they are the children of God and his â—eyrâ—s And by this firme hope vvhich the Apostle significantly calleth the confidence and glory of hope not of â—aith they patiently expect and attend that which yet they see not Thus vve speake and thinke of Christian and Catholike faith and never cal this imagiâ—ation or fansie But if yow aske vvhether we make so light account of the Protestant â—aith that vvhich was invented by Luther vvith the help of his old man after received by Zuinglius and set forth by Iohn Calvin this in deed vve account a very imagination and fantasie or rather a most vvicked presumption and damnable arrogancie And what can yow say to the contrarie or reprove vs for thus thinking and thus saying Mary say yow the Apostle describing it Hebr. 11. 1. cals it a substance and a substantial ground Looke how wel these 2. agrees an imagination and a substantial ground They cal it an vncertaine opinion fleeting in the brayne and fantasie of man he cals it an evidency demonstration in the same definition Hereof M. B. concludeth See how plat contrarie the Apostle and they are â—â—â— the nature of faith If a man should aske yow in vvhat Apostle yow find this definition of â—aith I suppose your answere would be in the Apostle S. Paule vvhom by the name of the Apostle we commonly meane and who is vniversally of Catholikes esteemed the author of that epistle If yow answere so as of necessitie yow must then by the vvay yow may note and hate the rashnes of your felow-ministers of England vvho in their late editions of the new testament have taken away S. Faule or the Apostles name from that epistle Yow may note and condemne the wickednes and impietie of Beza vvho in Calvins life making a register of Calvins Comments vpon the new Testament â—aith that he hath written Vpon the Actes of the Apostles Vpon al the Epistles of S. Paule Item Vpon the Epistle to the Hebrewes as though this vvere none of S. Paules so both Calvin Beza labour to persuade both in the argument also in their comments vpon the same Epistle But let this passe Come we to the Apostles definition vvhich is this Faith is the substance or substantial ground of things which â—â— to be hoped for an argument or sound firme probation and persuasion not as M. B. wil have it an evidence and demonstration for evidence and demonstration is against the nature of faith of things which appeare not noâ— are comprehended by reason and therefore are not evident as demonstrations are to reason and vnderstanding and yet for obedience to God and his vvord which passeth al humaine evidence and philosophical demonstration we frame our wil to obey it and by the same make out vnderstanding to geve firme assent and beleefe vnto it how so ever humaine reason or argument suggest the contrarie As for example in the Catholike Church vpon Christs vvord assuring that in the sacrament is his true natural body the same vvhich was delivered crucified for vs to al Catholikes how so ever they live wel or il faith is a substance ground and foundation of this veritie a â—ound firme and vnremoveable probation and persuasion that thus it is although it appeare not evident to them nether can they prove it by any demonstration or manifest reason if they be once removed from the word of God authoritie of â—aith By such faith â—aith the Apostle we beleeve the creation of the world and al things vvhich are therein By such faith Abraham and Sara old and barren received power to have a child because they beleeved he was faithful who had promised vpon vvhich promise and word of God they so rested that they hoped against hop For which cause of one man even dead by common estimation there rose thousands in multitude like the sand of the sea This faith vvas the right cause why Abraham at Gods vvord was fully resolved to have offered in sacrifice his only begotten sonne Isaac in vvhom the promise of such infinite posteritie and the Messias to come was made And though he could not see by ordinarie reason or discourse how the performance of that promise could stand vvith the death of that his only sonne in whose life and by whose life the promise was to be fulfilled yet thorough this substantial ground of â—aith he persuaded him self that albeit he could not reconcile those two points which seemed to him contrarie yet God vvas able to do it vvho could rayse him vp after death and so after death make him to beget children and multiplie as he had promised To this end the Apostle Paule referreth his examples and discourse of faith that by it as by a sure certain and infallible rocke ground worke or foundation in al adversities we are susteined borne vp and confirmed in assured beleef of vvhat soever God hath said promised ether touching this life or the life to come And vvhat maketh this for the Lutherish or Scottish special faith vvhereby every Protestant Lutheran Zuinglian Anabaptist or Caluinist vvarranteth him self that his sinnes are remitted that he is an elect he is iustified he is the sonne of God and as sure of heauen as Christ him self VVhat one sentence worde or peece of vvorde findeth he ether here in this place of S. Paule or in the whole corps of scripture to coÌ„firme this special faith S. Paule a 100. times speaketh of faith of diuers fruits effects of â—aith but among theÌ„ al what one place is there where faith signifieth that every particular man is bound thus to beleeve that such beleef is necessarie as an article of his Creed vvithout vvhich he can not be iustified nor communicate vvith Christ Let any such text of Apostle or Euangelist be shewed and I yeld If there be no such place as questioÌ„les there is none and this kind of faith being but lately inuented by Luther and his old man and never heard of before and lest of al among the Apostles therefore can not be mentioned in any part of the Apostles vvritings it is as vnfit to applie the Apostles speaches of the Catholike faith to this Lutherish CalviniaÌ„â—aith as it is to applie the EuaÌ„gelists words spokeÌ„ of Simon Peter prince of the Apostles to Simon Mag prince of al heretikes or to interprete of Beelzebub the god of Accaron the duties honors sacrifices appointed for the God of the Hebrues the creator of heaveÌ„ earth And this place which M. B. meÌ„tioneth is so far of froÌ„ approving that Lutherish faith or presumption that it cleane overthroweth and destroyeth it not only in the iudgement and verdite of a Catholike man but even of M. B. him self For the faith whereof the Apostle speaketh is a sure substantial grouÌ„d for that it is built vpoÌ„ gods word which is most certaine infallible and so vvith that there can
