The Sum of Christian Religion 2, Part 2 · Subpart 37 · Section 8

The Sum of Christian Religion 2 · Part 2 · Subpart 37 · Section 8

p. 7688 Who ought to approch and be admitted vntounto the ſupper.

THIS queſtion alſo conteineth two ſeuerall partes in it; vntounto which wee are ſeuerally to aunſwere. In the former part is demanded, who ought to approch vntounto the ſupper: In the latter, who ought to bee admitted. And this latter part is larger and more generall, becauſe not the godly onelyonly, but hypocrites alſo, who are not yet knowen to bee ſuch, are to be admitted vntounto the ſupper.

The godly onelyonly ought to approch vntounto the ſupper.Firſt then is to bee conſidered, who ought to approch thither. They onelyonly ought to approche vntounto the ſupper, who liue in true faith and repentance, and ſo who hauehave faith and repentance not in poſſibilitie onelie, but alſo actuallie: whereby this obiection is refuted, that Jnfants hauehave faith, and therefore ought to approche vntounto the Lords Supper. For they ought not to come in reſpect of this circumſtance, which is adioined in the inſtitution of the Supper,Not Infants. Shewe the death of the Lord: Likewiſe, Let a man examine himſelfe, and ſo let him eate of this bread, and drinke of this cup.

Wherefore we vnderſtand in this place an actual faith, which is a knowledge, confidence, beginning of obedience and a ſerious and earneſt purpoſe to liue well. But Infants hauehave faith onelyonly potentiallie and in poſſibility, not actually: they hauehave an inclination onelie to faith; or they hauehave faith onelyonly by inclination, but they hauehave not an actuall faith.Not the wicked, and hypocrites. F…thermore, that it is not lawfull for the wicked to approch p. 769vntounto the Supper, it is manifeſt: For the ſacraments are inſtituted only for the faithful & thoſe which are cōuerted, to ſeal to thē the promiſe, & to confirm their faith. The Word notwithſtanding is common to the conuerted and vnconuerted, that the conuerted may heare it, and bee confirmed by it; and that the vnconuerted alſo may heare it, and thereby bee conuerted. Wherefore from the nature and ſubiect of ſacramentes is drawen this demonſtratiue proofe: What God hath inſtituted for his houſhold and children, that hypocrites and aliants from the Church ought not to receiue. Moreouer Paul alſo interdicteth all the wicked without any exception from comming vntounto this holy ſupper, by woordes authentique; in which namely hee commaundeth, that euerie man trie and examine himſelfe, and ſo eate of that bread, & drinke of that cup. But to examine himſelf, is to trie whether he hath faith and repentance. Wherefore he will hauehave him to come, who hath theſe things in him. But how ſhall a man know that he hath theſe things? 1. By a purpoſe and deſire to obey god according to al the commandements of God. 2. By a confidence & tranquillity of conſcience. Hope maketh not aſhamed: becauſe the louelove of God is ſhed abroad in our harts by the holie ghoſt, which is giuen to vsus. 3. By effects, as by the beginning of inward & outward obedience. VntoUnto theſe may be adioined alſo generall teſtimonies, whereby vnbeleeuers are forbidden to come to the Supper. As Mat. 5.24. Leaue there thine offring before the altar: firſt be reconciled to thy brother, & then come & offer thy gift. Likewiſe, 66.3. He that killeth a Bullocke is as if he ſlew a man.

The ſecond part of the former queſtion is, Who ought to bee admitted vntounto the Lords Supper.

THey are to be admitted of the Church, who in woords & deedes profeſſe true repentance: they alſo who expreſſe & ſhew a profeſſion of faith & repentance in the actions of their life, are to be admitted: but not they, whoſoeuer ſimplie doe auouch that they beleeue all things. For he that ſaith he beleeueth and hath not woorkes, is a lier, and denieth indeede that which he affirmeth in words, according to that of the Apoſtle: They profeſſe that they knowe God, but by woorkes they denie him, and are abhominable, and diſobedient, and to euerie good work reprobate. So ſaint Iames alſo ſheweth, That faith which is without workes, is dead. The reaſons, why they are to be admitted onelyonly, who both by their confeſſion and life profeſſe p. 770faith and repentance, are theſe, 1. Becauſe the church ſhoulde prophane Gods couenant if it ſhoulde admit vnbeleeuers and men impenitent. For he that dooth a thing, and he that conſenteth vntounto it, are both obnoxious to the ſame lawe. To prophane the couenaunt of God, is, to commend and acknowledge them for the confederates or friends and fellowes of God, who are Gods enimies, and ſo to make God ſuch a one, as hath entered a couenaunt and is in league with hypocrites and wicked men. Now the couenaunt of God is two waies prophaned, namelie as well by communicating and imparting the ſignes of the couenaunt to them vntounto whom God promiſeth nothing, as by receiuing and vſing the ſignes without faith and repentance. For not onelyonly they prophane the couenant, who being as yet impenitent; take the ſignes of the couenant vntounto them, but they alſo, who wittingly and willingly giuegive the ſigns vntounto thoſe, whom god hath ſhut from his couenant. They make therefore God a felowe & friend of the wicked, & the ſon of the diuell the ſon of God, whoſoeuer reach the ſignes vntounto the wicked. Obiect. Hee that giueth to him that abuſeth it, ſinneth. The church giueth the ſupper vntounto hypocrits which abuſe it. Therefore the church ſinneth. Anſ. He that giueth the ſupper to one which abuſeth it, ſinneth, if he wittingly & willingly doth it: otherwiſe he ſinneth not, but they who abuſe the ſupper purchaſe damnation to thē ſelues. But the godly are not made partakers of that prophanation of the couenant prophaned by the wicked, if they knowe not the wicked approching vntounto the ſupper, neither doe willingly admit the wicked. Reply. If they ſinne, who giuegive the ſupper wittinglie to him that abuſeth it, then dooth the Minister alſo ſinne, if he diſtribute it vntounto ſuch a one, where yet there is no ſentence paſſed of excommunication. Aunſwere. True; if hee doe it willingly: but if the church proceed not againſt ſuch a man, and the miniſter notwithſtanding be inſtant vponupon the Church, and doe his duetie, he is blameleſſe, and the ſinne ſhall lie on others, euen on the Church. 2. They are not to bee admitted to the ſupper, who profeſſe not faith and repentaunce both in life and confeſſion; becauſe if ſuch ſhould be admitted, the church ſhould stir vp the anger of God againſt her ſelfe; as of whom wittinglie and willinglie this ſhoulde bee committed. Nowe that by this meanes the p. 771wrath of God is ſtirr…d vp againſt the church; the Apoſtle ſufficiently witneſſeth, ſaying: For this cauſe manie are weake and ſicke among you, and manie ſleepe. For if wee woulde iudge our ſelues, we ſhould not bee iudged. God therefore is angrie with the conſenters, & ſo puniſheth them, becauſe he puniſheth the wicked whom they cōſenting thereto admitted: for by both the ſupper of the Lorde is alike prophaned. 3. Chriſt hath cōmanded that the wicked be not admitted. And if any denie that any ſuch cōmandment is extant, yet the ſubſtance & tenor of the commandement ſhalbe eaſily prooued. For chriſt inſtituted his ſupper for his diſciples, & to thē alone he ſaid, I hauehave earneſtlie deſired to eate this Paſſeouer with you. Take this and part it among you. This is my bodie, which is giuen for you. This cup is the new teſtament in my bloud, which is ſhed for you. Wherefore the ſupper was inſtituted for Chriſtes diſciples onelyonly; all others, for whom Chriſt died not, are excluded. But yet for all this, thoſe hypocrites are to bee admitted together with the godly vntounto the ſupper, who are not as yet manifeſted, becauſe they profeſſe in confeſſion and outward actions faith and repentance. But none ought to approch thither, but true beleeuers. For theſe onelyonly excepted, all others, yea euen thoſe hypocrites, which are not as yet manifeſted, eate and drinke vntounto themſelues damnation, and prophane the Lords ſacred Supper. Obiection. They then who auoide the prophaning of the Lords Supper, doe well: but they who refraine from the Lordes ſupper in reſpect of ſome hatred they beare to others, or for ſome other ſinnes, auoide the prophaning of the ſupper. Therefore they doe well Anſwere. They who auoid the prophaning of the ſupper doe well, if they auoid it in ſuch ſort as they ought, namely by repenting themſelues of thoſe ſinnes which hauehave been the cauſes of their refraining.

