open and published for above sixteene yeares past in two Bookes one called An Encounter against the Foreman the other an Appeale against the Second yet hath not any one appeared out of your Romish Seminaries for the vindicating of them heerein âšœ Since this Part of this Advertisement thus given there have some of your Engineers sought to undermine the whole Structure of this Treatise by the odious Imputation of Falsification One was a L Baron and his Suggestor Another a notable Seducer in his Letters to a noble Peere of this Kingdome the Third a Romishly inspired Detractor who are in this Second Edition defeated by a Countermine of just Vindications against their False and frivolous Exceptions To say nothing of a late Hobgoblin his feigned Letter to a Ladie upbraiding mee with such Taxations of some Falsities which about six and twentie yeares since were falsly charged upon mee by Master Parsons as I proved in a Booke of Encounter By which your Practice is confirmed that which I have often averred That none may expect from you any Satisfactorie Confutation of this or the like Treatises seeing that instead of Shott you answere only with Squibs Goe on in the same Course to make mee thereby a true Prophet and by my Vindications against your Calumniations to occasion greater Advantage to our Cause and just Defence thereof âšœ By these Advertisements you may now easily conceive with what confidence I may procede in this Worke wherein is displayed and layd open in the discussing of these Eight Words of Christ his Institution of the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist HEE BLESSED BRAKE GAVE TO THEM SAYING TAKE EATE DRINKE your ten Romish Prevarications and Transgressions Afterwards in the following Bookes are reveiled the stupendious Paradoxes Sacrilegiousnesse and Idolatrie of your MASSE together with the notorious Obstinacies some few Overtures of Perjuries out of that great Summe which may afterwards be manifested in your swearing to the other Articles of your new Romane Faith and the manifold Heresies in the Defenders thereof as also their indirect and sinister Objecting and Answering of the Testimonies of ancient Fathers throughout as if they contended neither from Conscience nor for Conscience-sake To Conclude Whosoever among you hath beene fascinated according to your Colliers Catechisme with that onely Article of an Implicite Faith let him be admonished to submit to that Duetie prescribed by the Spirit of God to Trie all things and to Hold that which is good And if any have a purpose to Rejoyne in Confutation either of the Booke of the Romish Imposture or of this which is against your Masse I do adjure him in the name of Christ whose truth wee seeke that avoyding all deceitfull Collusions hee procede materially from * Sed surdis canimus poynt to poynt and labour such an Answer which hee beleeveth hee may answere for before the Iudgement seat of Christ Our Lord Iesus preserve us to the glory of his saving Grace AMEN THO. DVRESME late of COVEN LICHF ¶ THe Additions in this second Edition are made more obvious to the Reader by two Parallel lines drawne along the Context at the beginning and ending thus marked âšœ And the Testimonies of Authors now added in the Margin are discernable from the other by being noted with Numerall figures as the Authorities in the First Edition were cited by the Letters of the Alphabet THE SVMMARIE or Generall Heades of the Eight Bookes of this ensuing Treatise wherein also the Principall Additions throughout the whole at the beginning and end thereof are thus denoted âšœ BOOKE FIRST Chap. I. THat the word Masse is vainly and falsly urged from it's Originall to signifie Oblation or Sacrifice and so confessed pag. 1 2. âšœ A Vindication against a Romish Suggester concerning the Mixture of water with wine in the Encharist pag. 5. 6. âšœ The two points of Christs Institution handled in this Controversie are 1. Practicall 2. Doctrinall Chap. II. Of the Practicall and Active points pag. 7. Ten Romish Transgressions against that one Command of Christ DOâ— THIS pag. 9. I. Romish Transgression contradicting the word BLESSED p. 9. âšœ The Testimonie of a Greeke Patriarke thereupon pag. 12. And a Vindication against the adverse conceits of some p. 14. c. âšœ II. Romish Transgress of Christ's word BRAKE for distribution therof p. 15. III. Romish Transgression of the word THEM in the plâ—rall number signifying a Communion against their private Masse pag. 17. âšœ The Testimonie of Pope Innocent 3. pag. 21. c. âšœ IV. Romish Transgr of Christ's words SAID VNTO THEM namely in an audible voice p. 22. c. V. Romish Transgression is against the same word SAID VNTO THEM to wit by a language not understood of the Communicants against the Custome of Antiguitie c. p. 25. âšœ A Vindication against Pr. de S. Clara for his miserable maner of reconciling our English Article with their contrary Romish Canon pa. 37. to p. 43. âšœ VI. Romish Transgression is against Christs words TAKE YEE by not Taking with their hands pag. 43. c. VII Romish Transgression is against Christs