so taught the new sacrifice of the new testament which the church receiuing from the Apostles doth offer to god through the whole world Of which sacrifice the prophete Malachie foreprophecied thus I haue no liking in yow saith our lord almightie nether wil I take sacrifice of your hand o ye Iewes because from the rising of the Sunne to the going doune of the same my name is glorified among the Gentils incense is offered to my name in euerie place and a pure sacrifice The same argument and dedustion I haue noted before out of S. Cyprianâ— First that Christ our lord and god him selfe was high priest of god the father and he first of al offered him selfe a sacrifice to his father â—â—â—â—s last supper and commaunded the same to be done in commemoration of him Next that such priests occupie the place of Chist truly who do that which Christ did and then in the church offer they to god the father true ful sacrifice if they so offer as they see Christ him selfe to haue offered About some 100. yeres after S. Cyprian vvas gathered the first general Councel of Nice and about a hundreth yeres after that of Nice vvas the first general Councel of Ephesus in vvhich the bishops there assembled thus vtter their faith that is the faith of the vniuersal catholike church in this matter The vvoids of that most auncient Apostolical Councel of Nice are On the diuine table let vs not basely regard the bread and cup set there but lifting vp our myndeâ— let vs by faith vnderstand that on that holy table is placed the lamb of god which taketh away the sinnes of the world who there is without effusion of blud sacrificed by the priests and that we truly receiue his preticus body and blud beleeuing these to be the pledges of our resurrection The vvords of the other general Councel of Ephesus are to the same effect thus VVe confessing the death of Christ according to his flesh his resurrection and ascension into heauen confesse withal and celebrate in the church the holy liâ—eâ—â—uing and vnbluddy sacrifice beleeuing that which is set before vs not to be the body of a common man like to vs as nether is that pretious blud but rather we receiue that as the proper body blud of the word which geueth life For common flesh can not geue life as him selfe witnesseth saying flesh profiteth nothing it is the spirite that geueth life For because it is made the proper flesh of the word for this reason it is lifegeuing according to that our Sauiour him selfe â—aith As my liuing father hath sent me I liue by the father he that eateth me he shal liue by me This faith I say of Sacrament sacrifice in al sinceritie simplicitie thus passed on so vniuersally knovven beleeued that as vvriteth S. Leo in Italie S. Augustin in Africa very children vvere taught to acknovvledge the true flesh and blud of Christ to be offered in the sacrifice of the masse Tovvards 800. yeres after Christ one Bertram a litle before him one Scot â—s vvrote darkly of the truth of this sacrament Of the vvritings of the one of these nothing I thinke remayneth of the other a litle doth but the same vttered so doubtfully that as the Zuinglians vse his authoritie against the Catholikes so the Lutherans vse him to the contrarie yea they in maner reproue him as fauoring to much the faith of the Catholikes For of him Illyricus vvith his bretherne say that he hath in that his litle booke semina transubstantiationis the seedes original ground of transubstantiation But vvhat soeuer his priuate opinion vvere his publike speaches and vvriting â—ounded soâ—il in the eares of the Catholiks of that age that Paschasius an Abbat in France made a verie learned booke in refutation of him And al vvriters vvho about that age vvrote of this mysterie vsed more expresly to denâ—e the sacrament to be a signe trope figure image symbole c. in such sort as vvhereby the veritie of the real presence might be excluded as appeareth in the seuenth general Councel in Alcuinus scholemaister to Charles the great in Rabaâ—â—â— archbishop of Ments lib. de diuinis officijs Theophilact in Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Ioan. 6. Aâ—alarius Arch-bishop of â—reuirs lib. de mysterijs missae cap. 24. 25. Haymo bishop of Halberstat in 1. ad Corinth ca. 10. Remigâ—ê° bishop of Antissiodorum in Canonem missae Fulbertus bisshop of Chartres in epistola ad Adelman episcopum in lib. Paschasij Stephanus bishop in high Buâ—gundie Tom. 4. bibliothâ—cae Sanctorum patrâ—m and briefely al other that vvrote betvvene the time of Bertram Berengarius ¶ For after Bertram the next that appeared in fauour of this heresie vvas Berengarius vvho put forth him self a little after the yere of our lord 1000. vvhen as S. Ihon vvriteth in his Apocalyps the deuil was let lose to trouble the church This man as vvitnesseth our martyr-maker M. Fox like to those first heretiks in the Apostles tymes toke away the veritie of the body blud of Christ from the sacrament For vvhich cause he coÌ„mendeth him as a singular instrument whom the holy ghost raised vp in the church to ouerthrow great errors VVhat instrument he vvas vvhom he serued shal best appeare by his ovvne behauiour confession In the meane season this old heresie he published vvith greater industrie shevv of learning then his predecessors countenanced it with more credit assistance of many vnstable sowles and sinful persons as is noted by the godly and learned writerâ— of that tyme vvhich only kind of men ioyned them selues to him and that because his doctrine seemed to yeld them some quietnes securitie in their sinne from vvhich they vvere much withdravven by a reuerend feare and dread vvhich they had of Christs presence in the sacrament to the receauing vvhereof they vvere by order of the church at certaine times induced But as the heresie of this man spread farther then any of that kind in any age before so the church vsed more diligence in repressing the same by sundry publike disputations had vvith the same Berengarius by a number of most excellent vvriters against him among vvhom Lanfâ—ancus archbishop of Canterbury in England Guitmundus bisshop of Auersa in the kingdom of Naples Algerus a monke in Fraunce in that verie time excelled the supreme pastors of the church assembled sundry great synodes meetings of byshops and other doctors to discusse that opinion instruct those that erred after him first at Tours in Fraunce next at Vercellis in Italie then againe at Tours vvhere Berengariê° him selfe being manifestly conuicted 〈…〉 a solemne oth neuer to maintaine his former heresie VVhich oth vvhen as yet he performed not but returned to his former filth an other Councel vvas gathered in Rome of 113.
