of our Sauiour Christ what is to be said concerning the vnion of these two natures A. The manhood of our Sauiour Christ is inseparablie vnited to the person of the God-head and therin it subsisteth making but one person which neare vnion with the nature of man is so much the more wonderfull in that the very Angels which are much greater in glory then men are a Esa 6. 2. not able to abide the presence of God And indeed it is such b 1. Tim. 3. 16. a mysterie as neither Angels or men are able to comprehend Q. Then Christ though he consist of two natures is but one person A. It is truth he is true God and true man in one and the same person of the Deitie Luk. 1. 35. Ioh. 1. 14. Mat. 3. 17. Ephes 4. 10. Galath 4. 4. Q. Did not the inseparable vnion of the Humane nature to the person of the Deitie change the person thereof A. No verily but hee is the very same person that he was from all eternitie Q. Is it not said in the text that the WORD .i. the second person in Trinity was made flesh may it not seeme then that the God-head was turned into the Humane nature A. Nothing lesse no more then it can be said hee was turned into sinne or into a curse because it is said 2. Cor. 5. 11. Galath 3. he was made sinne or made a curse Q. Can you proue directly by the Scriptures that Christ after the vnion of the man-hood with the God-head is true God A. Yea verily for first the Scripture as hee is Christ the Messias absolutely calleth him God and giueth vnto him the name of Iehouah 1. Tim. 3. 16. Ioh. 20. 28. Act. 20. 28. Rom. 9. 5. 1. Ioh. 5. 20. Esa 9. 6. Ierem. 23. 2. Secondly the proper workes of God are attributed vnto him as the creation and gouernment of the world Ioh. 1. 3. 5. 17. Coloss 1. 16. Hebr. 1. 2. 3. The searching of harts Mat. 9. 4. Mark 2. 8. c. Thirdly the Essentiall Attributes of the Diuine nature are giuen to him he is said to be eternall Ioh. 1. 1. 17. 5. Micah 5. 2. Almighty in all places the King of Kings c. Ioh. 3. 31. Math. 18. 20. Apocal. 19. 16. Fourthly the Scriptures assigne Diuine honour vnto him Psalm 72. 11. Rom. 15. 12. Esa 11. 10. Ioh. 14. 1. Act. 7. 59. Q. But is not the God-head and man-hood at least mingled and confounded A. No by no meanes For then he should bee neither God nor man for things mingled doe not retaine the name of their simples as honey and oyle mixed together can neither be called honey nor oyle Further the properties of the two natures are such as cannot be mingled and confounded For neither can the Humane nature remaining a true humane nature partake or communicate of the properties and perfections of the Deitie or the Deitie of the defects of the Humanitie So that as the God-head cannot hunger thirst or be shut vp and circumscribed within the bounds of a place no more can the Humanity be infinite or in more places then one So that though the humane nature be no person of it selfe and hath no subsistance but in the person of the Deitie yet it continueth still distinct in substance properties and actions from the Deitie and both natures so vnited make but one Christ Q. Why was it necessary that Christ should bee both God and man in one person A. It was necessarie he should be man because he could not suffer as hee was God a Heb. 2. 14. 2. 16. 7. 4. 15. and it makes most for the glory of Gods Iustice to exact satisfaction from that nature that had sinned Secondly it was necessarie he should be God also that he might bee able to beare and ouercome all that was to be inflicted vpon him for our sinnes Thirdly it was necessarie also that the humane nature should in manner aforesaid be vnited to the person of the Deitie that the obedience which hee performed might bee of infinite merit as being the obedience of God Act. 20. 28. Q. What further fruit haue we by this coniunction A. That whereas God hath no shape comprehensible either to the eye of the body or of the soule and the mind of man cannot rest but in a representation of some thing that his mind and vnderstanding can in some sort reach vnto If it consider God in the second person in the Trinitie as he hath taken our nature and whereby God is after a sort reuealed in the flesh he hath whereupon in some sort to stay his mind Q. How did then the Iewes before his comming which could not doe so A. They might propose to themselues the second Gen. 18. 1. 2. 19. 1. 2. person that should take our nature and the same also that had appeared sundry times in the shape of a man albeit herein our priuiledge is greater then theirs wee beholding him as he is whereas they did behold him as he should be Q. Haue men onely benefit by this vnion of the two natures or doth it reach also to the Angels A. It seemeth to reach no further then to man for God neuer meant to saue those angels that fell seeing they fell maliciously into rebellion against God without tentation contrary to the cleare light of nature reuealed in their Creation And if he had purposed either to saue them or to haue benefited the elect Heb. 2. 12. 16. Angels any otherwise then by confirming them hee would haue taken their nature vpon him Q. But why then is it said that God by Christ doth reconcile all things vnto himselfe whether in earth or heauen Coloss 1. 20. A. By things in heauen is there to be vnderstood not the Angels but the Saints then in heauen For although God did elect the Angels to eternal glory yet Christ did not redeeme them but onely the seed of Heb. 2. 16. Abraham Q. Hitherto of the person and natures of our Sauiour Christ is there any such great necessity that Christians should be grounded in the truth of this doctrine A. Yea else Satan would neuer haue laboured as he hath done to corrupt and depraue the same by raising vp so many damnable heresies about the same Q. Why what heresies hath hee raised vp about this point A. The heresie first of Macedonius and the Valentinians who maintained that Christ brought with him out of heauen a heauenly body Secondly of Apelles that held hee had an aëriall bodie and that hee passed through the Virgin onely as water through a pipe Thirdly of the Manichies who made him to haue onely an imaginarie body Fourthly of Apollinaris who denied that Christ had a reasonable soule and who held that his Diuinitie was in stead of a soule Fifthly of Eunomions who affirmed that Christ was a meere man and the Sonne of God onely by adoption Sixthly of Ebion who held that Christ was
speeches What is it in receiuing them A. When men haue their eares open to heare ill of Psalm 15. 3. 101. 5. Prou. 17. 4. 25. 23. ◠Sam. 24. 10. their neighbour with allowance Contrary whereunto is the repulsing and terrifying of such as are bringers of tales and slanderous speeches against their neighbour Q. So much of the Commandement VVhat are the speciall punishments of them that are the ordinarie breakers thereof A. First to be suspected condemned and euill reported Matth. 7. 2. Eccles 7. 23. 24. of themselues Secondly false witnesses should haue that punishment laid vpon them which should Deut. 19. 18. 20. haue been inflicted vpon those whom they witnessed against if their witnesse had been true CHAP. 25. Of the tenth Commandement Sinne that cōmeth not so farre as consent is concupiscence The cause First Adams sinne Arising from the first Originall Corruption The degrees euill thoughts Neuer liked of Liked of but reiected EXOD. 20. vers 17. Thou shalt not couet thy neighbours house thou shalt not couet thy neighbours wife nor his man-seruant nor his maid-seruant nor his oxe nor his asse nor any thing that is thy neighbours Q. SO much of the Commandements that forbid those sinnes against our neighbour which come to consent or further The tenth Commandement followeth which forbiddeth those sinnes which come not so farre What is that Commandement A. Thou shalt not couet c. Q. Is here forbidden all coueting or desire A. No There is a naturall desire of meate drinke sleepe and posteritie which kept within their bounds Deut 12. 25. Gal. 5. 17. are not to be condemned Likewise the spirit after a sort desireth and lusteth against the flesh as well as the flesh against the spirit Q. What is the coueting then that is here condemned A. That which is called Concupiscence Q. VVhat is that A. All vnlawfull coueting of pleasures or profit which concerne our neighbour and in them all other lusts and desires against our neighbour which come not to consent and therfore it is not simply said Thou shalt not couet or thou shalt not couet a wife a man-seruant c. but Thou shalt not couet thy neighbours wife c. Q. Why is there heere speciall mention of seruants oxe and asse A. Because there was speciall vse of these amongst Gods people then more then amongst vs for as the Rabbines also haue truly obserued the Scripture vseth to speake of things that fall into the common practice of mans life Q. This Commandement then reacheth further then all the former A. Yea verily in which respect the Apostle confesseth that notwithstanding he profited in the knowledge of the Law aboue his fellowes yet hee knew not what sinne was vntill hauing commenced Doctor Rom. 7. 