is double the one visible and corruptible which is receiued with the hand and entreth into the body by the mouth of the faithfull to wit the Bread and Wine The other inuisible and incorruptible to wit the body broken and the Bloud of Iesus shed vpon the Crosse which is applyed to the soule of the faithfull for their sanctification and redemption As for the forme it is prescribed in the Gospel on the pastors part to take the bread into his handes to blesse it breake it distribute it to the people likewise to take the Wine to blesse it and giue it to all the Church to drinke thereof which are capable of it and to signifie vnto them the benefite of that Sacrament On the part of the faithfull Math. 26. Mar. 14. Luke 22.1 Cor. 11. hauing examined themselues they ought to present themselues to that holy communion take it eate and drinke that visible element with the mourh of their body and by faith to participate of the body blood of our Saviour apprehend the merit of his death the effect of his resurrection and the efficacy of his ascension As for the End it is to magnifie the bountie of God to render him thanks to accept his accordment made in the new Testament to receaue there the pledge and assurance of a better life to protest our fidelitie to his service from the vnion which we haue with him then with his mysticall body the Church receauing from him our spirituall nourishment so participating of that quickning bread to wit all his benefits his wisdome his iustice his sanctification redemption So then the vnion which we haue with our Saviour is reall but that is as much to say as reipsa for in regard of the veritie of it we are vnited vnto him and it is likewise spirituall in respect of the meanes whereby it is wrought which is the spirit and faith With this truth and this simplicity the faithfull of the first ages contented themselues and if they vsed the termes of sacrifice and oblation it was not either to play the Pagans or Iewes much lesse to crucify againe our Saviour as it hath beene proued before But as falshood is an ape of the truth the spirit of error hath falsified this testament strucke of her seales turned the things bequeathed to other vses depriued the legataries of their legacies inserted divers clauses to their owne profit and to be briefe hath so disguised and adulterated the coppies that from thence one can no more expect ayd for his salvation Wherefore the truely faithfull doe charge that instrument with falsehood haue recourse to the first draught of it in the Gospel and take no lesse care of the salvation of their soules then of the keeping of an heritage fearing as much false doctrine as to receaue false coyne righting themselues from the confessions of the forgers themselues doe finde great light for the discovery of these falshoods To this purpose confessed an ancient Abbot Rupert Tuit l. 2. cap. 21. that the Masse was not celebrated in times past with such apparell as it is now adaies and that it was not polisht by one alone in such sort as it is now c. and that it is not a whit the holyer for that considering that heretofore it was consecrated only with the words of our Lord and ioyning of the Lords prayer And a Bishop of Rome saith Greg. epist ex reg lib. 7. c. 63. Platin. in Xisto the Lords prayer is said incontinently after the other prayers because the Apostles were accustomed to consecrate the oblation of the host in saying only the Lords prayer Whence it appeares that the body of the Masse which is the Canon is not at all essentiall vnto it and that the soule of it which is transubstantiation was not infused into that body vntill by the Councell of Lateran in the yeare 1205. We must therefore here resume the first paths we must take away the hay durt and strawe from this building and ioine our selues to the foundation of the Apostles doing like those which goe astray return by their owne steps to finde the true way Wee shall finde Iustin Martyr writing about an hundred and sixtie yeares after the birth of Christ and wee shall note in reading him that water was mingled with the wine about 40 yeares before Iustin Apolog. 2. by Pope Xistus or Alexander See how he describes the celebration of divine service in his time The day saith he which is called Sunday an assembly is made of all those which abide in the fields or cities into one place and there are read the Commentaries of the Apostles and the writings of the Prophets so long as the time will permit Afterwards the reader hauing left off to read hee which is president in the assembly makes an exhortation to the people in a Sermon admonishing them to imitate those good things after that is finished all doe rise vp together and make our prayers vnto God hee saith not to any Saint and as we said before that prayer being done the bread the wine and the water are brought forth and hee that performeth that action pronounceth with all his might prayers and thanksgiuings the people there ioyne their voices their affections and their blessing saying Amen Then a distribution is made to every one and a communication of those things which were blessed with thanksgiuing The people were not then excommunicated I aske let any man speake in cōscience if that forme be not practised in the reformed Churches and why will not they follow it is it not the ambition of Prelats which hindreth them from acknowledging their fault and avarice which retaines them in a commodious errour whilst in the meane time the simple drinke the folly of their conductors great ones contributing their authority the people their violence the ignorāt their fury O Lord order proceeds from thee thou hast the hearts of kings in thine owne hands deliuer vs from popular seditions Let vs thinke that not the sacrament alone hath beene liable to abuse for even the tree of life the sacrifices of Moses the brasen Serpent which was a firgure of our Lord and many other divine institutions haue beene subiect to reformation after 900 yea after 1000 yeares of abuse and idolatry And as for the supper wee see how that that hath beene casheerd by the Masse the tables of wood by the tables of stone the Churches simplicitie by Iewish and heathenish superstition although some of these things might at the first haue beene introduced with a good intention Harken therefore to the advice of a good Cordelier named Ferus speaking of the idolatry which befel in Israel There was saith he a double sinne in Gedeon Ioh. Ferus in annot in lib. Iud. c. 8. both in that hee made an Ephod contrary to the word of God and in that he seeing the abuse of it tooke it not away Now
Sacrament Moreouer it being that we are to worship that onely which is eternall Damâ—sc lib. â— orthod fideâ—â— the humanity of Christ is not to bee worshipped if the diuinity be not joyned thereunto For Damascene distinguisheth totus Christus all Christ from totum Christi all that which is in Christ All Christ is perfect God and perfect man but all that which is in Christ is not God neither yet is it man Wee must distinguish and not separate his diuinity from his humanity which being ioyned doe make one hypostasis and one Person As for example all man is one soule and one body but all that which is in man is not soule neither is it body but both together Now we may say according to the doctrine of the Pope who would tye himselfe to the letter the Priest makes not all Christ neither all that which is in Christ he creates but a body broken vpon the Crosse and but blood shed forth consequently an humanity dead and separated from its soule And the glosse of the canon Comperimus saith Can. sic in sâ—â—ctificando gl Verb. Cal g de consec dist 2. that if a Priest should haue consecrated the bread whilest our Sauiour was in the sepulchre that the substance of the wheate would haue beene simply a dead body Now when one hath yeelded to the Priest that he can make a body and blood of the substance of the bread and wine which notwithstanding is false yet cannot that which he makes bee wholly Christ for his soule and his diuinity shall not bee made and consequently we ought not to adore that which he makes For we adore the humanity of Christ nor considered