am altogether persuaded so for the self same Christ yea the same whole Christ both in his audible worde and also in his visible wordes that is to say in the Sacraments is set foorth to the selfe same ende 68. Question I had almost quite forgotten that which I woulde gladly haue asked of thee to wyt howe it is that Sainct Augustine writeth as thou hast cyted that the Sacramentes can worke no suche astonishment as miraculous thinges doe if that same mystery of the vniting of Christ and his Church together be so wonderfull Answeare I haue answered vnto that alreadie that it is one thing to aske of the Sacramentes themselues another thing of those thinges which God doth worke by the vse of them Augustine therefore doeth very well forbyd whether we respect the nature of the Sacramentes or the Sacramentes them selues that they should bee numbred amongest miracles because it is not straunge neyther also against the order of naturall thinges that some thing for the analogie and proportion and also by the couenaunt of men shoulde bee vsed for the signifying of some thing altogether differing from the nature thereof For I beseeche thee what miracle is it that the betrothing of maryage to come shoulde be signified by a Ryng and putting into possession of houses should not onely be signified by the deliuering of a Keye but also confirmed There is the lyke reason altogether to bee had of the Sacramentes although not particularly yet generally albeit those thinges which God worketh in vs if wee rightly vse the Sacramences doe exceede the vnderstandyng euen of the very Angels them selues 69. Question But that which thou hast spoken of our Sacramentes doest thou also thinke of those same olde Sacraments Answeare I say both twayne in those thinges which are as I may say of the substāce of the Sacrament it selfe doe altogether agree but they differ in certaine circumstances 70. Question Shewe me therefore how they doe agree Answeare First of all they agree in the efficient cause For Christ our onely lawgiuer appoynted both these and them further they agree in the inwarde thing it selfe For Christe was that same tree of lyfe in Paradise that same Lambe slayne from the beginnyng of the worlde that same Paschall of the Fathers takyng away the sinnes of the worlde that same spirituall Rocke that same meate and drynke of the Fathers which thyng also is to be thought of those same types and figures and to bee short of all the olde Sacraments For very ryghtly and truelye sayeth Augustine in the six and twentie Treatise vppon Iohn that the Sacraments of the Fathers in respect of the signes were diuers from oures but concernyng the signification they were alyke They agree also in the worde concernyng the substaunce albeit the voyces be not the same For there is signified in the worde of institution that Christ and his gifts are offered vnto vs in either to the Fathers as to come but to vs which come already moreouer in both two there is found the selfe same instrument of applying him and the same Fayth in diuerse signes as the same Augustine saith in his 45. treatise vpon Iohn Also the selfe same end and effect is in both of them For Circumcision was both the signe and the seale of righteousnes by faith Rom. 4. 11. And the Fathers were circumcised in Christe with the circumcision of the heart made without handes Col. 2. 7. 71. Question But in what thinges differ they Answere Firste they differ in the signes by which I vnderstande the Sacramentall rytes them selues which we haue more spiritual fewer lesse laborsome further in the playnesse of the word which in ours is much more clearer whervpō also groweth another difference in the very measure of the efficacy and operation it selfe For the more playne and manifest the woorde is the more ought wee to be moued and therfore the more effectual ought our faith to be Wherto also belong the woordes of the selfsame Augustine that our Sacrament are fewer easier more significant and more full of Maiestie to which also that may bee added that these differ in this because they were instituted onely vntill the comming of Christe but ours shall take no end but with the worlde 72. Question If it bee so as thou sayest it appeareth vnto me that the state of the Fathers was mightier in twoo greate thinges then ours First because they had more then because they had more significant helpes of faith then wee Answeare But I pray thee whethers weakenesse of the bodie wouldest thou iudge to be greater his that hath need of two staies to vphold his going or his which leaning vpon one staffe doth easily goe anie whither Question Surely I woulde thinke him twofolde weaker then the other Answeare Euen so perswade thy selfe of the estate and condition of those fathers For the multitude of Sacraments sheweth not that theyr condition was the better but contrariwise that it was worse For neither should our faith if it were strong ynough of it selfe neede the Sacramentes 73. Question But certainly it seemeth that there was in those Sacramentes a more playne Analogie or proportion of the signes with the thinges signified For in very deede the flesh and blood of those slayne sacrifices did more playnely represent the fleshe and blood of Christe crucified then bread and wine and Manna falling downe from heauen did after a sorte more liuely set before our eies the incarnation of the word also the water flowing out of the opened rocke the blood of Christe flowing out of his wounded side then the breaking of bread the powring out of wine into the cup. Answeare In good sooth those not yet done but to be done ought to bee represented too the fathers by a more grosse proportion then vnto vs bicause that it is farre harder to beleeue thinges to come then already done and witnessed by a sure and playne historie Therefore as thou hast sayde those signes did signifie the thing to come more grossely palpably But in this thou art specially deceiued that thou thinkest the more grosse the Analogie or proportion is that the more significant it is Question Why so Answeare Because the thinges signified by the Sacramentes are heauenly which fleshe and bloode teache not but that same onely Maister of trueth the holie Ghost wherevppon all Beleeuers are sayde by Esay and by Christ himselfe Esay 5. 14. Iohn 6. 4 5. to be taught of GOD. Therefore the efficacie of the Analogie or proportion dependeth vppon the woorde whereby is sette foorth both what it is and whereto it tendeth Question Wilt thou bee so good as to sette downe some similitude whereby I may more fully vnderstand what this matter meaneth Answeare Verily I am very well content that also the mouthes of the Sophisters may be shut vp If thou beyng altogether ignorant of these mysteries shouldest see some circumcised what wouldest thou thinke of it Question Surely I would thinke the Parents to
be very cruell towardes their newe borne babe so that I shoulde vtterly detest them vnlesse I shoulde vnderstande their meaning to be otherwise Answeare But thou shouldst indeed vnderstand it if I shoulde shewe vnto thee that this were done by the commaundement of God But if so be also I shoulde declare vnto thee by the institution of God that by the foreskinne were signified our natural filthinesses and their fruits which that same sonne of GOD to be borne should take away by the shedding forth of his blood thou wouldest a great deale the rather cōtent thy selfe Notwithstāding thou wouldest desire being taught now the selfe same thing that the same might be shewed vnto thee after a more fit manner and with lesse danger of the infant Nowe if that same simple washing shoulde bee instituted in the place of that bloody cutting of the foreskinne thou wouldest sure preferre this condition before the other And the same reason is there of those slayne Sacrifices which were both laboursom and costly And concerning those same miraculous wonders to wit of Manna falling from Heauen and the water flowing foorth of the rocke these are to be rehearsed in the number of those same figures which were once shewed not amongst the Sacramentes which are perpetual against which our Sacraments are not to be set but the trueth perfourmed in Christe himselfe giuen vnto vs. Question I vnderstand that which thou sayest to wit that the more simple the proportion is the more playne the worde is whereby the signification it self is expressed the more excellent is our condition then our fathers But notwithstanding it seemeth that that same Analogie of the old Sacraments is more playne Answeare Neither doest thou in this point vnderstand what thou saiest For in very deed in circūcision thou seest nothing but the cutting of of the foreskin that is to say thou seest one onely part of the benefite of Christe shadowed And yet neyther ought the olde man onely too bee abolished but also the newe man too bee borne in vs neyther that onelie too be taken away which offended God but also that righteousnes to be geuen wherein he is delighted Now the very water of baptisme and the rites themselues doe they not declare eyther benefite muche more playner vntoo vs And so the difference also of our Fathers feastes and of ours is muche more euident Thou wilt saye that fleshe doth more expresly represent flesh then bread and the slaying of a