seemeth not to me to be the Sense of this place which All whom I have read except Hilarie do thinke Item Their Opinions are divers I rest upon of them all Item All Ancients almost do so expound this Text but this is no fit Interpretation Item Thus I expound this Scripture and albeit I have no Author of this Exposition yet I do approve it rather than that of Augustine or of Others although otherwise most probable even because it is repugnant to the Sense and Exposition of the CALVINISTS So hee and that usually O dura ilia With what Stomach could this man swallow that Oath Salmeron the Iesuite may stand for the Third upon that Text Rom. 5. In whom all have sinned which teacheth the universall Guilt of Originall Sin of mankinde What the Sense of the Fathers was from this Text your Canus will certifie you g Canus 〈◊〉 Theol lib. 7. cap. 3. Sanct omnes qui in ejus rei mentionem incidôre uno ore asseruerunt B. Virginem in originali peccato conceptam fuisse And then hee rechoneth adding Et si nullos contravenerit infirmum tamen ex omnium autoritate ArgumentuÌ„ All they saith hee who have formerly fallen upon this subject matter have confessed as it were with one mouth that the Virgin Mary was conceived in Originall sin no one contrarying this Opinion So hee of the Iudgement of Antiquity which notwithstanding hee durst contradict But wee returne to your Iesuite who premising that this Question doth belong to Faith propoundeth h Saloteron Ies in Rom 5. Disp 49. In quo omnes peccaverunt Mariam conceptam in originali peccato etsi non sit haeresis damnata nempè tamen ad fidem spectat Item Disp 51. A qua multitudine Patrum locum ab autoritate infirmum Pauperis est numerare pecus Exod. 13. In judicio plurimorum non acquitsces sententiae ut à vero demas multitudinem multitudini opponimus At Devoti erga D. Virg. Resp Totam Devotionem erga illam non consistere in Patribus ut in Bernardo c. At Antiqui Resp Quilibet senex laudator temporis actiâ—sed illud asserimus quo juniores eo perspicactores Doctores esse After hee wrangleth and wresteth some sayings of Fathers to his part In celeberrimâ Pansiensium Academâ nullus in Theologia titolo Doctoris dignus habetur qui non primum jusjurandi religione se adstrinxerit ad hoc Virginis privilegium tuendum Objections made out of the Fathers for proofe that the Virgin Mary hath the same Originall defect in her owne naturall Generation and shapeth Answers full of regret and reluctancie For first To this Objection The Fathers did consent Hee answereth thus The Argument from Authority is infirme II. To this The Fathers were Ancient Thus The younger Divines are more quicke of understanding III. To this The Fathers were many Hee answereth Hee is but a poore man that can number his Cattell And againe confronting the Ancient Fathers and preferring novell Divines hee saith Wee oppose multitude to multitude IV. But The Fathers were Devout hee answereth Yet all Devotion towards the Blessed Virgin resteth not in the Fathers And when one of the Devoutest of them Bernard by name is objected who had said of the point now in Question i Bernard Epist 174. Hanc prolis praerogaâ—ivam B. Mariae tribuere non est honorate Virginem sed honori detrahere Et Paulò antè Nunquid Patribus doctiores aut devotiores simus To ascribe the prerogative of the Son to the Blessed Virgin is not an honouring but a dishonouring her wherein the same holy Bernard appealeth to Antiquity saying Are wee either more Learned or more Devout than the Fathers Your Iesuite answering to him by name casteth him off with the Rest Here wee see an Oath exacting a Consent to the Vnanimous Expositions of Fathers and heare notwithstanding as plaine a Dissent of your Iesuites opposition unto Vnanimous Consent of Fathers which is the ordinary guise of your Disputers in their expounding of Scriptures and yet behold you forsooth the native children and heires of the Doctrine of Ancient Fathers Your Fathers of the Councel of Trent have set it downe for a Canon whereunto you are also sworne that the words of Christ his Institution concerning the giving of his Body and Blood * Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Have a plaine and proper signification without Tropes which notwithstanding the same words of Christ have beene evinced to be Figurative not onely by the Vnanimous Consent of k Booke 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. and Chap. 2. Sect. 6. 