Rejoinder to Bristows Reply, Part 2 · Book 3 · Chapter 4
CAP. IIII.
Answere is made to their obiections, who teach out of the holy Sander.fathers that the sixt Chapter of S. Iohn ought to be expounded only of spirituall eating.
Where it is alleaged, that the fathers expound the wordes of that Chapter, partly of beliefe in Christ, partly Fulk.of the vnitie which riseth by the Sacramentes of baptisme and penance (saith Sander) this shal be a sufficient answere. First so many fathers do …et expound it of any others argument, as do conformably expound it of the supper of our Lord.
To this I reply, y• al or in a maner all do interprete it of our spiritual coniunction, with the body and bloud of Christ, whereof the supper is a Sacrament, and confirmation. Secondly he answereth, that those fathers which hauehave expounded the wordes otherwise then of the supper, hauehave also expounded them of the supper, whereby their authority is as great, for that which I say, as it is against it. I reply, that none of them expoundeth the wordes of the supper so, as they be singular vntounto the supper, and therefore none of them maketh for Sanders purpose; nor expounde them otherwise then I hauehave shewed in reply to the first answere.
Thirdly he answereth, that no one of the fathers is brought forth, who denieth these words in S. Iohn to apperteine to the supper. A lewde answere, for none of vsus denieth those wordes to apperteine to the supper, but to be a promise singularly to be referred to the supper. Fourthly, many of the places brought for the contrary opinion, doe manifestly and as it seemeth to Sander, inuincibly prooue the wordes in S. Iohn to be literally ment of the supper of Christ. This shall appeare by the examples following. First Cyprian ad Quir…num lib. 3. Cap. 25. & 26. writeth that a man can not come to the kingdom of heauen without baptisme, because it is writen: Except a man be borne againe, &c. and likewise, Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, &c. Heere (saith Sander) he expoundeth not the wordes of baptisme, but meaneth according to the custome of the Church, which was to giuegive the cummunion to infantes, not so much for necessity, as for suerties sake, of which custome we hauehave mention in Dionysius, Ambrose, and other. The like answer (he saith) may be made to Innocentius, Augustinus, and Eusebius Emissenus, which bring these wordes against the Pelagians: Except'ye eat the flesh, &c. to prooue that infantes can not hauehave life, except they be baptized. To this I reply: it can not be denied, but such an erronious custome cōtrary to ye word of God, was vsed in those ancient times, to giuegive the communion to infantes, whereof grew afterward an opinion of necessity, which Pope Innocentius and Augustine, and all the West Church, (as Augustine saith) did hold, although Cont. dua… epist. Pel. lib. 2. Cap. 4.Sander would excuse it, to hauehave bene practised not for necessity, but for suerty: yet hereof it followeth not, that the wordes of S. Iohn in Cyprian and the rest, are literally vnderstoode of the supper, otherwise then as the supper is a Sacrament of that eating and drinking the flesh and bloud of Christ, which Sander confesseth may to be without the Sacrament, euen of such eating of the flesh of Christ, as the fathers were partakers of, vntounto their saluation, before Christ came in the flesh, wherof Augustine speaketh most plentisully. In Ioan Tr. 26. and concludeth of this question: Huius rei Sacramentum, id est vnitatis corporis, &c. A Sacrament of this thing, that is of the vnitie of the body and bloud of Christ, in some places eueryevery day, in some places by certaine distances of daies, is prepared in the Lords table, and from the Lords table is receiued: of some to life, of some to destruction. But the thing it selfe, whereof it is a Sacrament, is receiued of eueryevery man to life, of none to destruction, whosoeuer shall be pertaker of it. And because, Sander saith, the maintenance of life dependeth ordinarily vponupon the Eucharist alone: The same Augustine saith to the contrary, Hoc est ergo manducare illam escam, & illum bibere potum in Christo manere, & illum manentem in se habere. Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, & in quo non manet Christus, pro…ul dubio nec manducat spiritualiter carnem eius, nec bibit eius sanguinem, licet carnaliter & visibiliter premat dentibus Sacramentum corporis & sanguinis Christi, sed magis tantae rei Sacramentum ad iudi…itan sibi manducat & bibit. For this it is to eate that meate, and to drinke that drinke, to abide in Christ and to hauehave him abide in vsus. And by this, he which abideth not in Christ, & in whom Christ doth not abide, out of al doubt, neither doth he eate spiritually his flesh, not drinke his bloud, although carnally and visibly, he presse with his teeth, the Sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ, but rather he eateth and drinketh the Sacrament of so great a thing, vntounto his own damnation. Heere Augustine opposeth the eating of Christes flesh spiritually, with eating the Sacrament thereof carnally, whereby he sheweth, that Christes flesh is not eaten but spiritually and effectually, although the Sacrament thereof be eaten carnally to destruction. And by this you may see, howe well red Sander is in Augustine, which professeth, that in his workes he neuer sawe