Cup his blood These things Bethren are called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another is understood What is seene hath a corporall forme What is meant hath a spirituall fruite If then thou wilt understand what the body of Christ is heare the Apostle saying to the Faithfull Ye are Christs body and his members If ye bee therefore Christs body and members your mysterie is set on the table of the Lord c. He giveth the same exposition in the 26 Treatise upon Saint John By this mâ—ate and by this drinke the Lord will have to bee understood the society and fellowship of his body and of his members to wit the holy Church of the Predestinate And in the Roman Canon in the a Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Hoc est a Coelestis anis qui â—hristi caro 〈◊〉 suo modo â—ocatur â—rpus â—hristi cum 〈◊〉 vera sit â—cramentii â—rporis â—hristi illiâ—s videliâ—t quod â—alpabile â—ortale in â—uce posiâ—m est tâ—b Glos â—oeleste Saâ—amentum â—uod vere â—praesenâ—t Christi â—rnemdiciâ—r corpus â—hristi sed â—aproprie crum diciâ—r suo moâ—â—sed non â—iveritate sed significante mysterio Vt sit sensus vocatur Chriâ—â— corpus id est significatur The heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ although to speake truely it be the sacred signe of Christs body to wit of that which being visible palpable mortall was put upon the Crosse And thereupon the Glosse of the Doctors hath these words which truely are excellent The heavenly Sacrament that representeth truely the flesh of Christ is called the body of Christ but improperly for it is thus called after its manner but not according to the truth of the thing but by a significant mystery So that the sense is that it is called the body of Christ that is to say that it is signified S. Cyprian in his 63 Epistle will have in the sacred Cup water to be mingled with the wine His reason is because that as the wine is the blood of Christ so the water is the People and that the People ought not to bee divided from Christ b §. 9. Quando in Calice vino aqua â—iscetur Christo populus adunatur c. Sivinum tantum quis â—crat sanguis Christi inc pit esse sine nobis si veroaqua sit sola â—ebs incipit esse sinc Christo If saith he any one offereth nothing but wine Christs blood beginneth to bee without us but if the water be alone the people begins to be without Christ Whereby it followeth that as Cyprian did not beleeve that the water was transubstantiated into the people so did he not beleeve that the wine was transubstantiated into the body of Christ And in the same Epistle c Vinum fuit quod sanguiuem suii dixit That which Christ called his blood was wine And in the 76 Epistle d Dominus corpus suii paneÌ„ vocat de multorii granorum adunationâ— congestum The Lord called his body the bread compounded with the gathering together of many graines We have a Treatise of the two natures of Christ against Nestorius and Eutyches made by Pope Gelasius who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 495. There is this sentence to be found which vexeth and grieves mightily our Adversaries e Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per eadeÌ„ divinae effiscimur consortes naturae tameÌ„ esse non desinit substaÌ„tia panis vini Et certe image similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebraÌ„tur Certainely the Sacraments that we take of the body blood of Christ are a divine thing for which cause also by them we are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceaseth not to be And verily the Image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries Note that hee disputed against the Eutychians who held that the substance of the body of Christ was passed and changed into the substance of the divine nature The controversy was not about the conversion of the accidents but of the Substance which Gelasius maintaineth to remaine in the body of the Lord as the substance of the bread remaineth in the Sacrament Now no man can doubt but that this Book be of Gelasius Bishop of Rome Hoc etiam eatae meâ—orie Papa Gelasius c. in co â—bro quem â—emoratus â—â—ntistes â—onscripsit â—dversus eâ—â— qui in 〈◊〉 omino Ieâ— duarum at urarum â—olunt indiâ—â—aÌ„ credere â—ritatem Quomodo â—cend t in â—â—lum nisi â—â—ia localis verus est â—mo aut â—omodo aâ—st fidelâ—â—s suiâ—â—nisi â—â—a idem â—mensus 〈◊〉 â—rus dâ—us seeing that Fulgentius who lived in Gelasius time alleadgeth it * in his Book to Feâ—randus the Deacon in the 2 proposition and attributeth it to the Pope Gelasius Fulgentius Disciple to S. Austin in his second Book to Trasimondus chap. 17. a How is Christ ascended into Heaven but because he is in a place and a man indeed Or how is he present to his Faithfull ones but because he is infinit and a God indeed Again in his Book of the Faith to Peter the Deacon chap. 19. b Cuâ— nunc id est tempore nov Testamenti cum Paâ—e et Sp Sancto cum quibs illi est una diviniâ—as sacrificium â—ais et â—â—niâ—n side et charitâ—te sancta Ecclesia Catholica per uversum orâ—â—â—â—eâ—rae offerre non cessat etc. The holy Catholick Church which is over all the world now that is to say under the New Testament ceaseth not to offer unto Christ Jesus with the Father and the holy Ghost with whom he is one and the same Godhead a Sacrifice of bread and wine in Faith and Charity For in those caâ—n ill oblations of the Old Tetestament there was a figure of Christs flesh which he was to offer for our sins being without sin But in the sacrifice of the Eucharist is made an action of thankesgiving and a remembrance of the flesh of Christ which he offered for us and of the blood that himselfe who is God hath shed for us Besides this that he calleth the Holy Supper a remembrance and a Sacrifice of bread and wine it is very remarkable that he saith that this Sacrifice of bread and wine is offered unto Christ Jesus Whereby it appeareth that this Sacrifice is not Christ himselfe for Christ is not Sacrificed unto Christ Facundus an Affrican Bishop who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 550 in the defence of three heads or points of the Councell of Chalcedon * Potest Sacramentum adoptionis adoptio nuÌ„cupari sanguâ—neÌ„ dicimus noÌ„ quod proprie corpuâ— ejus sit panis poculum sanguis sed quod in se mysterium
corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant c. The Sacrament of Adoption to wit Baptisme may be called the Adoption even as we call the Sacrament of his body and blood which is in the bread and in the consecrated Cup his body and blood Not that to speake properly the bread is his body and the Cup his blood But because they containe in them the mystery of his body and blood This Book of Facundus drawn out of the Vatiean Library was published by Jacobus Sirmoudus a Jesuite who for this cause was suspected And I heare he hath been in trouble about it a Turrian li. 1. de Eucharist c. 18. §. Ad illud Vasq in 3. part Thomae Tomo 3. Dis 180. c. 9 pag. 107. Greg de Val. lib. de Trans c. 7. Sicut enim antequam sactificetur panis paneÌ„ nominamus divina auteÌ„ illum sanclificante gratia incdiante Sacerdote liberatus quideÌ„ est ab appellatione panis â—lignus habiâ—us est Dominici corporis appellatione etiamsi natura panis in co remansit Turrianus and Vasquez and Gregory of Valentia Jesuites object unto themselves a place of Chrysostome in his Epistle to Caesarius which Epistle also is in Biblioth Patr. Printed at