lesse Quando suppetet Pascha beatius cibusque coelestis in Regno Dei since hee had a more blessed Passeover and a heavenly banquet in the Kingdome of God PAR. 2. IT is a true Rule that not onely the prepositions before after untill unto from and the like which denote or signifie the bounds limits either of time or place either initiall or finall and determinative but all other descriptions or circumscriptions of time space or place are ambiguous and sometimes include sometimes exclude those very bounds assigned out Before the day of the Passeover the word before saith Illyricus sometimes includeth sometimes excludeth the very day of the Passeover when it is to be understood inclusivè the sense is Ante diem Pasche terminatum vel finitum before the day of the Passeover was terminated or ended yet commonly it is used exclusivè so after three dayes Christ shall rise againe Marke 8.31 and after three dayes he said he would rise againe Matth. 27.63 by which expressions is not meant that he would rise againe the fourth fifth sixe or seventh day or any time after that but the third day is included not excluded for his Resurrection was fore-prophecied of by Christ himselfe that it should be accomplished on the third day Matth. 16.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 raised againe the third day and accordingly it was performed Christ rose againe the third day saith the Apostles Creed He rose againe the third day 1 Cor. 15.4 according to the Scriptures After sixe dayes Jesus taketh Peter and James and Iohn and bringeth them unto an exceeding high mountaine Matth. 17 1. Marke 9.2 yet is it varied Luke 9.38 about an eight dayes after The reconciliation is faire the word after in S. Matthew and Marke excludeth dies terminales It was not in any part or parcell of the sixe dayes they were fully ended and passed but the preposition after in S. Luke excludeth them So Christ became obedient unto death Phil. 2.8 and though the word unto be often exclusive yet because Christ came not onely to the gate doore or chamber of death but passed through them and really truely was dead therefore death is not here excluded but included in the word usque or unto 1 Sam. 15.35 Samuel came no more to see Saul untill the day of his death usque ad that is from the houre neither before nor then nor after I have the more insisted on this Rulebecause it removeth many seeming contradictions in Scripture which the ignorant are not able to reconcile but swallow downe with their difficulties and now I descend unto the word Donec or untill to the further clearing of these difficult words Donec or untill the first is affirmative Matth. 28.20 I will be with you unto or untill the end of the world which promise proveth not that he would not be with them after the end of the world but rather that he would be much more with them in another world though he would not desert them here Psa 110.1 Sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footestoole grosse is the man who hence inferreth that Christ shall not sit at Gods right hand when Christ shall tread upon his enemies now he doth raigne over them even whilst there is opposition and shall much more hereafter when they shall be under his feete here Donec also affirmeth of the future times PAR. 3. THe second force of Donec is negative defuturo for the time to come Matt. 1.25 non cognoscebat eam donec peperit He knew her not untill shee had brought forth c. he meaneth not that after her sacred child-bearing Ioseph knew her for it is an Hebrew Idiotisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 donec the word untill excludeth without exception expressely till such a time and leaveth it implicitely to be understood that much lesse was it done or to be done afterward Rem nunquam factam certo tempore exprimit non factam quô videri facta poterat scireque necessaria erat non factam Excellently saith Lucas Brugensis he expresseth a thing never done by the not doing of it at a certaine time viz. at such a time as in all likelihood all others would have knowne their wives upon a new marriage but Ioseph did not so much no not at that time much lesse did he so afterward Michal the daughter of Saul had no child untill the day of her death 2 Sam. 6.23 Stupid is he who concludeth that she had children or a child after her death The Resultance is rather and firmer thus If shee had no child till her death much lesse had shee one after Ioseph knew not the blessed ever-Virgin Mary till she was delivered much lesse did he after that In both these passages the force of donec is negative So here I will not any more eate thereof till it be fulfilled not here much lesse hereafter in heaven where we shall have a more blessed Pascha sine intybis vel amaritudine without any bitter Sallet the like may be said of the word untill in the 18 verse but what is the kingdome of God Or how is the Passeover fulfilled in the Kingdome of God I answer by the Kingdome of God in this place is not meant the Militant Church but the Triumphant Origen Euthymius and others here appropriate it to the future world and in the world to come the Passeover is thus then fulfilled and perfected because the Iewish Passeover was to be eaten with bitter herbs and that Passeover was accompanied with a second Supper nor were all and every one blessed that tooke the Passeover therefore was it in a manner imperfect but blessed are all and every one who are called to the Marriage-Supper of the Lambe Rev. 19 9. and in that Supper is nothing wanting all sorrow excluded all joy prefected the Type being drowned in the glory of the great antitype an happier Supper an happier Passeover shall be in heaven This manner of speech perhaps hence arose saith Illyricus because the Writer would determine onely for his owne time or the time he propounded to handle and cared not to speake of further or remoter times as it was principally intended and all things were accordingly prepared that Christ might eate the Passeover Marke 14.12 So it is most true Christ sate not as an idle spectator but he did indeede eate the Passeover and promised never to eate it more PAR. 4. WHat else Luke 22.17 He tooke the Cup and gave thankes and said Take this and divids it among your selves for I say unto you I will not drinke of the fruit of the Vine untill the Kingdome of God shall come that this was not the Eucharisticall Cup appeareth by the Sequell where he instituted the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood PAR. 5. BUt what mean these words I will not drinke of the fruite of the Vine untill the Kingdome of God shall come What is the fruite of the Vine which then shall be drunken the
