signified in both the Sacraments yet in diuerse respects he is the thing signified in Baptisme and he is the thing signified in the Lords Supper This Christ Iesus in his bloud chiefly is the thing signified in the Sacrament of Baptisme and why Because that by his bloud he washeth away the filth of our soules because that by the vertue of his bloud he quickneth vs in our soules with a heauenly life because that by the power of his bloud he ingrafteth and incorporateth vs in his owne body For that Sacrament is a testimonie of the remission of our sinnes that is of the cleanenesse of our consciences that our consciences by that bloud are washed inwardly It testifieth also our new birth that we are begotten spiritually to a heauenly life It testifieth also the ioyning of vs in the body of Christ. As it is a testimonie so it is a seale it not onely testifieth but sealeth it vp in our hearts and maketh vs in our hearts to feele the taste of that heauenly life begun in vs that we are translated from death in the which we were conceiued and ingrafted in the body of Christ. Marke then Christ in his bloud as he is the washing of our regeneration is the thing signified in Baptisme In this Sacrament of the Lords Supper againe this same Christ is the thing signified in another respect to wit in this respect that his body and bloud serue to nourish my soule to life euerlasting for this Sacrament is no other thing but the image of our spirituall nourishment God testifying how our soules are fed and nourished to that heauenly life by the image of a corporall nourishment So in diuerse respects the same thing that is Christ Iesus is signified in Baptisme and is signified in the Lords Supper In this Sacrament the fruites of Christs death whereof I spake the vertue of his sacrifice the vertue of his passion I call not these fruites and vertues onely the thing signified in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper but rather I call the thing signified that substance and that person out of the which substance this vertue and these fruites do flow and proceede I grant and it is most certaine that by the lawful vse participiation of the Sacrament thou art partaker of all these fruites yet these fruites are not the first and chiefe thing whereof thou art partaker in this Sacrament but of force thou must get another thing first It is true that no man can be partaker of the substance of Christ but the same soule must be also partaker of the fruites that flow from his substance yet notwithstanding thou must discerne betwixt the substance the fruits that flow from the substance and thou must be partaker of the substance in the first roome then in the next place thou must be partaker of the fruites that flow from his substance To make this cleere in Baptisme the fruites of Baptisme are remission of our sinnes mortification the killing of sinne and the sealing vp of our adoption to life euerlasting The substance out of the which these fruits do flow is the bloud of Christ. Ye must here of force discerne between the bloud which is the substance and betweene remission of sinnes washing and regeneration which are the fruites that flow from this bloud so in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the fruits of that Sacrament are the growth of faith and the increase in holinesse The thing signified is the substance that is the body and bloud of Christ is the substance out of which this growth in faith and holinesse doth proceede Now see ye not this That you must discerne betwene â—he substance and the fruites and must place the substance in the first place So that the substance of Christ that is Christ himselfe is the thing signified in this Sacrament For your owne experience will make this plaine vnto you Before your stomacke be filled with any foode ye must eate the substance of the food first before you be filled with bread ye must eate the substance of the bread first before your drowth be quenched with any drinke ye must of necessity drinke the substance of the drinke first Euen so after this manner before the hunger of your soules be satisfied the thirst thereof quenched ye must eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud first and that by faith So consider the one by the other looke to what vse bread and wine serue to thy body to the same vse the body and bloud of Christ serue to thy soule and he that appointed the one to serue for thy body the same God appointed the other to serue for thy soule So looke how impossible it is for thee to be fed with that food that neuer cometh into thy mouth or to recouer health by those drugs which neuer were applyed it is as impossible for thee to be fed by the body of Christ and to get thy health by the bloud of Christ except thou first eate his body and drinke his bloud Then ye see that the thing signified in the Lords Supper is not the fruites so much as the body and bloud and Christ Iesus which is the fountaine and substance from which all these fruites do flow and proceed Then I say suppose Christ who is the thing signified remaine alwaies one and the same in both the Sacraments yet the signes whereby this one Christ is signified in the Sacraments are not one nor of an equall number For in Baptisme the thing that representeth Christ is Water In the Lords Supper the things that represent Christ are Bread Wine Water is appointed to represent Christ in Baptisme because it is meetest to represent our washing with the bloud of Christ for what is fitter to wash with then water So there is nothing meeter to wash the soule then the bloud of Christ. In this Sacrament he hath appointed Bread and Wine why Because there is nothing more meete to nourish the body then bread and wine so the Lord hath not chosen these signes without a reason As the signes in the Sacrament are not alwayes one so the same in both are not of one number For in Baptisme we haue but one element in this Sacrament we haue two elements Now what is the reason of this diuersity that the Lord in the one Sacrament hath appointed two signes and in the other but one signe I will shew you the reason He hath appointed onely one signe in Baptisme to wit Water because Water is sufficient enough for the whole If water had not beene sufficient to represent the thing signified he would haue appointed another signe but in respect that Water doth the turne and representeth fully the washing of our soules by the bloud of Christ what need then haue we of any signe Now in this Sacrament one signe will not suffice but there must be two And why Wine cannot be sufficient alone neither can Bread be sufficient alone for he
place of the Scripture Thirdly it is opposite vnto the end wherefore this Sacrament was instituted and this is most euident for the end of the Sacrament is spirituall as the effect that floweth thereof is spirituall and the instrument whereby this spirituall food is applyed to vs is also spirituall But from a naturall and corporall presence a spirituall effect can neuer flow therefore the corporall and naturall presence of the body and bloud of Christ Iesus repugnes directly the end of this Sacrament for the corporall presence must haue a corporall eating of this eating followeth a digestion in the stomacke and the thing that is digested in the stomacke is neuer able to feede my soule to life eternall So this corporall presence must euer tend to a corporall end which is directly contrary vnto the end wherfore the Sacrament was instituted Further if the bread were transubstantiate it should become the thing signified if it become the thing signified this Sacrament should want a signe and so it should not be a Sacrament for euery Sacrament as ye haue head is a signe Now to say that the accidents of true bread as the colour and the roundnesse of it may serue as signes that is more then folly for betwene the signe and the thing signified there must be a conformity but there is no conformity betweene the accidents and the body and bloud of Christ Iesus For if that were so the accidents behoued to nourish vs corporally as the body and bloud of Christ Ie pointed to nourish vs spiritually Againe if the bread become the body bloud of Christ Iesus it should follow that he had a body without bloud for he hath instituted another signe besides to represent his bloud Also if there had bene â—uch a wondefull thing as they speake of in this Sacrament there would haue bene plaine mention made thereof in the Scripture for God himselfe neuer works a notable worke but he declares it either openly or more secretly in the Scripture that thereby he may be glorified in his wonderfull workes As ye may reade in the Euangelist Iohn 2.8 where the water was changed into wine Gene. 2.22 where the rib of Adam was changed into Heua Exodus 7.10 where Aarons rodde was turned into a Serpent there ye see that changing is manifestly expressed Therefore I say if there had bene such a monstrous change in these elements of â—he Supper as they affirme the Scripture would not haue concealed it but expressed it but in respect there is no mention made of this change in the Scriptures therefore there is no such change in this action Further if there were such a change as they say either it is before these words of consecration be spoken or followes after the same words be spoken If the change be before the words of the consecration be spoken the consecration is superfluous and their Proposition is false if the change be after the words be spoken This bread is my body their Proposition is false also because the word bread is spoken before the last syllable of their fiue words is pronounced These and infinite more absurdities follow of this doctrine And yet they obstinately perseuer and vrge vs with the letter affirming that the words of Christ are so plaine that