Ratbertus an Abbot wrote fully and freely of that subiect against him So then we see him here confessed for the Author but opposed for his Doctrine if Bellarmine haue spoken the truth beare witnes w th him of the truth Onely let me tell you I haue read that whole Tract of Paschasius Printed by them and there I finde he writes of the Reall presence he mentioneth two Sacraments and maintaines the cōmunion in both kinds but of Bertram in his whole Treatie ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem he makes not so much as mention of him and this mine eyes haue witnessed the Truth against the Foreman In his Treatise of 3. Convers part 2. cap. 10. The second is F Parsons Bertram saith he was wholy of the Romane Religion and so liued and so died aboue eight hundred yeeres agoe though after his death some of Berengarius followers did forge a little Pamplet in his name against the Reall presence of Christs bodie as favouring the Berengarian Heresie Here then we haue the man confessed but not this Doctrine I wonder these two Elders liuing so neere together in Rome were so farre asunder in opinion Surely they agree like the two Elders against Susanna both ioyned together to accuse the Innocent both out of their owne mouths must receiue the like judgement The third About the yeare 806. Lib consens omniū atat de verit Chi in Euchar centen 9. Delirarecoepit Bertramus saith Garetius This man acknowledgeth Bertram for the Author but condemnes him for an old Dotard The fourth Langdailius Langd lib. 3 Cath confut He affirmeth That though in some things he transgressed the forme of wordes yet he holdes correspondencie with the Catholique Roman Doctrine By this mans saying I see no cause why Bertram deserved a Writ to priviledge his dotage De visib Monarch Eccles lib. 7. An. 816. c. The fifth Sanders he saith That vnder the name of Bertram there is a Booke extant of the Eucharist which is sayd to haue bin lately written or devised by some of Berengarius followers for that there was no such Doctrine then read or knowne in that time of his liuing In his Treatise of the Sacram cap. 1 fol. 23 The sixth Reynolds the Priest saith toward 800 yeeres after Christ one Bertram and a little before him one Scotus wrote darkly of the truth of this Sacrament but whatsoever the private opinion of Bertram was his publique speeches and writings sounded so ill in the eares of the Catholiques of that age that Paschasius an Abbot made a very learned Booke in refutation of him These two hold together like a rope of Sand the one saith Bertram did write but obscurely the other saith It was not Bertram but some obscure Authors the one saith there was no such doctrine published in that age the other saith that Scotus at that time wrote darkly as Bertram did on the Sacrament The seventh and eight Posseu prefi ad Lect tom 1. apparat Sixt Sen. prafat in Bibl. Oecolampadius vnder the name of Bertram wrote this booke to Charles the Great sayth Possevinus and Sixtus Senensis The ninth Greg lib. 1. de praf Chi in Euch. c. 2. The Worke is spurious and tainted with the Leven of Berengarius heresie saith Gregory de Valentia These also might well agree if they could reconcile the times and their different opinions for Berengarius liued about six hundred yeares agoe and Oecolampadius about a hundred But if either Berengarius followers or Oecolampadius himselfe wrote this Tract of Bertrams it must needs be that Paschafius Ratbertus who wrote against this Treatise 800. yeares agoe as Bellarmine Reynolds doe affirme did write by the Spirit of Prophecie against Berengarius followers Oecolampadius long before they were borne In his Parliament of Christ Sacr. in the Prologue The tenth Dr Heskius saith that Bertram in the time of Charles wrote of the Sacrament suspitiously and yet in such sort as no man could be certaine what hee assuredly meant De Ador Euchar cap. 19. The eleventh Espencaeus saith That Bertram wrote a Booke to Charles the Emperour of the Sacrament yet in the iudgement of those that favour his error he doth intangle both his cause and the minde of the Reader and although he citeth many of the ancient Fathers yet one while he seemeth a Catholique another while of another opinion These two are nere to reconciliation for they both agree vpon the certaintie of the Author but condemne the vncertaintie of his doctrine The twelfth Trithenius Tritenius de Bertr a man without exception he sayth That Bertram the Priest was exceedingly skilfull in the holy Scriptures he was sharpe in wit famous in speech neither was he lesse notable in life then in learning he wrote many famous and excellent workes vnto Charles the Great the brother of Lotharius the Emperour he wrote a praise-worthy Booke to wit one Booke concerning the Body and Blood of the Lord he flourished in the dayes of Lotharius the Emperour about the yeere of Christ 840. You haue heard the great Enquest what they can say against this Author Yet all this while the Trumpet hath given an vncertaine sound Some you see denyes the man as a singular Novelist others acknowledge the Author but affirme this Worke to be suppositious others say he held the catholique opinion in the maine but squared in the forme of speaking so that hitherto you see the Iurors are not agreed among themselues and therefore they