sacrifice the slaying of Christ admyt it But to what end is Christ slayne vnto me vnles I be a partaker of him Surely no more then dainties set afore mee whereof notwithstandyng I shal not eate Therfore our Sacraments that first parte not altogether pretermitted but yet lesse curiously signified of which we are fully persuaded in the history of the Gospell doe set as it were liuely before our eyes that same other principall parte For in very deede the vse of bread is muche more to the nourishment of this lyfe then the vse of flesh and forasmuch as the life is in the blood and the Fathers were restrayned from all vse of blood which nowe wee are no lesse commaunded to drinke in the wyne Sacramentally then spiritually to eate fleshe in the bread who seeth not that our Sacramentes doe excell those same olde ones euen in the very signes and sacramentall rytes 74. Question Yet there remaineth another doubt howe it shoulde come to passe that the humayne nature of Christ not yet existing in deede shoulde for all that be the thing signified of the olde Sacramentes and so indeede that it shoulde be truely communicated vnto the Fathers Answeare What thinkest thou therefore that the Sacraments of the olde fathers signified For neyther doe I thinke that thou dost agree vnto them who wil haue thē to be certaine resemblances ioyned onely vnto earthly promises Question Surely I consent not vnto that vngodlines which transformeth the people of God into a stye of Hogges But I aske whether they thinke rightly enough who thinke those same giftes in Christ bestowed vppon the Church which if it lacke it cānot be a partaker of euerlasting life to bee promised and giuen also in the Sacramentes of the olde fathers but notwithstanding those were not yet giuen forth which as yet were not Answeare Surely thou doest wonderfully mollifie the harde opinion of these men But I doubt not too say with the Apostle that they did truely and indeed eate the same meate that we doe and dranke the same drinke to witte euen Christ himselfe 1. Cor. 10. 3. 4. GOD and man Question Howe so Answeare First because the Apostle plainely speaketh so Question Yea but the Apostle saieth not in such plaine woordes that the Fathers did eate the same meate that we eate or dranke the same drinke that wee doe but rather that they did eate the same amongest themselues albeeit with a farre other effecte as at this day aswell the Godly as the vngodly are partakers of the same Sacramēts but some to saluation and othersome to iudgement Answeare This Sophisticall startinghole is confuted by foure reasons Firste because that Argument of Sainte Paule were not strong enough if the Sacramentes shoulde bee made vnequall in substaunce and in verie deede Agayne because the Apostle pronounceth in playne and euident woordes that this meate it selfe and this drinke is Christ Thirdly because hee chaungeth the very names of the olde Sacramentes and of the newe attributing the newe vntoo the olde that hee may declare that same thing too bee both in the thing signified and in the vse Fourthly that thing playnely appeareth by the expresse woordes as well of others as also of Augustine in the 45. treatise vppon Iohn and in his Booke of the profite of repentaunce the 102. Iohn 1. 29. 1. Cor. 5. 7. Epistle and elsewhere But nowe if this thing agree vntoo the Figures muche rather is it too bee thought too agree vnto the Sacraments which are perpetuall and which are appoynted to signifie this one thing alone In which sense Iohn the Baptist sayde Beholde the Lambe of God which taketh away the sinnes of the worlde Paule Christ our Passeouer is offered vp 75. Question But what if I shoulde except that all these things signifie nothing else but the onely efficacie or vertue of Christ to come Answere Yea but his efficacie dependeth as wel of those things which Christ should suffer for our cause as of Christ himself Why therefore shouldest thou now bee more offended when I say that the very humane nature of Christ it selfe albeit then it were not notwithstanding that it was truely and indeede geuen vntoo the Fathers in the Sacramentes and sealed vppe in them then that the Fathers were iustified and in very deed sanctified in spirite by the righteousnes of his fleshe which yet was not borne For this is the whole summe of the benifites of Christe Furthermore when thou thinkest that the fathers were made partakers of those
made the Sacrament of the blood of Christ and breade the Sacrament of his bodie and wine also of his blood 38. Question But thou a little before diddest cal these partes Answeare I did so and not without cause For these twoo which are causes by themselues are also essentiall partes of the thinges as the Logicians doe very well teach 39. Question Nowe what are the endes of these Sacramentes Answeare Some chiefe endes to wit that Christ as I haue said with all his gifts may more more be sealed in vs othersome not so special as that by this badge also we shoulde bee distinguished from others that make not profession of the Christian faith should bee knit together more and more amongst our selues in mutuall loue 40. Question And is there no more Answeare Yes this also is to be added That the Sacraments are also remēbraunces of thinges past as in the ceremonies of baptisme the powring out of water doth set before our eyes as present the shedding forth of Christes blood the putting into water the cōming out his death burial resurrection also the breaking of bread in the Supper doth after a sort represēt vnto vs Christ crucified for vs. 41. Question These thinges being expounded I woulde gladly learne of thee what the knitting together of the signes the thinges signified is For thou art not ignorant that this controuersie is specially handled nowadaies Whether the body and blood of the Lord be really present yea or no that is in the same place where that bread and that wine is or whether the signes remain as some think or be abolished the accidēts onely remaining as they teache which consent with the Pope Answeare This controuersy is growen so whot and come so farre that for the deciding thereof we neede rather conscience then knowledge but the Lorde alone either by some wonderfull iudgement or some notable example of his mercie will decide it notwithstanding I will endeuour too make it playne when I shall come too speake of the Lordes Supper Now that I may answeare to that which is demanded I say that forasmuche as the thinges signified both in the simple woorde and in the Sacramentes be partly things not subsisting or standing by themselues as the forgiuenesse of sinnes the gift of sanctification the encrease of faith incorporation into Christ and suche like that the questiō of the real presence of the things signified must necessarily bee restrayned to some real beyng Now as I suppose no other can bee put but Christe himselfe And when they with whom wee agree not concerning this matter doe not themselues as I suppose think that Christ should bee deuided as those that complaine notwithstanding vndeseruedly that the same is done of vs because that we denie the reall presence of Christes bodie Doest thou thinke that the state of this question is so too bee taken Whether Christe GOD and man bee present in those places themselues where the Sacramentes are ministred Question So I haue read in some of theyr wrytinges who notwithstanding affirme this not generally of all Sacramentes but onely of the Lordes Supper Answeare I woulde not doubte too affirme the same both of the supper of the Lord and of Baptisme and also after a certayne manner of those Sacramentes which were before the comming of Christ into the Earth neither woulde I think my selfe a Christian if I should denie this 42. Question I am glad that we agree amongest our selues Answere God graunt that at length we may agree Therfore heare I pray thee It cannot be denied but that Christ according too his Godhead is euery where This likewise is without all controuersie that forasmuch as mans nature is so taken of the Woorde that GOD and Man are one reall beeyng it must needes followe if thou consider Christe as some one and singular thing that whole Christ is also euery where present and yet not as in the Sacramentes in which vndoubtedly there must be appoynted some peculiar and special manner of presence as I may so speak that they may be distinguished from other common thinges in which also hee is present The other thing that I would haue wel weighed of thee is this that which is spoken of the whole is not yet spoken of the singular parts being amōgst themselues of a diuerse kinde As for example All the whole that we call man we define to be partaker of reasō which yet thou wilte not say of no essentiall parte of man considered in it selfe And yet there is somewhat in this definition too witte reason which is attributed to that other parte of man euen to the soule Doest thou not see then that whole Christ that is Christ considered as a certaine whole and absolute thing is another thing then all belonging to Christ that is Christ whō thou shalt way particularly by his partes For in this case let it be lawful for me to atttribute also the name of a part to the Godhead 43. Question I see it very well but is there any more Answeare Yea I woulde haue this farther to be marked of thee that certain thinges doo so fitly serue for the establishing of some singuler thing that that which by no meanes can agree by it selfe to some one may yet be attributed vntoo it as it cleaueth is conioyned with another the which thing is so farre foorth true that it may also be sayde of those which yet but accidentally onely and for a time are ioyned together as for example when a King is crowned and is honored in his robes the crowne and his robes are also reuerenced but yet in respect of another thing to witte of his kingly dignitie wherof they are ornamentes not in respect of them selues For heereby it plainely appeareth that the honour and reuerence is not referred too those things because when the king hath put them off no man can endure to reuerēce them vnlesse he bee out of his wits but they are reuerenced for another to wit for the Kinges sake of whom they are worne Neither euer doth the crown or robes grow vp into one real being with the king Much more therefore shall some thing be said in respect of another which is ioyned personally with another which yet can by no meanes in respect of it selfe be attributed vnto it So there is attributed to the worde taking mans nature that which is peculiar to mans nature as when it is sayd that God suffered as also to maas nature Actes 20. 