owr Sauior the verie tradition meaninge the Pater noster which he hym selfe dyd make But how so eueâ— it be he which reporteth that Gregorius tertius made the Canon might well inowgh write so according to his knowledge and when it is writen by S. Gregory that one Scholasticus or a disciple of Christs was the auctor therof this is nothiÌ„g falsified by him which wrot afterwardes And likewise it may stand that it cam from the Apostles as InnoceÌ„tius tertius writeth for all that an other saieth that it cam from Gregorius except perchaunce yow will say that one may not read more then an other an one see further then an other bothe speaking according to their knowledge euideÌ„ces But whosoeuer were the first deuiser of it it forceth not sayeth M. Iuell Yes mary Sir for this being proued by more auctorites of writers that the Canon did come from the Apostles or that it was extaÌ„t within vjC yeares after Christ theÌ„ it can be disproued to be of so great antiquity great sham it is for vs not to mainteine so auncient an order of the masse and great forgetfulnes in you M. Iuell to iest at that which is found to haue ben receaued within the compasse of six hundred yeres after Christ of which yeres you make your selfe so sure that for so long space you say all went with you without exceptioÌ„ But now if it forceth not who made the Canon wheras before you made the matter so great that it was against the scriptures bicause of S. Paule which saieth Sciocui credidi I know whoÌ„ I haue beleiued as though Catolikes had not a church to beloue but should hang vpon the report of historiographers well seing then now it forceth not who made the Canon what fault haue you found in the substaÌ„ce and meaning of the Canon First the preist in the Canon desireth God to blesse Christs bodie as though it were not sufficient lie blessed all readie First you make a shamefull he that the priest desireth God to blesse Christ his bodye Beare it well awaye I pray you and remember it that I charge you with makyng of an open lie euen at your first begynning which you make agaynst the Canon It is not I saye in owr Latin and common Canon that the priest desireth God the Father to blesse Christ his bodye And I dare sweare for it althowgh you may do much in Sarum that no missall after the vse of Sarum hath the lyke as you doe speake in the begynning of the Canon Also if it should be saied so as you report in any part of the whole Canon can you proue that the Catholikes haue prayed so for this cause as thowgh Christ his bodye were not sufficientlie blessed alreadiâ— What a Ioannes diuisar be you to make so wicked and vyle disâ—urses vpon that which either is not sayed at all or hath ben spoken with much reuerence and great humilitie of the parties In deed such lyke wordes haue ben vsed of the Grecians euen after the consecration perfected as appeareth by their wrytinges But what cause alleage they for it Marie thosâ— say they which are in great desire of any thing vse to speake of that which is most sure as thowgh they were not sure of it nothing thereby mistrusting the effect but declaring the vehemencie of theyr desire As the Prophete Dauyd when he had sayd God my ryghtuousnes hearde me when I called vnto hym yet in the same verye Psalme and verse folowing he addeth Haue mercye vppon me O Lord and heare my prayer Loe sayeth Theodoritus The iust man is not satisfied in prayer but making his petitions and obteyning them yet continueth â—e styll in prayer by which yow see how farr a Christian and good commentator would be from such deuyses as yow M. Iuell doe make vpon holye sayinges But the Latin Canon hath no such wordes at all neyther before nor it after consecration that I meane God shoulde blesse Christ his bodye In the beginnyng of the Canon the priest desireth God to accept and blesse those giftes and presentes and sacrifices or oblations of bread and wyne which may receiue encrease of sanctification and are in deede made most holyâ— when they are turned in to the bodye and bloud of Christ. Also after consecration the priest desireth God to loke meâ—cifullie downe vpon those pretiouse thinges which are there present But how not as they are in them selues mosâ— acceptable but as they are offered for who can saye that his hart is chast and pure and who knoweth whether God wil not punishe vs when we are not prepared rightlie to do that office Considering therfor the holines of God and vilenes of man the church desireth God to accept owr offering of Christâ— bodie owr Lord â–ª or in other wordes to saye it to accept that bodye and those giftes offered But of that place M. Iuell speaketh afterward I conclud therefore vpon his present wordes that he maketh an open lie and maniâ—est And if hymselfe was not the maker of it lett hym tell of what author he borowed it Further the priest saieth that he offereth and presenteth vp Christ vnto his father True it is and that you may wonder the more not the priest onely but all the whole church doth offer Christ daily to his father For as concerning the priest either tâ—ere is no priest among vs at all or we be no sinners or we must haue a daily sacrifice to make our God fauorable vnto vs. A sacâ—ifice not of thankes geuing onelye which the law of nature teacheth vs to offer to our cheif Lord and Creator neither of calfes and shepe as the old law did appoint it but a sacrifice proportionable to a new law and a sacrifice worthy and meete for a new testameÌ„t of Ihesus Christ. What say you then good Sir if the priest of the new law and testament offereth Christ vnto his father it is say you open blasphemy So say they which worship false Godes which they haue made to them selues by licentious vnderstanding of the Scriptures and by cutting hewing and pecing together of the veritie For wherin consisteth this blasphemye doe you which are of the church by outward shew of your degree and maÌ„ner of behauiour think priesthod to be a pelting base office as the worldly people doe But Chrisostom saieth That priesthod so far passeth kingdom as the soule passeth the body and we ought to reuerence priestes not only more then kinges and princes but to set them forth with more honor then our owne fathers Or think you that Christ in his last supper did not ofâ—er vp him selfe to his father But the Prophet saieth yea rather God not onely saieth it but bindeth it with an othe and it shall not repent him therof that Christ is a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech Can you saye for all this that priestes haue no authority to offer him But Chrisostom
to most shamefull death reignyng at the right hand of God his father and present among men vpon the altar Stick not therefor I say vnto the body lett not your thoughtes and desires rest in the flessh onlye but goe hyer by your faith and coÌ„sider that blessed sowle of his so chast patient wise charitable bright glorious and yet hyer and hyer in to the very heauens and aboue all heauens beholding and wondering how the maker of them all whom thowsand thowsandes and ten hundred thousand thousands do wayte vpon ys present here for vs to be receaued of vs and to incorporate vs in to hym selue This loâ— haue I spoken more largelie bicause M. Iuell hath no other way to answer S. Augustine but to declare as we denye it not vnto them but which thei haue lerned of vs that we must ascend with our hartes in to heauen and there honor Christ. Which being most true and grawnted vnto hym he doth vntruly and ignorantlye to say that Christ is not to be honored also in earth in the sacrament of his very bodye and bloud bycause he is to be honored in heauen For we doe not diuide Christ and make one Christ to be in heaueÌ„ an other to be on earth one bodye in heauen an other in earth but men worshipp hym in heauen one God and the Angells worshipp hym in the Sacrament here on earth as S. Chrisostome proueth And men worship hym as he lieth vpon the altar and Angells worship hym as he sitteth at the right hand of God his father And so both Angells and men doe worshipp Christ both in earth and in heauen and that not with two kindes of honors one for holy dayes an other for working but with one salfe same honor and worship The protestants wold be seen to say much when they appeale so often to heauen and receaue Christ sitting at the right hand of God as who shold saie the papistes myndes goe no hyer then the priestes handes when he sheweth the SacrameÌ„t vnto them And when they haue supposed that this is true then loe they triumph in recityng S. Chrisostome S. Augustyne S. Hierome and then are they sorye that old holie fathers be not regarded But the answer vnto them is readie that they haue saâ—ed therein very well but nothing to the purpose for Catholykes doe beleue that they must lift vp their hartes and seeke for Christ in heauen and worship hym at the right hand of his Fatherâ— but protestantes denye that Christ is reallie present in the Sacrament or that he is to be worshipped therein which I shal disproue a litle more S. Augustyne vpon the .21 Psalme The riche of the earth sayth he haue eaten also the bodye of their Lorde but they haue not been fulfylled as the poore men were in folowing of Christ but yet they dyd worship hym Now M. Iuell coÌ„fesseth that where we eate Christ there we worship Christ. ergo these riche men of whom the Prophet and S. Augustyne speak which did eate Christ on the earth did worshipp hym also on the earth for in heauen they did not eate hym bicause they folowed hym not as the poore did which worthelie did receaue hym Again how could the gentyles haue misreported the Christians in the primitiue church for honoring of Ceres and Bacchus the false goddes ouer bread and wyne except they had geuen some argument thereof in deed by reason of honoring Christ in the SacrameÌ„t For if an Ethnyk shold behold a Christian after grace sayd to eate his meate sauorlie and soberlye he could not think that he worshipped Ceres and Bacchus therein But when the panymes hard saye that the Christians dyd eate the flesh of theyr God and when they could see nothing but bread and wyne which were receaued with all reuerence and deuotion they might not saye that is was onlie bread bycause of the honor which at the presence thereof the Christians exhibited vnto it and they could not saye it was the bodye of Christ bycause that being yet infydells they were not instructed in owr misteries it remayned then to think and to report that vndoubtedlie Christians dyd worshipp Ceres and Bacchus Which proueth that the Sacrament was then adored and worshipped Besides this it ys gathered owt of the same blessed Doctor that we doe honor thinges inuisible I meane flessh and bloud vnder the forme of bread and wyne whiche we see And we doe not take these two kyndes after lyke sort as we dyd before the consecration whereas we confesse faythfullie that before the consecration it is bread and wyne which nature formed but after the consecration it ys the flessh and bloud of Christ which blessing hath halowed But yet for all those testimonye what sayeth M. Iuell It is a verie now deuyse quod he and which as it is well knoweÌ„ came but latelie in to the church about .iij. hundred yeares past Honoâ—us being Bishop of Rome and coÌ„maunding the SacrameÌ„t to be liâ—â—ed vp and the people reuerentlie to bowe downe to 〈◊〉 After hym Vrbanus the fowerth appointed 〈◊〉 holydaie of Corpus Christ c. Threâ— hundred yeares are 〈◊〉 but a very litle 〈◊〉 with â—ow when we â—alke of the adoration of the sacrament but if we come to the glorious setters furch of the new fownd Ghospell thirtie yeares lacking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 computationem Eccelesiâ— Anglicaâ—â— doe â—â—â—ke a greaâ—â— antiquitie And then 〈◊〉 or after hym Zuinglius must be named fathers and Apostells when very blessed Bisshoppes Honorius and Vrbanus whom all Christendome assented vnto are named contemptuouslie as who should say I knew them whem thei did stand withowt the church doores and could not read any letter in the bâ—ke But goe to when Honorius did commaund the adoration of the sacrament dyd any countrey of all Christendome or Cytie or godlye man speake agaynst it Or when S. Vrbane apoynted an holidaye for it is it writen or extant by any argument that it was refused in any place The popes I am sure were not withowt counsell the Vnyuersities were not withowt great scholars religious houses and orders were not theÌ„ destroyed the holy ghost in true Catholykes was inuincible the wicked spirite in heretykes would haue been venterous a good man with the daunger of his life would haue spoken the trueth an heretyke to wynne a fame would not haue passed vpon death the dyuel also being his comforter and in these so manye causes whi the trueth should not be suppressed is it possible that withowt open coÌ„tradiction a false honor of God should be receiued among Christians therough the whole world yf the adoration of the Sacrament were in deed blasphemous being so receaued as it was in all ChristeÌ„dome so many people runnyng headlong as you ween in to their damnatioÌ„ did the holy ghost stirr vp no one good man to call them back That holy ghost which was promysed before and is now performed vnto the church of Christ which
