alloquitur haec definitio non placet age praesta te Magistrum nos doce quid aliud vocatio Dei esse possit quando Deus vocat dicit appellat nominat Hoc verbum Dei est cum inquit Hoc est corpus meum sicut in Genesi ait Fiat lux fit lux Deus est qui nominat seu vocat quicquid nominat id illico praesto est vt Psalm 33 testatur dixit facta sunt Ibidem Item Irenaeus ait Quomodo autem rursus dicunt carnem in corruptionem deuenire non percipere vitam quae à corpore sanguine Domini alitur Hic iterum audimus corpus nostrum eo cibari corpore sanguine Domini vt in aeternum viuat non corrumpatur vt Haeretici somniabant Irenaeus loquitur de corporali manducatione cibatione corporis tamen vult cibum illum esse corpus sanguinem Domini Ibidem He brings there also the Sacramentarians Euasions and refutes them out of Irenaeus words cleere plaine in so much that it caÌ„not Si quispiam mihi persuadere potuisset in sacrameÌ„to praeter paneÌ„ verum ego captum me video nulla euadendi via relicta textus enim Euangelij nimis apereus est potens Epist ad Argentin habetur tomo 7. in Epist Farrag be auoided auouching withall that it was the Fathers tenet So likewise doth Melancthon Melancth l. de Ver. Corp. Quid fiet in tentatione cum disputabit conscientia quam habuerit caussam dissentiendi à recepta sententia in Ecclesia Tunc verba ista hoc est corpus meum fulmina erunt Ibidem Sequor saith he veteris ecclesiae sententiam quae affirmat adesse corpus in coena ac iudico hanc habere Scripturae testimonium I follow the sentence of the auncient Church which affirmes the bodie to be preseÌ„t in the supper I iudge it to haue the testimonie of Scripture Those who stood on Featlies side were such as by Apostacie had gonne out of the true Church Archidiaconus Andegauensis anno 1035. Docuit paruulos non esse baptizandos teste Guit mundo eiusdem temporis scriptore Hanc autem Haeresim esse constat vniuersalis ecclesiae testimonio idemque fatentur Angli Protestantes Berengarius who Malmesb. l. 3. recanted Sacerdos Pastor de Lutterworth anno 1371. Wickleff Archidiaconus VVittembergensis Lutheri discipulus Carolstadius Pastor Tigurinus Swinglius Ex monacho Apostata Oecolampadius Nouiodunensis Deus adeo hunc Haereticum percussit vt desperata salute daemonibus inuocatis iurans execrans blasphemans miserrimè animam malignam exhalarit Schlussel in Theol. Calu. fol. 72. idemque testatur Hieron Bolsecus in eius vita That Luther Caluin Swinglius Carolstadius Oecolampadius had beene Papists as they speake before they fell into their Heresies is declared out of their owne authors in the booke de Auth. Prot. eccles l. 2. c. 11. Caluin See the Censure pag. 274. Iudas and that great Apostata the See the Censure pag. 274. Deuil I do not mention Touching this Bertrame reade the Plea for the Reall Presence against Sir Humfrey Linde by I. O. Bertram because he that makes any speach in him Caluinisticallie ProtestaÌ„t in this matter doth withall make him coÌ„tradict himself it is the same of that Concerning this Homilie and the Author see the Prudentiall Balance l. 1. c 19. in Odo and Alfrick c. 22. n. 4. Homilie which is cited as Elfricks and thereby casts him of The Iudge of Controuersies is according to our Aduersaries themselues either the scripture or the Spirit If wee goe with the Controuersie to the Scripture to our Sauiour speaking in it the cause is ours This is my bodie which is broken for you Which words if they be certainlie true in a proper and literall sence then wee are to yeeld the whole cause reall Presence propitiatorie Sacrifice and Adoration saith D. MortoÌ„ the last who wrot in England before Waferer of this subiect I haue said oft and now repeate the same againe that the litterall sence or letter cannot be retained in these words of Christ Cited p. 293. This is my bodie without establishing the Papisticall transubstantiation saith Beza If we go with the Controuersie to the Spirit in the Church we gaine the Cause too for all knowne Churches in Luthers time did beleeue and professe it If to the Spirit in the first Protestantes Luther and his Disciples the Cause is ours If wee consider diligentlie the circumstances of the text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my owne bodie that which is deliuered broken crucified for you and of the blood in like manner vt supra pag. 11. wee are more and more confirmed in our tenet If wee reade the Fathers wee finde theÌ„ to be ours the Lord of Plessis Mornay had obiected out of them by the help of his Ministers what he could but he is fullie answered by the worthie Cardinall Peron in a iust tome of this subiect onlie which booke he were to refute that would laie claime to Antiquitie in behalf of the Sacramentarian Heresie Moreouer that our tenet of the Reall presence of our Sauiours bodie vnder the signes was the tenet of Antiquitie the Church tells vs the Church I say in Luthers daies and before a thousand yeers together in which Church there haue beene innumerable great Schollers examining Recordes reading the Fathers comparing and considering the text of Scripture and this Church tells vs the Fathers their predecessors taught them as they teach vs. Why should wee not beleeue them in a matter so plainlie deliuered