And He took Bread and gave Thanks and Brake it and gave unto them saying This is my Body which is given for you This do in Remembrance of Me. XVII Vers 20. Likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This Cup is the New Testament in My Blood which is Shed for you XVIII 1 Cor. 11. v. 23. For I have Receiv'd of the LORD that which also I Deliver'd unto you That the Lord JESVS the same Night in which He was Betray'd took Bread. XIX Vers 24. And when He had given Thanks He Brake it and said Take Eat This is my Body which is Broken for you This do in Remembrance of Me. XX. Vers 25. After the same manner also He took the Cup when He had Supp'd saying This Cup is the new Testament in my Blood This do ye as oft as ye Drink it in Remembrance of Me. XXI Vers 26. For as often as ye Eat this Bread and Drink this Cup ye do shew the LORD's Death till He come XXII Vers 27. Wherefore whosoever shall Eat this Bread and Drink this Cup of the LORD Vnworthily shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of the LORD XXIII Vers 28. But let a Man Examine himself and so let him Eat of that Bread and Drink of that Cup. XXIV Vers 29. For he that Eateth and Drinketh Vnworthily Eateth and Drinketh Damnation to himself not discerning the LORD's Body The Protestant Texts against It. I 1 Cor. 11. v. 23 24. The Lord JESVS the same Night in which He was Betray'd took Bread and when He had given Thanks He brake it and said Take Eat This is my Body which is Broken for you this do in Remembrance of Me. II. St. Mat. 26. v. 27 28 29. And He took the Cup and gave Thanks and gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it for This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins I will not Drink henceforth of this Fruit of the Vine until I drink it New with you in my Father's Kingdom III. St. Mar. 14. v. 23 24. And He took the Cup and when He had given Thanks He gave it to them and they all drank of it and He said unto them This is my Blood of the New Testament which is Shed for many IV. St. Luk. 22. v. 19 20. And He took Bread and gave Thanks and Brake it and gave unto them saying This is my Body which is given for you This do in Remembrance of Me Likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood which is Shed for you V. Act. 2. v. 42. They continued stedfast in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and in Breaking of Bread. VI. Act. 20. v. 7. Vpon the First Day of the Week when the Discipies came together to break Bread. VII 1 Cor. 10. v. 16 17. The Cup of Blessing which we bless Is it not the Communion of the Blood of CHRIST The Bread which we break Is it not the Communion of the Body of CHRIST For We being many are one Bread and one Body for We are all Partakers of that one Bread. VIII 1 Cor. 11. v. 26. For as often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the LORD's Death till He come Whosoever shall eat this Bread and drink this Cup of the LORD Vnworthily Let a Man examine himself so let him eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup. IX Act. 1. v. 11. This same JESVS who is taken up from you into Heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into Heaven X. Act. 3. v. 21. Whom the Heaven must Receive until the Times of the Restitution of all Things XI St. Luk. 24. v. 39. Behold my Hands and my Feet that it is I my Self Handle Me and see for a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as ye see Me have XII Act. 1. v. 3. To whom also He shewed himself alive after his Passion Being seen of them Forty Days XIII 1 Joh. 1. v. 1. Which we have seen with our Eyes which we have look'd upon and our Hands have handled XIV Heb. 9. v. 28. So CHRIST was once Offer'd to bear the Sins of many and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the Second Time. XV. Heb. 10. v. 12. This MAN after He had Offer'd one Sacrifice for Sins for ever sate down on the Right Hand of GOD. XVI Phil. 3. v. 21. Christ has a Glorious BODY Thus having truly laid down the Scriptures on both sides I doubt not but it doth appear that the Texts brought on the Catholick Part are abundantly sufficient and plain for the Being of Christ's Body and Blood in the Sacrament and that Those produced on the Protestant Part are also expresly For it or not at all Against it for that it is impossible to bring one Text out of the whole Bible to prove That the Body and Blood of Christ is not in the Sacrament as in effect is confessed by the Protestant Answ Pag. 3. where he says That the Church of England do hold several Doctrines which are not contain'd in Express Words in Scripture for says he besides their Positive Articles they have a great many Negative Ones So that to require plain and express Words of Scripture to prove that such a Doctrine is not there Taught is says he to demand a Proof the thing is not capable of Wherefore the denying of the Real Presence being one of their Negative Doctrines or Articles it 's plain That the Gentleman doth not pretend to produce those Texts to prove That the Body and Blood of Christ is not in the Sacrament but lays 'em