CERTAINE CONCLVSIONS OF THE SVPPER.

1 THE other ſacrament of the new teſtament is called, the ſupper of the Lord: not as if it were neceſſarie that the church ſhould celebrate it in the Euening or vſuall time of ſupper: but becauſe it was inſtituted of Chriſt in that ſupper which he laſt had with his Diſciples before his death. It is called the table of the Lord, becauſe Chriſt dooth feede vsus p. 772in it. It is called, the ſacrament of the bodie and bloud of chriſt: becauſe theſe are communicated and imparted vntounto vsus in it. It is called the Euchariſt, becauſe in it are giuen ſolemne thankes vntounto Chriſt for his death and benefites. It is called Synaxis, or the conuent, becauſe it ought to be celebrated in the conuents and aſſemblies of the church. It is called alſo of the auncient a ſacrifice, becauſe it is a repreſentation of the propitiatory ſacrifice accompliſhed by Chriſt on the croſſe, and a thankes-giuing, or Euchariſtical ſacrifice for the ſame. There is a third reaſon alſo why they called it a ſacrifice: becauſe the ancient were wont themſelues to confer bread vntounto it: & therefore were they ſaid to offer, that is, to conferre and giuegive in ſeuerall bread to that vſe.

2 The ſupper of the lord is a ſacrament of the new teſtament, wherein according to the commandement of Chriſt, bread and wine is diſtributed and receiued, in the aſſemblie of the faithfull, in remembraunce of chriſt: which is, that chriſt might teſtifie vntounto vsus, that hee feedeth vsus, with his body and bloud deliuered and ſhed for vsus, vntounto eternal life; and that we alſo might for theſe his benefites giuegive ſolemne thankes vntounto him.

3 The firſt and principal end and vſe of the Lords ſupper is, that Chriſt might therein teſtifie vntounto vsus, that hee died for vsus, and dooth feede vsus with his bloude and body vntounto euerlaſting life, that ſo by this teſtification hee might cheriſh and encreaſe in vsus our faith, and ſo conſequently this ſpirituall foode and nouriſhment. The ſecond end is thankes-giuing, for theſe benefites of Chriſt, and our publique and ſolemne profeſſion of them, and our duty towards chriſt. The third is, the diſtinguiſhing of the church from other ſectes. The fourth: That it might be a bond of mutual louelove and dilection. The fift; That it might be a bond of our aſſemblies and meetinges.

4 That firſt ende and vſe, which is the confirmation of our faith in Chriſt, the ſupper of the Lord hereof hath, becauſe Chriſt himſelfe giueth this bread and drink by the hands of his miniſters to be a memorial of him; that is, to admoniſh and put vsus in remembraunce by this ſigne as by his viſible word, that he died for vsus, and is the foode of eternall life vntounto vsus, while hee maketh vsus his members: both becauſe he hath annexed a promiſe to this rite, that hee wil feede thoſe, who eate this bread in remembraunce of him, with his owne bodie and bloud, when he ſaith, This my body: and alſo becauſe the holy ghoſt doth by this viſible teſtimony moue our minds p. 773and harts more firmely to beleeue the promiſe of the goſpel.

5 There is then in the Lords ſupper a double meat and drink, one externall, viſible, terrene, namely bread and wine: and another internall. There is alſo a double eating and receiuing: an external, and ſignifieng, which is the corporall receiuing of the bread and wine, that is, which is perfourmed by the handes, mouth, and ſenſes of the bodie: and an internal, inuiſible, and ſignified, which is the fruition of Chriſtes death, and a ſpirituall engraffing into Chriſtes bodie: that is, which is not perfourmed by the handes, and mouth of the bodie, but by the ſpirite and faith. Laſtly there is a double adminiſter and diſpenſer of this meat and drinke; an externall, of the externall, which is the miniſter of the church deliuering vsus by his hand bread and wine: and an internal of the internal meate, which is Chriſt himſelfe feeding vsus by his body and bloud.

6 Not the body and bloud of Chriſt, but the bread and wine are the ſignes which ſerue for confirmation of our faith: for the bodie and bloud of Chriſt are receiued, that we may liue for euer. But the bread and wine are receiued, that wee maie bee confirmed and aſſured of that heauenlie foode, and dailie more and more enioie it.

7 Neither is the bread changed into the bodie of Chriſt, nor the wine into the bloud of Chriſt: neither doth the bodie and bloud of Chriſt ſucceed in their place, they beeing aboliſhed: neither is Chriſts body ſubſtantially preſent in the bread, or vnderunder the bread, or where the bread is: but in the right vſe of the Lords ſupper, the holy Ghoſt vſeth this Symbole, as an inſtrument, to ſtirre vp faith in vsus, by which he more and more dwelleth in vsus, engraffeth vsus into Chriſt, and maketh vsus thorough him to bee iuſt and righteous, and to draw eternal life from him.

8 Now when Chriſt ſaith, This, that is, this bread, is my body, and, This cup is my bloud, the ſpeech is ſacramental or metonymical, becauſe the name of the thing ſignified is attributed to the ſign it ſelfe: that is, it is meant, that the bread is the ſacrament or ſigne of his bodie and doth repreſent him, and dooth teſtifie that Chriſtes bodie is offered for vsus on the croſſe, and is giuen vntounto vsus to be the foode of eternal life, and therefore is the inſtrument of the holie Ghoſt to maintaine and encreaſe this food in vsus, as Saint Paul ſaith, 1. Corinth. 10. The bread is the communion of the bodie of Chriſt, that is, it is that thing, by which wee are made partakers of chriſts bodie. And elſewhere hee ſaith: We hauehave been al made to drink into one ſpirit. The ſame is the meaning alſo: when it is ſaid, p. 774that the bread is called chriſtes bodie, for a ſimilitude which the thing ſignified hath with the ſigne, namely, in that chriſtes body nouriſheth the ſpirituall life as breade dooth the corporall life: and for that aſſured and certaine ioint receiuing of the thing and the ſigne in the right vſe of the ſacrament. And this is the ſacramental vnion of the bread which is ſhewed by a ſacramental kinde of ſpeaking▪ but no ſuch locall coniunction, which is by ſome imagined.

