a Papist speake write read reason or do what ye list nay what you can Notwithstanding how obstinate and selfe-willingly wedded soever they bee to their opiniōs yet it standeth vs greatly vpon to be obedient and yeeld vnto the truth demonstrated vnto vs by vndeniable testimonies out of Gods most holy word let vs pray the Lord both night day to be constantly grounded and established heerein And in deede it is a shame for vs to bee inferiour to our Adversaries heerein which are so purposedly stiffely nayled vnto their imaginarie devises dreames of men who after saying once it is my Conscience looke for no more they haue told you all it is a shame I say of all shames that wee should not most resolutely liue and die heerein For wee haue more to alleadge for our selues then It is my Conscience and who knowes not that conscience must bee grounded on science which science too commeth from the word of God otherwise it will proue but a bare buckle and thong that is a verie meere conceipte For wee haue these three thinges to stand in our behalfe 1 First the worde of God which is truth it selfe cannot lie this they haue not because they derogate therefrom saying that the authority of their church is aboue the same yea they sticke not to make their trashie traditions equal with it yea they abuse it and blaspheme it with the rankest Atheistes of our time the one tearming it a nose of waxe a shipmans hose a blackincky Gospel the other belching out this blasphemie valuing it to be no more but a wittie policie of wise men to keepe fooles in awe but let them walke togither as never a barrell of them better hering 2. Secondly Besides the word which is our warrant from God himselfe wee haue also his holy Spirit to ascertaine vs therein powring faith into our heartes whereby we do assuredly beleeue it this they haue not neither because they rob him of his proper effect and operation which is immediatly frō the Father the Sonne to illighten our minds giving to vs the right meaning and vnderstanding of his worde which they most bastardly appropriate to their Pope whose power is such as that he may racke thē at his pleasure And no marveile seeing they haue made a quarter God of him to rule the rost in the world as his holines listeth according to this blasphemous verse of him Oraclô voc is mūdi moderaris habenas Et merito in terris crederis esse Deus Yea hee is become such a sawcie Syr that he can change the Articles of faith and giue auctority to general councels as it is saide Articulos soluit synodumque facit generalem 3 Thirdly lastly Besides the word and spirit of God we haue our owne spirit that is our whole soule and conscience to testifie with vs that what we do we do it as his adopted children that is not hypocritically but faithfully truly and sincerely This doth St. Paule teach Ro. 8.16 The same Spirit beareth witnes with our Spirit that we are the children of God Let them then cast of this deceaveable maske of a sleeueles and pretended conscience of theirs and let thē soundly groūd it on Gods word desiring him to vonchsafe them of his Spirit to illuminate their mindes nowe darkened with errours and superstition that so they may ioine togither in one with vs to professe beleeve the same Which I pray God to graunt according to his good pleasure and will But to the Purpose where I doe mean to shew partly ab impossibili that is from the vnpossibilitie of the thinges partly a consequente absurdo that is frō the notorious absurdities which must follow that this carnal eating may not nor cannot at any rate stand with the analogie of faith which was as effectuall vnto the Fathers before Christes comming as it is to vs since his comming If Christ cannot bee receaved or eaten but after a carnal and grosse kinde then I pray how did the Patriarkes and Fathers eate Christ whenas Ioh. 6. c. 53. our Saviour Christ saith Verely verelie I saie vnto you vnlesse yee shall eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud yee haue no life in you But the fathers had life in them because they had an vndoubted faith in Christ to come which was as effectuall to them for their salvation receiving vp into glorie as was Enoch Heb. 11 cap 5 vers and Elias 2 Kings 2 cap. 11. verse as our faith is effectual in him now that he is come For which cause they must needes grant another māner of eating differing altogither from carnal which is spirituall onely done by faith Now as they did eat Christ then being not yet come in the flesh so doe nay so must wee also eate him nowe for if there be any difference it is in circumstance and Signes not in Substance as St. Paule wel declareth 1. Cor. 10 c. 1.2.3.4 verses viz. Moreover brethren I would not that ye should be ignorant that all our Fathers were vnder the cloud al passed through the sea And did all eate the same spirituall meate And did all drinke the same spirituall drinke for they dranke of the spirituall Rocke that followed them and the Rocke was Christ According to which spirituall kinde of eating both ours and theirs St. Austen saith thus Vt quid dentes ventrē parasti crede manducasti that is why hast thou prepared teeth a bellie beleeue and thou hast eaten Ab Absurdo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Philosopher that is grant one absurditie and