before you hoping you 'll think they do because the Word Bread is mentioned says he Pag. 15. Five times by St. Paul after he recited the Institution Very good and why not the Word BREAD I pray as well as the Word CVP seeing by the Word BREAD is meant the Communion of the Body of Christ as by the Word CVP 1 Cor. 10.16,17 is signified the Communion of the Blood of Christ And besides St. Paul mentions not the Words CVP and BREAD but he explains them to be the Body and Blood of Christ as 1 Cor. 11.26 where he tells ye As often as ye Eat this BREAD and Drink this CVP ye do shew the Lord's Death till He come which Death of the Lord was not shewn but by Offering up of his True and Real Body and Blood And Ver. 27. he tells ye Whosoever shall Eat this BREAD and Drink this CVP of the LORD VNWORTHILY shall be guilty of the BODY and BLOOD of the LORD Wherefore if it were not the Body and Blood of the LORD how could they be guilty of the Body and Blood if the Body and Blood be not there to be guilty of And further Ver. 28 29 He that Eateth and Drinketh VNWORTHILY Eateth and Drinketh DAMNATION to himself not discerning the LORD's BODY which still confirms it
to be the BODY of the LORD or how doth he say Condemn'd not discerning the LORD 's BODY if the Body of the LORD be not there to be discerned Wherefore St. Paul speaketh not but in Confirmation of its being the Body and Blood of CHRIST or 't would be hard a Sinner should be Damn'd meerly for Moderate Eating and Drinking of bare Bread and Wine For according to the Protestant Answerer the Sacrament is no more who tells you Pag. 11. That there is no other Substance distributed among the Communicants than that of Bread and Wine And Pag. 15. That they are as really and properly Bread and Wine after Consecration as before And further The said Texts are laid before You for that in some of them it is said THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME To which I Answer and say That those Words This do in Remembrance of Me do no way Relate to the Laiety who only receive the Sacrament but to the Priests who Consecrate and Administer the same for it is no where said This Eat This Take This Receive but This do in Remembrance of Me whereas it is not at all the Office of the Laiety nor have they the Power to do as our Saviour then did Bless and Administer the Sacrament of his Body and Blood to Themselves or Others but the Office of the Priests to whom was given by these Words This do c. a particular Power to do the same as Christ then did Take Bread and Wine Bless it and Administer it as he did for his Body and his Blood. Nor do the Words IN REMEMBRANCE any way serve Their turn for as You unanswerably have observed Pag. 7. of your Request That the Remembrance of its Being doth no way make it cease to Be which Argument the Protestant Answerer would fain Confute where Pag. 19. he tells You Tho' the Remembrance of its Being do no way make it cease to Be yet says he it supposeth the Absence of the Being which is to suppose the Body to be Present and Absent at the same Time A piece of Sophistry so weak as I admire a Man of Sense should insist thereon as if my Remembrance of your being with me when present did any way suppose your Absence from me at the same time It is surely Nonsense to think That the Remembrance of a Thing present did or could in the least suppose the Absence of the same Thing at the same time for tho' it be confess'd we may Remember the Being of a Thing when Absent yet the Remembrance of the same Thing when Present doth not at all suppose the Absence and the Presence too of the same Thing at one and the same time Wherefore the Remembrance of Christ's Body and Blood 's being Present in the Sacrament doth no ways suppose the Absence of the Being nor make the Being cease to Be. And further The said Scriptures are produced for that in some of them it is said THIS IS MY BODY which is Broken for you Before says he Pag. 14. it was Broke Whence he concludes it not to be the Body of CHRIST because as he conceives the Body of CHRIST was not Then Broke But before We proceed 't is requisite to inform your Self whether CHRIST had Two Bodies One Figurative and the Other Real I suppose 't will be resolved that CHRIST had but One Body and that was a True Real and Substantial Body and not a Figurative or Delusive Body Wherefore if CHRIST had but One Body 't was of that Body he spake when He said THIS IS MY BODY which is Broken for you and to doubt that what CHRIST said was either Improper or Untrue is to profess our selves Infidels and Jews at once for none but such can question GOD's Veracity Wherefore as what he said was certainly true so it was undoubtedly proper when he said Which is BROKEN FOR YOV For proof whereof I answer That tho' his Natural Body be There yet the manner of its Being is Spiritual and Sacramental and the manner of its Breaking follows the manner of its Being his Body is There Broken in the Sign not in the Substance Moreover those Words WHICH IS BROKEN do prove as the Holy Catholick Church always did and ever will hold it to be a