Infirmities Wee returne to the written word of God When the Apostle for the magnifying of the perfection of Christs glorious Resurrection as the Head by Analogy with the promised Corporall Glory of faithfull Christians as his Members by the virtue of Christs owne Resurrection saith of these Phil. 3. Hee shall transforme our vile Bodies and make them conformable to his owne glorious Body namely according to those Celestiall Dotes and Indowments set downe 1. Cor. 11. Incorruption Immortalitie Glory Power By all which the excellencie of the Corporall state of the Saints is delineated whereby to excite all the faithfull to possesse their bodies in sanctity and to prepare them to Martyrdome for the hope-sake of the glory whereof it is said The afflictions of this life are not worthy of the glory that shall be revealed Wee suppose the Apostle could not then dreame of a Body of Christ without facultie of Sense or power of Motion âšœ You must therefore derive this from him whom Christ calleth the Father of lyes Wee shall give you good reason for this our Declamation That this Romish Doctrine is Blasphemously Derogatory from the Majesticall Body of Christ SECT IV. WHat is this which we have heard Christ his humanity after his Resurection not to have so much Capacity as a Child which is as hee is here to understand or imagine any thing done not the power of a Moale or Mouse which is to heare or see not the faculty of a little Ant so as to move it selfe as if this were not an Antichristian Blasphemy against that all-Majesticall Body and humane nature of Christ which being once * 1. Cor. 15. 44 Sowen in Infirmitie is as the Scripture saith since risen in power Do you heare In power saith the Spirit of God shewing that Infirmitie is changed into Potencie in the Body of every Christian and you have turned Power into infirmity even in Christ himselfe whom you have now transformed into an * Psal 116. Idoll having eyes and seeth not eares and heareth not feete and walketh not heart and imagineth not and yet this you professe to adore as the person of the Sonne of God O the strength of Satanicall Delusion That this Romish Doctrine contradicteth your owne Principle SECT V. REmember your * See above 〈…〉 former generall Principle which wee acknowledged to be sound and true viz. All such Actions and Qualities which are reall in any Body without any relation to Place cannot be sayd to be multiplyed in respect of divers places wherein a Body is supposed to be As for example The Body of Christ cannot be cold in one Altar and hot in another wounded and whole in joy and griefe dead and alive at the same time The reason These are impossible say you because of Contradiction for that the same thing should be capable of such Contrarieties it is repugnant to the understanding of man So you which is an infallible Truth when the Modus or Maner of a thing is compared to it selfe and not to any thing else it is necessary that at one and the same time the Modus be onely one the same Jesuit cannot be sicke in Iapan and sound and in health at Rome in the same instant âšœ Take you for a Conclusion the Confession of your much approved Doctor who doubteth not to call the opinion which holdeth that The Body of Christ is imperfect to be 4 Petrus Arcad. Corcyren de Concord Eccles Occid Orient Anno 1626. Approbantibus Episcopo Bargi Episc Zacinth Andraea Eudâ—emone Ioh. Doctoribus Facult Parisien Tract de Eucharistia Dicere corpus Christi esse quandoque imperfectum est mira blasphemia Blasphemous Nor may you deny the Disabilitie of Motion in Christs Body to be an Imperfection seeing that as the Head of your Church taught that which all Christian Churches ever professed to wit 5 Innocent 3. Papa de offic Mâ—ssae lib 3. cap. 22. Quatuor sunt corporis glorificati propriae qualitates Claritas subtilitas Agilitas Impassibilitas Agility is a proper 〈…〉 of every glorified Bodie wheresoever it is And you may call to minde the Conclusion of your Iesuite Conincks above-mentioned Cap. 4. Sect. 10. Shewing that for the Same Body to be sayd to move in one place and stand still in another is as flat a Contradiction