bee briefe could in fauour and contemplation of his merits and dignitie obtaine of God remission of sinnes and the other graces needfull for them which trust in him and instantly desire him Secondly the Ministers say that there is no other sacrifice for sinne but that of Iesus Christ That he is the onely Lambe which beareth the sinnes of the world that there is nothing but his bloud whereby our filthinesse is washed To bee short that God taketh pleasure in no other sacrifice nor oblation and that hee requireth no other burnt sacrifice nor offering for sinne And that therefore Iesus Christe as it is written of him in the rolle of the lawe is come to doo and accomplish the will of God his Father Thirdly they say of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ that it was one onely and once offered by himselfe without that it was euer needfull afterwardes to repeate and reiterate the same considering the perfection and vertue thereof by which sinne is abolished and absolute and eternall sanctification obtained to all the elect as it appeareth in the 9. and 10. of the Hebrewes By meanes whereof no lesse blasphemy it is nor a thing lesse contrarie to the doctrine and meaning of the Apostle to approue the repetition and reiteration of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ then the pluralitie of sacrifices for sinne And if the Doctors would as they wontedly haue to disguise and colour such an abuse shewe forth their distinction betweene the propitiatory and applicatory sacrifice saying that the Priests pretend not in their Masses to sacrifice Iesus Christ for other end then to apply the merite of his death to those for whom they celebrate the same The Ministers answere that in so dooing they should attribute vnto Iesus Christ more then they do because all the fruite of his sacrifice commeth vnto vs by the application thereof As healing commeth not so much by the confection and preparation of the medicine as by the application of the same Furthermore the Ministers would willingly demaund of our Maisters by what meane the benefite of the death of Iesus Christ was applied to the Fathers before his comming seeing that as then they did sing no Masses Well seeth euerie man of any spirite or iudgement that such distinctions are friuolous and onely inuented to obscure the truth and dazell the eyes of the simple and ignorant For Iesus Christ who hath offered the sacrifice is hee himselfe which applyeth the same vnto vs by his spirite his word and his Sacraments To returne then to their former speech and declare why the Fathers haue called the Supper and all the action thereof a sacrifice It behoueth to note that there are many sorts of sacrifices in the Supper As the sacrifice of a contrite heart offered by publike confession of sinnes which there is made After the sacrifice of our body there offered by publike prayer which followeth the said confession Thirdly the sacrifice of praise there offered when they sing Psalmes after the confession and prayer After commeth the preaching of the Gospell which is called a sacrifice Rom. 15. then the confession and prayers ended the Minister presenteth himselfe to the people to preach vnto them the word of God The Almes which is an other kinde of sacrifice was heretofore brought forth in the Supper by the faithfull which would therby testifie not only their remembrance of the graces benefites of God but also their loue desire they had to relieue the necessities of their poore neighbors Besides all these Sacrifices there are yet in the Supper two particular sacrifices wherof mention is made in the writings of the Fathers The bread and the wine which were chosen and taken of the Almes brought thither for the poore and were consecrated that is to say deputed and appointed to the holy and sacred vse of the Supper The other is the memorie of the death and sacrifice of Iesus Christ celebrated and repeated in all the action of the Supper The which for this reason is called a Sacrifice by S. Iohn Chrisostome vpon the Epistle to the Hebrewes when he saith We make not euery day other Sacrifice then that of Iesus Christ. But rather saith he correcting himselfe we make the memorie of that Sacrifice S. Ambrose calleth it the memorie of our redemption To the end that we remembring our Redeemer may obtaine of him increase of his graces in vs. S. Augustine yet proposeth it more clearly vnder a comparison which he bringeth of the dayes of the passion and resurrection of Iesus Christ which he thus applieth when the Feast of Easter approacheth we vse oft times this maner of speech To morrow or within two daies we haue the passion or resurrection of Iesus Christ That cannot properly be vnderstood of the day wherein Iesus Christ suffered death which is long since passed but onely of the memorie of his death which is solempnized and celebrated as this day euery yeare A little after to appropriate his comparison he addeth Iesus Christ hath not he bene one only time offered in himselfe And neuerthelesse in the Sacrament of the Supper not only on Easter day but euery day also is hee offered to the people Also elsewhere The flesh and blood of this Sacrifice were before the comming of Iesus Christ promised by the figures of Sacrifices In the passion of Iesus Christ they were giuen and offered in trueth And after the Ascention of Iesus Christ into Heauen they are celebrated by the Sacrament of remembrance Of these and many other like passages one may deduct that the Fathers haue often called the Supper a Sacrifice by reason that in the same the memory of the Sacrifice of Iesus Christ is renued and celebrated The name of Sacrifice is by the Auncients often also applied to the Almes which the faithfull brought forth in the Supper As by Iustin Martyr in the second Apologie by S. Augustin in the 20. chap. of the 20. book Cotra Faust by S. Ciprian in the booke de Elimosina by S. Iohn Chrysostome Hom. 46. vpon S. Mathew Which thing may also be verified by the Canō of the Masse it selfe where it is said We offer to thy maiestie part of thy gifts benefits which ought to be referred to the Almes of the faithfull which the Minister in the name of the whole Church offered to God They haue sometimes also called the praiers there made Sacrifices As S. Ciprian vpon the Lords Prayer And Eusebius in the 7. of the Ecclesiasticall History Tertullian in the 3. booke against Marcion where alledging that written in Malachy of the cleane offering which ought to be made vnto God from the rysing of the Sunne to the going downe of the same saith that ought to be vnderstood of the Hymnes and praises of God Which S. Ierome expounding the passage aforesaid doth also confirme For conclusion of this matter the Ministers say that all the passages of the bookes of the Fathers wherin mention is
ea Thy truth ô Lord not mine nor of him or him but of all vs whom thou callest to communion terribly admonishing that wee haue not the truth priuate least wee be depriued thereof And touching the bookes of the old Testament which the Ministers will not receiue for Canonicall by the iudgement of their inward reuelation the Doctors doo shewe that before Saint Augustines time or at leastwise in his time in the Church vniuersall all the bookes which are contained in the holy Bible without distinction were holden and receiued for Canonicall as witnesseth the Councell of Carthage where S. Augustine was And also the Councell of Laodicia Now thus say the Doctors the Fathers which were present in these Councels if by inward inspiration wee must iudge of bookes they had it or at least they might perswade themselues to haue it more assuredly then many others The Ministers say that they iudge by their inward reuelation that they be not Canonicall The Doctors leaue it to iudgement which men ought rather beleeue whether the inspiration of the auncient Fathers receiued by the Church for so many hundred yeares vntill now or else the priuate and particular inspiration of the new Ministers They adde further that they submit themselues to proue that the auncient Fathers yea neare the time of the Apostles as Ireneus S. Ciprian Origen S. Ierome S. Augustine and others doo vse the testimonies of the bookes reiected by the Ministers yea for proofe of the doctrine against the heretikes And Saint Augustine himselfe in the 2. booke of Christian doctrine Cap. 2. dooth put all those bookes by name among the bookes Canonicall And Damascen likewise in his fourth booke de Orthodoxa fide Cap. 18. To know then whether a man haue the spirit of God to discerne and iudge of the bookes of the scripture he must bee reduced to the common consent and agreement of the Church for this is the ordinarie meanes left by God to that effect and the experience may bee made is an argument sufficient to conuince that the faithfull by inward inspiration cannot discerne the Canonicall bookes from the pretended Apocrypha Which might easily bee verified would the cause to come at this present some of the same pretended reformed Religion which haue not yet bene instructed in the diuision of the bookes vnto whom should one propose the bookes which the Ministers hold for Apocrypha they would in no wise distinguish them from other bookes of the holy Byble And vpon the whole they conclude that if one person hath the spirite of God c. vt supra Answere Touching the first Article the Ministers neuer said as may appeare by the reading of all the former answeres that their religion is founded on their particular reuelations but vpon the word of God as is proposed in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Of the truth whereof they haue said to be principally assured by the â—estimoniâ— and reuelation of the holy spirit They also say that faith is not the truth to speake properly but the perswasion of the truth which in the scripture â—s â—aught vs. Moreouer that this faith is not of our owne getting but a pure giâ—t of God adding that the Ministers to make them lawfullâ— ought to bee sent not from the pretended Pastors which haue not but the â—yâ—le and onely name of Pastors but ought to be sent from God a it appeareth in Ieremy where this marke is proposed to knowe and marke a false Pastor or Shepheard when hee thrusteth in himselfe or is sent of an other then of God Touching the article following they adde that the true marke whereby one may certainly iudge of the reuelation is rather the word of God then the consent of many for as much as it oft times happeneth that the multitude in the Church declining from the word doo altogether erre as in the time of Micheas the time of Iesus Christ and afterward also of Constance the Emperour Concerning the Prophets which doo follow theyâ— owne spirite as bee those which leaue the word of God and depend vppon the commaundements and traditions of men or on the vanitie of their owne sence there is no doubt but they are false Prophets and that such persons are to bee shunned and reiected But great difference must bee put betweene the reuelations and testimonies of the spirit of God and the vaine imaginations of the hearts of men Touching that which the Doctors haue set foorth that heretikes as Anabaptists and others doo vse for confirmation of their errors the texts of scripture alledged by the Ministers It may so bee for as much as the scripture beeing common may bee produced and alledged of eueâ—ie one And yet men must not stay vpon that which is alledged but weigh and examine how and to what end and purpose it is alledged and in so dooing men shall knowe the difference betweene the Ministers and heretikes And concerning that produced of Brentius and Bucer namely wherein they affirmed that by the onely tradition of the Church the Canonicall bookes may be discerned from the Apocrypha This it seemeth cannot well serue the Doctors seeing they maintaine all the bookes of the Bible to bee Canonicall and neuerthelesse by that they haue said of Brentius and Bucer it appeareth that the one and the other following the tradition as they say put a distinction therein calling the one Canonicall and the other Apocrypha Touching the Article following wherein the Doctors alledge certaine textes of the auntient Fathers to take away the difference betweene the bookes Canonicall and Apocrypha The Ministers do answer that as they haue alledged some to proue the same so can they also for their part alledge some to that purpose as Saint Ierome in his Prologue called Galeatus and in an other which beginneth Frater Ambrosius vnto whom writing the summe of euery booke of the Bible hee mentioneth those onely which the Ministers call Canonicall They may alledge also two or three Catalogues recyted in Eusebius which they receiue not for Canonicall bookes but those which the Ministers themselues approue Moreouer the Councell of Laodicia which the Doctors haue alledged is for the Ministers for as much as it comprehendeth not the bookes in question And touching the experience they answere that it is a question of fact and that it may be alledged rather against the Doctors then the Ministers And finally that they loose not more time in often repeating of one selfe-same thing but hasten to conferre of the points of the confession which the Doctors will debate The Ministers do shewe that the 24. bookes of the old Testament which are in the Canon of the Hebrewes with all the bookes of the new Testament be on both sides approued Canonicall And they are wholly sufficient to decide all the points of their confession all that in generall which appertaineth to true religion And by meanes thereof they haue no cause at all to drawe backe from the Conference for the
