the ground Let them proue to vs by Gods owne voice as here that their Images are holy and that Gods presence is in them And yet for all that will not this procure adoration to them no more then Moses adored the earth Fourthly this place if Images were holy should rather keep vs from them then make vs come to them For it is said Approach not or come not hither loose off thy shooes from thy feet for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground It s therefore rather against going to Images then to goe to worship them Adorâ—â—â—e the footstoole of his feet Vnderstood say they of the Arke 1. Chron. 28. 2. Which was worshipped of the Iewes in regard of the Images set vpon it Answ Vnderstanding this footstoole of the Arke as they say it will helpe nothing their worship of Images For first the Arke was of Gods own appointment to be made for manner matter and end Exod. 25. 9. but so bee not their Images Secondly the Arke is called his footstoole But Images are not so called neither claimeth he them for his Thirdly God promised his presence with the Arke Exod. 25. 22. But where is his promise to be with their Images Fourthly the Arke was not an Image What is this then to an Image Fiftly the Arke was in the most holy place into which none could enter but the High Priests Therefore the people could not adore it but a farre off as being in the out-Court without any sight thereof Now their Images are neere and in the peoples view and not only where the High Priest of Rome comes If they will haue Images as the Arke then let his High Priestship keepe them in his most holy Chappell for himselfe and let them be for him only as the most Holy was for the high Priest Sixtly by the Arkes being in so remote a place its cleere that the words must be translated Adore yee towards his footstoele as in 1. King 8. 44. Pray towards the holy Citie and the house which hee had chosen And then the Arke was not adored but God it being the signe of Gods presence before which they worshipped 1. Sam. 1. 19. Seuenthly if it was worshipped because of the Images vpon it then was it only worshipped in the Sanctum Sanctorum For there the Cherubims were spred ouer it and not elsewhere and then onely the High Priest adored it for he onely saw the Images ouer it And then this Text seemeth to speake not to all but to him What is this to the peoples worshipping of Images Eighthly and lastly it is vntrue to say the Iewes worshipped it because of the Images on it For first they neither did nor could euer see any Image vpon it Secondly wee reade of the Arke brought forth in their iourneyings in the wildernesse so in going ouer Iordan also into the Campe of Israel 1. Sam. 4. 5. and at other times but wee neuer read of any that did worship it But if this had beene a commandement here surely there would haue beene some example of adoring it Thirdly they were commanded to worship God Deut. 6. 13. 10. 20. but no where to worship any other thing Fourthly how could it be that they worshipped the Arke because of the Images vpon it when the angels which by the Images were represented were not adored of them Would they worship the Image and not the things themselues For as Origen saith No Contr. Cels lib. 5. man adored the heauenly Angels which did submit himselfe to the Law of Moses Phil. 2. 10. At the name of Iesus c. Answ 1. Here is no Image mentioned What is this to Saints worship and their Images For this Text speakes of Iesus our Lord Sauiour Christ because we must bow downe to him the Sonne of God one person God and Man when wee doe make mention of his name Will it follow therefore that we should doe so to dead Images XXIII Proposition That the Lords Supper is to be administred to the people in one kinde onely Confuted by their owne Bible 1. IT teacheth vs that Christ instituting this his last Supper administred it in both kinds giuing a commandement to take and eate and also to drinke Mat. 26. 26 27. Luk. 20. 20. Secondly the Apostle Saint Paul repeating the institution mentioneth both the Bread and the Chalice 1. Cor. 11. 24 25. And first he tels them that this hee receiued of the Lord. Secondly that he deliuered the same vnto them verse 23. Thirdly he in verse 28. plainely prescribeth the eating of the Bread and drinking of the Chalice and that to euery one that commeth prepared and proueth himselfe saying Let him eate of that bread and drinke of that Chalice Out of which place it is euident that the drinking of the Chalice is of equall extent with the duty of prouing our selues before wee come vnto this Sacrament But the duty is generall and belongeth vnto all indifferently The drinking of the Chalice therefore may not be denied vnto any Thirdly the Church then in his dayes did receiue it in both kindes 1. Cor. 11. 26. For it is said there So often as you shall eate this bread and drinke this Chalice you shall shew the death of our Lord vntill hee come By both they shew his death And this place shews clearely that so often as they receiued they did eate the Bread and drinke the Chalice Fourthly the Apostles and Ministers of Christ did administer in both For the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 10. 16. The Chalice of benediction which we doe blesse is it not the communication of the bloud of Christ and the bread which wee breake is it not the participation of the body of the Lord Here the Apostle first mentioneth both the Chalice and Bread Secondly by the word we he vnderstands himselfe and other which did blesse the Chalice and breake the Bread Thirdly he saith that by the Chalice we communicate of Christs bloud and by the bread wee participate of his bodie and not by one of them of them both Saint Paul would haue Christs bloud out of his bodie in the Against concomitancy See D. White his last booke pag. 460 466. Chalice represented and not by the bread onely both his body and bloud Fourthly Christ is perfect food wee must therefore eate him and drinke him Drinke alone preserues not life nor onely to eate but both to eate and drinke therefore Christ instituted both to be receiued If the Aduersaries say that this receiuing was of the Apostles and as they by consequent would See an answer to this there also pag. 488 489 492. inferre of Priests onely which may receiue in both kindes but not the Laitie I answer first that the Apostles receiuing the Sacrament from Christ were then and there for the whole Church They receiued alone because they were Christs family to receiue together the Passeouer Secondly the Apostles were not as yet fully ordained till Christ breathed on them after
