Christian Questions and Answers Part 2, Catechism · Question 229 – Question 230
228. Queſtion.
Shew the ſeuenth.
Anſweare.
I geather out of other places of the ſcripture, that this is not a proper propoſition. For as often thinges vnlike are attributed to the ſame ſubiect, it muſt needes be that ſome of theſe be taken properly, and ſome figuratiuely, wc I ſet foorth by examples thus: The Goſpell is called the power of God to ſaluation. Rom. 1. 16. And in the beginning of the ſame chapter it is called the doctrine reuealed from aboue, concerning the Sonne of God: which two foraſmuche as they are diuerſe, it muſt needes bee vnderſtoode that one bee ſpoken properly and the other figuratiuely.
It is geathered not darkely out of Iohn the 17. 3. that Fayth is the knowledge of the true God & of Ieſus Chriſt, whereby we are ſaued. The ſame is defined alſo to be the groūd of thoſe things which are not. Therefore one of theſeHeb. 11. 1. muſt needs be ſpoken poperly, the other figuratiuely.
Iohn is not Elias: Iohn. 1. 21. And he is that Elias that ſhal come. Mat. 11. 14. Therfore in one of thoſe we muſt needs grant, that there is a figure.
It is playne that Herode was properly a man. The ſame alſo is called a Foxe, one of theſe therefore muſt be vnderſtoode to be ſpoken figuratiuely. Of which, infinit examples might be alleaged: & yet notwithſtāding theſe are not alleaged by me, as though they were, to be expounded by the ſame figure, but to ſhew that that I hauehave ſayd is true: to wit, as often as vnlike thinges are ſpoken of the ſame Subiect, the one of them muſt bee a proper attribution, the other figuratiue.
But the cup, that is to ſay, the wyne conteyned in the cup, is ſometime ſaide to be blood, ſometime ſaide to bee the Teſtament in blood: and yet notwithſtanding it is plaine that the ſelfe ſame is properly the licoure of the Wine, as it is called of Chriſte. It is not therefore properly mans blood, and much leſſe alſo it is properly the laſt Teſtament of ones wyll that ſhall dye: but it is called blood, becauſe it is the Sacrament of his blood, whereby that ſame couenaunt or Teſtament of the remiſſion of ſinnes and of euerlaſting life, is ſtricken with vsus: the ſame alſo is the Teſtament in blood, becauſe it is the pleadge of his Teſtament which is ſealed and ratified by the blood of the Lord As the Lorde alſo in Moſes in the ſame place when had called Circumciſion the couenant, himſelfe doeth afterwardes interprete it too bee the ſigne of the couenant.
229. Queſtion.
Shew the eight.
Anſweare.
The conference of that place, the 1. Cor. 10. 16. with the wordes of Chriſt in which he calleth that ſame bread his bodie, & that ſame cup his blood: where that ſame bread is called the communion of his body & that ſame cup the communion of his blood, doeth altogether ſhewe that bothe theſe ſayinges are figuratiue, or at leaſt wiſe one of them too witte, eyther that of Paule or that of Chriſt.
Queſtion.
To wit that of Paule, is to bee expounded out of the proper ſaying of Chriſt.
Anſweare.
Therefore at the length thou arte brought too confeſſe that whoſoeuer doeth mainteine and defende figures in the controuerſie of the Sacraments, doe not ouerthrowe the Teſtament of the Sonne of GOD. But to the matter. It is eaſie too ſhewe out of our ſeuenth Argument, and out of that that went next before, that both theſe were figuratiue, whether thou doe interprete that out of this, or this out of that: as for example both theſe Propoſitions, This cup for this Wine is my blood: and this wine is the communion of my bloode: (nowe the like is too bee thought of breade) it is diuers from this, this wine is the licour of the vine, which notwithſtanding thou muſt needes ſay is moſt proper, and therefore ſo ſtoutly to bee maintened, becauſe as we hauehave ſaide, ouerthrowing or taking away the ſubſtaunce of the ſigne, the foundation of the analogy or proportion ſhoulde alſo bee taken away and ouerthrowen.
Queſtion.
I would anſweare that both Chriſt and Paule paſſed this ouer as a thing ſufficiently knowen. For to what purpoſe ſhoulde he hauehave taught his Diſciples, that that bread which he held in his handes, was breade, and that wine? But vndoubtedly it behooued him to teach them that, which otherwiſe they woulde neuer hauehave beleeued, too witte, that thoſe thinges alſo which hee helde in his handes and gaue them, in, vnderunder, or with Bread and Wyne: was his body and his blood.
Anſweare.
Therefore thou muſt needes determine that the figure Synecdoche is in theſe woordes, This breade and this cuppe, and therefore whileſt thou ſtudieſt to auoyde figures, thou falleſt into a figure. But we will way this Synecdoche in his place, to wit, when we ſhal come too the confutation. But thou in the meane time ſhalt not ſo eſcape. For with what manner and with how great coniunction ſoeuer thou ſhalte couple thoſe two vnlike thinges in themſelues indeede togeather, (ſuche as are the bread and the body, wine and the blood, yet notwithſtanding thou ſhalte neuer bring to paſſe, that the one may properly be ſayd to be the other. No neyther in the coniunction, can one be ſayde to be the other, but eyther of them muſt bee made a certayne thirde thing. Therefore this at the leaſt muſt bee a proper propoſition, in, or vnderunder, or with this bread and wine is my body & blood. It remayneth therefore that thou confeſſe, that both this ſaying of Chriſte, and that of Paule, whether thou interprete this out of that, or that out of this, be figuratiue.