they admit no figure They would haue spoken more aduisedly if they had sought counsell of Augustine to haue discerned betwene a figuratiue speech and a proper speech for he in his third booke and 16. chapter of Christian doctrine speakes after this sort If the speech saith he seeme to command a wickednesse or mischiefe or to forbid any happinesse or any welfare it is not proper it is then figuratiue And he addes for an example a place out of Iohn 6.53 Except saith our Sauiour ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud ye haue no life in you Whereunto Augustine addeth This speech saith he seemeth to commande a mischiefe therefore it is a figuratiue speech whereby we are commanded to communicate with the sufferings of Christ Iesus and with gladnes to keepe in perpetuall memory that the flesh of the Lord was crucified and wounded for vs. For otherwise it were more horrible as the same Augustine maketh mention in the second booke against the Aduersaries of the law to eate the flesh of Christ Iesus really then to murther him and more horrible to drinke his bloud then to shed his bloud Yet notwithstanding they are not ashamed still to hold maintaine that those words ought to be taken properly So that it appeareth that of very malice for contradiction sake to the end onely that they may withstand the truth they will not acknowledge this to be a sacramentall speech For they are compelled will they nill they in other speeches of the like sort to acknowledge a figure as Genes 17.10 Circumcision is called the couenant and Exod. 12.11 the Lambe is called the Passeouer and Math. 20.22 the Cup is called his Bloud and Luke 22.20 the Cuppe is called the new Testament and 1. Cor. 10.4 the Rocke is called Christ. All these speeches are sacramentall and receiue a kinde of interpretation yet they maliciously prease to deny vs this in these words Hoc est corpus meum which they are compelled to grant in the rest as especially where Paul calleth the rocke Christ. Now when they are driuen out of this Fortresse they flie as vnhappily to the second namely That God by his omnipotency may make the body of Christ to be in heauen and in the bread both at one time Ergo say they it is so If I denied their consequent they would be much troubled to proue it But the question standeth not here whether God may do it or not but the question is Whether God will it or not or may will it or not And we say reuerently that his Maiestie may not will it for though it be true that he may many things which he will not yet it is as true that there are many things which he may not will of the which sort this is and these are reduced to two sorts First he may not will those things which are contrary to his nature as to be changeable as to decay such others for if he might will these things they should not be arguments of any puissance or of any other power but rather certaine arguments of his impotency and infirmity And therefore though he may not will these things he ceasseth not to be omnipotent but so much the rather his constant and inuincible power is knowne Secondly God may not will some things by reason of a presupposed condition as such things whereof he hath concluded the contrary before of the which sort is this which is now controuerted For seeing that God hath concluded that a humane body should consist of instrumentall parts and therefore to be comprehended and circumscribed within one and the owne proper place and also seeing he hath appointed Christ
The reason wherefore I call them signes is this I call them not signes by that reason that men commonly call them signes because they signifie onely as the Brâ—â—d signifies the bodie of Christ the Wine signifies the bloud of Christ I call them not signes because they represent onely but I call them signes because they haue the body bloud of Christ conioyned with them Yea so truly is the bodie of Christ conioyned with that Bread and the bloud of Christ conioyned with that Wine that as soone as thou receiuest that Bread in thy mouth if thou be a faithfull man or woman so soone receiuest thou the bodie of Christ in thy soule and that by faith and as soone as thou receiuest that Wine in thy mouth so soone thou receiuest the bloud of Christ in thy soule and that by faith In respect of this exhibition chiefely that they are instruments to deliuer and exhibite the things that they signifie and not in respect onely of their representation are they called signes For if they did nothing but represent or signifie a thing absent then any picture or dead Image should be a Sacrament for there is no picture as the picture of the King but at the sight of the picture the King will come in your minde and it will signifie vnto you that that is the Kings picture So if the signe of the Sacrament did no further all pictures should be Sacraments but in respect that the Sacrament exhibites and deliuers the thing that it signifieth to the soule and heart so soone as the signe is deliuered to the mouth for this cause especially it is called a signe There is no picture of the King that will deliuer the King vnto you there is no other image that will exhibite the thing whereof it is the image therefore there is no image can be a Sacrament Then in respect the Lord hath appointed the Sacraments as hands to deliuer and exhibite the thing signified for this deliuery and exhibition chiefly they are called signes As the word of the Gospell is a mightie and potent instrument to our euerlasting saluation so the Sacrament is a potent instrument appointed by God to deliuer vs to Christ Iesus to our euerlasting saluation For this spirituall meate is dressed and giuen vp to vs in spirituall dishes that is in the ministerie of the word and in the ministerie of the Sacraments And suppose this ministerie be externall yet the Lord is said to deliuer spirituall and heauenly things by these external things Why Because he hath appointed them as instruments whereby he will deliuer his owne Sonne vnto vs. For this is certaine that none hath power to deliuer Christ Iesus vnto vs except God and his holy Spirit and therefore to speake properly there is none can deliuer Christ but God by his owne Spirit he is deliuered by the ministerie of the holy Spirit it is the holy Spirit that seales him vp in our hearts confirmes vs more and more in him as the Apostle giueth him this stile 2. Cor. 1.22 To speake properly there is none hath power to deliuer Christ but God the Father or himselfe There is none hath power to deliuer the Mediator but his owne Spirit yet it hath pleased God to vse some instruments and meanes whereby he will deliuer Christ Iesus vnto vs. The meanes are these the ministerie of the word and the ministerie of the Sacraments and in respect he vseth these as meanes to deliuer Christ they are said to deliuer him But here ye haue to distinguish betweene the principall efficient deliuerer the instrumentall efficient which is the word SacrameÌ„ts keeping this distinction both these are true God by his word God by his Spirit deliuereth Christ Iesus vnto you Then I say I call theÌ„ signes because God hath made theÌ„ potent instruments to deliuer the same thing which they signifie Now I go to the thing signified and I call the thing signified by the signes in the Sacrament that which Irenaeus that old Writer calleth the heauenly and spirituall thing to wit whole Christ with his whole gifts benefites and graces applied and giuen to my soule Then I call not the thing signified by the signes of Bread and Wine the benefits of Christ the graces of Christ or the vertue that floweth out of Christ onely but I call the thing signified together with the benefits and vertues flowing from him the very substance of Christ himselfe from which this vertue doth flow The substance with the vertues gifts and graces that flow from the substance is the thing signified here As for the vertue and graces that flow from Christ it is not possible that thou canst be partaker of the vertue that floweth from his substance except thou be first partaker of the substance it selfe For how is it possible that I can be partaker of the iuyce that floweth out of any substance except I be partaker of the substance it selfe first Is it possible that my stomach can be refreshed with that meate the substance whereof neuer came into my mouth Is it possible my drought can be slackned with that drinke that neuer passed downe my throat Is it possible that I can sucke any vertue out of any thing except I get the substance first So it is impossible that I can get the iuyce and vertue that floweth out of Christ except I get the substance that is himselfe first So I call not the thing signified the grace and vertue that floweth from Christ onely nor Christ himselfe and his substance without his vertue and graces onely but ioyntly the substance with the graces whole Christ God and man without separation of his natures wiâ—hout distinguishing of his substance from his graces I call the thing signified by the signes in the Sacrament for why if no more be signified by the Bread but the flesh and bodie of Christ onely and no more be signified by the Wine but the bloud of Christ onely thou canst not say that the body of Christ is Christ it is but a part of Christ thou canst not say that the blood of Christ is whole Christ it is but a part of him and a peece of thy Sauiour saued thee not a part of thy Sauiour wrought not the worke of thy saluation and so suppose thou get a peece of him in the Sacrament that part will do thee no good To the end therefore that this Sacrament may nourish thee to life euerlasting thou must get in it thy whole Sauiour whole Christ God and man with his whole graces and benefites without separation of his substance from his graces or of the one nature from the other And how get I him Not by my mouth It is a vaine thing to thinke that we will get God by our mouth but we get him by faith As he is a Spirit so I eate him by faith and beliefe in my soule not by the teeth of my mouth that is a vaine thing Be it that
