spiritually and effectually and touching al deriuation of vertue from his flesh as profitably eate Christ if so be at least we beleeue his death resurrection as fully and sufficiently as doth the Protestant which is easie to do VVherefore let this stand for a second degree of retracting his first iudgement that here not only the true and real presence of the body and blud but also al true and real deriuation or participation of any vertue or force to be obteyned in the supper is vtterly remoued for so much as the supper conteyneth nothing singular aboue vsual Christian beleefe and then doubtles no more real vertue is traduced from Christs flesh vnto vs supping then to a child saying his beleefe to a preacher preaching a good sermon or his audience attending him to a rich man geving his almes or a poore man saying his Pater noster or if that phrase be better liked the Lords prayer Al which beleeving Christ to haue dyed for their redemption and risen for their iustification as wel as doth a Caluinist and so beleeue they or else they are no Christians eate Christ as truly effectually really as doth any Caluinist vvhen he communicateth after Caluins guise And this maner of eating is most frequent in the bookes of Caluin and al Caluinists as when Caluin writeth that we haue perpetually a spiritual and ordinarie communication eating of the flesh of Christ out of the supper as wel as in the supper this eating is wrought only by faith Mary in the supper there is a figure adioyned besides As when Beza with a whole troupe of ministers defineth in the synode of Rochel that albeit the upper be particularly appoynted for our mystical piritual communication of Christ â—et Christ is receiued as fully cum omnibus suis donâ—s â—tiam in simplici verbo with al his gifts blessings yea in a simple word or sermon As when our English Iewel a true disciple of Caluin Zuinglius writeth that Christ 6. Ioan. speaketh of the spiritual eating by faith by which his very flesh very blud in deed verily is eaten drunken Notwithstanding we say saith he that Christ afterward in his last supper vnto the same piritual eating added also an outward Sacrament or figure In which senteÌ„ces Iohn Caluin Beza with his Synodical ministers and M. Iewel teach according to the true opinion of al Caluinists and Zuinglians that in the supper Christs flesh or presence is no otherwise then out of the supper at any other time saue that then there is a peece of bread in figure thereof ioyned to the spiritual eating VVhich as Caluin truly accompteth among Christians to be very ordinarie because it is nothing els but to beleeue â—o it is so far from reâ—uiring any miraculous descent of Christ to vs that according to Caluin his folowers vve rather vvorke the miracle in ascending vp in to heauen to Christ For the right way to find Christ receiue him in the supper say they is that our minds stay not in earth but mount ab fâ— in to the celestial glorie where Christ dwelleth there â—â— embrace him For the body of Christ is not infinite but in one certaine place aboue the heauens And so we enioâ— his presence as wel as if he descended vnto vs. And generally albeit Caluin after his maner affecting an obscuritie in vttering his mynd partly for that he vvould seeme to attribute much to the Sacrament because of the great force of Christs vvords and al the auncient church partly for that he coueteth to blind and circumvent his ignorant reader partly also and perhaps principally for that he knevv not vvel vvhat vvas his ovvne opinion or was neuer setled stedfastly in any one and therefore wist nor not verie wel how to expresse the same as him self confesseth may seeme somwhat to differ from other Sacramentaries yet his doctrine in most places agreing with them maketh no difference at al betwene eating of Christs flesh in the supper and out of the supper acknowlegeth no other eating but spiritually by only faith of vvhich spiritual eating the Sacramental bread as he writeth in the supper is a figure a seale confirmation And he is greatly deceiued saith Caluin what so euer magnificence and statelines in words I vse who supposeth that in the Sacrament anything is bestowed on him more then is offered in the word of God in hearing a sermon and he receiveth with true faith So writeth also Peter Martyr a right Caluinist VVe attribute no more to the words of god then to the sacraments nor more to these then to them I adde withal that touching the deliuery obteyning of Christs body blud if ye respect the thing substance it self we haue it no more by the sacraments then by words Nihilo magis habetur ex sacramentis quam verbis VVhich thing also Caluin setteth downe as a sure rule and infallible Fixum maneat non alias esse sacramentorum partes quam verbi Dei c. Let this stand for a sure ground that there is no other office or action of the SacrameÌ„ts baptisme the supper then is of the word of god vz. to offer set before vs Christ in Christ the treasures of grace Againe P. Martyr agreeing iust with Caluin before cited That which Christ promised in the sixt of S. Iohn where according to these meÌ„s coÌ„mentaries he spake only of spiritual eating his flesh by faith that he performed in the last supper but not only there For now also he performeth it when so euer we truly beleeue that he dyed for vs. Mary in the supper be ioyned therevnto bread wine as it were seales of his promise And this he hath in a number of places besides whereof I wil note one more because it may serue for a farther points and fuller declaration of that which I haue in hand and whereof I shal haue cause to entreate more hereafter The body of Christ saith this martyr is receiued as wel in hearing faithfully the word of god as it is in the sacraments But sacraments or symboles are ioyned thereto as it were certaine external seales by which the promises of god are confirmed For the promise and graunt of a prince is first to be obteâ—ned by word before it be confirmed with the seale Let Gardâ—ner striue and writh him self so much as he wil this hath alwayes bene the nature of sacraments ¶ VVhich phrase maner of speaking and discourse of Caluin and Peter Martâ—r iâ— we note exactly we sâ—al perceiue that it conteineth one other degree to remoue yet farther away from the supper al coÌ„municatioÌ„ of Christs flesh and blud then hetherto hath bene spoken of to remoue I say from it not only the substance â—or only the real vertue which by the conduit pipe was conâ—eyeâ— to vs in the supper but alâ—o the very spiritual eating For albeit
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
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