his Resurrection Ioh. 20. 21. as some euen of Papists affirme Thirdly if because they onely were present at the institution they therefore should onely receiue in both kinds then what warrant haue they to admit any but Priests to the Lords Supper What warrant to admit women to it so much as to receiue the bread Yea why are any Lay-men admitted to the bread or to the Sacrament at all for no Lay persons did receiue with the Apostles no not Christs Mother Fourthly touching the 1. Cor. 10. 16. there is vnder the word we meant the Apostles and other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments that they blessed and brake that is consecrated and administred the Lords Supper vnto other to wit the Laitie For in verse 21. he plainly sheweth how the Corinthians did drinke of the Chalice and did partake of the Table of the Lord though they could not receiue worthily so doing if they went vnto the Idol Temples Thus are they confuted by their owne Bible Contraried by Antiquitie Ignatius in Epist 6. ad Philadelp giueth vs to vnderstand that in his time the Cup was diuided to the whole Church Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. telleth vs that it was the manner of the whole Congregation to receiue both the Bread and Wine The first Councell of Nice speaking of the holy Table mentioneth both the Bread and Cup. Theophyl on 1. Cor. 11. saith that the Cup was in like manner deliuered vnto all See more for this Athanasius 2. Apolog. Chrysostome Hom. 27. in 1. Cor. and Ambrose in 1. Cor. 11. Cyprian in 2. Epist ad Cornelium in Epist 63. 54. Cyril Catech. mystag 5. Augustine in Ioh. tract 27. Tertul. deresurrect Clem. Alexand. 2. pedagog cap. 2. See Doctor White his last Booke pag. 482. citing Iust Martyr Chrysost Haymo Answ to Fisher Gainesaid by themselues Gelasius the Pope decret part 3. dist 2. ca. comperimus calleth it a fond superstition to abstaine from the Cup and satih that such a diuision cannot bee done without great sacriledge Alex. Hales 4. q. Art 2. saith that whole Christ is not contained vnder each kinde by way of Sacrament but onely his flesh vnder forme of Bread and his bloud vnder the forme of Wine and that there is more power of grace in Communion in both kinds then in one q. 11. in 2. Art 4 5 3. Lorichius lib. 5. Hospinian calleth them false Catholikes which hinder reformation of this point The Church of Rome for aboue a thousand yeeres after Christ vsed both the kinds in administring this Sacrament See this at large proued by Master Perkins in his demonstratiue of the Probleme out of Papists themselues To which adde the opinion in this point of receiuing in both kinds Lyra in 1. Cor. 11. Durand in national lib. 4. also Greg. de Valentia de legit vsu Enchar cap. 10. who confesseth that the custome began not much before the Councell of Constance Caietan 3. part Thom. q. 80. Art 12. q. 3. Ouand 4. p. 221. See Doctor White pag. 497. Fisher the Iesuite acknowledgeth the Lay people in the Primitiue Church to haue frequently receiued in both kinds Scriptures obiected answered Ioh. 6. 51. If any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer and the bread which I will giue him is my flesh Answ 1. This is not spoken of the Sacrament For first Christ So hold many Papists Doctor White pag 495 had not as yet instituted it Secondly he speaketh of spirituall bread then present I am the liuing Bread in the former part of the verse to which the relation is in these words here This bread to wit himselfe the liuing Bread I am the bread of life saith he verse 48. The Sacramentall bread was not as yet when thus he spake Thirdly the bread here was that which when he spake came downe from heauen verse 50. 58. But the bread which Christ administred at his last Supper neuer came from heauen Fourthly this bread whoso eateth maketh him that eateth it to liue for euer but so doth not the Sacramental bread which may be eaten by the wicked Fiftly he himselfe expoundeth what he meaneth by this Bread euen his owne flesh which he giueth for the life of the world and which he did giue vpon the Crosse But the Sacramentall bread is not his owne flesh As for that errour of transubstantiation the vanitie of it shall be confuted in the next question Sixtly if this bee spoken of the Sacrament then all that receiue it not haue no life in them verse 53. as Infants and other before they come to ripe age which they will not affirme And yet will it vndeniably follow if this be properly meant of the Sacrament II. If it were granted that Christ spake here of the Sacrament which hee would institute yet this place helpeth not our Aduersaries but rather maketh hue and cry after their the euery for presuming to rob the people of the Cup. For first in vers 53. Christ plainely saith Vnlesse yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall not haue life in you And in verse 54. he saith He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath euerlasting life So he bindeth life to both and secludeth life from such as receiue not both Secondly therefore both being so necessarie it followeth that when he onely mentioneth the eating of bread there is a figure one part for both Else should the diuine Oracles of our Sauiour thwart one the other in pressing both eating and drinking affirmatiuely to the obtaining of life in receiuing both and negatiuely to losse of life in not receiuing both Thirdly Christ goeth about to declare himselfe to be sufficient food for the life of his which beleeue in him Now a man cannot liue by onely eating nor onely drinking but by both Therefore saith he My flesh is meat indeed and my bloud is drinke indeed verse 55. He saith not that his flesh is both meate and drinke He knew that his body had flesh and bloud yet he willeth to eate and drinke Now the flesh is to be eaten and the bloud to be drunke In eating his flesh wee cannot be said to drinke his bloud For that which is to be eaten cannot bee said to bee drunken too these being two distinct and differing actions for two things If one would haue serued the vrging of two had beene needlesse Fourthly and lastly hee mentioneth Bread not to exclude Wine and eating not to exclude drinking but because hee had spoken of Manna the Israelites bread in the Wildernesse and so called himselfe Bread keeping the subiect and occasion of which hee had begun to speake So in Ioh. 4. speaking with the Woman of Samaria occasioned by the drawing of water out of the Well hee promiseth to giue her water to drinke Would any therefore hence conclude that onely water were sufficient and no need of eating bread As we cannot conclude so from the one no more can we from the
of the Sacrament as before is proued in the former question Mat. 26. 26. Take eate this is my body Luk. 22. 19. This is my body which is giuen for you Answ 1. I haue before proued that these words are spoken in an vsuall Sacramentall phrase figuratiuely and not properly Secondly they cannot be spoken but figuratiuely because Christ himselfe spake these words He willed them not to eate his naturall body which body was visible before them Had he his owne body in his hand and euery one of his Twelue Apostles the same in their mouthes then were there thirteene bodies of Christ at one time at the table twelue in their hands and mouthes and one sitting apparantly before their eyes One body cannot be in so many places at once as before I haue proued And what a little body must this be which Christ held in his owne hand which he did breake and which euery of the Apostles did put in their mouthes Thirdly The words must needs bee figuratiuely vnderstood now if we consider the time when Christ spake them to wit before his Passion when as yet his body was not giuen nor his bloud shed Fourthly Christ spake figuratiuely when hee deliuered the shop Mat. 26. 28. Then why more properly in the one then in the other Fiftly The end of Christs instituting this Sacrament shewes it to bee figuratiuely spoken For it was for a remembrance of him Luk. 22. 19. But if this vpon the words of consecration had beene his very owne bodie it could not be called properly a remembrance of him for wee remember by signes things absent and not things themselues present for so the signes were needlesse 1. Cor. 10. 16. The cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ 1. Cor. 11. He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh iudgement to himselfe not discerning the Lords body Answ 1. Here is no proofe for transubstantiation but that the Bread is Christs body and the Wine his bloud by the receiuing whereof wee receiue Christs very body and bloud But how Sacramentally spiritually by faith and such as come not prepared to this holy Sacrament as they ought eate and drinke vnworthily not making a difference of this bread and wine representing Christ from common bread and wine or a common banquet which is a grieuous sinne All this wee doe acknowledge neither doe we deny the bread to be the bodie of Christ or the wine his bloud but yet euer in a Sacramentall speech figuratiuely and not properly For if the signe be the very thing signified indeed then were there no Sacrament for it is an outward signe of an inuisible grace Now there being as is proued no transubstantiation then it followes that there is no adoration of the Sacrament in that respect nor therein offered any vnbloudy sacrifice for the quicke and the dead XXV Proposition That prayers are to be made vnto Angels and Saints departed Confuted by their owne Bible 1. FOr Angels their owne Bible telleth vs that the Angels themselues forbid worship to be done to them Reu. 19. 10. and 22. 9. And so Saint Paul taught that they should not be worshipped Col. 2. 18. Now prayer to them is worshipping of them and that in a great degree Secondly for Saints departed the Virgin Mary or any other they are not to bee prayed vnto for they know not our particular estates here Abraham hath not knowne vs and Israel hath beene ignorant of vs Esa 63. 16. The dead know nothing more Eccles 9. 5. Iob. cap. 14. 21. speaking of the dead saith Whether his children shall be noble or vnnoble he shall not vnderstand How vaine is it then to pray to them Touching either Angels or Saints their Bible alloweth vs not to pray vnto them I. It teacheth euery where wheresoeuer there is either a commandement to pray or an example of any holy man of God praying that the same is made vnto God For commandement Psal 49. 15. Inuocate me in the day of trouble who is very ready to heare Esay 64. 24. Mat. 11. 28. Come vnto me saith Christ and promiseth them that come vnto him that hee will not cost forth Iob. 6. 37. Iames saith Aske of God chap. 1. 