2. epist 50. ad Bonifac. in fine Tom. 5. de Ciu. l. 2. c. 25. But would you know what is to be against charities kingdome S. Augustin aunswereth Non est autem particeps diuinae charitatis qui hostis est vnitatis he is not partaker of diuine charitie who is an enemie of vnitie No catholick saythe he no fruitfull communion Therfor good M. Rider Aug. To. 10. de verb. Apo. ser 22. circa fineÌ„ let this goulden exhortation of S. Augustin take place after so many mis-informations of his perswasion VVould God saith he they would not feare them to whom long time they haue sould erroure for they respect them they are ashamed toward humane infirmitie and not toward inuincible veritie And they feare to be expostulated with all in this maner VVhy therfor haue you deceaued vs why haue you seduced vs why haue you affirmed so much ill and falshood They should aunswer yf they feared God it was humane to erre but diabolical through animositie to remayne in erroure And a litle after Let them say to their beleeuers we haue fayled together let vs retire from errour together VVe haue bene guydes to you and you followed to your fall will you not follow vs when we conduct you to the Church I pray God this exhortation may take effect according to the intention and worthe therof In the meane tyme it is the 33. vntrueth that we ouer-rule Scripturs and Fathers The 33. 34. 35. 35. 37. vntruth The 34. that we confesse to be figuratiue that is as you vnderstand only figuratiue these woords of Christ this is my blood of the new testament The 35. that Augustin reasoneth against Capharnaits who would not beleeue the woords of Christ no more them protestants in these tymes The 36. that by our literal exposition we forsake Augustins rule charities kingdome Apostolical and Catholick exposition The 37. that we be Caphernaits and Canibals I wil not requite his Theons style and bad demeanure knowing that it is for want of mater because Eccli 21. non est sensus vbi est amaritudo ther is no sense wher there is bitternes Yf vaunting were victorie reproaches reproofe dispising disconfiting M. Rider had bene as victorious as Cesar or Alexander as subtile and solid a disprouer as a second prophet Daniel as great a vanquisher as the faire king Arthure Rider Amb. lib. 4. de Sacrament to cap. 5. 55. Ambrose is of the same opinion with vs against you saying Fac nobis inquit oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi make vnto vs saith the Priest this oblation that it may bee allowable reasonable and acceptable which is a figure of the bodie and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ And Ambrose presentlie after saith the new Testament is confirmed by bloud in a figure of which bloud wee receiue the misticall bloud By these words the Reader may see that Ambrose and the Church in his dayes tooke it not for the naturall bodie of Christ but for a figure of his bodie and therefore cease to bragge heere to the simple of Ambrose and Augustine for they are not of your opinion Innocent Papae lib. tertius ca. 12. Fol. 148. and there shal you see the foolish and phantastical reasons the Pope giues for those said crosses And in the Canon of the Masse you haue these words of Ambrose in that part which begins Quam oblationem but you deale deceitfully with Gods people for you leaue out these words quod est forma corporis and there dash in fiue red crosses and still teach the people it is Catholicke doctrine and the old religion but these iuglings with the Fathers must be left or else good men that follow those Fathers will doubt that Gods spirit hath left you How dishonestly S. Ambrose is treated by M. Rider Fitzimon Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 5. 55. S. Ambrose is as fowly or rather worse vsed then S. Augustin Compare M. Riders woords and these together in the very same chapter In sanctis manibus suis accepit panem Antequam consecretur panis est vbi autem verba Christi accesserint corpus est Christi Deinde audi dicentem accipite edite ex eo omnes hoc est enim corpus meum Et ante verba Christi Calix est vini aquae plenus Vbi verba Christi operata fuerint ibi sanguis efficitur qui plebem redemit Paulo post Ipse Dominus Iesus testificatur nobis quod corpus suum accipiamus sanguinem Numquid debemus de eius fide testificatione dubitare In his sacred hands sayth S. Ambrose he tooke bread Befor it be consecrated it is bread but when the words of Christ come it is the body of Christ then heare him saying take and eate of this all for this is my bodie And befor the woords of Christ the chalice is full of water und wyne VVhen the woords of Christ haue operated the blood is made which redeemed the people A litle after Our Lord Iesus him selfe testifieth vnto vs that we receaue his body and blood should we doubt of his trueth and testimonie Could you M. Rider Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 5. in ether godly or honest disposition conceaue S. Ambrose thus speaking to thinke that in the sacrament was not the natural body of Christ but only a figure therof because he mentioned as we professe a figure to be therin Could you mistake without deepe hypochrisie these woords of his but when the woords of Christ come it which befor consecration was but bread is the body of Christ the blood is made which hathe redeemed the people Is not this a shamelesse resolution in making denials affirmations an act of such a carelesse man as is mentioned in Horace who had forfetted his credit abroad among all men freends and foes yet fayned to them of his priuat howshould that all went well and nothing against him saying Horacius lib. 1. Satyra 1. Populus me sibilat at mihi plaudo ipse domi The world doth hiss at me but yet I applaud to my selfe at home For opposition of S. Ambrose to protestantcy Causeus sayd he was bewitched by the deuil And truly in this point as after in treating of him in particular shal God willing be notifyed none was euer more opposit to them then he How lowde therfor The 38. vntruth hath M. Rider made his 38. vntrueth that Ambrose and the churche in his dayes thowght with him against vs But a mercenary minde to please man selleth it selfe rather then it would seeme disproueable S. Aug. late exhortation I feare will not benifit one of this humor 56. And Augustine else where saith Rider Aug. in â—narratione Psal 3. pag. 7. col 1. Printed at Paris anno 1566. August tom 6. contra Adimant cap. 12. Christ commended and deliuered to his disciples the figure of his body and bloud
the Sacrament before consecration Therefore some late Popes the new Church of Rome with the colledge of Cardinals new created Iesuits Semynaries and all the Romane Priests now in Ireland be lyers deprauers of the trueth and deceiuers of the people The maior or first proposition is your owne doctrine for you teach that before Hoc est corpus meum be pronounced there is no consecration The assumption or later proposition is as cleere for you perswade the simple people to beleeue that these texts out of the sixth of Iohn prooue a carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament a yeare before Hoc est corpus meum was by Christ pronounced or the Sacrament by Christ instituted Therefore the conclusion that you be lyers and deceiuers of the people is ineuitable Thus the Catholiques of this kingdome by the rules of your owne religion you haue deceiued in teaching Christes carnall presence in the Sacrament a yeare before either Sacrament or consecration in the Sacrament were instituted And this your leaden diuinitie without care or conscience you thrust vpon the simple people as sound doctrine But if there were no other errour or heresie held and taught by you but this one point it were sufficient to make all the Catholicks in this kingdome nay in Christendome to forsake your opinion considering your ignorance or malice presuming to iustifie that which holie Scriptures auncient Fathers Gods Church yea the perticuler Church of Rome with their Bishops Archbishops and Popes for a thousand yeares after Christs ascention neuer spake or heard of and therefore it is no olde faith taught by them but a new heresie invented by you But now to the rest of your proofe Of M. Riders Arguments and their sufficiencie And how the 6. chapter of S. Ihon doth belong to the B. Sacrament notwithstanding it was before the Consecration Fitzimon 47. AS paynters that by skill could not make difference betwixt a cat a horse and a dogg were wonte to tell by woords vnder their pictures this is a catt this is a horse and this is a dogg euen so M. Rider when he maketh an argument in his owne opinion substantialy yet least you should not so conceaue therof he addeth befor or behynde or in the margent this is an vnaunswerable argument Wherof you haue an instance befor the 38. numbre and in this place Yet I vndertake to aunswear this argument breefly and sufficiently and only by saying as befor in the 41. nuÌ„bre by consent of Catholicks and protestants that we teache Christs real presence in the Sacrament but after and not befor consecration yet that such gift was promised and specified for the future tyme according to the woords of Christ the bread which I will not that I doe giue c. in the 6. chapter of S. Ihon not that by such promise it was giuen at that tyme but after as the woords importe What parcell againe of this argument is now vnaunswared ether according to Catholicks or protestants Yea or according to M. Riders deduction saying that eating of Christ after the institution of the Sacrament is proued out of the 56. verse of the sixt of Ihon in such maner as it were damnable to doubt therof How is it thence proued vnlesse such verse and chapter belong to the eating of Christ Therfor by him selfe The 22. vntruth is made aunswerable this vnaunswerable argument and therby the 22. vntrueth acknowledged Luther tom sept defens verb. â—ene fol. 397. Against whom and his brethren in this opinion Luther whom they intitule Father of trueth thus discribeth the argumeÌ„ts which they call vnaunswerable Their greedines to defend their credit maketh them madd that whatsoeuer they take hould of though it be but a straw yet they imagin it to be a swoord or speare and that at euery stroake they kill thowsands Agayne They thinke to haue sayd passing well Luther ibidem fol. 394. 405. 381. 382. and much to the purpose although they touche not one argument And againe In their books there is noe pithe or substance but only friuolous cracking By whom could euer this be more verified then by my good frend M. Rider whose dealing in euery point being so seely and defectiue towards Gods woord Fathers Decretals and his owne brethren yet how he supposeth that riding lyke a second Perseus vpon Pegasus he hath transformed all his aduersaries into pillers by taking all power of aunswering from them O coÌ„fident Champion But let vs accompagnie him forwards obserue how litle his discourse amendeth Math. 26.26 Christ tooke bread did blesse it and brake it Catholique Priests and gaue it to his Disciples and said take and eate this is my bodie This is my bloud of the new Testament which shal bee shed for manie for remission of sinnes 48 GEntlemen this is your proofe out of Christs owne words Rider and this was deliuered by Christs owne mouth at the time of the institution of the Supper and the night before his blessed passion and either this must helpe you or else you are helplesse but Christ willing I will plainlie shew this your proofe to be your reproofe and I pray God for Christ his sake that the eies of your vnderstanding may be opened to see the truth and your hearts toucht to receiue and confesse the truth and renounce your errors and so cease to deceiue Gods people and the Queenes subiects least a worse thing come vnto you All the doubt and controuersie of this question betwixt vs dependes on this Text which you say must bee taken properlie and litterallie wee say Sacramentallie improperlie figuratiuelie and misticallie And our opinion God willing shall be proued by Scriptures auncient Fathers and Popes and the olde Church of Rome The third part of the Catholicks first proofe by Scriptures 48. THe Psillians a people in Afric neere the Garamants Fitzimon Sabel l. 4. c. 9. Herod l. 4. Goll l. 6. c. 11. being molested with Southern wynds to which their contry lay open in most simple maner armed them selues to a conflict with them Such would be my follye yf I would arme my writings to incountre a bagg-pype or sack of wynde only especialy it being not of the sweettest But let him conioyne any mater true or false and I will attend theron to auowche or auoyde it Rider 49. But this is straunge that men of your great learning as the Catholiques 〈◊〉 you to be wil deale so childishlie and weaklie in so weightie a matter Bee not offended that I say you handle this childishlie for in Schooles he that alleadgeth for the probation of a proposition the proposition it selfe for the probation of a text the text it selfe is counted childish and it is a childish point of Sophistrie and a falacie to be vsed among young schollers not to be practised among simple Catholiques The Catholiques demand of you how you prooue Christs carnal presence in the Sacrament and you bring in Hoc est
