in the death and passion of Iesus Christe and the true and spirituall cōmunion that we haue by the same with all the giftes and graces of the same The second is to yelde thankes vnto him and to giue testimonie of oure faith towards him of our charitie which we haue towards our brethrē and of the vnion with his Church The third to represente to vs by the breade and wyne whyche are there distributed the whole and perfecte spirituall nouriture whiche wée haue by the meane of the bodie flesh and bloud of Iesus Christ to the end that we maye be spiritually nourished into eternall lyfe according to the benefit whiche we haue already receyued by our regeneration whereof the Baptisme is to vs as a Sacramente in the whiche wée haue in the Supper as it were a guage of oure resurrection the whiche wée doe beleeue and wayte for Wherfore euen as the breade and wyne be there giuen to vs visibly and bodily euen so are the bodie and bloud of Iesus gyuen to vs in déed but inuisibly and spiritually by the mean of faith by the vertue of the holy Ghost for he is the meane by whiche wée haue true Cōmunion and true vnion with Iesus Christ and all hys Church the which is his bodye whereof all true Christians are membres Of the signification of the signes of bread and wyne in the Supper and of the agreemente and difference of them with the things that they signifie and of the error of the popish transubstantiation Chap. 40. WE then take the breade the wyne not for the propre body and bloud of Iesus Christe and the very naturall substance of them as if the breade and wyne were transubstantiate and conuerted into that very bodie and bloud to eate and drinke them bodyly and carnally or to worship them as Idols in steade of Iesus Christ as the Papists doe no more do wée take them only as common breade and wyne but we holde them as very signes of that body and bloud which were giuen for vs to death and of the whiche we are spiritually made partakers in dede according to the testimonie which Iesus Christ yeldeth vnto vs by his word in this holy Sacramēt in the meane while the bread and the wine do no more chaunge substance nor qualitie in the same thā doth the water in baptisme or the waxe wherein the seale of the Prince is imprinted also as the body and bloud of Iesus Christe are not naturally nor bodily conioyned with them but only in manner whiche is proper to sacraments that manner is such that albeit the signe be not the thing it selfe which it doth signifie yet is it not without the same whiche is communicated to the faithful spiritually in this Sacramente euen as the signe is administred vnto thē corporally by the meane which hath bene aboue spoken of Of the commemoration of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ in the Supper Chap. 41. ON the contrary we oughte to be assured that this holy Sacramente was not ordeyned to make a Sacrifice in the which Iesus Christe should be offered againe for the redemption of soules as well liuing as dead but to make commemoration of the sacrifice the which Iesus Christe himselfe hath made once of hys owne body and bloud by the whiche he hath once bought and sanctified for euer all the children of god Wherefore he hath ordeyned this holy sacrament to refresh our memorie and to sturre vs vp by this meane to acknowledge him and to render him immortall thanks in waiting that in his last cōming he may appeare from heauen where he now sitteth at the right hande of God vntill the last day Of the Supper and of the Masse of the Papistes and of the principall pointes wherin it is different and contrary to the true Supper Chap. 42. SEing then that the institution of the holy Supper of the Lorde and the ende for the whiche it was ordeined is wholly ouerthrown in the Masse supper of the Papists it is plain that neither the one nor the other not only can not be accōpted for the Supper of the Lorde nor celebrated to suche an ende But ouer and aboue that who soeuer will be accompted a christian and a partaker of the true table of the Lorde maye in no wyse communicate nor assist neyther at the Masse nor Supper of the Papistes if hée wyll not communicate at the Lordes table and at the diuels table altogether For fyrste where Saincte Paule sayeth playnelye that wee must shewe the Lordes death in his Supper and that nothing be declared nor sayde in the Churche but in suche a toung as all men may vnderstand All is sayde in the Masse and supper of the Papiste in a toung which the poore people vnderstande not And they doe not declare vnto them the Institution of the holye Supper of the Lorde The whyche thyng is euen of as greate effecte as yf there were no worde of God at all séeing it is not vnderstoode Without whyche woorde the Supper can not bée the Supper Moreouer the signes are there so confounded with the things which they signifie that they be all one thing wherefore that is as much as to haue sacramēts without signes Thirdly the bread wine are there worshipped as Idols