« ForrigeFortsæt »
By having a true knowledge of this Doctrine of Baptism. 2dly, To Thew that they have a sincere Intention in offering their Children to be baptized, as in Indenture to the Lord. 3dly, That they perfist according to their Word and folemn Oath, which they have engaged in before God and the Congregation, Eph. vi. 4.. And thus may have the Answer of a good Conscience toward God, i Pet. i. 21.
Of the Lord's Supper.
you have communion with the only Sacrifice af Christ offered on the Cross, and with all his Benefits?
“ A. As Christ has commanded me and all Bee
lievers, to eat of that broken Bread, and to drink " of that Cup, in Remembrance of him, with these • Promises adjoined ; ift, That his Body has been
as really offered upon the Crofs' and broken for me, and his Blood shed for me, as I behold with
my Eyes the Bread of the Lord broken for, me, us and the Cup communicated to me.' And 2dly, « That he will nourish my Soul in eternal Life,
with his Body crucified, and Blood Thed, as cer“ tainly as I receive from the Minister, and eat and « drink with my Mouth the Bread and the Wine,
the true Sacraments of the Lord's Body and
A. The Lord's Supper.
X. Of two Parts; one earthly and visible, to wit, Bread and Wine; the other spiritual and invisible, the Body and Blood of Christ, i Cor. x. 16. The
Cup of Blefing which we bless, is it not the Communion of the Blood
of Chrift? The Bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the Body af Christ? And Matt. xxvi. 26.
Q. How must these Elements be used?
A. 11, They must be blessed. 2dly, The Bread broke. 3dly, The Wine poured out. 4thly, The People must eat and drink it.
0. Must the Minister put the Bread in the Moutbs of the People ?
1. No ; that is meer Invention and Superstition; for the Lord faid, Take, eat; the Hands are no more unclean than the Mouth, to receive it.
Q. Wbat doth the breaking of Bread, and pouring out the Wine in the Sacrament signify?
1. It fignifies, That Christ's Body has been broken, and his Blood Thed for us, Matt. xxvi. 28. This is my Blood of the New Testament, which is phed for many, for the Remiffion of Sin. And I Cor. x. 16. The Bread wbich we break, is it not the Communion of the Body of Chrif?
Q. What doth the Giving and Taking of the facramental Bread and Wine signify ?
A. Thefe Actions signify God's exhibiting, and the Believer's applying of Christ and his Benefits to their Souls.
Q. How do you eat and drink the Body and Blood of Chrif in the Lord's Supper?
A. Not after a corporal, but a facramental Manner; namely, by Faith, whereby (as a worthy Re. ceiver) I am made Partaker of his Body and Blood, with all his Benefits, to my spiritual Nourishment and Growth in Grace, Knowledge, Obedience, and Love of God.
The 76th Question of the HEIDELBERG
Christ, and drinking his Blood that was shed? “ A. It is not only to embrace with a lively Faith " the whole Paffion and Death of Jesus Christ, and « by that Means to obtain Remission of our Sins, " and Life everlasting ; but also to be more and « more united to the facred Body of Christ, by the 6 Holy Ghost, whó dwelleth both in him and in us, " that although Jesus Christ is in Heaven, and we “ upon Earth, we may be, nevertheless, Flesh of « his Flesh, and Bone of his Bone; and that we " may be eternally animated and governed by one " and the same Spirit, as the Members of one Body
are by one and the fame Soul. The 77th Question of the HeidelbERG
Q. How do you prove that Chrif has promised,
that he would give to those who believe in him, . his Body to eat, and his Blood to drink, as certain as they eat of that Bread and drink of that Cup?
oš A. In the Institution of the Holy Supper ; of " which these are the Words, which are mentioned,
i Cor. xi. 23, 24. And 1 Cor. X. 16.”
Q. What do you learn by Christ's instituting it in the h fame Night he was betrayed ?
A. It teaches the great Esteem, Care, and Love of Christ to his People, in making comfortable Provisions for them, although he full well knew of his own bitter Agonies being just at Hånd, ready to be put in Execution against him !
Q. Why hath he instituted it after cating the Pallover? A. To liew that the Pafio ver thould no more be
celebrated, but by this Sacrament abrogated; which Sacrament came or was instituted in the Place of it; and for this particular End, that at every Time of this Sacrament's being celebrated, Christ and his Sufferings might be brought afresh to our Remembrance. Luke xxii. 19. This do in Remembrance of me.
Q. What Kind of Remembrance of Christ is here intended?
A. Not a speculative, but an affectionate Heartmelting Remembrance of him, like that of Peter, Matt. xxvi. 75. The 78th Question of the HEIDELBERG
CATECHISM. Q. ARE the Bread and Wine really changed into
the Body and Blood of Jesus Chrift? " A. No, But as in Baptism the Water is not “ changed into the Blood of Christ, nor that it is " the washing away of our Sins itself, but only a “ true Sign and Assurance of it; so the Bread in to the Lord's Supper,, is not changed into the Body " of Christ, altho` according to the Nature and « Propriety of Sacraments, it is called his Body." The 79th Question of the HEIDELBERG
CATECHISM. QW HY then doth Christ call Bread his Body,
and the Cup his Blood, or the new Covenant in his Blood; and Paul also calleth Bread and Wine the Communion of the Body and Blood of Chrift?
“ A. It is, that he would teach us thereby, that
as Bread and Wine nourish us in this temporal “ Life, so his Body crucified, and his Blood which
was spilt, are truly the Meat and Drink of our « Souls, whereby they are nourished to eternal Life ; 66 and also to assure us by these visible Signs and
" Pledges, that we are as truly made Partakers of * his Body, and of his Blood, by the Operation of
the Holy Ghost, as it is true we receive by the “ Mouths of our Bodies these Tokens confecrated “ in Memory of him; and that all his Passion and “ Obedience do as certainly belong to us, as if we “ had suffered all in our own Persons, and had ours felves made Satisfaction to God for our Sins.”
Q. What is the first Argument by which Protestants confute the Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation ?
A. The first Argument against Tranfubftantiation, is taken from the End and Design of the Sacrament, which is, to bring Christ's Body and Blood to our Remembrance, 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25. Now Signs for Remeinbrance are, of Things absent, not present, therefore the real Body and Blood of Christ cannot
Q. What is the second Argument ?
A. Because the Expressions Our Saviour and his Apostles have used, are according to the proper Idiom of the Bible and their Language ; thus in other Cases, as in Gen. xli. 27. we see, the seven IN-favoured Kine that came up after them, are jeven Years of Famine. And Rev. i. 20. The feven Stars, are the Angels of the Seven Churches, &c.
Q. What is the third Argument against TransubSantiation ?
A. The manifold gross Absurdities that naturally and necessarily follow on this Doctrine, fhew the falleness of it, and that it is justly reje&ted and abhorred by all true Christians.
Q. What is the first Absurdity that follows upon it ?
A. That a filly Priest may make his Maker! Which is not to be allowed to ali the Angels in Heaven. And after making his Maker, or God, he may eat his God, or dispose of hiun to whom he pleases. And in justifying that Point by the Omnipotency of God,