his forefathers vvas lead by the same spirite by vvhich they vvere Philip Melancthon vvho liued in VVittemberg vvith him in his epistles vvriteth of him thus Carolostadius primum excitauit hunc tumultum c. Carolostadiut first of al in our memory made this sturre about the sacrament a rude sauage man without wit without learning without common sense who for ought we could perceiue neuer so much as vnderstood any office of ciuil humanitie so far of is it that euer any token or signe of the spirite of god appeared in him Thus Melancthon Luthet in the second part of his booke contra caelestes prophetas against the heauenly prophetes Martinus Kemnitius in his booke de caens Domini vvith diuets others testifie of him that he vvas instructed by the deuil and that him self vvas vvont to bost among his frends scholers that there came to him a straunge man vvho taught him hovv to interprete the vvords of the supper This is my body especially that first syllable This. This master Carolostadius supposed to be a prophete sent from heauen but saith Luther it vvas certainly the deuil or the deuils dame VVhich deuil aftervvards fully perfectly as they vvrite possessed Carolostadiê° So that Alberus a great doctor among the Protestants in his booke against the CarolostadiaÌ„s vvriteth expresly that the deuil dwelt in him corporally yea that he vvas possessed with many legions of deuils In like sort Luther verely beleeued that the deuil spake out of him For vvhich cause he calleth him a deuil incarnate diabolum incorporatuÌ„ and vsually vvriting against him so frameth his vvords and vvriting as though he dealt vvith a deuil in the forme of a man That I cal him Deuil saith Luther let no man marueil thereat For I make no rekning of Carolostadius I regard not him but that other deuil of whom he is possessed who also speaketh by him or thorough him To be short three dayes before his death the same deuil came to him in forme of a man cited him to appeare in fine tooke him avvay out of the vvorld as vvitnesseth the sorenamed Lrasmus Alberus and other Protestant vvriters This vvas that Carolostadius vvho among many other singularities vvherevvith he adoâ—ned the Protestant-gospel especially brake the ise before them and vvas then first Apostle and guide in tvvo chief points in incestuous marriage and denying Christs presence in the sacrament For he being a vovved priest first of al euen before Luther ioyned him self in pretended vvedlocke to a sister and vvithal vvith helpe of his familiar deuised that interpretation of Christs vvords vvhich before is noted After vvhom came diuers others vvho though differing from him in particular circumstance and maner of expounding that short text yet al buylt vpon his foundation and thereof raised one the self same conclusion that the sacrament vvas only a signe Christs true body blud remoued as far from it as the highest heaueÌ„ is from the lovvest earth as Beza spake in the assembly of Poissye is commonly found in al the sacramentarie vvriters ¶ The first that folovved Carolostadius vvas Hulderike Zuinglius made from a parish-priest a Minister and an Apostata vvho not condemning the exposition of Carolostadius liked yet better of his ovvne conceite as al heretiks do vvhich vvas to applie Christs words to the sacrament but to expound the second particle Est is by the vvord significat doth signifie so that the meaning of Christs vvords according to him is This is my body that is to say this being mere bread doth signifie my body And this Zuinglius supposed to be the true sense and meaning of the holy ghost vsually arresteth him selfe vpon that significatiue exposition of the second vvord is as Carolostadius preferred the turning avvay of the first vvord This and therefore in diuers vvorks treatises heapeth vp together a number of places vvhere the vvorde est must needs stand for significat and finally this interpretation he accompteth so sure and sound as that he boldly pronounceth it can neuer be refelled by any scripture Hovvbeit these tvvo Commentaries thus made vpon Christs vvords that of Carolostadius and this of Zuinglius Luther vvho wrote many books against them both comparing together If quoth he I should geue sentence in the question betwene Carolostadius and Zuinglius I wold boldly pronounce that Carolostadius exposition were the more probable for their heresie then this other of Zuinglius For in this there is no colour of truth Next folovved Oecolampadius first a frier after an Apostata like those other vvho inuented a third shift vvhich vvas to leaue the first vvord This and the second vvord is in their proper and vsual signification but to alter the vvord body in to a figure and so to yelde the sense as though Christ shold say This is a figure of my body And yet vvhich stil is to be marked thus did OecolaÌ„padius not disprouing that of Carolostadius no more then did Zuinglius but preferring his owne marie with free libertie licence to his gospelling reader to take vvhich he listed because both suffised vtterly to destroy Christs real presence VVhereof thus vvriteth Balthasar PacimoÌ„tanus head of the Anabaptists in his letters to Oecolampadius I am very glad to vnderstand that yow dislike not Carolostadius bookes of the sacrament This your iudgement wold I ful fayne haue wrong out before For I knew right wel or at least I supposed that your opinion and ours disagreed nothing at al. But yow alwaies answered me in obscuritie and surely it was wisdom so to do and the time required it But now the time is to preach on the howse top that which before was whispered in corners So that albeit Zuinglius and Oecolampadius made choise better esteemed as hath bene sayd ech his ovvne imagination yet they approued ful wel that of their first founder Carolostadiê° for that these three opinions vvere in substance al one and al tended to one scope and marke ¶ This licence of turning and tossing the sacred vvords of our Sauiour being once geuen forthvvith by like right taken and practised of euerie sectarie that had any colour of learning and vvit many more ensued about the same time one vpon an other vvho al building vpon the foundation of Carolostadius and tending to one end that is to remoue the presence of Christ from the holy mysterie yet by diuers sundry vvaies vvrought the same eâ—h after his ovvne peculiar fansie perverting vvresting the vvords of the Institution vvhose seueral corruptions manglings Luther in one place reciteth refuteth to the number of six one vvhereof to vse Luthers vvords set as it were on the racke cleane inuerted turned vpside downe the whole text transposing the first word This from his first place to the last thus expounding the sentence Take and eate my body That