in the Scripture rather then Daniel Featlie or Oecolampadius or Iohn Caluin If you will moue vs with Authoritie bring greater Authoritie If you will moue vs with Scripture bring plainer Scripture and more worlds openlie in plaine termes interpreting it against vs. The Authoritie of one Deuine of a Nation will not serue against a world The Doctour obiecteth S. Augustine but against S. Augustine as hereafter will appeare He obiecteth Tertullian and Origen and against Tertullian and Origen they in this point were not diuided from the world But had Origen or Tertullian beene opposite in their opinioÌ„ who so mad as to follow them against so great an authoritie as the Church To oppose a lesse Authoritie to a greater thereby to think to winne the cause is absurd If Authoritie can moue the greater it is the more it moues To vrge against the Church the words of any in As when a man speakes of the practicall dictio or vocatio which is a making of the thing by saying it is or calling it by the name Ipse dixit facta sunt Lazare veni foras Adolescens tibi dieo surge to interprete hâ—s words of a meere speculatiue dictio or vocatio Qui est à terra panis percipiens vocationem Dei iam non communis panis est sed Eucharistia ex
vine I will not drinke from hence forth of this fruite of the vine and he is senceles that cannot see this reference it is so plaine If you desire to knowe more of this cup read S. Luke where the thing is more at large You are wont to saie Scripture must expound Scripture heere it doth so why doe not you beleeue what it tells you D. Featlie All the Fathers generallie vnderstand those words I will not drinke c. of the Sacrament Answer You were told that some doe and had answer giuen you according to that opinion which answer you haue not impugned that some doe not as S. Ierom S. Beade S. Anselme Theophilact whose opinion is better grounded as hath bene shewed Wherefore you did amplifie when you said all generallie vnderstood it of the Sacramentall cup. And when you come to verifie your words by naming those all you finde onelie fiue in all with one particular Councell all which held the reall presence and were opposite vnto you in the cause Let vs looke on them seuerallie Clement Cyprian Chrysostome the Authour de dogmatibus Pope Innocent and the Councell of Wormes First the Bishops in the Councell of Wormes were knowne Papists in communion with the See of Rome and at that tyme when by your owne confession the whole world beleeued the reall presence and Sacrifice of the Masse which they also professe euen in the Canon whence you would dispute and throroughout they shew themselues Papists acknowledging Confirmation Monkes Penance or Sacramentall Confession c. together with the Popes authoritie in calling Councells and determining controuersies appertaining to Religion The treatise de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus which you cite as S. Augustines is not his and you haue beene told alreadie what sainct Augustine said was in the Cup Ep. 162. euen the price of our Redemption He taught also that the holie victime whereby wee were redeemed l. 9. was dispenced from the Altar that Christ had his owne bodie in his owne hands Conf. c. 13. suprà pag. 45. and so caryed it after such a strange manner as no man euer before did or could beare himselfe that wee receaue the Mediatour Iesus Christ with our mouth Conc. 1. in Psal 33. l. 2. con◠Adu leg c. 9. and with our mouth drinke blood notwithstanding the seeming horrour Clement saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c as our Sauiour in the Gospell I am the true vine Io. 15. if he a vine his blood and especiallie as in the chalice may be called (a) See S. Ierome cited p. 111. m. wine S. Chrysostome saith in the place obiected that our Sauiour doth chang the things proposed that he doth nourish vs with his owne bodie that we receaue him and touch him and haue him in vs that Angels tremble when they see the thing wherewith wee are fed and exhorteth vs to beleeue it is as our Sauiour tould vs his bodie and not to trust our sence He saies also that is in the cup which did issue out of the side of our Sauiour S. Cyprian did openlie professe vnbloody Sacrifice vnder the formes of bread and wine Epist. 63. Neither can all your glosses obscure those words before alleadged Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed naturâ mutatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro suppose I say the same of the wine genimen istud non effigie sed naturâ mutatum omnipotentia Verbi factum est sanguis That frute of the vine being changed not in shape but in nature is by the OMNIPOTENCE of the WORD made blood Innocentius tertius in the booke you cite expounds the Masse defends the reall presence and teacheth expreslie transubstantiation which he did also define in the greate and generall Laterane Councell D. Featlie What answer you to so many Fathers a Councell and your Pope Answer I might as you see turne the demaund back to aske of you what you say to so many Fathers and a Pope in a Generall Councell But to forbeare making thrusts because you think that is not faire plaie in a defendant as there aret two Controuersies so you shall haue for