one sillable, why to thinke that he would the litteral sense of the sixt of S. Iohn to belong onelyonly to spirituall eating, when Augustine saieth expressely, This is to eate that meat, to eate spiritually, to hauehave Christ abiding in vsus, &c. But yt same Augustine de peccat. merit. lib 1. Cap. 20. saith: Dominum audiamus, inqu…m, nō quidem hoc de Sacramento lauacri dicentem, sed de Sacramento sanctae mensae suae, quò nemo ritè nisi baptiza…us accedit. Nisi manducaueritis carnem meam, &c. Let vsus heare our Lord, I say, not saying in deede, this of the Sacrament of baptisme, but of the Sacrament of his holy table, whither no man commeth well, vnlesse he be baptized. Except ye eate my flesh and drinke my bloud, you shall not hauehave life in you, &c. Heere (saith Sander) it is plaine by Augustines iudgment, yt Christ in that Chapiter speaketh not of baptisme, and that he speaketh of his supper. I answer, Augustin writeth against the Pelagians, which denied baptisme to be necessary for infantes, as for them that had no originall nor actual sin, laboring to prooue the necessity of baptisme by those wordes of Christ: Except a man be borne of water, and of the holy Ghost, &c. to bring infantes vnderunder the compasse of sinne and to establish their saluation onelyonly by grace, & not by merite of their workes. His cause in deede was good, but his argument was weake, to proue the necessity of baptisme by that texte, euen as to prooue the necessity of communion for infantes by this text, of the 6. of S. Iohn, which is not needful, nor lawful to be giuen vntounto them at all. Yet such was his error, that he thought infantes were charged by this text to cōmunicate in paine of dā nation. That he iudged they ought to be partakers of ye body & bloud of Christ, it is true by yt text, but that he thought this partaking was by the Sacrament in young children, he was deceiued, yet Sander saith, it was not of necessity, but of surety, whereas Augustines error is manifest to vrge it of necessity. An verò quisquā etiā hoc dicere audebit, quòd ad paruulos haec sententia nō pertineat? possint que sine participatione corporis h…us & sanguinis in se habere vitā, quia non ait, Qui non manducauerit, sicut de baptismo qui nō renatus fuerit, &c. Is there any man that dare say this also, that this sentence pertaineth not vntounto young children, and that they may without the participation of this body and bloud hauehave life in them, because he sayeth not, he that shall not eate, as of baptisme, he that shall not be borne againe? I will make answere to Augustine not in defence of the Pelagians, but in discouering of his error. Regeneration is vndoubtedly proued necessarie for infants, by that place of Iohn 3. as eating and drinking of the body and bloud of Christ in this 6. of Iohn: which is ynough to ouerthrowe the Pelagians, but neither in the one place, nor in the other, the necessitie of the external sacrament is required, but as it may possibly, and ought to be profitably receaued according to the worde of God. Wherefore Augustine in this place applying the text vntounto the sacrament, in arguing from the signe to the thing signified, or contrariwise, must be vnderstoode according to his deliberate exposition, in Ioh. Tr. 26. or else he should bee founde contrary to himselfe. And whereas Sander sayeth, This text so appertaineth to the supper, as it appertaineth not to baptisme, and therefore can not be taken of the spirituall vniting with Christ which is in baptisme: I deny the argument, for although it doth not so properly pertaine to the sacrament of washing, as to the sacrament of feeding and nourishing: yet doeth it also pertaine to baptisme, in as much as by baptisme we are not only washed by Christs bloud from our sinnes, but wholy regenerate, & borne a newe to be the children of God, which wee cannot be, but by participation of flesh & bloud with our brother Iesus Christ, and therefore we are also in baptisme spiritually fed with his body and bloud.
To that which is brought out of Basil, Ep. 141. That Christ in this text calleth his whole mystical comming, flesh and bloud: Sander answereth, that saying may be verified of the Sacrament of his supper, because he that receiueth worthily, is partaker of all the mysteries of Christ. But that it cannot be singularly applyed to the Sacrament, which is all the question, his owne wordes shall declare. Edimus enim ipsius carnem, & bibimus ipsius sanguinem per incarnationem participes fientes & sensibitis vitae verbi & sapientiae. Carnem enim & sanguinem totum suum mysterium aduentum nominauit, & doctrinam & actiua & naturali, ac theologica constantem indicauit per quam nutritur anima, & interim ad veritatis speculationem praeparatur. For wee eate his flesh and drinke his bloud, being made partakers by his incarnation both of sensible life of the word and of wisedome. For hee named his whole mysticall comming flesh and bloud, & shewed his doctrine, consisting of actiue, naturall and theologicall, by which the soule is nourished, and in the meane time prepared vntounto the beholding of the trueth. Thus by Basils iudgement, by faith in Christes incarnation and doctrine, wee eate his flesh and bloud, whereof wee are assured by the Sacrament, therefore the text is not a singular promise of Christes naturall flesh, to be after a corporall maner receiued in the Sacrament.