not but as the first hath verified the Title of that Booke to prove your Doctrine of the Necessity of salvation in your Romish Church to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE So this second which I now according to my promise present vnto 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 Church is commonly used as in it selfe a powerfull enchantment to stupifie every Romish Disciple and to strike him deafe and dumbe at once that he may 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 universall for Consent or necessary 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 Idolatrie in Scripture is often termed spirituall Adulterie the Romish Church which playeth the Bawd in patronizing Idolatry being once outted your Romish Masse as the Strumpet might the more easily either be reformed or wholly abandoned This may satisfie you for the necessity of this Tractate The next must be to set before you your owne delusorie tricks in answering or not answering Bookes written against you especially such as have beene observed from mine owne experience One is to stangle a Booke in the very birth so dealt Mr. Breereley long since by a letter writ unto mee to prevent the publishing of my Answere against the first Edition of his Apologie when he sent me a second Edition thereof to be answered which both might and ought to have beene sent a twelve-month sooner but was purposely reserved to be delivered not untill the very day after my Answere called and 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 Mr. Parsons with me Certifying me 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 following whereas there have beene above twenty Michaelmasses sithence every one giving Mr. Parsons his promise the flatt lie A third Art is a voluntarie Concealement and thus Maister Brereley who hauing had knowledge of the fore-mentioned Booke of Appeale manifesting his manifold Aberrations and Absurdities in doctrine his ignorances and fraudes in the abuse of his Authors as in other passages through-out that booke so more especially the parts concerning the Romish Masse yet since hath written a large Booke in defence of the Romish Liturgy or Masse vrging all the same proofes and Authorities of Fathers but wisely concealing that they had beene confuted and his fashoods discouered Only he and Master Fisher singling out of my Appeale an explanation which I gaue 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 iustification of their sacrilegious dismembring the holy Sacrament and fora foule Contradiction vnto my selfe notwithstanding that this their scurrilous iusultation as is here proued serueth for nothing rather than to make themselues ridiculous The last but most base and deuellish Gullerie is a false imputation of Falshoods in the alleaging of Authors which was the fine sleight of Master Parsons a man as subtileâ— for inuention as elegant for expression for obseruation as dextrous and acute and as politike and perswasiue for application as any of his time He in an answere to some Treatises written against your Romish blacke art of Aequiuocation by mentall Reseruation and other Positions fomenting Rebellion to wit in his bookes of Mitigation and Sober Reckoning doth commonly leaue the principall Obiections Reasons and falleth to his verball skirmishes concerning false Allegations and as turning that Ironicall counsaile into earnest Audacter fortiter calumniare c. he 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 of above forty more Which may seeme to verifie that Cognizance which your owne Brother-hood of Romish Priests in their Quodlibets have fastened on his sleeue calling him The Quintessence of Coggerie As for mine owne integritie I have that which may iustifie mee for howsoever any one or other Error may happen in mis-alleaging any one Author yet that I have not erred much or if at all yet never against my Conscience Heereof I have many witnesses One within me a witnesse most Domesticall yet least partiall and as good as Thousands mine owne Conscience a second is above me 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 Authors Testimonies by mee alleaged men of singular learning and iudgement who can testifie how much they endeared them-selves vnto 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 be the Bookes of my greatest Adversaries Mr. Parsons and Mr. Brereley whose many scores of falshoods have beene laid so open and published for above sixteene yeares past in two Bookes one called an Encounter against the fore-man the other an Appeale against the second yet hath not any one appeared out of your Romish Seminaries for the vindicating of them heerein By these Advertisements you may easily conceive with what confidence I may proceede in this worke wherein is displayed and layd open in the discussing of these Eight Words of Christ his Institution of the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist HEE BLESSED BRAKE GAVE TO THEM SAYING TAKE EATE DRINKE your Ten Romish Prevarications and Transgressions Afterwards in the following Bookes are reveiled the stupendious Paradoxes Sacrilegiousnes and Idolatrie of your MASSE together with the notorious Obstinacies some fewe Overtures of Periuries out of that great Summe which may afterwards be manifested in your swearing to the other Articles of your new Romane Faith and the manifold Heresies in the Defenders thereof as also their indirect and sinister Obiecting and Answering of the Testimonies of ancient Fathers thorow-out as if they contended neither from Conscience nor for Conscience-sake
Bigne all which have intituled this Gelasius Pope of Rome Howsoever it is confessed on all sides that he was an Orthodoxe Father and very Ancient Now then Gelasius said that The Sacraments of the Body and Blood of Christ being Divine things yet cease not to be the nature and substance of Bread and Wine In Answere whereunto both your foresaid Cardinals here as before by Substance interpret Accidents one of them labouring to prove that Gelasius somewhere else called Accidents Substances Were this granted yet the Argument which Gelasius hath in hand will compell the understanding Reader to acknowledge in this his Sentence a proper signification of Substance For whereas the Heretique Eutyches taught that Christ his Body was changed into the Substance of his Divinity after the Resurrection and that the substance of his Body remained no more the same Gelasius confuteth him by a Similitude and Comparison viz. That as the Substance of Bread remaineth after Consecration So Christ his Bodily Substance remained after the Resurrection Wherein if the word Substance be not in both places taken properly Gelasius should have made but a mad Reason as any reasonable man will confesse For albeit Similitudes doe not amble alwayes on foure feet yet if they halt upon the right foot which is the matter in Question they are to be accounted perfit Dissimilitudes Master Brereley would have you to know that this Gelasius whosoever hee were writeth against the same Eutychian Heresie that Theodoret did and thereupon useth accordingly to his like aduantage the words Substance and Nature in the same sence as did Theodoret. So he And he saith true and therefore must wee assure our selves of the consent of this Gelasius with us untill you shall be able to free your selves from our former Interpretation of Theodoret. But Mr. Brerely opposeth against us another sentence of Gelasius from whence he concludeth that Gelasius held Transubstantiation so that Gelasius must rather contradict himself then that he shal not consent to the Romish Tenet Whereas indeed hee saith no more than in a mysticall sence any Protestant must and will allow viz. that The Sacrament is a Divine thing and that whosoever eate spiritually the Body of Christ are by it made partakers of the blessing of his Divine Nature which dwelleth in Christ bodily saith the Apostle So Gelasius To which saying of Gelasius touching the Eucharist is answerable a like saying of Gregory Nyssen concerning Baptisme calling it a Divine Laver working miraculous effects Yea and Dionysius the Areopagite bestowed the same Attribute viz. Divine upon the Altar the Symbols the Priest the People and the Bread it selfe in the Eucharist If therefore the Epithet Divine must argue a Corporall Change what a number of Transubstantiations must you be inforced to allow Fie upon blind boldnesse This mans falsity in alledging Chemnitius I let passe It is further worthy your Reflection to observe your Disputers how earnest they have bin to prove that this Author was not Pope Gelasius contrary to the acknowledgement of your owne Historians May wee not therefore suspect that the Testimony obiected was distastfull unto them when they so greatly feared lest this Witnesse should be thought to have beene a Pope and Supreame Paster of your Church Two other Testimonies from Antiquity for the expresse acknowledgement of the Existence of Bread after Consecration in the Sacrament Chrysostome and Bertram SECT XIIII CHrysostome his words are these that Bread after Consecration is freed from the name of Bread being accounted worthy of the name of the Body of Christ albeit the nature of it remaineth therein still Your Exception is that this Epistle is not extant among the workes of Chrysostome This Answer might satisfie us were