yee First it is well knowne that S. Peter was a contemner of the pompe and pride of the world and a disregarder of the wealth riches thereof insomuch that hee said to one that asked almes of him that he had neither silver nor gold but the Pope of Rome is not so but contrariwise hath the pompe pride glorie and riches of the world in verie high and chiefe esteeme and aboundeth with them Againe Peter was subiect to Emperors Kings and Princes and taught all Christians to be likewise subiect to them but the Pope is so far from being subiect to them that contrariwise hee claimeth soveraignetie and supremacie over them all and taketh upon him to depose Kings Princes and Emperors at his pleasure and to disannull and dissolve the allegeance of subiects when and as often as he listeth Peter would not allow Cornelius though but a Captaine of the Italian band to fall downe at his feete but bad him arise but the Pope of Rome doth well allow not only Captaines but Kings Princes and Emperors to fall downe and kisse his feet Yea hee hath not beene ashamed with his feete to tread upon the necke of some of the Emperors Peter was a godly earnest and diligent Preacher of the Gospel in his owne person according to that commandement of Christ so often repeated saying unto him Pasce Pasce Pasce feed my lambes feed my sheepe feed my sheepe But the Pope of Rome like an idle pompous and slothfull man in his owne person seldome or never Preacheth Peter was content and well endured to be reproved at the hands of S. Paul when there was cause He also patiently suffered himselfe to be accused and contended against by certaine Christians and mildely and modestly answered to those their exceptions against him for their satisfaction But the Pope of Rome though he be never so worthie of reproofe will neverthelesse not suffer himselfe to be reproved nor accused or contended against nor will have his doings examined questioned censured or iudged by anie men such is his unmeasurable pride and unmatchable loftinesse Againe S. Peter did acknowledge S. Paul S. Matthew S. Andrew S. Iames and the rest of the twelve to be Apostles aswell as himselfe albeit they had no ordination or calling to that their Office of Apostleship from him for that they all had an immediate calling to that their Apostleship from Christ Iesus himselfe and not from Peter is a thing undeniably manifest But the Pope contrariwise acknowledgeth none to be a Bishop except he be ordeyned and made a Bishop by him or by his authoritie Moreover they were accounted and held to be Presbyters and Ministers of the Church which were made and ordeyned by other Apostles though they were not made or ordeined by Peter nor by anie authoritie derived from him But the Pope of Rome acknowledgeth none to be Presbyters or Ministers of the Church which be made by other Bishops except they be made and ordeined by him or by authoritie originally derived from him Yea S. Peter did acknowledge the rest of the Apostles to be his fellowes or Equals as well knowing that Christ Iesus himselfe did directly forbid them to beare Princely authoritie one over another insomuch that Peter aswell as Iohn was content to bee sent by the rest of the Apostles into Samaria and did goe thither at their sending But the Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth not other Bishops to be his fellowes or Equalls nor will be content to be sent as their Messenger to anie place but most proudly challengeth a Princely Primacie and king-like superioritie over them all If the Pope will needes be Peters successor it were reason and a thing equall and iust that he should claime no more authoritie over other Bishops then Peter had over the rest of the Apostles yea if hee will make Peter his patterne and president to follow as it were a happie thing for him if he were in verie deed so wel affected he must then utterly give over his triple Crowne and all his Papal worldly pompe and pride and be cleane reformed and become altogether another man in all respects wherein he is so exceedingly degenerated and unlike unto him And then together with the relinquishing of his most proud Popedome he must also forsake renounce and detest his Poperie and Popish Religion for S. Peter cleerely was such a one as we call a Protestant that is to say one that both held and taught that Religion that wee hold namely that which is conteined in the Booke of GOD the sacred and canonicall Scriptures Yea S. Peter died a Martyr for the testimonie of this faith and religion and the Pope of Rome is contrariwise a persecutor of those that professe this faith and religion For that the Papists be the cleere and undoubted persecutors of the Saints and Martyrs of Iesus is afterward manifested by a direct and most evident testimonie thereof in the Revelation of S. Iohn to the end ye should not hereafter bee mistaken in that point as usually yee be nor deceive your selves anie longer therein Furthermore S. Peter was content and held it honour enough to be a member of the bodie of Christ which is his Church acknowledging with S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles that Christ onely was and is the head therof But the Pope of Rome is not content unlesse he intrude himselfe into this his verie royal prerogative taking upon him to be the verie head of the whole militant church We know that the Church of Christ is but one body as the Scripture speaketh and witnesseth though there be manie members of it and one bodie is to have but one head why then or by what right or reason doe they make this bodie of Christ which is his Church to have two heads namely one in heaven which is Christ Iesus another on earth which they say is the Pope They confesse that of the Church in heaven which is to us invisible Christ is indeed the head but of the visible Church on earth the Pope say they is the head and that such a visible head for the visible church is requisite and necessarie And here they have a distinction that Christ is indeed Caput vitale the vital head from whence all his members have and derive their life but that the Pope is Caput ministeriale visibile the ministeriall and visible head And thus they boldly speake frame and devise matters and distinctions according to the fancie of their owne braines But first what Patent conveyance warrant or commission from God can the Pope of Rome shew whereby he is thus authorized to be either Christ his special or onely Vicar Deputie or Lievetenant over his whole universall church here upon earth or to be this speciall and onely visible and ministeriall head Iust none at all doe they or can they shew for it And is it
not then a shame for him if he had any shame in him thus to intrude himselfe into such an high and soveraigne Authoritie without anie commission or warrant from Christ the King of his church Besides themselves acknowledge and that rightly that the companie of the glorious and invisible Saints in heaven and the companie also of the visible Saints on earth do all make but one church and one Bodie to Christ Iesus though their states be differing that is to say though the one sort be triumphant and the other militant Inasmuch then as they all make but one church one bodie unto Christ Iesus how can it be shifted or avoided but that Christ Iesus must be the head aswell of the saints on earth as of the saints in heaven aswell of the visible militant company as of the invisible triumphant Yea Bellarmine himselfe will not allow anie Christian to bee tearmed or called a member of the Pope How then can the Pope rightly be the head of the church for if all true Christians vpon earth bee and be to be termed the members of Christ and not of the Pope it must be granted that not the Pope but Christ onely is their head for the head and the members be relatives And whereas in this matter they talke of a ministeriall head which is not vitall it is also but a phantasticall and vaine distinction For there can be no head in true and proper appellation to this one bodie of Christ which is his Church but that which is vitall The Pope as appeareth even by this their owne distinction is but a dead head and hath no life in him to give to anie of the members of Christ or wherby vertue grouth nourishment or increase may distil or be derived from him as from the head to anie of the members What then should the bodie of Christ doe with such a livelesse and dead head or what good profit or benefite can anie reape or receive from thence A dead bodie is fittest for such a dead head but the living and mysticall bodie of Christ hath and requireth another manner of head namely that which is vitall which is Christ Iesus onely of whose fulnesse they have all received as S. Iohn speaketh Neither is there anie such necessitie as they also vainely fancie for the visible and militant Church to have such a visible head for albeit Christ Iesus be absent from his church militant here upon earth in respect of his bodily presence which he hath carried with him into heaven yet in his Deitie and by the power of his spirit is he alwaies present with the same his church For so himselfe witnesseth saying I am with you alwayes unto the end of the world And therefore alwaies doth S. Iohn testifie that notwithstanding the manhood and bodily presence of Christ be in heaven and there remaining yet neverthelesse by his almightie power and spirit he walketh and is in the midst of the seven golden Candlestickes that is In the midst of the seven Churches for so the text it selfe expoundeth the Candlestickes saying thus The seven Candlestickes be the seven Churches Vnder the name of which seven churches be also all other churches upon earth shadowed out unto us as Augustine Primasius Haymo Beda Thomas Aquinas and others affirme Seeing then that Christ Iesus notwithstanding his bodily presence remaining in heaven is neverthelesse by his almightie power and spirit present with all the true Christian churches in the world and walketh in the midst of them to guide governe comfort teach order rule susteine uphold and direct them and give all gifts and graces requisite It is manifest that he is sufficiently present with them in the church militant to doe all the offices of an head unto them so that they need not in anie sort the Pope to become an head unto them for anie of those uses or ends Yea is it not a verie great absurditie for anie to suppose or imagine that the Pope or anie one man mortall whosoever being on earth can better rule order guide and governe the whole militant church then Christ Iesus himselfe can doe being in heaven by his wisdome almightinesse and power of his Spirit But yet further when Christ in his manhood was to ascend up into heaven he promised neither the Pope nor anie one Bishop over all the rest to be his Vicar on earth or to supplie his roome and absence but the holy Ghost onely For thus he saith I tell you the truth It is expedient for you that I goe away for if I goe not away that Comforter will not come unto you And this comforter is the Holy Ghost the spirit of truth as is there expresly affirmed And againe he saith that After his departure they shall have another Comforter that shall abide with them for ever even the spirit of Truth vvhom the vvorld cannot receive because it seeth him not neither knoweth him Doe not these texts verie plainely shew that the holy Ghost is and is to be accounted Christs Vicar upon earth ever since his departure into heaven that is to say is in his stead and place unto the militant Church and to abide with it for ever And therefore doth Tertullian say accordingly that Christus misit Vicariam vim spiritus sancti qui credentes agat Christ sent the power of the holy Ghost to be his Vicar or in his steed to leade and direct the beleevers Howbeit if some Bishop will needes be so intituled namely Christs Vicar as being an Ambassador for Christ and in Christs steade yet let him then know that he is not so alone but that all godly and faithfull Bishops and Ministers be so likewise For which cause it is that the ancient Fathers doe call them all alike Vicarios Christi the Vicars of Christ But S. Paul yet further sheweth that not Christ himselfe tooke upon him this honour to be head of the church without his fathers appointment and constitution If therefore the Pope will take it upon him it is good reason he should likewise shew where God hath so constituted and appointed him which he is not able to doe Yea S. Paul sheweth againe That onely he is head of the Church vvhich is farre above all principalitie and povver and dominion and might and every name that is named not onely in this vvorld but in the vvorld to come And therefore this is such a high peerelesse and supereminent an honour and prerogative as that it is proper to Christ Iesus onely and not communicable to anie creature Lastly you may perceive by S. Paul that Christ is so the head of the Church as the husband is the head of his wife And is there anie honest wife that will bee content to have two heads that is two husbands though for distinction sake you should terme the one a ministeriall head or howsoever else you would please to call him 6 Now touching Miracles
and Canons of the Church by this haughty name to make himselfe his forerunner that is the forerunner of the King of Pride namely of Antichrist And he further addeth that hereby Iohn went about to attribute to himselfe those things which properly belong to the head himselfe that is to Christ and by the usurpation of this Pompous Title to bring under his subiection all the members of Christ. And therefore hee saith They must beware that this Tentation of Satan prevaile not over them either to give or to take this title of universall Bishop Gregory the great was likewise verie vehement and earnest against it By this Arrogancy and Pride saith he what else is portended but that the time of Antichrist is now at hand in that he imitateth him who making light of that happinesse which he possessed in common with the whole army of Angels would needs aspire to a singularitie above all the rest Againe hee saith All those that have read the Gospel know well vvhat the Lord said unto Peter c howbeit he is not called the universall Apostle and yet behold my fellow Priest Iohn seeketh to be called the universall Bishop I am now forced to cry out O the times and ô the maners of men Europe is now exposed for a prey to the Barbarians and yet the Priests vvho should lye along in the dust upon the Pavement vveeping and rowling themselves in ashes seeke after names of vanity and boast themselves of their new found prophane Tiâ—les And againe he saith VVhat vvilt thou answer unto Christ vvho is the true head of the universall Church in that day of Iudgement seeing that by this name of universall Bishop thou seekest to bring under all the members of his body unto thy selfe whom dost thou imitate herein save onely him vvho in contempt of those legions of Angels vvhich vvere his fellowes sought to mount aloft to the Top of Singularity vvhere he might be subiect to none and all others subiect unto him Againe he saith The king of Pride is at hand and vvhich I dread to speake an army of Priests standeth ready to receive him For they that vvere appointed to chalke out the vvay of meekenesse and of humblenesse doe now become souldiers unto that neâ—ke of Pride vvhich lifteth it sâ—lfe up And againe he saith Not to speake of the vvrong vvhich he hereby doth unto other Bishops If there be one called universall Bishop then must the universall Church goe to the ground if he vvhich is universall happen to fall but never may such foolery befall us never may this vveakenesse come unto my eares And againe he saiâ—h I speake â—t confidently that vvhosoever calleth himselfe or desâ—reth to be called universall Priest is in that his elation of minde the forerunner of Antichrist And a great deale more doth he write to this effect against it But notwithstanding that both these Bishops of Rome were herein thus earnest and vehement yet neverthelesse after the death of this Gregory the great Sabinianus succeeded who was Bishop but for a verie little space then came in Boniface the third to be Pope of Rome who obteyned of Phocas the Emperor who was a Traytor and murtherer of his predecessor and liege Lord the Emperor Mauritius that new and proud title of universal Bishop or headship over the whole Church For so also testifieth Paulus Diaconus Abbas Vspergensis Platina Otho Frisingensis Marianus Scotus Sabellicus Blondus and other Historians So that this appeareth to be then and in those times a verie new device and a new matter