that it should be Holy and without blemish Ephes 5.26 27. Aqua quae benedicitur purgat illuminat hominem The water which is blessed doth purge and illuminate man saith Gregory Nyssen in lib. de Baptismo Caro abluitur ut anima emaculetur the body is washed that the soule may be made cleane saith Tertullian de resurrectione carnis From whence in all likelihood Augustine tract 80. in Johannem propounded that assevering interrogation unde tanta vis aquae ut corpus tangat cor abluat from whence is that powerfull vertue of water that the body being touched the soule is washed The blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist is more powerfull than over Paschal was Tertul. de resurrectione carnis thus Caro corpore Christi sanguine veseitur ut anima de Deo saginetur our flesh feedeth on the body and blood of Christ that our soules may be filled and fatted with God Bernard in primo Sermone de coena Domini pag. 145. Who can quell so fierce raging wilde motions of concupiscence who can beare the itchings bitings or akings of this wound Beleeve Gods grace is sufficient for men And that ye may be secure saith Saint Bernard you have the investiture that is a new acquist and possession of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ For that Sacrament worketh two things in us Et sensum minuit in minimis ingravioribus peccatis tollit omnino consensum it infeebleth and diminisheth sin in the smallest matters but in more grievous sins it wholly taketh away our consent If any of you find not so sharp motions to anger envie luxury or the like let him thank the body and blood of our Lord because the vertue of that Sacrament worketh effectually in him and let him rejoyce that the fowlest ulcer beginneth to heale I conclude this passage with the memorable words of our Saviour at the institution of the holy Eucharist Mat. 26.28 This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins Thus doe the Sacraments of Grace remit quell and mortifie sin whereas the divine Apostle speaking of the Sacraments of the old Law is expresse Heb. 10.4 It is not possible that the blood of Goats and Bulls should take away sins PAR. 3. A Third Reason for its Institution was to prefigure Christs death and going out of the world John 13.1 Jesus knew his houre was come that he should depart out of the world unto the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut transeat that he might Passe out of the world having apparent reference both to the old and new Passeover on the Crosse All Sacraments of the old Law were figures of the Eucharist And they did also finally designe and typifie Christs death Therefore the blessed Eucharist must needs adumbrate Christs death also Indeed the Egyptian Passeover by the sprinkling of whose blood the Israelites were freed from the exterminating Angel doth most lively typifie Christ slaine and his blood delivering us But the Paschal Lamb which afterward was yeerely slaine did more resemble the Sacrament of Christs body and blood and yet both the first and the succeding yeerely Passeover may all of them and each of them in a true and fitting sence be said to prefigure not only the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ but the very Crucifixion of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ PAR. 4. A Fourth Cause of Christ's superinducing of the blessed Eucharist was to be a remembrance to us of Christs death till he commeth againe 1 Cor. 11.24 Doe this in remembrance of me so verse 25. As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye doo shew the Lords death till he come ver 26. The Paschall was a memoriall of their deliverance from Egypt and of their passing the Red-sea without danger whilst the Sea stood as two Christall walls on the right hand and the left and they passed through dry-footed Exod. 14.22 Againe when in after times their children were to ask What mean you by this service Ye shall say It is the Sacrifice of the Lords Passeover who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt when he smote the Egyptians and delivere dour houses Exod. 12.26 c. But the Eucharist is a memoriall of our deliverance from Sin Hell and the power of Satan Therefore so farre as spirituall deliverances are above temporall as the soules are above the bodies heaven above earth so farre doth our holy Eucharist antecede their Paschal and bringeth with it more certaine fruit and fuller Grace infused not only Sealing and Signifying Grace but Conferring and Exhibiting it by it selfe in the true use I urge not this effect so farre as to exclude Baptisme from working remission of sinnes nor as if the sacred Sucharist did remit the Same Individuall sinnes which were Before remitted by Baptisme or as if it did remit sins that never were Repented of God doth not so much But the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord forgiveth such sins as have beene committed betweene the receiving of Baptisme and it and such sins as have overborne us since our hearty Contrition and Repentance yea where sins are perfectly forgiven before the holy Communion yet doth the Holy Communion Enseale and Ratifie the former remission if I may so speake and the Eucharist in the right use maketh an Attrite man a Contrite One A Contrite man to be Justified A Justified man to be Holy An Holy man to be More holy and the Holiest One to be more lively spiritfull and prompt in religious services than I think he would have beene if the Sacrament had beene omitted Thus I doubt not but if the Thrice-blessed Virgin Mary had received the consecrated Eucharist as in likelihood she did though she were full of Grace according to the Angels salutation when she received it yet it would not have beene uneffectuall to her Good for she was not so full of Grace but that shee was still capable of more and greater additaments of Grace Many more Reasons there are why Christ Jesus did superinstitute the blessed Eucharist destroying and abolishing thereby the old Passeover I will instance only in some of them and that very briefly PAR. 5. A Fifth Reason why Christ did institute this Sacrament was to unite us to Himselfe 1 Corinth 10.16 The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ The bread which we breake is it not the Communion of the body of Christ The cup is so necessary that the Apostle placeth it before the bread 6. To breed brotherly love and to unite us to Christ and one to another For we being many are One Bread and One Body For we are all partakers of that One Bread 1 Cor. 10.17 Hence floweth that great Article of our Creed The communion of Saints Hence is that Sacred Eucharist called Communio A Communion John 6.56 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my
the Eucharist which likewise he did not need nor want To this last point he either answereth nothing which he seldome doth or else it was suppressed by higher authority or his answer is involved in these words Quicquid de hoc sit and in this sense whether Christ received the blessed Sacrament or received it not I will not now speak I will passe it over or the like Aquinas Parte 3. Quaest 81. Articulo 1. handleth this point scholastically Whether Christ took his own Body and Blood And with his authorities and reasons is for the Affirmative though he saith Others think the contrary Soto likewise 4. Sententiarum Distinctione 12. Quaest. 2. Articulo 1. propoundeth the same quick question Whether Christ did Receive his own Body and Blood And he answereth stealing almost all from Aquinas There have not been wanting who have said Christ gave his Body to his Disciples but himselfe took it not Luther de Abrogandâ Missâ privatâ resolveth Christ took not that blessed Sacrament and thence collecteth if Soto belye him not that other Priests ought not to take it but to give Both kinds to the Laity If Luther so said Soto well reproveth him and confuteth him because by Luthers argument the Priests are of worse condition and in a worse state than the people Which none but a popular Claw-back or Calfe of the people will say Aquinas his Inference is much sounder Because the Ministers with us receive it first therefore we conclude Christ first took it For say I Christ commanded us to do as He did And the Church evermore since Christs time doing so that is the Priests not giving the blessed Sacrament till themselves had first received it followeth unforcedly that Christ took it first There be many Canons of the Church which command the Priests first of all to receive So is it in the Councell of Toledo If they that Sacrifice eate not they are guilty of the Lords Sacrament 1 Corinth 10.18 Are not they which eate of the Sacrifices partakers of the Altar For if to participate be to eate and the Sacrificers be the chiefe partakers it resulteth They must first eate The like was practised in the old Law The Priest was served even of the peoples offrings before the people themselves 1 Sam. 2.13 c. If you say that was but an usurpation and prophanation of Ely his sonnes then see the Law it selfe Leviticus 6.25 Where the burnt offring is killed shall the sin-offring be killed before the Lord it is most holy and verse 26. The Priest that offereth it for Sinne shall eate it Leviticus 7.29 c. You may see the Priests portion of the Peace-offrings by a statute for ever Numbers 15.20 Yee shall offer up a cake of the first of your dough Of the first of your dough yee shall give unto the Lord Vers 21. But especially see Deut. 18.3 4. verses and Numb 18.9 c. What God reserved for Aaron his sonnes daughters and house-hold that were cleane All the best of the oyle All the best of the wine and of the wheate the First fruits of them that offer and whatsoever is First ripe in the Land The people of the old Law shall rise up in Judgement against Our people who think the least and worst things are too good for the Clergy though God hath committed to us the word of Reconciliation and given us a power above Angels and Archangels in those most powerfull un-metaphoricall proper words John 20.23 Whosesoever sins yee Remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins yee Retaine they are retained The people of the Law enjoyed not Their part till the Priests had first Their parts not ought Our people to participate of our sacred offerings Till the Priests have taken Their parts Soto his proofe for the Affirmative is a ridiculous one David fuit figura hujus David was a figure hereof who 1 Samuel 21.13 c. before Achish Suis se manibus referebat sic Christus suum corpus suis tenebat manibus suo sumebat ore So Christ held his owne body in his hands and received it with his mouth I answer there are no such words nor words tending to that purpose in the Vulgar either of Hentenius or Saint-andreanus or in Vatablus or the Interlineary nor in the Greeke or Hebrew Nor can I judge from what words in that Chapter Soto did gather his wild protasis or first part of the typicall comparison A weake proofe doth harme to a good cause and so hath Soto done in this point The authority of Hierom in his Epistle to Hedibia de Decem quaestionibus quaestione 2. Tomo 3. fol. 49. reacheth home Dominus Iesus Ipse conviva et convivium ipse comedens qui comeditur The Lord Jesus was himselfe both guest and feast He was both eater and thing eaten Act. 1.1 Iesus began to doe and teach his actions led the way his voyce followed He first Received then Administred He first celebrated the Eucharist then made his Sermon in coenaculo or Sermon in the Supping Chamber Before be Instituted his Baptisme he was Baptized When he said to his Apostles Doe this in remembrance of me if followeth he did take it First Himselfe The Glosse on Ruth 3. saith Christ did eate and drinke That Supper when he delivered the Sacrament of his Body and Blood to his Disciples Soto bringeth this objection When Christ said Take and Eate the question is Whether He did eate or no If you say He had eaten this is against that opinion because he had not Then consecrated the bread For by the subsequent words he did consecrate and say This is my body If He had not eaten then it is apparent He did not before his Disciples For reaching it to them he said This is my Body I answer saith Soto He first broke the bread into Thirteene pieces which when he had in a dish together in his hands He said Take eate this is my body receiving his own part First For he kept Feast with them and the nature of a Feast requireth that the Inviter feed with the Invited He fed with them in the First Supper He dranke with them in the Second Supper In the Best Supper and the Supper which was most properly his Owne did he nor Eate nor Drinke Barradius thus Accepit ex mensâ panem azymum benedixit in partes Duodecem fregit eas consecravit unam sumpsit reliquas distribuit He tooke from the Table unleavened bread He blessed it He brake it into twelve parts He consecrated it One He tooke the Other he distributed Therefore even our adversary being our judge He was at a Table Iudas was not present for then there should have been Thirteene pieces or morsels Christ himselfe received himselfe So they cannot tax me for these opinions or these opinions for novelty but they must needs condemne Barradius and diverse others of their own side Chrysostome homilia 83. on Matthew 26. Christ dranke himselfe
And this may seeme to favour him Jesus said to the Iewes Destroy This Temple and in three dayes I will rayse it up Joh. 2.19 And the holy Apostle expoundeth it Christ spake of the temple of his body verse 21. Tolet in his Commentary on the place saith It is certaine that when Christ said This temple he did by his Gesture and the motion of his hands demonstrate Himselfe and pointed not at the materiall Temple built of stone so might he here doe Tolet his Collection is but probable For Christ might point at either at neither but leave them in suspence Many times did Christ use verball aequivocations as I have proved in my Miscellanies that is he so spake that his words might have a double Construction though he adhorred mentall Reservation Concerning Carolostadius I must needs say he was one of them who in those precipitious and whirling times did strive to rayse his owne name by inventing most new devices And this was one of them which is not seconded by any other Christian Divines which I have seene but disliked by many For when Christ said This is my Body which shall be given for you as Carolostadius hath it is as if he pointed at and did meane his naturall passiive body What did they eate They did eate none of That body nor was it Broken till after the Celebration of the holy Eucharist he did suffer But the holy Scripture hath it in the Present tense Luk. 22.19 This is my Body which Is given for you And vers 20. This Cup Is the new Testament in my Blood which Is shed for you Can you think O Carolostadius that when he gave them the Cup he touched his breast and pointed at and meaned the blood in the veynes lanes and hidden alleys of his mortall body So 1 Corinth 11.24 This is my body which Is broken for you And this Cup Is the new Testament in my blood vers 25. Likewise Matth. 26.28 This is my Blood which Is shed and so Mark 14.24 For though it be a truth most certaine that Christ his naturall body and naturall blood was broken given and shed afterwards in his Passion yet Carolostadius was too blame to change the Tense to invent an imagined gesture of Christ which is impossible to be proved Lastly to broach a new opinion contrary to all Divines from which refulteth That they did eate onely bare Bread but no way the Body of the Lord and dranke onely the fruit of the Grape but no way dranke the Blood of the Lord. Indeed the Vulgate hath it Frangêtur in the Future tense is Shall be broken for you But it starteth aside from the Originall Nor standeth it with sense reason or example that the Future is taken for the Present tense since it is a retrograde course against nature But the Present tense is often used for the Future foreshewing the infallible certainty of what will or shall come both in Propheticall and Evangelicall Writings Esay 60.1 The glory of the Lord Is risen upon thee And yet he speaketh of Christ and his comming And Revel 22.12 Behold I come quickly and my reward is with me And Yet he commeth not though it were said above fifteene hundred yeares passed But most undoubtedly He Shall come quickly Celeritate motus though not celeritate temporis when he beginneth to come he shall come speedily though he shall not quickly begin to come PAR. 7. IT succeedeth This is my Body Matth. 26.26 which is Given for you Luk. 22.19 Which is Broken for you 1 Corinth 11.24 This doe in remembrance or for a remembrance of Me as both S. Luke and S. Paul have it And he tooke the Cup and gave thankes and gave it to them saying Drinkeyee All of it for this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes Matth. 26.27 c. It is thus changed Mark 14.23 He gave it to them and They all dranke of it And S. Mark leaves out these words For the remission of sinnes S. Luke maketh the alteration thus Likewise also he gave them the Cup after Supper saying This Cup is the New Testament In my blood which is shed for You Luk. 22.20 Another diversity is yet 1 Corinth 11.25 Likewise after Supper he tooke the Cup when he had supped saying This Cup is the new testament In my blood This doe yee as oft as yee drinke it in remembrance of mee Matth. 26.29 Christ saith I will not drinke henceforth of the fruit of the Vine And this was After the sacred Supper But saith Adam Contzen A Matthaeo non suo ordine ad finem coenae recitantur ea verba de Genimine vitis S. Matthew reciteth not in Order the words concerning the fruit of the Vine nor were they spoken After Supper Perhaps say I they were spoken Twice Here if ever is an ample field to expatiate in these words have tortured the wits of the learnedst men since the dayes of the Apostles Et adhuc sub judice lis est And yet they are not determined And as the Areopagites in an inexplicable perplexity deferred the finall determination till the last day so the Roman Church might have deferred their definitive sentence and over-hard censure even till then especially since they confesse that the manner of Transubstantiation is inenarrable Whereupon I am resolved to forbeare farther disquisition and to lose my selfe in holy devotion and admiration that I may find my Christ The sayle is to large for my boat This Sea is too tempestuous for my Shallop The new Cut of Erasmus Sarcerius in his Scholia on the place of S. Matthew thus shuffleth it The Materiall causes are Bread and Wine and the things under them understood and present the Body and Blood The Formal causes are to Eat and to Drink The Efficient causes Christ who did institute it and his Word The Effectuall causes to have Remission of sins I say this may rather go among the finall causes And to make Effects to be Effectuall causes introduceth new Logick new Termes into Logick Besides he omitteth the Finall cause which is the first mover to the rest Divinity and the mysteries of it are not to bow down to any ones Logick Oh! but will you now say leus in the last Act in the last Scene Will you be silent where he and she Apprentices where Women and illiterate Tradesmen rayse themselves upon their startups prick up their eares and tyre their tongues 1. I answer If I should enter into the lists of controversie and take upon me to decide and determine all the doubts which concerne the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist and to untye all the knots which may be made from those words I am perswaded you might sooner see an end of me than I of this Work For I am wearied and tyred already This toyle which I have performed and the labour which I have bestowed hath cost me full deare My sedentary life hath made my
of his garments Psal 133.2 l Psal 133.2 For this trickled from his bloodyed head crowned with sharpe thornes his indented and as it were furrowed backe by the tearing whips and rods his broad-wounded side so broad that Thomas the Apostle put his hand into it l Ioh 20.27 Joh. 20.27 his pierced or rather digged hands and feete for so the Hebrew will beare it Psal 22.16 I saw trickled even to the ground this is a better sprinkling then all the Leviticall sprinklings for by it our hearts are now sprinkled from an evill conscience In the old Law all parts of their doores were sprinkled with blood to turne away the Apolyon or Abaddon the destroying Angell but the thresholds of their doores were not bloodied m Heb. 10.22 by which omission perhaps was signified that no sacred or holy thing should be cast on the ground or troden under feete which truth our Saviour divinely ratifieth n Matth 7.6 Matth. 7.6 Give not that which is holy unto dogges neither cast yee your pearles before Swine lest they trample them under their feete neither doe I remember any where that the Threshold or the ground were sprinkled in any of the Leviticall Services but men and all the people a Heb 9.13 19. Heb. 9.13 and 19. and the booke in the same verse and the Tabernacle and all the vessells of the Ministery vers 21. but Christ spirituale illud ostium that spirituall doore was sprinkled all over with blood and by the blood sprinkling of him we are saved from the exterminator or destroying Angell Two things more let me observe eâ—re I shake hands with this point first that onely one doore they did strike with blood on the two side-posts and on the upper doore-post of the houses b Exod. 12.7 Exod. 12.7 the doore in the singular throughout all the Chapter yet doore of houses and vers 13. posternes backe-doores or other out-lets needed not to be stricken with blood but as I guesse onely the great streete doore or fore doore or the doore in the high way of the death inflicting Angell Secondly this type must be cast into the number of those types which were soone to fade away and were never performed but once as the offering up of Isaack as Jonah's resemblance as Sampsons carrying away the gates of Gazah and the figure of the Lyon and the Bees out of the eater came meate out of the strong came sweetnesse other Types of our Saviour were yearely monethly weekely daily to be performed as sacrifices and the like PAR. 18. IT may be the witty Hannibal had heard how the destroying Angell was to passe over the houses marked with blood and in part imitated it for he commanded the Tarentines to keepe within doores and write their names on the doores all houses whose doores were not written upon he pillaged and gave over to direption so d Livius lib. 25 Livius and Polybius specializeth the incription Tarentini that was the ward-word I am sure Master George Sandys in the relation of his travailes begun Anno 1610. saith thus during our abode at Cairo in Egypt fell out the feast of their Byram when in their private houses they slaughter a number of sheepe which cut in gobbets they distribute unto their slaves and poorer sort of people besmearing their doores with their blood perhaps in imitation of the Passeover so farre hee PAR. 19. THe fourth ceremony peculiar to the first Paschatizing was They ate their Passeover in haste I shall proceede too hastily if I doe not distinguish on the word haste haste is twofold simple comparative they ate the first Passeover simply in all haste possible God commanded it time place and the occasions so required it and accordingly they performed it And in this first Passeover 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in haste doth involve tremulous fearefull suddaine and confused motions upon the apprehension of some solid great danger Mephibosheth's nurse fled in haste and in the flight lamed him e 2 Sam. 4.4 2 Sam. 4.4 The Syrians fled in haste and cast away their vessells and their garments f 2 King 7.15 2 King 7.15 Concerning the second kind of haste I say they are the Passeover ever after in haste yet not absolutely but onely referentially in respect of their slower eating of their common meales or in respect of their continued feasting at other Sacrifices which were eaten with grave majesty and devour during solemnities In Egypt they ate that passeover in confused haste caused through danger and feare the same radix is used Deut. 20.3 Deut. 20.3 doe not tremble or doe not haste which words are Synonyma's in the judgement of our last translatours and the immediate consequents prove that terrours weÌ„re annexed to such haste PAR. 20. IN the like haste was it never eaten afterwards for they had not the same cause of terrour or spurre to hasten them yet for ever after they might eate it in more haste then their ordinary food and that first in remembrance of their prime praesident Secondly as it was a Sacrifice or a Sacrament not to be retarded or demurred upon too long thirdly because it was as a preparatory or antipast to a second supper A sacred messe beginning with sower herbes their Paschall Festivalls which in Deuteronomy God enjoyned of which volente Deo more hereafter where I say the eating of the Passeover in the fore-described haste was peculiar to the first passeover in that one proposition two are involved one affirmative the other negative the affirmative that it was eaten speedily then and very speedily the negative it was never after eaten in such haste as the first was for then it would be of peculiar more common and indeed not peculiar Gratia quae datur omnibus non est gratia a courtesie done to all is no especiall favour done to any one Concerning the positive or assertive part thus that it was commanded to bee eaten in haste is notified g Exod 12.11 Exod. 12.11 yee shall eate it in Festinatione or Festinanter in haste or hastily that the things commanded were sutably performed is also evidenced ver 28. the Israelites did as the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron which is most remarkeably repeated so did they certainely Moses forepropecied to Pharaoh and it came to passe h Exod 11.8 Exod. 11.8 All these thy servants shall bow downe themselves unto me saying get thee out and all the people that follow thee therefore the Aegyptians did humbly beg them to goe forth in haste PAR. 21. IOsephus saith Iosephus lib. 2. cap. 5. the Aegyptians went by troupes to the Kings palace crying out that the Israelites might be suffered to depart and as certaine it is the Aegyptians were urgent upon the people that they might send them out of the Land in haste Exod. 12.33 Exod. 12.33 And the Israelites were thrust out of Egypt and could not tarry neither had they prepared for themselves any victualls
