Comparison of Parliamentary Protestation, Part 7
My words which you take for the ground of your doubt cleared of ambiguity, and the truth declare…, how Christ may be said to be received with one kind, how with both.
HAving purged my selfe, I hope, from all appearance of participation with your Romish Seminary, I shall now cleare my words from your three demands which you raise upon them; and shall further declare, how Christ may be said to bee received with one, how with both the parts of the Sacrament. Your first demand is what I mean 1. Demand▪by these words [There is no more necessity of the use of the one Element then of the other] whereupon mPag. 1.your words are, I cannot tell certainly what to understand, whether you meane comparatively for dimension or number.
If I have pusled you in that I have said, you have cryed quittance with me in your distinction of [comparatively for dimension or number] for I cannot understand with any congruity to the point in hand, what you meane by the difference betwixt dimension and number, if you had said [for degree or number] the termes of your distinction (being lodged in divers predicaments) might have been more easily conceived, and then I should have taken your doubt to be, whether the necessity be as binding for the one as for the other, and no more binding for both, but that one alone might serve for both kindes?
If you enquire of the comparison of one single Element with the other, I have answered you to that already: if of one with both, my words give you none occasion of such a doubt: for I compare but one with one, not one with both, yet the Case of Conscience, being mooved upon the inability of one to receive the bread of the Communion, I conceived it most probable, that in such a case it is better to receive the Sacrament innSee the case of conscience, p. 13, 14, 18, 19 Wine onelyonly, as for them that have an oSu…t qui sine animi deliquio … n…n possunt. Calv. Ep inter Ep. Bez Ep. 15. p. 167.Antipathy to Wine to receive it in Bread onelyonly, then either to forbeare both, or to make use of some other thing instead of that which they cannot have, or cannot take, which I propound (as in a probleme) but by way of probability, not meaning to binde any one to this resolution, nor to contend with any for it, who is otherwise minded, which, you may perceive by that pCase of conscience, pa. 8.I say of substituting some other matter analogicall to bread or wine in some cases of extreame and extraordinary necessity. And for mine opinion in that point conformable to the judgement and practise of theqIbid. p. 10. reformed Churche in France, confirmed in twenty severall Synods, IrIbid. p. 13, 14. rendred two reasons, which have had the approbation of as learned and judicious Divines as any I know. The one is that by receiving the one kinde [re] the other […oto] the one Element in deed, the other in desire (when it cannot really be had, or not so received) the party receiveth Christ, and with Christ both his body and blood. The other is, that it seemes hard measure to debarre any from both parts of the Sacrament, because God hath enabled them to partake but of one, especially if they much desire it, and be enclined to scruples and discomforts if they should want it.
The latter Reason is obvious to a meane understanding.
Of the former an intelligent Citizen (accustomed both to reading and reasoning more then ordinary Tradesmen) made some question, but he was not more scrupulous in his doubt, then ingenuous in receiving satisfaction by mine answer unto it.
And because others may haply be scrupled (as well as either you or he (though I be not made acquainted with it, as I am with your doubts) I will briefly deliver how I conceive Christ may be said to be received with one kinde, how with both.
It is the constant and sTotum & integrum Christum a… verum S…cramentum subqualibet specie sumi. Conc. Trid. Sess. 21. c 3. Tom. 9. pa. 399. Bin. euit. 1636.common Doctrine of the Papists, that whole and entire Christ is wholy and entirely under each kind, and that as whole Christ, and a true Sacrament is received in one kinde, so as tou…hing the f…uit they are defrauded of no grace necessary to salvation that receive only one kinde: and that not onelyonlytNec Vllatenus ambigendum est quod non sub specie panis caro tantum, nec sub specie vini sanguis tantum, sed sub qualibet specie est integer & totus Christi…s. Basil Conc…. Oecumen. Sess. 30. Tom. 8. p. 85. col 2. Totus Christus continetur sub specie panis, & totus sub specie vini, & sub qualibet qu… que parte host…ae consecratae, & vini consc…rati. Concil. Floren…. 3. sub Eugen. 4. Decret. super unione Jacobinorum & Atmenorum. Tom. 8. Conc…l p 866. col 1. Lumbard. l. 4. dist. 11. fol. 354 b Bel. l 4 de …uchar. cap. 21. Tom. 3 pag 287. Col 2. Ruardus Tapperun. act. 15 notat. post pag. 402. Tom. 1. Hard apud Jewell. Act. 2. pag 75. Ecciu… in locis suis dicit in unâ specie tantumesse quantum sub utra que , ideo quod sub qualibet specie totus fit Christus. Musc. loc. com. de caena. Dom. p. 373. whole Christ is contained under the species of bread, and under the species of wine, but under every part of the consecrated host, and consecrated wine.
And this so commonly held and pleaded (by the Romanists) that it commeth in continually like the Cuckoes note, asuIn utra que specie totu… Christus foreign perpetu…. Chami…r de Euch. l. 9. c. 10. Tom. 4. p. 510. col. 1. Chamier observeth, and giveth it a name accordingly.
