in the death and passion of Iesus Christe and the true and spirituall cōmunion that we haue by the same with all the giftes and graces of the same The second is to yelde thankes vnto him and to giue testimonie of oure faith towards him of our charitie which we haue towards our brethrē and of the vnion with his Church The third to represente to vs by the breade and wyne whyche are there distributed the whole and perfecte spirituall nouriture whiche wée haue by the meane of the bodie flesh and bloud of Iesus Christ to the end that we maye be spiritually nourished into eternall lyfe according to the benefit whiche we haue already receyued by our regeneration whereof the Baptisme is to vs as a Sacramente in the whiche wée haue in the Supper as it were a guage of oure resurrection the whiche wée doe beleeue and wayte for Wherfore euen as the breade and wyne be there giuen to vs visibly and bodily euen so are the bodie and bloud of Iesus gyuen to vs in déed but inuisibly and spiritually by the mean of faith by the vertue of the holy Ghost for he is the meane by whiche wée haue true Cōmunion and true vnion with Iesus Christ and all hys Church the which is his bodye whereof all true Christians are membres Of the signification of the signes of bread and wyne in the Supper and of the agreemente and difference of them with the things that they signifie and of the error of the popish transubstantiation Chap. 40. WE then take the breade the wyne not for the propre body and bloud of Iesus Christe and the very naturall substance of them as if the breade and wyne were transubstantiate and conuerted into that very bodie and bloud to eate and drinke them bodyly and carnally or to worship them as Idols in steade of Iesus Christ as the Papists doe no more do wée take them only as common breade and wyne but we holde them as very signes of that body and bloud which were giuen for vs to death and of the whiche we are spiritually made partakers in dede according to the testimonie which Iesus Christ yeldeth vnto vs by his word in this holy Sacramēt in the meane while the bread and the wine do no more chaunge substance nor qualitie in the same thā doth the water in baptisme or the waxe wherein the seale of the Prince is imprinted also as the body and bloud of Iesus Christe are not naturally nor bodily conioyned with them but only in manner whiche is proper to sacraments that manner is such that albeit the signe be not the thing it selfe which it doth signifie yet is it not without the same whiche is communicated to the faithful spiritually in this Sacramente euen as the signe is administred vnto thē corporally by the meane which hath bene aboue spoken of Of the commemoration of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ in the Supper Chap. 41. ON the contrary we oughte to be assured that this holy Sacramente was not ordeyned to make a Sacrifice in the which Iesus Christe should be offered againe for the redemption of soules as well liuing as dead but to make commemoration of the sacrifice the which Iesus Christe himselfe hath made once of hys owne body and bloud by the whiche he hath once bought and sanctified for euer all the children of god Wherefore he hath ordeyned this holy sacrament to refresh our memorie and to sturre vs vp by this meane to acknowledge him and to render him immortall thanks in waiting that in his last cōming he may appeare from heauen where he now sitteth at the right hande of God vntill the last day Of the Supper and of the Masse of the Papistes and of the principall pointes wherin it is different and contrary to the true Supper Chap. 42. SEing then that the institution of the holy Supper of the Lorde and the ende for the whiche it was ordeined is wholly ouerthrown in the Masse supper of the Papists it is plain that neither the one nor the other not only can not be accōpted for the Supper of the Lorde nor celebrated to suche an ende But ouer and aboue that who soeuer will be accompted a christian and a partaker of the true table of the Lorde maye in no wyse communicate nor assist neyther at the Masse nor Supper of the Papistes if hée wyll not communicate at the Lordes table and at the diuels table altogether For fyrste where Saincte Paule sayeth playnelye that wee must shewe the Lordes death in his Supper and that nothing be declared nor sayde in the Churche but in suche a toung as all men may vnderstand All is sayde in the Masse and supper of the Papiste in a toung which the poore people vnderstande not And they doe not declare vnto them the Institution of the holye Supper of the Lorde The whyche thyng is euen of as greate effecte as yf there were no worde of God at all séeing it is not vnderstoode Without whyche woorde the Supper can not bée the Supper Moreouer the signes are there so confounded with the things which they signifie that they be all one thing wherefore that is as much as to haue sacramēts without signes Thirdly the bread wine are there worshipped as Idols and as Gods newly made wherein there is not one idoll onely but two as if the bloude were separate from the body Fourthly they be there also offered in steade of Iesus Chryste in suche sorte as the masse is holden for a Sacrifice made for the redemption of soules It is holden also for a meritorious woorke whyche bryngeth Saluation vnto men as doth the Deathe and Passion of Chryste Fyfthely is that albéeit there be a certayne kynde of Communyon in the common Supper of the people yet in their Masses there is none at all For so much as the Préest whiche saith it maketh his supper all alone not admitting any one therevnto Wherefore such a supper may better be called an Excommunication than a communication For there is no communication nor communion where nothing is common and where one man alone taketh all that whiche should be distributed to al men in common Now then if there were none other faulte in the masse but only these fiue so muche lacketh it to be accompted the Supper of the Lorde that not only all the true vse of the same is there wholy ouerthrowen but also Iesus Christe is therein fully renounced by those whiche communicate there or beleue it And by the same meane the vertue efficacie of the death and passion of Christe is there vtterly of none effecte and abolished Of the proofe that euery man oughte to make of him selfe to communicate worthily at the supper and of the things required in the same Chap. 43. FVrder seing that the holy supper is ordeyned to suche an ende as hath bene alredy declared none may communicate in the same but to his condemnation which cōmeth