7. in the schoole of the holy Ghost through the knowledge of the Gospell he vnderstood this Commandement And therefore it is no great maruell if the great Doctors in Poperie remaine ignorant of this Commandement Further by this Commandement especially are all men conuinced of sinne because all Psal 143. 2. Rom. 7. 7. men couet Q. VVhat learne you from hence A. The errour of the Papists which denie Concupiscence to bee a sinne and that hold that wee haue Gal. 5. 16. 17. free will to doe good or euill whereas we cannot but couet euill vntill we be borne anew and the very coueting of euill is a sinne Q. If we sinne necessarily and cannot but sinne then it seemeth we are not to be blamed A. That followeth not for though wee sinne necessarily yet we sinne voluntarily also therefore that excuse which the necessity of sinning may seeme to make for vs our willingnesse to sinne doth take from vs. Besides this necessity is no other then that which we brought vpon our selues therefore as drunkennes excuseth not the murtherer because hee dranke willingly no more doth the necessity of sinning excuse vs because by our voluntary drinking of Satans poysoned cup in Adams loynes wee brought it vpon our selues Q. Shew me first the causes then the degrees of concupiscence A. The cause thereof is either first and mediate or immediate and secondarie Q. VVhat is the first cause A. That sinne which Adam committed first and which wee also haue committed in Adam the guilt thereof by propagation and generation being deriued to vs considering that as Adams integrity should haue been ours if he had stood in it so was his transgression ours the couenant being made with him both for himselfe and all mankinde that were to come of him Q. VVhat familiar example is there to make this somewhat more plaine A. A man being a slaue his progenie to all posterities are slaues A man also being attained of high treason the attaint of blood reacheth to his posteritie The young serpents and wolues that neuer stung men nor deuoured sheepe are notwithstanding worthie to die yea while they are in their dams bellies Q. VVhat is the secondarie or immediate cause A. That sinne which is commonly called Original sin consisting in the depriuation of good and pronenesse to euill which sinne is in vs from the first minute Jam. 1. 14. Rom. 1. 22. 23. Mat. 15. 19. and moment of our conception And this maketh against the Pelagians who teach that sinne commeth by imitation onely whereas this corruption is in all men hy nature and is the puddle and sinke from which all other sinnes doe flow which the more it is pressed the more it breaketh forth as mighty streames that cannot be stopped till God by his holy spirit do Iam. 1. 14. restraine it whence all other sinnes hauing their proper and speciall names this is called by the common and generall name of a Rom. 7. 7. 8. 17. Iam. 1. Heb. 12. 15. SINNE Q. VVhat are the degrees of Concupiscence forbidden heere A. The first is wandring and euil thoughts though wee neuer like of them for euen the very rising of such thoughts in our minds argueth our corruption of nature for were it not for that inborne corruption such thoughts could not once enter into our soules further then they were offered vnto vs by some outward tentation of the diuell or of the world as it was Mat. 4. 1. 2. c. vnto our Sauiour Christ And although in the incorrupt state of man he might dutifully haue thought of the transgression of the Commandement with a perfect hatred of it yet the same should not haue beene as now it is suddenly rising in the minde without thinking or meditation of the naughtinesse and hatefulnesse thereof where now these thoughts rise suddenly and the hatred and detestation commeth after and is not in such perfection as then it should haue been Whereas the Lord our God hath the eyes of his glory so pure that hee will not allow of the least corruption Habak 1. 13. in the temple of our hearts where hee seateth himselfe Q. VVhat is the second degree of Concupiscence A. When