Wherin though the Popish expression have a tang of Transubstantiation, saying, [in each kinde and under each kind is whole Christ] and that in such an advancing of the value of one Element only, their craft and drift is, to make the people contented to be cousened of the other; yet in a case of necessity (such as that I resolved) where both Elements cannot be had, or cannot be taken, it is no Popish, but a protestant Doctrine, That he that faithfully receiveth one kinde with an affection to both, receiveth whole Christ both body and blood. This position in expresse or equivalent termes, you might have read before my booke came forth, in the discourses of diversxThey (as we) also hold that whole Christ is received in either kind, for Christ is not d…vided. Bishop Morton. instit. Sacr lib. 1. c. 3. Sect. … p. 58 So also saith D. Willet. Synops. Papis. 13 Gen. controv. q. 8. pa. 640. As touching the use of the Eucharist, though we doe not deny that whole Christ is distributed, as well in the bread as in the wine, yet we teach the use of both parts to be common to the whole Church. Confess. Wittenburg. Harm. Confess. Sect 14. c 9. p 459. And the note of other Protestant D…vines upon it is, notwithstanding the signes be severally distributed, nothing is divided in the humanity of Christ. Observ. in Harm. Observ. 41. 42. He that receiveth in one kinde being not qualified to receive the other, receiveth the whole substance of the Sacrament, as it is taken for the thing signified. Dr. Featly in his conference with Mr. Everard, pag. 267. Idem. pag 201. The same confession of whole Christ received with either element. Dr Fr. White maketh, as his words are cited afterwards at the letter …. See also to the same purpose Fest. Hommij dis. 648 p. 263. Protestant Divines, who have approoved themselves very zealous Antipapists in the controversie of the Eucharist for both kinds.
Here I may fitly return you an answer to your second demand, viz. what I meane by the thing it selfe? wherin I may well admit of your distinction ofyMr. Harlow. pa. 2. res Sacramentalis & res Sacramenti, the Sacramentall signes or elements, and the thing of the Sacrament, that is, Christ which is signified and represented by them.
In application of which distinction, I say first, that on both sides it is held, as*At the letter…. I have shewed, that he that rightly receiveth but one element only, may receive rem Sacramenti, that is Christ, and whole Christ.
2. For res Sacramentalis, or the Sacramentall signes, there is no difference for the things themselves, but on both sides it is held that Christ is no lesse present to the faithfull receiver, when he receiveth the one signe then when he receiveth the other, which is all one as if we should say, that the bread hath no preheminence over the wine, nor the wine over the bread, as to a Sacramentall either ordinance or operation, and therfore,zD. Willet Synops Papis. 13. Gen. controv. q. 8. p. 644. as Dr. Willet rightly observeth, the Papists might as well have kept backe the bread, and have given the Cup without bread, as bread without the Cup.
But if the Sacrament be received but in one kind, though in such a case as that I discussed, you seem to deny participation of Christ and Sacramentall efficacy; otherwise your professed pleading against mine assertion were very impertinent, and if that be your mind, I shall desire your further consideration upon the sayings of sundry Orthodox Divines, forenoted in the margine at the letterx…, consenting that whole Christ is received with either Element. Of the same Judgement with them is learned Chamier, who, when the Papists urge the receiving of whole Christ, though but with halfe the visible Sacrament, grantsaConcedo quod ad rem significatam, idem else edere corpus & bil ere sanguinem. Chamier. de Euchar. l. 9. c. 10. Tom. 4. p. 511. col. 1. that for the thing signified by the Sacrament, that is all one to eate the body and drinke the blood of Christ; and that bDe re significata non est quod agane prolixius, quia bujus ratio longè est diversa á ratione signorum, certè res significata, neque editur, neque bibitur, cujus …ei illud argumentum est quod verè Bell…minus asserit non distirgui, sci l. in ie significata cilum & potum. Ibid. p. 508. col 2.there is great difference betwixt that, and the signes by which it is signified, for the thing signified, saith he, is neither eaten nor drunken; and hereto he applieth and approveth the saying of Bellarmine, that for the thing signified there is no distinction betwixt meat and drinke, and we have, saith*I am saepius protestati sumus non disputari de re significatâ, Ita que hoc sensu argumentum est extra Thesi…. Cham. de Euchar l. 9. c. 10. Tom 4. p. 510. col. 2. he, often protested unto you that we dispute not of the thing signified by the Sacramentall signes, but of the signes themselves; therfore in this sence your argument is an Alien from the Thesis in Question. Whence we may inferre a spirituall concomitancy and averre it too, though we deny the c…rnall concomitancy of the Papists, as D. Francis White hath done in his answer to Fisher the Jesuite, his words are these.
cD Ft. White ans…er to Fisher, p. 4…6.The ob…ection, to wit, if the soule and blood were not in Christs body by concomitancy (s…il. according to the Popish tenet, which teacheth that the bread is turned into flesh, and the wine into blood) communicants should receive the body of Christ, but not truly Christ is inconsequent, because by receiving the …, they receive the other: So in this kinde of spirituall concommitancy, neither the Fathers, nor Calvin, nor we, nor you, need to be at any difference: which differeth so much from the carnall concomitancy of the Papists, that the one is most abs…rd and contradictory both to Religion, and Reason, and common sence; the other, though too high a mystery to be perceived by a sensuall apprehension, yet very consonant to sound and religious reason, according to the prec…dent distinction betwixt the signes, and the thing signified.
