both b. Apol. pag 91. cups Vndoubtedlie Master Waferer can you demonstrate the thing by Theologicall arguments vnauoidable and so teach your owne Doctour or point out in Scripture the place or places that affirme it No not that you haue nothing which S.E. hath not allreadie answered what then Apologist What incongruitie is it to determine the matter thus S. Mathew and S. Marke relate them to the consecrated cup S. Luke after to the legall Censure What incongruitie is your vndoubtedlie no better grounded vndoubtedlie your Doctour smiles to see himself so vndoubtedlie confuted The incongruitie in your explication is easilie assigned for our Sauiour said of the Sacramentall cup this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many vnto remission of sinnes and it cannot without incongruitie and infidelitie be affirmed that this thing is the fruit of the vine properlie We were not redeemed with wine Moreouer the words of consecration were spoken thereby the sacramentall cup consecrated after supper similiter Calicem postquam coenauit c. the other words were spoken in supper time of that cup which was drunck before the consecration of the bodie of our Sauiour and answerablie to the words spoken of the lambe which at supper they did eate Desiderio desideraui hoc pascha manducare vobiscum antequam patiar dic o enim vobis quia ex hoc non manducabo illud pascba donâ—e impleatur in regno Dei With desire I haue desired to eate this Passeouer with you before I suffer for I say vnto you I will not any more eate thereof vntill it be fullfilled in the kingdome of God Lucae 22. reflect vpon the Notes of S. E. and you will easilie conceaue the matter Apologist You cannot saie Christs bodie and blood can be receaued either vnworthilie or to death for to the receipt of them Christ hath annexed the promise of life Censure The Apostle hath taught vs to distinguish two sortes of CommunicaÌ„tes some do proue examine discusse their consciences before and comming with due preparation do receaue worthilie these haue the promise of life supposing they perseuer others approaching vnto the table with their hearts bent on sinne do receaue vnworthilie and these offend greiuouslie in so doing Thus Iudas the traitour did receaue the price of our Redemption which the rest of the Disciples receaued the former waie they to life he to iudgment as hath beene declared els where more at large Pag. 357. And whilst you denie that Christs bodie can be receaued vnworthilie you contradict the Apostle 1. Cor. 11. v. 29. He that eateth and drinketh vnworthilie eateth drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords bodie Eateth vnworthilie what this bread What is it he tels you before v 24. in our Sauiours words take eate this is my bodie which is broken for you is it damnatioÌ„ to eate this vnworthilie yes Why so because it is our Lords bodie and he that eates it vnworthilie discernes it not in the manner of receauing he eates it as if it were commoÌ„ bread requiring of it's nature no spirituall preparation no reuerence wheras it is in it self a most holie thing euen the bodie that suffered for vs and as such with great reuerence to be receaued Apologist Saint Paules meaning is that who so commeth to those holie mysteries without that wherewith to discerne the Lords bodie is guiltie of the bodie and blood of Christ not in that he hath receaued them but in that he hath not receaued them since they onlie can be receaued by the mouth of faith Censure Only by the mouth of faith How then did Iudas receaue that which the faithfull knowe though you do not to be the price of our redemption if that caÌ„ be receaued only by the mouth of faith which mouth the traitour had not And What a peruerse exposition is this whosoeuer shall eate this consecrated bread which our Sauiour v. 24 saith is his bodie broken for vs vnworthilie shall be guiltie of the bodie of our Lord that is he shall be guiltie of the bodie not in that he hath receaued it but in that he hath not receaued it He receaues it the Apostle supposeth and vnworthilie and heerby he saies he shall be guiltie You saie No he shall not be guiltie in that he receaues it vnworthilie is not this later contradictorie to the former Waferers negatiue to S. Paules affirmatiue Againe S. Paul puts the fault in so receauing whosoeuer shall eate c vnworthilie v. 27. and v. 30 For this cause many sleepe c. Waferer in not receauing Not in that he hath receaued but in that he hath not receaued Thirdlie S. Paul saies he eateth drinketh damnation those acts in him are sinfull acts coÌ„mission omissioÌ„ Waferer the damnation is for not eating and not drinking Apologist Let