some other qualities lest the receiuers should abhorre rawe and bloodie thinges and that beleeuing they should receiue greater rewards of their faith This faithe Church which dispersed through out the world is called Catholike helde from oulde time now holdeth Yow behowld him of sett purpose to deliuer the ancient fayth to affirme the change into the essence of Christs bodie the accidents to remayne the causes of not seeming what is contayned playnly expressed the same to haue euer befor and then bene the beleefe of the Catholik Church as is now by vs beleeued What thinke yow two such holy archbishops of Canterburie are they not more worthy of credit then M. Rider Alas it is a shamefull demaund to be had in controuersie since therfor he is not worthy to be their chaplins equal wil he not blush yf his forhead be not of brasse to tell hencfoorth our doctrin not to haue bene euer the same in the Catholick Church 73. That in the Popes Court and in his Consistorie Rider there bee diuers opinions touching transubstansiation yet the deniall of it or the contradicting of the Popes opinion was (a) Deniall of Transubstantiation in Rome was no death no death though in those mercilesse daies of Spanish Philip and Romish Marie it was made the thirteenth Article of our faith and it had been lesse daunger to haue denied those twelue old articles of our old faith then this one of your new faith for the one was dispensed with for monie but the deniall of the other was punished with death without mercie But you will replie and say not withstanding the dissentions aforesaid yet Christs words be true he cannot lie he hath said hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie therefor it is his bodie 73. I report me to all considerations Fitzsimon whether they euer obserued a style lesse steeled as I sayd befor or more friuolouse What might I imagin to awnswer to suche pregnant vntruethes In the Popes court and consistorie in this point ther is dissention of opinions Vnder spanish Philipp and Romish Marie transubstantiatoin was made a thirteenth article of beleefe he immediatly telling it was made vnder Innocent the third who liued 300. yeares befor Philipp Marie Then dispensation to haue bene grawnted for mony concerning all other articles of beleefe c. The least that I can do is to score vp of so many the 76. vntrueth The 76. vntruth 74. We confesse these words to be Christs words and therefore true Rider but the litterall sence is yours and therfore false But that I will not bee tedious vnto you I could shew you as manie seuerall opinions dissenting about the meaning of hoc est and corpus as I haue done in the premisses but that the Catholickes shall know there is no such vnitie not veritie in your doctrine as you confidentlie but vntrulie haue taught them therefore I will giue them but a taste till some other time onelie pointing you and them to their Authors and places and then read aduisedlie and iudge without partiall affection This Frier you heard latelie recited your seuerall jarres touching consecration Iosephus Angles do Essentialibus Euch. pag. 114. 115. 116. now heare him with your patience to deliuer his other seuerall opinions touching the exposition of these three words seuerallie hoc est corpus The first opinion is that this demonstratiue pronoune hoc must bee referred not to the bread 1. Iosephus but to the bodie of Christ that this should be the sence hoc est c. id est corpus est corpus meum That is this my bodie is my bodie but how absurd this is let the young Sophisters in the schooles giue their censures 2. Bonauentura 3. Occham in lib. 4. 1. S. Thom. 2. Ricar 3. Scotus Nec panem nec corpus sub ratione corporis sed corpus Christi sub ratione entis vel Indiuidui c. lib. 4. pag. 182 de sacro Altaris mysterio cap. 17. But the second opinion is of Bonauentura who saith this pronoune hoc must be referred to the bread that must be conuerted into Christs bodie but not to Christs bodie The third opinion is Occhams and he is of opinion with the first There followeth three other learned mens opinions contrarie to all the former and say flatlie that this demonstratiue hoc must not be referred to note either the bread or the bodie of Christ but that this might be the sence hoc ens vel hac substantia quae continetur sub speciebus c. This thing or this substance which is contained vnder the accidents of bread is my bodie but how well these opinions with their straunge Logicall manner of reasoning will content the learned Priests Iesuits I would faine knowe for this I am sure they sound not either of diuinitie or learning But this Frier for a farewell concludes pag. 118. pronomen hoc nihil This pronoune hoc signifieth nothing till the last sillable vm be pronounced Hoc nihil demōstrat In the same pag. Pope Innocentius the third saith that hoc signifieth neither bread nor Christs bodie because the whole words of consecration were not spoken vnlesse saith he you will say the Priest consecrates at this word Benedixit he blessed But the Pope saith hoc signifieth nothing and his reason is that the Priest sheweth or noteth nothing because he vseth hoc est c. not by way of demonstration but by way of cursorie repetion Marke this you Iesuits and priests so then this Pope will haue this sence hoc est corpus meum that is nothing is my bodie But in the three of the last lines of that chapter his wisedome changed his minde and said this is my bodie that is what soeuer is vnder the formes of bread is my bodie Is not this thinke you deepe diuinitie for a Pope You may see hereein how the Pope vseth shamefull shifts to couer his sensible errors and to deceiue Christs littell flocke In his Marc. Anton. Con. Stephen Gardner liuing but latelie seeing euery mans opinion expounding what hoc should be hee disliketh them all and faith it signifieth indiuiduum vagum as if Christ had said This but what it is I cannot tell but it must of necessitie be some what is my bodie De consec dist 2. can Timorem Glossa ibidem But I will conclude with your owne Popes Canon and Glosse which you hold for Canonicall though in deed hereticall solet quaeri quid demonstratur per pronomen hoc It is a common question what is meant by this pronoune this whether bread or the bodie of Christ not bread for that is not the bodie of Christ nor yet the bodie of Christ for it appereath not that there is anie transubstansiation till the words bee all pronounced yea the last fillable vm To this question this must be aunswered That by the word this nothing is meant but it is there put
auowched Tertullian l. de resurrect Carnis Graunt you also with Tertullian that Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur the fleash not only the sowle is fedd with the body and blood of Christ that the sowle may be fatt in God Hieron ad Damasum de prodigo filio Wit hs Hierom I consent that the Sacrament is a representation do not you also impugne him saying Ipse Saluator est cuius quotidie carne vescimur cruore potamur It is our Saluiour him selfe Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 14. with whose fleash we are dayly feed whose blood we drinke I subscribe to S. Ambros that it is a signification do you no lesse that after consecration it is the fleash of Christ I allow with S. Chrysostom it is a remembrance Chrysost hom 60. ad pop Antioch and exemplar of Christs sacrifice vpon the Crosse for of that he speaketh do you no lesse when he saythe that in the Sacrament Christ is with vs non fide tantum sed ipsa re not in faythe only Clemens Alexandrin loco citato a Ridero but in very realitie I professe with Clement Alexandrinus to receaue Christ as he speaketh which is nothing to M. Riders intention and all other wayes it may be interpreted vnder an allegorie or figure as meat of faith c I coÌ„fesse also Ipsum Saluatorem intra pectus suscipi that our Saluiour him selfe is receaued into the breast I graunt all Beda in Luc. 22. that you alleage owt of Beda do you also not contradict your owne pretended witnesses but professe in the figure of bread and wyne is the Sacrament of Christs fleashe and blood Behould M. Rider you haue purchased that all which you haue here produced excepting vntruethes is freely and liberaly permitted but farr from your purpose or proffit Is it because a figure or allegorie is witnesed and that not only or without contradicting the substance that you and your only figure should seeme benefited I say with Gods woord and marke it well that Christ is a figure Sap. 7. 2. Cor. 4. Hebr. 1. Coloss 1. Ephes. 5. Luc. c. 12 c. 22. and image of his Fathers substance will you inferr that therfor he is not the selfe same substance with the Father I say Christ is spiritualy and figuratiuely the head of his Churche will you inferr that therfor he hathe not a material head I say that his baptisme and Crosse are taken some tyme spiritualy or figuratiuely will you inferr that therfor his material baptisme and sensible suffring should be excluded I say that he was habitu inuentus vt homo Philip 2. in shape found as a man wil you say that therfor he was no man It is no lesse against Scriptures and Fathers to doe the one then the other to exclude substance in the Sacrament for being together a figure and to doe it in the instances alleaged Therfor as I graunt and shew figure and veritie spirit and letter shaddow and substance by euery autheure by your selfe produced so reciprocally do not misinforme any longer but say although they affirme figure spirit and shaddow so they do not contradict veritie letter and substance Otherwyse euery Reader will condemne your honestie woords and learning as but a figure without veritie a spirit without letter and shaddow without substance Isichius in leuit l. 6. c. 22. So certifyeth saying He receaueth by ignoraÌ„ce who knoweth not this to be the body and bloud according to the trueth Which is as much to say as who by faythles fayth receaueth a figure without trueth of the thing figured he hath receaued according to ignorance and infidelitie But to your 4. Notes 1. grownded vpon Christs blood called wyne 2. consecration called benediction 3. wyne not changed because still called wyne 4. figuratiue phrase therfor not propre I aunsweare to the first and third that it is a custome in Gods woord and not only in holy Fathers to call thinges altered by their former names or according to the outward lyknes they represent Exod. c. 7. Toâ— 2. Gen. 18. As for example Aarons rodd deuowred their rodds wheras they were now no rodds but Serpents Raphael is called a yong man three angels three yong men according to their only outward resemblance I aunswer to the second and last that the name benediction doth rather approue the consecration then disanull it and the name figure not exclude propietie as aforsayd The premisses considered no man will deny the 39. vntrueth The 39. vntruth to be that his exposition is ancient Catholick and Apostolical ours new priuat and heretical Pardon him being of their fellow shipp whose spirit consisteth as Vincent Lirinensis cap. 26. sayth in contrarietie vt ignorantia scientiae caligo serenitatis tenebrae luminis appellatione fucentur that ignorance with them masketh vnder the name of knowledge clowds of cleernes and darkenes of light So that as Luther him selfe confesseth the dayes are come in quibus omnia libentissime docemus audimus praeter ea que sunt anâ—iquae solidae veritatis Luth. l. cont Catharin VVherin he and his compagnie do most willingly heare and teach all things els besyd things that are of ancient and solide veritie Therfor as I sayd pardon him in following his trade and their trayne which is now described when he claymeth his profession to be owld and ours new Let vs only be his Referendaries for escapes or vntruethes not to be omitted in his confession when God of his infinit clemencie will grawnt him grace for which I pray perhapp as much as him selfe to repent The 40. The 40. 41 42. vntruthe vntrueth that we might neuer aunswer his obiection owt of Chrisostom as also that in the 11. hom vpon Mathew he hath any woord of what is by M. Rider alleadged The 41. that Beda telleth in England in his tyme the text was taken figuratiuely The 42. That these Fathers do howld against vs wheras we professe in euery place as much as from them can lawfully be challenged Let fouer or fiue small vntruethes passe among the rest that it be knowen I keepe the bulke as small as is possible 57. But you will say these testimonies of these Fathers Rider though of your owne Prints yet they prooue nothing against you vnlesse the Church of Rome should receiue and allow that exposition of the Fathers to be Catholicke If you should so replie surely it were a weake replication and subiect to manie exceptions and you would wring I cannot say wrong the church of Rome that she should hold a doctrine against all the old Doctors But if you will thus replie to bleare the eies of the simple yet will I frustrate your expectation for now I will shew you that the auncient Popes and the auncient Church of Rome held as these Fathers did that the proposition Hoc est corpus meum to be significatiue and improper
therefore figuratiue against your opinion You shall heare the Church of Rome deliuer her owne minde with her owne mouth which you cannot denie her wordes be these Ipsa immolatio carnis quae sacerdotis manibus fit Christi passio mors crucifixio dicitur non rei veritate sed significante misterio That offering of the flesh which is done by the hand of the Priest is called the passion death Dist. 2. de consecratione canon Hoc est pag 434 You cannot denâ—â— but this Popâ— was a Protestant and if this canon be Catholicke then is your carnall presence antichristian and crucifying of Christ but not in exactnesse of trueth but in misterie of that which was signified and the glosse there maketh most plaine against you Dicitur corpus Christi sed improprie vt sit sensus vocatur corpus Christi id est significat corpus Christi It is called the bodie of Christ but improperly that is figuratiuely that this be the sence it is called the bodie of Christ that is it signifieth the bodie of Christ Fitzimon 57. How M. Rider abused the decretals and how by them he receaued vtter destruction to his cause is demonstrated in the 46. number Yet now agayne he kicketh against the prick wel then doth the text and glosse say that the immolation of the preist is called improprely the passion and death of Christ Truly and so will all Catholicks say the same For who euer heard the masse of the preist to be proprely the cruental acte of the Iewes against Christ or called the cruental sacrifice on the Crosse This is as much against vs as when we graunt it to be true we loose no more therby then a candle doth in giuing light to another candle reseruing as much light in it selfe as if it had lighted none So although we affirme all that is now produced M. Riders sute is graunted and our light nothing deminished Rider 58. I will alleadge in this case other Popes and the faith of the Church of Rome in another age whereby the Reader may plainelie see that the auncient Popes and auncient Rome had the true succession in doctrine which we stand now on not that false succession of the place and a rotten worme-eaten chaire that you brag of De consecratione dist 2 Panis est in altare Glossa ibid. page 435. the glosse speaketh thus against your litteral sence of Hoc est corpus meum Hoc tamen est impossibile quod panis sit corpus Christi yet this is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ Not possible by their owne confession that bread should bee the bodie of Christ. Now gentle Reader see the wrong the late Popes and Priests offer to the Catholicks of this kingdome they would haue them imbrace that for faith which the old Church of Rome held for heresie that for possibilitie which she saith is impossible Why would you haue vs to beleeue that which you your selues say is impossible This all the Iesuits and Priests in Christendome cannot aunswere If you say these two Popes and the Church of Rome then taught the truth why doe you now dissent from the olde Romane faith If you saye the Popes and Church of Rome then erred you will be counted an hereticke and therefore in Gods feare confesse the trueth with vs and the olde Church of Rome and deceiue the Catholickes of this kingdome no more with this litteral sence of Hoc est corpus meum which you borrow from the late Popes and late Church of Rome and is a new error dissenting from the old Catholicke faith Fitzimon 58. Here is great want of integritie In the glosse alleaged is affirmed that the saying it is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ should be takeÌ„ according to a sound maner to witt during the being therof bread For the saying that of bread is made the body of Christ Ita vt post consecrationem non sit iam ibi panis sed verum corpus Christi So that after consecration bread is ther no longer but the true body of Christ is towld to be the sound maner and meaning intended in the very same text and glosse Whether then can he seeme to any men Catholicks or others which had the face and conscience to misreport this glosse and to informe the decretals thus distroying protestantcie to stand for protestantcie woorthy to be houlden a lawfull Preacher or a faithfull witnes or conscionable informer or as being a godly spiritual honest preacher when so many others his betters are in great extremitie to haue yearly aboue 1500. raziers or cowmbs of corne besyds other commodities in such a choise deanry I know not how many vntruethes besyd all other faultines any other would skore vp in these woords which I calculat but for the 43 vntrueth only The 43. vntruth Let others imagin what discontentment and tediousnes any religious mynde might conceaue to incountre so contrarious a spirit or such a spirit of contradiction against knowen trueth 59. And I will adde one other Popes Canon Rider Corpus Christi quod sumitur de Altari figura est dum panis vinum videntur extra Dist 2. can Corpus Christi pag. 438. col 4. You cannot denie this Pope to be a protestant in this point veritas autem dum corpus sanguis Christi in veritate interius creditur The bodie of Christ which is taken from the Altar is a figure so long as the bread and wine are seene vnreceiued but the truth of the figure is seene when the bodie and bloud are receiued trulie inwardly and by faith into the heart Now the glosse in that place expoundeth the text and saith Corpus Christi est sacrificium corporis Christi alias falsum est quod dicit The bodie of Christ in the text signifieth the sacrifice of the bodie of Christ otherwise it is false Out of which I note the Church of Rome cals the outward Elements Christs bodie that is a figure of his bodie being not receiued though consecrated Secondly that the bodie of Christ wherof the Sacrament must be a figure The Popes glosse against the Popes text must be receiued by faith into the soule not by the mouth into the stomacke Now the glosse saieth the text is false vnlesse c. But I leaue the iarre to be reconciled by you who be the Popes friends yet this I say And Gelasius another Pope more auncient then those against Eut. is of this opinion Maledicta glossa quae corrumpit textum These three Popes and the Church of Rome in those dayes it was before the birth of your Transubstantiation and your carnall presence jumpt with all the old Fathers and the Primitiue Church that liued the first sixe hundred yeares after Christ and say it is called the bodie of Christ the flesh of Christ the passion and death of Christ but not rei veritate not indeed and
