woman shall breake the Serpents head Is not the latter part of the Article altogether Figurative yet signifying this Doctrinall point even the vanquishing of the power of Satan Your Fourth Romish Obiection SECT IV. THe Apostles saith your Cardinall were rude and simple Therefore needed to be Instructed by Christ in plaine tearmes without Figures So he CHALLENGE ANd yet Christ you know did often speake Figuratively unto them talking of Bread Leaven Seed c. And stiling them the Salt of the earth yea even in this Sacrament as hath beene confessed in the words Eate Shed Testament Another Iesuite witnesseth that The Apostles were illuminated and instructed by Christ that they might receive this Sacrament with all Reverence So he Therefore are they but rudely by you tearmed Rude and the rather because They who being commanded to prepare the Passeover perceived that by Passeover was figuratively vnderstood the Paschall Lambe and thereupon prepared the Passeover according to the Lord's Command could not be ignorant that in this like Sacramentall speech This is my body the Pronoune THIS did literally point out bread and figuratively signifie Christ's bodie Doubtlesse if the manner of Christ's speech in the Eucharist had not beene like the other in the Passeover they would have desired Christ to explaine his meaning as they did sollicitously in other doubts Their last Romish Obiection SECT V. VVE are never to let passe the Literall Sence saith your Cardinall except we be compelled thereunto by some Scripture or by some Article of Faith or by some common Interpretation of the whole Church So he CHALLENGE SVrely nor we without some one of these but that you may know the grounds of our perswasion to be more than one or yet all These And how bountifully we shall deale with you we shall shew in the Proposition following Ten Reasons for proofe of the Necessity of interpreting the wordâ— of Christ Figuratively SECT VI. FIrst We have beene compellable to allow a Figurative Sence by the consessed Analogie of Scripture in all such Sacramentall Speeches of both Testaments concerning Circumcision Rocke Baptisme as also that speech of Christ Ioh. 6. Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man as you have heard Secondly We are Challengable hereunto by our Article of Faith which teacheth but one naturall Body of Christ and the same to Remayne now in Heaven Thirdly We are inforced for feare of such Heresies as have followed in other Cases upon the literall sence for it was not the Figurative but the literall and proper sence of being borne againe by Baptisme lob 3. that begat the errour of Nicodemus and the like literall sence of God's Eyes Hands Feet c. brought forth the Anthropomorphites And so was it the literall sence of those words in the Canticles Tell me where thou lyest at noone which deluded the Donatists and of Origen you have heard that hee by the literall sense of these wordes Some there be that castrate themselves c. did fondly wrong himselfe Fourthly Wee are necessarily mooved to reject your literall sence by a confessed Impossibility taught by that Vniversall Maxime Disparatum de disparato c. shewing that Bread being of a different nature from flesh can no more possibly be called the flesh or Body of Christ literally than Lead can be called Wood. Fiftly We are perswaded hereunto by the former alleadged Interpretation of the Ancient Fathers both of the Greeke and Latine Church calling the Sacrament a Figure and expounding This is by This signifieth Sixtly Wee are urged by the Rule set downe by Saint Augustine for the direction of the whole Catholique Church that Whensoever the precept saith he seemeth to command that which is hainous as to eate the flesh of Christ it is figurative And of this Sacrament doth not Christ say Take Eate This is my body Seventhly A Motive it must needs be to any reasonable man to defend the figurative sence by observing the misery of your Disputers in contending for a literall Exposition thereof because their Objections have beene confuted by your owne Doctors and by Truth it selfe even the holy Scriptures Eightly your owne Vnreasonablenesse may perswade somewhat who have not beene able hitherto to confirme any one of your five former Obiections to the contrary by any one Father of the Church Ninthly For that the literall Interpretation of Christ's wordes was the foundation of the Heresie of the Capernaites and hath affinitie with divers other Ancient Heresies condemned by Antiquitie Tenthly Our last perswasion is the consent of Antiquity against the literall conversion of Bread into Christ's body which you call Transubstantiation against the Literall Corporall Presence against Literall Corporall Eating and Vnion and against a proper Sacrifice of Christ's body Subiectively All which are fully perswasive Inducements to inforce a figurative sence as the sundry Bookes following will cleerely demonstrate from point to point CHALLENGE YOu may not passe over the consideration of these points by calling them Schoole-subtilties and Logicall Differences as Master Fisher lately hath done thinking by this his slie Sophistrie craftily to draw the mindes of Romish Professors from the due discovery of your Romish false literall Exposition of Christ's words THIS IS MY BODY the very foundation of your manifold monstrously-erroneous Superstitious Hereticall and Idolatrous Consequences issuing from thence whereunto we now orderly proceed THE THIRD BOOKE Treating of the First Romish Doctrinall Consequence pretended to arise from your former depraved Exposition of Christ's wordes This is my Body called TRANSVBSTANTIATION Your Doctrinal Romish Consequences are Five viz. the Corporall 1. Conversion of the Bread into the Body of Christ called Transubstantiation in this Third Booke 2. Existence of the same Body of Christ in the Sacrament called Reall Presence in the Fourth Booke 3. Receiving of the Body of Christ into the Bodies of the Communicants called Reall or Materiall Coniunction in the Fifth Booke 4. Sacrificing of Christ's Body by the hands of the Priest called a Propitiatory Sacrifice in the Sixth Booke 5. Worshipping with Divine Worship called Latria or Divine Adoration of the same Sacrament in the Seventh Booke 6. The Additionals in a Summary Discovery of of the Abhominations of the Romish Masse and Iniquities of the Defenders thereof in the Eight Booke THese are the Doctrinall Consequences which you teach and professe and which we shall by God's assistance pursue according to our former Method of Brevity and Perspicuity and that by as good and undenyable Evidences and Confessions of your owne Authours in most points as either you can expect or the Cause it selfe require And because a Thing must have a Begetting before it have a manner of Being therefore before we treate of the Corporall Presence we must in the first place handle your Transubstantiation which is the manner as wee may so say of the Procreation thereof CHAP. I. The State of the Controuersie concerning the Change and Conversion professed
unbloody Service or Worship In the first place three Liturgies or if you will Masses are objected to prove that by unbloody Sacrifice and Reasonable and unbloody worship is betokened the Sacrifice of Christ's body and blood in the Masse one of Basil another of Chrysostome and by some others the Masse of Saint Iames of Ierusalem In which Epithet of Vnbloody say we could not be signified Christ's body Our reasons because as the Margent sheweth the word Vnbloody hath sometime Relation unto the Bread and Wine both unbloody before Consecration called in Saint Iames his Liturgy Gods gifts of the first fruit of the ground who also reckoneth Hymnes among unbloody Sacrifices But Christ's Body is the fruit of the wombe or else sometime is it referred to the Acts of Celebration in Supplication Thanksgiving and Worship of God all unbloody naming that Areasonable and unbloody Service which they had termed an unbloody Sacrifice as Lindan your Parisian Doctor hath truly observed Which Chrysostome also stiled Spirituall marke you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Service or Worship Was ever Christ called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is himselfe rather the person to be worshipped Secondly Reasonable could this point out Christ's Body in the sence of the objected Fathers suffer Chrysostome to resolve us Reasonable Service saith he is that which is performed with the minde without Bodily helpe Thirdly The vnbloody Sacrifice is called Spirituall as you heare how shall this be properly applyed to the Body of Christ You will say not in it's naturall Essence but in the manner of being Invisible Impalpable and the like But we demand the same head of a mans Body is it more Spirituall in the darke than in the light Lastly all these termes in these Liturgies of Vnbloody Sacrifice Reasonable Service and Spirituall are spoken before Consecration when the Body of Christ even in your owne Faith as yet can have no being in the Eucharist and therefore cannot be the Vnbloody Sacrifice here meant by you Will you have the full substance of all these Reasons The word Vnbloody whether it point out Bread and Wine or the Act of outward worship in this celebration called a Reasonable Service and Spirituall Sacrifice it must betoken a thing void of Blood which no Christian Professor dare attribute to the Body of Christ We proceed Eusebius saith indeed We offer an unbloody Sacrifice but what he meant thereby he doth not expresse whether the Signes of Bread Wine which he elsewhere with others as you have heard called Sacrifices or whether as Basil and Chrysostome have done he understood together the publike Service in celebrating the Memory of Christ's Death This then concludeth not for an Existence of the Body of Christ as of the Vnbloody Subject herein But whereas furthermore you may observe that Eusebius objected calleth Godly Actions a pure Sacrifice and opposeth this against Bloody Sacrifices and also termeth Holy Prayers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is without Materiall Substance as he did the Celebration of the Sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Vnbloody These shew that Eusebius meant a Sacrifice void of Blood which neither the word of God will permit us nor your Councell of Trent will suffer you to impute to the Body of Christ and therefore must needs wound your Roman Oblation of Body and Blood to the very heart Nazianzene objected is as directly opposite to your Masse as East is to West and will strike the matter dead calling it The unbloody Sacrifice whereby saith he we communicate with Christ Flatly differencing the unbloody Sacrifice whereby from Christ himselfe with whom the Faithfull doe communicate in this Sacrament Ambrose objected prayeth to God To accept of this immaculate and unbloody Hoast which are the very words of your Roman Masse and which your Cardinall seeketh to justifie by S. Ambrose But this he cannot doe except their meaning be both the same Let then your Cardinall but tell us the meaning of the Canon of your Masse and you will soone apprehend the Iudgement of Saint Ambrose In our Masse saith your Cardinall it is said Receive holy Father this immaculate Hoast where the Pronoune This saith he doth demo astrate Bread and Wine because spoken before Consecration So he And the Body and Blood of Christ you know are not Bread and Wine Let Athanasius put Perâ—od to this Section who saith that Melchizedech in giving â—read and Wine was the first Type of an unbloody Sacrifice But Melchizedech's was Vnbloody negatively having no Blood at all in it So was never the Body of Christ since his Resurrection according to our Christian Beleefe CHALLENGE WHat a faire peece of service doe you thinke have these Objecters done for the patronizing of your Romane Sacrifice out of the Sentences of Ancient Fathers whilest they alleaging their words citing their Bookes and quoting their Chapters have so handled the matter as if they had meant by prevaricating in their owne Cause to betray it seeing that it is apparant that they have delivered unto us the worship in stead of the thing worshipped out of the Councell of Ephesus Basil Chrysostome and Eusebius Next by the word Vnbloody being spoken before Consecration and therefore concerneth not the Vnbloody Body of Christ they have obtruded the thing Distinguished from Christ instead of Christ in the Testimony of Nazianzene But especiaily because in the most of the Sentences the word Vnbloody must needs be taken negatively for want or absence of of Blood and so you may bid your Corporall Presence adiâ—u All which may be strong Arguments unto us both of the deplorable Consciences of your Doctors and of the desperatenesse of your Cause Other Testimonies wherein there is mention of Christ's Body and Blood come now to be discussed A Confirmation of the former Demonstration from the use of the word Vnbloody in the objected Sentences wherein the Fathers make mention of the Body and Blood of Christ SECT X. THis Objection seemeth to be of better moment than the former but only seemeth Clemens Bishop of Rome the first of that name calleth indeed the Eucharisticall Celebration 〈◊〉 unbloody Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ In which sentence the Vnbloody Sacrifice is plainly distinguished from the Body and Blood whereof it is a Sacrifice even as both the Act and Service of Commemoration have beene oftentimes above and are hereafter called of the Fathers a Sacrifice in respect of the Object thereof which is the Body and Blood of Christ on the Crosse This is manifest by two especiall Reasons the first because that which he calleth Vnbloody he termeth also a Reasonable Service Secondly Clemens calleth the same Vnbloody Sacrifice the Signe and Type of Christ's Body and Blood thereby distinguishing them from that Body and Blood whereof they are but Types You will then aske what is this Body and Blood whereof they are said to be Types Yea marry
Perplexity in the Romish worship Book 7. Chap. 9. Sect. 3. Propitiatory Sacrifice distinguished B. 6. Ch. 8. Sect. 1. Objectively Chap. 9. Sect. 2. The Romish Propitiatory void of Propitiatory qualities Booke 6. Chap. 10. Sect. 1 c. Protestants professe an Vnion with Christ more than figurative B. 5. Ch. 2. They professe a Sacrifice both Encharisticall and Latreuticall B. 6. Ch. 7. Sect. 1 c. And offer Christ's Propitiatory Sacrifice objectively Ib. Sect. 4. Slandered as celebrating Bare Bread Book 4. Ch. 1. Sect. 3. In the celebration of the Eucharist they use due Reverence and are free from all Perplexities wherewith the Romish are intangled in their worship Booke 7. Ch. 9. Sect. 3. See Vnion Q. QVantity and Quality differ extremely in respect of their being in place or space Booke 4. Chap. 6. Sect. 6. R. REservation of the Eucharist to other ends than eating is an Innovation Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 10. Reverence of this Sacrament falsly pretended for an Alteration of Christ's Institution Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 10. Reverence professed by Protestants B. 7. Ch. 9. What are the properties of due Reverence Ibid. See Adoration and Idolatry S. SAcrifice not properly so called in the now Testament Book 6. Chap. 1. and so thorowout the Book 6. Not proved by Christ's Institution or any Scripture whether Typicall or Propheticall Chap. 3 c. Commemorative only not proper Ch. 5 c. The Romish Masse is destitute of all Sacrificing Acts Chap. 6. Sect. 1. Sacrifice how professed by Protestants Ch. 7. Sect. 1. Sacrilegiousnesse of the Romish Masse in a Synopsis Booke 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 2. Scriptures their Exposition impudently appropriated to the Romish Church Booke 8. Ch. 2. Sect. 8. Shed in Christ's Institution taken unproperly without effusion of Blood B. 6. Ch. 1. Sect. 4. Of the Present Tense B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 4. Similitude of making a Circle is but a juggling Invention for proofe of Transubstantiation or the literall sence of Christ's words B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 2. Another of a Stage-play for proofe of a proper Sacrifice â—idioulously objected B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Chall 2. B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 7. Ch. 5. Sect. 12. Slander of Iewes Pagans against Christians as eating a Childe foolishly objected for proofe of a Corporall eating of Christ's flesh B. 5. Chap. 9. Sect. 1. Against Protestants as denying God's omnipotency B. 4. Ch. 3. Sect. 1 4. And as if they held but bare bread in the Sacrament Booke 4. Chap. 1. Sect. 3. Soule fondly objected for proofe of a possibility of a Bodies existence in many places at once Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 2. A great difference betweene Body and Soule B. 4. Ch. 7. Sect. 7. Stage-play See Similitude Superstitiousnesse of the Romish Masse in a Synopsis Book 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. T. TOngue unknowen unlawfull in Gods Service Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. Translation called the Vulgar Latine rejected by the Romish Disputers notwithstanding their Oath to the contrary Booke 8. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. Booke 〈◊〉 Chap. 1. Sect. 2. And yet objected B. 6. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. Transubstantiation not proved by Christ's words This is my Body Booke 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 1. Novelty of the word and Article Ibid. Bread remaineth Sect. 4 c. As well foure Transubstantiations evinced out of the same Testimonies of Fathers whereby the Romish Disputers seeke to prove one B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 3. Types and Antitypes how applyed to the Eucharist by the Fathers B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. V. VIaticum spoken of by the Fathers objected idly B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 3. Vnbloody Sacrifice so termed of the Fathers to signifie void of blood as in the Sacrifice of Melchizedech B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 9. which they also call a Bloody Sacrifice Ibid. Ch. 5. Sect. 11. Vnion of Christ's body with the bodies of the Communicants by this Sacrament is spirituall B. 5. Ch. 1 2. The wicked are not united and yet guilty of Christ's blood Chap. 3. Corporall Vnion how understood by the Fathers B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 5 c. See Capernaites Voice objected seelily for proofe of a possibility of a Body to be indivers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 1. Vulgar Translation See Translation II. Index of the Generall Consent of ancient Fathers in points controverted thorow-out the eight former Bookes BOOKE I. ANtiquity in generall against the Romish forme of Consecration Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Against their Not Breaking of Bread in the distributing thereof Sect. 4. Against Private Masse Sect. 5. Against uttering the words of Consecration in a low voice Sect. 6. Against an Vnknowen tongue in the publike service of God Sect. 7. Against the presence of Persons not Communicating Chap. 2. Sect. 9. Against Reservation of the Eucharist for Procession or other like ends Sect. 10. Against Communicating but in one kinde Chap. 3. Sect. 5. The Objections out of the Fathers in this point answered Ibid. The Father 's many Reasons for the common use of the Cup. Sect. 9. BOOKE II. ANtiquitie agreeing in the Exposition of the words of Christ This is my Body by referring Hoc This to Bread Chap. 1. Sect. 6. And in yeelding unto them a Figurative Sence Chap. 2. Sect. 6 c. BOOKE III. ANtiquity never mentioning the word Transubstantiation Chap. 2. Sect. 2. Expounding these words Fruit of the Vine to meane Wine after Consecration Chap. 3. Sect. 5. Acknowledging the verity of Sence Sect. 9. And Bread remaining after Consecration Sect. 11. Never speakes of Accidents without Substance Sect. 11. Chap. 3. Sect. 14. Nor of any Miraculous Conversion of the Sacrament putrified into Bread againe Ibid. Romish Art in deluding the Testimonies of Antiquity Ibid. Antiquity objected and answered Chap. 4. thorow-out BOOKE IV. ANtiquity against the Possibility of the Being of a Body in moe places than one at once Chap. 6. Sect. 6 c. or yet Angels Chap. 5. Sect. 3. For the manner of the birth of Christ in opening the wombe Chap. 7. Sect. 7. BOOKE V. ANtiquity agreeing that only the Godly are partakers of Christ's body and blood Chap. 2. Sect. 2. In expounding the words The flesh profiteth nothing spiritually Chap. 5. Sect. 2. The Fathers Hyperbole's necessarily to be observed Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Objected for mens being nourished with Christ's flesh unconscionably Chap. 8. Sect. 1. As also for Mixture with mens Bodies Chap. 8. Sect. 3. whereby they must as well provâ— foure Transubstantiations as one 〈◊〉 Agreeing that Noneâ—… Christ in whâ—m Christ doth â—ot remaine Ibid. How they are to be understood concerning Corporall Vnion Ch. 8. Sect. 4 c. See Liturgies BOOKE VI. ANtiquity unconscionably objected for proofe of a Proper Sacrifice from the Sacrifice of Melchizedeâ—h Ch. 3. Sect. 2. And in the Exposition of Malachy Ch. 4. Sect. 2 c. Agreeth for Christ's Priestly Function in heaven Chap. 3. Sect. 8. Explane themselves to signifie a Sacrifice unproperly Chap. 4. Sect. 5
not but as the first hath verified the Title of that Booke to prove your Doctrine of the Necessity of salvation in your Romish Church to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE So this second which I now according to my promise present vnto you will make good by many Demonstrations that your Romish MASSE is a very Masse or rather a Gulfe of many Superstitious Sacrilegious and Idolatrous Positions and Practises And because the very name of Romane Church is commonly used as in it selfe a powerfull enchantment to stupifie every Romish Disciple and to strike him deafe and dumbe at once that he may may neither heare nor utter any thing in Conference concerning the Masse or any other Controversie in Religion be the Protestants Defence never so Divine for trueth or ancient for time or universall for Consent or necessary for beleefe I therefore held it requisite in the first place to discover the falshood of the former Article of your Church before I would publish the Abominations of the Masse to the end that for Idolatrie in Scripture is often termed spirituall Adulterie the Romish Church which playeth the Bawd in patronizing Idolatry being once outted your Romish Masse as the Strumpet might the more easily either be reformed or wholly abandoned This may satisfie you for the necessity of this Tractate The next must be to set before you your owne delusorie tricks in answering or not answering Bookes written against you especially such as have beene observed from mine owne experience One is to stangle a Booke in the very birth so dealt Mr. Breereley long since by a letter writ unto mee to prevent the publishing of my Answere against the first Edition of his Apologie when he sent me a second Edition thereof to be answered which both might and ought to have beene sent a twelve-month sooner but was purposely reserved to be delivered not untill the very day after my Answere called and Appeale was published Of which his prevention I have therefore complained as of a most unconscionable Circumvention Another device you have to give out that the Booke whatsoever written against your Romish Tenents is in answering and that an Answere will come out shortly So dealt Mr. Parsons with me Certifying me and all his credulous Readers of an Epistle which hee had received from a Scottish Doctor censuring my Latine Apologies to be both fond and false and promising that his Answere to them Printed at Gratz in Austria should be published before the Michaelmas following whereas there have beene above twenty Michaelmasses sithence every one giving Mr. Parsons his promise the flatt lie A third Art is a voluntarie Concealement and thus Maister Brereley who hauing had knowledge of the fore-mentioned Booke of Appeale manifesting his manifold Aberrations and Absurdities in doctrine his ignorances and fraudes in the abuse of his Authors as in other passages through-out that booke so more especially the parts concerning the Romish Masse yet since hath written a large Booke in defence of the Romish Liturgy or Masse vrging all the same proofes and Authorities of Fathers but wisely concealing that they had beene confuted and his fashoods discouered Only he and Master Fisher singling out of my Appeale an explanation which I gaue of the testimonie of Gelasius in condemning the Manichees concerning their opinion of not administring the Eucharist in both kindes did both of them divulge it in their Bookes and reports also in many parts of this kingdome as making for the iustification of their sacrilegious dismembring the holy Sacrament and fora foule Contradiction vnto my selfe notwithstanding that this their scurrilous iusultation as is here proued serueth for nothing rather than to make themselues ridiculous The last but most base and deuellish Gullerie is a false imputation of Falshoods in the alleaging of Authors which was the fine sleight of Master Parsons a man as subtileâ— for inuention as elegant for expression for obseruation as dextrous and acute and as politike and perswasiue for application as any of his time He in an answere to some Treatises written against your Romish blacke art of Aequiuocation by mentall Reseruation and other Positions fomenting Rebellion to wit in his bookes of Mitigation and Sober Reckoning doth commonly leaue the principall Obiections Reasons and falleth to his verball skirmishes concerning false Allegations and as turning that Ironicall counsaile into earnest Audacter fortiter calumniare c. he chargeth mee with no lesse than fiftie Falsifications All which I spunged out in a Booke entituled an Encounter and retorted all the same Imputations of falshood upon himselfe with the interest of above forty more Which may seeme to verifie that Cognizance which your owne Brother-hood of Romish Priests in their Quodlibets have fastened on his sleeue calling him The Quintessence of Coggerie As for mine owne integritie I have that which may iustifie mee for howsoever any one or other Error may happen in mis-alleaging any one Author yet that I have not erred much or if at all yet never against my Conscience Heereof I have many witnesses One within me a witnesse most Domesticall yet least partiall and as good as Thousands mine owne Conscience a second is above me God who is Greater than the Conscience A third sort of Witnesses are such as stand by mee even all they who have beene conversant with mee in the perusall and examination of Authors Testimonies by mee alleaged men of singular learning and iudgement who can testifie how much they endeared them-selves vnto mee when any of them happened to shew mee the least errour in any thing Hee that shall say Non possum errare must be no man and hee that will not say Nolo errare as hating to erre can be no Christian man The last witnesse for my integritie may be the Bookes of my greatest Adversaries Mr. Parsons and Mr. Brereley whose many scores of falshoods have beene laid so open and published for above sixteene yeares past in two Bookes one called an Encounter against the fore-man the other an Appeale against the second yet hath not any one appeared out of your Romish Seminaries for the vindicating of them heerein By these Advertisements you may easily conceive with what confidence I may proceede in this worke wherein is displayed and layd open in the discussing of these Eight Words of Christ his Institution of the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist HEE BLESSED BRAKE GAVE TO THEM SAYING TAKE EATE DRINKE your Ten Romish Prevarications and Transgressions Afterwards in the following Bookes are reveiled the stupendious Paradoxes Sacrilegiousnes and Idolatrie of your MASSE together with the notorious Obstinacies some fewe Overtures of Periuries out of that great Summe which may afterwards be manifested in your swearing to the other Articles of your new Romane Faith and the manifold Heresies in the Defenders thereof as also their indirect and sinister Obiecting and Answering of the Testimonies of ancient Fathers thorow-out as if they contended neither from Conscience nor for Conscience-sake
To Conclude Whosoever among you hath beene fascinated according to your Colliers Catechisme with that only Article of an Implicite Faith let him be admonished to submit to that Duety prescribed by the Spirit of God to Trie all things and to Hold that which is good And if any have a purpose to Reioyne in Confutation either of the Booke of the Romish Imposture or of this which is against your Masse I doe adiure him in the name of Christ whose trueth wee seeke that avoyding all deceitfull Collusions he proceed materially from Point to point and labour such an Answer which hee beleeveth he may answer for before the iudgement seate of Christ Our Lord Iesus preserve us to the glory of his saving Grace AMEN Tho Coven Lichff The principall Heads of the Tractate following I. BOOKE VNfoldeth the Ten Transgressions of the Canon of our Lord Christ his Institution in the now Romish Masse II. BOOKE Manifesteth the palpable Falshood of the Romish Exposition of Christ's words of Institution THIS IS MY BODY III. BOOKE Discovereth the Novelty and indeed Nullity of the Romish Article of Transubstantiation and proveth the Continuance of the substance of Bread after Consecration IV. BOOKE Reveileth the manifold Contradictions in the Romish Defence of a Corporall Presence of Christ's Body in the Sacrament and consequently a necessary Impossibilitie thereof without the impeachment of the Omnipotencie of God yea with the aduancement thereof Together with a Discovery of the falshood of their Thirteen Histories relating so many Apparitions of True Flesh and true Blood of Christ in the Eucharist As also shewing the Determination of the Generall Councell of Nice upon the the point of Corporall Presence V. BOOKE Noteth the three-fold Capernaiticall Conceit in the Romish pretended Corporall manner of Eating Swallowing and gâ—t-receiving of Christ's flesh VI. BOOKE Displayeth the manifold and grosse Sacrilegiousnes in the Romish Masse vpon their profession of a Proper and properly Propitious Sacrifice therein VII BOOKE Proveth the abhominable-double Idolatrousnes of the Romish Masse as well Formall as Materiall VIII BOOKE Besides the Three Synopses or Summarie Comprehensions First of the Superstitiousnes Secondly of the Sacriledge Thirdly of the Idolatrie of the Romish Masse it further declareth the diverse Periuries and Obstinacies of the Defenders and also the many notorious Heresies in the Defence thereof OF THE INSTITVTION OF THE SACRAMENT of the blessed Body and Blood OF CHRIST c. The first Booke Concerning the Actiue part of Christ his Institution of the Eucharist and the Ten Romish TRANSGRESSIONS thereof CHAP. I. That the Originall of the word MASSE nothing advantageth the Romish Masse SECT I. DIvers of your Romish Doctors would haue the word MASSE first to be in the first and primitiue Imposition and vse thereof Diuine Secondly in time more ancient than Christ Thirdly in signification most Religious deriued as They say from the Hebrew word Missah which signifieth Oblation and Sacrifice euen the highest homage that can be performed vnto God And all this to proue if it may be that which you call THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASSE CHALLENGE SO haue these your Doctors taught notwithstanding many other Romanists as well Iesuites as others of principall Note in your Church enquiring as it were after the natiue Countrie kinred and age of the Word MASSE doe not onely say but also prooue first that Hebrew-borne Secondly that it is not of Primitiue antiquitie because not read of before the dayes of S. Ambrose who liued about three hundred seuentie three yeeres after Christ Thirdly that it is a plaine Latine word to wit Missa signifying the Dismission of the Congregation Which Confessions being testified in our Margin by so large a consent of your owne Doctors prooued by so cleare Euidence and deliuered by Authors of so eminent estimation in your owne Church must not a little lessen the credit of your other Doctors noted for Neotericks who haue vainely laboured vnder the word MASSE falsely to impose vpon their Readers an opinion of your Romish Sacrificing Masse That the word MASSE in the Primitiue signification thereof doth properly belong vnto the Protestants and iustly condemneth the Romish manner of Masse SECT II. THe word MASSE by the Confession of Iesuites and others and that from the authoritie of Councels Fathers Canon-Law Schoolemen and all Latine Liturgies is therefore so called from the Latine phrase Missa est especially because the companie of the Catechumenists and those which were not prepared to communicate at the celebrating of this Sacrament after the hearing of the Gospell or Sermons were Dismissed and not suffered to stay but commanded To depart Which furthermore your Ies Maldonate out of Isidore the most ancient Authors and all the Liturgies is compelled to confesse to be the Most true meaning of Antiquity Which Custome of exempting all such persons being euery where religiously taught and obserued in all Protestant Churches and contrarily the greatest devotion of your Worshippers at this day being exercised onely in looking and gazine vpon the Priests manner of celebrating your Romane Masse without communicating thereof contrary to the Institution of Christ contrary to the practice of Antiquity and contrary to the proper vse of the Sacrament All which hereafter shall be plentifully shewed it must therefore follow as followeth CHALLENGE VVHereas there is nothing more rife and frequent in your speeches more ordinary in your outhes or more sacred in your common estimation than the name of the Masse yet are you by the signification of that very word convinced of a manifest Transgression of the Institution of Christ and therefore your great Boast of that name is to be iudged false and absurd But of this Transgression more hereafter The Name of CHRIST his MASSE how farre it is to be acknowledged by Protestants SECT III. THe Masters of your Romish Ceremonies and others naming the Institution of Christ call it his Masse And how often doe wee heare your vulgar people talking of Christ his Masse Which word MASSE in the proper signification already specified could not possibly haue beene so distastfull vnto us if you had not abused it to your fained and as you now see false sense of your kinde of Proper Oblation and Sacrifice Therefore was it a superfluous labour of Mr. Brereley to spend so many lines in prouing the Antiquity of the word MASSE CHALLENGE FOr otherwise Wee according the aboue-confessed proper Sense thereof shall together with other Protestants in the Augustane Confession approue and embrace it and that to the iust Condemnation of your present Romane Church which in her Masse doth flatly and peremptorily contradict the proper Signification thereof according to the Testimonie of Micrologus saying The Masse is therefore so called because they that communicate not are commanded to depart By all which it is euident that your Church hath forfeited the Title of Masse which shee hath appropriated to her selfe as a flagge of ostentation
