The Grand Sacrilege of the Church of Rome, Chapter 4 – Chapter 6
CHAP. IIII. Argument 3. drawne from the Analogie of the thing signified to the signe.
THe signe, viz. the Cup ought to be denyed to none, vponupon whom God conferreth the grace signified by the signe:
Upon all faithfull Christians God conferreth the grace signified by that signe:
Therefore that signe, viz. the Cup ought to be denied to no faithfull Christian.
The proposition is deduced from the words of mActs 10. 47.S. Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which hauehave receiued the holy Ghost as well as we? Surely to whom God intendeth the end, hee intendeth the vse of the meanes. nLor. in hac verba.Lorinus out of the ordinary glosse conceiues the Apostle to vse an argument à minori, which he thus reduceth to forme.
If God hath giuen that which is greater, no man ought to forbid the lesser:
But God hath giuen them the holy Ghost, which is the greater;
Therefore none ought to denie them the baptisme of water, which is the lesse.
This is all one, as if when the Pope hath bestowed an Archbishoprick vponupon any Bishop, the Datary should deny him the Pale: or when the Vniuersity hath conferred the degree of Doctor, the Beadle should denie him his Scarlet Hoode: or when the Captaine hath admitted a souldier into his band, any vnderunder officer should forbid him to weare his colours. As incongruous, if not far more, it is, when God the Lord and Master conferres the thing signified by the Sacrament, for man, the seruant, and minister to denie the signe.
The asumption is easily prooued; for the thing signified by the Cup, is either the Communion of Christs blood, as the Apostle testifieth; The o1. Cor. 10. 16.Cup of Blessing which we blesse, is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ? Or it is remission of sins by the blood-shedding of Christ, as the words of the institution imply; This is the blood of the new Testament, which is shed for man for the remission of sins: Neither of which benefits the Romanists dare to exclude the Laietie from. They hauehave vnion with Christ by faith, therefore Communion of his blood: they receiue the remission of sinnes by Christs blood shed vponupon the Crosse, with what colour then can the Romanists take away from them the Cup, the signe and pledge thereof? if they except against this argument, that children, & abstemious persons, such as cannot brook wine, receiue the thing signified, viz. remission of sins, and participate of Christs blood, and yet A Popish cauill.drink not of the holy Cup; the answer is easie; None are by this argument meant, but such as desire the Cup, and are capable thereof: such are not either children, or abstemious persons. Let the Opposition then, or Maior be vnderstood as it is intended, with this explication, or limitation: No faithfull Christians ought to be denied the Cup, vponupon whom God conferreth the thing signified by the Cup. viz. none that desire it, and are capable thereof, and can The answer thereunto.receiue it according to Christs ordinance, such are the faithfull people ordinarily, and so the former Cauill vanisheth into smoake.
This whole argument is confirmed by a Canon, extant in pSi quoties cunque effunditur sanguis Christi, in remissionem peccatorum effunditur, debeo illum semper sumere, vt semper peccata mihi dimittantur.Gratian de consecrat: dist: 2. If as often as the blood of Christ is shed, it is shed for the remission ofsins: I ought alwaies to take it, that alwayes sinnes may be forgiuen me. This Gratian gathered as a flowre out of Saint Ambrose his works: but behold a greater then Saint Ambrose, our Lord and Sauiour implieth as much, saying, This is my blood which is shed for you, and for many for the remission of sinnes; Drinke yee of it, for it is shed for you, and the remission of your sinnes. These therefore for whom Christs blood was shed, and they who hauehave obtained remission of sins by it, ought by the reason annexed to this precept, drinke of it. And I perswade my selfe, that no learned Papist hath so little charitie in his heart, or so much brasse in his brow, as doctrinally to deliuer, that Christs blood was not shed sor the Laietie, or that they receiue not remission of sinns thereby, as well as Priests.
CHAP. V. The fourth argument drawne from the nature of a banquet, or supper.
IN eueryevery supper, feast, or banquet, the cup is to be giuen to the guests, that they may drinke as well as eate:
The Sacrament of the Eucharist is a supper, feast, or banquet:
Therfore in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the Cup is to be giuen to all the communicants, that they may drink as well as eate.
The proposition is euident to sense, and is readily assented vntounto by the aduersaries, Aquinas qAd corporalem refectionem duo requiruntur sc. cibus, qui est alimentum siccum, & potus, qui est alimentum humidum. r Datur sacramentum sub duplici specie, sc. panis & vini: vt per hoc spiritualis refectio perfectè designetur. s 1. Cor. 11. 20.part. 3. q. 73. To a corporall refection, or repast, two things are required, viz. meat, which is a drie nourishment, and drinke which is a moyst. And y Lyranus in 1. Corin. 11. The Sacrament is giuen in two kinds, or formes, viz. of bread and wine, that thereby a perfect spirituall refection might bee signified.