cannot giue vp their Verdict against him Onely this last witnes doth best resolue all the former doubts he sheweth that Bertram was no dotard he shewes it could not be written by Berengarius or his followers for he liued wrote this Worke to Charles 200. yeares before his time he shewes he was not spurious but the true Author and by this his testimonie doth cleerely exclude Oecolampadius for the Author whose writings were not extant when Tritemius made his Catalogue of this and other Authors Certainely if these men had beene sworne to the Truth as well as to the Church the Foreman of the Inquest and the last would haue reconciled all the rest You haue heard Gentle Reader the Popes tenants his sworne servants our sworne enemies their best witnesses Bertrams worst accusers bound by oath to maintaine the Papacy divided amongst themselues Now listen and heare their soveraigne Iudges giue sentence and according to their agreement let him stand or fall in your judgment And first let their Lord chiefe Iustice Pope Clement the eyght be heard for as he cannot erre so he may not be contradicted Ant. Posseu Appar Pag. 230. Tom. 1. Let not Bertram be read saith he but with leaue of the Apostolique Sea and with this condition that the Reader my confute the heretiques by the errors of that booke The next are the Roman Inquisitors Ind libr. prohibited Anno 1559 Trident and the Trent Fathers these also
so much divided against it selfe that they cannot by any glue of Concord as Cyprian speaketh nor bond of vnitie be conioyned Cyp lib. 3. Epist 13. Some hold of Paul some of Apollos some allow the Booke others deny the Author Is the Worke man and the Worke divided Is the Author of the Booke commended the Booke it selfe condemned Is this the wisedome and pollicie of the Church to cry some one thing some another like the common Craftsmen for their great Diana of the Ephesians These things were much to be wondred at especially by one that wants perhaps the leisure perhaps the knowledge to search into these doubtfull disputes but that the ingenuous confession of Erasmus will satisfie a further jnquisition It is plainely found saith he that many things in Luthers Bookes are condemned for hereticall which in the Bookes of Bernard and Austen are read for holy and Orthodox Agreeable to that saying of Maldonats Maldon Comment in Ioh. 6. expounding a place of Scripture Although I haue no other Author saith he for my exposition yet I allow it rather then that of Austens and others though it be most probable because this of mine crosseth more the sense of the Calvinists Thus then to end with the Church of Rome with whom I began Isid Pleusit lib. 3. epist 408. Shee is like a Woman fallen from her ancient happinesse and retaining onely some signes thereof she hath the Sheaths and Caskets where the Ornaments lay but the goods themselues she is spoyled off Hence it is that wee are departed from their Church as Moses sometimes departed out of Egypt or as S. Austen from the Maniches Chrysost in Math. Homil 49. We haue departed from them in body they first departed from vs in minde we from them by place they from vs by faith we haue left with them the foundations of the walls they haue left with vs the foundations of the Scriptures We are departed from them in the sight of man they are departed from vs in the iudgement of GOD. And as concerning this Author which I here present vnto you Ierom Epist 126. ad Euagr I will say as S. Ierom answered Euagrius who desiring his opinion concerning Melchisedec whether he were the holy Ghost S. Ierom when he had shewed him the iudgement of the ancient Fathers of whom some thought Melchisedec a Man some an Angell You haue saith he what I haue heard what I haue read touching Melchisedec to bring forth the witnesses it was my part let it be yours to iudge of the credit of the witnesses Behold Gentle Reader the Worke-man and the Worke I haue cited the opinions of the Moderne Writers and of the best concerning this Author it is your part to iudge of the credit of them it was my part to summon their apparance for the tryall of the partie it is your part to iudge of the sufficiencie of their proofe their good agreement amongst themselues You haue the Author aboue 800. yeares continuance you haue his doctrine aboue 1500. yeares if his proofe make it not good we will disclayme both the Author and his Doctrine If such a light did so shine when the Church was so much darkned and obscured with the mists of IgnoraÌ„ce pittie it were but this Lampe should receiue a new Light by reprinting of him which the Iniquitie of the times hath almost extinguished Briefely all that I can say of the Author is this That which Vincentius Lyrinensis spake of Tertullian may very fitly be attributed to him His words are senses his senses victories and as concerning the Worke and the exquisite performance thereof I will say in two words Exegit Monumentum It may stand and long may it stand a Monument to after Ages that he may be justified in his sayings and cleare when he is judged H. L. ¶ Bertram the Priest his Preface concerning the body and blood of the LORD written to Charles the great being Emperour I Am commanded by you famous Prince to declare vnto your Highnesse What iudgement I am of concerning the mysterie of the Bodie and Blood of Christ Certaine it is that as this commandement doth well beseeme your magnificall and Princely estate so is it a most hard thing to be performed by my poore and small power For what is more meete for your Kingly Providence and government than in respect of your selfe to be vniversally wise concerning his holy mysteries who hath vouchsafed you worthy of the Kingly seate and in respect of your Subiects not to suffer them to thinke divers things concerning the bodie and blood of Christ in which doubtlesse consisteth the whole summe of Christian Redemption For while some of the faithfull affirme that the mysterie or Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ which is daily celebrated and administred in the Church is done vnder no figure and vnder no cover at all but perfâ—â—med vnder the naked manifestation shew of the truth it selfe and againe while other some testifie that these things are conteined vnder the figure of the mystery and that it is one thing which appeareth to our bodily senses and another thing that our faith looketh vpon it plainly appeareth that there is no small diversitie and difference amongst them And whereas the Apostle writeth vnto the faithfull people That all of them should savour one thing 1 Cor. 1.10 and speake one thing and that no schisme should appeare amongst them we must needs say that they are by no small schisme divided and rent asunder who not thinking the selfe same things doe speake diversly of the mysterie of the bodie and blood of Christ Wherefore your Kingly Maiestie and Highnesse being provoked no doubt with the zeale of Religion though perhaps not quietly and indifferently considering of these things and desiring also that all men should according to the Apostles Commandement thinke and speake one thing doth diligently search for the mysterie and secret of truth that so you may call backe such therevnto as haue wandred and strayed Wherevpon also it commeth to passe that you disdaine not to demand and aske the truth of this matter even of very poore and base men perswading your selfe that the mysterie of so great a secret cannot be knowne but by inspiration and revelation from God who having no respect of persons sheweth forth the light of his truth by whomsoever he himselfe hath chosen to so great a matter Now as it is very pleasant for me poore man to obey your Commandement so I confesse it is a very hard matter for me to dispute and reason of a matter so farre estranged from mans vnderstanding and senses and into which a man cannot pearse or enter but by the instruction and teaching of the holy Spirit Wherefore I being at this present subiect to your Highnesse commandement and yet trusting and cleaving to the ayde and assistance of him of whom we will speake will assay by what words I can to open my iudgement concerning
this matter not leaning in the treatie thereof to mine owne wit but pursuing and treading in the footsteps of the holy and auncient Fathers HERE BEGINneth the Booke of Bertram the Priest touching the body and blood of the Lord which he wrote to Charles the Great being Emperour YOur Highnesse Excellency demandeth 1 Two questions whether that the body and blood of Christ which in the Church is receiued by the mouth of the faithfull bee done in a mystery or in truth and verity that is to say whether it containe some secret thing which is euident to the eyes of faith onely or whether without the vaile or couerture of any mystery the bodily sight doe outwardly behold that which the sight of the minde doth inwardly looke vpon so that whatsoeuer is done appeareth manifestly or no And this is the first question The other is whether it be that very body that was borne of the Virgin Mary that suffered that died that was buried and that rising againe ascēding vp into heauen sitteth now on the right hand of the Father or no Now let vs looke into the first of these two questions and lest wee be letted with ambiguity and doubtfulnesse let vs define what a figure is and what the truth is that so beholding and perceiuing some certainty wee may know whither wee ought to deferre the course of our reasoning A figure is a certaine shadow by certaine vailes couertures as it were that is to say darkely declaring the thing which it intendeth to manifest as for example when wee minde to speake of Gods Word we call it bread so in the Lords Prayer wee desire to haue daily bread giuen vs. Also when Christ in the Gospell speaketh Mat. 6.11 saying I am the living bread which came downe from heaven Likewise Ioh. 6.51 when hee calleth himselfe a Vine and his Disciples branches saying I am the true Vine Ioh. 15.1.5 and yee are the branches For all these sayings seeme to speake one thing and yet meane another thing As for that which wee call verity or truth it is the declaration of a manifest and plaine matter which is not couered with any shew of shadowes but insinuated and delivered with pure and open or to speak more plainly with naturall significations as when it is said That Christ being borne of a Virgin suffered death was crucified Mat. 1.25 1 Pet. 3.18 1 Cor. 2.2 Ioh. 19.40 c. dead and buried Heere verily is nothing shadowed with figures ouer-couering the same but the truth of the things declared by the significations of naturall wordes or speeches neither may we heere vnderstand