respecte of their nature and substance but onely touching the vse and signification and that only during the Action in which they serue For to consecrate the signes as the water in Baptisme and the breade and wine in the supper is no other thing than to assigne and make them serue to a holy and sacred vse by the publike declaration of the ordinance of God made to that ende and not to chaunge them touching their nature and substance the which vanishing and being made nothing there shoulde be no more signe nor by consequence any sacrament So that euen as the water in the Baptisme after the Consecration remaines water without that his nature or substance be in any thing chaunged or altered so the bread and wine in the supper touching their substance remaine after the consecration suche as they were afore for there should be no Analogie nor correspondencie betwéene the signe and the thing signified For what comparison conformitie is there betwene the accidents of the bread and the truthe of the body of Iesus Christe séeing that the accidents of the breade as the whitenesse and roundnesse destitute of their substance as the Sophisters doe falsly imagine coulde not nourishe or sustaine the bodie and by that meane should not be proper to signifie that the fleshe and bloude of Iesus Christe nourishe and sustaine oure soules So that we must hold this for resolute that the bread and wine remaine in their substance the same being clearely verified by Iesus Christe who speaking of that which he gaue to his Disciples to drinke in the Supper calles it specially the fruite of the Vine Which can not be referred to the accidentes but is necessarily to be vnderstanded of the wine in his proper substance As also by that which S. Paule saythe calling the Elementes of the Supper Breade and Wine thrée seuerall times yea after they were Consecrated Like as also he wrytes elsewher we that are many are one bread and one body bicause we participate all of one lofe wherein he teacheth vs there by his comparison of the lofe that euen as it is made of many graines so wrought and mingled togsther that they can not be distinguished or seperated one from an other euē so also ought the faithful in the Church to be so knit and vnited togither in one selfe body as they may séeme to be membres one of another This comparison wold be altogither foolishe out of purpose if the bread which we eate in the supper were not true bread Gelasius Bishop of Rome wryting against Eutichus saithe that the sacramente which we take is a thing Diuine and yet forbeares not to be a substance and nature of breade and wine Theodoret also in his first Dialogue vseth these propre termes the Lorde hath honored with the name of his bodie and of his bloud the visible signes which represente them without chaunging their nature but adding only grace to the nature The same Author in his second Dialogue speaking also of the breade and wine distributed in the supper saythe that after the sanctification these misticall signes forsake not their nature for they remaine in their proper substance kinde and figure by meane whereof they are seene and handled after the Consecration neither more or lesse then afore S. Iohn Chrysostome wryting to the Monke Cesarius saythe in the Supper we call breade that which is there present afore it be sanctified And after the sanctification by Gods grace and meane of the minister it hath no more the name of breade but of the body of our Lord yet the nature of bread remaines there By the places aforesaide as well of the holy scripture as Auncient Doctors and others which mighte be yet alleaged for this matter it appeares that the breade and wine in the supper remaine alwayes as hath bene said in their proper nature and substance after the Consecration as well as before wherein it néede not to be doubted that the Faith of the auncient Churche hath not alwayes bene so and that Transubstantitiaon was neither established nor holdē for an Article of Faithe in the Romishe Church vntil the time of Innocent the thirde To withstande and reiecte all that hathe bene sayde touching the nature and substance of the signes which remaine after the Consecration suche as be aduersaries to this Doctrine alleage ordinarily the woordes of Iesus Christe speaking of the breade in the institution of his supper take eate this is my bodie And staying vpon the proper and natural signification of the termes they defend obstinately that the substance of bread is vanished in the Consecration and that there remaines no other substance except that of the bodie of Iesus Christe The reason of this is that they obserue not the Figures and manner of spéeches which are ordinarily vsed in the holy Scripture when and as often as there is Question of the matter of the sacramentes For then the name of the things signified is ordinarily attributed to the signes which represent and signifie them as the name of the alliance is attributed to the Circumcision bicause it was assigned to signifie and ratifie it The Lambe by like reason is called the passage and Baptisme washing of regeneration and that not bicause they be things like to the signes and mysteries signified by them But for the conformitie that is betweene them The signes as S. Augustine him selfe dooth say take oftentymes the name of the things which they represent So that the error procéedes in that they take and vnderstand the manners of spéeches figured as if they were propre and naturall That this spéeche take and eate this my body is figuratiue it appeares by that which our Lord Iesus Christe addes after of the cuppe saying this cuppe is the newe Testament in my bloud which is shed for you Héere he calles the cuppe Testament and new aliance in his bloude wherin we must necessarily confesse that there is figure and that with oute it the saide place could not be wel vnderstand nor aptly interpreted For it is a thing manifest that an aliance which is a contrary couenant betwéene parties made and cōceiued vnder a certaine promisse and woorde is not the wine and yet it is so called by figure bicause the wine which is distributed in the supper is as the seale by the which the saide aliance is sealed and the faithe of the same confirmed By suche or like manner must we also vnderstand and expoūd this sentence this is my body the same being as much to say as this is the newe Testament in my bodie which is deliuered for you For as by the effusion of his blud the new Testament was ratified so was it also by the death of his body we néede not searche better interpretation of the words of Iesus Christe than Iesus Christe himselfe For it is certaine that that which he saide of the cuppe is as a glose and cleare and familiare exposition of that which he sayd of
appeares first by this that it belongs not to al persons to cōsecrate the bread and the wine in the supper but only to such as are lawfully ordained by the imposition of the handes of the Pastors and Bishoppes according to the succession since the Apostles till our time And it is moste certaine that the most parte of the ministers of the supposed reformed church are not ordained by the authoritie of the handes of the Pastors who haue power by succession of one to an other since the Apostles So that we must conclude that suche ministers vsurping the office that pertaines not to them can not make any consecration and by consequence they giue but common bread and wine of which Article shall be spoken when we handle the sacrifice and priesthoode Secondly to make consecration of bread and wine it suffiseth not that the person be fit to consecrate the matter but it is also necessary that by a certaine meane the lawfull minister make the consecration which is by Benediction and pronuntiation of certaine woordes vpon the matters proposed as Iesus Christe did firste obserue wherein bicause the ministers albeit they were lawfully ordained and had authoritie and power to consecrate do not vse Benediction and pronuntiation of certaine woordes vppon the Breade and Wine impugning first that which Iesus Christe did and after left it to the Apostles and their successoures to doe so they can not pretende any consecration of the Breade and Wine nor that in them doe come any mutation whereof it foloweth that as they differre not from other Breade and Wine so that banket and feast is but common and that it is blasphemie to