hath this force and power to testifie and seal by the commandement of God through the promise of grace adjoined by Christ unto this rite rightly used For Christ baptiseth us by the hand of his Ministers as he speaketh unto us by the mouth of his Ministers 4. Wherefore there is in baptism a double water an externall visible water which is elementary and an internall invisible celestiall which is the bloud and spirit of Christ So also there is a double washing an externall visible and signifying washing namely the sprinkling or powring of water which is corporall that is is perceived by the parts and senses of the body and an internall invisible and signified washing namely remission of sins for the bloud of Christ shed for us and our regeneration by the holy Ghost and our ingraffing into his body which is spirituall that is is perceived and received by faith and the spirit Lastly there is also a double administer of baptisme an externall of the externall baptisme which is the Minister of the Church baptising us by his hand and water an internall of the internall baptisme which is Christ himselfe baptising us by his bloud and spirit 5. Neither is the water changed into the bloud or spirit of Christ neither is the bloud of Christ present in the water or in the same place with the water Neither are their bodies who are baptised washed therewith visibly neither is the holy Ghost by his substance or vertue more in this water then else-where but in the right use of baptisme he worketh in the hearts of them who are baptised and spiritually sprinkleth and washeth them with the bloud of Christ and hee useth this externall symbole or signe as an instrument and as a visible word or promise to stay and stir up the faith of them who are baptised 6. When as then baptisme is said to be the washing of the new birth to save us or to wash away our sins it is meant that the externall baptism is a signe of the internall that is of regeneration or our new birth of salvation and spirituall washing and this internall baptisme is said to be joyned with that externall baptisme in the right use and administration thereof 7. But notwithstanding so is sin in baptism abolished that we are delivered from being obnoxious to the wrath of God and from the condemnation of eternall punishment and further newnesse of life is begun in us by the holy Ghost but yet the remnants of sin remain in us untill the end of this life 8. Now all they and they alone receive baptism to the right use who are renewed or renewing and are baptised to those ends whereto baptisme was by Christ instituted 9. The Church doth rightly administer baptism to all them and to them alone whom she ought to repute in the number of the regenerate or members of Christ 10. Seeing also the infants of Christians are of the Church into which Christ will have all those received and inrolled by baptism who belong unto him and therefore baptism was substituted in the place of circumcision whereby as well unto the infants as unto the elder sort which did belong unto the seed of Abraham justification regeneration and receiving into the Church was sealed and therefore no man can forbid water that they should not be baptised who have received the holy Ghost purifying their hearts those infants then must necessarily also be baptised who either are born in the Church or come together with their parents to it 11. As the promise of the Gospel so baptism being received unworthily that is before conversion is ratified and profitable unto salvation to them that are penitent and the use thereof which was before amisse and unlawfull is now become unto them right and lawfull 12. Neither doth the wickednesse of the Minister make baptism void or of no effect and force unto them so that it be ministred into the promise and faith of Christ and therefore also the true Church doth not baptise them who have been baptised of hereticks but only must inform and instruct them with true doctrine concerning Christ and baptisme 13. And as the convenant once made with God is also afterwards after sins committed perpetually firme and of force to the repentant so also baptisme being once received confirmeth and assureth the repentant all their life time of remission of sins and therefore neither ought it to be re-iterated neither to be deferred untill the end of our life as if it so only cleansed men from sins if no sins be committed after it is once received 14. Neither yet are all those who are baptised with water whether they be of understanding or infants partakers of the grace of Christ for the everlasting election of God and his calling unto the kingdom of Christ is free 15. Neither are all who are not baptised excluded from the grace of Christ for not the want but the contempt of the baptisme shutteth men out of the convenant of God made with the faithfull and their children 16. And seeing the administration of the Sacraments is a part of the Ecclesiasticall Ministery they who are not called unto this and especially women may not take upon them the power and authority to baptise 17. Rites which are patched by men to baptisme as hallowing of the water tapers exorcisms chrisme salt crosses spettle and such like are worthily reputed in the Church as a corruption of the Sacrament OF THE LORDS SUPPER ON THE 28. SABBATH Quest 75. How art thou in the Lords Supper admonished and warranted that thou art partaker of that onely sacrifice of Christ offered on the crosse and of his benefits Ans Because Christ hath commanded me and all the faithfull to eat of this bread broken and to drink of the cup distributed in remembrance of him with this promise adjoyned a Mat. 16.27 28. Mark 14.22 23.24 Luke 22.19 20. 1 Cor. 10.16 17. 11.23 24 25. 12.13 First that his body was as certainly broken and offered for me on the crosse and his bloud shed for me as I behold with mine eyes the bread of the Lord broken unto me and the cup communicated to me and further that my soul is no lesse assuredly fed to everlasting life with his body which was crucified for us and his bloud which was shed for us then I receive and taste by the mouth of my body the bread and wine the signs of the body and bloud of our Lord received at the hand of the Minister The Explication The chiefe Questions concerning the Lords Supper are 1. What the Supper of the Lord is 2. What are the ends thereof or wherefore it was instituted 3. What it differeth from Baptisme 4. What is the sense and meaning of the words of the institution 5. What is the difference between the Lords Supper and the Papists Masse and why the Masse is to be abolished 6. What is the right use of the Supper 7. What the wicked receive
in the Supper 8. Who are to come to the Supper 9. Who are to be admitted to the Supper The three former of these belong to the 75. and 76. Questions of the Catechism the fourth to the 77 78 79. the fifth to the 80. the sixth seventh eighth and ninth to the 81. and under them they shall be placed and handled 1. What the Supper of the Lord is The names given to this Sacrament and the reason of the names FIrst we will see by what names the Supper of the Lord is called then we will in few words define what it is This action or ceremony or rite instituted by Christ a little before his death is called The Lords Supper It is called 1. The Lords Supper from the first institution of it that is in respect of the originall or first beginning of this rite or in respect of the time wherein this ceremony was instituted which circumstance of time the Church for her liberty in case of this quality hath changed For it was a matter of casualty that this ceremony was instituted of Christ rather in the evening at supper time then in the morning or at noon day to wit because of the eating of the Paschal Lamb which by the law was to be celebrated in the evening and was afterwards to be abolished by this new Sacrament It is called of S. Paul 2. The Lords Table The Table of the Lord. It is likewise called Synaxis that is a covenant 3. A covenant of assembly in respect of the assembly and convent of the Church because some either few or many must assemble and meet together in celebrating of the Supper for in the first celebration the disciples were present to them it was said Take this and divide it among you Wherefore it must needs be that there was some number there which also appeareth by the Apostle repeating the first institution where in the end he addeth 1 Cor. 11.20 35. When ye come together to eat tarry one for another And further that moe ought to come together to celebrate the Supper this end of the Supper doth evidently enough shew in that it was instituted to be a token and even a bond of love For wee that are many 1 Cor. 10.17 are one bread and one body It is called also the Eucharist 4. The Eucharist because it is a rite and ceremony of thanksgiving Last of all 5. A Sacrifice it is called also a Sacrifice not propitiatory or meritorious as the Papists dream but gratulatory because it is the commemoration of Christs propitiatory sacrifice And at length it was also called Missa from the offering or from the dismissing of the rest who might not communicate after the Sermon which went before the celebration was finished We retain the name left in Scripture and call it The Lords Supper Now let us come to define the Lords Supper The definition of the Lords Supper The Lords Supper is a ceremony or Sacrament instituted and appointed of Christ unto the faithfull for a memoriall of him whereby Christ doth certainly promise and seal unto me and all the faithfull first That his body was offered and broken on the crosse for mee and his bloud shed for me as truly as I see with mine eyes the bread of the Lord to be broken unto me and his cup distributed And moreover That hee doth as certainly with his body crucified and his bloud shed feed and nourish my soul unto everlasting life as my body is fed with the bread and the cup the Lord received from the hand of the minister which are offered to me as certain seals of the body and bloud of Christ It may be also more briefly defined on this wise The Lords Supper is a distributing and receiving of bread and wine commanded of Christ unto the faithfull that by these signes he might testifie that hee hath delivered and yeelded his body unto death and hath shed his bloud for them and doth give them those things to eate and drink that they might be unto them the meat and dâ—ink of eternall life and that thereby also hee might testifie that hee would dwell in them nourish and quicken them for ever And again That of the other side he might by the same signes binde them to mutuall dilection and love seeing Christ spareth not to give his body and bloud for us This is confirmed not only by Christ in the Evangelists but also by Paul who expresly saith The cup of the blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ Moreover The signe and things signified in the Lords Supper the signes in the Sacrament are bread and wine bread broken and eaten wine distributed and taken The things signified are 1. The breaking of the bodâ— and the shedaing of the bloud of Christ 2. Our union and conjunction with Christ by faith so that wee draw life everlasting from him and are made partakers as of Christ himselfe so also of all his benefits as the branches are made partakers of the life of the vine Wee are advertised of this our union and communion with Christ 1. By the proportion which the signes have with the things 2. By the promise which is adjoyned And the proportion doth chiefly propose and shew two things unto us 1. The sacrifice of Christ 2. Our communion with Christ because the bread is not only broken but is also given us to eat Breaking of the bread a part of the ceremony Now the breaking of the bread is a part of the ceremony because unto it a part of the thing signified doth answer namely the breaking of Christs body of which signification of this signe Paul doth testifie when he saith 1 Cor. 11.24 This is my body which is broken for you Here receiving and eating is part of the ceremony whereunto doth answer the thing signified to wit the eating of Christs body Now this divine and spirituall thing namely the breaking and communicating of Christs body is signified and confirmed by this ceremony which is the breaking and receiving of bread for two causes 1. Because Christ commandeth these rites unto which we ought to give no lesse credit then if Christ himself did speak with us 2. Because he annexeth a promise that they who observe these rites with a true faith must be assured and certain that they have communion with Christ. Wine is added that wee should know the perfection and accomplishment of our salvation to be in his sacrifice and that there was nothing which could be further desired The wine is severed from the bread to signifie the violence of his death because the bloud was sundered from his body 2. What are the ends of the Lords Supper THe ends for which the Lords Supper was instituted are Confirmation of our faith That it might be a confirmation of our faith that is a most certain testification of our communion and union with Christ
Church in the Supper of his continuing and increasing his benefits unto us In the mean time it is one and the same Christ who both regenerateth and nourisheth us to eternall life In manner of using In the manner of using them To the lawfull use of baptisme regeneration sufficeth therefore it agreeth to all whom the Church reputeth regenerate as all elder persons professing faith and repentance and infants born in the Church But the Supper requireth farther the triall of the faith of the receivers the remembrance of the Lords death and thanksgiving Luke 22.19 1 Cor. 11.18 Doe this in remembrance of me Shew forth the Lords death till he come Let a man examine himself Baptism therefore is due to the whole Church that is as well to infants as elder persons the Supper onely to elder persons who can prove themselves and shew forth the Lords death In order of receiving In the order of receiving them For baptism must goe before and the Supper follow that is the sacrament of the Supper must not be given but to them who are baptised and not to them neither presently after baptisme but after they have made confession of their faith and repentance Whereupon in the ancient Church after the sermon were dismissed such as were excommunicated likewise those that were possessed or troubled with an evill spirit and the Catechumens that is such as did not yet understand the grounds and principles of religion or were not as yet baptised So of old they who were not yet circumcised were not admitted to the sacrifices or ceremonies Now if they who were baptised before they have made confession of their faith and repentance are not as yet to be admitted unto the Supper much lesse are they who being baptised live after the manner of swine and dogs In order of receiving it selfe which of baptism is but once of the Supper often In the receiving it selfe Wee must often celebrate the Supper because we must often shew forth the Lords death for it was therefore instituted that in it should be made publick remembrance recounting and shewing of Christs death also the confirmation of our faith concerning the eternall continuance of the covenant which confirmation is by the Supper is often necessary and therefore the Supper is often to be reiterated as also the eating of the Paschal lamb prefiguring this Supper was for this cause yeerly reiterated But baptism is not to be reiterated but once only to be received in our life time even as circumcision of old was but once received and baptism is therefore not to be reiterated both because wee have no commandement to this purpose and also because it is a signe of our receiving into the Church and covenant of God for the covenant once made is not againe undone or made void to those that repent but remaineth ratified and firme for ever For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance and wee by repentance after our falls enter not a new league with God but renew and restore an old Hereof it is that Christ himselfe saith of the Supper Luke 22.19 1 Cor. 11.26 Doe this as often as yee shall drink it in remembrance of me And the Apostle As often as ye shall eat this bread and drink this cup ye shew the Lords death till hee come Rom. 9.3 But of baptism the same Apostle teacheth As many as have been baptised into Christ Jesus have been baptised into his death And Christ pronounceth Mark 16.16 He that shall beleeve and be baptised shall be saved Quest 76. What is it to eat the body of Christ crucified and to drink his bloud that was shed Ans It is not only to imbrace by an assured confidence of mind the whole passion and death of Christ and thereby to obtain forgivenesse or sins and everlasting life a Joh. 6.35 40 47 48 50 51 53 54. but also by the holy Ghost who dwelleth both in Christ and us so more and more to be united to his sacred body b Joh. 6.55 56. that though he be in heaven c Col. 3.1 Acts 3.21 1 Cor. 11.26 and we in earth yet neverthelesse are we flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones d Ephes 5.30 3.16 1 Cor. 6.15 1 John 3.24 and 4.13 and as all the members of the body are by one soule so are we also quickned and guided by one and the same Spirit e Joh. 6.57 15.1 2 3 4 5 6. Eph. 4.15 16. The Explication THis question expoundeth and declareth the thing signified in the Sacrament The eating of Christs flesh and drinking of his bloud is not corporall What it is to eat the flesh of Christ but spirituall and compriseth 1. Faith of Christs passion and death 2. An apprehension of remission of sinnes and eternall life through faith 3. Our union with Christ by the holy Ghost dwelling in Christ and in us 4. The benefit of his quickning by the same spirit Wherefore to eate the flesh of Christ and drink his bloud is to be received into favour with God for Christs merit to receive remission of sinnes and be reconciled to God by the same faith to have the Sonne of God who assumed mans nature and united it personally unto him dwelling in us and coupling us unto himselfe and his assumed nature by pouring into us his Spirit through whom he regenerateth us and restoreth light in us righteousnesse and life eternall such as is eminent in his assumed manhood More briefly to eate is 1. To beleeve 2. To receive remission of sins by faith 3. To be united to Christ 4. To be made partakers of the life of Christ or to be made like and conformed unto Christ by the holy Ghost who worketh the same things in us and in Christ This eating is our communion with Christ which the Scripture teacheth and which we professe in the Creed namely a spirituall union with Christ as members with the head and branches with the vine Christ teacheth us this eating of his flesh John 6. and confirmeth it in the Supper by externall signes Thus did the ancient Fathers Augustine Eusebius Nazianzen Hilary and others expound the eating of Christs body as hereafter shall appeare Wherefore the opinions of Papisticall Transubstantiation of a corporall presence and of eating Christs body in the bread with the mouth which many defend are not grounded on the words of the Supper which promise the eating of Christs body Quest 77. Where hath Christ promised that hee will as certainly give his body and bloud so to be eaten and drunken as they eat this bread broken and drink this cup Ans In the institution of his Supper the words whereof are these a 1 Cor. 11.23 24 25. Matth. 26.26 27 28. Mark 14.22 23 24. Luk. 22.19 20 Our Lord Jesus Christ in the night that hee was betrayed took bread and when he had given thanks hee brake it and said Take eat this
is my body which is broken for you this doe you in remembrance of me Likewise also hee took the cup when he had supped and said This cup is the new Testament in my bloud this doe as often as ye shall drink it in remembrance of mee For as often as ye shall eat this bread and drink this cup ye shew the Lords death till bee come This promise is repeated by S. Paul when he saith b 1 Cor. 10 16 17. This cup of thanksgiving wherewith wee give thanks is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ For we that are many are one bread and one body because we all are partakers of one bread The Explication THe institution of the Lords Supper doth confirme unto us by evident reasons what is the true and saving communion of Christs body and bloud and therefore the true sense and meaning of the words of the institution is diligently to be considered The holy Evangelists Matthew Marke and Luke do most especially of all others describe the institution of the Lords Supper and besides them the Apostle so declareth it no lesse plainly in his Epistle to the Corinthians The words of them all are these Matthew Chap. 26.26 c. As they did eat Jesus took the bread and when hee had given thanks hee brake it and gave it to the disciples and said Take eat this is my body Also hee took the cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it For this is my bloud of the new Testament that is shed for many for the remission of sins Mark Chap. 14.22 c. As they did eat Jesus took the bread and when hee had given thanks he brake it and gave it to them and said Take eat this is my body Also hee took the cup and when hee had given thanks gave it to them and they all drank of it and hee said unto them This is my bloud of the new testament which is shed for many Luke Chap. 22.19 c. And hee tooke bread and when he had given thanks he brake it and gave it to them saying This is my body which is given for you doe this in remembrance of mee Likewise after supper hee took the cup saying This cup is the new Testament in my bloud which is shed for you Paul 1 Cor. 11.23 c. I have received of the Lord that which also I have delivered unto you to wit that the Lord Jesus in the night that he was betrayed took bread And when he had given thanks hee brake it and said Take eat this is my body which is broken for you this do yee in remembrance of mee After the same manner also he took the cup when he had supped saying This cup is the new Testament in my bloud this doe as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me For as often as yee shall eat this bread and drink this cup yee shew the Lords death till he come The words of the Apostle wee will briefly expound and then wee will demonstrate our opinion in this point by true and firm arguments in the Question of Catechisme immediatly following The Lord Jesus This is the Authour from whom it is intituled the Lords Supper wee must therefore observe what the Lord did Lib 2. Epist 3. said and prescribed as Cyprian well warneth us If christ alone be to be heard wee must not attend or regard what any man before us hath thought meet to be done but what Christ who is before all first did perform In the night that hee was betrayed This circumstance is specified by the Apostle to give us to understand that Christ would at the last Supper of the Passeover institute this his Supper to shew 1. That now an end was made of all the old sacrifices and hee did substitute a new Sacrament which should succeed and should from henceforth be observed that Paschal Sacrament being finally abolished and which should signifie the same thing difference onely of time excepted For the Paschal lamb signified Christ which should come and should be sacrificed The Supper Christ already sacrificed Object But when the Supper was instituted Christ was yet to be sacrificed Answ But then was at hand the offering up and sacrificing of Christ For a few houres after hee was sacrificed and the Supper was from that time forward to signifie Christ sacrificed 2. That hee might stirre up in his disciples and in us greater attention and marking of the cause for which hee did institute it and that wee might understand how earnestly Christ would have this Supper to be commended unto us seeing hee did nothing before his death but that which was of most weight and moment Therefore did hee in the very point or instant before his death institute it to be as it were the testament and last will of our Testatour Briefly this clause Paul addeth that we may know that Christ instituted this Supper for a memoriall of himself now ready to die He took bread That is unleavened or not leavened bread which then they did eat of at the table in that feast of the passeover which admitted no leavened bread The institution of the Supper and unleavened bread did concurre then together and fall our by an accident and therefore this circumstance properly pertaineth not to the Supper as neither the evening doth at what time it was instituted neither can a necessity of unleavened bread for this use be hence inforced neither would Christ hereon prescribe any certain manner of baking bread for the Lords Supper Yet notwithstanding the bread of the Lords Supper differeth in use from common bread because this is taken for the nourishment of the body but that for the food and nourishment of the soul that is for the confirmation of our faith and union with Christ And here we are to note that hee is said to have taken bread from the table to wit with his hand hee took not his body therefore neither took hee his body in the bread with the bread or under the bread save only sacramentally for his body lay not on the table but sate down thereat Blessing and thanksgiving are all one in the Supper When hee had given thanks Matthew and Mark say of the bread When hee had blessed of the cup When he had given thanks Luke and Paul say of the bread When he had given thanks Wherefore To blesse and to give thanks both signifie one thing neither can the mystery of Popish magicall consecration be cloaked under these termes Christ therefore blessed that is he gave thanks namely to his Father not to be bread for spirituall blessings I meane for the satisfying of soules that his office being now performed and finished on earth his last act yet remaining to be done the time of his dying for the redemption of the elect was at hand that thus it had pleased the Father to redeem mankind or that the typicall Passeover was
is fed with Christs body eateth it and is false being universally proposed For doth thy thigh or thine elbow therefore eate because it is nourished by the meat which thou conveyest in by thy mouth It sufficeth that eating is by the mouth as an instrument framed by nature to this end to minister nourishment to the whole body So it is not necessary that our bodies should eate Christs body with their mouches therewith to be fed unto eternall life but it sufficeth that the mouth of faith taketh the spirituall meate that spirituall nourishment and life may be transfused throughout the whole man Quest 79. Why then doth Christ call bread his body and the cup his bloud or the New Testament in his bloud and Paul also calleth bread and wine the communion of the body and bloud of Christ Ans Christ not without great consideration speaketh so to wit not only for to teach us that as the bread and wine sustaine the life of the body so also his crucified body and bloud shed are indeed the meat and drink of our soule whereby it is nourished to eternall life a John 6.55 But much more that by this visible signe and pledge he may assure us that we are as verily partakers of his body and bloud through the working of the holy Ghost as we doe receive by the mouth of our body these holy signes in remembrance of him b 1 Cor. 10.16 And further also that that his suffering and obedience is so certainly ours as though we our selves had suffered punishments for our sins and had satisfied God The Explication WHereas neither Transubstantiation nor Consubstantiation are signified by Christs words the question is Why the bread is called Christs body and the cup Christs bloud that is why the things signified are attributed to the signes and the signes called by their name There are two causes alledged hereof 1. For the naturall analogy or likenesse Two causes why the things signified are attributed unto the signes which Christs body and the bread have between themselves 2. For the certainty or confirmation of the joynt-exhibition of the signe and the thing signified in the true use The similitude and proportion of the bread and Christs body especially consisteth in these points 1. As the Bread and Wine nourish our body unto this life so the Body and Bloud of Christ nourish us unto everlasting life 2. As the Bread and Wine are received by the mouth The Analogy or proportion between the bread and Christs body in the use of the Supper so Christs body and bloud are received by faith which is the mouth of the soule 3. As the bread is not swallowed whole but eaten being broken so Christs body is received being sacrificed and broken on the Crosse 4. As the bread and wine profiteth not him that eateth without appetite but we must bring hunger and thirst unto the Table so Christs body and bloud profit none but them who hunger and thirst after righteousnesse 5. As of many corns is made one loaf and of many grapes one wine so we by participation or communion of these signes though many yet are made one body and grow up into one body with Christ and between our selves The certainty also or assurance of faith is a cause why we affirme that of the signes which is proper to the thing signified For the signes testifie that Christs sacrifice is accomplished and that indeed for our behoofe and salvation as verily as we have the signes yea that we are fed with Christs crucified body and bloud shed and poured out as truly as we receive these sacred symboles of his body and bloud ON THE 30. SABBATH Quest 70. What difference is there between the Lords Supper and the Popish Masse Ans The Supper of the Lord testifieth to us that we have perfect forgivenes of all our sins for that only sacrifice of Christ which himselfe once fully wrought on the Crosse a Heb. 10.10 12. 7.27 9.12 25. John 19.30 Matth. 26.28 Luke 22.19 Then also that we by the holy Ghost are graffed into Christ b 1 Cor. 6.17 10.16 12.13 who now according to his humane nature is only in heaven at the right hand of his Father c Colos 3.1 Heb. 1.3 8.1 and there will be worshipped of us d Mat. 6.20 21. John 4.21 22. 20 17. Luke 24.52 Acts 7.55 Col. 3.1 Phil. 3.20 1 Thes 1.19 But in the Masse it is denied that the quick and the dead have remission of sins for the only passion of Christ except also Christ be daily offered of them by their sacrificers Further also it is taught that Christ is bodily under the formes of bread and wine and therefore is to be worshipped in them e In Canone Missae de consec dist 2. Concil Trid. Sess 13.5 And so the very foundation of the Masse is nothing else then an utter deniall of that only sacrifice and passion of Christ Jesus and an accursed Idolatry f Heb. 9.26 10.12 The Explication THis question is necessary by reason of errours which by the Masse have crept into the Church It is otherwise demanded Why the Masse is to be abolished But here this question is also contained and comprehended because these differences and contrarieties of the Lords Supper and the Masse are the causes why the Masse is to be abolished For whereas it hath so many abuses in it flat repugnant to the Lords Supper it may not be confounded therewith nor be thrust on the Church in place thereof nor be permitted and tolerated in the Church by godly and religious Magistrates but it ought to be utterly abandoned and put downe First then let us speak a few words of the name of Masse or Missa The word Missa seemeth to have his name derived from the Hebrew Masah that is a tribute or voluntary offering which was wont to be paid of every one The originall of the word Missa which we call the Masse The word is found Deut. 16.10 Missach nidbath jadecha a free gift of thine hand Now that offering was called so being as it were an yeerly tribute which was yet no exaction but given freely Others interprete it to be a sufficiency which is that there should be given so much as was sufficient and perhaps this is the truer because the Lord commanded the Israelites that they should open their hands unto the poore Deut. 15. â— and should lend him sufficient for his need This the Chaldee Paraphrast interpreteth to be Missah Hereof these our men think that it was called Missa as if it were a tribute and free-offering which should be every-where offered to God in the Church for the living and the dead But this is not of any likelihood to be true It is manifest indeed that the Church hath borrowed some words from the Hebrewes as Satan Osanna Sabaot Halleluja Pascha and such like But those words came
is the other Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ by which he testifieth to us who receive the consecrated bread and wine with a faithfull remembrance of his death that he feeds us with his bodie which was given for us and with his bloud which was powred out for us and that hee quickneth d us that with him and amongst our selves we may grow up into one e bodie and that the covenant begun with God in Baptisme may remaine f ratified to us for ever Testimonies of Scripture a 1 Cor. 10.16 The cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ the bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ b 1 Cor. 11.26 As often as you shall eat of this bread and drink of this cup you shall declare the Lords death untill he come c Matth. 26.26 Mark 14.22 Luke 22.17 1 Cor. 11.21 While they were eating he took bread and blessed and brake it then gave it to his disciples and said Take eat this is my body d John 6.54 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath life eternall and I will raise him up at the last day e John 6.56 Who eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud he abideth in me and I in him 1 Cor. 10.17 Because there is one bread we being many are one bread and one body for we all partake of that one bread 1 Cor. 12.13 We have all drunk into one spirit f 1 Cor. 11.25 This cup is the New Testament in my bloud II. We say also that this Sacrament consisteth of externall signes and of the promises of grace in the word annexed to the a signes and consequently of a twofold food and a twofold eating or taking to wit an externall of bread and wine which is done by the mouth of the bodie out of the hand of the Minister as our sense witnesseth and an internall spirituall of Christs bodie and bloud which is by faith out of the hands of God himselfe and by the externall it is both signified exhibited and sealed in the lawfull use of the Sacrament as the promise annexed to the Symboles b witnesseth Testimonies of Scripture and of others a Apolog. August Confes tit De use Sacram. c. And because in the Sacraments there are two things to wit the signe and the word the word in the New Testament is the promise of grace added to the signe The promise of the New Testament is the promise of the remission of sins as this Text saith This is my body which is given for you This is the cup of the New Testament with my bloud which is shed for many to the remission of sins The word then offers remission of sins and the ceremony is as it were the pledge of the word or feale as Paul calls it shewing the promise b Matth. 26. c. III. For whereas all Sacraments are seales of grace promised in the a Gospel it is not to be doubted but these words of promise in the Supper This is my body which is given for you This is my bloud which is powred out for you c. are the very same Evangelicall promise in b John The bread which I will give you is my flesh which I will give you for the life of the world for my flesh is meat indeed and my bloud is drinke indeed being covered with the sacramentall ceremonie and confirmed with a symbolicall eating for the greater safetie or assurance but that it speaketh of the spirituall food of Christs bodie and bloud which is by faith is c manifest Testimonies of Scripture and of others a Rom. 4.11 And he received the signe of circumcision the seale of the justice of faith received in the fore-skin Apolog. August Confes tit De usu Sacram. c. The word in the New Testament is the promise of grace as above b John 6.5 I am that living bread that came downe from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever But the bread which I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world c John 6.35 I am that bread of life he that cometh to me shall not hunger and he that beleeveth in me shall never thirst IV. Christ never promised in the Gospel any orall manducation of his flesh but by expresse arguments rejected a it and therefore never established it by the Sacrament of his Supper And doubtlesse they sin grievously who at this day disturb the Church with their orall manducation which to acknowledge is no waies necessary to salvation to any but rather pernicious to many Testimonies of Scripture a John 6.61 62 63. When Jesus knew in himselfe that his disciples murmured at it he said unto them Doth this offend you What and if you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are life V. The particle This as we teach and beleeve doth demonstrate the bread which Christ brake and that it is the true bodie of Christ not by conversion into the bodie nor by any reall co-existence with the bodie but by a sacramentall way because it is the Sacrament of Christs bodie or a sacred signe of it So the Apostle interprets Christs a meaning when he calls the cup The New Testament that is the Sacrament of the New Testament the bread The communion of Christs b body that is the Sacrament of that communion So c Austine The Lord saith he doubted not to say This is my bodie when he gave the signe of his bodie So d Prosper saith The bread is after a manner called the bodie of Christ and the sacramentall action is called the passion death and crucifying of Christ not in a reall veritie but in a signifying mysterie Testimonies of Scripture and of others a 1 Cor. 11.25 This cup is the New Testament in my bloud b 1 Cor. 10.16 The bread which we break c. c August cont Adimant cap. 12. d Prosper in Decret de Consecrat dist 2. cap. Hoc est VI. And whereas Christs bodie neither in the bread nor under the species of bread but rather in the word of promise is exhibited to us to be eaten by faith the wicked indeed eat the signes to their owne condemnation by abusing of which they sin against Christ himselfe but being destitute of faith they receive not his bodie Of which notwithstanding by the Apostles testimony they are guilty not that they receive it which by their infidelitie they tread upon but because they unworthily eat that bread which is the symbole or a signe of it Testimonies of Scripture a 1 Corinth 11.27 29. Whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. Also Who eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himselfe