call the Sacrament bread which yet condemneth all Lutherans and Zuin glâ—ans And she calleth the Sacrament bread bycause the Sacrament hath the forme of bread and bycause bread in the Scripture signifyeth any foode and bycause Christ his bodye ys in deede true bread and bread of life and heauenlie bread Therefore bycause it ys called bread vpon that onlye to conclud that it contynueth bakers bread it ys the argument of thinkers tailers and coblers and not of lerned scholars Then as concerning Gelasius which sayeth that the substance of bread or nature of wyne doe not cease to be in the Sacrament he expowndeth hym felfe by that which foloweth strayt after in thâ— same sentence adding these plaine wordes But they remaine in the proprieties of theyr nature Which proprieties are these folowing whitnes thicknes breadeth weight tast and power to norissh and feede the bodye with such like which he calleth the substance of bread and wyne and more playnelie the properties of their nature The lyke is to be answered vnto Theodoretus whiche sayeth that Christ honored the bread and wyne which we see with the names of his bodye aud bloud not chainging the nature of them that is to saye the naturall proprieties because in all poyntes it appeereth vnto owr eye to be euen as it was before consecration but ioyning grace vnto that nature Ouer and aboue all this a most true and readie answer ys that the faithfull doe consider allwayes not what one or two doe saye but what the whole cumpanye of lerned men or the greater part doe testifye Agayn before the church had expressed it and opened by her sentence the manner of Christ his being in the Sacrament it was no heresie if proude obstinacie dyd not make it to saye that bread remained or that it vanished in to nothing Bicause both opinions dyd hold with reall presence and the authors of them were contented to yeld vnto their betters iudgement And so if we should graunt vnto the heretâ—kes that which thei do require about Gelasius or Theodoretus they both defending the reall presence it ys no small matter against the heretykes other opinions and it ys nothing at all against the Catholykes But in these dares now when it hath been decreed according vnto scriptures and auncient fathers in a generall councell that the substance of bread is conuerted in to the bodie of Christ now to denie transsubstantiatioÌ„ and to reuyle the decree of the Catholike church this is greatlie against the faith and this is it which maketh heretikes S. Cyprian which defended the rebaptizing of them whom heretykes had baptized before was no heretyke in so doing bycause the question was not then determined by the church vnto whose iudgement he submitted his lerning and authoritie But now if it should come in to an idle head to bring that blessed martyrs reasons and to withstand the Catholike church he should do nothing els in wyse mens iudgementes but declare his owne vaine gloriouse folie And yet I do not ne will not vse this defence but plainelie answer that Gelasius and Theodoretus doe meane well and speak as papistes may doe that the substance or naturall propertie of bread remaineth that is to saie the same quantitie vertue and qualitie which it had before the coÌ„secration Wherefor to conclud the cleane contrarie vnto Master Iuells assertion I saie that neither the auncient doctors do affirme that the substance of bread remaineth vnderstanding by substance the essentiall and internall forme or nature of bread neither Duns and Durand doe saie that if bread remain there is daunger of Idolatrie Farther yet the scholemen say quod M. Iuell that yf a man happen to worship the accidentes of bread Idolatrie may be done to the sacrament No good Syr not to the sacrament but to the accidâ—ntes wherein if fault shold be committed it is not the fault of the institution of Christ but of the silence of priestes or simplicitie of the people Neither is adoration therefor to be forbydden but the manner of adoration is discretelie to be opened whiles owr Sauior him selfe walked visiblie vpon the earthe if one should haue worshipped his verie face or garment not able to distinct betweene the two natures of God and man neither in what diuersitie and degree the face and the garment appertein vnto one selfe same person whereas in truth it were idolatrie to worship that face with godlie honor in that respect and consideration as it is onlie an holie and graciouse visaige of a right excellent and perfect man bycause herein may be daunger should we not worship Ihesus Christ at all or not worshipp hym before we vnderstand the distinction betwene Latria and Dulia that is honor due and proper vnto God and honor which may be geauen vnto any holyâ— creature O miserable people sayeth master Iuell that thus are lead to worshipp they know not what For alas how manie of them vnderstand these distinctions or care for them How manie of them vnderstand after what sort accidentia be sine subiecto c. But o miserable world saye I allso then and alas alas that any wyse man should be so taken to thinke that what so euer ys concluded in scholes should be opened in the pulpites Alas alas the churche doth teache openlye that the Father ys vnbegotten the Soune onlye begotten the Holye ghost proceding and this who so euer doth not beleue shall not be saued O miseserable people that this are lead to beleue they know not what For what know they or what care haue they of proceding or begetting or how can they vnderstand those misteries of the schole men as for example Christ toke the nature of man he toke not the person of man as coÌ„cerning Christ his person God died for man as concerning the diuine nature God can not die and he which beleueth not those thinges shall neuer be saued O miserable people that this are lâ—â—d to beleue thei know not what for which of them vnderstandeth the distinction betwene substance and person But what shall we saie must the lerned men of the church O master Iuell beleue no more then the people are able to conceiue or bycause the people vnderstand not what is accideÌ„ce or what is substance or what is quantitie or qualitie relation or action is it therefor no matter whether it be fysh or flesh square or round white or black worldlie or euerlasting for the 〈◊〉 this is sufficient to beleue that Christ is in the sacrament vnder forme of bread and wyne the bread bâ—â—ng chainged by his almightines in to his boâ—â—e and the wyne in to his bloud or if some can not beare awaye all this let hym cleane to the Catholyke faith and hold vp his hands at sacring as others doe and beleue more excellent thinges to be present then hym selue can see or feele and be content to be reformed if perchaunse he should be in any error and God will 〈◊〉
action and gesture which might seem to cōmend this bread vnto vs and you haue rather chosen to leaue owt all māner of blessing then you would be bound to ceremonies and come within order and canons But whether this agreeth with your crakes and bostinges that you haue brought the supper of the Lord vnto his first order and perfection which you for all that do not blesse the bread as you should haue lerned by Christ his example and paterne lett any man iudge which hath but meane reason and vnderstanding Further more it is in S. Luke that lykewyse also the chalice vnderstand Christ gaue Which word likewyse I note bycause it importeth that there was a certaine especiall manner which our Sauior vsed in taking and geuing of bread the which he obserued in taking and delyuering of the chalice And reason vndoubtedlie geueth it that he which at other tymes vsed most solempne and reuerend gestures as in the feeding of fyue thousand with fyue barley losses and two fisshes and in the raysing of Lazarus he vsed blessing lifting vp of eies and lowd speakyng would not in such a tyme and towardes such a purpose either vse a common attentiō either a cōmon expressing of his intention especiallie where as the disciples with whom he turned in at Emaus knew him in the breaking of bread bycause he did it after such a diuine and solempne ceremonye as was not vsed of any other such was his grace therein and his ordenance O Lord how affectuouslie did he take that bread from the rest which was vpon the table of the which bread he appoynted to make his owne pretiouse bodye How reuerentlie did he looke vpp to heauen How hartelie did he thank his father How abundantlie did he blesse and halow the bread either by vsinge the playne signe of a crosse or by some other expressing of his goodnes which he woulde to come vpon that creature How attentiuelie did he break it How hartelie did he bid them to take it How louingelie did he geue them to eat it how mightelie and vnspeakablie did he turne and conuert it Lyke wyse also he toke and gaue the calice Surelie if there had ben no matter in the taking and handeling of it neither the bread I beleue neither the wyne was so far frō him but that he might haue poynted vnto them with his finger or looked at the least way vpon them saying Take ye and eate ye this is my bodye this is my bloudd Yet to declare the singulare working of his which is doone in the bread and wyne and to make vs the more attent and close in mynd by the folowinge of his owtward gestures he toke it separating it as it were from the reste of the lyke graine he blessed it by some speciall signe or sanctification such as is not for our common meates he brake it to represent misticallie the visible tearing of his bodie which the next day after folowed He gaue it to make thē one togeather with hym not by faith onlie and charitie but in verye flessh allso and bodie He saied This is my bodie this is my bloud to teach them a true faith in those misteries and to confirme and establish vs against the obiections which either heretikes or our senses doe make to the discrediting of the Sacramēt and to cōclud he said Doe this in remembrance of me by which he gaue full authoritie of consecrating vnto Priestes and willed them to folow his example But can you now M. Iuel proue that you keepe all these thinges in your communion Remember I pray you the order of it and consider that the bread and wyne are layed downe vppon your table where it pleaseth the sexten or the parish clark to sett them And when the tyme of consecration if all thinges dyd procede rightlie cummeth your booke apointeth no takyng no blessing no directing of the mynd to the bread But lyke as a man should tell a tale so the minister reciteth onlie the wordes of the Apostle and when all is quicklie doone he taketh the vncōsecrated bread hymselfe and geueth it to other willing them to be thankfull and to feed vpon Christ in their hart In so much that if a straunger should come in the meane tyme whiles you be at your cōmunion he might wonder why at the end you make so much of that bread and cupp of wyne with which all the seruice long before you seemed to haue had so litle to doe or nothing For neither by taking neither blessing neither direct and intentyue lookyng it appereth that you work any thing in the bread And all this not withstandyng haue you browghte back the cōmunion vnto that state and perfection in which Christ delyuered it vnto his Apostles May you not be ashamed of your vanitie which crake of the folowing of Christ and condempne his holie Catholike church your selues neither takyng neither blessing neither cōsecrating the bread and wyne as Christ hymselfe did in his last supper shew vnto vs Well M. Iuell this is one fowle lie of yowres Ther foloweth an other namely that you haue the same ordre which was practised by the Apostles But it appeareth not either in the Actes of the Apostles or any of their epistles what ordre of cōmunion they had In the Actes of the Apostles it is writē that they did breake bread in their houses and agayn that after the Apostles had fasted and sacrificed they sent furth S. Paule and Barnabas to fulfill the holy ghostes cōmaundement and to preache abrode the Ghospell But of the ordre which they vsed in breaking their bread or in their sacrifices nothing is declared precisely Again vnto the Corinthians the blessed Apostle writeth what he receaued of our Lorde and testifieth therin the verity of the sacramēt but of the ordre which is to be obserued he speaketh so litle that he endeth that matter with these wordes As for the rest when I come my selfe I wil set in ordre here be loe two foule ones past ther foloweth the third which hath many other vnderneth it And that lie is that the holy cōmunion is restored to the same ordre which hath been cōtinewed by the holy doctors fathers one for the space of .v. or vjC yeres two through out all the whole Catholike church of Christ three without exception or sufficient example to be shewed to the cōtrary fower yet are there some this daye q he that refuse it which is also the fifthe lye if he take this worde some for a small some Bicause in dede ther be very many persons which do refuse it and would gladlie runne to masse if there were anye But now to shame all these lies I will bring furthe a few exceptions by which I shall euidently proue many thinges yet to lacke in the Cōmunion of the ordre which in the primitiue church was vsed First of all you should torne your face
