Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	blood_n	bread_n	consecration_n	4,106	5	10.7048	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79524	Catholike history, collected and gathered out of Scripture, councels, ancient Fathers, and modern authentick writers, both ecclesiastical and civil; for the satisfaction of such as doubt, and the confirmation of such as believe, the Reformed Church of England. Occasioned by a book written by Dr. Thomas Vane, intituled, The lost sheep returned home. / By Edward Chisenhale, Esquire.	Chisenhale, Edward, d. 1654.	1653 (1653)	Wing C3899; Thomason E1273_1; ESTC R210487	201,728	571

wine we do signifie the flesh and blood which he offered for us And the Old Testament saith he was instituted in blood because that blood was a witness of Gods benefits in signification and figure whereof we take the mystical cup of his blood for the tuition of our body and soul he and many more concurring in judgement in this point that the Sacramental bread and wine are not corporally and really the natural substance of the flesh and blood of Christ but that they are similitudes significations figures and s●gnes of his body and blood and therefore be called and have the name of his flesh and blood and were but indeed tokens thereof and meant of a spiritual grace as Christ witnesses The words which he spake were spirit and life Joh. 6. It was bread which he took it was wine which he gave saying I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine till I drink it with you in my Fathers kingdom They were the elementary parts of the Sacrament signifying the spiritual substance of his body and blood And when he took the bread and the cup and said This is my body this is my blood it is manifest by what I have already spoken that that saying was a figurative speech To maintain that it was very flesh and very blood Christ gave to his disciples Bread and wide are the outward elements of the invisible grace doth utterly destroy the nature of a Sacrament both according to the Tenents of the Church of Rome and all other Churches concerning the nature of a Sacrament The Church of England holds that the bread and wine are but the outward visible signes of the inward spiritual grace And herewith agrees S. Austin in his definition of a Sacrament lib. 2. de doctr Christian Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum sensibile sanctificans nos S. Tho. part 3. quaest 60. art 3. says Tria significantur primū causa effectiva nostrae sanctificationis scilicet Passionem Christi Hoc facite in mei commemorationem 1 Cor. 11. secundum causam formalem nostrae sanctificationis scil gratiam tertium cansam finalem quae est gloria Whereupon the Church hath this heavenly Song Oh sacred banquet in which Christ is received and the memory of his Passion recollected by which our mindes are filled with grace receiving a blessed pledge of future glory Hugo de Sancta Victoria part 1. cap. 1. Sacramentum è materiale elementum foris sensibus praepositum ex similitudine representans ex institutione significans ex sanctificatione continens aliquam invisibilem spiritualem gratiam And herewith agreeth S. Austin saying Sacramentum signum est quod praeter speciem quam ingerit sensibus facit quicquid in cognitionem venire The Councel of Florens treating upon the Sacrament of Confirmation have resolved that all Sacraments must consist of matter and form there must be an outward signe to signifie the inward grace Wherefore I wonder that the Papists can for shame deny that the matter of bread and wine should remain in the Eucharist for by this means they deny it to be a Sacrament destroying the end of Christs holy institution which was That it should be had in remembrance of him And they generally gainsay the publike profession of their Church by the contradictory practices in private and particular Masses and Altar-Sacrifices And they likewise go against Christ who says This bread is my body He did not say This is no bread but my body And certainly if Christ would have had us to think the substance of the elements were changed he would not have called them bread and the fruit of the vine Nay he would not when he explained the words of giving his flesh to eat and his blood to drink have said his words were spirit and life And S. Paul therefore to witness this truth with the Church of England says The bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ He thereby explaining Christs saying Hoc est corpus meum to be meant of a spiritual eating and of a communion of his body we being hereby made one with Christ he dwelling in us and we in him Besides when Christ bade them drink all of the Cup it was wine he bade them drink for the words of consecration follow And therefore if the Apostles drank any thing else they did not fulfil the precept or else Christ commanded them to drink that that was not there which were impious to imagine And as for the bread it is called bread after consecration for S. Paul calls bread the communion of Christs body which must needs be understood of bread consecrate otherwise it is not the communion of his body So that it is evident that the elements of bread and wine remain in the Sacrament and are not materially changed And this the Monks which administred to King John of England and to Henry the seventh the Emperour knew well enough which Princes the better to further the holy designes of the Pope were dispatched hence out of this world by the poysoned elements of the Eucharist which elements Christ ordained Sacramentally to be received for our nourishment thereby signifying our