whereof more hereafter In the Interim we shall desire each one of you to hearken to the Exhortation of your owne Waldensis saying ATTEND and obserue the Masse OF CHRIST Of the CANON OF CHRIST his MASSE and at what wordes it beginneth SECT IV. CHrist his Masse by your owne confession beginneth at these words of the Gospell concerning Christ's Institution of the Eucharist Math. 26. Luc. 22. And Iesus tooke bread c. which also we doe as absolutely professe What Circumstances by ioynt consent on both sides are to bee exempted out of this Canon of Christ his Masse or the wordes of his Institution It is no lesse Christian wisedome and Charitie to cut off vnnecessary Controversies than it is a serpentine malice to engender them and therefore we exempt those points which are not included within this Canon of Christ beginning at these wordes And Iesus tooke bread c. To know that all other circumstances which at the Institution of Christ his Supper fell out accidentally or but occasionally because of the then Iewish Passeouer which Christ was at that time to finish or else by reason of the custome of Iudaea doe not come within this our dispute touching Christ his Masse whether it be that they concerne Place for it was instituted in a priuate house or Time which was at night or Sexe which were onely men or Gesture which was a kind of lying downe or Vesture which was wee know not what no nor yet whether the Bread were vnleauened or the Wine mixed with water two poynts which as you know Protestants and your selues giant not to be of the essence of the Sacrament but in their owne nature Indifferent and onely so farre to bee observed as the Church wherein the Christian Communicants are shall for Order and Decencie-sake prescribe the use thereof The Points contained within the Canon of Christ his Masse and appertaining to our present Controuersie are of two kindes viz. 1. Practicall 2. Doctrinall SECT V. PRacticall or Active is that part of the Canon which concerneth Administration Participation and Receiuing of the holy Sacrament according to this Tenor Math. 26. 26. And Iesus tooke Bread and blessed it and brake it and gaue it to his Disciples and said Take eate c. And Luc. 22. 19 20. Doe this in remembrance of mee Likewise also after Supper be tooke the Cup and gaue thankes and gaue it to them saying Drinke yee all of this But the points which are especially to bee called Doctrinall are implied in these words of the Euangelists This is my Bodie And This is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for you and for many for remission of sinnes We begin with the Practicall CHAP. II. That all the proper Active and Practicall points to wit of Blessing Saying Giving Taking c. are strictly commanded by Christ in these words DOE THIS Luc. 22. Matth. 26. 1. Cor. 11. SECT I. THere are but two outward materiall parts of this Sacrament the one concerning the element of Bread the other touching the Cup. The Acts concerning both whether in Administring or Participating thereof are charged by Christ his Canon vpon the Church Catholike vnto the ends of the World The Tenour of his Precept or command for the first part is Doe this and concerning the other likewise saying 1. Cor. 11. 25. This doe yee as often c. Whereof your owne Doctors aswell Iesuites as thers haue rightly determined with a large consent that the wordes DOE THIS haue relation to all the aforesaid Acts euen according to the iâ—dgement of ancient Fathers excepting only the Time of the Celebration which was at Supper and which together with us you say were put in not for example but only by occasion of the Passeouer then commanded to be observed Thus you CHALLENGE THis Command of Christ being thus directly and copiously acknowledged by the best Diuines in the Romane Church must needs challenge on both sides an answerable performance Vpon examination whereof it will appeare vnto euery Conscience of man which Professors namely whether Protestants or Romanists are the true and Catholike Executors and Obseruers of the last will and Testament of our Testator Iesus because that Church must necessarily bee esteemed the more loyall and legitimate Spouse of Christ which doth more precisely obey the Command of the celestiall Bride-groome Wee to this purpose apply our selues to our busines by enquiring what are the Actiue Particulars which Christ hath giuen in charge vnto his Church by these his expresse wordes Doe this All which wee are to discouer and discusse from point to point TEN TRANSGRESSIONS And Preuarications against the Command of Christ DOE THIS practised by the Church of Rome at this day in her Romane Masse SECT II. VVEe list not to quarrell with your Church for lighter matters albeit your owne Cassander forbeareth not to complaine that your Bread is of such extreame thinnesse and lightnesse that it may seeme vnworthy the name of Bread Whereas Christ vsed Solid and tough bread Glutinosus saith your Iesuit which was to be broken with hands or cut with knife Neuerthelesse because there is in yours the substance of Bread therefore we will not contend about Accidents and shadowes but wee insist vpon the words of his Institution The first Transgression of the now Church of Rome in contradicting Christ his Canon is collected out of these words AND HE BLESSED IT which concerne the Consecration of this Sacrament SECT III. FIrst of the Bread the Text saith He blessed it next of the Cup it is said When he had giuen thanks Which words in your owne iudgements are all one as if it should be said Hee blessed it with giuing of thankes By the which word Blessing he doth imply a Consecration of this Sacrament So you The contrary Canon of the now Romane Masse wherein shee in her Exposition hath changed Christ's manner of Consecration The Canon of the Romish Masse attributeth the property and power of Consecration of this Sacrament only vnto the repetition of these words of Christ This is my body and This my blood c. and that from the iudgement as Some say of your Councell of Florence and Trent Moreouer you also alleage for this purpose your publique Catechisme and Romane Missall both which were authorized by the Councell of Trent and command of Pius Quintus then Pope See the Marginals Whereupon it is that you vse to attribute such efficacie to the very words pronounced with a Priestly intention as to change all the Bread in the Bakers shop and wine in the Vintners Cellar into the body and blood of Christ As your Summa Angelica speaketh more largely concerning the Bread CHALLENGE BVt Christopherus your own Arch-bishop of Caesarea in his Booke dedicated to Pope Sixtus Quintus and written professedly vpon this Subject commeth in compassed about with a clowd of witnesses and Reasons to proue that the Consecration
But with what reason were they reprehended Because saith the Councell that fashion iâ— not â—ound in the sacred Storie of the Evangelists All those ancient Popes who held the Example of Christ in his Institution and Apostolicall Customes to be necessary Directions of Christ his Church in such points concerning the ministration of this Sacrament being so utterly repugnant to your now Romish opinions and Practices it must follow that those former Popes being admitted for Iudges whom all Christians acknowledged to have beene Apostolicall in their Resolutions the now Romish Church and her degenerate Profession must needs be judged Apostaticall Now from the former Actuall wee proceed to the Doctrinall points THE SECOND BOOKE Concerning the first Doctrinall Point which is the Interpretation of the words of Christ's Institution THIS IS MY BODY THIS IS MY BLOOD LVKE 22. The Doctrinall and Dogmaticall points are to be distinguished into your Romish 1. Interpretation of the words of Christ his Institution This is my Body c. 2. Consequences deduced from such your Expositions such as are Transubstantiation Corporall Presence and the rest CHAP. I. Of the Exposition of the words of Christ THIS IS MY BODY The State of the Question in Generall BEcause as Saint Augustine saith of points of faith It is as manifest an Heresie in the interpertation of Scriptures to take figurative speechees properly as to take proper speeches figuratively And such is the CAVEAT which Salmeron the Iesuite giveth you it will concerne both You and Vs as wee will avoide the brand of Heresie to search exactly into the true sence of these words of Christ especially seeing wee are herein to deale with the Inscription of the Seale of our Lord IESVS even the Sacrament of his Body and Blood In the which Disquisition besides the Authority of Ancient Fathers wee shall insist much upon the Ingenuity of your owne Romish Authours And what Necessitie there is to enquire into the true sence of these words will best appeare in the after-Examination of the divers Consequences of your owne Sence to wit your Doctrine of Transubstantiation Corporall and Materiall Presence Propitiatory Sacrifice and proper Adoration All which are Dependants upon your Romish Exposition of the former wordes of Christ The issue then will be this that if the words be certainly true in a Proper and litterall sence then we are to yeild to you the whole Cause But if it be necessarily Figurative then the ground of all these your Doctrines being but sandy the whole Structure and Fabricke which you erect thereupon must needs ruine and vanish But yet know withall that we doe not so maintaine a figurative Sence of Christ his Speech concerning his Body as to exclude the Truth of his Body or yet the truly-Receiving thereof as the Third and Fourth Bookes following will declare That a Figurative sence of Christ his Speech THIS IS MY BODY c. is evinced out of the words themselves from the Principles of the Romish Schooles SECT I. THere are two words which may be unto us as two keyes to unlock the questioned sence of Christ's words viz. the Pronoune THIS and the Verbe IS We begin with the former The State of the Question about the word THIS When wee shall fully vnderstand by your Church which holdeth a Proper and litterall Signification what the Pronoune THIS doth demonstrate then shall We truly inferre an infallible proofe of our figurative sence All Opinions concerning the Thing which the word THIS in the divers opinions of Authours pointeth at may be reduced to Three heads namely to signifie either This Bread or This Bodie of Christ or else some Third Thing different from them both Tell you vs first what you hold to be the opinion of Protestants Lutherans and all Calvinists saith your Iesuite thinke that the Pronoune THIS pointeth out Bread But your Roman Doctors are at oddes among themselves and divided into two principall Opinions Some of them referre the word THIS to Christ's Body Some to a Third thing which you call Individuum vagum In the first place we are to confute both these your Expositions and after to confirme our owne That the first Exposition of Romish Doctors of great learning referring the word THIS properly to Christ his Body perverteth the sence of Christ his Speech by the Consessions of Romish Doctors SECT II. DIvers of your Romish Divines of speciall note as well Iesuites as others interpret the word This to note the Body of Christ as it is present in this Sacrament at the pronuntiation of the last syllable of this speech Hoc est corpus meum Because they are words Practicall say they that is working that which they signifie namely The Body of Christ And this sence they call Most cleare and in their Iudgements there can be no better then this So your Stapleton Sanders together with Barradius Salmeron Chavausius these last three being Iesuites to whome you may adde Master Brereley his Answere saying that these words Most evidently relate to Christ's Body As evidently saith also your Iesuite Malloun as one pointing at his Booke should say This is my Booke CHALLENGE ARe not these Opinators in number many in name for the most part of great esteeme their Assertion in their own opinion full of assurance and delivered to their Hearers as the onely Catholique Resolution And yet behold one whose name alone hath obtained an Authority equivalent to almost all theirs your Cardinall Bellarmine who speaking of the same opinion of referring the word This to the Body of Christ doth in flat tearmes call it ABSVRD but not without good and solid reason and that according to the Principles of Romish Schooles to wit because before the last syllable of the last word Me-um be pronounced the Body of Christ is not yet present and the word This cannot demonstrate a thing Absent and therefore can it not be said This body is my body A Reason pregnant enough in it selfe and ratified by your publique Romane Catechisme authorised by the then Pope and Councell of Trent yet notwithstanding your fore-named Irish Iesuite hearing this Argument obiected by Protestants rayleth downe right calling it Accursed as iudged by the Church Hereticall and indeed Abhominable So hee who with Others if they were of fit yeares might be thought to deserve the rod for forgetting their Generall Catechisme and for defending an Exposition which even in common sense may be pronounced in your Cardinal 's owne phrase very Absurde else shew vs if you can but the least semblance of Truth for that Opinion Similitudes obiected for defence of their former Exposition and confuted by their owne fellowes The Similitudes which are urged to illustrate your former Practicall and operative sense are of these kinds to wit Even as if one say They in drawing a Line or a Circle should say in the making thereof This is a Line or This
ceased to be Water And so must Bread cease to be Bread This being the State of the Question we undertake to give Good Proofes of the Existence and Continuance of Bread in the Eucharist the same in Substance after Consecration Our First Proofe is from Scripture 1. Cor. 10. Saint Paul calling it Bread SECT IV. IN the Apostle his Comment that I may so call his two Chapters to the Corinthians upon the Institution of Christ we reade of Eating the Bread and Drinking the Cup thrice all which by the consent of all sides are spoken of Eating Drinking after Consecration and yet hath he called the outward Element Bread You will say with some It was so called onely because it was made of Bread as Aarons Rod turned into a Serpent was notwithstanding called a Rod. But this Answere is not answerable unto the Similitude For first of the Bread the Apostle saith demonstratively This Bread and of the other This Cup But of Aaron's Rod turned into Serpent none could say This Rod. And secondly it is contrary to Christian Faith which will abhorre to say in a proper sence that Christ's Body was ever Bread Or else you will answere with others It is yet called Bread because it hath the Similitude of Bread as the Brazen Serpent was called a Serpent But neither this nor any other of your Imaginations can satisfie for we shall prove that the Apostle would never have called it Bread after Consecration but because it was Substantially still Bread Our Reason is He had now to deale against the Prophaners of this Sacrament in reproving such as used it as Common Bread Not discerning therein Sacramentally exhibited the Lord's Body It had therefore concerned him to have honoured the Sacrament with Divine Titles agreeable to the Body of Christ hypostatically united to his God-head and to have denied it absolutely to have beene Bread considering that by the name of Bread the glory of the same Body might seeme to be abased and Ecclipsed if in Truth and Veritie hee had not beleeved it to have beene then Bread This Reason we guesse you are bound to approve off who in your opinion of the Corporall Presence of Christ his Body and Absence of Bread would never suffer any of your Professors to call it after Consecration by the name of Bread Whereupon it was that the Greeke Archbishop Cabasila complained of the Romish Professors for reprehending the Greeke Liturgies why Because saith he after the words of Christ This is my Body wee call the Symbols and Signes Bread and Wine So hee Which bewrayeth that the very naming of the Sacrament Bread and Wine is in the iudgement of the Church of Rome preiudiciall to their Transubstantiation and that if Saint Paul himselfe should deliuer the same words he did at this day hee should by your Romish Inquisitors be taught to use his Termes in another stile What need many words except in the words of Christ the word Body be properly predicated and affirmed of Bread farewell Transubstantiation of Bread into Christ's Body But that it is Impossible the Body of Christ should be properly predicated upon Bread hath beene the Generall Confession of your owne Doctours and the Conclusion of our second Booke Our Second Proofe of the Continuance of the Substance of Bread is from the speech of Christ touching the Continuance of Wine after Consecration Matth. 26. 