apart â—ren de incar c. 25. but as being vnited to the diuinity So sayth an ancient father Christ hath adored with vs and if it so be that we must adore him for to him must euery knee bow yet this is to be done onely in respect of one of his natures And Saint Augustine giues vs an example thereof If sayth he any of vs should finde a purple Robe or a Crowne lying on the ground Aug. de â—erbo 〈◊〉 58. would we worship it But when the King is cloathed therewith hee makes himselfe lyable to great punishment who through contempt adores it not with the King In the same manner shall he be culpable of eternall death which will not adore the humanity of Christ our Lord not as it is considered nakedly alone but as being vnited to his diuinity hee being the onely Sonne of God true God and true man This passage sheweth that Saint Augustine was farre from preaching the adoration of the Crosse Launce Nayles or Robe without seame which are not vnited vnto our Sauiour neither make one person If he should come to Argenteuill the Priest without all question would call him an Heretique Another abhomination is committed in that the Priest pretendeth to sacrifice Iesus Christ in the Masse which Christ himselfe did not in the supper for if hee had done it he verily would not haue reiterated the next day his oblation for that had not beene necessary Now Iesus sacrificing himselfe vpon the crosse said not doe this for hee had no other worthy sacrificer of such a sacrifice but himselfe whose effect is eternall and that which wee are to doe is to blesse breake and distribute in remembrance of that sacrifice vpon the crosse Chrysost in hom ad Corinth In this sense S. Chrysostome saith If Iesus Christ be not dead whereof shall this sacrifice be a signe or figure But this is more amply treated of in the chapter of Sacrifice and of the Sacrament where you shall see that the action of the supper differeth from that of the crosse in respect of the time place forme ende matter c. and therefore cannot bee the same action But seeing that the essence soule of the Masse consisteth in transubstatiation wee must examine it more particularly Of the pretended transubstantiation TWelue hundred yeares after the institution of the supper the Popes brought in this transubstantiation In the councel of Lateran as new for the name as the effect the Divell hauing by little and little at the length gained the top of the mystery of iniquitie Le ts set downe therefore that which wee are to beleeue in this communion and then by way of opposition we shall knowe the abuses It was instituted in generall for the commemoration of the death of Christ to celebrate the graces which he purchased for vs to ratifie his alliance to receaue the pledge seale and assurance of a better life to make protestation of that obedience which wee owe vnto God and of the vnion which wee haue with all the Saints particularly to receaue the nourishment of our soules to feele that we are vnited to our head and Lord Iesus Christ that we are one with him as he is with God the Father and that we are bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh that we inioy him intirely and all his benefits to wit his wisdome Iustice sanctification and redemption So the vnion which we haue with him is tearmed substantiall in regard of the things vnited reall in regard of the truth of the vnion and its effect and spirituall in regard of the meanes by which this vnion is made which are the spirit and faith but as for the forme that is incomprehensible vnto vs thus farre wee must goe that wee prescribe not vnto God an impanation concomitancy transubstantiatioÌ„ or other chimeraes which favour of impiety and idolatry First let vs consider the words of our Lord Fagius in Deut. c. 8. Ioseph Scal. de emend temp lib. 6. who ordayning the celebration of the Passouer and the commemoration of his death vsed in a manner the same tearmes which were vsed in the ancient passouer where they said this is th bread of misery which our fathers haue eaten in Egypt which is as much as to say this bread which you now eate doth represent that bread which our fathers did eat in Egypt it is 1500 yeares since you were deliuered from that captivitie The Iewes in blessing of bread and wine vsed these words Blessed be thou In lib. Vnisnaioth O God which hast giuen vs bread and the fruit of the vine of the earth And so we are to take these tearmes not according to the letter but sacramentally as those which were added after them this is my body this cuppe is my bloud of the new Testament which wee must thus interpret this wine which is in the cup doth represent and present vnto you the new alliance which I haue made with you by the shedding of my bloud for the remission of sinnes So that if one would demand how the bread is the body of Christ we are to answer that it is in the same manner as the cup is his bloud without changing of the substance This bread is the body of Christ as circumcision
hast eaten and the Liturgie of the Armenians Lord Iesus I eat by faith thine holy quickning sauing body The eighth is August ed Dardan item traâ—â— 30. in Joh. Vâ—gil l. 4 con â—â—â—â— qui vbiâ— hâ—â—â—rat nusquam habitat that such transubstantiation destroyes the nature of the body of our Lord making it to be no body Take from bodies their space and they are no more bodies The body of Christ is raysed from the dead and it must needs be in one certaine place for as Vigilius an ancient Bishop of Trent saith how comes it about that the word being every where the flesh is not every where For when it was on earth it was not in heaven and now it is in heaven it is not vpon earth In the Canons themselues this carnall eating is called by S. Augustine the first heresie where it is said Can. prima quidem haeresis de consec d st 2. That vntill the end of the world the Lord will be on high but the truth of the Lord is here with vs for the body wherewith hee was raised vp must needs be in one certaine place but his truth is diffused throughout And in the Acts of the Apostles it is written whom the heauen must receaue vntill the times of restitution of all things Act. 3.21 The ninth is Vide gl can Quia corpus v. convertuntur de consec dist 2. where the glosser is much troubled Ioh. 2.9 Exod. 7.10 that this doctrine of transubstantiation is contrary to it selfe because the corruption of the first matter ought to be the generation of the second as when the substance of the water was altered and turned into the substance of wine in the marriage of Cana or when the rod of Aaron was turned into a serpent Now in this sacrament the substance of bread is not altered and the substance of the body of Christ was before there is therefore onely a change of place and not of substance and the body which is in heauen comes but either to mingle it selfe or to take the roome of the bread contrary to that which hath been proued here before The tenth reason is that the body which Christ presents vnto vs is a crucified body the memory wherof he inioyned vs to celebrate wherefore it is said This is my body which is broken Mat. 26 26. 