communion with Christ by the bread and wine made of many ears and many grapes and our growing up by faith in Jesus even as those elements turn into our flesh and blood by natural digestion so Christ is spiritually conveyed unto our souls which are fed by his flesh and blood which every faithful and worthy receiver is by the receiving of this Sacrament made partaker of The Doctor would perswade us fol. 327. that if by denying the bodily presence we mean onely not with accidents of his body as quantity figure and the like and that Christ is ●ot so bodily in the Sacrament but spiritually Then we agree with the Catholikes But then in the same leaf ●e would again perswade us that Christ cannot be really there unless his body be there and that it must be as well corporally as spiritually there or else we deny Christs being there To which I answer The errour of Transubstantiation We by maintaining a spiritual eating and drinking of the body and blood do not divide the spirit from the body as the Church of Rome doth by maintaining a bodily presence because according to their doctrine the wicked receive the body and not the Spirit as I have already proved we by taking the bread and wine which tend to the nourishment of our outward bodies the thing signified by them to wit Christ Jesus is hereby conveyed unto us to be the food of our souls and becomes spirit and life to us he living in us and we in him and this is onely to the worthy receiver who by faith feeds upon him and lays hold of the benefits of his Passion The ungodly they onely receive the bread wine not discerning the Lords body And if the Church of Rome mean that his body is

this salvation And herewith agree the Fathers of the Primitive Churches Origen who writ about two hundred yeers after Christ upon the text of Matth. 15. The Word was made flesh and very meat which whoso eateth shall live for ever says that no evil man can eat thereof for it is onely eaten by faith And herewith agrees S. Cyprian in Serm. de Coena Dominic saying Our eating and drinking is a certain hunger and desire to dwell in him and that none do eat of this Lamb but such as be true Israelites which hunger is termed of the soul as David was an hungry Psal 41. My soul hath thirsted after God which is the well of life For the soul feeling nothing but the horrour of death and the terrour of Gods justice sin by the Laws impeachment having drawn that direful sentence upon her in her pensive meditations of her just demerits betakes her self to this spiritual refreshment of comfort and solace being hereunto invited with the sweet appellation of blessed if she hunger and thirst after righteousness and a cheerful promise of comforts that she shall be satisfied Matth. 5. Which spiritual hunger and thirst as it is not perceived of a carnal man but onely of such as inwardly desire this refreshment and ease from the deep throws of their sad condition so is it not given to any but such as spiritually long and seek after it God feedeth the hungry but the rich those that stand upon their own integrity he sends empty away It is no carnal banquet that flesh and blood can thirst after Have ye no houses to eat and drink in 1 Cor. 11. It is not eating an ordinary Supper to satisfie the greedy appetite of a natural man but as Christ said to his disciples Joh. 4.32 I have other meat to eat which ye know not The disciples themselves as carnal men knew not of this spiritual food and therefore Christ minding to draw them from their gross fleshly principles and to convince them that there is spiritual food as well as that which the mouth and throat take and swallow plainly says unto them Is any dry let him come to me Joh. 7. for he is meat he is drink which whosoever by faith spiritually eat and drink live for ever Athanasius de peccat in Spir. sanct says Christ made mention of his ascension to pluck men from corporal fancie and thereby to perswade them that his flesh was spiritual food the things which he spake were spirit and life It must needs therefore be understood of spiritual eating and spiritual drinking his flesh and blood which hereticks unbelievers could not do as S. Hierome upon Hos 8. witnesses And S. Ambrose de benedict Patr. cap. 9. says Jesus is the bread which is the meat of the Saints and he that taketh this bread dieth not a sinners death for this bread is remission of sins And S. Austin in his 26 Tract upon John Bread and wine which nourisheth the body a man may eat and drink and nevertheless die but the very body and blood no man eateth but hath everlasting life And in another place in sententiis ex Prosp decerpt cap. 339. He that agreeth not with Christ doth neither eat his flesh nor drink his blood although to the condemnation of himself for his presumption he every day receive the Sacrament of so high a nature Judas did eat the bread saith he in his 59 Tract but not the bread that was the Lord. Christ is onely spiritually in the bread and wine to such as by a lively faith receive him As for the wicked they receive but the meer bread and wine abusing the Ordinance From these Authorities may clearly be evinced that the Church of England doth maintain in this point as the ancient Fathers taught concerning this Sacrament Nor can any otherwise understand of this holy mystery for if Christ be corporally in the bread and wine then the wicked receiving him receive his body and not his Spirit for Rom. 8. as he that hath not the Spirit of Christ is none of his so he that hath Christ in him believeth because he is justified And if his Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Christ from death shall give life to your mortal bodies for his Spirits sake that dwelleth in you So that no wicked man hath the Spirit of Christ in him and to maintain that he hath him corporally and not spiritually is to divide his Humanity from his Divinity which blasphemy the Catholike Church abhors Now the Church of England doth not thus divide the Natures but holds that both his Body and Spirit is by faith received but not that the body is corporally in the bread the bread and wine being but the elementary parts signifying the spiritual substance and that God worketh this faith inwardly in our hearts 3. The bread and wine are but figures of the body and blood by his holy Spirit and outwardly confirmeth the same to our ears by the Word and to our senses by the eating and drinking the Sacramental bread and wine in his holy Supper Which eating and drinking is a spiritual feeding requiring no real presence of Christ but onely in Spirit grace and effectual operation And that when Christ said Hoc est corpus meum it was but figuratively spoken it being bread which he brake and gave as a type for a remembrance how his body was crucified for us And let none wonder at this her tenent to say that Christ spake in figures when he did institute this Sacrament for it is the nature of a Sacrament to be figures and types signifying mystical grace thereby received Hence it was that the Philistims when the Ark came into the army of the Israelites said that God was come into the army 1 King 4. And God himself at that time by the mouth of his Prophets said that from that time that he had brought the children of Israel out of Egypt he dwelled not in houses but that he was carried about in tents and tabernacles 1 King 7. which was a figurative speech he speaking that thing of himself which was to be understood of the Ark. Which phrase of speaking Christ himself often used as in Mat. 13.11 17. The field is the world The enemy the devil c. Joh. 16. I am the vine you are the branches Joh. 4. I have meat to eat which you know not And Joh. 10. I am the door Matth. 12. He that doth my Fathers will is my brother and sister c. These and many more Christ spake in Parables Tropes and Figures but chiefly when he said Hoc est corpus a figurative speech This cup is the new Testament in my blood the word my taken for the thing in the cup. Neither is the cup nor the wine Christs Testament but a signe and figure of his Testament And admit that by the word cup neither the cup nor wine is meant but the blood yet it

is a figure of the Testament of Christ which was to be sealed with his blood For his blood is not the Testament but the thing that confirms the new Testament This is so evident a place to disprove the tenents of Romes Church in this particular that her champions are forced to their last refuge of abusing Scripture and therefore they render that text thus This blood is a new Testament in my blood which translation I submit to the judicious Reader whether it be not more strange then any figurative speech Christ saith we must be baptized with the holy Ghost this is a figurative speech So likewise Except a man be born again c. that was a figurative speech intending thereby spiritual regeneration S. Paul saith that in Baptism we cloathe us with Christ and be buried with him Rom. 6. which are figurative speeches of our newness of life and mortification of sin The Paschal Lamb without spot signified Christ the effusion of that blood signified Christ's passion and the sprinkling of the posts with blood whereby the first-born escaped death is a type of those which at the last day shall be saved being sprinkled with the blood of Jesus As in the Old Testament Exod. 12. God said This is the Lords passeover which was not the Lords Passeover but a figure representing the Lords passing by so Christ in the New Testament says of the bread and wine This is my body This is my blood which is not so in substance but in signification A figure hath the name of a thing that is signified thereby as we say a mans image is called a man the figure of a tree a tree or the like So we say Let us go to S. Peter of Millain to S. James in Compestella c. not meaning thereby the things themselves but understanding by the things representive the things represented Even so the bread and wine though Christ call them his body and blood yet they are not verily so but the elementary parts and outward signes of the invisible grace his flesh and blood thereby signified Nor is this a strange interpretation but according to Christs own figurative speech saying Luk. 22. I have much desired to eat this passeover with you Which words none can deny to be figurative God himself used that figurative speech and Jesus the onely Son of that Father to ssure us of his unity with the Godhead breathes out the same Spirit to his Apostles This is my passeover This is my body This is my blood As the shedding of that Lamb's blood was a token of the shedding of Christs blood then to come and forasmuch as the Sacraments of the Old Testament ceased and ended in Christ lest we should through corrup●ion and depravity forget the accomplishment of those Types and not take heed to print in our memories the benefits we receive by Christ Therefore Christ at his last Supper when he took leave of his disciples being shortly to depart out of the world according to the will of the Father did make a new Will He did make a new Will and Testament wherein he bequeathed clear remission of sins which he sealed next day with his blood and instituted this holy Sacrament in remembrance thereof and ordained the same in