supper a supper appointed for the increase of holinesse for the foode of the soule in holinesse to feede the soule vnto life euerlasting Not a supper appointed for the bellie for he had ended that supper that was appointed for the bellie or euer he began this Supper which was appointed for the soule A supper no doubt hauing respect to the circumstance of time by reason it was instituted in that very same time when they vsed to sup It is called also in the Bible The Table of the Lord. It is not called the Altar of the Lord but the Apostle calleth it a Table to sit at and not an Altar to stand at a Table to take and receiue at and not an Altar to offer at It is called also the Communion and participation of the bodie and bloud of Christ we haue these names giuen vnto it besides some others in the Scriptures of God The Ancients of the Latine and of the Greeke Churches gaue it sundrie names for sundry respects They called it a publike action this was a very generall name Sometimes they called it a thanksgiuing Sometimes they called it a banquet of loue and sometimes they gaue it one name sometimes another And at last in the declining estate of the Latin Church in the falling estate of the Romane Church this Sacrament began to be peruerted and with this decay there came in a peruerse name and they called it the Masse They trouble themselues much concerning the deriuation of this name sometime they seeke it from an Hebrew originall sometime from a Greeke and sometime from a Latine originall but it is plaine that the word is deriued from the Latine and it is a word which might haue bene tollerable when it was first instituted for no doubt the Sacrament at the first institution of this word was not then wholly peruerted but now in processe of time corruption hath preuailed so farre that it hath turned the Sacrament into a sacrifice and where we should take from the hand of God in Christ they make vs to giue This is plaine idolatrie and therefore whereas the word was tollerable before now it ought not to be tollerated any way it ought not to be suffered And certainly if we had eaten and drunke as oft the bodie and bloud of Christ in our soules as we haue eaten that bread and drunke that wine which are the signes of his bodie and bloud we would not haue suffered this word of the Masse much lesse the very action of it to be so rise in this Countrey But because we haue but played the counterfeits defrauded our soules of the bodie and bloud of Christ and tooke only the outward Sacrament therefore it is that our zeale decayeth therefore it is that our knowledge and light decayeth and for want of zeale loue and knowledge the word of the Masse is become customable vnto you not onely the word but the very action I will not runne out herein I onely tell you what cometh of the abuse of the hearing of the word what iudgements follow vpon the abuse of the receiuing of the Sacraments Now I come to the ends wherefore the Sacrament was appointed This Sacrament was instituted in the signes of Bread and Wine and was appointed chiefely for this end to represent our spirituall nouriture the full and perfect nouriture of our soules that as he who hath Bread Wine lacketh nothing for the full nourishment of his bodie so he or that soule which hath the participation of the bodie and bloud of Christ wanteth nothing for the full and perfect nourishment of the soule To represent this full and perfect nourishment the signes of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament were set downe and instituted The second end wherefore this Sacrament was instituted is this That we might testifie to the world and to the Princes of the world who are enemies to our profession that we might openly avow and testifie vnto them our Religion and our manner of worshipping in the which we avow and worship Christ and that we might also testifie our loue towards his members our brethren this is the second end wherefore it was instituted The third end wherefore it was instituted is this to serue for our speciall comfort and consolation to serue as a soueraigne medicine for all our spirituall diseases as we find our selues either readie to fall or prouoked to fall by the diuell the flesh or the world or after that we haue fallen and are put to flight by the diuell and would faine flie away from God God of his mercie and of his infinite pitie and bottomles compassion hath set vp this Sacrament as a signe on an high hill whereby it may be seene on euery side farre and neere to call all them againe that haue runne shamefully away and he clucks to them as a Henne doth to her chickens to gather them vnder the wings of his infinite mercie The fourth end wherefore this Sacrament was instituted is this that in this action we might thanke him for his benefits and render to him heartie thanks that he hath come downe so familiarly to vs bowed the heauens as it were and giuen vs the bodie and bloud of his owne Sonne that we might render vnto him heartie thanks and so sanctifie his benefits vnto vs for this thanksgiuing this Sacrament was also instituted Thus far concerning the ends briefely Now I come to the things contained in this Sacrament Ye see with your eyes there are corporall things visible things as the Bread and Wine There are againe hid from the eye of your bodie but present to the eye of your mind spirituall things heauenly and inward things both these are in the Sacrament The corporall visible and outward things are the things which are appointed to signifie the spirituall heauenly and inward things And why Nothing without a reason These corporall signes are appointed to signifie the spirituall things because we are corporall we are earthly bodies we haue our soule lodging within a carnall body in a tabernacle of clay a grosse tabernacle which cannot be wakened nor moued except by the things that are like to it selfe It cannot be induced to the consideration of heauenly things except by grosse temporall and corporall things If we had bene of the nature of the thing signified that as the thing signified is spirituall and heauenly so we had beene spirituall heauenly we had not needed a corporal thing so if the thing signified had bene as we are corporall earthly visible we had not needed a signe to leade vs to consider of it But because the thing signified is spirituall we are corporal therfore to bring vs vnto the sight of these spirituall things he vseth a corporall meanes an outward signe This is the reason wherfore these corporall signes are appointed to signifie the spirituall thing The spirituall thing in both the Sacraments is one and the selfe same Christ Iesus
that hath Bread onely and Wine onely hath not a perfect corporall nourishment therefore that they might represent and let vs see a perfect nourishment he hath giuen vs both Bread and Wine for the perfect corporall nourishment standeth in meate and drinke to represent the full and perfect nourishment of the soule Marke how full and perfect a nourishment he hath to his body that hath store of Bread and Wine so he that hath Christ lacketh nothing of a full and perfect nourishment for his soule Then you see the reason wherefore there are two signes appointed in this Sacrament and onely one signe in Baptisme There remaineth yet concerning these signes two thing to be enquired First what power hath that Bread in this Sacrament to be a signe more then the bread which is vsed in common houses from whence cometh that power Next if it haue a power how long endureth and remaineth that power with the bread For the first concerning the power which that bread hath more then any other bread I will tell you That Bread hath a power giuen vnto it by Christ by his institution by the which institution it is appointed to signifie his bodie to represent his body and to deliuer his bodie That Bread hath a power flowing from Christ and his institution which other common bread hath not so that if any of you would aske when the Minister in this action is breaking or distributing that Bread pouring out and distributing that Wine if you would I say aske what sort of creatures those are this is the answer They are holy things Ye must giue this name to the signes and seales of the body and bloud of Christ. That Bread of the Sacrament is a holy Bread and that Wine is an holy Wine Why Because the blessed institution of Christ hath seuered them from that vse whereunto they serued before and hath applyed them vnto an holy vse not to feede the bodie but to feede the soule Thus farre concerning the power of that Bread it hath a power flowing from Christ and his institution Now the second thing is how long this power continueth with that Bread how long that Bread hath this office In a word I say this power continueth with that Bread during the time of the action during the seruice of the Table Looke how long that action continueth and that the seruice of the Table lasteth so long it continueth holy Bread so long continueth the power with that Bread but looke how soone the action is ended so soone endeth the holinesse of it looke how soone the seruice of the Table is ended so soone that Bread becomes common bread againe and the holinesse of it ceasseth Then this power continueth not for euer but it continueth onely during the time of the action seruice of the Table Thus far concerning the Elements There is besides the Elements another sort of signes in the Sacrament there is not a ceremonie in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper but is a signe and hath it owne spirituall signification