The Right Administration and Receiving of the Lords Supper, Treatise · Chapter 10
CHAP. X. A four-fold Exhortation from the premiſes.
FRom what hath been ſaid upon this point, I would poſſeſs you with four things.
§. 1 I. That you hold faſt and ſtick to the true ſenſe and right meaning of theſe words, This is my Body. This is the Blood of the New Teſtament, which hath been ſo perplexed and depraved by ſuperſtition, and the vanity of humane inventions, eſpecially ſince the riſe of the Schoolmen, whoſe itch of Diſputation hath bred ſuch a ſcab, that there hath been left no ſoundneſs in the place, which hath been tortured with ſuch Convulſions, Diſtortions and Abſurdities, that the ſenſe, which to a chaſt and ſimple ear is eaſie and ſmooth, hath been raveld into knots inextricable; and this Text of all other hath ſuffered infinite injuries, and been made the ſtage of impudent fooleries, which have brought and buried out of ſight the true meaning of them, and made our Saviour that Uſed to ſpeak vulgarly and eaſily, to delude the ſenſes, amUſe the Reaſon, nonplus the faith of ſober Beleevers. And though it be truly ſaid, The ſenſe of Scripture is the Scripture, and that the right underſtanding of theſe words, carries you in a right line, to the nature, Uſe and benefit of this Or inance, yet let me ſay this more to you as Engliſh men, That the true meaning of them hath been conveyed to you by the blood of your own Martyrs, who in Q Mary her daies, were moſt of them put to the teſt upon the point of Reall preſence of Chriſt in the Sacrament, and bare witneſs againſt it, and I do beleeve that if Popery do ever make another attempt upon you, it will play upon you with his battery at this place.
§. 2. Extreams about Chriſts Reall preſence, and the middle way held by the Churches of our Profeſsion.
§. 2 The Churches of our Confeſſion have warily and juſtly avoided the extreams on both ſides.
1. The firſt extream is that which ſome did fear in Zuinglius and others at firſt, and yet is unjuſtly charged upon us by many, viz. That the Sacraments are foreign, naked ſignes, empty figures and ſhadows, meerly repreſenting the death of Chriſt, as the Picture of Hercules reſembles and repreſents Hercules, which we diſclaim, and leave it to Socinianizing ſpirits, and other Levellers of Divinity; for we are taught that Sacramentall ſignes are more than meer repreſenting ſignes, being Seals which do confirm and make over unto us the ſpirituall benefit which they repreſent and exhibit, alſo they are ſigns which God commands us to Uſe, and in their right Uſe he conferres upon us the benefit, as the Seal paſſes a Right to the Eſtate promiſed and conveyed, as the Apoſtle ſaith, Rom. 4. 11. He received the ſign of circumciſion, a ſeal of the righteouſneſs of faith, and 1 Cor. 10. 16. The cup of bleſsing which we bleſs, is it not the communion of the blood of Chriſt; The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Chriſt? not repreſentation only, but communion or participation alſo; for the picture of a loaf of bread feeds not the hungry, nor doth the Ivy-buſh refreſh the weary, and therefore there is not only a repreſentation of the body of Chriſt broken, by the breaking of the bread, but Take and eat and drink, which denotes participation of the body and blood of Chriſt.
2. The other extream is twofold: 1. That the very body and blood of Chriſt is, as it were, moulded up with the bread and wine, or hidden under them, which is the ſenſe of the Conſubſtantiatiſts or Lutheran Churches; and this, though it be too groſs an opinion, yet is not liable to ſo many monſters, and incompreſenſible abſurdities as the other, which is, 2. That the bread and wine ceaſe to be, and are evoided, being turned or change, the ſubſtance of them into the very ſubſtance of the fleſh and blood of Chriſt, which is hidden under the ſpecies or outward accidents of bread and wine, a monſtrous Paradox, holden ſtifly by the Tranſubſtantiatiſts or Papiſts.
