Genus of a Sacrament or that general head of things under which we are to conceive of it Enquire we in the next place after the essential attributes thereof and by which it will not only be more perfectly known what it is but also be more clearly discriminated from those things which are of the same general nature Now as the essence of a relative thing consists in the relation it bears to another and that relative thing therefore whereof we speak in the relation which it bears to that of which it is a sign So the essential attributes of a Sacrament cannot therefore be better learned than by the knowledge of those things to which it doth relate the manner of its relation to them and the foundation of it I. In the general I observe that that to which a Sacrament relates must be something Sacred or Divine as both the term of Sacrament and the known nature of Baptism and the Lord's Supper perswade Which is the rather to be remarked to distinguish it from such signs as relate to civil matters and particularly from the purely military Sacrament For though even that had a relation to God as whose name it did invoke and to whose truth and justice it did appeal yet it referr'd to God rather as a witness of what it affirmed than as to the object of it For the object of a Military Sacrament was no other than the being faithful to those Generals under which the Souldiers that took that Sacrament were I observe more particularly that as that may be termed Sacred or Divine which hath God either for its principle or object and accordingly flows from him to us or passeth from as to him so a Sacrament relates both to the one and the other and ought to be looked upon as such That a Sacrament relates to that which flows from God to us is a thing neither denyed nor forgotten by any and is evident from what the Scriptures teach concerning Baptism and the Lord's Supper Witness
washing away their guilt or washing away the pollution of them we shall still find it to be the immediate issue of an inward and spiritual Grace It being the blood of Jesus Christ as the Scriptures (q) Explic. of the Creed in the word Dead every where declare that washeth us from sin in the former sense and the sanctifying Graces of God's spirit (r) Expl. of the Creed in the words I believe in the Holy Ghost which purifie us from it in the other If therefore the Sacrament of Baptism may be said so to wash and purifie it must be as it is an Instrument whereby it conveys to us those graces to which that purification doth belong But so the same Scriptures do yet more expresly declare as to that other Sacrament of our Religion even the Supper of the Lord St. Paul telling us (Å¿) 1 Cor. 10.16 of the bread of it that it is the Communion or Communication of Christ's body as of the Cup that goes along with it that it is the Communion of his blood For what other can we well understand by that expression of his than that they are an instrument whereby God conveys and we accordingly come to partake of that body and blood of Christ which is signified by them This only would be added for the clearer Explication of it that when were present the Sacrament as an instrument whereby God conveys to us that grace which is signified by it we do not mean thereby that it is a natural one or such as contains that grace in it as a Vessel doth liquor or a cause its effect but rather as the Judicious Hookes (t) Eccl. Pol. li. 5. sect 57. speaks as a moral instrument thereof That is to say as such a one to the use whereof God hath made a promise of his grace and which accordingly he will accompany with the exhibition of the other I deny not indeed but there are who are otherwise perswaded and who accordingly either attribute a greater efficacy to a Sacrament or deny even that which we have attributed to it Of the former sort are they who not contented to affirm that a Sacrament is an instrument whereby God conveys grace to the worthy receiver of it do moreover represent it under the notion of a Physical one yea of such a Physical one as contains grace in it as a cause doth its effect and accordingly contributes by its own internal force to the producing of it as well as to the possessing us thereof Even as a Chezil for so they (u) Hist of Counc of Trent li. 2. explain themselves contributes to the formation of a Statue or as a Hatchet to that Bed (w) Aquin. sum Part. 3. Qu. 62. Art 1. which is shaped by it But as it appears by Aquinas (x) Ibid. who was it may be the first framer of it that that conceit had its original from the fear of making a Sacrament to be nothing but a bare sign of grace contrary to the opinion of the Holy Fathers so nothing more therefore can be necessary toward the overthrowing of it than to shew the groundlesness of that fear which the doctrine before deliver'd will sufficiently evince For if it be but a moral instrument whereby God conveys his own graces it is certainly more than a sign yea it may in some sense be said to be a cause as well as the instrument thereof For as they who attribute to a Sacrament the efficacy of a cause make it to be no farther a cause of grace than that it produceth in the Soul a disposition (y) Hist of Counc of Trent li. 2. to receive it by which means it is not so much the cause of grace as of our receiving it so such a kind of causality will be found to belong to it though we make a Sacrament to be no other than a means whereby we attain it Because it is so far forth by the force of a Sacrament that grace comes to be in us that without that we cannot ordinarily hope to attain it nor fear to fail of it where the other is duly receiv'd The only difference as to this particular between the one and the other opinion is that whereas the former makes a Sacrament to dispose us to the reception of Grace as well as to convey it The latter supposeth that disposition already produc'd and consequently leaves no place for the former operation In that respect yet more agreeably to the Doctrine of the Scriptures because not only pre-requiring certain qualifications (z) Act. 8.36 37. 1 Cor. 11.20 of those that are to receive it but assuring them that if they come so qualifi'd they shall not fail * Mark 16.16 Act. 2.38 of that grace which the Sacrament was intended to convey These and the like assertions as they suppose the Soul to be before dispos'd so leaving no place for any other causality in a Sacrament than its serving to us as a means of conveying that grace which we are so disposed to receive And indeed as it doth not appear by any thing that Schoolman hath alledg'd that the Antients ever attributed any other causality to a Sacrament for though St. Augustine as he is quoted by him affirms the power of God to work by a Sacrament yet he doth not affirm it to do so as by a Physical instrument As it appears farther even from that Schoolman that St. Bernard was of opinion that Grace is no otherwise conveyed by a Sacrament than a Canonry in his time was by a Book or a Bishoprick by Ring so there is no defect in the Instances of that Father supposing a Book or a Ring to have been as much a means of conveying of those preferments as we affirm a Sacrament to be of the divine Grace For in that case the delivery of a Ring or a Book would not only have been a sign whereby the delivery of those preferments was declar'd as Aquinas argues in the place before but a ceremony by which they were actually made over and without which they could not have been Canonically invested in them I conclude therefore that if a Sacrament be an instrument of Grace it is a moral one and such as contributes no farther toward our partaking of it than as it is a means to which God hath annex'd the promise of it and which accordingly he will not fail where the receiver is rightly dispos'd to accompany with the exhibition of the other But because there are some who are so far from owning a Sacrament to be a physical instrument of grace that they will not so much as allow it to be a moral one And because such a conceit may tend as much to the depretiating of a Sacrament as the other seems to tend to the overvaluing of it Therefore consider we in the next place the pretensions of those that entertain it and the strength or rather weakness of those pretensions There are who have
as a means whereby we receive the same and as a pledge to assure us thereof Question How many parts are there in a Sacrament Answer Two the outward visible sign and the inward spiritual grace Question What is the outward visible sign or form in Baptism Answer Water wherein the person is baptized In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Ghost Question What is the inward and spiritual grace Answer A death unto sin and a new birth unto righteousness for being by nature born in sin and the children of wrath we are hereby made the children of grace Question What is required of persons to be baptized Answer Repentance whereby they forsake sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the promises of God made to them in that Sacrament Question Why then are Infants baptized when by reason of their tender age they cannot perform them Answer Because they promise them both by their Sureties which promise when they come to age themselves are bound to perform Question Why was the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ordained Answer For the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of Christ and of the benefits which we receive thereby Question What is the outward part or sign of the Lord's Supper Answer Bread and Wine which the Lord hath commanded to be received Question What is the inward part or thing signified Answer The body and blood of Christ which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper Question What are the benefits whereof we are partakers thereby Answer The strengthening and refreshing of our souls by the body and blood of Christ as our bodies are by the bread and wine Question What is required of them who come to the Lord's Supper Answer To examine themselves whether they repent them truly of their former sins stedfastly purposing to lead a new life have a lively faith in God's mercy through Christ with a thankful remembrance of his death and be in charity with all men OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM In Pursuance of an EXPLICATION OF THE CATECHISM OF THE Church of England BY GABRIEL TOWERSON D.D. and Rector of Welwynne in Hartfordshire Imprimatur Ex Aedib Lamb. Apr. 10. 1686. Jo. Battely RRmo P. ac D no D no Wilhelmo Archiep. Cantuar. Ã Sacris Domesticis LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in S. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVII TO THE Right Reverend FATHER in GOD FRANCIS Lord Bishop of ELY AND LORD ALMONER TO His Majesty My Lord YOUR Lordship 's favourable acceptance of my Discourse of the Sacraments in General with the desire I have if it may be to put an end to the whole hath prompted me to make the more hast to present your Lordship and the World with this of Baptism in particular Two things there are in it which I thought my self most concern'd to clear and which therefore I have employ'd all requisite diligence on the Doctrine of Original Sin and Infant-Baptism The former being in my opinion the foundation of Christianity the latter of our interest in it For if there be no such thing as Original Sin I do not see but some persons heretofore might and may here after live with such exactness as not at all to stand in need of a Saviour And I see as little if Infant-Baptism be null what interest any of us can have in him according to the ordinary dispensation of the Gospel who have for the most part been baptized in our Infancy or at least have been baptized by those that were Throughout the whole Treatise I have endeavour'd to retrive the antient notion of Baptism to shew what advantages are annexed to it and what duties it either involves or obligeth to To either of which if I have given any light or strength I shall hope I have done some small service to the Church and which your Lordship in particular will take in good part from Your Lordship's Most Obliged Most Obedient and Most humble Servant GABRIEL TOWERSON Wellwyne Aug. 23. 1686. THE CONTENTS OF THE FIRST PART Of the Rite of Baptism among the Heathen and the Jews THe Heathen themselves not without the knowledge of another World and of the insufficiency of natural Religion to bring them to the happiness thereof Occasion taken by them from thence to enquire after other ways of obtaining it and by the Devil to suggest the mysteries of their respective Deities as the only proper means of compassing it Those mysteries every where initiated into by the Rite of Baptism partly through Men's consciousness of their past sins and which they judged it but meet they should be some way purged from and partly through the policy of the Devil who thereby thought to procure the greater veneration to them That as it was a Rite which was in use among God's own people so naturally apt to represent to Mens minds their passing from a sinful to a holy Estate Of what Service the Heathens use of this Rite is toward the commendation of the Christians Baptism and a transition from thence to the use of it among the Jews Which is not only prov'd at large out of the Jewish Writings and several particulars of that Baptism remark'd but that usage farther confirm'd by several concurring proofs such as is in particular the no appearance there is otherwise of any initiation of the Jewish Women the Baptizing of the whole Nation in the Cloud and in the Sea and a remarkable allusion to it in our Saviour's Discourse to Nicodemus The silence of the Old Testament concerning that Rite shewn to be of no force because though it take notice of the first Jews being under the Cloud and passing through the Red Sea yet it takes no notice at all of their being Baptized in them or of their Eating and Drinking that spiritual Repast whereof S. Paul speaketh The Baptism of Christians copied by our Saviour from that of the Jews and may therefore where it appears not that he hath made an alteration receive an elucidation from it pag. 1. The Contents of the Second Part. Of the Baptism of the Christians and the Institution of it THe Institution of the Christian Baptism more antient than the Command for it in S. Matthew 28.19 though not as to the generality of the World nor it may be as to the like explicit Profession of the Trinity As is made appear from Christ or his Disciples baptizing in Judea not long after his own Baptism by S. John Enquiry thereupon made whether it were not yet more antient yea as antient as Christ's execution of his Prophetical Office Which is rendred probable from our Saviours making Disciples before and the equal reason there appears to have been for his making them after the same manner with those of Judea From Christ's representing to Nicodemus the necessity of being born again of water and the spirit which is shewn at large to be meant of a true and proper Baptism As
Disciples and requiring them to take and eat of it The words This is my body next taken into consideration and more particularly and minutely explain'd Where is shewn at large that by the word This must be meant This Bread and that there is nothing in the gender of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to hinder it That by body must be meant that body which Christ now carried about him and was shortly after to suffer in and that the sigurativeness of the proposition lies in the word is Vpon occasion whereof is also shewn that that word is oftentime figuratively taken that it ought to be so taken here and that accordingly it imports the Bread to be a sign and a memorial and a means of partaking of Christ's body This part of the Institution concluded with an explication of the words which is given or broken for you and a more ample one of Christ's commanding his Disciples to do this in remembrance of him Where the precept Do this is shewn to refer to what Christ had before done or enjoyned them to do And they enjoyn'd so to do to renew in themselves a grateful remembrance of Christ's death or prompt other Men to the like remembrance of it That part of the Institution which respects the Cup more succinctly handled and enquiry made among other things into the declaration which our Saviour makes concerning its being his Blood of the New Testament or the New Testament in it Where is shewn What that is which our Saviour affirms to be so what is meant by his Blood of the New Testament or The New Testament in it and how the Cup or rather the Wine of it was that Blood of his or the New Testament in it pag. 173. The Contents of the Fourth Part. Of the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper BRead and Wine ordinarily the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper and the Heresie of the Aquarii upon that account enquir'd into and censur'd The kind of Bread and Wine enjoin'd in the next place examin'd and a more particular Enquiry thereupon Whether the Wine ought to be mix'd with Water and what was the Ground of the Antients Practice in this Affair The same Elements consider'd again with respect to Christ's Body and Blood whether as to the Vsage that Body and Blood of his receiv'd when he was subjected unto Death or as to the Benefit that was intended and accru'd to us by them In the former of which Notions they become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood by what is done to them before they come to be administred and by the separate administration of them In the latter by the use they are of to nourish and refresh us Of the Obligation the Faithful are under to receive the Sacrament in both kinds and a resolution of those Arguments that are commonly alleg'd to justifie the Romish Churches depriving them of the Cup. pag. 197. The Contents of the Fifth Part. Of the inward Part of the Lord's Supper or the thing signified by it THE inward Part of the Lord's Supper or the thing signified by it is either what is signified on the part of God and Christ or on the part of the Receiver of it The former of these brought under Consideration and shewn to be the Body and Blood of Christ not as they were at or before the Institution of this Sacrament or as they now are but as they were at the time of his Crucifixion as moreover then offered up unto God and offer'd up to him also as a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the World The Consequences of that Assertion briefly noted both as to the presence of that Body and Blood in the Sacrament and our perception of them The things signified on the part of the Receiver in the next place consider'd and these shewn to be First a thankful Remembrance of the Body and Blood of Christ consider'd as before described Secondly our Communion with those who partake with us of that Body and Blood Thirdly a Resolution to live and act as becomes those that are partakers of them The two latter of these more particularly insisted on and that Communion and Resolution not only shewn from the Scripture to be signified on the part of the Receiver but confirmed by the Doctrine and Practice of the Antient Church pag. 213. The Contents of the sixth Part. What farther relation the Sign of the Lord's Supper hath to the Body and Blood of Christ THE outward Part or Sign of this Sacrament consider'd with a more particular regard to the Body and Blood of Christ and Enquiry accordingly made what farther relation it beareth to it That it is a Means whereby we receive the same as well as a Sign thereof shewn from the Doctrine of our Church and that Doctrine confirm'd by Saint Paul's entitling it the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood and by his affirming Men to be made to drink into one Spirit by partaking of the Cup of it Enquiry next made what kind of Means this Sign of the Lord's Supper is how it conveys to us the Body and Blood of Christ and how we receive them by it To each of which Answer is made from the Doctrine of our Church and that Answer farther confirm'd by the Doctrine of the Scripture The sum of which is that this Sign of the Lord's Supper is so far forth a Mean spiritual and heavenly That it conveys the Body and Blood of Christ to us by prompting us to reflect as the Institution requires upon that Body and Blood of his and by prompting God who hath annex'd them to the due use of the Sign to bestow that Body and Blood upon us In fine that we receive them by the Sign thereof when we take occasion from thence to reflect upon that Body and Blood of Christ which it was intended to represent and particularly with Faith in them What Benefits we receive by Christ's Body and Blood in the next place enquir'd and as they are resolv'd by our Catechism to be the strengthening and refreshing of the Soul so Enquiry thereupon made what is meant by the strengthening and refreshing of the Soul what Evidence there is of Christ's Body and Blood being intended for it and how they effect it The Sign of the Lord's Supper a Pledge to assure us of Christ's Body and Blood as well as a Means whereby we receive them pag. 219. The Contents of the Seventh Part. Of Transubstantiation THE Doctrine of Transubstantiation briefly deduc'd from the Council of Trent and digested into four capital Assertions Whereof the first is that the whole substance of the Bread is chang'd into the substance of Christ's Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the substance of his Blood The grounds of this Assertion examin'd both as to the possibility and actual being of such a change What is alledgâ—d for the former of these from the substantial changes mention'd in the Scripture of no force in this
Relation so that the words Hoc est corpus meum c. neither now have nor when Christ himself used them had in them the power of producing it What the true foundation of this relation is or what that is which consecrates those Elements which are to put it on endeavour'd to be made out from some former Discourses And those Elements accordingly considered either as being to become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood or as being to become also a Means of Communicating that Body and Blood to us and a Pledge to assure us thereof The former of these relations brought about by a declaration of those Purposes for which the Elements are intended whether in the words of the Institution or any other The latter by Thanksgiving and Prayer The usefulness of this Resolution to compromise the Quarrels that have arisen in this Argument upon occasion of what the Antients have said on the one hand for attributing the Power of Consecration to the Prayers and Thanksgivings of the Priest and on the other hand to the words of the Institution Those Quarrels being easily to be accommodated by attributing that Power to the Institution rather as applied than as delivered and as applied also by Prayer and Thanksgiving more than by the rehearsal of it pag. 261. The Contents of the Tenth Part. Of the right Administration of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ENtrance made with enquiring How this Sacrament ought to be administred and therein again whether that Bread wherewith it is celebrated ought to be broken and whether he who administers this Sacrament is obliged by the words of the Institution or otherwise to make an offering unto God of Christ's Body and Blood as well as make a tender of the Sacrament thereof to Men. That the Bread of the Sacrament ought to be broken as that too for the better representation of the breaking of Christ's Body asserted against the Lutherans and their Arguments against it produc'd and answered Whether he who administers this Sacrament is obliged by the words of the Institution or otherwise to make an offering to God of Christ's Body and Blood in the next place enquir'd into and after a declaration of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent in this Affair consideration had of those grounds upon which the Fathers of that Council establish it The words Do this in remembrance of me more particularly animadverted upon and shewn not to denote such an Offering whether they be consider'd as referring to the several things before spoken of and particularly to what Christ himself had done or enjoyn'd the Apostles to do or as referring only to that Body and Blood which immediately precede them In which last Consideration of them is made appear that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may as well and more naturally signifie make That there is nothing in the present Argument to determine it to the notion of Sacrificing or if there were that it must import rather a Commemorative than Expiatory one What is alledg'd by the same Council from Christ's Melchizedekian Priesthood c. more briefly consider'd and answer'd And that Sacrifice which the Council advanceth shewn in the close to be inconsistent with it self contrary to the present state of our Lord and Saviour and more derogatory to that Sacrifice which Christ made of himself upon the Cross The whole concluded with enquiring To whom this Sacrament ought to be administred and particularly whether it either ought or may lawfully be administred to Infants Where the Arguments of Bishop Taylor for the lawfulness of Communicating Infants are produc'd and answered and particularly what he alledgeth from Infants being admitted to Baptism though they are no more qualified for it than they are for the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper pag. 267 The Contents of the Eleventh Part. How the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ought to be receiv'd THE receit of this Sacrament suppos'd by the present Question and that therefore first established against the Doctrine of those who make the supposed Sacrifice thereof to be of use to them who partake not Sacramentally of it Enquiry next made How we ought to prepare our selves for it how to demean our selves at the celebration of it and in what Posture to receive it The preparation taken notice of by our Catechism the Examination of our selves whether we truly repent us of our sins stedfastly purposing to lead a new Life c. and the both necessity and means of that Examination accordingly declar'd The examination of our Repentance more particularly insisted upon and that shewn to be most advantageously made by enquiring how we have gain'd upon those sins which we profess to repent of and particularly upon our most prevailing ones which how they are to be discover'd is therefore enquir'd into and the marks whereby they are to be known assigned and explain'd A transition from thence to the examination of the stedfastness of our Purposes to lead a new Life of our Faith in God through Christ our remembrance of his Death and Charity Where the necessity of that Examination is evinced and the Means whereby we may come to know whether we have those Qualifications in us discover'd and declar'd How we ought to demean our selves at the celebration of this Sacrament in the next place enquir'd into and that shewn to be by intending that Service wherewith it is celebrated and suiting our Affections to the several parts of it The whole concluded with enquiring in what posture of Body this Sacrament ought to be receiv'd Where is shewn first that the Antients so far as we can judge by their Writings receiv'd in a posture of Adoration and particularly in the posture of standing Secondly that several of the Reformed Churches receive in that or the like posture and that those that do not do not condemn those that do Thirdly that there is nothing in the Example of Christ and his Disciples at the first Celebration of this Supper to oblige us to receive it sitting nor yet in what is alledg'd from the suitableness of that Posture to a Feast and consequently to the present one This as it is a Feast of a different nature from common ones and therefore not to receive Laws from them so the receit thereof intended to express the grateful resentment we have of the great Blessing of our Redemption and stir up other Men to the like resentment of it Neither of which can so advantageously be done as by receiving the Symbols of this Sacrament in such a posture of Body as shews the regard we have for him who is the Author of it pag. 289. ERRATA In the Text. PAge 158. line 36. r. they had p. 160. l. antep from of old p. 174. l. 26. a Transubstantiation ib. l. 34. too p. 190. l. 1. for hardly r. barely p. 202. l. 38. after Saviour add in S Matthew St. Mark and St. Paul p. 231. l. 45. r. opinion p. 234. l. 4. for Blood r. what ib. l.
words Blessed be thou O Lord our God King of the World who createst the Fruit of the Vine Which said he first of all tasted of it himself and then reach'd it out to all that sate with him Presently after he took a Loaf of Bread and holding it with both his hands consecrated it in these words Blessed be thou O Lord our God who bringest Food out of the Earth Which said he brake it and after he had eaten a piece of it himself gave the like to each that sate with him Thus that Learned Man informs us that the Father of the Family did at their sitting down at their more solemn Feasts As after the Feast was over that he or some other person to whom he committed it taking a second time a Cup full of Wine into both his hands prayed Let us bless him who hath fed us of his own and by whose goodness we live Passing on from thence to other Blessings and Prayers and particularly to bless God for the Food which he had afforded to them all and for all the Benefits bestow'd either on their Fathers or themselves and to pray unto him in like manner for the state of their Nation for the restoring of Jerusalem for the coming of Elias and the Messiah and particularly for their Domesticks and Kindred After which the same person began as before Blessed be thou O Lord our God King of the World who createst the Fruit of the Vine and thereupon again drank a little of the Wine himself and then gave it in order to his Guests Now as it is easie to guess by the likeness there is between our Sacrament and this Usance that our Sacrament or rather the Author thereof took his Pattern from thence if that Usance be ancienter than the Sacrament it self So there is just ground to believe it was both from what we find in St. Luke's account of Christ's celebration of the Passover and this Sacrament and from the manner wherewith this Sacrament was celebrated in the first Ages of Christianity For St. Luke in his account of the former Solemnities takes notice of our Saviour's taking a Cup giving thanks over it and distributing it among his Disciples (d) Luke 22.17 18. with this farther Remark that he said he would not drink any more of the fruit of the vine the particular title here us'd until the kingdom of God should come And the Ancients in their mention of the celebration of the Lord's Supper speak of the Symbols thereof as alike intended for memorials of their thankfulness to God for the Blessings of this World as well as for the Blessing of their Redemption For thus Justin Martyr first affirms the Bread of the Eucharist to have been given by our Saviour to us (e) Dial. cum Tryph. pag. 260. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we might at the same time give thanks to God for having made the World with all things in it for the sake of Man and for delivering us from the evil in which we sometime were by him whom he made passible for us As Irenaeus (f) Adv. haeres lib. 4. c. 32. Sed suis discipulis dans consilium primitias deo offerre ex suis creaturis non quasi indigenti sed ut ipsi nec infructuosi nec ingrati sint eum qui ex creatura panis est accepit gratias egit dicens Hoc est corpus meum Et calicem similiter qui est ex ea creatura quae est secundum nos suum sanguinem confessus est novi Testamenti novam docuit oblationem quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in universo mundo offert deo ei qui alimenta nobis praestat primitias suorum munerum in novo Testamento in like manner that Christ giving his Disciples counsel to offer to God the First-fruits of his Creatures not as to one that wanted them but that they themselves might not be ungrateful or unfruitful he took Bread and gave thanks saying This is my Body And the Cup in like manner which is of that Creature which is according to us he confessed to be his Blood and taught a new oblation of the New Testament Which Oblation the Church receiving from the Apostles offers in all the World to God even to him who gives us Food the First-fruits of his Gifts in the New Testament Agreeable hereto is that of Origen though not so clearly express'd as the former passages were For these Reasons saith he (g) Contr. Cels lib. 8. p. 399. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let Celsus who knows not God pay the testimonies of his thanks to Devils even for the Benefits of this World But we being desirous to please the maker of the Vniverse eat even those Loaves which are offered with Thanksgiving and Prayer over the things bestow'd upon us being now made by Prayer a certain Holy Body and one which sanctifies those who use it with a good intention Plainly intimating by the opposition he there makes between Celsus's paying the testimonies of his thanks to Devils for the Benefits of this World and our eating of the Eucharistical Bread with respect to the maker of the Vniverse that the Christians of old ate of it with regard to the Creation of the World and the Benefits thereof as well as with respect to the redemption of it by the Body of his Son Now from whence I pray considering the no intimation there is of any such thing in the Institution of Christ or Saint Paul's rehearsal of it from whence I say that regard to the Creation of the World and the Benefits thereof but from those Thanksgivings which from old descended to them from the Jews together with the Institution of Christ And which being so will prove the Usance before remembred not to have been the Usance of the latter Jews only but of those who were as old as our Saviour's time and that Passover which he celebrated among them Add hereunto what is apparent from the Ancient Liturgies of the Church the Prayers of the Eucharist descending to such Intercessions for all sorts of men as the Prayers of the Jews over their Eucharist appear to have done For these are a yet farther proof of the Antiquity of that Jewish Service and that our Saviour copied his own Institution by it What use these Observations may be of will be more fit to declare elsewhere neither shall I therefore at this time set my self to the investigation of it At present I desire only it may be remembred that in this Exemplar of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper both the one and the other Element thereof were consecrated with Thanksgivings and the Bread of it though consecrated in the mass or lump was yet carefully broken off from it in order to a distribution of it That as the Cup as well as the Bread had a place in that Eucharist so it was alike distributed among the Communicants yea distributed at the end as well as at
when consider'd as to that which is peculiar to them as preparatory to our partaking of what we so give Thanks for To give Thanks by way of preparation to the partaking of any Benefit implying an apprehension in him that gives it of the necessity of the Divine Blessing to make it useful to him and consequently thereto a Desire of and Prayer to God for the bestowing of it By which means the Thanksgivings of the Eucharist and particularly those which our Saviour made over the Bread of it will be though not express yet tacit Prayers to God for his Blessing on it and consequently of yet more force to procure that Blessing for it and for those that are to partake of it Only because the Blessings mention'd in the Scripture were oftentimes (g) Gen. 17.28 Num. 6.23 Prayers to God for his Blessing and it is hard to believe that when our Saviour design'd the Blessing of the Eucharist he should not seek to God for it by an express Prayer as well as by Thanksgivings and tacit ones I think it but just to enquire 3. Whether our Saviour's Thanksgiving did not also contain in it some express Request to God for the granting of that Blessing which he desir'd For the clearing whereof we are to know that as it is not unusual for that word which signifies only one noted part of a thing to be set to denote the other also For thus as was before observ'd the Bread of this Sacrament and the breaking of the Bread is set to denote the Wine as well as the Bread and all that is done to both of them as well as the breaking of one Element thereof so St. Paul (h) 1 Tim. 4.4 5. where he entreats of a like Argument to that which we are now upon because of the means whereby the Creatures of God are sanctified or blessed to us makes use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Thanksgiving to denote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Prayer as well as Thanksgiving and again of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Prayer to signifie Thanksgiving as well as that Otherwise to alledge as St. Paul doth that the Creatures are sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer could be no proof of the lawfulness of receiving the Creatures with Thanksgiving which is that he design'd to prove by it Because it is certain that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Prayer in strict speech is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Thanksgiving nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Thanksgiving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Prayer But therefore as nothing hinders but that our Saviour's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Thanksgiving might contain in it as express a Prayer to God to grant the Blessing he desir'd So there are many reasons to perswade us that it did and that Christ sought this Blessing by Prayer as well as by Thanksgivings Of which nature in particular was the momentousness of that Blessing which he now sought and which may seem no way unworthy of an express Prayer to the Father for it The same Christ's also employing such Prayers on less weighty occasions as well as upon more momentous ones But above all Christ's requiring us in the Celebration of this Sacrament to do as he did before us and St. Paul's pressing the Corinthians to conform to his Pattern and content our selves with the imitation of it It being hard to believe that when Christ so often call'd upon his Disciples to sue to God upon all occasions and to ask (i) Mat. 7.7 and seek and knock whensoever they stood in need of his assistance they should be under no obligation to crave his Blessing when the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament were to become the Communion of his Body and Blood Under which obligation yet they must in no wise have been if Christ whom they are requir'd to imitate offer'd no Supplications to his Father to procure from him the working of so great a change in the outward Elements I take no notice here because I may have a more proper place for it of the Antients sending up Prayers as well as Thanksgivings when they set themselves to the blessing of this Sacrament And shall only add That though Prayers as well as Thanksgivings had a place in this Affair yet the latter might be both more particularly inculcated and more often mentioned because more apparently agreeable to that thankful Remembrance of Christ's death which this Sacrament was in an especial manner ordained for The next thing that our Saviour did and we are accordingly to take notice of was the breaking of the Bread For so it follows in the Story And Jesus took Bread and blessed and brake it even the Bread Not only our own Translation obliging us so to understand the several Evangelists and St. Paul by its supplying the word it but the coherence of these words with the former and which is more the express Authority of Saint Paul (k) 1 Cor. 10.16 elsewhere He there describing this part of the Sacrament under the title of the Bread which we break and so shewing Bread to be the subject of it Now this Bread our Saviour brake partly in conformity to what was done to that of the Jewish Eucharist and partly that he might the better serve his own purposes in this For so careful were the Jews in the breaking of their Eucharistical Bread that whereas those thicker Loaves (l) Cassand Liturgic in initio which they made use of could not conveniently be broken in pieces he who blessed the Bread did before that Benediction of his cut one part almost from the remaining piece but so that it still stuck to it and after that Benediction of his brake it off and when he had again cut lesser Particles out of that took one himself and gave the rest unto his Guests In conformity to which Custom as it is reasonable to believe that our Saviour in part proceeded when he brake that Bread which he had before blessed So more especially that he might the better serve his own Purposes in it even the distribution of it to his Disciples and the representation of the breaking of his Body upon the Cross The former whereof St. Paul plainly intimates where he asks The Bread whith we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ The latter when in his rehearsal of the words of the Institution he brings in our Saviour saying This is my Body which is broken for you There being not otherwise any reason why he should attribute the term of breaking to Christ's Body but that the breaking of the Bread which was a Figure of it was intended to represent that violence which was offer'd to his crucified one And though it be true that none of the Evangelists give any such hint of this Mystery of the breaking of the Bread because affirming only This is my Body as St. Matthew and St. Mark do or This is my Body which is given
for you as St. Luke Yet as they all say enough to shew that this Sacrament of Bread and Wine was intended for a Representation of our Saviour's Passion and the violence that was then offer'd to his crucified Body so they do thereby sufficiently intimate that the breaking of the Bread was intended as a Representation of it There being nothing in the Bread to represent this to us but only the breaking of it This however is evident that our Saviour brake that Bread which he before took and blessed And that Rite of breaking was afterwards look'd upon as so considerable that it gave Name to the Sacrament it self and the whole of it from that one Rite entituled The breaking of Bread Our Saviour having thus taken and blessed and broken Bread for thus far to be sure we have Bread whatever we have beside he proceeds to give it to his Disciples For so the three Evangelists assure us Not that the Original of those Evangelists hath any thing in it to express the thing given but that it speaks of his giving somewhat to them and which considering the connexion of this Act of Christ with the former ones cannot reasonably be understood of any other than the Bread which he had before taken and blessed and broken And though St. Paul take no notice of this Gift of our Saviour's in the rehearsal he makes of this his Institution Yet he sufficiently intimates it when he brings him in saying Take Eat This is my Body c. His willing them to take and eat implying his parting with it that they might partake of it This however is manifest from the Evangelists that what our Saviour before took and blessed and brake he gave to his Disciples and I suppose to each of the Disciples in particular and by reaching it forth unto them The former being the manner of that Eucharist by which he fram'd his own Both the one and the other the Ancient Practice of the Church whether by the Hands of him that blessed it or of those Deacons that ministred to him I will not spend time in animadverting upon the words Take Eat which he us'd with the giving of the Bread It may suffice to say as to the former of these that as it is and always was the manner of Guests to take or receive into their hands or in some plate which they held in them what was given to them by another so the Antients knew no other taking or receiving of this Bread than that which was performed by them As little need to be said concerning that eating which our Saviour subjoin'd to the Command of taking or receiving what he gave them Unless there could be any doubt of that 's being Bread which was now to be eaten by them For as what it is to eat Bread is sufficiently known even after we have put it into our mouths to chew it there and transmit it from thence into our Stomachs for the nourishment of our Bodies So that it was Bread which they were commanded to eat St. Paul plainly shews in the words (m) 1 Cor. 11.26 27. which he subjoins to the Institution of this Sacrament He affirming the worthy Receiver of the Eucharist to eat Bread as well as the most unworthy one To go on therefore to those words which our Saviour subjoyn'd to his Precept of taking and eating even those most noted ones This is my Body Words which the wanton Wits of Men have transform'd into many shapes and those too no less monstrous than what they design'd to inferr from them Whereas if they were consider'd without any sinister Affections they would as Aretius long since observ'd (n) Com. in Mat. 26.26 Quomodo autem verae sint propositiones illae Panis est corpus Christi Vinum est sanguis Christi anxie disputatum est Res tamen sint affectibus simplicem habet intellectum Verae sunt ut aliae sacramentales loquutiones Agnus est transitus Circumcisio est foedus sacrificia sunt remissio peccatorum Baptismus est ablutio peccatorum In quibus nemo est tam stupidus ut nodos sibi quaerat Sed ut symbola sacramentalia hae res nominatae accipiuntur Ita judicandum de his propositionibus etiam puto have receiv'd a plain and simple Vnderstanding and which Men would otherwise no more have bogled at than at other Speeches of the like nature For this is my Body and This is my Blood are true as other sacramental Speeches are A Lamb is the Passover Circumcision is a Covenant Sacrifices are the remission of Sins and Baptism the washing away of them In which no Man is so stupid as to seek to entangle himself or go about to create Scruples to other Men. For these things are taken as sacramental Symbols and so I suppose we ought to judge of the former Propositions also Only because there is no one particle in the words This is my Body which hath not among prejudiced Men ministred matter for Dispute I will be so much the more minute in my Explication of them and first of the word This. This is my Body Now that which unprejudiced Men would undoubtedly think to be intended by the word This was the Bread before spoken of and which our Saviour is said to have taken blessed broken and given to his Disciples with a design they should take and eat of it Partly because that was the thing manifestly intended all along and therefore by the common Rules of Construction to be understood also here And partly because the demonstrative Particle This must by the natural importance of it be thought to point out something certain and apparent to them which hitherto nothing but the Bread of the Sacrament was Thus I say unprejudiced Men would be apt to think of the word This though they had nothing to direct them but the words of the Institution How much more then if they should reflect upon what St. Paul (o) 1 Cor. 11.26 27. subjoyneth to and inferreth from them in the account he gives us of that Affair For as often saith he as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew forth the Lord's Death till he come And again Wherefore whosoever shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord. For it appearing from the words of the Institution that the word This referrs to that which was given them to eat which St. Paul affirmeth to be Bread it must consequently be thought to denote not this Being or Substance in common or individuum vagum or the like but this Bread as St. Paul doth twice express it Conformable hereto whether the Romanists will or no is their own Opinion of the Bread's being transubstantiated by the words Hoc est corpus meum and that Transubstantiation not effected till the last Syllable of meum is pronounc'd For if that Transubstantiation be not effected till then it must