can not comprehend vet let our faith beleeue For true it is though most miraculous in these sacramental earings of the Ievves who so perceiueâ—h not many miracles to be coÌ„teyned is more then a doâ—t vvere he not if not in vvit a very dolt asse yet surely in diuinitie a very simple one vvho vvould attribute such miraculous excellencie to the ceremonies of Moses lavv vvhich them selues notvvithstanding al their hyperbol cal lâ—ing florishes meane not to be true no not in the gospel And vvhat so euer they meane the vniuersal scope and drift of scripture denieth refuteth it in the old lavv most effectually For although the good men vnder the law which vnderstood their ceremonies and sacraments to be shadowes and darke presignifications of a Messias and by vsing them were kept in an obedience and orderly subiection and expectation of a Sauiour to come by such obedience faith pleased god and were therefore rewarded at his hands yet that those ceremonies and sacraments velded them any such grace as is here declared much lesse the participation of Christs true flesh blud which is the supreme soueraine grace of al that euer was or euer shal be in this world the old testameÌ„t it self and also the new in many places denyeth especially the Apostle S. Paule in whole chapirers of his epistle to the Hebrewes where he most expresly treateth discourseth of their sacraments and state of the old testament in comparison of ours and state of the gospel For to omit sundry textes apperteyning to this purpose in the Prophets Euangelists to rest only vpon S. Paule when he saith that circumcision the principal sacrament of the law was nothing of no effect to conferre grace and that Abraham him self vnto whom singularly circumcision was a sâ—â—â—e of the iustice of faith was not yet iustified in circumcision nor by circumcision but otherwise when he disputeth that no worke no ceremonie no sacrament of the lâ—â— was 〈◊〉 to iustification but only the faith and grace exhibited in the new testament when he calleth al those Iudaical sacraments infirma et egena elementa weake and poore elements or as the English bibles translate it weake and beggerly ordinances when he teacheth the vvhole lavv and al the ceremonies sacraments thereof to haue bene reiected and altered because of their weakenes and vnprofitablenes that those sacrifices baptismes and meates drinkes blud of oxen and goates were only iustices of the flesh sanctified those that vsed them no otherwise then in taking away legal pollutions and so purified men only according to the flesh and therefore were instituted by god not to remayne for euer but only vntil the time of correction or new testament and then other maner sacrifice and Sacrament should succede in their place briefly when he teacheth the law to haue had a shadow of good things to come not the very image of them much lesse the body which is geuen by Christ in the nevv testament that it vvas impossible for the blud of those sacrifices to take away sinne and purifie the comscience for vvhich cause also god foretold by his prophets that he vvold reiect those hostes and oblations sacrifices and that they pleased him not vvhen the Apostle thus vvriteth thus teacheth thus disputeth against those legal sacraments vvhat Christian man vvil say that vvith them vvas exhibited and conioyned the true flesh and diuine blud of our god and Sauiour as before according to Caluins first preaching the same is conioyned vvith the sacraments of the nevv lavv If vnder those elements of bread and wine as novv in the supper the body and blud of Christ were not only figured but also truly deliuered if vvhen they vvere eaten of the Ievves by the omnipotencie of god and miraculous operation of his holy spirite Christ Iesus I meane as Calvin teacheth me the flesh blud of Christ yea the very substance thereof as Beza also with the consent of a whole Caluinian Synode speaketh were receiued vvithal then truly S. Paul in calling such a Sacrament a weake and beggerly ordinance had bene a very vveake Apostle an vnfit instrument to publish Christs name before nations and Princes of the vvorld vvho of Christs diuine person of his pretious flesh and blud the price raâ—â—â—om of the world reconciliation of al things in heauen and earth had had so meane and beggerly aâ— opinion But because most sure it is that b. Paule was â—â—â—nom any such beggerly or rather beastly ethnical â—og 〈◊〉 the Calumâ—â— who in this deteâ—â—able â— aâ— pâ—â—mous conâ—cite â—oloweth Calâ—in know that tâ— hâ—m S. Paule speaketh and he shal once to his eterna payne vnlesse â—e in time repent â—â—ele true that which S. Paule threatneth in eueÌ„ for this particular blasphe â—â—â—s heresie of matching the base Iewish ceremonies with Christs most heauenly and diuine Sacraments A man making frustrate the law of Moyses is adiudged to death therefore by the verdite of 2 or â— witnesseâ— How much more deserueth he more extreme punishmentâ— which thus treadeth the sonne of god vnder foote and esteemeth the blud of the new testament polluted by making it nothing superior to the blud of beasts and so hath done contumelâ—e to the sp rite of grace beyond al measure abased most vily and contemptuously the diuine state and maiestie of the new testament Let the discreete reader know that against this Iudaisme the Christians euer from the begâ—nning of Christianitie haue had touching their sacraments a more excellent faith and diuine perswasion as who vpon warrant of Christs words haue euer beleeued that in the one sacrament was deliuered the body and blud of Christ the same in veritie and truth of substance that was sacrificed on the crosâ—e as before more largely hath bene deduced And for the other sacrament for I mention no more because thâ—se men acknowledge no more the holy scriptures and writings of the Apostles and the church ensuing haue yelded vnto it as to an instrumental cause higher grace vertue then to any sacrament of the Iewes law or al their sacraments and sacrifices ioyned in one For proofe whereof when Christ was baptized the heauens opened and the holy ghost descended to signifie that by baptisme the way to heauen shut before is made open to is the holy ghost powred in to vs as Christ him self by word and deed taught most manifestly except a man be borne of water the spirite he can not enter into the kingdome of god And to testifie that aâ—â—uâ—â—dly and that in baptisme Christians are made partakers of the holy ghost in the begin â—â—â—g of the church the holy ghost â—â—sibly deseended rested on them that were baptized by the Apostles and first preachers of our faith And the gospel Apostolical writings euery where teach that â—â—bert the baptisme of Iohn
by like reason any baptisme vsed in the law were but â—gâ—â—â—â—ue in waâ—er alone yet the baptisme of Christ brought with it the holy ghost it gaue remission of synneâ— and therefore to there that were otherwiâ—e faithful beleeuing beâ—â—â—â—s their faith and beleef baptisme was neâ—eâ—â—aâ—â— for remission of their sâ—nnes eternal life For which cause it is called the holy ghosts lauer or font of regeneration and râ—â—â—uation By iâ— the word of life we aâ—â—cle â—nâ—ed from synne and siued as 〈…〉 â—â—uly as Neâ— and his â—aâ—â—â—lâ—e was sauâ—â— by the Arke and water supporting it in the time of the vniuersal deluge Al which promises and testimonies so plaine and preguant other to 〈…〉 as Calâ—â—â— Zuinghus Musculus and others do with flat denyal that by vertue of baptisme any such matter as grace remission is bestowed on vs or to elude by interpreting al thâ—â— to be spoken only for that baptisme is a signe or marke to â—estife the Lords wil vnto vs is to make a â—est of al scâ—â—pture nothing being so cleare but in this â—ort and with this audacitie may be shifted of or els to expound al these teâ—ts so that nothing be leaft singular to the new testament aboue the old this is plainly to disgrace and deface Christ with his new testament This is to match Moyses with Christ the servaÌ„t with his maâ—ster quit to destroy this new testameÌ„t whose essence coÌ„â—isteth in this differeth from that for that the old law coÌ„teyned shodowes signes prefigurations the grace veritie whereof was fulfilled in Christ Iesus That was a law of secuitude because it found meÌ„ sinners left the in then sinne occasionally encreased heaped synne vpon synne by no meanes of the lavy deliuered men from the burden of synne and therefore is called a TestameÌ„t in the letter which killeth not in the spirite which geueth â—â—fe the ministerie of death damnation because for the â—â—â—son a sore said it was a greater cause of death damâ—â—ion where as this is the law of freedom lâ—l ertie especialy for that it setteth men free from their sinnes hath old naâ—â—e meanes to abolish sinnes when they are committed and to pouregrace into men whereby they may absteyne from committing sinne and therefore