it not that it was extant sometime in the Libraries of Florence and Canterbury To whom may be adioyned the Authour of that Vnperfect worke still standing under the name of Chrysostome and by you upon any occasion obiected against vs wherein it is expressly said that The True Body of Christ is not contained within these sanctified Vessels It seemeth that your later Parisian Divines were offended with others who would have these words utterly dashed out of their last Editions which were published in the former as you have beene admonished by one most worthy and able to advertise in this kind Bertram is our next witnesse from Antiquity being about 800. yeares agoe and never noted of Errour antiently untill these later times of Booke-butchery that wee may so call your Index Expurgatorius denying altogether all liberty to all men of reading this Booke But why what saith he Hee maintaineth saith your Senensis that the Eucharist is the substance of Bread and Wine And indeed so he doth in his Booke dedicated to the Emperour Carolus Calvus which also he affirmeth to be written According to the truth of Scriptures and iudgement of Ancient Fathers before him This Author undergoeth also the Censure of the Vniversity of Doway which confessing him to have beene a Catholique Priest framed divers Answers whereby they meant to prevent all obiections which Protestants might peradventure urge vnder the Authority of this Author Bertram But how Marke this Romish Profession of answering Protestants as often as they shall insist in the Testimonies of antient Writers Let us say they in Disputation with our Adversaries obiecting ancient Authors tolerate many of their Errours extenuate and excuse them yea and oftentimes by some devised Comment deny them as also by feigning to apply some apt sence unto them So that Vniuersitie This being the guise and professed Art of your Schooles to use all their wits how to delude their Opposites in Disputation what great confidence shall any have of their sincerity in answering Let us leave Bertram under the Testification and Commendation of Abbot Trithemius for his Excellent Learning in Scripture his godly life his worthy Books and by name this now mentioned written expressly Of the Body and Blood of Christ CHAP. IV. Answeres to the Obiections of Romish Doctours taken from the Testimonies of Antient Fathers for Transubstantiation Or an Antidote to expell all their poysonsome Pretences in that behalfe SECT I. THis our Antidote is compounded of five Ingredients vsed for the Discovery of the Vnconscionablenes of your Disputers in their Obiecting the Testimonies of Fathers under False pretences First upon their terming the mysticall Act A Worke of Omnipotencie Secondly their denying of the Eucharist to be Naked and Bare Bread Thirdly in forbidding the Communicants to rely vpon the Iudgement of their Senses Fourthly in their mentioning the Change of Bread and Wine in this Sacrament and calling it Transmutation Transition and the like Fiftly and lastly in forcing of the speeches of Fathers which may seeme to make for Transubstantiation as absolutely spoken of the Sacrament of the Eucharist which the same Fathers doe apply as well to the Sacrament of Baptisme and
Perplexity in the Romish worship Book 7. Chap. 9. Sect. 3. Propitiatory Sacrifice distinguished B. 6. Ch. 8. Sect. 1. Objectively Chap. 9. Sect. 2. The Romish Propitiatory void of Propitiatory qualities Booke 6. Chap. 10. Sect. 1 c. Protestants professe an Vnion with Christ more than figurative B. 5. Ch. 2. They professe a Sacrifice both Encharisticall and Latreuticall B. 6. Ch. 7. Sect. 1 c. And offer Christ's Propitiatory Sacrifice objectively Ib. Sect. 4. Slandered as celebrating Bare Bread Book 4. Ch. 1. Sect. 3. In the celebration of the Eucharist they use due Reverence and are free from all Perplexities wherewith the Romish are intangled in their worship Booke 7. Ch. 9. Sect. 3. See Vnion Q. QVantity and Quality differ extremely in respect of their being in place or space Booke 4. Chap. 6. Sect. 6. R. REservation of the Eucharist to other ends than eating is an Innovation Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 10. Reverence of this Sacrament falsly pretended for an Alteration of Christ's Institution Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 10. Reverence professed by Protestants B. 7. Ch. 9. What are the properties of due Reverence Ibid. See Adoration and Idolatry S. SAcrifice not properly so called in the now Testament Book 6. Chap. 1. and so thorowout the Book 6. Not proved by Christ's Institution or any Scripture whether Typicall or Propheticall Chap. 3 c. Commemorative only not proper Ch. 5 c. The Romish Masse is destitute of all Sacrificing Acts Chap. 6. Sect. 1. Sacrifice how professed by Protestants Ch. 7. Sect. 1. Sacrilegiousnesse of the Romish Masse in a Synopsis Booke 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 2. Scriptures their Exposition impudently appropriated to the Romish Church Booke 8. Ch. 2. Sect. 8. Shed in Christ's Institution taken unproperly without effusion of Blood B. 6. Ch. 1. Sect. 4. Of the Present Tense B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 4. Similitude of making a Circle is but a juggling Invention for proofe of Transubstantiation or the literall sence of Christ's words B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 2. Another of a Stage-play for proofe of a proper Sacrifice â—idioulously objected B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Chall 2. B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 7. Ch. 5. Sect. 12. Slander of Iewes Pagans against Christians as eating a Childe foolishly objected for proofe of a Corporall eating of Christ's flesh B. 5. Chap. 9. Sect. 1. Against Protestants as denying God's omnipotency B. 4. Ch. 3. Sect. 1 4. And as if they held but bare bread in the Sacrament Booke 4. Chap. 1. Sect. 3. Soule fondly objected for proofe of a possibility of a Bodies existence in many places at once Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 2. A great difference betweene Body and Soule B. 4. Ch. 7. Sect. 7. Stage-play See Similitude Superstitiousnesse of the Romish Masse in a Synopsis Book 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. T. TOngue unknowen unlawfull in Gods Service Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. Translation called the Vulgar Latine rejected by the Romish Disputers notwithstanding their Oath to the contrary Booke 8. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. Booke 〈◊〉 Chap. 1. Sect. 2. And yet objected B. 6. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. Transubstantiation not proved by Christ's words This is my Body Booke 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 1. Novelty of the word and Article Ibid. Bread remaineth Sect. 4 c. As well foure Transubstantiations evinced out of the same Testimonies of Fathers whereby the Romish Disputers seeke to prove one B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 3. Types and Antitypes how applyed to the Eucharist by the Fathers B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. V. VIaticum spoken of by the Fathers objected idly B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 3. Vnbloody Sacrifice so termed of the Fathers to signifie void of blood as in the Sacrifice of Melchizedech B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 9. which they also call a Bloody Sacrifice Ibid. Ch. 5. Sect. 11. Vnion of Christ's body with the bodies of the Communicants by this Sacrament is spirituall B. 5. Ch. 1 2. The wicked are not united and yet guilty of Christ's blood Chap. 3. Corporall Vnion how understood by the Fathers B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 5 c. See Capernaites Voice objected seelily for proofe of a possibility of a Body to be indivers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 1. Vulgar Translation See Translation II. Index of the Generall Consent of ancient Fathers in points controverted thorow-out the eight former Bookes BOOKE I. ANtiquity in generall against the Romish forme of Consecration Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Against their Not Breaking of Bread in the distributing thereof Sect. 4. Against Private Masse Sect. 5. Against uttering the words of Consecration in a low voice Sect. 6. Against an Vnknowen tongue in the publike service of God Sect. 7. Against the presence of Persons not Communicating Chap. 2. Sect. 9. Against Reservation of the Eucharist for Procession or other like ends Sect. 10. Against Communicating but in one kinde Chap. 3. Sect. 5. The Objections out of the Fathers in this point answered Ibid. The Father 's many Reasons for the common use of the Cup. Sect. 9. BOOKE II. ANtiquitie agreeing in the Exposition of the words of Christ This is my Body by referring Hoc This to Bread Chap. 1. Sect. 6. And in yeelding unto them a Figurative Sence Chap. 2. Sect. 6 c. BOOKE III. ANtiquity never mentioning the word Transubstantiation Chap. 2. Sect. 2. Expounding these words Fruit of the Vine to meane Wine after Consecration Chap. 3. Sect. 5. Acknowledging the verity of Sence Sect. 9. And Bread remaining after Consecration Sect. 11. Never speakes of Accidents without Substance Sect. 11. Chap. 3. Sect. 14. Nor of any Miraculous Conversion of the Sacrament putrified into Bread againe Ibid. Romish Art in deluding the Testimonies of Antiquity Ibid. Antiquity objected and answered Chap. 4. thorow-out BOOKE IV. ANtiquity against the Possibility of the Being of a Body in moe places than one at once Chap. 6. Sect. 6 c. or yet Angels Chap. 5. Sect. 3. For the manner of the birth of Christ in opening the wombe Chap. 7. Sect. 7. BOOKE V. ANtiquity agreeing that only the Godly are partakers of Christ's body and blood Chap. 2. Sect. 2. In expounding the words The flesh profiteth nothing spiritually Chap. 5. Sect. 2. The Fathers Hyperbole's necessarily to be observed Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Objected for mens being nourished with Christ's flesh unconscionably Chap. 8. Sect. 1. As also for Mixture with mens Bodies Chap. 8. Sect. 3. whereby they must as well provâ— foure Transubstantiations as one 〈◊〉 Agreeing that Noneâ—… Christ in whâ—m Christ doth â—ot remaine Ibid. How they are to be understood concerning Corporall Vnion Ch. 8. Sect. 4 c. See Liturgies BOOKE VI. ANtiquity unconscionably objected for proofe of a Proper Sacrifice from the Sacrifice of Melchizedeâ—h Ch. 3. Sect. 2. And in the Exposition of Malachy Ch. 4. Sect. 2 c. Agreeth for Christ's Priestly Function in heaven Chap. 3. Sect. 8. Explane themselves to signifie a Sacrifice unproperly Chap. 4. Sect. 5 6.
