not only truly said of the Man Christ that he is Omnipotent Omniscient c. but also that of the humane nature of Christ that the same is Omnipotent Omniscient c. yet doe so temper and explaine this their opinion that they deny these divine properties to bee powered into the humane nature or ever become properties fixed and setled in the humane nature and determine them only by the personall Union and exaltation that followed upon it to be attributed to him in his Person and not severally If there be any difference betwixt these Opinion it is so subtle so farre removed from the capacity and cōmon understanding of Christian people that it cannot be in the number of fundamentall Doctrines except we will faine a new kinde of fundamentalls hitherto unknown and unheard of to the Catholike Church and people of God As concerning other questions which those foure words have bred unto us Verbally Really in the Concrete in the Abstract we may freely say such termes of Art ought not to enter into the articles of the Christian Faith from the knowledge wherof depends the life and Salvation not only of learned men and Logicians but of the unlearned and of all common Christians Moreover it is little suteable that we should seek fundamentall Doctrines in Propositions as long as it is not agreed on of the sense and signification of the termes which are used in the framing of them But what comes to be understood Colloq Mompel pag. 222. c. 22◠under the name of Concrete what under the name of Abstract could not be consented on betwixt James Andrewes and Theodore Beza neither as yet doe the Divines of both sides well agree in the signification of these words when they are referred to Christ Therefore it is enough for the retaining of Unity betwixt Churches that all acknowledge the Communication of Properties not to be verball but reall so farre forth as that the same and one only Person to whom it is attributed is truly and really God is also truly and really man and therefore things may really be predicated of God which belong to Man and of the Man Christ which belong to God But if we should change the name of God into Godhead or Man into Manhood all also will acknowledge that the Propositions are not to be received with the same certainty None will doubt of this Proposition God was Crucified for our sins But if it be thus altered The Godhead or Divine Nature was Crucified for our sins It will afford occasion not only of doubting but of being deceived So this Proposition is placed without the reach of all question The Man Christ is omnipotent omnipresent c. But if the word Man be changed into the word Manhood as to say The Manhood or humane nature of Christ is omnipotent omnipresent c. it will not appeare so plainly to the Orthodox in their Judgement Tom. 2. vide Epist 102. Tom. 6. contra Ser. Arian tom 7. De Pecc mer. lib. 1. c. 31 tom 10. S.N. 14. de verbis Dom. Hist Sacra vart 2. pag. 15 16 17. 18. Augustine sheweth us the light to frame and understand such Propositions made of Christ God and Man almost in every book Let the places noted on the margin be consulted with Also Luther himselfe in Hospinian hath many things most worthy to bee considered of the Person of Christ and communication of his Attributes and most to the purpose for the true understanding of this question I will adde this one thing that those two Propositions The Man Christ is God The God Christ is Man Which are the foundation of all the rest in which this communication of Attributes whereof the strife is is made are above and against all rules of Logicians and Philosophers In vaine therefore doe we leane to the consequencies of Logick when we endeavor to annex other new fundamentalls unto them we doe it in tearing and rending the unity of the Churches when they cannot see alike the force of such consequencies For those which acknowledge and embrace the truth of all fundamentals in this question about the Person of Christ are not to be cast off from other Churches for every error in the manner of speech or ignorance in the manner of inferring or deducing of consequencies Now in the last place let us briefely see what is to be determined in that controversie which is about divine Predestination Of Divine Predestination AS concerning this controversie many things in the very heat of disputation have fallen from some private Doctors of great account which seem not to agree square to the exact rule of Truth But these things ought not to be urged to the breaking asunder of the Unity and Communion of the Churches if once it appeare to all Protestant Churches that that is confessed whatsoever in this matter is necessary to be believed unto Salvation and that all errors are rejected of all which crosse and oppose Mans Salvation to be obtained by Christ Look into all the Confessions of the Reformed Churches you shall finde nothing left out of