do I remember that I ever heard of any Heretick so impudent as to say that the flesh of Christ upon the Cross profited nothing Besides is this a consequence the flesh profiteth nothing therefore it is not in the Sacrament truly if that be good Logick it may as well follow in my judgement that the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing therefore it is not in heaven over and above all this it is plain our Saviour speaks not there of his own flesh for he says not my flesh profiteth nothing indeed some of the Jews there had such a foolish oppinion as to think upon our Saviours mystical words that the very flesh of Christ should be visibly under the species of flesh torn by mens teeth that sottishness of theirs our Saviour onely reproves To the third To what you alledge out of Scriptures and Articles of Faith I answer and acknowledge our Lord and Saviour to be in heaven and fitting on the right hand of his Father in visible and quantitative form yet he may lye invisibly and sacramentally under the species of Bread Nor does the verity of our Eucharist clash at all with the verity of our Articles of Faith for we know as the Scripture tells us that with God nothing is impossible His Almighty word sure can as easily make a body to be in divers places as nature his servant can make the essence of a soul to be in divers members Nay we see it plainly and positively said so nor can it chuse but be so for Jesus Christ who as we said is eternally to be at the right hand of his Father yet appeared upon earth to S. Paul Acts 9.22 1 Cor. 15. To the fourth To what you alledge out of our Saviours institution I utterly deny that he said take ye bread but taking bread he said take and eat this is my body Now I would fain know what difference there is betwixt saying take my body and taking bread to say take this is my body nor is it the mumbling or breathing of the Priests mouth that makes this miraculous change but Christ himself when the Priest according to his institution speaks the words of consecration is pleased to assist with his divine omnipotency and convert the substance of bread into his very body and wine into his blood Now this power was delivered by Christ to his Apostles when he gave them Commission to do the like and bid them so often as they did it to do it in remembrance of him and so the Apostle Paul tells us that what he received from the Lord that he delivered to us Then as to the impassibility of the body of Christ we do most humbly acknowledge it nor do our Priests say who know that our Saviour dies no more that his body shall be delivered but they relate onely that our Saviour did use those words at his last Supper which is Truth for then his body was to be delivered and his blood to be shed To the fifth For the Evangelists calling it bread it is always understood before consecration but that being done they do all unanimously call it the body of Christ In like manner the Apostles and Fathers might sometime call it so because before its change it was so as a Serpent in Scripture was called a Rod because it was a Rod but Aarons Rod devoured their Rods Exod. 7. then because the figure of bread and all its other accidents remain as things are sometimes called from their representations 1 Kings 10. so Solomon was said to make oxen and little Lions because he made the images of them Then the Eucharist may still be called bread because in it is the living bread which came down from heaven John 5. To the sixth and last To what you alledge out of the 24th of S. Matthew I answer that you are mistaken cleerly in the Text for those words you make to be spoken of the body of Christ are clearly meant of Christs kingdome of Faith His divine Majesty cleerly foresaw that the Hussits would have one Christ to stand for them the Lutherans one Christ to be for them the Annabaptists one for them the Calvinists one for them the Arminians one for them and Socinians one for them and the like of such bold challengers of Christ as those and other Hereticks are our blessed Saviour gives us a fair warning to beware which good Mrs. N. God give you grace to do Thus I have briâ—fly and punctually as I could answered your alligations out of the Scripture against the mystery of Christs Reall Presence in the Sacrament Now give me leave to mind you of some places of Scripture that do most expresly assert the Catholick doctrine against you First the words of our Saviours institution in all the four Evangelists are most significantly harmonious to a letter Mat. 14.26 27 28. as first in S. Matthew And as they were eating Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it the Disciples and said take eat this is my body and he took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them saying drink yee all of it for this is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins S. Mark hath it thus And as they did eat Jesus took bread Mark 14 22 23.24 and blessed and brake it and gave to them and said take eat this is my body and he took the cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them and they all drank of it and he said unto them this is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for many Luke 22.19 20. St. Luke thus And he brake bread and gave thanks and brake it and gave unto them saying This is my body which is given for you this do in remembrance of me Likewise also the Cup after Supper saying This cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you St. John in his sixth Chapter Joh. 6.51.53 54 55 56 57. makes it his whole business to shew how our Saviour did endeavour to explain this mysterie and therefore is pleased expresly to say I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world Then upon the Jews murmuring he adds 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 whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father So he that eateth me even he shall live by me c. The Gospels themselves