Vnconscionable Objections from their Epithets of Terrible Chap. 5. Sect. 8. and Vnbloody Sect. 9. which They call also Bloody Sect. 11. And also Baptisme a Sacrifice Sect. 13. And other Spirituall Acts. Sect. 14. Vnconscionable Objections from their words Altar and Priest Sect. 15. Spirituall Acts called Sacrifices unproperly Chap. 7. Sect. 2. Yea and also Propitious Chap. 8. Sect. 1. BOOKE VII ANtiquity unconscionably objected for a Divine Adoration of the Sacrament from any of their words Chap. 2. Sect. 1. as also from any of their Acts either of their Concealement of this Mystery Ch. 3. Sect. 1. or Elevation Sect. 2. or Gesture Sect. 3. or Invocation Sect. 4. Which was never taught by them Ch. 5. Sect. 1. Nay Antiquity was against Divine Adoration of the Eucharist by their Common Admonition Lift up your hearts c. Chap. 4. Sect. 2. BOOKE VIII ANtiquity against the Romish Sacrilegiousnesse in a Synopsis Chap. 1. Sect. 4. Against their Idolatrousnesse teaching Bread to remaine Sect. 5. Their Testimonies unconscionably objected for Corporall Presence Proper Sacrifice and Divine Adoration as appeareth in a Synopsis Instance in Baptisme by paralleling their like speeches of it with the Eucharist Chap. 2. Sect. 2 3. Antiquity insolently rejected and falsly boasted of by our Adversaries Ch. 2. Sect. 4. III. Index of the particular Iudgements of Fathers severally as also of Councels and Popes both in our Oppositions and in the Romish Objections besides those here omitted which have beene otherwise answered in the Generall thorow-out the former TREATISE AMbrose Opp. against unknowen Prayer B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 7. And that the words of Christ are figurative Book 2. Sect. 9. and That Christ gave bread B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. And for a figurative Sence in the words This is my Body B. 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 9. And for Bread remaining B. 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 11. Ob. his terming it a Miraculous worke unconscionably Ch. 4. Sect. 2. And for saying Bread is made man's flesh Sect. 7. And that Bread is changed into another thing Ibid. Opp. Hee teacheth Christ's Priestly Function in Heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. And an Vnproper Sacrifice Ib. Ch. 5. Sect. 5. and correcteth his Excessive speech of Sacrifice B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Ob. For naming it an Vnbloody Sacrifice Vnconscionably B. 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 9. And for Adoration of Christ's footstoole B. 7. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. And Christ's appearing to Saul from Heaven Booke 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 5. Opp. proving the Holy Ghost to be God by it's Being in divers places at once Booke 4. Chap. 6. Sect. 2. Athanasius Opp. for a necessitie of Circumscription of a Body in one place only Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. And for Impossibility of Angels being in many places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. And for the spirituall Exposition of those words The flesh profiteth nothing B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. And that Angels cannot be in divers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. Augustine fondly Ob. for an unknowne tongue Booke 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 7. Chall 6. And for proofe that Christ in the Sacrament was a Figure of himselfe on the Crosse B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Chall 2. Opp. That Bread was called Christs body B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. And that hee alloweth the Iudgement of Sence in this Sacrament B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 9. And for a Figurative Sence in the words This is my Body B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 9. Ob. for Transubstantiation because a powerfull worke Book 3. Ch. 4. Sect. 2. Opp. For necessary Circumscription of a Body in one place B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. Ob. That Christ Efferebatur manibus ejus Ibid. Sect. 8. Opp. For the Being of Christ's soule but in one place Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. And that the godly only partake Christ's Body Booke 5. Ch. 2. Sect. 2. Ch. 3. Sect. 3 4. Ob. that the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist is a signe of it selfe on the Crosse fraudulently B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Chall 2. Opp. for expounding that Scripture The flesh profiteth nothing B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. Ob. that the Capernaites understood not Christ unconscionably B. 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. And that Wee receive with our mouths Christ's Body Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. And also his Fideles nôrunt B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. And None eateth before he adore Booke 7. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. And for Priests properly Book 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. Opp. Eucharist an unproper Sacrifice Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 5. and hee is an utter Adversary to the whole Romish Cause B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 8. Chall 4 5. And that Christ appeared to Saul from heaven Ibid. Sect. 5. And hee proveth the Holy Ghost to be God by it's being in divers places at once Booke 4. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. And is against a Bodies being without Commensuration to place and space Ibid. Sect. 6. And that no Body can be whole in any one part of place Chap. 7. Sect. 6. And that Angels cannot be in divers places at once Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Basil Opp. proving the Holy Ghost to be God by it's being in many places at once Booke 4. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. Ob. What were the words of Invocation And for Adoration of the Eucharist most grossely B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Opp. That hee called the Eucharist Bread after Consecration B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Bertram Opp. for the existence of Bread after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 14. Chrysostome Opp. against Gazers on the Sacrament B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. Ob. for private Masse Ibid. Sect. 5. Chall 3 Opp. teaching Bread to remaine after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 14. Ob. for Transubstantiation in his words Change by divine power Ibid. Chap. 4. Sect. 3. And his Exception saying Although it seeme absurd to Sense B. 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 5. and his Hyperbolicall Phrases Ibid. and his words It is made Christ's body indeed Ibid. Sect. 7. and these Wee are changed into the flesh of Christ Ibid. And that the wicked are guilty of Christ's Body for corporall presence B. 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. His 〈◊〉 miracle saying Christ in heaven is handled here on earth And of a double Elias B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 7. and for Christ's passing thorow the doores Ibid. Opp. his expounding the words Flesh profiteth not figuratively Booke 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. Ob. The words Tearing with teeth Ibid. Sect. 3. and these Christ is held in the hands of the Priest Ibid. And Christ hath made us his body B. 5. Chap. 8. Sect. 3. Opp. Christ's Priestly Residence in heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. And Sacrifice or rather a Memoriall thereof Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Ob. Sacrifice Pure and Terrible Ibid. Sect. 8. And Lambe lying on the Altar Terrible and Angels present B. 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 2. and Fideles nôrunt Ch. 3. Sect. 1. and Elevation Ibid. Ch. 3. Sect. 2. and Bowing before the Table Booke 7. Chap.