corpus meum which is the proposition whereupon all this disputation and contention dependeth After the same manner a man may prooue the blessed virgin Marie to be Iohn the Euangelists mother Ihon 19.27 and say still notwitstanding any text brought against him as Christ said Ecce mater tua Bâ—hold thy mother say what yee will the words be Christs words therefore they must be true they need no interpretation Christ is not a lyer And if a man aske a confirmation and say how prooue you this proposition of Christ to be true literallie in deed as Christ spake it This is a loose kinde of Logique You bring in for confirmation of the proposition the proposition it selfe and say Ecce mater tua Behold thy mother Thâ—â— when the Catholiques demaund of you to prooue your proposition of Hoc est câ—â—pus meum whether it must be taken corporallie or spirituallie grammaticallie oâ— misticallie In Schools it is called Petitio principij then you bring the proposition it selfe and say Hoc est corpus meum to prooue Hoc est corpus meum and so you would prooue idem per idem which is verie childish and a begging of that as graunted which is yet in question betwixt vs and vndetermined VVhether the woords Behould thy mother had one or lyke sence with the woords This is my bodye Fitzimon 49. WE approue our sacrament to be the true body and blood of Christ because he being the Trueth and whose saying as the prophet saith is effected Ioan. 14.6 Dixit facta sunt mandauit creata sunt he spoke and it was done Psal 32.9 he commaunded and they were created because he I say 1. Cor. 11.24 Matt. 26.28 him selfe did affirme it to be his body which was to be deliuered and his blood which was to be shedd and consequently his true body and his true blood which truely and not only figuratiuely were deliuered and shedd These powerfull woords of Christ which your great Melancthon saith Melanct. l. 3. epist Zuing. Oecolamp fol. 132. Mat. 24.35 wil be one day thunder to the misbeleeuers and which woords when heauen and earthe will fayle will remayne are our foundation Yf the blessed Virgin Marie be sayd to be the mother and S. Ihon the sonne it is sayd in such maner as only to giue to vnderstand that he should honoure and cherishe hir as his mother and no otherwyse and so the scripture sheweth he conceaued it as being without any circumstance conioyned to conceaue otherwyse But in the B. Sacrament Christ a whole yeare befor in the sixt of S. Ihon haueing forwarned Ioan. 6.55 c. that he would giue to be eaten his true fleash which should be their meat truely and his true blood which should be their drincke truely at the last supper making his new testament all being very attentiue in solemne maner he tooke blessed and broak bread saying this is my body c. So that it is not an idle proofe or idem per idem to proue it to be Christ corporaly when we shew Christ our omnipotent Lord to haue affirmed it with the former circumstances more to this effect shall follow God willing in our 62. number 50. But you should haue prooued by other places of Scriptures Rider that Hoc est corâ—us meum changeth the nature and substance of bread and wine and you should haue proued by the Scriptures Esay 7.10 that the Prophets foreshewed this strange conâ—eption of Christ to be conceaued of bread as well as they did foreshew his conâ—eption of the virgin And you should haue prooued by the Scriptures that it is â—ot onelie a Sacrament but a sacrifice not onely Eucharisticall but as well proâ—itiatorie and not onelie profitable to the quicke but also to the dead nay not â—nelie for plagues among men but murren and diseases also among beasts Cum â—ultis alijs quae nunc c. Now shew by the Scriptures that Hoc est corpus meum hath such a sence that the simple people may repose themselues more securely vpon your opinion and proofes But till you prooue it which you can neuer doe they must know you haue and doe deceiue them with false expositions against veritie antiquitie auâ—horitie yea consent of the old Church of Rome VVhether Christs woords doe testifie a change of nature And whether it was prophecied 50. THe nature of bread and wyne must be changed Fitzimon when they are turned into the body and blood of Christ one proofe serueth to proue the one and the other What proueth Eua to be a woman Gen. 2. Exod. 43. Exod. 7.17 Ioan. 2.8 proueth hir not to â—e a bone wherof she was made What proueth Moises rodd turned to a serpent and after into a rodd the riuers of Egipt turned into blood water turned into wyne and all other such alterations proueth theÌ„ not to haue bene what thy were befor The prophets did shew this not conception but transubstantiation when they fortould that Christ should be a preest according to the ordre of Melchisedech who sacrificed in bread and wyne wherby was signified Psal 109.4 Hebr. 5.6.20 c. 11.17 Iuel in his reply art 1. saith Iuel the sacrifice of the holy communion I say who sacrificed by confession of VVhitaker as also did Christ according to his being a preest of that ordre and that can not be conceaued of ether of bothe but in bread and wyne For the other cruental sacrifice of his passion was done not actiuely by Christ but only passiuely and that rather according to the ordre of Aaron then of Melchisedech Malach. 1. The prophets did shew this transubstantiation when they fortould that among the Gentiles from east to west there should be a cleane oblation offred to Gods name in euery place c. Which can not be vnderstood of any thanksgiuing or prayses as you imagin such being not peculiar to the Gentils Chrysostom hom in ps 95. but frequent among the Iewes Vpon which woords saith S. Chrysostom Behould how cleerly and playnly he hath interpreted the mystical table which is the vnbloodie Host Yea besyds all other proofs by Scripturs and Fathers which by the mercie of God shal be afforded in our treating of the Masse take this also from your Beza Beza in cap. 22. Luc. u. 20. Regius in 2. par operum resp ad 2. libros Eâ—ky de missa c. 7. Bibl. l. 1. de paschate Israelit pag. 25. 26. Vrbanus Regius Tremelius and Bibliander That befor the coming of Christ the ancient Israelits were commanded to celebrat a figuratiue communion in bread and wyne in token that the Messias would institute no figuratiue but true and substantial communion in the same By which is proued to the full contentment euen of the least indifferent that for whom soeuer Christ offred it may be proffitable be they quick or dead such sacrifice contayning truely and substantialy the same
he againe and all other Fathers noe Sacrament is thought duely ministred Saint Hierom telleth you how thronges of people flocked to haue S. Epiphanius and Hilarions blessing to them and their children And writing to Rustic bishop of Narbon he blameth him for disalowing a simple secular priest to blesse the people saying Benedicere populo non debet qui Christum etiam meruit consecrare Should not he blesse the people who deserueth to consecrat Christ S. Augustin relateth him selfe and others to haue vsed lyke deuotion Beda telleth how in England the godly Christians would trudge befor in highe wayes and crosse passages to obtayne preests blessing by mowthe or hand For the one doth not exclude the other So that it is tyme M. Rider to leaue this forme of argument by one trueth to exclude the other when both may consist together I grant you spent this trauayle against the Crosse when you were a puritan now perhapps you dare not Christen a child without it In the mean tyme by your great wysdome you haue made to Catholicks and protestants many good points God be praysed knowen which had bene more to your behoofe vnreuealed To conclude the vanitie of his long digression manifowldly appearing otherwise it is not also obscure in this that whether blessing and thanksgiuing had bene all one as is demōstrated not haue to bene yet it had imported nothing in the world to our cōtrouersie For the blessing being accidental not essential to the mater and forme of consecration the vse of it did only shew a greater solemnitie followed by Christ in the institution of the Sacrament and no necessitie That we are often bidd by M. Rider to read these and those in greeke gentle Reader he biddeth vs to doe for ostentation what he can not doe him selfe For in my particular knowledge and experience a blynd man hath as much sight in his eyes as he hathe good greeke in his head And yf we had found in greeke what he pretendeth you now vnderstand how litle it had bene to his proffit or our hinderance The 24. 25. 26 27 vntruth Vntruethes are heaped in this last discourse plentifully The 24. notoriouse vntrueth is that we teache our spiritual children they be pardoned from synns and preserued from dangers and spirits yf we crosse them with two fingers and a thumb The 25. that the pope and not God commandeth our blessing with the Crosse The 26. that we vse mumbling woords and charming Crosses We leaue charmings and coniurings for hereticks Nota sunt commercia haereticorum cum magis Tertul. de prescrip c. 43. Vide num 100. Ezech. 9.4 the intermedling of hereticks and magitians saith Tertullian are notorious Our crossing is no charming vnles God his angels were charmers of which see after in the 100. number The 27. that we teache a certayne power to be in our breath and fingers Such maters as these would seeme to deserue our allegations wher we teach these points But it is sufficient that vnles they be beleeued vpon puritan faith troth and honestie ther is no other proofe to auerr them Now I will in this conuict M. Rider both to be a puritan although the puritants respect him not and also to mis-informe our doctrin and that by the protestants euen of England and that befor his Maiestie in the conference sett foorth by Barlow anno 1605. pag. 73.74 as his royal Maiestie doubted not to acknowledge saying I am giuen to vnderstand by the bishops and I fynd it true that the papists them selues did neuer ascribe any power or spiritual grace to the signe of the Crosse Such a testimonie is a lawfull defense I trow against M. Rider both that he degenerateth from the doctrin of the bishops of England and falsifyeth our doctrin which is now lawfully warranted to thinke so of the Crosse as the best protestants do approue it The 28. vntruth The 28. that our blessing agreeth with Gods preists blessing no more then superstition with religion For I haue shewed it to haue proceeded from God by his Angel to haue bene practised by his Apostles and receaued by all the Fathers and primatiue Church The 29. 30. 31. vntruth The 29. 30. and 31. at least are included from the parcell your Apish toyes childishe tricks c. to the ende so perspicuously as no auditour most fauorable would take in his accompts and discharge him more sparingly Now let vs giue place M. Rider is at leyngthe to tumble into his mater in controuersie after his long peregrination to crossings charmings greeke and reprehensions Rider 54. But now to the rest of the bodie of the text and controuersie Wherein first let vs examine whether your two propositions this is my bodie and this is my bloud of the new Testament c. be proper or figuratiue litterall or Sacramentall For if they be improper borrowed figuratiue and Sacramental they prooue neither your Transubstantiation nor your carnall reall presence but euen plainlie disprooue them Augustin de doctr christiana lib. 3 cap. 16. pag. 23. Parisijs 1586. Saint Augustines rule before recited if you would be ruled by it but neither Scriptures nor Fathers can rule you but you will ouer rule them would presentlie satisfie you that these two propositions must be figuratiue the latter you confesse but the former as yet you wil not His words againe for the Readers good I wil repeat and they be these If the scripture seem to command any vile or ill fact the speech is figuratiue as Except yee eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you Facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere Christ seemeth to commaund a wicked act that is carnallie and grosly to eate Christs flesh Ether confute S. Aug. or confesse your error the firste is impossible the second were commendable Read it it containes but 6. or 7. lines The marginall note there condemes your litterall fence c. it is therefore a figuratiue speech So that Augustine thus reasons against you To eate Christs flesh and drinke Christs bloud corporallie is a hainous thing therefore Christes wordes be figuratiue so that if to eate Christes flesh with our mouths and teare his flesh with our teeth as also actually drinking of his bloud bee hainous and wicked why doe you so eagerly presse the litterall fence of these your two propositions against trueth against faith and the auncient Fathers Augustine in that short 15. chap. of the same booke immediatly going before wisheth alwayes the interpretation of these and all other figuratiue speeches to be brought ad regnum charitatis to the kingdome of charitie to haue their true exposition Now if you expounde this litterallie and properlie you forsake Augustines rule charities kingdome and the Apostolicall and Catholike exposition It is but small charitie to deuoure the food of a friend but to eate and deuoure corporallie and gutturallie the precious bodie and