any other thing than that which is spoken and expressed But it is not so in the former sentences for neither is Christ the bread substantiallly neither is Christ a Vine substantially neither are the Apostles branches substantially wherefore in these latter speeches there is a figure and in those former the truth that is to say a naked and open signification is declared by narration or plaine speech Now let vs returne to those things that is to the body and blood of Christ for whose these points haue been propounded and vttered Truly if that great mystery be celebrated and done vnder no mystery at all then it is not rightly called a mystery because that cannot be called a mystery or secret wherein there is no hidden thing and wherein there is no matter remooued from our bodily senses and wherein there is nothing covered with some vaile or couerture But that bread which by the Ministery of the Priest is now become the body of Christ doth shew one thing outwardly to mans senses and soundeth another thing inwardly to the mindes of the faithfull Outwardly indeed the form of bread which it had before is set out the colour thereof is shewed and the savour thereof received and tasted But inwardly a thing farre differing yea and much more precious and excellently is shewed and set forth and I say it is much more precious and excellent because it is heauenly and because it is diuine I meaning hereby that Christs body is manifested which is either seen or receiued or eaten not with the senses faculties or power of the flesh but with the eye and sight of a faithfull or beleeving minde The wine also which by the Priest through consecration is become the Sacrament of Christs blood setteth forth one thing outwardly and containeth an other thing inwardly For what other thing is superficially and outwardly locked vp then the substance of wine Taste it and it savoureth and smacketh wine smell it and it smelleth wine looke vpon it and thou mayst behold the colour of wine But if a man do consider it inwardly then it being not the liquor of wine but the liquor of Christ blood so savoreth to the beleevers minds while it is tasted and is so acknowledged while it is beheld and is so proved to be whilest it is smelled It is manifest that these things are so seeing no man can deny them to be true because the Bread and the Wine is figuratiuely Christs body blood For outwardly and according to that which is seene neither is any kind or shew of flesh knowne to be in that Bread nor any drop of blood shewed forth in the Wine and yet for all that after the mysticall consecration the Bread is no more called Bread nor the Wine Wine but both of them together are called the body and blood of Christ For if according to some mens mindes nothing were in this matter taken figuratiuely but the whole were considered and looked vpon in veritie or truth then should faith worke nothing at all therein because that no spirituall thing should be performed but looke whatsoever the thing it selfe were even that wholly should be taken according to the body and a mans fleshly vnderstanding Heb. 11.1 And seeing that faith as the Apostle saith is the argument and evidence of such things as appeare not that is to say not of such substances as are seene but of such as are not seene we shall then in this action receiue nothing according to faith because that we discerne and iudge of all that is in it according to our bodily senses And what I pray you can be more absurd then to take Bread to be flesh and to affirme that Wine is blood And a mystery that cannot be in which there is no secret or hidden thing conteined And how can it be said to be Christs body and blood in which it is not known that there is any change made Now every alteration and change He proueth by three sorts of change that there is no change made in the elements of the Supper is either made from that thing which actually it is not into that which actually it is or els when it is changed from that which it is into that which it is not or from that which it is to wit in respect of quality to that
were with the dainties of Gods word here on earth I mean men Verily the Psalmist or rather the holy Ghost in the Psalmist sheweth either what our fathers received in that heavenly Manna or els what the faithfull people should beleeue to be in the mysterie of Christs bodie In both of them certainely Christ is signified and set forth which Christ both feedeth the soules of the beleevers and is the food and meate of Angels and yet neither of them are done in corporall taste or bodily feeding but by the power of the spirituall word And wee know because the Evangelist hath declared the same that the Lord Iesus Christ before he suffered Tooke Bread and gaue thankes Mat. 26.26 c. 1 Cor. 11.23 c. and gaue it to his Disciples saying This is my bodie which is given for you doe this in remembrance of me Likewise he tooke the Cup after he had supped saying This Cup is the New Testament in my blood which shall be shed for you We see that Christ had not as yet suffered and yet for all that he wrought or made the mysterie of his body and blood for wee thinke truely that any faithfull man doubteth whether that Bread became Christs bodie which he gaue vnto his Disciples and said This is my bodie which is given for you or whether