Filter authors and titles

A14216:2265

The Sum of Christian Religion

Name: The Sum of Christian Religion
Author: Zacharias Ursinus

The sum of Christian religion: delivered by Zacharias Ursinus in his lectures upon the Catechism authorised by the noble Prince Frederick, throughout his dominions: wherein are debated and resolved the questions of whatsoever points of moment, which have been or are controversed in divinity. Translated into English by Henry Parry, out of the last & best Latin editions, together with some supply of wa[n]ts out of his discourses of divinity, and with correction of sundry faults & imperfections, which are [sic] as yet remaining in the best corrected Latin.

:2262p. 781–782¶4

4 They reason from the consent of the Evangelists, and sain• Paul. Matthew, as Theophylact calculateth, writ his gospel eight years after christs ascension: Mark, ten years: Luke, fifteen years: Paul, twenty years. And all use the same words. A speech that is often uttered with the same words is not figurative. Such is the speech of the Lords Supper. Therefore it is not figurative. Answer. It is false that a speech often uttered in the same words is not figurative: because when a figure is conspicuous, known, and forcible, as this, it is retained. Again, the Evangelists repeat the words of Christ, because he spake figuratively. Often, though it be figurative, is this repeated: He shall baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire. Joh. 1. Matth. 3. Moreover we deny that this speech of Christs Supper was repeated by all in the same words. 1. Because Matthew and Mark say, This is my blood of the new testament. Luke saith, This cup is the new testament in my blood. 2. Matthew and Mark say, This is my body. Luke addeth, which is given for you: Paul, which is broken for you. 3. Paul saith, That the bread is the communion of the body of Christ. And albeit in this place he speaketh not purposedly of the Supper, yet he stirreth up and exhorteth unto it. Reply. It is the same sense and meaning. Answer. The question is not now of the sense and meaning of the words, but of the identity of the words, that is, whether they be the same words. Reply. Where there is no mention at all of any figure, there is no figure. Answer. This is false. For foolish were it, and men should seem to make show and ostentation of their skill and art, if they should say that they used a trim figure. And the scripture also often speaketh figuratively, and yet doth it not ad withal that it speaketh figuratively. Furthermore, they make mention hereof, when they show, that it consisteth of the nature of the subject and the attribute. The body was borne of the Virgin, crucified, and so forth. The bread is made of meal. Secondly, Christ willeth this to be done in remembrance of him: Therefore the ⟨p. 782⟩bread is called his body, as a memorial of his body. Thirdly Matthew and Mark say, This is my blood of the new testament. Paul and Luke say, This is the new testament in my blood.

4 They reason from the consent of the Euangelists, and sain• Paul. Matthew, as Theophylact calculateth, writ his gospel eight yeares after christs assension: Marke, ten yeares: Luke, fifteene yeares: Paul, twentie yeares. And all vse the same words. A speech that is often vttered with the same wordes is not figuratiue. Such is the speech of the Lordes Supper. Therefore it is not figuratiue. Answere. It is false that a speech often vttered in the same words is not figuratiue: because when a figure is conspicuous, knowen, and forcible, as this, it is reteined. Againe, the Euangelists repeat the woordes of Christ, because hee spake figuratiuely. Often, though it bee figuratiue, is this repeated: He shal baptize with the holie Ghost and with fier. Ioh. 1. Matth. 3. Moreouer we denie that this speech of Christs Supper was repeated by all in the same wordes. 1. Because Matthew and Mark say, This is my bloud of the new testament. Luke saith, This cup is the new testament in my bloud. 2. Matthew and Marke say, This is my bodie. Luke addeth, which is giuen for you: Paul, which is broken for you. 3. Paul saith, That the bread is the communion of the bodie of Christ. And albeit in this place hee speaketh not purposedly of the Supper, yet hee stirreth vp and exhorteth vnto it. Replie. Jt is the same sense and meaning. Aunswere. The question is not now of the sense and meaning of the woordes, but of the identitie of the wordes, that is, whether they bee the same wordes. Replie. Where there is no mention at all of anie figure, there is no figure. Answere. This is false. For foolish were it, and men shoulde seeme to make shewe and ostentation of their skill and art, if they should say that they vsed a trim figure. And the scripture also often speaketh figuratiuely, and yet doth it not ad withall that it speaketh figuratiuely. Furthermore, they make mention hereof, when they shew, that it consisteth of the nature of the subiect and the attribute. The bodie was borne of the Virgin, crucified, and so forth. The bread is made of meale. Secondly, Christ willeth this to bee done in remembraunce of him: Therefore the ⟨p. 782⟩breade is called his bodie, as a memoriall of his bodie. Thirdly Matthew and Marke say, This is my bloud of the newe testament. Paul and Luke say, This is the newe testament in my bloud.

