infinite difference betvvene that antiquitie this noueltie that faith this infidelitie that sacrifice and sacrament of Christ and this sacrilegious bread and vvyne or perhaps some vvorse matter invented by Carolostadius his Sprite so if vve proceed on a litle farther to the practise and administration of this nevv deuised Communion vve shal yet somvvhat more throughly see in to the essence thereof and haue better helpe to iudge betvvene the one the other For before I come to Caluins opinion vpon vvhich I must lest most of al although in substance it be al one vvith these precedent I thinke it good for the better vnderstanding of the reader to let him see hovv the Protestants vse to administer this their supper vvithout superstition and most nighly to this order prescribed by Carolostadius Zuinglius Bullinger and the Tigurine gospellers after Zuinglius fasshion ¶ A Germane Protestant of this time in his booke vvhich he hath made conteyning 50. reasons vvhy one of his sect a Lutheran may not in any vvise become a Caluinist among other things vvriteth that the Caluinists or sacramentaries do so haâ—e the words of Christs Institution that they can not abide ether to see or to heare them therefore administer their supper vvithout them Ioachimus VVestphalus obiecteth to Caluin that the Ministers of his sâ—â—te in East Fâ—â—â—â—land minister the Eucharist vvith these only vvords Eate this bread beleeue and remember that the body of Christ offered on the crosse is the true sacrifice for your sinnes VVhich maner of administratio Caluin in his ansvvere iustifieth is as al men may perceiue very conformable to the assertioâ—s of Zuinglius of Bullinger of Oecolampadiê° those other before rehearsed The Anabaptists in this respect are perfite sacramentaries and Caluin in his booke against them vvhere he seuerally reciteth their errors and refuteth them confesseth that in the receiuing and administration of the supper they say nothing which we graunt not vnto them yea which we our selues teach not daily Nihil dicunt saith he quod ipsis non concedamus imo quod non quotidie doceamus So that in seeing the communioÌ„ of the Anabaptists vve see the communion of Caluinists and the forme and fashion of the one is a true and exact paterne of the other Novv that the Anabaptists vsually leaue out the vvords of Christs institution it is no lesse notorious to any man that knovveth their â—aith gospel and Communions whereof their practise in Munster the chief citie of VVestphalia where they began their kingdome the yere 1534 may seâ—â—e for a sufficient proofe One day as Sleidan reheaâ—seth the storie the king coÌ„maunded the brethern to meete in a certen place Being come thither some thousands in number they found their supper prouided beef mutton tost sod with such varietie as the country and time velded This supper being now almost exded the king him self reacheth bread to ech one vsing withal these words Take eate shew forth the death of the Lord. His Quene immediatly folowing deliuereth in like sort the cup saying drinke shew forth the death of the Lord. M. Fox our English Martyr-maker writing the storie of Anne Askew Iohn Lassels others in the end of king Henry the 8. his reigne setteth downe a long epistle writen by the said Lassels in which is conteyned their faith of the sacrament which faith also M. Fox seemeth wel to approue for that he saith This martyr confuteth the error of the Papists which are not contente with the spiritual receiuing also he doth câ—t oâ— tâ—e sinister interpretatioÌ„ which many make vpon the words of the institutioÌ„ Thus are the words of this martyr S. Paule 1. Cor. 11. saith That which I deliuered vnto yow I receaued of the Lord. For the lord Iesus the same night in which he was betrayed tooke bread thanked brake it and said take ye eâ—e ye this is my body which is broken for yow Here me seemeth S. Paule durst not take vpon him his Lord masters authoritie he durst not take vpon him to say This is my body It was the Lord IESVS that made the supper which also did finish it and made an end of the only act of our saluation both here in this world also with his father in heaven Now if any man be able to finish the act of our Sauiour in breaking of his body and shedding of his blud here also to finish it with his father in heauen then let him say it But I thinke if men wil looke vpon S. Paules words wel they shal be forced to say as S. Paule saith The Lord IESVS said it once for al which only was the fulfiller of it For these words HOC EST CORPVS MEVM This is my body were spoken of his natural presence which no man is able to deny Thus these martyrs By which discourse it appeareth that they acknowledge first the words of Christs supper to be spoken of Christs natural presence and body which they say is so playne that no man is able to deny it Next that this so apperteyneth to Christ alone that he only and no man euer after him could minister this supper â—or so it foloweth The act was finished on the crosse as the storie doth plainely manifest it to them that haue eyes Now this bluddy sacrifice is made an end of the supper is finished This seemeth to agree in part with Carolostadius in that it denyeth the words spoken by Christ at his last supper to perteyne to our Eucharist But it agreeth much more with the sansie of Petrus de Bruis author of the sect of the Albigenses For he taught directly that only once to wit in the last supper which Christ made with his Apostles was his body truly geuen vnder the forme of bread but afterward neuer as witnesseth Petrus Cluniacensis who then liued and reâ—uted this error of his VVhereas then these gospellers wil haue the words of Christs institution quit remoued from the administration of the supper some perhaps would gladly know in what sort they would haue it ministred Forsooth as before the Caluinsts of Fâ—isâ—laâ—d and Anabaptists in VVestphalia vsed VVhich M. Fox declareth thus Here now foloweth the administration of the supper of the Lord which I wil take at Christs hands after the resurrection although other men wil not be ashamed to bring their wicked Councels or foolish inuentions for them And it came to passe as Christ satte at meate with them he tooke bread blessed it and brake it gaue it vnto them their eyes were opened and they knew him and he vanished out of their sight and the Apostles did know him in breaking of bread Here we learne what is the supper not after the wicked Councels foolish inuentions of men for so I thinke it would be although by error the pâ—â—nter set it otherwise but after the Lords owne order
as these men forsooth haue taken it euen at Christs owne hands and that is that 3. or 4. of the bretherne go together take bread blesse it and geue it one to an other without vsing any farther ceremonie or words of Christ or consecration But here arise 3. or 4. great difficulties One whether there must necessarily be other meate and prouision besides the bread of the Eucharist as was at this supper whence these men take the paterne of their coÌ„munion A second how it wil stand with the sinceritie of their gospel to blesse the bread which blessing they so generally detest the English and Scottish coÌ„munion bookes refuse a late English Doctor in a large treatise hath condemned as superstitious wicked magical which words truly must needs proceede from a very prophane and Paganical hart mouth considering that Christ our Sauiour him self vsed it as here these martyrs tel vs. Thirdly which perhaps is greatest of al how they can frame their coÌ„munion by this paterne where is no mention of drinke And very probable coniecture there is that Christ vsed none for that as here the storie is rehearsed after Christ had deliuered them the bread their eyes were opened Christ forthwith vanished out of their sight And ioyne for a fourth that if the breaking of this bread were but breaking of common bread as our M. Iewel wil haue it an act of hospitalitie then foloweth it that the paterne whereby they frame out their communion teacheth them a coÌ„munion of such common bread as is vsed at euerie hosterie at euerie Inne and ale-house therefore they can not with reason blame Catholikes if they make no more esteeme of it But how soeuer this â—al out M. Fox with his Martyrs proceedeth oh wil needs proue that as Christ in the place before noted so his Apostles had no other communion nor ministred it in any otherwise For it foloweth Here also it seemeth to me the Apostles to folow their maister Christ to take the right vse of the Sacrament also to teach it to those that were converted to Christ as mention is made in the Acts of the Apostles where it is said They continued in the Apostles doctrine felowship in breaking of bread and prayer they did breake bread in euerie howse c. By al which he laboreth to perswade that the Institution of Christ as it is described by the Euangelists Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Luc. 22. should quit be remoued from the administration of the supper and only bread broken by the minister VVhich if he do and withal tel pronounce to the coÌ„municants the Lords death he maketh vnto them a persite and absolute supper according as these men haue receiued it at the Lords owne hands And the verie same ministration of the supper I fynd practised by the Scottish martyrs as writeth their friend and patâ—â—â—â— Bucâ—aâ—an About the yere 1545. one George Seâ—â—â—carde was aâ— S. Andrewes to be burnt VVhen the day of execution came the keeper of the castle and his seruants ready to go to breakfast asked George whether it would please him to take part with them He answered he would with a very good wil. But first quoth he I request yow to sitte downe here at the table with me and geue me leaue to make yow a short collation that I may pray vpon the bread which as brethren in Christ 〈◊〉 to eate so bid yow farewel In the meane season the table was couered bread being set on George began to entreate shortly plainely of Christs supper his paynes and death about halfe an hower Then he exhorted them especially to mutual loue that they wold become perfite members of Christ who continually prayeth to his father for vs that our sacrifice may with him be auayleable to life euerlasting VVhen he had thus spoken and yelded thanks to god he brake a lâ—fe of bread reached to euerie one a peece of it and likewise wine after him self had drunke a litle prayed them al that now with him in this Sacrament they would remember the death of Christ Afterward saying grace he retyred him self in to his chamber By these examples we learne how the communion is rightly ministred namely without al words of Christs Institution only that bread be divided among the bretherne and sisterne they willed to loue one an other and remember the Lords death VVhich seemeth generally to be the forme of the coÌ„munion among the Zuinglians in Suizzerland For as Zuinglius him selfe and Bullinger his successor rehearse the maner of it The people â—it al a long in order vpon formes and geue â—are to one who readeth to them the 13. chapter of S. Iohns gospel In the meane season is bread caried about in baâ—keâ—s or paâ—iaâ—s and wine in glasses One man geueth bread to an other likewise of the wine Thus endeth this coÌ„munion or Sacrament of the supper as Zuinglius termeth it And Musculus earnestly disputing against S. Chrysostom for that he attributed great force to the words of Christ by vvhich there is made in the Sacrament a sanctification alteration far surpassing the power of man as S. Chrysostom thought among other things thus reproueth him It is not needful that Christ should now againe sanctifie by a second repetition that which once for al he hath sanctified by the deed word of his Institution For that Institution once done hath sanctified the Sacramental signes for the churches vse euen to the end of the world And that being once done by him is of force through al churches to the worlds end without any other repetition or iteratâ—on thereof Once for al he said This is my body This cuppe is the new testameÌ„t in my blud Do this in remembrance of me and by these words once for al he instituted sanctified this ceremonie turned the bread from a natural vse to a Sacramental By which words especially conferred vvith those of Bullinger and Zuingliê° before rehearsed the practise of that church a man may perceiue that al these English Scottish Geneuian and Suizzer Protestantes agree in remouing Christs vvords from the supper and accompt the supper very sufficiently gospellike administred if the brethern diuide bread drinke amoÌ„ng them selues in memory of Christ without any nevv mentioning of his institution vvhich being once done by him selfe serueth for al without any more a do or new repetition of the same And this is the very exact forme of the Scottish coÌ„munion or supper now in practise as hereafter shal be declared ¶ Here before I end this chapiter I thinke it good to informe the reader of the resolution of the church of Geneua about the matter of this Sacrament for that of the forme we haue sufficient knowledge by this which hath bene said hitherto Concerning the matter this is the determination of that
church as we learne by Theodore Beza VVhere there is no vse of bread wine or no store thereof as it chaunceth at some certain time there the Lords supper is orderly ministred if in steed of bread and wine that be taken which supplieth the place of bread wine ether by common vse or at such tymes And he obserueth rightly enough Christs meaning who not for nouelties sake taketh in steed of bread wine such things as haue though not equal yet like proportion or analogie of foode As in like mâ—â—ner if water be wanting yet the baptizing of some child may not wel be differred with edification I truly wold baptise with any other liquor as wel as with water By warrant whereof in many places of Christendom where bread wine is haâ—d to come by stockfish with single ale more coÌ„mon in vsual diet there the Protestant communion is wel orderly ministred if the minister with 3. or 4. brethern go together into a tauerne eate a litle stockfish drinke a draught of ale he bid them to remember the Lords death For whereas the words of Christs institution are no waves necessarie but al dependeth on the faith of the bretherne which communicate here we learne that bread wine are not so requisite but that other meate drinke may supply the want thereof whereas in this coÌ„munion which here I note is both the matter and also the forme of a Protestant supper who can deny but it is a veâ—â—e complete perfite coÌ„munion And that not only if a man vse stockfish but also by like reason any other meate that nourisheth though not in equal degree as bread doth yet in some like sort And then as any flesh â—apon pâ—g goose beef or mutton may serue for the one kind so match-beer strong or smale ale good water metheglin or any such vsed liquor may serue for the other So that we now draw somwhat nigh to the perfectioÌ„ esseÌ„t al forme of that which ouâ— gospellers cal the supper of the Lord which we see may be had at euery breakefast at euery dinner supper beuer where there is bread beere or cheese water oâ— flesh and wine or any such â— things which nourish our bodies as bread wine do though not in so large maner yet with this sober caution that the bretherne which meete at this coÌ„munion remember the death of Christ vse these other kinds of meate not for loue of â—â—eltie but for loue of Christian libertie hatred of Papistrie because forsooth they wil shew that they hate the Catholike church which vseth superstitiously as they suppose those only 2. elements But now