Colen anno 1618 in the 8 Tome That place is such Afore the bread be sanctified we coll is bread But the divine grace sanctifying it by the meanes of the Priest it is freed indeed from the appellation of bread and is honored with the name of the body of the Lord though the nature of bread remaine in it These Iesuites answer that this place is not of John Chrysostome but of another John of Constantinople Which they say without proofe Yet it matters not for it sufficeth they acknowledge that place to bee of an ancient Author The 8 Books of Apostolicall Constitutions attributed to Clement the first Bishop of Rome are not of him Neverthelesse these Books are ancient and there is much good to be learned in them In the 5 Book chap. 16. it is said that b Cum verâ— anttypa mysteria pretiosi Corporis sanguinis sui nobis tradidisset Christ having given the figurative mysteries of his body and blood went to the mount of Olives And in the 7 Book chap. 26. c Etiam agimus gratias tibi Pater pro pretioso sanguine Iesu Christi qui effusuâ— est pro nobis et pro pretioso corpore cujus haec Antitypa perficimus We give thee thankes for the precious blood of Christ which was shed for us and for the precious body whereof we performe the signes by his command for to shew forth his death There would never be an end if wee should gather up all the places of the ancient Fathers wherein they say that that which we receive in the Eucharist is bread and that the bread and wine are Signes Symboles Figures and Antitypes of the body and blood of the Lord I will adde but two Canons of a Councell which are very formall The 24 Canon of the III Councell of Carthage is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let nothing be offered in the sacred service but the body and blood of the Lord as also the Lord hath ordained it that is to say nothing but bread and wine mingled with water The same Canon is found repeated in the very same words in the Councell of Trull in the Canon 32 aswell in the Greeck as in the Latin Copies Upon which Canon Baâ—samon maketh this Commentary The two and thirtieth Canon of the Councell of Trull hath ordained very at large a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the nonbloody Sacrifice was made with bread and wine mingled with water because that the bread is the figure of the body of the Lord and the wine the figure of his blood Here is then above two hundred Bishops gathered in a Councell that interpret these words the body and blood of Christ by the bread and wine mingled with water The same Councell in the 23 Canon ordaineth that when a man officiates at the Altar the Prayer must always be directed to the Father Whence appeareth manifestly that then they worshipped not the Sacrament seeing that the Councel forbiddeth when men assist at the Altar to addresse their Prayers to Christ If this hoste be Christ it must be worshipped and by consequent invocated And that it may appeare how lately this opinion of Transubstantiation was received in the Tome de Divinis officiis which is in Biblioth P atr we have an Epistle of that Great Emperor Carolus Magnus where he saith b Cum adaltare assistitur semper ad Patrem d rigatur oratio Christ supping with his Disciples brake bread and gave them likewise the Cup in figure of his body and blood This Epistle happily might bee written about the yeare of our Lord 800. Walefridus Strabo who wrote about the yeare 850 in his Book of Ecclesiasticall things chap. 16. c Christus coenando cii discipulis panem fregit calicem pariter cis dedit in figuram corporis sanguinis sui In coena quam ante traditioneÌ„ suaÌ„ ultimaÌ„ cum discipulis habu t post Paschae veteris solemnia corporis et saÌ„guinis sui SacrameÌ„ta in panis et vini substaeÌ„tia cisdeÌ„ discipulis suis tradidit et ea in coÌ„memorationeÌ„ sanctissimae suae passionis celebrare perdocuit The Lord at the last Supper he made with his Disciples afore he was betrayed after he had made an end of the solemnity of the ancient Passeover gave to his Disciples the sacred signes of his body and blood in the SVBSTANCE of the bread and wine and taught them to celebrate them in remembrance of his most holy Passion Rupertus Abbot of Deutsch neare Colen who lived in the yeare 1112. and whose works are yet extant hath condemned Transubstantiation and taught that the Substance of bread remaineth after the Consecration Here are his words upon the 12 chap. of Exodus d Rup Tuitiensis in Exo. 12. Sicut Christus humâ—na naturam nec mutavâ—â— nec destruâ—â—â— sed assumpsit ita in SacrameÌ„to nec destruit nec mutat substantiaÌ„ panis vini sed assumit in unitatem cororis et sanguinis sui Even as Christ neither changed nor destroyed the humane nature but joyned himselfe to it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe to it in the unity of his body and blood This place of Rupertus is alleadged by Salmeron in the 16 Treatise of the IX Tome § Ruit and Bellarmin in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers alleadgâ—s out of him many such like places and blameth him for it To so many places that say that the substance of the bread remaineth after the Consecration our Adversaries do reply that by the word of Substance the Fathers understand the Accidents As it is a great absurdity by the word of Accidents to understand the Substance So
is it as great an absurdity by the word of Substance to understand Accidents If it may be lawfull for them to wrest the Fathers thus and when they say a thing is white understand that they mean black never will there be any thing cleare nor sure Certainely if by this word Substance the Fathers had understood the Accidents they would have said the Substances in the plurall For Accidents are many Among which our Adversaries must chuse one that may be called a Substance But Theodoret in his second Dialogue saying that the bread after the Consecration remaineth in its former substance forme and figure refuteth this evasion For hee distinguisheth expressely the Substance from the Accidents Now as this error of the bodily presence of â—hrists body under the species of the bread began to be set on broach Bertram a Priest in Charles the Bald his time about the yeare of our Lord 870. made a Book against that abuse which Book is yet extant For which cause also Bellarmin in his first Book of the Eucharist chap. 1. placeth him among the Hereticks But Bertram all his life time lived with credit and honor and was never reprooved for it CHAP. XXVII Confirmation of the same by the customes of the ancient Church THis truth is confirmed by the ancient customes different from what is done in the Masse at this day and incompatible with Transubstantiation For in the ancient Church Service was said in a known tongue Every one received the Communion in both kinds The people offered upon the table abundance of bread and wine and not round light wafers * Cypr. Serm. de Lapsis Euseb Histor lib. 7. c. 9. Theod. Histor lib. 5. cap. 18. Nazianz. Orat. de Gorgonia The people aswell men as women received the Sacrament with their hand and many carried it home a long with them * Hesychius lib. 2. in Lev. c. 8. Ivo 2 part 2 de Sacr. c. 59. Burch l. 5. c. 12. The residues of the sacred bread that remained upon the table after the Communion were either burn't or * Evagâ— l. 4 cap. 36. given unto little children coming from Schoole or carried into the Priests houses for to be eaten