bread and wine saying This is my body This cup is my blood which is shed for remission of sins Do this in remembrance of me And Saint Paul says 1 Cor. 11. As often as we eat this bread and drink this cup we shew the Lords death till he come Therefore when we come to be made partakers of this heavenly food we should seriously call to minde the wonderful sufferings great goodness and marvelous kindness of Christ he offering himself for our redemption and by a lively faith apply the merits of his Passion to our souls and so we verily receive Christ he to be in us and we in him The Scriptures do sufficiently set forth this truth That when Christ said Hoc est corpus it was a figurative speech and the Church of England holds forth this truth against all adversaries and opposers thereof And that in this she may not seem arrogant to assume a self-interpretation of the Scriptures to maintain this her assertion I will bring in some ancient Fathers to bear witness for her Saint Augustine How to interpret Scrip ure de doctrina Christiana lib. 3. advising us how to interpret Scripture bids us beware how we take literally any thing that is spoken figuratively and figuratively any thing that is spoken literally And he therefore gives this Rule in way of caution If the thing saith he that is spoken be to the furtherance of Charity then it is a proper speech and no figure as when it commands any good or forbids any evil act then it is no figure but if it command any evil thing or forbid that that is good then it is a figurative speech Now this saying of Christ Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood ye have no life in you seems to enjoyn a hainous and vicked thing and therefore upon S. Austin's rule it is a figurative speech But I will not onely conclude it upon that general rule to be so But I will likewise for better clearing this truth ●t down the express opinions of the Fathers in this point The ancient Fathers agree that it was a figurative speech Irenaeus contr Valent. lib. 4. c. 32. ●aith Christ confessed bread which is creature to be his body and the cup to be his blood And in cap. 57. he ●●ith that Christ taking bread of the ●ame sort that ours is of confessed that ●t was his body It was saith he ma●erial bread and therefore a figurative ●peech Cyprian ad Magn. lib. 1. Epist 6. Christ called bread made of many corns and wine pressed out of many grapes his body and blood Cyril in Johan lib. 4. cap. 14. Christ gave to his disciples pieces of bread saying Take eat this is my body And herewith agree Austin de Trinit lib. 3. cap. 4. Theodoret. dialog 1. all concurring that when Christ took bread and wine and spake these words This is my body This is my blood that it was bread and wine which he gave and not any other substance And Origen in Levit. Hom. 7. declareth the eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood to be figurative therefore saith he understand them as spiritual not as carnal men Tertul. contra Marcion lib. 1. calls bread broken by Christ a figure of his body and wine his blood because saith he in the Old Testament bread and wine were figures of his body and blood And Chrysostome upon Psal 22. saith that Christ ordained the Table of his holy Supper for this purpose that in that Sacrament he should shew unto us bread and wine for a similitude of his body and blood So that all agree it is a figurative speech S. Ambrose upon 1 Cor. 11. saith that in eating and drinking the bread and

his One and twentieth Chapter fol. 323. calls the Protestants startling at the Romish doctrine concerning the Sacrament of the Lords Supper a Prodigie of Opinions And he musters up several Tenents concerning the same which being various in themselves and contradictory each to other I wonder he should offer them against any particular Church especially the Church of England against whom I suppose his darts are by this intended for that elsewhere fol. 259. he speaking of Protestants offers grounds of converting to them again which must needs be intended to the Church of England from whence he is gone which he in this particular goes about to tax her of Error Wherefore I made bold to recapitulate these ensuing Truths professed by her and which she assumes to maintain against the Errours and Innovations of Rome touching this Sacrament wherein my desire is rather to clear her from all malicious dirt by Satans instruments thrown upon her then that I should by this means lay open the failings of the Doctor or his ingratitude to his Mother-Church The Church of England doth maintain That Christs body is given received and eaten after an heavenly and spiritual not after a carnal and corporal manner and doth utterly disallow of the new doctrine of Romes Transubstantiation not condemning it as new in respect of the Word but as it is a doctrine and practice in it self varying from what Christ his Apostles or the Primitive Churches taught and contrary to what the Church of Rome has formerly maintained for that it is a meer novelty through the corruption of later times and by covetous and ambitious Popes for self-interest obtruded upon the people making them believe a real transubstantiated presence by the Priests consecration and by him offered up for the sins of the people that so the people giving money to the Clergie they may buy Masses and Sacrifices for their sins and for the sins of others as well quick as dead Against which impious practice and vain assertions I will for the satisfying of some doubting and others deluded in opinion offer these professions of the English Church to their serious consideration