of Truth and the way of Error the way of Godliness and the way of Iniquity the way of Life and the way of Death I most humbly and most earnestly beseech our most Gracious God for his Son Christ Iesus's sake to give you a right understanding in all things and to preserve you continually in the way of Truth Holiness Righteousness and Life Everlasting Amen THE END A SUPPLEMENT To the PRECEDING SERMONS TOGETHER WITH A TRACT concerning the Holy Sacrament OF THE Lords Supper Promised in the PREFACE By the Right Reverend Father in God HERBERT Lord Bishop of HEREFORD London Printed for Charles Harper 1679. A SUPPLEMENT To the Preceding SERMONS IN the Preceding Sermons I have proved these six things 1. That by God's special appointment all persons are to read and learn the Scriptures for their Edification in Faith and good Life and therefore 't is both foolish and impious for vain Man to take upon him to give reasons why the People should not read them 2. The reason of this because that in the Scriptures we have eternal life as our Saviour tells us which St. Paul explicates more particularly saying That they make us wise unto salvation that is they teach us all things necessary for our belief and they throughly furnish us unto all good works that is they teach us all things requisite for good life And these things the Scriptures compleatly contain in themselves without any Humane Doctrines so that if there were no other Writings nor Instructions in the World but the Scriptures alone yet we should not want any thing necessary to eternal life 3. That we are not to believe any thing with Divine Faith but what is clearly contained in Scripture for such a belief is a Duty belonging to God alone and 't is the greatest and most acceptable Duty and Sacrifice we can perform unto God to captivate our understandings in Obedience to Faith in God and therefore to give this principal Divine Service unto Man is high Idolatry and consequently to believe in the Apostles themselves had been great Idolatry had not Christ fully assured us That they should have the Holy Ghost to guide them into all Truth So that to speak properly we do not believe in the Apostles and Prophets but in God the Holy Ghost speaking in them And for this reason we find St. Paul very wary in distinguishing and declaring to the people what he delivered as from the Lord and what he delivered as from himself though he was perswaded he had the Spirit of the Lord even in that But yet no clear and full assurance that it was spoken directly by the Lord. Nay our blessed Saviour himself though God and Man yet would not have us believe in him as Man and therefore assures us That the words he spake were not his but the Father's speaking by him 4. I have proved that we have not any clear and full assurance from God That any Assembly of Men or Church since the Apostles are infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost into all Truth and therefore to believe in any Assembly of Men or Church without this full assurance of the Holy Ghost's speaking in them is Idolatry also for by such a belief you pay them the greatest Divine Worship 5. Though we should grant That some promise of Infallibility were made in Scripture to the Church yet this must include the Laity as well as the Clergy for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate Church is always set in Scripture for the Congregation of the Faithful and is not once set for the Clergy distinct from the Laity But there is no such thing as Infallibility granted to any neither Priests nor People nor both together 6. Grant yet farther that the word Church in Scripture should signifie the Clergy and a promise of Infallibility made to them as Successors to the Apostles yet the same Promise being made and the same Authority given to all the Apostles alike the Successor of St. Peter and his Clergy cannot from hence challenge any more Infallibility than the Successors of the other Apostles with their Clergy and Church But the Papists deny this Infallibility to other Churches Certainly then other Churches may as well deny it to them All these things I have proved But now for a fuller conviction of the Papists and perchance for better satisfaction to some others I have a mind to grant yet farther That Christ made some particular Promise to St. Peter above the other Apostles yea and to St. Peter's Successors also 't is impossible from Scripture to prove either of these but let it pass so let us now see how the Papists can from hence fix this Infallibility to the Bishop of Rome and his Churches For I have shewed you from Scripture which doubtless is of better Authority than any Writings the Papists can bring for St. Peter that Rome was comprised in St. Paul's Jurisdiction and that he lived and preached and suffered there But we will pass over this also and yield to St. Peter's Jurisdiction over the whole World What then Then St. Peter was Bishop of Rome and setled his Successor there And how do the Papists prove this They answer that many authentick Historians tell them so is this all their Proof Humane Testimony from History is this a sufficient foundation for a prime Article of Faith on which depends the Salvation of all Christian Souls Is this a sure Rock or rather a bank of Sand to build their Infallibility upon Do not the same Historians relate that St. Peter was Bishop of