not him therefore who without due preparation and so prophanes the holie ordinance of God vnworthilie eates the sacramentall bread and drinks of the cup think that he dâ—th communicate of the bodie and blood of Christ for so he should receaue to his saluation but let him assure himself howsoeuer he mixe himself with the faithfull at that holie banket yet he receaues barelie the outward food and not the heauenlie which can onlie be discerned and receaued by a liuelie faith Censure This then Master Mirth is the substance of the Catechisme you giue such as will beleeue you The wicked receaue barelie the outward food Out of which you shall giue me leaue to inferre Ergo the bare outward food is the price of our Redemption and Ergo the bare outward food is the bodie that was broken for vs. The sequele S. Paul and S Augustine yea and our Sauiour himself will make good Take a. 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. eate this is my bodie which is broken for you b. v 29. he that eateth vnworthilie the thing giuen when he said take eate this is c eateth damnation to himself not discerning the Lords bodie c. v. 30. For this cause for so eating vnworthilie manie are weake and sicklie amongst you 1 Cor. 11. Our Lord himself tolerateth Iudas a Deuill a thiefe his seller he lets him receaue amongst the innocent Disciples quod fideles nouerunt precium nostrum that which the faithfull knew our price S. Augustine Epist 162. Apologist After S.E. hath so poorelie as not worth the confutation iumbled in false witnesses cunninglie smothered the testimonie of those two who would coÌ„demne him he is so foole hardy as to affirme that though Christ said of the consecrated cup that it was the fruite of the vine yet it destroies not his tenet of transubstantiation Censure Fie Waferer will you neuer leaue your lying if your booke perseuer in the vice vntill the end and it is now verie neere t' will be condemned vnles hypocrisie may saue things otherwise obnoxious to the fier Daré pondus idonea fumo The witnesses your Doctour
space of an hower before D. Smith should obiect any thing D. Smith answered that he thought this to be an vniust condition as well because M. Featlie had not permitted him when he was to defend so much as to shew the grounds of his tenet and therefore why would himselfe demaund now to dispute when his turne of defending was as also because no such condition was agreed vpon in the treatie but onlie that M. Featlie should haue one daie allowed him to oppose and D. Smith should haue another He demanded therefore now a daie wherein he onlie might oppose according as it had bene graunted to M. Featlie before But M. Featlie refusing to yeeld thereunto M. Kneuet prouided himselfe for his iourney determining on Tuesday to leaue Paris VVhen M. Featly heard of this hoping as it seemes that D. Smith would not challeng him to dispute any more after M. Kneuets departure late at night about nine a clock he sent M. Kneuet to him and said he would be ready to meete him the next weeke vpon condition a day might be allowed him to prosecute the rest of his arguments D. Smith told him that could not be himselfe being the next friday to depart out of Paris but gaue him leaue to choose for the time of conference Tuesday VVednesday or Thursday for longer he could not differ it adding that if M. Featlie would make choise of none of those dayes he could neither performe his promise nor saue his honour He said also that if M. Featly would put downe vnder his hand that he would not keepe the first conditions of the conference but adde new conditions he would sollicite him no more but this he would interprete as a declining of the conflict VVherefore the day following M. Featly wrote vnto M. Kneuet saying he heard that D. Smith exacted of him his promise to meete againe that he was ready to performe it vpon Tuesday on condition that he might haue leaue first to propose all the rest of his arguments as he said D. Smith promised VVhich thing verily was most false for the promise was not made of all arguments but of a day wherein he should propose which what arguments he listed which wâ—s accordingly permitted him to doe That he now declines the conflict it is euident both by the new conditions which he doth propose by his owne words to one of his freinds whome he told that Catholikes brought so many (a) Traitté du S. SacremeÌ„t de l' Eucharistie par l'illust Cardinal du Perron Paris 1622. Testimonies of Fathers to proue the reall presence that there was need of many weekes to read them ouer and by the confession also of another of his companie who said plainly that M. Featly did exceedingly