other words Yet is not that essence or being to be adapted to the nature of that to which it is affixt Now wherein consists the essence or being of such a relative thing as a sacred sign but in the relation which it bears to the thing signified and consequently in its signifying that which it is appointed to mark out And if the essence or being of a sign consists in the relation which it bears to the thing signified may it not as such be said to be that thing which it is intended to signifie For who if ask'd concerning this or that Picture as for instance the Picture of Alexander or Julius Caesar would describe it by a piece of Paper or Cloath or Wood so and so Painted but as such or such a person who did such admirable things in the World Nay who is there that when he sees this or that Picture though he knows them to be but inanimate things doth so much as ask What it is but Who So naturally and almost necessarily do Men take the very being of such a thing to consist in its relation to the person it represents and accordingly do as naturally express themselves in that manner concerning it And if that be the case as to other signs why not in like manner as to this Sacred sign of Christ's Body the Bread Especially if as I shall by and by shew it hath a yet nearer relation to it In order whereunto I will now proceed to shew 3. What the word Is imports in that figurative sense whereof we speak And here in the first place it is easie to observe that the word Is imports that to which it is attributed even the Bread of the Sacrament to be a sign of that Body of Christ which it is affirmed to be Which I do not only affirm upon account of the notion that all Men have of it but upon account of the likeness there is between the Bread broken and the Mortifying of our Saviour's Body and upon account also of the same Body's being affirmed by St. Paul in his History of the Institution to be broken for us There being otherwise no ground for that expression as to the Body of Christ but that the breaking of the Bread was intended to signifie or represent the injury that was offer'd to Christ's Body and consequently that that Bread was so far forth intended as a sign of it Which is no more than the Romanists themselves and particularly Estius have said in this affair and therefore I shall not need to insist upon it I say secondly that as the word Is imports that to which it is attributed to be a sign of Christ's Body so also to be such a sign in particular as was intended to bring Christ's Body and the Crucifixion of it to our own Minds or the Minds of others or in a word to be a memorial of it The former being evident from our Saviour's enjoyning his Disciples presently upon these words to do what he had now taught them in remembrance of himself The latter from St. Paul's telling his Corinthians that as often as they ate that bread and drank that cup they did shew the Lord's death till he came I say thirdly and lastly that the word Is doth likewise import that to which it is attributed to be a means of our partaking of the Body of Christ as well as a sign or a memorial of it Which we shall the less need to doubt when St. Paul (a) 1 Cor. 10.16 doth in express terms represent the Bread which is broken in the Sacrament as the Communion or Communication of the Body of Christ and the Cup of Blessing which is blessed in it as the Communion of his Blood Now if a sign even where it is hardly such may be said to be that which it signifies How much more such a sign as is also by the Institution of Christ a means of its conveyance and of which whosoever doth worthily partake shall as verily partake together with it of the Body of Christ and of the Benefits that accrue to us thereby I may not forget to add what St. Luke and St. Paul have added to the words This is my Body even This is my Body which is given for you as the former which is broken for you as the latter Both to the same purpose though in different expressions even to mark out to us more clearly how we are to consider that Body that is to say as a crucified one The giving of Christ or his Body being sometime express'd by giving him for our sins (b) Gal. 1.4 and at other times by giving him (c) Tit. 2.10 to redeem us from them which we know by the same Scripture to have been compassed by his death As indeed under what other notion can we conceive the giving of his Body when it is not only consider'd apart from his Blood but that Blood afterward affirm'd to be shed for the remission of sins and accordingly so requir'd to be consider'd here The expression of St. Paul which is broken for you is yet more clear because more manifestly pointing out the violence that was offer'd to Christ's Body With this farther advantage as was before said that it doth not obscurely intimate the breaking of the Bread to have been intended to represent what was done unto his Body and under what notion we are to consider it Though to put it farther out of doubt St. Paul after his account of the History of the Institution affirms both the one and the other Element of this Sacrament to relate to our Saviour's Death and consequently to respect his Body as mortist'd as well as his Blood as shed He relling his Corinthians that he that did eat that Bread as well as he that drank that Cup did thereby shew forth the Lord's Death till he came Only if it be enquir'd why our Saviour should even then represent his Body as broken or given when it was not to be so till the day after the Institution of this Sacrament I answer partly because it was very shortly to be so but more especially because he intended what he now enjoyn'd as a prescription for the time after his Death as his willing his Disciples to do this in remembrance of him doth manifestly imply That importing the thing to be remembred to be past and gone as which otherwise could not be capable of being remembred It follows both in St. Luke and St. Paul Do this and Do this in remembrance of me Words which the Romish Church hath pick'd strange matters out of even no less as was before observ'd out of Baronius than the Priesthood of the A postles as which was collated upon them by these words and the Sacrifice of the Mass For then also saith that Author the Apostles when the Lord commanded them to do the very same thing in remembrance of him were made Priests and that very Sacrifice which they should offer was ordain'd By what Alchymie the
Apostles Priesthood and the Sacrifice of the Mass are endeavour'd to be extracted out of these words must be consider'd in another place where such kind of questions will be more fit to be debated At present it may suffice to say that as it doth not appear from the Institution that our Saviour made any other Offering of his Body in the Symbol of Bread than what he did to his Disciples nor indeed how he could unless he meant both to prevent and vacate the future Offering of himself upon the Cross by which yet as the Author to the Hebrews (d) Heb. 10.14 instructs us he perfected for ever them that are sanctified So it can much less therefore appear how the doing what Christ had before done or taught them to do could make the Apostles Priests or the Celebration of this Sacrament to be a Sacrifice All that can be fairly deduced from the words Do this and Do this in remembrance of me is that they should for the future take Bread bless it and break it and when they had done so both eat of it themselves and give it to others to eat of in remembrance of him and of his Death Or if we should think that the words Do this ought to have a nearer Antecedent that they should take and eat what had been before taken and blessed and broken and given to them by the Consecrator of it in remembrance of him That as it is the thing and the only thing just before enjoyn'd upon the Disciples For what he saith concerning the thing given them being his Body doth rather point out what regard they ought to have in the eating of it to that Body of which it was a Symbol than any new injunction or precept concerning it so it is the thing and the only thing therefore which he immediately referr'd to when he said This do in remembrance of me Which St. Paul doth yet more clearly insinuate when immediately after the History of the Institution and which he closeth in each Element with This Do in remembrance of me he adds as by way of explication of that passage For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's death till he come This I take to be a clear and natural account of what Christ enjoyn'd the Disciples to do and not any intimation at all either of the Apostles Priesthood or of the Sacrifice of the Mass And what he adds concerning their doing what he now enjoyn'd them in remembrance of him agrees as well to it because as appears from the words but now quoted they were to eat of that Bread as well as drink of that Cup with reference to him and to his Death or as St. Paul expresseth it to shew it forth Which will consequently leave nothing more to be consider'd upon this Head than what our Saviour means by in remembrance of him Do this in remembrance of me Now as there cannot well be any doubt concerning the Object of this Remembrance partly because Christ doth here represent himself as the Object of it and partly because he represents himself throughout this whole Sacrament as giving himself to Death for us and consequently he to be consider'd as such in our remembrance of him So I shall therefore need only to enquire what that remembrance of him doth import and how the thing enjoyned to be done serves to the exciting of it Now there are two things again which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or remembrance signifies and which we shall find upon enquiry that it signifies also here The recalling that to our own mind which is the Object of it or recalling it to the mind of others The former of these as it is the most simple and obvious notion of the word so no doubt principally intended here if Christ's giving his Body to death for us be the thing wherein we are to remember him because we are requir'd to take and eat the Bread exhibited to us as a Symbol thereof But therefore as we are to understand by doing what we do in remembrance of him and of his Death or as the Greek (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would perhaps be more commodiously rendred for the remembrance of him of our celebrating this Holy Sacrament so the better to recall him and his Death to our own Minds So it is alike evident from what St. Paul subjoins as a kind of Comment upon these words that we ought to do the same thing to recall it to the Minds of others and prompt them to reflect upon it St. Paul declaring thereupon that as often as we eat that Bread and drink that Cup we do shew forth or declare or preach his Death till he come Only as it is not to be thought that our Saviour would have instituted this Sacrament simply to bring the thing signified by it to our own or others Minds but to stir up in them and us affections sutable to the thing remembred So we are consequently to think because the thing signified by it was Christ's giving his Body to Death for us and for our Salvation that it was design'd to stir up us and other Men to remember his Death and the benefits thereof with a thankful Mind with a Mind sensible of so great a favour and ready to express that sense of its by all the ways it can possibly devise This I take to be that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or remembrance for which our Saviour requir'd his Disciples to do as he himself had before directed and enjoyn'd them And how well fitted that whole Ceremony is to excite such a remembrance in us and others will appear if we consider that remembrance either as a simple remembrance of Christ's Death and the Benefits thereof or as also a grateful one For it serves to the former of these by the representation it makes to our Eyes of the violence that was offer'd to his Crucified Body and by the known Laws and ends of the Institution of it And it serves in like manner to the latter of them by representing that Death of his to our Eyes not in bloody and cruel Rites as the ill usage of some of the Heathen Deities were sometime represented but in the innocent and useful and comfortable Elements of Bread and Wine and which whilst the Partakers thereof reflect upon they cannot but at the same time read in them the both usefulness and comfortableness as to themselves of that Body and Blood which they were intended to represent and be thereby excited to a joyful and thankful remembrance of them both and of the benefits that accrue to them thereby An account being thus given of the Bread of this Sacrament and of all that was said or done about it It remains that I entreat of the other Element thereof represented to us by the three Evangelists and St. Paul under the name of the Cup. Whether it were that they could not otherwise well express what
Covenant which was shed for many for the remission of fins but St. Luke and St. Paul as the New Testament or Covenant in his Blood which was shed for them For which cause I will consider the thing here affirmed under each of these notions and first as Christ's Blood of the New Testament or Covenant which I conceive to be the clearest and most proper declaration of it Because it appears even by that St. Paul who makes use of the other expression that the Blood of Christ is the principal thing signified by it even in that very Chapter where he entitles it the New Testament in his Blood For not only doth he before (i) 1 Cor. 10.16 entitle the Cup the Communion of his Blood as he doth the Bread in the same verse the Communion of his Body but immediately after the words of the Institution declare him who eateth that Bread and drinketh that Cup with due preparation to shew forth the Lord's Death till he come as him who eateth and drinketh unworthily to be guilty of his Body and Bloody The Blood of Christ therefore being the thing principally signified and consequently the principal thing predicated of the Cup by the one and the other reason would that we should enquire what our Saviour meant by it that is to say whether that Blood which now ran in his Veins and was shortly after to be shed or only a memorial of it A Question which will soon be voided not only by what I have before said concerning the Notion of Christ's Body but by the Adjuncts of that very Blood whereof we speak The Blood of the New Testament or Covenant as appears by a Text of the Author to the Hebrews (k) Heb. 9.14 c. and by what I have elsewhere (l) Expl. of the Sacrament in general Part 2. discours'd upon it being no other than that Blood which the Mediator of it shed at his Death For that Author tells us that neither that nor any other Testament or Covenant can be firm without it And the Blood that was shed for remission of Sins the very same It being by means of the same Death that the Redemption of Sins against the First Testament or Covenant is procur'd which is but another Name for the Remission of them And I shall only add for the better explanation of those words even the Blood of the New Testament or Covenant that as of old God would not enter nor did enter into the First Covenant with the Israelites till he was aton'd and they sprinkled by the Blood of their Sacrifices So neither would he enter into the New till he was first aton'd and we sprinkled by the Blood of the Sacrifice of his Son and that Blood therefore conformably to what was said of the Blood of the First Covenant stiled the Blood of the New There will be no great difficulty after what I have said of the Blood of the New Testament or Covenant as to the meaning of that New Testament or Covenant in Christ's Blood which St. Luke and St. Paul bring in our Saviour as affirming the Cup to be Because thereby must consequently be meant that New Covenant which was brought about by the Bloud of his Cross even that by which the same Saint Paul elsewhere (m) Col. 1.20 tells us that Christ made Peace between us and God Which will consequently leave nothing more to us to enquire into upon this Head than the importance of that is which joyns the subject and the foregoing predicates together and how the Cup of this Sacrament was and is his Blood of the New Testament or Covenant and how the New Testament or Covenant in his Blood For the understanding whereof though it may suffice to remit my Reader to what I before said upon the account of the Bread's being Christ's Body because that mutatis mutandis may be apply'd to the Particle Is here Yet I shall add ex abundanti that there cannot well be any doubt of its being taken figuratively here either in the one or the other predication concerning it Because the Cup of this Sacrament cannot literally and properly be both his Blood of the New Testament or Covenant and the New Testament or Covenant in it which yet in some or other of the Sacred Writers it is affirm'd to be Which as it will make it so much the more reasonable to allow of that figurative Sense here which we have attributed to the same Particle Is in This is my Body So consequently make it reasonable to understand by This is my Blood of the New Testament which answers directly to the other This is a Sign and a Memorial and a Means of its conveyance as well as the Bread is of my Body And indeed as the Cup or rather the Wine of it may well pass for a Sign of that Blood as for other Reasons so for that effusion which is attributed to it So that it is both a Memorial and a Means of its conveyance is evident from St. Paul's bringing in our Saviour subjoining the words Do this as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me to the Story of the Cup and elsewhere representing the same Cup as the Communion of his Blood This I take to be a fair account of the Particle Is as it is made use of to connect the Cup and Christ's Blood of the New Tescament or Covenant And it will be no less easie to give as clear an account of it as it is made use of to connect the same Cup and the New Testament or Covenant in his Blood That Cup representing to us God's exhibiting together with it Christ's Blood and the Merits of it and our receiving that Blood and the Merits of it with that thankfulness which doth become us and a Mind resolv'd to walk worthy of those Benefits we receive by it I will conclude this long Discourse concerning the Institution of this Sacrament when I have lightly animadverted upon that which St. Matthew and St. Mark bring in our Saviour subjoining to all he had said concerning the Elements thereof To wit that he would not any more drink of this Fruit of the Vine for so St. Matthew expresseth it until he should drink it new with them in his Father's Kingdom For though it should be granted what Grotius contends for out of St. Luke that these words were spoken just before the Institution of this Sacrament and only plac'd here upon the account of Christ's being again to speak of the Cup Yet thus much must be granted to St. Matthew and St. Mark 's placing it here that it was the Fruit of the Vine that our Saviour gave them and they accordingly drank of even in this Sacrament of the Lord's Supper There being no more reason nor so much neither considering that that is the immediate Antecedent to deny this Fruit of the Vine's referring to what our Saviour gave his Disciples and they all drank of than there would be to deny
its relating to that Cup which he took into his hands and blessed Which if we should there would be no proof either here or elsewhere of the Fruit of the Vine's being one of the Symbols of this Sacrament PART IV. Of the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper The Contents Bread and Wine ordinarily the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper and the Heresie of the Aquarii upon that account enquir'd into and censur'd The kind of Bread and Wine enjoin'd in the next place examin'd and a more particular Enquiry thereupon Whether the Wine ought to be mix'd with Water and what was the Ground of the Antients Practice in this Affair The same Elements consider'd again with respect to Christ's Body and Blood whether as to the Vsage that Body and Blood of his receiv'd when he was subjected unto Death or as to the Benefit that was intended and accru'd to us by them In the former of which Notions they become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood by what is done to them before they come to be administred and by the separate administration of them In the latter by the use they are of to nourish and refresh us Of the Obligation the Faithful are under to receive the Sacrament in both kinds and a resolution of those Arguments that are commonly alledg'd to justifie the Romish Churches depriving them of the Cup. THE way being thus plain'd to the Consideration of the present Sacrament and if I mistake not such a Foundation also laid as may support a better Fabrick than I am likely to superstruct upon it I will now pass on to a more particular handling of it in the method before observ'd in the Sacrament of Baptism as well as in the Sacraments in general In order whereunto I will enquire I. What is the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper II. What is the inward Part or thing signified by it III. What farther relation beside that of a Sign the outward part or Sign hath to the inward part or thing signified IV. What is the Foundation of those Relations V. How and to whom this Sacrament ought to be administred VI. How it ought to be receiv'd I. That which comes first to be enquir'd is what is the outward part Question What is the outward part or Sign of the Lord's Supper Answer Bread and Wine which the Lord hath commanded to be receiv'd or Sign of the Lord's Supper which our Catechism declares to be Bread and Wine which the Lord hath commanded to be receiv'd For my more advantageous handling of which Answer I will again enquire 1. What Evidence there is of Bread and Wine being the outward part or Sign of the Lord's Supper 2. What kind of Bread and Wine we ought to make use of in it 3. Wherein the Bread and Wine were intended as a Sign 4. What Evidence there is of Christ's commanding us to receive them 1. That Bread and Wine are the outward part or Sign of the Lord's Supper is so evident from the Story of the Institution and the account I have already given of it that it would be but lost labour to go about to prove it It may suffice here to add that as Bread and Wine were the Matter of that Jewish Eucharist which in all probability was the Pattern of the Christian one So the Practice of the Church of God hath been always conformable to it neither have any Persons willingly varied from it I will not say that have not been branded for Hereticks but that have not also been look'd upon as either stupidly ignorant or blotches of the Church rather than any part of it Of which nature were those Aquarii mention'd by St. Augustin * De haeres c. 6. Ed. Dan. and before him written against by St. Cyprian †Ad Caecil Ep. 63. that offer'd Water in the Cup of the Sacrament instead of that which all the Church doth Whether that they condemn'd the Creation of God as several of the ancient Hereticks did and accordingly abstain'd wholly from Wine as well as from some other things Or as I rather think for the most part by way of exercise upon and mortification of themselves of which sort of Abstinences out of the Sacrament there are frequent Instances in the Antient Christians Little considering that Obedience is much better than such Sacrifices though they were otherwise of far greater worth than they will be found upon examination to be For if St. Paul * 1 Tim. 5.23 could admonish Timothy even for his Stomach's sake and his often Infirmities not to drink any longer Water but to use a little Wine I doubt he would not have heard with any patience of his or other Men's abstaining wholly from the Cup of the Sacrament or using Water instead of it out of a Principle of mortification and self-denial I do not say the same as to the outward part or Sign of the Lord's Supper where one of those Elements is not to be had or at least not without much difficulty as to be sure in many places the Wine of the Sacrament is not For as I find by Cassander (a) Liturg. c. 14. that the Armenians in India where Wine is not to be had do beforehand steep dried Grapes in Water and the next day press out the Juice of them for the use of the Sacrament So I do not see but where neither the one nor the other is to be had Men may lawfully make use of other generous Liquors for the same purpose I do not say only upon the account of Necessity to which all positive Laws must yield but because as I shall afterwards shew they are equally fitted to represent to us those things for which the Fruit of the Vine was here ordain'd Only let not Men make a Necessity where there is none nor think themselves excus'd in the use of other Liquors where the Fruit of the Vine though not the Product of their own Countrey yet may well enough be had from abroad For where our Saviour hath annex'd a Blessing to the use of such and such Creatures I do not see how we can expect it without where we have not a just Necessity to excuse it how convenient soever those other Creatures are which we substitute in the room of them 2. But because question may be made what kind of Bread and Wine we ought to make use of in this Sacrament as well as whether Bread and Wine be the ordinary Matter or Sign of it Therefore I shall admonish as to the former of these that I see little reason to doubt but that the Bread of the place we live in may suffice provided it be of the better and more nutritive sort or at least as good as we are in a capacity to provide For our Saviour having not prescrib'd any thing as to the Grane whereof it is to be made and all sorts of Bread being in their Nature sufficiently fitted for those
Sacramental Purposes to which they are to be appli'd it is a needless superstition to be sollicitous about the kind of it or indeed about any thing else of that nature farther than the Laws of Decency or the general Nature of the Sacrament may seem to exact of us The same is to be said and for the same reasons as to the kind of the Wine though the Wines of Palestine were generally Red (b) Psal 75.8 Prov. 23.31 Isa 27.2 63.2 for which cause it is not improbable that they were stiled the Bloud (c) Deut. 32.14 of the Grape and those therefore the most apt to represent the Blood of our Saviour For whatever the Colour thereof may be they may serve by the Liquidness thereof and the pouring of them from one Vessel to another to denote the shedding of his Blood which is all that the Institution obligeth us to reflect upon Upon which account I shall in this place confine my self to enquire whether it ought to be mix'd with Water or no as which seems to me to be the only material Enquiry in this Affair And here indeed they who think it enough to make use of pure Wine may seem to be hardly press'd whether we do consider the Antiquity of the contrary Usance or the Reason which is alledged for it For it appears from Justin Martyr (d) Apol. 2. p. 97. to have been carefully practis'd in his time And it appears too not only to have been pleaded for by St. Cyprian * Ad Caecil Ep. 63. even where he disputes against the foremention'd Aquarii but to such a degree also as to represent the Sacrament as imperfect without it The mixture of Wine and Water being as he saith (e) Quando autem in calice aqua vino miscetur Christo populus adunatur credentium plebs ei in quem credidit copulatur conjungitur Quae copulatio conjunctio aquae vini sic miscetur in calice domini ut commixtio illa non possit ab invicem separari Nam si vinum tantùm quis offerat sanguis Christi incipit esse sine nobis si vero aqua sit sola plebs incipit esse sine Christo Quando autem utrumque miscetur adunatione confusâ sibi invicem copulatur tunc Sacramentum spiritale coeleste perficitur intended to signifie the conjunction of Christ and his People and that we can therefore in the sanctifying of the Lord's Cup no more offer Wine alone than we may presume to offer Water only These things to those that have a regard to Antiquity cannot but appear very considerable and I must needs say they weigh so much with me as to believe that the Wine of the Sacrament might have been from the beginning diluted with Water yea that that very Wine might which our Saviour consecrated into it But this rather with respect to the Custom of the Eastern Country and the generousness of their Wines which might be but needful to be temper'd where the same Liquor was to be the Entertainment of their Love-Feasts as well as the Matter of a Sacrament than out of any regard to the Sacrament it self or that particular Mystery in it which St. Cyprian thought to be intended Because there is not any the least hint either in the Evangelists or St. Paul of such a mixture or Mystery but rather an intimation of Christ's employing only the Fruit of the Vine and his having a regard to the sole Properties thereof and of that Blood of his which he shed for our Redemption If there were from the beginning any Mystery in such a mixture it may most probably be thought to have been intended to make so much the more lively a Representation to us of that Blood which it was designed to remember and which we learn from St. John (f) Joh. 19.34 to have issued from his side attended with Water and accordingly particularly remarked by him Upon which account though I cannot press a mixture of Wine and Water as necessary yet neither can I condemn it or those Churches which upon that reason think fit to retain it and enjoin on their respective Members the due observation of it 3. But because there neither is nor can well be a more material Enquiry than wherein the Bread and Wine of this Sacrament were intended as a Sign Therefore it may not be amiss to pass on to the resolution of it and employ all requisite diligence in it For my more orderly performance whereof I will consider those Elements of Bread and Wine with respect to Christ's Body and Blood whether as to the usage that Body and Bloud of his receiv'd when he was subjected to Death for us or as to the Benefit that was intended and accrued to us by them If we consider the Elements of Bread and Wine with respect to Christ's Body and Blood as to the usage they receiv'd when he was subjected to Death for us So we shall find them again to be a Sign of that Body and Blood by what is done to them before they come to be administred or by the separate administration of them when they are For in the former of these Notions the Bread manifestly became a Sign of Christ's Body by our Saviour's breaking of it For which cause as was before observ'd St. Paul in his rehearsal of the Institution attributes that breaking to Christ's Body and describes its crucifixion by it And not improbably the Wine of the Sacrament became a Sign of Christ's Blood by its being poured out of some other Vessel into that Cup which he took and blessed and gave to his Disciples There being not otherwise any thing in it to represent the shedding of Christ's Blood which it appears by the several Evangelists that our Saviour had a particular respect unto Neither will it suffice to say though it be true enough that we do not read either in the Evangelists or St. Paul of our Saviour's before pouring the Wine of the Sacrament out of some other Vessel into that Cup which he made use of for that purpose and consequently cannot with equal assurance make the Wine to be a Sign of Christ's Blood by any such effusion of it For whether we read of it or no such an Effusion must of necessity precede the use of a Cup being not to keep Wine in but to drink out of after it hath receiv'd it by effusion from another and that effusion therefore and the particular mention there is of the effusion of that Blood which is acknowledg'd to be signified by the Wine no unreasonable intimation of that Effusion's being one of those things wherein the Wine of the Sacrament was intended as a Sign or Representation of the other By these means the Bread and Wine become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood as to what is done to them before they come to be administred And we shall find them in like manner to be a Sign of the same Body and
Blood by the separate administration of them when they are For as our Saviour's Body and Blood were parted by Death and accordingly requir'd to be consider'd the one as broken and mortifi'd the other as shed or poured out of it So our Saviour did not only appoint divers Symbols to represent them but administred them apart and by themselves and if there be any force in Do this in remembrance of me commanded them to be so administred afterwards By which means they become even by that separate administration a yet more perfect and lively Representation of Christ's Body and Blood as to the usage they receiv'd when he whose they were was subjected to Death for us But because the Body and Blood of Christ are consider'd in this Sacrament as to the Benefit that was intended and accru'd to us by them as well as to the usage they receiv'd For This is my Body which is given or broken for you say St. Luke and St. Paul and This is my Blood of the New Testament or the New Testament in it which is shed for you say all the Evangelists upon this Argument Therefore enquire we wherein the Elements of Bread and Wine are a sign of his Body and Blood as to that Benefit they were so intended and given for Which will soon appear if we consider what the proper use of those Elements is what we are requir'd to do with them and what is elsewhere said concerning that Body and Blood when consider'd with respect to our welfare and advantage These several things making it evident that they become a sign of Christ's Body and Blood by the use they are of to nourish and refresh us For as we cannot lightly think but that when our Saviour made choice of such things as those to represent the usefulness of his Body and Blood to us he made choice of them for that purpose with respect to their proper usefulness as which is both most notorious in them and most apt to affect the Mind of him to whom they are suggested So much less can we think otherwise of them when he moreover requires us to eat of the one and drink of the other which are the ways by which we are to receive that nourishment and refreshment which we have said them to be so useful for Otherwise any thing else might have been as proper for the purpose as Bread and Wine Or if God who may no doubt make use of what Methods he pleaseth thought good however to make choice of Bread and Wine to represent Christ's Body and Blood yet he might have contented himself to have enjoyn'd upon us the casting our Eyes upon them and not as we find he doth prompted us to eat and drink of them as that too in remembrance of him and them For what need would there be of eating and drinking those Elements in remembrance of his Body and Blood or indeed what aptness in so doing to call them to our own Minds or the Minds of others were it not that there were somewhat in them to represent the usefulness of Christs Body and Blood which was not to be drawn from them or so sensibly perceiv'd in them as by eating and drinking of them This I take to be a competent evidence of Bread and Wine 's becoming a sign by the use they are of to nourish and refresh us But I am yet more convinced of it by what is elsewhere said concerning Christ's Body and Blood when consider'd as they are here as to our Benefit and advantage Even that his Flesh or Body was food * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed and his Blood drink indeed (g) Joh. 6.55 and that accordingly except his Disciples ate that Flesh of his and drank his Blood (h) Joh. 6.53 they could have no life in them but if they did (i) Joh. 6.54 they should have eternal Life In fine that the flesh (k) Joh. 6.51 which he should give for the life of the World was in the nature of Bread to them and so represented by him throughout that whole Discourse For if Christ's Body and Blood be in the nature of Food and drink to us If they be so far such that we are requir'd to eat and drink of them and so also that we cannot promise our selves life without them That Bread and Wine which in the present Sacrament are appointed to signifie and represent them cannot be thought by any more proper way to be a Sign or Representation of them than by their usefulness as Bread and Drink to nourish and refresh our Bodies to maintain them in their present beings and fill them with joy and gladness 4. The fourth thing to be enquir'd as concerning the Bread and Wine of this Sacrament is what evidence there is of Christ's commanding us to receive them A question which one would think might soon be voided by the words of the Institution it self Take Eat This is my Body being the voice of our Saviour concerning the Bread and Drink ye all of it and This do ye as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me being the words of the same Jesus in St. Matthew and St. Paul concerning the Cup which one would think to be sufficient expresses of Christ's command concerning it But as nothing is enough to those who are prejudic'd against any Doctrine as it is apparent that the Church of Rome was against the use of the Cup when this business came to be debated in the Council of Trent So that Council did not only determine that whole and entire Christ is contained under either species and particularly under the species of Bread (l) Sess 13. cap. 3. but that the faithful are not oblig'd by any command of the Lord to receive both species (m) Sess 21. cap. 1. and that accordingly if any shall say that all and singular the faithful people of Christ are oblig'd to take both species either by vertue of any command from God or as of necessity to Salvation (n) ib. Can. 1. he ought to be anathematiz'd for it or rather hath already incurr'd it For which cause it will be necessary for us to shew that the faithful are obliged by the Command of Christ to receive the Cup and then answer the principal reasons that are brought against it And here in the first place I would gladly know whether there be or ever were any command from Christ for the receiving of the Cup whether by the Apostles at first or the Priest that consecrates now whatsoever become of simple Laymen or the Priests that do not officiate and are therefore so far forth reckoned in the number of the other The ground of which question is because the Council of Trent doth not say that there is no command from Christ for the faithful's receiving the Cup but that the faithful are not bound by any command of his to the taking of both species and again that if any shall say that all the faithful
a danger of shedding in carrying about the Cup in the Church when among us who practise it in great Congregations no such danger doth appear and when that danger may in a great measure be prevented by bringing those that are to receive to the Rails of the Communion Table to take it from the Priest there And a Man would wonder no less thirdly why so much ado should be made about the carrying of it to sick Folks and the danger that attends it especially when it is over Mountains Because if Men were prompted as they ought to a frequent Communion in the publick Assemblies there would be the less need of carrying it to them when sick Or if it were thought meet however that they should receive the Communion when sick it might be consecrated as well as administred to them at home and a reasonable number of Communicants provided to receive with them as it is with us Or if that were not thought fit neither but that they must by all means be debar'd the Cup because of the danger of the Liquors growing sowre by being kept for them or of its shedding in the carriage yet is there no imaginable reason why they that are whole and come to it instead of expecting its being brought to them should be therefore deprived of it even in the Church because it may not be convenient to be brought to their Houses it may be once These things I say a Man might well wonder at but especially when they are urg'd as they are for a total removing of the Cup. But a Man would more than wonder fourthly if he did not know the force of Prejudice and Custom that the hanging of the Liquor in the Lay-men's Beards should be made so great a difficulty and danger as to debar them of the use of it For not to say that it is strange that if that were so considerable a thing neither our Saviour should be aware of it when he instituted the Cup nor the Church in so many Centuries of Years take care to prevent it especially when Beards were more in Fashion than they have been of late A Man would think that if the Blood of Christ and the observation of a Command of his were a matter of as great moment as the fear of the loss of any of that Blood in the Lay-mens Beards A Man would think I say that in such a Case both the Priests should have enjoin'd the Laity and the Laity for that time have willingly submitted to the shaving of their Beards rather than have suffered themselves for the sake of such an excrement to be robb'd of Christ's Blood or go against his Institution and Command To take away the Cup of the Sacrament for such like Fears as these being somewhat more extravagant than Lycurgus King of Thrace's cutting down all the Vines of his Kingdom for fear of the ill use that might be made of the Fruit of them In fine a Man might wonder if such like things as these were an affront to the Holy Sacrament and as such of sufficient force to remove the use of the Cup why our Saviour should not have found out some more decent place than the Stomach of the Faithful to bestow one Element of the Sacrament in or than the Stomach of the Priest to bestow them both They who are acquainted with the inside of that knowing it in that respect to be a more unseemly place for one or the other Element to be lodged in than many of those which they seem to be so jealous of and for fear of any pollution by which they deprive the Faithful of the benefit of the Cup and of that whether Wine or Blood that is contained in it The third thing pretended for depriving the Faithful of the Cup is that whole and entire Christ is contained under one only Species (r) Trid. Conc. Sess 21. cap. 3. Which the Council of Trent doth so peremptorily affirm that it pronounceth an Anathema upon any one that shall deny (s) ib. Can. 3. that whole and entire Christ the Fountain and Author of all Graces is receiv'd under the only Species of Bread For if that be true what need is there of the receit of the Cup by them or indeed what presumption of Christ's having given any Command concerning it But are they so sure as they would be thought to be that whole and entire Christ is contain'd under the sole Species of Bread Or if it were that it were therefore indifferent whether we receiv'd the Cup or no Nay is there not sufficient reason to believe that whole and entire Christ is not contained under it but under the one and other Species For beside that our Saviour by making choice of two distinct Elements to become them made as manifest a separation between his Body and Blood in the Sacrament as he did upon the Cross and may therefore be presum'd to give them if he gave them at all in their sense not conjunctly but apart and in that separate estate in which he had put them Beside that he requir'd not only two distinct and separate Acts those of eating and drinking I mean but two Acts that were distant in time toward the partaking of that Body and Blood and may therefore be yet more presum'd to give them not conjunctly but apart and agreeably to those Acts which he enjoin'd for the partaking of them If the Body and Blood of Christ are contained under and received with the sole Species of Bread as to be fure they must if whole and entire Christ be It must be either by vertue of those words Hoc est corpus meum This is my Body or by vertue of those words and the words that follow even This is my Blood of the New Testament As one would think that they who lay so much stress upon those words should readily grant either the one or the other or by vertue of that natural Connexion and Concomitancy to speak the words (t) Sess 13. cap. 3. of the Trent-Council whereby the parts of the Lord Christ who is now risen from the dead no more to die again are joined together between themselves If they who maintain whole Christ and consequently his Body and Blood to be contained under the Species of Bread affirm that to be by the sole vertue of those words Hoc est corpus meum or This is my Body They must consequently make them signifie This is my Blood as well as my Body as without which even in their own opinion so omnipotent an Effect is not to be produc'd Which suppos'd I would fain know whether they signifie so much always or only when the Sacrament is administred in one kind and to those alone to whom it is so administred If the words Hoc est corpus meum signifie so always and the like will follow if the Body and Blood of Christ be by any means brought together under the Species of Bread then is there no