29. by the Interpretation of Antiquity SECT V. THe same is as fully verified by our Lord and Master Christ himselfe in thesecond Element of Wine calling it This fruit of the Vine that is Wine after Consecration where the Pronoune This hath relation to the Wine in the Cup. For the proof of this our Exposition of the words of Christ we have the Consent of these and thus many holy Fathers Origen Cyprian Chrysostome Augustine Hierome Epiphanius Euthymius Theophylact and Bede as witnesseth your Iesuite Maldonate no one Father produced by him to the contrary Then answering But I saith hee cannot be thus perswaded So he Marke this you great Boasters of Accordance with Antiquity and yet this manner of answering the Fathers is most familiar with this Iesuite But he proceedeth telling you that The Fathers notwithstanding did not call it Wine as thinking it to be Wine but even as Christ did when hee called his flesh Bread Iohn 6. Then he addeth They that will follow the Exposition of These Fathers are thus to interpret them And gives his Reason of this his Aduertisement Lest the other Exposition saith he may seeme to agree with the opinion of the Calvinists So he For which his Answere Calvinists are as much beholding to him as are the Ancient Fathers with whom he hath made bold not only to reiect their Authority but also to pervert the plaine and evident meaning of their Testimonies who declare that they understood Naturall and Substantiall Wine as the Marginals doe manifest so plainly as to affirme that It was Wine which then Christ dranke and that hereby the practices of the Heretiques Aquarij are confuted who would drinke nothing but Water in the Eucharist It was the Wine saith Augustine which was used in the mysteries of our Redemption Even that Wine which was blessed saith Clemens Alexandrinus and your owne Bishop Iansenius doth confesse that these words of Christ had reference to the Cup in the Eucharist and not as some say to the Cup of the Passeover Marke you furthermore the Errour of the Aquarij and the Confutation thereof they used only Water in the Eucharist in pretence of Sobriety which Cyprian confuted only upon this ground viz. that this Practice was not warranted by the Institution of Christ wherein Christ ordained Wine and not Onely Water and now tell us if that your Doctrine of Transubstantiation had beene an Article of Faith in those dayes whether it had not concerned Cyprian to have stood exactly upon it for the more just condemnation of those Aquarij to let them know that if they would needs use only Water than according to your Doctrine their Consecration should be void and consequently their Adoration if it had beene then in use should have beene like wise Idolatrous The former Proofe confirmed by Analogie betweene Bread and Christ's Body both Naturall and Mysticall SECT VI. IN 1. Cor. 10. 16 17. The Bread which we breake saith the Apostle is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ for we being many are one Bread and one Body in as much as wee all partake of one Bread In this Sentence the word Bread hath a double Relation the First to Christ his Body Naturall Thus the joynt Participation of the Bread is called the Communion of the Body of Christ. The Analogie in this respect is excellently expressed by Isidore Bread saith hee because it strengtheneth the Body is therefore called Christ's Body and Wine because it turneth into Blood is therefore called Christ's Blood These two are
representing the Body of Christ is therefore called Christs flesh not in verity of the thing but in a mystery namely as the representation of Christ therein is called his Passion In a word rightly might Calvin say speaking of these Controversies concerning this Sacrament All the Bookes of Augustine upon this subiect proclaime that hee is of our profession Much more concerning Christ his not being corporally here on earth will by the iudgement of Augustine and other Fathers be found in the fifth sixt and seventh Bookes besides that which they affirme in this Booke in the thirteenth and sixteenth Sections following THE SIXT CHALLENGE In generall concluding the maine Point BY this time wee thinke you may discerne betweene plaine dealing and false iugling for your Disputers have usually alleaged for defence of your Transubstantiation and Corporall Presence in the Sacrament the sentences of Fathers used in their Sermons and Exhortations wherein commonly they exercised their Rhetoricke in Figurative and Hyperbolicall speeches as hath beene confessed by your owne Doctours and proved by many their like sayings concerning other Sacramentall Rites but especially of the Sacrament of Baptisme whereas our proofes arise directly from the testimonies of the Fathers which they have commonly had in their sad and earnest Disputations in confutation of many and maine Heresies where indeed they were necessarily to make use both of their Logicke for discerning Truth from Errour and also of Grammer we meane the Exactnesse and propriety of speech void of Amphibologies Hyperboles and Ambiguities whereby the minds of their Hearers or Readers might be perplexed and the Truth darkned This one consideration we iudge to be of necessary importance And thus much concerning the iudgement of ancient Fathers touching this second Contradiction That thirdly the Contradiction and consequently the Impossibility of the Being of one Body in divers places at once is evicted by two sound Reasons the first taken from Contradictory Relations SECT IX YOu have already heard of the Antecedent which was granted by Aquinas viz. It implyeth a Contradiction to say a Body is corporally in two places at once because this maketh that one Body not to be one Which being confessed you have also heard your Cardinall making this Consequence viz. by the same reason it must follow that it is absolutely Impossible But besides there are Actions and Qualities whereof some are Relatives and have respect to some place and others are Absolutes Of the Relatives you have determined that One Body say you as it is in diverse places at once might be below and above on the right hand and on the left behind and before it selfe may move and not move at the same instant without Contradiction because it is so said in divers Respects namely of divers places as the soule of man in divers parts of the Body So you These are but Capriccious Chimera's and mungrell fancies of addle braines who disputing of Bodily Locality can find no example within the Circumferences of the Vniversalities of Creatures but only Man's soule which is a Spirit which point is to be discussed in the twelfth Section In the Interim know you that although Relations doe sometimes take away Contradictions where they are applyable As namely for the same Body to be high and low in respect of it's owne divers parts to wit high in respect of the head and low in respect of the heele wherein there is no comparison of any whole or part with it selfe yet if any should say as much of the same Body whether whole or part as thus The same whole head goeth before and after it selfe or the same one finger is longer and shorter then it selfe hee may iustly be suspected to be besides himselfe all such like speeches being as Contradictory in themselves and consequently Impossible as for a man to say he is elder and yonger than himselfe You will say and it is your common Sanctuary that place is not essentiall to a Body and therefore separable from a Body so that a man may be in two places at once And you may as well say that because Time is not of the essence of a man some man may have a Being without any time or else in two times at once Finally this your Subtilty would have beene iudged a palpable absurdity by ancient Fathers among whom Theodoret taught this Philosophie to hold true in Divinity to wit that whosoever hath properly one thing on the right hand of it and another thing on the left it is Circumscribed in place Whereby hee demonstrateth the truth of Christ's Body because it is Circumscribed and that it is circumscribed because it is written of him that The sheepe shall stand on his right hand and the goates on the left Nor doe you your-selves teach nor yet can you imagine his body to want either his right hand or his left as he is present in this Sacrament One word more The Fathers who were many that distinguished the nature of Christs manhood from his God-head because the first is Circumscribed and the other is not circumscribed would never yeeld to either of both that it is both crucified and not crucified as you doe to Christ's bodie teaching it to be at the same time Circumscribed in Heaven when it is Vncircumscribed as it is on many Altars vpon earth That fourthly a Contradiction and consequently an Impossibility of the Being of a Body in two places at once is proved by absolute Qualities and Actions which are voyd of Relation to place SECT X. VVEre it possible that Actions and Qualities which have respect to Place might avoid the Contradiction yet of such Actions and Qualities as have no Relation to place it will be beyond your imaginations to conceive so as will appeare by your owne Resolutions For your Cardinall and your Iesuite Suarez with divers others have thus determined that such Actions and Qualities as are reall in a Body without any relation to place may not be said to be multiplyed in respect of divers places wherein the same Body is supposed to be As for example the same Body to be hot in some Countrey and cold in another at the same time wounded and not wounded passible and not passible And the like may be said of Love and Hatred which are vitall Actions proceeding naturally from the Subiect So that the Body which in one place is affected with love cannot possibly but be so affected in what place soever So your owne Disputers But have they any reason for these points Yes they have See the Margent For your Cardinall denying that the same Body in respect of divers places may be hot and not hot at the same time giveth us this reason Because saith hee it is one Body and not many So he A reason Infallible Your Iesuite Suarez also denying that the same party can love and hate consent and dissent at the same time in respect of divers places yeeldeth this reason Because saith he these
Fathers have declared what could these holy Fathers have thought of your Barbarous or rather Brutish faith that teacheth such a Corporall Vnion by a bodily Touch and Eating whereby according to your owne Doctrine Rats Wormes and Dogges and whatsoever vile beast may be as reall partakers of the bodie of Christ as Peter or Iohn or whosoever the essentiall member of Christ Wherefore you must suffer us to reason aswell against your Corporall Coniunction by bodily Touch as Many of your Divines have done against bodily Vnion by coniunction and commixture but why even Because the Sacrament was not ordained for a bodily but for a spirituall Coniunction So they So that wee need say no more but fore-seeing what you will obiect we adde the Propositions following CHAP. III. That wicked Communicants albeit they eate not bodily Christ's Bodie yet are they Guilty of the Lords Bodie for not receiving it spiritually namely thorow their Contempt for not receiving the Blessing offered thereby SECT I. THe Apostle 1. Cor. 11. 27. Whosoever saith hee Eateth this Bread and Drinketh this Cup unworthily he shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord And Vers 29. eateth and drinketh Damnation to himselfe not discerning the Lord's Bodie Your Rhemish Professors men not the least zealous for your Romish Cause obiecting this against the Protestants call upon you saying first Hereupon marke well that ill men receive the Body and Blood of Christ be they Infidels or ill livers for else they could not be guilty of that which they receive not Secondly That it could not be so hainous an offence for any to receive a piece of bread or a cup of wine though they were a true Sacrament for it is a deadly sinne for any to receive any Sacrament with will and intention to continue in sinne or without repentance of former sinnes but yet by the unworthy receiving of no other Sacrament is man made guilty of Christ's Bodie and Blood but here where the unworthy Receiver as Saint Chrysostome saith doth villany to Christ's owne person as the Iewes and Gentiles did that crucified him Which invincibly proveth against the Heretikes that Christ is herein really present And guilty is he for not discerning the Lord's Body that is because hee putteth no difference betweene this high meate and others So your Rhemists Your Cardinall also as though he had found herein something for his purpose fastneth upon the sentence of Cyprian who accounted them that after their deniall of Christ presented themselves to this Communion without repentance to offer more iniurie to Christ by their polluted handes and mouthes than they did in denying Christ and besides he recordeth Examples of God's miraculous vengeance upon those who violated the body of Christ in this Sacrament So hee All these points are reducible unto three heads One is that ill men might not be held guiltie of the Body of Christ except they did receive it as being materially present in this Sacrament Next is the Guilt of prophaning this Sacrament which being more hainous than the abuse of any other Sacrament therefore the iniury is to be iudged more personall The last that the Examples of God's vindicative Iudgements for Contempt hereof have beene more extraordinary which may seeme to be a Confirmation of both the former Before we handle these points in order take our next Position for a Directory to that which shall be answered in the VI. Section That some Fathers understood the Apostles words 1. Cor. 10. spiritually namely as signifying the Eating of Christ's Flesh and drinking his Blood both in the Old Testament and in the Newe SECT II. VPon those words of the Apostle 1. Cor. 10. v. 4. They ate of the same spirituall meate c. The Iewes received the same spirituall meate saith S. Augustine Yea saith your Cardinall the Iewes received the same among themselves but not the same with us Christians So hee Albeit the words of Augustine are plainly thus The same which we eat so plainly that divers of your own side doe so directly and truely acknowledge it that your Iesuite Maldonate not able to gain-say this Trueth pleaseth himselfe notwithstanding in fancying that If August were alive in this Age he would think otherwise especially perceiving Hereticall Calvinists and Calvin himselfe to be of his opinion So hee Was it not great pitty that Augustine was not brought up in the Schoole of the Iesuites surely they would have taught him the Article of Transubstantiation of the Corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament and Corporall Vnion against all which there could not be a greater Adversarie than was Augustine whom Maldonate here noteth to have beene the Greatest Enemie to all Heretickes whom Bertram followed in the same Exposition and by your leave so did your Aquinas also The same saith he which wee eate Thus much by the way Wee goe on to our Answeres That the wicked Receivers are called Guiltie of Christ's Bodie not for Eating of his Body unworthily but for unworthily Eating the Sacrament thereof SECT III. THe Distinction used by St. Augustine hath bene alwayes as generally acknowledged as knowne wherein hee will have us to discerne in the Eucharist the Sacrament from the thing represented and exhibited thereby Of the Sacrament hee saith that It is received of some to life and of some to destruction but the thing it selfe saith hee is received of None but to Salvation So hee No Protestant could speake more directly or conclusively for proofe First That in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the Body of Christ is as well tendred to the wicked as to the Godly Secondly that the wicked for want of a living Faith have no hand to receiue it Thirdly that their not preparing themselves to a due receiving of it is a Contempt of Christ his Body and Blood Fourthly and Consequently that it worketh the iudgement of Guiltines upon them All which both the Evidence of Scripture and consent of Antiquity doe notably confirme For the Text obiected doth clearely confute your Romish Consequence because S. Paul's words are not Hee that eateth the Body of Christ and drinketh his Blood unworthily is guilty of his Body and Blood but Hee that eateth the Bread and drinketh the Cupp of the Lord unworthily c. which we have proved throughout the 2. Booke to signifie Bread and Wine the signes and Sacraments of his Body and Blood after Consecration And to come to Antiquity All the Fathers above cited Ch. 1. § 6. who denyed that the wicked Communicants are partakers of the Body and Blood of Christ albeit knowing as well as you that all such unworthy Receivers are guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ have thereby sufficiently confuted your Consequence which was that because the wicked are Guilty of Christ's bodie Ergò his Body is Corporally present in them But we pursue you yet further That a Guiltines of Contempt of Christ's Body and