let vs go one step farther put the case that 3. or 4. gossips meete together at a drinking and after much good how shold talke in sine they remember them selues then one willeth the other to remember the death of the Lord so drinke one to the other and eate some such gossiping meate as they haue brought some applepie or flawne or so forth whie is not this as true a Protestant coÌ„munion as any yet mentioned Here is the matter of the coÌ„munion that is some foode that nourisheth the body here is faith which is the forme here is remembrance of Christ and his death then what wanteth to make vp and perfite the coÌ„munion Truly I can not imagine any default touching the substance essence but that this is as ful complete a communioÌ„ as any at this day ministred in England or Scotland For that which perhaps some man may obiect to be here wanting vz. a minister is an obiection more â—it for a Papist or Catholike then a Protestant or heretike Among whom very few there are who haue written especially bookes of coÌ„mon places but they discourse at large wemen no lesse then men to be priests of the new testament although for maners sake they may not in al places vse practise such their priesthod I in paâ—t agree with them that euery woman is as â—it lawful a minister as any who ministreth in the Scottish and English congregations Certainly Luther hath made long treatises heapeth tegether a number of allegations out of the holy scriptures to proue al that are baptized wemen no lesse then men to be priests by vertue thereof to haue power both to preach minister sacraments In the second Tome of his works he particularly rehearseth al ecclesiastical functions proueth as wel as he can that the execution of them al is a like common to al that are baptized Among much other talke to that purpose thus he writeth The first office of a priest is to preach the word of this depend al the rest But this is coÌ„mon to al. Next is to baptize and this also may al do euen wemen when they baptize they execute a lawful priesthod an ecclesiastical ministerie which is proper to priests only The third is to consecrate bread wine But this also is commoÌ„â—o al no lesse then priests And this I aduouch by the authoritie of Christ him self saying do this in remembrance of me This Christ spake to al there present to come afterwards who so euer should eate that bread drink that wine Ergo what so euer was there bestowed was bestowed on al. Nether can the Papists oppose any thing against this besides their Fathers Councels custome This also is witnessed by S. Paule who 1. Cor. 11. repeating this applieth it to al the Corinthians making them al as him self was that is to say consecrators c. Forthwith after a few words he concludeth Igitur si quod maius est collatum est omnibus etiam mulieribus c. If then that which is greater be geuen indifferently to al men and women I meane the word and baptisme then that which is lesse I meane to consecrate the supper is geuen also to them VVhich argument as a most principal he vrgeth againe a few leaues after VVhen the office of teaching the word is graunted to any together therewith al that is vsed in the church is graunted I meane to baptise to consecrate to bynd to lose to pray to iudge For the office of preaching the gospel is the chief a very Apostolical office which geueth the foundation to al other offices which al are built thereon The like hath he in sundry places and bookes Only he requireth that whereas the right power thus to minister is coÌ„mon to al that are baptized wemen no lesse then men yet that nether men nor wemen vse this right of theirs but where there is want of better ministers then also that they do it with modestie To which purpose clearing of his assertion he maketh an obiection to himself in an other booke thus But the Papists obiect the saying of the Apostle Let wemen hold there peace
spiritually we may eate Christ in the supper as we may also at dinner or breakfast or walking or praying or hearing a sermon or when so euer we thinke on him beleeue that he truly dyed for vs yet no such eating is proper to the supper â—oâ— vve see it is coÌ„mon to al times and al places the supper vvas not instituted therefore but to ratifie confirme and seâ—le such spiritual eating and herein in this 〈…〉 consisteth truly the essence of Calâ—ins supper and not in eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blud so much as spiritually For such a supper imparteth not vnto vs nether coÌ„municatâ—th the body of Christ nor is cause instrument or meane thereof othervvise then for that it stirreth vp ouâ—â—â—â—â— mynds and geueth vs occasion to beleeue in Christ by vvhich beleef only and no 〈…〉 Christ is eaten So that if by hearing a good sermon or reading a good chapter of the old testament or nevv or talking vvith a good zealous brother or sister a mans faith be better moued then by receiuing the supper to beleeue that Christ died rose again whereof many zealous Protestants much doubt to reforme their â—aith herein haue need of better helpes then is yelded to them by breaking of bread drinking of wine which thing may be very common and is very probably supposed then by such a sermon such a chapter such good brotherly talke Christs flesh is eaten more properly more truly more really and effectually then it is in the supper And therefore this is not the cause why the supper was instituted For so the word preaching serueth much better as Peter Martyr also conuinced by manifest reason and sequele of the Caluinian doctrine confesseth For being thus vrged I deny not saith he but this is our doctrine that the body of Christ is receiued no losse in words then in the sacrament or symboles For this receiuing is wrought by faith And to faith we are stirred vp by wordâ— aâ— wel as sacraments Neque vereor dicere multo etiam maâ—is c. And I feare not to affirme that wecome to the receiuing of Christs body much more by words then by sacraments For sacraments haue al their force from the words VVhich is most euideÌ„t to any Christian man indued with coÌ„mon capacitie To vvhom if one say these words that Christ dyed for our sâ—nnes rose againe for our iustification by whose death we al looke to be saued obteyne eternal felicitie and an other bring him in to the Protestant congregation and there breake before his eâ—es a loaf of bread and â—il a goblet of wine comparing these tvvo together there can be no question but the first vvords are ten rymes more avayleable to make the hâ—â—â—er eate Christ by faith then this later dumb ceremony vvhich may haue tvventie other significations as vvel as Christs passion death and resurrection and our iâ—stiâ—ication and doth not nor can signifie any such thing except some body tel him that such a signification is meant and intended thereby VVherefore the body of Christ being better receiued before supper by reading talking conferring vvith some honest zealous brother or before the taking of the bread by the preaching of the minister then by such symbolical receyuing of bread wine Christ being in that sort out of the supper both more coÌ„monly and ordinarily receiued as Caluin confesseth and euerie man may see then in the supper which chaunceth to many scarce once in the yere to some scarce once in 10. yere the receiuing also out of the supper by words being more effectual and profitable then in the supper by bread drinke as P. Martyr acknovvlegeth and by good reason iustifieth hereof Luthers obiection against this Caluinian supper albeit it vvere very rude and rustical yet lacked it not altogether ground that Christ had smale occasion to institute such a supper vvhereof al the Christian world is ful For there is neuer a Christian but ether doth or at least may make this supper euery hovvre of the day night also if he vvake and thinke vpon the passion and death of Christ VVhich obiectioÌ„ of Luther because it is though grosse and blunt yet sure euident therefore to auoyd that absurditie and that this supper of Carolostadius Zuinglius invention and framing but of Caluins polishing and persiting should not be altogether voyd of some vse this vvas deuised that it should serve for a seale to confirme the ministers preaching and the brethrens receiuing vvho ether before the supper or in the supper according as their mynd vvas thinking of Christ hauing eaten him by faith and cogitation spiritually aftervvards resorting together to their supper there receiue the seales of bread and vvine or some other nutriment to confirme assure them that before they haue receiued the Lords body spiritually by faith And this is the sealing and confirmation proper to the supper vvhereof in the places before noted P. Martir and Caluin vvrite and vvhich Caluin most accompteth of therefore geuing the definition of a Sacrament as it is common to the tvvo Baptisme and the Supper vvhich only he admitteth for sacraments maketh the very essence nature of them to consist in this sealing A Sacrament saith he is an external signe whereby the Lord sealeth to our consciences the promises of his beneuolence thereby to proppe vp our weake faith And this sealing and confirming is taught both by Caluin and al other right Caluinists as a most special substantial proprietie of their supper and the other sacrament of Baptisme also as that baptisme sealeth to vs remission of sinnes and election to life eternal the supper sealeth to vs the manducation of Christs body and blud which by faith we haue receiued For truly to speake after these mens doctrine the Supper yeldeth no more the one then baptisme doth the other the supper no more conferreth or imparteth Christs body then baptisme conferreth remission of sinnes and election to life eternal But saith Caluin aâ— in publike grauntes the seales which are set to the writings and instruments are of them selues nothing for if nothing were written the putting to of the seale were of no effect but when the writing is made graunted then the seales confirme make the same more autentical and as among the auncient Greekes Romanes their leagues and treaties of peace were confirmed by killing a sow which sow so killed had bene to no purpose had not the words couenants of the treatie bene accorded before for many a sow is killed which signifieth no such mysterie likewise in coÌ„mon contractes when matters haue bene by words of frendship agreement before concluded arrested on then is the contract ratified confirmed by shaking of hands without which antecedent words of concord the shaking of hands is nothing which may as wel be done by an enemie to euil purpose as
blud of the death of Christ If he looke vpon a picture of Christ not reverently vvhich as hath bene proved offereth Christ spiritually to the sowle better then any bread and vvine ministred at the best communion vvhere soever they breake theyr bread most bissilie if vvith the external sight of the picture he internally receive not Christ is he giltie of so great sacrilege as these vvords import â— doubtles not For so should vve multiplie sinnes and make men to commit sacrileges almost in every thing they do for that every creature as hath bene shewed is as nighly ioyned to Christs body as is their signes and seales of bread and vvine and represent Christ as perfitly and offer him to the faith mind and remembrance of every Christian as presently And albeit oftentymes Christian mâ—n in deed offend in not taking and vsing such occasions to remember Christ and so by faith to eate Christ as God offereth them yet such omission negligence is not to be condemned as sacrilege against Christs body and blud vvhich here is spoken of The self same may be conceived of a number of like examples If the minister ready to baptize a child and perceiving his hands sowle take a handful of vvater out of the font and first vvash his hands albeit he playeth a sluttish part and offendeth yet no vvise man vvil say he is gilty of Christs body and blud no more then he is gilty of the kings body and blud vvho to vse M. B. his example having the kings image and seale in wax by him and vvanting vvax to scale his owne letter breaketh the kings seale and applieth it to his owne vse These similitudes are of like condition qualitie therefore whereas for not discerning the body and blud of Christ in the sacrament a man is condemned as gilty of Christs body and he is not so in any of these matters hereof it is plainly inferred that Christs body is otherwise in the sacrament vvhereof S. Paule speaketh then in any of the rest ¶ The other argument vvhich M. B. alloweth to the Catholike is this The bread which the wicked eate is not naked bread bâ—â— the sacrament The sacrament hath ever coinoyned with it the thing signified Therefore the thing signified is geuen to al. To this argument M. B. pretendeth a double answere but geveth a single and the sâ—me very single and simple â—â— deed VVhat saith he if I graunt them al this argument there should no inconvenience folow For the thing signified â—ay be geven to al that is offered to al and yet not received of al. A man vvould thinke that when he thus beginneth vvith what if this vvere but a florish before hand being in deed al his answere vz that the wicked get the body and blud of Christ offered to them conioyntly with the word and sacraments but wanting faith they receive the bread but not the body This is the argument and this is his answere And although the argument be not very strong yet by the vveaknes of his answere it is much bettered For if the entier sacrament consist of not bread alone but bread vvith the body that is the thing signified how can it be truly said that the vvicked receive the vvhole entier sacrament vvho receive the one only more base and corruptible part For vvhereas M. B. maketh his foolish and childish evasion in saying To the vvicked is geuen that is to say is offered this is to play the boy in matters most grave and serious The sacrament is geven and received not offered only The sacrament consisteth of two parts bread the thing signified The bread alone is not the sacrament no more then a body alone is a man vvalles alone are a howse paper is a booke cloth is a gowne or vvheat is a loaf of bread VVherefore vvho so receiveth bread alone receiveth the sacrament no more then he hath a howse vvho hath the only vvalles vvithout ether foundatioÌ„ or roose then he hath a gowne vvho hath only a peece of cloth as it came from the draper vvithout stitch or cut So that the argument as M. B. maketh it standeth stil in force notwithstanding that childish sophistrie yea notvvithstanding ought that he can say against it by the rules of his Theologie And thus much Pet. Martyr frankly graunteth VVhereas saith he there are two parts of the sacrament the signe and the thing signified if a men wil speake of these matters exactly he must say that the wicked receive not the whole sacrameÌ„t but one only part that is the bread And a litle after The wicked in the holy supper receive nothing els but bread wine and consequently they receive not the sacrament nor any sacrament at al. ¶ VVhich albeit it be the general doctrine of the Calvinists for the Lutherans are contrary to them in this no lesse then are the Catholiks yet somwhat other to helpe this poore beggerly bread of theirs or to shew the vanitie and inconstancie of their doctrine I vvel briefly by their owne Theologie prove that the evil Protestants except they be plaine Apostataes and Atheists as many are receive not only the bread but also the thing signified as vvel as M. B. him self and therefore that al his talke against S. Paules vvords is mere sâ—ivolous cavilling vvithout any ground of learning not only Catholike but also Scottish or Genevical For vvhat is there that baâ—â—eth a common Protestant though in life he be never so bad and impure from receiving by faith the body of Christ as vvel as the minister He eateth the bread as vvel as the minister there is the body of the sacrament The life and sowle is put in to it by the ministers sermon as before vve are taught Now vvhen that evil Protestant after the sermon receiveth it vvhy receiueth he not their perfit ful and entier signe vvhereas he receiveth that vvhich hath both matter forme both body and sowle If M. B. reply that he lacketh faith vvhich is most necessarie I answere first that his faith is altogether impertinent to this purpose for that the sacrament hath before his total nature and complement vvhich can not be taken away by his faith vvhich as being very good maketh not the sacrament not is required as essential thereto so nether being very baâ— can it marre the sacrament from vvhose essential perfection it vvithdraweth nothing I say further that such a Calvinist be he vvicked in the highest degree so that he be not an Apostata hath faith good inough to receive besides the bread the thing signified that is Christs body For how is that receiued eaten by faith In vvhat sort thus that as his eye seeth the bread broken so his mind remembreth Christs death and passion And vvhat hinderance I pray yow is evil life to this imagination Can not this remembrance stand vvith evil life Can not he if