taken in the morning Secondly The Agapae were in the evening Thirdly Yet at the first they were both about the same time Let me say a little of each point 1. For the receiving of the Sacrament in the morning Tertullian ad uxorem thus Non sciot maritus quid secreto ante omnem cibum gustes Shall not thy husband know what thou dost eat in secret before thou dost caste a bit of any other meat And after him Saint Augustine would have the Eucharist eaten fasting propter honorem Corporis Dominici out of a religious reverence to the Lords Body More plainly the same Tertullian in lib. de corona militis Eucharistiae Sacramentum etiam antelucanis coetibus nec de aliorum manu quà m de prasidentium sumimus we receive the Sacrament of the blessed Eucharist even at our morning meetings and that at the hand of no other but of our owne Ministers And Pliny who was Rationalis Trajani Trajans Receiver and Accountant did certifie the Emperour that the Christians were wont to meet before day light ut sua sacra facerent to performe their divine service 2. Concerning the second point namely the Agapae that they were kept in the evening is as apparent Coena nostra de nomine rationem sui reddit Vocatur enim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id quod Dilectio penes Gracos est The name of our Supper sheweth its nature that it is a Love-feast yet a Supper it was and so he called it Otherwhere he saith Coenulas nostras sugillatis you scoffe at our Suppers where the Agapae are not wholly excluded Otherwhere Coena nostra vocatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Supper is called a Love-feast Quantiscunque sumptibus constat lucrum est pietatis nomine facere sumptum siquidem inopes quoque isto refrigerio juvamus How costly soever our Love-feasts be expence for pietie sake is gaine for the poore are refreshed with it Augustinus contra Faustum 20.20 Agapae nostrae pauperes pascunt sive frugibus sive carmbus Our Love-feasts doe feed the poore either with bread or meat one way or other 3. The third point is as evident from 1 Cor. 11. that the Primitive Christians kept no great distance of time betweene the sacred Eucharist and the Agapae For the Apostle proceedeth from the abuses of one to prevent the abuses which might fall in the other and speaketh as of things almost conjoyned And from hence the Gentiles objected that Christians at their Love-feasts did eat an Infant because the blessed Eucharist was in the same Agapae or neere the time administred and it being called spiritually the Flesh and the Blood of Christ the Christians were accused that they did eat mans flesh and drinke mans blood Alba-spinaeus doth answer very shallowly That this crime was forged even from the daies of Tiberius as Tertullian saith in his Apologetick I reply All this is true that it was a most horrid falshood an affected Lie coined in Tiborius his time But the question is not Whether the same were true or false to which only Alba-spinaeus supinely but idlely answereth but from what ground or probability the rumour did arise or how we may trace the report home to its owne forme to the bed from whence it first started I say againe It was because the Eucharist and the Agapae were conjoyned and were then kept at Night-season thereupon they found fault with the Suppers of Christians as sated with blood and humane flesh And perhaps in after times this was one true reason why they are the blessed Sacrament in the morning and the Agapae at night to remove that objection That in the night they feasted not themselves with the blood of an Infant Which practice though it staggered the report and someway diverted it and the Christians absoluti sunt were acquitted yet litura manebat the spot was not cleane taken away as Claudius was wont to say in another case aliquid haerebat but something still remained behind because the accusation was boldly vouched Inveterate rumours are not easily wiped out If Alba-spinaeus had observed that at their single separated Agapae there was no possibility of suspition of Infanticide or feeding on mans flesh or drinking of mans blood but that the words of the body and blood of Christ eaten and drunken might in the carnal mis-interpretation be Caput famae a ground though slippery for report and for such a report through their malice and infidelity he would then have said without a perhaps that for a good while after Christs time both the Eucharist and the Love-feasts did touch or kisse each the other and that thence arose the horrid imputation that their Suppers were accused as sceleris infames infamous for villanies to use Tertullians phrase Weigh this farther circumstance The Agapae were kept on the Lords day Diebus Dominicis celebrabant Agapas they celebrated their Love-feasts on the Lords day saith Alba-spinaeus himselfe observat 18. and then was the most blessed Eucharist administred that day above all other dayes that time of the day even about Supper time in imitation of our Lord. Tertullian ad uxorem 2.4 speaketh of Pagan husbands suspition of their Christian wives Quis ad Convivium Dominicum illud quod infamant sine sua suspitione dimittet Who can endure to let his wife goe to that infamous banquet of the Lord without jealousie What this Convivium Dominicum this Banquet of the Lord is falleth under enquiry Pamelius interpreteth it de Missa Christianorum of the Christians Masse Rhenanus Junius Mornaeus Casaubonus Exercitat 6. pag. 512. interpreteth it of the Eucharist Alba-spinaeus in his notes on this place of Tertullian thus farre concludeth wittily and truly That Tertullian speaketh of that Banquet or Feast that was infamous among the Gentiles Convivium illud quod infamant are the very words of Tertullian But they were not suspected of any incest at the Eucharist saith Alba-spinaeus or of any unlawfull lust then as from Pliny junior and others may appeare Therefore those scandals were only taken against the Agapae or Love-feasts What things are objected against the Christians in Justin adversus-Judaeos Apolog. 2. In Tertullian Apologet. and ad Scapulam De cultu foeminarum in Minutius Foelix in Eusebius 4.1 4. capitibus concerning their Suppers and Infanticide they are to be referred to the Agapae in which the Eucharist was neither consecrated nor received Thus farre White-thorne or Alba-spinaeus But if he had observed either that at their Agapae only there was no possibility of suspition concerning Infanticide and that at the Eucharist a carnall man might so interpret it or that the Eucharist was held by the Gentiles worse than the Agapae so much worse as Infanticide and devouring humane flesh and blood are worse than the sins of the eighth Commandement or that the holy Eucharist and the Agapae were kept both at one time about Supper time in the dayes Apostolicall and the Eucharist being first dispatched the suspition for lust
was laid upon the Second Supper where they did feast sing and were merry and that Tertullian Apologetico cap. 39. mentioneth the Triclintum Christianorum the Supping-beds of the Christians and their discumbing thereon both men and women I say againe he would have concluded without a perhaps that the blessed Eucharist and the Agapae were not dis-sundred by much time but rather were united and he would not have rejected as he did both his owne and our Heroes Pamelius Rhenanus Junius Mornaeus Casaubone to whom let me add that learned Jesuit Ludovicus de la Cerda who interpreteth Dominicum Convivium the Lords Supper thus Convivium Domini peragebatur celebrabaturque sacrâ Eucharistiâ ac tunc menticbantur Gentiles ac dicebant Christianos panem sacrum Eucharistiae edere intinctum sanguine jugulati Infantis So farre Cerda The Banquet of the Lord was kept and celebrated at the sacred Eucharist and then did the Gentiles falsly report and say that the Christians did eat the sacred bread of the Eucharist dipped in the blood of a butchered Infant I may not omit it is called Dei coena the Supper of God in Tertullian ad uxorem 2.6 And that Alba-spinaeus in all his Observations observed not that the Agapae or Love-feasts did succeed the Second Supper of the Jewes at all their great feasts which Suppers were for the most part contiguous and never farre dis-sundred Julian the Apostata taxed the Christians for these three altogether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is in Petavius his Edition pag. 588. Chrysostome Homiliâ 27. on the Epistle to the Corinthians Statis diebus mensas faciebant communes on set and certaine times they kept common feastings peracta synaxi post Sacramentorum communionem omnes commune inibant Convivium and when the Congregation was dismissed after they had communicated of the Sacraments they all met together at a common Banquet Thus did the Agapae or Love-feasts succeed in the roome of the Second Jewish Supper After the Sacraments were administred they feasted altogether PAR. 4. THe Papists say That the Apostle speaketh of the Agapae or Love-feasts and not of the sacred Eucharist as I proved before Suffer me I pray you to cleere the text concerning the Agapae 1. First I would know where any or whoever called the Agapae or Love-feasts the Supper of the Lord. Tertullian indeed Apologetic cap. 39. calleth their Love-feast Coenam a Supper but that ever he or any other called it singled by it selfe Coenam Domini the Supper of the Lord with reference to the Sacrament I remember not As Agapae were doled to the poore and what is given to them is lent to the Lord so it may be called the Lords Supper 2. Secondly the Agapae or Love-feasts were never begun or practised by Christ never in use whilest Christ lived on the earth in likelihood not till after he was ascended into heaven some short time after so they were of a latter institution than the blessed Sacrament though they were holy just conscionable and founded on sufficient good authority viz. Divine 3. Thirdly if there had beene no abuse In or At the Agapae or Love-feasts among the Corinthians yet the rightest use of them could never produce this Consequent That that was to eat the Supper of the Lord which must be the resultance from the opinion of the Papists For none can deny but the Church did sometimes use the Agapae or Love-feasts holily and heavenly And yet it was a different thing To eat the Lords Supper Both the Supper of the Lord and the Agapae or Love-feasts might be and have beene perfectly administred severally and at severall houres and watches of the day or night also jointly and contiguously one presently after the other sometimes the one first and sometimes the other 4. Fourthly the Agapae or Love-feasts succeeded indeed in the roome of the Second or Common Supper And it is as cleere as the light that the Corinthians did first eat their Agapa's or Love-feasts Every one taketh before his own Supper 1 Cor. 11.21 5. Fifthly These Corinthian Agapae or Love-feasts were celebrated in the Church For the Apostle reprooveth them because they did not eat at Home before they came to the Church What have ye not Houses to eat and drink in or despise ye the Church of God ver 22. 6. Sixthly There being divisions among the Corinthians v. 18. it is more than likely that the maintainers of each Schisme supped Apart by Themselves thereby fomenting divisions and cherishing factions 7. Seventhly It is probable that the Rich supped by Themselves For certain it is that the Poore were neglected Ye shame them that are poore or that have not ver 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subaudi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that have no part of Supper And this neglect was against the primary end of these Agapae which was principally to comfort and refresh the Poore Tertullian speaketh much in commendation of these Love-feasts Inopes quosque refrigerio isto juvamus we relieve every Poore body by that refection of ours saith hee Apologet. cap. 39. And the Confessors in Prison had not only part of the Collections of the Christians saith Tertullian ibidem but had part also of their Love-feasts Tertullian ad Martyres cap. 2. what is fit for the bodies of Martyrs they want not per curam Ecclesiae Agapen fratrum through the care of the Church and the charity of the Brethren PAR. 5. EIghthly as by the words One is hungry we may not imagine that the Apostle confined his meaning to singly One to Onely One and no other so when he saith Another is drunken he appropriateth not the fault to meer-One-alone as if no more were drunken but modestly covering their faults and charitably casting as it were a mantle over their nakednesse what was too common among them he qualifieth modifieth and diminisheth by reducing all to the singular number One is drunken 9. Ninthly Though the Maine abuses if not All reprehended by the Apostle in these Corinthians were committed in Agapis Before the receiving of the Lords Supper yet because these disorders were ill preparatories unto the heavenly food of their soules wicked in themselves and scandalous to others though they did receive the Lords Supper afterwards yet this was not the way to eat the Lords Supper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some interpret it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nonlicet ye may not eat it So. Others say that the Apostle by an usuall hyperbole precisely denieth That to be done which was not well done of the most I like the former exposition of Vatablus and Erasmus because the Apostle findeth fault with the Corinthians for eating the Lords Supper with those precedent ill fashions and reduceth them to Christs owne institution of his Third and last Supper without mentioning any thing concerning the Agapae Neither is there involved an expresse deniall of their receiving but they received in ill Fashion and after an ill Manner 10. Tenthly Casaubone Exercitatione
blood dwelleth in me and I in him 7. To be an antidote against dayly sins Panem nostrum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Give us this day our daily bread Here the Eucharist is called Panis supersubstantialis our supersubstantiall or Heavenly bread yea saith Ambrose it is called Panis quotidianus our daily bread because it is a medicine and a remedy against daily sins de Sacramentis 5.4 8. To further our spirituall Life And therefore it is not only set down negatively John 6.53 Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood ye have no life in you but it is further positively averred I am that bread of Life ver 48. and ver 50. This is that bread which commeth downe from Heaven that a man may eat thereof and not dye And ver 51. I am the living bread The bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the Life of the World And most apparently in the 54. ver who so eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath aeternall Life For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed ver 55. and ver 57. as the Living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father so he that eateth me even he shall live by me Lastly Cardinall Cusanus Exercitationum 7. Eucharistia est supremae charitatis Sacramentum The blessed Eucharist is the Sacrament of the most heavenly gift of charity When Christ had loved his unto the end because all the rest did not suffice to perfect Charity unlesse he gave himselfe for all of which the Eucharist was the wonderfull mystery Recipit se in manus suas in Sacramento fregit distribuit He taketh himselfe into his own hands and in the Sacrament brake and distributed himselfe Like as if bread were alive and should break and distribute it selfe that they might live to whom it was distributed and it selfe should dye by being distributed So Christ gave himselfe to us as if he did so distribute himselfe to us by dying Nota. that he might give life unto us In the same place he calleth it the Sacrament of Filiation all doubt being taken away concerning the Filiation of God For if Bread can passe over into the Son of God therefore Man may who is the end of bread Vide Dionysi Carthus in Luc. 22. fol. 258. Much more may be said but other points draw me to them THE PRAYER I Am not worthy O Lord holy Father of the least of thy benefits yea I have deserved that the full vyals of thy heaviest wrath should be powred down upon mee for I have many wayes offended thee and after manifold both vows and endevours to repent after teares sighs groanes and my contrite heart hath been offered on thy Altar yet I arknowledge my relapses and recidivations Good God let thy goodnesses strive against my wickednesse and fully overcome it Cleanse mee though thou slay mee and though thou shouldest condemne mee who wholly trust in thee yet Sanctify me thy Servant for Iesus Christ his sake my blessed Redeemer Amen CHAP. III. and fist Generall Which is divided into 5. Sections or particulars The first whereof is contained in this Chapter And therein is shewed 1. After what words Christ began this Third or Last Supper 2. A Digression 1. Concerning the division of the Bible into Chapters and Verses 2. Against filthy prophaners of Churches and Church-yards 3. Against Conventicles 1. What course Christ tooke in the perfecting of this Third or Last Supper First he removed Judas The ceremonies of the Grecians at their Sacrifices S. Augustines error who thought Judas did eat the bread of the Lord Sacramentally A more probable opinion that Christ did not institute the blessed Eucharist till Judas was gone forth After what words Christ began his Third Supper The word When doth not always note the immediation of times or things consequent 2. A discourse by way of digression The first part thereof Concerning the division of the Bible into Chapters and Verses Neither the Evangelists nor the Apostles divided their writings into Chapters and Verses Neither Christ nor his Apostles in the New Testament cited Chapter or Verse of the Old Testament Probable that the Books of the Old Testament were from the beginning distinguished and named as now they are And began and ended as now they do The Iewes of old divided the Pentateuch into 54. Sections Readings or Lectures The Iewish Section is either Incompleate termed Parashuh or Distinction signed with three P. P. P. Compleate stiled Sedar an Order marked with three S. S. S. All the Jewish Lectures read over Once a yeare The first Lecture what time of the yeare it began At what place of Scripture every every one of the 54 Lectures begins and ends Six books of Psalmes according to the Iewish division Every Lecture of the Law consisted of 136 verses Antiochus rent the Law in pieces God more regardeth every Letter of the Law than the Starres of Heave 3. Puritans taxed who taxour Church for mangling the Word of God and patching up a Lesson The bookes of the Bible were not at the first divided by Chapters nor the Chapters by Verses as now they are The Iews had by heart all the Old Testament 4. Traskites censured The Iews shall be converted to Christians not Christians to Iewes Secondly the second part of the Digression Against â—lthy prophaners of Churches and Church-yards more especially against them of the City of Exeter Nero bepissed Venus tombe The Heathens very zealous against such prophanation Caecilius his opinion concerning it Vespasian forbade it The Authors Apology His petition both to the Clergie and Laity of Exeter Gods Law Deut. 23.12 against filthinesse The Cats and the Birds cleanlinesse God and his holy Angels walke in the midst of our Temples That Law of God not Ceremoniall or Judiciall but Morall The Esseni diligent observers of it Cleanlinesse a kind of Holinesse Vncleannesse in the Camp was an uncleannesse in the Jews themselves God commandeth Cleanlinesse and Sweetnesse for mans sake not for his own Vncleanlinesse makes God turne away from us God a lover of internall and externall Cleannesse The Abrahemium the first Church-yard in the world Jacobs reverence to the place where he slept Some places more holy than other The Authors exhortation in this respect to the Magistrates of Exeter 5 Campanella the Friar examined and censured He learned Art magicke of the Divell Every one hath his Tutelary Angell as Saint Hierome and Campanella are of opinion Campanella healed of the spleene as hee saith by Charmes The name of a Friar more scandilous than of a Priest Proverbs and Taunts against Friars and Monks A Friar A Lyar. Friars railed against both by Ancient and Moderne Writers Priests and Jesuits at debate who shall be the chiefest in authoritie Friars Deifie the Pope Friars lashed by Pope Pius the second â—ampanella a prisoner for twenty yeeres together The Jesuits nipped by the Sorbonists banished by the
it signified The Administring and Receiving of the Eucharist called the Supper of the Lord. Christs Table in his Kingdome The Iews Tables in Christs time were not on the Ground but standing Tables The use of Tables is to eat and drink on them To serve Tables what it is The most holy Eucharist in Ignatius his dayes was celebrated on Tables Christ given For us in the Sacrifice Per modum Victimae To us in the Sacrament Per modum Epuli Banquets most commonly set on Tables Altars are for Offerings and Tables for Eating Christ the Altar Offering and Priest Christ used a Table at the first Consecration The Christians in the Primitive Church in times of Persecution used Tables where ever they came They made use of unconsecrated Tables Cups and Vessels The name and use of Altar vindicated The Devill had Tables erected to him by the Gentiles God had Tables erected to him by the Christians 6. The fifth Section or Particular of the fifth Generall wherein is shewed That the holy Eucharist was administred by Christ on a distinct Table Truth commanded not forbidden to be searched out A sting at Campanella who ascribes sense to stocks and stones and Reason to bruit Beasts Of two opinions the most probable is to be preferred Most probable the Deifying Sacrament was celebrated at a distinct Table Proved by Arguments 1. With reference to the Parties Recipient De maximis maxima cura est habenda Domitians folly Nothing equall to Christs Body and Blood 2. Inregard of the party Administrant Christ rose up from the Paschâll Table to wash the Apostles feet Probable he did the like to wash their Soules Christs humility at his Prayers A Story of a devout Cardinall Christs holy Gesture when he blessed any thing At the first Institution of any great matter mor ereverence is used than afterwards Diver se instances to this purpose All Christs Actions as well as his person pleased God PARAGRAPH I. FIrst therefore I resume that which before I proved and no man can justly deny that the upper Chamber wherein they are the Paschall and the Common Supper was a well furnished Chamber For it was a Guest-Chamber Marke 14.14 which always useth to be best adorned It was a large upper room so large if Dionysius Carthusianus opine not amisse as that it received the 120 Disciples mentioned Acts 1. vers 15. vide Dionys Carth. in Luc. 22. fol. 257. Act. 1. fol. 76. Furnished and prepared not with meat but with all other necessary utensils For the Apostles themselves were commanded There to make ready vers 15. and they did make ready the Passeover vers 16. Therefore the Table was not furnished with meat to their hands but the room with decent houshold-stuffe It was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was not only Mensa strata a spread Table The whole upper Chamber was Coenaculum grande stratum a large well accommoded room And in it might well be lesser Tables round Tables Livery Tables Tables to be used if need were with their faire furniture It had been a simple poore room if there had been nothing els but only what was for present use or what is particularly specialized were there no chayres no stooles no cushions no water no linnen to bee spred or spred at other boords PAR. 2. Secondly I hold it safest to say Christ did not institute his most holy Eucharist as they were eating other meats nor mixed Sacred things with Civil For in the Law of Moses he forbad such medleyes Deuter. 22.9 Thou shalt not sow thy Vineyard with diverse seeds Lest the fruit of thy Vineyard be defiled Thou shalt not plough with an Oxe and an Asse together vers 10. Thou shalt not weare a garment of diverse sorts as of wollen and linnen together vers 11. And can you think that the most Holy of Holies the immaculate Jesus Christ would make a mingle-mangle of Sacred and Common meat of Sacred and Common wine and whilst they were eating common food did consecrate the blessed Sacrament of his Body and Blood Obje Yea but it is so according to the letter As the◠were eating Sol. If you will go strictly according to the letter you must also say whilst meat was in their mouths whilst they were chewing it with their teeth Before their mouths were empty Christ gave them the Eucharist Now let any Christian heart judge whether it were not an indignity to the Sacrament to bee at such time administred whether the Letter be alwayes strictly to bee insisted upon Repl. If yet againe you urge the Letter Resp I answer that S. Luke and S. Paul say expresly Christ gave the Eucharist After Supper Luke 22.20 Likewise 1 Cor. 11.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which may be more largely interpreted than thus When Hee had Supped as our last translation hath it even thus After they all had Supped Therefore it was not done in Supper time or whilst they were eating And upon comparison of those foure places tell me now which standeth with most reason That hee gave the blessed Eucharist as they were chewing their meat or that it was done after Supper especially S. Paul writing last of them and being taught of the Lord Jesus himselfe the manner how it was administred I received of the Lord 1 Cor. 11.23 Again did Christ say Matth. 9.16 No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment neither do men put new wine into old bottles but they put new wine into new bottles and both are preserved vers 17. And can wee think himselfe would put the New sanctifying food of Grace and of his Body and Blood into those mouths which were eating and feeding upon the Common food of the Old Law even as they were Eating Or is it likely Christ gave Thanks whilst they were Eating But Thanks he gave as many Greek copies have it Matth. 26 26. And this Thanks began the Eucharist Or consecrated he the New Sacrament whilst they were eating their Ordinary food Christ blessed the bread ere he brake it Matth. 26.26 Did they eat whilst he was blessing the bread Ezechiel 44.23 The Priests shall teach my people the difference between the Holy and profane and cause men to discerne between the uncleane and the cleane Wherefore let no man imagine that Christ would make a mingle-mangle of earthly and heavenly matters of bodily and spirituall food and give them his Sacred Body and Blood As they were eating a Common Supper Edentibus illis may signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly That the Apostles were eating whilst Christ was discoursing That Christ ate little and conferred much and rather tasted meat than continued Feeding as the Apostles did Consider these points First He took bread 1 Cor. 11.23 Secondly He gave Thanks vers 24. Thirdly He blessed the bread Matth. 26.26 Fourthly Hee brake the bread ibid. Fifthly Hee gave it to them Luke 22.19 Sixthly He said Take Eat Mark 14.22 Were the Apostles eating