as to say It is frozen and warme both at once Which hee confirmed in the Margin with severall Reasons which do accordingly confute your Doctrine of Possibility of the voluntary Motion of Christs Body in Heaven and the Impossibilitie thereof as it is in this Sacrament âšœ CHALLENGE NOw say wee beseech you is there not the like Contradiction to make the same Christ at the same time as hee is in Heaven Intelligent and Sensitive and as on earth Ignorant and Senslesse Or Powerfull to move of himselfe on the Throne of Majestie and absolutely Impotent as hee is on the Altar Because these Attributes of Christ being Intelligent and Potent equally have no Relation to Place Notwithstanding all which you shame not to professe a senslesse ignorant and feeble Christ O come out of Babylon and be no more bewitched by such her Sorceries CHAP. X. The sixt kind of Romish Contradiction against these words Of Christ MY BODY as it is now most Glorious by making it most Inglorious SECT I. BEfore we proceed in discovering the ouglinesse of the Romish Doctrine in this point wee are willing to heare your a In his booke of the Liturgie of the Masse Tract 2. §. 4. Subd 1. M. Brerely his preface in your defence The carnall maâ— saith he is not for all this satisfied but standeth still offended at sundry pretended absurd and undecent indignities Calvin saying That hee rejected them as unworthy of the Majesty of Christ And Doctor Willet saith That they are unseemely and against the dignity of the glorious and impassible Body of Christ So hee at once relating and rejecting their opinions That the Indignities whereunto the Body of Christ is made subject by the Romish Doctrine are most vile and derogatory to the Majesty of Christ SECT II. ALl Christian Creeds tell us that Christ our Saviour sitteth at the right hand of God that is in perfection of glory But your Jesuite Suarez delivereth it in the generall Doctrine of the Romish Divines d Suarez Ies Dicendum tamdiu conservaâ—i Christum praesentem sub speciebus quamdiu species illae ibi ita permanent ut sub ijs possit substantia panis vini conservari Haec conclusio fere colligitur ex omnibus Theologis Catholicis Scriptoribus D. Thoma c. Sequitur falsam esse sententiam illorum qui dicunt corpus Christi recedere si in lutum cadant species In tertiam Tho. quaest 75. Art 1. Disp 46. §. Dicendum Sect. 8. Rursus q 76. Disp 54. §. 2. Christus non receditx hoc Sacramento donec in Accidentibus talis fiat Alteâ—atio quae ad corrumpendum panem
discerning therein Sacramentally exhibited the Lords Body It had therefore concerned him to have honored the Sacrament with Divine Titles agreeable to the Body of Christ hypostatically united to his Godhead and to have denied it absolutely to have beene Bread considering that by the name of Bread the glory of the same Body might seeme to be abased and Eclipsed if in Truth and Verity he had not beleeved it to have beene then properly Bread This Reason we guesse you are bound to approve off who in your opinion of the Corporall Presence of Christ his Body and Absence of Bread would never suffer any of your Professors to call it after Consecration by the name of Bread Whereupon it was that the Greeke o Archiâ—pisc Cabasila Latini nostros reprehendunt quòd post illa verba Hoc est Corpus meum Panem Vinum nominant c. Exposit Liturg. cap. 29. Archbishop of Cabasila complained of the Romish Professors for reprehending the Greeke Liturgies why Because saith he after the words of Christ This is my Body wee call the Symbols and Signes Bread and Wine So he Which bewrayeth that the very naming of the Sacrament Bread and Wine is in the judgement of the Church of Rome prejudiciall to their Transubstantiation and that if Saint Paul himselfe should deliver the same words he did at this day hee should by your Romish Inquisitors be taught to use his Termes in another stile What need many words except in the words of Christ the word Body be properly predicated and affirmed of Bread farewell Transubstantiation of Bread into Christs Body But that it is impossible the Body of Christ should bee properly predicated upon Bread hath beene