7. Antiquity but also by the expresse l Booke 2. Cha. 2. Sect. 4. See also B. 3. Ch. 3. in the words The fruit of the Vine Sect. 5. Confessions of your owne Iesuites in the words Eate Breake Cup c. and wherin your selves have acknowledged divers Tropes Besides the whole former Treatise is but a displaying of your unconscionable wresting of the Testimonies of ancient Fathers Ponder you these Observations with your selves and then judge whether your Swearing be not Perjury it selfe IV. Overture of Perjury in the Defenders of the Romish Masse is in respect of the pretended Necessity of their Doctrine IN the last Clause of the Oath prescribed in the Bull of Pope Pius the fourth you are sworne that every Article therein is the a See above in this Sect. 4. Initio at the letter a. True Catholike Faith without which none can be saved among which is the Article already mentioned swearing to whatsoever was declared in the Councel of Trent by which Councel your now Romane b Synod Trident Sess 15. Missall or Masse-booke is approved Now take a Taste of your Oath in every Epithet First True and hereby are you sworne that in the dayes of Pope Innocentius the third the Administration of the Eucharist to Infants was not held necessary which your owne Authors have c Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 11. confessed and proved to be false Secondly that the presence of them who at the administration of the Eucharist do not communicate is * Ibid. Sect. 5. Sect. 10. Commendable and held a Doctrine Catholike that is anciently Vniversall which was generally condemned by Ancient Fathers and even in the Church of Rome it selfe abandoned by two d Booke 1. Cha. 2. Sect. 9. Popes Lastly in the point of Necessity to salvation To sweare that whosoever believeth not that one may be said to c Booke 1. Cha. 2. Sect. 5. Communicate alone is damned that whosoever believeth not that the Priest in the Masse being alone can duly say The Lord be with you hee is damned or that the f See Booke 4. Body of Christ may not be run away with Mice and be blowne away with the wind hee is damned and a number other like extreme foolish Crotchets set downe in your Missals which wee willingly omit The Summe of all these is that
also of the Authors Sinceritie and his Adversaries unconscionable Dealing in their Allegations of Authors Grace Peace and Truth in CHRIST JESVS AMong all the Controversies held against your Romish Religion none were ever more hott to draw Protestants violently into the fire than these two First the denying your Romane Church to bee The Catholike Church without which there is no Salvation Secondly the affirming the Romish Adoration of the Sacrament of the Altar to be Idolatrous Therefore have I especially undertaken the discussion of both these Questions that seeing as Saint Augustine truly said It is not the punishment but the Cause which maketh a Martyr it might fully appeare to the world whether Protestants enduring that fierie tryall for both Causes were indeed Heretikes or true Martyrs and consequently whether their Persecutors were just Executioners of persons then condemned and not rather damnable Murtherers of the faithfull Servants of Christ And I doubt not but as the first hath veverified the Title of that Booke to prove your Doctrine of the Necessitie of Salvation in your Romish Church to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE So this second which I now according to my promise present unto you will make good by many Demonstrations that your Romish MASSE is a very Masse or rather a Gulfe of many Superstitious Sacrilegious and Idolatrous Positions and Practises And because the very name of ROMANE CHVRCH is commonly used as in it selfe a powerfull enchantment to stupifie everie Romish Disciple and to strike him deafe and dumbe at once that hee may neither heare nor utter any thing in Conference concerning the Masse or any other Controversie in Religion be the Protestants Defence never so Divine for Trueth or Ancient for Time or Vniversall for Consent or Necessarie for Beleefe I therefore held it requisite in the first place to discover the falshood of the former Article of your Church before I would publish the Abominations of the Masse to the end that for Iâ—â—latrie in Scripture is often termed spirituall Adulterie the Romish Church which playeth the Bawd in patronizing Idolatrie being once outted your Romish Masse as the Strumpet might the more easily either bee reformed or wholly abandoned This may satisfie you for the necessitie of this Tractate The next must bee to set before you your owne delusorie trickes in answering or not answering Bookes written against you especially such as have beene observed from mine owne experience One is to strangle a Booke in the very birth So dealt Master Brerely long since by a Letter writ unto mee to prevent the publishing of my Answere against the first Edition of his Apologie when hee sent mee a second Edition thereof to be answered which both might and ought to have beene sent a twelve moneth sooner but was purposely reserved not to bee delivered untill the very day after my * See the Protestants Appeale in the beginning Answere called An Appeale was published Of which his prevention I have therefore complained as of a most unconscionable Circumvention Another device