this is my bloud lett vs obey hym and beleue hym Further more Eusebius Emissenus in his fifth sermon of Easter he sayth Behould with thy faith honor and wonder at the holye bodye and bloud of thy Lorde But none of these are plaine inough for M. Iuell I doe aske hym therefore what S. Iames meant in his liturgie or masse when that lifting vp the gift which is the consecrated host he crieth owt holie thinges for the holie Yf he sayed holie in that respect onlye that Christ sitteth in heauen why doth he then lift vp the Sacrament Agayne in S. Basile his masse at the tyme of receauing the Bishop lifting vp the bread sayeth Looke doune o Lord 〈◊〉 Christ owr God owt from thy holie tabernacle and come to sanctifie vs thow which sittest aboue togeather with thy father and art togeather with vs here inuisiblie Vouchsafe with thy mightye hand to geue vnto vs thy holie and vndefiled bodie and pretiouse bloud and by vs sinners vnto the whole people And what meaneth S. Basile by lifting vp the bread and by so deuoute a prayer and by that which foloweth when with a great voyce he cryeth holie thinges for the holie Also how is it sayd in S. Chrisostome his masse that the priest after the lyke praier made as S. Basile hath taketh a portion of the host which is on the holie paten and lifting it vp a litle sayeth holie thinges for the holie the clerkes and the people answering one holie one Lorde in the glory of God his father But to lett these questions goe I will come more nerer and be certified of M. Iuell whether Christ were the very soun of allmighty God or no whether his bodie is to be worshipped or no whether he be reallye and trulie in the Sacrament of the faithfull M. Iuell denyeth that in any place in the whole world twelue hundred yeares after Christ the worshipping of the Sacrament was vsed But I aske whether any doctor or good man in the space of twelue hundred yeares after Christ did beleue that Christ was reallie in the Sacrament It can not be denyed but that holie men did beleue so As S. Damascene witnesseth saâ—eing Bread and wâ—ne are not the figure of the bodye and â—loud of Christ God â—â—â—bead but the verie bodie indued with the Godhead whereas our Lord hym self sayeth this is my bodie and not a figure of my bodie And lykewyse Algerus in his booke de Sacramento altaris is verye manifest And again Bâ—â—â—engarius which denied the veritie of Christ his bodie in the Sacrament and would haue nothing but a figuratiue bodie there he was condempned by a generall councel in which Lanfrancus Bishop of Canterburye was a cheife doer agaynst that heresie and wrot a boke by name agaynst Berengarius Therefor it can not be denied but that these men which again I saye lyued within the compasse of twelue hundred yeares after Christ his ascension did verelie beleue as the Catholykes and papistes doe at these daies Yf then Lanfrancus Archebishop of Canterburie beleued that Christ was verelie and reallie not as Berengarius the heretyke sayed figuratiuelie onlie in the Sacrament ergo he dyd worship our Sauior there present ergo a lerned blessed man hath worshipped the Sacrament within a thousand two hundred yeares after Christ his ascention ergo some man hath made a foule lie Certenlie yow can not escape here master myne For if LansraÌ„cus were one of that councel which condempned Berengarius and if Berengarius heresie was that these wordes of Christ This ys my bodye are no otherwyse to be taken then those other of his I am the vyne and if no Christians hart can choose but honor the bodie of his Sauyor and if Lanfrancus lyued within twelue huÌ„dred yeares after Christ ergo there was honoring of the sacrament before three hundred yeares last passed and therefore the memorie hath â—ailed the preacher But yet there was no lacke of memorie and the proposition dyd not escape M. Iuelles mouth vnware for he stowtlie repeteth it with once agayn I saie that a thousand two hundred yeares after Christ his ascention the worshipping of the sacrament was neuer knowen Well Syr the presence was knowen if you answer it was not whitheÌ„ was Berengarius condempned which denied the presence If it were confessed how could it but be worshipped I had rather one should answer that Lanfrancus and the councell called VercelleÌ„se dyd not beleue the presence of Christ in the sacrament which were verie ignorantlie and vntrulye spoken thei condempnyng Berengarius for an heretyke then to saye that for all his presence thei dyd not worship hym For that is not onlie ignorantlie but allso wickedlie and blasphemoâ—slie spoken Lanfrancus then was within twelue hundred yeares next after Christ and he beleued with all the Catholykes of that tyme Christ to be reallie present in the Sacrament ergo the worshipping of the SacrameÌ„t was knoweÌ„ within the cumpasse of the yeares which M. Iuell rekoneth vpon so that all is not the Ghospell which he spenketh But will you here now a pretie coniecture of his for conclusion I can not call it which maketh to no purpose After the people began sayeth he to worship the sacrament with godlie honor the lerned men and schole doctors that then were sawe it could not stand without great daunger and confessed that the ignorant sort might be leaden in to Idolatrie And what of this yf there be daunger in worshipping an host not consecrated how then Shall the honor due to Christ his bodye be taken awaye In the beginnyng of your sermon nothing to the purpose it was proued that abuses haue crept in to the sacrament â–ª would yow therefor the sacrament also to be abolished yf a leud priest with whom you were well acquaynted or els you bâ— light of belefe hath ben knowen for manye yeares space not to haue coÌ„secrated the host shal honest priestes therefor which do consecrate be suspected and the true sacrament dishonored The lerned men of whom yow speak dyd neuer doubt but the sacrament was to be honored but some of them dyd cast the worst saying what if by malice of the priest or other wyse there should be no consecration at all how then shall we think sayed they is there anye idolaâ—e committed of the ignorant people But you suppose they made this argument It may chaunce that an host not consecrated be lifted vp and honored of the people which thing ys daungerouse ergo it had ben better neuer to haue made corpus Christi daye or it were well done to take awaie the sacrament For this must be your conclusion to proue that euen by the verie scholemen adoration is taken awaie or not alowed For if this be not proued yow are fallen from your matter and you talke of scholemen besides all lernyng Yet graunt that there ys daunger bycause the dyuel hath his chapelaines it is easelie remedied
doe yow may be poysoned the host may chaunse not to be consecrated and then there is dawnger of idolatrie And so the people should be dimissed with scruple of conscience as M. Iuell vnderstandeth the scholemen which is nothing so â–ª for the conclusion of scholes and answer vnto that obiection which Master Iuell alleageth ys that the people are withowt all daunger in so much that the opinion of worshypping the Sacrament vnder a condition ys refused of the best lerned Now as concerning Duns and Durand Master Iuell reporteth of them by these wordes That they thowght it best to remoue away the bread and to bring in transubstantiation for it were remayned the substance of 〈…〉 and how 〈◊〉 vnto 〈◊〉 What is he which â—â—â—ring 〈◊〉 wordes and knowing neither the places where Dunâ— and Durand say 〈◊〉 or any good lernyng besides wolâ— not 〈…〉 Duns and Durand dyd so cast their heades to geather as thowgh they were able to bring thâ—â—â— opinions in to the articles of owr Crede and as thowgh transubstantiation were inuented and authorised by them and not rather coÌ„firmed by the whole church of Christ. It ys a shamefull kynd of lyeing when the true orderers of Christ his church shall be suppressed with silens and when the veâ—â—tyes of the Catholyke faith shall be attributed vnto the disputatioâ— of â—â—holemen Sainct Thomas indeed hath this argument that it ys agaynst the worshipping of the Sacrament if any creaâ—ed substance which may not be worshipped with godlie honor should be there ergo sayeth he no substance of bread remaineth Agaynst which reason of his Duns and Durand both doe argue verie busilie and they doe think that the substance of bread might be graunted to remain and yet the bodye of Christ might be worshipped in the Sacrament withowt all daunger of Idolatrie Therefor M. Iuell as cunnyng as he maketh hym selfe in Duns and DuraÌ„d doth so far and fowlâ—e goe â—â—de of theyr meanyng and opinion that they argued the plaine contrarie vnto that which he reporteth of them For whereas he interpreteth then sayinges after thiâ— manner that for auâ—yding of idolatrie in the Sacrament the substance of bread must be remoued they reason a playne contrarie way â–ª and argue their obedience vnto the church allwayes reserued that for all the remayning of â—read yet the bodie of Christ might be in the Sacrament and withowt daunger honored But they speak therein lyke scholemen and also lyke aduersaries of Sainct Thomas whose argumentes â–ª whiles they discussed to the vttermost â–ª they haue fallen some tymes in to the suspition either of enuie or curiositie And see agayne how litle it hangeth togeather that which M. Iuell would father vpon them Yf there be any substance of bread in the Sacrament sayeth master Iuell in his coÌ„mentarie vpon Duns and Durand there must be daunger of idolatrie ergo by transubstantiation lett vs take the substance of bread awaye and then will all thinges be safe and suâ—e and the people shall be cleane voyde of ieopardie But how can this sense and conclusion seeme agreable to a schole man For if as M. Iuell hath tolde vs owt of theire writinges there be daunger of Idolatrie when consecration ys omitted how much hath Duns holpen the people by bringing in of transubstantiation where as the substance of breade neuer so much taken away yet there may lacke consecration and that failing as master Iuell weeneth idolatrie may be committed and Duns and Durand should misse of their purpose for which they deuysed transsubstantiation Wherefore I wonder at the libertie which master Iuell taketh vpon hym in makyng as pleaseth hym free reportes vpon the lerned as thowgh they were easie to be vnderstanded or he had euer great mynd to read them or as thowgh his report were of such authoritie that as he sayeth so it must be in them Now as concerning Sainct Thomas which proueth that no bread doth remaine in the Sacrament bycause godlye honor ys geuen vnto it the authoritie and present practise of the church dyd moue hym thereunto As