abolished and the signified Pasteover was now exhibited and a memoriall of him was to be signed to the Church or lastly hee gave thanks for the admirable and wonderfull gathering and preserving of the Church Hee brake it That is hee brake the bread which hee took from the table and distributed the same being one among many not any other invisible thing hidden in the bread He brake not his body but the bread as Saint Paul saith The bread which hee brake c. Now he distributed the bread being one among many because wee that are many are one body But the cause for which he brake this bread was to signifie 1. His passion and the separation of his body from his soule Two things signified by the breaking of the bread 1 Cor. 10.16 2. The communion of many with his own body and their bond of union and mutuall love The bread which we breake is it not the communion of Christ For wee that are many are one bread and one body Wherefore the breaking of bread is a necessary ceremonie both in respect of the signification Poure causes why this ceremony is to be retained and in respect of the confirmation of our faith and therefore is this ceremony also to be retained 1. Because Christ hath commanded it Doe this 2. Because of the authority and example of the Church planted in the Apostles time which from the rite of breaking termed the whole action Breaking of bread 3. For our own comfort that we may know the body of Christ to have been as certainly crucified for us as we see the bread to be broken unto us 4. That the opinions of Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation may be pulled out of mens minds Take eat This commandement belongeth to the disciples and to the whole Church of the new Testament Whence it is cleer and manifest 1. That the Popish Masse wherein the priest giveth nothing to the Church to be taken and eaten is not the Supper of the Lord but a private supper of him that sacrificeth and a meer stage-play 2. That wee must not be idle beholders of the Supper but religious receivers of it 3. That the Lords Supper is not to be celebrated but in an assembly or congregation where there are such as receive and eat 4. That the Supper is a signe of grace in respect of God reaching out unto us his benefits to be apprehended with a strong faith even as we receive the signe with our hand and mouth This is my body This that is this bread Object Then should it have been said * These Greek pronouns cannot be expressed with the like English particles because the words BREAD and BODY being of divers genders in Greek the Greek pronouns also are divers when as in English our particle THIS serveth for words of all genders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as if he had said This thing which I have in my hand now that was bread And that it is so to be understood is proved by these reasons 1. Christ took nothing but bread he brake bread and gave bread to his disciples to eare 2. S. Paul saith expresly The bread which he brake is it not the communion of the body of Christ 3. Of the wine it is said This cup is the new Testament in my bloud Wherefore after the same manner it is said This that is this bread is my body which is broken and delivered unto death for you The literall sense if it be properly taken can be no otherwise understood then thus The substance of this bread is the substance of my body But so to understand it is an undoubted absurdity for bread is a masse without life baked of corn and not united personally to the Word but the body of Christ is a living substance born of the Virgin and united personally to the Word Christ therefore calleth the bread his body meaning Cont. Adim c. 12. the signe of his body by a sacramentall Metonymie attributing the name of the thing signified to the signe because he appointeth this bread to be signe and sacrament of his body as Augustine himself interpreteth The Lord doubted not to say This is my body when he gave the signe of his body Wherefore far be it from us that we should say that Christ took bread visibly and his body invisibly in the bread For it is to be observed that he saith not In this is my body Or This bread is my body invisible But This bread is my body true and visible which is given for you Moreover these are the words of the promise added to this sacrament to teach us what the bread is in this use to wit the body of Christ that is what Christ exhibiteth and imparteth to the receivers of this bread and beleevers of this promise even his body or that flesh which in the Gospel hee promised to give for the salvation of the world For this is no diverse promise from that hee delivered in the sixth of John John 6.51 but every way the same concerning his flesh quickning us and the eating thereof profitable to salvation Only here the sacramentall rite is adjoined wherewith the promise is adorned and sealed as if he should say In the Gospel I promised life eternall to all that eat my flesh and drink my bloud now I confirme and ratifie this my promise with an outward ceremony that henceforth they which beleeve this promise and feed on this bread may undoubtedly be perswaded and assured that they verily eat my flesh which was given for the salvation of the world and have life eternall By this promise therefore this bread is made the sacrament and signe of Christs body and Christs body is made the thing signified by this sacrament The union of the signe the thing signified in the Sacrament and these two I mean the signe and the thing signified are united in this sacrament not by any naturall copulation or corporall and locall existence one in the other much lesse by transubstantiation or changing one into the other but by signifying sealing and exhibiting the one by the other that is by a sacramentall union whose bond is the promise added to the bread requiring the faith of the receivers Whence it is cleer that these things in their lawfull use are alwayes jointly exhibited and received but not without faith of the promise viewing and apprehending the thing promised now present in the Sacrament yet not present or included in the signe as in a vessell containing it but present in the promise which is the better part life and soul of the sacrament For they want judgement who affirme that Christs body cannot be present in the sacrament except it be in or under the bread as if forsooth the bread alone without the promise were either a sacrament or the principall part of a sacrament Which for you my disciples that is for
Supper therefore is often to be iterated and celebrated 1. Because of the words of the institution 2. In respect of the end and purpose of the institution because it must be done in remembrance of Christ Shew the Lords death That is beleeve that Christ dyed and that for you and then professe it also publickly before all Till he come Therefore it must be observed unto the worlds end neither is any other externall form to be looked for untill the day of judgement The words of the institution which have been hitherto expounded 1 Cor. 10.16 may be made more plain and cleer by these words of the Apostle The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ The cup of blessing That is the cup of thanksgiving which is received namely to this end that we may yeeld thanks to Christ for his death and passion The communion of the body likewise the communion of the bloud is to be made through faith partakers of Christ and all his benefits the same spirit being in us which is in Christ John 15.2 â—phes 5. 1 John 1.6 and working the same in us which he worketh in Christ Or it is a spirituall fellowship of the faithfull with Christ as of members with the head and branches with the vine Bread and wine is the communion that is it is the signe and testimony of our communion with Christ But this our communion as the Apostle briefly declareth consisteth in this that wee who are many are but one body Whence it is most easie to collect That this communion of Christ is not a corporalleating For it is wrought only by faith and the holy Ghost Christ is the head and we the members and all wee who are members have also a communion of all Christs benefits Therefore the head is common the benefits common and so the members also common among themselves wherefore their love and dilection is common and mutuall Quest 78. Are then the bread and wine made the very body and bloud of Christ ON THE 19. SABBATH Ans No verily a Matt. 26.29 Mark 14.24 But as the water of baptism is not turned into the bloud of Christ but is only a signe and pledge of those things that are sealed unto us in baptism b Ephes 5.26 so neither is the bread of the Lords Supper the very body of Christ c 1 Cor. 10.16 11.26 although according to the manner of Sacraments and that forme of speaking of them which is usuall to the holy Ghost d Gen. 17.10 11. Exod. 12.11 13. 13.9 Titus 3.5 1 Pet. 3.21 1 Corinth 10.4 the bread is called the body of Christ The Explication THe Papists Transubstantiation under which also Consubstantiation maintained by the Ubiquitaries and others is comprehended is in this Question of the Catechisme consuted and rejected and the sacramentall kind of speech which we use with the true sense of those words of Christ This is my body examined and unfolded We will first intreat of that forme of speech which we use and of the true meaning of Christs words then will wee handle the controversie of Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation That therefore which hath been heretofore spoken in generall of sacramentall phrases and termes must be restrained to this Sacrament For thus Austine himself descendeth from the generall rule of sacramentall termes unto a particular instance of eating Christs flesh Eâ—ist 23. ad Bonifâ—â— This saith he is the only way to find whether a phrase be proper or figurative That whatsoever in Gods word cannot properly be referred to some point of morall duty or to the truth of faith you may be assured that it is figuratively spoken And a little after hee produceth this example Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud yee have no life in you Hee seemeth saith Augustine by these words to injoyne us some hainous crime It is therefore a figurative speech instructing us that wee are to partake of Christs passion and joyfully and fruitfully to recall to mind how his flesh was crucified and wounded for us Wherefore as of Baptisme as hath been already declared so of the Lords Supper also the Scripture speaketh sometimes properly and sometimes figuratively The speech is figurative when Christ saith of the bread This is my body and of the cup This is my bloud Likewise when Paul saith This cup is the new Testament in my bloud For in these the name of the thing signified is attributed to the signe Paul also then speaketh figuratively when he saith This is my body which is broken for you because he attributeth the property of the signe which is to be broken to the thing signified Thus Cyprian must be understood When we drink of the cup we cleave to the crosse Serm. de Coena Hom 24. in 1 Cor. 10. Hom. 27. wee suck Christs bloud and lay our tongues in our Redeemers wounds Thus Chrysostome is to be interpreted when he saith Christs bloud is in the chalice Christs body which is in heaven is presented on earth to our view and is not only seen but touched of us nor touched only but eaten also he is held bitten and eaten of us in token of love as sometimes wee bite at him whom we love and touch his flesh with our tongue These sentences are not truly spoken or understood of the body of Christ but by a trope and figure usuall in sacraments Now the speech is proper when Christ saith Doe this in remembrance of me and when the Fathers every where say The breaking of bread is a memoriall a lively shadow of Christs sacrifice The bread signifieth the body of Christ It is a figure a signe a sacrament of the body of Christ Of the controversie concerning the words used in the Supper NOw whereas our adversaries the Papists and others deny that Christs words are sacramentally spoken and say we are to keep the letter wee must here adde something touching the controversie of the letter and meaning of the letter The Papists bear us in hand that by the vertue and force of consecration there is made a transubstantiation or changing of the bread into the body of Christ the accidents only remaining Others tell us of a consubstantiation or co-existence of Christs body in or with the bread The Transubstantiaries The Transubstantiaries and Consubstantiaries relie not on the simple meaning of Christs words together with the Consubstantiaries doe boast and glory that they understand the words of Christ simply and aright But neither perform that which they brag and boast of for that is the true simplicity and property of the word whereunto for the just understanding and interpretation thereof nothing is to be added neither ought to be taken from it neither any thing altered But as many as hold that the body of Christ
is with in or under the bread they adde unto the words of Christ and depart from true simplicity For if that which Christ said is simply to be retained and that not to be admitted which he said not then may we not say The bread is both bread and the body of Christ but simply this only The bread is the body of Christ For he said not My body is with or in or under the bread or The bread is both bread and my body together neither addeth he as these adde of their own really substantially corporally but he uttereth these bare words of the bread This is my body Neither have the Transubstantiaries their opinion drawn from the words of Christ simply understood namely that of the bread is made the body of Christ or the bread is changed into the body of Christ for this is their own forgery and invention For Christ said not that the bread was now made or was a making or should be made but simply said The bread is my body where no change could come between so that the words of Christ be simply understood Therefore falsly do they perswade the people that they simply rest on the propriety of Gods word when as manifoldly and most farre they swerve and depart from it The true interpretation of Christ words We Protestants retain the words of Christ without adding or altering to wit that the bread is the body of Christ and indeed the true and visible body which was given for us But because these words literally taken would admit a sense repugnant to the truth of Christian faith for if bread were properly Christs body it would follow that bread was crucified for us therefore we affirm that in Christs words a convenient meaning must be inquired after that is Christs words must be understood sacramentally namely that the bread is called Christs body because it is a signe of Christs body the cup or wine in the cup is called Christs bloud because it is a sign of Christs bloud the cup is also called the new Testament because it is a signe of the new Testament even as baptism is termed a washing away of sins and a laver of new birth because it is a signe of both these which are wrought properly by the bloud and spirit of Christ The true sense therefore and naturall interpretation of Christs words is This is my body which is given for you that is This bread broken by me and given to you is a signe of my body delivered to death for you and an authentick seal of your conjunction with me so that he which shall beleeve and eat this bread he truly and really after a sort eateth my body Here therefore to the signe is attributed the name of the thing signified both for the conjunction which the thing signified hath in the right use of the Supper with the signe and also for the proportion which the signe hath with the thing signified In this exposition we are not led and over-ruled by Philosophy and humane reason as our adversaries traduce us and bear the world in hand we are but we observe those rules by which in the joint consent of all sound wise men wee are to censure the interpretation of any Scripture whatsoever namely by the analogie and rule of faith by the nature of the thing or subject by the testimonies of Scripture which teach the same thing Three rules wâ—ereby we may judge of the interpretation of Scripture For by help of these three rules the naturall sense of Scripture is wont to be examined as often as necessity driveth us from the letter to the sense and meaning 1. That no interpretation be received dissonant from the rule of faith or repugnant to any article thereof or any commandement of the Decalogue or any expresse testimony of Scripture for the spirit of truth is not contrary to it self 2. That the sense derived out of words signifying any thing have a congruity with the nature of the thing signified by the words as in this present subject of the Supper whereon wee insist when any question or doubt is moved therein we are to enquire seeing it is a Sacrament how the Scripture else-where speaketh of Sacraments and of the Supper it selfe 3. That other like places be weighed and considered by which it is either manifest and granted or may be demonstrated by some circumstance that they contain the same doctrine concerning the same thing which is contained in the place in controversie For if we be fully resolved of the meaning of any cleerer and uncontroversed place we shall also be resolved of the sense of the place in controversie if the same thing be delivered in both So then it is out of doubt that that meaning of the words of the Supper which is agreeable with these rules is true and those untrue which disagree from them But this our construing and interpretation which indeed is not ours but the doctrine of Christ himself his Apostles and all orthodox or right-beleeving antiquity doth every way sute with these rules wherefore undoubtedly it is most true and best beseeming the truth of the Gospel Now let us come to the arguments by which wee prove our interpretation to be true they are of four sorts 1. Some are taken out of the text it self and circumstances of the institution of the Lords Supper 2. Some are taken from the nature of the thing or subject that is by understanding the speech as the thing it self doth bear and suffer namely according to the nature of all Sacraments 3. Some are drawn from an analogie of the articles of our faith or from a conference of places or parts of Christian doctrine 4. Some are taken from other like places of Scripture where the same thing is delivered in such words as are manifest and whereof there is no controversie 1. The first sort of arguments taken out of the text and circumstances of the institution of the Lords Supper He sate down 1. CHrists humane nature at the first celebrating of the Supper by a corporall kind of placing sate in his proper place at the table and now is in heaven wherefore then it was not neither is it now corporally in the bread or in the place of the bread He took bread 2. Christ at the first Supper took not into his hands nor brake his body but bread wherefore bread is not properly and really the very body of Christ This is my body 3. Christs body was born of a virgin But bread is made of meal therefore it is not really Christs body 4. Christ said of the visible bread being broken This is my body and of the visible cup being distributed unto his disciples This cup is the new Testament in my bloud Therefore the Papists retain not the letter when they say My body is contained under the forms of bread and wine nor the Ubiquitaries when they thus speak My body is in with under this
bread and much lesse when both of them say My invisible body contained under this form or under this bread is my body For both of them do not only manifestly decline from the letter to a glosse of their own but shamefully pervert Christs words in the former glosse as if it were written My body is under this and in the later they father on Christ a childish tautologie or repetition of the same thing as if he had said My body is my body Which was given for you 5. Christs body which we eat in the Supper was delivered to death and crucified for us But bread was not given and crucified for us Therefore bread is not properly and really the body of Christ This cup is the new Testament 6. As the cup is the new Testament so the bread is the body of Christ The cup is the new Testament sacramentally as before hath been shewed and now may be farther proved by this reason The new Testament properly is not drunk with the mouth but beleeved with the heart but the cup is drunk with the mouth therefore the cup cannot properly be the new Testament Therefore the bread is Christs body in the same sense to wit sacramentally 7. If the bread be properly Christs body and the cup his bloud it must needs be that in the first Supper the bloud was separated from Christs body and that now both of them be given us apart as they are signes apart But neither in the first Supper was the bloud then without the body neither is the body now given without bloud for then Christ was not yet dead and now he dieth no more Therefore the bread is the body and the cup the bloud of Christ not properly but sacramentally 8. That which Christ himself did eat and drink was not properly his body and bloud else should hee have eaten and drunken himselfe But hee did eat of that bread and drink of that cup for he saith I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine Mark 14.25 and Chrysostome commenting hereon saith Hee also drank of the cup Hom. 83. in Mark. lest hearing those words they should say What Doe wee then drink bloud and eat flesh and so be troubled For when hee first made mention of this kind of eating and drinking many took offence for the words sake onely Therefore lest this should then also happen hee himselfe first did eat and drinke that so hee might lead them with a quiet reposed mind to the communion of the mysteries The bread therefore and the cup are not properly Christs body and bloud but sacramentally Doe this in remembrance of mee 9. Remembrance is not of things corporally present but of things absent Christ instituted this sacrament to be celebrated in remembrance of him Therefore Christ is not corporally present in the bread or sacrament Doe this 10. Either Christ with his body is not substantially in the bread or forme of bread or the Supper is not to be any more celebrated For the Apostle biddeth us eat of this bread and drink of this cup and shew forth the Lords death till he come But questionlesse the celebration of the Supper is not yet to be intermitted but ought to be continued unto the end of the world Christ therefore is not yet come neither is he corporally in the bread or form of bread 11. As the bread was the body of Christ in the first Supper and the disciples did eat Christs body so and no otherwise the bread is now Christs body and wee eat Christs body for our Supper is no other then the Supper of the disciples was But in the first Supper the bread was not essentially Christs body neither did the disciples eat Christs body with their mouthes in the bread or in the form of bread for Christ corporally and visibly sate at the table with his disciples and suffered no change the whole action throughout Therefore now also the bread is not essentially Christs body neither do we eat Christs body with our mouthes in the bread or in the form of bread 2. The second sort of arguments which are taken from the nature of the Sacraments 1. THe very manner and form of speaking yeeldeth us a firm and strong argument Bread is the body of Christ But bread is not in his own proper substance his body for by reason hereof have they invented Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation Therefore it is a figurative speech even such a one as is usuall unto sacraments and is afore declared in the institution of the Supper 2. In all sacraments when the name or properties of the things signified are attributed unto the signes there is not signified the corporall presence of the thing in the signes but first a similitude of the things with their signes and a sealing of them by their signes then a conjunction and union of the things with their signes in the right use But in this Sacrament Christ attributeth the names of the things signified his body and bloud to the signes the bread and wine saying This is my body This is my bloud Therefore there is not thereby signified a corporall presence of his body 3. The nature of all sacraments is that the signs be understood and taken corporally that the things signified must be understood and taken spiritually and that the visible things be not the things signified but only signes and pledges of them 4. Sacramentall phrases and termes are sacramentally to be understood These words of the Supper This is my body This is my bloud are sacramentall phrases for they signifie the Sacrament and attribute the names of the things signified to the signes Therefore they are to be understood sacramentally Object There is no figurative speech expressed in the words of the Supper Therefore wee may not so interpret them Answ The Antecedent is false for Christ himselfe adjoined a sacramentall declaration immediately on them saying Doe this that is eat this bread and drink this cup in remembrance of me that is that therby ye may be certified and assured that my body was given and my bloud was shed for you and given to you to be meat and drink unto life eternall Again This cup is the new Testament in my bloud that is the seale of the new Testament and promise of grace now fulfilled in my bloud 5. Whatsoever is not promised in the Gospel that cannot be sealed unto us by the Supper for sacraments confirm exhibite promise seal no other thing then the word doth whence they are termed visible promises and visible words In the Gospel is promised no corporall eating Joh. 6.62 63. nay it is peremptorily reproved and condemned by Christ in the Gospel by two arguments 1. Because not long after hee would exalt his body into heaven and remove it far from the Jews mouthes 2. Because the corporall eating of his flesh profiteth nothing Neither doth he there distinguish the eating of him into a grosse and a
place of the Supper Ans The Minor of this Syllogisme is figurative by the confession of the adversaries themselves For Jacobus Andreas in a disputation held at Mulbr when he could no wayes else escape expresly confessed that this proposition is figurative Bread is the body of Christ Protoc lat pag. 160. The same Andreas afterwards wrote that this phrase Bread is Christs body is proper Behold the spirit of contradiction and to be understood without any trope or Figure Is not this to blow hote and cold out of the same mouth to say one thing and to unsay it againe Object 4. Christs words are not to be changed Christ used the word IS This IS my body Therefore there may not be put in place thereof the word SIGNIFIETH Ans We grant the whole For we place not the word signifieth instead of the word is neither doe we change Christs words but retaine them as they were pronounced by Christ But we say that this is the true and naturall sense of those words namely that the bread is the body of Christ symbolically that is as a symbole or token of it or that it signifieth Christs body For so Christ himselfe construeth them saying Doe this in remembrance of me So Paul interpreteth them This cup is the New Testament in my bloud Tertublib 4. Cont Marc. And Tertullian saith The bread which he took and distributed among his Disciples he made it his body saying This is my body that is the figure of my body Lib. 4. cap. 4 5. de sacr Con. Adim ca. 12. And Austine Our Lord doubted not to say This is my body when he gave a token of his body 2. We retort the argument on our adversaries thus Christs words are not to be changed Therefore the Transubstantials glosse is false averring thus Vnder these forms is or is contained my body and likewise the Corsubtantials glosse in with under this bread is my body invisibly present 3. The words are not to be chaged to wit into another sense then Christ will have but otherwise they are often to be chaged that is interpreted aright as when it is said Pluck out thine eye To him that taketh away thy coate give thy cloake also For words are to be understood according to the nature of things Object 5. The words of Testaments are to be understood properly lest occasion of striving about the will of the Testator fall out the Supper is the New Testament Therefore the words therein are properly to be understood Ans To be Major we make answer that the words of Testaments are properly to be understood if they be properly spoken and figuratively if they be figuratively uttered If they say All words of Testaments are properly to be understood we deny the Major For it is sufficient that the words of Testaments be cleere and plaine though oftentimes they be not proper but figurative For when we are sure of the Testators will what it is in vaine doe we then dispute of the letter So God in the old time spake figuratively of Circumcision of the Paschall Lamb of the Sacrifices And Christ in the New Testament spake by a figure Take drinke This cup is the New Testament in my bloud For here is a double figure 1. A Synecdoche when he biddeth them drink of the cup that is of the wine in the cup. 2. A Metonymie when he calleth the cup the New Testament that is the reconciliation of mankind with God sealed by his bloud Object 6. The eating of bread is done by the mouth but the eating of the body is the eating of bread Therefore the eating of the body is done by the mouth Answ The Minor is either figurative or false It is figurative if you understand it thus The eating of the body is the thing signified and sealed by the eating of bread And so the manner of predication or affirmation being changed nothing is proved If it be properly understood it is false For the eating of the bread is externall corporall and visible but the eating of the body is internall spirituall and invisible Wherefore they are not properly one kind of eating but as the thing signified is distinguished from the signe so the receit of both of them is distinct though both be at once in the lawfull use of the Sacraments Object 7. That which quickneth and nourisheth must needs be received into us The body and bloud of Christ doe quicken us Therefore they must needs be received into us that is be eaten and drunken with the mouth Ans The Major is but meerly particular and therefore false in generall for not whatsoever quickneth and nourisheth us must necessarily be received into us That onely must be received into us necessarily which quickneth and nourisheth naturally that is by a joynt-touching of our body This meate which so nourisheth us after a naturall manner doth not nourish us except thereby the substance of our body be increased But we speak farre otherwise of the nourishing of the soule which is spirituall Christs body doth not at all nourish us naturally for it doth not being received in us quicken us by working in us new corporall qualities like as a medicine doth but the body of Christ nourisheth and quickneth us after a manner diverse from that naturall nourishing and accordingly as this manner of nourishing and quickning us requireth so receive wee Christs body The manner how Christs body and bloud nourish us The manner whereby Christs body and bloud nourish us is 1. The respect of his merit For for us Christs body is given and his bloud shed for us and for the body and bloud of Christ we have eternall life given to us After this manner then the body and bloud of Christ quickneth us as it is a merit deserving for us this blessing 2. His body or bloud quickneth or nourisheth us when we receive that merit of Christs body and bloud that is when we beleeve with a true faith that for it we shall have eternall life This faith resteth and hangeth on Christ hanging on the Crosse not corporally dwelling in us 3. It nourisheth us when the same spirit uniteth us by faith unto Christ and worketh the like in us which he doth in Christ For except we be graffed into Christ we doe not please God For he will on that condition receive us into favour and pardon us our sinnes so that by faith through the working of the holy Ghost we be joyned with Christ and ingraffed into him Seeing then this is the manner whereby the body and bloud of Christ quicken and nourish us there is no need of any descending of the body and bloud of Christ into our bodies to quicken us Repl. Not onely our soules but our bodies also are fed with Christs body and bloud unto eternall life Therefore our bodies must eate as well as our soules But our bodies eate and drinke by the mouth Answ The Major here omitted proceedeth thus Whatsoever
not to the Latine Church but by the Greeke Church and those words are found in the Greeke Testament when first it was written in Greeke And therefore wee have no Hebrew words derived unto our Church which the Greeke Church had not before us If also wee seek the Greeke Fathers the word Missa will never be found to have been used by them Therefore I think not that the word Missa was taken from the Hebrewes but Missa which doubtlesse is a Latine word by originall seemeth to have taken from the Fathers who used Remissa for Remissio as Tertullian Tertul. lib. 4. cont Marc. Cypr. debono patient Epist 4. lib. 3. Wee have spoken saith hee of a De remissa peccatorum remissio of sinnes And Cyprian Hee that was to give b Daturus remissam peccatorum remission of sins did not disdaine to be baptised And again he useth the same word Hee that blasphemeth against the holy Ghost hath not c Remissam peccatorum non habet remission of sins Wherefore as they say Remissa for Remissio so they seem also to have said Missa for Missio But herein againe they much vary For some will have the word Missa to be used as it were Missio from an ancient custome of Ecclesiasticall rites and actions which came from the Greeke Churches to the Latine because Sermons and Lectures being ended before the Communion a Deacon did send forth that is did command the Catechumenes the possested with spirits and the excommunicated persons to depart crying with a loud voice If any Catechumene be yet abiding within the Church let him depart and so the word Missa seemeth to be used as it were a Mission or sending away because it was the last part of divine Service Others will have it to be so called from a Dimission or from the manner of dimissing the congregation because Service being ended a Deacon dimissed them with these words Ite missa est that is Goe you may depart Or as others interprete it Go now is the collection of almes which they will have to be called Missa of the sending it in as we may so speake or throwing or casting it in for the poore Lombard hath a new conceit hereof Lib. 4. dist 15. It is called the Masse saith hee because an heavenly Messenger cometh to consecrate Christs quickning body according to that prayer of the Priest Almighty God command that this be carried by the hands of thine Angell into thine high Altar c. Therefore unlesse an Angell come it cannot rightly be called a Masse Loe the folly of the man Againe The Masse is so called either because the host is sent whereof mention is made in that Service whence it is said Ite missa est that is Follow the host Lib. 4. dist 24. which is sent up to heaven trace yee after it Or because an Angel cometh from heaven to consecrate the Lords body by whom the host is carried and conveyed to the heavenly Altar Whence it is also said Ite missa est Goe it is sent Wee reject both the name and the thing For this word the Masse doth not agree to the Lords Supper because the Lords Supper hath nothing common and agreeing with the name of Missa albeit it was used of the ancient Writers Moreover we have no need of this name for wee have other words for this purpose extant in Scripture where it is called The Lords Supper The Lords Table Breaking of bread c. Now let us see the differences of the Supper and the Masse and those most contrary one to another and such as in respect whereof the Masse ought to be abolished They are especially three and are desciphered in the Catechisme 1. The Lords Supper testifieth unto us That wee have full remission of sinnes and justification freely by faith for Christs one and onely sacrifice finished on the Crosse according to these sayings of Scripture The bread is the body of Christ given for us Heb. 7.27 Heb. 9.12 26. The cup is the bloud of Christ shed for us for remission of sinnes Doe this in remembrance of mee Shew forth the Lords death till hee come That did hee once when hee offered up himselfe By his owne bloud entred hee in once into the holy place and obtained eternall redemption for us For then must hee have often suffered since the foundation of the world but now in the end of the world hath hee appeared once to put away sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe Heb. 10.10 12 14. By the which will wee are sanctified even by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once made This man after hee had offered one sacrifice for sinnes sitteth for ever at the right hand of God With one offering hath hee consecrated for ever them that are sanctified Contrariwise the Masse denieth that both quicke and dead have remission of sins by and for Christs oblation except also he be daily offered by the Massing-Priests to God his Father For thus hath that their Canon which they call the lesse Holy Father Almighty and Eternall God receive this immaculate host or sacrifice which I thy unworthy servant offer to thee my living and true God for my innumerable sinnes offences and negligences and for all that stand about me here present yea and for all faithfull Christians quick and dead that it may be profitable to me and them to everlasting salvation And their greater Canon hath Remember Lord thy servants and handmaids N. and all here present whose faith and devotion is well knowne unto thee for whom we offer or who offer unto thee this sacrifice of praise for themselves and all that are theirs for the redemption of their soules for the hope of their safety and salvation What need was there that Christ should offer himselfe at all if the oblation of a petty Masse-Priest may serve for the redemption of soules 2. The Lords Supper witnesseth unto us That Christ according to the Articles of faith as concerning his humanity is in heaven at the right hand of his Father and is not shrouded under the bare accidents of the elements or signes in the Supper and that he exhibiteth unto us in the Supper his body and bloud to be eaten and drunken by faith and that he ingraffeth us into himselfe by his holy Spirit that we may abide in him and have him abiding in us as it is said He that is joyned unto the Lord 2 Cor. 6.17 10.16 Heb. 1.3 8.1 4. is one spirit The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ We have such an high-Priest that sitteth at the right hand of the Throne of the Majesty in the heavens For he were not a Priest if he were on earth Contrariwise the Masse teacheth us That bread and wine by force of consecration is changed into Christs body and blood and that this his body and bloud in the act of consecration
