A60427:70
Transubstantiation examined and confuted in two sermons on the Lord's Supper / preached in…Transusbstantiation examin'd and confuted in two sermons on the Lord's Supper / preach'd in…
Transubstantiation examined and confuted in two sermons on the Lord's Supper / preached in the reign of Queen Elizabeth by H. Smith, sometime preacher at St. Clement Danes.Transusbstantiation examin'd and confuted in two sermons on the Lord's Supper / preach'd in the reign of Queen Elizabeth by H. Smith, sometime preacher at St. Clement Danes.
London: printed by J. Wallis, 1688
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.
They which knew that the Lamb is not the Passover, though Christ called it the Passover; that Circumcision is not the Covenant, though God calleth it the Covenant; that Baptism is not Regeneration, though it be called Regeneration; that the Cup is not the New Testament, though Christ called it the New Testament; could they not as well understand, that the Bread and Wine were not Christ's body, though Christ called them his body? As they understood these speeches, so they understood this speech: therefore they which say, that the Bread and Wine are Christ's body, because Christ saith, This is my Body; may as 1well say, that the Lamb is the Passover, because Christ calleth it the Passover; that Baptism is Regeneration, because Paul calleth it Regeneration; that this Cup is the New Testament, because Christ calleth it the New Testament.
If every Sacrament was called by the thing which it signified, and yet never any Sacrament was taken for the thing it self; what reason have they to take this Sacrament for the thing it self more than all the rest? It is the consent of all Writers, that a Sacrament is a sign, therefore not the thing signified: no more than the Bush at the Door is the Wine in the Seller. If I call the Prince a Phoenix, the University a Fountain, the Court a Peacock, the City a Sea, the Country an Hermite: why, can the Papists understand me, and not understand Christ?
If every Sacrament was called by the thing which it signified, and yet never any Sacrament was taken for the thing it self; what reason have they to take this Sacrament for the thing it self more than all the rest? It is the consent of all Writers, that a Sacrament is a sign, therefore not the thing signified: no more than the Bush at the Door is the Wine in the Seller. If I call the Prince a Phoenix, the University a Fountain, the Court a Peacock, the City a Sea, the Countrey an Hermite: why, can the Papists understand me, and not understand Christ?