though he should saye on this wise The church doth geue godlie honor vnto that which ys vnder the formes of bread and wyne but no godlye honor ys due vnto anye pure creature ergo except the churche should committ Idolatrie which ys impossible no other substance besides the body of Christ can be conteined in the Sacrament In which his conclusion the honor which the church gaue to the Sacrament was sufficient vnto hym to inferr that no bread remayned and not his desire to haue the Sacrament worshipped was the motyue and occation to inuent that no bread remayned For to speake the trueth the scholemen as they were for the greater part men of excellent witt and holynes so thorowghe the ghift of vnderstanding and cumpassing weightie matters they went verie farr in serching owt the treasures of all diuinitie and yet thorowgh the grace of holynes which qualified their deepe inuentions they allwayes submitted their conclusions vnto the authoritie of the Catholyke church In so much that if a thowsand Dunces and Durandes shold so decide this question and matter as master Iuell reporteth of them yet needeth not the Catholyke for that cause to be trobled or the heretyke crake of anye victorie agaynst the practyse and faith of the churche But lett vs behold how master Iuell plaieth the schole man and vttereth such an insight in the Sacrament as the greatest doctors for subtilitye haue neuer marked throwgh their dulnes For vpon this which he supposeth Duns and Durand to saye the Sacrament ys to be worshipped ergo no bread must be remayning he inferreth a contrarie conclusion as that there ys bread remayning ergo it must not be worshipped Wherein both the argument concludeth not if he will folow Duns and Durand and the formar proposition ys hereticall if he would submitt his vnderstanding vnto the Catholyke church The argument I saye and the consequence ys nawght bycause for soth by his doctors Duns and Durand the schole men for all the substance of bread remainyng yet might the SacrameÌ„t be adored and worshipped But that is one doctors opinion Then also his antedent ys false because the church hath so receiued and tawght vs that the substance of bread ys clean conuerted And as concernyng master Iuell his profes of his antecedent where as he alleageth Sainct Augustyne in a sermon of his ad insantes saying that which you see vpon the table ys bread it doth conclud that the other thing which we beleue to be vnder those formes of bread is not Christ his naturall bodye And I trow Sainct Augustyne dyd not meane such bread to be there as childerne spread their butter vpon For it is wryten by the same blessed doctor VVe honor thinges which we see not that ys to saye flessh and bloud in the forme of bread and wyne which we see The church also herselfe feareth not to
sayeth he afterwardes he was not called vniuersall Bishopp Wherfor vnto M. Iuells question yf the name of vniuersall Bishopp was not in the primitiue church yet the thing it self was as 〈…〉 shewed so that the name it selfe 〈…〉 haue been vsed in that sense as it 〈…〉 Bishopp which hath charge 〈…〉 and of all the Catholike 〈…〉 But as it signifyeth hym which 〈…〉 other Bishop but hym selfe 〈…〉 there neither was 〈…〉 Bishopp vniuersall 〈…〉 people were then tawghte to 〈…〉 Christes 〈◊〉 ys reallye 〈…〉 carnailâ—e or 〈…〉 The 〈◊〉 â—ome of God is not in wordes but in power and strength and allbeyt owt of hand it could not be fownd to bryng a writer so auncient as yow require for euery one of those termes yet is the cause nothing the worse so that it may appere by any meanes that in the Sacrament is his verye body For I think it would be very hard to find in any writing of old and holy doctor with in vjC yeares of Christ all these wordes that he take râ—all substantiall corporall carnall naturall flâ—shâ— of the virgin Marie and yet they were instructed perfectlie to beleue that Christ toke owr verye flesh and not a figure onlye therof as the Maniches did euill report And so yf I could noâ— bring example of all the termes which yow would haue proued yet yf I can coÌ„clude that the verye body and not a fantasticall supposed bodye is in the sacrament for the wordes of carnall reall corporall substanciall and naturall I need not be woefull In the sacrament sayeth S. Ierome vnto Hebidia the verye bodyâ— of Christ ys of which bodye sayeth Isichius in Leu. lib 6. Cap 22. S. Gabriel did say vnto the virgin the holie ghost shall com vpon the. It is called of S. Cyrill lib. 3. in 10. Cap. 37. lib. 10. Cap. 13. the body of lyfe it selfe or of naturall lyfe Of Origene the bodye of the worde Of S. Chrisostome the body which is partaker of the diuine nature 1. Cor. Cap. 10. Of S. Augustine Psal. 33. the verye crucifyed bodye in the which he suffered so greate thinges Of Chrisâ—stome againe 1. Cor. Cap. 10. the body which was nayled vpon the crosse beaten wounded with spere which was not ouercoÌ„med with death What will a Christian man aske more and what neede to bring owt the wordes of carnall reall corporall naturall wheras the bodye of Christ being present and that body which was borne of the virgin Marye it foloweth that it is reall and naturall or els we are fallen from owr fayth in which we beleue that he toke reall flesh of the blessed virgin And here also where fynd you not onelye within vjC yeares of Christ but within .vj. and .vj. hundred and take three more vnto them that the people were taught to beleue that the body of Christ is onlye figuratiuelye sacrameÌ„tallie significatiuelye tropicallie imaginatiuelie in the Sacrament to the denyall of all presence and realitie S. Damascene a notable father writing purposelye of the sacrament of the altar sayeth that it is not simple bread or fode but vnited vnto the diuinitie Also hread and wyne sayth he is not a figure of the bodye and bloud of Christ God forbed but it is the very deisyed body of owr Lorde where as he hath sayed him selfe this is my body not a figure of my body and not a figure of my bloud but my bloud But M. Iuell appealeth vnto the vjC yeres next after Christ Vnto those vjC doth he appeale Vnto those vjC he that be browght And I require hym to shew furth where it was euer tawght with in vj. C. yeares after Christ that Christes bodie was in the sacrament figuratiuelye onely Lett one sentence example aucthoritye worde or sillable be browght furth of a bodye onelye figuratiue and significatiue and he shal haue the victorye Yea but sayth he the reall corporall carnall naturall presence was not preached or tawght at those dayes ergo a figuratiue bodye onelye was beleued And thus whiles we stryue vpon termes onely we spend the tyme in a questioÌ„ not necessarie and he will not consider the truth in it self as it is Christ sayd this is my bodye which shalbe delyuered for yow Saye the truth Is not this playne inowgh what yf he had sayd this is my naturall body should all mysbeleife on yowr part haue ceased I thinke not for these wordes which shalbe deliuered for yow do as playnely expresse what bodye he meaneth as yf he had vsed the worde naturall or corporall what difference is in these poyntes M. Iuell and the named Bishopp of Sarum and he which in the yeare of owr Lorde 1561. preached at Paules crosse the second sonday before Easter and after this sort yf I would proced further what difference were there or how many persons myght I be thowght to haue named in the iudgement of them which know the state of this world what oddes is there betwene fowre pens and a grote what difference betwixt the very body of Christ and the reall bodye the body borne of the blessed virgin and the naturall bodye the corporall bodye and his very flesh the carnall bodye and the bodye which was delyuered vnto death and hanged on the crosse for vs This is not childisshnes onely but very wantonnes to aske for the terme of a corporall and reall body and not to be coÌ„tent with such a bodye which dyed for vs to beleue owr eyes yf we should see hym and to discredite his voyce when we doe here hym not to be able to deny but this is the bodye which was delyuered for vs and yet to require whether it be his naturall bodye or no And yet bycause the church owr mother which in her selfe is strong doth condescend vnto the infirmitie of those which once the browght furth I will shew in one testimony that euen in playne worde corporallie Christ his body is geuen vnto the faythfull And yf copye of wordes delite M. Iuell I will proue also that he is naturally in his faithfull S. Cyrill a blessed and auncyent father in reprouyng and confutyng a certen Arrian which vpon those wordes of Christ I am the vyne and my father is the husbandman wold inferr that Christ and God the father were not of one substance no more then a vyne and a husbandman are which Arrian also sayde that those wordes I am a vyne c. apperteyned vnto the diuinitie and not the humanitie of Christ. S. Cyrill I saye in confuting this reason hath these wordes VVe doe not denye but we are ioyned spirituallie vnto Christ by right fayth aâ—d syncere charitie but yet that there is no waye of the ioyning of vs togeather with hym accordyng to the flesh that trulie we doe veterly denye And we say that to be altogeather besides the Scriptures For who hath doâ—ted Christ euen after this fashion vnderstand according to the flesh to be the vyne and vs to be
still that in the sacrament is Christ his bodye and to make playne what body is meaned it foloweth which shalbe delyuered for yow Agayne it is a verâ—tie most certain that Christ hath not left his church without guides and gouernours in which be first Apostles then Propheâ—s then EuaÌ„gelistes after these Pastors and Doctors to the perfiting of her Which if yow graunt to what purpose is any talk or brable moued if more masses be sayd in one church at one tyme if laye men be restrained from commenting vpon the Scriptures or if the host be diuided in to three partes or if the laie man receiue in one kynd alone wher as all these thinges be such that being once appointed they must nedes be obserued And if they neuer had ben appointed the veritie of the SacrameÌ„t were nothing thereby diminished To what purpose then do I speak all this Truly to come at length to some end with out aduersaries and to geue waâ—â—ing vnto our frendes that in all thinges they require that which is materiall and necâ—ssary and lerne to distinct that from thinges indifferent in them selues â–ª also to appeale vnto the principall coÌ„clusion and not to meddle with lower matters before the principall be decided Can you proue saieth M. Iuell that it was lawfull by the old Doctours and Councels for the priest to pronounce the wordes of coÌ„secration closely What then Sir I can proue that there was and must be a principall head in the church by whom we must be ruled whether he appoint the wordes closely or openly to be pronounced how now then should any wise man and desirous of the truth haue talk with an heretike aboute the open and close speaking of the priest which dependeth of that other question whether the Bisshoppes and heades of the church may not rule the churche of Christ as they shall see expedient what a doe is made about the coÌ„munion vnder one kynde of prayers in the vulgar tong and of order in the seruice in which questions the heretike hath this aduantage that whiles these thinges are indifferent he maye bring for him selfe a probable argumeÌ„t and the Catholike whatso euer he shall bring except he goe to a higher questioÌ„ he shall speak but probablye and so the hearer of bothe partes can not dissalow greately any one But if we wold come to that which is the chefe in all such indiffereÌ„t matters and reason whether we shold not obey the lawfull Bishoppes and heads this question concluded would sone put to silence all heresy and settle well the consciences of true Catholikes I would faine be at an end and I can not For behold more then a dosen interrogations do folow which if I doe not answer I think that will be the best answer rather then to trouble both you and my self in opening all the matters which goe before and folow after vpon the foresaied interrogations But what nedeth that I go thorough all his interrogations and articles whereas if we be able to auouche against him any one of them all he is content to yeld and subscribe I will shew therefor which he demeth that the priest hath authoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his