him come and observe it and he shall be as one that is born in the land For no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof 3. The allegories or resemblances between Christ and the Paschal lamb FOr confirmation and illustration of the principall end of the passeover the consideration of the resemblances of such rites as God prescribed to be observed in the killing and eating the Paschall lamb may much availe A Collation of the type and the thing signified by the type THE TYPE WAS THE THING SIGNIFIED IS 1. A Lamb out of the flock 1. Christ very or true man Isa 53. John 1. 2. Without blemish set apart 2 Without sin Isa 53. Heb. 7. 3. To be slain and rosted 3. Who suffered and died 1 Cor. 5. 4. Without breaking any bone 4. Without having his bones broken John 19. 5. About evening 5. In the end of the world Heb. 1. 9. 6. The posts were to be sprinkled witâ— his bloud 6. His satisfaction was imputed unto us Isa 53. Rom. 3. 7. That the Destroyer might passe over the Israelites housâ—s 7. That we might be delivered from everlasting death Heb 2. 8. He was to be eaten and that in every family 8. There must be in man an applying of this death of Christ to himselfe by faith Rom. 1. John 6. 9. He was to be eaten all 9. This application must be according to all the Articles of faith 2 Tim. 3. 10. Without leavened bread 10. Without hypocrisie 1 Cor. 5. 11. With sowre herbs 11. With patience of the crosse Matt. 10. 12. Hastily and in the habit of travellers 12. With a desire of profiting and expectation of an heavenly life Matth. 13. Heb. 13. 13. Of the Circumcised alone 13. The regenerate onely eat him and hee is profitable to them alone and they onely take not the Sacraments to their condemnation Joh. 6. Heb. 13. 1 Cor. 11. 4. Whether the ancient passeover be now abrogated THat the ancient passeover is now by Christs coming abrogated with all other types whatsoever prefiguring the Messias to come is cleer 1. Out of the whole disputation of the Apostle to the Hebrews touching the abolishment of the legall shadowes Heb. 7.12 which abolishment is now performed in the New Testament If the priesthood be changed then of necessity must there be a change of the law In that he saith a New Testament hee hath abrogated the Old 2. From the fulfilling and performance of those legall shadows These things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled Not a bone of him shall be broken John 19.36 Christ our passeover is sacrificed for us 1 Cor. 5.7 3. From the substituting of the New Testament in place thereof For Christ when he was ready to die and to sacrifice himselfe as the true Passeover ended the ceremony of the Paschall lamb with a solemn banquet and thenceforth instituted and ordained a Supper to be observed by his Church in place thereof I have desired to eat this passeover with you before I suffer Luke 22.15 19. Doe this in remembrance of mee Where hee commandeth that we celebrate and solemnize the supper in memory of him not the ancient passeover As then Baptism succeeded Circumcision so the Lords Supper succeeded the Passeover in the new Testament Certain conclusions of the Supper 1. THe Supper of the Lord is a sacrament of the new Testament wherein according to the commandement of Christ Bread and Wine is distributed and received in the assembly of the faithfull in remembrance of Christ which is that Christ might testifie unto us that he feedeth us with his body and bloud delivered and shed for us to eternall life and that we also might for these his benefits give solemn thanks unto him 2. The first and principall end and use of the Lords Supper is That Christ might therein testifie unto us that he died for us and doth feed us with his bloud and body unto everlasting life that so by this restification he might cherish and increase in us our faith and so consequently this spirituall food and nourishment The second end is thanksgiving for these benefits of Christ and our publick and solemn profession of them and our duty towards Christ The third is the distinguishing of the Church from other sects The fourth that it might be a bond of mutuall love and dilection The fifth that it might be a bond of our assemblies and meetings 3. That first end and use which is the confirmation of our faith in Christ the Supper of the Lord hath because Christ himself giveth this bread and drink by the hands of his Ministers to be a memoriall of him that is to admonish and put us in remembrance by this signe as by his visible word that he died for us and is the food of eternall life unto us while he maketh us his members both because he hath annexed a promise to this rite that he will feed those who eat this bread in remembrance of him with his own body and bloud when he saith This is my body and also because the holy Ghost doth by this visible testimony move our minds and hearts more firmly to beleeve the promise of the Gospel 4. There is then in the Lords Supper a double meat and drinke one externall visible terrene namely bread and wine and another internall There is also a double eating and receiving an externall and signifying which is the corporall receiving of the bread and wine that is which is performed by the hands mouth and senses of the body and an internall invisible and signified which is the fruition of Christs death and a spirituall ingraffing into Christs body that is which is not performed by the hands and mouth of the body but by the spirit and faith Lastly there is a double administer and dispenser of this meat and drink an externall of the externall which is the Minister of the Church delivering by his hand bread and wine and an internall of the internall meat which is Christ himself feeding us by his body and bloud 5. Not the body and bloud of Christ but the bread and wine are the signs which serve for confirmation of our faith for the body and bloud of Christ are received that we may live for ever But the bread and wine are received that we may be confirmed and assured of that heavenly food and daily more and more injoy it 6. Neither is the bread changed into the body of Christ nor the wine into the bloud of Christ neither doth the body and bloud of Christ succeed in their place they being abolished neither is Christs body substantially present in the bread or under the bread or where the bread is but in the right use of the Lords Supper the holy Ghost useth this symbole as an instrument to stir up faith in us by which he more and more dwelleth in us ingraffeth us into Christ and maketh us through him to be just and righteous and to draw eternall life from
ground and foundation of Christian doctrine and to have a purpose to obey it but those must be repelled who will not desist either from their errours and blasphemies or from manifest sins against their conscience being admonished by the Church and convicted of errour 16. The Pope hath corruptly taken away the breaking of the bread from the rite of the Supper and bereaved the people of the use of the cup. Corruptly also hath he transformed the Supper of the Lord with adding so many ceremonies not delivered by the Apostles into a theatricall or pageant-like Masse that is into a Jewish superstition and stage-like rounds and conveyances But more wicked and idolatrous inventions are these That the Masse is a propitiatory sacrifice wherein Christ is offered by the Masse-priests for the quick and the dead and is by the force of consecration substantially present and abideth so long as those forms of bread and wine remain uncorrupted and further doth bestow the grace of God and other benefits upon them for whom he is offered of whom also he is eaten with the mouth of their body yea though they have no good inward motion in them and lastly is being treasured and laid up and carried about under those forms to be worshipped In respect of these foul monsters it is necessary that the Masse be quite and clean abolished out of the Christian Church In summe they are these 1. Transubstantiation 2. Bread-worship 3. Sacrifice 4. Maiming of Christs Supper THE APPENDIX OR ADDITION ADJOYNING unto the former Treatise of the Supper Certain principall arguments of the Consubstantiaries against the sincere doctrine of the Lords Supper and the Sacramentaries as they call them together with a refutation of them 1. THe errours of the Sacramentaries say they are that there are but bare signes and symboles only in the Supper Ans We teach that the things signified are together with the signes in the right use exhibited and communicated albeit not corporally but in such sort as is agreeable unto Sacraments 2. The Sacramentaries say that Christ is present only according to his power and efficacie Ans We teach that he is present and united with us by the holy Ghost albeit his body be far absent from us like as whole Christ also is present with his ministery though diversly according to the one nature 3. The Sacramentaries say they affirm that an imaginary figurative or spirituall body of Christ is present not his essentiall body Ans We never spake of an imaginary body but of the true flesh of Christ which is present with us although it remain in heaven Moreover we say that we receive the bread and body but both after a manner proper to each 4. The Sacramentaries say they affirm that the true body of Christ which hung on the crosse and his very bloud which was shed for us is distributed and is spiritually received of those only who are worthy receivers as for the unworthy they receive nothing besides the bare signes unto their condemnation Ans All this we grant as being agreeing to the word of God the nature of sacraments the analogie of faith and the communion of the faithfull Certaine arguments of the Consubstantiaries whereby they goe about to overthrow our doctrine of the Lords Supper together with the refutation of them 1. THe words of the institution are open and plain This is my body This is my bloud Ans They alledge these words against themselves for they say That the body of Christ is received really in under with the bread when Christ saith that the very bread is the body Wherefore they doe a double injury unto the Church First while they thrust upon the Church their own words for Christs Secondly while they imagine that the Church perceiveth not these speeches to be divers In the bread is my body and The bread is my body They accuse Christ also for a liar for they deny that the bread is his body but that his body is in the bread Let them look therefore unto it how they will answer Christ at the last judgment for this blasphemy and reproach The Papists also do more retain the very words of Christ But these retain not the words but follow the sense and meaning Wee must see therefore which part followeth it Ours shall be proved in the end Repl. Christ addeth an exposition of his mind Which is given for you and Which is shed for you Ans First this is a begging of that which is in question for they take as granted that the bread is properly called the body which yet lieth upon them to prove for it is a sacramentall manner of speaking Secondly we return their own reason upon them by inverting it thus The body of Christ properly so called was given for us But the bread was not given for us Therefore the bread is not the body properly so called Likewise as the bread is the body broken so the breaking of the bread is the breaking of the body But the breaking of the body is the crucifying thereof Therefore the bread broken is but sacramentally and by representation the body broken 2. They reason from the authour who said it and is true Ans This is also a begging of that which is in question They must prove that Christ said his body was in under with the bread And further a man may speak figuratively and yet speak perspicuously and plainly Repl. He is also omnipotent therefore he is able to be every-where and so in the bread Ans Albeit he were able to bring to passe that two flat repugnant things should be true together yet will hee not do it Again God is not able to work contradictories or things flat repugnant because he is true Now to will those things which are contradictory argueth a lyar Wherefore we deny not the truth and omnipotency of God but these mens lies nay rather we defend Gods truth affirming that God doth that which he spake But they oppugne it making contrary wils to be in God Repl. Christs body hath many prerogatives not agreeable to our bodies as that he was born of a Virgin walked on the sea was at one time and together in the grave in hell and in paradise and passed thorow the gates when they were fast shut Ans These examples are partly not matches and partly false For this may agree unto a creature to walk on the waters as it did to Peter to passe thorow the gates shut as it is agreeable to the nature of a spirit Again these examples are not matches nor of the same quality with that which is in question because these do not imply a contradiction For when he is said to be born of a Virgin he is not said withall not to be born of a Virgin But to be both finite and infinite as they will have Christs body who consubstantiate it with the bread these imply a contradiction Now it is false that they say that he passed thorow the gates shut
whereas the gates might yeeld and open unto him as also that he passed thorow the door or stone of the grave when as it is said that the Angel did open it and lastly when they say that Christs body was once and together in moe places which they seem to have of Austin but Austin said That his body was in the grave his soul in hell and his God-head every where 3. They reason from a circumstance of the time the same night in which hee was betrayed No man which speaketh seriously speaketh figuratively Christ instituting his Supper spake seriously Therefore without any figure Ans I deny the Major because by that position no man that speaketh seriously should speak figuratively which is most false God speaketh in all Sacraments though figuratively yet seriously I have earnestly desired saith Christ to eat this Passeover with you Wherefore I answer that he useth not jesting or obscure figures This figure is perspicuous because it is usuall and his disciples speak so Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou maist eat the Passeover It is usuall also in all Sacraments it is forcible and emphaticall because it expresseth the similitude of the signe and the thing signified and the certainty of the conjunction of both in the right use and administration Again we invert their reason and say Because Christ spake seriously therefore he used a figure which doth well expresse and declare the thing Repl. Christ said This cup is the new testament In wils and testaments men speak properly Christ here instituteth a Sacrament Therefore hee speaketh properly Ans I deny the Major and invert the reason for seeing he would institute a Sacrament therefore he spake figuratively calling the Supper the new testament which is figuratively to be understood for these two reasons 1. Because otherwise there should be two covenants the one proper and the other the Supper 2. Otherwise also they should be shut out from Gods covenant who cannot come to the Supper and all who come to the Supper should be in the covenant Object Christ saith In my bloud Therefore the reall bloud of Christ is in the Supper and is drunk by the mouth Ans We conclude the contrary rather by those words of Christ because the new testament was made by Christs bloud shed on the crosse and applyed unto us by faith not drunk by the mouth for otherwise they should be excluded from the testament and covenant who were not able to come to the Sacrament Rep There is a great force in the word New That which was done in the Old Testament typically is done in the New really Ans If they adde Therefore done by the mouth of the body they bring in more in the conclusion then was in the antecedent for there was no type in the old Testament which did signifie the eating of Christ with the mouth 2. We invert their reason Christs body was no otherwise eaten in the new Testament then in the old But in the old it was eaten spiritually only Coâ— 2.17 Hebr. 9. Therefore in the new also it is so eaten Rep. The new Testament differeth from the old because in that were types in the new is the body it selfe Ans This difference of the old and new Testament is no where set down in holy Scripture that Christ is eaten in the old not really and in the new corporally by the mouth In the places which are alledged out of the Apostle the body signifieâ—h that the shadow was only of the old Testament and was accomplished and fulfilled by Christ because there the body is opposed to those shadows And further because he calleth it the body of Christ which kind of speech sheweth that by Christ was wrought accomplishment and fulfilling of the types and shadowes of the old Testament Moreover albeit we have Christ exhibited in the new Testament and he is there born a man yet notwithstanding it doth not therefore follow hereof that his body is in the bread but only that it is in the new Testament 4. They reason from the consent of the Evangelists and S. Paul Matthew as Theophylact calculateth writ his Gospel eight yeeres after Christs ascension Marke ten yeeres Luke fifteene yeeres Paul twenty yeers and all use the same words A speech that is often uttered with the same words is not figurative Such is the speech of the Lords Supper Therefore it is not figurative Ans It is false that a speech often uttered in the same words is not figurative because when a figure is conspicuous known and forcible as this it is retained Again The Evangelists repeat the words of Christ because he spake figuratively Often though it be figurative is this repeated Hee shall baptise you with the holy Ghost Matâ—h 3 1â— John 1.33 and with fire Moreover we deny that this speech of Christs Supper was repeated by all in the same words 1. Because Matthew and Mark say This is my bloud of the new Testament Luke saith This cup is the new Testament in my bloud 2. Matthew and Mark say This is my body Luke addeth which is given for you Paul which is broken for you 3. Paul saith That the bread is the communion of the body of Christ And albeit in this place hee speaketh not purposely of the Supper yet he stirreth up and exhorteth unto it Repl. It is the same sense and meaning Answ The question now is not of the sense and meaning of the words but of the identity of the words that is whether they be the same words Repl. Where there is no mention at all of any figure there is no figure Answ This is false For foolish were it and men should seem to make shew and ostentation of their skill and art if they should say that they used a trim figure And the Scripture also often speaketh figuratively and yet doth it not adde withall it speaketh figuratively Furthermore they make mention hereof when they shew that it consisteth of the nature of the subject and the attribute The body was born of the Virgin crucified and so forth The bread is made of meal Secondly Christ willeth this to be done in remembrance of him Therefore the bread is called the body as a memoriall of his body Thirdly Matthew and Mark say This is my bloud of the new Testament Paul and Luke say This is the new Testament in my bloud Now the new Testament is the bloud whereby God hath bound himself to receive the faithfull and repentant into favour and they bind themselves to yeeld faith and obedience unto him Fourthly Paul saith That the bread is the communion of Christs body which is not any corporall eating 1. Because the faithfull are thereby one body in Christ 2. Because he compareth it with the communion of the altar in the old Testament which was not corporall 3. Because it can agree but to the faithfull onely and not to the wicked 4. John sheweth that communion If we walk in
belongeth hither also the doctrine of Justification because in the Supper no other justice or righteousnesse is to be sought for but by the bloud of Christ 6. The manner how we eat it is not to be defined Ans They commit a double fault in so saying 1. When they deny that the manner is to be defined and so contradict and gainsay the Scripture which defineth it and sheweth that it is spirituall and that there is wrought an union with Christ by faith through the holy Ghost 2. They themselves define the manner as it cleerly appeareth by their writing 7. The saying of Durandus is true We hear the words wee perceive the motions we know not the manner we beleeve the presence Ans Durandus maketh nought either for you or against us or for himself because he was a Papist And again if his saying be rightly understood we may admit it We hear the words This is my body not that we eat with our mouth the body of Christ in the bread We perceive the motions that is we perceive the bread to enter into our mouth not the body of Christ Wee know not the manner that is not perfectly to wit after what manner the holy Ghost is every where whole in Christ and in all the Saints and how he uniteth us in Christ We beleeve the presence namely such as is the eating and as is the union of the members and in the head 8. Wee teach this only That the body and bloud of Christ is truly substantially and naturally exhibited Wee grant that wee eate the true body of Christ So then is their disputation vaine and frivolous 1. Because they confesse that wee are made partakers of the true body of Christ and that wee must not question of the manner for this wee grant 2. Because the reasons and refutation which they bring are of no weight or moment Certain reasons whereby is proved That the body of Christ is not present either In or Vnder or At the bread of the Lords Supper neither is corporally eaten Vnder With In or At the bread 1. BEcause hee took a true humane nature Whereupon we adde also that we cannot eate him otherwise than his disciples did in the first Supper 2. Hee truely ascended out of earth into heaven 3. Such is our eating of him as his abiding is in us 4. All the Saints of the Old and New Testament have the same union with Christ 5. Christ onely is able to offer himself unto the Father Now it is necessary in the use of the Supper to crave of God remission of sins Wherefore if he be present at the bread we must crave of him and so we offer the bread But in the New Testament it is not lawfull to direct our prayer to any certain place 6. The blessings which are promised unto the godly only are spirituall Unto these and other fore-alledged reasons cometh the consent of the ancient Fathers Ambrose Athanasius Austine Basil Bede Bertram Chrysostome Clement Alexandrinus the Councell of Nice Cyprian Cyril Denis Gelasius Gregorie the Great Gregorie Nazianzene Hesichius Hierom Hilary Irenaeus Justine Leo Macarius Origen Procopius Gaza Tertullian and so forth THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION Arguments whereby the opinion of the Vbiquitaries is refelled and the truth of sound doctrine confirmed THE FIRST ARGUMENT THE Marcionites and Manichees imagined that Christ had not a true and solid body but onely made shew of the shape of a body so that hee seemed onely to have flesh and bones whereas indeed hee had them not And further that the very incarnation and all the motions and operations of Christ did but onely seeme so in outward appearance whereas in the truth of the thing there was no such thing done Now the opinion of the Vbiquity and of the reall communicating of the properties of both natures doth raise againe from hell that fantasticall dotary and frensie of those heretickes Therefore it is no lesse to be abandoned and banished out of the Church to hell than that heresie of the Manichees That this opinion of Ubiquity doth give life againe to the former wee prove The Ubiquitaries are of opinion and so teach that all the properties of the God-head were presently from the very point of Christs conception really effused from the God-head of the Word into the humane nature which Christ took Hence these absurdities will follow 1. Christ shall not be truly born of the Virgin if as touching the nature of his humanity hee was truly and essentially without the wombe of his Mother before hee was born and after hee was born hee remained no lesse truly and substantially as touching his humanity in that selfe same womb than before 2. Christ was not truly weak in his humane nature and subject to passions if hee were then also as touching the same nature partaker of the divine majesty and omnipotency 3. Hee was not truly dead if also in the time of his death as touching his soul and body hee were essentially present every where together with his God-head For the soul being every where present could not be really separated in distance of places from the body which also should be every-where present and so neither could the body die but onely in outward appearance and imagination 4. Hee ascended not truly into heaven but it shall be said to have been onely a vaine and imaginarie and fantasticall spectacle if he were in his body substantially there before he visibly ascended thither and after he was ascended thither he remained yet in the substantiall presence of the same body no lesse truly than before on the earth yea in the very bodies also of the faithfull If these things so fell out in the truth of the thing it will follow that the same body of Christ was indeed at once and together both weak and omnipotent base and glorious subject to sufferings and not subject dead and alive limited and unlimited which is horrible to affirm For avoiding therefore of these prodigious and impious absurdities they will except that hee was not as touching his body otherwise than limited weak subject to passions and mortall in the time of his humiliation because hee had debased himself and would not shew forth that Majesty communicated unto his body before his resurrection Ans They interpret amisse that debasing of himself of all the glory and Majesty of his humanity hidden and kept close for a time whereas it is to be understood in respect of the Divinity of the Word in that he would take the forme of a servant that is the masse of our nature and become man Moreover it will follow that Christ did shew forth the communicated power and Majestie of his flesh even then when he was indeed weak and limited or circumscribed in body as when shedding tears he raised Lazarus from the dead and when being apprehended by the Jews he healed Malcus whom Peter wounded Now what is it else to raise the Marcionites up againe from
hell or in the greatest matter of all others impiously to blaspheme if this be not The second Argument THe blasphemie of Samosatenus Arrius and the late Anti-trinitaries is this That Christ-man is not properly and by nature God but onely by an accidentall participation of Divine properties majesty honour power and vertue The Ubiquitaries also maintaine the same consideration of the God-head of Christ-man while they define the personall union by his communicating alone of properties whereby the flesh of Christ is made omnipotent and every where So that now that man is and is called God not that hee is properly and by nature God but because in finite power majesty and glory is given him from God and all the gifts of the holy Ghost are bestowed on him without measure Now this accidentall bestowing of the God head and all the properties doth not make Christ to be properly and by nature God but only by divine grace or God unproperly so called because it is not the very essentiall God-head of the Word but a certain participation thereof in vertue and efficacy And therefore the sounder Fathers objected unto the Arrians that they took away the true and eternall God-head of Christ when they made him a God not by nature but by grace b participation onely of dignity and majesty Therefore seeing the Vbiquitaries also equalling our Immanuel with God by participation of properties onely take away his true and eternall God-head wee doe disclaime and accurse this their doctrine as blasphemous and hereticall And that they doe this their own words and opinions witnesse Brentius in recog p. 20 Anar Thes 10. â—â— p. Tubin Thes 25 26. and Apol. â—agr 29. as Brentius and Jacobus Andraeas and others of them in their writings Whence we conclude that the Ubiquitaries hold the same opinion with the Artians and the Anti-trinitaries of the God-head of Christ-man that is that all esteeme him for God not by nature but onely by grace of participation new temporary created adopted If these things be true Christ shall not be God and man Lib. 1. de Trinita but a divine man such as the Ubiquitaries repute him who as Servetus hold this opinion That God can communicate the fulnesse of his God-head give his divinity majesty power and glory unto man But wee execrate and detest the same blasphemy of both The third Argument NEstorius taught That the union of God the Word with man was wrought by the participation only of equality as touching majesty honour power vertue and operation Neither doth hee make the difference of the dwelling of the Word in mans nature which himselfe tooke and in other Saints to consist in any other thing than in those gifts and graces bestowed by God on man The selfe same also doe the Vbiquitaries teach because they cry that there is no difference between the inhabiting and dwelling of the God head in Peter and in Christ except it be taken from the communication of the gifts or properties of the God-head and they contend that by this meanes this man which was taken by the Word is God because the Word doth nothing without him but all things by him This is nothing else than to make Christ man onely God by an accident Wherefore the doctrine of Vbiquity is altogether the same with Nestorius his heresie Tert. lib. de Trin pag. 6. 10. Tertullian saith If Christ be man onely how then is he present every-where being called upon and invocated seeing this is not the nature of man but of God to be able to be present in all places By this testimony is refuted the Ubiquity of the humane nature in Christ Object But the union of the divine and humane nature in Christ is unseparable Therefore wheresoever the divine nature is there is also the humane nature Ans It is true which is said that the union is unseparable The Word never forsaketh the nature once assumed and taken But the Word is not in the humane nature as the soul is included in my body Wheresoever my body is there must my soule needs be neither is my soule at the same time without my body But the Word is not so in Christ-man But hee is so unseparably and personally in the humane nature as that he is together also without the humane nature in all the parts of the world as he filleth all and in holy men and Angels by his speciall presence The personall union of both natures doth not evert the generall action and working of his presence and majestie neither doth it let or hinder the speciall working of his presence because the Word is effectuall and worketh forcibly in the regenerate The generall points wherein the Churches which professe the Gospel agree or disagree in the controversie concerning the Lords Supper THey agree in these points 1. That as well the Supper of the Lord as Baptisme is a visible pledge and testimony annexed by Christ himselfe to the promise of grace to this end chiefly that our faith in this promise might be confirmed and strengthened 2. That in the true use of the Supper as well as in all other Sacraments two things are given by God unto us and are received of us namely earthly externall and visible signes are bread and wine and besides these also heavenly internall and invisible gifts as are the true body of Jesus Christ together with all his gifts and benefits and heavenly treasures 3. That in the Supper we are made partakers not only of the Spirit of Christ and his satisfaction justice vertue and operation but also of the very substance and essence of his true body and bloud which was given for us to death on the Crosse and which was shed for us and are truly fed with the self same unto eternall life and that this very thing Christ should teach and make known unto us by this visible receiving of this bread and wine in this Supper 4. That the bread and wine are not changed into the flesh and bloud of Christ but remain true and naturall bread and wine that also the body and bloud of Christ are not shut up in the bread and wine and therefore the bread and wine are called the body of Christ his body and bloud in this sense for that his body and bloud are not only signified by these and set before our eies but also because as often as we eat or drink this bread and wine in the true and right use Christ himself giveth us his body and bloud indeed to be the meat and drink of eternall life 5. That without the right use this receiving of bread and wine is no Sacrament neither any thing but an emptie and vaine ceremony and spectacle and such as men abuse to their owne damnation 6. That there is no other true and lawfull use of the Supper besides that which Christ himself hath instituted and commanded to be ketp namely this that this bread and this wine be eaten and drunken
in remembrance of him and to shew forth his death 7. That Christ in his Supper doth not command and require a dissembled and hypocriticall remembrance of him and publishing of his death but such as imbraceth his Passion and death and all his benefits obtained by these for us by a true and lively faith and with earnest and ardent thankfulnesse and applieth them unto those which eat and drinke as proper unto them 8. That Christ will dwell in beleevers only and in them who not through contempt but through necessity cannot come to the Lords Supper yea in all beleevers even from the beginning of the world to all eternitie even as well and after the same manner as he will dwell in them who came unto the Lords Supper They disagree in these points 1 THat one part contendeth that these words of Christ This is my body must be understood as the wordes sound which yet that part it selfe doth not prove but the other part that those words must be understood sacramentally according to the declaration of Christ and Paul according to the most certain and infallible rule and levell of the Articles of our Christian faith 2. That one part will have the body and bloud of Christ to be essentially In or With the bread and the wine and so be eaten as that together with the bread and the wine out of the hand of the Minister it entreth by the mouth of the receivers into their bodies but the other part will have the body of Christ which in the first Supper sate at the table by the Disciples now to be and continue not here on earth but above in the heavens above and without this visible world and heaven untill he descend thence again to judgement and yet that we notwithstanding here on earth as oft as we eat this bread with a true faith are so fed with his body and made to drink of his bloud that not only through his passion and bloud shed we are cleansed from our sins but are also in such sort coupled knit and incorporated into his true essentiall humane body by his Spirit dwelling both in him and us that we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones and are more neerly and firmely knit and united with him than the members of our body are united with our head and so we draw and have in him and from him everlasting life 3. That one part will have all whosoever come to the Lords Supper and eat and drink that bread and wine whether they be beleevers or unbeleevers to eat and drink corporally and with their bodily mouth the flesh and bloud of Christ beleevers to life and salvation unbeleevers to damnation and death the other holdeth that unbeleevers abuse indeed the outward signes bread and wine to their damnation but that the faithfull only can eat and drink by a true faith and the fore-alledged working of the holy Ghost the body and bloud of Christ unto eternall life Quest 83. What are the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven ON THE 31. SABBATH Ans Preaching of the Gospel and Ecclesiasticall discipline by which heaven is opened to the beleevers and is shut against the unbeleevers Quest 84. How is the Kingdome of heaven opened and shut by the preaching of the Gospel Answ When by the commandement of Christ it is publikely declared to all and every one of the faithfull that all their sins are pardoned them of God for the merit of Christ so often as they imbrace by a lively faith the promise of the Gospel but contrarily is denounced to all Infidels and Hypocrites that so long the wrath of God and everlasting damnation doth lie on them as they persist in their wickednesse a John 20.21 22 23. Mat. 16.19 according to which testimony of the Gospel God will judge them as well in this life as in the life to come Quest 85. How is the Kingdom of heaven opened and shut by Ecclesiasticall discipline Ans When according to the commandement of Christ they who in name are Christians but in their doctrine and life shew themselves aliens from Christ b Rom. 11.7 8 9. 1 Cor. 12.28 after they have been some time admonished will not depart from their errours or wickednesse are made knowne unto the Church or to them that are appointed for that matter and purpose of the Church and if neither then they obey their admonition are of the same men by interdiction from the Sacraments shut out from the Congregation of the Church and by God himselfe out of the Kingdome of heaven And againe if they professe and indeed declare amendment of life are received as members of Christ and his Church c Mat. 18.15 16 17. 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. 2 Thes 3.14 15. 2 John 10.11 2 Cor. 2.6 7 10 11. 1 Tim. 5.17 The Explication SEeing it hath bin shewed in the Treatise next going before who are to be admitted by the Church unto the Lords Supper very commodiously and fitly shall this doctrine follow concerning the power of the keyes wherein besides other things this chiefly is taught How they who are not to be admitted must be restrained and excluded from the Sacraments lest approaching unto them they profane them The chiefe questions are 1. What the power of the keyes given unto the Church is and what are the parts thereof 2. Whether Ecclesiasticall discipline and excommunication be necessary 3. To whom that power is committed against whom and in what order to be used 4. To what ends it is to be directed and what abuses therein are to be avoided 5. What that power of the keyes committed unto the Church differeth from the Civill power 1. What the power of the keyes given to the Church is and what are the parts thereof THe power of the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven which Christ gave to his Church is the preaching of the Gospell and Ecclesiasticall discipline whereby heaven is opened to the beleeving and shut up against the unbeleeving and unfaithfull Or it is the office or charge imposed on the Church by Christ of denouncing by the preaching of the Gospell and Church discipline Gods will and even of declaring the grace of God and remission of sins unto the penitent that is to them who live in true faith and repentance but of denouncing unto the wicked the wrath of God and exclusion or banishment from the Kingdome of Christ and of casting such out of the Church as long as they shall shew themselves in doctrine and life estranged from Christ and of receiving them againe into the Church when afterwards they shall repent It is called the power of the keyes by a Metaphor or borrowed speech taken from the Stewards of mens houses Why this power is called the keys to whom the keyes are delivererd in charge and the keyes import a Steward-ship by a Metonymy or change of names between the signe and the thing signified thereby as we use to say The Scepter