attribute to it the name of Christian Supper And this is a partie cause why we said the ministers supper was a banket prophane and polluted We haue required the ministers to Aunswere pertinently and fully to our Demaundes which bicause they haue not done to the ende to intercept all vaine trauaile we thinke it not good for the present to impugne their Aunsweres only we summon them eftsoones to Aunswere that which is proponed to them without shifting of the conference which they pretend to holde in so deare regarde The first Demaund was general for all the Sacraments to wéete if the ministers beléeued that two things were essentiall and necessary to the confection of the Sacramente which are the matter or element and the woorde the Ministers Answere that the Sacrament considered in his perfection consists in thrée things c. they speake in determinately so that it can not be iudged if their spéeche vnderstand the Sacrament only which they call of the Supper or generally of all as they were asked albeit in respecte they alleage Ireneus it may be easily gessed that they meane not but the Sacrament of the Supper we haue also to note the woordes of their Addition considered in his perfection as alwayes to haue a hole to créepe out when we speake of the essence of the Sacrament We demaunde that they Answere to the Question proponed in general of all the Sacramentes séeing there is like reason touching the essence of the Sacraments in generall and that also they declare openly what things are essentiall and necessary in the Sacrament to be made a Sacramente without speaking for the present of the perfection of one Sacrament containing the essence and spirituall frutes which are not of the essence of the Sacrament Touching the seconde Demaund the Ministers Answere no more pertinently than to the firste And specially where we made a Demaunde that certaine woordes muste be vsed for the confection of the Sacramente and what was necessary for the Sacramente of the Supper the ministers haue sayde that the base and secrete speeche of certaine woordes addressed to the Elementes was not a necessary speeche to the confection of the sacrament We did not Demaund whether that spéeche should be pronounced high or lowe But the Question was if there be any necessary spéeches to make the sacrament which ought to be pronounced vpon the matter or in administring the matter and what might be those woordes for the supper wherin it is not inoughe to say that the word by the which the ordinance of Iesus Christ is declared is the woorde of the sacrament But they muste Answere in what woordes that speeche consistes and when it ought to be pronounced Touching the sixthe Demaunde which is the principall the ministers care not to Answere pertinently and clearely only they exhibite a captious Answer by which it can not be perceiued what is their opinion of the presence and participation of the body of Iesus Christe in the supper And so doe they temper their spéeche that there is neither Zuinglian nor Almanist which confesseth not as muche or more than they that is to say that they are conioyned to our Lord Iesus Christe and that they possesse him ii vertue of their Faithe and by the operation of the holy Ghoste as to be made fleshe of his fleshe and bones of his bones c. But it is farre from the question which was if in the sacrament of the supper the Faithfull receiue in their soules besides all the spirituall graces amongst the which is communication with our Lord Iesus Christe the true bodie and the true bloude of him Really truely and touching the substance And if in the supper the Ministers make not distinction of the substance contained and perceiued in the Sacrament from the frutes and effects which procéede therof And to be short we aske if the Ministers receiue and allowe that which Caluine in his Catechisme Institution other Bokes hathe written of the Supper and that whiche is receiued therein Touching the seuenth Demaund the Ministers haue not vnderstand what was proponed to them touching the concomitance for they haue taken it as if the Demaund ran whether it was lawful to receiue the sacrament vnder one kind or not which was not ment nor put in question onely this was the difficultie that was proponed to them whether in their supper when the bread is receiued and afore the wine be receiued they participate really with the true body of Iesus Christe and not participate with his bloud till they haue taken the wine or whether in eating the bread the bodie be receiued afore the cuppe be taken To which Demaundes to the ende Paper be not spente and moiled for nothing we admonishe the ministers to Answere without swaruing or varietie and yelde open Confession of their Faithe And that we may knowe what Doctrine we may impugne or approue Touching the Articles of the Masse we reserue them to their propre places which is of the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Iesus Christe after it be knowne and proued that they are present in the supper and holy sacrament Sunday the fourthe of August the yeare aforesaide An Answere of the Ministers to the vvryting of the Doctours sent vnto them by the Duke of Nyuernois the Wedensday morning the seuenth
the bread more briefly and darkely which is also proued by S. Paule The breade which we breake saithe he is not the Communion of the body of Christe which is a manner of figuratiue spéeche bicause that to speake and vnderstaÌ„d properly the bread which is a corporall and materiall thing is not the Communion which we haue in the body of Iesus Christe which is a thing spiritual and inuisible and yet it is so called as being a signe thereof to represent it to vs and assure vs of it euen as we call commonly the letter signed and sealed which containes the declaration of the last will of a man his Testament albeit it is not his testameÌ„t which is properly the declaration which he hath made verballie of his said will but it is so called bicause it is the instrument and testimonie thereof And euen as the Scripture and the Auncients as well to recommende and raise the dignitie of the signes and cutte of by that meane the mistaking of them as also for the conformitie and likenesse that is betwéene the signes the things signified haue attributed sometimes the names of the same things signified to the signes which they represent and speaking of the signes haue vsed figuratiue speeche So they haue spoken of them sundry other times properly to take away all occasion of abuse and preuent that in taking without distinction the signes of the thing signified by them there shuld be attributed to them the effectes which appertaine not but to the matters only which they signifie of these two sundry reasons and manner of spéeche there be examples as well in the scriptures as in the Auncient fathers Of the firste we haue an example in the Circumcision when it is called by figure aliance Gene. 17. vers 13. And of the seconde there is also an example in the same Chapter vers 11. where the Circumcision is properly called signe of the aliance in Exo. 12. ver 11. there is also an other example of the firste manner of figuratiue spéeche where the Lambe is called the Passeouer of the Lorde and touching the seconde man which is propre an example also in the same place vers 3. where the bloude of the Lambe is called a signe In like manner and order when is mention in the scripture of the supper the woordes run somtimes of the bread by figure as when it is called the bodye of Iesus Christe or the Communion of the body as hathe bene said before and sometimes also it is spoken of properly as when it is saide who so euer shall eate of this breade also euery one then proues himselfe and eates so of this breade Like diuersitie in bothe the manners of spéeche is founde oftentimes in the Auncient fathers touching the matter of the supper For sometimes they speake of the breade by figure calling it the body of Iesus Christe as S. Cyprian when he sayeth the body of the Lorde is taken with foule handes and his bloude dronke with a prophane and defiled mouthe and in an other place that we sucke his bloude and fasten oure tongs in the woundes of our Redéemer Likewise S. Ierome when he saithe that Exuperius Bishop of Tholoze caryed the bodie of our Lorde in a little pannier of Willowes and his bloude in a glasse S. Chrysostome also when he wrytes that Iesus