you have to give out that the Booke whatsoever written against your Romish Tenents is in answering and that an Answere will come out shortly So dealt Master Parsons with mee * In his Sober Reckoning Certifying mee and all his credulous Readers of an Epistle which hee had received from a Scottish Doctor censuring my Latine Apologies to be both fond and false and promising that his Answere to them Printed at Gratz in Austria should be published before the Michaelmas next following whereas there have beene above twentie Michaelmasses sithence every one giving Master Parsons his promise the flatt lye A third Art is a voluntarie Concealement And thus Master Brerely who having had knowledge of the fore-mentioned Booke of Appeale manifesting his manifold Aberrations and Absursurdities in doctrine his ignorances and fraudes in the abuse of his Authors as in other passages throughout that Booke so more especially the parts concerning the Romish Masse yet since hath written a large Booke in defence of the Romish Liturgie or Masse urging all the same Proofes and Authorities of Fathers but wisely concealing that they had beene confuted and his Falshoods discovered Onely hee and Master Fisher singling out of my Appeale an Explanation which I gave of the Testimonie of Gelasius in condemning the Manichees concerning their opinion of not administring the Eucharist in both kindes did both of them divulge it in their Bookes and reports also in many parts of this Kingdome as making for the justification of their sacrilegious dismembring the holy Sacrament and for a foule Contradiction unto my selfe notwithstanding that this their scurrilous insultation as is * Boâ—ke 1. cap. 3. Sect. 7. heere proved serveth for nothing rather than to make themselves ridiculous The last but most base and devillish Gullerie is a false imputation of Falshoods in the alleging of Authors which was the fine sleight of Master Parsons a man as subtile for Invention as elegant for Expression for Observation as dextrous and acute and as politike and perswasive for Application as any of his time Hee in an Answere to some Treatises written against your Romish blacke Art of Aequivocation by mentall Reservation and other Positions fomenting Rebellion to wit in his Bookes of Mitigation and Sober Reâ—koning doeth commonly leave the principall Objections and reasons and falleth to his verball skirmishes concerning false Allegations and as turning that Ironicall Counsell into earnest Audacter fortiter calumniare c. hee chargeth mee with no lesse than fiftie Falsifications All which I spunged out in a Booke entituled an Encounter and retorted all the same Imputations of falshood upon himselfe with the interest discovering above forty more of his owne Which may seeme to verifie that Cognizance which your owne Brother-hood of Romish Priests in their Quodlibets have fastened on his sleeve calling him The Quintessence of Coggerie As for mine owne Integritie I have that which may justifie mee for howsoever any one or other Error may happen in mis-alleging any one Authour yet that I have not erred much or if at all yet never against my Conscience Heereof I have many Witnesses One within mee a witnesse most Domesticall yet least partiall and as good as Thousands mine owne Conscience a second is above mee GOD who is Greater than the Conscience A third sort of Witnesses are such as stand by mee even all they who have beene conversant with mee in the Perusall and Examination of Authours Testimonies by mee alleged men of singular Learning and Iudgement who can testifie how much they endeared them-selves unto mee when any of them happened to shew mee the least errour in any thing Hee that shall say Non possum errare must be no man and hee that will not say Nolo errare as hating to erre can be no Christian man The last Witnesse for my integritie may bee the Bookes of my greatest Adversaries Master Parsons and Master Brerely whose many scores of Falshoods have beene layd so
the way if wee shall consult with 18 Bertram de Corpore sanguine Domini after that he had cited Ambrose Hierome Austine Origen Fulgentius saith Animadvertat clarissimè Princeps sapientia vestra quod positis sanctarum â—rupturarum testimonijs sanctorum Patrum dictis evidentissimè monstratum est quod panis qui corpus Christi Calâ—s qui sanguis Christi appellatur figura sit quâ—à mysterium quod non parva differeâ—◠〈…〉 corpus quod per mysterium existit corpus quod passum est Quia hoc proptum Servatoris corpus â—st nec in eo aliqua figura est sed ipsa rei manifestatio At in isto quod per mysterium geritur figura est non solum proprij Christi corporis verumetiam credentis in Christum populi Bertram to know what he hath observed both out of Scriptures and Testimonies of Ancient Fathers by name Ambrose Augustine Hierome and Fulgentius he doth tell his Prince and Emperour that They