1. Cor. 1. and my bloud which is shed forth and not that which shall be or which hath beene for this lambe slaine before the creation of the world was present to Abraham vpoÌ„ the crosse through faith which is the substance of things hoped for Heb. 11.1 and whose effect was present before and since the passion in regard of the faithfull which are called not to the participation of a glorious body but of a body crucified not a body which cannot suffer but of him which makes his soule an oblation for sinne Esay 53.11 as Esay saith Durand de remed penit can vt quid de consecr dist 2. c. non iste Amb. lib. 6. de sacramento Idem lib. 2. c. 5. de Isaac anima Aug. in Joh. tract 5. The eleuenth reason is that the body of our Lord being spirituall food ought to be receaued spiritually and to that purpose S. Augustine saith To what end preparest thou thy teeth and thy belly beleeue and thou hast eaten And S. Ambrose As the bread is the proper food of our body and is eaten corporally so the body of Christ is the food of the spirit and is eaten spiritually And the same bringeth in our Saviour speaking Those are present with me whose faith is with mee and whose portion I am and S. Augustine Some will question how I shall enioy it being absent how I shall stretch forth my hand thither where he sits and hold him there send thither thy faith and thou takest hold of him thy forefathers enioyed him in the flesh enioy thou him by faith Our Saviour himselfe interpreteth to drinke and eat by the same tearmes to come and beleeue The twelfth reason is taken from the nature of the bodie and from the manner of the phrase to be in a place For if the naturall body borne of the Virgin be in the Sacrament it is then either definitiuely as the Angels be in a place and so it will haue no true body which ought to fill a place or else it will be there repletiuely and so in as much as it is a naturall body it should be there visibly and palpably For by being raysed againe and glorified it looseth not the nature of a true body for Christ said himselfe Touch and see Luk. 24.29 for a spirit hath not flesh nor bones as I haue It remaineth therefore that Christ is there by the virtue of his divinity which is every where as saith S. Augustine although his flesh bee in heauen and no otherwise then as we say the sunne to bee present with vs when the light thereof commeth through the windowes although the body thereof be fixed in the heauens The thirteenth reason is that if the eating of the body of Christ be carnall all the faithfull which liued before the comming of our Saviour be damned because they bee dead before they eat the body of Christ For it is written If you eat not the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke not his bloud there is no life in you But we are assured that they were saued by the words of our Saviour concerning the bosome of Abraham and by other testimonies and examples of Moses Enoch Elias Elizeus c from whence wee must conclude that they eat Iesus Christ it being written in expresse terms that all our Fathers did eat the same spirituall meat 1. Cor. 10.4 and did all drinke of the same spirituall drinke and that the rocke whereof they dranke was Christ Now before his nativitie they drank him not carnally and therefore it followeth that they did eat it by faith and that such a kind of eating is sufficient vnto salvation considering that by it alone they were saued being bound notwithstanding to eat it The fourteenth is taken from the effect of transubstantion for if the bread be made flesh by virtue of those wordes which are pronounced by the Priest it continues to be flesh vnlesse either by contrary words one dissubstantiats it whereof we haue no example or the incredulitie of the wicked receauer doth disanull that which the consecration had created For otherwise the wicked which receaue the sacrament should be infallibly saved and none of them receiue condemnation in regard that the promise is generall whosouer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud Ioh. 6.56 Aug. de verbo dom tract in Iohan. 26. Cyrill lib. 4. in Ioh. c. 19. the same hath life everlasting and that of S. Augustine when Christ is eaten life is eaten Againe The sacrament is life vnto every man is death vnto none whosoever he be which receaueth it
was the covenant for it is added Gen. 17.10 and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt mee and you So then the signe taketh the name of the thing signified as when it is said Exod. 11.12 1. Cor. 10 4. Tit. 3.5 Ioh. 3.6 Numb 10. 1. Cor. 5. that the lambe was the Passover that the rocke was Christ that baptisme is the washing of regeneration and Moses when the Arke set forwards said Rise vp Lord and when it rested Returne O Lord and the Arke is called the king of glory Ps 24.7 8. All which manner of speeches although they be in sacramentall matters yet are they not litterally to be vnderstood but doe receaue a sacramentall interpretation Which is the cause why the Doctors Pastours of the Church haue called the sacraments types antitypes figures similitudes significations images representations You shall see hereafter more varietie of the Doctors testimonies At this time note only this that according to the sacramentall phrase and according to the names giuen to the sacraments it may be verified that this is my body imports no changing of the substance for they should be neither types nor figures if they were of the same nature that the things themselues are which they represent figurae non sunt rerum homogencarum Another Classis of arguments against this pretended change is taken from divers concluding reasons The first is this This manner of speech this is my body soundeth not let this be or this shall be my body for these are not imperatiue or operatiue tearmes of a new creature no more then when it was said this is my welbeloued sonne Mat. 3.17 which was but a simple notification of that which he was before the pronouncing of them It is another matter when it is said Gen. 1. Let there be light increase and multiplie for these are not meere enuntiations of things which are but powerfull tearmes to create that which was not The second reason is drawne from the order which our Saviour vsed in taking blessing and breaking before he declared in words that which he presented for to what ende tooke he it but to blesse it and to what end blessed he it but to sanctifie it Now if that blessing had his force it is false to say that by the pronouncing of the last word Meum the consecration is made for if it were so hee should not haue said this is but this shall be my body For when hee would doe a miracle he said Lazarus come forth Ioh. 11.44 and not Lazarus is come forth For that was a tearme to doe and not to declare what was done The third reason is taken from the tearmes themselues for this is my body is not as much as this is my body and bloud which necessarily they must acknowledge if the bread bee transubstantiated into Iesus and so they shall haue good store of rhetoricall figures which notwithstanding the Priests reiect in these words In the same manner one might say as much of this cup is the new Testament for in it there be many degrees of figuratiue interpretations first a metonymie for by the Cup they vnderstand the wine which is within it and by the wine the bloud then a Synecdoche for by the bloud they vnderstand all Christ both his body and soule notwithstanding it is contrary to that which our Saviour would present and represent for by the bread is represented only the communion of the body and by the cup the communion of the bloud of our Lord this is that which we learne of S. Paul â— Cor. 10.16 who saith the bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body not of the bloud of Christ and the cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ Wherevpon one of the first Schoolemen saith â—â—trus de paluâ—e 4. sent d. 11. q. 3. 〈◊〉 44. That the Sacraments doe effect that which they prefigure and that the effect of this Sacrament is the perfect refection of the soule which is nothing else but to eate it drinke it and therefore concludes that it ought to haue a double matter in it to wit matter to eate and matter to drinke Now this Doctor wrot about the yeare 1300 and yet speakes not one word of transubstantiation but only of the figure The fourth reason is that if this transubstantiation of bread and wine had place there would bee three bodies of Iesus Christ at the same time differing in matter and forme that which is visible at the right hand of God in heaven coÌ„sisting of flesh and bone and other two the one made of the substance of bread and the other of water and wine both of them in forme of bread and wine so that they worshippe not Iesus which was borne of the virgin but Iesus which is made of wheat and wine Vâ—de gl verb. conâ—erturtur can quia corpies dist 2. de consec which denieth true substantiation The fift reason is that the perfect body of Christ should receaue every day as many additions as there bee consecrated hoastes or else the substance of this hoaste doth vanish away and giues place to her first body which if it were so there would be no changing but onely a displacing of the