CHRISTOPHAGIA The MYSTERY of Eating the Flesh AND Drinking the Blood OF CHRIST And the Modus or Manner thereof DISCOVERED Joh. 6. 53. Then Jesus said unto them 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 Tale tuum Corpus nobis Divine Redemptor Quale est corporibus Panis Vinumque Virorum Cento Virgâ—liâ—nus Eclog. 5. Si quid novisti rectiùs istis Candidus imperti Si non his utere mecum Hor. By ED M. PORTER D. D. and Prebend of Norwich London Printed by Tho. Nemcomb for Tho. Collins at the Middle-Temple-Gate in Fleetstreet 1680. TO THE READER IT pleased his Gracious K. Charl. II. Majesty in his Royal Prudence and Piety by His Declaration of Octob. 14. in the 14 Year of His Reign to direct his Clergy of this Realm to insist chiefly in their Ordinary Sermons on Catechistical Doctrines Which gracious Directions if obeyed and performed may with Gods Assistance produce tranquillity and peace in this Church and increase knowledge and comfort in the People Of all those weighty fundamental Doctrines none is more desirable and comfortable than that of the Sacred Eucharist if it may be rightly understood which upon serious consideration and in our time hath been added to our elder Catechism about sixty years since by the Authority of our then Royal Beauclerk King JAMES of ever happy Memory And yet at this day no one part of all those necessary Doctrines is less apprehended or understood by the People That Question which the Jewish Disciples moved How can this Man John 6. give us his Flesh to eat hath never yet been so fully and clearly answered but that People are still to seek and it is too evidently perceived that they do not understand one half of that Mystery Neither do we much marvel thereat because indeed the whole Christian World both anciently and also in our days hath been not only exceedingly exercised but also seem to have been posed in that Mysterious question as may appear by the multitude of Books published upon that Subject both by the Fathers and also since by many Learned men of the Reformed Unreformed Churches wherein many passages of the Fathers are produced which are so mysticall and ambiguous that Men of contrary Persuasions challenge their authorities to assert their differing Interests Yet of the multitude of Quotations out of the Fathers by Cardinal Bellarmine not one doth fully reach or extend to and clearly prove the new doctrine of Transubstantiation neither is that word found in any of those ancient Fathers by him alledged nor doth the Modus or manner of Eating the Flesh of Christ appear to have been defined or described by them although we find the words Mutation Conversion Transformation Transfiguration and Transelementation often used by them in the Question of the Eucharist which come not home to the newer Invention of Transubstantion The misunderstanding of those former words hath been long ago blown off by the Reformed Writers and the observation of Origen did very early and timely preclude the dangerous acception of those ambiguous passages which dropt from the Pens of the Fathers who on the 10. Chapter of Leviticus and in the 7th Homily saith Est in Evangelio litera quae occidit eum qui non Orig. in Lev. n. 7. spiritualiter advertit ut nisi manducaveritis carnem meam c i. There is even in the Gospel a Letter which killeth him who doth not consider it to be spiritually meant Except ye eat thâ— Flesh of the Son of Man c. Many Sentences are found in thâ— Fathers which are doubtfull and seem so near the brink that many Learneâ— men by misunderstanding them havâ— fal'n into the ditch St. Cyprian or some other under Cyp. de Coena his name had written Deus usque hodiè corpus suum creat That God unto this day doth stil create his own Body And Panis iste non effigie sed natura mutatus factus caro i. that the Sacramental Bread is changed not in shape but in is nature and is made Flesh After him St. Hilary saith Nos vere Hil. de Trin. l. 8. verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus that Communicants do truly receive the Word made Flesh in the Lords Supper After him St. Ambrose said Sermo Ambr. de Sacram. l. 4. c. 4. Christi mutat species elementorum And Panis iste ubi accesserit Consecratio fit corpus Christi i. That the words of Christ did change the Sacramental Elements so that by the words of Consecration the Bread is made the Body of Christ After him St. Chrysâ—stome said Christus Chrys Hom. 2. Antioch carnem suam nobis reliquit ipsam habens ascendit That Christ left his Flesh with us and yet took it with him when he Ascended But the words of St. Cyril if they Cyril Hieros Myst 4. be his own seem more harsh than the former and require a more charitable gloss to reconcile them with the truth of this Mystery where he saith Christus ut aquam in vinum mutabat in nuptiis sic vinum in Sanguinem transtulisse credendus est in Coena And addeth Panis qui videtur non est panis nec Vinum vinum sed Sanguis Christi i. As Christ turned water into wine John 2. at the Marriage so it is to be believed that he turned wine into Blood at his last Supper wherein that which seemeth Bread is not Bread nor is the Wine Wine but it is the Blood of Christ If these Fathers by these words meant only a Sacramental change of the Elements viz. of the use name signification and operation of them we willingly assent but if they meant a real change of the matter substance or essence of those Creatures we utterly dissent As for those words of Mutation before mentioned which are used in this question both by the Latine and Greek Fathers we say that the word Transformatio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth but a new formality or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or consideration and account put upon the Holy Bread although it continueth in its own substance bread As when of cloth a Gown is made or of wood a Chair or of gold a Ring the substances of Cloth Wood and Gold still remain although a new name or appellation is put on them So the word Transfiguration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used because the elements by Dedication or Consecration to so great holy an use are made more than they were naturaly of themselves before and are considered not as only meer Bread and Wine but as figures and Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Christ and this by Consecration or Sacramental constitution not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the word Transelementation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if it be meant and understood of the advancement preferment or dignity added to the Elements of
Bread and Wine so as that after Consecration to that Spiritual use they are to be considered not as only Bread and Wine or only as Elements so far we assent because of meer Elements they are made Sacraments Thus Theodoret very judiciously Theod. in Eranist Dial. 1. observeth that Christ in the Holy Supper changed the names of the Elements Non mutans naturam sed adjiciens gratiam viz. that he graced those signs or Sacraments with the title or appellation of his own Body and Blood although they still retained their former substance figure and form for so he expresly declares in his third Dialogue Manent in priore Id. Ibid. Dial. 3. substantia figura forma In like manner the words of St. Austin Aug. Psal 33. hom 1 on the 33. Psalm are to be understood where he saith Christus in manibus suis ferebatur quando dixit hoc est Corpus meum i. Christ was carried in his own hands when he said This is my Body That which he then bare in his hands was only the Sacrament of his Body which yet he called his Body although the Sacrament is but the sign thereof signum rei but as other signs often are it is called by the name of the thing signified Res signi The former is mentioned and meant in the Institution of that Sacrament Mat. 26. 26. The latter is mentioned Mat. 26. 26. John 6. 53. John 6. 53. which is the very reality of the thing it self for by those words of Eating and Drinking Christ declared the necessity of an Union or Conjunction of our flesh and blood with His in order to our Redemption and so to Life saying Except ye Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man c. ye have no life in you It may reasonably be thought that many learned Romanists do not really believe that impossible Doctrine of Transubstantiation who yet either for fear or hope of profit do profess and teach the same for great are the privileges and profits that arise from it and as the Prophet saith the Priests teach for hire and the Prophets Mich. 3. 11. divine for money The Fathers often observed that evil spirits used to speak from the belly of Pythonists who are therefore called Ventriloqui upon those words of Isaias Quaerite ventriloquos Isa 8. 19. Orig. in Loc. Origen saith that the Prophet pointed at such Ecclesiasticks as would teach for their own belly or profit for ever since the Curse was laid on the Serpent That he should go Gen. 3. 14 Phil. 3. 19. on his belly Satan hath got advantage by such of his Instruments whose god is their belly Surely if that doctrine were not profitable to the Teachers thereof it would soon be as despicable at Rome as it is now with us One Cassius a Roman Judge when Tul. Orat. pro Roscio Amer. n. 4 any Man was accused at his Tribunal for some heinous fact he would first enquire Cui bono what profit might accrue thereby to the accused if his accusation were true And when Rullus a Tribune very earnestly urged for the Lex Agraria i. for power to make sale of all the Roman Provinces he was first required to quit himself from suspicion of his own Covetousness Si Populo Consulis remove Id. Orat contra Rullum te à suspitione commodi tui If the Roman Priests would faithfully instruct the People in this gracious and comfortable Mystery they should forbear making such gain as they do by the consequences of their Doctrine thereof which otherwise may be thought to be the Diana of Rome like that other of Ephesus a craft by which they have their wealth for of Acts 19. 25. all their Legend of Romances none are so profitable to them as this as Pope Leo the Tenth profanely said of the whole History of Christ Quantas opes nobis peperit illa fabula de Plat. Christo We that are but By-standers or Lookers on may wonder at their Priests as Cato sometimes did at the old Aruspices how one of Tul. de Divinat lib. 2. them meeting with another can forbear laughing in their sleeves considering how grosly they have abused the People This little Essay concerning the Flesh and Blood of Christ is like to find such entertainment with them as himself had on Earth To be for a Sign that shall be spoken against and possibly it may find as little acceptance with some among us particularly in that part hereof wherein the propagation or traduction of our Souls is asserted the denial whereof I esteem to be a Philosophical Heresie as much disturbing the Doctrine of our Church concerning Vniversal Redemption for so Epiphanius accounts Epiph. Haer. 8. the errors of Epicureans Stoicks and Pythagoreans among his Heresies But yet because our Church doth not expresly define that or limit and declare the Modus or Way of Eating the Flesh or Drinking the Blood of Christ therefore the pious and diligent Disquisition of the truth and manner thereof without gainsaying the Doctrine established herein I conceive should be freely permitted neither should any mans private Opinion although of another Judgment prescribe to us or hinder this our Inquisition seeing it is not Magisterially dictated but humbly offered as an Essay And also because many of the right Pious and Learned Fathers have with great judgment and industry described and directed us in this very way as will appear to the Reader of this Book THE PREFACE IN order to the profitable Perusal of this Book we are first to consider how the Son of God came to be concerned and interested in the Affairs of Mankind especially in the grand work of Redemption and Salvation This Work was resolved and concluded before the Creation either of Mankind or of the World by vertue of a Secret but a most Gracious Covenant transacted between the Father and the Son from Eternity which Covenant is often mentioned in the Gospel under the title of the Everlasting Covenant Heb. 13. 2. Eph. 3. 11 Rev. 14. 6 and is called the Eternal Purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord and the Everlasting Gospel In all which places the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used We cannot apprehend any other Conditions in this Covenant but only that the Godhead in the Person of the Eternal Father required performance of the future Laws to be imposed on Mankind the intended Creature with promise of Life to the Performer and the penalty of Death to the Transgressor To these covenanted Conditions the same Godhead in the Person of the Eternal Son restipulated and agreed that Mankind should either perform the said Laws or so suffer This we conceive to be that Covenant and also to be attested by the same Godhead in the Person of the Eternal Spirit of the Father and the Son who also untill this day as the Apostle speaketh beareth witness with Rom. 8. 16. our Spirit And so do all the