when he said Drink yee all of this lest the hearers should say Why drinke I blood and eate flesh To keepe them from being troubled at it as they were troubled when many fell off from him he dranke his own blood first himselfe So Titus hath it the Abbreviator of him Isychius on Leviticus 8. as I guesse verse 23. Moses tooke of the blood of the Ramme and put it upon the tip of Aarons right eare and on the thumbe of his right hand and upon the toe of his right foot And verse 24. He did the like afterwards to Aarons Sonnes Not onely on their thumbes but verse 27 He put oyle upon Aarons hands and upon his Sonnes hands Not onely on his hands But verse 30. Moses tooke of the annointing Oyle and of the blood which was on the Altar and sprinckled it upon Aaron first and his garments and upon his Sonnes and his Sonnes Garments and sanctified both Aaron and his Sonnes and their Garments Isychlus addeth Christ in that Supper first dranke his blood Then gave it to his Disciples Yea but it is not read that he ate his Body and dranke his blood Soto answereth It is read that He Tooke the bread He Tooke the Cup and though it must be expounded He Tooke them into his hand or hands yet it is not said He tooke them into his hands onely but He tooke them himselfe as he commanded his Disciples to take them Therefore when he said to them Take eate drinke so when He tooke them it is deducible He did after the same manner eate and drinke The old Rimer before cited is authentique enough in this last point Se tenet in manibus se cibat Ipse cibus Christ in his hands Himselfe did bring The Food and Feeder being one thing Soto bringeth another objection Betweene the Receiver and the thing Received there is a Division But Christ is not divided from himselfe Therefore he could not take himselfe It is answered saith he Christ is not compared to the place by his proper Dimensions but by the Dimensions of the severall Species so that wheresoever They are there is his body and blood Therefore because he had the bread and wine in his mouth and stomach when he ate Them he did eate himselfe And to this there needs no division between the receiver and the received PAR. 2. A Third Objection by him urged is this There is a double eating of the Sacrament Spirituall Sacramentall Christ needed not the spirituall receiving for he received no Grace from the Sacrament The Sacramentall reception is improper proper to sinners onely and so unfit for Christ He answereth with Aquinas Christ received himselfe both Spiritually and Sacramentally And so before Aquinas Alexander Hales settled at last in that opinion For though Christ received no increase of Grace or Charity by the Sacrament because he needed none yet he received a spirituall Taste and sweet enjoying of Delight which are effects of this Sacrament So he tooke it also Sacramentally To take it Sacramentally without increase of Grace hapneth from hence that the Receiver Then is not capable of Grace And this may come to passe two wayes Either because he puts an impediment or block against it as he is a sinner or because a man is so full of Grace that he cannot receive an Increase of Grace as Christ was Much of this discourse proceeded from the learned Dominicus Soto Confessor to Charles the Fist which because he most inlargeth Aquinas I have translated and cleared and inlarged him To conclude let me adde that Christ might well take the blessed Eucharist himselfe for example sake to Teach us what we should doe who may recieve much good by taking it and should imitate him by taking it first our selves before we administer it unto Others For thus did he doe diverse Actions in his life to Teach us to doe the like Gregorius de Valentia Tom. 4. in Tertiam partem Thomae Disputat 6. Quastione 9. Puncto 1. pag. 1095. agreeth with Soto and useth most of his arguments producing nothing of his owne Cajetan in his Commentaries in Tertiam partem Thomae Quaest 82. seemeth to approve Durand for saying That the Apostles though they did concaenare cum Christo yet they did not concelebrare Christ did it by himselfe the Apostles did not assist him in Consecration but he leaveth Aquinas without exposition in the maine point Whether Christ are his owne Body and dranke his own Blood Franciscus Lucas Brugensis on Matth. 26. saith in these words Christus ipse comêdit priusquam discipuli ejus qui tamen non comêdit priusquam pronuntiasset haec verba Hoc est corpus meum Christ did Eate before his Apostles did yet did he not Eate before he had said This is my Body Lastly all the Fathers who say Christ communicated with Iudas are clearely for the Affirmative If by these words My Fathers Kingdome Matth. 26.29 and these The Kingdome of God Mark 14.25 the blessed Eucharist be pointed at and meant as is likely then apparent it is Himselfe dranke of his owne blood in the sacred Eucharist for he professed He would drinke no more of the fruit of the Vine but onely in the holy Eucharist Bishop Lake in his Sermon upon Matth. 26.26 c. saith It may well be presumed that Christ did receive it Himselfe For in his owne person he did sanctifie and honour both Circumcision and the Passcover Also he was baptized and sanctified the water of Jordan Why should we question his Taking of the Eucharist That he did so needed not to be expressed because of the correspondency of This Sacrament to That of the Passeover Indeed Christ needed not partake But by his owne participation he gave vertue to all the Sacraments So he needed not to die for Himselfe but he dyed for us To this effect that holy and learned Prelate now a great Saint in heaven PAR. 3. I Now come to the next points unexpressed 1. What Posture Christ used when he consecrated the Eucharist 2. What Gesture They used when they Tooke it Of which in the seventh Chapter Some there are who say That all the Gestures which we use in religious worship may be brought to Two heads Some belong to Hope as first the Lifting up of the eyes which doe crave or expect some good thing Secondly the Lifting up of the hands to reach at mercy offered or set forth The other Gestures belong to Humiliation as the Uncovering of the head is as the laying downe of the crowne glory and majesty that Man hath and a baring of Mans merit or emptying himselfe of worth to give it to the party worshipped Secondly the beating of the Breast shewing that in it is sin which ought to be expectorated Thirdly Bowing of the Knee which is a great token of the hearts contrition But somewhat is defective in this Dichotomy of which more fully hereafter I returne to the Queres Concerning the first Remember what I writ in the
in the porch of the Temple but onely the Kings of Davids loynes The humble gesture of the Iewes when they came in went out of the Temples The Primitive Church kneeled to the Altars Altars the seats of the body and blood of Christ The Crosse in Chrysostomes dayes did alwayes use to remaine upon the Altar An Angel an assistant when Christ is offered up Ambrose To this day we worship the flesh of Christ in the Sacrament Idem No man eateth the blessed Sacrament before be have worshipped Christ in the Sacrament Augustine Constantine the Emperour in his Soliloquies with God pitched on his knees with eyes cast downe to the ground K. Charles partaketh of the body and blood of Christ with as much Humilitie as the meanest penitent amongst his subjects His holy and devout gestures at the participation of the Lords Supper turned the heart of a Romanist to embrace the truth on our side In Origens Arnobius and Tertullians dayes the Saints never met in holy places about holy things without decent reverence The Papists in kneeling adore the very materials of the Sacrament Yet the abuse of a thing taketh not away the right use Proved by divers curious instances Christians may lawfully use many artificiall things though invented by Heathenish Gods and Goddesses To argue from the Abuse of things to the whole removing of the use is rediculous Illustrated by some particulars Veneration of the Sacrament is accorded on all sides In the very Act of receiving it it is lawfull to kneele downe and worship Christ in it Calvin himselfe holdeth that adoration to be lawfull The Lutherans are divided in this point Illyricus denieth Christ to be worshipped in the Eucharist Brentius and Bucer hold That then we must worship Christs body Luther himselfe stileth the Eucharist Sacramentum venerabile Adorabile Chemnitius saith None but Sacramentaries deny Christ to be adored in the Sacrament Chemnitius acknowledgeth these Theses 1. Christ God Man is to be adored Arrians deny this 2. Christs humane nature for the hypostaticall union with the Divinitie is to be adored None but Nestorians will deny this The Apostles worshipped the Humane Nature of Christ Adoration precedeth Communication by the judgement of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine Christs flesh as made of earth may be said to be Gods footestoole So is the Arke All the Angels of God doe Worship Christ Christ is to be adored alwayes and every where Augustine Ambrose Nazianzene and Eusebius Emissenus are Chemnitius Co-opinionists Not the materiall Elements but Christ onely in them is to be adored If wee must adore Christ when we celebrate the divine Sacrament much more did the Apostles Habituall not alwayes Actuall Adoration of Christ 〈…〉 â—â—â—â—ired of the Apostles The Apostles worshipped Christ 1 When he had newly performed any Super-humane worke 2 When they begged great matters of him 3 When he did heale some who were vehemently afflicted 4 When he conferred any extraordinary blessing on their soules As hee did when he instituted the new Sacrament Master Hooker tearmeth Kneeling an Adorative gesture No kinde of Worship accepted that is not sometimes conjoyned with Kneeling Gregory Nazianzens Story of his sister Gorgonia Eusebius Emissenus and Origen say Christ is worshipped in the Sacrament Kneeling at the Communion commanded by the Booke of Advertisments set down set forth by Queene Elizabeth by the Lawes of the Realme and the Queenes Majestie Injunctions They defraud the Knees of their chiefest office and honour who refuse to bend them at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament Fol. 645 The Contents of the eight Chapter Par. 1 WHat gesture we are to use at the Administration of it to others Receiving of it our selves Both handled promiscuously The English Liturgie our best guide At the Repeating of the Law the people must kneele Receiving of the same the Israelites did no lesse Never Patriarch Prophet Evangelist Apostle nor holy Man nor Christ himselfe prayed sitting when there Was oportunity of kneeling The Monkes of Egypt did pray sitting The rule of Saint Benedict mentioneth Sitting at the Reading of three Lessons Rising up at Gloria Patri c. Severall gestures are to be used both by Priests and People upon severall occasions The Priests never kneeles while the people stand but he may stand when they kneele Great reason why they should kneele at the receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ No superstition nor idolatry then to kneele but obstinate irreverence if not blaspemy not to kneele Prayer most an end used with bending of the knees The Pharisee stood Christ kneeled when he prayed The Rubricke of the Communion Booke is to be followed by all obediently Fol. 652 Par. 2 The Minister is to deliver the Communion to the people kneeling in both kindes into their Hands Maximus would have Men to wash their hands Women to bring clean linnen that will communicate The nicetie of former times questioned The sixth Synod Canon 3. against it The consecrated bread must be carefully delivered and received To let any crumme or particle thereof fall to the ground accounted a great sinne by Tertullian and Origen Pope Pius the first punished those who let any of the Lords blood fall upon the ground or Altar S. Cyrill of Hierusalem gives a caveat to this purpose Little tables set before the Communicants in former times as now we hold linnen clothes saith Baronius The usuall fashion of receiving the Consecrated bread between the thumb and a finger or two disliked Receiving the holy bread in the Palme of the hand a safer way In Tertullians dayes the Christians did stretch abroad their hands like Christ upon the Craffe in their prayers Damascene would have us receive the body of Christ crucified with our hands framed like to a Crosse The right hand being upward open and hollow to receive the bread This accounted the safer Way Saint Cyril commanded the same kinde of usance Other manner of taking it not sinfull In things indifferent wee must not love singular irregularity All unseemly motions and gestures are so many profanations of the Lords Supper Seven generall rules to be observed against the profanation of the Lords Supper The word Amen explaned and kneeling at receiving the blessed Sacrament pressed Fol. 653 Par. 3 Tenth Generall What Names are given to the blessed Sacrament by the Scriptures and Fathers the Latine and Greeke Church The hallowed bread is called in the Scriptures 1 The Lords body broken for us 2 The Communion of the Body of Christ And the reasons thereof Breaking of bread from house to house 4 Holy bread Blessed bread Eucharisticall bread Heavenly bread Joh. 6. In the Fathers 1 Taking of the Lords body Tertullian 2 Earthly bread sanctified by prayer consisting of Earthly and Heavenly things IreÌ„naeus A Medicine of immortality an antidote against death procuring life purging sinne driving away all evills idem 3 Christs Dole to his Church Tertullian The plenty abundance and fatnesse of the Lords Body The Wine is called in
three dayes o Exod. 10.23 Exod. 10.23 neither doe I thinke that the Israelites had beene able to see to choose Lambes or Kids if they had gone into the Aegyptian Territories where one might feele darkenesse or darkenesse might be felt Exod. 10.21 Exod. 10.21 Therefore they must needes and did provide the Lambes and Kids foure dayes before hand Seventhly to put them in minde that as they provided themselves for a departure so it was to an holy departure Reason 7 and the beginnings of labouring for Canaan must be sacred and their first footing not to be moved till God had beene devoutly served which cannot be done suddenly nor hastily nor was here done without foure dayes preparation and diligent circumspection Reason 8 Lastly the Lambe was to bee chosen and as it were in their sight for foure dayes perhaps to signifie either that Christ was publikely to be seene knowne made manifest by his open workes of his ministery about foure yeares e're he was offered up a day being set for a yeare in Scripture phrase or else to fore-signifie that Christ should come foure dayes to Hierusalem before the passion and so he did when they cryed Hosanna as if they had found the perfect Sacrifice their redeemer being in sight and welcomed with the extraordinary applause of the multitude that went before and that followed after p Matth. 21.9 Matth. 21.9 from the mount of Olives to the Citie and through a good part of it from the Citie into the Temple even in which temple the children tontinued crying and said Hosanna to the Sonne of David vers 25. Now the most of those reasons saying in future times for they were gone out from among the Aegyptians and they needing no such testimonies of the faith they had no such stinging threate as the death of their first-borne nor wanted such a spurre to quicken their preparation for a speedy journey as they were not commanded so neither did they practise in future times to gather up the Lambes foure dayes before hand PAR. 9. AEGidius a Aegid Hunnius comment in Matth 26. Hunnius hath it thus Apostoliparant agnum masculum anniculum immaculatum per quatriduum â reliquo grege separatum mactantes juxta legem that is the Apostles prepare a Lambe a male of a yeare old without spot separated foure dayes from the rest of the flocke slaying it according to the Law in which opinion he is both singular and singularly false and did not distinguish the temporary rites from the perpetuall PAR. 10. THe third ceremony peculiar to the first passeover was the striking or the sprinkling of the blood on the two side-posts and upper doore-post of the house Exod. 12.7 Exod. 12.7 PAR. 11. THe sprinkling of blood was an ordinary ceremony in the Leviticall Law and sometimes it was done with the finger alone b Num. 19.4 Num. 19.4 Eleazar shall take of the blood with his singer and shall sprinkle the blood of the red Heifer directly before the Tabernacle of the Congregation seven times Sometimes sprinkling was used by other mediate things c Heb. 9.19 Heb. 9.19 Moses tooke the blood of Calves and goates with water and scarlet Wooll and Hysope saying this is the blood of the Testament which God hath enjoyned unto you and he sprinkled with blood both the Tabernacle and all the vessells of the Ministery In the old Testament it was enjoyned unto the people as a part of their Covenant to be sprinkled with blood to which words of Moses our Saviour alludeth in his consecration d 1 Cor. 11.25 1 Cor. 11.25 This cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you or as it is varied e Matth. 26.28 Matth. 26.28 This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes PAR. 12. ANd in this third ceremony these things are farther observable as most probable first that those houses in Goshen needed not to be sprinkled where no people were where no Lambe was killed where all the inhabitants entred into other houses to make up the full number in Communicants PAR. 13. SEcondly in the houses that were sprinkled with blood according to the Law whether the doores were open or shut it was all one the destroyer was not to doe harme but was to passe by it and to enter no other way or ope whatsoever though the entrances might be many and questionlesse were many by the chimneyes by the windowes and other in-lets of ayre PAR. 14. THirdly that the striking of the blood on the two side-posts and upper doore-post of the houses was used in no other Sacrifice PAR. 15. FOurthly this puncto is most certaine that this ceremony was onely peculiar to this Passeover and to no succeeding Passeovers for they had not the same cause The generall consent of the Jewish Rabbins is that it was never used after f Beza ad Matth. 26.20 Beza saith Summo consensu Doctores omnes Hebraurum testantur that is the Jewish professours with an universall agreement witnesse that the sprinkling of the doore-posts and lintell and superliminary belonged onely to that night when they were to goe out of Aegypt PAR. 16. THe reason following maketh it apparent this was commanded to prevent the destroying Angel and to keepe the first-borne of the Israelites from being slaine as the first-borne of the Aegyptians were slaine which is most firmely grounded on g Exod. 12.13 Exod. 12.13 The blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are and when I see the blood I will passe over you and the Plague shall not be upon you to destroy you and it is also confirmed h Heb. 11.28 Heb. 11.28 Thorough faith Moses kept the Passeover and the sprinkling of blood lest he that destroyed the first-borne should touch them When this occasion was removed and no such cause of feare they omitted ever after that ceremony and Sublatâ causâ totali tollitur effectus nor was ever mention made afterward of this ceremony as practised from that time but the words to the Hebrewes seeme to restraine it to the first passeover by Moses rather then by others PAR. 17. I Dare not say that the sprinkling of the side-posts and upper doore-post had no reference unto Christ who saith of himselfe i Ioh 10.7 Ioh. 10.7 Verily verily I am the doore of the Sheepe and without that addition ver 9. I am the doore I am sure this doore was be sprinkled with blood on all sides before and behind his head and his armes as the superliminary both sides of him as the side-posts and his feete as the threshold Mundans aerem terramque suo sanguine cleansing both aire and earth with his blood and all mankinde in them of such as beleeve in him which was a more perfect smell or unction then the precious oyntment of Aaron was that runne downe upon his beard and went downe to the skirts
before Ahab He girded up his loynes b 1 Kin. 18.46 1 Kin. 18.46 Gird up thy loynes said Elisha to his servant c 2 King 4.29 2 King 4.29 when he sent him in haste When Peter was commanded d Act. 12.7 Act. 12.7 To arise up quickely he was also then commanded First to gird himselfe then to bind on his sandalls ver 8. Which is another preparative to travaile and the second hastening ceremony enjoyned to the way-fareing Israelites PAR. 30. THey were also to eate this Passeover with shooes on their feete as our last Translators well expound their meaning indeed if you weigh the words in the originall there is an Hypallage they seeme to crosse and contrary the sense Habebitis calceamenta in pedibus ye shall have shooes on your feete instead of this habebitis pedes in Calceamentis ye shall have your feete in your shooes but this is cleared by the Hebrew Idiotisme otherwhere e Iudg. 20.48 Judg. 20.48 Miserant civitates omnes in ignem where the Scripture intends onely this miserant ignem in omnes civitates they fired all the Cities I will not nicely stand on the difference betweene Calceamenta and Sandalia Shooes and Sandales A shooe was more compleate than a sandall and of more defence for the foote PAR. 31. GOing bare-foote that I may presse to the poynt was a signe of much sorrow assumed by David when out of question he might have had shooes or Sandales to expresse his wofull expulsion from his owne Countrey by his rebellious son f 2 Sam. 15.30 Isa 20.2 3 4. 2 Sam. 15.30 And distressed captives used it in their bondage in another Countrey Isay 20.2 3 4. verses PAR. 32. BUt wearing shooes or Sandals betokened also a readinesse to be walking g Isa 5.27 Mar. 6.9 Isay 5.27 Mar. 6 9. The Apostles in visiting the places of their jurisdiction were allowed by Christ to be shod with sandals as the Israelites here were to have shooes on their feete as a token of their preparation for their speedy Exodus or forth-going Neither had the twelve Apostles onely at their Mission a kinde of conformity for their feet with the twelve Tribes at their setting forth for Canaan from Aegypt but both sorts were commanded to have a staffe the Apostles had so h Mar. 6.8 Mar. 6.8 And the Israelites i Exod. 12.11 Exod. 12.11 PAR. 33. THe third ceremony of their preparednesse to their journey was that they were also to have a staffe in their hand and that not to set up in a corner not out of sight safely kept not lying by them or among their carriages but in their hand PAR. 34. YEt by these words in their hand I would have none to thinke that they never left holding their staffe in one hand or other during the eating of that Passeover for then they must have eaten it very unhandsomely and both cut and eate with one hand onely at one time which would have hindred and prolonged their supper rather then shortned it But here this is reckoned as a speed-making ceremony and therefore if now and then or for the most while they held the staffe in their hands and yet now and then let it rest or leane on it for the nimbler dispatch of their supper the intent of the Law was fulfilled PAR. 35. A Staffe in their hand perhaps to put them in minde that as Jacob passed over Jordan with his staffe k Gen. 32.10 Gen. 32.10 So should they with their staves the Israelites doing as their Father Israel did PAR. 36. BEsides a staffe in a mans hand secureth his footing preventeth sliding or falling It is an ornament to youth a crutch yea a very third legge to age it is a stay to the whole body it helpeth naturall infirmities and accidentall occurrences l Zach. 8.4 Zach. 8.4 Every man with his staffe in his hand for very age And so much for the first assertive part That the first Passeover was eaten in haste in great haste absolutely PAR. 37. THat it was not eaten in such hast ever after the Talmudists strongly averre m Beza ad Mat. 26.20 Beza saith that the sprinkling of the blood upon the doore posts the eating the passeover in haste with shooes on the men being girded with staves in their hands were practised onely this one night of the first passeover and in this saith he all the Jewish Doctors doe fully agree PAR. 38. ANd indeed what needed the sprinkling of the posts with blood when no Angell was to destroy and when they had no doore-posts in the Wildernesse to be sprinkle What needed their loynes to be girded when they were at rest What needed shooes on their feete when they mooved not nor needed to move What needed a staffe in their hand when no journey was toward What needed eating in extraordinary haste when there was no danger nor trouble nor discontent nor offence growing by the stay or by the eating leisurely or cum decenti pausâ The prime reason why they were commanded to eate in haste with those un-retarding ceremonies being to prevent imminent mischiefes arising from delayes which was not so nor likely nor scarse possible to be so in succeeding ages we may fairely conclude they did not in any future times commonly use these posting ceremonies but they were proper to their first Paschatizing This is undenyable the quickning ceremonies were neither repeated nor commanded at the reviving of the Law Levit. 23. Nor can be shewed to be precepted or practized at any other Passeover in any other place of the Old or New Testament PAR. 39. ANd so much sufficeth to have spoken of eating the first passeover in haste in great haste simply with its running moving ceremonies appropriated to it and never after in such perplexed speech performed though ever after the passeover was eaten in more haste then common food or the food sacred at other Festivities in haste not absolute but referentiall PAR. 40. THough it be said n Exod. 12.25 Exod. 12.25 When ye be come to the Land which the Lord shall give you ye shall keepe this service yet the words have no alliance with the immediately preceding transeunt ceremonies of sprinkling of blood which is of all men confessed to have ended for ever in the night of their departure and therefore by parity of reason the words comprehend not the other temporary ceremonies but onely extend to the maine businesse to the substantialls rather then the Accidentals to the durable and not to the vanishing short occasionall observances To the Reall Sacrifice to the Lords passeover as it is called ver 27. and not to the partly Semi-diarian partly Vespernall fading rites of one night All which were begotten borne living dying dead and buryed within twelve houres which rituall shadowes comparatively deserve not the great name of Gods worship the word is in the Originall Hagnabadah translated by the 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and