them which may be called fundamentall nothing put into them which overthroweth any fundamentall Article All doe consent that none is elected or Predestinated from Eternity to Salvation except out of the meer and most free mercy and grace of God that none in time is brought to Salvation or Eternall Life except by the way of Faith Repentance and new Obedience Also all grant that God from Eternity did as well decree to give to the Elect as he did foresee all those saving goods should bee given them by helpe whereof they are brought to Eternall Life That he did also decree so to give to them and did foresee that this saving grace should so bee given that they cannot boast of any cause or occasion found or foreseen in themselves of this Gods bounty unto them Lastly they grant that all the certainty which single persons have or ought to have to eternall Life ought not to be sought a Priori beginning at the Top in the Decree or Prescience of God but a posteriori beginning at the bottome in the fruits of Faith and Holinesse And moreover they conclude this That the Elect themselves cannot be sustained or refreshed with the comfort of their electiō or salvation when and as long as they wander out of the way of Salvation because the holy Spirit will not beare witnesse to their hearts Rom. 8.14 15 16. that they are the sonnes and heires of God but when they are led by the Spirit of God But men cannot have a sure and firme comfort of their Election and Adoption except the Spirit witnesse this unto their spirits Now as touching that Passing men by or not Electing them which is commonly called Reprobation I see nothing Fundamentall whereof there is any dissention betwixt the Reformed Churches If as yet all things be not well agreed on betwixt particular Doctors Let them so
clouds of speculation but in the plaine propositions of the holy Scriptures to the conceiving whereof there is more need and use of Faith than Art of an obedient Heart than of a subtile and piercing Wit Fourthly as all points justly challenging to themselves the Title of Fundamentall are plaine and naked for the manner of their Expression so ought they to be few and so framed that they do not swell to an infinite number yea that they grow not into so great a bulk burthensome to bee portable in the memory of Gods little ones Hence Aquinas cals them the First things to be beleeved 2a 2ae Qu. 2. de Fide cap. 2. and speciall Articles of the Faith William Paris termes them the Fundatories of Religion Others stile them Radicall Truths But although these first Fundatory and Radicall Doctrines of the Christian Religion may beget and bring forth a great uncertaine and numerous of-spring of Consequenceâ— arising from and following after â—â—â—m yet it beares no proportion with reason that they in themselves should 〈◊〉 many or uncertaine When therefore wee behold that to these First credibles of the Divine Essence and Attributes of the Incomprehensible Trinity of the Hypostatical Union of two Natures in Christ of the Cómunication of his Properties and almost of every Object of Knowledge in Divinity there is annexed so great a traine of severall points as thick Volumes are not able to containe them it is most certainely sure that the greatest part of them is not Fundamentall All Christians ought to heare the Counsell of Learned Nazianzen Orat. de Modest observ in D sp Contemplate saith he on Divine things but stay stil in the Termes Speake the Phrases and Language of the Spirit and if it be possible nothing else Do not thou curiously pry thorow those narrow rifts into the Nature of the Father the Essence of the only begotten Sonne the Glory of the Holy Ghost and one God in three Persons Vse the words accustomed the reason of them belongs to those that are Wiser to inquire Let it satisfie thee that thou hast the Foundation and let alone to Artificers to build thereupon Would to God only Artificers would build upon them would to God they would not mingle their many and almost infinite superstructures with the few and plaine Fundamentals to bee embraced with equall affections and to bee received with honour alike If they endeavour thus to do yet it becomes all pious and prudent Christians to discerne and make a difference betwixt those first and few things to bee beleeved immediately revealed by Christ and his Apostles and those numberlesse deductions of Divines which they according to their severall minds and opinions seeke to thrust and crowd into the same roome with Fundamentals Fiftly it is no Fundamentall point which though furbished and attired in new termes is not the same in effect with the Doctrine expressed in the words of the Holy Scripture For if the addition of our new coyned words importeth any thing more than what is in the Scripture this new accession may bee allowed for a consequent of the Fundamentall Doctrine but it cannot with