28. that which is peculiar to the woorde taking vpon it mans nature as when in mās nature at what time he talked with Nichodemus in the earth he sayd that Iohn 3. 13. he was in heauen Question These thinges thou hast handled before But thou diddest adde that this was spoken of certaine distinct woordes to witte of God and man But of the abstract to witte of the Godhead and manhoode not so Answeare Vnlesse this be so the confusion of the naturall
that same bread his bodie that same cup his blood where that same bread is called the communion of his body that same cup the communion of his blood doeth altogether shewe that bothe these sayinges are figuratiue or at least wise one of them too witte eyther that of Paule or that of Christ Question To wit that of Paule is to bee expounded out of the proper saying of Christ Answeare Therefore at the length thou arte brought too confesse that whosoeuer doeth mainteine and defende figures in the controuersie of the Sacraments doe not ouerthrowe the Testament of the Sonne of GOD. But to the matter It is easie too shewe out of our seuenth Argument and out of that that went next before that both these were figuratiue whether thou doe interprete that out of this or this out of that as for example both these Propositions This cup for this Wine is my blood and this wine is the communion of my bloode nowe the like is too bee thought of breade it is diuers from this this wine is the licour of the vine which notwithstanding thou must needes say is most proper and therefore so stoutly to bee maintened because as we haue saide ouerthrowing or taking away the substaunce of the signe the foundation of the analogy or proportion shoulde also bee taken away and ouerthrowen Question I would answeare that both Christ and Paule passed this ouer as a thing sufficiently knowen For to what purpose shoulde he haue taught his Disciples that that bread which he held in his handes was breade and that wine But vndoubtedly it behooued him to teach them that which otherwise they woulde neuer haue beleeued too witte that those thinges also which hee helde in his handes and gaue them in vnder or with Bread and Wyne was his body and his blood Answeare Therefore thou must needes determine that the figure Synecdoche is in these woordes This breade and this cuppe and therefore whilest thou studiest to auoyde figures thou fallest into a figure But we will way this Synecdoche in his place to wit when we shal come too the confutation But thou in the meane time shalt not so escape For with what manner and with how great coniunction soeuer thou shalte couple those two vnlike thinges in themselues indeede togeather suche as are the bread and the body wine and the blood yet notwithstanding thou shalte neuer bring to passe that the one may properly be sayd to be the other No neyther in the coniunction can one be sayde to be the other but eyther of them must bee made a certayne thirde thing Therefore this at the least must bee a proper proposition in or vnder or with this bread and wine is my body blood It remayneth therefore that thou confesse that both this saying of Christe and that of Paule whether thou interprete this out of that or that out of this be figuratiue 230. Question Howe therefore doest thou thinke this place of Paule shoulde bee expounded Answeare First of all they are to be confuted who take the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth common for distribution which the matter it selfe cryeth out too be most absurd forasmuch as bread and wine are substances but distribution is an action and Paule himselfe expounding that vseth a woorde that signifieth to participat and the scope it selfe of the Apostle requireth that it declare a communion and not a distribution Moreouer it is woonder that they who allowe no trope in the matter of the Sacramēt that they can in this place interpret the cōmunicating of the body for the bodie communicated or distributed that is cā confound the action with the effect For neither in good sooth doe they this well because they referre this distribution to the word of breaking as though Paule had written the bread which we distribute is the body cōmunicated For the word of breking ought to be taken properly in this action as wee haue shewed before and it appeareth by the word he gaue which is added to the woorde hee brake in the narration of the Euangelist Question What therefore thinkest thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be called Answeare Commmunion and felowship which is the true signification of his word it differeth somwhat frō 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Chrysost noteth although Paule vseth the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indifferently one for the other Such as the Communion is therefore that is to say the naturall societie of all men in the common nature of flesh blood as between themselues with Christ himselfe such is the communion by the goodnesse of God betwixt al the faithful Christ into whom they are engraffed and incorporated Question But by what maner of speach may that breade bee said to be that same felowship and communion Answeare With the Logitians it is called a causall affirmation whereby the proper effect is attributed to the proper cause whether it bee materiall or efficient which manner or fashion is to be referred to the fourth maner of affirming by it selfe as they speake in the schooles Now a figuratiue speach is when the effect is put for the cause or else forsooth for the very efficient cause as for example when Christ is called the resurrection the life for the rayser and giuer of life or the cause of resurrection life or for the materiall cause as when Paule sayeth You are my glory or reioycing the is to say the matter of my glory or reioycing or for the instrumental which also is it self efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say being as it were an vnder seruer as when the Gospel is said to be the power of God to saluation that is to say the instrument that God vseth effectually too saue vs. So also in this place that same Breade and that same wine are sayde to be that communion that is to say the instrumentes whereby that same consociation and felowship of ours is wrought and ratified in vs. Now this same instrument is sacramentall or rather symbolicall and not the verye efficient cause which is the holy Ghost Therefore as that same figuratiue proposition of Christe This bread is my body is expoūded by this This bread is sacramental my bodie so also this saying of Paul This bread is the communication of my bodie is to be expounded by this proper This bread is the Sacramental instrument of our consociation and felowship with the bodie of Christ For there the figure is onely in the Copulatiue that knitteth the matter together to wit a Sacramental Metonymie or translation but heere also in the attribute is a figure which they call Metalepsis too witte putting the effecte for the cause 231. Question But canst thou besides bring forth any other argumentes Answeare Yea that can I. And first of all that same from the essentiall and constituting fourme of all the Sacramentes which is in summ that they may consist of the