substance and changing of the place Neuerthelesse it will be hard to beleeue that of the substance of a glorified body wormes may be engendred or that it is at the mercy of a flye and it is blasphemous and contrary to naturall knowledge to beleeue that accidents may subsist without a subiect or can corrupt without a substance The sixt is that the bones of our Sauiour bee broken which were not euen in his type Exod. 12.46 Ioh. 19.36 you shall not breake the bones and therefore they were preserued vpon the crosse although it were the custome to breake their bones which died in that manner vpon the crosse Now if his bones were not broken in his humilitie wherefore doe they teach that they can breake them in his glory Psal 16. The seauenth is taken from that it is said that his body shall not take corruption Now if he be chewed by the teeth of the Priest Can 7. caueat execrationes goes down into his stomack passeth into his guts for to that purpose they abstaine to eat for some time if he doth that which the cautells specifie it is certaine that he corrupteth which being impossible it followeth that this eating of Christ is not carnall but to beleeue is to drinke Ioh 6.35 Ier. 15.16 and to come to Christ is to eate as saith S. Iohn So in Ieremy I haue eaten the word is to say I haue beleeued it and in the revelation to eat the booke Apoc. 10.9 Can. â—t quid putas de consec dist 2 Cass in liturg whereof he spake is to beleeue it as saith S. Augustine in the Canon beleeue and thou
For if it might be saith Origen vpon the 15 chap of Mat. that the wicked should eat the word which is made flesh it had never beene written whosoever shall eat this bread shall liue eternally The reason hereof is evident for seeing that the flesh and bloud are eaten only by the faithful and are receaued only by faith this body cannot bee eaten vnworthily For as S. Augustine saith Lib. 5. cont Donatistas tract in Iohan. 26. We are not to conceaue that the wicked doe eat the body of Christ although hee carnally and visibly doe breake with his teeth the signes of the body and bloud Note that he saith signes for S. Paul saith not whosoeuer eateth this body vnworthyly but whosoeuer eateth of this bread drinketh of this cup. Which eating of the meere signe is sufficient to make any man culpable which approacheth vnworthily and reiecteth the grace which his prince offereth him trampling vnder foot his armes and iniuring his ambassadour Heb. 10.26.28 which are no lesse then crymes of high nature offered to his sacred maiestie So the contempt of circumcision was a cause of Gods forsaking his people see more in the punishment of the Bethsamites for prying within the Arke of the covenant Gen. 17. 1. Sam. 7 36. 6.19 and of the Philistians who placed it in the temple of their Idoll Inn. de sacram altaris c. 4 13. 14. pâ—nem domini non panem dominum The fifteenth reason is taken from the wordes which S. Paul vseth that hee is culpable and receiueth his owne damnaon eating vnworthily the bread of the Lord. So Iudas eate the bread of the Lord but not the bread which is the Lord saith Innocent Whence it followeth that there is no transubstantiation considering that after the consecration he speaketh of two breades the one Panis domini the bread of the Lord which is the wheaten loafe the other Panis Dominus the bread which is the Lord to wit the true body of Iesus Christ the one in Heauen the other on earth the one receiued with the hand and the mouth of the body the other with faith which is the hand and mouth of the soule the one offered by the minister of the Church the other by Iesus Christ himselfe Wherefore S Paul saith that he which eateth and drinketh vnworthily discerneth not the Lords body Where to discerne διακÏίνειν is as much as to separate the one from the other and to haue a diuers respect of either for if there be but one there can be neither discerning nor distinguishing The sixteenth reason is taken from hence that the pretended change made by the pronouncing of words will accuse them in that they haue not the power to change as wel the accidents as the substance nor to conuert the forme as well as the matter And they must needes interprete these words this is my body in this manner this substance with his accidents is changed into an other substance without accidents The seuenteenth is taken from that which the Apostle saith You shall declare the Lords death vntill his comming 1. Cor. 11.26 For if we are not to celebrate this action but vntill his comming by a consequent there ought not to bee any more Masses said for according to the Priests doctrine Christ hath often descended already vnto vs. The eightenth is that we are not to celebrat the memory of things present but of those which are absent and therefore seeing that this is a commemoration of Iesus Christ it followeth that he is not there carnally present The nineteenth is taken from the letter to which the Priests so much sticke for this is my body makes not whole Christ and consequently the Priest in pronouncing those words vnderstands him not wholly and therefore ought not to adore him as is before said Numb 23. The twentieth reason is taken from the testimony of Cyrill before cited that the Sacrament is life vnto euery man Cyrill lib. 4. in Ioh. c. 19. is death vnto none whosoeuer he be that receiueth it So that if there were a true transubstantiation of the breade Pope Victor the 3. and the Emperour Henry the 7. would not haue beene poysoned with the bread and wine transubstantiated for neither the body nor bloud glorified is capable of poyson Exod. 16.15 78.25 Joseph Angles in storibus 4. quaest de susc diffic 2. Alexand Hales part 4. q. 45. m. 1. c. The one and twentieth reason for it is behoofull to haue iust furniture is taken from Manna a figure of this Sacrament which though it were not transubstantiated yet was it stiled the bread of Angels and Heau'nly bread and that which was reserued thereof in the Arke putrified not wherfore the bread which is in the Masse is not the naturall and carnall body of our Lord For if it were it would haue no lesse vertue in it to guard it then its legall figure had to preserue it selfe from wormes mice and other creatures with which the Priests stand at mortall enmity this day The last reason is taken from hence that our Sauiour ought to be adored with one onely kinde of adoration before and after his incarnation for the incarnation cannot be a cause of a new worship such as is in the Masse which endures no longer then the species doe subsist without putrifying whereas the onely and true adoration due to our Lord is due onely to the Person of Christ wherein two natures are inseparably vnited Wherefore the Ephesian Creed made against Paulus Damasetanus and translated out of Greeke into Latin by Peltanus the Iesuite saith We confesse that Iesus Christ our Lord ought to be entirely adored with his body but not according to his body For this reason the Arrians haue beene called idolaters by Athanasius Cyrill and Theodoret because they adored a god which they said was created §. Nobis quoque vers per quem The same say the Priestes in the Masse in these words by whom thou createst vnto vs these dayly goods And these goods after the words of pretended consecration are called pure Sacraments in temporall gifts and therefore they cannot be inseparably and hypostatically vnited to the person of our Sauiour § Corpus tuum Inspec sacer versican tangendo Corpus Christi propter continentiam tuam excellentissimae diuinitatis Christi who is neither a Sacrament nor in their sense a temporall gift Likewise Nestorius beleeuing our Sauiour to be man sustaining the God-head hath been condemned as an Heretique much more reason is there to brand with such a title those which beleeue the simple accidents doe sustaine a body and a soule euen the whole entire diuinity and who ordaine an adoration of Sacraments and things visible and temporall which are not God inuisible eternall infinite neither our Sauiour in his naturall existence who is at the right hand of God farre differing from a sacramentall existence which the Councell of Trent confesseth
