as witnesses and solemne othes by whome wede as it were homage to God and do make profession of our faith and Religion A. It is euen so Of the number of Sacraments vvhich are in the Chucrhe of Christ D. How many Sacramentes are there in Christ his Church A. There are but two whiche may be properly accoumpted for true Sacraments D. Which is the firste A. That of baptisme D. And the seconde A. The supper Of Baptisme D. What is baptisme A. It is a sacramēt by the which Iesus Christ doth offer vnto vs the remission of our sinnes and our regeneration vnder the figure of the water as he doth in déede communicate the same vnto vs by his holy spirite D. Doth it any thing else A. In like sorte it testifieth to vs that he receyueth vs into his Churche as true members of the same D. And of our parte what do we A. We testifie in lyke sorte that we acknowledge him for suche an one as he declareth himselfe towardes vs and that we beleue that he maketh vs partakers of all his great riches Of the Supper D. What is the supper A. It is a Sacrament by the which Iesus Christ doth present vnto vs vnder the signes of bread and wine the communion that we haue with him and with his Church D. Is there nothing else represented vnto vs in it A. The spirituall nouriture that we haue by faith in his flesh and in his bloud whiche haue ben giuen for vs. D And as touching the rest do we not there make the same profession of our faith that we do in baptisme A. It must be so vnderstood for so muche as such is the nature of all Sacraments and one of the principall ends and purposes for the which they are ordeyned of God. To vvitte vvhether the bread the wine be conuerted into the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the Supper D. Dost thou thinke that this bread and this wine that are giuen for signes in the Sacramente be the very naturall body and bloud of Iesus Christ A. If they were his very naturall bodie and bloud they could then not be the signes of it D. Why not A. For so much as if it were so there should be no difference betwene the signes and the things whiche they signifie D. Is there none other inconuenient A. There is also this inconuenient that if it were so this doctrine shoulde be wholly contrary to the articles of oure faith and namely to that of the ascention of Iesus Christ into heauen Of the coniunction of the signes in the supper vvith the thinges that they signifie D. Dost thou then thinke that the body and bloud are vnited and ioyned togither naturally and corporally with the bread and the wine A. No especially for two causes D. Whiche is the firste A. Seing there is question of spirituall nouriture in this holy Table we may not imagine here a materiall meate which is eaten on the same table as is bodily meate D. Which is the second A. It is that we shal fall into the same inconuenient whereof we haue euen now spoken touching the articles of our faith D. Do we then receiue ther nothing els but material bread and wine A. Yes that we do D. What is it A. The very body and bloud of Iesus Christ signified to vs by them Of the presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the Supper D. How may we receiue them if they be not there euen as thou saist A. I sayd not but that they were in dede in the supper or otherwise it should not be the true supper of Iesus Christ D. How dost thou thē vnderstande it A. Albeit that I denie the bodie and the bloud to be there naturally and carnally I denie not therefore but that they be there giuen and receyued spiritually in déede euen as that sacramente witnesseth it vnto vs. D. Thou doest not then denie the presence of the very body and very bloud of Iesus Christ in the supper A. No. D. What wilte thou then say for full resolution A. I will only say that the manner of that presence is not carnall and materiall but spirituall and diuine Of them to vvhome the communion of Sacramentes doth belong D. Seing then we vnderstande what the true nature of Sacraments is shewe me now which they be to whome they oughte to be administred A. It is easie to vnderstand by that which hath alredy bin said of the nature of them D. How dost thou vnderstand it A. Seing they be as seales of the worde of God and of the alliance that he hath made with his people and as a protestation of our faith towarde the same the matter is very playne that they belōg but only to those which vouch that doctrine and aliance and are comprised in the same Of the proofe that is required of euery man in the Supper D. Bycause that the supper is not administred but to such as are alredy at the age of discretion shew me how euery man ought to prepare himself for to receiue the same A. Sainct Paule giueth the rule when he admonisheth euery mā to proue himselfe D. What meaneth he by that proofe of himselfe A. That euery man do diligently examine him selfe whether he haue in him the things without the which he may not worthyly communicate at the holy Sacramente Of the principall points vppon the which euery man ought to examine and proue himselfe D. Whiche be those things A. There be chiefly thrée as men maye iudge by the matters that we haue handled heretofore De. Whiche is the first An. It is true repentaunce and a true acknowledging of his offences and sinnes for the whiche Iesus Christe dyed as he declareth vnto vs by the same holy sacrament D. Whiche is the second A. True faith in the onely grace and mercie of God whiche is offered and graunted vnto vs in Iesus Chryst and by Iesus Chryst as that Sacrament also testifyeth De. The thirde An. True charitie and vnion towarde all the membres of Iesus Christ as it is represented vnto vs in that wée there eate all of one self bread and drink all of one selfe cuppe Of the ministers of the Churche and of Magistrates D. There resteth nowe but one pointe it is to witte by whome these sacramentes ought to be administred A. By those same ministers to whome the charge to administer the worde of God hath bene committed by lawfull order as he hathe ordeyned in his Churche De. Is it lawfull then for none other An. As GOD hath ordeyned that there should be in the common wealth certain Magistrates and officers for the administration of ciuile and earthlye matters to the ende there shoulde be no confusion euen so hathe he willed his Churche to haue hir ministers chosen by lawfull vocation as his officers for the administration of Ecclesiasticall and spirituall matters to the ende that euery thing bée there handled and gouerned