father Euery Bisshop saieth the blessed Apostle vnto the Hebrewes selected and chosen outâ— of men is appointed for men in those thinges which appertaine vnto God that he offer vp giftes and sacrifices for sinnes which being a generall proposition ergo either there be no priests and Bishopes in the new lawe or els they must haue a sacrifice which they may offer Which sacrifice must be of that valew that none may offer it but he which is called therevnto as Aaron was called â–ª and which sacrifice must be according to the order of Melchisedech as it is writen Thou arte a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech Of which order Christ our Lorde was in his last supper as being the priest of the gentils and not annoynted with visible oyle as the olde Bishoppes of the lawe were and thirdly bycause he offred vp sacrifice there his owne body and bloud not in forme of bloud and flesh but in forme of bread and wine as Melchisedeth did before Of which order Christ is truly saied to be a priest for euer as Oecuâ—enius saieth in respect of the priests which be now a dayes by meanes of whom Christ doth offer and also is offred Therefore if allmighty God hath taken an oth and if it doth not repent him thereof that Christ is priest for euer according to the order of Melchiâ—edech and if these wordes for euer be verified in Christ thorough priestes which be now in the world and whereas Christ offred in his last supper his very body and bloud in formes of bread and wine as it dyd appertayne vnto the order of Melchisedech how can it be saied that the priests haue no authoritie to offer his bodye which except it were offred God should seme to repent him of his oth and to break it also And further except priestes made out of men should offer it no offering wold be at all our Sauiour now according to his visible forme being ascended in to heauen and there abiding vntill the last iudgement of the world And not onely by this argument it is proued that priestes may and should offer vp Christ but also by the very expresse commaundement of Christ in his last supper when he sayed Do this in remembrance of me which commaundement except it had ben geuen what man in all the world wold haue entreprised to haue coÌ„secrated the body of oure Lorde For as S. Denyâ— testifieth of the priests of his time They did excuse them selues reuerently and Bishoplike that they offred vp the â—olsome sacrifice which is farr aboue them trying first vnto God decently and saying Thou hast sayed Do this in my remembrance and then beseching him that they maye be made worthy of so great a ministery and seruice that they maye holylye consecrat the Sacrament By which wordes it appereth that the priestes of the primitiue church much abashed at the excellency of their function did yet take harâ—e of grace to consecrat the holsom sacrifice because they were commaunded so to do by God him selfe In which sense also Sainct Basil praieth in his lyturgye and masse Make me saieth he meete through the power of the holy Ghost that I being endued with the grace of priesthood maye stand at this holy table and maye consecrat thy holy and vndefiled body and precious bloud And like wise again For thy vnspeakable and exceding kindnes sake withoute all mutation and conuersion thou hast ben made man and hast ben named oure Bishop and hast deliuered vnto vs the consecratioÌ„ of this seruiceable and vnbloudy sacrifice And after this very sorte all blessed men haue euer done in the church of Christ not denying but that all priestes do in very dede coÌ„secrat and offer vp the body of Christ but leâ—t
â–ª 2. 11. lyke litle 66. 2. 1. lokes bokes lb. 2. 20. take toke 80. 2. 6. posteritie the posteritie 82. 2. 10. childeriâ— childerne 92. 1. 12. sould should 96. 1. 16. antedent antecedent lbi 1. 23. doth coÌ„clud doth not conclâ—d lbi 2. 19. thinkers tinkers 99. 2. 26. founded founde 122. 1. 9. iâ— so euen so 133. 1. 11. write wrote 144. 2. 10. circuÌ„scriptiue circuÌ„scriptiuelie â–ª Ibid. 1. 12. host host 155. 1. 13. one our 156. 2. 11. your our In the Challenge â—60 in the mergent Rom. 26. Prouer. 26 Galat. 1. The first maner of answeringe A second manner 1. Cor. 11. A third maÌ„nâ—r Tertull. adâ—xorem Cyp. ser. 5 de laâ— hist. trip li. 6. c. 44 Ambros. de obitu fratris Philip. 1. Esa. 54. Psal. â—1 Malach. 1. Matth. 16. Iuell Apo. vlt. M. Iuel mistaketh the wordes of the couÌ„cell of Nice Io. 13. Act. 15. M. Iuell hinderith his owne side by the alleging of the Councel of Nice â—rid and 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈…〉 14. why the heretikes admit only scripture and the fathers old customes also In 〈◊〉 Conc. Niceni Hist. trip li. 4. ca. 5. To refuse vnwriten verities the old wâ—nt of heretikes Trip. hist. lib. 5. c. 20 Trip. hist. lib. 5. c. 34 what the Councell meaneth sayng let old customes preuaile IohaÌ„ 14. Pronerb â— Iuell 1. ad Tim. cap. 1. A differeÌ„ce betwen thâ— coÌ„mandementes of god the ordinances of men Theoph. cap. 11. 1. ad Cor. 1. Cor. 11. 1. Cor. 11. 1. Cor. 11 Epist. 118. â—d lanuar 1. Cor. 11. Iuell 1. Cor. 11. M. Iuel vnderstaÌ„deth not theâ— place which he briÌ„geth out of the first vnto the Corinthias ca. 1â— Iuell The inconsâ—anciâ— of heretikes Ioan. 13. Iuell Note a most euident lye of M. Iuels There is one Ghospell but diuers Ghospellers Aedant Origines EcclesiaruÌ„suarâ— Lett them shew the bâ—ginninges and first rysing of theire churches Tertull. in â—script aduersus haereticos the ProtestaÌ„te hath no one â—â—doubted trew iudge teacher or fayth Consider whether â— new Ghospel â—aith may with any reason be trusted protestaÌ„tes will stand to theire owne iudgementes onlye M. Iuell Ioan. 13. Mat. 26. Ioan. 14. Note the Protestantes vse manie thinges iÌ„ theyr coÌ„munion which are not fownd in script to be by Christ his institutioÌ„ Also they haue many poyntes lesse then war doone by Christ at his last supper as .1 Matt. 26. Christ toke bread in to his handes Christ blessed the bread Luce. 22. Mattâ— 14. Ioan. 11. what reuerent gestures Christ vsed at his last supper whi Christ vsed such reuerent gestures at this institution of the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud 1. Cor. 11 The new ministers abuse and lacke in celebrating Christ his last supper An other lye of M. Iuells Act. 2. Act. 13. 1. Cor. 11. Manye lyeâ— of M. Iuelâ— in one 〈◊〉 â—e togethâ—r wherin the ProtestaÌ„tes CoÌ„munion agreeth not with the primitiue church and old fathers Prayer toward the East Iustinue 118. quaest Athan. quest 37 Basil. de â— 5. cap. 27. Lib. de ser. in monte the chalice owght to be mengled with water Câ—â— Car. 3 ca. 24. Cyp. â—p 3. lib. 2 Apoc. 17 The signe of the crosse owght to be vsed in the communion Libro de corona militâ—â— In demoÌ„st aduerssusgent to 3. Augustin tract 118. in IoanneÌ„ altars vsed and halowed in the primityue church Concil Agathen se. cap. 14. Optatus contra 〈◊〉 Perfumes â—incense vsed in the priâ—itiue churche Ecel Hierarch ca. 3 Amb. li. I. in csp 1. Luca. Lyghtes mainteined in the primitiue churche August Ser. 7. de temporâ— Paulin. in nat 3. â— Foelicis Hâ—ero aduersus Vigilantium â—oan 12. Of praying to Sainctes Basil. in sua Liturgia Chrisost. in Liturg. Chrisost. â—om 21. in acta Apo. Aug. li. de S. virgin cap. 45. Idem li. 22 de ciu Dei cap. 10. Lib. 20. ca. 21. contra FaustuÌ„ Praying at masse tyme for the dead Conf. lib. 9. Chris. homil 3. ad Philip. Reg. 3. cap. 18. M. Iuell fol. 8. It was no abuse in the primitiue church to carie home the Sacrament and receiue it alone Cyp. ser. 5. De Lapsis Iuell A nâ—wghtye argument of authoritie negatiuelie Exod. xx Lib. 2. deâ—câ—uit Dei cap. 26. The doinges of the church and of good meÌ„ are not lightlie to be iudged 2. lib. Dial. cap. 24. In oratione funebri de obitu fratris sui Satyri Matth. 14. Iuell A differeÌ„ce betwene the Catholikes and Protestantes assertions Cap de horis Canonicis what abuses are crept in to the church masse and diuine seruice what a masse is A timerous bragging and vaine gloriouse weakenes of M. Iuell M. Iuell Note how properlye M. Iuel argueth against the Masse obiections against M. Iuell coÌ„cernig his wil. that al thinges done in the church must be vnderstanded of the people 1. Cor. 14 1. Cor. 14 1. Cor. 14. why it is not necessarie the people vnderstand all diuine seruice Chrisost. lib. 3. de Sacerd. Exod. 19. 1. Cor. 14. Inconueniences by hauing diuine seruice in English the Canon of the masse owght to be secret Chrisost. lib. 6. de Sacâ—rd what is the peoples office at the masse tyme Pictures are necessarie for the faythfull people M. Iuell M. Iuell The fault of men is not the fault of the seruice of God M. Iuell The CanoÌ„ of the masse came froÌ„ the Apostles M. Iuell coÌ„futed by his owne report Gregor li. 7. epi. 63 Note the vncertaintie of M. Iuels mynd where to find it M. Iuell Vide Bessanionem Card. de sacr â—uch Psal. 4. Theodoritus in hunc Psalm 4. M. Iuell Libr. 3. de Sacerdâ—tiâ— Psal. â—09 Priestes doâ—â—â—â—er Christ. In moral Hoâ—â—l 2. in 1. cap. 2. epist. ad Timot. Cap. 10. ad Hebr. M. Iuell See what a reason M. Iuell bringeth Cap. 20. lib. 10. de ciuit Dei M. Iuell Psal. 49. Iuell playeth the Ethnyâ—â—es part Psal. 43. Psal. 131. Psal. 77. Psal. 19. in coÌ„secratione cerâ—i Paschalis Psal. 148. How pernicious it is godlye mens deuotions to be examined and iudged by worldlinges M. Iuell M. Iuells false reporting Of spirituall thinges man must speak and think spiritually Lib. 4. de Sac. cap. 6. The Protestantes preach to please ther audience M. Iuell M. Iuell M. Iuell The Protestantes condemne all voluntarâ—e seruice of God Matth. 2. Matth. 14. Matth. 20. Matth. 15. 10. 9. Luc. 24. An argument of authoritie negatiuely ys naâ—ght and protestantlyke M. Iuell The Protestantes argumeÌ„t M. Iuell Adoration dew to the Sacrament Chrys. â—o 83. in Mat. Chrys. ho. 24. in .10 cap. Matt. Chrys in Ora. in Philogontiâ—n Li 3. ca. 12. de â—p SctoÌ„ Esa. ca. 66 M. Iuell M. Iuell Coll. 3. Philip. 3. Aug. in Psal. 98. The truâ— meaning of lift vp yowr hartes Chrysost. lib. 3. de Sacer. Angels catholike mâ—n worship Christ both in earth and in heauen August in Psal. 21. That Christ is to be adored in the Sacrament Aug. li. 20 coÌ„tr â—austum ca. 13 In lib. sint
beginning it was necessarye to open my eares that the worde of God might entre by that way into my hart so the worde ones by faith conceiued and the hart being now throwgh the goodnes of the holy ghost made as it were great with childe there with all I shall more euidently behold the veritie of God in those mysteries of which it is sayed This is my body if eares and eyes and all sense were stopped then if I should entend the proper actions of those senses But S. Austen saieth in the praiers which we make vnto God we must not chirpe like birdes but sing like men ergo we must not vse an vnknowen tongue Yea with a further ergo we must lerne to vnderstand the English which we read in the congregation which bicause thousandes doe not receaue therfor they be chirpers and not speakers Yet the Englishe seruice doth remaine although euery one doth not vnderstand it Iustinian also a Christian Emperor made a strait constitution that the wordes of the ministration should be pronounced with open voice that the people might say Amen ergo the seruice must be in English yet for al that we say Amen vpon those wordes which we vnderstand not when ther is no mistrust in the faith and honesty of the person which pronounceth them And also if the people saied Amen to the wordes of the ministration which I think to speake more plainly are the wordes of consecration then doth it appeare that they confessed the wordes which the priest did speake to be most true in them selues so that when the priest pronounced these wordes This is my bodye the answering of Amen by the people did confirm it to be so in deed and excludeth quite all siguration and signification of his bodye Touching the second abuse of the coÌ„munion he findeth fault that the Sacrament is not receaued in both kindes of which afterward we shall speke seperatly And in the meane tyme this I say that this obiection maketh no more against the masse then if I should disproue a good dish of meate not for any vnsaâ—orines therin but bicause the good wife of the house for diuers causes doth kepe it away from the seruantes For what is this against the masse