this new peece bee urged for a direct downeright Fundamentall Doctrine But if the new word or the addition therein for matter of the Sense of the Proposition brings no new thing at all but so that understanding the Termes the effect of both appeares to be the same then wee acknowledge both to bee Fundamentall For the disserence of the expression alters not the nature of a Fundamentall Doctrine where the essence and meaning of the Proposition remaines the same What wee have said somewhat obscurely we will make plaine by an example Christ is God and the Sonne of God This is a Fundamentall Point and so also is this Christ is coessentiall with God his eternall Father For although in the latter there is a new Terme yet it addes no new thing nor affirmes any thing which will cause the cumberance of a toilesome deduction to extract it out of the former but whosoever understandeth the termes of both presently understands that they agree so well as in sense they are the same For no man of sound sense can have a conceit of diverse Gods in the same Essence or substance But if the Doctrine or Proposition deck't in forraign Termes and new language cannot bee annexed to a plaine and cleare Fundamentall Article without a busie and artificiall deducing of it it ought not to bee inserted into the Catalogue of Fundamentals Indeed those which perceive the force of the Consequence or Deduction are bound to afford beliefe to such Consectaries But they to whom it doth not sufficiently appeare that such a Proposition followeth from any Fundamentall point they are not bound to embrace it for a tried Truth much lesse for such a Doctrine without which no hope is left to obtaine Salvation To conclude in a word As often as it is inquired whether any Doctrine bee Fundamentall or no let us not give heed to the clamours of Disputants But have recourse to those Notes which now wee have reckoned up If the Doctrines they presse on us bee not clearely recommended by the Apostles themselves to the Catholique Church in the first preaching of the Gospell if in succeeding Ages they were not Universally received if they bee not suited to the capacity of simple Christians but only fitted to the braines of Philosophers and Logicians if they bee too many and not comprised within certaine bounds Lastly if expressed in such formes of Speech that they cannot bee reduced to an equivalent sense with a cleare and of all confessed Fundamentall Article sometimes they may bee Truthes but they can never beâ— counted Fundamentals CHAP. Chap. 7 VII Of the Summe of Fundamentall points contained in the Creed and Commandements so farre as wee ought to Beleeve or Practise MANY of the Papists and somme of ours when we maintaine that the difference betwixt the Reformed Churches is not about Fundamentals presently require of us to bring in a Bill and set forth an acurate Catalogue of Fundamentals so that we may say so many Fundamentals there be of the Christian Faith neither more nor lesse We easily answer the Papists that it were presumption in Protestants who confesse themselves subject to errour to undertake so hard a Taske let Papists rather addresse themselves to the Pope of Rome who alone can speake Oracles and is said to have all Laws Humane and Divine lockt up in the Closet of his Brest But if any of our men shall earnestly maintaine that unlesse this first be done no Brotherly love can be renewed betwixt the Protestant Churches let him try which is somewhat more easie if he can but only reduce the Propositions in Controversie which he desires should be Fundamentall to a certain and stinted number If he shrinkes to do this let him not blame the backwardnesse of others in the same matter Although it be not hard to show the reasons why
Churches concerning Fundamentalls and that the whole Bickering is either about certaine manners of speech which are not founded in the Scriptures themselves or about consequences which some affirme others denie that they can be rightly inferred out of the Scriptures meane time the Fundamentalls being safe on both sides although all errour be not excluded about things not Fundamentall The truth of this Assertion will appeare First if with a sincere and prudent Judgement we ponder all those things in which those who wrangle about other matters yet acknowledge there is one Consent and Harmony of all Protestant Churches Pag. 18. James Andrews reckons up seven Propositions of all which he confesseth there is no Controversie betwixt the Churches Pag. 20. Also Beza recites certaine heads of doctrine of the Person of Christ and Communication of his Properties in all which it is evident That all Protestant Divines doe Consent Not many yeeres since the Conference at Lipsigh Pag. 5.6 certaine famous Divines summ'd all these Points up to twelve Articles in which there is unanimous consent of the Communication of the Person