whether they that haue the dispensation of the Keyes doe alwaies necessarily bind and loose before God of these in order THE FIRST PART WHEREIN THE AVthoritie and power of the Keyes consisteth The Papists error 73 BY the Keyes and power of binding and loosing they chiefly and principally vnderstand the censures of the Church as Excommunications Anathematismes suspensiōs Degradations the whole Ecclesiastical iurisdictiō Rhemist Annot. Matt. 16. sect 14. Bel. lib. 1. de pontif cap. 13. Secondly they tye remission and retaining of sinnes to their imagined and deuised sacrament of penance saying that where Christ gaue authoritie to remit sinnes to his Apostles Iohn 20.23 he instituted the sacrament of penance Rhemist Iohn 20. sect 3. The sacrifice also and Sacraments of the Church say they are ministred for remission of sinnes Rhemist 2. Corinth 5. sect 3. Thirdly they seeme to grant in words that by preaching also of the Gospell sinnes are reteined and remitted ibid. but they make small account thereof for as we haue heard they make it not of the essence of their priesthood to preach neither doth it properly appertaine vnto that office yea say they absolutiō cānot be rightly sought for at the priests hands but by confession of our sins which is done in penance Rhem. Ioh. 20. sect 5. This then is their opinion that by their deuised ceremonie and Sacrament of penance sinnes are properly forgiuen and that the preaching of the word is not thereto necessarie Their chiefe argument is by abusing that place Iohn 20.23 where they say Christ instituted the Sacrament of penance when he gaue power to his Apostles to remit and reteine sinnes Ans. First your Sacrament of Penance is neither grounded vpon this nor any other place of scripture here in the wordes of Christ there is no institution of a sacrament because there is no visible element giuen whereunto the worde being added may make a sacrament Secondly here the commission is but renewed which was granted before to his Apostles and their successors Matth. 18.18 Fulk Annot. Iohn 20. sect 3. The Protestants THe Keyes of the Church that is the power to bind and loose sinners to open or shut vnto them the kingdome of God consisteth both in the externall discipline and gouernement of the Church lawfully executed according to the word of God as also in preaching of the Gospell by assuring in Christs name all faithfull and penitent persons remission and forgiuenes of their sinnes and in denouncing and threatning the wrath of God against the disobedient and impenitent also as the sacraments are ioyned to the word as seales and pledges of the promises thereof so by the right administration of the sacraments together with the preaching of the word sinnes are retained or remitted The Rhemists therefore doe vs great iniurie in falsely charging of vs that we should hold that the spiritual power of the Church standeth only vpon the preaching of the word whereas wee grant that it is exercised also in the Ecclesiasticall gouernement of the Church both in punishing excommunicating censuring of offenders which is the binding of them and in releasing and absoluing them againe which is the other power of loosing Rhemist 2. Corinth cap. 10. sect 1. Leauing now this part of spiritual power in Ecclesiasticall discipline which is not in this place in question betweene vs wee must touch that other part which is exercised in the word and sacraments 1 That the sacraments doe binde and loose it is proued out of the word of God they doe binde Whosoeuer eateth drinketh vnworthily eateth drinketh his own damnation 1. Cor. 11.29 they doe also loose As oft as ye shal eate this bread and drinke this cup you shewe the Lords death till he come vers 26. But here is a double caution and condition to be annexed First that all Sacraments worke not this effect but onely those of Christs institution which are but two baptisme and the supper of the Lord for Paul saith I haue receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto you 1. Cor. 11.23 If the Apostles would not neither might deliuer any Sacraments but those which were instituted of Christ what great presumption is it in any other to doe it Secondly we must not think that remissiō of sinnes is necessarily tied to the Sacraments as though there could be no remissiō without thē for the grace of remission may be effectual in the name of Christ by the preaching of the word without a sacramēt Ioh. 20. sect 4. Ful. For the word may be preached without a sacramēt but the sacramēt cānot be ministred without the word for that were as though a man should deliuer a seale without a writing Neither is it our meaning that as the Rhemists cauil with vs the sacramēt cannot be administred without a sermon of the death of Christ for though that were alwaies to bee wished yet where it cannot bee had there must and ought to be a briefe shewing and declaration of the death of Christ out of the word so oft as the Sacrament is administred as it is obserued in our Church Fulk Annot. 1. Corinth 11. sect 15. 3 We must take heede we conceiue not thus as though the Sacrament gaue grace by the worke wrought and that by the very vse forme and externall act of the Sacrament wee obtaine remission of sinnes as the Rhemists would beare vs in hand 1. Corinth 11. sect 15. But the Sacraments are onely effectuall to the worthie receiuers and to the worthie receiuing faith is requisite as Saint Paul willeth all men to examine themselues 1. Corinth 11.28 which is as hee himselfe interpreteth it to proue whether they be in the faith 2. Corinth 13.5 These conditions then being obserued we denie not but that there is an exercise of the keyes euen in the Sacraments 2 But chiefely and principallie is this power dispensed by the preaching of the word as Saint Paul saith Wee are the sauour of death vnto death vnto some there is the binding and to other the sauour of life vnto life there is the loosing 1. Corinth 2.16 So our Sauiour Christ saith He that refuseth mee the word that I haue spoken shall iudge him in the last day Iohn 12.48 Here is the power of binding Againe the truth shall make you free Iohn 8.32 Here is the power of loosing Who therefore doubteth this that the preaching of the word is the most proper and principall way and meane for the exercising of this Ecclesiasticall power for seeing faith is the key of heauen thereby wee haue free accesse vnto the throne of grace Rom. 5.2 and faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10.17 and hearing by the word It remaineth that by the word the keyes are dispensed Augustine also subscribeth vnto this for speaking of reformation of life and repentance with remission of former sinnes thus he saith Quid empturus es vt facias quae emplastra quaesiturus ecce cùmloquor muta cor factum est quod tam