others do follow straight vpon Wherefore if the reprobate should eate the body of Christ al these and a great many moe absurdities must needes follow as that the reprobate are made the members of Christ that the reprobate are ingraffed into the bodie of Christ that Christ doth dwell in the reprobate that they can bee made partakers of Christ Belial togither which is horrible to speake For which cause one saith Iudam panem Domini sed non panem Dominum comedisse that is Iudas did eate the bread of the Lord but hee did not eate bread the Lord. Reasons against carnall eating To make short of the matter these reasons following doe all make against carnal eating of Christ 1. First he tooke a true humane nature so that we can eate him no otherwise then did his disciples in the first supper But here do the Vbiquitaries giue vs the slippe wringing themselues out of the briars with a sophisme de falso subiecto elenchi whē they teach that Christ in these words of the supper take eate gaue commaundement for the orall or fleshly eating of his bodie yet those wordes are not spoken of the body of Christ because hee tooke not that into his hands neither did he breake his bodie and giue it to his disciples but they are spoken de pane of the bread which he tooke into his
one time yea vbique every where 1. Sophisme The Vbiquitaries when they woulde proue that the body of Christ is in the bread they haue nothing poore souls to bring but the literal words of Christ be cause he hath said This is my body But in the meane time petunt principium that is they begge of vs this favour to grant the whole matter that is in controversie betwixt vs. For who seeth not that about these wordes of Christ lyeth the whole question how or after what sorte they are to be vnderstood Therfore the proofe of this point cannot be taken frō them For the approbation of the true sense is not to be drawne out of the very wordes themselues whose meaning we doe explicate and seeke for but frō that which goeth before that which followeth after or els from other like places that so the Analogie of faith may be obserued 2. Sophisme Againe will ye heare an other acute reason of theirs acute did I say one may terme it so aswel as some do mons à movendo that is fine cute cote the body of Christ say they is every where because the proprieties of the diuine nature are communicated to it But wee finde here petitionem principij that is a begging of the argument because the argument is as vncertaine doubtful as the thing it selfe which is had in question They must first proue not as mendicant Friars begge that it be freely granted to them 1. Argument But one argument now against thē viz. Whosoeuer do take away the proprieties of the body of Christ they doe take away the bodie it selfe They who say that the bodye of Christ is euery where doe take away the proprieties of the bodie of Christ therefore whosoeuer say that the bodie of Christ is every where they take awaie the body it selfe Here the Vbiquitarians deny the cōclusion but tell them of answering the argument surdo narras fabulam that is it doth please them so well as though you had broken both their shinns with a crab-tree cudgel 2. Argument The bread is changed into the bodie of Christ either substantially or sacramētally but not substātially for Christ according to Theodoret hath honoured the visible Symbols by the names of his bodie and blood not changing the nature but adding grace vnto the nature Therefore it is changed only sacramentally that is it is made and turned out of common bread into a Sacrament of his bodie 3. Argument The bodie is spokē de pane of the bread either properly or tropically non properly because so al might be said of the bread properlie and truelie whatsoeuer are said of the bodie according to that axiome Quicquid dicitur de praedicate dicitur etiam de subiecto which absurditie deserues an hissing Therefore it is of necessity spoken of the bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is tropically 4. Argument Poison cannot bee mingled with the natural bodie blood of Christ but it may with the Eucharisticall bread and wine as experience hath taught For a certaine Monke of the Iacobin order named Bernhard de monte Politiano de Doncastro gaue vnto the Emperour Henry 7. an intoxicated or poisoned Host which hauing receiued he died Therfore the Eucharistical bread is not made the natural bodie and the wine is not likewise the natural blood of Christ 5. Argument This particle hoc in the words of the Supper which signifieth this either demonstrateth bread or the only accidēts of bread or els the body it self of Christ or lastly as Thomas Aquinas saith p. 3. Q. 78. Artic. 