her But as if any thing be of the substance of the Sacrament the doing of that must be which tends most apparently to set forth the Sacrifice of Christ's Death upon the Cross as which was one great end of its Institution and the most clearly expressed in it So nothing doth or can tend more apparently to the setting forth of that than Men's partaking of that Cup which was by our Saviour himself intended to represent the Blood of that Sacrifice of his as poured out for our Expiation and Remission PART V. Of the inward Part of the Lord's Supper or the thing signified by it The Contents The inward Part of the Lord's Supper or the thing signified by it is either what is signified on the part of God and Christ or on the part of the Receiver of it The former of these brought under Consideration and shewn to be the Body and Blood of Christ not as they were at or before the Institution of this Sacrament or as they now are but as thâ—y were at the time of his Crucifixion as moreover then offered up unto God and offer'd up to him also as a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of the World The Consequences of that Assertion briefly noted both as to the presence of that Body and Blood in the Sacrament and our perception of them The things signified on the part of the Receiver in the next place consider'd and these shewn to be First a thankful Remembrance of the Body and Blood of Christ consider'd as before described Secondly our Communion with those who partake with us of that Body and Blood Thirdly a Resolution to live and act as becomes those that are partakers of them The two latter of these more particularly insisted on and that Communion and Resolution not only shewn from the Scripture to be signified on the part of the Receiver but confirmed by the Doctrine and Practice of the Antient Church II. THE outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper being thus accounted for Question What is the inward part or thing signified and that shewn to be no other than Bread and Wine which the Lord hath commanded to be receiv'd Reason would as well as the Method before laid down that I should entreat of the inward part thereof or the thing signified by it Answer The Body and Blood of Crhist which are verily and indeed taken and received by the Faithful in the Lord's Supper Which on the part of God and Christ is that Christ's Body and Blood As on our part a thankful Remembrance of them our Communion with those who partake with us thereof and a Resolution to live and act as becomes those that are partakers of them That which our Catechism obligeth us especially to consider is that which is signified on the part of God and Christ and which accordingly it declares to be that Christ's Body and Blood A thing which consider'd in the general admits of no dispute because the plain Assertion of the Scripture as well as the Acknowledgment of all sorts of Men however otherwise divided about the Sacrament thereof or the presence of that Body and Blood in it They all agreeing as they must that the Body of Christ is that which is signified by one of its Signs and the Blood of Christ which is signified by the other But as it is not so well agreed under what Notion we are to consider that Body and Blood nor for ought that I have observ'd much attended to which is it may be the principal Cause of all the Controversie in this Particular So I shall therefore for the farther clearing of the thing or things signified by this Sacrament enquire under what Notion we ought to consider them which if we have a due regard to the words of the Institution will not be so difficult to unfold For from thence it will appear first that we ought to consider Christ's Body and Blood here not in the state wherein they were at or before the Institution of this Sacrament or in that more happy one to which they are now arriv'd but as they were at the time of our Saviour's Crucifixion To wit the one as given to Death or broken and the other as shed for us Which St. Paul farther confirms when he tells his Corinthians * 1 Cor. 11.26 that as often as they ate the Bread of this Sacrament and drank the Cup of it they did shew forth the Lord's death till he came The consequent whereof will be secondly because that Death of Christ is represented by the Scriptures as a Sacrifice that we ought to look upon that Body and Blood of Christ which we have said to be signified by this Sacrament as offer'd unto God by him and as such to be consider'd in it Which they of all Men have the least reason to refuse who do not only affirm †Conc. Trid. Sess 22. cap. 1. with us that this Sacrament was intended for a Memorial of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross but that the Body and Blood of Christ is even now * Ibid. offer'd up to God in it under the respective Species thereof It is as little to be doubted thirdly That as we ought to consider the Body and Blood of Christ here as offer'd up to God for us so we ought to consider them as offer'd up as a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of those Persons for whom it is offer'd Which is not only evident from the words of the Institution because representing the Cup of this Sacrament as the Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins but abundantly confirm'd by the suffrage of those Men with whom we have most to do in this Affair They not only representing the Sacrifice of the Mass as they are pleas'd to call this Sacrament as one and the same Sacrifice with that which our Saviour offer'd upon the Cross but as a truly propitiatory one (a) Ib. cap. 2. and which accordingly is of force for the sins of the quick and the dead and tends to the remission of them Of what use these Considerations are will more fully appear when I come to entreat of that relation which the outward Signs of this Sacrament have to the inward part thereof or the things signified by them At present it may suffice briefly to note that the Body and Blood of Christ consider'd as broken and shed upon the Cross having now no Existence in the World nor any more capable of having such an Existence than that which is past can be recall'd They cannot be substantially present either to the Sacramental Elements or to the Person that receiveth them nor be substantially eaten and drunken by him that eats and drinks the other That they must therefore be present to the Sacramental Elements in a Figure or Mystery and to the Receiver by their respective Vertue and Efficacy That being as was before said to be consider'd as offer'd up to
God to atone his Wrath and to procure the remission of our Sins and all other Graces they must consequently be look'd upon not as the immediate producers of those Effects which are attributed to them but as meritorious Causes thereof and disposing God who is the giver of every good and perfect Gift to produce them That therefore if the Body and Blood of Christ strengthen and refresh the Soul of the Receiver as the Sacramental Signs thereof do the Body of him that receives them they must do it in the way of a meritorious Cause and such as disposeth God to grant to the worthy Receiver of the Sacrament the pardon of his Sin which is that which especially refresheth the Soul and Grace whereby he may be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner Man In fine that the Body and Blood of Christ cannot otherwise be eaten and drunken than by the Mind meditating upon the Merits and Satisfaction of that Offering which our Saviour made of them and relying wholly upon them for that Salvation which it expects But leaving these things to be discuss'd in a more proper place where I shall also have an occasion to add farther light and strength to them Let us in the next place reflect upon that which I have said to be signified on our part by the Signs of the Lord's Supper which are these three especially First a thankful Remembrance of the Body and Blood of Christ consider'd as before describ'd Secondly our Communion with those who partake with us thereof Thirdly a Resolution to live and act as becomes those that are partakers of them Of the first of these little need to be said after the account I have given of it in my Explication (b) Part 3. of the words of the Institution It may suffice here to observe from thence that as the words of our Saviour are express that we should do what is enjoin'd as to the outward Elements of this Sacrament for a thankful Remembrance of the offering up of his Body and Blood So what is done by the Priest to those Elements and our receiving them from him in that state is a lively Representation to our Minds of the offering up of Christ's Body and Blood and a thankful Remembrance thereof therefore not unreasonably look'd upon as one of those things which are signifi'd on our part by the Sacrament thereof The second thing signified on our part by the outward Elements of this Sacrament is our Communion with those who partake with us of Christ's Body and Blood A thing which St. Paul doth not only fairly intimate where he affirms (c) 1 Cor. 10.17 that we being many are one Bread and one Body because we all partake of that one Bread which he had before affirm'd to be the Communion of Christ's Body But points us to those things by which this Communion of ours is signified even the unity of that Bread which is one of the Elements of this Sacrament and our partaking together of it For as there can be no better account given of St. Paul's calling us one Bread and one Body than that we our selves though many are yet one mystical Body as that Bread though made up of several Granes is one Loaf and ought accordingly to be thereby admonish'd of that intimate Communion which ought to be between us in all Offices of Christian Love and Friendship So there is nothing more usual with the Antients than to represent that Unity of the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament as a Symbol of ours and of that Communion and Fellowship which ought therefore to be between us For by this Sacrament saith St. Cyprian * Ep. 63. ad Caecil de Sacr. Dom. Calicis Quo ipso Sacramento populus noster ostenditur adunatus ut quemadmodum grana multa in unun collecta commolita commixta panem unum faciunt Sic in Chrislo qui est panis coelestis unum sciamus esse Corpus cui conjunctus sit noster numerus adunatus Our People is also shew'd to be made one that as many Grains collected into one and ground and mixed together make one Loaf so in Christ who is the heavenly Bread we may know there is one Body to which our number is conjoin'd and united And again Finally saith the same Father †Denique unanimitatem Christianam firmâ sibi atque inseparabili charitate connexam etiam ipsa dominica sacrificia declarant Nam quando Dominus corpus suum panem vocat de multorum granorum adunatione congestum populum nostrum quem portabat indicat adunatum Et quando sanguinem sunm vinum appellat de botris atque acinis plurimis expressum atque in unum coactum gregem item nostrum significat commixtione adunatae multitudinis copulatum Epist 76. ad Magnum de Bapt. Novatianis c. the Sacrifices of our Lord do also declare that Christian Vnanimity which is connected to it self by a firm and inseparable Charity For when the Lord gives the title of his Body to that Bread which is made up of the Vnion of many Granes he shews our People whom he carried to be united together and when he gives the title of his Blood to that Wine which is prest out of many Bunches and Grapes and gathered into one he also signifies our People coupled together by the commixture of an united multitude Thus St. Cyprian and other of the Antients argue from the Unity of the Bread and Wine that Union and Communion which ought to be between the Faithful and consequently shew that Communion to be one of those things which are signifi'd on our part by the Elements of this Sacrament And St. Paul without any Comment upon him will help us to inferr that the same Communion is signified by the Faithful's partaking together of them where he declares us to be one Bread and one Body for that we all partake of one Bread For if barely to eat and drink together be a Symbol of Love and Friendship and accordingly often employ'd both by Jews and Heathen (d) See a Discourse concerning the true Notion of the Lord's Supper by R.C. cap. 6. as a Ceremony whereby they declar'd their entring into Covenant or being at Peace with one another How much more may we affirm the same after so clear an Affirmation of St. Paul of Mens partaking of the same mystical Bread and Wine Even of that mystical Bread and Wine which was instituted by him who above all other things enjoin'd upon his Disciples the Love of one another and gave that as the great Characteristick whereby they should be known to be so Sure I am the Antients were so perswaded of this Communion's being a thing signified by this Sacrament that as I have elsewhere (e) Expl. of the Creed Art The holy Catholick Church shewn from Irenaeus the antient Presbyters of Rome in Testimony of that Communion sent the Mysteries of this Sacrament to the
cannot any other way convey Christ's Body and Blood to us than by prompting us by the representation it makes to us of the offering of that Body and Blood upon the Cross for us to meditate upon it and rely upon it for our Salvation and by prompting God who hath annex'd that Body and Blood to the due use of the Sacrament to confer that Body and Blood upon us In fine it appears from the premisses and from a passage or two (e) For as the benefit is great if with a true penitent heart and lively faith we receive that Holy Sacrament for then we spiritually eat the Flesh of Christ c. And above all things ye must give most humble and hearty thanks to God the Father c. for the Redemption of the World by the death and passion of our Saviour c. in our Church's exhortation to the Communion that we receive the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament when we are thereby prompted to reflect with a penitent and thankful heart upon the offering Christ made of that Body and Blood of his upon the Cross for us and to rely upon it for our Salvation Which several assertions what foundation they have in the Scripture is in the next place to be enquir'd and the Doctrine of our Church therein established by it In order whereunto we are to know that the Body and Blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper as well as out of it are in the opinion of the Scripture not corporal but spiritual food and as such therefore to be look'd upon and owned by us For St. Paul affirming of the Antient Jews that they receiv'd in their Eucharist of Manna and Water of the Rock the same spiritual Meat (f) 1 Cor. 10.3 4. and drink which we also do and which he afterwards (g) 1 Cor. 4. declares to be Christ must consequently suppose what there is of Christ in our Eucharist to be of the same spiritual nature and because the Body and Blood of Christ is that which we receive by it that that also is Spiritual Meat and Drink and as such to be look'd upon and owned by us Now as if the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist are Spiritual Meat and Spiritual Drink they must consequently be communicated rather to the Soul than to the Body as which alone is qualified to taste of them and be nourished by them So they must be communicated to the Soul by such ways and means as are proper to possess the Soul of them and receiv'd by the same Soul by such act or acts thereof as are proper to apprehend them Which things being granted it will not be difficult to make answer what kind of Mean the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is how it conveys to us the Body and Blood of Christ and how we receive them by it For if the things which this Sacrament professeth to convey be Spiritual Meat and Drink such as are proper for the nourishment of the Soul and accordingly communicated to it Then must this Sacrament so far forth be a Spiritual Mean also as which alone can make way for such Spiritual nourishment to enter into the Soul If again the things which this Sacrament conveys must be conveyed to the Soul by such ways as are proper to possess the Soul of them Then must this Sacrament convey them to it either by prompting the Soul to reflect as the Institution requires upon that Body and Blood of Christ which it was intended to represent or by prompting God who hath annex'd that Body and Blood to the due use of it to confer that Body and Blood upon us These being the only ways by which that Spiritual repast can be communicated to that Soul for which it was intended In like manner if the things which this Sacrament conveys are to be receiv'd by such Act or Acts of the Soul as are proper to apprehend them Then if the Soul do receive the Body and Blood of Christ by means of the Sacrament it must do it by taking occasion from that Sacrament to reflect as the Institution requires upon that Body and Blood of Christ which it was designed to represent and particularly with Faith in that Body and Blood as which is of all other things most required to apply them to us And though it be true that the Church of Rome hath found out another sort of food and another sort of receiving it as shall be more fully declar'd when I come to the handling of it Yet as the Tridentine Fathers have been forced to confess that our Saviour requir'd this Sacrament to be taken (h) Sess 13. cap. 2. as the spiritual food of Souls by which they are nourished and strengthened So they have in like manner acknowledg'd that it ought to be spiritually taken (i) ib. cap. 8. as well as Sacramentally in order to our profiting by it But because our Catechism Question What are the benefits whereof we are partakers thereby Answer The strengthening and refreshing of our souls by the Body and Blood of Christ as our Bodies are by the Bread and Wine where it entreats of the faithful's receiving the Body and Blood of Christ proceeds to ask as is but reason what are the benefits we partake of by it and makes answer that they are the strengthening and refreshing of our Souls by the Body and Blood of Christ as our Bodies are by the Bread and Wine Therefore it will be but needful before we pass any farther to reflect upon those Benefits and accordingly enquire 1. What is meant by the strengthening and refreshing of the Soul 2. What Evidence there is of the Body and Blood of Christ being intended for it 3. How the Body and Blood of Christ effect it 1. Now as Strength and Refreshment are things which relate rather to the Body than the Soul and must therefore receive their Explication from thence So the former when applied to the Body signifies an ability for those operations for which it is intended as the latter a freedom from all heaviness and lumpishness And they are brought about especially by the Food which we receive and particularly by that Food which was made choice of for the present Sacrament Bread as the Scripture speaks (k) Psal 104.15 being that which strengthens the Heart and Wine that which chears (l) Judg. 9.13 and refresheth it By Analogy to which as the strength and refreshment of the Soul must signifie in like manner an ability for its proper operations and particularly for such as Christianity obligeth it to and a freedom from all trouble and disquiet So that which is said to strengthen and refresh it must consequently furnish it with such an ability and freedom and both enable it to do those things which God requireth of it and deliver it from those troubles and disquiets which its own guilt or any thing else might be apt to fill it with 2. This therefore being
in the Eucharist yet they specifie nothing as to the modus of it and much less intimate any thing concerning their being under the Species thereof That that Body and Blood which is the fourth Capital Assertion in this Matter are truly really and substantially under the Sacramental Species shewn to be as groundless and Evidence made of the contrary by such Arguments from Sense and Reason as are moreover confirmed to us by the Authority of Revelation Some brief Reflections in the close upon the Worship of Christ in the Sacrament and more large ones upon what the Romanists advance concerning the real eating of him in it Where is shewn that that which they call a real eating is a very improper one that it is however of no necessity or use toward our spiritual nourishment by him and not only no way confirm'd by the discourse of our Saviour in the sixth of St. John's Gospel but abundantly confuted by it BUT because whatever Sacramental Relations our Church may content it self with yet it is certain that that which calls it self Catholick hath advanc'd one of a far different nature and those of Luther's Institution another before I pass any farther I will examine both the one and the other the grounds upon which they are built and the supposed Reasonableness thereof That which I intend to examine here is the relation which the Church of Rome advanceth by which as the Council of Trent * Sess 13. c. 4. instructeth us the whole substance of the Bread is changed into the substance of Christ's Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the substance of his Blood There remaining no more after that †Can. 2. of the Bread and Wine saving only the Species thereof and the Body and Blood of Christ together with his Soul and Divinity coming in the place of those Elements and truly really and substantially * Can. 1.3 contained under the Species of them By which means the same Christ comes to be worshipped with divine Worship in the Sacrament of the Eucharist (a) Can. 6. and to be really (b) Can. 8. eaten in it as well as either Spiritually or Sacramentally Now as such Assertions as these had need to be well prov'd because apparently contrary to Sense and Reason So especially such of them as are the Foundations of Transubstantiation which are these following ones 1. That the whole substance of the Bread is changed into the substance of Christ's Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the substance of his Blood 2. That those Substances of Bread and Wine are so changed into the substances of Christ's Body and Blood as to retain nothing of what they were before save only the Species thereof 3. That the true Body and true Blood of Christ together with his Soul and Divinity are under the Species of those Elements 4. That they are truly really and substantially contain'd in or under them Which four Assertions I will consider in their order and after I have examin'd the grounds upon which they stand oppose proper Arguments to them 1. That which is first to be consider'd is that the whole substance of the Bread is chang'd into the substance of Christ's Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the substance of his Blood An Assertion which though it require as substantial a Proof yet hath nothing of moment to support it whether as to the Possibility or actual Existence of it For though the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament make mention of substantial changes and from which therefore we may infer a Possibility of the like For thus we read of Moses's Rod being changed by the Divine Power (c) Exod. 4.3 into a Serpent and from a Serpent again (d) Exod. 4.4 into a Rod of Lot's Wife being turn'd (e) Gen. 19.26 into a Pillar of Salt and of Water (f) Joh. 2.9 into Wine Yet is there no appearance of their being chang'd into things that had an actual Existence at the instant when they were chang'd into them which is the change that Transubstantiation imports If there be any change of that Nature to make out the Possibility of this it must be that which is made of the Nourishment we receive into the substance of our Body and Blood But beside that this is a change by augmentation and must consequently be either preceded by an impairing of Christ's glorious Body which is not so consistent with that estate or make it in time grow into a monstrous one It is a change which will not do the Business of Transubstantiation even to bring whole and entire Christ (g) Conc. Trid. Sess 13. cap. 3. under either Species A change by augmentation being a change of the Object of it not into the whole substance of that into which it is chang'd but only into a part of it But it may be there is better proof of the actual being of the change we speak of than there is in any thing else of the possibility thereof As indeed such a stupendous change as this ought to be without Example Be it so But let us at least see so clear and express a Proof that our Faith may acquiesce in it if our Reason cannot let us see it affirm'd by him to whom so great a change is ascrib'd And neither are we without one if the words This is my Body and This is my Blood may pass for such a Proof as they have been hitherto represented to us I will not now say because I have elsewhere shewn it (h) Parts 3-8 that there is much more reason to believe that they ought to be figuratively taken and cannot therefore be any ground for such a change as is sought to be established by them I shall choose rather for once to allow that they may be literally taken and leave it to those that can to inferr such a change from them For whether by the word This in This is my Body be meant the Bread before spoken of As indeed how the change of the substance of the Bread into the substance of Christ's Body can be proved from those words which profess not to speak of that Bread is as hard to conceive as Transubstantiation it self But whether I say be thereby meant the Bread before spoken of or The thing which I now give you there is no appearance in the proposition of any substantial change and much less of such a substantial change as is intended to be inferred from them All that the words profess to say supposing them to mean Bread by the Particle This is that one thing is the other but in what manner or by what kind of change they do not in the least pretend to affirm And if the Text do not determine either where is that clear and express proof of such a substantial change as they profess to speak of Or where our either stupidity or infidelity for not being convinced by it But it
them It will not be difficult to make answer that that notion can have no place where St. Paul makes it his business as he doth where he recites the Institution to awe Men into a reverential receit of this Holy Sacrament To think that St. Paul would so often call that Bread which was a thing infinitely above it when his Design was to awe Men into a reverential receit of it being to think he either knew not how to suit his Expressions to it or that he basely and invidiously betray'd it I will conclude what I have to say against the substantial change of the Sacramental Elements when I have shewn from the Antients that such a change was unknown to them Which I shall endeavour to evince first from what they say concerning their continuing in the same nature in which they were before and then from what they say concerning their being Types and Symbols and Images of that Body and Blood into which the Romanists affirm them to be transubstantiated That the Antients represented the Sacramental Elements as continuing in the same nature in which they were before will appear first from what I have elsewhere said (n) Part 1. concerning their representing our Eucharist as an Eucharist for the things of this World and particularly for the Fruits of the Earth as well as for the Body and Blood of Christ and professing to eat of the Bread of it even when become the Body of Christ by Prayer as a Testimony of their Thankfulness for the other For how is that an Eucharist for the things of this World and particularly for the Fruits of the Earth which is now all Heavenly neither hath any thing of an earthly sustenance remaining Or how we said to eat of the Bread of it in token of such a Thankfulness if there be nothing at all in it of what we profess to give thanks for All other Offerings beside this having some affinity with that which they pretend to be Offerings of Thanks for Neither will it avail to say which is all that can be said that our Eucharist may become such even for earthly Boons by the remaining species thereof For beside that the Antients make no mention of any such separate species and we therefore not to interpret what they say of Bread and other such substantial things concerning the bare species thereof It is plain from what was before quoted out of Irenaeus that that which was tender'd unto God in this Eucharistical offering was the creatures of Bread and Wine and from Origen that the Eucharistical Offering consisted in eating of what was tendered to him as well as in the tendry it self So that if they were the Creatures of God that were tender'd to him and not only the species thereof they were the same Creatures and not only the species thereof that were in their opinion eaten and drunken by them and consequently by which they gave thanks to God for the Fruits of the Earth as well as for the great Blessing of our Redemption But of all the things that are said by the Antients to shew their belief of the Sacramental Elements continuing in the same nature in which they were before nothing certainly is of more force than the use they make of that relation which is between them and Christ's Body and Blood to shew against the Apollinarians and Eutychians that the divine and humane nature however united in the person of Jesus Christ yet are not so made one as to be confounded and mixed together as the Apollinarians taught his divine nature and flesh to be or the humane nature to be swallowed up into the divine as the Eutychians did For to confute each of these and to shew the distinction there is between the two natures of Christ the Antients alledged the near relation there is between the Sacramental Elements and Christ's Body and Blood but which how near soever doth not confound or destroy the truth of their respective natures but preserves both the one and the other of them entire For thus St. Chrysostome in his Epistle to Caesarius lately published (o) Appendix to the Def. of an Exposit of the Doctrine of the Church of England against de Meaux against the Doctrine of the Apollinarians As before the Bread is sanctified we name it Bread but the divine Grace sanctifying it through the mediation of the Priest it is freed from the title of Bread and thought worthy of the title of the Body of the Lord although the nature of Bread remaineth in it and it is not said to be two Bodies but one Body of the Lord So also here the divine nature being placed in the Body they both together make up one Son and one person but without confusion as well as division not in one nature but in two perfect ones So that as surely as the two natures of Christ continue distinct and unconfounded so the Sacramental Elements and the thing signified by them do because made use of to illustrate the distinction of the other To the same purpose though more clearly and fully doth Theodoret discourse in his Dialogues against the Eutychians For taking notice in one place (p) Dial. 1. c. 8. of our Saviour's calling Bread by the name of his Body and in like manner his Flesh by the name of Meat he proceeds to give this reason of that change of names To wit That he intended thereby to prompt those that partake of the divine Mysteries not to attend to the nature of the things that are seen but by that change of names to give belief to that change which is made by grace For he that called his natural Body Meat and Bread and again nam'd himself a Vine the very same person honour'd the Symbols that are seen with the title of his Body and Blood not changing their nature but adding grace to nature And again (q) Dial. 2. c. 24. after he had acknowledg'd to the Eutychian that the gift that was offer'd was call'd by its proper name before the invocation of the Priest but the Body and Blood of Christ after the sanctification of it and the Eutychians replying thereupon that as the Symbols of the Lord's Body and Blood are one thing before the invocation of the Priest but after that invocation they are chang'd and become other things so the Lord's Body after its assumption is chang'd into the divine essence He hath these very emphatical words You are caught saith he in those nets which you your self have weav'd For neither do the mystical Symbols after their sanctification go out of their own nature For they abide in their former essence and figure and fashion and are visible and palpable as they were before But they are understood to be Blood they have been made to wit Symbols of Christ's Body and what and believ'd and reverenc'd as being what they are believ'd In like manner the natural Body of Christ which is the Archetype thereof hath its former
form and figure and circumscription and in a word the essence of a Body But after the resurrection it became immortal and above corruption and was thought worthy to sit at the right hand of God and is worshipped by every creature as being called the Body of the Lord of nature So that if the two natures of Christ ought to be look'd upon even now as two distinct and different ones and not one nature swallowed up into the other We also in the opinion of this Holy Man ought to look upon this Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament as two distinct things and upon the Sacrament in particular however dignified with a noble relation yet as of the same nature and figure and form as it was before it was advanced to it For Theodoret arguing the distinction of Christ's two natures from the distinction there is between the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament and particularly from that Sacrament's continuing in its former nature and essence must consequently suppose that to have been a thing then known and confess'd as from which otherwise he could not reasonably have argued the other I am not ignorant indeed that even these passages have met with subtle evasions and such as shew in some measure the art of those that fram'd them But as whosoever shall compare them with those words to which they are apply'd will find them to be rather subtle than solid So they put such a sense upon the words of their respective Authors as if they should be admitted would make them look rather like Sophisters than Fathers of the Church like Men who intended to impose upon their Disciples rather than to enlighten them in the Truth For what other would it have been in Theodoret to have argued against the change of Christ's Body into the divine essence from the continuing of the Symbols of it in their essence and figure and form if he had meant no more thereby than that they remained what they were in their outward appearances as the Romanists are willing to understand him or as they are sometime pleas'd to phrase it in their outward substance For so the Body of Christ also might have remain'd as to the outward appearances thereof and yet have been as substantially chang'd into the divine essence or nature as the Bread of the Sacrament is said to be into the substance of Christ's Body But beside that the Antients represent the Sacramental Elements as continuing what they were and thereby sufficiently impugne that substantial change of them into Christ's Body and Blood which this first Assertion imports They represent them also as Types and Symbols and Images thereof and as we should therefore think as distinct things from them No like being the same with that to which it is said to be like nor indeed any more capable of being so than that which is the most different from it Now how standing the substantial change of the Sacramental Elements can these titles be admitted Or what is there to build that Typicalness or Symbolicalness or resemblance on Certainly no other than those aiery species thereof which in the opinion of those that maintain them have themselves no subject to uphold them But as it doth not appear that the Antients believ'd any such species and one (x) August ep ad Dardan 57. Tolle ipsa corporae qualitatibus corporum non erit ubi sint Et ideo necesse est ut non sint Veruntamen si moles ipsa corporis quantacunque vel quantulacunque sit penitus auseratur qualitates ejus non erit ubi sint quamvis non mole metiendae sint of the Learnedest of them deni'd the possibility thereof So they sometime place the Symbolicalness of the Sacramental Elements in such properties thereof as can belong to no other than their respective substances For thus they apparently do when they represent them as Symbols of Christ's mystical Body upon the account of their being made up of the substance of sevelal granes and several Grapes as that Body of Christ is of the respective members of it This importing the union of several substances into a Mass or Body and consequently that that is much more a substance which is made up of an aggregation of them 2. It appearing from the premisses how little ground there is to believe that the whole substance of the Bread is chang'd into the substance of Christ's Body and the whole substance of the Wine into the substance of Christ's Blood We shall the less need to concern our selves in the examination of that which follows even that those substances of Bread and Wine are so chang'd into the substances of Christ's Body and Blood as to retain nothing of what they were before save only the species thereof For if they can in no sense be said to be substantially chang'd how much less to such a degree as to retain nothing of what they were save only the species thereof But as this Assertion whatever it is hath something peculiar in it in the common understanding of the World So it may not therefore be amiss especially when the Council of Trent seems to have made a peculiar Article of it to consider it apart and both enquire what grounds it hath to support it self and oppose proper reasons to it In order whereunto I will consider it as importing first that nothing of the substance of Bread and Wine remains and secondly as importing that the species or accidents thereof do If they who affirm that nothing of the substance of the Bread and Wine remains mean no more thereby than that nothing thereof remains in the form or essence of Bread and Wine as one would think they should not by their affirming them to be chang'd into the substance of Christs Body and Blood They may then be thought to say somewhat which may seem to have some foundation in those words This is my Body and This is my Blood because those words make no mention of any thing else but them But then as they must also suppose that the matter thereof remains though in another form or essence because otherwise the substance thereof will not be chang'd but annihilated So they must suppose too an addition made thereby to the substance of Christ's Body because a new accession of matter to it Which being granted the change will be made not into the whole substance of Christ's Body and Blood as Transubstantiation was before said to import but only into that part thereof into which they are affirmed to be chang'd On the other side if they who affirm that nothing of the substance of Bread and Wine remains mean thereby that nothing remains in the form of Bread and Wine or any other substance They then do not only destroy the change of them into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood because that change supposeth the former matter of them to abide though in another form or essence but take away all pretence of founding
under the Species of Bread and Wine So they thereby ascribe the breaking or shedding of this Sacrifice rather to the Species under which they are offer'd than to the Body and Blood of Christ under them But beside that there is a manifest difference between the Assertion I am now upon and our Saviour's words as to that Body and Blood of Christ which they both profess to intreat of There is no less signal a difference between them as to the existence of that Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament which will be a yet farther prejudice against the inferring of this Assertion from them For whereas the utmost that our Saviour's words can be thought to import is the simple existence of his Body and Blood in the Sacrament the Assertion we are now upon proceeds to affirm that they exist under the Species of the Sacramental Elements as that too not only under the Species of their proper Element but under the one and the other of them Which how different it is from the importance of our Saviour's words will not be difficult for those to see who can discern any difference between a simple affirmation of any thing and that which proceeds also to determine the modus of it But it will be said it may be that though our Saviour's words do not expresly affirm the existing of his Body and Blood under the Sacramental Species yet they say that from which it may by just consequence be deduc'd If they do I willingly yield they say enough to justifie the present Assertion But I say withall that there is nothing in them which can give countenanee to such a Surmise For beside that they make no express mention of those Sacramental Species under which this Body and Blood are supposed to exist If they say any thing which may be thought to concern those Species it must be the conversion of them also into that Body and Blood into which their respective substances are chang'd That which our Saviour pronounc'd the words over being no doubt Species as well as Substances and those Species therefore as well as their Substances to fall under the same change if those words were intended to effect one 4. Now though these are Difficulties enough to choak any indifferent Man's Belief if they do not also trouble the Belief of those who pretend to be the most zealous Asserters of Transubstantiation Yet lest either they or we should want any thing to exercise it or improve the meritoriousness thereof they proceed to assert in express terms that this true Body and true Blood of Christ are as truly really and substantially contained in or under those Species under which they are affirmed to exist I will not as yet alledge any of those Difficulties wherewith this Assertion is encumbred because it may be time enough to do that when we have enquir'd into the grounds of it But as those Difficulties are apparent enough to make any Man stand upon his guard when such Assertions as these are endeavour'd to be impos'd upon him So one would think they should prevail so far with those who pretend to advance them as to see that they have sufficient ground for their Confidence in it Which whether they have or no let those Persons judge who consider first what can never be too often inculcated that whatever ground there is for a substantial Presence in the words This is my Body and This is my Blood it is for the substantial Presence of a Body broken and Blood shed for so the very Letter of the Text informs us and not for the substantial Presence of glorified ones Neither will it avail to say that they also affirm them to be broken and shed in their respective Species and ought not therefore to be debarr'd the use of those words for the proof of that substantial Presence which they advance For as it is evident that they mean no more thereby than that those Species are broken and shed as appears from their representing the immolation of Christ himself as a bloodless one So it is alike evident therefore that they mean not such a Body and Blood as the Text advanceth and ought not therefore to argue the substantial Presence thereof from it But let us suppose that our Saviour and the Tridentine Fathers meant one and the same Body and Blood I mean Christ's glorified ones and consequently that so far forth they have a right to make use of the present words yet how doth it appear that any substantial Presence of that Body and Blood can be inferred from them What is there in the Words themselves that can give any countenance to it If there be any thing in the words This is my Body and This is my Blood that may be thought to look that way it is manifestly that Is which connects the Subject and Predicate together because the word which the Romanists themselves make use of to press us with the Belief of that substantial Presence which they inculcate But what reason have they to take that for a proof of a substantial Presence of Christ's glorified Body and Blood which in their own opinion doth not reach it because having a respect only to that whether Body or Blood to which it is prefix'd and not as it must and ought to be to betoken a substantial Presence of a glorified Christ to both of them together For though the Tridentine Fathers assert that the glorified Body and Blood of Christ are contain'd indifferently under the Species of either Element yet only the Body under the Species of Bread and the Blood under the Species of the Wine by vertue of the words And the word Is therefore not of sufficient force to prove any substantial Presence of them Because Christ's glorified Body and Blood though they may be vertually and objectively present to us when consider'd apart yet cannot be substantially present but by a real Union and Connexion as they themselves have taught us to believe Now as where there is so little ground for the belief of a substantial Presence there may be place for alledging Arguments against it both from Sense and Reason For though Sense and Reason should be of no force against the certain Revelations of God yet nothing hinders but they may be where no such Revelation doth appear so especially if we find that the Arguments which they offer are such as are confirm'd to us by Revelation and in a manner put into our mouths by it For such I account that which Sense offers us for that 's being Bread and not a humane Body which is put into our Hands or Mouths and from thence transmitted to our Stomachs Our Eye and Touch and Taste assuring us that it is Bread and not the Body of a Man under the Species of Bread and much less that glorified Body which the Romanists would perswade us into For what other is that Argument for the substance thereof I mean which our Saviour sometime offer'd
