vine I will not drinke from hence forth of this fruite of the vine and he is senceles that cannot see this reference it is so plaine If you desire to knowe more of this cup read S. Luke where the thing is more at large You are wont to saie Scripture must expound Scripture heere it doth so why doe not you beleeue what it tells you D. Featlie All the Fathers generallie vnderstand those words I will not drinke c. of the Sacrament Answer You were told that some doe and had answer giuen you according to that opinion which answer you haue not impugned that some doe not as S. Ierom S. Beade S. Anselme Theophilact whose opinion is better grounded as hath bene shewed Wherefore you did amplifie when you said all generallie vnderstood it of the Sacramentall cup. And when you come to verifie your words by naming those all you finde onelie fiue in all with one particular Councell all which held the reall presence and were opposite vnto you in the cause Let vs looke on them seuerallie Clement Cyprian Chrysostome the Authour de dogmatibus Pope Innocent and the Councell of Wormes First the Bishops in the Councell of Wormes were knowne Papists in communion with the See of Rome and at that tyme when by your owne confession the whole world beleeued the reall presence and Sacrifice of the Masse which they also professe euen in the Canon whence you would dispute and throroughout they shew themselues Papists acknowledging Confirmation Monkes Penance or Sacramentall Confession c. together with the Popes authoritie in calling Councells and determining controuersies appertaining to Religion The treatise de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus which you cite as S. Augustines is not his and you haue beene told alreadie what sainct Augustine said was in the Cup Ep. 162. euen the price of our Redemption He taught also that the holie victime whereby wee were redeemed l. 9. was dispenced from the Altar that Christ had his owne bodie in his owne hands Conf. c. 13. suprà pag. 45. and so caryed it after such a strange manner as no man euer before did or could beare himselfe that wee receaue the Mediatour Iesus Christ with our mouth Conc. 1. in Psal 33. l. 2. con◠Adu leg c. 9. and with our mouth drinke blood notwithstanding the seeming horrour Clement saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c as our Sauiour in the Gospell I am the true vine Io. 15. if he a vine his blood and especiallie as in the chalice may be called (a) See S. Ierome cited p. 111. m. wine S. Chrysostome saith in the place obiected that our Sauiour doth chang the things proposed that he doth nourish vs with his owne bodie that we receaue him and touch him and haue him in vs that Angels tremble when they see the thing wherewith wee are fed and exhorteth vs to beleeue it is as our Sauiour tould vs his bodie and not to trust our sence He saies also that is in the cup which did issue out of the side of our Sauiour S. Cyprian did openlie professe vnbloody Sacrifice vnder the formes of bread and wine Epist. 63. Neither can all your glosses obscure those words before alleadged Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed naturâ mutatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro suppose I say the same of the wine genimen istud non effigie sed naturâ mutatum omnipotentia Verbi factum est sanguis That frute of the vine being changed not in shape but in nature is by the OMNIPOTENCE of the WORD made blood Innocentius tertius in the booke you cite expounds the Masse defends the reall presence and teacheth expreslie transubstantiation which he did also define in the greate and generall Laterane Councell D. Featlie What answer you to so many Fathers a Councell and your Pope Answer I might as you see turne the demaund back to aske of you what you say to so many Fathers and a Pope in a Generall Councell But to forbeare making thrusts because you think that is not faire plaie in a defendant as there aret two Controuersies so you shall haue for answer two things first that all are against you in the matter of the Reall presence against which you are disputing which matter is defined by the Church openlie deliuered in the Scripture generallie acknowledged in Antiquitie and those whose authoritie is obiected did all beleeue it as we doe wherefore themselues were to answer your scruple would doe it easilie in manner aboue (a) In my Lords answer pag. 165. specified Secondlie the other Controuersie is not determined by the Church neither did the Councell that you speake of a Nationall Councell only determine and define it nor Innocentius propose it as matter of beleefe but only as a priuate Doctour makes his vse of it nor the Fathers generallie