his vvit and memorie be but very indifferent especially vvhen he is first vvarned by the minister and after seeth the bread and vvine conceive thus much as vvel as the most honest man in the congregation For let M. B. marke vvel vvhat it is to eate Christ spiritually in their sacrament By his ovvne definition and the coÌ„mon consent of his maisters this eating hath no relation or dependence of charitie of honestie of vertue of good life but only of faith Bring with yow to the table saith M. B. not one mouth only of your body but also the mouth of the sawle VVhat is that A constant persuasion in the death of Christ and al goes wel This persuasion my Protestant of vvhom I speake vvanteth not For I presuppose him to be no apostata though I graunt him to be an heretike and therefore he doubtles hath this mouth of his sawle and therefore eates Christ and so al goes wel Again As the mouth of thy body takes the bread so them â—â—â— of thy â—awle takes the body and blud of Christ by faith For by faith and a constant persuasion is the only way to eate the body and drinke the blud of Christ â—nwardly Then inwardly doth this evil Protestant eate Christs body and inwardly doth he drinke his blud For being a Christian though a bad one he must needs have a faith and constant persuasion of Christs death Christ saith Peter Martyr in the 6. of S. thou promised to gâ—ve his flesh to be eaten And that which he then promised he performed in his lâ—st supper But not then only He also performeth it now so often as we truly beleeve that he hath dyed for vs. VVhat need I repeatâ— that vvhich is most evident that the vvicked have this faith of beleeving Christs death therefore eaâ—e spiritually the flesh of Christ Calvin goeth one point further requiring that they beleeve Christ not only to have died vvhich only M. B. and Peter Martyr vâ—ge but also that he beleeve Christ to have risen again VVhâ—â—â—as I sinâ— in Beza is a question of great 〈◊〉 and not beleeved of many Protestants But yet I presuppose â—â—â— Protestant not to be proceeded so far but â—esting in the vulgar heresies of Calvins Institutions or the Scottish confession of faith not to deny Christs death or resurrection and then nothing yet is said but that he eateth Christ truly by faith be his life never so detestable And thus vvhereas M. B. saith that no evil receive Christ I must conclude rather that al evil receive him after their doctrine as now appeareth But yet remaineth one farther subtilitie vvhich M. B. afterwards toucheth and greatly magnifieth Learne me saith he to applie Christ rightly to thy sowle and thâ—w hâ—â— wonne al thow art a great Theologe Let vs in the name of God learne this high mystical point Is there any other applicatioÌ„ of Christ then by faith by beleeving his death and rejurrection No doubtles as Calvin Beza Martyr M. B. him self have often told vs. Then this is not so mystical a point nor able to make so great a Theologe except every â—inker and cobler that beleeves his Creed be among the Protestants a great Theologe because perhaps most of their chief Ministers and preachers beleeve not so much Na saith M. B. there is yet a farther degree deeper mysterie in this eating and application Let vs once have a plaine descriptioÌ„ thereof that we may know vvhere to rest and vvherevnto vve shal trust That M. B. geveth in these vvords The eating and drinking of the sowle is no other thing but the applying of Christ to my sowle the applying of his death and passion to my sowle Yet this must be made somwhat more plaine and intelligible For as M. B. obiecteth afterwards Christ him self his body and blud can not be geuen or applied to thee seing that looke how great distance is betwixt heaven and earth as great distance is there betwene the body of Christ and thy body or sowle even so touching Christs death passion that is now long sithence past and as the Apostle teacheth he being risen from death dieth no more but liveth at the right hand of God â—â—â—nally and how then applâ—e yow his death and passion to â—â—â—â— sowle Thus and this must vve take for the chief last resolution vvhich this man here geveth vs and vvhich 〈◊〉 learned maketh vs great and profound Theologes The eating of the sawle is no other thing but â—â—e applying of Christ to the sawle that is to beleeve that he hath shed his blud for me that he hath purchased remission of sinnes for me This as being the very key and summe of that he preacheth concerning this matter in his next sermon he enlargeth thus VVe eate the flesh of Christ by faith and drinke his blud chiefly in doing two things first in calling to remembrance Christs death and passion how he dyed for vs. The second point of this spiritual eating stands in this that I and every one of yow beleeve firmely that he died for me in particular that his blud was shed on the crosse for a ful remission and redemption of me and my sinnes In this staÌ„ds the chief principal point of eating Christs flesh VVel then now vve know a thorough perâ—ite definition and explication of this spiritual eating and drinking to vvit that every man in particular is bound to beleeve that Christ died for him for so I interpret M. B. his meaning and not that every man is bound to beleeve that Christ died for M. B. shed his blud for M. B. and purchased remission of sinnes for him as his vvords sound to conclude my purpose I say vvhat Protestant if he be a Christian doth not thus applie Christ vnto him self doth not thus eate the body of Christ and drinke his blud except he be in desperatioÌ„ or as hath bene said be an Apostata so no Christian For no man can have the name of a Christian â—â—cept he beleeve the death of Christ vvhich vvas suffered according to Christs owne teaching his Apostles both for the sinnes of every particular Christian also of the vvhole vvorld He is the lamb of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world He came in to the vvorld and vvas incarnate to save his people from their sinnes To Christ al â—he prophetes geve testimonie that al receive remission of sinnes by his name vvhich beleeve in him He is the raunsom and propitiation for our sinnes and not for ours only but also for the whole world and so forth in every Gospel Epistle and almost in every chapter of ether Gospel or Epistle so plainly that no creature having the name of a Christian can doubt but Christ died for him and by his death purchased remission of his sinnes therefore every Christian be he never so evil applieth Christ
iudgement hath at al times among the learned bene much esteemed with whom the Catholike writers D. Allen Cardinal D. Harding D. Sanders D. Stapleton c. vvhom he termeth the yonge Louâ—nian Clergy may not wel compare in the profound knowledge of the Doctors without blushing VVherefore this man so wel esteemed among the learned of so profound knowledge in the Doctors concerning this matter vvriteth thus Protesting his ovvne faith vz that he had rather be drawen in peeces then to become of Berengarius opinion and thinke of the sacrament as the Zuinglians do that he vvold rather susteine al miserie then to defile his conscience vvith so fowle a sinne therein depart out of this life the reasons of this his constant persuasion thus he yeldeth I could neuer be induced to beleeue otherwise then that the true body of Christ was in the sacrament for that the writings of the gospel Apostles expresse so plainly The body which is geuen The blud which is shed for that this thing so wonderful wel agreeth with the infinite loue of God towards mankind that whom he redeemed with the body and blud of his sonne those after an inexplicable maner he should also feed with the body blud of the same his sonne and by this secrete presence of him at is were with a sure pawne or pledge comfort them vntil he shal returne manifest and glorious in the sight of al. Thus for the scriptures the gospels and S. Paule and the cleare euidence of this faith touching the sacrament vttered by them vvhich vvas to him as he vvriteth an vnmoueable foundation to ground vpon Novv for the auncient fathers Councels of the church thus he procedeth Seing then we haue so manifest warrant from Christ and S. Paule whereas besides it is most evidently proued that the auncient writers vnto whom not without cause the church yeldeth so great credit beleeued with one consent that in the Eucharist is the true substance of Christs body blud whereas vnto al this is ioyned the constant authoritie of Councels and so great consent of Christian people let vs also be of the same mynd concerning this heauenly misterie and let vs in a darke sort feed of that bread and cup of our lord vntil we come to eate and drinke it after another sort in the kingdome of God And I wish with al my hart that they who haue folowed Berengarius in his error wold also folow him in his repentance Thus Erasmus a man of profound knowledge in the auncient Doctors vvith vvhom if the yonge Doctors of the Catholike Clergie may not wel compare without blushing much lesse may the yonge scholers preachers of the Scottish and English congregations vvho for sound learning substance of Diuinitie so long as they liue I suppose vvil not be vvorthy to carie the books after those former And therefore being content that on both sides such great peerles authoritie be geuen to Erasmê° as M. Ievvel chalengeth for him thereof I coÌ„clude that the auncient fathers according to the plaine scriptures alvvaies thought and taught that in the holy Eucharist is the substance of Christs body and blud that a Christian man vvere better to suffer any torment and most cruel kind of death then to be of an other opinion And vvith Erasmus I vvish and our Lord of his mercy graunt that those of our poore Iland both English and Scottish who haue folowed Berengarius in his impudent error for so Erasmus termeth it may also foloâ— him in his repentance execration of the same impudent error whereunto Erasmus persuadeth them OF BERENGARIVS HERESIE RENEVVED IN THIS AGE The Argument Luther is to be accompted in some sort the very original ground and cause of the Berengarian heresie renewed in our time But more precisely directly Carolostadius a wicked man and very familiar with the devil and altogether possessed of him To whom succeded Zuinglius and after him Oecolampadi agreing with Carolostadius in substance of denying Christs presence but differing in particular interpretation of Christs words touching the institution of the sacrament Diuers other interpretations of Christs words one against an other al which are iustified by Zuinglius for that they al concurre to remoue from the sacrament the real presence and establish in steed thereof a mere priuatiue absence As the auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine in the primitiue church attribute the real presence of Christ in the sacrament to the vertue force of Christs words vsed in the consecration so the Sacramentaries by a contrarie opinioÌ„ account such consecration magical and therefore remoue the words of Christ teaching their Sacrament to be made as wel without them as with them Examples of the sacramentarie Communion practised without the words of Christ by the Protestants of England Scotland Zuizzerland and els where which they both by their practise writing iustifie as a very ful and perfite communion The resolution of the church of Geneua that the supper may be ministred in any kind of meate drinke as wel as in bread and wyne VVhereof is inferred that according to the Protestant doctrine that 2. or 3. Euangelical gossips meeting together to refresh them selues eating such vitails as they bring with them haue as true perfite a Communion as the Sacramentaries haue any both touching matter forme also a lawful Minister which ministerie or priesthod euen to preach minister their sacraments the Protestant-gospel alloweth to wemen no lesse then to men CHAP. 2. HAuing novv declared the truth of the Catholike beleef touching the blessed sacrament hovv the faith thereof vvas continued from the first primitiue church of Christ and his Apostles vvith very smale gainsaying in the first thousand yeres somvvhat more in the next 500 vntil the time of our fathers vvherein Luther certaine other vvith him began that vvhich novv is called the Gospel by the Protestants but an vniuersal gulph of heresie and Apostasie by Catholiks it resteth that I plainly sett forth hovv that heresie of Berengarius novv maynteyned in England Scotland began first vvhen Luther broched this nevv Gospel ¶ The original hereof is to be referred to Luther him self noâ— only in general for that he brake al order discipline of the church refusing the obedience vvhich by Christs ovvne precise ordinance vvas due vnto it the gouernors thereof so gaue free libertie by his ovvne craÌ„ple by vvriting arguing disputing to interpret the scripture as ech man listed vvithout regard to antiquitie vniuersalitie consent of al Christendom besides of al fathers Bishops auncient Councels vvhich example and behauiour vvas in general the cause and founteyne of al heresie Apostasie and Atheisme vvhich from such contempt self liking arrogancie must needs arise as vve see by experience but also in special the first origin and spring of this Berengarian