not heard of before in the Church and consequently could not be a declaration of a thing ever before acknowledged as Bellarmine would most strangely perswade Howbeit he alledgeth that before that time Iustinian called the Church of Rome the head of all the Churches And this is true but in that sense in which he called also that other namely the Church of Constantinople by the same name saying likewise that Constantinople is the head of all other Churches both which he so calleth in respect they were Patriarchall Sees and consequently everie of them Head of all the other Churches that were under them in those their severall Patriarchships But saith Bellarmine the Patriarch and Bishop of Rome was called Vniversall or Oecumenicall Bishop before Phocas his time whereunto is answered that so were also the other Patriarchs as well as he for so did Iustinian call Epiphanius the Bishop of Constantinople sometimes oecumenicall and sometimes which is all one universall Patriarch So doth he also call Anthemius and Menna in his Novels And the Councell of Calcedon likewise in sundry places calleth Menna oecumenicall Patriarch And so were other of the Patriarchs also called in respect of the generall charge which iointly together they had over all the Churches and in respect also of all those particular Churches which were severally belonging to each of them in right of those their severall Patriarchships Wherefore the taking of this Title from the rest of the Patriarches within their severall Patriarchships and the peculiarizing and appropriating of it to one Bishop or Patriarch alone as namely to the Bishop of Rome thereby to give him the headship and supremacie over all the Bishops in the world doth still appeare to be not untill this time of that abhominable Traytor and murtherer Phocas who bestowed it upon him about the yeare of our Lord 606. Such a wicked Founder and Author of it hath the Popes Ecclesiasticall Supremacy which as it had his originall from a Traytor so is it still continued upheld and maintained if ye well observe it by Treason and Rebellion But to make this yet more manifest ye may remember that the Christian Churches were in ancient times divided amongst foure or five Patriarches as of Rome Constantinople Alexandria Antioch and Hierusalem who in those ancient times were all of equall authoritie amongst themselves and had everie one their severall bounds limits beyond which they might not goe This is evident even by divers generall Councels and first by the first generall Councell of Nice holden anno 325. wherein were 318. Bishops The words of that Councell Can. 6. be these Let the ancient customes continue in force that are in Egypt Libia and Pentapolis That the Bishop of Alexandria have the governement of all these for as much as the Bishop of Rome also hath the like custome And so likewise throughout Antioch and in other Provinces let the Churches have their Prerogatives upholden by them Where we see that the severall Patriarches and by name the Bishop of Alexandria and the Bishop of Rome had their limits and bounds set them which they might not exceed for the ancient rights and customes touching the bounds limits of Alexandria be there confirmed because the Bishop of Rome who was another of the Patriarches had the like custome as touching bounds and limits set and appointed to him within his
and consequently this Apostacie and prohibition of Meates and Marriage in hycrisie that is under colour and pretence of sanctitie pietie and religion when revera there appeareth to be no sanctitie pietie or good religion in them being to fall out and to be accomplished neither in the primitive first or elder times nor yet in the last times but in the latter times as it were betweene them both doth for that reason also more aptly and fitly agree to these latter Hereticks the Papists then to those old and ancient Heretickes before mentioned And therefore it still appeareth by this Text and Prophecie of S. Paul to Timothy that the Church of Rome is the undoubtedly Apostaticall and Antichristian Church and consequently that the Pope the head thereof is the undoubted grand Antichrist CHAP. V. Answering certaine Objections of the Adversaries concerning Antichrist OBIECTION I. THE Bodies of the two witnesses that were slaine did lie in the streets of the great Citie which spiritually is called Sodome and Egypt where also our Lord was crucified Rev. 11.8 Ansvver By the great Citie there is meant not Hierusalem as you suppose but Rome otherwise called Babylon which throughout the whole Booke of the Revelation is called the great Citie as namely Rev. 14.8 Rev. 16.19 Rev. 18.10.16.18 19.21 and Rev. 17.18 c. except onely once that this Title is given to Hierusalem but then also not to the earthly but to the new and heavenly Ierusalem which will advantage your cause nothing at all Rev. 21.10 Neither indeed was our Lord crucified within the Citie of Hierusalem but without Heb. 13.12 Now Rome is said to bee the City where our Lord was crucified both because by Authoritie of that City it was that Christ himselfe was put to death for hee suffered under Pontius Pilate the Romane Emperors Deputie and also because there and from thence it is that hee still suffereth and is persecuted in his Members For the persecution done to anie of his members is by him accounted as done to himselfe Act. 9.4 And therfore also be those two Martyres or witnesses of Christs Truth said to be slaine and to have their bodies lye in the streets of the great City that is within the compasse and precincts of Romes authoritie and dominion Againe that great Citie Rome is there called Sodome for her pride and monstrous vncleannes and Egypt for her Idolatrie and crueltie towards Gods people and Babylon for her so long and miserable deteyning them in spiritual captivitie S. Hierome also herein is directly against you who Ep. 17. ad Marcellam earnestly contradicteth your opinion contending and maintaining that it cannot bee meant of Hierusalem in Iewry It therefore still remaineth firme that not Hierusalem but Rome is the Seat of Antichrist Obiect 2. I am come saith Christ to the Iewes in my fathers nume and yee receive mee not If an other come in his ovvne name him yee vvill receive Ioh. 5.43 Ans. This Text also maketh nothing for you For you expound it as if Christ had spoken definitely of one singular man to bee Antichrist whom the Iewes should receive whereas Christ speaketh indefinitely of any False-teacher whosoever that should come in his owne name that is not sent of God And sure it is that the Iewes have received more then one of such as have come in their owne name as namely Theudas Iudas Galilaeus Barcocabas c. In the text it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indefinitely and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 definitely as it is used in Ioh. 18.16 and Ioh. 20.2 3 4 And therfore also doth Nonnus in his paraphrase upon this place expound those words thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if anie other come whosoever hee bee c. Yea the very words of Christ bee directly Hypothetical or conditional If another come and not Categorical or affirmative of Antichrist or of anie other in particular as ye conceive and mistake And further whereas Christ speaketh of those Iewes that were then and there present to heare those his words you understand him to speake of such Iewes as should bee by your opinion a little before the end of the world at which time it is and not before that you suppose Antichrist shall come Howbeit the purpose of Christ in that place is not to foretell what manner of people the Iewes should bee so long after namely toward the end of the world but how in respect of their present disposition they were then at that time affected namely that him that came in his fathers name that is that was sent from God they refused and yet if anie should come in his owne name that is not sent of God him they were readie to receive But lastly why should you thinke that the Iewes before the end of the world shall receive Antichrist for their Messias when as S. Paul contrariwise hath foretold and assured us that the Iewes before the end of the world shall bee converted to Christ and his religion Yea it is before verie evident that Antichrist shall not bee a Iewe nor an observer of the Iewish religion but a pretended Christian and such a one as shall sit in the Temple of God and bee the head of the Apostacie apostated and revolted Christians of which sort and number the Infidels and unbeleeving Iewes cannot be For how can they bee said to bee Apostataes or to make anie apostacy or departure from Christ who never formerly embraced him nor received the profession of him Obiect 3 Christ is one certaine and singular man therefore Antichrist must bee so also Ans. It followeth not yea howsoever there is but one true Christ yet are there many Antichrists as S. Iohn expreslie affirmeth 1. Iob. 2.18 and many false Christs and false Prophets as Christ himselfe declareth which shal Shew great signes and wonders insomuch that if it were possible they should deceive the very elect Mat. 24.24 And yet also since the time that the Pope got the headship and Soveraignetie of Rome is Antichrist one as the Pope of Rome is one that is not in number and nature as one certaine and singular man but one at once by law and institution though successively so manie as since that time have enioyed the same Popedome Obiect 4. Hee is Antichrist which denieth the Father and the Sonne 1. Ioh. 2.22 Ans. The Pope and Popish Church also denie the Father and the Sonne in such sort as belongeth to Antichrist and Antichristian people to doe that is to say not openlie and professedly but in a covert and disguised manner For VVhosoever denyeth the Sonne the same hath not the Father saith the same S. Iohn 1. Io◠2.23 The like testifieth Christ Iesus himselfe in Iob. 5.23 So that to denie the Sonne is to denie the Father also inasmuch as the one cannot be denied without denial of the other And that the Pope and Papacie do denie the Sonne namely Christ Iesus viz. in respect of his Person and in
assurance of salvation or in the doctrine of redemption or in any point of the religion of the Protestants but the cleane contrary pag. 99 100 c pag. 153 154. c. pag. 125 c pag. 404 c Lay persons may and ought to reade the Scriptures and thereby to examine and try the doctrines of men vvhether they be right or no pag. 73 74 75 76. c. See also the Preface It is impossible for meere men by and in their owne persons perfectly to fulfill the Law of the ten Commandements and so to be iustified yea the Law vvas given to other uses and ends pag. 108 c No such place as Limbus Patrum pag. 130 131 132 M MIracles signes or vvonders done in the antichristian Church pag. 98 99 pag 306 307 pag 280 281 Mens Merits deserve not salvation but damnation p. 110 111 112 113 c. pag 366 367 N THe Name of Christians the most ancient and the most honourable See the Preface toward the end The Name of Catholicks to vvhom it rightly and properly belongeth pag. 63 64 O THe Oath of Supremacie to the King explaned and declared to be iust and lawfull pag 1 2 3 4 c. to the end of that chapter P THe Pope got his supremacie over Emperors and Kings partly by fraude and partly by force pag. 27 28 The Ecclesiasticall supremacie vvhen it vvas first affected by a Bishop vvas oppugned even by some of the B. of Rome themselves p. 13 14 15. Divers generall Councils also against it p 16 17 The Popes Supremacie vvhat a vvicked founder it had and how vvickedly it is still maintayned and upheld pag. 12 Three Texts of Scripture usually alledged for maintenance of the Popes supremacie abused answered p. 11 12 p. 291 292 c Excommunication and the power of the Kâ—yes abused by the Pope for establishing maintenance of his supremacie p. 299 300 301 Divers vvritings forged under the names of Clemens Anacletus Evaristus and other ancients for the upholding of the Popes new Supremacie pag. 12 The Donation of Constantine also forged for that purpose ibid. Miracles signes or wonders also done for that end p. 341 342 c Poperie is a corruption of the most ancient and Christian Religion and is to the Church as an infection or disease is to the body of a man or as a plague or pestilence is to a Citie pag. 38 Pope and Poperie exclaymed against long before Luther or Calvin vvere borne pag. 42 43 44 45 46 c The Popes excommunications and curses to be contemned pag. 44 45 299 Popes of Rome have erred and may erre even in matter of faith and iudicially pag 51 52 53 54. See the Preface also No such place as Popish Purgatorie pag. 125 126 c. to the end of that chapter That there is a Predestination is confessed both by Protestants and Papists the doctrine vvhereof being rightly understood is verie sweet and comfortable and is so farre from introducing any inconvenience licentiousnesse or impiety as that it inferreth the cleane contrary pag. 153 154 155 156 157 158 Predestination dependeth not upon the vvill of men but upon the vvill of God pag. 178.179 180 c Vocation iustification sanctification and all saving graces be consequents and effects of Election or Predestination to life everlasting pag. 154 c pag. 198 c Predestination dependeth upon Gods foreknowledge and vvhat that foreknowledge is pag. 194 195 196 c Faith foreseene and good vvorkes foreseene be not the cause of Predestination but the effect and a consequent thereunto ibid. The doctrine of Predestination teacheth no dissolutenâ—sse or carelesnesse but the cleane contrary pag 154 155 c. p. 199 200 c Predestination teacheth no man utterly to despaire though he be exceedingly vvicked and impious for the present inasmuch as there is a possibilitie to be converted so long as life lasteth as likewise it teacheth no man rashly or unadvisedly to presume p. 157 158 198 200 c The Popish Masse and Popish Priesthood thereto belonging both abominable pag. 217 218 219 c VVhat maner of Primacie it vvas that Peter had amongst the Apostles pag. 295 296 c Popish Priests be not the Ministers of Christ but of Antichrist and therefore to resort to them as if they had commission or authoritie from Christ to give absolution or forgivenesse of sins is vvicked and in vaine pag. 302. c. Q ALl Questions and controversies concerning faith and religion to be decided and determined by the sacred and canonicall Scriptures pag. 49 50 c. See also the Preface throughout R THat there is a Reprobation aswell as an Election and vvhat it is pag. 165 c Reprobation and Election both at one time and the cause vvhy this man in particular vvus chosen and that man refused is Gods own meere will and pleasure pag. 196 197 198 None can certainly determine of himselfe before-hand that hee is a reprobate though he be for the present exceedingly vvicked and ungodly because God may possibly call and convert him before hee dye p. 157.158 p 199 200 Rome apparantly proved to be the vvhore of Babylon p. 246 o. Bellarmine himselfe other Papists confesse Rome to be the whore of Babylon pag. 247 The evasion they make that onely heathen Rome is there intended is shewed to be very vaine and false pag. 247 248 249 c Some special spiritual whoredomes that is Idolatries of the Romish Church pâ—g 258 259 260 c VVho is the Rock and foundation vvhereupon the Church is builded pag. 292 293. c. S THe Spirit that speaketh in the sacred Scriptures is not a private or humane spirit but a divine spirit even the Spirit of God And by this Spirit speaking in those Scriptures is every spiriâ— speaking in men to be tryed pag. 53 54 Exposition of one place of Scripture must be such as agreeth vvith the rest of the Scriptures pag. 58 59 A rule to kâ—ow vvhen a man speaketh by a private Spirit of his owne and vvhen not pag. 53.54 The true Church to be tried and knowne by the sacred and canonical Scriptures pag. 59 60 61 62 Some bookes held by the Papists to be canonicall Scriptures which the ancient Church held not to be so pag. 65 66 The publicke prayers and Service in the Church should be in such a tongue as the people might understand pag 67 The originals of the Scripture incorrupt and to be preferred before that vvhich is called S Hieromes Translation and all other Translations vvhatsoever pag. 67 68 69.70 The English Translation of the Scripture is rightly iustified against the uniust exceptions of Papists pag. 71 Not any humane learning or private spirit of any man but God only and his Spirit is the opener and unfolder of the true sense of the divine Scriptures pag. 73 74 Lay people may and ought to reade the Scriptures pag. 73 74 75 76 77. See also the Preface That there be