answer two things first that all are against you in the matter of the Reall presence against which you are disputing which matter is defined by the Church openlie deliuered in the Scripture generallie acknowledged in Antiquitie and those whose authoritie is obiected did all beleeue it as we doe wherefore themselues were to answer your scruple would doe it easilie in manner aboue (a) In my Lords answer pag. 165. specified Secondlie the other Controuersie is not determined by the Church neither did the Councell that you speake of a Nationall Councell only determine and define it nor Innocentius propose it as matter of beleefe but only as a priuate Doctour makes his vse of it nor the Fathers generallie consent in it nor the Scripture openlie deliuer it but rather the contrarie Wherefore admitting it to be probable you are to thanke those Authours for the curtesie for you cannot get so much by waie of argument And he that could should not be contradicted on our part for persisting in the beleefe of the reall presence wee might indifferentlie defend The Reader may perceaue by the Ministers words more then the Minister would haue him to beleeue touching the euent of the conference either that it was or that it was not the consecrated cup which is meant by those words in S. Mathew D. Featlie D. Smith triumphed as if he had gotten the daie saying are these your demonstrations are these sufficient causes why you should seperate your selues from our Church and from your brethren the Lutherans Answer Had he not reason when your oppositions were all answered and the Dispute at an end The reasons mouing to leaue THE COMMVNION OF THE CHRISTIAN WORLD should be vnauoidablie conuincing but hetherto there haue appeared none such nor euer will doe from the mouth of any Protestant THE BREAKING VP of the conference and the Ministers terguiersation ANd heere the conference ended hauing lasted neere seuen howers from noone till it was almost night Some daies after D. Smith hoping according to M. Featlies promise he should also haue a daie to propose the arguments for the Catholike tenet told M. Kneuet that he would be readie to dispute the next Tuesdaie being the tenth of September desiring him to giue M. Featlie notice of it the Sundaie before but though he went thrise that daie and twise the next vnto the house wherein M. Featlie did abode he could not speake with him F. l. 1. d. 1. c. c. v. c. 9. 44. At length hauing gotten to speake with him he warned him to prouide himselfe against the daie appointed but the minister began to pretend that he was to write letters and that there remained yet a great part of their arguments whereunto in equitie it should be answered or at least they should be proposed for the
to crucifie it is Heauenlie mysticall bread not bread in substance but the bodie of Iesus Christ Against this bread they did afterwardes conspire they did crucifie this bread Itaque ill c. pag. 192. And that indeed this mysterie was couched vnder those words in the Prophet mittamus lignum c. our Sauiour himself best able to tell the meaning of Antiquitie declared in calling his owne bodie bread Ioh. 6. and afterwardes exhibiting it the very same that was crucified in the forme of bread by turning bread into it and so giuing it Matt. 26. Lue. 22. On the other side if we make of the words that construction which you would haue you I say who contend that in the proposition before alleadged panis stands for earthlie bread figuratiuelie representing the bodie the sence would be that the crosse was cast vpon that earthlie bread that bakers bread was crucified which is false and ridiculous Si panem eo sensu corpus suum Dominus appellauit faciebat ad vanitatem Caluini vt panis crucifigeretur Why because the crosse was to be laide vpon that bread whereof our Sauiour did interprete the speach or words of Ieremie mittamus lignum in panem You had from me in the former place obiected one reason why Tertullian did not vnderstand improperlie the predicate corpus in our Sauiours words hoc est corpus meum Heere now you haue an other out of this second place which declares that he vnderstood it to be so farre from a meere figure or bread-a-figure that it is he beleeued the thing it self which was crucified which agreeth well to the determination that our blessed Sauiour himself doth adde by way of difference to distinguish it from corporall bread-a-figure He doth not as you would haue Tertullian against his owne discourse expound him meane to say this is a figure or vnderstand by the predicate or word corpus the figure of a bodie the whole sence then had beene this This â—s a figure which is crucified for you but he saith this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my verie bodie which is giuen for you And so much you Chamier doth acknowedge against Featlie Quaeritur quid sit corpus meum sanguis meus Nos candiâ—e liberè ac libenter respondemus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interpretandum cum Heâ—ychio in Leuit 22. Sancta Sanctorum sunt propriè Christi mysteria quia ipsius est corpus de quo Gabriel ad Virginem dicebat Spiritus Sanctus superuenier c. Est igitur corpus illud id est solida substantia humanae naturae quam assumptam