which shal be deliuered for yow is this An exposition much like to that vvhich Musculus mentioneth geuen by certain his bretherne in these vvords Corpus meum quod pro vobis dabitur in ordine rerum spiritualium est hoc c. my body which shal be geueÌ„ for yow in order of spiritual things is this to vvit a mysterie of spiritual foode this bread of life After this and certain other of like qualitie râ—hersed by Luther he addeth that besides those six vt septenarius numerus compleatur sunt qui dicunt non esse articulos fidei c. to fil vp the number of seuen other there are which say this is no article of faith and therefore men should not striue for it but euerie man be left to his owne opinion to iudge what he listeth These men treade vnder their feete and destroy al. And yet saith he the holy ghost is in euery one of these and none wil be reproued of his error in these so diuers contrarie expositions whereas the text can beare but one direct true sense So grossly the deuil moâ—keth vs. Hovvbeit al those diuersities and contrarieties obiected by Luther Zuinglius taketh for no absurdities but vvith great facilitie as he thinketh econcileth and iustifieth al as very good Euangelical specially that of Carolostadius vvhom the Sacramentaries acknovvledge for one of their first principal Doctors Zuingliê° vvords are Carolostadius that good and godly man doth expound the words of the supper as though Christ had directed them not to the bread but to him self Take eate for I must yeld vp this my body for yow And ansvvering some vvho obiected this diuersitie of opinions vvhich vvere amoÌ„g his felovves comparteners he vvriteth thus Apud nos de Eucharistia nihil vere est dissidij c. Amongst vs concerning the Eucharist truly there is no discord One thinketh there is an Apostrophe turning away of the word Hoc This. An other maketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of it that is thinketh that to be put in the first place which should be in the last Againe an other supposeth and auoucheth that a trope and figure is in the worde est is an other wil place the figure in the words body and blud Al which haue one meaning and their diuersitie ought not to offend any man As when captaines entend to ouerthrow some aduersarie fortresse they caÌ„ not be said to disagree albeyt one be of mynd to batter it with gunnes an other wold vndermyne it a third wold get it by scaling for they al agree in one that is to ouerthrow the fortresse By vvhich conclusion vve may learne one good and sure rule to vnderstand the true mynd and meaning of the Sacramentaries as they novv are commonly called or Caluinists or Zuinglians or BerengariaÌ„s for these vvords must I needs vse not only to expresse the difference betvvene them the Catholikes but also betvvene them the Protestants of Germanie commonly named Lutherans and vvho is rightly to be accounted of their side The rule is that any sectarie if he so vvrite or preach or beleeue in this matter that he gainsay the Catholike faith deny the real presence of Christ he is a true gospeller of the Sacramentarie side hath the right sense of their gospelling faith vvhich laboureth only or principally to abolish that former Catholike faith of Christs real presence in place thereof to establish a real absence And so vvriteth Musculus very expresly Omnes vt a me vel inter se in hac causa dissideant c Al men â—ith he how soeuer they disagree from me or among theÌ„ selues in this matter of the sacrament so they mainteyne not the Papistical impietie embrace them as my louing brethern in the lord The reason is for that they al be they Berengarians old or nevv or Petrobrusians or Albigenses or Anabaptists or Trinitarians they entend the ouerthrovv and destruction of the Catholike faith of Christs presence and labour to bring in the Zuinglian absence vvhich is the matter that these men principally desire And therefore so as they agree in this al other errors are venial and pardonable vvhat so euer they teach and hovv so euer they erre and if they may be said at al to erre yet at last they erre in the letter not in the spirite in a circumstance not in the substance as Zuinglius vvriteth in the place last quoted And in an other place vvhen Luther obiected to him that there were among his folovvers diuers sectes he ansvvereth It is starke false There are no sectes no diuisions amongest vs. VVe al both I and Oecolampadius and Carolostadius and the rest agree in this that there is in the sacrament only a figure and symbole Mary we shift the words of Christ diuers wayes as we can Asserimus symbola tantum esse sed verba diuersimode expedimus VVhereof him selfe yeldeth a number of examples vvorth the noting of vvhich many are gathered together out of diuers his books by loachimus VVestphalus a great gospeller but of an other stampe Out of the heape I vvil here recite 4. or 5. Thus are his vvords Zuinglius in his second treatise of the supper of the Lord saith that in these words This is my body the word body must be taken for the passion death which Christ susteyned in his body The like he hath in his answere to a frend touching the words of Christ The bread which I wil geue is my flesh Here saith Zuinglius by the word flesh is meant death as likewise when he saith This is my body which is delivered for vow by the word body he vnderstandeth his death passion How beit in an other treatise of the supper he saith the bread and flesh-which Christ here mentioneth is nothing els but faith And yet in an other booke he is of an other iudgement that the word flesh is to be taken for the deitie For saith Zuinglius Christ vsing the word flesh vnderstandeth the diuine nature which toke flesh so by a certain figure speaking of his mortal nature whereas he meaneth his nature immortal he vseth the word flesh but meaneth the spirite that is his diuinite which geueth life to the flesh In his epistle to Luther he taketh it for the memorie of Christ It is called the body saith he not for that this solemne meeting or the bread which then is broken is in deede Christs body but for that the memorie of his body death is then recorded In his second answere to Luthers Confession he taketh it for a thankesgeuing in these words The Sacrament is nothing els but a certaine diuine and very manerly holy assembly of the people and congregation of god when they meete together to the body of Christ that is to the Eucharist or thankesgeuing for Christs death which is therefore called Christs body
for that his death passion is then called to memorie and thanks are yelded for so great a benefite Thus VVestphalus and much more to this purpose may the learned reader see in the same place Yet one other interpretation Zuinglius geueth of this vvord body vvhich VVestphalus mentioneth not vz. that the body of Christ in the Eucharist signifieth the church His vvords are VVhen as Paule 1. Cor. 10. saith that the bread which we receiue is the coÌ„munication of Christs body here it standeth for the coÌ„munication of the church for that by this meanes euery man approueth him self to the church and ingraffeth him self therein as it were by geuing an othe The same exposition he auoucheth in his Commentarie de vera falsa religione cap. de Eucharistia Thus Zuinglius VVestphalus in the place before noted alleageth one more exposition taken not from Zuinglius but Ioan. a Lasco whom our late king Edward the sixt created Superintendent of the congregation of straungers in London VVhich exposition is so much the more to be regarded because Caluin him self highly esteemeth it vvhereof thus vvriteth VVestphalus Albeit Caluin in his coÌ„mentarie vpon the first epistle to the Corinthians putteth it out of doubt that THIS HOC in Christs supper pointeth the bread yet that notwithstanding here he defen leth the contrarie opiof Ioanne a Lasco who in his booke of the sacraments of the church assureth that it pointeth not the bread but the whole forme and ceremonie the verie external action of the supper This glose of his reuerend brother that HOC doth not demonstrate bread but the external action of the supper Caluin honoreth as an Oracle from heauen VVhere by the vvay VVestphalus geueth vs a good example hovv much vve may esteeme the conference of places of scripture and interpretation there after made by the Zuinglians and Sacramentaries For saith he let this stand for good that the first particle HOC this according to Caluiâ— Ioannes a Lasco signifieth the external action Next vve must by like reason confesse that Est doth stand for Significat vvhich Zuingliê° proueth by a number of textes of scripture as before hath bene shevved and is after likevvise proued by M. B. Thirdly vve may not deny to Occolampadius like grace vvho saith that scripture al Antiquitie expounded the vvord Body corpus by a figure or signe of the body Let vs now in fine conioyne al together and thence wil arise this prodigious proposition Haec formâ— seu actio câ—nae significat figuram corporis Christi This forme ceremonie or action of the supper signifieth a figure of Christs body And if Christs body stand for the Church as the same Zuinglius sometimes affirmeth or his Passion or his Deitie then the sense is This action signifieth a figure signe of the church of Christs passion or Deitie so forth Al vvhich dravveth to this point first that from the sacrament Christs body is quit remoued and no maner of Christs presence least there at al more then in any other common action place or assembly of Christians Next that concerning any vvorke effect vertue or operation vvrought in the elements of bread and vvine by force of Christs vvords there is nothing done at al. Only in the mynd and vnderstanding of the còmunicants if they be vvel instructed somvvhat there may be perhaps For they coÌ„ming to receiue some perchance remember Christ other geue thanks for his death other thinke vpon his Deitie other vpon the church his mystical body and so â—orth ech hath some imagination one or other according as the preacher ether then at that instant warneth them or as euery man by some fore-conceiued opinion directeth him self and so the bread becoÌ„meth to them a symbole a memorie a signe a thankes-geuing c. according as euerie man is affected ¶ For this the discrete reader vvho coveteth to knovv truly the opinion of our aduersaries whereof in a maner al dependeth must diligently note remember that as the auncient Primitiue church bishops thereof which in most plaine and sincere maner confesse the real presence of Christs body and blud in the Sacament attribute that grace operation to the force of Christs vvord so the Zuinglians or Sacramentaries vvho denie that presence ake the contrarie course flatly resolue the vvords of Christ to vvorke nothing but to be as idle and vnprofitable as if they vvere neuer vttered that for any thing added to the supper by them as good it vvere to reade no chapter at al or any chapter of the bible that if ye please of Christs genealogie in the first of S. Matthevv as the 26. vvords of Christs InstitutioÌ„ Concerning the fathers and auncient church their faith is sufficiently knovven by their manifold most plaine confessions For instruction of the simple I vvil recite the sayings of a fevv Iustinus the martyr in his second Apologie for the Christians made to the Romain Emperour Antoninus vvriteth thus As by the word of god our Sauiour Christ Iesus was incarnate and for our saluation toke flesh and blud euen so by the worde of God with prayer we are taught that of vsu il bread wine is made the flesh blud of the same incarnate Christ Iesus S. Ambrose in a long chapiter by many examples proueth this force and povver of Christs vvord to conuerte the elements of bread and vvine in to his body and blud His vvords are Thou wilt say perhaps how is this the body of Christ whereas my eyes teach me the contrarie He ansvvereth How many examples do we bring to proue that not to be in the Sacrament which nature hath framed but that which benediction hath consecrated And after a number of examples taken out of the old Testament wherein the nature of things hath bene altered of Aarons rod turned in to a serpent of the riuers of Aegipt turned in to blud of the red sea diuided and standing stedfast like a wal of the riuer Iordan turned backe to his fountayne of these he inâ—erreth If then the blessing or prayer made by man were able to chaunge nature what shal we say of the Diuine consecration where the very words not of man but of Christ our lord and Sauiour do worke For the Sacrament which thou receiuest is made by the word of Christ And if Elias speach were of such force that it caused fier to come from heauen shal not Christs speach be of suficient force to alter the nature of these elements bread and wine Thou hast read in the works of al the world He spake the word and they were made he commaunded and they were created Then the word of Christ which was able to make somwhat of nothing can it not change that which already is and hath an essence in to that which it is not c. And this self same reason taken from the creation he vseth
spiritually and effectually and touching al deriuation of vertue from his flesh as profitably eate Christ if so be at least we beleeue his death resurrection as fully and sufficiently as doth the Protestant which is easie to do VVherefore let this stand for a second degree of retracting his first iudgement that here not only the true and real presence of the body and blud but also al true and real deriuation or participation of any vertue or force to be obteyned in the supper is vtterly remoued for so much as the supper conteyneth nothing singular aboue vsual Christian beleefe and then doubtles no more real vertue is traduced from Christs flesh vnto vs supping then to a child saying his beleefe to a preacher preaching a good sermon or his audience attending him to a rich man geving his almes or a poore man saying his Pater noster or if that phrase be better liked the Lords prayer Al which beleeving Christ to haue dyed for their redemption and risen for their iustification as wel as doth a Caluinist and so beleeue they or else they are no Christians eate Christ as truly effectually really as doth any Caluinist vvhen he communicateth after Caluins guise And this maner of eating is most frequent in the bookes of Caluin and al Caluinists as when Caluin writeth that we haue perpetually a spiritual and ordinarie communication eating of the flesh of Christ out of the supper as wel as in the supper this eating is wrought only by faith Mary in the supper there is a figure adioyned besides As when Beza with a whole troupe of ministers defineth in the synode of Rochel that albeit the upper be particularly appoynted for our mystical piritual communication of Christ â—et Christ is receiued as fully cum omnibus suis donâ—s â—tiam in simplici verbo with al his gifts blessings yea in a simple word or sermon As when our English Iewel a true disciple of Caluin Zuinglius writeth that Christ 6. Ioan. speaketh of the spiritual eating by faith by which his very flesh very blud in deed verily is eaten drunken Notwithstanding we say saith he that Christ afterward in his last supper vnto the same piritual eating added also an outward Sacrament or figure In which senteÌ„ces Iohn Caluin Beza with his Synodical ministers and M. Iewel teach according to the true opinion of al Caluinists and Zuinglians that in the supper Christs flesh or presence is no otherwise then out of the supper at any other time saue that then there is a peece of bread in figure thereof ioyned to the spiritual eating VVhich as Caluin truly accompteth among Christians to be very ordinarie because it is nothing els but to beleeue â—o it is so far from reâ—uiring any miraculous descent of Christ to vs that according to Caluin his folowers vve rather vvorke the miracle in ascending vp in to heauen to Christ For the right way to find Christ receiue him in the supper say they is that our minds stay not in earth but mount ab fâ— in to the celestial glorie where Christ dwelleth there â—â— embrace him For the body of Christ is not infinite but in one certaine place aboue the heauens And so we enioâ— his presence as wel as if he descended vnto vs. And generally albeit Caluin after his maner affecting an obscuritie in vttering his mynd partly for that he vvould seeme to attribute much to the Sacrament because of the great force of Christs vvords and al the auncient church partly for that he coueteth to blind and circumvent his ignorant reader partly also and perhaps principally for that he knevv not vvel vvhat vvas his ovvne