Priests Teachers and Leaders unlesse they be sure that they direct and teach aright for there be false Teachers as well as true Teachers and some that be blinde leaders of the blinde who cannot therein excuse the People because They both as Christ himselfe affirmeth in that case doe fall into the Ditch Neither is it a sure or sufficient ground for anie of them to build upon to say that their Religion of Popery is of a great long continuance in the world For Paganisme and Mahometisme have beene likewise of verie great and long continuance in the world and yet are they never the truer for all that A Custome therefore or Prescription or Continuance though it be for manie hundreth yeares in the world nor anie Antiquity ye can alledge though you could alledge it never so truely is not sufficient in this case unlesse it be the most ancient antiquitie extant in the daies of the Apostles and from their times deduced and in the sacred and Canonical Scriptures to be seene and there approved For there is an Antiquitie in Error and wickednesse as well as in Pietie and right Religion and a Mysterie of Iniquitie as well as a Mysterie of Godlinesse and an Antichristianisme as well as a Christianisme and a growth succession and proceeding in them both they both growing together as Wheate and Tares doe in a field untill they be separated Which Mystery of Iniquity otherwise called Antichristianisme that yee may know of what Antiquitie it is S. Paul telleth you that it began to work in the Apostles daies even in his time And so also doth S. Iohn expresly testifie although it then climbed not to that great growth and height that afterward by little and little and by degrees it ascended unto So that Mysticall Iniquity or which is all one Antichristian Errors and heresies began as you see verie early and went on forward endevoring to corrupt and infect Gods Church and his Religion and in continuance of time so encreased and prevailed as that at last like a Leprosie it overspread the whole Body miserably defiling polluting and deforming it and that for sundrie Ages even untill the time appointed of God came wherein Antichrist and that mysterie of Iniquitie were to be discovered and that the Church and Religion thereupon were to be reformed by the Booke of the Holy Scriptures opened and the true doctrine thereout once againe preached and delivered to the world which was not to come to passe untill the Sixt Angell had begun to blow his Trumpet as is shewed in the Revelation of S. Iohn that is not till toward the latter end of the world For under the blowing of the Trumpet by the seventh Angell the world is to end as appeareth in the same Revelation Now then what cause hath anie knowing and considering these Prophesies in the Booke of God concerning the state of the Church to marvaile or wonder that the Church and religion had such corruptions and so manie errors by degrees accrued unto it and continued so long in them or where our Church and Religion was all that while For this Prophecy and foretelling of these things thus to come to passe namely that the Church was to have these corruptions to grow upon it and to be continued therein for so long a time and that it was not to begin to be reformed or purged of them untill the blowing of the Trumpet by the sixt Angell giveth a full answer solution and satisfaction to all those demands and requireth everie one to cease questioning marvailing or wondering anie longer in that behalfe Would anie then know where our Church was all that while and untill they made an actuall separation from the Popish Assemblies The answer is verie easie and apparant namely that it was where those corruptions were and even where the Papacy and Antichristianisme was For Gods people doe sometimes dwell and be even where Sathans Throne is yea Antichrist himselfe being at length mounted aloft and placed in his Throne did then as was foretold he should doe sit in the Temple of God domineering over it So that Protestancie and Poperie that is true Christianitie and Antichristianisme were then mingled together with much griefe and sorrow to the true Christians untill they afterwards through the crueltie and persecution of their enemies and in detestation of their abhominations were forced to make and did make an actuall separation from them Which thing also was foretold that so it should come to passe for a voice sounding from heaven commanded them to Come from them to a more pure and heavenly-minded Church and to Goe out from amongst them lest being partakers of their sinnes they should also receive of their plagues When they were thus commanded to depart and to separate themselves and to goe out from amongst them it is evident that before and untill this their departure and going out from them they were amongst them and intermingled with them Yea even in those times namely under the blowing of the Trumpet by the sixt Angell when the Temple came to be measured it is apparant that the false Christians there noted under the name of Gentiles were the most and greatest number and did tread the rest that were the true Christians under foot so that even then as there appeareth there were some that were right and true worshippers of God in that Temple Yea euen during the time that they were thus intermingled together did God neverthelesse distinguish put a difference betweene them for he would have one part namely Atrium that is The Court or outer part under which those false Christians that is the Antichristian people are comprehended which outwardly pretended to worship God aright and yet were not the right and true worshippers of him indeed to be excluded and not to be measured or reckoned as anie part of the holy Citie or holy Temple that is of the true Christian Church Which I here observe the rather because some upon this That Antichrist was to sit in the Temple of God verie inconsequently and no lesse untruely inferre that therefore the Popish or Antichristian Church or people be the true Church For you see them here directly excluded from being anie part of the holy Citie or true Church Albeit therefore both Protestants and Papists were in those times thus intermingled together yet was not the Papacie the true Church as is here apparant For indeed Poperie to the Church is but as a corruption contagion or disease is to the bodie of a man or as a plague or pestilence is to a Citie and therefore they that made a separation from Poperie separated themselves not from the Church of God but from the disease corruption and contagion of the Church and from the plague and pestilence in that Citie and consequently cannot but most uniustly be termed Schismatickes especially considering that they also made this their separation by the warrant
Relatum where it is said Non enim sensum extrinsecus alienum extraneum debetis quaerere Sed ex ipsis Scripturis sensum capere veritatis oportet For yee ought not to seeke for a strange and forraine sence from vvithout but out of the verie Scriptures themselves yee must take the sence of the truth So that although the Church of Christ and the Bishops Pastors and Ministers therein be to expound the Scriptures yet wee see by what rule they are to be directed namely by the Scriptures themselves and not to expound it at randome or as they list If they wil have their expositions to be right and sound and such as shall be deemed to come from the holy Ghost 3 Yea the verie Church it selfe is also thus to be tried and decided namely by the Scriptures For so S. Augustine holdeth directly saying thus Let us not heare I say and thou sayest but let us heare Thus saith the Lord. There are verily the Lords bookes to the authoritie vvhereof vvee both consent vvee both beleeve vvee both serve There let us search the Church there let us discusse our cause And againe he saith That all that should be remooved vvhatsoever is alleaged on eyther side against other saving that vvhich commeth out of the Canonicall Scriptures And againe he saith Let them shevv their Church if they can not in the sayings and fame of the Affricanes nor in the determinations of their Bishops nor in any mans reasonings nor in false signes and vvonders for against all these vvee be vvarned and armed by Gods VVord but in the things appointed in the Lavv spoken before by the Prophets in the Songs of the Psalmes in the voyce of the Shepheard himselfe and in the preachings and painefulnesse of the Evangelists that is in the authoritie of the bookes Canonicall And a little after he saith againe thus To that eternall salvation commeth no man but he that hath the head Christ and no man can have the head Christ vvhich is not in his bodie the Church vvhich Church as also the head it selfe vvee must knovv by the Canonicall Scriptures and not seeke it in divers rumors and opinions of men nor in facts reports and visions c. Let all this sort of them be chaffe and not give sentence before hand against the vvheat that they bee the Church But this point viz. vvhether they be the Church or no Let them shevv no other vvay but by the Cononicall boâ—kes of the holy Scriptures For neither doe vvee say that men ought to beleeve vs because vvee are in the Catholike Church of Christ or because Optatus Bishop of Millevet or Ambrose Bishop of Millain or innumerable other Bishops of our Communion doe allâ—w this doctrine that vvee hold or becaâ—se in Churches of our Companions it is preached or because that through the vvhole world in those holy places vvhere our Congregations resorted so manie wonders either of hearings or of healing be done vvhatsoever such things be done in the Catholicke Church the Church is not thâ—refore proved Catholicke because these things bee done in it The Lord Iesus himselfe vvhen he vvas risen from death and offered his ovvne bodie to be seene vvith the eies and handled vvith the hands of his Apostles least they should for all that thinke themselves to bee deceaved hee rather iudged that they ought to bee established by the testimonie of the lavv Prophets and Psalmes shevving those things to be fulfilled in him that were there spoken so long before of him And hereupon a little after he saith againe These are the doctrines these are the stayes of our cause vvee read in the Acts of the Apostles of some faithfull men that they searched the Scriptures vvhether the things vvere so or no vvhich they had heard preached vvhat scriptures I pray did they search but the Canonicall of the Lavv and of the Prophets To these are ioyned the Gospels the Epistles of the Apostles the Acts of the Apostles The Revelation of S. Iohn Search all these bring forth some plaine thing out of them vvhereby you may declare that the Church hath remained onely in Affricke So farre Augustine Chrysostome also speaketh to the same effect saying VVhen you shall see the abhominable desolation stand in the holy place that is as he expoundeth it VVhen you shall see vngodly Heresie vvhich is the army of Antichrist stand in the holy places of the Church in that time let them which are in Iurie flie vnto the hills that is saith hee Let them that are in Christendome resort vnto the Scriptures for like as the true Ievv is a Christian as the Apostle saith he is not a Ievv vvhich is one outvvard in like manner the verie Ievvrie is Christianitie the hills are the Scriptures of the Apostles and Prophets But why doth hee command all Christians at that time to resort to the Scriptures Because in this time sithence Heresie hath prevailed in the Church there can bee saith hee no proofe nor other refuge for Christian men desirous to knovv the truth of the right Faith but onely by the Scriptures And the reason hereof he further sheweth For saith he such things as pertaine to Christ the Heretickes also have in their schisme They have likevvise Churches likevvise the Scriptures of God Bishops also and other orders of Clerkes and likevvise Baptisme and the Sacrament of the Eucharist and to conclude Christ himselfe vvherefore he that vvill knovv vvhich is the true Church of Christ in this so great confusion of things being so like hovv shall he knovv it but onely by the Scriptures And afterward againe he saith thus For if they shall looke upon anie other thing but onely the Scriptures they shall stumble and perish not perceiving vvhich is the true Church and so fall into the abhominable desolation vvhich standeth in the holy places of the Church So farre he Now then these being times of Schisme and heresie and of much contention and variance betweene the Protestants and the Papists and the great question betweene them being VVhether of them is the true Church Yea these being the times wherein the verie grand Antichrist himselfe with his armie of Bishops Priests and Clerkes hath place in the world as before in some sort but afterwards is more fully declared It followeth necessarily by this rule of his as also by the former Rule and direction of S. Augustine likewise that all people that bee desirous to know the truth in these times and which is the true Church must resort and betake themselves for the true tryall discerning and deciding hereof vnto the holy Scriptures only for all other waies and courses be uncertaine and unsure and such as whereby a man may possibly and easily be deceived as those ancient Fathers do there expresly teach and affirme And to give you some little tast here also that these be the times of Antichrist and that Antichrist is long sithence come and that the Pope of Rome
a salve to all if all can take hold of him and apply him unto themselves as a Saviour by a true and lively faith But because all cannot doe this for none have this true lively and iustifying faith but Gods elect onely therefore he died efficiently that is his death was effectuall and beneficiall only to Gods Elect. Wherfore also well doth he distinguish whether it were Augustine or Prosper Qui magnitudinem pretii distinguit a proprietate redemptionis vvhich distinguisheth the greatnes or sufficiencie of the price from the proprietie of redemption Agreably whereunto S. Ambrose likewise saith that Etsi Christus pro omnibus passus est specialiter tamen pro nobis passus est quia pro Ecclesia passus est Although Christ suffered for all excluding none from the benefite of his death if they beleeve in him yet specially or in a speciall manner hee suffered for us that doe beleeve in him because for his Church it was that hee suffered And so likewise testifieth S. Hierome that Christ gave his life a redemption not for all but for manie that is saith hee for them that beleeve In like manner doth S. Paul say that God gave him to death for us all that is for all Gods elect whereof hee was one For so also S. Augustine interpreteth it in Ioh. tract 45. Pro nohis omnibus tradidit illum Sed pro quibus nobis praescitis Praedestinatis Iustificatis Glorificatis Hee gave him to death for us All But for vvhich Vs namely for them saith hee vvhich are the foreknovvne the Predestinate the Iustified and the Glorified persons Againe in the Epistle to the Hebrevves it is said that Christ Tasted death for all but in the verses that follow he sheweth the speciall meaning of those words viz. that those All vvere sanctified persons the brethren of Christ the Children vvhich God had given him and the Children which hee by that his death and passion was to bring unto glory For which cause he is also there called the Prince of their salvation In like sort it is said in the second Epistle to the Corinths that Christ dyed for all but in the words following he explaineth the matter and sheweth that hee died for all such as finding themselves dead in themselves should afterwards live not unto themselves anie longer but unto him that died for them and rose againe which kinde of godly and new life none doe live but the elect onely Againe in his Epistle to the Thessalonians he speaketh thus God hath not appointed us unto wrath but to obtaine salvation by the meanes of our Lord Iesus Christ which dyed for us Observe here likewise that he maketh Christ Iesus in a speciall and peculiar manner to die onely for those which bee appointed to obtaine salvation by the meanes of him and not for the rest which were appointed unto Wrath for he there manifestly distinguisheth betweene those two sorts of people Againe S. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians speaketh thus Husbands love your vvives even as Christ loved the Church and gave himselfe for it Where you see also that he appropriateth the benefit of the death of Christ to his Church which he so entirely loved Yea Christ Iesus himselfe affirmeth the same saying that Hee is that good Shepheard which giveth his life for his Sheepe And againe hee saith Greater love hath no man then this that a man bestovv his life for his friends yee are my friends if yee doe whatsoever I command you By all which appeareth that Christ in respect of the proprietie of redemption gave his life and died onely for his Church for his Sheepe for his Friends that would obey him which is as much to say as that hee died specially and properly for the Elect. Yea he was in Gods purpose intended and ordayned to come into the world for the redemption of the Elect. So S. Peter likewise testifieth directly for writing his Epistle to the Elect of God 1. Pet. 1.2 he saith that They were redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ as of a Lambe undefiled and without spot and hee there further saith expresly that Christ was ordained before the foundation of the world but was declared in the last times for their sakes Where you see it precisely affirmed that Christ was ordained to come and did come into the world for the Elect sake And so also doth S. Paul declare in his Epistle to Timothy And this likewise doth Esay shew in his Prophesie saying Vnto us a Childe is borne unto us a Son is given that is unto the Church and people of God of which number the Prophet was one that so speaketh Againe S. Paul writing to the Church and people of God distinguishing them from the rest saith thus unto them Yee are not your owne for yee are bought with a price Therefore glorifie yee God in your bodie and in your spirit for they are Gods Againe in the Acts of the Apostles it is said to bee The Church of God which Christ hath purchased with that his blood Yea this is so evident that by the All for whom Christ died is in respect of redemption and remission of sinnes meant all the elect onely that for the clearer illustrating of it to be so the Scripture it selfe often useth in stead thereof this word Manie As in the Gospell according to S. Matthew Christ Iesus himselfe saith thus This is my blood of the nevv Testament that is shed for manie for the remission of their sinnes Againe hee saith The sonne of man came not to be served but to serve and to give his life a redemption for manie Marke that in both those places he saith That he gave his life to be a ransome or redemption not of all in a generalitie but of Manie that is as I said before of the Elect onely So likewise it is said in the Epistle to the Hebrevves Christ vvas once offered to take avvay the sinnes of manie And againe it is said by S. Paul that By the â—bedience of one namely of Christ manie shall be made righteous And so againe it is said in Daniel that The Messias should be slaine and that he should confirme the covenant vvith manie But beside all this S. Paul speaketh yet further verie plainely thus God setteth out his love tovvard us seeing that vvhilst vvee vvere yet sinners Christ died for us much more then being novv iustified by his blood vvee shall be saved from vvrath through him Observe here first that he saith Christ died for us that is for us that be of Gods Church and people for he speaketh in the person of them and in their behalfe and secondly observe that he maketh this an argument as it is indeede of Gods great and speciall love towards them that he sent his sonne to die for them what can be more plaine to shew that in Gods
should bee termed Regeneration which is not the verie Regeneration it selfe but a signe and token of regeneration for the Regeneration it selfe is the renewing of the man to the Image of God wherin hee was at first created which is a thing begun to bee wrought in him in this life not by the verie externall act of Baptisme performed and administred but inwardlie by the operation of the holy Ghost And likewise it ought for the same cause to seem nothing strange to anie that the Bread in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is called his bodie when as neverthelesse it is not his verie natural and substantiall bodie but a figure signe and token of that his bodie As for the reason which yee draw from the omnipotencie or almightinesse of Christ whereby hee is able as yee saie to make his verie essentiall and naturall bodie out of bread you must first proove that it is his will to have it so made before ye dispute of his power or omnipotencie For no man doubteth but that he can doe manie things which neverthelesse hee doth not doe nor will doe It is an Axiome in the Art and rule of reasoning that a Posse ad Esse non valet argumentum and therefore that God can doe such a thing and such a thing ergo hee hath done it is no good argument But that you may the better conceive the weakenesse of this your argument grounded upon Gods omnipotencie in this matter take another like unto it in this sort Christ saith of the Cup This is my blood And he by his omnipotencie is aswell able to make the very Cup his verie essentiall and natural blood as the bread his bodie ergo the verie Cup is his verie essentiall and natural blood Againe Christ saith that hee is a Vine and that hee is also Bread and by his omnipotencie hee is aswell able to make himselfe a verie Materiall Vine or verie materiall Bread as he is to make bread his natural bodie ergo hee is a verie Materiall Vine or verie Materiall Bread These arguments bee like yours when you say thus Christ saith the Bread is his body and he is by his omnipotencie able to make it his verie essential and natural bodie Ergo it is his verie essential and natural bodie I hope by this time yee see the vanitie and absurditie of this maner of reasoning But you still urge the words of Christ and say that hee saith It is his bodie and wee must not say you make him a Liar and therefore it is his verie essential and natural bodie God forbid that anie of us should goe about to make Christ a liar who is all Truth and the teacher of all Truth neither doth anie of us go about it but we say that Christ is true in those his words but men speake more then is true when out of those words of his they teach and affirme that the bread is become by way of Transubstantiation his verie essential and natural bodie For Christ doth not say so that it is his verie essential and natural bodie by way of Transubstantiation as they inferre but his wordes are onelie that it is his bodie And it may bee and is his bodie as I said before though it be not his bodie by way of Transubstantiation For if it be as it is his bodie figuratively sacramentally and significatively I trust his words are found true enough without anie such Popish grosse supposition Because Christ saith the Cup is his bloud shall he therefore be supposed a liar or untrue except the verie material Cup be beleeved in verie deed to be his verie essential and natural bloud by way of Transubstantiation or because Christ saith that he is a Vine shall he by and by be concluded to be false or untrue unlesse it be beleeved that therefore he is turned and transubstantiated into a verie natural and substantial Vine But moreover if it be Christs natural and substantial bodie in verie deed as you say it is shew us some way how we may be induced to beleeve it or how it may be proved or appeare to be so you answer that Christ his body is there miraculously But I replie againe that if it be there miraculouslie it must be there visibly and so appeare to the outward senses for it is of the propertie of everie miracle to be visible and to appeare to be so to the eie to the rest of the outward senses as when Christ turned water into wine it did appeare to be no longer water but wine to the outward senses So likewise when Moses rod was turned into a serpent it appeared to the eie outward senses to be no longer a Rod but a Serpent If therefore the bread be turned as yee say miraculouslie into the verie natural bodie of Christ it must likewise appeare visiblie to the eie and to the outward senses so to be namelie no appearance of bread must anie longer be there and on the other side onlie the verie natural bodie of Iesus Christ must appeare to the eye and the outward senses of the Receiver but cleane contrariwise there is no natural bodie of Christ Iesus appearing to the eie and outward senses of the receiver after consecration but bread onlie ergo the verie natural bodie of Iesus Christ is not there miraculouslie as Papists most absurdly affirme But although they cannot shew Christ his verie natural bodie to be there by way of transubstantiation yet say they they doe beleeve it to be so and they say withall that it is as well to be beleeved as the creation of the world the resurrection of the dead a virgin to beare a childe namely Christ Iesus such like But whilst they speake thus I pray let them tell mee can their supposed real bodilie presence of Christ in the Sacrament by way of Transubstantiation be as well proved by the Scriptures as the creation of the world the resurrection of the dead the bearing of a childe by a virgin or as the rest of the things which they meane and are directlie found in the Scriptures I am sure it cannot for all that can be said for your Transubstation hath beene examined againe and againe but no such matter can be proved or appeare Why then doe they match those things together which be nothing like Yea why be anie so unwiselie confident as to say they beleeve and verilie beleeve this real bodilie presence of Christ in the Sacrament by way of transubstantiation when they can no way shew it by anie maner of proofe or probabilitie What will men beleeve unremoveably beleeve things without wit sense reason or religion for which they have no maner of colour or warrant at all in Scripture from God or his word If they be such credulous people they may beleeve if they will anie thing whatsoever be it never so incredible or absurd for if their will and fancie shall be held for a sufficient râ—â—son who
shall be able to diswade them Howbeit I would desire you to be better advised and though it be to the utter overthrowing of your fancies and wills to yeeld to that puissant and unvanquishable truth which not onlie reason but all right faith and religion also requireth at your hands for even faith and religion aswell sense and reason perswadeth against that monstrous conceipt of Transubstatiation and of the natural bodie of Christ to be eaten with the bodilie mouth For further declaration whereof doe but consider some absurdities and inconveniences wherewith it is accompanied First you thereby make the Lords Supper to be no Sacrament for if it be a Sacrament it must of necessitie have aswel an outward visible signe of an holie thing as the holie thing it selfe The outward visible signe in this point is the bread and the holie thing whereof it is a signe is the verie natural bodie of Christ which was crucified for us Now you sâ—y That after consecration there is no bread at all remaining but onlie the verie natural bodie of Iesus Christ and so making no bread at all to be there you also make no outward visible signe to be there and consequentlie make it no Sacrament Secondlie if there be no bread remaining but onlie the Accidents of bread that is whitenesse roundnesse and such like without a substance as yee hold then beside that it is most absurd by the rules of reason to hold that anie accidents can be without their substance I pray further tell me what it is that the communicant receiveth and eateth for we thinke everie man should be ashamed to say that he eateth bare accidents and not the substance of bread But for cleere proofe S. Paul affirmeth it expreslie to be still bread after consecration and that accordinglie the communicant eateth bread neither will the bare accidents of bread without the substance nourish anie man Thirdlie how absurd and unseemlie a thing is it for one man to eate up another as if it became Christians to be Caniballs or Anthropophagi that is such as were eaters of men and yet if this Popish opinion were true should Christians be eaters even of the bodie of a man and of the best mâ—n that ever lived even of their owne Saviour and Redeemer Iesus Christ both God and man and that in a most grosse and carnal manner which is a most impious and most inhumane barbarous conceit Fourthlie it is well knowne that Christ Iesus is true man and hath all the properties of one that is a true man being like unto man in all things sinne only excepted as the Scripture witnesseth And therefore as he is a true man and hath a true humane bodie like other men sinne onelie excepted that his humane bodie cannot possiblie be in two or manie places at once no not after his resurrection as S. Augustine expresly witnesseth no more then the bodies of other men For which cause the Angel said of Christ Non est hic surrexit enim He is not here for he is risen This speech of the Angel sheweth contrarie to your conceit that the humanitie and bodie of Christ even after his resurrection is not in diverse places at once as his Deitie and Godhead is and that it cannot be in anie more places then one at a time because when his bodie was in the grave it was not anie where else and when it was risen ouâ— of the grave then it was not there but in another place as the Angel declareth Yea whilest you make his humanitie to be multi-present what doe yee else but confound his humanitie and fall into as manifest an errour as is the Heresie of the ubiquitares If anie alledge that the humanitie of Christ and his Deitie be inseparable and that therefore wheresoever his Deitie is there is also his humanitie and consequently because his Deitie or Godhead is everie where his humanitie also or manhood must be likewise everie where This is but a sophistical and deceitfull kinde of reasoning wherewith none should be ensnarled for although it be true that the Deitie and humanitie of Christ be inseparable in him in respect of his person in whom they are united both together making but one Christ yet are they not so inseparable but that the one may be and is namelie his Deitie or Godhead where the other is not For example the Deitie or Godhead of Christ is indeed everie where and filleth heaven and earth as it is said in the Prophet yea the heaven of heavens cannot conteine him as Solomon saith and consequently that Deitie was also even in the grave of Christ after he was risen from death and yet was not his humanitie or manhood there as the Angel himselfe hath before assured us So that although wheresoever his humanitie or manhood is there is also his Deitie or Godhead yet it followeth not contrariwise that wheresoever his Deitie or Godhead is there also is his humanitie or manhood Again doth not Christ Iesus himselfe say thus The poore ye have alwayes with you but me ye shall not have alwayes How could these words be true except wee confesse that he may be and is absent from us in his humanitie and manhood although he be alwaies present with us in respect of his Deitie and by his power and spirit In which respect he hath also said that Hee vvill be vvith his Church to the end of the vvorld You perceive then how Christ is present and how absent namelie that he is alwaies present everie where in his Deitie but not so in his humanitie or manhood And for further proofe hereof doth not Christ Iesus say againe expressely thus It is expedient for you that I goe away for if I goe not away the Comforter will not come unto you Againe he saith I leave the vvorld and goe to the Father And againe he saith Now am I no more in the vvorld but these are in the world and I come to thee Holy Father keepe them in thy Name even them vvhom thou hast given mee What meaneth all this but that Christ Iesus after his resurrection was to ascend into heaven and so to goe away to depart to leave the vvorld and to be as himselfe there speaketh no more in the vvorld Must not this needs be intended in respect of his manhood and bodily presence for most certaine it is that in respect of his Deitie power and spirit he is with us to the worlds end and for ever as before is said And therefore also doth S. Peter witnesse that in respect of that his manhood or humanitie the Heavens must conteyne him untill the time that all things be restored vvhich God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy Prophets since the vvorld began For which cause also we beleeve according to our Creede that from thence hee shall come to iudge both the quicke and the dead If then ever since his ascention hee be