the Generall Confession of your owne Doctors and the Conclusion of our second Booke âšœ Wee returne againe to the Text where the Apostle having named it Bread after Consecration expoundeth himselfe what Bread he meant saying Bread which we breake But never durst any of your Romanists say that the Body of Christ is truly Broken in this Sacrament and never any Father of Primitive times we are sure taught the Breaking of the Accidents of Bread And therefore it must follow that it was still substantially Bread The Apostle hath not yet done but 1 Cor. 17. sayth Because it is one Bread wee being many are one Body for wee all communicate of one Bread Which Chrysostome is well as other Fathers doth analogize thus * See above B. 2. â—â—ap 2. Sect. 6. Challeng 1. See also Cypriâ—â— and S. August Bâ—â—k 3. Chapt. 3. Sect. 9. That as oâ—â— loafe consisteth of many granes united together so are the faithfull Communicants joyned together So hee hereby teaching you the substantiall Materialls of the same Bread Many granes of Corne. And as though the Apostle had meant to muzzle the Adversaries of this truth with variety of proofes hee 1 Cor 10. 17. hath these words Wee participate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is De pane hoc Of this Bread thus called after Consecration And againe 1 Cor. 11. 28. Let him eate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of this Bread which manifesteth the Eating of a part of an whole loafe of Bread and not of the Body of Christ which even by the Romish faith is not nor cannot bee divided into parts Thus hath Saint Paul the Scholler of Christ concluded of Substantiall Bread agreeable to that which our Master Christ himselfe taught of the other sacred Substantiall part of Drinke after the Coâ—secration of this Sacrament as is proved in the next Section Our Second Proofe of the Continuance of the Substance of Bread is from the speech of Christ touching the Continuance of Wine after Consecration Matth. â— 29. by the Interpretation of Antiquity SECT V. THe same is as fully verified by our Lord and Master Christ himselfe in the second Element of Wine calling it * Matth. 26. 29. This fruit of the Vine that is Wine after Consecration where the Pronoune This hath relation to the matter in the Cup of the Eucharist For the proofe of this our Exposition of the words of Christ wee have the Consent of these and thus many holy Fathers Origen Cyprian Chrysostome Augustine Hierome Epiphanius Euthymius Theophylact and Bede as witnesseth your Iesuite p Origenes Cyprianus Chrysost August Hieron Epiphan Beda Euthymius Theophylact. Genimen Viâ—s ad Sanguinem Christi referunt Maldon Iâ—s Com. in cum locum where he addeth Persuadere mâ—hâ—non possum haec verba ad Sanguinem esse referenda Hoc Patres sed also sensu à Calvinistis qui dicunt Christum Vinum appellâsse quia Vinum erat sed Patres vocâ unt Sanguinem Vanum sicut Christus Carnem Iohan. 6. vocabat Panem Maldon in eundem locum Haec nè illi Calvinistatum errori affinis esse videatur Maldon ibid. Maldonate no one Father produced by him to the contrary Then answering But I saith hee cannot be thus perswaded So hee Marke this you great Boasters of Accordance with Antiquity and yet this maner of Answering the Fathers is most familiar with this Iesuite But hee proceedeth telling you that The Fathers notwithstanding did not call it Wine as thinking it to bee Wine but even as Christ did when he called his flesh Bread Iohn 6. Then hee addeth They that will follow the Exposition of These Fathers are thus to interpret them And gives his Reason of this his Advertisement Lest the other Exposition saith hee may seeme to agree with the erroneous opinion of the Calvinists So hee For which his Answer Calvinists are as much beholding to him as are the Ancient Fathers with whom he hath made bold not only to reject their Authority but also to pervert the plaine and evident meaning of their Testimonies who declare that they understood Naturall and Substantiall Wine as the q Novum promisit id est Novum quendam modum sumptionis in regno id est post resurrectionem quando Cibum sumpsit corporalem Theophyl in Matth. 