follow you no further then you follow Christ according to his word For if anie man nay all men nay if an Angell nay all Angels should come from heauen and preach otherwise then Christ and his Apostles haue taught let him be accursed If Angels nay all Angels from heauen must not be beleeued bringing contrarie doctrine to Christ and his Apostles Gal. 1.9 will you then binde the Catholickes of this kingdome to beleeue you onely comming from Rome and Rhemes whence you bring new doctrine not onelie contrarie to Gods truth but to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church And to beginne with Guido in his Manipulo curatorum VVhether Consecration be a new tearme Fitzimon 64. ALas is consecration a new tearme First your principal Doctor Beza telleth you are greuously deceaued Beza in 1. Cor. 10. v. 16. S. Ambros. l. 4. c. 14. de Sacram. informing you that by the woord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is signified the same in S. Paul as consecrare sanctificare to consecrat and sanctifie So then by this testimonie it is as ould as S. Pauls so teaching You tould vs a litle befor that Ambrose did not vse the woord of Consecration Yf you may and please I craue how would you interpret this his saying Vbi accesserit consecratio de pane fit caro Christi Should it not be thus or can it be otherwyse VVhen consecration cometh of bread is made the fleash of Christ. I thinke also S. August de consecr d. 2. c. nos autem all Scholers would thus translate these woords of S. Augustin Fideliter fateamur ante consecrationem panem esse vinum c. post consecrationem verò Carnem Christi sanguinem Before consecration let vs confesse faythfully to be bread and wyne c. but after consecration to be the fleash and blood of Christ Remembre also what woords of his are to the same effect in the next precedent number Now as our maner is we must make M. Rider him self accompt vpon him selfe the 55. The 55. vntruth vntrueth in aunswering beneath our allegation out of S. Ambrose The bread is bread befor the consecration but when it is consecrated of bread is made the fleashe of Christ All this saith M. Rider we graunt to be true Assuredly you must then graunt to be vntrue these woords of yours The woord consecration was not heard of in any ancient Father such he accōpteth S. Ambrose nu ibid for many hondred yeares after Christ it being confessed by you to be truely vttred by S. Ambrose And that so often beside as you haue made an obseruatiō against it as but lately frequented so often you haue informed idely and vntruely It is an ould prouerb Bis interimitur qui suis armis perit He is twyse defeated who perisheth by his owne weapon which is here and not seldome before breefly and apparantly verifyed against my Copes-mate 65. And to beginne with Guido in his Manipulo curatorum Rider Guido cap 4. pag. 23. 24. 45. But more you may see in the cautels or sleights of your masse cōcerning the necessitie of the crosses words of the canō of the masse the priests intētion Who saith there be foure seueral opinions amongst the learned Rabbins of Rome touching the words of Consecration The first sort saieth hee will haue besides the words of the. 3. Euangelists and Paule the intention of the Preiste (a) In the cautels printed at Venice 1464. and so saith your Masse booke and the precepts of the Church to bee dulie obserued jumping with your said Masse booke that vnlesse the Priests intention bee to consecrate there is no consecration though he vse all Christs words and Pauls And if the priest omit precepta ecclesiae that is the commaundements of the Church of Rome in his consecration mortalissime peccaret he sinnes most deadlie and is to be punished most grieuously But Abbot Panormitane de celebratione missarum page 220 is of another minde saying Etiamsi sacerdos celebret vt Deus perdat aliquem tamen bene consecrat Not witstandinge the priest saie Maste with intention that God would destroy some man yet doth hee consecrate wel What Christian heart doth not loath this diuelish intention and hellish religion Heere let all Catholicks marke As the people are not sure of the priests intētion so they are not sure of Christs carnal presence so commit idolatrie in worshipping bread being not consecrated that this first opinion holds that Christes institution is not sufficient without the priests intention For if his head be otherwise occupied he consecrates not and the due obseruation of the precepts of the Church which partlie consist in wordes partlie in gestures c. so that by this opinion those that simplie and plainlie for the first eight hundred or a thousand yeares next after Christ vsed the forme of Christs institution onelie neuer consecrated rightlie no not Christ himselfe nor Paul and so till of late daies there was no Consecration Transubstantiation or carnall presence So that this opinion prooueth your owne transubstantiation carnal presence not to be either Apostolicall or Catholicke but new inuented and phantasticall The second opinion is of maister Doctor Subtilis for so he calls him and he flatlie contradicteth the former opinion and saith If you say Christs institution were sufficiēt then your canon of your masse is superfluous if you say it is not sufficient without your masse canon then Christs institution were imperfect VVhich to thinke is blasphemy that all the words from qui pridie to simili modo in the Canon of your masse booke are necessarilie required to consecration and therefore the former Doctors shot short But Gentlemen you know that the Canon of the masse was not made by one Pope nor by tenne Popes but in manie hundred years it was in patching togither I hope you will not saie that those Saints and Marrirs of God from Christs time to the making of that Idolatrous Canon of the masse beeing manie hundred yeares had not the right consecration when they practized Christs institution Alij dixerunt there is a third opinion of diuers Doctors which held contrarie to both the former but because it is but fabulous and not woorth reading therefore I will scilence it as not worth the writing VVhether there can possiblye be any discord among Catholicks in points of beleefe SVddenly as I remarked M. Rider intermedling among scholasticks my thoughts exclaimed Fitzimon Num Saul inter prophetas what is Saul among the prophets Considering in quam alienum chorum pedem posuisset in to what vnsutable assemblye he had inchroached But his meaning was to make sporte to his aduersaries Forward then in the name of God First he saithe that we among our selues haue great dissension in our opinion of Consecration I will not calculat vp an vntrueth 1. Cor. 11.16 but will say Nos talem consuetudinem non habemus neque ecclesia Dei
did he commanded it Now if either Christs commandement Hoc facite Doe this or the Popes law can preuaile with you follow Christ his institution If you care for neither Christ nor Pope then the Catholicks may see that you are Antichrists and Antipopes and denie Christ written trueth and the primitiue practise of the Church of Rome and the best that you can make of your selues is not ancient Romane Catholickes but new vpstart Romish heretickes And so to your third Article How M. Rider behaueth him selfe toward Acts of parlament And of his impugning Communion vnder one Kynde Acts of parlament since protestantrie command to beleeue the real presence 130. YET more Puritantrye Fitzsimon to witt to confesse these Acts proceeding from all the nobles learned of the lande and yet not to let them passe without his examination naye without his condemnation of them all to be heretical The first article that in the B. Sacrament is the real presence of Christs natural body is saythe he sufficiently confuted This to be the 182. vntrueth he him selfe against him selfe shall contestat The 182. vntruth saying numb 28 that Christ is realy in the blessed Sacrament a thing neuer denyed by vs nor euer in question betwixt Protestant and Papist Yf it was neuer denyed or in question how could it be sufficiently confuted All the glue in Christendome will neuer make these two to stick together Atleast then the one of them must be vntrue I take vpon my reputation yf this last be true or vntrue the first that he hath confuted it sufficiently or insufficiently is in the eyes of all men and of all professions most vntrue To the second although it be as is sayd an act of parliament of al the nobles and learned in the Lande yet in the examination of our Puritan it is abhominable He proueth it first by our owne Pope one of the decrees that the formes should be receaued both wholy or refrayned both wholy I answer the decree to be fulfilled by priests as only to them the speech was intended in receauing both formes wholy For more instruction in this mater why hereticks do communicat not in one but in both kynds Luth. tom 3. Germ. Ien. fol. 274. de formula Missa attend Reader their impulsion therto Yf sayth Luther the Concil of Trent had allowed communion vnder both kinds he would in spyte of the Concil of Trent maintayne the contrary Yf the Catholick Church had permitted the clergie to marrye he would mantaine such to be more in Gods fauoure who would retayne two or three whoores then who would conforme them selues to the Church Yea he would command vnder payne of damnation that none by permission of the Concil should marrye Tom. 2. Germ. fol. 225. Idem in art 500. ser 4. post inuocauit Also that he would approue transubstantiation but because he would not consent with the Church yet that he would rather accept therof then consent with the Sacramentaries Yf the Pope commande thee not to eate fleash on fryday and in the Lent keepe thy libertye in no case obey him but say in spyte of thee I will eate therof Follow this in all things according to my example c. Breefly this contradiction of the Popes profession and opposition against him Zuingl tom 2. sol 296. is by Zuinglius sayd to be fundamentum bona pars religionis the foundation and cheefe party of reforming religion The same motiue to haue giuen the first entrance of their gospell into England Fox Acts. pag. 977. the very Apostle therof as they esteeme him Tindal witneseth in these woords of a leter to his scholer Ihon Frith He smelled a certaine counsell taken against Papists But that Frith must vnderstand that it was not for God but for reuenge and to inioye the spoyle of the Church Thus much out of the very roote of Protestantrie may acquaint vs by what instinct they impugned our doctrin as well in general as in the forsayd articles in particular Now listen why single Communion is vsed Wheras it euer hath bene beleeued in Gods holy catholick-Catholick-Church that Christ wholy is contayned in ether of both the formes of bread and wyne for after his passion Vide Suarez tom 3. in 3. par quest 80. disp 71. sec 1. 2. 3. nether his blood is separated from his body nor the body deuoyed of blood but where the one is there is the other the practise of primatiue Christians was indifferently to communicat ether vnder one forme or vnder both according to the diuers commodities presented knowing they had as much benefit by th' one as by the other For all is one and the selfe same Christ S. Aug l. 5. con Faustum c. 6. S. Leo â— serm 4. de quadrages Not long after first Christianitie sprong vp the heresie of the Manicheans who condemned the vse of wyne saying it neuer came from God by means of the manifould abuses insueing therby which was the ould heresie of Seuerus according S. August her 24. and S. Epiphan her 45. and is now a turkish error as appeareth in the Alcoran Azoara 3. For disprouing thwarting of which errour the Church frequented communion vnder both formes generaly to auow the forme of wyne to be good In succession of tyme that heresie being vanished there budded another errour that Christ was not intierly in ether forme but in both together as yf his body were now separated from his blood Against which errour the Church Concil Constantien sess 13. Concil Trid. sess 21. c. 1. Concil Basil sess 30. to testifie that ether of bothe was perfect Christ and as fruictfull in one forme as both swayed to the contrary syde by first practising then determining that only the priests should receaue vnder both forms and the laye people but vnder one of bread For the forme of wyne it seemed not so conuenient both for the danger of shedding in the giuing therof as also for the danger of sowring yf it should be kept long in any vessell for the vse of the people especialy of the sicke The power of the church in this decree is warranted by the woords of S. Paul saying Let a man so esteeme vs as the seruants of Christ 1. Cor. 4. and dispensers of the mysteries of God Being then such dispensers and hauing such impulsions the Prelats of the Church fulfilled and followed such decrees and practises For the confirmation of all that I haue sayd first is presented that Christ some tyme ministred vnder one forme and some tyme vnder both this at his supper that to his disciples at Emaus who in the breaking of bread which was the B. Sacrament by most principal Fathers Doctours perswasion being knowen of them suddenly vanished away Secondly the Apostles continued in prayer and breaking of bread that is Act. 2. in communicating the B. Sacrament yet without any mention of the vse of wyne The same appeareth
Apostles And wherfor should they not they being knowen the Sonns of Scena mentioned in the Acts not able as Luther confesseth to heale a lame horse or to woork other miracle then to draw after them to their licentious doctrin great multitudes Aptly to such miracle woorker sayth S. Hierom Ne glorieris quod multos habeas discipulos Quod mali acquiescunt sententiae tuae S. Hieron con Iouin l. 2. indicium voluptatis est Non enim tam te loquentem probant quam suis vicijs fauent Do not bragg that you haue many disciples That badd people delyte in your perswasion it is a shew of licentiousnes For they do not so much approue your speeche as they yeeld to theire owne vices Aelian l. 13. variar hist And conformably therto Socrates answered the harlot Castilla obiecting against him that with all his eloquence he could not diuert any of hir louers from hir saying It was no meruayle that they being peruerse were more aptly drawen downward to vice then vpward to vertue At our miracles reported vnto them 1. Cent. 6. c. 13. p. 815. 2. pag. 16. 3. pag. 814. 4. pag. 816. 5. pag. 810. what exclamations haue they nay rather what blasphemies haue they not O credulos stupidos homines O praestigias contra verbum Dei O tenebras ingentes O say the centuriasts credulous blockish people O iuggling contrary to the woord of God! O owgly darknes Vide Bezam volum 3. p. 146. l. 61. Danaeum to 1. resp 785. to 2. 1421. Cal. in pref Instit Math. 12. S. Aug. l. 10. de ciu c. 18. S. Ambros. in Ser. de SS Geruas Prothas S. Hier. con vivigila S. Victor l. 2 de persec VVandal Ioan. 14. Mat. 10. Mar. 6. Mar. 16. Psal vlt. Psal 14. v. 5. v. 1. c. So againe they and Caluin say that our miracles are ether fayned or fantastical or by witch-craft As much sayd the pharisees of Christs miracles the pagans of them of the Christians the Arians Eunomians Vigilantians against the Catholicks as S. Ambrose S. Hierom S. Victor c. recompt These two assurances we haue in defence of miracles to cownterpoise all that Sathan and his sucklings can obiect First Christs promises that his disciples should do the thinges he had done and greater then he had and that they should cure the sicke rayse the dead cleanse the leopers and cast out deuils Secondly that all cheefe Fathers are recompters of miracles and wryters of admirable liues of Saincts in euery age from Christs tymes mitating S. Lukes admirable and miraculous relation of the acts of the Apostles Which Dauid aduiseth saying Laudate Dominum in Sanctis eius praise God in his Saincts As also animating them to follow such deuotion because Qui timentes Dominum glorificat habitabit in tabernaculo requiescet in monte sancto Domini He that glorifyeth them that feare our Lord he shall dwell in his tabernacle and rest vpon his holy hill It is harder to name any of the Fathers who omitteth to treat of miracles then to specifie them who are reporters of them Not only the eares but the eyes of all Catholicks being full of certaintie in that point I desyre to answer M. Riders obiections in particular without dwelling in confirming light to be in the sunne or water in the sea Only let the inconstancie of heresie not be vnknowen also in this point For Caluin some tyme sayth that the Apostles Miracula doctrinae sigilla rectè vocant Do tearme rightly miracles the seales of Doctrin in Hebr. 2.4 2. Cor. 11.12 and others Fidem scripturam stabiliri fatentur do confesse that they establish Fayth and Scriptures Martyr in locis 38.41.489 Kimedon de verbo Dei 225. Yf it be so verily protestants haue great cause to distrust their doctrin as being vnsealed and vnestablished For miracles they vterly are knowen to want besyd the former wherof they should litle glorifie Rider Part. 2. decreti aurei auns 1. Q 1 page 119. Teneamus fratres 146. It is straunge to see the difference of the old Church of Rome and this last giddiepated Church of Rome The last Church of Rome thinketh that Church to be no true Church vnlesse she worke miracles but I pray you heare olde Romes censure of new Romes opinion Praeter vnitatem qui facit miracula (*) Glossa ibid nihil ad vitam aeternam nihil est in vnitate fuit populus Israel non faciebat miracula praeter vnitatem erant magi Pharaonis faciebant similia Moysi He that worketh miracles without the vnitie of the Church doth nothing the Israelits were in the vnitie of the Church and did no miracles the Magicians of Pharao were out of the Church and yet did like things to Moyses Therefore true miracles such as Moises wrought may be done by such as are not members of the true Church and so consequentlie miracles by olde Romes confession prooue neither anie such wherein they are workt to be the true Church nor the workers true members of the same And then it followeth Petrus Apostolus c. Peter the apostle wrought miracles and so did Simon Magus manie things yet there were manie Christians that coulde not worke miracles as Peter did or as Simon did and not withstanding reioyced that their names were written in heauen Now for the Catholickes good let vs examine the faith of old Rome The old Church of Roome taught vs to be assured of our saluation in this life The new Church of Roome to doubt of our saluation in this life The children of Israell wrought no miracles yet the true Church Pharao his Inchaunters workt miracles yet were the false church And that manie of Christs flocke that neither workt miracles as Peter did yet they reioice for that they were assured that their names are written in the booke of life And thus much for your owne Pope against your owne miracles And doth not your owne Doctor Lyra tell you plainlie that similiter fit aliquando in ecclesia maxima deceptio populi in miraculis (b) fictis factis a sacerdotibus vel eis ad haerentibus propter lucrum temporale c. and so in like manner it commeth to passe (a) Vpon Dan. cap. 14. page 222. but Lira printed at Venice hath that sometimes in the Church the people are often most shamefullie cosoned with fained and false miracles deuised by the priests or their followers euen for a temporall gaine which shamefull shifts of cosoning and couetous priests Lira wisheth to be seuerelie punished by the chiefe Prelats and to expell it and them out of the Church And your owne (c) Alex de Hales part 4. quaest 53. member 4. Irrefragabilis Doctour for that is one of his titles recordeth more speciall iugling then this saying In sacramento apparet caro interdum humana procuratione interdum operatione diabolica In your very Sacrament of the