words EAT YEE by their approving of meere Gazers at the Celebration p. 45. c. VIII Romish Transgression is against the same word EAT by their other use than Eating as their carrying it about in publique Procession pag. 48. IX Romish Transgression is against these words IN REMEMBRANCE OF MEE holding that Infants are capable of the Eucharist and Mad-men also pag. 51. Chap. III. X. Romish Transgressions of the Institution of Christ is against his words DRINKE YEE ALL OF THIS c. p. 54. âšœ Other Testimonies from the Divines of Colen pag. 60. The Councell of Braccara pag. 63. and of Trent pag. 64. Of the Jesuite Vasquez pag. 64 65. And of Pope Clement pag. 75. âšœ BOOKE II. OF the Doctrinall poynts in the Institution of the Eucharist pag. 90. Chap. I. Of the Exposition of Christs words THIS IS MY BODY in a figurative sense pag. 91. Proved from these three words THIS IS and MINE ibid. I. The Pronoune THIS properly betokeneth not Christs Body p. 92. âšœ The Testimony of Pope Innocent pa. 93. âšœ Nor signifieth it any Individuum Vagum confessed pag. 95. Nor can Bread properly be called Christ's Body confessed p. 99. But that it noteth Bread as representing Christ's Body prooved p. 100. c. âšœ A Confirmation hereof from the word Cup pa. 105. c. âšœ Chap. II. II. Is Which Verbe doth open the figurative sense to be as much as Signifieth pag. 107 Eight Figures being confessed to be in the words of Christs Institution p. 110. c. âšœ The Testimony of Vasquez Ies for confirmation thereof pag. 112. âšœ The Iudgement of the more ancient Church of Rome and of the Greeke Fathers heerein pag. 114 115. Romish Objections out of the Greeke Fathers answered pag. 115. to 122. And of the Latine Fathers p. 123. âšœ A Vindication of Tertullians Testimony pag. 124. Cardinall Bellarmine his
also of the Authors Sinceritie and his Adversaries unconscionable Dealing in their Allegations of Authors Grace Peace and Truth in CHRIST JESVS AMong all the Controversies held against your Romish Religion none were ever more hott to draw Protestants violently into the fire than these two First the denying your Romane Church to bee The Catholike Church without which there is no Salvation Secondly the affirming the Romish Adoration of the Sacrament of the Altar to be Idolatrous Therefore have I especially undertaken the discussion of both these Questions that seeing as Saint Augustine truly said It is not the punishment but the Cause which maketh a Martyr it might fully appeare to the world whether Protestants enduring that fierie tryall for both Causes were indeed Heretikes or true Martyrs and consequently whether their Persecutors were just Executioners of persons then condemned and not rather damnable Murtherers of the faithfull Servants of Christ And I doubt not but as the first hath veverified the Title of that Booke to prove your Doctrine of the Necessitie of Salvation in your Romish Church to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE So this second which I now according to my promise present unto you will make good by many Demonstrations that your Romish MASSE is a very Masse or rather a Gulfe of many Superstitious Sacrilegious and Idolatrous Positions and Practises And because the very name of ROMANE CHVRCH is commonly used as in it selfe a powerfull enchantment to stupifie everie Romish Disciple and to strike him deafe and dumbe at once that hee may neither heare nor utter any thing in Conference concerning the Masse or any other Controversie in Religion be the Protestants Defence never so Divine for Trueth or Ancient for Time or Vniversall for Consent or Necessarie for Beleefe I therefore held it requisite in the first place to discover the falshood of the former Article of your Church before I would publish the Abominations of the Masse to the end that for Iâ—â—latrie in Scripture is often termed spirituall Adulterie the Romish Church which playeth the Bawd in patronizing Idolatrie being once outted your Romish Masse as the Strumpet might the more easily either bee reformed or wholly abandoned This may satisfie you for the necessitie of this Tractate The next must bee to set before you your owne delusorie trickes in answering or not answering Bookes written against you especially such as have beene observed from mine owne experience One is to strangle a Booke in the very birth So dealt Master Brerely long since by a Letter writ unto mee to prevent the publishing of my Answere against the first Edition of his Apologie when hee sent mee a second Edition thereof to be answered which both might and ought to have beene sent a twelve moneth sooner but was purposely reserved not to bee delivered untill the very day after my * See the Protestants Appeale in the beginning Answere called An Appeale was published Of which his prevention I have therefore complained as of a most unconscionable Circumvention Another device you have to give out that the Booke whatsoever written against your Romish Tenents is in answering and that an Answere will come out shortly So dealt Master Parsons with mee * In his Sober Reckoning Certifying