by the vertue of the same and therfore the holy Ghost is often signified in the holy Scriptures by water M. Are there yet any other proprieties P. Wée can not vnderstād our regeneration into a new creature to be made new men except wée vnderstād also the mortificatiō of our old nature which is our old Adam and our old man And therfore S. Paule sayth That by baptisme we ar dead and buried risen agayn with Iesus Chryst M. Is the water propre to signifie the deth burial of the old mā the resurrectiō and renewing of the newe P. The water alone doth not represēt vnto vs only these things but also the maner in the whiche it is administred in baptisme M. Howe may that be P. Thou séest that cōmonly it is poured vpon him that is baptised in token that our old Adam is drowned and dead in Iesus Christ as the olde Pharao and the Egyptians were drowned in the redde sea And therfore Saint Paul compareth baptisme to the passage thorowe the red sea M. And what signifieth thys that they doe but poure this water vpon him that is baptized P. The same signifieth vnto vs howe that of the death of the olde man the newe riseth as if our olde Adam after that he were drowned were risen againe a newe man and that all his olde filthines were drowned by the water of grace in the which he was plunged which is the bloode of Iesus Christe the true washer of regeneration M. I doe nowe vnderstand all this very well but is there any other proprietie to consider touching the water P. If we shuld make comparisō of all the other properties that it hath with the holy Ghost which it doth figure in Baptisme I could giue thée manie others from which I doe abstaine at this present seing that that which I haue said may suffice thée for the vnderstāding of the matter of Baptisme Of the admonition and figure that the faithfull haue of a Christian life in Baptisme M. HAst thou yet any thing to say touching this Sacrament P. I haue nowe to shewe thée what pattern and example wée haue there of a Christian life and of the dutie of a Christian and of true repentance which ought to be in him all the time of his life M. Expound all these to me P. Séeing that baptisme is to vs the Sacrament of regeneration of penaunce and of mortification wée are admonished by the same of the perpetuall penance that ought to be in vs of the mortification where by we ought to mortifie our earthly mēbers to the end that wée being dead to sinne may liue to God in iustice Of the Supper and why Iesus Christe did ordaine two signes for the same M. IT séemeth to mée nowe that I doe sufficiently vnderstand that matter of Baptisme and therfore lette vs procéede to the Supper P. The Supper is a Sacrament in the which Iesus Christ representeth to vs by the signe of breade and wine howe he hath giuen his bodie and his bloud to the deathe that hauyng reconciled vs vnto God he moughte bee our spirituall nouriture and mought cōfirme vs in the faith of the promisse whiche he had made vnto vs. M. For what cause hathe he represented his bodie and bloud by the bread and by the wyne P. To signifie vnto vs that euen as breade and wine are giuen to vs by God for our corporall nouriture euen so the bodye and bloud of Iesus Chryste is giuen vnto vs for spiritual foode M. And for what cause did Iesus Chryste ordeyne two signes in the supper but one in baptism Mought not the bread or the wine onely haue ben sufficient to represent this spirituall life without adding both of them P. As he hath ordeined the signe of the water whiche is very méete to represente that whiche in Baptisme he woulde represent vnto vs euen so he hath chosen for the Supper those signes that were most méet to signifie that which he wold haue signifyed in the same M. I doubte not at all of that P. And therfore albeit that by one onely signe as in Baptisme he coulde haue done all that whiche hath pleased him to do by two yet he woulde giue two for the better expressing of that whiche it pleased him to giue Of that whiche is speciall in the Supper wherein it differeth from baptisme and howe that all that is verye well represented in the bread and the wyne M. DEclare vnto mée then the properties whiche the breade and wine haue agréeable to the things the whiche they represent in the supper P. For the first thou must note and remember that whiche I haue alreadie touched that the supper hathe this proper vnto it that euen as baptisme is to vs a testimonie of our spiritual birth life which we obtayn by Iesus Christe euen so is the supper a sacrament and testimonie howe that God wil continue in vs that benefite whereof baptisme is to vs a Sacrament and will nourishe and entertayne vs in the same spirituall lyfe the which he signifieth vnto vs therin vnto the tyme that we haue the full enioying in heauen with Iesus Chryst M. I thinke than that to be the cause why Iesus Chryste would signifie those things to vs by the eating and drinking and by those things