:2263p. 782–783¶4

Now the new testament is the bond whereby God hath bound himself to receive the faithful and repentant into favour, and they bind themselves to yield faith and obedience unto him. Fourthly, Paul saith, That the bread is the communion of Christs body, which is not any corporal eating. 1. Because the faithful are thereby one body in christ. 2. Because he compareth it with the Communion of the altar in the old testament, which was not corporal. 3. Because it can agree but to the faithful only, and not to the wicked. 4. John showeth that communion: If we walk in the light we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin. And further this communion whereof saint Paul speaketh, is our union with Christ, and fruition of all his benefits by faith. Hither belongeth the similitude of the body and the members, the vine and the branches; which have nothing to do with any corporal eating. This communion was and is common to all the faithful from the beginning unto the worlds end. But they could not eat the body of christ corporally by their mouth. That we might grow up unto him, by whom all the body is coupled and knit together. He that is joined unto the Lord, is one spirit. And by one spirit are we all baptized into one body. Hereby know we, that we dwell in him, and he in us; because he hath given us of his spirit. This union therefore is that communion, which is wrought by the holy Ghost. Wherefore it is spiritual For bread cannot be this communion but by a figure, as it is a sign of it. Reply. He that is guilty of the body of Christ, eateth it. They who receive unworthily are guilty of the body of Christ. Therefore they eat it corporally: for spiritually they cannot: because if they could so eat it, they should not be guilty. Answer. The Major is false For he is guilty of Christs body who by his sins hangeth it on the Cross again, and despiseth Christs benefit. For any real eating is not required to this guilt, but he that will not receive Christ offered by faith, is thereby made guilty. So the injury done unto the Ark, is said to be done unto the Lord. Reply. They that discern not the Lords body, eat it. But the ⟨p. 783⟩guilty discern it not; Therefore they eat it. Answer.

Now the newe testament is the bond whereby God hath bound himselfe to receiue the faithful and repentant into fauour, and they binde themselues to yeelde faith and obedience vnto him. Fourthly, Paul saith, That the bread is the communion of Christs bodie, which is not any corporal eating. 1. Because the faithful are thereby one bodie in christ. 2. Because he compareth it with the Communion of the altar in the old testament, which was not corporal. 3. Because it can agree but to the faithful onely, and not to the wicked. 4. Iohn sheweth that communion: If we walke in the light we haue fellowship one with another, and the bloud of Iesus Christ his sonne cleanseth vs from all sinne. And further this communion whereof saint Paul speaketh, is our vnion with Christ, and fruition of all his benefites by faith. Hither belongeth the similitude of the bodie and the members, the vine and the braunches; which haue nothing to doe with any corporal eating. This communion was and is common to all the faithful from the beginning vnto the worlds end. But they could not eat the body of christ corporally by their mouth. That wee might growe vp vnto him, by whom all the bodie is coupled and knit together. He that is ioined vnto the Lord, is one spirite. And by one spirite are we all baptized into one bodie. Hereby know we, that we dwell in him, and he in vs; because he hath giuen vs of his spirite. This vnion therefore is that communion, which is wrought by the holy Ghost. Wherefore it is spiritual For bread cannot be this communion but by a figure, as it is a signe of it. Replie. He that is guiltie of the bodie of Christ, eateth it. They who receiue vnworthilie are guiltie of the bodie of Christ. Therefore they eate it corporallie: for spirituallie they cannot: because if they coulde so eate it, they shoulde not be guiltie. Aunswere. The Maior is false For hee is guiltie of Christes bodie who by his sinnes hangeth it on the Crosse againe, and despiseth Christs benefite. For any real eating is not required to this guilt, but hee that will not receiue Christ offered by faith, is thereby made guiltie. So the iniurie done vnto the Arke, is said to be done vnto the Lord. Replie. They that discerne not the Lords bodie, eate it. But the