feare to vndertake the part of defendant and sought a fit occasion to saue his honour THE NOTES OF S. E. THus ends the Relation which had neuer lookt so farre abroad had not the Minister importunely called it out It was not adorned for the print but plainely set downe as you see howbeit being euocated to publik iudgment it feares not to appeare euen there where the Doctour thinks all are on his side It is no great matter by the presse to make a show to triumph in papers and speake freely there where none may contradict but could the Reader haue beene a Spectatour and seene this action in the life he would haue acknowledged what M. Kneuet hereupon did confesse that M. Featly was to yong for Doctour Smith He is many waies to weake to vndertake so greate a wit so ready in answer so strong in argument so conuersant in Scripture Fathers Deuines Much lesse whateuer outrecuidance makes him think of his ability is he able to ouermatch an vnderstanding so full of light so ample so vigorous excellently furnished with all variety of learning and in a cause so cleere so common the cause of the whole Catholike world wherin the IVDGE of Controuersies if the Scripture be Iudge giues the sentence openly in plaine termes on our side and the Holy Ghost in the CHVRCH doth confirme it By the Ministers cariage in the busines and by his owne Relation since you may conceaue what is in him Ex vngue you may gather what a thing the (a) Iâ— taâ—res Libyâ—â— ruunt leones Ne sint papalionibus molesti Featlie of himselfe in his Sacrilegâ— p. 28â— Lion is I haue heard from one that was present at the Conference that he brought his arguments with him written in a paper and vrged them soo poorely that M. Pory did prompt him diuers times He reports indeed that one of the standers by said it was vera digladiatio and not Sorbonica velificatio velitatio I thinke he would say I inquired of the partie from whose mouth the speach should haue come who remembers no such thing but tells me the minister did runne ouer his arguments so sleightly that it deserued on his part rather to be called leuissima velitatio then vera digâ—adiatio And as for the Sorbone Disputants ouer whom he would insult in the comparison the Hugonots in France do know there neuer wanted euen of those Bachelours which he doth glance at such as were able ready to meete his Master Moulins when soeuer he durst enter combat M. Kneuet vpon the Ministers poore cariage in the dispute and tergiuersation afterwards when he shoulde haue answered disliked the Protestant Cause which he saw their Champion could not make good with argument in the presence of a Schollar nor durst face to face appeare to defend it and soone after was reconciled vnto the Church and at Venice died a Catholike So my Lord though he were not permitted once to put an argument nor so much as to shew the grounds of our tenet vsing the buckler onely neuer suffered for to draw the sword got the feild and bore away the prize 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heer 's the leap Heere the leape HAEC Relatio disputationis habitae inter Reuerendissimum Dominum Richardum Episcopum Chalcedonensem Danielâ—m Featlaeum Ministrum Protestanticum de Reali Praesentia Sacro-sancti Corporis Domini N. I. C. in Eucharistia vna cum notis S. E. adiunctis nihil habet Catholicae fidei aut bonis moribus contrarium prout mihi constitit ex fideli relatione cuiusdam S. T. Doctoris qui opus totum perlegit Actum Duaci 9. Iunii 1632. GEORGIVS COLVENERIVS S. T. Doctor Regius Ordinariusque ac primarius Professor Collegiatae Ecclesiae S. Petri Praepositus Canonicus Academiae Duacensis Cancellarius librorum Censor A RELECTION OF THE PRECEDENT CONFERENCE Wherein it is defended against the exceptions OF MIRTH VVAFERER MASTER OF ART OF ALBAN HALL IN OXFORD AND HIS APOLOGIE FOR DANIEL FEATLIE D.D. Censured by L. I. Non disputare amant Haeretici sed quoquo modo superare August con Faustum lib. 13. c. 12. TO THE READERS OF THE TITLE THese Gentle Readers are to thank you for your
