supposition renders it most probable be it known to all such unnatural Parents as reject Infant Baptism that they harden their hearts against their own flesh Q Why so A. Because Children are parts of Parents and by this contempt of Baptism they reject the Counsel of God against themselves and their Children Q What other reason have you for Infant Baptism A. 3. Children were ever admitted to the sign and Seal of this Covenant which of old was Circumcision and Baptism succeeds in the room of Circumcision Q. How doth that appear A. 1. It appears in that the Apostle of the Circumcision commands Baptism upon the same ground that Circumcision was 2. Because St. Paul in Col. 2. gives to Baptism the very Name of Circumcision to teach us that it succeeds iâ— Object But if Baptism ought to be administred to all those to whom Circumcision was administred because Baptism succeeds Circumcision by the same reason the Eucharist ought to be administred to all those who did eat the Paschal Lamb seeing the Eucharist succeeds the Iewish Passover But you stay longer before you admit your Children to the Lords Supper than the Iews did before they admitted their Children to the eating of the Paschal Lamb. A. The Jews admitted their Children to eat of the Paschal Lamb so soon as they were able to eat flesh and to ask their Fathers the reason of that legal ceremony and we defer the admitting of ours to the Lords Supper until they be capable of those dispositions which God requires and are able to examine themselves according to the command of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. Let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup. Q. 96. What is the Lords Supper A. The Lords Supper is a Sacrament wherein by giving and receiving Bread and Wine according to Christs appointment his Death is shewed forth and the worthy receivers are not after a corporal and carnal manner but by Faith made partakers of his Body and Blood with all his benefits unto their spiritual nourishment and growth in Grace Explic. Q. What is the other Sacrament of the New Testament called A. The Lords Suâ—pâ—â— Q. Why so A. Because it was instituted at that time after the Paschal Supper was endâ—d Q. Are we therefore bound to celebrate it alwaies at the same time A. No because there is no command for it nor is there the same reason for it now as then this circumstance of time not obliging us to do it after Supper any more than the fashion of lying along binds us to the using of the same posture both of them being upon occasion of the Paschal Supper then Q. Why do you super add the circumstance and limitation of that present time A. Because the first Paschal Supper in Egypt was eaten standing but afterwards sitting and lying along leaning one on anothers breasts in sign of their rest and security otherwise than they had in Egypt Q. What are the sacramental Elements in the Lords Supper A. Bread and Wine Q What are the sacramental actions A. Breaking the Bread giving and receiving the Bread and Wine Q. What is signified by the Bread and Wine A. The Body and Blood of Christ. Q. What are the Ministers actions A. Breaking the Bread and giving the Bread and Wine not withholding the Cup from the people as the Papists sacrilegiously do Q. What is signified by the Ministers breaking the Bread A. Christs Body being broken for us Q. Why must the people partake of the Elements of both kinds A. Because all that were present at the first Sacrament given by the Lord Jesus himself did so Q How dâ—th that appear A. By the plain express words of Scripture Mat. 26. 26 27. Mark 14. 22. 23. Q. But all present at the first Sacrament were the twelve whom Christ sent forth as Apostles to Preach the Word and administer the Sacraments and therefore they and their Successors only had the priviledâ—e to drink of the Cup A. 1. By this argument the Bread may be taken away from the people too and so they would have no right to any part of this Sacrament And what is this but egregious sacriledge in robbing the people of their highest Church-priviledge 2. The practice and writings of the ancient Church in this matter which is the best way to explicate any such difficulty in Scripture is a clear Testimony that both the Bread and the Wine belong to all the people in the Name of the twelve Disciples at that time Q. What is signified by the giving of the Bread and Wine A. Gods giving all Christ to us Q. What is the peoples action A. Receiving eating and drinking the Bread and Wine Q. What is signified by the peoples receiving A. Their taking a whole Christ. Q. Why are the Bread and Wine given apart and not together A. To shew forth Christs Blood in the parting of his Blood from his Body Q. What is the rule of Administration and Participation A. All must be done according to Christs appointment Q. For what end is this Supper celeâ—rated A. Hereby Christs death is shewed â—orth Q. How many sorts of Receivers are there A. Two worthy and unworthy Q. What do the unworthy Receivers partake of A. They pertake of the outward Elements only Q. What do the worthy Receivers partake of A. They partake of Christs Body and Blood Q. After what manner do not these worthy Receivers partake of Christs Body and Blood A. Not after a corporal and carnal manner they partake not of the substance