with it as namely looking to the breaking of that Bread it representeth vnto thee the breaking of the bodie and bloud of Christ. Not that his bodie and bones were broken but that it was broken with dolour with anguish and distresse of heart with the weight of the indignation and furie of God that he sustained for our sinnes which he tooke vpon him Then the breaking is an essentiall ceremonie the pouring out of the wine also is an essentiall ceremonie For as ye see clearely that by the Wine is signified the bloud of Christ so by the pouring out of the Wine is signified that his bloud was seuered from his flesh and the seuering of those two maketh death for in bloud is the life and consequently it testifieth his death The pouring out of the Wine then telleth thee that he died for thee that his bloud was shed for thee so this is an essentiall ceremonie which must not be left out Likewise the distribution giuing and eating are essentiall ceremonies And what doth the eating testifie vnto thee The applying of the bodie bloud of Christ vnto thy soule So that there is none of these rites but haue their owne signification and there cannot one of them be left out but ye shall peruert the whole action Thus far concerning the signes Now what profit can ye make of all this discourse Learne this lesson and ye shall make profite by these things In respect that euery signe and ceremonie hath it owne spirituall signification so that there is not a ceremonie in this whole action that wanteth it owne spirituall signification consider this and thinke with your selues at that time especially when ye are at the Lords Table and in the sight of that action that looke what thou seest the Minister doing outwardly what euer it be Is he breaking that Bread is he dealing that Bread Thinke assuredly with thy selfe that Christ is as busie doing all these things spiritually vnto thy soule he is as busie giuing vnto thee his owne bodie with his owne hand he is as busie giuing to thee his owne bloud with the vertue and efficacie of it So in this action if thou be a faithfull Communicant looke what the mouth doth and how the mouth of the bodie is occupied outwardly so is the hand and mouth of the soule which is faith occupied inwardly As the mouth taketh that Bread and that Wine so the mouth of thy soule taketh the body and bloud of Christ and that by faith For by faith and a constant perswasion is the onely way to eate the bodie and drinke the bloud of Christ inwardly and doing this there cannot but follow a fruitfull eating Thus far for the consideration of the signes Now cometh in the matter wherein greatest difficultie standeth whereof I spake the last day as God gaue me the grace yet in the particular I must speake as well as in the generall but somewhat more shortly Then ye haue to vnderstand for the better information of your consciences for the better preparation of your soules ye haue to vnderstand how that Bread and that Wine which are signes are coupled with the body and bloud of Christ which are signified thereby What sort of coniunction is this and from whence this coniunction floweth I shall be briefe because I haue already in my last Lecture spoken of it at large Take heede for if ye giue not good attention it is not possible that ye can conceiue this coniunction Concerning this coniunction would you know how these two are coupled Then must you first marke the nature of the signes and the nature of the thing signified ye must obserue both their natures And why Because nothing can be coupled nor conioyned with other but so far as the nature of it will suffer if the nature of it will not suffer a coniunction they cannot be conioyned Or will the nature of it
suffer a coniunction looke how farre it will suffer a coniunction so far are they conioyned Seeing then ye must obserue the nature of the things that are conioyned first marke the thing signified what the nature thereof is marking that ye shall see that the thing signified is of a spirituall nature or a heauenly and mysticall nature Then may ye conclude that this spirituall thing will suffer a spirituall coniunction a mystical and secret coniunction Againe obserue the signe The signe of his nature as I haue told you hath a relation vnto the thing signified and the thing signified of his nature hath a relation vnto the signe So then the signe and the thing signified will suffer to be conioyned by a mutuall relation both the signe and the thing signified in respect they haue a mutuall relation the one vnto the other they will suffer themselues to be conioyned by a relatiue coniunction Now if ye aske me what sort of coniunction is betweene that Bread and Wine and the bodie and bloud of Christ to tell you in a word I say it is a secâ—et and spirituall coniunction such a coniunction as standeth in a mutuall respect betwixt the Bread and the bodie of Christ and betwixt the Wine and the bloud of Christ then I say it is a secret and a spirituall coniunction Ye would not be so inquisitiue of this coniunction if it were corporall visible or locall if you saw them both before your eyes you would not aske how they are conioyned or if thou didst see them both in one place But because you see but the one with your eyes and the other is hid this maketh the coniunction the more difficult to be vttered and vnderstood And how is it possible that ye can conceiue this secret hid coniunction except you haue the eyes of your mind illuminated by the Spirit whereby ye may come to the right vnderstanding But if ye haue any insight into these spirituall matters that come by faith this coniunction will appeare as clearely by the eye of your faith as the physicall coniunction doth to the eye of your body Now to haue this matter made more plaine there is another coniunction which serueth to make this coniunction very cleare namely the coniunction betwixt the word which I speake and the thing signified by that same word As if I speake to you of things in this language which ye vnderstand be it of things past though neuer so long since of things to come though neuer so farre off of things absent though neuer so farre distant yet so soone as I speake the word whether it be of things past or to come the thing it selfe will come into your mind The word is heard no sooner by your eare but the thing signified by the same word cometh into your mind What maketh the thing signified though absent to come into my mind This could not be except there were a coniunction betweene the word and the thing signified by the word As for example if I speake of the King who is now a great way distant from vs I pray God blesse him ye will no sooner heare the word but the King who is the thing signified by the word will come into your mind If I speake of things past though they be already expired yet the thing signified will presently come into your mind so there is a coniunction ye see betweene the word and the thing signified by the word Marke this coniunction and ye shall get the nature of the coniunction and coupling of the signe which is the thing signified in the Sacrament For obserue what sort of coniunction is betweene the word and the thing signified by the word the same sort of coniunction is betweene the Sacrament which is seene to the eye of your body and the thing signified by the Sacrament which is seene to the eye of your soule onely As for example so soone as thou seest that bread taken in the hand of the Minister thou seest it not so soone but incontinent the body of Christ must come into thy minde these two are so conioyned that they come both together the one to the outward senses the other to the inward senses This is not enough now because in the institution ye are commanded to go further and not onely to looke to that bread and that wine but to take that bread and that wine incontinent as your hands take the one so your heart takes the other as your teeth eates the one so the teeth of your soule which is faith eates the other that is applyeth Christ vnto your soule So ye see there is a coniunction here secret and mysticall and therefore Christ cannot be conioyned but by a secret and mysticall coniunction The coniunction betweene Christ and vs is a secret and mysticall coniunction which the Apostle in the fift of the Ephes. calleth that spirituall coniunction full of an high mystery this coniunction cannot be taken vp at the first So seeing the coniunction is secret and spirituall and not perceiued but by the spirit of God all is as nothing except ye haue some portion and measure of his Spirit All that is taught in the word and Sacraments will neuer do you good will neuer carry your soules to heauen except the Spirit of God illuminate your mindes and make you to finde in your soules the thing that ye heare in the word Then learne this seeing the word cannot be vnderstood but by the spirit of God craue that the Loâ—d would illuminate the eyes of your mindes by his Spirit and be you as carefull to get the Spirit as ye are carefull now in the hearing of the word Thus farre concerning the coniunction Now ye haue heard how the signe is conioyned with the thing signified what remaineth for you to know This rests yet to know how the signe is receiued how the thing signified is receiued whether they be both receiued with one mouth or not whether the signe and the thing signified be receiued after one fashion and maner or not And marking the diuerse maner of receiuing the diuersity of the instruments ye shall not easily erre in the Sacrament The signe and the thing signified are receiued by two mouthes for ye see the signes that is that bread and wine whereunto they are giuen they are giuen to the mouth of the body Then the mouth of the body is the instrument that receiueth that bread and that wine which are the signes As that bread and that wine are visible and corporall so the mouth and instrument whereby they are receiued is visible and corporall The thing signified by the bread and wine is not receiued by the mouth of the body no the Scripture denieth that plainely but it is receiued by the mouth of the soule Then there are two mouthes that bread and that wine which are the signes are receiued by the mouth of the body Christ who is the thing signified is receiued by the