is called a nevv Testament in the spirite which geueth life not in the letter which killeth the ministerie of the Spirite and iustice because it maketh men iust holy by conferring grace in her sacrifice and sacraments vvhereas in those other of the lavv was nothing els but a perpetual commemeratioÌ„ of synne once committed without forgeuing putting away or abolishing the same Al which difference the Apostle sammatilie compriseth when as comparing these two Testaments together he coÌ„cludeth that the nevv Testament standeth and is grounded on better promises then the old which out of the prophete Ieremie he noteth to be these In the new testament I wil geue my lawes into theirs mynds and in their hart wil I write them and not in tables of stone as before and I wil be mercyful to their iniquities and their synnes I wil not new remember which in the old testament vvere neuer forgotten but by the very sorme of then seruice remembred perpetually ¶ But to dravv to a conclusion of that vvhich I purpose that is to make plaine and manifest the true nature of the Eucharist after Caluins faith and the faith of such congregations as are erected grounded vpon his Apostolical ministerie and vvithal to demonstrate where to this gospel tendeth that is to a very abnegation of Christianisme establishing in place thereof Iudaisme or some worser thing let vs in this principal mysterie coÌ„sider wel hovv they forsaking Christ and his Apostles forsaking the Apostolical primitiue church of al fathers martyrs the beleef vse of this SacrameÌ„t practised amongest them haue taken their Supper from the Ievves from a Iewish ceremonie vsed amongest the Ievves before Christs coming It is recorded by good historiographers that Berengarius was thought to haue bene instructed in this point of his insidelitiâ— â—y a certain Iew and that al his argument vvhich he made against the truth of Christs presence in the sacrament vvere borowed and taken from Iosephus Albo a Iew a capital enemie of Christian name and religion For that Iew chap. 2â— of his 3 oration which he wrote concerning the points of Moyses law vâ—â—ereâ—h the self same arguments against the Eucharist which afterwards Berengarius his sectaries cast forth Eadem omnino dicit que BereÌ„garius se tatores eâ—uâ— pâ—stea vomueruÌ„t Beza out of Emanuel Tremell us the Ievv telleth that among the Iewes it vvas a custome yerely vvhen they did â—ate their paschal lamb vvithal to ioyne a ceremonial eating of bread and drinking of vvine in this sort The good maÌ„n of the house in the beginning of supper taketh an vnleauened loaf which he diuiâ—eth in two parts and blesseth the one with these words Blessed art thow O lord our god king of al things which out of the earth doest bring forth bread The other part of the loaf â—e â—â—uereth with a napkin and reserueth Then â—al they to their supper merily which being ended the good man taketh out that part of bread which was couered and sitting downe eateth so much as is the quantitie of an oliue distributeth the like to al that sit with him in memorie of their passe ouer Then sitting stil in like order he drinketh and saith the ordinarie grace c. This Ievvish ceremonie I make choise of to compare vvith the Caluinian Supper principally for that both in matter and forme al circumstances it resembleth the Calâ—inian deuise most aptly but partly also that vvithal I may shevv to the reader the incredible â—rovvardnes and peruersitie of Caluin and Beza vvho vvhen they haue equalled al sacraments and ceremonies of the lavv vvith those of the gospel yet forsooth for honour of their ovvne inuention can not abide to haue their peeuish supper called a Ievvish ceremouie or coÌ„pared vvith any such vvhereaâ— Caluin stoâ—meth maruelously Beza in the place before quoted vvheÌ„ he hath likened the one to the other very diligently in fine as though he bare some special reuerence to his ovvne supper addeth by vvay of correction Longe â—amen aliter iudicandum est de hac sancta solemni c. yet must we iudge fâ—â— other wise of this holy and solemne institution of the supper as it is set forth by Ihon Caluin and the church of Geneua whereby we are put in possession of Christ then of thâ—â— external rite humane traditioÌ„ Thus Beza most foÌ„dly frovvardly For what more peevish frovvardnes can be imagined then that they vvho against Christ his Apostles and al scripture haue altogether made equal our Testament with the Ievvish our sacraments vvith theirs ouâ— Eucharist with
circuâ—cised afterward received the signe of circumcision a seale of the iustice of faith which he had being yet vncircumcised that he should be the father of them thaâ— beleeue c. And vvhat maketh this for the sacrament of the Supper vvhat to our purpose here Certainly as much as circumcision resembleth the supper For first it vvâ—l not folovv in any reason ether humane or divine that vvhich is spoken of one particular streight vvays to be extended to al. The argument on the contraâ—ie side is good from al to some or any one But from one to al is as vvise as if I should say M. B. is minister eâ—go al men are ministers For questionles not al sacraments of the old lavv vvere such signes and seales of iustice For so al that vvere vvashed or purified Iudaically al that eate the Paschal lamb or vnleavened bread yea by the Protestant doctrine al that passed the red sea and eate of Manna or drunke of the vvater issuing out of the rocke vvhich the Protestants make as good sacraments as are the Christian should haue bene iustified vvhich iâ— flat against the Apostle and should from god him self haue received the seale and testification that they vvere iust before him Next if a man deny the sacraments of the old and new law to be of one qualitie as al Catholikes do ever did then againe the collection from circumcision to the supper is fond foolish Thirdly it wil not folow from this of Abraham to any sacrameÌ„t that it is a seale of iustice to the receiuer For albeit it were so in AbrahaÌ„ of whom the scripture testifieth that before this time he was iustified and afterwards receiving the signe of circumcision that was to him a seale and confirmation of iustice as the plain storie and sequele of the Scripture sheweth and S. Chrysostom expoundeth yet this signe can be no such seale to al others except they haue the like warrant and testimonie of their iustice from god out of his word as Abraham had which to affirme fighteth directly against the Protestants doctrine who teach that many were as then circumcised so now baptized who are not iust before god but remayne stil in their sinnes So nether baptisme now nor circumcision then could be to such men a seale and confirmation of iustice which they then had not nor novv haue Fourthly this vvas to Abraham a seale not of iustice only but also of an other promise as vvitnesseth S. Paule â—â— fiereâ— pater multarum gentium that he should become the father of many nations both of Ievves Gentilessuch as beleeved For as before his circumcision he vvas iustified by his faith to testifie that the Gentiles might be iustified if they beleeved and did as he did vvithout circumcision so after vvas he circumcised to testifie that in like â—ort the circumcised Ievv should be iustified as he vvas And as to him his circumcision vvas a seale of his iustice by â—aith so vvas it also a seale assurance that he should be the father of many natioÌ„s vvhich beleeved vvere they circumcised or no. Which both parts the Apostle in one brief sentence for this cause coupleth together And nether this Apostle nor any other nether Evangelist noâ— prophet ever calleth circumcision a seale but in this special place and that no doubt for this special reason So that this being a proper privilege and prerogatiue geâ—eâ— in singular sort to Abraham in testimonie of his obedience