9 As therefore the body of chriſt ſignifieth both his proper and natural bodie, and his ſacramental bodie, which is the bread of the Euchariſt: ſo the eating of Chriſtes body is of two ſorts; one ſacramental of the ſigne, to wit, the externall and corporall receiuing of the bread and wine: the other reall or ſpirituall, which is the receiuing of chriſts very body it ſelfe. And to bel…eue in chriſt dwelling in vsus by faith, is, by the vertue & operatiō of the holy ghoſt to be engraffed into his bodie, as members to the head, & branches into the vine: and ſo to bee made partakers of the frutie of the de…th and life of christ. Whence it is apparant that they are falſly accuſed who thus teach, as if they made either the bare ſignes onelyonly to be in the Lords Supper, or a part…cipation of chriſtes death onelie, or of his benefits, or of the holy Ghoſt, excluding the true, reall, & ſpirituall communion of the very body of Chriſt it ſelfe.

10 Now the right vſe of the Supper is, when the faithfull obſerue this rite inſtituted by Chriſt, in remembraunce of Chriſt: that is, to the ſtirring and raiſing vp of their faith and thankefulneſſe.

11 As in this right vſe the bodie of Chriſt is ſacramentallie eaten: ſo alſo without this vſe, (as by vnbeleeuers and hypocrites) it is eaten ſacramentally indeede, but not reallie, that is, the ſacramental Symboles or ſignes bread and wine are receiued, but not the thinges themſelues of the ſacrament, to wit, the bodie and bloud of Chriſt.

12 This doctrine of the ſupper of the Lord is grounded vponupon verie manie and thoſe moſt ſound and firme reaſons. All thoſe places of Scripture confirme it, which ſpeake of the Lords ſupper; and Chriſt, calling not anie inuiſible thing in the bread▪ but the verie viſible and broken bread it ſelfe his bodie deliuered or broken for vsus: which whereas it cannot bee meant properlie, himſelfe addeth an expoſition, that that bread is truely receiued in remembraunce of him; which is as if he had ſaid, That the bread is a ſacrament of p. 775his bodie. So likewiſe he ſaith, the ſupper is the new teſtament, which is ſpirituall, one, and euerlaſting. And Paul ſaith it is the communion of the bodie and bloud of Chriſt, becauſe al the faithful are one bodie in chriſt; who cannot ſtand together with the communion of Diuels. Likewiſe, he maketh one and the ſame engraffing into chriſtes bodie by one ſpirit to bee both in Baptiſme and in the Lords Supper. Moreouer the whole doctrine and nature of ſacramentes confirme the ſame, all which repreſent vntounto the eies the ſame ſpirituall communion of chriſt to bee receiued by faith, which the word or promiſe of the Goſpel declareth vntounto the eares. Therefore they are called by the names of the thinges ſignified, and in their right vſe hauehave the receiuing of the thinges adioined vntounto them. The Articles alſo of our faith confirme it, which teach that chriſts bodie is a true humane bodie, not preſent at once in manie places, as being now receiued into heauen, and there to remain, vntil the Lorde returne to iudgement; and further that the communion of Saintes with chriſt is wrought by the holie Ghoſt, not by anie entraunce of chriſts bodie into the bodies of men. Wherefore this ſentence and doctrine is of all the purer antiquitie of the church with moſt great and manifeſt conſent held and profeſſed.

13 The Supper of the Lord differeth from Baptiſme, 1. Jn the Rite and manner of ſignifieng, becauſe the dipping into the water or waſhing ſignifieth a remiſſion and purging out of ſinne by the bloud and ſpirit of Chriſt, and our ſocietie & fellowſhip with chriſt in his afflictions and glorification. But the diſtributing of the bread and wine ſignifieth the death of Chriſt to bee imputed to vsus vntounto remiſſion of ſinnes, and our ſelues engraffed into Chriſt to become his members. 2. They differ in their ſpeciall vſe, becauſe Baptiſme is the teſtimonie of our regeneration, and of the couenant made betweene vsus and God, and of our receiuing into the Church: But the Lords ſupper teſtifieth that wee are euer to bee nouriſhed by Chriſt remaining in vsus, and that the couenant made betweene God and vsus ſhall euer be eſtabliſhed and ratified vntounto vsus, and that we for euer ſhall abide in the church and bodie of Chriſt. 3. They differ in the perſons, to whom they are to be giuen. Baptiſme is giuen to all thoſe, who are to bee accounted for members of the church, whether they be of yeares and vnderſtanding, or infants. The Lords Supper is to bee giuen to them onelyonly, who are able to vnderſtand, and celebrate the benefits of chriſt, and to examine themſelues. 4. They differ in p. 776the often celebrating of them. Baptiſme is to bee receiued but onc… onelyonly, becauſe the couenant of God being once made is alwaies firme and of force to the penitent: But the Supper is often to bee receiued, becauſe an often renewing and recalling of that couenant to our remembrance, is neceſſarie for our faith. 5. They differ in the order which is to bee obſerued in vſe of them. Becauſe Baptiſme is to bee giuen before the Supper, and the ſupper may not be giuen vntounto any except hee be firſt baptiſed.

14 They come worthily to the Lords Supper, who examin themſelues, that is, are endewed with true faith and repentance. They who finde not this in themſelues, ought neither to come without it, leaſt they eate and drink their owne iudgement; nor to differ repentance wherewith they ſhould come, leaſt they draw vponupon themſelues hardnes of hart and eternal pains.

15 The church ought to admit all thoſe vntounto it who profeſſe themſelues to embrace the ground and foundation of chriſtian doctrine, and to hauehave a purpoſe to obey it: but thoſe muſt bee repelled, who wil not deſiſt either from their errors and blaſphemies, or from manifeſt ſinnes againſt their conſcience, beeing admoniſhed by the church and conuicted of error.

16 The Pope hath corruptlie taken awaie the breaking of the bread from the rite of the ſupper, and bereaued the people of the vſe of the cup: Corruptly alſo hath hee deformed the ſupper of the Lord, with adding ſo manie ceremonies not deliuered by the Apoſtles, into a theatricall or pageant-like Maſſe, that is, into a Iewiſh ſuperſtitiō & ſtagelike rounds & conueiances. But more wicked & idolatrous inuentions are theſe: That the Maſſe is a propitiatory ſacrifice, wherein chriſt is offered by the Maſſe-prieſts for the quick and dead, and is by the force of conſecration ſubſtantiallie preſent and abideth ſo long as thoſe formes of bread and wine remaine vncorrupted, and further, dooth beſtow the grace of God and other benefits vponupon them for whom he is offered; of whom alſo he is eaten with the mouth of their body, yea though they hauehave no good inward motion in them: and laſtly is, being treaſured and laid vp and carried about vnderunder thoſe formes, to be worſhipped. Jn reſpect of theſe foule monſters, it is neceſſary that the Maſſe be quite and cleane aboliſhed out of the chriſtian church. In ſumme they are theſe, 1. Tranſubſtantiation. 2. Bread-worſhip. 3. Sacrifice. 4. Maiming of Chriſtes Supper.

p. 777THE APPENDIX OR ADDITION ADIOINING VNTOUNTO THE FORMER TREAtiſe of the Supper.

