Transubstantiation Exploded, Part 1 · Paragraph 14
PAR. 14.
That in the words of the institution of the cup. this cup is the New Testament i… my blood, there are divers figures is prooved by unavoidable consequences, and the confession of our Learned Adversaries, Salmoron, Barradius and Jansenius.
THe two kindes in the Lords Supper, are like the eyes in our body which are mooved by the same nerve opticke: or double strings in an instrument which are tuned alike: … comparative reason therefore drawne from the one to the other cannot but be of great force. The sixt argumen… therefore in the Conference as you reckon was from thence drawne after this manner.
The words used in the Consecration of the bread, are so to bee expounded as the like in the consecration of the cup.
But the words used in the Consecration of the cup, are to bee expounded by a figure.
Ergo the words used in the Consecration of the bread, are to …ee expounded by a figure.
In this Sylogisme, because you lay you… batteries at both propositions, the Major and the Minor I will fortifie them both, and first the Major It is a topi…k axiome similium est id…m judicium, like are to be judged by the like, and these are so like, that aI. …. de Sacr. Euch. c. 10. Add… argumentum robustissi… ex scriptura, Nam si hoc demonstraret …, ita etiamin consecratione vini hi… sive hoc … vin….Bellarmine himselfe draweth an argument from the one to the other. I will add saith hee a most forcible argument. If the pronoune hoc used in the Consecration of the bread, demonstrateth bread, then also the same pronoune this used in the Consecration of the cup must needs demonsta… wine, the validity of which consequence dependeth upon the correspondencie betweene the words used in the institution of each kinde, neither indeed can any reason bee assigned why the words used in the one, may not as well admit of a figure as the words used in the other: both are dogmaticall, both have a precept annexed unto them, both are words of a Testament, both Sacramentall, and according to your doctrine alike operatory: never therefore exclaime against us for expounding the words used in the institution of the bread by one figure, when you expound the words used in the institution of the cup by two figures at least. Blame not us for interpreting This is my Body, tha… is a signe or Sacrament of my body, when you your selves interpret This cup is the New Testament, that is, this drinke is … signe or Sacrament of the New Testament: If you alleadge that Calix is expounded in the same place by funditur, and argue from thence, that because the blood of Christ and not wine is shed for us: therefore this cup must needs signifie his blood: I answer, that the figure in panis in like manner is expounded in the same place by frangitur, and 1 Cor. 11. 24. This is my Body which is broken.argue that because bread is broken in the Sacrament, and not Christs body, therefore (this) must needs signifie thi… bread. If you replie that frangitur is …t for frangetur, I will say in like man…er, that funditur is put for fundetur. …he Major being therefore put out of all doubt, let us examine the Minor, which was this. The words used in the Consecration of the cup, are to he expounded by one figure or more. For the words as they are recorded by Saint Luke, are these, This Cup is the New Luk. 22. 20.Testament in my blood. Where we have a double figure: First, a Metonomie, …ntinentis pro contento, the cup is taken for the thing contained in the cup. Secondly, signatū pro signo, the Testament for the Signe, Seale, or Sacrament of the New Testament. So saith Theophylact, In Luk. …. Sanguine suo novum Testamentu… obsig…vit.alleadged by you. In the Old Testament Gods Covenant was confirmed by the blood of bruit beasts: but now, since the Word was made flesh. He sealed the New Testament with his owne blood. So your Gorran, the blood of Iesus Gor. in Luk. 22. Sanguis Christi est confirmatio novi Testamenti.Christ is the confirmation of the New Testament, for a Testament is confirmed by the death of the Testator. Nay so your most accomplished Jesuits, Solmeron, Sol…. Ies. Tom 9. Tract. 