by the vertue of the same and therfore the holy Ghost is often signified in the holy Scriptures by water M. Are there yet any other proprieties P. Wée can not vnderstād our regeneration into a new creature to be made new men except wée vnderstād also the mortificatiō of our old nature which is our old Adam and our old man And therfore S. Paule sayth That by baptisme we ar dead and buried risen agayn with Iesus Chryst M. Is the water propre to signifie the deth burial of the old mā the resurrectiō and renewing of the newe P. The water alone doth not represēt vnto vs only these things but also the maner in the whiche it is administred in baptisme M. Howe may that be P. Thou séest that cōmonly it is poured vpon him that is baptised in token that our old Adam is drowned and dead in Iesus Christ as the olde Pharao and the Egyptians were drowned in the redde sea And therfore Saint Paul compareth baptisme to the passage thorowe the red sea M. And what signifieth thys that they doe but poure this water vpon him that is baptized P. The same signifieth vnto vs howe that of the death of the olde man the newe riseth as if our olde Adam after that he were drowned were risen againe a newe man and that all his olde filthines were drowned by the water of grace in the which he was plunged which is the bloode of Iesus Christe the true washer of regeneration M. I doe nowe vnderstand all this very well but is there any other proprietie to consider touching the water P. If we shuld make comparisō of all the other properties that it hath with the holy Ghost which it doth figure in Baptisme I could giue thée manie others from which I doe abstaine at this present seing that that which I haue said may suffice thée for the vnderstāding of the matter of Baptisme Of the admonition and figure that the faithfull haue of a Christian life in Baptisme M. HAst thou yet any thing to say touching this Sacrament P. I haue nowe to shewe thée what pattern and example wée haue there of a Christian life and of the dutie of a Christian and of true repentance which ought to be in him all the time of his life M. Expound all these to me P. Séeing that baptisme is to vs the Sacrament of regeneration of penaunce and of mortification wée are admonished by the same of the perpetuall penance that ought to be in vs of the mortification where by we ought to mortifie our earthly mēbers to the end that wée being dead to sinne may liue to God in iustice Of the Supper and why Iesus Christe did ordaine two signes for the same M. IT séemeth to mée nowe that I doe sufficiently vnderstand that matter of Baptisme and therfore lette vs procéede to the Supper P. The Supper is a Sacrament in the which Iesus Christ representeth to vs by the signe of breade and wine howe he hath giuen his bodie and his bloud to the deathe that hauyng reconciled vs vnto God he moughte bee our spirituall nouriture and mought cōfirme vs in the faith of the promisse whiche he had made vnto vs. M. For what cause hathe he represented his bodie and bloud by the bread and by the wyne P. To signifie vnto vs that euen as breade and wine are giuen to vs by God for our corporall nouriture euen so the bodye and bloud of Iesus Chryste is giuen vnto vs for spiritual foode M. And for what cause did Iesus Chryste ordeyne two signes in the supper but one in baptism Mought not the bread or the wine onely haue ben sufficient to represent this spirituall life without adding both of them P. As he hath ordeined the signe of the water whiche is very méete to represente that whiche in Baptisme he woulde represent vnto vs euen so he hath chosen for the Supper those signes that were most méet to signifie that which he wold haue signifyed in the same M. I doubte not at all of that P. And therfore albeit that by one onely signe as in Baptisme he coulde haue done all that whiche hath pleased him to do by two yet he woulde giue two for the better expressing of that whiche it pleased him to giue Of that whiche is speciall in the Supper wherein it differeth from baptisme and howe that all that is verye well represented in the bread and the wyne M. DEclare vnto mée then the properties whiche the breade and wine haue agréeable to the things the whiche they represent in the supper P. For the first thou must note and remember that whiche I haue alreadie touched that the supper hathe this proper vnto it that euen as baptisme is to vs a testimonie of our spiritual birth life which we obtayn by Iesus Christe euen so is the supper a sacrament and testimonie howe that God wil continue in vs that benefite whereof baptisme is to vs a Sacrament and will nourishe and entertayne vs in the same spirituall lyfe the which he signifieth vnto vs therin vnto the tyme that we haue the full enioying in heauen with Iesus Chryst M. I thinke than that to be the cause why Iesus Chryste would signifie those things to vs by the eating and drinking and by those things which are propre to nouriture P. It is euen so and for somuche as man can not lyue by meate only or drinke only except he haue them bothe togither no more is Iesus Chryst contented to ordeyne only the breade or only the wine for signes of the spirituall nouriture whiche wée haue in his Supper but would ordeine those two to giue vs to vnderstande that euen as he which hathe meate and drinke hath his whole nouriture euen so the faithefull haue in Iesus Chryst fully all that whiche is necessarie for the spiritual lyfe M. Is there yet none other reason why Iesus Chryst did ordeyn those two signes M. Yes for Iesus Christe hathe also by these two signes better expressed howe that he hath giuen his bodie and his lyfe to the deathe for vs thā if he had ordeined but one only in so much as he hath giuen one particuler signe to signifie his body and an other to signifye his bloude M. What further signification hath it P. To set the better before our eyes howe that he is in déede dead for vs in so much as his bloude was separated from his body and consequentlye his life and that he hath so loued vs that he hath not spared it for vs. How we must eate the body and fleshe of Iesus Christ and drinke his bloud in the Supper M. BVt séeing that the breade representeth vnto vs in the Supper the fleshe and bodie of Iesus Christ which is there gyuen vs for meate and that the wine representeth the bloude which is there gyuen vs for drink must wée there also eate the body of Iesus Christ and drinke hys bloude in the same
sorte as wée eate the breade and drinke the wine which represent them vnto vs P. If there were none other reason but that which may be gathered of that which I haue euē now spoken it mought suffice vs to discharge our heads of all such imaginations M. I doe not well vnderstand yet what thou meanest herein P. Seing that Iesus Christe hath ordeyned one seuerall signe to signifie his body and an other seuerall signe to signifie his bloud and that it hath pleased him so to discerne them the one from the other the better to represent to vs how his bloud was separated from his body for vs in such sorte as his life and soule was separated likewise it should also followe that his body must be eatē a parte as we there eate the breade and there drink the bloud a parte as we there drinke the wine M. If it were so we shoulde not haue in the Supper the liuing body of Christ but dead and other thā he is raigning in heauen where his bloud is not separated frō his body P. Thou sayest truth But thou hast yet to note that if the body and bloud of Iesus Christ were giuen vs to nourish and mainteyne vs in this corporall life as is bread and wine we shoulde then also eate the body and drinke the bloude of Christe corporally as we doe eate and drinke the corporall breade and wine But forsomuche as they are giuen vs for spirituall nouriture we must eate and drinke them spiritually M. What doest thou call to eate and drinke spiritually Peter To speake properly to eate and drinke is vnderstoode of the body and of the bodily meate and drinke but when we speake of spirituall thinges we take those wordes for a figure by the whiche we declare the spirituall thinges by the bodily thinges bycause of the similitude and agremente that they haue togither M. Why is that done P. To the ende that by the similitude and comparison of corporall