The Sum of Christian Religion, Catechism · Part 2 · Section · Question 82 – Question 84

The Sum of Christian Religion · Catechism · Part 2 · Section · Question 82 – Question 84

p. 465Queſt. 82. Are they alſo to be admitted to the Supper, who in confeſsion and life declare themſelves to be unbeleevers and ungodly?

Anſ. No. For by that means the Covenant of God is profaned, and the wrath of God is ſtirred up againſt the whole aſſemblyaa1 Cor. 11.20, 34. Iſa. 1.1. &c. & 66.3. Jerem. 21. Pſa. 50.16. &c.1 Cor 11:201 Cor 11:34Isa 1:1Jer 21Ps 50:16: wherefore the Church, by the commandement of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, uſing the keyes of the kingdome of heaven, ought to drive them from the Supper, till they ſhall repent and change their manners.

p. 466The Explication.

Who are to be admitted to the Supper.THey are to be admitted of the Church to the Lords Supper, 11. Who are of a fit age to prove themſelves, and to re-call to minde, and meditate on the Lords death, according to that commandement: Do this in remembrance of me. Let a man examine himſelf, and ſo let him eat of this bread. Shew forth the Lords death till he come: Luke 22.19. 1 Cor. 11.2…, 28.Luke 22:191 Cor 11:21 Cor 11:28Therefore the infants of the Church, though they be reckoned among the faithfull, yet they are exempted from the uſe of the Sacrament. 22. Who are baptiſed, and by baptiſme made members of the Church: For in the Supper, the covenant plighted with God in baptiſm is renewed: Therefore in old time none might eat of the Paſſeover, except hee were firſt circumciſed. So that Turks, Jewes, and other aliants from the Church are to be debarred of the Supper. 33. Who in words and deeds profeſſe true repentance and faith, or they who expreſſe and ſhew a profeſsion of faith and repentance in the actions of their life, whether they doe this truly and ſincerely, or of ſecret and hidden hypocriſie: For of things concealed the Church judgeth not. Therefore it admitteth all whom it may judge to be Chriſts members; that is, whom it heareth and ſeeth profeſſing faith and repentance in publick confeſſion and outward actions, whether they be truly godly, or hypocrites not yet unmasked. But they are not to be admitted, whoſoever ſimply do avouch that they beleeve all things, and yet live wickedly: for hee that ſaith he beleeveth, and hath not works, is a liar, and denieth in deed that which he affirmeth in words; according to that of the Apoſtle,T…. 1.…6. They profeſſe that they know God, but by their works they deny him, and are abominable and diſobedient, and to every good work reprobate. So S. James ſheweth,James 2.20. Why they onelyonly who profeſſe faith and repentance are to be admitted to the Supper.Jas 2:20 That faith which is without works is dead. The reaſons why they are to be admitted onelyonly who both by their profeſſion and life profeſſe faith and repentance, are theſe: 1Profaning of Gods covenant. What it is to profane Gods covenant. Gods covenant two wayes profaned.Becauſe the Church ſhould profane Gods covenant, if it ſhould admit unbeleevers and men impenitent: For he that doth a thing, and he that conſenteth unto it, are both obnoxious to the ſame law. To profane the Covenant of God, is, to commend and acknowledge them for the confederates, or friends and fellows of God, who are Gods enemies; and ſo to make God ſuch a one as hath entered a covenant, and is in league with hypocrites and wicked men. Now the covenant of God is two wayes profaned: namely, as well by communicating and imparting the ſigne of the covenant to them unto whom God promiſeth nothing; as by receiving and uſing the ſignes without faith and repentance. For, not only they profane the covenant, who being as yet impenitent, take the ſignes of the covenant unto them; but they alſo who wittingly and willingly give the ſignes unto thoſe whom God hath ſhut from his covenant. They make therefore God a fellow and friend of the wicked; and the ſons of the divell they make the ſons of God, whoſoever reach the ſignes to the wicked. 2Fear of Gods w…ath.They are not to be admitted to the Supper, who profeſſe not faith and repentance both in life and confeſſion: becauſe, If ſuch ſhould be admitted, the Church ſhould ſtir up the anger of God againſt her ſelf, as of whom wittingly and willingly this ſhould be committed. Now, that by this means the wrath of God is ſtirred up againſt the Church,1 Cor. 11.31.1 Cor 11:31 the Apoſtle ſufficiently witneſſeth, ſaying; For this cauſe many are weak and ſick among you, and many ſleep. For if we would judge our ſelves, we ſhould not be judged. God therefore is angry with the conſenters or winkers at the profanation of the Sacrament, and ſo puniſheth them, becauſe he puniſheth the wicked, whom they, conſenting thereto, admitted: for by both the Supper of the Lord is alike profaned. 3Chriſts commandement.Christ hath commanded that the wicked be not admitted. And if any deny that any ſuch commandement is extant, yet the ſubſtance and tenour of the commandement ſhall be eaſily proved: For Chriſt inſtituted his Supper for his diſciples, and to them alone he ſaid,Iuke 22.15, 17, 19, 20. I have earneſtly deſired to eat this paſſeover with you. Take this, and part it among you: This is my body, which is given for you. This cup is the new Teſtament in my bloud, which is ſhed for you. Wherefore the Supper was inſtituted for Chriſts diſciples only; all others, for whom Chriſt died not, are excluded. To theſe three reaſons we may here adde a fourth. 4. This is an evident demonſtration: p. 467They who deny the faith are not to be accounted for members, no not of the viſible Church: But all that refuſe to repent deny the faith; according to that ſaying of the Apoſtle, They profeſſe that they know God, but by works they deny him, Tit. 1.16.Titus 1:16and are abominable, and diſobedient, and to every good work reprobate: Therefore they who refuſe to repent are not to be reckoned members, no not of the viſible Church; and therefore are not to be admitted to the Sacraments of the Church, but to be ſecluded, as aliants, from them, untill they repent and change their evill manners. But yet, for all this, thoſe hypocrites are to be admitted, together with the godly, unto the Supper, who are not as yet manifeſted; becauſe they profeſſe in confeſſion and outward actions faith and repentance. But none ought to approach thither but true beleevers; for, theſe only excepted, all others yea, even thoſe hypocrites which are not as yet manifeſted, eat and drink unto themſelves damnation, and profane the Lords ſacred Supper. Object. The Church profaneth the covenant, if it admit the impenitent, Anſw. To the Antecedent we anſwer, that the Church ſinneth not in admitting hypocrites, to wit, as yet concealed, and not unmasked to the view of the world, ſeeing the Church is forced to acknowledge them for ſincere members, who confeſſe with their mouthes, and counterfeit repentance. It ſhould ſin indeed, if wittingly and willingly it admitted open and profeſſed hypocrites, which in word or deed deny faith and repentance. Rep. But many impenitent perſons intrude themſelves, and profane the covenant, eſpecially where excommunication a part of Church diſcipline flouriſheth not; and theſe the Church admitteth without ſin: Therefore it offendeth not in admitting others which deny repentance. Anſ. The Church herein ſinneth not, not becauſe it is no ſin to admit the unrepentant; but becauſe it admitteth them without knowledge that they are ſuch. But the impenitent perſons themſelves, who preſſe unto this table, profane the covenant; not to the impeachment of the Church, or them that communicate with them, but of themſelves: for they procure unto themſelves damnation. Nevertheleſſe, it is the duty of the Church to obſerve diligently what manner of men it admitteth; and the Miniſter of the Church is there excuſed, where excommunication is not authoriſed: yet ſo, that hee give not willingly the Sacrament to the abuſers thereof, but be inſtant in warning and reproving them, and wiſh them to take heed of, and avoid their abuſes. For,Matth. 5.6.Matt 5:6 Bleſſed are they that hunger and thirſt after righteouſneſſe. But the ſin ſhall lie on others, even on them who commit the abuſe, and on them who wink with both their eyes thereat.