which are propre to nouriture P. It is euen so and for somuche as man can not lyue by meate only or drinke only except he haue them bothe togither no more is Iesus Chryst contented to ordeyne only the breade or only the wine for signes of the spirituall nouriture whiche wée haue in his Supper but would ordeine those two to giue vs to vnderstande that euen as he which hathe meate and drinke hath his whole nouriture euen so the faithefull haue in Iesus Chryst fully all that whiche is necessarie for the spiritual lyfe M. Is there yet none other reason why Iesus Chryst did ordeyn those two signes M. Yes for Iesus Christe hathe also by these two signes better expressed howe that he hath giuen his bodie and his lyfe to the deathe for vs thā if he had ordeined but one only in so much as he hath giuen one particuler signe to signifie his body and an other to signifye his bloude M. What further signification hath it P. To set the better before our eyes howe that he is in déede dead for vs in so much as his bloude was separated from his body and consequentlye his life and that he hath so loued vs that he hath not spared it for vs. How we must eate the body and fleshe of Iesus Christ and drinke his bloud in the Supper M. BVt séeing that the breade representeth vnto vs in the Supper the fleshe and bodie of Iesus Christ which is there gyuen vs for meate and that the wine representeth the bloude which is there gyuen vs for drink must wée there also eate the body of Iesus Christ and drinke hys bloude in the same
sorte as wée eate the breade and drinke the wine which represent them vnto vs P. If there were none other reason but that which may be gathered of that which I haue euē now spoken it mought suffice vs to discharge our heads of all such imaginations M. I doe not well vnderstand yet what thou meanest herein P. Seing that Iesus Christe hath ordeyned one seuerall signe to signifie his body and an other seuerall signe to signifie his bloud and that it hath pleased him so to discerne them the one from the other the better to represent to vs how his bloud was separated from his body for vs in such sorte as his life and soule was separated likewise it should also followe that his body must be eatē a parte as we there eate the breade and there drink the bloud a parte as we there drinke the wine M. If it were so we shoulde not haue in the Supper the liuing body of Christ but dead and other thā he is raigning in heauen where his bloud is not separated frō his body P. Thou sayest truth But thou hast yet to note that if the body and bloud of Iesus Christ were giuen vs to nourish and mainteyne vs in this corporall life as is bread and wine we shoulde then also eate the body and drinke the bloude of Christe corporally as we doe eate and drinke the corporall breade and wine But forsomuche as they are giuen vs for spirituall nouriture we must eate and drinke them spiritually M. What doest thou call to eate and drinke spiritually Peter To speake properly to eate and drinke is vnderstoode of the body and of the bodily meate and drinke but when we speake of spirituall thinges we take those wordes for a figure by the whiche we declare the spirituall thinges by the bodily thinges bycause of the similitude and agremente that they haue togither M. Why is that done P. To the ende that by the similitude and comparison of corporall thinges we moughte the better vnderstande the spirituall things Of the true spirituall eating and drinking M. DEclare this to me yet somewhat more plainely Peter Thou mayest well vnderstande that the soule and the Spirite do neyther eate nor drinke corporally and materially as dothe the bodye Mathevve I doe well vnderstande at the leaste that they haue neither mouth nor téeth nor stomackes nor bellies corporall whereby they may do the same P. And therefore it must néeds be that if the soule and the spirite do eate and drinke they eate and drinke in an other sorte than doth the body the whiche is proper and agreable to their nature M. There is reason in that whiche thou sayest P. And on the other side thou mayest well knowe also that the flesh of Iesus Christ is neyther eaten nor chawed neyther is swalowed downe into the stomacke and bellie neyther is it digested as is the corporall and materiall meate M. For what cause is it then that Iesus Christ hath vsed that manner of spéeche saying he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life P. It is to giue vs the better to vnderstande the communion and coniunction whiche we haue with him and how that his flesh and his bloud do the very same towarde the soule and also toward the body touching the spirituall life being receiued with a true and liuing faith as do the bread and wine towards the body touching the bodily life whē they are bodily eaten dronken The sixtenth Dialogue is of the transubstātiation cōsubstantiation and of the true presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper Of the error of transubstantiation and hovv the Supper cannot be a Sacramente if the bread and the vvine do not there remayne in their proper substance MATHEVV HOw is it that men do eate the flesh of Iesus Christ and do drinke his bloud as thou hast euen nowe saide It is to bée vnderstoode that the breade and the wine be transubstantiate and conuerted into them or else that they be ioyned and vnited with the bread and the wine P. For the firste there is no reason eyther to thinke or saye that the breade and the wine be conuerted or chaunged into the body and bloud of Iesus Christe M. For what cause P. Bycause that if the bread the wine did not remayne still in the supper bread and wine in their proper substance they shoulde not be the signes of the body of the bloud of Iesus Christe but if they