thinges we moughte the better vnderstande the spirituall things Of the true spirituall eating and drinking M. DEclare this to me yet somewhat more plainely Peter Thou mayest well vnderstande that the soule and the Spirite do neyther eate nor drinke corporally and materially as dothe the bodye Mathevve I doe well vnderstande at the leaste that they haue neither mouth nor téeth nor stomackes nor bellies corporall whereby they may do the same P. And therefore it must néeds be that if the soule and the spirite do eate and drinke they eate and drinke in an other sorte than doth the body the whiche is proper and agreable to their nature M. There is reason in that whiche thou sayest P. And on the other side thou mayest well knowe also that the flesh of Iesus Christ is neyther eaten nor chawed neyther is swalowed downe into the stomacke and bellie neyther is it digested as is the corporall and materiall meate M. For what cause is it then that Iesus Christ hath vsed that manner of spéeche saying he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life P. It is to giue vs the better to vnderstande the communion and coniunction whiche we haue with him and how that his flesh and his bloud do the very same towarde the soule and also toward the body touching the spirituall life being receiued with a true and liuing faith as do the bread and wine towards the body touching the bodily life whē they are bodily eaten dronken The sixtenth Dialogue is of the transubstātiation cōsubstantiation and of the true presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper Of the error of transubstantiation and hovv the Supper cannot be a Sacramente if the bread and the vvine do not there remayne in their proper substance MATHEVV HOw is it that men do eate the flesh of Iesus Christ and do drinke his bloud as thou hast euen nowe saide It is to bée vnderstoode that the breade and the wine be transubstantiate and conuerted into them or else that they be ioyned and vnited with the bread and the wine P. For the firste there is no reason eyther to thinke or saye that the breade and the wine be conuerted or chaunged into the body and bloud of Iesus Christe M. For what cause P. Bycause that if the bread the wine did not remayne still in the supper bread and wine in their proper substance they shoulde not be the signes of the body of the bloud of Iesus Christe but if they were conuerted into the same they shoulde be the selfe same thing the which they oughte to signifie and represente vnto vs. M. What inconueniente should there be in that P. There shoulde be this inconuenient in it that the supper should be a Sacramente withoute signe and so shoulde it haue no Sacramentall signe without the which the Sacramēts may not be Sacraments Of things vvithout the vvhich the sacraments cannot be sacramēts M. HOwe vnderstandest thou that P. Thou must note that a Sacramente cannot be a Sacramente excepte it haue at the leaste thrée things whiche are of the proper substance of all Sacramens M. Whiche are these thrée things P. The firste is the worde of God which is the foundation of all the Sacraments M. And the seconde P. The visible and materiall signes such as God hath ordeyned by that very word M. And the third P. The thinges signified aswell by that word as by the signes Of things vvhich are to be considered in the vvord of God in all Sacraments and in the signification of the same M. DEclare vnto me that whiche thou sayest by some similitude P. Séeing that we be vppon the matter of the Supper thou hast firste the worde of Iesus Christ in the which thou hast to note two pointes M. Whiche be they P. The first is the commandement which Iesus Christe there giueth to take and to eate the bread to drinke the wine which are giuen in the same M. Which is the secōd P. The promise whereby he declareth what it is that this bread and wine do signifie and for what cause he hath ordeyned and commaunded to receiue them and what frute we must looke for of them Math. Wherevpon takest thou thys promise Pe. Vppon that whiche is saide of the breade This same is my bodye whiche is broken for you and in like sorte vppon that whiche is spoken of the wyne Thys cuppe is my bloude or the newe Testamente in my bloude whiche is shedde for you doe this in remembraunce of mée Math. Muste wée vnderstande the lyke of all the other Sacramentes to witte that they haue commandemēt and promisse from God Peter There is no doubte thereof Ma. What is there more yet to cōsider cōcernyng the worde of GOD P. There is nothing more to be consydered concerning that same exteriour worde whyche is pronounced by the mouth of the mynisters Math. What resteth there yet more Peter That which is signified by the woorde the whiche doth also declare the signification
of the signes how God doth accomplishe by effect that which is signified as well by the worde as by the signes Of things to consider in the signes and in the signification of them in all Sacramentes M. WHat hast thou yet to saye of the sygnes and of their signification Peter Thou séest how that Iesus Chryst was not contented with the wordes only in the Supper but he added also therevnto the signes of the breade and of the wine as is that of the water in baptisme M. I demaund thée nothing of their signification For thou hast alredy declared it vnto me P. Thou hast only to note that these signes are not true signes without the things signified by them VVhether Hipocrites and Infidells do as vvell communicate in the Supper of the things signified by the signes as they do of the signes M. IF it be so that the signes be not vaine neyther in the supper nor yet in the other Sacraments without hauing with them the things which they signifie it thē followeth that whosoeuer receyueth the signes receyueth also the things signified by them and by that meane the infidells which are hypocrits do no lesse part take of the whole Sacramente than do the faithfull P. Thou concludest not well For when I say that the signes are not in the Sacraments without the thinges by them signified thou must vnderstād that on God his parte for he dothe not sette foorth his worde and sacraments to men without presenting vnto them also the things wherof he doth admonish them by the same Ma. How commeth it then to passe that all do not communicate alyke Pe. Bycause that all they to whome the gyftes of God are offered do not receyue them M. What is the cause that they do not receiue them P. Bicause they bring not fayth with them without the whiche no man can receiue them M. Thou wilt then say that they shut themselues from it by meane of their vnbeléefe and that it is not sufficient that the gifts of God bée presented vnto vs by his worde and hys sacraments if that forthwith they be not receiued and they can not be receiued but by meane of Faith which the infidels and hypocrites haue not P. Thou oughtest here to vnderstād that Iesus Christ may not be separated from his sprite séeing that it is so as none can receyue him but by his spirite euen so can hée not be receyued excepte he forthwith gyue hys holy spirite with him and doe make partakers of all these guiftes and graces all those whiche receiue him Mathevve Thou haste here yelded a greate reason Peter If it were not so there should be no difference betweene the faithfull and the infidell in the communion of GOD his Sacramentes and guyftes M. Yet