mouth of the soule that is by a true faith Then bring not to the Lords Table one mouth onely for if ye bring the mouth of your body onely it auaileth nothing but bring with you also the mouth of your soule a constant perswasion in the death of Christ for that is auaileable Now concerning the manner how the signes are receiued and the manner how the thing signified is receiued ye may easily know that these corporall and naturall signes must be receiued after a corporall and naturall manner they must be taken with the hand or mouth of the body Againe a supernaturall thing must be receiued after a supernaturall maner And a spirituall thing must be receiued after a spirituall manner So as the signes are corporall and receiued after a corporall manner with the hand or the mouth of the body in like mannner the thing signified is spirituall and receiued after a spirituall manner with the hand and mouth of the soule which is true faith Thus ye haue briefly deliuered vnto you the whole preparation that is necessary for the vnderstanding of the Sacrament Now what doctrine gather I from this Of this last point where I say that Christ is the thing signified caÌ„not be perceiued but by faith cannot be receiued nor digested but by a faithfull soule what kinde of receiuing confirme I in this Sacrament I establish no kinde of receiuing of Christ but a spirituall receiuing he can not be perceiued nor receiued but by faith and faith is spirituall Therefore in this Sacrament I establish onely a spirituall taking of Christ and not a carnall or fleshly receiuing This is the ground Now let vs see what inconuenience can follow vppon this ground The Papists say that vpon this ground this inconuenience shall follow If there be no receiuing of Christ but a spirituall receiuing then say they your Sacrament is in vaine this Sacrament of the Lords Supper was instituted to no end And what is their reason If there be no way to receiue Christ say the Papists but by faith what neede you then a Sacrament Ye receiue Christ by faith in the word by the naked and simple preaching of the word ye get faith So the simple word may serue the turne What neede haue ye of a Sacrament if ye get not some new thing in the Sacrament which ye could not get in the word This is their argument whereof ye see their conclusion to be this We get no other new thing in the Sacrament then we do in the word if there be no receiuing but spirituall Ergo The Sacrament is superfluous We admit the Antecedent to be true we get no other thing nor no new thing in the Sacrament but the same thing which we got in the word I would haue thee deuise and imagine with thy selfe what new thing thou wouldst haue let the heart of man deuise imagine and wish he durst neuer haue thought to haue such a thing as the Sonne of God he durst neuer haue presumed to haue pierced the clowdes to haue ascended so high as to haue craued the Sonne of God in his flesh to be the food of his soule Hauing the Sonne of God thou hast him who is the heire of all things who is King of heauen and earth and in him thou hast all things What more then canst thou wish What better thing canst thou wish He is equall with the Father one in substance with the Father true God and true man what more canst thou wish Then I say we get no other thing in the Sacrament then we had in the word content thee with this But suppose it be so yet the Sacrament is not superfluous But wouldest thou vnderstand what new thing thou obtainest what other thing thou gettest I will tell thee Suppose thou get that same thing which thou hadst in the word yet thou gettest that same thing better What is that better Thou obtainest a greater and surer hold of that same thing in the Sacrament then thou hadst by the hearing of â—he word That same thing which thou possessedst by the hearing of the word thou doest possesse now more largely it hath larger bounds in thy soule by the receiuing of the Sacrament then otherwise it could haue by the hearing of the word onely Then wilt thou aske what new thing we get I say we get this new thing we get Christ better then â—â—fore we get the thing which we had more fully that is with a surer apprehension then we had it before we get â— greater hold of Christ now For by the Sacrament my faith is nourished the bounds of my soule are enlarged and so whereas I had but a little hold of Christ before as it were betweene my finger and my thumbe now I get him in my whole hand and still the more that my faith groweth the better hold I get of Christ Iesus So the Sacrament is very necessary and if it were no more but to get Christ better to get a faster apprehension of him by the Sacrament then we could haue before Now if it were true that the Sacrament is superfluous by the same reason it should follow also that the repetition of the Sacrament is superfluous For when ye come to the Sacrament the second time ye get no other thing then ye did the first time when ye come vnto the Sacrament the third time ye get no other thing then ye did the first time and yet no man will say that the third and the second comming is a superfluous thing And why Because by the second coming my faith is augmented I vnderstand better I grow in knowledge I grow in apprehension I grow in feeling and in getting the growth of all these as oft as I come there is no man will say that the oft coming to the Sacrament is superfluous and if it were euery day once So their first inconuenience auaileth not We get no new thing in the Sacrament Ergo the Sacrament is superfluous Thus far for the first Then there depends another thing on the same ground If Christ be not receiued but by faith then say we no wicked bodie can receiue him he that lacketh faith cannot receiue him He that lacketh faith may receiue that Sacrament of that Bread and Wine and may eate of that Bread and drinke of that Wine but he that wanteth faith may not eate and drinke of the body and bloud of Christ signified by that Bread and by that Wine So this is the ground No faithlesse people can receiue Christ nor eate the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament Against this ground they bring their Argument out of the same words of the Apostle which I haue read the worâ—â— are these He that eateth of this Bread vnworthily saith the Apostle and drinketh of this Cup vnworworthily is guiltie of the bodie and bloud of Christ. There is their ground So that their Argument will suffer this forme No man can be
guiltie of that thing which he hath not receiued they haue not receiued the bodie and bloud of Christ therefore they cannot be guiltie of the body and bloud of Christ but so it is that the Apostle saith they are guiltie therefore they haue receiued the bodie and bloud of Christ. I answer vnto the Proposition and say it is very false They could not be guiltie of that bodie and bloud except they had receiued it for they may be guiltie of that same bodie and of that same bloud suppose they neuer receiued it But marke the Text the Text saith not that they eate the bodie of Christ vnworthily but it saith that they eate that Bread and drinke that Wine vnworthily and yet because they eate that Bread drinke that Wine vnworthily they are counted before God guiltie of the bodie and bloud of Christ. Now wherefore is this Not because they receiue him for if they receiued him they could not but receiue him worthily for Christ cannot be receiued of any man but worthily but they are accounted guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Sonne of God because they refused him For when they did eate that Bread and drinke that Wine they might if they had had faith haue eaten and drunke the flesh of Christ Iesus Now because thou refusest the body of Christ offered to thee thou contemnest his bodie offered vnto thee if thou haue not an eye to discerne and iudge of this bodie that is offered For if they had had faith they might haue seene his bodie offered with the Bread by faith they might haue taken that same bodie and by faith they might haue eaten that same bodie Therefore lacking their wedding garment wanting faith whereby they should eate the bodie and drinke the bloud of Christ wanting faith which is the eye of the soule to perceiue and the mouth of the soule to receiue that bodie which is spiritually offered they are counted guiltie of that same bodie and bloud Now let vs make this more cleare by a similitude Ye see among worldly Princes their custome is not to suffer their maiestie to be impeached in the smallest thing that they haue What meaner thing is there that concerneth the maiestie of a Prince then a seale for the substance of it is but waxe yet if thou disdainefully vse that seale and contemne it and stampe it vnder thy feete thou shalt be esteemed as guiltie of his bodie and bloud as he that laid violent hands on him and thou shalt be punished accordingly Much more if thou come as a swine or a dog to handle the seales of the bodie and bloud of Christ much more I say mayest thou be reckoned guiltie of his bodie and of his bloud Thus farre of the eating of the bodie of Christ The wicked cannot eate the bodie of Christ but they may be guiltie of it The Apostle maketh this more plaine yet by another speech which I haue sometimes handled in this place In Hebr. 6.6 it is said that Apostates they that fall away crucifie the Sonne of God