consent in it nor the Scripture openlie deliuer it but rather the contrarie Wherefore admitting it to be probable you are to thanke those Authours for the curtesie for you cannot get so much by waie of argument And he that could should not be contradicted on our part for persisting in the beleefe of the reall presence wee might indifferentlie defend The Reader may perceaue by the Ministers words more then the Minister would haue him to beleeue touching the euent of the conference either that it was or that it was not the consecrated cup which is meant by those words in S. Mathew D. Featlie D. Smith triumphed as if he had gotten the daie saying are these your demonstrations are these sufficient causes why you should seperate your selues from our Church and from your brethren the Lutherans Answer Had he not reason when your oppositions were all answered and the Dispute at an end The reasons mouing to leaue THE COMMVNION OF THE CHRISTIAN WORLD should be vnauoidablie conuincing but hetherto there haue appeared none such nor euer will doe from the mouth of any Protestant THE BREAKING VP of the conference and the Ministers terguiersation ANd heere the conference ended hauing lasted neere seuen howers from noone till it was almost night Some daies after D. Smith hoping according to M. Featlies promise he should also haue a daie to propose the arguments for the Catholike tenet told M. Kneuet that he would be readie to dispute the next Tuesdaie being the tenth of September desiring him to giue M. Featlie notice of it the Sundaie before but though he went thrise that daie and twise the next vnto the house wherein M. Featlie did abode he could not speake with him F. l. 1. d. 1. c. c. v. c. 9. 44. At length hauing gotten to speake with him he warned him to prouide himselfe against the daie appointed but the minister began to pretend that he was to write letters and that there remained yet a great part of their arguments whereunto in equitie it should be answered or at least they should be proposed for the
Bagshaw seemes by his Relation pag. 301. to haue beene before this His Refusall to meete my Lord whereof S. E. makes mention pag. 10. E. H. M. W. the Doctour can spell these letters was when the Prince our now Soueraigne was in Spaine I haue the Relation by me but forbeare to print it vnles I be further called vpon THE SVMME OF A CONFERENCE BETVVIXT M. D. SMITH NOW B. OF CHALCEDON AND M. DAN FEATLY MINISTER ABOVT THE REALL PRESENCE VVITH THE NOTES of S. E. Facile est vt quisque Augustinum vincat quanto magis vt vicisse videatur aut si non videatur vicisse dicatur facile est S. Aug. Epist 174. TO THE READER IT is now more thē a yeere COVRTEOVS READER since first I saw the Sacrilege of M. Featlie whereunto he hath adioyned a Conference or Disputation had in Paris long agoe with my Lord of Chalcedon This Conference being short I presently read it ouer and liked so well some fragmēts of my Lords Answer which the Minister hath imparted that I desired to see the whole but could not then get a coppie Hauing lighted now at leingth on a Latine one and liking it exceeding well I haue thought good to translate it and impart it vnto others by the print partly because it is not easilie found by such as do seeke after it the Conference being past almost twenty yeeres agoe and partly also because the Minister who would seeme to haue a Coppie doth cite imperfectlie my Lords answers putting words or peeces together at his pleasure and sometimes adding and obscuring the sence which in the Relation it selfe I find to be distinct and cleere He hath also striuen to make good his former Arguments inuoluing them in a new discourse hath thrust in heere there what he thought good wherefore for their sakes that are vnlearned I will as oft as there is cause adde a note and taking of the new maske of words will let the Reader see that after all his washing those Ethiopians haue not changed their complexion and that now this second time of their comming on his Errand they neede not any other Answer then that was giuen them before In one of his Epistles before the booke I mentioned he demands to see another leap which may be shewed him in good time meane while you may be pleased to measure this which the minister would not haue begunne himselfe to chronicle had he not thought it to be extraordinarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heer 's Rhodes IN the yeere 1612. Master Daniel Featlie being in France Chaplaine to the Embassadour of our Late Soueraigne there came to Paris one M. Kneuet halfe-brother to M. Iohn Foord an honest vertuous Gentleman the liuing in that Cittie This M. Kneuet being vpon his arriuall there put in mind