15. Subest in his duplex metonymi…, primò quia continens pon…ur pro con…, id est poculum … … pro …no …o quod vinum in ipso contine…r Secundum est in eo quod … in poculo foedus v… Testamē tum dicitur …, cum s…us …ymbolum.and Barradius, Solmeron pointeth to a double figure, saying, in these words we have a double figure, first, the cup being put for that which is contained in the … Secondly, the Testament for a Symb… thereof. Barradius though he expo… the word Testament as you doe for Legacie bequeathed by Christs w… yet he addeth expressely, that it is taken by a figure called Metony… What say you here to this, … word Testamentum is here taken p… perly enough. For not onelyonly a mans … ward will. but also his outward wri… will in parchment, is commonly called T… stamentum, because it is an authent… Tom. …. l. 3. c. …. de iustit. Euch. T…stamentum su…ur pro legato Meto…, conti… Testamentum su …ur pro cote…to leg…o vel …, hoc sensu sangu… Christi est Testa… novum, id est leg… … novum & admira…le.signe of his will. I pray expresse y… selfe a little farther, what meane y… by properly enough? doe you mea… by an usuall figure, or without a… figure, if you meane by an usuall figure, assent unto you, and it sufficeth for th… strengthening of my argument: if … meane without a figure, name me … Author of note, Divine or Civil… who before you affirmed that either Legacie bequeathed by will, or the p… per and parchment in which the will… writtē is in propriety of speech with… any figure, either foreign in Greeke, Testamentum in Latine, or Will in … glish. Not to take the advantage might against you, that the blood of Christ as you beleeve it to bee in the …acrament cannot bee an authenticall …gne of Christs will, because if wee should grant it to be there really, in your sense: yet it is not there visibly, …nd therefore cannot be an authenticall signe of it, like the paper or parchment …ou speake of, or as we teach the wine in the cup to be: I shall bee much in…ebted unto you if you can resolve mee …ow the blood of Christ can be without any figure, his last Will and Testament, sith
1. He made his Will at this his last Supper, but made not then his blood.…igest. de test. Testamentum est volunt… nostrae iust… sententia de eo quod qui… … veli… …st mo…em s…m. Mat. 26. 28.
2. His Will was his just determination or appointment of what he would have done after his death, his blood is no such thing.
3. The Scripture speakes of blood of the Testament, hic est sanguis novi Testamenti, never of a Testament of blood.
4. Blood is a su…stantiall part of the Testator, and therefore not his Will or Testam…nt.
5. Every Will is either written or nuncupative, the blood of the Testator is neither.
After you have blunted the edge of these weapons, see how you can rebate the point of aIan har. Evang p 91. Dicendum est certum esse hanc lacutionem, hic calix novum Testamentum est in me… sanguine, non posse accipi in proprio senso, sed per tropum quē dam. Sive enim Calix dicitur accipi pro vasculo potorio d… quo bibeb… Apostoli, sive pro sanguine Synecdochicè in ipso poculo contento, non potest consistere ut is illis verbis sit propria …: Ne… enim dixerit propria locutio… vas…ulum illud potorium fuisse Testamentum, cum incertum sit … … ex… illud poculum, …c nov… Testamentum … esse o…es testat…r …, sed nec sang…is in calice … potest propria loc… dic… Testamentum.Iansenius his dart… which he lets flie levell at you. These words saith he, cannot bee taken properly, whether the cup be taken for the vessell used for drinking, or for the blood of Christ by a Synechdoche: for no man will say that the vessell in propriety of speech is Christs Testament, sith the Scripture testifieth that Christs Will is eternall, so i… not that cup, which no man knoweth whether it be extant at this day or no, neither can the blood of Christ bee properly said to be his Testament, for his Testament i… one, not many, and Paul in the Epistle … the Hebrewes, teacheth out of Jeremie, that the Gospell is the New Testament, Christs blood is not therefore properly the New Testament. Moreover in Matthew and Marke the blood is said to be the blo… of the New Testament, it is not therefore the New Testament no more then the blood of Bullocks is the Old Testament. Lastly, the word cup cannot be taken for blood contained in the cup, as it is evident by that which is added in my blood. For the speech will not bee congruous if thou say this blood is the New Testament in my blood: the cup therefore must be properly taken for the vessell, which undoubtedly in the proper signification is not the New Testament, wherefore of necessity wee must confesse that these words this cup is the New Testament in my blood, cannot bee taken in the proper sense, but are spoken by a trope or figure.