Certaine principal arguments of the Conſubſtantiaries againſt the ſyncere doctrine of the Lordes Supper, & the Sacramentaries, as they cal them: together with a refutation of them.

1 THE errours of the Sacramentaries (ſay they) are, that there are but bare ſignes and Symboles onelie in the ſupper. Anſwere. We teach that the things ſignified are together with the ſignes, in the right vſe, exhited and communicated, albeit not corporally, but in ſuch ſort as is agreeable vntounto ſacramentes. 2. The Sacramentaries ſaie, That chriſt is preſent onlie according to his power and efficacie. Aunſwere. Wee teach that he is preſent and vnited with vsus by the holy Ghoſt, albeit his bodie bee farre abſent from vsus: like as whole Chriſt alſo is preſent with his miniſterie, though diuerſlie according to the one nature. 3. The Sacramentaries, ſay they, affirme that an imaginarie, figuratiue or ſpiritual bodie of chriſt is preſent, not his eſſentiall bodie. Anſwere. Wee neuer ſpoke of an imaginarie bodie, but of the true fleſh of Chriſt, which is preſent with vsus, although it remaine in heauen. Moreouer wee ſay that wee receiue the bread and the body, but both after a maner proper to ech. 4. The Sacramentaries, ſaie they, affirme, that the true bodie of Chriſt, which hung on the croſſe, and his verie bloud which was ſhed for vsus, is diſtributed, but is ſpirituallie receiued of thoſe onelie who are worthy receiuers; as for the vnworthy, they receiue nothing beſides the bare ſignes vntounto their condemnation. Aunſwere. Al this wee graunt, as beeing agreeable vntounto the woorde of God, the nature of ſacraments, the analogy of faith, & the communion of the faithful.

Certaine arguments of the Conſubſtantiaries, whereby they goe about to ouerthrow our doctrine of the Lords Supper: together with the refutations of them.

1 THE words of the inſtitution are open and plain, This my bodie, this is my bloud. Anſwere. They alleadge theſe woordes againſt them-ſelues. For they ſaie, That the bodie of Chriſt is receiued reallie in, vnderunder, with the p. 778bread: when chriſt ſaith, that the very bread is his body. Wherefore they doe a double iniury vntounto the church: firſt, while they thruſt vponupon the church their owne words for Chriſts. Secondly, while they imagine that the church perceiueth not theſe ſpeeches to be diuerſe, In the bread is my body, and, The bread is my bodie. They accuſe Chriſt alſo for a lier: for they deny that the bread is his body, but that his body is in the bread. Let them looke therefore vntounto it, how they wil aunſwere Chriſt at the laſt iudgement for this blaſphemy and reproch. The Papiſtes alſo doe more retaine the very words of Chriſt. But theſe retaine not the woord, but follow the ſenſe and meaning. We muſt ſee therfore which part followeth it. Ours ſhal be prooued in the end. Replie. Chriſt addeth an expoſition of his minde, Which is giuen for you, and, Which is ſhed for you. Anſwere. Firſt, this is a begging of that which is in queſtion. For they take as graunted, that the bread is properly called the bodie, which yet lieth vponupon them to prooue. For it is a ſacramental maner of ſpeaking. Secondly, we returne their own reaſon vponupon them by inuerting it thus. The bodie of Chriſt properly ſo called was giuē for vsus. But the bread was not giuē for vsus: Therfore the bread is not the body properly ſo called. Likewiſe, as the bread is the body broken, ſo the breaking of the bread is the breaking of the bodie. But the breaking of the bodie is the crucifieng thereof. Therefore the breade broken is but ſacramentally and by repreſentation, the bodie broken.

2 They reaſon from the autor, who ſaid it, and is true. Aunſwere. This is alſo a begging of that which is in queſtion. They muſt proue that Chriſt ſaid, his bodie was in, vnderunder, with the bread. And further a man may ſpeake figuratiuely, and yet ſpeake perſpicuouſlie and plainly. Reply. He is alſo omnipotent. Therefore he is able to be eueriewhere, and ſo in the bread. Aunſwere. Albeit he were able to bring to paſſe, that two flat repugnaunt thinges ſhould be true together: yet wil he not doe it. Againe, God is not able to woorke contradictories, or thinges flat repugnaunt, becauſe he is true. Now, to wil thoſe thinges which are contradictorie, argueth a lier. Wherefore wee deny not the trueth and omnipotency of God; but theſe mens lies: nay rather we defend gods truth, p. 779affiming that God doth that which he ſpake. But they oppugne it making contrary wils to be in God. Replie. Chriſts bodie hath manie prerogatiues not agreeable to our bodies: as that he was borne of a Virgine, walked on the ſea, was at one time and together in the graue, in Hel, and in Par…diſe: and paſſed through the gates when they were faſt ſhut. Aunſwere. Theſe examples are partly not matches, & partly falſe. For this may agree vntounto a creature, to walke on the waters, as it did vntounto Peter: to paſſe through the gates ſhut, as is agreeable to the nature of a ſpirit. Againe, Theſe examples are not matches nor of the ſame qualitie with that which is in queſtion. Becauſe theſe doe not …mply a contradiction. For when hee is ſaide to bee borne of a Virgine, he is not ſaid withal, not to be borne of a Virgine. But to be both finite and infinite (as they wil hauehave Chriſts body who conſubſtantiate it with the bread) theſe implie a contradiction. Now it is falſe, that they ſaie, that hee paſſed thorough the gate… ſhut, whereas the gates might yeelde and o…en vntounto him: as alſo, that he paſſed through the doore or ſtone of the graue, when as it is ſaid that the Angell did open it: and laſtly, when they ſaie, that Chriſtes bodie was at once and together in moe places: which they ſeeme to hauehave taken out of Auſtine. But Auſtine ſaid, That his bodie was in the graue, his ſoule in hel, and his Godhead eueriewhere.