signe and the thing signified or as Irenaeus speaketh of an earthly and heauenly thing But nowe neyther can that that is signified be spoken of the signe nor the signe of the thing signified but by the figure of Metonymie and therefore the propositions of the first kinde are declared by the verbe signifieth vnderstand of the sacramental signification to which also the giuing or ministration is alwayes adioyned but the latter by the Verbe Passiue as this breade is my bodye that is This breade sacramentally signifieth my bodie my bodie is this breade that is my bodie sacramentally is signified by this bread Now that this is the essentiall fourme of all sacramēts it appeareth by the verie name of sacramentes as witnesseth Augustine in these woordes in his 5. Epistle It were ouerlong saith hee to dispute of the varietie of signes which when they belong to holy thinges are called sacraments It appeareth also by this that that is common to all sacraments As in the tree of life in that it is a sacrament there is considered the outward thing and the signe the visible plant the spiritual heauenly thing Iesus Christ life In the tree of the knowledge both of good and euell a naturall plant also and the experience of good and euill in Circumcision the cutting off the foreskinne and the taking away of sinne the imputation of righteousnes and regeneration in the passeouer the Lambe and Christ in the rock of the desert the rocke and Christ pouring out bloode in the Baptisme of the cloude the cloudes and the sea and the blood of Christ in Manna breade giuen by miracle and the flesh of Christ In the Sabboth the seauenth day with ceasing from woorke and the mortification of the flesh and euerlasting life In the Sacrifices the offering slayne and the oblation of Christ made by himselfe in the Sanctuarie the entrance intoo into the Temple and heauen in the Tabernacle the woorke made with hand and the bodie of Christ in the Cherub in the Images ouer the Arke and the Angelles in the propitiatory or mercie seate the gilded couering and Iesus Christ So in the appearing of the doue the doue and the holy Ghost in baptisme water with washing and the blood of Christ washing vs in the fierie tongues the naturall fire and the holy Ghost Finally euen so in the Supper of the Lorde breade and wine the signes and the body and bloode our Lorde the thinges Sacramentally signified Question But manie of these are rather types then Sacramentes Answeare Admitte it be so yet this notwithstanding is the fourme of all symbolicall speeches concerning God Therefore in the verie writings of the Apostles they are called Signes Seales Types Figures parables shapes resemblances And of the Fathers also besides that they are called figures they are called mysteries types significations similitudes darke speeches and mysticall Symbolles and by suche like names Question What doest thou therefore conclude of all these Answeare That neyther the thing signified can be sayde of the signe nor the signe of the thing signified otherwyse then by translation and that that is so vsuall in the scriptures as that they neuer in a maner speake otherwise 232. Question But the Supper of the Lorde hath a certaine proper and speciall fourme which maketh that the same is not too bee thought of that whiche is to bee thought of the other Sacraments Answeare Albeit that this specially belong vnto those confutations which I woulde differ to their proper place notwithstanding that the force of the former argument may appeare more clearely go too let vs speake somewhat also nowe cōcerning this matter Indeede I graūt that the Supper of the Lorde hath his peculiar fourme whereby it differeth from the rest aswell olde as newe Sacramentes But to what ende is this For these fourmes which are called discerning fourmes because they doe discerne the specials of the same generall they doe not take away the constituting in which of necessitie all the specialls must be constituted that they may bee referred to the common general So for example sake a liuing creature is the common essential fourme and substance of all fourmes perteyning to that gender Now reason is the fourme whereby man is sundred from all other kindes of liuing creatures Nowe wilt thou say that this same speciall fourme doth bring to passe that that same generall to wit liuing creature should not be layde altogether by the same reason of man and of other liuing creatures And I pray thee how if that which is called differentia or proprium for nowe I doe not distinguish betwixt these should altogether take away the same attribution of gender should the distinction consist of gender and difference Therfore that same speciall difference of the lords Supper whatsoeuer it be can not bring to passe that that same common reason which maketh a Sacrament altogether by the same meane should lesse be spoken of the Lords Supper then of other Sacramentes Nowe that same common reason as we haue shewed is that the outwarde signe should signifie another thing sacramentally Nowe nothing is a signe of it selfe forasmuch as a signe is in the kynde of those thinges which are conferred with another therfore that same remaineth common without exception to all Sacraments that the thing signified is not the signe because these two must bee in very deede and therefore the thing signified can not be sayde of the signe but transitiuely But furthermore here I will demaund of thee what manner of difference thou makest this to be Question One in the Subiect an other in the attribute the third in the very meanes of the attribution Answeare And what in the Subiect Question Because the Elements of the Supper of the Lorde are diuers from the Element of Baptisme Answere Be it so But what in the Attribute Question Because the bodie and blood of our Lord are the signified thinges of the Supper of the Lord. Answeare Thou art deceyued For in Baptisme also the blood of the Lorde is the thing signified But what in the attribution Question Because onely the Elements of the Lordes Supper are sayde in the words of the institution to be the very body and the very blood of our Lord. Answeare And what wylt thou conclude thereof Question Forsooth that in Baptisme the very blood of Christ is not present and giuē but onely the fruit of the blood shead but that in the Supper the body it self and the blood it selfe is present and offered to the mouth it selfe Answeare Whether these thinges are truely sayde or no we will see in theyr place But I pray thee doest thou not marke that thou playest the Sophister Question Why so Answeare Because thou chaungest the questions For wee did not demaund whether the matter of the Lordes Supper and of other Sacramentes were one and the same but whether in another kynde of attribution that same matter of the Lordes Supper whether it bee onely the fruite or it be Christ himselfe
some wil seme so altogether of the spirit that they despise all outward things as grosse others againe beleue nothing in a maner vnles they may fele handle it with their hands But they that wil heare God first speking by his prophets then by his Apostles shal go to neither side But herof we shal see more hereafter that al things may be hādled in their fit place In few words therfore thus I answeare thee Although God teach vs spiritual euerlasting thinges inwardly by his spirit notwithstanding he semeth to haue set this law vnto him self to teach vs the same by the senses which are giuen vs vnlesse it be when he would worke any thing extraordinarily in his children Now there are fiue senses as it were the messengers of the minde too wit seeing hearing tasting smelling feeling Of these God hath made speciall choice of two too wit seeyng and hearing of which I woulde gladly learne of thee whether thou thinkest to excell the rest Question I thinke Seeing whose place aboue the rest seemeth to bee vnspeakeable Answeare Thou art greatly deceaued For albeit the sighte seeme by kinde as it were too drawe nearest the verye nature of the mynde it selfe aswell for the swiftnes of the eyes as for theyr sharpnesse in beholding things yet notwithstanding forasmuche as thou canst see nothing but that which is to be seen and as a mā would say sightable in those things themselues which are seene the most notable things cānot be seene but in mind and there are more things infinitely which cannot bee beholden then which may be seen with the eyes to be short seing whatsoeuer is conceaued in the mind may by the sound of words for soūd is appointed to teach the mind by the eares after some sort bee expressed It followeth that hearing by infinite oddes is a more profitable instrumēt then seing for the knowing of those thinges that are conceaued in the minde Question I came that I might heare a diuine not a naturall Philosopher Answeare When thou knowest to what end these words tēd thou shalt wel vnderstād the I do not any whit at all decline from the scope and end of a Diuine And if it be a wicked thing for them that speake of Diuine thinges too touche anye thing of naturall Philosophie then then thou must of necessitie blotte out in a manner al the woorde of GOD. Deniest thou therefore that there is greater vse of the eares thē of the eies for the knowledge of thinges Question No not so verily seeing we learn euerie thing by hearing and onely behold thinges that are sightable or to be seen neither are we cunning in thē vnlesse we be by hearing taught of others both what and what maner of things they are But whereto tende these thinges Answeare That thou shouldest knowe that when God appointed to teach man concerning that same secret will of his in the knowledge whereof consisteth all our saluation he chose out frō amongest all the other senses that of hearing as most fitte for that purpose by which faith cōmeth and therefore Rom. 10. righteousnesse and life as the Apostle teacheth And her of is that same authoritie and worthines of the woord of God so oftentimes witnessed in the holy Scriptures Question