demonstrate that the Bread which is called the Bodie of Christ is a figure because a Mysterie and that there is no small difference betweene the same Body which is the Mysterie and the Bodie which was crucified for that this is the proper Bodie of Christ and no figure but a manifestation But in that which is done by a Mysterie there is a figure both of the proper Bodie of Christ and also of the people that believe in him The same Orthodoxe Fathers of Primitive times thirteene in number have told us already that Christ called * See above B. 2. Chaâ— 1 Sect. 6. Bread his Body which hath beene the overthrow of your Romish Expositions of Christ's speech as you have heard Saint Cyprian saying that Christ created his owne Body thereby as your * â—yp ian See Book 3. 〈◊〉 4 Sect. 2. in 〈◊〉 second Ediâ—ion Cardinall confessed meaning Bread The Fathers of the Councel of Carthage forbidding any thing to be offered in this mysterie but Bread and Wine mixed with Water deliver their Canon thus 29 Conc. Carâ—â—ag Tempare Bontâ—â— Can 37. Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lâ—tta apud Bin. Canon 4. In Sacramento corporis sanguinis Domini nihil amplius offeratur quà m quod Dominus prodidit hoc est Panis Vâ—num aquâ mixtum Which is a most corrupt Transtation and ought to bee thus Nihil amplius quà m corpus sanguis Domini id est Panis Vinum Which is recorded De Consecrat Cap. In Sacramento It can be no Answer to say that they meant the Layâ—â—ffering before Consecration becauâ—e they call that Offering now spoken of The Body and Blood of Christ which all know to bee spoken Sacerdotally before it was consecrated That nothing in those sacred mysteries be offered more than the Body and Blood of Christ as Christ himselfe hath ordained That is say they than the Bread and Wine Hereby plainly teaching that as they are called Christ's Bodie and Blood in their Sacramentall and Mysticall use and signification so are they Bread and Wine in their proper essence The foresaid Canon is registred among the Papall Decrees The Heretike Novatus binding some Receivers of the Eucharist to his part by saying 30 Euseb lib. 6. Cap. 35. Verba Novati Eucharistiam sumpturo Iura mihi per corpus sanguinem Domini te nunquà m me deserturum c. Whereupon Eusebius Miser ille homo non priùs degustavit Graec. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Here the Translator omitteth in his Translation the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bread Sweare to me by the Bodie and Blood of Christ not to depart from mee Hereupon Eusebius So the miserable man did not receive that Bread before he had said Amen that is given consent to the Motion of Novatus Where we finde Eusebius calling it Bread which had beene Consecrated by Novatus and named The Bodie of Christ This our Collection may be held so much the rather of some force because the Romish Translator which was Christoferson Bishop of Chichester according to his guise els-where did fairely leave out the word Bread but is a foule fault in a Translator of an History Will you have any more you may admit into the same Cuire these other Suffrages of Cyprian Hierome Eucherius and Primasius * See afterwards B. 6. C. 3. §. â— Melchizedech in his Oblation of Bread and Wine offered the Body and Blood of Christ Calling that the Body and Blood of Christ which then before Christ his incarnation in the flesh could bee essentially nothing but Bread and Wine because it was onely a Type of the Body and Blood of Christ to come And what will you say to the other * See afterwards B. 6. C. 5. §. 11. Fathers who affirmed hereof in as full an Emphasis that Christ is still Crucified bleeding and slaine in this Sacrament notwithstanding that our Christian Faith generally beleeved denyeth that this can happen to his glorified Body now after his Resurrection and therefore such Phrases were to be understood of the breaking of the Bread and powring out of Wine Sacramentally and Analogically that is Figuratively representing the Crucifying of his Body and Shedding of his Blood The Fathers who used this accent of speech were Alexander and Gregory both Popes of Rome Chrysostome Cyprian Hierome Cyrill of Hierusalem Hesychius Paschasius Eusebius Emissenus Enow one would thinke to silence all Oppositions of them who are instant in nothing more than in pressing the Improprieties of the speeches of Antiquitie in a literall sense and hereby verifying that Proverbe of Salomon Qui nimis emuâ—git elicit sanguinem Even so they who by the same Reason wherby they urge the sayings of Fathers literally for the proofe of an unbloody Sacrifice properly so called must be constrained likewise â—o admit against the Catholike faith of all Christians a Sacrifice properly slaine and bloodie therein The like will bee proved from their other Hyperboles and the Excessive termes of Antiquitie viz. of Tearing