Is their meaning this bread not being bread is Christs bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Iust Supra p. 45. Answer They meane that the thing vnder the forme of bread which indeed is not bakers bread is his bodie And so did our Sauiour meane too when he said the bread which I will giue is my flesh Ioh. 6. if it were flesh it was not properlie bread but improperlie And that breade improperlie so called was a mans bodie properlie Wherefore our Sauiour could not saie as you would ridiculouslie haue him saie it is my bodie that is to saie it is not my bodie Neither is the sence of an affirmatiue proposition suppose it improper to be reÌ„dred as you doe As where God said to Adam putuis es thou art dust it is not to be glossed after your manner thou art dust that is to saie thou art not dust Serm de Coena Ambr. de Myst init c. 9. Gregor Nysl or Catec c. 37. August Suprà Eo nomine appellata res vnde versa est noÌ„ in quo versa est S. Aug. q. 21 in Exod. God doth there auouch something trulie wherefore you must studie for his meaning and not blasphemouslie impose a ridiculous sence vpoÌ„ his words The Fathers as I haue shewed haue declared their owne meaning it is bread changed not in shape but in nature transelemented super-substantiall bread and such is not indeed bread As the rod changed was not indeed a rod but a serpent and water changed was not indeed water but wine The name was vsed to signifie another thing The Doctours other proofe whereby he Would faine shewe that Hoc stands for bread is an ordinarie obiection borrowed from our Schoole deuines who propose it for the better explication of the termes and may be and is by them diuers wayes answered I am to defend heere that answer which my Lord gaue omitting what the Minister impertinentlie hath thrust in and giuing the Reader before notice that there are some propositions meerelie speculatiue as this God is wise or this a man is a reasonable creature And these doe not make but suppose what they signifie Others are operatiue or practicke as this I doe baptise thee and this Tabitha arise and these doe worke what they signifie The proposition which is heere in questioÌ„ Hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie is of the later kinde practicke D. Featlie This pronoune demonstratiue hoc this must needs signifie some thing that * In the instant when that word was vttered then was existent to which Christ pointed sayingh This. Answer It must not for the proposition being practicall it doth signifie and demonstrate not that which is supposed alreadie being but that which it makes to be The propositioÌ„ I doe not say the subiect or the attribute but the whole entire propositioÌ„ is the cause and the thing signified is the effect which effect the foresaid proposition demonstrating doth make and making doth withall demonstrate it Now the effect you know if you know any thing in Philosophie doth suppose the whole cause and followes it So in these operatiue speaches of our Sauiour Lazarus come forth yong man arife the words Lazarus and yong man did not signifie persons existent then preciselie when they were vttered Cyrill Catena but when the speaches were compleate The words did signifie then when they were but not things existent then for when the words were the persons by them signifyed were not D. Featlie That hoc the first word of the proposition when it is vttered doth it signifie or no Answer Nomen significat sine tempore Arist li. 1. Periher c. 3. It doth signifie and by waie of demonstration and hauing donne that office goes away for words you know cannot staie nor can the speaker vtter all at once Neither can you determine preciselie hauing heard it what it did demonstrate It relates to the substantiue which followes but must harken to the rest for to know I point for example towards that before your eies and say This is And you see and heare me but know not preciselie what I meane by the word this till you heare the praedicatum If I saie whitenes or colour there is one subiect of the speach if I saie paper there is another if English there is a third The pronoune this is yet vndetermined it doth not of it selfe point at colour or paper Paper is not whitenes nor whitenes paper or any other thing If it did it would still shewe the same and so were not a fit instrument or signe to shewe indifferentlie the one or the other And being of it selfe indifferent and vndetermined if you will know determinatelie what it stands for you must stay till the praedicatum come for before you cannot vnderstaÌ„d it preciselie by that Hoc nor by the second word which is est But hauing heard the whole speach or signe you will easilie then perceaue what I meane Haec est What albedo charta I point at the Chalice and say This is and till you do heare more you know not whether I demonstrate the cup or the thing in the cup. scriptura you know not what I meane by that Haec nor whether it be made as yet or metaphysicallie present moâ—allie at least it is When I speake or no. Perhaps I meane the word or letter which I make whilst speake perhaps I meane the paper whereupon I write perhaps I meane the superficies onlie or the whitenes or the light vpon it The praedicatum when it comes will determine And If it be vncertaine to the hearer vntill