were conuerted into the same they shoulde be the selfe same thing the which they oughte to signifie and represente vnto vs. M. What inconueniente should there be in that P. There shoulde be this inconuenient in it that the supper should be a Sacramente withoute signe and so shoulde it haue no Sacramentall signe without the which the Sacramēts may not be Sacraments Of things vvithout the vvhich the sacraments cannot be sacramēts M. HOwe vnderstandest thou that P. Thou must note that a Sacramente cannot be a Sacramente excepte it haue at the leaste thrée things whiche are of the proper substance of all Sacramens M. Whiche are these thrée things P. The firste is the worde of God which is the foundation of all the Sacraments M. And the seconde P. The visible and materiall signes such as God hath ordeyned by that very word M. And the third P. The thinges signified aswell by that word as by the signes Of things vvhich are to be considered in the vvord of God in all Sacraments and in the signification of the same M. DEclare vnto me that whiche thou sayest by some similitude P. Séeing that we be vppon the matter of the Supper thou hast firste the worde of Iesus Christ in the which thou hast to note two pointes M. Whiche be they P. The first is the commandement which Iesus Christe there giueth to take and to eate the bread to drinke the wine which are giuen in the same M. Which is the secōd P. The promise whereby he declareth what it is that this bread and wine do signifie and for what cause he hath ordeyned and commaunded to receiue them and what frute we must looke for of them Math. Wherevpon takest thou thys promise Pe. Vppon that whiche is saide of the breade This same is my bodye whiche is broken for you and in like sorte vppon that whiche is spoken of the wyne Thys cuppe is my bloude or the newe Testamente in my bloude whiche is shedde for you doe this in remembraunce of mée Math. Muste wée vnderstande the lyke of all the other Sacramentes to witte that they haue commandemēt and promisse from God Peter There is no doubte thereof Ma. What is there more yet to cōsider cōcernyng the worde of GOD P. There is nothing more to be consydered concerning that same exteriour worde whyche is pronounced by the mouth of the mynisters Math. What resteth there yet more Peter That which is signified by the woorde the whiche doth also declare the signification
both in heauē and in earth S. Paule in like fort hath written that he is ascended aboue all the heauens to the ende he mought fill al things that he mought fulfill all in the same M. Doest thou vnderstand that he doth accomplishe and fill all things not by his corporall presence but by his spirituall diuine presēce and vertue P. We may not otherwise vnderstand it if we do beleue that Iesus christ hath a very natural body that he be in déede gone vp into the heauens For as we haue alredy said as ther is no reason to giue him many bodies to be in manye places at a time euē so is it ouer strange to giue hym a bodye which may fill the heauen and the earth Hovve that the corporall presence of the body and of the bloude of Iesus Christ is contrary to the true communion of them in the Supper M. I Doe now remember that thou hast alredy said that the body the bloud of Iesus Christ could not be separated frō his spirit frō whence I do conclude that the body and bloud of christ Iesus cānot be receiued but to the saluation of them which doe receiue it P. None may doubt thereof M. It followeth then further that infidells cannot receiue them forsomuch as they cannot receiue them except they receiue their saluation the whyche they cannot obtaine without faith wherof they are void P. This which thou sayest dothe yet confirme more and more all that whiche we haue handled heretofore concerning the corporall presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper M. It is also the cause why I did againe set foorth thys matter For if the body and the bloude of Iesus Christ be corporally in the supper in suche sorte that whosoeuer receiueth bodily the bread and the wine therein receiueth also the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ corporally there shall follow thereof many things which séeme to me very contrary as well to the office of Iesus christ as to the nature of this Sacrament of the Supper P. Thou sayest very truthe and I am very glad to here of thée that which thou thinkest M. For the firste we shall be constrayned to confesse that a man maye in the Supper receiue the body and the bloude of Iesus Christe without faith and without his spirite for the vnfaithfull whiche shall receiue the bread and the wine shall no lesse receiue the body and the bloud of Iesus Christe than the faithfull P. Beholde there a very straunge consequencie M. Moreouer if a man may receyue them without faithe they whiche shall receiue them in such sorte shal receiue thē either to their saluation or condemnation if they receiue thē to their saluation it must néedes followe that a man maye obtaine saluation without faith if they do receiue thē to their condemnation it must then followe that the body and the bloude of Iesus Christe do bring in this Sacramente against their nature deathe in stéede of life whiche is also against the nature of the Sacramente for it was not ordeyned to bring death to man but life VVhether a man maye conclude of the vvords of Sainct Paule that a man may receyue the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ in the supper to condemnation P. THou concludest very well but they which houlde the opinion againste the whiche we dispute at this presente make no difference to affirme that the infidels receiue in the supper the body the blud of Iesus Christ that they receyue thē to their