Christs Bodie and dying our teeth in his Blood and the like in the * Booke 5. thorow-out fifth Booke and from their checking their owne Phrase of offering the Sacrifice of his Bodie by recalling and correcting themselves immediatly thus Or rather a Memoriall thereof in the * Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 6. sixth Booke All these Observations are as demonstrable for the vindicating of the judgement of Ancient Fathers as any Child of the Catholike Church could have desired if the same holy Fathers had beene intreated to expound their owne meanings Wee returne to our former Argument Christ Instituting a Sacrament and in Taking Bread and Blessing Bread saying This is my Bodie must necessarily bee understood to have spoken Sacramentally that is Figuratively as hath beene prooved from Scripture as in all other Sacraments so likewise in the severall confessed Figurative words of Christ concerning this Sacrament by eight severall Instances in this second Booke This one Argument
Dei modus igitur edendi Patribus à nostro diversus quia Substantialis hodiè manducatio quae tunc esse non potuit nempe dum carne pro nobis immolatâ Christus nos pascit ut vitam ab ejus substantia hauriamus Ibid. pag. 83. Calvin himselfe as would make any Romish Adversary blush at your former Calumnies who hath not abandoned shamefastnesse it selfe ⚜ As that your Doctor must needs have done 1 Dr. Heskins in his Parliam of Christ Book 3. cap. 48. who therefore upbraided Protestants with their Common Bread onely because they denyed it to be Transubstantiated into Christ's Body even in the same his Booke wherein notwithstanding he confesseth the Shew-Bread delivered to David by Abimelech to have beene no Common Bread Which because it was before Christ incarnate in the flesh you your selves will sweare was not Transubstantiated into the Body of Christ and yet notwithstanding was it no Common Bread CHALLENGE THus may you see that wee have not hitherto so pleaded for the Existence of the Substance of Bread in this Sacrament after Consecration as thereby to exclude all Presence of Christ his Body nor so maintained the proprietie of a Signe or Figure as not to beleeve the thing signified to be exhibited unto us as you have heard With what blacke spot of malignity and falshood then were the Consciences of those your Doctors defiled thinke you who have imputed to Protestants a Profession of using onely bare Bread which they notwithstanding teach and beleeve to bee a Sacred Signe of the true Body of Christ in opposition to Heretikes an Evangelicall Signe of the Body of the Messias crucified against all Iewish conceit yea a Seale of Ratification yea and also a Sacramentall Instrument of conveying of the same precious Body of Christ to the soules of the faithfull by an happy and ineffable Conjunction whereof more hereafter in the * In the fift Book throughout Booke following where the consonant doctrine of the Church of England will likewise appeare And as your Disputers are convinced of a malicious Detraction by the confessed positions of Protestants so are they much more by your owne Instance of a Crucifix◠for which of you would not hold it a great derogation from Christ that any one seeing a Crucifix of wood now waxen old should in disdaine thereof call it a wooden or rotten Blocke and not account them irreligious in so calling it but why onely because it is a signe of Christ crucified Notwithstanding were the Crucifix as glorious as either Art could fashion or Devotion affect or Superstition adore yet is it but a signe invented by man And therefore how infinitely more honourable in all Christian estimation must a Sacramentall Signe be which onely the God of Heaven and Earth could institute and Christ hath ordained to his Church farre exceeding the property of a bare signe as you have heard A Father delivering by politike assurances under hand and seale a portion of Land although an hundred miles distant and conveying it to his Sonne by Deed if the Sonne in scorne should terme the same Deed or writing blacke Inke the Seale greasie Waxe and the whole Act but a bare signe were he not worthy not only to loose this fatherly Benefit but also to be deprived of all other the temporall Blessings of a Father which hee might otherwise hope to enjoy yet such like have beene your Calumnies and opprobrious Reproaches against our celebration of the Sacrament of Christ The Lord lay not them to your Charge Now you who so oppose against the Truth of the Mysticall Presence will not conceale from us that Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ which your Church doth so extremely dote on CHAP. II. The Romish professed maner of Presence of Christs Body in this Sacrament SECT I. OVr Methode requireth to consult in the first place in all Questions with the words of Christ his Institution but seeing that you can