ANSWER.
The Precept, Drinke ye all of this (saith the Iesuit) was per∣sonall, and concerned the Apostles onely, because our Sauiour commanded them All to drinke of the same Cup without fil∣ling and consecrating it anew. But, if Drinke ye all of this, had imported a generall duty, then Christ could not haue stinted them to one single Cup.
This obiection is grounded vpon a false Principle, which is, [ C] all Precepts are Personall in regard of their substance, wherein any circumstance is Personall. Nothing can be more absurd and false than this Position: for in the Decalogue it selfe, some things were Personall, as appeareth by the Preface, Exod. 20.2. Likewise in many generall or common Preepts of the old and new Testament, some personall circumstances may be noted, and yet the substance of the Commandement is generall. 1. Cro. 28.9. Pro. 30.1.3. Math. 18.2.3. Ioh. 13.13, 14.
Also we may consider a twofold vnitie of the Cup: Specifical, [ D] and Indiuiduall; to drinke of the same indiuiduall Cup, euen as to eate of the same indiuiduall loase, is an accidentall circum∣stance. But to drinke, and receiue the common kind, to wit, the fruit of the Wine, this is the substance of the Commandement. If we parallell the Obiection, the defect is manifestly ridicu∣lous. It is not of the substance of Christs Commandement, That lay People shall receiue consecrated Bread at the Communion, because the Bread which Christ gaue his Disciples, was of one Indiuiduall loafe, but the bread of one indiuiduall loafe will not suffice all men in the world, therefore the Precept of receiuing [ E] consecrated Bread was Personall, and concerned the Apostles only. Now if a man should vse this Argument, which in sub∣stance is the same with the Iesuits, he had in my opinion, more cause to blush for shame, than to glory before the Presence of a most iudicious and learned King, as this vaine Boaster doth.