we made partakers of the bodie and blood of Christ but this fayth the wicked cannot haue The first part is proued out of the Gospell He only that drinketh of the blood of Christ shall neuer thirst agayne Iohn 4.14 He that shall neuer thirst must beleeue in Christ Iohn 6.35 Ergo he onely that beleeueth doth drinke the blood of Christ. So Augustine saith Nolite parare fances sed cor non quod videtur sed quod creditur pascit doe not prepare your iawes but your heart it is not that which is seene but what is beleeued that nourisheth Ergo Christ must bee receiued by faith therefore Infidels or vnbeleeuers cannot receiue him Argum. 2. Whosoeuer eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh his blood shall haue eternall life Iohn 6.54 But the wicked haue not eternall life Ergo they neither eate nor drinke Christ. Augustine sayth De mensa dominica sumitur quibusdam ad mortem quibusdam ad vitam res verò cuius sacramentum est omni homini ad vitam nulli ad exitium quicunque eius particeps fuerit From the Lords table some doe receiue vnto life some vnto death but the thing whereof it is a sacrament worketh in all to life in none to death whosoeuer are partakers of it But the bodie and blood of Christ are the things signified in the sacrament Ergo whosoeuer receiueth them hath life thereby the wicked then receiue them not THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONTROVERSY CONCERNING the Popish Masse THis part likewise comprehendeth diuers questions 1 Of the diuers representations of the death and sacrifice of Christ. 2 Of the sacrifice of the Masse the name thereof and of the sacrificing priesthood 3 Of the vertue and efficacie which they falsely ascribe to the Masse 4 For whom the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable whether for the quicke and the dead 5. Of priuate Masses 6. Of the manner of saying and celebrating Masse 7. Of the ceremonies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse some goe before some are obserued in the celebration thereof 8. Of the forme of the Masse which consisteth partly of the Canon and of the preface to the Canon where we are to shew the foule and heretical blasphemies which in great number are belched out by them in the Masse Of these now in their order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE DIVERS representations of the death of Christ. The Papists THey are not contented with that one liuely representation of the death of Christ which is exhibited in the Lords Supper but they haue brought in error 126 two more beside that and so make three in all the first say they is simplex repraesentatio a simple and plaine representation of the death of Christ which is done so often as the Sacrament is receiued the second is Repraesentatio ad vinum A liuely and full representation of Christs death which they doe vse yearely to set forth by solemne gestures apparell and other ceremonies vpon Good Friday as it is commonly called before Easter when they doe make nothing else but a Pageant play of the Sacrament the third representation is also a sacrifice beside and that is the sacrifice of the Masse Bellarm. de Missa lib. 1. cap. 1. The Rhemists make a fourth representation beside which is in the solemne receiuing of the Communion at Easter So then first Christs death is shewed forth by the Sacrament of the Eucharist all the yeare long as it hangeth in the pixe or when it is carried to house the sicke Catechism Rom. pag. 408. Secondly it is represented once in the yeere by their solemne Pageant vpon good Friday when there is no Sacrament consecrated but an histrionicall expressing by certaine gestures and actions the manner of Christs crucifying Thirdly in the continuall sacrifice of the Masse Christ his death is represented And lastly in the solemne receiuing at Easter for then especially the mysterie of Christ our Paschall lambe is commended to the people to be eaten with all sinceritie in the Sacrament and so doe the Rhemist expound that place of Saint Paul Let vs keepe feast or holy day not with the leauen of malitiousnes 1. Cor. 6.8 literally applying it to the feast of Easter Rhemist in hunc locum The Protestants FIrst we are taught by the word of God that by eating the bread and drinking of the cup in the Sacrament not by gazing looking lifting vp turning hanging vp bread in pixes or by any such meanes but onely as we haue saide is the Lords death shewed forth and represented 1. Corinth 11.26 Wee acknowledge therefore one onely Sacramentall representation of Christ and no more in the Lords Supper the sacrifice of the Masse we iudge to bee an abominable idol as afterward shall be shewed Secondly it is a foule absurditie to make any representation of Christs death by bare gestures shewes and actions of the bodie without any Sacrament as they doe in their popish pageants vpon Christs Passion daye for at that time there is no Sacrament consecrated Eckius cap. 15. But the Priest by certaine gestures and motions of the bodie in bowing bending casting abroade his armes and such like dooth resemble Christ crucified Bellarm cap. 1. But to call this a liuely representation being done without a Sacrament and the other in the Sacrament simplicem repraesentationem but a simple and plaine representation is too great presumption wherein they prefer their owne superstitious deuises before the ordinance of Christ. Thirdly that place of Saint Paul is vnfitly applied to the celebration of Ester Augustine expoundeth it far otherwise Diem festum celebremus non vtique vnam diem sed totam vitam in azymis synceritatis veritatis Let vs keepe holy day not one onely day but all our life long in the vnleauened bread of purenes and trueth So then in Augustines iudgement the Apostle had no relation to any certaine time which he would haue kept holy but to the reformation of the whole life THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE sacrifice of the Masse and the Priesthoode thereto belonging THE FIRST PART OF THE name and terme of Masse The Papists error 127 THere are diuerse opinions amongst them concerning the originall of this name Some say it is called Missa the Masse Quia oblatio preces ad Deum mittantur Hugo de S. Victore Others quod Angelus a Deo mittatur quisacrificio assistat Because an angell is sent of God to bee assistant at the Masse Thom. Aquinas 3. part quaest 83. artic 4. Some of the hebrue worde Missath Deut. 16. which signifieth an oblation Some ex missis donarijs symbolis of the giftes and offerings sent or put in before the Communion But what beginning soeuer it had they doe now generally take the Masse for that solemne action whereby the Sacrament is made a sacrifice and offered vp to God Bellarm. lib. 1. de missa cap. 1. The Protestants WE doe not greatly force vpon this name for both the name
not onely of remission of sinnes but that Christ is become our righteousnes and sanctification 1. Cor. 1.30 that he will assist vs with his spirite and replenish our harts with grace Ioh. 4.14 yea the spirituall eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Christ is a pledge vnto vs of the resurrection and of life eternall Ioh. 6.54 But that amongst the rest it also assureth vs of remission of sinnes thus it is proued Argum. Christ after S. Mathew saith This is the blood of the new testament that is shed for many for remission of sinnes Math. 26.28 But the new testament includeth a promise of remission of sinnes Iere. 31.34 Yea our Sauiour setteth it downe in plaine termes for why els should our Sauiour make expresse mention of forgiuenes of sinnes if this sacrament did not serue for that vse Secondly we doe holde that to haue a liuely faith in the promises of God with repentance for our sinnes and a full purpose to amend our liues is a sufficient preparation for the Communion and that this sacrament is a soueraigne remedy for a troubled conscience Neither ought men to refraine from the Communion till they haue fully satisfied for their sinnes as the Papists teach and are cleered in their conscience of all their sinnes for so few or none at all should be admitted to the Lords table but in whom faith hath alredy wrought repentance in some measure he may safely receiue the sacrament for his further comfort and assurance of remission of sinnes Argum. Iohn 6.35 He that beleeueth in me saith Christ shall neuer thirst S. Paul also exhorteth men to examine themselues 1. Corin. 