The asumption is testified by a cloud of witnesses: by Saint Paul; When you come together therefore into one place, this is not to eate the Lords Supper; for in eating, eueryevery one taketh before hand his own supper. By Saint Cyprian, who intituleth his Treatise of this Sacrament, De coena Domini, of the Lords Supper: by Tertullian, who sayth, what shall her husband sing to her, what shall shee sing to her husband? tAudiat aliquid Dei coena de taberna, de gehenna? quae Dei mentio, quae Christi invocatio?shall Gods Supper heare something from the Tauerne, from hell? what mention of God? what calling vponupon Christ can there be there? &c. By Saint Ierom epist. 14. ad Damasum, tUitulus saginatus ipse saluator est, cuius quotidie carne vescimur, cruorē potamus: hoc conuiuium quotidie, celebratur quotid e pater fi…um recipit.pa. 409. * the fat calfe is our Sauiour, whose flesh we dayly eat, and drinke his blood; this banquet is eueryevery day kept, eueryevery day the Father receiues his Sonne. By Soto, art. 12. quest. in 12. dist. uSacramentum nisi in … raque so c…e non …; est enim conu…tum ex cibo & po…u constans.The Sacrament is not perfect, but in both kinds; for it is a banquet consisting of meate and drinke Nay, by the whole Church of Rome in her Offices, and publique Liturgie, in the Antiphony sung at the Vespers, on Corpus Christi day, ‖O sacrum conuiuium.O holy banquet; and in the prayer after the Communion, in the feastof Cosimus and Damianus.
This whole argument is confirmed by *Hoc sacramentum sub duplici specie est institutum, vt …sset instar conui…ij: ide…que de illo dix…t hristus: caro mea ve…est cibus, & sanguis verè est potus Nam in conuiuio ni…il a…ud est, nisi cibus & potus; quorum quilibet su… pec…iari modo resi…t, & ad nutri…nem. & aug…entum cond…it. Vasqu. in Aquin. part. 3. quaest. 80. art. 12 disp. 215.Vasques the Iesuite, disp. 215. The Sacrament is instituted in both kinds, viz. bread and wine, that it might be a kind of banquet. Therfore Christ speaking of himselfe saith, My fl…sh is meate indeed, and my blood is drinke indeed: now in a banquet there is nothing but me …t and drinke, whereof each refresheth the body after a seuerall manner, and conduceth to the nourishment and increase thereof. Whereupon he inferreth, that each kinde in the Sacrament hath a peculiar and proper signification and operation. This testimony of Vasques commeth home to the point; for he confesseth all that is inforced by this argument: first, that a banquet consists of drinke as well as of meat: Secondly that the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist is a banquet; Thirdly, that the seuerall kinds of foode in this banquet nourish after a seuerall manner; from whence, who seeth not, that it will follow that the Laietie which are debarred of one kinde of viand in this banquet, and receiue onelyonly the other, cannot participate the full effect and operation of the Sacrament, which is a perfect spirituall refection, or nourishment.
CHAP. VI. The fift Argument drawne from the precept of drinking.
NOne can drink in the Sacrament without the Cup:
All that communicate, ought to drinke in the Sacrament:
Therefore all that communicate, ought to hauehave the Cup giuen them.
The proposition cannot be denyed, the relation is so neere betweene drinking and the Cup; none drinke but by taking the Cup; none taketh the Cup in the Lords Supper, but hee drinketh: Spirituall drinking indeed may bee * For albeit the Pope at this day is said to sucke the wine out of a quill, and in some Churches anciently the people dranke out of pipes, for feare of spilling: yet this drinking was not without the cup, out of which they dranke, though not immediately as we doe, and they ought to doe, according to the practice of the Apostles themselues.without a materiall Cup, or Chalice; but corporall and sensible, such as is drinking in the Sacrament, which is a visible signe, cannot be without the Cup.
The assumption may be collected, if not out of Saint Iohn, 6. 53. and 56. vnlesse you drinke my blood you hauehave no life in you: and hee that drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me: (because some Iudicious Diuines vnderstand those texts of Spirituall, and not Sacramentall drinking) yet most euidently out of other texts of Scripture, which by consent of all diuines, either directly point vntounto, or manifestly allude to drinking in the Sacrament; As the 1. Cor. 11. 28. So let him drinke of that Cup: vers. 29. Whosoeuer drinketh vnworthily, drinketh damnation vntounto himself. And 1. Cor. 10. 4. All did drinke that same spirituall drinke: and vers. 21. Ye cannot drinke the Cup of the Lord, and the Cup of deuils: and 1. Cor. 12. 13. we are all made to drinke into one spirit. Besides, Mat. 26. 28. Drinke you al of this; of which before in the first argument.
This whole argument is confirmed by Pope Innocent himselfe, one of the learnedest of all the Popes, and best studied in this argument. In his fourth booke of the Mysteries of the masse, c. 21. The blood of Christ is xVecsanguis sub specie panis comeditur. nec corpus sub specie vini bibitur: quia sicut nec sanguis comeditur, nec corpus bibitur: ita neutrum sub specie panis bibitur, sub specie vini comeditur.not said to be drunke vnderunder the forme of bread, as neither to bee eaten vnderunder the forme of wine; but wee inferre, all faithfull Christians are inuited by Christs precept, and the vndeniable practise of the Apostolike Churches, not onelyonly to participate of Christs blood in some manner, as the Romanists conceiue they may doe in eating the flesh, but truly and properly to drinke it, but sacramentally. And therefore albeit we should admit, that the blood of Christ might in some sort be taken together with the bodie, because now since his resurrection and ascention, they are neuer seuered; but where his body is locally and really, there is his blood also: yet this doth not satisfie Christs command, who requireth, that we distinctly Drinke of the Cup, or wine, which he calleth his blood, Mat. 26. 28. and that we drinke his blood, Iohn 6. 53. which most of our learned aduersaries vnderstand properly of drinking Christs blood really present, as they belieue, in the Sacrament. Were his blood really present, as they suppose, in the bread by the words of consecration turned into his body yet certainely in eating the body they cannot be said to drinke his blood: for eating is not drinking; neither can any man possible imagine true reall and proper drinking of any thing, which is not sub liquidâ formâ, as Christs blood cannot bee sub forma panis, vnderunder the forme of bread, which is drie and solid.