5. There is no commandement to pray to any other in all the Scripture For examples Abraham called vpon the Name of the Lord so Isaac Iacob Moses Iosua Samuel Dauid and all the rest No instance can be giuen to the contrary in either precept or example II. The Apostles desired to be taught to pray Luk. 11. Now Christ in his perfect forme of Prayer taught them and in them all vs to pray aright And it is against praying to Saints and Angels in the Preface Our Father which art in Heauen First this is against all Shee Saints for we cannot call the Virgin Marie nor any woman-Saint Father Secondly this is against all Angels for they bee not our Fathers but Fellow-seruants as they confesse Reuel 19. 10. Thirdly this is against all Hee-Saints departed for they be our Brethren and in Heauen but one Father Matth. 23. 8 9. In the Petitions which Christ willeth vs to pray for they cannot be made to any of them We cannot say to them Hallowed be thy Name Thy Kingdome come Thy will be done in Earth as it is in Heauen Can we say to them Giue vs this day our daily bread Forgiue vs this day our trespasses Leade vs not into temptation but deliuer vs from euill In the conclusion for may wee ascribe to them and say Thine is the Kingdome the power and the glory for ouer Amen Now if we cannot aske of them these things nor ascribe to them kingdome power and glory without horrible idolatrie and sacriledge then either Christ taught not sufficiently in this Prayer to whom and what to pray for or else if he did then no Saints or Angels are to be prayed vnto III. Their Bible maketh onely Christ the meanes betweene God and vs For first it telleth vs but of one Mediatour One God and also one Mediatour of God and men 1. Timoth. 2. 5. Who this one is it also telleth vs euen the Man Christ Iesus 1. Timoth. 2. 5. And further teacheth that he is our Mediatour both of redemption Heb. 9. 12. and of intercession Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 7. 25. neither doth their Bible make any other Mediatour in either of these respects vnto God for vs saue Iesus Christ alone Secondly their Bible telleth that no man commeth to the Father but by Christ Ioh. 14. 6. Thirdly that we haue a promise to be heard if wee aske the Father in his Name Ioh. 16. 23. Fourthly that Christ foreshewed that his Disciples should aske and pray his Father in his Name Ioh. 16. 26. Fifthly their Bible exhorts vs therefore to goe to him Heb. 13. 13. to offer vp our prayses and so our prayers by him Heb.
wood are called idols and diuels But they worship the workes of their hands made of such things and therefore worship idols and diuels Thus God condemneth Imagerie for idols and diuels And this very place may fitly be vnderstood of Papists For first these idolaters here spoken of are such as fall out to bee vnder the sixt trumpet long after the destruction of the Heathen idolaters 2. They are such as be after the Starre is fallen chap. 9. 1. and become a King of the Locusts But what Clergie man since Christ euer wore a Crowne but the Pope 3. They are such as those great Armies verse 16. were raised vp to plague for their idolatry But what can these be but Turkes the scourge of Popish idolaters idolatrous Christians 4. They are such as ouer-ranne the true Religion so as Christ sends out his Word to recouer his from vnder this idolatrie and from among them chap. 10. 11. But who haue spred their idols ouer the Church Not Iewes nor Turkes but Papists And hath not Christ sent out his Word to regaine his from among them 5. And lastly the words chap. 9. 20 21. doe set out Papists 1. They repented not of the works of their hands whē they saw the Easteme Churches ouerthrowne by the Turkes for their idolatrie after the second Nicene Councell there establishing it 2. These committed Murthers Sorceries Fornication and Thefts And doe not all know how these raigne among Papists For murders their massacres of Christians and vnheard of cruelties vpon poore Indians many millions witnesse them For Sorceries is not spirituall Babylon that is Rome full thereof chap. 18. 23 Rome now is that Whore drunke with bloud chap. 17. which deceiued the Nations by her Sorceries chap. 18. 23. For her Fornication she is called the Mother of whoredomes chap. 17. And doe not her Stewes witnesse it What shall I speake how vnder colour of vowed pouertie by Dispensations Pardons Indulgences shee robbed euery Kingdome Therefore these are Papists worshipping idols and diuels and cannot so well bee applyed to any other vnder heauen all the former circumstances seriously and throughly weighed See B. Carleton his Booke of Thanksgiuing how he presseth this text vpon Papists Contraried by Antiquitie Tertul. de idolat God hath forbidden both the making and worshipping of an Idol Now by Idol he meaneth euery forme or representation as himselfe there saith and that the consecration of Images is Idolatry Epiphanius The superstition of Images is vnfit for the Church of Christ He seeing an Image in a Church tare it in sunder hee also exhotred to bring no Images into the Churches as an horrible wickednesse yea though it were the Picture of Christ himselfe Lactantius saith Out of doubt there is no Religion where there is an Image Gregory the Bishop of Neocaesaria saith Concil Nicen. 