allege nothing for proofe of a Corporall Presence of Christ in this Sacrament but only a literall Exposition of Christ's words This is my Body which by Scriptures Fathers your owne Principles and by unanswerable Reasons hath beene * Booke 2. proved to be most grosly false wee shall not need to insist further upon that only wee shall but put you in mind of Saint Pauls words in teaching the use and end of Christ his Institution of this Sacrament to wit The shewing of Christ's death untill his coming againe meaning corporally at the last day Which word VNTILL being spoken of a last day doth exclude your coming againe of Christ in his Corporall Presence every day for the Apostles word is absolutely spoken of his Bodily Coming and not of the maner therof albeit other Scripture teach that his Coming must be in all glorious Visibility We goe on In the Eucharist saith your m Si quis negaverit in sanctissima Eucharistia contineri verè realiter substantialiter corpus sanguinem Christi Anathema sit Concil Trid. Sess 13. Can. 1. Nos dicimus Dominum Christum corporalitèr sub specie panis conemeri Gre. Valent. Tom. 4. disp 6. qu. 3. pag 1. Councell of Trent is contained truly really and substantially the Body and Blood of Christ and they account him Accursed whosoever shall not beleeve this By all which is signified a Corporall maner of presence excepting onely Relation to place which we say is in many respects impossible as wee shall prove but first wee are to remove two Mil-stones for so you esteeme your Objections which you cast in our way of Demonstration of a Corporall Presence First de facto from as you say Miracles manifesting the same And the Second is your Pretence of Omnipotencie for the effectuating that Presence The pretended principall Romish Demonstration of a Corporall Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in this Sacrament taken from pretended n Supremus Iorus detur miraculis veluti testimonis 〈◊〉 Dei Bozius de finis Eccles lib 14. cap. 7. pag. 170. Miraculous Apparitions of visible Flesh and Blood revealed to the World SECT II. TRue Miracles wee shall hold as Gods Seales of Divine Truth if therefore you shall allege any such for proofe of a Corporall Presence see they be true else shall wee judge them not to be Gods Seales but the Devills Counterfaits Your Bozius one of the number of the Congregation of the Oratory in Rome professedly studied in historicall learning and appointed to extract out of all Authors whatsoever may make for defence of all Romish Causes after his diligent search into all ancient Records as it were into the Ware-houses of all sorts of stuffes having collected a packet of Apparences useth his best Eloquence to set forth his merchandize to sale telling us by the way of Preface o Hic ea tantummodò referemus quibus est palam factum divinitus in Eucharistia verum corpus esse oculi humani viderunt quod est omnium
the same your Oath made to damne others doth serve chiefly to make the Swearers themselves most damnable If peradventure any of you shall oppose saying that none of you within this Kingdome which never admitted of the Councel of Trent nor of the Bull of Pope Pius the fourth are yet bound to that Oath let him know that although this may excuse him from an Actuall Perjury yet can it not free him from the Habituall which is that hee is disposed in himselfe to take it whensoever it shall be offered unto him in any Kingdome that doth imbrace and professe the same Our last Advertisement followeth Of the Mixture of many old Heresies with the former Defence of the Romish Masse SECT V. THe more odious the Title of this Section may seëme to be the more studious ought you to shew your selves in examining the proofes thereof that so you may either confute or confesse them and accordingly re-assume or renounce your Romish Defence Heresie hath a double aspect One is when it is direct having the expresse termes of Heresie the Other is oblique and by consequence when the Defence doth inferre or imply necessarily the same Hereticall Sense even as it may be said of Treason For to say that Caesar is not King is a Treasonable speech Directly in a plaine Sense and to say that Tribute money is not due to Caesar is as Treasonable in the Consequence Thus much being premised wee are now to recognize such Errours wherin your Disputers may seeme to have accordance with old Heretikes which point wee shall pursue according to the order of the Bookes BOOKE I. Wherein your Church is found altering almost the whole forme of Christ his Institution and the Custome of the Catholike Church descended from the Apostles which Presumption Pope a Booke 1. Cha. 3. Sect. 3. Iulius condemned in divers who sopped the Bread in the Chalice and squeezed Grapes in the Cup and so received them even as did the * Ibid Artotyritae in mingling Bread with Cheese censured for Heretickes by your