wine saith Lucas Brugensis Non exvirtute vitis sed ex Dei fruitione proficiscitur that wine shall not flow-forth from the blood of the Vine but from the beatificall fruition of the face of God Psal 36.8 They shall be abundantly satisfied with the fatnesse of thine house and thou shalt make them drinke of the river of thy pleasures inebriabuntur ab ubertate domus tuae they shall be drunken with the plenty of thine house as it is in the Vulgar Bellarmine de Sacramento Eucharist 1.11 in fine cap. 4.10 saith truely and exquisitely to the purpose the first cup of wine in Luke ended the Pascall or the Supper of the Paschall-Lambe So also thinke Theophylact Montanus Beda Cajetane Carthusian but if you will see the point handled at large have recourse to the first cited place of Bellarmine the best Nectar I appoint you a Kingdome that yee may eate and drinke at my Table in my Kingdome Lvk. 22.30 Math. 8.11 Many shall sit downe with Abraham Isaac and Iacob in the Kingdome of Heaven not as if Christ and his Disciples did place eternall felicity in sensuall pleasures as the Turkes doe at this day but by these outward things the inward is sigured Titus Bostrensis haec eâ de causâ non asserit quasi ullus istic denuo mensae aut esculentis locus futurus sit sed quod res spirituales rebus apud nos usitatis exprimere voluerit that is our blessed Saviour doth not therefore speake this as if there should be any place hereafter for tables or meate or drinke in the Kingdome of God but that hee might expresse spirituall things by carnall things things that are frequent and usuall amongst us i. you shall enjoy all possible spirituall pleasures with me Beza hath an old exposition upon usque quo completum fuerit untill it be fulfilled S. Paul saith he 1 Cor. 5.7 best cleareth the sense Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us for from that time compleate Christ doth feast with us and we with him in the Kingdome of God which truth that figure designe Beza on Matth. 26.29 Non bibam ab hoc Tempore ex hoc fructu vitis usque ad diem illum quùm ipsum bibam vobiscum novum in regno Patris mei bie sermo vel Metaphoricè accipiendus est in posteriori membro de convictu ac si diceret Dominus adhuc vobiscum vixi ut homines cum hominibus consueverunt ab hoc Tempore desinet vitae istius consuetudo siquidèm vobiscum non ero nisi in Regno illo aeterno ubi aliam vitam vivemus that is I will not from henceforth drinke any more of this fruite of the Vine untill the day when I shall drinke it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome this saying is either to be understood metaphorically in the latter member of it concerning his manner of living with them as if the Lord should have sayd hitherto have I lived with you as men use to doe with men but henceforth that manner of living shall surcease for I will not be with you any more but in that eternall Kingdome where we shall live another manner of life or saith he this is to be referred to that which is written Act. 2. that Christ to make his Resurrection beleeved did eate 40. dayes with his Disciples not for necessity nor as other men doe usually eate because he had put off all bodily infirmity which is signified here under the name of the Raigne of his Father to which those words seeme to have reference Mat. 16.28 Some here shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man comming in his Kingdame So Beza That this cup was part of the second Supper I see no probability the words praecedent of eating the Paschall-Lambe co-haering so strictly to the drinking afterward of the wine used also at the Paschall doe evidently evince that all this was done at the first Supper onely of the Passeover PAR. 6. MAldonate thinkes Christ speakes twice of the same cup because the words which S. Luke here useth of the first cup I will not drinke of the fruite of the Vine untill the kingdome of God shall come Luke 22.18 is in substance repeated and applyed to the most sacred cup Mat. 26.29 Mar. 14.25 But Maldonate is deceived for in S. Luke he spake of the wine at the Paschall as is most apparent and it is as apparent that S. Matthew and S. Marke doe apply the like words to the Vine Eucharisticall and there is no incongruitie to say that Christ did repeate the substance of the same words twice on two severall occasions for he never dranke of either of those cups afterward either of that belonging to the Old Testament or of that which belongeth to the new-law of grace Secondly the very variety of words which are used by the severall Evangelists prove that he spake not twice of one and the same cup but of severall and distinct cups so much for the words spoken at the eating of the Passe-over PAR. 7. IF any object Christ brake the Law because by the Law their especiall Table-talke was appointed of which before and the children were to aske and the men to answere as it is Exod. 12.25.26.27 but here was no such thing at the eating of the Paschall but other discourses which now I have recited I answere blessing and giving of thankes and divers other things are omitted in words which we may be sure were performed in deedes and why might not this rite be performed though it be not recorded Secondly I answere if Christ at his last eating of the Paschall-Lambe mentioned nothing concerning the deliverance in and from Aegypt I say he therefore might well omit the type because he spake of the substance at least implicitely of the Sonne of man and his death to deliver mankinde from hell of the fearefull woes due to the Traytor worse than the Aegyptian drowning of heavenly promises and food spirituall at the heavenly Table which super-coelestiall Manna farre exceedeth the being carryed on Eagles wings and being enlightned by a Pillar of fire by night and guided by a Pillar of clowd in the day or their Manna on earth of Christs ardent desire to eate the Passeover with his Apostles the Law required the performance onely a fervent desire to eate it was more than was commanded of the voluntary death of the worlds Saviour under the covert of these words The Sonne of man goeth indeede 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vadit of the going out of this world to his father Iohn 13.1 even by the phraze of Transitus or Passeover ut transeat ab hoc mundo ad patrem to passe out of this word unto his father as the Vulgat translates it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 better then Beza his digrediatur goe away of Gods determination that the Sonne of man should fulfill his will of Judas his treason against the innocent blood of Christ which was to be