eat bread therefore the mother doth first digest and so incarnate the bread and uniteth it with her own body and of it by her mild and tender Breast she produceth milk by which the Infant is mediatly so fed with the said bread Such is the Union of the Flesh of Christ with our flesh because both he and we received our flesh from that one Original lump of the first Man wherein both he and we were united and thereby he and we became one Body just as our food becomes one flesh and one body with that Body of ours which we had before any new Addition was made to it by any new food which is the reason why the Scripture accounteth Christ and his Members to be but one Body as the Apostle saith We being many are one Ro. 12. 5. 1 Cor. Body in Christ and We are the Body of Christ and Members in particular and Ye are all one in Christ Jesus and We are Members 12. 27. Gal. 3. 28 Eph. 5. 30 of his body of his flesh and of his bones By vertue of this Union the obedience of Christ both Active and Passive is and justly may be accounted ours because Christ and his Members are One. And for this consideration only and for this resemblance only Christ said of the Sacramental Bread This is my Body which is given for you Likewise of the Wine Christ said This is my Blood Drink ye all of this We know that by Blood the life or soul is signified as is before proved therefore the Sacramental Wine represented his Soul the Wine which we drink as well as the Bread which we eat becomes our nourishment and so unites it self with our Persons and grows into one bulk with us and is really one with us and thereby it becomes to us such as the Soul of Christ is already to us for our souls and the Soul of Christ are really united because his Soul and our souls and the souls of all our Ancestors and Posterities ever were and still will be derived and propagated from that one Original Soul of the first Man in whose Soul at its very Creation and Insufflation the Soul of Christ and all our Souls are virtually included and united Therefore surely the meaning of those words of Christ must be this that his Soul and our Souls must have been so united as well as his Flesh and our flesh that so he may be fitly the Redeemer both of our Bodies and of our Souls for certainly no man can have Redemption by him except as a necessary Preparative thereunto he be really united with him both in Flesh and in Soul which is that very thing which Christ called the Eating of his Flesh and Drinking his Blood This Doctrine is not new but hath been long ago taught by the School in those times when Truth might be declared without danger of the Fagot For Pet. Lombard Sent. 4. Dist 11. about the year of Christ 1150. which was before Transubstantiation was established in the Church of Rome thus writeth Christ saith he took on himself the whole Nature of Man that he might redeem the whole Man therefore his Assumption is celebrated in the Holy Supper by the two Elements of Bread and Wine Panis ad carnem refertur Vinum ad Animam ut animae carnis susceptio in Christo utriusque liberatio in nobis significetur The Bread representeth the Flesh and the Wine the Soul that thereby the Assuming of a Body and a Soul by Christ and the Deliverance or Redemption of our Bodies and Souls by him may be signified So Clemens Romanus long before Christus dedit carnem suam pro carne nostra animam suam pro anima nostra vid. f. n. 3. in Clem. Rom. Those that imagin that the Sacramental Chalice representh only the Blood of Christ and that those words of Christ This is my Blood signified only the meer natural Blood of Christ Grammatically properly and literally taken such do greatly err and mistake the Mystery for this cannot possibly be the meaning thereof because as is before said his meer Blood was not Redemptive for the Act of Redemption consisted Sup. cap. 14. only in the powring out his precious Life and Soul for us so that by the Blood the Soul must needs be meant and the Sacramental Wine must needs relate to the Life or Soul of Christ Those likewise that teach the withholding of the Sacramental Chalice from the People or Lay-Communicants do misunderstand the meaning thereof they pretend that after the pronouncing of the words of their Consecration the Wine is not Wine for that the substance of Wine is quite gone and annihilated leaving nothing behind but only the meer Accidents viz. the colour taste and quantity of the Wine but not the Wine it self and that the Chalice doth contain only the Blood of Christ instead of the Wine and because they make the People believe that in their little Wafer-Host the whole Christ is contained viz. his Body and Blood therefore in Receiving the Host they receive both the Flesh and the Blood by Concomitancy But herein they err in that they think that by the word Blood only meer blood is meant which indeed doth signifie not literally Blood but the Soul of Christ in which Soul if the People do not really Communicate that is if their Souls be not really united with the Soul of Christ they cannot be in a full capacity of the Redemption of their souls by his Soul Besides what need was there that Christ should require with the Eating of his flesh particularly as another thing the Drinking of his Blood if by Blood he had meant only meer Blood seeing that the living Flesh of Christ must needs include his Blood as themselves acknowledge The laborious and tedious Disputes of Divines of contrary Persuasions in Religion concerning the presence of Christ in the Sacrament whether it be a carnal and corporal Presence or only a Spiritual Presence I conceive with submission to Superiors to have been as needless as we have found them to be fruitless and endless their various glosses upon the Scriptural words in that business have more obscured the question as Origen said of the Exposition of a passage of St. Paul Hic sermo non sui nanatura Orig. in Ro. 12. 16 sed interpretatione obscurior fact us est And Maldonate a learned Jesuit of Mald. in Lu. 2. 34. late observed concerning a place in St. Luke Nescio an facilior hic locus fuisset si nemo eum exposuisset They both conclude that some Scriptures would be more easily understood if Expositors had not too much tampered with them and so verily I think of those words which mention the Eating and Drinking the Flesh and Blood of Christ The real and true Presence of the Flesh and Blood or Soul of Christ is not to be thought to be in the Elements or Sacramental signs of Bread and Wine neither is there
in Covenant or Suretyship 5. Fide in Faith The Vnion which I shall chiefly endeavour to describe in this Tractate consisteth in the two first of these which I firmly believe to be intended and meant in that Speech of Christ Joh. 6. 53. Except ye Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink his Blood c. THE Flesh of Christ CHAP. I. HE that attempteth to discover the grand mystery of Eating and Drinking the Flesh and Blood of Christ must begin his Work very early even at the Creation of our first Parents or rather before the foundation of the World Because the most wise mercifull and just Godhead had designed the redemption of Mankind from Eternity by God the Son And did lay the foundation and the frame order and method thereof in the first Man and the first Woman from whom every man and woman that are were or hereafter shall be born with Christ himself also have derived both their Flesh and their Souls that so an Union and conjunction might be made of the Redeemer with the Redeemed without which Union the Son of God could not be fitly qualified to perform with Justice the great Work of Redemption of Mankind Concerning this Union those words of Christ are to be understood John 6. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and Joh. 6. 53. Mat. 26. 26. drink his blood and those other words Mat. 26. 26. This is my Body and This is my Blood both must needs be true because Truth hath spoken them The former were meant of the real and substantial Union and conjunction of our flesh with his Flesh and of our souls with his Soul the latter were meant of the Representation or similitude of our true real and substantial union with Christ in his whole humane Nature signified to us by the Sacramental eating and drinking of Bread and Wine as it was before represented to the Israelites in eating the flesh of the Paschal Lamb. For as with them and with us The Lamb and Bread and Wine were really to be taken into our bodies and do really nourish us and unite themselves with our bodies and grow into one bulk with us So Christ with Mankind must be united and be One with us otherwise he cannot with the strictness of Divine Justice be the Redeemer of Mankind neither could man be capable of redemption by him Concerning the truth and reality of eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ the Redeemer the Reformed Chruches and also the Vnreformed do both agree and yet exceedingly differ and disagree in the manner and way thereof 1. The Roman Transubstantiators would have us believe that Christ is eaten in the Sacrament really pretending that the Bread and Wine are transubstantiated or rather annihilated and that the whole Christ is brought into the room thereof and so eaten But this cannot be the mode or way of eating Christ because the eating and drinking by him meant must have been in all former and past Generations and must still stand firm and true although the Sacrament or Eucharist had never been instituted for Abraham Isaac Jacob Noah and Adam himself must have eaten so as is here meant else they could not be redeemed by Christ And this Eating of Christ was true and real before he was actually Born or Incarnate St. Paul saith Our Fathers did eat the same meat and drink of the same Rock that 1 Cor. 10. 3. followed and that Rock was Christ therefore they did eat Christ so as he meant 2. The Lutheran Consubstantiators would have men believe that the Flesh and Blood of Christ literally understood are really carnally and grosly received in and with the Sacramental bread and wine But neither can this way be true because the Eating here meant must have been and still is without the Sacrament thereof for the flesh of Christ is now and hath been eaten by those that never heard of nor ever did receive or communicate in the Sacrament for Children Heathens Turks and Jews and the most profane Christians must have eaten Christ otherwise they could have no possibility or be in any capacity of Redemption Yet the Scriptures the primitive Fathers and the Church of England do clearly declare that the benefit of Redemption belongeth and is offered to God the Son hath redeemed me and all Mankind the whole World to all and every Man and Woman as our Church Catechism teacheth 3. The Zuinglians who are called Sacramentarians would have men believe thatf Eating the flesh and Drinking the blood o Christ is meant only of receiving the signs figures or Sacraments thereof viz. by bread and wine in the Eucharist But neither can this way be the right meaning thereof because we must truly and really receive the very thing it self for we must corporally be united with the flesh of Christ and really and truly must our Souls be united with the Soul of Christ else no redemption can possibly be either of our bodies or of our Souls by him Calvin upon those words This is my Body very truly Calvin n 1 Cor. 11. 24. affirmeth Neque fallax est Christus qui vacuis figuris nos ludat Mihi extra controversiam est Veritatem hic cum suo signo conjunctam esse 1. Christ did not delude us with empty figures I doubt not at all but that the truth was joyned with the sign 4. The Church of England doth not to my apprehension clearly determine of the Modus or manner of Eating the Flesh or drinking the blood of Christ either in the Sacrament or out of the Sacrament yet thus far this Church proceedeth in the mystery Art Relig 28. of the holy Supper and saith in the 28th Article that it is the Sacrament of Redemption just so as St. Cyprian had before written of the same thing in an Epistle to Coecilius wherein he calleth the Lords Supper Sacramentum Redemptionis because Cyp. 2. epist 3. thereby as by an holy sign we are taught the manner way and method used by Christ in the work of our Redemption The Church of England again declareth in the Office of the Eucharist that the faithfull and penitent Receivers do spiritually eat and drink the Flesh and Blood of Christ that they dwell in Christ and Christ in them that they be One with Christ and Christ with them the meaning is that the holy Supper is the Sacrament or mysterious sign of our Union with the flesh of Christ and with the blood or Soul of Christ just as both S. Austin and Aug. in John 26. Ansel in Mat. 26. after him S. Anselm called it Sacramentum Vnitatis 2. The Sacrament of Union and the very word Communion as this Sacrament is called signifieth the same Communio is all one with counio or unio cum because the sacramental Eating and Drinking representeth the Union or conjunction of the flesh and soul of Christ with our flesh and soul without which neither our bodies nor