mee and all his credulous Readers of an Epistle which hee had received from a Scottish Doctor censuring my Latine Apologies to be both fond and false and promising that his Answere to them Printed at Gratz in Austria should be published before the Michaelmas next following whereas there have beene above twentie Michaelmasses sithence every one giving Master Parsons his promise the flatt lye A third Art is a voluntarie Concealement And thus Master Brerely who having had knowledge of the fore-mentioned Booke of Appeale manifesting his manifold Aberrations and Absursurdities in doctrine his ignorances and fraudes in the abuse of his Authors as in other passages throughout that Booke so more especially the parts concerning the Romish Masse yet since hath written a large Booke in defence of the Romish Liturgie or Masse urging all the same Proofes and Authorities of Fathers but wisely concealing that they had beene confuted and his Falshoods discovered Onely hee and Master Fisher singling out of my Appeale an Explanation which I gave of the Testimonie of Gelasius in condemning the Manichees concerning their opinion of not administring the Eucharist in both kindes did both of them divulge it in their Bookes and reports also in many parts of this Kingdome as making for the justification of their sacrilegious dismembring the holy Sacrament and for a foule Contradiction unto my selfe notwithstanding that this their scurrilous insultation as is * Boâ—ke 1. cap. 3. Sect. 7. heere proved serveth for nothing rather than to make themselves ridiculous The last but most base and devillish Gullerie is a false imputation of Falshoods in the alleging of Authors which was the fine sleight of Master Parsons a man as subtile for Invention as elegant for Expression for Observation as dextrous and acute and as politike and perswasive for Application as any of his time Hee in an Answere to some Treatises written against your Romish blacke Art of Aequivocation by mentall Reservation and other Positions fomenting Rebellion to wit in his Bookes of Mitigation and Sober Reâ—koning doeth commonly leave the principall Objections and reasons and falleth to his verball skirmishes concerning false Allegations and as turning that Ironicall Counsell into earnest Audacter fortiter calumniare c. hee chargeth mee with no lesse than fiftie Falsifications All which I spunged out in a Booke entituled an Encounter and retorted all the same Imputations of falshood upon himselfe with the interest discovering above forty more of his owne Which may seeme to verifie that Cognizance which your owne Brother-hood of Romish Priests in their Quodlibets have fastened on his sleeve calling him The Quintessence of Coggerie As for mine owne Integritie I have that which may justifie mee for howsoever any one or other Error may happen in mis-alleging any one Authour yet that I have not erred much or if at all yet never against my Conscience Heereof I have many Witnesses One within mee a witnesse most Domesticall yet least partiall and as good as Thousands mine owne Conscience a second is above mee GOD who is Greater than the Conscience A third sort of Witnesses are such as stand by mee even all they who have beene conversant with mee in the Perusall and Examination of Authours Testimonies by mee alleged men of singular Learning and Iudgement who can testifie how much they endeared them-selves unto mee when any of them happened to shew mee the least errour in any thing Hee that shall say Non possum errare must be no man and hee that will not say Nolo errare as hating to erre can be no Christian man The last Witnesse for my integritie may bee the Bookes of my greatest Adversaries Master Parsons and Master Brerely whose many scores of Falshoods have beene layd so
out of Theodoret. That Christ gave to Iudas his precious Body And Lastly out of Saint Augustine 8 In 1. Cor. 11. Aug. lib. contra â—ulgent Donatist Dr. Heskins in his parliament of Christ Chap. 48 fol 369. That hee that drinketh the Blood of the Lord unworthily drinketh Iudgement unto himselfe So your Doctor Wee shall helpe him with another Testimonie of 9 Aug. lib. 5. de Baptismo Chap. 8. Iudas peccavit corpus Domini non malum accipiendo sed malâ— pag 369 Tract 6. 〈◊〉 Apostolus ait Qui edit indigne Reus est corporis Domini de ijs dictum qui corpus Do mini velut quem libet cibum sumebant c. Augustine that Iudas sinned in wickedly receiving the Body of Christ. But not to usurpe in this place the Answer of your owne Doctors unto the Ordinary speeches of Chrysostome in his Homilies noting his Rhetoricall Hyperboles wee answer directly from Saint Augustine himselfe who hath already told you that the calling Bread the Body of Christ is not spoken in the strictnesse of the truth of the thing but in a Mysticall Signification that is said your owne Romish * See above â— 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 5. Glosse unproperly The same Answer may serve for the Objected place of 10 Cypriâ—n de Coena Dâ—m Sacramenta quidem quantum in se sunt sine propria virtute esâ—e non possunt nec