againe and their falling away maketh them as guiltie as they were who crucified him He is now in heauen they cannot fetch him from thence to crucifie him yet the Apostle saith they crucifie him Why Because their malice is as great as theirs that crucified him because they match in malice with them that crucified him so that if they had him on the earth they would do the like therefore they are said to crucifie the Son of God So in Heb. 10.29 there is another speech the wicked are said to stampe the bloud of Christ vnder their feete Why Because their malice is as great as theirs that stamped his bloud Now they are accounted for this reason to be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of Christ not because they eate his bodie but because they refused it whem they might haue had it Now the time remaineth yet wherein we may haue the bodie and bloud of Christ. This time is very precious and the dispensation of times iâ— very secret and hath it owne bounds if ye take not this time now it will away This time of grace and of that heauenly foode hath bene dispensed vnto you very long but how ye haue profited your liues and behauiours testifie Remember therefore your selues in time and in time make vse of it for ye know not how long it will last craue a mouth to receiue as well the foode of your soules that is offered as ye do the food of your bodies take this time while ye may haue it or assuredly the time shall come when ye shall cry for it but shall not get it but in place of grace and mercie shall come iudgement vengeance and the dispensation of wrath They will not leaue this matter so but they insist yet and they bring more Arguments to proue that the wicked are partakers of the bodie and bloud of Christ That bread say they ye will grant which the wicked man eates is not naked bread but is that bread which is the Sacrament Thus then they make their Argument The Sacrament hath euer conioyned with it the thing signified But the Sacrament is giuen to all therefore the thing signified is giuen to all What if I grant to them all this Argument There should no inconuenience follow For the thing signified may be giuen to all that is offered to all as it is offered to all men and yet not receiued of all Giuen to all therefore receiued of all it followeth not I may offer you two things yet it is in your owne will whether you will take them or no but ye may take the one and refuse the other and yet he that offers offered you the thing that ye refused as truly as the thing which ye tooke So God deceiueth no man but with the word and Sacraments assuredly he giueth two things if they would take them By his word he offers the word to the eare he offers Christ Iesus to the soule By his Sacraments he offers the Sacraments to the eye he offers Christ Iesus to the soule Now it may be that where two things are truly and conioyntly offred a man may receiue the one and refuse the other He receiueth the one because he hath an instrument to take it he refuseth the other because he wanteth an instrument I heare the word because I haue an eare to heare it with I receiue the Sacrament because I haue a mouth to receiue it with but as for the thing which the word and Sacraments represent I may refuse it because I haue not a mouth to take it nor an eye to perceiue it and therefore the fault is not on Gods part but on our part The wicked get the body and bloud of Christ offered to them conioyntly with the word and Sacraments but the fault is on their part that they haue not a mouth to receiue him and God is not bound to giue them a
to whom the Priest applieth that sacrifice And as for the rest of the Church who are absent they obtaine this remission of their sinnes by this worke generally These three things are necessarie to the substance of the Masse As for the accidents that must concurre to the making of a Masse they are of two sorts Some of them are alwaies necessarie without the which that action cannot be againe some are not necessarie and the action may be without them but not without a deadly sinne These things that are necessarie concerne partly the Priest and partly the action it selfe The accidents that are necessarie to the Priest are of two sorts One sort are such as without the which he cannot be a Priest The other sort such without the which he cannot be free from deadly sin The things without the which he cannot be a Priest are these Except he haue a power giuen of his Bishop to consecrate which power is iustified by the vnction and shauing of his crowne Except againe he haue power to speake and that the roofe of his mouth be whole that he may speake he cannot be a Priest These two are alwaies necessarie and concurre to the person Other things againe are not so necessarie as that the Priest must be free from suspension from cursing deadly sinne and all Ecclesiasticall paine and censures These things are necessarie to the person There are againe two things necessarie to the action One sort without the which the action cannot be without the Lords prayer it cannot be without the fiue words of the institution it cannot be Other things againe are not so necessarie as the consecration of the place where the Masse is said the Altar stone the blessing of the Chalice the water the singing he that should helpe to say Masse and the rest So they and we in no sort agree concerning the word what is meant by it The second point is how this woâ—d ought to be intreated wherein we are as farre asunder we say the word taken as hath bene said for the whole institution ought to be intreated after this manner First there ought to be a lawfull Pastor who hath his calling of God to deliuer it And this Pastor ought to deliuer the word lawfully what is that he ought to preach it to proclaime it publikely with a plaine speech to denounce it he ought to open vp and declare all the parts of it what is the peoples part what is his owne part how he ought to deliuer and distribute that Bread and that Wine how the people ought to receiue at his hands that Bread and that Wine to informe their faith how they ought to receiue Christs bodie and bloud signified by that Bread and Wine As also he ought to teach them how they should come with reuerence vnto that Table and communicate with the pretious bodie and bloud of Christ. This he ought to do in a familiar language that the people may vnderstand him that they may heare him that they may perceiue and lay vp in their hearts the things that he speaketh For what auaileth it you to heare a thing whispered and not spoken out or if it be spoken out what auaileth it you to heare it if ye vnderstand it not For except ye heare Christ in a familiar and plaine language ye cannot vnderstand and except ye vnderstand it is impossible for you to beleeue and without beliefe there is no application of Christ and except ye beleeue and apply Christ to your selues your coming to the Sacrament is in vaine So of necessitie if â—his Sacrament be lawfully handled the Pastor must preach the institution of Christ that it may be heard and in a familiar language that it may be vnderstood in such sort that the faithfull people may be informed how to receiue and the Minister may know his part how to deliuer and distribute This I say should be the right handling of the holy institution of this Sacrament Now what do they In place of a Minister Pastor or Bishop call him as you please who is lawfully called of God they substitute a priest surrogate an hireling who hath no calling or office now in the Church of God For the office of a priest as they vse their priesthood is no other thing but the office of Christ Iesus the office of the Mediatour betwixt God vs for they make their priests daily to offer vp Christ Iesus to the Father Now this is the Mediatour Christ his office and he did it once for all once for euer saith the Apostle so that they haue no entrance to do this ouer againe and in respect that their priests do this againe which Christ hath done already they do it without command they haue no warrant in the word of God And if they had warrant for their calling in the word of God yet they handle the Sacrament amisse for whereas they should speake forth cleerly they whisper and coniure the elements by a certaine kinde of whispering Whereas they should speake it in a knowne language that the people may vnderstand they speake in an vnknowne language and though they spake it in a knowne and familiar tongue yet in that they whisper it the people cannot be the better And what shall I say Seeing they thus handle the word though it be the very institution it selfe yet they so spoyle it in the handling that it is not an holy Sacrament Then we differ as much in the second poynt how that word ought to be handled and intreated Now the third poynt is what vertue this word hath how farre the vertue of this word extendeth it selfe In this point we grant and acknowledge that the word hath a vertue the word taken as hath bene said worketh some what euen toward the same elements of bread and wine for we acknowledge that those element by the vertue of this word are changed not in their substance and naturall properties but we grant that the elements are changed in a quality which they had not before in such sort that these elements are taken from the common vse whereunto they serued before and by the institution of Christ they are applyed vnto an other holy vse Marke how farre the holy vse differs from the common vse there is as great difference betwixt the elements this day in the action and the thing that they were yesterday For I grant that the elements are changed and yet this change proceedeth not of the nature of the elements from an inclosed vertue supposed to be in the words nor from the whispering of the words but it proceedes from the will of Christ from the ordinance and appointment of Christ set downe in his owne institution for that thing is holy which God calleth holy and that thing is profane which God calleth profane To let you vnderstand how these signes are made holy it is necessary that these two things be considered First what he is that makes them holy