bloud of our Christ and Sauiour it is no charitie Nay saith Augustine it is plaine impietie and a wicked and a most damnable fact And so to prooue the action lawfull Augustine would haue you Catholicks but you wil hee Caphernaiâ—â— Canibals the kingdome of charitie hath euer taken these and the like propositions to bee figuratiue and the sence to be spirituall Therefore if you will bee loyall subiects of charities kingdome shewe your subiection to her charitable and Catholicke exposition otherwise you will stand indited of spirituall and vncharitable rebellion That protestants by their owne principles can not affirme Christ our Saluiour not to be spiritualy it selfe in the Sacrament Also that S. Augustin disproueth them 54. HIs late saying that he hath my hand Fitzimon to the great errours which most safely he keepeth with him I graunt to be true yet not to but against the errours which to his perdition most safely as he saythe he keepeth with him which as a candle by fingers snuffed leaueth blacknes and burning to the snuffers hands remayning by their detraction more cleere and in it selfe mor delytsome As in all our processe by Gods grace it hath and shall more and more appeare It is first the 32. vntrueth The 32. vntruth that yf these woords of Christ be figuratiue and Sacramental This is my bodye this is my blood of the new testament they will plainly disproue our transubstantiation For it hath bene oft professed that we allow but not only as you doe spiritual and figuratiue sence of these woords not excluding real substantial and literal It appeareth in the numbers 14. 15. 31. 34. 40. 42. 46. 49. c. You haue bownd your selfe in your first position for which you replye as it is ingrossed by your selfe to stand vpon a spiritual presence only to the faythfull beleeuers Therfor no testimonie or allegation will auayle you wher in only spiritual or only figuratiue is not coÌ„prised Nay yf it coÌ„tayne the woord spiritual it must be also impertineÌ„t to your purpose vnlesse you recant your agreemeÌ„t with the protestaÌ„t martyrs who sealed with their blood as Fox deliuereth Fox Acts Monum pag. 1529. that the difference of doctrin betweene the faithfull and papists coÌ„cerning the Sacrament is that the Papists say that Christ is corporaly vnder or in the forme of bread and wyne but the faythfull say that Christ is not there nether corporaly nor spiritualy Behould how you are ingaged that nether can you hould corporal or the so much spoken of spiritual Caueat in aunswer to our allegation of Tindal c. 1 vnlesse you degenerat from your protomartyrs primatiue protestantcie to whom and which you haue bound your selfe in expresse woords to agree in vnitie and veritie of doctrine Now to our mater and S. Augustins woords First he doth not say that they be figuratiue only coÌ„sequently are not against vs as appeareth in the numbers lately specified nor for yow Secondly he disputeth not against our beleefe but against the Capharnaits August tom 9. trac 27. in Ioan. of whom he saith Sicut illi intellexerunt carnem non sic egâ— do ad manducandum carnem meam as they vnderstood fleash not so do I giue my fleash to eate But how saith he did they vnderstand fleash Quomodo incadauere laniatur aut in macello venditur As it is torne from a carcas or sould in a shambles In such sense only and to such conceits would S. Augustin haue Christs woords to be esteemed figuratiue to witt in regard of them who as S. Cyrill l. 4. in Ioan. c. 22. saith Ad immanes ferarum mores vocari se à Christo arbitrabantur incitarique vt vellent crudas hominum carnes manducare sanguinem bibere They surmised that they were prouoked after the sauage maners of beasts to eate mans raw fleash and drinke his gore bloud Wheras Christ did farr otherwyse intend it as that he would be eaten in the lykenes of bread and wyne which were figures of his operations in our soules But to say that for the seeming of Christs woords to be horrible or to be taken figuratiuely his substantial and real presence should be excluded August tom 6. con aduer leg prophet l. 2. c. 9. is most remote from S. Augustins inteÌ„tion and all his writings Behould here but one yet infallible and palpable proofe therof Mediatorem Dei hominum hominem Christum Iesum carnem suam nobis manducandum bibendumque sanguinem dantem fideli corde ore suscipimus quamuis horribilius videatur humanam carnem manducare quam perimere humanum sanguinem potare quam fundere VVe receaue with faythfull hart and mowthe Iesus Christ man Mediatour betwixt God and man giuing his fleash to eate and his blood to drincke although it seemeth more horrible to eate the fleash of man then to kill and to drincke the blood of man then to shedd it Doth is seeme horrible to eate Christs fleash according to S. Augustin and to drincke his blood yea more horrible then to kill yet he assureth vs that not withstanding such seeming we should eate and drinke not his figure but his fleash and blood not in faithfull hart only but also by mowthe Alas let S. Augustin alone in lyfe a Catholick Frier or Monke in his books a Catholick doctor in bothe an enemye and triumpher against hereticks Hitherto you haue neuer brought S. Augustins testimonies â— Reg. 11. but as Vrias tooke infortunat leters to his owne distruction Aug. l. 3. de Ciu. c. 16. Further S. Augustin would haue these figuratiue speeches so long to be accompted figuratiue till charitie consist with their meaning Out of which you inferr that Christ can not be eaten corporalye it being say you farr against charitie But this consequence is farr against Charitie Ex Serm. de verbis Euan. Citatur a Beda 1. Cor. 10. and veritie Witnes the same S. Augustin saying Quis inuitauit quos inuitauit Et quid preparauit Inuitauit Dominuâ— seruos preparauit eis cibum seipsum Quis audeat manducare Dominum suum tamen ait qui manducat me viuit propter me Quando Christus manducatur vita manducatur Nec occiditur vt manducetur sed mortuos viuificat Quando manducatur reficit sed non deficit VVho hathe inuited whom hathe he inuited and what hath he prepared our Lord hath inuited his seruants and prepared him selfe meat to them VVho dareth deuoure his Lord yet neuer the lesse he sayth who eateth me liueth because of me VVher Christ is eaten lyfe is eaten Nether is he killed that he should be eaten but he quickneth the dead VVhen he is eaten he feedeth but is not impaired Loe whether S. Augustin thinketh it inconuenient or against charitie for any to eate his Lorde himselfe being the inuiter himselfe the preparer himselfe the foode Loe whether the eating of Christ be a tearing digesting or consuming of Christ Tom.
would be spoken of and for a short tyme might escape vncontrowled Vpon my conscience and honestie yf I could I would not follow him but by only mildest method and modestest maner but his inueterated and reiterated falsifications and blasphemies by no Christian mynde might be lesse rigorouslie pursued then is done by me Who could in any pietie or peacable disposition say or do lesse to his blasphemie against the B. Sacrament among so innumerable others tearming it a carnal kingdome of a breaden God then to applye the woords of S. Cyrill S. Cyrill l. 10. con Iulia. Nihil facilius est scurrae quà m mentiri temerè vituperare ther is nothing more easie to a scoffer then to forge and disprayse Such scurrilitie against the B. Sacrament Pagans as after in the 147. number appeareth frequented and commended to their successours in impietie I can not debarr them from following Pagans in this behalfe S. Bern. ser 66. super cantica VVho as S. Bernard saith nec rationibus conuincuntur quia non intelligunt nec authoritatibus corriguntur quia non recipiunt nec flectuntur suasionibus quia subuersi sunt Probatum est mori magis eligunt quà m conuerti Horum finis interitus horum nouissima incendium est By reasons are not conuicted because they vnderstand not by authorities are not corrected because they allow them not by perswasions are not inclined because they are peruerse It is approued they had rather die then be reclaimed The ende of such is destruction their conclusion is fyer The only thing that I entreat of the honester sorte of Reformers is this request of S. Augustin S. Aug. l. 1. de morih Cathol Eccl. cap. 18. Audite Doctos Ecclesae Catholicae viros tanta pace animi eo voto quo vos ego audiui nihil opus erit 20. annis quibus me ludificastis longè omnino longè breuiore tempore quid intersit inter veritatem vanitatemque cognoscetis Heare the learned of the Catholick Church with lyke peace of mynde and desyer as I heard you There wil be no neede of 20. yeares in which you beguiled me in farr lesse farr lesse tyme you will perceaue what manifest difference there is betwixt veritie and vanitie And in the same booke in the 34. chapter he saith Tum videbitis quid inter ostentationem sinceritatem inter viam rectam errorem inter fidem fallaciam c. intersit Then will you behould what is betwixt vaunting and veritie right and straying sayth and fraud c. Which otherwyse vnles you help your selues that God may help you you will not discouer but still remayne deceaued Rider 62. But yet you perchaunce will demaund the reason why Christ called it his bodie if it be not his body Let me first aske you another question and then I wil resolue you this Gen. 17.10.11 Rom. 4.11 Exod. 12.11 Why did God cal circumcision the couenant when in deed it was not the couenant but as God himself saith a signe of the couenant Why did God cal the Paschall lambe the Passouer when it was but a signe of the Angels passing ouer the houses where the bloud of the lambe was sprinkled one aunswere wil resolue both our questions It is the vsuall maner of the holy Ghost in all Sacraments both of the old Testament and new VVheresoeuer the holie Ghost speakes of Sacramets the phrase is tropicall mitonymimicall and figuratiue attributing the name of the thing signified to the signe signifying as in these examples the phrase addeth a dignitie to the sacrament but changeth not the nature of the sacrament to terme the visible signe by the name of the thing signified as circumcision is called the couenaunt the Lambe is called the Passouer so Baptisme is called the fountaine of regeneration and bread Christs bodie and yet in deed they are but outward signes and to the faithfull onely seales graced by the holie Ghost with the names of the things they represent and confirme the more to mooue and stirre vp our affections and to edge our zeale with a religious preparation to receiue the same and to lift vp our hearts soules by faith to behold consider and feed vpon Christ crucified the thing signified Yet for your further satisfaction I will intreat Augustine to aunswere your doubt who saith (a) Aug. epistol 23. ad Bonifacium Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum sacramenta sunt non haberent omnino sacramenta non essent ex hac autem similitudine plerunque etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt Sicut ergo secundùm quendam modum sacramentum corporis Christi corpus Christi est sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est ita sacramentum fidei fides est In English thus If the Sacrament had not some certaine similitude and likenesse of the things whereof they be Sacraments they should be no Sacraments at all And of this similitude manie times they haue the names of those things themselues as the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ is after a certaine manner the bodie of Christ and the sacrament of his bloud is after a certaine maner his bloud So the Sacrament of faith or Baptisme is faith Out of which wee may note first they are but Sacraments or similitudes of the thing signified not the things themselues secondlie that bread wine are the bodie bloud of Christ but secundum quendam modum after a certaine maner and shewes how by an example as the Sacrament of faith is faith so the Sacrament of Christs body is Christs bodie but the Sacrament of faith is not faith naturallie substantiallie by a chaunge of substance but by chaunge of qualitie or vse therefore the Sacrament of Christs bodie is not chaunged into the substance of Christs bodie Theodoret dialog 2. cap. 24. pag. 113. dialog 1. cap. 8. pag. 54. read them I pray you but onely in qualitie and vse as Theodoret saith in his first dialogue not changing nature but adding grace vnto nature And the same Father in his second dialogue explaines this more plainly saying the misticall signes after sanctification Non recedunt a sua natura manent enim in priore substantia figura c. they depart not from their nature but remaine in their former substance and figure may be seene touched as before Out of which auncient learned Father I obserue three necessarie points for the Catholickes instruction Consecratiō vnknown to Theodor therefore it is a new terme The change is in the name honour and vse not in the nature and your confutation First he saith Post sanctificationem after sanctification then your new coined terme of consecration was not known in the Church of God but sanctification and benediction Secondly I note out of this Father that though the Sacraments haue gotten a new diuine qualitie yet they haue not lost their nature they had before as you
the administration of the Cupp didst not thow command thy collegue or compartner that in the face of the congregation he showld take the cupp from me by force And for that cause did not I howld it fast and with bothe my hands I know that others will lawgh at this disordre but I had rather haue them lament that in all this dissolut or disioynted glosse M. Rider the woords of Christs institution Hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis tradetur c. this is my body which shal be deliuered for you c. can not be perceaued but in lieu therof our Lord and Saluiour is made to tripp from mater to mater without any one sillable to our purpose in question Wher is here shewed that bread after consecration remayneth still bread Wher is the satisfaction by the Euangelists and S. Paul that we must relye vnto in spyte of Pope and poperie What marrow or substance is in thes woords for any other then for a single Sintaxian to know that dedit and Fregit be actiue verbs and Datur and Frangitur be passiue c. For breuities sake I will not repeat the dismal hate of thes reformers against the woords of Christs institution which I haue alredy amply prosecuted in the 68. numbre yet will I not omitt Luthers verdict against his brethren saying they feare Luther tom 7. defen verb. caena fol. 383. least they should stumble and breake their necks at euery sillable which Christ pronownced And this maketh them range abowt through all the parts of learning and not to come to any issue in the mayne point of his sacred institution truely fullfilling the saying of the royal Prophet Psal 11. impij in circuitu ambulant the wicked wander in a circuit and lyke serpents troden on the heads or henns whose neckes are newly crackt they wreath and wrest vp and downe in manifould skippings spending wasting their small tyme to liue which by being quiet might some what longer continue Rider 78. Thus you see how distinctlie Christ disioynes them sundring them with their seuerall properties Bread and wine remain after consecration by Christ his testimony therefore transubstansiation is a forged and false fable inuēted by new Rome to support your new heresies of Christs carnall presence the signe from the thing signified not confounding them as you vntrulie teach yea after that Christ vttered hoc est corpus meum which you call your consecration Now let vs compare the phrase and words that the holie Ghost vseth in both the new Testament the old and then you will say they are so like that they are rather borrowed of the old testament then instituted in the new and of necessitie seeing they are both Sacraments of like words ordained by one Author to one end they must needs haue one sence so that the one will best expound the other the one being Sacramentall and relatiue the other cannot be Grammaticall and proper As it is said in the old (a) Gen. 17.10 Testament of the sacrament of circumcition hoc est pactum meū this is my couenant So it is said in the new (b) Math. 26.26 Testament by the same spirit hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie but as by those words like to these in sillables sound and sence there was no transubstansiation of the peece of flesh of the foreskin that was cut off into Gods couenant made with his Church so there is no naturall nor miraculous chaunge made of anie part of the bread or wine into Christs bodie and bloud Exod. 12. 1. Cor. 11.24 Exod. 24 8. And as it was said of the Paschall Lambe hoc erit vobis in memoriam this shall be to you a rememberance so it is said of the Lords Supper Doe this in rememberance of me And as it was said in the olde Testament hic est sanguis faederis This is the bloud of the couenant yet was not the couenant but à signe of the couenant Luc. 22.20 So is it said by Christ himselfe This cup is the new Testament in my bloud yet the cup was neither the Testament nor the bloud but a signe representation and rememberance of Christs bloud And the new Testament is an obligation or bond wherein God for his part binds himselfe with most sure couenaunts and seales it with word oath and Sacraments that hee will receiue into his protection and fauor the beleeuer and penitent And the beleeuer repentant of their parts binde themselues by like indented couenants to performe vnto his sacred Maiestie Rom. 1.5 a liuelie steadfaste faith with holy obedience Now the cup or the wine in the cup is a representation or commemoration vnto vs of this couenant of grace made in the newe Testament as the Paschall Lambe and the bloud of beasts were signes of Gods couenaunt in the old Testament This may suffice for the plaine and true vnderstanding of these words this is my bodie and this is my bloud beeing expounded according to the holie scriptures Now to your first proofe out of saint Paul Fitzsimon 78. It is an easie mater vpon all the premisses to tell vs You see you see when nothing is giuen to be seene but gross impietie futilitie I admonished you deere Readers that Reformers conceaued a Vatinian hatred against Christs institution Wil you now behowld a liuely demonstration therof First he saythe that the phrase and woords vsed therin is no new institution but borrowed owt of the owld testament Secondly that the Sacraments of the owld testament and new are so lyke as they must haue one ende and sence and the one not to be literal more then the other It is to be remembred which is mentioned in the 36. and 63. numbers that by Reformers opinion ther is noe more benifit by Christs Sacrament of the Altar then by the Iewish ceremonies which according to their translation Sainct Paul saith to haue bene only bare Galat. 4.9 and beggerly ordonances I request all curteouse readers to spare me the payne to relate the substance of such numbers in this place and that they will not proceed further vntill they haue perused what ther is fownd First then I aunswer that yf by similitud of speeche vsed in the figure and the thing figured should be gathered that they bothe were of equal sence ende and literalitie it would followe that all figurs of Christ in the owld testament were equal with Christ himselfe that the owld testament is as behooful as the new Note because they haue one authour one sence one ende one phrase and one literalitie accordinge to M. Rider Wherefore since Ioseph in the owld testament was called Saluator mundi the Saluioure of the world Genes 41.45 Ioan. 4.42 and Christ in the same Phrase by S. Ihon is called Saluator mundi they must haue on ende one sence one literalitie And therfor as Ioseph was noe
as deliuer bread to the hongry or to litle ones and the literal signification of deliuering is verifyed in Christs passion but not of breaking For he was deliuered for our synnes but I being able to say that he was also broken for vs in the B. Sacrifice of his body vnder the forme of bread and M. Rider denying such his sacrifice and not being able possibly to shew any other his breaking do you thinke that leauing to talke of deliuerie for breaking he knoweth what is with him or against him The amplifying of Christs promise in the present tence there being no promise in these woords this is my body which is broken for you sheweth such mates when they can gett a woord to wander against the trueth for Christ vsed then a present tence to testifye the efficacie of his institution of the B. Sacrament in which his body was presently deliuered inuisibly which was the next day to be deliuered visiblye therevpon they amplifie and descant at full wheras vpon the true and literal institution of Christ arcording the propre signification therof they walke so nicely Luth. tom 7. defen verb. caenae fol 383. as yf they were treading vpon egges Fearing sayth Luther to stumble and breake their necks at euery woord which Christ pronownced 83. In the first that Christs Rider birth and life though both innocent was not sufficient to cleanse my sinne In the second Christ would vndergoe shamefull buffets on the face pricking of thornes vpon his head piercing nailes into his hands and feete a bloudie speare into his blessed side before mans sinne could bee satisfied Gods wrath appeased Sathan death and hell conquered this our liuing Christ would haue his bodie broken for vs he would not leaue one sighein his soule for our sakes nor one drop of bloud in his bodie vnshed for our sinnes These comforts are expressed by this word broken which are not nor can be gathered by this word deliuered 83. In my Examination of the Creed in the 14. numbre Pitzsimon I haue shewed that euery meritt of Christ being of infinit valew had bene sufficient to redeeme a thowsand worlds and that his death and passion were suffred vpon his excessiue abundance of loue which was not content with what had bene sufficient but also powred owt it selfe beyond all respect and measure to the last drop of blood in his bodye for greater manifestation of his bountifull charitie toward mankinde How cometh my Warr-man and sayth that Christs death it selfe was not only not of superabundant affection but that beyond his death the very pearcing of his syde with a speare was necessary to clense his synne Which is blasphemie against all Scripture and Christianitie referring always our redemption to Christs holye passion I knowe not whence it coulde come to him but only to fulfill the saying of S. Nazianzen Inter se certant perinde atque non id metuant ne impijs erroribus sese constringant sed ne in hac re leuius tolerabiliusque peccent quà m alij They stryue among them selues as yf they had no feare to intangle them selues in impious errours but that euery of them be not behinde his compagnions in lesse offendinge Other aunswer is in the forsayd 14. number Rider 84. Another comfort is concealed from the Catholickes in omitting the 25. verse in these words Math. 25.40 Heb. 2.12.13.17 Ioh. 10.27 The newe Testament in my bloud Out of which euerie man may gather these comforts to himselfe by particular application First that I am not a straunger to Christ but one of