spiritually we may eate Christ in the supper as we may also at dinner or breakfast or walking or praying or hearing a sermon or when so euer we thinke on him beleeue that he truly dyed for vs yet no such eating is proper to the supper â—oâ— vve see it is coÌ„mon to al times and al places the supper vvas not instituted therefore but to ratifie confirme and seâ—le such spiritual eating and herein in this 〈…〉 consisteth truly the essence of Calâ—ins supper and not in eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blud so much as spiritually For such a supper imparteth not vnto vs nether coÌ„municatâ—th the body of Christ nor is cause instrument or meane thereof othervvise then for that it stirreth vp ouâ—â—â—â—â— mynds and geueth vs occasion to beleeue in Christ by vvhich beleef only and no 〈…〉 Christ is eaten So that if by hearing a good sermon or reading a good chapter of the old testament or nevv or talking vvith a good zealous brother or sister a mans faith be better moued then by receiuing the supper to beleeue that Christ died rose again whereof many zealous Protestants much doubt to reforme their â—aith herein haue need of better helpes then is yelded to them by breaking of bread drinking of wine which thing may be very common and is very probably supposed then by such a sermon such a chapter such good brotherly talke Christs flesh is eaten more properly more truly more really and effectually then it is in the supper And therefore this is not the cause why the supper was instituted For so the word preaching serueth much better as Peter Martyr also conuinced by manifest reason and sequele of the Caluinian doctrine confesseth For being thus vrged I deny not saith he but this is our doctrine that the body of Christ is receiued no losse in words then in the sacrament or symboles For this receiuing is wrought by faith And to faith we are stirred vp by wordâ— aâ— wel as sacraments Neque vereor dicere multo etiam maâ—is c. And I feare not to affirme that wecome to the receiuing of Christs body much more by words then by sacraments For sacraments haue al their force from the words VVhich is most euideÌ„t to any Christian man indued with coÌ„mon capacitie To vvhom if one say these words that Christ dyed for our sâ—nnes rose againe for our iustification by whose death we al looke to be saued obteyne eternal felicitie and an other bring him in to the Protestant congregation and there breake before his eâ—es a loaf of bread and â—il a goblet of wine comparing these tvvo together there can be no question but the first vvords are ten rymes more avayleable to make the hâ—â—â—er eate Christ by faith then this later dumb ceremony vvhich may haue tvventie other significations as vvel as Christs passion death and resurrection and our iâ—stiâ—ication and doth not nor can signifie any such thing except some body tel him that such a signification is meant and intended thereby VVherefore the body of Christ being better receiued before supper by reading talking conferring vvith some honest zealous brother or before the taking of the bread by the preaching of the minister then by such symbolical receyuing of bread wine Christ being in that sort out of the supper both more coÌ„monly and ordinarily receiued as Caluin confesseth and euerie man may see then in the supper which chaunceth to many scarce once in the yere to some scarce once in 10. yere the receiuing also out of the supper by words being more effectual and profitable then in the supper by bread drinke as P. Martyr acknovvlegeth and by good reason iustifieth hereof Luthers obiection against this Caluinian supper albeit it vvere very rude and rustical yet lacked it not altogether ground that Christ had smale occasion to institute such a supper vvhereof al the Christian world is ful For there is neuer a Christian but ether doth or at least may make this supper euery hovvre of the day night also if he vvake and thinke vpon the passion and death of Christ VVhich obiectioÌ„ of Luther because it is though grosse and blunt yet sure euident therefore to auoyd that absurditie and that this supper of Carolostadius Zuinglius invention and framing but of Caluins polishing and persiting should not be altogether voyd of some vse this vvas deuised that it should serve for a seale to confirme the ministers preaching and the brethrens receiuing vvho ether before the supper or in the supper according as their mynd vvas thinking of Christ hauing eaten him by faith and cogitation spiritually aftervvards resorting together to their supper there receiue the seales of bread and vvine or some other nutriment to confirme assure them that before they haue receiued the Lords body spiritually by faith And this is the sealing and confirmation proper to the supper vvhereof in the places before noted P. Martir and Caluin vvrite and vvhich Caluin most accompteth of therefore geuing the definition of a Sacrament as it is common to the tvvo Baptisme and the Supper vvhich only he admitteth for sacraments maketh the very essence nature of them to consist in this sealing A Sacrament saith he is an external signe whereby the Lord sealeth to our consciences the promises of his beneuolence thereby to proppe vp our weake faith And this sealing and confirming is taught both by Caluin and al other right Caluinists as a most special substantial proprietie of their supper and the other sacrament of Baptisme also as that baptisme sealeth to vs remission of sinnes and election to life eternal the supper sealeth to vs the manducation of Christs body and blud which by faith we haue receiued For truly to speake after these mens doctrine the Supper yeldeth no more the one then baptisme doth the other the supper no more conferreth or imparteth Christs body then baptisme conferreth remission of sinnes and election to life eternal But saith Caluin aâ— in publike grauntes the seales which are set to the writings and instruments are of them selues nothing for if nothing were written the putting to of the seale were of no effect but when the writing is made graunted then the seales confirme make the same more autentical and as among the auncient Greekes Romanes their leagues and treaties of peace were confirmed by killing a sow which sow so killed had bene to no purpose had not the words couenants of the treatie bene accorded before for many a sow is killed which signifieth no such mysterie likewise in coÌ„mon contractes when matters haue bene by words of frendship agreement before concluded arrested on then is the contract ratified confirmed by shaking of hands without which antecedent words of concord the shaking of hands is nothing which may as wel be done by an enemie to euil purpose as
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
word SacrameÌ„t inuented by man not rather the vvord Signe or Seale appoynted by god As yovv haue altered the Masse in to the Communion Bisshop in to superintendent priest in to minister church in to congregation c. so why in like maner chaunge yovv not sacraments in to signes and seales and then inscribe these your sermons Sermons not vpon the sacraments but vpon the signes and seales But this fault vvere lesse and more pardonable if these men vpon the self same word vvhich they condemne did not buyld the vvhole frame of their cauilling and sophistical Theologie vvhen they ether vvrite against their aduersaries be they Catholiks or Lutherans or in sermons preach to the people because the word being in deed ambiguous ministreth them more occasion to multiplie words to shuffle from one sense to an other to abuse their simple auditors and to saue them selues from plain and direct expressing of that which in deed they stil entend although at some times they are loth to vtter Ioachimus VVestphalus the Lutheran in his last ansvvere to Caluin vvriteth that Carolostadius the first father of the sacramentaries in our daies in his disputations and bookes of the supper of the lord vtterly reiected the word sacrament as new and not found in scripture But our aduersaries the Caluinists saith he because they find the word apt for them to shift and lurke vnder very greedely embrace it and make it their chief ground and ankerhold So Caluin braggeth that this is to him a wal of brasse that Christs words are to be expounded sacramentally This one word he bosteth is sufficient to ouerthrow al the arguments of the Magdeburgenses