of both we agree â—ith late Reformers For althowgh they inculcat a faythfull â—â—ceauing a faythfull coniunction a faythfull vnion c. betwixt â—eir sowles and Christ Yet is there noe participation betwixt â—e maner of fayth by vs intended and by them We instruct in â—e woords of S. Chrysostom Cum fide enim accedere S. Chrysost ho. 24. in 1. Cor. non est vt propoâ—um Corpus tantummodo recipias verum multo magis vt mundo corde tangas 〈◊〉 sic adeas quemadmodum ipsum Christum To approache by fayth is not â—t thow showldest only receaue the body propownded but muche more that â—w shouldest touch him with a pure hart and so approache as to Christ him â—fe Also in the woords of S. Augustin S. Aug. Ser. 2. de verb. Apost 17.26 27. in Ioan. Corpus sanguis Christi erit â—ta cuicunque si quod visibiter accipitur in Sacramento spiritualiter comedaâ—r in veritate ipsa The body and blood of Christ wil be lyfe to euery one yf what is visibly taken in the Sacrament be spiritualy eaten in the true veritie So that according our approaching by fayth we come with a clensed hart as to Christ him selfe according to veritie and not as to a figure appellation or representation All this is taught after by M. Rider himselfe They teache the contrarie that the Sacrament only serueth as an external signe that Christ feedeth at that tyme their sowls as bread feedeth their bodies Christ operating no effect by the Sacrament in their sowls and being no neerer vnto them then in heauen nor the Sacrament effecting any thing in their bodyes because it is a Sacrament say they only during the vse and the vse consisting only in the similitude of his feeding the sowle as the bread feedeth the body Yet at that tyme of receauing they hould that bread as yet nourisheth not the body which is to none vnknowen for foode must abyde many alterations yea and mutations in substance before it nourishe so that I can not conceaue nor any other that euer I could incounter how at the tyme of receauing there can be any such signification of duble nourishing in body and sowle there being none possible at that tyme in body the bread not deing digested and consequently how there can be any Sacrament in tyme of receauing which wanteth the lyfe of the Sacrament which is say they only signification Zuingl to 2. resp ad Luth. Confession fol. 477. For this is the office of euery Sacrament sayth Zuinglius that it signifie only Yf they them selues conceaue better therof I do not maligne them Concerning our former doctrin by means of the same obiections often reiterated it must be often also expressed num 34. 39. 46. 94. VVhether any ancient wryter alloweth or mentioneth Corporal receauing 15. Although this belongeth to our second proofe for the real presence by suffrages of Councels and Fathers yet this fowle fift vntruth Thâ— 5. vntruth is breefly to be disproued in this place Because I am after in the 120. number by Gods grace to deliuer a verdict of Luthers that they are hereticks who denye God ore carnali with the fleashly mouth to be receaued I here omitt it First therfore S. Augustin sayth S. August l. con Aduers legâ— Proph. Tertull. l. de resurrect Carnis S. Châ—â—â—â—t l. om 45. in Câ—p. 6. Ioan. Fideli corde atque ore suscipimus VVe receaue with faythfull hart and mouthe Secondly Tertullian Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur The fleash is sedd with the body and blood of Christ Thirdly S. Chrysostom Permittens se tangi maÌ„ducari dentes carni suo infigi Permitting him selfe to be tutched and eaten and teeth to be printed in his fleashe â—f in the mouth of two or three witneses euery woord be to staÌ„d â—en here is it made vndoubtfull that the denial of any ancient â—riter to haue beleeued the corporal receauing is the fift vntruth â—â—r the receauing by mouth the feeding the fleashe the touching 〈◊〉 teeth are euidentlly corporal receauing and consequently this 〈◊〉 truth is inexcusable But I will in forme and propre tearmes â—â—d not by construction only shew the falshod of M. Riders negaâ—on in this point Cyrill l. 10. in c. 13. Ioan. per communionem corporis Christi habitat in nobis Christus csrporaliter By the communion of the bodie of â—hrist Christ dwellesh in vs corporaly Looke M. Rider the very woord 〈◊〉 self Corporaly Blush and beleue contradict no more the apâ—areÌ„t truth An aunswer to this place is in Fox pag. 1325. but such 〈◊〉 one as should shame all Foxian brethren that there could no other be giuen For he coÌ„fesseth that corporaly is to be taken heere â—n the same sense that S. Paul sayth the fullnes of Diuinitie to dwell corporaly in Christ that is not lighly nor accideÌ„taly but perfectly and substantialy Then which aunswer what might we requyre more to condemne M. Rider 16. But you will say it is shame for me to belie the holie Sea The third booke cap. 3. de interpretandis scripturis pag. 102. Colen print 1588. Then it seemeth some grosse falts remain stil whose doctrine is Apostolicall and their life Angelicall My prooffes shall be your owne friends Lindanus speaketh of an ancient complaint of Agobertus Bishop of Lions who said Antiphonarium magna ex parte correximus amputatis quae superflua leuia falsa blasphema phantastica multa videbantur We haue the most part corrected the Antiphonarie cutting off those which seemed superfluous light false blasphemous and manie phantasticall things Behold now the puritie of the doctrine of the Church of Rome who dare venture his soule vpon such sandie superstition nay wicked and damnable heresie and irreligion And for the life of your Cleargy in Rome heare some of your own friends speak their knowledge Read Concilium delectorum Cardinalium Concil Tom 3. pag. 823. there thus you shall find it speaking of Rome In hac etiam vrbe meretrices vt matronae inceduÌ„t per Vrbem seu mula vehuntur quas affectantur de media die nobiles CardinaliuÌ„ familiares Clericique Nulla in vrbe vidimus hanc corruptionem praeterquam in hac omnium exemplari That is to say in this cittie of Rome the curtisans or common whoores passe through the streets or ride on their mules like honest matrones And in the middest of the day the Noblemen the Cardinals deare friends and Priestes attend vppon those whoores We never saw such corruption but onelie in this cittie of Rome which is an example to all other cities The Popes owne Cardinals beeing appointed by Pope Paul the third anno Dom. 1538. to visit the cleargie and the stewes returne this shamefull commission But perchance you will tell the Queenes subiects that these whoores dwel in some blind Alley but the Popes court pallace are a most holie sanctuarie of saints No saith Luitprandus your own
one costeth nothing but a dash of a â—nn and trauaile of toung the other requyreth great charges â—reat toyle great aduenture and great tyme. But in particular 〈◊〉 the vvandring matter vvithout vvandring It is the seuenth grosse vntruth that the Pope hath dravven 37. The 7. and 8. vntruth Catholicks to idolatrie It is the 8. vvhich in euery part of the â—ormer diuagation is contayned Some merry compagnions inâ—ended to make you M. Rider ridiculous to the vvorld Euery â—eane howse in Millan and Naples might be a howse competent â—or the mayor of your VVigen Euery Citisen is armed at his â—hoise Euery weapon long at will and pointed sharply Euery such poesie no point might passe for good English but not for â—ny frenche Nether do they speake frenche in those contryes Haue not these men much mynde to discusse a controuersie of â—he real presence that make prefaces so far wyde from it and â—ange rouing to Antiphonaries to prelats liues to whoores to Popes supremacie to the plotts of the K. of Spaine the habiâ—ations and weapons in Naples and Millan His preface being â—t large considered let my preface which he concealed haue liâ—ence to appeare aunswering this challenging letter wherby our â—isputation began â—8 I couet only at this tyme to premonishe the Reader conâ—erning the inscription of this letter S. August to 4. con mendac c. 6. that as S. Augustine sayd of â—uld hereticks Although they beleeue not the Catholick fayth yet they â—o speake as they may be taken to be of our profession euen so our new Euphrateans Iudicum 12.6 they would fayne passe for good Israelits but they can not pronounce Schiboleth that is they can not counterfett the style of Catholick but that they are discouered A FRIENDLY CAVEAT TO IRELANDS CATOLICQVES CONCERNING THE DAVNGEROVS Dreame of Christs corporall presence in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper grounded vpon a letter sent from the Catholicques c. To the reuerend Fathers the holy Iesuits Seminaries and all other Priests that fauour the holy Romane religion within the kingdome of Ireland HVmbly praieth your Fatherly charities Rider F. W. and P. D. with many other professed Catholicques of the holie Romane religion that whereas of late they haue heard some Protestant Preachers confidently affirme and as it seemes vnto our shallow capacities plainly do prooue that these positions here vnder written cannot be proued by anie of you to be ether Apostolicall or Catholicque by canonical Scripture or the auncient Fathers of the Church which liued and writ within the compasse of the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascension which assertion of theirs hath bred in â—our suppliaÌ„ts great doubts touching the trueth of the same vnlesse your fatherly â—ccustomed charities be extended presently to satisfie our consciences in the same â—y the holy written word of God such Fathers of the Church as aforesaid which being so directly and plainely proued by you as aforesaid may be a speedie meanes to conuert many Protestants to our profession Otherwise if these points â—annot be so proued by you vpon whose learned resolution we greatly relie then â—ot onely we but many thousands more in this kingdome of Ireland can hold â—hese points to be neither Apostolicall or Catholicque And thus hauing shewed â—â—me of our doubts we desire your fatherly resolutions as you tender the credit â—f our religion the conuincing of the Protestants and the satisfying of our poore â—onsciences And thus crauing your spedie learned and fatherly answeres in writing at or before the first of Februarie next with a perfect quotation of both â—cripture and Fathers themselues not recited or repeated by others for our better â—â—struction and the aduersaries spedier stronger confutation we coÌ„mend your â—ersons and studies to Gods blessed direction and protection Positions That Transubstantiation or the corporall presence of Christs bodie and bloud in the Sacrament was neuer taught by the auncient fathers that euer writ in the first fiue hundred years after Christs ascention but a spirituall presence onely to the faithfull beleuers 2 That the Church of God had not their seruice in an vnknowne tongue but in suâ—â— language as euery perticuler Church vnderstood 3 Thirdly that Purgatorie and prayers for the dead were not then knowne in God Church 4 Fourthly that images praying to Saints were then neither taught by theâ— Fathers nor receiued of the Catholicque Church 5 Fiftly that the Masse which now the Church of Rome vseth was not then known to the Church 6 Sixtly that there ought not to bee one supreame Bishop ouer all the world and the Bishop to be the Pope of Rome and that the said Pope hath not vniuersall iurisdiction ouer all Princes and their subiects in all causes Temporall and Ecclesiasticall The Protestant Preachers affirme vnles you prooue the premisses by canonical Scripture they cannot be Apostolicall there fore bind not the conscience of anie And if they cannot bee proued by the said Fathers then they be neither auncienâ— nor Catholike And therefore to be reiected as mens inuentions Gatho Priests PRouoked to prooue either by Scriptures or Fathers which liued within the comâ—â—â—â— of fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention that the Primitiue Church and Catholicques of this time are of consent touching these Articles 1 That Christ is really in the blessed Sacrament 2 That scriptures should not be perused by the vulgar 3 That praier for the dead and Purgatorie was beleeued 4 That images were worshipped and praiers made to Saints 5 That Masse was allowed 6 That the supremacie of the Pope was acknowledged Rider Maister W. N. GEntlemen the cause of this your prouokement was a quiet and milde conference vpon these positions with an honorable Gentleman and a speciall good friend of yours concerning religion wherein he confidently affirmed that the Iesuits ond Romane Priests of this kingdome were able to prooue by Scriptures and Fathers these Positions to be Apostolicall Catholicque And that the Church of Rome add the Romane Catholicques in Ireland now hold nothing touching the same but what the holy Scriptures and primitiue Fathers held within the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention Now yf you in this conference for your part haue made such proofe by the holy canonicall Scriptures and such Doctors of the Church as aforesaid I haue promised to become a Romane Catholicque if you haue failed in your proofe which I am assured you haue done he likewise before worshipfull witnesses hath giuen his hand to renounce this your new doctrine of the church of Rome and become a professor of the gospel of Christ This was the occasion and maner of your prouokement which I hope the best minded will not mistake nor you misconter being onelie prouoked by your friend 1. Pet. 3.15 yea and faith if you refuse not Saint Peters counsell to be readie alwais to giue an answere to anie man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you The