opinion or was neuer setled stedfastly in any one and therefore wist nor not verie wel how to expresse the same as him self confesseth may seeme somwhat to differ from other Sacramentaries yet his doctrine in most places agreing with them maketh no difference at al betwene eating of Christs flesh in the supper and out of the supper acknowlegeth no other eating but spiritually by only faith of vvhich spiritual eating the Sacramental bread as he writeth in the supper is a figure a seale confirmation And he is greatly deceiued saith Caluin what so euer magnificence and statelines in words I vse who supposeth that in the Sacrament anything is bestowed on him more then is offered in the word of God in hearing a sermon and he receiveth with true faith So writeth also Peter Martyr a right Caluinist VVe attribute no more to the words of god then to the sacraments nor more to these then to them I adde withal that touching the deliuery obteyning of Christs body blud if ye respect the thing substance it self we haue it no more by the sacraments then by words Nihilo magis habetur ex sacramentis quam verbis VVhich thing also Caluin setteth downe as a sure rule and infallible Fixum maneat non alias esse sacramentorum partes quam verbi Dei c. Let this stand for a sure ground that there is no other office or action of the SacrameÌ„ts baptisme the supper then is of the word of god vz. to offer set before vs Christ in Christ the treasures of grace Againe P. Martyr agreeing iust with Caluin before cited That which Christ promised in the sixt of S. Iohn where according to these meÌ„s coÌ„mentaries he spake only of spiritual eating his flesh by faith that he performed in the last supper but not only there For now also he performeth it when so euer we truly beleeue that he dyed for vs. Mary in the supper be ioyned therevnto bread wine as it were seales of his promise And this he hath in a number of places besides whereof I wil note one more because it may serue for a farther points and fuller declaration of that which I haue in hand and whereof I shal haue cause to entreate more hereafter The body of Christ saith this martyr is receiued as wel in hearing faithfully the word of god as it is in the sacraments But sacraments or symboles are ioyned thereto as it were certaine external seales by which the promises of god are confirmed For the promise and graunt of a prince is first to be obteâ—ned by word before it be confirmed with the seale Let Gardâ—ner striue and writh him self so much as he wil this hath alwayes bene the nature of sacraments ¶ VVhich phrase maner of speaking and discourse of Caluin and Peter Martâ—r iâ— we note exactly we sâ—al perceiue that it conteineth one other degree to remoue yet farther away from the supper al coÌ„municatioÌ„ of Christs flesh and blud then hetherto hath bene spoken of to remoue I say from it not only the substance â—or only the real vertue which by the conduit pipe was conâ—eyeâ— to vs in the supper but alâ—o the very spiritual eating For albeit
and memoratiue bread panis commemorialis of like qualitie or proprietie to signifie Christs death as is the ivie bush to signifie the sale of vvine or in some places a vvaze of stravv to signifie vvhere is good ale or as Zuingliê° vsing more Capitaynelyke and honorable comparison to the honour of his mysteries as a noble mans armes or princes scutchion signifieth the noble maÌ„ or prince to vvhoÌ„ it apperteineth For so vvriteth he See and marke wel this is the acramental presence of Christs body in the supper as Charles the Emperour or the king of France is said to be in the kingdome of Naples because their banners or scutchions are there where as in in the meane season one of them remayneth in Spaine the other in France So Christ also is here present in the harts and minds of the faithful As for the bread and wine they are wont to be called Christs body and blud but they are no more so then those banners or scutchions are the kings them selues non magis eadem sunt quam signa sunt ipsissimi reâ—es The selfe same in sundry other places he expresseth by many like similitudes some times calling them tesseras militares soldyars markes at an other tyme comparing them to a white crosse or rod vvhereby the buizzer soldyar and the Burgundian are distinguished vvhich is his more vsual comparison The sacrament saith he is an external marke whereby we shew whose men we are what is our dutie as one that weareth a white crosse thereby declareth him self to be a Suizzer And this is Caluins resolute iudgement of the supper that it serueth for nothing els but for a memorandum to refresh our memorie vvhich I could shevv more at large out of his vvritings vvere not the thing euident inough of it self For although some Lutherans not so conuersant in Caluins hipocritical stile vvhereby he vseth to set a graue solemne countenance on the matter vvhich othervvise is light and apish make so great a difference betvvene the old nevv Sacramentaries as before hath bene touched as though Carolostadius Zuinglius and other of that reuerend antiquitie thought one vvay and Caluin and the later heretikes of this nevv creation vvere of an other beleefe yet in truth if vve desire to heare and haue his plaine and simple explication such as his folovvers must be lead by he then ansvvereth and so Beza in his behalfe protesteth that he esteemeth of the supper no othervvise nor any vvaies more diuinely then those auncient and first sacramentaries did And therefore to such Lutherans and other Adâ—ersaries who obiected that Caluin a late vpstart in this matter varyed from those more auncient Euangelists Beza vvith great stomacke replieth Dâ—co impudentes esse calumniatores qui c. I say they are very impudent slaunderers that imagin there was euer any coÌ„trarietie betwene those most excellent men Zuinglius Oecâ—lampadius and Caluin in their doctrine concerning the sacraments So that â—â—yng vvhat is the doctrine of one of these great and excellent men the same is the doctrine of the other vvhere as both by Caluin and also Zuinglius the supper is nothing els but a token and memorial an obscure and slender image of Christs death pasâ—ed vvhich in bread and vvine is but poorely represented it foloweth that not only the true and real presence of Christs body as in the first place nor only a real vertue deriued and flowing from the flesh of Christ as in the second but also al other vertue grace operation is quit excluded remoued from the supper and that left a bare and naked token such as is a lyon rampant set in the beginning of M. B. his booke to represent the king of Scotland or 3. lyons passant to represent the Queene of England ¶ To which purpose also it auayleth much more to consider one other general point of their doctrine concerning the sacraments of the nevv Testament to wit that the Protestants and Caluin especially make them euen leuel vvith the sacraments of Moyses law attributing no more to our Eucharist then to the Iewish calues or sheep or laÌ„b or bread minchah vsually adioyned to al their sacrifices For which of these they wil make most properly answerable and correspondent to ours as they vse the matter I knovv not wel for that plaine bakers bread without sacrifice and real presence is not very aptly figured by the first and this being as graceles and emptie bread as bread may be caÌ„ not be wel foresignified by the last for that things performed in the new TestameÌ„t should be of more honour grace vertue efficacie then vvas the signe prefiguring it in the old But to omit this in that the Sacramentaries namely Caluin make no difference touching vertue and grace betvvene the sacraments of Christs gospel and Moses lavv hereof it is inâ—â—rred yet more certainly assuredly that al his first amplification of the diuine presence of our Sauiours body and blud in the Eucharist is more verbal and fantastical For in the sacraments of the old lavv nether he nor any of his vvil graunt I suppose that ether Christs body blud vvas truly really ioyned vvith the signe or any quickening vertue flowing from Christs â—â—esh was annexed to those sacraments For in al this discourse the reader must euer note carie away the state of the question which is noâ— what those men beleeued then or vvee beleeue novv or vvhether they did eate Christ by faith spiritually as we do or how they vvere sanctified or iustified by him as we are but what then sacraments ours in them selues by them selues considered were vvhat vertue and grace they gaue by then ovvner at â—re in that they vvere and ours are sacraments ordeyned by god seâ—nestred from al forain and external consideration Novv that thâ—s Caluin matcheth the lâ—vviâ—h sacraments of Moyses lavv vvith ours delâ—uered by Christ in the Gospel it is very manifest That â—holistical opinion saith he whereby the Papists put a great difference betwene the sacraments of the old and the new law as though they figured only the grace of god and these gauâ— it presently is altogether to be abandoned For the Apostle Pauâ—e speaketh no more divinely of the one then of the other whereis â—e teacheth that our fathers of the old law dâ—d eate the some spiritual meate that we do 1. Cor. 10. v. 3. c. And to the end no man vnder the gospel should prefer him self as though he had some priuilege the Apostle preuenteth this obiection making them altogether like to vs. And especially he sheweth this equalitie in the sacraments VVherefore al what soeuer we haue now geuen vs in our sacraments the same the Ieweâ— of old receiued in theirs that is Christ with his spiritual riches And the vertue whiâ—h ours haue they also found in theirs to wit that they should be seales of gods
the 〈◊〉 also thereof both which the Iewes vâ—â—d nâ—their solemne paschal ceremonie And this bread and drink without any consecration or sanctification or alteration other then vvas vseâ— among the Ievves saue only that it should eâ—â—e for a signe of a thing novv passed as before it signified the same to come he made according to these mens doctrine the sacramental bread of the nevv testament So that if no â—vve can orderly as hath bene declared procced by legrecâ— first to remoue from the sacrament the true body and blud of Christ and leaue yet a real qualitie vertue derived thenge then to take avvay that real qualitie descend to a spiritual eating only by faith and make no other presence of Christ in the supper then in hearing a sermon or reading a chapiter of some good booke after to take aâ—â—aâ— that also make the supper to serue only for a seale and testimonie that vve haue receiued Christ by faith in the next place to make the supper a bare signe of Christs body and finally a mere â—â—vviâ—h ceremonie causing vs to remember the Messias â—ovv fistene hundred yeres since incarnate â—â— the Ievves communion put them in mind of the same Messias who was to be incarnate many yeres after it besides specially and principally we haue a singular rega◠〈◊〉 vvith the Scholemen Catholikes we imagine not any secrete vertue to be hid or annexed to this 〈…〉 bread no more then vvas in that breaâ— of the Ievves or is novv in other common bread vseâ— at the vulgar suppers of religious Caluinists vvho in their suppers and dinners thinke of Christs death then come vve nigh to haue a right apprehension and concene of 〈…〉 communion And to this very conclusion as the vvhole doctrine of Calâ—m and the right sacramentaties tendeth so Z 〈…〉 us Prince of the sacramentaries vvhich excellent mans doctrine vvas ever agreable to Caluins concerning the sacraments expresseth the same in most plain and â—lat termes For speaking of the first sacrament of baptisme vvhich â—e calâ—â—tâ— the chief and principal signe of the new testament VVhaâ— is â—aith heâ— the condition and vertue thereof Iohn declareth Matth. 3. I baptise yow in water to repentance Iohn taught them to amend their liues and to repent And whâ—â—râ—â—eâ—ued his preaching these he marked with the external element of water nec tamen iâ—circo aliqua ex parte melâ—â—res eraÌ„â—â— and yet for their baptisme they were neuer a whit the better For what let was there but that they might haue repented as wel without baptisme Therefore baptisme is only a ceremonie and signe c. And in the next leaâ—e The baptisme of the Apostles was al one with that of Iohn For they also as wel as Ihon gaue nothing elsâ—buâ— the external signe of baptisme â—uapropter illorum quoque baptismis non â—â— uâ—fuit quam signaâ— purâ—daÌ„ initta e externâ—â—remonia VVherefore their baptisme also waâ— nothing els but a certain entring signe and external ceremonie And a litle after It was a great error of the old Doctors that they supposed the external water of baptisme to be of any valew towards the purging of sinne For it is most assured that the external baptisme in water is of no force or vâ—eâ— to the cleansing of our sowles And therefore this veâ—â— baptisme vvhereof the Doctors make â—o great a matter is nothing els but a ceremonie I meane an external signe whereby a man professeth that he wil now folow Christ Al which in his ansvvere to Luthers confession he applieth in like maner indifferently to the Eucharist and to the sacraments of the old lavv For this saith he is the office of every sacrameÌ„t that it signifieth only c. So did circuÌ„cifioÌ„ so â—â—â— the paâ—châ—l lamb So baptisme maketh not men the sonnes of god but these which before were the sonnes of god receiue by baptisme a testimonie a signe or badge thereof the like iâ— dâ—ne in â—he supper of Christ Yea this he reckeneth for so suâ—e a principle that of the two he thinketh the sacrameÌ„ts of Christs gospel more voyd of al spiritual grace and vertue to sanctifie then those of the old lavv For so he disputeth Iâ— in the old Testament the carnal and external sacrament could not bring any puritie or cleanesse to sinâ—ul and deâ—iled consciences how much lesse can such sacraments do vâ— any like profite in Christ in the new testament where only the spirite geueth life and worketh al ¶ Against al which if perhaps the good reader thinke that in Bezaes words before cited there is some secrete force and pith to aduaunce his supper aboue those other because his â—upper he termeth a solemne holy institution whereby we are put in possession of Christ or els in Caluins obiection taken from the Apostle let the reader be warned that this of Beza is nothing els but a solemne kind oâ— lying hipocritical feyning vsual to him the rest of his bretherne as before bath bene sayd For he meaneth nothing more but that by their holy and solemne bread our faith is stirred vp to beleeue Christ by which faith we feed on Christ and so apprehend and possesse him euen as did the Iewes in their communion And the very self same holy and solemne apprehension and possession Beza in like maner attributeth to the Iewish ceremonies thereby discovereth his couÌ„terfeit solemne hipocrisie vsed here For expounding that word of S. Paule where he calleth circumcision signaculum iustitiae Beza falleth out in to a wondering exclamatioÌ„ Quid magnificentius de vllo sacramento dici possit VVhat can be spoken more highly or amply of any sacrament what so euer ether old or new Before the Apostle called it a signe which is the common nature of al sacraments for that they are external signes and ceremonies Nâ—â— he expresseth the substance and effect thereof that it is ordeyned not only to signifie but also to sâ—ale the iustice of faith by which we are put in possession of Christ him selfe quatenus sâ—ilicet spiritus sanctuâ— reipsa id intuâ—â—raeâ—â—aâ— quod externa câ—remonia praelicationi verbi coniuncta oculis repraesentat I meane so far forth as the holy ghost â—â—th performe that within which the external ceremonie ioyned to the preaching outwardly representeth to the eyes This is the precise and true forme by which he meaneth that we are put in possession of Christ by his holy and solemne supper for that by the breaking of bread and preaching of the minister our external senses if we wel atteÌ„d the breaking and preaching are moued and consequently by meanes thereof our faith and mynd erected to beleeue so the holy ghost working in our harts we possesse Christ which possession as he graunteth was in like sort and as largely geuen in the Iewish sacraments as in the Christian As for the obiection taken from the Apostle