there Than were there no private Masses Nor no Corpus Christi day The consecrated Host was not carried in procession * Ambâ—l de Viduis Oportet eam Viduam primo carere variarum illecebris voluptatuÌ„ vitare internum corporis animiq laÌ„guoreÌ„ ut corpus sanguinem Christi ministret Ambrose in his Book of Widdows saith that the Widdowes were imployed in the administration of the Sacrament a Editionis Parisiensis anno 1624 coluÌ„ 161. Virgo postquaÌ„ coÌ„municavit reservet de ipsa coÌ„munione unde iâ—sque ad diem octavum communicet In the Roman Order which is in Bibliotheca Patrum these words are to be found Let the Virgin receive the Communion after the Masse is ended and after she hath received let her reserve of the Communion sufficiently for to communie the eight dayes together Had they then beleeved the Transubstantiation they would never have given unto maids the Sacrament to keep so long a time Certain it is the ancient Church worshipped not the Sacrament There may be found indeed some places of the Fathers that say that in the Eucharist wee worship Christ But it is one thing to worship Christ in the action of the Sacrament and another thing to worship the Sacrament The Father and the holy Ghost in the Eucharist are also worshipped In vaine do they alleadge some ancient Fathers that speak of the elevation of the Sacrament For the elevation inferreth not necessarily adoration seeing that in Moses Law the Priest * Exod. 29 24. Levitiâ— 8.27 29. Num. 5.25 waved the breast and shoulder of the offering and a handfull of the first fruits without worshipping these things Moreover that elevation was nothing like to the elevation of the Host which the Priest maketh now a dayes over his head turning his back to the people and ringing a little Bell. But then after the Priest had uncovered the bread and wine he tooke the Platter or Dish with both his hands and lift it up for to shew it unto the people and that even before the words which are called of Consecration CHA. XXVIII Explanation of the places of the Fathers that say that in the Eucharist we eate the body and blood of Christ and that the bread is changed into the body of Christ and is made Christs body Specially of Ambrose Hilary and Chrysostome That the Fathers speake of severall kinds of body and blood of Christ THe holy Scripture speaketh of two sorts of body of Christ Namely of the natural body of Christ which he took in the womb of the Virgin Mâ—ry and of his mysticall body which is the Church and of his Sacramentall or commemorative body which is the bread of the holy Supper as we have shewed already The Fathers following the stile of the Scripture besides Christs mysticall body which is the Church speak of two bodies of Christ to wit of his naturall body and of his Symbolicall and Sacramentall body of which body they speak as of a divine thing and full of Mysteries and of a Spirituall flesh which is made by the iâ—effable power of God by the meanes and for the causes which I shall relate hereafter Likewise also they make two kinds of blood of Christ the one naturall the other mysticall and Divine which we receive in the Sacrament Clemens Alexandrinus in his second Book of the Pedagogue chap. 2. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is two sorts of blood of Christ the one is his carnall blood by which we are redeemed fâ—om corruption The other is Spirituall to wit that by which we are annointed and that is to drink the blood of Jesus to be partaker of the Lords incorruption Saint Hierome upon the Epistle to the Ephesians a Ex Hieron in Epist ad Ephes caâ—â— Dist 2. de Conse Can. Dupliciter Dupliciter intelligitur caro Christivel spiritualis illa atque divima de qua ipse aâ—t Caro meaverc est cibus vel caro quae crucifixa est sanguinis qui militis effusus est lanced Christs flesh is meant or understood in two manners either that spirituall and divine flesh of which hee saith himselfe My flesh is meate indeed Or else that flesh that was crucified and that blood which was shed by the speare of the Souldier This place is alleadged in the Roman Dâ—cree in the second Distinction of the Consecration at the Camon Dupliciter And in the same Distinction at the Canon b De hac quidem hostia quae in commemorationem mirabiliter sit edere licet De illa vero quam Christus in ara crucis abtulit secundum se nulli edere licet De hac the same Father is alleadged upon Leviticus in these words It is indeed lawfull to eate of this
blood that wee fasten our teeth in his flesh that wee put ouâ— fingers in his wounds and suck the blood of them and that a Seraphin bringeth unto us a burning coale with a paire of tongs they bee outlashing words that savour of a declamation and which our Adversaries themselves doe not beleeve CHAP. XXIX That divers Ancient Fathers have beleeved a mysticall Union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread of the Sacrament NEverthelesse I cannot deny but that many Fathers have had an opinion which with good reason is rejected by the Roman Church of these dayes They teach that as Christs divine nature hath united it selfe personally unto his humane nature so the same divine nature by vertue of the Consecration is united to the bread of the Eucharist by an union though not personall and hypostaticall yet mysticall divine and ineffable by which the bread remaining bread is made the body of Christ For they use this comparison taken from the personall union of the two natures of Christ for to shew how the bread is the body of Christ This opinion hath no foundation in the Scripture Yet I dare say it is an errour no way prejudiciall to Christian Religion For that opinion changeth not the nature of Christ and destroyes not his humanitie Neither doth it destroy the nature of the Sacrament since they did beleeve that the bread changeth not its substance Whence also they worshipped not the Sacrament neither did fall into Idolatrie To be short it was an innocent error serving to augment and encrease the peoples respect and reverence to the holie Sacrament which for that cause they call terrible and wonderfull In the meane while we have in that a most evident proofe that these Fathers did not beleeve the Transubstantiation For as they beleeved not that by the union of Christs divinitie with his humanitie the human nature was transubstantiated or his bodie abolished so did not they beleeve that by this mysticall and divine union of the God-head of Christ with the bread the bread should be destroyed and turned into another substance By this doctrine the bread of the Eucharist is the body of Christ in two manners the one because of that mysticall union of the bread with Christ after the same sorte as Jesus Christ man is called the Son of God because of the personall union with the Sonne of God The other because this bread is the sacred signe and remembrance of Christs body as it is usual to give to the signes the name of that which they doe signifie For this second consideration they say that the bread of the Eucharist is the body which was borne of the Virgin and crucified for us For as touching the first Consideration it is certaine that this bread which they say is made Christs body by that mysticall union is another body of Christ than that which was crucified for us For to effect such a transmittation they interpose the Omnipotencie of God For it must bee a divine power for to cause that the