A TREATISE OF THE LORDS Supper in two Sermons Imprinted at London by R. Field for Thomas Man dwelling in Paternoster row at the signe of the Talbot 1591. To the Reader IN the first sermon the aduersarie is confuted In the second sermon the Communicants are prepared In both are many obseruations and the words of the text expounded Now labor for thy selfe as I haue labored for thee I would haue thee profit somewhat more by this booke because it hath weakened me more then all the rest Farwell A Treatise of the Lords Supper in two Sermons The first Sermon 1. Cor. 11. 23. 24. The Lord Iesus in the night that he was betrayed tooke bread And when he had giuen thanks he brake it and said Take eate this is my bodie which is broken for you this dayes in remembrance of me THE Word and the Sacraments are the two breasts wherewith our mother doth nurse vs. Seeing euerie one receiueth and few vnderstand what they receiue I thought it the necessariest doctrine to preach of the Sacramēt which is a witnes of Gods promises a remembrāce of Christs death a seale of our adoptiō therfore Christ hath not instituted this Sacrament for a fashion in his Church to touch and feele and see as we gaze vpon pictures in the windowes but as the woman which had the bloudie issue touching the hemme of Christes garmēt drew vertue from Christ himselfe because she beleeued So Christ would that we touching these signes should draw vertue from himself that is all the graces which these signes represent Therefore as the Leuits vnder the Law were bound to prepare their brethren before they came to the Passeouer so preachers of the Gospel should prepare their brethrē before they come to the Supper of the Lord. For which purpose I haue chosen this place to the Corinthians which is the clearest fullest declaration of this Sacrament in all the scripture The Lord Iesus in the night c The summe of all these words is the institution and vse of the Lords Supper First Paul sheweth the author of it The Lord Iesus then the time when it was instituted in the night that he was betrayed then the manner how he did institute it he tooke bread and when he had giuen thankes he brake it and gaue vnto his Disciples c. then the end why he did institute it for a remembrance of his death Touching the author he which is signified by it was the author of it The Lord Iesus hath bid vs to supper I am not worthy saith Iohn to loose his shoe so we are not worthy to waite at his trencher and yet he wil haue vs sit at his table To him belongeth the power to ordaine Sacraments in his Church because he fulfilled the Sacraments of the Law When Christ came the Passeouer ceased because he is our Passeouer that is the Lamb by whose bloud we are saued When Christ came Circumcision ceased because he is our Circumcision that is the purifier and clenser of our sinnes Now these two sacraments are fulfilled he hath appointed two other Sacraments for them in steed of the paschall Lambe which the Iewes did eate he hath giuen vs another Lamb to eate which Iohn calleth the Lambe of God that is himselfe vpon whom all do feede whosoeuer do receiue this Sacrament with an assured faith that Christ died to possesse them of life The breaking of the bread doth signifie the wounding of his bodie the powring of the wine doth signifie the shedding of his blood The eating of the bread and drinking of the wine doth signifie that his flesh and bloud doe nourish in vs life eternal as the bread and wine do nourish the life present In steed of Circumcision which began at Abrahā he hath ordained Baptisme which began at Iohn a more liuely representation of the true circumcision of the hart because it representeth vnto vs the bloud of Christ which washeth our soules as the water in Baptisme washeth our bodies Touching the time In the night saith Paul therefore this Sacrament is called The Lords Supper because it was instituted at night when they vsed to sup But what night euen that night saith Paul when he was betrayed that night which he should haue cursed as Iob did the day of his birth if he had suffred against his will that night when hee should haue thought to destroy men as men conspired to destroy him that night saith Paul this Sacrament of grace and peace and life began Euen that night when we betrayed him Manie nights did he spend in watching and praying for vs is there a night now for vs to kill betray him That was a darke night when men went about to put out the sonne which brought them light Who can but wonder to see how Christ they for whom Christ came were occupied at one time when they deuised mischief against him sought all meanes to destroy him then he consulted how to saue them and instituted the same night this blessed Sacrament to conuay all his graces and blessings vnto them Euen that night when they betrayed him The reason why this actiō was deferred vntill night is because that was the time appointed by the Law to eate the Passeouer which was like a predecessor of this Sacrament The reason why he deferred vntill his last night was because the Passeouer could not be ended before the fulnesse of time and the true Paschal Lambe were come to be slaine in stead of the other Therefore how fitlie did Christ ende the Passeouer which was a signe of his suffering so presently before his suffering And beside how sweetly did he confirme his disciples faith when as they should see that the next day performed before their eyes which ouernight both in the Passeouer and in the Sacrament was so liuely resembled vnto them If any from this do gather that we ought to eate the Lords supper at night as Christ did he must vnderstand that we haue not the same cause to do so which Christ had because of the Passeouer And therefore the Church which hath discretion of times and places hath altered both the time and the place vsing the temples in stead of the chamber and the morning in stead of the euening for indifferent things are ruled by order decencie Touching the maner He tooke bread and when he had giuen thankes he brake it and gaue it vnto them He would not eate it nor breake it before he had giuē thankes to God What neede he which was God giue thankes to God but to shew vs what we should doe when we eate our selues In all things giue thankes saith Paul whereby we declare that all things come from God but the wicked beleeue easier that God doth take than that he doth giue and therefore they neuer pray heartily vnto him for any thing nor