then which this our Saviour Jesus Christ bringeth us is righteousnesse and life everlasting Seventy weeks are determined to finish the wickednesse and to seale up the sinnes and to reconcile the inquity and to bring in everlasting righteousnesse Dan 9.24 1 Cor. 1.30 Hee is made unto us wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption 3. How hee saveth Christ saveth us 1. By his merit HE saveth us after two sorts by his merit and by his efficacy 1. Hee saveth us by his merit or satisfaction because by his obedience passion death and intercession he hath merited for us remission of sinne reconciliation with God the holy Ghost salvation and life everlasting Testimonies hereof are these If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father 1 John 2.2 Jesus Christ the just And hee is the reconciliation for our sinnes and not for ours onely but also for the sinnes of the whole world that is for the sinnes of all sorts of men of what soever age place or degree The bloud of Jesus Christ the Sonne of God purgeth us from all sinne 1 John 17. Rom 3.25 Whom God hath set forth to be are conciliation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousensse by the forgivenesse of sinnes By the obedience of one many shall be made righteous He was wounded for our transgressions Rom. 5.19 Esa 53.5 he was broken for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes wee are healed All we like sheep have gone astray we have turned every one to his owne way and the Lord hath laid upon us the iniquitie of us all 2 Cor. 5.2 Gal. 3.13 Hee hath made him to be sinne for us which knew no sin that we should be made the righteneousnesse of God in him Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law when hee was made a curse for us that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Christ Jesus Galat. 4.4 Galat. 3.13 that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith God sent forth his Son made of a woman and made under the Law that is made an execration or curse For wee are delivered not from the obedience but from the curse of the Law that he might redeeme them that were under the Law that wee might receive the adoption of the sonnes Heb. 9.14 How much more shall the bloud of Christ which through the eternall Spirit offered himselfe without spot to God purge your consciences from dead workes to serve the living God By the which will we are sanctified even by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once offered By these and very many the like places of Scripture it is manifest that for Christs merit we are not only freed from punishment the remission of our sins being obtained but are also reputed righteous before God adopted of him to be his Sons blessed endued with the holy Ghost sanctified and made heires of everlasting life By his efficacy and powerfull working Christ saveth us by his efficacy power and operation because he not only obtaineth by his meriting for us remission of sins and that life which wee had lost but also applyeth effectually unto us by vertue of his Spirit through faith the whole benefit of our redemption For what benefits he merited by his death he doth not retain them unto himself but bestoweth them on us For salvation and life everlasting which himself had before he purchased not for himself but for us as being our Mediatour Therefore he revealeth unto us his Fathers will instituteth and maintaineth the ministery of his word whereby he giveth the holy Ghost by whom he worketh in us both faith whereby we applying Christs merit unto our selves may be assured of our justification in the sight of God through the force thereof and also conversion or the desire and love of new obedience So by his word and spirit he gathereth his Church he bestoweth and heapeth on in all blessings necessary for this life defendeth and preserveth it in this life against the force of Divels and the world and against all corporall and spirituall assaults of all enemies even to the end so that not one of those which are converted perisheth finally at length their bodies being raised in the last day from the dead hee fully delivers the Church from all sin and evill advancing it unto everlasting life and glory casting the enemies thereof into perpetual pain and torment To comprise the whole in a word his efficacy by his word and spirit regenerateth us in this life The efficacy of Christs merit performeth three things unto us 1. Our regeneration Mat. 18.17 and preserveth or sustaineth us being regenerate lest we fall away in the end raiseth us unto life eternall Of his revealing himself unto us and regenerating us speak these places No man knoweth the Son but the Father neither knoweth any man the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son will reveale him No man hath seen God at any time John 1.18 the onely begotten Son which is in the bosome of the Father he hath declared him Mat. 3.11 John 15 26. Ephes 4.8 10 11. 1. John 3.8 He that cometh after mee will baptise you with the holy Ghost and with fire I will send unto you from the Father the Spirit of truth When he ascended up on high he gave gifts unto men He ascended up on high that he might fill all things For this purpose appeared the Son of God 2. Our perseverance therein John 14.1 Mat. 28.20 John 14.18 23. that he might loose the workes of the Divel Of his raising us from death these Scriptures make evident mention I will raise him up in the last day No man shall take my sheep out of mine hands I give unto them eternall life and they shall never perish 3. Our Resurection from death Joh. 6.54 10.28 1 Cor. 15.28 Ephes 5.27 When all things shall he subdued unto him he shall make unto himselfe a glorious Church in the sight of God which he gathereth from the beginning of the world unto the end Hereby we may understand that the giving of the holy Ghost is a part of our salvation or delivery by Christ Jesus our Mediatour For the holy Ghost is he by who Christ effectually performeth this which he being our Intercessor with his Father hath promised his Father in our behalfe that is he teacheth us by illuminating our minds with the knowledge of God and his divine will and regenerateth or sanctifieth and guideth and stablisheth us that we may begin the study of holines persist and profit therein untill sin be fully abolished in us and sin being abolished death must needs be abolished which that he might together with death destroy Christ was sent of his Father into the world Christ is our most perfect Saviour Christ saveth us from all evils whether of crime or punishment by
in office only and in the manifestation of his God-head For they which are in nature equall may be unequall in degree of office 10. This is saith Christ life eternall John 17.3 that they know thee to be the only very God Therefore the Son and the holy Ghost are not very God Ans In this place are opposed not the Father and the Son or the holy Ghost but God and Idols and Creatures Therefore these are excluded not the Son or the holy Ghost 2. There is a fallacy of severing and dividing clauses of mutuall co-herence and necessary connexion For it followeth in the Text And whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ Therefore herein also consisteth life eternall that Jesus Christ sent of the Father be likewise knowne to be very God as it is said The same is very God and life everlasting 1 John 5.20 3. There is a fallacy in transferring the particle Onely unto the subject Thee unto which it doth not belong but unto the predicate God which the Greek Article in the originall doth shew For the sense is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they know thee the Father to be that God who only is very God Repl. But this argument followeth Maximilian is Emperour Therefore Rodulph is not Why then doth not this follow The Father is God Therefore the Son is not God Ans These persons are finite and their essence cannot belong to moe but the Father and the Son are persons infinite and their essence may be of moe namely of three persons 11. Jehovah or the true God is the Trinity The Father is Jehovah Therefore the Father is the Trinity that is all three persons Ans Meere particular propositions conclude nothing And if the Major be expounded generally after this manner Whatsoever is Jehovah is the Trinity it is false for that which is Jehovah may be some one person of the Trinity The Syllogisme therefore is faulty because Jehovah is not taken in the same signification in both the premisses For the name Jehovah in the Major is taken absolutely and essentially for the three persons for one and the same Jehovah or true God is the Father and Son and holy Ghost joyntly but in the Minor it is taken personally for one person of the God-head that is the Father who is Jehovah of himself Repl. Jehovah is one in number Therefore it is alwaies taken in Scripture after the same manner Ans Jehovah is one in number of essence not of persons 12. Where are three and one there are foure But in God are three and one to wit three persons and one essence Therefore there are foure in God Ans The Major is to be distinguished Where are three and one really distinct there are foure But these three in God are not another thing distinct in the thing it selfe from the essence but each is that one essence the same and whole as they differ from their essence only in their maner of subsisting or of being The maner of existing is not a diverse substance from the existence being or essence 13. Christ according to that nature according to which in Scripture hee is called Son is the Son of God But according to his humane nature only hee is called Son Therefore according to that only and not according to his divine also hee is the Son of God and so by a consequent the Son is not very God Ans The Minor is false John 3.16 5.18 Rom 8.32 John 5.17 19. John 1.18 Heb. 2.16 John 3.13 17. John 1.14 For Christ is called the only begotten and proper Son of the Father and equall with the Father The Father hath created all things by the Son The Son from the very beginning worketh all things likewise which the Father doth The Son revealed the Fathers will of receiving mankinde into favour unto the Church before his flesh was borne The Son was sent into the world descended from heaven and took flesh But the Word which is God is the only begotten and proper Son of God and took flesh And not the humane but the divine nature of Christ is Creatresse and worketh with equall authority and power with the Father and descended from heaven Therefore God or the God-head or divine nature of Christ is both called in the Scripture and is the Son and by a consequent the Son is that one true and very God These Objections we may compare with those that are before set downe in the Common place concerning the Trinity of the persons For with whatsoever Sophismes the Trinity it selfe and divinc essence is impugned with the selfe-same also is each Person assaulted and contrariwise with whatsoever Sophismes one person is impugned with the same the whole essence of the Deity is assailed Besides some objections were there only proposed which are here more fully assoiled You may reade more of this point Vol. 1. Ursin from page 115. to page 125. Quest 34. Wherefore callest thou him Our Lord Ans Because he redeeming and ransoming both our body and soule from sins not with gold nor silver but with his precious bloud and delivering us from all the power of the Divell hath set us free to serve him a 1 Pet. 1.18 19. 2.9 1. Cor. 6.20 1. Tim. 2.6 John 10.28 The Explication Here we are to observe these two things 1. In what sense Christ is called Lord. 2. For what causes hee is our Lord. 1. In what sense Christ is called Lord. TO be a Lord is to have right and power granted by Law either divine or humane over some thing or person as to use and enjoy it and to dispose thereof at thy owne will and pleasure Christ therefore is our Lord 1. Because hee hath dominion over all things and over us also and hath care of all things and of us especially that is ruleth preserveth and keepeth us as his own to eternall life and glory as being bought with his precious bloud None of them is lost John 17.12 John 10 28. whom thou gavest mee None shall pluck them out of my hand 2. Because all things are subject unto him and we are bound to serve him both in body and soule that he may be glorified by us Ye are bought with a price therefore glorifie God in your body and in your spirit Cor. 6.20 for they are Gods Quest To which nature then is the name of the Lord to be referred Ans To both like as also the names of Priest Christ is out Lord according to both his natures King and Prophet For the names of the office benefits dignity and bountifulnesse of Christ towards us are affirmed of his whole person not by communication of properties as the names of his natures and properties are but properly in regard of both natures For both natures of Christ will and work our redemption For the humane nature of Christ is made the price of our redemption by dying for us his divine nature doth give and offer that price
the God-head signifieth not the person which hath both names but only the divine nature it selfe But of God which is the concrete name the properties not of the God-head only but of the man-hood also may be affirmed because God signifieth not the divine nature but the person which hath both the divine nature and the humane Object 3. There is no proportion between temporall punishment and eternall Christ suffered onely temporall paines and punishments therefore he could not satisfie for eternall punishment Answ There is no proportion between temporall and eternall punishment if they be considered as being both in the same subject but in diverse subjects there may be The temporall punishment of the Son of God is of more value and worth than the eternall punishment of the whole world for divers causes heretofore alledged Object 4. If Christ satisfied perfectly for all then all must be saved But all are not saved Therefore he satisfied not perfectly for all Answ Christ satisfied for all men as concerning the application of his merit and satisfaction True it is that Christ fulfilled the Law two wayes 1. By his owne righteousnesse 2. By satisfying for our unrighteousnesse and both these he performed most perfectly But the satisfaction is made outs by our private application which is two-fold the former is wrought by God when he justifieth us for his Sons merit and causeth us to cease from sin the latter is effected by us through faith For we then apply unto our selves the merit of Christ when by a true faith we are perswaded that God remitteth our sins for his Sons sacrifice and satisfaction and without this application Christs satisfaction availeth us nothing Object 5. There were also propitiatory sacrifices in Moses Law Answ There were no sacrifices which might properly be termed expiatory but those that were were shadowes onely of Christs sacrifice which onely is propitiatory Hebr 10.4 1 John 1.7 1 John 2.2 For it is impossible that the bloud of Buls and Goates should take away sinnes The bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne He is the propitiation for the sinnes of the whole world 2. Whether Christ suffered according to both natures CHrist suffered not according to both natures neither according to his God-head but according to his humane nature onely both in body and soule For his divine nature is immutable impassible immortall and very life it selfe which cannot die Now he so suffered according to his humanity that by his death and passion he made satisfaction for infinite sinnes of men And the divinity sustained and upheld the humanity in the griefes and paines thereof and raised it againe to life when it had been dead Christ was put to death concerning the flesh but was quickned in the spirit 1 Pet. 3.18 4.2 John 2.19 Rev. 1.18 John 10.18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sinnes the just for the unjust that he might bring us unto God Destroy this Temple and I will raise it up againe in three dayes I was dead and loe I am alive I have power to lay downe my life and to take it up againe These testimonies prove that there was another nature in Christ besides his flesh which other nature neither suffered nor died Irenaeus saith As Christ was man that so he might be tempted Lib. 3. cont hares so he was the Word that so he might be glorified The Word indeed and Deity so resting in him that he might be tempted crucified and suffer death and yet united to his humanity that so he might overcome temptation death c. Object God purchased the Church with his owne bloud therefore the God-head suffered Ans It doth not follow Acts 20.28 because an argument from the concrete which is God to the abstract which is the God head is of no consequence Againe the kind of affirmation is altered God is said to have dyed by a figurative speech which is Synecdoche use when we signifie the whole by a part as whole Christ by God and by a communicating of the properties But when it is said The God head died this affirmation admitteth no figure seeing the subject in it is a meer abstract The concrete signifieth the subject or person having the nature or forme but the abstract signifieth the bare nature and forme onely Wherefore as the argument doth not follow A man is compounded of the clements and is corporeall Therefore his soule also is corporeall this cannot follow because all things agree not to the forme which agree to the subject the soule is the forme of man man is the essentiall subject of the soule So neither doth it follow Christ-God died therefore Christs God-head died For from the concrete to the abstract the reason doth not follow 3. The causes impellent or motives of Christs Passion John 3.16 1. THE love of God towards mankind So God loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son 2. The mercy of God towards man fallen into sin Of his mercy he saved us Titus 3.5 3. The will of God to revenge the injury of the Devill who in reproach and despight of God averted us from him and maimed the image of God in us in despight of the Creatour 4. The finall causes or ends of the Passion THE finall causes and fruits of Christs Passion are all one save that they differ in divers respects For in respect of Christ who suffered they are termed finall causes in respect of us they are called fruits The finall causes or ends of his Passion are 1. The manifesting of the love goodnesse mercy righteousnesse of God while he punisheth his Sonne for us 2. That his Passion might be a sufficient ransome of our sins or the redeeming of us The chiefe finall causes then are The glory of God and our salvation To the former finall cause belongeth the knowledge of the greatnesse of sinne that we may know how great an evill sinne is and what it deserveth To the latter belongeth our justification wherein all the benefits are comprehended which Christ merited by dying and by his freeing himselfe from death Hence know we that death is not now pernicious and hurtfull to the godly and therefore not to be feared Quest 38. For what cause should he suffer under Pilate as being his Judge Answ That he being innocent and condemned before a civill Judge a John 18.38 Mat. 27.24 Luk. 23.14 15. John 19.4 might deliver us from the severe judgement of God which remained for all men b Psal 69 5. Esay 53.45 2 Cor. 5.21 Gal. 3.13 The Explication MEntion is made of Pilate in Christs Passion 1. Because Christ did receive from him a testimony of his innocency that thereby we might know that he was pronounced innocent by the voyce of the Judge himself 2. That we might know that he though innocent was notwithstanding solemnely condemned 3. That we might be advertised of the fulfilling of the prophecy Eâ—ck â—1 27 I will over-turne
man Nestorius separated the two natures in Christ Nestorius heresie neither would have the Sonne of God but man onely to have died Doe not boast thou Jew saith Nestorius thou hast not crucified God but man The Ubiquitaries beleeve that the humanity of Christ The Ubiquitaries heresie from the moment of his incarnation was so endowed with all the properties of the God-head as that onely in this the humanity differeth from the God-head that the humanity hath by an accident whatsoever the God-head hath by and of it selfe Hereof it cometh that they imagine that Christ was in the time of his death yea when he was inclosed in the Virgins womb in heaven and every where not only as touching his God-head but with his body too This is it which they call the forme of God Phil. 2.6 Wherefore against all these we affirme and in the Creed beleeve that Christ died truly and corporally even by a true divulsion and separation of his soule from his body 1. Christ died truly and that a locall separation so that not onely his soule and body were not together every where but were not together in one place the soule was not where the body was Matth. 27.50 Marke 15.37 Luke 23.46 John 19.30 nor the body where the soule was Then Jesus cried againe with a loud voyce and yeelded up the Ghost Jesus cried with a lowd voyce and gave up the Ghost Father into thy hands I commend my spirit And when he had said these words he gave up the Ghost He bowed his head and gave up the Ghost Object But as vertue that is his divinity is said to have gone out of him so also he gave up the Ghost Answ There is a dissimilitude in these Because the divinity remaining united with the humane nature yet did work abroad without it The soule did depart from the body The reason of this dissimilitude is because the act of his divinity is increate and infinite but the act and power of his soule finite and created But yet this is further to be added 2. Christ died without breach of the union of his two natures that although his soule was truly separated from his body yet the Word notwithstanding did not forsake neither body nor soule but remained neverthelesse joyned both to body and soule and therefore the two natures in Christ were not divelled or sundered by that divulsion of the soule and body Object Why then cryed he Matth. 27.46 My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Answ Because of his delay and deferring of help and succour For the two natures in Christ ought not to have been divelled or sundred because it is written God hath purchased the Church with his own bloud And he was to be the Son of God who should die for our sins Acts 20.28 that he might be a sufficient price for them Hereby also it doth cleerly appeare That The union of both natures in Christ is no Vbiquity For the soule being separated from the body was not in the grave with the body and by a consequent not every where because that which is every where can never be separated and yet in death and in the grave the union of both natures remained and continued 2. Whether it was requisite and necessary that Christ should die IT was requisite and necessary that Christ to make full satisfaction not only should suffer but also should die 1. In respect of the justice of God that so his justice might be satisfied which required the death of men by whom it was violated For the hurting and offending of the greatest good is to be expiated with the greatest punishment or with the utmost destruction of nature that is with the death of the guilty condemned for sinne according to that The wages of sinne is death Rom. 6.23 But Christ succeeded in our stead and took on him our person who had sinned and had deserved death not only eternall but temporall also For wee deserved destruction which is the dissolution of the soule from the body whereon ensueth the dissolution of the body as a house is said to be subverted and destroyed when one part is separated from another Now it was requisite that the Sonne of God should die that he might be a sufficient ransome for our sins For no creature could have sustained such a punishment as should have been equivalent to eternall punishment and yet withall should have been temporall Object They have deserved eternall punishment whosoever are not reconciled to God by Christ therefore the soules ought not to be separated from their bodies that they might suffer eternall damnation Ans It doth not follow but this rather That therefore both body and soule must be together that they may suffer it which at length shall so come to passe Therefore it was necessary that Christ should die for us and his soule be separated from his body 2. In respect of Gods truth that the truth of God may be satisfied For God threatned and denounced death when ever we sinned which denouncing was to be fulfilled after sin was once committed And this is that commination or threatning pronounced by God himself In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death Obj. But Adam did not presently die Ans Truely he forth-with died not a bodily death Gen. 2.17 howbeit he became mortall straight upon it and by little and little he dayly died and even now already had he died spiritually eternall death and now was dead I heard saith he thy voice and I was affraid because I was naked Gen. 3.20 There was a terrour in him and a feeling of Gods wrath a strife with death the losse of all the gifts both of body and mind But there followed the equity moderation and lenity of the Gospel For God had not expresly said that he should certainly die wholly and presently For so had he perished for ever Wherefore the Son offered a mitigation and lenifying raised him up to a new life that notwithstanding he should remain subject to the corporall death which yet should not be deadly and pernicious unto him 3. In respect of the promise made to the Fathers both by words He is brought as a sheep to the slaughter and as a sheep before be shearer is dumb Esay 53.7 so openeth he not his mouth and by sacrifices whereby God promiseth that Christ should die such a death as should be an equivalent price for the sins of the whole world This could not be the work of a meere creature but of the Son of God only and therefore it was requisite and necessary that the Son of God should suffer so grievous a death for us Ob. Then they do not satisfie Gods justice who are punished because their punishment is endlesse and eternall Ans They satisfie by eternall punishment Rep. So then might we also be delivered from the curse by our selves Ans So then shall we never be
the place and state of the blessed where both of us shall be free from these paines that is he speaketh of felicity and liberty which is not in hell for his meaning is both of us who now suffer shall this day be in Paradise a place of everlasting salvation or happinesse where being delivered from all torments we shall injoy most pleasant quiet and repose But Paradise is neither hell nor in hell which is the place of torment Whereupon also it is cleere that Christ spake this to the Thiefe not of his God-head but of that which suffered which was his soule For the God-head was not with the Thiefe neither did Christ suffer or was elivered as touching his God-head but as touching his soule 2. If Christ did locally descend into hell Because there was no cause why Christ should descend Joâ—â— 39.30 he descended either to suffer or to deliver the Fathers thence as the Papists affirme But he descended not to suffer because now all things were finished on the Crosse as Christ himselfe also hanging on the Crosse said It is finished Hee descended not to deliver the Fathers 1 1. Not to suffer 1. Because hee did this before in suffering for them on the earth 2 2 Not to tree the Fathers out of the Limbo Wisd 3.1 Luke 16.26 2. He did the same by his power and efficacy of his God-head from the very beginning of the world not by the descension of his soule or body into hell The Fathers were not in Limbo Therefore they could not be delivered thence as it is said The soules of the just are in the hand of God Between you and us there is a great gulfe set so that they which would goe from hence to you cannot neither can they come from thence to us And in the same place Lazarus dying is said to be carried by the Angels into Abrahams bosome not into Limbus Patrum Some thinke that Christ indeed descended not into hell either to suffer 3 3. Not to triumph over Death and the Divell and affright them 1 Pet. 3.19 or to deliver the Fathers thence but to shew there the Divell and death his victory and to strike a terrour into them But that Christ descended for this cause is no where found extant in Scripture They object unto us first that place of Peter By the which he also went and preached unto the Spirits that are in prison which were in time passed disobedient Answ Peters meaning in this place is not as these men conjecture but is on this wise Hee saith Christ went that is being sent from the beginning of the Father unto the Church By his Spirit that is by his God-head To the Spirits that are now in prison that is in hell He preached in time passed When as yet they lived and were disobedient namely before the Floud For then hee preached to the disobedient when they were disobedient But they were disobedient in the time of Noah Therefore Christ preached by Noah and by the Fathers inviting the disobedient to repentance Farther if Peter here spake of the descension into hell yet this was not their opinion who pretend the broaching of it but the Papists who affirme and teach that Christ preached in hell unto the Fathers and delivered them 1 Pet. 4.6 They bring another place of Peter The Gospell was also preached unto the dead Answ That is unto those which are now dead or were then dead when Peter wrote this and who then lived when the Gospell was preached unto them They wrest and misconstrue also a place of Paul Ephes 4.9 Christ descended into the lowest parts of the earth Answ Into the lowest parts of the earth that is into the earth which is the lowest part of the world For one part of the earth is not opposed unto another but the earth is opposed unto heaven and the humiliation of Christ is thereby signified This interpretation is proved by the scope and drift of the Apostle who maketh in that place an opposition of Christs great glory and his great humiliation So on the other side Christ ascended into the highest paris of heaven that is into heaven into the highest part of the world These places therefore make nothing for the descension of Christ into hell and were it so that these places alledged to establish this opinion were to be understood of a locall descension of Christ into hell yet would they not make for them but rather for the Papists who teach that Christ preached unto the Fathers in hell and thence delivered them Now if these testimonies help not the Papists much lesse will they help them For it is certaine that it cannot be thence proved that Christ descended into hell to strike a terrour into death and the Divell This opinion indeed is not impious or ungodly and is approved by many of the Fathers so that we are not to contend maliciously with any therein yet I leave it because it is not grounded on any firme reasons neither can be gained by witnesse of Scripture and contrary reasons are at hand easie to be had For 1. After his death when he had said It is finished the soule of Christ rested in the hands of his Father into which he had commended it And 2. If hee descended to triumph this Article should be the beginning of his glorification but it is not likely that Christ took the beginning of his glorification in hell For it is apparent by the opposition of the Article following that Christs descension was the lowest degree of his humiliation And yet I confesse withall that Christ strook a greater terrour into the Divels but that was by his death whereby hee disarmed and vanquished the Divell Sin and death and without doubt the Divell perceived himselfe conquered by the death of Christ Hell signifieth in this place the terrours and torments of the soule What meaneth then this Christs descension into hell It signifieth 1. Those extreme torments straights and griefes which Christ suffered in his soule namely the wrath of God against sinners and that such as the damned feele partly in this life and partly in the life to come 2. The exceeding and extreme ignominy and reproach which Christ suffered That Christ suffered these things is proved by the testimony of David before alledged The griefes of hell caught mee Psal 116.3 which is said of Christ in the person of David There are other the like sayings whereby the same is proved The Lord would breake him and make him subject to infirmities Esay 53.10 Mat 26.31 My soule is very heavie even unto the death The same doe those his vexations also shew in the Garden when he sweat bloud because The Lord hath laid upon him the iniquities of us all Luke 22.44 Esay 53.6 Therefore he crieth out My God my God why hast thou forsaken mee The same is also proved by these reasons 1. Christ was to redeeme not only our bodies
shall be covered with this my skin And the Apostle saith Every man shall receive in his body according to that he hath done This mortality must put on immortality If then the bodies which have finned shall receive accordingly not other bodies but the same shall rise Therefore in the African Churches it was said I beleeve the resurrection of this flesh Cyprian in expos Symb. And the very word it selfe of rising enforceth as much for nothing can rise but that which is fallen This is the resurrection saith Ambrose as is intimated by the sounding of the very word that that which fell may rise that which was dead may revive Wherefore seeing our bodies shall rise no other bodies shall rise or be quickned then those which have fallen and are dead or no other then those which doe fall and die The justice also of God enforceth as much De side resurrect cap. 19. For this saith Ambrose is the order and course of justice that because the actions of the body and soule are common to both the body executing that which the soule decreed both of them should likewise come unto judgement both of them be either delivered up to perpetuall punishment 2. Thes 1.6 Cyprian in expos Symb. or reserved to eternall glory For the justice of God requireth that the flesh of the Saints which have fought in the field should also be crowned and the flesh of the wicked which have blasphemed against God should be tormented Wherefore to every soule shall be rendered not any other body what soever but the body wherewith it was once knit and coupled that forth-with the flesh with her owne soule may according to the actions of this present life either be gloriously crowned as chaste or as unchaste be extreamly afflicted Lastly as Christ rose againe in the same flesh wherein he died so shall we rise with that very flesh we now are clothed withall 1 Cor. 15.50 Object Flesh and bloud cannot inherit the kingdome of God These our bodies are flesh and bloud Therefore they cannot possesse the kingdome of God and by consequent not these but other bodies shall rise in the last day Answ 1. Flesh and bloud in this saying of the Apostle which maketh the Major proposition signifie some evill adherent quality of the substance or the substance in respect of that quality But in the Minor they signifie the very substance of our bodies How flesh and bloud 〈◊〉 denied the heavenly inheritance whereof the Anabaptists falsely understand their conclusion 2. Here is a fallacy of Accident For the reason proceedeth from corrupted substance to meere substance thus Flesh and bloud being mortall and corruptible as now it is shall not possesse the kingdome of God they fore simply no flesh or bloud shall enjoy the kingdome of God Which kind of reasoning is altogether inconsequent So then flesh that is sinfull and corruptible shall not possesse the kingdome of God but our flesh shall enter in being glorious and immortall and being then no more able to sinne neither shall it be corruptible The Apostle of purpose layeth this downe in the same chapter It is sowed a naturall body and is raised a spirituall body Repl. 1 Cor. 15.44 Our bodies shall rise spirituall bodies Therefore then our bodies shall not have the properties of our flesh Answ The Apostle calleth that a spirituall body not which is changed into a spirit in all properties In what sense our boâ—â—es shall be spirituall but which is guided by the spirit of God which is immortall and free from all miseries adorned with heavenly lightnesse glory might and holinesse As likewise on the other side he termeth that a naturall body not which is turned into the soule or is like unto the soule in all properties but which in this mortality is swayed quickned and governed by the soule That this is the meaning of the Apostles words is apparent by these reasons Verse 53. 1. Because he saith It shall rise a spirituall body but a spirit is no body 2. Himself addeth This corruptible body must put on incorruption 3. If any body after the resurrection should be so spiritual as not retaining at all any bodily properties then surely Christs body should have been so but now he saith to the Apostles Handle me and see Luke 24.39 for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee see me have Therefore much more shall our spirituall bodies have flesh and bones Thus Augustine interpreteth Apostles meaning Cons. Adimanw cap. 12. Whereas the Apostle saith that in the resurrection the body shall be spirituall we may not therefore thinke that it shall be a spirit and no body but he calleth that a spirituall body which without any corruption or death is altogether subject to the spirit For when he calleth the body which we now have a naturall body we may not imagine hereon that it is a soule and no body Therefore as the body is now called naturall because it is subject to the soule and cannot be called spirituall because it is not yet fully subject to the soule as long as it may be corrupted so then it shall be called spirituall when by no corruption it can resist the spirit and eternity 6. How the Resurrection shall be The dead shall be raised THe dead shall be raised with a shout and with the voice of the Archangel At the resurrection and with the trumpet of God and shall be presented before the high and most just Judge Jesus Christ The resurrection shall be in glorious manner and openly not fearfully not in secret and shall be far other then that which was wrought in some men at the resurrection of Christ For it shall be done all Angels men and divels beholding it yea with the exceeding joy of all the godly and with the exceeding feare and trembling of the wicked The living shall be changed They who then shall remaine alive shall be in a moment of time changed and be made of mortall immortall Read cap. 15. of the former to the Corinthians and cap. 4. of the former to the Thessalonians 7. When the Resurrection shall be THe resurrection shall be in the end of the world in the last day John 6.40 John 11.24 Mat. 24.35 I will raise him up at the last day This Martha confessed I know that Lazarus my brother shall rise againe in the resurrection of the last day But of that day knoweth no man no not the Angels of heaven but God only This question is to be held and proposed of us that our faith be not troubled while we are forced to expect and tarry or that we may not imagine to our selves any certain time when we think those things will happen and so begin to doubt and think our selves to be deluded when those things fall not so out nor come to passe at the time appointed by us This question maketh for the increase of hope