but once in the year and that is Saturday in the holy week neither is there any consecration at all made that day of the Sacrament But the Eucharist that was consecrated the former day is then receiv'd lest the Church of Christ should remain depriv'd of the comfortable fruits of our Lords Passion The other way of Oblation is cleerly Sacramental and yet nevertheless real by which Christ is daily offer'd in the Church and receiv'd by Priests in the Sacrifice of the Mass under the Sacrament in commemoration of the Passion Dead and that former Oblation once made upon the Cross So that the Priest in the person of the whole Church doth present to God the Father the Oblation made by the Sonne upon the Altar of the Cross and him offered and that is the Offering according to the order of Melchisedech However this Oblation may be but rightly call'd commemorative not that Jesus Christ is not rightly and truly offered but because he is offered here under a Sacrament invisibly and recordatively in remembrance of his former Oblation by his own command Numb 28.3 and according to his own Institution And this is the oblation that was signified by the continual burnt-offering in the Old Law in which there was a Lamb without spot to be offered every morning and every evening This second Oblation I say the Priests of Christ doe make daily by the command of Christ himselfe Luke 22. grounded upon those words Do this in remembrance of me For this word do cannot referre onely to a bare sumption or taking of the Sacrament as you would have it but an Action and Oblation otherwise they should not have had the power of Consecration by those words Christ perfected at once the Oblation of himself upon the Altar of the Cross in one bloody Sacrifice and by the frequent repetition of this unbloody one the fruits and effects of the former are daily deriv'd to us So that the Mass is not only a representation of our Lords last Supper but of his Passion Death and Oblation of himselfe and therefore our Eucharist is not onely a Sacrament as you say but it is also a real Sacrifice a Sacrament truly it is as it does represent and is taken but a Sacrifice it is as it is offered and sacrificed to God and by this reason our Mass in which this great Sacrifice is celebrated is called a Sacrifice too To the second and third In the like manner I shall answer both your following arguments for those Texts doe clearly speake of the first Oblation that Christ made of himself our Sacrifices here are but examples of that and yeâ— we offer still the same thing not as in the Old Law to day one Lamb and to morrow another but alwayes the same so it is still one Sacrifice for as he that is offered is one body not many so is our Sacrifice still but one Behold how we offer daily one Sacrifice which once was offered though as is aforesaid there is great difference in the manner of offering the one by a real bloody oblation the other by recordation and representation To the fourth That our Saviour did say that his blood was the New Testament c. I grant but deny that therefore the Mass should be so for that which he spoke was onely to confirme our Faith in the New Testament Exod. 24.8 for as Moses being to confirm the Old Testament took the blood of Calves and Geats c. and sprinkled the people saying this is the blood of the Covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words So Christ with his own blood confirm'd his New Testament unto us and enter'd into the Holy of Holyes Besides there be many things of the New Testament that belong not at all to the Mass as Baptism the Power of the Keyes c. Nay over and above all this it does not follow Heb. 9. that if the Mass were a Testament it should be therefore no Sacrifice for a Testament according to that of the Apostle includes the death of the Testator and the Mass being a Testament does imply the death of its Testator Jesus Christ and so by consequence must involve the Oblation To the fifth and last I shall clearly grant you again that the Mass is a recordation or remembrance of the Passion of Christ but not so nakedly as when a Lay person does simply communicate but it is a remembrance after this manner as it is the representative action of the whole Passion And this Jesus Christ said do ye not onely take ye but do ye that is if we joyne the precedents and sebsequents together consecrate offer take therefore that part of the Mass is called Action So therefore as there was a continual Sacrifice in the Old Testament so in the Law of Grace is Christ our Saviour made our continual Offering and shall continue so for ever till Anti-Christ shall come as our Doctors do affirm and then it shall cease for a while Now give me leave again to return you some proofes out of the Scriptures of the congruity and necessity that the Mass should bee a Sacrifice First Lev. 5.6.9.14 it is manifest that in the Old Law there was to be an offering for the sins of the people and it was alwaies the duty of the Priests to offer for their ignorances and sins and for their cleansing And what Religion was there ever so stupid as to pretend to the service of a Deity without some Sacrifice except some novel Christians to the very scandal of Jews and Turks Secondly Malach. 1.10 11. The Prophet Malachy does most plainly Prophesie of our great Sacrifice when he brings the Lord speaking to Israel I have no pleasure in you saith the Lord of Hosts neither will I accept any offering at your hand for from the rising of the Sun to the going down of the same my name shall be great amongst the Gentiles and in every place Incense shal be offered unto my name a pure offering for my name shall be great among the heathen saith the Lord of hosts Is not this a most plain Prediction of the Cessation of the Sacrifices of the old Law and the Institution of the Sacrifice of the new Law Nor can this be meant of that Sacrifice which Christ offered once upon the Cross because the Prophet speaks of a Sacrifice to be offered in every place and speaks but only of one oblation and that is nothing nor can be but the pure Sacrifice of the body of Christ so often repeared upon in our Masses and upon our Christian Altars Nay yet examine a little further in this great Prophet Malath 3.1 2 3. and you will finde yet a clearer evidence for our Christian sacrifice for being about his prophecies of the Messiah to come and having foretold the coming of the Baptist before him says plainly that the Lord shall suddenly come to his Temple even the Messenger of