Traâ—sient and Passable but permanent and durable which hee proveth both from their expresse words and also by the ground of their Speech which is the Doctrine of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 10. For we being many are one Bread in as much as we are partakers of one bread which are spoken of a permanent Vnion of Christians as they are members of Christ As for the second note of Vnion professed by holy Fathers we have already learned from this their generall Doctrine that the Godly onely are truly Partakers of the flesh of Christ And that our Vnion with Christ by virtue of this Sacrament is proper to the Godly and Faithfull is now further confirmed by the Testimonies obiected Some expressing the Vnion to be such whereby Christ abideth in us and we in him as you have heard and some that whosoever hath it hath spirituall life by it whereas They who eate the Bread of iniquity doe not eate the flesh of Iesus nor drinke his Blood saith Hierome whereas your Popish Vnion is common to both For indeed what is it for Christ his Body to be receiued of the wicked but as it were to have him buried in a grave againe And to feed the ungodly with such precious food is like as if a man should put meate into the mouth of a dead Carkasse The former Assertion being so generally the Doctrine of primitive Fathers it is in it selfe a full and absolute Confutation of the Romish Defence throughout the whole Controversie touching the Corporall Vnion with the Body of Christ as properly so taken Have not then your Disputers in urging the iudgement of holy Fathers spun a faire thred trow yee whereby they have thus evidently strangled their whole Cause A Determination of this point in question I. That the former obiected Sentences of Fathers concerning Corporall Vnion are Sacramentally and Spiritually to be understood as proper to the Godly and Faithfull Receiver SECT V. HOwsoever the sound of their words have seemed unto some of you to teach a proper Corporall Vnion with the Bodies of the Communicants yet the Reasons wherewith the said Sentences are invested doe plainly declare they meant thereby a Spirituall Vnion onely first and principally because they ground their sayings upon that of Saint Iohn He that eateth my flesh abideth in me and hath life and I will raise him up at the last day He dwelleth in me and I in him which many of your owne Doctours have expounded to be taken spiritually as doth also your Bishop Iansenius out of Augustine Secondly because they make the Vnion perpetuall to the Receiver Thirdly because they hold this Vnion proper to the spirituall Communicant excluding the prophane from any reall participation of Christs flesh Fourthly because they taught the same Vnion whereof they speake to be made without this Sacrament even by Baptisme and that Really as your Iesuite Tolet hath said Fiftly because they have compared this Vnion to the continued-Vnion betweene Man and Wife Good and solid Reasons we thinke to perswade any reasonable man that they meant no proper Corporall Vnion Whereby peradventure your Iesuite Tolet was induced to grant that Hilarie and Cyril by the Corporall Vnion of Christ's Bodie with ours meant the Vnion by Faith and Charitie As also whereas Damascene saith That by this Communion wee are made ioynt-bodies with Christ And lastly Cyril of Ierusalem calleth the Communicants by reason of their participation of the Bodie and Blood of Christ Christophers that is being interpreted Carriers of Christ and that hereby we are made partakers of that divine nature a Sentence much urged by your Disputers notwithstanding your Suarez seeth nothing in it but a Spirituall Vâ—ion by Grace and Affection Which two Testimonies we may adde to the former Fathers for proofe that onely the Godly have Vnion with Christ II. That the obiected Ancient Fathers without Contradiction to themselves have both affirmed and denied a Corporall and perpetuall Vnion of Christ's Bodie with the Bodies of the Communicants SECT VI. THree acceptions there may be of the word Corporall Vnion the first Literall and proper which this whole Booke proveth out of the Fathers to be Capernaiticall by Corporall Touching Corporall Tearing with Teeth Corporall Swallowing and Devouring and Corporall mixture with our flesh a sence seeming pernicious to Origen and to Augustine odious and flagitious as hath beene proved The second is a Corporall Coniunction Sacramentall that as they called Bread broken the Bodie of Christ by reason of the Sacramentall Analogie with his Bodie Crucified as hath beene plentifully demonstrated so have they called the Sacrament all Vnion with our Bodies the Corporall Vnion of his Body with ours namely that as the Bread is eaten swallowed disgested by vs and incorporated into our Bodies to the preservation of this life so by the virtue of Christ's humanity dying and rising againe for us our Bodies shall be restored to life in that day In which respect Bread the Sacrament of Christ's Body being so changed into the Substance of our flesh is in us a perpetuall pledge of our Resurrection to glory The last is a Spirituall Vnion that as the Body of Christ is immediately foode of the Soule onely so is the Vnion thereof immediately wrought in the Soule and because in Christian Philosophy the Body followeth the Condition of the Soule according to the tenour of Iudgement used in the last day when as the vngodly Soule shall take unto it selfe it 's owne sinfull Body and carrie it into Hell and the regenerate Soule shall returne to it 's owne Bodie and being united thereunto be ioyntly raised to immortalitie and blisse and all this by our Spirituall and Sacramentall for they are not divided in the Godly Communicating of the Bodie and Blood of Christ This ought not to seeme unto you any novell Doctrine having heard it professed by your Iesuite in your publique Schooles saying The glory of the Bodie depends on the glorie of the soule and the Happinesse of the soule depends on Grace therein neither doth this Sacrament saith he any otherwise conferre immortalitie to the Bodie than by nourishing and preserving grace in the soule So hee In which respect wee concurre with the iudgement of ancient Fathers who call this Sacrament the Symbol and Token of the Resurrection the Medicine of Immortality by which our verie bodies have hope of Immortality So they Yea and which is a further Evidence as your obiected Optatus called the Eucharist The pledge of Salvation and hope of the Resurrection so doth Basil speake of Baptisme tearming it our Strength unto Resurrection being a Sacrament both of his death and Resurrection and the Earnest thereof Nor can wee desire a more pregnant confutation of your Corporall Presence than that the Eucharist is called of the Fathers a Pledge as you have obiected To this purpose wee are to consult with Primasius hee telleth vs that Christ
condemned in divers who sopped the Bread in the Chalice and squeezed Grapes in the Cup and so received them even as did the Artoryritae in mingling Bread with Cheese censured for Heretiques by your Aquinas In which Comparison your Aberration from Christ's Example is so much greater than theirs as you are found Guilty in defending Ten Innovations for one 2. Your Pope Gelasius condemned the Hereticall Manichees for thinking it lawfull not to receive the Cup in the Administration of the Eucharist judging it to be Greatly Sacrilegious notwithstanding your Church authorizeth the same Custome of forbidding the Administration of the Cup to fit Communicants 3. As you pretend Reverence for withdrawing the Cup so did the Aquarii forbeare wine and used only Water under a pretence of Sobriety 4. Sometime there may be a Reason to doe a thing when as yet there is no right nor Authority for him that doth it Wee therefore exact of you an Autority for altering the Apostles Customes and Constitutions and are answered that your Church hath Authority over the Apostles Precepts Iumpe with them who being asked why they stood not unto the Apostles Traditions replyed that They were herein above the Apostles whom therefore Irenaeus reckoneth among the Heretikes of his Time BOOKE II. It is not nothing which hath beene observed therein to wit your Reasoning why you ought not to interpret the words of Christ This is my Body literally and why you urge his other saying Except yoâ—… eat my flesh for proofe of Bodily Eating so that your Priest may literally say in your Masse that The Body of Christ passeth into your bellies and entrâ—ils because forsooth the words of Christ are Doctrinall And have you not heard of one Nicodemus who hearing Christ teach that every man must be Borne againe who shall be partaker of God's Kingdome and that hee expounding them in a Literall Sence conceited a new Entrance into his Mothers wombe when as nothing wanted to turne that his Errour into an Heresie but only Obstinacie But of the strong and strange Obstinacies of your Disputers you have received a full Synopsis BOOKE III. After followeth your Article of Transubstantiation I. Your direct profession is indeed to beleeve no Body of Christ but that which was Borne of the Virgin Mary But this your Article of Transubstantiation of Bread into Christs Body generally held according to the proper nature of Transubstantion to be by Production of Christs Body out of the Substance of Bread it necessarrly inferreth a Body called and beleeved to be Christ's which is not Borne of the Blessed Virgin as S. Augustine hath plainly taught diversifying the Bodily thing on the Altar from the Body of Christ borne of the Virgin Therefore your Defence symbolizeth with the heresie of Apollinaris who taught a Body not Borne of the Virgin Mary Secondly you exclude all judgement of Senses in discerning Bread to be trâ—… Bread as did the Manichees in discerning Christ's Body which they thereupon held not to have beene a True but a Phantasticall Body Tertullian also challengeth the Verity of Sense in judging of Wine in the Eâ—charist after Consecration in confutation of the same Errour in the Marcioniâ—es Thirdly for Defence of Christ his invisible Bodily Presence you professe that after Consecration Bread is no more the same but changed into the Body of Christ which Doctrine in very expresse words was bolted out by an Eâ—tychian Heretique and instantly condemned by Theodoret and as fully abandoned by Pope Gelasâ—… BOOKE IV. Catholique Fathers were in nothing more zealous than in defending the distinct properties of the two natures of Christ his Deity and Humanity against the pernicious heresies of the Manichees Marcionites Eâ—tychians and Eâ—nomians all of them diversly oppugning the Integrity of Christ's Body sometime in direct tearmes and sometime by irrefragrable Consequences whether it were by gaine-saying the Finitenesse or Solidity or else the compleat Perfection thereof wherein â—ow farre yee may challenge affinity or kindred with them be you pleased to examine by this which followeth 1. The Heretiques who undermined the property of Christ's Bodily Finitenesse said that it was in divers places at once as is confessed even as your Church doth now attribute unto the same Body of Christ both in Heaven and in Earth yea and in Millions of distant Altars at the same time and consequently in all places whatsoever Now whether this Doctrine of Christ's Bodily Presence in many places at once was held of the Catholique Fathers for Hereticall it may best be seene by their Doctrine of the Existence of Christ's Body in one only place not only Definitively but also Circumspectively both which doe teach an absolute Impossibility of the Existence of the same in divers places at once And they were as zealous in professing the Article of the manner of Christ's Bodily Being in place as they are in instructing men of the Article of Christ's Bodily Being lest that the deniall of it's Bodily manner of being might destroy the nature of his Body To which end they have concluded it to be absolutely but in one place sometime in a Circumspective Finitenesse thereby distinguishing them from all created Spirits and sometime by a Definitive Termination which they set downe first by Exemplifications thus If Christ his Body be on Earth then it is absent from Heaven and thus Being in the Sunne it could not be in the Moone Secondly by divers Comparisons for comparing the Creature with the Creator God they conclude that The Creature is not God because it is determinated in one place and comparing the humane and divine Nature of Christ together they conclude that they are herein different because the humane and Bodily Nature of Christ is necessarily included in one place and laâ—tly comparing Creatures with the Holy Ghost they conclude a difference by the the same Argument because the Holy Ghost is in many places at once and all these in confutation of divers Heretiques A thing so well knowen to your elder Romish Schoole that it confessed the Doctrine of Existence of a Body in divers places at once in the judgement of Antiquity to be Hereticall 2. The property of a Solidity likewise was patronized by Antient Fathers in confutation of Heretiques by teaching Christ's Body to be necessarily Palpable against their Impalpabilitie and to have a Thicknesse against their feigned subtile Body as the Aire and furthermore controlling these opinions following which are also your Crotchets of a Bodies Being whole in the whole space and in every part thereof and of Christ's Body taking the Right hand or left of it selfe 3. The property of Perfection of the Body of Christ wheresoever in the highest Degree of Absolutenesse This one would thinke everie Christian heart should assent unto at the first hearing wherefore if that they were judged Heretiques by Antient
Fathers who taught an Indivisible Vnion of mens soules with their Bodies naturally still subiect to corruption after the resurrection who can imagine that the holy Catholique Fathers would otherwise have judged of this your generall Tenet viz. to beleeve a Body of Christ now since his Glorification which is destitute of all power of naturall motion sence appetite or understanding otherwise than of a senslesse and Antichristian Deliration and Delusion Yea and that which is your only Reason you alleage to avoid our Objection of Impossibilities in such cases to wit The Omnipotencie of God the same was the Pretence of Heretiques of old in the like Assertions which occasioned the Antient Fathers to terme the Pretence of Omnipotencie The Sanctuary of Heretiques albeit the same Heretiques as well as you intended as a Father speaketh to magnifie God thereby namely in beleeving the Body of Christ after his Ascension to be wholly Spirituall To which Heretiques the same Father readily answered as wee may to you saying When you will so magnifie Christ you doe but accuse him of falshood not that wee doe any whit detract from the Omnipotencie of Christ farre be this Spirit of Blasphemy from us but that as you have beene instructed by Antient Fathers the not attributing an Impossibility to God in such Cases of Contradiction is not a diminishing but an ample advancing of the Omnipotencie of God BOOKE V. Your Orall Eating Gutturall Swallowing and Inward Digestion as you have taught of the Body of Christ into your Entrails hath beene proved out of the Fathers to be in each respect sufficiently Capernaiticall and termed by them a Sence both Pernicious and Flagitious Besides you have a Confutation of the Hereticall Manichees for their Opinion of Fastning Christ to mens guts and loosing him againe by their belchings Consonant to your Romish Profession both of Christ's Cleaving to the guts of your Communicants and Vomiting it up againe when you have done BOOKE VI. This is spent wholly in examining the Romish Doctrine of Masse-Sacrifice and in proving it to be Sacrilegiousnesse it selfe as you have seene in a former Synopsis BOOKE VII This containeth a Discoverie of your Masse-Idolatry not onely as being equall with the Doctrine of some Heretiques but in one respect exceeding the inâ—atuation of the very Pagans besides the Generall Doctrine of the power of your Priests Intention in consecrating hath beene yoaked by your owne Iesuite with the Heresies of the Donatists When you have beheld your owne faces in these divers Synopses as it were in so many glasses we pray to God that the sight of so many and so prodigious Abominations in your Romish Masse may draw you to a just Detestation of it and bring you to that true worship of God which is to be performed in Spirit and in Truth and to the saving of every one of your soules through his Grace in Christ Iesus AMEN ALL GLORY BE ONELY TO GOD. I. INDEX OF THE PRINCIPALL MATTERS Discussed thorow-out the eight Bookes of the whole former Treatise A ACcidents merely feed not Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 10. Nor inebriate c. Ibid. Not without Subject according to the ancient Fathers Ibid. See more in the words Bread Councell Cyrill Adoration of the Eucharist Romish Booke 7. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Not from Christ's Institution Chap. 2. Nor from Antiquity Ibid. Sect. 1. Not by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 3. Romish Adoration Idolatrous by their owne Principles Booke 7. Chap. 5. Sect. 1. Eucharist forbid to be carried to the sicke for Adoration Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 10. Romish manner of Adoration of the Host Book 7. Chap. 7. Sect. 1. Coadoration may be Idolatrous Sect. 2. See the words Gesture Idolatry Invocation Reverence Altar unproperly used of the Fathers Book 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 13 15. Angels not possibly in two places at once Book 4. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Apparitions of Christ's flesh and blood in the Sacrament fictitious Booke 4. Chap. 2 c. See more in the word Miracles Application of Romish Propitiatory Sacrifice not yet resolved of Booke 6. Chap. 11. Sect. 1. Otherwise the Fathers Ibid. Sect. 2. Romish Application not sufficient for all in Purgatory Sect. 3. Application of Protestants Propitiously how justifiable Ib. Ch. 2. Sect. 1 2. B. BAptisme called a Sacrifice of the Fathers Book 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 15. Want of it in the Romish Priest inferreth Idolatry Booke 7. Chap. 5. Sect. 4. Paralleled with the Eucharist in most points Booke 8. Chap. 2. Sect. 2 3. Beast prostrate before the Host Objected Ridiculously for Adoration Booke 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 3. Blood of Christ not properly shed Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. Body of Christ not properly broken Book 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. That in the Eucharist not borne of the Virgin Mary Booke 4. Chap. 4 5. By Corporall Presence not one Ibid. Sect. 2. Infinite Ibid. Chap. 6. Not organicall Chap. 7. not perfect Chap. 8. nor glorious and subject to vile indignities Chap. 9. See more in Vnion Bread not duly broken in the Romish Masse Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. Remaining after Consecration Book 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 4 5. Proved by many Arguments Ibid. unto Sect. 9. Engendring Wormes Booke 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 10. See Accidents Broken Body of Christ unproperly Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. and Booke 6. Chap. 1. Sect. 4. The word Broken in S. Luke signifies the Present Tense Booke 6. Chap. 2. Sect. 3. C CAnonization of Saints a Case doubtfull and dangerous Book 7. Ch. 7. Sect. 3. Capernaiticall conceit of eating Christ's flesh Bodily Booke 5. Chap. 4. Sect. 1. Such was the Romish and is Sect. 3. As also in swallowing and bodily mixture Ibid. Chap. 7 8. See Vnion Christ's Priesthood See Priest-hood Church of Rome hath erred in her opinion of administring the Eucharist to Infants Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 11. Her Doctrine made necessary to Salvation Book 8. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. Concomitance of Blood under the forme of Bread how Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 6. Consecration used of Christ by prayer Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Now transgressed in the Romish Church Ibid. Sect. 4. Forme thereof not set downe either in Scripture or in ancient Tradition Book 7. Chap. 3. Sect. 4. Many Defects incident to make void the Act and to inferre Idolatry Book 7. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. Contradictions Romish VI. against these words of Christ My Body Booke 4. Ch. 4. Cup is to be administred to all the Communicants Book 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. By Christ's precept and example Sect. 2 3. By Apostolicall practice and Fathers c. Ibid. Custome of 300. yeares preferred by the Romish before a more ancient of a thousand Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 5. D. DEvouring Christ's flesh such is the Romish Swallowing of Christ Booke 5. Chap. 6. Sect. 1 2. and Chap. 9. Distinction of the Sacrifice of Christ's Body as Subjectively