condēpnation For they build themselues vpō that which s Paule hath saide That who so eateth in the supper the bread drincketh the wine of the lorde vnworthily doth eate and drinke his condempnation M. I know well that those mē affirme that which thou saist But I cannot well agrée their opinion with the matters the which we haue alredy handled And as touching that which they alledge of S. Paule he sayth not who so shall eate the body and drincke the bloud vnworthily shal receiue his condempnation but he saith he that shall eate of this bread shall drinke of this cup. P. Thou hast also to note beside this that there is difference betwene receiuing the supper vnworthily to receiue it without faith and as touching the word of condempnation it may be also taken in diuers maners but wée will now no longer dwell vpon these two pointes It is sufficient for vs to knowe that the bodye and the bloud of Iesus Christ cannot bée truely receyued but by the faythfull Of the principall difference that maye be betvveene the transsubstanciation of the bread and of the vvine into the bodie and the bloud of Iesus christ and the bodily coniunction of them together M. I Do well vnderstand by all the reasons testimonies which thou hast brought out of the holy scriptures that we may seke no corporal nor carnall presēce of Iesus christ neither in the supper nor yet in all thys visible worlde but only a spirituall and diuine presence Wherfore whē I haue well considered the whole I finde no great difference betwene them that affirme that the bread and the wine be conuerted transubstanciated into the bodie blud of Iesus christ in the supper by the vertue of the sacramentall wordes those which affirme that albeit that the bread the wine remayne still in their owne substāce yet notwithstāding the body blud of Iesus christ be there also present with thē in their proper and natural substāce not only spiritually but also corporally substancially as are the bread the wine P. There is no great difference but in that that the one sort thinking to auoid the absurdities which follow the opinion of the others do fall into other absurdities which are nothing lesse of the which we will no more speake here bycause the matter woulde be to long whereof we haue alredy sufficiently spoken Of the vnion that is betvvene Iesus Christ and his members signified by the breade and the vvine in the Supper M. I Am very well contented for thys time with that which thou hast said and therefore shewe me now what properties the bread and the wine haue yet which are agreable to this Sacramente of the Supper beside that whiche thou hast already said P. I haue already sayd that those signs were agreable to this sacrament bycause they be apte to represent the spirituall nouriture by the bodily M. I doe very well remember thys pointe P. Thou hast also to note vppon the same that as one lofe and one vessell of wine are made of many graines gathered togither euen so doe they in the Supper represente vnto vs how that al the children of God which are dispersed are gathered broughte togither in one and vnited with Iesus Christ their head by his deathe as Saincte Iohn doth witnesse M. Thou wilte then saye that that vniō which is made of many graines in one lofe or in one wine
that may be accoumpted for common Sacramentes generally of the whole Churche as the true nature of the Sacramentes of the same requireth M. Whiche be these two sacramentes P. That of baptisme and the supper M. For what cause did Iesus Christe ordeyne neyther moe nor fewer P. Thou must vnderstande that if Iesus Christ had ordeyned so many Sacramēts as we receiue benefits and graces of him to represente the same vnto vs by them their number shoulde be infinite and in that sorte should he engender confusion in mens vnderstanding which are rude and grosse And therefore he was contented to ordeyne a small number by the which it hath pleased him to represent vnto vs his principall benefites vnder the which mē may comprehende and bring all the rest M. Seing there is suche daunger in it as thou hast sayde coulde not he well haue comprehended in onely Sacrament that which he hath cōprehended in two P. He could well haue done it if it had so pleased him But as he woulde on the one side prouide for the rudenesse of our vnderstandings in sparing them in that that he would not lode them with great numbers of Sacramentes euen so woulde he succoure our infirmitie by the small nūber which he hath ordeyned for vs to the end that we mought more specially know in two Sacramēts that which we could not so easilie so properly cōprehend in one Of that vvhich is generall and common to all Sacraments M. SHew me thē which be those diuers benefits and the sacraments which represent them P. For more plaine vnderstanding of that whiche thou demaundest we haue first to consider that whiche is commō and generall to all the Sacraments and then we will come to that whiche is proper and speciall to euery of them M. What is that then which they haue common to them both P. There be chiefly three points M. Which is the first P. It is that God on his part doth declare and testifie the good will which he hathe toward his faithfull the fauoure which he wil shew thē in his sōne Iesus Christ M. Which is the second P. It is the confession of faith and the homage whiche he also requireth of the faithful by the which they confesse and acknowledge him to be theyr God and Iesus Christ to be theyr true sauioure redéemer by this meane declaring the faith that they haue in hys promises as though they made a solemne oth to Iesus Christe as to their king and true Lord and sauioure M. Which is the thirde P. It is an aduertisement whiche we haue in all the sacraments of the dutie of Christians