3 They reaſon from a circumſtance of the time: The ſame night in which hee was betraied. No man which ſpeaketh ſeriouſly, ſpeaketh figuratiuely, Chriſt inſtituting his ſupper ſpake ſeriouſly. Therefore without any figure. Aunſwere. I denie the Maior: becauſe by that poſition no man that ſpeaketh ſeriouſly ſhould ſpeak figuratiuely, which is moſt falſe. God ſpeaketh in all ſacraments, though figuratiuely, yet ſeriouſly. I hauehave earneſtly deſired (ſaith Chriſt) to eate this Paſſeouer with you. Wherefore I aunſwere, that he vſeth not ieſting or obſcure figures. This figure is perſpicuous, becauſe it is vſual, and his diſciples ſpeak ſo: Where wilt thou that wee goe, and prepare that thou maieſt eate the paſſouer? It is vſuall alſo in all ſacraments It is forcible and emphaticall, becauſe it expreſſeth the ſimilitude of the ſigne and the thing ſignified, and the certainetie of the coniunction of both in the right vſe and adminiſtration. Againe we inuert their reaſon, and ſay, Becauſe chriſt ſpake ſeriouſly, therefore he vſed a figure which p. 780doth well expreſſe and declare the thing. Replie. Chriſt ſayd, This cup is the new teſtament. Jn wils and teſtaments men ſpeake properly. Chriſt here inſtituteth a ſacrament: therefore, &c. Anſwere. I denie the Maior, and inuert the reaſon: for ſeeing hee would inſtitute a ſacrament, therefore hee ſpake figuratiuely, calling his Supper the new Teſtament; which is figuratiuely to be vnderſtoode for theſe two reaſons. 1. Becauſe otherwiſe there ſhould be two couenants, the one proper, and the other the ſupper. 2. Otherwiſe alſo they ſhould be ſhut out from Gods couenant, who cannot come to the ſupper, and all who came to the ſupper ſhould be in the couenant. Obiection. Chriſt ſaith, In my bloud. Therefore the real bloud of chriſt is in the ſupper, and is drunke by the mouth. Aunſwere. Wee conclude the contrarie rather by thoſe woordes of Chriſt. Becauſe the newe teſtament was made by Chriſts bloud ſhed on the Croſſe and applied vntounto vsus by faith, not drunke by the mouth: for otherwiſe they ſhoulde bee excluded from the teſtament and couenaunt, who were not able to come to this ſacrament. Replie. There is a great force in the woord, Newe. That which was doone in the old teſtament typicallie, is done in the new reallie. Aunſwere. If they adde, Therefore doone by the mouth of the bodie: they bring in more in the concluſion, than was in the antecedent. For there was no type in the olde teſtament which did ſignifie the eating of Chriſt with the mouth. 2. We inuert their reaſon. Chriſts bodie was no otherwiſe eaten in the new teſtament, than in the olde: But in the old it was eaten ſpirituallie onelyonly: Therefore in the new alſo it is ſo eaten. Reply. The newe teſtament differeth from the olde, becauſe in that were types, in the newe is the bodie it ſelfe, Heb. 9. Col. 2. Aunſwere. This difference of the old and new teſtament is no where ſet downe in holy ſcripture that Chriſt is eaten in the old not really, and in the newe corporally by the mouth. In the places which are alleadged out of the Apoſtle, the bodie ſignifieth that the ſhadow was onelyonly of the old teſtament and was accompliſhed and fulfilled by Chriſt. Becauſe there the bodie is oppoſed to thoſe ſhadowes: and further becauſe he calleth it the bodie of chriſt: which kinde of ſpeech ſheweth that by Chriſt was wrought the accompliſhment & fulfilling of the types p. 781or ſhadowes of the Old Teſtament. Moreouer, albeit wee hauehave Chriſt exhibited in the newe teſtament, and hee is there borne man, yet notwithſtanding it dooth not therefore folow hereof, that his bodie is in the bread, but onelyonly that it is in the new teſtament.

4 They reaſon from the conſent of the Euangeliſts, and ſain… Paul. Matthew, as Theophylact calculateth, writ his goſpel eight yeares after chriſts aſſenſion: Marke, ten yeares: Luke, fifteene yeares: Paul, twentie yeares. And all vſe the ſame words. A ſpeech that is often vttered with the ſame wordes is not figuratiue. Such is the ſpeech of the Lordes Supper. Therefore it is not figuratiue. Anſwere. It is falſe that a ſpeech often vttered in the ſame words is not figuratiue: becauſe when a figure is conſpicuous, knowen, and forcible, as this, it is reteined. Againe, the Euangeliſts repeat the woordes of Chriſt, becauſe hee ſpake figuratiuely. Often, though it bee figuratiue, is this repeated: He ſhal baptize with the holie Ghoſt and with fier. Ioh. 1. Matth. 3. Moreouer we denie that this ſpeech of Chriſts Supper was repeated by all in the ſame wordes. 1. Becauſe Matthew and Mark ſay, This is my bloud of the new teſtament. Luke ſaith, This cup is the new teſtament in my bloud. 2. Matthew and Marke ſay, This is my bodie. Luke addeth, which is giuen for you: Paul, which is broken for you. 3. Paul ſaith, That the bread is the communion of the bodie of Chriſt. And albeit in this place hee ſpeaketh not purpoſedly of the Supper, yet hee ſtirreth vp and exhorteth vntounto it. Replie. Jt is the ſame ſenſe and meaning. Aunſwere. The queſtion is not now of the ſenſe and meaning of the woordes, but of the identitie of the wordes, that is, whether they bee the ſame wordes. Replie. Where there is no mention at all of anie figure, there is no figure. Anſwere. This is falſe. For fooliſh were it, and men ſhoulde ſeeme to make ſhewe and oſtentation of their skill and art, if they ſhould ſay that they vſed a trim figure. And the ſcripture alſo often ſpeaketh figuratiuely, and yet doth it not ad withall that it ſpeaketh figuratiuely. Furthermore, they make mention hereof, when they ſhew, that it conſiſteth of the nature of the ſubiect and the attribute. The bodie was borne of the Virgin, crucified, and ſo forth. The bread is made of meale. Secondly, Chriſt willeth this to bee done in remembraunce of him: Therefore the p. 782breade is called his bodie, as a memoriall of his bodie. Thirdly Matthew and Marke ſay, This is my bloud of the newe teſtament. Paul and Luke ſay, This is the newe teſtament in my bloud. Now the newe teſtament is the bond whereby God hath bound himſelfe to receiue the faithful and repentant into fauour, and they binde themſelues to yeelde faith and obedience vntounto him. Fourthly, Paul ſaith, That the bread is the communion of Chriſts bodie, which is not any corporal eating. 1. Becauſe the faithful are thereby one bodie in chriſt. 2. Becauſe he compareth it with the Communion of the altar in the old teſtament, which was not corporal. 3. Becauſe it can agree but to the faithful onelyonly, and not to the wicked. 4. Iohn ſheweth that communion: If we walke in the light we hauehave fellowſhip one with another, and the bloud of Ieſus Chriſt his ſonne cleanſeth vsus from all ſinne. And further this communion whereof ſaint Paul ſpeaketh, is our vnion with Chriſt, and fruition of all his benefites by faith. Hither belongeth the ſimilitude of the bodie and the members, the vine and the braunches; which hauehave nothing to doe with any corporal eating. This communion was and is common to all the faithful from the beginning vntounto the worlds end. But they could not eat the body of chriſt corporally by their mouth. That wee might growe vp vntounto him, by whom all the bodie is coupled and knit together. He that is ioined vntounto the Lord, is one ſpirite. And by one ſpirite are we all baptized into one bodie. Hereby know we, that we dwell in him, and he in vsus; becauſe he hath giuen vsus of his ſpirite. This vnion therefore is that communion, which is wrought by the holy Ghoſt. Wherefore it is ſpiritual For bread cannot be this communion but by a figure, as it is a ſigne of it. Replie. He that is guiltie of the bodie of Chriſt, eateth it. They who receiue vnworthilie are guiltie of the bodie of Chriſt. Therefore they eate it corporallie: for ſpirituallie they cannot: becauſe if they coulde ſo eate it, they ſhoulde not be guiltie. Aunſwere. The Maior is falſe For hee is guiltie of Chriſtes bodie who by his ſinnes hangeth it on the Croſſe againe, and deſpiſeth Chriſts benefite. For any real eating is not required to this guilt, but hee that will not receiue Chriſt offered by faith, is thereby made guiltie. So the iniurie done vntounto the Arke, is ſaid to be done vntounto the Lord. Replie. They that diſcerne not the Lords bodie, eate it. But the p. 783guiltie diſcerne it not; Therefore they eate it. Aunſwere. If the Maior bee taken ſacramentally, as of the breade, which is called and is the bodie of Chriſt, it is true: but if properly, it is falſe. For, not to diſcerne his body, is not to giuegive due honor to it, to contemne it, yea not to receiue the thing ſignified So Heb. 10.29. They are ſaid to treade vnderunder foote the ſonne of God, and to count the bloud of the teſtament as an vnholie thing, who contemne him.