bread remaining bread bee so straitly united to the Godhead of Christ as to become the body of Christ Now that these Fathers doe hold that this mysticall body of Christ is another body than that which was crucified for us though it be the same in signification we prooved it just now by a multitude of places of Fathers wherein they say that Christ hath two sorts of flesh and that we may very well eate of that flesh or mysticall body which is taken in the Sacrament but no manner of way eate the flesh that was crucified for us The first Father that ever made use of the personall union of the two natures of Christ for to shew how the bread is made the body of Christ not by Transubstantiation but by the mysterious union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread is Justin Martyr about the end of his second Apologie where he speaketh thus Wee doe not take these things as common bread but after the same manner as Christ our Saviour was incarnate and made flesh and blood for our salvation so we have beene taught that the meate whereon thankesgivings have been rendred by the prayer of the Word whereby our flesh is nourished by a By this transmutation hee understandeth the change of the bread which is made in the stóach for the nounishment of our bodies transmutation is the body and blood of Christ Jesus Now that Justin beleeved that this meate is bread stil and hath not lost its substance he sheweth it when hee saith that our bodies are fed with it And by that which he saith in that very place that the Deacons give to all them that are present to participate the bread and wine whereupon graces have beene said The Author likewise of the Catechesticall prayer attributed to Gregory of Nysse useth the same comparison b I shew this falsity in my book against Cardinall du Perron lib. 7. cap. 22. Namely in that he speaks of one Severus an Heritick which came above a hundred yeares after the death of this Gregory The body saith he was changed into a divine dignity by the inhabitation of the Word God With good reason then also now I beleeve that the bread sanctified by the word of God is changed into the body of God the Word If this comparison be good as the body of Christ was not transubstantiated by the inhabitation of the Godhead no more likewise is the bread transubstantiated by the consecration which is made at the Sacrament Hilary speaketh just so in the eighth Booke of the Trinity c Sivere Verbum caro factum est nos Verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus If the Word was truly made flesh and wee also in the meate of the Lord doe take the Word flesh Gratian in his second distinction of the Consecration d Can. hoc est Hoc est quod dicimus c. Si ut Christi persona constat ex Deo homine cum ipse Christus verus sit Deus verus sit homo alleadgeth a place of Austin drawne from the Sentences of Prosper in these words The Sacrifice of the Church is composed of two things to wit of the Sacrament and of the thing of the Sacriment hat is to say of the body of Christ after the same manner as Christs person is composed of God and man For Christ is very God and very man Ireneus hath an opinion by himselfe For he saith c Quomodo constabâ—t cis eum panem in quo gratiae actae sunt corpus esse Domini sui calicem sanguinem ejus si non ipsum fabricatoris muÌ„di filium dicunt .i. verbum ejus per quod lignuÌ„ fructâ—ficaâ— defluunt fontes dat terra primo quidâ—m foenum deinde spicas that the bread is the body of Christ because Christ is the Creator of all things esteeming that the whole world in respect of God is what the body
of man is to his Soule Which was the opinion and beleife of Plato of Cicero of Virgil and of all the Platonick Schoole that bore the sway in Ireneus his time Such was the beleife of the Author of the Booke of the Lords supper attributed to Saint Cyprian That Author speaketh thus f Panâ—s ste communis in carnem sangumem mutatus procurat vitam incrementum corporibus ideoque ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adjutamsirmit as sensibil argumento edocta est visibilibus Sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum The common bread being changed into flesh and into blood bringeth â—ife and growth unto the body And therefore the infirmity of our flesh being helped by the accustomed effect is taught by a sensible proofe that in the visible Sacraments there is an effect of eternall life When he saith that the common bread is turned into flesh and into blood he doth not meane that it is turned into the flesh and blood of Christ but into our flesh and blood by disgestion for hee addeth that this bread nourisheth our bodyes and maketh them to grow and all the currant of the speech sheweth that But a little after hee addeth some wordes whereupon our Adversaries doe triumph and glory for lack of understanding what this Authors beleefe was * Panis queÌ„ Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro Et sicut in persona Christi humanitas videbatur et latebat d vinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter divina se infudit essentia The bread saith hee that the Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shew but in nature is made flesh by the omnipotency of the Word But in the words following he sheweth that this conversion of the bread into the flesh of Christ is made not by Transubstantiation but by an union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread like unto the union of Christs divine nature with his humane nature For he added immediatly after And even as in â—he person of Christ his humanity was â—eene but his divinity was hidden so the * Panis itaque hic azymus cibus verus sincerus per speciem Sacramentum nos tactu sanctificat divine essence is infused in the visible Sacrament by an unspeakable manner There is nothing more expresse nor more contrary unto Transubstantiation For according to this Authors beleefe even as Christs divine nature did not transubstantiate his Manhood but made it to be the flesh of the Son of God So the divine Essence which he saith to be infused in the bread of the Sacrament maketh it to become Christs body without being Transubstantiated Wherefore a litlte after he saith that that which we receive in the Sacrament * Caro quae VerbuÌ„ Dei Patris assuÌ„psit in utero virginali n un tate suae personae et panis qui consecratur in Ecclesia unum corpus sunt Divinit atisenim plenitudo quae fuit in illa replet et istum paâ—em is unleavened bread which sanctifieth us by touching it acknowledging that it is bread still Bellarmin in the 15 chap. of his third Book of the Eucharist alleadgeth Saint Remigius that wrote about the yeare of our Lord 520 in these words a The flesh which the Word of God the Father tooke in the Virgins wombe in unity of person and the bread that is consecrated in the Church are one and the selfe-same body For the plenitude of the divinity which was in that flesh filleth also this bread Bellarmin addeth that Haimo held the same language and that Gelasius and Theodorets words that we have alleadged above may be fitted to this opinion The Author our Adversaries alleadge with more ostentation is Damascene whom they rank among the Saints This man may be tearmed the Lombard of the Grecians because he is the first among the Grecians that handled divinity in Philosophicall tearmes And is the first that wrote for the adoration of Images Now he did write