OF THE PASSEOVER.

SEeing it is aforeſaid, that the Lords Supper ſucceeded the Paſſeover, it ſhall not be impertinent to declare here in brief the doctrine of the Paſſeover. The Queſtions concerning the Paſſeover are theſe:

1. What it was.

2. What were the ends and uſes thereof.

3. What are the allegories or reſemblances of the rites of the Paſchall lamb.

4. Whether it be now abrogated, and what ſucceeded in place thereof.

1. What the Paſſeover was.

THe Paſſeover was a ſolemn eating of a Lamb, enjoyned the Iſraelites by God that this ceremony, being yeerly performed throughout every houſe, might be a memoriall unto them of their deliverance out of Egypt, but ſhould eſpecially ſignifie unto the faithfull their ſparituall freedome from ſin and death by Christ, which was to be ſacrificed or ſlain on the croſſe, and to be eaten by faith. Or, It was a Sacrament of the ancient Church, which by Gods commandeme…t was to be celebrated with the yeerly ſlaying and eating in every family of the Jewes a lambe of a yeer old, to be a remembrance unto hem of the benefits of their delivery out of Egypt, and a ſeale of the promiſe of grace touching remiſsion of ſins for the ſacrifice of the Meſſias. Paſcha the Greek word, cometh from the Hebrew Peſach a p. 468Paſſeover, derived of Paſach, which ſignifieth, To paſſe over. This Sacrament and whole ſolemnity had his name from the paſſing over of the Angel, who ſeeing the bloud of the Lamb on the Iſraelites upper door-poſts, paſſed over, and ſpared their firſt-born, when he ſlew all the firſt-born of the Egyptians. The hiſtory of the inſtitution of the Paſſeover is extant Exod. 12. God commanded that the killing of the Lamb ſhould be executed with certain and divers ceremonies.The rites and ceremonies of the paſſeover. For, A lamb of a yeer old, a male without blemiſh, was to be ſeparated from the flocke, the tenth day of the firſt monethmonth called Niſan, or Abib, according to the number of the families, for every houſhold a lamb; and was to be ſlain four dayes after, that is, the fourteenth day at even, and the poſts and lintels, or upper cheeks of the doors of their houſes were to be ſprinkled with his bloud: then was hee to be rosted, and eaten whole, and in haſte, with unleavened bread and ſowre herbs; and they that did eat it ſtood with their loins girt, their ſhooes on their feet, and their ſtaves in their hands. Exod. 12 11, 23.Exod 12:11Exod 12:23Of this ceremony, ſaith God, It is the Lords Paſſeover. The bloud ſhall be a token for you upon the houſes where ye are, that when I ſee the bloud, I may paſſe over you. This feaſt God would have to be yeerly, that is, once every yeer ſeven whole dayes celebrated with great ſolemnity:Exod. 12.14, 15.Exod 12:14Exod 12:15 And this day ſhall be unto you as a remembrance: and ye ſhall keep it an holy feast unto the Lord, throughout your generations yee ſhall keep it an holy ordinance for ever. Seven dayes ſhall yee eat unleavened bread, &c. Look Exod. 23.15. Levit. 15.5. Deut. 16.1.

2. What the ends and uſes of the Paſſeover were.

FIve ends of the inſtitution of the paſſeover are ſpecified, Exod. 12. 1To be a confirmation of the promiſe of the Angels paſſeover, and of the ſaving of the Iſraelites firſt-born.That the bloud of the lamb ſprinkled on the poſts might be a ſigne of the Angel-which ſhould paſſe over the Iſraelites, and ſave their firſt-born; as it is ſaid, ver. 13. And the bloud ſhall be a token for you upon the houſes where you are, that when I ſee the bloud, I may paſſe over you. This end, after the firſt performance of the rite, and execution of the paſſeover, ceaſed forthwith, although the analogie thereof remain for ever. For God both heretofore ſpared, and now ſpareth the faithfull for Chriſts bloud ſhed; that is, for it remitteth their ſins, as in the ſecond end is declared. 2To be a type of Chriſt.That it might be a figure of the Meſſias his ſacrifice to come or a ſign of the deliverance to be performed by Chriſt, and of Gods grace towards his Church: this was the principall end of the yeerly paſſeover.Exod. 12.45. John 19.36.Exod 12:45John 19:36 This is thus proved: It is ſaid, Ye ſhall not break a bone thereof: This figure, John ſaith, was then fulfilled when Chriſts bones were not broken on the croſſe; therefore the lamb was a type of Chriſt, and of his ſacrifice. Againe, Christ our paſſeover is ſacrificed for us: 1 Cor. 5.7.1 Cor 5:7Therefore the paſchall lamb ſignified Chriſt, and the ſacrificing thereof repreſented the ſacrificing of Chriſt. Beſides, the Church underſtood the ſignifications of other ſacrifices, that they were types of the ſacrifices of the Meſſias (for the Fathers of the old Church were not ſo brutiſh, as to hope for remiſſion of ſins by the bloud of buls:) much more therefore did they by faith behold the Meſſias and his ſacrifice in the Paſchall lamb Finally, John calleth Chriſt The Lamb of God: Revel. 13.8.Rev 13:8and, the Lamb which was ſlain from the beginning of the world; to wit, becauſe he was prefigured by that lamb which was ſlain to be the paſſeover. 3For a remembrance of their delivery out of Egypt. Exod. 12.15. Deut 16.3.Exod 12:15Deut 16:3To be a memoriall of the firſt paſſeover, and of the delivery out of Egypt. For God would, that the memory of ſo great a benefit ſhould be preſerved among his people, leſt their poſterity ſhould wexe unthankfull. Seven dayes ſhalt thou eat unleavened bread, even the bread of tribulation, (for thou camest out of the land of Egypt in haste) that thou mayeſt remember the day when thou camest out of the land of Egypt, all the dayes of thy life. 4To be an occaſion of publick concourſe to praiſe God for this benefit. Exod. 12.16.Exod 12:16That it might be a bond of publick aſſemblies, and maintenance of eccleſiaſticall Miniſtery: In the firſt day ſhall be an holy aſſembly. 5To diſtinguiſh Iſrael from other people. Exod. 12.43, 48.Exod 12:43Exod 12:48That it might be a Sacrament whereby to diſtinguiſh Gods people from other nations: No ſtranger ſhall eat thereof. But if a ſtranger dwell with thee, and will obſerve the paſſeover of the Lord, let him circumciſe all the males that belong unto him, and then let him come and obſerve it; and he ſhall be as one that is born in the land: For no uncircumciſed perſon ſhall eat thereof.

p. 4693. The allegories or reſemblances between Chriſt and the Paſchal lamb.

FOr confirmation and illuſtration of the principall end of the paſſeover, the conſideration of the reſemblances of ſuch rites as God preſcribed to be obſerved in the killing and eating the Paſchall lamb, may much availe.

A Collation of the type, and the thing ſignified by the type.