when he said Drink yee all of this lest the hearers should say Why drinke I blood and eate flesh To keepe them from being troubled at it as they were troubled when many fell off from him he dranke his own blood first himselfe So Titus hath it the Abbreviator of him Isychius on Leviticus 8. as I guesse verse 23. Moses tooke of the blood of the Ramme and put it upon the tip of Aarons right eare and on the thumbe of his right hand and upon the toe of his right foot And verse 24. He did the like afterwards to Aarons Sonnes Not onely on their thumbes but verse 27 He put oyle upon Aarons hands and upon his Sonnes hands Not onely on his hands But verse 30. Moses tooke of the annointing Oyle and of the blood which was on the Altar and sprinckled it upon Aaron first and his garments and upon his Sonnes and his Sonnes Garments and sanctified both Aaron and his Sonnes and their Garments Isychlus addeth Christ in that Supper first dranke his blood Then gave it to his Disciples Yea but it is not read that he ate his Body and dranke his blood Soto answereth It is read that He Tooke the bread He Tooke the Cup and though it must be expounded He Tooke them into his hand or hands yet it is not said He tooke them into his hands onely but He tooke them himselfe as he commanded his Disciples to take them Therefore when he said to them Take eate drinke so when He tooke them it is deducible He did after the same manner eate and drinke The old Rimer before cited is authentique enough in this last point Se tenet in manibus se cibat Ipse cibus Christ in his hands Himselfe did bring The Food and Feeder being one thing Soto bringeth another objection Betweene the Receiver and the thing Received there is a Division But Christ is not divided from himselfe Therefore he could not take himselfe It is answered saith he Christ is not compared to the place by his proper Dimensions but by the Dimensions of the severall Species so that wheresoever They are there is his body and blood Therefore because he had the bread and wine in his mouth and stomach when he ate Them he did eate himselfe And to this there needs no division between the receiver and the received PAR. 2. A Third Objection by him urged is this There is a double eating of the Sacrament Spirituall Sacramentall Christ needed not the spirituall receiving for he received no Grace from the Sacrament The Sacramentall reception is improper proper to sinners onely and so unfit for Christ He answereth with Aquinas Christ received himselfe both Spiritually and Sacramentally And so before Aquinas Alexander Hales settled at last in that opinion For though Christ received no increase of Grace or Charity by the Sacrament because he needed none yet he received a spirituall Taste and sweet enjoying of Delight which are effects of this Sacrament So he tooke it also Sacramentally To take it Sacramentally without increase of Grace hapneth from hence that the Receiver Then is not capable of Grace And this may come to passe two wayes Either because he puts an impediment or block against it as he is a sinner or because a man is so full of Grace that he cannot receive an Increase of Grace as Christ was Much of this discourse proceeded from the learned Dominicus Soto Confessor to Charles the Fist which because he most inlargeth Aquinas I have translated and cleared and inlarged him To conclude let me adde that Christ might well take the blessed Eucharist himselfe for example sake to Teach us what we should doe who may recieve much good by taking it and should imitate him by taking it first our selves before we administer it unto Others For thus did he doe diverse Actions in his life to Teach us to doe the like Gregorius de Valentia Tom. 4. in Tertiam partem Thomae Disputat 6. Quastione 9. Puncto 1. pag. 1095. agreeth with Soto and useth most of his arguments producing nothing of his owne Cajetan in his Commentaries in Tertiam partem Thomae Quaest 82. seemeth to approve Durand for saying That the Apostles though they did concaenare cum Christo yet they did not concelebrare Christ did it by himselfe the Apostles did not assist him in Consecration but he leaveth Aquinas without exposition in the maine point Whether Christ are his owne Body and dranke his own Blood Franciscus Lucas Brugensis on Matth. 26. saith in these words Christus ipse comêdit priusquam discipuli ejus qui tamen non comêdit priusquam pronuntiasset haec verba Hoc est corpus meum Christ did Eate before his Apostles did yet did he not Eate before he had said This is my Body Lastly all the Fathers who say Christ communicated with Iudas are clearely for the Affirmative If by these words My Fathers Kingdome Matth. 26.29 and these The Kingdome of God Mark 14.25 the blessed Eucharist be pointed at and meant as is likely then apparent it is Himselfe dranke of his owne blood in the sacred Eucharist for he professed He would drinke no more of the fruit of the Vine but onely in the holy Eucharist Bishop Lake in his Sermon upon Matth. 26.26 c. saith It may well be presumed that Christ did receive it Himselfe For in his owne person he did sanctifie and honour both Circumcision and the Passcover Also he was baptized and sanctified the water of Jordan Why should we question his Taking of the Eucharist That he did so needed not to be expressed because of the correspondency of This Sacrament to That of the Passeover Indeed Christ needed not partake But by his owne participation he gave vertue to all the Sacraments So he needed not to die for Himselfe but he dyed for us To this effect that holy and learned Prelate now a great Saint in heaven PAR. 3. I Now come to the next points unexpressed 1. What Posture Christ used when he consecrated the Eucharist 2. What Gesture They used when they Tooke it Of which in the seventh Chapter Some there are who say That all the Gestures which we use in religious worship may be brought to Two heads Some belong to Hope as first the Lifting up of the eyes which doe crave or expect some good thing Secondly the Lifting up of the hands to reach at mercy offered or set forth The other Gestures belong to Humiliation as the Uncovering of the head is as the laying downe of the crowne glory and majesty that Man hath and a baring of Mans merit or emptying himselfe of worth to give it to the party worshipped Secondly the beating of the Breast shewing that in it is sin which ought to be expectorated Thirdly Bowing of the Knee which is a great token of the hearts contrition But somewhat is defective in this Dichotomy of which more fully hereafter I returne to the Queres Concerning the first Remember what I writ in the