suffreth himselfe not onely to be seene but also to be touched and eaten and that teethe are fixed in his fleshe and touched with tong Lastly S. Augustine With what care do we take heede when the bodie of Iesus Christe is administred to vs that nothing of the same fall from our handes to the earthe All which senteÌ„ces with their likes are figuratiue wherin is no doubt that in the right and directe interpretation of them ought not to be taught to the readers but that in them the name of the thing signified is applied to the signes which signifie it which may be easily gathered of other sentences and textes of the saide Auncients where speaking properly of the breade and wine which are distributed in the supper they cal them signes and figures As Tertullian Iesus Christ saith he tooke breade and distributed it to his Disciples and makes it his body when he saith this is my body which is to say a figure of my body And Cyprian by the wine shewes the bloude of Christe Also in a Sermone which he made of the supper of oure Lorde As often as we do this we whette not our teethe to bite but breake and distribute the holy breade in true Faithe by the which we distinguishe the matter diuine and humaine Also in a Sermon he made De Câ—â—â—â—â—le the Lord gaue with his proper handes bread and wine in the Table wherein he performed his laste repaste with his Disciples but on the Crosse he deliuered into the hands of the armed men his body to be wounded to the ende he might imprinâ—e so muche the more deepely the truthe into his disciples and they to declare to the people how the bread and wine were his body and bloud and howe the sacrament agréed with the thing for the which it was instituted and also howe one sacrament is made of two things and therefore is named with two names and one selfe name is giuen to that which signifieth and to that which is signified S. â—asile propones to vs figures and patrones of the sacred bodie and bloud of Iesus Christe And likewise S. Augustine the Lord had no horror to say this is my body when he gaue the signe of his body The Lord receiued Iudas to his supper wherin he recommended and gaue to his Disciples the figure of his bodie S. Ierome After he had eaten the Pascall Lambe with his disciples he tooke bread to strengthen the hart of man and past to the true sacrament of the passage to the end that as Aâ—lchisedech had done before in his figure he mighte also there represent his true bodie S. Ambrose this sacrifice is a figure of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christe Chrysostome he hath dressed this Table to the ende he may shew vs daily the breade and wine in mysterie and similitude of the body and bloude of Christ And it happeneth sometimes that a Doctor in this matter expoundes the other as may be perceiued in the conference of the two places the one of S. Augustine alreadie alleaged and the other of Tertullian in the Booke of the crowning of a Knighte where he sayth we hardly suffer that any thing of oure breade and wine fall on the earthe In place of that which S. Augustine to the same matter saythe as hathe bene recited heere before we take diligent heede that nothing of the body of oure Lorde fail on the earthe And euen as in diuers places the Auncientes as hathe bene declared haue vsed the two manners of speeche aforesaide speaking of the supper sometimes by figure somtimes simple and properly so it is oftentimes
1. Cor. Cap. 11. Whereunto howe so euer the Ministers Aunswere the Doctoures desire that the text of Caluine together with the reasons which he brings of the holy spirite may be well weighed and considered They Obiect further that the Ministers in their Supper attribute more to the humaine vertue than to the omnipotencie of God yea they doe more than God coulde doe as in that they vaunt to doe a thing by their Faith which implies contradiction saying in their Confession of Faithe exhibited at Poissi to the Bishoppes which were in the congregation that Faith makes things absent present at one instant in one place that is in the soules of the Faithfull when they make the supper the same being as much as if they had saide that faith makes things not present present in one time place so as to euery Faithful man in the Supper comming woorthily the Body of Iesus Christe is there present in vertue of Faith And yet is he not there present as themselues holde saying He is but in Heauen wherein maye be séene implication of contradiction that is presente and not presente Really neither can it serue to any purpose a little stippe or scape whiche they saide to vs that the body of Christe is on high corporally but in the hearts of the Faithfull in the supper spiritually For the spiritualitie can not take away the substance of the thing and their Faith can not bring to passe that a body is not a body and that a body hathe not his dimensions as they haue saide héere before Therefore in what sorte so euer they confesse that the Faithfull in the Supper receiue the substance of the body of Iesus Christe into their soules they muste necessarily and willingly confesse that either their Faithe is more mightie than the vertue and infinite power of God or else that God can bring to passe that his body shall be locally in Heauen and Sacramentally Really notwithstanding and substancially in the Sacrament of the Aultare in which pointe the Doctoures desire to heare the Ministers and after to sette downe their Aunswere by writing The Ministers can neuer shewe by the woorde of God that their Faithe can bring to passe that in one instant and in one place a thing shall be present and not present And it is as muche to say a thing present and not present by Faithe as to say the body of Iesus Christe is in a Faithfull man and is not Neither néede there to be put any chanell of the power of the holy Spirite to make the Fleshe of Iesus Christe slide from Heauen hither if the saide Fleshe were not but in Heauen and yet come to vs. And touching the poyntes which the Doctoures haue obiected that Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza were the first that saide that God could not bring to passe that one body might be in two places which newe Doctrine the Ministers would confirme by antiquitie we not name it otherwayes than blasphemie The Doctors say that many times they haue prayed the ministers not to lose time to the end things might be better cleared to say nothing that were not to purpose which notwithstanding they alleage forthwith the testimonies of the fathers to shew that a body by nature is circumscript naturally can not be in many places but the same authors speake nothing that God is able to do it And yet S. Augustine and others in their places recited by the Doctors touching the Article of the doores being shutte witnesse that by the power of God two bodies may occupie one place which containes the like difficultie and when it comes to the profe of the reall presence of the body and bloud of Christ they are to shew euidently that all the auncients wholly which haue spoken of the Sacrament haue not onely confessed hys abilitie to bring to passe that his body was on highe in heauen and héere belowe in the Sacrament but also they with one accorde haue aduouched to beléeue according to the woorde of Iesus Christe that he is in Heauen and heere in the Sacrament The Doctoures demaunde of the Ministers if any afore Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza haue denyed this power of God whome they maruell not if they so muche magnifie séeing of them they haue taken all the places alleaged For the Article that begins where the Doctours pretende that the forme c the Doctoures say this forme is common as often as the power of God is debated vppon neither can she proofe be better guided than to folowe the woorde of the Aungell that there is nothing impossible to God From which when any thing is exempted there is alleaged the selfe same that the Ministers inferre that there is a repugnancie of things wherof folowes an implication of contradiction as did the auncient Heretikes against the Fleshe of Iesus Christe alleaging alwayes some impossibilitie according to nature doing the like againste the Article of Resurrection and Incarnation as if there had bene contradiction that God was man man was God As shall be easie to a wicked mind to forge alwayes some contradiction in his spirite