I beseech them seeing that reason failes them that they fight not against God for maintenance of a lie how old soeuer it be for the diuell is old enough and yet he could neuer change his nature But let them rather glorifie God in confessing these speeches to be Sacramentall Then what is the reason and ground wherefore the Papists pull downe the substance of the body of Christ and the bloud of Christ and make the very substance to be corporally really and substantially in the Sacrament The reason is this Because they cannot see by their naturall iudgement nor can vnderstand by their naturall wit the truth of this to wit how Christs flesh and bloud caâ— be present in the Sacrament except he be present to their corporall mouth and stomacke If they had the light to informe them that Christ might be present in the Sacrament and not to the hand to the mouth or stomack they would neuer think of such a monstrous presence as they imagine to be there But being destitute of the spirituall light they follow their naturall reason and make a naturall and carnall presence So that ye haue this lesson to nore from hence There is no man that hath not the spirit of God to vnderstand this word This is my body but out of question he will do as the Papists do that is he will vmderstand it carnally And so they misknowing the right meaning of it it is no marueile though and we differ in this matter For will you aske of a Papist first if the true body of Christ be there or if the true flesh and bloud of Christ be there he will say it is there will you aske him wherein he will say in and vnder the accidents of the bread and wine vnder the hew and roundnesse of the bread will you aske him againe by what instrument it is receiued He will tell you by the mouth and stomacke of the body So this is their grosse vnderstanding of the body and bloud of Christ. Will you aske of the Vbiqueter if the true body of Christ be present he will say it is will you aske if it be in with or vnder the bread he will answere It is in the bread contentiuè that is the bread containes it will you aske him to what instrument it is offered he will answere that the bodie of Christ is offered to the mouth of our bodie and that the bloud of Christ is offered to the mouth of our body as the Papists do Will you know of vs how Christ Iesus his true body bloud is present We wil say that they are spiritually present really present that is present in the Lords Supper and not in the bread we will not say that his true flesh is present to the hand or to the mouth of our bodies but we say it is spiritually present that is present vnto thy spirit and faythfull soule yea euen as present inwardly vnto thy soule as the bread and wine are present vnto thy body outwardly Will you aske then if the body and bloud of Christ Iesus be present in the Lords Supper We answer in a word They are present but not in the bread and wine nor in the accidents nor substance of bread and wine And we make Christ to be present in this Sacrament because he is present to my soule to my spirit fayth Also we make him present in the Lords Supper because I haue him in his promise This is my body which promise is present to my faith and the nature of faith is to make things that are absent in themselues yet present And therefore seâ—ing he is both present by faith in his promise and present by the vertue of his holy Spirit who can say but that he is present in this Sacrament But yet the word would be explained what we meane by the word present how a thing is said to be present and absent And knowing this ye shall finde all the mater easie I say things are said to be present as they are perceiued by any outward or inward sense and as they are perceiued by any of the senses so are they present and the further they be perceiued the further present and by what sense any thing is perceiued to that sense it is present As if it be outwardly perceiued by an outward sense that thing is outwardly present As for exaÌ„ple if it be perceiued by the outward sight of the eye by the outward hearing of the eare by the outward feeling of the hands or taste of the mouth it is outwardly present Or if any thing be perceiued by the inward eye by the inward taste and feeling of the soule this thing cannot be outwardly present but it must be spiritually and inwardly present to the soule So I say euery thing is present as it is perceiued So that if you perceiue not a thing outwardlie it is outwardly absent and if ye perceiue not a thing inwardly it is inwardly absent It is not distance of place that maketh a thing absent nor propinquity of place that makes a thing present but it is onelie the perceiuing of any thing by any of thy senses that makes a thing present and the not perceiuing that makes a thing absent I say though the thing it selfe were neuer so farre distant if thou perceiue it by thine outward sense it is present vnto thee As for example my bodie and the Sunne are as farre distant in place as the heauen is from the earth yet this distance stayeth not the Sunnes presence from me why because I perceiue the Sunne by mine eye and other senses I feele it and perceiue it by the heate by the light and by his brightnesse So if a thing were neuer so farre distant if we haue senses to perceiue the same it is present to vs. Then the distance of place makes not a thing absent from thee if thou hast senses to perceiue it likewise the neerenes of place makes not a thing present be it neuer so neere if thou hast not senses to perceiue it As for example if the Sunne shine vpon thine eyes if thou be blinde it is not present to thee because thou canst not perceiue it A sweete tune will neuer be present to a deafe eare though it be sung in the eare of that man because he hath not a sense to perceiue it and a well told tale will neuer be present to a foole because he cannot vnderstand it nor hath no iudgement to perceiue it So it is not the nearenesse nor distance of place that maketh any thing present or absent but onely the perceiuing or not perceiuing of it Now the word being made cleare aske you how the bodie of Christ is present To giue our iudgement in a word as ye haue heard from time to time he is present not to the outward senses but to the inward senses which is faith wrought in the soule For this action of the Sacrament and
Sacrament You may perceiue easily that there is a coniunction by the effect although you cannot so well know the mannâ—r of coniunction And why You heare not the word so soone spoken by me but incontinent the thing which my words wherof I speake signifie cometh into your mind If I speake of things past of things to come or of things that are neuer so far absent I can no sooner speake to you of them in this language but presently the thing signified cometh into your mind no doubt because there is a coniunction betweene the word and the thing signified So euery one of you may easily perceiue that there is a coniunction betweene the word and the thing signified by the word As for example suppose Paris be far distant from vs yet if I speake of Paris the word is no sooner spoken but the Citie will come into your mind If I speake of the King although he be farre distant from vs the word is no sooner spoken but the thing signified will come into your mind So this coming of the thing signified in the heart and mind maketh it plaine vnto you that there is a coniunction betweene the word and the thing signified by the word To tell you of this sort of coniunction it is not so easie because the thing signified is not present vnto the eye as the word is to the eare If euery thing signified were as present vnto your eye as the word is to the eare it were easie to see the coniunction but now seeing the coniunction is mysticall secret and spirituall therefore it is hard to make you vnderstand it Euer obserue what coniunction is betweene the simple word the thing signified by the word the same kind of coniunction is betweene the Sacrament the thing signified by the Sacrament for the Sacrament is no other thing but a visible word I call it a visible word why Because it conueyeth the signification of it by the eye to the mind as this is an audible word because it conueyeth the signification of it by the eare to the mind In the Sacrament so often as ye looke on it ye shall no sooner see that Bread with your eye but the body of Christ shall come into your mind ye shall no sooner see that Wine but after the preaching and opening vp of the parts of the Sacrament the bloud of Christ shall come into your mind Now this coniunction betweene the signe and the thing signified in the Sacrament standeth chiefly as ye may perceiue in two things First in a relation betweene the signe the thing signified which arisâ—th from a likenesse and proportion betwixt them two for if there were no proporâ—ion and analogie betweene the signe and the thing signified by the signe there could not be a Sacrament or a relation So the first part of this coniunction standeth in a relation which ariseth from a certaine similitude and likenesse which the one hath with the other And this likenesse may be easily perceiued for looke how able the Bread is to nourish thy body to this life earthly and temporall the flesh of Christ signified by the Bread is as able to nourish both bodie and soule to life euerlasting So ye may perceiue some kinde of proportion betweene the signe and the thing signified The second point of the coniunction standeth in a continual and