words do prooue that the bread and wine are turned into Christes bodie Paule saith Iesus tooke bread well theÌ„ yet it is bread when he had taken it then he blessed it what did he blesse the bread which he tooke well then yet it is bread when he had blessed it then he brake it what did he breake the bread which he blessed well then yet it is bread when he had brokeÌ„ it then he gaue it what did he giue the bread which he brake well then yet it is bread when he had giuen it they did eate it what did they eate the bread which he gaue them well theÌ„ yet it is bread when they did eate it theÌ„ he said This is my body what did he call his bodie the bread which they did eate well then yet it is bread If it be bread all this while when he did take it and blesse it and breake it and giue it and they did eate it when is it turned into his bodie here they stand like the Sadduces as mute as fishes Now that ye may see that not we onelie say it is bread and wine after the consecration in the 27. Verse Christ himselfe doth call it bread and wine after he had giueÌ„ it as he did before And in Marke he saith I will drinke no more of the fruite of the vine Here Christ saith that it was the fruite of Vine which he dranke but his bloud is not the fruite of Vines but Wine therfore wine was his drinke and not bloud Beside if you would heare Paule expound Christ he sheweth that all our Fathers had the same substaÌ„ce of Christ in their Sacramentes that we haue in ours for he saith They all did eate the same spirituall meate and all drinke the same spirituall drinke Straight he sayth that this meate and this drinke was Christ Marke that he saith not onely They did eate the same meate that we eate but he saith that this meate was Christ and not onely so but to shew that Christ is not a corporall meate as the Papistes say he saith he is a spirituall meate as we say therfore you see that we do not eate him corporally no more than our Fathers but that as they did eate him spiritually so do we for spirituall meate must be eaten spiritually as corporall meate is eaten corporally Agayne for the signes to be turned into the thing signified by theÌ„ is vtterly against the nature of a Sacrament makes it no Sacrament because there is no signe for euery Sacrament doth coÌ„sist of a signe and a thing signified the signe is euer an earthly thing and that which it signifieth is a heauenly thing This shall appeare in all examples as in Paradise there was a verie Tree for the signe and Christ the thing signified by it In Circumcision there was a cutting off of the skin and the cutting off of sinne In the Passe-ouer there was a Lambe and Christ In the Saboth there was a day of rest eternall rest In the Sacrifices there was an offering of some beast and the offering of Christ In the Sanctuarie there was the holy place and heauen In the Propitiatorie there was the goldeÌ„ couering Christ our couer In the Wildernesse there was a Rocke yeelding water and Christ yeelding his bloud In the Apparition there was a a Doue the holy Ghost In the Manna there was Bread and Christ In Baptisme there is verie water which washeth vs and Christes bloud washing vs so in the Supper of Christ there is very Bread Wine for the signe the body and bloud of Christ for the thing signified or else this SacrameÌ„t is against the nature of all other Sacraments Againe there must be a proportion betweene the Passe ouer and the Lords Supper because this was figured by the other Now the Iewes had in their Passeouer Bread and Wine and a Lambe so Christ instituting his Supper left bread and wine and a Lambe which name is giuen to himselfe because he came like â— Lambe and died like a Lambe Agayne if Christes verie bodie were â—ffered in the SacrameÌ„t theÌ„ it were not a Sacrament but a Sacrifice which two differ as much as giuing and taking for in a Sacrifice we giue in a Sacrament we receiue and therefore we say our Sacrifice and Christes Sacrament Agayne euerie Sacrifice was offered vpon an Altar Now marke the wisedome of the holy Ghost least we should take this for a Sacrifice he neuer names Altar when he speakes of it but The Table of the Lord. Therefore it is no doubt but the deuill hath kept the name of Altar that we might thinke it a Sacrifice Agayne if the bread were Christes flesh and the wine his bloud as these two are separate one from the other so Christes flesh should be separate from his bloud but his bodie is not deuided for then it were a dead body Agayne that which remaineth doth nourish the bodie and relish in the mouth as it did before which could not be but that it is the same foode which it was before Agayne I would aske whose are this whitenes and hardnes and roundnesse and coldnesse None of them say that it is the whitenesse and hardnesse and roundnesse and coldnes of Christes bodie therefore it must needes be the whitenesse and hardnesse and roundnesse and coldnesse of the bread or else qualities should stand without substaÌ„ces which is as if one should tell you of a house without a foundation Agayne as Christ dwelleth in vs so he is eaten of vs but he dwelleth in vs onely by faith Ephes 3. 