ullo modo divina majetas absentat se mysterijs sed quamvis ab indignis se sumi contingi Sacramenta permittant non possunt tamen spiritus esse participes quorum infidelitas tantae sanctitudini contradicit And a 〈◊〉 after Sicut corporea natura substantiâ potus esuâ— ita vita spiritus hoc proprio alimento nutritur A little before Haec mâ—â—erâ— alijs odo viâ—ae in vitam alijs mortis in mortem quia omâ—no justum ut tanto priventur beneficio graâ—â—ae contemptores Objected by Dr. Heskins in his Parliament of Christ B. 3. c. 49. Cyprian wherein furthermore wee find a cleare Distinction betweene the Being of Christs Body Sacramentally in the Eucharist together with the Receiving thereof and it 's Being Spiritually Concerning the Sacramentall virtue namely the thing signified which is ministerially offered to every Communicant in every Divine Sacrament but that this should be effectuall to any Communicant it is necessary that his Receiving be Spirituall For Grace is the virtue of Baptisme to every Person baptized yet according to the termes of Schooles Hee who either by his Infidelity or Impenitency shall Obicem ponere that is set a Barre and resist that Grace hee doth not receive it A man that receiveth with his hand a politike Instrument and Scale offered unto him yet if hee yeeld not his Consent to accept of the Guift it selfe therby conveyed and in the maner that hee ought it may well be sayd that the thing thus bequeathed is really tendered yet in respect of the Parties Contemning it although it be touched and taken after the publike and Civill touch yet notwithstanding is hee not partaker thereof For which Cause it is added in Cyprian that These are therefore the Savour of Life unto Life to some and the Savour of Death unto the Contemners of them which as the Scripture teacheth is common to the preaching of the Word of God likewise Besides do you not marke thaâ— Cyprian speaketh of Sacramenta Sacraments in generall But you have * See above â— 1. c. 3. § 6. at 〈◊〉 told us that the two parts of the Eucharist make but One Sacrament and then may you by the same Alchymie as well extract a Corporall Presence of Christ out of Baptisme as out of the Eucharist That the Vngodly do not Communicate of Christs Body in Receiving the Eucharist is the Determinate Iudgement of Antiquity and Consequently argueth a No-Corporall presence of Christ as an Vnion with him in the Eucharist SECT VIII AFter that you have heard the Symbolicall Phrases of the Fathers so Dissonantly objected for proofe of a Bodily Presence of Christ in the Eucharist Hearken I pray you to their accurate and Determinate Resolutions to the Contrary The Fathers in the Margin deliver their Judgements sometime in an Affirmative locution concerning each true Communicant and partaker of Christs Sacred Body and Blood saying of every such a one that 11 Irenaeâ— adversus Haeres lib. 5. confesseth Caro sanguine Christi nutrita membrum ejus est Hee is a member of Christ So Irenaeus And 12 Cyrill Alex. in Ioh lib. 11. c 26. Vnio haec per quam nos inter nos omnes cum Deo conjungimur Et l. 4. c. 10. Qui edunt panem viâ—ae immortalitatem consequuntur Et lib. 10. c. 13. Christum in nobis habitatuâ—um Hee that eateth this Bread of life is joyned with Christ and Christ dwelleth in him So Cyrill And 13 Origen in Matth 15 Verbum caâ—o factum est quem â—â—bum qui comedit vivet iâ— aeternum quem nullus malus potest comedere alioqui scriptum non esset qui edit vivet in aeternum Whosoever eateth of this meate shall live for ever So Origen And 14 Ambrosius de ijs qui myster initiant c. 8. Est panis iste vivus quem qui comedit vivet in aeternum It is living Bread which who so eateth liveth everlastingly So Ambrose 15 Chrysost Hom. 61. ad Pop. Antioch Tradit unâ—onem ratione cujus dicuntur membra Christi The Vnion is that whereby the Eaters are sayd to be the members of Christ So Chrysostome Sometime more Emphatically in a Negative style 16 Origen vide paulâ— sup Origen No wicked one can eate this meat As also Hierome 17 Hiâ—ronym in Malac. Sordidi mundum sanguinem bibunt namely Sacramentally for the signe of his Body who himselfe in lib. 1. contra â—ovianum calleth it Typus sanguinis And againe in Isaiâ—â—â— 66. speaking conclusively saith Omnes qui non sunt sancti spiâ—itu corpore non comedunt carnem nec bibunt sanguinem eius All that are not holy do not eate Christs Flesh or drinke his Blood Wee reserve Saint Augustine for a peculiar Section and our reason is because your Disputers do so earnestly struggle to draw him to your part but yet most vainely and unconscionably as will appeare in the Section following Now whether side yours or ours can more satisfactorily reconcile the seeming Contradictions of the Fathers in saying and gain-saying the Eating of Christs Flesh by the Wicked it will stand with equity and good Conscience that they may carry the Cause Your All-answer and the Answer of you All is by Distinction saying that The wicked eate the Body of Christ Corporally in this Sacrament by a Bodily Touch but they eate it not Spiritually for they eate it not worthly and in that respect are said not to eate it So you As if the Fathers in denying the Wicked to be partakers