according to the propreties of nature for the Article beginning wher the Doctors alleage that God can change c The Doctoures say they haue not well conceiued their meaning For they take for a thing absurde that a substance resting affected of his qualities may by Gods power haue effectes contrary to his qualities As if God coulde not bring to passe by his omnipotencie that the fire possessing his natural heat in place to burne do refreshe and qualifie which no man of sounde iudgement and a Christian would not denie For the Article touching the limitation of the povver c the Doctoures say it séemes by the Aunswere of the Ministers that Gods power is limitted according to his will which is as muche to say as God can not but that which he willes which is manifestly false Touching the Hebrue alleaged it séemes the Ministers haue desire to shewe their skill therein For suche recitall is nothing to purpose resting principally vpon the woorde danar which is as muche to say as a thing but it meanes not that we oughte to vnderstand it as a thing done the sense of the place is suche by the woorde shall any thing be hid from me And bicause harde things be hid and things impossible also more hid they haue therefore turned is there any thing hard or impossible to me which Pagninus and other interpreters of the Hebrue tonge shew well that the verbe Pala signifieth to hide The Doctoures had not made Aunswere to this but to make it knowne that they are not astonied at one woorde of Hebrue For the Article beginning touching the daunger c the Doctours say they are but woordes superfluous and what so euer the Ministers were able to produce others mighte vse againste them And where they say it is a reproche in that they
are obiected to corrupte the scripture the Doctors say the the Ministers can not deny that they chaunge not the sense and glose the matter of the Supper this is my body this is my bloude By which and suche like Authorities vnder pretext of obscure reasons euery one may pretend to corrupte the other Scriptures and alleage certaine impossibilities of nature and contradictions For the Article beginning touching the opinion of the scripture that the body c the Doctors say that in time and place they will declare their Obiections and make a more large discourse of the Sacrament of the Altare Touching the Obiection of the Doctoures that the contrary parte doe not grounde their affirmation which is that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places vppon the expresse testimonie of the Scripture or that they can deduce it thereof the Ministers haue alleaged for all their places but that God can not lie God can not deny him selfe But the Doctoures say this consequence is nothing woorthe God can not lie God then can not bring to passe that one body be in two places which notwithstanding it had behoued the Ministers to haue made so if the places brought in had serued to the purpose like as also when it is saide that God can not lie as the Ministers haue recited to be able to lie is not power but infirmitie So that it behoued to say thus according to the true sense God is not infirme or weake as to be able to lie than God cannot bring to passe that one body be in two places which consequence woulde be ridiculare And where the Ministers haue broughte in certaine authorities of the Auncientes to proue that there is diuersitie betwéene the Creatures and the Creator and that the Creator by Nature is euery where and the Creatures are not in diuers places naturally The Doctoures receiue with reuerence the Authorities of the holy Fathers but there was no néede of their trauaile to produce the saide places for the confirmation of a thing so manifest and which was not in difficultie But the Doctors are yet to vnderstand one only place of the Scripture or one onely Testimonie of the Auncientes which sayeth that God coulde not bring to passe that one body were in diuers places The Doctoures desire the Ministers to receiue with like reuerence the Auncients specially touching the interpretation of the holy Scripture whose Exposition shall be the iudge betwéene them and the Ministers Vppon a request made to the Lorde of Neuers by the Ministers to assigne a day for Aunswere particularely to euery Article and reproche heaped before by the Doctoures in their Obiections The saide Lorde prouided that the Ministers shoulde take away with them at nighte one of the Copies of the Obiections to the ende to come readely prepared the next day by noone to Aunswere them whereunto the doctoures agréed who for their partes made like request for sufferaunce to Replie to the Ministers Aunsweres if they sawe it were so good with the which they will giue Resolution touching this Article of Gods omnipotencie to the ende to passe further and examine the Reall veritie of the bodie of Christe in the Sacramente of the Altare like as also the Ministers for their partes doe agrée to yelde a full Resolution to what so euer shall be deduced by them The morowe folowing being Wedensday the seuentens of Iulie the companie being assembled the Lorde of Neuers considering that the day afore the Doctoures had furnished all the time so that the Ministers had no oportunitie to aunswere presently thoughte there was no lesse leisure due to them to Aunswere and therefore with other necessary respectes which woulde haue bene a long and weary season he ordained from thence foorthe the conference to passe by wryting and that the Ministers shoulde bring againe the Copie that was giuen them to Aunswere and sende it vnto him signed by them and two Notaries whereof he woulde cause his secretorie to drawe oute an other copie to sende to the Doctoures reseruing with him selfe the Originall and in like case woulde sende the Ministers the copie of such as the Doctoures should send to him Wherunto the one and other parte submitted them selues and disputed afterwarde by wryting as foloweth The Aunswere of the Ministers to the Doctoures Obiections giuen vppon Tuesday the sixtienth of Julie THey denie that the Doctoures consequence is necessary which is God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places at one instant and that therfore God is not almightie bicause Gods omnipotencie ought not be measured but by the things only conformable to his will and do not derogate either his nature his wisedom his truth or the order he hath established in the world Whereunto that which the Doctoures preferre dothe directly resiste that one selfe body at one selfe instante may be in diuers places by which it should folowe that a body may be a body and not be limitted and so by consequence that he may be and may not be all together For the measures as to be long large and thicke and to be bounded and limitted within certaine endes are so essentiall to the bodie that withoute them he is no more a bodie in whiche spéeche the Ministers doe in nothing diminishe Goddes omnipotencie but of the contrarie establishe it not attributing to him any mutabilitie or chaunge in his Councell nor contradiction in his will for feare to make him lie a thing impossible to him by the Scripture And touching that which the Doctoures alleage of the ancientes that they haue not denied the almightinesse of God the Ministers haue declared héere before that they haue and in what cases it may happen yea Fertullian in his Booke which he wrote against Praxeas speaking of this matter vseth this spéeche Certainely nothing is hard to god But if withoute iudgement we vse this sentence and interprete it according to our fond fansie we may faine al things of God and say he hathe made them bicause he coulde make them wherin we must not beléeue that bicause he might and may do all things that therefore he hath made that which he hath not made but rather to enquire if he haue made it and so the conclusion folowes that the power of God is his wil and his not power likewise his not wil. It rested then to the doctors to shewe that God would make a body which in one instant should be in diuers places as to shew that he could do it And it is a maruellous matter that they impute againste the ministers to derogate the almightinesse of God as to except frō the same that which is contrary to his wil séeing they themselues confesse it and except the same things as standing betwéene them and the Doctors no other difference than that they say that God brings to passe that one body be in diuers places in one instante bicause he can doe it and the