the Sacrament before consecration Therefore some late Popes the new Church of Rome with the colledge of Cardinals new created Iesuits Semynaries and all the Romane Priests now in Ireland be lyers deprauers of the trueth and deceiuers of the people The maior or first proposition is your owne doctrine for you teach that before Hoc est corpus meum be pronounced there is no consecration The assumption or later proposition is as cleere for you perswade the simple people to beleeue that these texts out of the sixth of Iohn prooue a carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament a yeare before Hoc est corpus meum was by Christ pronounced or the Sacrament by Christ instituted Therefore the conclusion that you be lyers and deceiuers of the people is ineuitable Thus the Catholiques of this kingdome by the rules of your owne religion you haue deceiued in teaching Christes carnall presence in the Sacrament a yeare before either Sacrament or consecration in the Sacrament were instituted And this your leaden diuinitie without care or conscience you thrust vpon the simple people as sound doctrine But if there were no other errour or heresie held and taught by you but this one point it were sufficient to make all the Catholicks in this kingdome nay in Christendome to forsake your opinion considering your ignorance or malice presuming to iustifie that which holie Scriptures auncient Fathers Gods Church yea the perticuler Church of Rome with their Bishops Archbishops and Popes for a thousand yeares after Christs ascention neuer spake or heard of and therefore it is no olde faith taught by them but a new heresie invented by you But now to the rest of your proofe Of M. Riders Arguments and their sufficiencie And how the 6. chapter of S. Ihon doth belong to the B. Sacrament notwithstanding it was before the Consecration Fitzimon 47. AS paynters that by skill could not make difference betwixt a cat a horse and a dogg were wonte to tell by woords vnder their pictures this is a catt this is a horse and this is a dogg euen so M. Rider when he maketh an argument in his owne opinion substantialy yet least you should not so conceaue therof he addeth befor or behynde or in the margent this is an vnaunswerable argument Wherof you haue an instance befor the 38. numbre and in this place Yet I vndertake to aunswear this argument breefly and sufficiently and only by saying as befor in the 41. nuÌ„bre by consent of Catholicks and protestants that we teache Christs real presence in the Sacrament but after and not befor consecration yet that such gift was promised and specified for the future tyme according to the woords of Christ the bread which I will not that I doe giue c. in the 6. chapter of S. Ihon not that by such promise it was giuen at that tyme but after as the woords importe What parcell againe of this argument is now vnaunswared ether according to Catholicks or protestants Yea or according to M. Riders deduction saying that eating of Christ after the institution of the Sacrament is proued out of the 56. verse of the sixt of Ihon in such maner as it were damnable to doubt therof How is it thence proued vnlesse such verse and chapter belong to the eating of Christ Therfor by him selfe The 22. vntruth is made aunswerable this vnaunswerable argument and therby the 22. vntrueth acknowledged Luther tom sept defens verb. â—ene fol. 397. Against whom and his brethren in this opinion Luther whom they intitule Father of trueth thus discribeth the argumeÌ„ts which they call vnaunswerable Their greedines to defend their credit maketh them madd that whatsoeuer they take hould of though it be but a straw yet they imagin it to be a swoord or speare and that at euery stroake they kill thowsands Agayne They thinke to haue sayd passing well Luther ibidem fol. 394. 405. 381. 382. and much to the purpose although they touche not one argument And againe In their books there is noe pithe or substance but only friuolous cracking By whom could euer this be more verified then by my good frend M. Rider whose dealing in euery point being so seely and defectiue towards Gods woord Fathers Decretals and his owne brethren yet how he supposeth that riding lyke a second Perseus vpon Pegasus he hath transformed all his aduersaries into pillers by taking all power of aunswering from them O coÌ„fident Champion But let vs accompagnie him forwards obserue how litle his discourse amendeth Math. 26.26 Christ tooke bread did blesse it and brake it Catholique Priests and gaue it to his Disciples and said take and eate this is my bodie This is my bloud of the new Testament which shal bee shed for manie for remission of sinnes 48 GEntlemen this is your proofe out of Christs owne words Rider and this was deliuered by Christs owne mouth at the time of the institution of the Supper and the night before his blessed passion and either this must helpe you or else you are helplesse but Christ willing I will plainlie shew this your proofe to be your reproofe and I pray God for Christ his sake that the eies of your vnderstanding may be opened to see the truth and your hearts toucht to receiue and confesse the truth and renounce your errors and so cease to deceiue Gods people and the Queenes subiects least a worse thing come vnto you All the doubt and controuersie of this question betwixt vs dependes on this Text which you say must bee taken properlie and litterallie wee say Sacramentallie improperlie figuratiuelie and misticallie And our opinion God willing shall be proued by Scriptures auncient Fathers and Popes and the olde Church of Rome The third part of the Catholicks first proofe by Scriptures 48. THe Psillians a people in Afric neere the Garamants Fitzimon Sabel l. 4. c. 9. Herod l. 4. Goll l. 6. c. 11. being molested with Southern wynds to which their contry lay open in most simple maner armed them selues to a conflict with them Such would be my follye yf I would arme my writings to incountre a bagg-pype or sack of wynde only especialy it being not of the sweettest But let him conioyne any mater true or false and I will attend theron to auowche or auoyde it Rider 49. But this is straunge that men of your great learning as the Catholiques 〈◊〉 you to be wil deale so childishlie and weaklie in so weightie a matter Bee not offended that I say you handle this childishlie for in Schooles he that alleadgeth for the probation of a proposition the proposition it selfe for the probation of a text the text it selfe is counted childish and it is a childish point of Sophistrie and a falacie to be vsed among young schollers not to be practised among simple Catholiques The Catholiques demand of you how you prooue Christs carnal presence in the Sacrament and you bring in Hoc est
VVe haue no such custome nor the Churche of God For yf any be of a contrary beleefe among vs obstinatly we discarde him presently in to the ranke of hereticks by commission of Christ Math. cap. 18. Thom. waldens doctrinalis fidei l. 2. c. 21.23 Si Ecclesiam non audierit sit tibi tanquam Ethnicus Publicanus Yf he do not heare the Churche let him be vnto thee as an Ethnick and Publican Because Ecclesiae iudicium sequi debet lector Christianus sub poena perfidiae si ad fidem res pertineat sub poena contumaciae si non pertineat A Christian reader must follow the iudgement of the Churche vnder the payne of disbeleefe yf it belong to beleefe or vnder the payne of obstinacie yf it doth not belong Wherby all Catholicks are warranted that neuer dissension can possibly haue place in their profession yf it be obstinat In the disputations of Doctors when the Churche authoritie or iudgement is not as yet pronounced August con Faust. l. 11. c. 5. Et epist. 48. ad Vincent according to S. Augustin Liberum habet lector indicium The reader hath a free choise to iudge to take or leaue Yea concerning his owne wrytings he licenseth the same most religiously saying Quae vera esse perspexeris tene Ecclesiae Catholicae tribue Ibidem Quae falsa respue mihi qui homo sum tribue c. VVhat soeuer thow fynde true imbrace and impute it to the Catholick Churche what soeuer thow fynde false reiect and impute it to me which am a man Quia totum hoc genus literarum Ibidem non cum credendi necessitate sed cum iudicandi libertate legendum because all this kynde of learning is not to be read with necessitie to beleeue but with libertie to iudge Euery Catholick and I among the rest do thus offre our whole vnderstanding and all our wrytings at the feete of Gods holy Churche to say and vnsay according therto So that yf you could fynde no other diuersities among vs then seueral disputations being altogether knitt in one submission to Gods Churche you haue laboured as wysely as one that would contend that many musitians disagree in consort or simphonie because they were not in one vnisone but in seueral tunes Which grosse misconceit is excellently refelled by S. August l. 2. de baptism con Donatist c. 3. saying the differences betwixt Catholick wryters to be Sine vllo typho sacrilegae superbiae sine vlla inflata ceruice arrogantiae sine contentione liuidae inuidiae cum sancta humilitate cum pace catholica cum charitate Christiana donec plenario totius Orbis concilio quod saluberrime sentiebatur etiam remotis dubitationibus firmaretur To be without any whirlwynd of sacrilegiouse pryd any puffed arrogant neck any comention of maliciouse enuie with holy humilitie with vniuersal peace with Christian charitie vntill by a full Concill of all the world what was soundly supposed should be vndoubtedly confirmed Now in particular to these 20. diuers opinions among vs. The first requireth saith he the intention of the priest that the consecration be vayleable Why Sir would you haue madd men or any without intention to minister Sacraments For none but ought to suppose that a man without intention doing good or ill is not worthy of reward or punishment The second opinion of Panormitan is all one with the former differing only that it saith to consecrat in a badd intention euen to kill doth not hinder consecration I aunswer that a swords making Note is not hindred by the purpose to abuse it no more is celebration by the intent to misaply it Note then curteous Protestant his great wysdome in so simple a conceit against this opinion as for it to name our religion hellish Note secoÌ„dly how this deepe learned Christian doctor affirmeth that Christ himselfe the Apostles whole Church waÌ„ted intention in the institution and ministration of the B. Sacrament I surmised by the want of method the second opinion to haue bene of Panormitan Scotus in 4. d. 8. q. 2. a. 2. but here I fynde it most confusedly ascribed to Scotus Truely Scotus requireth to the essential forme of consecratioÌ„ no more nor lesse then according the doctrin of the Churche to the greater explication of all circumstances he requyreth as also the Church doth the whole Canon Which Canon for the essential part was euer vnuariable from the begyning but for more ample declaration it hathe in succession of tyme receaued new additions but alwayes out of traditions Scripturs and Concils Vnles that after in particular I did intend to vnfould the antiquitie of all parcels of the Canon and shew the signification original and allowance of the least sillable to be aboue a thousand yeares ratified I would in this place prosecute it The third opinion by him selfe he silenceth as not woorthy the wryting Truly nether are the residue produced woorthy relation especialy to testifie our pretended disagreement considering that neuer sobre man can hitherto collect any discord in these two opinions ether among them selues or with the Catholick established doctrine Rider 66. But Guido his opinion is flat contrarie to them all and saith precisâ—ly that hoc est enim corpus meum doth consecrate without anie more helpe So Guido is contrarie in opinion to the former three opinions and euerie of them all contrarie one to another Heere now the Catholickes may see the consent and vnitie of the late Church of Rome touching consecration Yet I will bring you a learned Frier which hath tossed this question like a tennis-ball Iosephus Angles in lib. 4. sententiarum Printed by king Philips priuiledge 1572. pag. 108. 109. de essentialibus Euch. This Frier saith in his conclusion Christus Iesus his verbis hoc est enim corpus meum Eucharistiam confecit c. Christ Iesus in these words for this is my bodie did consecrate the Euchariste and so hath continued still by the custome of the Church c. But presentlie in his Appendix hee checkes that opinion saith yet it is to be beleeued that Christ consecrated with other words then these that he vsed in the institution and there be manie of this latter opinion saith he as Innocentius c. so that it is a palpable discord amongst them touching the verie words of consecration Two other contrarie opinions And in the same page he deliuereth two other opinions one of Thomas Aquinas the other of Scotus the one contrarie to the other which if you want opinions the booke I will shew you Pag. 109. Soto saith if Quâ— pridie being the Priests words be not vsed as well as Christs TuÌ„c incertum est c. Then it is vncertain whether there be anie Transubstantiation at all VVhat wise catholicks wil beleeue this your vncertaine doctrine And in the same page he sheweth that hoc est enim corpus meum be the words of Christ that
Qui pridie be the wordes of the Priest so that Christs words without the Priests words worke nothing or are nothing worth And the same Frier deliuers the opinion of Doctour Soto touching the intention of the Priest in consecration of the cup but checks his Doctor ship in his immediat conclusion verie sharplie I will not say shamefullie saying Magister Soto hoc in loco sibi repugnat Maister Soto in this place disagreeth with himselfe olde Cato tells vs that he that disagreeth with himselfe cannot agree with anie (a) pag. 113. Read the place But in the next pages he setteth down six seuerall opinioÌ„s touching the forme of consecration one contrarie to another and all of them held and maintained verie stiflie for the truth whereof fiue of them must needs be false But I assure you there is none of them of Christs institution and therefore neither true Apostolical nor Catholique If they were not fabulous and friuolous I would pen them down verbatim But if you list to see their errrors I haue trulie quoted their places you may see them without paine and I trust you will not read them without dâ—slike Now let me intreate you to heare some other of your friends speake that liued in another age that the Catholickes may see your vncertaintie in this point that none of you all knowe what to say nor what to beleeue and the reason is because you haue denied and refused the cleere waters of Gods truth therefore drinke of the puddels of mens inuentions which are nothing else but fables and lies without certaintie or veritie Gabriel Biel. lect 36. Mark this you Priests and Iesuits Gabriel a learned man on your side saith Christus potuit sine verbo tanquam verus Deus substantiam panis vini consecrare vel potius verba quaedam secreto proferre per illa consecrare vol per haec verba hoc est corpus meum consecrare potuit vel potuit prius consecrare postea distribuere vel primum distribuere postea consecrare Behould I pray you the vncerteinty of your consecration therefore ceasse to deceaue Petrus de Aliaco in 4 lib. sent Q 5. Quid autem horum fecerit ex sacris scripturis non constat Christ as being verie God might consecrate the bread and wine without anie word Or else he might speake certaine words in secret and by them consecrate or else might consecrate by these words This is my bodie or he might first consecrat and after deliuer or else first deliuer and then consecrate but which of all these he did by the holie scriptures it appeareth not But Petrus de Alliaco crosseth them all and saith that Christ consecrated before these words of Hoc est corpus meum Marke this good Reader for saith hee Quia nisi ante fuisset corpus Christi Christus non vere dixisset hoc est corpus meum If it had not bene Christs bodie before Christ could not haue said trulie This is my bodie This now toucheth your free-hold for hee saith plainlie vnlesse consecration goe before these words This is my bodie both Christ and priest should lye This tramples your consecration in the durt And your Antididagma printed at Collen How blasphemous this is let the learned in Christ iudge Bonauentura in 4. lib. Sententiarum dist 8. q. 2. with the approbation of all the learned Doctors in that age saith preciselie that the bare words of Christs institution without the words of the Canon of the Masse are not sufficient to worke consecration And Bonauentura is not ashamed to say that if wee will rightlie consecrate wee must not seeke to the Gospell of Christ but to the Canon of the Masse Now Scotus though he be maister Doctour Subtilis is put to his dumpes what to do in this doubtfull case of consecration when there be twentie seuerall opinions one contrarie to another and all contrarie to Christs trueth in the end this is his resolution Quod ergo est consilium Dico quod sacerdos intendens facere quod facit ecclesia legens distinctè verba canonis à principio vsque ad finem verè conficit nec est tutum alicui reputare se valdè peritum in scieÌ„tia sua dicere volo vti praecisè istis verbis pro consecratione The matter being so doubtfull what then is your aduise I say that the priest intending to doe whatsoeuer the Church doth and reading the words of the Canon distinctlie and plainly from the beginning to the end doth verelie consecrate neither is it wisedome for a man to account himselfe verie skillful in his knowledge and to say I will vse without all doubt these or these words to worke consecration Here your champion Scotus cares not a point for your three Euangelists nor the Apostle Paul for reading of the Canon distinctly is sufficient Oh damnable heresie that renounceth Christs institution and followeth mans inuentions And the wordes of your Masse-booke are distinctè secretè attentè And also it must be pronounced vno spiritu nulla pausatione interposita If the foresaid cautions be not performed by the priest your consecration and appliccation is marred and not worth a pin Now Gentlemen these be your Doctors this is your doctrine here betwentie seuerall opinions of consecration in seuerall ages none tells the trueth Haue you vsed Gods people the Queenes subiects Christianlie in perswading them that all Churches and all Fathers in all ages with one consent haue embraced this your opinion touching consecration for Catholicke without discord or dissention I tell you no for in this you haue crackt their conscience do hazard their soules to maintaine your superstition But perchance you will perswade the Catholickes False witnesses examined a sunder must needs be taken tripping founde liars for how should you agree in that yee knowe not nay in that which is not that though these Doctors grosly erred yet the Church of Rome euer held one manner of consecration but that is as vntrue as the rest For I will shew you plainlie that your late Popes and Church of Rome since three hundred or three hundred and seuentie yeares last past knewe not what to hold nor what to affirme touching the fourme of consecration And therefore in this your new doctrine there is neither vnitie antiquitie vniuersalitie nor veritie with which termes you so long haue deceued the people 66. Fitzimon Wheras the doctrin of the Catholick Churche is manifoudly expressed that consecration is essentialy wrought by the very and only woords of Christ Hoc est corpus meum hic est sanguis meus This is my bodie this is my blood lett all indifferent readers maruayle at M. Rider for affirming Guido and Angles teaching by his owne declaration the very selfe same doctrin in euident tearmes to be repugnant one to another or with Gods Churche And yf these all did assuredly determine that Christ ether in more words or