Antioch and we have more reason to believe History for this because the Scripture tells us he was there but not one tittle of his ever being at Rome but strong Presumptions to the contrary St. Luke in the Acts speaking so much of St. Paul's going thither hath not one word of St. Peter's who being as the Papists believe so eminent an Apostle above all the rest seems somewhat neglected by St. Luke which makes me suspect St. Luke was not of their Opinion And shall we accuse St. Paul also for want of charity or civility never to mention St. Peter in all those his particular and numerous Salutations to and from others in his Epistles we must not think that their quarrel at Antioch where St. Paul withstood St. Peter stuck so long in his mind as to omit all Salutation to him in several Epistles We ought rather in charity to St. Paul to believe St. Peter was not at Rome And truly methinks the Papists themselves who pretend so much to honour St. Peter do him no small dishonour in affirming him to be at Rome when St. Paul answered for himself before Nero the first time St. Paul complaining that no man stood with him but all forsook him And if those Historians which the Papists rely on for St. Peter's being Bishop of Rome speak true in the circumstance of time then he was at Rome when St. Paul first answered
of God to confirm their Doctrine for we have no other assurance of the Doctrine delivered by the Apostles but the miracles which they wrought in confirmation of it Excuse me for herein you are foully mistaken we have our Saviours command given them to preach the Gospel to all the world and we have his promise made to them that he would send the Holy Ghost unto them to lead them into all truth which we are assured did descend upon them working miraculously in divers and sundry manners Wherefore to speak properly we say That we do not believe in the Apostles but we believe in God the Holy Ghost speaking to us by the Apostles And which is yet more our Saviour himself which was both God and man yet he doth not require us to believe in him as man but as God assuring us so Ioh. viii 28. I do nothing of my self but as my father hath taught me I speak these things And again xii 49. I have not spoken of my self but the father which sent me he gave me a commandment what I should say and what I should speak By which we are fully instructed that we are not to believe in any man living but only in God speaking to us by man and therefore we are not to give Divine Faith to the Doctrine of any man the greatest Saint that ever was unless we are as fully assured that he hath God the Holy Ghost speaking in him as we are that he spake to us by the Apostles And certainly we have no such assurance of any man since the Apostles no special command given by Christ to preach any new Gospel no promise of the Holy Ghost to lead them into all truth no visible descension of the Holy Ghost in after Ages no gift of tongues nor prophesie But it may be you think that at the end of St. Matthews Gospel where Christ sends the Apostles to preach and says Lo I am with you always even unto the end of the world this promise must be intended to the Apostles Successors also the Fathers of the Church that Christ would be with them unto the end of the world for the Apostles themselves were not to continue unto the end of the world but their Successors All this I grant that Christ will be with the Fathers of the Church the Successors of the Apostles to the end of the world who succeed the Apostles in their Doctrine as well as in Office Christ will bless them and prosper that Doctrine unto the end of the world Wherefore I pray you consider the whole context of that place Vers. 19 20. Go ye therefore and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and lo I am with you always even unto the end of the world So long as you teach the things I have commanded you so long I am with you even to the end of the world The promise then of being with them to the end of the world is conditional viz. If they teach the things that Christ hath commanded either by himself or by his Apostles who were guided by his Spirit all which commands of Christ and his Apostles are delivered unto us in the Scriptures On this condition the promise was made in teaching the things commanded and not otherwise What is this to teaching of new Doctrine not commanded by Christ not contained in Scripture Not one tittle of promise made for that nor any commission given to teach new Doctrines but rather a curse for the person teaching any other Gospel than what was already preached be he man on earth or Angel from Heaven Gal. i. 8. Why because the Doctrine preacht by Christ and his Apostles was compleat for our Salvation And therefore we do not find that any one of the antient Holy Fathers doth pretend to any such infallible guidance of the Holy Ghost and thereby require submission and obedience to his Doctrine but rather declares quite contrary as I have newly mentioned unto you out of St. Austine one of the four principal Doctors of the Church who gives us a general rule Not to give any assured belief to any the most learned and most Holy Fathers farther than they can prove their Doctrine by Scriptures that is our compleat rule of faith Is it not then a strange disobedient wilful blind submission to their Doctrine expresly contrary to the rule of faith given