about the yeare of our Lord 740. This man in his 4 Book of the Orthodox Faith chap. 14. extendeth himselfe upon this matter and will have the bread b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be changed into the body of the Lord not by transubstantiation but by c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assumption and union with the divinity like unto the union of Christs divinity with his humanity Because saith hee d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is the custome to eate bread and to drink wine and water the Lord hath conjoyned his divinity to these things and hath made them to be his body and blood And a little after e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If thou inquirest in what manner that is done let it suffice thee to understand that it is done by the holy Spirit after the same manner as the Lord hath made himselfe to himselfe and in himselfe a flesh taken of the holy Mother of God by the holy Ghost And a little after he saith that the bread and wine c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the body of Christ Deified Chiefly he is very expresse in that he addeth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The bread of the Communion is not meere bread but it is conjoyned to the Divinity But still he acknowledgeth that it is bread saying the bread is the body of Christ and calling it the bread of the Communion And a little after The loaves of proposition did figurate this bread Item The broad is the first fruits of the future bread And a little after We partake all of one bread Only he hath this of particular to himselfe that he will not have the bread to bee called the figure of Christs body rejecting that kind of speech usuall and ordinary in the Fathers that have written afore him It appeareth likewise in that he will have the Sacrament to bee honored but not to be worshipped d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us saith he honor it with purity corporall and spiritual and will have it to be received with the hands set in forme of a Crosse For then it was not as yet the custom to chop it into the mouths of Communicants Rupertus was imbrued with the same opinion e Rupertus Tuitiensis in Exod. c. 12. Sicut Christus humanam naturaÌ„ nec mutavit nee destruxitysed assumpsit it a in Sacrameto nec destruit nec mutat sub stantiam panis et vini sèd assumit in unitatemcorporis et sâ—ngumis sui Even as Christ saith he did neither change nor destroy the humane nature but joyned himselfe unto it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe unto it in the unity of his body and blood For which cause also Bellarmin placeth him among the Impanators This doctrine doth no whit agree with the ubiquity For they did put this union of
far as to be able to make God with words and to have Christ in their own power This abuse beginning to creepe in France King Charles the Bald about the yeere 870 made a commandement unto one Bertram a Priest and as learned a man as these times did affoord to compose and write a Book of this matter which Book we have yet whole and â—xtant at this day wherein hee maintaines the true doctrine and withstands stoutly and vigourously that opinion of the reall presence of the body of Christ under the species of the bread For of Transubstantiation there was yet no speech of it For which cause also Bellarmin in his first Book of tee Sacrament of the Eucharist first chap. puts this Bertram amongst the Hereticks Who not withstanding in his time lived with honor and was neither troubled nor received any rebuke or reprehension upon this subject Of the same opinion were Iohn Scotus and Drutmarus and others of the same time And I make no doubt but many others with them have defended the same cause in writing But the following ages in which error prevailed have abolished their writings and it is marvel how this Book of Bertram could escape thus The tenth and eleventh Ages are the Ages wherein this error did strengthen it selfe most in which neverthelesse God left not himselfe without testimony For Bruno Bishop of Angiers and after him but more vigorously Berengarius his Arch-Deacon taught and maintained openly that the bread and wine of the Eucharist were not the body of Christ but the figure and remembrance of it * Sigebert ad annum 1051. This Berangarius began to shew himselfe about the yeare of our Lord 1050. Against whom Pope Victorius 2. caused a Councel to be gathered at Tours about the yeare 1055 and foure yeeres after Nicholas II. cited him to Rome to the Councel assembled for that effect where Berengarius was forced to condemn his own doctrine submit himself to the Popes wil. By the reading of that Councel it appeares that â—here were in it many others of the same opinion of Berengarius And Leo * Leo Hostiensis Chrâ— Cassinensi li. 3. c. 35. E que cum nullus valeret resistere Alberiâ—us â—deÌ„ evoâ—ntur Hostiensis recordeth that none of those that were there present could resist Berengarius The forme of the abjuration prescribed unto him is to be found in the Collections of the Decrees made by Ivo Carnutensis and by Gratian which forme is set down in absurde tearmes and which the Church of Rome her selfe beleeves not For they make him say a Can. Ego Berengar Dist 2. de consecr that the bread is the true body of Christ and that Christs body is truely and sensibly handled and bruised by the teeth of the Faithfull But Berengarius being rid out of the hands of that Councell and returned back into France protested against the violence offered unto him and continued to teach the same doctrine till the yeere 1088. in which he died Upon his tombe Hildebertus * Hild. Epitaphio Berengar apud Malmesburiensem Quem modo miratur semper mirabilâ—ter orbis Ilâ—e Berengarius non obiturus obit Quem sacrae fidei fastigia summa tenentem c. Vide Baron ad ann 1088. § 21. who after was Bishop of Mans made an honorable Epitaphe wherein he tearmes him the Prop and Support of the Church the hope and the glory of the Clergy And France Germany Italy and England were full of people that embraced his doctrine as William Malmesbury testifies in the 3. Book of his English Historie All France saith hee was full of his doctrine And Matthew of Westminstâ—r in the year 1087 * Eodem tempore Berengarius Turonensis in haereticam lapsus pravitatem omnes Gallos Italos Anglos suis jam pene corruperat pravitatibus Berengarius of Tours being fallen into heresie had corrupted by his depravations almost all the French Italians and English Platina in the life of John XV. speaks thus of Berengarius It is certain that Odius Bishop of Clugni and Berengarius of Tours men famous and renowned for doctrine and holinesse were in great esteeme in that time Adde to this that Berengarius distributed all his meanes to the poore and betooke himselfe to get his living with the labour of his hands * Guit alias Berengarius istevir bonus plenes eleemosynis et humilitate magnorum possessioneÌ„ qui omnia â—â—usiâ—spauperum â—dispersit c. Antoninus Arch-Bishop of Florence whom the Pope hath canonized and made a Saint gives him this testimony in the 2 Tome of his Chronicles Tit. 16 § 20. This Berengarius was otherwise a good man full of Almes deeds and humility and having great possessions and riches which hee distributed to the poore and would have no woman to come before his eyes About the latter end of Berengarius his life