To Conclude Whosoever among you hath beene fascinated according to your Colliers Catechisme with that only Article of an Implicite Faith let him be admonished to submit to that Duety prescribed by the Spirit of God to Trie all things and to Hold that which is good And if any have a purpose to Reioyne in Confutation either of the Booke of the Romish Imposture or of this which is against your Masse I doe adiure him in the name of Christ whose trueth wee seeke that avoyding all deceitfull Collusions he proceed materially from Point to point and labour such an Answer which hee beleeveth he may answer for before the iudgement seate of Christ Our Lord Iesus preserve us to the glory of his saving Grace AMEN Tho Coven Lichff The principall Heads of the Tractate following I. BOOKE VNfoldeth the Ten Transgressions of the Canon of our Lord Christ his Institution in the now Romish Masse II. BOOKE Manifesteth the palpable Falshood of the Romish Exposition of Christ's words of Institution THIS IS MY BODY III. BOOKE Discovereth the Novelty and indeed Nullity of the Romish Article of Transubstantiation and proveth the Continuance of the substance of Bread after Consecration IV. BOOKE Reveileth the manifold Contradictions in the Romish Defence of a Corporall Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament and consequently a necessary Impossibilitie thereof without the impeachment of the Omnipotencie of God yea with the aduancement thereof Together with a Discovery of the falshood of their Thirteen Histories relating so many Apparitions of True Flesh and true Blood of Christ in the Eucharist As also shewing the Determination of the Generall Councell of Nice upon the the point of Corporall Presence V. BOOKE Noteth the three-fold Capernaiticall Conceit in the Romish pretended Corporall manner of Eating Swallowing and gâ—t-receiving of Christ's flesh VI. BOOKE Displayeth the manifold and grosse Sacrilegiousnes in the Romish Masse vpon their profession of a Proper and properly Propitious Sacrifice therein VII BOOKE Proveth the abhominable-double Idolatrousnes of the Romish Masse as well Formall as Materiall VIII BOOKE Besides the Three Synopses or Summarie Comprehensions First of the Superstitiousnes Secondly of the Sacriledge Thirdly of the Idolatrie of the Romish Masse it further declareth the diverse Periuries and Obstinacies of the Defenders and also the many notorious Heresies in the Defence thereof OF THE INSTITVTION OF THE SACRAMENT of the blessed Body and Blood OF CHRIST c. The first Booke Concerning the Actiue part of Christ his Institution of the Eucharist and the Ten Romish TRANSGRESSIONS thereof CHAP. I. That the Originall of the word MASSE nothing advantageth the Romish Masse SECT I. DIvers of your Romish Doctors would haue the word MASSE first to be in the first and primitiue Imposition and vse thereof Diuine Secondly in time more ancient than Christ Thirdly in signification most Religious deriued as They say from the Hebrew word Missah which signifieth Oblation and Sacrifice euen the highest homage that can be performed vnto God And all this to proue if it may be that which you call THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASSE CHALLENGE SO haue these your Doctors taught notwithstanding many other Romanists as well Iesuites as others of principall Note in your Church enquiring as it were after the natiue Countrie kinred and age of the Word MASSE doe not onely say but also prooue first that Hebrew-borne Secondly that it is not of Primitiue antiquitie because not read of before the dayes of S. Ambrose who liued about three hundred seuentie three yeeres after Christ Thirdly that it is a plaine Latine word to wit Missa signifying the Dismission of the Congregation Which Confessions being testified in our Margin by so large a consent of your owne Doctors prooued by so cleare Euidence and deliuered by Authors of so eminent estimation in your owne Church must not a little lessen the credit of your other Doctors noted for Neotericks who haue vainely laboured vnder the word MASSE falsely to impose vpon their Readers an opinion of your Romish Sacrificing Masse That the word MASSE in the Primitiue signification thereof doth properly belong vnto the Protestants and iustly condemneth the Romish manner of Masse SECT II. THe word MASSE by the Confession of Iesuites and others and that from the authoritie of Councels Fathers Canon-Law Schoolemen and all Latine Liturgies is therefore so called from the Latine phrase Missa est especially because the companie of the Catechumenists and those which were not prepared to communicate at the celebrating of this Sacrament after the hearing of the Gospell or Sermons were Dismissed and not suffered to stay but commanded To depart Which furthermore your Ies Maldonate out of Isidore the most ancient Authors and all the Liturgies is compelled to confesse to be the Most true meaning of Antiquity Which Custome of exempting all such persons being euery where religiously taught and obserued in all Protestant Churches and contrarily the greatest devotion of your Worshippers at this day being exercised onely in looking and gazine vpon the Priests manner of celebrating your Romane Masse without communicating thereof contrary to the Institution of Christ contrary to the practice of Antiquity and contrary to the proper vse of the Sacrament All which hereafter shall be plentifully shewed it must therefore follow as followeth CHALLENGE VVHereas there is nothing more rife and frequent in your speeches more ordinary in your outhes or more sacred in your common estimation than the name of the Masse yet are you by the signification of that very word convinced of a manifest Transgression of the Institution of Christ and therefore your great Boast of that name is to be iudged false and absurd But of this Transgression more hereafter The Name of CHRIST his MASSE how farre it is to be acknowledged by Protestants SECT III. THe Masters of your Romish Ceremonies and others naming the Institution of Christ call it his Masse And how often doe wee heare your vulgar people talking of Christ his Masse Which word MASSE in the proper signification already specified could not possibly haue beene so distastfull vnto us if you had not abused it to your fained and as you now see false sense of your kinde of Proper Oblation and Sacrifice Therefore was it a superfluous labour of Mr. Brereley to spend so many lines in prouing the Antiquity of the word MASSE CHALLENGE FOr otherwise Wee according the aboue-confessed proper Sense thereof shall together with other Protestants in the Augustane Confession approue and embrace it and that to the iust Condemnation of your present Romane Church which in her Masse doth flatly and peremptorily contradict the proper Signification thereof according to the Testimonie of Micrologus saying The Masse is therefore so called because they that communicate not are commanded to depart By all which it is euident that your Church hath forfeited the Title of Masse which shee hath appropriated to her selfe as a flagge of ostentation