then in speculatiue propositions much more in such as are practike where by the speakers intention the demonstratiue this concurres to make what by the same intention it doth relate vnto D. Featlie If hoc doe signifie the bodie of Christ or transubstaÌ„tiated bread you make a false proposition for when hoc preciselie is vttered there is not transubstantiated bread or the bodie of Christ Answer Who tould you that hoc is a proposition staie till the proposition be vttered all then there is the bodie of Christ because Gods words must needs be true his omnipotencie doth verifie them and if they be true the thing in that forme is his bodie for his words doe signifie and importit 1. Replie Hoc signifies it seemes that it is then the bodie when the word hoc is pronunced Answer No that one word hoc doth not signifie all this When all are vttered then there is that bodie present vnder the species which you see for so much is imported Not by any part of the proposition preciselie no part is a perfect signe of the bodie now present in this forme but by the whole as I tould you before It works instrumentallie the thing signified and in this thing the proposition with all it's parts is verified the veritie of a proposition being nothing els but the conformitie of it to that which
to crucifie it is Heauenlie mysticall bread not bread in substance but the bodie of Iesus Christ Against this bread they did afterwardes conspire they did crucifie this bread Itaque ill c. pag. 192. And that indeed this mysterie was couched vnder those words in the Prophet mittamus lignum c. our Sauiour himself best able to tell the meaning of Antiquitie declared in calling his owne bodie bread Ioh. 6. and afterwardes exhibiting it the very same that was crucified in the forme of bread by turning bread into it and so giuing it Matt. 26. Lue. 22. On the other side if we make of the words that construction which you would haue you I say who contend that in the proposition before alleadged panis stands for earthlie bread figuratiuelie representing the bodie the sence would be that the crosse was cast vpon that earthlie bread that bakers bread was crucified which is false and ridiculous Si panem eo sensu corpus suum Dominus appellauit faciebat ad vanitatem Caluini vt panis crucifigeretur Why because the crosse was to be laide vpon that bread whereof our Sauiour did interprete the speach or words of Ieremie mittamus lignum in panem You had from me in the former place obiected one reason why Tertullian did not vnderstand improperlie the predicate corpus in our Sauiours words hoc est corpus meum Heere now you haue an other out of this second place which declares that he vnderstood it to be so farre from a meere figure or bread-a-figure that it is he beleeued the thing it self which was crucified which agreeth well to the determination that our blessed Sauiour himself doth adde by way of difference to distinguish it from corporall bread-a-figure He doth not as you would haue Tertullian against his owne discourse expound him meane to say this is a figure or vnderstand by the predicate or word corpus the figure of a bodie the whole sence then had beene this This â—s a figure which is crucified for you but he saith this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my verie bodie which is giuen for you And so much you Chamier doth acknowedge against Featlie Quaeritur quid sit corpus meum sanguis meus Nos candiâ—e liberè ac libenter respondemus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interpretandum cum Heâ—ychio in Leuit 22. Sancta Sanctorum sunt propriè Christi mysteria quia ipsius est corpus de quo Gabriel ad Virginem dicebat Spiritus Sanctus superuenier c. Est igitur corpus illud id est solida substantia humanae naturae quam assumptam in vtero Virginis circumtulit in Hypostasi sua verbum Etenim omnino Christi corpus non nisi dupliciter nominatum est vel proprium illud a nobis designatum vel mysticum quod est Ecclesia the Question is what is Corpus meum my bodie sanguis meus my blood whereunto wee answer ingenuouslie openlie and willinglie with Hesichius that it is litterallie to be interpreted The mysteries of Christ are properlie the holie things of holies for it is his bodie of whom Gabriel said to the Virgin the Holie Ghost shall come from aboue c. It is therefore that very bodie that is to say the solid substance of humane nature which being assumed in the Virgins woombe the word caried about in his Person For Corpus Christi signifies but two things in all the proper bodie which wee haue now specified and the mysticall which is the Church so he a protestant and he instar omnium you know the man