that same bread his bodie that same cup his blood where that same bread is called the communion of his body that same cup the communion of his blood doeth altogether shewe that bothe these sayinges are figuratiue or at least wise one of them too witte eyther that of Paule or that of Christ Question To wit that of Paule is to bee expounded out of the proper saying of Christ Answeare Therefore at the length thou arte brought too confesse that whosoeuer doeth mainteine and defende figures in the controuersie of the Sacraments doe not ouerthrowe the Testament of the Sonne of GOD. But to the matter It is easie too shewe out of our seuenth Argument and out of that that went next before that both these were figuratiue whether thou doe interprete that out of this or this out of that as for example both these Propositions This cup for this Wine is my blood and this wine is the communion of my bloode nowe the like is too bee thought of breade it is diuers from this this wine is the licour of the vine which notwithstanding thou must needes say is most proper and therefore so stoutly to bee maintened because as we haue saide ouerthrowing or taking away the substaunce of the signe the foundation of the analogy or proportion shoulde also bee taken away and ouerthrowen Question I would answeare that both Christ and Paule passed this ouer as a thing sufficiently knowen For to what purpose shoulde he haue taught his Disciples that that bread which he held in his handes was breade and that wine But vndoubtedly it behooued him to teach them that which otherwise they woulde neuer haue beleeued too witte that those thinges also which hee helde in his handes and gaue them in vnder or with Bread and Wyne was his body and his blood Answeare Therefore thou must needes determine that the figure Synecdoche is in these woordes This breade and this cuppe and therefore whilest thou studiest to auoyde figures thou fallest into a figure But we will way this Synecdoche in his place to wit when we shal come too the confutation But thou in the meane time shalt not so escape For with what manner and with how great coniunction soeuer thou shalte couple those two vnlike thinges in themselues indeede togeather suche as are the bread and the body wine and the blood yet notwithstanding thou shalte neuer bring to passe that the one may properly be sayd to be the other No neyther in the coniunction can one be sayde to be the other but eyther of them must bee made a certayne thirde thing Therefore this at the least must bee a proper proposition in or vnder or with this bread and wine is my body blood It remayneth therefore that thou confesse that both this saying of Christe and that of Paule whether thou interprete this out of that or that out of this be figuratiue 230. Question Howe therefore doest thou thinke this place of Paule shoulde bee expounded Answeare First of all they are to be confuted who take the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth common for distribution which the matter it selfe cryeth out too be most absurd forasmuch as bread and wine are substances but distribution is an action and Paule himselfe expounding that vseth a woorde that signifieth to participat and the scope it selfe of the Apostle requireth that it declare a communion and not a distribution Moreouer it is woonder that they who allowe no trope in the matter of the Sacramēt that they can in this place interpret the cōmunicating of the body for the bodie communicated or distributed that is cā confound the action with the effect For neither in good sooth doe they this well because they referre this distribution to the word of breaking as though Paule had written the bread which we distribute is the body cōmunicated For the word of breking ought to be taken properly in this action as wee haue shewed before and it appeareth by the word he gaue which is added to the woorde hee brake in the narration of the Euangelist Question What therefore thinkest thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be called Answeare Commmunion and felowship which is the true signification of his word it differeth somwhat frō 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Chrysost noteth although Paule vseth the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indifferently one for the other Such as the Communion is therefore that is to say the naturall societie of all men in the common nature of flesh blood as between themselues with Christ himselfe such is the communion by the goodnesse of God betwixt al the faithful Christ into whom they are engraffed and incorporated Question But by what maner of speach may that breade bee said to be that same felowship and communion Answeare With the Logitians it is called a causall affirmation whereby the proper effect is attributed to the proper cause whether it bee materiall or efficient which manner or fashion is to be referred to the fourth maner of affirming by it selfe as they speake in the schooles Now a figuratiue speach is when the effect is put for the cause or else forsooth for the very efficient cause as for example when Christ is called the resurrection the life for the rayser and giuer of life or the cause of resurrection life or for the materiall cause as when Paule sayeth You are my glory or reioycing the is to say the matter of my glory or reioycing or for the instrumental which also is it self efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say