5. some wandring and indeterminat kinde of substance For besides these there was nothing of which Christ touching his body might bee spoken 1. First then this particle doth not demonstrate substantiam vagam that is a wandering or roaming substance because it was a determinate setled substance not a rouing substaunce euen that which Christ held in his handes which he brake and which he gaue to his Disciples 2. Next it doth not demonstrate the bodie it selfe of Christ neither visible nor invisible For the visible body Christ himselfe had on but hee gaue vnto his Disciples after hee had broken it a plaine evident and demonstrate thing An Invisible or Vbiquitarie bodie in the Supper Christ had none yea the Papists too doe confesse that the body of Christ is not yet presēt vnder the forme of bread when the Priest doth begin to pronounce this Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this but then it is present at last cast as they say euen after the chaunge is made nowe they say that the immutation of breade into the body of Christ is made in the very last gaspe of the cōsecratiō wherin the syllable VM is pronoūced in these fine words Hoc est yet the change is not enim nor yet Corpus nor yet me now t is neere um here t is Lo now he hath stroken it dead now in deed hee hath kild the cow and neuer before till this syllable VM flue mee out of his chaps Hence you may take a short surview of Popery in graine that is in his right stampe couler and cue as men commonly saie 3. Thirdly lastly this particle hoc this doth not demonstrate the shew onlie or accidents of bread aswel because Christ held not in his hand neither did he breake bare accidents but the verie materiated thing it selfe clad and bounded about with accidentes as also because it was false that the shew or resemblance of bread should be the body of Christ For this were to make a body of the aire nay marry it is not so wel by a great deal because that the aire though it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a most moist fluid body yet it is a body but accidents are immateriall things are no subiect of themselues but they doe inhaerere subiecto that is they are fastned in some Subiect which must support and beare them vp It is a common saying that beggers repeate their Pater noster so oft till at length they cleane forget it so the fabulous massing wittals doe beat about the bush of Sophistrie and quirkes so long till at last they leese the bird it selfe that is they forget the maine groundes and rules of Logike Wherfore to conclude this Particle Hoc doth demonstrat nothing els then the bread alone neither doe the words of Christ this is my bodie sound any other thing then Hic panis that is this bread is my bodie Let this suffice for the first the two other middle motiues against that grosse interpretation of the words this is my body namely the authority of the Scriptures the reasons with the cōtrary absurdities shal be set downe as occasiō offereth in the particular hand ling and discussing of this Sacrament In the meane space you haue heard the definition and nature of the Lordes Supper you haue heard howe many things do generally belong thereto you haue had and heard
vilely plaie the patchpannels Yea but some vvill say if so that the Sacramentes bee but signes and representations what necessitie lieth in theÌ„ seeing the word of God it selfe doth teach vs as much and therfore vvithout the other were sufficient alone for vs. First I answere that the necessity of the SacrameÌ„ts staÌ„deth vpon this grouÌ„d that is to say on the ordinance of God who will not bee called to accompte of vs for any thing that he doth Secondly I answere that the word indeede of God is all-sufficieÌ„t by it selfe had not wee bin insufficient by reason of our dulnes to beleeue the same And for this cause hee ordained the Sacramentes to helpe our weakenes and dulheartednes to believe any thing vnlesse we do with St Thomas both see feele him first Iob. 20.13 though not corporally as he did theÌ„ that is in his flesh and bodely presence but Sacramentally representorilie that is by Signes And therfore we are most highly bouÌ„d vnto God for the same seeing he doth debase himselfe so farre by these terrestrial creatures of bread wine as ther by to apply and make himselfe familiar to our feeble to our sleÌ„der more theÌ„ weake yea childish capacitie reach vnderstanding Heere theÌ„ we are to note that threefold difference betwixt the word the Sacraments in the order of confirming faith viz. 1. The word is offered preached generally vnto all but the Sacraments are singularly ministred to every of the faithfull 2. The word is offered in preaching to the eare onely but the Sacramentes are presented to all the senses that so we may be every way sensiblie affected assured of the goodnes favour mercie of our God 3. God by his word hath revealed expressed set downe his will vnto vs by the Signe or Sacrament he hath coÌ„firmed the same vnto vs. To the end that that thing which the mind did coÌ„ceaue out of the word might after a sort through the Signe be presented to the senses c. Now forsomuch as our Adversaries the Papists do still baÌ„gle about mooneshining in the water by standing so stifly vppon the grosse and literall sense of these wordes Hoc est corpus meum that is this is my body that neither they may be their owne carvers nor we wax olde in our opinion without reason reason I say such as they never will haue the like vnlesse they haue the same I will oppose against that grosse taking of the wordes fower especiall thinges to annihilate infringe the same viz. 1. The iudgment verdite of the learneder sounder sort touching the true meaning of the wordes 2. The auctoritie of the Scripture the best interpreters thereof 3. Reasons with the contrarie Absurdities 4. Lastly if that none of these the least whereof is sufficient