by themselves And great reason had St. Austin to give us this rule when he had found as he expresses in another place that St. Cyprian a preceding Father of the Church most eminent for learning and sanctity who laid down his life for the faith this great Doctor Saint and Martyr taught and maintained an error even unto death which error of his was condemned afterwards by the whole Christian Church And not only St. Cyprian but all the great Bishops of Affrica joyned with him in this error And long before St. Cyprian Papias Bishop of Hierapolis whom that famous Bishop of Lyons Irenaeus affirms to have been a Disciple of St. Iohn the Evangelist and very probably he might be so for St. Iohn dyed in the hundred and second year of our Lord and Papias was then a Pastor of the Church He taught if not began as most antient Writers conceive the error of the Chiliasts That Christ should come again to reign here on earth a thousand years Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons mentioned before learnt this error of him and did propagate it farther till at length it infected most Writers of that Age. And this Irenaeus himself was the Disciple of St. Polycarpus and Polycarpus the Disciple of St. Iohn and therefore 't was no wonder that this error was taken up by many Doctors of the Church having two such famous men the Authors of it Yet this error was not long after rejected by the whole Christian Church Good reason then had St. Austin to give us that rule not to subscribe to any Doctrine of the Fathers but such as they proved by Holy Scriptures And it was a seasonable caution to future Ages against his own Doctrine for he himself taught the error that it was necessary to administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to Infants and this was an opinion generally believed in the Christian Church for many years though afterwards and to this day concluded a gross error And I beg leave to say this as true as free That whoever reads the Doctors and Fathers of the Church writings of the erroneous customs generally practised in their times but afterwards rejected by the whole Christian Church as well by the Papists as others shall find these Fathers as zealously maintaining by forced arguments and wrested Scriptures those their erroneous customs as the soundest truths God is my record I say not this out of any reproach to them whereof many have been great Champions for the fundamental truths and
would be happy for us but hence comes our misery that instead of practising what we understand we fall to disputing of that we understand not and so we grow into passion from passion into faction from faction into schisms and heresies Were our passion laid aside there would be no need of laying aside the Scriptures but we should read them to our edification whereas we now read them to our destruction and confusion and thus the word of Eternal Life becomes unto us the savour of Death unto Death Wherefore my beloved when you take the Scriptures into your hands to read let your main intention be to observe the Instructions there given for your behaviour and course of life and then labour to stir up your affection and desire to practise it As for matters of belief as much as is necessary will quickly be attained but for practice that will require the whole study of a mans life Neither doth this consist so much in reading as in meditating on what we do read and striving to subdue our hearts in obedience to it and sending up also short but fervent ejaculations to Almighty God for the powerful assistance of his holy spirit to enable us to perform that is the end of all to perform This do and thou shalt live And if we thus read the Scriptures they will be unto us as the words of Eternal Life and the power of God to our Salvation Which God of his infinite mercy grant THE THIRD SERMON ON JOHN V. Ver. 39. Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life THE last thing we were upon in handling this Text was that the Scriptures wherein we say we have Eternal Life tells us that we are to hear the Church and he that will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican Mat. xviii 17. Here say the Papists we have a plain easie and safe rule to guide all in matters of Faith both learned and unlearned this cuts off all disputes and prevents all errors Hear the Church what the Church believes we must belieue and if we will not hear the Church we are hereticks heathens If this be the safe and only way to heaven what man in his right wits would not take this safe and easie way Doubtless a very easie way and truly I think that is the reason why many so much incline to it most men love an easie way to Heaven and few are found willing to take much pains for it And those few that are conscientious in their way are often scrupulous also and fearful and being wearied with anxieties and disputes in their melancholy moods may be willing to lie down on this specious bank not considering Latet anguis in herba the lurking Adder that there lies concealed For certainly this way is as dangerous as easie far from safe Can any man think it a safe way to forsake the God of truth and his holy word and hearken to vain erroneous men and their doctrines whereof our Saviour bids us beware No Let God be true and every man a liar Rom. iii. 4. But you will say what the Papists here urge is not the