Mans union with the flesh of the Redeemer 3. The Paschal Lamb signified the Lamb of God And the Eating thereof signified the conjunction or union of the flesh of the Redeemer with the Redeemed 4. The legal Sacrifices represented Christ to be sacrificed on the Altar of the Cross And they were to be eaten except Holocausts The eating of them signified mans union with the Antitype that is Christ even as that which we eat becomes one with us it grows into one bulk with our bodies and is united with us and is animated with the same life and soul with our bodies it lives it dies and is buried and riseth again with us and continueth with us after the Resurrection everlastingly in like manner the flesh of Christ is united with our flesh without which Union there can be no Redemption of us by him nor indeed any resurrection of our Bodies nor Immortality of our Souls more than of the bodies and souls of brute Creatures as will appear hereafter therefore Christ said Except John 6. ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man c. you have no life in you And in the Sacramental sign of this real Mystery he said Take eat this is my Body that is my Mat. 26. Body is to you such a thing as this Bread which you eat is to be which will be concorporated and joyned in One and united with your bodies and will be animated with the same life and soul wherewith all the parts of your body were formerly endued and informed If it be enquired why the very individual flesh of Christ should not be in truth and reality and propriety of speech confessed to be eaten in full correspondence with the Type viz. the flesh of the Paschal Lamb which was really eaten Our Answer is That if there were no other way or signification of Eating the flesh of Christ but only Orally or as the Letter soundeth then of necessity it must be so meant and understood and must be so eaten as the Paschal Lamb and the Sacrifices were But there is another way and meaning thereof wherein the flesh of Christ is truly said to be eaten both before he was incarnate or born and also after his Ascension into Heaven in both which times it was and is impossible to be 1 Cor. 10. 3. eaten Orally For when his Disciples were offended at the mentioning of Eating his Flesh he said What and if you shall see the Son of man ascend Joh. 6. 62 up where he was before as if he had said my flesh must have been eaten so as I mean even before I took human flesh upon me And also after my assumed flesh shall be ascended locally into Heaven and not be any more upon Earth or out of Heaven untill my return at the last Judgment and therefore far out of the reach of any mortal hand or mouth therefore it cannot be meant literally of any oral o◠gross carnal Eating If we shall rest satisfied and seek no farther into this Mysterious Eating than only to believe that Christ doth daily in the Sacrament thereof vouchsafe and condescend to exhibit his very true Body in or under the species or appearance of Bread or Wafer-cakes and that his very Body is so really existant in many thousand distant places in the same minute of time which to human Reason is incredible and contrary to Philosophy and even to our senses If we can swallow this vain impossible and unprofitable Camel it would be a quick expedient and an easie or lazy gloss to unriddle this grand mystery by which hath a long time perplexed and posed the Christian World Concerning which good Christian Reader I do here tender my poor Meditations in humility not Magisterially but with due submission to the judgment of my Superiors most earnestly begging of God instruction illumination and a right understanding herein and wholly trusting and relying upon him who by his Apostle hath thus directed and promised that If any want wisdom Jam. 1. 5. let him ask it of God and it shall be given him in hope therefore of his assistance I proceed to examination of the particulars of Eating the Flesh and Drinking the Blood of our Redeemer CHAP. III. THe words of Christ from whose lips never any guile or untruth fell are these Verily verily I say unto you except Joh. 6. 53 ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink his Blood ye have no Life in you here are two Verilies or Amens which are often used by S. John only whereas the other Evangelists never use but one Amen in the weightiest narrations this double Assertion falling from the mouth of Christ argueth a certain and undeniable truth which because it is hard and mysterious yet necessarily to be received and believed therefore it is thus strongly and vehemently affirmed and must be believed although i◠be not at first understood for this is a character of Christian Faith to confess the Words of God to be true although we do not understand them as Prosper saith Magna fortitudo est consentionis cui ad sequendam Prosp de Voc. Gen. l. 2. c. 2. veritatem autoritas sufficit latente ratione The valiantness of Christian Faith is in consenting to Truth by authority of Gods Word when the reason thereof doth not appear The Jews asked whilest Christ was John 6. 52. with them on earth How can this Man give u◠his Flesh to eat We may now much rather ask the same question seeing his Flesh is now in Heaven far remote from us and certainly his Flesh since his Ascension never was on Earth to this day Therefore to eat his Flesh orally grosly and literally understood is both unpossible and as Christ affirmed unprofitable The Flesh profiteth nothing or if to eat his Flesh orally John 6. 63. were necessary and profitable how can we come at it The Apostle adviseth Say not in thine heart who shall ascend into Ro. 10. 6. Heaven that is to bring Christ down That which is meant by Eating his Flesh is done already and brought home to us Eating in Scripture phrase doth not always signifie Oral eating nor doth it so signifie in those Words of Christ David Abraham and the Antediluvian Patriarchs must so have eaten Christ as Eating here signifieth else they could not have been redeemable by him Christ said Blessed Mat. 5. 6. are they that hunger and thirst after Righteousness upon which words S. Austin asketh Quis dilaniat justitiam and addeth nè putetis morsibus fieri Who can eat Righteousness think not that this Eating is done by morsels So Pharisees devoured widows Mat. 23. 14. houses yet they did not Eat them Men are often said to feed their eyes Pascere oculos Virg. Aen. 1. and Animum pictura pascit inani in the Poet yet neither our Eyes nor our Souls can eat The Church exhorteth to feed on Christ in our hearts this is done without a
out of the Man and not made of another piece of Earth for the Woman could not have been in union with Christ except she had been taken out of the Man as Christ and all Mankind are nor could she or we have been capable of Redemption by Christ without this union with Christ in the first Man Hence it is that the Apostle saith We are Members of his Body of his Flesh and of his Eph. 5. 30 31 32 Bones The like he saith of Christ and his whole Church They two shall be one Flesh but I speak concerning Christ and his Church This is said because all Men and Women with Christ also were originally joyned and united in Adam and therefore Prosper Prosp ad Cap. Gallorum observeth Nullus est hominum cujus natura non erat suscepta à Christo there is not any Man in the world whose Nature was not assumed by Christ Ipse Adam toto terrarum orbe sparsus est Aug. Ps 95. And St. Paul saith God hath made of one Blood all Acts 17. 26. nations of Men it is meant of the blood of the first Man by which word Blood something more is implied than only Flesh as will appear hereafter and more than Blood literally taken In the Old Testament where we read of Filius Hominis or Son of Man the same words in the Original are Ben-Adam often The Genealogy of St. Luke derives Christ from Adam and St. Paul calls Christ the Last Adam as children are called by the 1 Cor. 15. 45. names of their Progenitors therefore St. Austin to shew the original of all Men with Christ himself saith Omnis homo terrenus Aug. Retract l. 1. c. 16. est Adam every Man of the Earth is Adam for it is as easie to apprehend Christ to be the Son of Adam as to be the Son of David and of Abraham and as easie Mat. 1. 1. to understand that Christ was united with Mankind in the loins of Adam as to apprehend that Levi was in the loins of Abraham Heb. 7. 10 when Melchisedech met him which was long before Levi was begotten Moreover even when Adam was formed there was an original corporal union of all Mankind in that one parcel of Earth of which Man was made which is the reason why not only Adam but all his Posterity are called Earth and Dust O Earth Earth Earth hear the Word of the Lord. Gen. 3. 19 Jer. 22. 29. The reason why I have said that the Redeemer must be united and be one with the Redeemed is because God doth not punish or reward eternally one for another but the same that performeth or transgresseth his Laws is punished or rewarded The Wise man saith He that justifieth the Prov. 17. 15. wicked and condemneth the just are both abominable to the Lord. The Jews had a cursed and murmuring Proverb among them The Fathers have eaten sour grapes and the Eze. 18. 2 Jer. 31. 29. Childrens teeth are set on edge their meaning was that their Fathers had committed that sin for which their Children were punished but God did controll that false imputation saying Every one shall die for his own sin And He that eateth sour grapes his teeth shall be set on edge and the Soul that sinneth it shall die So it is said in the Gospel Every man shall bear his own burthen Gal. 6. 5◠1 Pet. 1. 17. and God judgeth according to every Mans work Therefore the Redeemer must be really united and be as one man with the Redeemed otherwise the passions and Death of Christ the Redeemer cannot in the exact Justice of the Godhead satisfie for the sins of the People Christ said to a young man If thou wilt Mat. 19. 17. enter into life keep the Commandments This must be confessed to be true that no man can be saved except he perform the Law If it be enquired how any meer man can enter into Life seeing every one transgresseth the Law We answer that every true and faithfull Member of Christ fulfilleth the Law because Christ hath performed it who is One with his Members This weighty and necessary Doctrine of the union of Christ with Mankind is evidently and plentifully declared both in the Holy Scriptures and also in the Writings of the Fathers which I have elsewhere shewed at large in the Gospel Christ said I am the Vine ye are the branches the root stock and branches of the Vine are Joh. 15. 5 but one Tree St. Paul saith of Christ and of men that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fellow Plants or planted together planted in Adam and we being many are one body in Christ and Rom. 6. 5 Rom. 12. 5. as the Body is one and hath many members and all the members of that one body being many are one body so is Christ And your 1 Cor. 12. 12. 1 Cor. 6. 15. 1 Cor. 12. 27. Gal. 3. 28 bodies are the members of Christ and ye are the Body of Christ and members in particular and therefore the same Apostle saith of the Galatians Ye are all one in Christ Jesus The union or Oneness of men with Christ doth not consist only in this that Christ communicateth his Spirit to us men but also in that Christ and all Mankind were originally together in the first Man and are all derived from the flesh and blood of him as I noted before from the words of St. Paul Acts 17. 26. that God made of one blood all Nations of men and that one Blood was the blood of Adam For although we never were in the loins of Christ nor derived from him yet because Christ and we and all Generations of men were originally in the loins of Adam therefore in him we were then all united CHAP. V. IN the next place we are to enquire what was the Doctrine of the Fathers concerning the Body of Christ and also concerning the Union of the Head with the members thereof 1. The Body of Christ in Scripture hath a double signification 1. It signifieth the natural proper and individual or personal Body of Christ of which it is said a woman poured ointment on his Body and Joseph begged Mat. 26. 12 27 58 the Body of Jesus 2. The Body of Christ signifieth his Body Mystical that is the whole Corporation of Christ and his Members of which it is said He is the Head of his body the Church Col. 1. 18 Christs Natural body is but a part of his Mystical body as our head is but a part of our natural body And as the head and other parts of our natural body are visibly united so Christ and all his Members are united and joyned by an invisible Tie or knot both in Flesh and Soul as will hereafter appear as also in one Spirit proceeding from Christ the Head and communicating it self to every particular member of that great Mystical Body as it is said of the precious Ointment upon the