Benedicts in their names Can there be then any Analogie betweene your High Romane Priest and Christ the Prototype to Melchisedech in so manifold Repugnancies yet notwithstanding every one of you must be forsooth a Priest after the order of Melchisedech Nay but not to multiply many words the Novelty of your Pretence doth bewray it selfe from k Lambard de Ordinat Presb. Accipiunt etiam calicem cum vino patinam cum Hostijs ut sciant se accepisse potestatem placabiles Deo hostias offerendi Hic ordo à filijs Aaron sumpsit initium c. Lib. 4. Distinct 24. 〈◊〉 I. Peter Lombard Master of the Romish Schoole who Anno 1145. taught how truly looke you to that that every Priest at his Ordination in taking the Chalice with Wine and Platter with the Hoast should understand that his power of Sacrificing was from the order of Aaron Nor may you thinke that this was his private opinion for Hee saith your l Pet. Lombardus collegit sententias Theologoorum Magister Theologotum scholasticorum dici meruit Lib. de Script Eccles Tit. Petrus Lombardus Cardinall of him collected the Sentences of Divines and deserved to be called the Master of Schoolemen Thus farre of the Person of Christ as Priest in the next place wee are to enquire into his Priestly Function Of the Function of Christ his Priesthood now after his Ascension into Heaven and your Cardinall his Doctrine Sacrilegiously detracting from it SECT VII BY the Doctrine of your Cardinall in the name of your Church a Bellar. Crucis Sacrificium non est perpetuum sed effectum ejus nec dicitur aeternuÌ„ quod non jugiter sacrificatur non in caelis jam Sacerdos per solam orationeÌ„ nec mediante oblatione Victimae quià tun necesse est eum semper offerre Ergo Eucharistia Sacrificium quod jugiter offertur Oblatio in coelis non est propriè dictum Sacrificium Ergò non est verè ac propriè Sacerdos cùm verum ac proprium Sacrificium offerre non potest Lib. 1. de Missa c. 6 sparsim And Christus non sacrificat nunc per se visibiliter nisi in Eucharistia Bell. ibid c. 25. § Quod autem And Sacrificium câ—â—cis respectu Christianorum â—b c. 20. And Per Ministros suos perpetuò sacrificat seipsum in Eucharistia hoc enim solummodo perpetuum habet Sacerdotium Bellar. ibid. cap. eod ad finem The old Priesthood of Aaron was translated into the Priesthood of Christ Every Priest saith the Apostle must have something to offer else hee were no Priest Thus his Priesthood is called Eternall and must have a perpetuall offering which was not that upon the Crosse Nor can that suffice which the Protestants say That his Priesthood is perpetuall because of the perpetuall virtue of his Sacrifice upon the Crosse or bicause of his perpetuall Act of Intercession as Priest in Heaven or of presenting his passion to his Father in Heaven whither his Priesthood was translated No but it is certaine that Christ cannot now properly sacrifice by himselfe Hee doth it by his Ministers in the Eucharist Because the Sacrifice of the Crosse in respect of Christians is now invisible and seene onely by Faith which although it be a more true Sacrifice yet it is not as our Adversaries say the only Sacrifice of Christian Religion nor sufficient for the Conservation thereof And againe His sacrificing of himselfe in the Sacrament by his Ministers is that by which onely hee is said to have a perpetuall Priesthood Accordingly your Cardinall b Alan Christus in 〈◊〉 coelo 〈◊〉 aliquid Sacerdotalâ— facit nisi respectu nostri Sacramenti quod ipse per nostruÌ„ ministerium efficit continuò offert Lib. 2. â— Euchar. ca. 8 §. Reliqua Alan Christ saith hee performeth no Priestly Function in Heaven but with relation to our Ministery here on earth whereby hee offereth So they for the dignifying of their Romish Masse as did also c Rhemists Christ his Priesthood consisteth in the perpetuall offring of Christ his Body and Blood in the Church Annot. in Heb. 7. 17. your Rhemists but with what Ecclipse of Iudgement and good Conscience is now to be declared If wee take the Sacrifice of Christ for the proper Act of Sacrificing which is destructive so was Christ his Sacrifice but One and Once Heb. 7. and 8. But understanding it as the subject matter of the same Sacrifice once so offered to God upon the Crosse and after his Ascension entred into Heaven and so is it a perpetuall Sacrifice presentative before God For as the High-Priest of the Law after the Sacrifice was killed entred into the Holy place once a yeare but not without Blood Heb. 9. 7. so Christ having purchased an eternall redemption by his Death upon the Crosse went into the Holy place of Heaven with the same his owne Blood Vers 12. To what end Alwayes living to make supplication for us Chapt. 7. Vers 3. and 25. Hence followeth the continuall use which the soules of the faithfull have of his immediate Function in Heaven Having a perpetuall Priesthood hee is able continually to save them that come to God by him Vers 24 25. Whence issueth our boldnesse and all-confidence alwayes to addresse our prayers to him or by him unto God Wee having an High-Priest over the house of God let us draw nere with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts sprinckled from an evill Conscience Chap. 10. 