But in vaine is it vttered to them that are deafe And thou hast taught in thy former treatise that we are altogither by nature vnapt to heare the woord of God Answeare Now truely any man may very wel heare that is indued with the sense of hearing and also may vnderstand the meaning of those things he hath heard neither is he deuoyd of reason But in good earnest to agree and consent to these things so heard and vnderstoode as right and true no man can doe it but by the peculiar grace of the holy Ghost which notwithstanding is giuen to many Reprobates for their farther iudgement To conclude for a man to apply the promise of saluation in Christ particularly to himself which is the verie propertie of faith this is onely giuen to the elect which gift wee call the regenerating grace This foundation being layde in deede the woord of God is not preached to them that are deafe GOD giuing vs eares to heare and as Saint Luke saith opening our heartes that wee might apply through fayth vnto our selues those thinges vnderstood with our eares which flesh and blood teacheth not 5. Question I see not yet howe these thinges should belong vnto the Sacramēts Answeare Yea but I haue sayde before that God to the end he might certifie vs of his good will in sauing vs hath also chosen the sense of seeing which was the cause of instituting the sacraments Question But seeing these same euerlasting and heauenly benefits which are set foorth vnto vs in the holy scriptures to be layde hold vpon by fayth in Christ are spirituall they cannot be seene but in minde yea and Christ himselfe cannot nowe bee seene by any carnall eyes Answeare Thou sayest verie true But GOD hath found out a way whereby hee might in a manner set these thinges before our eyes yea which were of them selues inuisible and were for the greatest part as I may say not to be vnderstood Nowe that thou mayst see this matter more plainly I will not stick to vse a distinction vsed of that same Dionysius whosoeuer he were He sayth therfore that partly the doctrine wherby god deliuereth vnto vs those same holy thinges is cleare applied to our knowledge as whē this or that is spokē vnto vs in vsual knowne wordes partly darckly and mystically spoken which also he calleth symbolical that is which is so after a certaine sort taught that it doth not by by set forth those thinges naked to be vnderstood but as it were leadeth vs about by certaine thinges enterlaced and wrapped vp And that it is so the holy Scriptures plainely shew as we will anon declare 6. Question Are therefore some principles of Christian doctrine plainlyer and some darkelyer taught of God in the Church Answeare Surely in this point many haue greeuously offended because they translated those thinges to the things themselues that belonged to the forme and maner of teaching as though forsooth he taught I cannot tell what part of heauenly wisdome to be necessarie to saluatiō to the common sort another part to belong I cannot tell to what more perfect men 7. Question Doest thou say therefore that no other thinge is taught of God by the eyes or in the sacraments then that which is perceiued by the eares or by the simple word Answere I say that these differ not in the thinges themselues that are taught but in the manner of teaching 8. Question But to what purpose was it to adde that symbolical and obscurer manner of teaching to that simple and plaine kinde if no other thing be taught in that then in this Answere Yea rather that which thou thinkest to be the harder is the
euerlasting life 21. Question And what are those same thinges signified Answeare Christ himselfe as I haue sayde before with all his benefites necessary to the saluatiō of the particular members of the Church 22. Question And why doest thou adde that worde spiritually Answeare That I may shew the sealing of these thinges to depende vppon the heauenly power and mysticall vertue of the holy Ghost and not vpon the bodily vnderstanding or outwarde senses or vpon that naturall and sensitiue vnderstanding 23. Question Why dost thou adde by faith Answeare First that I may teach that indeede the signes are set forth vnto the outward senses and are receiued of them but the thinges themselues are offered too the minde and yet notwithstanding are not receiued of euery minde albeit they be offred to the mind of al that come to the Sacraments but onely are receaued of that minde that is indued with fayth because faith is the onely instrument of receiuing Christ 24. Question But why doest thou make mention of things past Answeare Because our faith looketh partely too those thinges which Christ for our sake hath performed partly it beholdeth the promises which are not yet fulfilled in vs. 25. Question What callest thou Healing Answeare A more effectuall application by the increase of faith For the greater Faith is the more excellent is the effect therof that Christ with his gifts may be as it were more and more engrauen in vs whereto the Apostle hauing regarde he saith that Christ groweth vp in vs we againe in him 26. Question But what is that same naturall establishment of our felowship in Christ Answeare So I cal that same spiritual knotte of loue whose bond is in the right vse of the Sacramentes strongly tyed as it were of members knit vntoo the same head quickened by the same spirit aswell by outward profession as by the accesse of the inward affection 27. Question Say therefore what is the efficient cause of our Sacraments Answeare Christ God man according to his own good wil power which he testifieth in prescript wordes by the mouth of the minister 28. Question And what is the matter Answeare The matter of the Sacramentes is two fold one earthly the other heauenly as Ieremias witnesseth which a man may also cal essētial parts For in very deede whatsoeueuer is in the Sacrament either it offereth it selfe to the outward sēses so is considered as a signe or els it is a spirituall or a heauenly thing and so is signified by that outward 29. Question What thou diddest meane by the name of signe thou hast saide before but what doest thou call the spiritual and heauenly thing Answeare I call the heauenly thing chiefly Christ himselfe then his benefites and last of all the application both of himselfe and of them vnto vs. Question Goe to then let vs speake of these three seuerally wilte thou not as I suppose vnderstande by the name of Christ the alone power and operatiō of Christ flowing intoo vs and much more also that his only righteousnes which by imputation is made ours Answeare Thou iudgest aright for Christ himselfe must become ours and must bee ioyned vnto vs as in whom are al these things that we may draw those things from him that are in him and that appeareth plainly by the proportion For thou canst not be washed vnlesse water be applyed and thou canst not be fedde but by taking meate and drinke Question But as I gesse thou vnderstandest Christ wholly and not eyther his Diuinitie alone or his soule alone or his body alone Answeare I vnderstand whole Christe and all that belongeth to Christ For Christ beyng diuided cannot be a Sauiour 30. Question And is there any difference in these Answeare Yea indeed that there is whereof we will speake afterwardes Question Goe to let vs leaue this nowe But if the matter be so why dost thou vnderstande Christ by the name of that spirituall and heauenly matter Doest thou it in respect of his Diuinitie or Soule Answeare No not so For thou seest in the Sacraments mētion to be made expressely of the blood and of the body and againe of the blood which as they are of a bodily nature so also they are represented by bodily signes to wit by water bread and wine 31. Question And why dost thou cal that thing spirituall and heauenly Answeare Not because they are of a spirituall inuisible substance or bicause they are now endued with heauenly glory as the Apostle saith that our bodies shal be spirituall heauenly to wit in glory not in substance but because they are sette foorth in these mysteries not to our bodily senses after a bodily maner For neither can our bodily senses doe otherwise but as the words teach to be beholden in minde and to be laid hold vppon by the hand of fayth 32. Question These are then but mysteries in imagination Answeare So I see some gather but howe vndeseruedly they so conclude I will then shewe when I shall come to that question How we may be partakers of those thinges signified Question Therfore let vs come to that other part to wit to the benefits of Christ which therefore are they Answeare These are declared of vs in the former treatise But they both may and ought keping the Analogie or proportion of the signes and thinges signified be brought to two certayne heades too wit to washing away and too nourishment whereof that is established in the mysterie of Baptisme and this in the mysterie of the Lordes Supper 33. Question And what callest thou washing away Answeare The forgiuenesse of sinnes in place wherof succedeth the obediēce of Christ and the abolishing that is begon of the corruption of nature to which sanctification now begon in vs is opposed 34. Question And what callest thou nourishing Answeare The growth as it were and increase of these 35. Question Now there remaineth the thirde which thou diddest call the applying of these benefites Answeare So I call that same as it were a certayne insinuation which is by the power of the holy Ghoste woorking in vs but is signified by Sacramentall not vaine and vnprofitable rites to wit by the bodily washing through the putting into the water and comming out agayne and also as well by the bodily both eating of breade and drinking of wine 36. Question But what is the forme of the sacraments Answeare Euen that same outwarde action duely and lawfully obserued and also that inwarde action of the holy Ghost 37. Question But doeth this forme change the substance of the signes Answeare No not so For they should cease too be signes if they were changed into any other substaunce because the Analogie or proportion wherein consisteth the whole consideration of the Sacramēts shoulde perishe There is therefore a Sacramentall chaunge but not a substantiall that is not consisting in the chaunge of the thing it selfe but in the vse thereof changed as when water is