can satisfie such vnreasonable and flint-harted Papists that do most obstinately put away the true and sincere knowledge of these mysteries I must be driven to discover to their shame had they any the most impure irreligious doctrine vvhich they mordicùs tooth naile defende about their Masse First of the First that is the iudgement of the Fathers 1. The bread taken and given to his Disciples he made that his body saying This is my bodie that is a figure of my bodie Tertullian lib. 4. coÌ„tra Marcionem 2. After such a maner he saith that the bread wine are the flesh bloud of Christ as that both the thinges signifying and the things signified are iudged or esteemed by the same words Cyprian de Chrism 3. The Lord saith Augustine did not doubt to say This is my bodie when he gaue a Signe of his bodie August contra Adamant chap. 12. Againe Cyprian he calleth it panem sanctificatum that is hallowed bread 4. The bread vpon the Alter onely is a Signe as Baptisme is and it proffiteth nothing vnlesse the bread be nowe eaten within Lut. in Serm super Iohan. 6. Anno 1523. 5. The Latine Church speaketh Nulla rei fit scissura signi tantum fit fractura qua nec status nec statura signatiminuitur that is no reÌ„ting is made of the thing onely there is a breaking of the signe whereby neither the state not stature of the thinge signified is diminished And they hold this to bee the definition of a Sacrament That it is a Signe of an holie thing 6. The destroying or taking avvaie the Proprieties is a denying of the Nature Theodoret. Dial. 3. 7. The natural essential Proprietie beeing cutte of the verie whole nature also it selfe is overthrowen therewith For a nature cannot be found out anie way but by the essentiall Proprietie that doth designe and note out the same Vigilius in Epist. Synod adversus Monothel He that denieth the Proprieties denieth the nature Luth. in lib. Concil If then the bodie of Christ is not visible and circumscribed it cannot bee a bodie For take away the essentiall Adiunct and take away the Subiect also once put the AdiuÌ„ct forthwith adde the Subiect toe Vbiquitie therefore is not communicated vnto the body because it is a Proprietie of the divine Nature 8. Do thou not saith Austen doubt that the man Christ Iesus is there now from whence hee shall come and print it firmelie in thine heart keepe faithfullie the Christian confession because he hath risen from the deade he ascended vp into heaven hee sitteth at the right hand of the Father neither shal he come else-where then from thence to iudge the living and the deade And he shall so come the evangelicall voice Act. 1. bearing witnes heereto as he was seene to goe into heaven that is in the same forme substaÌ„ce of his flesh to which flesh he gave immortality indeede but yet tooke not away the nature According to this forme he is not to bee thought to bee spredde every where For we must beware that we do not so maintaine the divinitie of man that wee should take away the truth of his bodie Besides it folâ—oweth not that that which is in God should bee everie where so as God For the scripture saith most true thinges to vs that wee live in him move and haue our being yet are wee not everie where as he is But that man is otherwise in God because God is also otherwise in that man after a certaine proper and singular manner For one person is God and man both is one Christ Iesus Every where by that that he is God but in Coelo in heaveÌ„ by that that he is man August in Epist ad Dardanum Althique dicit Sacramentum premi dentibus In a word all this contention saith Mulculus standeth on the right sense of the wordes of Christ viz. This is my bodie where the true meaning of them is held there those arguments do make nothing at all to the purpose by which they labour in laying on Hampton load of sophismes fooleries to proue that the body of Christ can be in many places at
by through Christ that we leese not the same any more but let vs lay sure hold on our Lord Sauiour and as Simeon Luc. 2.28 tooke him vp in his armes so let vs take him vp also not in our armes without but inwardly in our heartes and then may we boldly come before and praise his holy name One sometime that could not tell how to escape losse of life from a certaine king because the king was provoked against him tooke vp the kings son who was enwrapte with the loue which he bare to his sonne that he cleane forgate the hatred hee bare to his enemie so we must pray Christ Iesus to bee our advocate to his Father beeing assured that God is well pleased in him and we must take CHRIST as it were in our armes and then God looking on vs forgetteth our sinnes For by this means it will come to passe that wee shall haue iust cause to reioyce at all times yea even then when God is saide to iudge the worlde with righteousnesse For though wee bee not righteous in our selues yet Christes righteousnes is imputed for ours And as Parents loue their children though they bee never so deformed so God louing his Sonne lookes on vs and loues vs. This is called Rom. 13 14 Gal. 3 27 a putting on of Christ And as Iacob hauing putte on Esaues apparell wan the blessing so wee putting on Christs garments of righteousnes shall obtaine the blessing and fauour of God for evermore Lastly vnto this our spirituall mariage and coniunction it shall not be vnconuenient to annexe three necessarie obseruations rules or conclusions as followeth First this coniunction heere spoken of must be substantiall or essentiall and not only energeticall that is to say Virtuall namely whole man with whole Christ yea and by meanes of him even with the whole Trinitie and Godhead See these places 2 Epist Pet 1 cap 4 ver Ioh 17 22 23 Ioh 14 23. 