4. Whether the ancient paſſeover be now abrogated.

THat the ancient paſſeover is now by Chriſts coming abrogated, with all other types whatſoever, prefiguring the Meſſias to come, is cleer: 1. Out of the whole diſputation of the Apoſtle to the Hebrews, touching the aboliſhment of the legall ſhadowes, Heb. 7.12.Heb 7:12which aboliſhment is now performed in the New Teſtament. If the prieſthood be changed, then of neceſsity muſt there be a change of the law. In that he ſaith, a New Teſtament, hee hath abrogated the Old. 2. From the fulfilling and performance of thoſe legall ſhadows. Theſe things were done, that the Scripture ſhould be fulfilled; Not a bone of him ſhall be broken. John 19.36.John 19:36Chriſt our paſſeover is ſacrificed for us. 1 Cor. 5.7.1 Cor 5:73. From the ſubſtituting of the New Teſtament in place thereof: For Chriſt, when he was ready to die, and to ſacrifice himſelfe as the true Paſſeover, ended the ceremony of the Paſchall lamb with a ſolemn banquet; and thenceforth inſtituted and ordained a Supper to be obſerved by his Church in place thereof. I have deſired to eat this paſſeover with you before I ſuffer. Luke 22.15, 19.Luke 22:15Luke 22:19Doe this in remembrance of mee. Where hee commandeth, that we celebrate and ſolemnize the ſupper in memory of him, not the ancient paſſeover. As then Baptiſm ſucceeded Circumciſion; ſo the Lords Supper ſucceeded the Paſſeover in the new Teſtament.

Certain concluſions of the Supper.

1. 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 received in the aſſembly of the faithfull, in remembrance of Chriſt: which is, that Chriſt might teſtifie unto us, that he feedeth us with his body and bloud delivered and ſhed for us to eternall life, and that we alſo might, for theſe his benefits, give ſolemn thanks unto him.

2. The firſt and principall end and uſe of the Lords Supper is, That Chriſt might therein teſtifie unto us, that he died for us, and doth feed us with his bloud and body unto everlaſting life, that ſo by this reſtification he might cheriſh and increaſe in us p. 470our faith, and ſo conſequently this ſpirituall food and nouriſhment. The ſecond end is thankſgiving for theſe benefits of Chriſt, and our publick and ſolemn profeſſion of them, and our duty towards Chriſt. The third is, the diſtinguiſhing of the Church from other ſects. The fourth, that it might be a bond of mutuall love and dilection. The fifth, that it might be a bond of our aſſemblies and meetings.

3. That firſt end and uſe, which is the confirmation of our faith in Chriſt, the Supper of the Lord hath, becauſe Chriſt himſelf giveth this bread and drink by the hands of his Miniſters, to be a memoriall of him; that is, to admoniſh and put us in remembrance by this ſigne, as by his viſible word, that he died for us, and is the food of eternall life unto us, while he maketh us his members: both becauſe he hath annexed a promiſe to this rite, that he will feed thoſe who eat this bread in remembrance of him, with his own body and bloud, when he ſaith, This is my body; and alſo becauſe the holy Ghoſt doth by this viſible teſtimony move our minds and hearts more firmly to beleeve the promiſe of the Goſpel.

4. There is then in the Lords Supper a double meat and drinke,; one externall, viſible, terrene; namely, bread and wine: and another internall. There is alſo a double eating and receiving; an externall and ſignifying, which is the corporall receiving of the bread and wine; that is, which is performed by the hands, mouth, and ſenſes of the body: and an internall inviſible, and ſignified, which is the fruition of Chriſts death, and a ſpirituall ingraffing into Chriſts body; that is, which is not performed by the hands and mouth of the body, but by the ſpirit and faith. Laſtly, there is a double administer and diſpenſer of this meat and drink; an externall, of the externall, which is the Miniſter of the Church, delivering by his hand bread and wine: and an internall, of the internall meat, which is Chriſt himſelf, feeding us by his body and bloud.

5. Not the body and bloud of Chriſt, but the bread and wine are the ſigns which ſerve for confirmation of our faith: for the body and bloud of Chriſt are received, that we may live for ever. But the bread and wine are received, that we may be confirmed and aſſured of that heavenly food, and daily more and more injoy it.

6. Neither is the bread changed into the body of Chriſt, nor the wine into the bloud of Chriſt; neither doth the body and bloud of Chriſt ſucceed in their place, they being aboliſhed: neither is Chriſts body ſubſtantially preſent in the bread, or under the bread, or where the bread is; but in the right uſe of the Lords Supper, the holy Ghoſt uſeth this ſymbole, as an inſtrument to ſtir up faith in us, by which he more and more dwelleth in us, ingraffeth us into Chriſt, and maketh us through him to be juſt and righteous, and to draw eternall 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 ſacramentall, or metonymicall; becauſe the name of the thing ſignified is attributed to the ſigne it ſelf; that is, it is meant, that the bread it the ſacrament or ſigne of his body, and doth repreſent him, and doth teſtifie, that Chriſts body is offered for us on the croſſe, and is given to us to be food of eternall life: and therefore is the inſtrument of the holy Ghoſt to maintain and increaſe this food in us,1 Cor. 10.1 Cor 10 as S. Paul ſaith, The bread is the communion of the body of Chriſt: that is, it is that thing by which we are made partakers of Chriſts body. And elſe-where he ſaith, We have been all made to drink into one Spirit. The ſame is the meaning alſo, when it is ſaid, that the bread is called Chriſts body for a ſimilitude which the thing ſignified hath with the ſigne; namely, that Chriſts body nouriſheth the ſpirituall life, as bread doth the corporall life: and for that aſſured and certain joint-receiving of the thing and the ſigne in the right uſe of the ſacrament And this is the ſacramentall union of the bread, which is ſhewed by a ſacramentall kind of ſpeaking, but no ſuch locall conjunction as is by ſome imagined.

9. As therefore the body of Chriſt ſignifieth both his proper and naturall body, and his ſacramentall body, which is the bread of the Euchariſt; ſo the eating of Chriſts body is of two ſorts: one ſacramentall, of the ſigne to wit, the externall and corporall receiving of the bread and wine; the other reall or ſpirituall, which is the receiving of Chriſts very body it ſelf. And, to beleeve in Chriſt dwelling in us by p. 471faith, is, by the vertue and operation of the holy Ghoſt, to be ingraffed into his body, as members to the head, and branches into the vine: and ſo to be made partakers of the fruit of the death and life of Chriſt. Whence it is apparent, that they are falſly accuſed, who thus teach, as if they made either the bare ſignes only to be in the Lords Supper, or a participation of Chriſts death only, or of his benef…s, or of the holy Ghoſt; excluding the true, reall, and ſpirituall communion of the very body of Chriſt it ſelf.

10. Now the right uſe of the Supper is, when the faithfull obſerve this rite inſtituted by Chriſt in remembrance of Chriſt: that is, to the ſtirring and raiſing up of their faith and thankfulneſſe.

11. As in this right uſe the body of Chriſt is ſacramentally taken: ſo alſo without this uſe (as by unbeleevers and hypocrites) it is eaten ſacramentally indeed, but not really; that is, the ſacramentall ſymboles or ſignes, bread and wine, are received, but not the things themſelves of the ſacrament, to wit, the body and bloud of Chriſt.

12. This doctrine of the Supper of the Lord is grounded upon very many, and thoſe moſt ſound and firm reaſons. All thoſe places of Scripture confirm it, which ſpeak of the Lords Supper; and Chriſt, calling not any inviſible thing in the bread, but the very viſible and broken bread it ſelfe, his body delivered or broken for us: which, whereas it cannot be meant properly, himſelfe addeth an expoſition, that that bread is truly received in remembrance of him: which is, as if he had ſaid, That the bread is a ſacrament of his body. So likewiſe he ſaith, The Supper is the new testament, which is ſpirituall, one, and everlaſting. And Paul ſaith, It is the communion of the body and bloud of Christ; becauſe all the faithfull are one body in Chriſt, who cannot ſtand together with the communion of the divels. Likewiſe he maketh one and the ſame ingraffing into Chriſts body by one ſpirit, to be both in baptiſm and in the Lords ſupper. Moreover, the whole doctrine and nature of Sacraments confirm the ſame: all which repreſent to the eyes the ſame ſpirituall communion of Chriſt to be received by faith, which the word or promiſe of the Goſpel declareth unto the ears: Therefore they are called by the names of the things ſignified, and in their right uſe have the receiving of the things adjoined unto them. The articles alſo of our faith confirm it, which teach, that Chriſts body is a true humane body, not preſent at once in many places; as being now received into heaven, and there to remain untill the Lord return to Judgement: and further, that the communion of ſaints with Chriſt is wrought by the holy Ghoſt, not by any entrance of Chriſts body into the bodies of men. Wherefore this ſentence and doctrine is of all the purer antiquity of the Church with moſt great and manifeſt conſent held and profeſſed.