I vvil take as sure certainâ— vz. that Christ not only gaue thankes to his father but also blessed sanctified and consecrated the bread because vve are taught so to beleeue both by the plain vvords of the Evangelists by S. Paule by consent of al fathers oâ— al auncient I â—â—uâ—gies or soâ—mes of Masse in al churches of Christendome vvhereof some example shal be geuen hereafter also by vâ—â—â—â—t of M. Ievvel Caluin Eâ—â— a vvho so effectually by innumerable places of cripture pâ—oue it and refel Musculus and consequently M. B. in thâ—â— point vvâ—o against al scripture wil haue blessing of these elements to be al one vvith geuing thanks to God VVherefore according to this most sufficient authoritie as Musculus truly telleth vs that Christ at tvvo seueral times first ouer the bread next ouer the cup gaue thanks to God so must vve also assure our selues the scripture these Protestans leading vs therevnto that Christ at tvvo seueral times blessed sanctified and consecrated those 2. seueral elements of bread and vvine vvhich he tooke in his hands Concerning the breaking and deliverie of the bread Musculus vvords are Christ brake it with his owne hands gaue it to his disciples He gaue not the bread whole to them which they afterwards should breake but him self brake it He gaue it not them to distribute but him self did distribute it willed them to take and eate it He deliuered with his owne hands this sacrament of grace signifying withal that it was not possible for any man to haue participation of his grace except himself gaue it by the vertue of his spirite Of which point I warne the reader not without cause Thus much saith Musculus concerning the external fact doing of Chrisi so far furth as agreeth to the institutioÌ„ of the mystical Supper After al vvhich finally for declaration that they might vnderstand vvhat he meant by the premisses he addeth This is my body which is geuen and broken for yow Do this in commemoration of me Again This cup is the new Testament in my blud which is shed for yow and for many to remission of sinnes Do this so oft as ye shal drinke it in commemoration of me This is the summe of that which Christ did vvhich he spake about the sacrament vvhich as the same author vvitnesseth Christ first of al did in the eyes of his disciples both that they afterwards should do the same them selues and also deliuer the same order to his church ¶ And this being agreed vpon according to the manifest storie of the Gospel exposition of the purest Protestants that Christ thus did as hath bene novv in particular described and thus spake item that thus he did spake as things apperteyning to the Sacrament and which he would not haue omitted by his Apostles disciples and aftercomeâ—â— to returne to M. B vvho affirmeth al the actionâ— and speeches which Christ did and vttered to be so essential to the Supper that if any one yea any iote be omitted the whole Supper is marred and peruerted let vs conserre these doings of Christ vvith the Scottish Supper ministred after their order vvhich is this Commonly once in a moneth the minister vvhen the supper is to be ministred first of al out of the pulpit reherseth briefly to the people a peece of the 11. chapiter of S. Paule touching the Institution of this sacrament Afterwards he maketh some Sermon against ether the Pope and Catholike religion vvhich is their common argument or in praise of their owne which is more seldom or as seemeth good to the minister The Sermon or exhortation ended the minister cometh downe from the pulpit and sitteth at the table now beginneth the communion euery man and woman likewise taking their place as occasion best serueth Then he taketh bread and geueth thanks ether in these words folowing or like in effect The thankes-geuing set downe for a paterne for al ministers to folow as in sevv vvords it rendereth thanks to God for his benefites of creation sanctification and redemptioÌ„ by Christ as is ordinarie in many good prayers so it maketh no mention of the Supper or any thing vvhich Christ spake or did therein saue that in one place they mention a table and remembrance of Christs death in these vvords Although we be sinners neuertheles at the commaundemeÌ„t of Iesus Christ our lord we present our selues to this his table which he hath left to be vsed in remembrance of his death vntil his coming again to declare and witnesse before the world that by him alone we haue receiued libertie and life c. and that by him alone we are possessed in our spiritual kingdom to eate and drinke at his table with whom we haue our conuersation presently in heauen This is al that approcheth any thing nigh to the vvords and Institution of Christ Immediatly after this thankes-geuing the ministâ—r breaketh the bread and deliuereth iâ— to the poeple who distribute and diuide the same amonge them selues according to our Sauiour Christ commaundement Likewise he geueth the â—â—p Here is the entier forme and essence of the Scottish communion For that during the time of eating and drinking some place of the scripture concerning Christs death is read this is a sequele and fashion folowing after and not included in the nature substance of the communion vvhich al goeth before Let vs novv seuerally confer Christs supper vvith this communion and consider how many the same most substantial and essential points after their ovvne graunt vsed there are wanting here Christ first of al tooke bread in to his hands and afterwards gaue thanks and blessed vvhich albeit it may seeme vsual and ordinarie yet saith Musculus it is not so and the very vvords of scripture shevve that it apperteyned to the order and institution of a sacrament Here the minister cleane contrariwise inuerting the order of Christ first geueth at large a thanks after taketh the bread the vvhich vvithout any thanks or any vvord at al he deliuereth to the people Secondarily Christ made a special and seueral thankes-giuing blessing and sanctification or consecration first of the bread and next of the cup and this also he did as a thing perteyning to the verie order and institution of his sacrament Here is no such matter but a confuse thankes-geuing vvithout relation to ether and vvhich conteyneth a blessing sanctification or consecration of nether Christ did not only breake the bread once and afterwards bid them breake and distribute it amonge them selues but him selfe brake and distributed and deliuered it to them ech one with his owne hand signifying thereby that it was not possible for them to haue any participation of grace except he gaue it them by the vertue of his spirite Of vvhich point Musculus geueth the reader a special warning and prouiso Here the minister loth belike to take so much paynes
present vvho thinks vvith Luther the Lutherans that al such creatures are martyrs of the Deuil the drinking of the vvine vvil rather put them in mynd of other martyrs blud If a right Zuinglian preach vnto vvhom the Sacrament is nothing els but as a soldiers colours or a seruing mans badge as Zuinglius vsually taught vvrote he after the sermoÌ„ ended vvheÌ„ he seeth bread vvine must needs coÌ„ceiue thereof according as he hath hard the minister preach and open vp the parts thereof and so furth a number of such significations and as proper apt conuenient one as the other must needs rise according to the difference of ministers sermons of mens conceites and fantalies So that betvvene the bread and vvine and Christs body and blud there is no such coniunction as is betvvene vvords signifying the things signifyed for that the vvords in euery seueral nation at lest haue vsually one certaine signification vvhereas the bread vvine hath diuers according to the diuers coÌ„ditions opinions both of ministers of coÌ„municants ¶ And vpon this same ground I farther infer against M. B. that a picture is a better and more diuine sacrament and hath a more neere coniunction vvith Christ then hath the bread and vvine of their supper And this I proue by M. B. his owne words preferre a picture before his bread vvine by the same reason by vvhich he goeth about to proue the contrarie The bread and vvine saith he doth not only represent or signifie a thing absent For so any picture or dead image should be a sacrament for there is no picture as the picture of a king but at the sight of the picture the king wil come in to your mynd Is it true Hath a picture such force and vertue to cavse vs at the sight thereof to remember the thing represented Ergo a picture is a far better sacrament then is your bread and vvine in the supper For a picture let it be for example sake the picture of Christ crucified at the first sight of it bringeth to the memorie of a Christian the death passion of Christ so doth not your bread vvine vvithout farther declaration as your self write In the Supper ye shal not so soone see that bread with your eye ye shal not so soone see that wine but after the preaching and opening vp of the parts of the sacrament the body and blud of Christ shal come in your mynd So then the bread and vvine can not signifie thus much but there is required vvithal a preaching and opening of the parts of the sacrament But a faire and vvel made picture vvithout preaching or so much a do forthvvith at the first sight thereof vvil bring the passion of Christ to my mynd Again vvhat man endued vvith common reason and wit wil not graunt that a picture vvhich signifieth naturally and naturally caâ—ieth by the eye to the memorie one only thing to the signification vvhereof it is determined is more potent and fit and profitable to cause such remembrance then a thing signifying not naturally but by ordinance of man and vvhich of it self is not determined to one kynd of representation as the picture is For bread vvine eaten and drunken by men â—â—â—â—ing together at a table may signifie good cheere may signifie hovv Sodome and Gomorrha perished through abundance and delicate fare may signifie temperate diet hovv many good men haue liued a long â—â—â—e vvith bread drinke without any other kynd of sustenance may signifie that al things are gotten by travail and labour as the bread is gotten out of the earth may signifie a Catholike vnitie of mynd and faith as the bread is made one of many cornes may signifie a Protestant and schismatical diuision of mindes hartes from the vnitie of faith as the bread is broken and diuided Briefly if the bread be faire vvhite it may signifie cleanes and puritie if fovvle and blacke it may signifie filthines and iniquitie being vsed vvith some forme of religion in a temple as among the Caluinists may signifie honour done to Bacchus and Ceres as in time of the old Paganes and so forth a number of like things may the bread signifie as many mo the vvine vvhich the picture of Christ crucified can not Again vvhereas the bread and vvine doth signifie as these men appoint it in special only by reason of the preaching annexed and opening vp the parts of the sacrament seeing this signification and declaration hath bene made fully perfitely and absolutely by the preaching and opening vp the parts of the sacrament vvho can deny but it is mere superstuous to adde the breaking of the bread and drinking of vvine an obscure darke secret figure after a cleere manifest and publike declaration This is in deed vvhen the Sunne shineth to light a candle to dig a vvel by the mayne riuer to cast a quatrine in to Creâ—us treasures This is like as if an orator or preacher hauing made a plaine euident and sensible narration of the Hugonâ—â— tragical histories in France hovv they overthrevv churches monasteries tovvres castels burnt vvhole cities made desolate most faire florishing Prouinces in fine after a long sermoÌ„ or oratioÌ„ to such effect should before his audience pul out of his bosome a sticke or a peece of paper and breake the one or teare the other to signifie those former vvasts and desolations This is to childish and ridiculous and yet this is al the grace of the Scottish and Geneua signe ¶ And vvhereas M. B. to helpe his poore signe imaginarie coniunction of Christs body vvith it addeth tvvo qualities incident thereto the first maketh not but mareth altogether his coniunction the second is a plaine falsitie and cleane against the Protestant doctrine and therefore helpeth it as litle His vvords are This coniunction betwixt the signe or sacrament and thing signified in the sacrament standes chiefly in two points The first part of the coniunction standes in a relation which rises vpon a certain similitude likenes proportion and analogie which is between the one the other VVhich likenes may be easely perceiued For looke how able the bread is to nurish the body to this life earthly and temporal the flesh of Christ signified by the bread is as able to nurish both body and sowle to life euerlasting This is the first vvhich as I say nothing iustifieth but rather quit ouerthrovveth destroyeth his sacramental coniunction For this signification and relation the bread and vvine haue ether by the sermon preached or vvithout the sermon being coÌ„sidered in them selues apart in their owne nature If the first so they no more signifie this then any other thing vvherevnto it shal please the minister to apply his sermon and referre the proportion analogie and similitude of his bread and vvine vvhich may very diuers as hath bene shevved