1 Ioh 4 ca 12 13 15 16. v. Secōdly it must be reall true therfore not imaginatorie or accidentall namely as the braunches with the vine as the stones of the wall with the whole building as the members of mans body with the head and as the coupling of man and wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one flesh according to Gods ordinance be they never so far a sunder in respect of place Ephes 5 cap 29 30. Thirdly which must ever diligentlie be marked It must quoad modum that is in respect of the māner be a spiritual and no corporall or carnall cōiunction This is over hard to bee comprehended of flesh and bloud nay it surpriseth cleane mans sense his witte and reason in-somuch that St. Paule himselfe calleth it Ephes 5 32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great secret which we cannot attaine vnto but by a sure and liuely Ephes 3 cap 3 9 v faith yea which is more the verie Angels themselues 1. Pet 2 cap 12 vers doe desire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 introspicere that is to behold or more neerely to the Greeke word to see and prie into this mystery of the salvation of mankind purchased and wrought by Christ wherof this spirituall vnion with him is the very sūme interest earnest of the holie Ghost givē to his elect children for their most ful assurance which they doe enclose lay vp in their harts by faith What shal one say then to these bussardly Papists that bee they convinced by the scriptures never so plainely yea though the Apostle St. Paule so wonderfully endewed with the Spirit doth not omitte to say and confesse that it is a great mysterie moreover that the holy Angels too thēselues do even long to know this secret yet for all this they are neverthelesse caried and ledd away still with a carnall or fleshly vnderstanding of this so spiritual deepe a mysterie avouching that they doe eate orally the transubstantiated bodie of Christ made by the cunning slipper-devise and incantation I should haue saide consecratiō of the maskinglike attired massing-Priest Hitherto we haue handled the three first special endes of the Lords Supper the two latter whereof tended to our mysticall incorporation or inauguratiō with Christ as also vnto a spirituall repast food wherby we gather strength and growe vp continually from faith Rom. 1.7 to faith vntill we bee made a perfect man in him It resteth now that we should declare the two other ends but that present occasiō vrgeth vs to interlace certain reasōs against the orall fleshely eating of Christes body in the Sacrament with the absurdities that doe rise therevpon Q. You said before in the third speciall ende that this Supper is a Sacramēt of our spirituall nourishment do you then make a difference of eating seeing you adde spirituall A. It is right meete so to distinguish least wee shoulde bee caried away with the sweepe of grosse errour as to to many are For māducatio or eating is sometime sacramentall sometime spiritual onely sometime both spiritual sacramentall Q VVhat is sacramentalleating A. It is the externall sēsible eating drinking of the bread wine without faith Q. VVhat is spirituall eating A. It is that which is done onely by faith and it answereth ex opposito vnto that first which is nothing else but a signe symball heereof Q. Then these two are not alwaies ioyned togither A. No. For as the externall ceremoniall eating may be without the spiritual so the spiritual also may be without the externall As saith St. Austen de Ciuit lib. 21. cap. 23. Q. VVhat is the Sacramentall spirituall eating togither A. It is the very right vse of the Supper which is required in the institution of Christ Q. How is carnall eating convinced by the word A. Christ himselfe doth overthrow it by two arguments Iohn 6. ca. 62.63 v. The one drawen from the signe the other from the vse viz. 1. A signo or from the signe Doth this offend what then saith he if yee should see the Sonne of man ascend vp where he was before Signifying therby as Athanasius rightly thinketh that his ascension carnall eating of his flesh can in no wise stād togither 2. Ah vsu that is from the vse It is the Spirit saith he that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the wordes that I speake vnto you are Spirit and life That is as the naturall and proper sense of the Text inferreth earnall eating is vnprofitable but the spirituall doth giue life and quickneth Now the Papistes doe checke these words of Christ and cavill stoutly or rather stubburnely spitefully with vs that it is the orall fleshly chamming and grinding of Christ betwixte their teeth that profiteth But it is in vaine to reason the cause which these drawe-latches and cornerlurkers For as the Proverbe goes an Ape will be an Ape still putt him into a coate of velvet or what you will so is a Papist no changling in opinion but will liue and die