13. The Supper of the Lord differeth from Baptiſm, 1. In the rite and manner of ſignifying; becauſe the dipping into the water or waſhing, ſignifyeth a remiſſion and purging out of ſin by the bloud and ſpirit of Chriſt, and our ſociety and fellowſhip with Chriſt in his afflictions and glorification. But the diſtributing of the bread and wine ſignifieth the death of Chriſt to be imputed unto us unto remiſſion of ſins, and our ſelves ingraffed into Chriſt to become his members. 2. They differ in their ſpeciall uſe, becauſe Baptiſm is the teſtimony of our regeneration, and of the covenant made between us and God, and of our receiving into the Church. But the Lords Supper teſtifieth, that we are ever to be nouriſhed by Chriſt remaining in us, and that the covenant made between God and us, ſhall ever be eſtabliſhed and ratified unto us, and that we for ever ſhall abide in the Church and body of Chriſt. 3. They differ in the perſons to whom they are to be given: Baptiſm is given to all thoſe who are to be accounted for members of the Church, whether they be of yeers and underſtanding, or infants. The Lords Supper is to be given to them only who are able to underſtand and celebrate the benefits of Chriſt, and to examine themſelves. 4. They differ in the often celebrating of them: Baptiſm is to be received but once only; becauſe the covenant of God being once made, is alwayes firm and of force to the penitent. But the Supper is often to be received; becauſe p. 472an often renewing and recalling of that covenant to our remembrance is neceſſary for our faith. 5. They differ in the order which is to be obſerved in the uſe of them: Becauſe Baptiſm is to be given before the Supper, and the Supper may not be given unto any, except he be firſt baptiſed.

14. They come worthily to the Lords Supper who examine themſelves, that is, are endued with true faith and repentance. They who find not this in themſelves, ought neither to come without it, leſt they eat and drink their own judgement; not to defer repentance wherewith they ſhould come, leſt they draw upon themſelves hardneſſe of heart, and eternall pains.

15. The Church ought to admit all thoſe unto it, who profeſſe themſelves to imbrace the ground and foundation of Chriſtian doctrine, and to have a purpoſe to obey it: but thoſe muſt be repelled who will not deſiſt, either from their errours and blaſphemies, or from manifeſt ſins againſt their conſcience, being admoniſhed by the Church, and convicted of errour.

16. The Pope hath corruptly taken away the breaking of the bread from the rite of the Supper, and bereaved the people of the uſe of the cup. Corruptly alſo hath he transformed the Supper of the Lord, with adding ſo many ceremonies not delivered by the Apoſtles into a theatricall or pageant-like Maſſe, that is, into a Jewiſh ſuperſtition, and ſtage-like rounds and conveyances. But more wicked and idolatrous inventions are theſe; That the Maſſe is a propitiatory ſacrifice, wherein Chriſt is offered by the Maſſe-prieſts for the quick and the dead, and is by the force of conſecration ſubſtantially preſent, and abideth ſo long as thoſe forms of bread and wine remain uncorrupted: and further, doth beſtow the grace of God, and other benefits upon them for whom he is offered: of whom alſo he is eaten with the mouth of their body, yea, though they have no good inward motion in them: and laſtly, is, being treaſured and laid up, and carried about under thoſe forms, to be worſhipped. In reſpect of theſe foul monſters, it is neceſſary that the Maſſe be quite and clean aboliſhed out of the Chriſtian Church. In ſumme, they are theſe: 1. Tranſubſtantiation. 2. Bread-worſhip. 3. Sacrifice. 4. Maiming of Chriſts Supper.

THE APPENDIX OR ADDITION ADJOYNING unto the former Treatiſe of the Supper.

Certain principall arguments of the Conſubſtantiaries against the ſincere doctrine of the Lords Supper, and the Sacramentaries, as they call them: together with a refutation of them.

1. THe errours of the Sacramentaries (ſay they) are, that there are but bare ſignes and ſymboles only in the Supper. Anſ. We teach that the things ſignified are together with the ſignes in the right uſe exhibited and communicated, albeit not corporally, but in ſuch ſort as is agreeable unto Sacraments. 2. The Sacramentaries ſay, that Christ is preſent only according to his power and efficacie. Anſ. We teach that he is preſent and united with us by the holy Ghoſt, albeit his body be far abſent from us: like as whole Chriſt alſo is preſent with his miniſtery, though diverſly according to the one nature. 3. The Sacramentaries (ſay they) affirm, that an imaginary, figurative, or ſpirituall body of Chriſt is preſent, not his eſſentiall body. Anſ. We never ſpake of an imaginary body, but of the true fleſh of Chriſt, which is preſent with us, although it remain in heaven. Moreover, we ſay, that we receive the bread and body, but both after a manner proper to each. 4. The Sacramentaries (ſay they) affirm, that the true body of Chriſt which hung on the croſſe, and his very bloud which was ſhed for us, is diſtributed, and is ſpiritually received of thoſe only who are worthy receivers: as for the unworthy, they receive nothing beſides the bare ſignes, unto their condemnation. Anſ. All this we grant, as being agreeing to the word of God, the nature of ſacraments, the analogie of faith, and the communion of the faithfull.

p. 473Certaine arguments of the Conſubſtantiaries, whereby they goe about to overthrow our doctrine of the Lords Supper; together with the refutation of them.

1. THe words of the institution are open and plain, This is my body; This is my bloud. Anſ. They alledge theſe words againſt themſelves: for they ſay, That the body of Chriſt is received really in, under, with the bread: when Chriſt ſaith, that the very bread is the body. Wherefore they doe a double injury unto the Church: Firſt, while they thruſt upon the Church their own words for Chriſts. Secondly, while they imagine that the Church perceiveth not theſe ſpeeches to be divers, In the bread is my body; and, The bread is my body. They accuſe Chriſt alſo for a liar: for they deny that the bread is his body, but that his body is in the bread. Let them look therefore unto it, how they will anſwer Chriſt at the laſt judgment for this blaſphemy and reproach. The Papiſts alſo do more retain the very words of Chriſt: But theſe retain not the words, but follow the ſenſe and meaning. Wee muſt ſee therefore which part followeth it. Ours ſhall be proved in the end. Repl. Christ addeth an expoſition of his mind, Which is given for you; and, Which is ſhed for you. Anſ. Firſt, this is a begging of that which is in queſtion: for they take as granted, that the bread is properly called the body, which yet lieth upon them to prove; for it is a ſacramentall manner of ſpeaking. Secondly, we return their own reaſon upon them, by inverting it thus; The body of Chriſt properly ſo called was given for us: But the bread was not given for us: Therefore 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 body: But the breaking of the body is the crucifying thereof: Therefore the bread broken is but ſacramentally and by repreſentation the body broken.