2. Act. 6. that Heathenisme was the first deuiser and head of Images Enseb l. 7. c. 17. calleth it an heathenish custome Origen against Celsus Common sense doth will men to thinke that God is not delighted with honour of Images made by men And of his owne time hee saith thus We worship no Images In Saint Austins time it is cleere by that which hee writeth on Psal 113. that there were no Images in Churches The Councell at Eliberis or Granada in Spaine decreed that nothing which is honoured of the people should be painted in the Churches The first and sixth Constantinopolitan Councell held against Images that it was not lawfull either to haue the Images of Saints or to worship them And if any from that time durst make or adore them in the Church or at home if of the Clergie he was to be deposed if of the Laity accursed The generall Councell by the Commandement of the Apostolike See at Franckford vnder Charles the great where the Popes Legates were condemned the worship of Images Abb. Vsperg Anno 793. Rhegino Anno 794. Opus illustr Caroli Mag. contra Synod p. 486. l. 4. c. 2. See Alan Cope dial 4. cap. 18. The Ancient Christians of the Primitiue Church had none Clem. Alexand. hort ad Gent. pag. 14. Minutius Foelix Octau Atheuag Legat. Athanasius against the Gentiles saith If a liuing man cannot teach thee to know God how can a carued stocke and a stone doe it that is dead Gregory Bishop of Rome lib 7. Epist 109. commends the zeale of Serenus a Bishop in France who would haue nothing made with hands worshipped and therefore brake the Images which act though Gregorie commended not yet hee would haue him keepe the people from the worship of them The Bishop of Orleance Ionas lib. 1. de cultis Imag. professed his detestation against the worship of Images and held the doers worthy to be cursed Bishop Durandin Rational lib. 1. cap. 3. and Catharin tract de cult Imag. thinke their vse to be dangerous Gainesaid by themselues Polydor. Virgil lib. 6. cap. 13. de inuent rerum writeth that by the testimonie of Ierome it appeareth how in a manner all the ancient holy Fathers condemned the worship of Images for feare of idolatry Erasmus in Catechis saith that by the testimonie of sound and approued Stories it is cleere that till Ieromes time such as were of sound Religion would endure no image either painted or grauen to be set vp in the Churches no not the image of Christ himselfe Holcot in lib. Sap. lect 7. saith that no adoration is due to any Image and that it is not lawfull to adore any Image Agobardus B. of Lyons who liued in Anno 815. saith in Bibl. Paetrum Whosoeuer worshippeth a Picture molten or grauen Statue worships an Idol not God nor Saint nor Angel See Roger Houeden part 1. Annal. fol. 272. where he sheweth how the Church of God detested the Decree of the 2. Nicene about worship of Images Aquinas Hales Albertus Bonauenture Marsilius and nine more cited by D. White in his last Booke pag. 209. doe hold that Adoration of Images was prohibited the Iewes Then such places as bee alledged for Images in the Old Testament by our moderne Papists are but abused Bannes in Tho. 229. par 10. pag. 170. saith that the worship of the Images of Saints is neither expressely nor vnfoldedly taught in holy Scriptures All Scriptures therefore alledged are but abusiuely alledged to beguile the simple Scriptures obiected answered 1. For making Images to be worshipped Exo. 25. 18. And thou shalt make two Cherubims c. Ans This is no warrant now for vs. For we haue a perpetuall law forbidding the making of Images likenesses Exod. 20. to worship them Leu. 26. 1. This binds vs for euer But God is not bound he makes a Law for vs not to himselfe And this commandement which he gaue was extraordinarie for a time and therefore not imitable of vs no more then his command to Abraham to kill his sonne or to Israel to rob the Egyptians are to be warrants for vs to kill or rob any 2. This was not done
signe being called by the thing signified as we see in other Sacraments which must teach vs to expound this as also the rest of the words this Chalice is the new Testament 1. Cor. 11. 25. this is my bloud of the New Testament Math. 26. 28. this is the Chalice the New Testament Luk. 22. 20. and Drinke the Chalice saith S. Paul which they yeeld to be figuratiuely spoken and therefore so must the other Thirdly the name of bread both before the mentioning of the words of Consecration by Saint Paul in 1. Cor. 11. 23. and after is still kept verse 26 27 28. 1. Cor. 10. 16 17. not because only shew of Bread was so to the eye but for that it remained bread indeed and is yet so to feeling and taste as well as to sight Fourthly their Bible telleth vs that heauen truely hath receiued Christ vntill the times of the restitution of all things Acts 3. 21. Till then hee commeth not bodily out of heauen except the bread be heauen it selfe into which at his Ascension he was receiued Fiftly their Bible telleth vs that when Christ commeth hee shall come from heauen visibly so come againe as the Apostles saw him goe vp Act. 1. 11. But they saw him in his body visibly ascend so shall he in body come againe and not in a conceited inuisibilitie into the Sacrament bodily Sixtly their owne Bible teacheth that a body cannot be in two places at one instant of time Mat. 28. 26. He is not here said the Angell and giueth the reason For he is risen Because hee was in another place being risen and gone out of the Sepulchre See Augustine in Ioh. tract 31. shewing that Christ is not in two places at one time the Angell plainely and truely denied him therefore to be there Now wee beleeue him to bee euer bodily in heauen Therefore by an heauenly Angels reason wee may truely say that bodily he is not here in the Sacrament no more then he was in the Sepulchre because he was risen Seuenthly their Bible teacheth that wheresoeuer Christs bodie was at any time hee was discernable by sense and therefore he willeth his Disciples to vse their sense to discerne him Luk. 24. 39. So did Thomas Ioh. 20. 28. But in the Sacrament is no sensiblenesse at all of his bodily presence Eighthly their Bible doth teach that whensoeuer God turned one substance into another or tooke one away and put another in stead thereof that the same was discernable by sense Moses Staffe was visibly a Serpent Dust in Egypt was Lice seene and felt and so the Water was Bloud sensibly and the Water good Wine in Ioh. 2. 