The middle way holden by the Churches of our Confeſſion, is, That the outward Elements do repreſent as Signes and exhibit as Seales and morall Inſtruments to the faith of the receiver, the very Body and Blood of Chriſt ſacrificed, as ſpirituall repaſt for our ſouls and ſpiritually given and taken, but that they continue not as incorporated with them, nor are converted into the very naturall Body of Chriſt, as locally or corporally, there to be received by the mouth of the receiver.
We hold a difference or change of bread and wine bleſſed, but it is a change of ſignification not of ſubſtance, a relative change, not reall, a change in regard of Uſe and eſteem, not of their naturall ſubſtance, as the wax, now a Seal to a Conveyance is wax ſtill, but not a Seal, not of that value till now; all the Rhetoricall flowers Uſed by the Ancients reach no further, if they do, we cannot keep them company: We hold that the Body and Blood of Chriſt is really, that is, truly exhibited and preſent to the faith of the receiver; and we might expreſs the reall preſence, as reall is oppoſed to imaginary or chimericall, were it not for caption and miſ-underſtanding; none of ours denies the Body of Chriſt to be really, though ſpiritually eaten by a Beleever; nay it is immotum axioma, whatſoever is eaten, in that it is Forbes p. 53….eaten, it muſt be preſent; no man can eat a thing that's abſent, but the preſence with or under the Elements is one thing, and the preſence to the ſoul and faith of a Beleever is another: We know no union of Chriſts Body with bread and Wine, but with his members, which is reall and myſticall, not reall and corporall; therefore Chriſt ſaith, Take eat, before he ſay, This is my Body, as if it were his Body to their faith, not as in the outward Element.
§. 3. Arguments for the Proteſtants ſenſe of the words, This is my Body.
§. 3 For atteſtation of this ſenſe, many Arguments may be muſtred up together.
1. Compare one part of this Sacrament with the other: This cup is the New Teſtament in my Blood, that is by Metonymy, the Seal of the New Teſtament, but not the New Teſtament it ſelf: ſo, This is my Body, that is the Signe and Seal of it, but not it ſelf.
2. Compare the one Sacrament of the Goſpel with the other: In Baptiſm the water is water without reall alteration, ſo here the bread is bread, the wine is wine, not changed into fleſh or blood.
3. Compare the Sacraments of the Old Teſtament with the New: Circumciſion is the Covenant becaUſe the Sign or Seal of it, the Lamb is the Paſſeover becaUſe the memoriall or ſign of it, ſo the bread is my Body, the wine is my Blood in the ſame form of ſpeech.
4. The Language in which our Saviour ſpake, had no other property of expreſſion, there being no word for [ſignifie] but [is] in ſtead thereof, as Learned men ſay; and its certain the Scripture in both Teſtaments, Hebrew and Greek, Uſes the ſame form in a hundred places, giving the name of the thing ſignified to the ſign, as hath been ſhown, as the ſeven ears of corn are ſeven years. The dry bones are the hoUſe of Iſrael. The ſeven Candleſticks are ſeven Churches, &c.
5. The words, This is my Body, are not proper in the Lutheran ſenſe, no more than to ſay, This Cloak is Peter, becaUſe Peter is in it: nor in the Popiſh ſenſe, except the Body of Chriſt be there before the words be pronounced, This is my Body, which ſhould rather be thus, Let this be my Body; as God ſaid, Let there be light, not This is light, for it was not light before.
6. The ſpirituall benefit which is eating and drinking Chriſts Body and Blood by faith, is no leſs in our ſenſe, than if there were his very fleſh, for Chriſt ſaith, The fleſh profits nothing, Joh. 6. and the Papiſts hold that the eating of Chriſts fleſh by wicked men profits nothing, except beſides the Sacramentall, there be a ſpirituall feeding upon Chriſt, which we affirm.
