17. Genis Pactum hoc loco sumitur pro signo pacti Emâ—a Sa Primâ—edâ—tio eâ—â— Notis Pactum id est sâ—num pacti because it was the signe and remembrance of it So in the twelfth of Exodus the Sacrament of the Pascall Lambe is called the Passe-over because it was a memoriall of the Passeover of the Augell sparing the houses of the Israclites And Saint Paul 1. Corinth 10. speaking of the Rock which gusht out waters in the Wildernesse saith that this Rocke was Christ because it was the sigure of Christ As Austin saith in the Eighteenth Booke of the City of God Chapter 48. b Dâ—â—tum 〈◊〉 Aâ—â—sâ—â—â—â— pâ—â—ra Gaâ— Christus quia 〈◊〉 â—lla 〈◊〉 quahoâ— dâ—â—â—â—m est 〈◊〉 â—â—â—abat 〈◊〉 the Apostle saith the Rocke was Christ because that Rocke did signisie Christ And in the 57 question upon the Leviticus The thing which signifieth is wont to beare the name of the thing signified as it is written Seven eares of corne are seven yeares and seven kine are seven yeares and many such like things a Hine est quod dictuÌ„ est Petra crat Christus Non enim dixit petra signisicabat Christum sedtanquâ—â— hoc esseâ— quod utique per substantiam non hoc erat sed per signâ—ficationem Thence comes what is said that the Rocke was Christ he did not say the Rocke signifieth Christ but as if it were that which it was not in substance but onely by signification Pope Innocent the third in the fourth Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse chapter 7. saith Petra erat Christus id est significabat Christum The Rocke was Christ that is to say did signifie Christ And Aquinas in the Exposition of this Epistle b Petra erat Christus non per substantiuÌ„ sed per sig nificatione The Rock was Christ not in substance but by signification Lombardus in his Commentary upon this Chapter c B bebant de petra spirituali sâ—â—â—et quae Christum sign sicâ—â— bat They did drink of the Rock which signified Christ Which thing is confirmed by that word Was. For Bellarmin that doth invert these words and translateth Christ was the Rocke seemes to imply that Christ was then the Rock but is not now And the same Apostle to the Romans Chapter 6.4 saith Wee are buryed in Christs death by Baptisme because Baptisine signifieth to us that our sins are as buried with Christ and that we are to be made conformable to 〈◊〉 death And without extending my selfe further upon this Christ giving the Cur said This Cup is the New Testament iâ— my blood Wherein there is two figures as Salmeron the Jesuite saith truely a Salm. Tomo IX Tra. XV. pag. 98. 99. Subest in his verhis duplex Motonymia prima qua contmens ponitur pro contento id est poculum sive calix pro vino co quod vinum in ipso continetur Altera est qua contentum in poctelo id est sanguis sub specie vin soedus vel Testamentum diatur Novum cum sit ejus symbolum propter sâ—â—cies There is saith he a double Metonymie by which the continent is put for the thing contained that is to say the Cup for the wine contained therein the other that that which is contained in the Chalice iâ—â— called the Covenant or Testament for that it is the symbole or signe of it because of thâ— species And a little after b Idem ibidem pag. 100 Dicitur sanguis Novum Testâ—mentum sicut circumcisio dicitur foedus quia illud foedus representar The blood iâ— called the New Testament as the Circumcision is called the Covenant because it representeth that Covenant And Thomas Aquinas in his Commentary upon the eleventh chapter of the first to the Corinthians c Hic calix est N. T. in meo sanguint quasi dicat Per id quod in bâ—câ—aâ—â—ce contiâ—â—ur commâ—â—â— ratur N. T. c. This Cup is the New Testament in my blood as if be did say By that which is contained in this cup is made a commemoration of the New Testament which was confirmed by Christs blood And Emanuel Sa the Jesuit in the first edition of his notes upon the first to the Corinthians Chapter 11. saith that the word IS implies as much as containeth or signifieth This manner of speaking is ordinary to say a mourning suite because it is a signe of mourning a celestial Spheare for the figure of a heavenly Spheare And in shewing of Mappes to say This is France and that is Spaine And to be lodged at the Eagle or at the Swan for the signe of the Eagle or of the Swan So doth Saint Austin say in the fifty seventh question upon Leviticus The thing which signifieth is wont to be called by the name of the thing signified And Theodoret in the first Dialogue speaking of these words This is my body saith that the Lord gave unto the signe the name of his body And Tertullian in his fourth Booke against Macion chapter 40. He made it to be his body saying This is my body that is to say the sigure of my body Saint Austin in the 23 Epistle to Bonisâ—ce is very expresse If Sacraments had not some resemblance of the things whereof they be Sacraments they would be no Sacraments But because of this resemblance they take very often the name of the things themselves Even then as the Sacrament of Christs body is in a manneâ— the body of Christ so the Sacrament of faith to wit Baptisme is faith Note that he saith that the Sacrament of Christs body is the body of Christ after the same manner as Baptisme is faith Therefore our Adversaries say very ignorantly that figures elsewhere are receiveable but in the Articles of faith and institution of a Sacrament figures are no way convenient or agreeable For we have produced many examples of figures in the institution of Sacraments and they themselves acknowledge two figures in these words This Cup is the New Testament And touching the Articles of faith the Creede saith that Christ sitteth at the right hand of God which is a figurative kinde of speech for God hath no right hand The wh le Gospell is comprized under thâ—se words Jâ—sus is the Lambe of G d and all Popery is grounded upon these word Vpon this Rock will â—â—uild my Church â—nd I will give thee the keeps of the kingdome of heaven which he all figurative words And it is to be observed that when Christ instituted this holy Sacrament he spake in the Jewish language which is a dialect of the Syrian tongue saying * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro cadavere 1. Sam. 17.46 Amos. 6.3 Es 14.19 2. Paral. 20.24 Gen. 15.11 Num. 19.29 Hâ—n in pagri that is to say This my dead body supplying the word IS after the manner of the Hebrewes and Syrians He did then say to his Disciples that hee gave them his dead body Which could not be true but in
bodie of Christ and of the residues of the body of Christ that remaine after the Communion Which cannot agree with Christs naturall body crucified for us that cannot be broken in peeces and whereof there can be no residue Pope Gelasius in the Canon Comperimus second Distinction of the Consecration d Comperimus quod quidam sumpta taÌ„tum modo corporis sacri portione à calice sacrati cruoris abstineant We have learned that some having taken one part of the body of Christ abstaine from the cup which thing he calleth a sacriledge And Evagrius the Historian in his fourth Booke Chapter 36. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The ancient custome of the royall City requireth that when many Peeces of the immaculate body of Christ remaine children not yet in age to be corrupted going to Schoole be called for to eate them How could one give peeces of the naturall bodie of Christ who sitteth at the right hand of God What likelihood is there to give to a troope of little children the residues of the body of Christ Would not that bee esteemed at this day in the Romane Church an horrible profanation Wherefore it is a thing very frequent in the Fathers to say that Panis est Corpus Christi The bread is Christs body And we have heard Saint Austin here above speake so Words which if they were taken or understood of the naturall body of Christ would be false For the bread is not the body that was crucified for us It is therefore unjustly done by our Adversaries to expose unto the View with great noyse and rumour some placeâ— out of the Bookes of Sacraments attributed to Saint Ambrose and out of the Booke of the Lords Supper attributed to Cyprian wherein is sayde that the bread after the words of Consecration becometh and is made Christs bodieâ— since we doe shew by so many proofâ—â— that they speake of another body that of that which was borne of the Virgin Marie and that was crucified aâ— we will shew yet more clearely hereafter For that the Author of these Bookâ— attributed to Saint Ambrose hath beleeved that after the Consecration the bread is bread still he shewes it plainly when he saith c Lib. 4. de SacrameÌ„t cap. 4. Let us therefore establisâ— this to wit how that which is bread may be Christs body And a little after a Si tanta vis in Sermone Domini Iesu ut inciperent esse quae noÌ„ erant quaÌ„to magis operatorius est ut sint quae erant et in aliud commutentur If there be such power and vertue in the word of the Lord Jesus as to make that things which were not begin to bee how much more shall he make that the things which were be and be changed into other things This excellent place which saith that the things which were are still that is to say that that which was bread is bread still is found thus alleadged by Lombard in his fourth Booke of Sentences Distinction 10. And by Thomas in the third part of his Summe question 78. Art 4. And by Gratian in the second Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Panis est And by b Gabr. lect 40. in Can. Missae Alger de Sacram corp lib. 2. cap. 7 Ivo Car. 2. Parte cap 7. Et Iodocus Coccius Tom. 2. lib. 6. pag. 621. Gabriel Biel and Alger and Ivo Carnutensis and Jodocus Coccius and not according to the new editions of Ambrose in which these words Sint quae erant are left out Such falsifications are frequent in the new editions Some places may bee found indeed wheâ—ein some Fathers say that the bread of the Eucharist is the body of the Lord crucified for us But that must be understood after the sâ—me manner as Christ said of the bread that it was his body and that the Cup is the New Testament because it is the Sacrament or remembrance of it They doe object a place of Saint Hilarie out of his eighth Booke of the Trinitie where he saith a De veritate carnis saguinis noÌ„ relictus est ambigendi locus Nunc enim â—psius DoÌ„mi professione side nostra vere caro est vere sanguis Et hac accepta atque hausta essiciunt ut nos in Christo Christus in nobis sit Of the truth of the flesh and blood there is no doubt For at this day both by the profession of the Lord and by our Faith it is flesh indeed and blood indeed and these things taken and swallowed downe cause us to be in Christ and Christ in us First