True and Proper Sacrifice for the Being Broken does explain the nature of a Sacrifice which imports the destruction of the Thing Offered if Corruptible and lyable to Destruction But the Body of CHRIST being Incorruptible and Immortal can't be really hurt therefore the manner of Breaking is only Mystical and Representative But if this manner of Breaking do not please the Gentleman let us to verifie the Words of Christ whose Truth he so much doubts see whether the Body of Christ were not otherwise Broke before He Instituted the Sacrament or rather whether his Body had not been Pierced and his Blood had not been Spilt for that it is written John 19.36 A Bone of Him shall not be broke And another Scripture saith Ibid. Ver. 37. They shall look on Him whom they Pierced Wherefore the Body of CHRIST was not otherwise Naturally Broken than by Piercing of his Body and Spilling of his Blood. Now that his Body at that time had been Pierced and his Blood had been Spilt appears c. when at Eight Days Old He began to smart for us Which Piercing of his Flesh and Spilling of his Blood at his Circumcision was followed by Vnspeakable Pains Restless Labours Travels and Fastings insomuch that his whole Life from the Hour of his Birth to the Moment of his Death was but One Passion-continued What I pray his Agony in the Garden What His being Crown'd with Thorns and Bloody Whipping at the Pillar That in the Opinion of this Gentleman his Body was not at all Broke nor his Blood in the least Shed till Consummate for us upon the Cross Wherefore with Truth our Saviour might have said of his Body which is Broke and of his Blood which is Shed without supposing that any thing he said was either Improper or Untrue And the said Scriptures are produced for that it is said I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the Vine until I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom which our Saviour might have said and not at all Recal his first Assurance for we do not deny the use of Figures in Expression as the Word CVP for his Blood contain'd in it and the Word BREAD for his Body contain'd under that Form But there is no Figure in this Mystery which excludes but asserts the Reality of CHRIST's Body and Blood in the Sacrament For the terms CVP and BREAD sometimes used by the Apostles after the Institution as by us at this day do not at all destroy the Substance for which our Saviour gave them when he said EAT THIS IS MY BODY DRINK THIS IS MY BLOOD Nor do I see what Reason they have to Carp at either of the said Terms CVP or BREAD seeing Both are
explained by St. Paul 1 Cor. 10.16,17 One for the Communion of the Blood the Other for the Communion of the Body of Christ Nor do the Words of our Saviour where he speaks of the Fruit of the Vine signifie the Wine which was Consecrated into his Blood for that they were spoken of the CVP whereof they Drank at Supper and not of the Consecrated CVP which He Instituted not till after Supper as appears by St. Luke who gives the plainest Order of it Chap. 22.14,15,16,17,18 where it is said And when the Hour was come He sate down and the Twelve Apostles with Him And He said unto Them With desire I have desired to Eat this Passover with You before I Suffer For I say unto You I will not any more EAT thereof until it be fulfilled in the Kingdom of God. And He took the Cup and gave Thanks and said Take This and divide it among your selves For I say unto You I will not drink of the Fruit of the Vine until the Kingdom of God shall come Where you see our Saviour spoke of not EATING as well as not DRINKING that is of the Pascal Lamb and Cup at Supper for that He did not Institute the Sacrament of his Body and Blood till afterwards as we read Ver. 19 20. That He took Bread and gave Thanks and brake it and gave unto them saying This is my Body which is given for You This do in Remembrance of me Likewise also the CVP after SVPPER saying This CVP is the New Testament in my Blood which is shed for you Wherefore we are to distinguish the CVP which He bid them divide at Supper and of which He said He would not Drink until the Kingdom of God shall come from the CVP which He Blessed and gave to them after Supper saying It was his Blood for nothing can be more plain than that what our Saviour said of not Eating and not Drinking was of the Passover or Sacrifice according to the Law and not of the New Sacrifice or Testament in his Blood according to the Gospel But if this Order wherein St. Luke hath it which speaks of Two Cups and which is certainly true be not acceptable to the Obstinate let us suppose it otherwise and that the Words Fruit of the Vine were as they were not said of the Consecrated Cup it would yet follow That the meaning of them could in no wise be applyed to the Substance of Wine proceeding from an Earthly Vine but to the Substance of his Blood the Fruit of the Heavenly Vine For that it was to be Drank New with them in His Father's Kingdom and in His Father's Kingdom which is Heaven they neither keep Taverns nor Drink Wine the Fruit therefore of the Vine serves for neither