Hereon he frameth his rules herevpon he bringeth in his tropes If a man marke him he shal fynd that euer he maketh his retreat to this one word sacrament and as a sure buâ—kler he euer opposeth a sacramental maner of speech when he hath nothing els to say In one place he writeth that al this controuersie might forthwith be ended if we could be content to admit a sacramental speech c. Thus he vvhere vve perceiue that although no man be more fierce and eager then is Caluin against words inuented by man out of the compasse of holy vvrite yet him self is content to make his most aduantage chief buckler thereof And this one vvord he not only vseth and vrgeth continually vvhich in him is a great fault but also maketh it to signifie vvhat him self best pleaseth vvhich is intolerable But VVestphalus ansvvereth him rightly that he his Lutheran bretherne are not so simple nor so careles of their faith and saluation as that they can or wil hazard their cause vpon a word obscure ambiguous c. withal stand to rules deduced thence at the pleasure of the Zuinglians VVolâ— Musculus in his common places vvhere he entreateth of the sacraments because he refuâ—eth that name and calleth them sacramental signes for his defence in so doing that good men be not offended very religiously layeth for his discharge â—â—o principal doctors Luther and Melanethon of vvhich Luther writeth thus If we wil speake as the scripture teacheth vs then haue we but one sacrament Christ and three sacramental signes the supper baptisme and penance Melanothon thus That which the common people calleth a sacrament we wil cal a sacramental signe because Paule calleth Christ him self a sacrament So that their proper name it signes and sacramental vvhich Musculus ioyneth is no more then holy or Christian or appointed by Christ vvhom the scripture acknovvlegeth only for a sacrament and only calleth a sacrament and so these fignes are called sacramental because they vvere ordeyned by him signifie him vvho is the sacrament as also a chapiter of S. Matthevv or S. Paul may be called a sacrameÌ„tal chapiter because it entreateth of Christ the only sacrament in which sense al figutes sacrifices many chapiters of the old testament were likevvise sacramental figures chapiters VVhereas then the scripture calleth not the supper by the name sacrameÌ„t but applieth this word only to Christ is it not straunge that the same maÌ„ almost in the same place debating this very question of Christs presence in the supper betvvene his felovves the Zuinglians the Lutherans the Catholikes vvheÌ„ as he should speake most plainly most distinctly intelligibly vvould yet â—un against his ovvne knovvlege and conscience to cover him self to obscure and confound and trouble both the matter vvhereof he treateth and his auditors or readers by such ambiguous and darke vvords vvhich him self vvith such religioÌ„ disliketh and condemneth as not agreable to the vvord of god Yet this man forsooth vvhen he cometh to expound the words of Christ concerning this sacrament not by the vvay or accidentally but fully and directly and of purpose placeth the entier summe substance of his resolution vpon this terme sacrament sacrameÌ„tal For pretending great reuetence to the vvords of Christ protesting that his desire is most religiously to hold fast the words of Christ not to alter any one iote of them that he may thus do he refelleth a number of his bretherne as he calleth them Carolostadius Occolaâ—â—padius Zuinglius Luther and the Lutherans for their expositions of Christs words This is my body for that they al depart from the precise letter and text of the gospel And I saith he can not say as they do that Christs body is with the bread quia ab ipsis verbis domini discedere neâ—uâ—â— because I may not depart from the very words of Christ and if I should thinke as they do haec cogitatio me ab ipso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abduceret such thinking would withdraw me from folowing the plaine and precise letter After this much more to like effect in fine coming to his ovvne exposition Let is now consider saith this doctor how bread may be the true body of Christ that same which was delivered for vs on the crosse so that nether the bread leefe his owne nature and substance and yet receâ—ue in it the substance of Christs body which also remayneth immutable Nam omnâ—no sunt haec omniuÌ„ verissima For 〈…〉 both these are most true that the bread which our lord geueth is his owne body yet as verely bread as it was before the communion c. VVhere by the vvay the reader may see the vvicked and feared conscience of these prophane heretikes vvhom not vvithout great reason S. Paule teâ—meth damned in their owne iudgement vvho feyning a great regard and religious dread to depart from Christs words in the self same instant pervert his words most malitiously For vvhere sayd Christ euer This bread is my body oâ— This wine is my blud what Apostle doth witnesâ—e it what EuaÌ„gelaâ— recordeth it Certainly Christ neuer sâ—ake 〈…〉 contrativvise by his divine wisedome so tempered his words that it is not possible to frame
Vniuersitie who saith he by good reason proved that the word Sacrament and Sacramenâ—ally were not to be vsed in treating of the Eucharist because of their divers and doubtful signification This may serue for a very notable example to the Christian reader to teach him vvith vvhat impretie vvicked conscience and iugling al bent to circumvent and coosen their poore folovvers these ministers handle the sacred vvord of god They confesse the vvord Sacrament not to be vsed of their supper nether by Christ nor his Apostles they dislike it them selues they acknovvledge it to be ambiguous doubtful they protest to reverence the vvords of Christ the true sease vvhereof they solemnly protest to geue to their scholers and in â—ine after al these preambles like most detestable hipocrites mockers of god man they make their resolutioÌ„ vpon the same vvord Sacrament vvhich they haue so improved vvhich they can not be ignorant that to Luther is as much as bread and the real body of Christ present vvith the bread to Calvin in some places bread vvith a vertue of Christs body in others a signe in others a sâ—ale But generally to the Zuinglians and Calvinists and this self same expositor is nothing but bread vvith a tropical signification of the body of Christ vvhich in truth and really they account no more ioyned vnto it then heaven is ioyned to earth or the North pole to the South And this self â—ame is M. B. his determination behaviour For so he preacheth Come on How is the body of Christ coÌ„ioyned with the bread He answereth VVe can not crauâ— any other sort of coniunction nor may stand with the nature of the sacrameÌ„t Againe There can not be here any other sort of conâ—unctiâ—â— then the nature of the sacrameÌ„t wil suffer Againe The nature of the sacrament wil not suffer but a sacramentâ—â— coniunction Thus M. B. after the example of Caluin Musculus forgetting his manifold sober admonitions geuen before forgetting him self and his ovvne teaching that this word sacrameÌ„t was not vsed in scripture forgetting that it was inuented by the wit of man which is mere folly forgetting that it was and is the cause of much strife coÌ„tention digladiatioÌ„ forgetting the Apostolical vvord of signes seales vvhich should be vsed in steed thereof briefly neglecting his ovvne Euangelical rule that nâ— flesh should presume to be wiser then god but should stoupe keepe the names appointed by