thou confessest that notwythstandyng they may communicate of the outwarde signes as well as the other albeit they can not communicate of the thyngs signifyed by the signes Peter They maye there communicate well forsomuche as no mā may let them so long as they offer themselues as faithfull and that they be not discouered to the Churche for suche as they bée in sorte that they mought be vanquished of their vnworthinesse to seclude them wholly For if the things signified by the Sacramentes do not belong to them no more also doe belong the signes whiche signifie them Math. If they were then knowne of men to bée suche as they be before GOD they shoulde bée excommunicate to the ende they shoulde not approche Peter It is certayne And bycause that they are not knowne yf they were well aduysed they woulde of them selues forbeare for so much as they can not communicate of the very outward Sacramentes but to their condemnation bycause they are in no respect capable thereof wherfore they do but dishonour God and his Church prouoke daily more and more the wrath of God vpon them VVherfore are the breade and wyne called by the name of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ if they be not that body and bloud M. I Am satisfied touching that poynte but I haue yet some difficultie concerning that which thou hast said that the bread and the wine are not the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the Supper and yet it séemeth that Iesus Christ saieth the contrarie cleane For he calleth them his body and his bloud by his owne wordes which thou hast euē now alledged P. But he meaneth not thereby that the breade wine are his body and bloude in proper substance in suche sort as their substance is cōuerted into the substance of his bodye and bloud M. For what cause then vseth he that maner of speache and hath not rather vsed some other more playne P. There are chiefely two reasons not only for that he vsed it but also why that maner of speache is more proper and more plaine in that matter than any other M. Which is the first of these reasons P. It is that when the holy scripture speaketh of Sacramentes it doth willingly name the signes with the names of the thinges whiche are signified by them And therfore Iesus Christ would accōmodate himselfe to that speache which the holy Ghost hath alwaye accustomed to vse in the Church bycause that it is familiar and easye to vnderstand to God his people with whō he hath to doe and vnto whom he doth addresse his doctrine M. And why is it that the holy Ghost speaketh rather this lāguage than otherwise P. Bycause it is more agréeable to this matter than any other M. For what cause P. For so muche as the Lorde will giue vs to vnderstand by suche phrases of speache that albeit that the signes of the Sacramentes be not the very same thinges which are signified by them yet notwithstanding they are not without them Of the manner in the vvhiche the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Christe are present in the supper and are communicate to the faithfull as vvell as the signes vvhich represent them M. IN what sorte then are they there if the signes remayn stil in their own substance P. Albeit they be not there by a naturall corporall materiall presence as the visible signes whiche are there giuen to vs that notwithstanding they be thereby a diuine spirituall vertue and maner wherby God by the vertue of his holy spirite doth make partaker of them all suche as by true and liuely faithe doe receiue his word and his sacraments by which he cōfirmeth the same in our harts Of the substantiall and naturall coniunction of the bodie and bloud of Iesus Christ with the bread and vvith the vvine of the Supper M. BVt if the breade and the wine doe not chaunge their substaunce and neyther be transubstantiated conuerted nor changed into the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Chryste may not then the bodie and bloud of Iesus Chryste be well ioyned to them in their owne proper substāce nature P. Ther are among those which reiect the false doctrine of transubstantiation
both in heauē and in earth S. Paule in like fort hath written that he is ascended aboue all the heauens to the ende he mought fill al things that he mought fulfill all in the same M. Doest thou vnderstand that he doth accomplishe and fill all things not by his corporall presence but by his spirituall diuine presēce and vertue P. We may not otherwise vnderstand it if we do beleue that Iesus christ hath a very natural body that he be in déede gone vp into the heauens For as we haue alredy said as ther is no reason to giue him many bodies to be in manye places at a time euē so is it ouer strange to giue hym a bodye which may fill the heauen and the earth Hovve that the corporall presence of the body and of the bloude of Iesus Christ is contrary to the true communion of them in the Supper M. I Doe now remember that thou hast alredy said that the body the bloud of Iesus Christ could not be separated frō his spirit frō whence I do conclude that the body and bloud of christ Iesus cānot be receiued but to the saluation of them which doe receiue it P. None may doubt thereof M. It followeth then further that infidells cannot receiue them forsomuch as they cannot receiue them except they receiue their saluation the whyche they cannot obtaine without faith wherof they are void P. This which thou sayest dothe yet confirme more and more all that whiche we haue handled heretofore concerning the corporall presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper M. It is also the cause why I did againe set foorth thys matter For if the body and the bloude of Iesus Christ be corporally in the supper in suche sorte that whosoeuer receiueth bodily the bread and the wine therein receiueth also the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ corporally there shall follow thereof many things which séeme to me very contrary as well to the office of Iesus christ as to the nature of this Sacrament of the Supper P. Thou sayest very truthe and I am very glad to here of thée that which thou thinkest M. For the firste we shall be constrayned to confesse that a man maye in the Supper receiue the body and the bloude of Iesus Christe without faith and without his spirite for the vnfaithfull whiche shall receiue the bread and the wine shall no lesse receiue the body and the bloud of Iesus Christe than the faithfull P. Beholde there a very straunge consequencie M. Moreouer if a man may receyue them without faithe they whiche shall receiue them in such sorte shal receiue thē either to their saluation or condemnation if they receiue thē to their saluation it must néedes followe that a man maye obtaine saluation without faith if they do receiue thē to their condemnation it must then followe that the body and the bloude of Iesus Christe do bring in this Sacramente against their nature deathe in stéede of life whiche is also against the nature of the Sacramente for it was not ordeyned to bring death to man but life VVhether a man maye conclude of the vvords of Sainct Paule that a man may receyue the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ in the supper to condemnation P. THou concludest very well but they which houlde the opinion againste the whiche we dispute at this presente make no difference to affirme that the infidels receiue in the supper