Sermons, Treatise · Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII. Of the Real Preſence.
NOw I draw on to the Anatomy of the viſcera, the entrails and inwards of this Ordinance under the outſide, whereof if you take off the cover, you ſhall finde ſuch cheer as never was in any other feaſt, This is my body (ſaith Chriſt) which is broken for you (ſaith Paul) Which is given for you (ſaithMat. 26 26, 27 28 Mark 14. 22, 24. Luk. 22. 20. Luke) This Cup is the New Testament in my bloud (ſaith Paul) Which is ſhed for you (ſaith Luke;) Or as Matthew and Mark, This is my bloud of the New Teſtament, which is ſhed for many, for remiſsion of ſinnes, ſaith Matthew, which is ſhed for many, ſaith Mark, which is ſhed for you, ſaith Luke. And all theſe together are my Text at this time.
§. 1.
In this Sacrament, Mirificè luſit Satan, ſaith an excellent Authour, Satan hath play'd his pranks, andChamier. de Euchar. l. … c. 1. §. 1. tried concluſions upon Divines, how he could infatuate aad make them mad, ſuch cart-loads of perplexities, alterations, abſurdities, and wilde fancies have they been poſſeſt with in the agitation of this point, and diſcuſſion of theſe very words, which as a ReverendD. Rainolds Medit. Divine ſaith truly, are clear and eaſie to a ſpiritual ear or minde, it is the carnal fancy that perplexes all, and corrupts the Text, which had been clear, if the water had not been muddied with dirty hands: ſo Nicodemus underſtands Chriſt carnally in matter ofJoh. 3. Regeneration, and talks of entring again into our mothers womb: So the Diſciples of Cap…rnaum underſtand that excellent Doctrine of Chriſt, John 6. about eating his fleſh, and drinking his bloud; of the very Cannibal eating of mans fleſh and bloud: The very antidote he gave them would ſerve here, John 6. 63. The words that I ſpeak, they are ſpirit, and they are life, that is, their ſpiritual meaning is lively, and if we could agree on this, then we ſhould give ourHooker. l. 5. p. 359. ſelves more to meditate with ſilence what we have by this Sacrament, and leſſe diſpute the manner how, for this heavenly food is given for ſatisfying empty ſouls, and not exerciſing our curious and ſubtil wits; for it often comes to paſſe, that curious ſifting and diſputingHooker. Eccleſ. Pol. l. 5. p. 364. too boldly chils all warmth of our zeal, and brings ſoundneſſe of belief into great hazzard.
§. 2.
The words have been and are interpreted in divers ſenſes, the moſt notable I have obſerved to be five, IHooker ſpeaking of Ancients, lib. 5. pag. 362. ſay the moſt notable for there are more.
1. That Chriſt is preſent in this Sacrament by his efficacy and power, to realize and exhibit vertue to, and by the Ordinance, Nec ullo modo ſe abſentat divina Majeſtas a Miniſteriis. Cyprian. de Caena, and other Ancients.
2. That Chriſt his very body is preſent with, or in or under the outward elements, as the Conſubſtantiatiſts, or Lutheran ſaith.
3. That Chriſt is really preſent, but modum neſcimus, we know not the manner how, and in this dark ſome of our learned men ſpoke of late, to what intent they beſt knew.
4. That there is a real turning of the ſubſtance of Bread and Wine into the very ſubſtance of Chriſts Body and Bloud. Thus the Papiſts or Tranſubſtantiatiſts.
5. That the Bread and Wine are ſacramentally Chriſts Body and Bloud, or the memorials thereof, ſymbolically repreſenting and exhibiting to the faithfull Chriſtians, himſelf, and ſo ſay We.
§. 3.
And yet all parties in their difference profeſſe themſelves clear, and that they follow the true, naked and literal ſenſe in their judgement. Chemnitius that learnedExamen de Eucbar. p. 65. Col. 1. Luther an profeſſes, That he imbraceth that ſenſe which holds the true and ſubſtantial preſence of Chriſt in the Supper, which the words in their proper, and genuine, and uſual ſignification hold forth. The Papiſt profeſſes, That he hath the very plain letter of the words, and the ſenſe literal; So farre as Lapide, I know not whether with more confidence or impudence ſaith, That if God ask him at the day of Judgement, why he held ſo, he will confidently ſay, Tu docuiſti, Thou haſt taught me. We are as clear,Vide Lee in Annot. in loc. that we follow the true proper literal ſenſe, and that ſaith a learned man, Upon my ſoul, there is no ſuch D. Jo. Burgeſſe, Kneeling at Sacram…nt. p. 113.turning of the Bread into Chriſts Body, as the Papiſt affirms.
§. 4 §. 4. This is my Body.
