Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 1 · Part 19
Hesk.The ninteenth Chapter continueth the proofe of the same matter by S. Augustine, & S. Cyrill.
Fulk.M. Heskins promiseth in his Epistle, and gloryeth often in his worke, that he doth not alledge the doctors wordes truncately, & by peece meale, as heretikes do. But you shal see how well he handleth him selfe. He would hauehave S. Augustine speake for his bil, and alledgeth his words out of his worke. contrae literas Petiliani, quoting neither what booke nor what Chapter of the same, by which it seemeth that either he red not the place him self out of Augustine, but receiued it of some gatherer, or else hee would cloake his vnhonest dealing. Hee citeth it thus: Aliud est Pascha quod adhuc Iudaei celebrant de Oue: Aliud autē quod nos in corpore & sanguine domini celebranus. It is another Passouer that the Iewes do yet celebrate with a sheepe, another, that wee do celebrate in the bodie & bloud of Christ. But Augustines wordes, not truncately and by peece meale rehearsed nor altered are these: Contrae literas Petiliani lib. 2. Cap. …7. Sed sicut aliud est carnis circumcisio Iudeorum, aliud autem quod octauo die baptizatorum nos celebratius: et aliud est Pascha quod adhuc illi de Oue celebrant, aliud autem quod nos in corpore & sanguine domini accipimus: sic alius fuit baptismus Ioannis, alius est baptismus Christi, illis enim ventura ista praemanciabantur: istis completa illa praedicantur. But euen as the circumcision of the fleshe of the Iewes is one thing, and that which wee do celebrate the eyght day of them that are baptized is another thing: and the Passeouer whiche they do yet celebrate of a sheepe is one thing, and that which wee receiue in the bodie and bloud of the Lorde is another thing. So the baptisme of Iohn was one, and the baptisme of Christe is another: for by those things these things were foreshewed to come: by these, those things are preached to be accomplished.
First, the supper is not made here another Passeouer but another thing, that is, an other sacrament. Secondly here is declared, howe the sacraments of the old lawe, differ from ours of the newe Testament, not in substance, which is all one in both, but that they were signes of things to come, ours are signes of things accomplished. Which thing hee teacheth often, and in this Chapter moste plainly. Lex & Prophetae, &c. The lawe and the Prophetes had Sacraments, foreshewing the things to come: but the Sacraments of oure time do testifie that to bee come, which they did preache that it should come.
And in Ioan. Tract. 28. hee sayeth, that the Sacraments of the olde testament and the newe, in signis diuersa sunt, in re quae significatur paria. In visible kindes, diuerse, but aequall in spirituall vertue. By which, and a hundreth such places, it is manifest to be ouerthrowen, which M. Heskins would buylde, that Christ spiritually receiued, is not our Pascall lambe, but that we receiue another substance of Christe, then the faithfull did in the olde Testament. The seconde place he citeth out of Augustine, I marueile he could not see it to be as plaine against him as the first. cont. Faust. Man. lib. 20. Cap. 18. The Hebrues in the sacrifices of beastes, which they did offer to God many and diuerse wayes, as for so great a matter it was meete, did celebrate a Prophesie of the sacrifice to come, which Christ hath offered. Wherefore nowe the Christians do celebrate the memorie of the same sacrifice being accomplished by the holie oblation and by the participation of the bodie and bloud of Christ. In this sentence is manifestly declared, the same difference we spake of before of the Iewishe sacraments, and of our sacraments, the one being a Prophesie of Christes sacrifice to come, the other, a remembrance of the same beeing past, and fulfilled.
