1 Cor. xi.

if ye

a speech any trope, (for allegory there is none, knew the proper difference of them both, which every grammarian can teach you,) then do I lay before your old eyes and spectacles too, Christ's words spoken of Luke xxii. the cup both in Luke and Paul, saying, This cup is the New Testament through my blood which is shed for you. Here Christ calleth the wine in the cup the self cup, which every man knoweth is not the wine. Also he calleth the cup the New Testament, and yet was not the cup nor yet the wine contained therein the New Testament, and yet calleth it the New Testament, established and confirmed with his blood; here ye see he called not the cup his blood, but the Testament. Where is now your literal sense that ye would so feign frame for your Papists' pleasure? If ye will so sore stick to the letter, why do your faction leave here the plain letter, saying that the letter slayeth; going about the bush with this exposition and circumlocution, expounding "This is my body," that is to say, this is converted and turned into my body, and this bread is tranScripture. substantiated into my body. How far, lo! M. More, is this your strange Thomistical sense from the flat letter? If ye be so addicted to the letter, why fray ye the common people from the literal sense with this bug, telling them the letter slayeth? But there is neither letter nor spirit that may bridle nor hold your stiff-necked heads.

How the Papists wrest the words of

John iv.

1 Cor. x.

Also ye shall understand that Christ rebuked the Jews for their literal sense, and carnal understanding of his spiritual words, saying, My flesh profiteth you nothing at all to eat it, &c. And their literal taking of his spiritual words was the cause of their murmur, &c. For even there (as also like in other places) to eat Christ's flesh, &c. after the common phrase of the Scripture, is not else than to believe that Christ suffered death, and shed his blood for us. Read ye Paul. Paul. Our fathers did all eat the same spiritual meat and drink the

Here

To eat flesh is to

Christ's

believe in

him.

The man

ner of

St. Paul's speaking.

same spiritual drink that we now eat and drink. I think M. More must leave his literal sense and material meat, or else deny Paul, and deny too, that our fathers did eat Christ and drink his blood, which all here Paul saith, for to eat and to drink this spiritual meat and drink, was, as himself declareth, to eat and drink Christ. They drank of the stone (saith Paul) that went with them, which stone was Christ. And we eat and drink the very same stone, which is nothing else than to believe in Christ. They believed in Christ to come, and we believe in him come, and to have suffered. Where is now, think M. More's literal sense for ye, the eating of Christ's material body? Our fathers were one and the same Church with us, under the same testament and promise, and even of the same faith in Christ. And even as they eat him and drank his blood, even the same spiritual meat and drink that we do eat and drink; so do we now in the same faith. For what else was signified by this manner of speech, Our fathers Matt. xv. did eat and drink Christ, than that they believed in Christ to be incarnated and to suffer death? What else meant the poor woman of Canaan by eating, than to believe? When she answered Christ, saying, Ye say truth my Lord. But yet do the little whelps eat of the crumbs that fall from their master's table. This did she answer in an allegory according to Christ's first answer unto her, she meaning by the eating of the crumbs, the belief of his words and Gospel to be scattered among the Gentiles as Christ answering, confirmed her meaning, saying, O woman, great is thy faith. He said not, thou art a great eater and devourer of bread. Here it is plain, that to eat in the Scripture is taken to believe, as Christ himself expoundeth it, so often and so John vi. plenteously. And I am here compelled to inculcate and iterate it with so many words, to satisfy (if it were possible) this carnal flesh vowerer and fleshly Jew.

Now to examine and to discuss this matter more

An allego

rical speech well allow

ed and

used of

Christ.

The old Passover compared with the Supper of our Lord.

Baptism compared

with Cir

cumcision.

1 Cor. x.

xi. and xii. Rom. vi. Eph. iv.

Eucharis

giving.

1 Cor. x. and xi.

deeply and plainly, I shall compare the old Passover with the new and Supper of the Lord. And to show you how the figures correspond their verities, I will begin my comparison at baptism, comparing it with the Lord's Supper, which be the two Sacraments left us now under the grace of the Gospel. And afterwards (to set forth both these Sacraments plainly,) I will compare Circumcision with Baptism, and the paschal lamb with Christ's Supper.

