A dispute against the English-popish ceremonies, obtruded upon the Church of Scotland Wherein not…A dispute against the English-popish ceremonies, obtruded vpon the Church of Scotland Wherein not…

Further, it is to be remembered (which I have also before ^xnoted out of Dr. Usher) that the Sacramental presence of the body of Christ, or that presence of it which is inferred upon the Sacramental union which is betwixt it and the outward Sign, is not the real or spiritual presence of it, (for in this manner, it is present to us out of the Sacrament, even as oft as by faith we apprehend it and the virtue thereof,) but it is figuratively only so called, the sense being this, that the body of Christ is present and given to us in the Sacrament, meaning by his body the Sign of his body. These things being so, whosoever worshippeth Christs body in the Eucharist, & that in respect of the Sacramental presence of it in the same, can not choose but hold that Christs body is bodily and really under the species of the bread, and so fall into the Idolatry of bread-worship; or else ^your Divines have not rightly convinced the Papists, as Idolatrous worshippers of the bread in the Eucharist, for as much as they attribute to it, that which it is not, nor hath not, to wit, that under the accidents thereof is contained substantially the true & living body of Christ, joined and united to his Godhead. What can B. Lindsey now answer for himself, except he say with ^zone of his brethren, that we should adore the flesh of Christ in the Sacrament, because Corporalis praesentia Christi, sed non modo corporali, comitatur Sacramentum Eucharistiae: And Christ is there present corporaliter, modo spiritually? But this man contradicts himself miserably; For we had him a little before, acknowledging that in pane, corporalis Christi presentia non est. How shall we then reconcile him with himself? he would say that Christ is not bodily present in the Sacrament after a bodily manner; but he is bodily present after a spiritual manner. Why should I blot paper with such a vanity, which implieth a contradiction, bodily and not bodily, spiritually and not spiritually?

Further, it is to be remembered (which I have also before ^xnoted out of Dr. Vsher) that the Sacramentall presence of the body of Christ, or that presence of it which is inferred upon the Sacramentall union which is betwixt it and the outward Signe, is not the reall or spirituall presence of it, (for in this maner, it is present to us out of the Sacrament, even as oft as by faith we apprehend it and the vertue thereof,) but it is figuratively only so called, the sence beeing this, that the body of Christ is present and given to us in the Sacramēt, meaning by his body the Signe of his body. These things being so, whosoever worshippeth Christs body in the Eucharist, & that in respect of the Sacramentall presence of it in the same, can not choose but hold that Christs body is bodily and really under the species of the bread, and so fall into the Idolatry of bread-worship; or else