7. The Apoſtles underſtood theſe words as we do, and as the Hebrews had ever underſtood the ſame expreſſion for form in the Old Teſtament, elſe they would have been amazed and ſtartled at it, and have asked ſome Queſtion as they were inquifitive enough in leſſer matters, but they ſaw Chriſt fit at table, and eat and drink firſt himſelf, and therefore could not be ignorant of their meaning.
8. The Capernaite Diſciples, Joh. 6. having taken offence at thoſe frequent expreſſions of eating Chriſts fleſh and drinking his blood, underſtanding them carnally, were anſwered by Chriſt himſelf, The fleſh profits nothing, The words that I ſpeak are ſpirit and life, as if he himſelf would give the interpretation.
9. The Apoſtle thrice in this Chapter following cals it ſtill bread after conſecration, as alſo in the Chapter foregoing, and ſurely he that never before did, would not delude the ſenſes of his Diſciples in this Ordinance; and himſelf cals it wine too, Matth. 26. 26. I will not henceforth drink of this fruit of the Vine, which is the Periphraſis uſuall among the Jews for wine.
10. The remembrance of Chriſt, the ſhewing forth his death till he come, do import the abſence of his Body, which the Scripture tels us, aſcended into heaven and there is contained, in lieu of his corporall abſence he ſent the Spirit to abide for ever as another Comforter: Memorials and monuments are of things abſent.
11. For the Ancient Fathers they prove againſt the Marcionites, that held the Body of Chriſt to be meerly phantaſticall, That it is ſubſtantiall, becaUſe the Elements of bread and wine are ſubſtantiall, which was no good argument, if only the accidents or ſhadows of the Elements do remain; and all along downwards they call the outward Elements, ſymbols, Forbes p. 561.types, figures, ſignes of Chriſts Body, untill about the year 1215. when ſubtill and ſuperſtitious Diſputes grew hot about the preſence of Chriſt in the Sacrament, which occaſioned Innocent the third to introduce both name of Tranſubſtantiation and thing, not before openly heard of, and ſo as a Decree of the Lateran Council, vented it as a point of faith, ſince which time the Councill of Trent hath confirmed Seſſ 13. ca. 4.the Decree, and the word, as moſt fit and proper, which are the rotten, yet the beſt props upon which Tranſubſtantiation doth ſtand at this day, being upon the firſt birth of it, as I ſaid even now, oppoſed Forbes p. 609 col 1.by the Waldenſes, and afterward by Wicliff, and thoſe that followed them, and ſhall be oppoſed by all Orthodox, till that Dagon fall.
§. 4. Why the Error of Tranſubſtantiation is to be rejected with utmoſt deteſtation.
§. 4 II. To reject with utmoſt deteſtation the impoſſible and incomprehenſible Errour of Tranſubſtantiation, and corporall preſence, by which Doctrine a ſilly Prieſt doth that which all the Angels cannot do, and that is, Make his Maker, as they call the Hoſt; and people do devour their God, and yet they juſtifie it by Gods omnipotency, that God is able to effect it, which is no better an argument than the Turks may juſtifie moſt of the fooleries of their Alcoran. There are two grounds for the rejection of this abomination.
1. The Idolatry and Sacriledge which doth enſue upon it, and that is the adoration and worſhip of the Hoſt, a piece of bread, and the mutilation or maiming of the Sacrament by bread only, and the propitiatory Sacrifice of Chriſt himſelf in the Maſs, who was once only offered up to God upon the Croſs, all which are the iſſue of this Errour.
2. The monſters of contradiction and abſurdity to ſenſe and Reaſon which follow thereupon. It was begotten by feigned miracles and fabulous Legends, and is the mother of blaſphemies and inextricable abſurdities, which ſet faith it ſelf on the rack, and which though they would ſeem eaſily to blow away, yet by their ſtragling it appears they ſtrive with that they cannot maſter. The point of Conſubſtantiation hath brought forth a grand abſurdity, maintained by ſome Pſendo▪ Lutherans, the Ubiquity of Chriſts Body in all places.