there are wandring wicked thoughts with some liking though we reiect them Hither may be referred first vaine sudden wishes then dreames which haue some euill in them and yet are not from any liking of those things when a man is awake but which a man when he is awake misliketh Q. So much of the Commandement What is the vse of it A. It teacheth vs more then all other Commandements of the second table doe that wee are miserable and wretched by nature subiect to the curse and wrath of God CHAP. 26. Of the summe of the Law The summe of the Law consisteth in the loue of God with all the powers of our Soule in 1. Vnderstanding Iudgement Memorie 2. Will affectiō Body Our neighbour which is like to the first LVKE chap. 10. vers 27. Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soule and with all thy strength and with all thy mind and thy neighbour as thy selfe Q. HAuing spoken of all the ten Commandements tell me what is the summe of all A. Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart Luk. 10. 27. with all thy mind and with all thy vnderstanding and thy neighbour as thy selfe taken out of Deut. 6. 5. and Leuit. 19. 18. Q. VVhat is the summe of this summe A. Loue which consisteth of two heads to wit the loue of God and of our neighbour 1. Ioh. 5. 2. 1. Tim. 1. 4. 5. Q. VVhat vse is there of this short summe A. It furthereth vs in the twofold vse of the Law before spoken of for first it will be a meanes the more to humble vs and so the more effectually to driue vs to Christ because when all our sinnes are gathered and mustered into one troope or heape they will appeare the greater and cast vs downe the more as a man owing sundrie debts vnto diuers or vnto one man in the particulars is confident of his ability to pay all as long as he heareth they are all but smal sums but hearing the whole summe despaireth of the paiment of it Secondly it helpes vs much in our obedience to the Law for by this as by a glasse wee may the easier see and being shortly contriued we may the better remember our whole dutie both to God and man this being as a Card or Map of a Countrey easily carried about with vs. Q. What is it to loue the Lord with all our heart and all our mind and all our strength A When the whole man yeeldeth simple obedience vnto him in all the powers both of soule and body As when the vnderstanding doth perfectly comprehend all things that God would haue vs to know when in iudgement we thinke aright of them when the memorie accordingly retaineth them when in our wils and affections we perfectly loue al knowne good and perfectly hate all knowne euill and when all the members parts and graces of the body as beauty strength c. are wholly employed in the seruice of God and in the doing of his will Q. What is it to loue our neighbour as our selues A. When that which we would that men should Mat. 7. 12. doe to vs we doe to them Q. Is it not possible for a man to doe all this A. No for wee are ignorant of many things and those which we know we know but in part and that which we know we iudge not aright of nor remember as wee ought And as for will and affections they are a great deale shorter then our knowledge And the wandring of our eyes in the hearing of the Word and other parts of Gods seruice doth easily bewray the small obedience and conformity of the rest of the members and parts of the body To conclude if wee doe but examine our soules how wee stand affected to our enemies to strangers to common men to them wee know yea to our dearest friends we shall finde that we herein come short of any such affection to our neighbour which as it is so much lesse then the former by how much man is inferiour to God so wee being not able to accomplish it are much lesse able to accomplish the other And therefore the righteousnesse of the Papist is a rotten righteousnesse and such as will neuer stand before the iudgment seate of God Q. Seeing then that the whole summe and maine end of the Law is Loue what gather you thereof 1. Tim. 1. 4. 5. A. That which the Apostle exhorteth vnto viz. to leaue all idle questions as vnprofitable and to deale in those matters onely which further the practice of loue Q. Why is the loue of God called the first and greatest Commandement A. Because wee should chiefly and in the first place regard our duties to God and be most carefull 1. Ioh. 4. 20. to vnderstand his will and to worship him Q. Why is the second Table said to be like vnto the first A. For that they go so hand in hand together that no man can performe the one vnlesse hee accomplish the other which the Apostle Iohn plainly teacheth 1. Ioh. 15. 2. Q. What is to bee said of those that seeme to keepe the one and care not for the other A. If they seeme to serue God and are not in charity they are meere hypocrites and if they will seeme to deale vprightly with their neighbour and haue not the loue of God in them they are prophane politicks and very Atheists Q. Hitherto of the Couenant of workes what is the maine vse of all the doctrine hereof A. To shew that wee cannot thereby attaine vnto Reconciliation with God and life euerlasting by reason of our corruption and the infirmity of our flesh Rom. 8. 