9. 10. to the taste But in this change at the Sacrament is no such sensible perception and therefore is there no such thing for God in his miracles deludeth no mans sense Contraried by Antiquity Tertul. aduers Marcionem This is my bodie that is This is a figure of my body Ambros desacra lib. 4. saith that it is a figure of the body and bloud of Christ And speaking of the signes he saith that they remaine the same that they were August in Psal 3. saith that in this Feast the Lord commanded and deliuered the figure of his bodie and bloud to his Disciples And the same Father contra Adamantium cap. 12. saith that wheÌ„ the Lord said This is my body he gaue the signe of his body See more in his Booke de Doct. Chri. lib. 3. cap. 16. calling it a figure and contr Maximinum lib. 3. cap. 22. he calleth the things visible Signes Chrysost ad Caesarium Monachum saith that though the bread hath the name of the Lords body yet the nature of bread remaineth still Theodoret. in Dialo immuta Hee changed the names and gaue his bodie that name which belonged to the signe and to the signe that name which belonged to his body not by changing their nature but by adding grace to nature And in Dial inconfusus hee saith that the mysticall signes after consecration doe not depart from their nature but they abide still in their former substance figure and forme and may be seene and touched as before Cyril in Ios lib. 4. cap. 14. saith that Christ gaue to his faithfull Disciples pieces of bread See farther in Bishop Vsher his last Booke of the controuerse of the Reall presence citing Iustine Martyr Ireneus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Theophilus of Antioch the Author of the harmony of the Gospels Eusebius Acacius Macarius Austin Chrysostome Theodores Ephraemius the Councell of Constantinople Bishops of France in a Synode at Carisiacum Rabanus Also D. White his last Booke pag. 401. citing many and pag. 435. answering the Aduersaries places out of the Fathers Gainsaid by themselues Golasins a Pope de duabus nat Chri. saith that the nature of the Bread and Wine ceaseth not but remaine stil in the propertie of their nature and contra Eutycheten The elements are the image and similitude of the body and bloud of Christ Their Glosse de cons Dist 2. The heauenly Sacrament is called the body of Christ but vnproperly It is impossible that the bread should be the body of Christ Pet. Lombard sent 4. dist 11. si autem c. saith that some iudged and some wrote that the very substance of bread and Wine remained still and of the manner of conuersion he saith he is not able to define Petrus de Aliaco the Cardinall 4. q. 6. Art 2. saith that the opinion which holdeth the substance of bread not to remaine doth not euidently follow of the Scriptures nor in his seeming of the Churches determination Caietan 3. par q. 75. Art 1. pag. 153. saith that in the Gospel there is nothing that compelleth vs to vnderstand them properly See more in Bishop Vsher his last booke of this point Ratrannus Scotus Alfrick Abbot of Malmesbury The Scriptures obiected answered Luk. 22. 15. With desire I haue desired to eate the Passeouer with you before I suffer Answ 1. This Text is vnderstood of the Iewish Passeouer and not of the Lords Supper for the Supper was not called the Pasche or Passeouer Also the whole Text sheweth it to bee â—â— verse 7 8 11 13 15. Secondly euen in this Text is a Sacramentall phrase for here the eating of the Lambe is called the Passeouer which was an act done long before of which this Feast was onely a remembrance and not the thing it selfe Thirdly this Passeouer did Christ certainly eate of with his Disciples but the Bread Wine in the Supper which he instituted for this new sacrament of the new Testament the Apostles ate and dranke of but not a word of Christs eating thereof but onely of the other Iewish Sacrament of which in the Verses next following hee also speakes saying that he would no more drinke of the Vine verse 18. as before he said that he would not eate of the Passeouer verse 16. Ioh. 6. 51. I am the liuing Bread c. Answ This speaketh not
this life but such as were accounted as dead as going downe to the graue for so Baruch speakes to Israel verse 9 11. And hee speakes of such dead Israelites and their children which had sinned before God and had not hearkened to him verse 4. expressing their deserts worthy death Doe men aliue requesting God to heare for them the prayers of the dead vse to moue God with telling of the Saints sinnes and their rebellion against him Is this a Romish prayer Heare Lord the prayers of the dead for mee for they haue sinned against thee Will any be so madde to alledge such a reason Therefore Baruch makes confession of the liuing Israelites being then through distresse as dead men and beggeth pardon for them as followeth in verse 5. Fiftly their Doway Annotation on this place is this Men in sinnes and miseries are as if they were dead verse 11. yet by Gods mercy may receiue new grace of spirituall life They then take these for men aliue and not dead as this foolish Gagger doth Reu. 2. 26 27. This is answered before and nothing concerneth the prayers of the Saints departed Luk 16. Diues in hell prayed for his brethren on earth much more then will the Saints in heauen Answ 1. This is but a supposed speech a parable and therefore nothing thence to be gathered but as is intended in the scope of the Parable Secondly if there bee such all-knowing vision and all-helping charitie in Heauen it is maruell that in all the Scripture it should no where as clearely be mentioned as this charitie of one damned in hell Reuel 6. 