A golden chaine: or The description of theologie containing the order of the causes of saluation and damnation, according to Gods word. A view whereof is to be seene in the table annexed. Hereunto is adioyned the order which M. Theodore Beza vsed in comforting afflicted consciences.

The X. point. Of reall presence. (Book 10)

Our Consent.

I. We hold and beleeue a presence of Christs bodie and blood in the sacra∣ment of the Lords supper: and that no fained, but a true and reall presence which must be considered two waies: first in respect of the signes, secondly in respect of the communicants. For the first we hold and teach, that Christs bo∣die and blood, are truely present with the bread and wine, beeing signes in the Sacrament: but how? not in respect of place or coexistence: but by sacramen∣tall relation on this manner. When a word is vttered, the sound comes to the eare; and at the same instant, the thing signified comes to the mind; and thus by relation the word and the thing spoken of, are both present togither. Euen so at the Lords table bread and wine must not be considered barely, as subsistā∣ces and creatures, but as outward signes in relation to the bodie and blood of Christ: and this relation, arising from the very institution of the Sacrament, standes in this, that when the elements of bread and wine are present to the hand and to the mouth of the receiuer; at the very same time the bodie and blood of Christ are presented to the minde: thus and no otherwise is Christ truely present with the signes. The second presence is in respect of the com∣municants, to whose beleeuing hearts he is also really present. It will bee said, what kind of presence is this? Ans. Such as the communion in the sacrament is, ••uch is the presence: and by the communion must we iudge of the presence. Nowe the communion is on this manner: God the father according to the te∣nour of the Euangelicall couenant. gives Christ in this sacrament as really and truely, as any thing can bee giuen to man, not by part and peecemeale (as wee say) but whole Christ, God and man, on this sort. In Christ there be two na∣tures, the godhead•• & manhood. The godhead is not giuen in regard of sub∣stance, or essence: but only in regard of efficacie, merits, & operatiō cōceiued thence to the manhood. And further in this sacrament Christs whole man∣hood is giuen both bodie and soule, in this order. First of all is giuen the very manhood in respect of substance, and that really: secondly the merits and be∣nefits thereof, as namely, the satisfaction performed by and in the manhood; to the iustice of God. And thus the intire manhood with the benefits thereof,

are giuen wholly and ioyntly togither. For the two dislinct signes of bread and wine signifie not two distinct giuings of the bodie apart, and the blood a∣part; but the full and perfect nourishment of our soules. Againe the benefits of Christs manhood are diuersly giuen, some by imputation, which is, an acti∣on of God accepting that which is done by Christ as done by vs: and thus it hath pleased God to giue the passion of Christ and his obedience. Some a∣gaine are giuen by a kind of propagation, which I cannot fitly expresse in tearmes but I resemble it thus. As one candle is lighted by another, and one torch or candle-light is conueied to twentie candles: euen so the inherent righ∣teousnes of euery beleeuer, is deriued from the storehouse of righteousnesse, which is in the manhood of Christ; for the righteousnes of all the members, is but the fruit thereof, euen as the naturall corruption in all mankinde, is but a fruit of that originall sinne which was in Adam. Thus we see howe God for his part giues Christ: and that really. To proceede, when God giues Christ, he giues withall at the same time the spirit of Christ, which spirit creates in the heart of the receiuer the instrument of true faith, by which the heart doeth re∣ally receiue Christ giuen of God, by resting vpon the promise, which God hath made that he will giue Christ and his righteousnesse to euery true belee∣uer. Now then, when God giues Christ with his benefits, & man for his part by faith receiues the same as they are giuen, there riseth that vnion which is betweene euery good receiuer and Christ himselfe. Which vniō is not forged but a reall, true, and neere coniunction: nearer then which, none is or can be: because it is made by a solemne giuing and receiuing that passeth betweene God and man: as also by the bond of one and the same spirit. To come then to the point, considering there is a reall vnion, and consequently a reall commu∣nion betweene vs and Christ, (as I haue prooued) there must needes bee such a kind of presence wherein Christ is truely and really present to the heart of him that receiues the sacrament in faith. And thus farre doe wee consent with the Romish Church touching reall presence.

The dissent.

We differ not touching the presence it selfe, but onely in the maner of pre∣sence. For though we hold a reall presence of Christs bodie and blood in the sacrament, yet doe we not take it to be locall, bodily, or substantiall, but spiri∣tuall and mysticall; to the signes by sacramentall relation, and to the commu∣nicants by faith alone. On the contrarie the Church of Rome maintaines tran∣substantiation, that is, a locall, bodily, and substantiall presence of Christs bo∣die and blood, by a change and conuersion of the bread and wine into the said bodie and blood.

Our reasons.