in respect of his bodily presence and manhood departed from the world and in that respect is as himselfe affirmeth no more in the vvorld but in heaven untill the day of the general judgement as S. Peter also and our Creede doe teach us how grosse and absurd yea what misbeleevers be Papists that dare affirme him cleane contrarie to his owne testimonie and the testimonie of S. Peter and the rest of the Scriptures and contrarie also to the verie Creed it selfe to be still in the world in that his manhood and bodily presence It is high time therefore for all to renounce and forsake this monstrous and detestable errour if they will be right Christians and right beleevers As for that Text where it is said No man ascendeth up to heaven but he that descended from heaven even the sonne of man vvhich is in heaven It is easily answered and resolved for most true it is that the Sonne of man Christ Iesus was even then in heaven in his Deitie at such time when hee was also upon the earth in his humanitie So that in respect of that his Deitie or Godhead it is that being upon the earth he was neverthelesse also in heaven and not in respect of his manhood or humanitie for his manhood or humanitie or bodily presence was then on the earth and could not also be in heaven at one and the selfe same time as is before declared S. Iohn saith that Every spirit vvhich confesseth not that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God but this is the spirit of Antichrist Now what is it else to denie Iesus Christ to be come in the flesh but to denie him to be true man and like unto men in all things sinne onely excepted Whilest men therefore thus denie Christ to be come in the flesh that is to have all the properties of a True man and to be like unto other men in all things sinne onely excepted how can they cleere themselves but that they must be enforced to yeeld and confesse that they be herein led not by the spirit of Christ but by the spirit of Antichrist Yea whilest they thus say that Christ is in his manhood and natural bodie present upon earth what doe they else but denie or impugne not onely those Articles of the Creed viz. that Christ is ascended into heaven and that there hee sitteth at the right hand of God his Father and that from thence he shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead But this Article also that Iesus Christ vvas borne of the Virgin Mary and was incarnate and made man of her substance For this doubtlesse is the right Iesus Christ in whom wee are to beleeve but by this their doctrine they contrariwise beleeve in another Iesus Christ namely in such a one as they affirme by this their Transubstantiation to be made of another substance namelie out of the substance of a piece of bread And how can such a Christ so made of the substance of a piece of bread be the true Christ Of which and of all other sorts of false Christs the true Christ Iesus himselfe hath given us sufficieÌ„t forewarning Fiftly they herein make their Massing Priest after their words of consecration uttered to be the maker of his Maker namelie of Iesus Christ And that Iesus Christ is thus made anew everie day or so oft as their Masse is celebrated How manie thousand Iesus Christs by this meanes will they have in the world But can anie be so absurdlie impious as to beleeve or suppose that Christ Iesus can be made out of the substance of a piece of bread by a Priest by vertue of anie words of consecration uttered or by anie devise whatsoever Can anie creature possibly make his Creator or the thing made make his maker Fie on these and all other such senselesse detestable abominations Diverse other absurdities also of the Papists might here be further alledged but these before mentioned will I hope suffice to declare the most grosse and most notorious false exposition of the Popish Church concerning those wordes of Christ This is my Body in the Lords Supper wherby they strangely suppose a Transubstantiation and a carnal eating of Christ his verâ—e natural bodie contrarie to the Scriptures and contrarie to all sense reason right faith and true Religion For ye must learne so to expound Scripture as that yee make all the rest of the Scriptures to stand and agree with that sense you set upon it so that there may be no repugnancie But the sense and exposition which the Popish church setteth upon those words of Christ namely This is my Body is cleerely repugnant to other Scriptures and even to the verie Articles also of the Creede aswell as to all sense and reason as is before apparant and therefore it cannot possibly be the right sense nor true exposition What remaineth then but that the right and true sense and meaning of those words is and must needs be the same which the Protestants set upon them because that their exposition is consonant agreeing to the rest of the Scriptures and to all the Articles of the Creede aswell as to all sense and reason and is also sutable and correspondent to the like usuall ordinarie phrase and manner of speech in other and former Sacraments amongst the Iewes the old people of God under the old Testament according to which maner of speech Christ also spake when he instituted this Sacrament of his Supper under the new Testament calling according to the usuall Sacramental phrase the signe by the name of the thing signified Which thing I trust is now so cleare and evident as that none can iustly anie longer make anie doubt or question of it 5 But yet for the fuller discussing hereof it will not be amisse here to speake a few words touching Consecration because upon Consecration it is that they seeme to build their before mentioned error of Transubstantiation Let us therfore consider what Consecration is and what it importeth or worketh To Consecrate then is to take a thing from the prophane or ordinarie and common use and to destinate or appoint it to some holy use and end And if wee would know how things come to bee consecrate or sanctified S. Paul saith that everie Creature of God is good and nothing to bee refused if it bee received with thankesgiving For it is sanctified saith hee by the word of God and prayer Sanctification then or Consecration of a thing doth here appeare to bee by the institution and word of God and by praier or invocation whereof thankesgiving is a part And therefore the Lord Iesus before he brake the bread and gave it hee Blessed that is he gave thankes to his Father that hee out of his love to men had appointed him to bee the Redeemer for the satisfying of his Iustice in the behalfe of his elect and had given him authoritie to institute this
Sacrament in remembrance of that his death and passion For whereas in Matth. 26.26 it is said that when Christ had taken bread hee blessed S. Marke S. Luke and S. Paul all three of them as it were expounding what that meaneth in steede of those words hee blessed doe say that Hee gave thankes Mar. 14 22. Luk. 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 By the word blessing then mentioned in S. Mâ—thew is meant Thankesgiving as by conferring him with the other three doth plainely appeare Yea this doth also appeare even by S. Mathew himselfe For whereas S. Mathew saith That Iesus tooke the Bread and when hee had blessed hee brake it and gave it c. hee saith likewise that hee tooke the Cup and when hee had given thankes hee gave it c. Mat. 26.26.27 thereby shewing that to blesse in S. Mathew and to give thankes is all one And this also serveth well to declare and expound those other words of S. Paul concerning the Cup in 1. Cor 10.16 where he saith thus The Cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ He calleth it the Cup of blessing which we blesse saith Chrysostome because when wee have it in our hands with admiration and a certaine horrour of that unspeakeable gift wee praise and blesse Him for that hee hath shed his blood that wee should not remaine in errour and hath not onely shed it but made us all partakers of it And so doth also Photius and OEcumenius expound those words The Cup of blessing which vvee blesse that is say they vvhich having in our hands vvee blesse Him vvho hath gratiously given us his blood that is vvee give him thankes Iustin Martyr toward the end of his 2. Apologie saith thus VVee receive vvith the action of thankesgiving the consecrated meaâ—e blessed by prayer S. Augustine in his third Booke of the Trinitie Cap. 4. saith VVee call that the bodie and blood of Christ Iesus vvhâ—ch vvee receive for the health of our soules it being taken from the fruits of the earth and consecrated by mystical prayer And Gregorie the first Bishop of Rome in his 7. Booke of Epistles Epist. 63. saith that The Apostles did consecrate by prayer Yea Pope Innocentius the third also in his third Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse doth himselfe hold that Christ did not consecrate by these words Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodie but that hee had consecrated before those words were uttered Consecration then in a Sacrament is of no such nature operation or force as to make anie change or alteration in the substance of a thing but onely in the qualitie use or end And this you may verie clearely and demonstrativelie perceive by the vvater consecrated and applied in Baptisme for before it be consecrate to that use it is but common and ordinarie water But after it is consecrate it is then become another thing namely a sacred signe of the washing and cleansing wee have by Christ and yet neverthelesse it is still water as touching the substance of it as it was before although in the qualitie and use it bee altered So likewise is it of bread and wine in the other Sacrament of the Lords Supper before Consecration it is but ordinarie and common bread and wine but after Consecration they are become holie signes of the bodie and blood of Christ and yet are they still bread and wine as touching the substance of them as before though they bee thus altered in the use and qualitie And so saith Ambrose Sunt quae erant in aliud commutantur They are the same things still for matter and substance vvhich they vvere before and yet be changed into another thing in respect of the use and qualitie An example for better explications sake and to take away all doubt in this matter he giveth in a man before he be consecrate and sanctified and after he is sanctified Tu ipse eras c. Thou thy selfe vvast faith he before thou vvast sanctified but thou vvast an old Creature But after thou vvast sanctified or consecrated thou begannest to be a nevv Creature So that he is the same man still as touching matter and substance after his consecration or sanctification that hee was before albeit in qualitie hee bee thus altered and changed And this also witnesseth S. Chrysostome Panis sanctificatus dignus est dominici corporis appellatione etsi natura panis in illo remanserit The bread after it is sanctified or consecrated hath this dignity to bee called the Lords Bodie although saith he the nature of bread still remaine in it Theodoret likewise most plainelie telleth us that Signa mystica post sanctificationem non recedunt a natura sua manet enim in priori substantia figura forma The mystical signâ—s after sanctification or consecration doe not depart from their ovvne nature for they still remaine in their former substance figure and forme Yea even Gelatius himselfe a Bishop of Rome saith also that after consecration Non desinit esse substantia panis natura vini There ceaseth not to bee the substance of bread and the nature of vvine These so direct and expresse speeches and most evident testimonies of the ancient times concurring with the Scriptures bee they not sufficient to satisfie all that bee reasonable and equal christians that there is no transubstantiation in this Sacrament or real bodily presence of Christ to the bodily Mouth of the Receiver For that there is a real bodilie presence of Christ to bee apprehended by the mouth of the Soule that is by the faith of the Receiver is a thing granted and so affirmed by S. Augustine who expreslie saith that Faith is the mouth vvherby vvee eat and drinke Christ and the hand vvhich vve stretch to heaven to lay hold upon him sitting there And so saith S Ambrose also Fidei tactus est quâ— tangitur Christus It is by faith that vvee touch Christ. Yea this is so cleare as that the verie Church of Rome it selfe in ancient and former times beleeved heerein as wee doe as is manifest at large in the second distinction of Consecration and in the glosse likewise upon the Canon hoc est where it is said that the consecrated bread is called the Bodie of Christ Non propriè sed impropriè nec rei veritate sect significante mysterio Not properly but improperly and not in the truth of the thing but in a mysterie signifying it Thus then as touching this point it is more then evident that Rome is departed from that shee was in former times But hence arose moreover their adoration of the bread at their elevation wherein most grosse Idolatrie is committed inasmuch as it still remaineth Bread after consecration as you see And I wonder they tremble not at this their most horrible Idolatrie so often as they thinke upon it or use it For even the rudest and most barbarous Heathens were never
such grosse Idolaters as to worship a peece of â—read for God Yea even that Heathen man Cicero could say Quem tam amentem esse putas qui id quo vescâ—tur Deum creda esse VVhom doe you thinke to be so mad as to beleeve that which he eateth to be God Is it not then high time for all that love their owne salvation utterly to forsake that monstrous and Idolatrous Church of Rome which is become thus extreamely degenerate and deformed 6 But the Popish Church hath yet further mangled and maimeâ— this sacrament of the Lords supper most audaciously and Sacrilegiously in that contrarie to the Institution of Christ and practise of the Apostolicke primitive Church it depriveth the Laie people of receiving anie consecrated wine As though the Laie people might not receive aswell the consecrate wine as the consecrate bread Did not Christ say Drinke yee all of this and doth not S. Paul shew directly that the Laie people in his time did aswell drinke of that Cup as eate of that Bread Yea the late Councell of Constance doth confesse that in the Primitive Church the Laie people did communicate in both kindes and received aswell the wine as the bread and yet for all that doe they there decree against it Must not this needs bâ— the spirit of Antichrist which dareth thus in their Councells to contradict and decree against the Institutions of Christ and the manifest and confessed practise of the primitive Church For feare of spilling some of them say the Laie people may not receive the consecrated wine As though the Priest might not also sometimes spill it upon some accident aswell as they or as though the like inconvenience of letting fall of the consecrated bread by some accident might not aswell bee feared But how commeth it to passe that the Popish Councell and Church taketh upon them to bee herein wiser then Christ and all his Apostles and then the Primitive churches For Christ ordained and so the Apostolicke and Primitive churches practised and observed that the Laie people should aswell drinke of the consecrated wine as eate of the consecrated bread without anie such feare of inconvenience or inconveniences as the Popish church hath sithence that time found out devised But they say that per concomitantiam by a concomitancie forsooth the blood is included in the bodie of Christ so that if the lay people receive the bread which say they after consecration is the verie natural bodie of Christ they do therein withall receive the blood of Christ because in the bodie say they the blood also is included And thus hath one error begotten another with them as is indeed the fashion of all errors to do for Vno absurdo dato sequuntur infinita But if this their doctrine of concomitancie be true then by the same reason also it may suffice the Priest to receive likewise the consecrated bread onely without the wine And why then doth the Priest drinke of the consecrated wine for is not the blood of Christ per concomitantiam by their concomitancie aswell included in the bread which they say is the body of Christ to him as to the lay people Can anie tolerable or allowable reason be yeelded by your Priests or Church for these things May they not then all bee ashamed thus grosly to abuse and delude the world But now if that which is confessed to bee the Primitive and Apostolike Church administred the Lords supper to Laie people in both kinds namely aswell in wine as in bread How can anie suppose the Popish church which hath decreed and observeth the cleane contrarie to be