the cup conteineth Christes blood of which cup our Saviour Christ himselfe saide This cup is the New Testament in my blood which shall be shed for you Therefore as he could even a little before he suffered turne the substance of the Bread and the creature of the Wine into his owne body which should suffer and into his own blood which afterwardes should be shed so likewise was he able in the Wildernesse to turne the Manna and the water that issued out of the Rocke into his owne flesh and blood although that a long time after both his flesh was to be hāged on the crosse for our sakes and his blood to be shed for the washing away of our sinnes Here also wee ought to consider how we must vnderstand that which he himselfe saith Ioh 6.53 Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee shall not haue life in you For hee doth not say or meane that his flesh which afterwards hanged on the Crosse should bee cut in peeces and parts and so be eaten by his Disciples neither yet that his blood which hee should shed for the redemption of the world should bee given vnto his Disciples for drinke because it should be a most wicked and horrible thing for his Disciples either to drinke his blood or to eate his flesh as the vnbeleevers did at that time vnderstand him Therefore in the words following he said to his Disciples who did not vnbeleevingly but in some measure of faith receiue Christs wordes although they could not as then pierce and perceiue how those wordes were to bee vnderstood to them I say he said Doth this offend you Ioh. 6.61.62 What then if yee should see the Sonne of man ascend vp where he was before As though he should say Thinke not I pray you that you must either bodily eate my flesh or bodily drinke my blood or that my body must bee divided into parts to be eaten or my blood distributed to be drunke seeing that after my resurrection yee shall see mee to goe vp into heaven with the fulnesse of my whole body and blood and then shall ye vnderstand that my very flesh shall not be eaten of the beleevers as the infidels suppose but that the bread and the wine being turned into the substance of my body and of my blood the substance thereof shall bee in a mystery received by the beleevers And presently he addeth Ioh. 6.63 The spirit is it saith hee which quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing He saith that the flesh profiteth nothing at all after such a forme and manner as the vnbeleevers vnderstood it otherwise it giveth life as the faithfull do in a mystery receiue it And why this is done he himselfe doth manifestly declare when hee saith It is the spirit that quickeneth Wherefore there is in this mysterie of the body and blood of Christ a spirituall opperation and working that giveth life without the working whereof these mysteries profit nothing at all because they may indeed feed the bodie but they cannot feed the soule Now then heere ariseth a question which while many propound they say and affirme that these things are done not in a figure or mystery but in verity and truth Which while they affirme they are found to goe against and to gaine-say the writings of the holy Fathers Saint Augustine Aug. de doct Christ lib. 3. one of the chiefe Doctors of the Church in his third booke of Christian doctrine writeth thus Ioh. 6.53 Except ye eate saith our Saviour the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee shall not haue life in you Hee seemeth to command a wicked thing and an vngodly act Wherefore it is a figuratiue speech commanding vs to communicate in the Lords passion and sweetly and profitably to lay vp this in our memories that his flesh was crucified and wounded for our sakes Here we perceiue that this Doctor saith and affirmeth that the mysteries of the bodie blood of Christ are vnder a figure celebrated and received of the faithfull for hee saith plainely that it belongeth not to religion but is rather a wicked thing carnally to eate Christs body or to drink his blood into which fault they fell who not spiritually but fleshly vnderstanding the Lords words in the Gospell Ioh. 6.66 Departed or went backe from him and went or walked no more with him The same Doctor writing in a certaine Epistle to Boniface the Bishop Aug. ad Bonifa epist amongst other things saith thus Truly we vse oftentimes to speak thus that when Easter draweth nigh that to morrow or the next day after shall be the Lords passion whereas hee suffered so many yeares before and verily that passion or suffering was done but once for all Also on the Lords day that wee call Easter day wee vsually say this day the Lord rose againe whereas indeed and truth so many yeares are since he rose againe already past And why is no man so fond and foolish as to reproue vs speaking thus as though we had lyed but onely because wee name those dayes according to the similitude and likenesse of these dayes in which these things were done Insomuch that it is called the very same day which yet is not in deed the very same but in the revolution and turning about of the time is like it and so also that is said to be done vpon that day by reason of the celebration and administration of the Sacrament which is not done vpon that day but was performed long agoe Was not Christ once offered about that time And yet notwithstanding hee