Doctrine of men but the Word of God Hear the Church I grant 't is the Word of God but strangely abused by the interpretation of men and wrested very far from the clear meaning of the Text as I shall now shew you Look I pray you a few verses before and see what is the business here treated of and to what this saying relates V. 15. If thy Brother shall trespass against thee go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone if he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother V. 16. But if he will not hear thee then take with thee one or two more that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established V. 17. And if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican I beseech you what is this to our purpose to the determination in matters of Faith Are trespasses matters of Faith No but they will prove from hence by necessary consequence That if you are to hear the Church in matters of fact such as trespasses much more are you to hear the Church in matters of faith They will prove I thought we had laid aside all proofs and consequences for they produce this Text as a clear evident rule to cut off all doubts and disputes a plain and safe way for all men learned and unlearned What is proposed as a plain rule to clear all doubts and determine all controversies ought in it self to be as clear as the Sun so that whosoever is not stark blind must needs see it and then doubtless I am stark blind for I cannot see one word here tending to matters of faith But they will argue thus If we are to hear the Church in temporal matters much more in spiritual matters for the Church being a spiritual body hath more to do in spirituals than temporals As blind as I am I plainly see as gross a mistake here in the word Church as before in the word Trespasses Did not I fully shew you the other day that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Text which we in English translate Church never in Scripture signifies the Clergy but the Congregation of the people the assembly of the faithful though we in English use the word Church very variously which is often the cause of great mistakes and therefore I pray you remember it well that in Scripture it still signifies the Congregation of the People And would the Papists have the Congregation of the People be our Infallible Guide to give rules of Faith and determine all controversies If so I see a sure and fatal consequence to their Infallible Head the Pope he and his triple Crown would soon be tumbled from his Throne to the ground and all his power under foot But put the case we would take the word Church here for the Clergy as the Papists would have us yet this gives no commission farther then to determin trespasses And as for their consesequences 't is very absurd to infer that because God leaves unto men to determin the small matters of this world therefore men may determin matters of that infinite weight as the eternal salvation of Souls For though the Church that is the Congregation should make a wrong judgment in the case yet the party suffering may if he please make great advantage by it for the patient suffering the loss for peace sake as God hath required he shall gain a hundred fold in Heaven but the party that forsakes Gods Wâ—â—d and hearkens to the wrong determination in matters of Faith shall suffer a hundred fold damage in Hell This therefore God reserves to himself and his Holy word unto which we are
As for example If one of their Priests should pronounce the words of Consecration in the Lord's Supper and not intend to consecrate the Bread then 't is no Sacrament but the Bread remains bare Bread still because he did not intend to consecrate it I pray you remember this for I shall have occasion to mention it again hereafter So when any Bishop says the words for ordaining a Priest and doth not intend really to ordain they say he is no Priest So when an Archbishop seeming to consecrate another Bishop says the words but doth not intend his Consecration then they believe this Man is not hereby really made Bishop the words without the intention having no effect From hence 't is evident That if the Bishop that consecrated the Pope did not intend to make him Bishop he is none or if the Bishop that consecrated that Bishop that consecrated the Pope did not intend it then he was no Bishop and consequently could not consecrate a Bishop he being none himself So that going back from Bishop to Bishop if one of a hundred in process of time hath failed of intention then there can be no assurance that this Man is really a Bishop and Pope Now considering how many devilish wicked Bishops have been among them 't is more than probable some one of them hath minded the business of his Consecration no more than a Horse nay perchance in the wickedness of his heart hath laughed at that thing as a meer foppery as that blasphemous devilish Pope laughing said O quantum nobis profuit haec Fabula Christi What mighty advantage hath that Fable of Christ brought unto us But whether he really intended Consecration or no that being in the secret of his own heart alone is impossible to be known by another 'T is then most evident we cannot possibly have any assurance that such a Mâ—n is a Priest Bishop Pope and St. Peter's Successor and if he be not St. Peter's Successor then his Determinations signifie nothing as the Papists confess