all power without exception ouer the creatures and by written examples and straunge my racles wrought vpon their bodies against the nature of them Tertullian in his booke of the Resurrection saith To the end wee may beleeue that our God is more mightie then all lawe and nature of all bodies And addeth that they knowe God amisse who thinke that is not in his power which they in their braine cannot comprehend From whence it commeth as saith S. Cyrill that such wicked spirits doo reiect and condemne all things as impossible because they themselues do not vnderstand them Moreouer the Doctors suppose they haue sufficiently shewed as well by expresse scripture as by the expositions thereof taken from auncient Christians that it was not onely in the power of God to make two bodies in one place and one body without place equall to it greatnesse but that alreadie it was truly done in the birth of the body of our Lord Iesus Christ in his resurrection in the entrie through the closed doores and in the ascention aboue all the heauens And the Doctors haue shewed that there was like and semblable repugnancie in these deeds as in the other that is of one body in two places which is not exempted by the scripture from the power nor will of God more then the others to iudge it impossible to bee done and that there was neuer Christian before our time which dared to affirme that thing to be impossible â—nd out of the power of God although occasion was often offered to say it had they any way thought it impossible as the Ministers of the pretended reformed Religion do pretend Contrariwife the most part of the auncient authors of the Primitiue Church haue held it expresly to be in Gods power to place one creature in many places as held Saint Ierome against the heretike Vigillantius that the soules of the Saints might be present in many places with the immaculate Lambe our Lord Iesus Christ And the question was whether the said soules and spirits of the Saints were sometimes present in the Churches where their Sepulchres and monuments were And so much thereof holdeth S. Augustine in the 16 Chap. of the booke which he wrote of the due care of the dead where he writeth that soules by the power of their owne nature cannot be here belowe and in heauen or in many places but that it may be done by the power of God and will not resolue whether they vnderstand our affaires by such a presence in many places or by the reuelation of Angels or other meanes by the power and grace of God Also it is certain that in the matter of the holy Sacrament the auncient Fathers of the Church haue acknowledged and maintained that the bodie of Iesus Christ was in many places by the almightie power of God As doth S. Ambrose vpon the tenth of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and Saint Chrisostome in his 17. Homily vpon the same Epistle Where both two as it were in like words do write that although in many places there are many actions and oblations of the body of Iesus Christ neuerthelesse hauing regard to the thing which is offered to wit the true lambe and body of Christ Iesus that this sacrifice in many places offered is but one for so much as it is but one selfe-same thing to wit the true lambe and the true body of Iesus Christ which is but one and abideth whole in all places where it is offered They adde also that the oblations of him in diuers places is not an iteration of the sacrifice of the Crosse but in commemoration of him So that in the sacrifice of the Masse they acknowledge and distinguish two points The one which concerneth the realtie of the thing offered and they say that this is the true lambe and true body of Iesus Christ which then remaining intierly one is neuerthelesse in many places And the other concerneth the action and oblation of such thing by the Priest which is no iteration nor like action or oblation as that of the Crosse but diuerse in remembrance notwithstanding of that was made vpon the Crosse S. Chrisostome in the third booke of Priesthood cryeth out saying Oh myracle and power of God! He which sitteth on high at the right hand of his Father is held betweene the hands of each one in the Sacrament S. Augustine vpon the 33. Psalme sheweth that the body of Iesus Christ in the Supper was in two places that is to say in it visible place among his Apostles and neuerthelesse betweene his owne hands So that he himselfe did beare himselfe And before he concludeth the same Saint Augustine debateth how it was possible that one person should beare his body betweene his hands And after he had shewed that it was impossible for Dauid and cuerie creature he descended at last to the diuine power which was in Iesus Christ by the which to him alone among all men such myracle was possible And to the ende that men should not depraue nor wrest the meaning of S. Augustine because there is something which after a sort is carried as though it diminished the truth let them note that the purpose of S. Augustine is to shewe that Iesus by his almightinesse did carrie himselfe which to any creature was impossible Now had he onely in the Supper borne betweene his hands the figure of the Sacrament and signe of his body and not his true and reall body hee should haue done nothing but what the least man might do For each man can carrie betwixt his hands the figure Image signe or Sacrament of his body or sticke it in his hat without myracle or supernaturall power It be houeth then that the certaine maner which S. Augustine vseth doth nothing diminish the truth and this it is that betweene his hands he was inuisible and in a supernaturall maner of being reall neuerthelesse and true S. Basil in his Liturgie with the others auoucheth the body of Iesus Christ to be in heauen and by his almightinesse notwithstanding to bee present in the Sacrament although the Ministers to proue it impossible for one body or one other creature to be in many places do chiefly build vpon S. Basil but the said S. Basil in the place by the Ministers alledged doth expresly protest not to speake but according to the naturall proprietie And in his Liturgie he declareth that it is not onely in the power of God to cause the body of Iesus Christ to be in heauen and vpon the Aultar but that it is so truly done The Doctors to end this question of one body in many places say that such matter is not onely in the power of God but that it must so be beleeued to bee done in the holy Sacrament that God be not found a lyar and deceiuer in his word whereby Iesus affirmed to his Apostles that that which he gaue with his hands was his true body deliuered for vs. This is an argument which
betweene the true reuelations of the Lord and the Word which proceeding from him is as true as the reuelation And the reuelation reciprocally as true as the Word Yet doth it not therefore follow that the word and the reuelations of the spirit of the Lord by the which we may be conducted to the vnderstanding of the word are not things different and that the one doth not go before the other And where the said Vigor prayeth the said De Spina to hasten to the point he answereth That he cannot else where ground his answeres then vpon the demaundes which be made vnto him Reply Whereunto the said Vigor replyed that hee referred himselfe touching the sence to that which is touched in the answere of the said De Spina And where he saith that the word goeth before the reuelation that is of no value to make difference vpon the question proposed And to come to the point the said Vigor demaundeth whether a man may be assured that he hath reuelation from the Lord that a booke is a booke of the holy Scripture and when he may iudge assuredly of his inward inspiration Also how he can assure any of this inspiration giuen him of the Lord Answere Touching the first Article of the last demaund It is not a thing impertinent to distinguish the scripture from the interpretation thereof inaâ—much as they bee things diuers and diuers gifts of the Lord. And to answer to the question proposed how a particular man before the reuelation and inward testimonie of the spirit of God in his heart may acknowledge that it is Canonicall The spirit of God varieth not from himselfe And abiding in one particular man he wil acknowledge the Scripture which is come from him and beareth his markes And for answere to the second demand hee also saith that the selfe same spirit beeing likewise in a third person will acknowledge both that the word and the reuelation are of him for the reasons alledged That is to say that the spirit of God in diuers persons is alwayes equall and like vnto himselfe Obiection This is no full satisfaction to the first question proposed by the which it was demaunded how some man may iudge in himselfe that hee hath the holy Ghost to discerne one Booke to be the holy Scripture and another not but Apocrypha and how he may declare vnto another that he hath his inspiration from God Answere The spirit of God is called a seale in the scripture therefore is it that the first effect which it produceth in the heart of him vnto whom it is communicated is to assure him of his presence As for assuring a secoÌ„d person of the reuelation that one hath receiued of the spirit of God it is easie Forasmuch as the spirit of God which openeth the mouth of the one to speake doth also open the eares of the other to listen to his word and the heart to beleeue it to be perswaded thereof So that betweene the maister and the scholler between the teacher and the hearer when they be both furnished and enlightened by the Spirit of God there is alwayes one mutuall consent to acknowledge one another Obiection Such certaintie is a great incertaintie And there is not any of what sect soeuer which doeth not assure himselfe to haue the holy Ghost and the trueth on his side which is a foolish presumption How can a man distinguish a presumption from a true inspiration Answere S. Iohn Chrisostome saith that in vaine a man boasteth of the spirit without the word which is a meane to represse sectes and heresies and to iudge of all things which heretiques others would propose vnder the authoritie tytle of the Spirit of God For as by the spirit we know the true sence of the word so do we also mutually acknowledge by the word who those be which haue the spirit of God or no. Obiection This is no answere to the question For the question is not to examine the doctrine by the word but the question is to know whether it be the word of God by which a man will examine and approoue a doctrine And how a man shall iudge assuredly that hee hath a reuelation of the Lord that that is the word of God Answere If he be faithfull therefore shall he iudge by the Spirit of God which is in him as in him which telleth the same vnto him And if he be vnfaithfull as impossible it is that he should iudge thereof as it is to a blinde man to iudge and discerne of colours presented vnto him Forasmuch saieth S. Paul as the Spirit of God is he by whom wee know and iudge the things that are of God Obiection Yet is not this an answere to the question proposed let the iudgement thereof be left to the readers and hearers Now make they another demaund that is to say Whether we be not very certaine by the word of God that the Lord doeth assist his Church and will assist it vnto the end of the world And whether it be not a more assured thing to stay on the consent and iudgement of the Church touching the determination of the Canonicall bookes of the holy Scripture the distinction of them from the Apocrypha then to leane vpon his owne iudgement esteeming it to bee an inward inspiration whereof a man can make no proofe but supposeth that he hath the holy Ghost Answere The Doctors doo confound the opinions which fantasticke men may haue with the witnesses and reuelations of the holy Ghost although betweene those two there is as much distance as is from heauen to earth And as touching the consent of the Church suppose that it proceedeth from the spirit of God Infallable it is also certaine that particular reuelations may be as of Esay and other Prophets And forasmuch as the one and the other do proceed from one selfe same Authour which is the Spirit of trueth The certaintie of the reuelations of God his Spirit made vnto all the Church in generall and to euery member of it in particular is of one selfe same moment Obiection The Minsters cannot shew to the Catholiques nor to any others that they are not fantasticall for asmuch as they make no proofe more then do other sects of the reuelation of the holy Ghost made vnto them and as touching that is said suppose that it proceedeth froÌ„ the Spirit of God They doubt it seemeth of the assistance of the holy Ghost in the Church of God which saith S. Paul is Columna firmameÌ„tuÌ„ veritatis the pillar ground of truth And a thing it is to be wel considered that they are more certain of the assistaÌ„ce of the Lord in one particular person then in the Church vniuersal And where they say that to know the truth the holy Spirit assisteth as well euery member of the Church as the whole church By that might a man conclude that the particular faithful could neuer erre that the