his younger brethren and not onelie well knowne vnto him but also as well beloued of him which appeareth in this that hee did not onelie remember me in his last will but also most freelie and liberallie bequeathed vnto my soule and bodie most precious Legacies where wee may finde them registred most safelie kept in Gods booke and daylie pronounced in our Creed as remission of sinnes of both guilt punishment peace of conscience in this life at the latter day rising of my bodie from death and dust af erwards life eternall both to soule and bodie These Legacies be bequeathed and contained in this Testament which be hath not onely sealed outwardlie with Sacraments but also inwardlie with his bloud by faith to assure vs of the performance of his promise and therefore he addeth in my bloud so that all other Testaments Wils Buls or Pardons which are not sealed with Christs bloud but with lead or war are but counterfeit labels stitcht to Christs testament by some false forgeries of periured Notaries wherin they doe falselie promise remission of sinnes and the kingdome of heauen Fitzsimon 84. M. Rider shall pull off with his owne hands his maske of consolation by these woords the new testament in my blood and acknowledge to all Readers his contentment to be but forged and his cause and coÌ„science to be full of desolation by means of them First then he sayd in his 78 number that thes woords of Christ ordayned by one authoure haue one sense one sounde one ende with these woords of the ould testament this is the blood of the Couenant Exod. 24.8 But the sense of thes woords of Moises is that the ould testament was ratified by true and real blood substantialy sprinkled vpon the Israelits therfor the sense of Christs woords must lykewyse be yf as he saith they haue one sense that his new testament was made at his last supper and his true and real blood was substantialy powred into the mowthes of his Apostles which blood deliuered them after as S. Luke saith Lâ—c. 22.20 was to be shedd for them Now Sir what consolation haue you about yourt hart Are not you made your selfe to disguise your fayned countenance That Christ made his testament at his last supper it is first the confession of Musculus saying In the same supper being then nighe his death he made his testament How did Musculus ground his opinion because saith he Musculus in locis coÌ„ Cap. de cana n. 2. pag. 332. that a testament be made auaylably is requyred first that the maker therof be at his owne libertie for a slaue a seruant a sonn in his Fathers gouernement can make no testament This libertie had Christ at his supper and not at his death Also he must make executours so did Christ make his Apostles by this institution appointing them to dispense the grace of this testameÌ„t c. wheras ther was no such mater at his death I add that lawfull testaments are made by men befor their death when they are in good memorie and not at the instant of their death Which according to good protestantcie had great occasion in Christ our Saluiour whom at the tyme of his death they affirme to haue bene in desperation in torments of conscience c. as is assured in the 14. and 15. numbers of the Examination Is not this a good
brotherly helpe to M. Riders consolation by thes woords of Christ the new testament in my blood Math. 25.40 For a testament is not a testament till the partie dye And Christ at his supper dyed not otherwyse but mysticaly as in sacrifice therfor yf ther was a testament made such sacrifice is to be confessed Will you haue Christ him selfe manifest his making the new testament at his supper Why then at it he sayd mandatum nouum do vobis Ioan. 13.34 a new law I giue you Marke this sequel vpon this planted foundation Christ by confession of greatest protestants made his testament at his last supper and M. Rider accordeth therto confessing him in this present place and numbre to haue made his last will bequeathed legacies c. Well then I inferr both that he shedd or deliuered his blood at this table and also that he sacrificed him selfe which in effect is all one For by M. Riders confession among his legacies Ad Hebr. 9.22 at his supper one principal is the remission of our synnes But S. Paul saith Sine fanguinis effusione non fit remissio withowt shedding of blood ther is no remission Ergo or therfor Christ in his supper shed his blood by which he bequeathed such legacie of remission of synns Now yf Christ as M. Rider sayd in the precedent number could not clense his synn without death and yet that at his supper he bequeathed vnto him by his last wil remission of synns of both guilt and punishment as is saith he pronounced in the Creed wherof others may be iudges whether he vnderstand his Creede or noe considering that to this day all mortal men do feele the punishment at least of Adams guilt to be vnforgiuen as to one not only well knowen by him but also well beloued of him as his yonger brother they are his owne woords It must followe that Christ was sacrificed I mean incruentally to his heuenly Father at his last supper Ad Hebr. 9.16 both for his making then his testament vbi enim testamentum est mors necesse est intercedat authoris for wher a testament is it is necessarie the deathe of the testator happen as also for shedding his blood and fullfilling all figuratiue sacrifices of the owld law in which the blood was not only shedd but also the things sacrificed were first putt to deathe yet this shedding of blood is not to be vnderstood in any other then in a mysticall and impossible maner No body hathe ingaged M. Rider to confesse this trueth but him selfe Wherfor yf his pew-fellowes exclaime at him and say that he hath confessed the true shedding of Christs blood substantialy although not in propre forme but only vnder the forme of wyne vnderstanding by shedding only the powring therof into the mouthe of the Apostles at his Supper and also the Sacrifice of Christ therby which is the Masse without which his blood could not then be shedd nor his testament had bene auaylable for nondum valet dum viuit qui testatus est Ad Hebr. 9.17 it is not of force while the testator without all death mystical or corporal liueth and therby ratifyed all papistry and confownded all protestantcy and which might seeme most absurd allowed a duble death of Christ one at his Supper another vpon the cross S. August tom 8. in Psal 61. Let him aunswer first for the residue out of S Augustin Occultari potest ad tempus veritas vinci non potest Florere potest ad tempus iniquitas permanere non potest Veritie for a tyme may be hydd but it can not be vanquished Iniquitie may florishe for a space but can not continue And to that heynouse doctrin of Christs duble death let him denye it hardely and say that at his Supper was only anticipated in an incruental and incomprehensible maner and mysticaly not in his propre forme but of bread and wine and without violence the same death which succeeded in a cruental violent maner as it was one the same lambe of God sacrificed in bothe maners first incruentaly after cruentaly In teaching this doctrin first he hathe it assured to him by the connection of Scripturs here produced Secondly by Musculus an arche Protestant Calu. in libell de caena de vera Eccles refor Zuing. to 1. de canone misse fol 183 â—iblia de Trinit l. 2. pag. 89. Thirdly by the ancient Fathers vniuersaly whom Caluin and Zuinglius testifye to establishe this incruental sacrifice And Bibliander certifyeth it was the vndowbted beleefe of the ancient Israelits that Christ would institute such a sacrifice in bread and wyne Therfor Gentle M. Rider reioyce at those sugred woords of Christ this is my blood in the new testament not faynedly or by dissembling those remote causes alleaged but for the riche treasure left perpetualy to Gods Church of so pretious a sacrifice wherby force is giuen to all bulls and pardons necessarie for remission of our synns In truth I had forgotten to calculate incident vntruthes in a long tyme yet now am constrayned to score vp at least the 81. grosse vntruth The 81. vntruth that we teache other remission of synns then by Christs testament My good Sir affoord vs some citation of such our doctrin according to your promise to alleadge booke leafe c. or elss we will thinke that we may lawfully say yow ryde c. 85. These deceiuers must be told as Peter told Ananias Rider why hath Sathan fild thy heart that thou shouldest lie not onelie vnto men but also vnto the holie Gost Acts. 5.3 In Ananias heart there was a wicked conceit in his practises a wicked deceit and for his reward a suddaine death You Chaplens of the Pope doe tell the poore people many waies to haue remission of their sinnes besides Christes Testament Christes blood which I will deliuer particularlie if I be vrged but you are deceiued and so you deceiue them and because you would keepe them still blinde that they should neither see your deceit nor theyr owne daunger therefore you kept this comfortable clause from them The new Testament in my bloud whithout which there is neither remission of sinns nor sauing of soules Another comfort you conceale from the deuout meditation of euerie good Christian which is In rememberance of me We read in histories after Iulius Caesar was slaine Suetonius Plutarch Marcus Anthonius made an Oration to the people of Rome in which he shewed Caesars loue and painted out verie Rhetoricallie Caesars bountie to them while he liued but in the heat of his speech he made a pause shewed them Caesars robes sprinkled with his princelie bloud shed by the bloudie hand of his cruell and malicious enemies which when the Cittizens sawe remembring his loue presentlie they ranne vpon the murtherers and slew them Did the Cittizens of Rome being Pagans reuenge Caesars death vppon his enemies onelie remembring his loue and liberalitie Then
absurdly confesse that not onelie the wine is transubstantiated changed into Christs last Testament but that the challice or cup is transubstantiated into his last testament is his testament substantiallie properlie and realie the accidents of the challice onlie remaining that is to say the height depth weight colours c. Of his cruel threat against the Masse Fitzsimon 88. I Trust M. Rider you will not be so ill as your woord Will you shew in all the masse from the first woord to the last ther is nothing but magical superstition heresie and idolatrie Is the Psalme of Dauid Iudica me Deus the song of the Angels glory be to God on high all the Epistles and Gospells being parcels of scripture the creed of the first Concil of Nice the institution of Christ our Lords prayer which are all included betwixt the first and last woords of the masse but ether superstition or heresie or idolatrie What sparke of Christianitie could be in his brest what hands could wryt that Dauid the Angels the Euangelists and our deere Lord and Saluiour Iesus Christ had committed superstition or heresie or idolatrie For it is impossible to proue all from Introibâ— to Ite missa est to be such vnlesse also this other sauage blasphemie against Prophets Angels And the Lord of all Saincts be infallibly proued But soft M. Rider your tyme is not yet come to abolishe iuge sacrificium Dan. 8. v. 12. c. 12. v. 11. S. Iren. con her l. 4. c 32. S. Chrysost ho. 49. in Math S. Hippolyt orat de consum saeculi Isa 16.6 the dayly sacrifice which is reserued as the Scripturs and Fathers affirme to Antichrist and yet not to abolish it but that the frequent vse therof shal cease in his tyme. Of M. Rider and euery other petty aduersarie of the Masse may be applyed the saying of the Prophet Isaie Superbia eius arrogantia eius indignatio eius plus quam fortitudo eius his pryde his arrogancie and his indignation is more against this inuincible sacrifice then his strengthe For hell gates can not preuayle against the faith whose principal act and obligation is this sacrifice of the Masse I trust in Gods mercie befor I dye to iustifie the least sillable and parcel therof against the sayd gates and all therto belonging which is a contradiction of what M. Rider threatneth Rider 89. Now if you cannot denie a figure in the challice how dare you for the like or worse inconuenience denie it in the bread This you thought to omit hoping thereby to couer this your error But it was ill done to deceiue the Catholicks who so liberallie relieue you and so dearely haue loued you And wheras you translate challice for cup