27 When in the Church the bread and the wine are brought forth being antitypes of the body and blood of him those which partake of the visible bread doe eate his body and his blood spiritually And that which the Priest saith after he hath taken the Eucharist shewes that there is no transubstantiation for after the consecration he saith quod ore sumpsimus c de munere temporali fiat c also the prose sub diuersis speciebus signis tantum non rebus latent res eximiae the Sacraments are termed signes not things Chrys ad Caesar mon. And S. Chrysostome saith that the bread is called by the name of our Lord although the nature of bread doe yet continue The same said Pope Gelasius writing 1000 yeares after our Sauiour Gelas contra Eutich Car. lib. de diuin eff pag. 85. Tertull. lib 4. cont Marcion Chrys 1. Cor. c. 10. Amb. de iis qui init myst c. 9. Can. ante benedict dist 2. de consec Dionys de eccles Hierarch c 3. Aug. in Psal 3. Aug. contra Adim manich c. 12. and Charlemaine writing to Alcuinus his Master hath these wordes In supping with his disciples hee brake the the bread and gaue it vnto them and likewise the cup as figures of his body and blood And Tertullian Christ hauing taken the bread and distributed it to his disciples he made it his body in saying this is my body that is to say the figure of my body And Chrysostome What is that which the bread signifieth the body of Christ And Ambrose Before the blessing of those heau'nly words another kinde was named but after the consecration the body of Christ is signified And Saint Denis By the venerable signes of the Sacrament Iesus Christ is signified and receiued And S. Augustine saith that he eateth Christ which eateth him within and not without which eateth him in his heart and not he which feedeth on him with his teeth In his 26 tract vpon Saint Iohn The patience of Iesus Christ was admirable in that he admitted Iudas to the banquet in the which he instituted and gaue to his disciples the figure of his body and of his blood The Lord made no difficulty to say this is my body when he gaue them the figure of his body and his blood And in the canon taken out of Saint Hierome vpon the Epistle to the Ephesians it is said that the body of Iesus Christ is two wayes vnderstood the first carnally when it is said that it is crucified Euseb de vita const lib 10. c. 3 Maldonat Iesuit in Ioh. c. 6 v. 55. the other spiritually when is is called bread So are the Sacraments called by Eusebius secret Symboles of the passion of our Sauiour Againe he calls his flesh true food and blood true drinke because it doth truly nourish our soules and giues vnto them life euerlasting As in the 32 verse he calls himselfe true bread yet certainely not of nature for if one regard nature he is not true and proper bread but onely in respect of the effect because hee truely doth doe that which bread vseth to doe And Saint Augustine The Apostle saith Aug. ad Bonifac epist 23. wee are buried with Christ through Baptisme into his death hee saith not that wee signifie his burying but hee saith absolutely that we are buried Wherefore hee called not the Sacrament of so great a thing otherwise then by the name of the thing it selfe And the same puts downe this rule Aug. quaest super Leuit. 67. the thing which signifieth hath beene vsed to bee called by the name of that which it signifieth as it is written the seuen eares of corne are seuen yeares hee saith not that they signifie seuen yeares so likewise the seuen kine are seuen yeares and many others From thence it commeth that it was said the rocke was Christ for it is not saide the rocke signifieth Christ but as if it had beene that which it was not in substance but in signification Now that which hath brought in this errour is that they thinke that faith cannot produce any reall effect Heb. 11. and neuerthelesse wee haue the Scriptures full of contrary examples by faith Enoch was translated that hee should not see death through faith Sara conceiued by faith the Israelites passed through the red sea by faith the walles of Iericho fell downe And as for corporall manners of speaking attribubuted to the soule as when it is said that faith eateth and drinketh they enforce not any communication of the proprieties of the body any more then when it is said that the soule heareth and seeth although it haue neither eares nor eyes The effects therefore of the spirit are reall and true although the meanes and causes be spirituall for otherwise the Angels which killed the first borne in Egypt and defeated the Army of Senacherib because they had not bodies could not haue done that reall execution whereas indeede it was so much the more reall by how much the instrument was the more agile and disburdned of that corporall Masse which is an impediment to our actions Obiections There remaine now the Obiections whereof the first is that vnder the Ghospell all figures cease Where wee must distinguish of figures for sometimes they are taken for Rhetoricall figures and manners of speech which they call Tropes and those cease not for the Ghospell is full of them as for example Iesus is called the Lambe the Hedge the way by a Metaphore and euen in this place the cuppe is taken for the wine by a Metonomie Sometimes figures are taken for the ceremonies of the Law which prefigured Christ and his sacrifice These indeed cease in the reformed Churches but not in the Romane For if wee may beleeue Biell Titleman and others there were neuer more figures vnder the olde Law then are now vnder the new See the significations of the Altar the kissing of it the right hand and the left the turnings of the Priest the signes and a thousand significations and inuentions which wee know notwithstanding to haue ceased Wee answere therefore that figures doe not cease in the former signification but the later The second obiection is taken from the omnipotency of God who is able to make a body to be every where to bee invisible and existe without its accidents To this wee must answer that by this argument Mahumet and his abominations may be maintained for God is able to doe any thing But before we imploy this omnipotency we ought to examine if such be his will and then wee may boldly conclude that hee can doe it for the proposition is not convertible God can doe all that he will Aug. Euchirid c. 96. and God will doe all that hee can This is taught vs by S. Augustine God is not called omnipotent for any other reason then for that hee is able to doe all that which he is willing to doe and that the effect of his
by it not only the administring of the Sacraments but also the preaching of the word in which two things consist the office and charge of the Pastor In the like manner doth Iustinian the Emperour interpret it and Cuias also Novel 7. Iustin Nov. 7. c. 11. de Ecclesiasticis bonis ibi Cuiac tom 3. p. 549. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. signifying that besides the reading of the holy Scriptures the litourgy was performed tradita populo sancta communione by administring to the people the holy coÌ„munion Whence we ought to conclude that in the time of Iustinian being 530 years after Christ the people stood not by only as meer spectators in a theater but to taste as at a feast Act. 13. and so must we vnderstand that passage in the Acts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is preaching the Gospell and administring to the people the Holy Communion From which two passages one may cleerely collect that the Church in those daies vsed not the tearme of the Masse and that Iustinian retained this word as being vsed in his time CHAP. IIII. Of the Sacrament AFter the three Greeke words wee will explaine three Latin and begin backwadrs to the end that one may deriue the one froÌ„ the other The first therefore shal be the Sacrament marueilous agreable to this actioÌ„ For Festus witnesseth that the ancients vsurped it in actions which they performed with an oath For when they entred Soldiers into their Rowle they exacted an oath either of euery one in particular or of the whole band in grosse this they stiled a conjuration because they sware altogether or particularly and these oathes they termed military Sacraments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Serui. 