herein like unto that Primitive and Apostolicke Church And if that primitive and Apostolicke Church were as questionlesse it was guided by the holie Ghost the Spirit of Truth must not your Priests Teachers and Church observing teaching and decreeing the contrarie needs bee supposed â—o be led not by that but by another spirit And what other spirit then can it be but the spirit of Error of opposition to Christ even the spirit of Antichrist Yea farre degenerate even in this point also is the Church of Rome from that it was in the daies of Pope Gelasius in whose time it was decreed that All they should be excommunicated that would receive but in one kinde 7 But yet a further wound also hath the Papacy given to this Sacrament of the Lords Supper by diverting and turning it from a communion of the faithfull into a private Masse or into such an action as wherein the Priest eates and drinkes alone without anie Communicants with him the people onely looking on Did Christ thus celebrate his Supper alone and did the rest that were his Disciples onely looke on and not communicate Wee know that Christ willeth them both to eate and to drinke at that Table and not to bee lookers on onely And so in the Primitive and Apostolicke Churches not the Pastor alone but the people also together with him did communicate And in verie deede what is more absurd then to bid men to a Supper to looke on onelie and neither to eate nor drinke S. Chrysostome complaineth of this corruption beginning to creepe in in his time O custome saith hee O presumption In vaine is the daily Sacrifice offered in vaine doe wee stand at the Altar seeing no bodie communicateth And a little after hee saith thus The Lord saith these things to us all who stand by heree unwisely and rashly for everie one that partakes not of the Mysteries is unwise and rash in standing by And hee addeth further saying Tell mee If a man that is bidden to a feast wash his hands aâ—d be placed at the table and yet eates not doth hee not wrong him that â—ad him vvere it not better that such a one were not present So thou art present thou hast sung the Hymne and in that thou hast not retyred thy selfe with them that are unworthy thou hast made profession that thou art of the number of those that are vvorâ—hie Hovv then dost thou stay and not partake ef the Table thou art therefore unvvorthy also to partake of the Prayers Yea the rule even of the Church of Rome it selfe in ancient time said to bee Pope Agapets which is Dist. 2. de Consecra Can. peracta is delivered in these words VVhen Consecration is finished all that vvill not bee put out of the Church dore must Communicate for so the Apostles ordained and so the Church of Rome observeth Marke well these words for thereby you see how farre differing at this day the deformed and new Church of Rome is in this point also from that it was in former and ancient time But againe can anie be so besotted as to thinke that onely by looking on hee communicateth or that by the eating and drinking of another as namelie of the Priest himselfe can bee fed or nourished Can the eating or drinking of another preserve your life if
likewise touched him I say why should not all and euerie of these be by the same reason worshipped and adored with divine honour You see then what weake most poore reasons Papists have for this their Idolatry in worshipping a wooden Crosse in stead of the true God that made heaven and earth S. Ambrose directlie brandeth it and calleth it an Heathenish error to vvorship the Crosse vvhereon Christ dyed And yet neither are yee able to prove that all and everie of those severall Crosses which in so manie distant places of several Kingdomes and Countries amongst Papists be thus worshipped bee that verie Crosse whereon Christ our Saviour died and was crucified Yea it is a thing impossible that they all and everie of them they being so manie and diverse should or can bee that verie Crosse. 7 I shall not neede here to shew how the Pope of Rome is made a god or rather exalted above God himselfe in the Papacie because this is declared partlie before and partlie and more fully afterward But yet consider here whether they make not also the Church a God whilst they not onelie beleeve it but beleeve in it For accordinglie the Rhemists teach it to be lawfull to beleeve in Men and in the Church The Creede contrariwise teacheth us Credere sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam to beleeve that there is an holy Catholik Church but it doth not bid us to beleeve in the holy Catholike Church Yea it teacheth everie Christian to beleeve onelie In God for thus it saith I beleeve in God the Father c. and in Iesus Christ his only Sonne c. and I beleeve in the holy Ghost And this distinction of creatures and mysteries in the Creede from the Creator by the preposition In is likewise so observed and taught by the Ancient Fathers For Ruffinus saith thus Non dixit in sanctam Ecclesiam c. He said not I beleeve In the Catholicke Church nor In the remission of sinnes nor In the resurrection of the Body for if he had added the preposition In there should have beene the same force of meaning vvith that vvhich went before But now in those vvords in vvhich is set forth our faith of the Godhead it is said In God the Father and In Iesus Christ his Sonne and In the Holy Ghost But in the rest vvhere the speech is not of the Godhead but of Creatures and Mysteries the preposition In is not added that it should be said In the holy Church but that vvee should beleeve that there is an holy Church not as God but as a Church gathered unto God And men should beleeve that there is a remission of sinnes but not In the remission of sinnes and they should beleeve the resurrection of the Body but not In the resurrection of the Body Therefore by this syllable of Preposition the Creator is distinguished from the Creatures and things pertayning to God from things belonging to men Agreeablie to him writeth also Eusebius Emissenus saying Aliud est credere Deo aliud In Deum credere c. It is one thing to beleeve God and another thing to beleeve In God we ought of right to beleeve both Peter and Paul but to beleeve In Peter and Paul that vvere to bestow upon the servants the honour due to the Lord vvhich vve ought not to doe To beleeve him that is to give credite to him every one may doe it to a man but this to beleeve In him know that thou owest onely to the Divine Maiestie And this also is to be marked It is one thing Credere Deum to beleeve that there is a God and another thing Credere in Deum to beleeve in God for the Divel is found to beleeve that there is a God but to beleeve In God none is found to doe this but he vvhich hath devoutely trusted in him And therefore to beleeve that there is a God is to know naturally but to beleeve in God is faithfully to seeke him and vvith our vvhole love to passe into him So likewise touching the Articles of the Catholicke Church Remission of sinnes Resurrection c. he saith Let us beleeve In God These other things vve doe rehearse vve doe not beleeve in them but vve beleeve them These things I say vvee confesse not as God but as the benefites of God Primasius also observeth this distinction saying Fides perfecta est non solum Christum sed etiam In Christum credere It is perfect faith not onely to beleeve that Christ is but to beleeve In Christ. If you would know what it is to beleeve In God S. Cyprian will further informe you Non credit In Deum qui non in eo solo collocat totius foelicitatis suae fiduciam He doth not beleeve In God saith hee vvhich doth not repose in him alone the confidence of his vvhole felicity Credere in Creaturam est divinitatis offensio To beleeve in a Creature is an offence against the Deity saith Greg. Baeticus ad Gallam Placidiam Yea Cursed is the man that putteth his trust in man saith the Lord God himselfe Thus then you see a difference betweene Credere Deum and Credere Deo and Credere in Deum namelie that Credere Deum is to beleeve that there is a God and Credere Deo is to beleeve all that God speaketh to be true and thus farre Divels and Reprobates may goe but Credere in Deum to beleeve in God that is to repose the confidence of a mans whole felicitie not in his owne or in other mens merits nor in Saints or Angels or in the Church or in anie creatures but in God onlie is the faith and beleefe proper and peculiar to the true Christian. And herewithall you may perceive that Credere Ecclesiam Catholicam is to beleeve that there is a Catholike Church and Credere Ecclesiae Catholicae is to give credite to the Catholik-Church that is to beleeve that to be true which the Catholike Church teacheth and that Credere in Ecclesiam Catholicam is to repose a mans trust affiance faith and confidence in the Catholike Church which what is it else but to make a god of it and so to have moe gods then One and consequentlie to commit a most grosse Idolatrie For what greater dishonor or wrong can be done then to put the Church in the place of God or to attribute that to men or Angels or to anie creatures which properlie belongeth to the Creator But the Rhemists alledge three Texts of Scripture to prove it lawfull to beleeve in men The one is in the Epistle to Philemon where S. Paul speaketh thus unto him Hearing of thy love and faith vvhich thou hast toward the Lord Iesus and toward all the Saints c. But reddendo singula singulis it is easie to be perceived that Faith is there to be referred to Christ and Love to all the Saints for S. Paul himselfe who is the best expositor of his owne words
doth in other places declare that they are so to be referred and expounded saying thus in his Epistle to the Ephesians Having heard of the Faith vvhich ye have in the Lord Iesus and love toward all the Saints c. So againe hee speaketh in his Epistle to the Colossians Having heard of your faith in Christ Iesus and of your love toward all the Saints By conferring of which two Texts with that to Philemon it is verie evident to everie one that is not wilfully contentious or perverse that Faith is as well in the one place as in the other to be attributed to Christ and Love to all the Saints The other Text they alledge is Exod. 14.31 where the wordes are not They beleeved in God and in Moses but the words be thus The people feared the Lord and beleeved the Lord and his servant Moses And so is your owne translation Crediderunt Domino Mosi servo eius They beleeved the Lord and Moses his servant The third Text they alledge is 2. Paral. 20.20 where your owne translation likewise is thus Credite in Domino Deo vestro securi eritis Credite Prophetis eius cuncta evenient prospera Beleeve in the Lord your God and yee shall bee sure Beleeve his Prophets and all things shall fall out prosperously But the Rhemists here seeme to appeale to the Hebrew Text because they see their owne Latin Translation to make against them and yet the Hebrew Text will also nothing helpe them inasmuch as it herein agreeth with the same their owne Latin Translation But yet they further alledge that ancient Fathers did reade indifferently I beleeve in the Catholicke Church and I beleeve the Catholicke Church It is granted that some of them did so and therefore to beleeve in the Catholicke Church was with them and in that speech of theirs all one with this to beleeve that there is a Catholike Church as they said likewise I beleeve in one Baptisme I beleeve in the Resurrection of the dead in the life to come So that although their speech herein was somwhat improper as appeareth by that which is before delivered by the ancient Fathers upon the Creede yet their meaning in those wordes being as is evident no more but to beleeve that there is a Catholike Church and not that wee should put our trust faith and confidence in the Church it maketh nothing against that which is here intended and spoken And therefore still for anie to beleeve in the Church in this sense viz. to put his faith affiance tâ—ust and confidence in the Church is to attribute that to the Church which rightly and properly belongeth unto God consequently is to make a god of it which is abominable Idolatrie 8 I here forbeare to speake of their superstitious reserving and worshipping of Reliques that is of dead bodies and insensible bones of Saints and Martyrs which it were far more meet honestly and decently to burie then so to abuse yea of some that are by Papists supposed to be Saints and Martyrs and yet are not so For all be not Saints nor the Martyrs of Iesus that are supposed to bee so neither doe all die â—or religion that are supposed by Papists to die for that cause As for example there was a Booke set forth of late entituled Martyrium c. The Martyrdome of Conoghor O Deveny which was a Popish Bishop and of Gilpatrick Ologran which was a Popish Priest which two neverthelesse were not put to death for the cause of Religion as that Booke would perswade but for Treason as the Enditements against them both extant of Record in the Kings Bench of Ireland doe expresly and openly testifie and as all the multitude of people then present at their arraignement can also witnesse Which is ever sufficient to confute the most slanderous and most notorious untruth of that Booke But Popish Rome being before verie evidently proved to be the vvhore of Babylon and consequently the Persecutor of the Saints and Martyrs of Iesus it is thereby an easie matter to collect who be the Saints and Martyrs of Iesus and who not namelie that the Protestants be the Saints and Martyrs of Iesus and that the Papists be the persecutors So that if anie be so wilfull as to die in defence of the Pope or Popish Religion they appeare to be therein no Martyrs of Christ but of Antichrist And therefore also as touching this point of martyrdome let them be no longer mistaken as heretofore they have beene CHAP. II. Wherein is further shewed that the Pope of Rome is the Grand Antichrist out of 2. Thess. 2. BVT concerning this point that the Pope of Rome is that verie grand Antichrist and consequentlie that the Popish Church ruled and governed by him is the very undoubted AntichristiaÌ„ Church and therefore of everie one to bee utterlie forsaken and detested Although that cleere and evident testimonie before going of S. Iohn in his Revelation discovereth the same sufficientlie yet shall you have it manifested further by the direct testimonie also of S. Paul for your better and fuller satisfaction S. Paul therefore in his second Epistle to the Thessalonians foretelling of the great Apostacie or departure from the right faith and religion which was then to come writeth thus Let no man deceive you by anie meanes for that day namelie of Christ to Iudgement shall not come except there come a departure first and that that man of sinne bee disclosed even the sonne of perdition which is an Adversarie and exalted above all that is called God or that is worshipped so that hee doth sit in the Temple of God as God shewing himselfe that hee is God Remember yee not that when I vvas yet vvith you I told you these things and now yee knovv what withholdeth that hee might be revealed in his time for the mysterie of iniquitie doth already worke Onely be vvhâ—ch now vvithholdeth shall let untill hee bee taken out of the vvay and then shall that vvicked man bee revealed vvhom the Lord shall consume vvith the spirit of his mouth and shall abolish with the brightnesse of his comming even him whose comming is by the vvorking of Sathan with all povver and signes and lying vvonders and in all deceaveablenesse of unrighteousnesse amongst them that perish because they received not the love of the truth that they might bee saved And therefore God shall send them sâ—rong delusion to beleeve lies that they all might be damned vvhich beleeved not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousnesse In these words ye see first that S. Paul fortelleth of an Apostaâ—y or Departure from the right faith and religion which should come and bee in the world which apostacie or departure namelie from the faith hee alâ—o mentioneth in his Epistle to Timothie 1. Tim. 4.1 And this Apostacie or departure from the faith least wee should be mistaken in it hee sheweth that it should bee A mystery of Iniquity