Aquinas In which Comparison your Aberration from Christs example is so much greater than theirs as you are found Guilty in defending b Booke 1. thorowout Ten Innovations for one 2. Your Pope Gelasius condemned the Hereticall Manichees for thinking it lawfull not to receive the Cup in the Administration of the Eucharist judging it to be c Booke 1. Cha. 3. Sect. 7. Greatly Sacrilegious notwithstanding your d Ibid. Church authorizeth the same Custome of forbidding the Administration of the Cup to fit Communicants 3. As c Booke 1. Cha. 3. Sect. 10. you pretend Reverence for withdrawing the Cup so did the f Ibid. Sect. 10. Aquarij forbeare wine and used onely Water under a pretence of Sobriety 4. Sometime there may be a Reason to do a thing when as yet there is no right nor Authority for him that doth it Wee therefore exact of you an Authority for altering the Apostles Customes and Constitutions and are answered that g Booke 1. Cha. 3. Sect. 4. your Church hath Authority over the Apostles Precepts Iump with them who being asked why they stood not unto the Apostles Traditions replyed that h Ibid. They were herein above the Apostles whom therefore Irenaeus reckoneth among the Heretikes of his Time BOOKE II. It is not nothing which hath beene observed therein to wit your Reasoning why you ought not to interpret the words of Christ This is my Body i Booke 2. Cha. 3. thorowout literally and why you urge his other Saying Except you eate my flesh k Ibid. for proofe of Bodily Eating so that your Priest may literally say in your Masse that The Body of Christ passeth into your Bellies and Entrails because forsooth the words of Christ are l Booke 2. Cha. 3. Sect. 2. Doctrinall And have you not heard of one Nicodemus who hearing Christ teach that every man must be * Ioh. 3. Borne againe who shall be partaker of Gods Kingdome and that hee expounding them in a Literall Sense conceited a new Entrance into his Mothers wombe when as nothing wanted to turne that his Errour into an Heresie but onely Obstinacie But of the strong and strange Obstinacies of your Disputers you have received a full m See above in this Booke Chap. 2. Sect. 3. Synopsis BOOKE III. After followeth your Article of Transubstantiation I. Your direct profession is indeed to believe no Body of Christ but that which was Borne of the Virgin Mary But this your Article of Transubstantiation of Bread into Christ's Body generally held according to the proper nature of Transubstantiation to be by n Booke 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 2. Production of Christs Body out of the Substance of Bread it necessarily inferreth a Body called and believed to be Christs which is not Borne of the Blessed Virgin as Saint Augustine hath plainly o Booke 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. taught diversifying the Bodily thing on the Altar from the Body of Christ borne of the Virgin Therefore your Defence symbolizeth with the Heresie of Apollinaris who taught a p Booke 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 2 Body not Borne of the Virgin Mary Secondly You exclude all judgement of q Booke 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 9. Senses in discerning Bread to be truly Bread as did the r Manichaei dicebant Christum non esse verum hominem sed phantasma quoddam Prâ—teol Elench Haeret. Manichees in discerning Christ's Body when hee was heere alive which they thereupon held not to have beene a True but a Phantasticall Body Tertullian also challengeth the Verity of Sense in judging of Wine in the Eucharist after Consecration in Confutation of the same Errour in the Marcionites Thirdly for Defence of Christ his invisible Bodily Presence you professe that after Consecration Bread is no more the same but changed into the Body of Christ which Doctrine in very expresse words was bolted out by an Eutychian Heretike and instantly coudemned by Å¿ Booke 3. Cha. 3. Sect. 12. Theodoret and as fully abandoned by Pope t Ibid. Sect. 13. Gelasius BOOKE IV. Catholike Fathers were in nothing more zealous than in defending the distinct properties of the two natures of Christ his Deity and Humanity against the pernicious Heresies of the Manichees Marcionites Eutychians and Eunomians all of them diversly oppugning the Integrity of Christ's Body sometime in direct termes and sometime by irrefragrable Consequences whether it were by gaine-saying the Finitenesse or Solidity or else the compleat Perfection thereof wherein how farre yee may challenge affinity or kindred with them be you pleased to examine by this which followeth I. The Heretikes who undermined the property of Christ's Bodily Finitenesse said that it was in divers places at once as is u Book 4. Chap. 4. Sect. â— Chap. â— Sect. 3. Chap. 6. Sect. 1. confessed even as your Church doth now attribute unto the same Body of Christ both in Heaven and in Earth