8. Aeneid L. 8. c. de leg 2. § miles de his qui notantur l. v. de re militari inde sacramento liberati From hence it commeth that Christian Souldiers which are the truly faithfull presenting themselues in Baptisme to bee enrowled and at the Supper to muster and receiue presse-money in the militant Church haue termed these actions Sacraments and because it is sufficient to be once enrowled Baptisme is not to be reiterated but in as much as Soldiers are often to muster to make open profession to beare the colours and to take the bread of munition during this spirituall warfare thereupon it is that this Sacrament of the Supper is often to be reiterated in which on Gods behalfe wee are assured by the truth of his Word by the exhibiting of his pledge by the character of his Seale by the efficacy of his Spirit that he loues vs in his Sonne will be fauourable vnto vs through his obedience will exalt vs in his fauour through the humility of his Lambe sacrificed vpon the Crosse And againe on our parts we accept that grace we protest that we will abide constant we sweare that wee will serue so good an Head that we will loue and honour such a Father and that we will renounce sathan and his promises the world and its delights Now if you consider it in its matter it wil be double to wit in signes and in that which they signifie which is called the matter of the Sacrament The signe in Baptisme is the water the thing which is signified is Blood the signe in the Supper is Bread and Wine the thing signified is the Body and Blood neuerthelesse in regard of the Sacramentall vnion which the signe and the thing signified have one with another they borrow one anothers name in this action sometimes the Body is called the Bread somtimes the Bread the Body For Saint Augustin saith Aug. ep 166. Idem cont advers leg prophet lib. 2. c. 9. Id. de civ dei l. 10. c. 5. Idem in Ioh. tract 26. idem n Leuit. l. 3. q. 57. Amb. de iis qui mysterii init tit 4 c. 9. Theod. dial con quosdam haeret the thing which signifieth is vsed to be honoured with the name of that thing which it signifieth and Saint Ambrose before the benediction of those heauenly words one kinde is named to wit the Bread and Wine after the consecration the Body is signified And Theodoret Our Sauiour hath honoured the signes Symboles which we see with the name of his Body and Bloud not in changing their nature but in adioyning his grace add that is the reason why euery part of the Sacrament is opposed the one vnto the other the one corruptible the other incorruptible the one the figure the other the thing the one earth the other Heauen the one visible the other invisible the one taken by the body the other taken by the soule the one presented by the Pastour the other by the Spirit of God Maxim schol Dionysii So Maximine opposeth the signes or symboles to the verity of the thing σÏμβολα τᾶυτα καί οá½Îº ἀλήθεια Following this truth there is no Sacrament to be found in the Masse for before the consecration there is no more but simple Bread and Wine and after the consecration according to their saying there is no more Bread yet notwithstanding Cyril l. 4. in Ioh. c. 19. August tract in Ioh. 59. Innocent de sacrament altar c. 4. 13. 14. the Sacraments ought to haue two parts to wit the signe and the thing signified of the Bread of our Lord and the Bread which is the Lord. CHAP. V. Of Sacrifice SAcrifice is a Latin terme and signifieth in generall Plaut Poen si hercle istud vnquam factum est tum me Iupiter faciat semper sacrificem neque vnquaÌ„ liteÌ„ to performe any holy thing and particularly to make prayers and oblations to God although one obtaine not that which he requires in which sense it is opposed to the Verbe Lito to appease More specially this word hath beene in vse amongst the Iewes and Pagans signifying to offer to God fruites beasts incense bread or wine and molam a round loafe from whence comes the Verbe Immolo As for the sacrifices of the Heathens the Church both ancient and moderne hath alwayes condemned them as being abominable before God The Iewish consisting in materiall things in types and figures of that onely and eternall sacrifice of our Sauiour were accomplisht in that sacrifice vpon the Crosse and now there remaine none but sacrifices of thanksgiuings and praises of the which Dauid in the Psalmes often speaketh For as concerning our Lord Iesus he can not be offered vp againe after his passion for then saith Saint Paul must hee often haue suffered Heb. 9. v. 26. Whence it followeth that as he can suffer no more so can he no more be offered vp Besides to reiterate his sacrifice is to argue it of vnsufficiency and to match it with the Iewish sacrifices of which it is written He. 10. v. 11. c Euery high Priest standeth dayly ministring and offering diuers times the same sacrifices which can neuer take away sinnes but this man after hee had offered
Magician or Sorcerer as he was which not long since was burned in the Greue at Paris the Parishioners would bee full ill assured of their saluation Fourthly hoc sacrificium laudis this sacrifice of praise witnesseth that it was not made to purchase remission of sinnes but to render thankes vnto God for that purchase which Iesus Christ his Sonne hath made for vs. Moreouer it is not possible to reiterate such a sacrifice and if it were yet this heere cannot be sufficient Heb. 9.22 25. for without shedding of blood euen vnto death there was neuer made any sinne-offering But there are diuers fractions interlarded vsually in this prayer Afterwards followeth the canon We communicating and honouring the memory first of the euer-glorious Virgin Mary mother of God of our Lord Iesus Christ and of the blessed Apostles Martyrs Peter Paul Andrew Iames Iohn Thomas Philip Bartholomew Mathew Simon Thaddeus Linus Cletus Clement Sixtus Cornelius Cyprian Laurentius Chrysogonus Iohn and Paul Cosma and Damian and all thy Saints for whose merits and prayers grant that in all things wee may be fortified by the aide of thy protection through the same Christ our Lord Amen Communicantes memomoriam venerantes imprimis gloriosae semper Virginis Mariae genitricis Dei Domini nostri Iesu Christi sed beatorum Apostolorum ac Martyrum Petri Pauli Andreae Iacobi Iohannis Thomae Philippi Bartholomaei Matheęi Simonis Thaddei Lini Cleti Clementis Sixti Cornelii Cypriani Laurentii Chrysogoni Iohannis Pauli Cosmae Damiani omnium sanctorum tuorū quorum meritis precihusque concedas vt in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum Amen Durand in rational l. 4. ad 3. part c. 38. Durand attributes this peece to Pope Syricius In the Primatiue Church mention was made of Saints simply for the reasons before mentioned but they were not therefore invocated saith Saint Augustine but were named to teach vs Aug. de ciu dei lib. 22 c. 10. Dionys hierarch c. 3. that they were not dead but translated vnto life For Dionysius saith in the place aboue quoted that they are not dead at all Now heere they goe much beyond the ancient limits for the Communion which ought to be celebrated in remembrance of Christ is now performed in remembrance of men such as it hath pleased the Pope to register as Cosma Damian Chrysogonus c. Secondly the Canon is false in all particular Masses for there the people communicate not at all and therefore they are excommunicated as often as they assist at such Masses following the doctrine of the Pope in the Canons Can. peracta de consecrat dist 2. Thirdly through whose vertue is it that the Priest implores the aide of God Is it not through the vertue of Cletus and Chrysogonus c. And how well agrees this with a canon following which beginneth Nobis quoque where he beseecheth God not to poyse at all their merites but to grant them his pardon where we may obserue that after they haue once stood vpon their merits in this canon they renounce them in a canon following see what strange contradictions be heere throughout Holding his hands extended ouer the oblations he saith We pray thee therefore thou being pacified that thou wouldest receiue this our oblation of seruitude of all