of all it is a great abuse to urge Saint Hilary who in this point of the nature of Christs body had an errour that destroyes the whole Christian Religion For b Hilar. lib. 10. de Trinitate In quem quanvis aut idlus incideret aut vulnus descenderet c. afferrent quideÌ„ haec impetuÌ„ passionis non tamen doloreÌ„ passionis inferrent ut teluÌ„ aliquod aut aquam perforans aut ignem compungens aut aëra vulnerans Et paulo post Virtus corpoâ—is sine sensu poenae vim poenae in se desaevientis excepit he teacheth that Christ in his Passion suffered no manner of paine at all and that the stripes they gave him were as if they had pierced the aire or the fire with a dart Secondly it appeareth that Hilary speaketh of the Spirituall manducation For by it alone are we in Christ and Christ in us Thirdly when Hilarie saith there remaineth no place to doubt of the truth of the flesh and blood of the Lord he doth not meane it must not be doubted but that in the Eucharist we cate truely the naturall flesh of Christ by the mouth of the body But he saith that we must not doubt but Christ had a true flesh and a true blood For he disputeth against certaine Hereticks that destroyed the truth of his human nature For as touching the Mystagogicall Catecheses attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem which are objected against us where it is sayd that we must not beleeve our senses telling us that it is bread it is certaine that those Catecheses are supposed and falsly attributed to Cyril For the Stile of them is very different from those 18 Catecheses of Cyril that precedes them which are cited by Theodoret and by Gelasius and by Damascen but these last are never alleadged by any one In the first Catechese there is an evident marke of falsity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For hee disswadeth his hearers from frequenting the Amphitheater where the Gladiators chases and combates were made against wild beasts and the Hippod omus or Circus that is to say the Parke or Place where horses races and combates were exercised For then were no such buildings nor spectacles in Jerusalem nor never were any since Jerusalem was Christian And concerning Chrysostomes hyperbolical amplifications saying that the Altar streames with
blood that wee fasten our teeth in his flesh that wee put ouâ— fingers in his wounds and suck the blood of them and that a Seraphin bringeth unto us a burning coale with a paire of tongs they bee outlashing words that savour of a declamation and which our Adversaries themselves doe not beleeve CHAP. XXIX That divers Ancient Fathers have beleeved a mysticall Union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread of the Sacrament NEverthelesse I cannot deny but that many Fathers have had an opinion which with good reason is rejected by the Roman Church of these dayes They teach that as Christs divine nature hath united it selfe personally unto his humane nature so the same divine nature by vertue of the Consecration is united to the bread of the Eucharist by an union though not personall and hypostaticall yet mysticall divine and ineffable by which the bread remaining bread is made the body of Christ For they use this comparison taken from the personall union of the two natures of Christ for to shew how the bread is the body of Christ This opinion hath no foundation in the Scripture Yet I dare say it is an errour no way prejudiciall to Christian Religion For that opinion changeth not the nature of Christ and destroyes not his humanitie Neither doth it destroy the nature of the Sacrament since they did beleeve that the bread changeth not its substance Whence also they worshipped not the Sacrament neither did fall into Idolatrie To be short it was an innocent error serving to augment and encrease the peoples respect and reverence to the holie Sacrament which for that cause they call terrible and wonderfull In the meane while we have in that a most evident proofe that these Fathers did not beleeve the Transubstantiation For as they beleeved not that by the union of Christs divinitie with his humanitie the human nature was transubstantiated or his bodie abolished so did not they beleeve that by this mysticall and divine union of the God-head of Christ with the bread the bread should be destroyed and turned into another substance By this doctrine the bread of the Eucharist is the body of Christ in two manners the one because of that mysticall union of the bread with Christ after the same sorte as Jesus Christ man is called the Son of God because of the personall union with the Sonne of God The other because this bread is the sacred signe and remembrance of Christs body as it is usual to give to the signes the name of that which they doe signifie For this second consideration they say that the bread of the Eucharist is the body which was borne of the Virgin and crucified for us For as touching the first Consideration it is certaine that this bread which they say is made Christs body by that mysticall union is another body of Christ than that which was crucified for us For to effect such a transmittation they interpose the Omnipotencie of God For it must bee a divine power for to cause that the bread remaining bread bee so straitly united to the Godhead of Christ as to become the body of Christ Now that these Fathers doe hold that this mysticall body of Christ is another body than that which was crucified for us though it be the same in signification we prooved it just now by a multitude of places of Fathers wherein they say that Christ hath two sorts of flesh and that we may very well eate of that flesh or mysticall body which is taken in the Sacrament but no manner of way eate the flesh that was crucified for us The first Father that ever made use of the personall union of the two natures of Christ for to shew how the bread is made the body of Christ not by Transubstantiation but by the mysterious union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread is Justin Martyr about the end of his second Apologie where he speaketh thus Wee doe not take these things as common bread but after the same manner as Christ our Saviour was incarnate and made flesh and blood for our salvation so we have beene taught that the meate whereon thankesgivings have been rendred by the prayer of the Word whereby our flesh is nourished by a By this transmutation hee understandeth the change of the bread which is made in the stóach for the nounishment of our bodies transmutation is the body and blood of Christ Jesus Now that Justin beleeved that this meate is bread stil and hath not lost its substance he sheweth it when hee saith that our bodies are fed with it And by that which he saith in that very place that the Deacons give to all them that are present to participate the bread and wine whereupon graces have beene said The Author likewise of the Catechesticall prayer attributed to Gregory of Nysse useth the same comparison b I shew this falsity in my book against Cardinall du Perron lib. 7. cap. 22. Namely in that he speaks of one Severus an Heritick which came above a hundred yeares after the death of this Gregory The body saith he was changed into a divine dignity by the inhabitation of the Word God With good reason then also now I beleeve that the bread sanctified by the word of God is changed into the body of God the Word If this comparison be good as the body of Christ was not transubstantiated by the inhabitation of the Godhead no more likewise is the bread transubstantiated by the consecration which is made at the Sacrament Hilary speaketh just so in the eighth Booke of the Trinity c Sivere Verbum caro factum est nos Verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus If the Word was truly made flesh and wee also in the meate of the Lord doe take the Word flesh Gratian in his second distinction of the Consecration d Can. hoc est Hoc est quod dicimus c. Si ut Christi persona constat ex Deo homine cum ipse Christus verus sit Deus verus sit homo alleadgeth a place of Austin drawne from the Sentences of Prosper in these words The Sacrifice of the Church is composed of two things to wit of the Sacrament and of the thing of the Sacriment hat is to say of the body of Christ after the same manner as Christs person is composed of God and man For Christ is very God and very man Ireneus hath an opinion by himselfe For he saith c Quomodo constabâ—t cis eum panem in quo gratiae actae sunt corpus esse Domini sui calicem sanguinem ejus si non ipsum fabricatoris muÌ„di filium dicunt .i. verbum ejus per quod lignuÌ„ fructâ—ficaâ— defluunt fontes dat terra primo quidâ—m foenum deinde spicas that the bread is the body of Christ because Christ is the Creator of all things esteeming that the whole world in respect of God is what the body
of man is to his Soule Which was the opinion and beleife of Plato of Cicero of Virgil and of all the Platonick Schoole that bore the sway in Ireneus his time Such was the beleife of the Author of the Booke of the Lords supper attributed to Saint Cyprian That Author speaketh thus f Panâ—s ste communis in carnem sangumem mutatus procurat vitam incrementum corporibus ideoque ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adjutamsirmit as sensibil argumento edocta est visibilibus Sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum The common bread being changed into flesh and into blood bringeth â—ife and growth unto the body And therefore the infirmity of our flesh being helped by the accustomed effect is taught by a sensible proofe that in the visible Sacraments there is an effect of eternall life When he saith that the common bread is turned into flesh and into blood he doth not meane that it is turned into the flesh and blood of Christ but into our flesh and blood by disgestion for hee addeth that this bread nourisheth our bodyes and maketh them to grow and all the currant of the speech sheweth that But a little after hee addeth some wordes whereupon our Adversaries doe triumph and glory for lack of understanding what this Authors beleefe was * Panis queÌ„ Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro Et sicut in persona Christi humanitas videbatur et latebat d vinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter divina se infudit essentia The bread saith hee that the Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shew but in nature is made flesh by the omnipotency of the Word But in the words following he sheweth that this conversion of the bread into the flesh of Christ is made not by Transubstantiation but by an union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread like unto the union of Christs divine nature