Where then is their assurance of any Pope's â—nfallibility having no assurance that he is Pope Bishop or Priest Can any Man think Gods infinite Goodness and Providence would leave hiâ— Church in so great distraction as the Papist s belief of their Pope's Infallibility embroils us in No certainly but God hath left us a short and safe way his holy Scripture in searching of which with sincerity and humility we shall be sure to find eternal life for God resisteth the proud and giveth grace to the humble I have a desire to go yet a little farther And let us suppose there were Infallibility settled in the Church of Rome I desire to know particularly where 't is to be found Here we shall find the Papists at a great stand Some say 'T is in the Pope alone some in a General Council alone some say in Pope and Council together Nay some will farther tell you That whether Pope or Council or both together decree any thing yet that Decree is not obligatory in any National Church as for example in the Church of France unless the Church of France have approved and received that Council You see at what a loss we are still for Infallibility they themselves are not agreed where 't is to be found But certainly of these three several Opinions I pass over the fourth it is most rational and coherent to their first Principle That the Infallibility is fixed in the Pope whom they all grant to be St. Peter's Successor for this Infallibility being originally granted to St. Peter 't is most coherent to this that it should descend to his Successor Besides they that would have it in the Pope and Council together say That the Pope only hath the power to call General Councils and to confirm the Decrees of the Councils so that if he doth not both call and confirm all the Decrees they are of no force nor any obliged to submit to them And thus in effect this Infallibility determines in the Pope alone the Council signifying nothing without him And then if this Infallibility be residing in the Pope I pray you remember what I told you but now the impossibility of assurance of any man's being rightly Pope which requires so many assuring Circumstances But now after all these innumerable difficulties and perplexities to find out where this Infallibility lies I meet with another grand difficulty yea as great as all these put together For if we consider what strange horrid wicked Creatures have been Popes since the Creation of the World there have not been persons more abominably and devillishly wicked what possible assurance then can be found sufficient to make us believe the Infallible Spirit of the Holy Ghost inhabits in such Dens of uncleanness and cruelty as the Breasts of such detestable Monsters of Iniquity To believe the high incomprehensible mystery of our Saviour s incarnation That the Omnipotent Divine Nature and the weak Nature of Man are united in one Person of Christ is sure a thing of very hard belief and requires the express Word of God to make us to submit and captivate our understandings in obedience to it What then can be sufficient to make us believe this so extreamly contrary to all reason That the All-glorious and All-holy Spirit of God and the spirit of the Devil should be united in the heart of such abominable Popes What can captivate our hearts to this belief I confess we are to submit to God's Word though it seem ever so contrary to reason I dare not say otherwise But then I beg leave to say That I may require to see the Word of God for this as plainly and as expresly as we see the Sun in a clear Sky at Noon Gideon as it is set forth Iudg. vi after that God had plainly declared unto him by an Angel That he should conquer the Midianites and had confirmed his Word by that miracle of Fire rising out of the Rock and consuming the Sacrifice yet presumed to require of God a farther assurance by a Miracle of Dew filling a Fleece of Wool yea and after that a third Miracle of having the Fleece dry and all the ground wet round about it and the great goodness of God hearkened to him in all I hope then the infinite goodness of God would not be angry if I should desire one two or three evident assurances to make me believe a thing to humane reason far more impossible than his conquering the Midianites God was graciously pleased to assure us by his beloved Disciple St. Iohn of the Incarnation of his Eternal Son that he had heard and 〈◊〉 â—nd looked upon the Original word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies consideringly to observe yea and his hands had handled the Word of Life all which put together is as compleat an assurance as can be imagined and all this to assure us of the Union of the two Natures Divine and Humane in one Person as I