11.28 which is nothing els as himselfe expondethu it then to proue whether they be in the faith 2. Cor. 13.5 Ergo the examination or triall of faith is a sufficient preparation for the Lords table Augustine saith Ad Deum acceditur fide sectando corde inhiando charitate currando We come or haue accesse vnto God in folowing him by faith seeking him in our heart and running to him with loue In Psalm 33. concion 2. Ergo by fayth we haue accesse vnto God Rom. 5.2 but a liuely fayth which worketh by loue Galath 5.6 THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE manner to be obserued in receiuing the communion The Papists 1 THey holde it in no wise lawfull for Christians otherwise then fasting to error 121 receiue the communion and that they ought to eate nothing before they doe communicate vnlesse it be in a case of great necessitie Concil Constantiens sess 13. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eucharist cap. 22. ratione 4. The Protestants 1 WHat they here vnderstand by necessitie it may be doubted seeing they themselues will not graunt the like necessitie to be in the Eucharist as they say there is of Baptisme All sacraments we graunt are necessary that is profitable expedient requisite so often as they may bee had But none so necessary that the want thereof vnto a faythfull man that in heart doth wish and desire them can be any hindrance to his saluation 2 That it is lawfull for any man to eate before he come to the communion if his stomack be weake and not able to fast so long for otherwise if a man can abstaine we wish him so to do rather Saint Paul sheweth writing to the Corinthians 1. cap. 11.34 If any man be hungry let him eate at home Some of them he sayth came hungry some drunken vers 21. the Apostle commendeth neither but telleth them if they bee hungry they haue houses to eate in Againe in that our Sauiour Christ after supper instituted the sacrament it doth euidently declare vnto vs that it is no sinne to eate or drink before we receiue the sacrament Augustine sayth Neminem cogimus dominica illa coena prandere sed nulli etiam contradicere audemus We compell none to take the Lords Supper in dinner while or after dinner neither dare wee forbid any so to doe so hee maketh it a thing indifferent to communicate fasting or otherwise The Papists 2 THey binde the people onely once in the yeare to receiue the communion error 122 at Easter time and take it to be fully sufficient for them so to doe Concil Trident. sess 13. can 9. The Protestants 2 THis decree of theirs is contrary to the practise of the Apostles whom the Rhemists confesse to haue ministred the sacrament to the Christians daylie Annotat. Act. 2. sect 6. So expounding the wordes of the text They continued dayly in breaking of bread 2. It seemeth also to be contrary to Saint Pauls rule who speaketh of often communicating Doe this sayth he as oft as you drink it 1. Corinth 11.25 For seeing the eating of that bread and drinking of that cuppe is nothing els but a shewing foorth of the Lords death till he come who seeth not that it ought oftener then once or twice in the yere to be receiued seeing the death of Christ ought continually to be remembred and shewed foorth 3 Therefore Augustine doth boldely reprehend their custome that content themselues with once receiuing in the yeare Si panis quotidianus est cur post annum illum sumas accipe quotidie quod quotidie tibi prosit If it be thy daylie bread why doest thou take it but yearely take that daylie and continually which may profit thee daylie In Luk. serm 28. THE EIGHT QVESTION OF RECEIuing the Sacrament in one kinde The Papists error 123 CHristians say they are not bound by any commaundement of GOD to receiue the sacrament in both kinds Concil Trident. sess 21. can 1. And whosoeuer saith that the Church hath erred or done amisse in decreeing that lay men and the Clergie not saying Masse should receiue in the one kinde that is bread onely Or that it is lawfull for them to communicate in both contrary to the determination of the Church let him bee accursed Concil Trident sess 21. can 2. Rhemist Iohn 6. sect 11. Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eucharist cap. 20. Argum. 1. Christ is all and whole in euery parte of the sacrament his blood by a certaine concomitance is in the bread his flesh by the like concomitance is in the cup for otherwise Christ should be deuided But euery spirit sayth the Apostle that dissolueth Iesus is of God 1. Iohn 4.3 Wherefore hee that receiueth in one kinde is as well partaker of whole Christ and of the full grace and effect of the sacrament as if hee receiued in both Bellarmin cap. 21. Ans. 1. We denie any such concomitance of the blood and flesh of Christ in the sacrament for he is not in his carnall presence with his very flesh and blood there included as we haue shewed before the bread and wine are signes onely of his body and blood and therefore Christ is not diuided they being the signes onely and not the thing signified 2 The place alleadged out of Saint Iohn is greatly abused and corrupted by them while they choose rather to follow their
olde blinde latine translation then the authenticall Greeke text the words in the originall are Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus Christ not euery spirite that dissolueth And this may appeare to bee the true reading by the opposition in the former verse Euery spirite that confesseth Iesus is of GOD therefore this is the best reading Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus as being set opposite and contrarie to the other verse Againe the Rhemists vnderstand this place after their owne reading of the dissoluing of the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ not of any such separation of the flesh and blood of Christ as Bellarm supposeth 3 This their deuice of concomitance ouerthwarteth the institution of Christ For he sayth the bread is his body the wine his blood but by their rule the bread is his blood and the wine his bodie And be it graunted that the blood of Christ is in the bread yet how can any man be sayd to drink it in bread We vse to eate bread not to drink bread his blood therefore cannot be there because it cannot be drunke there Argum. 2. Luk. 24.30 Christ brake bread to his disciples Act. 2.42 the Apostles brake bread Ergo to communicate in one kinde is grounded vpon the example of Christ and his Apostles Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eucharist 24. Rhemist Iohn 6.11 And Christ sayth Whosoeuer shall eate this bread shall liue for euer Iohn 6.58 Ergo it is sufficient to receiue in one kinde Answer 1. To the two first places we say that it is not necessary to vnderstand the breaking of bread in the sacrament but the vsuall bread rather which was accustomed in their daylie repasts and feasts after thankesgiuing to be broken Or if we take it for the sacrament the breaking of bread is by a Synecdoche taken for the whole mysterie as it is an vsuall phrase of speech in scripture for otherwise wee will conclude as well that Christ and the Apostles did but consecrate in one kinde which they holde for a great absurditie as that the other receiued but in one kinde But their opinion is that although the people must communicate in one kinde onely yet the Priest must consecrate both Rhemist annotat Iohn 6. sect 11. 