lived Gregory the seventh who entred into the Papacy in the yeare of our Lord 1073. called Hildebrand before he was Pope This Gregory was suspected to incline to Berengarius his opinion Sigonius in his 9 Book of the reigne of Italy in the yeare 1080 recordeth that the Bishops of Germany assembled at Brixina in Bavaria did call this Gregory Vâ—terem haeretici Berengariâ— discipulum an old disciple of Berengarius the heretick accusing him of calling into question the Apostolicall Faith touching the body and blood of the Lord. And this agrees with Cardinall Benno Arch-Priest of the Cardinals who was very inward and familiar with the said Gregory and who wrote his life wherein hee saith that Gregory appointed a fast to three Cardinals to the end God might shew whither of the two to wit Berengarius of the Church of Rome had the rightest opinion And there he relates that John Bishop of Port in a Sermon at S. Peters Church did declare in presence both of Clergy and People that Gregory for to obtaine some divine answer had in the presence of the Cardinals cast the holy Sacrament into the fire Berengarius being dead he had many successors that maintained the same doctrine even to the time of Petruâ— de Valdo of the City of Lions whose disciples were named by their enemies Valdenses and Albigenses Of whose Religion and Confession of Faith conformable to ours Fasciculus rerum expetâ—ndaruÌ„ fol. 95. Indocus Câ—â—cius Tom. H. lib. 6. de Euchar fol. 602. hath been spoken before in the 21 chapter of the first Book and shewed that their Churches remaine even unto our times Furthermore John Wicklâ—f in England in the yeere 1390. taught the same Of whose doctrine contained in eighteen Articles here is the first That the substance of the bread remaines after the Consecration and ceases not to bee bread Against the Faithfull that professed this doctrine the Pope stirred up Kings and Princes and caused an incredible butchery to bee made of them preaching the Croisadoe against them whereby hee gave the same spirituall graces unto those that should
is no consecration THis change and so horrible a depravation of the institution of the Lord hath wholy abolished the nature of the Sacrament For Sacraments are sacred signes Not onely the Ancient but also all the Doctors of the Roman Church doe define the Sacrament after that manner saying that Sacramentum est sacrum signum So in Baptisme water is the signe and Christs blood is the thing signified And in the holy Supper the bread and the wine are the signes but the body and blood of Christ are the things signified Even therefore as if the water were taken away from Baptisme it would be no more a Sacrament nor Baptisme so the Eucharist in the Roman Church is no more a Sacrament since the signes to wit the bread and wine are abolished in stead of which they put Christs naturall body and blood which they call the Sacrament Wherefore the Councell of Trent ordaineth that the Sacrament be worshipped Ses XIII chap. 5. By this meanes Christ in the Masse is the figure and the signe of himselfe Bellav lib. 2. de Euchar cap. 24 Christus sui ipsus sigura fuit as Bellarmine with the rest teacheth as if one should say that a man is the picture of himselfe Moreover the Sacraments are not instituted for to make Christ come downe to us but to lift up our hearts to him Nor for to eate Christ with our teeth but to feed our soules and strengthen our faith Againe by Transubstantiation the consecration of the Sacrament is destroyed and there is nothing in the Masse that is consecrated The bread is not consecrated for they hold that the bread is no more bread Christs body is not consecrated for Christ cannot be consecrated by men Neither can the accidents of bread and wine be consecrated For lines colours and taste are not the offering which is pretended to be offered unto God Therefore there being nothing consecrated there is no consecration and there being no consecration there is no Sacrament CHAP. IV. That by altering the Lords Institution the Romane Church hath changed the nature of Christ THis change is gone so farre that Christs humane nature by Transubstantiation is wholy destroyed and abolished For the Scripture speaking of Christs humane nature saith that he is like unto us in all things Heb. 2.17 c. 4.15 sinne excepted But the Roman Church gives unto Christ a body that is nothing like ours Whence followeth that he is no more our brother so that all the glory of the faithfull which consisteth in haveing a brother who is the eternall Sonne of God is altogether abolished For the Church of Rome forgeth unto Christ a body which is in many severall places at one and the same time which is in Heaven and upon severall Altars but not in the space that is between From whence followeth that Christs body is separated from it selfe and farre from it selfe and higher and ower than it selfe There is no lesse aburdity in willing that an humane body â—e at the same time in severall remote places than to will that a man in one and the selfe same moment be in two severall yeares and so be young and old at once and out-live himselfe The same doctrine giveth unto Christ an humane body which is whole in every crumme of the Hoste and hath his head and his feet in one and the selfe same place and both his eies under one point Can a man say that a body whose parts are not one out of the other and differ not in situation and which taketh and filleth no place and is more spirituall than the very spirits themselves is a true humane body And for that cause the priests of the Romane Church shave or keep short the beard of their upper lips For that Church beleeveth that if a Priest should dip his mustachoe in the chalice the whole body of Christ would remaine hang'd at every haire thereof The same doctrine forgeth unto Christ two bodies of a contrary nature and unto which are attributed contradictory things For the body of Christ which was at the table celebrating the Eucharist did speake and stirre his hands But he that was in the mouthes and stomaâ—â— of the Apostles neither spake not stiâ—â— his hands The soule of Christ as he at the table was in anguish but tâ—â— which was in the Apostles mouth suâ—â—red no griefe Christ after he was riâ—â— from the table entred into the gardâ—â— did sweat great drops of blood but that was in the Apostles stomacks did 〈◊〉 sweat drops of blood Which of thâ— two is our Saviours Or if it be the sat Christ how is he contrary to himselfe Furthermore by this doctrine 〈◊〉 whole history of Christs life is madeâ—â— diculous and turn'd into a fable Fâ—â— if Christs body may be in severall remoâ—â— places at once it may be said that whilâ—â— he was in the Virgins wombe peradventure he was in other wombes And thâ— whilst he was upon the Crosse he walked in Spaine From thence also followeth that all the journies that Chrisâ— made to and fro going and comminâ— from Galilea to Judea were to no purpose For why did he goe from Galilea to Judea if he might be in both places at one the same time and be found it Judea without budging from Galilea What say they is not God omnipotent for to doe this I answer that God without question could doe all these things if he would But I say It is impossible that God should will such things For he is no lyar and cannot contradict himselfe But it were to contradict himselfe if he would that at one and the same time a man should