bloud chiefely is the thing signified in the Sacrament of Baptisme and why because that by his bloud hee washeth away the filth of our soules because that by the vertue of his bloud he quickneth vs in our soules with a heauenly life because that by the power of his bloud hee ingrafteth and incorporateth vs in his owne body For that Sacrament is a testimonie of the remission of our sinnes that is of the cleanenesse of our consciences that our consciences by that bloud are washed inwardly It testifieth also our new birth that wee are begotten spiritually to a heauenly life It testifieth also the ioyning of vs in the body of Christ As it is a testimony so it is a seale it not onely testifieth but sealeth it vp in our harts and maketh vs in our harts to feele the taste of that heauenly life begun in vs that wee are translated from death in the which wee were conceiued and ingrafted in the body of Christ Marke then Christ in his bloud as hee is the washing of our regeneration is the thing signified in Baptisme In this Sacrament of the Lords Supper againe this same Christ is the thing signified in another respect to wit in this respect that his body and bloud serue to nourish my soule to life euerlasting for this Sacrament is no other thing but the image of our spirituall nourishment GOD testifying how our foules are fed nourished to that heauenly life by the image of a corporal nourishmeÌ„t So in diuerse respects the same thing that is Chr. Iesus is signified in Baptisme and is signified in the Lords Supper In this Sacrament the fruits of Christes death whereof I spake the vertue of his sacrifice the vertue of his passion I call not these fruits vertues only the thing signified in the Sacrament of the L Supper but rather I call the thing signified that substance that person out of the which substance this vertue these fruits do flow and proceed I grant and it is most certain that by the lawfull vse participation of the Sacrament thou art partaker of all these fruites yet these fruites are not the first and chiefe thing whereof thou art partaker in this Sacrament but of force thou must get another thing first It is true that no man can be partaker of the substance of Christ but the same soule must be also partaker of the fruites that flowe from his substance yet notwithstanding thou must discerne betwixt the substance and the fruites that flowe from the substance and thou must be partaker of the substance in the first roome then in the next place thou must bee partaker of the fruites that flowe from his substance To make this cleere in Baptisme the fruites of Baptisme are remission of our sinnes mortification the killing of sinne and the sealing vp of our adoption to life euerlasting The substance out of the which these fruite doe flowe is the bloud of Christ Ye must heere of force discerne between the bloud vvhich is the substance and betweene remission of sinnes washing and regeneration which are the fruites that flow from this bloud so in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the fruits of that Sacrament are the growth oâ— faith the increase in holiness The thing signified is the substance that is the body bloud of Christ is the substance out of which this growth in faith and holinesse doth proceed Now see ye not this That you must discerne betweene the substance and the fruites and must place the substance in the first place So that the substance of Christ that is Christ himselfe is the thing signified in this Sacrament For your owne experience will make this plaine vnto you Before your stomack be filled with any foode yee must eate the substance of the food first before you be filled with bread yee must eate the substance of the bread first before your drouth bee quenched with any drinke yee must of necessitie drinke the substance of the drinke first Euen so after this maner before the hunger of your soules be satisfied the thirst thereof quenched yee must eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud first and that by faith So consider the one by the other looke to what vse bread and vvine serue to thy body to the same vse the body and bloud of Christ serue to thy soule and he that appointed the one to serue for thy body the same God appointed the other to serue for thy soule So looke how impossible it is for thee to be fedde with that foode that neuer commeth into thy mouth or to recouer health by those drugges which neuer were applyed it is as impossible for thee to be fed by the body of Christ to get thy health by the bloud of Christ except thou first eate his bodie and drinke his bloud Then yee see that the thing signified in the Lords Supper is not the fruites so much as the body and bloud and Christ Iesus which is the fountaine and substance from which these fruites doe flowe and proceed Then I say suppose Christ The thing signified in both the SacrameÌ„ts is one the signes are not one who is the thing signified remaine alwaies one