A14212:248
A collection of certain learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zachary Ursine; doctor and professor of divinity in the noble and flourishing schools of Neustad. For explication of divers difficult points, laid down by that author in his catechism. Lately put in print in Latin by the last labour of D. David Parry: and now newly translated into English, by I.H. for the benefit and behoof of our Christian country-manA collection of certaine learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zachary Ursine; doctor and professor of divinitie in the noble and flourishing schools of Neustad. For explication of divers difficult points, laide downe by that author in his catechisme. Lately put in print in Latin by the last labour of D. David Parry: and now newlie translated into English, by I.H. for the benefit and behoofe of our Christian country-man
Oxford: printed by Joseph Barnes, 1600Oxford: printed by Ioseph Barnes, 1600
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
1 The first reason is because as Ireneus saith there are two things which have a Sacramentary proportion in the Eucharist, which the Accidents of bread and wine, & the substance of the body and blood of Christ can by no means have.
1 The first reason is because as Ireneus saith there are two thinges which haue a Sacramentary proportiō in the Eucharist, which the Accidents of bread and wine, & the substance of the body and bloud of Christ can by no meanes haue.
2 The second reason is deduced out of the words of Christ who said. This is my body, not, let this be, or, be made my body.
2 The second reason is deduced out of the wordes of Christ who saied. This is my body, not, let this bee, or, bee made my body.
3 The third reason is because the bread is termed bread both before the action of Consecration, in the action, and after the action.
3 The third reason is because the bread is termed bread both before the action of Consec••tion, in the action, and after the action.
4 The fourth reason is because the sounder Fathers retain the name of bread in the Lords Supper; and when they speak by way of Hyperbole of changing of the bread, 1they will be understood to speak Sacramentally As Theodore• Diolog. 1. witnesseth saying; it was the will of Christ that they who use the Sacraments should not bend and set their minds on the nature of the things which are seen, b•t should believe that which was made through grace by alteration of the names. Here in the same dialogue he teacheth that we must understand a sacramental change in these words; Christ honoured the visible signs with the title and name of his body and blood, NOT BY CHANGING THE NAME, but by adding grace to the nature.
4 The fourth reason is because the sounder Fathers reteine the name of bread in the Lords Supper; and when they speake by way of Hype•b•le of chāging of the bread, 1they will be vnderstood to speake Sacramentally As Theodore• Diolog. 1. witnesseth saying; it was the will of Christ that they who vse the Sacraments should not bend and set their mindes on the nature of the thinges which are seene, b•t should beleeue that which was made through grace by alteratiō of the names. Here in the same diologue he teacheth that we must vnderstand a sacramentall change in these wordes; Christ honoured the visible signes with the title and name of his body and bloud, NOT BY CHANGING THE NAME, but by adding grace to the nature.
II. The Signs and things signified are not united by Consubstantiation, that is, by a real Existence of two bodies in the same place, or, by the close conveyance of one within the other, such as we see is of the corn in a sack, ⟨p. 157⟩of […] in a mans purse, of an Infant in his cradle, or of […] in a roundlet. For this is a likelihood of things united in substance.
II. The Signes and things signified are not vnited by Consubstantiation, that is, by a reall Existence of two bodies in the same place, or, by the close conveiance of one within the other, such as we see is of the corne in a sacke, ⟨p. 157⟩of 〈…〉 in a mans purse, of an Infant in his cradell, or of 〈…〉 in a roundler. For this is a likelihood of things vnited in substance.
1 The first reason is, because the words of Christ, This is my body do signify unto us, not where Christs body is, neither what it is IN, WITH▪ or UNDER the bread: but what the bread it self is▪ and ought to be unto the godly in this use.
1 The first reason is, because the words of Christ, This is my bodie doe signifie vnto vs, not vvhere Christs body is, neither what it is IN, WITH▪ or VNDER the bread: but what the bread it selfe is▪ and ought to be vnto the godly in this vse.
2 The second Reason is, because the body of Christ is a true instrumental, finite, & visible body; after his ascension no longer present on the earth or every where, but conversant and remaining in heaven, even until his last coming.
2 The second Reason is, because the body of Christ is a true instrumentall, finite, & visible body; after his ascension no longer present on the earth or every where, but cōversant and remaining in heaven, even vntil his last comming.
3 The third Reason is, because the sounder Fathers do teach that the body and blood of Christ is in the bread & wine, not as in a cave ordain, but as in a mystery, and by a mystery. Chrysostom opers imperfecto Math. Homil 11. saith In hallowed and sanctified vessels is contained not the true body of Christ, but the mystery of Christs body.
3 The third Reason is, because the sounder Fathers do teach that the body and bloud of Christ is in the bread & wine, not as in a caue orden, but as in a mystery, and by a mystery. Chrysostome opers imperfecto Math. Homil 11. saith In holied and sanctified vessels is conteined not the true body of Christ, but the mysterie of Christs body.
III. The Signs and Things have their coherence in the Lords Supper by a Sacramental union. Now this union is of like quality with that union which is common to the whole kind of Sacraments; otherwise it should not be a sacramental union, but by a title of distinction should be termed, The union in the Lords Supper. But in all the other Sacraments their is an union of Relation and respect, to wit. A ⟨p. 158⟩mystical signification of the Thing signed by the Sign, a sealing, exhibiting, & receiving thereof after a lawful use, which is not without the faith and repentance of them which approach unto it to use it.
III. The Signes and Things haue their coherence in the Lords Supper by a Sacramental vnion. Now this vnion is of like quality with that vnion which is commō to the whole kinde of Sacraments; otherwise it should not be a sacramentall vnion, but by a title of distinction should be tearmed, The vnion in the Lords Supper. But in al the other Sacraments their is an vnion of Relation and respect, to wit. A ⟨p. 158⟩mysticall signification of the Thinge signed by the Signe, a sealing, exhibiting, & receiving thereof after a lawful vse, which is not without the faith and repentance of thē which approach vnto it to vse it.
1 The first is drawn from the nature of the whole kind, in this sort; There is such an union in all Sacraments; Therefore in the Supper also.
1 The first is drawne from the nature of the whole kinde, in this sort; There is such an vnion in all Sacraments; Therefore in the Supper also.
The Antecedent or former proposition of this argument is manifest out of the definition & principal end of the Sacraments.
The Antecedent or former proposition of this argumēt is manifest out of the definition & principal end of the Sacraments.
2 The second is framed on this manner; The bread is the body of Christ either in the truth of the thing (as Augustine according to Prospers opinion speaketh) or in a mystery signifying it. But it is not the body of Christ essentially & […] the truth of the thing▪ because there is no Transubstantiation. Therefore it is the body of Christ in a mystery so signifying.
2 The second is framed on this manner; The bread is the body of Christ either in the truth of the thing (as Augustine according to Prospers opinion speaketh) or in a mysterie signifying it. But it is not the body of Christ essentially & 〈…〉 the truth of the thing▪ because there is no Transubstantiation. Therefore it is the body of Christ in a mysterie so signifying.