2 To the second place wee answere First it is not vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating of Christ but of the spirituall manducation of him which may be done without a sacrament For whosoeuer eateth this bread shall liue for euer but whosoeuer eateth the sacrament shall not liue for euer Secondly seeing the eating and drinking of Christ are so often ioyned in this chapter as vers 53.55.56 they might well know that drinking is here to be vnderstoode though it be not expressed Argum. 3. In many countries there is no wine to bee had as in the cold Northerly countreies and therefore they cannot communicate according to the institution whereupon that there might be an vniformitie in all Churches it is most meete that where wine may bee had they should notwithstanding be content to receiue it in one kinde Bellarmin cap. 28. Also there may arise much inconuenience in graunting the cuppe to the people as in spilling and sheading the wine which after consecration is the blood of Christ Rhemist annot Iohn 6. sect 11. Answ. 1. As in some countries there is no wine to bee had so wee finde that in certaine places and regions of the world there is no bread such as Christ vsed made of wheate or the like grayne as in some places amongst the West Indians they haue a certaine kinde of bread made of rootes called Cazabi as Benzo witnesseth Wherefore by this reason of vniformitie wee should not communicate at all either in bread or wine seeing that as some countreyes are destitute of wine so other are of bread but all this not withstanding the sacrament may be duely administred in all places in both kindes and where they haue neither bread nor wine neither can possibly prouide them they may safely vse such other elements as doe stand them in the like stead as in the place of bread that which commeth nearest to the vse thereof and for wine some other precious liquor that is to be had as in Russia in stead of wine they vse a certaine drink like vnto that which we call Metheglen 2 As for the other reasons of the inconueniences in spilling the wine shaking the cuppe the hanging of it on mens beards other such friuolous allegations as they were no let or hinderance why Christ notwithstanding did not institute the sacrament in both kindes and the Church accordingly obserued it as we reade the Corinthians did communicate in both kindes so ought they to bee no reason why Christians should not receiue in both kindes nowe The Protestants WE holde it to be an Antichristian practise of the Church of Rome to take away from the people the cuppe in the sacrament for although they sometime minister the cuppe to the people yet they vse no consecration ouer it neither giue it as any parte of the sacrament Fulk annotat 1. Corinth 4.10 sect 4. They doe therefore offer great wrong to the people of God in depriuing them of the one halfe of the communion Argum. 1. Iohn 6.53 Christ sayth Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood you haue no life in you Here wee see both eating and drinking are ioyned together Ergo Christians ought to doe both This place maketh strongly against our aduersaries who doe expound it of the sacramental eating and drinking of Christ. Argum. 2. Christ instituted the sacrament in both kinds giuing charge and commaundement to all Christians in the same manner to celebrate it for he sayth Drinke ye all of this If our aduersaries answere as they doe that this was spoken to the Apostles by the like reason they may say also that when Christ sayd Take eate he spake vnto his Apostles and so the people shoulde neither receiue bread and wine but the Ministers onely Agayne Saynt Paul the best expounder of our Sauiour Christ declareth the right vse of the Lords Supper in both kindes for all Christians for hee writeth to the whole congregation and Church of the Corinthians not to the Pastors and teachers onely and to euery Christian he sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread and drinke of this cuppe vers 28. Argum. 3. The Priest that saith Masse you allow to consecrate and receiue in both kindes because hee must expresse liuely the passion of Christ and the separation of his blood from his bodie in the same Rhemist annotat Iohn 6.58 By the same reason all the communicants ought to receiue in both kindes because they doe all shewe foorth the death of Christ and sheading of his blood in the sacrament 1. Corinthian 11.26 And seeing the cuppe is a signe of the blood of Christ shedde for remission of sinnes Math. 26.28 for as much as the thing signified that is
by the power of Christ but the blind heart is lightened and illuminate through the Gospell of Christ Such miracles the Lord be blessed we can shewe sinners are conuerted afflicted consciences are comforted the ignorant are instructed many are called by the preaching of the Gospell Thirdly if this will not content them but they still crye with open mouth and say where are your miracles Behold to stop their wide and clamorous mouth we will shewe them also such miracles as they looke for like to which they haue none Was not that a miracle which Oecolampadius reporteth to haue been done at the Martyrdome of Master Hugh Spengler who being cast into the water and so drowned presently all the water was coloured with bloud he hauing receiued no wound nor hurt in his bodie before at the which all the people were greatly amazed But what thinke you of that straunge signe which George Scherrer shewed at his death who being beheaded the bodie lay a pretie space vpon the bellie till one might haue eaten an egge and then turned it selfe vpon the backe crossed the right hand ouer the left and the right legge ouer the left the Magistrates seeing it hauing condemned his bodie to be burned before being moued at the sight hereof caused it to be buried Fox ex Math. Illyrico It is worth the remembring that is reported in the French stories of Petrus Burgerius a blessed Martyr who was cast into a filthie dungeon where a theefe had lien the space of eight moneths being almost eaten vp with lice and in such miserie that he cursed his parents that bare him This man through the teaching and the prayers of the Martyr felt such comfort in the Gospell that he became very patient in his affliction and after his conuersion this straunge thing was wrought vpon him that whereas before he was so full of lice that he might haue plucked out twelue at once betweene two of his fingers the next day he had not one Now because the Iesuite hath such a spite at Luther he is a great eye sore to him we will in a word or two declare what straunge things were wrought by Luther It is credible reported of him that a certaine young man had bound himselfe by obligation to the diuell sealed with his bloud to giue him his soule so he might haue his wish and desire satisfied with money In short time hee grewe to great wealth the matter being disclosed with much adoe to Luther he calleth the congregation together and ioyneth in prayer for this yong man and as they prayed the obligation was cast in at the windowe A notable and straunge miracle which is crediblie reported of Luther He was a man feruent in prayer one might haue seen the teares falling from his eyes as he prayed And as he was earnest in prayer so his prayers wanted not effect for as he himselfe confessed he had obtayned of God that so long as he liued the Pope should not preuayle in his countrey And is not this also a thing to be wondred at that for all the Pope and Emperour ioyned together bent their forces against this silly poore man yet the Lord defended him from the Lyons teeth and graunted him to end his dayes in peace Thus it is apparant and manifest that the Lorde sheweth his miraculous power manie times in his Saints to astonish the wicked The great miracles which haue been