17. Therefore he is eaten onely by faith Agayne none can be saued without the communion of the body of Christ but if all should communicate with it corporally then neither infants nor any of our Fathers the Patriarkes or the Prophets should be saued because they receiued it not so Agayne Christ sayth not this wine but this cup and therefore by their conclusion not onely the wine should be â—urned into bloud but the cup to Again Paul saith They which receiue vnworthilie receiue their owne damnation But if it were the flesh of Christ they should rather receiue saluation than daÌ„nation because Christ sayth He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath life euerlasting Agayne if they would heare an Angell from heauen when Christes bodie was glorified an Angell said to the women He is risen and is not here as if he should say his body is but in one place at once or else he might haue been there though he was risen Agayne why doe they say in receiuing this Sacrament euer since the Primitiue Church Lift vp your hearts if they haue all in their mouthes To end this controuersie Here we may say as the Disciples said to Christ Whither shall we go from thee I meane we need not to goe to any other
expositor of Christ than Christ himselfe Therefore marke what he sayth At first when Christ said that he was the bread of life that all which would liue must eate him they murmured vntill he expounded his words and how did he expoūd his wordes Thus He that commeth vnto me hath eaten and he that beleeueth in me hath drunke After whē he instituted this Sacramēt in like wordes they murmured not which they would as before if he had not resolued thē before that to eate his body and to drinke his bloud was nothing but to come to him beleeue in him After he had sayd so they murmured not because they did see some reason in it As it is plainlie sayd This is my body so it is plainlie said these wordes are spirite that is they must be vnderstood spiritually and not literally But if it be flesh indeed why do they not satisfie the simple people how they may eate this flesh in Lent when they forbid thē to eate any flesh they must needes eate it doubtfully and he which doubteth sayth Iames receaueth nothing therefore he which eateth the Masse receiueth nothing I did not alledge the Fathers in my Sermon but if any suspend his assent till they bring in their verdit let him heare thē make cōfessiō of their beleefe Augustin sayth the Lord doubted not to say this is my body when he gaue onely a signe or Sacrament of his body Tertulian saith this is my body that is a signe of my body Ambrose sayth the bread and wine remayne still the same thing that they were Theodoret saith after the consecration the mysticall signes do not cast off their own nature but abide still in their first substance and forme Origene sayth the bread that is sanctified with the word of God as touching the materiall substance thereof goeth into the bellie and forth agayne like other meates Irenaeus saith that it hath two things in it one earthly and the other heauenly Cyrill saith Our Sacraments auouch not the eating of a man Cyprian sayth the Lord calleth bread made of many graines his body called wine made of many grapes his bloud Athanasius saith Christ made mention of his ascention into heauen that he might withdraw his disciples from corporall and fleshly eating Chrysostome saith God giueth vs things spirituall vnder things visible naturall And againe being sanctified it is deliuered from the name of bread is exalted to the name of the Lords bodie although the nature of the bread still remaine And because they beleeue that the Pope cannot erre Pope Gelasius setteth to his hand and saith with the rest Neither the substance of the bread nor nature of the wine cease to be more thā they were before Tell vs Papist doe not these Fathers speake as plaine as we Canst thou auouch Transubstantiation more flatly than they denie it How had this heresie bene chased if the diuel had hatched it in their time Thus the Scriptures on the one side and the Fathers on the other side did so trouble three arch papists Biel Tonstal and Fisher that Gabriel Biel saith how the body of Christ is in the Sacrament is not found in the canon of the Byble Tonstal saith It had bene better to leaue euerie man to his owne coniecture as they were before the Councell of Laterane than to bring in such a question Fisher saith No man can proue by the words of the gospel that any Priest in these dayes doth consecrate the verie bodie and bloud of Christ Here is fulfilled Out of thine owne mouth I will condemne thee But we will not carry the matter so because a iudge must haue two eares therefore now let them speake Because they cannot tell how the bread and wine should be turned into flesh and bloud and yet appeare bread and wine still they say it is a myracle but how do they proue it If they contēd it is a myracle they must shew vs a signe for euerie myracle may be seene like all the myracles of Moses and Christ and the Apostles and therefore a myracle is called a signe because it may be seene like a signe and the word signifieth a wōder as though we did see some thing to wonder And the Iewes crauing a myracle saide Shewe vs a myracle as though they were taught to iudge of myracles by sight