that he was mistaken in the matter of Religion which is the thing a man should principallie attend vnto and that before Luther all knowne Churches did beleeue that which he saw there in Fraunce openlie professed tould his brother M. Foord he would see one of ours defend it before M. Featlie whom he did esteeme a greate Scholler Withall he acquainted M. Featlie with the busines with the point he meant should be discussed M. Featlie thinking himselfe alone hard enough for the whole Church of Rome vndertooke it and to performe it with the more applause did prouide himselfe diligentlie for encounter At leingth vpon the third of September word was sent to M. D. Smith who being then in towne was entreated to vndertake the cause that he should prouide himselfe for the morrow On the 4. of September there met at M. Kneuets chamber M. D. Smith and M. Featly With M. D. Smith came his cozen M. * Since Doctour of Diuinitie Rainer with M. Featly came one M. Iohn Porie who had beene a burgeois as it was said in the firste Parlament in King Iames his time There were also present M. Iohn Foord M. Thomas Rant M. Ben Iohnson M. Henrie Constable others not English onelie but also Frēch for M Featly presuming the victory had made the matter knowne The cōference began at noone and by agreement M. D. Smith was this time to defend M. Featly to dispute Afterwards vpon another daie M. D. Smith was to dispute and M. Featly to defend the rest not to entermedle THE RELATION THE conditions of this Conference Master Featlie did not obserue for wheras it was to haue beene priuate before it M. Kneuet for whose sake it was vndertaken and his brother onlie Master Featlie brought to passe that it was publike there being many called vnto it not English onelie but also French Secondly whereas the conference according to appointment was to be betwixt them two onelie M. Featlie called M. Moulins thither also though this Minister afterwards changing his minde did not come Thirdlie he let not M. D. Smith know of the time of Conference but one daie before they were to meete whereas he as we may iustlie beleeue had prouided himselfe long before VVhence one of his frinds said the conference would be exact and elaborate Before they began to dispute D Smith said the conference was to be not of transubstatiation but of the reall presence onely which by order of disputation ought to be first He said also that he was content to graunt vnto M. Featlie the opponents part for this daie so that M. Featlie would promise to let him haue it another daie otherwise he would by lots trie who that daie should be opponent And M. Featlie promising that another daie he should propose arguments for the Catholike tenet he willinglie vndertoke the defendants part But when according to the manner of Oxford he began to declare the state of the question to shew whitall the grounds of the Catholike tenet Featlie cryed out that he would in no case giue way thereunto D. Smith tould him that himselfe was a Doctour of Oxford and that he M. Featlie was a Graduate of the same Vniuersitie wherefore there was reason they should obserue their vniuersitie manner But M. Featlie tooke this in so ill part that he said openlie he would rather omit the conference then permit it So that D. Smith was forced herein to let him haue his will least the expectation of the auditorie should heerevpon haue bene frustrate or they take occasion to suspect that he sought to decline the cumbat VVherefore leauing that his fort wherein he might haue iustlie staid and comming out into the open field he bad M. Featlie bring out his arguments such as might suffice to iustifie before God and men his departure both from the Roman Church and all other auncient whatsoeuer yea and from the Lutheran too in this point which need to be demonstrations without doubt for there be not wanting probable arguments to impugne à truth most euident THE NOTES OF S. E. D. Featlie in his Relation doth acknowledge that he would not permit my Lord of Chalcedon
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