:2264p. 783¶4

If the Major be taken sacramentally, as of the bread, which is called and is the body of Christ, it is true: but if properly, it is false. For, not to discern his body, is not to give due honour to it, to contemn it, yea not to receive the thing signified So Heb. 10.29. They are said to tread under foot the son of God, and to count the blood of the testament as an unholy thing, who contemn him.

If the Maior bee taken sacramentally, as of the breade, which is called and is the bodie of Christ, it is true: but if properly, it is false. For, not to discerne his body, is not to giue due honor to it, to contemne it, yea not to receiue the thing signified So Heb. 10.29. They are said to treade vnder foote the sonne of God, and to count the bloud of the testament as an vnholie thing, who contemne him.

:2265p. 783¶5

5 They reason from the testimonies of the Fathers and the godly of ancient times in the purer state of the church. Answer. The sayings of the Fathers are to be understood sacramentally, or of our spiritual communion. Reply. Austin saith, thou shalt receive this in the bread, which hung on the cross: and this in the cup, which was shed out of christs side. Answer. In the bread, as in the sign, that is, together with the sign thou shalt receive the thing signified. When we receive the bread, we are certain that we have Christ. 2. Reply, Cyril upon John saith: By natural participation, not only spiritually, but also corporally: not only according to the spirit, but also according to the flesh, corporally & essentially. Ans. Cyril speaketh not of the manner of eating, but of the thing which was to be eaten. He showeth that we are made partakers not only of christs spirit, but also of his human nature. Now he understandeth a spiritual communion. 1. Because he citeth those places concerning it. Joh. 6. & 1. Cor. 10. where no mention is made of corporal eating. 2. He speaketh of the presence of Christ, not in the bread, but in us. 3. He proveth the abiding of Christ in us by the use of the Supper, not by any corporal eating. 4. He so describeth it, that he saith, It shall continue in the life to come. 5. He speaketh of that communion, which is proper unto the Saints. Now this is spiritual; for otherwise it should befall also to the wicked.

5 They reason from the testimonies of the Fathers and the godlie of auncient times in the purer state of the church. Aunswere. The sayings of the Fathers are to be vnderstoode sacramentally, or of our spiritual communion. Replie. Austin saith, thou shalt receiue this in the bread, which hung on the crosse: and this in the cup, which was shed out of christs side. Answere. In the bread, as in the signe, that is, together with the signe thou shalt receiue the thing signified. When wee receiue the bread, wee are certaine that wee haue Christ. 2. Replie, Cyrill vpon Iohn saith: By natural participation, not onelie spirituallie, but also corporallie: not onelie according to the spirit, but also according to the flesh, corporally & essentially. Ans. Cyril speaketh not of the maner of eating, but of the thing which was to be eatē. He sheweth that we are made partakers not only of christs spirit, but also of his human nature. Now he vnderstandeth a spiritual communion. 1. Because he citeth those places cōcerning it.

:2266p. 783

The shifts of Consubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & shift off certain of our objections, not all: for moe are objected against them.

The shifts of Consubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & shift off certaine of our obiections, not all: for mo are obiected against them.

:2267p. 783–784¶1

1 We make not, say they, any Capernaiticall eating. Ans. We demand of them whether Christ be eaten by the bodily mouth; be it after a gross, or after finer manner. But how ever they answer, in that opinion which they hold, there is too too much idolatry. For christ ⟨p. 784⟩refuting the Capernaites, doth not distinguish the eating of him, into a gross and a finer manner, but saith simply, That his body can not be eaten with the bodily mouth: for he sayeth, that he must ascend; And that the words which he speaketh are spirit and life.