that both kindes be not ministred in the which masse both kindes are consecrated and both kindes may be receaued if the masters of the house doe thinke it good Were the law of Mâ—â—â—â—s or the. Ghospell of Christ worthely to be reproued bicause a few onely were suffred to read the law and Ghospell doth the Sonne lese any of his light bicause the cloudes com betwixt our sight and him and kepe his beames away from vs Suppose then that it were most true which is most false that the Bishopes and heades of the church did robbe the people of one part of the sacrameÌ„t shall this robbery be obiected against the masse it self in which both kindes are consecrated I graunt vnto yow M. Iuell that the sacrament hath been receaued and may be receaued hereafter in both kindes what doe you conclude thervpon ergo there is an abuse in the masse Why Sir doth the order of the masse forbed the receauing oâ—der both kindes are not both kindes consecrated in the masse doe not the priestes receaue both Yea but the Bishopes and priestes deliuer vnto the lay people one kind onely They doe it in deede and for iust cawses But a Bishopp or priest is not a masse and the fault of men is not the fault of the seruice Reproue then the Bishopes and speake not against the masse and confesse that the masse is autentike and godly but that the ministers do not folow their boke which I say not as thowgh the Bishoppes and priestes were in deed giltie theyr doinges being grownded vppon most iust causes but to shew that if there were any fault it is yet more rhetorike then reason to obiect that agaynst the masse which apperteyneth onlye vnto the men The third point that I promised to speake of is the Canon a thing for many causes very vain in it selfe and so vncertain that no man can redely tell on whom to father it Loe what a fault here is no man can tell who made the Canon of the masse ergo it is not to be credited As who might doubt whethere the third and fowerth bokes of the kinges were to be credited the proper author of them being vnknowen or as thowgh they were fautles which haue denied S. Ihons reuelations and S. Paule to the Hebrewes bycause it hath been a question whether they were the true authors of those thinges After like maÌ„ner of folly it is saied no man can redely tell what yere of Nero his raigne S. Peter did come to Rome ergo he was neuer at Rome which liberty of babling ones graunted there may be found which shall make this quareling argument and say the histories doe not agree what yeare of his age Christ suffered ergo his passion is not to be beleued wel yet among all them which are named authors of the Canon take him which was farthest of from Christ and see what a foule blank M. Iuells cause must haue Innocentius tertius saieth that it cam from the Apostles that is to high thinketh M. Iuell Goe to then take him which cometh lower that is S. Gregory the first who lyuing within six hundred yeares after Christ it foloweth well that the Canon of the masse is of great antiquitie And now bicause you glory that for six hundred yeares after Christ there can be found nothing against your communion and religion it is easy to nombre that the very Canon of the Masse which you speake most against was in those dayes vsed in the church of Christ. Wherfor if the Apostles made not the Canon them selues yet are you coÌ„founded bicause they made it which liued within six hundred yere after Christ by which yeres you are contented to be iudged But you wil say that some write how Gregorius the third made the Canon and that you beleue that to be most true In deed it is the property of your side to take all thinges at the worst â–ª for otherwise why should you not beleue rather that one Scholasticus made it before S. Gregoâ—â—e his tyme as you vnderstand hym and other also before you no euill men or protestantes Althowgh in deede it is worth the coÌ„sidering whether he meaned some one certaine lerned man whose name should be Scholasticus or els some of the Apostles and scholars of Christ. for his wordes be these in his epistle and answer made in the defence of the order of the masse of his church where coÌ„cerning owr Lordes prayer why it is readen after the Canon It seemeth vnto me an vnseemelie thing sayth he that we shold saie ouer the oblation the praier which Scholasticus or â—ls as I wold translate it which the scholar made and should not saye ouer the bodye and bloud of
all foules of the aire and to be short all creatures are called vpon to praise God may you wisely now obiect and say the moone can not heare me the wild beastes be neuer the soner obedient for me the birdes will sing no louder for all me with princes of the earth what is ther to doe for me yong mâ—n and virgins old men with younglinges let them praise the name of our Lord and who made me an officer to commaund so many I will goe no further but breifly will I conclude there was neuer kind of argument more pernicious then this one to examine the deuotions and praiers of good men by the rules of worldly ciuilitye and to iest at the homlines and hartines of Catholikes when they speake to God as one frind would vnto an other familiarly or wheÌ„ they speake according to the world childishely or according to the nature of thinges absurdly Off all which poyntes yow may fynd examples in the boke of Cantica Canticorum if euer yow haue either reade them or can with al your wit vnderstand them and then to bring those sayinges before the people to be iudges therof which haue no tast almost of heauenly thinges it is most vaine and vnreasonable Besides this he dosireth God that an Angell may come and cary Christ his bodye away into heauen VVhat a fable is this that Christ should be born vpon an Angel and so caried vp away into heauen It is besides the person of him which hath ben brought vp among lerned men and for opinion of learning and grauity is called a Bishop so to dissemble and so to counterfaict the vice in making of sporte with a fable of his owne And first the Canon is not truely Englished in this parte which he iesteth at For the wordes of the Latin CanoÌ„ be these Iube haec perferri per manus Sancti Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum which is to say coÌ„maund o Lord these thinges to be brought by the handes of thy holy Angell in to thy high altar Yet M. Iuell to make more sport englisheth perferri to be caried away not to be brought or caried vp as the truth is And bicause the Canon maketh mention of the Angells handes he fableth as though Christ should be caried vpoÌ„ an Angells back or shoulders or as though the Catholike did meane that Christ should be borne vpon an Angels backe and caried vp away into heuen But what a fable is this sayeth he for soth a very folish grosse fable in deed inuented by the diuell and vttered by Melhoserus and translated in to english by M. Iuell A folish grosse fable I say bicause the church of God hath no such carnall base vnderstanding of the place But desireth God that by the ministery of Angells which wait vpon vs and his misteries he would commaund the body of his soune our Lord to be caried vp not according to the changeing of place but according to his gracious acceptation of our seruice in to his high altar which is heauen For thinketh M. Iuell that when the Angells doe cary vp good mens almes deades or their praiers or fastinges or teares or any such like in to the sight of God that they make those thinges vp in fardels and cast them vpon their backes and make hast to heaueÌ„ warde and there vndoe their packes for the worde of carying vp soundeth in the eares of a carnall man as though there were changeing of place ther about or heuines of a burden or vse of armes sholders or back or some stay vpon which the cariage might rest which members are not in Angels and yet the scripture speaketh after the fashion of men testifying our almes dedes fastinges and prayers to be caried vp before the face of God in heauen and presented before his maiesty by the ministery of Angells now if one did not vnderstand the sense of those wordes rightly it were wisedom for him to hold his peace rather then to vtter his grossenes in vnderstanding them so basely and folishelye Especiallye wheras Sainct Ambrose so blessed and lerned a doctor hath like wordes vnto these which M. Iuell contemneth saing in his boke which he made of the sacramentes VVe besech the and pray the that thou wilt receaue this oblation vp to they high altar by the handes of thy Angells as thou hast vouchsafed to receaue the giftes of thy iust seruant Abell and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham and that which the high priest Melchisedech offered vp vnto the. Loe Sir if it please you to shew the finenes of your witt you may find fault with Sainct Ambrose and aske of your audience more folish then your selfe what a tale is this that the oblation of the church should be borne vpon an Angell on pick packe perchaunce and so caried vp away into heauen but see the good nature of the man he confesseth his folies and saieth he would not stand so long vpon them if force draue him not ther vnto But what force trow ye I think bicause a wanton audience is most delited with iesting against other and bicause a grosse audience conceiueth thinges spoken after a carnall sort and thinketh that preacher which so doth to be a very 〈◊〉 that to serue his audience he could not leaue of so plausible a matter Therfore saieth he after he had done his worst I leaue to speake farther of the Canon geuing you occasion by these few thinges the better to iudge of the rest Which wordes I note bicause in deed as the whole CanoÌ„ might haue ben mistrusted if any certain faultes had been noted in it so when with all his power and cunning he hath spoken the worst and yet hath reproued nothing but his owne misunderstanding an imagination which he fained to be in the Canon therfor we may iudge all well of the rest when no euill is found in those pointes which he toke to be farthest from the best The â—owerth matter that remayneth to be towâ—hed is the adoration It is agreable withe the rest of their doctrine and it foloweth coÌ„sequentlye that no bodye of Christ being in the Sacrament there should be no adoration vsed at all So that the very sure way to disproue adoration were to disproue the reall presence Which bycause they can not doe against so manifest wordes of our Sauior therefor how so euer the matter of the presence doth stand yet will they assaye to take away the worshipping or adoring of Christ in the Sacrament But that is done with so light and vnfytt argumeÌ„tes that they may serue by changeing of a few wordes against all kynd of orders in the church and consequentlye of owr fayth For what is it that you say good master myne against adoratioÌ„ Christ sayeth he which knew best what owght to be done when he ordeyned and deliuered the SacrameÌ„t of hys body and bloud gaue no coÌ„maundement that any man should fall downe to