and faith as Beza also in part confesseth pecâ—liari ratione hoc convenit Abrahamo cui vni dictum est in â—ebenediâ—entur omnes gentes this saith Beza agreeth to Abraham after a verie special and peculiar sort vnto whom only it was said in thee shal al nations be blessed M. B. must learne as the laâ—v and common reason teacheth him that priuilegia paucorum non faciunt legem communem The priuileges of a few much lesse of one make no common'law for al. And therefore al sacraments can not be called seales although the sacrament of circumcision was so to Abraham Fiftly which is the principal in this place how soeuer that were to Abraham a seale of iustice whether as Origen interpreteth it because it shut vp the iustice of faith vvhich vvas in the time of the gospel to be plainly opened so that this carnal circumcision vvas a secret feale and presignification of the internal circumcision vvhich vvas to be vvrought spiritually after or as S. Chrysostoni interpreteth it vvas a kind of bond and obligation vvhich God tookâ— of Abraham to bynd him and his posteritie the more deeply to gods service for as vvhen vve distrust mens vvords vve take some pledge of them so god knovving the inconstancie of mens mynds vvould haue this signe and assurance from them saith S. Chrysostom or as some other vvil a signe and seale to put men in memorie of their dutie to god in vvhich soâ—t also our sacraments of baptisme and the Eucharist are signes and seales of Christs death his paâ—sioÌ„ and resurrection to the cogitation and remembrance vvhereof vve are induced by the vse of them or vvhat so euer good sense of this word is geuen by good men no good man ever expounded it to signifie that it is oâ— waâ— a seale to confirme the promises of god or gods woâ—d preached which is the point of our question here intreated Finally of this place amongst other let the Christian reader stil nâ—â—â— the frowardnes of our adâ—ersaries vvho in al the nevv Testament having this only tâ—â—t vvhere a sacrament of the old lavv is called a seale and that peculiarly in one man vpon that one place being so doubtful in deed not applicable to other sacraments wil needs reproue the vsual speech of the church vvhich though not found in scripture as they suppose yet can they not deny but it was vsed in the primitiue church from the beginning For so M. B. confesseth as a thing certain and out of question that the Latin Theologes who were most auncient did interprete the Greeke word 〈◊〉 by the word sacrament and applied it to baptisme and the Supper and vvith a litle study and humilitie he might fynd the vvord thus taken in the scripture it self Vpon this so vveake and pitiful a foundation that is vpon this one vvord of seales once vsed by the Apostle in one only place applied to one only man by special privilege never attributed to baptisme never to the supper that is to say vpon his ovvne mere fansie or at lest vpoÌ„ the fansie of Caluin a vvicked and proud heretike condemned not only by Catholikes but also by most of his felow heretikes of this age M. B. buildeth his entier definition of sacraments VVhich therefore if in this discourse I refute vvith any contemptible words or comparisons let the Reader vvel vnderstand me that In ever intend any such vvord or comparison
Christ These fevv instances and exceptions for example sake I geue to the Christian reader vvho may find a number of this sort if he please advisedly to consider that vvhich bath bene said of this matter heretofore And if novv according to M. B. his resolution a man leaving out the least ceremonie vsed by Christ in his supper perverteth the whole institution and marreth the sacrament so as it becommeth no sacrament vvhat horrible prophaners perverters and destroyers of gods sacraments are these vvho leaue out so many and those not the least but the greatest vveightiest ceremonies And if they haue no sacrament vvho lacke in the administratioÌ„ any signe elemental or ceremonial any material part because they be al substaÌ„tial how far are these men from having any shew colour pretence or similitude of Christs Sacrament who lack so many signes ceremonial substantial besides vvhich is the head top leaue out cleane al the vvords of Christ vvhich in deed is the formal therefore the chief soveraine and principal part of the sacrament hovv soever it please these proud ministers to take that honour froÌ„ the vvord of Christ attribute it to their owne vvord Truly as the Catholike for sundry other reasons hath iust cause to abhorre their bread and vvine as polluted as schismatical as heretical as leading the high vvay to Gods vvrath and indignation to hel damnation so these arguments and reasons geven published by them selues suffise to proue as much to proue their communion a schismatical communion cleane divided from Christs communion a perverting a corrupting and destroying of his holy sacrament vvith vvhich it hath no more resemblance by this their ovvne confession then hath an ape vvith a man copper vvith gold heresie vvith religion and an angel of darknes vvith an angel of light Yea many times spiritually sprites of hel doubtles counterfeit Saints and Angels and many apes or munkeys sensibly counterfeit the actions of men vvith more likelihood colour and probabilitie then these mens apish and spritish communion resembleth the Divine Sacrament ordayned by our blessed Saviour Of names attributed to the Sacrament The Argument Of names by which the blessed Sacrament is called in the scripture It is not there called the Lords supper as M. B. falsely supposeth nor yet the Communion Toat it is called mensa domini our Lords table maketh nothing against the sacrifice but rather for it Of names by which the B. Sacrament according to M. B. opinion is called in the auncient fathers It is not called a publique action as by any proper name nor yet a banquet of loue VVhy it is called the Eucharist It was also called the Masse in the Primitiue church when that church generally and especially the church of Rome was most pure and therefore that name savoureth nothing of Idolatry as M. B. ignorantly concludeth But most commonly it was named the sacrifice of Christs body and as a true and real sacrifice was offered vnto God in the church euer since Christs time and first institution of it M. B. argument made to the contrarie answered CHAP. 12 Many of the things which M. B. handleth in these later Sermons or as he calleth them lessons and exercises are by him particularly vttered and entreated of so far furth as concerneth the Sacrament in the first sermon or lesson likewise so much hath bene said of them by me as I thinke convenient ether for proofe of the truth or confutation of error For which cause I shal when they occurre hereafter passe them over in silence or touch them more sleightly The first nevv matter mentioned in this lesson is about names geven to the SacrameÌ„t in holy scripture auncient fathers wherein he speaketh some truth which therefore I gladly embrace as that it is called in the booke of god The body and blud of Christ and never the figure trope signe or seale of that body and blud and therefore belike that being the proper name conteyneth also in proprietie of speech what it is Also it is called the coÌ„munion and participation of Christs body and blud vvhich implieth the former truth It is also called saith M. B. the supper of the lord not a prophane supper not a supper appointed for the belly for Christ had ended the supper that was appointed for the belly or ever he began this supper which was appointed for the sowle In this M. B. is somewhat deceiued as likewise in his explication of the next vz that it is called also in the bible The table of the Lord. It is not called the altar of the lord but the Apostle calâ— it a table to sit at and not an altar to stand