Fruit nor Wine to them As to what the Gentleman says Pag. 15. of the Order observ'd in St. Mark 's Relation of it Who saith says the Protestant Answerer That all the Apostles first Drank of the Cup and that then our Saviour said unto them THIS IS MY BODY Chap. 14. v. 23 24. For my part I find no such thing in St. Mark as That all the Apostles first Drank of the Cup and then that our Saviour should tell them It was his Body Wherefore it 's a great Mistake 'twixt the Writer and the Printer and when they Mend their Bill We 'll Answer But in the mean time whether St. Mark expresseth the Words in the same Order as they were spoke or no it matters not seeing he has the Substance of what was said and wherein they all agree to wit That it was his Body and his Blood And it 's also apparent That CHRIST first Gave Thanks and Blessed it before He Gave it and before He gave it they could not have it nor before they had it could they either Eat it or Drink it The Gentleman continues Pag. 15. to tell you That the Letter is for Them meaning That in the Sacrament is not contain'd the Body of CHRIST for That CHRIST's Body had the Natural Properties belonging to a Body Extended Finite and Circumscribed And therefore like another Didymus he will not Believe except he see and into the Prints of the Nails of his Hands put his Fingers and into his Side thrust his Hand So Sensual was he that to feel with his Finger the Wound in his Side would not suffice unless therein he thrust his whole Hand Even so this Gentleman For GOD's Holy Word so often repeated to Confirm the Being of his BODY and BLOOD in the Sacrament will not suffice unless he See and Feel the Body Extended Finite and Circumscrib'd But methinks the Reproof our Saviour gave to One Didymus might be a Warning to All the Didymus's that should ever happen after him when John 20. v. 29. he told him Thomas Because thou hast SEEN Me thou hast BELIEVED Blessed are they that have NOT Seen and yet HAVE Believed Wherefore to Believe but what we See Feel Taste and Smell is to be Brutes not Christians and worse than Thomas who Saw but the Humanity yet Believ'd the Divinity of CHRIST Pray how was his Body to be Seen Extended Finite and Circumscrib'd when He penetrated and pass'd through Walls and Doors that were close as proved Pag. 15 16. For by the same Reason that You prove That CHRIST's Body can pass Intire through Walls or Doors when close by the same Reason will I prove That CHRIST's Body may be in the Sacrament Intire though no more to be seen There than to be seen passing through the thickest Walls But upon the Whole the Gentleman argues most Perfidiously of CHRIST as if He were not GOD nor distinguishing between his Glorious Body and Ours or any other Corruptible Carkass As He is Perfect GOD all Things are possible to Him If so Where then is the Difficulty to believe but that CHRIST may as well be Contain'd under the Forms of BREAD and WINE as the Holy Ghost under the Form of a DOVE Mat. 3.16 with Feather Beak Wing and all the Properties of a Fowl Or as the same Spirit in the Form of TONGVES of FIRE Act. 2.3 both which to our Eyes were but as a perfect Dove and as perfect Tongues Yet those different Objects to the Eye of Flesh were but one Holy Ghost to the Eye of Faith whereas if Faith had been grounded upon Sense they could never have believ'd that Bird in Feather and Form and those Tongues of Flesh in Flame to be one and the same Holy Ghost Therefore nothing can be more plain than that Objects may be one thing to the Eye of Flesh and another thing to the Eye of Faith for to our Sense it was a perfect Bird but to our Faith it was the Holy Ghost Even so the Sacrament to our Sight and Taste is but plain Bread and Wine but to our Faith in GOD's Word it is the Real and Intire Body and Blood of CHRIST and the Authorities we have from Scripture are far
take his Word when he tells us The Son of Man was Sealed of GOD the Father and Believe him without calling of GOD to question How or diving into the secrets of Heaven So How he came down c. and the rest of his How 's if they are not sufficiently plain in the Bible so as to be clearly understood I 'll agree with the Gentleman and submit to the determination of the Church and so must YOV and all the SEEKERS in England if what the Protestant Answerer Insinuates be true For if these express and plain words of Christ be a Figure where he says as plain as plain can be That he would give us BREAD to Eat which should be his FLESH and accordingly He took Bread and Blessed it and Brake it and gave it saying TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY I say if these words are Figurative and must not be properly understood I see no Reason why the whole Bible should not be a Figure too For if ever CHRIST was Plain in any thing 't was in this especially in a Point wherein there was never more occasion to Expound if a Figure than when the Jews to whom He came murmur'd and said How can this Man give us his Flesh to Eat and when some of the Disciples said It was an hard saying who could hear it and thereupon walked