or Objectively Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Of Propitiousnesse B. 6. Ch. 8. Sect. 1. Divine Sacrament so called of the Fathers without any inference of a Corporall Presence B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 13. Dominus Vobiscum in the Romish Masse condemneth their private Masse Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 5. E. EAting and drinking spiritually are all one but not Sacramentally B. 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 8. Elevation not ancient B. 6. Ch. 1. Sect. 5. Proveth not Adoration B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 2. Eucharist anciently called the Lord's Supper Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. Forbid to be carried to the sicke for Adoration Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 10. In both kindes proved by Christ's precept B. 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 1. See Cup. Exposition of Scripture by the Romish Church sworne unto but not without Perjury in a Synopsis B. 7. Ch. 2. Sect. 5. G. GAzers excluded from the Sacrament anciently Book 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 9. Gesture of bowing objected for Adoration of the Host vainly Booke 7. Chap. 3. Sect. 3. God's Presence in many places objected fondly for proofe of the possibility of a Body in divers places at once Book 4. Chap. 5. Sect. 2. Holy Ghost proved to be infinite and God by it's being in divers places at once by the Iudgement of Antiquity Booke 4. Chap. 6. Sect. 2. Guilty of the Lords Bodie Words objected for proofe of Corporall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist vainly Book 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 1 5. H. HAbituall Condition no sufficient Pretence to free the Romish from Idolatry Booke 7. Chap. 5. Sect. 3 4. A matter of great perplexity in the Romish worship Ibid. Chap. 9. Sect. 7. Hands not taking the Sacrament therewith an Innovation against the Institution of Christ B. 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 8. Heresie the Defence of the Romish Masse fraught with many B. 8. Chap. 2. Sect. 5. Hoc facite Absurdly objected for proofe of a Sacrifice Booke 6. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Hoc in the words Hoc est corpus meum doth not point out properly either Christ's Body or Individuum vagum Booke 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 2 c. I. IDolatry materiall in the Romish Masse possible almost infinitely Booke 7. Chap. 5. Sect. 1 c. Yea and Formall notwithstanding any Pretence to the Contrary Ib. Chap. 6. Sect. 1. No warrant for such Pretences from Antiquity Ibid. Sect. 5. A Synopsis of this Booke 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 5. Idolatry an errour in the understanding Booke 7. Chap. 7. Sect. 1. The Romish as Idolatrous as the Heathen Ibid. Chap. 8. Sect. 1. And in one respect worse B. 7. Chap. 8. Sect. 2. Impossibility acknowledged in things contradictory even with the Advancement of God's â—mpotencie Book 4. Ch. 3. Sect. 2. See Contradiction Omnipotencie Infants made partakers of the Eucharist erroneously B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 11. Institution of Christ transgressed by the Romish Church by ten Prevarications B. 1. Ch. 2. Intent good cannot free one from Formall Idolatry B. 7. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. Intention of the Priest if not right occasioneth Idolatry B. 7. Ch. 5. Sect. 4. A matter of extreme perplexity Ibid. Ch. 9. Sect. 5. Invocation upon the Sacrament can never be proved out of the Fathers B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 1. Romish manner of Invocating the Host Ibid. Chap. 7. Sect. 1. L. LIft up your hearts used anciciently maketh against Adoration of the Eucharist Book 7. Chap. 4. Sect. 2. Liturgies or Missals ancient praying God to accept this as Abel's Sacrifice B. 8. Ch. 8. Sect. 4. M. MAsse the word B. 1. Ch. 1. The Romish hath ten Innovations contrary to Christ his Institution B. 1. Ch. 2. The Superstitiousnesse thereof Book 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Sacrilegiousnesse thereof Ibid. Sect. 2. Idolatrousnesse Booke 7. thorowout B. 8. Ch. 1. Sect. 5. Melchizedech his Priesthood and Sacrifice objected and discussed Booke 6. Chap. 3. Miraculous Apparitions thirteene of true flesh and blood in the Eucharist falsly pretended for proofe of a Corporall Presence Booke 4. Chap. 2. Sect 1 c. Miraculous birth of Christ thorow the wombe of the Blessed Virgin ob and his entrance thorow the doores and passing thorow the Tombe and a Camels passing thorow a needles eye Booke 4. Chap. 7. Sect. 7. Morall Certainty no sufficient Pretence to excuse from formall Idolatry B. 7. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. A matter of great perplexity in Romish worship Book 7. Ch. 9. Sect. 4. D. Morton vindicated from two Romish Adversaries in the point of the Maniches opinion imputed to the Romish Church B. 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 7. O. OBstinacies of the Defenders of the Romish Masse discovered in a Synopsis B. 8. Ch. 2. Sect. 1 c. Omnipotencie spoken of the Fathers and objected for a Corporall presence of Christ's body and for Transubstantiation vainly B. 3. Ch. 4. Sect. 2. God's Omnipotencie nothing impeached by the acknowledgement of Impossibilities by Contradiction B. 4. Chap. 3. Sect. 2 c. Omnipotencie pretended by Heretikes Ibid. Chap. 4. Sect. 5. See Impossibility and see Contradiction Ordination awanting in the Romish Priest causeth Idolatry in their Masse Booke 7. Chap. 5. Sect. 6. P. PAsseovâ—s no Type of a proper Sacrifice in the Eucharist Booke 6. Chap. 3. Sect. 10. Pastophorium what it signifieth B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 10. B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Perjuries of the Romish Disputants in Defence of their Masse in a Synopsis Book 8. Ch. 2. Sect. 4. Perplexities wherewith the Romish are intangled in their Adoration and from which Protestants are free B. 7. Ch. 9. Place One Body in many places impossible proved by Contradictions in it selfe Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 2 c. By Confession Scripture and Fathers Ibid. Sect. 3 c. By Reasons Sect. 9. Objections to the contrary answered B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 1 c. Ob. Sol. Chap. 5. Sect. 4. The Fathers prove the Holy Ghost God by it's being in divâ—…s places at once B. 4. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. See Angels Pledge of Resurrection is the Eucharist called of the Fathers vainly objected for proofe of a Corporall Presence B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 6. B. 4. Ch. 10. Sect. 5. See also B. 〈◊〉 Ch. 3. Sect. 11. Popes Consecration a matter doubtfull and dangerous B. 7. Ch. 7. Sect. 4. Popes made wiser than the Apostles Book 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 4. Christ's Divine Precept held to be by the Pope dispensable Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 13. Presence of Christ's Body wherein the Difference de modo 〈◊〉 necessary Booke 4. Ch. 1 c. Romish manner Capernaiticall Chap. 2. Sect. 1. Impossible Chap. 3. Sect. 1. Priesthood Romish not after the order of Melchizedech B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. Word Priest uproperly used of the Fathers B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 15. Christs Priesthood now performed in heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 7. Confirmed by antiquity Sect. 8. Private Masse See Masse Procession with the Sacrament an Innovation Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 10. Pronuntiation of the words of Consecration a matter of
6. Vnconscionable Objections from their Epithets of Terrible Chap. 5. Sect. 8. and Vnbloody Sect. 9. which They call also Bloody Sect. 11. And also Baptisme a Sacrifice Sect. 13. And other Spirituall Acts. Sect. 14. Vnconscionable Objections from their words Altar and Priest Sect. 15. Spirituall Acts called Sacrifices unproperly Chap. 7. Sect. 2. Yea and also Propitious Chap. 8. Sect. 1. BOOKE VII ANtiquity unconscionably objected for a Divine Adoration of the Sacrament from any of their words Chap. 2. Sect. 1. as also from any of their Acts either of their Concealement of this Mystery Ch. 3. Sect. 1. or Elevation Sect. 2. or Gesture Sect. 3. or Invocation Sect. 4. Which was never taught by them Ch. 5. Sect. 1. Nay Antiquity was against Divine Adoration of the Eucharist by their Common Admonition Lift up your hearts c. Chap. 4. Sect. 2. BOOKE VIII ANtiquity against the Romish Sacrilegiousnesse in a Synopsis Chap. 1. Sect. 4. Against their Idolatrousnesse teaching Bread to remaine Sect. 5. Their Testimonies unconscionably objected for Corporall Presence Proper Sacrifice and Divine Adoration as appeareth in a Synopsis Instance in Baptisme by paralleling their like speeches of it with the Eucharist Chap. 2. Sect. 2 3. Antiquity insolently rejected and falsly boasted of by our Adversaries Ch. 2. Sect. 4. III. Index of the particular Iudgements of Fathers severally as also of Councels and Popes both in our Oppositions and in the Romish Objections besides those here omitted which have beene otherwise answered in the Generall thorow-out the former TREATISE AMbrose Opp. against unknowen Prayer B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 7. And that the words of Christ are figurative Book 2. Sect. 9. and That Christ gave bread B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. And for a figurative Sence in the words This is my Body B. 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 9. And for Bread remaining B. 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 11. Ob. his terming it a Miraculous worke unconscionably Ch. 4. Sect. 2. And for saying Bread is made man's flesh Sect. 7. And that Bread is changed into another thing Ibid. Opp. Hee teacheth Christ's Priestly Function in Heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. And an Vnproper Sacrifice Ib. Ch. 5. Sect. 5. and correcteth his Excessive speech of Sacrifice B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Ob. For naming it an Vnbloody Sacrifice Vnconscionably B. 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 9. And for Adoration of Christ's footstoole B. 7. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. And Christ's appearing to Saul from Heaven Booke 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 5. Opp. proving the Holy Ghost to be God by it's Being in divers places at once Booke 4. Chap. 6. Sect. 2. Athanasius Opp. for a necessitie of Circumscription of a Body in one place only Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. And for Impossibility of Angels being in many places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. And for the spirituall Exposition of those words The flesh profiteth nothing B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. And that Angels cannot be in divers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. Augustine fondly Ob. for an unknowne tongue Booke 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 7. Chall 6. And for proofe that Christ in the Sacrament was a Figure of himselfe on the Crosse B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Chall 2. Opp. That Bread was called Christs body B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. And that hee alloweth the Iudgement of Sence in this Sacrament B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 9. And for a Figurative Sence in the words This is my Body B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 9. Ob. for Transubstantiation because a powerfull worke Book 3. Ch. 4. Sect. 2. Opp. For necessary Circumscription of a Body in one place B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. Ob. That Christ Efferebatur manibus ejus Ibid. Sect. 8. Opp. For the Being of Christ's soule but in one place Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. And that the godly only partake Christ's Body Booke 5. Ch. 2. Sect. 2. Ch. 3. Sect. 3 4. Ob. that the Flesh of Christ in the Eucharist is a signe of it selfe on the Crosse fraudulently B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Chall 2. Opp. for expounding that Scripture The flesh profiteth nothing B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. Ob. that the Capernaites understood not Christ unconscionably B. 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. And that Wee receive with our mouths Christ's Body Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. And also his Fideles nôrunt B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. And None eateth before he adore Booke 7. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. And for Priests properly Book 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. Opp. Eucharist an unproper Sacrifice Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 5. and hee is an utter Adversary to the whole Romish Cause B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 8. Chall 4 5. And that Christ appeared to Saul from heaven Ibid. Sect. 5. And hee proveth the Holy Ghost to be God by it's being in divers places at once Booke 4. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. And is against a Bodies being without Commensuration to place and space Ibid. Sect. 6. And that no Body can be whole in any one part of place Chap. 7. Sect. 6. And that Angels cannot be in divers places at once Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Basil Opp. proving the Holy Ghost to be God by it's being in many places at once Booke 4. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. Ob. What were the words of Invocation And for Adoration of the Eucharist most grossely B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Opp. That hee called the Eucharist Bread after Consecration B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Bertram Opp. for the existence of Bread after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 14. Chrysostome Opp. against Gazers on the Sacrament B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. Ob. for private Masse Ibid. Sect. 5. Chall 3 Opp. teaching Bread to remaine after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 14. Ob. for Transubstantiation in his words Change by divine power Ibid. Chap. 4. Sect. 3. And his Exception saying Although it seeme absurd to Sense B. 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 5. and his Hyperbolicall Phrases Ibid. and his words It is made Christ's body indeed Ibid. Sect. 7. and these Wee are changed into the flesh of Christ Ibid. And that the wicked are guilty of Christ's Body for corporall presence B. 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. His 〈◊〉 miracle saying Christ in heaven is handled here on earth And of a double Elias B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 7. and for Christ's passing thorow the doores Ibid. Opp. his expounding the words Flesh profiteth not figuratively Booke 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. Ob. The words Tearing with teeth Ibid. Sect. 3. and these Christ is held in the hands of the Priest Ibid. And Christ hath made us his body B. 5. Chap. 8. Sect. 3. Opp. Christ's Priestly Residence in heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. And Sacrifice or rather a Memoriall thereof Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Ob. Sacrifice Pure and Terrible Ibid. Sect. 8. And Lambe lying on the Altar Terrible and Angels present B. 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 2. and Fideles nôrunt Ch. 3. Sect. 1. and Elevation Ibid. Ch. 3. Sect. 2. and Bowing before the Table Booke 7. Chap.