declared in their holy martyrdomes would fil a large volume And by the grace of God hereafter we may haue occasion in an other treatise of purpose more at large to publish them But these arguments wee doe not chiefly stand vpon Yet thus much was not amisse by the way to be put in to requite our aduersaries withall who doe so greatly magnifie and extoll their Antichristian Church for their lying and fayned miracles The sixte Note of the gift of Prophecying error 23 THis also our aduersaries holde to be a perpetuall marke whereby to knowe the Church for they say that the true Church of GOD wanteth not those which are endewed with the spirit of prophecie And so they beare vs in hand that in euery age there hath flourished some Prophet in their Church the first that the Church shall alwayes haue Prophets they would prooue out of Ioel 2. I will power of my spirit vpon all flesh The second that they haue had such prophets they do infer vppon a few forged examples of Saint Barnard and S. Frauncis a popish Saint and the founder of the superstitious order of the Franciscanes To the first we aunswere 1. The prophecie of Ioel was accomplished in the Apostles time Act. 2. as S. Peter expoundeth it and therefore we need not looke further for the fulfilling of it 2. The Church of the Iewes wanted Prophets for the space of 4. hundred years and more before the comming of Christ for we read of no Prophet after Malachy and the Church complayneth of this want Psalm 74. verse 9. that they had Prophets no more wherefore the Church of God after the comming of Christ may better spare this extraordinary function of prophecying seeing both Christ is already come who was the very subiect and matter of all the auncient prophecies And wee haue also most euident prophecies of the Apostles Rom. 11. cōcerning the calling of the Iewes 2. Thes. 2. of Antichrist in the Apocalipse of the general estate conditiō of the Church to the end of the world Som of which are already accomplished som to be fulfilled in their seasō In these prophecies we must rest cōtent our selues not looking for new reuelations 3. There haue been Prophets amongst the heathen out of the Church of God they also can bring foorth diuers olde prophecies so that if the issue lay in this poynt they might as well contend to be the Church of God Astiages dreamed that hee sawe a Vine growing out of his daughter that couered all Asia which came to passe in Cyrus Augustine reporteth a prophecie of Hermes Trismegistus how that all the Images and Idols of the heathen should be broken downe through all Aegypt The Indians were foretolde of the Spaniards comming many a yeare before their arriuall in those places Their Zemes that is their diuels which they worshipped as Gods told them that there should come a people with long beards fierce and cruell that at one stroke should strike men off by the middle And all these thinges fell out afterwards to that nation accordingly But they wil answere that these were not true prophecies inspired of God but vncertaine predictions of the diuell What will they say then to Balaam that prophecied of Christ there shall come a starre of Iacob saith he Numb 24.17 and in the same place he sayth he heard the words of God The prophecies also of Sibill are wonderfull which many yeares before the comming of Christ prophecied of his incarnation and of his passion with the circumstances
to come Ans. Mark expoundeth Mathew He saith It shall neuer be forgiuen Mark 3.29 So that not to be forgiuen either in this world or the world to come is nothing els but neuer to be forgiuen for if it be not forgiuen in this life it shall neuer be forgiuen Bellarm. Yea but Mathew must expound Marke because he setteth it downe more fully and Marke doth but abridge the Gospell written by S. Matthew De Purgat lib. 1. cap. 4. Ans. But why should not Mark rather expound Mathew seeing he writ after him and we vse to expound the former writers by the later not contrariwise AN APPENDIX OR AN APPERTINENCE TO this part concerning the burials and funerals of the dead THere are certaine poynts wherein there is no great variance or dissension betweene vs. First we confesse that it is meete and conuenient that the bodies of Christians being departed should after a seemely and comely manner be brought to the graue as Dauid commendeth the men of Iabesh Gilead for burying the bodie of Saul 2. Sam. 2.5 The brethren also tooke the bodie of Stephen buried it Act. 8.2 Secondly it is not to be denied but that lamentatioÌ„ and sorow may be made for the dead obseruing S. Pauls rule that We mourne not as those that haue no hope that is excessiuely 1. Thess. 4.13 where S. Paul doth not simply forbid Christians to sorow but not as the Gentiles The brethreÌ„ also made great lamentation for Stephen Act. 8.2 Thirdly we doe also graunt that according to the diuers customes of couÌ„treys it is not vnlawfull to vse some comely rites and ceremonies in the buriall of the dead not for religion but for orders sake as among the Israelites the mourners were wont to goe about in the streetes Ecclesiast 12.5 And Christ commended the woman in the Gospell for anoynting of him against his buriall Mark 14. But beside these poynts by vs confessed and acknowledged there are other more waightie matters as touching the order of funerals wherein we worthily and iustly dissent from our aduersaries error 16 1 They doe attribute much to the places where men are buried as in Churches and Churchyards but especially vnder the Altar Rhemist as the soules of the righteous doe rest in Christ who is that altar vnder the which the Apostle sawe the soules of Martyrs so for the correspondence to the place in heauen their bodies are commonly layd vnder the altar where the sacrifice of the body of Christ is daylie offered Annot. Apocalyps 6. vers 9. Ans. The altar of the Crosse was the onely place where the bodie of Christ was sacrificed neither need it to be often offered in sacrifice but it sufficed once onely to haue been done Heb. 9.25.27 And in the Communion we acknowledge no sacrifice but of praise and thanksgiuing Heb. 13.15 It is kept onely in remembrance of the death of Christ 1. Cor. 11.25 And how should it be auaileable for the dead seeing it profiteth not all the liuing but onely those that are present which doe eate and drinke the holy elements of bread and wine in remembrance of the bodie and blood of Christ giuen and shed for them So saith the scripture Doe this as oft as you doe it in remembrance of me 1. Cor. 11.25 The doers therefore agents and receiuers haue the present benefite not they which are absent how then can the dead receiue any solace by it It profiteth then not a whit to be layd in Churches or Churchyards or other hallowed places as they call them for all places are alike neither helpeth it the dead to be buried in one place more then another for God shall command the sea and all other places to giue vp their dead Apocalyps 20. The very heathen did confesse as much one sayth It skilleth not humÃne an sublimè putrescam whether I rot vnder or aboue the ground And another thus writeth Coelo tegitur qui non habet vrnam Heauen is a couering to him that hath no other coffin It were a foule shame then for Christians to exceede the very Gentiles in their superstitious conceits Augustine sayth Si aliquid prodest impio sepultura preciosa oberit pio vilis aut nulla If sumptuous funerals profite the wicked then homely or no burials doe hurt the godly Therefore as it helpeth not a wicked man to be buried in one place more then another so it doth not hinder or hurt