signified by the Sacraments Furthermore Baptisme and the Lords Supper are Sacrifices not indeed principally but as they are our work which we performe to God that is as we receive these signes as it were from the hand of God and so declare our obedience towards God 4. In what Sacraments agree with the Word and in what they differ THis agreement and difference shall be handled in the 67. Question of the Catechisme 5. How the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament agree and how they differ THey agree They agree In the authour In the author for both were instituted by God In substance In the things signified or in substance for by the Sacraments of both Testaments the same things are offered signified and promised unto us even remission of sinnes and the gift of the holy Ghost and that by Christ alone This is proved in the Epistle to the Hebrewes Hebr. 13.8 Jesus Christ yesterday and today the same also for ever But these are not in respect of rites and ceremonies the same Therefore they are the same in respect of the thing by them signified 1 Cor. 10.2 Colos 2.11 The Fathers under the law were baptised in the cloud and in the sea and did all eate the same spirituall meate By Christ ye are circumcised with circumcision made without hands that is in Baptisme we receive the same benefits August Tract 26. in John which they did in circumcision Augustine saith The Sacraments of the Old and New Testament differ in their signes but agree in the thing signified by the signes All the Fathers did eate the same spirituall meate I say they verily did eate the same spirituall meate For indeed the corporall meate they ate was diverse from our corporall meate seeing their meate was Manna but ours is of another kind But they did eate the same spirituall meate which we eate Without Christ therefore who is the thing signified of all the Sacraments both of the Old and New Testament no man was ever saved or now is or ever shall be saved Whence it followeth that the Fathers in the Old Testament had the same communion with Christ which also we have and that it was no lesse signified and confirmed then unto them by the Word and Sacraments then it is now unto us in the new Covenant Wherefore it is not only idolatry to seek another communion of Christ then is in the Word but also to seek another communion of Christ in the Sacraments of the New Testament then which was in the Sacraments of the Old Testament The Sacraments of the old new Testament differ 1. In rites They differ first in rites whereof change and alteration was made at Christs coming that thereby might be signified the ceasing of the Old Testament and the beginning or succeeding of the New Testament In number They differ in multitude and number There were moe and more laborious here fewer and more easie rites In signification In signification Those signified Christ to come these Christ that was come The signification is divers as the circumstance of time is divers which the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament signifie For the Sacraments of the old Church signified the time to come of Christ which should come our Sacraments signifie the time past of Christ already manifested in the flesh In the persons whom they bound In binding and obliging men The old bound onely Abrahams posterity for the converted Gentiles were not bound to observe circumcision Cap. 2.5 such as were those religious men spoken of in the Acts ours bind the whole Church of all Nations and Countries Baptise all nations Mat. 28.19 Mat. 26.27 Drinke ye all of this In continuance In continuance The old were to indure but untill the coming of the Messias the new untill the end of the world In cleernesse IN cleernesse Those are more obscure and dark because they signifie things to be manifested but these more cleere and plaine because they signifie things already manifested 6. What the signes are what the things and in what they differ IN every Sacrament are two things the signe and the thing signified The signe in the element and the whole externall action The thing signified is Christ himselfe and his benefits or the communion and participation of Christ and his benefits Differences of the signes from the things signified The signes therefore differ from the things signified 1. In substance for the signes are corporall visible earthly the things heavenly invisible spirituall Obj. But the body and bloud of Christ are things corporeall Ans The things are here called spirituall not as touching their substance but acrording to the manner of receiving them because through the working of the holy Ghost they are received by faith onely and not by any part of our body For that which is called spirituall in Scripture sometimes signifieth an incorporeall nature or spirit What is mean by that which the scripture calleth spirituall 1 Cor. 10.2 sometimes an effect or gift of the holy Ghost sometimes an object of the spirit and of spirituall motions which object is received by the spirit that is by the motion of the holy spirit or which is given to them in whom the holy Spirit dwelleth as All did eate the same spirituall meate And in this sense the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacraments are called things spirituall 2. They differ in manner of receiving The signes are received visibly by the hand mouth and parts of the body and therefore also of unbeleevers The things are received by faith only and the spirit and therefore of the faithfull only 3. In the end or use The things are given for the possessing of eternall life they are eternall life it self or some part thereof or purchase it unto us The signs are received for the sealing and confirming of our faith concerning the things themselves promised 4. The things signified are necessary unto the salvation of all the members of the true Church The signs are not simply necessary for all but for them only who are able to receive them because it is not the want but the contempt of the Sacrament which condemneth the despisers thereof 5. The signes are divers in divers Sacraments the rites and ceremonies are variable but the things are perpetuall and the same in all Sacraments 7. What the Vnion of the signes and the things is which is called Sacramentall UNion in generall is the conjunction of two or moe things whereby in some sort they are made one Hypostaticall or personall union is the coupling of two natures in one person The combining of the signe and the thing signified in Sacraments is called Sacramentall union The question is what kinde of union this is The Papists opinion confuted The Papists imagine that in the Lords Supper there is a conversion and change of the signes into the things signified But a change is no
offer our obedience unto God 18. Wherefore also one and the same ceremony may be considered both as a Sacrament and as a Sacrifice as whereby God in giving us visible signes testifieth his benefits towards us and we in receiving them testifie again our duty towards him And this testification of our faith and thankfulnesse dependeth of that testification of Gods benefits towards us as of the chiefe and proper end and use of the Sacraments and is thereby raised in the minds of the faithfull The confirmation of such of the former conclusions as most require it THe confirmation of the second conclusion The definition therein delivered of Sacraments is expressed Genes 17.11 Exod. 20.20 Exod. 31.14 Thou shalt keep my Sabbaths Now that Sacraments are rites commanded and prescribed to the Church by God is apparent by the institution of them as also that they are rites adjoyned unto the promise as visible signes and tokens thereof Deut. 30.6 Heb. 8.9 10. because all Sacraments are necessary duties towards God But chiefly and principally they are Gods benefits towards us as Circumcision did portend and shew remission of sinnes and mortification Neither onely doe we signifie them in confessing and celebrating them but chiefly God himselfe doth signifie them unto us testifying and confirming them unto us by the ceremonies of Sacraments For the Ministers as well in the administration of the Sacraments as in the preaching of the Word beare the person and possesse the place of God in the Church Teach and baptise all Nations Mat. 28.19 John 4.1 2. Jesus did baptise when yet not he himselfe but his Disciples did baptise So of the signe and ceremony of inauguration or annointing one to be King it is said The Lord hath annointed thee 〈◊〉 Sam. 10.1 when yet Samuel was sent to annoint Saul They further are therefore said to confirme our faith because the Scripture witnesseth them to be the signes and tokens of the muâ—uall and everlasting Covenant betweene God and the faithfull which God signifieth unto us in the bestowing of his benefits promised us in the Gospel But God is alike to be beleeved whether by signes or by words which signifie his will because not onely our sacrifices and obedience but also the signes of grace delivered to us by God have in their right use the promise of grace adjoyned unto them As He that shall beleeve and shall be baptized shall be saved And lastly because the Scripture to signifie the receiving or want of the thing signified alledgeth the receiving or want of the signes Psal 51.7 Deut. 30.6 Rom. 3.6 2 Cor. 10.16 As Purge me with hysope and I shall be clean The Lord will circumcise thy heart All we which have beene baptized The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ And hereof also follow the other ends specified in the definition in the second conclusion As That the Sacraments discerne and sever the Church from other Sects This is manifest both by effects and by restimonies A stranger shall not cate thereof Exod. 12.45 What is the profit of Circumcision Much every manner of way Rom. 3.1 Ephes 2.11 because unto them are committed the Oracles of God Yee being in times past Gentiles and called Vncircumcision of them who were at that time without Christ and were aliants from the Common-wealth of Israel and were strangers from the Covenant of promise Genes 17.11 and had no hope and were without God in the world It shall be a signe of the Covenant betweene me and you and it shall be my Covenant in your flesh Another end is that that they preserve the memory of Gods benefits As often as yee shall eate this bread ye shew the Lords death untill he come 1 Cor. 11.26 Exod. 12.14 Deut. 6 8. Luke 22.11 This day shall be unto you a remembrance Thou shalt binde them for a signe unto thy hand and they shall be as signes of remembrance betweene thine eyes Doe this in remembrance of me Lastly They are also bonds of love because they who are confederated with God Ephes 4.5 1 Cor. 10.17 are united also among themselves One Lord one faith c. We being many are one body The confirmation of the fourth conclusion The distinction there delivered is manifest in it self The receiving of the signs is corporal and external But the things especially signified are not received without faith because they are promised to beleevers onely And the signes are no otherwise true then the promises unto which they are annexed Againe The signes declare the same to the eyes which the promise declareth unto the eares As therefore the promise is but an empty sound without faith so also are the ceremonies vaine spectacles Againe the things signified are the communion of Christ and all his benefits but this can no man have otherwise then by faith either in the use or without the use of the Sacrament The confirmation of the sixth conclusion Such is the conjunction of all signes with their things signified as that they represent the things signified and confirme the acceptation of them For the pledges or tokens and symboles testifying other things are though not in the same place yet together with the things testified and signified The reason is Because To make one thing a signe of another thing is not to include or tye the thing with the signe as that they should be in one place but to ordaine the signe to signifie the thing the signe being in the same place with it or in some other place Againe the nature of the things signified by the Sacraments doth not admit the locall union For some are subsisting formes some accidents not inherent in the sacramentall signes but in the minds of men as the gifts of the holy Ghost Some are corporeall and in one place onely and not locally existent wheresoever the Sacraments are used as the flesh and bloud of Christ The confirmation of the seventh conclusion The Scripture speaketh thus of the Sacraments Circumcision is the Covenant the Lamb is the Passeover the bloud of the Sacrifices the bloud of the Covenant the expiation of the Sacrifices the Sabbath the everlasting Covenant the mercy-seat of the Arke Baptisme a cleansing or washing Bread and Wine the body and bloud of Christ And so the Scripture expoundeth it self when Circumcision is called the signe of the Covenant the Paschall Lamb the signe of the Passeover the Sabbath a perpetuall signe of grace and sanctification the ceremonies types and shadowes of true things the beleever and baptized shall be saved and of the signes and symbols of the Lords Supper it is said that they are to be received of our reconciliation The confirmation of the tenth conclusion The signes of the Covenant confirme nothing unto them who keep not the Covenant or who referre them to another end But the Sacraments are signes of the Covenant whereby God bindeth himselfe to give unto us
by the Passeover and other Sacrifices as also by the Sabbath which all were commanded by God that the godly might celebrate and worship God and shew themselves gratefull unto him and might withall take the signes and tokens of those benefits of God which they received by the Messias So Baptisme is a confession of Christianity and a sign whereby Christ testifieth that we are washed by his bloud The Supper of the Lord is a thanksgiving for the death of Christ and an advertisement that we are quickned and revived by his death and are made his members and shall remain and continue with him for ever OF BAPTISME ON THE 26. SABBATH Quest 69. How art thou admonished and assured in Baptisme that thou art partaker of the onely sacrifice of Christ Ans Because Christ commanded the outward washing of water a Mat. 21.19 adjoyning this promise thereunto b Ibid. Mar. 16.16 Acts 2 38. John 1.33 Mat. 3.11 Rom. 6.3 4. that I am no lesse assuredly washed by his bloud and spirit from the uncleannesse of my soule that is from all my sins that I am washed outwardly with water c 1 Pe 3.21 Mar 1.4 Luke 3.3 whereby all the filthinesse of the body useth to be purged The Explication The principall Questions touching Baptisme are 1. What Baptisme is 2. What are the ends of Baptisme or for what it was instituted 3. What is the sense and meaning of the words of the institution thereof 4. The lawfull and right use of Baptisme 5. What are the formes and kinds of speaking of Baptisme 6. Who are to be baptized 7. In place whereof Baptisme succeeded 8. How Baptisme agreeth with Circumcision THe two former of these questions touching Baptisme are handled under the 69. and 70. questions of the Catechisme the third and fourth under the 71. the fifth under the 72. the sixth under the 73. the seventh and eighth under the Common place of Circumcision which followeth immediatly after those questions of Catechisme aforenamed 1. What Baptisme is THe word Baptisme signfieth a dipping in water or sprinkling with water Those of the East Church were dipped their whole body in the water Those of the North in coâ—der countries are only sprinkled with water This circumstance is of no moment or weight For washing may be either by dipping or sprinkling and Baptisme is a washing The Catechisme definition is Baptisme is an outward washing with water commanded by Christ adjoyning this promise thereunto that we being baptized are no lesse assuredly washed by his bloud and spirit from the uncleannesse of our soules that is from all our sinnes then we are washed outwardly with water It may be also fitly defined on this wise Baptisme is a ceremony instituted by Christ in the New Testament whereby we are washed with water in the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost to signifie that we are received into favour for the bloud of Christ shed for us and are regenerated by his spirit and also to bind us that hereafter we endeavour in our actions and death truly to testifie newnesse of life Or It is a Sacrament of the New testament ordained and authorised by Christ whereby is sealed unto the faithfull being baptized with water in the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost remission of all their sinnes the gift of the holy Ghost and a planting of them into Christs body which is his Church whereby they also professe that they receive these blessings from God and will ever hereafter live unto him Or yet more briefly Baptisme is an externall washing instituted by the Son of God with the pronouncing of these words I baptize thee in the name of the Father and the Sonne and the holy Ghost to be a testimony that he who is so washed or dipped is reconciled through Christ by faith and is sanctified by the spirit unto eternall life We are said to be received into favour for the bloud of Christ shed for us to wit on the Crosse that is for Christs whole humiliation applied unto us by faith The Scriptures confirme this definition Mat. 28.19 Go and teach all Nations baptising them in the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost that is testifying by the signe of Baptisme that they are received into favour of God the Father through the Son and are sanctified by his Spirit Marke 1.4 Marke 16.16 John did baptize in the wildernesse and preach the baptisme of amendment of life for remission of sins He which beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved Wherefore Baptisme comprehendeth Three things comprehended in baptisme 1. The signe which is water and the whole ceremony as the sprinkling of water or the dipping into and againe returning out of the water 2. The things themselves signified by the ceremonies which are the sprinkling of the bloud of Christ the mortification of the old man the quickning of the new man into a certaine hope of the resurrection to come by Christ 3. The commandement and promise of Christ whence the signe hath authority and power of confirming Baptisme not a bare signe only Object 1. Baptisme is said to be an externall washing of water Therefore Baptisme is a bare signe onely Ans 1. This is a fallacy of division dividing things which are to be joyned because when we say that Baptisme is an externall signe we joyn with the signe the thing that is signified Ans 2. There is no particle added in our definition which excludeth the thing And Baptisme is in its owne nature without the promise adjoyned a bare signe and to the unbeleeving who receive not the promise by faith it is indeed an externall washing only with water but the promise cometh thereto The differences betweene Baptisme and the washings of the Old Testament and is joyned with this signe when it is used aright Object 2. There were washings also in the Old Testament Baptisme therefore is no Sacrament proper to the New Testament Ans There is a great dissimilitude and difference between the washings under the Law and our Baptisme 1. The washings in the old Testament were not a signe of the entrance and receiving into the Church as our Baptisme is 2. They were instituted to wash away a ceremoniall uncleannesse as when a man had defiled himselfe by touching a dead carkasse or any such uncleane thing his ceremoniall uncleannesse was to be purged with a ceremoniall washing our Baptisme is ordained to wash away a morall uncleannesse that is sinne And hence it is that Baptisme is called in Scripture alaver or washing to wit in respect of that washing of the morall uncleannesse that is in respect of that inward or spirituall washing whereby we are washed or cleansed from our sins 3. They signifie a washing by Christ which was to come our Baptisme sealeth that washing which is by Christ already exhibited in the flesh 4. They did bind the Jewes only Baptisme extendeth and belongeth to
with circumcision made without hands by putting off the sinfull body of the flesh through the circumcision of Christ In that ye are buried with him through baptism in whom ye are also raised up together through the faith of the operation of God which raised him from the dead And you which were dead in sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened together with him forgiving you all your trespasses Here the Apostle by two reasons proveth that there is no fruit or use of externall circumcision or that circumcision is now no longer to be retained in the new Church first because wee have circumcision not made with hands that is spirituall in Christ a signe whereof was the corporall circumcision that is because that is now accomplished and fulfilled in Christ which was by circumcision prefigured and shadowed Again hee proveth it because baptisme now hath the same signification and use which heretofore circumcision had this only is the difference that baptisme is the signe of the thing exhibited which circumcision prefigured when it was yet absent and not exhibited Wherefore wee are taught by this place of Paul that baptisme is the same to Christians which circumcision was before to the Jewes 2. That baptism was substituted in the same place of circumcision the end common to both these Sacraments convinceth because both these Sacraments are a signe of our adoption into the people of God and a Sacrament of our admission and receiving into the Church For as the infants of the Jewes and Proselytes as born citizens of the Church were forthwith circumcised on the eighth day but those who were of elder yeers were then first admitted into circumcision when they professed Judaisme so also the infants of Christians are presently baptised but the elder sort are not untill they have made profession of true Christian doctrine in stead of which profession it serveth the infants that they were born in the Church 5. How baptisme agreeth with circumcision and how it differeth from it CIrcumcision and baptisme agree They agree In end Rom. 4.11 Tit. 3.5 In the chiefe and principall end whereas in both is sealed the promise of grace by Christ which is alwayes one and the same In signification Colos 2.11 Deut. 30.6 Jerem. 4.4 Mark 1.4 By both of them is signified regeneration and a promise is made on mans part of faith and obedience towards God In effect Rom. 6.3 Both of them is a Sacrament of our entry admission and ingraffing into the Church Circumcision and baptisme differ They differ In tires In rite or ceremony For the same are not the rites of circumcision and of baptism In circumstance of sex and age Gen. 17.10 Mat. 28.19 In circumstance of sex and age For circumcision was injoined the males alone on the eighth day but baptisme pertaineth to both sexes in the Church presently after their nativity and birth In the manner of signifying In the manner of signifying Circumcision on Gods behalfe promised grace for the Messias to come Baptisme for the Messias exhibited The circumcised were received into favour for Christ which was to be exhibited the baptised are received for Christ exhibited In a parcicular promise Gen. 17.8 In a particular promise For circumcision had a promise also of a corporall benefit that is it was a testimony also that God would give a certain place for the Church in the land of Canaan untill the coming of the Messias Baptism hath no promise in particular of any temporall benefit In manner of binding In manner of binding Circumcision on our behalfe did bind the Church to observing of the whole law ceremoniall judiciall and morall Baptism bindeth us only to the morall law that is to faith and amendment of life In objects and continuance In their objects and continuance Circumcision was instituted only for Abrahams posterity and it was to continue but untill the coming of Christ Baptism was instituted for all nations that are desirous and willing to come unto the society of the Church and it shall continue unto the end of the world 6. Why Christ was circumcised THere was no cause of circumcision in Christ for nothing could be sealed or bestowed on him neither did any uncleannesse cleave unto him the pruning whereof should be sealed unto him howbeit he would be circumcised 1. That he might signifie that he was also a member of that circumcised people as also he would therefore be baptised that he might testifie that he was a member of those which are baptised He would therefore be sealed with the initiatory Sacrament of both Churches to intimate and signifie that he was the Head Saviour and corner-stone of both and would one day make one of both 2. That he might shew that he received and took all our sins on himself that he might satisfie for them and cleer us from all guilt Gen. 5.21 He hath made him to be sin for us which knew no sin that wee should be made the righteousnesse of God in him Isa 53.5 6. The chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed The Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all 3. That he might restifie that for our sakes he was made subject to the law and that he did intirely and fully fuifill the law on our behalf deriving the curse thereof on himselfe so to redeem us from the same 4. The circumcision of Christ was a part also of his humiliation and ransome paid for our sins Certain conclusions of baptisme BAptism is a Sacrament of the new Testament whereby Christ testifieth unto the faithful which are baptised in the name of the Father and the Son and the holy Ghost remission of all their sins the giving of the holy Ghost and their ingraffing into the Church and his body and they of the other side professe that they receive those benefits from God and therefore will and ought hereafter to live unto him and to serve him And further the same baptism was begun by John Baptist and concinued by the Apostles because he baptised into Christ who should suffer and rise again and they into Christ who had suffered and was risen again 2. The first end of baptism instituted by God is that God might thereby signifie and testifie that he cleanseth by his bloud and the holy Ghost them which are baptised from their sins and so ingraffeth them into Christs body and maketh them partakers of his benefits 2. That baptism might be a solemn receiving or matriculating and admitting of every one into the visible Church and a distinguishing mark of the Church from all sects 3. That it might be a publick and solemn profession of our faith in Christ and our bond whereby we are obliged to faith and obedience towards him 4. That it might advertise us of our sinking into afflictions and of cur rising out of them again and deliverance from them 3. Baptism
because Christ testifieth unto us by these signes that hee doth as verily feed us with his body and bloud unto everlasting life as wee receive at the hand of the minister these the Lords signs and this testification is directed to every one who receiveth the signes with a true faith For wee so receive the signes at the ministers hand as that rather the Lord himself giveth them us by his ministers John 4.1 Wherefore Christ is said to have baptised moe disciples then John when yet he did it by his Apostles and other disciples Distinction of Christians from infidels That it might be a publick distinction or marke discerning the Church from all other nations and sects For the Lord instituted and appointed his Supper for his disciples and not for others Testification of our faith That it might be our testification to Christ and the whole Church which is a publick confession of our faith and a solemn thanksgiving and binding our selves to perpetuall thankfulnesse and the celebration of this benefit both which are proved by these words of Christ Luke 22.19 1 Cor. 11.26 Doe this in remembrance of me This remembrance is taken first for faith in the heart then for thanksgiving and our publick confession To be a bond of the Churches assembly That it might be a bond of the Churches assemblies and meetings because the Supper was instituted that it should be done and celebrated in a congregation and that either great or small Therefore the Supper as was said before is called a * Synaxis Mat. 20.27 1 Cor. 11.33 Convent and Christ expresly commandeth Drink yee all of this Likewise Paul When ye come together to eat stay one for another To be a bond of love among men 1 Cor. 10.17 That it might be a bond of mutuall love and dilection because the Supper testifieth that all who receive it aright are made the members of Christ under one head as also Paul saith For wee that are many are one bread and one body because we are all partakers of one bread Now the members of one body mutually love one another The Lords Supper may not be celebrated by one onely Of this which hath been spoken we gather that the Lords Supper ought not to be celebrated by one onely 1. Because it is a communion and the signe of our communion and a private supper is no communion 2. Because it is a solemne thanksgiving and all ought to give thanks unto God and by consequent hee that thinketh himself unworthy to communicate with others in the Lords Supper doth withall confesse himselfe not to be fit to give thanks unto God 3. Because Christ together with his benefits is not proper to any but common to all wherefore a private Supper maketh that good private which should be publick 4. Christ called all his houshold unto it even Judas himselfe Therefore a private Supper is coutrary to Christs institution 5. That some abstain from coming to the Supper it cometh of a certain evill and corrupt motion either because they will not communicate with others or because they think themselves not worthy enough to approach unto this Table But all are worthy who beleeve themselves to be desivered by Christ from eternall damnation and desire to profit and goe forward in godlinesse In summe if the Supper be received by one onely that is done against the use appellation institution and nature of the Sacrament Object An objection against that end which before â—as alledged to be principal in the Lords Supper Christ in the words of the institution of the Supper putteth as the principall end of his Supper his remembrance Therefore the confirmation of faith must not be made the principall end of his Supper Ans The reason followeth not to the deniall of a part by putting the whole For the remembrance of Christ is the whole wherin is comprised both our confession and our solemn bond to thankfulnesse and also the consirmation of our faith Wherefore rather by inverting the reason I thus inferre and conclude because the remembrance is the Supper therefore it is the confirmation of our faith and because also Christ proposeth unto us that ceremony or rite which must be unto us a remembrance of him hee doth verily propose also a confirmation of our faith which is nothing else but a remembrance of Christ and his benefits Ob. The holy Ghost confirmeth our faith therefore the Supper doth not Ans The reason followeth not to the removing of an instrumentall cause by the putting of a principall cause as if a man should say God feedeth and nourisheth us therefore bread doth not For the holy Ghost confirmeth indeed our faith but by the word and sacraments as God feedeth and nourisheth us but by bread 3. What the Supper differeth from Baptisme ALthough the same benefits are imparted and sealed unto us both in the Lords Supper and in Baptism to wit a spirituall ingraffing into Christ and a communion with him and the whole benefit of salvation whereof the Apostle speaketh saying By one spirit are we all baptised into one body 1 Cor. 12.13 and have been all made to drink into one spirit Yet many and manifest are the differences of these sacraments for the Supper differeth from Baptisme In ceremonies In ceremonies or externall rites In signification of ce emonies The same thing is sealed in baptism and the Supper but the meanes of sealing is diverse In the signification of the ceremonies For albeit it is the same participation of Christ namely both the washing away of sins by the bloud of Christ which is represented in baptisme and eating and drinking of the body and bloud of Christ which is confirmed unto us in the Supper yet notwithstanding that signification of our new birth is sealed by the dipping of our body into the water of baptisme and this of our maintenance and preservation is depainted and sealed by the eating and drinking of bread and wine in the Supper And therefore the thing signified of the sacraments is not divers because it is the same To be washed with the bloud of Christ and To drink the bloud of Christ But the manner of signifying one and the same thing is divers In ends In their proper ends Baptisme is a covenant made betweene God and the faithfull the Supper is a signe of the continuing of that covenant Or Baptisme is a signe of regeneration and of our entrance into the Church and covenant of God the Supper is a signe of their fostering abiding and preservation who are once entred into the Church The new man must first be born by the spirit of Christ and the signe of this renewing or regeneration is baptisme afterwards when he is once renewed and born again hee must be fostered and nourished by the body and bloud of Christ the signe of which nourishing is the Supper Briefly in baptisme God confirmeth us of our receiving into the
your salvation and the salvation of the whole Church Is broken Object But Christs body neither is nor was broken Answ Paul hath a respect to the signification which the breaking of the bread did import now this breaking signifieth the pains and renting of Christs body and the violent sundering of his soule and his body one from the other For as the bread is broken and parted into divers parts so the soul and body of Christ were separated and parted from each other Wherefore the property of the signe is here attributed to the thing signified Doe this These words are a commandement to observe the ceremony which Christ instituted This to wit this which ye see me do do you also henceforth in the Church that is being gathered and assembled together take bread give thanks break it distribute it eat it c. He understandeth the whole action which he commandeth and that to us which beleeve and not to the Jewes who were ready to crucifie him In remembrance of me That is thinking and mediating of my benefits which I have done for you and which are by these rites recalled into your memory and further verily feeling and finding in heart that I give you these my benefits and therefore celebrating them by publick confession before God and Angels yea before men also and so giving mee thanks for them Wherefore the end of Christs Supper is remembrance The end of the Supper is the remembrance of Christs benefits which is not a meer meditation on the history but a calling to mind the death and benefits of Christ and a faith whereby we apply Christ and his merit unto us and gratefulnesse or a publick confession of his benefits This remembrance is the whole whose parts are the memory of Christs benefits faith whereby we apply Christ and his merit unto us thankfulnesse or publick confession of his benefits Whence it is manifest that the Supper was instituted to this end to be unto us a memoriall of Christ putting us in mind what and how great blessings he hath purchased for us and with what and how exquisite torments and bitter death hee obtained them confirming in us also our faith whereby wee apprehend them Wherefore it followeth not Christ did institute his Supper for a remembrance of him Therefore hee did not institute it for confirmation of our faith For this objection is no lesse frivolous then if I should say The holy Ghost confirmeth our faith Therefore the Supper doth not For as it hath been said before the reason followeth not to the removing of the instrumentall cause by the putting of the principall cause as neither doth it follow to the deniall of a part by the putting of the whole for remembrance compriseth the remembring of Christs benefits faith and thanksgiving For by his sacraments Christ remembreth us of himselfe and his benefits and by his sacraments hee raiseth and establisheth in us our trust and confidence in him and further of that remembrance of Christs benefits it must follow that we also yeeld thanks unto him therefore publikely So then the Supper is not only to admonish us of our duty as some think but it must first represent unto us Christs benefit and then afterwards our duty for where no benefit is there we cannot be thankfull Drink ye all of this This commandement of Christ we oppose against the sacriledge of the Pope who bereaveth the Laity of the cup Against Popish administring the communion under one kind and against that sophisticall figment of concomitancie of the bloud with the body under the form of the bread Christ biddeth all eat and all drink The Pope will not permit all to drink but the Priest only the Lay-men he suffereth to eat only because saith he they drink it eating This shamefull dealing is reproved and confuted by Christs commandement Drink ye all of this Here the Popes Sophisters cavill with us telling us that this commandement which we urge and presse on them pertaineth only to the disciples then present who were no Lay-men but Priests But we answer 1. That they fondly imagine Christs disciples to have been Masse-mumming Priests 2. There is no such difference in Scripture as they put of Priests and Lay-men seeing the Scripture intituleth all the faithfull priests of God He hath made us kings and priests unto God Rev. 1.6 1 Pet. 2.9 5. even his Father Ye are a royall and holy priesthood to offer up spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ 3. Under this pretext and colour the whole Supper might be taken away from the Laity especially from women if it were true that such men only were to be admitted to the Supper as were at the first Supper Their tale of concomitancy is an impious and sacrilegious pretext which Christ confuteth and discovereth to be false when he calleth the bread by it self his body and the cup by it self his bloud and reacheth both apart to his disciples to be eaten and drunk and commandeth them henceforth to be so ministred apart This cup is the new Testament Or the Covenant as both the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greek and * Berith Hebrew word admitteth Now it is called the new covenant that is renewed or to speak in a word fulfilled And this new covenant is our reconciliation with God the communion and participation of Christ and all his benefits by faith in the sacrifice of Christ now fulfilled and finished without any observation of the ceremonies of the old Passeover The Supper is called the new Covenant How the Sacrament is called the new Covenant because it is a signe and a seale of this covenant signifying and sealing unto us our reconciliation with God and our conjunction with Christ which is wrought by faith Now Christ in calling the Supper the new Covenant 1. Comprehendeth both the promise and the condition which is expressed in the promise namely our faith and repentance whereof also it followeth that the Supper was for this cause also instituted that it might be a bond to bind us to lead a Christian life 2. Hee maketh an opposition between the new Covenant and the old Covenant which was the Passeover together with the rites thereof For the Supper signifieth Christ offered the Passeover signifieth Christ who should be offered There is notwithstanding no small similitude and agreeing of both for both signifie our reconciliation with God and conjunction with Christ Hence also we conclude that the drinking of Christs bloud is not corporall for the new Testament is but one and all the elect before Christs birth appertain thereunto In my bloud which is shed for you for remission of sins The bloud of Christ is his death In the bloud of Christ is as much as to say In the death or for the death of Christ The shedding of Christs bloud is the merit for which being apprehended of us by faith we receive remission of sins For as often as ye shall eat The