and of the life that they should lead folowing the professiō which they make when they do receiue thē M. Declare vnto me nowe by examples all these points and thē shew me foorthwith what it is of euery sacramēte in his particuler and what euery one of them hath proper and speciall P. For the firste séeing that all the Sacraments do send vs to Iesus Christe and to his deathe they are witnesses and seales of the forgiuenesse of our sinnes of the agremēt cōmuniō which we haue with god by Iesus Christ M. They serue vs then as an acquittance of that wherevnto we are bounde at the iudgemente of God and as a letter of fauoure authorised and well signed and sealed with the seale of the soueraine prince P. It is euen so And as God on his parte dothe assure vs of his pardon and of oure saluation we also on our parte doe owe vnto him that honour that we hold him true in his promisses and that wée acknowledge him for oure onely God and Iesus Chryst his sonne for our only sauiour and that wée renounce all other gods and idoles and all false religions and that we will followe none other but his only suche as he hath set foorth vnto vs in his worde Of Baptisme and of the signification of it M. SEing that all Sacramentes haue that in common declare to me now in speciall what baptisme is and what is propre vnto it and wherein it differeth from the Supper Peter Baptisme is a Sacramente of repentance in the which GOD dothe assure vs by hys promisse of our regeneration which hath the sign of the water as his seale for the confirmation of the same Ma. I doe not here aske thée what Regeneration is bycause that thou hast sufficiētly declared it heretofore but I doe aske thée if the Supper be not also a Sacrament of repentance and of our regeneration Pe. Thou haste here to consider that forsomuche as thys benefit of regeneration the which we obtaine by Iesus Chryst is one of the most excellente fauours that God sheweth vs it hathe pleased Iesus Chryste to declare the same vnto vs by certaine signes and by a speciall Sacramente among others For hée comprehendeth also the benefite of iustification and sanctification of whiche we haue sufficiently and fully heretofore spoken Of the agreement and difference that is betwene baptisme and the supper M. ANd what sayst thou of the supper Pet. Thou canste not well vnderstande what the Supper is if thou doe not first know what baptisme is M. Hast thou any thing then yet to say concerning baptisme P. For so muche as regeneration emporteth renewing of lyfe as if we were borne again in the house of GOD thou knowest well that a man must first be borne and then nourished after that hée is borne M. Wilte thou then saye that Baptisme is to vs a Sacramente of oure newe and spirituall birthe by the whiche we are borne againe children of God in his Church and that the Supper is to vs an other Sacrament of the spirituall nouriture whiche is necessarie for vs to entertayne vs in this new and spirituall lyfe of the whiche baptisme is to vs a sacrament Pet. Thou haste herein to note that God will first assure vs that hée accompteth vs for hys children begotten by the incorruptible séede of hys woorde in the vertue of the holy Ghost into his Churche whiche is the espouse of his sonne Iesus Chryste and therfore hée will witnesse vnto vs by thys Sacramente of Baptisme that he receyueth vs into his house and dothe aduowe vs for his lawfull children whiche he hath adopted to hym selfe in his sonne Iesus Chryste whiche he will as it were enroll in the booke of his housholde as his true children and enheritours Of the proprietie of the water of Baptisme to represent the graces of god whiche are communicated vnto vs by the same M. FOr somuche as it is so what proprietie hath the water to represent vnto vs all that thou sayest P. It hathe great proprietie M. Whiche is the first P. Forsomuch as the nature of it is to wash and to clense it is verie proper to represente howe we are washed and clensed in the bloud of Iesus Chryste and by the water of lyfe which is the holy ghost wherewith wée are watered and washed
by the whiche we haue bene sometyme taught that the very substāce of the bread and of the wine was chaunged into the very substance of the body of the bloud of Iesus Chryst which ar of the opinion that thou now settest forth M. And why do they rather folow that opinion than the other P. Bicause that they know well that opinion to be too grosse And therfore they haue recourse to that other maner of presence of the bodie and bloud of Iesus Chryste in the Supper whereof thou haste now made mention M. And what inconueniente fyndest thou in that opinion Peter I fynde not muche lesse therein than in that of Transubstantiation Math. Thou canste not saye at the leaste but that they whiche followe it doe take from the Supper the signes of the breade and of the wyne for so much as they ioyne them wyth the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Chryste the whiche they signifie Peter No more are they also so greatlye different in other matters to them that mayntain transubstantiation And therfore may we lawfully call the opiniō of such men cōsubstantiation M. What vnderstandest thou by this word of Consubstantiation P. As they which haue forged the transubstātiation do vnderstand by the same a changing of substance into an other euen so by the name of consubstantiation a man may vnderstande the coniunction of diuers substances togither Of the agreement that is betwene this opinion that of transubstantiation M. DEclare vnto me then wherin they do agrée and wherin they doe differ Peter For the first if they doe vnderstande that the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Christe bée wyth the breade and the wine in their own