26. Bibite ex hoc omnes Non bibam amodò c. quâ in parte invenimus Vinum fuisse quod Sanguinem suum dixit undè apparet Sanguinem Christi non offerti 〈◊〉 desit Vinum Calici Cyprian ad Cecil Epist 63. paulò ante medium Epiphan cont Encratit Qui aquam solùm adhibuerunt in Eucharistiaâ— ut dicant vino quoque utendum In hoc sermene Domini inquit redarguuntur Non bibam de fructu hujus Vitis Epiphan Tom. 2. lib. 2. Non bibam de genimine hujus Vitis Christus post resurrectionem nè putaretur Phantasia comedit undè Apostoli dixerunt Act. 10. Comedimus Bibimus cum eo Sed cujus re gratiâ non Aquam sed Vinum bibit ad perniciosam Haeresin radicitus evellendam eorum qui Aquâ in Mysterijs utuntur Idem In nuda Mysterij mensa Vino usus est Ex genimine Vitis Certè Vinum non Aquam producit Chrysost in eum locum Hom. 83. Marginals doe
or Sweet Whereunto we willingly subscribe As for the sayd Qualities which the latter Iusuite answereth to be 21 Ibiden Mihi semper verius est visum non solùm Quantitatem sed alias Qualitates hîc per se existere nullique Subjecto niti ac proinde calorem frigus similes Impressiones extrinsecùs immissas non recipi in Speciebus tanquam in Subjecto proprio sed penetrativè mutuo nexu commisceâ—i mingled with the other Accidents which were inherent in the Host before Consecration the former Iesuit gaine sayeth it because Accidents are not predicated of themselves in the Concrete to wit wee say not of Coldnesse it is cold or of Sweetnesse it is sweet but these are spoken of their Subjects which wee call either Sweet or Gold And this wee likewise approve Seeing then that no Accident can bee predicated but of some Subject and this Subject of Coldnesse Hotnesse Sweetnesse Sowernesse and of other the like Accidents hapning to the same Sacrament after Consecration cannot bee so called either in respect of Quantity or Quality it remaineth that the Subject of them must bee a materiall substance which as you your selves we know will sweare cannot bee the Body of Christ for you dare not say of it that it in your touch or tast is either Cold Sweet or Sower You must therefore give us leave to beleeve it to bee still the Substance of Bread And this our Argument taketh away your Fancy of Accidents without a Subject else must you affirme that he or shee whosoever shall make the Host after it bee Consecrated either Hote Sweet or Sowre doth in so doing make so many Miracles of Accidents which are void of their Subjects which unnecessary multiplication of Miracles both your old and new Schooles have ever controlled âšœ Our First Proofe that Bread remaineth Bread in Substance after Consecration in this Sacrament is by the Iudgement of Ancient Fathers First from due Inferences SECT XI TEstimonies of Ancient Fathers inferre a necessary Consequence for proofe of the Existence of Bread and Wine in this Sacrament as might bee proved partly by the repetition of many Arguments premised and partly by intimation of other Arguments afterwards expressed But wee shall be content with those few which do more properly appertaine to this present Dispute concerning the nature of a Body First Irenaeus speaking of the Eucharist after Consecration as being not now common Bread sayd that r Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 34. Sicut Panis qui est à tetrâ jam non Communis Panis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terren à coelesti Sic Corpora nostra participantia Eucharistiam jam non sunt Corruptibilia sed spem Resurrectionis habentia It consisteth of an earthly part and an heavenly how even as the Bodies of the Communicants saith hee are no more corruptible having an hope of the Resurrection to come Scan these words by the Law of Similitude and it must infallibly follow that as our Bodies albeit substantially Earthly are notwithstanding called Incorruptible in respect of the Glory and Immortality in which through â—ope it hath an Interest Even so the Earthly substance of this Sacrament being Bread is neverthelesse indued with a sacred and Divine property of a Sacramentall Representation of Christ's Body Which Sacrament Origen calling Sanctified meat saith that the Å¿ Origen in Matth. 