god him self vvil novv prâ—sume to be wiser then god and leauing the names which gods vvisdome appointed and resting vpon the vvord which mans folly inueÌ„ted teacheth his auditors to beleeue sacramental coniunctions vvhere as he should be plain and preach to vs that Christs body being as far from vs as heauen is from earth is conioyned with the bread and vvine in the supper as vvith a signe significatiuely oâ— as vvith a figure signâ—atiuely or as vvith a rude image imaginarily he stil doth inculcate his sacramental coniunction that Christs body is in the sacrament conioyned therewith sacramentally and vve can haue no other coniunction then the nature of a sacrament wil suffer Al vvhich as I graunt it is very true the Catholike euer hath confessed the same so these men very shamefully abuse such speeches as I haue said to blind the eyes and vnderstanding of the poore sovvles that trust them others that reade them so as nether vve nor they can lightly tel vvhere â—o find them For if a man go no farther then to these vvords the vvords may seeme to be vttered by a Catholike man Againe they may wel be the vvords of a Lutheran although in deed they be spoken in the sense of a sacramentarie or Caluinist vvhom both Lutheran Catholike detesteth I omit here to speake of this coniâ—nction vvhereof somvvhat hath bene sayd already more shal be hereafter For the present the Christianâ— reader careful of his salvation is to be warned that he haue diligent regard to these mens words and maner of speeches for that never as I suppose any other heretikes vsed more craft and false meaning in their words â—â—hen these do They for the most part wil not stick in speech in preaching in writing to vse the very same words and maner of vtterance as the Catholike church doth when as yet they being heretikes haue no part of the meaning But as some man that inteâ—deth to poison an other tempereth his cup with pleasant suckets or sweetneth the brim of it whence it must be drunken vvith some delitious confiture in like maner these impoisoners of mens sovvles because their heresies proposed in their ovvne rude termes vvould not so soone be swalovved of their hearers therefore they coÌ„mend set them forth vvith the sacred and holy vvords vsed by the Catholike church as vve haue had some examples in Calvin before and a number vve haue in our English Ievvel a perfit Zuinglian vvho yet vvil not let to say vvrite that by this sacrament Christs body dwelleth in ours and that not by way of imagination or by figure or fantasie but really naturally substaÌ„tially fleshly in deede VVhich his Cambridge interpreter rendereth in latin very Catholikely Christus per sacramentum corporis sui habitat in corporibus nostris idque non tantum imaginatione figura aut cogitatione sed realiter naturaliter substantialiter carnaliter eâ— reipsa VVhereas yet M. Ievvel as likevvise his interpreter meaneth that Christs body by the bread vvine of their vvorshipful Supper is communicated to vs and received in to our bodies nether in deede â—or substantially nor naturally nor really but only figuratiuely by imagination for that forsooth by their broken bread our mynd is moved to remember Christ crucified and so as the church of Zurick declareth the matter in their Confession albeit the thing signified be corporally absent yeâ— a faithful imagination and sure faith renewéth or remembreth that worke once done ¶ Let vs novv returne to M. B. vvho having disliked and condemned the vvord Sacrament because it is not in scripture preferreth the vvord seales and signes for that so the Apostle calleth them VVhere In vvhat Epistle In vvhat chapiter The devise being so nevv straunge vvhy is not the place quoted Truly I know no such place in any Epistle of those that be extant in our Catholike church And therefore except the Scottish Seignone haue some secret Apocâ—phal Epistles and chapiters of the Apostle I verely beleeue that he findeth no one place or sentence in the Apostle Paule or any Apostle vvhere the sacraments of baptisme or the supper are called signes and seales No â—aith M. B Looke in the Apostle to the Romanes chap. 4. v. 11. there shal yovv find both signe and seale True it is there I find them in that only place of the Apostle vvhere he vvriteth that Abraham by his good and fruitful faith being iustified before â—e was
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
against any sacrament of the church of Christ mentioned in the gospel and practised among Christians but only against the inventions of that pernitious Apostata vvhich hovv soeuer he terme by the honorable name of the church sacraments as likevvise he every other heretike calleth his proper devised heresie by the name of Christs gospel yet I esteeme them no othervvise then the devises of the poorest carter in Scotland then the devises of Robin Hood and litle Iohn auncient rank riders in the borders of Scotland and England yea much vvorse for that their deuises ended only in robbing mens purses and at the farthest in killing temporally their bodies vvhereas these SacrameÌ„tarie devises tende to robbe men of their Christian faith and to kil eternally vvith their bodies their soules also And therefore vvhereas I esteeme them such as such also vvil I speake of them and vvith gods assistance by the gospel of Christ and doctrine of Christs Catholike church refel them And for distinction sake and to separate their toyes from the true sacraments I vvil so far as commodiously I can cal them by the names vvhich M. B. and the Sacramentaries better allovv that is signes and seales not sacraments vvhich is the churches word and not so meete to be applied to the signes and seales of their congregations albeit oftentimes especially in this first Sermon I shal be constreyned to cal them sacraments as they do His definition of sacraments taken from Caluin is this The sacrament is a holy signe and seale that is annexed to the preached word of god to seale and confirme the truth contayned in the same word This definition thus he more at large declareth I cal not only the seale separated from the word a sacrament For as there can not be a seale but that which is the seale of an evidence and if the seale be separated from the evidence it is not a seale but what it is by nature no more so there can not be a sacrameÌ„t except it be hung to the evidence of the word But looke what the sacrament was by nature it is no more VVas it a common peece of bread it remaines a common peece of bread except it be hung to the evidence of the word Therefore the word only caÌ„ not be a sacrameÌ„t nor the elemeÌ„t only can not be a sacrament but the word the element coniunctly That to the making of a sacrament is required the word is out of controversie among al Catholikes But vvhat meane yovv by the word not that vvord of god vvhich the Catholikes do For that is in these mens Theologie magical but they meane by the word the vvord of a minister a sermon preached by him For so it solovveth By the word I meane the word preached For the word preached distinctly and al the parts of it opened vp must go before the hanging to of the sacrament and the sacrament as a seale must folow and be appended there after Then I cal a sacrament the word and seale coniunctly the one hung to the other But here some vvil perhaps obiect vvhat need such hanging of seales to the vvord vvhereas the vvord of god is by it self of sufficient autoritie and needeth no such seales for confirmation thereof To this M. B. answereth with Calvin