But this of Tranſubſtantiation ſurpaſſes all, as I ſhew thus,
1. Suppoſe Chriſt ſitting at the table with his Diſciples, and eating this bread and drinking this cup firſt, as the cuſtom at the Paſchall Supper was, and as the Papiſts generally, and the Fathers hold, and we deny not, becaUſe the Scripture ſeems plain for it, foreign, Matth. 26. 19. Henceforth I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine; ſuppoſing, I ſay, this, How is it poſſible or imaginable that he ſhould eat himſelf? or how can he ſit at table, and yet be in the mouths of his Apoſtles? Was he at the ſame time in his Apoſtles mouths or ſtomacks, while he ſate and roſe from table, and diſcourſed thoſe three Chapters of John 15, 16, 17? or while he ſweat that Bloody ſweat in his Agony in the Garden, &c. a monſtrous impoſſibility!
2. It's Impoſſible to make that which was before exiſtent and in being: Can a father beget a ſon that Chelling. p. 70.is already begotten? Can an Architect build a hoUſe that is already built? Can the body of Chriſt, which is before the converſion of the bread, be made or produced by the turning of bread into it? Can he that was conceived by the holy Ghoſt born of the Virgin be made by pronouncing of four or five words? If ever deluſions were ſtrong, theſe are, Nam factum facere & factum infectum facere, are equally impoſſible.
3. They ſay that the ſubſtance of bread and wine is avoided, and that only the accidents remain, ſo that there is length and nothing long, breadth and nothing broad, thickneſs and nothing thick, whiteneſs and nothing white, moiſture and nothing moiſt, ſweetneſs and nothing ſweet, that is, a long, broad, thick, white, moiſt, ſweet Nothing. The Prieſt pours out nothing but lines and colours, when he pours out the wine, for theſe accidents of bread and wine are not in the bread, becaUſe that is avoided and vaniſht, and they are not in the Body of Chriſt, as themſelves ſay, and yet it is plain this bread and wine do nouriſh the body, and is the body nouriſhable by meer accidents? Can there be plainer contradictions?
4. Can the ſame body at the ſame time have his juſt dimenſions, diſtance of parts, ſymmetry, proportion, as the Body of Chriſt hath, and yet not have theſe, becaUſe all parts? yea the whole Body of Chriſt, ſay they, are in one and the ſelf ſame point or crum of bread.
5. Can the Body of Chriſt which is much greater be wholly contained in a wafer or piece of bread, in his full dimenſions, and that as many times as there are points, crums, drops in the bread or wine?
6. Can the bread be turned into the very Body of Chriſt, and yet not anything of that bread become anything of Chriſt, nor the matter nor form nor accidents of bread be made either the matter or form or accidents of Chriſt?
7. Can the ſame thing, as Chriſts true Body, at the ſame time be wholly above it ſelf, and wholly below it ſelf, within and without it ſelf? can it be moved, and yet be ſtill? be carried from one place to another, and yet not move? be brought from heaven to earth, and yet not come out of heaven? who then can aſſure me that when he hung upon the Croſs, he was not walking ſomewhere elſe, crucified and not crucified, eaten and not eaten, alive in one, dead in another place, as in caſe the Apoſtles celebrated this Supper while Chriſt was in the grave.