you must conceaue coloratum is the proper obiect of the sence of seeing and therefore can not be the obiect of the vnderstanding formallie and qua sic Censure Nullo thure litabis Haereat in breuis vt semiuncia recti If a reasonable creature without adding more doth answere fullie to the name we speake of man your mother Master Waferer is a man there is no waie to scape Laeto vnles you say that she hath not all this and so either is no creature no animal or not rationale not reasonable or neither animal nor rationale Or that the word man signifieth more then animal rationale that is not in your mother which were to retract your Apologie and to let the discourse of S. E. stand againe as first it did Moreouer you must acknowledge that a mans vnderstanding can conceaue not onlie substance but also colours and quantitie and figures and consequentlie it may be able to conceaue an extended and figured and coloured liuing substance How do you conceaue the Predicaments the ten genera and their species whith your intellect or with your heeles or not at all if your heeles serue your turne you may runne ouer them apace without troubling of your head if not at all he was forsworne that presented you for your grace if with your intellect then ones vnderstanding may conceaue a man coloured he may conceaue colour as well as man and colour in a man and for that as you may keepe it till there be neede together with your formallie and qua sic Let coloratum or what els you please be the proper obiect of the sight it is all vnder the obiect of the intellectiue power which may know what all the sences can and more whereby it comes to passe that coloratum cannot be the proper or adequate obiect of this power but some thing larger that includes it Apologist If homo signifie colour what colour is homo I pray If you say white then say I a black man is no man if black then a white man is not perfectlie a man Censure This is but to make waie for a conceipt as you think which your head was great withall albus an ater homo sit nescio VVaf. Ibidem Suppose I put color into the place of homo argue as you do thus If the latine word color doth signifie colour what colour is color I pray you if white black is none if black white is none To Which Question your Mastership thinks there is no other Answer possiblie to be made but this albus an ater sit nescio The Philosophers are wont to saie that in genere latent aequiuocationes do you vnderstand this I think not But to your interrogatorie the species or differences in colour which you speake of are not properties of the nature of manâ— but the one of this the other of that Indiuiduum from which the species or nature is abstracted and no man is without colour it is found in all and euerie one An black for exaÌ„ple though this or that a determinate colour be not in euerie one In the extraction of a definition we looke wherein all agree beginning first as we can with a fewe The conclusion still comparing more and more till we find the notion common vnto all Facilius est singula de finire quà m vniuersale Arist 2. Post Anal â— 82.83 qua propter oportet a singularibus ad ad vniuersalia transire aequiuocationes enim latent magis in vniuersalibus quà m in indifferentibus quemadmodum autem in demonstrationibus oportet a esse ipsum syllogizatum fuisse ita in definitionibus manifestum est hoc autem erit si per ea quae singulariter dicuntur sit in vnoquoque genere definire seorsum vt simile non omne sed quod in coloribus figuris acutum quod in voce ita in commune progredi obseruantem ne aequiuocatio incidat Cum ad senatum rediremus atque vt missa in vniuersum aboleretur ageremus c restabat aahuc non minimus conatus quo scilicet exempla proderemus qua nulla cum parabola coniuncta forent coepimus omnia cogitare attamen aliud nihil exemplorum occurrebat c. cum vero tredecima dies adpeteret vera narâ—o c. visus sum mihi in somno multo cum taedio denuo contendere cum aduersario scriba sicque obmutuisse vt ibi tanquam é machina visus est monitor adesse ater fuerit an albus nihil memini somnium enim narro qui diceret qum ignauâ— respondeses quod in Exodo scribitur est enim Phase id est transitus Domini protinus vt hoc phasma visum est simul expergesio e lecto exilio locum apud septuaginta primum vndique circumspicio ac de eo coram tota concione pro virili dissero Swinglius lib. de subsid Eucharist The acumen of your iest albus and ater Wherewith you bred your self a difficultie your aduersarie suffering none as you haue seene hath let your cause blood so vnwarie you were in the head-veine See the liues of Luther Swinglius Corolstadius c. By Master Brierley by directing the minde of the hearer to the stories of your predecessours the glories of your Gospell Luther Caralostadius Swinglius who were instructed by a black thing the Deuill against the Masse Luther saith in plaine tearmes it was Diabolus and Satan Swinglius ater fuerit an albus nihil memini But Conradus Sclusselburg himself a ProtestaÌ„t with diuers other Protestantes affirme that without doubt it was tho Deuil Sole meridiana clarius est non Deum verum sed Diabolum ipsissimum Swinglio per somnium suam Haeresin Sacramentariam inspirasse Schlu Theop. Caluin in prooem It is more cleere then sunne light at mid-day that it was not the true God but the very Diuell himself