of Christ and his Properties In these things wherein we have the opinions of all Protestant Churches so well agreeing I dare not say that nothing is wanting which belongs to knowledge in divinity yet I confidently affirme That there is nothing deficient which pertaines to the Catholike Faith nothing which is necessary to be knowne and beleeved to the Salvation of a Christian man Lastly nothing which argues either these or those to have started asunder from the Foundation or that they ought to start from mutuall Communion If therefore in this Controversie of the Person of Christ and Properties of his Natures there remaine some knotty things which are more smoothly to be explained Let Divines afford their helping hand to this matter and not for this thing rend their Churches in pieces Let them kindly bring back their wandring Brethren into the way let them not furiously break asunder the bands of Brotherly Unity Let them build upon the fundamentall Doctrines their owne Gold Silver or Pretious stones and let them throw downe the hay and stubble built up by others Let them not thrust downe others from the Foundation nor disjoynt themselves from those whom they themselves see stick fast to the Foundation and Fundamentall Articles Secondly what hath been said of the joynt Consent in Fundamentalls may be plainly seene if we weigh all those Heresies that ever opposed the Fundamentall Articles of the Person of Christ and overturned the Foundation of mans salvation For they who damne and curse all these cannot be accused of violating the Foundation except by Slander cannot be condemned but by high injustice But now it is well knowne that no Heresie can be reckoned up whether ancient or moderne against which all the Protestant Churches are not most ready to bring their voice to condemne them In the Conference at Lipsigh whereof we have often made mention for the hope it gave to us of renewing of unity all the speakers with joynt consent Pag. 10. and from their whole heart did damne and reject all errours of ancient and later Arians Nestorians Eutichians Monothelites Marcionites Photinians and by what other names soever they be called On the other side with mouth and heart they gave their consent to the Apostolicall Nicene and Athanasian Creed He that in this manner approves all Points received and allowed of the Ancient Church concerning the Person of Christ and properties of both his Natures rejects all things condemned of the same may perchance in manner of speech retaine a forme of words not very sound or in some consequences may make a small swerving from the Truth but cannot make a departure from the foundation or fundamental Doctrine of the Catholike Church seeing Melanct. said rightly Apud Lutherum Tom. 1o. in disp p. 441. B. That opinions unknown to the ancient church although at this time they be generaly received yet are no Doctrines of the Catholik Church much lesse such Fundamentall doctrines as are of force before God to break the Peace Unity of Churches Thirdly in this matter of the Person of Christ and communication of his Properties that those things are not fundamentall which as yet hang undecided may appear from the very terms and words which Divines are constrained to use to expresse their opinion For in fundamentalls we heare Plaine cleer propositions such as these are In Christ God and Man the humane and divine nature are most neerly coupled together each nature in Christ hath and retaines its owne proprieties The proprieties of one nature can never be made the proprieties of another nature In the person of Christ there is a Communication of Properties by which that is attributed and ascribed to the whole Person which is proper to one of his natures As when we say God was crucified for us or the Man Christ is Omnipotent In this Communication the divine nature neither powreth forth the properties of its Divinity nor infuseth them into the humane nature These and all other things which are cleerly spoken of the Person of Christ and Communication of his Properties are contradicted by none But those things which are conceived and infolded in strange forreign and doubtfull termes beget strifes upon strifes and questions upon questions Such are those Problems Whether the proprieties of the Natures in the Person of Christ be communicated only verbally or really Whether they bee communicated in the abstract or the concrete and others of the same stampe which by the very sound of the words doe appeare to have sprung out of the Schoole of Grammarians and Logicians not of the Apostles and ancient Fathers and therefore not to bee recounted in the number of fundamentalls But let us adde some few things of the questions themselves That some affirme that this question is propounded Whethere there be such an Union of natures in the person of Christ in which neither nature communicates any