1 WEe make not, say they, any Capernaiticall eating. Ans. We demaunde of them whether Christ be eaten by the bodily mouth; be it after a grosse, or after finer maner. But how euer they aunswere, in that opinion which they hold, there is too too much idolatry. For christ ⟨p. 784⟩refuting the Capernaites, doth not distinguish the eating of him, into a grosse and a finer manner, but saith simplie, That his bodie can not be eaten with the bodily mouth: for he saieth, that hee must ascend; And that the woordes which hee speaketh are spirit and life.

:2268p. 784¶2

2 We maintain not Ubiquity: for there is not a word thereof to be found. Answer. Here is to be observed the dissension of the adversaries about Ubiquity. But neither is a word to be found hereof, That the body of Christ is together in two places. And further, of this their opinion followeth Ubiquity. For he that is together & at one time in moe places, must needs be infinite, & therefore everywhere.

2 Wee mainetaine not Vbiquitie: for there is not a woorde thereof to bee found. Aunswere. Here is to bee obserued the dissension of the aduersaries about Vbiquitie. But neither is a worde to be found hereof, That the bodie of Christ is together in two places. And further, of this their opinion followeth Vbiquitie. For he that is together & at one time in moe places, must needes be infinite, & therefore eueriewhere.

:2269p. 784¶3

3 We overthrow not the article of Christs ascension. Answer. Yea, but they do overthrow it. For while they hold, that, as often as the supper is celebrated, Christ is corporally eaten, they must needs say that he remained and is invisible on earth. But he is said to have left the world, to have ascended from a lower place into an higher, and to remain in heaven, until he come to judgement. Now, that some except, That Christ doth descend from heaven, as oft as the supper is administered; it is already refuted.

3 Wee ouerthrow not the article of Christs ascension. Aunswere. Yea, but they doe ouerthrow it. For while they holde, that, as often as the supper is celebrated, Christ is corporallie eaten, they must needes say that he remained and is inuisible on earth. But he is said to haue left the world, to haue ascended from a lower place into an higher, and to remaine in heauen, vntill hee come to iudgement. Nowe, that some except, That Christ dooth descend from heauen, as oft as the supper is administred; it is already refuted.

:2270p. 784¶4

4 We take not away the doctrine of the properties of christs humanity. Answer. They altogether take it away. For they will have his humane nature to be such, as is not seen, nor felt, nor limited in place. Reply. But christ did put off these infirmities, & retained the essential properties. Answer. But these are very essential properties, which being taken away, the verity also and truth of his humane nature is taken away, Augustine saith; Take away from bodies their spaces, and they shall be no where.

4 We take not awaie the doctrine of the properties of christs humanitie. Answere. They altogether take it away. For they wil haue his humane nature to be such, as is not seene, nor felt, nor limited in place. Reply. But christ did put off these infirmities, & reteined the essential properties. Answere. But these are verie essential properties, which being taken away, the verity also and truth of his humane nature is taken awaie, Austine saith; Take awaie from bodies their spaces, and they shall be no where.

:2271p. 784–785¶5

5 We abolish not the Doctrine concerning the communicating of properties of both natures. Answer. Yea but they endeavour it. For they apply those properties of his divine nature which are affirmed of the whole person in the concrete, to both natures. J will be with you to the end of the world. This they understand of both natures: which is all one, as if, when it is said, Christ God and man was circumcised, one should thus conclude; Therefore the godhead of Christ was circumcised as well as his flesh. Reply. ⟨p. 785⟩This only we add; That those Articles belong to them. Answer. After this sort all sects may shift off all testimonies of Scriptures. But they belong hither, and that by a double right. 1. Because they are written of the body of Christ. But the body of Christ belongeth to the supper. Therefore these Articles also belong hither. For they show, how Christs body is to be ea•en 2 They belong hither, because no Article of faith, is at variance with another. So belongeth hither also the Doctrine of justification because in the •upper no other justice or righteousness must be sought for, but by the blood of Christ.