application or communicating to be meere spirituall and mysticall 58. Question Why doest thou call it spirituall Answere First that I may shut out all touching of the bodie of Christ with our bodie all locall coherence and existing together and to cōclude that mōstruous opiniō of eating with the mouth as meere Cyclopicall howsoeuer it bee excused with other no lesse fained deuises of not beingseen being without place Next because this pertaking in respect of vs is wrough by the onely hand and mouth of the minde and of faith For this is the meate as Augustine hath verie wel sayd not of the belly but of the minde 59. Question But why doest thou call it mysticall Answeare That I may teach that this knitting together wherby we are made fleshe of his flesh and bones of his bones to witte by a certaine spirituall mariage dooth depend of the only power of the almightie spirt altogether secret and incomprehensible to vs which also knitteth nearely together things most farre asunder Ephe. 5. 30. 32. Therein following the stepps of the Apostle who cryeth out that this is a great misery 60. Question And why also callest thou that communicating an vniting knitting togeather Answeare Because the whole Scripture witnesseth that we must be made one with Christ that we must be incorporated into Christ beknit to him as mēbers to the heade so that he may liue in vs and we in him Now this connexion wee affirme to bee not onely of a certaine consent as when Luke writeth Actes 24. 31 that the heartes and soules of the beleeuers was one but also natural or as Cyril hath very wel writtē that so must be vnderstood the communion of Christ himselfe 61. Question Canst thou shadow out vnto mee after some sort by some fitte similitude this mysterie otherwise incomprehensible Answeare Yes verily that I can euen out of the same similitude of the head and members so vsual with the Apostle I besech thee therefore whēce haue these armes their naturall sense and moouing Surely euen from the heade to which they are knit after a naturall manner as it were by ioyutes sinewes and artiries which otherwise shoulde become deuoyd of all motion and feeling Now imagine with thy selfe that euen as boxes of sweet smelling oyntment doe euen pierce things verie farre of and the secrete Magnes is a stone that hathe the propertie to draw yron vnto it force of the Magnes preuayleth against yron though it be remoued far frō it so is there so much liuely strength in this my heade that although it were at Constantinople and one of myne armes in India and another in Spaine yet notwithstanding by the help of these same fitte and conueniēt ioyntes it is able to giue them life imagine I saye some such thing with thy selfe and thou shalt haue the lyuely Image of this our incorporation into Christe For Christ him selfe according too the fleshe neyther nowe placed any other where then aboue these heauens intoo which hee hath ascended according to the fleshe by a physicall and naturall moouing neyther shall come agayne from thence before that same last day doth so truely and effectually knyt couple and ingreffe into him self al beleeuers placed here in this earth by that same diuine power of his woorking in the matter which is hindered by no distāce of place the afterwards out of his flesh in which life it self dwelleth bodily and which hath not receiued the spirite by measure that same liuely iuice might flowe into vs beleeuing in him 62. Question Therefore there is no neede either of any locall motion or touching or to be short of any placing of the humaine nature of Christ in the earth for this knitting of vs the members vnto our heade Christ neither doth this same communicating of Christ himself tend to this that ther should bee a commixture and mingling of substances but that out of Christ himselfe spiritually so ioyned vnto vs that same quickning power of his should flow into vs. Answeare Fye away I say with al those false and foolish tryfles 63. Question But why doest thou rather make mentiō of the flesh then of the Godheade in this coniunction or knitting togeather Answeare I doo not this as though the God head did nothing here when as contrawise in very deede the very fleshe of Christ simply and considered in it selfe as it is fleshe dooth not quicken vs but because as the Fathers very wittily speake it is the flesh of the woord But in this I follow Christ the Maister expresly repeating the names of his fleshe and bloode in this mysterie of our coniunction with him because we cannot be ioyned with him but by reason of his humaine nature and in asmuch as he is our brother 64. Question But like as thou sayst that this meat is receiued of vs onely by the mynde endued with fayth shall we likewyse thinke that the fruite of this vnion dooth onelye belong vnto the minde Answeare No not so For Christ beyng layde hold vpon of vs by faith in this life doth bestowe vpon vs all good benefites aswell of the bodie as of the minde as many and asmuch as we haue neede of and at the length will also giue vnto vs wholy euerlasting life 65. Question But doest thou restrayne this our vniting with Christ to the only mystery of the Lordes supper as some do Answeare Be it farre from vs. For both in the simple woorde and also in eyther Sacrament albeit in an vnlike proportion neyther equall effect vnlesse our vnbeliefe doe let it whole Christ is offered vnto vs too bee layde holde vpon spiritually by faith so farre is it off that wee shutte Christ out of the Lords Supper as diuers doe sclaunder vs. 66. Question Doest thou thinke then that there is no difference betwixt that dayly partaking of Christ through fayth and that which is made in the Lordes supper Answeare Yea I thinke that there is greate difference vnlesse vnbeliefe let it betwixt that which I call meere spirituall that which is sayd to be sacramentall and yet notwithstanding not concerning the thing it selfe neyther in respect of the instrument of fayth but in this because there onely by the woorde but here also by visible signes our fayth is admonished and the thing signified is sealed Moreouer this partaking excelleth the woorde in this that the simple worde for the most part is vniuersally sette foorth vntoo the people but the Sacramentes are giuen vntoo euerie singular person as it were by the hande of GOD himselfe which thing dooth woonderfully profit vnto that same particular and full perswasion that ought to be in euery one 67. Question 67. Question But doest thou thinke that Christe in like sort was set foorth vnto our olde fathers before his comming into the fleshe and all his benefites aswell in the simple worde as in the types and Sacramentes ioyned to the worde also to bee apprehended and layde holde off by fayth Answeare I
the same Rocke But what will they doe with these wordes of Saint Augustine in his 45. Treatise vppon Iohn Loe the signes changed Fayth remaining there Christ is the Rocke to vs Christ is that same that is set foorth vpon the Altar and if thou looke vppon the visible fourme it is another thing but if vpon the sensible signification they dranke the same spiritual drinke And in the 102. Epistle some tyme the thyng which signifieth taketh the name of that thing which it signifieth For so the rocke was Christ because it signifieth Christ To conclude the same interpreteth the spiritual Rocke mentioned in the 77. Psalme not Christ him selfe as they doe but suche a Rocke as shoulde signifie some spiritual thing Question Therefore proceede on Answeare So to conclude that bread is sayde to bee the body giuen for vs and that same cuppe to be the blood shead for vs. Question But who doth so expound this Answeare Amongest the rest Theodoret in his Eranista by expresse wordes wherof we shall entreate more at large in his proper place 81. Question And is there any more Answeare The third kinde of figuratiue sacramentall speache is that whereby the effect of the thing signified is attributed to the outwarde signes or instrumentes So it is sayde that the tree of life was planted in Paradise and the tree of the knowledge both of good and euill And yet was neyther life nor knowledge in those same trees as if thou shouldest cal a tree the Ague which either causeth an Ague or els driueth it away but those same trees were onely the effectuall signes of these same effectes By the same figure Circumcision is called the couenant whereof onely it was a signe as God him self expoundeth it Gen. 17. 