5 They reaſon from the teſtimonies of the Fathers and the godlie of auncient times in the purer ſtate of the church. Aunſwere. The ſayings of the Fathers are to be vnderſtoode ſacramentally, or of our ſpiritual communion. Replie. Auſtin ſaith, thou ſhalt receiue this in the bread, which hung on the croſſe: and this in the cup, which was ſhed out of chriſts ſide. Anſwere. In the bread, as in the ſigne, that is, together with the ſigne thou ſhalt receiue the thing ſignified. When wee receiue the bread, wee are certaine that wee hauehave Chriſt. 2. Replie, Cyrill vponupon Iohn ſaith: By natural participation, not onelie ſpirituallie, but alſo corporallie: not onelie according to the ſpirit, but alſo according to the fleſh, corporally & eſſentially. Anſ. Cyril ſpeaketh not of the maner of eating, but of the thing which was to be eatē. He ſheweth that we are made partakers not only of chriſts ſpirit, but alſo of his human nature. Now he vnderſtandeth a ſpiritual communion. 1. Becauſe he citeth thoſe places cōcerning it. Ioh. 6. & 1. Cor. 10. where no mention is made of corporall eating. 2. Hee ſpeakeih of the preſence of Chriſt, not in the breade, but in vsus. 3. Hee prooueth the abiding of Chriſt in vsus by the vſe of the Supper, not by any corporal eating. 4. He ſo deſcribeth it, that hee ſaith, It ſhall continue in the life to come. 5. Hee ſpeaketh of that communion, which is proper vntounto the Saintes. Nowe this is ſpiritual; for otherwiſe it ſhould befall alſo to the wicked.

The ſhifts of Conſubſtantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & ſhift off certaine of our obiections, not all: for mo are obiected againſt them.

1 WEe make not, ſay they, any Capernaiticall eating. Anſ. We demaunde of them whether Chriſt be eaten by the bodily mouth; be it after a groſſe, or after finer maner. But how euer they aunſwere, in that opinion which they hold, there is too too much idolatry. For chriſt p. 784refuting the Capernaites, doth not diſtinguiſh the eating of him, into a groſſe and a finer manner, but ſaith ſimplie, That his bodie can not be eaten with the bodily mouth: for he ſaieth, that hee muſt aſcend; And that the woordes which hee ſpeaketh are ſpirit and life.

2 Wee mainetaine not Vbiquitie: for there is not a woorde thereof to bee found. Aunſwere. Here is to bee obſerued the diſſenſion of the aduerſaries about Vbiquitie. But neither is a worde to be found hereof, That the bodie of Chriſt is together in two places. And further, of this their opinion followeth Vbiquitie. For he that is together & at one time in moe places, muſt needes be infinite, & therefore eueriewhere.

3 Wee ouerthrow not the article of Chriſts aſcenſion. Aunſwere. Yea, but they doe ouerthrow it. For while they holde, that, as often as the ſupper is celebrated, Chriſt is corporallie eaten, they muſt needes ſay that he remained and is inuiſible on earth. But he is ſaid to hauehave left the world, to hauehave aſcended from a lower place into an higher, and to remaine in heauen, vntill hee come to iudgement. Nowe, that ſome except, That Chriſt dooth deſcend from heauen, as oft as the ſupper is adminiſtred; it is already refuted.

4 We take not awaie the doctrine of the properties of christs humanitie. Anſwere. They altogether take it away. For they wil hauehave his humane nature to be ſuch, as is not ſeene, nor felt, nor limited in place. Reply. But chriſt did put off theſe infirmities, & reteined the eſſential properties. Anſwere. But theſe are verie eſſential properties, which being taken away, the verity alſo and truth of his humane nature is taken awaie, Auſtine ſaith; Take awaie from bodies their ſpaces, and they ſhall be no where.

5 We aboliſh not the Doctrine concerning the communicating of properties of both natures. Aunſwere. Yea but they endeuour it. For they apply thoſe properties of his diuine nature which are affirmed of the whole perſon in the concrete, to both natures. J wil be with you to the ende of the world. This they vnderſtand of both natures: which is all one, as if, when it is ſaid, Chriſt God and man was circumciſed, one ſhould thus conclude; Therefore the godhead of Chriſt was circumciſed as wel as his fleſh. Replie. p. 785This onelie wee adde; That thoſe Articles belong to them. Aunſwere. After this ſort all ſectes may ſhift off all teſtimonies of Scriptures. But they belong hither, and that by a double right. 1. Becauſe they are written of the bodie of Chriſt. But the body of Chriſt belongeth to the ſupper. Therefo…e theſe Articles alſo belong hither. For they ſhew, how Chriſts bodie is to be ea…en 2 They belong hither, becauſe no Article of faith, is at variaunce with another. So belongeth hither alſo the Doctrine of iuſtification becauſe in the …upper no other iuſtice or righteouſnes muſt bee ſought for, but by the bloud of Chriſt.

6 The manner how we eate it, is not to bee defined. Anſwere. They commit a double fault in ſo ſaying. 1. When they denie that the maner is to be defined, and ſo contradict and gain ſaie the Scripture which defineth it, and ſheweth that it is ſpiritual, & that there is wrought an vnion with Chriſt by faith through the holy Ghoſt. 2. They themſelues define the manner, as it clearly appeareth by their writings.

7 The ſaieng of Durandus is true: We heare the woords; we perceiue the motions; we know not the manner; we beleeue the preſence. Aunſwere. Durandus maketh nought either for you, or againſt vsus, or for himſelfe, becauſe he was a Papiſt. And againe, if his ſaying be rightly vnderſtoode, we may admit it. We heare the words, This is my bodie; not that we eate with our mouth the bodie of Chriſt in the breade. Wee perceiue the motions; that is, we perceiue the bread to enter into our mouth, not the bodie of Chriſt. We know not the maner, that is, not perfectly, to wit, after what maner the holy Ghoſt is eueriewhere whole in Chriſt and in al the Saints, and how he vniteth vsus in Chriſt. We beleeue the preſence, namely, ſuch, as is the eating, and as is the vnion of the members and the head.

8 We teach this onelie, That the bodie and bloud of chriſt is trulie, ſubſtantiallie, and naturallie exhibited. Aunſwere. Wee grant that we eat the true bodie of Chriſt. So then is their diſputation vaine and friuolous. Firſt, Becauſe they confeſſe that wee are made partakers of the true bodie of chriſt, and that wee muſt not queſtion of the manner. For this wee graunt. Secondly, Becauſe the reaſons and refutations which they bring, are of no weight or moment.

p. 786Certaine reaſons whereby is proued, That the bodie of Chriſt is not preſent either in, or vnderunder, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporallie eaten VnderUnder, With, Jn, or At the Bread.