of his flâ—sh and blood Q. Why so A. For that is in Heaven Q. But do not you affirm with the Paâ—ists that in this Sacrament the Body and Blood together with the Divinity of Iesus Christ are truly really and substantially present and that the whole substance of the Bread is converted into his Body and the whole substance of the Wine into his Blood A. Nâ— should we do it our Senses our Reason and the Word of God would give us the Lye We perceive by our Senses that the Bread and Wine are the same they were before Consecration And we are not more certain that there is a God who created us and a Sun that gives us light than we are fully perswaded that the Divinity of Jesus Christ is every where and his humane nature at the right hand of God from whence he shall come to Judge the quick and the dead Q. And why are you afraid to affirm that the Elements of Bread and Wine art transubstantiate and changed into the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ when the Scripture is plain and express that Christ took the Bread and said This is my Body And after the same manner took the Cup which Protestants as well as Papists interpret figuratively for the Wine in the Cup and said This is my blood of the New Testament c. as you mâ—y read in the following Texts Mat. 26. 26
or they do not If they do then they worship false Gods and are guilty of gross Idolatry there being no similitude or likeness of the true God If they do not then is ignorance the Mother of that Dâ— votion and with the Samaritans they worship they know not what Or if they do worship the true God they worship him ignorantly and know not the manner of the God that made the Heavens and the Earth Deut. 4. 12 15. Isa. 40. 18. Ioh. 4. 22. Acts 17. 23. 2 Kings 7. 26. Q. Why can there be no manner of similitude of the true God A. Because he dwelleth not in Temples made with hands and is the unapproachable invisible God Acts 17. 24. 1 Tim. 6. 16. Q. The Papists worship God by Images the Protestants worship God without them which way therefore are we to worship the true God A. The way the only infallible Judge of Controversies hath declared unto us Q. Is the Pope this infallible Iudge A. There is no infallible Judge upon Earth and the Pope being but the Hâ—ad of a Party the supream Head of the Romanists neither he nor they can be Judge in their own Cause Iam. 4. 12. Mat. 23. 9 10. Prov. 18. 17. Q. Who then is the infallible Iudge of Controversies A. Christ the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father He is the only infallible Judge of Controversies who hath told us all things and wâ— have his Determinations upon Record Q. Where are his Determinations Recorded A. In the holy Scriptures Q. What are his Determinations concerning God and the manner of his worship A. They are 1. Negative that God dwelleth not in Temples neither is to be worshipped by Images made with mens hands Acts 17. 24. with 1 Kings 8. 27. Acts 17. 25. 2. They are affirmative viz. That God is a Spirit and that they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and truth Ioh. 4. 23 24. Q What other sin is chiefly forbidden in this Commandment A. Superstition Q. What is Superstition A. Superstition in the proper and strict notion of the word is the worshipping of Idols or dead men Act. 17. 22. But this is the same with that Idolatry the giving that worship and glory to others which is due to God alone which is forbidden in the first Commandment Q. What is therefore Superstition in the 〈◊〉 generally received notion and as it is forbidden in this Commandment A. It is when things are either abhorred or observed with a zealous or fearful but erroneous relation to God by means of which the superstitious serve either the true God with needless Offices or defraud him of necessary Duties or bestow such honours and service upon others as is proper for and should be peculiar for him only Or More plainly thus It is the worshipping of God in any other way or by any other means than what he hath appointed in his Word called Ordinances the Commandments and Doctrines of men Q. How manifold is this Superstition A. Twofold Affirmative and Negative Q. What is Affirmative Superstition A. That whereby the Superstitious serve the true God with needless Offices Q. And what the Negative A. That whereby men out of a sâ—â—â—pulous Conscience or ignorant fear of displeasing God abstain from things lawful and laudable as sinful and ungodly Q. Doth the Scripture warrant this distinction A. Yes Q. 1. What is the Idolatry and Superstition of the Church of Rome A. The worshipping of the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist out of a false and groundless perswasion that they are substantially changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. 2. The worshipping and invocation of Saints and Angels and particularly of the Virgin Mary which hath now for some Ages been a principal part of their Religion 3. Their worshipping of Images Which practice notwithstanding all their distinctions about it which are no other but what the Heathens used in the same case flies as full in the face of the second Commandment as deliberate and malicious killing of a man is against the sixâ—h Acts 17. 29. Rom. 1. 23. 