whereof more hereafter In the Interim we shall desire each one of you to hearken to the Exhortation of your owne Waldensis saying ATTEND and obserue the Masse OF CHRIST Of the CANON OF CHRIST his MASSE and at what wordes it beginneth SECT IV. CHrist his Masse by your owne confession beginneth at these words of the Gospell concerning Christ's Institution of the Eucharist Math. 26. Luc. 22. And Iesus tooke bread c. which also we doe as absolutely professe What Circumstances by ioynt consent on both sides are to bee exempted out of this Canon of Christ his Masse or the wordes of his Institution It is no lesse Christian wisedome and Charitie to cut off vnnecessary Controversies than it is a serpentine malice to engender them and therefore we exempt those points which are not included within this Canon of Christ beginning at these wordes And Iesus tooke bread c. To know that all other circumstances which at the Institution of Christ his Supper fell out accidentally or but occasionally because of the then Iewish Passeouer which Christ was at that time to finish or else by reason of the custome of Iudaea doe not come within this our dispute touching Christ his Masse whether it be that they concerne Place for it was instituted in a priuate house or Time which was at night or Sexe which were onely men or Gesture which was a kind of lying downe or Vesture which was wee know not what no nor yet whether the Bread were vnleauened or the Wine mixed with water two poynts which as you know Protestants and your selues giant not to be of the essence of the Sacrament but in their owne nature Indifferent and onely so farre to bee observed as the Church wherein the Christian Communicants are shall for Order and Decencie-sake prescribe the use thereof The Points contained within the Canon of Christ his Masse and appertaining to our present Controuersie are of two kindes viz. 1. Practicall 2. Doctrinall SECT V. PRacticall or Active is that part of the Canon which concerneth Administration Participation and Receiuing of the holy Sacrament according to this Tenor Math. 26. 26. And Iesus tooke Bread and blessed it and brake it and gaue it to his Disciples and said Take eate c. And Luc. 22. 19 20. Doe this in remembrance of mee Likewise also after Supper be tooke the Cup and gaue thankes and gaue it to them saying Drinke yee all of this But the points which are especially to bee called Doctrinall are implied in these words of the Euangelists This is my Bodie And This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for you and for many for remission of sinnes We begin with the Practicall CHAP. II. That all the proper Active and Practicall points to wit of Blessing Saying Giving Taking c. are strictly commanded by Christ in these words DOE THIS Luc. 22. Matth. 26. 1. Cor. 11. SECT I. THere are but two outward materiall parts of this Sacrament the one concerning the element of Bread the other touching the Cup. The Acts concerning both whether in Administring or Participating thereof are charged by Christ his Canon vpon the Church Catholike vnto the ends of the World The Tenour of his Precept or command for the first part is Doe this and concerning the other likewise saying 1. Cor. 11. 25. This doe yee as often c. Whereof your owne Doctors aswell Iesuites as thers haue rightly determined with a large consent that the wordes DOE THIS haue relation to all the aforesaid Acts euen according to the iâ—dgement of ancient Fathers excepting only the Time of the Celebration which was at Supper and which together with us you say were put in not for example but only by occasion of the Passeouer then commanded to be observed Thus you CHALLENGE THis Command of Christ being thus directly and copiously acknowledged by the best Diuines in the Romane Church must needs challenge on both sides an answerable performance Vpon examination whereof it will appeare vnto euery Conscience of man which Professors namely whether Protestants or Romanists are the true and Catholike Executors and Obseruers of the last will and Testament of our Testator Iesus because that Church must necessarily bee esteemed the more loyall and legitimate Spouse of Christ which doth more precisely obey the Command of the celestiall Bride-groome Wee to this purpose apply our selues to our busines by enquiring what are the Actiue Particulars which Christ hath giuen in charge vnto his Church by these his expresse wordes Doe this All which wee are to discouer and discusse from point to point TEN TRANSGRESSIONS And Preuarications against the Command of Christ DOE THIS practised by the Church of Rome at this day in her Romane Masse SECT II. VVEe list not to quarrell with your Church for lighter matters albeit your owne Cassander forbeareth not to complaine that your Bread is of such extreame thinnesse and lightnesse that it may seeme vnworthy the name of Bread Whereas Christ vsed Solid and tough bread Glutinosus saith your Iesuit which was to be broken with hands or cut with knife Neuerthelesse because there is in yours the substance of Bread therefore we will not contend about Accidents and shadowes but wee insist vpon the words of his Institution The first Transgression of the now Church of Rome in contradicting Christ his Canon is collected out of these words AND HE BLESSED IT which concerne the Consecration of this Sacrament SECT III. FIrst of the Bread the Text saith He blessed it next of the Cup it is said When he had giuen thanks Which words in your owne iudgements are all one as if it should be said Hee blessed it with giuing of thankes By the which word Blessing he doth imply a Consecration of this Sacrament So you The contrary Canon of the now Romane Masse wherein shee in her Exposition hath changed Christ's manner of Consecration The Canon of the Romish Masse attributeth the property and power of Consecration of this Sacrament only vnto the repetition of these words of Christ This is my body and This my blood c. and that from the iudgement as Some say of your Councell of Florence and Trent Moreouer you also alleage for this purpose your publique Catechisme and Romane Missall both which were authorized by the Councell of Trent and command of Pius Quintus then Pope See the Marginals Whereupon it is that you vse to attribute such efficacie to the very words pronounced with a Priestly intention as to change all the Bread in the Bakers shop and wine in the Vintners Cellar into the body and blood of Christ As your Summa Angelica speaketh more largely concerning the Bread CHALLENGE BVt Christopherus your own Arch-bishop of Caesarea in his Booke dedicated to Pope Sixtus Quintus and written professedly vpon this Subject commeth in compassed about with a clowd of witnesses and Reasons to proue that the Consecration
condemned in divers who sopped the Bread in the Chalice and squeezed Grapes in the Cup and so received them even as did the Artoryritae in mingling Bread with Cheese censured for Heretiques by your Aquinas In which Comparison your Aberration from Christ's Example is so much greater than theirs as you are found Guilty in defending 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 Greatly Sacrilegious notwithstanding your Church authorizeth the same Custome of forbidding the Administration of the Cup to fit Communicants 3. As you pretend Reverence for withdrawing the Cup so did the Aquarii forbeare wine and used only Water under a pretence of Sobriety 4. Sometime there may be a Reason to doe a thing when as yet there is no right nor Authority for him that doth it Wee therefore exact of you an Autority for altering the Apostles Customes and Constitutions and are answered that your Church hath Authority over the Apostles Precepts Iumpe with them who being asked why they stood not unto the Apostles Traditions replyed that 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 literally and why you urge his other saying Except yoâ—… eat my flesh 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 entrâ—ils because forsooth the words of Christ are Doctrinall And have you not heard of one Nicodemus who hearing Christ teach that every man must be Borne againe who shall be partaker of God's Kingdome and that hee expounding them in a Literall Sence conceited a new Entrance into his Mothers wombe when as nothing wanted to turne that his Errour into an Heresie but only Obstinacie But of the strong and strange Obstinacies of your Disputers you have received a full Synopsis BOOKE III. After followeth your Article of Transubstantiation I. Your direct