finer manner but simply rejecteth all eating of his flesh with the bodily mouth We may not therefore forge any corporall eating in the Supper contrary to the Gospel 6. The conceit of a corporall presence and feeding on Christs flesh under the bread is wholly different and diverse from the formall consideration of a Sacrament Therefore it is to be rejected The Antecedent is proved because it cannot be accounted either for the signe or the thing signified of which two every Sacrament wholly consisteth It is not the signe or sacrament because it is not object to the senses and if it were there is nothing which it might signifie And further it hath no proportion or similitude with the thing that is with the spirituall eating Neither can it be said to be the thing signified seeing the Scripture no where speaketh of an essentiall transfusion and reall commixtion of Christs flesh with our bodies neither can there be any except wee entertain the follies and dreams of Eutychians and Swenckfeldians For the sacraments testifie of those blessings only and them onely doe they seale unto us which are contained in the promise of the Gospel Againe it is not the thing signified because this eating may be without faith and is common to the godly and ungodly But the things signified in the sacraments are received by faith alone and of the faithfull and godly alone Besides if it were the thing signified none had ever beene sayed or at any time should have beene saved without it For in all Sacraments the things signified are the same and are given to all that are to be saved because they are the benefits of the Messias comprehended in the promise of the Gospel which benefits are the same unto all and without them no man is saved Therefore no place is left for a substantiall presence and mouthy eating of Christs body under the bread or under the forme of bread and this substantiall presence and mouthy eating is indeed nothing but a vaine name and Idoll in the world Object The corporall eating is a signe of the spirituall eating and a singular confirmation of faith Therefore Christs body is also a Sacrament or signe and invisible grace is the thing signified Answ The Antecedent is denied 1. Because Christs flesh under the bread is invisible Therefore it cannot signifie another invisible thing or strengthen faith For Sacraments or signes ought to be visible so that it deserveth not saith Erasmus to be called a Sacrament which is not accomplished by an externall signe For to this end and use are they given of God that they may as it were effectually shew to our outward senses that which is promised in the Word and performed by the holy Ghost in our hearts that they may be visible testimonies and pledges of the promise of grace exhibited and applyed Whence is that saying of Austine a Sacrament is a visible word And Lib. 19. cap. 18. cont Fault lib. 2. cap. 1. De Doct. Christ de Catech-rud ca. 26. Prosp in sentent it is a visible forme of invisible grace And A signe is a thing besides that forme which it presenteth to our senses causing something else by it selfe to come into the knowledge And the signes indeed of divine things are visible but the things themselves are invisible And that of Prosper The sacrifice of the Church consisteth in two things in the visible forme of elements and the invisible flesh and bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Sacrament or signe and in the thing of the Sacrament that is the body of Christ Therefore no thing or action which is invisible insensible and not naturall can make the nature or appellation of a Sacrament And consequently they who will have Christs flesh in under or with the bread to be a Sacrament or will have the bread to be transsubstantiated into his flesh let them shew us a visible or sensible eating of it in the Supper lest they seeme to dissent from the ancient Fathers 2. There must be an analogy and proportion betweene the signe or Sacrament and the thing signified or the thing of the Sacrament For Except the Sacraments saith Austine had some similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not verily and Sacraments Now Epist 23. ad Bonifacium if Christ flesh be also a Sacrament and the thing of those Sacraments be invisible grace what proportion then and similitude shall there be between the two Sacraments but seeing there can be none it followeth that Christs flesh may not be called a Sacrament as being no lesse the thing it selfe of the Sacrament then eternall salvation signified by way of proportion by visible bread as by a signe Wherefore the sacramentall eating which is done naturally by the mouth doth not belong unto the body of Christ considered by it selfe in any physicall or naturall respect because unto this sacramentall eating the externall signes only are object in their owne nature S. Austine demanding how bread is the body of Christ and wine his bloud These saith he brethren are therefore called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another thing understood That which is seene Serm-ad Infant hath a corporall forme that which is understood hath a spirituall fruit If then thou wilt understand the body of Christ here the Apostle speaketh to the faithfull Yee ar the body of Christ and his members If then yee be the body of Christ and his members your mystery is set on the table c. 7. The communion of Christ which is promised in his Word and sealed in his Sacraments is not corporall but spirituall But the communion of Christ which is given in the Supper is the same with that which is promised in the Word and sealed in all other Sacraments Therefore the communion of Christ in the Supper is not corporall but spirituall The Major is manifest For in the Gospel no other communion is delivered or specified but that which is spirituall The Minor also is evident because the same benefits are proposed in all the promises of the Gospel which are presented and offered in the Sacraments For the Sacraments are the visible word because they promise that which the Word promiseth by visible signes and are seales of the promise of the same grace 8. There is one and the same signification of all the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament and in them one and the same communion of Christ But the signification of all other Sacraments and their communion is spirituall onely Therefore there is no other in the Supper The Minor is granted on all sides The Major is demonstrated by the Apostle in these words 1 Cor. 12.13 10.2 By one spirit we are all baptized into one body And All were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea and did all cate the same spirituall meate Object There is not the same thing signified of all Sacraments For in Baptisme the thing
is The washing by the bloud of Christ in the Supper The body and bloud of Christ Ans The thing is not diverse because it is the same To be washed by the bloud of Christ and To drink the bloud of Christ as we have heretofore proved But the manner of the signifying one and the same thing is diverse that is there is a diverse similitude of one and the same thing signified by the signes or one and the same thing hath a diverse similitude or proportion Therefore as in Baptisme so in Circumcision likewise and the Passeover is promised a spirituall thing not a corporall and so also here in the Lors Supper 3. The third sort of Arguments which are deduced from the analogie of faith 1. FIrme and strong reasons are drawne from the Article which is concerning the truth of Christs humane nature Christ took a humane nature like unto us in all things sinne only excepted and retaineth the same through all eternity for our comfort and safety but humane nature is neither infinite neither can it be in moe places at once nor visible and invisible both together For it is proper unto the Deity only which is unmeasurable to be essentially in many or in all places at once according to that saying of Scripture Jerem. 23.24 Am not I he which fill heaven and earth and by this very attribute or property God is distinguished from all creatures Now the God-head it selfe cannot at the same time be both visible and invisible finite and infinite but in its own substance remaineth alwayes invisible incomprehensible and infinite else could it not be unchangeable We may not therefore imagine that when Christ said This is my body his body then sate both visible to them at the Table and yet was invisible also in the bread or that now it is both visibly conversant in heaven and invisibly contained in the bread 2. From the Article of Ascension Christ ascended truly that is was in his body visibly and locally taken up into heaven so that his body remained not nrr now remaineth on earth but in heaven whence he shall visibly returne to judgement He is not therefore in the bread Or thus we may urge the reason Christs body is finite as being a true body But it is now in heaven Therefore Christs body is not in While they beheld him he was taken up Acts 1.9 Colos 3.1 Seek the things which are above where Christ is The Major also is evident For if the true and very body of Christ be infinite it is on earth was no true body of Christ but apparent and phantasticall because it cannot agree no not to the God-head it selfe to be at one time finite and infinite sensible and insensible and so all those things which are spoken of Christ in the Articles of our Beliefe should not have been done indeed but only should have seemed and appeared to be done and so we should as yet remain in death Now here are two things to be noted 1. That by the argument drawn from the ascension Christs body is not cleane taken out of the Supper as some cavill but only out of the bread For the distance of heaven and earth only hindereth the existence of Christs body both in heaven and in the bread together but not his presence in the Supper to be spirituall eaten by faith For our faith in the word of the promise annexed to the bread and wine beholdeth and imbraceth the body and bloud of Christ and all his benefits there present 2. That the Argument of the Ascension not done but together with the former Argument of the truth of his humane nature overthroweth the opinion of a corporall presence of Christ in the bread For if Christs humane nature might be every-where or present in many places his Ascension could not hinder but that he might at once be both in heaven and in the bread But whereas the humane nature is finite not present in many places nor every-where hence it is that the Argument borrowed from the Article of his Ascension presseth most powerfully and as in the first Supper the consequence derived from the property of his humane nature thus Christs body sits at the Table Therefore it is not in the bread or in the mouth of his Disciples is sound and good so now we necessarily conclude out of the truth of his Ascension thus Christs body is in heaven Therefore it is not in the bread or elsewhere on earth Object It is humane reason alone that judgeth Christs corporall presence in the bread contrary to these Articles of faith Therefore they are not indeed contrary Answ We deny the Antecedent For not reason onely but the Christian faith and Gods Word reacheth us that Christs body is a true humane and finite body and not conversant at once in all or many places and that now since it ascended into heaven it is not in the earth but remaineth and abideth in heaven untill he returne thence to judge the quick and the dead That Christs body then should be present at once in heaven and in the bread is repugnant not to humane reason only but also to Gods Word This indeed is a principle uncontroversed How farre forth we are not to listen to mans reason in divine matters That mans reason in divine matters oppugning Gods Word is not to be regarded but ought to be subject thereunto Notwithstanding it is not simply to be cashiered or discharged no not in controversies of Divinity as if we were to bring a meer brutish and blockish sense to the sifting of the truth of Gods Word but we are to use reason aright to discern therby truth from falshood For to this end was reason given to us men that we should discern by the light of understanding contradictory opinions and fully conceiving what is consonant with Gods Word and what jarreth therewith should applaud and imbrace the one and reject the other If this be not grounded and settled in us there will be no opinion so absurd and impious there will be nothing in the polluted sinks of all Hereticks so filthy and monstrous which may be confuted by holy Scripture For Hereticks and Deceivers will alwayes except against us that their opinions impugne not the truth of Gods Word but that they seeme onely in mans reason so to doe Repl. The Scripture attributeth to Christs body many properties and prerogatives supernaturall or above and beyond nature which are not incident to our bodies as to walke on the waters to be transfigured to be carried up into heaven to pierce and passe through a stone and closed doores to be united to the God-head personally to be made a sacrifice for our sinnes c. Therefore it is no absurdity to attribute unto it presence in heaven and in the bread both at once or even ubiquity it selfe Ans In the Antecedent are many untruths mingled with some truths For the penetration of Christs body through the stone
in the place of bread The Minor That he is not to be adored in the Supper is easily proved because in the New Testament since Christs ascension it hath not been nor is lawfull to tie and binde invocation to any certaine place or thing without the expresse command and permission of God except we will commit open Idolatry For all adoration bound and restrained to any certaine place or thing on earth is abrogated and cancelled by Christ The houre cometh John 4 21 22 23 24. when ye shall neither in this mountaine nor in Jerusalem worship the Father Ye worship that which ye know not we worship that which we know for salvation is of the Jews But the houre commeth and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth For the Father requireth even such to worship him God is a Spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and truth Againe if Christ be so to be adored and worshipped in the Supper by our minds and motions of body converted unto the bread that whole oblation and sacrifice should consist in the hands of sacrificing Masse-Priests because they offer the Sonne unto the Father to obtaine remission of sinnes and so were his crucifying to be re-iterated Object Christ commanded not himselfe to be offered or adored but to be eaten Therefore we establish not the Papists offering up of Christ to his Father or their worshipping of him in the bread by that corporall presence which we uphold Ans This their reasoning is two waies faulty First they begge that which is in question whilest they say that Christ commanded us to eate him in the bread for this is no where found in Scripture 2. They shift and seeke to slide from the question in averring that Christ commanded not himselfe to be adored for we have a generall precept of adoring Christ in these words Psal 45.13 Psal 97.7 Heb. 1.6 He is the Lord thy God and thou shalt worship him And let all the Angels of God worship him This generall precept without any speciall exception or expectation of any particular injunction should no lesse binde us all unto obedience and to the adoring of Christ in the bread if we had any evident proofe of his invisible existence therein than if we beheld him present with our eyes Thus Thomas expecteth not some speciall expresse warrant but doth well in worshipping towards the place where he seeth Christ standing saying My Lord and my God Wherefore John 20.28 as long as the opinion of corporall presence standeth so long the Papists idolatrous adoration and oblation and their whole Masse must needs stand also For the Papists themselves will not have that we understand their offering of Christ in the Masse of any slaughtering or murthering him but only of a publique shewing him being there corporally present and of a craving and obtaining remission of sinnes for his sake whom the Priests beare in their hands and present unto God the Father 4. The fourth sort of Arguments drawne from like places of Scripture where namely the samething is delivered in words whereof there is no controversie 1. LIke phrases have a like sense and interpretation But all these phrases are accounted for like namely for sacramentall formes of speech wherein the names or proper effects of the things signified are attributed to the signe as Circumcision is the Govenant of God The Lamb is the Passeover of the Lord. Gen. 17.10 11. Exod. 12.11 31.16 Levit. 1.4 Exod. 24.18 Exod. 26.34 1 Cor. 10.3 Marke 2.26 Luke 22.20 Acts 22.16 Titus 3.5 1 Pet. 3.21 Gen. 17.11 Exod. 12.13 14. 13.9 31 17. The Sabbath is the Covenant of the Lord. The Leviticall sacrifices are an expiation or doing away of sinne The bloud of sacrifices is the bloud of the Covenant The covering of the Arke is the mercy seate The Rock was Christ The bread is the body of Christ The cup is the New Testament Baptisme washeth away sinne Baptisme is the washing of the new birth Baptisme saveth us c. Therefore their interpretation is alike Now God himselfe interpreteth some of them thus Circumcision is a signe of the Covenant The Lamb is a signe and memoriall of the Passeover The Sabbath is a signe of the Covenant Therefore we may justly interpret the rest on the same manner The Leviticall sacrifices signifie the attonement for sinnes made by the Messias The bloud of sacrifices is a Sacrament or signe confirming the Covenant or a signe of Christs bloud whereby the Covenant was established The covering of the Arke signifieth the Mercy-seate The Rock signifieth Christ The bread is a Sacrament of the body of Christ The cup is a Sacrament sealing the new Covenant Baptisme is a Sacrament of the washing away of sins and of our regeneration and salvation 2. As the cup is the New Testament so is the bloud of Christ the New Testament The cup is the New Testament Sacramentally that is it is a signe of the New Testament Therefore Christs bloud is a signe of the New Testament The Major is apparent because without doubt the words of Luke and Paul This cup is the New Testament in my bloud and the words of Matthew and Marke This is my bloud of the New Testament have all one meaning The Minor is proved before in the first argument and cannot be taken otherwise For the New Testament is no externall thing or ceremony but a free reconciliation with God promised in the Gospel through the bloud and death of Christ The cup then is either the thing promised or the seale of the promise but it is not the promise nor the thing promised Therefore it is the seale of the promise 3. The bread which we breake saith the Apostle is it not the communion of the body of Christ As bread is the communion of the body of Christ so also it is the body of Christ The reason is cleere because Pauls words and Christs have both one meaning seeing Paul interpreteth Christ But the bread is the communion of the body of Christ sacramentally that is it is a Sacrament or signe of our spirituall communion with Christs body For properly and literally bread cannot be termed a communion Therefore bread also is Christs body sacramentally that is it is a Sacrament or signe of Christs body Now that the communion or communication of Christs body is spirituall is thus proved 1. Paul speaketh of such a communion as whereby we being many are made one bread one body But we being many are one body spiritually Therefore the communion mentioned of Paul is spirituall 2. The communion of Christ whereof he speaketh cannot stand with the communion of Divels 1 Cor. 10.21 Ye cannot saith he drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of the Divels ye cannot be partakers of the Lords Table and of the table of the Divels The argument is not deduced from an inconvenience or an undecency as some
fondly tell us Mat. 6.24 but from an impossibility as that of Christ Ye cannot serve God and Mammon Where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye are not able or ye have no possibility are likewise used as well as in this place 2 Cor. 6.15 and as that of the same Apostle else-where What concord hath Christ with Belial or what part hath the Beleever with the Infidell 3. This communion of the Saints with Christ and Christ with the Saints is spiritually expounded in Scripture 1 John 1.6 7. Our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ If we say that we have fellowship with him and walke in darkenesse we lye and do not truely But if we walke in the light as he is in the light we have fellowship one with another and the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne Neither doe we in the Creed beleeve any other communion of the Saints with Christ and Christ with the Saints but that which is spirituall Hom. 24. in 1 Cor. 10. 4. Lastly Chrysostome interpreteth Pauls words of a spirituall communion Why said he not participation That he might manifest unto thee somewhat more excellent then it to wit the strongest and mightiest union that can be And a little after Why call I it communion Yea we are the selfe-same body of Christ What is the bread even the body of Christ What are they made who receive the body of Christ not many bodies but one body For as the bread is kneaded of many graines so we also are joyned with Christ 4. Out of the words of Christ John 6.62 What then if ye should see the Sonne of man ascend up where he was before It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speake unto you are spirit and life In these words Christ expresly rejecteth all eating of his flesh with our mouths and overthroweth by two arguments which wee have heretofore declared and on the other side he approveth and confirmeth our spirituall eating his flesh Wherefore we may not forge any corporall eating of Christs body in the Supper when such a kinde of eating is precisely reproved in the Gospel Object The sixth chapter of John treateth not of the Supper Therefore this testimony maketh nought against the eating of Christs body with our mouths instituted in the Supper Answ Here our Adversaries deceitfully argue from the deniall of a part to the deniall of the whole This Chapter we grant pertaineth not to the Ceremony of the Supper But hence it followeth not that simply it pertaineth not to the Supper For it concerneth the promise This is my body which is given for you because this promise is desumed out of this Christs Sermon registred in this sixth of John and is ratified and confirmed by the signes of bread and wine Wherefore it cannot be understood of any other eating of Christs body in the Supper then of that which is delivered in the sixth of John which is spirituall For bodily eating is in that Sermon condemned Repl. It is not simply the eating with the mouth that is there condemned but a Capernaiticall eating Answ All eating with the mouth is Capernaiticall For a Capernaiticall eating is not a bloudy renting onely and eating of Christs flesh and chewing it between the teeth but simply any eating with the mouth For the Capernaites say not among themselves How can this man give us his flesh to devoure to gnaw on with our teeth to rend asunder c. But they say How can this man give us his flesh to eate John 6.54 Neither doth Christ re-call them from a grosse eating with the mouth to a subtile kinde of eating with the mouth but to his ascension into Heaven which should shortly come to passe and thereby his body should be far removed from their mouthes and trained them to a spirituall eating which is with the heart by faith 5. Out of the same sixth Chapter of John To eate Christs flesh and To drinke his bloud signifieth To beleeve in Christ To dwell in Christ and Verse 54 56. To have Christ dwelling in us as appeareth because he attributeth the same effect of eternall life to both namely to the eating of his flesh and to faith in him But in the Supper this eating is authorised For no other purpose besides this can be shewed in the whole Gospel for sealing whereof the Supper was instituted Therefore To eate Christs body and To drink his blood is To beleeve in Christ To dwell in Christ and To have him dwelling in us 6. By one spirit are we all baptised into one body whether we be Jews or Grecians 1 Cor. 12 13. whether we be bond or free and have beene all made to drink into one spirit Hence we draw two arguments 1. Such as is the drinking of Christ such is the eating of him in the Supper The drinking of him is spirituall Therefore the eating of him is spirituall 2. The eating of Christs body and drinking his bloud is common to all the faithfull even to the Fathers of the Old Testament For we have all bin made to drink into one spirit But the eating with the mouth is not common to all the faithfull For the Fathers before Christs birth could not and at this day Infants and many of ripe yeeres having not liberty to partake of the Supper cannot eate his flesh with their mouthes Wherefore this mouthy eating of Christs flesh urged by our Adversaries is not that true eating which the Gospel promiseth and which the Supper sealeth The testimonies of Fathers in this point UNto these arguments drawne out of the sacred Scripture and the ground of our faith may be added testimonies of the Fathers and the purer Church who if we looke into their writings we shall finde that they plainly teach the same doctrine touching the Lords holy Supper which we do Among many we will produce onely some few notable and cleere in this point Irenaeus saith Lib. 4. cap. 34. The earthly bread taking his name from the word of God is no longer common bread but becometh the Eucharist or Sacrament which consisteth of two things an earthly and an heavenly thing Tertullian The bread which he tooke and distributed among his Disciples he made it his body saying This is my body that is The figure of my body Lib. 4. contra Marcion Praedag lib. 2. cap. 2. Lib. 2. Ephes 3. Serm. de Coena Clemens of Alexandria This is to drinke Christs bloud to be partaker of Christs immortality Cyprian Neither can his blood wherewith we are redeemed and justified seeme to be in the Chalice when the wine faileth in the Chalice wherein Christs bloud is shewed which is spoken of in every Sacrament and testimony of Scripture Againe the same Father saith As often as we doe this we sharpen not our teeth to bite withall but we breake and part the sanctified bread with a sincere
faith whilst we distinguish and separate that which is divine from that which is humane and joyning them againe after their separation confesse one God and man yea we our selves are made his body by this Sacrament and knit and united to our head by the thing signified by the Sacrament De divina mensa Et quod The Canon of the Nicene Councell Againe here also is the Lords Table Let us not childishly cleave to the bread and wine set before us but lifting up our minds on high by faith let us consider that on that Table is set the Lamb of God taking away the sinnes of the world which is offered of the Priests without killing and let us truely receiving his precious body and bloud beleeve that they are SIGNES of our resurrection For therefore we receive not much but little thereby to acknowledge that it is not received to satisfie In Litur de Trin. l. 8. Orat. de pas but to sanctifie us Basil We have set on the Table the figures of the sacred body and blood Hillarie The bread and wine received and drunke effect and worke that both we are in Christ In 1 Cor. 11. and Christ in us Gregory Nazianzene The figures of the precious body and bloud of Christ Ambrose Because we are delivered by our LORDS death being mindfull thereof in eating and drinking wee Signifie or Represent the flesh and bloud that were offered up for us De Sacr. l. 4. c. 5. Cont. Adim cap. 12. In Psa 3 Epist 23. ad Bonisac Againe This oblation is the FIGVRE OF THE BODY AND BLOVD of our LORD Jesus CHRIST Augustine Our Lord doubted not to say This is my body when he gave a TOKEN of his body Againe The Lord admitted Judas to that banquet wherein he ministred and gave to his disciples the FIGVRE of his body and bloud The same Father saith Vnlesse Sacraments had a certaine likenesse of the things whereof they bee Sacraments without question they were no Sacraments And in consideration of this likenesse oftentimes they beare the names of the things themselves As therefore the Sacrament of the body of CHRIST is AFTER A CERTAINE MANER the body of Christ and the Sacrament of Christs bloud is his bloud so the Sacrament of faith is faith In senten Prosper de ause dist 2. c. Hoc est Againe As then the celestiall bread Christs flesh is IN SOME SORT called Christs body whereas indeed it is a Sacrament of Christs body namely that visible palpable and mortall body which was nailed on the Crosse and the sacrificing of his flesh done by the hands of the Minister is called Christs Passion death and crucifying NOT IN THE TRVTH OF THE THING but in a mysterie SIGNIFYING it So the Sacrament of faith by which is meant Baptisme is faith Serm. ad infant Also These my brethren are therefore called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene another understood That which is seene hath a bodily forme that which is understood hath a spirituall fruit or benefit In Mat. Hom. 83. Chrysostome This is my bloud which is shed for the remission of sinnes which Christ said to shew that his Passion and Crosse was a mysterie and to comfort his disciples Dialog 1. Theodoret Our Saviour verily changed the names of the signes and the things signified and gave the same name to the body which is proper to the signe and that to the signe which is proper to the body The cause of this change is manifest to them that are entred into the first principles of divine mysteries For he would that they who use the Sacraments should not bend and set their minds on the nature of the things which are seene but for the alteration of the names should beleeve that alteration which is made through grace For he who tearmed that by name of corne and bread which is by nature a body and called himselfe a vine he honoured the signes which are seene with the title and name of his body and bloud not by changing the nature but by adding grace to the nature Macarius the Monke hath a famous saying to this purpose Hom. 27. Bread and wine are a correspondent type of his flesh and they who receive the bread which is shewed eate the flesh of Christ spiritually Other testimonies for briefenesse sake we omit Of Transubstantiation NOw it is easie to see what we are to think of Transubstantiation even that it is an impious invention and device of the Papists which also we will shew and prove briefly by divers reasons But first we must declare in a word what the Papists properly meane by their Transubstantiation They suppose that by force of Consecration that is of uttering these words upon the creatures of bread and wine This is my body This is the cup of the new Testament in my bloud the bread and wine is substantially converted or turned into the body and bloud of Christ the formes onely or accidents of bread and wine remaining namely the shape or figure the heat the taste the weight c. They therefore call these words of Consecration operatorie and effective able to work and effect the conversion and change and they say that the change is fully accomplished in the very last instant of uttering the syllable * The Latine particle was UM hoc est corpua me VM which I chose rather to resemble by the English forme of Consecration DY This is my boDY and then there is no longer bread and wine but the body and bloud of Christ is present and is contained under the forms of bread and wine and is eaten and drunk in the Eucharist or Supper by the mouth of the Communicants Concerning the manner of the change it is not agreed on by all Some say that the substance of bread and wine is by Transsubstantiation changed into the substance of Christs body and bloud so that the bread and wine is essentially made the very body and bloud of Christ the externall formes only remaining and this they terme a substantiall change or change of the substance What the Papists call a substantiall change Others are of opinion that the substance of bread and wine is not changed but vanisheth by annihilation or by being brought to nothing and that then the substance of Christs body and bloud succeedeth in place thereof so that the substance of Christs body and bloud after the consecration cometh under these formes and accidents under which before was the substance of the bread and wine And this they call a formal change or a change of formes Lombard in his Sentences expoundeth both these opinions What they call a formall change Li. 4. di 11. Tho. Aqui. p. 3. q. 78. a. 5. and seemeth to approve the former alone Howbeit they call both these changes by the name of Transsubstantiation They affirm also that the particle This in the words of consecration doth note some indeterminate
bloud is no remission Heb. 9.22 7. The Masse is repugnant unto the Articles of our faith concerning the true humanity of Christ concerning his true ascension into heaven and his returning from thence at the day of judgement For it fastneth on Christ a body made of bread it feigneth that Christ lieth hid corporally under the formes of bread and wine 8. The Masse is contrary to the communion of Saints with Christ For it imagineth an execrable invention which is that Christs body doth descend into our bodies and remaineth as long within our bodies as the formes remaine of bread and wine But the Supper teacheth that we are made members of Christ by the holy Ghost and ingraffed into him 9. The Masse is repugnant to the true worship of God because it maketh Christ to be there corporally present and so by consequent there to be worshipped Even as of old before his ascension it was not only lawfull but in duty required that Christ should be worshipped in whatsoever place he was and so also did his Disciples alwayes worship him when he was present as also when he ascended from them but after his ascension they did not from that time adore and worship him turning unto any one particular place more then other Wherefore seeing the Papists in their Masse tie the worship and adoration of Christ to a thing whereunto Christ himselfe by expresse word hath not tyed it They professe themselvs to be idolaters and doe no lesse absurdly and impiously in this then if they should worship Christ at a wall or if they should worship a pillar falling downe before it Hence it is evident that the Masse is an Idoll made by Antichrist out of divers and those horrible errours and blasphemies and substituted in place of the Lords Supper and for this cause is justly and rightly supprest Object 1. The Masse is an application of Christs sacrifice Therefore it is not to be taken away Ans I deny the Antecedent because we apply Christs merit by faith only as it is said Ephes 3.17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith Object 2. There must be a perpetuall sacrifice in the Church Esay 66.23 Mal. 1.11 because Esay foretold that it should be from Sabbath to Sabbath and Mal. They shall offer a pure offering Ans The sacrifices of the new Church of the Gentiles is the Sacrifice of thanksgiving and the Prophets insinuate unto us such a Sacrifice perpetuall and pure Such a Sacrifice of thanksgiving the Fathers termed the Eucharist 1. Because it is a remembrance of Christs Sacrifice 2. Because almes were given in the Primitive Church after the Supper was ended which were a Sacrifice But that the Supper should be a propitiatory Sacrifice the Fathers never so much as once dreamed Quest 81. Who are to come unto the Table of the Lord Ans They only who are truly sorrowfull that they have offended God by their sins and yet trust that those sins are pardoned them for Christs sake and what other infirmities they have that those are covered by his passion and death who also desire more and more to go forward in faith and integrity of life But hypocrites and they who doe not truly repent doe eat and drink damnation to themselves a 1 Cor. 11.28 10.19 20 21 22. The Explication Here are three things to be handled and declared 1. Who ought to approach unto the Lords Supper 2. What the wicked receive if they come 3. What is the right and lawfull use of the Supper 1. Who ought to approach unto the Lords Supper THese are distinct questions Who ought to approach unto the Supper and Who ought to be admitted to the Supper The former concerneth the duty of the Communicants the latter the duty of the Church and Ministers The former is stricter the latter larger and more generall for touching the former the godly alone ought to come touching the latter not the godly onely but Hypocrites also who are not known to be such are to be admitted by the Church unto the Supper Wherefore all that ought to come ought to be admitted but on the other side not all that ought to be admitted Who ought to come unto the Lords Supper ought to come but they only ought to approach unto the Supper 1. Who acknowledge their sinnes and are truly sorry for them 2. Who have a confidence that they are pardoned and forgiven them by Christ and for his sake 3. Who have an earnest purpose and desire of profiting and going forward more and more in faith and purenesse of life that is they only ought to approach and draw neer unto the Lords Supper and are worthy guests of Christ who live in true faith and repentance Herein a mans true proof and examination consisteth whereof Saint Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 11.28 What it is to prove himselfe Let a man examine himselfe and soâ—let him eat of this bread To prove thy self is 2 Cor. 13.5 How we may be assured that we have true faith and repentance Rom. 1.1.5 To examine whether thou have faith and repentance according as it is said Prove your selves whether yee are in the faith whether Christ dwell in you But how shall a man know that he hath these things 1. By a confidence and tranquillity of conscience because Being justified by faith we have peace towards God Hope maketh not ashamed because the love of God is shed in our hearts by the holy Ghost which is given unto us 2. By effects that is by the beginnings of true outward and inward obedience and by an earnest purpose to obey God according to all his commandements They who have and perceive this in themselves ought to draw neere and partake of Christs Supper namely whoso have faith and repentance not in possibility only but also actually Therefore infants are not capable of the Supper because they save faith only potentially and in possibility not actually they have an inclination to faith or they have faith only by inclination but they have not an actuall faith But here is required an actuall faith which is both a knowledge and confidence or assurance on Christs merit a beginning of new obedience and a purpose of living godly also an examination of himselfe and commemoration or remembrance of the Lords death Foure causes why wicked men and hypocrites ought not to approach unto the Supper It is not lawfull for the wicked to approach unto the Supper 1. Because Sacraments are instituted only for the faithfull and those which are converted to seale to them the promise of the Gospel and confirm their faith The word notwithstanding is common to the converted and unconverted that the converted may heare it be confirmed by it and that the unconverted also may hear it and therby be converted But the Sacraments pertaine to the faithfull alone and Christ instituted his Supper for his Disciples alone Luke 22.15 as he said I have earnestly