I rather thinke the Romans followed the Grecians and the Grecians imitated the effeminate Asiatiques the Romanes tooke most of their Lawes and most of their Customes from the Greekes 1. Concerning this particular posture of Discumbing e Alexander ab Aâ—exan gen dier l. 5. c. 21. Alexander ab Alexandro thus a principia Majores nostri sedentes epulabantur Laconum more that is in the beginning our Ancestors feasted sitting as the Lacedemonians used apud veteres Romanos non crat usus accumbendi saith Isidorus the Ancient Romanes were not wont to lye downe at meales Afterwards when the men did lye downe the women sate saith the Great Varro Quià turpit visâ—is est in muliere accubitus because it was a filthy unseemely sight for a woman to lye downe saith he afterward none but the next kindred of women-kinde might Accumbere neither among the greater men PAR. 8. YEt Annarus Babylonia Rex cum 150. psaltrile accubans coenitabat saith Alexander ab Alexandro Annarus King of Babylon supped with 150. Psalterists or Minstrellests lying downe with them even among the Romans Suetonius saith of Caligula pleno convivio sorores singulas infra se vicissim collocabat uxore suprâ cubante that is at a great feast he placed every one of his sisters one after another below himselfe and his wife lay above him Nero mixt himselfe with Harlots on their Feasting Beds in ipsis lectis cum viris cubantibus foeminae sedentes coenitabant men and women supped together the women sate the men lay on their beds saith the same Alexander ab Alex. but this was labentibus moribus when the Empire was increased and good Discipline was corrupted PAR. 9. YEa Tertullian himselfe acknowledgeth that discumbing was practised by the good Primitive Christians and cap. 39. Apologet. mentioneth Triclinia Christianor um the parlours of Christians and otherwhere he confesseth that even women did accumbere lye downe at meales by the men And to the carping objection of the Heathens Tertall Apologet cap. 7. he answereth fully holily and truely the words of Tertullian are these Vescere libenter intere à discumbens dinumera loca ubi mater ubi soror supple torum presserit nota diligenter ut cum tenebrae ceciderint Canine non erres piaculum enim admiseris nisi incestum feceris the supply hath firme ground from his owne words in another a Tertul. ad Nationes 1 7. place dinumera loca ubimater aut soror torum presserit Which words of Tertullian may bethus translated eate willingly the flesh of an Infant in the meane time as thou lyest downe observe the especiall places where thy mother or thy sister reposeth her selfe on the bed marke it diligently that when the dogges have tumbled downe and put out the Candles thou mayst be sure to constuprate thy Mother or thy sister It is an haynous offence not to bee Incestuous lest these words of Tertullian should be mistaken or misapplyed you are to be informed that in that part of the Chapter Tertullian to the confusion of the Heathen most wittily and divinely frameth his discourse by way not of truth or granting but by way of supposall as if a Christian Prelate should say these words to an Heathen newly Christianized eate the flesh of Infants drinke their blood commit Incest doe such horrid and dismall sinnes and live for ever you would not buy saith Tertullian eternall life at so deere a rate nor would you beleeve him therefore you are to thinke we Christians neither doe such evill nor beleeve such words not say them b Tertul. ad uxorem v. 5. Tertullian againe ad uxorem discumbit cum marito in sodalitiis saepè in popinis I returne to the old Romans who were wont to sit at meales so c Virgil. Aeneid 8. Virgill Perpetuis soliti patres considere mensis that is It was their guise in Ancient time To sit at boord when they did dine And againe Vivoque sedilia saxo The rockes did sometimes afford them refreshing places at their meate and yet Virgill saith of Aenem before Rome or Romans were Inde toro pater Aeneas sic orsus ab alto Then old Aeneas Virgil. Aeneid 2. from his lofty bed Thus gan his tale when first be had well fed PAR. 10. THe Graciant also at first did fit and not lye downe onbeds I observed before that in the beginning the Lacedamonians fashion was to sit they of Crete held it a horrible thing to lye downe at meate saith Alexander ab Alex. ibid. King Alexander ate his â—eate sitting saith he and yet within three leaves after even in the same forecited Chapter he saith fertur Alexander Macedo appetente nocte coenâsse primo diluculo prandio accubuisse Alexander of Macedon supped at earely night and lay downe to dinner at the first shine of morning PAR. 11 ACcubation was in free prosperous Times if not delicate and luxurious Terentius Varro and Hanniball in their Misery supped standing and Cato after Pompey's death in the Civill wars did not discumbere as he was wont but sate The Romans made their way to Asia through Greece partaking of the Graecian fashions as the Greekes did of the Asiatique effaeminatenes Antiqui torum ex palustri ulvâ ex stramento vel ex cespite fuisse saith the often cited a Alexand. ab Alex. l. 5. cap. 25. initio Alexander ab Alex. their beds were made of reedes or of Sea-grasse straw stubble or turfe then they left those homely Countrey fashions and had first square then round Tables to dine and suppe on which fashion saith he I beleeve they borrowed from the Lacedaemonians PAR. 12. AFter this Cneius Manlius carried in Triumph upon the Asian Conquest amongst other things aeratos lectos Triclinia bedsteads of Brasse and Feasting beds and then did voluptuousnesse encrease among the Romans of which hereafter but the Asiatiques used it long before the Romans PAR. 13. BEsides what before I related of Annarus King of Babylon which story I hold to be uncertaine sure I am that in the dayes of Ahashuerus they used accubation of bed-repasting for Hest 1.6 the very banqueting beds with their furniture are described and Hest 7.8 Haman was fallen on the bed whereon Ester was Est 1.6 7.8 and at the banquet of wine it was a feasting bed Est 3.15 the King and Haman sate downe to drinke Iasheba sate in likelihood on their feasting beds yea an hundred yeares before the raigne of Abashuerus and Ester Ezekiel prophecied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he so describeth a wicked woman that in her you may conjecture at the custome of the Jewes and that the Jewes did not take up that custome of feasting beds from the Romans for this was within a while after Romulus but the Romanes or Graecians might take it from the Jewes howsoever b Pererius in Ioh 13. â— Pererius is confident that herein the Jewes followed the Romane usance the
had we have had hundreds and the Gospell of Christ hath lasted longer than both their Temples with all their Jewish Policie yea for Numbers of each side we have and yet doe exceede them by millions PAR. 13. ONce more I returne from my By-pathes and Diversions The Passeover continued all the dayes of the prosperity during the second Temple nor did the Annuall sacrifice cease at Hierusalem whilst the Temple was purified yet must you not thinke that the proper Passeover was tyed and fastned to the Temple but rather the Sacrifices of the feast belonging to the Passeover It is a confessed and yet proved truth that the Passeover was not bound to be slaine and eaten in the Temple but might be must be performed in their private houses at Hierusalem but the rest of all the Sacrifices which were to be offered during the feast of unleavened bread which endured seven dayes all those were commanded as well as other Sacrifices to be killed in the Temple at Hierusalem Deut. 12.13 Take heede to thy selfe that thou offer not thine offerings in every place that thou seest but in the place which thy Lord shall chuse in one of thy Tribes There thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings and there shalt thou doe all that I command thee ver 14. I will not deny but sometimes upon some extraordinary occasions the Passeover might be slaine in the Temple but that was not often or necessary-legall nor might ever or was it ever eaten there but in any other part of the City PAR. 14. MArke the judgements of God in these two points though many are most observable First he who undertooke and performed to keepe their Cities during their absence at Hierusalem whilest they truely served him the same Almighty God caused the Romans to fall upon their Cities and to besiege Hierusalem whilest they were there when once their sinnes were come to maturity Iosephus de Bello Iudaico 6.4 is either wronged by transcribers or wrong in his account which is not likely when he saith that the day of unleavened bread fell on the 14. of Aprill The City was full of people observant of the Passeover and Titus besieged them and they valiantly beate him off One of the 3. Factions viz. the Zelotes were slaine upon the day of unleavened bread every one of them by Iochanan the head of other mutiners who closely sent armed men into the Temple and filled it with blood They broke the Covenant and therefore the bond betweene God and them was now of none effect Nor was the siege ended till toward the end of September the Temple being fired and the people in it on the tenth day of August even the same day that it had beene burnt once before by the King of Babylon as Baronius collecteth from Iosephus the City was burned after and mount Sion forced on the Sabbath day being the 8. of September A stone was not left upon a stone in Hierusalem The second point which I observe is this that whereas the Jewes cryed fiercely when they would have Christ crucified His blood bee on us and on our Children Mat. 27.25 Titus as the Jewes were taken even five hundred a day and more caused them all to be crucified Ita ut jam spatium Crucibus deesset corporibus Cruces so that there was not roome for crosses nor crosses enough for their bodies as Iosephus an eye-witnesse relateth it de Bello Iudaico 6.12 Lastly I have either credibly heard or read that whereas Christ was sold for 30. pieces of silver the Captive Jewes were sold 30. of them for one piece of silver and more particularly for Iudas Rupertus observeth that for the 30 pieces of silver which Iudas tooke to betray Christ he had just as many Curses Prophetically denounced against him Psal 109.6 c. though I will not avouch that Rupertus hitteth the exact number or that every curse in that Psalme is appropriated to Judas onely excluding all other of Davids enemies Yet I dare say most of them fully reflect upon Iudas So much concerning this sixth Ceremony this durable Rite that the Passeover was to be kept in Hierusalem onely after the Temple was once erected The Prayer MOst infinite and incomprehensible God sometimes above all the rest of the world in Iury wert thou knowne thy Name was great in Israel in Salem was thy Tahernacle and thy dwelling place in Syon Salvation was of the Jewes unto the Jewes were committed the Oracles of God and the Sacraments of the old Law but blessed be the glory of thy mercy to us the partition wall is now broken downe and thou O blessed Saviour didest dye out of the gates of Hierusalem with thy face to us-ward and the houre now is when the true worshipper shall worship the father in Spirit and in Truth and that not in Hierusalem alone or in any other especiall mountaine or valley but every where art thou called upon and every where art praysed The heathen adore thee O God and the Islands rebound thankes unto thee for enlarging thy Kingdome for spreading thy armes of mercy to embrace them and for bringing them unto thy fold O blessed Saviour the onely shepheard of our Soules O Jesus Christ the Righteous who didst give thy life for thy sheepe and who by tasting death for all men doest bring us to life againe All prayse honour and glory be ascribed unto thee the most holy indivisible Trinity through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen CHP. XII The Contents of the twelfth Chapter 1. The Paschall Lambe was to be eaten in one house and slaine not in the Temple but in the house commonly More Lambes might be eaten in one great house It might not be eaten without doores No Salvation without the Church Schisme is forbidden 2. Not onely the Priests but the people of Israel might kill the Paschall-Lambe the people might not slay any other Sacrifice Nor the Levites ordinarily but the Priest onely Every one in the Congregation of Israel did not slay the Passeover but the Chiefe in one houshold Maymonides rejected Bellarmine truely avoucheth this duty of offering the Paschall-Lambe to belong to the priviledges of the first-borne before Aaron or his sonnes were chosen to be Priests 3. The Levites might offer the Sacrifice of the Passeover for the Priests if the Priests were not sanctified and the Priests might slay the Paschall-Lambe for the people if the people were not sanctified 4. Whether the head of the family himselfe must of Necessity slay the Passe-over or whether he might depute another in his place Barradius rejected for saying Christ himselfe slew the Passeover 5. A strange story out of Suidas 6. The Apostles prepared the Passeover before Christ came 7. The Passeover was not slaine at the Altar neere the Temple 8. The roasting of it whole is another fixed Ceremony 9. They were to eate it roasted with fire 10. They were not to eate it raw 11. Not sodden at all with water 12. The head was to
Serm. de Caena Dom. pene in principio Parag. 2. p. 500. Christus finem legalibus Ceremoniis impositur us parari sibivoluit Pascha ex consuetudine Legis ea quari quae solennitas exigebat assum agnuâ—â— panes ezymos lactucas agrestes that is Cyprian in his Sermon of the Supper of the Lord almost in the beginning Christ being about to put an end to the Legall Ceremonies would have the Passeover prepared for him and those things to be provided according to the Custome of the Law which the solemnitie of that feast did require namely a rosted Lambe unleavened bread sowre â—erbes PAR. 2. VVE may not imagine they ate the flesh of the Paschall without unleavened bread nor yet unleavened bread alone in that supper without the Paschall-Lambe but were to be both served in and eaten together the end of rosting was for eating and the manner of eating the Lambe was with unleavened bread Exod. 12.8 They shall eate the flesh rosted with fire with unleavened bread and this precept is repeated Levit. 23.6 Numb 28.17 At the Even the 14. day was the Passeover of the Lord to be slaine and to be eaten the other Evening which began the 15. day with unleavened bread PAR. 3. MAymonides saith the Passeover may be eaten if they cannot get unleavened bread nor sowre herbes I answere it is not then truely and perfectly the Passeover the infinite wisedome of divine providence so sweetely ordeined this Sacrament that where Ewes and Lambes were fed there must needes be grasse and other herbes and naturally some wild herbes sprout up rather than the choycer herbes and may be sooner gathered picked washed and minced then a Lambe could be rosted In lesse time also might the flower be made unleavened either bread or cakes or wafers likewise the leavened Masse presupposeth the unleavened for if any flower be to be had at all it is unleavened before it is leavened So that the Jew neede not suppose the want of unleavened bread if they had any corne at all ye shall eate the Passeover with unleavened Bread and with bitter herbes therefore whatseover the Jew saith they might not eate it without either of these PAR. 4. BOth unleavened bread and bitter herbes must not onely be present but eaten and eaten with it else it was but an adulterate Passeover and a great spot or maime was in that Sacrifice was the flesh of the Passeover to be without bread especially in a Land of Corne Deut. 33.28 They may as well remove bread from being one of the materialls in our Sacrament of the Eucharist PAR. 5. IN the Sacrifice of thankesgiving they were to offer unleavened cakes or wafers Levit. 7.12 and yet besides the cakes he shall offer for his offering leavened bread with the sacrifice of thankesgiving of his peace offerings ver 13. And in the new meate offering or the first fruites unto the Lord they were to bring two wave-loaves of fine flower baken with leaven Levit. 23.16 17. And yet Leaven was wholly forbidden in divers things Levit. 2.11 No meate-offering which ye shall bring unto the Lord shall be made with Leaven for ye shall burne no leaven in any offering of the Lord made by fire I answere these words and they immediately following doe evince leaven is not excluded from all offerings but onely in burnt-offerings on the Altar As for the oblation of the first-fruits yee shall offer them unto the Lord but they shall not be burnt on the Altar for a sweete savour why so because the two wave-loaves of the first fruites were to be baken with Leaven Levit. 23.17 Briefely thus with Origen leaven was forbidden ad sacrificium non ad sacrificii ministerium ad sacrificium non ad esum that is it was forbidden in the Principall sacrifice not to the subservient ministers againe Levit. 23.18 Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread which is varied thus Levit. 34.25 Thou shalt not offer the blood of my Sacrifice with leaven Lastly in the Passeover offerings unleavened bread was excluded even from their houses and coasts in the feast of seven dayes which feast was called the feast of unleavened Bread Exod. 12.17 PAR. 6. THat the Israelites used any at all from their going out of Aegypt till they came into the Land of Canaan I doe not see prooved sure I am God saith Levit. 23.10 When ye be come into the Land which I shall give you leavened bread was permitted to be offered ver 17. So the Law of meate offering and drinke-offering was prescribed When ye be come into the Land of habitations Numb 15.2 and ver 18. And when you come into the Land whether I bring you then it shall be c. Likewise for the leavened wave-loaves of their first fruites this was not fulfilled in the wildernesse where they had no corne growing but the Law was to take force when they came into the borders of Canaan where corne was They carryed no Leaven out of Aegupt and within 33. dayes they were fed with Manna till they tasted of the old corne of the land of Canaan Josh 5.12.40 yeares did they eate Manna Exod. 16 35. In this journey from Ramesis to Succoth or at their resting places there they baked unleavened cakes of Dough Exod. 12.39 Josephus saith the Israelites lived on unleavened bread till they had Manna It appeareth not that they are leavened Manna nay rather it is probable that they did never leaven it For no Manna was kept above two dayes none above one day except the Sabbaticall Manna which was a wonder and except the re-memorative and miraculous Manna reserved in the pot for future times besides the taste of Manna was like wafers made with honey Exod. 16.31 If it had beene leavened it would have beene bitter or sowre cleane contrary to the taste of honeyed things againe Manna needed no preserving by leaven it was stedfastly good till the time by God appointed corruption could not seize on it on the other side all the leaven in the world could not keepe it from stinking and wormes and putrefaction if they spent it not by its appointed time to put leaven into Manna was to mingle things profane with sacred Dr. Willet on Exod. 12. quest 15. hath these words it is to be considered that in this first Passeover they were not commanded to eate unleavened bread seven dayes neither did they intend so much but they carryed their dough forth unleavened not for any Religion but for haste therefore that prescription to abstaine from leavened bread seven dayes ver 14. belonged to the perpetuall observation of the Paschall but the other Rites prescribed unto the 14. v. appertained to the first Passeover If Dr. Willet doe meane onely that the Israelites did eate unleavened bread the night of the Passeover but were not necessarily bound to keepe the feast of 7. dayes of unleavened bread till they came into Canaan I will not much oppose him both because
lesse Quando suppetet Pascha beatius cibusque coelestis in Regno Dei since hee had a more blessed Passeover and a heavenly banquet in the Kingdome of God PAR. 2. IT is a true Rule that not onely the prepositions before after untill unto from and the like which denote or signifie the bounds limits either of time or place either initiall or finall and determinative but all other descriptions or circumscriptions of time space or place are ambiguous and sometimes include sometimes exclude those very bounds assigned out Before the day of the Passeover the word before saith Illyricus sometimes includeth sometimes excludeth the very day of the Passeover when it is to be understood inclusivè the sense is Ante diem Pasche terminatum vel finitum before the day of the Passeover was terminated or ended yet commonly it is used exclusivè so after three dayes Christ shall rise againe Marke 8.31 and after three dayes he said he would rise againe Matth. 27.63 by which expressions is not meant that he would rise againe the fourth fifth sixe or seventh day or any time after that but the third day is included not excluded for his Resurrection was fore-prophecied of by Christ himselfe that it should be accomplished on the third day Matth. 16.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 raised againe the third day and accordingly it was performed Christ rose againe the third day saith the Apostles Creed He rose againe the third day 1 Cor. 15.4 according to the Scriptures After sixe dayes Jesus taketh Peter and James and Iohn and bringeth them unto an exceeding high mountaine Matth. 17 1. Marke 9.2 yet is it varied Luke 9.38 about an eight dayes after The reconciliation is faire the word after in S. Matthew and Marke excludeth dies terminales It was not in any part or parcell of the sixe dayes they were fully ended and passed but the preposition after in S. Luke excludeth them So Christ became obedient unto death Phil. 2.8 and though the word unto be often exclusive yet because Christ came not onely to the gate doore or chamber of death but passed through them and really truely was dead therefore death is not here excluded but included in the word usque or unto 1 Sam. 15.35 Samuel came no more to see Saul untill the day of his death usque ad that is from the houre neither before nor then nor after I have the more insisted on this Rulebecause it removeth many seeming contradictions in Scripture which the ignorant are not able to reconcile but swallow downe with their difficulties and now I descend unto the word Donec or untill to the further clearing of these difficult words Donec or untill the first is affirmative Matth. 28.20 I will be with you unto or untill the end of the world which promise proveth not that he would not be with them after the end of the world but rather that he would be much more with them in another world though he would not desert them here Psa 110.1 Sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footestoole grosse is the man who hence inferreth that Christ shall not sit at Gods right hand when Christ shall tread upon his enemies now he doth raigne over them even whilst there is opposition and shall much more hereafter when they shall be under his feete here Donec also affirmeth of the future times PAR. 3. THe second force of Donec is negative defuturo for the time to come Matt. 1.25 non cognoscebat eam donec peperit He knew her not untill shee had brought forth c. he meaneth not that after her sacred child-bearing Ioseph knew her for it is an Hebrew Idiotisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 donec the word untill excludeth without exception expressely till such a time and leaveth it implicitely to be understood that much lesse was it done or to be done afterward Rem nunquam factam certo tempore exprimit non factam quô videri facta poterat scireque necessaria erat non factam Excellently saith Lucas Brugensis he expresseth a thing never done by the not doing of it at a certaine time viz. at such a time as in all likelihood all others would have knowne their wives upon a new marriage but Ioseph did not so much no not at that time much lesse did he so afterward Michal the daughter of Saul had no child untill the day of her death 2 Sam. 6.23 Stupid is he who concludeth that she had children or a child after her death The Resultance is rather and firmer thus If shee had no child till her death much lesse had shee one after Ioseph knew not the blessed ever-Virgin Mary till she was delivered much lesse did he after that In both these passages the force of donec is negative So here I will not any more eate thereof till it be fulfilled not here much lesse hereafter in heaven where we shall have a more blessed Pascha sine intybis vel amaritudine without any bitter Sallet the like may be said of the word untill in the 18 verse but what is the kingdome of God Or how is the Passeover fulfilled in the Kingdome of God I answer by the Kingdome of God in this place is not meant the Militant Church but the Triumphant Origen Euthymius and others here appropriate it to the future world and in the world to come the Passeover is thus then fulfilled and perfected because the Iewish Passeover was to be eaten with bitter herbs and that Passeover was accompanied with a second Supper nor were all and every one blessed that tooke the Passeover therefore was it in a manner imperfect but blessed are all and every one who are called to the Marriage-Supper of the Lambe Rev. 19 9. and in that Supper is nothing wanting all sorrow excluded all joy prefected the Type being drowned in the glory of the great antitype an happier Supper an happier Passeover shall be in heaven This manner of speech perhaps hence arose saith Illyricus because the Writer would determine onely for his owne time or the time he propounded to handle and cared not to speake of further or remoter times as it was principally intended and all things were accordingly prepared that Christ might eate the Passeover Marke 14.12 So it is most true Christ sate not as an idle spectator but he did indeede eate the Passeover and promised never to eate it more PAR. 4. WHat else Luke 22.17 He tooke the Cup and gave thankes and said Take this and divids it among your selves for I say unto you I will not drinke of the fruit of the Vine untill the Kingdome of God shall come that this was not the Eucharisticall Cup appeareth by the Sequell where he instituted the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood PAR. 5. BUt what mean these words I will not drinke of the fruite of the Vine untill the Kingdome of God shall come What is the fruite of the Vine which then shall be drunken the