that said so and if it be so then a greater scholler then he that said so your Master Featlie The third place corporis sui figuram pani dedisse will neither yeeld solid proofe for you nor vs because omitting the cause of doubting whether they be Tertullians words or no which is insinuated together with the reason by Pamelius out of whom you reade pani the lection and it seemes by some defect in a copie out of which other later were transcribed is doubtfull whether it should be pane as Latinius thinks or panis as most do reade with Beatus Rhenanus or pani as Pamelius found in one of the three Vatican copies which he had and where the ground shakes none but W build on it Moreouer none of those lections do fauour you and were it pani the sence would be that he gaue to celestiall bread his bodie the figure which was before by turning the substance of it into the substance of his bodie and with the exteriour shape which was left couering the same so ioyning figure and veritie together and by the one confirming to vs the other leauing the Church withall a Sacrament consisting of them both not the bodie onlie that were not a Sacrement and the communicant would haue horrour to receaue naked flesh nor the figure onlie that would haue beene elementum egenum futurorum vmbra a signe and nothing but a signe but figure and bodie to and so that the tyme of meere figures exspiring the former substance of the figure Vt ergo in Genesi per Melchisedeth Sacerdotem benedictio circa Abraham possit rite celebrari praecedit ante imago Sacrificij in pane vino scilicet constituta Quam rem perficiens adimplens Dominus panem calicem mixtum vino obtulit Et qui est plenitudo veritatem praefiguratae imaginis adimpleuit S. Cypr. l 2. Ep. 3. bread by conuersion passeth into the veritie the bodie thus were it pani the place would make for vs and imply a transubstaÌ„tiation as I haue declared neither would the words admitte any other so genuine a sence as his for if you take pani for bakers bread the construction supposing which is a thing manifest and aboue demonstrated that the figure he speakes of was an old figure would be corporis sui figuram pani dedit he gaue to bakers bread the old figure of his bodie which figure also was bakers bread which is as much as if he had said he gaue bread to bread old to new iumbling belike both together to make one loafe of two as some doe mingle beere old and new together when the one is newlie made and the other growing soure Pane and panis were further from your purpose as I could easilie shew if any should pretend it the fittest if you could find it in any copie were panem but hitherto no such appeares and if it should in time we should not be to seeke a solution hauing allreadie said that the sacrament called also by the name of bread for diuers reasons els-where specified is a figure of the bodie but not a meere and emptie figure I had allmost forgot to take notice of your translation of the wordes corporis sui figuram pani dedisse he gaue to bread to be the figure of his bodie If he had donne so either at the supper by making of it the blesed Sacrament which is a figure though not
est ex pane vino vt vnione cum eo quod est immortale sit etiam homo particeps incorruptionis Haec autem dat virtute benedictionis in illud quod est immortale nempe corpus suum transelementatae eorum quae apparent natura Cyrillus Episcopus Hierosol Cathechesi 4. Aquam olim in vinum conuertit in Cana Galileae quod vinum cum quandam habeat cum sanguine propinquitatem facilè in illum transmutatur eum patum dignum existimabimus cui credamus quod vinum in sanguinem transmutet infra Hoc sciens pro certissimo habens panem hunc qui videtur à nobis non esse panem etiamsi gustus panem esse sentiat sed esse corpus Christi vinum quod à nobis conspicitur tametsi sensui gustus vinum esse videatur non tamen vinum sed sanguinem esse Christi Seculo 3. Sermo de Coena apud Cyprianum Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non essigie sed natura mutatus omni potentia Verbi factus est caro sicut in Persona Verbi humanitas videbatur latebat diuinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter diuina se infudit essentia Origenes l. 8. contra Celsum Nos qui rerum omnium conditori placere studemus cum precibus gratiarum pro beneficiis acceptis actione oblatos panes edimus corpus iam per precationem factos sanctum quoddam sanctificans Et hom 5. in diuers Quando sanctum â—â—bum illudque incorruptum accipis epulum quando pane vitae poculo frueris manducas bibis corpus sanguinem Domini tunc Dominus sub tectum tuum ingreditur tu ergo humilianâ— temetipsum imitare hunc Centurionem dicito Domine