5 We abolish not the Doctrine concerning the communicating of properties of both natures. Aunswere. Yea but they endeuour it. For they apply those properties of his diuine nature which are affirmed of the whole person in the concrete, to both natures. J wil be with you to the ende of the world. This they vnderstand of both natures: which is all one, as if, when it is said, Christ God and man was circumcised, one should thus conclude; Therefore the godhead of Christ was circumcised as wel as his flesh. Replie. ⟨p. 785⟩This onelie wee adde; That those Articles belong to them. Aunswere. After this sort all sectes may shift off all testimonies of Scriptures. But they belong hither, and that by a double right. 1. Because they are written of the bodie of Christ. But the body of Christ belongeth to the supper. Therefo•e these Articles also belong hither. For they shew, how Christs bodie is to be ea•en 2 They belong hither, because no Article of faith, is at variaunce with another. So belongeth hither also the Doctrine of iustification because in the upper no other iustice or righteousnes must bee sought for, but by the bloud of Christ.

:2272p. 785¶6

6 The manner how we eat it, is not to be defined. Answer. They commit a double fault in so saying. 1. When they deny that the manner is to be defined, and so contradict and gain say the Scripture which defineth it, and showeth that it is spiritual, & that there is wrought an union with Christ by faith through the holy Ghost. 2. They themselves define the manner, as it clearly appeareth by their writings.

6 The manner how we eate it, is not to bee defined. Answere. They commit a double fault in so saying. 1. When they denie that the maner is to be defined, and so contradict and gain saie the Scripture which defineth it, and sheweth that it is spiritual, & that there is wrought an vnion with Christ by faith through the holy Ghost. 2. They themselues define the manner, as it clearly appeareth by their writings.

:2273p. 785¶7

7 The saying of Durandus is true: We hear the words; we perceive the motions; we know not the manner; we believe the presence. Answer. Durandus maketh nought either for you, or against us, or for himself, because he was a Papist. And again, if his saying be rightly understood, we may admit it. We hear the words, This is my body; not that we eat with our mouth the body of Christ in the bread. We perceive the motions; that is, we perceive the bread to enter into our mouth, not the body of Christ. We know not the manner, that is, not perfectly, to wit, after what manner the holy Ghost is everywhere whole in Christ and in all the Saints, and how he uniteth us in Christ. We believe the presence, namely, such, as is the eating, and as is the union of the members and the head.

7 The saieng of Durandus is true: We heare the woords; we perceiue the motions; we know not the manner; we beleeue the presence. Aunswere. Durandus maketh nought either for you, or against vs, or for himselfe, because he was a Papist. And againe, if his saying be rightly vnderstoode, we may admit it. We heare the words, This is my bodie; not that we eate with our mouth the bodie of Christ in the breade. Wee perceiue the motions; that is, we perceiue the bread to enter into our mouth, not the bodie of Christ. We know not the maner, that is, not perfectly, to wit, after what maner the holy Ghost is eueriewhere whole in Christ and in al the Saints, and how he vniteth vs in Christ. We beleeue the presence, namely, such, as is the eating, and as is the vnion of the members and the head.

:2274p. 785¶8

8 We teach this only, That the body and blood of christ is truly, substantially, and naturally exhibited. Answer. We grant that we eat the true body of Christ. So then is their disputation vain and frivolous. First, Because they confess that we are made partakers of the true body of christ, and that we must not question of the manner. For this we grant. Secondly, Because the reasons and refutations which they bring, are of no weight or moment.

8 We teach this onelie, That the bodie and bloud of christ is trulie, substantiallie, and naturallie exhibited. Aunswere. Wee grant that we eat the true bodie of Christ. So then is their disputation vaine and friuolous. First, Because they confesse that wee are made partakers of the true bodie of christ, and that wee must not question of the manner. For this wee graunt. Secondly, Because the reasons and refutations which they bring, are of no weight or moment.

:2275p. 786

Certain reasons whereby is proved, That the body of Christ is not present either in, or under, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporally eaten Under, With, In, or At the Bread.