1 BEcauſe hee tooke a true humane nature. Whereunto wee ad alſo, that wee cannot eate him otherwiſe than his diſciples did in the firſt Supper. 2. He truely aſcended out of earth into heauen. 3. Such is our eating of him, as his abiding is in vsus. 4. All the Saints of the old and new Teſtament hauehave the ſame vnion with Chriſt. 5 Chriſt onelyonly is able to offer himſelfe vntounto his Father. Now it is neceſſarie in the vſe of the Supper to craue of God remiſſion of ſinnes. Wherefore if he bee preſent at the bread, we muſt craue of him, and ſo wee offer the bread. But in the New teſtament it is not lawfull to direct our prayer to any certaine place. 6. The bleſſings which are promiſed vntounto the godly onelyonly, are ſpirituall. VntoUnto theſe and other fore alleaged reaſons commeth the conſent of the auncient Fathers, Ambroſe, Athanaſius, Auſtine, Baſil, Bede, Bertram, Chryſoſtome, Clemēs Alexandrinus, the councell of Nice, Ciprian, Cyrill, Denis, Gelaſius, Gregorie the Great, Gregorie Nazianzene, Hezichius, Hierom, Hilarie, Irenaeus, Juſtine, Leo, Macharius, Origen, Procopius, Gaza, Tertullian, and ſo forth.

THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION. Arguments, whereby the opinion of Vbiquitaries is refelled, and the truth of ſound doctrine confirmed.

THE FIRST ARGVMENT.

THE Marcionites and Manichees imagined that Christ had not a true and ſolid bodie, but onelyonly made ſhew of the ſhape of a bodie, ſo that hee ſeemed onelyonly to hauehave fleſh and bones, whereas indeed hee had them not: And further that the verie incarnation, and al the motions and operations of chriſt did but only ſeeme ſo in outward appearāce, whereas in the truth of the thing there was no ſuch thing done. Now the opinion of Vbiquitie, and of the reall communicating of the properties of both natures doth raiſe againe from Hel that phantaſticall dotarie and frenſie of thoſe heretiques. Therefore it is no leſſe to bee abandoned and baniſhed out of the church to Hell, than that hereſie of the Manichees. That this opinion of Vbiquitie doth giuegive life againe to the former, wee p. 787proue. The Vbiquitaries are of opinion, and ſo teach, That all the properties of the Godhead were preſently, from the verie point of Chriſts conception, reallie effuſed from the Godhead of the woorde into the humane nature which chriſt tooke. Hence theſe abſurdities will folow. 1. Chriſt ſhall not be truely borne of the Virgine, if as touching the nature of his humanitie he was truely and eſſentiallie without the wombe of his mother before hee was borne; and after hee was borne hee remained no leſſe truely and ſubſtantiallie, as touching his humanitie, in that ſelfe-ſame wombe, than before. 2. Chriſt was not truely weake in his humane nature and ſubiect to paſſions, if hee were then alſo as touching the ſame nature partaker of the Diuine maieſtie and omnipotencie. 3. Hee was not truely dead, if alſo in the time of his death, as touching his ſoule and bodie, hee were eſſentiallie preſent euerie where together with his Godhead. For the ſoul being euerie where preſent could not be really ſeparated, in diſtance of places from the bodie, which alſo ſhould be euerie where preſent, and ſo neither could the body die, but onelyonly in outward appearance and imagination. 4. Hee aſcended not truely into heauen: but it ſhall be ſaide to hauehave beene onelyonly a vaine and imaginarie, and phantaſticall ſpectacle▪ if hee were in his bodie ſubſtantiallie there, before hee viſiblie aſcended thither: and after he was aſcended thither, he remained yet, in the ſubſtantiall preſence of the ſame bodie, no leſſe truely, than before, on the earth, yea and in the verie bodies alſo of the faithfull. If theſe thinges ſo fel out in the truth of the thing; it will follow that the ſame bodie of Chriſt was indeede at once and together both weake and omnipotent, baſe and glorious, ſubiect to ſufferinges, and not ſubiect, dead and aliue, limited and vnlimited; which is horrible to affirme For auoiding therefore of theſe prodigious and impious abſurdities they will except, that he was not as touching his body, otherwiſe than limited, weak, ſubiect to paſſions, and mortal, in the time of his humiliation: becauſe he had debaſed himſelfe, and would not ſhew forth that maieſtie, communicated vntounto his bodie before his reſurrection. Aunſwere. They interpret amiſſe that debaſing of himſelfe, of all the glorie and maieſtie of his humanity hidden and kept cloſe for a time: whereas it is to bee vnderſtoode in reſpect of the diuinitie of the Worde, in that hee woulde take the forme of a ſeruant, that is, the maſſe of our p. 788nature, and become man. Moreouer it will folow, that chriſt did ſhew forth the communicated power and maieſty of his fleſh, euen then, when he was indeed weak and limited or circumſcribed in bodie: as when ſhedding teares he raiſed Lazarus from the dead, and when being apprehended by the Iewes hee healed Malchus whom Peter wounded. Now what is it elſe to raiſe the Marcionites vp againe from hell, or in the greateſt matter of all others impiouſly to blaſpheme, if this bee not?

THE SECOND ARGVMENT.

THE blaſphemie of Samoſatenus, Arrius, & the late Antitrinitaries, is this: That Chriſt, man, is not properlie and by nature God, but onlie by an accidental participation of diuine properties, maieſtie, honour, power, and vertue. The Vbiquitaries alſo maintaine the ſame conſideration of the God-heade of Chriſt, man, while they define the perſonall vnion by his communicating alone of properties, whereby the fleſh of Chriſt is made omnipotent and euerie where. So that now that man is, and is called God, not that he is properlie & by nature God, but becauſe infinit power, maieſtie, and glorie is giuen him from God, and all the gifts of the holie Ghoſt are beſtowed on him without meaſure. Now this accidentall beſtowing of the Godhead and all the properties, doth not make chriſt to be properlie and by nature God, but onelie by diuine grace, or God vnproperlie ſo called: Becauſe it is not the verie eſſential God-head of the Word, but a certaine participation thereof, in vertue and eff…cacie. And therefore was it obiected by the ſounder Fathers vntounto the Arrians, that they tooke awaie the true and eternall God-head of chriſt, when they made him a God not by nature, but by grace, by participation onlie of dignitie and maieſtie. Therefore ſeeing the Vbiquitaries alſo equalling our Immanuel with God by participation of properties onlie, take awaie his true and eternal God head: wee doe diſcl…me and accurſe this their doctrine as blaſphemous and heretical. And that they doe this,Brentius in recog. p. 20. Andrae. Theſ. 20. diſp Tubing. and Theſ. 25. and 26. And Apol. Ing. 26. their owne words and opinions witneſſe; as Brentius, and Iacobus Andraeas, and others of them in their writings. Whence wee conclude, that the Vbiquitaries holde the ſame opinion with the Arrians and Antitrinitaries, of the God-head of Chriſt, man… that is, that all theſe eſteem him for God not by nature, but onelyonly by grace of participation, new, temporarie, created, adopted. If theſe thinges p. 789bee true, Chriſt ſhal not bee God and man, but a diuine man, ſuch as the Vbiquitaries alſo repute him, who, as Seruetus, Lib. 1. de Trinicate.hold this opinion: That God can communicate the fulnes of his God-heade, giuegive his diuinitie, maieſtie, power and glorie vntounto man. But wee execrate and deteſt the ſame blaſphemie of both.