that inspired into Swinglius in a dreame his Sacramentarian heresie Not albus then but ater Thus farre touching the Philosophicall part of that Digression the rest you were content to lett passe as you do still the grearest part of S. E. his Notes without replie in the examen wherof you haue shewed your ignorance in that kind of learning too It is needles to examine that poore Inference which you build vpon your owne mistakes that will fall of it self it tottered and was sensles when I looked on it Next you will needs thrust in a dispute of the veritie of propositions Apologist A proposition is not said to true or false because it is answerable to the intellectuall image but answerable to the thing Censure That which S. E. had said was this that in attributing the name to a thing for example the name man to your mother we seeme to saie that it hath in it self Confer pag. 52. al which the name doth signifie that is all which the conception wherunto this name was subordinated as a signe
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
tell you Your Sophistrie is slender and boyish your verie A. B. C. of Logick will teach you Onlie smile at some passages and they are answered He must giue me leaue to answer with a smile you doe wiselie to applie your self to the vnlearned for they that can sift authors we will pardon his doting you close this senteÌ„ce verie saucilie if you were not as good as cup-valiant though you should teach the ignorant as seldome you do now at least in his place I am to do so but Mercurie is not made of euery stock Pardon my interrupting of you I was wearie in gathering those phrases out of your booke Brieflie that I may end though you do not you tell him he is shameles and foole-bardie that there is in hâ— answer that Reader which thou hast but now seene insufficiencie and obstinacie fallacious dealing the spirit of contradiction bitternes satyrs inuectiues jeeres slaunders detractions lies non-sence calumniations and what not yet forsooth if some lines may seeme to gall him I ' le make say you no Apologie because it can plead retaliation Can it so Master Waferer and are the holie Brethren vindicatiue indeed It seemes Et Laeto sua bilis inest I haue recited part of your language which you say you deuided betwixt them two for you deale by retaile with them with other Catholike Deuines you deale in grosse calling their learning iugling Philosophie their tenets impious delusions their pens impudent and their doctrine such as will not stick to license the lowdest lie so it be aduantagious to the cause of Rome So you There are some the Philosopher tels qui circa finem communem peruerse iudicant who iudge vnto wardlie of the the common highest end You know their name The Scripture saith there are an infinite companie of fooles and euerie one will be medling you beginne to be wise in your owne conceit I will answer or censure you this once least that egge prooue a cocatrice in your braine my Censure shall be your glasse wherein you may examine both your learning and your manners and amend I shall be thought by some lesse wise for appearing with you vpon â—he stage especiallie in the manner that I do but no matter so I may do you or any other good One said S. Paul to the weake I became as weak that I might gaine the weak and I am made all things to all men to gaine all to Christ. To deale with you required no sad thoughts or deep studdie and there are Feriae Academicae schollers haue their daies of recreation Neque semper arcum you came abroad Master Waferer as I suppose a fit of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shew Mirth and I without offence may sometimes smile congruit veritati ridere quia laetans Tertull de suis aemulis ludere quia secura est It appertained to the part I vndertook Vbicumque dignus risus officium est Sickmens pills are lapt in sweete some maladies be cured with musick If mirth recouer you I shall be glad I made you merrie If vpon the Censure you grow penitent I shall be glad I made you sorrie Not that you were made sorrie but that you sorrowed to repentance To others I shall giue warning to take heede of such PaÌ„phlets as yours made to spred errours they be prophane and vaine bablings that increase by degrees to more and more vngodlines they partake in their kind the pestilent nature of serpents and this yours Master Waferer which raiseth vp the head to hisse at the doctrine of the Church and spits venom at the Defenders of it is one But I will cut it into pieces and with the segments will make a medicine to cure the swelling which another of the same kind Featlies Conference hath made in your head This your Pamphlet the gay coate of your Indiscretion