For the Popish concomitancy dasheth upon this horrible absurdity, dTo this absu…dity … M. E…erar… driv… by D Featly in his disput. pag. 268, 269.That the flesh and bones of Christ without any alteration of them at all are drunke out of the Challice.
In which respect with other such like sutable absurdities, which are concomitant with transubstantiation and concomitancy, e… illu… …rrendum, & qua…e nu…qu…m … in …, vel … vel …, nullum no… …, sed …e que , i… Tur…ismo, out etia… … de Euc…ar. l. 9. c. 6. Tom. 4 de S…cr. p. 497. c…l. ….Chamier calleth Transubstantiation the most horrid monster that in the whole world was ev…r fained or formed, not onelyonly … mong the Haeresies, but in Turcisme or He…henis…e.
But of the spirituall concomitance, that is of receiving whole Christ in spirituall manner, though but one element be received, as in the case of necessity fore-mentioned and presupposed in my resolution of the case of conscience, there is good reason very agreeable to Orthodox Doctrine; as
First, because the means of receiving Christ spiritually is by faith, according to our fifteenth Article, and faith so layeth hold upon Christ, as to be partaker of whole Christ, according to the spirituall concomitancy fore-mentioned, and acknowledged by our Protestant Authours.
2. Though the manner of signification of Christ be divers betwixt the Sacrament of Baptisme and the Lords Supper, yet Christ the thing signified is as fully exhibited to those that are fit to receive it by the use of one element (though but water) as by the use of both those of the Eucharist, bread and wine; and therfore it is true whichfIn baptism… proponitur Iesus Christus conceptus, …atus, crucifixus, ut omnibus credentibus fiat sapientia. justitia, sanctificatio & redemptio, Sic Beza confess. c. 4. Act. 50. Beza delivereth, That in Baptisme Jesus Christ is proposed as conceived, borne, crucified, dead, buried, raised up, and ascended into Heaven, that to all beleevers he may become wisdome, justification, sanctification and redemption, and though in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the signes & significations be divers, the thing signified, that is whol Christ is the same to the faithful receiver: & though the signes be severed, the thing signified is not so, the body and blood of Christ are not divided, as out of our Protestant Writers I have observed.
3. Then if one have received the bread (faithfully beleeving that he receiveth whole Christ, according to the Protestant concomitancy fore-mentioned) should by some extraordinary hap be disappointed of the other part of the Sacrament (as sometimes it hath, and too oft may fall out in Congregations of the Country, where there may be an unexpected failing of wine, and no timely supply from Vintners to be expected, doth that failing which was none of the receivers fault, make his faith to faile, which was his duty and vertue rightly exercised upon the right object, if it doe not in a case of such necessity, as I discussed, the faithfull receiver may receive whole Christ, though for the outward element he receive but one part of the Sacrament.3. Demand.
Vpo… your second demand you presently make a third, viz. wh…t I meane by necessity? To which I need not make a particular reply in this place, for I have made answer to it already under the first part of your charge, wherin you would have chain…d your Seminary and me tog…ther in an hainous breach of the Sacramentall combination. And yet even the word necessity maketh a maine and materiall diff…rence betwixt the halfe Communion of the Papists, and that which I propound and plead for in my Case of Conscience, viz. the lawfulnesse and sufficiency of one Element alone in case of necessity where both cannot be had, or cannot be taken, which isgExtraordin…ry cases ought not to ju…tle outordinary laws & customes; …or th…t command of Christ to his Apostles, Goe … every crea…ure of ma…, stood good in the generall, albeit many men hapned to b… deafe—every one by S Peter is to give an answer of his faith, to every one t…at asketh, which precept was not therefore alterable because of multitudes of men that were dūb Bish. Morton of t…e Instit. of the Sacr. l 1. c. 3. §. …0 p. 61. extraordinary and rare. But the Popish parting of the Sacrament and putting a part for the whole (saving a few exceptions of conficient or consecrating Priests or Princes) is generall and ordinary, and that by Canon discharged with a dreadfull curse, as hath before been observed; so that when you professe to hold, That the Eucharist ought to be communicated by such as are able and fit, both Priests and people in both Elements, and not in one of them indifferently. You hold nothing against me for your limitation [of able and fit] maketh for such indulgence as I defend; otherwise and out of such cases of exception, I hold (as you doe) that all both Pastours and people ought to receive in both Elements, and not in one of them indifferently.