But they will reply,1 that Jesus Christ and his Apostles, and the ancient doctors of the Primitive Church, have done both in the Supper, to wit, that they offered unto God in Sacrifice, the body and the blood of ⟨image 53⟩Jesus Christ: and then have also forthwith communicated them to the Christian people, & that in so doing, there is no inconvenience but that the supper may be both sacrament and sacrifice together. I answer,2 it is not enough that they do affirm, except they do prove it forthwith. I will grant them that the sacrifices of the law were also as a kind of sacraments, and that there were some, in the which there was oblation to God of one part of the beast which was sacrificed, and in like sort communion of an other part among the people, and that there was joined to the sacrifice a banquet, the which signified the communion of the people in the same. But that cannot agree with the supper.3 For, for the first, as there was daily new banquet in these sacrifices, so was there new host. For they mought not sacrifice one very thing oftener then once, nor by consequent communicate the same more often to the people, but they must needs take daily new. But the like is not of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. For there is but one only host of the same, which is very Jesus Christ,4 the which is the lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world, figured chiefly by the paschal lamb, which among the rest was chiefly sacrifice and sacrament both together, because that the Lord had two regards ⟨image 53⟩in the institution of the same. For first he instituted it to be in the Church of Israel, for a memorial and remembrance of the passage which the Angel of the Lord did make in Egypt, striking the first borne of the Egyptians,5 and of the deliverance of the Israelites from the captivity of them, as Moses doeth plainly witness. For the which cause it was called by him, and consequently by the other Hebrews, Pesah, which is to say Passage, by the name of the thing that it did signify, of the which the Greeks and the Latins have made their word Pascha, the which they have used, and which since have been converted into our speech, by the name of Easter. Behold then how this sacrament had regard unto that which was already done, and to that benefit of God the which the Israelites had already received, touching their deliverance out of Egypt.
BVt they will replie,1 that Iesus Christ and his Apostles, and the auncient dnctors of the Primitiue Church, haue done both in the Supper, to wit, that they offered vnto God in Sacrifice, the body and the bloud of ⟨image 53⟩Iesus Christ: and thē haue also forthwith communicated them to the Christian people, & that in so doing, there is no inconuenience but yt the supper may be both sacrament and sacrifice together. I answere,2 it is not enough that they do affirme, except they doe proue it foorthwith. I wil graunt them that the sacrifices of the lawe were also as a kind of sacramēts, and that there were some, in the which there was oblation to God of one part of the beast which was sacrificed, and in like sort communion of an other part among the people, and that there was ioyned to the sacrifice a banket, the which signified the communion of the people in ye same. But that cannot agree with the supper.3 For, for the first, as there was dayly newe banket in these sacrifices, so was there newe hostie. For they mought not sacrifice one very thing oftener then once, nor by consequent communicate the same more often to the people, but they must needes take dayly new. But ye like is not of the sacrifice of Iesus Christe. For there is but one onely hostie of the same, which is very Iesus Christ,4 the which is the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde, figured chiefly by the paschall lambe, which among the rest was chiefly sacrifice and sacrament both together, because that the Lord had two regards ⟨image 53⟩in the institution of the same. For first he instituted it to be in the Church of Israel, for a memoriall and remembrance of the passage which the Angell of the Lorde did make in Egypt, striking the first borne of the Egyptians,5 and of the deliuerance of the Israelites from the captiuitie of them, as Moyses doeth plainly witnesse. For the which cause it was called by him, and consequently by the other Hebrues, Pesah, which is to say Passage, by the name of the thing that it did signifie, of the which the Greekes and the Latines haue made their worde Pascha, the which they haue vsed, and which since haue bene cōuerted into our speach, by the name of Easter. Beholde then howe this sacrament had regard vnto that which was already done, and to that benefit of God ye which the Israelites had already receyued, touching their deliuerance out of Egypt.
- 1Replc•
- 2•we••.
- 3[…].〈…〉.
- 4•ry. 53 •hu. 1. •et. 2. •or. 5. •hu. 19.
- 5••od. 12.13.