THE THIRD ARGVMENT.

NEſtorius taught, That the vnion of God the Word with man was wrought by the participation onelie of equality, as touching maieſty, honour, power, vertue, and operation. Neither doth he make the differēce, of the dwelling of the Word in mans nature which himſelfe tooke, and in other Saintes, to conſiſt in anie other thing than in thoſe giftes and graces beſtowed by God on man. The ſelfe ſame alſo doe the Vbiquitaries teach, becauſe they crie that there is no difference betweene the inhabiting and dwelling of the God-head in Peter, and in Chriſt, except it bee taken from the communication of the giftes or properties of the God-heade. And they contend that by this means this man, which was takē by the Word, is God, becauſe the Word doth nothing without him, but al things by him. This is nothing els, than to make chriſt man, onelie God by an accident. Wherefore the doctrine of Vbiquitie is altogether the ſame with Neſtorius hereſie. Tertullian ſaith: Tertul. lib. de Trinit. p. 610.Jf Chriſt be man onlie, how then is he preſent eueriewhere being called vponupon and inuocated, ſeeing this is not the nature of man, but of God, to be able to be preſent in al places? By this teſtimony is refuted the Vbiquity of the human nature in Chriſt. Obiect. But the vnion of the diuine & human nature in Chriſt is vnſeparable. Therefore whereſoeuer the diuine nature is, there is alſo the humane nature. Aunſw. It is true which is ſaid, that the vnion is vnſeparable. The Worde neuer forſaketh the nature once aſſumed and taken. But the Word is not in the humane nature, as the ſoule is included in my bodie. Whereſoeuer my bodie is, there muſt my ſoule needes be, neither is my ſoul at the ſame time without my bodie. But the Worde is not ſo in Chriſt, man: but hee is ſo vnſeparably and perſonally in the humane nature, as that he is together alſo without the humane nature in all the partes of the world, as hee filleth al, and in holy men and Angels by his ſpecial preſence. The perſonall vnion of both natures dooth not euert the general action and woorking of his preſence and maieſtie, neither p. 790doth it let or hinder the ſpeciall woorking of his preſence: becauſe the Word is effectual, and worketh forcibly in the regenerate.

The generall points wherein the churches which profeſſe the Goſpell, agree or diſagree in the controuerſie concerning the Lordes Supper. They agree in theſe points.

FIRST, that as wel the Supper of the Lord as Baptiſme, is a viſible pledge and teſtimonie annexed by Chriſt himſelfe to the promiſe of grace, to this ende chiefly, that our faith in this promiſe might be confirmed and ſtrengthned.

Secondly, that in the true vſe of the ſupper, as well as in al other ſacraments, two things are giuen by god vntounto vsus, & are receiued of vsus, namelie, earthly, externall, and viſible ſigns, as are bread and wine; and beſides theſe, alſo heauenlie, internall, and inuiſible gifts, as are the true bodie of Ieſus Chriſt together with al his gifts and benefits, and heauenlie treaſures.

Thirdly, that in the ſupper we are made partakers not onlie of the ſpirit of Chriſt and his ſatisfaction, iuſtice, vertue, and operation, but alſo of the verie ſubſtaunce and eſſence of his true-bodie and bloud, which was giuen for vsus to death on the croſſe, and which was ſhed for vsus; and are trulie fed with the ſelfe-ſame vntounto eternal life: and that this verie thing chriſt ſhould teach vsus and make knowen vntounto vsus by this viſible receiuing of this bread and wine in his ſupper.

Fourthly, That the bread and wine are not changed into the fleſh and bloud of Chriſt, but remaine true and natural bread and wine: that alſo the bodie and bloud of chriſt are not ſhut vp into the bread and wine, and therefore the bread and wine are called of chriſt his bodie and bloud, in this ſenſe, for that his bodie and bloud are not onlie ſignified by theſe, and ſet before our eies, but alſo becauſe as often as we eat and drink this bread and wine, in the true and right vſe, Chriſt himſelfe giueth vsus his body and bloud indeed to be the meat and drink of eternal life.

Fiftly, That without the right vſe this receiuing of bread and wine is no ſacrament, neither anie thing, but an emptie and vaine ceremonie and ſpectacle, and ſuch as men abuſe to their own damnation.

Sixtly, That there is no other true and lawful vſe of the ſupper, p. 791beſides that, which Chriſt himſelfe hath inſtituted, and commaunded to be kept, namelie this: that this bread and this wine be eaten and drunken in remembrance of him, and to ſhew forth his death.

Seuenthly, that Chriſt in his ſupper dooth not commaund and require a diſſembled and hypocritical remembraunce of him and publiſhing of his death: but ſuch as embraceth his paſſion and death, and all his benefites obtained by theſe for vsus, by a true and liuelie faith, and with earneſt and ardent thankefulneſſe, and applieth them vntounto thoſe which eate and drink as proper vntounto them.

Eightly, that Chriſt will dwell in beleeuers onelie, and in them, who not through contempt, but through neceſſitie cannot come to the Lords ſupper, yea in al beleeuers, euē from the beginning of the woorld to all eternitie, euen as well and after the ſame manner, as hee will dwell in them, who came vntounto the Lords Supper.

They diſagree in theſe pointes.

FIRST, that one part contendeth, that theſe woordes of Chriſt, This is my bodie, muſt be vnderſtood, as the words ſound, which yet that part it ſelfe doth not: but the other part, that thoſe words muſt be vnderſtoode ſacramentallie, according to the declaration of Chriſt and Paul, according to the moſt certaine and vnfallible rule and leuil of the articles of our chriſtian faith.

Secōdly, that one part wil hauehave the bodie & bloud of chriſt to be eſſentiallie Jn or With the bread & wine, & ſo to be eaten, as that together with the bread & the wine, out of the hād of the miniſter, it entereth by the mouth of the receiuers into their bodies: but the other part wil hauehave the body of chriſt, which in the firſt ſupper ſate at the table by the diſciples, now to be & cōtinue, not here on earth, but aboue in the heauens, aboue and without this viſible world and heauen, vntill hee deſcend thence againe to iudgement: and yet that we notwithſtanding here on earth, as oft as wee eate this bread with a true faith, are ſo fed with his bodie, and made to drink of his bloud, that not onlie through his Paſſion and bloudſhed we are cleanſed from our ſinnes, but are alſo in ſuch ſort coupled, knit and incorporated into his true, eſſential, humane bodie, by his ſpirit dwelling both in him and vsus, as that we are fleſh of his fleſh, and bone of his bones, and are more neerly, and firmlie knit and vnited with him, than the members of our bodie are vnited with our head, and ſo wee drawe and hauehave in him and from him euerlaſting life.

p. 792Thirdly, That one part will hauehave all whoſoeuer come to the Lordes ſupper and eate and drinke that breade and wine, whether they bee beleeuers, or vnbeleeuers, to eate and drinke corporallie and with their bodilie mouth the fleſh and bloud of Chriſt; beleeuers, to life and ſaluation; vnbeleeuers to damnation and death: the other holdeth, that vnbeleeuers abuſe indeede the outwarde ſigns, bread and wine, to their own damnation: but that the faithful onelie can eate and drinke by a true faith, and the fore alleaged working of …he holie Ghoſt, the bodie and bloud of Chriſt vntounto eternal life.