and as Gods newly made wherein there is not one idoll onely but two as if the bloude were separate from the body Fourthly they be there also offered in steade of Iesus Chryste in suche sorte as the masse is holden for a Sacrifice made for the redemption of soules It is holden also for a meritorious woorke whyche bryngeth Saluation vnto men as doth the Deathe and Passion of Chryste Fyfthely is that albéeit there be a certayne kynde of Communyon in the common Supper of the people yet in their Masses there is none at all For so much as the Préest whiche saith it maketh his supper all alone not admitting any one therevnto Wherefore such a supper may better be called an Excommunication than a communication For there is no communication nor communion where nothing is common and where one man alone taketh all that whiche should be distributed to al men in common Now then if there were none other faulte in the masse but only these fiue so muche lacketh it to be accompted the Supper of the Lorde that not only all the true vse of the same is there wholy ouerthrowen but also Iesus Christe is therein fully renounced by those whiche communicate there or beleue it And by the same meane the vertue efficacie of the death and passion of Christe is there vtterly of none effecte and abolished Of the proofe that euery man oughte to make of him selfe to communicate worthily at the supper and of the things required in the same Chap. 43. FVrder seing that the holy supper is ordeyned to suche an ende as hath bene alredy declared none may communicate in the same but to his condemnation which cōmeth
soule from the whiche sinne cheefely doth procéede For the bodie shoulde not sinne at all if sinne were not firste in the soule M. Why sayst thou so P. Forsomuch as the body is but as it were the instrument of the soule by the whiche she worketh and dothe hir workes wherfore if there be faulte in the worke the faulte maye not be attributed to the instrument but rather to the woorker whiche worketh or else if there bée faulte in the instrumente it is greater in the woorker whiche woorketh euill Mathewe Thou wilte then conclude that it was necessarie that Iesus Chryste shoulde suffer for vs not onely in bodie but also in soule Peter He hathe righte well declared it when he sayde My soule is heauie euen to deathe and when he did sweate bloud in great abundance euen for very sorrowe and anguishe that he felte in his soule in the whyche hee hathe suffered more than in his bodie for so muche as he bare the iudgemente of God in the same chéefly whyche the bodye coulde not apprehende but in as muche as the féeling of it is come to it by the meane of the soule Mathew The passage whiche thou haste euen now alledged séemeth to me very cleare and plaine against those whiche estéeme the Godheade of Iesus Chryste to bée in steade of his soule Peter Iesus Chryste hym selfe hathe yet more confirmed that which thou sayest when he yelded vp his spirite vppon the Crosse and that he sayde Father I commende my soule into thy handes M. This passage sheweth playnely that by the death of Iesus Christ there was a very separation of spirite and bodye and so consequently of the soule for so muche as the spirite is also taken for the soule P. The matter is very plaine For if the diuinitie of Iesus Christ had ben in stead of his soule without a very humane soul he could not haue died of a very humane death forsomuch as it can not dye except there be very separation of bothe bodye and soule in man. The nynth Dalogue is of the offices of Iesus Christ Of the signification and exposition of the name of Christ and of his offices the whiche that name doth comprehend MATHEVV I Do now wel vnderstād all the matter which thou hast nowe handled ther resteth that thou expounde vnto me that which thou hast to say yet concerning the office of Iesus Chryste P. Forsomuche as we haue alredy spokē largely inough when we did speake of the meane by the which man is deliuered from sin made agréed with God that whiche we haue already sayd may serue vs much to that whiche yet resteth to be spokē of M. What wilt thou then say more P. We haue nothing here to consider but only that whiche the name of Iesus Christe doth importe M. And what doth it import P. First he is called by the name of Iesus which signifieth Sauior to admonish vs that he was sent vnto vs from the Father to saue vs and that we may haue saluation by none other but by him only M. And what importeth the name of Christ P. Thrée offices whiche belong vnto him for whose cause he is called by that name M. Whiche be these offices P. The office of a prophet of a king and of a Sacrificator M. What signifyeth then the name of Christe whiche comprehendeth so many things P. It signifieth anointed and bicause that in the auncient Churche of Israell the Prophets kings and sacrificators were annoynted by the ordinance of God in testimonie of their vocation and office they were called by that name and in