with his humane nature For he added immediatly after And even as in â—he person of Christ his humanity was â—eene but his divinity was hidden so the * Panis itaque hic azymus cibus verus sincerus per speciem Sacramentum nos tactu sanctificat divine essence is infused in the visible Sacrament by an unspeakable manner There is nothing more expresse nor more contrary unto Transubstantiation For according to this Authors beleefe even as Christs divine nature did not transubstantiate his Manhood but made it to be the flesh of the Son of God So the divine Essence which he saith to be infused in the bread of the Sacrament maketh it to become Christs body without being Transubstantiated Wherefore a litlte after he saith that that which we receive in the Sacrament * Caro quae VerbuÌ„ Dei Patris assuÌ„psit in utero virginali n un tate suae personae et panis qui consecratur in Ecclesia unum corpus sunt Divinit atisenim plenitudo quae fuit in illa replet et istum paâ—em is unleavened bread which sanctifieth us by touching it acknowledging that it is bread still Bellarmin in the 15 chap. of his third Book of the Eucharist alleadgeth Saint Remigius that wrote about the yeare of our Lord 520 in these words a The flesh which the Word of God the Father tooke in the Virgins wombe in unity of person and the bread that is consecrated in the Church are one and the selfe-same body For the plenitude of the divinity which was in that flesh filleth also this bread Bellarmin addeth that Haimo held the same language and that Gelasius and Theodorets words that we have alleadged above may be fitted to this opinion The Author our Adversaries alleadge with more ostentation is Damascene whom they rank among the Saints This man may be tearmed the Lombard of the Grecians because he is the first among the Grecians that handled divinity in Philosophicall tearmes And is the first that wrote for the adoration of Images Now he did write about the yeare of our Lord 740. This man in his 4 Book of the Orthodox Faith chap. 14. extendeth himselfe upon this matter and will have the bread b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be changed into the body of the Lord not by transubstantiation but by c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assumption and union with the divinity like unto the union of Christs divinity with his humanity Because saith hee d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is the custome to eate bread and to drink wine and water the Lord hath conjoyned his divinity to these things and hath made them to be his body and blood And a little after e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If thou inquirest in what manner that is done let it suffice thee to understand that it is done by the holy Spirit after the same manner as the Lord hath made himselfe to himselfe and in himselfe a flesh taken of the holy Mother of God by the holy Ghost And a little after he saith that the bread and wine c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the body of Christ Deified Chiefly he is very expresse in that he addeth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The bread of the Communion is not meere bread but it is conjoyned to the Divinity But still he acknowledgeth that it is bread saying the bread is the body of Christ and calling it the bread of the Communion And a little after The loaves of proposition did figurate this bread Item The broad is the first fruits of the future bread And a little after We partake all of one bread Only he hath this of particular to himselfe that he will not have the bread to bee called the figure of Christs body rejecting that kind of speech usuall and ordinary in the Fathers that have written afore him It appeareth likewise in that he will have the Sacrament to bee honored but not to be worshipped d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us saith he honor it with purity corporall and spiritual and will have it to be received with the hands set in forme of a Crosse For then it was not as yet the custom to chop it into the mouths of Communicants Rupertus was imbrued with the same opinion e Rupertus Tuitiensis in Exod. c. 12. Sicut Christus humanam naturaÌ„ nec mutavit nee destruxitysed assumpsit it a in Sacrameto nec destruit nec mutat sub stantiam panis et vini sèd assumit in unitatemcorporis et sâ—ngumis sui Even as Christ saith he did neither change nor destroy the humane nature but joyned himselfe unto it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe unto it in the unity of his body and blood For which cause also Bellarmin placeth him among the Impanators This doctrine doth no whit agree with the ubiquity For they did put this union of
are truly the plague and contagion of the mind All that in figurative tearmes and yet true and wherein the word true excludes not the figure 6. What they do adde is not a whit better Christ say they used an oath saying Verily verily I say unto you Except ye eate the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you But it is not convenient say they to use figures in an oath What will they say then to these places Verily verily I say unto you that he that entreth not by the doore into the sheepfold the same is a theife and a robber Iohn 10.1 And a little after Verily verily I say unto you that I am the doore of the sheep And in S. Matth. 18.18 Verily I say unto you that whatsoever ye shal binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven And Iohn 3.5 Verily verily I say unto you Except a man be borne of the water and of the spirit c. Where we have the same oath with figurative words What more the same verse which they alleadge Verily verily I say unto you Except ye eaâ—e my flesh and drink my blood ye have no life in you is the same verse in which they will have drinking to signifie eating And in the same chap. ver 32. Christ calleth himselfe the true bread wherein our Adversaâ—ies do acknowledge a figure To let passe that the word Amen is not an oath but a simple and strong assirmation CHAP. VI. Testimonies of the Fathers IT is good upon this point to heare the ancient Fathers S. Austin shal march in the fore front In his Book of Christian Doctrine chap. 16. * Nisi manducaver it is inquit carnem filii hominis c sacinus vel slagitium videtur juhere Figura ergo est praecipiens passioni Dominâ— esse communicandum suaviter at que utilter recondendum in memoria quodpro nobis caro ejus crucifâ—a a el vul nerata sit When the Lord saith Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee have no life in your selves it seemes that he commands some great crime or haynous offence It is then a figure that commandes to communicate unto the Lords Pâ—ssion and sweetly and profitably to put in remembrance that Christs flesh was crucified and wounded for us Our Adversaries to cleare themselves and avoyd the force of this place do make long discourses and sinde there are figures in these words Except yee eate c. To wit that in the Eucharist Christs body is not eaten by peece-meales as the flesh of the Shambles But they come not neare the point For Saint Austin saith not onely that it is a figure but he declares also how that figure is to be taken and expounded to wit that to eate Christs flesh is to meditare and call to remembrance with delight that Christ his flesh was crucified for us Which is an exposition our Adversaries doe not allow The same Father upon the 98 Psalme Vnder stand spiritually whâ—t I have said unto you Yee shall not eate this body that ye see and shall not drinke that blood that shall be shed by those that shall crucifie mâ— I have commended unto you a sacred figne which being under slood spiritually shall quicken and vivisie you We have in this Father a long exposition of the sixth Chapter of Saint John in the 25.26 27 Treatise upon Saint John In the 25 Tractaâ— he saith a Vi quid paras detâ—s el vetrem crede el maduâ—asti This viz. to beleeve is to eate the meate that perisheth not Why doest that make ready thy teeth and thy belly Beleeve and thou hast eaten And in the 26 Treatise b Credere in eum hoc est manducare panem vivuÌ„ Quâ— credit iâ— cuÌ„ manducal invâ—sibiliter sagâ—natur quia el invisibiliter renascitur To beleeve in him is to eate the living bread He that beleeves in him eateth him he is fed invisibly because he is regenerated invisibly And in the same place c HuÌ„c it aque cibuÌ„ et pot 〈◊〉 societatem vult intellâ—â—i corporâ—â— et membrorum suâ—â—um quod est sanila Ecclesia in praedestinatis c. By this meate and drinke Christ will have to be understood the society of his body and members which is the Church of the Predestinate This Father was so far from beleeving that Christ was eaten even by the mouth of the body that by this meate he will have the Church to be understood Whence also he addeth d Hoeveraciter non praestat nisi iste cibus potus qui cos aÌ„ quibus sumitur immortales incorruptibiles sacit iâ— societas ipsa Sanctorum c. This meate and drinke which makes such as doe take it immortall and incorruptible is the fellowshippe of Saints where there shall bee peace and perfect unitie And in the same place e Hoc est ergo manduâ—â—â—al lamescam bâ—bere ill â—mpotumâ—â— Câ—â—â—stoâ—â—â—â— manere ilum manâ—â—ntâ—â—in se habere de per haeâ— qui non maâ—â— in Chrisio in quâ— nor manâ—â— Chrisia in quo nor manâ— Châ—â—slâ—â— procâ—â—dnâ—no nec manducat spiratalâ—ter â—â—nem â—jus aâ—c bâ—hâ—â— ejus sâ—nguâ—nâ—n luet carnalaeâ— â—â—silâ—luâ—â— prâ—â—â—â— doelâ—bus Sacraâ—â—â—â— isâ—â—â— corpoâ— is sangâ—â—â—â—â— Châ—â—sâ—i That therefore is to eate this meate and to drinke this drinke to dwell in Christ and to have him dwelling in us And therefore he that dwelleth not in Christ and in whom Christ dwelleth not doublesse he eates not spiritually his flesh and drinkes not his blood how be it that carnally and visibly he presfeth with his teeth the sacred signe of Christs body and blood In summe in three long Treatises containing many pages wherein this good Doctor expoundeth the sixth Chapter of Saint John there is not one word of eating by the mouth of the body the Lords flesh crucified for us Which exposition was so disliked by Cardinall du Perron that he speaketh contemptibly of these Tractates of Saint Austin upon Saint John f In his Booke against the King of Great Britaine In the Treatise of the Eucharist saying that they be popular Sermons made before all kindes of persons to whom he would not declare openly the Churches beleife Tertullian in the 37 Chapter of his Booke of the Resurrection expounding these words The flesh profiteth nothing The sense saith hee must bee addressed according to the subject whereof he speaketh g Quia durum intolerabilem existimaverunt sermonem ejus quasi vere carnem suam illis edendam determâ—nasset ut in spiritu dispone ret statum salutis oraemisit Spiritus est quâ— vivificat Tum add t Caro non prodeâ—t quiâ—quam ad vivificandum sâ—ili et For because they esteemed his words to be harsh and intolerable as though he had determined to give them truely his flesh to eate that he might render spirituall the state of salvation he