non sum dignus vt intres sub tectum meum Vbi enim indigné ingreditur ibi ad iudicium ingreditut recipientis Seculo 2. Tertullianus l. 4. contra Marc. c. 40. Acceptum panem distributum discipulis corpus suum illum fecit l. de resurrect carn Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur Irenaeus Episcopus l. 4. aduers Haeres c. 34 Qui est à terra panis percipiens vocationem Dei iam non communis panis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena coelesti Seculo 1. Paulus Apostolus pri Corinth 11. Ego enim accepi à Domino quod tradidi vobis quoniam Dominus Iesus in qua nocte trade batur accepit panem gratias agens fregit dixit Accipite manducate HOC EST CORPVS MEVM quod pro vobis tradetur Qui manducat bibit indignè iudicium sibi manducat bibit non dijudicans CORPVS Domini Retinuit Antiquitas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Contentorum ordo sub aspectabili panis forma Sub illa fuit ante consecrationem vera panis natura accepit panem cui successit sub eadem forma corpus Domini verum hoc est corpus quod pro vobis A deo que sub illa specie vel aspectabili forma facta mutatio Aduersariorum Confessio Beza de Coena con VVestphal Hoc quidem saepe diximus quod nunc quoque repetam retineri reipsa non posse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Christi verbis Hoc est corpus meum quin transsubstantiatio Papistica statuatur Morton Institut Sacram. l. 2 ca. 1 pag. 72. VVhat necessitie there is to enquire into the true sense of these words This is my body will best appeare in the after-examination of the diuers consequences of your owne sense to wit your doctrine of transsubstantiation corporall and materiall presence propitiatotie sacrifice and proper adoration all which are dependants vpon your Romish exposition of the former words of Christ The issue will be this that if the words be certainlie true in a proper and litterall sence then wee are to yeild to you the whole cause So he S. E. had said that Berengarius broched your (a) About the yeere of our Lord 1060. the denying of transubstantiation began to be accounted Heresie and in that number was first one Berengarius who liued about â—â— 1060. Fox pag. 1121 Brier heresie and this you Master Waferer take heynouslie telling vs that you haue it from the Apostles If you had said that one of them Iudas was of your opinion you might peraduenture haue found Scripture for it in the 6. of S. Iohn where after our Sauiour had said the bread which he meant to giue was his flesh that flesh which he would giue also for the life or redemption of the world the Iewes began to dispute of the modus how that could be quomodo potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum how can this man giue vs his flesh to eate whervpon our Sauiour told them that his flesh was meat indeed and that his blood was drink indeed and that they were to eate this flesh and to drink this blood heereat some of the Disciples were scaÌ„dalized and said as you do durus est hic sermo this is a hard speach they had not the patieÌ„ce to heare of it they beleeued not and amongst those was the man I spake of Sunt quidam ex vobis qui non credunt sciebat enim ab initio Iesus qui essent non credentes quis traditurus esset eum there are some of you that beleeue not For Iesus knew from the beginning who they were that beleeued not and who should betray him you know the man he was of your opinion yet Berengarius being the first that taught it openlie as a doctrine he may well be said to haue broached it first and if insteed of the word opinion or heresie you put in Sacrament that it runne thus Berengarius broached your Sacrament it may be no metaphor for it is wine that is in your communion cup nothing els but wine Heere is an end of your second Section I will leaue you now alone in your recreation roome and go speake with others at the dore you shall heare of me againe by that time you haue stepped into your third Section where if you can compose your self thereunto we will be more seriouse It is not my labour it was your Mothers to breed Mirth Nobis non licet esse tam disertis Qui Musas colimus seueriores Master Mirth is a merrie man he can laugh out anothers eies and his owne it seemes is not laughing the cause be not fullie open he hath studied so long in the Vniuersitie and talkt there so much of homo that he hath forgotten part of his owne mother tounge I haue beene disputing with him about a peece of it and would haue left him sooner being wearie in the verie beginning dat sine mente sonum to heere so manie words with so litle sence but that he would haue taken occasion thereby to make the presse labour againe in the edition of an other as impertinent a discourse not omitting