materially without anie signification at all See now whither you are brought or rather whither haue you brought Gods people from trueth to false hood if hoc signifieth nothing where then is your transubstantiation For if in that word which should first worke in the change there bee no mention of bread how can that which is no way comprised in them be changed by them and so you speake against your selues Againe as you are rent in sundrie opinions touching hoc so also are you touching est for when you saw that est would not serue in his proper Euangelicall and Apostolicall signification then you gaue him a new exposition For Bonauenture seeing that est as Christ and Paul meant it would not fit their purpose VVhat est signifieth there is great variāce amōgst the Romish Prelats Est i. Fit Est est verbum anuntiatiuum non constitutium Est i. erit Iosephus Angles in loco praedicto pag. 115. then hee of purpose expounded it by Fit vt sit sensus panis fit corpus meum that it might be thus in sence The bread is made my bodie Yet Occham hee likes not Bonauentures Fit because hee thinkes it is too grosse and too false and therefore he will expound est by erit that it may carrie with it this sence this shall be my bodie but saith he it is a verie rash and brainsicke opinion and alleadgeth as brainsicke a reason as there you may see Yet Caietanus the Cardinall de Eucharistia cap. 7. pag. 104. col 2. C. D. denieth est to haue anie such signification vnlesse it be in metaphors and parables But least that I shuld be too offensiue vnto you I could deliuer so many seueral opinions of yours touching the praedicat corpus one saith it must bee meant of Christes bodie glorified no saith another that is false but it must be vnderstood of his bodie as it was before his passion And a third opinion obiects certaine doubts against both the former Magister Sententiarum lib. 4. dinstinct 12. page 60. deliuers foure seuerall opinions de fractione partibus Now Gentlemen I appeale to your consciences if they be not cauteriated whether you haue dealt well with the ignorant Catholickes of this land in perswading them that in all your doctrine there is consent without jarres antiquitie without innouation and vniuersalitie without limittation whereas there is nothing but jarres discords and dissentions in your consecration in your transubstantiation and in euery word almost nay perticle as hoc and est be so wrested by your construction that you haue brought both their proper significations to plaine destruction Is this exposition Catholicke what auncient father euer expounded it so let the Catholickes know or else they with vs will iudge neither you nor your doctrine Catholicke Will you follow a foolish Frier an ignorant Abbot a late vpstart Pope or Priest that writ and wrested within these foure hundred yeares and forsake Scriptures and the auncient Doctours of the Church Now let the indifferent minded Catholikes be iudges whether you or wee haue antiquitie consent and veritie on our sides And who differs from Scriptures and fathers from and amongst themselues not onelie in one point of religion but almost in euerie point particle of doctrine Thus much concerning your discords amongst your selues all against the auncien◠Apostolicall and Catholick truth 74. Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici Fitzsimon being admitted to behowld this courser I would say discourser can yow good frends refrayne from smyling He telleth yow the third opinion is all one with the first and yet that it is the third and not all one but a seueral opinion This must needs make vp the 77. vntrueth The 77. vntruth Next that the fowerth fift and sixt opinions are all contrary to the former and yet that being different The 78. vntruth they are not different among thēselues but that they all agree This is the 78. Then he maketh a ragged argument yf nothing be conuerted by the first worde all our dealing is vndone Alas yf he would be capable he might thinke that this conuersion is done by Gods infinit vertue in an instant not by parts seueraly according to the woords Hoc est corpus meum as yf to euery woord a sondry part were correspondent but that to all the forme conioyntly all the conuersion is to be referred so that ther be conceaued a diuers substance present whiche was not befor not euery woord but the whole forme being pronownced Is not this a frantick kynde of cofuting to say only this is sayd I am suer it is false how absurd this is let young sophisters iudge I am suer they sound not of Diuinitie or learning is not this deepe diuinitie for a pope and no suche matter sayd but forged by him selfe his assurance childishe the absurditie only in his conceits the diuinitie and learning impugned so inexpugnable as nether in his brayne is ther any reason and by his mowth but Riderian blasts to contradict it Therfor to bring disputations of Doctors therby to testifie a disagreement betwixt them in their beleefe of the substance of transubstantiation they being only of the tyme therof is as wysely done especialy by one more frequent and seasoned with experience in law cowrts then learned colledges as yf he wowld assure that laweyers disagree in allowing the law because they plead seueraly for their Clyents of the construction or tyme of constitution or number of sillables of the law Or yf he wowld say that philosophers doubt whether ther be wynde rayne riuers because they diuersly imagin how when and whence they haue their original Remembre what was informed in the 65. numbre that it is impossible we can haue any dissentiōs among vs according to the saying of the Apostle Si quis autem videtur contentiosus esse 1. Cor. 11.16 nos talem consuetudinem non habemus neque Ecclesia Dei Yf any seeme contentiouse we haue noe suche custome nor the Churche of God Because a Christian wryter among vs must follow as Waldensis saythe Tho. Wald. l. 2. doctrinalis fidei cap. 21.23 the iudgement of the Churche vnder the payne of misbeleefe yf it be a point of faythe or vnder the payne of contumacie yf it be not And all Catholick students among vs doe read the disputations of Doctors vndecided by the Churche cum iudicandi libertate with libertie to censure according to S. Augustins woords S. Augustin cō Faustum lib. 11. c. 5. Et epist 48. ad Vincent and his instructiō toward himselfe and all others imbraceing whatsoeuer they fynde true and imputing it to the Catholick Churche and reiecting what they fynde false imputing it to deceaueable man This is a priuilege of Catholicks to be free from dissentions and neuer but to concurr in one Faythe Luther Zuinglius Cal. n. 19. examinis Not so the wicked not soe as appeareth in the 19. number of the precedent examination
accessorie in like eloquence to witt in moste deceitful vehemencie iustifyinge a falshoode which is by him selfe and al others for such accompted For to be truly acquainted with the truth herein whether the wicked receaue the whole Sacrament vnderstand the doctrin of Gods Church to be expressed in this controuersie aboue a thousand yeares paste although M. Rider immediatelye before saith S. Gregorius S. August l. coÌ„ Fulg. Donat. c. 6. Idem l. 2 con Lit. Petil. c. 40. In Psal 10. Theodoret. 1. Cor. c. 11. S. Chrysost ho. 8. in Math. in cap. 11. 1. Cor. Ser. 3. in c. 1. ad Ephes. c. S. Hieron in Psal 54. that it is an inuention of late writers by S. Gregorie saing Est quidem in peccatoribus et indignè sumentibus vera Christi caro verus sanguis sed essentia non salubri efficientia The true fleash of Christ and true blood is certainely in sinners and vnworthy receauers but in essence and not in healthful efficacie S. Augustine more ancient said Iudas the traitoure receaued the bodye of Christ and Simon Magus the good Baptisme but because they vsed not wel the good by vsing it ill they perished The same doctrine he els where manifouldly inculcateth Theodoret Bishope about the same time said Iesus Christ did not only giue his pretious body and blood to eleauen Apostles but also to Iudas the traitour By S. Chrisostom is said The traitour was made partaker of diuine presents He also of this matter hath written certaine expresse homilies plentifully containing Iudas to haue receaued the B. Sacrament By S. Hierom Cibus dulcis est corpus Christi quod ipse accipit indignus Sweete meate is the body of Christ which he Iudas receaued vnworthely What need I any witnesse to conuict the 86. The 86. vntruth vntruth in this matter then M. Rider againste him selfe Who so often is made to ouerthrow him selfe that he confirmeth the saying of Gods holy word Micheae l. 7.6 Math. 10.25 Inimici hominis domestici eius The enimyes of a man are his owne domesticalles He then repeating soone after S. Augustins woordes that the wicked presse with their teeth the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ thereby eateing them to their iudgment because they are vncleane in hart What doe wee craue more then that the wicked eate the Sacrament of Christs bodie and blood and consequently not of his figure only to their iudgment What heapes of Doctors and Fathers might I produce to auerre this doctrin 1. Cor. 11. if in this so cleere a case S. Paul so manifestlye auouching those to be guiltie of the bodye and bloode of our Lorde and to eate their owne iudgment not who did not beleeue in Christ or who did abuse a figure of Christ but they who did eate and drinke his bodye and blood vnworthely not discerning the body of Christ the few testimonies here alleaged and M. Riders owne interpretation of S. Augustin did not commaunde me to forbeare superfluitie Origen produced by M. Rider Origen in Psal 37. telleth the 87 The 87. vntruth Origen in Psal 37. vntruth to be that he denieth the wicked to coÌ„municate the B. Sacrament he saying to the wicked Doste thou not feare to communicate the body of Christ approaching to the Eucharist as if thou werst pure and cleane and as if there were nothing in the vnworthy c. Doste thou thinke that in all this thou wilt auoyde the indignation of God Doste thou not remember what is written that for this cause many are become sick and feeble yea and stroken to death Continually you behoulde that M. Riders sayinges are true like dreames rather by being true contrariously then as they were by him related The 88. vntruth S. Chrisostom also craueth to haue numbered the 88. vntruth that he denieth the wicked in that homilie to communicate Christs true body he only exhorting that they who should receaue would omitt to be wicked and to that end heaping most goulden sentences to perswade them thereto Is shame and fidelitie vanished out of the worlde Can such Fathers by any honest hart be wreasted to denye when they affirme to affirme when they denye Aurifaber a Protestant Aurifaber apud Ministro machiâ— pag. 7. affirmeth that Luther on a time complained that Post reuelatum euangelium virtus est occisa iustitia oppressa temperantia ligata veritaâ—a canibus lacerata fides clauda nequitia quotidiana deuotio pulsa heresis relicta After the gospel of pretended reformation reuealed vertu is slaine iustice oppressed temperance tyed truth torne by dogges faith lame wickednesse continuall deuotion fled heresie remaining If Luther had knowne M. Riders dealing among the rest thinke you would he not applaud to him selfe that he was become a prophet S. Augustin whom he by ignorance maketh a Pope claymeth to haue the 89. The 89. vntruth vntruth marked because in saying he that dissenteth from Christ eateth him to his perdition for as the glosse contayneth mali accipiunt corpus de virgine natum the wicked receaue the body borne of a virgin he is made by M. Rider absolutly to affirm In cap. citatum à Ridero that the wicked doth nether eathe his fleashe nor drinke his blood The 90. The 90. vntruth vntruth is that in the third chapter following any such mater as he informeth is ether contayned or mentioned I leaue and report all arbitrement of such proceeding not only to all others but euen to my good Reformer him selfe especialy yf he be not in his furious but in his merry moode wherin diuers tymes he acknowledgeth many trueths wherof otherwyse he had not bene so liberal But I must confesse by the way that he affoordeth once a varietie yet not in true learning but deceytfull sophistry saying That the wicked haue not a liuely and iustifying faythe as nether we nor all our syde can denye This caption or fallacie is called Captio plurimum interrogationum vt vnius of sundrie demandes as beinge all one As if one woulde require 1. Elench 4. Note wel is Peter a man and a woman If you answere affirmatiuely the Sophist therupon inferreth that Peter is a woman if you answere negatiuely he inferreth that Peter is not a man So M. Rider knoweth that we will not say that the wicked haue a liuely iustifying faythe for how can they be iustifyed yf they be wicked and he is not ignorant but we would and should say that wicked people may haue fayth or that they become not infidels or hereticks by euery act of wickednes and therupon as yf these two were all one he inferreth that we and all our syde can not deny but that they are without faythe and dead men not able to eate spiritual meat c. How they are able to eate such meat namely not to their benefit but to their perdition is often towld and contayned in S. Gregories woords before alleaged This sophistrie of
not against his opinion how did he pronounce sentence against Ihon Lambert and Anne Askew principally for being of his opinion Fox confesseth the cheefe condemners of them to haue bene Crammer and Cromwell Perhaps he will thinke to escape with a turne of a Fox saying that to haue bene compassed by the pestiferous and crafty counsell and stratagems of Bishop Gardener that by the gospellers them selues the gospellers should be condemned Good ghospellers they must haue bene in the meane time But I am now so vpon the chase as I can not so lightly loose my game Why then in King Edwards dayes the forsaid Bishop as he sayth being cast into the tower did the sayd Cranmer condemne Ioan of Kent What Fox or woolfe can auoyd that but that Cranmer was therby knowen no frend euen then to any of the forsayd Anne Askews disciples I will not in vayne haue bene some tyme of your profession and hauing touched it and bene defyled with the pitch therof for which offense I dayly and most humbly craue pardon of my deere and soueraigne Lord and Saluioure but that of the same pitch I will light a toarche to them that are in darknes and in the shaddowe of death to direct their feete into the way of peace Let vs therfor pursue more of this kynde to haue the true portraicture of M. Rider placed befor all mens eyes Catho Priest Magdeburg in Epi. ad Eliz. Angliae Reg. Amongst factions of opinions some latelie take away the bodie and bloud of Christ touching his reall presence contrarie to the most plaine most euident and puissant words of Christ. Rider 124. GEntlemen this concerneth not vs it may fitter be inuerted vpon your selues for we denie not Christs spirituall presence taught in the Scriptures and receiued in Christs Primitiue Church but we denie your imagined carnall presence neuer recorded in Gods booke nor beleeued of auncient father nor euer knowne to Christs spouse the Primitiue Church as you haue hearde trulie prooued But this is your great fault vsuallie practised that whether in Scriptures or Fathers you heare of Christs bodie and bloud and his presence or reall presence you imagine presently without further examination that it is your carnall presence which thing is growne vp with you from a priuate errour to a publike heresie Catho Priest Fox in Martirol Kemnitius in Exā Conc. Trid. cenira tan de Eucharistia Tyndall Frith Banes Cranmer left it as a thing indifferent to beleeue the reall presence So that the adoration saith Frith be taken away because there then remaineth no poison whereof anie ought to be afraid of Yet Kemnitius vpon the assurance of the reall presence approoueth the custome of the Church in adoring Christ in the Sacrament by the authoritie of Saint Augustine and S. Ambrose in Psal 98. Eusebius Emissenus c. Saint Gregorie Nazianzen saith it is impietie to doe the contrarie So that the brood being of such agreement we haue the lesse occasion to embusie our braines to confute them GEntlemen by peeces you repeat some of their words not knowing at it seemeth the occasion and so you vtterlie mistake the sence which was this These godlie Martirs perceiuing the flame of persecution to burne so fast and mount so high as it was neither bounded in measure nor mercie and onelie for a new vpstart opinion hauing no warrant from Gods word They in a Christian brotherlie discretion exhorted the learned bretheren onelie to preach that necessarie Article of our free iustification by faith in the personall merits of Christ And touching the Lords Supper to teach to the people the right vse of the same yet not to meddle with the manner of the presence for feare of daunger if not death but leaue it as a thing indifferent till the matter in a time of peace might be reasoned at large on both parties by the learned Prouided euer that poisonfull adoration be taken away The premisses considered what can yee now gather that prooueth with you or disprooueth vs. Nay here is nothing but against you altogither For if you had dealt trulie with the dead Martirs or the liuing Catholickes these collections and not yours you should from hence haue gathered 1 First these Martirs taught with their breath and sealed with their bloud that your carnall presence and transubstantiated Christ was neither commandement giuen by God nor Article of our faith euer taught in the primitiue Church but a late inuented opinion deuised by man 2 Secondlie they wished the bretheren considering it was but mans inuention and neuer recorded in gods booke that therefore they should not hazard the losse of their liues which would tend so much to the preiudice of Christs Church 3 Thirdlie they wished it to be taken for a season as a thing indifferent yet not absolutelie but with these cautions 1 First that adoration or worshipping of the creatures were quite taken away which neuer was done by you and therefore they held it not absolutely indifferent 2 Secondlie till the Church of Christ had peace and rest from your bloudie and butcherly slaughters wherein the matter might be decided not with faggots but scriptures which was not graunted in their daies and therefore you greatlie wrong the dead when you make them speake that thing absolutelie which was limitted by them with conditions Now I appeall to the indifferent Reader whether you desserue not a sharpe reproofe thus to dazell the eies and amaze the minds of the simple Catholickes by violent wresting the writings of the martirs perswading the ignorant they should either dissent in this opinion amongst themselues consent with you or varie from vs. Whereas both they and we now and then consent with Scriptures Fathers and Primitiue Church in vnitie and veritie of doctrine against your dissentions pestiferous errours and open blasphemies Of M. Riders bynding him selfe to Consent with the first protestant Martyrs And of how many and monstruous beleefes he maketh him selfe therby 124. THey and he then and now sayth he consent with Scripturs Fitzsimon Fathers and Primatiue Church in vnitie and veritie of Doctrin against our dissentions pestiferous errours and open blasphemies Perhaps before I part I will make him beshrew the fingers of him that printed this protestation although I know Stow in Chron. anno 1549. it was not the printers fault Omitting woords let vs repayre to woorks The last named Ioan Knell of Kent shal be first confronted with M. Rider Fox Acts. pag. 398. 571. to see yf he will stand to this woord This Ioan as also did Peter the Germain an other his martyr denyed Christ to haue taken fleash of the B. Virgin M. Riders woords are that he consenteth with protestant Martyrs in vnitie and veritie of all doctrin It must then follow that he denyeth the same Since that I deale against a puritan I will alleadge one of the same sorte William Cowbridge Fox pag. 570. because he affirmed as Fox confesseth no
