copies which the Authors writ and whereby that should be tried that we say So that in the ages to come when the old copies shall be worne out and their New-purged ones shall haue gotten a little antiquitie these desperate Termagants will resolutely deny that euer any such thing was written or any such purging vfed so it shal be generally maintained that the things that the Iesuites and censors haue clapt into their bookes were written by the authors themselues If this can be answered what do pillories and papers ordained for forgers when not a poore parchment of euidence but the deeds and euidences of the Christian world shall thus be forged and all antiquitie be Iesuited and reduced by this practise to the new cut 2 In the meane time I answer the Iesuite that I wil stand to my offer if he will let the triall be made by bookes vnpurged such as are the true copies that the authors published that there is no point of our faith but many learned in their owne Church hold it with vs and no point of Papistrie that we haue reiected but some of them haue misliked it as well as we and his two instances of the Masse and Reall presence I accept though I haue answered them a Pag. 158. letter m. 178. lett e. 379. lett f. in THE WAY so directly that it was his best policie to dissemble it and to require me for my credit to do that which I had done alreadie For to his first demand How many learned men of our Church haue denied the Masse to containe a sacrifice in such sort as Protestants do denie I answered b Vbi sup in two seuerall places For the vnderstanding whereof and the applying my said answer to this place the Protestants denie that Christ in his last Supper which the Iesuite absurdly calls the Masse offered any propitiatorie sacrifice properly so called according to the reall notion of the word sacrifice of his bodie and bloud This I shewed by the testimonie c Can. loc l. 12. c. 13. Suar. com 3. d. 84. f. 2. Azor instit moral tom 1. l. 10. c. 18. of three seuerall Papists to be denied by some Catholickes in the Councell of Trent and they consequently denie as we do that the Priest offers any such sacrifice d Christus ea quae ab alijs obseruanda instituit ipse primitùs obseruarit Tho 3. q. 81. art 1.0 In hac quaestione initium sumendum est ex facto Christi quod exemplar est actioniâ— nostrae fundamentum ac primum initium huius mysterij Fra. Suar. vbi sup pag. 949. because the Priest now doth no more then Christ did then in his Supper They therefore that denie Christ offered any sacrifice denie it also in the Priest And then I alledged a discourse of Thomas where he propounds the question Whether in this Sacrament Christ be immolated that is sacrificed and his answer is that the celebration of this Sacrament is called the sacrificing of Christ for two causes First because images are vsed to be called by the names of the things whose images they be as when we behold a picture on a table we say this is Cicero Now the celebration of this Sacrament is a certaine image representing the passion of Christ which is his true sacrificing and therefore is called the sacrificing of Christ Next in regard of the effect of Christs passion because by this Sacrament we are made partakers of the benefit of our Lords passion In which words making no mention of such reall and vnbloudie sacrificing as the Church of Rome now teaches it is more then plaine that he beleeued it not For if he had he would haue vttered it as fully as he doth other things Besides these I ad the Master of Sentences who e If we talke of all Diuinitie the bookes of Peter Lombard Master of the Sentences is held to be the first methodicall worke that drew all diuinitie into a certaine forme Walsing p. 128. professing to set downe all the points of Diuinitie most exactly as our aduersaries say yet no where in all his booke mentions this kinde of sacrifice but f 4. d. 12 §. Post haec quaeritur propounding the question Whether that which the Priest doth in the Eucharist be properly said to be a sacrifice or immolation and whether Christ be dayly sacrificed or were onely once sacrificed his answer is To this it may briefly be said that which is offered and consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and an oblation because it is a memoriall and representation of the true sacrifice and holy immolation made vpon the altar of the crosse and Christ died once vpon the Crosse and was there sacrificed in himselfe but he is dayly sacrificed in the Sacrament because the remembrance of that which is once done is retained These words shew plainely that some learned men in the Romane Church haue denied the Masse to containe a sacrifice euen in such sort as Protestants denie it 3 So there be also that affirme the reall substance of Christs bodie to be no nearer them that receiue the Sacrament then heauen is to the earth as the Caluinists hold For Picus Mirandulus g Conclus pag 64. nu â—4 pag 65. nâ— 20. sayes the bodie of Christ is sacramentally on the altar but locally in heauen and one bodie cannot be in diuers places at once And the opinion of the Caluinists is no otherwise then h Effectum tandem vt in hanc insaniam prorumperet Berengarius vt verum corpus sanguinem Christi non esse an pane vino docuerit haec haeresis apud Heluetios hoc nostro tempore per Caluinum reuocatae est Prateol Elenc verbo Berengarius Berengarius and yet Waldensis i Sacrament Eucharist c. 19. pag. 17. tom 2. writes that there were many that with the Church of Rome condemned Berengarius for his maner of speaking which yet thought as he did And k THE WAY pâ—g 349. I alledged a saying of l 4. d. 10. q. 1. §. Quantum Scotus that from the beginning since the matter of this Sacrament was beleeued it hath euer bene beleeued that Christs bodie is not moued out of his place in heauen that it might be here in the Sacrament and yet it was not in the beginning so manifestly beleeued as touching this conuersion Where Scotus affirmes that it hath not alway bene beleeued that the bodie of Christ is moued out of heauen to be in the Sacrament * Note touching the forme of recantation prescribed to Berengarius by Pope Nicolas wherein the Pope enioynes him to say J confesse the bread and wine after consecration to be the true body and bloud of Christ and to be sensibly handled in the hands of the Priest yea broken and chewed with the teeth of the faithfull Which words are read de Consec d. 2 ego Bereng and pressed by the
aduersaries If he thinke his Diuines haue spoken so abundantly for it let him say ingeniously how chances his Bellarmine d De iustif l. 5. c. 7. confesses that by reason of the vncertenty of a mans owne righteousnesse and for feare of vaine glorie the safest way is to repose our whoâ—â— confidence in the sole mercy and goodnesse of God how chance his Waldensis saies e Pag. 30. Sacram The same merit of condignity condeÌ„ned also by Grego Ariminensis Burgensis Echius saies Vega qu. 5. de merit p. 788. He is to be reputed the sounder Diuine and the better Catholicke and more consonant with the Scripture that simply denies such merit confessing that simply no man merits the kingdome of heauen but obtaines it by the grace and free will of God that giues it These are strange courses therefore to affirme that an ancient doctrine which is neither so Catholicke nor so safe as the contrary nor so agreeable with the Scripture But of this point I haue intreated at large a the WAY Digr 35. elsewhere and laied downe enough to shew the foulenesse of it here I am onely to vphold that I said It was begun lately by the Schoolemen which is the confession of Friar Waldensis a man as learned as any of them all that say the contrary and b Quod opus Doctrinale antiquitatum sidei Thomae Waldensis non immerito And. Vega fontem esse asseruit ex qua postea plerique omnes qui contra nouos haeresiarchas scripserint hauserunt Posseu Bibl. sel p. 286. ThomaÌ„dico Waldensem vberrimum fontem ex quo hauserunt bonam partem fete omnes qui Luteranam sectam impugnarunt Vega qu. 4. de merit pag. 782. to whom the best of our aduersaries are beholding 5 The Sixt point was the Masse wherein the Digress by cleare testimonies shewed the vse of an vnknowne tongue the Transubstantiation the Sacrifice and the outward forme to be all brought in and added to the Sacrament since the Apostles time and the time of the Primitiue Church Whereto the Reply saies no more but that I cannot name the time when nor place where nor the persons in whom the substance of the Masse consisting onely in the consecration oblation and consumption of the hoast began I answer first these 4. the Latine language the Transubstantiation the Sacrifice and the forme of Praiers and other actions vsed as their garments ceremonies eleuation adoration circumgestation c. * Essentia sacrificij Eucharistiae in duobus consistit nempe in ritu externo in significatione Suar tom 3. p. 958. c. belong to the substance of the Masse and the Digress shewed they were not vsed by Christ nor his Apostles nor yet in the time of the Primitiue Church Now that which was not thus vsed is an innouation forsomuch as Christ left both the substance and manner of ministring the sacrament certaine and determinate and indispensable and it is not necessary in euery innouation to shew one determinate time person or place where it began because if it began after Christ and his Apostles it is an innouation when or where or by whom soeuer it was brought in Secondly touching the Sacrifice which is thâ— maine substance and very heart of the Masse I shewed the full confession of some Papists denying that Christ offered any sacrifice of himselfe vnder the formes of bread and