the godly and righteous man 2 We condemne also their superstitious ceremonies which they vse at their error 17 funerals as the burning of Tapers which signifieth say they that the soules of the dead are aliue Bellarm. de purgator lib. 2. cap. 19. Ans. First this superstitious vse of setting vp candles was directly forbidden in the Elibertine Councel Canon 34. Of the like sort also were other superstitious vsages as the going about of the belman to will the people to pray for their soules the ringing or iangling of bels to bring their soules to heauen with queere songs and other melodie to commit the bodies to the ground and commending their soules to the protection of Saints We denie not but comely and decent orders voyde of superstition may be vsed according to the fashion of the countrey as Iacobs bodie was embaulmed after the manner of the Egyptians Genes 50.2 At the buriall of their Kings the Israelites vsed to burne odors Iere. 34.5 The Iewes manner was to wash the bodies of the dead to winde it vp in a linnen cloth and burie it with spices and odors So our Sauiours bodie was buried after the manner of the Iewes Iohn 19.40 We reade also that Ioseph was put into a coffin or chest Genes 50.26 Of these and the like customes Augustine giueth a rule writing vpon those words in the Gospell Iohn 19.40 As it was the manner of the Iewes to burie Non mihi videtur Euangelista sic frustra dicere voluisse ita quippe admonuit in huiusmodi officijs quae mortuis exhibentur morem cuiusque gentis esse seruandum in Iohann tract 120. Me thinketh the Euangelist sayd not thus without cause hereby letting vs to vnderstand that in performing such dueties of buriall to the dead the manner and custome of euery countrey is to be kept The Iewes also had a custome with some companie or frequencie of people to bring their dead to the ground Eccle. 12.5 And in the while to vse some admonition to the people concerning death and mortalitie which came in by sinne and of the wrath and mercie of God Syrus interp in Mark 14.3 Neither doe we see why it is not lawfull now among Christians at funerals and burials to haue some godly sermon and exhortation to put the people in mind of their end and to comfort them with the hope of the resurrection as also to giue God thankes for those his faithfull seruants that did glorifie him by their life and by their godly departure This seemeth also to haue been the
yet after another maner For he is in heauen according to the naturall existence of his body in the sacrament he is really present in his flesh yet sacramentally by his omnipotent power Concil Trid. sess 13. can 1. Argum. 1. The figures must be inferior to the things that are figured and represented the sacraments of the law were figures of the sacraments in the Gospel therfore they ought to be inferior But vnles the bread wine should be the very blood flesh of Christ in the sacrament their sacraments in the law should not only not be inferior but far superior to ours As for example the Paschal Lambe is in nature to be preferred before bread and the slaying of the Lamb did more liuely represent the death of Christ then the breaking of bread the eating of flesh doth also better set forth the spirituall nourishing then the eating of bread Wherefore vnlesse we beleeue a reall presence in the sacrament their sacrifices in dignitie and excellencie should farre exceed and excel ours Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram Eucharist ca. 3. Ans. 1. It is not true that their sacraments were figures of ours But S. Paul sheweth that both their sacraments and ours doe figure out and represent the same thing as the spiritual eating and drinking of Christ 1. Corint 10.2.3 Our sacraments are indeed figures correspondent and answerable to theirs and theirs also had a certaine reference and relation to ours but they were not types of ours for then our sacraments should bee the body of theirs whereas Christ is the bodie both of their sacraments and ours Saint Peter sayth that Baptisme is an antitypon a figure answerable to the sauing of the eight persons in the flood 1. Pet. 3.21 They are correspondent one to the other and had mutuall relation and respect one to the other But that was not properly a type of Baptisme but both Baptisme and that are figures and signes and liuely representations of our saluation in Christ. 2. If the reall presence of Christ onely commendeth the sacrament and aduanceth it before the rytes of the law which in all other respects are better by this argument Baptisme still remayneth inferior to the sacramēts of the law for you affirme no reall presence in Baptisme as you do in the Eucharist and in all other respects it must needes giue place to Circumcision for the cutting of the flesh is a more liuely representatiō of regeneratiō thē is the washing by water and the flesh of man is in nature more precious then water So by this reason though you haue wonne credite for the Eucharist yet you haue lost it for Baptisme 3 We answere therefore that although the reall presence bee set aparte yet our sacraments are more excellent then theirs First the price and woorth of thinges in their nature are not to be weighed in a sacrament but they must bee considered in respect of the vse to the which they are ordayned by the institution Flesh you say is better then bread so is wine and milke better then water in their nature but in Baptisme water is better then they because Christ hath now set it apart for a more holy vse Secondly the slaying of the Lambe doth more liuely represent say you the death of Christ then the breaking of bread Answ. We graunt that if breaking of bread had beene vsed in the law it had not been then so significant as the slaying of beasts but the breaking of bread now in the light of the Gospell in this abundance of knowledge and instruction being a signe of a thing already done and finished must needes be more pregnant and liuely in representation then the killing of sacrifices in the law which were types of things to come the mystery of the Gospel being not yet opened to the world Wherefore our sacraments are more excellent then theirs in respect of the more cleare light and fuller signification which they haue by the word of God the preaching of the Gospel ioyned vnto thē We neede not deuise any other way of excellencie for our sacraments then this which we haue sayd agreeable to the scriptures 2. Cor. 4.3 Galat. 3.1 The Papists ARgum. 