be preferr'd before the figurative willingly allowd But that no exception ought to be made unless where the Scripture it self obligeth us to depart from the literal sense shewn to be neither true in it self nor pertinent to the present Texts because there is enough in the words that follow them to oblige us to preferr the figurative sense before it The Lutherans special Arguments next brought under Consideration and First that which is drawn from the supposed newness and strangeness of the Christian Sacraments at the first and which consequently requir'd that they should be deliver'd in proper and literal Expressions as without which otherwise there could have been no certain knowledge of them Where is shewn that the Christian Sacraments were neither such new and strange things at the first Institution of them as is pretended There having been the like under the Old Testament nor under any necessity if they had been such of being delivered in literal and proper Expressions because figurative Expressions with a Key to open them might have sufficiently declar'd the nature of them What is urg'd in the second place from the nature of a Testament under the form of which this Sacrament is thought from Luke 22.20 to have been instituted shewn to be of as little force Partly because it is justly questionable whether what we there render Testament ought not rather to be render'd a Covenant and partly because even Civil Testaments are shewn to admit of figurative Expressions A short Answer made to what is alledg'd in the third and fourth place from the Majesty of him that instituted this Sacrament and from the supposed Conformity there is between the several Evangelists and St. Paul in their accounts of the words in question And a more full one to what is offer'd in the fifth place to shew the absurdity of a figurative Sense from the no place there is for it either in the Subject Predicate or Copula The Copula or the word Is thereupon made choice of to place the Figure in and answer made to what is objected against it from the Rules of Logick and from the Scripture That the literal Sense is not as is pretended in the sixth Argument the only one that can quiet the Mind or secure the Conscience briefly shewn And Enquiry next made whether though the literal Sense of the words should be allow'd Consubstantiation could be inferred from them Which that it cannot is made appear from there being nothing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or This to denote that complexum quid which Consubstantiation advanceth IF Transubstantiation be a hard word and such as will not easily down with the Romanists themselves That which the generality of Men call Consubstantiation but the Lutherans themselves †Confess August Art 10. Cons Cassand ad dict Art a true real and substantial Presence of Christ's Body and Blood will be found to be of no very easie digestion by those that shall take the pains to consider it For though it doth not pretend to annihilate or transform the Sacramental Elements and therefore neither offer that violence to our Senses and the Scripture which Transubstantiation doth Yet which is hard enough to believe it professeth to teach * Gerhard Loc. Commun Tract de Sacr. Caenâ cap. 10. that the Body of Christ is so united to the blessed Bread and the Blood of Christ to the blessed Wine that together with that Bread we receive and eat the Body of Christ by one Sacramental Manducation and together with that Wine receive and drink the Blood of Christ by one Sacramental Draught By which means Christ's glorious Body is not only contrary to the nature of a Body made to be present to many places at once even to Heaven and as many other as this holy Sacrament is celebrated in but for ought that I can discern jumbled together into one Physical Mass with those Sacramental Elements to which it is affirmed to be united which is that Consubstantiation which they seem so desirous to avoid This Union as it is in their own opinion an union of Substances and of corporeal Substances also So so strait a one as to occasion their own affirming that the Body and Blood of Christ are given in with and under their respective Elements which how they should be without the former Consubstantiation is not easie to imagine Now as this opinion of the Lutherans is founded by themselves upon the literal sense of the words This is my Body and This is my Blood and must therefore stand or fall with it So I shall therefore think it enough to enquire 1. Whether those words ought to be taken in the literal sense 2. Whether supposing that they should be so understood that which we call Consubstantiation can be inferred from them 1. That the words This is my Body and This is my Blood Vid. Gerhard ubi supra ought to be taken in the literal sense is affirmed by the Lutherans as well as by the Romanists and both general and special Arguments alledged for it Whereof the former are that the literal sense because the first and most natural is generally to be prefer'd before the figurative one That this ought especially to be observ'd in the Interpretation of the Scripture unless the Scripture it self oblige us to depart from it but most of all in divine Precepts Promises and Articles of Faith Partly because of the danger there may be of running into great errours if the literal sense should not generally be adhered to and partly because it is pretended that there is nothing of the former nature which in some place of Scripture or other is not delivered in plain and literal expressions and by which judgment may be made of what is elsewhere deliver'd in figurative ones And I willingly grant that the literal sense because the first and most natural is generally to be prefer'd before the figurative And I grant too that this ought especially to be observ'd in the Interpretation of the Scripture But that no exception ought to be made from this general rule unless the Scripture it self oblige us to depart from the literal sense is a thing I see no reason for where the matter intreated of is a proper matter of Reason or of that law of Nature which is conducted by it Partly because in such a case Reason and Nature may be presum'd to be competent judges of the thing intreated of and consequently may prescribe against the literal sense of such expressions as shall be found to be manifestly contrary to the dictates of it And partly because the great design of Scripture being to direct us in supernatural things it may well enough be presum'd to leave things of the former nature to be judg'd of for the main by that Reason to whose cognisance they do belong Thus for instance because the preservation of those natures which God hath given us is a thing proper enough for the cognisance of
that he is a reasonable Creature which points out the very Essence of him But as the word Is hath this certain signification in the general as to point to somewhat that naturally belongs to the Subject to which it relates whether it be of the Essence or only an Accident thereof So it may so far forth be capable of being alter'd from its native signification to a foreign one which is the thing this Argument was intended to impugne But leaving such Niceties as these to such as take more pleasure in them that so we may with more freedom apply our selves to the Consideration of the Scriptures Let us as is no doubt more for our Profit consider what they alledge from thence to impugn the figurativeness of this so much controverted word Is Where the first thing that occurrs is that in those words which respect the Cup the word Is in the original Greek is wanting in St. Luke For whatever is pretended it is not wanting in S. Paul though it be out of its usual order And this for ought I can see is made one of those potent Arguments which confounded Piscator and caused him after he had many years stoutly defended the Figurativeness thereof to retract his Opinion in that Particular But as I see no such force in this or the other Arguments to occasion any change of Opinion So the word Is is so often understood that St. Luke might upon that account take the less care to express it especially having before made use of it in the matter of the other Element And I shall only add that if there be any thing which seems to press hard upon the supposed figurativeness of the word Is it must be that the Hebrew for ought appears hath no word to express Is or Are and our Saviour therefore when he pronounc'd the present Propositions to have uttered them without any word to answer to it only mentioning This my Body and This my Blood as the Scripture speaks in the like Cases Which suppos'd one would think the figurativeness of those Propositions should not be plac'd where we have done it and because there seems nothing else to place it in to be utterly banish'd from them But as it is plain from the Evangelists translating those words This is my Body and This is my Blood that the word Is though not express'd yet was always understood by the Hebrews So to suppose the contrary is to destroy the literal Sense as well as the figurative because there can be no Sense at all unless it be either expressed or understood By the same Reason therefore that they who advance the literal Sense of those Propositions place that literal Sense in the word Is though it be rather suppos'd than express'd By the very same Reason may we place the figurativeness thereof in it and interpret those Propositions by it One only Argument remains if yet it deserve that Name that the literal sense is the only one that can bring Men to a setledness in the Doctrine of the Eucharist or give us any good Assurance when we come to appear before Christ's Judgment-Seat They who run after Tropes and Figures knowing not where to fix as appears by the differences that are between them and much less likely to stand in the day of Temptation or in that more terrible day of the Lord Jesus But as it is now pretty evident that they who follow a figurative Sense are neither so uncertain in themselves nor so different from one another (l) Vid. Cosins Hist Trans Papal cap. 2. that any Man can with Reason reproach them upon that account So they who pretend to follow the literal Sense are so far from coming to any settledness in this Affair that they cannot agree what that literal Sense is and ought not therefore to be more confident of their own future standing at the day of Trial than a sincere pursuit of the Truth and a belief they have it will be able to give them Which as it is not deni'd to them by us so will it is hoped be as easily granted to us by them when they consider more calmly of our Opinions and the grounds of them 2. But let us suppose that the words in controversie were to be taken in the literal sense and whatever can be fairly deduc'd from thence to be the genuine issue of Christianity Yet how doth it appear that that which we call Consubstantiation and they though improperly enough a true real and substantial Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament can receive any countenance from it For not only do the Lutherans maintain a simple Presence of them in the Eucharist but so intimate a Presence also that they and the Sacramental Elements make up one compound By means whereof as the Person of Christ by the union of his Divine and Humane Nature may be said to be either God or Man so that which is made up of the Sacramental Element and the thing of the Sacrament may by that union of theirs be in like manner affirm'd to be either the one or the other without any kind of impropriety or figure Consequently whereto as our Saviour call'd this Compound thing by the Name of his Body and Blood so St. Paul might as well give it the Title of Bread or Wine where he speaks so often of its being eaten or drunken by both the worthy and unworthy partakers of it Now what is there in the letter of the words This is my Body and This is my Blood to found such a Doctrine on What is there in them that they themselves can think of any moment to inferr it Nothing for ought that I can discern but the Neuter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hoc and which because it agrees not in Gender with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bread must be taken not adjectively but substantively and consequently for that complexum quid or compound thing which they advance But if the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hoc being of the Neuter Gender do not hinder its referring to the Bread If it be so far from being any impropriety in construction when so referr'd that it is agreeable to the use of the best Authors both in Greek and Latin Lastly if the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hoc may as well be rendred This thing meaning the Bread before spoken of as this Compound of the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament as hath been heretofore (m) Part 3. declar'd at large Then is all this Presence and Union without any kind of foundation in the Text and they must either believe as we do that Christ meant no more by This is my Body and Blood than This is the Sacrament thereof Or that that Bread and Wine which he gave to his Disciples is by his Almighty Power transubstantiated into his very Body and Blood Or that his Body and Blood are in the Sacrament but after what manner they are utterly
ignorant and are not curious to enquire and much less of Courage enough to determine For as for whatever else they advance upon this Head it is either founded upon this supposed Union or tends only to shew that there is a real and substantial Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament and which because I have already sufficiently consider'd I think it not worth the while to speak again unto And I shall only add that as it doth not appear that our Saviour meant any compound thing by that which he affirm'd to be his Body and much less such a compound thing as answers to that which ariseth from the Union of the two Natures in Christ without which they themselves confess that it could not be affirmed to be Christ's Body So St. Luke and St. Paul give this great presumption against it that when they come to speak of the Cup they do not set the simple word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or This to express the Subject of this great Predication but add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cup to it For beside that that makes it yet more probable that they meant no other by it than that Cup which they before affirm our Saviour to have taken and which to be sure did not then contain that compound thing which the Lutherans advance St. Paul where he intreats of the end of Mens drinking of it opposeth this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or This Bread and so offers a yet greater presumption against our understanding it of any other PART IX Of the foundation of that relation which is between the outward and inward parts of the Lord's Supper The Contents The foundation of that relation which is between the outward and inward parts of this Sacrament shewn from some former Discourses to be the Institution of Christ not so much as delivered by him as applied to those Elements that are to put it on by the Minister's executing the Commands of it and by Christ's fulfilling the Promises thereof What is the foundation of this relation on the part of the former the subject of the present Enquiry and his pronouncing the words Hoc est corpus meum and Hic est calix c. shewn not to be it from the insufficiency of those grounds on which it is built What is urg'd in the behalf of those words more particularly considered and evidence made that as there wants not in the Prayers and Praises of the Communion-Office that which may tend to the founding of this Relation so that the words Hoc est corpus meum c. neither now have nor when Christ himself used them had in them the power of producing it What the true foundation of this relation is or what that is which consecrates those Elements which are to put it on endeavour'd to be made out from some former Discourses And those Elements accordingly considered either as being to become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood or as being to become also a Means of Communicating that Body and Blood to us and a Pledge to assure us thereof The former of these relations brought about by a declaration of those Purposes for which the Elements are intended whether in the words of the Institution or any other The latter by Thanksgiving and Prayer The usefulness of this Resolution to compromise the Quarrels that have arisen in this Argument upon occasion of what the Antients have said on the one hand for attributing the Power of Consecration to the Prayers and Thanksgivings of the Priest and on the other hand to the words of the Institution Those Quarrels being easily to be accommodated by attributing that Power to the Institution rather as applied than as delivered and as applied also by Prayer and Thanksgiving more than by the rehearsal of it IV. HAving thus given an account of the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper of the inward Part or thing signified by it and of the Relation that is between them My proposed Method obligeth me to enquire What is the Foundation of that Relation or that I may speak more agreeably to the Language of the Church What that is which consecrates the Bread and Wine of it and makes them become the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood Now though that hath in a great measure been satisfied already and so may seem less necessary to be consider'd a second time Yet because what I have said upon it lies dispersedly in several Discourses and will therefore require more pains to put it together than will be fit for me to impose upon my Reader And because too many things may and must be added to it to give the World a more distinct knowledge of this Affair I shall though so much the more briefly repeat what hath been elsewhere said and add farther light and strength to it In the general I observe from what I have elsewhere * Expl. of the Sacr. in Gen. Part 2 3. discours'd that the Foundation of that relation which is between the outward and inward part of the present Sacrament is the Institution of Christ not as delivered by him For so it hath no more influence upon the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper than upon those of our ordinary Repasts but as applied to those particular Elements that are to put on the relation of a Sacrament I observe farther that the Institution of Christ consisting of Commands and Promises to make it effectual to the producing of this Sacramental relation in the Elements it must be applied to them by a due observation of those Commands and by a like Completion of its Promises The Consequent whereof will be thirdly that it must be applied to them on the one hand by the Stewards of this Mystery as to whom belongs the execution of its Commands and on the other by Christ himself as to whom alone belongs the Completion of the other That though that application which is to be made by Christ is no doubt of the most Efficacy toward the producing of this Sacramental Relation and in strictness of speech the only one which can make those Elements the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood Yet that that application which is to be made by the Stewards of this Mystery is in order of Nature before it neither can Men expect that Christ should convert those Elements into a Sacrament unless what he enjoins concerning them be first observed by the other I observe lastly that when question is made in this particular what is the Foundation of this Sacramental Relation or that I may speak more agreeably to the Language of the Church what that is which consecrates the Sacramental Elements The meaning thereof is what is the Foundation of that relation on the part of the Stewards of this Mystery and what is requir'd of them to dispose Christ to perform his part in this Affair and cause those Elements which in themselves are
no way fitted for it to become to all intents and purposes the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood The Romanists as is very well known make the words Hoc est corpus meum c. to be the words of Consecration and that it is to them and them only that this great relation is owing and which is more a substantial change of the Elements into the very Body and Blood of Christ For though the Council of Trent is no way clear in this particular as may appear to any that shall take the pains to consult it †Sess 13. cap. 1. Yet as it is the general opinion of their Writers and the only one that can safely be maintain'd among them so it is that which the Roman Missal doth sufficiently confirm Because entitling those words and those alone the words of Consecration A man would willingly see something like a Reason for this Assertion that so he might return something like an Answer to it But if you look into the Master of the Sentences (a) Lib. 4. Dist 8. or his great Commentator Aquinas (b) Summ. tert parte qu. 78. Art 1. you shall find no other than this that in the other parts of this Service there is only Praise given to God or Prayer made unto him But when this Sacrament comes to be made the Priest doth not then use his own words but the words of Christ himself therefore the word of Christ even Hoc est corpus meum c. makes this Sacrament I say nothing at this time that this Argument such as it is is drawn from the Service of the Church and not as one would have thought and had been but reasonable from the words of the Institution or from some other words of our blessed Saviour and his Apostles But I say which will be enough that let the Service of the Church be as legitimate as may be yet there is nothing in it to perswade what is endeavour'd to be inferred from it For what though in the other parts of the Service there is nothing but Praise given to God including therein as I suppose the giving of Thanks and Prayer to God Yet how will it thence follow that there is nothing in it tending to the Consecration of the Elements For it appears by St. Luke and St. Paul's making use of the word gave Thanks for what the other Evangelists express by blessed that our Saviour blessed by giving Thanks And why might not he then or we now bless the Sacramental Elements in like manner and by that blessing change them into a Sacrament which is as much as to say Consecrate And it appears also that as little as the Romanists seem to esteem of Prayer in this particular Yet as there is even in their own Missal a Prayer to God that he would vouchsafe to make their Oblation a blessed One c. that it might become to them the Body and Blood of his Son So Prayer it self so far as Man is capable of blessing is no contemptible one yea such a Blessing as God himself thought no improper one for a Priest or rather (c) Num. 6.23 c. for the High Priest himself But it may be there is more in what they alledge that when this Sacrament comes to be made For still they will take that for granted the Priest doth not then use his own words but the words of Christ himself The Priest as Aquinas afterwards (d) Vbi supra tells us speaking as it were in the Person of Christ to let us understand that in the perfection of this Sacrament he doth nothing but pronounce the words of Christ But first if the Priest's using not his own words but the words of Christ be that which makes what he saith to have the force of Consecration How comes it to pass that his using the words Accipite manducate which are as certainly the words of our Saviour comes to have no part in it Especially when Hoc est enim corpus meum for so they express it in their Missal do so manifestly referr to the former and are as manifestly a Reason of what is exhorted to in them I say secondly that though it be true that the Priest doth not then use his own words but those of Christ himself Yet he doth not use them as one speaking in the Person of Christ as Aquinas would insinuate but as a bare reciter of them and a reciter of them too as spoken the Night before he suffer'd and with respect to that particular Eucharist which he gave to his Disciples Which how it should convert the Elements then before him into the Body and Blood of Christ is a thing as hard to be understood as that conversion it self Words being in reason to be construed with relation to that and that alone to which they are applied by the Author of them Neither will it avail to say that though the words considered in themselves respect only that particular Eucharist which our Saviour gave to his Disciples yet as applied by the Priest to the Elements that are before him they may affect them also For if they are any otherwise applied to them than to shew what our Saviour intended this Sacrament for and consequently what we may expect in those Elements which we set apart for it if we follow his directions in the Consecration of them They are no more the words of our Saviour Christ but of the Priest who so applies them and from which therefore no such effect can be expected This I take to be a sufficient Bar against placing the Power of Consecration in those words yea though when uttered by our Saviour they should be thought to have had that force in them How much more if even so they were rather declarations from Christ of what the Elements were already become than any way productive of a Sacramental relation in them For neither could our Saviour have truly said This is my Body unless at that instant when he spake those words it were really such And much less could that have been any reason why he should exhort them to take and eat what he then offer'd them as both the tenour of the words and the Hoc est enim corpus meum in the Roman Missal doth yet more plainly declare Because if the words Hoc est corpus meum make the change it must have been Bread and not his Body which our Saviour offer'd his Disciples before he uttered them and willed them to take and eat of But not any longer to insist upon the destruction of that sort of Consecration Let us enquire if it may be after a more legitimate one and such as shall not only be free from the like Exceptions but better answer those Sacramental relations which it is to give birth unto In order whereunto I will consider the Sacramental Elements first as being to become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood and then as also a Means to communicate
that Body and Blood to us and a Pledge to assure us thereof If we consider the Sacramental Elements as being to become a Sign of Christ's crucified Body and Blood and accordingly to represent them both to our own Minds and those of others So it cannot but be thought necessary to declare whether by the words of the Institution or others for what purposes they are design'd and what they were intended to represent For those Elements (e) Expl. of the Sacr. in Gen. Part 2. being not so clear a representation of the things intended by them as by their own force to suggest them to the Minds of those for whom they were intended Being much less so clear a representation of them as to invite those to reflect upon them who are either slow of understanding or otherwise indisposed to contemplate them such as are the generality of Men It cannot but be thought necessary even upon that account to call in the assistance of such words as may declare to those that are concern'd for what ends and purposes they were appointed Otherwise Men may either look upon the whole of that Sacrament as a purely civil Action or if the Person that administreth it and other such like Circumstances prompt them to conceive of it as a religious one yet fancy to themselves such ends and purposes as are either different from or contrary to the due intendment of it And though it be true that in that Eucharist which our Saviour celebrated with his Disciples there appears no such declaration of the ends of Christ in it till he comes to admonish them to take what he gave as his Body and Blood which supposeth them to have been made so before Yet as it is clear from thence that he thought such a declaration to be necessary to manifest his ends in it so it is no way unlikely but rather highly probable that he interlaid that Thanksgiving and Prayer wherewith he is said to have bless'd the Elements of this Sacrament with a declaration of those ends for which they were designed by him It appearing not otherwise how that Thanksgiving and Prayer could have fitted the matter in hand or stirred up the Minds of his Disciples to intend it with that devotion which the importance thereof requir'd On the other side if we consider the Sacramental Elements as being to become a Means of communicating that Body and Blood to us and which is but consequent thereto a Pledge to assure us thereof So it is as little to be doubted but that it must be brought about by Thanksgiving to God on the one hand for giving him to die whose crucified Body and Blood this Sacrament was intended to convey and by Prayer to him on the other to make those Elements become the Communion of them The former because Thanksgiving appears to have been the Means by which our Saviour blessed them and moreover the principal design of this Sacrament toward God and which therefore unless we comply with we cannot reasonably hope for the Benefits of The latter because as hath been elsewhere shewn Prayer was a part of that Thanksgiving and because it is undoubtedly the general Means appointed by Christ for the obtaining of all Benefits whatsoever Which things how momentous soever I have thus lightly passed over because I have spoken to them sufficiently elsewhere and particularly where I intreated of the Institution of this Sacrament and of that Thanksgiving by which our Saviour is affirmed to have bless'd it That which in my opinion ought more especially to be considered is the usefulness of the former Resolution to compromise those Quarrels which have for some time been raised in this Argument For whilst some contend earnestly for Consecration by Thanksgiving and Prayer as they have reason enough to do upon the account of our Saviour's being affirmed to consecrate by it and of Justin Martyr Origen and several others representing the Elements of this Sacrament as becoming what they were intended by the force of those Thanksgivings and Prayers which were made over them And whilst others again contend as earnestly that they are made such by the words of the Institution and alledge with the same heat Irenaeus his affirming (f) Adv. haeres li. 5. cap. 2. the mixt Cup and broken Bread to become the Eucharist of Christ's Body and Blood by receiving the Word of God and St. Augustine's more celebrated saying that let the Word come to the Element and it becomes a Sacrament They say things which will be easily made to agree with each other if they who alledge them will but hear one another speak For it is the word of the Institution applied as that Institution directs which consecrates the Elements into those several relations which they assume And it is the same word of Institution declar'd which contributes more particularly to the making of those Elements become a Sign of Christ's Body and Blood But then as it is appli'd by Thanksgiving and Prayer because they are a part of its Commands as well as by a declaration of the whole So that Thanksgiving and Prayer contribute to those relations which do most ennoble them even those by which the Elements become the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood and a Pledge to assure us thereof Not by any force which is in the Letters and Syllables thereof as Aquinas makes Hoc est corpus meum and Hic est Calix sanguinis mei to do but by the force of that Institution which prescribes them and by their natural aptitude to dispose God to whom alone such great Effects are to be ascrib'd to give the Elements of this Sacrament those most excellent relations and efficacy PART X. Of the right Administration of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper The Contents Entrance made with enquiring How this Sacrament ought to be administred and therein again whether that Bread wherewith it is celebrated ought to be broken and whether he who administers this Sacrament is obliged by the words of the Institution or otherwise to make an offering unto God of Christ's Body and Blood as well as make a tender of the Sacrament thereof to Men. That the Bread of the Sacrament ought to be broken as that too for the better representation of the breaking of Christ's Body asserted against the Lutherans and their Arguments against it produc'd and answered Whether he who administers this Sacrament is obliged by the words of the Institution or otherwise to make an offering to God of Christ's Body and Blood in the next place enquir'd into and after a declaration of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent in this Affair consideration had of those grounds upon which the Fathers of that Council establish it The words Do this in remembrance of me more particularly animadverted upon and shewn not to denote such an Offering whether they be consider'd as referring to the several things before spoken of and particularly to what Christ himself had done or enjoyn'd the Apostles
to do or as referring only to that Body and Blood which immediately precede them In which last Consideration of them is made appear that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may as well and more naturally signifie make That there is nothing in the present Argument to determine it to the notion of Sacrificing or if there were that it must import rather a Commemorative than Expiatory one What is alledg'd by the same Council from Christ's Melchizedekian Priesthood c. more briefly consider'd and answer'd And that Sacrifice which the Council advanceth shewn in the close to be inconsistent with it self contrary to the present state of our Lord and Saviour and more derogatory to that Sacrifice which Christ made of himself upon the Cross The whole concluded with enquiring To whom this Sacrament ought to be administred and particularly whether it either ought or may lawfully be administred to Infants Where the Arguments of Bishop Taylor for the lawfulness of Communicating Infants are produc'd and answer'd and particularly what he alledgeth from Infants being admitted to Baptism though they are no more qualified for it than they are for the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper V. THE nature of this Sacrament being thus unfolded and the Minds of Men so far forth imbued with a due apprehension of it I might with the leave of that Catechism which I have taken upon me to explain proceed to that which is the last in order even to shew What is requir'd of them who come to the Lord's Supper But because unless it be rightly administred it cannot be rightly receiv'd or at least not with that advantage which men might otherwise promise to themselves from it And because those with whom we have to do in this Affair differ as much from us about the Administration of this Sacrament as they do about the Nature of it I think it but reasonable so far forth as those differences or the nature of the thing shall lead me to it to make that also the subject of my Discourse and accordingly enquire first how it ought to be administred and then to whom it ought to be so I. Now there are two things again which will be necessary to be enquir'd into as concerning the manner of its Administration 1. Whether that Bread wherewith this Sacrament is celebrated ought to be broken 2. Whether he who administers this Sacrament is oblig'd by the words of the Institution or otherwise to make an Offering unto God of Christ's Body and Blood as well as make a tender of the Sacrament thereof to Men. 1. Whether that Bread wherewith this Sacrament is celebrated ought to be broken is a Question between us and the Lutherans who look upon the breaking of it as no otherwise necessary than as the Bread which we employ may make it to be so for the distribution of it Agreeably to which Opinion of theirs they furnish themselves with such small round Wafers as require no breaking at all and communicate both themselves and their People with them We on the other side led thereto as we suppose by the Institution of Christ have a quite different opinion of it and do not only think it necessary for the distribution of larger Loaves but so far forth at least as a divine Precept can make it such necessary also as a Sacramental Act and for the better representation of the usage of that Body of Christ which it was intended to denote Which Opinion of ours we are farther confirmed in by what we learn from the care that was used by the Jews in the breaking of that Eucharistical Bread of theirs which seems to have been the Exemplar of ours By the Scriptures and the Antients representing the whole of this Sacrament under the title of breaking of Bread and by S. Paul's intimating the Bread which they brake to be as much the Communion of Christ's Body as the Cup of Blessing which they then bless'd was the Communion of his Blood A Man would think that they who stand out against the force of these Arguments should be provided of sufficient Answers to them and not only so but of sufficient Arguments too to strengthen their own Opinion But whether either the one or the other are of that force which they are supposed to be of shall be permitted to judgment after I have taken a view of them To begin with the Answers * Vid. Geâ—â— hard Loc. Theolog. Tract de Sacr. Coen cap. 14. which they return to the former Arguments and particularly with what they answer to what is urg'd from the Institution of Christ Where they tell us in the first place that though Christ brake the Bread and may so far forth perhaps be thought to prescribe the like to those that were to administer the Sacrament after him Yet it was rather in order to the distribution of it the Bread then us'd requiring him so to do than to represent the breaking of his own Body But beside that what they affirm in the former part of it is said without any other proof than that the Bread then us'd requir'd breaking in order to the distribution of it For as to any thing they advance to the contrary Christ might break the Bread for representation as well as for distribution St. Paul hath said enough to shew that Christ brake the Bread of this Sacrament to represent the ill usage of his Body There being not any tolerable reason why St. Paul should in the very History of the Institution attribute so improper a term as that of breaking to Christ's Body but that the breaking of the Bread which was a Figure of it was intended to denote that violence which was offer'd to his crucified one That Answer not succeeding they flie unto another and tell us that the words Do this referr principally to what the Apostles were to do in the present Action amongst which the breaking of Bread being not then to be because the Bread was before broken to their hands the Command of Do this is not to be thought to extend properly and principally to the breaking of the Bread but to the taking and eating of it It is a strange thing to see how Prejudice will cast a mist before wise Mens Eyes and prompt them to say that for the defence of their Opinions in one thing which will do them as much mischief in another For the very same Argument mutatis mutandis will serve alike to overthrow that blessing of the Bread which they as well as we think themselves obliged to maintain as without which indeed it can be no part of the present Sacrament For if the words Do this are to be thought to extend no farther than to what the Apostles were to do in that Sacrament which they celebrated with our Saviour then are they of as little force to conclude the blessing of the Bread before we eat it because the Bread was at that time as much blessed to their hands as it is affirmed to have
been broken to them But beside that that Answer is as much of force against themselves in the blessing of the Bread as it can be suppos'd to be against us in the breaking of it It hath nothing in it which can conclude against the force of those words from which the breaking of the Bread is inferred For whether principally or less principally if the words Do this referr'd to somewhat else than what the Apostles were then to do then might they referr also to the breaking of the Bread and consequently the breaking of the Bread be inferred from them as well as the eating of it And indeed as he who suggests this Answer lays the necessity of blessing the Bread †Gerhard ubi supra cap. 13. Sect. 149. in Christ's commanding us to do the same thing which he did which if he did in any words of the Institution it was in the present ones and thereby shews them to extend to somewhat else beside eating So if they relate to succeeding Sacraments as well as to what our Saviour celebrated with his Disciples as is evident from his adding in remembrance of me they must consequently relate to all that which was necessary to make the Bread which he enjoyned us to eat to become the Sacrament of his Body because the Bread which he commanded his Disciples to eat was represented by him as such From whence as it will follow that somewhat else was referr'd to by the words Do this than that eating which was just before enjoin'd upon the Disciples even that Blessing or Thanksgiving which Christ is said to have premis'd to this whole Action So it is but just to believe that that breaking also was which followed immediately upon it and which appears from what hath been said to represent the breaking of that Body which the Bread they were commanded to eat was intended as a Representation of I say thirdly and lastly that how confidently soever it is affirm'd that the words Do this relate principally to the eating next before enjoin'd yet is there no reason to believe that it related more to eating than to any of the foregoing Actions otherwise than as that eating was the Complement of the whole and consequently presuppos'd all the former Actions to have been perform'd Partly because if eating in it self consider'd had been the principal thing design'd the repetition of the same word eat would have better fitted the end of the Speaker And partly because setting aside those general words Do this there would have been nothing in the Institution to express with any clearness that Blessing and distribution of the Bread which they as well as we think to be enjoin'd upon us in the administration of this Sacrament One other Answer they have if it be lawful so to call it that if we will argue from what Christ did in this particular to what we our selves are to do we must either shew that action to be otherwise necessary or find our selves oblig'd to celebrate this Holy Sacrament in the like posture and time and place wherein we read our Saviour to have done it But beside that we do not argue simply from what our Saviour did in this particular but from that Action of his being plac'd between two that are confessed to be intended by the words Do this and so in all reason to be look'd upon as alike enjoined by them We cannot but think that it hath farther evidence for the necessity of it from its so well representing that ill usage which our Saviour's Body receiv'd that St. Paul when he came to speak of that usage of it as a thing commemorated in this Sacrament expressed it by the breaking of it The Argument from the Institution being thus secur'd and vindicated from the Exceptions of its Adversaries we shall the less need to concern our selves about what the Lutherans answer to those that follow as which we our selves make use of rather to strengthen our Assertion than that we think them of themselves to be a just foundation of it Only that it may appear that even they are not without their weight I shall though very briefly reply to what is answer'd to them Now as that which the Lutherans answer upon all occasions is that that breaking which was made use of by our Saviour and his Apostles was rather for the better distribution of the Bread they us'd than for any significancy in it So when we press them with the Jews breaking their Eucharistical Bread which in all probability gave occasion to the Institution of ours they tell us that as the Bread which the Jews made use of was more easie to be broken than ours as being made not so thick as ours now is but broader and thinner and indeed rather like Cakes than Loaves so the only end of that breaking was to distribute the Bread they us'd among those that were to partake of it But as whatever is to be said concerning the usual Bread of the Jews yet if I can understand the account that is given by Cassander out of Paulus Fagius For I have not Fagius his discourse upon this Argument to consult the Bread the Jews both heretofore and now make use of in their Eucharist was cast into so thick a mass that it could not well be broken in pieces so this Ceremony of breaking was and is so religiously observ'd in the present instance that though they almost cut off from the whole that part which they are to make use of yet they leave so much of it uncut as may serve still for the breaking of it which shews that there was somewhat else in it The next thing alledg'd by us to strengthen the present Assertion is this Sacrament's being describ'd both in the Scripture and the Antients by the Name of breaking of Bread which we suppose it would hardly have been if that had not been accounted a considerable Action in it and much less if it had been accounted so indifferent a one as the Lutherans are willing to have it thought But as where they can they endeavour to turn those Expressions to another sense but with how little reason the places before quoted (a) Part 2. will shew So the burthen of their Song always is that the breaking there mention'd had no other design than the distribution of the Bread among those that were to receive it which few impartial Men will believe who find St. Paul representing the Bread which our Saviour brake as that Body which was broken for his Disciples I find nothing of moment return'd to what is before alledged by us concerning St. Paul's intimating the Bread which we break to be as much the Communion of Christ's Body as the Cup of Blessing which we bless is the Communion of his Blood And therefore I shall only add that though I do not pretend to inferr from thence that the breaking of the Bread ought to be rank'd in the same order with the blessing of the Cup Yet