I. This corporall presence ouerturnes sundrie articles of faith. For we be∣leeue that the bodie of Christ was made of the pure substance of the Virgin Marie, and that but once, namely when he was conceiued by the holy Ghost, and borne. But this cannot stand, if the bodie of Christ be made of bread and his blood of wine, as they must needs be, if there be no succession or annihila∣tion but a reall conuersion of substances in the sacrament: vnlesse we must be∣leeue contrarieties, that his bodie was made of the substance of the Virgin, &

not of the Virgin; made once and not once but often. Againe, if his bodie and blood be vnder the formes of bread and wine, then is he not as yet ascended into heauen, but remaines still among vs. Neither can hee be said to come frō heauen at the day of iudgement: for hee that must come thence to iudge the quicke and dead, must be absent from the earth. And this was the auncient faith. Augustine saith,* 1.1 that Christ according to his maiestie and prouidence and grace is present with vs to the ende of the world: but according to his assumed flesh he is not alwaies with vs. Cyril saith, He is absent in bodie and present in vertue, whereby all things are gouerned. Vigilius saith, That he is gone from vs accor∣ding to his humanitie: he hath left vs in his humanitie: in the forme of a seruant absent from vs: when his flesh was on earth, it was not in heauen: being on earth, hee was not in heauen: and being now in heauen, he is not on earth. Fulgentius saith, One and the same Christ according to his humane substance, was absent from heauen whē he was on earth: and left the earth when he ascended into heauen.

Reason II. This bodily presence ouerturnes the nature of a true bodie, whose common nature or essentiall propertie it is, to haue length, breadth, & thicknes, which beeing taken away a bodie is no more a bodie. And by rea∣son of these three dimensions, a bodie can occupie but one place at once, as Aristotle said,* 1.2 the propertie of a bodie is to be seated in some place, so as a mā may say where it is. They therefore that hold the bodie of Christ to be in ma∣ny places at once, doe make it no bodie at all; but rather a spirit, and that infi∣nit. They alleadge that God is almightie; that is true indeede, but in this and like matters we must not dispute what God can do, but what he wil doe. And I say further because god is omnipotent, therfore there be some things which he cannot do, as for him to denie himselfe, to lie, & to make the parts of a con∣tradiction to be both true at the same time. To come to the point, if God should make the very body of Christ to be in many places at once, he should make it to be no bodie while it remaines a bodie: and to be circumscribed in some one place and not circumscribed, because it is in many places at the same time: to be visible in heauen and inuisible in the sacrament; and thus should he make contradictions to be true: which to doe, is against his nature, and ar∣gues rather impotēcie then power. Augustine saith to this purpose.* 1.3 If he could lie, deceiue, he deceiued, deale vniustly, he should not be omnipotent. And, Therefore hee is omnipotent, because he can not doe these things. Againe, He is called omnipo∣tent•• by doing that which he will, and not by doing that which he will not: which if it should befall him, he should not be omnipotent.

Reason III. Transubstantiation ouerturnes the very supper of the Lord. For in euery sacrament there must be a signe, a thing signified, and a propor∣tion or relation betweene them both. But popish reall presence takes al away: for when the bread is really turned into Christs bodie, and the wine into his bloode, then the signe is abolished, and there remaines nothing but the outwarde formes or appearance of breade and wine. Againe, it abolisheth the endes of the sacrament, whereof one is to remember Christ till his comming againe, who beeing present in the sacrament bodily, needes not to bee remembred: because helpes of remembrance are of things absent. A∣nother ende is to nourish the soule vnto eternall life: but by transubstanti∣ation

the principall feeding is of the bodie and not of the soule, which is one∣ly fed with spirituall foode: for though the bodie may be bettered by the food of the soule, yet can not the soule be fedde with bodily foode.

Reason IV. In the sacrament the bodie of Christ is receiued as it was cru∣cified, & his blood as it was shed vpon the crosse: but now at this time Christs bodie crucified, remaines still as a bodie, but not as a bodie crucified; because the act of crucifying is ceased. Therefore it is faith alone, that makes Christ crucified to be present vnto vs in the sacrament. Againe, that blood which ran out of the feete and hands and side of Christ vpon the crosse, was not gathe∣red vp againe and put into the veines: nay, the collection was needles, because after the resurrection, he liued no more a naturall but a spirituall life: & none knowes what is become of this blood. The Papist therefore can not say it is present vnder the forme of wine locally: and we may better say it is receiued spiritually by faith, whose propertie is to giue a being to things which are not.

Reason V. 1. Cor. 10.3. The fathers of the old testament did eate the same spirituall meate, and drinke the same spirituall drinke: for they dranke of the rocke which was Christ. Now they could not eate his bodie which was cruci∣fied, or drinke his blood shedde bodily, but by faith: because then his bodie and blood were not in nature. The Papists make answer, that the fathers did eate the same meate, and drinke the same spirituall drinke with themselues, not with vs. But their answer is against the text. For the Apostles intent is to prooue, that the Iewes were euery way equall to the Corinthians, because they did eate the same spirituall meate, and dranke the same spirituall drinke with the Corinthians; otherwise his reason prooues not the point which he hath in hand, namely that the Israelites were nothing inferiour to the Corin∣thians.