And whereas M. Heskins vrgeth the worde oblation, to exclude ye spirituall eating, he doth verie ridiculously, as though there might not be as wel a spiritual oblation, as a spirituall participation, especially when the author shewing what we do in oblation and participatiō, sayeth, we so celebrate the memorie of Christes sacrifice alredie fulfilled. Therefore, this oblation is another from that: namely, a spirituall oblation and thanksgiuing, for that whose memorie it celebrateth, as Augustine most plainly teacheth in the same booke, Cap. 21. Sed quid agam & tantae caecitati istorum Hęreticorum, quando demonstrabo quam vim habeat quod in Psalmis canitur: Sacrificium laudis glorificabit me & illie via est vbi ostendam salutare meum? Huius sacrificij caro & sanguis ante aduentum Christi per victimas similitudin…m promittebatur: in passione Christi per ipsum veritatem redd…batur: post ascensum Christi per sacramentum memoriae celebratur. But what shall I do? or when shall I shewe vntounto so great blindnesse of these heretikes, what force that hath which is soung in the Psalmes? The sacrifice of praise shall glorifie mee, and there is the way where I will shewe my saluation. The fleshe and bloud of this sacrifice before the comming of Christ, was promised by sacrifices of similitudes: in the passion of Christ, by the verie trueth it selfe, it was giuen vp: after the ascension of Christ, it is celebrated by the sacrament of remembrance. Iudge by this place, whether Christes bodie be really offered, or whether it be a mathematicall sacrifice, as it pleaseth M. Heskins in his merie vaine to call it. Augustine maketh three kindes of oblation of the fleshe and bloud of Christ: In promise by sacrifices of similitudes, in truth by Christ in his passion, in the sacrament of remēbrance after his death.
Now followeth a long speache of Cyrill, directly against M. Heskins the alledger of it: lib. 4. in Ioan. 6. ca. 14. Nec putet &c. Neither let the Iewe of the dullnesse of his whiche thinke, that we hauehave inuented mysteries neuer heard of before. For he shall see, if he will seeke more diligently, that the verie selfe same thing hath beene done since the times of Moses. For what deliuered their Elders from death, and the destruction of Aegypt, when death raigned vponupon the first borne of Aegypt. Is it not euident to all men, that because they being taught by Gods institution, did eat the flesh of the Lambe, and oynted the postes and vpper doore postes, with the bloud of the Lambe, therfore death departed from them: for destruction, that is death of this fleshe, raged against mankinde for the transgression of the first man. For because of sinne, we hauehave heard: Earth thou art, and into earth thou shalt returne: but for asmuch as Christ by his flesh would ouerthrow that cruell tyrant, therefore that was shadowed by a mystery among the auncient fathers, and they beeing sanctified by the sheepes fleshe and bloud (God so willing) escaped destruction. Therefore ô Iewe, why art thou so troubled, seeing the trueth prefigured long before: Wherefore I say art thou troubled, if Christe saith: except ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, you shall hauehave no life in you, whereas it behoued thee, beeing instructed in the lawes of Moses, and well taught by the olde shadowes to beleeue, to be most ready to vnderstand these mysteries? The shadowe, and the figure thou knowest, therefore learne the very trueth of the thing. My fleshe, saith he, is meate in deede, and my bloud is drinke in deede. In these wordes beside that there is nothing to proue the Pascall Lambe, to be a figure of the Lordes Supper: it is directly said, that the selfe same mysterie of eating the fleshe of Christ, hath ben obserued since the time of Moses: and that there is no cause, why the Iewe should be offended at the saying of Christe, if he would vnderstand the trueth, whereof the Pascall lambe was the figure and shadowe. Which trueth was no mysterie newly inuented, but practised euer since Moses, for not by the fleshe and bloud of the Lambe, but by the flesh and bloud of Christ, the people were deliuered from death. The Lambe was then a sacrament: Christe was then, and euer shall be the trueth: but what neede we more striue, whē M. Heskins confesseth, That the faithfull of the olde Testament did eate the flesh, & drinke the bloud of Christ spiritually, as the Apostle teacheth. 1. Cor. 10. They did all eate the same spirituall meate, &c. And Cyrill saith, We hauehave no newe mysterie, but euen the same that hath beene practised since the time of Moses.