and the same in both the Sacraments yet the signes whereby this one Christ is signified in the Sacraments are not one nor of an â—quall number For in Baptisme the thing that representeth Christ is Water In the Lords Supper the things that represent Christ are Bread and Wine Water is appointed to represent Christ in Baptisme because it is meetest to represent our vvashing with the bloud of Christ for what is fitter to wash with then water so there is nothing meeter to wash the soule then the bloud of Christ In this Sacrament he hath appointed Bread and Wine why Because there is nothing more meet to nourish the body then bread and vvine so the Lord hath not chosen these signes without a reason As the signes in the Sacrament are not alwaies one so the same in both are not of one number for in Baptisme wee haue but one element in this Sacrament wee haue two elements Now what is the reason of this diuersitie that the Lord in the one Sacrament Why in Baptisme there is but one signe and in the Lords Supper two hath appointed two signes and in the other but one signe I will shew you the reason He hath appointed onely one signe in Baptisme to wit Water because Water is sufficient enough for the whole If Water had not been sufficient to represent the thing signified hee would haue appointed another signe but in respect that water doâ—â— the turne and representeth fully the washing of our soules by the bloud of Christ what need then haue we of any other sign Now in this Sacrament one signe will not suffice but there must be two And vvhy Wine cannot be sufficient alone neyther can Bread be sufficient alone for he that hath Bread onely and
THE MYSTERIE OF THE LORDS SVPPER CLEERELY MANIFESTED IN FIVE SERMONS Two of Preparation and Three of the Sacrament it selfe BY A REVEREND AND FAITHfull Preacher of Gods word IOHN 6.54.63 Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day It is the Spirit that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speake vnto you are spirit and life AT LONDON Imprinted for Thomas Man 1614. THE PRINTER TO THE READER I Present here vnto thy viewe good reader a learned and godly treatise wherein the Doctrine of the Lords supper is both plainely and fully handled A worke which heretofore hath beene in diuers mens hands yet not without some inconuenience for being at first borne in another soyle then our owne it was written in a language though but the same with ours in substance yet by reason of the peculiar dialect or propriety so often varying and more then sufficient to make them that are not throughly acquainted with the difference to mistake euen things that to our vnderstanding are much more familiar then the holy mysteries of our saluation The consideratiō of which incommodity did moue a worthy and truly religious Gentleman M. S. Michell to take the paines to peruse and polishe so good a worke to the end to publish it that so it might be profitable to all But hauing scarse finished and prepared it for the presse it pleased God to take him to himselfe before he could see a finall end of this and many other his religious and honest endeauors yet least the Church should haue lost so precious a Iewell his zeale of good doing continuing vnto the end he committed the execution of this so godly a desire to the speciall care of one of his good and trusty friends who being faithfull in the trust committed vnto him is a principal meanes that now it commeth safely to thy hands receiue it therefore and esteeme it as the most godly and iudicious haue euer done the best and most profitable treatise that euer hath bin published of this subiect and cease not to thanke God for raising vp so many meanes to procure thy good whose sole end in all their labours is Gods glory and the furthering of thy true happinesse Farewell Thine in Christ Iesus F. B. The first Sermon vpon the Sacraments in generall 1. Corin. 11.23 For I haue receiued of the Lord that which I also haue deliuered vnto you to wit that the Lord Iesus in the night that he was betrayed tooke Bread c. THere is nothing in this world nor out of this world more to be wished of euery one of you more to be craued and sought of euery one of you then to bee conioyned with Christ Iesus then once to be made one with the God of glory Christ Iesus This heauenly and celestiall coniunction is purchased and brought about by two speciall meanes It is brought about by meanes of the word and preaching of the Gospell and it is brought about by the meanes of the Sacraments and ministration thereof The word leadeth vs to Christ by the eare the Sacraments lead vs to Christ by the eye Two senses of all the rest which God hath chosen as most meet for this purpose to instruct vs and bring vs vnto Christ For that doctrine must be most effectuall mouing that wakeneth and stirreth vp most of the outward senses that doctrine that wakeneth not onely the eare but the eye the taste the feeling and all the rest of the outward