22. The evidence of these Scriptures hath drawne from your Iesuite Ribera even then when hee professeth himselfe an earnest defender of your Romane Masse these Acknowledgements following d Ribera Ies in his Comment upon the places alleged Chap. 7. 23. Chap. 8. 2. 3. Chap. 9. 23. His Book is familitar with you where you may peruse the places viz. upon the Chap. 7. 23. That Christ is a true Priest and all other do partake of his Priesthood in offering Sacrifice only in remembrance of his Sacrifice And that hee did not performe the office of Priesthood onely upon earth but even now also in heaven which Function hee now dischargeth by the virtue of his Sacrifice upon the Crosse Hee proceedeth No man saith hee will deny this Position namely that Christ now ever exerciseth the office of a Priest by presenting himselfe for us So hee Another Theologicall Professour of Bellarmines owne Society in the place where hee noteth Bellarmine to walke in his owne opinion alone procedeth further 8 Vasquez Ies in 3. Thom Disp 225. c. 2. Nullus quic em ex Doctoribus quos recentiores Theologi pro hac sententia allegarunt praeter nostrum Bellarminum qui expressè asserit Christum esse principalem offerentem in hoc Sacramento Dicunt Patres Cyprian Ambros alij Nos Sacrificia offerre vice Christi Signifitant nos esse Christi Ministros in hoc Sacrificio non quod Christus hoc Sacramentum offerat
their Tombes yea and when as also Theodoret which proveth your Cardinals Objection lucklesse doth expresly say that The substance of Bread remaineth meaning absolutely the proper substance of Bread as hath beene * See this discussed to the full Booke 3. copiously proved whereunto no Divine worship can be lawfully given not onely in the Faith of all other Catholike Fathers but even in the beliefe of the Romane Church at this day And although the Symbols and Signes as you fancie were meere Accidents yet dare not you your selves say that they are to be properly adored with Divine Worship Hitherto have we insisted upon the words objected out of the Fathers by you with more eagernesse than either with good Iudgement or Conscience Your next Objections are taken from their Acts whereunto wee addresse our Answers CHAP. III. That no objected Act out of the Fathers for proofe of an Invocation by Divine Adoration of the Eucharist is conscionably alleged not the first which is their prescribed Concealment of this Mysterie SECT I. ACts insisted upon by you for proofe of Adoration are these The Fathers injoyning a Concealment of this Mysterie from some others their Elevation of the Host after Consecration their Cautelousnesse in administring it without letting any part thereof fall to the ground their Bodily Gesture in token of Humiliation and their pretended Invocating on it Wee acknowledge that wee may begin with the first how strictly often times the Ancient Fathers generally prescribed to others which they observed themselves that this Mysterie should be kept secret from all persons who were not initiated by Baptisme and incorporated therby into the visible Church of Christ were they Infidels or Catechumenists that is unbaptized Christians Vpon this our Confession as the Base hearken what a discant your Doctors can chant saying as followeth a Bellar. lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 2. ciiat Augustin Serm. 10. de verbis Apostol viz. Quod corpus dixit escam sanguinem potum Sacramentum fidelium agnoscunt fideles Be hanc phrasin nôrunt fideles habet in locis infinitis at profectò non est fidelibus tantùm notum quòd corpus Christi fide percipiatur Idem Objicit Claudius de Sanctes ante lib. de Liturgijs patrum Rursus Bellar qui sup cap. 15. At certè nulla reddi potest causa cur Eucharistiam ne videri quidem permitterent Infidelibus vel etiam Catechumenis si nihil est nisi signum The Fathers said of this mysterie of the Eucharist that onely Fideles nôrunt the Faithfull know it and therefore wee must be perswaded they understood a Corporall Presence of Christ herein and consequently a Divine Adoration due unto it Master Brerely swelleth big in amplifying this Objection take a brief of the whole The Fathers professing to write more circumspectly of this Sacrament so as not daring to explaine it as Theodoret Origen Augustine Chrysostome this were causlesse if the Fathers had thought Christ's words figurative nor had it beene more necessary in this than in Baptisme had the Fathers acknowledged no other presence in this than in Baptisme c. So hee and so also your Irish 1 Mr. Mâ—llon in his Reply pag 221. Iesuite Well then by your owne judgement if it may be found that the Eathers observed a like Circumspection in the maner of uttering and Cautelousnesse in concealing the Sacrament of Baptisme from Infidels and Catechumenists then must you confesse that this your Argument maketh no more for proofe of a Corporall