thing to the other besides the bare name they seem to me to feigne a question which never was betwixt the protestant Churches For with one voice they confesse That such is the Union of the natures in the Person of Christ in which many things are communicated to the humane Nature yea all things although excellent gifts whereof a created nature can be a subject capable to receive them And even as no Protestant corrupteth this Proposition The Man Christ is God with this wicked Interpretation The Man Christ hath the bare and empty title of God So neither doe any deprave this proposition The Man Christ is omnipotent with this perverse exposition The Man Christ is in word only or title Omnipotent but acknowledgeth the matter it selfe which is signified in this Praedicate truly and really to agree to the Man Christ because it truly agrees to his person which the terme Man doth designe and denote They which on the other side defend that it is
transubstantiation to be made neither conceive there is made any Locall inclusion in the Bread or any durable conjunction out of the use of the Sacrament yet they grant the Bread to be the Body of Christ in a Sacramentall Vnion and that when the Bread is reached forth thâ— Body of Christ is together present and exhibited No one thing can be more like to another than is the judgement of the Helvetians to the judgement of the Lutherans Yet if any suspect that under this concord of words some Repugnancy of meaning and opinion may lye hid neverthelesse this is to be urged and enquired into whether this Repugnancy be such and of so great moment that it renders the Peace and Unity between Churches impossible and makes the Schisme and disjoynting betwixt them necessary and everlasting I know it seemeth farre otherwise to most learned and solid Divines when they side not to take part and are without the Lists of this discord Now as concerning those controversies of the Omnipresence of the Body of Christ the communication of his properties and others that first may seem to have bred whosoever shall weigh with Judgement what is granted what denyed on both sides shall presently perceive that neither of these nor of those any Fundamentall Article is called into question much lesse opposed or overthrowne For whatsoever was determined of these matters by the Catholique Church in the Creeds and Generall Councells that both sides receive and professe whatsoever was rejected and condemned that both alike reject and abhorre but that sometimes one Party should endeavour to draw the other by the small cords of consequences into the dirt of filthy Heresies is not a thing so much to be admired as to be bemoaned We all know the custome of angry disputants especially after they have begun to be throughly hot with long contending Also we have briefly touched before what is to be conceived of Heresies which are charged on others by consequences not at all granted or understood For the present this one thing may suffice to demonstrate the possibility of brotherly communion That on neither side any doctrine which is point blanck contrary to a Foundation of Faith Devoratoâ—rium Salutis or to use Tertullians word such as swallows up and devours Salvation is explicitly defended yea those whiâ—h are such are all cleerely and explicitly condemned on both sides If there be any other new controversies bred betwixt the Churches a-about Predestination Freewill and the like They can with no colour be pretended for the hindering of the Churches communion For in all these this one thing alone belongs to the Catholick and Fundamentall Faith That the free Grace of God in predestinating miserable men in conversion of sinners in setting free of mens wils Lastly in perseverance and Salvation of the Elect be so fully acknowledged that whatsoever he doth to the attaining of the state of Grace or Glory or whatsoever is done by men in reference hitherto that wholly be given to God and granted to Gods speciall grace and mercy On the other side whatsoever pertaines to the corruption of mans nature whatsoever to his obstinacy in sin whatsoever to the viciousnesse and servitude of Frâ—ewill Lastly whatsoever draws miserable mortals to damnation and tumbles them headlong into Hell that we impute all this to our selves and our owne demerits and command it distance to be farre off from God himselfe Whilest these things remaine fixed and immoveable as indeed they doe remaine although in the doctrines built upon the Foundation they have divers manners of conceiving and formes of speaking yea although they follow different opinions such errours are not so deadly that for their sakes a deadly hatred should be hatched or that a perpetuall Schism ought to be norished betwixt the churches If therfore this once be agreed on betwixt Divines that their strifes neither were nor are about any fundamentall Articles and things