2. They reaſon from the authour who ſaid it, and is true. Anſ. This is alſo a begging of that which is in queſtion. They muſt prove that Chriſt ſaid, his body was in, under, with the bread. And further, a man may ſpeak figuratively, and yet ſpeak perſpicuouſly and plainly. Repl. He is alſo omnipotent: therefore he is able to be every-where, and ſo in the bread. Anſ. Albeit he were able to bring to paſſe, that two flat repugnant things ſhould be true together: yet will hee not do it. Again, God is not able to work contradictories, or things flat repugnant, becauſe he is true. Now, to will thoſe things which are contradictory argueth a lyar: Wherefore we deny not the truth and omnipotency of God, but theſe mens lies; nay rather, we defend Gods truth, affirming, that God doth that which he ſpake. But they oppugne it, making contrary wils to be in God. Repl. Christs body hath many prerogatives not agreeable to our bodies: as, that he was born of a Virgin, walked on the ſea, was at one time and together in the grave, in hell, and in paradiſe; and paſſed thorow the gates when they were fast ſhut. Anſ. Theſe examples are partly not matches, and partly falſe. For this may agree unto a creature, to walk on the waters, as it did to Peter: to paſſe thorow the gates ſhut, as it is agreeable to the nature of a ſpirit. Again, theſe examples are not matches, nor of the ſame quality with that which is in queſtion; becauſe theſe do not imply a contradiction. For when he is ſaid to be born of a Virgin, he is not ſaid withall not to be born of a Virgin. But, to be both finite and infinite, (as they will have Chriſts body who conſubſtantiate it with the bread) theſe imply a contradiction. Now it is falſe that they ſay, that he paſſed thorow the gates ſhut, whereas the gates might yeeld and open unto him: as alſo, that he paſſed thorow the door or ſtone of the grave, when as it is ſaid, that the Angel did open it: and laſtly, when they ſay that Chriſts body was once and together in moe places, which they ſeem to have of Auſtin: but Austin ſaid, That his body was in the grave, his ſoul in hell, and his God-head every where.

3. They reaſon from a circumstance of the time: the ſame night in which hee was betrayed. No man which ſpeaketh ſeriouſly, ſpeaketh figuratively: Chriſt inſtituting his Supper, ſpake ſeriouſly: Therefore without any figure. Anſ. I deny the Major: becauſe by that poſition, no man that ſpeaketh ſeriouſly ſhould ſpeak figuratively, which is moſt falſe. God ſpeaketh in all Sacraments, though figuratively, yet ſeriouſly: I have p. 474earneſtly deſired (ſaith Chriſt) to eat this Paſſeover with you. Wherefore I anſwer, that he uſeth not jeſting or obſcure figures. This figure is perſpicuous, becauſe it is uſuall, and his diſciples ſpeak ſo: Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou maiſt eat the Paſſeover? It is uſuall alſo in all Sacraments; it is forcible and emphaticall, becauſe it expreſſeth the ſimilitude of the ſigne and the thing ſignified, and the certainty of the conjunction of both in the right uſe and adminiſtration. Again, we invert their reaſon, and ſay, Becauſe Chriſt ſpake ſeriouſly, therefore he uſed a figure which doth well expreſſe and declare the thing. Repl. Chriſt ſaid, This cup is the new testament. In wils and teſtaments men ſpeak properly: Chriſt here inſtituteth a Sacrament: Therefore hee ſpeaketh properly. Anſ. I deny the Major, and invert the reaſon: for ſeeing he would inſtitute a Sacrament, therefore he ſpake figuratively, calling the Supper the new teſtament, which is figuratively to be underſtood for theſe two reaſons: 1. Becauſe otherwiſe there ſhould be two covenants, the one proper, and the other the Supper. 2. Otherwiſe alſo they ſhould be ſhut out from Gods covenant who cannot come to the Supper, and all who come to the Supper ſhould be in the covenant. Object. Christ ſaith, In my bloud: Therefore the reall bloud of Chriſt is in the Supper, and is drunk by the mouth. Anſ. We conclude the contrary rather by thoſe words of Chriſt: becauſe the new teſtament was made by Chriſts bloud ſhed on the croſſe, and applyed unto us by faith, not drunk by the mouth; for otherwiſe they ſhould be excluded from the teſtament and covenant, who were not able to come to the Sacrament. Rep There is a great force in the word New; That which was done in the Old Teſtament typically, is done in the New really. Anſ. If they adde, Therefore done by the mouth of the body, they bring in more in the concluſion then was in the antecedent; for there was no type in the old Teſtament which did ſignifie the eating of Chriſt with the mouth. 2. We invert their reaſon: Chriſts body was no otherwiſe eaten in the new Teſtament then in the old: But in the old it was eaten ſpiritually only:Co…. 2.17. Hebr. 9.Heb 9 Therefore in the new alſo it is ſo eaten. Rep. The new Teſtament differeth from the old; becauſe in that were types, in the new is the body it ſelfe. Anſ. This difference of the old and new Teſtament is no where ſet down in holy Scripture; that Chriſt is eaten in the old not really, and in the new corporally by the mouth. In the places which are alledged out of the Apoſtle the body ſignifie…h that the ſhadow was only of the old Teſtament, and was accompliſhed and fulfilled by Chriſt: becauſe there the body is oppoſed to thoſe ſhadows: And further, becauſe he calleth it the body of Chriſt: which kind of ſpeech ſheweth, that by Chriſt was wrought accompliſhment and fulfilling of the types and ſhadowes of the old Teſtament. Moreover, albeit we have Chriſt exhibited in the new Teſtament, and he is there born a man; yet notwithſtanding it doth not therefore follow hereof, that his body is in the bread, but only that it is in the new Teſtament.

4. They reaſon from the conſent of the Evangeliſts, and S. Paul. Matthew, as Theophylact calculateth, writ his Goſpel eight yeeres after Christs aſcenſion, Marke ten yeeres, Luke fifteene yeeres, Paul twenty yeers, and all uſe the ſame words. A ſpeech that is often uttered with the ſame words is not figurative: Such is the ſpeech of the Lords Supper: Therefore it is not figurative. Anſ. It is falſe, that a ſpeech often uttered in the ſame words is not figurative: becauſe, when a figure is conſpicuous, known, and forcible, as this, it is retained. Again, The Evangeliſts repeat the words of Chriſt, becauſe he ſpake figuratively. Often, though it be figurative, is this repeated; Hee ſhall baptiſe you with the holy Ghost, Mat…h. 3.1…. John 1.33.John 1:33and with fire. Moreover, we deny that this ſpeech of Chriſts Supper was repeated by all in the ſame words: 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 Mark ſay, This is my body. Luke addeth, which is given for you: Paul, which is broken for you. 3. Paul ſaith, That the bread is the communion of the body of Chriſt. And albeit in this place hee ſpeaketh not purpoſely of the Supper, yet he ſtirreth up and exhorteth unto it. Repl. It is the ſame ſenſe and meaning. Anſw. The queſtion now is not of the ſenſe and meaning of the words, but of the identity of the words; that is, whether they be the ſame words. Repl. Where there is no mention at all of any figure, there is no figure. Anſw. This is falſe: For fooliſh p. 475were it, and men ſhould ſeem to make ſhew and oſtentation of their skill and art, if they ſhould ſay that they uſed a trim figure. And the Scripture alſo often ſpeaketh figuratively, and yet doth it not adde withall, it ſpeaketh figuratively. Furthermore, they make mention hereof, when they ſhew, that it conſiſteth of the nature of the ſubject and the attribute: The body was born of the Virgin, crucified, and ſo forth: The bread is made of meal. Secondly, Chriſt willeth this to be done in remembrance of him: Therefore the bread is called the body, as a memoriall of his body. Thirdly, Matthew and Mark ſay, This is my bloud of the new Teſtament: Paul and Luke ſay, This is the new Testament in my bloud. Now the new Teſtament is the bloud whereby God hath bound himſelf to receive the faithfull and repentant into favour, and they bind themſelves to yeeld faith and obedience unto him. Fourthly, Paul ſaith, That the bread is the communion of Chriſts body: which is not any corporall eating; 1. Becauſe the faithfull are thereby one body in Chriſt. 2. Becauſe he compareth it with the communion of the altar in the old Teſtament, which was not corporall. 3. Becauſe it can agree but to the faithfull onelyonly, and not to the wicked. 4. John ſheweth that communion: If we walk in the light, 1 John 1.7.1 John 1:7we have fellowſhip one with another, and the bloud of Jeſus Chriſt his Son cleanſeth us from all ſin.And further, this communion whereof Saint Paul ſpeaketh, is our union with Chriſt, and fruition of all his benefits by faith. Hither belongeth the ſimilitude of the body and the members, the vine and the branches, which have nothing to doe with any corporall eating. This communion was and is common to all the faithfull from the beginning unto the worlds end. But they could not eat the body of Chriſt corporally by their mouth. That we might grow up unto him, by whom all the body is coupled and knit together. Eph. 4.15, 16.Eph 4:15Eph 4:16He that is joyned unto the Lord is one ſpirit. 1 Cor. 9.17.1 Cor 9:17And by one ſpirit are we all baptiſed into one body. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and hee in us: 1 John 4.13.1 John 4:13becauſe hee hath given us of his Spirit. This union therefore is that communion which is wrought by the holy Ghoſt; wherefore it is ſpirituall: For bread cannot be this communion but by a figure, as it is a ſigne. Repl. He that is guilty of the body of Chriſt, eateth it: They who receive unworthily are guilty of the body of Chriſt: Therefore they eat it corporally, for ſpiritually they cannot; becauſe if they could ſo eat it, they ſhould not be guilty. Anſw. The Major is falſe. For he is guilty of Chriſts body, who by his ſins hangeth it on the croſſe again, and deſpiſeth Chriſts benefits. For any reall eating is not required to this guilt: but he that will not receive Chriſt offered by faith, is thereby made guilty. So the injury done unto the Ark is ſaid to be done unto the Lord. Repl. They that diſcern not the Lords body, eat it: But the guilty diſcern it not: Therefore they eat it. Anſ. It the Major be taken ſacramentally, as of the bread, which is called, and is the body of Chriſt, it is true: but if properly, it is falſe. For, not to diſcern his body, is, not to give due honour to it, to contemn it; yea, not to receive the thing ſignified. So, They are ſaid to tread under foot the Son of God, Heb. 10.29.Heb 10:29and to count the bloud of the teſtament as an unholy thing, who contemn him.