would signifie a necessity of our most near conjunction with him so as to be one flesh with his Flesh in order to the Redemption of our bodies by his Body which otherwise could not be as is shewed before for there cannot be a surer Union than such as our food with us which unites it self and grows into one bulk with our Bodies as is before said the whole stature and increase of our magnitude from Cap. 2. our Nativity our augmentation from one cubit at our Birth to five cubits at our full and ripe Age is wholly by our food so that nothing is more ours than that There was a truth in that Epitaph of the voluptuous King Sardanapalus Haec habui Plut. mor. Diod. Sic. quae edi he accounting nothing to be his but what he had eaten for when all other worldly acquirements of lands wealth treasures and honours at our death are utterly lost that only by which our Food is united with us shall be restored and after the Resurrection will continue with us for ever and must he accounted ours Like this union is the Union of our flesh with the Flesh of Christ in the first Man which is the ground of our Redemption and of the Resurrection of our bodies without which neither could be more than the resurrection of brute beasts for in the first Man was the general Atonement of mankind with Christ both in flesh and in Soul by which Vnion Mankind is made capable of claiming the benefits of his Merits and of the Passions of his blessed Body and Soul Christ saith No man hath ascended Joh. 3. 13 into heaven but the Son of Man c. upon which words St. Austin saith Si vis ascendere Aug. in loc esto in Christo whosoever shall ascend into heaven must necessarily be in Christ that is united with Christ for except we so eat the Flesh of the Son of Man c. we have John 6. no life in us This doctrine of Vnion was represented and signified by Christ in the Institution of his Holy Supper by eating and drinking that sanctified Bread and Wine That Sacrament is therefore called by St. Cyprian the Sacrament of Redemption and by St. Austin the Sacrament of Vnion and both Cap. 2. the Scripture and the Church call it the Communion which word clearly signifieth the mutual Union of Christ and Mankind as is before shewed which the Primitive Fathers did so rightly apprehend as may appear by a general usance practised in those times in the office of the Sacrament In the Sacramental Chalice the Fathers for many Ages tempered or mixed water with the Wine although we find neither Precept nor Precedent for it in the holy Scriptures yet de facto it appeareth that so it was by many evidences in the Fathers as in Justin Martyr Cyprian Ambrose Chrysostom and Austin which Custome is to this day continued in many Places and Churches and by reason of the Antiquiry thereof it is pretended to be an Apostolical Tradition and very early instituted as a Canon by Alexander the first who was Bishop of Rome about the year of Christ 118. as Platina reports Of this Usance St. Cyprian renders this Cyp. l. 2. epist 3. reason and plausible account in an Epistle written to Caecilius in the sacred Chalice saith he the Water signifieth the People and the Wine representeth Christ Vinum sine aqua est Christus sine Populo Aqua sine vino est Populus sine Christo Wine alone may signifie Christ without his People and water alone may signifie the People without Christ but both together so mingled in the Chalice was to signifie that Christ and his People were so united concorporated and entwined one with the other as the wine with the water therefore Christ said He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my John 6. Blood dwelleth in me and I in him which is as much as if he had said he that dwelleth in me is he that Eateth my flesh which dwelling is mutual for by this Union the flesh of Christ dwelleth in us and our flesh in him There were a Sect of Hereticks called Theod. haer fab lib. 1. Hydroparastatae or Aquarii set up by one Tatianus mentioned in Theodoret who consecrated water only in the Sacramental Chalice without Wine and are therefore by St. Austin put into his Catalogue of Hereticks under the title of Aquarii because Aug. T. 6. haer 64. water alone did not represent that mutual Union of Christ and his People which the Church intended as is before said by their mixture of Water with Wine CHAP. IX THere were in the Primitive times some Hereticks who thought those words of Christ concerning the eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood were to be understood grosly and literally of Oral eating just as the Transubstantiators at this day pretend and as formerly the Disciples of Capernaum thought when they asked how can this Man give us his flesh to eat Upon which words St. Austin saith Discipuli ejus Aug. in Psal 25. acceperunt id stultè carnaliter cogitantes quòd Dominus praescisurus erat particulas de corpore suo eis daturus Those Disciples apprehended that speech foolishly and carnally thinking that he would cut his Body in pieces and give it them The Manichees said that when men did eat fruits or herbs or other food that then they did eat the parts or Members of God mingled with those creatures As St. Austin Aug. cont Faust l. 13. c. 6. reporteth of them The Gnostick Hereticks used for their Mysteries or Sacraments to bruise the flesh of a new-born Babe in a mortar and to eat it with Honey and Pepper and for this they pretended those words of Christ Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man c. as Epiphanius reporteth Epiph. hâ—â—r 26. Hie. Epi. ad Marcel n. 18. Epip haer 48. The Montanists also cruelly and impiously used to prick the veins of a sucking Child and with it to knead Meal and of both to make their Encharist as Epiphanius reporteth and St. Cyril of Jerusalem nameth Cyril cat 16. a Montanist-Woman one Midra who practised this cruelty in the 16th Catechism of Illuminates if those Catechismes be his Now let the prudent Reader consider whether the Doctrine of the Transubstantiators be not grounded on the same misunderstood Principle on which the above-named Hereticks founded their Errors and cruel practices viz. on those words of Christ Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man c. These practices brought a great suspicion and raised scandalous reports upon the ancient Christians as Epiphanius observes Epip haer 26. 29. for because those Hereticks who did really in their Mysteries so do as is said and called themselves Christians therefore the Jews and the Gentiles and Persecutors thought that all true and Catholick Christians did the same Salvianus tells us that Salv. n. 6. the
Gentiles said that Christians in their Sacrifices committed Homicide Origen Orig. n. 36 saith that the Jews accused Christians to be eaters of Humane flesh Tertullian reports Tert. Apolog n. 2. that they were accused as murtherers of Infants And Athenagoras that they Athenagoras n. 72. 75. were charged with Thyestian Feasts Thyestes was maliciously trapan'd to the eating of the flesh of his own Children unawares Minutius Foelix confirmeth that in his time Minut. in Octavio n. 99. Christians generally were accused falsly as Murtherers and Eaters of the flesh and blood and members of Infants mingled and wrought up with Meal In later times Huldericus Zuinglius the Zuing. Sup. n. 11. younger in his Supplement of the Chronology of Pet. Pictaviensis reporteth of Averroes a great Philosopher and an Heathen who lived about the year of Christ 1149. hearing of the Doctrine of real and carnal Eating the very flesh of Christ as it was in his time taught by some Christians as now it is by Transubstantiators said that Summaest insania adorare quod comeditur Theod. in Gen. quaest 55. of all Religions that he had seen he thought there was none worse than Christianity because Christians Deum quem colunt devorant They professed to eat him whom they worship and acknowledge to be their God To these calumnies and false aspersions of Christians the Fathers and the above-named Apologists have left us true satisfactory and undeniable Answers by any man that is judicious and uninterested in the Herisie of carnal Eating 1. The Christians affirmed that their very Accusers confessed that they never saw any such thing done by any Catholick Christian 2. That the true Christians suffered patiently stripes wounds torments losses yielding themselves patiently to all injuries and also in the midst of their sufferings prayed for their very Afflictors therefore unlikely to be Manslayers 3. That they could not reasonably be imagined to eat the flesh and blood of Men except they first killed those that were so to be eaten but Christians were so far from either killing or eating human Flesh which was unlawfull that they abstained from eating the flesh of other Creatures which was lawfull 4. That their Christian Discipline restrained them from being so much as but spectators only of the bloody conflicts of Gladiators and even of the Baytings and slaughters of Beasts which usually were presented in the Roman Theaters by the Roman Emperours and Consuls and by other heathen Princes nor might they go to see the Execution of men condemned to die 5. That Christians accounted those Women guilty of Homicide and liable to answer to God for murther who used medicinal Drinks or Druggs to destroy Conceptions or cause Abortions Surely they would not murther Children born and perfect who were carefull to preserve unborn Conceptions 6. That Christians accounted those to be Infanticides or Parricides who did but on-only expose their own Infants 7. That they who firmly believe a Resurrection of their bodies cannot reasonably be thought to make those bodies sepulchres of other Bodies by eating them who also shall certainly so rise again at the last day These and many more Allegations we find in the ancient Christian-Writers to confute the slander of Anthropophagy The Transubstantiators of our time may upon more evident reasons be charged justly with such Accusations than the Primitive Christians were because those do not only acknowledge but with all the cunning and subtilties and arguments that Mans wit and brain can invent pertinaciously and obstinately assert the real carnal corporal and Oral eating of the Body and drinking the Blood of Man even of the best Man that ever was the Man Jesus whom they dare not deny to be to this day and forever to continue Perfect Man as well as Perfect God and more also they affirm that in the Blessed Eucharist they eat and drink not only his Body and Blood but also his Soul and his very Godhead although Christ had said before to his Jewish Disciples that so to eat his Flesh as then the Capernaitans and our Transubstantiators now apprehended those words profiteth Joh. 6. 63 nothing And as to the Eating or drinking his Soul and Godhead that is altogether impossible St. Austin in his Polemicks against the Aug. cont Marc. l. 2. T. 6. Marcionites considering those words of Eating and Drinking the flesh and blood of Christ saith figuratè dictum that those words are figurative And sapienter intelligamus we are warily to understand them for saith he Horribilius videatur humamanum sanguinem potare quam fundere To drink Human blood seemeth to be more abhorred than to spill it for the same Father had written before Si Scriptura videtur Id. de Doct. Christ l. 3. c. 15. To. 3. n. 55. flagitium aut facinus jubere figurata locutio est ut nisi manducaveritis carnem Filii Hominis when the Scripture seemeth to command any heinous or mischievous act it is figuratively meant as those words are Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man And in that Sermon de Coena which goes under the name of St. Cyprian which Cyp. de Coen n. 95 was not his but written about the Year 1150. not long before Transubstantiation was first established Upon those words Except ye Eat c. it is said If the flesh of that Person were divided into pieces it would not suffice all Mankind it would be consumed and with it our Religion would cease Therefore certainly that Eating which Christ spake of is not to be understood of Oral eating as may appear also by that which follows CHAP. X. THe learned Reader may be pleased to observe with me that those words of Christ John 6. Except ye Eat being in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are far otherwise read and rendred by all the Latin Fathers generally than as they are now Translated with us in England for Tertullian Cyprian Hierome Austin Prosper and other Fathers thus read them Nisi manducaveritis which words signifie the time past as if he had said Except ye have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man just so doth the Translation of Sixtus and Clemens render those words Nisi manducaveritis and biberitis So doth Bellarmine and generally all the Roman Writers and the Lutheran Writers and Calvin and Beza and so do the Translators of the Greek Fathers as of Origen and Epiphanius indeed Orig. in Levit. c. 10. n. 7. all though they be of divers Persuasions in Religion yet they agree in the said rendring of those Words and our own right Learned Grammarians consent unto and approve of this Reading and St. Austin Aug. in Joh. Tract 25. seems to intimate the same saying Crede manducasti From whence we may observe that Eating the Flesh of Christ in their sense or by their Interpretation at least is not to be understood of any present Oral Eating or if it were to be done only in the future or in