thing which is séene Neither is it lesse harde that suche a thing be done than that two bodyes be penetrate We must not forgette that oftentimes the scripture in the appearings and spirituall visions vseth this language that the Heauens were open and yet in suche cases there was but spirituall vision and likewise but spirituall appearing And as the Ministers séeke to take the rigoure of the woorde opening of the Heauens euen so they must not note it straunge if we wrest in like rigoure the penetration of the Heauens specially in the Article of the Ascention where is Question of the body of Iesus Christe which had already pierced bodyes more impenetrable than the Heauen which pointe of penetration of the Heauen we referre to be more amplie handled an other time as nowe to auoide tediousnesse Touching the eight and twentieth Article where the ministers againste expresse scripture defend obstinately that God of his power can not bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eye of a néedle we can not a little maruell bothe at their blindnesse séeming to sée nothing in the midde day and at their frowarde obstinacie By which as we can not iudge that they vnderstand not wel their fault but sinne euen against their conscience oppugning the truthe by them well knowne so it séemes God suffereth this to happen to them in this text and place of the scripture so manifest to the ende that by this Article the world may vnderstande howe farre more hardie they are to giue false vnderstandings of scriptures more obscure than this yea in the matter of the Auncient Christians which are against them But to the ende the world vnderstand their great wrong to denie that our Lorde can bring to passe that a Camel or cable passe thorowe the hole of a néedle we obiecte that it were impossible to God to saue a riche man vsing this Argument taken of the texts of the Gospell it is more impossible or harde that God saue a riche man than to bring to passe that a Camel or cable passe thorow the hole of an Néedle God can not bring to passe of his omnipotencie as the Ministers say that a Camell enter the hole of a néedle then he can not of his almightinesse make that a riche man be saued and enter into the kingdome of Heauen The Maior is of the Scripture the Minor is confessed by the Ministers and the consequence is necessary and according to all Philosophie he that can not doe the moste easiest can not doe the moste hardest The Auncientes also haue expounded withoute gaine saying the present Scripture as Origen in his Homilie vppon this place saying it is possible that a Camell enter the eie of a néedle not for all that that it be possible as in respecte of men but to God like as the manner by which suche things may be done is knowne to God and his Sonne Iesus Christe and to him to whome it is reuealed S. Augustine likewise in his Booke de spiritu littera Cap. 1. and 5. writes in this sorte to Marcellinus it séemes to thée an absurde thing when I tell thée that a man may be withoute sinne albeit there is none suche founde except Iesus Christe thoughte it to seeme absurde to thée that a thyng may be done whereof no Example can be shewed séeing as I beléeue thou doubtest not at all that it was neuer done that a Camell entred the eye of a néedle and yet it is said that suche a thing is possible to God. By their Aunswere to the nine and twentie Article it may easily be knowne that they beguile and abuse their Disiples making them beléeue by faire woordes and writings that Really in the Supper they receiue the bodie of Iesus Christe euen he that issued out of the wombe of the virgine and was putte vppon the Crosse for the restauration of mankinde And they séeke to make to vnderstande that these which put not to the Sacrament which they call of the Supper wyth the Breade and Wine but some Spirituall effecte onely as redemption iustice sanctification eternall life and other giftes and benefites which Iesus Christe brings to hys chosen diminish the excellencie dignitie of the same Sacrament and that they be Zuinglians yea and that ouer and aboue suche spirituall effectes it muste be beléeued that the body of Iesus Christe is truely receiued in the Supper and yet they feede an other opinion in their braine For when they are pressed to Argue not being able to sustaine that fantasticall presence confessed in their writings they make themselues Zuinglians and returne to the spirituall presence of Iesus Christe in the Supper the same being as muche to say that bisides the Breade and Wine they receiue some spirituall effecte and not Really the body as the Ministers holde in the presente Aunswere which as they make manifest by that they recite of the Apostle S. Paule so by the same may be gathered what is their opinion touching the supper which is that the body of our Lord Iesus Christ is not Really but onely by spirituall effecte in the heartes of the Faithfull For the Galathians by the hearing of the preaching of S. Paule did not receiue Really the body of Iesus Christe crucified but onely had an imagination of the Crosse and Passion of Iesus Christe and receiued onely the frute of their Faithe That is by that meanes they were iustified and sanctified before God. The Allegation also which the Ministers make of S. Cyprian tendes to this ende to shewe that in the Supper is receiued onely certaine effectes spirituall which notwithstanding Allegorically are signified by these woordes to embrace the Crosse of Iesus Christe to sucke his bloude c. wherein they denie albeit againste the intente of S. Cyprian in his Sermon of the Supper the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christe The Doctoures confesse that the Argumente which they haue made tendes to the Caluinistes and not to the Zuinglians neither did they thinke that the ministers woulde otherwayes iudge of this Sacrament than Caluine Beza and the other ministers who vaunte them selues to be ministers of the churche of the Caluinistes which they call reformed But those which exhibited to the Bishops being at Poissi the Cōfession touching this Sacrament vsed an other maner of spéech They without difficultie confessed Really the Bodye of Iesus Christ to be present in the Supper which at this daie the Ministers denie with the Doctoures conferentes And as farre as the Doctoures can iudge the Ministers be come of Caluinistes Allemanistes which suche wil not wel disgest as mainteine the Doctrine of the Churche whiche they call Reformed séeing their principal supposts faile them at néed as vnable to aunswere one Argumente obiected by the Doctours as affirming in their aunswere to be so farre illumined with the Holy Sprite which makes them vnderstande and knowe al things Touching the Article folowing they reueale openly their present opinion touching
the greatnesse of our God to maintein his woorkes incredible by nature which are comprehended in his woord in our Faith and also to confute all suche as woulde deny any of them as impossible to be done by any manner what so euer And bicause Caluin and Beza with their Ministers raise them selues against the power and greatnesse of our Lorde and openly deny him to be able to commit the body bloude of Iesus Christ vnder the formes of Breade and Wine and bicause also that in the Religion pretended reformed to resist the efficacy of the woorde This is my Body this is my Bloude they teach not a more great reason nor more familiare to al those that are out of the way than the impossibilitie of God to be able to make a body to be in twoo or many places that is to say in the Sacrament and in Heauen wée obiecte with good righte to the Ministers that in their Doctrine they derogate the firste Article of Faithe which is of the Almightinesse of god And also we knowe that the anciente manner of the Christians disputing againste the aduersaries of Faith was oftentimes to beginne to aske whether that whereon they doubted were possible to God or not or whether onely he woulde not doo it in which sorte and order Tertullian and others propone the pointes wherein they enter into contention againste the Heretikes In like sort afore we passe further into the matter of the holy SacrameÌ„t we would in preamble wise fele of the Ministers whether they iudged it to be in Goddes power to make a body occupy