5. They reaſon from the teſtimony of the Fathers, and the godly of ancient times in the purer ſtate of the Church. Anſ. The ſayings of the Fathers are to be underſtood ſacramentally, or of our ſpirituall communion. Repl. 1. Auguſtine ſaith, Thou ſhalt receive this in the bread, which hung on the croſſe: and this is the cup, which was ſhed out of Christs ſide. Anſw. In the bread, as in the ſigne, that is, together with the ſigne, thou ſhalt receive the thing ſignified. When we receive the bread, we are certain that wee have Chriſt. Repl. 2. Cyril upon John ſaith, By naturall participation, not onelyonly ſpiritually, but alſo corporally: not onelyonly according to the ſpirit, but alſo according to the fleſh corporally and eſſentially. Anſw. Cyril ſpeaketh not of the manner of eating, but of the thing which was to be eaten. He ſheweth that we are made partakers not only of Chriſts ſpirit, but alſo of his humane nature. Now he underſtandeth a ſpirituall communion: 1. Becauſe hee citeth thoſe places concerning it, John 6. & 1 Cor. 10. where no mention is made of corporall eating. 2. He ſpeaketh of the preſence of Chriſt, not in the bread, but in us. 3. He proveth the abiding of Chriſt in us, by the uſe of the Supper, not by any corporall eating. 4. He ſo deſcribeth it, that hee ſaith, It ſhall continue in the life to come. 5. Hee ſpeaketh of that p. 476communion which is proper unto the ſaints. Now this is ſpirituall, for otherwiſe it ſhould befall alſo to the wicked.

The ſhifts of Conſubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude and ſhift off certain of our objections, not all; for moe are objected againſt them.

1. WEe make not, ſay they, any Capernaiticall eating. Anſ. We demand of them whether Chriſt be eaten by the bodily mouth; be it after a groſſe, or after a finer manner. But how ever they anſwer; in that opinion which they hold there is too too much idolatry: for Chriſt refuting the Capernaites, doth not diſtinguiſh the eating of him into a groſſe and a finer manner; but ſaith ſimply, That his body cannot be eaten with the bodily mouth: for he ſaith, that he muſt aſcend: And, that the words which he ſpeaketh are ſpirit and life.

2. We maintain not Ubiquity, for there is not a word thereof to be found. Anſ. Here is to be obſerved the diſſention of the adverſaries about Ubiquity. But neither is a word to be found hereof, That the body of Chriſt is together in two places. And further, of this their opinion followeth Ubiquity: For he that is together and at one time in moe places, muſt needs be infinite, and therefore every-where.

3. Wee overthrow not the article of Chriſts aſcenſion. Anſ. Yea, but they doe overthrow it. For, while they hold that as often as the Supper is celebrated, Chriſt is corporally eaten, they muſt needs ſay that he remaineth and is inviſible on earth. But he is ſaid to have left the world, to have aſcended from a lower place into an higher, and to remain in heaven untill he come to judgement. Now, that ſome except, that Chriſt doth deſcend from heaven as often as the Supper is adminiſtred, it is already refuted.

4. We take not away the doctrine of the properties of Chriſts humanity. Anſ. They altogether take it away. For, they will have his humane nature to be ſuch as is not ſeen, nor felt, nor limited in place. Rep. But Chriſt did put off theſe infirmities and retained the eſſentiall properties. Anſ. But theſe are very eſſentiall properties, which being taken away, the verity alſo and truth of his humane nature is taken away. Auguſtine ſaith, Take away from bodies their ſpaces, and they ſhall be no where.

5. Wee aboliſh not the doctrine concerning the communicating of properties of both natures. Anſ. Yea, but they endeavour it: For they apply thoſe properties of his divine nature, which are affirmed of the whole perſon in the concrete, to both natures. I will be with you to the end of the world: This they underſtand 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 God-head of Chriſt was circumciſed as well as his fleſh. Repl. This only we adde, That thoſe articles belong not unto them. Anſ. After this ſort all ſects may ſhift off all teſtimonies of Scriptures. But they belong hither, and that by a double right: 1. Becauſe they are written of the body of Chriſt: But the body of Chriſt belongeth to the Supper: Therefore theſe articles alſo belong hither, for they ſhew how Chriſts body is to be eaten. 2. They belong hither, becauſe no article of faith is at variance with another. So belongeth hither alſo the doctrine of Juſtification, becauſe in the Supper no other juſtice or righteouſneſſe is to be ſought for, but by the bloud of Chriſt.

6. The manner how we eat it is not to be defined. Anſ. They commit a double fault in ſo ſaying: 1. When they deny that the manner is to be defined, and ſo contradict and gainſay the Scripture, which defineth it, and ſheweth that it is ſpirituall, and that there is wrought an union with Chriſt by faith, through the holy Ghoſt. 2. They themſelves define the manner, as it cleerly appeareth by their writing.

7. The ſaying of Durandus is true: We hear the words; wee perceive the motions; we know not the manner; we beleeve the preſence. Anſ. Durandus maketh nought either for you, or againſt us, or for himſelf, becauſe he was a Papiſt. And again, if his ſaying be rightly underſtood, we may admit it: We hear the words, This is my body; not that we eat with our mouth the body of Chriſt in the bread. We perceive the motions: that is, we perceive the bread to enter into our mouth, not the body of Chriſt. Wee know not the manner: that is, not perfectly, to wit, after what manner the holy p. 477Ghoſt is every where whole in Chriſt, and in all the Saints, and how he uniteth us in Chriſt. We beleeve the preſence: namely, ſuch as is the eating, and as is the union of the members and in the head.