a common Man and that afterwards God the Word united himself with his flesh for that was done in the Virgins Womb his Flesh was never existing alone but ever was the Flesh of God his Body always was Corpus Dei the Body of God as the Scripture calls his Blood the Blood of God Acts 20. 28. And Acts 20. 28. 1 John 3. 16. his Death the Death of God as St. John saith Hereby we perceive the love of God because he hath laid down his life for us The laying down of the life of Christ is called the laying down the life of God The vertue and efficacy of the Flesh of the Son of Man and that which makes his flesh so benificial to Mankind consisteth in this Vnion viz. Because his Flesh is joyned and personally united with the Word or Son of God for his Flesh if it were nothing else but only flesh it could not profit us as Christ said the Flesh profiteth nothing for it is the Union of his Divine Spirit with his Flesh that maketh his flesh Vivifical or Quickening as Christ said It is Joh. 6. 63 the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth nothing the Words that I speak they are Spirit and they are Life the meaning is that the whole efficacy of his Flesh consisteth only in and by the conjuction of his Divine Spirit with it who is not only Vivifical but also Life it self therefore the Apostle saith the last Adam was made a quickning 1 Cor. 15. 45. Spirit The last Adam signifies Christ who is called Adam only because his Human nature was derived from Adam which human Nature was made Vivifical by being united with the Divine quickning Spirit and because this last Adam and the Divine Spirit or Godhead were personally united in Christ therefore he saith of him The Second Man is the Lord from Heaven The flesh Vers 47. of Christ thus being sweetned by his Divine Spirit is like that Leaven mentioned Mat. 13. 33. in the Gospel wherewith the whole lump of Mankind is seasoned the efficacy power and operation whereof may more easily be apprehended by this similitude As wood or a dead coal or iron do noâ— of themselves alone burn or heat a man but if they be joyned with fire and made red hot thereby they will heat and burn The flesh of the Son of Man alone is like the wood and iron and the Divine Spirit united with the flesh is like the fire as he once appeared in Cloven tongues like as of Acts 2. fire by which Spirit only the flesh is actuated and made operative hence proceed those effects and productions mentioned in the Gospel where Christ said I am the Bread which came down from Heaven and John 6. 33 41 51 giveth life to the World we know that only his Divine Spirit came from Heaven not his flesh of which effects we shall say more in their due place CHAP. XII ANother Question to be disputed concerning the Modus the way or manner of this mysterious Eating is how Men can be truly said to eat the Flesh of Christ And this because those that disavow and abhor the Dream of Transubstantiators of a gross carnal and Oral eating have conceived another way which they call Eating Spiritually which word is used in this question by the Church of England declaring to the penitent and faithfull Communicants that They Spiritually eat the Flesh of Christ and drink his Blood They dwell in Christ and Christ in them They be One with Christ and Christ with them which is true By those words of Dwelling in Christ and being One with him and Eating his Flesh this Church declareth 1. First a true and real Union of our flesh with his very Flesh although she utterly denieth the gross and Oral eating and tearing of his Flesh 2. Secondly she declareth by the word Spiritually That this Eating is to be understood only Mystically or Spiritually and not carnally or Orally for Oral eating is only of the Sacrament but not of the very real Substance which is signified by that Sacrament So we are now to enquire what is meant by the Eating the flesh of Christ spiritually To this we Answer That this word Spiritually hath a double signification for D. Vshers Serm. ad Parl. 1620. 1. First It is by many Learned Men thought to signifie only the Receiving the Spirit of our Lord Jesus by which we are united with him because the same Spirit which is in Jesus is from him the Head derived and communicated to his Members Of this Union of the Spirit or spiritual Union of us with Christ the great Apostle often speaketh He that is joyned to the Lord 1 Cor. 6. 17. 12. 13. Eph. 4. 4. is one Spirit and By one Spirit ye are all bapzed into one Body and There is one Body and one Spirit By vertue of this one Spirit so communicated the whole multitude of the Church or Members of Christ are accounted but one Mystical Body But this Spiritual Vnion or Union in Spirit although it is true and real yet this alone may not be thought to be so plenary or so sufficient an Union as is necessarily required for expediting that great Work for which the Blessed Godhead designed Mans Union with Christ as may appear by the Reasons following 1. First If to eat Spiritually should signifie to receive the Spirit of Christ only and no more and be only so by us apprehended utterly disowning the eating or the real Union of his Flesh with our flesh in truth and reality we shall thereby disturb and null the Order of the grand and mercifull work of Redemption which could not be wrought only by an union or conjunction of the Spirit of the Son of God with us but also with the Union of his blessed Flesh and Blood with our flesh and blood because the Spirit alone is not a Redeemer for the Spirit could not suffer and die for us as a Redeemer must it was the vital blood and death of the Redeemer that was necessarily required for Mans Redemption 2. Secondly The Son of God as only so was a Spirit from Eternity for God is a Spirit But if the Son of God will vouchsafe to become a Redeemer he must needs be first the Son of Man and Emanuel as the Church in her Hymn confesseth When thou tookest upon thee to deliver Man thou didst not abhorr the Virgins Womb. For if God the Son or God the Word had so continued in his pure Divinity and had not assumed our Human nature so as to be the Son of Man and the Word made Flesh he could not have been Christ nor Jesus nor Priest nor Sacrifice nor Redeemer for otherwise we might as well say that the Person of the Father or the Person of the Holy Ghost were our Redeemers although neither of those Persons assumed our nature as Austin or rather Gennadius observed Aug. T. 3. n. 72. Nec Pater nec Spiritus
believing they tremble and although they believe as we do yet they have not so eaten nor are so united with Christ as Mankind is I may truly say of Angels Credunt sed non edunt because they are not so united they are utterly uncapable of the benefit of Christs Incarnation and therefore of Redemption by him There have been and still are many Millions of People in the World who never believed the Christian Faith as Pagan-Infidels and Jews and such as are above-mentioned Cap. 10. and many barbarous and uncivilized People that still sit in darkness and in the shadow of death who never so much as heard of Christ Yet all these being the Redemtion is as broad as Human nature Bish Bedels Letter pa. 26. race and posterity of Adam have every one so eaten the flesh of the Son of Man as is here meant that is they are united with the flesh of Christ in the loyns of the first Man which Union was actuated at their conceptions in the Wombs of their mothers although they never were or perhaps never will be Believers of all such I may say Edunt sed non credunt therefore this Eating cannot be meant only of Believing St. Austin in his 25. Tractate on St. John Aug. in Joh. writing upon those words in the 6. Chapter This is the work of God that ye believe Joh. 6. 29 on him whom he hath sent saith Quid paras dentes ventrem crede manducasti Why preparest thou thy teeth and thy stomach believe and thou hast eaten by which passage some have thought that St. Austin meant that Believing was the only way of Eating the flesh of Christ But the contrary is proved before and if St. Austin were of that Opinion he is not to be followed therein yet I am confident that he did not so mean because I find that this learned Father hath divers times otherwise expounded those words which mention the Eating and Drinking the flesh and blood of Christ to be meant of our Incorcorporation in him which must signifie the union of our flesh with his Flesh for so he Aug. lib. 3. con Pelagian c. 4. to 7. n. â—9 saith of those words John 6. Nisi manducaveritis carnem nemo potest vitam aeternam habere nisi incorporetur Christo No man can have Eternal life except he be incorporated in Christ And in another place he bringgeth in Christ saying Qui venit ad me incorporatur Id. in Joh. Tract 25. Ibid. Tract 27. mihi he that cometh to me is incorporated in me Again he saith Manducare illam escam est manere in Christo Christum manentem in se habere to eat that Food is to abide in Christ and to have Christ abiding in him And in the same Tractate he thus sheweth the union or conjunction of Christs Flesh with our flesh Siquis liquefactae cerae c. If a man shall Id. ibid. melt wax and then put other melted wax into it he wholly mingleth the one with the other Just so is it with the flesh of Christ and our flesh whereby it comes to be truly said by Christ He that eateth my Joh. 6. 56 Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him for certainly that God the Creator might effect this Union of Mankind with the Redeemer he extracted all out of one as Prosp very judiciously observeth Deus ex uno fecit omnes ut in Christi corpus Prosp de Prov. n. 39. venirent God made men Christ and all out of one Adam that all Men might come into the Body of Christ If now it be granted that St. Austin did intend those words to signifie so as is above said then they will amount no farther than this which to me seemeth a true gloss and as much as if he had said think it not needfull to prepare thy mouth to eat the Flesh of Christ for Crede manducasti thou hast so eaten his Flesh already as he meant by being united with him in the very Conception only believe in him and thereby that Eating or Vnion shall be profitable for thee and not otherwise because the Union or Concarnation of our flesh with his without Faith cannot reach so far as to Salvation for the very worst of men as is said before are united in flesh with the Flesh of Christ The Wisdom of the Godhead with Justice and Mercy designed this our Union with the flesh of God the Son on purpose to qualifie and prepare our foreseen lapsed Nature so as by this way to put Mankind into a condition and capacity of Redeemableness and so of Salvation possibly which could not otherwise be consistent with Divine Justice as neither could it become his Mercy to have created Mankind on purpose to torment us for ever in Hell Our perdition is not from him but from our selves for he would not the death of a Ezek. 18. 32. sinner therefore hath he set us into this way and possibility of Life For the Nature of Mankind hath been in three several conditions which Divines express by these three words 1. Natura Instituta 2. Natura Destituta 3. Natura Restituta By which they mean the state of Innocency the state of our Fall and the state of our Recovery by Christ The first was whilst our first Parents who were created pure and holy continued in that Original Integrity without sin The second was after their Fall or Sin by which they became destitute and were deprived of their prime Graces and Purity and we by them The third condition is our restitution to Grace and Pardonableness by Christ who being the Son of God to effect this Restitution became the Son of Man by assuming the same Nature which we have and in that Nature perfectly performed that Law of God which was imposed upon us in our behalf and for us and moreover bare in his own Body the punishments due for the sins of our lapsed Nature All the wisdom of Men and Angels could not find out a way whereby lapsed Mankind could with justice be restored but the mercifull Godhead effected it by God the Son to become Emanuel this was the Lords doing only Or if any creature had known or discovered the same means what Man or Angel or Archangel durst presume to have suggested it to the Godhead so as to say Thou O God hast imposed a Law on man which Mankind by all its own power being lapsed cannot possibly perform And thou hast threatned death for transgression thereof which no Man possibly by himself can escape therefore do thou O God thine own self perform thine own Law and to this end abase thy self and assume mans Nature on thee and suffer the punishment due to Man for otherwise the whole Generation of Mankind must perish everlasting How unlikely or rather impossible would this suggestion seem to any Creature ever to take effect Yet the mercifull Godhead in great power and wisdom