All which doth shew that a myracle may be seene but here no myracle is seene Againe a myracle especially in the time of the Gospell is an extraordinary thing but they make this an ordinarie thing for if the bread and wine be turned into flesh and bloud then myracles are as common as Sacramēts and so because they haue Masse euerie day they should worke myracles euery day Lastly this seemeth strange that Augustine whom they so much honor gathered all the myracles which are written in the scripture yet amongst all speakes not of this therefore then it was counted no myracle but Paul speakes of lying myracles and this is one of them If they say that Christ can turne bread and wine into his bodie therfore he doth First they must proue that he will for they can doe many things themselues which they doe not because they will not therefore it is an old answere that from Can to Will no argument followeth The Leper did not say to Christ If thou can thou will but If thou wilt thou canst But the question which they thinke can not be answered like their inuincible Nauies is this If the bread be not his bodie why doth he call it his bodie Resolue this knot al is cleere Marke then and we will loose it as well as we cā He saith This is my bodie as he saith after which is broken for you Why his bodie was not broken before he suffered how did he say then which is broken before it was broken There is no sense of it but this the bread was broken and signified that his body should be broken Now as the breaking of the bread did signifie the breaking of his bodie so the bread must needs signifie his bodie but as his bodie was not broken indeed when the bread was broken so the bread could not be his body indeed for then his bodie should haue bene broken when the bread was broken yet let them obiect what they can If say they the bread and wine be not changed into his bodie and blood why doth he speak so darkly he might haue spoken plainer I answere though this seeme darke to Papists yet it was not darke to the Apostles they vnderstood his meaning well enough and all the rest for 1215. yeares after Christ before Transubstātiation was spoken of If the Apostles had not vnderstood his meaning they would not sticke to aske him as their manner was vntill they were acquainted
but to suffer and suffer and euer to suffer all that the diuels would heape vpon vs. Then came the mercie of GOD for Christ which shed his blood like an vmpire betweene God and vs and said as Esaiah said to Hezekiah Thou shalt not die but liue loose him let him go for he is mine So we were stayed like the widdowes sonne when hee was carried to his graue This is the benefite of Christs death and this Sacrament is the remembrance of it and therefore whensoeuer we receiue it this addition commeth with it which is shed for the remission of sinnes our fault was so hainous and grieuous that no ransome could counteruaile it vnlesse GOD himselfe had suffered for vs. Being in this extremitie neither man nor Angel offered his life for vs but the Prince himself which shold haue crucified vs came to be crucified of vs for vs that we might say with stedfast faith I beleeue the remission of sinnes not the satisfaction of sinnes but the remission of sinnes Marke this distinction against Popish merites of works or penance Christ hath satisfied and not we we are remitted and not Christ therfore we say in our Confession I beleeue the remission of sins which I may call the merciful Article because it is the quintessence and sweetnesse of all the twelue Therefore who but Antichrist durst depraue it If there be a satisfaction for our sins by our works or by our Pilgrimages or by our Masses or by our penance let Christ neuer be called a forgiuer but an exchanger like the Pope which selleth his pardons Wretched creatures which will not receiue the Lord when he comes to their dore Christ saith take for nothing and they say no we will not take but buy Vile base miserable men disdaine to take grace of God without satisfaction but they wil cope with the Lord giue him so manie Pilgrimages fast so many dayes heare so many Masses pay so many works for it vntill they haue done as much good as they haue done euill Our sinnes are infinite and God is infinite but our workes are finite in number and measure how can they answere then to that which exceedeth number and measure Therefore be content with Iosephs brethrē to take your money again say that you haue corne for nothing that is you are saued for nothing or else when you say I beleeue the remission of sinnes you lie vnto God because you do not beleeue the remission of sinnes but satisfaction for sinnes like the Papists It followeth As often as yee shall eate this bread and drink this cup ye shall shew the Lords death till he come Here are three inuincible argumēts against Popish Transubstantiation like the three witnesses vnder which euerie worde doth stād First we are said to eat bread then it is not flesh but bread Secondly we are said to shew the Lords death then it is but a shew or representation of his death Thirdly it is said vntill he come if he be to come then he is not come if he be come how can we say vntill he come The effect of this verse was shewed in these words Doe this in remembrance of me for to say Do this in remembrance of me and to say so oft as you do this you shew my death is much at one so that if you call this Sacrament a shew of Christes death as it is called here then it is not Christ or if you call it a remembrance of Christ as it is called there yet it is not Christ but a shew or remembrance of Christ but this is such a shew and remembrance