8. Wee teach this only, That the body and bloud of Chriſt, is truly, ſubſtantially, and naturally exhibited. Wee grant that wee eate the true body of Chriſt. So then is their diſputation vaine and frivolous: 1. Becauſe they confeſſe that wee are made partakers of the true body of Chriſt, and that wee muſt not queſtion of the manner, for this wee grant. 2. Becauſe the reaſons and refutation which they bring, are of no weight or moment.

Certain reaſons whereby is proved, That the body of Chriſt is not preſent, either In, or Ʋnder, or At the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporally eaten Ʋnder, With, In, or At the bread.

1. BEcauſe hee took a true humane nature. Whereupon we adde alſo, that we cannot eate him otherwiſe than his diſciples did in the firſt Supper. 2. Hee truely aſcended out of earth into heaven. 3. Such is our eating of him, as his abiding is in us. 4. All the Saints of the Old and New Teſtament have the ſame union with Chriſt. 5. Chriſt onelyonly is able to offer himſelf unto the Father. Now it is neceſſary in the uſe of the Supper, to crave of God remiſſion of ſins. Wherefore, if he be preſent at the bread, we muſt crave of him, and ſo we offer the bread. But in the New Teſtament it is not lawfull to direct our prayer to any certain place. 6. The bleſsings which are promiſed unto the godly only, are ſpirituall. Unto theſe and other fore-alledged reaſons cometh the conſent of the ancient Fathers, Ambroſe, Athanaſius, Auſtine, Baſil, Bede, Bertram, Chryſoſtome, Clement Alexandrinus, the Councell of Nice, Cyprian, Cyril, Denis, Gelaſius, Gregorie the Great, Gregorie Nazianzene, Heſichius, Hierom, Hilary, Irenaeus, Juſtine, Leo, Macarius, Origen, Procopius, Gaza, Tertullian, and ſo forth.

THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION.

Arguments, whereby the opinion of the Ʋbiquitaries is refelled, and the truth of ſound doctrine confirmed.

THE FIRST ARGUMENT.

THE Marcionites and Manichees imagined that Christ had not a true and ſolid body, but onelyonly made ſhew of the ſhape of a body, ſo that hee ſeemed onelyonly to have fleſh and bones, whereas indeed hee had them not. And further, that the very incarnation, and all the motions and operations of Chriſt, did but onelyonly ſeeme ſo in outward appearance, whereas in the truth of the thing there was no ſuch thing done. Now the opinion of the Ʋbiquity, and of the reall communicating of the properties of both natures, doth raiſe againe from hell that fantasticall dotary and frenſie of thoſe heretickes. Therefore it is no leſſe to be abandoned and baniſhed out of the Church to hell, than that hereſie of the Manichees. That this opinion of Ubiquity doth give life againe to the former, wee prove. The Ubiquitaries are of opinion, and ſo teach, that all the properties of the God-head were preſently, from the very point of Chriſts conception, really effuſed from the God-head of the Word into the humane nature which Chriſt took. Hence theſe abſurdities will follow: 1. Christ ſhall not be truly born of the Virgin, if as touching the nature of his humanity, hee was truly and eſſentially without the wombe of his Mother before hee was born; and after hee was born hee remained no leſſe truly and ſubſtantially, as touching his humanity, in that ſelfe ſame womb, than before. 2. Chriſt was not truly weak in his humane nature, and ſubject to paſsions, if hee were then alſo as touching the ſame nature partaker of the divine majeſty and omnipotency. 3. Hee was not truly dead, if alſo in the time of his death, as touching his ſoul and body, hee were eſſentially preſent every where together with his God-head: For, the ſoul being every where preſent, could not be really ſeparated, in p. 478diſtance of places from the body, which alſo ſhould be every-where preſent, and ſo neither could the body die, but onelyonly in outward appearance and imagination. 4. Hee aſcended not truly into heaven: but it ſhall be ſaid to have been onelyonly a vaine and imaginarie, and fantaſticall ſpectacle, if he were in his body ſubſtantially there, before he viſibly aſcended thither: and after he was aſcended thither, he remained yet in the ſubſtantiall preſence of the ſame body, no leſſe truly than before on the earth, yea, & in the very bodies alſo of the faithfull. If theſe things ſo fell out in the truth of the thing; it will follow that the ſame body of Chriſt was indeed at once and together, both weak and omnipotent, baſe and glorious, ſubject to ſufferings, and not ſubject, dead and alive, limited and unlimited; which is horrible to affirm. For avoiding therefore of theſe prodigious and impious abſurdities, they will except, that hee was not as touching his body, otherwiſe than limited, weak ſubject to paſsions, and mortall in the time of his humiliation; becauſe hee had debaſed himſelf, and would not ſhew forth that Majesty, communicated unto his body, before his reſurrection. Anſ. They interpret amiſſe that debaſing of himſelf, of all the glory and Majeſty of his humanity hidden and kept cloſe for a time: whereas it is to be underſtood in reſpect of the Divinity of the Word, in that he would take the forme of a ſervant, that is, the maſſe of our nature, and become man. Moreover, it will follow that Chriſt did ſhew forth the communicated power and Majeſtie of his fleſh, even then, when he was indeed weak and limited, or circumſcribed in body: as when, ſhedding tears, he raiſed Lazarus from the dead, and when being apprehended by the Jews, he healed Malcus, whom Peter wounded. Now, what is it elſe to raiſe the Marcionites up againe from hell, or in the greateſt matter of all others impiouſly to blaſpheme, if this be not?

The ſecond Argument.

THe blaſphemie of Samoſatenus, Arrius, and the late Anti-trinitaries, is this: That Chriſt-man, is not properly and by nature God, but onelyonly by an accidentall participation of Divine properties, majeſty, honour, power, and vertue. The Ubiquitaries alſo maintaine the ſame conſideration of the God-head of Chriſt-man, while they define the perſonall union by his communicating alone of properties, whereby the fleſh of Christ is made omnipotent and every where. So that now that man is, and is called God; not that hee is properly and by nature God, but becauſe in finite power, majeſty, and glory is given him from God, and all the gifts of the holy Ghost are bestowed on him without meaſure. Now this accidentall beſtowing of the God head and all the properties, doth not make Christ to be properly and by nature God, but only by divine grace, or God unproperly ſo called: becauſe it is not the very eſſentiall God-head of the Word, but a certain participation thereof, in vertue and efficacy. And therefore the ſounder Fathers objected unto the Arrians, that they took away the true and eternall God-head of Chriſt, when they made him a God, not by nature but by grace b participation onelyonly of dignity and majeſty. Therefore, ſeeing the Ʋbiquitaries alſo equalling our Immanuel with God, by participation of properties onelyonly▪ take away his true and eternall God-head, wee doe diſclaime and accurſe this their doctrine as blaſphemous and hereticall. And, that they doe this, their own words and opinions witneſſe; Brentius in recog. p. 20 Anar. Theſ. 10. … p. Tubin. & Theſ 25, 26. and Apol. …agr 29.as Brentius, and Jacobus Andraeas, and others of them in their writings. Whence we conclude, that the Ubiquitaries hold the ſame opinion with the Artians and the Anti-trinitaries, of the God-head of Chriſt-man: that is, that all eſteeme him for God, not by nature but onelyonly by grace of participation, new, temporary, created, adopted. If theſe things be true, Chriſt ſhall not be God and man,Lib. 1. de Trinita. but a divine man, ſuch as the Ubiquitaries repute him, who (as Servetus) hold this opinion: That God can communicate the fulneſſe of his God-head give his divinity, majeſty, power, and glory unto man. But wee execrate and deteſt the ſame blaſphemy of both.