many places or whether only he would not c. wherein wée are enforced to aduertise al Christians of one manner of dealing common to al the Ministers of the pretended reformed Religion which is when they are asked if God can establish the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament or not they aunswere that there is no question of the power of God but of his Will onely And when wée produce matter which declares the will of God then of the contrary they deny that his wil is suche bicause it is impossible to him Alleaging here their contradictions according to the nature of the body And bicause they thinke this to be impossible in action they depraue and interprete the woorde of the Supper otherwayes than either it beares or is written Here is also to be noted that wherin an Almaine called Heshusius reprocheth Caluin that he his felowe Ministers are goodly noble amplifiers of the power of God but when it comes to the déede and pushe as the saying runnes they neither giue or graunte him any more than they thinke méete to introduce their errours and fansies resembling as the saide Almaine compares them a good Traitor who most dooth cherishe and magnifie a man when he is most ready to betray him as Iudas did our Lorde wherin wée are constrained to say of the Ministers touching Goddes Almightinesse as Tertullian saith of the Heretikes Credendo non credunt which is in beleuing the Omnipotencie they beleue it not for when they haue saide that there muste be no exception they hold againe an other way that it must not stretch to euery thing that mannes sprite can conceiue and so they will not apply it but to what they thinke good couering themselues with the nature wisedome eternal wil of God which are no lesse vnknowne and incomprehensible to them than his Omnipotencie in which respecte wee aduise euery one not to be abused with the speach of Caluin nor his ministers but to consider the woorkes which they deny to be in the power of god Wée haue produced to them these foure questions Whether God may make a body to be in twoo places and of the contrary twoo bodyes in one place Whether he can lodge one body in one space lesse than his greatnesse and whether he can make it inuisible which haue bene specially culled and chosen for that vpon them are founded the principal arguments of the pretended reformed Religion againste the true presence of the Bodye and Bloude of Iesus Christ in the Holy Sacrament Wée beleue simply as al other things that the foure questions are possible to God and haue proued it by the infinitie of his power both by the scriptures who giue vnto him al vertue ouer creatures without any exception and also by Examples and straunge myracles don vpon bodyes against their natures which are writteÌ„ as Tertullian holdeth in his Booke of the Resurrection to the ende wée beleue that our God is more mighty than al Lawe and nature of al bodyes whereunto he addes that such knowe God very euill who thinke that he hath not in his power things which thei cannot comprehende in their fansie From whence it comes as S. Cyril saith that such wicked sprites reiecte and condemne al things as impossible bicause they vnderstand them not Besides wée thinke wée haue sufficiently shewed no lesse by expresse scripture than by the Exposition of the same taken of the Ancient Christians that it was not only in Gods power to make twoo bodyes to be in one place and one body without place equall to his greatenesse but also that he had already truely done it in the byrth of the body of our Lorde Iesus Christe in the Resurrection of the same â—â—is entry throughe the doores shutte and in his Ascension aboue al the Heauens like as also wee haue deduced that there was equall and like repugnancy in those deedes as in the other of one body in twoo places whiche by the scripture is no more excepted from the power nor will of God than the others as to iudge it impossible to be done neither hath there bene any Christian afore our time which durst affirme the same to be impossible and out of the power of God notwithstanding the occasion was often offered if they had any waye estéemed it impossible as the Ministers of the supposed refourmed Religion pretende Of the contrary the most parte of the auncient Authours of the Primitiue Churche haue holden expressely that it was in Goddes power to bestowe a creature in many places according to S. Ieromes opinion againste the Heretike Vigilantius that the soules of the Sainctes maye assiste in many places with the immaculate Lambe our Sauiour Iesus Christe Yea there was question Whether the saide soules and sprites of the Holy ones did assiste at any time the Churches where their Graues and Monumentes were the same resembling with S. Augustine in his Booke whiche he wrote of the care to be had of the Dead Chapter 16. wher he saithe that by the power of theire nature the soules cannot be here belowe and in Heauen or in many places but that the same may be done by the power of God and he will not resolue whether they vnderstande our affayres by suche assistaunce in many places or by reuelation of the Aungels or other meane of the power and grace of God. Morouer it is
most certaine that the Auncient Fathers of the Churche in the matter of the Holy Sacramente haue acknowledged mainteined that the Body of Iesus Christe by Omnipotencie was in many places as S. Ambrose vpon the tenth of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and S. Chrysostome in his seuententh Homilie vpon the same Epistle where they both almoste in one phrase and woordes write that albeit in many places there be many actions and oblations of the Body of Iesus Christe yet hauing regard to the thing which is offered that is to the true Lambe and body of Iesus Christe that Sacrifice offered in many places is but one bicause it is but one selfe thing the true Lambe and true body of Iesus Christe which is but one and remaines whole in all places where he is offered And they adde further that the Oblation of the same in diuers places is not an iteratioÌ„ of the sacrifice of the Crosse but in commendation of the same so that in the sacrifice of the Masse they acknowledge and distinguishe twoo pointes the one concerning the Realty of the thing that is offered which they saie is the true Lambe and true Body of Iesus Christ who as then remaining one and in his entyer is notwithstanding in many places And the other concernes the action of suche a thing by the Prieste whiche is no iteration nor like action or oblation to that of the Crosse but diuers in commemoratioÌ„ notwithstanding of that which was made on the Crosse S. Chrysostome in his thirde Booke of Priestehoode cryes out and saith Oh myracle and power of God He that uts on the Right hande of the Father aboue is holden betwene the handes of euery one in this sacrament S. Augustine vpon the 33. Psalme declares that the body of Iesus Christ in the supper was in two places that is in his visible place amongeste his Apostles and yet betweene his proper handes in suche sorte as he carried him selfe But afore he concluded vpon this S. Augustine debates with him selfe howe it was possible that a person shoulde beare his Body betwéene his handes And after he hath examined it to be impossible to Dauid and al other creatures he discends at last to the Diuine power which was in Iesus Christe by the whiche to him alone amongest other men that myracle was possible But leasâ—e wée depraud or wrest the intent of S. Augustine bicause he was carried in a certaine maner as though that diminished the truth let vs consider that the end meaning of S. Augustine is to shewe that Iesus by his Omnipotencie carried himselfe which was impossible to any Creature But if he had only carried in the Supper betweene his handes the Figure Sacrament and Signe of his Body and not the Reall Truthe he had done no more than the leaste man mighte haue done séeing euery one maye beare the Figure Image Signe or Sacrament of his body betwéene his handes or fastened as a Brooche to his Cappe without myracle or power supernaturall so that the certaine manner which S. Augustine vseth diminisheth nothing of the Truth which is that he was visible betweene his hands and in one manner supernatural albeit Real and true S. Basil with others in his Liturgie auowes the body of Iesus Christ to be in Heauen and yet present in the Sacrament by