that the next verse saith Whosoeuer receiueth it vnworthely is guiltie of the bodie bloud of Christ Will yee know who receiueth vnworthily In verse 29. Paul saith he discerneth not the Lords bodie that is which putteth no difference betweene this bread and other but eateth like a child the meat which he knoweth not and after the bread seemeth stones to him and the wine poyson because his conscience telleth him I haue receiued vnworthily before I could say like Dauid My heart is prepared My sheep saith Christ know my voice as they discerne Christs words so they discerne Christs bodie and therefore so often as they come to the Lords Table they seeme to come into the Lords presence there they greete and kisse and imbrace one another with affections which none cā know but they that feele like Iohn which leaped in the wombe so soone as Christ came neare him Will ye know beside what it is to be guiltie of the bodie bloud of Christ euen as Iudas was guiltie for betraying him and Pilate for deliuering him and the Iewes for crucifying him so they are guiltie which receiue this Sacrament vnworthily as Pilate and Caiphas and Iudas were If they be guiltie of Christs death they are guilty of their owne death to as if they had committed two murthers and therefore Paul saith after that many of the Corinthians died onely for the vnworthy receiuing of this Sacrament As the word is the sauour of death to them which receiue it vnworthily so the Sacrament is the sauour of death to thē which receiue it vnworthily it neuer goeth into their mouth but they are Traitors ipso facto and may say to Hell this day I haue taken possession of thee because I am guiltie of Christs bloud Therefore it followeth immediatly Let a man examine himselfe before he eate of this bread or drinke of this wine as if he should say if he which receiueth this Sacramēt vnworthily be guiltie of Christes death like Iudas which hanged himselfe if these signes be receiued to saluation or damnation like the word the next lesson is to examine your selues before you receiue least you receiue like the sonne of perditiō which swallowed the bread and the diuel togither Therfore Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate that is let him examine first receiue after for if we should receiue the bread of the earth reuerētly how shold we receiue the bread of heauen When Iehonadab came to Iehu his chariot he said Is thy heart vpright as my heart is toward thee So when we come to the Lords Table he would haue our hearts vpright to him as his heart is to vs for who feasteth his enimies and mockers The golden Ring sitteth highest at our table but the wedding garment sitteth highest at this Table It is safer eating with vnwashen hands than with an vnwashen hart The Iewes were taught to choose the Lambe of the Passeouer on the tenth day of the first moneth in which moneth they cāe out of Egypt on the fourteenth day after they were taught to eate him so they had foure dayes respit betweene the choosing and the killing to prepare and sanctifie thēselues for the Passeouer which was a signe of the Lords
at one time for if his body be in the Sacramēt he must needes haue so many bodies as there be Sacraments nay he must haue so many bodies as there be bits in euerie Sacramēt Thirdly it will follow that his bodie is diuided from his soule and consequētly is a dead bodie because the bread is onely changed into body and not into his soule Fourthly at will follow that the wicked and prophane and reprobate may receiue Christ as well as the godly because they haue a mouth to eate as well as the best Fiftly it will follow that Christs sacrifice once for all was not sufficient because we must sacrifice him againe and breake his bodie shed his bloud as the Iewes crucified him vpon the Crosse Sixtly it will follow that the bread being turned into the body of our redeemer hath a part of our redemption as well as Christ Seauenthly it will follow that Christ did eate his owne bodie for all the Fathers say that he did eat the same bread which he gaue to his Disciples Lastly it will follow that a Massing Priest shal be the creator of his creator because he makes him which made him all these absurdities are hatched of Transubstantiation Thus when men deuise articles of their owne while they strike vpon the handuill the sparkes flie in their face they are like the man which began to build and could not finish it When I see the Papist in so many absurdities for intertaining one error me thinks he seemeth like a Collier which is grimed with his owne coales Therefore as in manners we should think of Peters saying Whether is it meete to obey God or men So in doctrines we should thinke whether it be meete to beleeue God or men Thus you haue heard the author of this Sacrament the Lord Iesus the time when it was instituted in the night that he was betraied the manner how it was instituted after thanks giuing the end why it was instituted for a remembrance of his death and the discouery of Transubstantiation one of the last heresies which Babylō hatched Now they which haue been Patrons of it before should do like the father and mother of an Idolatrer that is lay the first hand vpon him to shorten his life Thus I end Thinke what account ye shall giue of that ye haue heard The end of the first Sermon A TREATISE OF THE LORDES SVPPER The second Sermon 1. Cor. 11. vers 25. 26. 27. 28. 25 After the same manner also he tooke the cup whē he had supped saying This cup is the New Testamēt in my bloud this doe as oft as ye drinke it in remembraunce of me 26 For as often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shew the Lords death till he come 27 Wherefore whosoeuer shall eate this bread and drinke the cup of the Lord vnworthelie shall be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. 