some giving him three stripes and some five With the like effeminatnesse that King yeelded up to the Pope the Investures of Benefices which the Kings his predecessors had possessed till that time That King being dead in the yeare 1189. had for Successor Richard his son and after him John a King brutish and furious who made some attempts to recover the Investures which his Father had yeelded up to the Pope But being hated and contemned of his subjects Pope Innocent the third had a faire way to handle him ill He did declare him to have lost the right of his Kingdome dispensed his subjects from their Oath of allegiance a thing never seene nor heard of before in England caused Divine Service to cease throughout all the Kingdom and Churches and Church yards to be shut up Which continued by the space of six yeares and a halfe He also excommunicated the King and gave the Kingdome of England to Philip Augustus King of France upon condition to Conquer the same at his owne perill and fortune and that for the remission of his owne sinnes That constrained King John to yeeld up his Kingdome to the Pope and to binde himselfe to doe homage unto him for his crowne So hee made himselfe the Popes vassall and England became Saint Peters patrimonie And a Patent with a golden seale was made and framed by which the King did oblige himselfe and his successors for ever to pay yearely unto the Pope a thousand marks in gold in signe of subjection besides Saint Peters moneys that were paid by polle Unto which that poore King was forced to adde an Oath whereby hee swore that hee was induced so to doe without constraint and of his owne accord and by the motion of the holy Spirit and that for the remission of his sinnes Vnder this slaverie died this King in the yeare of our Lord 1216. to whom succeeded Henrie the third who did put his Crowne at the Legats feete one knee upon the ground doing homage unto him for his Kingdome Then did the Pope beginne to send his Legats who skimmed England of money by a thousand kindes of devices The Orders of the Franciscans and Jacobins were newly instituted The same Friers preached the Croisado whereby the Pope promised the remission of all sinnes and a degree of glorie in heaven above the common sort to all those which being arm'd would make the vâ—w to goe to the holy I and fâ—r the recovering of Christs Sepulcher possessed by the Sarrasâ—ons At these Predications every one câ—ossed himselfe with a crosse upon the shoulder and a great multitude of Gentry and people sold and moâ—gaged their Lands and estates for the charges of that Journey But as they were armed and furnished for the journey another Legate would come that dispensed the English from their vow and gave them the same graces and Indulgences without bâ—dgeing from their owne houses provided they would give to the Pope as much money as was necessary to have beene spent in their journey By these meanes this Legate gathered huge summes of money And that money was employed by the Pope for to conquer the Cities and Provinces which the Emperour had in Italy Thus did the Pope inlarge his limits Never a yeare came over head but hungry Italians came over into England with new Commissions to raise moneyes with power to excommunicate all such as would refuse and put the Churches into interdict What good horses soever there were or curious houshold stuffe or fine wares in shops were conveyed away without paying for and carried into Italy The Exactors tooke up the tithes of the corne yet unsowen The Italians possessed in England the best Benefices The Pope called England his garden of pleasure and his bottomlesse treasure Whereupon great clamours arose among the People The Nobles said Matth. Paris pag. 267. Marxidiribaldi These are the successors of Constantine and not of Peter O shamefull thing rascally ruffians that know not what armes and honour is will domineere over all the World by their excommunications Matth Paris pag. 423. The Monkes in the Countrey did say The Daughter of Sion is become a brasen faced Whore and without shame at all through the just judgement of him who because of the sins of the People makes an Hypocrite to raigne and a Tyrant to governe and rule But all these clamours were unprofitable and without effect because the holie Scripture was a Booke then altogether unknowne amongst the English people They spake of nothing but of Miracles and of Images and of Pilgrimages and of Reliques Vntill such time as an English Doctor and Preacher named John Wicklef fell to preaching and writing openly against the Pope and against the Masse about the yeare of our Lord 1370. Hee was listened unto with great applause and was able to have caused a great alteration in England if the King would have given way to it Of this oppression in England Matthew Paris and Westmonasteriensis English Monks that lived in those dayes wrote strange and prodigious things Now as John Wicklef was a teaching Aencae Sylvii Hist Bohem. it fell out that a Bohemian Gentleman who was a student of Oxford did taste and rellish wicklefs Doctrine and coppied out his Bookes which he carryed over into his owne Countrey and imparted them to John Huz a famous Preacher to whom Wenceslans King of Bohemia brother to Sigismond Emperour had committed the government of the Schoole of Prague renowned at that time This John Huz overcome by the evidence of Wickless reasons fell a preaching his doctrine and being a vehement and perswasive man he drew after him a great number of People To whom Hierome of Prague did adjoyne himselfe who surpassed John Huz in eloquence and learning There came also out of Germanie one Petrus Dresdensis and one Jacobellus that spake with vehemencie against Transubstantiation and against the Communion under the onely species of the bread For to appease these stirres and commotions the Arch-Bishop of Prague called Subinco Cepus caused Wicklefs Bookes publickly to bee burned and drove out John Huz from Prague But seeing the number of those that he called hereticks did encrease dayly he himselfe fled into Hongaria towards Sigismond and John Huz returned back to Prague Then Benedict the thirteenth Gregory the twelfth excommunicated one another the one having his seat at Auignon the other at Rome A Councell was kept at Pisa in the yeare 1409. in which they created a third Pope to wit Alexander the fifth who dying shortly after John XXIII succeeded him So there was then three Popes all at once and there was no body in all the Church of Rome but was excommunicated by some one of these Popes This John had warre against Ladislaus King of Naples and for to strengthen and fortifie himselfe against him he sent Preachers abroad over all the Countries of his obedience to preach the Croisadoe whereby hee promised the forgivenesse of all sinnes to all
conforme himselfe to the Lords Institution 45. Chap. X. Places wherein the Doctors and Councels of the Roman Church maintaine that the Pope and the Church of Rome are not subject to the Scripture and have greater authority than the Scripture and may make voide and abolish the Commandements of God 46. Chap. XI That our Exposition of these words This is my body is conformable to the Scripture and to the nature of Sacraments and approved by the ancient Fathers and confirmed by our Adversaries 55. Chap. XII That our adversaries to avoide a cleare and naturall figure forge a multitude of harsh and unusuall ones and speake but in figurative tearmâ—â— And of Berengarius his confession 63. Chap. XIII Of the Ascension of the Lord and of his absence and of that our Adversaries say that in the Sacrament he is Sacramentally present 68. Chap. XIV Confession of our Adversaries acknowledging that Transubstantiation is not grounded in the Scriptures That the Primitive Church did consecrate by the Prayer and not by these words This is my body 76. Chap. XV. Of the adoration of the Sacrament The opinion of the Roman Church 82. Chap. XVI Examen of the Adoraâ—â—â—n 〈◊〉 Sacrament by the word of God That the ancient Christians did not worship the Sacrament 88. Chap. XVII Of the Priests intention without which the Roman Church beleeveth no consecration nor Transubstantiation is mad â—6 Chap. XVIII That our Adversaries in this matter intangle themselves into absurdities and insoluble contradictions 104 Chap. XIX Of accidents without a subject Places of Fathers 117. Chap. XX. Answers to some examples brought out of the Scriptures by our Adversaries for to prove that the body of Christ hath beene sometimes in two severall places 122. Chap. XXI Of the dignity of Priests And that our Adversaries debase and vilifie the utility and â—fficacy of Mâ—sses and make them unprofitable for the remission of sinnes And of the traffick of Masses 126 Chap. XXII That the Roman Religion is a new Religion and forged for the Popes profit and of the Clergies 138. Chap. XXIII Answer to the question made unto us by our Adversaries Where was your Religion before Calvin 146. Chap XXIV That our Adversaries doe reject the Fathers and speake of them with contempt 161 Chap. XXV Of the corruption and falsification of the Fathers Workes and of the difficulty to understand them 169. Chap. XXVI Places of the Fathers contrary to Transubstantiation to the manducation of the body of Christ by the corporall mouth 175. Chap. XXVII Confirmation of the same by the custome of the Ancient Church 197. Chap. XXVIII Explanation of the places of the Fathers th t say that in the Eucharist we eate the body and blood of Christ and that the bread is changed into the body of Christ and is made Christs body Specially of Ambrose Hilary and Chrysostome That the Fathers doe speake of severall kindes of body and blood of Christ 200. Chap. XXIX That divers ancient Fathers have beleeved a mystical Vnion of the Godhead of Christ with the bread of the Sacrament 212. Chap. XXX Pâ—rticular opinion of Saint Austin and of Fulgenâ—â—uâ— and of Innocent the third 226. Chap. XXXI Tâ—at the Church of Rome condemning the Impâ—â—â—â—tion is fâ—llen her selfe into an error a thousand times more pernicious by Transubstantiation And of the Adoration of the accidents of the bread 228. Chap. XXXII That the Sacrifice of the Masse was not instituted by Christ Confesssion of our Adversaries 