telling the people that the challice consecrated by you is holier then other vsual cups and that Christ vsed in the institution a challice and no vsuall drinking cup. 89. Here is an argument that ther is a figure concerning the cupp Fitzsimon ergo also concerning the bread I aunswer owt of S. Augustin S. August c. 31. Super Genes ad lit l. 11. For the translation of one woord the whole sentence owght not to be taken figuratiuely As for example of the new disciples going to Emaus is sayd their eyes were opened which is to be vnderstood figuratiuely for they were nether blynd wynking nor a sleepe befor but the residue Luc. 24. that they knew Christ c. is to be vnderstood properly and literaly In this point of M. Rider Besa in c. 26. Mat. v. 26. because the cupp standeth for what is in the cupp as Beza confesseth vulgata trita omnibus linguis consuetudine loquendi in the common meaning of all tongs litle or nothing differing from a propre speeche Math. 26. Mar. 14. as also because by two Euangelists Mathew and Marke it is specified expresly in a literal and propre sence by thes woords This is my blood of the new testament no such mater being obserued of bread but all circumstances precedent concomitant subsequent manifesting the literal and propre signification therof ther is no sequel or censequence in the world in the forsayd argument For the liberalitie of Catholicks toward vs it being sayd of exorbitant enuie I leaue to the prophet Ezechiel in his 24. chap. 18. and 19. verse to replye vnto it 90. I say in saying thus you shew your self ignorant in the Greek tongue Rider wherin Christ spake it the Euangelists writ it Poterâ—on for they all so hath Paul but one vsuall word which signifieth a vsual drinking cup and no charmed Challice as you ydlie vainly informe the Catholickes And now to your 27. verse which you would couple to your 24. verse which thus you recite very corruptlie who so doth eate vnworthelie c. shall be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord but if you had meant plainlie and trulie you should haue recited all the Apostles words in this manner whosoeuer shall eate this bread and drinke this cup of the Lord vnworthelie shall be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. VVhether Chalices were aunciently consecrated and of what matter they were made 90. I Tould you often Fitzsimon you would carry your emptie cruse so oft to the greeke streame that it would come home broken What did Christ euer speake greeke In what greeking will all scholers thinke your head to haue bene that will reade this Certainly Christ Sonne of the B. Virgin borne in Bethelem liuing in Palestim or Iewrie suffring by Hierusalem was neuer yet sayd by any of reading or reason or wanting reading and reason to haue spoken greeke Without further hissing at it so many other no lesse The 82. vntuth yea farr greater occasions presented to do the lyke let it stand for the 82. vntrueth and so remayne Yet this appeale to the greke is not so to be dismissed First our aduantages in the greke are specified and assuredly proued in the preff of the Remish testament So that they are superfluous to be repeated by him who followeth greatest breuitie and escheweth borrowed ornaments Secondly who are not the Adders mentioned in the psalmist may vnderstand that nether greke nor latin but willfull corruption is the cause of sectarists excepting against the sacred Scripture now in this laÌ„guage now in that As for exaÌ„ple in their Bibles of the yeares 1579. 1580. nether greke nor latin obtayned of them to putt S. Pauls name befor the Epistle to the Hebrues Some time againste Greeke and Latin they demaund to what purpose should the holy Ghost or Luke add this Some time against Greeke and Latin Beza Act. 8. v. 26. they confesse wilfull deprauation as Beza Mat. 10. v. 2. anno 1556. against the primacie of S. Peter And Luke 22 v. 20. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 14. n. 26. l. c 3. n. 10. in Ps 58. against the real presence as also Acts 3.21 and
his third Tom. pag 142. Rider There was a learned and godlie woman proposed twelue questions of diuinitie to Hierome wherin of which she desired resolution For in those daies it was lawfull for women and all men to aske doubts touching religion and for their further instruction consolation might read Gods word freelie conferre touching matters that concerned their saluation And this greatly blemisheth your Roman doctrine that will haue neither men nor women to read diuinitie the reason is this least they should see your errors and forsake your profession For this is your strongest tenure Marke this yee Catholickes to keepe them in blindnesse with ydle ceremonies dumb shewes Latten seruice But I trust in Christ shortlie to see most of their eies opened that wil discouer your priuie plots discourage your haughtie stomacks and generallie forsake your new religion being in deed but mans inuention This is the second question of the twelfth but you omit some words cut off some which obscures the matter But if a little charitable chiding would make you more painfull in your bookes and lesse carefull to please mens humors I could finde in my heart to bestow it vpon you but praemoniti praemuniti you are now forewarned I hope you will bee here after better armed or better minded which I wish with all my soule as to my selfe But your proofe is thus in Latten Si ergo panis qui de caelo descendit corpus est Domini vinum quod discipulis dedit sanguis illius est noui Testamenti qui pro multis effusus est in remissionem peccatorum Iudaicas fabulas repellamus c. If therefore the bread that descended from heauen bee the bodie of the Lord and the wine which he gaue his disciples be his bloud of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes then let vs cast away all Iewish fables Here you omit Si ergo and noui Testamenti qui pro multis effusus est in remissionem peccatorum If therefore and of the new Testament which is shed for manie for the remission of sinnes All this you haue left out which was ill done What now can you gather out of this to prooue that Christes bodie is made of bread and his bloud of wine no substance of either creature remaining but onelie Christs carnall presence as he was on the crosse Surelie here is not one word silable or letter to prooue it but the contrarie You wronged the father so to mangle him yet as you deliuer him it proueth nothing of the manner of Christs presence that is in question but the matter neuer in controuersie for saith shee to this learned â—â—ther if therefore the bread which came downe from heauen bee the bodie of Christ so she speakes of Christs diuinitie that came downe from heauen for his humanitie did not and our question is of his humanitie by transubstansiation in the Sacrament so that this proofe nothing sorteth your purpose And the bloud here spoken of is his bloud of the new Testament shed on the crosse not in the Sacrament once for all not for anie that pleased the Priest And therefore as she said Iudaicas fabulas repellamus let vs cast away Iewish fables So in Gods name for the loue of Gods trueth and of the peoples saluation cast yee from you all Munkish fables and forged legends that haue misled the people into this blinde superstition and ioyne with vs to teach Christs precious flocke the old Apostolicall and Catholicke religion commaunded in Gods word practised in the primitiue Church that you with vs and we wiâ—h you and all in the Lord may now in this plentifull vintage so labour in the Lords vinyard his Church according to our talents receiued that euery one of vs may deliuer his talent with aduantage of manie soules and then we shall be patakers of that sweet saying Wel done thâ—u good and faithfull seruant enter into thy maisters ioy Which God graunt to vs both And so to the next as followeth The 11. parte of the Second proofe concerning S. Hierome VVherein is discussed whom and how we allowe and disalowe to reade Scriptures and heretical bookes and whether Protestants or we doe most Symbolize with Iewishnes Fitzsimon Cart. lib. 1 pag. 103. lib. 2. pag. 303. 502. lib. 3. pag. 89. 90. Caus â—ial 8. 11. Fulk against D. Bristow pag. 15. 54. 115. CArtwright saith there is not such synceritie to be looked for at Hieroms hand as from others that went befor him That he is a cownterfeit that he often strayneth the text and for milke some tyme draweth blood Causeus saith that he is no lesse damned then Lucifer Fulke that he was but a rayler Sainct Hierome in this allegation teacheth the wyne giuen to the Disciples to haue bene Christs blood In the selfe same resolution to Hedibia he saith the bread quem fregit Dominus deditque discipulis esse corpus Domini Saluatoris which our Lord broke and gaue to his disciples to be the body of our Saluiour Els where he saith ipse Saluator est S. Hieron ad Damas de Filio prodigo cuius quotidie carne vescimur cruore potamur it is our very Saluiour whose fleash we are fedd withall and whose blood we drinke Come foorthe M. Rider and play your wonted parte Come tell vs what you oppose against this First you ronne halfe way in your tale befor you stumble at this block in one only woord At leinthe hemm and speake out your mynde suerly say you here is not one woord sillable or leter to proue that Christs body is made of bread and his blood of wyne Not one woord leter or sillable man Let other mens witts and eyes be iudge how couragiously the 134. vntruth The 134. vntruth is deliuered But suerly the baker and the pillorie once againe must not be suffred to parte so sleightly but that we may examine his cause by parcels and yet not in prolixe or tedious maner That women might aske doubts touching religion is as lawfull now as in those dayes That they might vulgarly read Gods woord or the Scripture seemeth an vntruth at least it is not proued but only affirmed by M. Riders woord the valew whereof is knowen That is was not thought conuenient S. Hieron 103. I gesse by these woords of S. Hierome of whom now we treate Only the arte of Scripture saith he is that which euery one challengeth This the chatting ould wyfe this the doting ould man this the babling Sophister this on euery hand men presume to teache before they learne it Nay more anciently sayd Tertullian Tertul. de praescripe Omnes tument omnes scientiam pollicentur Ipsae mulieres haereticae quam procaces quae audeant docere contendere c. All are puffd vpp all do professe knowledg The very hereticall women how malapert how audacious to teach to dispute c. of which
Primitiue Church Serm. 140. de tempo fol. 297. col 3. to prooue it but in this one point of our queâ—â—on Augustine saith Ideo Dominus absentauit se corpore omni ecclesia c. Therâ—â—e the Lord Christ absented himselfe touching his bodilie presence from everie â—â—urch and ascended into heaven that our faith might be edified Brag now no â—ore of Christs corporall presence to be in your Church yf you doe wee with â—ugustine will say you haue no true Church VVhether by Christs being in heauen his real absence from the Church is proued 1. HE sayth it is most fure that we haue forsaken the veritie c. which he proueth because S. Augustin certifyeth that Christ touching his bodely presence is absent from the Church that our fayth may be edified I showld thinke that for â—â—ch a peremptorie conclusion some very choise proofe should be â—leaged which might effectualy perswade But God be glorifyed â—ther this must purchasse our recaÌ„tation or there can be no other â—roofe fownde to deserue it besyde this We therfore aunswer â—oth that the ascension of Christ into heauen and also that S. Auâ—ustin in this place confirmeth vs in our beleefe The ascension â—ecause it being wrought beyond the nature of a corporal body which rather descendeth then ascendeth it sheweth that Christ was not tyed to nature but as aboue nature he was borne of a â—irgin walked on the sea made him selfe inuisible issued out of his â—epulchre entred among his closed disciples asceÌ„ded vp to heauen â—enetrated the heauens so also he may aboue nature be in heauen â—nd earth together And that he had so bene in very deed shal God â—illing be notifyed in the 71. number Yea Christ him selfe vsed â—â—e argument that he would ascend to perswade that his woords 〈◊〉 his fleash to be meat truely and his blood drinke truely c. Weare to be â—eleeued Yet now they are here called into distrust by M. Rider â—ecause