3. For we hauing on our part broke this Couenant God cannot without iniustice iustifie vs by this Couenant and consequently wee cannot bee saued thereby Q. But why then is it called a Couenant seeing it is in the nature of a Couenant to reconcile those that are at variance as is to be seene in the example of Abraham and Abimelech Laban and Iacob Gen. 21. 27. and 31. 44. A. Although it bee not able to reconcile vs yet it maketh way to reconciliation by another Couenant Neither is it meet strictly to bind Gods couenant with men to the same lawes that the couenants of one man with another are bound vnto for amongst men the weaker seeketh reconciliation at the hands of the Luk. 14. 31. 32. 2. Cor. 5. 20. mightier But God who neither can be hurt or benefited by vs seeketh vnto vs for peace CHAP. 27. Of the Couenant of Grace In the Couenant of Grace is to be considered First The parts Gods act with vs. Ours with God The sorts the Old Testament New Secondly the foundation thereof Christ Iesus Chap. 28. IER chap. 31. vers 31. 32. 33. 34. 31 Behold the daies come saith the Lord that I will make a new couenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Iudah
32. Not according to the couenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I tooke them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt which my couenant they brake although I was an husband vnto them saith the Lord. 33. But this shall bee the couenant that I will make with the house of Israel After those daies saith the Lord I will put my Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall be my people 34. And they shall teach no more euery man his neighbour and euery man his brother saying Know the Lord for they shall all know me from the least of them vnto the greatest of them saith the Lord for I will forgiue their iniquitie and I will remember their sinne no more Q. THus much of the Couenant of Workes called the Law the Couenant of Grace followeth What doth this Scripture call it A. A new Couenant Q. Why is it called a new Couenant A. Because it succeedeth the former Couenant Heb. 8. 13. and was made vpon the breach thereof Q. Doth then the making of this Couenant disable the former A. Yea for the latter Couenant had not been Heb. 8 7. Rom. 3. 23. Galath 3. 21. made if the former had not bin broken so become insufficient And therefore they are conuinced of impiety by the very making of this couenant who seeke Iustification by the old Couenant Q. What is this new Couenant A. A free contract or Couenant betweene God Act. 16. 30. 31. Iohn 3. 16. 17. 18. and a sinner concerning the pardon of sinne and life euerlasting through faith in Christ Iesus Q. When did this Couenant begin A. Immediately after the Fall Gen. 3. 15. Q. What is specially to be considered in this Couenant A. First the parts and sorts thereof secondly the ground and foundation Q. What are the parts thereof A. The mutuall acts betweene God and a sinner Q. What is the act on Gods part A. A free offer of saluation vnto a sinner vpon this Iohn 3. 14. Act. 10. 43. condition that he will beleeue in Christ Q. What is the act on the sinners part A. An acceptance of this offer by submitting to the condition Q. What followeth hereupon A. That hee will be their God who are vnder this Exod. 3. 15. Couenant and will be surnamed by them and therefore in the third of Exodus a Heb. 11. 16. and else where he is called the God of our Fathers which noteth the singular priuiledge and glory of Gods people in that hee is content to be surnamed by them otherwise the proper name of God would bee fearfull vnto vs without the addition of some such Sur-name Q. Of how many sorts is this Couenant A. In substance it is but one but in regard of circumstance it is two the Old Testament and the New Q. What is the Old Testament A. It is the couenant of God a Heb. 8. 4. 5. which vnder types figures and shadowes did set forth Christ before his comming in the flesh and by vertue whereof life euerlasting was giuen by faith in Christ that was to come Q. What is the new Testament A. It is the couenant of God which since the comming of Christ in the flesh hath abolished those shadowes giueth life euerlasting by faith in Christ that is come by meanes whereof it is in a speciall respect called the Gospell Coloss 2. 16. 17. 20. Hebr. 9. 1. 2. 3. c. CHAP. 28. Of Christs person In Christ is to be considered his Person Consisting of two natures Diuine Humane Conioyned in one person Office Chap. 29. IOHN chap. 1. vers 14. And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among vs and we beheld his glory as the glory of the onely begotten of the Father full of grace and truth Q. THus much of the parts and sorts of the Couenant of Grace what is the ground and foundation thereof A. Christ Iesus aforesaid Ioh. 3. 