Of the Elements, Action, and Subjects of it
death of the Testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no force at all, whilst the Testator liveth.
Thus much of the Author, nature, and ends of the Lord's supper.
Of the Elements, Action, and Subjects of it Quest. 1. ARE not bread and wine too small and common things, to represent the body and blood of Christ?
A. Though a bit of bread, and a draught of wine, be things of small value in themselves; yet they are great in respect of their use and end. A pennyworth of wax is a small thing in itself, but being applied to the label of a deed, may be advanced to the worth of thousands of pounds, as it receives the seal to a great inheritance.
Q. 2. Is not the bread in the sacrament turned into the very body of Christ itself, by transubstantiation?
A. No, it is not; but the elements retain still their own proper nature of bread and wine, after the words of consecration; and are so called;
1 Cor. 11:26. For as often as ye eat this bread, &c. Mat. 26:29. But I say unto you, I will not henceforth drink of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
Q. 3. What is the first argument, by which Protestants confute the Popish doctrine of transubstantiation?
A. The first argument against it, is taken from the end of the sacrament; which is, to bring Christ's body and blood to our remembrance; 1 Cor. 11:24, 25. This do in remembrance of me. Now signs for remembrance, are of things absent, not present.
Q. 4. What is the second argument?
A. Because the language in which our Saviour spake, had no other property of expression; there being no other word for signify, but is instead thereof, as is manifest in both Testaments; Gen. 41:27. And the seven ill-favoured kine, that came up after them, are seven years of famine. Rev. 1:20. The seven stars, are the angels of the seven churches; and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest, are the seven churches.
Q. 5. What is the third argument against transubstantiation?
A. The manifold gross absurdities, that naturally and necessarily follow on this doctrine, shew the falseness of it, and that it is justly rejected and abhorred by all sound Christians.
Q. 6. What is the first absurdity that follows it?
A. This doctrine allows that to a silly priest, which is not to be allowed to all the angels in heaven. It allows him power to make his
Maker, and eat his God; and in justifying this by the omnipotency of God, they say no more, than what a Turk may say to justify the most ridiculous fooleries of the Alcoran.
Q. 7. What is the second absurdity of transubstantiation?
A. The second absurdity is this, that it denies the truth of the testimony given by the senses of all men, that it is real bread, and real wine, after consecration, and not flesh and blood. And if the testimony of sense be not certain, then the being of God cannot be proved by the things that are made; contrary to Rom. 1:20. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, &c. Nor the truth of Christ's resurrection, by seeing and feeling; contrary to Luke 24:39. Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see, &c.
Q. 8. What is the third absurdity of transubstantiation?
A. The third absurdity is this, that in affirming the accidents of bread and wine to remain, and their substance to vanish; they affirm, that there is length, breadth, thickness, moisture, and sweetness; and yet nothing long, broad, thick, moist, or sweet; which is a perfect contradiction.
Q. 9. What is the fourth absurdity of transubstantiation?
A. It implies, that the entire living body of Christ sat at the table, and at the same time was dead, and in the disciples mouths and stomachs in the first sacrament; and that in all after-sacraments it is wholly in heaven, and wholly in as many thousand places in the world, as there are sacraments administered.
Q. 10. What doth the breaking of this bread, and pouring out of wine in the sacrament, signify?
A. It signifies the violent painful death, and bitter sufferings of Christ for us; 1 Cor. 11:26. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
Q. 11. What doth the giving and taking of the sacramental bread and wine signify?
A. These actions signify God's exhibiting, and the believers applying of Christ, and all his benefits, to their souls.
Q. 12. Who are fit subjects to receive the Lord's supper?
A. None that are grossly ignorant, scandalous, or unbelievers in their natural state, for such cannot examine themselves, as the word requires; 1 Cor. 11:28. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. But do eat and drink judgment to themselves; 1 Cor. 11:29. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.