altogether necessary to be known to Salvation with all it will appeare That it is not impossible that Union and Communion betwixt the Churches be renewed that this pernicious Schisme be forthwith taken away and a blessed Peace for the time to come be holily preserved betwixt the German Churches Now it follows in the next place since we perceive this union is possible that we consider Whether Princes Doctors and even all Christian people be not tyed by vertue of Gods command and their own bounden duty every one for his own part to endeavour that this Brotherly Communion as soone as conveniently it may be be established between the Churches In the first place that of Paul mentioned by us in the beginning seems to intimate that we are all bound to this If it be possible and as much as in you lyeth have Peace with all men If a Civill and outward Peace is to be kept with so great desire betwixt all men without doubt the Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Communion betwixt Christians is to be procured and cherished with farre greater Enâ—eavours Where therefore no unconquerable impossibility hinders on the part of the thing to be done mans Will cannot be excused which herein neglects or refuses is either lazy or perverse to obey the commandement of God nor is there cause why any should pretend that the differences of repugnant opinions cannot as yet be reconciled If in the meane time the Schisms of the Churches may bee taken away as out of doubt they may I had rather a Milstone were tyed about my neck and I cast into the depth of the Sea than that I would hinder a work so acceptable to God so necessary to the avoyding of scandals or not with all my mind and might further and advance the same Hither it may be added that all have need to confesse that true and genuine charity is no lesse necessary to Salvation for all Churches and members of Christian Churches than the true and entire profession of sound and saving Faith For by this badge our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ would have his true Disciples distinguished and discerned Joh. 13.35 from those that are false and counterfeit By this all shall know that you are my Disciples if yee love one another Now I leave it to be decided of every mans conscience what charity at last that is which permits Christian Churches on no just cause of refusall mutually to deny the right hands of fellowship and eternally to detest the making of an Union betwixt them Is it not enough for us to depart from the Hay and Stubble that is the errours of other Churches except also by making a voluntary rent we depart from the Churches themselves which never as yet departed from Christ Besides I seeme to my selfe to have observed both those that embrace the Zwinglian and Lutheran doctrine as they use to call it on both sides to acknowledge that the Churches whether they maintaine that or this doctrine remaine the true Churches of Christ or the true members of the
Protestant Church can be named which professeth not with the Eucharist the true Presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ although it acknowledgeth the very manner of the Presence to be Supernaturall and plainly divine And sets down that the same doth consist not in any Physicall touch or contact but in a lively influence and mysticall Union and that most reall and neer It is a Fundamentall point That the Bread and Wine were the means ordained by Christ by which those which duely eat this bread being consecrated and drinke this wine eat the lively Flesh of Christ and drinke his saving blood to the Salvation of their soules The agreement of all Protestants in this point is so well known we need not take paines to prove it It is a Fundamentall That Bread and Wine are present in the Supper and are eaten and drunke in a locall naturall sensible manner but that Christs Flesh and Bloud are present and partaken of in a Divine admirable manner and not to be searched out So James Andrewes Col. Momp p. 17. 18. Concerning the manner wee can only say this That it is Supernaturall and imcomprehensible to humane reason and therefore there is no disputing thereof A little after Pag. 25. in not is marg The manner is heavenly supernaturall insomuch as it is wholly spirituall And as the Church is a mysticall body with Christ so also this receiving is done in a Mysterie In the Conference lately had at Lipsigh the Saxons did grant That the manner of the receiving which they defended to be done by vertue of the Elements was notwithstanding heavenly supernaturall and knowne to God alone None is ignorant that Calvin Bucer and all the rest were in the same opinion Col. Mompelg p. 66. Beza saith expresly The manner of the Receiving is a Mystery to be beleeved which exceedeth the capacity of mans wit and understanding Hitherto the Doctors and Churches well agree amongst themselves