5. Sect. 3. Opp. Angels cannot be in divers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. jet Ob. for Christ's presence in divers places at once Vnconscionably B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 7. Clemens Alexandrinus opp calling Bread Christ's body B. 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6. and calling Bread and Wine Antitypes after Consecration Ibid. Naming it a Sacrifice of Christs body Clemens Bishop of Rome See Pope Councell of Collen opp that contemptuous Refusers to communicate are guilty of the body of Christ B. 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 4. Of Constance ob for Communion in one kinde B. 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. Of Ephesus opp for a palpable Body of Christ B. 4. Ch. 7. Sect. 7. Of Lateran 4. ob for Transubstantiation B. 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Of Naunts opp against private Masse Book 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 5. Of Nice Lambe of God on the Table ob unconscionably for a corporall presence and proper Sacrifice B. 4. Ch. 10. Sect. 3. And for calling the Eucharist a Pledge of the Resurrection B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 6. opp the same Councell against both corporall presence and proper Sacrifice Booke 4. Ch. 10. and against sole Accidents Ibid. Sect. 2. Of Toledo and Trullo opp for receiving the Sacrament with hands Book 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. And of Toledo against Innovating in the Eucharist Booke 1. Ch. 3. Sect. ult And against Transubstantiation and Corporall Eating Booke 4. Chap. 10. Sect. 3. and against sole Accidents Ibid. Chap. 10. Sect. 2. And of Trullo to prove that which is called Body to be Bread B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 8. Of Trent opp for reporting the Errour of the Romish Church about ministring the Eucharist to Infants B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 11. Cyprian calling it a worke of omnipotency ob Booke 3. Ch. 4. Sect. 2. and Bread changed in nature Ibid. Figurative Sence of Christ's words This is c. Opp. B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. and calling Bread Christ's body B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 11. Against Reservation of the Sacrament B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 10. Ob. Wicked men guilty of Christ's body B. 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. and Wee are anoynted with his blood inwardly B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. Opp. calling it a True and Pure Sacrifice Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 8. Cyril Alexand. Opp. Godly only partakers of Christ his Body B. 5. Chap. 2. Sect. 2. ob that wee have a naturall conjunction hereby with Christ B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 8. and Ob. his Similitude As Wax melted Ibid. Ch. 8. Sect. 3. And Christ dwelleth in us Ibid. Opp. Body as well circumscribed in one place as God uncircumscribed B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. Cyril Hierosol ob Thinke not thou takest bread unconscionably B. 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 4. and under the forme of bread for proofe of only Accidents fraudulently and Species for Typus Ibid. and Chrisma for Charisma Ibid. and Sacrifice of Christ's Body B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 10. and Bowing for Adoration B. 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 3. Opp. against Christs body going into the draught B. 4. Ch. 9. Sect. 3. Damascen opp that Angels cannot possibly be but in one place B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. Circumscription of a Body necessary Ib. Chap. 4. Sect. 6. and against penetration of Bodies Chap. 7. Sect. 6. And for teaching the word Antitype to have beene used only before Consecration falsly Yet ob B. 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. And for naming Elevation is ob for Adoration unconscionably Book 7. Chap. 3. Sect. 2. and for his O Divine Sacrament unconscionably Ib. Sect. 4. Dionysius Areopag opp Calling the Sacrament Antitype after Consecration Booke 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. Didymus Alexand. opp Proving the Holy Ghost God by it's being in divers places at once Book 4. Ch. 6. Sect. 2. Epiphanius his Hoc est meum Hoc objected B. 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 7. Eusebius ob his saying It is Christ's body unconscionably B. 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 7. Opp. his correcting of his speech saying Or rather a Memoriall of a Sacrifice B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Ob. naming the Sacrament a bloody Sacrifice unconscionably B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 9. Fulgentius opp For necessary circumscription of a Body Book 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6. Gaudentius opp calling that which is present A pledge of Christ's body absent Book 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 11. and calling Bread Christ's body Book 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6. His saying ob Body which Christ reacheth Book 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Gelasius See Pope Gregory Nazian opp against the possibility of the being of one Body in divers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 1. and also of the Angels Ibid. Sect. 3. and that Christ's Priestly Function is in heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. Ob. his naming the Eucharist a Bloody Sacrifice unconscionably Chap. 5. Sect. 9. Opp. against Proper Sacrifice he saith that This is not so acceptable as that in heaven Ibid. Sect. 9 15. and calleth the Symbols after Consecration Antitypes B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. Ob. hâ—s sister Gorgonia for Adoration unconscionably Book 7. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Gregory Nyssen ob his saying It is changed into whatsoever c. unconscionably Book 3. Ch. 4. Sect. 7. as also these other words Christ's body when it is within ours c. B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 3. Againe One body divided to thousands and undivided B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 7. Gregory the Great See Pope Hesychius ob for Praying Perceiving the truth of blood B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. unconscionably Hierome opp that the words of Christ This is my body are figurative B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. and calling the Sacrament present a Pledge of his Body absent B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 11. and that only the Godly are partakers of Christ's body Book 5. Chap. 2. Sect. 2. Hilary ob for saying Wee are nourished in our bodies by Christ's body B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 2. unconscionably As also ob That Christ is naturally within us Ibid. Sect. 3. Irenaeus opp For the remaining of Bread after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 11. Ob. For denying the Sacrament to be common bread Ibid. Chap. 4. Sect. 3. unconscionably And that our bodies are nourished with his body B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 2. and for his saying that our Bodies are not now corruptible Ibid. Sect. 6. Opp. his saying that it was Bread which was called Christs body B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. Isidore Hispal opp For a figurative Sence of Christ's words This is my Body B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. Opp. against Conversion by Transubstantiation Book 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 6. and for the Sence of the word Masse B. 1. Ch. 1. Sect. 2. and for calling the thing sacrificed after the order of Melchizedech Bread and Wine B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 2. and calling it Bread changed into a Sacrament after Consecration B. 2. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. and against Prayer in an unknowen tongue B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 7. Isidore Pelus opp that Christ spake from heaven to Saul B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 5. and for
Christ's opening the wombe of the Blessed Virgin at his birth Ibid. Ch. 7. Sect. 7. Iulius See Pope Iustine Martyr ob his Apologie against the slander of Christians as eating an Infant B. 5. Ch. 9. Sect. 1 3. unconscionably And for calling it no common bread B. 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3. unconscionably Opp. Calling the Symbols Antitypes after Consecration B. 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. and against the altering of Christ's body in his entrance thorow the doore B. 4. Ch. 7. Sect. 7. Leo. See Pope Nicholas See Pope Oecumenius Opp. For Christ's Priestly Function in Heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. Optatus Ob. his calling the Altar the seat of Christ B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. and that the Eucharist is the Pledge of our Salvation B. 5. Ch. 8. Sect. 6. Origen ob For bread remaining after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 11. Opp. Against prayer in an unknowen tongue Book 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 7. Chall 6. and against Christ's body going into the draught Book 4. Chap. 9. Sect. 3. and that only the Godly are Partakers of the body of Christ B. 5. Chap. 2. Sect. 2. and for expounding Iob. 6. The flesh profiteth nothing B. 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 2. Ob. his saying Not worthy that Christ should come under the roofe of our mouthes Ibid. Sect. 3. and for Christ's Priestly Function in Heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. and that it was bread which was called Christ's body Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6. Pope Calixtus opp against Gazers only at the celebration of the Sacrament Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 9. and for calling Communion but in one kinde Sacrilegious B. 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 7. For the existence of Bread after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 13. Clemens ob for unbloody Sacrifice B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 10. Greg. 1. opp against Gazers on the Eucharist Booke 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 9. Ob. for Transubstantiation out of a Legend Booke 3. Ch. 4. Sect. 7. and for his saying Blood sprinckled upon the posts B. 5. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. unconscionably Opp. Angels cannot be in divers places at once B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. Gregory 7. Pope ob for Transubstantiation B. 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Iulius opp against Innovation in the Eucharist B. 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 3. Leo Ob. his saying Let us taist with our flesh B. 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Opp. against them who erre in pretence of Omnipotency B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. Nicholas ob his Tearing sensibly Christ's flesh with teâ—th B. 5. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. Pius 2. against an unknowen tongue in Gods service B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 7. Chall 5. Primasius opp his correction Sacrifice or rather a Memoriall B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Tertullian opp for his expounding Christ's words This is my body figuratively B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 9. and for verifying the Truth of Sence in this Sacrament B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 9. and for expounding the words of Ioh. 6. Flesh profiteth nothing B. 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 2. and that Angels are not in many places at once Book 4. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. and mans being in many places at once impossible B. 4. Ch. 5. Sect. 3. and that it was Bread which he called his Body B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. Theodoret opp For his expounding Christ's words This is my body figuratively B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6 8. and of bread remaining after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 9 12. and that one thing cannot have the right hand and left of it selfe Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 9. and for Christ's Priestly Function in heaven B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. and for correcting himselfe a Sacrifice or rather a Memoriall Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 6. and for circumscription of a body in one place necessarily B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. ob his Symbols adored B. 7. Ch. 2. unconscionably Opp. That it was bread which he called his body Book 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 6. Theophylact ob for Transubstantiation B. 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 2. Ch. 4. Sect. 7. unconscionably Opp. for correcting himselfe saying Sacrifice or rather a Memoriall B. 6. Ch. 5. Sect. 6. Vigilins Opp. For circumscription of Christ's body in one place B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 6. IV. Index of the principall places of Scriptures opposed by us and objected against us thorow-out this Controversie PSal 72. 16. There shall be an handfull of corne Ob. to prove the Romish Sacrifice Booke 6. Chap. 4. Sect. 4. Malach. 5. 1. In every place shall Sacrifice and Oblation be offered to my name Ob. For a proper Sacrifice but vainly B. 6. Ch. 4. Sect. 1 3. Matth. 19. 14. Easier for a Camel to passe thorow the eye of a needle c. Ob. For the manner of Christ's presence B. 4. Ch. 7. Sect. 7. Matth. 26. 29. Fruit of the vine Opp. against Transubstantiation B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 5. Matth. 26. 26 c. And he blessed it Opp. B. 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. Brake it Ibid. Sect. 4. Said unto them Ibid. Sect. 5 6. Take Ibid. Sect. 7. Eat yee B. 1. Ch. 1. Sect. 9. In remembrance Ibid. Sect. 11. Drinke yee all of this Book 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 1. In like manner he tooke the cup. Ibid. As often as you shall doe this Ibid. THIS IS MY BODY The word This B. 2. Ch. 1. Sect. 1 c. The verbe Est Ibid. Ch. 2. Sect. 1. Figurative and not making for Transubstantiation Book 3. Ch. 1. Sect. 1. My body Farre differing from that which is in the hands of the Priest B. 4. thorow out Doe this Ob. for Sacrifice B. 6. Ch. 1. Sect. 1. Is shed Is broken Is given Ob. for Sacrifice Ibid. Sect. 2. Both unreasonably In remembrance of mee B. 6. thorowout Shed for remission of sins Ob. for a Sacrifice Propitiatory B. 6. Ch. 8. Sect. 2. Matth. 28. 6. He is not here for he is risen Opp. against Being in two places at once Book 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 4. Luc. 24. 16. Their eyes were holden Ob. B. 4. Ch. 3. Sect. 9. Ibid. Knowen at Emmaus by breaking of bread Ob. Book 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 3. Ioh. 6. 54. Who so eateth my flesh Opp. Booke 5. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. Ibid. vers 63. It is the Spirit that quickneth Ibid. Ch. 5. Sect. 2. Chap. 3. Sect. 6. Ioh. 19. 33. They brake not his legs Ob. B. 6. Ch. 1. Sect. 2. Ch. 3. Sect. 10. Acts 2. 42. They continued in fellowship breaking of bread Ob. B. 1. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Acts 9. Concerning Christ's Apparance to Saul Ob. B. 4. Ch. 4. Sect. 5. Acts 13. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ob. B. 6. Ch. 2. Sect. 1. 1. Cor. 5. 7. Our Passeover is sacrificed Ob. B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. 1. Cor. 10. 3. The same spirituall meat Opp. Booke 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 1. Ibid. vers 16. The Bread which wee breake Opp. against Transubstantiation Booke 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 6. Ibid. vers 18. They which eat are partakers of the Altar Ob. B. 6. Ch. 2. Sect. 10.
for proofe of a proper Sacrifice 1. Cor. 11. vers 28. So let him eat of this Bread and drinke of this cup. Opp. against Communion but in one kinde Booke 3. Ch. 2. Sect. 6. And Opp. for proofe of Bread after Consecration B. 3. Ch. 3. Sect. 4. Ibid. vers 27. Guilty of the Lord's body Ob. Booke 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 1 4. 1. Cor. 14. 16. How shall hee say Amen Opp. against unknowen Prayer Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. Heb. 5. Concerning Melchizedech Ob. for Sacrifice B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 2 4. Heb. 9. 22. Without shedding of Blood Opp. Booke 6. Ch. 10. Sect. 3. Heb. 13. 10. We have an Altar Ob. B. 6. Ch. 3. Sect. 8. Faults committed in some Copies of the first five Bookes PAg. 3. lin 35. Read according to the. pag. 25. lin last but one read oppose pag. 36. lin 5. read Publike Procession pag. 53. â—ine last but foure read of longest pag. 61. lin last but two read kept fasting pag. 171. lin 15. for Chatters read Characters pag. 178. lin 24. crucified read circumscribed twice in that line pag. 211. lin 9. read in the Propositions pag. 232. lin 36 for Commandement read Commentary pag. 235. lin 33. read Tropologicall phrases Besides these there is an Omission pag. 108. in the lin 9. of § 4 where over against these words of the Context * Acts of this Councell were not published untill more than 200 read 300 yeares after for proofe thereof the Observation which the same Author under the name of M. Widdrington hath made may be thus inserted in the Margine * Conc. Lateranense non nisi post trecentos annos in lucem publicam prodiisse neque in Tomis Conciliorum à Jac. Merlin conscriptum esse And againe At si Conc. istud plenâ— absolutum fuisset aliquis intrà trecentorum Annorum spatium publicandum curâsset neque Joh. Cochlaei ope indiguissemus qui post totos tercentum annos Conc. istud non ex Bibliotheca Vaticana c. Faults in the three last Bookes PAg. 6. lin 24. for Translation read Interpretation pag. 9. lin 25. adde and read 6. yea and although pag. 36 lin 23. read two Scales pag 74. lin 4 read Veniall sins Ibid. lin 7. read namely not Christ pag. 80. lin last but six read shall eat c. Other Errata especially in the Marginalls by mis-accâ—â—ting of some Greeke words through the Correctors unskilfulnesse in the Character the inganious and ingenuous Reader may as easily amend 〈◊〉 espiâ— FINIS * See the Protestants Appeale in the beginning * In his Sober Reckoning * Booke 1. c. 3. §. 7. a Nomen antiquissimum Missa quod quidem fides Christiana profitetur ex Hebraica vel Chaldaica nomenclatura acceptum esse videtur Missah i. e. spontanea oblatio conueniens instituto Sacrificio Baron Cardin. Anno 34. num 59. Est Hebraicum Tolet. Ies Cardin. Instruct Sacerd li. 2. c. 4. Quidam vt Reulin Alcian Xaintes Pintus Pamelius existimant esse Hebraicum At Azor. Ies. reporteth in Inst Moral par 1. li. 10. ca. 18. b Latinum non Hebraicum est vt Neoterici studiosè exquitunt Binius Tom. 3. Conc. p. 110. Eodem modo interpretantur coÌ„plures Durant de Ritib l. 2. c. 2. p. 190 192. Magis spectat ad Latinam phrasin Salmeron Ies Epist ad Canis de nomine Missae So also Azor. the Ies in the place aboue cited Multò probabilius esse Latinam nam si vox Hebraica in vsu apud Apostolos fuisfet certè retinuissent eam Graeci Syri aliaeque Nationes vt retinuerunt vocem Hosanna Allelujah Pascha Sabbatum similes voces Apud Graecos nulla est hujus vocis mentio pro ea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicunt est autem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aeunus siue ministerium publicum Bellar. l. 1. de Missa c. 1. Melius qui Latinam Suarez Ies in Thom. Tom. 3. disp 74. §. 3. where he alleageth Lindan Thom. Hug. de Vict. Leo primus quidem est author apud quem legerim Missae verbum Masson l. 2. de Episc Rom. in Leon. 1. And Ambrose is the ancientest that either Bellar. or Binius in the places before-quoted could mention Missa à Missione dicta est Salmeron Ies Tom. 16. pag. 390 391. It is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greeke Church and with Ilicet amongst the ancient Romanes See the Testimonie following c Missa à Missione dicta est quoniam Catechumeni â—â susceptâ foras de Ecclesia emitterentur vt in ritibus Paganorum dici consueuerat Ilicet quod per Syncopen idem est ac Ire licet Sic nostrum verbum Missa Ite missa est Salmeron Ies in the place aboue-cited p. 390 391. Sic accipitur in iure Canonico in Patribus etiam atque Concilijs Azor. Ies Inst. par 1 pag 850. Geminâ— Missio prima Catechumenorum alia peractis sacris Missâ completâ Binius in the place afore-cited Esse à dimissione per â—te missa est tenet Alcuin Amalar. Fortunat. Durant quo suprà And the other fore-named Authors who confesse the word to be Latine doe hold that it commeth of Ite Missa est â—or Iubebantur exire Catechumeni Poenitentes vt qui nondum ad communicandum praeparauerant Cassaud Consult Art 24. As also in his Tract de solit Missa p. 217. with others See more hereafter Chap. 2. §. 5. where this point is discussed As for the dismissing of the whole Congregation after the receiuing of the Sacrament by an Ite missa est it was vsed in the second place after the other See Binius aboue d Alij ut Isidorus de diuin offic dixerunt Missam appellatam esse quasi dimissionem à dimittendis Catechumenis antequam Sacrificium inchoaretur quaÌ„ sententiam colligo esse verissimam ex antiquiss Authoribus Clamabat enim Diaconus post CoÌ„cionem Catechumeni exeunto et qui communicare non possunt vt constat ex omnibus Liturgijs vbi non potest nomen Missae accipi pro Sacrificio Maldon Ies lib. dc 7 Sacram. Tract de Euch. §. Primum p. 335. * See Chap. 2. Sect. 9. * See below Chap. 2. Sect. 5. e Durand Ration lib. 4. c. 1. Durant de Ritib l. 2. c. 3. So Christoph de Capitâ— fontium Archiep. Caesar var. Tract de Christi Missa pag. 34. Liturgiae veteres partes Missae Christi exactè respondent Missa Christi Ecclesiae Missam declarat f Liturg. Trac 1. §. 1. * Confess Aug. Cap. de Coena Domini g Microl. de Eccl. obseruat c. 1. Propter hoc certe dicitur Missa quoniam mittendi sunt forà s qui non participant Sacrificio vel communione Sancta Teste Cassand Liturg fol 59. * See below c. 2. sect 9. h Attende Missam Christi c. Waldens de Missa i Hoc officium Christus instituit ubi dicitur Accepit Iesus panem Durand Ration l. 4. c. 1.