Presence in the Eucharist as you would have it than in Baptisme where you confesse it is no. And now behold the Fathers are as precise in concealing the Mysterie of Baptisme from all persons unbaptized even in as expresse termes as was spoken of in the Eucharist Chrysostome saying against such Persons b Chrysost in Gal. 4. Non natura sed Dei promissio Sacramentum fecit sic renascentia nostra natura quidem nulla est caeterum verbum Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The faithfull know this And againe entring into a discourse of Baptisme he prefaceth saying c And againe in 1. Cor. Hom. 40. about to entreat of the words of S. Paul Quid facientij qui baptizantur pro mortuis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 âšœ And yet againe in Ioh. 85. Hom. 33. joyning that Contemplation of Baptisme and of the Eucharist together hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Initiati âšœ I would indeed speake this plainly but I dare not because of them that are not initiated or Baptized âšœ Basil also speaking of the Rites of Baptisme saith that 2 Basil de Spir. Sanct. Cap. 27. Consecrare oleum unctionis hominem ter mergi renuntiare Satanae reliqua etiam in Baptismo unde habemus nonnè ex antiqua traditione nonnè ex doctrina quam Patres in silentio quod curiosos otiosos submovet servârunt The Ancient Fathers before his time left them in silence and preserved them from curious and idle men âšœ And Dionysius the supposed Areopagite d Dionys Hierar cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let none that is not a perfect Christian be admitted to the sight of the signes of Baptisme even as the Councell e Conâ— Arauâ—â—â—n 1. Catechumeni non sunt ad Baptismum admittendi Can. 19. Arausicanum also decreed Which Cautions are long since antiquated by disuse in Churches Christian because all are now baptized that come to behold this Sacrament If hereupon any Protestant shall inferre a Corporall Presence of Christ in Baptisme and consequently an Adoration of Christ in the same Sacrament you your selves wee know would but hisse at him in detestation of his Consequence as judging it Idolatrous But do you aske why then the Fathers did teach Christians not to speake of these Mysteries in the hearing of the Catechumenists Saint Augustine himselfe whom your Cardinall hath brought in for defence of Corporall Presence will resolve us and witnesse against him telling him not that the reason was the sublimity of the matter as though they could not apprehend it but because f Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 〈◊〉 in Ioh. Quid si eis fidelium Sacramenta non producuntur non ideo fit quod ea ferre non possent sed ut ab 〈◊〉 tantò ardentiùs concupiscantur quantò honorabilius eis occultantur Speaking of the Catechumenists The more honourably the Sacraments are concealed speaking in generall the more ardently they would be coveted and desired As for their not revealing them unto Infidels the reason is evident Infidelity is a mocker and they meant to preserve Christs Sacrament from contempt Thus your most specious Objection serveth for nothing more than to prove your Disputers to be wonderfully precipitant in their Arguing That the objected Elevation or lifting up of the Hoast and preserving of it from falling are no Arguments of Divine Adoration SECT II. SEcondly the Elevation of the Hoast over the head of the Priest is your ordinary Objection
to deserve death shall equally satisfie it after hee shall be sorry for his offence and love him and promise amendment will any affirme if the nature of the thing bee duly considered that the Prince is bound to be aswell pleased with the griefe of that man for his offence proceeding from love as hee was offended at the injurie and that hee ought not to punish him nay but the man hath deserved to lose both Land and Life although hee be a thousand times sorry for his offence much lesse possible is it for man to returne an equall Compensation unto God So hee which sheweth sufficiently that there is a Disproportion of Contraries in their divers respects ⚜ CHALLENGE DO you not perceive what a patched Cloake of Sophistry your Cardinall cast upon your Good Intent in your Adoration to cover the filthinesse thereof if it might be and how by another Position hee rent the same in pieces when hee had done Againe you stand thus farre furthermore condemnable in your selves in this Point whilest as you seeke to free your Adoration from Idolatry by Pretence of a Good Intent and notwithstanding hold a Good Intention not to be sufficient thereunto except it be qualified and formed with an Habituall Condition which is your Third and last Pretence as fond and false as either of the former whereof hereafter That the Third Romish Pretence of an Habituall Condition in the Worshipper excuseth him not from formall Idolatry proved first by Scripture SECT IV. HAbituall Condition you have interpreted to stand thus * See above Sect. 1. at the letter a ad finem If hee that chanceth to worship onely Bread be in that Act so disposed in himselfe that hee would not worship the same Bread as Christ if hee knew it were but Bread and not Christ and by this you teach that the Act which you call a Materiall Idolatry is made not onely excusable but your * Ibid. owne words honest and commendable also So you What execrable Doctrine is this that wee heare which cannot be justifiable except you will justifie the Murtherers of the members of Christ and of Christ himselfe First of the members of Christ wee reade of one Saul afterwards Paul breathing out threatnings and slanders against them Act. 9. 