Secondly nothing can be conceived contrary to the Fundamentall doctrine of this Sacrament which is not rejected and damn'd of all Protestant Churches they are point blanck against all erroenous doctrines of the bare representation of the Body and Blood of Christ parted from the true and reall exhibiting of him of the prodigious Transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ the Accidents only remaining safe without a Subject Of the Locall and naturall presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Lords Supper Of the Locall Consubstantiation Coexistency or Inexistency of the Body and blood of Christ with the earthly Elements or in the same These and if there be any other which oppose or fight against the very nature of a Sacrament and the truth of the Body of Christ are condemned by the common assent not only of the Helvetian but Lutheran Churches Col. Mompel p. 16. Let James Andrewes speake for all the rest Wee doe not determine a Physicall or Locall presence of the Body and blood of Christ in the holy Supper These words Substantially pag. 183. Corporally Really Orally signifie nothing else to us but the true presence and eating of the Body and Blood of Christ We reject all Physicall Consubstantiation whether it be visible or invisible and only teach such a Conjunction as is Sacramentall The same was the opinion of the Saxons in the conference at Lipsigh to which these of Brandenburg and Hessland did subscribe Thirdly nothing remaineth undecided in this Controversie which can be called a Fundamentall point or for which the Brotherly Communion of Churches cannot be established For that word Orally which is used of the Saxons and is disallowed of other Churches is so used of these that they bring in no Fundamentall errour and is so rejected of those that they overthrow no fundamentall Doctrine For they that defend the Orall eating as well of the Body of Christ as of the bread notwithstanding denie such a Presence of the Body of Christ as is Locall to mens mouthes without which an Orall eating cannot properly be performed For that body cannot be eaten with the mouth betwixt which and mens mouthes there is granted a great distance of place That cannot be eaten with the mouth of the Body which is so present to the place of the mouth that it is not locally present to the mouth When therefore they allow of such a distance and give such a Location to the Body of Christ it is plaine that they passe and transferre the Orall eating which is truly and properly affirmed of the bread alone by a new and figurative manner of speech to the Flesh of Christ locally remaining in the Heavens and not locally present to the mouthes of men Moreover when they remove from this Orall eating all champing and chewing of the body of Christ the letting down of the thing chewed into the stomack the increasing and nourishing of the body of man by this flesh thus chewed it is evident however they thinke fit to retaine this forme of speech yet they meane nothing by this Orall eating that is joyned with the Capernaites rending of the Flesh of Christ with their teeth or agreeable with the signification of the words as they sound to mens eares in the Latine They only seeme to desire to affirme this That this Orall eating which truly properly usually and immediately is affirmed of the eating of the Bread may by the force of the consecrated bread comming between by a new unusuall mysticall and plainly heavenly signification of Orall eating be fitted and applyed to the Flesh of Christ Now as touching those who on the other side contend That the eating of the Flesh of Christ is not to be called an Orall eating but rather a Mentall Spirituall or Personall because the Person eating the bread with his mouth with his minde together eates the true and lively flesh of Christ Yet they denie not but that the visible bread is the Instrument or means appointed by Christ which the person useth to the cating of the Invisible bread but they thinke that the eating of that thing is properly called Orall which may be done by the Teeth and instruments in the mouth but that the eating of that thing cannot be called Orall which is neither locally present to the mouth neither if it were present could it be subject to any Act of mans mouth because of the Glorious and impassible nature which it hath Betwixt these Opinions I see some contrariety about the propriety of words and phrase of speech but of the maine and of the Truth of the Catholique Faith either none at all or at least so little that notwithstanding there may be place for the establishing of Brotherly Communion betwixt the Churches This of the first Controversie we passe to the Second Of the Person of Christ and Communication of his Properties IT is easie to shew out of their Writings who have handled this Controversie that there is a full Consent betwixt Reformed