28 Let a man therefore examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread and drinke of this cup. HEre I am to speake of the second seruice as it were at the Lordes Table and of that preparatiō which is like the Wedding garment that euerie man must bring vnto this banquet These wordes are diuerslie repeated of the Euangelistes Here it is said This Cup is the New Testament in my bloud In Mathew and in Marke it is sayd This Cup is my bloud of the New Testament This is the first mētion which Christ makes of a Testament as though now his promises deserued the name of a Testament because the seale is set vnto them which before this Sacrament was not sealed but like a bare writing without a signet This word Testament doth implie a promise and therefore teacheth vs that the Sacrament doth cōfirme and strēgthen and nourish our fayth because it sealeth the promise which we should beleeue Here is to be noted that Christ doth not onely speake of a Testament but he calleth it a New Testamēt which words neuer met together before as though the Law were for the old man to mortifie him and the Gospell for the new man to comfort him agayne or as if the old Testament had so washt her face and chaunged her apparell at Christes comming that one would not thinke it the same but a New Testament because euē now she was shadowed with a thousand Ceremonies now they are gone from her like a myst at the Sunne rising As Christ calleth loue a New Commaundement because he renewed it like a Law worne out of memorie so he calleth the promise of saluation a New Testament Because as it was renewed to Sem and after renewed to Abraham and after renewed to Dauid so now he renewed it agayne which should bee alwaye new and fresh vnto vs. Euerie Testament is confirmed with bloud the old Testament was confirmed by the bloud of Goats and Bullockes and Rammes but the New Testament is confirmed by the bloud of Christ My bloud saith Christ is the bloud of the New Testament nay This Cup sayth Christ is the New Testament You may see thē that they may gather as well out of Christes wordes that the Cup is the New Testament as that the Wine is his bloud For Christ sayth This Cup is the New Testament as well as he sayth This Wine is my bloud or This bread is my body Beside when Christ speakes of a New Testament he implieth that the old Testament is fulfilled the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the Law did signifie Christ before he came therefore they are fulfilled in his comming no mo Sacrifices no mo Ceremonies for the truth is come Sacrifices and Ceremonies are honorably buried with the Priesthood of Aaron let them rest it is not lawfull to violate the Sepulchers of the dead and take their bodies out of the earth as the Witch would raise Samuell out of his graue Therfore they which retaine Ceremonies which should be abrogated reliques of Iudaisme or reliques of Papisme may be said to violate the sepulchers of the dead and disturbe the deceased like the Witch which presumed to raise Samuell out of his graue This Testament is called a Testament in bloud because the Testament and will of a man is cōfirmed when the man is dead so Christ cōfirmed his Testament by his death Moses saith that life is in the bloud so the bloud of Christ is the life of this Testament If Christes bloud had not been shed this Testament made vnto vs had been vnprofitable as the Testamēt of a Father is to his Sonne if the Father should not dye but liue Therefore the Apostle sayth without shedding of bloud there is no remission of sinnes Therfore the Testament or couenaunt of the remission of our sinnes is called the Testament in bloud the bloud of Christ is the seale of the Testament which we haue to shew vnto God for the remission of our sinnes and the
with Christs phrase whensoeuer they doubted vpon any of his speeches they were wont to come vnto him and say master what is the meaning but they were vsed to such phrases for it was Christs manner to teach by similitudes shewing one thing by another which is the plainest manner of teaching and most vsed in holy Scripture especially in the types and shadowes of this Sacrament For example Christ calleth the Lamb the Passeouer in place wherof this Sacrament succeeded and therefore presently after they had eaten the Passeouer Christ instituted this Sacrament to be vsed for it Christ I say called the Lambe the Passeouer and yet the Passeouer was this an Angel passed ouer the houses of the Israelites and strooke the Aegyptians this was not a Lambe and yet because the Lamb was a signe of this Passeouer as the bread wine is of Christs body therfore Christ called the Lambe the Passeouer as he calleth the bread and wine his bodie Againe Circumcision is called the Couenant yet Circumcision was nothing but the cutting away of a skin but the Couenant is In Abrahams seede all nations shall be blessed I will be their God and they shall be my people I will defend and saue them and they shall serue worship me This is not Circumcision yet as though Circumcision were the Couenant it selfe it is called the Couenant because it signified the Couenant so bread and wine are called Christs bodie because they signifie Christs bodie Againe Baptisme is called regeneration and yet baptisme is a dipping of our bodies in water but regeneration is the renewing of the minde to the image wherein it was created this is not Baptisme and yet as though Baptisme were regeneration