2. vnder the name of Oyntment and in many other places Obiection The places heere-aboue alledged make nothing to prooue that the Spirite was promised to all to iudge of the doctrine otherwise euen women and all faithfull Artificers should iudge of the doctrine as the Prophets and Apostles To the contrary whereof Saint Paul sayeth Nunquid omnes Prophetae c. Are all Prophets hee putteth downe expresly that the discerning of Spirites is to haue vnderstanding of the Scriptures and are gifts which are not common to all the faithfull but particular to some Answere The consequence which the Doctors gather is nothing worth forasmuch as the Spirit of God is more abundantly oft times comunicated to some then to others And some also are better exercised in the Scripture then others Touching the place of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 12. the Ministers say It maketh nothing against them forasmuch as the Spirit of prophecâ—e and the spirit of discretion are different gifts as it appeareth by the declaration which the Apostle maketh in the same Chapter The second dayes Dispute beeing Wednesday the tenth of Iuly THE Doctors required that their protestations the day before made might be registred which was such That they protested they would not enter into any Dispute of things receiued in the vniuersall Church from the Apostles time hitherto decided and determined by holy Eâ—umenicall and generall Councells holding them for certaine and indubitable and that all doctrine to the contrary was false But following the good and holy desire of the Lorde Montpensier and Madam de Buillon his daughter they were ready to make knowne by the verey exâ—resse word of God interpreted by the sayd vniuersall Church and Councells that their doctrine wherein the sayd Ladie was formerly instructed is sound and wholesome And that the instruction which hath beene giuen her to the contrarie is perniâ—ious and damnable And that this Conference is by way of instruction and not of Dispute The Ministers likewise protested that they assembled not with the Doctors for any doubt they had that whatsoeuer is conteined in their confessioÌ„ of faith is not certain and true and founded vpon the word of God as appeareth by the places of scripture quoted in the margeant of the said confession And doo beleeue that whatsoeuer is contrarie and opposite therevnto is damnable and to be reiected yea though an Angell from heauen should propose it And as touching themselues they were not come thither to be instructed in other doctrine then such as they follow and haue learned of Iesus Christ whom they acknowledge to be the onely maister and instructor of the Church It was declared by my Lord of Neuers that he desired after the obiections and answeres there should bee giuen a short resolution both of the one side and the other of that was conferred of the day before Following which remonstrance the Doctors say that to iudge of a booke whether it be the writing of holy scripture or not and likewise to discerne a booke Canonicall from one Apocrypha or Ecclesiasticall a man must not rest on his owne priuate opinion or priuate and particular inspiration for as much as none haue ordinarie assurance that it is a true reuelation of the holy Ghost without reducing himselfe to the common consent and agreement of the Church vniuersall And also that God albeit hee had power to reueale and imprint in each one the true knowledge necessarie to saluation yet hath he ordained a certaine meane whereby faith is obtained which is a reuealed truth that is to say by hearing of the word of God preached by lawfull Ministers sent by the Pastors of the true Church as by the text of Saint Paul to the Rom. 10. and Ephes 4. appeareth If then the meane to haue faith and inward reuelation of the knowledge of saluation bee by the hearing of the word of God lawfully preached by the Ministers of the same according to the ordinary meane to be assured that a man hath inward reuelation It behoueth necessarily to bee assured that the word by which faith is obtained hath bene preached by the lawfull Ministers of the true Church And by consequence to be first assured of the church before his own inward reuelation following the meane which Iesus Christ hath followed They say further that the true and certaine marke of a true inward reuelation is when as it is reduced to the common consent of the Church And contrariwise that euery pretended inward inspiration particular and priuate is a false perswasion if it bee different from the common consent of the Church For the spirite of God is not particular but common And say moreouer that to finde out a false doctrine it behoueth to examine the same to knowe whether it bee priuate or common euen as our Lord hath giuen the true marke in Saint Iohn 8. saying Qui de se loquitur mendacium loquitur Hee that saieth any thing of himselfe and of his owne proper inspiration is a lyer And likewise as it is written in Ezechiel Sonne of man prophesie against the Prophets of Israel that prophesie and say vnto them that prophesie out of their owne heart heare the word of the Lord. Thus saith the Lord God Woe to the foolish Prophets which follow their owne spirit and haue seene nothing And afterward they haue seene vanitie and lying diuination saying The Lord saieth it and the Lord hath not sent them and they haue made others to hope that they would confirme the word of their prophesie And the verses following doo serue to the purpose Which false Prophets said they had an inward reuelation and the word of God They say also and let it be well wayed that the proppe of Religion grounded and assured vpon an inward inspiration is the foundation of many Sects in our time as of Anabaptists and Suencfildians who stay their doctrines vpon priuate reuelations and alledge the same texts to serue them for foundation of their doctrine which the Ministers yesterday alledged that is to say Ieremy in the third Chapter and Ioel. 2. and Saint Paul 1. Cor. 2. which Brentius and Bucer considering haue confessed that by the onely tradition of the Church wee are acertained of the bookes of the holy scripture in following the doctrine of the auncient Fathers as Saint Ierome who confesseth hee receiued by the tradition of the Church and by the same did knowe that there bee foure Gospels As much thereof saith Origen recyting the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament saying I haue learned by tradition that there bee foure Gospels And you shall not finde any auncient Catholicke which hath stayed his faith to discerne and iudge of bookes vpon his onely priuate and particular inspiration And Saint Augustine Liber Confess cap. 25. vseth these wordes Veritas tua domine non mea nec illius aut illius sed omnium nostrum quos ad communionem aduocas terribiliter admonens ne priuatam veritatem habeamus ne priuemur
Epistle of S. Iohn and others But in time the Church guided by the holy Ghost with common consent receiued indifferently for Canonicall all the bookes that bee in the Bible which consent continued by so many hundred yeares hath more authoritie then the sayings of one or two the which neuerthelesse spake not but of their owne time And further there is no comparison betweene the sayings of one or two particular men the determinations of Councels and consent of the Church as hath already beene sayd And it will be found that S. Ierom hath approoued these bookes as Canonicall And for the same will referre themselues to the Prologue which hee made vpon the bookes of the Macabees where he saith Touching the Hebrewes they are not Canonicall histories of the Church or other wordes to the like effect For the Councell of Laodicia they referre them to that which is contained therein It may bee they are deceiued in cyting one Councell for another For the Article beginning Touching the experience c. Although it be a question of fact yet it ceaseth not to be much auailable And if it be found as the Doctors haue proposed of which they doubt nothing the foundation of their particular reuelation is ouerthrowne Touching the Ministers conclusion the Doctors doo shew that they haue oft times complained they fell into by-matters They referre themselues to the iudgement of all men that their last resolution was deducted all of one thread continuing without straying in the same matter In which albeit they had found something wherein difficultie had beene had the Ministers so much desired to proceed to the conference of the chiefe pointes they might briefely haue admonished them of the said difficultie The Doctors vpon these articles had verily said something but to hasten the busines for the which they bee called they do forbeare to multiply words Where the Ministers shew that they receiue the 24. bookes of the old Testament with all the bookes of the Newe The Doctors say that that is not the point For all the conference they haue made hitherto that is to say by what rules men might discerne some bookes from other some and iudge whether they were of the Scripture or not was to raunge them in this point that they receiued them by the tradition of the Church which is iudge of the number of the bookes and by the same meanes when the question should bee of the vnderstanding of the word of God euen in the conference of the places of the same Scripture the Ministers and Doctors should haue such reuerence to the Catholique Church that she should be of both parts accepted for iudge of the vnderstanding of the Scripture which they acknowledg to haue receiued of the same wherof she is an infallible iudge and more certaine then the one or the other And notwithstanding the Doctors doo make offer to the Ministers that they will not vse at this time against them but those bookes onely which they receiue for Canonicall But when they shall fall into difficultie of the interpretation of some text or of the conference of many the Doctors esteeme it more reasonable to haue recourse to the Catholique Church and to the auncient Fathers then to their proper sence or that of the Ministers Answere For conclusion the Ministers do accept of the offer made them by the Doctors to decyde the pointes and articles of their Confession by the bookes Canonicall whereof they are agreed that is to say the 24. bookes of the Hebrewes and all the bookes of the new Testament protesting neuerthelesse that in the last writtings proposed by the Doctors there bee many things which they no wayes approoue and doo hope to confute as occasions shall bee offered and would presently haue done it had it not beene that they will shew against that imputed to them by the Doctors that they will not stray nor any way retyre from the conference of the points of their Confession Reply The Doctors reciprocally do agree to the Ministers in the said offer with this moderation to ad the authoritie of the vniuersall Church and the auncient Doctors for the interpretation and vnderstanding of the holy Scripture when they cannot agree The third dayes Dispute on Thursday the eleuenth of Iuly THE