I can hardly think that if St. Paul had thought it so inconsiderable a thing as the Lutherans seem to do he would have made use of no other Epithet than that of broken to denote that Bread which he intimated to be as much the Communion of Christ's Body as the Cup that is bless'd is the Commnnion of the other For to make the words which we break to signifie no other than what we give or distribute which is the common Answer to all Difficulties is without any foundation in the present place Because what St. Paul affirms of the Cup relates to that which makes it to be a Sacramental one and not to the delivery of it to those that are to partake of it But it may be their Arguments are better than their Answers and so they had need to be to give any strength to their Opinions But whosoever shall take the pains to consider them or indeed but to look over them will soon be convinced of the contrary For to say nothing at all to what they alledge concerning this Ceremony of breaking being without any divine Command because the contrary thereof hath been shewn already How absurd is it to say that it is repugnant to the nature of the New Testament to have any thing in it to represent another when not only the Waters of Baptism and their cleansing quality are a manifest Image of a better Purification but the plunging the baptized Party in them and his rising from thence was thought to be so clear a one of our being buried and rising after a spiritual manner that St. Paul describes the former by being buried with him by Baptism into death (b) Rom. 6.4 and by being planted together in the likeness (c) Rom. 6.5 of it But it may be there is more reason in that which it follows even that the breaking of the Bread cannot be thought to be a representation of that in the Body of Christ which is expresly denied of it For so they think that breaking to be where it is said (d) Joh. 19.26 that they brake not his Legs according to a Prophecy (e) Psal 34.10 that went of old concerning him But as they ought to have remembred that St. Paul notwithstanding that affirms Christ's Body to have been broken and in that very place also where he speaks of the breaking of the Sign of it which shews that he thought all breaking of Christ's Body not to be deni'd There is no necessity that that which is intended to be represented should strictly and literally answer what was design'd as a representation of it Otherwise the spiritual things of the New Testament will hardly pass as things represented by the sensible ones of the Old Testament which yet these latter being affirm'd to be Figures (f) Heb. 9.24 of the former will oblige us to believe It is enough in things that are of a very different nature that there is some general resemblance between them and such as that difference which is between them will allow Which suppos'd there may be enough in our Saviour's Body though not capable of a strict and proper breaking to answer that breaking which St. Paul attributes to it and the breaking of that Bread which was designed to represent it Our Saviour's Body having had thus much of a breaking in it that an equal violence was offer'd to it and the continuity thereof dissolv'd in several parts of it by those Nails and Spear that pierced it The same persons go on to object that if the breaking of the Bread be necessary to design the breaking of Christ's Body the pouring out of the Wine will be as necessary to mark out the shedding of his Blood Which latter being not to be pretended because of the silence there is of it in the Institution the former hath as little reason to be believ'd or asserted But as it appears from what hath been elsewhere said (g) Part 4. that there are very fair intimations of that pouring out of the Wine which is here so expresly deni'd and the significancy of the breaking of the Bread not to be deni'd upon that account So the Argument alledg'd against the necessity thereof proceeds upon the supposition of our thinking it to be necessary in it self and so that the Sacrament cannot be salv'd without it Whereas all that we pretend to affirm is its being necessary by a Divine Precept and otherwise convenient enough to mark out that violent usage of him upon the Cross which the whole Sacrament was confessedly intended for a Memorial of Both which things may be affirm'd without inferring any necessity of the pouring out of the Wine or of our Saviour's giving Command concerning it For if even the breaking of the Bread abstracting from the Command of Christ be rather convenient than necessary the pouring out of the Wine can be no more than such And if neither of them be necessary Christ may no doubt command one and not the other and what he hath therefore said concerning the breaking of the Bread of no force to conclude that there ought to be the like Command for the pouring out of the other Element It is objected yet again For what is wanting in strength men commonly endeavour to make up by the number of their forces it is objected I say that if Christ should have instituted this Sacrament to represent the breaking of his Body and the shedding of his Blood by the breaking or pouring out of those Elements that were intended to represent them he should have made choice of a more obscure Figure to come in the place of a clearer one which is not to be supposed of him There being no doubt but the killing of the Paschal Lamb was a more lively Image of what was done unto our Saviour than what is done to the Elements of this Sacrament But as it becomes not us to dispute what was most proper for God or Christ to do where they have at any time declar'd their own will and pleasure So Christ might have reason enough to preferr the Representation he here made use of though perhaps not so clear before that which he made choice of among the Jews As because that People by reason of the grossness of their Understandings stood in need of clearer Figures than we our selves do to insinuate into their Minds the things intended by them So because whilst he taught them upon the matter only by Types and Figures he teacheth us for the most part by plain Declarations and from which therefore if there be any need of it we may easily collect what is the intention of the other It is objected lastly For so low at length do their Arguments run that our Doctrine concerning the mystical signification of the breaking of the Bread savours of Popery and ministers to Socinianism though how it should do both considering the contrariety of those two Hypotheses is not so easie to apprehend But as I see not how
that Doctrine savours at all of Popery because the signification we give to the breaking of the Bread is of a quite different nature from what the Papists suggest and indeed no other than the Institution it self offers to us For we no more than the Lutherans believe that the Host ought to be broken into just three parts or for the reasons that are given by them for it so I see as little how our Doctrine ministers to Socinianism even in the point that is now before us Because though we declare the breaking of the Bread to have been intended for a representation of our Saviour's crucified Body yet we do not believe as they do that that was the sole intendment of that and other the usances of the present Sacrament but that as Christ meant we should shew forth by them what he suffered in his Body so we should also thereby be made partakers of it and of the Benefits thereof 2. But not any longer to insist upon the breaking of the Bread because as I suppose sufficiently clear'd Let us go on to enquire because a Question of far greater moment whether he who administers this Sacrament is oblig'd by the words of the Institution or otherwise to make an Offering to God of Christ's Body and Blood as well as to make a tender of the Sacrament thereof to Men The Council of Trent as is well known avowing that to be the importance of the words Do this in remembrance of me and that the Apostles were by the same words appointed Priests to offer them For my more advantageous resolution whereof I will shew 1. What they who advance this Offering declare concerning it 2. The vanity of those Grounds upon which it is built and 3. Oppose proper Arguments to it 1. That which the Council of Trent teacheth concerning this pretended Offering is that it hath for the matter of it the Body and Blood of Christ (h) Sess 22. cap. 1 2. Can. 3. or rather Christ himself under the Species of Bread and Wine That the Offering which is made of it is no simple tender of it to the Father but the offering of it up by way of a Sacrifice and accordingly he himself sacrificed or slain in it but after an unbloody manner That this Sacrifice is not only an Eucharistical or Commemorative Sacrifice but a truly propitiatory one for quick and dead and by which God is so far appeas'd as to grant Pardon and Grace to the one and a Refrigerium to the other 2. How well these things agree either with one another or with that Sacrifice which Christ made of himself upon the Cross shall then be considered when I come to oppose proper Arguments to it My present Business shall be to examine the Grounds upon which it is built and shew the vanity thereof Where again I will insist upon no other Grounds than what the same Council of Trent offers for it and which therefore those of the Roman Communion must think themselves obliged either to stand or fall by Now that which the Council of Trent principally founds it self upon in this Affair is on the one hand the conversion of the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament into the Body and Blood of Christ as without which there could be no Pretence for the offering of them up under the Species of the other And on the other hand those known words of Christ to his Apostles and their Successors Do this in remembrance of me These words as that Council tells us having been always understood and declar'd by the Catholick Church as a Command of Christ to them to offer up his Body and Blood But as enough hath been said already (i) Part 7. to shew the unsoundness of the former of these grounds and that therefore no just foundation of the offering of Christ's Body and Blood in the present Sacrament So we shall find there is as little solidity in that supposed Command of Christ to his Apostles and their Successors in the words Do this in remembrance of me For neither can those words be fairly drawn to signifie the offering up of Christ's Body and Blood neither doth it appear whatever is pretended that the Catholick Church hath had that understanding of them That the words themselves cannot be fairly drawn to signifie the offering up of Christ's Body and Blood will appear if we consider them either as referring to the several things before spoken of and particularly to what he himself had done or enjoined them to do or as referring only to that Body and Blood which immediately precede them and in which sense they are suppos'd to signifie the sacrificing or offering of them If we consider the words Do this in remembrance of me as referring to the several things before spoken of even those which Christ himself had done or enjoined them to do So there is no appearance of their being a Command to the Apostles or their Successors to offer up his Body and Blood unless there had been any precedent mention of Christ's offering them up himself or any kind of intimation of his enjoining them to do it The latter of which two as it is not to by affirm'd by those who make the words Do this in remembrance of me to be those which constituted both the Sacrifice and the offerers of it So I see as little reason for the affirming of the former how confidently soever the Church of Rome advanceth it For what mention can we expect for instance of Christ's offering up his Body under the Species of Bread when till he had spoken the words This is my Body which was not till he had done all appertaining to that Element there was no such thing under the Species of Bread for Christ to offer up because not to be till those words had pass'd upon it But it may be there is more force in the words Do this as referring to that Body and Blood which immediately precede them in which sense they are suppos'd to signifie the sacrificing or offering of them And so no doubt there is or they will be found to have little force in them But what if we should say first that there is as little appearance of their referring to the words Body and Blood as what St. Paul subjoineth to them and the very Canon of the Mass perswades For St. Paul inferring upon those words that as oft as they ate that Bread and drank that Cup they did shew forth the Lord's death till he came And again that whosoever should eat that Bread and drink that Cup of the Lord unworthily should be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord He doth not obscurely intimate that when our Saviour said with relation to each Element Do this in remembrance of me his meaning was that they should do what he had before enjoin'd them concerning each in remembrance of himself and particularly that they should eat and drink them with that design Which they of all Men
ought not to refuse who are taught by the Canon of the Mass to look upon the words Hoc est enim corpus meum and Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei for so the Roman Missal expresseth them as a Reason of what is before enjoin'd and particularly of the Disciples eating and drinking the things given to them For if those very words referr'd to what was before enjoyn'd and particularly to their eating and drinking the things given to them The words Do this in remembrance of me ought in reason to referr to the same eating and drinking and no otherwise to the Body and Blood of Christ than as that was an inducement to them to do what they did in remembrance of Him and of his Death But let us suppose however because some of the Roman Communion will have it so that the words Do this c. referr to the Body and Blood of Christ and that it must therefore be somewhat about those that this Precept of Christ must be thought to enjoin Yet how doth it appear which is the only thing that can advantage them that we are to understand thereby Sacrifice or make an Offering of them For though I grant that if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be considered with respect to Christ's Body and Blood it must have another sense than we are wont to put upon it Yet why should it not signifie make as well as sacrifice especially when that sense is both the most natural and the most obvious one For so it will yet more agree with the opinion these Men have of their converting the Bread and Wine of the Sacrament into the Body and Blood of Christ and accordingly producing that Body and Blood out of them And indeed as one would think that they who give the Priest the priviledge of making his God should be willing to understand the words in that sense because setting those aside there is nothing else from whence that Power can be colourably deduc'd So one would think too that they should secure to themselves that Power before they pretend to offer him as without which there can be no place for it But let that Notion also how natural soever even in their own opinion be laid aside with the rest if it be only to make way for that other of sacrificing or offering Yet how will it appear that this latter one ought to have place here or if it hath that it denotes such a sacrificing or offering as they advance For though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agreeably to the notion of the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth sometime signifie to sacrifice or offer for so it doth Lev. 15 15-30 and in other places according to the Septuagint Version * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yet as even there it comes to have that sense rather from the matter intreated of than from any natural signification of the word So there is nothing in the present Argument to determine it to that sense or oblige us to such an understanding of it Though if that also should be allow'd which yet there is not the least necessity of doing yet will not the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reach that Sacrifice which is intended to be superstructed upon them Because he who commands Men to sacrifice or offer in remembrance of himself doth rather enjoin a Commemorative than Expiatory one and consequently not that Sacrifice which is intended So little is there in the words themselves how favourably soever consider'd to oblige us to understand them of such an Offering as the Church of Rome advanceth And we shall find them to signifie as little though we take in the sense of the Catholick Church upon them how conformable soever the Council of Trent affirms it to be unto its own Because though the Antients did all agree upon a Sacrifice and which is more look'd upon those words as either directly or indirectly obliging to the offering of it yet as hath been elsewhere (k) Part 2. shewn they advanc'd other kind of Sacrifices than what the Church of Rome now doth and consequently cannot be suppos'd to give any countenance to it And I shall only add that though Justin Martyr (l) Dial. cum Tryph. p. 259 c. represented that Offering of fine Flour which was offer'd for those that were cleansed from the Leprosie as a Type of the Bread of the Eucharist Though he moreover appli'd the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that Bread and if any of the Fathers therefore did affirm'd Christ to command us to make or offer that Bread to God Yet he adds that he commanded us to do so in remembrance of that Passion which he suffered for those that were cleansed in their Souls And again that we might at the same time give thanks to God for his having made the World and all things in it for the sake of Man and for his having delivered us by Christ from that wickedness in which we sometime were and dissolv'd all noxious Principalities and Powers Which shews him not to have thought in the least of our being commanded to offer Christ's Body and Blood under the Species of Bread or indeed of any other Sacrifice than a Commemorative or Eucharistical one The principal Argument of the Tridentine Fathers being thus discharg'd and the Sacrifice of the Mass so far forth depriv'd of its support We shall the less need to concern our selves about those which are of an inferiour rank and in truth rather Assistants to the former Argument than any proper proofs of the Sacrifice it self For what boots it to alledge that our Saviour's Priesthood like that of Melchizedek being not to be extinguished by death we are in reason to presume that upon his departure hence he appointed his Apostles and their Successors to offer up continually that Offering which Melchizedek first and after him our Saviour offer'd For beside that there is no appearance of Melchizedek's offering up Bread and Wine and we therefore not to argue from the Bread and Wine which he brought forth that our Melchizedek was either to offer or appoint any such Sacrifice Our Melchizedek was to abide for ever as well as his Priesthood yea he was to abide in his Priesthood for ever as well as in his Person Witness not only the Psalmist's affirming that he was to be a Priest for ever but St. Paul's affirming also that (m) Heb. 7.23 24. whereas the Aaronical Priests were of necessity to pass over their Priesthood from one to another because no one of them could continue by reason of Death our Melchizedekian Priest because he was to abide for ever was invested with an unchangeable Priesthood and such as should not pass away from him For what was this but to say that he should keep his Priesthood in his own Person and should not therefore either need or be in a capacity to appoint other Priests in his room
for the former their representing Baptism as the laver (k) Tit. 3.5 of Regeneration which is a thing we must have from God (l) Joh. 3.5 and as a thing by which we must obtain forgiveness of sins (m) Act. 2.38 which is as undoubtedly (n) Expl. of the Lords Pr. forgive us c. another For the latter the same Scriptures requiring us to look upon the elements thereof as that body of Christ which was (o) Luk. 22.19 given for us and that blood which was shed for many (p) Matt. 26.28 for the forgiveness of sins For as these and the former benefits are such as manifestly come from God so they are alike manifestly represented as the consequents of the former Sacraments and a Sacrament therefore as such to be looked upon as having a relation to that which flows from God to us The only difficulty in my opinion is to shew a Sacrament to relate equally to that which passeth from us to God and imports our duty and service But besides that the Antients apprehended no such difficulty in it because giving it the title of a Sacrament in respect of that Obligation * See the prec Disc which it lays upon the Receivers of it The Scriptures have said enough concerning Baptism and the Lords Supper to confirm us in the belief of this relation of them Only because I would not too much anticipate my Discourse concerning those Sacraments and beside that may have another occasion to speak more largely to this Argument I will content my self at present with what St. Peter hath observ'd of Baptism (q) 1 Pet. 3.21 and which I have elsewhere (r) Explic. of the Prel Quest and Answers c. given a more particular account of For if as that Apostle insinuates and hath accordingly been more largely confirmed the stipulation or answer of a good conscience toward God be a considerable part of Baptism If it be so considerable a part of it as to give it much of that savingness which it hath Then must that Sacrament be thought because the stipulation of a good Conscience is of that nature to relate to something that must come from us as well as to those things which flow from God to us It is true indeed that our Church where it sets it self to define a Sacrament takes no notice of this object of it Whether it were through a simple inadvertency and from which our Church doth no where pretend it self to be free or which I rather think that it might give so much the more particular an account of that other and more considerable object of it even that inward and Spiritual Grace which it was intended to signifie and exhibit and assure For that our Church did not wholly forget this second object of a Sacrament even that duty and service of ours which it doth equally signifie and prompt us to declare is evident from its before minding the Catechumen of his Baptismal vow (ſ) Prelim. Quest and Answ of the Cat. and from the declaration it elsewhere (t) Office of Publ. Bapt. makes that they who are to be baptized must also for their parts promise the renouncing of the Devil and his works and both Faith and Piety toward God That as it shews her to have looked upon Baptism as a federals rite or ceremony so that she equally believed it to relate to our duty and service as well as to those divine benefits we receive from the Author of it Let it remain therefore for an undoubted truth and the acknowledged Doctrine of our Church that a Sacrament relates as well to what is to pass from us to God as to what is to come from God to us and that accordingly it may be so far forth defined such an outward and visible sign whereby we make a declaration of our piety toward God as Mr. Calvin (u) Instit li. 4. c. 14. §. 1. hath very well observed I may not forget to add for the farther clearing of this head that as a Sacrament relates first and chiefly to that which passeth from God to us so we are to conceive of that to which it so relates under the notion of a Grace given unto us yea of an inward and spiritual one That we ought to conceive of it under the notion of a grace given unto us is evident from those Texts which I but now made use of to shew that a Sacrament relates to that which passeth from God to us For instancing in such things as have the nature of benefits and so far forth therefore are to be looked upon as Graces or Favours instancing moreover in such benefits as are manifestly the issues of the Divine Goodness yea which the Scripture expresly affirms to be given to us by him for so it doth as to that (w) Luk. 22.19 Body of Christ which is the foundation of them all they must consequently oblige us to conceive of that to which a Sacrament relates as a Grace given unto us But neither will there be less evidence from thence if those Texts be well considered that that Grace to which a Sacrament relates is an inward and Spiritual one For as our Church means no other by an inward and Spiritual Grace than that which conduceth in an especial manner to the welfare of our inward man or Spirit as is evident from its making the Body and Blood of Christ the inward and Spiritual Grace of the Lords Supper and which it cannot be in any other sense than that it hath such an effect upon us so the Texts before alledged attribute such Graces to the Sacraments as are in that sense at least inward and Spiritual ones Witness their attributing to them the Graces of regeneration and forgiveness which are as it were the formal causes of our welfare and the grace of Christs Body and Blood which is the meritorious cause thereof and under God and by his acceptation in the place of an Efficient also I observe farther that as a Sacrament relates to such things as have the nature of divine Graces or humane duties so those graces and duties being parts of the New Covenant and receiving all their force from it a Sacrament must consequently relate to that New Covenant to which they do belong and from which they receive all their force Of which yet if there remain any doubt it will not be difficult to clear it from what the Scripture assures us concerning Baptism and the Lords Supper St. Peter (x) 1 Pet. 3.21 representing the former under the notion of a Stipulation or Contract as our Saviour the Cup of the other (y) Luk. 22.20 Matt. 26.28 as the New Covenant in his Blood for the remission of those sins for which it was shed For that that is in truth the meaning of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not as we usually render it the New Testament in it is not only evident from the word 〈◊〉
of the death of the same Mediators In fine that I render the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is never of force whilst he who so makes it lives is because those words as the former are a continuation and confirmation of the foregoing Argument and so still to be understood with reference to the same Mediator All which things I have laid together not so much out of a desire of being thought the Author of a new Interpretation from which no man is more averse where there is not some kind of necessity for it but to clear up an acknowledged and important truth and which the Text I have so long insisted upon hath helped more than any thing to obscure For as there is nothing more certain from the Scripture nor more attested to by our own Translators than that the dispensation of the Gospel ought to be looked upon under the notion of a Covenant As there is nothing in like manner of more importance to us to know and consider because it will prompt us to the doing of our part in the Covenant if we mean that God should do his so setting aside this Text of the Hebrews there is not one where this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is mentioned which will not as commodiously or more be interpreted of a Covenant than it can be thought to be of a Testament Only if some men swayed by their former prejudices or by the Latins giving the Codex of the Old and New Law the title of the Old and New Testament †Tertull. de jejun c. 11. Secundum utriusque Testamenti paraturam though they also give them the more general title of Instrumenta * Idem Apol. c. 19. Primam Instrumentis istis auctoritatem summa Antiquitas vindicat Ib. c. 21. Sed quoniam edidimus antiquissimis Judaeorum Instrumentis sectam istam esse suffultam Adv. Marc. li. 1. c. 13. Quantas autem foveas in ista vel maxime epistola ad Romanos nempe Marcion fecerit auferendo quae voluit de nostri Instrumenti integritate parebit But if some men I say swayed by the one or the other think fit to continue to the former Text and some others the notion of a Testament As I shall not contend with them about it for the reverence I my self bear to the judgment of the Antients so I shall ask as is but reason their acknowledging in like manner that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do equally import a new Covenant and particularly where mention is made of the Cup of the Lord's Supper being the blood of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in it Partly because that old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which it was opposed had the nature of a Covenant and could not unless very improperly be stiled a Testament And partly because it was not only sealed with blood but that blood also stiled the blood of (k) Exo. 24.8 the Covenant For that is enough to perswade especially when we otherwise know that the dispensation of the Gospel is undoubtedly a Covenant that our Saviour when he represented the Cup of his Last Supper as the blood of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meant the blood of the New Covenant and consequently that that Sacrament and the other have a relation to it I will conclude what I have to say concerning those things to which a Sacrament relates when I have taken notice of its relating to that body of men with whom this New Covenant is made as well as to the Covenant it self For that it doth so we have the former instances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper to assure us or rather what we learn from the Scriptures concerning them St. Paul giving us to understand that it is into that body that we are baptized (l) 1 Cor. 12.13 as in like manner that though we be many yet we become one bread and that one body (m) 1 Cor. 10.17 by partaking of the bread of the other Sacrament II. It appearing from the premises what those things are to which a Sacrament relates and the way therefore so far plained toward the discovery of the properties thereof enquire we in the next place into the nature of that relation which I have affirmed it to bear unto the other For my more advantageous discovery whereof I will resume each of those things to which it doth relate and shew what kind of relation it beareth to them Now as the first of those things is an inward and Spiritual Grace that is to say such a one as conduceth in an especial manner to the welfare of our inward man or spirit so we shall find a Sacrament as to it to have the nature of a sign or visible representation of it A thing so acknowledged by all by whom the Sacraments are acknowledged in any measure that it will hardly be worth our while to insist upon it It may suffice here to say that as a sign is so much of the Essence of a Sacrament that it is the very Genus of it and must therefore be supposed to be such as to all those things to which it relates so we shall find the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper to represent even to our eyes those inward and spiritual graces which are attributed to them For thus the water of Baptism doth by that cleansing quality which is natural to it and which as such is a representation of that spiritual Grace which purgeth (n) Heb. 9.14 the Conscience from dead works which are as it were the filth (o) 2 Cor. 7.1 and pollution of it And thus too the Elements of the Lord's Supper do as by other ways and means so by that which is done unto them The breaking of the one serving to set forth the breaking of Christs body upon the Cross as the pouring out of the other doth the shedding of his blood at those passages which were made for it by the Nails and Spear that pierced him But beside that a Sacrament hath the relation of a sign to that inward and spiritual Grace which belongeth to it it hath also the relation of such a sign as is moreover an apt instrument to convey that grace which is signified by it I instance for the proof hereof in the Scriptures attributing such effects to Baptism and the Lord's Supper as are the immediate issues of those graces which are signified by them For if it attribute such effects to them it must consequently intimate them to be the conveyers of those Graces from whence they result as which otherwise they could not be in a condition to produce Now that the Scriptures attribute such effects to the Sacraments before remembred as are the immediate issues of those graces which are signified by them will appear as to Baptism by their attributing to it a power of washing away (p) Acts 22.16 the sins of men For whether we understand thereby the
even upon that account to call in the assistance of such words as may declare to those that are concern'd for what ends and purposes it was appointed Otherwise men may either look upon the whole as a purely civil action or if the Person that administers it and other such like circumstances prompt them to conceive of it as a religious one yet fancy to themselves such ends and purposes as are either different from or contrary to the true intendment of it Agreeable hereto is the command of the Author of our respective Sacraments as is evident from what he enjoyns concerning Baptism and the Lord's Supper His own express injunction concerning the former being that his Disciples should baptize men in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost which could not be done without a rehearsal of those names at least As concerning the latter that they should do what they had seen and heard him do as oft as that Sacrament was administred and therefore also make a verbal declaration concerning it For though that be not so clear from those words of our Saviour Do this in remembrance of me I mean as they lie in St. Luke (n) Luk. 22.19 yet will it be found to be so if we take in the Comment of St. Paul (o) 1 Cor. 11 20. c. where he gives a like account of the Institution of it For representing what was then said and done as a prescription for future (p) 1 Cor. 23.25 26. Sacraments as well as for that of Christ's own immediate consecration Representing it moreover as such upon the account of what Christ then enjoyn'd concerning their doing the same things in remembrance of him he must consequently because he brings in our Saviour making a verbal declaration concerning the purport of that Sacrament and subjoyns the former injunction to it be thought to represent it as our Saviour's mind that they who consecrated that Sacrament should use the same declarations concerning it But beside a declaration of the purport of the Institution and which the Church hath generally kept so close to as to make that declaration by the very words (q) Constit Apost li. 8. c. 12. of the Institution it is no doubt alike necessary if not more toward the producing of the former relations to do those things to the Elements which either the general tenour of Christianity or the particular precepts of the Institution prompt us to the performance of For if Prayer be so generally necessary toward the procuring of any favour that it becomes such as to the obtaining of common and ordinary ones If it be so far necessary toward them as to become such even to the blessing of our ordinary repast (r) 1. Tim. 4.4.5 though that be not without a natural aptitude to nourish and sustain us How much more may we think it to be necessary as to the making of those elements which are in no disposition to it to become the conveyers of the Divine Grace to those who are to partake of them But so the perpetual practice of the Church will oblige us to believe and act as to the one and other Sacrament of our Religion For though there be not any particular injunction concerning consecrating the water of Baptism and I suppose because the necessity thereof was sufficiently known by what the Scripture hath said concerning the general necessity thereof Yet as we find Ananias admonishing St. Paul (Å¿) Act. 22.16 to wash away his sins by Baptism calling upon the name of the Lord and which no doubt because he Baptiz'd him the same Ananias went before him in As we find farther by Justin Martyr (t) Apolog. 2. that they who were to be baptiz'd were admonished to fast and pray the Brethren praying and fasting for and with them for these are sufficient proofs that some sort of Prayers did alway precede it so we find by those who have given a more particular account of the Offices of the Church that the Priest did pray particularly (u) Constit Apost lib. 7. c. 43. Dionys Areop Eccl. Hier. c. 2. that God would look down from Heaven and sanctifie that water wherein they were to be Baptized by him The case is yet more plain as to the Sacrament of the Eucharist as shall be made appear when I come to entreat purposely concerning it And therefore I shall only add that as the Institution of our respective Sacraments cannot obtain its effect without doing those things to the Elements thereof which the general tenour of Christianity obligeth us to perform so much less without the doing of those things which the particular precepts of the Institution oblige to the practice of For the force of a Sacrament depending more immediately upon the Institution of him whose the Sacrament is it must consequently as to the application of that Institution depend more upon the doing of those things which the particular precepts of the Institution oblige to the practice of than upon those which the more general and therefore remoter precepts of Christianity oblige unto The consequence whereof as to the Eucharist will be among other things a necessity of giving God thanks for those gracious boons which that Sacrament was intended both to convey and assure The result of the premises is this A Sacrament as such is a relative thing it is so in an especial manner as to the Divine Grace as which it signifies and conveyes and assures But as those relations thereof are founded rather in the institution of the Author of it than in the vertue of those elements in which they are subjected so in that again not so much as delivered by our Saviour as applied to the elements by a declaration of the purport of it and by such other Acts as the general tenour of Christianity or the particular precepts of the Institution oblige those who are the dispensers of a Sacrament to do to the elements thereof I do not at all found the relations of a Sacrament in such Act or Acts as are requir'd of those that partake of it Yea though without such Act or Acts they cannot partake of the Graces of it Partly because a Sacrament being an institution of Christ it must rather depend upon his appointment and the facts of those who act in his behalf than upon the disposition of such as are to partake of it And partly because a Sacrament though not conveying or assuring the Divine Grace to any but the worthy Receivers of it yet is as really and truly a Sacrament to those who are otherwise dispos'd as it is to the most worthy ones As is evident among other things from St. Paul's affirming the unworthy receiver of the Eucharist to be guilty of the Body (w) 1 Cor. 11.27 and Blood of Christ and again to eat and drink Damnation to himself for not discerning (x) 1 Cor. 11.29 the Lord's Body For how come they to be guilty of
the Body and Blood of Christ by the meer reception of the elements if those elements be not even to them a Sacrament of his Body and Blood Or how faulty for not discerning in them the Lord's Body and Blood if those elements which they receive have not the relation of a Sacrament to them Neither will it avail to say that such persons may become guilty of Christ's Body and Blood because receiving not as they ought those elements which are the signs of them For as it will follow from thence that those elements which they receive are so far at least a Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood I mean as that is a sign of them so there is reason enough to believe from the way the Apostle takes to prove the foremention'd charge that those elements were as really a Sacrament to them in all other respects as they were in the notion of a sign Because he founds that charge of his upon Christ's making those elements the Sacrament of his Body and Blood (y) 1 Cor. 11.27 and which therefore he must suppose them to be as much to them as they are to any person whatsoever That which I conceive hath occasion'd men to be otherwise opinionated was their conceiving of a Sacrament not as a means fitted by Christ to convey or assure the Divine Grace and which accordingly where it is duly receiv'd actually doth so but as a thing which is not only in a disposition to it but where it is really a Sacrament infallibly doth so to all that partake of it Which conceit it may be they were the more easily betray'd into by the Scriptures representing it rather as a thing which actually sanctifies and saves than as a thing which is only fitted for it But as there might be ground enough for such expressions as those whether upon the account of the persons whom it is so said to sanctifie and save or upon the account of there being enough in a Sacrament to do it where the parties that partake of it are duly qualified for it so the Scripture hath sometimes so qualified its own assertions by making the due disposition of the party receiving it to be necessary to procure the other that we cannot but look upon a Sacrament rather as a thing fitted to produce such effects than as actually and infallibly producing them And indeed as there is therefore but reason to conceive so of a Sacrament even as a means fitted by God and Christ to produce those effects which are attributed to it so by thus stating it a way is opened to distinguish between the Efficacy of a Sacrament and of the Receiver's faith and accordingly to assign each its proper interest in the procuring of those Graces which are attributed to it For by this means we shall make a Sacrament with that blessing of God which attends it to be the sole conferrer and assurer of those Graces which is but agreeable to it as an instrument in the hand of God And the faith of the party receiving only the receiver and applier of the other which is as agreeable to that hand of man For as if a Sacrament be a means fitted by God for the forementioned purposes the conferring and assuring of those Graces will belong to it and that blessing of God which doth accompany it so nothing therefore will remain to the faith of the party receiving but to receive and apply what the other doth so conferr and assure I say secondly that as by this means a due distinction will be made between the efficacy of a Sacrament and that of the receiver's faith so a way will be opened in like manner without detracting in the least from the efficacy of a Sacrament to return an answer to what is advanc'd on the one hand for the opus operatum of all Sacraments and on the other for making the elements of the Eucharist to be that very Body and Blood of Christ which it was intended to convey For whereas it is pretended (z) Vid. Chemnit Exam. Conc. Trid. Part. 2. in Can. 7 8. de Sacram. in the behalf of the former and accordingly alledged as a proof of it that the efficacy of a Sacrament depends upon the institution of God and not upon the dignity of him that administers it or the faith of the receiver I answer that that is indeed true and agreeable enough to our stating the nature of a Sacrament but of no force at all to shew that opus operatum whereof they speak For as if a Sacrament be a means fitted by Christ for the conferring of his Graces the conferring of those Graces will belong wholly to it and that blessing of God which goes along with it so if it be a means rather fitted for the conferring of them than that which actually and infallibly doth any otherwise than as it is receiv'd and appli'd as Christianity admonisheth there will be a like necessity of the opus operantis even of that faith and repentance which are requir'd in order to the reception of them And it may not unfitly be illustrated by the natural quality of those elements which are by Christ made use of for the Sacrament of his own Body and Blood For as of what force soever those elements may be either to sustain or refresh us yet they cannot be expected to do either unless they be receiv'd and well digested so how well fitted soever by the Institution of God the same elements may be to conferr to higher purposes yet there is as little reason to expect they should unless they be applied by us as he who so instituted them hath admonish'd In like manner whereas it is pretended * Esth Com. in locum from unworthy receivers of the Eucharist being guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ that therefore those elements which they do so receive are really that Body and Blood and accordingly are actually partook of That also is taken away by what we have before said concerning the Eucharists being a means fitted by Christ for the conveying of them Because if it be only such there will be place for that guilt yea though that Body and Blood of Christ be not in it nor receiv'd by those who are partakers of the other In as much as he offers a sufficient affront to them who receives those elements unworthily which were by God and Christ intended and fitted for the conveying of them I may not omit to add if it were only for that hint which the former observation affords us that we shall by thus stating the nature of a Sacrament imprint also in the minds of men a just apprehension of that guilt which ariseth from an unworthy reception of it For as if it be fitted by Christ to convey or assure the Divine Grace it must make those that partake unworthily thereof guilty of an equal affront to that Grace which it is so fitted to convey or assure so if it be not so fitted
Therefore pass we both from the one and the other to that Heavenly thing to which it relates the manner of its relation to it and the foundation of that relation Now as the first of these hath been before defin'd to be an inward and Spiritual Grace as that again declar'd to be such a Grace or favour of God as conduceth in an especial manner to the welfare of our inward Man or Spirit so I must now add for the farther Explication of it that it is moreover such a Grace as conduceth immediately to the welfare of it Whether as purifying the soul from the filth of sin and introducing the contrary affections or as delivering it from that guilt which the filth of sin had brought upon it A notion which stands confirm'd to us not only by the Doctrine of our own Catechism but by the account the Scripture gives us both of Baptism and the Eucharist and the confesons of the Romanists themselves Witness for the first its declaring the inward and Spiritual Grace of Baptism to be a death unto sin and a new birth unto Righteousness as the inward grace of the Eucharist to be the Body and Blood of Christ and by which as it afterward follows our Souls are strengthened and refreshed as our bodies are by the outward elements thereof Witness for the second its representing Baptism as a thing which sanctifies (b) Eph. 5.26 and saves (c) 1 Pet. 3.21 and both that (d) Act. 2.38 and the Eucharist (e) Matt. 26.28 as things which tend to the remission of Sins Witness for the third their great Schoolman Aquinas (f) Sum. 3. Part. quaest 60. Art 2. representing a Sacrament as a sign of such a Sacred thing as procures the sanctification of us Which is the rather to be noted because of the use it will hereafter be of toward the determining the Number of those things which are to be accounted of as Sacraments of our Religion Concerning the relation a Sacrament bears to the object of it and particularly to that Grace to which it especially referrs I have nothing to add and shall not therefore bring it again under consideration I shall only observe from what hath been before said concerning it that it is an instrument of Grace as well as a pledge of it that it is a moral instrument thereof and not a physical one that it is such a moral instrument thereof as is rather apt to convey or produce it than that which actually and infallibly doth The actual conveying of that Grace depending upon the due disposition of the party receiving it and who as St. Paul speaks if he be not rightly qualified for it will rather reap Damnation by it than either the Divine Graces or the rewards of them Which things I have this second time made mention of not because they were not before sufficiently clear'd but because they lay dispersedly in my former account of this relation and so would have been less useful toward the forming a distinct conception of it That which will especially require our second thoughts is the foundation of that and other the relations of a Sacrament The which as I have affirm'd in the general to be the Institution of Christ so the farther consideration of that Institution will both lead us to a more distinct knowledge of the nature of a Sacrament and inform us concerning the necessity and efficacy thereof Now as there are two things which that Institution doth manifestly import that is to say a Command and a Promise so that Command again respects the elements of a Sacrament either as being to put on that relation or as actually invested with it In the former of these regards it commands the setting them apart for that purpose but more especially because that is the principal design of a Sacrament for their becoming a means of conveying the Divine Graces to us Which as was before observ'd it either prescribes particular rules for or remits men for them to the general precepts of Christianity so far as they are applicable thereto And I shall only add because those rules were before declar'd that to make the elements put on the relation of a Sacrament there is a necessity of applying that part of the Institution to them by the execution of those Commands which it enjoyns Because the setting them apart for that purpose is by the Institution it self put into the hands of men But of what men and how qualified I have not as yet declar'd and shall therefore now set my self to enquire And here in the first place it is easie to see by what is deliver'd in the general concerning the power of remitting sins or in particular concerning the power of Baptism that the Separation or Consecration of the elements is the proper work of the Ministers of the Gospel and ought accordingly to be left to them to perform Because as both the one and the other were by Christ committed to his Apostles so none can therefore pretend to the power of either but those who deriv'd it from them which none but the Ministers of the Gospel have It is no less easie to see secondly that as the Separation or Consecration of the elements is the proper work of the Ministers of the Gospel even by the Institution of Christ so it cannot therefore ordinarily at least be attempted without sin by others because a deviation from his Institution And thus far all who acknowledge a Ministerial Function are at an accord in this particular and the farther prosecution thereof no way necessary to be intended I say therefore thirdly that as the Separation or Consecration of the elements cannot ordinarily at least be attempted without sin by other than the Ministers of the Gospel so there is reason enough to believe even from thence that those elements cannot ordinarily have the relation of a Sacrament by any others Consecration than theirs For beside that the Promise of Christ is not to be suppos'd to extend any farther than those Commands to which it is annexed are observ'd Neither can we think he will vouchsafe his benediction to that Action which without any necessity at all varies from his own Institution This being to encourage men to go against his own Institution which no wise Institutor can be suppos'd to give way to All therefore that can be suppos'd to admit of a dispute in this affair is whether in extraordinary Cases and where a lawful Minister cannot be had other Persons may take upon them to Consecrate and Administer it And whether if they do so what they do is so far valid as to make that which they pretend to Consecrate and Administer to have the relation of a Sacrament But as it would be consider'd whether it were not equally advisable for such Persons to let alone altogether the Consecration and Administration thereof Because Christ may as well supply to men the want of the Sacraments themselves as the defects of those who