of such ascension which is to argue altogether oppositly to Christ and consequently to trueth Secondly S. Augustin only reasoneth of Christs visible being in the Church not vsual since his ascension into heauen intending neuertheles that his inuisible being therin is nothing therby hindred As appeareth by his saying in the same place Non eum visuri eramus in carne S. Augustin serm 140. de temp tamen manducaturi eius carnem VVe were not to behould him in fleashe and yet we weare to eate his fleashe Absentia Domini non est absentia The absence of our Lord is not absence Tecum est quem noâ— vides The 3. vntruth Glossa dist 2. de Consecr c. Prima quidem 44. § donec He is with the whom thow seest not c. Therfore it is a third great vntrueth perspicuous in the eyes of all men that by such allegation we are proued to haue departed from Christs veritie c. Or that S. Augustin is against vs. Further awnswer is in the glosse vpon à lyke testimonie of S. Augustin in the Canon law And because I en end by Gods helpe to conuict M. Rider in euery principal point by his owne principal brethren I wil heere insert Melanctons and VVestphalus Woords coÌ„curring in this mater VVestphalâ— citat Melanct. in apol con Calu. pag. 216. Augustin neuer meant to tye Christ so to one place that he cowld not be in another especialy because the scripture neuer so teacheth and nothing can be browght to bynde Christ to one place besyde the iudgment of humain reason c. This is Melancton whom Martyr con Gardiner de Eucha parte 4. pag. 768. calleth a singular and incomparable man great or small fatt or leane as he is he contradicteth M. Riders wysdome in inferringe out of S. Augustin that Christ is ascended therfor he is not in the B. Sacrament 12. And againe as you will haue a corporall presence so you teach the communicants to receiue Christ with their mouths corporallie Super Ioh. Tract 26. pag. 174. col 4. Fide non denie Read Aug. super Ioh. tract 25.26 50. not with their faith spirituallie contrarie to the opinion of Augustine shewing the manner how Christ is to be eaten in the sacrament foure times together saith spiritualiter spirituallie spirituallie And you cannot shew one auncient writer that speaking of the manner of our eating Christ in the Sacrament that saith once corporallie And therefore seeing this ancient Father condemneth your faith and contradicts your doctrine forsake new Romes heresie and returne to old Romes religion VVhether corporal communion doth exclude spiritual communion Thr 4. vntruth 12. IN the 4. palpable vntruth is contayned that we teach the coÌ„municants to receaue with their mowth corporaly not with their faith spiritualy I am witnes that M. Rider perused and noted our decretals and all the second distinction of Consecration which I vnderstood by viewing his marginal obseruations and vnderlynings when I had borrowed his booke There he found vs teache out of S. Augustin which â—â—o confirmeth that is contayned in the next precedent number 〈◊〉 that we receaue Christs body and blood De consecra dist 2. c. non hoc corpus Cap. Quid est Ibid. Cap. vt quid Ibid. Cap. hoc est Ibid. which the Apostles 〈◊〉 behould and the Iewes did shed Ipsum inuisibiliter non ipsum â—iliter The same inuisibly but not visibly Secondly in the three next chapters he teacheth that we should â—eaue Christ worthely by his and our dwelling one in another â—d by faithe and not only receaue the Sacrament but also the â—ce of the Sacrament Besyd Cap. Qui manduâ— at c. credere c. Corpus c. Hoc Sacram. c. panem c. what others in the sayd distinction â—che to the same effect manifould whole chapters are therin out 〈◊〉 S. Augustin So that no ignorance could excuse this to be the â—wrth vntrueth he hauing perused the decretals and knowing â—nsequently our doctrin to teache both corporal and spiritual reâ—â—uing Yea I vndertake in the 34. number to disproue him by 〈◊〉 owne woords that in our decretals we professe a spiritual â—eauing Such our doctrine as not long after in the 39. S. Chrysost hom 60. ad Pop. Antio number will â—peare of receauing the B. Sacrament both corporaly and spiriâ—â—ly and not only corporaly nor only spiritualy was anciently â—ofessed by S. Chrysostom saying Non fide tantùm sed ipsa re Not 〈◊〉 fayth alone but also in very substance And by S. Cyril saying S. Cyrill l. 10. in Ioan. c. 13. Not 〈◊〉 charitie only but by natural partaking is Christ in vs. Wherby apâ—areth that to say we exclude the internal by including the â—â—ternal or contrary wyse is not ether to know what we professe 〈◊〉 knowing it to misinforme wittingly VVhether our receauing by fayth be only of a figure â— Yet is it warily to be considered that in teaching ether maner 〈◊〉 receauing corporaly and spiritualy in nether
committeth high treason against Christ though in deed in substance they receiue but bred and wine And as a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defacing or clipping the kings picture seale or coine though the king be not locallie in place so the wicked in the Sacraments which are Christ seales which being abused by them they are guiltie of Gods iudgements though Christ be not inclosed locallie in the bread and wine And what Chrysostome speaketh here of the Lords Supper the same hee doth of Baptisme and saith a man may be as well guiltie of the Lords bodie and bloud in cōtemning Baptisme which is but a seale of his washing in the bloud of Christ though hee neuer washed but in water and alleadgeth Paul Heb. 10 29 saing Of how much sorer punishment suppose yee shal be be worthy which treadeth vnder foot the sonne of God counteth the bloud of the testament as an vnholie thing c. These Fathers haue aunswered you and I hope will satisfie fullie the indifferent Reader Now three sorts of men are guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. The first are plaine Atheists that are without God or godlinesse in this present world and such eate this bread vnworthelie and therefore are guiltie of Christes bodie and bloud 2. The second sort haue a historicall faith and a generall knowledge Thre sorts of mē guilty of the Lords bodie and beleeue that whatsoeuer is taught in Gods booke is true but they lacke apprehension and application to make a particular and holy vse of the same and therefore if such come and eate of this bread they are guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. 3. The third sort haue a liuelie apprehending and applying faith yet in their life they slippe and fall yea sometimes verie grieuouslie yet they awake and weep with Peter and repent for the same All these are said to eate vnworthelie but the first two sorts vnto their condemnation The third sort for their faults frailties negligences and vndue preparation are in this life of the Lord corrected least with the world they should be damned The two first sorts eateth onelie the outward elemēts the last sort eateth the bodie of Christ and drinketh the bloud of Christ And now to your second proofe out of Saint Paul VVhether it be treason to breake Images Fitzsimon 96. YF as he in this place affirmeth a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defaceing or clipping the kings picture seale or coyne though the king be not localy in place then consequently and necessarilie they must be guiltie of treason toward God who rent deface or clipp his pictures seales or coyne The necessitie of such sequel or inference is apparent considering that any abuse or contempt in the resemblance of a prince is not more iniurious to a prince then the lyke in a representation of God is to God Nether was there other cause why God did punish Oza 2. Reg. 6. 13. but prophaning resemblances of him contayned in the arke and all others that sacrilegiously misbehaued them selues not only toward his figures yea shadowes but also toward vesselles and ornaments belonging to them Now then tell plainly M. Rider will you stand to your words or recant them what say you Neuer thinke sayth S. Cyprian ep 73. because you haue once fayled that you should therfor blush to reuoke What say you shall his discourse be starling or noe Me thinke I behould you frowning fretting at me for seeming to thinke that you would euer reclayme Your conclusion therfor is that treason is cōmitted by iniurie to the pictures persons alyke Then woe and well away to all your brethren image-breakers Then woe and well away to VValer the murtherer vnder-minister of Swoords who hanged on a gibbet the picture of Christ crucifyed anno 1603. Then woe and well away to M. Rider who only to haue stones to build an ouen to bake bread to impouerish bakers of the citie not hauing idely or without price seuenten hondred barrells of corne yearly as he hath pull'd downe the fayre crosse in S. Patricks which all others his predecessors of that profession had permitted vnuiolated and to the same vse to haue fyer pull'd downe all the trees therin This sentence of his giuen against him selfe brethren made his owne sonn mense Maio 1604. when he attempted to pull downe ane image to be by Gods iudgment precipitated from a height and altogether crushed and at the same tyme his seruant to be stricken with the plague c. This sheweth that it is noe greater treason against a king to abuse and despise his picture then against Christ to prophane and distroye his images What needed this moth to intermedle with the candle of learning wherby his wyngs are so often scortched What needed him to implie that abusers of the communion according to his surmise being but a bare representation of Christ shal be punished with equal torments with such as nayled him on the Crosse Where then will the final Rende vous of Protestants be who haue abused other his representations images appellations as well expressing his death as the Protestant Sacrament I can not choose but say with the Poet. Ingratum genus vestrum quicunque forenses Admiramini plausus Euripides Hecuba ex versione Gasparis Stiblini vtinam non essetis mihi cogniti Qui nihil pensi habetis amicos laedere Modo dicatis grata multitudini O hatefull race of Mercenarie mates Searching applauds ô that I knew you not Not waying how you harme your frends throwgh hates So you the peoples itching eares befott But by the waye what meaneth this often tearming of Sacraments to be but seals and especialy by them who by their profession are bound to beleeue that they nether seale the body nor soule that they nether bring fayth nor confirme it that they are nether fruictfull nor needfull Yf otherwyse we be myndfull of Christ Ochinus apud Andream Iurgiewicium in bello quinti Euangelij pag. 102. Ochinus resolueth Spiritu Dei non Sacramentis fidem confirmari By the spirit of God and not by Sacraments fayth to be confirmed Yf seales be accepted in stidd of Sacrament because this woord is not in Scripture as your brethren before determine tell vs so playnly and we will not inforce you to grawnt that your Supper of the Lord which your great Doctor P. Martyr sayth in respect of the tyme it is receaued P. Martyr in 1. Cor. c. 11. pag 293. 294. and of your emptie stomacks should with greater reason be called a breakfast or dyner is a Sacrament Now as I tould you befor such hate is conceaued alredy among the Reformers against this woord Sacrament as it is conuenient you abstayne from it For they say Bruces sermons pag. 4. 126. VVestphal in apol pag. 5. Pag. 126. about the ambiguitie of this word are rysen many tragedies which will not cease whyle the world lasts that