Ministers haue shewed what are the protestations which the Doctors haue made not for other ende to appeare in this Conference but to satisfie Madam de Buillon and not to bee instructed and otherwise informed of the pointes of Religion then they be And those which the Ministers haue on their part made also not to conferre with them for any doubt they haue of the pointes of their Confession whereof they bee wholely resolued By reason of which protestations they haue required that the first point whereof they shall conferre may bee that which Madam de Buillon hath publiquely required to bee decyded that is of the Supper and of the Masse that they may bee discharged of that also which hath beene imputed vnto them by the Doctors that they wandered and would not come to the principall point which is that aforesaid of the Masse but cōtrariwise that they fled away drew backe from the conference Finally that it may bee knowne who doo flye the decyding thereof They offer after they haue cleared that point to conferre with them if they please of all the other points which be in controuersie as leisure and time shall therfore be granted And doo also require to avoyd all confusion and such as happened in the Conference the day before that the Doctors may propose their arguments particularly each one apart and that the answers also may bee made vnto them particularly by the Ministers Ir els if they will propose all their arguments and reasons together that one whole day may bee graunted vnto them wherein they may doo that without any interruption conditionally that the Ministers may haue the day following to answere by order to all their arguments The Doctors say by that which is aboue written in the behalfe of the Ministers That it is easie to know they haue alwayes recoyled and yet do recoyle from conference of the things which they haue put in controuersie and they are maruellously abashed that they will not now permit the articles of their confession to be examined by order as the day of the first Conference they had required my Lord of Neuers my Lord and Lady of Buillion and other Lords and Gentlemen being present in presenting their said confessions contained in a little guilded booke making offer to the Doctors to examine them in order if they pleased which they found very reasonable And indeed the Ministers themselues hauing demanded of the Doctors whereof they would intreate departed yesterday contented to begin this day to examine the Articles of the Creed And as touching their speeche of the protestation that the assembly was made for the instruction of my Lady who desireth as they say in her absence to bee
it be of like authoritie with the proper writtings of the Apostles Answere The first question was whether the Creed were made by the Apostles Whereunto hath beene rendred sufficient answere After which it is lawfull to make the second demand which is diuers from that Obiection The second dependeth on the first and so hath it been made Whether it bee thought sufficiently answered let the iudgement thereof be referred to the reader Answere Because it dependeth thereupon it is not therefore the same Question Whether they approoue the Creed onely because they know it to be conformable to the writings of the Apostles Or whether there any other cause which incyteth them to beleeue it Answere It is not onely conformable but the doctrine it selfe and for that cause doo they beleeue it and approoue it Question Whether a man be not bound to receiue it but for so much as hee knoweth it to bee the same writing or conformable to the writings of the Apostles as is aforesaid Answere The principall cause that may moue him that beleeueth it to beleeue it is the knowledge afore spoken of Question Although this be the principall cause they require an absolute answere whether there be not other sufficient cause to beleeue it in such wise as this first is necessarie Answere For the Creed and euery other thing we beleeue the principall cause is the knowledge we haue that the same hath bene left in writing or collected of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles And we for our part seeke no other reason but that of the faith which we haue Obiection They answere not vnder correction to the question which is whether to receiue the Creed of the Apostles this cause be necessary to know the cōformitie of the said Creed with the writings of the Apostles and that without the same none can or ought to receiue it The Doctors pray them to auoyd circumlocution and answere absolutely the one or the other And more simply to explane the question this it is to wit whether one ought not to receiue the Creed of the Apostles but because he knoweth that it is conformable to the Apostles writings Answere The matter considered after the doctrine of S. Paul that there is no true faith without knowledge and assurance of the word to beleeue it behoueth to know that it is the word of God Question It would be knowne whether they vnderstand this word to be written or not written Answere The word written and reuealed by the Prophets and Apostles which is the foundation of the Christian faith Obiection The Ministers doo then maintaine that before the beleeuing of the Creed or proposing it to be beleeued it behoueth to be instructed or to instruct an other in the writings of the Apostles and Prophets Now that is contrary to all the order euer holden in the Church and contrary to that which is contained in the forme prescribed for administration of the Sacraments in the Church at Geneua made by Caluin and inserted amongst his workes which beareth these words addressed to them that haue charge of the childe they baptise For as much as the matter wee haue in hand is to receiue this childe into the fellowship of the Christian Church yea do promise whē it shal come to yeares of discretion to instruct it in the doctrine which is receiued and approued of Gods people And after these words is inserted the Creed after which it is said they shall proceed to the instruction of the childe in all the doctrine contained in the holy scripture of the olde and new Testament so that before they propose the Creed to be beleeued they propose not to be beleeued that there is any word of God written nor what it is nor that therein contained to know the conformitie of the Creed with the same Also they place not the foundation of the beleeuing of the Creed vpon the knowledge and conformitie of the scripture but vpon the doctrine receiued and approued by the people of God As the auncient Church yea before the scriptures of the new Testament were written did wontedly propose both to great and small the beliefe of the Creed before they proposed the holy scriptures vnto them as by Christian antiquities appeareth And therefore the beliefe of a Christian touching the Creed dependeth not on the written word but vpon the word reuealed to the people and church of God Answere Touching the first article it is very necessarie that in teaching a childe or any other ignorant person the Creed of the Apostles they also forthwith teach him the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets seeing that which is contained in the Creed is no other thing but the selfe-same doctrine and that they are things not onely conioyned but also like if not in words yet at least in sence and substance Touching the second article they denie that that abouesaid is any way cōtrary to the established order in the church of Geneua or any other well gouerned Church And as touching the reason drawne frō the forme of the Baptisme vsed in the said Churches it followeth not by the alledged words and sayings thereof that Caluin proposed thē to exclude the Creed and to seperate the same from the writings and doctrine of the Prophets Apostles which is impossible but plainly to shewe that when he added that word hee meant therin to comprehend it and generally which the Doctors haue omitted in their allegation to comprehend that which remaineth in the holy scriptures after the deduction he had made of the points of doctrine particularly comprised in the Creed And for the other reason added that the Creed was proposed to those that were catechised before any booke of the new Testament was written they grant it But it followeth not therefore that it was not founded on the word and doctrine which the Apostles did preach although then not put in writing And likewise on the writings of the Prophets wherevpon is founded the doctrine of the Apostles For conclusion the Ministers put no difference as touching the sence betweene the word of God preached and written Obiection The Ministers it seemeth haue not well conceiued the meaning of the Doctors For the question is not whether the Creed bee conformable in it selfe to the writings Apostolike but whether it first behoueth to beleeue and vnderstand that the Apostles and Prophets haue put a doctrine in writing vnto which the Creed is conformable and that otherwise the Creed cannot bee beleeued And for more easie explanation the question is whether it be not possible for a childe being come to yeares of discretion or any other by the instruction of the father and mother or others to beleeue the articles of the Creed without being first instructed by them that there are certaine Apostolike writings vnto which the Articles of the Creed are conformable And whether to moue them so to beleeue it be necessary to know that conformitie Let the Ministers absolutely answere therevnto Answere Faith
of it proper essence So that it is impossible that a body should bee a body which is not measured and circumscript The first example they produce for confirmation of their saying is that a massie thing which naturally for the waight thereof declineth downward may be lifted on high Wherevnto the Ministers do answere that it may be done and that by violent motion But that this example nought serueth to ouerthrow that they haue said for as much as such things in themselues containe no contradiction and that they are not contrary to the essence of the thing where they happen For a stone which a man throweth vpward doth not therefore cease to be a stone neither by such a mouing is it not depriued of the waightinesse thereof To the example of the fire they answere that it is one selfesame reason of light as of heauie things and that without any corruption of their essence their naturall mouings may be changed by some force and violence done vnto them And as touching that they alledge of fire which contrary to it nature namely to heat and burne refreshed the three Iewes in the Babilonian furnace they answere that the fire therefore was nothing altered in the essence nor qualiries thereof which may easily appeare in that it spared the three Iewes and burned and consumed those which kindled the same Whereof may be inferred that the cause why it did not offend them proceeded not because the nature or qualities thereof were any way changed but onely because the action thereof was suspended And where they alledge that two bodies may be at one instant in one selfe-same place together and for proofe therof propose that which is written in S. Iohn that Iesus Christ did enter where his Disciples were the doores beeing shut the Ministers do answere that it is not so in the text but the text sheweth that the Disciples beeing assembled in a place Iesus Christ stood appeared in the middest of them Whereof can be no way inferred that hee entred into the place where they were without opening of the doores nor that hee pierced them to enter therein And very like it is that they were opened and shut againe as well as those which the Angell did open and shut againe when hee was sent to deliuer S. Peter out of prison and when likewise hee was sent for the Apostles deliuerance As touching that they propose of a grosse body passing through a straight place alledging the example of a Cable through the eye of a needle The Ministers answere that it is ill to the purpose alledged and is an argument grounded vpon a thing impossible They say moreouer that the Doctors haue all vnderstood the word Camilos vsurped in the scripture not for a Cable but for a Camell as to them it is manifest which are but meanely seene in the antiquities of the Hebrewes And as appeareth by that which Angelius Caninius writeth in the end of his Caldean Grammer And for the conclusion which the Doctors drawe from the precedent examples it is from the purpose and founded vppon presupposed antecedents and premisses by them brought which in the sence they alledge them for the reasons aboue declared they neither haue nor