231. Chap. XXXIII That the Sacrifice of the Masse agrees neither with Scripture nor with reason 235 Chap. XXXIV In what sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice Of Melchisedeks sacrifice And of the Oblation whereof Malachy speaketh 243. Chap. XXXV In what sence the Fathers have called the Eucharist a sacrifice 247. The Second Booke OF THE MANDUCATION of the Body of Christ Chap. I. OF two sorts of manducation of Christs flesh to wit the spirituall and corporall and which is the best 253. Chap. II. That in the sixt of Saint John the Lord speakes not of the Sacrament of the Eucharist nor of the manducation of his flesh by the mouth of the body 260. Chap. III. That the Roman Church by this doctrine depriveth the People of salvation 269. Chap. IV. That the Principall Doctors of the Roman Church yea the Popes themselves doe agree with us in this point and hold that in the sixt of Saint John nothing is spoken but of the spirituall manducation and that those that contradict them doe speake with incertitude 274. Chap. V. Reasons of our Adversaries for tâ— prove that in the sixt Chapter of Saint John it is spoken of the Manducation by the mouth of the body 280. Chap. VI. Testimonies of the Fathers 285. Chap. VII Impiety of Salmeron the Iesuite and of Peter Charron And of Bellarmins foure men inclosed in one sute of clothes That by this doctrine Christ hath not a true body in the Sacrament 292. Chap. VIII Of the progresse of this abuse and by what meanes Satan bath established the Transubstantiation 298. Chap. IX Of the judgement which the Doctors of the Roman Church doe make touching the apparitions whereby a little Child or a morsell of flesh hath appeared at the Masse in the hands of the Priest and touching Christs blood that is kept in Reliques 312. Chap. X. Of the corruption of the Papall Sea in the Ages wherein this errour was most advanced 317. Chap. XI Of the oppression of England How Reliâ—ion passed out of England into Bohemia Of Wicklef Of John Huz and of Hierome of Prague Of the Councell of Constance Of Zisca and Procopius and of their Victories 323. Chap. XII The Confession of Cyril Patriarch of Consta tinople now living touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist 324. ERRATA Page 5. Line 3. Reade any p. 10. l. 1. What is in the Margent must be in the Text. p. 11. l. 5. r. of this bread p. 28. l. 2. r. nor stirred and line 11. r. Saviour p. 68. l. 8. r. sensibly p. 69. l. 11. r. chap. 17. 11. p. 70. l. 23. r. Word p. 76. l. 15. r. Doctor p. 79. l. 15. r. Church p. 105. l. 10 r. as if I should say p. 121. l. 23. r. of miraculous p. 136. l 18. put a full point after fourefold p. 145. l. 20. r. benefit p. 152. from the 14 line to the 27 should be Italica p. 157. l. 2. r. yeare 1512. p. 177. l. 21. r. remained p. 178. l. 25. r. For the old Passeover p. 182. l. 1. r. Father p. 186. l. 2. r. invisible p. 187. l. 9. r. Brethren p. 194. l. 2. r should be made p. 200. l. 12. r. three sorts p. 223. l. 10. r. those of Ambrose p. 233. l. 17. r. acknowledgeth p. 244. l. 7. r. alleadge p. 248 l. 12. r perfecting l. 23. r. sacrificed p. 250. l. 28. 30. r. gifts p. 253. Chap. 1. r. Of the two sorts c. p. 282. l. 22. r. of
Gabriel Biel and the old editions of Saint Austin have oportet Reason also requireth it For it would be repugnant to common sense to say that the body of Christ may be in one place as if one should say that the Sunne may be in one place it were to say that it may be in no place Cyril of Alexandria in his eleventh booke upon Saint John chap. 3. * Dâ—st 10. A. Thomas 3. parte suâ—â—mae qu. 75. art 1. Gabr el Biel Lell 39. in Canonem M ssâ— Eâ—st abest corpore Patri pro nobis apparens ac à dextris ejus sedens habitat tamen in Sanct is per Spiritum Though he be absent in body appearing for us before his Father and sitting at his right hand he dwelleth in his Saints through his Spirit He supplyeth the want of his corporall presence by giving his Spirit and nor in keeping himselfe hidden under the accidents of bread The Eutychian hereticks spake as our Adversaries doe For they said thâ—â— Christs body is present on earth as well as in heaven by an invisible presence Against whom whither Vigil or Gelasius Pope hath written five Bookes in the first whereof he speaketh thus * Vigil l. 1. Dei silius secundum humanitatem suam recessit à nobis Secundum divinitateÌ„ suaÌ„ alt nobis Ecce sum vobiscum usque ad consummationem saeculi The Sonne of God according to his humanity hath left us and withdrawne himselfe from us But according to his divinitie he saith unto us I will be with you till the consummation of the world And in the 4 Booke †Lib. 4. Quando in terra fuit non erat utique in coelo Et nunc quia in coelo est non est utique in terra When Christs flesh was upon earth it was not in Heaven and now that it is in Heaven it is not on earth Even as Vigilius saying that when Christs flesh was upon earth it was not in heaven understood it was not in heaven neither visibly nor invisibly So when he saith that now it is no more on earth he meaneth it is not there neither visibly nor invisibly That if he meant or understood that Christs flesh is present unto us invisibly then would he plead the Eutychians cause for that was their opinion To be short the Apostle to the Ephesians chap. 3.17 saith that Christ dwelleth in our hearts by faith and not in our stomacks in the midst of meat When we aske of them after what manner the body of Christ is present in the Sacrament they answer that it is not present there circumscriptively as wine is enclosed in a tunne or caske nor definitively as immateriall spirits But that it is Sacramentally present This answer truly is ridiculous For to say that Christ is in the Sacrament sacramentally present is a thing as absurd as to say that a man which is in a Temple is there Templarily present and he that is in a Coach is present in it Coacharily Moreover it is certaine that by this answer they come to be of our side For they say themselves that this word Sacrament signifieth a sacred signe Therefore to be present sacramentally signifieth no other thing but to be present significatively and by figure and representation CHAP. XIV Confession of our Adversaries acknowledging that Transubstantiation is not grounded in the Scriptures That the Primitive Church did consecrate by the prayer and not by these words This is my body THe most learned of the Roman Church ground their Transubstantiation not upon these words This is my body but upon the authority of the Church of Rome which as they hold cannot erre Scotus which is termed the suttle Doâ—tor upon the fourth of the Sentences Dist 11. quest 3. saith There is no place 〈◊〉 be found in the Scripture that may wi hout the determination of the Church compellâ— man to beleeve the Transubstantiation Vpon which place Cardinall Bellarmine in his 3. booke of the Eucharist chap. 23. speaketh thus * Secundo dicit non extare loâ—uÌ„ ulluÌ„ Scripturae tam expressuâ—â— ut sine declara â—â—ne Ecclesâ—â—â—â—â—dentâ—â— cogaâ— Trasubstant â—â—â—ionem admittâ—â—â— Et id non est omatâ—â— improhahile Nam et si Scriptura quam 〈◊〉 suprà ad duxâ—â—â— videatur nobis 〈◊〉 â—â—â—ra ut possiâ—◠〈…〉 non proteâ—â—â—umâ— tamen an 〈◊〉 sit merito dubitarâ— poâ—est cum 〈◊〉 nâ—s doctissiâ—â— acurat â—â—â—mi qualâ—s imprâ—â—â— Scotus 〈◊〉 â—â—â—trarium sentiant Sc tus saith that there is no place in the Scripture so expresse as to compell evidently without the declaration of the Church to receive the Transubstantiation And that is not altogether improbable For although the Scripture that we have alleaged seeme to us so plaine that it may compell a man not proud or insolent yet neverthelesse it may justly be doubted whether it be so or no seeing the most acute and learned men such especially as Scotus was are of a contrary opinion And in the same place he tels us that Scotus saith that Transubstantiation was not an article of faith before the Councell of Lateran held Anno 1215. For that cause Vasquez the Jesuite upon the 3. part of Thomas Disp 180. chap. 5. having represented the opinion of Scotus who saith * Scotus docet potuisse servari veritatem verborum consecrationis etiamsi in Eucharistia maneret substantia panis v ni that the truth of the words of consecration might have beene preserved though the substance of the bread and wine had remained in the Eucharist to whom also Durand joyneth himselfe blameth Bellarmine without naming him for saying that the opinion of Scotus is probable accuseth him of halting on both sides We see †Videas aliquos Theologiae Professores nostriceporis qui in utraÌ„que parteÌ„ al quaÌ„tulum clau diâ—aÌ„tes non putant improhahile id quod Scotus de verhis consecrationis dixit saith he certaine professors in Divinity in our times who halting a little on both sides do not esteeme improbable that which Scotus hath said touching the words of consecration Of that number of learned and acute men was Cardinall Cajetan who in hiâ— notes upon Thomas speaketh thus * Cajetanus in 3. Thomae q. 75. art 1. Alterum quod Evangelium non explicavit expresse ab Ecclesia accepimus scile conversionem panis in corpus Christi Thâ— other point which the Gospel expoundeth nâ—â— expresly we have received it from the Church to wit the conversion of the bread into the body of Christ Item Conversio non explicate habetur iâ— Evangelio The conversion of the bread is not to be found explicitly in the Gospel The Cardinall de Alliaco †Petr. de Alliaco in 4. Sent. q. 6. art 2. Patet quod ille modus est possibilis nec repugnat rationi nec authoritati Bibliae immo est sacilior ad intelligendum rationabilior quà m aliquis aliorum It appears that this manner which supposeth that