11. 14. And that same cupp is called the newe Testament in his blood Luke 22. 20. So Baptisme is called the washing of regeneration Tit. 3. 5. So the Church is sayde to bee purged by the washing of water Ephes 5. 26. So the outward worde which being onely the Chariot as it were of the diuine power is in many places sayd to be the word of life and the incorruptible seede and to it is attributed both clensing and sanctification So the sacrifices are in many places called attonements when notwithstanding the very blood of Goates and Oxen cannot sanctifie any So also the priests themselues are sayde to sanctifie and to make an attonement for sinnes Leuit. 16. 30. When as it onely belongeth vnto God to forgiue sinnes and to make cleane So the Ministers of the Gospell are sayde to binde and to lose Matth. 18. 18. And to forgiue sinnes Iohn 20. 25. yea also to saue them selues to saue others 1. Tim. 4. 16. Of which matter if it please thee thou mayest see Augustine in his booke of questions vppon Leuiticus Chapter 84. 82. Question Is there yet remayning any other kinde of sacramentall figures Answeare There remayneth the fourth quyte contrary to that same third kynde wherby it is brought to passe on the contrary that that which is proper vnto the fignes is drawen vnto the thing signified And hereof commeth that same inwarde Circumcision or of the hearte So the fleshe or the bodie of the sonne of man is said to be eaten and his blood to be dronke which beyng bodily actions can not bee vnderstoode otherwyse then improperly of the thing signified that is to say of Christ him selfe offered either in the simple worde or in the Sacramentes least as Saint Augustine very well sayeth a foule and haynous thyng to wyt the sauadge and barbarous eatyng of mans fleshe seeme to bee commaunded And heereof come these same vsuall maner of speeches so often in the Fathers wherein it is sayd that the body of our Lorde lyeth vppon the Altar yea also that it is seene handled goeth into the mouth is made falleth vpon the grounde is consumed 83. Question Therefore makest thou it a metaphoricall bodie and a metaphoricall Supper Answeare In deede suche are the filthy slaunders of certaine men which we wil confute in their proper place For nowe I entreate generally of the Sacraments In meane tyme knowe this that wee neyther fayne any other bodie to Christ then that same true body giuen for vs nor transforme that same most holy action into those same monstrous Chimeres but onely wee say this followyng the proportion of Fayth that that same very partakyng of Christ him selfe which is altogether of the mynd and of Faith for this is the meate of the mynd not of the belly is not properly but metaphorically declared by those same bodily actions of eating and drinking 84. Question Then is it all one with thee to beleeue and spiritually to eate Christ Answeare Thou causest me yet againe to stray from my purpose If thou take to beleeue for the very action of fayth it self I consent vnto thee But if thou take it for the very habite of fayth then euen like as thou doest distinguish the teethe the instrument of eating from the eating it selfe so it must needes bee that thou discerne fayth it selfe from that apprehension of Christ through fayth which is the spirituall eating Question Proceede on Answeare I haue nowe finished those thinges which belong vnto those same Sacramentall fourmes of speaking aswell those that are proper as those that are figuratiue 85. Question But when thou shalt say that the Sacramentes were added vnto the simple word to the end the more plainly to shew foorth the promises many men meruaile that these figuratiue speeches are vsed in the Sacramentes in which the speech ought rather to be most proper and most plaine least any should be deceiued Answeare Here I pray thee marke what bold rashnesse the spirite of error hath in sclaundering and what power it hath when it pleaseth God in perswading For these men affirme that the figuratiue speeches are more obscure then those that are proper but contrarywise they themselues also teach giue manie preceptes concerning this matter that Oratours doe verie well vse figures not too darken but to set out and make more playne their speeche Now they are verie well vsed when they both adorne that that wee woulde haue spoken with a certaine dignitie and grace and better infixe it in the mindes of the hearers then if any man should vse a plaine and simple speeche Now forasmuch as the Sacraments are therefore instituted that they may leade our vnderstanding too an other thing which by Gods ordinance they signifie from that which they are by nature or rather that I may vse the words of S. Augustine against Maximinus Lib. 3. cap 18. that wee marke not what they are but what they set out and shewe because they are signes of thinges shewing one thing and signifying another who seeth not that the nature and vse of the Sacramentes is much better fixed in the minde of the hearer when the signes are sayd to bee the thing it selfe that they signifie Let vs set
Christ 221. Question Wilt thou also rehearse the eight Answeare If that same bread be properly the bodie of Christe then it shoulde sease to bee bread forasmuch as these twoo thinges are wholly in kinde vnlike But if it cease to be bread now the sacrament shall not consist of these two thinges one earthly and the other heauenly vnlesse thou call the earthly shadowes that is to say accidences without a subiect But these being ouerthrowne the proportion of substances shal be also ouerthrowne therefore the whole reason of a sacramēt shal be ouerthrowne It must needes bee therefore that that breade be called the body of Christ figuratiuely But now I come to the other ranke of argumentes to witte drawen from those wordes which goe before and followe those former This is my bodie and from the circumstaunces and conferences of other places of the Scrypture 222. Question Tell the first Answeare I say out of the former woordes too wit he tooke and brake that this is playne that that which he tooke coulde not properly of Christe hee called his owne bodie as of whom it coulde not bee sayde that hee tooke helde and brake himselfe to himselfe but as one that gaue and brake the breade of hys body receiued in too his handes to his Disciples manifestly beholding him Therfore August that he might mollisie that same sacramental Metonymia he sayde that Christ did after a certaine sort beare himselfe in his owne handes namely least it shoulde seeme to bee a vayn Sacrament the name of the thing signified is geuen vntoo the signe The same also is to be thought of the cup as wee shall shew in his proper place into which vndoubtedly Christ had neuer yet powred foorth that same blood of his conteyned in his body 223. Question Tell the other Answeare If the body should properly be spokē of the bread and the blood of the wine then the words folowing should properly also be spoken of the bread which is geuen for you which is shedde for you both which is most false 224. Question Rehearse the thirde Answeare By that that is added Do this in the remembrance of me it is playne that the body is not properly so called of the bread nor the blood of the wine because they were there present together in the same place whereas bread wine were Nowe remembrance is not of thinges present but of thinges absent Therfore Bernard in his 33. sermō vppon the Canticles disputing of the selfe same thing opposeth Faith and the shewe that is that that is seene with the eyes and also remembrance and presence 225. Question Shew the fourth argument Answeare The same appeareth playnely by those woordes that are added 1. Cor. 11. 16. As often as yee shall doe this yee shall shewe foorth the Lordes death till hee come Verily hee that shall come is not yet come or if hee bee nowe properly come these mysteries are no longer to be celebrated Now all these thinges followe not onely if the bread be properly the bodie but also if within or vnder the Bread and Wyne hee bee present in the selfe same place where there is bread and wine 226. Question Declare the fift Answeare So I gather it from the Circumstaunce of the time At what time the Lorde sayde of that wine This is my blood which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes as yet it was not shedde foorth out of the vessell of the bodie of Christ neyther euer after is it read to be gathered in any vessel Therfore in that cuppe then there was not properly that blood of Christ shedde for vs betweene the handes of the tormentours neither nowe also is it Muche lesse therfore was that wine thē or now is that same blood properly shed for vs. But that same proposition is figuratiue which testifieth vnto vs that wee truely and spiritually through faith are partakers of Christ himselfe and of his passion and of all other his giftes 227. Question Declare the sixth Answeare I gather also by that that Chrysostome hath written that Christ hymselfe was a Partaker of those signes Hom. in Matth. 