IESVIT.
The second Text, much vrged for the giuing of the Cup vnto all men, is the words of our Sauiour, Bibite ex hoc omnes, wherein some note our Sauiours prouidence, saying, That he foreseeing that some would take the Cup from the Laitie, granting them the consecrated Bread, said [ B] of the Supper, Bibite ex hoc omnes; but not of the Bread, Manducate ex hoc omnes. I answere, The words of our Sauiour be plaine, Drinke ye all of this; but the diffi∣cultie is, to whom they are spoken, and who are these all? Luther would haue, all men for whom the bloud of Christ was shed; whence is followes, that as the Bloud of Christ was shed for all men, euen Infidels, Iewes, Turkes, In∣fants, the Cup also should be giuen vnto all these, which to [ C] say were verie absurd. Others restraine the word, All, to the Faithfull, come to the yeares of discretion, who must drinke of the Cup all of them. But what shall we say of them that are by nature abstemij, who cannot indure the tast of any wine, yet are not to be excluded from the Sa∣crament?
Wherefore the trueth is, that these wordes were spo∣ken vnto all the Apostles, and to them All only. And though [ D] it be enough for Catholickes to say it, and put their Ad∣uersaries to prooue their pretended precept, which they call of the eternall King, for the Cup (and so long as they cannot cleerely conuince the contrarie, good reason the word of the Church, defined by Councels, should stand) yet exabū∣danti, we can very probably shew out of the sacred Text, that the particle All, concernes all the Apostles only. First, what one Euangelist saith was commanded vnto all, Bibi∣te ex hoc omnes, Drinke yee all of this; another relates to [ E] haue beene answerably performed by them all, biberunt ex eo omnes, all dranke thereof. But the second All, is re∣strained to all the Apostles, and to them all onely: What