wine at his last supper This is close to the matter for c Catholici scriptores omnes in eo potissimum laborant vt osteÌ„dant in Missa offerri Deo vere ae propriè corpus ac sanguinem Domini Bell. de Miss l. 1 c. 5. §. è contrario if the sacrifice be the sustance and Christ offered no sacrifice when he instituted it d Nam tota haec essentia ex institutione pendet Suar. p. 961. e. its plaine the substance of the Masse is not from Christ Therefore an innouation an addition an alteration therefore not Catholicke Thirdly afore the Repliar be so resolute about his sacrifice and substance it were expedient for the question in hand to be at some certenty touching the thing wherein his sacrifice consists for there is much reasoning about a sacrifice and yet no agreement what or which it is e Bell. de Miss l. 1. c. 27. Some say there is but onely one sacrifice f Tapper art 16. Cassal de sacrif p. 63. c. 20. Roffensis Alphons Gab. Hos Caâ—et Alexand Eck. Mag. TurrecreÌ„ quos refert Cassal ibid. p. 64 Some two They that say two hold the bread and wine to be one and the body and blood of Christ another They that hold onely one are not agreed what it is g Refert Suar. p. 959. B. whether the body and blood of Christ onely or h Bell. vbi sup the formes of bread and wine withall Againe whether i Suar. d. 75. s 2. the actions exercised in the Masse are sixe First the oblation of bread and wine by eleuation praier and other ceremonies before consecration Secondly the consecration Thirdly the distribution Fourthly another oblation after consecration Fifthly the breaking of the host and putting part of it to the wine Sixthly and the eating of it which the Reply calles consumption it is not agreed in which of these the essence of the sacrifice consists but k See them in Suar. s 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 there are as many opinions as there be men and their assertions and reasons are so ridiculous that nothing can be more When therefore the Reply hath no certainty touching the substance of his sacrifice but all things are still in question it is but folly for him to brag that the first author of this substance cannot be named But let him name the substance and shew me an agreement among his fellowes and masters that what he names is the substance and he shall haue an author Else when I haue named the author of this he may say neither this nor that belongs to the substance but the other For there are not so few as 6. opinions euery one whereof is guarded with speciall authors that we may entertaine them in their opinions as Hermias did the Philosophers l Herm. gentil philosoph Irrisio Let them shew me what is true and I will obey them But they plucke my minde in peeces and I confesse I cannot endure this frequent conuersion of euery thing Now they tell me I am immortall and I reioyce presently they say I am mortall and then I weepe by and by they turne me into water ayre fire a little after I am none of these but a beast or a fish now I swim among the Dolphines anon I am a dog or a bird When I looke vpon my selfe I know not how to call me whether a man or a wolfe or a serpent or a Chymaera These wise men turne me into all manner of things I swim I flie I creepe I runne I sit Empedocles turnes me into a tree
Papists to explicate proue their transubstantiation that it is confessed to be too grosse and meerly false if the words be vnderstood as they sound of the bodie of Christ So the Glosse Nisi sanc intelligas verba Berengarij in maiorem incides haeresim quà m ipse habuit §. Dentibus Turrecremata Nec iste modus loquendi est tenendus Ibi. nu 1. §. Respondeo Hervaeus Quod quidem vocabulum vt sc à dentibus tereatur non est extendendum sed exponendum restringendum vt sit sensus non quod corpus verum Christi teratur dentibus sed quod illae species sub quibus realiter est tereantur dentibus Et ideo est alia opinio communior verior c. 4. d. 10. qu. 1. pag. 17. But this Glosse is proued vntrue by this that the words thus expounded containe nothing against Berengarius opinion who had denied onely the grosse and reall presence of Christs flesh it was sometime therefore beleeued by some bodie in the Church of Rome belike that his blessed bodie touching the place and maner of presence was as far from them that receiue the Sacrament as heauen is from earth This for the reall and spirituall presence If the Iesuite dare put his Transubstantiation to the triall let him looke into m Digress 49. nu 9. THE WAY and hearken what many of his owne learned men say of it and when he hath done let him take a view of the poore answer that in this his Reply he hath made vnto them Pag. 32. A.D. The fourth marke is set downe by M. White in these words The most points of Papistrie are directly and at the first sight absurd and against common sence and the law of nature