no more with Him He that in Cases of less Moment always explain'd his Parables should yet be Dark and Figurative in This of that Importance which occasioned not only the Murmuring of the Jews and Departure of the Disciples Then but also occasions as CHRIST well foresaw our differences at This Day Should He I say explain Himself in matters of less weight and yet be Dark in this great Concern is what would be contrary to his Wisdom and Goodness But so far was CHRIST from meaning otherwise than plainly as he spake that to the murmuring Jews he confirms it vers 53. with a Verily verily I say unto you Except ye EAT the FLESH of the Son of Man and DRINK his BLOOD ye have no Life in you and to the Unbelieving Disciples vers 61 62. with a Doth this offend you What if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before Whereas when he spake by Parables He explain'd himself to them as Mat. 13.3 And he spake many things to them in Parables saying Behold a Sower c. or when he spake by way of Similitude as Mat. 18.23 Therefore is the Kingdom of Heaven LIKENED unto a certain King. Mat. 20.1 For the Kingdom of Heaven is LIKE unto a Man that is an Housholder Mat. 22.1,2 And JESUS answered and spake unto them again by PARABLES and said The Kingdom of Heaven is LIKE unto c. Mat. 23.1 Then shall the Kingdom of Heaven be LIKENED unto Ten Virgins c. See Mark 4.2 Mark 12.1 Luke 12.16 Luke 13.18,19 Luke 15.3 Luke 19.11 Luke 20.9 and you 'll find that in all Cases CHRIST spake not by PARABLES without telling them it was so and Expounding the same unto them But because the Gentleman is more particular pag. 22. upon that of CHRIST's being a Door a Vine a Rock c. let 's see whether the Parity 'twixt I am the DOOR the VINE c. be the same with The BREAD that I will give is my FLESH which I will give for the Life of the World or with what he said at his Last Supper when He took BREAD and Blessed it and Brake it and Gave it and said TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY without ever Explaining a Syllable to the contrary Whereas in that of the DOOR John 10. the Text tells us It was a PARABLE saying Vers 6. This PARABLE spake JESUS unto them c. Wherefore if the Protestant Answerer would be so kind as to produce as plain Scripture for this of the Sacrament's being a Figure as I have done for the Door 's being a Parable he 'll doubtless oblige YOV and certainly gain a Proselyte of ME. And in like manner of the Vine CHRIST saith Joh. 15.1 I am the True VINE and my Father is the Husbandman as before Mat. 20.1 where he likened the Kingdom of Heaven to a Man that is an Housholder and so goes on Explaining the same saying Vers 4. As the Branch cannot bear fruit of it Self except it abide in the VINE no more can ye except ye abide in ME which if you read the Chapter you 'll find to be more plain And in like manner of the ROCK That he was the CORNER STONE upon which the Foundation was laid and no other Foundation can any Man lay than what CHRIST has lay'd for on Him is Built the whole structure of our Salvation Wherefore whether these Parables of the DOOR the VINE c. be as plain as TAKE EAT THIS IS MY BODY be You or any Impartial Soul the Judge in his own Conscience As to what he says Pag. 9. That if the Words are Literally to be understood they would rather Infer the Conversion of Christ's Flesh and Blood into Bread and Wine For Proof whereof let 's go to the Words of Conversion themselves Mat. 26.26,27,28 where it is said Christ took Bread and Blessed it and Brake it and gave it and said Take Eat This is My BODY he doth not say Take Eat my BODY is this BREAD And in like manner of the CVP For this is my Blood which Words This is my BODY This is my BLOOD are the Words of Conversion and do no ways imply a Change of Christ's Flesh into Bread nor of his Blood into Wine but to the contrary they plainly Infer the Conversion of Bread and Wine into both the Body and Blood of Christ As to the Texts he brings from the 6th of St. John there was no Conversion then made nor do They make for him Besides that he who but just now Pag. 6. of his Answer told us That this Discourse in St. John had no special Reference to the Sacrament should now apply them notwithstanding is an odd way of shifting however as 't is these are the Words John 6.48,55 I am that Bread of Life For my Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed Had the Words been My Flesh is Bread indeed as the Gentleman would fain have them if you observe it Pag. 6. then indeed he would have had something of his side but as they are they make clear against him As to those Words ver 48. I am that Bread of Life methinks they are sufficiently explained by the following Texts where he says v. 50. This is the Bread which cometh down from Heaven ver 51. I am the Living Bread c. which Bread he tells us plainly is his Flesh saying Ver. 51. And the Bread that I will give is my Flesh and not that the Flesh which He would give was Bread But that That Bread was his Flesh which as said is sufficiently plain if not rather than differ I 'll joyn in Opinion with