14. Act. 10. 43. Q. Who is Christ Iesus A. The a Luk. 2. 11. 1. Tim. 2. 5. eternall Sonne of God the second person in the Trinitie that b Joh. 1. 45. 8. 56. Messias whom the Fathers vnder the Law expected and the Prophets foretold of Q. What are we more particularly to consider in him A. First his Person secondly his Office Q. What is to be considered in the Person of Christ A. The diuersitie of natures and vnion of them Q. What are the natures of Christ A. Two his Diuine and Humane Q. What haue you learned concerning the Diuine nature of Christ A. That he is the onely begotten and naturall Son Iohn 3. 16. 18. 1. 1. Heb. 1. 3. Coloss 1. 15. of God his Word Character and Image God co-essentiall and Coequall with the Father and the holy Ghost Ioh. 10. 30. Rom. 9. 5. 1. Ioh. 5. 20. Q. What is the Humane nature of Christ A. That nature by which he is also true man Q. Is Christ Iesus true man also A. a Gen. 3. 15. 1. Tim. 2. 5. Yea in all things b 1. Ioh. 2. 1. Matth. 1. 18. 20. sinne onely excepted Q. How did he become man A. Hee was conceiued by the holy Ghost in the wombe of the Virgin Mary and was afterward borne and brought forth into the world after the manner of other men Q. Did he not passe through the Virgin Mary without taking any thing of her substance A. No for hee is called the seed of the woman Gen. 3. 15. He is said to be made of the seed of Dauid according to the flesh Rom. 1. 3. To bee made of a woman Galath 4. 4. To be a plant that sprang out of the root of Iesse Esa 11. 1. 10. Q. How is he said to be conceiued by the holy Ghost A. Because the holy Ghost by his incomprehensible Mat. 1. 18. 20. power wrought his conception supernaturally Q. Is he then the Sonne of God in respect of his Humane nature A. No for first the Apostle saith Hee is without Father and without mother that is without father as hee Heb. 7. 3. is man without mother as God Secondly then there should be in the person of Christ two sonnes one of the Father another of the holy Ghost Q. But is he not therefore called the Sonne of the highest Luk. 1. 32. because he was conceiued by the holy Ghost A. No but onely because hee that was so conceiued was the naturall sonne of God Q. Doth the humane nature of Christ consist of a reasonable soule as well as a body or was the God-head in stead of the soule vnto him A. It consisteth also of a reasonable soule as appeareth by that which he said My soule is heauie to the very Mat. 26. 38. death And our soules should haue perished euerlastingly except our Sauiour Christ had had a soule and had suffered in soule Q. Thus much of the two natures
for such our Sauiour at the first institution tooke as was at that time commonly Exod. 12. 18. 19 vsed It was indeed vnleauened bread but no other at that time was lawfull nor to be had in that place Q. VVhat doth the bread and wine signifie A. The body and blood of Christ Mat. 26. 26. 28. Q. VVhy did the Lord make choyce of these creatures of bread and wine to this end A. Because they are of all the meanes of our nourishment Psal 104. 15. the chiefest and therefore meaning to set forth our spirituall nourishment by bodily things he made choyce of them Q. VVhy did hee not content himselfe with one of these onely A. That hee might thereby shew that by him wee haue whatsoeuer is needfull to nourish vs to life euerlasting and that wee haue a plentifull and assured redemption in Christ Wherefore the practice of the Papists in taking away the cup is answerable to their doctrine who teach that neither we are saued wholly nor certainly by Christ Q. VVhat are the sacramentall actions about the bread and wine A. The Actions of the Minister or Communicants Q. VVhat are the Ministers actions A. First after the example of our Sauiour Christ he consecrateth the bread and wine Q. How did our Sauiour consecrate them A. First by separating the bread and wine from the ordinarie vse to this holy vse by prayer and thankesgiuing the latter whereof being plainly expressed by the Apostle doth imply the former Whereby wee may vnderstand that our Sauiour Christ prayed to Mat. 26. 26. 1. Cor. 11. 