will confesse vnto them Where they say that what the Ministers haue said touching a body that it cannot be in two places at one instant were it the body of Iesus Christ it selfe was neuer written by any of the auncient Fathers nor proposed before the comming of Peter Martyr and Theodoret Beza The Ministers do maintaine that it was And that S. Augustine in his Epistle to Dardanus saith the same in these tearmes According to this forme meaning the corporall forme of Iesus Christ we must not thinke that it is euery where And wee must beware least in establishing in him his diuinitie we take not frō him the veritie of his body And else-where hee saith That by reason of the nature and measure of a true body hee is in one place in heauen The selfe-same thing saith Therdoret in his second Dialogue as hath bene before alledged And so doth Vigilius in his fourth booke against Eutiches where hee writeth as followeth If the word and flesh be but of one nature how commeth it to passe that the flesh is not found euery where as the word of which word it was taken to constitute one selfe-same person and Hypostaly is euery where for when it was on the earth it was not in heauen and now that it is in heauen surely it is not on the earth And so farre off is it that he is there that we attend Iesus Christ to come according to his flesh whom neuerthelesse we beleeue as he is the word to be here on earth with vs. By these and other like authorities often found in the writings of the Fathers men may know that Peter Martyr and Theodoret Beza are not the first authors of this doctrine and that it is falsly imputed to them for as much as they haue but drawne and word by word copied as it were the same out of the bookes of the auncient Fathers To that which the Doctors pretend that the forme of arguing which the Ministers haue vsed affirming some things to be impossible to God doth not derogate his omnipotēcie ouerthroweth the forme of the argument which the Angell speaking to the virgin vseth for cōfirmatiō of that which he declared vnto her that is that nothing is impossible to God The Ministers do answere that it is nothing to the purpose for as much as the question is neither of a thing which containeth in it self any contradiction nor that is contrary to the truth of God which be the two matters they haue alledged and yet do alledge for the expositiō of the omnipotencie of God And touching that which the Doctors do adde that God can change the nature and qualitie of things there is no man doubteth the same But whē that is done it behoueth also to auow that the things be changed that they remain not in their first nature And the Ministers say that it is not all one with the thing here proposed for as much as the Doctors wil haue a thing to remain in it essence and nature although the essentiall parts therof be changed altogether extinct and abolished Touching the limitation of the power of God towards his creatures there is none so presumptuous to attempt to limit the same in whatsoeuer he wil and which confesseth not that he may ordaine dispose of all his creatures in generall as it pleaseth him as a Potter doth of his earth And thervnto say they ought the authoritie of Ieremy to be referred as it appeareth very clearly by these Hebrew words L◠gippale Mimmecha col-dauar To wit nothing shal be hard to thee ô Lord. Concerning the danger which the Doctors pretend may come of the abouesaid answeres of the Ministers they answer that men of sound and good judgement wil neuer drawe thereof
naturall proprietie of a body can make a great and thicke body to passe in a space and place vnequall to it greatnesse largenesse and thicknesse The Doctors cyted what our Lord saith in the 19. of S. Mathew It is easier for a Cable to goe through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen Two things haue the Ministers answered vnto the one that in the translation wee must not vse Cable but rather Camel although neuertheles their own French Bible of Anthony Rebulls impression which they haue brought containeth the translation of this word Cable And Caluin himself likewise in his Hermony of the foure Euangelists saith that to bee better But here in appeareth to be truth what Tertullian against the Valentinians and before him Ireneus in his first booke and 14. Chapter against the Valentinians doo say That they which seperate themselues from vs to go to an other schoole do alwaies inuent some new thing that the disciples may bee found more cunning then their Maisters But well this word Camell beeing yeelded vnto them as the Doctors doubt not to haue bene expounded by Saint Hillary S. Ierom and others the reason thereof is yet more strong For it is yet more repugnant that a crooked grosse and great Camell then a Cable should enter through the eye of a needle The other reason giuen by the Ministers is that God cannot make a Camel or Cable to enter throgh the eye of a needle which is notwithstanding against the pure word of Iesus Christ who saith not it is is impossible to God but rather easie to do that and by comparison more easie vnto God then to make a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen which neuerthelesse is said by our Lord to be possible not vnto men but vnto God to whom there is nothing vnpossible Whervpō the Doctors say thus If God can do that which is more difficult he can doo that which is more easie Now by the text of the scripture it is said that God can make a rich man enter into the kingdome of heauen which is the more difficult he can therfore make a Camell or Cable to enter through the eye of a needle which is more easie The answeres of the Ministers here aboue confuted tend to such absurdities and blasphemies that Iesus Christ by his almightinesse could not enter through the closed doores that hee could not come forth of the belly of his mother through her body without fraction that he could not make a visible body to be inuisible that a grosse and great body might be in a place vnequall to it that hee could not by his diuine power make penetration of dimensions and that he could not make by the same diuine power one body to bee in two places for it is like reason of the last article and of the others albeit such things are declared in the scriptures not onely to be possible but euen the most part of them to haue bene done And the Doctors do wonder how the Ministers dare denie such things seeing themselues must necessarily confesse if their doctrine of the Supper be true that the body of Iesus Christ is in diuers places which they proue thus The faithfull really receiue in their soules the substance of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ by the working of the holy Ghost and not the bread and the wine onely or else as saith Caluin in the 4 booke 17. Chapter and 11. section of his Institution the effect and vertue of the same Sacrament Now the Doctors conclude thus It is impossible for a man to receiue into him the substance of the body of Iesus Christ but the body of Iesus Christ is in him But all the faithfull in the Supper do receiue the same into their soules therefore must the body of Iesus Christ be in them and by consequent in diuers places to wit in all places where their Supper is made and likewise in heauen They say further that Caluin in his Institution the fourtth booke 17. Chapter and 24. sect saith That in the Supper the power of God is required to the ende that the flesh of Iesus Christ may pierce euen vnto vs and that humane nature cannot comprehend the same But it behoueth that the power of God doo worke therein And by this meane Caluin doth admit by the power of God the flesh of Iesus Christ in many places to wit in heauen and in vs into whom it must pierce by the power of God And in the tenth number he saith That the truth signified and represented by the signes must bee represented and exhibited in the same place where the signes be Which hee proueth by reason in many places to wit that the signes must no more bee voyd then the Doue was voyd of the holy Ghost But as the essence and substance of the holy Ghost was conioyned and present with the Doue so the flesh and bloud of our Lord before there be a true Sacrament must be conioyned and vnited with the signes The passages are against Heshusius and in his booke of the Supper and vpon the first of the 11. Chapter to the Corinthians And although the Ministers will answere the Doctors beseech them well to weigh and consider the text of Caluin and of the reason he giueth of the holy Ghost They doo obiect further that the Ministers in their Supper doo attribute more to the humane power then to the omnipotencie of God yea they do more then God can do which is that they brag to do a thing by their faith which implyeth contradiction saying in their confession of faith exhibited to the Bishops in the congregatiō at Poissy That faith maketh things absent to be present in one selfe-same instant and place That is to say in the soules of the faithfull when they celebrate their Supper which is as much to say as faith maketh things not present present at one selfe-same instant and place So that to euery faithfull in the Supper comming worthily therevnto is the body of Iesus Christ there present by the power of faith And neuerthelesse it is not there present for they say so and that it is onely in heauen Wherein appeareth that there is implication of contradiction to wit present not really present And the small starting hole they told vs of that the body is aboue corporally and spiritually in the Supper in the harts of the faithfull can serue for nothing For the spiritualtie cannot take away the substance of the thing and their faith cannot make a body not to be a body and that a body haue not it dimensions as heretofore they haue said Therefore howsoeuer they confesse that the faithfull in the Supper receiue into their soules the substance of the body of Iesus Christ will they or nill they must they necessarily confesse that either their faith is more mightie then the infinite vertue and power of God or else that God can make
there is diuersitie betweene the creatures and Creator and that the Creator by nature is euery where and naturally the creatures be not in diuers places the Doctors reuerently imbrace the authoritie of the holy Fathers But to produce the said places for coÌ„firmation of a thing so well knowne and not doubted of their trauell was now needlesse But the Doctors yet attend one sole place of the scripture or one sole testimony of the auncient Fathers which saith That God cannot make one body to be in diuers places The Doctors pray the Ministers that with like reuerence they receiue the auncient Fathers chiefly touching the interpretation of holy scriptures whose exposition as are the places aboue cyted shal be agreed vpon betweene them and the Ministers Vpon request made to the Lord Neuers on the behalfe of the Ministers that hee would please to assigne a day for answere particularly to all and euery article and slaunders here aboue proposed by the Doctors in their obiection The said Lord ordained that the Ministers should carry with them that euening one of the Copies of the Doctors obiections against them to be ready the next morrow by noone to answer thervnto which the Doctors agreed vnto And made likewise request to the said Lord of Neuers to haue leaue if it so seemed them good to reply to the answers that the Ministers should make And therwith to deliuer their resolution touching this article of the omnipotency of God To th' end to proceed and examine the reall truth of the bodie of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Aultar Whervnto the Ministers added that they also for their parts would deliuer a briefe resolution of all that which shall be deduced by them The company assembled on the morrow beeing Wednesday the 17. of Iuly My Lord of Neuers considering that the Doctors the day before had imployed all the time without any left for the Ministers to make present answere to them supposed no lesse time would be needfull for the Ministers to answerefully which had bene a thing tedious and irksome For this cause and others by him declared he ordained they should thenceforth speake by writing And that the Ministers should carry with them the Copie which was giuen them to make answere therevnto and to send it vnto him signed by them and two Notaries Of which he would cause a Copie to be written by his Secretary to giue it to the Doctors reseruing the Originall to himselfe And in like sort would he keepe for the Ministers the Copie of that which the Doctors should send him Wherevnto