8. What diſhonour do theſe men render the Body of Chriſt obnoxious unto, to be eaten by wicked men, by bruit creatures, by mice, by other vermin, to be caſt into ſome unclean place? for ſo long as the form of bread remains, ſo long the Body of Chriſt is there, though it be in the mouth or belly of a moUſe, ſaith Ales and the reſt of the Schoolmen, who do one where or other acknowledge the moſt of theſe monſtrous abſurdities, and go about to heal and ſalve them. I ſurceaſe from raking further into this ingratefull ſink, whoſe name Tranſubſtantiation is but of yeſterday in compariſon, and which diſhonours the Body of Chriſt into a monſter, deſtroies the nature of the Sacrament, and fils the world with dreadfull contentions and broils; and let us but obſerve, 1. What grievous impoſitions the Romaniſts lay upon the faith of them that are devoted to her communion. 2. What contradictions and abſurdities the common people do ignorantly and implicitly beleeve. 3. What ſtrong deluſions even to believe lies God gives up Learned men unto, that refUſe the ſimplicity of the truth for intereſts and politick ends! 4. What a mercy of God it is to deliver us from that tyranny, which leaves us no other choice, but to ſwallow and digeſt ſuch impoſſible things, or to be ſacrificed in flames; and the Lord forbid the re-entrance of that Religion among us, which in all likelihood will coſt us our ſouls or our lives.
§. 5 III. Having paſt the moſt rugged and craggy part of my way, now we ſhall have a ſweeter and ſmoother way; and the third thing that I commend to you is, To keep fixt your eyes and hearts upon the inward of this Sacrament, which Chriſt himſelf doth anatomize and unfold to you, ſaying, This is my Body, This Cup is the New Teſtament in my Blood, teaching all Miniſters to explain the outward Ordinance what it means, and all communicants to ſet their hearts upon it; for as the Parchment and Wax are little worth, but the Eſtate conveyed, ſo the Bread and Wine do but convey by their Uſe, the Body and Blood of Chriſt, and the Covenant of grace and peace confirmed unto us; and as we Uſe to ſearch and pick out of every corner of the ſhell that's broken, as of a Wallnut, the kernell that is in it, ſo we ſhould ſtudy the marrow and kernell of this Ordinance, to loſe the ſight and Uſe of nothing here preſented; God loſes honour and praiſe, and we benefit and com ort, when we look not to the inwards of an outward Ordinance, eſpecially when Chriſt himſelf and all the great and capitall benefits that accrue by him, are not only repreſented but confirmed, and to be participated: They that look upon a meer repreſentation of Chriſts death in this Ordinance, reduce it to a pretence or ſhadow, and look for too little, for it's a ſealing Ordinance: They that look for his very Body to be eaten, look for too much; we may expect from Gods inſtitutions the grace or benefit which God appoints them to exhibit, and in the way wherein he ſo appoints: Then have we the benefit of his death, when we have him; and here is offered to Calvin in 1 Cor. 11.you not the benefit only, but the Body in which he ſuffered; his body was a Sacrifice, here it is ſpirituall food, we feed upon that Sacrifice as the manner was; the Covenant was confirmed by his Blood, here we feaſt upon it; the Blood was ſhed that he might reconcile to God, it's drunk that we may be partakers of that Reconciler, and that reconciliation. He ſhall confirm the Covenant with mercy, is Daniels phraſe, Dan. 9. 29. The memoriall we celebrate, the benefit we participate here, and the great Queſtion, Whether I have remiſsion of ſins, whereat we ſtick, is here anſwered to a doubting ſoul, that beleeves in deſire, not in comfort, as ſure as God can deviſe by outward Ordinance. The Word anſwers that Queſtion by deſcription of qualification of the perſon, a Believer: The Spirit anſwers it by witneſſing and ſealing it up to our ſpirits that we are children: The graces of Regeneration do anſwer it, as fruit doth to the life of the tree, by demonſtration: This Sacrament anſwers it by exhibition and offering Chriſt to me that I may appropriate him, for the blood was ſhed for you, ſaith Chriſt, Luk. 22. 20. for you that take and eat and drink.
§. 6 IV. The communicant ſhould be one that ſeeks union and communion with Chriſt, for he that is not a Jew inwardly, eats but outwardly. Finis non intus, dente non mente, as Auſtin expreſſes the inward of Ordinances are enjoyed by them that inwardly are Chriſtians: the Covenant is ſealed to them that come to the terms of that Covenant: thoſe that bring inward graces receive inward benefits: Sed de hoc plura.