141. l Si propriè loqui velimê° falsae sunt istae Propositiones Corpus Christi manducatur à nobis corpus Christi teritur corpus Christi devoratur corpus Christi frangitur quia ipsi modi qui significantur his verbis non conveniunt corpori Christi Sacramentalis locutiâ— esset si corpus Christi dicerâ—tur frangi aut dentibus teri haec enim non possint nisi Sacramento tenus intelligi quia non propriè corpus Christi frangitur sed Sacramentum Mald. Ies de Sacram. in gener Tom. 1. §. Quapropter p. 144. Com. in Matth. 26. Frangi cum dicitur est Metaphorica locutio quià fractiò propriè significat divisionem discontinuationem partium quam constat non fieri in partibus corporis Christi Suarez Ies Tom. 3. dis 47. Sect. 4. §. Exempla tertiae pag. 577. m Corpus quod pro vobis datur id est quod offeretur pro vobis in Cruce mactatum Valent. Ies l. 1. de Missa c. 3. §. Igitur Of the word Eate litterally false so your Jesuites See Booke 5. C. 4. §. 2. n Graecus Textus Effunditur Non est negandum morem esse Scripturae eam dicere jam esse quae futurasit ut hîc Effunditur quià paulò post in Crace effundendus Salmer Ies in 1. Cor. 11. p. 154. o Hic Calix est Novum TestamentuÌ„ Non potest accipi in proprio sensu sed in eo quem clariora verba Matthaei Marci indicant exigunt Sivê enim Calix fumatur pro poculo potorio fivè Synecdochicè pro sanguine in poculo contento non potest consistere ut in ijs verbis sit propria locutio Nemo enim dixerit propriâ locutione vasculum illud potorium fuisse TestamentuÌ„ Novum cum incertum sit an adhuc extet illud poculum at Novum Testamentum est aeternum sed necâ—sanguis in Calice contentus potest esse novum Testamentum quià lex Evangelica in Epist ad Hebr. dicitur Novum TestameÌ„tum apud Matthaeum Marcum sanguis dicitur Novi Testamenti At vnicum est Novum Testamentum Ergo non est Novum Testamentum Iansen Conc. in cum locum pag. 910. p Subest in his duplex Meronymia 1. quia continens ponitur pro contento id est poculum siue Calix provino eò quòd vinum in ipso continetur 2. est eò quòd contentum in poculo foedus vel Testam entum dicitur Novum cum sit eius symbolum propter species Testamentum hoc in loco potest sumi prolege Evangelicâ quae veteri legi opponitur vel vtrem Testamento legatam testatamuè significet Quemadmodum Haeres dicere solet Hic fundus est testamentum patris mei id est portâ—o haereditatis à patre meo legata in quem sensum loquitur A postolus ad Hebr. Iefus est sponsor melioris testamenti id est haereditatis Salm. Ies Tom. 9. Tract 15. §. Tertio p. 98. q Testamentum sumitur prolegato Metonymicè continens testamentum sumitur pro contento legato seu haereditate quae testamento continetur Barrad l. 3. de Euch. c. 5. p. 79. Tom. 4. * 1. Cor. 10. 17. r Sicut vnus panis ex multis granis c. Aquinas in eum locum * See above Booke 〈◊〉 cap. 3. §. 8. * Master Brereley Liturg. Tract 4. §. 8. s See heereafter Booke 6. Chap. 1. §. 2. t Coeleste Sacramentum quod verè representat Christi carnem dicitur Corpus Christi sed impropriè unde dicitur suo more sed non rei veritate sed significaÌ„te mysterio ut sit sensus vocatur Corpus Christi id est significatur Gloss Decret de Consecrat dist 〈◊〉 Can. Hoc est u Gregorius XIII Papa In the priviledge before the body of the Canon Law x Graeci Patres vocant Eucharistiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae lunt apud nostros figurae Sacramenta Signa haec omâ—…a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accepère Alan lib. 1. de Euch. cap. 30 pag. 383. Dionys c. 1. Eccle. Hier. Theod. Dial 1. Macarius Hom. 27. Nazianzen Orat. in Gorgon vocant Eucharistiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 post recitationem horum verborum Hoc est corpus meum Teste Bellar. lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 15. §. Sed Dionys Ep. 9. ad Titum loquens de sacris Signis tropicis locutionibus dicit Christum Iesum in Parabolis per typicae mensae apparatum deifica mysteria tradere Eodem modo Greg. Nazi orat 11. vocat Antitypum pretiosi corporis sanguinis Domini Euseb lib. 8. Demonstrat in fine Christus discipulos hortatur ut sui ipsius corporis imaginem repraesentent Teste Suarez Tom. 3. in Thom. Quest 74. disp 46. §. 4. pag. 547. 552. Theod. dial 1. cap. 8. Scis quòd Deus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luc. 22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ipseigitur Salvator noster 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paulâ— post interrogando docet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen etiam in Matth. 15. calleth materiam panis Symbolicum Corpus y Prima solutio Vocem Antitypon non accipi pro signo sed pro Exemplari c. sed haec opinio facilè reijci potest quià vox ea nunquam sumitur pro exemplarâ— Bel. l. 2. de Euch. cap. 15. z Alterasolutio est alioruÌ„ Panem Vinum Antitypon dici sed ante CoÌ„secrationem non postea it à respondit olim Ioh. Damasc l. 4. de â—ide c. 14. Et Epi. in 7. Syn. Art 6. Tom. 3. sed invenimus apud BasiliuÌ„ EucharistiaÌ„ dici Antitypon corporis post recitationem istorum verborum H. E. C. M. Tamen Theod. apertissimè eam sic vocat Dial. 1. Macar Aegypt Hom. 27. imo Dion Areop Eccl. Hier. c. 1. Naz. orat in Gorgon Bell. ibid. Etiam Clemens in Constit Billius Com ad Eliam Cretâ—nsem in Orat. 11. Nazianz. Hanc interpretationem Damasceni refellunt Bessarâ—on Card. Turrian Durant de Rit l. 2. c. 39. a Foratassis Basilius alij Graeci Patres non vocant typum aut figuram sed Antitypa quia Antitypa non sunt quaelibet figurae sed illa tantuÌ„m quae nihil fere differunt à veritate Bel. Ibid. quo supra b Negari non potest quin nonnunquam nomen Typi inveniatur in Patribus ut ex Hieronymo paulò ante notavi Idem reperitur apud Chrysost Hom. 16. ad Hebr. Bilius apud Nazian Annot. in or at vndecimam in fine Quare probabile valdè existimo vocem Antitypi in eadem significatione usurpari hoc loco quo Typi seu figurae Suarez Ies quo sup p. 554. c Solutio Eucharistiam etiam post Consecrationem dici posse Antitypum corporis sanguinis Domini non solùm quia species panis vini sunt figurae corporis sanguinis Domini ibi rever a existentium sed etiam quià corpus sanguis Domini ut sunt sub illis speciebus signa sunt ejusdem
Scripturam ullam nisi juxtà unanimem Consensum Patrum interpretabor b Valent. Ies Anal. lâ—b 8. cap. 8. Patet nobis via urgendi unum aut alrerum Doctorem authoritate reliquorum c Canus loâ— theol lib. 7. cap. 3. num 8. Plurium Sanctorum authoritas reliquis licet paucioribus reclamantibus firma Argumenta sufficere praestare non valet d Valent. quo supra Quod si per Sententiam Doctorum aliqua fidei controversia non satis commodè componi posset co quòd de corum consensu non satis constaret sua tunc constet Autoritas PoÌ„tifici ut consult is aliis ad definiendum reguliâ— de quibus est dictâ—m Ecclesiae proponat quid sit sentiendum e Bellarm. Epist Dedic Paulo Quints antè Comment in Psal Psalmorum ego tractationem magis propriâ meditatione quaÌ„ multa librorum lectione composui f Maldon Ies in Matth. 20. Existimant Patres filios Zebedaei temerè respondisse ego vero credo eos verè esse locutos Item in Matth. 16. 18. Non praevalebunt Quorum verborum sensus non videtur mihi esse quem omnes praeter Hilarium quos legisse memini Authores putant Item in Matth. 11. 11. Variae sunt Patrum opiniones sed ut liberè fatear in nul a carum aquiesco Item in Matth. 11. 13. Prophetae lex Omnes fere veâ—eres ita exponunt sed non est apta satis interpretatio Item Matth. 19. 11. Non omnes capiunt i. e. non omnes capimus Sic omnes fere veteres exponunt quibus equidem non assentior Item in Iob. 6. 62 Sic quidem expono licet Expositionis hujus Autorem nullum habeo hanc tamen magis probo quam illam Augustini caeterarumque alioqui probabilissimaâ—â— quia hoc cum CALVINISTARUM sensu magis pugnat g Canus loc Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. Sancti omnes qui in ejus rei mentionem incidêre uno ore asseruerunt B. Virginem in originali peccato conceptam fuisse And then hee reckoneth adding Et si nullus contravenet it infirmum tamen cx omnium autoritate ArgumentuÌ„ h Salmeron Ies in Rom. 5. Disp 49. In quo omnes peccaverunt Mariam conceptam in originali peccato eâ—siâ— non siâ— haeresis daninata nempè tamâ—… ad fidem spectat Item Disp 51. A qua multitudine Patrum locum ab autoritate infirmum Pauperis est numerare pecus Exod. 13. In judicio plurimorum non acquiesces sententiae ut à vero demas multitudinem multitudini opponimus At Devoti erga D. Virg. Resp Totam Devotionem eâ—ga illam non consisteâ—e in Patribus ut in Bernardo c. At Antiqui Resp Quilibet senex laudator temporis acti sed illud asserimus quo juniores eo perspicaciores Doctores esse After hee wrangleth and wresteth some savings of Fathers to his part In celeberrimâ Parisiensium Academiâ nullus in theologia titulo Doctoris dignus habetur qui non primum jusjurandi religione se adstrinxerit ad hoc Virginis privilegium tuendum i Bernard Epist 174. Hanc prolis praerogativam B. Mariae tribuere non est honorare Virginem sed honori detrahâ—re Et Paulò ante Nunquid patribus doctiores aut devotiores sumus * Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 1. k Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6. and Chap. 2. Sect. 6 7. l Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. See also Booke 3. Chap. 3. in the words The fruit of the Vine Sect. 5. a See above in this Sect. 4. initio at the letter a b Synod Trident. Sess 1â— c Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 11. * Ibid. Sect. 5. Sect. 10. d Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 9. e Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 5. f See Booke 4. a Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 3. * Ibid. b Booke 1. thorow-out c Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 7. d Ibid. e Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 10. f Ibid. Sect. 10. g Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 4. h Ibid. i Booke 2. Chap. 3. thorowout k Ibid. l Booke 2. Chap. 3. Sect. 2. * Iohn 3. m See above in this Booke Chap. 2. Sect. 3. n Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 2. o Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 〈◊〉 p Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 2. q Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 9. r Manichaei dicebant Christum 〈◊〉 esse verum hominem sed phantasma quoddam Prâ—…l Eleâ—ch Haret s Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 12. Ibid. Sect. 13. u Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 3. Chap. 6. Sect. 1. x Chap. 4. thorowout y Ibid. Sect. 6. a Ibid. b Chap. 4. Sect. 〈◊〉 c Chap. 6. Sect. 〈◊〉 d Ibid. e Chap. 7. Sect. 6. f Chap. 7. Sect. 6. g Chap. 4. Sect. 9. h Prateol Elâ—nch â—â—res Tit. Philoponus Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 Statuit morâ—…m resurrectionem esse viz. ratâ—onalium animaruÌ„ cum corruptibili corpore indissolubilem unionem i Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6. k Ibid. Chap. 3. Sect. 2. l Chap. 4. Sect. 6. at b c m Ibid. n Booke 5. thorowout o Chap. 5. Sect. 2. p Booke 5. Chap. 6. Sect. 3. q Booke 5. Chap. 7. Sect. 4. r Booke 5. Chap. 7. Sect. 1. s See above in this Booke Chap. 1. Sect. 2. t Booke 7. Chap. 8. Sect. 2. u Chap. 5. Sect. 3. x Chap. 9. Sect. 5.