Omnipotencie And yet the Ministers are grounded principally vppon the saide S. Basil to proue the impossibilitie that one bodye or an other creature maye be in many places But he protestes expressely in the very place alleaged by the Ministers not to speake but according to the natural propertie And in his Liturgy he declares that it is not only in Gods power to bring to passe that the body of Iesus Christe be in Heauen and in the Aultare but also that it be truely done so To end this question of one body in many places we say that it is not only in the power of God but also we must beleue that it is so done in the Sacrament to the ende God be not founde a lyer or a deceiuer in his woord by which Iesus affirmed to his Apostles that that whiche he gaue with his handes was his true Body deliuered for vs Which Argumente Tertullian makes in his Booke of the Resurrection after he had disputed against suche as denied it to be possible to God wherin it séemes that they saide as the Ministers said firste there was something impossible to God by Scripture whiche is that he could not lye nor deceiue of which they tooke occasion to passe further and dispute that the Resurrection was also impossible to him like as also the Ministers of the point that could not lie haue labored to inferre that to put one body in two places was impossible to him as well as to lie and deceiue in the ende Tertullian accordes with the Martianistes that he had rather confesse that God could not deceiue and that he is only weake and impotent in deceit to the ende that thereby it might be séene that he hath not otherwayes taughte or spoken nor otherwayes disposed the facte than is contained in his woorde Then if he can not as Tertullian concludes deceiue and abuse we must beléeue the resurrection as his word beares it and not otherwayes to the ende there be no deceit in the sayd woorde and in God Euen so we say and willingly confesse that God can not lie nor deceiue in regarde wherof we must beléeue that he hath so willed and ordained the truthe of the supper as the woord pronounceth and not otherwayes And if it be so that the woord beare Verbatim and expressely that he affirmes that that which he gaue with his handes to his Apostles to eate was his body deliuered for vs we must theÌ„ beléeue that his word speakes not otherwayes then his wil is least he be estéemed a lier And that as he hathe saide this is my Body this is my bloud that truely it is so which God willing we meane to handle in the next conference for declaration that not onely he might establishe his body in the holy Sacrament but also that he would and did so Articles proponed by the Doctors for the next conference and others folowing according to the order of the said Articles ALbeit according to the order of the conference touching the Créede of the Apostles we ought secondly to entreate of an other Article like as euen the ministers themselues in the first dayes of conference did not only consent but made request offering the Articles of their Confession Imprinted vnder Date .1564 to be examined by vs from the firste to the last yet we séeing it can not be much from the matter after we haue handled the omnipotencie of God which stretches so farre as to make him able to bring to passe that the bodie of Iesus Christ be in heauen and in the sacrament continuing stil this matter to enter into the profe of his wil are content to shew that not
only he could do it but also he would do it and so consequently are determined to refute all the blasphemies heresies of the supposed reformed side which are contained in the supper to the ende also we be not thought to eschue the combate of the supper the Masse as the ministers haue reproched to vs protesting notwithstanding to kéepe in meaning that after we haue concluded resolued vpon this matter to returne to the examination of the moÌ„strous errors of the ministers which containe great numbers against the other Articles of the Créede which the ministers feare by all likelihoode in that they are not willing we pursue the order begon as foreseeing that in the next conference we wold open vnto them an other blasphemie maintained by the reformed church against the bountie of God according to Caluines doctrine which is that God works in the reprobate the euill sinne which they coÌ„mit which is an execrable atheisme no lesse than the denial of gods omnipoteÌ„cie and in like sort as such as shal read these coÌ„ferences if they continue to the end discussing of the ministers errors their religion against al the articles of the Créede shall maruel to vnderstand the absurdities blasphemies discending from them so yet there is an other point the drawes the ministers to demaund the disputation of the supper which is that they haue al their matter redily prepared by many of their sect which haue written therof as especially they will not want the great Booke of Peter Martir by which they are furnished with sundrie infamous obiections certaine texts of the Ancients either cut of depraued or euil applied to impugne in shew the truth of the body in the sacrament but to the defense of all their other errors they are very slenderly prouided wherin their coÌ„science is a sufficient witnesse that by the scripture iudgmeÌ„t of general councels coÌ„mon consent of the authorities of the ancients they are coÌ„uinced condeÌ„ned of their errors against the said Créede But to enter into the supper of the ministers we say it is a prophane eating drinking not differing from the coÌ„mon eating drinking sauing that it is so much the worse as they abuse the holy institution of the supper of Iesus and pollute and defile such their banket withal impietie blasphemie we maintaine also that they do great wrong to the sacrament of Iesus Christe to attribute falsly to suche their banker so prophane and defiled the name of sacrament And to the ende to proue it more cleare we aske them if they receiue a common doctrine allowed not only in the catholike church but also of all the sects which are separated froÌ„ it the same is that in the confection of sacramentes there be two things essentiall and necessary the matter or the element and the woorde Secondly what word is necessary with the element to coÌ„stitute a sacrament namely that which they cal the sacrament of the supper and whether they must vse certain woords or not Thirdly if the woorde haue any vertue or efficacie in this sacrament and what And if it worke any thing in the matter of bread and wine Fourthly whether by the same woord the consecration be made of the matter of the sacrament or not In the fifth place if by the woord there be not made consecration of the matter that is howe the same consecration is made and by what vertue the sacrament is made For the sixth if bisides the bread wine and the spirituall graces benefites of Iesus Christ is receiued in the supper really the true body bloud of Iesus Christe in his propre substance not only in spirituall effect vpon this Article we require of the ministers an open confession of faithe We ask further if in receiuing the bread afore they take the wine they receiue by the eating of the bred the body bluâ— of Iesus Christ or only the body to beâ—â—â—rt if they admit that which the diuines cal a concomitance of the body bloud of Iesus Christ We aske also if the supper bisides the assurance it giues them of participation in the flesh of Iesus Christ in their redemption do woorke in them reâ—ission of sinne We aske lastly if by the supper there is receiued any thing which can not be receiued oute of the Supper or if withoute taking of breade to goe to the Supper or to assist it may be receiued as muche of the body and graces of Iesus Christ as if they did assist the supper We will debate afterwards the other Articles contained in the laste pamphelet of the ministers bicause the former demaundes are to be first examined as grounds of the other Articles proponed by the ministers For the rest after the supper of the ministers is confuted and the Real presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the sacrament confirmed we will procéede by order and withoute confusion to teache clearely by the pure and moste expresse woorde of God that the Masse was instituted said by Iesus Christe and that also he commaunded his Apostles to say it which they did according to the ordinaunce of their Maister