that the seales be annexed to the word for our cause For there is no necessitie on gods part but the necessitie cometh of vs. There is sicke a great weakenes in vs and inhabilitie to beleeue that to helpe this wonderful weakenes whereby we are ready to mistrust god in every word he hath hung to his sacraments Thus much for the general nature of sacraments as they are vsed in the Scottish congregation vvherein there is scarce any one vvord vvhich carieth not vvith it very sovvle absurditie even against the first principles of Christian faith For to examine a litle the definition vvhereon dependeth al I demaund hovvamong Christians can bread or wine or vvater vvhich be the signes of baptisme and the Supper confirme the faith of the preached vvord Is it in respect of the vvord it self or of Christians to vvhom the vvord is sent Not of the vvord it self For that vvere iniurie to god vvhose vvord it is therefore of sufficient credit vvithout such confirmation as Caluin first next M. B. here graunteth Then it remayneth to be in respect of Christians and here againe I must demaund in respect of vvhat sort of Christians strong or vveake perfit or vnperfit â—â—r so vve find them in scripture and in the church generally divided Truly of nether sort if they be right Christians and setled in their Christian faith For is there any true Christian a Christian I say rightly brought vp in the faith of Christ that beleeveth in one god almighty maker of heauen and earth a god vvhom every peece and parcel of his faith teacheth to be most iust most potent most true yea truth it self vvho possibly can not vtter any salsitie is there any Christian thus beleeving and thus he beleeveth or els he is no Christian for vvhom only the sacraments are appointed vvho beleeveth the vvord of god any thing the more for that he seeth bread and vvine and vvater in the ministers hands The Apostles first disciples Martyrs of the Primitiue church replenished vvith the holy ghost vvho being most assured of every vvord and sillable that Christ had taught them vpon confidence and warrant of such invincible and vnmoveable faith ventered them selues in a thousand dangers and perils of death perils on the land perils on the sea perils among Iewes perils among Gentiles c. vvho 300. yeres space together suffered al kind of prisons of miseries of banishments of torments of rackings of fier of being torne in peeces cast to beasts devoured of Lyons c. of vvhom it is vvritten that some thus vvished and prayed Come fier come gallowes come wild and savage beasts breaking of my bones renting in sunder of my quarters come on me al the torments of the devil so that at length I may enioy Christ they who being condemned to be devoured of beasts vvhen they heard the Lyons and Tigres roring for greedines of their pray exclamed VVe are gods wheate let vs willingly be grinded with the teeth of these beasts that we may be made cleane flower these men vvho as S. Paule speaketh died every day for Christs gospel and the truth thereof vvhen they resorted to the sacrament resorted they for this end that vvhereas othervvise they mistrusted god by receiuing these seales of bread and vvine they might confirme their faith towards him vvhich vvas alredy a thousand tymes better confirmed then it could be by any such vveake seales Doubtles as Calvin saith of them that they are signes memorials to helpe weake memories if a maÌ„ were otherwise myndful inough of Christs death this helpe of the supper
first obey the commaund of taking and eating so if a man first obey and execute the commaund that is to take and eate if after any vvould deny him the promise surely he must by Calvins ovvne iudgement and conclusion litle differ from a mad foole yea an Apostata and plaine enemie of God vvho could so foolishly and madly and Apostatically make God false in performing his promise And therefore it must needs be inferred that in every breakefast every dinner every beuer every supper every banquet feast and collation Christian men receiue the body of Christ as truly and really as in the Scottish or any such like Geneuian communion VVhich as for myne owne part I nothing doubt to be true so yet that these mens Theologie and preaching should tend to the same end should inferre the same conclusion that M. B. after such high magnifying vaunting their sacramental bread and drinke should â—al to such base and contemptible esteeme of it as in these two last chapters appeareth this might seeme incredible were it not that herein also as in the rest he resembleth his maister Caluin who vsed the same maner and veyne And both the one and the other in mind invvardly making no more accompt of this their supper then of their ordinarie dinner from the abundance of their hart their mouth and pen vttereth that vvhich is conformable to their invvard cogitations and vvhich is the principal God vvho suffereth not his people to be tempted aboue their abilitie causeth these false teachers among many foolish absurd counterfeite and affected figures of their lying Theologie vvhereby they circumvent vnskilful persons thus sometimes to expresse in plaine blunt sort their direct meaning that his people seyng vvhereto their preaching is bent that is to a manifest contempt of Christ his gospel sacraments al that holy is may be vvarned to yeld no more credit to them then they deserue that is no more then is due to heretikes to false teachers to scorneâ—s vvho pretend pietie and religion but deny the vertue thereof to enemies of Christs crosse the figure signe memorie vvhereof as they can not abide so can they not this principal divine sacrameÌ„t whereby the redemption vvrought on the crosse is more vniversally and plentifully then by other sacraments deriued to the benefite and salvation of Christians Comparison of the Sacramental Signe vvith the vvord The Argument M. B. his variable and inconstant maner of preaching writing His absurd Paradox that we possesse Christ better by their sacramental â—igne then by the word of god is refuted VVithal it is shewed probably what was the first original cause of this fond doctrine of the Protestants which maketh the sacraments seales to confirme Gods word and promises CHAP. 9. THE variable maner of M. B. his preaching writing in these his Sermons declareth him to be in the number of such persons whom for their inconstancie and mobilitie the wise man in holy scripture compareth to the Moone the prophete to the Sea which is neuer in one stay For as the moone from wane encreaseth to the ful from fulnes decreaseth to the wane and then backe again and so doth the Sea from ful Sea to low from low to ful neuer keepeth at one even so after the fashion of other Protestant writers especially Iohn Caluin plaieth M. B. in these his Sermons At one time we haue Christ his true substance his very body and blud conioyned with the signe in the supper so firmely effectually that no Lutheran could speake more for the real presence Here is as it were the ful Sea ful Moone replenished with al light so much as a man needeth By and by he falleth to the wane to the low water marke that Christs body is no more ioyned with the signe then it is with any word vttered by any man nay lesse then it is ioyned with a word which is in effect nothing at al. In the last chapiter the sacrament or signe was a mere humaine ceremonie an earthly signe and corruptible a peece of bread not worth a straa Here in this chapiter from that low sea wane of the moone he beginneth to fil againe And because those