like wise bycause they were true fygures of the very anoynted of the Lorde which is the very sonne of God whyche was anoynted by the holy Ghoste who was giuen to him withoute measure aboue all other men M. Thou wilte then say that Iesus Christ is also named with that name aswell bycause of the same vinction as bycause that all those offices were enioyned to him by the father P. It is euen so Of the office of a Prophete of Iesus Christ and of the per fection of his doctrine M. SHewe me nowe what euery one of these offices importeth and begin by his office of Prophete Peter As concerning hys office of Prophete hée is not onely a Prophete as those whiche in the Scriptures are called by that name but of an other sorte muche more excellent M. What is the difference that thou there puttest P. I finde there difference chiefly in two points M. Whiche is the firste Peter It is that God hathe not spoken in his Church in the person of Iesus Christe onely in the manner that he hath heretofore spoken by his Prophets in sundry sortes more couert and darke but hath spoken by his owne Sonne plainly and with an open face and hathe shewed vnto vs by him the doctrine of saluatiō so fully and perfectly that we may not attende any other perfection in thys worlde as touching that pointe M. Thy meaning is then that seeing Iesus Christ is come vppon earth he hath brought the doctrine requisite in his Churche so perfecte that no man may adde any thyng more therevnto and that none ought frō that time foorth to loke for any more ample and perfecte reuelation and manifestation of the wil of God. P. Sainct Iohn doth witnesse it vnto vs when he saithe that no man euer sawe God but the sōne which is in the bosom of the Father hath declared him vnto vs For this cause Iesus Christe him selfe hath saide that he hath declared to his disciples all that whiche he hath hearde of his Father Of the povver and efficacie of the ministerie of Iesus Christ and of that vvhich he giueth to the ministerie of others M. WHiche is the other pointe that thou hast yet to expounde concerning the difference whereof thou hast made mention touching the office of prophet of Iesus Christ P. It is that Iesus Christ is not a Prophete hauing none other power but to shew foorth the worde of God by mouth as the other ministers of the same do But beside that he hathe the power to imprinte the same in theyr hartes by the vertue of his holy spirite and to giue it vertue and efficacie in thē M. Thy meaning is then that the other prophets and ministers of the worde of God haue not that power P. Not of them selues but so farre foorth as Iesus Christ doth worke in them and in their ministerie by the diuine power of his holy Spirite And therefore when he commanded his Apostles to go and preache the Gospell and did giue vnto them power to pardon retaine sinnes by him he foorthwith gaue vnto them the holy Ghost brething vppon them in token of the same and afterwarde did send him to them vppon the daye of Pentecost after that he was ascended into Heauen M. I thinke that that whiche thou saist is the cause why Sainct Paule sayd he that
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
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
Chryste thorough faythe after that GOD by the same hathe iustified vs by his holye Spirite in Iesus Chryste oure Lorde he dothe also sanctifye vs communicating vnto vs his gyftes and Graces whyche are the frutes of Faythe to the ende that we shoulde bée dedicated and consecrated vnto hym all the dayes of our lyfe to serue and honour hym as hys childrē regenerate by his holy spirite into a newe life Ma. Thou doest reporte faith to iustification and charitie to the worke of sanctification whiche are both works of the holy Ghost P. Thou maiest vnderstand it by the discourse whiche we haue already made of iustification and sanctification In vvhat sorte charitie is necessary to saluation M. CHaritie is not then necessarie to saluation nor other like vertues but faith only P. It is necessary there vnto and not necessary M. I do not well vnderstand this speache for it is contrary in it selfe P. I say that faith is necessary therevnto as cause of saluation withoute the whiche we cannot obtayne it for the causes which I haue alredy declared For somuch as it is the instrument the whiche the holy Ghoste giueth vs wherewith to receiue him when he is offered vnto vs by Iesus Christ and the meane whereby he doth communicate him to vs in hym and by him But charitie is not there ioyned as a cause of saluation without the which we cannot be partakers of it but as a thing ioyned vnto it the whiche followeth faith in suche sorte whiche is the true cause of saluation as I haue already sayde that she cannot be separate no more than the heate from the lighte or the mouing or féeling from the life and from the soule But yet notwithstandyng we haue not saluation thereby no more than brightnesse by the heate the whiche we haue of the lighte