the body the blud of Iesus Christ that they receyue thē to their condēpnation For they build themselues vpō that which s Paule hath saide That who so eateth in the supper the bread drincketh the wine of the lorde vnworthily doth eate and drinke his condempnation M. I know well that those mē affirme that which thou saist But I cannot well agrée their opinion with the matters the which we haue alredy handled And as touching that which they alledge of S. Paule he sayth not who so shall eate the body and drincke the bloud vnworthily shal receiue his condempnation but he saith he that shall eate of this bread shall drinke of this cup. P. Thou hast also to note beside this that there is difference betwene receiuing the supper vnworthily to receiue it without faith and as touching the word of condempnation it may be also taken in diuers maners but wée will now no longer dwell vpon these two pointes It is sufficient for vs to knowe that the bodye and the bloud of Iesus Christ cannot bée truely receyued but by the faythfull Of the principall difference that maye be betvveene the transsubstanciation of the bread and of the vvine into the bodie and the bloud of Iesus christ and the bodily coniunction of them together M. I Do well vnderstand by all the reasons testimonies which thou hast brought out of the holy scriptures that we may seke no corporal nor carnall presēce of Iesus christ neither in the supper nor yet in all thys visible worlde but only a spirituall and diuine presence Wherfore whē I haue well considered the whole I finde no great difference betwene them that affirme that the bread and the wine be conuerted transubstanciated into the bodie blud of Iesus christ in the supper by the vertue of the sacramentall wordes those which affirme that albeit that the bread the wine remayne still in their owne substāce yet notwithstāding the body blud of Iesus christ be there also present with thē in their proper and natural substāce not only spiritually but also corporally substancially as are the bread the wine P. There is no great difference but in that that the one sort thinking to auoid the absurdities which follow the opinion of the others do fall into other absurdities which are nothing lesse of the which we will no more speake here bycause the matter woulde be to long whereof we haue alredy sufficiently spoken Of the vnion that is betvvene Iesus Christ and his members signified by the breade and the vvine in the Supper M. I Am very well contented for thys time with that which thou hast said and therefore shewe me now what properties the bread and the wine haue yet which are agreable to this Sacramente of the Supper beside that whiche thou hast already said P. I haue already sayd that those signs were agreable to this sacrament bycause they be apte to represent the spirituall nouriture by the bodily M. I doe very well remember thys pointe P. Thou hast also to note vppon the same that as one lofe and one vessell of wine are made of many graines gathered togither euen so doe they in the Supper represente vnto vs how that al the children of God which are dispersed are gathered broughte togither in one and vnited with Iesus Christ their head by his deathe as Saincte Iohn doth witnesse M. Thou wilte then saye that that vniō which is made of many graines in one lofe or in one wine
¶ A Christian Instruction conteyning the law and the Gospell Also a Summarie of the Principall poyntes of the Christian fayth and Religion and of the abuses and errors contrary to the same Done in certayne dialogues in french by M. Peter Viret somtime minister of the word of God at Nymes in Prouince Translated by I. S. Seene and allowed according to the Queenes Maiesties Iniunctions Imprinted at London by Abraham Veale dwelling in Paules churchyard at the signe of the Lambe ANNO. 1573. To the honorable and vertuous Lady Elizabeth Countesse of Lincolne Iohn Shoute vvisheth encrease of all godly honoure and knowledge WHEN I HAD TVRNED into English this vvorke I cōsidered in my selfe that in aunciente time and also in this our age men haue accustomed to dedicate their trauayles vnto such vertuous personages as they haue honored And I examining my selfe vnto vvhome I moughte addresse this little labour of mine thought good to presume vppon your goodnesse and to addresse the same vnto your honorable Ladyship knovving this vvorke to be a meet subiect for the exercise of noble spirits in the which they may see the great mercies of God tovvards mankinde and learne hovv to be thankfull for the same tovvards his diuine maiestie It may please you therefore good Madame to accepte this present at the hand of him vvho vvisheth vnto you great encrease of spirituall blessings and that after this momentayne life you may be one of those vvhich shall euer vvayte on the Lambe in the heauenly Ierusalem vvhich vvas slayne for the sinnes of man before the foundation of the world was layde to the end he mought make vs acceptable vnto God by vvhome vve haue redemption thorough his bloud euen the forgiuenesse of our sinnes according to the riches of his grace From London the 4. of Ianuary To the Christian Reader SEeing that the chiefe cause for the whyche God created mā is to be serued and honored by him our duty is thē to seke to vnderstand how to honor and serue him and we cānot know howe to serue honoure nor obey him but by his worde and albeit his worde be suche as it is able to giue instruction both to learned and vnlearned hauing in it milke for children and strong meate for men yet is it necessarie to vse for our better instruction the helpe of the worthy fathers in the study of the same wherby we may the better and more certainely iudge of that whiche we shall reade by the which meane we may the more easily know our good God his benefites vnspekeable presented to vs in his deare Christe and what we are by our Lord Iesus Christ what we are of our selues without which knowledge none can be a true Christian For if we knowe not that our only saluatiō is founded by God in Iesus Christ that oure eternall life proceedeth onely from the free mercies of god withoute any iote of oure deseruings surely we cannot be saued For if we will be accepted at the handes of God for his faithfull and obedient children we may not presente vnto him any workes of ours for satisfaction for our sins either in parte or in al albeit we ought and are bound to do good works For if we haue in vs a liuely faith we cannot but do good works For as faith is a frute of oure election so are good works a frute of our charitie towardes oure neighboure whiche charitie is a frute of oure liuely faith whiche worketh thorough charity as S. Paule saith but if we will be acceptable vnto God we must vtterly cast downe our selues before him acknowledging our selues worthy of eternall damnation a thousand times and embrace Iesus christ wholly with all his merites who hath satisfied the iustice of God for vs fulfilled the lawe paid our debte caried away with him captiues in vnspekeable triumph Sathan sinne deathe and Hell and hath taken possession for vs of the heauenly inheritaunce and there sitteth at the right hand of God the father making intercession for vs cōtinually And to the end we may wel knowe howe we do obtayne these inestimable benefites by Iesus Christe I haue tourned into oure naturall language this worke in the which are