eating the bread or seeing the bread broken then by hearing the vvord preached Yow confesse that by the vvord we get possession of the sonne of god yow coÌ„fesse we possesse him by the vvord fully and perfitly This possession is the vvorke of faith and the body of Christ is not othervvise gripped possessed or eaten in the supper but by faith when as we beleeue that Christ died for out redemption and rose again for our iustification VVhich being al your ovvne doctrine hovv can yovv explicate to the intelligence of any man that vve better grip possesse and eate Christ in bread and vvine then in the vvord It a true honest man vvhose vvords I trust before vvitnesses geue me a booke and I take it of him and being possessed of it vse it as myne ovvne neuer a vvhit doubting of my right if the same person after come to me and vvil persvvade me by an external signe and say Sir see here is a peece of bread as truly as I breake and eate this bread I geue yow that booke haue I by this external act any better possession right interest or grip in the booke then I had before certainly not In like sort Christ dwelleth in our harts by faith his vvord assureth vs after these mens doctrine that so often as vve trust to be saued by his passion vve eate his flesh and drinke his blud and that fully truly verily really and substantially VVhereas then vve make no doubt of present possession vvhich we already fully and perfitely enioy hovv can this possession be better any vvaies because vve see bread broken before our eyes Again let him remember the resolution of his principal Doctors vvho haue taught vs the cleane contrarie to that he preacheth here vz that Christ is receiued â— possessed as fully by the vvord as by their sacramental bread Let him remember his ovvne preaching in this same Sermon where he hath so diligently told vs that Christ is delivered and receiued in the bread no othervvise then in the vvord Let him remember that P. Mattyr goeth one step farther assuring vs that Christ is better received and possessed by the word then by their signes oâ— bread and vvine vvhich assertion doth plainly folovv is rightly deduced out of the very principles of their doctrine in this point For vvhereas the possession of Christ vvhich vve have ether by the signe or by the vvord dependeth only of faith so the possessing of Christ more or lesse better or worse in greater degree or smaler is to be measured by our faith only if he vvil say that vve possesse Christ better by their signe of bread then by the word he must consequently say that such bread more then the vvord stirreth vp our faith tovvards Christ by which faith only vve possesse and take hold of him And vvhat man of common reason and vnderstanding vvil not be asnamed to say that he is more moved to beleeue Christs death resurrection by seeing a peece of bread broken vvhich is a dumb and dead ceremonie of it self signifieth nothing but is a like indiffereÌ„t to signifie a number of things as vvel Christs life as his death his ascension as his resurrection his incarnation and circâ—â—neisioÌ„ as wel as any of the former which bread therefore M. B. calleth truly a corruptible earthly dead element voyd of life and sowle what reasonable man I say vvil graunt that by such a dumb ceremonic he is more stirred vp to beleeue Christs passion then vvhen he heareth the same plainly and cleerly preached out of the holy Euangelists out of the vvord of god vvhich as S. Paule calleth it is the power of god working saluation to al that beleeue vvhich vvord is lively and forcible and more persing then a two-edged sword able to diuide euen the sowle and the spirite the ioynts and the marow and to discerne the intrinsecal cogitations and intents of the hart Is that blunt bread able to stirre vp our faith comparably to this tvvo-edged sword that dul earthly dead element more then this diuine creature so lively and forcible and persing as here by S. Paule it is described If to folovv M. B. ovvne reason comparison the bread vvithout the vvord be nothing but a common peece of bread and the word serues as it â—ere a sowle to quicken the whole action without vvhich the bread is nothing els but a dead element hovv can a common peece of bread broken by the minister though neuer so artificially geue vs a better holdfast a better grip a more ample possession of Christ theÌ„ the vvord of Christ vvhich is omnipotent and able to vvorke al and vvhich without diminution of his ovvne life imparteth to the bread al the life vvhich it hath Is bread the dead elemeÌ„t more effectual then the vvord vvhich is the sovvle that putteth life in to that dead element Can the body separated from the sovvle or opposed to the sovvle be said to haue more life and spirite then the sovvle vvhich is the only founteyne of life and spirite to the body and vvithout vvhich the body remayneth as voyd of al life and spirite as doth any stocke or stone Novv surely this is aâ—â—ry dead imagination not to be conceiued of a man that hath life and sense and a litle vvit in him I omit that Caluin P. Martyr and Zuinglius commonly vvrite that never vvas there nor is there any sacrament which exhibited or deliuered to vs Christ but al sacraments serve â—ther to signifie and figure Christ absent as Zuinglius wil haue it or to seale the communication of Christ and his promises receiued before as is the more vsual opinion of Caluin Beza Martir and those that be right Caluinists And therefore vvhat speaketh M. B. of better gripping Christ by the sacrament then by the word of possessing him more fully and largely by the sacrameÌ„ts then by the word vvhereas they teach that by the sacraments vve posseâ—â—â— him not nor grip him at alâ—as out of Calvin Musculus Bullinger Zuinglius hath bene sâ—evved VVherefore M. B. perceiuing belike of him self that tâ—â—â— his riddle or oracle of possessing Christ better by 〈◊〉 signe of bread drinke by vvhich vve possesse him 〈◊〉 thing at alâ—then by the word which vvorketh some possessioÌ„ of Christ vvithin vs could very hardly sinke in â—â— the minds of his auditorie he therefore from this 〈◊〉 â—â—th to the first old auncient grace of his sacramenâ— bread lest it should seeme altogether friuolous and â—â—â— profitable For the sacraments serue also saith he â—◠〈◊〉 vp and confirme the truth that is in the word For â—â—â—â— office of the seale hung to the euidence is not to confirme any other truth but that which is in the euidence suppose ye beleeved the euidence before yet by the seales ye beleeue it the better euen so the sacrament assures me of
of what matter and in vvhat sort he must preach is that word vvhich is so necessarie and vvhich maketh the sacrament In vvhich discourse first of al the Christian reader may note the good opinion that these Ministers haue of them selues and their owne vvords These signes seales albeit they be ordeyned by Christ to signifie and seale as hath bene often tymes said yet are they dead the bread is commoÌ„ bread the vvine is common vvine notvvithstanding Christs ordinance institutioÌ„ Many times the Protestant vvriters vvil beare vs in hand that the auncient fathers vvheÌ„ they speake of Consecâ—ation meane thereby nothing els but the application of the bread vvine from prophane vse to holy from serving coÌ„mon tables to â—â—â—â— the table of the Lord. The bread water and wine when in baptisme the supper they are applied to holy vses then are they consecrated saith M. Ievvel Bullinger This is their Consecration saith Caluin when they are applied to spiritual vses And so commonly vvrite Peter Martyr Zuinglius â—â—â—a and the rest But novv albeit the bread and vvine be brought from the tauerne to the church and there remaine vpon the table al the bretherne and sisters attend ready to receiue it in memorie of the Lords death vvhich is from prophane vse to apply it to maruelous holy yet notvvithstanding stil it remaineth coÌ„mon bread coÌ„mon wine a dead elemeÌ„t vvithout life sowle like a dead carcas If a Catholike priest take such bread and vvine and hauing vvith him a sufficient company to make a communion after their praiers ether priuate or publike purpose farther to consecrate this common bread by rehearsing al the words of Christ ether after S. Maâ—thevv S. Marke S. Luke or S. Paule al this vvorketh nothing thus to recite Christs vvords is magical inchauntment and it is grosse beastlines doltishnes to suppose that they are of any effect to vvorke any thing say Caluin and Zuingliê° The Papists do perversly superstitiously ascribe force of sanctification to recital of such vvords Nulla est vis in recitatione verberum Domini there is no vertue at al in reciting the words of the Lord ether in baptisme or in the supper saith Bullinger But yet after al this if a minister of Calvins creation vvho hath as much authoritie to make this sacrament as hath his vvise and nether of them more then they haue to create a nevv Sunne or Moone if such a minister come tel a tale of his owne spend perhaps an houâ—e oâ— more in railing at the church discipline at the Pope at Papists or in some such other argument vvhich is the coÌ„mon subiect of their sermoÌ„s for fevv ministers folovv M. B. order of preaching prescribed here then forsooth the whole action is quickened then the bread and vvine receiue life and sowle and from common bread become sacramental bread significatiue bread sealing bread vvhereby it is sealed and confirmed to al the bretherne and sisterne that they haue spiritually eaten the flesh of Christ by faith Is not the blindnes of these men vvonderful that can thus iustle our Christ to thrust in them selues can reiect his vvords and so magnifie their ovvne And where find they in any part of the scripture old or nevv that a Sermon is required as a necessarie part of the sacrament VVhat Apostle or Euangelist vvriteth so vvhat Doctor or Councel euer so expounded the scripture or gathered any such rule or conclusion thence VVe find in the Evangelists the vvhole entier forme vsed by Christ when first of al he instituted this sacrament which before we haue in particular declared and that according to the iudgement of a learned and siue Caluinist Nether in the text of the Evangel noâ— yet in the exposition of this Euangelist is any such preaching mentioned much lesse is it made a necessarie part of the sacrament vvhereon the life of it dependeth Our sauiour after the deliuerie of it in S. Iohn maketh a long sermon I graunt but nether is that adioyned as a part of the Supper nether toucheth it the sacrameÌ„t the institution oâ— administration or explication or declaration there of to the people which only declaration of the mysterie to the people saith Caluin maketh the dead elemeÌ„t to become a sacrament In the other sacrament of baptisme this â—â—oward perversitie sheweth it self much more For to vvhom wil they preach there To vvhose vse frame they their sermon To the infants or to the people present if any be If to the infant this in deed were very magical not preaching but inchauntement to preach to the infant who vnderstandeth never a vvord To the people Hovv so vvhereas the sacrament is not for them the baptisme is not to be applied to them the signe or element must be ioyned to make a sacrament not for the standers by but for the receiuers ¶ Because this vvhereof vve now intreate is the most necessarie and substantial part of the sacrament and also of these sermons we must somvvhat more exactly sift and search the true meaning of this word preached which is of so great authoritie and operation in geving life and spirite to the Scottish and Geneua sacraments otherwise very dead and deadly VVherefore I desire a litle more particularly to be resolued and ansvvered vvhat word preached this is whereof dependeth the life and sovvle of their sacrament Hath euery sermon this grace Doth every idle preaching of a minister geue life and sowle to the sacrament and with common bread make such a wonderful coniunction of Christs body as M. B. telleth vs VVhat if out of the pulpit he tel a tale of Robin hood and litle Ihon VVhat if he do nought els but inveigh against the Pope the Cardinals Purgatorie praying to Saints so forth VVhat if he fal in commendation a common argument among the ministers of love matters and chamber-worke as VVigandus an Archprotestant one of the framers of the Magdeburge Centuries writeth that once him selfe was present vvhen a gospelling minister in his sermoÌ„ to that effect cited aboue 20. verses out of Ovid dâ— arte amandi which also to be a common veine of preaching in Scotland it is wel knovven testified Doth every such pulpit talke geue sowle to your sacrament Yovv wil say no. For albeit both in ScotlaÌ„d EnglaÌ„d a number of CoÌ„munions are currant passe wel with such Sermons both the CoÌ„munions Sermons are compted perfite enough the multitude both of ministers and Protestants like this kind of preaching best yet vvhen they come to M. B. scanning he as vve may here perceiue vvil dislike them find theÌ„ deficient VVherefore let vs put the case somwhat more indifferent VVhat if the Minister make his sermon of the creation of the vvorld of the fal of Adam of the patriarchs mariages of the deluge of the childreÌ„ of Israels captivitie of the old law VVhat if he talke of
est Christianum hominem non esse qui non eadem fidei certitudine credit Dominum Iesum esse filium Dei se per eum esse percepturum vitam aeternam VVe professe â—aith Bucer Brentius Georgius Maior vvith other Lutheran Divines disputers against the Catholikes in that conference that he is not to be taken for a Christian man who beleeveth not with the same certitude or assurance of faith both that Christ our lord is the sonne of God and that him self in particular by Christ shal possesse life eternal This is that vvhich M. B. meaneth vvhen he saith that the applying of Christ eating of Christ by faith is to beleeue that he hath shed his blud for me that he hath purchased remission of sinnes to me VVhich iustification and remission of sinnes being in particular beleeved of the Protestant in such sort as is any article of his â—aith thereby geveth a spiritual manducation to him vvhich the Catholike hath not Thus writeth M. B. afterwardes vvhere he spendeth many pages in magnifying this â—aith This faith â—aith he workes a wonderful assurance and persuasion that God loves me that he wil saue me that meâ—â—â— life saluation at perteynes to me This works the seeling of mercy in our hart a particular application whereby we claime Christ and God as proper to vs as if no man bâ—â— title to him and his promises but we Again This particular application is 〈…〉 difference the chief marke and note whereby our â—â—ith who are iustified in the blud of Christ is discerned 〈…〉 faith of the Papists c. For the Papist 〈…〉 promise of mercy to his ownesowle He countes it preâ—â—â—tion as in truth it is and for presumption counted and coâ—demned by the Apostle Rom. 11. 20. 21. â—â— Corint 9. â—7 Philip. 3. 11. 12. Hebr. 4. 1. 