If he meane that they seeme at the first sight absurd c. to the seduced people of his sect who neither beleeue nor rightly vnderstand either the things by vs beleeued or the reason or authoritie for which we beleeue them then it may be he saith true but nothing to the purpose For if this were a sufficient marke to make vs misdoubt our religion by the like reason other heretickes or infidels who do not beleeue the mysteries of the blessed Trinitie the Incarnation c. might thinke to make vs misdoubt the truth of these mysteries because they who neither beleeue these mysteries nor rightly vnderstand them nor the reasons and motiues which make vs beleeue them will say that these mysteries are directly and at first sight absurd c. yet in truth they are not absurd nor against but aboue our reason and sense so I say to M. White although other points of our religion seeme to him absurd yet in truth they are not absurd neither are they contrary to but at most aboue the reach of naturall reason 4 I do not obiect against the religion of the Papacie that it is but aboue the reach of reason For many mysteries of the true faith are so the which we must beleeue and n Nec quisquam potest intelligentiam Dei apprehendere nisi qui toto se despecto conuersus ad sapientiam Dei omnem quaerendi ratiocinationem transtuleriâ— ad credendi fideÌ„ Oros l. 6. c. 1. not examine by sence but that many points thereof are absurd and directly against sence and the light of nature which no peece of true religion is as for example that a man endued with reason should fall downe and adore and inuocate an image o Shewed in THE WAY §. 50. n. â—6 51. n 7. and below chap. 54. the which in the Church of Rome is taught and practised As many other points are as absurd as it But if it be true which the Iesuite sayes that they are mysteries which we vnderstand not being a seduced people not acquainted with the authority whereupon they are beleeued that is another matter that I knew not before for they are to blame that will demand reason for the mysteries of Rome that haue authoritie beyond reason p Apoc. 17.5 whose forehead hath the word Mysterie written in it and I had forgotten q Quia in his quae vult ei est pro ratione voluntas Nec est qui ei dicat cur ita facis Gloss §. Veri c. Quanto de transl ep Sacrilegij instaâ— esset disputare de facto suo Glos §. Quis enim d. 40. Non nos Jta nos ad iudices reuocas ac si nescires omnia iura in scrinio pectoris nostri collecata esse sic flat sententia Loco cedant omnes Pontifex sum Paul 2. Platin. p. 304. a rule in his law that forbids men to aske any reason of his doings But in the mean time where are the Iesuites r Introd q. 4. p. 100. prudentiall motiues without which nothing ought to be beleeued because the vnderstanding cannot assent to the thing propounded without some probable motiue For religion bids not men be stockes A. D. And one cause why the common sort of Protestants do at the first sight thinke them absurd is because they haue not heard points of our doctrine truly related and declared as our Authors declare them nor the reasons and authorities set downe for which we beleeue them but haue heard such ignorant or malicious Ministers as M White make false relation of points of absurd doctrine to be held by vs which we do not hold but abhorre As to go no further M. White falsely relateth in this very place that we hold the Pope to haue right to Lord it ouer the Scriptures Fathers Councels Church and all the world That we teach also men to murther the King to pay no debts to blow vp the Parliament to dispense with murther and whoredome c. These and such like be not points of our doctrine but shamelesse and slanderous vntruths by which simple people are drawne by ignorant or malicious Ministers to mislike our doctrine in generall and to be apt to haue a worse conceit of euery point of it in particular especially at the first sight then by due examination they shall finde it to deserue 5 Not Protestants onely thinke Poperie absurd but many Papists also censuring the points I haue named and misliking them shew plainly that I spake true yet the Reply sayes the cause why the common sort of Protestants thinke Poperie absurd is because they heare not the points of Papistrie truly related but their ignorant and malicious Ministers charge them to hold what they hold not This is false for first these Protestants that thus condemne Papistrie do dayly reade the Papists owne bookes which are not restrained and prohibited with a The reading and vse of Lutheran bookes forbidden not onely the vulgar but all others of what state degree order or condition soeuer they be though Bishops Archbishops or greater onely the Jnquisitors are excepted by a Decretall of Iulius the 3. See Sept. Decr. l. 5. tit 4. de lib. prohib c. 2. that seueritie wherewith