you haue laced vp and downe verie trimlie with verses Nunc oblita mihi tot carmina It is longer since I was a child Els out of the ruines of that kind of learning I would hurle sometimes a piece at the head of your Apologie My quarrell Master Waferer is not with your person but with your book If I touch you it is by that medium no other put that of I touch not you but some other that hath scribbled it Whether you be the man or not I wish to you as to my self and to all that God in his mercie will please to amend what is amisse in vs and make vs eternallie his seruants This is the minde and prayer of Your frindlie Enemie and censuring Friend L. I. ANSWER TO THE EPISTOLARIE PROLOGVE BEfore your Apologie be diuers Epistles scarce worth reading not worth answering In one of them which is to S. E. you quarrell with him first for concealing his name you sawe the first letters of it enough to owne the book He was not to make it further knowne to such as you who vex your Antagonists more with Pursuiuants then with Arguments Had I been the man I might haue told you further that your prophetick wit had half speld the letters begining your Epistle to him thus Sir Refuter in concealing your name c. S. you read sir the title of a Barchelour Dimidium facti qui benè coepit habet Secondlie you quarrell with him for saying that my Lord of Calcedon is a Doctour of Deuinitie and of Oxford he told Featlie so when they met whereas it is conceaued Suprà pag. 8. say you that his Lordship can shew no testimonie of his degree taken then his owne hand Yet he can Master Waferer as good not to say better then your Doctour can for his and deriued from that Authoritie which is able to erect Vniuersities and hath established all that indeed giue degrees in Deuinitie The authorizing of that power which is to giue publik testimonie of abilitie in highest learning and to declare a man fit to teach it teaching of Deuinitie being a matter of great consequence in the Christian Societie doth appertaine to the See Apostolique And he who can erect an Academie can make one to be of it Thirdlie you tax him as if he had said that my Lord Suprà pag. 10. after he was Bishop had challenged Featlie in England you shall haue your answer in the end of the Censure meane while he who reades the words of S. E. will see that you mistake and misreport him In another of your Epistles you shew the streingth of your phantasie which hath suddainlie shrunk S. E. into the littenes of a pigmie and magnified Featlie into a tall Giant He S. E. is say you far belowe the answer of D. Featlie who lookes be like ouer him as the Deuil did the word is ouer Lincolne But if your Champion be so far aboue may it not be waigh them againe because he is in this cause minus habens You adde that some weaker pen your owne may foile him But you beginne to crow to soone
Were you borne with a crowne vpon your head if not you must winne before you sing your epinicia you must fight before you winne yet see this Pulius Martis crowes againe the Conference you saie is so weaklie maintained that one who was at that time an infant is now growne strong enough to disable it how strong enough you might haue left that rather to some friend of yours or to the iudgment of the Reader who now perhaps hearing you so soone commend your self before you come to tryall will haue difficultie to beleeue that that Infant which you speak of is yet come to his age of discretion Neither haue you omitted to insinuate the method ouer and aboue lying and calumniating which you meane to keepe in putting of those things whereunto you cannot frame a seeming answer Only smile say you at some passages and they are answered They be answered then sure for your spleene is petulant but curandum plané ne risus rideatur Solutos Qui captat risus hominuÌ„ famaÌ„que dicaciâ—â— Fingere qui non visa potest coÌ„missa tacere Qui nequit hic niger est hunc tu Romane cauêto Who seeke occasion to laugh and Ieere feigne things that are not babble all they heare Such black ones Romane do not thou come neere Thus farre your Epistolarie Prologue I come now to THE CENSVRE OF THE APOLOGIE THe Doctors first obiection was that in the wordes of Institution there was a figure It was Answered by the distinction of a double figure one hath the veritie ioâ—ned with it and this kind of figure was admitted Another hath not the veritie ioyned with it and this kind of figure was denied to be in the wordes of institution THe Apologist Before I answer your Doctours distinction I can not but challeng S. E. for smoothering our Doctours maine argument The Censure I neuer saw your face yet I know you By your voice by the beginning of your speach by the