Sacrament and so far therefore to be in a capacity to profit those to whom they are dispens'd so it is Christ and not the Minister who must dispense the Graces of the Sacrament and the effect of that Sacrament therefore depend not upon the Minister's intention and purpose but upon the intention and purpose of Christ whose Instrument and Minister he is As will appear yet more clearly when I come to consider the Promises of the Institution the second thing whereof I affirmed it to consist Only as that Command of it which I am now entreating of doth as well respect those for whose sanctification the Sacraments were intended as those who are the Consecraters and Dispensers of them so I must therefore admonish first of all that as that part of the Institution of Christ enjoyns upon his Ministers the dispensation of the Sacraments so it must consequently enjoyn the receipt or use of them by all that are capable thereof as without which the former injunction would be vain I say secondly that as it enjoyns upon all that are capable thereof the receipt or use of the Sacraments so it enjoyns their receipt or use of them under the relation of Sacraments and particularly because that is the principal relation of a Sacrament as a means appointed by Christ for the conveying of the Divine Graces Which is so true as to those Sacraments which are the only clear and undoubted ones and by which if there be any such the other are to be judg'd that men are expresly call'd upon to be Baptiz'd (k) Act. 2.38 for the remission of sins and as expresly admonish'd by our Saviour to take the elements of the Eucharist (l) Matt. 26.26 c. Luk. 22.19 as that Body which was given for them and as that Blood which was shed for them and others for the same remission of sins From whence as it will follow that those Sacraments are of necessary use as which both the one and the other injunction oblige us to believe so they are also so necessary by vertue of the former that they cannot be neglected without sin and by the latter if not the former that men cannot hope for the graces of them where those Sacraments are in like manner neglected For beside that every neglect of a Command is as such a sin against the imposer of it and must consequently not only despoil us of his favour but expose us also to his Wrath and Vengeance Beside that that neglect must be yet more sinful and dangerous which is a neglect of such a Command as is enjoyn'd for the Subjects profit He who commands this or that particular for such or such an end must thereby be presum'd to declare that he will not give it in any other way than that which is prescribed by him Because otherwise a gap would be open to the Violation of his Authority which every wise Lawgiver must be suppos'd to provide against Neither will it avail to say that there are other means beside Sacraments for the attaining of the Divine Graces and such as God hath promis'd to reward with the bestowing of them Of which nature are our attendance to the word and Prayer For as it doth not appear that these are any where represented as sufficient of themselves for that purpose and therefore the Divine Graces not to be expected by them alone so they can however be no farther represented as such than as made use of by men out of a due regard to his Authority and wisdom by whom they are imposed on them Which cannot be suppos'd to be there where any one prescribed mean is neglected because the same Authority and Wisdom will lead to the observation of it As little will it avail to say that the Divine Graces have been sometime bestow'd without them and the Sacraments therefore not to be accounted as necessary to the attaining of them For as the question is not now Whether Sacraments are so necessary that the graces thereof can in no case be hop'd for without them but whether they can be hoped for where the Sacraments are neglected so that they are so far necessary will need no other proof than the enjoyning of Baptism to those who may seem if any to have attain'd the graces thereof without it For so we find St. Peter to have done as to Cornelius (m) Act. 10.48 and his company Yea though Cornelius had before his Preaching receiv'd a Divine approbation of his Prayers and Alms and after that that gift of the Holy Ghost for the procuring whereof we find Baptism to have been especially (n) Act. 2.38 ordain'd For well may we look upon that Sacrament as so far necessary to obtain the Divine Graces the use whereof was commanded even to those men who had in a great measure before attain'd them The only thing that seems to me to admit of any doubt is whether Sacraments be so far necessary that the Divine Graces cannot be had without them or at least cannot with any assurance be expected by us But as the single example of the Thief upon the Cross to say nothing now of that of Cornelius may suffice to perswade that no Sacrament is so necessary but that the Graces thereof may be had without it As the benignity of the Divine nature and those Graces God hath sometime given even to unbaptized persons may serve in like manner to perswade men that if that or any other Sacrament be wanting without their fault it shall be otherwise supplied to them So I cannot forbear to say that such persons have not the same Assurance with that which Baptized persons have Partly because they have no promise to bottom their assurance on and partly because God who may annex what conditions he pleaseth to his own favours hath made those Sacraments whereof we speak the standing means of obtaining them I will conclude what I have to say concerning that part of the Institution which enjoyns the receipt or use of the Sacraments when I have admonished in the third place that it requires our coming to it with certain previous qualifications in order to our receiving the benefit thereof Which is so notorious as to Baptism and the Lord's Supper and will hereafter be so largely insisted on that I shall content my self with the bare mention of it All that I at present aim at is to give a general account of what it enjoyns and which having now in some measure done I shall proceed to consider of what it promiseth which is the second thing whereof I affirmed the Institution of a Sacrament to consist For the clearing whereof we are first to know that though those Promises whereof we speak are not always so express as its Commands must be acknowledg'd to have been Yet will it not be difficult for us to evince the being of such Promises nor after that to shew what things it makes a promise of For supposing as we now may because I have
For even the elements of our Eucharist though appointed by Christ as the Sacrament of his Body and Blood yet are not always us'd as such But only when they are by God's Priests set apart for that purpose and his spiritual Benediction and Grace invoked on them I will conclude what I have to say concerning the Being of the former Sacraments when I have added thereto their being ordained by God and Christ for the gracious purposes before remembred Of the former whereof as we cannot reasonably doubt because nothing less than a Divine Institution could make them the conveyers of Christ's Graces so as little of the latter if we consider what hath been elsewhere (e) Expl. of the Creed in the words Our Lord. said concerning Christ's governing even then and the Apostles exhorting the Corinthians immediately after (f) 1 Cor. 10.9 not to tempt Christ as the Israelites did and were destroy'd by Serpents for it For as it is not to be imagin'd how the Israelites could tempt Christ unless they had been even then under his conduct So if Christ had the conduct of them there is as little doubt of his being the Institutor of their Sacraments because that was a considerable part of it II. There being therefore no doubt of the Being of Sacraments among the Jews which was the first thing we proposed to consider Enquire we in the next place what those their Sacraments were and which we shall find to be either Extraordinary or Ordinary Extraordinary those which were just before recited even their being baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea and their partaking of Manna and of the Water of the Rock Manna being no doubt the spiritual meat St. Paul speaks of both because their then only repast and the bread (g) Exod. 16.4 that came down from Heaven As the water of the Rock their spiritual Drink and so yet more plainly declared by him And I have the rather given to them the name of Extraordinary Sacraments because as they had them only during their passage through the Wilderness so they had them too when their ordinary Sacraments ceased which is the proper season for extraordinary ones As will appear if we can shew what I shall by and by endeavour that Circumcision and the Passover were their ordinary ones It being certain from the Book of Joshua (h) Josh 5.5 that from the time of the Israelites going out of Aegypt till their coming to Gilgal none of the Israelites were circumcised and as certain too from the same place (i) Josh 5.10 that they had not till then any Passover That as it is the first time wherein the observation of it is mention'd after their coming out of Aegypt so being the first time also wherein they were in a capacity to observe it because not till then furnished or at least not ordinarily with that earthly Bread wherewith their Passover was required to be observ'd From those their Extraordinary Sacraments therefore pass we to their Ordinary ones and which as I have already intimated to be Circumcision and the Passover so I must now manifest to be so but it must be by other Arguments than are commonly alledged for it For as for what is alledged from St. Paul's representing the Circumcision of Abraham (k) Tom. 4.11 as a Seal of that righteousness which he had being yet uncircumcised it seems to me to make nothing at all for it Because as was before (l) Supra Part II. shewn rather intended to denote God's approbation of his particular Righteousness than any declaration of the nature of the thing it self But as therefore I cannot see what can be argued from thence toward proving Circumcision to have been a Sacrament So I shall chuse rather to evince it from the Institution of it as where if any where the design thereof is most clearly set down Now the first thing observable from thence is that Circumcision was a Sign as our Sacraments are and so far therefore of the nature of them For this saith God shall be a sign or token (m) Gen. 17.10 of the Covenant between me and you That is to say as was before (n) Gen. 17.7 express'd between God on the one hand and Abraham and his Seed on the other It is alike observable secondly that as Circumcision was a sign yea a sign of that Covenant which God then propos'd between himself and the foremention'd persons So it was such a sign too as was also of the Essence of it and till the passing whereof it was not to be look'd upon as struck Which I gather not only from its being stil'd a Covenant (o) Gen. 17.10 as well as a sign of it yea more often a Covenant than the other but from God's affirming it to be that Covenant which ought to be kept (p) Ibid. between him and them and accordingly representing the neglecters of it as those which had broken * Gen. 17.14 his Covenant From whence as it will follow that it had a more intimate relation to the Covenant than that of a bare sign or token So it must be either that which was to strike the Covenant between them and so make it actually such as to those persons that receiv'd it or one of those things which were to be observ'd after the Covenant was struck between them and for which it was enter'd into But as it appears from those words of God which usher in the mention of this Covenant that the thing so agreed upon was a matter of much more weight even their walking before God and being perfect So we are therefore in reason to resolve Circumcision to be that which was to strike the Covenant between God and them and make it actually such as to those persons that receiv'd it From whence as it will follow farther because striking the Covenant between God and them that it ensur'd to those that receiv'd it the future Blessings of it and so might not unreasonably be represented as a Seal or a Pledge of them So that it put them into actual possession of such Blessings as were presently to be bestow'd if there were really any such and accordingly was no less a means of conveying them Which will consequently leave nothing more to enqui e than whether that Covenant assur'd the same Blessings with the Christian and whether any of those Blessings were to be immediately bestow'd by vertue of it For if that Covenant assur'd the same Blessings with the Christian then had the sign thereof relation to the same inward Graces with ours and so far forth therefore agreed with them And if any of those Blessings were to be immediately bestow'd it was also a conveyer of them and so yet more perfectly the same Now that that Covenant of which Circumcision was a sign assur'd the same Blessings with the Christian seems to me to be sufficiently evident from it's being affirmed (q) Gen. 17.7 to import that God
be thought to have had any interest in it and much less to have been especially intended as the Sacrament thereof And indeed as there are no footsteps in that Antiquity which is truly primitive of any such Unction of sick persons in order to their spiritual welfare As there is mention moreover in it of another kind of treatment and particularly of the Elders of the Church giving unto those Dionys Alex. apud Euseb Eccl. Hist li. 6. c. 44. item Conc. Nic. can 13. that were under penance the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood as their last and necessary Viaticum So I see not what necessity there is of any such Sacrament as Extreme Vnction to confer upon sick persons the remission of sins or other such like graces as they may stand in need of There being place even in them for the Absolution of the Church and the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood In fine so far is that Vnction of which St. James speaks from being any standing Sacrament of our Religion that it may seem to have been only an Appendage of that extraordinary gift of healing (g) 1 Cor. 12.9 which was sometime deposited in the Church and which therefore was to cease when that and other such like operations vanished As appears in part from its being joyned in St. Mark (h) Mark 6.13 with the casting out of Devils but more from our Saviours ranking the laying on of hands upon the sick which was but another way of administring it with (i) Mark 16.17 18. the same casting out of Devils speaking new tongues and the taking up of Serpents For if these be to be look'd upon as extraordinary gifts there is equal reason to believe the anointing or laying on of hands upon the sick to have been of the same order Sure I am Tertullian (k) Tert. ad Scapnlam cap. 4. doth not only rank the gift of healing even in his time with the casting out of Devils but makes mention of one Proculus a Christian administring this supposed Sacrament to Severus the Emperor yea curing him by the Oyl of it From Extreme Vnction therefore pass we to that which they call the Sacrament of Orders and which is not only affirm'd by the Trent Council to be a true (l) Sess 13. Can. 3. and proper Sacrament but as certainly to confer (m) Ib. cap. 3. grace as the most undoubted Sacraments do It is not my purpose nor was it ever the purpose of the Church of England to detract in the least from the force of that which they entitle the Sacrament of Orders But that it hath not the nature of a true and proper Sacrament will appear in the first place from it s not having by the Institution of Christ any external sign to which the grace thereof may be supposed to be annexed For if it had it must have been the external sign or ceremony of breathing on the persons to be ordain'd This being the only one which our Saviour (n) Joh. 20.22 made use of when he conferr'd the power of Order upon his Apostles But so far were the Apostles or the succeeding Church from making use of that that we find them on the contrary to have made use of Imposition of Hands yea to have entitled the grace of Orders (o) 1 Tim. 4.14 2 Tim. 1.6 in a more especial manner to it Whether it were that they took their pattern therein from the known usage of the Jews and which we find our Saviour himself to have followed in other instances or which I rather think that they were directed to it by that spirit of God which guided them in all their actions and to whose guidance and instruction our Saviour had left them after his being taken from them Sure I am there are no footsteps of that external sign in the first Institution of it as there was in the Institution of Baptism and the Lord's Supper of their proper ones nor any appearance from Scripture of any after command of Christ concerning it But because the external sign of Ordination though none of our Saviours Institution yet is confessed by our selves to have had a legitimate one Therefore enquire we in the second place whether after the manner of other Sacraments it be a means of Grace or as the Romanists love to speak have the power of conferring it A thing which seems to them sufficiently evident not only from that form of words (p) Joh. 20.22 wherewith by the prescript of Christ it hath been always attended even receive ye the Holy Ghost but from St. Paul's willing Timothy in one place (q) 1 Tim. 4.14 not to neglect that gift or grace which was given with it and in another (r) 2 Tim. 1.6 to stir up that gift or Grace of God which was in him by the laying on of his hands And thus much I willingly yield to the force of the foremention'd Texts that the Holy Ghost ever was and still is conferr'd upon those men who are rightly ordain'd by the Governours of the Church But in what measure and to what purposes is the thing in question between us and particularly whether it is conferr'd as to its sanctifying and saving Graces which I have shewn elsewhere (Å¿) Supra Part 3. to be the proper graces of a Sacrament Now what is there in any or all the foremention'd Texts to evince that which they call the Sacrament of Orders to confer such graces upon the person Ordain'd If we enquire as to the first of them (t) Joh. 20.22 even that Text which makes Orders to exhibit the Holy Ghost the utmost that can be inferr'd from thence is such an exhibition of it as may be requisite for the party ordain'd to remit or retain sins as for which (u) Joh. 20.23 and which alone it is professed to be bestow'd But so sure the person ordain'd may be qualifi'd to do without the sanctifying graces of God's Spirit even in the opinion of the Tridentine Fathers themselves It being their opinion (w) Sess 7. can 12. as well as ours (x) Art of Rel. 26. that the personal qualifications of the Minister do neither add to nor detract from the force of the Sacraments they dispense But as therefore no such sanctifying graces can be suppos'd to be design'd though we make the Text to import such an exhibition of the Holy Ghost as is requisite for the remitting or retaining of sins so much less if nothing more were meant by Receive ye the Holy Ghost than receive ye Authority from him so to do Which that there was not is at least probable from his referring them to another time (y) Act. 1.4 c. for the other powers of the Holy Ghost yea bidding them not to expect them till after his ascension (z) Joh. 16.7 into Heaven For that supposeth them to have been as yet without those powers of the Holy Ghost and consequently that Christ meant
entered into Marriage and still do in the Eastern parts But beside that general and external cognation which is between Sacraments and Sacramentals for so I shall for the future entitle those things which are not strict and proper ones there is also as to some of the latter a more particular and intimate cognation but especially as to those which are before remembred and are by the Papists advanc'd into true and proper Sacraments For setting aside that which they call the Sacrament of Marriage and which hath even among them rather the name than nature of one There is none of the other four which tend not to the conferring of some Divine Grace or Benefit as well as to the signification of it For thus Confirmation tends to procure a farther addition of God's sanctifying Graces and so to strengthen and perfect the person that ofers himself unto it And thus the Oyl of Vnction as us'd of Old toward the procuring of the Grace of health and the removal of the sick persons guilt so far as was necessary for the procuring of the other Thus Absolution tends to the procuring of the forgiveness of the Penitent and Ordination for the person ordain'd of a spiritual and ghostly Authority if not also of such spiritual gifts as are necessary for the exercise thereof By which means as they approach yet nearer to the nature of true and proper Sacraments so it is the less to be wonder'd at that they should obtain the name of Sacraments yea have the reputation of such in a more eminent manner than other Sacramentals had Especially if we consider thirdly that those five supposed Sacraments are upon the matter the only noted Acts that are administred by the Church or at least that are attended with such Rites and Ceremonies For so it is yet less difficult to believe that they might not only come by degrees to be ranked with Baptism and the Lord's Supper but together with them to be accounted if not the only yet at least the primary ones Which Peter Lombard (o) Sentent li. 4. Distinct 2. taking notice of made the Number of Christian Sacraments to be neither more nor less than seven and the Church of Rome sway'd by him did afterwards Authoritatively confirm This I take to have been the true Original of that number to which the Sacraments are now advanc'd and not either any cogent arguments for the being of so many or indeed any firm belief even in that Church it self that they ought all to be look'd upon as true and proper ones And I am yet more confirm'd in that belief by the silence there was (p) Consult Cassandri ad Art 13. before Peter Lombard of any certain and determinate number and by the Authority of two of the greatest Fathers of the Latin Church St. Ambrose in his tract de Sacramentis and in another de iis qui mysteriis initiantur mentioning only Baptism and the Lord's Supper and St. Augustine not only resolving (q) Epist 118. ad Januar. the Sacraments to be numero paucissima and mentioning none but those but affirming elsewhere (r) De Doctr. Christ li. 3. cap. 9. that our Lord and the Apostolical discipline had delivered some few such as is the Sacrament of Baptism and the celebration of Christ's Body and Blood For that is enough to shew that though the Fathers might sometime mention the other Institutions under the notion of Sacraments yet they look'd upon Baptism and the Lord's Supper as the only true and proper ones or at least were not over confident of the being so of the other If the Church of Rome hath since arriv'd at a greater confidence it will concern her rather than us to give an account of it But however not so far concern us as to remove us from an opinion which seems to us to be built upon solid and substantial grounds For either she hath arriv'd at that confidence by the means before declar'd and then her Authority will be very incompetent Or she hath arriv'd at it by some other means which we are not acquainted with and which therefore we cannot be suppos'd to be influenced by till she shall be pleased to declare them I have insisted thus long upon the Number of the Christian Sacraments not because I was obliged to it by my more immediate task for our Catechism contents it self to declare that there are two only as generally necessary to Salvation but because our Church affirms elsewhere (Å¿) Art of Rel. 25. and Homily of Com. Pr. and Sacram. that there are but two strict and proper ones and because the joyning of others with them in the same rank and order of Sacraments may help in time to bring them into less repute It being natural for men where there are several means tending to the same end either to adhere to some of them to the utter rejecting of the other or to use those others with less preparation and respect And whether this be not the case of the Eucharist where that which they call the Sacrament of Penance is so much in vogue may be judg'd of by the little care they take to fit themselves for the one where they have obtain'd as they easily may the absolution of the other And I shall only add that if our Church did not distinguish in the present Catechism between proper and improper Sacraments it was not as I conceive because she had departed from her own Articles and Homilies but because being to instruct those who were no proper Auditors of higher matters she contented her self to let them know what was sufficient for their purpose that there were but two that were generally necessary to Salvation even Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. Now that there are no more than these that are generally necessary to Salvation which is all that remains for me to demonstrate will appear if we reflect upon those which have been added to them by the Papists and ranked in the same order with them For who can think Marriage to be such who believe as the Papists do that it is unlawful to the whole Order of Priesthood yea who know that there are not a few who live not long enough to desire or need it or are otherwise sufficiently fortified by God against any necessity of espousing it Who can believe Orders to be such when there ever was and ever will be a greater number of those who are to be instructed than there was or ever will be of those who are to instruct them In fine who can believe the Vnction of the sick to be such when it appears by the former discourse to have had no other design than the recovery of them from their infirmities For well may that be look'd upon as not generally necessary to Salvation which appears not to have been intended to minister at all unto it If therefore there be any of the five of that necessity it must be Confirmation and Absolution but
them of those inward and spiritual Graces which those sacred Offices were intended to procure or convey Which how great a commendation it is of our Vnion to that Body and consequently of that Baptism by which it was made will need no other proof than the Scripture's assuring us that Christ is the Saviour (h) Eph. 5.23 of that Body and the promises it makes to those Prayers (i) Matt. 18.19 20. that are made by it and to that Eucharist (k) Matt. 26.26 c. which is administred in it The purport of those promises being no other than the granting what is asked by it and particularly all those benefits which Christ's Body and Blood were intended for the procuring of And if these be as no doubt they are the consequences of our union to the Church by Baptism yea so far as I have elsewhere (l) Expl. the Creed Art of The forgiveness sins shewn that they are not ordinarily to be attained out of it That very Union may not improperly be stil'd one of its inward and spiritual Graces because leading to those that are most strictly such and indeed the only ordinary means of obtaining them PART VIII Of the Profession that is made by the Baptized person The Contents The things signified by Baptism on the part of the baptized brought under consideration and shewn from several former discourses which are also pointed to to be an Abrenunciation of sin a present belief of the Doctrine of Christianity and particularly of the Trinity and a resolution for the time to come to continue in that belief and act agreeably to its Laws Our resolution of acting agreeably to the Laws of Christianity more particularly consider'd and the Profession thereof shewn by several Arguments to be the intendment of the Christian Baptism What the measure of that conformity is which we profess to pay to the Laws of Christianity and what are the consequences of the Violation of that Profession HAving thus consider'd the things signified by Baptism on the part of God and Christ best known by the name of its inward and spiritual Graces It remains that I give the like account of the things signified by it on the part of the baptiz'd or the things the baptized person maketh Profession of by it Which as was before observ'd are an Abrenunciation of sin a present belief of the Doctrine of Christianity and a resolution for the time to come to continue in that belief and act agreeably to its Laws That something is signified by Baptism on the part of the baptized as well as on the part of God and Christ is evident from what was before said * Of the Sacrament in general Part 2. concerning the nature of a Sacrament in the general and Baptism's †Ibid. relating as well to something to be perform'd by the baptiz'd as to those divine Graces or priviledges which we expect from the other That the things before mentioned are the things thus signified by it hath also been elsewhere * Expl. of the Apostles Creed declar'd and so that it would not be difficult for a diligent Reader to satisfie himself from thence But because what I have said concerning them lies dispersedly in my former Discourses and would therefore require more pains than I ought to impose upon my Reader to find it out and apply it to the present Argument I will here though very briefly consider them anew and if not which would be too tedious repeat all that I have said concerning them yet point him as I go to the particular places from whence they may be fetch'd That Abrenunciation of sin is one of the things signified by Baptism is not only evident from the manner of administring it in the Primitive times and which together with the form of their Abrenunciation and our own are set down in my account of the Preliminary questions and answers of the Catechism but also from the general tenour of that Religion which Baptism is an initiation into That requiring the renouncing of all sin and wickedness and therefore supposing the baptized person to do so when he takes that Religion upon him For which cause as an express Abrenunciation was heretofore requir'd and continues so to be to this very day So it was signified as by other Rites and particularly by the baptized persons putting off his cloaths in order to his Baptism as putting off together with them the Old Man and his deeds so by the Rite of Baptism it self He who submits to that implying thereby his looking upon sin as a Moral impurity and which therefore for the future he would not have any thing to do with The second thing signified by Baptism on the part of the baptized is his present belief of the Doctrine of Christianity more especially of the Doctrine of the Trinity As is evident from that Baptism's being commanded by our Saviour to be made in or into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost For to be baptiz'd into the name of those persons importing the owning of those persons as our Masters (a) Expl. of the Creed Art I believe in the Holy Ghost and our selves as the Disciples of them To be so baptized moreover importing the owning of those persons as alike (b) Ibid. Masters of us and consequently because the Father cannot be own'd in any lower relation as partakers of the same divine Nature and Authority Lastly to be so baptiz'd importing the owning of them in particular by a belief of the Christian Doctrine that being the most signal instance of that Discipleship we receive by it The belief of the Doctrine of Christianity and of the Trinity in particular must be look'd upon as signified by Baptism on the part of the baptized and those baptized ones consequently as making profession of that belief by it For which cause as the rule of Faith or the Creed (c) Introd concerning Catechising c. was given to those to learn who were willing to be initiated into Christianity so they were particularly interrogated (d) Expl. of the Prel Quest and Answers as to their belief of the Articles thereof and then and not till then baptiz'd into it and the priviledges thereof The third and last thing signified on the part of the baptized is a resolution for the time to come to continue in the belief of Christianity and act agreeably to its Laws Both which will receive a sufficient confirmation from S. Peter's affirming Baptism to be the Answer or stipulation of a good conscience toward God and from what I have elsewhere (e) Ibid. said concerning it For as it is evident from thence that Baptism signifies on the part of the baptized a stipulation or promise of somewhat to be done by him So it will not be difficult to inferr from thence that it signifies also a stipulation or promise to continue in that belief of Christianity into which he
consider it as a Feast a Supper-feast or a Supper-feast of the Lord Because intended as a Communion of that Body and Blood by which we are to be nourished to eternal life instituted at first at Supper time and both instituted by and intended for a Commemoration of our Lord. Next to the name of the Lord's Supper reckon we that of the Eucharist or Thanksgiving for so the word Eucharist imports A name thought to have been given to it in the time of the Writel of the New Testament but however following close after it For thus they are wont to interpret what we find in St. Paul (g) 1 Cor. 14.16 17. where he disputes against praying in an unknown tongue Else when thou shalt bless with the Spirit how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy Eucharist or giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest For thou verily givest thanks or celebratest the Eucharist well but the other is not edified Where we have not only the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are made use of to denote what our Saviour did to the Elements of this Sacrament but an intimation of that Amen which we shall understand afterwards from Justin Martyr to be return'd to the office of it However that be most certain it is that this name of Eucharist followed presently upon those times as appears by the familiar use of it in Ignatius's Epistles For thus he tells us in one place (h) Ep. ad Smyrn pag. 5. ed Voss That certain hereticks abstain'd from the Eucharist and prayer because they confess'd not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ And presently after (i) ib. pag. 6. Let that Eucharist be accounted firm which is under the Bishop or to whom he shall commit it As without whom as it follows it is not lawful to Baptize or celebrate a Love-feast but only what he shall approve In fine saith the same Ignatius elsewhere (k) Ep. ad Phil. pag. 40. endeavour therefore to use one Eucharist For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one Cup for the union of his Blood Agreeable hereto that I may not now descend any lower was the language of Justin Martyr's time as may appear from these following testimonies Where he doth not only shew this to have been the name of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper but acquaints us with the reasons of their so denominating it After prayers saith he (l) Apol. 2. pag. 97. are done we salute one another Then is offer'd to him who presides over the Brethren Bread and a cup of Water and Wine Which he taking sendeth forth praise and glory to the Father of the Vniverse through the name of the Son and Holy Ghost and maketh a large Thanksgiving unto God for that we have been made worthy of these things by him Having thus completed the prayers and Thanksgiving all the people present signifie their Assent to it by an Amen which in the Hebrew Tongue is as much as So be it After that the President hath thus given thanks and the people answer'd Amen they who among us are called Deacons give to every one that is present of that Bread and Wine and Water over which thanks hath been given and carry it to those that are absent And this Food saith he is among us called the Eucharist to wit because of the Thanksgivings before remembred To the like purpose doth the same Father discourse elsewhere (m) Dial. cum Tryph. Jud. pag. 259 c. speaking still of the same Sacrament of the Lord's Supper And that offering of fine flowre which was delivered to be offered for those that were cleansed from the Leprosy was a type of the Bread of the Eucharist which Jesus Christ our Lord commanded us to celebrate in remembrance of that passion which he suffered for those that are cleansed in their Souls from all the wickedness of Men That we might at the same time give thanks or keep an Eucharist to God both for his having made the World and all things in it for the sake of man and for his having delivered us from that wickedness in which we sometime were and having perfectly dissolv'd Principalities and Powers by him who was made passible according to his will From which places it is evident that as the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper had at that time the title of the Eucharist or Thanksgiving so it receiv'd its name from those Thanksgivings which were us'd over the Elements thereof and which what they were I shall in another place have a more fit occasion to enquire All I desire to observe at present is that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper receiving one of its most noted names from those Thanksgivings that were us'd over the Elements thereof we are in reason to think that those Thanksgivings contribute in a great measure to that saving nature and efficacy they put on I may not forget to add because that seems as antient as any that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was also known by the name of breaking of Bread Not only the Syriack version but reason also obliging us so to understand St. Luke where he tells us that the first Converts of the Apostles (n) Acts 2.42 continued stedfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of Bread and in prayer As again of the Disciples of Ephesus (o) Acts 20.7 that they came together on the first day of the week to break Bread For what other breaking of Bread can we understand there where it is joyn'd with the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship and prayers and moreover made the special business of the Assemblies of that day which was from the beginning set apart for the honour and service of Almighty God Agreeable hereto was the language of Ignatius's time as appears by this following testimony He describing those (p) ep ad Ephes pag. 29. who communicate with the Bishop and his Presbytery in the exercises of Religion as breaking that one Bread which is the medicine of immortality an antidote against death and a means of living in Jesus Christ for ever And it had no doubt its original from the Hebrews manner of speaking who as I have elsewhere (q) Expl. of the Lord's Prayer in the words Give us this day out daily Bread shewn under the title of Bread comprehended the whole of their entertainments and from the breaking of the Bread of the Eucharist's being one special ceremony about it and intended as St. Paul remarks (r) 1 Cor. 11.24 to signifie the Breaking of Christ's body After which if any Man can think fit to make use of such like passages to justifie a Communion in one kind he may as well hope to shew that even the Feasts of the Hebrews for of such I have shew'n (ſ) Expl. of the Lord's Prayer ubi supra the word Bread to
they were first to mention even our Saviour's taking it and giving it to his Disciples because liquid things cannot well be taken by our selves or convey'd to others but by a Cup or by an usual Metonymy of the continent for the thing contained in it set to denote the Wine wherewith it was replenished This Cup as we shall afterwards understand being given them to drink of and as appears from what our Saviour subjoins in the close of St. Matthew's and St. Mark 's account of this matter of the Fruit of the Vine or Wine Now this Cup as he had done before with the Bread he in like manner (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 22.20 1 Cor. 11.25 after he had supp'd took into his Hand or Hands as the fashion was in the Eucharistical Cup of the Jews but however so took as was before observed concerning the Bread as to separate it from what other Wine then was upon the Table and appropriated it to his own purposes The Cup being thus taken by our Saviour into his Hands and held by him there till he gave it to his Disciples Two of the Evangelists tell us he gave thanks over it and as appears by what was said before in the matter of the Bread and by St. Paul's elsewhere (g) 1 Cor. 10.16 entitling it the Cup of blessing which we bless by that Thanksgiving and Prayer blessed it or rather recommended it to the Father to be blessed by him and made useful for those purposes for which it was design'd and particularly for the Communion of his Blood Which Blessing there is no doubt the Father granted thereupon and fitted it for that for which it was so separated and recommended to him As because he readily promis'd the like or a greater Blessing to the Blessing (h) Num. 6.23 c. of the Jewish Priests and may therefore be presum'd as ready to grant this to the Blessing of his well beloved Son So because our Saviour when he gave this Cup to his Disciples told them even then that it was his Blood of the New Testament and St. Paul that being blessed by such as himself it was the Communion of Christ's Blood which it could not have been in either instance without the Blessing of the Father Our Saviour having thus taken and given thanks over the Cup or blessed it gave it to his Disciples saying Drink ye all of it But whether as was said before in the matter of the Bread he gave it into each of his Disciples Hands or to him only that sat next to him and by him to be handed to the next is not material neither will I therefore concern my self about it Sure it is that by the words accompanying that Gift he signified it to be his Mind that they should all drink of it and St. Mark in particular tells us that they all drank of it Upon the strength of what Motive is in the next place to be enquir'd but which we shall not need to go farther than St. Matthew for or at least not for the general notion of it For this saith he in our Saviour's name is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins The thing which I now offer you is my Blood of the New Testament and it is upon that account I both invite and oblige you all to drink of it And if it was even when he offer'd it to them to drink his Blood of the New Testament one would think it should need no new Blessing or Consecration to make it such and much less that those words by which he declar'd it to be so should be that blessing or Consecration it self But be that as it will at present for the fuller discussion of these things belongs to another place most certain it is from the other Evangelists and from St. Paul that our Saviour when he gave the Cup to the Disciples made use of these or the like words upon what occasion soever they were employed by him And as certain it is from the Controversies now on foot that the words consider'd in themselves will require an explication to which therefore I shall now address my self In order thereunto as I did before in the matter of the Bread enquiring what the subject of this Proposition is what the thing predicated of it and what the importance of the word Is which is made use of to joyn them together And here in the first place it is easy to see that whatever difficulties the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or This may be encumbred with when set to denote the Bread because of a different Gender from it both in the Greek and the Latin yet it is encumbred with no such difficulties here Because even in St. Matthew and St. Mark where it hath no Substantive affixed to it it is of the same Gender with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cup before spoken of and which they were also commanded to drink of as well as with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Blood that follows it It is alike easy to see secondly that whatever pretence may be made for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or This in the former Proposition having respect to some individuum vagum yet there is not the like pretence here Because though St. Matthew and St. Mark add no Substantive to it yet St. Luke and St. Paul in their History of the Institution add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to it and so shew This Cup even the Cup before spoken of to be the thing whereof our Saviour spake And indeed as the rules of Construction require us so to understand it even where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cup is not express'd and much more where This is my Blood is assign'd as a motive to the Disciples drinking of the Cup For how could it otherwise be any motive to it if that Cup were not the Blood here spoken of So our Saviour's commanding his Disciples to drink of that Cup in order to their partaking of his Blood and his afterwards describing it by the title of the Fruit of the Vine shews the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cup to be set to denote the liquor that was contained in it and particularly the Blood of the Grape Which is a proof that figurative expressions are no such strangers to the Doctrine of a Sacrament because one is of necessity to be allow'd in the subject of this important Proposition and is accordingly allow'd by the Romanists themselves The subject of the present Proposition being thus found out and shewn to be no other than the Cup before spoken of or rather the Wine of it Let us in the next place take a view of the thing affirmed of it and wherein indeed there is some variety even between those who give an Historical account of this affair St. Matthew and St. Mark representing the Cup here spoken of as Christ's Blood of the New Testament or