at a table to take and receiue and not an altar to offer and propine That M. B. supposeth S. Paule to name the sacrament dominicâ—â— caenam our lords supper it is his error and not S. Paules meaning For albeit at the same time and in the same place whereof S. Paule speaketh Christs sacrament was also communicated vnto the faithful for which cause and also in regard of the time when Christ first instituted it some auncient fathers sometimes inscribe their treatises of the Sacrament De caena domini yet that the booke of god that is the bible and scriptures of god geue not this appellation to it it is plain inough by that place of S. Paule where only in al the scriptures of god that word is vsed For S. Paule mentioning that at these suppers of our lord some devoured al and had to much some could get nothing and rose a hungred some were drunke c. declareth thereby that this place can not directly be vnderstood of Christs sacrament except M. B. be of the opinion with some Puritans whom my self haue heard vpon this place to argue that at their Lords supper there should be not only bread and drinke but also varietie of other meate flesh fish rost and baked wine and beere according as it is in other suppers and feasts Vnto vvhich conceit M. B. by his discourse after ensuing seemeth somewhat to incline But the common opinion of learned men is otherwise that this place meaneth the church-feasts of old time termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were called dominicae caenâ— our lords feasts or suppers because they were kept at night in churches which were in the primitive church and also after called Dominicae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our lords howses whence I suppose our name kirke cometh to vvhich feasts the rich sort contributed liberally for the benefite and relief of the poore Before vvhich as S. Chrysostom supposeth though others thinke after the Sacrament vvas also received But that the vvords of S. Paule meane not the sacrament S. Chrysostom is very plaine the circumstance of the place proueth sufficiently This supper saith S. Chrysostom might rather be called humaine then divine potius humana quam dominica rather
prove that Christ can not be at one tyme iâ— heauen and with his church in earth VVhich if he coâ—â— not he would never so have promised So long as they bring sorth no such scripture to prove this sequele or consequent their impertinent allegation of peeces of the holy scripture proving the antecedent nothing excuseth them but that they ground their faith altogether vpon Aristotles philosophie and Galenes phisicke saith this Protestant The Arians the Donatists the Pelagians ciâ—â—l many sentences of scripture yet can any man deny but they drew their arguments from the dregs of philosophie The Anabaptists in like â—oâ—t against Christs incarnation of his mother a virgin â—uddle vp many places of scripture yet shal â—â— graunt that they fetch their doting opinion from the oracles of holy scripture and not from the ayde of prophane philosophiâ— And thus much for M. B his phisicke or philosophie ¶ The other argument taken from the qualities of a glorified body 1. Cor. 15. 42. M. B. prosecuteth in many pages That to be in many places at once is not by S. Paule assigned as any qualitie of a glorified body and therefore â—t may not chalenge it to Christi albeit glorified This argumeÌ„t Calvin in many places vrgeth and much better especially for that he concludeth by conference of S. Paule in an other place that Christs body can not have such prerogative more then the glorified bodies of other Saints for that as the Apostle vvriteth Christ shal make our bodies like to his owne and therfore if ours can not be in many places nether can Christs To this obiection although many answeres may be made and al true as that God if it so plealed him might make any glorified body in many places at once That Catholikes put not the glorification of Christs body to be the only cause vvhy Christs body is in the sacrament for so the blessed virgin his mothers body should be there also vvhich we beleeve to be in heaven most glorious glorified Christ before he vvas glorified gave the disciples his true body yet not immortal nor glorified though he gave it after an immortal and impassible maner only Catholiks shew by the supernatural excellences of a glorified body that Christs body is not subiect to the base rules of this corruptible life of humane reason and phisical prescription c. yet for brevities sake I vvil content myself vvith that one plain answere vvhich is made to Calvin obiecting the same argument vvhich is this This argument taken from the qualities of a glorified body in Christ and vs proveth nothing lesse then that Christs body can not be geuen in many places Only it proveth that our bodies shal be conformed or made like to the body of Christ in glorie but not in equal glorie That likenes or conformitie is not the cause why our bodies must after the resurrection be in divers places because Christs body is dispensed in diuers places at the ministration of the holy Supper Christ hath primaâ—ie in al things he hath more excellent glorie beyond his felowes His flesh hath this glorie which we want that it is meate geving life eternal Likewise this prerogative of glorie agreeth to his flesh that whereas it is geven for foode of life to the members of his church which are dispersed over the whole world he is present in many places which glorie our flesh lacketh Christs body sitteth advaunced and exalted at Gods right hand The conformitie of our bodies with Christ reacheth not so far that our bodies also shou'd obteyne such place at the right hand of God VVherefore the true answere to his argument is that we shal be like to Christ in conformitie of â—lâ—râ— but not in equalitie VVhich answere a meane Christian might learne of him self vvere he endued vvith a litle faith vvhich teacheth that the body of Christ is the body of God and man a body assumpted in to vnitie of person vvith God vvhich albeit it take nothing from the nature of a true body yet putteth it an infinite difference betwene the excellencie of such a body and the body of any other creature be it never so much glorified A brief confutation of the last tvvo Sermons concerning preparation to receive the sacrament The Argument M. B. straunge vncoherent and contradictorie doctrine especially concerning faith and workes in his last two sermons which is manifested by a number of particular examples Of Christ despayring Faith is not geven only to the elect Once had it may be lost Scripture abused to prove contrarie assertions His more general contradictorie preaching concerning preparation for receiving the sacrament There is no comparison betwene the sacrament and the vvord in this respect of preparation for receiuing ether Vnder pretence of preparing his auditors to worthy receiving by holy life he frameth them to most vnworthy receiuing and with manifest and direct opposition to the Apostle S. Paule setteth them headlong to all filthines iniquitie and securitie in finne geuing tâ—â—m assurance and warrant before hand that they shal never be damned but be saued iâ—â—allibly whatsoeuer their life be CHAP. 22. ANd thus much concerning the veritie and substance of the sacrament vvhich is the principal subiect of the first â— sermons There remayne yet the later 2. apperteyning to preparation requisite in those vvho are to receive the sacrament on vvhich I vvil make no long stay as for other reasons so partly because the argument is different and for some part such as a Christian man may vvel approve Only thus much I thinke good to vvarne the reader of that vvhether it be the vveaknes of the man as perhaps or course and sway of his doctrine vvhich is probable â—nough he here as in other parts of these sermoÌ„s pulleth downe with one haÌ„d as fast as he buildeth vp vvith the other He gainsaieth him self as fully and directly as possibly any his adversarie can vvhile he pretendeth to fâ—ame in his auditory vpright coÌ„science sincere life that they may vvorthely receyue the sacrameÌ„t he setteth them in the broad vvay to al iniquitie al losenes of life presumptuous coÌ„tinuance therein For to prosecute these points a litle how can these instructions stand together Thy affection and action must be examined and tried by the square of Gods law yow must see how far they agree with his law or how they dissent from it This is the rule to know sinne which severs thee from God The God of heaven he can have no societie nor can keepe companie with the sowle which is alwayes vncleane This is true Catholike doctrine delivered every vvhere in the scripture And hereof it foloweth that good men in vvhom God dwelleth are voyd of grosse and mortal sinnes vvhich sever from God and vvith vvhich so long as a man remayneth desiled so long remayneth he deprived of gods holy spirite which thing M. B. by many propositions proveth hereafter