I ſhall open the words ſeverally, This is my Body, about which there is the greateſt heat and quarrel.
In the Rite of the Paſchal Supper, when the breadCameron. Myr…thec. in Mat. 26. Sc…iger. de Emend lib. 6. pag. 536. was given, there was a ſolemn ſignification put upon it, This is the bread of affliction, and our Saviour transferring that bread into his Supper, gave a new ſignification, This is my body; In the firſt Rite there was no turning the ſubſtance of bread, nor yet in this ſecond.Mouliu Bucklet p. 471.
For our clearer underſtanding, we muſt conſtantly hold theſe two things:
1. That Christ gave bread.
2. That this bread was his body.
Firſt, Chriſt gave bread to his Diſciples at this Supper; for that which he took, which he bleſt, which he brake, was bread, He took bread, and that he gave, ſaying, This is my body which is broken for you; for the bread was broken as a ſigne that his body ſhould be crucified, and bread the Apoſtle cals it after conſecration, thrice in this Chapter, verſ. 26, 27, 28. and 1 Cor. 10. 16. The bread which we break, and ver. 17. We are all partakers of that one bread, and he cals it ſo, not becauſe it was bread before, for he might ſo have called it wheat; a man might be called a boy, ripe wine verjuice, but becauſe it is ſo, except all our ſenſes be put out and extinguiſht with the bread.
Secondly, This bread is Chriſts body; What body? Even his own natural body, which is given for you, Luk. 22. 19. which is broken for you, as in my Text; What bloud? Even that which is ſhed for you, Matth. 26. 28. Luke 22. …0. But how can this be, it's impoſſible that bread while it is bread, as we have proved it is, ſhould be Chriſts body, or wine, while it's wine, ſhould be his bloud? It's very true, that it is impoſſible, Diſparatum de diſparato non proprium praedicatur, therefore we muſt ſeek for a poſſibleCalvin. in 1 Cor. 11. meaning, and of neceſſity conclude with Calvin, Sacramentalem eſſe loquutionem, that it is a ſacramental form of ſpeech, the ſigne bears the name of the thing ſignified, as in vulgar, and in Scripture language, for in Scripture both ſigns figuratively repreſenting, or ſacramentally ſealing, do bear the name of the things repreſented or ſealed, as …en. 40. 12. The three branches are three dayes, verſ. 18. The three baskets are three dayes, Gen. 41. 26. The ſeven ears of corn are ſeven years; the ſeven kine are ſeven years. Ezek. 37. 11. Theſe dry bones are the whole houſe of Iſrael. Dan. 2. 38. Thou, O King, art this head of gold, Dan. 7. 17. The four beaſts are four Kings. Gal. 4. 25. This Agar is mount Sinai. Revel. 17. 9. The ſeven heads are ſeven mountains: So in ſacramentals, Circumciſion is called the Covenant, Gen 17. 13. And a token of the Covenant, v. 11. And a ſeal of the righteouſnes of Faith, Rom. 4. 11. The Lamb is called the Paſſeover, Exod. 12. 21. The Rock was Chriſt, 1 Cor. 10. 4. and in this Sacrament, This Cup is the New-Testament; What ſhall we require further, the form of ſpeech is plain, a childe may underſtand it? And it is without example in all Scripture, that the ſigne ſhould be, or be changed into the ſubſtance of the thing ſignified; and which is further to be ſaid, The Hebrew Tongue, or the Syriack, in which Chriſt ſpake doth not uſe in this form of ſpeech any copula of ſubject and predicate, either is, or ſignifieth but ſometimes, and not alwayes a Pronoun, as in theſe places by me cited in the Old Teſtament; There is no [is] nor other Verb, but thus the ſeven ears of corn, they ſeven years, the four beaſts, four Kings, which whenCameron. Myrothec. in Mat. 26. Moulin. Buckler p. 478. they come to be tranſlated into Greek or Latine, then the idiome of the language requires it, and ſaith [is] The Rock was Chriſt, and ſo in the preſent caſe, Hoo lach ma, this bread of affliction, that is, This is the bread of affliction.
§. 5 §. 5. This Cup is the New Teſtament in my bloud.