his manifold contemptuous speeches and comparisons vsed against their Signe to any wise auditor gaue sufficient cause to deeme it nought worth and altogether superfluous especially if to his discourse a man ioyne the common vulgar practise of the Protestants who presuming of their daylie howerly eating Christ by faith sometimes in ten yeares together care not to receiue him in the Supper and the true issue of their doctrine is such that the spiritual commoditie which the communicant hath by eating that bread considered in it self is in deed not vvorth the labour for a man to go to the church to receiue it although the church vvere the next dore to his hovvse M. B. somvvhat to salue this soare taketh a little paines to shevv that his bread and vvine hath some vse in it To vvhich purpose he frameth to him self this obiection VVhat neede is there that these sacraments and seales should be annexed to the word VVherefore are they annexed Seing we get no more in the sacrament thâ—â— in the word and we get as much in the very simple word as in the sacrament wherefore then is the sacrament appointed to be hung to the word He answereth It is true certainly we get no other thing in the sacrament then in the word But the sacrament is appointed to get the same thing better then in the â—â—â—d The sacrament is appointed that we may haue a better grip of Christ then in the simple word that we may possesse Christ in our harts and minds more fully and largely then we did in the simple word This is his ansvvere vvhich attributeth great prerogatiue coÌ„moditie to their supper For no only to compare and match it vvith the vvord of god but also to preferre and aduaunce it so much aboue the vvord of god that it putteth the bretherne in fuller better more ample and sure possession of Christ then doth the word of god it can not be denyed but this is a verie singular high diuine benefite and much maketh for the honour and excellencie of their supper But vvhen vvd come to trial hereof al this is but vvords al is counterfeit and being a litle examined falleth out to be like to the apples growing by the lake of Sodome vvhich make to the eye of the passinger an apparance of fayer greene fruit but vvhen he cometh to handle and tast them they â—esolve in to dust asnes Euen so this ansvvere carieth â—vith it some craft iugling and false shevv vvhich being a litle considered prooueth nothing but emptie â—vords vvithout substance mere forgerie and hipocrisie â—vithout al plaine meaning and honestie For hovv can yovv explicate your self that vve receiue Christ better by
me seemeth if partly to avoid superstitioÌ„ partly to correct their ovvne error principally for truthes sake they vvould from hence forth cal their coÌ„mumons rather breakefasts then Suppers For so should men thinke of them as divinely as they deserve and whereas the Protestants cal it a supper imitating that vvord in the Apostle where certainly he calleth not the sacrament but other feasts by the name of our lords Supper they should amend that oversight and vvithal speake more soundly and according to truth as P. Martyr hath very discreetly noted vvriting vpon that same place of the Apostle For in respect of the time and our emptie stomake it were saith he more reason to cal it a breakfast or dinner then a supper And this is the true right issue of the nevv vvord devised by Iohn Caluin and approved by M. B. of that word which they require to the essence of their sacrament a vvord which maketh al singular their communions and sacraments to be of a cleane different nature from that sacrament vvhich Christ instituted for that their sacrament is framed in an other mould hath though not always an other matter yet ever an other forme which geveth the essence to every thing then that of Christs institution theirs receiving al life sovvle perfection and integritie from the ministers cleere voyce and sermon or the receivers faith whereas Christs sacrament receiued his integritie and perfection other ways not by such meanes Again this word of theirs maketh not only their sacrament no sacrament being compared vvith Christs Institution but maketh it also nothing els but common bread for the most part being examined even by this very word which them selues haue inuented as hath bene now declared and the learned reader shal doubtles find most true if he examine the communions and suppers vsed in England France Geneua Zurick ZuizzerlaÌ„d c. by this vvord here appointed as necessarie to separate their sacramental supper from vulgar prophane And if their supper be no sacrament of Christ according to Christs order nor yet according to their owne rules and Theologie vvhat regard would they haue vs to make of it How shal vve esteeme of it as diuine sacred and celestial vvhen as them selues conclude and proue that it is nothing but a common peece of bread an earthly creature voyd of al grace and spirite a dead element not worth â— straa fitter for Pagans then Christians more meet for dogs then men M. B. contradictions The Scottish Supper is no sacrament of Christ The Argument M. B. very notably contradicteth him self in this first serâ—â—â—â— touching the lords Supper as is shewed by sundry examples As before cap. 10. it is proved that they haue no sacrament for want of the word which is the formal part of the sacrameÌ„t so here by a brief repetition of sundry things wanting in the material part which things M. B. consesseth to be of the substance of the sacrament it is manifestly concluded that their supper is no sacrament of Christs institution in respect of the matter no lesse then of the forme CHP. 11. And thus much concerning the word the formal part of the sacrament by vvhich as the more principal vve see proved that their Scottish Supper is no sacrament of Christ Novv for a conclusion of this first Sermon I vvil gather proue as much by the other part vvhich is the matter of the supper according to M. B. his ovvne division out of both vvhich the Christian reader shal be able to gather a most strong and sure resolution that it possibly can not be any sacrament vvhich saulteth both in the one part and in the other vvhich nether hath right matter nor right forme Only first of al I vvil in fevv vvords put the reader in remembrance of M. B. notorious contradictions vsed in this short sermon vvhich I vvisn the rather to be marked partly for that they shew this man to be a right scholer of Iohn Caluin whom he so narowly folovveth eveÌ„ in this blind kind of vvriting and preaching partly for that the original cause of this such opposite doctrine in them both is one that is to say an ambitious affectation vvith high ample and maiestical vvords to vvin some good opinion to their single bread and drinke among their simple auditors vvhom by such glorious speach as it vvere by a baite and pleasant allurement they vvould gladly dravv to some honest opinion of their late devised fantasie These contradictions albeit they be scattered thorough out this vvhole treatise yet the 7. chapiter and 8. and 9. yelde better store of them as for example The bread not only signifieth the body of Christ but hath it also truly conioyned with it For if it signified only a picture were as good And yet the bread is so far from having this coniunction that it vvanteth the signification of a picture I say it signifieth not so much as doth the picture vvhich repre'enteth Christ vnto our remembrance of it self and by it self and so doth not the bread and vvine vvithout a sermon yea and then also it