9 10. And I saw vnder the Altar the soules c. and they cryed with a lowd voice How long Lord holy and true doest thou not iudge and auenge our bloud on them that dwell on the earth Answ 1. This was seene by Iohn in a vision and is not to bee interpreted according to the Letter to establish a doctrine of faith Secondly though it be taken after the letter yet here is no proofe that Saints pray for any in particular but for the Church militant in generall Thirdly their Prayer is not for other in the Church they intercede not for other but the request they make concerneth themselues Fourthly their cry is literally for iustice and reuenge vpon their enemies persecutors and sheaders of their bloud Doth mindfulnesse of iniuries remaine in Saints departed They then are lesse charitable then Saints on earth Steuen at his death prayed for his enemies This place proueth not that Saints departed pray particularly here for vs on earth but rather they pray against the enemies of the Church 2. Pet. 1. 15. I will endeuour after my decease to haue remembrance of these things Answ This is not meant by his intercession to God after death but of his then present and diligent writing to them while he was aliue whereby they might bee made to remember after his decease what hee had taught them by word of mouth or writing while he liued 1. King 2. 13 19. Adoniah had a suite to Solomon and used the helpe of Bathsheba to him Absalom vsed Ioabs intercession for him to Dauid 2. Sam. 14. So should we goe vnto God by Saints intercessors for vs. Answ 1. Similitudes are for illustration but doe not proue any thing especially thus detorted absurdly Secondly the case is not alike as betweene man and man so betweene God and vs in this case Hee is God and so euery where and not as man circumscribed in a place To man wee cannot speake when and where we would but to God wee may whose eyes and thoughts are not like to mans Esai 55. Man through pride will not or through carelesnesse regards not or through ignorance knowes not or through businesse is hindered so as hee cannot helpe such as come for helpe or his attendants about him may keepe Petitioners from him so as they cannot speake to him But there are no such lets in God The Simile therefore is not fit Thirdly this is voluntarie humilitie which caused the worship of Angels by certaine Heretikes which the Apostle condemneth Col. 2. 18. Fourthly wee need no Saints to goe to God for vs for wee haue appointed by God himselfe a Mediatour of intercession betweene God and vs his Sonne Iesus Christ by whom boldly with confidence we may goe to God Ephes 3. 12. Heb. 4. 16. 10. 22. 7. 25. Fiftly as for any to goe betweene Christ and vs wee neede it not For he is the Head and all wee the members of his bodie as well those in earth as those in heauen wee here on earth being as deare to him as those in heauen Hee sitteth in heauen to request for vs and is a most mercifull High Priest touched with our infirmities Heb. 4. 15. Therefore hee tooke our nature vpon him Heb. 2. 16. to be a faithfull and mercifull High Priest verse 17. Steuen made no meanes to him but prayed immediately to him Act. 7. 59 60. and so did Iohn Reuelation 22. 20 21. Christ willeth vs himselfe to come vnto him Math. 11. 28. And we reade not that any of the Apostles or holy men praying mentioned in Scripture did euer goe to Saint or Angell to make request for them Also to answer the Simile Is there any of vs hauing a great mans Command in all our needs to come to himselfe giuing his faithfull word and promise to heare our suites requests very readily at any time and none appointed by him to heare suiters when they come but onely himselfe attending mercifully in his owne person for vs in open place without let of any that would goe first to any of his seruants and not forthwith rather to himselfe with all gladnesse I appeale to mens owne hearts in this Lastly this putting of Saints betweene Christ and vs is to make an Intercessor and to hold Saints departed if wee were sure they could heare vs which yet is very vncertaine to bee more louing more tenderly affected toward vs then Iesus Christ himselfe who hath with his owne bloud bought both them and vs. Scriptures obiected that wee may pray to God to haue our Petitions granted in fauour and merit of Saints departed Exod. 32. 13. Remember Abraham Isaac and Israel thy seruants to whom thou swarest c. Answ 1. Here is no merit of Saints vrged Secondly their persons are mentioned by Moses not for their owne worthinesse but for the Couenant which by oath God confirmed to them which Couenant Moses vrgeth not their deserts For Moses speakes of Gods act to them but not a syllable of any thing that they either did or spake note it well 2. Chron. 6. 16. Keepe with thy seruant Dauid my Father that which thou hast promised Answ 1. Here is no word no worke of Dauid remembred and therefore no merit of his vrged Secondly that which Salomon alledgeth in his prayer it Gods promise made vnto Dauid So in 2. Chro. 1. 9. in 1. Chro.