15. Ille Cibus qui sanstificatur per Verbum Dei Orationem juxtà id quod habet materiable in secessum emittitur And after hee calleth this Mâ—teriale Materia Panis super quem dictus est sermo ibid. Materiall part thereof goeth into the Draught or seege which no sanctified heart can conceive of Christ's Body whereof the Fathers often pronounce that It goeth not into the Draught But what is meant by Materiall in this place thinke you M. * Liturg. Tract 2. §. 11. Subd 3. Brerely namely Magnitude and other Sensible Accidents which in regard of their Significations are materialls So hee Very learnedly answered forsooth If Magnitudo that is Greatnesse bee a Materiall thing bee you so good as tell us what is the matter thereof for whatsoever is Materiall hath that appellation from it's Subject matter Is is the Body of Christ then must you grant which wee with the holy Fathers abhorre to thinke that the Body of Christ passeth into the Draught or is it Bread Then farewell Transubstantiation Nay will you say but they are meere Accidents And we Answer that it was never heard no not in your owne Schooles that meere Accidents were called which are Origen's words in this place either Meats or Materialls Yea and Origen that he might be knowne to understaud Materiall Bread furthermore calleth it now after Consecration Matter of Bread not of Accidents of Bread or yet Accidents signifying Bread for what Papist will say that the Formes of Bread and Wine in this Sacrament after Consecration are Symbols or Signes signifying Bread and Wine and not Symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ S. Ambrose his Comparison is of like Consequence t Ambros lib. 4. de Sacrament cap. 4. Quanto magis est operatorius Sermo Christi ut sint quae erant in aliud convertantur Tu eras vetus Creatura postquam consecratus nova Creatura esse coepisti As one Baptized had beene an old Creature and was made a new one even so speaking of the Bread and VVine after Consecration they being changed into another thing remaine that which they were before But hee you know that was baptized remaineth after Baptisme in Substance the same man although in respect of Spirituall Graces he suffereth a Change Of which Testimony more * See below ch 4. Sect. 2. at the let 〈◊〉 hereafter Cyprian is a Father much alleaged and urged by you in defence of Transubstantiation but is now at hand to controll you u Cyprias lib. de Vnctione Dedit Dominus noster in Mensâ in qua ultimum Convivium cum Apostolis participavit propris manibus Panem Vinum in Cruce verò manibus miliâ—um corpus tradidiâ— vâ—â—â—tandum ut 〈◊〉 Apostolis secretiùs impressa sincera veritas vera sinceritâ—s exponeret Gentibus quomodò Panis Vinum Caro ejus essent Sanguiâ— quibus rationibus Causae effectis conrenirent diversa nomina vel species ad unam reducerentur essentiam ut significantia significata eisdem vocabulis conferentur Our Lord gave in this Banquet saith he Bread and VVine with his owne hands when hee partaked thereof with his Apostles but on the Crosse hee delivered up his Body to the Souldiers to be pierced with wounds to the end that sincere verity and true sincerity having an inward impression in the Apostles hee by them might manifest to the Gentiles how that Bread and wine is his Body and Blood and by what meanes there may be agreement betweene Causes and Effects and how different names
vinum sueceret §. Dico secundò Rursus Quòd Christus recedat statim ut Species deglutiantur antequam alterentur ffist contra generale principium §. Tertio That the Body of Christ remaineth so long under the formes of Bread and Wine whersoever as the same formes remaine in the same plight as that the same formes of Bread and Wine might be preserved And this hee calleth a Generall Principle in your Romish profession Insomuch that the Body of Christ is moved wheresoever the formes of Bread are moved be it into the dirt or into the Dunghill Secondly that according to your e Potest corpus Christi per accidens moveri ab eo qui potest especies consecratas secundùm locum mutare Suarez Tom. 3. quaest 76. Disp 2. Art 7. And Ad