did just so perform that great Work Well might St. Paul say We preach Christ crucified the Power of God and 1 Cor. 1. 23 24. the Wisdome of God Christ signifieth God yet not only his pure Godhead but as God is Incarnate and made Man The Wisdom of his Godhead appointed this way of ransoming the whole World from death by the death of one Man and the Power of his Godhead enabled and impowred one Man to perform that Work with full satisfaction to Divine Justice When Christ had miraculously cured a Paralitick St. Matthew tells us that the multitude glorified God Mat. 9. 8. which had given such power unto Men and we for weightier reasons shall be ever obliged to say Glory and honour and thanks be to the Son of God for so enabling and impowering the Son of Man Thus far we have proceeded in shewing the Modus or way which we conceive of the Eating the flesh of Christ If this Exposition be approved which is easily understood it will quit us from the multitude of impossibilities and the Labyrinth of subtilties and intricacies wherein that other way of Transubstantiation hath entangled many Learned men for mine own part I am persuaded that if this way which I have here described be slighted we shall never by any other way attain to any certain or but probable understanding of this Mystery In the next place by Gods assistance we will endeavour to discover the other part and more difficult Mystery which is called the Drinking of the Blood of Christ My whole Design Good Reader in the former Chapters of this Book was to shew and prove the Vnion of our flesh or body with the Flesh or Body of Christ as being necessary to the Redemption of our bodies by his Body In the following Chapters I am to shew the Union of our souls with his Soul to be altogether as necessary to the Redemption of our souls by his Soul which that I may perform truly and plainly I humbly implore the Divine and Illuminating assistance of the Spirit of our Lord Jesus our Blessed Redeemer CHAP. XIV The Blood of Christ THe Words of Christ which concern and import the Drinking of his Blood John 6. are meant and are to be understood in like manner as we said of Eating his Flesh for both those expressions signifie only the Vnion of our flesh and blood with the Flesh and Blood of Christ or with that which is by him called his Blood For the word Blood hath a more high and noble signification in that speech of Christ than the outward and literal sound expresseth for to drink his Blood literally and grosly understood is as impossible as unprofitable for us as hath been before shewed of the Oral eating of his Flesh Besides if we will suppose it possible whilest he conversed with Men on Earth or at the time of his death the real shedding of his Blood we say that in that time the eating or drinking of Blood was forbidden by God in the Jewish Law and afterwards Lev. 17. Acts 15. by the Apostles in the Gospel therefore certainly in those words of Christ some other thing is meant by Blood which liteterall and properly is not very Blood The blessed Virgin Mary and Mary Cleophas and John 19. Mary Magdalen and St. John the Evangelist stood by the Cross when Christ was crucified and although his Blood trickled down from his Hands and Feet and Side yet there was no care taken by any of those holy and zealous Persons to catch or preserve his Blood in any vessel for any present or future use which would not have been so carelesly neglected if the Oral and literal Drinking thereof had been profitable or usefull therefore surely there is some other mystical meaning of Drinking his Blood Mr. Fox reporteth that one Johannes de Mountziger wrote that Christ Act. Mon. sub Edw. 3. n. 38. at his Resurrection resumed to himself all the Blood which he had shed in his Passion the Writer it seems thought that the stock of his Blood needed to be carefully husbanded for if at this day his Blood were literally and orally to be received by Communicants how many Tunn of blood would be sufficient to Communicate the whole Christian World But the word Drink and the word Blood signifie something else and not as they sound as is next to be shewed Of the word Drink We know that this Word hath other significations in the Holy Scriptures besides oral Drinking for Christ himself when he said If any man thirst let him come to me Joh. 7. 37 and drink he did not mean or intend it of any oral Drinking as the same Evangelist immediately thus declareth saying This he spake of the Spirit which they that believe 39. on him should receive Surely no Beleever can orally Drink the Spirit or Holy Ghost So when Christ was apprehended by the Souldiers and St. Peter attempted to rescue him Christ declared that he would not be rescued saying The cup which my John 18. 11. Father giveth me shall I not drink it This cup and this drinking he meant of his Passions and that speech also when he prayed saying O my Father if it be possible Matth. 26. 39. let this cup pass from me and when he foretold some of his Disciples that they should drink of the same cup that he drank of he Mar. 10. 39. meant it of his own and of their Passions we read of drinking Iniquity and of drinking Job 15 16. 21. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wrath of the Almighty The old Greek Poet Anacreon phansied that the Sun drinketh the Sea and that the Moon drinketh the Sun The Sun and Moon properly do not drink neither are Iniquity wrath of God persecutions and passions such things as Men can properly be said to drink Orally therefore surely these speeches are but figurative and by them we are to understand some other way of Drinking which is not Oral Of the word Blood Neither is the word Blood in that speech of Christ to be taken or understood properly and literally according to the meer Grammatical signification thereof as if Christ had intended that Men should drink his very Blood this could not be his meaning as may appear by these Reasons following First Because as is beforesaid Blood was forbidden in the Old Testament Flesh with the life thereof which is the blood thereof Gen. ◠4. ye shall not eat this inhibition was by God afterwards by Moses being directed by God He that eateth any manner of Blood Lev. 17. 10. I will cut him off from among his People This Judaical and Ceremonial Law was in force at that time when Christ spake those words Secondly Because Blood was forbidden in the New Testament by that holy and unerring Council of the Apostles assisted by the Spirit of their Master Jesus It seemeth Acts 15. 28. good to the Holy Ghost and us
that ye abstain from Blood This Decree was directed to the Gentiles for the Jews were then and before zealous enough in abstaining from Blood by vertue of the old Law and the Christian Gentiles by vertue of this Apostolical Decree did absolutely forbear Blood for some Ages of the Church and it became one of the common Disciplines of Christians and was so esteemed in the days of Tertullian and after him Thirdly It being granted that the Christians upon this reason did abstain from the blood even of beasts which is true and easily proved how can it be imagined that they should eat or drink the blood of Man or which is less credible the Blood of that Man whom they believed and knew to be their most High and only Lord God Fourthly If it were possible for us Men now to drink the very Blood of Christ orally and literally understood it could not in the least advantage us in order to our Redemption because it was not the meer Blood of Christ literally taken that was the price of our Redemption although one drop of his precious Blood was worth more than the whole World for he shed his Blood at his Circumcision but that Blood was not Redemptive suppose he had opened a vein and presented or offered that Blood yet this could not have redeemed us neither could that Blood which issued out of his Body in Agony and bloody Sweat or at his Scourging or Crowning with thorns or that at the piercing of his Hands and Feet all these Bloodsheddings together could not redeem Mankind but the Blood of Christ which was really redemptive was his Vital Blood whereof the words of St. Peter are rightly to be understood Ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible 1 Pet. 1. 18. things but with the precious Blood of Christ as of a Lamb and St. John declareth that it was of a Lamb considered as a Lamb slain and we know that the Paschal Rev. 13. â— Lamb slain was the Type or figure thereof It was not then his meer Blood-shedding that redeemed us but it was the pouring out of his Life and Soul that was the ultimate act and consummation thereof of which all the four Evangelists have carefully informed us St. Matthew St. Mark St. Luke after the narration of all his grievous Sufferings adds this as the principal and most concerning and beneficial to us that he gave up the Ghost for Christ himself had said before The good Shepherd layeth John 10. 11 17 down his life for the Sheep and Therefore doth my Father love me because I lay down my life for the Redeemer was engaged not only to perform the Law actively in his life time but also passively by his death to undergo the penalty due to the Transgressors of the prime Original Law which was In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt Gen. 2. 17. surely die The great Apostle often mindeth us of this great Truth saying We are reconciled to God by the Death of his Son Ro. 5 10. 8. 34. Phil. 2. 8. and Who is he that condemneth It is Christ that died and He became obedient to death And for our remembrance and acknowledgment thereof the holy Sacrament was set up as the same Apostle saith Ye shew the Lords death till he come and Christ had before 1 Cor. 11. 26. John 15. 13. declared Greater love than this hath no Man than to lay down his Life for his friend surely his own love was the greatest love CHAP. XV. THe Law of abstaining from Blood was enacted by God in a typical reference to the Blood of Christ which was to be shed in after times upon the altar of the Cross for Expiation of the sins of Mankind which Expiation was before the death of Christ typically represented by the death and blood of certain Creatures appointed by God whereby the legal or ceremonial Atonement was to be performed for which purpose God did except and reserve the blood of those Sacrifical Creatures from being eaten by Men which reason is declared by God himself evidently as to me seemeth in these words I will set my face against that Soul that eateth Blood and Lev. 17. 10 11. will cut him off from among his People for the life of the flesh is the Blood and I have given it to you upon the Altar to make an atonement for your Souls for it is the Blood that maketh an Atonement for the Souls this was the law for the Blood of the Sacrifical Creatures And as for the blood of other Creatures which were profane and not to be used for Sacrifices their blood was also forbidden to be eaten by Men but by another Law Lev. 17. 13. Deut. 12. 16. was commanded to be poured out upon the earth as water and to be covered with dust this Law being but a ceremonial and Typical law must be confessed to become void and antiquated when the Type was fulfilled by the blood-shedding and death of Christ and that fully declared and published But then we are to enquire what moved Quest. the Apostolical Council to revive that Antiquated law of abstaining from Blood more than the other Ceremorials of Sacrifices Circumcision Paschal Lamb Sabbatizings c. And why they imposed this Decree or Canon upon the converted Gentiles 1. To this we answer First That the Answ Apostles directed by the Holy Ghost did impose this Abstinence on the converted Gentiles in the Pedagogy of the Church on purpose for compliance with the converted Jews least they should be soandalized or offended with Christianity it self when they should see Christians eating Blood from which themselves in the time of their Judaism were by their law debarred and could not suddenly be withdrawn from so old a Custom untill they were more fully instructed in Christian Religion for it might seem to them a disparagement and a contempt of Moses and his Laws which reason is intimated by St. James in that he said Moses is read in the Synagogues every Acts 15. 21. Sabbath day which he spake in that very Council so we our selves at our Tables forbear the setting on of certain meats which our selves like because they would be offensive to some of our invited Guests as Swines flesh Cheese and such like Yet this Discipline of abstaining from Blood was not intended to be a continual and standing Law in Christianity but only a temporary Ordinance and to last no longer than there was danger apparent of occasioning a Schism or Division between the Converted Jews and the Christian Gentiles 2. This Discipline did as well become the mildness of Christianity as that old Law did the Religion of the Jews whereby they were restrained from using such cruelties to Creatures as possibly might be practised by Eating some parts of the bodies of Beasts whilst other parts were preserved alive which kind of cruelty was acted by the Romans upon the bodies of the captive Jews at the last destruction of