thy family and that thou wouldest dispose our dayes in thy peace and deliuer vs from eternall damnation enrole vs amongst the flock of thine elect Heere hee ioynes his hands through Christ our Lord Amen Which oblation wee beseech thee O God in all things to make †blessed †ascribed †ratified †reasonable †and acceptable to the end that it may be made vnto vs the body and blood of thy most beloued Sonne our Lord Iesus Christ Hanc igitur oblationem seruitutis nostrae sed cunctae familiae tuae quaesumus domine vt placatus accipias diesque nostros in tua pace disponas atque ab aeterna damnatione nos eripias in electorum tuorum iubeas grege numerari per Christum Dominum nostrum Amen Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quasumus †benedictam †ascriptam †ratam †rationabilem †acceptabilemque facere digneris vt corpus sanguis fiat dilectissimi Filii tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi Heere the Priest playes the fencer and redoubles the battery for he makes fiue crosses the three first vpon the hoaste and the chalice the fourth vpon the hoaste alone and the fift vpon the chalice onely saying sanguis fiat if it bee not made before But heere you may note a notable forgery for the Priest pruneth Saint Ambrose words Ambr. lib. 4. de sacr c. 5. and insteed of saying after acceptable which oblation is the figure of the body and blood of our Lord he changeth and substituteth in their roome these words that it may be made vnto vs the body and blood of our Lord and from thence they take the foundation of transubstantiation to forge an idoll insteed of the Sacrament It followeth afterwards Who the day before hee suffered tooke bread into his holy venerable hands and lifting vp his eyes vnto Heauen to thee God his Almighty Father giuing thankes vnto thee he blessed it brake it and gaue it to his Disciples saying Take and eate you all of this for this is my body Qui pridie quam pateretur accepit panem in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas eleuatis oculis in coelum ad te Deum patrem suum omnipotentem tibi gratias agens benedixit fregit deditque discipulis suis dicens accipite manducate ex hoc omnes hoc enim est corpus meum Note that in saying he tooke bread he takes the hoaste with his fore finger and his thumbe and saying eleuatis he liftes vp his eyes and saying he blessed it he makes a signe of the crosse as if that had beene the forme of the benediction which our Sauiour vsed before his crosse was made Then saying hoc he holdes the hoaste with his two fore-fingers and his two thumbes and with one breath pronounceth these words distinctly attentiuely and with a low voyce Iustin Nou. 123. This is my body contrary to the vse of the Primatiue Church which raised her voyce in pronouncing these words Tertia cautela and that in the vulgar tongue And if the Priest stayes or makes a comma at any word the cautell saith that the consecration is to no purpose So that all lyes at the mercy of the Priest who speakes low and whom it much concernes according to that cautell that hee bee not pursye or short-winded That word being spoken the Priest falles vpon his knees adores the hoaste then lifts himselfe vp and holding the hoaste on high makes the people adore it then layes it vpon the corporall and adores againe and you are to remember that from this vntill he wash the foure
cannot be expressed in which regard one may say vnto them You know not that which you adore but wee know that which we worship euen Iesus which is God inuisible made man like vnto vs in all things sinne onely excepted Now this new adoration was instituted by Honorius the 3. about the yeare 1225 and the prayer vnto it is prescribed in the glosse Salue lux mundi c. God saue thee thou light of the world word of the Father true hoaste liuing flesh § Placeat tibi entire deity true man c. And although this adoration bee addressed directly to the hoaste yet the Priest knowes well that it is differing from Iesus Christ not onely in regard of the termes aboue mentioned to wit that he is called a pure Sacrament and a temporall gift but also in respect of the prayer which he makes Let the office of my seruitude please thee holy Trinity c. and grant that the sacrifice offered by me be agreeable vnto thee c through Iesus Christ Now I say that if this hoaste were Iesus Christ himselfe we ought not to say let Iesus be agreeable through Iesus for men imploy not the intercession of a thing to the thing it selfe Moreouer Iesus Christ was not Mediatour for himselfe to God for betweene the Persons of the Trinity there is no mediation but betweene the hoaste and him to whom it is offered a kinde of mediation is suggested for in the same moment the Priest throwes himselfe below the hoaste to adore it and aboue it intercedes for it to God that it may be acceptable vnto him so that he makes two Christs the one at the right hand of the Father inuocated and prayed vnto and the other in the hands of the Priest supplicating and attending to finde grace the one vnto whom the sacrifice is offered and the other which is sacrificed Whence appeares a manifest idolatry for there is but one onely adoration of the same essence which receiues neither more nor lesse neither differeth from it selfe either in substance or accident The next order of arguing against this pretended transubstantiation is taken from the analogy of the Sacraments which are visible signes and seales of the inuisible grace of God so that the signe is a thing differing in his owne nature from that which it signifies as the water in Baptisme which although it be a Sacrament of bloud yet is it not transubstantiated Can. quia passus in fine de consec dist 2. And the Popes themselues heerein agree with vs saying We are not to doubt that euery faithfull man is made partaker of the body and of the cup when hee is baptised although he dye before he receiue the Eucharist and marke the reason added thereunto because hee hath in himselfe that which this Sacrament signifies The same may bee saide of the Sacraments of the Passeouer the Rocke the Arke in which the Lambe was not changed into the Passeouer nor the Rocke into Christ nor the Arke into the Couenant notwithstanding they contayned the truth of that which they prefigured and they which were partakers of them did really enioy that which was represented by them Ibid. Omnis res in sese illarum rerum continet naturam veritatem ex quibus conficitur And this is the reason why the Canon hoc est shewes that euery Sacrament hath two parts and sets down this Maxime that euery thing containeth in it selfe the nature and the verity of those things whereof it is composed From whence it is easie to conclude that the Sacrament of the Eucharist being amongst other things composed of bread and wine the bread and the wine retaine the nature and verity of bread and wine And more plainely in the same canon is said that the bread is called a body Gl. verb. coelestis suo modo after its owne maner not in truth but in signifying it in a mystery And the reason why they continue in their proper nature is euident Nullum simile est idem for otherwise there would bee no resemblance betweene the thing signifying and the thing signified and we should with blasphemy say that as the accidents without the substance cannot nourish the body so likewise that which they prefigure can yeeld no nourishment to the soule Heare St Augustine If the Sacraments had no agreement with the things whereof they be Sacraments Aug. ep 23. they would be no more Sacraments because they would not signifie them at all Wherefore after the blessing Math. 26. 1. Cor. 11. euen our Sauiour himselfe called the Sacrament the fruit of the Vine and Saint Paul saith the bread which we breake c. Againe whosoeuer shall eate of this bread and drinke of this wine vnworthily c. hee saith not of his body Lastly our Sauiour hauing said that he would drinke of this fruite in the kingdome of his Father it is certaine Luke 24. that he meant not that hee would drinke himselfe after the resurrection but foretold onely the repast which after it he would take with his Disciples and though he spake there onely of eating yet drinking is well enough vnderstood for men vse not to eate without drinking Finally besides arguments drawne from reason certaine it is that by testimonies and inartificiall proofes it may bee verifyed that twelue hundred yeares after our Sauiour vntil Innocent the third the Church receiued not that transubstantiation which is set downe in the canon Ego Berengarius De consecr dist 2. â—an quia corpus gl can firmiter ardeum de suam Trinit in decretales Caâ— Vtrum sub figura v. Vorard veritatem egressus hyperbolica loquutus est Theod. 