being as it were an vnder seruer as when the Gospel is said to be the power of God to saluation that is to say the instrument that God vseth effectually too saue vs. So also in this place that same Breade and that same wine are sayde to be that communion that is to say the instrumentes whereby that same consociation and felowship of ours is wrought and ratified in vs. Now this same instrument is sacramentall or rather symbolicall and not the verye efficient cause which is the holy Ghost Therefore as that same figuratiue proposition of Christe This bread is my body is expoūded by this This bread is sacramental my bodie so also this saying of Paul This bread is the communication of my bodie is to be expounded by this proper This bread is the Sacramental instrument of our consociation and felowship with the bodie of Christ For there the figure is onely in the Copulatiue that knitteth the matter together to wit a Sacramental Metonymie or translation but heere also in the attribute is a figure which they call Metalepsis too witte putting the effecte for the cause 231. Question But canst thou besides bring forth any other argumentes Answeare Yea that can I. And first of all that same from the essentiall and constituting fourme of all the Sacramentes which is in summ that they may consist of the
made the Sacrament of the blood of Christ and breade the Sacrament of his bodie and wine also of his blood 38. Question But thou a little before diddest cal these partes Answeare I did so and not without cause For these twoo which are causes by themselues are also essentiall partes of the thinges as the Logicians doe very well teach 39. Question Nowe what are the endes of these Sacramentes Answeare Some chiefe endes to wit that Christ as I haue said with all his gifts may more more be sealed in vs othersome not so special as that by this badge also we shoulde bee distinguished from others that make not profession of the Christian faith should bee knit together more and more amongst our selues in mutuall loue 40. Question And is there no more Answeare Yes this also is to be added That the Sacraments are also remēbraunces of thinges past as in the ceremonies of baptisme the powring out of water doth set before our eyes as present the shedding forth of Christes blood the putting into water the cōming out his death burial resurrection also the breaking of bread in the Supper doth after a sort represēt vnto vs Christ crucified for vs. 41. Question These thinges being expounded I woulde gladly learne of thee what the knitting together of the signes the thinges signified is For thou art not ignorant that this controuersie is specially handled nowadaies Whether the body and blood of the Lord be really present yea or no that is in the same place where that bread and that wine is or whether the signes remain as some think or be abolished the accidēts onely remaining as they teache which consent with the Pope Answeare This controuersy is growen so whot and come so farre that for the deciding thereof we neede rather conscience then knowledge but the Lorde alone either by some wonderfull iudgement or some notable example of his mercie will decide it notwithstanding I will endeuour too make it playne when I shall come too speake of the Lordes Supper Now that I may answeare to that which is demanded I say that forasmuche as the thinges signified both in the simple woorde and in the Sacramentes be partly things not subsisting or standing by themselues as the forgiuenesse of sinnes the gift of sanctification the encrease of faith incorporation into Christ and suche like that the questiō of the real presence of the things signified must necessarily bee restrayned to some real beyng Now as I suppose no other can bee put but Christe himselfe And when they with whom wee agree not concerning this matter doe not themselues as I suppose think that Christ should bee deuided as those that complaine notwithstanding vndeseruedly that the same is done of vs because that we denie the reall presence of Christes bodie Doest thou thinke that the state of this question is so too bee taken Whether Christe GOD and man bee present in those places themselues where the Sacramentes are ministred Question So I haue read in some of theyr wrytinges who notwithstanding affirme this not generally of all Sacramentes but onely of the Lordes Supper Answeare I woulde not doubte too affirme the same both of the supper of the Lord and of Baptisme and also after a certayne manner of those Sacramentes which were before the comming of Christ into the Earth neither woulde I think my selfe a Christian if I should denie this 42. Question I am glad that we agree amongest our selues Answere God graunt that at length we may agree Therfore heare I pray thee It cannot be denied but that Christ according too his Godhead is euery where This likewise is without all controuersie that forasmuch as mans nature is so taken of the Woorde that GOD and Man are one reall beeyng it must needes followe if thou consider Christe as some one and singular thing that whole Christ is also euery where present and yet not as in the Sacramentes in which vndoubtedly there must be appoynted some peculiar and special manner of presence as I may so speak that they may be distinguished from other common thinges in which also hee is present The other thing that I would haue wel weighed of thee is this that which is spoken