Certaine reasons whereby is proued, That the bodie of Christ is not present either in, or vnder, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporallie eaten Vnder, With, Jn, or At the Bread.

:2276p. 786¶1

1 Because he took a true humane nature. Whereunto we ad also, that we cannot eat him otherwise than his disciples did in the first Supper. 2. He truly ascended out of earth into heaven. 3. Such is our eating of him, as his abiding is in us. 4. All the Saints of the old and new Testament have the same union with Christ. 5 Christ only is able to offer himself unto his Father. Now it is necessary in the use of the Supper to crave of God remission of sins. Wherefore if he be present at the bread, we must crave of him, and so we offer the bread. But in the New testament it is not lawful to direct our prayer to any certain place. 6. The blessings which are promised unto the godly only, are spiritual. Unto these and other fore alleged reasons cometh the consent of the ancient Fathers, Ambrose, Athanasius, Augustine, Basil, Bede, Bertram, Chrysostom, Clemens Alexandrinus, the council of Nice, Cyprian, Cyril, Denis, Gelasius, Gregory the Great, Gregory Nazianzene, Hezichius, Hierom, Hilary, Irenaeus, Justine, Leo, Macharius, Origen, Procopius, Gaza, Tertullian, and so forth.

1 BEcause hee tooke a true humane nature. Whereunto wee ad also, that wee cannot eate him otherwise than his disciples did in the first Supper. 2. He truely ascended out of earth into heauen. 3. Such is our eating of him, as his abiding is in vs. 4. All the Saints of the old and new Testament haue the same vnion with Christ. 5 Christ onely is able to offer himselfe vnto his Father. Now it is necessarie in the vse of the Supper to craue of God remission of sinnes. Wherefore if he bee present at the bread, we must craue of him, and so wee offer the bread. But in the New testament it is not lawfull to direct our prayer to any certaine place. 6. The blessings which are promised vnto the godly onely, are spirituall. Vnto these and other fore alleaged reasons commeth the consent of the auncient Fathers, Ambrose, Athanasius, Austine, Basil, Bede, Bertram, Chrysostome, Clemēs Alexandrinus, the councell of Nice, Ciprian, Cyrill, Denis, Gelasius, Gregorie the Great, Gregorie Nazianzene, Hezichius, Hierom, Hilarie, Irenaeus, Justine, Leo, Macharius, Origen, Procopius, Gaza, Tertullian, and so forth.

:2277p. 786

The Sum of Christian Religion

The Sum of Christian Religion

The shifts of Consubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & shift off certain of our objections, not all: for moe are objected against them.

The shifts of Consubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & shift off certaine of our obiections, not all: for mo are obiected against them.

Certain reasons whereby is proved, That the body of Christ is not present either in, or under, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporally eaten Under, With, In, or At the Bread.

Certaine reasons whereby is proued, That the bodie of Christ is not present either in, or vnder, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporallie eaten Vnder, With, Jn, or At the Bread.

THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION. Arguments, whereby the opinion of Ubiquitaries is refelled, and the truth of sound doctrine confirmed.

THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION. Arguments, whereby the opinion of Vbiquitaries is refelled, and the truth of sound doctrine confirmed.

Reformers309

Puritans1,782

Westminster Assembly24

Evangelicals36

The shifts of Consubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & shift off certain of our objections, not all: for moe are objected against them.

The shifts of Consubstantiaries, whereby they go about to elude & shift off certaine of our obiections, not all: for mo are obiected against them.

Certain reasons whereby is proved, That the body of Christ is not present either in, or under, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporally eaten Under, With, In, or At the Bread.

Certaine reasons whereby is proued, That the bodie of Christ is not present either in, or vnder, or at the bread of the Lords Supper, neither is corporallie eaten Vnder, With, Jn, or At the Bread.

THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION. Arguments, whereby the opinion of Ubiquitaries is refelled, and the truth of sound doctrine confirmed.

THE SECOND APPENDIX OR ADDITION. Arguments, whereby the opinion of Vbiquitaries is refelled, and the truth of sound doctrine confirmed.