sayeth VVe are fed with that thing which the Angels seeing do tremble at and can not loke vpon it without â—ear bycause of the brightnes which reboundeth from it Agayn the same blessed Doctor in the .24 homylie vpon the .10 chapâ—ter of the first to the Corinthians sheweth at large that at the least we should doe towardes the Sacrament of the altar that which the Magians dyd towardes owâ— Sauyor lying in the maynger which dyd come vnto hym with great reuerence and horror Which example he repetyng in an oration of his vpon S. Philogoâ—ius sayeth As thou doest receaue and intertayn God here menyng in earth with much honor so will â—e receaue the there vndowbtedly in heauen with much glorye Lykewyse S. Ambrose most playnly reasonyng with hym self how the Prophet Danyd in the Psalmes willeth vs to worshipp the footestole of God which by the interpretation of an other Prophet ys called the earth at the length he concludeth Therefor by the footstoole let the earth be vnderstanded and by the earth the flesh of Christ which also at this daye we worship in owr misteryes and which the Apostles dyd worship in owr Lord Ihesus Marke the worde which Sainct Ambrose hath That to this day we worshâ—pp Christ in owr misteries Because M. Iuel will haue vs to ascend vp I can not tell how in to heauen to worshipp Christ there as thowgh there wer no â—ote stoole of his that is to saie no flesh of his in earth For where as S. Augustyne hath these wordes manifestlye Christ toke earth of earth for flesh is of the earth he toke flesh of the flesh of Marie and because he walked here in that very flesh and gaue that very flessh vnto vs to be eaten for owr health and no man eateth that flessh except first he adore and worshyp it it is found owt how such a fotestoole of owr Lord may be adored and that we not onlye do not oâ—â—end in worshipping it but in not worshipping of it we doe offend M. Iuell doth expouÌ„d hym after this sort that the eating of hym and worshipping of hym must ioyne togeather but we eate hym in heauen sayth he ergo we must worshipp hym there But how much better doth it folow we eate hym on earth ergo we must worship hym on earth where we eate hym or els to ioyne bothe sayinges togeather we eate hym in heauen and in earth ergo we must worship hym in heaueÌ„ and in earth For as concernyng those testymonyes which are alleaged by M. Iuell that we must lift vp owr hartes And Yf we be rysen agayn with Christ let vs seeke those thinges which are aboue And agayne Owr conuersation ys in heauen By which testimonies he would conclud that Christ his body is to be sowght for only in heauen verely as the wordes doe sownd diuinelie and trulie so is the coÌ„clusion inferred very madly and miserablie Bicause those textes do no more disproue Christ his body to be on earth reallye then they proue owr bodies to be now reallie in heauen As in this short example Owr conuersation ys in heauen sayeth S. Paule and yet when he spake those wordes was he not on the earth in presence of bodie Doth M. Iuels hart goe owt of his body when he doth lift it vp to God Or when I am coÌ„maunded to seeke those thinges which are aboue must I make a ladder for my bodye to clyme vp to heauen All blessed men doe counsell the receauers of the Sacrament to ascend in their hart to loke vp to heauen to worshipp Christ sittyng at the right hand of the Father Which they doe not therefor counsell that we should not beleue owr Sauior to be present in his misteries but bicause they couet to withdraw our imaginations from all earthlines and to geue vs warnyng that we doe not make rekonyng to see with our eâ—e or perceaue by tast or smell or grosslye to conceiue by any bodilye sense the manner of Christ his being in the Sacrament For euen then also when owr Sauior hanged visiblie vpon the crosse it might haue ben well sayed to the faithfull lift vp yowr hartes and ascend with your myndes in to heauen not fastenyng your eyes so much vpon this present forme most pytiefull but rysing with yowr faith to apprehend that infinite maiestie and diuinitie and wysedom and power of Christ which is the glorie of his Father in heauen and comfort of all the holie Angells and thus presentlie yet now ys tormented and defaced vpon the earth As S. Augustyne sayeth very wysâ—lye in the Psalme which I haue fornamed entreatyng vppon the adoration of Christ his flessh It is the spirite which quickeneth the flessh profyteth nothing And therefore when thou doest bowe downe thy selfe and â—al prostrate before any such earth meanyng the flessh of Christ looke not vpon it as it were earth but looke vpon that â—oly one whose fotestoole it is which thou doest worshipp So that the bodye of Christ being present vpon the altar bycause we are all very prone to grosse cogitations and sensible loues therefor may it be sayed most iustly vnto vs lift vp yowr hartes goe vp towardes heauen with them there lett yowr thowghtes be occupyed As who should saye bycause good people yow here that this is his body and yow see it yet in a simple forme as lying vppon an altar and caryed in mennes handes broken also and deuyded yow may perchauÌ„se haue to base and lowe cogitations But I tell yow ascend in yowr myndes dilate yowre hartes and enlarge yowre thowghtes This is his bodye in deed as he hath spoken hymself the word which can not be false and this ys his bloude But whose body and bloud lyft vp yowr hartes now The body of the second person in trinite the onlye begotten of the Father the maker of the world the wisedome of God the ouerlooker of all creatures good and badd angells and diuells men and beastes the sercher of owrâ— hartes the disposer of tymes the iudge of the worlde the felicytie and ioye of the good the terror and feare of the condempned Lyft vpp yowr hartes I saye Thinke you that here ys present a bodye or flessh onlye And that as in diseases some whott meates doe cumfort the bodye so that yow haue but a lyuely peece of his â—lessh onlye Or els doe you conceaue the matter after this sort that as one fâ—nde sendeth to an other a morsell of good meate which the other had not that so Christ in this banket geueth vnto euery man a tast or els a portion onlye of his pretious bodye as it were a most excellent gyft but yet baser then his sowle and diuinitie O lift vpp your hartes You must not seeke Christ so grosselye looke not to haue hym so vpon the earth Christ ys one perfect person God and man maker of all tymes and borne according to flesh in tyme euerlasting lyfe and yet putt
present are thei all lost and art thow thi self togeather with them condempned It was not for a man alone to compile out of bothe testamentes so manye testimonyes for the sacrament and so compile them that lyke two Cherubins the old should looke vpon the new aud the new answer the old It was not of flesh so to doe but of the spirite of God Read ouer the antempnes the respondes the versicles of that blessed daye and by the verie sound and sense of them thei declare plainlie from whence thei proceded The first respond owt of the old lawe is this The numbre of the children of Israel shall offer vp a kydd at the euening tyde of their passeouer and thei shall eate flâ—sh and vnleauened bread The versicle answering the same out of Sainct Paules epistle is this Christ our passeouer ys offered vp therefore lett vs eate in the vnleauened bread of sinceritie and veritie Againe an other respond is Helias looking back dyd see at his head a cake and rysing dyd eate and drinck and with the strength of that meate he walked vnto the hyll of God This is the respond but what is there in the new testament to answer this It foloweth owt of Sainct Iohn his Ghospell Yf any man eate of thys bread he shall lyue for euer It ys writen in Iob The men of my tabernacle haue sayd who might geue vs of his flesh that we might be satisfied and the respond is that whyles thei were at supper Christ toke bread and brake it and gaue it and sayed take ye and eate ye this is my bodie What could haue been deuysed more agreeable and comfortable Then in other partes of the seruice how playnelie ys the faith of the church in how few wordes declared and how effectuallie be the effectes of the sacrament proponed O holie feast sayeth the antempne of the later euensong in which Christ ys receaued the memorie of his passion ys repeted the mynd ys filled with grace and a pledge of the glorie to come ys geuen vnto vs. The heretykes say that we must remembre Christ his passion and that that ys the verie some of the institution of the Sacrament But they forget three partes of the whole bycause we not onlie remember his passion but we receaue hym also in deed and grace presentlie ys geuen vnto vs and a pledge of the glorie to come hereafter The church tawght them eueÌ„ that veritie which thei hold as it appereth in the praier of corpus Christi daye O God which hast left vnto vs the memorie of thi passion vnder a wonderfull sacrament but then she sayeth further Grawnt vs we besech the so to honor the holie misteries of thy body and bloud that we may daylie feele in owr selues the fruct of thi redemption So then she grawnteth the memorie of his passion but she holdeth the veritie of his bodie she pelteth not with God denying this to be his body bicause she is coÌ„maunded to do this in remembraÌ„ce of hym but she doth best remembre hym when she hath the bodie which suffered before her She calleth the sacrameÌ„t the misteries of his bodye and bloud yet she doth plainelie adore and worship his presence which is couered I may seem to be to long in my seruice but certeÌ„lie if we should coÌ„sider the marueilouse wisedome of almighty God and the multitude of misteries which by the mowth of S Thomas were vttered in that matter it were argumeÌ„t inough that it come froÌ„ God And is all this geare lost now And where as most manifest miracles haue testifyed vnto the world that our Sauyor accepteth hym and hath takeÌ„ hym in to heaueÌ„ shal the sprite of pride lyeing with one worde coÌ„dempne hym euerlastinglie ThaÌ„ked be God that euer the holiday was made in the worship of Christ his body in the sacrament for this argumeÌ„t is so euideÌ„t that bothe he which can read no letter in the boke an other which wil read no good thing the third which for honest necessarie busynes can not well intend it all yet be sufficientlie warned what to think of the ChristiaÌ„s sacrameÌ„t bicause they haue coÌ„pted it worthie of an especial holiday And wher as no text can be alleaged so plaine for adoration no not owt of this verie seruice which is for corpus Christi day but the heretykes will putt it owt of strength by spirituall and misticall vnderstanding which wordes thei vnderstand not them selues but lyke smoke vanysh awaye in their cogitatioÌ„s yet the apointing of an holydaye in honor of the sacrament ys so manifest an argument against them that they haue no other remedie but to saye Vrbanus was not auncient inowgh for them Which holye pope if he had wryten a whole boke in the prayse and honor of the sacrameÌ„t calling it as the holie doctors haue done the bread of liffe the bread of diuyne substance the bread vnited to the diuinitye the pledge of everlasting lyâ—â—e the bodie most holie pretiouse saue inestimable with an hundred other such tytles they would haue escaped by leing or denying But now what can they saye not onlie S. Vrbanus but all Christendome not onlie doe speake but commaund and proue by sensible and visible argument that the very bodie of owr Sauior is in the SacrameÌ„t and that they adore it with a proper holidaye But Christ sayeth M. Iuell and his Apostles the holie fathers in the primitiue church the doctors that folowed them and other lerned men whatsoeuer for the space of a thousand and two hundred yeares after Christ neuer heard of it Neuer will you abyde by it Yea sayeth he once agayne I saye for the space of a thowsand and two hundred yeares after Christ his ascension in to heauen this worshipping of the Sacrament was neuer knowen or practised in any place within the whole Catholyke church of Christ within the whole world Here I am at a staye I tell yow troth bycause I can not tell by which waye I might begin to answer so vehement an asseueration For were it best think I to tell hym he lyeth and to proue it or to wish hym shame onlie and to permitt the matter to the handes of God or to reason with hym as if he were present or what waye might I take I haue alleaged S. Ambrose and S. Augustyn before and if those two be not sufficient Theodoretus sayeth that the misticall signes remayn in their formar substance and figure and forme and they may be seen and felt as they were before but they are vnderstode to be those thinges which they are made and they are beleued and adored as being those thinges which they are beleued to be Euthimius also sayeth in the 64. chap. vpon S. Mathew Lett vs so doâ— in the worshipping of the misteries not onlie looking on those thinges which are sett before vs but beleuing his wordes And whereas be sayeth this is my bodie