it selfe it is called regeneration because it signified regeneration so the bread and wine are called Christes bodie because they signifie Christs bodie Againe the Cup is called the new Testament and yet the Cup is but a peece of mettall filled with wine but the new Testament is He which beleeueth in the Sonne shall be saued this is not a Cup and yet as though the Cup were the new Testament it selfe it is called the new Testament because it signifieth the new Testament so the bread wine are called Christes bodie because they signifie Christs body They which knew that the Lambe is not the Passeouer though Christ called it the Passeouer that Circumcision is not the Couenant though God called it the Couenant that Baptisme is not regeneration though it be called regeneration that the Cup is not the new TestameÌ„t though Christ called it the new Testament could they not as well vnderstand that the bread and wine were not Christs body though Christ called theÌ„ his bodie As they vnderstood these speeches so they vnderstoode this speech therfore they which say that the bread and wine are Christes bodie because Christ saith This is my bodie may as well say that the Lambe is the Passeouer because Christ calleth it the Passe ouer that Baptisme is regeneration because Paul calleth it regeneration that the Cup is the new Testament because Christ calleth it the new Testament If euerie Sacrament was called by the thing which it signified and yet neuer any Sacrament was taken for the thing it selfe what reason haue they to take this Sacrament for the thing it selfe more than al the rest It is the consent of all writers that a Sacrament is a signe therefore not the thing signified no more then the bush at the dore is the wine in the seller If I cal the Prince a Phoenix the Vniuersitie a Fountain the Court a Peacocke the Citie a Sea the Countrey an Eremite why can the Papists vnderstand me and not vnderstand Chrst What a darke and strange and intricate and incredible speech had this beene for them to vnderstand grosly literally Would they think that they did eate Christes body when his bodie stoode before them and he had told them before that his bodie was like their bodie Nay this would â—aue required moe words and made â—hem come againe with Master what 〈◊〉 the meaning for they were not so â—structed yet before the resurrection â—o beleeue euerie thing without queâ—â—ioning if it were contrarie to sense and reason but as they asked who had giuen him any meate when he said that he had meate and they coulde see none so they would haue asked what meate is this which we see not How can euerie one of vs eate his bodie and yet he hath but one bodie and that bodie is whole when we eate it Loe he standeth before vs and saith that his bodie is like vnto ours and yet hee takes bread and breakes it and giues it vnto vs to eate and when we eate it he saith This is my bodie and yet his bodie standeth before vs still If his bodie be like ours as he saith how can it be eaten and be there for ours cannot Thus they would haue questioned if they had not beene vsed to such phrases but as they could vnderstand him when he called himselfe a stone and a rock and a dore and a window and a Vine so they could picke out his meaning when he said that bread was his bodie for he had told them before that he was the bread of eternall life Now the bread of eternall life is not eaten with teeth for the bodie cannot eate spiritually no more then the soule can eate corporally and therefore he is such a bread as is eaten with faith and so himselfe saith in the Gospel of Iohn Marke this eating by faith and all the strife is ended Flesh and bloud indeed need not faith to chew them for the teeth can chew theÌ„ well enough Therfore if the bread and wine were the bodie of Christ then we need not faith to eate it but all which haue teeth might eate Christs bodie yea the Mice might eate it as well as men for they eate the same bread that we do as well after it is consecrated as before If this be not enough to batter the ruines of this vpstart Heresie I will come to interrogatories and see whether they haue learned it by rote or by reason If they ground their Transubstantiation vppon these wordes of Christ This is my bodie which hee spake to his Disciples I aske them whether they receiue that bodie which was mortall or that bodie which is glorified because one of these bodies they must needs receiue either his mortall bodie or his glorified bodie If they say that it is his mortall bodie the mortal bodie wil not profite them for you see that mortall food is but for this mortall life neither hath Christ a mortall bodie now to communicate vnto them because it is changed to an immortall bodie therefore they cannot receiue the mortall bodie because Christ hath not a mortall bodie to giue them If they say that they receiue his glorified bodie then they must she