Presbyters of those very Churches that differ'd from them about the observation of Easter And the like was done by other Churches as appears by the fourteenth Canon of the Council of Laodicea till it was forbidden by that Council because of the inconveniences thereof The third thing signified on our part by the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is a Resolution to live and act as becomes those that are partakers of Christ's Body and Blood For the evidencing whereof we are to know that as this Sacrament hath been shewn to be a Sign of the New Covenant (f) Expl. of the Sacraments in Gen. Part 2. which as such implies a Profession of something to be done on the part of God So the taking of this Sacrament must consequently imply our Covenanting to perform whatsoever that New Covenant obligeth us unto Which what it is will need no other Proof than what I have shewn in another place (g) Expl. of the Prelimin Quest and Answ c. to be the importance of that Sacrament whereby we enter into it For if that Sacrament import the Profession of a good Conscience toward God That new Covenant of which it is a Sacrament must consequently have the same good Conscience for the Object of it and therefore also make the like Profession of it to be the Duty of that Man who takes this other Sacrament thereof And though it be true that this part of the signification of the Lord's Supper is not so clearly express'd in the Stories of the Institution of it Yet as they give us to understand that we ought to take the Elements thereof in remembrance of Christs giving his Body and Blood for us so they do consequently imply our taking them also with a Resolution to live and act as becomes those that are partakers of them That Remembrance as it can be no other than a thankful one because the remembrance of such Benefits as do above all others require such a Remembrance of us so connoting as such a readiness to walk well-pleasing unto him by whom those Benefits are bestow'd Agreeable hereto is the both Language and Practice of the Antient Christians as appears by that account which I have before given of them (h) Expl. of the Sacr. in Gen. Part 1. They not only giving this Institution as well as Baptism the Name of a Sacrament in consideration of that Obligation they supposed it to lay upon the Persons that took it but obliging themselves by this Sacrament not as too many have since learn'd to do to the perpetrating of any notorious wickedness but to avoid all Thefts and Robberies and Adulteries the falsifying of their Trusts or the denying of any thing that was committed to their Custody when they were call'd upon by the true Owner to restore it For that those words of Pliny are to be understood of this Sacrament is not only evident from its being represented as a constant Attendant of the Christians publick Assemblies and particularly of their Assemblies before day which the Eucharist is known to have been (i) Tert. de Cor. Mil. c. 3. but from the no mention there is in Ecclesiastical Story of any other Sacrament in them PART VI. What farther relation the Sign of the Lord's Supper hath to the Body and Blood of Christ The Contents The outward Part or Sign of this Sacrament consider'd with a more particular regard to the Body and Blood of Christ and Enquiry accordingly made what farther relation it beareth to it That it is a Means whereby we receive the same as well as a Sign thereof shewn from the Doctrine of our Church and that Doctrine confirm'd by Saint Paul's entitling it the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood and by his affirming Men to be made to drink into one Spirit by partaking of the Cup of it Enquiry next made what kind of Means this Sign of the Lord's Supper is how it conveys to us the Body and Blood of Christ and how we receive them by it To each of which Answer is made from the Doctrine of our Church and that Answer farther confirm'd by the Doctrine of the Scripture The sum of which is that this Sign of the Lord's Supper is so far forth a Mean spiritual and heavenly That it conveys the Body and Blood of Christ to us by prompting us to reflect as the Institution requires upon that body and Blood of his and by prompting God who hath annex'd them to the due use of the Sign to bestow that Body and Blood upon us In fine that we receive them by the Sign thereof when we take occasion from thence to reflect upon that Body and Blood of Christ which it was intended to represent and particularly with Faith in them What Benefits we receive by Christ's Body and Blood in the next place enquir'd and as they are resolv'd by our Catechism to be the strengthening and refreshing of the Soul so Enquiry thereupon made what is meant by the strengthening and refreshing of the Soul what Evidence there is of Christ's Body and Blood being intended for it and how they effect it The Sign of the Lord's Supper a Pledge to assure us of Christ's Body and Blood as well as a Means whereby we receive them III. WHat the outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper is and what the inward Part or thing signified by it enough hath been said to shew neither shall I need to resume the Consideration of them That which will more concern me to intend is What farther relation beside that of a Sign that outward Part or Sign of the Lord's Supper hath to the inward part or thing signified and particularly to the Body and Blood of Christ Where first I will declare and confirm the Doctrine of our own Church concerning it and then enquire into the truth of those Relations which the Church of Rome hath advanced on the one hand and the Lutheran Churches on the other Now as our Church hath defin'd a Sacrament to be such an outward and visible Sign of an inward and Spiritual Grace as is also ordain'd as a means whereby we receive the same and must therefore be suppos'd to have the same opinion of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper So it hath said enough both in its Catechism and elsewhere concerning that Sacrament to shew this to have been its opinion of it For it gives us to understand * Catechism that the Faithful for whom to be sure this Sacrament was principally ordain'd do verily and indeed receive the thing signified even the Body and Blood of Christ as well as the Signs of them and that they do verily and indeed receive that Body and Blood in the Lord's Supper which one would think were a competent Evidence of that 's being a Means whereby we receive them It consequently thereto teacheth us to pray †Pray of Cons in the Commun Service which one would think to be of equal force as to this Particular that we
to his Disciples to prove the Body in which he appeared to them to be a real Body and not a Spirit under the appearances of one For handle me saith he * Luk. 24.39 and see For a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as ye see me have For there as well as we here our Saviour appeal'd to the Senses of his Disciples for the reality and substantialness of that Body of his which then presented it self to their Eyes And there too as well as we do here he appeal'd to the Testimony of the same Senses that it was not a thing different from a body even a Spirit Which last particular is the more to be taken notice of as because according to that the Testimony of Sense may be a sufficient Evidence of the not being of a thing that appears not as well as of the being of a thing that doth So because as the Romanists order the matter concerning the glorified Body of Christ in the Sacrament there is no material difference if any at all between that glorified Body of his and what our Saviour in the place before quoted calls a Spirit They representing that Body as present in an invisible and impalpable manner which is the very presence of a Spirit By the same reason therefore that our Saviour might argue from his own falling under their Eye and Touch that that substance wherein he presented himself to them was a Body and not a Spirit By the same reason may we argue that that which our Senses assure us to be Bread is really such and not such a Body as according to the Romanists is an invisible and impalpable one and so far forth of the nature of a Spirit Of the same force as well as nature I judge the Arguments which Reason offers against the substantial Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament and particularly that which it offers to us from the impossibility of a Body's being in so many places at once as the Doctrine of Transubstantiation obligeth us to believe concerning the Body of Christ For what other is that Argument which the Angels offer'd to the Women (x) Mat. 28.6 that sought Christ in the Grave after he was risen from it He is not here for he is risen as he said Come see the place where the Lord lay For by the same reason that Christ's Body could not be in the Grave because he was risen and departed from it By the same reason it cannot be in this or that particular place on Earth now it is departed from the whole of it to Heaven and sitteth at the right hand of God there And I must needs say I could not therefore but wonder when I read in the Council of Trent (y) Sess 13. cap. 1. that they were things no way repugnant to each other for our Saviour to sit always at the right hand of the Father in Heaven after a natural manner of existing and yet in many other places be sacramentally present to us by his substance For as they thereby sufficiently intimate that even the glorified Body of our Saviour cannot be in Heaven and here after its natural manner of existing So setting aside the disguise of the word Sacramentally that Council says nothing at all to hinder our belief of its falling into that very absurdity it self For understanding by Sacramentally no other than substantially and which accordingly they just before express by the same term as well as in other places (z) Ib. Can. 1. of that Session they must consequently because it is a corporeal substance whereof they speak be thought to mean corporally also which is certainly its natural manner of existing For if to be substantially present be no other than to be present after the manner of a substance to be substantially present when applied to such or such a sort of substance must be to be present after the manner of such or such a substance and consequently if we speak of a corporeal substance to be coporally present or after the manner of a Body and not after the manner of a Spirit These four Capital Assertions being thus destroy'd and shewn to be both without Reason and against it we shall not need to concern our selves much about the other two as being only the Consectaries thereof and therefore falling together with them For if the Body and Blood of Christ be not substantially in the Eucharist there can be no ground even in the opinion of the Romanists for worshipping Christ with Divine Worship in it And there can be as little Pretence for his being really eaten in it as well as spiritually and sacramentally Only because these two Assertions are as much stood upon as any of the other and the former is also of pernicious consequence I think it not amiss to say somewhat to each of them and first to the worshipping Christ with Divine Worship in it And here in the first place I cannot but observe that however the Tridentine Fathers may in some places seem to confine this Divine Worship to Christ as present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist For so they do both in the Reason they * Sess 13. cap. 5. Nam illum eundem deum praesentem in eo adesse credimus quem pater aeternus in orbem introducens c. give of the Divine Worship of the Host and in the Canon †Can. 6. Si quis dixerit in sancto Eucharistiae Sacramento Christum c. non esse cultu latriae etiam externo adorandum c. they make against those that shall deny it yet do they also extend it to that Sacrament in which they suppose him to be present and as we should therefore think are guilty of gross Idolatry in it though Christ should be allow'd to be worshipp'd with Divine Worship in it For as the title of that Chapter * Cap. 5. De cultu veneratione huic sanctissimo Sacramento exhibenda which professeth to intreat of this Matter is concerning the Worship and Veneration which is to be exhibited to this most holy Sacrament So the Chapter it self begins with these express words (a) Nullus itaque dubitandi locus relinquitur quin omnes Christi fideles pro more in Catholicâ Ecclesiâ semper recepto latriae cultum qui vero Deo debetur huic sanctissimo Sacramento in veneratione exhibeant Neque enim ideo minus est adorandum quòd fuerit à Christo domino ut sumatur institutum There is therefore no place for doubt but that all Christ's faithful ones after the manner always receiv'd in the Catholick Church ought with Veneration to exhibit to this most holy Sacrament that Worship of Latria which is owing to the true God For neither is it therefore the less to be worshipped because it was instituted by Christ our Lord to be receiv'd For can there be any thing more plain especially when the very next words (b) Nam illum eundem Deum praesentem
is spiritual as if the latter though undoubtedly the principal were an imaginary one But as we gain thus much by it that that Council by real must consequently mean a corporal one so I shall therefore make no farther use of that opposition at present than to enquire into the truth of that real manducation understood as is before describ'd In order whereunto that which I shall in the next place take notice of is that the word manducare which the Council makes use of signifies primarily and properly chewing and consequently where intended to denote a corporal manducation ought to be understood of such a one as is made by the breaking of the thing eaten by the Teeth And indeed as this is the true corporal manducation and which alone therefore deserves the name of a real one So the Church of Rome appears to have been heretofore of the same mind by the recantation it put into the Mouth of Berengarius The words thereof so far being (g) Baron Annal. Eccl. ad Ann. 1059. that he believ'd the true Body of Christ to be sensually not only in Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the hands of the Priest and ground in pieces by the Teeth of the faithful And thus if the Romanists were still persuaded they might pretend to a real manducation indeed and such as had some title to that name which they bestow upon it But as they saw such a manducation to agree but ill with that glorious Body to which they ascrib'd it and have not therefore fail'd to set a brand upon those words which were made use of to express the Churches mind So they now put off that manducation to those Capernaites to whom our Saviour discours'd in St. John concerning eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood and make that to be the very eating which our Saviour faulted them for the imagination of and not that more refined one which they themselves advance But what then is that real manducation or eating of Christ which the Romanists advance What is that which they think fit to give that name unto Nothing for ought that I can discern save the receiving of him with their mouth and transmitting him from thence into their stomachs If there be any thing else that looks like manducation the poor species are fain to bear it For that is the Sum and substance of their eating Christ in them But in conscience can this manducation of Christ look like a real one Is this answerable to that literal sense which they seem to be so fond of in other things For why if the letter of the text persuades that the very Body of Christ is in the Sacrament as that too not figuratively or spiritually but properly and substantially should not the same letter persuade that it is eaten as literally and properly and not only spiritually and sacramentally Especially when they themselves advance a real manducation as well as a sacramental and spiritual one But as they who contend so eagerly for the very Body of Christ being in the Sacrament and which is more will have it to be substantially there do yet arbitrarily enough assert its being only spiritually there or after the manner of a Spirit So out of the same meer will and pleasure they assert also a real manducation and yet at the same time make that real manducation to be no other than Mens receiving Christ's Body into their Mouths and transmitting it from thence into their Stomachs As if our Saviour had given them an absolute Empire over his words and empower'd them to give those words a proper and improper Sense as best suited with their own Hypotheses and interests For if the letter of the words will prevail so far as to make us understand the eating enjoyn'd of such an eating as is performed by the Mouth I do not see without the Empire before spoken of why they should not understand it of such an eating as is also performed by the Teeth and profess as Berengarius was taught to do that the Body of Christ is sensually not in Sacrament but in truth handled and broken by the hands of the Priest and ground in pieces by the Teeth of the Faithful Beside to what purpose any corporal eating at all To what purpose our so much as receiving Christ with our Mouths and transmitting him from thence into our Stomachs when for ought appears by the Council of Trent it self this Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood was intended not for the corporal nourishment of our Bodies but for the spiritual nourishment of our Souls That Council where it professeth to intreat of the Reason of the Institution of this most holy Sacrament (h) Sess 13. cap. 2. affirming only that our Saviour would have this Sacrament to be taken as the Spiritual Food of Souls whereby they are nourished and strengthened living by the Life of him that said He that eateth me even he shall live by me For such as the Food is such in reason ought to be that eating by which it is to be receiv'd And therefore if the Body of Christ in the Sacrament were intended for the Spiritual Food of our Souls to be spiritually eaten also and not after a corporal manner But that which will shew yet more the no necessity there is of this corporal eating of Christ's Body any more than of that Body's being really and locally present in the Sacrament is what is assign'd by Mons Claud (i) Resp au â— Traite de la Perpet c. 4. where he intreats of the no necessity of the latter and which because I know not how to do better I will express in that Author's words To wit that the Flesh and Blood of Christ are indeed a Principle of Peace and Life and salvation to our Bodies and Souls not in the quality of Physical Causes which act by contact and by the position of their substances but in the quality of meritorious Causes which act morally or of Causes Motives which do not only operate and produce their Effects being absent but when they themselves are not as yet in being as appears by the Examples of the Antient Patriarchs who were sav'd by the vertue of Jesus Christ even as we For what necessity can there be of any corporal eating of Christ's Body when that Body is not a Principle of Life to us in the quality of a Physical Cause but of a meritorious and moral one And when moreover they who were antienly saved by it as well as we now are were not in a capacity so to eat of it because that which was to be the matter of it had not at that time a being in the World Agreeable hereto is the discourse of our Saviour in the sixth of St. John's Gospel and after which it is a wonder that any Man should think of eating Christ's Flesh after a corporal manner For when they who were present at it desir'd him evermore to give them of that Bread
(k) Joh. 6.34 which he had but just before affirm'd to give Life unto the World he not only declar'd to them in express words that he (l) Joh. 6.35 was that Bread of Life but sufficiently intimated that the way for them to attain it and that Life together with it was by coming to him and believing on him For he that cometh to me saith our Saviour (m) Ibid. shall never hunger and he that believeth on me shall never thirst And he farther confirms that sort of eating by suggesting as he goes that it was the Will of his Father that every one which seeth the Son (n) Joh. 6.40 and believeth on him should have everlasting Life and that he that believeth on him (o) Joh. 6.47 hath everlasting Life For how was that either pertinent to the account he gave of his being the Bread of Life or but consistent with what he afterward saith that except (p) Joh. 6.53 they ate his Flesh and drank his Blood they had no Life in them if that belief in him were not the thing intended by the eating of him and that eating therefore a spiritual rather than a corporal one In like manner when some of his Disciples conceiving he intended another sort of eating were offended with that Discourse of his and represented it as an hard (q) Joh. 6.60 and unnatural one After he had ask'd them What if they should see the Son of Man ascend up (r) Joh. 6.62 where he was before whether the more to enhance the Difficulty before he resolv'd it or by the mention of his ascending into Heaven to take them off from understanding him in a carnal sense he hath these following words (s) Joh. 6.63 It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing The words that I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are Life The most plain and obvious meaning of which words is that it was the spiritual eating and not the carnal one that availed unto Life and that it was of such an eating that he had spoken all along as the only one from which eternal Life could be expected And indeed as the latter part of the words cannot well bear any other sense because words cannot be Spirit and Life unless it be as to the sense and meaning of them So I do not see how any other sense can answer that Design for which these and the former words were produc'd even the softning of that hard saying which the Disciples were so offended at To say as the Romanists (t) Annot. in loc in Vers de Mons do that our Saviour intended thereby that it was his Spirit or Divinity which made that Flesh of his to be such living Food and not any Property of the Flesh consider'd as separated from it answering in some measure what scruple they might have concerning its giving eternal Life to those that eat of it but answering not at all the scruple they had concerning the possibility of that Flesh of his being divided among so many or the lawfulness of their eating of it though it could be so divided For so far is the sense of the Romanists from answering the latter of these Scruples that it makes it yet more painful by how much more unnatural it is to eat the Flesh of him that was God-man as well as a living one than that of a meer Man and one that is also dead Sure I am St. Augustine was so choak'd with the literal sense of that which Christ's Disciples and the Jews are said to have been offended at that he took occasion from thence to assert (u) De Doct. Christ li. 3. cap. 15. Si autem praeceptiva locutio flagitium aut facinus videtur jubere aut utilitatem an t beneficentiam vetare figurata est Nisi manducaveritis inquit carnem filii hominis sanguinem biberitis non habebitis vitam in vobis faâ—inus vel flagitium videtur jubere Figura est ergo praecipiens passioni Domini esse Communicandum suaviter atque utiliter recondendum in memoriâ quòd pro nobis caro ejus Crucifixa vulnerata sit not only that that and other such like Precepts as seem to command any great wickedness ought to be look'd upon rather as figurative than proper but resolv'd the meaning of what is said concerning the eating of Christ's Flesh and drinking his Blood to be that we ought to communicate with his Passion and sweetly and profitably to lay up in our Memory that his Flesh was crucified and wounded for us Conformably to which he elsewhere (w) In Joh. Tract 26. En. in Psal 98. understands by those words They are Spirit and they are Life They ought to be spiritually understood and will be Spirit and Life to those which have that understanding of them And therefore as I cannot but wonder that the Romanists should think to free themselves from the Carnality of Christ's Disciples and the Jews because they do not understand our Saviour here of tearing his Flesh with their Teeth as the other are thought to have done For to take that Flesh into their Mouths which is their avow'd opinion and transmit it from thence into their Stomachs though it look like an improper eating yet will hardly pass for a figurative or spiritual one as the Scripture and St. Augustine represent the eating here enjoin'd so I cannot forbear with the same St. Augustine to admonish even with respect to the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament (x) Nolite parare fauces sed cor Inde commendata est ista coena Ecce credimus in Christum cum fide accipimus In accipiendo novimus quid cogitemus Modicum accipimus in corde saginamur Non ergo quod videtur sed quod creditur pascit De verbis Dom. Serm. 33. that we prepare not our Jaws but our Heart because the commendation of that Supper is that it was prepar'd for the latter Behold we then believe in Christ we receive him with Faith In receiving we know what we ought to think upon We receive a little and are fatned in the Heart It is not therefore that which is seen that feeds but that which is believ'd PART VIII Of Consubstantiation The Contents An account of that Doctrine which is by us called Consubstantiation out of the Augustan Confession and Gerhard And as it is founded by him and other the Lutheran Doctors in the letter of the words This is my Body and This is my Blood so Enquiry thereupon made first whether those words ought to be taken in the literal sense Secondly whether if so taken Consubstantiation can be inferred from them That the former words ought to be taken in the literal sense is endeavour'd by the Lutherans to be prov'd by general and special Arguments and those Arguments therefore propos'd and answer'd What is alledg'd in the general concerning the literal sense of Scripture being for the most part to
Reason and Nature and manifestly prescrib'd by the dictates of it not only we but all Christians whatsoever think themselves licensed if not oblig'd to put a figurative sense upon those words which command the pulling out an offending eye or cutting off an offending hand yea though there should not be as perhaps there is not any so express precept of Scripture against the mutilation of our selves But let us examine yet more nearly the purport of the former Argument as it relates to such divine precepts and promises as may seem to have a more particular regard to the life to come and so may be rather reckoned to supernatural truths than moral ones For neither here is it so clear that the literal sense is to prevail unless some text be produced which shall oblige us to the contrary Neither if it were would it be of force to conclude against a figurative interpretation of those words for which this Argument is alledged I instance for the former of these in what was but even now †Part 7. quoted out of St. Augustine concerning our looking upon that as a figurative expression which enjoyns the eating of Christ's Flesh and drinking his Blood in order to eternal life For as that Father thought it enough to prove that expression to be such because it seem'd to command a great wickedness without so much as taking notice of any Scripture that represented it as such so I do not see what text can be produc'd that is so express against the eating of humane Flesh and drinking humane Blood as this is for the eating and drinking them in the present instance In which case that wickedness which St. Augustin affirms the former precept to lead to in the literal sense must be pronounc'd as such by the law of Reason and Nature and no necessity therefore of sticking to the literal sense of any Scripture till we can find as express a text elsewhere to take us off from the embracing of it But let us suppose that the literal sense is to prevail till some text of Scripture can be produc'd which shall oblige us to a contrary one Yet will it not therefore follow but that the words we are now upon may and ought to be figuratively taken because there is enough in those that follow to oblige us to it I alledge for this purpose our Saviour's representing the things he gave as his Body broken and Blood shed which his natural Body and Blood were not at the Institution of this Sacrament nor can now be since his Resurrection from the dead For if the Body and Blood of Christ were not then broken or shed nor can be so since his Resurrection from the dead what our Saviour then gave or we now receive cannot be that Body and Blood and therefore to be understood rather as Signs and efficacious Means of conveying the Merit of that Body and Blood to us than as the letter of the words seems to import that Body and Blood it self The same is yet more evident from our Saviour's requiring his Disciples to do that whole action and particularly to eat and drink the things given in remembrance of him and of his death That which is design'd as a memorial of any thing being in reason to be look'd upon as a thing distinct from that which it was intended as a memorial of and design'd to supply the place of Neither will it avail to say as it is in my opinion idly enough that if the last suggestion were true Christ's Body and Blood must have been absent from that Sacrament which our Saviour celebrated with his Disciples which it is certain from the Story that they were not For as that Sacrament it self was principally design'd for the times succeeding our Saviour's passion and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or remembrance in all probability made use of with a particular relation to them So Christ's Body broken and Blood shed were as much absent from that Table and Sacrament as they are from our Sacramental Tables or any other Those general Arguments of the Lutherans being of no more force let us cast our eyes upon their special ones or at least upon such of them as seem most worthy of our regard Whereof the first that occurs is taken from the nature of a Sacrament which as they say being a thing perfectly new and accordingly unknown to all Men till it come to be reveal'd is in reason to be delivered in proper and literal expressions as concerning which otherwise there can be no certain knowledg Which suppos'd the words that declare this Sacrament must be concluded to be such and as such understood and asserted A Man would wonder to hear Learned Men argue at this rate concerning the Sacraments of our Saviour when it appears by what I have elsewhere (‖) Expl. of the Sacr. in Gen. Part 4. said that there were several such things before and by which St. Paul tells us that the Jews did all eat the same spiritual meat with us and drank the same spiritual drink even Christ Yea though the natural Body and Blood of Christ were not then in being and consequently could not literally be eaten or drunken For how come our Sacraments to be such new and unknown things when there were the like long before Or how under a necessity of being deliver'd in literal and proper expressions when there were not only such like Sacraments to give light to them though figuratively delivered but the Doctrine of those Antient Sacraments deliver'd even by St. Paul in those very figurative expressions which are thought to be such absurdities in ours For however we may be thought literally to eat and drink Christ's Body and Blood yet they to be sure cannot be thought to have done so who liv'd before that Body and Blood of Christ were in being Though granting that our Sacraments were at first as new and unknown as it is pretended that they are Yet will it not therefore follow but that they might be delivered in figurative as well as in literal expressions Because figurative expressions according to themselves may be easily enough understood if there be but a Key to open them Now whether there be not such a Key to open the figurative expressions of the present Sacrament I shall leave to those to judge who shall reflect upon our Saviour's representing the Symbols of this Sacrament as his Body broken and Blood shed and willing us moreover to eat and drink of them in remembrance of him and of his crucifixion Those two things being enough to assure us that the things given by our Saviour were rather Memorials of that Body and Blood of his and conveyers of the Merits of them than either the substance of that Body and Blood or the Means of communicating it to the Mouths and Stomachs of those who were to partake of them But it may be there is more force in what they argue from the nature of a Testament upon
occasion of those words of our Saviour This is my Blood of the New Testament or The New Testament in it which is shed for many for the remission of Sins For since it should seem by those expressions that that Sacrament was instituted under the form of a Testament the words whereof ought in reason to be taken in the literal sense as without which all Testaments would be very uncertain and litigious Therefore the words of this Sacrament and particularly such of them as respect the principal Legacies in it ought to be taken in the literal sense and not in a figurative one If a Man should make answer as I have elsewhere (a) Expl. of the â—â—â—r in Gen. Part â— done and I think too not without great reason that what we render Testament ought to be rendred a Covenant all that argument would be spon'd and whatever the promoters of it have brought concerning Testaments out of the Body of the Civil Law or the Interpreters thereof But I will however allow for once the usual rendring of the Word and answer directly to that Argument which is formed from it As indeed what should hinder me when those very Laws which they pretend to do not prove what they are designed for For such I look upon that (b) Ille aut ille D. de legat fidei commiss which saith that when there is no ambiguity in the words there ought to be no question made concerning the Will of the Testatour For who will allow these Men to suppose that there is no ambiguity in the words of the present Testament strictly and literally understood and particularly in those words that are the subject of the present controversie As little force is there in that Law (c) L. Non aliter D. de legatis c. which saith that we ought not otherwise to depart from the natural signification of words than when it is manifest that the Testatour meant somewhat else than what seems to have been expressed in them For one would think that should consider what impossibilities and contradictions the literal sense of This is my Body and This is my Blood involves one would think I say that those alone should make it manifest enough that the Testatour meant somewhat else than what the literal sense of the words will necessarily lead Men to So little reason is there to believe that there is any thing even in the Civil Law to persuade a strict and literal interpretation of all that a Testament contains And they who produce the two former Laws to persuade such an Interpretation are the more inexcusable in it because if they had pleas'd to read on to the paragraph Titius in the latter of them they would have seen enough to make them asham'd of their pretensions Because it is there affirm'd in express terms that we are not in a cause of Testaments to descend to a strict definition of words since for the most part Testatours speak abusively neither do they always use proper Names and Titles All which things I have said not as constrain'd thereto by the force of the present Argument For I know no reason why the sense of the New Testament should be judg'd of by the niceties of the Law but to let the World see how partial Men are in the allegations of such proofs as they think to be of use to them For beside what was before quoted from the Law concerning Testatours speaking abusively and improperly the same Law gives us to understand (d) L. ex facto D. de haered institu Paragr Rerum aubem Italicarum that the will of the deceased doth all and that (e) L. Siquis â—ta D. de adimendis vel tâ—ansferendis c. Par. Condit Legati his sense is more to be regarded than the words Which could have no sense in it if Legitimate Testaments were alway to be taken in the strictness of the letter For then the will or sense of the Testatour and the words of his Testament would be perfectly the same The next argument for the literal sense of the words in question is taken from the Majesty of him that instituted this Sacrament and from all those glorious Attributes that make it up Such as are his Truth and the place he holds under God of our Instructer his being the very wisdom of the Father and omniscient his being nigh unto death when he instituted this Sacrament and so much the more likely still to weigh all the words he utter'd in this important affair as in fine his being so far from giving any indication of other than a literal Interpretation of the present words that when he was advanced to Heaven he reveal'd the Doctrine of the Eucharist in the very same words wherein he had before exhibited it Things which for the most part must be acknowledg'd to be duly attributed to Christ but which have no force at all to conclude the thing in question For what if Christ be true and appointed by God to be our Instructer Will it therefore follow that we must understand all he saith in the Letter though we want not sufficient Indications even from some of his own words that we ought to understand him in a figurative sense All that they who press us with Christ's Truth and the Place he holds under God seem to pretend to is that we ought to hear him and be guided by him in our Belief Which I suppose they do to very good purpose who submit their Belief to that which all things consider'd they are firmly perswaded to be his Mind and Will But it is farther alledg'd that Christ is the very Wisdom of the Father and one who could therefore express his Mind clearly and plainly and in proper and literal Expressions as well as in figurative ones And whoever doubted of it or could doubt of it who look'd upon him but as an ordinary Prophet and not as one who was also of the same Essence with the Father But as the Question is not What Christ could do but What he hath done So we find no reason to grant but that our Saviour hath spoken plainly enough to those that are willing to understand him The Argument goes on to alledge that our Saviour was omniscient and as he could not therefore but know what Contentions would arise about this part of heavenly Doctrine to the certain destruction of Souls So it is not at all likely that he would so far contribute to it as of set purpose to wrap the true and certain meaning of this holy Mystery in the dark coverings of figurative words But as I do not find any necessity to grant that Christ was bound to do all he could to prevent the Contentions that might afterwards happen because as St. Paul spake (f) 1 Cor. 11.19 concerning Heresies this Good might accrue by them that they that were approved might thereby be made manifest So I see as little reason to grant that Christ did
any way contribute to those Contentions or the ruine of Souls by them by those figurative Expressions which he made use of in the present instance Those Coverings wherein the Doctrine of the Sacrament is suppos'd to be wrap'd up being not so thick or obscure but that they may be seen through by Men of unprejudiced Minds I know not why it is added unless it be to fill up the number of its forces that our Saviour was near to death when he instituted this Sacrament and therefore no doubt well weighed before-hand what he spake concerning it For who but a blasphemous Heretick ever thought or said that our Saviour under any Circumstances knew not what he spake And therefore I shall only take notice of that which concludes the present Argument even that our Saviour was so far from giving any indication of other than a literal interpretation that after he was advanced to Heave he reveal'd the Doctrine of it in the same words wherein it was at first delivered For not to say any thing at present to the latter part of this Allegation Our Saviour as was before shewn gave sufficient Indications of a figurative Interpretation when he represented the things given as his Body broken and Blood shed which they were not then nor can be now and moreover willed his Disciples to partake of what he gave them in remembrance of him and of his death A fourth Argument for the literal sense of the words in question is the great Conformity there is between the several Historians of the Institution as to the words we are now upon It being not to be thought but that if they had been to be taken in other than a simple and proper sense one or other of those holy Men would have added an Explication of them But neither is there that Conformity between them as to the words whereof we speak neither can it be said that none of those Historians have given an Explication of them For though for instance This is my Body is indeed in all of them and we so far forth oblig'd to acknowledge a Conformity between them in their account of the present words Yet St. Luke and St. Paul add to those words which is given for you and which is broken for you which are not only Additions but if what I have elsewhere said (g) Part 5. be well weigh'd due Explications of them also and such as shew them not to be capable of that literal Interpretation which they are so willing to put upon them There is as little truth in what is added that none of those Historians have given any explication of them For not to repeat what was but now said concerning the words which is given or broken for you St. Luke and St. Paul take care to remark that our Saviour enjoin'd his Disciples to eat what he gave them in remembrance of him and of his Death which is no obscure Indication of those words being to be figuratively understood The fifth Argument for the literal Sense is the supposed Absurdity of the figurative Which the better to evince it is pretended that there is no place for any Figure either in the Subject Predicate or the Copula that ties them together And if there be no Figure in either of these there is no Figure at all and the Propositions therefore that are compos'd of them to be literally understood Now as I have elsewhere (h) Part 3. affirm'd the figurativeness of these Propositions to consist in the word Is as which I have there shewn to be the same in sense with signifies and accordingly so us'd in Speeches of the like nature So I shall therefore content my self to return an Answer to what is objected as to the figurativeness of that word whether it be from Logick or from the Scripture Now the first thing that is objected from the former of these Heads is that the Copula or the word Is is no part of a Proposition according to Aristotle and others and therefore the figurativeness of the whole not to be placed in it I will leave it to the Sophisters to answer to Aristotle's Authority because I think that Office is fitter for them than for a Divine It shall suffice me to make answer that as a Man of good natural Understanding would take that to be a part of a Proposition without which in many Propositions the Subject and Predicate could have no connexion nor any more constitute a Proposition than Stone and Timber and other Materials do a House till they are united to one another and compacted into a Building of that Shape and use So men that have had a Name for this Art of Reasoning have been of a quite different opinion from the Objectors and not only not look'd upon the word Is as no part of the Proposition but as the very Soul of it For the Copula saith Petrus à Sancto Joseph (i) Idea Phil. Ration li. 2. Art 4. is to the Subject and Predicate as the Form is to the material parts of any thing and gives them the Essence of a Proposition After the same manner as the formal part of a House is not the Stones and Timber of it but that by which they are connected And Burgersdicius an Author better known and as terrible a Man at the Art of Reasoning is not only of the same Mind with the former as to the word Is being part of a Proposition but tells us moreover (k) Instit Log. li. 1. cap. 27. that it is a part of the Predicate and indeed the very Form and Soul of it Which he proves by a thing that is agreed on among the differing Parties even that the word Is when included in another Verb is part of the Predicate For if saith he the word Is when included in another Verb is part of the Predicate why shall it not be a part of the Predicate when it is set by it self Which with the Instance which he subjoins and another Reason for it I shall leave to the Logicians of the other side to answer But beside that more remote Objection of the Copula's being no part of a Proposition and therefore the figurativeness of the present ones not to be placed there It is farther added that this Copula or the word Is is a word of no certain signification in it self For I forbear the mention of that hard Name which the Logicians give it whereas Tropes and Figures can have place only in words of certain signification because altering them from their native signification to a foreign one And it must be granted that the word Is is so far forth of an uncertain signification that it may and is wont to be appli'd to several sorts of Predications and particularly to such as are only accidental as well as to those that are essential For thus we may and do affirm that Socrates for instance is of this or that Colour which denotes only an Accident as well as