the branches which receiue and get lyfe from thence Here S. Paule saying that all are one bodie in Christ. For althowgh we be many yet in him we be one for all take parte of one bread Doth he think perchaunce meaning the Arrian that we doe not know the strength and power of the misâ—icall benediction which when it is done in vs 〈…〉 not make Christ also corporallie to dwell in vs throwgh the communicating of the flesh of Christ For why are members of the faithefull the members of Christ know yow not saith S. Paule that your members are the members of Christ And shal I then make the members of Christ the members of an harloâ—â— God for send Also owr Sauior sayeth he that â—ateth my flâ—sh and drinketh my bloud remayneth 〈◊〉 me and â—in hym whervpon it is to be considered that Christ is in vs nos onely by habitude and fashion that which is vnderstode to be throwgh charitie but also euen by naturall participation For like as yf a man melting waxly the fyer would so mengle it with an other wax likewise melted that of them bothe one certayne thing may seeme to be made so by the communicatyng of the body and bloud of Christ he is in vs and we are in hym For otherwise this corruptible nature of owr bodye could not be browght vnto incorruption and lyfe except the bodie of natural lyfe were ioyned togeather with it Doest thow not beleue me speakyng these thynges geue crediâ—e then I beseche the vnto Christ. Verely verely I saye vnto yow except yow eate sayth he the flessh of the soun of man and drink his bloud yow shall not haue lyfe in yow c. In this testimonye of S. Cyril althowgh it be playne to vnderstand yet shal I put you in remembrance of noting two poyntes the one that he sayeth Christ to be in vs by charitie but not onelye throwgh charitie which is when we beleue in hym and long for hym and thank hym for his benefites the other that euen by naturall participation and corporallie and by the naturall body of lyfe he is in vs. Ergo it is false â–ª to say that the receiuing of Christ is onely by faith and that the body which we receiue is onlye a figuratiue spiritual bodye which heretikes haue inuented And on the other syde it is trew that besydes the spirituall receiuyng of Christ throughâ—h 〈◊〉 there is an other kynde by which his naturall body is corporallie ioyned to owr corporall bodye in which the Catholikes doe beleue So that to vse the wordes of â— Cyâ—â—l which folow in the place forenamed both spirituallie and corporallie we are bâ—â—nches and Christ is the vyne And yf yow aske the waye how this hath been and is browghte to passe the same Doctor in an other place â–ª declareth it most plainelye Corporallie sayeth he the soun of God throwgh the mysticall blessing is vnited to vs as man but spirituallie as God he is vnited vnto vs by renewyng owr spirite by the grace of his spirite vnto a newlyfe and vnto the partakyng of the diuine nature Christ therfore is the knytting vp of owr vnion with God which is naturallie vnited vnto vs as man vnto God the father as God More authorities of this blessed father and of others myghâ— be recited to the proufe hereof that women are ioyned naturallye and corporallye vnto Christ not onely by that he toke owr nature on hym in the vitginâ— wombe but also rather bycause we eate hys flessh and drink hys bloud throwgh the strength of the misticall benediction But one instaÌ„ce is sufficient against him which vniuersallie belyeth the Catholikes that they haue no proufe at all to dâ—clare that the naturall reall corporall bodie of Christ should be in the SacrameÌ„t which is so vntruly reported that the doctors conclude S. Cyrill in the place alleaged S. Hilarye in the .viij. boke De trivitate S. Gregory Nissenus in oratione catechetica and others in diuers places that except this bodye of owrs had a lyuche bodye by participatioÌ„ of which it should be repayred it were impossible that it should ryse agayne when it were once by death cast downe not bycause God of his absolute power were not able to haue done it which withowt the incarnation of his blessed soun myght haue saued the world but the order most wyse and agreable once beyng lett owt by almightye God that owr sowle by his spirite owr body by his flesh should be properlye preserued now in this order and wisedome he which taketh away from Christians a bodely reall presence he taketh awaye the proper and chiefest hope of the resurrection of bodyes Or that hu bodye is or may be in a thousand places or moâ— at one tyme. This question neadeth not as many others which folow in the sâ—rmon First bicause the principall matter establesshed that the bodye of Christ is present when so euer a lawfull priest doth coÌ„secrate the bread reason doth declare her fowle solye to goe aboute to reproue that thing which by fayth we must stand vnto bycause of an absurditie which should seme to folow Then wheras owt of one principle a hundred conclusions may be deductâ—â— it is not necessary that euery conclusion be expresselie writen in the auncyent fathers workes or ells that we make doubâ—e of the principle which afterwardes I will make more playne and probable Thirdlye wheras the Catholikes do teach that Christ is not locally in the Sacrament as in a place to aske of them wherby they proue that Christes body is or may be in a thowsand places which do know but of one place which his body circuÌ„scriptiue occupyeth and yet beleue that he is verilye and bodylie present in euery consecrated host it is quyte owt of the purpose Yet for all this I wil shew what S. Chrisostome answereth vnto the like question as M. Iuell moueth which in expounding of those wordes of Sainct Paule to the Hebrewes that Christ doth not offer vp hym selfe oftentymes as the priest in the olde law did enter in to the most holye places euery yeare with the bloud of beastes How then doe we sayth Chrisostome doe we not offer vpp euery daye we doe offer in deed but as men which make a remeâ—brance of his death And this sacrifice is one not manie How is it one and not many bycause that once beyng offered it was offered in to the most holye places and this sacrifice is an example taken owt of that VVe offer vp the self same allwayes and not trulye this tyme one lambe to morow an other but allwayes the self same Therfor this sacrifice is one other ells by this reason bycause it is offered in many places there be many Christes No not so but Christ is one euery where both here full and whole and there full and whole one bodye For as he which is euery where offered vp is one bodye and not many bodyes so also the
breaketh the coÌ„secrated host holding the halfe in one the halfe in his otheâ— hand And that which is in the right hand he putteth in to the chalice saying The vnion of the most holy bodye and precious bloud of oure Lorde and God and Sauiour Thesus Christ. Then the other part which was in the left hand he blesseth and diuideth and putteth it in to chalices saying it is vnited and sanctified and coÌ„summated in the name of the Father and Soun and the Holy Ghost now and euer I leaue owt manye thinges as praying vnto Saincts and also praying for the dead oft inclinations and bowinges oft lifting vp the voyce oft speaking to hym selfe alone with incense agayne offred in the later end of the masse Which masse truly yf it were in english and sayed accordingly it would seme more superstitious and more full of cerimonies gestures then the masse which they saye to haue nothyng well nere but mennes inuention What memories haue these felowes which so frely report of S. Iames masse that which they haue forgotten howe it standeth or yf memory faile them not what hartes haue they to lye so lowdly and to the shame of their communion to crie owt that Saint Iames masse hath Christ his institution that the people which haue neuer reade it heard it or sene it might think it were as prety a thing as the communion is wheras in dede all thinges being knowen it vtterly confoundeth all their craking and glory except they haue forgotten that incensing blessing crossing and soft speaking and saluting of oure blessed lady all which thinges are vsed in Sainct Iames masse doe vtterly disagree froÌ„ their positions whereof it foloweth that he speaketh much against him selfe which praiseth so highely that masse whose rites and cerimonies do turne their religion to vtter shame and vnworthines I praye God to send them all better mindes and not to seke their owne glory by defending of that which once they take in hand to maintayne but the honour of God and his truth which hath and shall continew for euer Amen Thus then now Sir you haue a pece of an answer vnto the stoute chalenge and a token of my good will toward your beneuolence and some example of the exercise in the whiche I bestow my solitary and sorowfull time Of which three poyntes although euery one separatly were sufficient to haue geuen an occasion to this my labour and should be available to obtaine easy pardon for suche thinges which may be amended by the lerned Catholikes yet chefely I entended to destroy the assertions of Master Iuell Which if I haue not fully done yet all is not lost bicause I haue other prouided a tokeÌ„ to send to my very frend or chosen such an exercise where in I was not vnfrutfully occupied But on the other side if I haue attained vnto the coÌ„futation of those matters which I know deserue iust confusion then haue I that which I principally sought for â–ª and then as I would be content that our frendes should haue a sight of it so would I not be asâ—amed if the enemies should chauÌ„ce to find it But who is there that is able to saie that this is so diligently wrought that it should be welcome to those which do loue vs or should be accepted for probable of suche as fiâ—d faulte with vs Well yet how so euer it be I put it in to your handes to haue and to hold for better for worse vntill you see occasion from it to departe Fare you well You know my ordinary commendations which I vse in all letters Do them at this tyme extraordinarely with an ouerplus bycause it is long sence I wrote laste vnto you Your owne I. R. A CONCLVSION TO THE READER VVITH a challenge annexed THVS much vnto a singular Frind but to take my leaue of the also Reader and to shutt vpp all this matter with some coÌ„clusion well worth the remembring I think it verie good and profitable to sett furth also a solemne challenge thereby to geaue owr aduersaries an occasion to shew furth their Scriptures Councells Doctours c. and to declare their deepe knowledge in answering for themselues whose art we haue experience of in deuysing of obiections against other Which enterpryse and ventering of myne as it will be most subiect vnto their eye and consâ—quentlie vnto their prying and exâ—myning so haue I taken vnto me the 〈◊〉 of a perfect wyse man and 〈…〉 which hath tawght me how to procede against them that I neede not to mistrust my boldnes For thus he saieth in his boke of Prouerbes a boke of good authoritie and instruction Doe not aunswer a foole according to his folisshnes least thow be made lyke vnto hym And in the next sentence folowing Aunswer saieth he a foole according vnto his folisshnes that he may not seeme to hymselfe to be wyse To folow now therefore this duble and good counsell of not aunswering and yet aunswering a foole I will sett furth vâ—to the Reader two challenges to plaie the foole with a foole in the first of theÌ„ that he may beholde his artificiall wysedome and in the second not to agree with hym in his folie because I will refuse his waies and order But how may one aunswer a foole according vnto his folie or what hope is there of anye vantage â–ª if that waie be taken with hym Marie lyke as some madd men I haue heard saie haue ben meetlie well browght to themselues when an other hath stared and gaped vpon them all counterfaicting an owtragiouse behauyor so vndowbtedlie against fond questions it ys a profitable waye of replying to putt the lyke againe vnto madd aduersaries and cawse them to behold the absurditie For as the fault which an other maketh doth more sensiblie appeere vnto vs then the lyke of owr owne vsing thowgh owrselues be neerest to owrselues so to declare the absurditie of the challenge which M. luell with much opinion of wisedome pronounced against all Catholykes lett one of a lyke proportion to his be made furth vnto hym that he may coÌ„sider the well fauorednes of his owne worke when the lyke example of it shall greatlie mislyke hym Now if there were not so good lykelyhode and reason why this counterfaited challenge so to call it shoulde be vttered profitablie yet the wyseman so plainelie either counselling or licensing vs To aunswer a foole according to his foolisshnes his authoritie ys sufficient inowgh for me to beare me owt in this my doing and to saye that if I playe the foole yowr example M. Iuell hath moued me vnto it I saye therfore Yf any learned man of all our aduersaries or yf all the lerned men that be alyue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholike doctour or father or out of any old generall Councell or out of the holy Scriptures of God or any one example of the primitiue church wherby it may be clearlie and plainely