nature and substance and by a naturall corporall and materiall maner as the bread and the wyne are there they agrée therin with the erroure of transubstantiation M. It séemeth to mée that they drawe well to one poynte sauing that they make no transubstantiation nor chaunge of the breade and of the wine into the body and bloude of Iesus Christ P. Thou séest it plainely by that whiche we haue alredy sayde thou mayest well vnderstand that such a naturall and corporall presence of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ in the Supper should be cleane contrary to the nature of a spirituall nouriture the whiche is there set foorth vnto vs and likewise to the māner of eating of the body and the flesh and the drinking of the bloud of Iesus Christ according to the whiche they may be eatē and dronkē for spirituall meate drinke The seauententh Dialogue is of the communication of Iesus Christ as wel in Baptisme as in the Supper VVherevnto baptisme and the signification thereof may serue to giue vs to vnderstand in vvhat sorte it behoueth vs to be nourished by the body and bloud of Iesus Christ MATHEVV I Haue well vnderstoode that thou hast sayde that we must be nourished with spirituall meate and nouriture into eternall life and that by a spirituall maner agreable to the spirituall birth and life into the which we are regenerate by baptisme and according to the testimonie of God which is set foorth vnto vs in the same concerning our regeneration P. That whiche thou sayest maye serue vs very much to the vnderstanding of the matter which we now hādle For thou doest wel know that we are not regenerate in baptisme by any corporall or material séede of the body and of the bloude of Iesus Christe nor by any naturall manner as we are naturally begotten by our fathers mothers M. I know well also that we may not enter againe into our mothers womb as Nicodeme said to Iesus christ to be borne a new once more as we are already once borne P. And therefore I doubt not but that thou doest well vnderstande that that regeneration and newe birth is wrought by a séede incorruptible spiritual and diuine by the which we are begotten into the Churche by the vertue of the holy Ghoste by whome we are regenerate into a new life In vvhat sorte vve do communicate of the body bloud of Iesus christ in baptism M. IT is not also said that Iesus Christ doth giue his body and his bloud in Baptisme as he doth in the supper like wise the water is not called therein the body and the bloud of Iesus Christe as Iesus Christ doth in the Supper call the bread the wine by the name of them P. Albeit the the water be not there called in baptisme by that name dost thou thinke for all that that the body and bloude of Iesus Christ be not there distributed and communicated vnto thée in the same as well as in the Supper M. I do not so vnderstand it P. Thou wilte then ordeyne a Baptisme withoute Iesus Christe M. Wherfore P. Bycause thou cāst not haue Iesus Christ except thou haue him wholy and very God and very man and that thou haue true communion with his body with his bloud not only in the supper but also in baptisme M. Shewe me the cause thereof P. It is bycause that the Baptisme doth no lesse sende vs to the deathe and passion and to the body and bloud of Iesus Christe than doth the Supper for somuch as that is proper to al sacramēts VVhat difference there is betvvene the baptisme and the Supper touching the communion of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ M. IT séemeth to me that thou speakest against that whiche thou hast sayde heretofore touching the difference which thou hast put betwene baptisme and the Supper for it séemeth that thou speakest now as though baptisme the supper were one very Sacramente and that there were no difference betwene them P. Thou makest an euill conclusion For albeit that we doe as well participate of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ in baptisme as in the Supper yet notwithstanding there is difference in the participation and in the manner thereof in respect of the benefites of Iesus Christ whiche are signified and communicated vnto vs as wel in the one of the sacramēts as in the other M. I haue not thē wel vnderstoode thée yet heretofore and therfore declare vnto me more easily that whiche thou now speakest of P. Although the body of Iesus Christe be not giuen vnto vs in baptisme as for spirituall foode as it is in the Supper that notwithstanding it is there giuen vnto vs in very déede as a garment of innocencie of Iustice and of holynesse to couer all our sinnes before god And therefore S. Paule saith that all those which are baptised haue put on them Iesus Christ M. And of the bloud what sayest thou P. Albeit that it be not giuen vnto vs in Baptisme as for drinke as it is in the supper yet notwithstāding it is there giuen vnto vs for a spirituall washing of our soules and consciences whereby Iesus Christe dothe purifie and clense his Church in this lauer of