sufficiently and excellently handled all the principall pointes of our Christian religion I haue added to the ende of thys worke the exposition of Master Viret vpon the preface of the law which conteyneth sundry excellent doctrines I haue done it to helpe to aduaunce in the way of their saluation al such as are ignoraunt of the tongues wherefore I beseeche God that they whiche shall reade it may so profite thereby that God may in them be glorified and their soules edified THE SVMME OF the principall pointes of the Christian faith and Religion and of the abuses and errors contrary to the same Hovve nedefull it is that all Christians doe vvell knovv vvhat faith is vvherby they are made Christians vvhat things she doth comprehend Chap. 1. WHOSOEVER dothe beléeue the testimonie whiche God in his word doth yelde of his will holdeth alreadie for certaine that the saluation of men by the which God will be glorified in them resteth in the only faith in Iesus Christe and that from the heart men beleue to iustification with the mouthe men make confession wherby they are saued Wherfore séeing it is so it is néedfull not only that euery true Christian do well vnderstand what is the nature of the true faith and which are the principall pointes that she conteineth without the which she cannot be a true and perfecte faithe but also that he be wel resolued in them For faith can not be a true faithe without the true knowledge of the things that she beléeueth so farre as God hath reuealed by his worde and is requisite for euery man to knowe for his saluation Wherefore they which know not nor do vnderstand at all that whiche they say they do beléeue haue no faith at al but by imagination and fantasie whatsoeuer they doe persuade themselues to haue Of the summaries of the faith of the christian Churche named Symboles Chap 2. FOr that cause the ancient Church hath comprehended all the poyntes of the Christian faith in certaine Summaries whiche are called commonly the Nicene Créede the Créede of Athanase and that of the Apostles This name of Symbole was giuen vnto them as well for that they did conteyne in summe the principal pointes and foundations of the Christian doctrine whyche are more at large expounded in the holye Scriptures as also for that they are the true markes and tokens of a Christian man in euery one that beléeueth and confesseth the doctrine conteyned in them Wherefore it is requisite that euery one knowe at the least that same whiche is commonly called the Créede of the Apostles which is the most cōmon and most short of them all according to the which the Church doth daily make publique confession of hir fayth as followeth I beleeue in GOD the Father
procéede Wherfore if there be any sinne that deserueth to be accompted sinne it is that same Of the meane vvhereby man maye be deliuered from sinne and from the vvrathe of God vvhiche sinne bringeth to him M SEing then that mā can find in himselfe no remedie to with-holde him from that bottomlesse pitte of perdition where is it that he shal fynd it elsewhere P. In God only who only canne reforme hym to his Image as at the fyrste hee did and formed him according to the same M. But by what meane may he obtayne so greate a good thing of God considering that he hath so greatly offended him and procured his wrath P. It is certaine that no man may haue accesse to God to obteyne saluation of him without a mediatoure by whome he may be made at one with him Of the causes for the vvhich there is neyther man nor Angell sufficiente to the office of mediatoure betvvene God and man and of the greatnesse of the vvrath of God against sinne M. ANd who is this mediatoure which may make this appointmente P. For so much as all men are in like faulte and condemnation there is none among them sufficient for that office of what holynesse and qualitie soeuer he be Mat. Where must he then be sought Shall it be among the Angells whiche haue no sinne P. The very Angells can not be sufficiente therevnto M. Why not P. Chiefly for two causes M. Whiche is the first P. It is that the wrath and cursse of God is so heauie a burden that there is no creature whatsoeuer he be neyther in heauen nor in the earth that may beare it but that he shall be beaten downe with it vtterly M. What is the cause there P. It is bicause that the offence through sinne committed is done against God which is infinite and an eternall prince and king wherefore it deserueth also paines infinite and eternall M. Haue we any testimonie of the same P. The angells which haue sinned may be sure testimonies vnto vs. M. In what sorte P. If that they which were so excellent creatures coulde not themselues beare that which they had deserued for their parte how may one amongst them beare all that that all mankind hath deserued togither M. This reason is very plaine But which is the other cause that maketh that the very Angells are not sufficient to such an office P. For so much as seing that the offence was cōmitted by mā it must also be repaired in him by him M. For what cause P. To the ende that God may be founde true and iust and also mercifull togither Of the setting forth of the iust iudgemēt of the mercy of god in the redēptiō of mā M. HOw doste thou vnderstande the same P. If god did not punish mā acording to the desert of his transgression and according to the threatnings that he himself hath giuen vnto him the sentence that he hath giuen against him where should the truth iustice of God be M. I vnderstand well this point but what wilt thou say of his mercy P. In like sort if he punished man according to his desert where should then this mercy be by the which he sheweth forth his infinit goodnesse more than by any other vertue whatsoeuer that is in him Of the only true mediator Iesus Christ M. If there be neyther man nor Angel sufficient to that office what other mean resteth then by the which that fault of man may be repaired by him in him P. Bycause that man could not among all the creatures find any God hath prouided according to the pietie compassion that he had of him being moued by his only mercy and inestimable charitie M. Which is this mean P. It is that he hath giuen his only sonne Iesus Christe to do this office M. And what mean hath he obserued in this worke P. It is that Iesus Christ being the Eternal true God of one only essence with the father toke humain flesh in the womb of the virgin Marie by the very ordināce of God his father M. What néed was there that he should take humain fleshe vpon him to execute that office P. It was euen so necessarie to the ende that in the same he might satisfie the iust iudgement of God for all men Of the vnion of the diuine and humaine nature in the person of Iesus Chryst and of the causes of the same M. Was it necessary that the same mediator should be very God and very man togither in one very person P. It is euen so chiefly for thrée causes M. Which is the first P. It is that if he had not bene very man he could not haue suffred in our flesh nature that which he hath suffered was to suffer for vs. M. And if he had not suffred the same what incōuenience shuld ther haue ben P. That he shuld not haue born for vs in our nature fleshe the wrath curse of God which we had deserued and then he should not haue satisfied the iudgement of God thorowe his obedience to put away by the same in our own flesh and nature