or furnish them with any Sacrifice to employ them There is as little force if it be duly considered in what the same Fathers alledge from the Prophet Malachi (n) Mal. 1.11 where it is said that from the rising up of the Sun unto the going down of the same God's Name should be great among the Gentiles and that in every place Incense should be offered unto his Name and a pure Offering For though it be true that the Antients appli'd this Text to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and thought that to be the pure Offering which was to be offer'd up unto God Yet as they who did so appli'd it rather to the Sign than to the thing signifi'd for so Justin Martyr Irenaeus and Origen apparently do but however represented it as an Eucharistical or Commemorative Oblation and not as an Expiatory one So they who follow the Antients too nearly will find themselves oblig'd by the present words to offer up Incense unto God as well as that Oblation whereof they speak For by the same reason that a strict and proper and material Oblation is to be understood by the same reason a true and proper Incense is to be understood also because equally foretold by the Prophet and coupled with the other It is enough to salve the Prophecy that God should have his publick Worship among the Gentiles and a Service as notorious and more acceptable than the Jews Incense and Oblations were And he that makes the Prophecy to import any thing more may as well argue from it the continuance of the Jewish Service among the Gentiles because if we take the Prophecy in the Letter it cannot be thought to denote any thing else than the offering of the same Incense and Oblations that the then Jews did though more free from impurity than theirs If the Prophecy had a more particular relation to the Eucharist as it should seem by the Comments of the Antients that it had I should think it was rather because it was an eminent part of the Christian Service and because of those Prayers and Thanksgivings which attended it than for any formal Oblation of the Signs of it or of that Body and Blood of Christ which it was signified by them Which Justin Martyr though elsewhere (o) Dial. cum Tryph. p. 260. seeming to referr it to the very Oblation of the Bread and the Cup of the Eucharist gives no small countenance to when in answer to Trypho the Jew (p) Ib. p. 345. who it seems interpreted this Prophecy of the Prayers of the Jews in their dispersion among the Gentiles he saith that such Prayers and Thanksgivings as were made by worthy Men were acknowledg'd by him also to be the only perfect Sacrifices and such as were well-pleasing unto God And that these were the only things which the Christians had received to do even in the remembrance of their both dry and liquid Food wherein also is commemorated that Passion which the Son of God suffered by himself as our Mede hath well mended that latter Clause of the words For if Justin Martyr thought as he professeth to do that Prayers and Thanksgivings were the only perfect and acceptable Sacrifices and that they too were the only things which the Christians had received to do or offer in the Eucharist it self Then did not the present Prophecy either in his or other Christians opinion referr more particularly to the Eucharist upon the account of any proper Oblation of the Signâ— of it and much less upon the account of any propitiatory Sacrifice that was there made of the Body and Blood of Christ but upon the account of those Sacrifices of Praise and Thanksgiving which attended it and were indeed the principal part of that Service The Council of Trent therefore not daring to trust too much to this Prophecy of Malachi goes on to suggest that the Sacrifice which it advanceth is not obscurely intimated by St. Paul where he tells his Corinthians (q) 1 Cor. 10.21 that they who are polluted by partaking of the table of Devils cannot be partakers of the Table of the Lord understanding in both places by the word Table an Altar And consequently because every Altar must have its Victime that the Table of which the Christians partook had its Victime also even that Body and Blood of Christ which they professed to partake of and which he himself had before affirm'd the Bread and Cup of the Eucharist to be the Communion of It is very well said by the Council that the Sacrifice whereof it intreats is intimated by those words of St. Paul For to be sure they are no plain and express declarations of it But that it is not obscurely intimated by those words of his is a thing which we can by no means grant because we cannot grant that which is the foundation of their Argument even that St. Paul by Table understood an Altar For beside that it is not easie to be thought that even the Heathen Deities did so far forget the place they had usurp'd as to admit their Worshippers to their own proper Tables for so I take the Altars of those Deities to have been but only to have allow'd of their receiving by the hands of their Priests some Portions from their Altars and eating of them at Tables purposely prepared for them It is manifest by the description which Virgil (r) Aeneid li. 8. v. 103 c. v. 172 gives us of this Affair where he intreats of the Sacrifice of Hercules that though the Gentiles partook of those Meats which were offer'd to their Idols and might so far forth also be said to partake with their Altars and them yet they did not eat of them at the Altars of their Idols but on Tables prepared for them for that purpose Which suppos'd neither St. Paul's Table of Devils nor his Table of the Lord will be found to be Altars and no Argument therefore to be made from thence that that Table of the Lord imports the offering up of that Lord upon it or that we are under any Obligation to make such an Offering of him The utmost that can with reason be inferr'd from St. Paul's arguing from the one to the other Table is that as both of them presuppose a Victime or Sacrifice so they in like manner suppose our Victime or Sacrifice to be exhibited on that Table which we Christians are to partake of Which though it may be no proof of the offering up of Christ's Body and Blood upon it yet may seem to be some proof of the Presence of that very Body and Blood upon it which Christ sometime offer'd upon the Altar of the Cross But as whosoever shall consider that it was only a part of the Victime that was brought from the Idols Altar to the Table of his Worshippers will find himself obliged to confess either that there is no exact similitude between the Devils Tables and ours or that we no more than
seems to do that that cannot be thought to derogate from Christ's Sacrifice upon the Cross which is taught by themselves to be a Means whereby the fruits of the other are most plentifully convey'd For either it is such a Means as doth also propitiate God and then it will however derogate from the Propitiation and Redemption of the other or it is not such a Means and then it is not a Propitiatory Sacrifice at all If there be any thing to hinder this pretended Sacrifice from entrenching upon that of the Cross it must be by attributing to it another and a lower sort of Propitiation than they think to be due unto the other But as the Council of Trent seems so far from allowing that that it professeth to believe that God is so far appeas'd with the Oblation of this Sacrifice as to grant Repentance and Pardon of Sin upon it and as one would think too by the Reason annexed with little difference from what is granted upon the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross For it is saith that Council one and the same Host that is offer'd it is one and the same Person that now offers it by the ministry of his Priests who then offer'd up himself upon the Cross only after a different manner of offering so the great Trust their People are prompted to repose on this Oblation even when they do not communicate at it as that too upon the account of its being offer'd up for all the Faithful and for those in particular that are mention'd by name in it gives cause enough to believe that they think not much otherwise of it than they do of that Oblation which Christ made of himself upon the Cross if yet because of the more particular application of it to themselves they do not entertain a higher opinion of it II. The manner of the Administration of this Sacrament being thus accounted for and consideration therein had of what is most in controversie in it It remains that I enquire To whom it ought to be administred Which in the general are such as have given up their Names to Christ for so our Saviour first administred it and no doubt therefore intended that it should afterwards be More particularly those of them who are qualified by their Understanding and Life to partake worthily of it to do what they do in remembrance of Christ and to the comfort and benefit of their own Souls the salvation whereof was thereby intended Which both general and particular Qualifications Justin Martyr seems not obscurely to insinuate (x) Apol. 2. pag. 97. when immediately after the account he gives us of the Administration of this Sacrament in his time he tells us that the Eucharistical Food thereof was lawful for none to partake of but him that believ'd those things to be true that were taught by them who was moreover wash'd in that Laver which was appointed for remission of Sins and liv'd also as Christ deliver'd to us If there be any considerable difficulty in this Affair it is about the Administration of this Sacrament to Infants and which as some Ages of the Church seem to believe to have been necessary so one (y) Jer. Taylor 's Worthy Communicant cap. 3. sect 2. among our selves hath taken upon him to defend as to the lawfulness thereof As touching the necessity of its Administration to Infants little needs to be said because it is manifestly built upon a Text which considered without prejudice cannot tend in the least to the support of it That I mean where it is said that unless we eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood we can have no Life in us For it appearing from the Text it self and from what I have elsewhere (z) Part 7. said upon it that this Passage relates not to a Sacramental Manducation but rather to a Spiritual one the Communion of Infants is so far from being established by it that the Communion even of elder Persons cannot be concluded from it But because the Question is not so much at present concerning the necessity of administring this Sacrament to Infants as concerning the lawfulness thereof And because he who professeth to deny the one hath taken upon him to defend the other and the Practice of several of the Antients in it I think it not amiss to make that also the subject of my Discourse and both shew why I look upon it as a thing no way lawful and examine the Arguments that are brought in the behalf of it That which makes me look upon it as no way lawful to administer this Sacrament to Infants is their being not in a capacity to answer what is requir'd on the part of Communicants whether before or in the receiving of it For neither can they as St. Paul requires examine themselves before they address themselves to this Sacrament neither can they which is more material and requir'd by Christ himself do what they do in it in remembrance of Christ and of his Death By which means as they must be look'd upon as no way qualified for it so as such therefore excluded from the participation of it by him who was the Instituter thereof Neither will it avail to say as the forequoted Author objects that the former of these Precepts concerns those only that need an examination and have an ability for it and consequently cannot concern Infants in whom no such need or ability is For as I willingly grant that that Precept doth not concern Infants so I think therfore that they have as little concernment in that Sacrament to which such an Examination is pre-requir'd He who cannot do that which is prerequir'd to the receiving of any Sacrament being to be look'd upon as one for whom that Sacrament was never intended and consequently as one who ought not to be admitted to it Otherwise we must suppose Christ to have intended his Sacraments for those who are not in a condition to perform such things as are prerequir'd by himself to the partaking of it I am yet less concern'd at what the same Author seems to answer to what our Saviour enjoins concerning the doing what we do in this Sacrament in remembrance of him and of his Death For as all the Answer he makes to it is that one may shew forth Christ's Death by the very Act of Communicating and consequently that Infants because capable of that Act may shew forth Christ's Death also So that Answer is defective in this that it supposeth the shewing forth of Christ's Death to others to be all that our Saviour requir'd by doing what we do in remembrance of him The contrary whereof is evident because he commands the Communicant but just before to take what is given him as his Body and Blood and his Apostle St. Paul adjudge some Communicants to condemnation for not discerning in themselves the Lord's Body Both which Passages suppose that the Communicant ought to reflect in his own Mind upon the
to be eaten by the Houshold (c) Exo. 12. ◠of which the younger Infants to be sure were no way capable And it appears from a Passage in Josephus (d) Jud. Antiqu. li. 12. cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that no one that was born was to taste of any Sacrifice till he came to the Temple which we learn from the instance of our Saviour (e) Luke 2.42 Grot. in loc not to have been till they were twelve Years of Age. At or after which time they might be in a capacity to enquire into the meaning of their Paschal Service and receive a due information concerning it Which instead of justifying the communicating of Infants will rather overthrow it and perswade the deferring of it till they be of understanding to consider the nature of the Sacrament and prepare themselves in some measure for the receiving of it One only Argument remains for the administring of this Sacrament to Infants even the long and general practice of the Antient Church in this particular and the like general practice at this day of the Greeks Aethiopians Bohemians and Moravians All which to condemn of Errour may seem a little hard as we must do unless we will at least allow of the lawfulness of the Practice whatsoever we do of the necessity thereof But as I must needs say that I do not see how we can acquit them for Errour considering what hath been before said against the Communion of Infants So I a little wonder how he should stick at the condemnation of the thing it self who so freely acknowledg'd the Practice to be built upon a Text which he himself confesseth to have been mistaken by them The utmost in my opinion that is to be said in behalf of the Antients and accordingly of those Churches which derive their Practice from them is that the Communicating of Infants was an Errour of their charity toward them and whom whilst they were willing to deliver from that Original Corruption wherein they were born and bring them to Christ's Kingdom and Happiness they did not only conferr upon them the Sacrament of Baptism which they had learn'd from the words of our Saviour (f) Mark 10.13 the Doctrine of St. Paul (g) 1 Cor. 7.14 and the Circumcision of the Jewish Infants to be but proper for them but mistaking what our Saviour spake in St. John concerning the necessity of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood for the necessity of a Sacramental Manducation gave them this Sacrament also so the better to secure them of eternal Life and Heaven For as for that Salvo of the Council of Trent (h) Sess 21. cap. 4. that the Antients gave them the Sacrament of the Eucharist out of some probable and temporary Reasons and not out of a Belief of the necessity thereof unto Salvation or the like Salvo of Mr. Thorndike * Epil to the Trag. of the Ch. of Engl. li. 1. cap. 23. who agreeably to the same Opinion makes them look upon that Text in St. John as sufficiently answer'd by the Sacrament of Baptism and their partaking of Christ's Body and Blood in it It is so contrary to the Doctrine of the Antients and particularly to that of St. Cyprian (i) Cypr. Test ad Quirin li. 3. cap. 27. Pope Innocent (k) Epist 93. apud August and St. Augustine in many places of his Works that it is not a little to be wondred at that so learned a Man as Mr. Thorndike could advance so groundless an Assertion For though it be true that St. Cyprian where he makes it his Business to shew that none can enter into the Kingdom of God unless he be baptiz'd and born again doth not only alledge that Text for it (l) Joh. 3.5 which doth more immediately concern it but that unless Men eat Christ's Flesh and drink Christ's Blood they shall have no Life in them Yet that he did not intend thereby their receiving that Body and Blood in Baptism but in the Sacrament of the Eucharist and only made use of that Text as proving Baptism â fortiori because enforcing the necessity of a Sacrament which was to be administred after it is evident from his beginning his next Testimony or Christian Doctrine with these very words That it was a small matter to be baptiz'd and receive the Eucharist unless a Man profit in good Works For how comes the Eucharist to be join'd with Baptism in Testimonies that depend so upon one another but that he had spoken of it just before and consequently meant no other than that Eucharist by eating Christ's Flesh and drinking his Blood according as is but just before alledg'd In like manner though Pope Innocent to shew the foolishness of the Pelagians in affirming that little Children could have eternal Life without Baptism make use of these very words to prove it For unless they shall eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood they shall have no Life in them Yet whosoever shall consider what he saith as it is worded by himself will find that he did not at all intend their receiving the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament of Baptism but in the Sacrament of the Eucharist and that he esteem'd that Sacrament to be as necessary as the former and intended to prove the necessity of Baptism by the necessity of that Sacrament which was to follow it For thus he in his Epistle to the Fathers of the Milevitan Council Now that which your Brotherhood affirms them to preach that little Children may have their rewards of eternal Life even without the Grace of Baptism is extreamly foolish For unless they shall eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood they shall not have Life in them For what was this but to say that they should be so far from having eternal Life without the Grace of Baptism that they could not by the Dispensation of the Gospel attain that Life without the Grace of the Eucharist also Agreeable hereto is the Doctrine of St. Augustine as appears from this following Testimony (m) De peccat merit Rem li. 4. cap. 24. Where having said that by an Antient and Apostolical Tradition as he thought the Churches of Christ were intimately perswaded that without Baptism and the participation of the Lord's Table none could come to the Kingdom of God and eternal Life and confirm'd that Opinion of theirs and his own by Scriptures peculiar to each Sacrament and particularly as to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper by that so much celebrated saying of our Saviour Vnless ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man c. he hath these following words If therefore as so many and so great Divine Testimonies do agree neither Salvation nor Life can be hoped for by any one without Baptism and the Body and Blood of Christ in vain is it promised to little Children without them even without
those two Sacraments which he had before intreated of and which he affirms in the next words the guilt of that sin in Children to be loosed by concerning which the Scripture affirms that no one is free from it though his Life be but of a days continuance PART XI How the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ought to be receiv'd The Contents The receit of this Sacrament suppos'd by the present Question and that therefore first established against the Doctrine of those who make the supposed Sacrifice thereof to be of use to them who partake not Sacramentally of it Enquiry next made How we ought to prepare our selves for it how to demean our selves at the celebration of it and in what Posture to receive it The preparation taken notice of by our Catechism the Examination of our selves whether we truly repent us of our sins stedfastly purposing to lead a new Life c. and the both necessity and means of that Examination accordingly declar'd The examination of our Repentance more particularly insisted upon and that shewn to be most advantageously made by enquiring how we have gain'd upon those sins which we profess to repent of and particularly upon our most prevailing ones which how they are to be discover'd is therefore enquir'd into and the marks whereby they are to be known assigned and explain'd A transition from thence to the examination of the stedfastness of our Purposes to lead a new Life of our Faith in God through Christ our remembrance of his Death and Charity Where the necessity of that Examination is evinced and the means whereby we may come to know whether we have those Qualifications in us discover'd and declar'd How we ought to demean our selves at the celebration of this Sacrament in the next place enquir'd into and that shewn to be by intending that Service wherewith it is celebrated and suiting our Affections to the several parts of it The whole concluded with enquiring in what posture of Body this Sacrament ought to be receiv'd Where is shewn first that the Antients so far as we can judge by their Writings receiv'd in a posture of Adoration and particularly in the posture of standing Secondly that several of the Reformed Churches receive in that or the like posture and that those that do not do not condemn those that do Thirdly that there is nothing in the Example of Christ and his Disciples at the first Celebration of this Supper to oblige us to receive it sitting nor yet in what is alledg'd from the suitableness of that Posture to a Feast and consequently to the present one This as it is a Feast of a different nature from common ones and therefore not to receive Laws from them so the receit thereof intended to express the grateful resentment we have of the great Blessing of our Redemption and stir up other Men to the like resentment of it Neither of which can so advantageously be done as by receiving the Symbols of this Sacrament in such a posture of Body as shews the regard we have for him who is the Author of it VI. THE sixth and last Question proposed to be discoursed of Question What is requir'd of them who come to the Lord's Supper Answer To examin themselves whether they repent them truly of their former sins stedfastly purposing to lead a new Life have a lively Faith in God's mercy through Christ with a thankful remembrance of his Death and be in charity with all men is How this Sacrament ought to be receiv'd Which Question I have proposed in those terms partly that it may come so much the nearer to the last Question of our own Catechism and partly because there is no one sort of Men that doth expresly deny that it ought to be receiv'd by all that are qualified for it as well as administred by those who are the proper Stewards of it For though the Socinians out of a belief of Baptism's being proper only to Jewish or Gentile Converts have thrown off that Sacrament altogether and which is more have represented the shewing forth of Christ's Death as the only design of this yet they have thought fit to retain the use of it as a thing enjoin'd by our Lord himself Though the Tridentine Fathers have also in a great measure transform'd this Sacrament into a thing of another nature and accordingly pointed out other ways for Men to receive benefit by it beside their communicating at it Yet they have declar'd an Anathema (a) Sess 13. Can. 9. against any one that shall deny all and singular the faithful People of Christ to be oblig'd when they come to years of discretion to communicate every year at least at Easter according to the Precept of holy Mother the Church Only because those Fathers seem to found even that single Communion upon the Precept of the Church or at least do not represent it as enjoin'd by any Divine Law And because though they elsewhere profess to wish that they who assist at their several Masses did also Sacramentally communicate at them for their receiving greater benefit by them (b) Sess 22. cap. 6. yet they represent even those where the Priest alone Communicates as common to them that do not I think it not amiss to premise something concerning the obligation of the Faithful to receive this Sacrament as well as to assist at the celebration of it and examine what those Fathers alledge for their loosing the Faithful from it That the Faithful are under an obligation of receiving this Sacrament as well as of assisting at the celebration of it is so evident from the words of the Institution that I know not how our Saviour could have more expresly enjoin'd it For Take Eat saith he concerning the Bread of it And Drink ye all of it saith the same Jesus concerning the Cup With this farther Reason as we learn from the Hoc est enim corpus meum and Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei in the Roman Missal because the one is his Body and the other as certainly the Cup of his Blood as that Missal expresseth it So that if a Command with so substantial a Reason annex'd may be concluded to be obligatory the receit of this Sacrament is And we can no more be freed from doing it than we can be freed from believing that it is Christ's Body and Blood that is tender'd to us or believing it than we may reject so signal a Blessing as that is which was either broken or shed for our Redemption For what is this but as the Author to the Hebrews speaks (c) Heb. 10.28 29. to despise not Moses's Law but one the transgression whereof is worthy of a sorer punishment yea to tread under foot the Son of God and count the Blood of the Covenant wherewith we are sanctified an unholy thing and as such contemptuously to reject it Neither will it avail to say as possibly it may be that they cannot be look'd upon as despisers
of Christ's Body and Blood who do even when they avoid the partaking thereof humbly and devoutly adore them For whatever may be said of that adoration of Christ's Body and Blood To adore them is not to eat or drink of the Symbols of them and that Law therefore that enjoins both the one and the other as much despis'd as if they ador'd them a thousand times and together therewith that Body and Blood which it so graciously enjoins us to partake of Agreeable to this Command of our Saviour concerning eating and drinking the Sacramental Elements is his own subjoyning to the mention of each of those Acts (d) 1 Cor. 11.24 25. that they should do them in remembrance of him and of his death which is a farther inculcating of the former Command of Christ and of the Faithful's doing honour to him by the observation of it And to the same purpose is St. Paul's reckoning that eating and drinking in the number of those things whereby we are to shew (e) 1 Cor. 11.26 forth Christ's death For so the connexion of those words with Do this in remembrance of me perswades His cautioning the Corinthians thereupon against an unworthy (f) 1 Cor. 11.27.29 eating and drinking and willing them after they had examin'd themselves so to partake (g) 1 Cor. 11.28 of the Sacramental Elements In fine his supposing the Christians when they came together to the places of their Assemblies to come together to eat (h) 1 Cor. 11.20.33 the Lord's Supper For what are these but so many several Proofs that he look'd upon that eating and drinking not only as things enjoin'd by Christ in this Solemnity but the principal end of their meeting at it and the very top and perfection of it A Man would think that these Arguments were of sufficient force to shew our receit of the Sacramental Elements to be a thing ordinarily enjoin'd upon us and without the doing whereof therefore we cannot expect to reap the benefit of them But the Tridentine Fathers tell us another story and as they have transform'd a Sacrament of Christ into a Sacrifice of their own making so they tell us that that Sacrifice though the Priest alone partake Sacramentally of it is common to those that do not Partly because the people communicate spiritually in it (i) Sess 22. cap. 6. and partly because it is celebrated by the publick Minister of the Church not only for himself but for all the Faithful that pertain to Christ's Body It is very well though I think not very agreeably to their own Principles that they make the commonness of such Masses or Sacrifices to consist partly in the Peoples communicating spiritually in them For so some kind of communicating will appear to be necessary whatever the Sacramental one is which I do not see how the Dead are capable of But certainly Take Eat or as the Roman Missal reads it Take and eat ye all of this and drink ye all of this betoken a Sacramental eating and drinking as well as a Spiritual one Otherwise those words will be ill employ'd to prove that corporal manducation and drinking of Christ's Body and Blood which the Romanists so studiously advance Now if Christ himself require a Sacramental communicating at the celebration of the Lord's Supper or as the Romanists are pleas'd to phrase it at the celebration of the Mass I doubt a bare Spiritual communicating at it will hardly obtain the benefit thereof for those who do so communicate when they may pass to a Sacramental one This I take to be a sufficient Answer to what is alledged in the first place for those Masses at which the Priest only communicates being common to the People with him And I think it will be as easie to answer to what is alledged for it in the second place from those Masses being offer'd up by the publick Minister of the Church not only for himself but for all the Faithful that pertain to the Body of Christ For granting such an Offering as is pretended yet can they not expect the benefit of it who partake not of it as he enjoin'd who was both the Instituter and Exemplar of it The Sacrifice of the Cross of Christ being no farther available to any than it is apprehended and applied as he who offer'd it up appointed But to return to that which is the proper subject of this Enquiry even to shew how this Sacrament ought to be received by us Where again I will enquire 1. How we ought to prepare our selves for it 2. How we ought to demean our selves at the celebration of it 3. In what posture to receive it 1. It is the first of these which our Catechism speaks to even how we ought to prepare our selves for it Which it affirms to be by examining our selves whether we repent us truly of our sins stedfastly purposing to lead a new Life have a lively Faith in God's Mercy through Christ with a thankful remembrance of his Death and be in Charity with all Men. That we ought to examine our selves about the truth of our Repentance is manifest on the one hand from the necessity thereof toward the procuring of that Pardon which this Sacrament is intended to convey and on the other from our aptness to be deceived in it For generally speaking every little sorrow for sin though it be occasion'd only by what we are likely to suffer by it passeth with us for true Repentance And provided we lament our sins upon what account soever it be we think our selves truly penitent and as such therefore duly qualified for that or any other religious performance But as it appears from what I have elsewhere said (k) Expl. of Bapt. Part 10. that the Repentance which the Gospel requires is a repentance toward God and a sorrow according to God and must therefore proceed from a due sense of the affront we have offer'd whether to his Authority or Kindness So the best and most certain way to know whether our Repentance be such is by the amendment it produceth in us and particularly as to those Errors that prevail most in us and which the Scripture entitles (l) 1 Kings 8.38 the plague of a man 's own heart For he that finds himself to gain upon these needs not suspect the truth of his Repentance because nothing else but a due sorrow for Sin can carry a Man to abandon that to which the bent of his own nature doth forcibly encline him Upon which account I should advise that instead of running over a long catalogue of sins which few Men have leisure for and doth however but divert them from the main they would endeavour to find out their most prevailing sins and examine the truth of their Repentance by their conquest over them In order whereunto I shall lay down three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or marks whereby those prevailing sins may be known Now the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or mark
sin is generally Luxury and Vanity If in a City or other place of Trade Deceit and Covetousness If in a mean estate any where repining and murmuring If in a more honourable one oppressing or Lording it over other Men. By one or other of these marks a Man may come to know his prevailing Sin and knowing it to know also the truth of his repentance for them and others For if he finds himself to get ground on such sins he shall not need to doubt of the truth of his Repentance because there cannot be a better proof of that than its leading Men to abandon their sins and particularly such of them as have the greatest force with the committers of them and are therefore the most difficult to be overcome And though it be true that all Men neither have nor can have that proof of their Repentance For they who have but lately begun to make a strict search into themselves must of necessity be without it how true soever their Repentance is Though they ought not therefore if they find no other reason to question the truth of it to condemn or doubt of that their Repentance because true Repentance must of necessity precede the Fruits of it Yet I think they will act most safely for themselves and most for the comfort of their own Souls I do not say if they stay so long from the participation of this Sacrament till they can have the Fruits of their Repentance to justifie the sincerity thereof but if when they may they think betimes and often what Repentance they are to bring with them to this Sacrament and accordingly set themselves as early to improve what they have and bring forth the fruits of it in those instances wherein they have been most peccant and are by their natural inclinations most likely to be so still For so they shall be able to see by the event what the nature of their Repentance is and accordingly be stirred up to labour after a more sincere one or be satisfied by the fruits they have brought forth that they are so far duly qualified for the partaking of this so excellent a Sacrament Having said thus much concerning the examination of our Repentance which I judge of all other things to be most necessary to be enquir'd into I shall need to say the less concerning that which follows even the examination of our stedfast purpose to lead a new Life as well as of the truth of our Repentance For as it is evident from what hath been said elsewhere (t) Part V. that that ought to be enquir'd into because the thing we are to make profession of in the receit of this Sacrament So he who is satisfied of the truth of his Repentance by the fruits which it hath produc'd may by the same fruits satisfie himself of the stedfastness of his present Purpose to abandon his former sins and pursue the contrary Graces There being no great likelihood of his departing from his present Purpose who knows himself to have already produc'd those good fruits which he now resolves upon as that too out of the Conscience of his own obligation to them and the just sense he hath of his former aberrations and the Affront he offer'd to his both Authority and Kindness to whom he now devotes himself anew Only if any Man find not in himself this most sure proof of the stedfastness of his Purpose and yet find in himself a disposition thus to shew forth his Saviour's death and a desire to partake of the several Graces and Benefits of this Sacrament Let him see whether he can by his own earnest Prayers and reflections and God's Blessing upon them both bring himself to resolve as well against the particular ways and means whereby he was formerly train'd into sin as against the sin it self and upon such particular ways and means also whereby it is most certainly prevented For so I do not see why he should not look upon his Resolution as stedfast and such as God will both accept of in the present case and add farther strength to by the participation of this Sacrament those Resolutions which prove in the event to be uncertain and tottering being for the most part only general ones and such as descend not to those particular ways and means whereby men come to be ensnar'd or whereby that seduction of theirs may be certainly prevented Thus for instance if a Man who hath heretofore given himself more liberty in drinking than the Laws of Temperance will allow should reflect so far upon his former failings this way as not only to resolve against the like intemperance for the future but against such Company too so far as he may by which he hath been drawn into it or to keep however within such measures that there can be no danger for him of offending I do not see why that Man may not look upon such a Resolution as a stedfast one and which God the giver of all Grace will add farther firmness and stedfastness to and make it hold out even against those temptations which at present it may be it is not in a condition to grapple with The Catechism goes on to tell us That we ought to examine our selves in the third place whether we have a lively faith in God's mercy through Christ As well it way when he who was the Institutor of this Sacrament prompts us to receive the Elements thereof as that Body of his which was broken for us and as that Blood which was shed for the remission of our sins That as it supposeth that we ought to look upon the mercy of God as convey'd to us by Christ's death and accordingly expect that mercy by it and trust upon that death for it which is that our Church understands by Faith (u) See Expl. of Bapt. Part 10. so supposing too that we ought to approach this Sacrament with such a sorrow for sin and resolution against it as so great a Benefit requires which will convert this Faith or trust into a lively and operative one Now whether we have such a lively Faith or no we may easily satisfie our selves by its being attended or not attended with that sorrow and resolution and which how they are to be known I have already accounted for I shall hardly need to say any thing concerning examining our selves in the fourth place whether we have a thankful remembrance of Christ's death Partly because that thankful remembrance is one of the principal things enjoin'd in the celebration of this Sacrament and we therefore to bring that with us to the due receiving of it And partly because it will not be difficult for us to discover whether we have such a Remembrance or no That being to be judg'd in part by our own desire of receiving the present Sacrament but more by the care we take to prepare our selves for it as by other ways and means so by an earnest reflection upon the Benefits of that Death
same Justin Martyr (a) Apol. 2. p. 98. receive these things as common Bread and common Drink But as Jesus Christ our Saviour being incarnate by the Word of God took both Flesh and Blood for our Salvation so also we have been taught that that Meat which is made Eucharistical by the Prayers of that Word which came from him and by which our Flesh and Blood are nourished through the conversion thereof into them is the Flesh and Blood of Jesus Christ incarnate And that they had not a less venerable esteem for the same Sacramental Elements in the succeeding times may appear from Tertullian's (b) Despectac cap. 25. giving them the title of Sanctum or the Holy thing and from the Bishop or Priest's delivering them with these words (c) Tert. ib. cum notis Rigalt The Body of Christ or The Blood of Christ and the Peoples receiving them with an Amen or So be it (d) Iterum Euseb Eccles Hist li. 6. cap. 43. cum notis Valesii So praying that what was intended by Christ and accordingly delivered by his Minister as the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood might prove such effectually to them For who can think after all this unless there were some presumption of their receiving the Elements in any other posture but that they receiv'd them in such a one as was suitable to such thoughts and such practices and not in one which hath no affinity at all with them Especially if there appear any express proof near those times of their receiving them in a posture of Adoration and particularly in the posture of standing Which that there is is evident from an Epistle of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria to Xystus Bishop of Rome (e) Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 7. cap. 9. For speaking therein of one who had been long admitted among the Faithful but beginning to doubt of the truth of his Baptism among Hereticks was importunate with him to Baptize him anew he tells Xystus that he for his part did not dare to do it and therefore answer'd the Person That that long Communion which he had in the Church suffic'd him for that Purpose For how could he have the confidence to renew him again who had oftentimes heard the Service of the Eucharist and with the rest of the Congregation answer'd Amen to it who had stood by the Table and stretched out his hands to receive the holy Food in fine who had receiv'd that holy Food and for a long time been partaker of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ But beside that the Antients receiv'd in a posture of Adoration and they therefore who represent sitting as the only allowable one so far forth guilty of singularity It will be hard to find any among the Moderns who do not receive in a posture of Adoration or at least do not believe it to be lawful which is a farther proof of the others singularity For the Bohemian Churches who were the first that reform'd from Popery in those poor remains of them that yet continue receive kneeling (f) Durel View of the Gov. and publ Worsh c. Sect. 1. Par. 57. to this day and which is more when they join'd with those of Polonia Major and Lithuania agreed unanimously to forbid the receiving of the Sacrament sitting as a Custom which was brought in by the Arrians The Reformed Churches (g) Durel Serm. of the Liturg. of France so long as they continu'd received standing and the great Men thereof as a reverend Person of our Nation (h) Hammond View of the New Direct c. informs us made a low Cringe before they took it into their hands Both French and Dutch in fine when they gave their Opinion concerning the Gesture us'd by the Bohemians did also deliver it as such That every Church ought to be left to its own liberty (i) Ham. L'Estrange Alli of Div. Offic. Cap. 7. in Annot. in this particular All which things consider'd it will appear that if they among us who advance sitting at the Sacrament be not therefore guilty of singularity yet they must be for advancing it as the only allowable one as if their Reasons were good they must be thought to do But because how singular soever this Opinion of theirs may be yet it is pretended that it hath Christ and his Disciples example on its side together with the suffrage of Reason Therefore it will be but just to examine those Pretences and see what there is of strength in them And first it is pretended that our Saviour Christ and his Disciples sat at the receiving of this Sacrament or at least us'd such a posture as was answerable to sitting among us even lying along upon Beds as the fashion of those Countries was And it is not to be denied that there is sufficient ground from the Scripture for their using that Posture at the Passover and not unlikely neither that they held it on at the Celebration of the Lord's Supper But will it therefore follow that we ought to look upon no other Posture than that or one of the same nature as allowable For beside that things which are but probable may be false and things improbable true Beside that things probable for that very reason cannot conclude the Conscience of any Man and ought much less to be made use of to conclude the Consciences of others If Christ and his Disciples practice in this particular were as certain as it is supposed to be probable yet could it not be of force to conclude ours unless there were some Command to oblige us to follow it or some cogent Reason in the Practice it self to shew the necessity thereof Because Example consider'd in it self is no Rule of humane Actions in as much as it rather shews what others have done before us than what we our selves are to do in any Affair Which is so true as to that very Example which we have now before us that they who insist upon it in the posture of receiving do yet without any hesitancy depart from it in other Circumstances and such too as are more certain than the posture of receiving is For they no more than we think themselves oblig'd to receive either in the Evening or in an upper Room or in unleavened Bread all which Christ and his Disciples must be acknowledg'd to have done in that Supper which he celebrated with them But therefore as if they will have this Example of Christ and his Disciples to be obligatory they must find out some Command obliging us to follow it or some cogent Reason in the practice of it self to shew the necessity thereof So if we stay till that be done we may stay long enough because there is no just Pretence for the one or the other of them For what shadow is there for instance of any Command to follow Christ or his Disciples Example in this as there is for the taking of the Sacramental Elements and eating