words did sufficiently enough declare the Traytor for divers might dip-together with Christ and in likelihood divers did dippe yet did they make the galled-horse to winch when Christ said It had beene good for that man if he had not beene borne whereupon Iudas alone replied Master Is it I Matth. 26.25 and Christ replied Thou hast said PAR. 11. VVHich words Thou hast said though they be an Hebrew Idiotisme and plaine enough to those that are skilfull in that language yet in another Language they are ambiguous and reserved enough The Apostles now spake Syriacke and perhaps were not then acquainted with the more learned proprieties of the holy tongue I acknowledge that Matth. 26.64 and Luke 22.70 the words are to be taken for the affirmation of a question yet it may be doubted whether of malice they did so interpret them that they might the rather condemne Christ I am sure when Christ said to Pilat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou sayst Matth. 27.11 Pilat esteemed it not for an affirmation for then he would and must have condemned Christ as publikely professing He was King of the Iewes and durst not have excused him as he did for feare of Caesar his Master The words Thou sayest are ambiguous and to any to all of the Apostles who likewise interrogated Is it I Christ might have sayd Thou sayest Christ could have sayd O sordid and wicked Judas thou haste a long time sate abrood on this evill and of late hast concluded for money darest thou as an innocent man interrogate me to thy question Is it I take this answere thou sayest Terminos nobis ac regulas tolerantiae figens oblivion is injuriarum Thou sayest the truth or a truth or the matter questioned may be here understood a full and cleare light of detection as yet shineth not These are all the things which S. Matthew or S. Mark have recorded of the words or deedes spoken or done at the eating of the Paschall-Lambe If any object that I leave the businesse of Judas imperfect let him consider that our blessed Saviour during the Passeover and till that Supper was ended did leave the designing of the Traytor in ambigno so that the Apostles knew not perfectly whom Christ meant they might perhaps upon some of those severall Indicia or discoveries which Christ made guesse at the Traytor certaine knowledge of him they had not Simon de Cassiâ thinketh Christ did purposely with-hold the Apostles from understanding when he described the Traytor lest they would have made a tumult Aquinas before him Theophylact and Chrysostome thinke Peter would have killed Iudas yet Simon de Cassiâ might have remembred that our blessed Saviour could as well and as easily with-hold his Apostles from a tumult and Peter from killing Judas as he could keepe the Apostles from understanding what he meant by words not very obscure Barradius judgeth that if the Apostles had infallibly knowne Iudas to be the Traytor they would have laboured to convert him I answer could not Christ himselfe have done it more easily if he would and if they had laboured to convert him would Iudas have regarded their words who regarded not the words of Christ and who after so many warnings so many reproofes and menaces intermixed also with many kinde offices done to him by our Saviour yet would not be recalled I rather imagine our Saviour at the eating of the Passeover made no exact and perfect discovery of him because his sinne not full and ripe as then his conscience might recoyle and be on the stayes he might doubt feare and vary from himselfe but as Treason did grow upon his soule more and more so were the detections proportionable and none beyond the present intentions of Iudas when our blessed Saviour spake degrees of detection answered the degrees of Iudas his entertainment of sinne and courting it nor may a man doubt but at that instant when Christ spake in the present tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traditur Is betrayed Matth. 26.24 even then the Treason was in Iudas often before Christ had foretold them he should be betrayed when Iudas began to undertake the Treason Christ spake more clearely of it and the more his heart was hardened the more did Christ detect him but a full discovery of the Traytor was not clearely made to the Apostles was not made at all at least till towards the end of the second Supper though Iudas perhaps understood every word but in the second Supper you must heare more of this He named him not Ne irritaret cum ut conscius agat poenitentiam saith Hierome lest he should stirre up his conscience unto Repentance Leo Ser. 7. de Pass Notam sibi esse proditoris conscientiam demonstravit non asperâ apertâ eum increpatione confundens sed leni tacitâ admonitione conveniens ut facilius corrigeret poenitendo quem nulla deformâsset abjectio that is hee made demonstration that he knew well enough what was in the Traytors conscience in that he did not reprove him sharpely and openly but admonish him gently and privily that so he might the more easily draw him to repentance The Prayer WHom have I O Lord in heaven but thee and there is none on earth nor any thing that I desire besides thee keepe me ever in this constant love I beseech thee and if thou vouchsafest unto me but the meanest degree of glory if I may but eate of the crummes that fall from thy Table my soule shall be refreshed and I shall for ever magnifie thy holy name through Jesus Christ my Mediator and Advocate Amen CHAP. XXIII The Contents of the three and twentieth Chapter 1. Christs hearty desire to eate his last Supper 2. The words before after untill unto from c. are particles sometimes inclusive sometimes exclusive 3. Donec or untill negatively used de futuro 4. Kingdome of God what 5. He tooke the Cup not the Eucharisticall Cup fruit of the vine spirituall Nectar Turkes place eternall felicitie in sensuall Pleasures 6. Maldonates error concerning the Cup. 7. Spirituall Table-Talke at Christs last eating of the Passeover 8. Methodus rerum aut Historiae not alwayes observed in Scripture the Originall of greatest authority nothing to be altered in the Scriptures PARAGRAPH 1. SAint Luke hath most considerable varieties Christ said With desire have I desired to eate this Passover with you before I suffer that is I have heartily desired to eate it with you Luke 22.15 Tertullian Contra Marcion 4.46 rendreth it concupiscentiâ concupivi the reason of his desire annexed by S. Luke which is omitted by all the other Evangelists For I say unto you I will not any more eate thereof donec impleatur untill it be fulfilled in the kingdome of God Luke 22.16 He meaneth not saith the learned Lucas Brugensis that he would againe at another time eate the Paschall-Lambe especially in the Kingdome of God but that he would eate it no more in this world much