motum specierum movetur Christus Bellar. lib 3. de Euch. c. 19. Si per negligentiam aliquid de sanguine stillaverit in terram c. Decret D. 2. Cap. Si per negligentiam Nunquid cadente Sacramento cadit corpus Christi Dic quod sit Glossa ibid And Bozius lib. 14. de signis Eccles cap. 7. telleth of a woman that hid it in a Dunghill See above Chap. 1. Sect. 2. Romish Decrees and publike Missals the same Body of Christ is vomited up by the Communicant yea and you have f A Nauseabundis expuituir Suarez quo supra Si quis stomacho evomit illas species corpus Christi evomit si species possint discernab alijs debent cum reverentia sumi cremari cineres juxta Altare recondi Gloss Decret quo supra Summa Angel Tit. Eucharistia n. 5. pag. 147. Cases about the vomiting of it whether upon weakenesse of g Si fiatâ— usea Sacerdâ—â— pâ—r mâ—scam â—ciden em si aliquid venenâ—sum â—â—â—deret in calicem vel quod provocaset vomitum tum c. Missal Rom. Decreto jussâ— PijV. Pont. edit in instruct ante Missâ—m pag. 35. In hac parte distinctionis ponitur poenitentia corpus Christi vomentibus Decret de Conseâ—rat quo supra Stomacke or of h Si quis per ebrictatem vel voracitatem Eucharistiam evomuerit 40. diebus poeniteat Decret ibid. Dicunt isti quod corpus Christi non intrat ventrem quod falsum est cum species intrant quamdiu enim species manenâ— Christus latet integer sub ijs sic potest evomi Drunkennesse Next that it is devoured of i A muribus comâ—ditur quia Denominâ—tiones qua tanâ—ùm indicant motum localem perterminum ejus propriè tribuuntur corpori Christi à quocunque fiant huju smodi est commestio Suarez Tom. 3. qâ—aest 76. Disp 54. pag 706. Mice and blowne away with Wind for we read of your Church-Cases also for these in your * Si hostia consecrata dispareaâ— vel casu aliquo vel vento vel à mure accepta ut nequeat reperiri altera consecretur Missal Rom. quo supra pag. 32. Missals Nor are you satisfied with these but as if you had some hoggish Appetite delighted with dirt you will have it knowne that as you have * See above in this Booke Chap. â— Sect 2. found the Body of Christ Hid for many yeeres in a Dunghill so will you * See Booke 5. Chap. 11. Sect. 1. hereafter prove it to be found in Mans Seege and Draught That the Romish fore-sayd Indignities are contrary to holy Scriptures and Iudgement of Ancient Fathers SECT III. HOly Writ teacheth us that there is as great differerence betweene the Humiliation of Christ when hee was on Earth and his now Exaltation in glory in Heaven as there is betweene shame and Glory it being now * 1. Cor. 15. Philip. 2. 8. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Body of Glory Now for you to beleeve and professe the personall burning devouring regorging yea and the hiding of that glorious Body of Christ in a dunghill and the like are such execrable speeches as that wee stand astonished with horrour to heare them thinking that wee have heard in these the scoffes reproaches and blasphemies of some Pagans against Christian Religion rather than the opinion of any that take to themselves one syllable of the name of Christians If this had beene the ancient Faith some Fathers doubtlesse upon some occasion by some one sentence or other would have revealed their Judgement therein from whose diuerse and copious Volumes neither do you allege nor we read any one word of mans spewing up or Mice eating or so much as the Wind blowing away the Body of Christ much lesse of the other basenesse spoken of But contrariwise l Origen in Matth. 15. 27. Id quod materiale est in ventrem abit in secessum suum eijcâ—tur Origen and * Cyril Hier. Catech. Mystag 5. pag. 542. Panis hic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrysost Hom. de Euch. in Lucam Num vides panem num vides vinum sicut reliqui cibi in secessum vadunt absit sic ne cogites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyrill distinguishing betweene the spirituall Bread which is the Reall Body of Christ and the Bread Sacramentall say That not that Body but this Bread goeth into the Draught Which to affirme of Christs Body were an Assertion abominable âšœ Suffer us to aske you a question When in the dayes of old as you * See above Booke â— Chap 2. §. 