Reason VI. And it is said, the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: so it may be saide, that the sacrament of the Lords supper was made for man, and not man for it: and therefore man is more excellent then the sacrament. But if the signes of bread and wine be really turned into the bo∣die and blood of Christ, then is the sacrament infinitely better then man; who in his best estate is onely ioyned to Christ, and made a member of his mysti∣call bodie: whereas the bread and wine are made very Christ. But the sacra∣ment or outward elements indeede are not better then man: the end beeing al∣waies better then the thing ordained to the ende. It remaines therefore that Christs presence is not corporall but spirituall. Againe in the supper of the Lord, euery beleeuer receiueth whole Christ, God and man, though not the godhead: now by this carnall eating, we receiue not whole Christ, but onely a part of his manhood: and therefore in the sacrament there is no carnall eating, and consequently no bodily presence.

Reason VII. The iudgement of the auncient Church. Theodoret saith,* 1.4 The same Christ, who called his naturall bodie foode and bread, who also called him∣selfe a vine, he vouchsafed the visible signes the name of his owne bodie, not chaun∣ging nature, but putting grace to nature, whereby he meanes consecration. And,* 1.5 The mysticall signes after sanctification loose not their proper nature. For they re∣maine in their first nature, and keepe their first figure and forme: and as before,

may be touched and seene: and that which they are made, is vnderstood, beleeued, a∣dored. Gelasius saith,* 1.6 Bread and wine passe into the substance of the bodie & blood of Christ, yet so as the substance or nature of bread and wine ceaseth not. And they are turned into the diuine substance, yet the bread and wine remaine still in the propertie of their nature. Lumbard saith,* 1.7 If it be asked what conuersion this is, whether formall, or substantiall, or of an other kind, I am not able to define. And that the fathers held not transubstantiatiō, I proue it by sundrie reasons. First, they vsed in former timesa 1.8 to burne with fire that which remained after the ad∣ministration of the Lords supper. Secondly by the sacramentall vnion of the bread and wine with the bodie and blood of Christ, they vsed to confirme the personall vnion of the manhood of Christ with the godhead against he∣retickes: which argument they would not haue vsed, if they had beleeued a popish reall presence. Thirdly it was a custome in Constantinople, that if ma∣ny parts of the sacrament remained after the administration thereof was en∣ded, that young children should be sent for from the schoole to eate them; who ne∣uerthelesse were barred the Lords table.* 1.9 And this argues plainely that the Church in those daies, tooke the bread after the administration was ended, for common bread. Againe, it was once an order in the Romane Church, that the wine should be consecrated by dipping into it bread, which had beene con∣secrated.* 1.10 But this order cannot stand with the reall presence, in which the bread is turned both into the bodie and blood. Nicholaus Cabasilas saith, Af∣ter he hath vsed some speech to the people, hee erects their mindes, and lif••s their thoughts from earth and saith, Sursum corda, Let vs lift vp our hearts, let vs thinke on things aboue, and not on things that are vpon the earth. They consent & say, that they lift vp their hearts thither, where is their treasure, and where Christ sits at the right hand of his father.

Obiections of Papists.

I. Their first reason is, Ioh. 6.55. My flesh is meat indeede, and my blood is drinke indeede: therefore (say they) Christs body must be eaten with the mouth and his blood drunke accordingly. Ans. The chapter must be•• vnderstood of a spirituall eating of Christ: his bodie is meate indeed, but spirituall meate, & his blood spirituall drink, to be receiued not by the mouth, but by faith. This is the very point that Christ here intends to prooue, namely that to beleeue in him is to eate his flesh and to drinke his blood are all one. Againe, this chap∣ter must not be vnderstood of that speciall eating of Christ in the sacrament: for it is said generally, v. 53. Except ye eate the flesh of Christ, and drinke his blood, ye haue no life in you: and if these very wordes (which are the substance of the chapter) must be vnderstood of a sacramentall eating, no man before the cō∣ming of Christ was saued: for none did bodily eate or drinke his bodie or blood; considering it was not then existing in nature, but onely was present to the beleeuing heart by faith.