The Church of England teacheth 1. Christ is spiritually eaten That Christ is not in the bread and wine but onely to such as worthily eat drink them That as Christ is a spiritual meat so he is spiritually eaten and digested with the spiritual part of us by faith And for this her doctrine she has warrant from Christ himself who speaking of the bread of life which came down from heaven and the bread which he would give them which was his flesh Joh. 6.51 the Jews and many of his disciples were offended saying How can he give us his flesh to eat and his blood to drink Christ perceiving their murmuring that they should not remain in ignorance explains it to them saying What if you see the Son of man ascend up where he was before It is the Spirit that giveth life and flesh availeth nothing The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life Which is a manifest clearing how the flesh is to be eaten and how the blood to be drunk that is after a spiritual manner and so Abraham and many others did eat him many yeers before he was born of the Virgin according as S. Paul witnesses 1 Cor. 10. They did eat the same spiritual meat and drank the same spiritual drink that is to say Christ For to eat that meat and drink that drink is to have Christ dwelling in us The wicked do not eat the body and we in Christ which must needs be understood of worthy receivers and not of the ungodly in whom Christ cannot be said to dwell it must needs be understood of one that truly believing feeds upon Christ in his heart and the wicked unbelieving sinner he receiveth onely the bread and wine not discerning the Lords body Saint Paul witnesseth this truth 1 Cor. 11. He that eateth of this bread and drinketh of this cup unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of Christ He saith not He that eateth and drinketh the body and blood for none but a worthy receiver doth that Nor doth this doctrine deny any to receive unworthily as the Doctor fol. 328. would perswade us because saith he such onely receive bread and wine and not the Lords body But it rather serveth to condemn their errours who would perswade that the wicked receive very Christ and so none should be guilty because whoso verily eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood hath everlasting life Therefore the Church of England is careful to avoid this error and maintains according to Christ his explanation that Christ is onely spiritually given received and eaten and that those onely that believe in Christ eat him and live by him and that every one eating that bread according to Christs institution and Ordinance is assured by Christs own promise and testament that he is a member of his body and receives the benefit of his passion and likewise be that drinks of that cup according to Christs institution is certified that he is made partaker of Christ his legacie his blood which was shed for remission of sins Whereas the unworthy receiver coming to this divine Ordinance without due reverence and a lively faith eateth and drinketh his own damnation for that he receiveth that bread and that wine unworthily which ought with faith to have been received believing that as that bread and wine nourish the outward man so Christ is thereby conveyed to the nourishment of the inner man and so Christ is in him and he in Christ And by thus receiving is the saying of Christ in Joh. 6. My flesh is very meat and my blood is very drink to be understood for none but the faithful are partakers of this heavenly banquet Christ is the bread of life he that eateth that bread shall live for ever which must be by faith in the Son of God Gal. 2. It must needs be understood of a mystical and not a real eating that even as the bread and wine which we receive is turned into our flesh and blood and is so joyned and mixed together with our flesh and blood that they be made one body together so be all faithful Christians spiritually turned into the body of Christ and be so joyned unto Christ and also together amongst themselves that they do but make one mystical body of Christ as S. Paul 1 Cor. 10. We be one bread and one body as many as be partakers of one bread and one cup. The wicked are not partakers of this banquet but onely the members of Christ therefore none verily eat the flesh and drink the blood but the believers It is not like the eating of Manna both good and bad ate that saith our Saviour Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness and are dead but he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever which must be by faith and in heart believing unto

Commandment is drawn from the example of Christs precept who himself gave the Cup as well as the Bread and bade them drink as well as eat the one being the outward element to signifie his flesh the other his blood and Christ having said Vnless ye eat the flesh and drink the blood ye have no life in you it follows of necessity and in obedience to the precept that both be given that both be received Wherefore the Doctor might well have spared his twit against the Protestants who do not by that place of John ●●derstand bare faith as he saith without the outward elements fol. 340. but they do thereby understand the holy Sacrament of Christs body and blood which by the receiving of those outward elements according to Christs institution and the operation of faith is conveyed to the spiritual nourishment of the soul Such weak objections as these against the Protestants gives occasion to the world to suspect the Doctor did not understand the Protestant Religion and that his going to the Romish Church proceeded