4. Their superstitious Fasting and ab staining from Flesh in Lent Their superstitious Holy-daies Their adding Cream Oyl and Spittle to the water in Baptism and their Baptizing of Bells Their praying upon Beads and mary more superstitious customs For which there is not the least command in the Scriptures Q. What if the Doctrine of Transubstantiation be not true A. Then by the confession of several of their own learned Writers they are guilty of gross Idolatry Q. Doth not the Bread in the Communion remain Bread after the words of Consecration A. Yes the Scripture expresly calls it so after the words of Consecration 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28. Q. But what if the Bread be transubstantiâ—te and turned into the very Body of Christ A. Then all mens senses are deceived in a plain sensible matter wherein 't is as hard for them to be deceived as in any thing in the world Q. Why so A. For two things can hardly be imagined more different a little bit of Waâ—er and the whole Body of â— man Q. But what if the Testimony of sensâ— be not to be relied upon A. Then no man is sure that Christianâ—ty it self is true Q. Why so A. For the utmost assurance that the Apostles had of the Truth of Christianity was the Testimony of their own senses concerning our Saviours Miracles Q. And what if the Testimony of sense 〈◊〉 to be relied upon A. Then it plainly follows that no man no not the Apostles themselves had more reason to believe Christianity to be true than every man hath to believe Transubstantiation to be false Q. But if the case be so plain a man would think that at least the Teachers and Guides of that Church should be sensible of it A. Why they are so and afraid the People should be so too and therefore by their corrupt Glosses and Phâ—risaiâ—al Traditions in their interpreting the holy Scriptures they tye up and keep the Pâ—ople in ignorance of the true meaning of those places which do more expresly condemn their damnable Idolatrous practises and their superstitious customs and in their ordinary Caâ—â—chisms and Manuals of Devotion they leave out the second Commandment and divide the tenth into two to make up the Number lest if the common people should know it their Consciences should startle at the doing of a thing so directly contrary to the plain command of God Q. And is it not well observed by the learned from Deut. 11. 28. That he that professeth Idolatry is as if he denied the whole Law A. Yes Q. But because after all the unanswerable Objections and Arguments of the Protestants against Transubstantiation that Monster aâ—d shame of humane nature and the other Blasphenies and absurd Doctrines of the Papists they do all unanimously betake themselves to the authority of their Church as their main and last Refuge and tell us
c. Mark 14 22 c. 1 Cor. 11. 23 c. A. Indeed if the forecited Texts ought to be understood in the literal sense we need not dread this Popish Doctrine But if they ought of necessity to have a mystical and figurative sense and interpretation put upon them we may well enough be afraid of that Doctrine which the Papists themselves in the supposed case confess to be gross damnable Idolatry Q But if we once take this liberty to impâ—se our mystical or figurative Interpretation on the Scripture without express warrant of the Scripture it self we shall have no setled belief but be liable continually to be turned aside by any one that can invent a new mystical meaning of the Scripture there being no certain rule to judge of such meanings as there is of the literal ones Nor is there any error how absurd and impious soever but may on such terms be accorded with the Scripture Why therefore must we of necessity suppose the forecited Texts to be understood in the figurative and not in the literal sense A. 1. Because the letter is contrary and repugnant to our senses which the Scripture it self intimates to be of infallible certainty 2. It is absurd and contradictive of right reason 3. There appears much in the contexts to cross it nothing at all to countenance it 4. Because other places collated expresly thwart and contradict it Q. What sense then may or must be put upon the forecited Texts A. It will be an Introduction and a very good help to us for the right understanding of the said Texts to consider those observations taken from the Jewish phrases and customs used in this matter viz. 1. That the Lamb that was drest in the Paschal Supper and set upon the Table was wont to be called the Body of the Passover or the Body of the Paschal Lamb and probably Christ alludes to this phrase when he saith This is my Body as if he should say the Paschal Lamb and the Body of it i. e. the representation of that on the Table in the Jewish Feast that was the memorial of deliverance out of Egypt and type of your deliverance out of the state of sin and death I will now have abrogated and do now institute Bread and Wine instead of that Paschal Lamb that you may hereafter retain and continue to posterity a Memorial and Symbol of me who am the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world and am now about to be sacrificed for you This for the words My Body and my Blood But then 2. For the whole phrase and form of speech This is my Body this is my Blood It seems to be answerable to and substituted instead of the Paschal form This is the Bread of