10. in the Challenge know the Remainders of the Sacrament were committed to the fire tell us what that was which was burned was it onely Bread and Wine or yet the Accidents of them only This you cannot say whose Vniversall Doctrine is that so long as the Formes of Bread and Wine are uncorrupt the Body and Blood of Christ are Existent under them Or eâ—se was it the Body and Blood of Christ which was cast into the fire who will not abhorre to conceive such an Abomination to have beene willingly committed by Sacred and Primitive Antiquity and Consequently you ought to execrate all beliefe of a Corporall Existence of Christs Body in the Sacrament within the â—â—â—â—â—dents thereof âšœ That the Romish Answeres for defence of this their vile and beastly Opinion are but false and fond SECT IV. IT was sayd of Philosophers of old that nothing was so absurd but some one or other of them would take in hand to defend it the like may be sayd of our Romish Opposites whereof wee haue given you divers Instances throughout this whole Treatise as in the most particulars so for the point now in Question And although many of your Disputers have for modesties sake passed by it yet have two among you as it were putting on Visards on their faces come in with two fanaticall m Card. Bellar. and Master Brereley in places above-cited Answers Both which are taken from the condition of Christ his humane Body whilest he was in the World n Noâ—nulli vix ferre possunt ChristuÌ„ quoquo modo
shewed in the Third Booke III. Vpon the same Sacramentall and Analogicall reason they have used to say that wee See Touch Tast and Eat Christs Body albeit Improperly as hath beene plentifully declared and confessed in this Fift Booke IV. Because Eating produceth a Nourishing and Augmentation of the Body of the Eater by the thing Eaten they have attributed like Phrases of our Bodily Nourishment and Augmentation by Christs Body which you your selves have confessed to be most Improperly spoken in the same Booke V. Almost all the former Vnions Corporall of our Bodies with Christ have beene ascribed by the same Fathers unto the Sacrament of Baptisme wherein there cannot Properly be any Corporall Touch or Conjunction at all As for example in saying I. That Wee in Baptisme hold the feet of Christ II. Are Sprinkled with his Blood III. Do Eat his flesh have Vnion with him in Nature and not onely on Affection IV. Being made Bone of his Bone and Flesh of his Flesh V. Thereby have a Pledge of our Resurrection to Life And a Pledge as you have now heard is of that which is Absent Each one of these and many other the like are abundantly alleged in the Eighth Booke of this Treatise of the Masse The summe of all these Premises is that wee are to acknowledge in the Objected Testimonies of Fathers concerning the Symbol and Sacrament of Christs Body their Symbolicall and Sacramentall that is Figurative Meanings And lest you may Doubt of the reason hereof we adjoyne the Section following The Divine Contemplations which the Holy Fathers had in uttering their Phrases of our Naturall and Corporall Conjunction with Christs Body and Nourishment thereby to Immortality for the Elevating of our minds to a Spirituall apprehension of his Body and Blood SECT V. YOur Jesuites Bellarmine Tolet Suarez and Vasquez have already instructed you not to take such Sayings of the Fathers as they are uttered lest the Fathers might be held to be Absurd in themselves or Derogatory to the Dignity and Majesty of this Sacrament And they say well But it had beene better if they had furthermore unfolded unto us the Fathers true Mysticall meaning therein which wee must endeavour to do out of the premised Sentences of the same Fathers to the end that you and wee may make an holy and comfortable use of their Divine meditations upon this Sacrament They have sayd I. That Christ hath a Naturall Vnion by his Godhead with God the Father II. That this Godhead of Christ by his Incarnation is united Hypostatically into our Nature of Manhood in him whereby wee have with Christ our Naturall and