of the whole is not yet spoken of the singular parts being amōgst themselues of a diuerse kinde As for example All the whole that we call man we define to be partaker of reasō which yet thou wilte not say of no essentiall parte of man considered in it selfe And yet there is somewhat in this definition too witte reason which is attributed to that other parte of man euen to the soule Doest thou not see then that whole Christ that is Christ considered as a certaine whole and absolute thing is another thing then all belonging to Christ that is Christ whō thou shalt way particularly by his partes For in this case let it be lawful for me to atttribute also the name of a part to the Godhead 43. Question I see it very well but is there any more Answeare Yea I woulde haue this farther to be marked of thee that certain thinges doo so fitly serue for the establishing of some singuler thing that that which by no meanes can agree by it selfe to some one may yet be attributed vntoo it as it cleaueth is conioyned with another the which thing is so farre foorth true that it may also be sayde of those which yet but accidentally onely and for a time are ioyned together as for example when a King is crowned and is honored in his robes the crowne and his robes are also reuerenced but yet in respect of another thing to witte of his kingly dignitie wherof they are ornamentes not in respect of them selues For heereby it plainely appeareth that the honour and reuerence is not referred too those things because when the king hath put them off no man can endure to reuerēce them vnlesse he bee out of his wits but they are reuerenced for another to wit for the Kinges sake of whom they are worne Neither euer doth the crown or robes grow vp into one real being with the king Much more therefore shall some thing be said in respect of another which is ioyned personally with another which yet can by no meanes in respect of it selfe be attributed vnto it So there is attributed to the worde taking mans nature that which is peculiar to mans nature as when it is sayd that God suffered as also to maas nature Actes 20. 28. that which is peculiar to the woorde taking vpon it mans nature as when in mās nature at what time he talked with Nichodemus in the earth he sayd that Iohn 3. 13. he was in heauen Question These thinges thou hast handled before But thou diddest adde that this was spoken of certaine distinct woordes to witte of God and man But of the abstract to witte of the Godhead and manhoode not so Answeare Vnlesse this be so the confusion of the naturall
be very cruell towardes their newe borne babe so that I shoulde vtterly detest them vnlesse I shoulde vnderstande their meaning to be otherwise Answeare But thou shouldst indeed vnderstand it if I shoulde shewe vnto thee that this were done by the commaundement of God But if so be also I shoulde declare vnto thee by the institution of God that by the foreskinne were signified our natural filthinesses and their fruits which that same sonne of GOD to be borne should take away by the shedding forth of his blood thou wouldest a great deale the rather cōtent thy selfe Notwithstāding thou wouldest desire being taught now the selfe same thing that the same might be shewed vnto thee after a more fit manner and with lesse danger of the infant Nowe if that same simple washing shoulde bee instituted in the place of that bloody cutting of the foreskinne thou wouldest sure preferre this condition before the other And the same reason is there of those slayne Sacrifices which were both laboursom and costly And concerning those same miraculous wonders to wit of Manna falling from Heauen and the water flowing foorth of the rocke these are to be rehearsed in the number of those same figures which were once shewed not amongst the Sacramentes which are perpetual against which our Sacraments are not to be set but the trueth perfourmed in Christe himselfe giuen vnto vs. Question I vnderstand that which thou sayest to wit that the more simple the proportion is the more playne the worde is whereby the signification it self is expressed the more excellent is our condition then our fathers But notwithstanding it seemeth that that same Analogie of the old Sacraments is more playne Answeare Neither doest thou in this point vnderstand what thou saiest For in very deed in circūcision thou seest nothing but the cutting of of the foreskin that is to say thou seest one onely part of the benefite of Christe shadowed And yet neyther ought the olde man onely too bee abolished but also the newe man too bee borne in vs neyther that onelie too be taken away which offended God but also that righteousnes to be geuen wherein he is delighted Now the very water of baptisme and the rites themselues doe they not declare eyther benefite muche more playner vntoo vs And so the difference also of our Fathers feastes and of ours is muche more euident Thou wilt saye that fleshe doth more expresly represent flesh then bread and the slaying of a sacrifice the slaying of Christ admyt it But to what end is Christ slayne vnto me vnles I be a partaker of him Surely no more then dainties set afore mee whereof notwithstandyng I shal not eate Therfore our Sacraments that first parte not altogether pretermitted but yet lesse curiously signified of which we are fully persuaded in the history of the Gospell doe set as it were liuely before our eyes that same other principall parte