representeth him very doubtfully Againe the bread and wine truly and really deliver the substance of Christ vnto vs For except first we receiue the substance we can haue no participation of the fruit and merits And therefore the bread wine are a very hand which delivereth vs that substance and with that hand is Christs fiesh verely conioyned as a medicine in the boâ—e of the Apotecaries shop And yet the bread doth no wayes deliver or exhibite the body of Christ but only signifie the same For it is a sacrament and ye must looke for no other coniunction then sacramental that is for no other coniunction then significatiue and figuratiue For that is al that a sacrament valueth with these men Again that which we receiue in the sacrament is signified by the bread and vvine is not the benefites of Christ or vertue which fleweth from him only but the very substance of Christ him self For it is not possible that I be partaker of the iuyce which floweth out of any substance except I first get the substance it self And yet the blud of Christ vvhich vve receiue is not the substance of Christ nor any part of his substance For it is no other thing but the quickening vertue and power that fâ—wes from Christ and the merites of his death And we drinke of that blud when we drinke of the lively power vertue that flowes cut of that blud Again there is a wonderful high and mystical yet very true and real coniunction betvvene the bread Christs body yet for al that the bread is no more coÌ„iovned there vvith then Christ is â—oyned with the devil For there is no other coniunction then is betvvene the vvord spoken and the thing vvhich the vvord signifieth and so vvhen Christ commaunded the devils out of
drinke in deed He that eateth my flesh and â—â—keth my blud abideth in me I in him If these be Christ owne vvords and if to have life everlasting to be raised that life in the last day if to abide in Christ and Christ â—â— abide in vs be some profite and al this Christ him â—â— ascribeth directly to his flesh which is the chief and principal instrument conioyned vvith the diuinitie vvhereby God vvorketh these effects vvhat Iewish impudencie â— infidelitie is it to say that Christs flesh profiteth nothing which flesh geveth life to the whole world Doubtles â—â— Christs flesh had profited nothing Christ vvould neâ—â— haue takeÌ„ flesh nor come in to the world vvhich he diâ— to this end that in his flesh by his flesh he miâ—hâ— coÌ„dâ—â—â— sinâ—e that by his flesh he might make an end of that â—â—â—â—â— vvhich vvas ether betwene Iew and Gentil or â—â—â— and man and in the body of his flesh â— as the Apostle speaketh â—â—â—ght reconcile man to God and by the some 〈…〉 ouen for vs the vvay to heaven And therefore M. â— denying Christs flesh to be profitable vvere as goodâ—â—â—â— vvith our Familianes that Christ never came in 〈◊〉 but only in spirite and mystically and so al Christi 〈…〉 may say to him and of him vvith S. Iohn that he in not confessing that Christ came in slesh vvhich by plaine consequence he flatly denieth is roâ— of God but of the devil he is a very seduâ—er and an Antichrist A third collectioÌ„â—e maketh of like qualitie vvith the â—ormer in these words Suppose Christs body be not â—uâ— in the band â—â— mouth of thy body And wherefore should it Hâ—th he not appointed bread wine for the nurriture of thy body and may not they coÌ„tent â—ow Are they not sufficient to â—uâ—rish yeâ— to this earthly temporal life God â—ath appointed Christ to be deliuered to the inward mâ—uth of the sowle The flesh of Christ is not appointed to nurrish thy body but to nurrish thy sowle in the hope in the groweth of that immortal life And therefore I say suppose the flesh of Christ be not delivered to the land of thy body â—et is it delivered to that part this is should nurrish Here a man might demaunde of M. B. how he caÌ„ match these words vvith the last If Christs flesh profite nothing how nurrisheth it the sowle to life immortal If it may nurrish the sowle vvhy not the body or â—ow is Christ potent to profite the one and impotent to benefit the other Nay if it profite nothing how can it be beneficial ether to body or sowle Next the reader may marke how directly his vvords tend to denial of the rosurrectioÌ„ of our bodies which in deed is an opinion already much spread among these bretherne and this denial of our corporal communication vvith Christ helpeth it forward excedingly For as though there vvere no difference betwene the body of a man and of a beast both vvhich once dying should lie rotte eternally vvhat need Christs flesh saith he for the nurriture of our body May not bread and wine and flesh fish such other good cheere as vve have in Scotland content yow Are not the sufficient to nurrish yow to this earthly and temporal life Yes truly And if vve had no more to looke for but this earthly and temporal liâ—e vvhich belike is al that M. B. and his â—elow ministers care for then earthly and temporal vitailes vvould serve and suffise vs abundantly But vvhereas Christians have an other life vvhich they expect besides this earthly and temporal vvhereas they hope that not only their sowle but their body also shal enioy life immortal they can not content them selves vvith bread and wine and flesh and fish and such other belly cheere vvith vvhich these Sadduces and Epicures can nurrish their bodies to an earthly and temporal life there with wel content them selves looking no farther but they require such food such meate as feedeth both body and sowle to life eternal VVhich seing Christ promised and promised that to that end he vvould geve his owne body the bread of life vve therefore in respect hereof contemne this Geneva bakers bread and tapsters vvine and tel M. B. that in thus preaching he preacheth like an â—picure like Marcion like Cerdon like a number of his felow ministers and Gospellers of this age vvho vpon pretence of the immortalitie of the sowle deny the immortalitie resurrection of the body both vvhich our faviour by imparting his pretious body to both nurrisheth to life immortal and these vvicked and prophane Sadduces by denving that grace vnto the one take from it so great a help and instrument of eternitie immortalitie vvhich in time also they vvil doubtles deny and take from the other Hereof hath bene spoken before vvhere vvas shewed that the auncient fathers drevv from this coÌ„munication of Christs body vvith our body a very common and very effectual argument to prove the resurrection and immortalitie of our bodies Here let it suffise to vvarne the reader thus much that as of old in the primitive church Cerdon Marcion Basilides Carpocrates and such other Archheretikes denyed the resurrectioÌ„ of our bodies the Catholike fathers S. Ireneus S. Gregorius Nyssenus Tertullian S. Hilarie and others argued against them out of this Catholike veritie that our bodies being made partakers of Christs body in this B. sacrament vvere thereby assured of resurrection life eternal so in our daies not only Catholike vvriters bisshops but even Luther also the Lutherans accuse and condemne the Calvinists and Sacramentarieâ— as gilty of those damnable heresies because against the general faith of al the auncient fathers they denie to Christian men the corporal and real participation of Christs body VVhen as Zuinglius had reproved Luther for vvriting that Christs body cateÌ„ corporally nurrisheth and preserveth our bodies to the resurrection Luther at large defending this proposition both by the authoritie of Christ and of the auncient fathers in fine concludeth thus According to the old fathers our bodies are nurrished with Christs body and blud to the end our faith and hope may rest vpon a more sound foundation that our body naturally receiving the sacrament of Christs body shal also in the resurrection become incorruptible and immortal And for that cause Christ wil be naturally in vs saith Hilarie both in our sowle and also in our body according to his word Ioannis 6. VVhich thing because Zuinglius and OF colampadius denyed he therefore pronounceth sentence against them as plain infidels These gentil Sacramentaries saith Luther make a faire way to deny God Christ and al the articles of our Creed and for a great part of them they have begon already to beleeve nothing And certain it is that they tend to a verie Apostasie in this article of the resurrection Certum