83. But if his body shoulde be spoken properly of that bread which Christ did eate and his blood of that Wine which Christ dranke then shoulde Christ properly eate and drinke himselfe 228. Question Shew the seuenth Answeare I geather out of other places of the scripture that this is not a proper proposition For as often thinges vnlike are attributed to the same subiect it must needes be that some of these be taken properly and some figuratiuely which I set foorth by examples thus The Gospell is called the power of God to saluation Rom. 1. 16. And in the beginning of the same chapter it is called the doctrine reuealed from aboue concerning the Sonne of God which two forasmuche as they are diuerse it must needes bee vnderstoode that one bee spoken properly and the other figuratiuely It is geathered not darkely out of Iohn the 17. 3. that Fayth is the knowledge of the true God of Iesus Christ whereby we are saued The same is defined also to be the groūd of those things which are not Therefore one of these Heb. 11. 1. must needs be spoken poperly the other figuratiuely Iohn is not Elias Iohn 1. 21. And he is that Elias that shal come Mat. 11. 14. Therfore in one of those we must needs grant that there is a figure It is playne that Herode was properly a man The same also is called a Foxe one of these therefore must be vnderstoode to be spoken figuratiuely Of which infinit examples might be alleaged yet notwithstāding these are not alleaged by me as though they were to be expounded by the same figure but to shew that that I haue sayd is true to wit as often as vnlike thinges are spoken of the same Subiect the one of them must bee a proper attribution the other figuratiue But the cup that is to say the wyne conteyned in the cup is sometime saide to be blood sometime saide to bee the Testament in blood and yet notwithstanding it is plaine that the selfe same is properly the licoure of the Wine as it is called of Christe It is not therefore properly mans blood and much lesse also it is properly the last Testament of ones wyll that shall dye but it is called blood because it is the Sacrament of his blood whereby that same couenaunt or Testament of the remission of sinnes and of euerlasting life is stricken with vs the same also is the Testament in blood because it is the pleadge of his Testament which is sealed and ratified by the blood of the Lord As the Lorde also in Moses in the same place when had called Circumcision the couenant himselfe doeth afterwardes interprete it too bee the signe of the couenant 229. Question Shew the eight Answeare The conference of that place the 1. Cor. 10. 16. with the wordes of Christ in which he calleth
be sayde otherwyse of the bread wyne then the matter whether it bee the same or another is sayde of other signes Admit then that I graunt that which thou hast sayde yet notwithstanding there shall not bee diuers kindes of attributions but also onely diuers thinges shal be attributed And surely vnlesse it were so that is if the thing signified were otherwise sayde of the signe in the Supper of the Lorde then in other Sacramentes and also in other types they should not be referred to the same kynd for that same generall fourme shuld not be the essentiall fourme of all euen lyke as if a liuing creature shoulde bee sayde of a man in any other respect then of a horse a liuing creature shoulde not be the common genus or kynd of a man and a Horse 233. Question Wilt thou therefore that there shal bee no speciall fourme of the Lordes Supper Answeare God forbid But I saye that the speciall fourme is partly in the proper Elementes and rytes partly not in the attribute it selfe but in the qualitie of that attribute that is to say because Christe is the matter of both Sacraments in Baptisme verely he is set out to vs as the lauer and sealing vp of our entraunce into the Churche but in the Supper as the heauenly nourishment of those that are entred in 234. Question I meane this that the very body of Christ his very blood in very deede is present in or vnder or with that bread and that wyne in the Lordes Supper but not so in the water of Baptisme Answeare Thou resistest therefore their doctrine who teache that the humanitie of Christ also is euery where present according to the very substaunce But nowe let vs leaue this Doest thou not see that the question is agayne chaunged of thee For neyther dyd wee indeede seeke that whether the thing signified were present in the selfe same place where that breade and that wine was or whether it were absent but this we demaunded in what kinde of attribution the thing signified eyther present or absent might be saide of the signe properly or figuratiuely and whether it might be said in an other kinde of attribution of the elemēts of the Lords supper then of the elementes of other Sacraments The question therfore of presēce or absēce maketh nothing to the matter neither cā by any maner of meanes bring to passe that that which is or is giuen in vnder or with somewhat eyther present or absent shoulde there fore be sayde properly too bee that verye thing in vnder or with which it is 235. Question Let vs goe forewarde then to other arguments Answeare I set downe therefore first of all that which is most true that the bodie of Christ is truely an organicall and a naturall bodie the which nature hee had neyther then put of when he instituted the supper neither afterwardes did his glorie take it away frō him I set down also this that Christ properly is saide according to the flesh too bee ascended that is gone out of the earth vpwardes aboue the heauens hauing chaunged the situation of his place I sette downe also this thirde thing too witte that he shall not returne from thence whether hee ascended before that day wherein hee is looked for too come againe These groundes beeing thus layde so I gather If that breade bee properlye that verye bodye and that Wyne properly that verye blood Yea further if the Bodie and Bloode be properly in vnder or with the breade and wine they are then in the same beeing and occupying of a roome and in verye deede are also present togeather and in the selfe same moment there is present in as many places that same body and that same blood as that same bread and that same wyne are present But this thing and they holde not in any fourme of argument or reason But they are most certayne Both these opinions therefore seeing they are agaynst the analogy of Fayth are false Notwithstanding both are witnessed in the holy scriptures both therefore of necessitie must be true But two contradictoryes if they be properly taken can not bee true Of these therefore of necessitie one must bee taken properly the other figuratiuely Question But who will agree vntoo these groundes Answeare Surely whosoeuer is a Christian For he that denyeth that the body taken of the sonne of God was a true therfore an organicall body he is a Martionite and not a Christian Hee that denyeth that Christe came according to his fleshe thither whether hee came went away whence hee went and therefore was not truely absent and present in certaine places he is refelled by the hystory of the Gospell He that taketh away the proprietie of a naturall body that is to say which is not in any other place then wherein it is limited eyther from the tyme of that substantiall vnyon or from the tyme of his ascention hee is an Eutichyan and not a Christian They also that interprete the ascentiō of Christ after the mutation of qualitie and not of place and interprete the heauens into which hee ascended allegorically they are refelled also by the hystorie it selfe and by the analogie and proportion of Fayth and that they may deny one vsuall type figure and altogether agreeable to the proportion of Fayth they bring in innumerable figures disagreeing from the proportion of Fayth Finally they that thinke that the proprietie of the woordes in the hystorie of the ascention can stande with that reall presence eyther by consubstantiō or by trāsubstātiatiō they maintein two cōtradictiōs at once to which contradictiō that there is no place neither in nature nor in the mysteries of faith we wil shewe in his place This collection therfore standeth sure is inuincible Christ according to the flesh properly is gone frō vs aboue the heauens not to come againe from thence before that he shal come to iudge both the quicke and the deade Therefore neyther the breade which is in the earth is properly the very fleshe of Christ neyther the fleshe of Christ is properly in or with or vnder the breade Question Yea but this same proposition Bread this is my bodie is no other wise true nowe then when Christe spake it yea therefore nowe it is true because then it was true to witte by the vertue of the same institution But then was hee himselfe present Therfore now also the same presence is required Answeare Of this we shal see afterwards Now I saye agayne whether the bodie of Christ be determined to bee present or absent yet notwithstanding that that cannot stand that that breade shoulde be properly sayd to be the very body of the Lord. Now I proceede to those argumentes which are taken from the true properties of mannes fleshe 236. Question Say on therefore Answeare He that ouerthroweth the essentiall propertie of any thing ouerthroweth the thing it selfe because the definition being ouerthrowen the thing defined is ouerthrowen But to