the substance of bread remaines still is possible neither is it contrary to reason nor to the authority of the Bible but is more easie to conceive and more reasonable And for this cause he is checked by Vasquez the Jesuite in the 3 Tome upon the 3 part of Thomas Disp 180. cap 5. And in that same place he saith that Durand followed the opinion of Scotus upon the 4. of the Sentences Disp 11. quest 2. Gabriel Biel in the 40 lesson upon the Canon of the Masse * Biel Lect. 40. Quomodo ibi sit Christi corpus an per conversionem aâ—icujus in ipsum an sine conversione incipiat esse corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantia accidentibus panis non invenitur expressumin canone Bibliae How the body of Christ is there whether it be by conversion of â—â—me thing into it or whether without converâ—ion Christs body beginnes to be there with the bread the substance and the accidents remaining it is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible And even there That hath beene proved by the authority of the Church and of the Saints for that cannot be proved by reason The same * Sed cur hunc intellectum difficilem Sancti dicere Ecclesia determinarre elegerunt cum scripturae possint exponi salvari secundum intellectum facilem de hoc articulo in the 41 lesson asketh Why the Saints and the Church have chosen to say and determine that that should be understood in so difficult a manner seeing the Scriptures may be expounded and kept in their soundnesse in a manner easie to be understood To this he answereth that the Church hath determined it so meaning by the Church not the Syrian nor the Greeke or Ethiopian but the Roman Church onely Salmeron the Jesuite in the thirteenth Treatise of the ninth Tome expounding these words This is my body speaketh thus b § Secunda Prosectò illis verbis nequaquam conversio significatur ex vi verborum Alià s qui diceret Hoc est corpus meum demonstrando suum corpus significaret conversionem alicujus rei in suum corpus Certainely these words doe not signifie that any conversion be made by the force of the words Otherwise he that should say this is my body in shewing his owne body would signifie that some thing is converted into his body And he insistes very much upon this that these words This is my body are declarative or significative of the thing which is and not effective of that which is not Wherefore the same Jesuite in thâ— same Treatise * Inno. 3. â—ib 4. de Myster Missa cap. 6. Sane dicâ— potesi quod Christus vâ—rtute divina confeâ—â—t poslâ—â— forma expressit c. Et cap. 17. Ab hajus quaestonis laqueo saeâ—le se absolvit qui dâ—cit quod Chrâ—stus tunc conscit cum hened câ—t joynes himselfe to thâ— opinion of Pope Innocent the third a who in the fourth booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapters 6. and 17 teacheth that Christ made not the conversion of the bread by these words Hâ—est corpus meum but by his divine power and by the blessing that had preceded For he will have the pronouncing of these words to have another vertue at this day in the mouthes of Priests than they had in the mouth of Christ Which opinion of Innocent the third is followed by Innocent the fourth his Successor and by multitudes of Doctors which Salmeron produceth * § Porio pag. 82. in the same Treatise It is credible that these Popes and Doctors were moved to teach that Christ did not consecrate by these words This is my body but by the prayer 〈◊〉 blessing he made before because the Fathers say the same and that such was the beleefe of the ancient Church Justin Martyr b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calleth that which wee receive in the Eucharist a foode consecrated by the prayer of the Word that is to say Christ Saint Austin in the third booke of the Trinity Chapter 4. speaking of that which we receive in the Sacrament saith that it is taken of the fruits of the earth prece mystica consecratum and is consecrated by the mysticall prayer | 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen in his eight booke against Celsus * We eate loaves of bread which by the prayer are made one bodie which is some holy thing Ireneus in his fourth Booke Chapter 34. * Qui est à terra panis percip â—is vocationem Deâ— jam non est panis communâ—s sed Eucharisiâ—a The bread receiving the invocation of God is no more common bread but Eucharist Basil in the first booke of the holy Ghost 27 Chapter calleth the words of consecration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words of invocation Isido us in the sixth booke of Origines in the Chapter de Officijâ— * Sâ—â—â—â—ficâ—ii diâ—tum quasi sacrii saâ—â—â—m quâ—â— ece mâ—sti a consecratur in meâ—â—â—â—â—â—m pro 〈◊〉 is domâ—nuae passion v. The Sacrifice is so called as if one should say a sacred deede because it is consecrated by the mysticall prayer in remembrance of the Passion which the Lord sâ—ffeced for us Yet at this day the Greek Churches consecrate by the prayer as Bellarmin acknowledgeth in the fourth Booke of the Eucharist Chapter * § Habemus 12. See the Canon Corpus in the second distinction of the consecration By this it is as cleare as the light that the Ancient Fathers did not beleeve that by these words This is my body any conversion of the bread was made CHAP. XV. Of the Adoration of the Sacrament The opinion of the Roman Church THe Roman Church having deified the Sacrament hath consequently obliged her selfe to worship it with the highest adoration which is due to God alone By this meanes a wafer of bread hath taken Gods place and is called God and is worshipped as God They speake of lifting up God in the Masse and of Gods feast viz Corpus Christâ— day and of carrying God to a sickâ— body Phrases that are not to bee found in the holy Scriptures and unheard off in the Ancient Christian Church The Councell of Trent in the thirteenth Session Chapter 5. speaketh thuâ— There remaines no doubt but that all faithfull Christian people ought to give the worship of Lâ—tria nullus dubu andi locus relinquitur quâ—n omnes Christi sideles latriae cultum qui vero Deo debetur huic sanctissimo Sacramento in veneratione adhibeant which is due to the true God to this holy Sacrament in the veneration Now by this word Sacrament they understand the body of Christ with the species or accidents For by this word Sacrament our Adversaries never understand Christ Jesus out of the species This Councell then ordaineth that the species of the bread and wine shall be worshiped with soveraigne adoration The practise doth verifie what I say For the people worshipping the consecrated hoste
had much paines to discover the falsity of many places and false Workes which are in so great number that if they were taken away the Fathers Workes would bee found diminished of a third part Those among our Adversaries that are well read in the Fathers acknowledge the same with us and passe condemnation in this point Reade Sixtus Senensis about the end of his fourth Booke and the Booke of Cardinall Bellarmin Of Ecclesiasticall Writers where he hath put the Catalogue of the Fathers Works There shall ye wonder to see the multitude of Bookes which he saith to be doubtfull or manifestly counterfeit Which causes men to doubt of the other Workes whose falsitie is not easilie found out For the discovering of these falsities we have beene helped by the Catalogue of the Workes of Ancient Writers which Photius Patriarch of Constantinople who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 878. hath put into his Librarie And by Gennadius a Priest of Marseilles that wrote a Booke of the Illustrious men about the yeare of our Lord 492. Item by the diversity of stile Item by certaine places of the Fathers which are alleadged by Ivo Gratian Burchardus Lombard Thomas and others quite otherwise than they bee found in the editions printed in this last age Item by other places of the same Fathers which say the contrary so that one and the same Father is oftentimes found to contrarie himselfe Even as the ninth Age was the Age wherein the Decretals of the ancient Bishops of Rome were forged under the name of one Isidorus Mercator which was falsely framed for the grounding of the Papall Monarchy which with might and maine was a building in that Age So the eleventh Age in which Berengarius Archdeacon of Angiers withstood and impugned stoutly and vigorously the opinion of the reall presence and Transubstantiation was the Age wherein were forged sundry works in the behalf of that error and divers clauses were chopt into the Books of the ancient Fathers Of this false coyne is the Book attributed to * Bellar. lib. de Script Eccles Sixtus Senensis sub sinem libriquart Cyprian of the Lords Supper which all the learned of the Roman Church acknowledge not to be of his making And the Cathecheses Mystagogicall of Cyril of Jerusalem The Catecheses of Gregory of Nysse are indeed his but horribly corrupted and full of errors which the Roman Church approves not There is mention made there of one Severus an Heretick who is posterior to this Gregory above 150. yeares Of these falsifications and divers others we have entreated more at large in the Book against Cardinal du Perron He that should take away from the works of Cyprian Ambrose Hierome Austin and Athanasius the counterfeit Books should diminish the writings of these Fathers more than of a third part Wherefore after so many falsities discovered when our adversaries object us some place of a Father we might very justly desire them to proveunto us that that place was not added or depraved by some falsifier aswell as so many others By all manner of reasons if in an writing brought in justice there be found but one falsification the whole instrument loseth all its force and is rejected There is another difficulty that deceiveth such men as are not wel seen in antiquity to wit that the words used in old time have now changed their signification In the Fathers are found these words of Pope of Sacrifice of Oblation of Purging fire of Indulgence of Station of Species of Monke of Penance but quite in another sense than these words are taken at this day Notwithstanding these difficulties and disadvantages whereby our adversaries strive to prevaile against us we refuse not for all that to buckle with theÌ„ For what falsifications soever were made in the Books of Ancient writers yet in them remaines still so many expresse and formall places against Transubstantiation that of the collection of them a man might make a great volume Wee have produced above 500 in the Book of the Novelty of Popery and Mr le Faucheur and Mr Aubertin have laboured lately and taken paines about this subject with a â—ost exact diligence and full of great learning Here wee will content our selves to produce some few places for a taste yet with this protestation that I do not alleadge the Fathers for to be a stay to our cause which is sufficiently propped and established upon the Word of God Goâ— doth not beg the testimonies of men Hâ—â— word is as strong alone as being aâ—companied with humane testimonâ— To goe about to defend it with thâ— testimonies of men subject to errouâ— is as if a man would lighten the Sunâ—â— with a Candle But wee doe alleadgâ— the Fathers for to defend their honour because that against their â—â—tent our Adversaries make them Advocates of a bad cause And for 〈◊〉 condescend and yeeld some thing to the disease of this froward age wherein the holy Scripture hath lost its power and efficacy and which armeth it selfe with human testimonies against the Word of God CHAP. XXVI Places of the Fathers contrary to Transubstantiation and to the manducation of the body of Christ by the corporall mouth TErtullian in his fourth Booke against Marcion chapter 40. disputing aâ—ainst the Marcionites that denyed Christ â—o have a true humane body speaketh â—hus a Acceptum panem distributum discipulis corpus suuÌ„ illum fecit dicendo Hoc est corpus meum id est figura corporis mei Figura autem non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus Christ when he had taken the bread â—nd distributed it to his disciples made it â—o be his body saying This is my body â—hat is to say the figure of my body But it were not a figure unlesse it were a true body His reason is because men represent not by figure the things that are not And in the third Booke chapter 19. b Panem suum corpus appellans ut bâ—â—c jam euâ— intelligâ—â— corporis sui figuram paâ—i dedisse Christ called the bread his body that thereby thou mightest understand that he gave to the bread to be the figure of his body Origen upon the fifteenth Chapter of Saint Matthew speaking of that which the Faithfull receive by the corporall mouth in the Eucharist * Quod si quicquid ingreditur in os in veâ—â—e abit in sâ—cessum â—jicitur ille cibus qui sanctificatur per verbit Dei perque obsecratâ—oneÌ„ juxta id quod habet materialein ventrem aâ—â—â— in secessuÌ„ emitâ—itur c. â—â—t haecquidem deâ—ypico symboluoqueâ—orpore If every thing that entereth into the mouth goes into the belly and is sent into the prity this food which is sanctified by the Word of God and by the Prayer as it is materiall gâ—â— into the belly and is sent into the privy And a little after And thus much be said touching the typicall and symbolicall body of Christ Vpon this place
corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant c. The Sacrament of Adoption to wit Baptisme may be called the Adoption even as we call the Sacrament of his body and blood which is in the bread and in the consecrated Cup his body and blood Not that to speake properly the bread is his body and the Cup his blood But because they containe in them the mystery of his body and blood This Book of Facundus drawn out of the Vatiean Library was published by Jacobus Sirmoudus a Jesuite who for this cause was suspected And I heare he hath been in trouble about it a Turrian li. 1. de Eucharist c. 18. §. Ad illud Vasq in 3. part Thomae Tomo 3. Dis 180. c. 9 pag. 107. Greg de Val. lib. de Trans c. 7. Sicut enim antequam sactificetur panis paneÌ„ nominamus divina auteÌ„ illum sanclificante gratia incdiante Sacerdote liberatus quideÌ„ est ab appellatione panis â—lignus habiâ—us est Dominici corporis appellatione etiamsi natura panis in co remansit Turrianus and Vasquez and Gregory of Valentia Jesuites object unto themselves a place of Chrysostome in his Epistle to Caesarius which Epistle also is in Biblioth Patr. Printed at Colen anno 1618 in the 8 Tome That place is such Afore the bread be sanctified we coll is bread But the divine grace sanctifying it by the meanes of the Priest it is freed indeed from the appellation of bread and is honored with the name of the body of the Lord though the nature of bread remaine in it These Iesuites answer that this place is not of John Chrysostome but of another John of Constantinople Which they say without proofe Yet it matters not for it sufficeth they acknowledge that place to bee of an ancient Author The 8 Books of Apostolicall Constitutions attributed to Clement the first Bishop of Rome are not of him Neverthelesse these Books are ancient and there is much good to be learned in them In the 5 Book chap. 16. it is said that b Cum verâ— anttypa mysteria pretiosi Corporis sanguinis sui nobis tradidisset Christ having given the figurative mysteries of his body and blood went to the mount of Olives And in the 7 Book chap. 26. c Etiam agimus gratias tibi Pater pro pretioso sanguine Iesu Christi qui effusuâ— est pro nobis et pro pretioso corpore cujus haec Antitypa perficimus We give thee thankes for the precious blood of Christ which was shed for us and for the precious body whereof we performe the signes by his command for to shew forth his death There would never be an end if wee should gather up all the places of the ancient Fathers wherein they say that that which we receive in the Eucharist is bread and that the bread and wine are Signes Symboles Figures and Antitypes of the body and blood of the Lord I will adde but two Canons of a Councell which are very formall The 24 Canon of the III Councell of Carthage is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let nothing be offered in the sacred service but the body and blood of the Lord as also the Lord hath ordained it that is to say nothing but bread and wine mingled with water The same Canon is found repeated in the very same words in the Councell of Trull in the Canon 32 aswell in the Greeck as in the Latin Copies Upon which Canon Baâ—samon maketh this Commentary The two and thirtieth Canon of the Councell of Trull hath ordained very at large a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the nonbloody Sacrifice was made with bread and wine mingled with water because that the bread is the figure of the body of the Lord and the wine the figure of his blood Here is then above two hundred Bishops gathered in a Councell that interpret these words the body and blood of Christ by the bread and wine mingled with water The same Councell in the 23 Canon ordaineth that when a man officiates at the Altar the Prayer must always be directed to the Father Whence appeareth manifestly that then they worshipped not the Sacrament seeing that the Councel forbiddeth when men assist at the Altar to addresse their Prayers to Christ If this hoste be Christ it must be worshipped and by consequent invocated And that it may appeare how lately this opinion of Transubstantiation was received in the Tome de Divinis officiis which is in Biblioth P atr we have an Epistle of that Great Emperor Carolus Magnus where he saith b Cum adaltare assistitur semper ad Patrem d rigatur oratio Christ supping with his Disciples brake bread and gave them likewise the Cup in figure of his body and blood This Epistle happily might bee written about the yeare of our Lord 800. Walefridus Strabo who wrote about the yeare 850 in his Book of Ecclesiasticall things chap. 16. c Christus coenando cii discipulis panem fregit calicem pariter cis dedit in figuram corporis sanguinis sui In coena quam ante traditioneÌ„ suaÌ„ ultimaÌ„ cum discipulis habu t post Paschae veteris solemnia corporis et saÌ„guinis sui SacrameÌ„ta in panis et vini substaeÌ„tia cisdeÌ„ discipulis suis tradidit et ea in coÌ„memorationeÌ„ sanctissimae suae passionis celebrare perdocuit The Lord at the last Supper he made with his Disciples afore he was betrayed after he had made an end of the solemnity of the ancient Passeover gave to his Disciples the sacred signes of his body and blood in the SVBSTANCE of the bread and wine and taught them to celebrate them in remembrance of his most holy Passion Rupertus Abbot of Deutsch neare Colen who lived in the yeare 1112. and whose works are yet extant hath condemned Transubstantiation and taught that the Substance of bread remaineth after the Consecration Here are his words upon the 12 chap. of Exodus d Rup Tuitiensis in Exo. 12. Sicut Christus humâ—na naturam nec mutavâ—â— nec destruâ—â—â— sed assumpsit ita in SacrameÌ„to nec destruit nec mutat substantiaÌ„ panis vini sed assumit in unitatem cororis et sanguinis sui Even as Christ neither changed nor destroyed the humane nature but joyned himselfe to it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe to it in the unity of his body and blood This place of Rupertus is alleadged by Salmeron in the 16 Treatise of the IX Tome § Ruit and Bellarmin in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers alleadgâ—s out of him many such like places and blameth him for it To so many places that say that the substance of the bread remaineth after the Consecration our Adversaries do reply that by the word of Substance the Fathers understand the Accidents As it is a great absurdity by the word of Accidents to understand the Substance So
said before It is the spirit that quickneth Then he addeth The flesh profiteth nothing to wit for to vivifie And there againe h Quia sermo caro câ—at factus proinde m causam vitae appetendus devorâ—ndâ—s audau et â—uminandus intellectu et fide digerendus The word was made flesh and by consequent for to have life it must be desired and devoured by the eare and ruminated by the understanding and disgested by faith And a little after The Lord had a little afore declared that his flesh is the heavenly bread i Vrgens usquequaque per allegoriaÌ„ necessarioruÌ„ pabuloruÌ„ memoriam PaetruÌ„ c. urging altogether by allegory taken from necessary meates the remembrance of the Fathers Clemens Alexandrinus in his second Booke De Pedagogo Chapter 6. k Hee said eate my flesh and drinke my blood propoundiog by an allegoric the evidence of the faith and the drinke of the promise And a little after l Si secundum literam sequeris hoc ipsâ—ra quod â—â—â—â—um est Nisi manducaveritis carnem meam et biberitis sangutaâ—â—â—â—um hoec litera occid t. Hee calleth the holy Spirit flesh by aâ—â—egory For the flesh was created by him and the blood signifies the Word Origene upon the Leviticus in the seventh Booke n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Know that these things writen in the divine volumes are figures and understand them as spirituall and not as carnall For if you receive them as carnall they hurt you in stead of nourrishing you For in the Gospells there is a letter which killeth him that observes not the things that are spoken spiritually m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if thou takest according to the letter that which is said Except ye eate my flesh and drinke my blood that letter killeth The Commentary upon the Psalmes attributed to Saint Hierome upon the 44 Psalme n Quando dicâ—t Qui non manducaverit carnem meam et biberit sanguinem me um licet in mysterâ—o possit intel ligi tamen veriùs corpus Christi et sanguis ejus sermo Scripturarum est When the Lord saith He that eateth not my flesh c. though that may be understood in mysterie yet to speake more truely the body and blood of Christ is the word of the Scriptures and the heavenly doctrine And a little after o Corpus et sanguis ejus in auribus nostris fund tur The flesh and blood of Christ is powred into our eares It is true that some places may bee found in ancient Fathers that apply and fit the words of the sixth Chapter of Saint John to the Eucharist because the manducation of the Sacrament serves to helpe the spirituall manducation and there is some