mutuall concurring the one with the other in such sort that the signe and the thing signified are offered both together receiued together at one time and in one action the one outwardly the other inwardly if so be that thou hast a mouth in thy soule which is faith to receiue it Then the second point of coniunction standeth in a ioynt offering in a ioynt receiuing and this I call a concurrence Then would you know what manner of coniunction is betweene the signe and the thing signified I say it is a relatiue coniunction a secret and a mysticall coniunction which standeth in a mutuall relation There is no more to be obserued herein but this onely that if ye conioyne these two ye be carefull not to confound them beware that ye turne not the one into the other but keepe either of them in his owne integrity without confusion or permixtion of the one with the other and so ye shall haue the lawfull coniunction that should be in the Sacrament There is not a lesson that can be learned out of this at the least that I can marke or gather except onely the lesson of the kindnesse and goodnesse of the euerliuing God who hath inuented so many wonderfull sorts of coniunction and all to this purpose that we might be conioyned to aduance this great and mysticall coniunction betwixt the God of glorie and vs In the which coniunction our weale felicity and happinesse in this life and in the life to come doth onely stand That he is so carefull to conioyne himselfe with his word and Sacraments that we in his word and Sacraments might be conioyned with him If we were mooued with the care and loue of God expressed in these coniunctions though it were neuer so little on our parts assuredly we would neuer defraud our selues of the fruite of that happie coniunction nor bring it in such a loathing and disdaine as we do at this day for we by following and preferring of our pleasures to Christ and his counsell haue made the stomacks of our soules so foule and ill disposed that either they receiue him not at all or if he be receiued he is not able to tarrie And why Because a foule stomacke is not able to keepe him for incontinently we choke him so either with the lusts of the flesh or with the cares of this world that he is compelled to depart And if Christ be not both eaten and digested he can do vs no good this digestioâ— cannot be where there is not a greedie appetite to the receit of him for if thou be not hungrie for him he is not readie for thee And I am assured if all the men in the Countrie were examined by this rule that there were none that receiue Christ but he that hath a stomacke and is hungry for him I doubt that few should be found to receiue him I feare that we haue taken such a loathing and disdaine of that heauenly foode that there is not such a thing as any kind of hunger or appetite of it in our soules And what is the cause of this I will tell you Suppose we haue renounced the corporall and grosse idolatry wherein our Father were plunged drowned which men in some parts go about to erect now yet as the manners of this Countrey and the behauiour of euery one of vs doth testifie there is not a man that hath renounced that damnable idoll that he hath in his owne soule nor the inuisible idolatry that he hath in his owne heart and minde There is not a man but to that same idoll wherwith he
whether God Angell or man Secondly whosoeuer he be that maketh them holy by what meanes and way he maketh them holy And by the consideration of these two we shall come to the consideration and right viewing of the sanctification of the Elements For the First we say that God is onely he that may make a thing which was common to be holy So we say that God by his will and ordinance declared and set downe in his word hath made the things that were common by his appoyntment to be holy As for the way and meanes whereby they are made holy it is the word of God the institution of Christ the wil of Christ declared in his institution that maketh them holy For the preaching and opening of the word institution of Christ le ts vs see that God hath made these things holy and not onely that he hath made them holy but letteth vs see an holy manner how they should be vsed in what place at what time with what heart and to what end So it is the will Christ declared in his institution whereby the things that were common before are now made holy There are two other things also which make the same elements holy and these two are vsed in this institution There is prayer and thanksgiuing which make the creatures of God holy to our vse whereas otherwise if we receiue the good creatures of God like dogs and thanke him not for them it is a sure token that they were neuer sanctified to our vse By prayer we obtaine grace and strength from God to vse the creatures and this whole action holily and lawfully as it should be And therefore not onely in this holy action should we begin with God with inuocation of his name but in all actions in the world we begin in the name of God So it is the will of God that prayer and thansgiuing conioyned with the elements do make them holy All these three contained in the action of the Lords Supper make the Seales holy For beside the will of God declared in the institution in the Lords Supper we vse inuocation and in this inuocation we vse thankesgiuing The elements are not made holy by the word of God onely but by the vse of prayer and thankesgiuing which three are the onely meanes whereby these things are sanctified Now to expresse and lay forth the sanctification of the Elements The Euangelists and the Apostle Paul vse indifferently the word To blesse and to giue thankes and commonly they put the one for the other For ye may see that Marke and Paule vse the word Blesse Mathew and Luke vse the word to giue thankes and all in one signification And Marke himselfe in the 14. of his Gospell 22. verse speaking of the same action of the Lords Supper vseth the the word to Blesse and in the 23. verse he vseth the word â—o Giue thankes and both in one signification to let you see that the Apostle Christ himselfe and the Euangelists vse the word to Blesse and to Giue thankes indifferently to signifie the sanctification and consecration of the elements Except ye take the one for the other it will be hard to gather any good meaning out of the Apostles wordes for I remember the Apostle 1. Corinthians 10.16 sayth The cup of blessing which we blesse what is that I take the word to signifie as I haue said which we blesse that is which we sanctifie and prepare by blessing So to blesse and to giue thankes in the Lords Supper signifie no other thing but to sanctifie otherwise if ye take the word in another signification ye shall fall into an error and why God is said to blesse and man is said to blesse God is said to blesse when he giueth good things vnto his creatures for Gods blessing is euer effectuall and therefore he is said to blesse when he giueth good thing Man againe is said to blesse either priuately or publikely when he craueth blessing at the hands of God for any man when he blesseth in the name and at the commandement of God any person or people Now if ye ascribe blessing in any of these two significations to the cuppe it is amisse for we vse neyther to craue a blessing to insensible elements nor yet to blesse them in the name of God and God vseth to giue good things to the sonnes of men and not to insensible creatures Therefore we must needes vse the word Blesse in the third signification The cuppe of blessing which we blesse that is which we sanctifie and prepare by blessing Thus farre we vnderstand for the sanctification of the elements Now let vs see how they sanctifie the elements and what is the forme of their consecration so farre as I vnderstand of it it consisteth in these fiue words Hoc est enim corpus meum It standeth in these fiue words and in the whispering of them for if you whisper them not ye lose the fashion of incantation for the thing which we call sanctifying they call whispering and the whispering of those fiue words they call the consecration of the elements And when the words are after this manner whispered they presuppose such a secret and monstrous vertue to be inclosed in the syllables that the vertue and power which floweth from the words is able to chase away wholly the substance of the bread so that the very bread and substance of it is altogether destroyed by this power Secondly that this power which floweth from these words is able to fetch and pull downe another substance to wit the flesh and bloud of Christ Iesus that sitteth at the right hand of his Father and is able to put it within the compasse of that bread This is a strange and a great vertue that not onely will ouerthrow that substance but put it within the compasse of that bread The same fiue words whispered in this manner haue such a monstrous operation say they that they are able both to chase away the one substance to pull downe another and to put it within the compasse of that bread We altogether denie that there is such a vertue in these words for as I haue said before we denie not that the word hath a vertue but denie that there is such a vertue inclosed in the words we denie the qualitie of the vertue or that it floweth from such a fountaine For we grant that the word hath a vertue there is neuer a word that God speaketh here but it hath a vertue ioyned with it but we denie that this vertue is inclosed in the syllables in the whispering or pronouncing of the words for if there were such a vertue and power inclosed in the syllables by the same reason it should follow that there were a vertue in the figure shape of the letters that make vp the words Now there is no man will thinke that there is any vertue in the figure or shape of the letters and there is as