verie opening of your mouth You can not but challeng When man was first made he was left the Scripture saith in manu consilii sui fit to deliberate on his actions with power giuen him freelie to choose and do what in discretion he thought best And the wise do so still when the they see no iust occasion they can choose and do forbeare to intrude themselues into Disputes and questions that are aboue their reach and in such matters to presume to teach and correct and challeng others that haue spent more time therein Which wisdome and discretion be the first things of many which I misse in you who are at this present so disposed that you can not forbeare you can not but challeng A Martialist sure from your natiuitie It were good wee knew whom you meane to set vpon that others be out of feare In the prosecution of Which Inquirie I meete another of your indiscretions You know not yet the maÌ„ onlie you haue seene two letters of his name but were he some Deuine though your self be but a smattrer in the Science it matters not you are resolued and do challeng him May not the matter betwixt you which you know was neuer any be taken vp No by no meanes Hath he donne you any wrong None at all Why then must you challeng and him rather then some other For smoothering the Doctours Argument Are you the Doctour No sure you are not I know you by your voice Yet me thought when I toucht your booke first I perceaued Esaws hand The more circumspect must I be comming to deale With so monstrouse an Aduersarie that hath more handes then one man Well we haue had a sight of your one half we know your genus one that cannot but challenge But such there may be perchance more that are indiscreetlie determined to challeng What is your difference let vs see that Ap. Before I Answer your Doctors distinction I can not but challeng You doe not onlie challeng then that without discretion for you can not but do so but you Answer distinctioÌ„s also This indeede euerie challenger doth not It is your difference this Neither woods nor villages breed any such challengers So yow we haue from you and of you a definition at least a Description taken according to the qualitie which heere you come to shew I desire not to take away what God hath giuen you your wit Master Waferer is not the slowest and your vnderstanding seemeth to be good enough were it out of the bondes of errour But that humour which makes you raise your selfe aboue the Church and iudge and condemne contemne it being seconded with the passion of a Spirit whollie Puritanicall hatâ— blinded your vnderstanding and so turned your wit awry that had your friends loued you well they should not haue let you looke abroad in this publik manner For the condition of the world is such that possiblie some will laugh at Mirth and say Why man you in your gowne and cap be distinctions to be answered are you yet to learne the difference betwixt an Answer and an Argument betwixt a buckler and a sword and yet can not but challeng Ludere qui nescit But I pray you Sir will you meete at cuggels or at sharp not at sharp belike for that were dangerous your cause might haue holes made in it no not at sharpe But such as you thinke will strike with bucklers onlie you can not but challenge Thus freelie will they speake to your face But what will your Academians do behind your back O Iane à tergo quem nulla ciconia pinsit Nec manus auriculas imitata est mobilis The two fac't man was happie in his kind That none did mock him for he saw behind Apologist For smothering our Doctours maine Argument Censure Not he It was choked with a distinction All his labour was to bring it forth into the light which is far from smothering Apologist He makes him beginne to dispute at the third syllogisme Censure The substance of your Doctors Argument is related and answered to the full The preambles which you misse had rusted in the paper of Argumentes he brought with him had he not drawne them long after for the print The good soldier doth not esteeme a florish amongst strokes when his aduersarie comes to strike he stands his ground and encounters pede pes densusque viro vir but whilst offers are made onlie a farre of he smiles at the follie To beate the aire is no conquest for a man The summe of your Doctors flourishing which you call the maine argument as far as it is pertinent to the first obiection is this The Catholik tenet of the reall presence hath no ground in Scripture Ergo. the Antecedent is proued because if there were any ground in Scripture for it it were Matth. 26. or Ioh. 6. but in neither of these Ergo. The Minor proued because these wordes Matth. 26. This is my body are to be vnderstood figuratiuelie At which proofe the