speake and not speake stirre and not stirre suffer and not suffer and be farre and remote and divided from himselfe He will have Christs body to be a true humane body God will not have a thing so absurd and contradictory wherby they will that in the Hoste there be accidents without a subject Innoc. III. lib. 4. de myster Missa cap. 11. Est enim hic color sapor quantitas qualitas cùm nihil alterutro sit coloratum aut sapidum quantum aut quaâ—â— and as Pope Innocent the third teacheth that there be in the hoste greatnesse and nothing great color and nothing coloured As if one should suppose an ecclipse of the Sunne without a Sunne a halting of a legge and no legge a sicknesse without a sick-man Besides the omnipotencie of God is not the rule of our faith but his Will By that meanes a man might maintaine all the fables of the Alcoran saying that God is powerfull so to doe Joyne to this that God doth nothing but wisely Therefore he will never have Christ to be subject to sinnefull men now that he is glorified and be exposed to 〈◊〉 disgraces and ignominie which thâ— make him suffer every day whereof shâ—â— be spoken hereafter CHAP. V. Of Maldonats audaciousnesse 〈◊〉 giving Saint Paul and Saiâ— Luke the lye and
Inventions They use meere Water in Baptisme They have no holy Water They me not consecrate their Church-yards They bury their dead in the fields and with â—easts as also they deserve it c. And â—ee addeth that the Emperour in stead of destroying them granted unto them safety and liberty But he should have added to this that the Emperor Sigismond having by armes assaulted and scuffled with them lost there many Battles For which cause he did let them rest in peace In this discourse Aeneas hath chopt and thrust in some calumniations as when he saith they give the Eucharist to madde men and to Infants and bury their dead with beasts Things very absurde and that never were As for the rest all our Religion almost is seene in it Hungaria at the same time was full of Faithfull people holding the same beleife They presented to the King Vladislaus in the yeare of our Lord 1508. their Confession of faith conformable to ours defending themselves against an Austin Frier that had accused them to the King of many errors namely for that they did not obey the Pope called not upon Saints denied Purgatory received the Communion in both kinds and rejected Transubstantiation Vpon which last point they speak thus This Frier writeth that the bread and wine in their naturall substance are changed into the body and blood of Christ This Confession is to be fouÌ„d in Fascioulo rerum expetendarum and are changed into Christ God and man so that nothing of the substance of the bread and wine remaineth but that the onely accidents are meerely upheld by miracle This Confession of faith hath no foundation in the Lord Christ Jesus his words who never spake one word of the conversion of the substance And a little after By that is manifested that the Primitive Church had this Beleife and hath confessed it and hath not erred and did not bowe at this Sacrament For in that time they received the Sacrament sitting and reserved nothing of it and carried none of it out of the house c. About the same time in the yeare 1520. Calvin being yet very young the Faithfull of Provence presented to the Parliament of Aix their Confession of Faith conformable to ours Vpon the point of the Sacrament they speak thus We are not entangled with any errors or heresies condemned by the Ancient Church and we hold the documents and instructions approved by the true Faith And as for the Sacraments particularly we have the Sacraments in honour and beleeve that they be testimonies and signes by which Gods grace is confirmed and assured in our consciences For which cause wee beleeve that Baptisme is a signe whereby the purgation that we obtaine by the blood of Jesus Christ is corroborated in such sort that it is the true washing of Regeneration and renovation The Lords Supper is the signe under which the true Communion of his body and blood is given unto us And these poore Churches were the remainder of the horrible Persecutions exercised by the space of three or foure hundred yeares by Kings and Princes at the instigation of Popes Which Churches they had defamed with horrible heresies accusing them to be Manicheans and enemies of Marriage even as they accuse us now to be enemies unto the Saints and the blessed Virgin and to beleeve that good workes are not necessary to salvation and that we make God Author of sin A few yeares before under the raigne of good King Lewis the XII who was called the Father of the People happed a memorable thing which Carolus Molinaeus a famous Jurisconsulte reciteth in his Booke of the French Monarchie He saith that certaine Cardinals and Prelates did goe about to stirre up and incite this good King to destroy and exterminate the Inhabitants of Cabrieres and Merindoles in Provence saying they were Sorcerers Incestuous persons hereticks condemned already by the Apostolick Sea But this King answered that he would condemne no body to death without hearing both sides and be fully acquainted with the cause And that for that end he sent one Adam Fumee a Master of Request and John Parin a Jacobin Frier his Confessor for to transport themselves into the place where they lived and be informed of their Religion Which they did and reported to the King that among these men they had found no Images nor any â—race or vestige of any ornaments of Masses or Papall Ceremonies That they had found nothing touching Magicall Artes whoredomes and other crimes laid upon them The King understanding this cryed out with a lowde voice and swore that those people were better Christians than hee and his people and confirmed their priviledges and immunities That fell out about the yeare 1412. Calvin scarce being borne Pope Julius the second made warres against this King But the King defeated his Armie and the Emperours neare the City of Ravenna Assembled a Councell at Piso against the Pope Caused money to bee coyned with this Inscription round about PERDAM BABYLONIS NOMEN as Thuanus relateth in the first Booke of his History But under the raigne of King Francis the first Successor unto Lewis the twelfth these poore Churches of Provence suffered hard and rude persecutions and Massacres Neverthelesse they subsist yet at this day and Thuanus in the sixth Booke of his History speaketh of their Religion Hee saith that these Valdenses for hee tearmes them so did say that the Church of Rome had departed from the faith of Christ Jesus and was become Babylon and the great Whore whereof is spoken in the Revelation That none ought to obey the Pope nor his Prelates That Monachall life was a sinke of the Church and an Infernall thing That the fiâ—â—â— of Rurgatorie the Masse the Dedicatiâ— of Churches the Service of Saints as Suffrages for the dead were inventionâ— Satan Then hee addeth To these 〈◊〉 and principall heads of their doctrine 〈◊〉 thens were falsly added touching Muriage the Resurrection the state anâ— condition of the dead and touchâ—â— meates The same Author in the 27 Booke speaketh of the Churches of the Valsies of the Alpes which he saith to be descended from the ancient Valdeuses which have yet at this very day a Religion altogether conformable to ourt and saith that in the yeare 1560 they presented their Confession of Faith unto those whom the Duke of Savoye their Lord had sent them by which they declared that they stuck fast and adheared to the ancient doctrine contained in the Old and New Testament and to the Apostles Creed and to the foure first Generall Councels and that for the rule of a good life they kept themselves close to the renne Commandements of the the Law That they taught to live chastely soberly and justly and to yeeld obedience unto Princes and Magistrates That neverthelesse they rejected Sacrifice of the Masse the â—â—â—rament of Penance Auricular Conâ—â—sion humane Traditions Prayers for the dead but cleaved to the holy Scripâ—â—es Which things they said to have â—â—eived