affliction which our Fathers eat in Egypt or This is the unleavened Bread c. or This is the Passover And therefore the Bread and the Wine in the Eucharist are no more the very Body and Blood of Christ than that Bread which the Children of Israel eat in the Land of Canaan was that Identical that very Bread of affliction which their Fathers eat in the Land of Egypt Q. Is not this Popish Doctrine that the Bread of the Eucharist is transubstantiated into the Body and the Wine into the Blood of Christ a very ancient Doctrine A. It is but four hundred fifty nine years since it was declared by Pope Innocent the third in the Council of Lateran Q Is not this impossible and incomprehensible error of Transubstantiation to be rejected with our utmost Detestation A. Yes Q. Doth not this Doctrine suppose a silly Priest to do that which all the Angels cannot do and that is to make his Maker as the Papists call the Host and the people to devour their God A. Yes Q Can they justifie this by Gods omnipotency that God is able to effect it A. No this is no better argument than the Turks may justifie most of the sopperies of their Alcoran by Q. What reasons and grounds have you for the rejection of this abomination A. There are two grounds especially for the rejection of it 1. The Idolatry and Sacriledge which doth ensue upon it and that is the Adoration and worship of the Host a piece of Bread and the mutilation or maiming of the Sacrament by Bread only and the propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ himself in the Mass who was once only offered up to God upon the Cross all which are the issue of this error 2. The Monsters of contradiction and absurdity to sense and reason which follow thereupon It was begotten by feigned Miracles and fabulous Legends and is the Mother of Blasphemies and inextricable absurdities and hath set Faith it self on the Râ—ck and surpasseth all the Harlotry that the Adulterate Church of Rome that Mother of Fornications ever brought forth Q. If you can but make good this high charge you have drawn up against that most degenerate and corrupted Church of Rome in this one error of Transubstantiation being comprehensive of all errors Papâ—l Rome being nothing else but the worst corruption of the once most famous Church of Rome whose Faith was spoken of throughout the world you may easily perswade all the friends of the Bride the Lambs Wife to aboâ—inate all the other Fornications of that Whorish Church And because the Protestants Arguments against Transubstantiation may convince us how fully they have made good this charge pray produce a few of the many Arguments they have against this Mother Error A. 1. Suppose Christ sitting at the Table with his Disciples and eating thâ—s Bread and drinking this Cup first as the custom at the Paschal Supper was and as the Papists generally and the Fathers hold and we deny not because the Scripture seems plain for it Mat. 26. 29. Hence forth I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine supposing therefore this How is it possible or imaginable that he should eat himself or how can he sit at Table and yet be in the mouths of the Apostles Was he at the same time in the Apostles mouths or stomachs while he sate and rose from Table and discoursed those three Chapters of Iohn 15 16 17. Or while he sweat that bloody sweat in his Agony in the Garden c. A monstrous impossibility 2. It 's impossible to make that which was before existent and in being Can a Father beget a Son that is already begotten Can an Architect build an House that is already built Can the Body of Christ which is before the Conversion of the Bread be made or produced by the turning of Bread into it Can he that was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary be made by pronouncing of four or five words If ever delusions were strong these are For to make that which is made and to unmake that which is made are equally impossible 3. They say that the substance of Bread and Wine is avoided and that
only the accidents remain so that there is length and nothing long breadth and nothing broad thickness and nothing thick whiteness and nothing white moisture and nothing moist sweetness and nothing sweet that is a long broad thick white moist sweet nothing The Priest pours out nothing but Lines and Colours when he pours out the Wine for these accidents of Bread and Wine are not in the Bread because that is avoided and vanisht and they are not in the Body of Christ as themselves say and yet it is plain this Bread and Wine do nourish the Body and is the Body nourished by meer accidents Can there be plainer contradictions 4. Can the same Body at the same time have his just Dimensions distance of parts symmetry proportion as the Body of Christ hath and yet not have these because all parts Yea the whole Body of Christ say they is in one and the self same point or crumb of Bread 5. Can the Body of Christ which is much greater be wholly contained in a Waâ—er or piece of Bread in his full Dimensions and that as many times as there are points crumbs drops in the Bread or Wine 6. Can the Bread be turned into the very Body of Christ and yet not any thing of that Bread become any thing of Christ nor the matter nor form nor accidents of Bread be made either the matter or form or accidents