profession is indeed to beleeve no Body of Christ but that which was Borne of the Virgin Mary But this your Article of Transubstantiation of Bread into Christs Body generally held according to the proper nature of Transubstantion to be by Production of Christs Body out of the Substance of Bread it necessarrly inferreth a Body called and beleeved to be Christ's which is not Borne of the Blessed Virgin as S. Augustine hath plainly 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 Body not Borne of the Virgin Mary Secondly you exclude all judgement of Senses in discerning Bread to be trâ—… Bread as did the Manichees in discerning Christ's Body 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 Eâ—charist after Consecration in confutation of the same Errour in the Marcioniâ—es 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 Eâ—tychian Heretique and instantly condemned by Theodoret and as fully abandoned by Pope Gelasâ—… BOOKE IV. Catholique 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 Eâ—tychians and Eâ—nomians all of them diversly oppugning the Integrity of Christ's Body sometime in direct tearmes and sometime by irrefragrable Consequences whether it were by gaine-saying the Finitenesse or Solidity or else the compleat Perfection thereof wherein â—ow farre yee may challenge affinity or kindred with them be you pleased to examine by this which followeth 1. The Heretiques who undermined the property of Christ's Bodily Finitenesse said that it was in divers places at once as is confessed even as your Church doth now attribute unto the same Body of Christ both in Heaven and in Earth yea and in Millions of distant Altars at the same time and consequently in all places whatsoever Now whether this Doctrine of Christ's Bodily Presence in many places at once was held of the Catholique Fathers for Hereticall it may best be seene by their Doctrine of the Existence of Christ's Body in one only place not only Definitively but also Circumspectively both which doe teach an absolute Impossibility of the Existence of the same in divers places at once And they were as zealous in professing the Article of the manner of Christ's Bodily Being in place as they are in instructing men of the Article of Christ's Bodily Being lest that the deniall of it's Bodily manner of being might destroy the nature of his Body To which end they have concluded it to be absolutely but in one place sometime in a Circumspective Finitenesse thereby distinguishing them from all created Spirits and sometime by a Definitive Termination which they set downe first by Exemplifications thus If Christ his Body be on Earth then it is absent from Heaven and thus Being in the Sunne it could not be in the Moone Secondly by divers Comparisons for comparing the Creature with the Creator God they conclude that The Creature is not God because it is determinated in one place and comparing the humane and divine Nature of Christ together they conclude that they are herein different because the humane and Bodily Nature of Christ is necessarily included in one place and laâ—tly comparing Creatures with the Holy Ghost they conclude a difference by the the same Argument because the Holy Ghost is in many places at once and all these in confutation of divers Heretiques A thing so well knowen to your elder Romish Schoole that it confessed the Doctrine of Existence of a Body in divers places at once in the judgement of Antiquity to be Hereticall 2. The property of a Solidity likewise was patronized by Antient Fathers in confutation of Heretiques by teaching Christ's Body to be necessarily Palpable against their Impalpabilitie and to have a Thicknesse against their feigned subtile Body as the Aire and furthermore controlling these opinions following which are also your Crotchets of a Bodies Being whole in the whole space and in every part thereof and of Christ's Body taking the Right hand or left of it selfe 3. The property of Perfection of the Body of Christ wheresoever in the highest Degree of Absolutenesse This one would thinke everie Christian heart should assent unto at the first hearing wherefore if that they were judged Heretiques by Antient
Eucharistiam acciperet â Fratre ordinis Praedicatorum Bernardo à Florentinis à Siciliae rege subornato illicò caepitaegrotare ferebatur Monachus sub unguibus venenum habuisse quo Calicem Hostiam infecerat mox obijt Imperator Beneventi animam Deo reddidâ—t Anno 1313. Cuspinian Valater lib. 23. ut refert Zuingerus 4 Quod vermes generantur ex Sacramento dubium non est cum experimentis conster Difficultas ergo circa modum est Suarez Ies Tom. 3. qu. 77. Art 5 Disp 57. pag. 427. Alij ex aere vermes generari dicunt Thomas refert hanc â—pinionem sed dicit eam esse contrariam ei quod ad sensum apparet quod reverà ità est satisque ab ipso quatuor rationibus confirmatur Suarez ibid. 5 Generatio Nutritio fit ex quantitate Panis quae divinitùs locum tenet materiae Panis ut Thomas explicat Greg. de Valent. Ies lib. 2. Exam. mystag Calvin pag. 446. Nullam esse necessariam materiam sed solam quantitatem sufficere ut subster formae substantiali advenienti sive de potentia eius educatur sive per nutritionem varietur Sic Thomas Alij Fundamentum huius opinionis est quià conveniâ—ntèr hic modus est sine novis Miraculis Haec opinio videtur falsa mihi om ninò incredibilis Dicendum est necessariam esse omninò aliquam materiam ex qua Generatio fiat quià deratione essentiali huius Compositi est substantialis materia propter quod Aristoteles dicit Impossible esse Substantiam componi à non substantiâ Ergo impossibile est ut Quantitas aleretur ad proprium munus Materiae substantialem Causalitatem eius Suarez quo supra Disp 57. Art 8. §. 〈◊〉 p. 733. Algerus Guitmundus Waldensis dicunt ex speciebus nutritionem generationem fieri non posse Suarez ibid. Vtrùm materia generationis sit eadem quae fuit antèa sub speciebus Panis vel alia Thomas eandem esse negat ne multiplicetur miraculum finè necessitate 6 Mihi tamen videtur eandem numero esse Etiam iuxtâ quorundam veterum Sententiam Alens Bonavent Innocent nec maius est miraculum sivè eandem sivè materiam novam facere Suarez ibid. o Quomodò fiat haec materia Thomistae aliquot dicunt per Conversionem aliquam in ipsum Panem Alij iterùm Creari hoc verius Suarez quo supra p See above at n num 3. q Platina in vita Victoris Henrici Regis fraude ut Martinus scribit veneno in Calicem iniecto dum sacrificat necatur See also above at n num 3. * In Cella Vicaria novis vinis impletâ solus Aâ—r odore infectus inebriat Coster Ies Christian Institut lib. 1. c. 8. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iustin Eâ—posit Fidei r Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 34. Sicut Panis qui est à terrâ iam non Communis Panis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrenâ caelesti Sic Corpora nostra participantia Eucharistiam iam non sunt Corruptibilia sed spem Resurrectionis habentia s Origen in Math. 15. Ille Cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Dei Orationem iuxtà id quod habet materiale in secessum emittitur And after hee calleth this Materiale Materia Panis super quem dictus est Sermo Ibid. * Liturg. Tract 2. §. 