those that would take up Armes against Ladislaus for the defense of the Church This Indulgence being published at Prague many of the people beganne to say aloud and openly that it was indeed the language of Antichrist that promised salvation to those that should spill the Christian blood At which the Magistrate of Prague being angry hee layd hands on some of them and clapped them up into prison But the people gathered themselves together and demanded of the Magistrate the release of these prisoners who fearing an uproare appeased the people with milde words promising that no harme or wrong should be done unto them But so soon as this multitude was separated the Magistrate caused these prisoners to be stabbed with a dagger or pomard in the prison So that the blood ran out in such abundance that it streamed into the very street At the sight of that blood the people being provoked to wrath and fury they caused the Prison doores to be opened unto them and conveyed away the dead corpses and carried them from Church to Church crying aloude These are the faithfull ones that have exposed their bodies fâ—r the Covenant of God The King did consider these things without being much moved at it But the Emperour Sigismond desiring to remedy the disorders of the Papacie and by the same meanes to pacifie the troubles of Bohemia did in such sort by his going and comming and bestirring himselfe too and fro that a Councell was called and kept at Constance a City of Suaube in Germanie in the yeare 1414. wherein the three forenamed Popes were degraded of especially John XXIII for having among other things laid to his charge * Concâ—l Constant Sâ—ss X I. maintained openly and obstinately that the soules of men die as the soules of beasts and that there is neither Heaven nor Hell In these three Popes roome was chosen in the Councell Martin the fifth to whom the Emperour Sigismund kneeled downe before the whole Councell kissed his feet and worshipped him This Martin sent some Embassadors to Constantinople to whom hee gave instructions that begin thus Sactissimus et beaâ—issimus qui bahet coeleâ—te arbitriâ—m qui est Dominus in â—erris sucâ—essor Petri Christus Deâ—ini Domiâ—us uniâ—ersi ReguÌ„â—ater orbis â—umen c. The most holy and most blessed who hath the heavenly Empire who is Lord on Earth successor of S. Peter the Christ of the Lord the Master of the Vniversall World the Father of Kings the Light of the World the most high and Soveraigne Bishop Martin by the divine providence commandeth unto Master Anthonie Masson c. These instructions are inserted in the Councell of Siena held a little after Printed at Paris in the yeare 1612. At the same Councell of Constance John Huz and Hierome of Prague were called for to conferre of their doctrine they shewed some unwillingnesse to meet thither fearing some ill usage But the Emperour assured them and gave them by the advice of the Councell a large safe conduct whereby he did promise they should receive no harme there but might with all liberty and freedome propound their reasons and after that returne home in all safety Grounded upon the Emperours faith and promise they resorted to the Councel and propounded their reasons They spake chiefly of the Communion under both kinds But the Fathers of the Councell perceiving they would not yeeld to that which was enjoyned unto them concluded that they should be burned alive The Emperour made some difficulty in it saying he had obliged his faith unto them and that they came under his promise Thereupon that the Emperours conscience might be at quiet * This Canon by which is defined that one is not bound to keepe faith with hereticks is to be seene in the 19 Session of the Councel of CoÌ„stance the Councell framed a Canon wherein is declared and defined that faith must not be kept unto hereticks after men have done what they can for to convert them and that a Prince is not bound to keepe what hee hath promised them This Sentence being pronounced to John Huz he appealed to Christ Jesus They were then executed publickly And Aeneas Sylvius who afterward was Pope and made himselfe to bee called Pius the second speakes thus of them in the 36 chapter of his Historie of Bohemia * Pertulerunt ambo constanti animo neceÌ„ quasi ad epulas invitati ad incendium properaruÌ„t nullam emittentes vocem quae m seri animi esset indicium Vbi ardere coeperunt hymnum cecinere c. Both of them suffered death with a constant courage and made haste to goe to the fire as if they had been invited to a feast without heâ—ring any word come from them that shewed or testified any sorrowfulnesse of minde When they beganne to burne they fell a singing of an Hymne which could hardly be hindred by the violence and noyse of the flames No Philosopher ever suffered death with such magnanimitie as these indured burning Then he alleadgeth an Epistle of Poggius a Florentine that describeth the death of Hierome of Prague who was put to death some dayes after John Huz In that Epistle Poggius speakes as one that was present at the examination and death of the sayd Hierome I confesse saith he I never saw any body who in a cause altogether criminall came neerer the eloquence of the Ancients It was an admirable thing to sie with what words what eloquence what arguments what countenance what confidence hee answered his Adversaries and that too after he had beene three hundred and forty dayes in a deepe and stinking dungeon Then he relates afterwards how a list of heresies that were laid to his charge was read unto him and that upon everie head or point he answered in such sort as hee did shew they were calumnies laid upon him saying he beleeved nothing of all that And being brought to the place of punishment and compassed round about with faggots and straw hee fell a singing of an Hymne or Psalme The Executioner drawing neare for to kindle the fire hehind him he said unto him Friend come neere put the fire here before mee for if I did feare the fire I would not bee here The ashes of these Martyrs were cast into the Lake of Constance for to abolish the memory of them In this Councell was framed a Canon Sessioâ— XII whereby those are declared hereticks and punishable by the secular power who for conforming themselves unto Christ and unto the Ancient Church will have the people to receive the Sacrament under both kindes There also was condemned Wicklefs doctrine to whom in that Councell are falsly attributed impious doctrines and which never came into his minde For example That God ought to obey the Devill That a Prince is no lawfull master while he is in a mortall sinne And that it belongs to the people to chastise their Lords In the like manner was handled John Huz whose doctrine was condemned by