of ignorance and if so he is less to be blamed for chusing Rome for his Mother Church for unless she reform he may according to such humour be shaddowed under her wing and spend the rest of his dayes in blind obedience and make his own ignorance mother of his devotion The Doctor would perswade that these words import no precept because in respect Christ intended to injoyn no more but the substance to wit really to receive his body and blood which sayes he fol. 341. may be done under one kind 'T is a strange presumption to argue this against the express words of Christ and Saint Paul Do this drink of this Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood c Which certainly they would never have practised according to these words had it been needless to receive the Cup as well as the Bread whenas they are thereby made all to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.13 Plutarch reports that Pericles had such skill in wrastling that though he received a fall he would perswade the standers by and the wrastler that cast him that he himself was the Conqueror and such art doth the Doctor use in denying this to be a precept and yet beside the overthrows that Christ and Saint Paul have given him he has crossed legs with himself and given himself the fall So fol. 338. he sayes the Priests receive in both kinds because they offer a sacrifice upon the Cross which sayes he is not perfect without that and if that be not a perfect sacrifice of Christ that suffered without the Cup I desire to know how it came to pass to be a perfect Transubstantion of perfect Christ in the Cake onely to the people and not to the Priest unless he will confess the people receive nor the same body the Priest doth offer I for my part know not how this should be and desire to be better informed herein otherwise to persist to maintain the Cup to be necessarily given to the people We do not when we receive his flesh by the Bread and his blood by the Wine receive dead Christ as the Doctor would infer fol. 342. because we separate the blood from the flesh for this were to tax Christ of giving and the Apostles of receiving dead Christ which is gross and impious Besides he himself has answered himself as to that objection fol. 338. for saith he the Priest receiving under both doth not receive two Sacraments because the Sacrament is essentially and entirely contained under either kind and being received both at once they make but one refection signifying one thing and producing one effect no more saith he then 6 or 7 dishes of meat make but one dinner Now as the Priest doth not divide the flesh and blood and receive two Sacraments no more do we and if the Doctor would have advisedly considered with himself when he taxed us in this he might easily have perceived that he did through our sides wound Christ and his Apostles nay the Church of Rome it self for that she administred and her people received in both kinds and after the same manner and unless he can shew stronger reasons then these for her change the Church of England desires her not to censure too severely of her for not conforming with her for that she is not easily induced to forsake the practice of Christ and his Apostles and for that the Sacrament is to be administred in remembrance of Christ she conceives we ought not to forget the manner of Christs institution were there no precept for it but especially sith we are enjoyned so to do we desire to drink the blood and to eat the flesh that we may have eternal life thereby We must drink his blood Eating and drinking as well as eat his flesh and although as the Doctor affirms admitting Transubstantiation we may be said to drink that that is drinkable and eat that that is eatable yet we are to remember the end for which we are commanded to drink that blood which is in remembrance that Christs blood was shed This Cup is my blood in the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins Matth. 26.28 And Saint Paul witnessing that it was Christs will it should be drunk in remembrance thereof 1 Cor. 11. which cannot be properly signified in the Cake there being no outward Element to represent the shedding of Christr blood and precious price of our redemption and for which end this Sacrament was ordained Besides Christ calls himself the Vine as well as the Bread and we hereby become Branches lively growing and budding upon our ever-living Root Christ Jesus whose holy institution whilst we follow and reject any other rule of humane institution we may truly say We bear not the Root but the Root beareth us Rom. 11.18 The Doctor 3. And taken for or by the Doctors construction to avoid the precept of Christ in relation to the Cup takes upon him to construe and for or Joh. 6.53 Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood he reads it or drink the blood ye have no life in you And this he would have done for avoiding of contradiction because that in the same Chapter eternal life is promised to them that eat onely To which I answer The Bread is not Sacramentally so often in Scripture mentioned alone as it is with the Cup joyntly wherefore if avoiding contradiction be the reason then must we not admit or for and in that of John and 1 Cor. 11.27 For if so then we contradict 1 Cor. 10. Our Fathers did eat the same spiritual meat and drink the same spiritual drink Saint Cyprian lib. 2. Epist 3. sayes this was prefigured by the bread and wine which Melchizedek gave to Abraham Gen. 14. and likewise that text of the 1 Cor. 11.28 Let a man examine himself and so let him eat and drink c. And we further do hereby contradict all