things Yea this kinde of fasting without praier and without other divine exercises ioyned therewith is nothing else but a meere bodilie diet and altogether a corporal and no spirituall exercise But were fasting never so truly and rightly performed yet why should you account it meritorious or of merit sufficient to take away sinnes or to satisfie Gods Iustice for your sinnes Did it not cost more to redeeeme soules and to satisfie Gods Iustice for them then so have wee not beene often told that it is the Sonne of God and our all-sufficient Saviour and Redeemer that hath with his most bitter suffrings and most perfect obedience satisfied Gods Iustice for our sinnes which wee for our parts were never able to satisfie But againe yee know that true right and christian fastings prayers humiliation mortification and all other duties of obedience wee owe unto God as a debt And how then can the payment or performance of these debts be a satisfaction to Gods Iustice for other debts which wee did likewise owe and have not performed Yea moreover all the duties of obedience which wee owe unto God wee performe with much weakenesse and imperfection ioyned and mixed therwithall and therfore even all our best works and actions bee so farre from meriting or deserving anie grace or â—avour at Gods hands that contrariwise in that respect we had neede to crave mercie and forgivenesse of him even for those defects frailtie weaknesse and imperfections that is intermingled in them 5 As for Christ his fasting fortie daies and fortie nights hee eating nothing all that while as S. Luke testifieth it was Miraculous and therefore not to bee made an example for Christians to imitate For what christians can fast in that sort and live The Rhemists from hence would deduce the Lent Fast or Fast before Easter calling it an Apostolical tradition But this opinion is confuted first by Eusebius who in the fift booke of his historie reciteth an Epistle of Irenaeus to Victor Bishop of Rome mentioning how diversly of divers persons it was observed in that ancient time There bee some saith he vvhich thinke they must not fast but one day others there bee that fast two daies some more and some forty hovvers day and night And this diversitie of fasting saith he commendeth the unitie of faith and religion Dionysius Alexandrinus also sheweth that some fasted sixe dayes before Easter some two daies some three some fower some none S. Basil in his two Sermons of fasting speaking of the fast before Easter telleth us often that this fast lasted not aboue five dayes S. Ambrose in his 34 Sermon saith That in his time there were some which made their Lent to last twentie daies other thirtie by interchangeable weekes But the Church disputing against the Montanists in the tenth chapter of Tertullians Booke of fasts saith That those daies in the Gospel are marked out for fasting daies in which the Bridegrome was taken away that is to say the daies in which Iesus Christ suffered and was in his grave and that all other dayes bee in a mans owne libertie Againe Socrates saith that At Rome they did not â—ast but three weekes before Easter excepting Saturday and Sunday That in Sclavonia Greece and Alexandria they fasted six That in other places they fasted three times five dayes at three several times and that yet neverthelesse they did call this Lent everie one alledging a divers reason That there was also a difference in their fasting touching their meat some absteyning from all living creatures others feeding upon fish onely others eating fowle together with fish and some abstaining from the fruites of trees and from Eggs and some which tied themselves to eate nothing but bread and some that eate no bread at all Whence hee collecteth and inferreth that this fasting is a matter voluntarie and left free to bee used at such times and in such order as everie man shall thinke best and fittest His words for this purpose bee these Since no man can shew anie expresse commandement as concerning this It is evident that the Apostles did leave it to every mans ovvne vvill and pleasure to the end everie man might doe good but not through feare or by constraint And so S. Augustine likewise teacheth and testifieth saying thus I see vvell that fasting is commanded in the Evangelical and Apostolicall vvritings and throughout all the nevv Tastament But upon vvhat dayes vvee should fast or not fast I see no commandement for this neither of Christ nor of his Apostles And so also did the Catholikes tell the Montanists in ancient time saying The Law and the Prophets lasted but till Iohn after which time men fasted as they thought best not for that they vvere so commanded by the Imposition of a new discipline but according as everie man saw his occasion and that the Apostles used to doe thus imposing no burden of solemne and set fasts Yea Montanus the hereticke as Eusebius also noteth out of Apollonius was the first that prescribed Lawes of Fasting You see then that this Lent-fast or fast before Easter is neither a divine ordinance nor an Apostolical tradition Yea Damasus Bishop of Rome in his Pontifical affirmeth that Telesphorus Bishop of Rome did institute it and Telesphorus also himselfe in his Decretal Epistle testifieth the same 6 But touching this matter the storie of Spiridion related by Sozomen is also not unmeet to be remembred to whose house a stranger comming suddenly upon him he commanded his daughter to cover the Table and to set something upon it for the stranger to eate and shee at that time setting certaine flesh-meate upon the Table for him to eate hee answered that he would not as then eate of it because hee was a Christian Then Spiridion replied saying that for this reason he should the rather eate of it for God saith Vnto the cleane all things be cleane and he did eate thereof himselfe to give the other an example to follow Hee did not say eate of it for I have nothing else in the house and so necessitie may excuse you but he alledged a Text of Scripture to assure him of the lawfulnesse to eate of it as being no offence against the Christian Religion and hee himselfe in eating thereof did likewise declare so much The Text which this godly man Spiridion cited is S. Pauls in his Epistle to Titus who saith accordingly that Vnto the cleane all things be cleane But the Rhemists take upon them to answer this Text and say that S. Paul speaketh not of their Churches abstaining from meates which is not for anie uncleanenesse in the creatures but for chastening their bodies and that hee speaketh against the Iewish superstition who now being Christians would not for all that cease to put difference of cleane and uncleane according to the old Law But first whereas they say that this abstinence from flesh-meate in their Church is and serveth for chastisement of their
bodies and for repressing of lust what is this else but speaking an untruth or a lye as S. Paul calleth it in Hypocrisie and so a cleere fulfilling of this Prophecie For abstinence from flesh can have no such vertue in it when as all other kindes of meates and drinkes are permitted them which procure lust as much if not more then flesh meate which they are prohibited Secondly the Iewish abstinence from some kind of meates was not for anie uncleanenesse by them supposed to be in the creatures by Gods creation but onely in respect of Gods prohibition by his law Now if notwithstanding Gods prohibition in his law the Iewish superstition in abstaining from some kinde of meates be condemned as the Rhemists themselves affirme much more is the Popish superstition in their abstinence from some kinde of meates to be condemned who knowing that Christ hath made all things cleane to the cleane yet cease not to put difference of meates cleane and uncleane holy and unholy not according to Gods law as the Iewes did which therefore might seeme the more tolerable but according to mans law even the law of the Pope which is Gods adversarie and therefore the more intolerable Thirdly they make the creatures of God uncleane although not in respect of their creation yet in respect of their Antichristian prohibition it being given under pretence and colour forsooth of a great deale of sanctitie pietie and religion by them supposed and taught to be therein For if you reade the Disputations of the Schoole-Doctors as of Durandus and Alensis and others you shall finde that the reasons which they give why flesh is forbidden and not fish doe presuppose some uncleanenesse in flesh more then in fish For some of them say as namely Durandus lib. 6. cap. de alijs Ieiunijs that the reason is because the creatures of flesh were accursed and drowned in the general deluge in the daies of Noah others of them alledge the reason to be because Christ did never eate anie thing but fish after his resurrection Againe What needeth that custome of carrying their flesh-meate after Lent to the Priest for him to say his Exorcismes over it if they did not thinke that some wicked Spirits lay lurking in it all the Lent or that it had some pollution in it whereof it had need to be purged or why else are they accounted the most holy and the most religious men amongst them which most abstaine from flesh as the Benedictines and Charterhouse-Monkes which abstaine from flesh all their life long and eschue the touching or tasting of it as an unholy prophane thing Or why else doth the Church of Rome inflict a greater punishment upon him that doth eate flesh in Lent then on him that hath committed fornication For doth it not hereby appeare that they take the eating of flesh in Lent to be a more uncleanenesse and a greater sinne then fornication But yet further S. Paul hath an excellent Text touching this matter in his Epistle to the Colossians where he writeth thus VVherefore if yee bee dead vvith Christ from the ordinances of the vvorld vvhy as though yee lived in the vvorld are yee burdened vvith Traditions as Touch not Tast not handle not vvhich all perish with the using and are after the commandements and doctrines of men vvhich things have indeed a shew of vvisedome in voluntary religion and humblenesse of minde and in not sparing the body vvhich are things of no value seth they belong to the filling of the flesh Observe here first that he reproveth such superstitious people as put pietie religion and Gods worship in abstinence from some kinde of meates by reason of a prohibition of men for these words Touch not Taste not Handle not be plaine and direct words of prohibition And observe withall that these people used this abstinence even as the Papists also say they doe for humiliation of themselves and for afflicting and chastening of the flesh or which is all one for not sparing the Body as the Text here speaketh But howsoever these things have a shew of vvisedome as he calleth it they have not for all that the substance of true wisedome in them because religion and the right worship and service of God and his kingdome consisteth not in meates and drinkes and such external things as perish vvith the using and belong onely to the nourishment of our flesh and bodies but in those things that be spiritual and concerne the soule and life everlasting Yea observe further that he calleth them things of no value and that by these prohibitions there is a Burden imposed upon Christians even a burden of Mens Traditions and inventions and therefore hee utterly disalloweth them as being no commandements of God or anie of his doctrines but as being the commandements and doctrines of men So that they cannot shift this Text by saying that he speaketh here onely of the Iewes or of Iewish superstition for it before appeareth that the Iewes did not abstaine from certaine kindes of meate to subdue their bodies but to obey the law of God given them by Moses in that case Yea you see plainely that S. Paul reproveth these observations as being the commandements of men but the Iewes kept theirs as being the commandements of God And therefore in that place he speaketh against anie sort of superstitious people whosoever who being Christians would neverthelesse suffer themselves to be thus yoaked and burdened with mens Traditions and commandements in the way of Religion Although then the Rhemists and other Papists answer aswell to this Text of 1. Tim 4.1.2 3 4 5. as also to that other Text of Tit. 1.15 that S. Paul in both those places speaketh only against such Hereticks as abstained in respect of an impuritie of an uncleanenesse supposed to be in the meates by nature and creation it appeareth by that which is before spoken that even they also that hold no impuritie in the meates by creation but abstaine from them in this respect of not sparing their Bodies or for chastening and subduing the flesh by reason of Mens commandements given for religion sake in that case be taxed and reproved For In vaine do they vvorship mee saith Christ teaching for doctrines the commandements of men Yee have heard before that the Montanists were condemned by the ancient Church because they forbad flesh to be eaten whether they did this out of an opinion that flesh was defiled and polluted or for discipline and exercise sake to represse the bodie and subdue lust who can better resolve us then Tertullian who himselfe was stained with this error Now he reciting the obiections and arguments of the Catholikes against these Montanists they appeare to be such and the same that wee also use against the Church of Rome herein But lastly whilst the Popish Church forbiddeth flesh permitting neverthelesse fish and wines of all sorts and all maner of confections and banquetting stuffe to be taken who
seeth not that such a kinde of fast or abstinence pretended to be for religion sake to keepe downe the bodie and to suppresse lust is meerely hypocriticall and a verie mockerie serving for nothing so well as to declare it selfe to be an apparant direct and demonstrative note of Antichristianisme For to absteine from flesh and to fill the belly with fish and wine and other dainties and delicates or to have a law permitting this Can anie that hath but common understanding suppose it to be availeable to the chastening of the bodie taming of the flesh and subduing of lust Must not he needs be verie senselesse that shal beleeve it and verie shamelesse that shall affirme it 7 Touching that they alledge of the Rechabites absteyning from drinking Wine at the commandement of their father they did therein well to obey the lawfull commandement of their father whom Gods law also requireth to honour and obey but this is no warrant for anie to obey an unlawfull commandement of an unlawful and wrong mother namely of the Church of Rome which is before evidently proved unto you to be the vvhore of Babylon whom all Gods people be required not to obey but to depart from and to renounce and forsake And as touching that they alledge of the Nazarites that they also absteined from wine they had Gods expresse commandement requiring them to do so and therefore might not omit it But have they likewise Gods expresse commandement to absteine from flesh in their fasts with an allowance and permission neverthelesse to eate fish and other meates during the same daies and that also for religion sake If there be anie such expresse commandement from God for this as is for the other let them bring it forth that it may appeare but if they can shew none such as wee are sure they cannot in vaine doe they make those cases like that doe so farre differ and have no resemblance As for the Fast of the Ninevites Moses Elias Anna or of anie other godly persons mentioned in the holy Scriptures their fastings not consisting in difference of meates but in an abstinence from all kinde of meates for the time they be so apparantly unlike to your Fasts as that it were but labour vainely bestowed to take paines to make anie further answer to them Touching that you say that in England Fish-dayes be observed and commanded to be observed and therein an abstinence from flesh required during those times you are to know that it is no constitution or decree of the Church for religion sake but a Statute of the commonweale made onely in politicke and civill respects namely for the maintenance of Navigation and Fishermen and for the breed of yong cattell and such like civill uses and ends And so much the verie Statute it selfe made in that behalfe doth tell you if you please to reade it But for your better and easier satisfaction I will here recite unto you one clause of the same Statute which is this Because no manner of person shall mis-iudge of the intent of this Statute limiting orders to eate fish and to forbeare eating of flesh but that the same is purposely intended and meant politickely for the increase of Fishermen and Mariners and repayring of Port-townes and Navigation and not for any superstition to be maintayned in choyse of meates Be it enacted that vvhosoever shall by preaching teaching vvriting or open speech notifie that any eating of fish or