the one and twentieth Chapter Par. 1 PErerius his fift Ceremony bodily posture the ancient Jewes and Romans sate at Feasts Fol. 186 Par. 2 Discumbing at feasts Fol. 187 Par. 3 Pererius his 6. Ceremony omitted Fol. ib. Par. 4 Pererius his 7. Ceremony supping on high beds The woman standing behinde Christ Fol. ibid. Par. 5 Pererius his 8. Ceremony Fasting bare-footed washing of feete practised in Abrahams daies Fol. 189 Par. 6 Pererius his 9. Ceremony lying in the bosome Abraham's bosome Fol. ib. Par. 7 Pererius his 10. Ceremony highest roomes at feasts the chiefest guests sate in the chiefest and highest roomes which place in discumbing was the highest whether Christ in the Supper at Bethany sate in the highest roome Christ had the middle place and is said most commonly to be in the middest highest in situation not alwaies highest in dignity Fol. ibid. Par. 8 Parerius his 11. Ceremony Three on a bed Triclinium whence so called How many beds at feasts Σ sigma what it was Biclinium how many guests on a bed Fol. 291 Par. 9 Whether Christ and his 12. Apostles at his last supper discumbed on three beds Fol. 192 Par. 10 Order of discumbing Jesuites in this point dissent among themselves faire collections from the Scriptures lawfull Fol. ibid. Par. 11 How farre the Apostles discumbed the one from the other Fol. 193 Par. 12 The words dividite inter vos not to be understood of the Eucharist Edentibus illis interpreted Eucharist in stituted after the Paschall Supper Christ gave bread and wine to his Disciples severally Fol. ibi Par. 13 Pererius his 12. Ceremony the Romans and Jewes ate in Common the Romans huge platters Aesop's Vitellius Platters Trojan Boare Fol. 194 Par. 14 Romans and Jewes in their feastings had divers dishes the Roman carving of foules Aegyptians and Jewes great platters M. Anthonies immania pocula Vessels of the Sanctuary vessels of desire Fol. 197 Par. 15 Romans did lye not sit on beds discumbing Pererius affirmeth denyeth it Romans Supper at times continued from night till Morning Romans changed their posture in discumbing Rosinus his description of the Romans discumbing ancient Romans temperance at feasts Roman fashion in drinking at feasts Fol. 198 Par. 16 Pererius his 13 Ceremonie the Romans in their feasts appointed Magistrum potandi Regem vini modimperatorem the manner of the Graecian and Latine jolly drinking Fol. 199 Par. 17 The Epitome of all Pererius his twofold mistaking the conclusion directly against Pererius Fol. 200 The Contents of the two and twentieth Chapter Par. 1 HOw Christ with his 12. Apostles kept his last Passeover 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 two Disciples prepare it Christ with the 12. eate it in the Evening they sit down Fol. 201 Par. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expounded S. Matthews Evangelisme written in Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 its divers significations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interpreted The Apostles in the description of the Lords Supper single out words properly signifying lying downe Fol. 202 Par. 3 Our English Translatours excused Fol. 203 Par. 4 Sitting Communicants censured Fol. ibid. Par. 5 As they did eate expounded Fol. 204 Par. 6 The use of the word Verily Amen its divers acceptions Fol. ib. Par. 7 Future things are to others unknowne to Christ knowne The Table and its rites sacred even among the Heathen Fol. 204 Par. 8 Judas not necessitated to betray Christ the manner of Christs detecting him traytor Fol. ib. Par. 9 What was done in the first Paschall-Supper Iudas detected for a Traytor in a generality Disciples enquire Fol. 205 Par. 10 Iudas discovered for a Traytor in a mixt manner good for Iudas not to have beene borne Fol. ib. Par. 11 Thou sayest is no full discovery of Iudas to be the Traytor Simon de Cassia his errour Iudas his treason not discovered till the second Supper divers reasons thereof Fol. 206 The Contents of the three and twentieth Chapter Par. 1 CHrists hearty desire to eate his last Supper Fol. 208 Par. 2 The words before after untill unto from c. are particles sometimes inclusive sometimes exclusive Fol. ib. Par. 3 Donec or untill negatively used de futuro Fol. 209 Par. 4 Kingdome of God what Fol. ib. Par. 5 He tooke the Cup not the Eucharisticall Cap first of the vine spirituall Nectar Turkes place eternall felicity in sensuall Pleasures Fol. ib. Par. 6 Maldonates error concerning the Cup. Fol. 210 Par. 7 Spirituall Table-talke at Christs last eating of the Passeover Fol. 211 Par. 8 Methodus rerum aut Historiae not alwayes observed in Scripture the Originall of greatest authority nothing to be altered in the Scriptures Fol. ibid. The Contents of the foure and twentieth Chapter Par. 1 MInisters or attendants at Christs last Passeover the blessed Virgin Mary no attendant difference betweene Apostles and Disciples Disciples might attend Fol. 212 Par. 2 Bishops Presbyters succeede the Apostles the seventy Names of Apostles and Disciples confounded S. Augustine questioned Fol. 213 Par. 3 Whether any of the 70. Disciples were Apostates other Disciples beside the 70. Some of them backesliders the 70. Disciple were the future Presbytery Idolatar the 70. Disciples who they were whether there were 72. Disciples Fol. ib. Par. 4 Divers legall Types of the 12. Apostles 70. Disciples Fol. 215 Par. 5 The Master of the house was not excluded he might waite on Christ also some of the houshold might be attendants Fol. ibid. Par. 6 Attendants Male and Female three degrees of Male-attendants divers offices of Attendants Christ and his Apostles had their Attendants Fol. 216 Par. 7 Some of the 72. were Christs Attendants to here his Table-talke Servitours animated instruments Fol. 217 Par. 8 The Synopsis or summe of all Fol. 218 LIB 2. The Contents of the first Chapter Par. 1THree premisses Fol. 224 Par. 2 Christs and his Apostles Temperancie Fol. ib. Par. 3 The Paschall Supper a Sacrament Type of the New Old Testament Christ eate of the three Suppers sparingly Fol. 225 Par. 4 Christ did seldome eate flesh Christ ate Butter and Honey Christs knowledge to refuse the Evill and chuse the Good The words Ad scire ipsum interpreted Fol. 226 Par. 5 The Iewes blasphemy against Christ The words Emmanuel aend Samuel whence derived That Christ was God proved from Scriptures Rabins and the word Emanuel Difference betweene Emmanuel and Samuel Fol. 227 Par. 6 The Iewes blasphemy against Christs Mother Fol. 227 Par. 7 Christ borne according to the Scriptures borne of a Woman not of a Girle The Nobility of Christs Birth wherein in consisted Fol. 228 Par. 8 Christ a Stone ibid. Par. 9 Gnalam or Glialam and Gnelem what it signifieth Fol. 229 Par. 10 Emmanuel Iesus is a name of Nature Imposition ibid. Par. 11 Mary a Virgin Aarons Rod Christ borne of a Virgin by Miracle a threefold Vnion in Christ Fol. 230 Par. 12 Christ made but one meale in one day The aspertion of Gluttony in him rejected Christ