senses must moue the heart most must be most effectuall and pearcing in the soule But so it is that this doctrine of the Sacraments moues stirres vp and wakens most of the outward senses therfore it must bee if wee come well prepared vnto it most effectuall to stirre vp the inward senses of the dull heart But there is a thing that yee must euer remember there is no doctrine neither of the simple word nor yet of the Sacraments if Christ abstract his holy spirit that is able to moue therefore when euer yee come to heare the doctrine whether it be of the Sacraments or of the simple word craue of God that hee would be present by his holy spirit or otherwise all the doctrine in the earth will not awaile you Alwaies this doctrine of the Sacraments stirres vp and wakens most of the outward senses and therefore there is no question but it is an effectuall and potent instrument to waken prepare and stirre vp our hearts Then to let you see what the word Sacrament meaneth The diuerse taking of the word Sacrament and to remoue the ambiguitie of it it is certaine and out of all question that the Latine Diuines who were most ancient did interpret the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the word Sacrament and they vsed the Greeke word not onely to signifie the whole action of the Supper of the Lord and the whole action of Baptisme but they vsed the word Mystery to signifie whatsoeuer is darke and bid in it selfe and not frequented in the common vse of men as after this manner the Apostle calleth the vocation of the Gentiles a mysterie Ephes 3.9 Ephes 5.32 This coniunction which is begun heere betwixt vs and Christ is called a Mysterie and the Latine Interpreters call it a Sacrament and to be short ye will not finde in the booke of God a word more frequent then the word Mysterie But as for the word Sacrament wherby they interpret the Greeke word we finde not this word by the same Diuines to be taken so largely neither is it takē so largely in any part of the booke of God Alwayes the word Sacrament is very ambiguous in it selfe and there ariseth about the ambiguitie of this word many controuersies which are not yet ceased nor will not cease while the world lasteth whereas if they had kept the Apostles words and called them as the Apostle calleth them Signes and Seales all this digladiation strife and contention appearingly had not fallen out but where men will be wiser then God and giue names to things without warrant from God vpon the wit of man which is but meere folly all this stirre falleth out Well then to come vnto the purpose The ancient Diuines tooke the word Sacrament as we may perceiue in a fourefold manner Sometime they tooke it for the whole action that is the whole ministery of the Elements sometime they tooke it not for the whole action but for the outward things that are vsed in the action of Baptisme and of the Supper as they tooke it for the vvater and sprinkling of it for the Bread and Wine breaking distributing and eating thereof Thirdly againe they tooke it not for the whole outward things that are vsed in the action but onely for the materiall and earthly things the Elements as for Bread and Wine in the Supper and water in Baptisme And after this sort saith Augustine the wicked eate
visible and palpable I proue my Proposition by Christ his owne words taken out of Luke 24.39 In the which place to perswade the Apostles of the verity of his body and to proue euidently that it was not fantasticall heevseth the argument taken from these tvvo qualities and he commands his Apostles to feele and see giuing them thereby to vnderstand that as these two senses are the most certaine of all the rest so are they most able to discerne whether hee was a body or a spirit As if he would haue said If I be visible and palpable ye may be out of doubt that I haue a true body For as the Poet saith which Tertullian citeth also to this same purpose Tangere enim et tangi nisi corpus nulla potestres By these arguments it may be euidently seen how this Transubstantiation may no way stand with the verity of the bodie of Chr. Iesus And as it fights with the flesh of Christ Iesus so it repugnes directly the articles of our faith For in our Beliefe we professe Second sort of argumeÌ„t that Christ ascended out of this earth to the heauen where hee sits at the right hand of the Father vvhere hee gouerns and directs all things in heauen and earth from the which place he is to come at the last day to iudge the world This article teacheth vs that hee hath changed his dwelling vvhich hee had amongst vs on the earth and is ascended into the heauens where he sits at the right hand of his Father and shall remaine there according to the testimony of Peter which I cited out of the Acts 3.21 vntill the last day If hee sit at his Fathers right hand and be to remaine in heauen vntill the last day theÌ„ is he not corporally in the bread But the article of our Beliefe saith That he sitteth