1. and persecuting the Church 1. Cor. 15. Galath 1. and drawing both men and women to death Act. 22. 4. And all this not maliciously but as you heare himselfe say Ignorantly 1. Tim. 1. 13. and with a good Conscience Act. 23. 1. and in zeale Phil. 3. 6. A fairer expression of a Good Intent in a wicked practice cannot be than this was and as much may be said for his Habituall Condition namely that if hee had then as afterwards knowne Christ to have beene the Lord of life and those murthered Christians to have beene his mysticall Members hee would rather have exposed himselfe to Martyrdome than to have martyred those Saints of God This Consequence directly appeareth first by his Answer in his miraculous Conversion saying * Acts 9. 5. Who are thou Lord next by his detestation of his Fact * 1. Cor. 15 9. I am unworthy to be called an Apostle because I persecuted the Church c. then by his Acknowledgement of Gods especiall mercie * 2. Tim. 1. 13. But God had mercie on mee Afterwards by his Labour for winning soules to the Faith I have laboured more abundantly than they all And lastly in that hee was one of those Actors of whom Christ himselfe foretold saying * Ioh. 16. 2. They shall draw you before Iudgement seats and when they shall persecute you they will thinke that they do God good service Which also plainly argueth that their and his perswasion of so doing proceded from a Morall Certainty Good Intent and Habituall Condition From these Members let us ascend to our Head Christ the Lord of Glory what thinke you of the Iewes of whom Saint Peter sayd You have murthered the Prince of life Act. 3. 15. But did they this Voluntarily and knowingly as understanding him to have beene the Redeemer of the world and indeed the Prince of life they did not for the same Apostle testifyeth in their behalfe saying I know you did it ignorantly as did also your Rulers Act. 3. 17. If this be not sufficient heare the voice of the person that was slaine Christ himselfe who did so farre acquit them saying They know not what they do Luk. 23. 24. Ignorantly then in a Conjecturall Certainty but yet with Good Intent of whom Saint Paul witnesseth in these words I beare them witnesse that they have the Zeale of God but not according to knowledge Rom. 10. But what for Habituall Condition were they not bent in their owne minds if they had understood what Christ was to have abhorred that so heinous a guilt of the death of the Sonne of God questionlesse for so saith the Apostle If they had knowne they would not have crucifyed the Lord of Glory 1. Cor. 2. 8. Wee conclude seeing these Iewes notwithstanding their Morall Certainty being seduced by their Priests or else their Good Intent of doing God good service therein or yet their Habituall Condition not to have crucified Christ if they had truly knowne him were neverthelesse by Saint Peter condemned yea and of themselves as Formall and verily Murtherers of Christ then ô you Romish worshippers of the Host must it necessarily follow that in your Masses you are equally all Formally Idolaters notwithstanding any of the same three Pretences to the contrary Wherefore as Salomon speaketh of an Adulterous woman * Prov. 30. 20. Shee eateth and wipeth her mouth saying I have done no wickednesse so may wee say of Idolatrous Worshippers and their Proctors for what else are these your three Romish Pretences but like such mouth-wipes or as Anodyna and stupifying Medicines which take away the Sense of the diseased person but do not cure the disease So do you delude miserable people with false Pretences lest they discerning the grosnesse and ouglinesse of your Idolatry might abhorre that worship and abandon your Romish worshippers That the former Romish Pretences have no warrant from Antiquity SECT V. THe number of Ancient Fathers whose workes are yet extant who lived within Six or Seven hundred yeares after Christ are recorded to have beene about 200. out of whose monuments of Christian learning your chiefest Disputers could never hitherto produce anyone that justified your Romish worship by so much as in distinguishing of Materiall and Formall Idolatry nor yet by qualifying any Idolatry under pretence of either Morall Certainty or Good Intent or yet Habituall Condition and therefore must wee judge that they never gave Assent to this your Sorcery For wee may not be so injurious to the memory of so many so famously learned and Catholike Doctors of the Church of Christ that they could not or of persons so holy and zealous of Gods honour and of mens Salvation that they would