the-flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him What can be more plainly exprest even to the meanest capacity of men Good Reader I suppose you conceive that here we are hard beset for these words certainly carry far more appearance for their transubstantiating the Bread into real Flesh than the bare saying This is my Body which as I shewed you is a common figurative way of speaking in Scripture But yet as our Saviour saith If ye have faith ye may say unto this mountain be thou removed and it shall be done So you shall see this their mountain of Objection presently removed Come then my Papist Doctors Will you have these words in St. Iohn literal down right literal without any figure I beseeeh you then tell me What becomes of all the Laity in your Church Will you send them into Hell Body and Soul for ever to make good this new-found Transubstantiation Doth not our Saviour here expresly declare That Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you Eat and Drink mark and Drink And do the Laity eat and drink literally no certainly How then shall they enter into life Must none but the Priests be saved Poor miserable Laity I am sure you must literally be damned for ever to save Transubstantiation a sad doctrine for you whatever becomes of your Priests I fear they will fare little better that thus blindly lead you into this fatal ditch of damnation Consider I beseech you how they delude and gull you They press these words of St. Iohn upon the ignorant Laity My flesh is meat indeed to perswade them 't is real flesh in the Sacrament but when we press them with those words Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you thereby shewing That 't is necessary for all to drink the blood as well as eat the flesh then they say all here is to be taken in a spiritual sence of eating and drinking by Faith Wherein they say truly but yet shew they deal falsly with you making you believe all here is to be taken literally whereas in truth all is to be taken spiritually and they compelled to acknowledge it so by their unlucky Decree of taking the Cup from the Laity Had it not been for this good God how would they have dunn'd our ears with this Chapter of St. Iohn there would have been no enduring their lowd clamors for their literal sence But now I beseech you calmly to consider this passage in St. Iohn Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you Who so eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day These words carry far more appearance of Christ's real Flesh in the Sacrament than those in St. Matthew This is my Body which as I said before is a figurative way of speaking very frequent in Scripture and no body startled at it but when our Saviour pronounced those words in St. Iohn most that heard them were very much startled and disordered at them yea many Disciples left following our Saviour upon them crying This is an hard saying who can bear it for really it sounds very hard if you take the bare words in themselves without our Saviour's Comment upon them whereof we shall speak by and by This then is the thing I pray you to consider if these words in St. Iohn which carry so much a greater appearance of real flesh in the Sacrament yet may and ought to be taken and are taken by the Papists themselves in a Spiritual sence Is it not a most unreasonable and senceless thing in the Papists to cry out upon us for taking those words in St. Matthew This is my Body in a spiritual sence It is just the same as for a man that refuses to take a guilded shilling for pure Gold 〈◊〉 out on me because I will not accept of a piece of plain brass for pure gold But setting aside the Papists who take all Scriptures right or wrong as they serve most for their turn and as they blasphemously call the Scripture a nose of wax so use it and shape all to their own â—ancy let us now see our Saviour's own Comment on his own words that is the sure way to have the right sence of them I pray you then observe how our Saviour in this Chapter v. 47. just before he began this discourse prepares his Disciples for the spiritual understanding of what follows by saving Verily verily I say unto you He that believeth on me hath everlasting life Which plainly shews that the words he was going to speak were to be apprehended by Faith and not in a carnal way for as he saith in this 47 Verse with a double asseveration Verily verily I say unto you He that believeth on me hath everlasting life So Verse 53. 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 Here he affirms the very same of eating his flesh as before of believing in him shewing that our eating must be by Faith and not carnally And then again after our Saviour saw that many were offended at those words of Eating his flesh to take them off from any gross carnal apprehension he tells them The words that I speak unto you they are spirit and they are life After that our Saviour had thus instructed his Disciples in the true spiritual sence of his words we find it so rectified their Understandings as that when he administred to them this holy Sacrament and gave them that which figuratively he called his Body to eat not one of them in the least scrupled at it which doubtless some one or other would have done had they imagined our Saviour had given his real Flesh. They who startled at hearing it would much more at acting it for their Faith was not yet so strong as to believe such a miraculous Transubstantiation as the Papists fancy and that his whole Body should enter in at the narrow circle of their mouthes For we see how weakly they staggered at our Saviour's Resurrection though forewarned of it several times by him and they had seen him also raise several others from the dead yet would not believe his Resurrection till they saw him and scarce then All which plainly shews they took the Bread as real Bread according to Christ's Institution in remembrance of his Passion and Death and not as his very Body entring in at their mouthes into their breasts which doubtless some of them