and his Apostles using the keyes of the kingdome of heaven ought to drive them from the Supper till they shall repent and change their manners The Explication Who are to be admitted to the Supper THey are to be admitted of the Church to the Lords Supper 1. Who are of a fit age to prove themselves and to re-call to minde and meditate on the Lords death according to that commandement Do this in remembrance of me Let a man examine himself and so let him eat of this bread Shew forth the Lords death till he come Luke 22.19 1 Cor. 11 2â— 28. Therefore the infants of the Church though they be reckoned among the faithfull yet they are exempted from the use of the Sacrament 2. Who are baptised and by baptisme made members of the Church For in the Supper the covenant plighted with God in baptism is renewed Therefore in old time none might eat of the Passeover except hee were first circumcised So that Turks Jewes and other aliants from the Church are to be debarred of the Supper 3. Who in words and deeds professe true repentance and faith or they who expresse and shew a profession of faith and repentance in the actions of their life whether they doe this truly and sincerely or of secret and hidden hypocrisie For of things concealed the Church judgeth not Therefore it admitteth all whom it may judge to be Christs members that is whom it heareth and seeth professing faith and repentance in publick confession and outward actions whether they be truly godly or hypocrites not yet unmasked But they are not to be admitted whosoever simply do avouch that they beleeve all things and yet live wickedly for hee that saith he beleeveth and hath not works is a liar and denieth in deed that which he affirmeth in words according to that of the Apostle Tâ—â— 1. â—6 They professe that they know God but by their works they deny him and are abominable and disobedient and to every good work reprobate So S. James sheweth James 2.20 Why they onely who professe faith and repentance are to be admitted to the Supper That faith which is without works is dead The reasons why they are to be admitted onely who both by their profession and life professe faith and repentance are these Profaning of Gods covenant What it is to profane Gods covenant Gods covenant two wayes profaned Because the Church should profane Gods covenant if it should admit unbeleevers and men impenitent For he that doth a thing and he that consenteth unto it are both obnoxious to the same law To profane the Covenant of God is to commend and acknowledge them for the confederates or friends and fellows of God who are Gods enemies and so to make God such a one as hath entered a covenant and is in league with hypocrites and wicked men Now the covenant of God is two wayes profaned namely as well by communicating and imparting the signe of the covenant to them unto whom God promiseth nothing as by receiving and using the signes without faith and repentance For not only they profane the covenant who being as yet impenitent take the signes of the covenant unto them but they also who wittingly and willingly give the signes unto those whom God hath shut from his covenant They make therefore God a fellow and friend of the wicked and the sons of the divell they make the sons of God whosoever reach the signes to the wicked Fear of Gods wâ—ath They are not to be admitted to the Supper who professe not faith and repentance both in life and confession because If such should be admitted the Church should stir up the anger of God against her self as of whom wittingly and willingly this should be committed Now that by this means the wrath of God is stirred up against the Church 1 Cor. 11.31 the Apostle sufficiently witnesseth saying For this cause many are weak and sick among you and many sleep For if we would judge our selves we should not be judged God therefore is angry with the consenters or winkers at the profanation of the Sacrament and so punisheth them because he punisheth the wicked whom they consenting thereto admitted for by both the Supper of the Lord is alike profaned Christs commandement Christ hath commanded that the wicked be not admitted And if any deny that any such commandement is extant yet the substance and tenour of the commandement shall be easily proved For Christ instituted his Supper for his disciples and to them alone he said Iuke 22.15 17 19 20. I have earnestly desired to eat this passeover with you Take this and part it among you This is my body which is given for you This cup is the new Testament in my bloud which is shed for you Wherefore the Supper was instituted for Christs disciples only all others for whom Christ died not are excluded To these three reasons we may here adde a fourth 4. This is an evident demonstration They who deny the faith are not to be accounted for members no not of the visible Church But all that refuse to repent deny the faith according to that saying of the Apostle They professe that they know God but by works they deny him Tit. 1.16 and are abominable and disobedient and to every good work reprobate Therefore they who refuse to repent are not to be reckoned members no not of the visible Church and therefore are not to be admitted to the Sacraments of the Church but to be secluded as aliants from them untill they repent and change their evill manners But yet for all this those hypocrites are to be admitted together with the godly unto the Supper who are not as yet manifested because they professe in confession and outward actions faith and repentance But none ought to approach thither but true beleevers for these only excepted all others yea even those hypocrites which are not as yet manifested eat and drink unto themselves damnation and profane the Lords sacred Supper Object The Church profaneth the covenant if it admit the impenitent Answ To the Antecedent we answer that the Church sinneth not in admitting hypocrites to wit as yet concealed and not unmasked to the view of the world seeing the Church is forced to acknowledge them for sincere members who confesse with their mouthes and counterfeit repentance It should sin indeed if wittingly and willingly it admitted open and professed hypocrites which in word or deed deny faith and repentance Rep. But many impenitent persons intrude themselves and profane the covenant especially where excommunication a part of Church discipline flourisheth not and these the Church admitteth without sin Therefore it offendeth not in admitting others which deny repentance Ans The Church herein sinneth not not because it is no sin to admit the unrepentant but because it admitteth them without knowledge that they are such But the impenitent persons themselves who presse unto this table profane the
him 8. Now when Christ saith This that is This bread is my body and This cup is my bloud the speech is sacramentall or metonymicall because the name of the thing signified is attributed to the signe it self that is it is meant that the bread it the sacrament or signe of his body and doth represent him and doth testifie that Christs body is offered for us on the crosse and is given to us to be food of eternall life and therefore is the instrument of the holy Ghost to maintain and increase this food in us 1 Cor. 10. as S. Paul saith The bread is the communion of the body of Christ that is it is that thing by which we are made partakers of Christs body And else-where he saith We have been all made to drink into one Spirit The same is the meaning also when it is said that the bread is called Christs body for a similitude which the thing signified hath with the signe namely that Christs body nourisheth the spirituall life as bread doth the corporall life and for that assured and certain joint-receiving of the thing and the signe in the right use of the sacrament And this is the sacramentall union of the bread which is shewed by a sacramentall kind of speaking but no such locall conjunction as is by some imagined 9. As therefore the body of Christ signifieth both his proper and naturall body and his sacramentall body which is the bread of the Eucharist so the eating of Christs body is of two sorts one sacramentall of the signe to wit the externall and corporall receiving of the bread and wine the other reall or spirituall which is the receiving of Christs very body it self And to beleeve in Christ dwelling in us by faith is by the vertue and operation of the holy Ghost to be ingraffed into his body as members to the head and branches into the vine and so to be made partakers of the fruit of the death and life of Christ Whence it is apparent that they are falsly accused who thus teach as if they made either the bare signes only to be in the Lords Supper or a participation of Christs death only or of his benefâ—â—s or of the holy Ghost excluding the true reall and spirituall communion of the very body of Christ it self 10. Now the right use of the Supper is when the faithfull observe this rite instituted by Christ in remembrance of Christ that is to the stirring and raising up of their faith and thankfulnesse 11. As in this right use the body of Christ is sacramentally taken so also without this use as by unbeleevers and hypocrites it is eaten sacramentally indeed but not really that is the sacramentall symboles or signes bread and wine are received but not the things themselves of the sacrament to wit the body and bloud of Christ 12. This doctrine of the Supper of the Lord is grounded upon very many and those most sound and firm reasons All those places of Scripture confirm it which speak of the Lords Supper and Christ calling not any invisible thing in the bread but the very visible and broken bread it selfe his body delivered or broken for us which whereas it cannot be meant properly himselfe addeth an exposition that that bread is truly received in remembrance of him which is as if he had said That the bread is a sacrament of his body So likewise he saith The Supper is the new testament which is spirituall one and everlasting And Paul saith It is the communion of the body and bloud of Christ because all the faithfull are one body in Christ who cannot stand together with the communion of the divels Likewise he maketh one and the same ingraffing into Christs body by one spirit to be both in baptism and in the Lords supper Moreover the whole doctrine and nature of Sacraments confirm the same all which represent to the eyes the same spirituall communion of Christ to be received by faith which the word or promise of the Gospel declareth unto the ears Therefore they are called by the names of the things signified and in their right use have the receiving of the things adjoined unto them The articles also of our faith confirm it which teach that Christs body is a true humane body not present at once in many places as being now received into heaven and there to remain untill the Lord return to Judgement and further that the communion of saints with Christ is wrought by the holy Ghost not by any entrance of Christs body into the bodies of men Wherefore this sentence and doctrine is of all the purer antiquity of the Church with most great and manifest consent held and professed 13. The Supper of the Lord differeth from Baptism 1. In the rite and manner of signifying because the dipping into the water or washing signifyeth a remission and purging out of sin by the bloud and spirit of Christ and our society and fellowship with Christ in his afflictions and glorification But the distributing of the bread and wine signifieth the death of Christ to be imputed unto us unto remission of sins and our selves ingraffed into Christ to become his members 2. They differ in their speciall use because Baptism is the testimony of our regeneration and of the covenant made between us and God and of our receiving into the Church But the Lords Supper testifieth that we are ever to be nourished by Christ remaining in us and that the covenant made between God and us shall ever be established and ratified unto us and that we for ever shall abide in the Church and body of Christ 3. They differ in the persons to whom they are to be given Baptism is given to all those who are to be accounted for members of the Church whether they be of yeers and understanding or infants The Lords Supper is to be given to them only who are able to understand and celebrate the benefits of Christ and to examine themselves 4. They differ in the often celebrating of them Baptism is to be received but once only because the covenant of God being once made is alwayes firm and of force to the penitent But the Supper is often to be received because an often renewing and recalling of that covenant to our remembrance is necessary for our faith 5. They differ in the order which is to be observed in the use of them Because Baptism is to be given before the Supper and the Supper may not be given unto any except he be first baptised 14. They come worthily to the Lords Supper who examine themselves that is are endued with true faith and repentance They who find not this in themselves ought neither to come without it lest they eat and drink their own judgement not to defer repentance wherewith they should come lest they draw upon themselves hardnesse of heart and eternall pains 15. The Church ought to admit all those unto it who professe themselves to imbrace the
the light 1 John 1.7 we have fellowship one with another and the bloud of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin And further this communion whereof Saint Paul speaketh is our union with Christ and fruition of all his benefits by faith Hither belongeth the similitude of the body and the members the vine and the branches which have nothing to doe with any corporall eating This communion was and is common to all the faithfull from the beginning unto the worlds end But they could not eat the body of Christ corporally by their mouth That we might grow up unto him by whom all the body is coupled and knit together Eph. 4.15 16. He that is joyned unto the Lord is one spirit 1 Cor. 9.17 And by one spirit are we all baptised into one body Hereby know we that we dwell in him and hee in us 1 John 4.13 because hee hath given us of his Spirit This union therefore is that communion which is wrought by the holy Ghost wherefore it is spirituall For bread cannot be this communion but by a figure as it is a signe Repl. He that is guilty of the body of Christ eateth it They who receive unworthily are guilty of the body of Christ Therefore they eat it corporally for spiritually they cannot because if they could so eat it they should not be guilty Answ The Major is false For he is guilty of Christs body who by his sins hangeth it on the crosse again and despiseth Christs benefits For any reall eating is not required to this guilt but he that will not receive Christ offered by faith is thereby made guilty So the injury done unto the Ark is said to be done unto the Lord. Repl. They that discern not the Lords body eat it But the guilty discern it not Therefore they eat it Ans It the Major be taken sacramentally as of the bread which is called and is the body of Christ it is true but if properly it is false For not to discern his body is not to give due honour to it to contemn it yea not to receive the thing signified So They are said to tread under foot the Son of God Heb. 10.29 and to count the bloud of the testament as an unholy thing who contemn him 5. They reason from the testimony of the Fathers and the godly of ancient times in the purer state of the Church Ans The sayings of the Fathers are to be understood sacramentally or of our spirituall communion Repl. 1. Augustine saith Thou shalt receive this in the bread which hung on the crosse and this is the cup which was shed out of Christs side Answ In the bread as in the signe that is together with the signe thou shalt receive the thing signified When we receive the bread we are certain that wee have Christ Repl. 2. Cyril upon John saith By naturall participation not onely spiritually but also corporally not onely according to the spirit but also according to the flesh corporally and essentially Answ Cyril speaketh not of the manner of eating but of the thing which was to be eaten He sheweth that we are made partakers not only of Christs spirit but also of his humane nature Now he understandeth a spirituall communion 1. Because hee citeth those places concerning it John 6. 1 Cor. 10. where no mention is made of corporall eating 2. He speaketh of the presence of Christ not in the bread but in us 3. He proveth the abiding of Christ in us by the use of the Supper not by any corporall eating 4. He so describeth it that hee saith It shall continue in the life to come 5. Hee speaketh of that communion which is proper unto the saints Now this is spirituall for otherwise it should befall also to the wicked The shifts of Consubstantiaries whereby they go about to elude and shift off certain of our objections not all for moe are objected against them 1. WEe make not say they any Capernaiticall eating Ans We demand of them whether Christ be eaten by the bodily mouth be it after a grosse or after a finer manner But how ever they answer in that opinion which they hold there is too too much idolatry for Christ refuting the Capernaites doth not distinguish the eating of him into a grosse and a finer manner but saith simply That his body cannot be eaten with the bodily mouth for he saith that he must ascend And that the words which he speaketh are spirit and life 2. We maintain not Ubiquity for there is not a word thereof to be found Ans Here is to be observed the dissention of the adversaries about Ubiquity But neither is a word to be found hereof That the body of Christ is together in two places And further of this their opinion followeth Ubiquity For he that is together and at one time in moe places must needs be infinite and therefore every-where 3. Wee overthrow not the article of Christs ascension Ans Yea but they doe overthrow it For while they hold that as often as the Supper is celebrated Christ is corporally eaten they must needs say that he remaineth and is invisible on earth But he is said to have left the world to have ascended from a lower place into an higher and to remain in heaven untill he come to judgement Now that some except that Christ doth descend from heaven as often as the Supper is administred it is already refuted 4. We take not away the doctrine of the properties of Christs humanity Ans They altogether take it away For they will have his humane nature to be such as is not seen nor felt nor limited in place Rep. But Christ did put off these infirmities and retained the essentiall properties Ans But these are very essentiall properties which being taken away the verity also and truth of his humane nature is taken away Augustine saith Take away from bodies their spaces and they shall be no where 5. Wee abolish not the doctrine concerning the communicating of properties of both natures Ans Yea but they endeavour it For they apply those properties of his divine nature which are affirmed of the whole person in the concrete to both natures I will be with you to the end of the world This they understand of both natures which is all one as if when it is said Christ God and man was circumcised one should thus conclude Therefore the God-head of Christ was circumcised as well as his flesh Repl. This only we adde That those articles belong not unto them Ans After this sort all sects may shift off all testimonies of Scriptures But they belong hither and that by a double right 1. Because they are written of the body of Christ But the body of Christ belongeth to the Supper Therefore these articles also belong hither for they shew how Christs body is to be eaten 2. They belong hither because no article of faith is at variance with another So
which are not converted is done without faith and is therefore sin and abomination before God First therefore those things which are spoken of Conversion are in few words to be expounded Then ensueth the common place of good works for by them we declare our thankfulnesse towards God and true conversion cannot stand without good works Afterwards is adjoyned the doctrine which intreateth of the law whereby we learn to know good works For those are truly said to be good works by which we worship God aright and shew our selves to be thankfull which are done by faith according to the rule and prescript only of Gods law Because God will chiefly be worshipped of us and magnified by invocation and for this cause we shew our thankfulnesse most of all by prayer and thanksgiving at length the common place of prayer shall be lastly annexed These things we purpose to declare briefly and in order here following ON THE 32. SABBATH Quest 86. When as wee are delivered from all our sins and miseries without any merit of ours by the mercy of God only for Christs sake for what cause are we to doe good works Answ Because after that Christ hath redeemed us with his bloud he reneweth us also by his Spirit to the image of himselfe that we receiving so great benefits should shew our selves all our life time thankfull to God a Rom. 6.13 12.1 2. 1 Pet. 2.5 9. 1 Cor. 6.20 and honour him b Matt. 5.16 1 Pet. 1.12 Secondly that every of us may be assured of his faith by his fruit c 2 Pet. 1.10 Matth. 7.17 18. Galat. 5.6 22. And lastly by our honest and good conversation may win others unto Christ d 1 Pet. 2.12 Romans 14.19 Matthew 5.16 The Explication THis Question concerning the impulsive causes of good works is moved in the first place and before we come to handle the Question of mans conversion not that good works goe before conversion but for the orderly connexion of this latter part of Catechism with the former For out of the doctrine of free satisfaction humane reason thus argueth He is not bound to satisfie for whom another hath already satisfied Christ hath satisfied for us Therefore there is no need that we should do good works Ans The Conclusion containeth more then the premisses enforce that which followeth out of the two former propositions is this Therefore we our selves are not bound to satisfie and thus much we grant 1. In respect of Gods justice which exacteth not a double payment 2. In respect of our salvation for which if wee were bound to satisfie it should be no salvation at all Farther also we are obliged unto obedience and good works in regard of those causes which are in this Question inlarged 1. Because good works are the fruits of our regeneration by the holy Ghost which is perpetually united with free justification For whom hee called them also he justified and glorified Rom. 8.30 Such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified 1 Cor. 6.11 Therefore they who perform no good works declare themselves to be neither regenerated by the Spirit of God nor redeemed by Christs bloud 2. To testified our thankfulnesse towards God for the benefit of our redemption Rom 6.13 12.1 Give your members weapons of righteousnesse unto God Give up your bodies a living sacrifice holy acceptable unto God which is your reasonable serving of God 3. That God may be honoured by us Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorifie your Father which is in heaven Mat. 5.16 That by your good works which they shall see 1 Pet. 2.12 they may glorifie God in the day of visitation 4. Because good works are fruits of faith by which we judge of our owne faith and of the faith of others Give diligence to make your calling and election sure 1 Pet. 1.10 after which words of Peter certain copies insert these words by good works Matth. 7.17 Every good tree bringeth forth good fruit A good tree cannot bring forth evill frruit Galat. 5.6 22. Faith worketh by love The fruit of the Spirit is love joy peace long-suffering gentlenesse goodnesse faith meeknesse temperance 5. That we may win others unto Christ When thou art converted Luke 22.32 1 Pet. 3.1 strengthen thy brethren Let the wives be subject to their husbands that even they which obey not the word may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives Let us follow those things which concern peace Rom. 14.9 and wherewith one may edifie another These causes are with diligence to be urged and unfolded unto the people in our sermons of exhortation and hereunto tendeth the whole sixth Chapter and part of the eighth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans as far as the sixteenth Verse Three causes why justification and regeneration have a necessary coherence For farther declaration of the first cause we may observe that the benefit of justification is not given without the benefit of regeneration 1. Because Christ hath merited both to wit remission of sins and the dwelling of God in us by his holy Spirit Now the holy Ghost is never idle but alwaies working and so maketh those men in whom he dwelleth conformable unto God 2. Because by faith the hearts are purified Acts 15.9 For in them to whom Christs merit is by faith applied is kindled a love of God and earnest desire of performing things acceptable unto him 3. Because God imparteth the benefit of justification to none but to them which prove thankfull But no man can prove thankfull but he which receiveth the benefit of regeneration Therefore neither of these can be separated from the other We are farther to note the difference of the first and second cause The first sheweth us What Christ worketh in us by the vertue and power of his death The second teacheth us What things we are bound unto in regard of the benefits we have received Quest 87. Cannot they then be saved which be unthankfull and remain still carelesly in their sins and are not converted from wickednesse unto God Ans By no means For as the Scripture beareth witnesse neither unchaste persons nor idolaters nor adulterers nor theeves nor covetous men nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers shall inherit the kingdome of God a 1 Cor. 6.9 Ephes 5 5 6. 1 John 1.14 The Explication THis Question is a collection or consequent issuing out of the former Question and depending thereon For whereas good works are the fruits of our regeneration and are the thanks we owe unto God and evident arguments of true faith which whosoever have they onely are saved on the contrary it followeth that evill works are the fruits of the flesh unthankfulnesse to God and cleer arguments of infidelity wherein whosoever persevere they cannot be saved Therefore they who are not converted from their evill
thy glory Quest 129. What meaneth this particle Amen Ans That the thing is sure and out of doubt a 2 Cor. 1.20 2 Tim. 2.13 For my prayer is much more certainly heard of God then I feele in my heart that I unfeignedly desire the same The Explication THis particle is added not as a part of the prayer but it noteth and betokeneth 1. A true and sincere desire wherewith we wish that we may be heard that the thing we aske may be sure and certaine unto us and that God would condescend and answer unto our request 2. A certainty and profession of our confidence or confirmation of our faith whereby we trust that we shall be heard Wherefore the word Amen signifieth 1. So be it and sure and certaine be that which wee desire 2. So God being not unmindfull of his promise truely and certainely heare us FINIS Soli Deo Laus Gloria A large Alphabeticall Table containing all the chiefe and remarkable points contained in this BOOKE A ABsolution How the word of God doth absolve and condemne 485. Actions All actions are not sins in themselves but by accident 209. No action evill in it self in respect of God 210. Adultery The meaning of the word Adultery 601. Vide Chastity Affability What it is 613. Afflictions How many kinds of them 103. How they are punishments and how crosses ibidem Eight causes of them on the godly 104. The comforts which they have in them 105. 106. Three causes of the afflictions of the godly 161. All. Why all men are not saved by Christ but the faithfull onely 132. Whether Christ died for all 298. A reconciliation of those Scriptures which seeme to make for Christs dying for all 298. 299. Amen What it signifies 655. Angels What good Angels are 189. They are finite ibid. How they are called the children of God 190. They are the Ministers of the Elect. ib. Why called Powers 191. of evill Angels ibid. Christ called an Angel 256. Two reasons proving it ibid. c. Anger Gods anger against sin 165. Annointed Vid. Christ Why Christ is so called 226. What this annointing is ib. the Analogie betweene the signe and the thing signified 227. Christ is annointed spiritually 228. Why God cannot be said to be annointed ibidem and yet in what sort Christ may be said to be annointed according to his Godhead ibidem What the annointing of Christians is 234 What it is to be the partaker of Christs annointing 235. Arrians Their heresies confuted 263. 264. 265. c. Ascension What Christs ascension is 313. whither he ascended ibid. The manner how 314. The fruits of it 320. B BAptism What it is 409. Three things comprehended in it 410. The differences betweene baptisme and the washing of old ibidem Its ends and why it is not to be re-iterated 411. What it is to be baptised into Christs death 412. A two-fold washing in baptisme 413 What the right and lawfull use of baptisme is 414. The proper and improper formes of speaking of baptisme 415. Why baptisme is called the washing of the new birth 416. The baptisme of Infants confirmed by many arguments 417. The Anabaptists Arguments answered about the baptisme of Infants 418. 419. c. How baptisme and circumcision agree and how they differ 423. 424. Beget Begotten How Christ is said to be the only begotten Sonne of God 239. Why according to his manhood be cannot be properly so called 240. Beleeve What it is to beleeve God and IN God 179. what it is to beleeve IN Christ 237. Vid. Faith Blasphemy The difference betweene the blasphemy against God and against the holy Ghost 558. Blessings Wee may desire as well corporall as spirituall blessings 641. why corporall blessings are comprehended under the word Bread 643. Body How the parts of mans body are attributed to God 152. The Image of GOD in man doth not argue a bodily shape ibidem The similitude of mans body to declare our union with Christ 234. Of the bodies resurrection Vide Resurrection 372. 373. The ubiquity of Christs body confuted 459. Borne Five causes of Christs being borne of the Virgin Mary 272. The benefit of it 272. 273. Bounty In what the bounty of God is seen 164. Bread The breaking of Bread is one of the names which the Lords Supper yet retaines 427. Two things signified by it 434. Foure causes why this ceremony is yet retained ibid. whether Bread and Wine are the very body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament 436. why the Bread is called the body 455. their Analogie 456. How corporall blessings are contained under the name of Bread 643. how we call Bread in the Lords Prayer Ours ibid. why Daily Bread and This Day 644. Brother Brotherhood Of our Brotherhood with Christ 240. Buriall To what end Christ was buried 300. C CAtechisme Catechising What. 25. who were the Catechumeni 25. 26. The originall and perpetuall use of Catechisme 26. The parts and points of it 27. Why necessary ibidem Its ends 29. Ceremonies What they are with their severall sorts 588. whether the Church may ordaine ceremonies 589. Chastity What it is 602. It s contrary vices 602. 603. c. Vide Adultery Christ Hee is perfectly just foure waies 115. why Christ is the Sonne and not Father nor holy Ghost 118. 119. why all are not saved by him and why the faithfull onely 132. why hee is called Jesus a Saviour 220. his office and benefits differ ibidem He is our most perfect Saviour 223. whom he saveth 224. why Jesus is called the Annointed 226. 227. he is annointed spiritually 228. Vide Annoint Christs Propheticall function what 229. Vide Prophet Why he is called the Word 230. why a Priest with the circumstances thereof See the word Priest Why Christ is a King and what his Kingdome is Vide King 233. Christ is our head in three respects 235. how Christ can be called the onely begotten Sonne of GOD when we also are called his sonnes 238. Of Christs God-head 241. his God-head proved by our Regeneration 251. Christ the Sonne of GOD a person really distinct from â—he Father and the holy Ghost 257. Christ hath the whole God-head entire 258. The properties thereof 259. he is equall in honour with the Father and the holy Ghost 260. Christians Why wee are so called 233. what our annointing is 234. Our Propheticall function and Priesthood 236. Church A definition of the doctrine of the Church 1. Reasons why GOD would have his Church distinguished from other Sects ibidem Notes of the Church 3. The parts of its doctrine with the differences from other Sects 3. 4. The difference betweene Church-doctrine and Philosophy 3. 4. How the Church-doctrine was delivered of God and how confirmed 4. 5. Reasons why the Scriptures depend not on the Church 5. Objections against this answered 6. 7. The Papists brag of their Churches not erring 16. Not the Church but the holy Ghost is Judge of the Word 21. Three Rules for having the
13.8 Jesus Christ yesterday to day and the same for ever 1 Cor. 8.6 We have one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him d 1 Cor. 10.4 All did eate the same spirituall food and all did drinke the same spirituall drinke for they dranke of the spirituall Rock which followed them and that Rock was Christ 1 Cor. 12.13 By one Spirit we are all baptised into one body both Jews and Greeks and have beene all made to drink into one Spirit Ephes 1.4 5. He elected us in him before the foundation of the world was laid and hath predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himselfe according to the good pleasure of his will IV. The spirituall grace or the thing signified is with the signes received in the true use of the Sacrament which is when with true faith and conversion to God the Sacrament is a received for God so instituted the Sacraments that the signes ordained to confirme our faith should be received out of the hand of the Minister the promise annexed to the signes and spirituall grace it self promised should be received by faith from b God as the promise cannot be received but by faith Hence the Sacraments are not availeable to those that are without faith and conversion Testimonies of Scripture and of others a John 1.26 33. I baptise you with water but he standeth in the midst of you whom yee know not he it is who baptiseth with the holy Ghost 1 Cor. 3.6 I have planted Apollo hath watered but God gives the increase b Rom. 2.25 But if thou breakest the Law thy circumcision is become uncircumcision 1 Cor. 11.20 When ye come together therefore into one place this is not to eate the Lords Supper Apol. August Confes Tit. De usu Sacram. Therefore as the promise is ineffectuall if it be not received by faith so the Ceremonie is unprofitable if faith be not added which truly assureth us that here remission of sins is proffered V. Here is the true use of Sacraments when the Sacramentall signes are received with true faith and a repentance and are directed to that end for which they were ordained by God Testimonies of Scripture and of others a Mark 16.16 He that beleeveth and is baptised shall be saved Rom. 2.25 Circumcision indeed availeth if thou fulfill the Law Apol. August Confes De Sacram. c. Therefore we teach that in the use of the Sacraments faith is required which may beleeve these promises and may receive the things promised which are there offered in the Sacrament and it is a most plaine and firme reason that the promise is uselesse if it be not received by faith Idem De usu Sacram. And such an use of the Sacrament is the worship of the New Testament when faith quickneth the affrighted soule Idem But that faith acknowledgeth mercy and this is the principall use of the Sacrament VI. By reason of the Sacramentall signification obsignation and exhibition of things by signes it comes to passe that oftentimes the signes do retaine the names of the things signified which phrase is called Sacramentall Testimonies of Scripture and of others Gen. 17.18 This is my Covenant Verse 11. This shall be the signe of the Covenant betweene me and you Exod. 12.11 This is the Lords Passeover 1 Cor. 11.24 25. This is my Body This Cup is the New Testament in my blood August Ad Bonifac. Epist 23. If Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of these things of which they are Sacraments they could not be Sacraments at all and by reason of this similitude many times they receive the names of the things themselves Idem Tom. 4. in Levit. quaest 57. The thing which signifieth is wont to be called by the name of that thing which it signifieth as it is written The seven sheaves are seven yeares VII We therefore reject these truly Sacramentarian errors which are partly Papisticall and partly Ubiquitarian as 1. That there is no need of the generall doctrine of Sacraments 2. That Sacraments are not fully but onely in some sort defined by the efficient and small cause or by their effects as the Apology of Exfurt teacheth 3. That they are not the Seales of the promises of grace nor do they confirme our faith as the Jesuits and Anabaptists contend 4. That they containe justifying grace in them as it were the pitchers or vessels thereof that they are the instruments of justification by conferring it 5. That by their force they conferre justifying grace by the work wrought as they say 6. That there is not the same spirituall grace in the Word and in all the Sacraments nor the same communion of Christ 7. That the old Sacraments were bare signes without the true exhibition of the things themselves in their true use 8. That the spirituall things signified no lesse then the signes signifying are carried in and dispensed by the hands of the Minister 8. That spirituall things are received by the wicked even without faith 9. That there are no phrases figurative and Sacramentall but all proper in the Sacraments 10. That there are seven or more Sacraments then the two of Baptism and the Lords Supper instituted by God ARTICLE IX Of Baptisme I. WE beleeve that Baptisme is the laver of water in the Word by which Christ cleanseth his Church regenerating and renewing it by the holy a Ghost that is to say that it is a Sacrament instituted by Christ in which God witnesseth to those that are baptised with water in the Name of the Father Son and holy b Ghost that he receiveth them into the Covenant of grace through Christ and that he reneweth and cleanseth them from sin by the holy Spirit through his bloud Testimonies of Scripture a Ephes 5.26 Even as Christ loved the Church and gave himselfe for her that he might sanctifie her having cleansed her by the laver of water in the Word Tit. 3.5 By his mercy he hath saved us through the laver of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost b Mat. 28.19 Go and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and holy Ghost Mark 16.16 He that beleeveth and is baptised shall be saved 1 Cor. 6.11 You are washed you are sanctified you are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 12.13 By one Spirit we are baptised into one body II. We say that it consisteth of the Element and the a Word according to that vulgar saying Adde to the Word the Element and it becomes a Sacrament as if it were a visible word and therefore it consisteth of a two-fold b washing the one external of water obvious to the sense the other internal of bloud and of the holy Ghost and of this the Word instructs us The externall signifying washing which is a signe is done by the Minister touching the body externally the internall which is the thing signified