II. Obiect. An other argument is taken from the words of the institution. This is my bodie. Ans. These words must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure: his bodie beeing put for the signe and seale of his body. It is obiected, that when any make their last wills and testaments, they speake as plainely as

they can; now in this supper Christ ratifies his last will and testament: & there∣fore he spake plainely, without any figure. Ans. Christ here speaketh plainely and by a figure also: for it hath beene alwaies the vsual manner of the Lord in speaking of the sacraments, to giue the name of the thing signified to the signe: as Gen. 17. 10. circumcision is called the couenant of God: and in the next verse in the way of exposition, the signe of the couenant. And Exod. 12. 11. the paschall lambe is called the angels passing by or ouer the houses of the Israe∣lites, whereas indeede it was but a signe thereof: and 1. Cor. 10.4. The rock was Christ. 1. Cor. 5.7. The passeouer was Christ. And the like phrase is to bee founde in the institution of this sacramēt concerning the cup, which the Papists thē∣selues confesse to be figuratiue: when it is said, Luk. 22. This cup is the newe te∣stament in my blood, that is, a signe, seale, and pledge thereof. Againe the time when these words were spoken must be considered, and it was before the pas∣sion of Christ, whereas yet his bodie was not crucified nor his blood shed: and consequently neither of them could bee receiued in bodily manner, but by faith alone. Againe, Christ was not onely the author, but the minister of this sacrament at the time of institution thereof: and if the bread had beene truely turned into his bodie, and the wine into his blood, Christ with his own hands should haue taken his owne bodie and blood, and haue giuen it to his disci∣ples, nay, which is more, he should with his owne hands, haue taken his owne flesh, and drunken his owne blood, and haue eaten himselfe. For Christ him∣selfe did eate the bread and drinke the wine, that he might with his owne per∣son consecrate his last supper, as he had consecrated baptisme before. And if these words should be properly vnderstood, euery man should bee a man∣slaier in his eating of Christ. Lastly by means of popish real presence, it comes to passe, that our bodies should be nourished by naked qualities without any substance which in all philosophie is false and erronious. To help this and the like absurdities, some Papists make nine wonders in the sacrament.* 1.11 The first, that Christs bodie is in the Eucharist in as large a quantitie as he was vpon the crosse•• and is now in heauen, & yet excludes not the quantitie of the bread. The second, that there be accidents without a subiect. The third, that bread is turned into the body of Christ, & yet is not the matter of the bodie, nor resolued to nothing. The fourth, that the bodie increaseth not by consecration of many hosts, and is not diminished by often receiuing. The fifth, that the bodie of Christ is vnder many consecrated hosts. The sixt, that when the host is deuided, the body of Christ is not deuided, but vnder euery part thereof is whole Christ. The seuenth, that when the priest holds the host in his hand, the bodie of Christ is not felt by it selfe nor seene, but the formes of bread and wine. The eight, that when the formes of bread and wine cease, the body and blood of Christ ceaseth also to be there. The ninth, that the accidents of bread and wine haue the same effects with the bread and wine it selfe, which are to nourish and fil••. On this manner it shall be easie for any man to defend the most absurd opinion that is or can be, if he may haue libertie to answer the arguments alleadged to the contrarie by wonders.

To conclude, seeing there is a reall communion in the sacrament between Christ and euery beleeuing heart, our dutie therefore is, to bestowe our hearts on Christ, endeauouring to loue him, and to reioyce in him, and to

long after him aboue all things: all our affiance must be in him, & with him; wee beeing now on earth must haue our conuersation in heauen. And this is the true reall presence, which the auncient Church of God hath commended vnto vs: for in all these liturgies these wordes are vsed, and are yet extant in the Popish masse, Lift vp your hearts: we lift them vp vnto the lord. By which words the communicants were admonished to direct their mindes and their faith to Christ sitting at the right hand of God. Thus said Augustine,* 1.12 If we celebrate the ascension of the Lord with deuotion, let vs ascend with him, & lift vp our hearts. Againe, they which are alreadie risen with Christ in faith and hope are inuited to the great table of heauen, to the table of Angels, where is the bread.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Tract. 1. in Ioh. Li. 9. in Ioh. c. 21. Contr. Eu∣tich. l. 1. & 4 Lib. 2. ad Thrasi mun∣dum.
• * 1.2

  cap. de cate∣gor. quant.
• * 1.3

  De Symb. ad Catech. l. 1. c. 1.
• * 1.4

  Dialog. 1. immutab.
• * 1.5

  same dialog.
• * 1.6

  Lib. de duab. nat. Christ.
• * 1.7

  Li. 4. dist. 11.
• a 1.8

  Hesych. lib. 2. c. 8. in Le∣uiticum. Theodoret. dialog. 2.
• * 1.9

  Euang. l. 4. Niceph. l. 17 c. 25.
• * 1.10

  Am••la. 2. l. de off. eccles. c. 12. & 15. Li. de expos. Liturg. c. 26.
• * 1.11

  Ioh. de Com∣bis comp. Theolog. lib. 6. cap. 14.
• * 1.12

  Serm. de Ascens. 1. Serm. 14. fer. pascae.