seven a brawle Turba plerunque turbnlenta est sayth Gellius 13.11 from Varro that is a route most commonly turnes into a riot I would chuse alwayes if I might the number of the foure Evangelists at an ordinary repast I cannot abide to eate my morsells alone at a great solemne Feast the number of the twelve Apostles seemeth fit to me The Primitive Christians continued their course of meeting Per sodalitia by fraternities even at the time that Rome was arrived to its highest pitch of glory Pliny 10.97 wrote to Trajan that the Christians confessed they were wont to meete before day to adore worship and sing praises to Christ as God then to receive the Sacrament binding them as it were from all evill and to all manner of goodnesse when these things were ended they departed and met customarily againe to eate meate together promiscuously but innocently This was at their Love-feasts which then were taken after the blessed Eucharist The same truth is also confirmed by Tertullian in Apologet. cap. 2. Belike Trajan had heard of such meetings for sayth Plinius to him secundum mandata tua hetaerias esse vetui betaeriae hoc est ipsa sodalitita vetia erant sayth b Baron ad An. Christi 104. Num. 4. Baronius when Pliny had forbid them according to the mandate of the Emperour the Christians did forbeare such meetings To this effect Caius Plinius secundus But I fully beleeve that after Trajan his favorable Edict Conquirendi non sunt that Christians should not be enquired after and much more after that Persecution wholy failed and Peace was restored to the Churches of God the Christians met againe as they were wont and more boldly more publiquely celebrated both Divine and Humane Offices and renewed their sodalitates or fraternities The Prayer O Lord our good God a little doth content our naturall bodies yet superabundance of provision thou hast prepared for us yea thy mercy hath permitted us to recreate our selves sometimes even with Feasting and holy thankes be ascribed to thy name therefore yet we meekely beseech thee O gracious God that we never so eate or drinke to sustaine our weake nature but we may alwayes keepe our selves in appetite and strong desire to feed on the Divine food at thy heavenly Table with all the most blessed societie of our beatified Predecessors the Participants and Communicants with Iesus Christ our Lord in his Kingdome Amen CHâ—P IX The Contents of the ninth Chapter 1. Non-admittance of strangers to the Passeover divers sorts of servants and strangers servants of the seed of Israel their estates and priviledges servants of forraine Nations their hard condition hired servants and their differences from others the hired servant might not he forced to be circumcised 2. Maimonides falsely opineth that the seed of Abraham were onely to be circumcised 3. There were three sorts of strangers in Israel two sorts of Aliens Adam's sixe Preceps to all the world Noahs additionall inhibition the Law of Moses is a branch of the Law of Nature Bishop Andrewes commended and excellent passages of his Worke transcribed The Romane Lawes borrowed from the Iewes in Tertullian's judgement The twelve Tables and their supposed perfection their imperfection in precept The fragments onely remaine of them some semblance betweene the foure first Commandements of the first Table in Gods Law and betweene the Romane Lawes Rigalitius rejected Gothofredus preferred Comparisons beeweene the Gentiles keeping the Saturday and Christians the Sunday Saturday was the Sabboth of the Romanes kept with joy and feasting as our Lords day A large Treatise concerning the Lords day the Christians pray towards the East the Reasons thereof The holy Communion Table justly placed at the East end of the Chancell ignorant and irreligious Censurers taxed and objections answered the promiscuous use of the words Altar and the Lords Table The Commandements of the second Table of Moses followed by the Papyrian Law and twelve Romane Tables except the tenth Commandement onely a forraigner unfixed might not eate of the Passeover a sojourner or stranger whose males were circumcised might eate thereof and so might their sons onely Circumcised ones might eate the Passeover all others were forbidden women were held as circumcised in the circumcision of the Iewish males PARAGRAPH 1. ANother Paschatizing Ceremony of durabilitie which is the sixt was the non-admittance of strangers or the admittance of the Iewish Church onely the expresse Lawes concerning this point are some inhibitory some mandatory The negative precepts are first of all Exod. 12.43 This is the Ordinance of the Passeover there shall no stranger eate thereof Secondly ver 45. A forraigner shall not eate thereof an hired servant shall not eate thereof The preceps affirmative are these Exod 12.44 Every man servant that is bought for money when thou hast circumcised him then shall be eate thereof and ver 48. When a stranger shall sojourne with the and will keepe the Passeover to the Lord let all his males be circumcised and then let him come neare and keepe it and he shall be as one borne in the Land One Law shall be to him that is home-borne and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you ver 49. The same in effect is repeated to shew it is a lasting Rite of the passeover Num. 9.14 If we deepely consider the occurrent and emergent particularities comprised in the affirmative and negative precepts I dare say we cannot open nor understand the businsse as it ought to be understood unlesse we take notice both of the divers sorts of servants and divers sorts of strangers in the Iewish Law Servants were thus to be distinguished first such as were of the seede of Iacob secondly servants of other Nations The first kinde of servants were in a farre better estate than the latter and had divers priviledges above other servants a powerfull man might take some true or supposed offenders for bondmen otherwise the brethren of Joseph had needlesse and false suppositions in their heads for they feared lest they should be taken for bondmen Gen. 43.18 Any man might make himselfe a bondman We will be my Lords bondmen Gen. 44.9 If a Iew did sell himselfe to a stranger or sojourner he himselfe if he grew able or any of his kindred might redeeme him if not he was to be as a yearely-hired servant he shall not be ruled with rigour he and his children shall goe out in the yeare of Iubilee the reasons of these priviledges followeth Levit. 25.55 For unto me saith God the children of Israel are servants they are my servants as if he had said the Israelites indeed were Pharoahs bondmen Exod. 6.21 Thou wast a bondman Deut. 15.15 But I have redeemed you out of the house of bondmen from the hand of Pharoah Deut. 7.8 therefore they shall be no longer bondmen Gods service is perfect freedome and now saith God Exod. 4.22 Israel is my Sonne even my first borne let my Sonne goe that hee may serve me ver 23. If a