not discerning the Lords body Hebr. 10.29 Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye be shall be thought worthy who hath troden under foot the Son of God and hath counted the bloud of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing and hath done despite unto the spirit of grace VII Therefore we dis-approve those other doctrines which teach 1. That Christs bodie is in the bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or under the accidents of bread corporally present by consubstantiation or by transubstantiation 2. That Christs bodie is properly carried in the Ministers hands 3. That it is eaten by the bodily mouth 4. That the Pronoune This doth shew an uncertaine individuum or singularitie or an indeterminate substance 5. That This demonstrates both the bread and also Christs bodie lurking invisibly in the bread 6. That wicked men do properly eat Christs bodie ARTICLE XI Of the Civill Magistrate Translated out of Dutch into Latine I. IN man there is a two-fold government the one belonging to the soule or the inward man making him truly to know God rightly to worship him and at length to attaine righteousnesse and life eternall the other governes the bodie and outward man that he might passe this politicall life amongst men with all modestie and honestie II. And although the holy Scripture chiefly handles the government of the soule and is ordained principally by God to give directions to the soule yet it delivers also many excellent and wholsome precepts concerning the outward government of the bodie And for the better administration of this that mankind might be preserved God hath commanded in his word that among men some should command and have the charge of civill government others should obey and be subject to that government Those by a relation are called Magistrates and Subjects III. The power of the civill Magistrate is no lesse nay more necessary then our daily food then the sun aire or water seeing this terrene life cannot subsist without these for by these naturall things man breathes eats drinks lives and moves as other creatures which enjoy these things in common with man Now that men may not live like beasts but like men that is that they may live with all modestie and honestie before God and men that they may beware of all idolatrie blasphemy or any other abuse of Gods Name also that they may avoid all sort of filthinesse and damages by which either wee our selves or the life fame and possessions of our neighbour may be hurt and that the true knowledge of God sincere worship and feare and that all civill honestie may prevaile and that the publick peace and tranquillitie among men may not be troubled that every one may safely enjoy his owne that honest and necessary contracts may flourish and lastly that all things in the Common-wealth may be done in a lawfull way the civill Magistrate should be very carefull of seeing he is ordained for this end by God therefore they may truly be called beasts rather then men who would remove and overthrow this ordinance of God among men IV. The doctrine of the civill Magistrate consisteth of these three heads First concerning the authoritie of the Magistrate whether it is ordained by God or pleasing to him also of his office right and power as well in ecclesiasticall as politick affaires Secondly of the lawes to which Christian Magistrates are tied Thirdly of the dutie of subjects what they owe to their Magistrates and how far they are to obey them Of each of these what is to be concluded out of Gods word the ensuing Aphorismes will teach V. The Apostle expresly teacheth that the Magistrate is ordained by God in these words There is no power but of God The powers that be are ordained of God Rom. 13.1 4. For he is the minister of God to thee for good By this divine authoritie the Magistrate being guarded let him think how wisely and diligently he must carry himselfe in his office For if hee be so from God that hee is the minister of God surely hee should endeavour with all care that all things be done according to Gods ordinance as well in ecclesiasticall as in politick affaires neither must hee doe any thing wittingly and willingly against it From this ground of divine ordination Moses the man of God and holy King Jehosaphat did so speak unto their Judges and Governours Take heed what ye doe for ye judge not for man but for the Lord Deut. 1.17 2 Chron. 19.6 7. who is with you in the judgement Wherefore now let the feare of the Lord be upon you take heed and doe it for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God nor respect of persons nor taking of gifts Againe if the Magistrate be ordained by God to be his minister hee ought to assure himselfe that he must serve God that he must doe all to his honour and for mans benefit so he doe that according to the prescription of Gods word VI. Therefore that cannot be unpleasing to God which he himself ordained Yea he calls Magistrates by his owne Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods because they exercise judgement in stead of God Exod. 22.8 If the thiefe cannot be found then shall the master of the house be brought unto the gods God standeth in the midst of gods Psal 82.1 which Psalme Christ alledgeth John 10.35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came I have said Ye are gods Besides the Scripture witnesseth that many holy men did exercise the office of the Magistrate as Josuah David Ezechia among the Kings Joseph and Daniel among Princes Moses Josuah Gedeon amongst the Dukes or Judges VII Away then with these fooleries of Anabaptists and other fanaticall spirits saying That in the Old Testament the office of the Magistrate was necessary to Gods people by reason of the imperfection of the Jewish nation but that it s written in the New Testament The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them Luk. 22.25 and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors But it shall not be so with you Galat. 5.16 Againe In Christ nothing availeth except the new creature Also I say unto you Matth. 5.39 Doe not resist the evill VIII For first if the imperfection of the Jewish people did necessarily require a Magistrate surely much more necessary will the having of a Magistrate be to us Christians seeing it is written also of us In many things we offend all But they who offend in many things must needs be imperfect yet wee deny not James 3.2 but that Christians by Gods favour have a great prerogative above the Jewes in respect of the cleare knowledge we have of God and of that grace which is exhibited to us by Christ but in respect of our politick life we have no lesse need of this divine ordination of Magistrates then the Jewes had Besides it is written in the New Testament not in the
that the nature assumed the nature or the nature assumed the nature mediately the person immediately assumed the nature because as they speake the union is immediatly terminated in the person mediatly in the divine nature III. The humanity in Christ is not a person subsisting in it selfe but a nature having no proper personality but by reason of the union fully capable and participant of the person of the Word The Animadversion It is rightly said that the humanity wants a proper personality for a personality is a subsistence or the power of subsisting by it selfe without any other and without any other suppositum or supporting subject of a rationall nature which power the humanity neither had Whether and how the flesh is capable of the person nor hath but it is a new improper and deceitfull saying that by force of the union the flesh is made fully capable and partaker of the person of the Word It is first new because neither the Scripture nor the Church speaketh thus that the flesh is capable of the person 2. Improper because the flesh neither containes nor incloseth the person of the Word as the place is said to be capable of the thing placed He begins to speake thus Thes 44. neither becomes it the person it selfe or is it informed by the personality as the subject is capable of the forme 3. Deceitfull because the Sophister useth this phrase as a preparative for the reall communication of the properties in the natures to wit that he may say that the flesh is after the same manner capable and partaker of the deity and omnipresence as it is according to his saying partaker and capable of the personality and that therefore not by its owne but by the deity and immensity of the Word it is God and omnipresent even as not by its owne but by the personality of the Word it subsisteth But orthodox men confesse with Damascen that the person of the Word by reason of the union is common to both natures that now the humanity subsisteth in Christ by the same personality that the divinity doth but they deny that the flesh is made so capable and partaker of the person as if it were the person it selfe as they also deny that it is made so partaker of the deity and omnipresence as if it were the deity of God himselfe the omnipresence or omnipresent c. neither doe they grant that it is otherwise partaker of the person of the deity of the omnipresence or can be then by the union which maketh not that the humanity but that man is the person is God is omnipresent in which sense the Apostle saith That the Son of God was made partaker of the flesh and bloud of the children to wit Heb. 2. by assuming the seed of Abraham into his personality or by the hypostaticall union whereby not the deity of the Son but God the Son is made flesh and blood that is to say true man In this sense also it may be rightly said that the flesh or humanity of Christ is partaker of the person of the deity of omnipresence to wit by the union with the divine person and omnipresent which union makes not that the humanity of Christ but that the man Christ is a person is God is omnipresent IV. This in the Scripture is called flesh by which word not the onely corporeall masse is understood but the full and entire humanity consisting of a true body and a reasonable soule V. For the Son of God is made partaker of flesh and bloud as we are to wit in all things made like to his brethren except sin The Animadversion He saith well That under the terme of flesh is meant the entire humanity consisting of a true body and soule so he would adde these words With the true properties of both and withall the infirmities except sin For if he be like his brethren in all things then surely in locality and circumscription hee is made like to them and that in the union and in the Word For without the union and without the Word the flesh hath neither being nor subsistence at any time Therefore that is false which he affirmes in the 36. Thesis That the flesh by power of the union hath in a most eminent way transcended all locality in the illocall Word and that it hath obtained an illocall manner of existence VI. Therefore the Word did not assume an imaginary but a true and solid body consisting of flesh and bones Luke 24. of flesh and bloud John 16. which also in glory remaines a true body conformable to the glorified bodies of the Saints both in substance and qualities The Animadversion This Thesis alone doth strongly refute these ensuing subterfuges 1. For if the Word assumed not a fantasticall but a true and solid body then doubtlesse it assumed a body endued with quantitie dimension visibilitie and localitie For that is not a true body but an imaginary that wants quantitie nor can that be solid which wants dimensions and that hath no dimensions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is indivisible illocall for an uncircumscribed nature is invisible saith Theodoret. Now such a body as the Word did assume such a body assumed is in the Word Therefore it is false That the body of Christ in the Word which is illocall did obtaine an illocall way of subsisting that is that it is made and becomes illocall 2. If the body assumed by the Word consisteth of flesh and bones Luke 24. of flesh and bloud Hebr. 2. certainly that body which is feigned to lurk in a crust of bread or under the accidents of bread and to be eaten by the mouth is not that true and solid body assumed by the Word because it hath not flesh and bones 3. If also it remaines in glory such a bodie to wit solid and true consisting of flesh and bones having dimensions then doubtlesse in glory it retaines the definition of a true bodie from which definition the three dimensions and by reason of these circumscription and locality can be no more separated then rationality from man 4. If it be conformable to the glorified bodies of the Saints in substance and qualities it cannot then be illocall immense every-where for our bodies shall not be illocall nor every-where but shall have their Vbs by Christs owne testimony John 17.24 Father I will that they whom thou hast given to me may be with me where I am John 14.2 3. I goe to prepare a place for you and if I goe and prepare a place for you I will come againe and receive you unto my selfe that where I am there you may be They need not then cavill thus That the body is such in its owne substance but in the Word by reason of the union it is not such for whereas it hath its being not in it selfe but in the Word which assumeth it and alwaies had doubtlesse it is and remaineth such in the Word and in the
made a curse for us upon the tree hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law e Ephes 1.7 Col. 1.14 We have redemption by his bloud f Col. 1.20 Having made peace by the bloud of his Crosse by him he hath reconciled all things to himselfe hath reconciled them in the body of his flesh by death g 1 Pet. 1.18 We are redeemed by the precious bloud of the immaculate Lamb. h Isa 53.5 By whose stripes we are healed i 1 John 1.7 The bloud of Christ purgeth us from all our sins k Rev. 19. 7.14 Thou hast redeemed us by thy bloud They have washed their robes and made them white in the bloud of the Lambe The latter is this The Scripture defines our whole justification by remission of sins through the bloud of Christ therefore onely the effusion of bloud is that by imputation of which we are justified and the remission of sins is our whole righteousnesse They confirme the Antecedent by testimonies of Scripture l Luke 18.13 God be mercifull to me a sinner I tell you that he went downe unto his house justified rather then the other m Acts 13.38 Be it knowne to you that to you is preached remission of sins through him and from all things from which by the Law you could not be absolved by him all that beleeve are justified Here to be absolved to be justified to have remission of sins are the same things David pronounceth that man blessed to whom God imputeth righteousnesse without works n Rom. 4.7 Psal 32.1 Blessed are they whose sins are forgiven and whose iniquities are hid Blessed is the man to whom God imputeth no sin o Rom. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect It is God that justifieth who shall condemne It is Christ who is dead c. p 2 Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ reconciling to himselfe the world by not imputing to them their sins q Ephes 1.7 In whom we have redemption by his bloud that is remission of sins c. They have also other arguments which for brevities sake I omit they alledge also for themselves the Catechisme of the Palatinate qq 37.45.66.55.57.72.76.80.84 c. In which it is taught that we obtaine remission of sins justice and life eternall for the alone sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse and that onely the bloud of Christ purgeth us from all sin which very thing is every-where found in the Directory of the Palatinate Hitherto the different opinions concerning justice I now passe to the second head where I will briefly shew without prejudice to others what I can approve or disapprove in those who follow the first opinion I cannot see how they can prove out of Scripture the imputation of Gods essential justice or why that should be said to be imputed seeing man was never obliged either to the possession or performance of it for God never conferred upon man his essentiall justice and man never lost it They make God then unjust as if he did require of man divine justice which he never gave him nor ever will give him The reason is a Paralogisme non causae for although whole Christ is a King Priest and Saviour and whole Christ justifieth yet it is knowne that he performes the effects of his office among which is justification by the distinct operations of his natures therefore whole Christ justifieth but one way according to his divinity to wit as the efficient cause another way according to his humanity to wit as a meritorious cause and the dignity of the merit flowes from the dignity of the person that is from the deity of the Mediatour But from hence it doth not follow that the deity can challenge any part of the merit being the fountaine of merit It behooved then the Mediatour to be God not that the deity or justice of the deity might be imputed to us or according to Osianders madnesse essentially dwelling in us might become our justice but for the cause explained in the Catechisme q. 17. Therefore the justice of the divinity differs from merit as the cause from the effect Other inconveniences also of this opinion belong to the two ensuing therefore I joyne the second and third opinion together for they differ not save onely that the one makes two parts the other three parts of imputative justice All which opinions are subject to the same inconveniences 1. All confound the justice of the person and of the merit of Christ which the Scripture oftentimes conjoynes but doth also manifestly distinguish as the efficient cause or sine qua non and the materiall cause of our justice as My righteous servant by his knowledge shall justifie many For such an High-Priest became us who might be holy separated from sinners that he might offer not for his owne but for the sins of the people Him who knew not sin he hath made sin for us that we c. 1 Pet. 3. Christ suffered once the just for the unjust And so our Catechisme quest 15.16 2. These distinctions which they make betweene not unjust and just betweene not transgressing of the Law and fulfilling of the Law betweene not dead and alive they have more subtlety then verity being indeed equivalent termes as I will afterward shew for of necessity he that before God is not unjust must be just who transgresseth not the Law fulfils it who is not dead is alive Seeing all these are immediate contraries one of which being affirmed or denied the other must necessarily be affirmed or denied 3. If by the imputation of the passive obedience we are not as yet just but onely not unjust how is this true We are justified by the bloud of his Son We are reconciled by his death c 4. If remission of sins be not whole justification how can that be true Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven Rom. 4. c. how doth the Apostle in the same place take for the same thing To impute righteousnesse and Not to impute sin 5. If the omission of obedience to the Law and the imperfection of our holinesse are not expiated by Christs passive obedience but necessarily that must be covered with Christs actuall obedience this with his naturall holinesse how againe can this be true The bloud of Jesus Christ purgeth us from all sin unlesse perhaps omission and imperfection be not sins 6. If we are not justified by the passive but by the active obedience of Christ how is it that Christ died not in vaine For what need was there that Christ should die and by his death procure to us pardon for our sins if by his just and holy life he had already merited righteousnesse for us for righteousnesse necessarily presupposeth remission of sins 7. It is manifest that all these partitions of Christs merits into two or three members do exceedingly derogate either from the death of Christ or from the justice of God For these
for all beleevers I beleeve Ergo he dyed and prayed for mee But they are too cold comforters who teach afflicted consciences thus to reason Christ dyed for all men I am a man Ergo he dyed for mee Why may not a Turk a dog or a hog wallowing in the mire conclude so O brave comforters and Preachers of Gods word for the maineâ—inew of Christian comfort is not to be a man but to be ingraffed into Christ Againe they object out of the Apostle That all are made alive in Christ 1 Cor. 15.22 as all dyed in Adam But if they will absolutely say that all are made alive in Christ Scripture and experience will refell them This is it then the Apostle saith that Christ gives life to all his owne as Adam brought death upon all his owne And he indeed by grace which is more but this by naturall propagation which is easier This sense of the Apostle is proved by the subsequent words for when he had said that all were made alive in Christ hee presently subjoynes Every one in his owne order Christ as the first-fruits afterward they that are Christs that is beleevers who are given to him by the Father and for whom he earnestly prayed to the Father Neither is Austins interpretation different from this De civit Dei l. 13. c. 33. therefore it is said that all are alive in Christ not as if all that die in Adam were members of Christ but because as no man except in his naturall bodie dyeth in Adam so no man in the spirituall bodie is quickned but in Christ Neither have they cause to object that by these meanes Adam is made stronger then Christ if he destroy more by death then Christ preserveth by his death and life They know not what they bark against Be it so that all who are lost in Adam are saved by Christ But this way grace shall not abound but will be onely equall to sin The power of both is not to be measured by the number of those who die or live but by the manner by which perdition and vivification are obtained or else by the greatnesle of the benefits received or lost It s an easie matter to wound but hard to cure according to the Proverb You shall sooner and with more ease destroy 600 men then save one You shall sooner tumble downe many men from off the bridge into the water then you can preserve one from drowning So it was more easie to undoe all mankind then to restore one man from destruction That Satan could doe Adam could doe but this none can effect except Christ Beasts or afflictions can hurt offend and kill men but it is in no mans power save onely in his who is the Creatour of all things â—o restore salvation and life eternall Therefore Christs death had been stronger then Adams though he had restored but one man to life Besides it is certaine and out of question that the good things we have by Christ doe as far excell those things which we lost by Adam as heaven and eternitie exceed terrene and transient blessings For Adam was earthly saith the Apostle Christ heavenly he was naturall this spirituall he ejected us out of an earthly Paradise this hath introduced us into an heavenly Mansion and hath crowned us with eternitie of happinesse Thus I suppose we have sufficiently demonstrated and defended that the fruit of Christs death and resurrection doth appertaine to all and onely to them who repent and by faith adhere to Christ A briefe Introduction to the Controversie of the Eucharist explaining the chiefe Questions that are controverted or not controverted among the Protestants By D. DAVID PARIE Foure generall Remembrances 1. LEt the younger sort remember to discriminate between the questions that concerne the ceremonies and rites of the Supper and questions of doctrine which is the Evangelicall promise annexed to the ceremonie 2. Let them learne also to put difference between questions controverted and not controverted whether of doctrine or of ceremony 3. Let them know that the controversies about the ceremony are of lesse consequence and may for the most part yea should with moderation be decided or agreed upon according to the circumstances of time place and people but alwaies to edification 4. Let them know that there are three chiefe questions of the doctrine of the Supper not controverted and so many controverted to which all others may be easily reduced Of both I will briefly give some hints to young Divines Three uncontroverted Questions concerning the doctrine of the Supper 1. What the Supper of the Lord is All Protestants agree in this that the Lords Supper is a Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ in which bread and wine being taken the true bodie and bloud of Christ is also received so that there is sealed to the faithfull the communion of Christ and of his benefits 2. What be the ends and uses of the Supper instituted by Christ All Protestants consent in this that this receiving confirmes the faith of the promises of grace both because this is the common use of Sacraments as also because Christ said of this Sacrament 1 Cor. 11.26 Doe this in remembrance of mee And This cup is the new covenant in my bloud Therefore they consent in this that the holy Supper is the commemoration of our Lords death untill he come according to the Apostles admonition 3. What is exhibited and received in the Lords Supper In this also the Protestants agree that bread and wine is received by the mouth and bodie the bodie and bloud of our Lord with all his benefits are taken by a faithfull heart I say the Protestant Divines agree in these but as for contentious pratlers they neither agree in these nor in any thing else whose brawlings should not measure mens judgements concerning the consent or controversies of the Protestant Churches The three controverted Questions be these Quest 1. What the union of the signe and thing signified is in the Lords Supper Whether transubstantiation or consubstantiation or else a mysticall relation To these the answer shall be in three Propositions two whereof shall be negative and one affirmative Proposition 1. The signe and the thing are not united by transubstantiation that is by such a mutation which turnes the substance of the signes into the substance of the things the bare accidents remaining Reason 1. From Christs words This is my body He said not Be this or Let this be made my bodie Reas 2. Bread in the Scripture is called bread in the action before and after the action Reas 3. The orthodox Fathers retaine bread in the Supper and when they speak hyperbolically of changing of the bread they will be understood sacramentally as Theodoret Dial. 1. Christ would have those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa est sacramentis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who receive the Sacraments not to be intent upon the nature of the things which are seen but
by the changing of names to beleeve that change which is made of grace Here Theodoret himselfe in the same Dialogue teacheth that a sacramentall change is to be understood thus speaking He honoured the visible signes by the name of Christs body and bloud not changing nature but adding grace to nature Propos 2. The signes and things signified are not united by consubstantiation that is in the reall existence of two bodies in the same place under the same accidents or under the lurking of the one within the other such as is that of oates in the sacke of mony in the purse of the infant in the cradle or of wine in the pot which are like to things consubstantiated Reason 1. Because the words of Christ This is my body shew to us not where the bodie of Christ is nor what it is in with or under the bread but what the bread it selfe is and should be to godly men in this Sacrament to wit his bodie Reas 2. The bodie of Christ is a true organicall finite and visible bodie not present or every-where upon earth since the Ascension but existing and remaining in heaven even till his last returne As the Apostle tells us Declare the Lords death untill his coming againe Reas 3. The orthodox Fathers teach that the bodie and bloud of Christ are in the bread and wine not as in lurking places but as in a mysticall or in a mysterie Chrysostome in that imperfect work Matth. Hom. 11. In the consecrated vessels not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of Christs body is contained Propos 3. In the sacramentall Supper the signes and things are united by a sacramentall union This is it which is common to the whole kind of Sacraments otherwise this union were not sacramentall or of a Sacrament but of a Supper Now in all other Sacraments there is a relative union that is a mysticall signification obsignation exhibition and reception of the thing signified by externall symbols in the right use which is not without faith and repentance in the receivers Reason 1. From the genus in all Sacraments there is such an union therefore in this Supper also The Antecedent is manifest out of the definition and chiefe end of Sacraments Reas 2. The bread is the bodie of Christ either in the truth of the thing as Austin speaks in the sentence of Prosper or in a signifying mysterie not in the truth of the thing or essentially because there is no transubstantiation therefore in a signifying mysterie Reas 3. Hither belong all the Arguments by which a sacramentall phrase is proved to be in the words of the Supper for a sacramentall union begets sacramentall phrases Reas 4. The testimonies of Fathers that the bread is a signe a figure a sacrament of Christs bodie August contra Adim c. 12. The Lord doubted not to say This is my bodie when he gave the signe of his bodie The Objection of Papists for Transubstantiation out of the words of the Supper That which Christ gave and the Priest consecrates is Christs bodie Ergo it is not bread It followes because these are disparata As this thing is a man Ergo it is not an oxe I answer by denying that this argument is grounded upon the position of one species to the removing of the disparate species of the same genus because it is vicious proceeding from the position of a sacramentall relation to the negation of the subject or fundamentall Such as if I would say This man is a father Ergo he is not a man This man is Cesar Ergo he is not a man So they This bread is Christs bodie Ergo it is not bread It is therefore fallacia accidentis no lesse absurd then if you should reason from the position of the forme to the negation of the matter This thing is a table Ergo it is not wood For though Christs bodie is not the forme or accident of bread yet the relation which the bread by vertue of the promise hath to Christs bodie is the forme of the Sacrament So it doth not follow The Dove is the holy Ghost Ergo this is not a Dove Circumcision is the covenant Ergo it is not circumcision The cup is the New Testament Ergo it is not the cup. As for the testimonies of the Fathers which the Papists object concerning the changing of the symboles the common answer is That they are to be understood of a sacramentall not of an essentiall change which is manifest out of the orthodoxall consent of the Fathers on this Sacrament Quest 2. How as well the symboles as the celestiall things signified in the Supper are exhibited and received About this question we are at controversie both with the Pontificians and Ubiquitarians because both of them will have the things signified to be secretly and miraculously present in the signes or species of the signes and to be carried in and handled by the Ministers hands and to be received into the mouths of the communicants Wee teach on the contrary that the things are exhibited with the signes and are received together with them in the lawfull use of the Supper but in a different manner The symboles are touched by the hands of the Minister and received by the mouths of the communicants but the things themselves are exhibited by Christ himselfe our high-Priest and by faith are received of us Which also may be explained in three Propositions two negative and one affirmative Propos 1. The body and bloud of Christ which are the things signified are neither handled nor exhibited by the hand of the Ministers to the end that they should in these symboles be corporally received Reas 1. Is negative from the whole kind of Sacraments In no Sacrament doth the Minister handle or give spirituall things signified therefore neither in the Supper The antecedent is proved both by induction which is also plaine by the Adversaries confession as also by the analogie of Sacraments and of the Word Mark 1. I am the voice of a crier John 1. I baptise with water Hee that cometh after mee shall baptise you with the holy Ghost and with fire 1 Corinth 3.7 Neither is he that watereth nor he that planteth any thing but God who giveth the encrease Therefore it is so in the Sacraments which are the visible word Reas 2. The things signified are not in with or under the symboles being there corporally present as was shewed Quest. 1. Propos 2. therefore they are not handled by the Ministers fingers nor distributed Reas 3. The things signified in the Supper are spirituall which are offered to the faithfull in the promise of grace annexed to the symboles but the promise of grace is not touched by the hand c. Reas 4. The testimonies of Fathers as Chrysoft serm de Euch. in encaen Doe not thinke you that come to these mysteries that you receive from man the divine body that is from the Minister and many such like Propos 2. The
body and bloud of Christ which are the things signified are not received with in or under the bread and wine with the mouth of the body Reas 1. Because they are not corporally present with in or under the symboles as was shewed Quest 1. Prepos 2. Reas 2. Because they goe not into the belly which is appointed for corporall food 1 Cor. 6.13 but whatsoever entreth into the mouth goeth down into the belly Matth. 15. Reas 3. Because the promise by which the things are offered is not received by the mouth but by faith Propos 3. The things signified to wit the body and bloud of Christ are received by faith spiritually Reas 1. From the genus because in all Sacraments the things signified are received by faith by which alone as we are justified so we receive all the benefits of the New Testament by which faith Christ dwells in our hearts Ephes 3.17 Reas 2. Because the promise of grace is not received but by faith but the communion of the bodie and bloud of Christ is that of the promise of grace See the first volume of Vrsine pag. 103. The Arguments of a certaine famous Disputer for the orall manducation To whatsoever organ the eating of one thing in the Lords Supper doth agree to that same it is needfull that the eating of another thing should agree but to the mouth of the body the eating of one thing that is of the bread in the Supper doth agree and therefore of another thing that is of Christs body Answ The Major is true of foods that are naturally conjoyned or contain each other as meat or flesh-pies but the bread and Christs bodie are not thus conjoyned and therefore of these the Major is false But he proves the Major Whosoever includes under the same word of eating bread and wine the body and bloud of Christ he also affirmes that both are received by the same instrument but Christ includes bread and wine his body and bloud within the same word of eating Therefore Christ affirmes also that both are received by the same instrument of eating Answ 1. The Disputer doth not conclude the Major that is denied which he should conclude by an universall Syllogisme in Barbara therefore his proofe is idle Answ 2. The Major is a petition of the thing in question and is denied The falshood also is plaine out of John 3. where Christ under the same word of birth includes the spirit and flesh and yet it followes not that both are borne after the same manner or by the same instrument Answ 3. The Minor is also false For the word Eat is referred to the consecrated bread and not to the bodie but onely by consequence or analogie for properly it belongs to that which Christ took with his hands and broke which was bread and not his bodie This reason is worth the noting because according to the Papists and the simple Consubstantiators the bodie of Christ is not present till the words of consecration be uttered but in the last instant of uttering these syllables For this is my body it begins to be present But according to the Ubiquitaries who are as it were chymicall Consubstantiators it is present as in any other bread but is not eatable till after the consecration Christ then did not command us to eat that in the bread which as yet was not there or not as yet eatable We say briefly that by the word of eating is onely commanded the orall manducation of the outward Sacrament or the bread but by the word of promise This is my body which is given for you which promise agreeth with that John 6.52 The bread which I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world is required faith spiritually eating Christs bodie given for us and drinking Christs bloud powred out for us for the remission of sins Yet againe the Grammarian goeth about to prove the Major of the Prosyllogisme The word that hath but one signification is to be understood in that one But Manducation as well of the bread as of Christs body hath but one signification Ergo that one is to be understood of both Answ 1. He failes againe in the proofe of his Major because he concludes the Major neither of the Syâ—logisme nor Prosyllogisme by any universall Syllogisme in Barbara as he should have done 2. The Minor is a demand of the thing in question for he takes it for granted that eate ye is meant as well of the body as of the bread which is the thing he should prove and that this is false the story of the Institution tels us for Christ bodily did not lurke within the bread but sate at table when of the bread which he received broke and gave to his Disciples he said Eate yee Question 3. To whom the things signified are offered and by whom received To this we answer in two Propositions both being affirmative Propos 1. The things signified in the Sacrament to wit the body and bloud of Christ though they be offered to all yet are received by the faithfull onely Reas 1. Because the faithful only by faith receive the promise by which the things signified are offered Reas 2. Because the beleevers alone have the Spirit of Christ from which his living flesh cannot be separated Reas 3. Because Christ dwels onely in the faithfull and they in him by faith Ephes 3.17 Reas 4. Because the beleevers alone receive and have life eternall John 3. and 6. Propos 2. Impious or incredulous men coming without faith receive the signes without the thing signified but the things themselves being proferred they reject because of their infidelity For the Reasons see Explicat Catechet q. 81. Titulo What the wicked receive in the Lords Supper As for the Objections concerning wicked mens eating in the Supper see ibid. D. DAVID PARIE'S Epitome of Arminianisme OR The Examination of the five Articles of the Remonstrants in the Netherlands ARTICLE I. GOD by an eternall and immutable Decree in his Son Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world did decree out of the lapsed race of man-kinde subject to sin to save such in for and by Christ as by the grace of the holy Spirit do beleeve in the same Son and persevere in that obedience of Faith to the end by the same grace On the other side he decreed to relinquish and condemne as strangers from Christ such as are not converted but continue in infidelity subject to sin and wrath according to that of the Gospell John 3.36 He that beleeveth in the Son hath life eternall but he that beleeveth not shall not see life eternall but the wrath of God abideth on him The Examination AT first sight this Article seemes to have no question or inconvenience in it but to deliver the summe of the Gospell what sort of men by what meanes God decreed from eternity to save to wit beleevers in the Son of God and perseveres to the end in faith