are yet more clearly explicated by St. Paul who tels us thus 1 Cor. 11.23 24 25. For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread And when he had given thanks he brake it and said Take eat this is my body which is broken for you you this do in remembrance of me and after the same manner also he took the cup when he had supped saying This cup is the New-Testament in my blood c. And then to set the business out of all doubt concludes He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body Can any thing be more plain Then further St. Paul begins with a Preface I speak as to wise men 1 Cor. 10.15 16 17. judge ye what I say The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the body of Christ The Bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ For we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Does not the Apostle here most clearly and expresly shew that in every particle of the consecrated bread the whole body of Christ is communicated and as he thought them only wise that could understand that mysterie so we must think them stupid that will not and worse then Jews that go about to pervert and torment this and other Texts to any other sense Over and ahove all this consider a little more upon that Text before cited 1 Cor. 11.28 29. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords body Here it is clear that by reason of the presence of the body of Christ the unworthy Receiver is damned because he sins against that body There is no man can deny but the unworthy eater be it what it will that is eaten must be guilty of that which is eaten Here St. Paul most clearly instructs the Corinthians that it is no simple bread or ordinary nourishment that is set upon the Altar but the very body of Christ that who ever eats thereof should be guilty of it therefore the Apostle adds not discerning the Lords body that is not distinguishing it from other food This I am likewise informed by the Learned to be the sence of the Church in all Ages no Primitive Christian ever daring to oppose the clearness of so much express Scripture till one Berengarius as they call him had the impudence to do it but afterwards recanted and abjured it before the Pope thirteen Arch-bishops and an hundred Bishops which God grant all those that have followed his footsteps to do likewise Now that this Transubstantiation Gen. 2. or transelementation is no way impossible to be done no nor for you to conceive as you alledge see what God hath done in the like kinde first in the beginning of the world God form'd man of the dust of the earth here God changed dust into flesh in the same chapter we finde how God turn'd the rib of man into woman a bone into flesh Gen. 19. Exod. 4. Then Lots wife looking back is turn'd into a pillar of salts then Moses threw down his Rod and it was turn'd into a Serpent Then I will strike the water of the River with my Rod and it shall be turn'd into blood Exod. 7. and divers more such mutations there are in the Old Testament As for the New we find that our Saviours first publick miracle was to turn water into wine and this great omnipotency of his the Devil full well knew when he to tempt him said If thou beest the son of God turn these stones into bread Thus you dispute that power in him which the Devils themselves acknowledge Now as Christ with five little Breads did feed five thousand men by making of bread by his Almighty multiplication so now he feeds his whole Church of the faithful with one Bread that is his body Sacramentally Then that Jesus Christ did do some things miraculously with his body whilest he was upon the earth which we cannot do with our bodies nor can any humane reason comprehend you will not dare to deny as that he pierced the grave and Tombstone afterwards when he rose from the dead that he pierced a house the doors and windows being shut and that he pierced the Highest Heavens with his body when he ascended all these things I say you will not dare to deny yet this which is enjoyned you by the same Authority to believe you are pleas'd to dispute What is this but to pick and choose what you please your selves to believe and from being such a chooser in matter of Faith shall be ever a part of my Letany Good Lord deliver me for that I am told is to be a true Heretick To what you alledge of Impiety against the Church of Rome for depriving the people of the Cup I answer thus To the first Argument I shall clearly grant what you say that Christ being then to Consecrate did Institute the Sacrament under both kinds and gave it to his Apostles in both kinds who now were Priests Therefore the Priest to this day that celebrates takes it likewise in both kinds but what is this to the Laity For those words Drink ye all of this was said only to his Apostles and Priests who do it still that is Consecrate in the Commemoration of Christ for no other were present at his most holy Supper but the Apostles no not his own blessed Mother as it is clear out of all the Gospels Nay St. Mark tells us Mar. 1â— 23 that they all drank of it which shews clearly that that all was only meant of the Apostles for it was impossible to be true of the Laity To the second I shall likewise grant that he that drinketh not his blood as well as he that eateth not his flesh hath no life in him but to a Sacramental eating and drinking there is required still a Spiritual intelligence according to what our Saviour himself said the words that he spake they were spirit and they were life From whence we may conclude that since the whole Christ both body and blood is comprehended under one Species a Lay man may be said to drink the blood of Christ though not under its proper species yet under the species of Bread Again our Saviour in that Chapter of St. Johns Gospel treats principally of our incorporation into him which is sufficiently effected by our Communion in one kind the whole Christ being there and the other Species is not at all to be said necessary to that incorporation with Christ To the third I shall grant likewise that it hath been permitted to the Laity to participate of the blessed Sacrament under both kinds