it is a name proceeding from meere folly of man that Carolostad vtterly reiected it and that you must be satisfyed with the woord of seale which sayth Bruce God and Christ haue giuen to his Apostle c. Only yf this had bene sayd befor not couertly but playnly and sensiblye we had neuer inueyed against your figuratiue SacrameÌ„t Muscul in loc con c. de canan 2. pag. 327. but against your figuratiue seale And then according to Musculus had we bene neuer the nerer For seale is not fownd so conuenient to specifye your doctrin as appeareth by him in these woords the bread is the body of Christ nether naturaly nor personaly nor realy marke good M. Rider nor corporaly nor yet spiritualy agayne marke I pray you for in the 62. number you are shewed to be a falconer and therfor may obserue your game in your owne phrase nor figuratiuely good Sir attend nor significatiuely you will loose all your opinion yf you take not heede restat post haec omnia Westphal loc cit Clebitius in victoria veritatis ruina Papaâ—us Saxonici argum 12. vt dicamus panemesse corpus Domini sacramentaliter it remayneth after all these that we say the bread is the body of Christ sacramentaly So that this woord Sacrament is nethet allowed nor the woord seale retayned but Sacrament sayth Westphalus then only obserued when Caluinists may shift and lurk vnder it as in this case tearming it a brasen wall being at all other tymes disclaymed as noteth Clebitius Notwithstanding this foisting in of the new fangled woord Seal and enimitie against the woord Sacrament as else where against the woords Christ Churche Catholick traditions preests merit good woorks Romain real Trinitie consubstantial Crosse blesse c. Yet you shall behould our Reformer so Catonicaly to censure this lightnes as yf it had not bene his and his brethrens but our fault Sic curios simulant bacchanalia viuunt Yet mistake me not that I seeme to dissalowe the worde Seale in his naturall signification knowinge that it is founde applyed to Circumcision Gen. 17.10 Rom. 4.11 but what I indeuour is only to taxe this translation of wordes out of the owlde testament into the newe without al authoritie and occasion to prepare a way to exclude al Sacraments of the new testament by proouing them of no greater force then the ceremonies of the ould lawe with whom they agree in appellation P. Martyr 1. Cor. 11. His diuision of three sortes of faithe is borrowed out of Peter Martyr nothing belonginge to any matter in question S. Chrysost hom 45. in Ioan. nothing true and containing nothing needful to be refuted Lastly al his former discourse out of S. Chrisostom of treason by the violence toward the picture as much as toward the Prince in person although it ouerthroweth euery way image-breakers c. yet how it ouerthroweth the point in question is breefly to be declared Yf sayth S. Chrysostom the defylers of the kings robe be noe lesse then the tearers therof punishable what meruayle yf vncleane consciences receauing the body of Christ be as damnable as the crucifiers of him Wherby obserue how this maketh against Protestancie that the vncleane receaue the very body of Christ that it is more treason against Christ to abuse this Sacrament then against a kinge teare to a kings robe it is no lesse then to crucifie him 1. Cor. 10.16 The challice of benediction which wee blesse is it not the communication of the bodie of Christ And the bread which wee blesse is it not the participation of his flesh 97. GEntlemen yee wrong the Apostles text first in your abuse of words Rider Verse 21. secondlie in mistaking the sence Your words be these The challice of benediction Pauls words in Greeke that must be iudge betwixt vs and which wee doe follow if we will follow Christ are these The cup of thanksgiuing And the holie Ghost so expounds his owne meaning after calling it poculum Domini the cup of the Lord. But you are much to be blamed of all good men because you had rather follow some late corrupt translation vse some superstitious inkhorne termes latelie deuised and so forsake the olde Apostolical phrase which the holie Ghost vseth in that holie tongue and in which it is still recorded for our instruction either confesse your ignorance in the Greeke or your malice against the trueth that the Catholickes bee no longer seduced by you that long trusted in you and to your doctrine Againe you say The bread which we blesse we say as Paul said and the holie Ghost pend The bread which we breake Alasse alasse what sinne doe you commit in thus seducing Christs flocke and the Queens subiects who hitherto haue builded their faith vppon your bare words Is this plaine dealing with Gods heritage are you Catholicke Priestes I pray you certifie the Catholikes what tongue or traÌ„slation hath it thus as you pen it The bread which wee blesse I tell you plainelie yet in charitie that you doe belie the Texte falsifie the tongue and seeke to keepe the people in blinde ignorance and superstitious palpable darknes to their euerlasting condemnation vnlesse the Lord recal them and they repent them Paules wordes ar these in Greeke and so your owne Hieroms translation hath them The bread which we break But you are so besotted with the crossing of your fingers which you tel the people is the true Catholick blessing that you forget and forgoe the true blessinge of the cup which is the Apostolical thanksgeuing to God for our redemption purchased in Christs blood whereof the cup is the true signe Againe we say as the holy Ghoste indited it and Paule writte it The communion of the body of Christ you say as no learned man of the Greeke text euer saide Error in the sence of the Texte Rhem. Testament 1. Cor. 10. sect 4. the participation of his fleash Thus much I haue shewed how vntruly you deale First in abusing the wordes of the Apostle Secondly in seducing and deceauing the Catholickes Let here the charitable Catholickes iudge how you wil abuse theire eares with fables that dare thus falsifie the plaine text Now come to shew how you mistake the sence of the words in the text seeking by indirect wresting to make the text prooue your errour which it denieth in flat termes and truth For I assure the Catholickes that nor one word fillable letter or title of this text once sounds of your carnall presence You follow the Rhemish who in this place thus expounds the words of the Apostle The cup which we blesse that is to say the challice of consecration which we Apostles and priests by Christs commission do consecrate c. and afterwards it followeth the Apostle expresly referreth the benediction to the Challice and not to God making the holie bodie and the communicating thereof the effect of the benediction Now let me intreate you to aunswere me
you change the singular number for the plurall sacrament for sacraments 6 Sixtlie you quite leaue out two wordes of great consequence communis and 〈◊〉 7 Seuenthlie you adde this word Blessed which is not in the Author 8 Eighthlie you point it not right considering the Authour spake it onelie by way of interrogation Which premisses are faultes great and grosse which sheweth plainlie that you neâ—â—â— reade the Author himself but borrowed them forth of some other mans papers therfore you sin grieuously in perswading mens consciences to take there things at your hands for truth faith when indeed you tender them nothing but things â—â—â—sled from all faith and trueth Now Gentlemen doe you deale plainlie with the world in bringing this plaâ—â— against vs did euer anie of vs denie that Christ was borne of the virgin Marie and conceiued by the holie Ghost you cannot charge vs with it Did euer anie of 〈◊〉 teach that Christs bodie was phantasticall neither did you euer heare it Then in this as in the rest you wrong vs deceiue the Catholickes and abuse Leo sometime Pope But I will shew you plainlie that this Bishoppe of Rome and this your proofe confutes and confounds your owne opinion and confirmes ours Reade page 7. 8. in the same Epist where he bringes in the Sacraments of Redemption of Regeneration First Leo saith the truth of Christs bodie and bloud is in both the two sacrament as well in Baptisme as in the Lords Supper and as he is reallie in the other and what presence of Christ is in the one sacrament there is the like presence in the other as hath been prooued before But least this would maâ—â— the fashion of your transubstantiasion and carnall presence therefore you transâ—â—â— it sacramentum in the singuler number not sacramenta in the plurall Secondlie you haue left out two words communis fidei of common faith becâ—â—â—â— no man should see it was then as Catholick opinion to beleeue that the truth of Chriâ—â— bodie and bloud was as reallie in Baptisme as in the Lord Supper yet in both spirituallie in neither corporallie But you will say I abuse the Reader because Leo neuer spake of this word spiritual or spirituallie and therfore I wrong both the Author and Reader I answere as 〈◊〉 the prophet answered Achab the king when he told Eliah that he troubled Israel 〈◊〉 saith the Prophet it is thou and thy Fathers house that haue troubled Israell in that you haue forsaken the commandement of the Lord 1. Kâ—nge 18.17.18 and followed Balaam So Gentlemen it is not I that wrong the Author that is dead or the people that yet liue but it is you and your confederates that followe Balaam of Rome God keep you free from folowing Balack of Spaine and that the Reader shall see I will prooue that Leo ioyneth with vs and we with him and both of vs with Christs truth against your trash I will make him speake in his owne defence and vtter that which you concealed It followeth immediatlie after your profe in the next immediat words after this maner In the same page quia in illa mystica distributione spiritualis alimoniae hoc impartitur vt accipientes caelestis tibi in carnem ipsius qui caro nostra factus est transcamus Because that in the mysticall distribution of that spirituall food this is giuen and receiued that we which receiue the vertue of the heauenlie meat wee passe into his flesh which was made our flesh Gentlemen this you should haue added to your former for the Authour ioyned them togither the one to accompanie the other in Gods seruice and in deed the latter to expresse the former But now let vs out of this but compare the old doctrine of the old Bishoppes of Rome and the doctrine of the moderne Popes and his Chaplens 1 The old Bishops of Rome said the food in the sacrament was spirituall and heauenlie the late Popes Iesuits and Priests say that it is carnall and materiall 2. The old Popes said the distribution of that spirituall food was misticall you say presbiteriall 4 They said in ould times that the worthie receiuers of this spirituall meat were transformed into Christ his flesh The late Popes and you his Ecchoes say no But the sacramentall bread and wine are transsubstantiated and transnatured into Christs flesh and bloud The Bishop of Rome brought in this to prooue Christs humanitie conceiued by the holie Ghost and borne of the virgin Marie against heretickes who taught the Christs bodie wa phantasticall And you alleadge the same place to prooue Christs humanitie to be made by a sinfull ignorant Priest that of bread and so contrarie to Scripture and Creed will recreate Christ of a new matter which is as blasphemous and hereticall The olde Bishoppes and Church of Rome held So Tertull. contrâ— Marcion lib. 4. that the Sacraments could not be true signes of Christs bodie vnlesse he had a true bodie and because thy were true signes therfore Christ had a true bodie And the late Popes and Popelings teach that Christs bodie is made a new of the signes and so confoundeth the signes with Christs bodie and in deed maintaineth heresie as grosse as the Manicheans For they held that either he had no bodie or a phantasticall bodie And you hold that there be no signes in the Sacraments but that they are transubstantiated into Christs bodie and bloud And so Christs bodie is dailie made of a peece of bread Iohn 6. which must needs be a bodie phantasticall not a true bodie as our Creed witnesseth And as in the manner of eating Christs bodie you disagree not much from the Capernaits so in the case you differ not much from the Manicheis Now will I say as the painfull owner of the vineyard said Isaie 5. 3â— Now therefore oh you inhabitants of Ierusalem and men of Iudah iudge I pray you between me and my vineyard So oh you Inhabitants of this worshipfull Cittie of Dublin and you loyall subiects of Ireland and all the learned and well minded of both England and Ireland iudge I pray you charitablie yet trulie betwixt me and these my aduersaries And if you refuse to censure vs and this our conference according to the truth then I say as Dauid said to Saul The Lord bee iudge between thee and me 1. Sam. 24.13 so the Lord be iudge betwixt vs whether of vs haue more trulie and with greater sinceritie of truth and conscience behaued our selues in this matter for his glorie discharge of our owne consciences instruction and saluation of the Catholickes The last parte of the Second proofe Concerning S. Leo. Fiâ—zsimon 117. MAister Rider as the hare is wonte befor he seate him selfe in his forme had a great desyre to strayne him selfe to greater leaps and girds toward the ende Yet all will not serue As farr as my remembrance serueth me Sidneis Arcadia I reade in Sr. Phillip Sidneis