become a Catholike which Religion he did afterwards professe in his life time and also dyed in it at Vâ—mice being marryed after the Catholike manner to a Catholike Gentle woman Heere be two against your one I will not name them till I know where to heare of your Master Russel who if he will manifest himself and abide the tryall may know their names time enough though it be not hard to guesse what measure those are like to haue if Puritans prescribe it who come in to testifie against you And in the meane time the Reader desirous of further satisfaction may if he please inquire of M. Doctour Rainer who liues in Paris at Aras Colledge and was himself at the Conference acquainted with M. Kneuet what he knowes in the matter Apologist Your curtesie in lending me this work of your frinde S. E. hath made you the occasion of a great dâ—ale of charitie which hath cleered both our Doctour and our cause In requitall of the large encomium you gaue the author I haue iustified our Doctors merit from whose esteeme he seekes to derogate In some lines my pen may seeme to gall him but I le make no Apologie Censure You will do well indeed to forbeare making more Apologies for your cannot make them well But what charitie is that you talk of your diligence hath laid open the nakednes of your beggarlie cause call you that charitie For vs to laie it open that men detest and abhorre so fowle an heresie and to defend those who maintaine our Sauiours doctrine and the cause of God this Master Waferer is charitie This vertue loues God aboue all and riseth vp when there is need in defence of His and his seruants honour It takes vnto it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole armour of God and armes it self to the casting â—wne of vaine imaginations and eâ—â—rie high thing that exalteth it self â—â—ainst the knowledge of God But you haue cleered you saie your â—â—use Because perhaps by your meaâ—es it appeares a meere fiction which â—efore your Masters had acknowledâ—ed to be a meere figure Yet sometiâ—es by your leaue you would haue â—â—st a clowde ouer it being ashaâ—ed that men should see their conâ—eipt naked bread-a-figureâ— no more â—ou are ashamed of this If you meaâ—e other cleering that is giuing cleere â—nswers as in the beginning you did â—rofesse to do to distinctions sure you â—aue not made any thing cleere vnâ—es it be this that indeed you cannot â—nswer Heere and there you haue â—auilled at a fewe peices of the RelatioÌ„ â—hat is all I finde in your long Pamâ—hlet Wherefore I may tell you as â—aint Augustine once tould a Gramâ—arian who trifled in like manner Si â—ropterea respondisti quia tacere noluisti non quidem ad omnia sed tamen respoâ— disti Apologist If the bodie be substantiaâ—lie in the Sacrament then is there a trâ— a. The like CoÌ„fession there is in D. Morton and is cited aboue pag. 293. Sacrifice and if so then pro vâ— uis defunctis if for the dead then sâ— such as are capable of release and coâ—sequentlie for release of Soules out of Pâ—â—gatorie Censure Let me make vp the Syllâ—gisme But the bodie is substantiallie in thâ— Sacrament by the testimonie of oâ—â— Sauiour himself This is my bodie Matâ— 26 This is my bodie which is giuen fâ—â— you Luk. 22. This is my bodie which broken FOR you 1. Cor. 11. All the Wâ—ferers in the world cannot proue thâ—â— was a meere Wafer Ergo there is a true Sacrifice aâ— FOR pro viuis defunctis c. The Apologie hauing beene loâ—â— time drawing towards an end is the last period now giuing vp tâ—â— Ghost The faith it pleades for is substance this vizt that is not oâ— Lords bodie which he said was his bodie â—â—d the Authors Spirit is Protestanâ—sh for he presumes that he discernes the bodie better then the Cathoâ—â—ke and Vniuersall Church that was â—â—fore Caluin could If now at his â—â—st Apologeticall gaspe he would but â—â—de an act of Hypocrisie to his Proâ—â—ssion the Continuator of Acts and â—onuments might write his name in â—â—d letters Apologist For my part it shall be part 〈◊〉 my continuall thanksgiuing to him in â—hom onlie wee can see light that wee â—â—ue not so learned Christ but can better â—â—scerne of the Lords bodie Censure O the Saint Apologist Vale. Censure Longum Iucunde Vale Vale. Ah! littles Toyes awaie awaie â—ollow your Master If I haue now â—hen smiled in his companie it was â—is companie drew me Being quitt â—f it I returne to serious thoughts aâ—aine Et Laet longum valedico Nugis Apologist Hic Rhodus Censure Mirth 's But S.E. tould vs of another Apologist Hic saltus Censure Out of the frying pan into the fire Exit Magister Exit Baccalaureus