Table For if David did so in urgent and extreame necessitie and in the desolate inhospitable Wildernesse is it likely Christ would doe so where all necessary utensils were prepared for a Feast Nor are the words of David in Terminis as my learned friend supposeth though they approach to the sense He that sitteth at Table with me Psal 41.9 And if they had been so from the correspondence betweene the Type and Substance I should rather have concluded As Achitophel did eate at Davids Table so did Judas at Christs Table They both did eate at a Table and both were notorious traytors If Beza say Such a Table as our Saviour did institute this Supper on or That Table was no Table indeed but in name onely or not a Table framed of wood I must tell Beza that none is able to prove his Negatives and the contrary is evinced by their common usance And the word Table doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and most properly signifie somewhat to eate upon raysed from the ground Nor can I finde in any place of S. Augustine any inclination of him to this That the earth ground plaine floore or pavement was the Table on which Christ instituted the holy Eucharist So much against the opinion that Christ celebrated his blessed Supper and Sacrament on the pavement with humble subjection of my Writings to the Church of England the uncorruptedst part of Christs Militant Church and with this solemne protestation that though I differ in judgement in this point from the learned Doctor yet I shall never differ from him in affection but be ready upon better proofes to change somewhat of my opinion and still to love him Lastly I shall fling water into the Sea and mispend time to prove that the Jewish people made great and much use of Tables long before Christs Incarnation and so downe to his death PAR. 5. COncerning the blessed Eucharist it cannot be certainly knowne on what speciall Table it was administred or what was the forme or fashion of That Table Two points are considerable The first seemes more than probable to me That it was administred or celebrated on a Table Secondly I hold it likely it was administred on a Table distinct from the Paschall and ordinary-Supper Table Concerning the first In the Temple at Hierusalem they had a Table of Shittim wood two cubits the length thereof and a cubite the breadth thereof and a cubite and an halfe the height thereof Exod. 25.23 And thoushalt set upon the Table Shewbread before me alwayes vers 30. There was no Long-square Table of Incense but the Altar to burne Incense upon was also of Shittim wood foure-square A cubit the length thereof and a cubit the breadth thereof Exod. 30.1 And it was two cubits high The former Table allegorically did signifie the Table of the body and blood of Christ as Cornelius à Lapide on Heb. 9.2 avoucheth from Cyrill Hierome Damascene Therefore the Substance of the Type was also a Table and Christ celebrated the I ords Supper on a Table Secondly 1 Corinth 11.20 it is called the Lords Supper The Administring and Receiving of the Eucharist is called the Supper of the Lord. Augustine ad Januarium Epistolâ 118. cap. 5. affirmeth that the Apostle calleth the very Receiving of the Eucharist the Dominicam coenam the Supper of the Lord So Ambrose Pelagius Glossator Lombardus Hervaetus Aquinas Rickelius saith Estius on the 1 Corinth 11. Theodoret and Oecumenius call Dominicam coenam The Lords Supper Domini Sacramentum The Sacrament of the Lord though Estius minceth the point But they were wont in those times to eate their Suppers on Tables Ioh. 12.2 Lazarus was one of them who sate at the Table with Christ when Christ said Luk. 22.30 Yee may eate and drinke at my Table in my kingdome he draweth the Metaphor from the Tables on which he and others were wont to feed on in those dayes Ioh. 12.2 c. Matth. 15.27 The dogs eate of the crummes which fall from their Masters Table Therefore there was a distance betweene the Tables and the Ground S. Mark 7.28 varieth it thus The dogs under the Tables eate of the childrens crummes Therefore the Tables were not On the ground when dogs could be under them The rich man had a Table from whence such crummes fell as would have fed Lazarus Luk. 16.21 Therefore the Table was not On the ground floore or pavement but Above it and from it the crummes fell lower So Tables being in viridi observantiâ in ordinary use among the Jewes in those dayes and Christ avoyding factious singularity and running fairely with the streame of those times in things indifferent we may conclude Christ fed not from the pavement at any time for ought that is recorded or involved But it is very likely our Saviour on a Table did celebrate the holy Eucharist Tables were principally ordained to be eaten and drin kt upon whether at sacred or common Feasts Take this and eate it as from a Table and Christ tooke the cup as from the Table and gave thankes as they used to doe at the Table and gave it to them as they were at Table Drinke yee all of this as was wont to be done at the Table Matth. 26.27 Act. 6.2 It is not reason we should leave the Word of God and serve Tables And these Tables were for the poore or for their holy feasts of charity if not for the receiving of the most holy Eucharist also For it may be well observed Men were chosen to serve Tables full of the holy Ghost of honest report and wisdome as Stephen was a man full of faith and of the holy Ghost verse 5. full of faith and tower verse 8. consecrated to that worke by prayer and imposition of hands with as much ceremony and solemne majesty as others were chosen to be Presbyters nay more viz. with the generall consent and joynt action of all the Apostles To serve at Common Tables alone such worthy Heroes were not fittest to be destinated or appointed that I may use the Scripture phrase meaner people might and would have served the turne But these sanctified Deacons did not onely take care of the poore but administred at the most holy Tables on which the Eucharist was celebrated Ignatius Epistol ad Trallenses almost in the beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yee ought to please the Deacons the ministers of the mysteries of Christ in all things for they are not the servitors of meats and drinkes but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ministers of the Church of God doe you reverence them as Jesus Christ whose Vicars they are My collection is Sacred things yea the most holy Eucharist was celebrated Then on Tables And in all likelihood from the example of Christ who consecrated the blessed Sacrament on a Table Nor doe the Apostles think it unreasonable to serve Tables either common or sacred simply and absolutely for the works were devout but comparatively and referentially They