11. Subd 3. t Ambros l. 4. de Sacram cap. 4. Quanto magis est operatorius sermo Christi ut sint quae erant in aliud convertantur Tu eras vetus Creatura posâ—quam Consecratus nova Creatura esse coepisti * See below Chap. 4. Sect. 2. at the let c. u Cyprian lib. de Vnctione Dedit Dominus noster in mensâ in qua ultimum Convivium cùm Apostolis participavir proprijs manibus Panem Vinum in Cruce verò manibus militum corpus tradidit vulnerandum ut in Apostolis secretiùs impressa sincera veritas vera sinceritas exponeret Gentibus quomodò Panis Vinum Caro eius essent sanguis quibus rationibus Causae effectis convenirent diversa nomina vel species ad unam reducerentur essentiam ut significantia significata eisdem vocabulis conserentur * Causabon Exercit ad Baronij Annal. c. 38. Ignatius Epist ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ad Philadelph de Eacharistia loquens Panis inquit omnibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Comminutus est Vox haec propriè de ijs vsurpatur quae in minutas partes comminuuntur Sunt qui cas micas vocant August in Epist 59. ad Paulinum Cum illud ait quod est in Domini mensâ benedicitur Sanctificatur ad distribuendum comminuitur Idem Casaub quo supra cap. 50. Osim in Ecclesia partes divisas vocabant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 potiùs quà m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Patres in Synod Nicaen Can. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yea and Baronius himselfe Anno 57. nu 149. Eucharistiae partes Tert. de Monog Buccellas August ac Alij Particulas vocant * Belowe in the fourth Booke Ch. 9. y Hieron in 1. Cor. 11. Dominus passionis suae ultimam nobis Commemorationem memoriam reliquit quemad modùm siquis peregrè proficiscens aliquod pignus ei quem diligit derelinquat ut possit eius amicitias benficia commemorate z Gaudent Tract 20. Christus crucifigendus istud haereditarium munus Testamenti eius Novi tanquà m Pignus suae Praesentiae dereliquit a Thâ—â—d Dial. 2. c. 24. Non post sanctificationeÌ„ mystica signa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paulo post Sic illud Corpus Christi prioreÌ„ habet Formam Figuram Circumscriptionem ut summatim dicam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etiamsi post resurrectionem immortale immune ab omni corruptione b Non loquitur de substantiâ quae distinguitur contra Accidentia quam in Categoricâ posuit Aristoteles sed de Essentiâ naturâ Accidentium Bellar. lib. 2. de Euch c. 27. §. Sed me * 1. Cor. 15. 〈◊〉 c Alphonsus à Castro de haeres Eutych Negabant Christum habuisse naturam humanam tantùm iâ— eo ponentes naturaÌ„ divinam * Alter hircuÌ„ mulgeâ— alter cribram supponit * Vid Protestants Appeale Booke 2. Ch. 2. § â—0 d In his Liturgie of the Masse Tract 2. §. 2 subd 3 p. 254. * Not so for he was now not in a personall dispute but deliberately writing against the Heresie of the Eutychians * Valent. Ies lib. 2. de Transub c. 7. Dabimus aliud breve simplex sine ullo incommodo responsum Enimverò antequam quaestio ista de Transubstantiatione palà m in Ecclesia agitaretur minime mirùm est si unus aut alter aut etiam aliqui minùs considerate rectè hac de resenserint scripserint maximè cum non tractarent ex instituto ipsam quaestioneÌ„ e
voluisset Ibid. quo supra t Non sunt Concionatorum verba in rigore accipiâ—nda quùm primùm ad aures perveniant multa enim per Hyperbolen Declamatores enunciant â—â—c interdum Chrysostomo contingit Senensis Biblioth Annot. 152 u Dentes Carni suae infigere Chrysost hom 45. in Ioh. Lingua cruentatur hoc admiâ—abili Sanguine Hom. 83. in Matth. Turbam circuÌ„fusam rubifieri Lib. 3. de Sacerdotio x Num vides Panem num vinum nè putetis Corpus accâ—pereab homine sed ex ipso Seraâ—hinforcipe ignem Idem ToÌ„ 3. de Euch. in Encaenijs y SacramentuÌ„ est invisibilis gratiae signum visibile Magist Senten lib 4. dist 1. Sacramentum est res sensibus obiecta Ca. tech. Trid. Teste Bellar. lib. 1. de Sacram. c. 11. z Sensus non fallitur circà proprium obiectum Sententia vera Bellar. lib. 3. de Euch. cap. 24. a Sicut in Baptismo c. Chrysost See above §. 5. at r. * See hereafter at large in the 8. Booke * See above Chap. 3. §. 13. b Nos per hunc Panem vnione coniungimur Chrysost in 1. Cor. hom 24. c Chrysost Homil. 50. in Matth. iuxta Edit Graec. Nè existimes Sacerdotem esse qui hoc facit sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then followeth of Baptisme Ibid. Ille non te Baptizat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * See above c. 3. §. 7. * Ibid. in the Chapters following c Eusebius Emiss Ad est Substantia Panis sed post verba Christi est Corpus Christi Hom. 5. Obiected by Mr. Breerly Liturg. Tract 2. §. 2. Subd 2. * See above Booke 2. throughout d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyrill sup * See above Booke 2 c. 1. §. 4. e Ambros De Paâ—e Fit Corpus caro Christi Oâ— by Bellar lib. 2 de Euchar. c. 14. and by others f Chrysost Nos secum Christus in unam ut ità dicam massam reducit neque id fide tantùm sed reipsâ nos Corpus suum effecit In Math. 26. hom 83. Ob. by Mr. Breerly Liturg. Tract 2. §. 2. Subd 2. g Aug. Ipsi Christiani cum Capite â—uo quod ascendit in coelum vnus est Christus Enarrat in Psal 127. Etin Psal 26. Titulus Psalmâ— Omnes in illo Christi Christus sumus h Leo De homine Regenerato per Baptismum Vt susceptus à Christo suscipiens Christum non idem sit post LavacruÌ„ quod ante Baptismum fuit sed ut corpus Regenerati fiat â—aro Crucifixi Serm. de Passione 14. i Beda in 1. Cor. 10. Nam nosipsius Corpus facti sumus quod accipimus nos sumus k See above C. 4. §. 7. l See above C. 4. §. 2. m Ibid. at the Letter r. o Gregor Nyssen Quicquid assumenti conveniens est expetitum sit ut Apostolus vult qui hanc mensam nobis praeparavit in id commutatur infirmioribus olus Infantibus Lac c. Lib. de vita Mosis p. 509. p Greg. Nyss Corpus illud Christi in Corpus nostâ—um ingrediens totum in se transfert Ob. by Bellar lib. 2. cap. 10. §. Idem Greg. q Mr. Breerly Tract 2. §. 4 Subd 2 p. 164. r Chrysost Admiranda Mysteria ut non solùm per dilâ—ctioneâ— sed reipsa in illam Carnem coÌ„vertamur Hom. 45. in Ioh. s Theoph. in Marâ— 14. Vocat hanc Conversionem Transelementationem quae quidem vox nihil minùs significat quà m transubstantiatio naÌ„ TranselemeÌ„tatio significat mutationem totius rei ad ipsam materiam quae ab Aristotele Elementum dicitur Si muâ—atio solius Formae rectè dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transformatio mutatio externae figurae transfiguratio cur mutatio substantiae non poterit rectè dici Transubstantiatio Bella. l. 3. de Euch. c. 23. §. Secundo t Theoph. in Ioh. 6. Qui me manducat quodammodò 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 u Isidor Pelusiot l. 3. Epist 107. De recipiente semen ut terra bona Qui verbu recipit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 x Theoph in Mat. 26. Panis ineffabili modo transformatur Panis quidem apparet sed caâ—â—â—st Obiected by Mr. Breerly Liturg. Tract 2. Sect. 2. Subd 2. As for est caro this Phrase hath beene already answered See above at s y Hier. in Marc. 14. Accepit Iesus Panem benedixit fregit Transsigurans corpus suum in Panem quod est Ecclesia praesens quae frangitur in passionibus z Leo. Non alia igitur participatio Corporis quà m ut in id quod suâ—imus transeamus De passiâ—…e Serm. 24. a Mr. Breerly in his Apologic of the first Edition concerning the faith of the ancient Greeke Church b Hier. Patriarch Non enim hîc nominis tantùm communicatio est sed rei identitas etenim verè corpus sanguis Christi mysteria sunt non quòd haec in corpus humanum transmutentur sed nos in illa melioribus praevalentibus Which is his Answer in this point to the Doctors of Wittemberge * Appeal lib. 1. Ch. 2. §. 7. The testimony it selfe cited out of Greg. by Mr. Breerly is answered in the first Booke concerning EATING * See above in this Chap. §. 3. c. * Booke 8. Ch. 2. §. 1. Conc. Nicen. Baptisma non Corporis sed mentis oculis considerandum Apud Biniâ—m lib. 3. Decret Concâ— Nic. de Baptismate * See above Ch. 4. §. 4. a Marcionitae Manichaei alij Haeretici putabant corpus Christi verum non esse sed phantasticuÌ„ esse Bellar. lib. 3. de Euch. cap. 24 §. Resp Argumentum b Ignatius citante Theodoret. Dlal 3. Eucharistia est caro Christi Bellar. l. 2. de Euch. c. 2. Hoc scripsit Ignatius contra Haereticos qui negabant ChristuÌ„ habuisse carnem veram sed tantùm visibilem apparentem Observandum est Haereticos illos non tà m SacramentuÌ„ Euch. quaÌ„ mysterium incarnationis oppugnâsse True and the Argument of Ignatius was the same which Tert vsed also against the same kinde of Heretikes Lib. 4. in Marcion Hoc est corpus meum Id est figura corporis mei Figura autem non fuisset nisi veritas esset corpus See this in the place of Tertullian at large * See above Booke 2. Chap. 2. at a. c Concilium dicit verò contineri corpê° in Sacramento contra Sacramentarios qui volunt Christum adesse in Signo Figurâ signa enim veritati opponuntur Bellar. lib. 2. de Euch. cap 2. d Augustin contra Faustum lib. 19. pag. 349. Tom. 6. Delirat qui dicit mutatis Sacramentis res ipsas diversas esse quas ritus Propheticus pronunciavit implendas quas ritus Euangelicus annunciavit imâ—â—â—tas aliter res annunciatur facienda aliter facta * Heb. 10. * Ioh. 1. 15. * Ibid. 29. e Origen Hom. 7. in Numer p. 195. Illa in aenigmate designari quae nunc in nova lege in