Jerusalem when they were condemned to be devoured by Lions or other Beasts and were so cruelly used by the Beast-masters that as Josephus reported one half of their Jos de Bello Ju. Lib. 7. bodies were eaten and the other half kept alive in warm blood for a second meal for the Beasts 3. This Discipline was needfull in Christianity especially in those primitive times of Persecution to confute those calumnies and false accusations which the Heathens and Persecutors raised against Christians of their Thyestean Feasts as if in their Sacraments they had used to Eat the flesh and blood of Children which they had for that use murthered which thing the Christians abhorred and to shew that they were far from any such bloody practices by direction of that Apostolical Canon they abstained even from the blood of Beasts during the whole time of the Persecutions 4. That Discipline which was intended to continue but for the abovesaid time is needfull and of great concernment to be seriously considered and pondered in these times as a clear evidence against the semiuniversal deluge of Transubstantiation whereby the Eating and Drinking of the living flesh and blood of Christ is so fiercely and pertinaciously maintained although the Apostles who forbad Blood certainly in those very times did often communicate in the Sacrament of the Blood of Christ Therefore they did not think that Sacrament to be turned into blood nor did they in the least believe that Doctrine thereof which is now taught they did really and orally drink the blood of the grape but in no wise orally the Blood of Christ. Porpherie sometime a Christian but afterwards Soc. l. 3. C. 19. an Apostate Idolater as Socrates reporteth said Sanguis est esca Daemonum that Blood is the food of his Idol-Devils in his Porphy n. 13. Book de Sacrificiis We should in the next place enquire what Christ meant by those words of drinking his Blood which he spake both before the Eucharistical Sacrament was set up and also at the Institution thereof which we must respit for a little time untill we have cleared some Questions concerning the Apostolical Decree against Blood which I have said was but a Temporary Canon at least in part In that Council and in their Rescript to the Gentiles of Antioch three things are forbidden 1. Idol-meats 2. Blood 3. Fornication in these words That ye abstain Acts 15. 29. from meats offered to Idols and from Blood and from Fornication for those other words things Strangled are implied in the word Blood The first of these three we are well assured was but Temporary because S. Paul did soon after permit the eating of Meats brought from the Shambles although they had been offered to Idols as the common custom of the Gentile-Idolaters was in those times and also although the Christians did know that those meats had been offered to Idols only in case any Christian Brother should take offence thereat then he adviseth to abstain saying whatsoever is sold in the 1 Cor. 10. 25. Shambles eat asking no question for conscience sake and though they are bid to a feast by an Vnbeliever yet eat But if any man 27. 28. shall say unto you this is offered unto Idols eat not for his sake that shewed it The second concerning Blood was also Temporary for the reasons above-mentioned The third concerning Fornication was not Temporary for it was forbidden by the 7th Precept of the Moral Law and by the Levitical Law Lev. 19. 29. Deut. 23. 17. and by the Gospel often Neither Fornicators nor Adulterers c. shall inherit the Kingdom of God and Whoremongers 1 Cor. 6. 9 18. Heb. 13. 4 Eph. 5. 3. and Adulterers God will judge by which laws both Jews and Christians were restrained and also the very Heathens by the Law moral although they took no notice thereof therefore this law against Fornication was in force before that Council sate and will so continue as long as the World endures But then our Question must be why it pleased that Council to impose that Canon Quest or Decree upon the Gentiles seeing they were restrained before 1. Our Answer is that it was so ordered Answ to direct not only those Gentiles which were already converted but all others which afterward should be converted 2. Because those Gentiles which then continued in their Heathenism did not account Fornication to be a vice or sin having no commerce with the Mosaical or Moral or Evangelical Laws neither had they any Civil or Municipal law in force against it as may appear by the most civilized and best governed Commonwealth of Rome whilst it was Heathen Even Tully himself in one of his Orations delivered in Open Court said Si quis est qui meretriciis Tull. pro Caelio n. 31. amoribus interdictum Juventuti putet est ille quidem valdè severus And Abhorret ab hujus seculi licentia à majorum consuetudine atque concessu And Quando hoc non factum est quando reprehensum quando non permissum quando fuit ut quod licet non liceret He that thinks Fornication interdicted to young Men is very severe it is contrary to the licentiousness of this Age and the custom of our Ancestors and their Concessions When was it not done when was it reprehended when was it not permitted when was it unlawfull to act that which was lawfull thus he And for former times we find this licentiousness to have been proclaimed in their Theaters Plus est scortorum Plaut in True Curcul Poen n. 37 62 74 ferè quam muscarum olim cùm caletur maximè and Publicâ viâ nemo ire vetat and Mercatus meretricium apud aedem Veneris That there were more Harlots than flies that Fornication was a common high-way wherein no man was forbidden to walk that the Temple of Venus was the market for Harlots thus Plautus And a little after him Terence Ter. Adelph saith Non est flagitium in Adolescente scortari c. The Christian Writers also took notice of this piece of Heathenism as St. Austin Aug. To. 10. n. 38. testifieth De verbis Apostoli Ser. 4. Fornicari inebriari licitè committuntur sed non Dei legibus quis enim ad Judicem ductus est quia meretricis lupanar intravit si uxorem habens vitiavit ancillam quis crimen habet c. After him Salvianus saith Fornicatio Salv. de Gub. li 7. nondum prohibita per leges Romanas and Lupanaria aedisicant timent nè Homines nimis casti essent he addeth That the Roman laws which forbad Adultery for removing that corruption from Matrons yet permitted Fornication with the unmarried Women This Heathen practice continueth even to this day in Rome-Christian and so it did here in England for by K. Hen. 2. and his Parliament the Stews or Bordello was Stow's Survay permitted and continued all the time that England held Correspondence with Rome untill it
was put down by K. Hen. 8. they had certain Signs painted on the walls of those Houses to be known by whereof one was a Cardinals Hat as J. Stow reports Now let us return to the signification of Blood CHAP. XVI IT will not I suppose be denied that the Apostolical Council did forbid the Eating of Blood so as is said And that the Apostles and the Converted Jews and the Christian Gentiles did abstain from blood by vertue of this Decree Add yet notwithstanding that Apostolical Constitution the Apostles themselves and other Christians did drink the Blood of Christ in that sense which Himself meant before the Sacrament John 6. And also in the Sacrament of which he said This is my Blood and Drink ye all of this All this being true and confessed we are next to enquire diligently what our Redeemer meant by this word Blood which certainly did not signifie his own very natural Blood literally and grammatically taken but some other thing which for some weighty reason he was pleased to call Blood That other thing which he meant by Blood we confidently affirm to be his Soul his Human or reasonable Soul and this we doubt not to make clear and apparent with Gods Assistance by the Holy Scripture because we find by many overtures and plain expressions that the Life or Soul in Holy Writ by the Mouth of God is called Blood At the Creation of Man God appointed to Adam and so to the Ante-diluvian Patriarks for their food only the herbs bearing seed and every tree in which is the Gen. 1. 29. fruit of a tree yielding seed But after the Flood he gave to the Patriark Noah and his Sons every Moving thing that liveth to be Gen. 9. 3. meat for them and although he gave them the flesh of his Creatures yet so early he forbad the Eating of the blood with the flesh giving this reason Flesh with the life thereof which is the Blood thereof shall you not eat V. 4 The Blood we see is there called Life although we know that Blood in propriety of speech is not the Life or Soul of Man or Beast but only signifieth the Life or Soul for one may loose some Blood by a wound or otherwise yet the life may continue and because the Soul it self is invisible therefore that which is visible is named for the Soul and because the blood is the companion and also the chariot of the Soul and because the letting out or spilling the Vital blood carrieth out with it the life and Soul therefore God presently after called Mans Blood the Blood of our lives which V. 5 he will require at the hand of every Beast and at the hand of every Man who shall commit homicide at the hand of every mans Brother will he require the life of Man by which words it appeareth that Blood and Life here signifie only the Soul In another place where Blood is forbidden it is said The life of the flesh is in the Blood and The life of all flesh is the Blood Lev. 17. 11 14 thereof and more plainly God saith The blood is for the life thereof whereby it may appear that Blood was not esteemed to be really the life or Soul but only to represent or signifie or to stand for the life or Soul St. Austin considering that place in Deut. Deut. 12. 23. where it is said Be sure thou eat not the blood for the Blood is the life saith Sanguis Cont. Adimant C. 12. T. 6 pecoris ejus anima sc in signo The blood of the creature is the Soul but only in sign he addeth Our Lord doubted not to say this is my body when he gave the sign of his Body The same Father on the like words Lev. 17. 14. saith Anima est sanguis non Aug. con Adv. legis L. 2. c. 6. quia hoc erat sed quia significabat sicut dicitur Petra est Christus Blood is the Soul not that blood is really the Soul but because blood signifieth the Soul even as St. Paul speaketh the Rock was Christ and it is usual 1 Cor. 10. 4. in Heathen Writers to put blood for the Soul and the Soul for blood as in Virgil. Purpuream vomit ille animam And Virg. Aen. 9. Sanguine quaerendi reditus Animâque litandum As Hugo Grotius hath observed to be frequent Grot. de Satisf n. 10. 14. that because that Blood is instead or place of the Soul often put therefore it is called the Soul so that by offering the blood of Beasts they meant the life or Vital blood of those Creatures killed and sacrificed When the Scripture saith Whoso sheddeth Mans blood by Man shall his blood be shed Gen. 9. 6. every one knows that by shedding of Blood in that place is meant the taking away a Mans life Est animae non parcere Isych in Lev. saith Isychius upon these words Judas said I have sinned in betraying Innocent Mat. 27. ◠Blood he meant his betraying his Masters life to death The Jews said His Blood be 25. upon us and our children that is let his death or murther be laid to our charge The Apostle saith to his Hebrews Ye have not yet Heb. 12. ◠risisted unto Blood that is to Martyrdom or loss of your lives So when Christ spake of drinking his Blood he spake of his Soul for so his Blood signified and must necessarily be so understood But how we can be truly said to drink a Soul seeing the soul of Man is a meer Spirit and incorporeal and therefore not literally drinkable and yet that these words of Christ must really be performed How both these can stand together is next to be enquired CHAP. XVII THat the Blood of Christ in those words signifieth the human Soul of Christ I nothing doubt and to drink his Soul orally is as impossible as it is for us to drink his Blood literally taken which is now in Heaven therefore as I have shewed before that the Eating of his Flesh signifieth only the Union of his Flesh with our flesh so the Drinking of his Blood or Soul signifieth only the union of his Soul with our Souls which two Unions viz. of our flesh and souls with his Flesh and Soul are so necessary in order to the redemption of our bodies by his Body and of our souls by his Soul that otherwise we could not with Justice be redeemed by him This Union which seemeth so secret and mysterious is declared to us by Christ in this Figurative or Metaphorical speech of Drinking his Blood which is all one as if he had said except my Soul be united with your Souls so as that wine which you drink for your food and nourishment is turned into your Blood and then is joyned and united with your Persons and becomes One with you otherwise your Souls cannot be redeemed by me for the word Blood signifies the Soul of Christ and drinking his Blood