2. c. to say I am an elect I â—â— saueâ— iustified This is the vvonderful faith of the Protestants vvhich to them is al in al. This M. B. calleth their iustifying faith By this thy eate Christ so as no man doth 〈…〉 theâ—â— By this they are sure of heaven in heaueÌ„ to be felowes equal vvith S. Peter S. Paule yea vvith the blessed virgin mother of God For so Luther foundeâ— and first inventor of this faith writeth expressely Quâ—â— hac side renati sumus pares sumus in dignitate honore D. Paulo Petro S. Deiparae virgini ac divis omnibus VVâ—â— now that at last vvâ— know exactly vvhat faith it is vvhich geveth the Protestants so deep holdfast in their spiritual maÌ„â—ucatioÌ„ let vs retouâ—â—â— to our principal purpose And as by this vvhich hath bene said of this special Protestant faith I confesse M. B. hath a sufficient ground to chalenge such kind of eating by this faith I meane to him self and his companions Protestants and to exclude out al Catholikes be they as holy as S. Peâ—er or S. Paule vvho never had such a special faith and therefore could never thus â—aâ—e Christ so yet the blocke lyeth stil in M. B. vvay and the rest of his consâ—aternitie that by this saith evil Protestants receive Christ no lesse then good For among the Protestants the most detestable and most blasphemous heretikes have this assurance of their iustification and remission of sinnes no lesse then M. B. or Iohn Calvin or Luther him self vvho by the helpe of an old man whose name Luther expresseth not saith M. Fox but belike it vvas the same man vvho in an other forme frequeÌ„ted Carolostadâ—ê° instructed him first of al inveÌ„ted this special iustifying faith For as after Luther al Lutherans have it most assuredly and after Zuinglius al Zuinglians and after Calâ—in al Calvinists so the Anabaptists more then any of those former sects and Libertines Familie of love by vvord and deed by life and death most confidently chalenge to them selves this assurance that they in Christ have remission of their sinnes that Christ died for them that he shed his blud for them that they are spiritually vnited to Christ they are inwardly so fed by him and outwardly so clothed vvith him that as it is testified by sundry stories many such Protestants both men vvemen and maydens long sithence in Bohemia and of late in Holland at none dayes in the sight of thousands vvould vvalke naked thorough the streetes preaching the vvord of the Lord and could not be vvithdrawen from that furious vnnatural madnes by the terror of present death continually even to death and in death some crying Praise the Lord others Open your eyes ye blind Papists others Revenge O Lord the blud of thy servants and thus not by vvords as M. B. doth but by deeds and facts by patient suffering of death approved they their confidence and assurance of such special faith as M. B. teacheth and Luther the Calvinists describe If then the Anabaptists to make stay and exeÌ„plifie this matter by them vvhom Calvin condemneth for heretikes and vvhose martyrs though in shew marvelous holy and in number never so many he accounteth and calleth martyres diaboli the devils martyrs by vvhich name likewise the Lutherans cal the martyrs of Calvins sect have this sure faith that Christ dyed for them in special and that Christ shed his blud for them in particular and they in this sort spiritually eate Christ how vvith vvhat prohabilitie can M. B. deny such eating to al Protestants of his owne sect though evil livers vvho much more certainly have this faith and therefore much more spiritually eate Christ If an heretike can have a constant persuasion in the death of Christ and then al goes wel and he therefore truly receives Christ by faith according to M. B. definition how much more may a vvicked Calvinist vvhom M. B. accounteth no heretike reteyne this constant persuasion Hath an Anabaptist a â—â—â—th of the sowle apt for such receiving hath not a Calvinist Is evil life a greater bar to such receiving then naughty faith vvhereas this receiving is vvrought only by faith not by life And vvhat need I to rest exemplifie this by Libertines or Anabaptists vvhereas the best surest ground to refute M. B. in this point is the general doctrine of Calvin and Calvinists and the same preached at large by M. B. him self in these Sermons For as M. B. is sure that he is iustified he is elect he is saved he hath this special faith vvhich applieth Christ to him so properly and peculiarly as though no man had interest in Christ but him self alone so this faith vvhich is the right perfit iustifying faith and proper to the elect being once obteyned is never after lost nor never can possibly depart from them commit thy sinnes never so greavous and horible Thus teacheth Beza in the Confession of his Christian Geneva faith most plainly This Calvin in his Institutions
times wrought so that al men desired to touch him because vertue proceeded from him and healed al that were present desired so to touch him at an other time vvhen his body was in like maner present to al the vertue thereof healed one only persone amongest a number At an other time it wrought the like benefite to persons many miles distant from the place where his body vvas at some other time it did no such benefite to many that vvere not only in one place vvith him but also touched and pressed and throng him vvho vvere neuer a vvhit the better therefore but perhaps the worse And yet forsooth is it al one to say the body of Christ or a vertue issuing from his body Or doth this man that thus speaketh in these most serious and diuine matters care vvhat he speaketh In the same place going about as it were to moderate his former plaine speaâ—â—es he repeateth that we receiue Christ remayning in heauen And this communication of Christ which is offered vs in the supper requireth nether local presence nether that he descend vnto vs nether that his body be infinitely extended nor any such matter but we receiue him though so far distant from vs as heaueÌ„ is for that he causeth from heauen to descend on vs presently and truly the vertue of his flesh Al vvhich in his Institutions he expresseth more plainly by the similitude of the Sunne a similitude very familiar with Peter Martyr and others that as the Sunne with his beames shining ouer the earth doth after a sort communicate his substance with it to the engendring cherishing refreshing of the fruits thereof so the spirite of Christ by his illumination traduceth vnto vs the communion of Christs flesh and blud albeit the flesh it self enter not into vs no more then the Sunne leaueth his place in the heauen to descend dovvne to the earth In which words and al this maner of discourse there appeareth a very plain and sensible contradiction to his former talke There vve had in the mysteries of bread and vvine Christ truly deliuered I meane quoth Caluin his true body and blud which veritie is truly conioyned with the symbole here vve haue only a quickening vertue flovving thence There Christ bad vs vnder the symboles of bread wine to eate his body drinke his blud I nothing doubt saith Caluin very religiously but he truly reacheth it me I truly receiue it novv he not only doubteth of it but also plainly denieth any such ether deliuery on Christs part or receiuing on ours and in steed thereof placeth an irradiation or illumination as from the sunne by vvhich a certain grace and vertue out of Christs flesh as heate from the sunne is conueyed vnto vs. There Christ descendeth vnto vs the flesh of Christ entreth in to vs and notwithstanding so great distance of place the flesh of Christ penetrateth and cometh downe vnto vs in tanta distantia locorum penetrat ad nos Christi caro here al such â—enetration and application or coÌ„munication is vtterly refused condemned and Christ descendeth no more then doth the sunne out of his sphere no more as he other vvhere vvriteth then vve ascend vp in to heauen to him mary yet we draw life from Christ Christ froÌ„ the substaÌ„ce of his flesh remayning in heauen powreth life in to vs albeit his flesh enter not in to vs quamuâ—s noÌ„ ingrediatur in nos carâ— Christâ— There the matter vvas so incredible so mystical so miraculous far exceding al capacitie of man that Caluin him selfe so sing lar a prophete and instrument of the holy ghost as his scholers terme him could nether comprehend it by his wit nor declare it by his tonge here the matter is made so familiar and vulgar as for the sunne to shine in a sommets day and therefore nothing so profound hard to vnderstad as Caluin vvith his hipocritical retorike vvold make the case seeme For vvhat plain rural Caluinist can not comprehend this But the manifold manifest contradictions of Caluin to him selfe in this article vvil yet appeare more sensibly if vve continue to declare by vvhat other degrees he falleth from his first high and diuine description of Christs real presence in the supper to a plain Zuinglian and Carolostadian absence from the saine Let this stand for the first vvhere in steede of a true and real presence of Christs body and blud deliuered vs vvith the figure or sacrament vve haue not the true body but only a certaine vertue deriued thence in to our sovvles vvhich tvvo are as far different as is heauen and earth as is the body and sovvle of Cicero and his vvit or learning as is Caluins person and his heretical Institutions S. Peters coate and his shadovv a good feast and the smel thereof ¶ The second degree of abasing the supper and contradicting that his first and more true opinion is vvhen as he pulleth from the supper euen this communication of any such particular vertue and force and maketh the vvhole eating to consist in only faith and beleeuing For then al such deriuing of vertue by his conduit-pipe from the flesh of Christ is no othervvise deriued in the supper then in any other good action of praying or preaching vvhen so euer a ChristiaÌ„ man stedfastly beleeueth in Christ So he vvriteth more commonly and that according to the vulgar maner of al sacramentaries as for example VVe confesse that we eate Christ no other way theÌ„ by beleeuing Againe VVe eate truly the flesh drink the blud of Christ in the supper but this eating driÌ„king is only by faith sicut nulla alia fingi potest as no other kind of eating or drinking can be imagined VVhich eating by faith beleeuing vvhat it is vvhat he meaneth thereby he declareth in his Catechisme vvhere he geueth this definition of it In beleeuing that Christ is dead for our redemptioÌ„ is risen for our iustificatioÌ„ our sowle eateth the body of Christ spiritually VVhich being so this maner of eating geueth no title of preeminence nor maketh any kind of difference betwene the supper and any other time place or action when so euer we beleeue in like sort Nether if al the eating consist in beleeuing that Christ is dead for our redemption risen for our iustification is there any more vertue force or quickening power as Caluin speaketh deriued to vs from Christs flesh when we eate the Protestant supper then when we eate our owne dinner in case we beleeue Christ to be our redeemer iustifier which is the whole only way to eate Christ and then which there can be no other imagined The Protestant at this supper hath perhaps a draught of wine a bit of bread more then the stander by or then we at our dynner but our faith being as good as his we
by a frend to good euen so fareth it in the sacraments of baptisme and the supper which are seales to ratifie coÌ„firme spiritual things but not to geue or confer them as hath bene said before So then now we are come so far of from our first diuine opinion of the Sacrament that no maner coÌ„munication of Christs flesh is properly attributed vnto it no more then the graunt of a Lordship by the prince to his subiect is to be attributed to the seale of wax the articles of peace betwene the Romans their enemies to the sow or hog the private coÌ„tracts betwene men in buying selling borowing c. is ascribed to the snaking of haÌ„ds which only succedeth in co 〈…〉 mation of bargains promised as the sacrameÌ„t of the supper succedeth for a scale cotirmation of the body of Christ which the Protestat hauing eaten before â—or a pledge â—atification thereof aftervvards cateth dâ—â—keth this symbolical bread vvine ¶ But yet Caluin slaieth not here nether can hevey vvel For besides some other absurdities against this sâ—aling inuented by him vvithout any vvariant or probable prâ—tâ— vt of scripture as shal be shevved here after this â—â— one sound argument to breake al these seales for that they thus vâ—ed are very lyâ—â—g and countersent seales and therefore not to be thought in any case to proceed from god but rather from his enemie the deuil For seing as Caluin testifieth sure it is that many vvhich come to the Lords tables haue no participation of the flesh and blud of Christ they â—eede not on lam spiritually but remaine his enemies and receiue that bread and vvine to their condemnation and yet this notvvithstanding the minister geueth indifferently to al these seales vvhich confirme assure to them al that they haue receiued Christ maruelous effectually hovv caâ—t be auoyded but the minister lyeth dovvne â—ight vvhen in fact he thus informeth the communicants as also he plaieth the traytour against god in that he putteth his scale to a blaÌ„ke where in god neuer vvrote ought that is to say he testifieth by deliuering this symbolical or scaling bread and vvine that god highly fauoureth and loueth such a protestant vvhom yet in veritie god hateth and purposeth eternally to damne Nether doth Caluin nether can he by any probable colour auoid this absurditie Only somvvhat to mend the matter to proppe vp his poore Supper that it be not altogether void and ridiculous he continually runneth on â—atther and saither and at lenght alloweth it for his final conclusion to be a memorial or commemo ratiue signe to recal to our memories the death of Christ mary yet vvith this sober caueat that vve suppose in no vvise there is in it any vertue or grace of sanctification but only a bare memorial as it vvere a picture or image rudely fashioned to helpe our vveake memories and put vs in remembraÌ„ce of Christ Both these parts I vvil ioyne together for brenities sake and for that Caluin also teacheth them both together in very precise and plane termes â—nocerning the one part that it is void of al vertue VVe must beware saith he that we fal not in to error by reason of such speaches as the faâ—hers sometimes vse conteyning more honorable traise and commendation of the sacrameÌ„ts then needeth as though there we eany hid vertue 〈◊〉 or ioâ—ned to the sacraments as wine is offered to vs in a â—oblet For sacraments are the same thing to vs from god as messengers that bring good newes are from men or els we may wel liken them to an earnest penny in confirming a bargain for that the of them selues geue no maner grace but they declare and shew and confirme such things as by gods bâ—untisulnes are ceuen vâ— Againe in the litle booke which he made conteyning the consent of doctrine betwene his Geneuian church the Tigurine of Zuinglius forndation thus is their consent expressed touching the sacrament Si quid boni nobis per sacramenta confertur c. If aâ— good be bessowed on vs by the sacraments that is not wrought by the proper vertue of the sacraments no not if ye ioyne to them the promise of god with which they are adorned For it is only god that worketh by his spirite And albeit he vse the seruice of sacraments yet thereby he nether powreth his grace in to them nor withdraweth any thing from the force of his spirite but for our rude and grosse capacitie so vseth thee helpes that yet al vertue of action or operation remayneth in him self alone As for the signes saith Beza after Caluin there is in them no other force or uertue but so far forth aâ— by those external obiects of bread and wine our internal senses are moued In which words both the master and the cholâ—r both Caluin Beza the church of Geneua as also Zurick remoue al maner vertue of grace and sanctification from the sacraments and make them mere signes and as it were painted tables to bring vs being othervvise forgetful â—ude and grosse to remembrance sometimes of Christ which is the second part and clearly set downe by Caluin who writing vpon S. Paule and declaring what is the force of the Eucharist maketh it to consist nether in deliuering vs the body blud of Christ present with the signe nor yet in deriuing to vs some real vertue from that diuine body remayning in one only place nor in spiritual imparting the body or vertue of it nor in sealing that which was receaued before nor any matter hetherto treated of but only in that it serueth as a picture or image to put vs in remembrance of Christ so that if we were of good memorie to remember Christs death vvithout this breaking of bread and drinking of vvine in the supper by his iudgement the Supper might be spared wel mough Vpon Christs words Do this in remembrance of me thus he argueth Ergo caena 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est c. Therefore the supper is a token or memorial appointed to helpe our infirmitie For if otherwise we were myndful inough of Christ death this helpe were superfluous And this is common to al sacraments for they are helpes of our infirmitie VVhich vvords withdravv from the Supper al maner grace and vertue and leaue it a naked and bare signe ordeyned only to helpe vveake memories and as Zuinglius defineth it to be nothing els but a commemoration thinkes geuing for the Lords death And so saith he the old writers called it the body and blud of Christ when as in the meane season they meant it to be no other thing then a signe or figure which renewed the memory of Christs body deliuered for vs as if some good wife receiuing a ring of her husband when he goeth out of the towne should cal that ring her husband For vvhich cause he vseth to cal the sacrameÌ„t symbolical bread