2. Iohn 6.55 Christ sayth My flesh is meate indeed and my blood is drinke in deede he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him First this place must be vnderstoode not of any spirituall eating or drinking of Christ without the sacrament but is properly meant of the manducation and eating of him in the sacrament First Vers. 51. The bread sayth Christ that I will giue he speaketh of a thing to come for the sacrament was afterward instituted but if this bread were to be taken for his word and the eating thereof for beleeuing in him in this sense the bread was giuen already Answ. Christ also speaketh in the present tense vers 32. My father giueth you the true bread from heauen I am the liuing bread that came down from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer vers 51. Hee sayth not he that shall eate but he that euen now eateth And afterward he speaketh of the time to come The bread that I shall giue because his death and passion was not yet finished therefore he sayth The bread that I shal giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the worlde But he speaketh euery where of the eating of his flesh in the present tense vers 35.50.51.53 which cannot bee vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating the sacrament being not yet instituted but of a spirituall manducation The Papists SEcondly those words being applyed to the sacrament must needes also bee vnderstood properly and literally for the very eating of the flesh of Christ drinking his blood not tropically or figuratiuely 1. The flesh of Christ which Christ promiseth to giue them to be eaten he preferreth before the Manna which their fathers did eate in the wildernes the true bread which he giueth them is more excellent then the bread of Manna But if the bread in the sacrament doe but signifie the flesh of Christ and be not it in very deede it should be no better then Manna which also did signifie and shew foorth Christ Bellarm. cap. 6. Ans. Christ compareth not the spirituall substance of Manna with his flesh and blood but the corporall foode which being receiued into the belly and not receiued into the heart by fayth hath no power to giue eternall life For vers 32. Christ sayth that Moses gaue them not Manna from heauen Ergo he meaneth the corporall foode not the spirituall substance of Manna for as it was a sacrament of Christ it was heauenly bread Againe vers 49. Your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernes and dyed He speaketh of the materiall foode for they that did Manna spiritually by fayth died not in soule Ans. Now on the contrary side we will prooue that this place contayned in the sixt
person of Christ euen as his humanitie so that Christ was bread by consecration as he was man by his incarnation an horrible and monstrous opinion which is fathered vpon Rupertus the Abbot Iohannes Parisiensis also came neere this opinion who likewise affirmed that the bread was assumed to the person of Christ and vnited vnto him yet not immediatly as the other taught but by the mediation and meanes of the humanitie of Christ. Secondly of those that maintaine the conuersion of the elements First some would haue the forme onely of bread chaunged not the matter as Durandus Secondly some contrariwise would haue the matter altered and the forme to remaine Thirdly the Iesuits affirme the bread wholly in substance both in matter and forme to be changed the outward formes and accidents onely remaining ex Bellarm. lib. 3. de sacram Eucharist cap. 11. Thus men when they begin once to leaue the truth the Lord leaueth them to themselues and they runne mad in their owne inuentions not finding any end and so it is iustly come vpon them as S. Paul saith of the heathen Because when they knew God they did not glorifie him as God neither were thankfull they became vaine in their own imaginations and their foolish hart was full of darkenes when they professed themselues to be wise they became fooles Rom. 1.21.22 We therefore leauing these shalow pittes of humane inuentions which will holde no water will betake vs to the fountaine of truth This then to conclude is our definitiue sentence and full determination according to the Scriptures that Christ indeed is verily present in the Sacrament neither by conuersion of the bread into his body either wholly or in parte nor by assumption of the bread to the vnity of his person nor yet by the coniunction of his body and bread together but he doth verily exhibite himselfe with all his benefits spiritually by faith to be eaten and drunke of the worthy receiuer as we haue sufficiently proued before out of the Scriptures THE THIRD QVESTION WHETHER THE Eucharist being once consecrated be a Sacrament though it be neither eaten nor drunk The Papists THe elements in the Sacrament that is the bread and wine being once consecrate error 116 which say they is done by the prolation of those words hoc est corpus meum This is my body whether they be receiued or not at that instant but be reserued and kept in boxes and pixes and other vessels of the Church for daies weekes moneths to be caried solemnely to those that are sick and to be applyed to other vses are still the very body and blood of Christ. Trident. Concil sess 13. can 4.7 Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. Argum. 1. Christs words which were spoken ouer the bread This is my body were true as soone as he brought them forth before he said Take eat and so likewise of the cup therefore it was a Sacrament before they did receiue and eate it and had beene a Sacrament still if it had not bene receiued at all at that time Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. Those wordes of Christ This is my body were not spoken before he brake the bread and distributed it but first as S. Math. setteth it downe he brake the bread and gaue it to his Disciples saying Take eate and then follow those words This is my body Math. 26.26 which seeme to haue bene vttered euen in that instant when they tooke the bread and began to eate it Secondly the institution of the Sacrament consisteth partly of a promise partly of a precept the promise is this Hoc est corpus meum This is my body the precept Accipite manducate Take eate Christ doth no otherwise make good his promise then we performe the condition vnlesse therefore accordingly we doe take and eat it it is not the body of Christ. The Protestants THe Eucharist is no sacrament beside or without the vse thereof so that though some form of words be pronounced ouer it if it be not receiued and eaten and drunk it is no sacrament neither is that which remaineth after the distribution the Eucharist being ended either of the bread or wine any part of the sacrament but so much onely as is taken and vsed Argum. 1. It is no Sacrament vnlesse it be vsed according to the institution as Christ hath commanded it but to the institution it belongeth on the behalfe of the Minister to blesse break and distribute it on the behalfe of the communicants to take eate and drinke it in them all thereby to shew the Lords death and to doe it in remembrance of Christ. But this cannot be performed by vsing the words of benediction onely but by the whole action for how can they shew the Lords death or doe it in remembrance of Christ vnlesse they take and eate Ergo if it be not so vsed it is no Sacrament Argum. 2. The Sacraments of the new testament are alike and of one and the selfesame kinde there is one way of instituting and consecrating both but the water in baptisme is no part of the Sacrament but during the solemne action of baptizing afterward it returneth to the common vse so much as is not vsed Ergo it is so also in the Eucharist for as Christ saith to his Apostles Ite baptizate Goe and baptize so that it was no Sacrament vnlesse some body were baptized euen so he saith Accipite â—anducate Take eate No SacrameÌ„t then vnlesse it be receiued and eaten And here I pray you let it be noted how well the Iesuits agree amongst themselues our Rhemists doe commend the reseruing also of the water in baptisme and carrying of it home to giue it the diseased to drink annot Iam. 5. sect 5. Bellar. saith that Res permanens in baptismo That the thing permanent in Baptisme that is water which remaineth is not the sacrament but ipsa actio the action of baptizing it selfe and alloweth onely the Eucharist to be reserued and remaine a Sacrament Etiam extra vsum Without the vse thereof Bellar li. 4. de Eucharist cap. 3. But we haue shewed already that both the Sacraments are halowed and sanctified alike and that both in the one and the other the vse onely and present action according to Christs institution maketh the Sacrament In Augustines time some vsed to receiue the Communion dayly but vpon the Sabboth or Lords day it was commonly receiued of all Quotidie Eucharistiae communionem percipere nec laudo nec reprehendo omnib tamen dominicis diebus communicandum suadeo et hortor Euery day to receiue the Eucharist I neither commend nor dispraise it but euery Lords day I doe perswade men and exhort all to communicate It should seeme then that in those daies there was no such superstitious reseruation of the Sacrament seeing euery day or at the least euery Sabboth it was administred THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the elements or materiall part of the Sacrament namely bread and wine The Papists 1. The bread