For in very deede the vse of bread is muche more to the nourishment of this lyfe then the vse of flesh and forasmuch as the life is in the blood and the Fathers were restrayned from all vse of blood which nowe wee are no lesse commaunded to drinke in the wyne Sacramentally then spiritually to eate fleshe in the bread who seeth not that our Sacramentes doe excell those same olde ones euen in the very signes and sacramentall rytes 74. Question Yet there remaineth another doubt howe it shoulde come to passe that the humayne nature of Christ not yet existing in deede shoulde for all that be the thing signified of the olde Sacramentes and so indeede that it shoulde be truely communicated vnto the Fathers Answeare What thinkest thou therefore that the Sacraments of the olde fathers signified For neyther doe I thinke that thou dost agree vnto them who wil haue thē to be certaine resemblances ioyned onely vnto earthly promises Question Surely I consent not vnto that vngodlines which transformeth the people of God into a stye of Hogges But I aske whether they thinke rightly enough who thinke those same giftes in Christ bestowed vppon the Church which if it lacke it cānot be a partaker of euerlasting life to bee promised and giuen also in the Sacramentes of the olde fathers but notwithstanding those were not yet giuen forth which as yet were not Answeare Surely thou doest wonderfully mollifie the harde opinion of these men But I doubt not too say with the Apostle that they did truely and indeed eate the same meate that we doe and dranke the same drinke to witte euen Christ himselfe 1. Cor. 10. 3. 4. GOD and man Question Howe so Answeare First because the Apostle plainely speaketh so Question Yea but the Apostle saieth not in such plaine woordes that the Fathers did eate the same meate that we eate or dranke the same drinke that wee doe but rather that they did eate the same amongest themselues albeeit with a farre other effecte as at this day aswell the Godly as the vngodly are partakers of the same Sacramēts but some to saluation and othersome to iudgement Answeare This Sophisticall startinghole is confuted by foure reasons Firste because that Argument of Sainte Paule were not strong enough if the Sacramentes shoulde bee made vnequall in substaunce and in verie deede Agayne because the Apostle pronounceth in playne and euident woordes that this meate it selfe and this drinke is Christ Thirdly because hee chaungeth the very names of the olde Sacramentes and of the newe attributing the newe vntoo the olde that hee may declare that same thing too bee both in the thing signified and in the vse Fourthly that thing playnely appeareth by the expresse woordes as well of others as also of Augustine in the 45. treatise vppon Iohn and in his Booke of the profite of repentaunce the 102. Iohn 1. 29. 1. Cor. 5. 7. Epistle and elsewhere But nowe if this thing agree vntoo the Figures muche rather is it too bee thought too agree vnto the Sacraments which are perpetuall and which are appoynted to signifie this one thing alone In which sense Iohn the Baptist sayde Beholde the Lambe of God which taketh away the sinnes of the worlde Paule Christ our Passeouer is offered vp 75. Question But what if I shoulde except that all these things signifie nothing else but the onely efficacie or vertue of Christ to come Answere Yea but his efficacie dependeth as wel of those things which Christ should suffer for our cause as of Christ himself Why therefore shouldest thou now bee more offended when I say that the very humane nature of Christ it selfe albeit then it were not notwithstanding that it was truely and indeede geuen vntoo the Fathers in the Sacramentes and sealed vppe in them then that the Fathers were iustified and in very deed sanctified in spirite by the righteousnes of his fleshe which yet was not borne For this is the whole summe of the benifites of Christe Furthermore when thou thinkest that the fathers were made partakers of those
do offer their children to the Priestes to be baptized of them Answeare No not so Question And yet thou sayest that that is a true baptisme Answeare And yet doth not that followe heere of For although that be auaileable that is geuen yet notwithstanding it followeth not that he is without sinne that required it For seing that many things are impure in the Papisticall rytes of Baptisme hee is not deuoyde of sinne which geueth occasion of the vse of thē that I say nothing that so by this means they are nourished in theyr bastardely calling whom those that shoulde chiefly take charge thereof ought by Christes example too driue out of the house of God Question What thinkest thou thē to be done of those fathers who imbracing true religion dwell amongest the Papistes Answeare I aduise thē that they spare no cost and leaue no way vnsought that they may prouide to haue their children baptized purely and that rather they defer their baptisme then become guiltie of those corruptions 146. Question But what if in the meane tyme the childe dye Answeare Surely the chylde it selfe shall not beare the blame and we haue sayd often tymes alreadie that it is not the want of baptisme but the contempt of it in it selfe that maketh a man vnwoorthie of the benefite of the couenant Question But the Lorde witnesseth that it shall come to passe that whosoeuer is not circumcized shal be cut off Genes 17. 