at the right hand of his Father and Peter saith in that place that the heauens must containe him vntill the last day Therefore this Transubstantiation is directly against the articles of our Beliefe the manifest place of the Scripture Thirdly it is opposite vnto the end Third sort of argumeÌ„t wherefore this Sacrament was instituted this is most euident for the end of the Sacrament is spirituall as the effect that floweth thereof is spiritual and the instrument whereby this spirituall food is applyed to vs is also spiritual But from a naturall and corporall presence a spirituall effect can neuer flowe therefore the corporall and naturall presence of the body and bloud of Christ Iesus repugnes directly the end of this Sacrament for the corporall presence must haue a corporall eating of this eating followeth a digestion in the stomacke and the thing that is digested in the stomack is neuer able to feed my soule to life eternall So this corporall presence must euer tend to a corporall end which is directly contrarie vnto the end wherefore this Sacrament was instituted Further Other arguments vnto the same effect if the bread were transubstantiate it should become the thing signified if it become the thing signified this Sacrament should want a signe and so it should not be a Sacrament for euery Sacrament as yee haue heard is a signe Now to say that the accidents of true bread as the colour and the roundnesse of it that they may serue as signes that is more then folly for between the signe and the thing signified there must be a conformity but there is no conformity between the accidents and the body and bloud of Christ Iesus For if that were so the accidents behoued to nourish vs corporally as the body and bloud of Christ Iesus is appointed to nourish vs spiritually Againe if the bread become the body and bloud of Christ Iesus it should follow that he had a body without bloud for hee hath instituted another signe besides to represent his bloud Also if there had been such a wonderfull thing as they speak of in this Sacrament there would haue been plaine mention made thereof in the Scripture for God himselfe works neuer a notable worke but he declares it either openly or more secretly in the Scripture that thereby hee may be glorified in his wonderfull works As yee may read in the Euangelist â—ohn 2.8 where the vvater was changed into wine Gene. 2.22 where the rib of Adam was changed into Heua Exodus 7.10 where Aarons rodde was turned into a Serpent there ye see that changing is manifestly expressed Therefore I say if there had bin such a monstrous change in these elemeÌ„ts of the Supper as they affirm the Scripture would not haue concealed it but expressed it but in respect there is no meÌ„tion made of this change in the Script therfore there is no such change in this action Further if there were such a change as they say either it is before these words of consecration be spoken or followes after the same words be spoken If the change be before the words of the coÌ„secration be spoken the consecration is superfluous their Proposition is false if the change be after the words be spoken This bread is my body their Proposition is false also because the word bread is spoken before the last syllable of their fiue words is pronounced These and infinite moe absurdities follow of this doctrine And yet they obstinately perseuer and vrge vs with the letter affirming that the words of Christ are so plaine that they admit no figure They would haue spoken more aduisedly if they had sought counsell of Augustine to haue discerned between a figuratiue speech and a proper speech for he in his third booke and 16. chapter of Christian doctrine speakes after this sort If the speech saith hee seeme to commaund a vvickedness or mischeife on to forbid any happinesse or any vvelfare it is not proper it is then figuratiue And he adds for an example a place out of Iohn 6.53 Except saith our Sauiour ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud yee haue no life in you Whereunto Augustine addeth This speech saith he sesmeth to coÌ„maund a mischiefe therefore it is a figuratiue speech vvhereby wee are commanded to coÌ„municate with the sufferings of Christ Iesus and with gladnes to keepe in perpetuall memory that the flesh of the Lord was crucified and wounded for vs. For otherwise it were more horrible as the same Augustine maketh mention in the second booke against the Aduersaries of the lavv to eate the flesh of Christ Iesus really then to murther him and more horrible to drinke his bloud then to shed his bloud Yet notwithstanding they are not ashamed still to hold maintaine that those words ought to be taken properly So that it appeareth that of very malice for contradiction sake to the end onely that they may withstand the truth they will not acknowledge this to be a sacrameÌ„tall speech For they are compelled will they nill they in other speeches of the like sort to acknowledge a