We (by baptism) as we testified unto the congregation our entering into the body of Christ, (take here Christ's body, as doth Paul for his congregation,) to die, to be buried, and to rise with him, to mortify our flesh, and to be revived in spirit, to cast off the old man, and to do upon us the new even so by the thanksgivtia thanks- ing (for so did the old Greek doctors call this supper,) at God's board, or at the Lord's Supper, (for so doth Paul call it,) we testify the unity and communion of our hearts, glued unto the whole body of Christ in love: yea and that such love as Christ at this, his last Supper, expressed, what time he said, his body should be broken, and his blood shed for the remission of our sins. And to be short, as baptism is the badge of our faith," so is the Lord's Supper the token of our love to God and our neighbours: whereupon standeth the law and the prophets. For the end of the precept is love out of a pure heart, and good conscience and faith unfeigned. So that by baptism we be initiated and consigned unto the worship of one God in one faith. And by the same faith and love at the Lord's Supper, we show ourselves to continue in our possession, to be incorporated and to be the very members of Christ's body.

1 Tim. i.

Baptism

by Circum

Both these sacraments were figured in Moses' law. was figured Baptism was figured by circumcision; and the Lord's cision, and Supper, by the eating of the paschal lamb. Where like Supper by as by circumcision, the people of Israel were reckoned the paschal to be God's people, several from the Gentiles, so be

the Lord's

lamb.

we now by baptism reckoned to be consigned unto Christ's church, several from Jews, paynims, &c. And as their passover, that is to say, their solemn feast yearly, in eating their paschal lamb, was an outward token of their perseverance in their religion, and in remembrance of their passage out of Egypt into the land

of Canaan; so is now the eating of the Lord's Supper Luke xii. (which Christ and Paul called our passover,) a token of 1 Cor. v. our perseverance in our christian profession at baptism, and also thanksgiving with that joyful remembrance of our redemption from sin, death, and hell, by Christ's Exodus xii. death. Of the figure of this Supper, our new passover, thus it is written. After ye be entered into that land, which the Lord God shall give you according to his promise, ye shall keep this ceremony. And when your children ask you what religion is this? Ye shall answer them, It is the sacrifice of the passover of the Lord, when the Lord passed forth by the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, smiting the Egyptians and delivering our houses. This eating therefore of the paschal lamb was the figure of the Lord's Supper, which figure, when the hour was come that he would it to cease and give place unto the verity, as the shadow to vanish away at the presence of the body; he said thus, Luke xxii. With a fervent desire do I long to eat this passover

with you ere I suffer.

Let The pas

eaten and

ment in

Again, let us compare the figure with the truth, the old passover with the new, and diligently consider the property of speaking, in and of either of them. us expend the succession, imitation, and time, how the chal lamb new succeeding the old mediator Christ between both the Sacrasitting at the Supper celebrating both with his presence, stituted. did put out the old and bring in the new. For there is in either of them such like composition of words, such affinity and proportion of speech, such similitude and propriety in them both, the new so corresponding in all things to the old, that the old declareth the new, what

Two things to be considered in

the Sacraments.

is it, wherefore it was instituted, and what is the very use thereof. And to begin at circumcision, the figure of baptism. Ye shall understand, that in such rites and sacraments there are two things to be considered, that is to wit, the thing, and the sign of the thing. The thing is it wherefore the sign is instituted to signify it, as in circumcision, the thing is, the covenant to be of the people of God, and the sign is, the cutting of the foreskin of the privy member. In the passover, the thing was, the remembrance with thanksgiving for the deliverance out of the hard servitude of Egypt; but the sign was, the lamb roasted with such ceremonies as were there prescribed them. So in baptism; the thing is, the promise to be of the church of Christ: the sign is, the of the Sa- dipping into the water with the holy words.

The matter and

substance

crament

and the

same.

In our

Lord's Supper, the very thing is Christ promised and signs of the crucified, and of faith with thanksgiving unto the father for his son given to suffer for us. But the sign is, the dealing and distributing or reaching forth of the bread and wine, with the holy words of our Lord spoken at his supper, after he had thus dealt the bread and wine unto his disciples.

The sign

is called

Gen. xvii.

And here is it diligently to be noted, that in all such the thing. rites, ceremonies, or sacraments of God thus instituted, these two things (that is to wit, the thing signified, and the sign that signifieth,) be concurrent and inseparable. It is the common use and property of speech in the scripture, to call the sign the thing. As is circumcision called the covenant. Every manchild must be circumcised, that my covenant might be in your flesh for a perpetual band. And yet was it only but the outward sign and seal of the covenant, that the seed of Abraham should be his especial chosen people, and that he would be their God. The lamb that was but the Exodus xii. sign, was called the passover; and yet was not the lamb the passing over, but the sign only exciting and admonishing them to remember that deliverance by the