both parts submitting themselues they disputed afterwards by writing as followeth The Answere of the Ministers to the Obiections of the Doctors giuen on Tuesday the 16. of Iuly 1566. THe Ministers deny that the consequence proposed by the Doctors to wit God cannot make one body to be in two places at one selfe-same instant Therfore â—e is not omnipotent is necessary For as much as the omnipotency of God ought not to be measured but by the things only which be agreeable to his will and are not derogate either to his nature or to his wisdome or to his truth or to the order he established in the world Vnto which that directly repugneth which the Doctors set forth that one selfe same body at one selfe-same instant may be in diuers places For it would follow that a body should be a body without being limitted And by consequence that it should be and not be altogither For the measures as to be long large thicke and to be bounded limitted with certaine bounds are so essentiall to a body that without that it is no more a body And so farre of is it that the Ministers in so saying do diminish the omnipotency of God that contrariwise they establish the same and will not attribute to him any mutabilitie and chaunge in his counsaile nor any contradiction in his will for feare to make him lye which by the scripture is impossible to him And where the Doctors alledge froÌ„ the Fathers that they haue not denied the omnipotency of God The Ministers haue heretofore shewed that they haue and in what case it may happen Tertullian in his booke written against Praxeas speaking of this matter saith as followeth Surely nothing is hard vnto God But if without iudgemeÌ„t we wil vse this sentence and interpret it according to our foolish fantasie we may faine all things to be of God and say that he hath done them because he can do them Now must it not be beleeued because he can do all things that therfore he hath done what he hath not done but enquired whether he hath done it And finally concludeth that the power of God is his wil and his inhabilitie likewise his vnwillingnesse The Doctors then to shew that he can do it should declare that God hath willed to make a body which at one selfe-same instant hath bin in diuers places And a maruellous thing it is that they impute to the Ministers that they derogate from the omnipotency of God when as they do except froÌ„ the same what is contrary to his wil seeing they themselues do confesse it and except the same things And that there is no other difference between theÌ„ the Ministers but that they say that God maketh one body to be in diuers places at one selfe instaÌ„t because he can do it And the Ministers say that he doth it not and cannot do it because he wil not do it For as much as is said according to Tertullian the power of god is his wil. Touching the reason that the Doctors do alledge in Phisosophie to proue that a bodie for being a bodie doth not therfore leaue to be in diuers places The Ministers say they suppose a falshood To wit that quantitie is accidentall and not essentiall to a body For that to wit that a body is measured bounded and circumscript is in such sort of it essence that without that it is no more a bodie As S. Augustine him selfe speaking of the glorified body of Iesus Christ saith That if space be taken away from a body there is no more place where it might be and by consequence being no part is no more at all The reaso of Philosophie they propose touching the first heauen as that it is not in any place The Ministers do denie it for to speake according to the language of the scripture it must be confessed that there is place eâ—en aboue the heauens As Iesus Christ said vnto his Disciples I go to prepare a place for you And in the same place In my Fathers house there are many mansions And else where Where I am taking the present time for the future there shal my seruants be In the which sentence must be obserued that there be aduerbes of place And S. Augustine writing to Dardanus expresly saith That it behoueth that the body of Iesus Christ be in some place in heaueÌ„ because it is a true
interpret that two bodies to pierce one an other is no other thing then one body to giue place to the other Of which false and licencious interpretation the common phrase of speech among Philosophers themselues doth condemne them And the feat example brought of them which walke through the aire beating vpon them and of Birdes when they flye is ouer subtill And whereas they boast in the said article that in denying that two bodies may be in one place by the omnipotencie of God or one bodie in two places they aduance and magnifie the power of God As true is that as when in all their other errors by which they resist the truth of God and blaspheme him they euer boast to aduance the glorie of God And the Ministers must paint and couer their filthinesse and deformitie with some colour of speech to blinde the simple and ignorant Good reason also haue the Ministers not to excuse the interpretations of Caluin and Beza as too too friuolous and ridiculous and preferre in the meane time their owne interpretation though more ridiculous then those of their Maisters wherein appeareth the concorde betweene the Maisters and Disciples all vsing one foundation of their religion which is to trust alwayes to their owne particular and priuate interpretation and inspiration and to preferre the same to all others Where the Ministers say that the bodie of our Lord was not inuisible to the Disciples of whoÌ„ mention is made in the 24. of Luke but that his bodie only being nimble he suddainly withdrew himselfe the Doctors obiect that the suddaine departing whereof speaketh S. Ambrose and Lyra maketh not but that the bodie was inuisible as signifieth the Greeke word Aphantos which signifieth not a suddaine departure but an incapacitie to be seene and knowne And so the text of the scripture is plainly for the Doctors Ioyned neuerthelesse that when the olde and late Diuines wil giue examples that Iesus was made inuisible they ordinarily alledge this passage The Ministers also who boast that they rest vpon nothing but the pure word of God for exposition of scripture bring their dreames aboue their owne perswasion as touching the closed doores appeareth And with like libertie vse they to expound the text of Saint Paul which expresly maintaineth that our Lord pierced the heauens And it is likely say they that the heauens claue a sunder and were opened And if one demaund whence they learned such an interpretation they answere from the word of God founded vpon their inward inspiration by which they appropriate that which is written in Saint Mathew that heauens were opened when the Doue descended vpon our Lord. As though all the heauens were clest asunder and the holy Ghost had not power to descend without the opening of them not nothing that the scripture in many places taketh heauen for the ayre Concerning that they alledge of S. Stephen who when he was stoned sawe the heauens open more meete it were for the Ministers to interpret such visions to bee made in spirit as there is great likelyhood else should it behoue to confesse two myracles the one in the diuision of the heauens the other in this that the sight of S. Stephen not onely pierced vnto but also aboue the heauens where the Ministers confesse the body of Iesus Christ to bee at the right hand of the Father whom Saint Stephen sawe which is against the order of God established in the wold whereby it is necessarie that there be a certaine distance betweene the eye seeing and the thing which is seene And no lesse hard is it that such thing bee done then that two bodies should pierce one an other Nor must they forget that the scriptures oftentimes in spirituall apparitions and visions vseth this phrase of speech that the heauens were opened and yet in such case was there but a spirituall vision and likewise but a spirituall opening And euen as the Ministers will take the rigour of the word the opening of the heauens so should they not thinke it straunge if the Doctors with like rigour take the piercing of the heauens especially in the article of the Ascention where the question is of the bodie of Iesus Christ which had alreadie pierced more impenitrable bodies then the heauens And the Doctors to auoyd tediousnesse referre themselues to more ample debating this point of the piercing of the heauen hereafter As touching the 28. article where the Ministers against expresse scripture do obstinately defend that God cannot by his power make a Camell or Cable to passe through the eye of a needle the Doctors cannot sufficiently maâ—uel either at the blindnesse of the Ministers which seeme to see nothing at noone-day or at their obstinacie and boldnesse And that the Ministers vnderstand not their fault the Doctors cannot thinke but that impugning the truth well knowne to themselues they sinne against their owne conscience And God suffereth that it seemeth to happen vnto them in this so manifest a place and text of the scripture to the end that by this article one may perceiue how much more bold they are to giue false sences to scriptures more obscure then this and to the sayings of the auncient Christians which make against them Now that the great wrong may be vnderstood which the Ministers doo in denying that our Lord can cause a Camell or Cable to passe through the eye of a needle the Doctors do obiect that it should be impossible with God to saue a rich man vsing such argument taken from the text of the Gospell More impossible or hard is it for God to saue a rich man then to make a Camell or Cable to passe through the eye of a needle But God by his omnipotencie cannot make after the Ministers a Camell or Cable to passe through the eye of a needle Therefore God by his omnipotencie cannot cause a rich man to be saued and enter into the kingdome of heauen The Maior is of the scripture The Minor is confessed by the Ministers and the consequence is necessarie And according to all Philosophie hee that cannot doo a more easie thing cannot doo a thing more hard So also without contradiction haue the Auncients expounded the present scripture as doth Origen in the Homily vpon this place saying that it is possible for a Camell to enter through the eye of a needle yet not possible with men but with God And the manner how such thing may bee done is knowne of God and his sonne Iesus Christ and of him to whom hee shall reueale it Semblably Saint Augustine in the first and fift Chapter of his booke of the spirite and letter thus speaketh to Marcellinus whom hee wrote vnto It seemeth to thee absurd when I say vnto thee that a man may bee without sinne albeit that Christ excepted such a one is not founde Should it seeme absurd vnto thee that a thing may bee done whereof no example can bee shewed Seeing thou doubtest not as I thinke but it neuer happened