the rebellion by the whiche we haue deserued this iudgemente M. Which is the other cause P. It is that if he had ben but only man and that he had not ben vnited with God being very God and very man in one very person he could not haue ben able to beare this burden of the wrath of god which is so greate and so importable but that he shoulde haue ben swallowed vp how iust or innocent soeuer he shulde haue ben M. Which is the thirde P. It is that he shoulde not haue ben able also to haue brought saluation and life to man if he had not had the fountaine in him selfe by meane of his diuine nature Of the sacrifice and satisfaction of Iesus Christ and of the vertue therof M. WHich is then the meane whereby Iesus Christe hath satisfied for vs in his humaine nature and fleshe P. It is the sacrifice that he himselfe hath made of his owne body and bloud by his passion and death M. Howe is the sacrifice of Iesus Christ of such vertue P. For two principall causes M. Whiche is the first P. The paine the which he béeing innocent hath endured for vs whiche were culpable by the which payne he who had not deserued it hath deliuered vs from it which we haue deserued M. Which is the seconde P. It is the perfecte obedience whiche he hath yelded to God his father in recompence of the transgression and rebellion which was founde in vs. Of the communication in the benefites of Iesus Christ M. IS it sufficiente that he is deade and that he hath yelded to God his father one such an obedience P. If that same were ynough all shoulde be saued indifferently as well infidels as faithfull men M. What is more required then P. That
planteth and he that watereth are nothing but God whiche giueth the encrease P. It is true And for that cause in somuche as he is man he hath planted and watered by his outwarde ministerie but in that that he is very God he hath also power to giue the encrease and doth dayly giue it by the ministerie of his seruāts M. In so doing he doth there dayly the office of prophet P. If he did not so all the rest as well Prophetes as Apostles and all the ministers of the worde of God shold trauel in déede in vaine M. Doth he also the like in the administration of the Sacramentes P. Thou maist easily iudge by that which Saincte Iohn Baptiste sayde that as for him he baptised but with water but that there shoulde be an other to witte Iesus Christe whiche should baptise with the holy Ghoste and with fire M. It semeth to me that this passage whiche thou haste euen nowe alledged doth confirme all that whiche thou hast alreadie spoken of the power of the ministerie of Iesus Christ P. It is very certaine For as he giueth vertue and efficacie to the Sacramentes euen so dothe hée to the worde and to the preachyng of the same and in like sorte he doth in the Sacramentes as in the administration of the worde for the reason is lyke Of the office of Kyng of Iesus Chryste M. I Doe nowe well vnderstande this poynt concerning the office of Prophete of Iesus Chryste continue the others whyche also concerne his office Peter The seconde poynte is touchyng hys office royall Math. What dothe it importe Peter That he is the true and eternall King of the people of GOD whiche he hathe boughte with his bloud and deliuered from the captiuitie and tyrannie of the diuell to sette them in full spirituall libertie and to leade and gouerne them as a spirituall king and to make them partaker wyth hym of hys heauenlye kingdome Is thys the cause why he is called our Lorde P. It is certaine that this name and title is proprely giuen vnto him in respecte of the worke of the redēption by the which he hath woon vs to himselfe and for the whiche cause his people is called the woon people Of the office of Sacrificer of Iesus Chryst and of the parts therof M. LEtte vs nowe come to the thirde point of the office of Iesus Christ whiche is touching his office of Sacrificer P. It is an office whiche dothe also comprehende thrée very excellent things the whiche Iesus Christe hath fully accomplished in perfection M. Whiche be they P. To teache to pray and to offer sacrifice Of the office to teache M. THe auncient Préests of the lawe had they all these offices P. It appeareth that they had the office to teach by that which is writen in Malachie The lips of the Sacrificer do kepe knowledge and men shall require the lawe at his mouth For he is the Ambassador and messenger of the Lorde of hosts M. Touching thys pointe Iesus Christe hath very well discharged himselfe for he hath not spared to teach the people yea in his owne person P. No man may doubte thereof Of two most principall partes of the preestly office of Iesus Christ M. BVt it séemeth to me that this point is alredy comprehendid vnder the office of Prophet P. It is true and therefore he is called properly the Eternall préest after the order of Melchisedech bycause of the prayer and of the sacrifice by which he hath bin intercessor for vs and hath made our attonemente with the father M. The auncient préests of the law had they also that charge to praye and to sacrifice P. The holy Ghoste doth tell it vs plainely in the Epistle to the Hebreus not only that this office did appertaine to the anciente préests of the lawe but it doth also declare vnto vs the cause why it was necessarie that this office should be assygned to Iesus Christ M. What is it then that is mente by it P. That euery préest was ordeyned to pray first for hys owne sinnes and then for those of the people and in like sorte to sacrifice to the ende that God should be reconciled vnto him Hovv that none may be a perfecte sacrificer but Iesus Christ only M. ANd if the préests of the lawe were ordeyned by God therevnto what néed was there then that this office should be assigned to Iesus christ P. The passage which I alledged to thée euen now dothe giue plaine matter to the solution of thy question with that whiche we haue alredy handled heretofore to this purpose M. How P. For somuch as the préests of the lawe had néede to pray not onely for the sinnes of the people but also for theyr owne the same maye giue thée to vnderstande that they could make no sacrifice to God which should be sufficiente to appease his wrath towarde his people M. Why so P. I haue alredy shewed thée heretofore that there is no man that may do any worke which may be acceptable to him if first the person whiche doth it be not acceptable to him Now sinne of hys nature deserueth the wrath of God and not his loue and fauour M. Doest thou then meane that bycause al men are sinners there are none which are agreable to him and if their persons be not agréeable to him no more can their workes please him P. No so long as he doth consider them in their owne nature without his grace in Iesus Christ by whome only man is made agreable vnto him For vvhat cause no sacrifice nor any other vvorke of man vvhatsoeuer it be may be able to make satisfaction to God. M. IS there yet any other reason than that which thou sayst P. Euē as God is perfecte so is there no worke that can be plesant vnto him except it be perfect M. Doest thou then meane that there is no worke of man be it neuer so perfecte whiche is not imperfect in his sighte P. I haue sufficiently shewed it them heretofore Wherefore it followeth that there is none that may fully satisfie him M. I haue very well vnderstoode already that thou hast sayde that there was no worke that mighte satisfie him neyther in parte nor in all but I do not yet well vnderstand what reason there is in it P. And yet notwithstanding I haue alredy declared it to thee M. It is true but I am not yet wel satisfied For if a debter cannot pay the whole summe that he oweth and if he pay parte is there not alwayes so much rebated and diminished of the principall summe P. Albeit that that whiche thou saist hath place among men yet notwithstanding he that hath not satisfied the whole summe standeth still bound euen according to the contracts of men for she rest which he oweth is not cléerely discharged vntill he haue paide all vnlesse that of fauour the creditor wil acquite him otherwise if he wil kepe him prisoner vntill he haue