or else life by the motion and féeling M. Charitie then and good workes may not be taken for causes by the which or by whose meane we obtaine saluation but onely so farre as they cannot be separated frō true faith by the which we ar made partakers of it P. It is euen so M. Thou hast here opened vnto me one point that was very harde to vnderstande the whiche séemeth to me very well worthy to be diligently noted For there bée fewe whiche do well vnderstande it Peter If all men did well vnderstande it there woulde be no more differente betwene the Christians touching iustification and touching faith and workes and grace and merites and the causes of oure saluation for that whiche we haue sayde of charitie is also vnderstoode of all the other vertues and workes of the regenerate man as I haue alredy sayde whiche are the frutes the which Saincte Paule doth call the frutes of the spirite and the which he doth oppone to the frutes of the flesh Of the regeneration of a Christian man. M. SEing that thou arte lighted vppon the pointe of regeneration me thinketh that it should be also comprehended among those giftes of the holy Ghost the which thou sayest do belong but to the elect of God and be so necessarie to saluation that none may attayne vnto it without them P. It must be so vnderstoode for it is of the chiefe of them and in very déede it is the principall pointe whiche maketh vs to vnderstande the cause why we do cal worke of viuification and sanctification that thirde worke of God whereby we say that God hathe declared himselfe vnto men Ma. Expounde the same to me somewhat more plainely P. Thys worde of regeneration as thou mayest well vnderstande emporteth as muche as a man moughte saye newe birth as if after that we are once borne we are borne yet agayne Mathevve I sée well that the worde of regeneration importeth euen so Peter And therefore it importeth foorthwith a reformation of the man whiche is a rising agayne from the deade whiche is wroughte in the Spirite as the last resurrection shall be wroughte in the fleshe Mathevve What meanest thou by that resurrection of the Spirite Peter Séeing that thorough sinne man is deade of spirituall death whiche bringeth afterwarde death of the body he is as it were risen from that deathe when by Iesus Christe he is in suche sorte delyuered from sinne that he is by the vertue of hys holye Spirite made as it were a manne thoroughly newe or as a manne who hauinge béene deade shoulde haue recouered hys lyfe and shoulde bée raysed agayne Mathevve Thou puttest then so great difference betwene the man whiche abideth still in his firste nature corrupted through sinne and hée which is deliuered from the same corruption and is quickened and regenerated by the holy Ghoste as thou puttest betwene a dead and a liuing man. P. There is no difference but in asmuch as the spirituall death is much more worthy to be called death than is the corporall death and that the estate of the man dead thorough sinne is much more perillous and daungerous than is the estate of the man which is dead but bodily Of the life of the regenerate man. M. Séeing that man is as it were risen from death and borne a new when he is regenerate by the holy Ghost it followeth then necessarily that he do other works after that he is regenerate than he did before his regeneration P. Thou mayest wel vnderstand that if there be so greate differēce betwene the mā regenerate the not regenerate as is betweene a dead and a liuing man it must also necessarily come to passe that there bee as great difference betwene the workes of the one and the other M. I do euen so vnderstand it P. And therfore Iesus Chryst hath sayd that what is borne of fleshe is fleshe and what is borne of the spirite is spirit For euen as a dead bodie can bring forth but infection and corruption euen so on the contrary a liuing body doth the works of lyfe bicause of the liuing soule that he hath more than hath the dead bodie M. It foloweth then that the faith wherby man is viuified and regenerate is vnto him as the soule which bringeth to him spiritual life and that the vnfaithful and not regenerate man is as a body without a soule P. S. Paule following the prophet Abacuk giueth thée playnly to vnderstand that it is so by that whiche he sayth The iust man shall liue of his faith Wherefore if the iust man do liue of his faith it followeth then that Faith is to his soule to giue it spirituall lyfe that whiche the naturall soule is to the bodie to giue it corporall lyfe Mathevv There are then two things to be considered in the regenerate spiritual man to wit Faith which is in him as the soule whiche giueth him spiritual lyfe euen as the soule naturall which giueth corporall lyfe to the body then the workes of the spirite are ioyned to it which are the works of faith which is the spiritual soule euen as the works of life
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
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