vsed by our Sauiour was performed by that his Blessing by Prayer which preceded the pronouncing of those words Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodie c. To this purpose hee is bold to averre that Thomas Aquinas and all Catholikes before Caietane have confessed that Christ did consecrate in that his Benedixit that is He blessed it And that Saint Iames and Dionyse the Areopagite did not Consecrate only in the other words but by Prayer Then he assureth vs that the Greeke Churches maintained that Consecration consisteth in Benediction by Prayer and not in the only repetition of the words afore-said After this hee produceth your subtilest Schooleman Scotus accompanied with divers others Who Derided those that attributed such a supernaturall vertue to the other forme of words After steppeth in your Lindan who avoucheth Iustin one of the ancientest of Fathers as Denying that the Apostles consecrated the Eucharist in those words Hoc est c. and affirming that Consecration could not be without Prayer Be you but pleased to peruse the Marginals and you shall further find alleadged the Testimonies of Pope Gregorie Hierome Ambrose Bernard and to ascend higher the Liturgies of Clement Basil Chrysostome and of the Romane Church it selfe in gain-saying of the Consecration by the only words of Institution as you pretend And in the end he draweth in two Popes contradicting one the other in this point and hath no other meanes to stint their iarre but whereas the authoritie of both is equall to thinke it iust to yeild rather to the better learned of them both Whosoever requireth more may be satisfied by reading of the Booke itselfe It will not suffice to say that you also vse Prayer in the Romish Liturgie for the question is not meerely of Praying but wherein the forme of Benediction and Consecration properly doth consist Now none can say that he consecrateth by that Prayer which he belieueth is not ordained for Consecration We may furthermore take hold by the way of the Testification of Mr. Brereley a Romish Priest who out of Basil and Chrysostome calling one part Calix benedictione sacratus alloweth Benediction to haue beene the Consecration thereof All this Armie of Witnesses were no better than Meteors or imaginarie figures of battailes in the aire if that the Answere of Bellarmine may goe for warrant to wit that the only Pronuntiation of these words Hoc est corpus meum imply in them as hee saith an Invocation or Prayer Which words as any man may perceiue Christ spake not supplicatorily vnto God but declaratiuely vnto his Apostles accordingly as the Text speaketh Hee said unto them as is also well observed by your fore-said Arch-bishop of Caesarea out of Saint Hierome But none of you we presume will dare to say that Christ did Invocate his Disciples These words therefore are of Declaration and not of Invocation Which now Romish Doctrine of Consecrating by reciting these words This is my bodie c. your Divines of Colen haue iudged to be a Fierce madnesse as being repugnant both to the Easterne and Westerne Churches But we haue heard divers Westerne Authours speake giue leave to an Easterne Archbishop to deliuer his minde No Apostle or Doctor is knowne to affirme saith hee those sole words of Christ to haue beene sufficient for Consecration So he three hundred yeares since satisfying also the Testimonie of Chrysostome obiected to the contrarie As miserable and more intolerable is the Answere of others who said that the Evangelists haue not observed the right order of Christ his actions as if hee had first said This is my bodie by way of Consecration and after commanded them to Take and eat Which Answere your owne Iesuite hath branded with the note of Falsitie yea so false that as it is further avouched all ancient Liturgies aswell Greeke as Latine constantly held that in the order of the tenour of Christ his Institution it was first said Takâ— yee before that he said This is my Bodie Lastly your other lurking-hole is as shameful as the former where when the iudgement of Antiquitie is obiected against you requiring that Consecration be done directly by Prayer vnto God you answere that some Fathers did use such speeches in their Sermons to the people but in their secret instraction of Priests did teach otherwise Which Answere besides the falsitie thereof Wee take to be no better than a reproach against Antiquitie and all one as to say that those venerable Witnesses of Truth would professe one thing in the Cellar and proclaime the contrarie on the house-top It were to be wished that when you frame your Answeres to direct other men's Consciences you would first satisfie your owne especially being occupied in soule's-businesses We conclude Seeing that Forme as all learning teacheth giveth being vnto all things therefore your Church albeit shee vse Prayer yet erring in her iudgement concerning the perfect manner and Forme of Consecration of this Sacrament how shall shee be credited in the Materialls wherein she will be found aswell as in this to haue Transgressed the same Iniunction of Christ DOE THIS Neuerthelesse this our Conclusion is not so bee interpreted as hearken Mr. Brereley to exclude out of the words of this Celebration the Repetition and pronunciation of these words This is my Bodie and This is my Bloud of the new Testament Farre be this from vs because wee hold them to be essentially belonging to the Narration of the Institution of Christ and are vsed in the Liturgie of our Church for although they be not words of Blessing and Consecration because not of Petition but of Repetition yet are they Words of Direction and withall Significations and Testifications of the mysticall effects thereof Your Obiection out of the Fathers is answered The second Romish Transgression of the Canon of Christ his Masse is in their Contradicting the sence of the next words of Institution HE BRAKE IT SECT IV. HE brake it So all the Evangelists doe relate Which Act of Christ plainly noteth that hee Brake the Bread for distributing of the same vnto his Disciples And his Command is manifest in saying as well in behalfe of this as of the rest Doe this Your Priest indeed Breaketh one Hoast into three parts vpon the Consecration thereof but our Question is of Fraction or Breaking for Distribution to the People The Contrarie Canon of the now Romane Masse BEHOLD say you Christ brake it but the Catholike Church meaning the Romane now doth not breake it but giueth it whole And this you pretend to doe for Reverence-sake Lest as your Iesuite saith some crummes of Bread may fall to the ground Neither is there any Direction to your Priest to Breake the Bread either before or after Consecration in your Romane Masse especially that which is distributed to the people CHALLENGE BVt now see wee pray you the absolute Confession of your owne Doctors whereby is