I proceed to the next part, This Cup is the New Testament in my bloud; or, This is the bloud of the New Teſtament, where the contenders are a little cooler, and muſt perforce allow a Trope or figurative ſpeech; for the Cup ſure is not changed into a Covenant or Teſtament, nor the bloud of Chriſt neither, nor the wine; The cup is not put for the bloud of Chriſt, for then it would be thus, This bloud is the New Teſtament in my bloud, a pure non ſenſe, that Papiſts cannot ſalve without invention of two blouds, but the cup is put for the wine; This wine is the New Teſtament foreign, ratified in my bloud; The wine repreſents, and by repreſentation is the very bloud of Chriſt, which confirms and ratifies, Gods Goſpel-covenant, or the New Teſtament, bequeathing to believers the Legacy of remiſſion of ſinnes in Chriſt, for that Chriſt gave wine, and not very bloud in the cup, is that which Matthew and Mark ſay, Matth. 26. 29. Mark 14. 25. I will drink no more of the fruit of the Vine; Peri Haggephen, was the word ſignantly uſedStegman. disp. 51. p. 593. for wine in the Paſchal Rite, The fruit of the vine. That Climax and Gradation of Luther is pleaſant, The Cup contains the wine, the wine exhibits the bloud of Chriſt, the bloud of Chriſt ratifies and confirms the New Covenant, the New Covenant promiſeth remiſsion of ſinnes: Therefore the drinking of this Cup, applies, ſeals, confirms to believers the promiſe of remiſsion of ſinnes; And the alluſion is excellent, asCameron in Mat. 26. 27. the Apoſtle obſerves, Heb. 9. 20. out of Exod. 24. 8. that Moſes ſaid, This is the bloud of the Covenant which God hath enjoyned you; for all covenant with man fallen is ſealed with bloud, that, under the Law with typical bloud, this, of the Goſpel by the very bloud of Chriſt; For without bloud is no remiſsion, Heb. 9. 22. And of this Covenant-confirming bloud of Chriſt, this wine is the lively repreſentation or memorial.
The particulars thus caſt up, are ſumm'd up into this total, as the ſenſe and meaning of this Ordinance:
§. 6.
Firſt, This bread is my body, this wine is my bloud, as repreſentations and memorials of my body broken, and my bloud ſhed, figuring and ſignifying my death and ſuffering for you, but this is not all, for God doth not feed us with empty ſhows and void figures onelyonly repreſenting, as the footſtep in the ſnow the foot, or the picture of Hercules repreſents Hercules; This would bring the Sacrament to a Socinian emptineſſe, as a matter of our duty onelyonly, not as of Gods conferring any benefit upon us; This is more like the Signe of a Shop, than the Seal of a Deed, and would rather ſerve the eye, than refreſh the ſoul by eating and drinking, as meat and drink. Therefore.
Secondly, This Bread is my Body, This Cup is theCalvin. in 1 Cor. 11. New Teſtament in my bloud, as Pledges, Seals and inſtrumental means of exhibition, ſolemnlyPe…. Martyr. ibid. H…aker. Eccleſ. Pola. p. 359. Paraeus in 1 Cor. 11. conveying, though ſymbolically to the faith of a beleever, Chriſt himſelf, for union and communion, and the benefits of his death, remiſſion of finnes; as the pledge confirms the contract, the Seal paſſeth or conveyeth the eſtate, by which we are as truly partakers of Chriſt Jeſus, if we receive by faith, as we are partakers of bread and wine for nouriſhment; this is a high ſignification and uſe, it's full, and rich, and comfortable, and this I prove by that of the Apoſtle, wherein I reſt as a full explication of the phraſe in hand, 1 Cor. 10. 16. The Cup of bleſsing which we bleſſe, Is it not the Communion of the bloud of Chriſt? The bread which we break, Is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? Here is Participation, Communion; and he ſaith, Is it not, Is it not? As a known and received truth amongſt Chriſtians, and with this I content my ſelfe, as cleare and full againſt all contenders and gainſayers.
As for the Ancients, I referre you to a whole Parliament of them, called together, and voting down Tranſubſtantiation. Crakanthorpe Defenſ. cap. 73. againſt that unhappy man, the Arch-Biſhop of Spalato, who had before his laſt revolt ſaid, Omnes Patres, All the Fathers are againſt the Real Preſence, but he unſaid it again afterward to hisJuſtin. Apol. 2. loſſe. Juſtin Martyr cals the bread foreign, Bread over which thanks were given. Irenaeus the very ſame. Tertullian and Origen prove, ThatTertul. l. 4. contra Marc. …. 40. Origen. Chriſt had a true body, againſt the Phantaſticks, becauſe the bread is a figure and ſigne of a true body. Hierom cals it a repreſentation; and Auſtin isGreek Fathers call them foreign Dionyſius. Baſilius. Theodores. totus Calvinianus in the point: There are rhetoricall flouriſhes, hyperbolies, and high expreſſions ſometimes to procure honour to the Ordinance, or quicken up the Communicants, but in judgement they are with us, Crakantherp Defenſ. cap. 73. §. 30. foreign lingua foreign, Chry. hom. 82. in Matth. ſanguinem ſugimus Cyp. de caena, and ſuch hyperbolies, &c.
So much be ſpoken for the explication of the words, which are ſo ravelled and perplexed by contrary ſenſes.