any need of or benefit by such a Presence but the true and concerning and beneficial Presence of Christ is in and with the Communicants which Presence is effected by the Union of his Flesh and Soul with our flesh and soul so as hath been before shewed Wherefore if we will be content and rest satisfied with this plain and easie Exposition of those words of Christ which I firmly believe to be true viz. that the Eating and Drinking of His flesh and blood signifieth only the union or conjunction of his Flesh and Soul with our flesh and soul all difficulties and obscurities will be cleared without any violence to those words of Christ And the order and method in which the just and mercifull Godhead proceeded in preparing and in making a way to the Redemption of our lapsed Nature will be to our great Consolation made manifest to us We have seen before how our flesh and the Flesh of Christ have been united in the next place we are now to show how the Union of our souls with his Soul hath been wrought and really performed CHAP. XIX IN order to the understanding of the Union of our Souls with the Soul of Christ which is mysteriously vailed by an obscure description under a Figurative Speech of Drinking his Blood we are first to enquire of and to find out the Original or Spring whence both Christ and we have derived and received our Souls For if it may appear that the human Soul of Christ did proceed from the very same Fountain from which all Men in the world have received their Souls then it cannot be denied that his Soul and our souls were joyned and united in that one Original Fountain which is the Soul of the first Man For why should it seem less credible or harder to conceive that all Human Souls are derived and have proceeded from that one Soul of the first Man than to believe and acknowledge that all Human Bodies Christs and all are derived and propagated from the body or lump of the said first Man Surely no Learned or but Intelligent Christian will deny that Christ and all Men were united in the Loins of Adam Now if it be enquired whence or from whom Christ immediately received his Soul We answer that he received it from his Blessed Virgin Mother and in her Womb and that it was derived and propagated from her Virgin Soul for he had no Earthly Father from whose Thigh his Soul could be propagated If it be again enquired whence the blessed Virgin received her Soul We answer that she also received it from her Mothers Soul and in the Womb and so we affirm of all the souls of Men and Women that they are propagated from the souls of their Mothers and that this Propagation ascendeth ultimately unto Eve the first Woman from whose Soul the Soul of Christ and the Souls of all her Posterity are descended If it be farther enquired when Eve had and received her Soul We answer that she received her Soul with her Body also from the first Man her Body from his Body and her Soul from his Soul and whence Adam received his Soul the Scripture evidently declareth that his Soul was immediately Created and Inspired by God in these words God breathed into his nostrils the Gen. 2. 7. breath of Life and Man became a living Soul We farther affirm that the Soul of Adam was the only Soul that was created by God and also that from that one Soul all human Souls from that time till now and also untill the end of the World are and will be derived and propagated We read not of any other particular Soul in the Holy Scriptures that was immediately created by God because indeed all Human Souls were Originally couched and virtually included in that one Prime Soul of the first Man Inspired by God Good Reader observe with me that Bucan p. 86. 88. Woolnor p. 77. which hath been formerly observed by other Writers that those words which our English Translation renders the breath of Life Gen. 2. 7. might and should more fitly and truly have been rendred the breath of Gen. 2. 7. Chaiim of Lives Lives Spiraculum Vitarum Because in the Original the word which is translated Life is a word Plural and signifieth Lives it may therefore reasonably be conceived that the most wise Spirit of God intended to signifie by that Plural word that the whole multitude of human Lives and Souls were potentially and virtually residing in that one created Soul of Adam and were to be derived and propagated from thence to all Mankind Christ and all as being the Spring and Fountain of all future Souls for of him only and of none other it is said that God breathed into him the Breath of life or lives We know that the first Woman had a Soul proper to her self but we find not that God did newly Create or Breath into her a new and several Soul because she did receive her soul from the Man and so it must have been produced for weighty Reasons and not any other way her soul was derived from his soul the Godhead did not create two Originals or Fountains of souls nor of bodies for both the flesh and the soul of Eve and of all Men with Christ also were necessarily to be derived from the flesh and soul of Adam for otherwise although the first Man and the first Woman were united in flesh yet they had not been united in Soul except Eve's soul had been derived from the soul of Adam nor could the soul of Christ by any other way have come from Adams soul and consequently he could not have been the Redeemer of the souls of Adams Posterity Certainly all Men in the World are Adamites both in respect of their bodies and also of their souls so is Christ himself Ben-Adam therefore the Apostle calls him the Last Adam because he was the Son of 1 Cor. 15. 45. Adam therefore he is called by his Fathers name By reason of the Union of our bodies with Christs Body in the loyns of Adam the Apostle saith we are members of his Flesh and by reason of the Union of all Mens souls in that one Original Soul of Adam the same Apostle said to the Athenian Philosophers that God hath made of one Blood Acts 17. 26. all Nations of Men. Blood in Scripture signifieth the soul as hath been proved before and so I believe it doth in that place and so the meaning must be that God hath made of one Soul all the souls of all nations of Men which surely is true For if their was a necessity in order to the Redemption of our Bodies that the Redeemer must have received his flesh by Propagation from the first Man the like necessity must needs be for the Redemption of our Souls that the Redeemer must have received his Soul by Traduction from the Soul of the same first Man in whom the Redeemer and the Redeemed were
erroneous and untheological and will appear anon to be Heretical because it is destructive of the Doctrine of Redemption except we will confine it and understand it to be spoken only of the Soul of Adam which was the first and the only human Soul that ever could truly and properly be said to be so created and infused Neither is the time of Drinking the Blood of Christ to be confined or thought to be first performed when we receive the Sacrament thereof because the Blood of Christ is not really in the Sacramental Chalice neither is his Soul there but his blood or Soul are in the Communicants for this drinking of his Blood which is really intended by those words must have been performed although the Sacrament had never been set up for we drink the Blood of Christ at our quickning in the Womb because then our blood or souls are united with the Blood or Soul of Christ when we are not in any capacity of Receiving the Sacrament thereof Therefore all the Latine Fathers and all later Theological Writers although they are of several and opposite Persuasions in Religion yet they generally Read those words of Christ Nisi Biberitis which I conceive to signifie a Tense of the time past Except ye have drank as is observed before of the word Eat The flesh and blood of Christ is not now to be eaten and drank really for that was actually performed before even at our Union with his Flesh and Soul in our Mothers Wombs St. Austin upon those words Psal 22. Aug. in Psal 21. 10. Thou art my God from my Mothers belly observeth that although God the Father was the Father of God the Son before his Incarnation and from Eternity Yet that he could not be called the God or the Lord of the Son but only in consideration of his intended Incarnation And because the Son in the womb of the Virgin assumed the whole Human Nature and not only Flesh nor only a Soul but both therefore God the Father became his God and his Lord the God and the Lord both of his Body and of his Soul This the same Father divers times observeth as namely on the 136 Psalm and also in his To. 6. n. 17. 19. Polemicks against the Arians The Church of England evidently declareth the same Doctrine in the 2 Article of Religion in these words Christ took Mans Nature in the Womb of Art Rel. 2. the Blessed Virgin of her Substance so that two whole and perfect Natures that is to say the Godhead and the Manhood were joyned together in one Person It being granted that Christ took the whole and perfect Human Nature upon him in the Womb it must needs be consequently granted that he there received his Human Soul because neither the Flesh alone nor the Soul alone can be truly and severally called the Perfect Human Nature We know that the Ancient Church accounted Athan. de Incar n. 22. Epip haer 77. them to be Hereticks who taught that Christ assumed only his Flesh but not his Human Soul in the Womb of the Virgin The Athanasian Creed also declareth Athan. Symb. that Christ was Man of the Substance of his Mother Perfect God and Perfect Man He could not be Perfect Man of the Substance of his Mother except he had received both his Flesh and his Soul from her otherwise by her he could have been but Semivir i. an imperfect or half-man The true and real Union of the Son of God with Mankind consisteth in the assumption of his Flesh and Soul from Mankind by which assumption the Son of God became the Son of Man and by it only he is stiled Emanuel And the Union of Mankind with Christ which is called Eating the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drinking his Blood consisteth only in the propagation or derivation of our Bodies and Souls with the Body and Soul of Christ from that one Original Mass and Fountain of all Human Bodies and Souls viz. from Adam in whose loyns and Soul all Mankind with Christ himself were in the beginning United CHAP. XXII THE Doctrine of this Vnion is so necessarily to be joyned and considered with the grand Doctrine of our Redemption by Christ that it cannot reasonably be by us apprehended how our bodies or our souls can with Divine Justice be redeemed by him without the mutual Union of his Body and Soul with our bodies and souls For if Christ must necessarily have taken his Flesh of Man because he might not otherwise destroy or condemn sin in the flesh the like reason will hold concerning the Soul that he might not condemn sin in the Soul but by assuming his Rom. 8. 3 Soul from Man The Soul by sin fell as much as the Body or rather much more for the transgression of Gods Command was principally or soly the act of the Soul the body did but only execute that which the Soul prescribed and dictated The body by it self could not sin more than a sword by it self can wound or a pen alone can write St. Austin often tells us and truly Non peccat nisi Anima only the Soul Aug. de Gen. lib. 10. c. 11. sinneth The same kind of Arguments by which the Fathers answered and confuted those Hereticks who denied the traduction of the Body of Christ from the body of the first Man are as firm and strong to confute the other sort of Hereticks who denied the propagation of the Soul of Christ from the Soul of the first Man both which Heresies depraved and indeed destroyed and nulled the Doctrine of Redemption of our Bodies and Souls by the Body and Soul of Christ Epiphanius and after him St. Austin report this as the Heresie of Apollinarius Epip haer 77. Aug. in Joh. Tract 47. that he affirmed that Christ had no Human or Intellectual Soul but that his Godhead supplied all the Offices and actions of a reasonable Soul in his Body St. Jerome and St. Austin charge Origen Hier. n. 42. Aug. Epist 27. that he had taught that the Souls of Men were more Ancient than their Bodies and that they were created before their Bodies and that they came from Heaven this error of Origen appeareth in his Third Book Orig. Per. Arch. l. 3. c. 3. Lib. 4. c. ◠Perj Archoon in which he agreeth with the Opinions of Plato and Aristotle who had said that the Souls of Men were not derived from their Ancestors but came from without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These erroneous Opinions disturbed the doctrine of our redemption by Christ which Redemption necessarily presupposeth an Union of our souls with the Soul of Christ which Union cannot otherwise be found but only in the Original Fountain of all our Souls viz. in the Soul of the first Man Let it now be considered whether the present vulgar Opinions and the Doctrines of some Divines and Neoterick Writers be not altogether as destructive of the doctrine of Redemption