in vtero Virginis circumtulit in Hypostasi sua verbum Etenim omnino Christi corpus non nisi dupliciter nominatum est vel proprium illud a nobis designatum vel mysticum quod est Ecclesia the Question is what is Corpus meum my bodie sanguis meus my blood whereunto wee answer ingenuouslie openlie and willinglie with Hesichius that it is litterallie to be interpreted The mysteries of Christ are properlie the holie things of holies for it is his bodie of whom Gabriel said to the Virgin the Holie Ghost shall come from aboue c. It is therefore that very bodie that is to say the solid substance of humane nature which being assumed in the Virgins woombe the word caried about in his Person For Corpus Christi signifies but two things in all the proper bodie which wee haue now specified and the mysticall which is the Church so he a protestant and he instar omnium you know the man that said so and if it be so then a greater scholler then he that said so your Master Featlie The third place corporis sui figuram pani dedisse will neither yeeld solid proofe for you nor vs because omitting the cause of doubting whether they be Tertullians words or no which is insinuated together with the reason by Pamelius out of whom you reade pani the lection and it seemes by some defect in a copie out of which other later were transcribed is doubtfull whether it should be pane as Latinius thinks or panis as most do reade with Beatus Rhenanus or pani as Pamelius found in one of the three Vatican copies which he had and where the ground shakes none but W build on it Moreouer none of those lections do fauour you and were it pani the sence would be that he gaue to celestiall bread his bodie the figure which was before by turning the substance of it into the substance of his bodie and with the exteriour shape which was left couering the same so ioyning figure and veritie together and by the one confirming to vs the other leauing the Church withall a Sacrament consisting of them both not the bodie onlie that were not a Sacrement and the communicant would haue horrour to receaue naked flesh nor the figure onlie that would haue beene elementum egenum futurorum vmbra a signe and nothing but a signe but figure and bodie to and so that the tyme of meere figures exspiring the former substance of the figure Vt ergo in Genesi per Melchisedeth Sacerdotem benedictio circa Abraham possit rite celebrari praecedit ante imago Sacrificij in pane vino scilicet constituta Quam rem perficiens adimplens Dominus panem calicem mixtum vino obtulit Et qui est plenitudo veritatem praefiguratae imaginis adimpleuit S. Cypr. l 2. Ep. 3. bread by conuersion passeth into the veritie the bodie thus were it pani the place would make for vs and imply a transubstaÌ„tiation as I haue declared neither would the words admitte any other so genuine a sence as his for if you take pani for bakers bread the construction supposing which is a thing manifest and aboue demonstrated that the figure he speakes of was an old figure would be corporis sui figuram pani dedit he gaue to bakers bread the old figure of his bodie which figure also was bakers bread which is as much as if he had said he gaue bread to bread old to new iumbling belike both together to make one loafe of two as some doe mingle beere old and new together when the one is newlie made and the other growing soure Pane and panis were further from your purpose as I could easilie shew if any should pretend it the fittest if you could find it in any copie were panem but hitherto no such appeares and if it should in time we should not be to seeke a solution hauing allreadie said that the sacrament called also by the name of bread for diuers reasons els-where specified is a figure of the bodie but not a meere and emptie figure I had allmost forgot to take notice of your translation of the wordes corporis sui figuram pani dedisse he gaue to bread to be the figure of his bodie If he had donne so either at the supper by making of it the blesed Sacrament which is a figure though not
voce earum quae sunt in anima passionum notae neither had he neede of Smiglecius hauing cited the Commentators interpretation which is cleare enough dictiones significant primó intentiones quae sunt in anima Apologist you tell how the species which together with the vnderstanding concurre to the framing of verbum mentis are sent into the mind or vnderstanding by way of sence but you are deceaued these species which concurre with the vnderstanding to frame verbum mentis are species intelligibiles and the obiect sends no species into the eie or anie other sence but sensible species and those sensible species are not sent into the vnderstanding by way of sence Censure It would haue well become a Master Master Waferer if he finds a fault to shew the way to mend it and if you do not shew that it is indeed a fault howeuer your sillie Pupils may be content to beleeue it on your word without euidence of reason and will profit accordinglie in their studies your aduersaries in the matter will not If the species of paper be not sent into your mind by paper and by the way of sence how came it thether did you know what was in this Censure before you reade it are you able to make vs a particular description of that part of the world which is not yet discouered and to write vs their historie it seemes you can for you gather not your knowledge by waie of sence your Intellect by priuiledge was otherwise stored from the beginning which is the reason why you teach diuinitie before you learnd it and talke non-sence so familiarlie whilst others comming more nakedlie into the world with their Quo omnia fieri the passiue or possible and quo omnia facere the ageÌ„t are faine to learne before they teach and to abstract from the phantasmes which exteriour obiectes by the sence cause in them the formes of thinges whereby they may conceaue or vnderstand Aristotle thought that the possible vnderstanding or intellect is Arist. 