are well done and ordained although that the reason and order therein be oftentimes vnknowne to men which Salomon wrote saying God maketh all things good in their season Wherevnto may be also applied that which is read in the booke of Sentences of S. Augustine Sent. 283. and 284. God who is the Creator and conseruer of nature doth nothing in his myracles which are against nature And it followeth not that that which is new to custome is contrary and repugnant to reason c. If the Doctors will know more thereof let them reade the two bookes of Order which this holy man composed and that which he wrote concerning myracles in the fift and sixt Chapter of his third booke of the Trinitie This answere shall serue for confutation of two other pretended blasphemies which follow in the obiection of the Doctors Concerning the fourth the Ministers for answer say that the will of God after the doctrine of Diuines may in two sorts be cōsidered to wit according to that which by words signes and effects is declared to men and according to that which is reteined hidden in himselfe The one is called the will knowne by signes and the other the will of the good pleasure of God For the first consideration the Ministers do confesse as heeretofore they haue to the Doctors that God can do many things which he will not do But as touching the other they say that it is equall to his power as is also his power in this respect equall to his will According to which consideration the sentence of Tertullian alledged by the Ministers and to the Monarchians ill applied by the Doctors ought to be vnderstood and expounded As all those may iudge which attentiuely shall read the passage by the Ministers produced Who to answer one slaunder of the said Doctors which accuse them to haue wronged the auncient Fathers in saying that they excepted some causes of the omnipotencie of Cod are yet constrained here to repeate that which Theodoret saith thereof in the 3. Dialogues who writeth as followeth It must not be said without any determination that all things are possible to God For who so absolutely saith this comprehendeth all things as well good as bad which no way ought to be attributed to God whereby it appeareth that this good author and the other before alledged by the Ministers haue not indifferently submitted all things to the power of God but excepted from the same whatsoeuer is contrary to his will and essence To be briefe but one meane there is to appease the difference between the Ministers who say that it is impossible for one body to be in diuers places at one instant and the Doctors which affirme the cōtrary to wit that the Doctors without taking so long circuit loosing so many words and alledging so many superfluous things do proue briefly by one only passage of scripture that God willeth the same Whether the Ministers haue well or euilly alledged Saint Augustine to proue that a body cannot be without place and measures and also whether they haue well or euilly said and defended that quantitie is essentiall to a body and not accidentall as hold the Doctors they leaue the iudgement to the Readers of the Actes of this Conference Touching that which followeth in the writing of the Doctors to wit that there is no place aboue the heauens that Iesus Christ is not therein comprised nor conteined that bodies and spirites bee indifferently there without any distinction or distance of place the Ministers say that touching all these points they rather beleeue the scripture and expresse word of God by them alledged then all the subtilties sophistries of vaine Philosophie which the Doctors or others can propose Ioyned herevnto that it is expresly cōteined taught in one of the articles of our faith where it is said Frō whence he shall come to iudge the quick the dead Wherevpon must bee noted that there is Vnde an Aduerbe signifying place As touching the 4. and 5. articles to know whether the Ministers haue ought imposed vpon the Doctors which is not true they send backe the readers to the precedent conference And also to know in what sence and to what end the auncient Fathers haue bene alledged by the said Ministers which they may easily perceiue by the reading and diligent obseruation of the passages and sentences of the said Fathers there inserted For the 6. article wherein the Doctors had rather confesse their Canons to be false then accusing their authoritie to auouch that the body of Iesus Christ is a true dody and that to be such it ought necessarily to bee in one certaine place the Ministers answere that by the obseruation of the place of S. Augustine whence the said Canon is taken it is easie to iudge that the word Oportet is there much more conuenient then that of Potest To the 8. article the Ministers answere that a substance is not without quantitie and whiles it is such and so remaineth it cannot any waies be a body And the reason is because that of the substance and that of the quantitie are two diuers predicaments vnder which one selfe-same thing for one selfesame respect cannot be any way comprised Moreouer Iesus Christ alledged no other reason to shewe that his body was not a spirit but that hee had members and parts which in respect of their measures might bee handled and touched Whence it followeth that without this a substance cannot be a body And as touching the difference which by the Doctors opinion should remaine betweene our soules and our bodies exempted from quantitie if that were possible the Ministers say that although they were substances both in number and different they should neuerthelesse be like as touching the kinde and that the one and the other should be contained vnder the kinde of an incorporeall substance The Ministers passe ouer the 9. article because it is but a repetition and that they haue largely answered what the Doctors there repeate To the 10. article the Ministers answere that the consequence whereof is the question cannot bee otherwise defended by the Doctors but by the rule which saith that of one absurditie may all things be inferred Moreouer they complaine of time which the Doctors make them loose by reading so many things wherevnto they haue alreadie answered and which it seemeth they repeate not for any other ende then to fill vp paper and to make men thinke they say something For first the Euangelist saith not as the Doctors pretend that Iesus Christ entered by the shut doores but onely that he came the gates beeing shut So that he speaketh nothing there of the maner of his entry nor how the doores were opened or other place about the house by the which he entered And all that which the Doctors say cannot be grounded neither vpon the scripture nor vpon any authoritie of all the auncient Fathers by them alledged which bee more against them then with
and proued to the expense of their bloud and losse of their liues So that the King and his Councell by his Edict hath declared them to haue bene very faithfull and well affected subiects to his Maiestie And wee must not maruell if the Doctors thus slaunder the reformed Churches for as much as the Christians in all times haue bin accused of like crimes by the enemies of the truth As it appeareth by the Apologie of Tertullian the booke of S. Augustine de Ciâ—itate Dei by the Tract of Saint Ciprian against Demetrius and by the booke of Arnobius which he wrote against the Gentiles But the Ministers much maruell how the Doctors are so ill aduised to alledge the suppers celebrated in the reformed Churches to verifie their accusations seeing that the same at this day being throughout publikely done in the eyes and presence of them that will behold them there is nothing therein hidden and whereof each one if he will may not easily be informed But this is the zeale and great charitie of my Lords our maisters whereof they haue heretofore protested that by inuocatioÌ„ of Gods name which so transporteth them to slaunder without shame or shewe those whose iustice in that matter shall answere for them before God and men Touching that which the Doctors â—â—erwards say that in the Supper of the Ministers no consecration is made of the matter of bread wine which be there proposed The Ministers do confesse that the bread and wine which be truly in their Supper are not consecrated in sort as the Doctors pretend to consecrate them in their Masse For so they approue not such a consecration But yet do they maintaine that there is in their Supper consecration of the matters aforesaid in sort as they in their articles and resolution haue heretofore very largely declared The Doctors for proofe and confirmation of that aforesaid do adde that it belongeth not to all persons indifferently to consecrate the matter of the Sacraments but to them onely which are ordained by the laying on of hands of the Romane Bishops wherevnto the Ministers for answer say that the first point they confesse and also as else-where they haue said that calling is necessarie to such a purpose But they denie vnto the Doctors notwithstanding that this calling is the imposition which they pretend and the Ministers assure themselues that their calling is more lawful and better founded then is that of the Doctors Whereas the Doctors propose in the article following that the Ministers haue not answered them clearly enough to their liking touching the parts of the Sacrament and of the word required for the consecration of the matter which therein is The Ministers answere that there is no doubtfulnesse obscuritie nor any inuolution in their writings sauing that which the Doctors will finde therein the iudgement whereof the Ministers referre to the vpright readers And yet they hold it not more straunge that the Doctors finde their writings obscure then did Saint Paul that his Gospell was hidden and couert to them which perished And in whome the God of this world had blinded the mindes To that of the presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the Supper for which the Doctors require of the Ministers a more large declaration then that they haue giuen in theyr former answere The Ministers say that they haue theâ—evnto clearly answered albeit the Doctorâ— bee not satisfied with their 〈◊〉 whereat they nothing wonder knowing well it is not theyr custome to be contented if one yeeld not to them what they demaund and desire Which the Ministers haue not determined to do much lesse to exceed in their answer the limits and bounds of the scripture be it in this article of the Supper or in others but rather to follow as neare as possibly they can the phrase and maner of speaking of the same By means whereof for full answere the Ministers acknowledge no other eating of the flesh and bloud of Iesus Christ bee it in the Supper or out of the Supper sauing that which Iesus Christ himselfe declareth in the sixt Chapter of Saint Iohn Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life Also He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dweâ—leth in me and I in him Also As the liuing Father hath sent me so liue I by the Father And he that eateth me euen he shall liue by me To the last Article which is of Concomitance the Ministers answere that the demaund of the Doctors was not so hard but that they had well conceiued it But they dissembled the same because they would not loose time to speake and write of such dreames And they well thought that the Doctors were subtill inough to vnderstand that in their denying Transubstantiation it was not to proâ—e their Concomitance Now for their satisfaction they adde that they will know no more then that which Iesus Christ himselfe hath taught in his word That is to say that in the Supper to participate in his flesh crucified and bloud shead for the remission of sinnes it behoueth to take and eate the bread drinke the wine which be administred without any way diuiding or seperating the same Which thing is also forbidden by the Canons De Consecr Dist 2. C. CuÌ„ omne Crimen Finished on Wednesday the 14. of August in the yeare aforesaid This writing being sent the Ministers went shortly after towards my Lord of Neuers to shew vnto him that they for theyr part had largely treated of this matter but they well perceiued that the Doctors by theyr friuolous and impertinent questions hitherto sought not but to passe away the time without ought doing in the decyding of the Supper and of the Masse And albeit they fayned that such demaunds did serue for a preparatiue to this dispute yet was it to no other end but not to enter thereinto at all and to hold things in suspence vntill length of time should begin to be troublesome and by that meane all should break off That his lyking might be to make the Doctors vnderstand that without turning this or that way they should come to end the difference refuting that which the Ministers had maintained of the Supper and supporting that which they had condemned in theyr Masse Which thing he promised them to do Of which promise began the Ministers to hope thence forward for some profitable matter and seruing to the edification of the Readers and rooting out of the greatest abuse and error that is in the Romane Church Neuerthelesse shortly after was it bruted through the Citie that Doctor Vigor was fallen into a very daungerous disease and wherof was no hope he should hastâ—ly recouer which made the Ministers feare that they were frustrate of theyr hope And yet more did they feare when they vnderstood that the Doctor de Sainctes was the same time departed from Paris and gone towards Monsieur the Cardinal of Lorraine For they could not otherwise presume but that they