Corporall Conjunction III. That by the same Hypostaticall Vnion of his Divine and Humane Nature together his Bodily Flesh is become the Flesh of God his Blood the Blood of God IV. That these being the Flesh and Blood of God are become thereby to be Vivificall that is giving Life Blisse and Immortality both to the Bodies and Soules of the Faithfull in Christ V. That the Faithfull by Reason of the Specificall Vnion of their Humane nature with the Humane Nature of Christ are made partakers the reby of his Divine Nature and of all the Infinite Vivification and power of grace in this world and of Glory and Immortality in the world to come wrought by his Death and Passion VI. Both by Baptisme and by the Eucharist wee have a Naturall and Corporall Vnion with the Body of Christ mystically in as much as the Sacrament of Bread and Wine the Choycest Refections of mans Bodily Life are Touched Tasted Eaten and Sensually mixed with our Flesh to the nourishing and augmenting the same untill it become of the Essence of our Bodily Substance unseparably Therfore hath this Sacrament most aptly beene called a Pledge of an unspeakable Vnion of Christs Body with ours unto Immortality and an Earnest of our Resurrection Lastly from this Sacrament there resulteth a Spirituall Vnion continuing in the Faithfull after the Receiving of this Sacrament even all their life long and notwithstanding called by the same Fathers Corporall and Naturall that is as they interpret themselves from the Nature of Faith by believing that Christ had truly a Naturall and Bodily flesh the same Specifically with ours Which Vnion your Jesuites have beene enforced to acknowledge to be in it selfe not Properly a Corporall and Naturall Vnion but Spirituall and Mysticall wrought onely in the Soule But how This indeed is worthy our knowledge as a matter full of Christian Comfort Thus then The Disposition of the Body in Christian Philosophy followeth the Disposition of the Soule For when the Soules of the Faithfull departing this life in the state of Grace and the Soules likewise of the Vngodly passing but from hence into the thraldome of Sin shall resume their owne Bodies by virtue of that Resumption shall be made possessors of Life and Blisse both in Body and Soule and the Wicked contrarily of Curse and Damnation in both according to that Generall Doome Come you Blessed unto the one c. and Goe you Cursed to the other c. Nor will your learned Suarez deny this 22 Suarez in 3. Tho. qu 79. Disp 64. §. 2. Gloria corporis respondet gloriae animae sicut beatitudo animae respondet gratiae charitati ut sicut hoc Sacramentum neque habet nequè haberé potest aliam efficaciam circa gloriam animae praeter eam quam habet circa gratiam charitatem itaque neque aliter pâ—â—est efficere gloriam corporis quam gloriam animae CoÌ„dudit Hoc Sacramentum non aliam conferre vitam immortalitatem corporis quam nutriendo conservando charitatem gratiam The Glory of the Body saith hee dependeth upon the Glory of the Soule and the Happinesse of the Soule dependeth upon Grace therein neither doth the Sacrament any otherwise conferre Immortality to the Body but by nourishing and preserving grace in the Soule Which is Divinely spoken And yet wee have a more Ancient than your Jesuite even Cyprian one of the Ancientest of the Primitive Fathers whose words may serve us for a Comment upon the former objected Sayings of other Fathers Hee in his Discourse of the Supper of the Lord the Blessed Sacrament of our Vnion which the Faithfull Communicants have in receiving it 23 Cyprian de Câ—na Dom. Potus Esus ad eandem pertinent rationem quibus sicut corporea nutritur substantia vivit â—â—colum 〈◊〉 perseâ—erat ita vita spiritus hoc propâ—io alimento nutritur quod est esâ—a 〈◊〉 hoc animae est fides quod cibus corporiâ— est verbum spiritui excellentiori virtute peragens aeternaliter quod agant alimenta carnalia temporaliter As by meat and drinke saith hee the Substance of our Bodies is nourished and liveth in health so the life of the Spirit is nourished with this Aliment For what Meat is to the Flesh that is Faith to the Soule and what Food is to the Body that