first spoken by Moses and applied by Moses to the first times so soone as Man was created and so continually dispersed into the History of the other Patriarcks Moses delighting in his prerogative of first knowing the the name of Iehova as Lawyers may more eloquently utter the Laws of the 12 Tables which were in rude Latin long before in the more refined and fuller expressions of latter times Or like Historians and Poëts who ascribe the name of Iove and Ioves words and deeds to the first beginning of times though Iove had no being till after the Flood of Noah and therefore no name So Moses might write according to the most cleare Revelations of his time what was done and said in other termes not so energeticall long before to the Patriarcks If this please you not what say you to a second way May not the words be read by way of Interrogation which is as good as a strong and vehement affirmation By the name of Iehova was not I known to them As if he had said yes certainly I was as may be seen in their particular stories and passages of their time And I have elso established my Covenant with them Exod. 6.4 Even by that name Jehova Gen. 15.1 2 4 6 7 8 verses For I pray you consider God here speaketh not to diminish the reputation of Abraham Isaac and Jacob but to the great glory of their names and persons with whom first hee established the Covenant made with them for the Jews And therefore Ignorance of God or nesciency of his great Name cannot be handsomely ascribed to those Patriarcks in this place where the knowledge and ratification of Gods Covenant and Gods familiarity with them are reckoned as their glorious priviledges above all other men of those times Did not Abraham see Christs day a far off Did he not rejoyce at the sight of it Was God the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob above other men and they esteemed as the Living and not as Dead shall we rest in Abrahams bosome and eat and drink with Abraham in the Kingdom of Heaven than which prerogatives none ever had greater and more except our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who also came of Abraham and was promised particularly to Abraham that in his seed that is as the Apostle saith not in his seeds but in Christ all the Nations of the World should be blessed and shall Abraham be ignorant of the name Jehova which both Caine knew at first and every Jew and Christian now knows I cannot so undervalew those Patriarcks majorum Gentium Besides though not a Sentence not a Word not a Letter not a jot of Scripture can now be lost or perish yet the note of an Interrogation or a Comma a Colon a Mark or a Pause might be omitted long since For was not all Scripture written without both points and vowels at first If you say the marke of an Interrogation being wanting leadeth us to perplexities to diversity yea contrariety of senses I answer Do not full many words in the Hebrew Bible signifie contrary things exciting our studious minds to a search of the most probable matters and meaning whilst the truth is known to God alone Even thus might it be with this passage Where the note of an Interrogation might either be wholly omitted at first or casually unobsetved and left out by the first Transcribers or Translators and this might lead men into Ignorance ever since and yet no imperfection is to be imputed unto Gods Word nor is it blameable for any deficiency And therefore I conclude according to the Rules of Aristotle Top. 6. cap ult Let this exposition stand and be beleeved till better be invented and come in place And then let the clearest light of truth have his due that is perswasion And let the lesse yeeld and obey the greater If you expect authorities averring that Idolatry was not before the Flood I refer you to the learned Salianus in divers places especially in anno Mundi 250 and to the learned Scholia ibid. who citeth for me and for the negative Cyril Alexandrinus contra Julianum libro primo Irenaeus 5.29 and divers others Besides such whom my wearinesse commandeth me to omit that I may returne from extravagances to the right way and method propounded by me And so because there was no Idolatry before the Flood and Kings at least eminent men of high renown and worth were long before the times of the Flood or Idolatry I conclude Kings Princes Dukes and other men of venerable account for their goodnesse in making Cities governing of Nations and founding Common-weales had not the beginnings of their Adoration from the worship exhibited to Idols Statues Images or Pictures but rather those Simulacra were Adored because they were the representations of Kings Princes or other people beloved and revered who both in their lives and after their deaths were Adored And yet to make the best interpretation that I may of Mr. Seldens words whom for his depth and variety of learning I admire Let my consent run along thus far by his side That the later Kings and Heroës might perhaps have had their Adorations from some kind of Adoration derived from Idoles and yet the first Idols had their primitive Adoration from the Adoration of Kings and other people of esteem which were before Idolatry When Christ Worshipped and Adored God as doubtlesse he did full often I think He fell down on his Face No Gesture could be more convenient at the celebration of the holy Sacrament For we cannot think otherwise but that Christ used almost all possible meanes to make the Apostles attentive to him and stirred them up to the consideration of so stupendious mysteries that they might be better prepared to the holy receiving of them Among Gestures exciting and raising up of Devotion the falling down upon ones Face is most forcible either in seeing it so done by others or in practising it our selves The dejection and prostration of the body is the elevation of the soule and a meanes to sanctifie and quicken the spirit When he took the bread and gave thankes for thankes hee gave Luke 22.19 I cannot think otherwise but he lifted up his Eyes and Hands to Heaven So did he in lesser matters for when he multiplied the five loaves he looked up to Heaven and blessed and brake and gave the loaves to his Disciples And can we now think He looked on the Earth and not up to Heaven when he gave Thanks and blessed the Food of life for us When he brake the bread and gave it It is likeliest he stood on his Feet and might move from one to another or reach it to every one severally So did the Pater familias or chiefe of the Feast among the Jews stand and distribute the bread at their sollemne meetings as the Rabbins affirme When hee consecrated the Bread saying Take eat this is my Body which is given for you Do this in remembrance