analogie betweene these two Adde moreover that we have proved already by a multitude of places of Ancient Fathers that when they say that in the Eucharist wee eate the flesh or the body of Christ they meane to speake of another flesh and another bodie than that which was crucified for us which is called Christs bodie because of the mysticall union of the bread with Christ and because the signes take the name of the things signified Vpon this the words of Pope Pius the second are notable in his 130 Epistle p Sed nec â—overi debetis quod nonnulli Doctores de communione Sacramentali loquentes ill amque populo suadentes Iohannis verba recipiunt Neque enim propterca illius loci vel talis verns est es proprius intellectus sed ex quadam similitudiâ—e consonantique ratione trahitur inde magis sensus quà m ducitur c. Yee must not wonder saith he if some Doctors speaking of the Sacramentall communion and counselling it unto the People doe imploy Saint John his words For it doth not follow from thence that it bee the true and proper sense of that place but by some resemblance and agreeable reason this sense is rather drawne than led And it is lawfull for the Doctors speaking after the manner of Orators to use sometimes figures and translations so that often times speaking of the signe they passe vnto the thing signified CHAP. VII Impiety of Salmeron the Jesuite and of Peter Charron And of Bellarmins foure men inclosed in one sute of clothes That by this doctrine Christ hath not a true body in the Sacrament Superstition and Atheisme are verie neere neighbours and the one leadeth unto the other For frantick superstition intangles the minde with extravagant conceits that expose Religion to laughter and make men to thinke that Religion is a shop of fables and a meere imagination Whence it comes to passe that those that take upon them to defend Superstition let goe very often certaine words of impietie whereby they profane the mysteries and scoffe at their owne Religion under colour of defending it Salmeron the Jesuite and Doctor Charron gives us an example thereof This Jesuite in the IX Tome and 26 Treatise for to represent the manner and the end for which Christ gives us his flesh to eate Sub finem Tractatus saith that Christ hath done as men doe who for to kindle and inflame a woman with love doe give her an amorous potion or morsell and that just so Christ in the Eucharist gives to his Church Panis bucellam sanctè benedictam incantatam a morsell of bread holily blessed and INCHANTED for to transport her with his love Charron hath followed him but with an addition that declares what are the ingredients of those philters or amorous potions to wit that there enters in them something of the substance of the Lover which substance is a thing not fit to be named In his eighth Discourse of the Eucharist after hee hath said that God comes downe in the forme of bread and wine and that to dance for to serue God is lesse strange then what is done in the Masse a little after he declares how Christ communitates himselfe unto men in the Eucharist to wit that he allures and intices them with a dainty and delicious bit Love saith he is so ingenious and inventive that for to win and allure the heart and will of others it hath found out a device to imploy inchanted morsels philters and amorous potious and to make them to be taken and drunke by those of whom one desires to bee loved in which morsells or potions enters some thing of the Lover or Suitor Thus it seemes that God for to draw and allure unto himselfe the heart and love of the Church would present a bit or potion made of his substance in this Sacrament the philter and amorous drinke of all Christians the dainty and delicious bit for to draw and allure them unto himselfe Doubtlesse this man jeasted and intended to make the world laugh for he could not expect that men should beleeve him I know not whither Bellarmin did mock or jeast Bellar. lib. 3. de Euchar cap 7 〈◊〉 ad tertiuÌ„ Potest
far as to be able to make God with words and to have Christ in their own power This abuse beginning to creepe in France King Charles the Bald about the yeere 870 made a commandement unto one Bertram a Priest and as learned a man as these times did affoord to compose and write a Book of this matter which Book we have yet whole and â—xtant at this day wherein hee maintaines the true doctrine and withstands stoutly and vigourously that opinion of the reall presence of the body of Christ under the species of the bread For of Transubstantiation there was yet no speech of it For which cause also Bellarmin in his first Book of tee Sacrament of the Eucharist first chap. puts this Bertram amongst the Hereticks Who not withstanding in his time lived with honor and was neither troubled nor received any rebuke or reprehension upon this subject Of the same opinion were Iohn Scotus and Drutmarus and others of the same time And I make no doubt but many others with them have defended the same cause in writing But the following ages in which error prevailed have abolished their writings and it is marvel how this Book of Bertram could escape thus The tenth and eleventh Ages are the Ages wherein this error did strengthen it selfe most in which neverthelesse God left not himselfe without testimony For Bruno Bishop of Angiers and after him but more vigorously Berengarius his Arch-Deacon taught and maintained openly that the bread and wine of the Eucharist were not the body of Christ but the figure and remembrance of it * Sigebert ad annum 1051. This Berangarius began to shew himselfe about the yeare of our Lord 1050. Against whom Pope Victorius 2. caused a Councel to be gathered at Tours about the yeare 1055 and foure yeeres after Nicholas II. cited him to Rome to the Councel assembled for that effect where Berengarius was forced to condemn his own doctrine submit himself to the Popes wil. By the reading of that Councel it appeares that â—here were in it many others of the same opinion of Berengarius And Leo * Leo Hostiensis Chrâ— Cassinensi li. 3. c. 35. E que cum nullus valeret resistere Alberiâ—us â—deÌ„ evoâ—ntur Hostiensis recordeth that none of those that were there present could resist Berengarius The forme of the abjuration prescribed unto him is to be found in the Collections of the Decrees made by Ivo Carnutensis and by Gratian which forme is set down in absurde tearmes and which the Church of Rome her selfe beleeves not For they make him say a Can. Ego Berengar Dist 2. de consecr that the bread is the true body of Christ and that Christs body is truely and sensibly handled and bruised by the teeth of the Faithfull But Berengarius being rid out of the hands of that Councell and returned back into France protested against the violence offered unto him and continued to teach the same doctrine till the yeere 1088. in which he died Upon his tombe Hildebertus * Hild. Epitaphio Berengar apud Malmesburiensem Quem modo miratur semper mirabilâ—ter orbis Ilâ—e Berengarius non obiturus obit Quem sacrae fidei fastigia summa tenentem c. Vide Baron ad ann 1088. § 21. who after was Bishop of Mans made an honorable Epitaphe wherein he tearmes him the Prop and Support of the Church the hope and the glory of the Clergy And France Germany Italy and England were full of people that embraced his doctrine as William Malmesbury testifies in the 3. Book of his English Historie All France saith hee was full of his doctrine And Matthew of Westminstâ—r in the year 1087 * Eodem tempore Berengarius Turonensis in haereticam lapsus pravitatem omnes Gallos Italos Anglos suis jam pene corruperat pravitatibus Berengarius of Tours being fallen into heresie had corrupted by his depravations almost all the French Italians and English Platina in the life of John XV. speaks thus of Berengarius It is certain that Odius Bishop of Clugni and Berengarius of Tours men famous and renowned for doctrine and holinesse were in great esteeme in that time Adde to this that Berengarius distributed all his meanes to the poore and betooke himselfe to get his living with the labour of his hands * Guit alias Berengarius istevir bonus plenes eleemosynis et humilitate magnorum possessioneÌ„ qui omnia â—â—usiâ—spauperum â—dispersit c. Antoninus Arch-Bishop of Florence whom the Pope hath canonized and made a Saint gives him this testimony in the 2 Tome of his Chronicles Tit. 16 § 20. This Berengarius was otherwise a good man full of Almes deeds and humility and having great possessions and riches which hee distributed to the poore and would have no woman to come before his eyes About the latter end of Berengarius his life lived Gregory the seventh who entred into the Papacy in the yeare of our Lord 1073. called Hildebrand before he was Pope This Gregory was suspected to incline to Berengarius his opinion Sigonius in his 9 Book of the reigne of Italy in the yeare 1080 recordeth that the Bishops of Germany assembled at Brixina in Bavaria did call this Gregory Vâ—terem haeretici Berengariâ— discipulum an old disciple of Berengarius the heretick accusing him of calling into question the Apostolicall Faith touching the body and blood of the Lord. And this agrees with Cardinall Benno Arch-Priest of the Cardinals who was very inward and familiar with the said Gregory and who wrote his life wherein hee saith that Gregory appointed a fast to three Cardinals to the end God might shew whither of the two to wit Berengarius of the Church of Rome had the rightest opinion And there he relates that John Bishop of Port in a Sermon at S. Peters Church did declare in presence both of Clergy and People that Gregory for to obtaine some divine answer had in the presence of the Cardinals cast the holy Sacrament into the fire Berengarius being dead he had many successors that maintained the same doctrine even to the time of Petruâ— de Valdo of the City of Lions whose disciples were named by their enemies Valdenses and Albigenses Of whose Religion and Confession of Faith conformable to ours Fasciculus rerum expetâ—ndaruÌ„ fol. 95. Indocus Câ—â—cius Tom. H. lib. 6. de Euchar fol. 602. hath been spoken before in the 21 chapter of the first Book and shewed that their Churches remaine even unto our times Furthermore John Wicklâ—f in England in the yeere 1390. taught the same Of whose doctrine contained in eighteen Articles here is the first That the substance of the bread remaines after the Consecration and ceases not to bee bread Against the Faithfull that professed this doctrine the Pope stirred up Kings and Princes and caused an incredible butchery to bee made of them preaching the Croisadoe against them whereby hee gave the same spirituall graces unto those that should