bishops to haue any more authoritie then preests as also because as other puritans can not tolerat any honour to the name of Iesus so could not he to the name of Christ but sayde that it was a filthye name Alan Copus dial 6. c. 17. and all that did beleeue in the name of Christ were damned Also that Christ was not redeemer of the world but deceauer therof Which with many other lyke articles he professed at his deathe as is not only affirmed but also proued by Alanus Copus alias Nicholas Harpsfeld against Fox All which M. Rider hath bound himselfe to beleeue Fox loc proxime cit Fox pag. 1151. Tom. 1. Luth. in disp de baptism Art 3. Gagninus l 6. hist Fran. Item Gerson tr 3. in Mat. Paul Aemil. l. 6. hist. Gal. Genebr in Chron. an 1280. by his former woords Thirdly Ihon Wesell denyed the holy Ghost to proceed from the Father and the Sonne Yet he a Foxian Martyr Fowerthely Haux denyed baptisme of Children to be necessarie to saluation yet he a Foxian Martyr Yet Melancthon and he a Foxian Confessor pronounceth Furor est affirmare quod paruuli sine Sacramentis salâ— fiant it is furie to affirme that children may be saued without Baptisme Fiftly Almaricus as Gagnin relateth denyed resurrection heauen hell Christ in the Sacrament more then in a stone that God spake more in S. Augustin then in Ouid Yet he was a Foxian Martyr and by him made a great bishop which others could neuer haue knowen So he made Sr. Ihon Ould castle L. Cobham by his owne absolute authoritie as well allowed to make Lords and Knights as Martyrs and Confessours Fox pag 942. 943. 944 Sixtly Frith the learned and excellent Martyr of Fox affirmed the real presence no article of beleefe affirmatiue or negatiue although the expresse scripture record it and offred sayth Fox to Sr. Thomas More to beleeue the real presence without the adoration Ihon Clerke Fox in his Caleddar 12. 13 14. Nouemb. Iuly 3. Item Acts pag. 111. col 2. num 26. and Alice Potkins defended ther was no other Sacrament then Christ hanging on the crosse Antonie Person Testwod other assured the woords of Christ this is my body which is broken for you only to meane the breaking of Gods woord among the people All this by his former woords my Caualiero is bound to beleeue for these are Foxian Martyrs with whom he sayth he is consenting in vnitie and veritie of Doctrin So is againe William Cowbridge Alan Cop. dial pag. 6. 633. Fox pag 738. saying that nether the Apostles nor Euangelists nor sower Doctors of the Church haue hitherto reuealed how synners might be truely saued So Also is Richard Hunne saying that poore men and idiots haue the truth of the Scripturs more then a thousand Prelats and clercks of the schooles What say you M. Rider will you affirme the same according to your woord and bonde There is no remedie your obligation is to do it But I would know whether you now hould with the idiots rather then the Scholers Truly in any consequence you can not both for such promise and for being non proficiens accompagnie Scholers Yet yf you disdayne to be an idiot which your bond hath made you and perforce inuita Minerua will intrude your selfe among clercks listen how your Martyr in vnitie and veritie of doctrin Fox pag. 738. cometh ouer you he damned sayd Fox the vniuersitie of Oxford with all degrees and faculties in it So that vnlesse you take to be an idiot your Martyr condemneth you To be breefe in this ruthful obligation printed against your selfe to stand to such confederats besyd your making you selfe idiot c. you must auerr with Ihon Teuxburie Ibid. pag. 935. that it is impossible to consent to Gods law that all things are equaly belonging to all that the Iewes of good zeale putt Christ to death c. Of all othets mentioned in the examinatio of the Creed being all for the most parts saints of the same stamp add Calendarie you haue bound your selfe fast to ratifie their damnable blasphemies and to consent with them in vnitie and of doctrin You are to iustifie all that they haue affirmed or els your printed protestation will bewray your puritanical faythlesnes in performance of your promises 125. And next you bring in another learned Protestant Cheminitius Rider who you say alleadgeth Augustine Ambrose and Gregorie Naziazen to approoue your adoration in your sacrament Intimating to the world that we should either allow that in you which publikely we preach against or else that we should be at a discord amongst our selues touching this your opinion But the matter being exactlie examined out of these Fathers themselues and not by your Enchiridions or heresay the Catholickes shall see you wrong vs and abuse them And first it seemeth verie plaine you neuer saw or at least neuer read Chemnitius and my reasons bee these First you know not so much as his right name much lesse his precise opinion Chem pars 2. Canon 6. page 434. for you misspel his name Kemnitius for Chemnitius which had been a small fault if you had rightlie alleadged him touching the matter For your Tridentine Canon commandeth an externall or outward worship of Christ in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine And Chemnitius hee condemneth your outward worshippe for ydolatrous and teacheth onelie an inward spirituall worship And to prooue what I say I will trulie alleadge your Cannon then Chemnitius his examination of it and then let the Catholickes but iudge indifferentlie whether of vs deal more trulie and syncerelie in this case This is your Canon Si quis dixerit in sancto Eucharistiae sacramento Christum vnigenitum Dei Filium non esse cultu latriae etiam externo adorandum solemniter circumgestandum c. Anathema sit That is if anie man shall say that in the blessed sacrament of thanksgiuing that Christ the onelie begotten Sonne of God is not to bee worshipped with that outward and diuine worship which is proper and due onelie to God as well when the Sacrament is carried about in procession as in the lawfull vse of the same Page 435. 436. 437. let him be accursed Martyn Chemnitius examining this your Canon first condemneth your fained Transubstansiation and sheweth the reason for saith he vnlesse the Church of Rome had deuised this Transubstansiation you should haue been palpable ydolaters worshipping the creatures for Christ And therefore she imagined that the substance of bread wine were quite chaunged into Christs bodie and bloud no substance of them remaining lest the simplest should spie their ydolatrie Secondlie he expreslie condemneth your outward worship as ydolatrous and sheweth there that Christ must be receiued by faith and worshipped in spirit and truth Page 444. lines 2. 3. 4. And afterwards hee saith comprehenditur autem vera interior spirituali veneratio adoratio
more belonging therto saying nemo militans Deo implicet se negotijs secularibus no man seruing God imployeth him selfe in secular affayres but of S. Pauls mynde afterwards Although S. Ihon Baptist was the sonne of a preest yet is it not true that if so hapned in the new testament or that he was sonne of a preest of the new testament for the new testament was made only at the last supper befor Christs passion before which both Zacharie and S. Ihon Baptist both dyed Now let vs attend to his obiections out of Scripture against the continencie of the Clergie and not exact at his hands any exact knowlege in maters of new or ould testament Fitzsimon 132. To auoyde fornication I graunt euery man may hate his wyfe yf he entred no other bonds contrary to hauing a wyfe or yf being free from such bonds he can not otherwyse auoyd fornication For otherwyse the very next lyne befor doth assure it is good for a man not to touch a woman 1. Cor. 7.1 Secondly not long after he aduiseth euen the marryed them selues when they would be vacant to prayer to obserue continencie Thirdly followed for such as are not marryed and widdowes it is good they would soe remayne as S. Paul did him selfe Fowerthly that we being deerly bought should not make our selues subiects of men but he without worldly cares wheras yf any be marryed he is carefull of the world and how he may please his wyfe and is diuided as also the woman toward hir husband This and much more hath S. Paul in the very chapter whence the forsayd obiection was borrowed Wherby the continencie of the Clergie is ratifyed and testifyed to be necessarie yf we couet to haue the Clergie be vacant to prayer to follow that which is good to be without worldly cares to thinke of things which are of our Lord how they may please God To the other obiection I graunt lykewyse that mariage is honorable among all men for none ought to dishonour it but to accompt it a great Sacrament in Christ and his Church Hebr. 13.4 Also it is honorably contracted by all who haue not otherwyse deuoted them selues to a higher state of perfection or by lawes of God and his Church are prohibited to marrye within certain degrees As for example although the Scripture speaketh without exception or limitation yet you are not so farr gone M. Rider as to allow marriage to be honorable betwixt mother and sonn sister and brother the grand-father and grand-dowghter And yf you be forward in such Puritantrie as to allow such marriages to be honorable Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 19. n. 37. you forsake Caluin the founder of your holy consistorial discipline accompting them very dishonorable Hitherto nothing appeareth against the not marrying of Preests yf they haue deuoted them selues to a higher state then it of marriage and especialy yf they haue plighted their promise or vowe to liue chast therby to be more vacant to prayer carefull of the things of our Lord how they may please God and be more free from the cares of the world For of such as had so obliged them selues to greater perfection Mat. 19. S. August l. de Sācta Virginitate c. 23. qui se castrauerunt propter regnum caelorum and had gelded them selues that is sayth S. Augustin qui pro proposito ab vxore ducenda se continuerunt such as by a godly purpose abstayned from taking a Spowse for the kingdome of heauen and had entred obligation of vow yf after they would marrye S. Paul sayth 1. Tim. 5. damnationem habent quia primam fidem irritam fecerunt they haue damnation because they haue infringed their first fayth Yf therfor it could not be honorable to forsake attentiue prayers to God and being carefull of pleasing him and fulfilling the first fayth plighted it could not be honorable also for such to marrye who had betaken them selues to such state of lyfe and vndertaken such obligations For what honor can there be in purchasing damnation Hereby appeareth that the Scripture ether hath not or to M. Riders skill affoorded not any aduise or commendation of such mens marriage 133. And the same Apostle pointeth out to all posterities Rider that the Authors and vpholders of this Article bee liers and hippocrits Heb. 13.4 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 and the forbidding of meates and marriage to bee the doctrine of Diuels And this is onelie proper to the Church and Chaplens of Rome as now they stand in the view of God Angles and men VVhether we forbidd Marriage or Meats 133. BY a testimonie of S. Paul he indeuoureth to proue Fitzsimon 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 that the vphoulders of this Article against Preests marriage are lyers and hypocrits Let such as he confesseth to haue bene all the nobles and learned in the land giue him thancks for this curtesie We graunt the forbidding of marriage and meats to be a doctrin of deuils yf they be forbidden absolutly or as things abhominable i but not yf they be forbidden for greater proffit of spirit and glorie to God That we doe not forbidd them absolutly is knowen when we accompt none fitt for Gods seruice as Churchmen but such as are begotten in lawfull marriage and when we eate such meates out of fasting dayes as we eschued in fasting dayes This argumēt a secundū quid ad simpliciter that who forbidd marriage and meat in certayne persons and tymes they absolutly forbidd them you shall behould how ridiculous it is by these few weake inferences Leuit. 18.7 c. Gods woord and his Churches lawes and also Princes decrees do forbidd as is to euery one knowen marriage betwixt father and dowghter mother sonne c. By your rules taken without limitation that marriage is honorable among all and forbidding marriage is a doctrin of deuils do not you blaspheme against God and his Church and iniurie your Prince for their forbidding such marriages Next the Apostles forbidd the eating of blood Acts 15.20.29 c. 21.25 and strangled meat for which in presence of the Constable a Puritan Sadler whose name I can not remembre and others your deuout Doctor Ihon Laney Cutler maintayned in May last 164. that it was vnlawfull to eate puddings or henns whose necks were crackt the lawes of Princes forbidd to eate fleash in lent and certayne dayes of the weeke and Phisitians forbidd diuers meats By your general rule that the forbidding of meats ' is a doctrin of deuils do not you make the Apostles Princes and Phisitions diuilish doctors Because I intend God willing in my replye vpon these points to dwell some what longer let Gods woord the Churches lawes Decrees of Princes the Apostles The 184. vntruth and Phisitions testifie that it is the 184. vntrueth to be only propre to the Church of Rome to forbidd marriage and meats as aforesayd Rider 134. Did not Tertullian write two bookes to his wife in
marriage For yf one of ours mantayne this point of controuersie how is euery one of vs sayd to be against it For the honor of God M. Rider leaue collusions and imposturs in abusing your fraternitie with such iuggling doctrin being fast and loose off and on vp and downe without ryme or reason Thirdly S. Gregorie sayth not that yf marriage must be dissolued but si enim dicunt religionis causa coniugia c. Yf any say that marriage for religions sake may be dissolued although lawe of men accord therto yet the lawe of God doth forbidd it to witt as he there expoundeth that without mutual consent they should diuorce them selues for any pretext to enter into religion And nether is this against vs not allowing the contrary nor for him to approue marriage of Preists because it speaketh only of the continuance of marriage inuiolably vnlesse mutual consent be graunted befor any man attayne to preesthod or religion So that it is farr more for our purpose that he that can not gett his wyfs consent to be deuorced can not be Preest and none Preest but yf he were marryed which hath such consent to remayne diuorced Fowerthly the Latin or Syntax of S. Gregorie is misreported For he could not vse the masculin gendre to Theotista a woman by calling hir Patricium but the feminine according to good congruitie by calling hir Patrician All was one to M. Rider who is loath to haue to great knowledge in that Papistical latin tong Luther de abrogaÌ„da missa priuata Pâ—mer lib. de coiugio episcoporum Magdeburg en vnaquiâ—que ceÌ„turâ—a cap. 7. cent 11. c. 7. as shall after appeare Fiftly yf any couet to haue a patterne of M. Riders choosing of proofs yf he be learned and a Protestant he may peruse Luther Pomeran the Centurians Beza Martyr Melancthon Caluin Brentius Kemnitius Iuel Fox Du Plessis c. in treating of Preests marriage Yf he be a Catholick Beza Martyr 1. Cor. 7. MelaÌ„c Conf. Augustana art 23. Caâ—uin 4. Instit c. 12. n. 23. Brent in Conf. VVittemberg c. de coniugio Kemnit 3. par exam Iuel con Harding Fox acts c. Plessis l. con Eucham pag. 307. Michael Medina libris 5. de continentia hominum sacrorum Espenceus in lib eiusdem argumenti Clictoueus de celibatis Sacerd. Hosius dial de eod Didac Payua lib. vlt. Cochleus con Calu. de votis Alphon. a Castro l. 13. de her ver Sacerdotium heres 4. Alb. Pighius controuersia 15. Vide CeÌ„tur 6. c. 7. col 388. cap. 10. col 686. vide Fox Act. and Mon. pag. 386. and would fynde the obiections of Protestants answered I report him to Bellarmins third part of the first tome lib. 1. chap. 19. seq and chap. 22. seq of the booke following to Hardings reioynder fol. 170. and to other Catholicks refutations mentioned in the margent against such heresies Lastly to acquaint the vnlearned with his choise in this mater for yf I would delate it in euery occasion I should augment to much this volume let him compare the seelie obiection brought by him out of S. Gregorie of whom we treat and the huge accusation brought by others against preests continencie because forsooth as they say it was so subiect to abuses as S. Gregorie abrogated it by a contrary law as S. Vdalricus is sayd to testifie especially for that in seeking fishe in his ponde instidd of fishe there were found six thousand heads of preests children smuthered to conceale their parents leacherie This obiection had carryed some weight with it and is found in Fox and euery other of that sort not only Foxes but asses wryting of this mater Only M. Rider ouer rydeth all substancial stuff stopping and stouping to snatch euery bayte whether it be to his behoofe or to his bane Yf he had omitted it because he had found it confuted in Bellarmine c. it might be excused But the not finding of all the residue of is guggling stuff confuted in Bellarmin c. sheweth that he was to good a Rider to be so good a reader as to haue euer perused him Now then to answer this forgerie so vehemently aggrauated by his brethren I say to it as to lyke vntruethes that one part therof supplanteth another For the forged autheur therof liued not a hondred yeares neere the tyme of him to whom he is sayd to haue written as appeareth in Bellarmine Secondly no such law or memorial or mention is extant in S. Gregorie Vide Staphilum resp ad fictas dissensiones obiectas ab Illiryco Vide Alan Cop. dial 1. cap. 23. S. Greg. l. 1. epist 42. or in any autheure treating of his lyfe as Iohanes Diaconus Beda Sigebertus Ado Treculphus c. Thirdly S. Gregorie confuteth it him selfe confirming the Catholick doctrin in this behalfe by commanding Non ordinari Subdiaconos nisi prius vouerint continentiam Subdeacons them selues not to be receaued to holy ordres vnles they would vow continencie Fowerthly some tyme those heads are sayd to be found in Sicile some tyme in Rome c. Other stuffe besydes rayling at the parlament proofs by him confessed to be the act of all the nobles and learned in the land saying them to be vnlawfull and horrible doctrin of Deuils repugnant to Christs trueth and the Pope to be a bloodie murthering Italian Preest and Foxes Saincts to be innocent lambs crying for reuenge against their murtherers wherby you perceaue agayne that he accompteth them of a good beleefe and the lyke not worth the taking vp by any sincke-sweeper I can not fynde or perceaue wherunto I might replye therfor to discharge my promise I will acquaint the truth of this point of Coelibat or vnmarrying of Preests in the East and West Churches Rider 140 Now yee see Scriptures Fathers Popes practise of the primitiue Church and presidents of godlie Bishops and priests witnesse with vs against you that the marriage of priests is lawfull and honorable and your parliament stuffe vnlawfull and horrible the one hath the warrant from Christ the other is the doctrine of Diuels from which recall your selues your confederates and nouices least in abstaining from lawfull matrimonie yee fall into damnable adulterie which the Lord preuent for Christs sake And thus much for the first three Articles Catholick doctrin of the not Marrying of Priests Fitzsimon 140. FIrst it is to be vnderstood that the determination of the Church is authorised from God as yf it were his owne act He that heareth you heareth me VVhen you receaued the woord of obedience of God by vs you receaued it not as the woord of men Luc. 10. 1. Thess 2. 1. Ioan. 4. but as it is truely the woord of God He that knoweth God heareth vs He that is not of God he doth not heare vs. In this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of errour c. Secondly it is to be knowen that the Church from