1. dial contra quosdam haeret tom 2. where Nicholas caused it to be said that not onely the Sacrament but also the true body and blood of our Lord is sensually handled and broken by the hands of the Priest and chewed with his teeth Which beleefe being ful of impiety the canons themselues doe derogate from it and the glosse of the canon Vtrum euen in the same title of consecration where the glosse saith that Berengarius lyed and spake by an hyperbole What credit shall we giue to these forgers of traditions let 's haue recourse vnto antiquity Our Sauiour hath changed the names in the Sacraments and hath giuen to his body the name of the signe and to the signe also hath he giuen the name of his body and in the same manner as he was called an hedge he called the wine his blood Afterwards he concludes So the visible signes are honoured with the name of body and bloud not in changing nature but in adding grace vnto nature And in the second Dialogue For euen after the benediction the mysticall Symboles leaue not their owne nature for they abide in their proper substance and visible forme and shape and to bee touched in such sort as they were before And Macarius Macar hom
had beene made to God it had beene good but the Priest applyes it to the bread and wine saying Per hoc sacrum and afterwards he adores it and his hands being joyn'd saith Let not Lord Iesus Christ the receiuing of thy body which I vnworthy doe presume to take iudge and condemne me but for thy piety let it be vnto mee a defence both of body and mind and also a medicine who liuest and raignest with God the Father Perceptio corporis tui Domine Iesu Christe quem ego indignus sumere praesumo non mihi perueniat in iudicium condemnationem sed pro tua pietate profit mihi ad tutamentum mentis corporis ad medelam percipiendam qui vivis regnas cum Deo Patre Wee haue shewed heere aboue that the body of Christ cannot be taken vnworthily though the bread may which representeth it but the Priest heere deceiues himselfe as hee doth in many other places concerning transubstantiation Afterwards he lifts vp himselfe againe I will take the heauenly bread and call vpon the Name of the Lord. Panem coelestem accipiam nomen Domini inuocabo He takes the two peeces of the hoaste which were vpon the plate betweene the thumbe and the forefinger of the leaft hand and in manner of a paite of pinsers takes with the same hand the plate betweene the fore-finger and the middle and beates his brest with the right hand saying thrice Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter vnder my roofe onely speake the word and my soule shall be healed Domine non sum dignus vt intres subiectum meum sed tantum dic verbum sanabitur anima mea Then he taketh the host and maketh a signe of the crosse vpon himselfe with his body aboue the plate and saith The body of our Lord Iesus Christ keepe my soule vnto eternall life Amen Corpus Domini nostri Iesu Christi custodiat animam meam in vitam aeternam Amen Then he takes the two peeces of the host either with his tongue vpon the plate or else makes the signe of the crosse with the plate That being done he ioynes his hands reposeth himselfe for a little time afterwards he vncovers the chalice adores it if any crumme remaine in the plate puts it into the cup and saith What shall I giue vnto the Lord for all the benefits which hee hath done vnto me Quid retribuam Domine pro omnibus quae retribuit mihi Then he takes the cup with both his hands and makes therewith a signe of the crosse vpon himselfe and saith I will receaue the cup of salvation and call vpon the name of the Lord. Praysing I will call vpon the Lord I shall be safe from mine enimies Calicem salutaris accipiam nomen Domini invocabo Laudans invocabo Dominum ab inimicis meis salvus ero This verse is taken out of the 116 Psalme in which David being deliuered from Saul promiseth to giue thanks vnto God and not to be any longer vngratefull but to sacrifice vnto him praise as it is in the Greeke θυσίαν αινÎσεος That which is contained in these verses is nothing to this purpose for David hauing beene deliuered saith not I will oblige my selfe once more vnto God in making me to bee deliuered the second time as the Priest doth for the Priest hauing taken the bread saith what requitance shall I make vnto the Lord for this present and answereth himselfe I will moreover take the wine and hauing dranke it by the same reason he ought once more to say what reward shall I giue and answer I will take the bread and so never make an end For at every receauing he ought to retribute But it hapneth vnto them which is written Let their table be made a snare and a net a stumbling blocke even for a recompence vnto them Consider without passion if al this be to any purpose or if the Priest haue quitted himselfe of his first receaving by the second then it followeth The bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ keepe my soule vnto eternall life Amen Sanguis Domini nostri Iesu Christi custodiat animam meaÌ„ in vitam aeternam Amen Saying this he taketh all the wine with the morsell steeped in it and then giues to those which are to communicate if it be a day that the people are to receaue on For you must note that the people doe not ordinarily receaue which is contrary to the institution and commandement of Christ And from this errour proceeded first the prohibition to touch the bread secondly to drinke at all and lastly neither to eat or drinke aboue once in the yeare and that by those which are priviledged What impudency is this to maintain that the primatiue Church communicated not vnder both kinds 〈◊〉 dâ— com 〈…〉 spâ—â—â—e and that the cup was denied vnto the people Heare the Doctors I doe not thinke saith Cassander that for a thousand yeares and more in any part of the Catholike Church this Sacrament was administred any other waies then vnder both kinds â—â—toâ— 3. lib 4. 〈◊〉 And Innocent The bloud is not drunk vnder the species of bread neither is the body eaten vnder the species of wine And Hales Aâ—â—x H tâ—â—s 4 seâ—â— q 53 mâ—â—th 1. Aâ—â—â— l. 4 〈◊〉 dâ—â— q 3. apud Cass All Christ is not contained vnder either kinde sacramentally much lesse essentially but the flesh onely vnder bread and the bloud only vnder wine And Albertus Magnus The vnitie of the mysticall body of Christ is not perfectly represented but vnder a double signe and therefore through the virtue of the Sacrament we ought to haue both the one and the other Amb. â—â—â—d Cor cap. 1â— And Ambrose He is vnworthy of the Lord which celebrateth this mystery otherwise then the Lord hath ordained And Pope Iulius saith Can. cum omne de consec dist 2. can compeâ—â—mus Serm. 44. p. 79. tom 1. that our Lord did severally recommend the taking of the bread and wine Also Pope Gelasius in another Canon saith that one may not abstaine from receauing the cup or divide this mystery without sacriledge And Leo in his sermons calls those which doe otherwise sacrilegious and on oynes to excommunicate them Why therefore doe they vse the Church worse at this day Greg 3. ep ad Bonif tom 2. conâ—il p. 441. Conâ— coâ—â—t 〈◊〉 13 toâ— â—2 then the leapers in times past were vsed for Boniface writes in these words If the leapers be faithfull Christians let them be admitted to the participation of the body and bloud of our Lord. But Pope Martin brought in the quite contrary as witnesseth Kalteysen Bishop of Midrosia against the Bohemians Can. Epis opus de consec dâ—â—t 1. haeâ— sup Can. enim archidiac Can. Episc 2. de paâ—attentis Can. peracta de consec diâ—t 2. Alex. v. 1. epist de mysterio corp sang Concil Const less 1â— tom 2 and