Masse is not of that nature for it is made by the ministerie of man for euery one of their sacrificing Priests is able to make the bodie of Christ but this bodie which Christ had to offer was made onely by God without the helpe of man as the Apostle saith Againe say if you dare that the bodie which you offer is the true Tabernacle and temple of God for then it would followe that God dwelleth in temples made with hands that is by the ministerie of man contrarie to the Scriptures seeing you affirme that the bodie of Christ is no otherwise present but by the ministerie of the Priest And what a goodly Tabernacle is this for God thinke you which you shut vp in a pixe and hang vp in your Churches A mouse may eate it the fire may consume it corruption may take it would God suffer his Tabernacle thus to be defiled Wherefore vpon these premises we conclude that what you offer in your popish sacrifice cannot be the proper gift belonging to Christes Priesthoode Argum. 3. The Apostle saith Hebr. 13.10 Wee haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate which serue in the Tabernacle Ergo we haue not onely a common table to eate meere bread vpon but a verie altar in the proper sense to sacrifice Christs bodie vpon Rhemist annot Hebr. 13. sect 6. Ans. First the Apostle speaketh of the sacrifice of Christs death whereof we are made partakers by faith which they can reape no benefite by which remaine in the ceremoniall obseruations of Leuiticall sacrifices Christ therefore is our Priest altar and sacrifice for verse 12. the Apostle maketh mention of the suffrings of Christ he meaneth not then the Communion table which is vnproperly called an altar or any materiall altar beside but the altar onely of Christs death Secondly if wheresoeuer in Scripture this worde altar is read it must be taken for a proper materiall altar we shall haue also a material altar in heauen Apoc. 8.3 which I am sure they wil not grant Thirdly the Apostle saith We haue an altar which is but one whereas popish altars are many it cannot therefore be vnderstoode of such altars The Protestants THat there are spirituall sacrifices remaining yet vnto Christians in the exercise of religion we doe verily beleeue being so taught by the Scriptures such are the sacrifices of praise and thankesgiuing Heb. 13.15 The sacrifice of almes and distribution verse 16. the mortifying also of the flesh is a kinde of crucifying and so a spirituall sacrifice Galat. 6.14 And in this sense wee denie not but that the Sacrament may be called a sacrifice that is a spirituall oblation of praise and thankesgiuing but that there is a proper and externall sacrifice as in the lawe of Goates and Bullocks vpon the crosse of the bodie of Christ so in the Eucharist of the same bodie and flesh of Christ we doe hold it for a great blasphemie and heresie Argum. 1. The very flesh and true naturall bodie of Christ is not as wee haue shewed before at large in such carnall and corporall manner present in the Sacrament therefore it cannot in the Sacrament be sacrificed and offered vp Argum. 2. This sacrificing of the bodie and blood of Christ is contrarie to Christs institution for he saith onely Take yee eate yee drinke yee he saith not Sacrifice yee or lift vp and make an oblation of my bodie Neither doe those wordes hoc facite doe this giue them any power to sacrifice for to whome he saith Eate yee drinke yee to the same also he saith Doe yee Wherefore if doe yee be as much as sacrifice yee all Christians for whome it is lawfull to eate and drinke the Sacrament by this rule haue authoritie to sacrifice Againe the words are Doe this in remembrance We remember things absent and which are alreadie done and past if then there be a present sacrifice in the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ it cannot properly be said to be a memorie of his sacrifice Argum. 3. The Apostle saith that Christ neede not to offer himselfe often but that he hath done once in the end of the world Heb. 9.26 And with one offering hath hee made perfite for euer them that are sanctified 10.14 Ergo Christ cannot be sacrificed againe for that were to make his sacrifice vpon the crosse imperfect Bellarmine answereth that the Apostle here speaketh of the bloodie and painefull sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse which was sufficient once to bee done but this taketh not away the vnbloodie sacrifice which is but an iteration of the former whereby the fruite and efficacie of that first oblation is applied vnto vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de miss cap. 25. Ans. First the Apostle excludeth all manner iterations of the sacrifice of Christ for otherwise if Christ should now bee often howsoeuer sacrificed the difference would not hold betweene the sacrifices of the lawe which were often done and the sacrifice of Christ which was once to be performed for their sacrifices were also in a manner iterations and commemorations of the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostle then thus reasoneth They had many iteratiue and commemoratiue sacrifices of Christs death Ergo we haue not now Secondly that is but a foolish and false distinction of the bloodie and vnbloodie sacrifice as they vnderstand it for there can be no proper vnbloodie sacrifice of Christ neither could he be offered vp otherwise then by dying Heb. 9.27.28 Therefore he is not offered vp in the Sacrament because now he dyeth not Thirdly neither neede wee inuent a new kinde of sacrifice for the application of Christs death for to that end Christ hath appointed the preaching of the word and instituted the Sacraments wherby the death of Christ with al the benefites thereof are most fruitefully applied vnto vs Galath 3.1 1. Corinth 11.26 Argum. 4. Augustine in a certaine place allegorizing the parable of the prodigall child thus writeth Vitulum occidit quando in sacramento altario memoriam passionis in mente renouauit He slew the fat calfe when hee renewed in the Sacrament of the altar the memorie of his passion in his minde Hee calleth it the Sacrament not the sacrifice of the altar and it onely bringeth to our minde the memorie of Christs passion and sacrifice there is then no oblation or sacrifice in the Sacrament but onely a commemoration of Christs sacrifice which we denie not AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART OF the name and office of Priestes The Papists AS they doe falsely teach and perswade that there is yet remaining a proper error 129 externall sacrifice for Christians vnder the Gospell so also they maintaine a sacrificing Priesthoode And further they say that the Leuiticall Priesthoode was not translated into the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse but is properly turned into the Priesthoode and sacrifice in the Church according to Melchisedechs rite in offering vp the bodie and blood of Christ in the formes of bread and wine Rhemist