the Apostles tymes hath eschued Marriage in the Clergie and followed Coelibat Ver. 35. 1. Cor. 1. Ver. 33. S August lib. 5. cap. 26. cōtra Donatistas or Continencie that according to S. Paul Facultatem prabeat sine impedimento Dominum obseruandi It might inable them without impediment to serue our Lord. For he that is marryed is carefull of the things which are of the world how he may please his wyfe and he is diuided Thirdly sayth S. Augustin and it is a godly and goulden saying De eo quod tota per orbem frequentat ecclesia disputare an ita faciendum sit insolentissimae insaniae est To dispute of that which the whole Church doth obserue whether it should be obserued or not Conc. 2. Carthag can 2. An. 396. fuit probatum 2 Leone 4. d. c. de libellis is most insolent madnes Fourthly that it proceeded from the Apostles tymes of innumerable proofs extant to that effect I will only tendar these few 1. Out of the 2. Concil of Carthage Placet vt Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vel qui Sacramenta contrectant pudicitiae custodes etiam ab vxoribus se abstineant Vt quod Apostoli docuerunt ipsa seruauit antiquitas nos quoque custodiamus It pleaseth that Bishops Preests and Deacons or they who administer the Sacraments euen from their wiues should abstayne and keepe integritie That what the Apostles taught and antiquitie obserued we also should continue In which woords all that we sayd of the being of Coelibat the Apostles doctrin and practised in the Church and commanded to posteritie is contayned Conc. Neocaesar Anno 312. probatū à Leone 4. d. 20. 2. Conc Neocaesar Presbyter si vxorem duxerit ordine suo moueatur Yf a Preest marry a wife let him be deposed from his ordre This Concil was more ancient then the former and testifyeth how heynous a punishment it had bene that a Preest should marry 3. Concil Concil Elibertinum Anno 325. Elibertinum in Hispania Placuit in totum prohibere Episcopis Presbyteris Diaconis ac Subdiaconis abstinere se à coniugibus non generare filios It pleaseth altogether to forbidd Bishops Preests Deacons and Subdeacons to abstayne from wiues Conc. Aquisgran an 816. cap. 6. Maguntin an 888. cap. 10. Wormatiense anno 868. cap. 9. S. Clem. can 27. Apostolorum S. Calixtus 1. apud Gratian. d. 27. c. Presbyteri Siricius ep ad Himericum Vide Bellarm. Baron Valentiam De caelibatu S. August de baptismo con Donatistas lib. 2. c. 7. 23. epist 118. and not to ingender Children This concil was in the West the other two in the East and Southe yet concurrng in one doctrin And for the North the Concils of Aquisgran of Worms and Mayence in Germanie not only followed the same doctrin but also the same woords And these concils being partly before Siricius and cettayne of them also before the Concil of Nice in vayne doth Flessis VVillet and such others drawe the original of Coelibat from Siricius and the sayd Concil For S. Clement in the canons of the Apostles Calixtus the first Siricius c. being neere the tyme of the Apostles them selues do certifie yf that might serue our veneral ministers distrust the antiquitie therof long before Therfor by the rule of S. Augustin Quae non inueniuntur in literis Apostolorum neque in Concilijs posteriorum per vniuersam custodiuntur Ecclesiam non nisi ab ipsis tradita commendata creduntur VVhat are not found in the epistles of Apostles nor Concils of their successours yet are kept through the vniuersal Church are beleeued not to haue bene deliuered and commended but by them By this rule I say Coelibat finding still one more ancient then another testifying the obligation therof can be no other then an Apostolical tradition Fiftly omitting all other proofs of Fathers who by life and writings were conformable to such will of the Apostles as among the whole troope how much euery one was more singular otherwyse so was he also in chast lyfe as appeareth by induction I wil be now contented with S. Epiphanius and S. Hieroms only suffrages S. Epiphan ad finem operiscontra haereses Item her 59. Epiphanius Sanctum Sacerdotium ex virginibas vt plurimum aut ex solitarijs aut si hi ad ministerium non suffecerint de his qui se à proprijs vxoribus continent et si quis ab initio continens viduus fuerit habere potest locum Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi Hypodiaconi Holy preesthood for the most part is of Virgins or solitarie persons or yf these be not sufficient toward the charge of them who liue continent from their propre wyues and yf any from the begyning had bene a continent widdow he may haue place of a Bishop Preest Deacon Subdeacon Hieronimus Quid facient Orientis Ecclesiae quid Aegipti sedis Apostolicae quae aut virgines clericos accipiunt aut continentes aut si vxores habuerint mariti esse desistunt VVhat shall the Churches of the East doe S. Hieron circa initium libri contra Vigilantium Idem in fiue Apologiae contra Iouinianum what of Aegypt and the seat Apostolical which ether receaue Virgins into the Clergie or Continent or yf they had wiues they leaue to be husbands Long befor sayd Origen hom 23. in lib. Num. Illus solius offerre sacrificium indesinens qui perpetuae se deuouet castitati It is his parte alone to offre the continual Sacrifice who hath deuoted him selfe to continual or perpetual chastitie Nay the pagan and most lasciuous Poet could say discedat ab aris Tibulus 2.1 queis tulit histerna gaudia nate venus Casta placent superis By these testimonies dearly beloued Reader vnlesse thou be peruerse vnsatiable thou hast that Celibat being cōmanded by the Church is therby also commanded by God him selfe that the Apostles taught it to be obserued that Concils of East West South and North concurred in the obseruation therof that the disciples of the Apostles testifie the necessitie therof that other vnspitious assurance auerre the same Thou perceauest also that the obiections against it are as light in them selues as they and their liues are light from whom they come who being licentious and fleashly Libertins do only seeke for cloaks to their shame Women as of Samson Dauid Salomon and the Children of Israel so peculiarly of the forsayd mates were the stone of offense or scandal and of Apostasie according to the saying of Gods woord Ecclesiastici 19.2 Vinum mulieres apostare faciunt sapientes VVyne and women do make wyse men in their owne Conceits to fall from beleefe Besyd all which thou hast lately out of Luther before that he would haue taught celibat Vide num 130. but to be opposit to the Pope and yf the Pope had allowed it he would mantayne whoordome to be more lawfull 4. Article
points of deuotion therfor no deuotion to be followed For so you might proue that law phisick eating drinking weapons appareil preaching c. were not to be vsed because they be some tyme abused In the next citation which by wante of the booke I could not now examen of the Sacrament according to your translation of the altar and apparences therin by mans procurement and deuilish operation you take a licence to add to the text the woords of the altar Vide num â—07 Yet you blamed me for adding the woord blessed befor Sacrament because it is not in the authoure You inferr next lyke your selfe vpon this proposition some tyme by abuse there are apparitions ergo yf ther be any fleash in the Sacrament of the altar whether visible or inuisible it is wrought through the priests legerdemain or the deuils cunning and craft First without doubt the sequel is Riderial that is farr beyond being ridiculous and preposterous For yf it were allowable would follow as reasonably some tyme M. Rider hath bene knowen in London to vse legerdemain and all to haue abused diuers by the deceitfull suggestions of the deuil therfor in all other places whether he be visible or inuisible he is to be accompted not seene but by legerdemain and deceit of the deuil Yf your cursing were no better then your discoursing you would as badly deserue the name of the one as you are farr and for all I could vnderstand euer was from obtayning the other Secondly do not you start from your word in the 35. number in your Rescript that as we beleeue to receaue Christ realy so you do also yet now you profess that you do not beleeue him to be receaued visibly or inuisibly in the Sacrament that yf he be therin visibly or inuisibly it is by legerdemayne Can he be realy and yet nether visibly nor inuisiblie Not to be vnsutable in your proceeding you make the next stuff of one liuerie with the precedent by diuers dishonest dealings First you say that Tharasius was President in that Concil which maketh the 195. vntrueth The 195. vntruth For he was nether first second nor third therin as appeareth in the begyning of the first act Secondly by the 196. vntrueth The 196. vntruth you affirme that it was an idolatrous Concil It is a puritaninical proprietie to be sawcie and malapert toward Concils and Parlaments The 197. vntruth as is befor testifyed Thirdly it is the 197. vntrueth that Tharasius demanded any such mater he only propounding it as an obiection by these woords Sed quispiam dixerit c. Some one would say c. and answered it him selfe to him selfe saying that miracles were graunted to the not beleeuers The 198. vntruth By the 198. vntrueth you add the woord only Wherby might follow yf what was graunted to the not beleeuers the same was graunted only to them then M. Rider vnlesse he be an vnbeleeuer hath no eyes head armes no witt or moral honestie because all these are graunted to the vnbeleeuers which by his addition is all one and to be graunted only vnto them And consequently he hauing all the same must by his owne woords be an vnbeleeuer he partaking such things as by his deduction only vnbeleeuers haue But M. Rider yf it may please you let Christ him selfe expound the saying of miracles or signes to be graunted for the vnbeleeuers not to exclude them from the beleeuers for sayth he Signa antem eos qui crediderint haec sequentur c. Mar 16.17 But such as beleeue these signes shall follow and consequently only to import that they are graunted to vnbeleeuers to conuict them of falshood Yet remayning with beleeuers not to such intent but to confirme and confort them in their religion To which ende the woords of S. Augustin are appliable which shortly after you alleadge and misalleadge He that yet requyreth prodigious wonders to beleeue therby M. Rider maketh false latin in S. Augustins allegation Ipse not ipsum is him selfe a great prodigious wonder who beleeueth not the whole world beleeuing We requyre not wonders to beleeue therby but inioye them by Christs promise to assure the weake and confort the feeble in faythe Good Lord What benifit can your beleefe receaue by this sentence of S. Augustin not only no world but no contry nor no citie nor no house being now or euer befor intierly of your beleefe Easely might I answer S. Chrysostom yf any such mater were in that place But it maketh the 199. vntrueth The 199. vntruth that he so saythe Lykewyse it is a Riderian sequel signes are found among those that are false Christians Ergo she is a false Church and hath all false Christians which will haue miracles First it is against Christs former woords that beleeuers should not want signes Secondly yf the sequel be allowable that what Church soeuer will haue miracles both it and all therin are false the Lutheran Staphil in respon Con. Scihmidelin pag. 414. Lindan dial 3. c. 1. Dubitantij Bolsec in vita Caluini cap. 13. Caluinian Churches are false and all therin because Luther coueted to woorke a miracle vpon one possessed and Caluin by raysing his man Brule from dissembled death Luther to his owne extremitie and Caluin to the true death of his man Then also Foxes Church and all therof are false by forgerie of some of his martyrs speaking without tongs burning without payne and being martyred and yet aliue long after As for example Ihon Marbeck by Fox in his first editions was made martyr together with Antonie Parson Robert Testwood Henry Filmer and many rare points of his martyrdom related especialy his pleasantnes in going to the fyer yet he being fownd aliue long after Vide Alan Cop. Dial 6. Pag. 697. Fox had no other excuse but to confesse him selfe deceaued and to rayle against them that warned him therof calling them Carpers Fox Acts and Mon. pag. 1114. wranglers exclaimers deprauers whisperers raylers quarrell-pyckers Corner-creepers fault-finders Spider-catchers c. Now as I sayd by M. Riders being of Foxes Church according to vnitie and veritie of doctrin as he sayth him selfe and Fox seeking false miracles and martyrdoms as hereby appeareth to his Church it must follow by M. Riders owne sequel that suche Churche and all therof are false Why should such vnfortunat disputers euery moment made to confownd them selues intermedle at all with maters of learning He proceedeth in the same vayne and vanitie of reasoning saying All God and Christs miracles as yf they were not all one in the point of miracles do change as well the accidental formes as the substances as it hapned in Moises rodd and the water turned into wyne Yf any would bidd him proue that Moises rodd did not retayne the leinthe it had befor after it was made a Serpent or the water in Cana Galileae the quantitie and moistnes of water when it was turned to