exhilarated body with competent meate and drinke wee finde by experience to make us better affected both towards God and Man Hold man hold though thy Master hold that when a man hath eaten moderately he is fitter to receive the Communion then when he is fasting because after meate the head is more purged the mouth cleaner the breath sweeter yet I dare say the head is fuller of noysome fumes the mouth no cleaner when one hath eaten and if thy breath stink common food maketh it no sweeter then the Divine Eucharist I am sure the third Councill of Carthage Canone 29. hath decreed Vt Sacramenta Altaris non nisi a jejunis hominibus celebrentur That the Sacraments of the Altar should not be celebrated but onely by those that are fasting and the seventh Councill of Toledo Canone 2. excommunicateth such as eate any thing before the performance of divine offices It was likewise a Novell position That when a man commeth most unprepared to receive the holy Sacrament then hee commeth best prepared and when he is most sinfull then a sinner may most worthily receive His very words are these in his Sermon of the Eucharist made 1526. Ille ut aptissimus ad communicandum qui ante retro est peccatis contaminatissimus sine peccatis mortalibus nullum debere accedere Hee is fittest to communicate who before and behinde who on all sides is most defiled with sinne and without deadly sinne none ought to come to the Communion He meaneth not that a new life sufficeth without contrition confession satisfaction as some of his fellowes say his words runne to a worse sense For in another Sermon of the worthy receiving the Eucharist eight yeeres before Optima dispotio est saith he non nisi ea quâ pessime es disposit us è contrario tunc pessimè es dispositus quando optimè es dispositus Then art thou best disposed when art thou worst disposed and contrarily then art thou worst disposed when thou art best disposed Are not such words the meanes for men to commit sinnes and continue in them and with unrepentant hearts boldly fiercely impudently to swallow up the heavenly food of our soules the sacred Eucharist rather then exhortations to devout receiving Is this way the proving and judging of our selves doth it teach repentance for sinnes past sorrow shame feare selfe-accusing for the present doth it teach a stedfast resolution and a setled purpose never to doe so againe doth his way encrease faith strengthen hope nourish charity yet these things are expected from a worthy Communicant What preparation was used at the giving of the Law Exodus 19.20 c. What sanctifying of themselves both people vers 14. and Priests vers 22. All this preparation might have beene cut off and saved by Luthers doctrine They did not eate the Paschall Lambe without divers washings and many legall purifications insomuch that a second Passeover in another moneth was ordained for the uncleane by Gods extraordinary appointment Numbers 9.10 Which was practised in Hezekiah his dayes 2. Chron. 30.15 18 19. verses Abimelech gave the hallowed Bread to the sanctified onely 1. Sam 21.4 c. David professed I will wash my hands in innocencie So will I compasse thine Altar O Lord Psal 26.6 Saint Paul adviseth or commandeth 1. Corin. 11.28 Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of that bread and drink of that cup. Aug. alluded to the words of the Psalmist when he said Tractatu 26. in Iohannem Innocentiam ad altare pertate peccata si sint quotidiana vel non sint mortifera Carry innocencie instead of Frankincense unto the Altar though thou hast committed no mortall sinnes but sinnes of infirmity The same Divine Saint Augustine Hom. 50. Tom. 10. pag. 115. Constituto in corde judicio adsit accusatrix cogitatio testis conscientia carnifex timor Inde quidem sanguis animae confitentis per lachrimas profluat posiremo ab ipsa mente talis sententia proferatur ut se indignum homo judicet participatione sanguinis corporis Domini Vt qui separari â regno coelorum timet per ultimam sententiam summi judicis per Ecclesiasticam disciplinam a Sacramento coelestis panis interim separetur When a Tribunall is erected in thy heart let thy thought accuse thee thy conscience be witnesse against thee thy feare and dread be thy tormentor then let the bloud of a soule confessing it selfe flow out in teares Lastly let the minde pronounce this sentence That a man judge himselfe unworthy to receive the body and bloud of our Lord That he who feareth to be separated from heaven by the last sentence of the supreme judge may in the meane time bee separated according to Ecclesiasticall discipline from the Sacrament of the heavenly Bread By which words in the meane time might well be inferred that S. Augustine differed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heaven wide from a novel German who would have a man fall upon the Sacrament with mortall offences on his soule with unwashed hands having newly committed sins Vastantia Conscientiam devoratoria salutis which lay waste a mans conscience and woorie his salvation He avoucheth the best disposition to be the worst and the greatest preparation the unfittest But Augustine would have a man after mortall sinne to abstaine from the most holy Eucharist a competent time till hee had repented till hee had proved and judged himselfe till hee had confessed his sinnes and laboured to wipe away the blots by his teares Which truth is confirmed divinely by our sacred Liturgi If any of you be a blasphemer of God c. unto these words so shall yee be meete partakers of these holy mysteries when Christ said Come unto me all yee that are heavie laden he meant not with loads of unrepented sinnes for as such cannot move one foot toward Christ to such obstinate sinners Christ is a judge and condemner not a mercifull Saviour And the words cannot aime at that sense for then not onely the spirituall food in the Sacrament but even Christ should bee the great allurer unto sinne as being abettor thereof which God forbid for then not onely a window but a doore were set open to all iniquity and villany but the meaning of that most comfortable invitatory is and must be this All yee who have sinned and are heartily sorry for your offences wearied groaning and ready to faint under griefe for the same yea who finde no comfort in your selves but are ready to be swallowed up of despaire or too much not sinnes but sorrow for sins O come yee unto me and this is evidenced by the gratious promise I will refresh you refreshing being opposed to trembling dejectednesse weakenesse swownings trepidations grievings faintings which are fruits of the heavie-hearted sinner and steps or breathings toward repentance refreshing is not opposed robustae iniquitati to strength of sinning or boystrous coutinuing in iniquity or triumphing rebellion and so the sorrowfull penitent
The third degree Judas a bold shamelesse impudent man a brazen face 3. Peter beckned to John Beckes have their language S. John understood S. Peters becke S. John S. Peters Mediatour to Christ D. Collins vindicated 4. The 1. Detection of Judas his uncleannesse 5. The 2. Detection he lifted up his beele against Christ God fore-knew Judas would be a Traytour He praedestinateth no man to sinne Why Christ would chuse Judas The booke of Gods Praedestination cannot be opened 6. The 3. Detection of Judas One should betray him Christs Passions and perturbations free from sinne 7. The fourth and last Detection of Judas He it is to whom I shall give a sop Many questions concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Whether it were Bread or flesh Diogenes saying of the Megarians Nonnus holdeth that 1. The thing delivered was Bread 2. It was dipt in Wine 3. It was Sacred and Divine The Aegyptians Custome Pope Julius wholly forbad the Intinction of the Bread in the Wine S. Augustine mistaken 8. The Morsell was Part of the second Supper Not of the blessed Eucharist S. Bernard Soto Ludolphus S. Augustine S. Hilary Soto mistaken in Bucella Salsamento Wine in all three Suppers In the second Supper great varieties The Sop not dipped in Wine 9. The second Quaere concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether Judas received the blessed Eucharist in it or no Authorities that he did S. Augustine Nonnus Dominicus a Soto and Aquinas from Chrysostome Dionysius S. Hierome and S. Bernard thinke so and Soto sayes that Haymo and Remigius thought so 10. Soto his note upon the words Edentibus illis He makes the Tricoenium compleate 11. Barradius S. Hierome Eugenius S. Cyprian Euthymius Equinas thinke so S. Cyprian thought the Sop to be the Sacrament 12. S. Augustine thought Christ praysed the Eucharist By Word Deede S. Augustine saith Judas received it Theophilacts wilde Crotchet PARAGRAPH 1. I Am now come to the second passage in the last partition of time allotted to the Second Supper namely a further detection of the Traytor Judas and this was partly whilst Christ washed their feete partly after it What I before handled in the first Supper I repeate not you may have recourse to it Thus hangeth our present Cohaerence Our Saviour having pronounced happinesse to them that doe well because Judas did not so He excludeth Iudas from happinesse saying in the 18. verse I speak not of you all I know whom I have chosen implying whom he had not chosen not him who did eate bread with Christ and yet lift up his heele against him vers 18. It is a Metaphor taken say some from wrastlers who put their legges betweene the legges of their adversaries and by that meanes cause them to fall and so metaphorically signifieth him who by craft and deceite ruineth another perhaps Christ secretly compareth Iudas to some horse Asse or other beasts who use to kicke backeward Aristotle was justly taxed for recalcitrating against Plato as shewing great unthankefulnesse to his Master Christ infinitely surpassed Plato in all goodnesse and Judas extreamely went beyond Aristotle in unthankefulnesse Qui velit ingenio cedere rarus erit saith Martial In contestation of a wit Not one will yeeld no not a whit Though omnis ingenii arrogantia turpis est T is a base thing for a man at any time to bragge of his wit Aristotle onely laboured to outgoe Plato in learning and in good same But Iudas was a very horse Leech Non missura cutem nisi plena cruoris hirudo PAR. 2. A Blood-sucker a sucker of innocent blood Lutum sanguine maceratum as one sayd of Tiberius One who loved to bathe himselfe in blood In contemplation whereof after some other discourse our Saviour was troubled in Spirit and testified and sayd Verily verily I say unto you that one of you shall betray me That the same matter with some little variety of words might be spoken in both the first and the second Supper no man can deny considering the manifold relations in all the Evangelists of the same protestations of Christ Vbi dolor ibidigitus where the soare itches there the finger scratches The presence of the Traytour oft gave Christ occasion to touch at him oft to forewarne him The repetitions made him more inexcusable as growing still more refractory fore-warned fore-armed as is usually sayd but a triple cord will not draw some It followeth The Disciples looked one on another doubting of whom he spake vers 22. This is a passage which none other of the Evangelists doe touch at Frons index animi And the wickednesse of the heart breaketh oft out into some change or disfiguration of the countenance In the forehead you may finde All the passions of the minde But belike Iudas being a bold shamelesse man whose forehead was hardned and his conscience seared had such command of his passions that his intentions could not be discerned by his lookes A man past shame hath great advantage over a modest man in point of contestation Iudas it seemes kept a stanch countenance out of which the other Recumbents could not picke his guiltinesse nor reade the dictates of his heart trafficking for blood PAR. 3. AFter the Apostles doubting and gazing one upon the other when they found no signes of discovery Peter who before was chid about his too resolute deniall to be washed fearing perhaps lest the aspersion might rest on himselfe Beckned to Iohn who was leaning on Iesus bosome that he should aske who it should be of whom Christ spake Iohn 13.24 Even beckes have their language Augustine de Doctrinâ Christiana lib. 1. cum oculis fabulamur we discourse with our eyes Confessionum 8.8 plus alloquebantur animum meum frons genae oculi color modus vocis quam verba quae promebam my frowne my cheeke my colour my manner of speaking did make fuller expression of my minde than did the words themselves which I did utter Ovidius Metamorpho 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. Nutu signisque loquuntur With beckes and signes Th' expresse their mindes Proverb 6.13 He speaketh with his feete he teacheth with his fingers loquens in pedibus suis docens in digitis suis as Montanus hath it Digitis loquitur saith the Vulgar digitis saepe est nutuque locutus Et tacitam mensae duxit in orbe notam Ovid. Trist 1. Oft with his fingers oft with beckes he spake And on the round board secret signes did make Navius in Tarentilla Alii dat digito literas To some others he wrote letters on his fingers ends Et potest de computo digitorum manualis loquela figurari saith Beda in libro de indigitatione There may be framed a certaine kind of speaking by the hand even by an arithmeticall disposall of his fingers The wanton Tibullus was not ignorant Lib. 1. nutus conferre loquaces Blandaque compositis abdere verba notis How to conferre by speaking beckes How to compose his speech In silent language when h'
proceedeth Quibus non tacuit esse inter illos tanti seeleris hominem tamen primum Sacramentum corporis sanguinis sui Nondum ipso excluso Communiter Omnibus dedit From whom he did not conceale that there was among them so wicked a Villaine as he was and yet notwithstanding he gave the first Sacrament of his body and blood generally to all He to wit Judas being not as yet excluded out of their company Theophylact hath a wild crotchet on Mat. 26. That Iudas dranke Christs blood but reserved and hid the bodie of the Lord of shew it to the Iewes This is rather Divinatio quam opinio saith Barradius rather a conjecture than an opinion Somnium potius quam Divinatio say I rather a dreame than a conjecture The Prayer MOst mercifull Saviour thou wert very mercifull unto Iudas himselfe and didst use many wayes to worke his conversion but he did harden his heart the more in evill obstinacie and played the part of a stout hypocrite and hee would not be reclaimed but upon his detection he grew more desperate O father of all consolation give me a tender heart and keepe it so still that I may bee terrified with thy threatnings and comforted by thy promises and may effectually be mooved with those meanes which thou hast ordained to bring me to Salvation Amen Amen CHAP. XIV The Contents of the foureteenth Chapter 1. Authorites that Judas did not receive the blessed Eucharist Hilarius Rupertus Innocentius 3. Theophylact Tatianus Alexandrinus Gregorius Pachymeres Turrian Maximus Ludolphus Barradius Beza The ground of S. Augustines and many other famous mens errours concerning this point Reasons to proove that Judas did receive the blessed Eucharist 2. The 1. Reason 3. The 2. Reason 4. The 3. Reason 5. The 4. Reason 6. The 5. Reason Christ never shewed any extraordinary favour to Judas S. Augustine reports strange courtesies of Christ to Judas Judas borne at Marmotis as saith S. Bernard Much holinesse required to the participation of the body and blood of Christ Notorious wicked men not to be admitted to the Communion 7. The 6. Reason when the Devill first entred into Judas The prime intentions of the Compilers of our Liturgie concerning those words Lest the Devill enter into you as he did into Iudas c. Satanentred into Judas at severall times PAR. 1. AUthorities that Iudas did not receive the Sacred Eucharist are many Clemens Apostolicarum Constitutionum 5.13 Mysteria pretiosi corporis ac sanguinis sui nobis tradidit absente Iuda He gave unto us the Mysteries of his precious body and blood in the absence of Judas Hilarius Canone 3. in Matth. Sine Iudā Pascha spirituali accepto Calice fracto pane conficitur dignus enim aeternorum Sacramentorum Communione non erat The spirituall Passeover was instituted by the taking of the Cup and the breaking of the bread without Iudas for he was unworthy to be partaker of the everlasting Sacraments Rupertus in Iohan. Cap. 6 Diligentius Evangelistarum narratione doctorumque confideratâ diversitate citius deprehendi potest Iudam huic Sacramento Corporis Sanguinis Christi nequaquam interfuisse If we will diligently consider the History of the Evangelists and diversitie of the opinions of divers Doctors we may easily perceive that Iudas was not at all at this Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ Innocentius tertius patet quod prius exiit Iudas quam Christus traderet Eucharistiam It is plaine to be seene that Iudas went forth before Christ delivered the blessed Eucharist Theophylact. on Mat. 26. citeth others for this opinion with a good reason annexed Quidam dicunt quod egresso Iuda tradidit Dominus Sacramentum aliis Discipulis Proinde nos sic facere debemus males arcere à Sacramentis Some say that when Iudas was gone forth the Lord delivered the blessed Sacrament to his other Disciples And therefore we also ought to doe the like and to put backe the wicked from the Sacraments Tatianus Alexandrinus placeth Iudas his Egresse before the Sacred Mystery was consecrated Gregorius Pachymeres the Scholiast of Dyonisous Areopagita Excludit Dominus segregat justissimè Iudam qui non sanctè Convivio interfuit The Lord doth exclude and separate Iudas and that most justly because he was not present at the banquet so holily and religiously as he ought to have beene Indeede hee imagineth that Christ gave panem Vinum mysticum Iudae post discessum ejus Eucharistiam praebuisse Apostolis Mysticall Bread and Wine to Iudas and that after his going forth he gave the blessed Eucharist to his Apostles If he meane the dipped sop which had in it a Mysterie all this may be granted and yet our Conclusion is constant from him that Iudas partaked not of the Eucharist Turrian proveth from Dyonisius Areopagita that Iudas are not the blessed Sacrament Maximus an old Greeke interpreter of Dionysius Areopagita expoundeth him as denying that Iudas tooke the Eucharist But suppose I grant that Dionysius his owne words be dubious yet Pachymeres Turrian and Maximus say Judas was excluded Ludolphus the Carihusion Cap. 55. placeth the separation of Iudas before the administring of the Sacrament and Cap. 57. Post egressum Iudae after Iudas was gone forth when the cleane remained with their cleanser Christ comforted his Disciples and made a Sermon unto them full of sweetnesse and love honied with heavenly honey enlightned with light from God Corruptus ille uter foras missus fuerat Iudas that corrupt vessell was sent forth whom Christ knew to be unworthy c. Barradius is expresse that Iudas was excluded from the Sacred Body and Blood of Christ The worthy Hierome Zanchius whose Authority may passe for many Tom. 2. in quartum praeceptum Lib. 1. pag 762. truely opineth that Iudas his receiving of the holy Eucharist apertè pugnat cum historia Johannis Evangelii is cleane contrary to S. Iohns Gospell and saith expressely Lucam fecisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his narration that Iudas his hand was with him on the board Beza on Iohn 13.30 from the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presently went forth gathereth a good argument that Iudas was not at the sacred Supper Quum igitur non nisi Mensis secundis sublatis Dominus Sacrosancta sua Mysteria instituerit Luke 22.20 Since Christ began not his Sacred Supper till the two former suppers were ended and since Iohn saith after the sop Iudas went out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 continuò statim immediately they have the more certaine opinion who thinke Iudas not present at the Eucharist why S. Luke saith as if after Eucharist Christ sayd Luke 22.21 Behold the hand of him who betrayeth me is on the board with me wee must explaine by the other Evangelists from whom it is apparent that this speech was made before the Eucharist which was the last close of this feast The same Beza on Luke 22.21 on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or
offâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est ab scidisse separasse divisisse a Sacro choro traduxisse quoque Iudam in potestatem Diaboli the Ancients doe note that the Lord by that sop did cut off separate and divide Iudas from the holy Quire of the Apostles and did deliver him over into the power of the devill This proveth that Iudas went out before the holy Sacrament was administred And how could he then partake of the Eucharist Moreover the words As he entred into Iudas may be as a parenthesis having an entire sense of it selfe though the word of similitude reacheth not to identifie the times but onely compareth the entrances themselves and the words are full of Divine sense though they were reade Come not to this holy Table lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament the Devill enter into you and fill you full of all iniquities Moreover the Lyturgie may truely be sayd to compare the sinnes and following punishments though it compared not the times who offend like Iudas shall be punished like Iudas though the Devill entred into Iudas even before the Paschall Supper and doth enter into Christians after they have received the punishment shall be all one though inflicted at severall times Before the Passeover Iudas sought how he might conveniently betray him Mark 14.11 And before the Passeover Iudas sought opportunity to betray him Mat. 26.16 Yea before he trafficked for blood and before he communed with the chiefe Priests and Captaines Satan entred into Iudas Luk. 22.3 For he had resolved for the sinne before and then Satan entred He entred also into him after hee had received the sop and this was at the second Supper Which of those two extreames did the Lyturgie intimate Againe when Satan entred into Iudas is no matter of faith or of any great consequence nor is so propounded to us in the Lyturgie Last of all the Lyturgie doth not say that Iudas received the Divine food of the most Sacred Eucharist nor can the sense of those words be deduced thence But it saith at the utmost extension that the devill entred into Iudas after he had received the holy Sacrament Which holy Sacrament may very well be understood of the Passeover which was an holy Sacrament of the Iewes and which Iudas questionlesse did take and after which he tooke the Sop at the second Supper and then the devill entred into him And yet for all this Iudas did not partake of the body and blood of our Lord which he was justly separated from because he had sinned and betrayed the innocent blood as himselfe confessed of himselfe Mat. 27.4 And this I hold to be the most satisfactory answere to that specious objection from the Lyturgie the word Sacrament being applyable both to the Jewish and Christian Sacrament Judas taking the former the other Disciples taking both The Prayer OEternall God in Wisedome great in greatnesse powerfull in power infinite in judgement most just and yet such a gracious God whose mercy is over all thy workes and therefore much more over all our workes have mercy upon us deliver us from being the sonnes of perdition keepe Satan from entring into our hearts but rather tread him under our feete and lift us up to thee and fixe our scules on thee for Christ his sake Amen CHAP. XV. The Contents of the fifteenth Chapter 1. Reasons proving that Judas was not present at the Eucharist The 1. Reason drawne from Christs owne Example Examples pierce deeper than words Legall Conjunction 2. A 2. Reason drawne from the Leviticall Leper Leviticus 14.46 3. A 3. Reason drawne from the Leviticall Priests Ezek. 44.23 4. The 4. Reason drawne from Christs purging the Temple from prophane things Marke 11.11 5. The 5. Reason drawne from Davids example Psal 26. 6. The 6. Reason Iudas a Devill Iohn 6.70 7. The 7. Reason drawne from 1 Corinth 10.20.21 The Cup of the Lord and the cup of Devills opposite 8. The 8. Reason drawne from Christs washing the Apostles feete Iohn 13.2 The Schoole-mens opinion 9. The 9. Reason drawne from Heb. 10.26 10. The 10. Reason from Iudas his being excluded from Grace at the end of the second Supper The fourth Generall point 11. The Subsequent or Concomitant occurrences after the Traytors detection The 1. Occurrence Satans entring into Judas When Satan entred into Iudas How Satan entred into Iudas S. Augustine saith Affectu tantum Voluntate Ludolphus Essentially Not into his Soule But into his Body Tolet not Corporally but taking a quiet possession of him Theophylact Occupavit Cor ejus Cyrill praecipitem egit Origen Egit ut Ascensor equum Item Iudas totum Satanam suscepit in se After the Sop. 12. How Iudas was tempted Temptations are either 1. Ascendentes Inward 2. Obrepentes Outward 3. Immissae Darted in by Satan himselfe 13. Three Conclusions 1. Conclusion the Temptations of the world are severall from the Devills Three kindes of Tempters 1. The World 2. The Flesh 3. The Devill 2. Conclusion The temptations hath 3. degrees 1. Beginning 2. Proceeding 3. Consummation Or thus Consider 1. The Primitive Motion 2. The Assisting Commotion 3. The Plenary Agreeing Or thus 1. Suggestion 2. Delight 3. Pleasure 3. Conclusion The Devill is the Authour and Cause of all and every temptation The Devill a tempter The World and Flesh the Devills Instruments 14. How the temptations of the Devill be knowne from the temptations of the World Flesh 15. Satans temptations are Many Manifold Which temptations are grievous and fiery Which temptation is the worst and most dangerous How the World Flesh Satan tempteth The same sinne may be of the World Flesh Devill 16. The Creatures of God tempt us not primarily but by casualty the starres and heavenly influences tempt no man to sinne No more does any earthly thing in its owne Nature What temptations be from Satan the variety of Satans Temptations 17. All men have beene Tempted even the Spirituall Not Christ himselfe nor his Apostles free from Temptations The manner of Satans Temptations 18. Satan may enter into a man often times Iudas his state after Satans second entrance into him PARAGRAPH 1. THe Reasons also hold fairely that Iudas was not present at the Eucharist First whatsoever the Lord commanded himselfe fulfilled for Act. 1.1 Christ began both to doe and teach His first teaching was his doing no teaching is compared to the first practising Examples pierce deeper than words he was first baptized by Iohn before either he baptized and or gave authority to his Disciples or Apostles that they should baptize any But the Lord commanded the giving of holy things to holy people onely when he did say Give not that which is holy unto the dogges neither cast your pearles before swine Mat. 7.6 Therefore he himselfe gave not the holy Sacrament unto Judas PAR. 2. SEcondly Levit. 13.46 The Leper is uncleane he shall dwell alone without the Campe shall his habitation be Numb 5.2 Put out of the Campe every
Leper and every one that hath an issue and whosoever is defiled by the dead accordingly Azariah though he were a King yet because he was a Leper he dwelt in a severall house 2 King 15.5 And his Kingdome was ruled by his sonne Iotham as followeth If so strict a Command was to separate such as had onely bodily infirmities and such sickenesses as are Naturall even though they were no notorious sinners we may not imagine that Iudas whose sinne was above all bodily and ghostly spots was admitted to the most Holy of Holies PAR. 3. THirdly Ezech. 44.23 The Priests the Levites the Sonnes of Zadock that kept the charge of my Sanctuary shall come neere to my Table to minister unto me they shall teach my people the difference betweene the holy and profane and cause men to discerne betweene the uncleane and the cleane Therefore much more did Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Minister of holy things and the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not Man Heb. 8.2 By the separation of Iudas teach the Apostles and all the world the differences betweene the holy and prophane betweene the holy Apostles and prophane Iudas and caused men to discerne betweene the uncleane and the cleane when he sayd Ye are cleane but not all not Iudas the traytor Iohn 13.10 and 11. verses and therefore he sent him forth suddenly That thou doest doe quickely and Iudas went out immediately Iudas being as it were excommunicated and gone there followed the Most Sacred Supper PAR. 4. FOurthly did Christ when he came into the Temple looke round about all things Mark 11.11 Did Christ cast out all them who bought and sold in the Temple and overthrow the Tables of the money-changers and the seates of them that sold Doves Mat. 21.12 Did Christ more than ever he did before make a scourge of small cords and drive the prophaners of the Temple all of them out of the Temple and the sheepe and the Oxen Ioh. 2.15 Was Christ so zealous for the purification of the materiall Temple and shall wee not thinke hee did looke round about before he admitted any to his most sacred Table In this circumspection he saw Iudas and cast him out They who bought and sold in the Temple are held by divers to have meant well and to prepare the businesses the better for the sooner and better accommoding of the sacrifices for the service of the Temple yet did Christ cast out all these Now let any man say if he can that Christ admitted Iudas to better things than the Temple even to his owne sacred body and blood that Iudas who had no intentions even Iudas whom the devill before had entred into even Judas who had sold innocent humane blood or rather the blood of the Son of God Would Christ suffer the first institution of his last Divine Supper to be polluted by the presence of a Traytor Or did Iudas eate of that body which he murthered Or drinke of that blood which he caused to be shed Procul ô proculite profani Away away farre hence depart Each one that harbors a profane heart Profane Iudas was executed PAR. 5. FIfthly I have not sate with vaine persons neither will I goe in with dissemblers I have hated the Congregation of evill doers Gather not my soule with sinners nor my life with bloody men in whose hands is mischiefe and their right hand is full of bribes Psal 26.4.5.9.10 verses I will wash my hands in innocency and so will I compasse thy Altar O Lord ver 6. Shall Iudas who washed his hands and bathed his soule in blood partake of Christ who is our Altar Or would Christ administer the blessed Sacrament to Iudas who was a vaine person a dissembler an hated evill-doer a sinner a bloody sinner in whose hands were mischiefe and bribes farre was it from him PARA 6. SIxthly Have I not chosen you twelve and one of you is a Devill And he spake of Iudas Iscariot Ioh. 6.70 But Christ would never suffer a divell to be partaker of the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood Therefore before he administred that hee separated Iudas Iscariot Suppose the word Divell be taken for the instrument and agent of Satan and not the proper name of him whom we call the devill Antonimastieè figuratively grant it also that Iudas is called a devill because he imitated the workes of the devill Ioh. 7.44 Ye are of your father the devill the lusts of your father you will doe he was a murtherer from the beginning and abode not in the truth yet wee shall derogate from the puritie of the first institution to imagine that Christ would or did admit Iudas to taste of the Super-coelestiall Manna even while Iudas had the thoughts of murther in his soule PAR. 7. SEventhly 1 Cor. 10.20 21. verses I would not that yee should have fellowship with devills yee cannot drinke the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of devills yee cannot bee partakers of the Lords Table and the Table of devills God and Satan have severall distinct both Cups and Tables opposite one to the other Every man receiveth either the one or the other none partaketh both He who doth partake one doth not may not cannot saith the Apostle partake of the other There is a wall of partition of separation betweene those two Tables Iudas was discarded ere they began to take the Lords Supper at the Lords most sacred Table See the Schoolemens opinion concerning Judas his eating or not eating PAR. 8. EIghtly Maldonate on Iohn 13.2 saith Propteria pedes discipulorum lavit ut externe illo doceret Symbolo non debere homines impuros illotos ad sumendam sacrosanctam ac divinam Eucharistiam accedere Christ did therefore wash his Disciples feete that by that externall signe he might teach us that impure and unwashed men ought not to be admitted to the participation of the sacred and Divine Encharist And when all Christs washing and wiping made not Iudas cleane is there any likelihood Christ would admit the defiled Traytor to the most pure Supper of his Body and Blood PAR. 9. NInthly Heb. 10.26 If we sinne wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth as never man after so much knowledge sinned so wilfully as Iudas did there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinne but a certaine fearefull looking for of judgement and fiery indignation which shall devoure the adversaries ver 27. Therefore the holy Sacrament being a meanes of remission of sinnes remained not for Iudas to take PAR. 10. TEnthly and lastly Since Christ said What thou dost doe quickly by which words he did as it were bid him be gone before Grace was ended for the common Supper and that the gracelesse Traytor went out immediatly unlesse hee came backe againe presently which could not be because he went to the High Priests and gathered a band of men he could not possibly be at the participation of the holy Eucharist PAR. 11. The fourth
as dividing one chapter into soure chapters another or the second chapter into three chapters Nonnus observeth not our chapters much lesse verses Suidas doth otherwise distinguish the chapters Cyrill maketh twelve bookes on Saint John as if all were concluded in twelve chapters Who desireth to see more let him have recourse to the cited place of that rare Scholer and he shall find admirable curiosities concerning chapters and verses of the New Testament and he shall not repent him of his labour And let him consult with Sixtus Senonsis Bibliothecae Sanctae 3. pag. 157. c. Let me adde somewhat more The Arabick Translator is much different from all others Francis Junius in his preface before the Arabick translation of the Acts Arabs noster capita nec sine judicio aliter planè distinguit atque in libris nostris distincta sunt consimiliter versus alios dividit in nostris confusos Alios conjungit disparatos suâ compositione id quod fuerat obscurius tanquam adunatis stellis illuminant Our Atabick Interpreter saith Iunâ—us distinguisheth not without cause or reason the chapters otherwise than they are distinguished in our bookes Likewise concerning the verses he divided some which are confounded together in our bookes and joyneth others together which were disparate and sundred And by this his Composition that which was more obscure he ilustrateth and illuminateth as by a conjunction of stars Heinsius in the fore-cited place concurreth with unius that some others divisions are better than those which we now have in use in some things His words are Intelligimus eos nonnunquam meliùs quae non haererent divisisse where some chapters or verses had little dependance one upon another they sometimes better distinguished them than we doe now I answer if in some few of their variations they come neerer to conveniency than ours doe which I will not wholly deny yet if I have any judgement they have strayed worse than the Greek divisions have done in other places whilest they strive to be menders that ought to be but Translators Indeed if Saint Mark had delivered the Gospell to the Syrians as themselves say he did and if their distinguishments be now such as Saint Mark left them it would make much for their authority Or if any of those Arabians Acts 2.11 who were at Jerusalem at Pentecost had in the dayes of the Apostles translated the Gospels and kept them since from alteration we might ascribe much to it But concerning the Syriack translation Non desunt etiam quaedam in ea editione quae viris doctis piis non admodum placent There are somethings in that edition which holy and learned men are not well pleased with saith Bellarmine And I cannot easily be brought to beleeve that S. Mark delivered to the Churches of Syria and Egypt the Syriac edition of the New Testament since neither Clemens Alexandrinus nor that living Library Origen who laboured more about the Editions than ever any other did Nor Eusebius nor Athanasius nor Dydimus nor Theophilus nor Epiphanius nor Hierom nor Cyril nor Theodoret nor other Fathers who were Bishops or Priests in Syria or Egypt since none of these Fathers who lived there mentioned any such Edition or Translation it shall passe with me as a work of later times The same Arabick translator maketh fifty chapters of the Acts of the Apostles whereas we have only 28. chapters The first Epistle of S. Paul to the Corinthians in the Arabick hath 21. chapters having only 16. chapters with us The second Epistle hath only 12. chapters in the Arabick and yet we have 13. chapters in the Greek Ammonius divided every one of the foure Evangelists into many chapters S. Matthew into 355 chapters S. Marke into 135 chapters S. Luke into 344 chapters S. John into 232 chapters So Sixtus Senensis Bibliothecae sanctae lib. 3. pag. 160. relateth If such difference be in chapters which is the mainer division there must needs be more variant diversity in the verses which are the subalternate differences depending on the chapters Much more might be said but I have wandred too long and returne to what I handled before namely That we have no reason of necessity to expect that Christs administring of his Third and Last Supper should be distinguished by the beginning of a new chapter For it is not so in any other of the Three Evangelists Nor are the chapters and verses of Divine institution but servient to the Churches ordination varying according to the opinions of diverse ages and in the opinion of Junius and Heinsius may be better than now they are And yet there might be a new chapter in ancient times when Judas went out the old one ending John 13.30 at these words And it was night For presently thereupon in all likelyhood was the blessed Eucharist administred and the Evangelist S. John wholly omitted what the other Three Evangelists had so fully described And a new chapter might begin John 13.31 Or if not a new matter namely our thrice blessed Saviour his holy heavenly last Sermon Sermo Domini in coenaculo which the other Three Evangelists very briefly touched at but S. John declareth at large from John 13.31 to John 18.1 Foure whole chapters and more in a continued and uninterrupted manifesto or declaration PAR. 8. LAstly since it is apparant even to sense and rectified reason that Christ mingled not his most sacred Third Supper and holy Eucharist with ordinary meats but took it by it selfe as a distinct Sacrament of the New Testament and as a glorious testimony of the Law of Grace there is no place in my opinion so likely to establish our Saviours administration of it as immediately upon Iudas his excommunication and secession And when the holy administration was ended to the joy of the Apostles and to the glory of God Our divinest Saviour brake forth into this Jubilee and exultation of joy Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him viz. when his Flesh and Blood were made a glorious Sacrament of the New Law then Christ was glorified and God in Christ How was Christ at that instant glorified above other times if not by Iudas his departure and Christ giving the holy Eucharist to his holy Apostles Or where could it be given more commodiously As for the words Edentibus ipsis I have heretofore cleared them by good authority that they are not to be taken strictly as if whilest meat was in their jawes and whilest their mouths were full and their teeth champing Christ gave them the Supper of the Lord nor as if we were not to receive the hallowed food but as we are eating of some other things nor as if it were essentiall to have a co-eating No Christian heart can think so For it were an undervaluing of the Body and Blood of the Lord and little or no discerning of the Lords Body from other common meats yea indeed an horrid mingle-mangle But the words are to
all this while The Inadvertency or not distinguishing of this one point That the Supper of the Lord was instituted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After Supper as both S. Luke and S. Paul have it in the same tearmes and letters hath bred many great errors As That Christ Sate at the Eucharist which indeed if at all was at the Paschall That he tooke and gave the Eucharist Sitting or Leaning because at the Second Supper they did All Discumbere and Christ Rose up and Lay down Again That the most Holy and Common food were eaten together and promiscuously And that grosse opinion of Aquinas justly disliked by Estius on 1 Cor. 11.25 That Christ gave his Body in Supper-time and his Blood After Supper though Aquinas seek to give a mysticall reason of it But had Aquinas considered the force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Similiter Likewise he would have been of another mind The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Likewise twice used Luke 22.20 Likewise also he tooke the Cup After Supper and 1 Cor. 11.25 After the same manner also he tooke the Cup. In both places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which doth demonstrate Not that Bread was given them Before Supper was ended and the Cup After which is Aquinas ill-hanged conclusion but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oâ— the word Likewise extendeth fully and fairely to this point That both the Bread and the Wine were Alike and in the Same sort given and administred After supper And this S. Paul did learne of the Lord himselfe and he received it of the Lord vers 23. And this also which others misunderstanding and misapplying some words of S. Luke have held That After the thrice blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist given and received they fell Again to their victuals But in Luturgico Canone saith Estius absolutè dicitur Postquà m coenatumest instead of the Vulgat postquà m coenavit post coenasse as others have it post cibos saith Augustine Not in meale time but After was the Holiest of Holies administred Consider I pray you these two propositions cannot consiste together but are Contradictory 1 Christ administred the Sacrament As they were Eating At Supper 2. Christ administred the Sacrament to them After Supper Which is most likely PAR. 3. THirdly it must be acknowledged that whatsoever Gesture or Posture our blessed Saviour had used if it were certaine that he used it it had been Approveable Holy and Divine His exemplary beginning might justly give a forme to After times And whatsoever he had done had been admirably good But oh the vaine thoughts of men loosing themselves in unlikely conjectures Ludolphus without any good ground saith That Christ went with his Apostles into a Lower Chamber to wash their feet which hath not so much as a foot-step or shadow of reason Nearer to the purpose The same Ludolphus the Carthusian cap. 55. is too peremptory Mensa erat in Terrâ more antiquo in Terrâ sedebant ad coenam in coenaculo strato quasi jacendo recumbentes The Table was on the earth and according to the Old fashionâ— they Sate at supper on the earth as it were Lying and Recumbing in the Furnished Room Perhaps Hugh Broughton from hence tooke his wild Irish opinion Concerning the discumbing of Christ with his Apostles and their Tables see what I have written lib. 1. Tricoenii cap. 21. Let me adde my opinion for all the world is full of opinions in so unexpressed a matter That they Sate not at the Sacred Supper on Couches or Carpets spread on the ground or such like things though a very learned man my honored old acquaintance quem honoris causâ nomino is a little too resolute in the point For it is not probable much lesse very probable that our Saviour did institute this Sacrament of the blessed Eucharist potius supra Pavimentum quà m supra Mensam rather upon the Pavement than upon a Table For if he had instituted it Supra Pavimentum upon the Pavement yet had he instituted it also Supra Mensam upon a Table For the earth adorned with Carpets or other furniture supplyed the room of Tables Coenaculum stratum A well prepared Chamber implyed more than Mensam stratam A spread Table Mensa strata a Table spread is involved in coenaculo strato in a well prepared chamber not è contra Certainly in so dubious a point I heartily could have wished a more timerous kind of assertion Christ saith he did administer the same not sitting at a Table but Lying on the floore on Couches I answer They never lay on the floore at repast but they had Tables also of one forme or other or spread Carpets instead of Tables for that couches were on the floore without any Tables seemes strange to me It is impossible to prove this Negative Christ administred the Eucharist not sitting at a Table or this Affirmative he administred it Lying on the floore on Couches Couches were above the floore if not always yet most an end And the Tables and Couches were answerable in conveniency one to another that there might be a delightfull and convenient repast with all possible ease But it is little ease if you make triall to lye on Couches above ground and to stoop for your meat and drink down to the earth or pavement and take them from thence Tables that are for ease delight and conveniency are and must be as high if not higher than the beds on which guests lye or feates on which they sit Experience daily teacheth so much The very formes of the old Triclinia kept as venerable Monuments to this day do prove Christ Sate not on the Ground nor Lay on a low couch neare the Ground Nor was it the fashion of that Nation in those times to eat their meat on the Pavement spread with Carpets Nor can it be proved that in any of all those great Feasts in the Jewish Law whether they were sacred or profane they did eat their meat on the Floore or Pavement That they did Discumbere veste stragulâ Sit on Carpets being uppermost in Stratis tapetibus with covered Tapestry I will not deny Juvenal Satyra 5 vers 17. goeth further Tertia ne vacuo cessaret culcitra lecto Vna simus ait On my third pallet take you a place Lest on one bed there be a voyd place Horace Sermonum 1. Satyra 4. Post medium more fully Saepe tribus lectis videas coenare quaternos Twelve sup together oft as you may see Foure on a bed and so the beds are three Nor had they Beds only and Arras but Cushions or Pillows Seneca in lib. de Irâ Quid interest quam lecti partem premas Honeâ—â—iorem te aut turpiorem potest facere pulvinare It mattereth not on what part of the Bed you lye can a Boulster or Pillow make you ever a whit the better or worse That these Beds were immediately upon the Floore or Pavement or neare it I deny They were raised above the ground and the