forbearing of flesh mentioned in this Statute is of any necessity for the saving of the soule of man or that it is the service of God otherwise then as other politicke Lawes are and be that then such persons shall be punished as spreaders of false newes are and ought to be Whereby you see that the Statute and Law of England is so farre from favouring their opinion touching abstinence from flesh and eating of fish by reason of prohibition given in the way of religion or otherwise then in politicke and common-weale respects upon fish daies for so the Statute also calleth them fish-daies and not fasting daies that contrariwise it inflicteth a punishment upon those that shall spread or publish anie such opinion 8 Now then forasmuch as these two notes and markes of the Apostatical and Antichristian Church viz. forbidding of Marriage under colour and pretence of chastitie and holiness and commanding to abstaine from some kinde of meates for Religion sake and under pretence to chasten the bodie and subdue lust when neverthelesse Fish and other kinde of meates be permitted bee cleerely and undeniably found in the Church of Rome it followeth that the Church of Rome is and must needes be concluded to be not the Christian and Apostolicall but the Apostaticall and Antichristian Church and consequently that the Pope of Rome being the Head and Ruler thereof is and must needs be the Grand Antichrist For howsoever the Rhemists and other Papists to shift these things from their Church would have this Text of S. Paul to Timothy expounded onely of the hereticks in old time that utterly condemned both marriage and meates as things in themselves and by nature and creation polluted and uncleane you perceive that it much more fitly agreeth to the later heretickes namely the Papists First because the Text it selfe sheweth that it is most properly to be intended of such false Teachers as speake lies or falshood in Hypocrisie but those old Heretickes that utterly condemned Marriage and Meates as things in themselves and by creation polluted and uncleane did not speake lies in Hypocrisie but in plaine manifest palpable and open blasphemie On the other side the later Heretickes namely the Papists be such as speake these lies or falshood in Hypocrisie inasmuch as they forbid Marriage and Meates not in respect of anie supposition that they be in themselves or by creation polluted or uncleane but upon pretence of much chastitie forsooth sanctitie and religion therein to be conteyned And therefore these later rather then those old Heretickes be here to be intended Secondly this Prophecie is of such as did make the Apostacie or departure from the faith Now this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostasie or departure from the right faith being the same that is mentioned in 2. Thess. 2.3 doth for that cause also rightly and fitly agree to the Papacie Thirdly observe that he saith this Apostacie or departure from the right faith and this attending to spirits of error and doctrines of Divels by meanes of such persons as speaking lies in hypocrisie should forbid Marriage and Meates was to come to passe neither in the first or elder times not yet in the last times but in the later times for wee must note that Saint Paul in these his Epistles to Timothy speaketh distinctly of two times shewing him what shall come to passe not onely in the later but in the last times also Seeing therefore hee hath expressely distinguished these times wee must not confound them
be conditions of his person as he was in sacrifice and oblation But our ancestours in the use of their Sacrament received the Eucharist in both kindes not being so acute as to discerne betwixt the things that belonged unto the integritie of the sacrifice of the sacrament because in verie truth they tooke the one to be the other Thus Bede relateth that one Hildmer an officer of Egfrid king of Northumberland intreated our Cuthbert to send a Priest that might minister the sacraments of the Lords body and blood unto his wife that then lay a dying and Cuthbert himselfe immediately before his owne departure out of this life received the communion of the Lords body and blood as Herefride abbat of the monasterie of Lindisfarne who was the man that at that time ministred the sacrament unto him made report unto the same Bede who elsewhere also particularly noteth that he then tasted of the cuppe Pocula degustat vitae Christique supinum Sanguine munit iter least anie man should think that under the formes of bread alone he might be said to have beene partaker of the body blood of the Lord by way of Concomitance which is a toy that was not once dreamed of in those dayes So that we need not to doubt what is meant by that which we reade in the booke of the life of Furseus which was written before the time of Bede that he received the communion of the holy body and blood and that he was wished to admonish the Pastors of the Church that they should strengthen the soules of the faithfull with the spirituall food of doctrine and the participation of the holy body and blood or of that which Cogitosus writeth in the life of S. Brigid touching the place in the Church of Kildare whereunto the Abbatesse with her maidens and widdowes used to resort that they might enjoy the banquet of the body and blood of Iesus Christ. which was agreeable to the practise not only of the Nunneries founded beyond the seas according to the rule of Columbanus where the Virgins received the body of the Lord and sipped his blood as appeareth by that which Ionas relateth of Domna in the life of Burgundofora but also of S. Brigid her selfe who was the foundresse of the monasterie of Kildare one of whose miracles is reported even in the later Legends to have happened when she was about to drinke out of the Chalice at the time of her receiving of the Eucharist which they that list to looke after may finde in the collections of Capgrave Surius and such like But you will say these testimonies that have beene alledged make not so much for us in proving the use of the communion under both kindes as they make against us in confirming the opinion of Transubstantiation seeing they all specifie the receiving not of bread and wine but of the body and blood of Christ. I answer that forasmuch as Christ himselfe at the first institution of his holy Supper did say expressely This is my body and This is my blood hee deserveth not the name of a Christian that will question the truth of that saying or refuse to speake in that language which hee hath heard his Lord and Master use before him The question onely is in what sense and after what maner these things must be conceived to be his body blood Of which there needed to be little question if men would be pleased to take into their consideration these two things which were never doubted of by the ancient and have most evident ground in the context of the Gospell First that the subject of those sacramentall propositions delivered by our Saviour that is to say the demonstrative particle THIS can have reference to no other substance but that which he then held in his sacred hands namely bread and wine which are of so different a nature from the body and blood of Christ that the one cannot possibly in proper sense be said to be the other as the light of common reason doth force the Romanists themselves to confesse Secondly that in the predicate or later part of the same propositions there is not mention made onely of Christs body and blood but of his body broken and his blood shedd to shew that his body is to be considered here apart not as it was borne of the Virgin or now is in heaven but as it was broken and crucified for us and his blood likewise apart not as running in his veynes but as shedd out of his body which the Rhemists have told us to be conditions of his person as he was in sacrifice and oblation And least we should imagine that his bodie were otherwise to be considered in the sacrament then in the sacrifice in the one alive as it is now in heaven in the other dead as it was offered upon the crosse the Apostle putteth the matter out of doubt that not only the minister in offering but also the people in receiving even as often as they eate this bread and drinke this cup doe shew the Lords death untill he come Our elders surely that held the sacrifice to be given and received for so we have heard themselves speake as well as offered did not consider otherwise of Christ in the sacrament then as he was in sacrifice and oblation If here therefore Christs body be presented as broken and livelesse and his blood as shedd forth and severed from his body and it be most certaine that there are no such things now really existent anie where as is confessed on all hands then must it follow necessarily that the bread and wine are not converted into these things really The Rhemists indeed tell us that when the Church doth offer and sacrifice Christ daily he in mysterie and sacrament dieth Further then this they durst not go for if they had said he died really they should thereby not only make themselves daily killers of Christ but also directly crosse that principle of the Apostle Rom. 6.9 Christ being raysed from the dead dyeth no more If then the bodie of Christ in the administration of the Eucharist be propounded as dead as hath bin shewed die it cannot really but only in mysterie and sacramēt how can it be thought to be contayned under the outward elements otherwise then in sacramēt mysterie and such as in times past were said to have received the sacrifice from the hand of the Priest what other body and blood could they expect to receive therein but such as was sutable to the nature of that sacrifice to wit mysticall and sacramentall Coelius Sedulius to whom Gelasius Bishop of Rome with his Synod of LXX Bishops giveth the title of venerable Sedulius and Hildephonsus Toletanus of the good Sedulius the Evangelicall poët the eloquent orator and the catholick writer is by Trithemius and others supposed to be the same with our Sedulius of Scotland or Ireland whose
them within his dominions in France he received such another answer from them as Thaddaeus in the Ecclesiasticall historie is said to have given unto Abgarus the governour of Edessa We who have forsaken our owne that according to the commandement of the Gospell we might follow the Lord ought not to embrace other mens riches least peradventure we should prove transgressors of the divine commandement How then did these men live will you say Walafridus Strabus telleth us that some of them wrought in the garden others dressed the orchard Gallus made netts and tooke fish wherewith he not only relieved his owne companie but was helpefull also unto strangers So Bede reporteth of Cuthbert that when he retired himselfe unto an anchoretical life he first indeed received a little bread from his brethren to feed upon and drank out of his owne well but afterwards hee thought it more fit to live by the worke of his owne hands after the example of the Fathers and therefore intreated that instruments might be brought him wherewith he might till the earth and corne that he might sowe Quique suis cupiens victum conquirere palmis Incultam pertentat humum proscindere ferro Et sator edomitis anni spem credere glebis The like doth he relate of Furseus and Bonifacius of Livinus and Theodorus Campidonensis or whosoever else wrote that book of Gallus Magnoaldus and the rest of the followers of Columbanus that they got their living by the labour of their owne hands And the Apostles rule is generally laid down for all Monks in the life of Furseus They vvhich live in monasteries should worke with silence and eate their owne bread I passe by a like sentence which we reade in the life of S. Brendan A Monke ought to be fedd and cloathed with the labour of his owne hands that is more memorable which others do write of the same Brendan that he governed three thousand Monkes who by their owne labours and handy-worke did earne their living Such was the monasterie of Magio founded in this countrey by Bishop Colman for the intertainment of the English where they did live according to the example of the reverend Fathers as Bede writeth under a rule and aâ— canonicall abbot in great continencie and sinceritie with the labour of their owne hands Such also was the monasterie of Mailros planted by Bishop Aidan and his followers in Northumberland where S. Cuthbert had his education who affirmed that the life of such monkes was justly to be admired which were in all things subject to the commands of their Abbot and ordered all the times of their watching praying fasting and working according to his direction Excubiasque famemque preces manuumque laborem Ad votum gaudent proni fraenare regentis As for their fasting for of their watching and praying there is no question made and of their working we have alreadie spoken sufficiently by the rule of Columbanus they were every day to fast and every day to eate that by this meanes the enabling of them for their spiritual proficiency might be retayned together with the abstinence that did macerate the flesh Hee would therefore have them every day to eate because they were every day to profite and because abstinence if it did exceed measure would proâ—e a vice and not a vertue and he would have them to fast everie day too that is not to eate anie meate at all for other fastes were not known in those dayes untill evening Let the food of Monkes saith he be meane and taken at evening flying satietie and excesse of drinke that it may both sustaine them and not hurt them This was the daily fasting and feeding of them that lived according to Columbanus his rule Such as followed the instructions of Bishop Aidan observed this kinde of fast on Wednesdayes Fridayes only upon which dayes they forbare eating of anie meate untill the ninth houre that is to say untill three of the clock in the afternoone according unto our account So Bishop Cedd who was brought up at Lindisfarne with Aidan and Finan keeping a strict fast upon a speciall occasion in the time of Lent did every day except the Lords day continue his fast as the maner was untill the evening and then also did eate nothing but a smal pittance of bread one egge with a little milke mingled with water Where by the way you may note that in those dayes egges were eaten in Lent and the Sondayes excepted from fasting even then when the abstinence was precisely and in more then an ordinarie maner observed But generally for this point of the difference of meals it is well noted by Claudius out of S. Augustin that the children of wisedome doe understand that neyther in abstayning nor in eating is there any vertue but in contentednesse of bearing the want and temperance of not corrupting a mans selfe by aboundance and of opportunely taking or not taking those things of which not the use but the concupiscence is to be blamed and in the life of Furseus the hypocrisie of them is justly taxed that being assaulted with spirituall vices doe yet omit the care of them and afflict their body with abstinence who abstayning from meates which God hath created to be received with thankesgiving fall to wicked things as if they were lawfull namely to pride covetousnesse envy false witnessing backbiting And so much for that matter Now concerning the Catholick Church our Doctors taught with S. Gregory that God hath a vineyard to wit the universall Church which from just Abel untill the last of the elect that shall be borne in the end of the world as many Saints as it hath brought forth so many branches as it were hath it budded that the congregation of the just is called the kingdome of heaven which is the Church of the just that the sonnes of the Church be all such as from the beginning of mankinde untill now have attayned to be just and holy that what is said of the body may be said also of the members and that in this respect as well the Apostles and all beleevers as the Church it selfe have the title of a pillar given them in the Scriptures that the Church may be considered two maner of wayes both that which neyther hath spot nor wrinkle and is truly the body of Christ and that which is gathered in the name of Christ vvithout full and perfect vertues which notwithstanding by the warrant of the Apostle may have the name of the Church given unto it although it be depraved with errour that the Church is sayd not to have spot or wrinkle in respect of the life to come that when the Apostle saith In a great house there are not only vessels of gold c. but some to honour and some to dishonour 2. Tim. 2.20 by this