The third Argument.

NEstorius taught, That the union of God the Word with man was wrought by the participation only of equality, as touching majeſty, honour, power, vertue, and operation. p. 479Neither doth hee make the difference of the dwelling of the Word in mans nature, which himſelfe tooke, and in other Saints, to conſiſt in any other thing, than in thoſe gifts and graces beſtowed by God on man. The ſelfe ſame alſo doe the Ʋbiquitaries teach, becauſe they cry that there is no difference between the inhabiting and dwelling of the God head in Peter, and in Chriſt; except it be taken from the communication of the gifts or properties of the God-head: and they contend, that by this meanes, this man, which was taken by the Word, is God, becauſe the Word doth nothing without him, but all things by him. This is nothing elſe, than to make Christ man, onelyonly God by an accident: Wherefore, the doctrine of Ʋbiquity is altogether the ſame with Nestorius his hereſie. Tert. lib. de Trin pag. 6. 10.Tertullian ſaith: If Christ be man onelyonly, how then is he preſent every-where, being called upon and invocated, ſeeing this is not the nature of man, but of God, to be able to be preſent in all places? By this teſtimony is refuted the Ubiquity of the humane nature in Chriſt. Object. But the union of the divine and humane nature in Christ is unſeparable: Therefore whereſoever the divine nature is, there is alſo the humane nature. Anſ. It is true which is ſaid, that the union is unſeparable. The Word never forſaketh the nature once aſſumed and taken. But the Word is not in the humane nature, as the ſoul is included in my body. Whereſoever my body is, there muſt my ſoule needs be; neither is my ſoule at the ſame time without my body. But the Word is not ſo in Chriſt-man: But hee is ſo unſeparably and perſonally in the humane nature, as that he is together alſo without the humane nature in all the parts of the world, as he filleth all; and in holy men and Angels by his ſpeciall preſence. The perſonall union of both natures doth not evert the generall action and working of his preſence and majeſtie; neither doth it let or hinder the ſpeciall working of his preſence: becauſe the Word is effectuall, and worketh forcibly in the regenerate.

The generall points wherein the Churches, which profeſſe the Goſpel, agree or diſagree in the controverſie concerning the Lords Supper.

THey agree in theſe points: 11. That as well the Supper of the Lord, as Baptiſme, is a viſible pledge and teſtimony annexed by Chriſt himſelfe to the promiſe of grace, to this end chiefly, that our faith in this promiſe might be confirmed and ſtrengthened. 22. That in the true uſe of the Supper, as well as in all other Sacraments, two things are given by God unto us, and are received of us, namely, earthly, externall and viſible ſignes, are bread and wine; and beſides theſe, alſo heavenly, internall, and inviſible gifts, as are the true body of Jeſus Chriſt, together with all his gifts and benefits, and heavenly treaſures. 33. That in the Supper we are made partakers not only of the Spirit of Chriſt and his ſatisfaction, juſtice, vertue, and operation; but alſo of the very ſubſtance and eſſence of his true body and bloud, which was given for us to death on the Croſſe, and which was ſhed for us; and are truly fed with the ſelf ſame unto eternall life: and that this very thing Chriſt ſhould teach, and make known unto us by this viſible receiving of this bread and wine in this Supper. 44. That the bread and wine are not changed into the fleſh and bloud of Chriſt, but remain true and naturall bread and wine: that alſo the body and bloud of Chriſt are not ſhut up in the bread and wine; and therefore the bread and wine are called the body of Chriſt, his body and bloud, in this ſenſe; for that his body and bloud are not only ſignified by theſe, and ſet before our eies, but alſo becauſe as often as we eat or drink this bread and wine, in the true and right uſe, Chriſt himſelf giveth us his body and bloud indeed to be the meat and drink of eternall life. 55. That without the right uſe, this receiving of bread and wine is no Sacrament; neither any thing, but an emptie and vaine ceremony and ſpectacle, and ſuch as men abuſe to their owne damnation. 66. That there is no other true and lawfull uſe of the Supper, beſides that which Chriſt himſelf hath inſtituted and commanded to be ketp, namely, this; that this bread and this wine be eaten and drunken in remembrance of him, and to ſhew forth his death. 77. That Chriſt in his Supper doth not command and require a diſſembled and hypocriticall remembrance of him, and publiſhing of his death; but ſuch as imbraceth his Paſſion and death, p. 480and all his benefits obtained by theſe for us, by a true and lively faith, and with earneſt and ardent thankfulneſſe, and applieth them unto thoſe which eat and drinke, as proper unto them. 88. That Chriſt will dwell in beleevers only, and in them, who not through contempt, but through neceſſity, cannot come to the Lords Supper, yea, in all beleevers, even from the beginning of the world, to all eternitie, even as well, and after the ſame manner, as he will dwell in them, who came unto the Lords Supper.

They diſagree in theſe points:

1 THat one part contendeth, that theſe words of Chriſt, This is my body, muſt be underſtood, as the wordes ſound, which yet that part it ſelfe doth not prove: but the other part, that thoſe words muſt be underſtood ſacramentally, according to the declaration of Chriſt and Paul, according to the moſt certain and infallible rule and levell of the Articles of our Chriſtian faith. 2. That one part will have the body and bloud of Chriſt to be eſſentially In, or With the bread and the wine, and ſo be eaten, as that together with the bread and the wine, out of the hand of the Miniſter, it entreth by the mouth of the receivers into their bodies: but the other part will have the body of Chriſt, which in the firſt Supper ſate at the table by the Diſciples, now to be and continue, not here on earth, but above in the heavens above and without this viſible world and heaven, untill he deſcend thence again to judgement, and yet that we notwithſtanding here on earth, as oft as we eat this bread with a true faith, are ſo fed with his body, and made to drink of his bloud, that not only through his paſſion and bloud ſhed, we are cleanſed from our ſins; but are alſo in ſuch ſort coupled, knit, and incorporated into his true, eſſentiall, humane body, by his Spirit dwelling both in him and us, that we are fleſh of his fleſh, and bone of his bones; and are more neerly and firmely knit and united with him, than the members of our body are united with our head, and ſo we draw and have in him and from him everlaſting life. 3. That one part will have all, whoſoever come to the Lords Supper, and eat and drink that bread and wine, whether they be beleevers, or unbeleevers, to eat and drink corporally, and with their bodily mouth the fleſh and bloud of Chriſt: beleevers to life and ſalvation; unbeleevers to damnation and death: the other holdeth, that unbeleevers abuſe indeed the outward ſignes, bread and wine, to their damnation, but that the faithfull only can eat and drink by a true faith, and the fore-alledged working of the holy Ghoſt, the body and bloud of Chriſt unto eternall life.

Queſt. 83. What are the keyes of the Kingdome of heaven?

ON THE 31. SABBATH.Anſ. Preaching of the Goſpel, and Eccleſiaſticall diſcipline: by which heaven is opened to the beleevers, and is ſhut againſt the unbeleevers.

Queſt. 84. How is the Kingdome of heaven opened and ſhut by the preaching of the Goſpel?

Anſw. When by the commandement of Chriſt it is publikely declared to all and every one of the faithfull, that all their ſins are pardoned them of God, for the merit of Chriſt, ſo often as they imbrace by a lively faith the promiſe of the Goſpel: but contrarily is denounced to all Infidels and Hypocrites, that ſo long the wrath of God and everlaſting damnation doth lie on them, as they perſiſt in their wickedneſſeaaJohn 20.21, 22 23. Mat. 16.19.John 20:21John 20:22Matt 16:19: according to which teſtimony of the Goſpel, God will judge them, as well in this life, as in the life to come.