two Sacraments are a feale of that bloud to witnes that it was shed Againe this is a matter regarded in Testaments and Willes to the Testament of him that is dead no man addeth or detracteth but as the Testator made it so it standeth without alteration so should this Testamēt of Christ and this Sacrament of Christ no man should alter it now he is dead for hee which addeth or detracteth hath a curse in Gods booke Therefore Christ when he instituted this Sacrament commanded do this that is do as I do least they should swarue one whit from his owne manner yet how many gaudes haue the Papists added to it that he which had heard Christ say Do this in remembrance of me and should see how they handle the matter in their Masse could see nothing to remember Christ by but a vaile to hide Christ from him Therfore this commandement was repeated againe when he gaue the wine Do this c. as he commanded them to eate the bread in remembrance of him so he commandeth them to drinke the wine in remembrance of him nay he speaks more precisely of the wine than of the bread for he saith of the wine Drinke you all of this which he saith not of the bread Surely Christ did foresee that some proud Heretiks would do otherwise after him euen as it is come to passe for the Papist doth breake this Commandement of Christ as flatly as Saul brake the commandement of Samuel Samuel commanded him to kill the fat the leane Saul killed the lean but not the fat so Christ commandeth to receiue bread and wine they teach to receiue bread but not wine Christ saith Drinke you all of this they say drink not all of this Christ gaue the bread and wine to all they giue the bread to all the wine to some their Priests receiue all but the people must content themselues with halfe the Priest eates and drinks but the people must not drinke for spilling on their cloathes Is this the Church which cannot erre Doe they think to hemme Christ in their Masse and shut his ordinance out of their Masse The Souldiers diuided Christes coate but these diuide his bodie and separate the bread wine which Christ hath ioyned Paul speaketh of heretikes which taught Touch not tast not handle not so these say touch not tast not handle not when they should say Touch and tast and handle Of all Heresies either old or new there is none so iniurious to the common people as the pasture of shauelings Poperie for they may not reade the scriptures they may not come to Councels they may not examine that which is taught thē they may not be buried without a mortuarie they may not drinke at the Cōmunion as though their Priestes were their Lords Therefore we may say as a Heathen did There is no charitie in the Papists Sacrament because like Anantas the Priestes keepe backe that which they should distribute mangle the Sacrifice as though Ely his Sonnes had left their hooke to the Massing Friers Thus that yee may know who succeed the Pharisies they haue fulfilled that which the Pharisies did that is By their owne Commandements they haue made the Commandement of God of no effect For whereas the purpose of Christ was to tye our faith wholly to himselfe that we should not seek for any thing without him knowing that the maintenāce of this life hath need both of meat and drinke to teach vs that all sufficiencie is in himselfe by bread and wine he sheweth that he is in stead both of meat and drinke that is in stead of al which signification is taken away where the wine is not giuen as well as the bread Therefore as it is said of a horrible and odious crime Consider the matter and giue sentence so I wish all to consider this Innouation and giue sentence of it Can there be any clearer contradiction to the Word or bolder checke to Christ than when he saith Drinke you all of this to say drinke not all of this It is euen as when God said Ye shal die the diuell said yee shall not die Shall we go now to a Counsell or a Father or a Doctor to inquire whether this doctrine be like Christ doctrine I do verely thinke that none here is so simple but that he seeth that if any thing can be contrarie to Christs speech this is contrarie to it But this is onely their detraction from the Sacrament Now you shall heare their additions to the Sacrament looke vpon their vestures and their gestures and their Altars and their pix and their incense their beckes and their nods and their turnings all this is more then Christ did and therefore the Prophet may say againe Who hath required this of you Did Christ commaund you to do more then he did and not do as he did Therfore let them which haue eyes to see be thankfull for their light when they heare how blind they were whom God gaue ouer to be seduced The fruit of this Sacrament is noted in these words Which is broken for you which is shed for you that is as Matthew interpreteth shed for the remission of sinnes As al was made for vs so al which Christ spake he spake for vs and all which Christ did he did for vs and all which Christ suffered he suffered for vs that the sinnes of men might be forgiuen and yet so few apprehend this benefite that the way to heauen is called a narrow way as though all these pains did ransome but a smal number and certaine order of men All are not saued by Christ death but all which are saued are saued by Christs death his death is sufficient to saue all as the sun is sufficient to lighten all but if anie man winke the Sunne will not giue him light so if any man contemne will not receiue Christ will not thrust him into Heauen but euerie man shall haue that which he chooseth as Dauid saith Blessing to him that loueth blessing and cursing to him which loueth cursing There wants not a hand to giue but a hand to take I would saith Christ but you would not Stretch forth thy hand and here is Christes hand which takes make thee quake and tremble if thou shouldst see but another so dismēbred before thy face Thou hast no comfort now but this when I haue suffered I shall be free before to morrow at this time all my paine will be past though my shame continue and my children be beggers What grace what fauour what mercie now to pardon thee all this and saue thy life and set thee at libertie as though thou haddest neuer offended So I and thou and euery one here had committed reason against the King of Kings and stood condemned for it not to suffer and then to be free like them which breake the lawes of men