shuld make a long and vnprofitable aboad at Paris not hauing wherewithall to imploy theyr time Considering they were not there but by accident to wit that de Spina was come thither to passe further and make a voyage into Aniou and the other who was Minister of the Church of Orleance was lately come forth of prison where he had beene brought in the Moneth of Iune next precedent vpon a false accusation suborned against him by the enemies of Gods Church which charged him to be author of a pernicious and wicked booke written against the obedience due to Kings and Princes Therefore was it very hurtfull for him to soâ—ournâ— so long a time in a Citie whither hee came against his lyking For these causes they purposed to returne towards my Lord of Neuers to shew vnto him the things aforesaid and tell him that De Sainctes who might haue stayed and ioyned some other with him in the stead of Vigor was departed thence without making it knowne when his returne would be that it was not reason they should stay there being incertaine of that which they had to doo and considering that their Churches had need of them to execute therin their charges and that they desired the same Notwithstanding in the end they found it better to suffer an inconuenience and to abide there vntill my Lord of Neuers departed from Paris as in the end of the Moneth of August he should goe to his owne land called Coâ—lomiers For seeing the Doctors were then absent the Lord of Neuers being departed the Ministers could doo nothing not hauing whom to write vnto nor with whom to conferre These remonstances being liked by the said Lord hee gaue them leaue to depart by writing signed Lodouico de Gonzague and below Varin Secretarie Dated 26. of August wherein were declared the occasions here before touched and remoÌ„strance of the Ministers with promise made by the said Lord to cause the answeres which the Doctors would make to be brought vnto them And that by the meane of Monsieur de Buci S. George who was charged with this businesse Also the Ministers promised to be readie were it to returne to Paris or else to answere from the place where they should be as often as the Doctors should write These things thus done and passed the Ministers returned presently after supposing to haue some speedie newes from the Doctors But they haue attended and yet do attend without that there hath bene any appearance thereof And they vnderstood nothing of that matter sauing that many seuerall writings were afterwardes cryed and solde through the Citie of Paris In the tytles whereof some found meane to enterlace the word Conference to make shewe vnto the world that it was something touching the former disputations And such a subtiltie indeed was not without great profit to the Printers So great desire had men to know the truth of the thing For contentation of whom we haue thought meet to bring to light what was done concerning the same reseruing to another time to publish what the Doctors when they shall do it shall write against it and what the Ministers also will there vnto answere if they can recouer the same In the meane time shall each one be admonished to make profit of that which is here contained And to pray the Father of lights to shead more more the brightnesse of his spirit vpon his Church to the true vnderstanding of his holy word for the restauration and aduancement of the spirituall kingdome of Iesus Christ his sonne our Lord. So be it the 8. of Nouember 1566. FINIS A briefe Table of the titles of the Acts of the Disputation THe Preface containing the occasions of the Dispute following The first day of the Disputation which was Tuesday the 9. of Iuly 1566. touching the assurance one ought to haue of the word of God and of the meane to knowe what is the word of God and to discerne betweene the bookes of the Bible to call the one Canonicall and the other Apocripha The second day being Wednesday the 10. of Iuly touching the same matter with the resolution of the Doctors concluding that it is by the authoritie of the Church that the holy scripture is knowne to be the word of God And the resolution of the Ministers to the contrary That it is the spirite of God which sealeth and imprinteth the assurance thereof in the harts of the elect The third day being Thursday the 11. of Iuly containing the demaunds and answeres vpon the Creede of the Apostles and why it is so called The fourth day being Friday the 12. of Iuly comprehending the resolution of the Doctors concluding that it is by the tradition of the Church that one is assured of the Creed of the Apostles And that of the Ministers tending to this that it is knowne by the conformitie which it hath with the holy scriptures The fift day being Mâ—nday the 15. of Iuly where is the beginning of the disputation of Gods Omnipotencie vnder the couert whereof the Doctors do ground foure points contained in the 63. Page On this Omnipotencie and the points aboue said the disputes following as well by word as by writing were continued The sixt day of the Dispute Tuesday the 16. of Iuly The Ministers answere to the obiections of the Doctors 〈◊〉 Tuesday the 16. of Iuly The reply or obiection of the Doctors against the answere of the Ministers touching the article of Gods omnipotencie on Satterday the 20. of Iuly The answere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctors sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 22. of Iuly about fiue of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. The reply of the Doctors to the writing of the Ministers sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 25. day of Iuly about 8 of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. The Resolution of the Doctors touching the article of the Almightinesse of God in respect of the foure questions proposed by them to the Ministers Which serue to the vnderstanding of the reall presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the holy Sacrament The articles proposed by the Doctors for the next and other conferences following according to the order of the said articles The answere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctors sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 28. of Iuly about seuen of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. A briefe resolution of all the answeres and discourses which the Ministers haue made vpon the matter of Gods omnipotencie in the conference which they haue had with the Doctors The answeres to the preface of the Doctors questions The answeres to the questions proposed by the Doctors touching the Supper A briefe reply of the Doctors against the last answere of the Ministers sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Niuernois the first of August at 7. of the clocke in the euening Anno.
made of Sacrifice in the speech of the Supper ought to be referred to one of these kinds aforesaid And that it shal neuer be found that they haue said or written or yet euer haue thought that there was any other sacrifice propiciatory then that alone which Iesus Christ in his owne body once offered vpō the Crosse for our redemptiō And that by means therof it is certain that in the Christiā church he ought to be acknowledged the priest of the new Testament And as touching the other sacrifices namely of a Contrite heart of the Mortification of the fleshe of Praises and Almes and of the shewing forth and memorie of the death of Iesus Christ they say that it generally belongeth to all the Church to offer them And that there is no faithfull nor any member in the whole bodie of the Church which in this respect is not a Priest As saith S. Peter in the 2. Chapter of his first Epistle And S. Iohn in the first Chapter of the Apocalips And that we ought for this cause to offer in the Supper such Sacrifices vnto God As appeareth by the same Cannon of theyr Masse by them euilly vnderstood and applied to the Sacrifice which they pretend to make of the body blood of Iesus Christ where it is said For the which we offer vnto thee or who offer vnto thee c. Our saying of the Sacrifice that it is common to all the Church to offer vnto God Sacrifice of praise ought not to be slaunderously interpreted as if we would confound the Ecclesiasticall Ministery with the sayd Priesthood and by that meanes ouerthrow and disturbe the order of the Church attributing to each one authoritie and power to gouerne the same For we know well that the callings be different among the people of God And that it is needfull there be in the Church Pastors and Doctors and other Ministers as Deacons and Elders to well guide and edifie the same as well by the daily preaching of the word as by the carefull and diligent execution of other things which concerne their charges But it behooueth notwithstanding to distinguish such callings which be particular from the Priesthood aforesaid which ought to be generall and common as is said to the whole Church It shall now be easie for all them which will diligently obserue the things here before discouered and shewed forth by the word of God to vnderstand and iudge that the Masse such as is now celebrated in the Romane Church is a whole corruption and ouerthrowing of the institution of the Supper which Iesus Christ made and left in his Church So that it should be now impossible to acknowledge therein one onely trace or marke of it first ordinance For of a Sacrament which Iesus Christ left in his Church to edifie and entertaine the same in a present memorie of his death haue they made a sacrifice whereby the remembrance of that of Iesus Christ hath bin wholly buried and interred And herein is there a maruellous thing and worthy to be well marked That is to say that that which appertaineth not but to the sonne of God onely and was impossible for any other but him to do as to sacrifice for sin to reconcile men vnto God to appease his wrath towards them and to make intercession to obtaine for them his fauour and aide the Priests do attribute to themselues And that which to them was lawfull and commaunded and also possible and easie to do that is to say to solemnize the memorie of Iesus Christ in taking and breaking distributing and eating of the bread and drinking the wine to shewe forth his death they haue wholly cast aside So that one may say that the Priests do nothing of all that which Iesus Christ did and commaunded to be done in the Supper And that which he did vpon the Crosse and that he neuer commaunded man to do the Priests dare enterprise and will do the same The errors and abuse as well of Transubstantiation as of the Priesthood and expiatorie sacrifice and of the repetition of the same which be the principall parts and as it were the foundations of the Masse haue bene heretofore confuted and sufficiently conuinced by the word of God and by the reasons which haue bene alledged in the declaration of the parts of the Supper And nothing more remaineth to cast downe this Idoll but to shewe that that which is in the Masse besides the abuses aforesaid is not better nor better founded vpon the word of God For the adoration which there is made of the bread and wine is an Idolatrie condemned and accursed of God And it is not like that Iesus Christ instituting the Supper would not haue ordained it that S. Paul recyting this institution as he had receiued it of the Lord would not haue taught it and that the auncient Church would haue omitted the same had it bene a thing wherein God had bene any way honoured Afterward the seperation of the Priest from the people is directly contrary to the Article of the faith of the Communion of the Church and to the ende for which the Supper was ordained which is to confirme and entertaine due societie among the faithfull and to binde them alwayes more straightly one to an other And none can say but that it is an intollerable presumption and a manifest contempt and disdaine of the residue of Gods people And a plaine mockery is that which the Doctos alledge to excuse and couer such a sacriledge to wit that the Masse of the Priests ceaseth not to bee good when those that are there present will not comunicate For first it is forbidden them to eate alone in the Supper And a Supper it is not where there is not a Communion as Saint Paul teacheth reproouing the Corinthians because they departed one from an other in the celebration of their Supper When sayth he yee come together therefore into one place this is not to eate the Supper of the Lord For euery man when they should eate taketh his owne supper afore And teaching in the ende of the Chapter the forme which they ought to hold hee sayth vnto them Wherefore my bretheren when yee come together to eate tarry one for another Furthermore oft times it happeneth that there are not in their Masse but the Priest and the little Clarke which answereth him whom they will not receiue to communicate with them Also how can they excuse the Masses which are sung in Monasteries where the people are forbidden to communicate with the Monkes which celebrate the same Moreouer it is ordinarily seene in great Parishes of this Cittie of Paris and else-where euen vppon the dayes that the people Communicate that they are seperated from the Priests who do their businesse apart and wil not vouchsafe to feed communicate with them vpon one table Also what communion is there betweene the Priests and the people seeing that in stead of breaking