depends on good life and good conscience and not on faith alone that it is not sufficient for a man to leave sinne and leade a new life but he must vvithal lament for that which he hath committed and with a godly sorow deplore it and so forth in a number of the like Ipecified before VVhat vvisedome or probabilitie of reason can move a Christian to beleeve such preachers in other their assertions discredite them in these If reply be made that because they be contradictorie it is vnpossible to folow them in both is not this very reply a most sufficient and abundant cause cleane to shake them of to esteeme them for men vnsetled in any one faith and therefore very vnfit to be guides and lights ditectors and Apostles to others vvho as yet have no stayd faith of their owne And vvhat miserie is it vvhat grief of hart to a Christian of any zeale to see men vvhom God hath abundantly blessed vvith so rare gifts of nature both in body mynd as al straunge nations of Europe acknowlege to appeare eminently in the inhabitants of our Iland such meÌ„ to be mislead by so rude so savage so barbarous an heresie by so fond brutish vnreasonable ministers vvho ether vvriting vvith one pen or preaching in a maner vvith one breath at one time and place informe them vvith such contradictorie instructions S. Gregâ—â—â—â— that glorious Saint bishop of Rome vvhen he saw in Rome certain of our countrymen of Yorkeshire or the bisshoprick of Duâ—â—haÌ„ vewing their comely countenaÌ„ce good proportion of body vnderstanding that the country vvhence they came vvas then not Christened sighing from the bottoÌ„ of his hart Alas quoth he what a pitiful case is it that the autor of darknes should possesse so beautiful a people men of so fayre a face should inwardly cary so fowle a sowle But how much more pitiful lamentable is the case now that the same people indued by Gods prouidence with those gifts as largely as euer heretofore hauing by meanes of that blessed Pope or other Apostolical bisshops bene established rooted in the ChristiaÌ„ faith 1400. yeres continually as the Scottish or almost a thousand as the English should vpon I know not vvhat weake pretence vpon friuolous light persuasion vpon the word of ministers most vnstable ignoraÌ„t vngrounded fal froÌ„ the Christian faith to an heresie so wicked sowle as is the Caluinian or Zuinglian coÌ„demned not only by al ChristendoÌ„ besides but also by those very schismatikes Arch-heretikes them selues who were the first authors of this schisme heresie Much better had it benâ— for vs neuer to have knoweÌ„ the way of iustice ChristiaÌ„ faith then vvhen once vve vvere put in possession thereof so carâ—lesly to neglecte it and so shamefully reiecte it embrasing in steed thereof the vncertain sansies of 2. or â— â—oâ—e â—editious Apostataes which is to put our selues in more damnable estate before God then vve vvere in that our first infidolitie as after Christ our Sauiour S. Peter the Apostle the auncient fathers teach ¶ And yet this vvhich I write let not the reader so interprete as though I supposed the learned the sober the vvise and discrete or the general number of â—ther nation so far seduced as to beleeve this ragged Caluinian Gospel For as in England the publike practise of certain bluddy persecutors the daily murthering or imprisoning spoiling of constant Catholikes the chief Theological argument vvhich for many veres hath bene vsed there for only religion though they cal it treason maketh thousands doubtles of civil honest natured men for sauing of their lives libertie and goods to them their vviues posteritie to frequent the Protestant churches vvhose harts yet can not possibly be induced by such bluddy and butcherly argument to beleeve that their priuate Parlament religion is the publike faith of Christ his Apostles so in Scotland not only reason persuadeth the like the religion of Scotland though it come from Caluin and Beza yet being as vveakely grounded as the English devised by as meane instruments in the nonage of K. Edward the sixt but also M. B. maketh a plain and comfortable confession to the same purpose For saith he I see our hail youth for the most part geuen to Papistâ—ie as likewise our noble men for the greatest part trauailes vtterly to banish the Gospel of Luther Iohn Caluin and Bezaes inuention And vvhat maâ—ueil is it if the youth and noble men be thus affected nâ—ther of vvhich ever perhaps liked your gospel the one because even by moral vvisedome and humaine discourse they see it to be nothing els but a vvild irreligious heresie the other because being free from grosse sinne iniquitie gods merciful hand vvithholdeth them from crediting such infidelitie in to which blindnes he coÌ„monly permitteth men to fal for punishment of sinne and naughtie life vvhereas the hote and zealous bretherne them selues vvho vvere the first stickleâ—s and earnest promoteâ—s thereof are now so far altered that they also make as light account of it as other the Nobilitie or the youth I or euen so M. B. testifieth saying that such also loath disdaine ofcast the Gospel whereas in the beginning they would haue gone some 20. some 40. miles to the hearing of this word they wil scarcely come now fra their howse to the â—irk and remayne there one howre but bides at home This is the very forme and essential proprietie of this new gospel Christian reader to please the eye or tast for a vvhile but in short space to lease both beautie and sweetenes and dislike both eye and tast It glittereth at the first like a painted puppet but a very few yeres or moneths take from it the counterfeit shape and leave it to be seene in his natural deformitie VVhen Carolostadius first began it and had made a treatise or two in defense of his opinion the bretherne vvere so feruent in setting it forward that as vvriteth Zuinglius they came flocking in great numbers to Basile vvhere his bookes vvere printed carying them avvay on their shoulders dispersed them yea filled vvith them almost everie citie towne village and hamlet non modo vrbes oppida pagos verum etiam villas ferme omnes oppleusruÌ„t and vvere so earnest in setting vp that opinion that as Vrbanus Regius a principal new Euangelist complaineth they accompted him not a right Christian though otherwise a right Protestant that vvas not a Carolostadian and refused to be present at a sermon or heare the Gospel and vvord of the Lord preached by any that was not of that sect A verbo per nos prâ—dicato abhorrent vvriteth Vib. Regius hoc vno nomine quod Carolostadianus non sum Quasi vero Carolostadiani soli mysticuÌ„ Christi corpus absoluant pro quo Christus sit mortuus A few yeres after came Zuinglius on the stage