A26931:439
Full and easy satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference…Full and easie satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference…
Full and easy satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference between D. a doubter, P. a papist, and R. a reformed Catholic Christian : in four parts ... / by Richard Baxter.Full and easie satisfaction which is the true and safe religion in a conference between D. a doubter, P. a papist, and R. a reformed Catholick Christian : in four parts ... / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for Nev. Simmons, 1674
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.
Saith Bellarmin de Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. [In the Eucharist we receive not corporal food that the flesh may be thence nourished and made fat: but only to signify inward refection.] So that he acknowledged this to be part of the Sacramental sign. So Gregor. Valent. saith that [The chief and essential signification of this Sacrament is that which by external nourishment is ⟨p. 131⟩signified, the internal spiritual refection of the soul by the body of Christ.] So that denying the nourishing sign is destroying the essence of the Sacrament.
Saith Bellarmin de Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. [In the Eucharist we receive not corporal food that the flesh may be thence nourished and made fat: but only to signifie inward refection.] So that he acknowledged this to be part of the Sacramental sign. So Gregor. Valent. saith that [The chief and essential signification of this Sacrament is that which by external nourishment is ⟨p. 131⟩signified, the internal spiritual refection of the soul by the body of Christ.] So that denying the nourishing sign is destroying the essence of the Sacrament.
IV. The breaking of the Bread and pouring out the Wine is confessedly another part of the Sacramental sensible sign. But, 1. When there is no Wine, there is no pouring it out: 2. And if there be no Bread neither, there is no breaking it: Can that be broken which is not? They that deny (as the Papists do) that the Bread is broken (saying that only the Quantity of Nothing is broken) deny the sensible Sacramental sign.
And here I may note, that we do not well to contend with them for denying the Cup only to the Laity, and granting them only the Bread, when indeed they grant neither, but deny them both: There is (say they) no more Bread than Wine, but only a false appearance of it.