est eos spectare ad manifestam in hoc articulo Apostastam And as it is croniâ—led by those that vvere present eye-vvitnesses Richerus vvhom Calvin sent from Geneva as an Apostle to preach his gospel in the nevv France ioyning to America among his Calvinists there preached the eating of Christs body to be peculiar and proper to the sowle as here M. B. teacheth for that hope of resurrection was only for the sowle and not for the body And being after convented examined vvhat he meant to preach so he ansvvered that he vvould stand to his preaching and iustifie it repeating againe this reason quia spes vitae non est corporum sed animarum for that the hope of eternal life apperteyneth not to the bodies but to the fowles Briefly one Pappus a Lutheran Doctor of Strasburg a dosen yeres since vvriting against Sturmius a Caluinist Rhetorike reader in the same citie rehearsing in fine the Caluinists Creed vvith this preface I wil saith he frind Starmius â—â— cite to thee the Creed of these Calvinists whom thow dost defend not as they protest openly in wordes but as their mind is and intention which also they vtter in their writing and â—â— not able to conceale in their familiar talke And beginning vvith Credo in Deum patrem multipotentem c. I beleev is God the father who can do many things c. vvhen he cometh to this article of the resurrection thus he vttereth it Credo noncarnis quae ad vitam non alitur nec sustintatur in sacra Eucharistia sâ—d animae tantum resurrectionem vitam aeternam I beleeve the resurrection and life eternal only of the sowle not of the flesh which is not â—ed and nourished iâ— the holy Eucharist to eternal life VVherevnto immediatly he adioyneth these vvords vvhich I vvish M. B. to coÌ„sider Here thoâ—r Sturmius wilt vse I doubt not al maner of exclamations and cryingâ— out against me But that skilleth â—â— For thow hast taught in thy Rhetorike that al such Rhetorical exclamations and amplifications are nothing but repetatio priâ—cipiâ— idâ—e repeating of that which is in question words and wind without matter OsteÌ„de si poâ—es si bonus es quicquam iâ— isto abominando blasphâ—mo Sâ—mbolo falso imputari ijs â—â—â—uÌ„â—u causam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defendendaÌ„ suscepisti shew me if thow be able and if thow be a honest man anything in tâ—â— abominable and blasphemous Creed which is falsely attributed to these Calvinists whoâ—e cause thow a wicked râ—etor ciâ—â— hast taken vpon thee to defend These vvords touch M. B. to the quicke For his preaching as directly tendeth to denial of the Creed and namely this article as lightly may be â—ound in any other of his false bretherne be they Calvinists never so pure and zealous ¶ One more collection and this shal be the last to like effect as the former that is to disgrace al corporal communication vvith Christ he maketh in these vvordes So it is that never no mâ—n was better for carnal tuitching iâ— Christ As the woman troubled with the bluddy issue vpon thâ—â— persuaâ—â—on that Christ may cure both body and sowle she coâ—es to him and as the text sais she preases through the multitude til she come to him and when she comes to him it is not said that she tuitched his flesh with her hand in case the Papistes would ascribe the vertue which came out of him to her carnal tuitching O how careful this man is to vvithdraw al vertue from the flesh of Christ and real tuitching thereof but it is said she tuitched only the hem of his garment and with faith which is the hand of the sowle she tuitched Christ Hereof he concludeth To let yow vnderstand that she tuitched him by faith he saith to her Go thy way thy faith hath saued thee She tuitched him not so soone by faith but incontinent there comes a power out of him So that this tuitching of him hath ever bene is and shal be profitable as the corporal tuitching of Christ never was profitable is not nor neuer shal be profitable These vvords as the Christian reader may easely see tend to evacuate and disanul most of Christ and his Apostles actions here in this vvorld If he had said that faith vvas requisite in those that songht to Christ for helpe as Christ him self teacheth like as the phisicion of his patient requireth credit and obedience that he trust him obey him before he vvil vndertake to cure him he had spoken like a Christian and like a true preacher and one that had a litle marked the scriptures vvhereof they talke so much and for ought may appeare vnderstand so litle But to attribute al to the faith of the partie and to vvithdraw it from al other actions vnto which it is as properly yea more properly due this is dishonorable to Christ and quit besides yea against the vvhole storie of the Gospel Christ coming in to the vvorld and preaching amonge the Iewes for this end that he might plant his faith amongest them ever vrged them to this faith required of them this faith vvithout this faith seeldom did any miracles somtimes as the EuaÌ„gelists expresle the matter could not do miracles in some places because the people vvere so ful of vnbeleefe and incrudelitie for that it vvas against Gods ordinarie providence Christs vvisdome to shevv his miraculous power vvhere men vvere bent to contemne mocke and laugh at him rather then take benefite by him among vvhich people to have shevved forth any such divine operatioÌ„ had bene nothing els then to have vvatered a dead tree aud sowed corne in the sand or vpon a rocke For this reason Christ so commenly required faith as being a qualitie necessarie to make men capable of his grace and benediction other temporal or spiritual Yet the vâ—ne storie of the gospel in the same place noted by M. B. sundry the like prove other things as coming to Christ praying requesting perseverance charitie c. to have bene as requisite as such credulitie and to have coÌ„ curred as effectually to the obteyning of such graces as did this faith or good opinion of Christs person Fâ—â— that by the vvay let the reader marke that the faith here and in like places coÌ„mended is not the Catholike faith of Christians vvhich vve vniversally professe in Christs Church much lesse the Protestant faith or solisidian coÌ„ ceit or rash presumption of their particular iustificatico and remission of sinnes but only a reverend opinion persuasion that Christ as a blessed man and prophete vvas of abilitie to do such things And thus Christ him self describeth this faith in diuers places namely and most expressely in S. Matth. VVhere two blind men crying on him to have their sight Christ called them vnto him and said to them Do yow beleeve that I can do this vnto you
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