Num. 38.81.154 and falsifyed the sacred Scriptures them selues perspicuously to all mens eyes aboue all excusation or tergiuersation 6. You haue paragoned or compared the mysteries of Christs gospell with all Sacraments and sanctification therof to base beggerly ordonances of the ould law Num. 36.63.78 7. You haue disdayned the woords of Christs institution of his B. Sacrament and corrected them with a new institution of your owne Num. 68. 8. You haue denyed the whole merits of Christs lyfe and death Exam. n. 14. and imputed your Saluation to it which hapened after Christs death 9. You haue made Christs institution by your actiue and passiue commentarie Num. 76.77 to contradict it selfe and to be absurd and false 10. You haue made Prince and people great and small who euer did breake Images of Christ Num. 96. to be traytours against Christ 11. You haue testifyed your selfe manifouldly to be a Puritan that is a seditious resister Num. 99.122 by your owne priuat diuersitie of iudgment to Princes and Parlament ordonances of late reformation and deadly enemie of Protestantrie which hath bene established 12. You haue bound your selfe to beleeue Num. 35.108 123.124 125. and not to beleeue Christ realy yet not realy spiritualy yet not spiritualy Sacramentaly yet not Sacramentaly literaly yet not literaly c. in the B. Sacrament 13. You haue concourse and consociation with Iewes and Iewishnes in your selfe and your Patriarches Num. 115.119.160 as also with the most heynous hereticks and also disproued condemned all and euery one of the most famous Protestants Num. 122.123 and by them you as generaly are refuted which also is done against by your owne Confessours and Martyrs Num. 124. 14. You haue entred bond and obligation in print to auerre in vnitie and veritie of Doctrin all that euer might be blasphemed against God and Godlines 15. You haue most puritanicaly censured the acts of Parlament since the suppression to be heretical abhominable repugnant to Christs trueth to ancient Fathers and the practise of the primatiue Church Num. 130.131 16. You haue contrarie to your clayme it of first Protestantrie disauowed the General Concil of Nice from you to vs and haue allured the nobilitie of Vlster in Irland Num. 138. to imitat them who intended to kill their King rebelled against his constitutions Breefly what vntruethes denials interpretations sequels arguments contradictions impudencies and impieties you haue besyd all the former runne into they are not so obscurely or seldomly incideÌ„t but all that fauour your profession may thinke you were hyred or of your selfe intended to disgrace disable and condemne your and there cause Since you can not deny any silable of these imputations you may worthely crye the crye of Oecolampad Vtinam c. You may worthely shunne the light of the sunne and therby professe playnly simply that heresie hath no defense but in a lye and can but by lyes and darknes be protected and that coming to light it is suddenly disconfited Inuincible and infallible Spouse of Christ the Catholick Church I resigne and deuote my trauayles wrytings to thy sacred doome With thee I say and vnsay commend condemne all doctrin by me or others professed FINIS A TABLE OF THE MOST PRINCIPALL MATTERS CONTAINED IN THIS BOOKE VVhich the Reader if he please in many pointes may fitlie compare with the Englishe Table of the Protestant Doctors Confessors and Martyrs printed in Black Friars commonlie sould about the streetes and vsuallie hunge vp in sundrie houses VVherin he shall find the foresaid Doctors to be painted in far more truer colours ABBIES ABbies Thomas Muntzer and his fellow Phifer an Apostata Monke destroyed in one yeare 200. Abbies and Castles in Franconia alone pag. 217. A hundred Abbies built in France by one only Moncke of Benchor Abbie named Luanus Ep. ded parag 16. AGNVS DEIES Of the great reuerence exhibited by Charles the Great towardes an Agnus Dei sent vnto him by Leo the third pag. 378. Of the pietie and deuotion of the Emperor of Constantinople towardes another sent him by Vrbanus the fifth ibid. APOSTLES Apostles How Heretiques condemne the Church of the Apostles and how contemptiblie they speake of the Apostles them selues pag. 31. Beza affirmeth Antechrist to haue then begunne pag. 31. The Centurists Beza and Illiricus haue carefully calculated fifteene sinnes of S. Peters ibid. Caluin sayth of S. Paul that he was full of presumption temeritie and precipitation ibid. Quintinus that he was not a chosen but a broken vessel ibid. The Centurists that he was dissentious towardes Barnabas and an hipocrit towardes Iames and others ibid. Bullinger that S. Iohn sinned in Apostacie ibid. Quintinus calleth him a foolish youth pag. 31. Caluin calleth S. Mathew and abuser and distorter of diuers citations pag. 31. S. Marc an Apostata and disloyall Luther that S. Luke was to excessiue in commending good woorkes pag. 31. Caluin of all the Apostles that they were ouer superstitious and subiect to vice ibid. Pomeran that the Apostles wrote wickedlie pag. 138. Luther that they are no true Euangelists ibid. Caluin that they ought not to bable what they list ibid. VVilliam Cowbridge that nether the Apostles Euangelists nor Doctors of the Church haue reuealed how sinners might be trulie saued pag. 308. See more in the woord Creâ—de Caluin they wrest allegations Replie Pag. 49. Depart from the right meaning of them ibid. Shuffle abruptlie many sentences into their writinges ibid. Tearme improprelie ibid. Vse wooodes improprelie c. ibid. BAPTISME Baptisme PuritaÌ„s doe imitate the practise of the Iewes in imposing names vpon their children pag. 273. Certaine new fangled Puritan names noted by a late Protestant ibid. The Lord is neere More triall Reformations Discipline Ioy-againe Sufficient From-aboue Free-gift More fruit Dust. c. ibid. Haux Foxes Martyr denied Baptisme of children to be necessarie to saluation pag. 308. The Puritans Baptisme not to regenerate Replie pag. 66. Not to belong to Infants ibid. VVithout it saluation not to be doubted ibid. pag. 67. To be no more necessarie then Circumcision ibid. BELLS The Assembling of people to Church by ringing Bells to be Antechristian BELEEFE Protestants Abssemled sundrie times and in sundrie famous cities to ioyne in a Fraternall attonment about Religion confesse that there is no hope thereof to be expected but only the hastning the day of iudgment to shut vp all their variances pag. 159. That Sectarists did neuer yet compose any forme of Beleefe whereunto them selues would irreuocablie remayne bound pag. 133. The Arrians foure times in few monthes changed reuoked their Creede ibid. The same testified by suÌ„drie Sectarists them selues of their owne religion ibid. By Clebitius pag. 134. By Hosius ibid. By Osiander ibid. By English Puritans saying that the Church of England is Antechristian and Diabolicall and that none but betrayers of God doe defend it ibid. How 12. choice Protestants at Ratisbon ioyning
Zuinglius as the Emperor is in his banner ibid. Caluin Beza Peter Martyr and Iewell no otherwise in the Sacrament then in a sermon ibid. Musculus saith that nether naturallie nor personallie nor reallie nor corporallie nor spirituallie nor figuratiuelie nor significatiuelie is bread the bodie of Christ. pag. 252. SVPREMACIE Of the Supremacie of the Pope and authoritie of the Church of Rome confirmed by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers of Protestants themselues pag. 240. Diuers other proofes for the Popes Supremacie Replye pag. 35. 36. Of the new Oath of alleigance and of the Popes Breue and Cardinall Bellarmins leter Replye pag. 109. 110. 111. 112. VVhat Sr. Iohn Perrot said to a shrinking Scismatick who accepted the Oathe of Supremacie pag. 115. TRADITIONS Of diuers thinges beleeued by Protestants not contained in the written woord of God pag. 29. TRANSVBSTANTIATION Diuers inuincible proofes for Transubstantiation both out of Catholiques and also out of Heretiques them selues By S. Ciprian pag. 128. By S. Bede pag. 129. By Berengarius pag. 303. By VVickliffe ibid. By Iohn Husse and others ibid. That it is the custome in Gods woord to call thinges altered by their former names pag. 90. VVhat sundrie sortes of most forcible woordes the ancient Fathers vsed to expresse Transubstantiation pag. 128. Proofes of Transubstantiation by S. Anselme pag. 66. By Lanfrancus ibid. By S. Ciril of Hierusalem pag. 200. By Tertullian pag. 244. By S. Damascen pag. 255. By S. Ambrose pag. 258. By S. Cyril of Ierusalem pag. 265. 266. Of the change of substances the formes remayning proued by sundrie instances pag. 366. The floute of a Pagan saying an infant shrowded in a cake of flower is giuen to them that are made Christians pag. 370. TREASONS Of sundrie Treasons practized by Puritans against their Princes Kinge Iames our soueraigne restrained and indangered by the treacherous practizes of Puritans pag. 224. Puritans for this fact published a iustification vnder the title of A Declaration of the iust c. printed anno 1582. ibid. Primatiue ChristiaÌ„s falsly accused by their persecutors of Treasons as Catholiques are at this day by Heretiques pag. 225. Of the dutifull and loyall respect of Catholiques towardes their Princes ibid. The Treason of Puritans against his Maiestie in Rutheuen and in Striueling Replye pag. 17. Puritans in France Geneua and Cabillon not priuatlie but sinodicallie resolued the killing of Kinge Queene Princes and nobilitie Replye pag. 69. The Queene Douager then Regent was rebelliously contemned and violently hastned to death Replye pag. 69. By Puritans in Scotland the Kinge and Queenes Secretarie was killed in their sight Replye pag. 69. The Queene great with childe of his Maiestie that now is designed to death with a Pistoll if it would haue taken fyre Replye pag. 70. She forced to surrender hir crowne to a bastard ibid. Lastly exiled to hir finall destruction ibid. His Maiestie that now is imprisoned by Puritans censured by excommunications and sought his death by the Earle Gowrie Replye pag. 70. Finally made him as him selfe saith a Kinge without State without honor without order where heardles boyâ—â— would braue him to his face ibid. VESSELS Of the vses of consecrated Vessels of gould and siluer proued by S. Aug. pag. 198. Also by Theodoretus Prudentâ—us and Theophilactus ibid. By S. Chrisostom pag 234. How pagan Emperors cried out in admiration at the sumptuousnes of holie Vessels ibid. VNCTION Of the doctrin of Reformers concerning Extreme Vnction see Replye pag. 68. VNITIE Of the sweete Vnitie and agreement in doctrine that is betwixt our late Reformers The Lutherans in their publique writinges condemne the Churches of England France Flanders and Scotland and call their Martyrs Martyrs of the Diuel pag. 158. The curteous entertainment of Lascus Superintendent of 175. fugitiues at Coldigna in Denmark ibid. Protestants assembled sundrie times and in sundrie famous Cities to ioyne in a fraternall attonment confesse that there is no other hope nor helpe but the hastining of the great day of Iudgment to shut vp all their variances pag. 159. Nicholaus Gallus saith that the contentions amongst vs are not smale nor touching trifles but of the highest atricles of Christian religion pag. 172. The Lutherans say of the Caluinists that they giue the lye to the Sonne of God pag. 173. Tilman saith that they inforce them selues against the woordes of the Sonne of God pag. 180. Heshasius saith that they blaspheme with an impudent mouth the Sonne of God pag. 180. Againe they blaspheme barbarously and are culpable of the blood of Iesus Christ and are murtherers of him ibid. Luther saith They will say any thing boast of any thing confidently affirme any thing but prooue nothing pag. 296. And againe Luther saith Let no manâ—â— leeue their Protestations for it is certaine that th y lie and lie againe ibid. VVigandus saith that they are nether flocks nor towe but the capitall points of Christian doctrin that they contend about Replye pag. 50. Puritans say of the religion professed in England thâ—t â—t is Antechristian and none but betrayers of God doe defende it Replye pag. 39. George Maior saith The euangelicall Doctors doe more brutallie and cruellie contend amongst them selues then any barbarous Ruffians Replye pag. 50. And the like hath Chitreus another brother in the Lord. ibid. Caluinists to requite the Lutherans say they haue resuscitated damned heresies out of Hell Replye pag. 56. And Lutherans againe to them The Caluinists haue allowed for their Catholique faith the heresie of the Arrians Eutichians Appolinarists Tomotheans Acephalists Theodosians Gaianits and Macarians Reply pag. 56. Iohn Scut saith The Sacramentarian profession is a iakes or sinke of many heresies the last rage of Sathan Replye pag. 56. And the Puritans That there is no right religion established in England Replye pag. 68. That they be all Infidels that goe to their Churches ibid. pag. 65. That it shall be easier for Sodom and Gomor in the day of Iudgment ibid. That it is a verie Babilon c. Againe the Puritans say that the Protestant Ministers are dumbe dogges Idol shepheards c. Replye pag. 88. 89. And finally the variablnes of their doctrin is cleerly manifested by sundrie examples of their owne proceedinges Replye pag. 97. 98. 99. WICKED Euident proofes that the wicked receiue the bodie of Christ in the B. Sacrament By S. Gregorie Theodoret S. Chrisostom S. Hierom Origen and others pag. 150. pag. 212. Sundrie pregnant inferences vpon Protestant suppositions to proue that the wicked may eate the bodie of Christ. pag. 207. 208. 247. WOORKES Of good Woorkes see pag. 154. ZVINGLIVS Zuinglius saith of him selfe and his brethren that leacherie had made them infamous pag. 18. Zuinglius died in rebellion armed pag. 18. His epitath ibid. How a black or white Aduiser appeared in the night to Zuinglius and taught him how to expound the woord is in this is my bodie pag. 104. An Errata of some faultes escaped in
our obiections that they accept of the Sacraments no better then of bare figures pag. 107. VVhether Consecration be a new tearme pag. 110. VVhether there can possiblie be any discord amongst Catholiques in pointes of beleefe pag. 111. VVhat the true Consecration is which the Gospellers teache And whether it be according to Christs institution pag. 121. VVhether Transubstantiation had bene anciently knowne And whether new names may consist with ould doctrine pag. 125. VVhat the sense of Transubstantiation is and how ould it is pag. 128. VVhether the Article of Christes Ascention be not rather a proofe then disproofe of the Reall presence pag. 131. An examination of Protestantrie concerning the twelue Articles of Beleefe in generall pag. 133. An examination of Protestantrie concerning the twelue Articles of Beleefe in particular pag. 139. VVhether Transubstantiation be but fortie yeare ould pag. 166. The fourth part of the Catholikes proofe by Scriptures for the Reall preseÌ„ce p. 181. A discouerie of more Puritancie in M. Rider And of Puritan Protestations how they are performed pag. 183. VVhether the vulgar latin translation of the Bible be to be preferred to all other translations pag. 186. VVhether Masses be said to Saints And whether it be dangerous now a dayes to honor Saints pag. 194. Of his cruell threat against the Masse pag. 196. VVhether Chalices were anciently consecrated and of what matter they were made pag. 197. VVhether the wicked receiue Christ or no. pag. 204. VVhether it be treason to breake Images pag. 210. The last part of the Catholiques proofe by Scriptures for the Reall presence pag. 214. A necessarie digression contayning a declaration what Puritans are and what they teache and preâ—end pag. 217. VVhether M. Rider be a Puritan c. pag. 228. The second proofe of Catholiques for the Reall presence by Concils and Fathers By the Concil of Nice pag. 237. The second part of the second proofe By the Concil of Ephesus pag. 239. The third part of the second proofe by Tertullian pag. 242. The fourth part of the second proofe by S. Cyprian pag. 245. The fifth part of the second proofe by S. Hilarie pag. 248. The sixt part of the second proofe by S. Athanasius pag. 251. The second parcell of the sixt part pag. 252. The third parcell of the sixt part of the second proofe ibid. The seuenth part of the second proofe by S. Damascen pag. 254. The eight part of the second proofe by S. Ambrose pag. 258. The ninth part of the second proofe by S. Chrisostom pag. 261. The tenth part of the second proofe by S. Cyrill of Alexandria pag. 264. The 13. chapter of the 4. booke of S. Cyrill faithfullie translated to testifie the fidelitie of Protestants citations pag. 205. The eleuenth part of the second proofe by S. Hierom wherin is discussed whom and how we allowe and dissalow to reade Scriptures and Hereticall bookes And whether Protestants or we doe most simbolize with Iewishnes pag. 268. The twelfth part of the second proofe by S. Augustin pag. 275. The last part of the second proofe by S. Leo. pag. 282. A confirmation of all our former doctrine by the Disciples of the Apostles Martiall Anaclete Dionise c. pag. 288. A conclusion of these two seuerall proofes out of Scriptures and Fathers p. 251. The third proofe that the chiefe Protestants did beleeue the Reall presence and alleadged all the Fathers for the maintenance thereof pag. 296. How our opinion the Sacramentarian opinion and Luthers opinion are reported pag. 298. VVho are indeed Protestants and wherfore so called pag. 300. The second part of the third proofe how English Protestant Martyrs confessed the Reall presence pag. 304. Of M. Riders binding him selfe to consent with the first Protestant Martyrs And of how many and monstrous beleefes he maketh him selfe thereby pag. 307. Of Kemnitius citation out of S. Ambrose and Eusebius Emissenus pag. 314. VVhether Kemnitius allowed externall Adoration VVhen Pixes began And of the triumphe of Corpus Christi feast pag. 316. How M. Rider behaueth him selfe towards Acts of Parlament And of his impugning Communion vnder one kinde pag. 321. VVhether Continencie of the Clergie was anciently commanded pag. 325. VVhether we forbid Mariages or Meates pag. 327. VVhether Tertullian did write to his wife And whether he were for or against Priestes Mariages pag. 328. VVhether S. Ignatius did fauour Priestes Mariages And whether the Apostles were married pag. 329. VVhether all that may not contemne their wiues may conuerse with them carnallie And whether sometime married men may not be Priestes pag. 331. VVhether Paphnutius perswaded the Concill of Nice to allowe Priestes to marrie pag. 332. Of M. Riders grant of the Concill of Nice to be ours And his clayme of predecessors in Vlster pag. 334. VVhether S. Chrisostom and S. Gregorie allowed Priestes Mariages pag. 337. Catholique doctrine of the not marrying of Priests pag. 340. VVhether Sectarists or Catholiques be greater discommenders of Matrimonie pag. 343. Of Priests marriages in the Orientall Church And of late Sectarists seeking their fauour pag. 347. VVhether ancient denyers of the Reall presence were condemned as Heretiques pag. 350. Berengarius his recantations and condemnations pag. 355. Of many miraculous testimonies of the Reall Presence pag. 358. VVhat Miracles are reproued by Catholique writers pag. 362. VVhether M. Rider vnderstandeth any hard Latin pag. 368. VVhether Eusebius affirmed true Miracles to haue ceased pag. 370. VVhether Christ being a man may notwithstanding appeare in the likenes of a childe pag. 371. How ancient the Masse is pag. 372. VVhether S. Ambrose esteemed it a miracle by the B. Sacrament that his brother was not drowned pag. 375. VVhether Crosses Holie bread or Agnus Deis be allowable pag. 377. VVhether M. Rider or I doe misreport the relation of Sozomen pag. 380. Of his euident deprauing Gods woord pag. 381. VVhether Crantzius be belied by M. Rider or me pag. 382. VVhether Optatus commended or condemned Protestantrie pag. 384. VVhether the Puritan Church hath the sincere preaching of Gods woord lawfull vse of the two Sacraments c. pag. 385. VVhether S. Gregorie Nazianzen beleeued the Spirituall Corporall and Reall presence pag. 338. VVhether in wisdome we should by M. Rider be prouoked to Miracles pag. 389. How suteable the last woordes of M. Rider are to them of ancient Heretiques pag. 391. The Conclusion ibid. A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAYNED IN THE SECOND VOLVME Intituled A Replye c. A Replye to M. Riders Rescript pag. 1. 1. Title concerning the inscription of M. Riders Rescript pag. 1. 2. Title whether it be true that I vsed sleights and delayes to confute M. Rider pag. 5. 3. Title whether M. Riders pretence concerning the legible Copie be true p. 8. 4. Title whether it be true that I refused to stand to the arbitrement of the College pag. 11. 5. Title of the villanie and iniquitie of these Puritans in this Iudgment pag. 16. 6. Title of other vntruthes and false vawnts of M.