faith to which he exhorts in verse 23. saying that it is a commandement of God that we should beleeue in the name of his Sonne Iesus Christ Rom. 3. 31. Doe we destroy the Law by faith God forbid but we rather maintaine the Law Answ The whole Chapter is against iustification by workes and for faith and euen in this very verse For what meane these words but to shew that faith by which wee are iustified doth fulfill the Law so as what men would obtaine by the workes of the Law the same they haue by faith in Christ who hath for vs perfectly fulfilled the Law So the Law is not destroyed but by faith established Phil. 2. 12. Worke out your saluation with feare and trembling Answ What meaneth this babbling Babylonian hereby Will he conclude that he which is to worke out his saluation with feare and trembling is not iustified by faith onely Iustifying faith maketh none presumptuous It makes a man put on the Armour of God It so maketh vs confident in God as withall neuer to neglect any good meanes in the way to saluation It maketh vs not high-minded but to feare and to tremble and so to worke out our owne saluation which euer accompanyeth our iustification XXXIII Proposition That no true beleeuer particularly can in this life be certaine of his saluation without a miracle or extraordinary reuelation Confuted by their owne Bible BY their Bible we doe learne and it is cleere First that the vnalterable ground of our saluation is laid in Iesus Christ God hauing chosen vs in him before the constitution of the world Ephes 1. 4. which he wil perfect for whom he hath predestinated them also he hath called and whom hee hath called them also he hath iustified and whom he hath iustified them also he hath glorified Rom. 8. 30. Secondly that Christ hath taken away all and euery cause of damnation and euery thing that might hinder the saluation of such as beleeued in him as to wit sin Hee is made sinne for vs 2. Cor. 5. 21. the curse of the Law he hath redeemed vs from the curse thereof Gal. 3. 13. and from vnder it Gal. 4. 5. the anger and wrath of God for we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son Rom. 5. 10 11 2. Cor. 5. 19. So that there is no damnation to them that are in Christ Rom. 8. 1. Thirdly that Christ is euery thing for vs vnto God our Wisdome Iustice Sanctification and Redemption 1. Cor. 1. 30. yea in Christ we are made the Iustice of God 2. Cor. 5. 21. So that God iustifieth vs with his owne Iustice which cannot bee excepted against Who therefore shall accuse the elect of God or who is hee that shall condemne Rom. 8. 33 34. And if free from accusation and condemnation are they not sure of saluation What is it that letteth Fourthly that no power though they haue many temptations and many combates shall euer finally ouercome them The gates of hell shall not preuaile against them Matth. 16. 18. For in the vertue of God they are kept by faith to saluation 1. Pet. 1. 5. and are in all power strengthened according to the might of his glory in all patience longanimitie with ioy Col. 1. 11. Christ promiseth not to cast forth his Ioh. 6. 37 40 and he holdeth vs that none shall plucke vs out of his hands Ioh 10. 28. Not Satan for Christ hath ouercome him Matth. 4. Heb. 2. 14. Not the world for he hath ouercome it also Ioh. 16. 33. Not false Teachers for it is not possible that the elect should bee induced into errour Matth. 24. 24. meaning totally and finally Not our sinnes for the bloud of Christ hath cleansed vs from all sinne 1. Ioh. 1. 7. and in him we haue redemption the remission of our sinnes Col. 1. 14. Ephes 1. 7. See also Heb. 8. 12 9. 14. Not the terrour and curse of the Law for hee hath fulfilled it for vs and remoued the curse Gal. 4. 5. 3. 13. Not our once being vnder the power of darknesse for God hath deliuered vs from our enemies Luk. 1. 74. and from the power of darknesse and translated vs into the kingdome of the Sonne of his loue Col. 1. 13. Nor Gods once former displeasure against vs for when we were impious Rom. 5. when wee were sinners Christ dyed for vs verses 6. 8. and when we were enemies we by Christs death were reconciled to God verse 10. and haue receiued reconciliation verse 11. Not any thing that may fall out after reconciliation For if when we were Enemies we were reconciled much more being reconciled shal we be saued in the life of him Rom. 5. 10. No not Gods iust deserued wrath for our often falls For if when we were sinners Christ dyed for vs much more therefore now being iustified by his bloud shall wee be saued from wrath by him Rom. 5. 8 9. 1. Thes 1. 10. Not the Law of sinne captiuing vs so as we cannot doe that which wee would but doe often that which wee would not For Iesus Christ shall deliuer vs from the body of this death Rom. 7. 24 25. Not tribulation distresse famine nakednesse danger persecution nor the sword though wee were killed for his sake all the day long For to vs it is giuen for Christ not onely that wee should beleeue in him but also that we suffer for his name Phil. 1. 28. And in all these things wee ouercome because of him that hath loued vs Rom. 8. 37. and because God is faithfull who will not suffer his to bee tempted aboue that which they are able but will also make with temptation issue that you may be able to sustaine 1. Cor. 10. 13. To conclude there is nothing possible that can separate vs from the charity of God in Christ Iesus our Lord. For I am sure saith the Apostle that neither Death nor Life nor Angels nor Principalities nor Powers neither things present nor things to come neither might nor height nor depth nor other creature shall be able to doe it Rom. 8. 38 39. For we know that to them that loue God all things co-operate vnto good to such as according to purpose are called to be Saints Rom. 8. 28. And Christ Iesus is able to saue for euer them that goe by him to God Heb. 7. 25. hee being entred into Heauen now appearing to the countenance of God for vs Heb. 9. 24. who is on Gods right hand making intercession for vs Rom. 8. 34. So that it is vndoubtedly certaine that those that bee Christs shall not perish Ioh. 3. 15. nor come into iudgement but passe from death to life Ioh. 5. 24. Fifthly their Bible teacheth not onely these things in the generall but also how euery true beleeuer may particularly be assured that he hath his part in these things and be certaine of his owne saluation and that is by Christs Spirit and by the grace of faith wrought by the same