would not neglect the preaching of the Word of God nor exclude themselves from It to serve Tables In this sense S. Paul said 1 Corinth 1.17 Christ sent me not to Baptize but to preach the Gospel yet both Baptising and Serving at Tables especially the Sacred Ones were divine offices Christ was given for us in the Sacrifice was given to us in the Sacrament In the first per modum victimae as an offring in the last per modum epuli as Bishop Andrews hath it as in a Banquet Who knoweth not Banquets are commonly set on Tables In the Feastings of our great Ones you may perhaps find out the Jewish fashion of Feastings For as oft times our people arise when the first and second courses are removed and other meat and messes carried away and go to another Table and Banquet of Sweet-meats as the close of all So very well may it be that when Judas was excluded out of that room and gone down staires and forth of doores Christ and his Apostles might arise from their former Feasting and at another Table apply themselves to this Sacred banquet of the Holiest Heavenliest Sweet-meat since more devotion was required at this most Sacred food than at their other repast of which hereafter Besides I desire to see one proofe where ever any of Christs Apostles or any Jew of those times did feed from the Ground Floore or Pavement when they did eat in any house well-furnished I cannot omit another place 1 Cor. 10.21 Ye cannot be partakers of the Lords Table and of the Table of Devils That the Apostle speaketh of the sacred Eucharist in the first place appeareth by the precedent verses The Cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ The Bread which wee breake is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ vers 17. Here are both Species both Kinds Christ blessed the Cup and so do we before and in the Consecration and this is the Communion of Christs blood Giving of thanks preceded consecration The Heathen had Altars on which they made offrings to their Gods the Devils and they had also Tables from which they did participate of things Offered It was lawfull to go to the Tables and Feasts of the Gentiles and to eate whatsoever was set before them 1. Cor. 10.27 But they might not approach to the Pagan Altars to partake of them Nor eat any thing in Idolio in the Idols Temple Nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As a thing offred to Idols no though a man did but say so vers 28. Yet Christians partaked even of the Sacrifices which were upon and taken from the Heathen Altars on which they were Sacrificed if they knew it not as the Gentiles and Jews also Deuteronomy 18.1 c. though not Altars but Tables were principally ordained to eat upon Yet they who waited at the Altar are partakers with the Altar 1 Cor. 9.13 Christ could not expect an Altar in an upper chamber of a private man Altars were no part of chamber-furniture The Jews might have no other permanent Altars after their setting in Hierusalem bu two The Altar of Incense and the Altar of Sacrifice Christ may be said in a sort to be the Altar the Offring and the Priest when he was Sacrificed on the Crosse Other than a Metaphoricall Altar he used not he was not The poore mans box or chest shall be set neare to the high Altar Injunction the 29. But he consecrated the saving Eucharist on a Table and therefore is it called the Lords Table And because Christ did so all other Christians were the apter to do so and for a while called the Church-Altars Tables in reference to Christs first Institution upon a Table For in times of persecution they could well use none but Tables and therefore doth the Primitive Church oft call them Tables and seldome Altars unto which they were not admitted to administer the Sacrament of the body and blood of the Lord. Nor did they carry Altar or Altars from house to house from City to City from Countrey to Countrey as they Communicated in severall Houses in severall Cities and Countreys and for a while daily so communicated but used the Tables such as they were made by Art wheresoever they came Nor perhaps did they stand on the particular consecration either of Tables or of Cups and Vessels to hold the Body and Blood of Christ but in the fiery furnace of persecution were content sometimes to make use of such things as could be had and rather made them holy than found them holy But he who from hence will think that the name of Altar is unlawfull or of a late invention or that they were excluded from Christian Churches or that there were Tables allowed and every where set up in the Churches Or that Altars were destroyed generally or for the most part Or that even Altars themselves were not sometimes called Tables with an eye to Christs first institution Or that will cry-up Tables to cry-down Altars He knoweth not the different usances of the Church in times of persecution and cut of it but taketh advantage of words to set asunder things which well may stand together and runneth with a strong by as to his own works Neither would I have my speciall friend to precipitate himselfe into the other extreame or so to fix his mind on Altars so to undervalew Tables as to maintain or publish that Christ did not celebrate the Heavenly Eucharist on a Table and that he instituted it on a plain Floore or pavement which opinion I think was scarce ever heard off a thousand yeares after the first Institution of the Sacrament The extract or exempt especially appropriated to our purpose is this Not only the Devils in a kind of imitation of God Almighty this worship had by the Heathen Tables erected and consecrated to them of which they took part and were allowed their divident or portion on which they fed sometimes in the Temples of their Idols sometimes at home But even the holy Christians in their best perfection had diverse Tables on which they did administer the Lords Supper and partaked of the holy Communion and they were called the Tables of the Lord. For the Lord himselfe and his holy Ones a long time after him administred the blessed Eucharist on Tables PAR. 6. THe second point held probable was and is The holy Eucharist was administred by Christ on a Table different and variant from the Paschall and Ordinary Supper-Table Object Yea but what proofes have you for that Sol. I answer what proofes have you to the contrary And why was not the Heavenly food consecrated on a distinct Table Or which opinion is like-liest In this so uncertaine a point we are not forbidden but rather commanded to search for the truth 1 John 4.1 Beleeve not every spirit but try the spirits whether they are of God 2 Thess 2.2 Be not soon shaken in mind or troubled But 1 Thess 4.21 Prove
with their severall senses formes and fashions may be included He falleth down to the graven Image and worshippeth it and prayeth unto it Esay 44.15 17. The meane man Boweth down and the great Man Humbleth himselfe Esay 2.9 He humbleth himselfe even unto the Ground such was the worship of their Idols They dawbed them over with silver and gold Opinio mens Imperitorum artis concinnitate decipitur auri fulgore perstringitur argenti nitore candore eboris hebetatur The opinion and judgement of unlearned men is deceived by the exquisitenesse of Art by the shine of Gold and is dulled by the brightnesse of Silver and whitenesse of Ivory They clothed them with costly Garments Dionysius his sacrilegious violence taking away Jupiters golden coate upon pretence it was cold in the Winter and too heavy in the Summer and putting on a woollen coate as warmer in the Winter and lighter in the Summer is knowne to children The knave that stole away two eyes of pure gold massie gold out of Jupiters Image knew Jupiter could see as well without eyes as with eyes or rather that he did not see either with them nor without them But of the Adorning of their Images I have spoken before and yet the very Robbing of them proveth the precedent Adorning of them These things they did when they came neare to Worship them and Adore them PAR. 9. BUt there was another kinde of Adoration of them when they passed by the Images and stood at distance from them Minutius Foelix in Octavio toward the beginning setteth it downe by the actions of Cecilius who seeing the Image of Serapis Vt vulgus superstitiosum solet manum ori admovens osculum labiis impressit As the superstitious people is wont putting his hand to his mouth he Kist it This was a kinde of Honorary salutation of Devotion a Running Adoration a Worship at Distance But that his hand did kisse his Lips or fasten a kisse on them as the phrase may seeme to import and not rather his Lips did kisse his Hand is observable as an Heterogeneall kinde of expression For it is proper for the Mouth and Lips to kisse when the other parts of the body do touch or rub but not kisse Yet if the words be read in the Ablative case he printed a kisse on his Hand by or with his lips we may give it the priviledge of an African phrase And yet in the Hebrew the phrase is reciprocall My Mouth hath kissed my Hand or my Hand hath kissed my Mouth See our last Translation Iob 31.27 and the marginall note In Adorando dextram ad osculum referimus When we worship we kisse our Right hand Apuletus lib. 4. Millesiarum as Elmenhorst quoteth him Let me also defend the African Optatus against Rigaltius who in his Observations on Tertullian towards the end of them pag. 119. among the Inserenda citeth a place of Tertullian in Apologetico cap. 4. The purport is this The lawes were of old that the Creditors should cut in piecest he condemned Debtors who were not able to pay and every Creditor might have a portion of his flesh See Aulus Gellius 20.1 who hath that Law of the Twelve Tables at large In which place Caecilius saith Nothing is more cruell and vastly extreme unlesse as it seemeth this Law was made so cruell to this end that no man should ever venture to endure it For saith he many debtors are adjudged to their Creditors and bound or imprisoned But that ever any was cut into pieces and each Creditor had severall gobbets or portions I never heard or read though the rigor of the Law ran so If there were more Creditors to whom the indebted man was adjudged the Law permitted them to cut in pieces and divide the body of the Debtor among them Iunius Rabirius in his Tractat called Hastarum Auctionum Origo ratio sollemnia hath the words of that Law pag. 7. in Terminis and more succinctly than Gellius Which cruelty by a generall consent was taken away Death was turned into Shame the Proscription of their goods did rather make them blush than bleed For must they not needs blush who when they parted from all their goods by Proscription were to sit on a Stone bare-breeched with naked and seene and shewed buttocks also with their uncovered podds to strike or run at a Marble Lion set before the gate of the Capitoll for that purpose See Cerda on the place of Tertullian Pamelius cleared the way to Cerda though he complaine of Zephyrus his obscurity in this point And yet I wonder why nor Gellius nor the accurate Rabirius doe mention the manner of the Commutation in their punishment unlesse modesty deterred them Rigaltius saith nothing to the maine matter but picks a quarrell and findeth fault with Optatus for the like phrase Suffundere maluit hominis sanguinem quà m effundere said Tertullian Optatus lib. 2. Fundentes sanguinem non corporis sed pudoris At quis alius pudoris sanguis quà m corporis saith Rigaltius As if there were some other blood of shame which was not of the body Wittily enough if it be wit to find Nodum in scirpo a knot in a bulrush For Optatus in the cited book hath it otherwise Episcopos gladio linguae jugulastis fundentes sanguinem non corporis sed honoris You have slaine the Bishops with your tongues as with swords shedding the blood of their honor and credit though sparing the blood of their Bodies And this reading and exposition is confirmed by the words one leafe before Linguas vestras acuistis in gladios quas movistis in mortes non corporum sed honorum Jugulastis non Membra sed Nomina Quid prodest quia vivunt homines occisi sunt honores à vobis Valent quidem membris sed ereptae portant funera dignitatis You have sharpned your tongues as swords which you have moved and thrust into the death and destruction not of Bodies but of Goods you have killed not their bodily Members but their Names and Credit what boots it that they live when their honors are destroyed by you They are healthy but they carry about the carcasse of funerall exequies of their Dignities and Honors He speaks of a Civill death Metaphorically when a mans good Fame is blemished wounded or destroyed Honores occisi sunt Their Honors were slaine as it is in the Margin He doth not oppose Sanguinem corporis sanguini pudoris the blood of the body to the blood of shame sed sanguini Bonorum or Honoris to the blood of Goods or Honor. In the opposition of the bodily blood to the blood of shame is no good sense the resultance of it beeing that the blood of Blushing is not of the Bodily blood but it stands with faire reason to say ye shed the blood not of their Bodies but of their Goods or Honors Howsoever Rigaltius was supine For if his coppy had the words as he cites them which is
not themselves from the usance of the Church in this specialtie For Augustine Tom. 7. contra literas Petiliani 2.23 pag. 22. saith to Petilian and his adherents I doe instance and make rehearfall unto you of a man who lived with you into whose hands yee placed or put the Eucharist Ruffinus Ecclesiastica Historiae 6.33 saith of Novatus or Novatianus That when he divided the Sacrament to the people he held the Hands of the Receivers till he made them sweare by what they held in their Hands and then they did Sumere They did accipere manu Sumemere ore Tooke it with their Hand and received it with their Mouth And I doubt not but these holy ancient Fathers followed Christs celebration in such things as he commanded When they did Reserve the Sacrament and carry it to their houses I hope they tooke it not into their Mouths they carried it not in their Mouths but tooke it in their Hands Accepto corpore Domini reservato saith Tertullian in the end of his booke de Oratione It was first received and this was not within their Mouths but with their Hands If it had beene in their Mouths it was not so fit to be Reserved And how vaine had it beene to take it out of their Mouths and to reserve it to that end that they might put it another time into their owne Mouthes or into other folkes Mouthes either If you plead it was reserved for the sicke Gregorius Nazianzenus Oratione 11. in laudem Gorgoniae saith If Gorgonia's Hand treasured up any part of the Antitypes of Christs honoured body and blood shee bedewed it or mingled it with her teares The word If not betokening any doubt but implying a certainty that sometimes shee did weepe over the consecrated mysteries which her Hand had Reserved The word If being taken for When. So it is used 1 King 8.46 If they sinne against thee for there is no man that sinneth not I conclude with the binding Rubrick of out Lyturgy that the Priests or Priest must deliver the Communion to the people in their Hands Kneeling Maldonate on Matth. 26. confesseth it further proofe needed not Yet was Maldonate too blame to say The same Church with better Counsell begins to give the Sacrament not into their hands but into their mouthes because there was both more reverence and lesse danger To call that better Counsell which varied from Christs Institution I like not Nor doth Maldonats similitude hold For if the Churches are the Eucharist fasting varying from Christ yet they had Apostolicall Authority to guide them which the Handlesse and Mouthlesse Receivers wanted Some Reject things really Given and Tendred Matth. 7.9 Yee Reject the Commandements of God Jeremy 8.9 Some rejected the Word of the Lord. Luke 7.30 The Pharisees and Lawyers rejected the Counsell of God against themselves 1 Samuel 10.19 The Israelites rejected their God Is not in those words included a plaine offer and withall a Not-accepting of the Tendry Remarkably is it said Joh. 12.48 He that rejecteth me and receiveth-not my words the same Word shall judge him at the last day Rejecting is expounded by Not-receiving if it signifie not worse also So some Refused to heare Gods Word Jeremy 13.10 Ammon refused to eate 2 Sam. 13.9 though the cakes were powred out before him Elishah though he was urged to take a gift yet refused 2 Kings 5.16 Yet for all this I cannot think but when Christ said to his Disciples Take they did Take it and when he said Eate they did Eate For it argueth Obedience to their Master and their conformity to partake of the mysteries of Christ PAR. 6. THe next part of our Saviours words is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eate That Christ gave Judas a Sop is cleare a dipped Sop Joh. 14.26 that Iudas received it I hold as cleare Iohn 14.30 He then having received the Sop went immediately out That Iudas did eate it is not expressed nor so cleare He might possibly Take it and not Eate it but let it lie on his trencher Besides the Sop beeing given for a Manifesto that Iudas was the onely Traytor perhaps he was not willing to swallow the Disgust as he accompted it and the Sop also But it may be well answered Iudas was so surprized with the unexpected Offer his reason wit and senses so clouded his soule amazed with such arisings and fumes of his treasonable plot in one word so given over to Satan that what another man yea what he himselfe would have done at another Time either not Receive or not Eate he certainly received and in likelihood swallowed If the words of Scripture be closer followed and more forcibly urged That Iudas having received the Sop went out immediately and therefore he did receive it onely but not Eate it I answer The end of his Receiving was onely to Eate it and there was no great distance of time betweene the Receiving and Eating of the Sop but he might put his hand to his mouth even almost in an instant or in tempore penè imperceptibili in the twinckling of an eye and swallow without chewing a moystned soft little glibbery Sop that his going out immediately excludeth not his Eating Besides the word Receive may extend not onely to his Taking of it with his hand but to the Eating of it also For there is a receiving into Ones mouth and it is not possible to be proved that Iudas did not So receive it nor Eate it And it may be well beleeved because so many holy Fathers have declared themselves to think He did Eate the Sop. I know but few that deny it but many affirme it Some indeed say He carried away the Sop and shewed it to the High Priests and thence framed a forged accusation against Christ or an excuse for his own treachery as if without cause he would not have betrayed him A man having his hidden sinnes revealed groweth worse and more madd in sinning Per scelera semper sceleribus tutum est iter said One The safest way to commit sinne Is by new sinnes still to beginne Lucas Brugensis on Matth. 26. saith That after the word Eate the reason was given And the word Enim is to be understood Indeed it may well be understood because at the delivery of the Cup it is expressed Matth. 26.28 For this is my blood of the new Testament And yet the sense seemeth to me as full Take Eate This is my Body as if it had beene written Take Eate For this is my Body I would not willingly adde any new sense to Scripture no more than I would diminish a letter from it especially if as it is the sense may be well accepted Carolostadius and never any before him that I have read of fancieth That when Christ said these words This is my Body he put his finger to his breast shewed himselfe and meaned thus Here sitteth my Body which shall be given for you This Sleidan reporteth in the Fift booke of his Commentaries
other do both find by meanes of so great contradiction between their opinions and true principles of reason grounded upon experience nature and sense Which albeit with boysterous courage and breath they seeme oftentimes to blow away yet who so observeth how again they labour and sweat by subtilty of wit to make some show of agreement between their peculiar conceits and the generall Edicts of Nature must needs perceive they struggle with that which they cannot fully master Besides sith of that which is proper to themselves their discourses are hungry and unpleasant full of tedious and irksome labour heartlesse and hitherto without fruit on the other side reade we them or heare we others be they of our own or of ancienter times to what part soever they be thought to incline touching that whereof there is controversie yet in this where they all speak but one thing their discourses are heavenly their words sweet as the Hony-comb their tongues melodiously tuned instruments their sentences meere consolation and joy are we not hereby almost even with voyce from Heaven admonished which wee may safeliest cleave unto He which hath said of the one Sacrament Wash and be cleane hath said concerning the other likewise Eat and live If therefore without any such particular and solemne warrant as this is that poore distressed woman comming unto Christ for health could so constantly resolve her selfe May I but touch the skirt of his garment I shall be whole what moveth us to argue of the manner how life should come by bread our duty being here but to take what is offered and most assuredly to rest perswaded of this that can we but Eat we are safe When I behold with mine eyes some small and scarce discernable graine or seed whereof Nature maketh promise that a tree shall come and when afterwards of that tree any skilfull artificer undertaketh to frame some exquisite and curious work I look for the event I move no question about performance either of the one or of the other Shall I simply credit Nature in things Naturall Shall I in things artificiall relye my selfe on Art never offering to make doubt and in that which is alone both Art and Nature refuse to beleeve the Author of both except he acquaint me with his ways and lay the secret of his skill before me where God himselfe doth speak those things which either for height and sublimity of matter or else for secrecy of performance we are not able to reach unto as we may be ignorant without danger so it can be no disgrace to confesse we are ignorant Such as love piety will as much as in them lyeth know all things that God commandeth but especially the duties of service which they owe to God As for his dark and hidden works they prefer as becommeth them in such cases simplicity of Faith before that knowledge which curiously sifting what it should adore and disputing too boldly of that which the wit of man cannot search chilleth for the most part all warmth of zeale and bringeth soundnesse of beleife many times into great hazard Let it therefore be sufficient for me presenting my selfe at the Lords Table to know what there I receive from him without searching or inquiring of the manner how Christ performeth his promise Let disputes and questions enemies to piety abatements of true devotion and hitherto in this cause but over patiently heard let them take their rest Let curious and sharp-witted men beat their heads about what questions themselves will the very letter of the Word of Christ giveth plaine security that these mysteries do as nayles fasten us to his very Crosse that by them we draw out as touching officacy force and vertue even the blood of his goared side in the wounds of our Redeemer we there dip our tongues we are died red both within and without our hunger is satisfied and our thirst for ever quenched they are things wonderfull which he feeleth great which he seeth and unheard-of which he uttereth whose soule is possest of this Pascall Lambe and made joyfull in the strength of this new Wine This Bread hath in it more than the substance which our eyes behold this Cup hallowed with solemne benediction availeth to the endlesse life and wel-fare both of soule and body in that it serveth as well for a medicine to heale our infirmities and purge our sins as for a sacrifice of thankesgiving with touching it sanctifieth it enlightneth with beliefe it truly conformeth us unto the Image of Jesus Christ What these Elements are in themselves it skilleth not it is enough that to me which take them they are the Body and Blood of Christ his promise in witnesse hereof sufficeth his word he knoweth which way to accomplish Why should any cogitation possesse the mind of a Faithfull Communicant but this O my God thou art true O my soule thou art happy So far M. Hooker The Prayer THou art mercifull oh Heavenly Saviour thou art mercifull to Mankind against the fiery and furious temptations and assaults of spirituall powers sometimes alluring sometimes haling sometimes leading men captive unto sin and under it Thou most graciously hast ordained an Host of Holy Angels to help us to suggest good thoughts unto us to free us to streng then us that we shall not so much as hurt our foot and there are more on our side than against us But in opposition of the allurements from the wicked world and the insurrections and ebullitions of the skittish civill warre betweene the flesh and our soule thou hast provided both preservatives that we fall not and redemptives if we fall even thy powerfull Sacraments replenished with Divine vertue For thine own sake most holy Mediator and Advocate let thy blessed Sacraments work effectually in us be conduit-pipes of grace and conveyers of goodnesse into our soules Let them nourish us up unto true Faith Hope and Charity and let thy sacred Eucharist be our spirituall Food both in Life and Death Amen Lord Jesus Amen CHAP. VII And the eight Generall Wherein is questioned what Gesture the Apostles used in Receiving the blessed Eucharist 1. The Word of God hath omitted to set it down in particular 'T is probable they did Kisse their Right hand and so receive it An evill custome of False complementing by Kissing the hand in Jobs daies In Adoration our hands must be lifted up Our voyce lowly and submisse In great Agonies it is lawfull to Cry alowd and Roare Probable it is the Apostles received the heavenly Sacrament humbly Kneeling on both their Knees Tertullian is punctuall against Sitting even after prayer The Heathen after their prayers and some even at their prayers did use to sit upon their Altars Their Servants had three Sanctuaries to fly unto from their angry Masters Numa's Law to sit at the time of Adoring their false Gods A reason why no passage either in the Evangelists nor Apostles commandeth Adoration at the Sacrament How the Antient Fathers are to