24. God his heauenly Father to this effect that his death in it selfe sufficient to saue might by the working of his spirit be effectuall to the elect and that those outward signes of bread and wine might through the operation of his holy spirit bee effectuall to the purposes they are ordained for Q. Doth this consecration change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ A. No but they still continue in nature and substance bread and wine still and are but only types and seales of Christs body and blood Q. But doth not our Sauiour say of the bread This is my body and of the wine This is my blood A. Though he do yet it thence no more followeth that the bread is his very reall body and the wine his blood then that he is a materiall doore or vine because he saith I am the doore I am the vine Q. How is our Sauiour then to be vnderstood A. To speake by an vsuall figure where the name of the thing signified is giuen to the signe After the same manner that in the old Testament Circumcision is called the Couenant and the Lambe the Passeouer Act. 22. 16. Tit. 3. 5. because they were signes of those things Q. What speciall reasons haue you against the change of these elements into the very body and blood of Christ commonly called Transubstantiation A. First then at the first institution there must needs be two Christs one that giueth another that is giuen Secondly If the bread bee the very body of Christ c. then there is no true and proportionable signe to represent the thing signified and consequently no Sacrament Thirdly the same indiuiduall body must then of necessity be in more places then one at once which is not onely against the nature of a true humane body but of a body in generall also Fourthly the Apostles and Euangelists cal it bread and wine after the consecration 1. Cor. 10. 16. 26. 27. 28. Matth. 26. 29. Fifthly if there were any such change it were the greatest miracle in the world but all other miracles are such as haue been apparent to sense Sixthly then the wicked as well as the godly should receiue Christ Iesus and his quickening spirit which is neuer separated from him Yea which is horrible to consider mice and rats may eate the true bodie of Christ and drinke his blood Q. But it is not likely that at this time and in this place our Sauiour would vse a figuratiue speech and speak obscurely whereas he might haue spoken plainly A. First it is plaine that at the same time he vsed as Iohn 14. 6. 15. 5. figuratiue a speech as this Secondly in this institution also wee must of necessity acknowledge that hee vseth a figure when hee saith that a Luk. 22. 10. the cup is the new Testament Thirdly there is often more light and plainnesse in a figure then in a proper speech Q. But what may be noted out of this forme of speech A. The neare and sure coniunction of the signe 1. Cor. 10. 16. with the thing signified which it hath in them that shall receiue it worthily in so much as they which partake of the one receiue the other also Q. Then it seemes that though vpon the consecration the bread and wine bee not changed into the reall body and blood of Christ that yet they are present in with or vnder the bread and wine A. Not corporally substantially or locally for then first the body of Christ should be euery where which doth as much destroy the nature of a humane body as to be in many places at once Secondly then as in transubstantiation the body and blood of Christ should not be a spiritual food of the soule but bodily such as the wicked eate of as well as the godly Thirdly then also as in transubstantiation Christ should be eaten as the Capernaites fancied really with the body Iohn 6. 26. which our Sauiour denieth Fourthly it should not then be true which is said Act. 3. 21. That the heauens shall containe him till the time that all things bee restored Fifthly it is the nature of that faith by which we lay hold on and receiue Christ to seeke him and Coloff 3. 12. Philip. 3. 10. Hebr. 6. 10. behold him in heauen and to feed vpon him there Q. Thus much of the first action of the Minister what other actions are there of his A. Hee taketh the bread and breaketh it and the wine and poureth it out deliuering them vnto the receiuers and shewing the signification of them Q. What is meant and signified hereby A. That Christ himselfe of his owne accord offereth his body to be boken and his blood to be shead for our sinnes and that this body so broken and his blood so shead being receiued by faith is that food by which we liue euerlastingly Q. Why doth our Sauiour say This is my body which is broken for you when yet it was not broken A. It is vsuall in the Scripture to shew the certainty of that which is to come by speaking of them as if they were present Esa 9. 6. Ezech. 39. 8. Q. Why doth Christ call the cup the cup of the new Testament A. Because it is a seale of the promise of God touching our saluation in Christ which being in old time vnder the Law shadowed by