of Christ 7. Can the same thing as Christs true Body at the same time be wholly above it self and wholly below it self within and without it self Can it be moved and yet be still be carried from one place to another and yet not move be brought from Heaven to Earth and yet not come out of Heaven Who then can assure us that when Christ hung upon the Cross he was not walking somewhere else Crucified and not Crucified eaten and not eaten alive in one and dead in another place 8. What dishonour do these men render the Body of Christ obnoxious unto to be eaten by wicked men by brute Creatures by Mice by other vermine to be cast into some unclean place For so long as the form of Bread remains so long the Body of Christ is there though it be in the Mouth or Belly of a Mouse saith Hales and the rest of the Schoolmen who do one where or another acknowledge the most of these monstrous Absurdities and go about to heal and solve them Q. We shall surcease from raking further into the ingrateful sink whose Name Transubstantiation is but of yesterday in comparison and which dishonours the Body of Christ into a Monster destroyes the nature of a Sacrament and fills the world with dreadful Contentions and broils And shall now consider with our selves what may profitably be observed from all this What therefore may be observed upon the whole matter A. We may observe 1. What grievous impositions the Romanists lay upon the Faith of them that are devoted to her Communion 2. What contradictions and absurdities the common people do ignorantly and implicitly believe 3. What strong delusions even to believe lies God gives up learned men unto that refuse the simplicity of the truth for interests and politick ends 4. What a Mercy of God it is to deliver us from that Tyranny which leaves us no other choice but to swallow and digest such impossible things or to be sacrificed in flames and the Lord forbid the Re-entrance of that Religion among us which in all likelihood will cost us our Souls or our Lives Q. Since the worthy Receivers are not after a corporal and carnal manner partakers of Christs Body and Blood After what manner are they partakers of them A. By Faith Q How understand you that A. As truly as the Minister gives them the Bread and Wine so truly doth God give them the Body and Blood of Christ that is the Crucified Saviour not by local motion but by real communication not to their teeth but to their Souls and consequently exhibits to them all the benefits thereof to their spiritual nourishment and growth in Grace and all the advantages that flow to them from the death of Christ. Q. 97. What is required to the worthy receiving of the Lords Supper A. It is required of them that would worthily partake of the Lords Supper that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lords Body of their Faith to feed upon him of their Repentance Love and new Obedience lest coming unworthily they eat and drink Judgement to themselves Explic. Q. How ought Christians to partake of the Lords Supper A. They ought to partake worthily that is suitably with a suitable frame of heart to this Ordinance Q. What is the great duty of those that would thus partake A. It is required that they examine themselves Q. How many things must they examine themselves about A. Five especially viz. 1. Knowledge 2. Faith 3. Love 4. Repentance 5. New Obedience Q. Must every one that cometh to the Lords Supper have Knowledge A. Yes Q Why is Knowledge necessary A. To discern the Lords Body Q. What other graces must they examine themselves about A. Their Faith Repentance and Love Q. In their examination what must they look after A. Two things especially 1. That they have these Graces 2. That the said Graces be in readiness for service and exercise that is that they so stir up these Graces of the Holy Ghost as they may be most profitably exerted in this most Sacred solemn Ordinance Q. Why is Faith necessary A. To feed on Christ. Iohn 6. 53. Q. Why is Repentance necessary A. Repentance for sin will fit them to receive and sweeten their receiving the benefits of Christs death to their Souls Q. Why is Love necessary A. Because they who have no Love to God and Christ and their Brethren are unfit to receive the pledge of Gods Love to themselves Q. What else must they examine themselves about A. New Obedience whether they propose and practise it in any good measure Q. Why is New Obedience necessary A. Because Christ only communicates the benefits of his death to them that obey him Q. What if any Communicants shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the Lord unworthily A. They shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ Q. What danger is there in that A. All such Communicants eat and drink Judgement to themselves Q. 98. What is Prayer A. Prayer is an offering up of our desires to God for things agreeable to his Will in the Name of Christ with confession of our sins and thankful acknowledgement of his mercies Explic. Q. What are the parts of Prayer A. Confession Petition and Thanksgiving Q. And how many things are there as the matter of these A. Three our sins as the matter of our Confession our desires and wants as the matter of our Petition and our Mercies as the matter of our Thanksgiving Q. What is Confession A. A due acknowledgement of