That the Masse is a true sacrifice of the Euangelical law That suche as reiecte the Masse and admit no outwarde sacrifice in the Church nor priesthoode are without true law and without true Religion and therefore worse than Idolatrers That the Masse is of value to obtaine remission of sinnes fauoure and grace of God and that it is of value bothe for the quicke and the dead That it is no abuse in the Church if the Priest communicate alone in the Masse when the assistantes will not communicate with him That suche commit horrible blasphemie which call the woorshipping of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament the worshipping of breade and wine and falsly doe they call such veneration of the body of Iesus Christ idolatrie To be short there is nothing in the masse as it is celebrated in the Church at this day which is not good and holy in it selfe and conformable to the woorde of God. We require the ministers to Aunswere to the demaunds héere before written pertinently clearly and by order Sunday .28 of Iulie the years aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the vvryting of the Doctors sent to them by the Duke of Nyuernois the .28 of Julie .1566 about .7 of the clocke in the Euening THe Doctors in the beginning of their writing reproche vs as that in our complainte against them we imitate the Donatistes wherin they iustifie oure former iudgement and opinion of them that the moste parte of their wrytings swarmed more with matters of repeticion iniuries scoffes and inuectiues than with argumentes and good reasons like as also the example of the Donatistes becomes them farre better than vs bicause the Donatistes soughte to restraine the name of the Churche who comprehendes vniuersally all the chosen and Faithfull that eyther
his iustice life and other fruites of his sacrifice but also they receiue and possesse euen himself and are made one with him no lesse truely and stricktly then the members be conioyned to one head we say further that this coniunction is the fountaine and meane of all the benefites which discende vnto vs by him through Goddes grace But we say with all that this receiuing oughte to be attributed in all and by all to the free woorking of the holy Ghoste who makes vs fitte and capable to knowe our Lord Iesus Christe with all his vertues and propreties and in knowing him to put oure truste in him and in reapposing our truste in him to possesse and enioy him wholly To Aunswere the .vij. question we say that we reiecte and reproue the terme of concomitance togither with the thing it signifieth as being the occasion that the common people haue bene barde and secluded from one of the essential partes of the sacramēt which is the participation of the cup and we say it is an attempt against the diuine maiestie to seeke to seperate that which the sonne of God hathe conioyned denie to any of his membres that which he hath willed and commaūded to be common to all Like as also the reason of the sacrament requires it the same being instituted for our spirituall nouriture the which as doth the corporal consists in eating and drinking To the end therfore that there be a certain correspondencie betwéene bothe it must be that as we are filled with the crucified flesh of Iesus Christ that euen so also we be licoured with his bloud shed for the remission of sinnes To be short seeing the supper was principally instituted to declare the deathe of our Lord that in his death his bloude was deuided from his body it is very conuenient the bread wine be there administred to represent both the one and other more clearly to propound to vs the whole misterie of the death of Christ To the .viij. Question we acknowledge no other cause or meane for remission of sinnes than the grace of God the bloud of Iesus Christ faith by the which the effect of gods grace the frute of the death of Iesus Christ are applied vnto vs. Our Aunswer to the .ix. question is that the faithful comming to the Supper come not to receiue there a newe Iesus Christ with whom they haue not bene conioyned before nether a new iustice which hath not bene cōmunicate to them But we say that if any man present him self there without faith by want wherof he was not vnited incorpored knit in Iesus Christe to participate with his iustice his life other his gifts and blessings in this case the holy supper is vnprofitable to him as meat to a dead man But if liuing by the meanes aforesaid by gods grace the bloud of Iesus Christ and faith he present himself there in such estate that then gods graces are multiplied cōfirmed and increased in him more more as the Circumcision brought not to Abraham a new iustice but sealed and ratified that which had bene communicate to him before by the promisse the which being knowne to the faithfull in what degrée of vertue so euer they be ought not to mistake the holy supper nor in any sorte abstaine from it when they haue the occasion and meanes to assist it considering that they cānot be so farre aduaunced in the knowledge and feare of God and in the faithe of his promisses but that they may further profite and encrease therin in what estate so euer they be by the meanes which God hath lefte and ordained for this effecte in his Churche neither is it possible that a man hauing a true faith in his heart do otherwayes hauing the commoditie of it Bicause the nature of faithe is not to comprehend only the promisses of God but also to engender and bring foorthe in the hearts of the Faithfull a wil to obey him with obseruation of his commaundements and ordinances To Aunswere the first Articles proponed by the Doctors touching their Masse we say they blaspheme openly Iesus Christe as to authorise vnder his name and by his example such an abhomination and that also they make a scoffe of the church and the world to preach and wryte such impieties To the second Article of the Masse we Aunswere that there is no other sacrifice in the church by which men are reconciled to God and which makes him mercifull and fauourable to them in appeasing his wrath than only that which Iesus Christe hathe once offred to his father vppon the crosse the vertue of the which being eternal to sāctifie all the beleeuing and obtaine remission of their sinnes for euer there is no néede of any others nor that that which he hath once offered be euer repeated For Answer to the third Article we say that suche as approue the Masse and other sacrificature than that of Iesus Christ and seeke to establish for remission of sinnes an other Sacrifice than that which he himselfe offered in his bodie of the Crosse are Antichristes and deface in so muche as in them is all the vertue and frute of the deathe and sacrifice of the Sonne of God. To Aunswere the fourthe we alleage that which S. Paule wryteth that where is remission there is no more Oblation for the sinne And if it be so that by the death of Iesus Christ remission hathe bene obtained for vs it foloweth that there is no more Oblation for sinne neither in the Masse nor oute of the Masse And if there be none for the liuing there is lesse for them that be dead For Aunswere to the fifthe we maintaine that the Communion is of the essence of the supper according to S. Paule in the first to the Corinthians Chap. 10. and .11 and as the Canon and other partes of the Masse importes For Aunswere to the sixthe we alleage thrée things First that the Masse of the Papists is no Sacrament and then that the bodie of Iesus Christe is not there and conclude thereupon that there can not be worshipped therein but the breade and wine which rest there which being creatures can not be woorshipped but that suche as doe woorship them are Idolatrers To Aunswere the seuenth and last Article we say contrary to the Doctors that there is nothing in the Masse which either directly or indirectly is not contrary to Gods woorde And for Conclusion we aduise and praie the Doctoures not to excéede or forsake the limites of the matter proponed this day to dispute vpon as they haue done héeretofore to the ende that these two pointes which stande at this day in debate betwéene them may be perfectly and wholly decided to the contentment and edifying of suche as shal read the Actes of this conference Tuesday the .30 of Iulie the yeare aforesaid A summary Replie of the Doctours against the laste Aunswere of the Ministers sente to them by the Duke Nyuernois the