by the whiche we haue bene sometyme taught that the very substāce of the bread and of the wine was chaunged into the very substance of the body of the bloud of Iesus Chryst which ar of the opinion that thou now settest forth M. And why do they rather folow that opinion than the other P. Bicause that they know well that opinion to be too grosse And therfore they haue recourse to that other maner of presence of the bodie and bloud of Iesus Chryste in the Supper whereof thou haste now made mention M. And what inconueniente fyndest thou in that opinion Peter I fynde not muche lesse therein than in that of Transubstantiation Math. Thou canste not saye at the leaste but that they whiche followe it doe take from the Supper the signes of the breade and of the wyne for so much as they ioyne them wyth the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Chryste the whiche they signifie Peter No more are they also so greatlye different in other matters to them that mayntain transubstantiation And therfore may we lawfully call the opiniō of such men cōsubstantiation M. What vnderstandest thou by this word of Consubstantiation P. As they which haue forged the transubstātiation do vnderstand by the same a changing of substance into an other euen so by the name of consubstantiation a man may vnderstande the coniunction of diuers substances togither Of the agreement that is betwene this opinion that of transubstantiation M. DEclare vnto me then wherin they do agrée and wherin they doe differ Peter For the first if they doe vnderstande that the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Christe bée wyth the breade and the wine in their own nature and substance and by a naturall corporall and materiall maner as the bread and the wyne are there they agrée therin with the erroure of transubstantiation M. It séemeth to mée that they drawe well to one poynte sauing that they make no transubstantiation nor chaunge of the breade and of the wine into the body and bloude of Iesus Christ P. Thou séest it plainely by that whiche we haue alredy sayde thou mayest well vnderstand that such a naturall and corporall presence of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ in the Supper should be cleane contrary to the nature of a spirituall nouriture the whiche is there set foorth vnto vs and likewise to the māner of eating of the body and the flesh and the drinking of the bloud of Iesus Christ according to the whiche they may be eatē and dronkē for spirituall meate drinke The seauententh Dialogue is of the communication of Iesus Christ as wel in Baptisme as in the Supper VVherevnto baptisme and the signification thereof may serue to giue vs to vnderstand in vvhat sorte it behoueth vs to be nourished by the body and bloud of Iesus Christ MATHEVV I Haue well vnderstoode that thou hast sayde that we must be nourished with spirituall meate and nouriture into eternall life and that by a spirituall maner agreable to the spirituall birth and life into the which we are regenerate by baptisme and according to the testimonie of God which is set foorth vnto vs in the same concerning our regeneration P. That whiche thou sayest maye serue vs very much to the vnderstanding of the matter which we now hādle For thou doest wel know that we are not regenerate in baptisme by any corporall or material séede of the body and of the bloude of Iesus Christe nor by any naturall manner as we are naturally begotten by our fathers mothers M. I know well also that we may not enter againe into our mothers womb as Nicodeme said to Iesus christ to be borne a new once more as we are already once borne P. And therefore I doubt not but that thou doest well vnderstande that that regeneration and newe birth is wrought by a séede incorruptible spiritual and diuine by the which we are begotten into the Churche by the vertue of the holy Ghoste by whome we are regenerate into a new life In vvhat sorte vve do communicate of the body bloud of Iesus christ in baptism M. IT is not also said that Iesus Christ doth giue his body and his bloud in Baptisme as he doth in the supper like wise the water is not called therein the body and the bloud of Iesus Christe as Iesus Christ doth in the Supper call the bread the wine by the name of them P. Albeit the the water be not there called in baptisme by that name dost thou thinke for all that that the body and bloude of Iesus Christ be not there distributed and communicated vnto thée in the same as well as in the Supper M. I do not so vnderstand it P. Thou wilte then ordeyne a Baptisme withoute Iesus Christe M. Wherfore P. Bycause thou cāst not haue Iesus Christ except thou haue him wholy and very God and very man and that thou haue true communion with his body with his bloud not only in the supper but also in baptisme M. Shewe me the cause thereof P. It is bycause that the Baptisme doth no lesse sende vs to the deathe and passion and to the body and bloud of Iesus Christe than doth the Supper for somuch as that is proper to al sacramēts VVhat difference there is betvvene the baptisme and the Supper touching the communion of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ M. IT séemeth to me that thou speakest against that whiche thou hast sayde heretofore touching the difference which thou hast put betwene baptisme and the Supper for it séemeth that thou speakest now as though baptisme the supper were one very Sacramente and that there were no difference betwene them P. Thou makest an euill conclusion For albeit that we doe as well participate of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ in baptisme as in the Supper yet notwithstanding there is difference in the participation and in the manner thereof in respect of the benefites of Iesus Christ whiche are signified and communicated vnto vs as wel in the one of the sacramēts as in the other M. I haue not thē wel vnderstoode thée yet heretofore and therfore declare vnto me more easily that whiche thou now speakest of P. Although the body of Iesus Christe be not giuen vnto vs in baptisme as for spirituall foode as it is in the Supper that notwithstanding it is there giuen vnto vs in very déede as a garment of innocencie of Iustice and of holynesse to couer all our sinnes before god And therefore S. Paule saith that all those which are baptised haue put on them Iesus Christ M. And of the bloud what sayest thou P. Albeit that it be not giuen vnto vs in Baptisme as for drinke as it is in the supper yet notwithstāding it is there giuen vnto vs for a spirituall washing of our soules and consciences whereby Iesus Christe dothe purifie and clense his Church in this lauer of