14. Answeare If thou vnderstande this of the shutting out aswell from holy exercises of religion as from ciuill fellowshyp because it is added from amongest his people this shal be the manacing that the vncircumcized were neyther admitted to the exercises of religion nor to ciuill offices But if thou take this of the shutting out from the very couenaunt of euerlasting saluation this that is added for hee hath ouerthrowen my couenaunt sheweth that it must bee vnderstood of those onely which willingly and wittingly or els through negligence shall haue dispised Circumcision Yea rather it is certayne that they who lyued so long vncircumcized in the Wildernesse Iosuah 5. 4 yet for all that went to the holy congregations and were accompted Citizens of the commō wealth of the Iewes to wyt because that fell out not through contempte of Circumcision but because it could not bee commodiously ministred in the Wildernesse For it is not probable that Moyses and Aaron woulde otherwyse haue neglected it 147. Question But thinkest thou that there is no consideration to be had of the age of those that are to be baptized Answeare For as much as the profession of faith is required of those that are of the yeres of discretion the more diligent that they shal be in knowing the chiefe and principall pointes of Christian religion the better they shal prouide for them selues But the sooner that godly parentes shal offer their children to bee baptized the better they shall doe least if it might be they shoulde bee depriued of this benefite 148. Question But yet the Male children of the Israelites were not circumcized before the eight day Gen. 17. 12. Answeare Forsooth because there was another lawe that letted pronouncing those to bee vncleane till the seuenth day that had touched a woman in childe bedde Leuit. 12. 2. 15. 19. 149. Question But it is euident that many put off Baptisme long so that euen Gregory Nazianzen the sonne of a Bishop him selfe came not to bee baptized vntill he was euen nowe fully growen and come to rype yeeres Answeare This also manifesteth as many other thinges doe the negligence of many Bishops of vs not in any case to be followed Moreouer Nazianzen himselfe doeth sharpely reprooue euen this same putting off of Baptisme in his oration vpon holy Baptisme with whome notwithstanding I doe not consent in this as also I doe not in certayne other poyntes comprehended in the same oration because hee persuadeth vs to put off the Baptisme of children to the space of three or foure yeares some at lesse or more vnlesse sayeth hee that daunger doe enforce vs in which they myght learne answere some mysticall thing For that very Lawe of Circumcision sheweth that this is a most vayne reason which was giuē aswel as baptisme for the sealing vp of that couenaunt in Christ 150. Question But what tyme thinkest thou the fittest to administer Baptisme Answeare Here in a maner it is incredible to be spoken howe great confusion was brought into the Churches vnder the shewe of order and specially into the Greeke Churches For it is certayne by the Acts of the Apostles that at the beginning baptisme was ministred as occasion was offred they for the moste parte which came vnto Baptisme beeing rather endued with Faith in Christ by miracle then by any order of the institution Afterwardes as it specially appeareth by the seconde Defensory oration of Iustinus the holy Ghost beginning to woorke by litle and litle by ordinary means when the congregations were gathered together baptisme was ministred Afterwardes that all things might be done in order instructers being ordeyned two dayes were at the first by a certayne custome then by lawe and at length as it were by a certaine superstition appointed for the baptizing of those that were so instructed Nowe at the length it was brought to this passe that it was in a maner compted a great trespasse to baptize at any other time then at Easter and at Whitsontide Further vnder the cullour of this order appointed to the end that they that were catechized suche as were in the beginning all those that were to be baptised as well of the Iewes as of the Gentiles should not be called euery day nor before a lawful profession it is in a manner incredible to thinke what confusions were pulled intoo the church especially for that cause because that whereas baptisme in those same that were of the yeeres of discretion was the first entrance intoo the congregation of the Church they coulde not precisely wayte for the sett time of Easter and Whitsontide but they must thinke themselues after a sort condemned who in the meane season fell into the daunger of death And heerevpon that also ensued that they were bounde too discharge an infinite number from those Lawes who also pretended other thinges So crept in that same errour to the absolute necessitie of baptisme which opinion when it seemed to thrust downe all men headlong into hell a wise treacle was giuen of some diuising a certaine place in which they shoulde bee placed which were deade without baptisme through no faulte of their owne neyther shoulde they feele indeede those euerlasting paynes neyther be pertakers of that heauenly blessednesse which also Nazianzen hath taught I omitte other infinite things which may rightly cause Christians being better learned too bee ashamed and were brought in by the meanes of those thinges which at the first were appointed for order sake Question But what doest thou gather of these Answeare That for as