doth signifie vnto vs the vnion that is betwene Iesus Christ and his Church to witte betwene the head and the mēbers P. It signifieth not only the vnion which is betwene Iesus Christ and his members but also the vnion which is and ought to be betwene all the members of his body which cannot be vnited with their heade Iesus christ nor haue him for their head if they be not vnited among themselues the one with the other for Iesus Christ may not be deuided And therefore Sainct Paule hath saide to the same purpose that we are all one bread and therefore we do also euery of vs part take of one very bread and one very cuppe Hovv the supper is the sacrament of vnion and of charitie and of the admonition that vve haue in the same M. SEing it is so it followeth then that the supper is vnto vs a Sacrament of the vnion charitie that all the faithfull ought to haue the one with the other P. That is not to be douted therfore thou must note that euē as baptisme doth admonish vs of the perpetual repentāce mortification which ought to be among vs al the time of our life euē so hath the supper this propre vnto it that it putteth vs in mynd of the vnion charitie wherby we ought to be ioyned the one with the other without the which we can not be christiās forsomuch as Iesus Chryst setteth it foorth vnto vs for a marke wherby his disciples shuld be knowne M. Seing it is so I think assuredly also that we cānot communicate at this holy sacramēt of the supper but to our cōdemnatiō if we haue not this charitie vnion amongst vs. P. It is easie to iudge The 19. dialogue is of the proofe that euery man ought to make of himselfe before the supper Of the principall points vvhich are required in the proofe that is required of euery man before he go to the Supper MATTHEVV M. SEing that we be lyghted vpon the matter of thīgs required wherwith worthily to communicate in the supper declare vnto me now in what sorte wée ought to proue oure selues according to the doctrine of S. Paule to the end wée receiue not this Sacrament vnworthily and to our condemnation P. Thou maist wel know by the matters which we haue alredy handled what it is to receyue the Supper worthily or vnworthily and to saluation or condemnation and how euery man may proue himselfe to communicate thereat as he ought M. I graunte that which thou sayest but I shall vnderstande and comprehende it better if thou doest declare vnto mée briefly the principall pointes whiche are chiefly required in this proofe P. Seing that Iesus Christe is dead for oure sinnes and that therfore all Sacraments doe sende vs to the same death to obtaine forgiuenesse of the same it followeth well that we can not communicate worthily at the Supper except we acknowledge first our selues to be sinners suche as we are and do confesse that we haue deserued by meane of our sinnes eternall death and damnation and that wee can not be deliuered from them but only by the death of Iesus Chryst M. I doe well vnderstand alredie this poynt P. If thou do well vnderstand this thou vnderstandest well also that that acknowledging cōfession can not be in vs without that true repentance wherof we haue alreadie spoken whiche can not be without true amendement of life M. I vnderstand wel also that other pointe P. Thou haste well vnderstoode how that true faith can not be separated frō true repētance For the knowledge of our sins should serue vs to smal purpose if it were not ioyned with a sure trust of forgyuenesse of the same M. That is playne P. Nowe séeing we can not obtain that remission but only by the death of Iesus Chryst and that the Supper is ordeyned to witnesse vnto vs and to assure vs more fully it is therfore easy to iudge that none maye communicate at this holy sacrament without true faith by the which he holdeth himself assured to obtaine the grace which is promised witnessed vnto him in the same M. Thou wilt then say in effect that it is néedful for those whiche dispose themselues to communicate at this sacrament to note diligentely whether they haue true repentance and true faith in Iesus Chryste or no. P. To the ende that the proofe may be the more full and perfect thou shalt ioyne also to these two pointes charitie of the which we euen now did speak by meane wherof all the faithfull are vnited and conioyned the one with the other euen as they be vnited conioyned by fayth with Christ Iesus their head For euen as true repentāce can not be without true faith euē so true faith cānot be without true charitie as wée haue sufficiently alreadie declared M. I vnderstand wel also séeing the Supper is a Sacrament of vnion and charitie as thou hast alreadie declared it that he is not capable of the same that hath not true charitie P. Beholde they are the thrée points to wit repentāce faith and charitie whiche comprehende all the rest that maye be required in the proufe of any man. VVhether it be requisite that euery man haue perfecte repentance faith and charitie before he go to the Supper M. NOwe I haue yet one difficultie vppon these thrée pointes the whiche thou sayst are chiefly required in the proofe of those which will communicate at the Supper P. Shew me that difficultie M. Tell me firste if there be any man that in this mortall life may haue perfecte repentaunce perfecte faithe and perfecte charitie P. If we could haue those vertues so perfecte that nothing coulde be more added therevnto then were wée no more mortall men and shoulde no more néede neyther the preaching of the Gospell nor yet the Sacramentes Mat. Why so Bycause we shoulde then haue all the things for the which al the ministerie of the Churche was ordeyned of God and shoulde be already like to the Angels in such sorte as we shall be after our resurrection when we shall be fully refourmed to the image of Iesus Christ and fully glorified with him M. And yet thou sayest that we cannot worthily communicate at the supper except we bring with vs true repentāce a true faith and a true charitie Pet. That same is not at all against that which I haue nowe sayde VVhat differēce ther is betvvene true perfect repentance faith charitie M. IT must néedes be then that thou put differēce betwéen true perfect repētāce true faith charitie P. Euē so thee is differēce M. What is it P. To make thée the better to vnderstād it I wil shewe thée it by exāmple M. I like well the maner of declaration P. Take then for exāple a yong chyld wilt thou say that he is a perfect man M. No till such time as he be come to the age in which men do accōpt the perfection