3. de Anima â— 4. 13. as a painters table that hath yet no picture in it and his reason doth demonstrate what he saith In this table the Soule whose instruments all the powers be doth with her actiue intellect as with a spirituall hand describe the species of that which is represented and offered to her by the phantasie then doth vse it the same species to conceaue intellectuallie the obiect of it Imaginatio aliud est a sensu arationatione Arist 2. de Animat t. 153. which obiect it had onlie imagined or by the phantasie conceaued before The phantasme of it selfe was not able to describe the foresaid species or Image in the spirituall table which the soule hath as wanting actiuitie in this higher kind but there is in the soule power enough to make it A faire picture in a transparent glasse-window is not of it self able to make it's species in the aire or in your eie but light comming vpon it the species is made so heere the picture which is in the Imagination cannot of it self worke a species in your vnderstaÌ„ding but the spirituall light comming on it Species impressa the species is imprinted This way according to the Philosopher the species comes into our mind and from the thing conceaued First into the exteriour sence from thence not the same species numero but in equiualeÌ„ce the same into the interiour sence and still further till at last being purged of it's materiall conditions or abstracted from them it arriues in the vnderstanding where it is not corporeall as in the senses but spirituall according to the nature of the power wherein it is receaued and is not a sensible specie that is seruing for the sense to know by but an intellectiue species as being in the vnderstanding and seruing it to conceaue the thing that was offered to the sense a man paper QuoniaÌ„ autem vt in vniuersa natura est aliquid alterum materia cuique geners quod iaâ—o sic est quod potentia est illa omnia alterum causa effectinum eo quod omnia efficiat quae res vsu venit in arte si cum materia comparetur ita etiam in anima hae adsint differentiae necesse est Atque est quidam intellectus talis quod omnia fiat quidam quod omnia faciat veluti habitus perinde ac lumen nam lumen quoque quodammodo sacit actu colores eos qui sunt potentia colores Arist 3 de Anima t. 17. 18. In nobis intellectus agens possibilis est per comparationem ad phantasmata quae quidem comparantur ad intellectum possibilem vt colores ad visum ad intellectum autem agentem vt colores ad lumen vt patet teâ—tio de Anima S. Tho. 1. p. qu. 54. a. 4. whitenes Apologist That which presents it self to the eie saith S. E. is not the pure essence or quidditie of a thing as they speake in Schooles it is an extended coloured thing which thing we do see and coÌ„ceaue and name agreeing that such or such a word shall be in speach the signe of it And do they in the Schooles indeed say that we do conceaue a man as we see him not in the pure esseÌ„ce or quidditie of a maÌ„ but as an extended or coloured thing and do wee agree that this word maÌ„ shall be a signe of that extended coloured thing Censure Had you meant to make such a comment you should haue left out the text by which the Reader presentlie seeth your mistak Doth S. E. tell you that in schooles we do not conceaue a man in the pure essence and quidditie of a man he knowes well enough how a man is coÌ„ceaued both in the schooles of Metaphysick which doth abstract from sensible matter in the Schooles of naturall Philosophie which doth not abstract from it but it seemes that you do not and therefore if you were yet to begge your grace for Master you were in danger to be put back least the Vniuersitie in your ignorance should be disgraced And the rather because you do not vnderstand a peece of plaine English which you take vpon you to refute In S. E. thus it is That which presents it self to the eie to be seen marke that Confer pag. 51. to the eie is not the pure essence or quidditie of a thing as they speake in schooles and you by experience know it but it is a thing sensible and to be perceaued with this organe and facultie mark that also with this organ this organ and this eie is not our vnderstanding one would think it is an extended coloured thing which thing we do see and conceaue and name I pray you haue not you a name did your Godfather if you be Chrisned vnderstand or conceaue the thing he named or did he not conceaue it how knowes he you his God sonne from an other man or woman agreeing that such or such