Augustine Ambrose Nazianzene and Eusebius Emissenus are Chemnitius Co-opinionists Not the materiall Elements but Christ onely In them is to be Adored If Wee must adore Christ when we celebrate the divine Sacrament much more did the Apostles Habituall not alwaies Actuall Adoration of Christ was required of the Apostles The Apostles worshipped Christ 1. When he had newly performed any Super-humane worke 2. When they begged great matters of him 3. When he did heale some who were vehemently afflicted 4. When he conferred any extraordinary blessing on their soules As he did when he instituted the New Sacrament Master Hooker tearmeth Kneeling an Adorative gesture No kinde of Worship accepted that is not sometimes conjoyned with Kneeling Gregory Nazianzens Story of his Sister Gorgonia Eusebius Emissenus and Origen say Christ is worshipped in the Sacrament Kneeling at the Communion commanded by the booke of Advertisements set forth by Queene Elizabeth by the Lawes of the Realme and the Queenes Majesties Injunctions They defraud the Knees of their chiefest office and honour who refuse to Bend them at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament PARAGRAPH 1. THe next point of my propounded Method leadeth me to enquire With what kinde of Gesture the Apostles Received from our blessed Saviour his sacred body and blood in the holy Eucharist 1. I answer the Word hath omitted to set it downe in particular and there is no absolute unquestionable certainty hereof Therefore looke not for Mathematicall Demonstrations which are saith Orantius Finaeus purae fideles in primo certitudinis gradu constitutae most certaine and Infallible It is well if our Collections may in secundis tertijsve consistere finde place in a Second or Third Degree of Truth If out of that which is written we can extract that which is not written if we avoyd all absurdities on the one side and be guided by the best and most probabilities on the other side It is a custome among many of us when we receive a courtesie of an high nature from our Superiors whom we reverence we kisse our Right hand first and Then receive it That such was the old guise of the Romanes in their Adorations Pliny in his Naturall History 28.2 averreth In Adorando dexteram ad osculum referimus When we Worship we kisse our Right hands Perhaps the Apostles might doe so and devoutly kissing their Right hands convery Reverend Love from their Lips to it and bring back with their Right hands the Consecrated and Adored Body and Blood of our Saviour unto their Lips and Mouths In Jobs time there was such an evill custome of false Complementing which he found fault withall Iob. 31.27 If my mouth hath kissed my hand or it may be read If my hand hath kissed my mouth But if the Apostles did so they did it devoutly truely and most piously And so let this rest upon Conjecture onely Tertullian de Oratione cap. 13. thus describeth the Gesture of such as Worship God Cum modestiâ humilitate adorantes magis commendamus Deo preces nostras nec ipsis quidem manibus sublimiùs elatis sed temperatè ac probè elatis When we Adore God with modest humiliation our prayers are the rather accepted nor must we Lift up our hands Too high but indifferently decently moderately measurably Yet David Lifted up his Hands Psal 28.2 63.4 And Salomon 1 King 8.22 spread forth his hands toward heaven and Christ lifted them up Luk. 24.50 Ne vultu quidem in audaciam erecto as he proceedeth not with a bold face but shamefast countenance Sonos etiam vocis subjectos esse oportet The voyce also must be Lowly and Submisse The Devill that uttered the Pythian Oracles could say Et mutum intelligo non loquentem exandio I both understand the dumbe and heare him who saith nothing And shall Gods eares expect a noyse a voyce or a sound How then was Ionas his prayer heard from the belly of the Whale thorow the bowels of so great a beast from the depth of deepes thorow so vast a compasse of the sea and yet ascended up to heaven It was not by vertue of his lowd voyce If a clamorous voyce were best accepted happy were Stentor that thunder of humane Voyce that monster of Roaring And yet in great Agonies it is lawfull it is fit to Cry to Cry aloud I cryed with my whole heart saith David Psal 119.145 The Levites cryed with a loud voyce Nehemiah 9.4 Mordecay cryed with a loud and bitter cry Esther 4.1 Christ himselfe cryed with a loud voyce Joh. 11.43 Matth. 27.46 I have roared by reason of the disquietnesse of my heart Psal 38.8 He roared all the day long Psal 32.3 He deserveth not much pitty who by a small low heartlesse voyce as if things concerned him not coldly expresseth his soules sorrow My opinion therefore is that the Apostles received the heavenly Sacrament not supinely not slovenly not lying leaning or sitting but humbly and devoutly most thankfully and joyfully piously kneeling on both their knees if not with greater Adoration Tertullian de Oratione cap. 12. is punctuall against sitting even after prayer which though we use and lawfully use yet they in Tertullians time did so in imitation of the Heathen who closed their prayers and sealed them up with sitting as if without sitting they had not been made perfect And this made Tertullian find fault with them for it But if he reprove them for sitting after prayer would he not much more have censured them if during their prayers they had sate But the Heathen after their prayers did sit upon their Altars Plautus in Mustell Ego hanc aram occupabo I will sit on this Altar for so it is to be understood which though it be somewhat obscure yet it is cleered by Tibullus lib 4. toward the end Sed Veneris sanctae considam vinctus ad aras But I being bound will on the Altar sit Of holy Venus Ioseph Scaliger on the place observeth that servants with whom their masters were offended had three Refuges or Sanctuaries though he accounts them but as two The Altars of the Gods the Statutes of the Mediation of Friends Nec hic tibi Aram aliquam nec Deprecatorem paraveris Thou hast neither Altar nor friendly Mediator to fly unto Terence in Phormione calleth him Precatorem a Spokesman I returne Pindarus O de 6. Istm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When he said these things or ended praying he presently sate downe Pausanias in Laconicis recordeth Orestes sitting about holy businesses even when he was out of his mad humour Let Numa Pompilius praescribe what law he will for worshipping his false gods Deos adoraturi sedeant let them who ador'd their gods Sit. It was casually wise For indeed they were not worth the rising up unto much lesse deserved they to be adored with bended knees or face prostrate Our God cannot have reverence enough If we could in humility cast our selves down to the bottome of Hell we doe but our
De corona cap. 5. Deus auditum in auribus fodit visum in oculis accendit gustum in ore conclusit odoratum in naribus ventilavit contactum in manibus astimavit per haec exterioris hominis ministeria interiori homini ministrantia fructus munerum divinorum ad animam deducuntur à sensibus God hath bored hearing in the eares because into them it descendeth as into an hole He hath kindled sight in the eyes for the eyes do sometimes sparkle with fire and are of a fiery nature He hath shut up tasting within the mouth for he hath bounded it within that compasse He hath winnowed or vanned smelling in the nostrils by the playing of the wind He hath made the hands the judicatories of touching which touching being diffused over all the body yet is more used by the hands He concludeth divinely By these ministeriall bodily Organs serving the inner Man the blessings and fruits of heavenly gifts are from the Senses conveyed to the soule Much more might be added of other parts I will end all in this addition They defraud their Knees of the chiefest office and greatest honour who refuse to bend them in holy times and places especially at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament which I would take after I had fallen on my Face and used groveling Adoration if the Church so appointed me or if scandall would not arise from such extraordinary Gesture THE PRAYER O Lord thou knowest my heart and that with Soule and Body I Reverence and Adore thee in thy divine Eucharist I humble my selfe as much as I can and I would humble my selfe lower even unto the gates of Hell if I could confessing my worthinesse in nothing but that I am worthy to be condemned In such contemplations quakeing and terror take hold of my heart and I am horribly afraid of thy Iudgement Abraham Isaac and Jacob shall be in a sweat at the day of Iudgement as good children shall be in a dread to see their father angry with his rebellious children The earth shall melt away like wax the heavens shall tremble and the pillars of Heaven shall shake to whom shall I fly to whom shall I say Cover me but unto thee most compassionate Saviour for thou art my rocke thou art the buckler of my defence under the shadow of thy wings do I desire to rest as thou wert superexalted because thou didst humble thy selfe so grant good Lord I may so fall down before thee that I may bee taken up by thee and that the greatnesse of my humility may bring unto mee by thy favour the riches of thy glory the exaltation both of my soule and body Lord heare my prayer and let my cry come unto thee for Iesus his sake Amen CHAP. VIII Which containes the ninth tenth and eleventh Generals Wherein is declared 1. What Gesture we are to use at the Receiving of the blessed Eucharist 2. What Names have been given to it 3. What Words were spoken by our Saviour after the Third Supper before he departed out of the Coenaculum 1. What Gesture we are to use at the Administration of it to others Receiving of it our selves Both handled promiscuously The English Liturgy our best guide At the Repeating of the Law the people must Kneele Receiving of the same the Israelites did no lesse Never Patriarck Prophet Evangelist Apostle nor holy Man nor Christ himselfe prayed Sitting when there was opportunity of Kneeling The Monkes of Egypt did pray Sitting The Rule of Saint Benedict mentioneth Sitting at the Reading of three Lessons Rising up at Gloria Patri c. Severall Gestures are to be used both by Priest and People upon severall occasions The Priest never Kneeles while the people stand but he may stand when they kneele Great reason why the people should kneele at the Receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ No superstition nor Idolatry then to Kneele But obstinate Irreverence if not blasphemy not to Kneele Prayer most an end used with bâ—nding of the Knees The Pharisee Stood Christ Kneeled when he prayed The Rubrick of the Communion Book is to be followed by all obediently 2. The Minister is to deliver the Communion to the people Kneeling in both kindes into their Hands Maximus would have Men to wash their hands Women to bring clean linnen that will Communicate The Nicity of former times questioned The sixth Synod Canon 3. against it The consecrated bread must be carefully delivered and received To let any crumb or particle thereof fall to the ground accounted a great sinne by Tertullian and Origen Pope Pius the first punished those who let any of the Lords blood fall upon the ground or Altar S. Cyril of Hierusalem gives a Cave at to this purpose Little Tables set before the Communicants in former times as now we hold Linnen clothes saith Baronius The usuall fashion of receiving the Consecrated bread between the Thumb and a Finger or two disliked Receiving the holy bread in the Palme of the hand a safer way In Tertullians dayes the Christians did stretch abroad their hands like Christ upon the Crosse in their private prayers Damascene would have us receive the Body of Christ crucified with our hands framed like to a Crosse The right Hand being upward open and hollow to receive the bread This accounted the safer way S. Cyril commandeth the same kind of usance Other manners of Taking it not sinfull In things indifferent we must not love singular irregularity All unseemely Motions and Gestures are so many profanations of the Lords Supper Seven Generall Rules to be observed against the profanation of the Lords Supper The word Amen explaned and Kneeling at Receiving the blessed Sacrament pressed 3. Tenth General What Names are given to the blessed Sacrament by the Scriptures and Fathers the Latine and Greek Church The hallowed Bread is called in the Scriptures 1. The Lords Body Broken for us 2. The Communion of the Body of Christ And the Reasons thereof 3. Breaking of Bread from house to house 4. Holy Bread Blessed Bread Eucharisticall Bread Heavenly Bread Joh. 6. In the Fathers 1. Taking of the Lords Body Tertullian 2. Earthly Bread sanctified by prayer consisting of Earthly and Heavenly things Irenaeus A Medicine of immortality an Antidote against death procuring life purging sin driving away all evils idem 3. Christs Dole to his Church Tertullian The Plenty Aboundance and Fatnesse of the Lords Body The Wine is called in the Scriptures 1. The New Testament in his Blood 2. The Blood of the New Testament 3. The Cup of the Lord. 4. The Communion of the Blood of Christ The blessed Eucharist consisting of both kinds is styled In Scripture 1. The Lords Supper And in what regards it is so called The Papists dislike the frequent use of this Phrase Casaubone confutes Justinian and Maldonate the Jesuits and cals it The Great Supper The most Divine Supper The Arch-Symbolicall Supper 2. The Table of the Lord 1 Cor. 10.21 With Vs it is commonly
proveâ—â— second Supper Poculum bibatorium The Tricoenium accomplished Fol. 278 Par. 6. Christ was present at the First or Paschall Second or common Supper ib. Par. 7. The Jewes at their solemne feasts had double Commons ib. Par. 8. When the second Supper began about sixe of the clocke at night How long the second Supper lasted When it ended Fol. 279 The Contents of the eleventh Chapter Par. 1 WHat was Said Done at the second supper the first quarter Christ began the Chagigah with saying of grace Grace and thankesgiving a prime duty at feasts Fol. 280 Par. 2 The forme of Grace at The eating of Manna Other feast The Paschall Festivity Fol. 281 Par. 3 The Iewes began their second Supper with the cup of Charity Wonderfull great grapes ib. Par. 4 An hymne was sung after the Grace cap among the Iewes The hymnâ— in the New Testament sung after the Eucharist Fol. 283 Par. 5 The discourse at the second Supper ib. Par. 6 The Apostles contention before they received the blessed Eucharist The Apostlâ—â— contend for superiority ib. Par. 7 When Christ began to wash the Apostles sects Osiander rejected Saint Cyrill rejected The Iewes began their second washing at the beginning of their second supper Christ in the middle of it Baronius argument confutes Osiander Fol. 285 The Contents of the twelfth Chapter Par. 1. WHat was done or said the second of the third quarters of the houre in the second Supper Christ beginneth to wash his Disciples feete The Scribes booke Commanded frequent washings The Jewes used much water for purifications both Legall Prescribed Fol. 290 Par. 2. S. Peter the Primate and Prince of the Apostles Whether S. Peter lay on the discubitory bed above Christ Fol. 291 Par. 3. Whether Christ washed S. Peters feete first of all Whether Iudas was washed at all No washing of the feete no partaking of the Eucharist ib. Par. 4 S Bernards Pedilavium no Sacrament Christs washing his Apostles feete an example of humility Whether Iudas was first washed ibi Par. 5 All the Apostles were first washed Vncertaine who first It matters not S. Peters Priviledge Fol. 292 Par. 6 S. Peters and Christs Dialogue Obedience required Iohn the Baptist called a foole Peters double deniall reproved Fol. 293 Par. 7 Bodily washing Spirituall washing ibid. Par. 8. Christ kist his Apostles feete even Iudas his feete Fol. 294 Par. 9 Whether Christ at the second Supper had on a supping garment Whether he had on a Cloake as Barradins thought 3 Vestments as Buthymius thought 5 As some others have thought Christ at his Passion had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. Par. 10 The last quarter of the seventh houre or the third part of the second Supper What was done or said in it The first passage is Christs Question His Diversion Fol. 294 Par. 11. The title of Lord Master forbidden to the Apostles The difference betweene Rab and Rabbi Ambition forbibden The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attributed to Man God in the Old New Testament How God Man Christ is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Lord. Fol. 295 Par. 12. Woshing of feete imports humblenesse of minde Christs Precept and Example to be imitated Lorinus his story Christ the most perfect example of all Seneca his advice The difference betweene Examplar Exemplum Examples move more than Precepts The Worthinesse Vnworthinesse of the Administrant addeth nothing detracteth nothing from the Sacrament ibid. Par. 13 Motives to Humility Fol. 296 Servants equall to their Masters in participation of Troubles Blessings Servants inferiour to their Masters in Civill Morall Oconomicall affaires ibid. Par. 14 Nor worders nor Krowers but Doers enjoy happinesse Fol. 297 The Contents of the thirteenth Chapter 1 THe Par. 2. Passage in the 3. quarter of the second Supper is the graduall detection of the Traytor The first degree I ueds not chosen Iudas like an Asse kickt against Christ The second degree Iudas a Horse-leech a blood-sucker Fol. 298 Par. 2 Iudas aymed at in the Individuum vagum One of you c. The third degree Iudas a bold shamelesse impudent man a brazen face Fol. 299 Par. 3 Peter beckned to John Beckes have their language S. John understood S. Peters becke S. John S. Peters Mediatour to Christ. D. Colins vindicated ib. Par. 4 The first detection of Iudas his uncleannesse Fol. 300 Par. 5 The 2. detection he lifted up his heele against Christ God fore-knew Iudas would be a Traitor He predestinateth no man to sinne Why Christ would chuse Iudas The Booke of Gods Predestination cannot be opened ib. Par. 6 The 3. Detection of Iudas One should betray him Christs Passions and perturbations free from sinne ibid. Par. 7 The fourth and last Detection of Iudas He it is to whom I shall give a sop Many questions concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Whether it were Bread or flesh Diogines saying the Megerians Nonnus holdeth that 1. The thing delivered was Bread 2. It was dipt in Wine 3. It was Sacred and Divine The Aegyptians Custome Pope Iulius wholly forbade the Intention of the Bread in the Wine S. Augustine mistaken Fol. 331 Par. 8 The Morsell was Part of the second Supper Not of the blessed Eucharist S. Bernard Soto Ludulphus S. Augustine S. Hilary Soto mistaken in Bucella Salsamento Wine in all three Suppers In the second Supper great varieties The Sop not dipped in Wine Fol. 332 Par. 9 The second Quaere concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether Iudas received the blessed Euâ—â—charist in it or no Authorities that he did S. Augustine Nonnus Dominus a Soto and Aquinus from Chrysostome Dionysius S. Hirerome and S. Bernard thinke so and Soto sayes that Haymo and Remigius thought so Fol. 333 Par. 10 Soto his note upon the words Edentibus illis He makes the Tricoenium compleate Fol. 334 Par. 11 Barradius S. Hierome Eugenius S. Cyprian Euthymius Equinas thinke so S. Cyprian thought the sop to be the Sacrament ib. Par. 12 S. Augustine thought Christ praysed the Eucharist by Word Deed. S. Augustine saith Iudas received it Theophylacts wilde Crotchet Fol. 334 The Contents of the foureteenth Chapter Par. 1 AVthorities that Iudas did not receive the blessed Eucharist Hilarius Rupertus Innocentius 3. Theophylact Tatianus Alexandrinus Gregorinus Pachymeres Turian Maximus Ludolphus Baradius Beza The ground of S. Augustines and many other famous mens errours concerning this point Fol. 336 Reasons to prove that Iudas did receive the blessed Eucharist Par. 2 The 1. Reason Fol. 337 Par. 3 The 2 Reason ib. Par. 4 The 3 Reason Fol. 338 Par. 5 The 4 Reason Par. 6 The 5. Reason Christ never shewed any extraordinary favour to Iudas S. Augustine reports strange courtesies of Christ to Iudas Iudas borne at Marmotis as saith S. Bernard Much holinesse required to the participation of the body and blood of Christ Notorius wicked men not to be admitted to the Communion 338 Par. 7 The 6. Reason when the Devill first entred into Judas
The prime intention of the compilers of our Liturgie concerning those words Lest the Devill enter into you as he did into Judas c. Satan entred into Iudas at severall times Fol. 339 The Contents of the fifteenth Chapter Par. 1 REasons proving that Iudas was not present at the Eucharist The 1. Reason drawne from Christs owne Example Examples pierce deeper than words Legall Conjunction Fol. 343 Par. 2 A second Reason drawne from the Leviticall Leaper Leviticus 14.46 ib. Par. 3 A third Reason drawne form the Leviticall Priests Ezeck 44.23 ib. Par. 4 The fourth Reason drawne form Christs purging the Temple from prophane things Marke 11.11 ib. Par. 4 The fourth Reason drawne form Christs purging the Temple from prophane things Marke 11.11 ib. Par. 5 The fifth Reason drawne from Davids example Psal 26. Fol. 344 Par. 6 The sixth Reason Iudas a Devill Ioh. 6.70 ib. Par. 7 The seventh reason drawne from 1 Cor. 10.20.21 The cup of the Lord and the cup of Devills opposite ib. Par. 8 The eight Reason drawne from Christs washing the Apostles feete Ioh. 13.2 The Schoole-mens opinion ib. Par. 9 The ninth Reason drawne from Heb. 10.26 Fol. 345 Par. 10 The tenth Reason from Iudas his being excluded from Grace at the end of the second supper ib. Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traytors detection The 1. Occurrence Satans entring into Iudas When and how Satan entred into Iudas Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traytors detection The 1. Occurrence Satans entring into Iudas When and how Satan entred into Iudas Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traytors detection The 1. Occurrence Satans entring into Iudas When and how Satan entred into Iudas Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traytors detection The 1. Occurrence Satans entring into Iudas When and how Satan entred into Iudas Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traytors detection The 1. Occurrence Satans entring into Iudas When and how Satan entred into Iudas S. Augustine saith Affectu tantum Voluntate Ludolphus Essentially Not into his soule But into his body Tolet not corporally but taking a quiet possession of him Theophylact Occupavit Cor ejus Cyrill praecipitem egit Origen Egit ut Ascensor equum Item Judas totum Satanam suscepit in se After the sop ib. Par. 12 How Iudas was tempted Temptations are either 1 Ascendentes Inward 2 Obrepentes Outward 3 Immissae Darted in by Satan himselfe ib. Par. 13 Three Conclusions 1. Conclusion the temptations of the world are severall from the Devills Three kindes of tempters 1 The World 2 The Flesh 3 The Devill 2. Conclusion The temptations hath three degrees 1 Beginning 2 Proceeding 3 Consummation Or thus Consider 1 The Primitive Motion 2 The Assisting Commotion 3 The Plenary Agreeing Or thus 1 Suggestion 2 Delight 3 Pleasure 3 Conclusion The Devill is the Author and cause of all and every temptation The Devill a tempter The World and Flesh the Devills Instruments Fol. 347 Par. 14 How the temptations of the Devill be knowne from the temptations of the World and the Flesh Fol. 348 Par. 15 Satans temptations are Many Manifold Which temptations are grievous and fiery Which temptation is the worst and most dangerous How the World Flesh Satan tempteth The same sinne may be of the World Flesh Devill Fol. 348 Par. 16 The creatures of God tempt us not primarily but by casualty the starres and heavenly influences tempt no man to sinne no more does any earrhly thing in its owne Nature What temptations be from Satan the varietie of Satans temptations Fol. 349 Par. 17 All men have beene tempted even the spirituall not Christ himselfe nor his Apostles free from temptations The manner of Satans temptations ib. Par. 18 Satan may enter into a man oftentimes Iudas his state after Satans second entrance into him Fol. 350 The Contents of the sixteenth Chapter Par. 1 CHrists sentence of separation of Iudas That thou dost doe quickly Whither those words were spoken to the Devill or to Iudas Origen Cyrill Ambrose thinks they were spoken Either to the devill or to Iudas Augustine saith it was Verbum Non Imperantis sed Exprobrantis The Apostles thought them spoken to Iudas 354 2 The Apostles Nesciencie Christ himselfe knew Iudas also knew and some thinke S. Iohn knew Wherefore Christ spake these words That thou dost doe quickely 3 The Apostles misunderstanding Christs words The words were spoken not privately but openly ib. 4. Christ needed nothing for Himselfe his Apostles Christ would have the Church plentifully provided of Temporalls ib. 5. Cookes Reports censured Iudas carried the bagge Fol. 355 The money in the bagge to be employed for Christ. Apostles Poore Par. 6. Iudas his speedie Egresse His receiving the Sop imports Orall manducation Par. 7 Lanthornes and torches import Outward light Inward darkenesse Iudas his Egresse at night At what houre of the Night Iudas went forth Selneccerus his Distribution of the Night-watches What was done in every severall watch Selneccerus censured The crowing of the Cocke about what houre of the night ib. Par. 8. Two questions concerning this Cocke-crowing 1. Question Whether this Cocke did crow Naturally or by Divine Motion Christs looke upon Peter was operative and Vertuous Corporall and Spirituall S. Augustine censured Peters three denialls when and where Fol. 357 Par. 9. 2. Question concerning this Cock-crowing How the different Relations of the severall Evangelists may be reconciled Here are handled 4. Quaeres 1. Quaere whether Christ sayd as S. Marke or as S. Matthew and S. Luke hath it Fol. 344 Par. 10 The 2 Quaere whether S. Peters threefold deniall was accomplished before the Cocke crowed at all or before it crowed twice ib. Par. 11. The 3. Quaere How oft S. Peter was questioned or by others affirmed to bee Christs Disciple ib. Par. 12. The fourth Quaere How many times Peter denyed Christ ib. Par. 13. Answere to the 1. Quaere Fol. 359 Par. 14. Answere to the 2. Quaere ib. Par. 15. Answere to the 3. Quaere Cajetan thinkes S. Peter was 7. times examined thrice by Women foure times by men ib. Par. 16. Answere to the fourth Quaere Cajetans frivolous objection Fol. 360 Par. 17. Three sorts of people questioned Peter Peters threefold deniall and the manner thereof ib. Par. 18. The Divers Relations of the Evangelists reconciled Fol. 361 Par. 19. The Paschall Common Supper lasted about 1. quarter 3. quarters of an houre All the Leviticall Ceremonies performed betweene 6. and 7. a clocke at Night Fol. 362 LIB 3. The Contents of the first Chapter Par. 1_A Preface by way of Admonition to the Vnlearned Invocation of the Learned Fol. 522 Par. 2 Reasons of the word Tricoenium and why I call the Work Tricoenium Christi A threefold Supper farther proved The Papists offended for calling the third Supper the Supper of the Lord. A deviation concerning Maldonat the Jesuite his Life and