that by writing which he doth approue at least so farre forth as mans iudgement can haue place The fyft Paragraph That the holy Eucharist is a figure and signe of Christes body and bloud not the thing it selfe that is thereby signified corporally but in a diuine and spirituall sort FOr the perspicuous explication of this Paragraph I will vse certaine effectuall and distinct proofes and that done I will succinctly aunswere to such obiections as may be made against the same My first proofe is grounded in the analogie of our christian faith for first Christ tooke our nature vpon him and that so really and truly as it was like vnto ours in euery thing sinne only excepted The former part saint Paul prooueth in these wordes who being in the forme of God thought it no robberie to be equall with God but he made himselfe of no reputation and tooke on him the forme of a seruant and was made like vnto men and was found in shape as a man The latter part S. Peter proueth in these words for Christ suffered for you leauing you an ensample that ye should follow his steps who did no sinne neither was there guile found in his mouth And S. Paule sayth for he hath made him to be sinne for vs who knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him Now our bodies are such as they can not with one act be made to be in two places at one time ergo the priests words can not make Christs body in a thousand places at once for if he could so do Christs body should be of an other nature then ours contrary to the holy scripture Secondly Christ sayth Ye worship that which ye know not God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and truth Thus doth our faith tel vs but the Papists say that we must worship God in a round cake that we must worship for God that which neither we nor they know to be God for if the priest either want intention to consecrate which often chaunceth by reason of wandring imaginations or of purpose meaneth not to consecrate or of negligence omitteth any one word of consecration then by popish religion the thing adored is but pure bread and yet do they worship it for the euerliuing God It is therefore truely said to them that they worship they know not what Thirdly Christ must so be eaten of vs as he abideth in vs for to that end do we eate him that he may dwell in vs and yet is it certaine that he dwelleth not in vs corporally but spiritualy by faith The former part is not only euident in it selfe but verified by Christ himselfe in these words he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him the latter part S. Paule proueth in these words that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith Fourthly Christ ascended vp visibly into heauen and there must remaine til the day of generall doome as our faith telleth vs therefore we must feede on him in heauen by faith and not on earth with our teeth For which cause the auncient Church exhorted y e people before the communion to lift vp their hearts vnto the Lord as if it had beene said ye must not affixe your mindes to these visible creatures but meditate on heauenly things which are promised by y e reuereÌ„t faithfull vse thereof Fiftly S. Paul saith plainly that the faithfull in the old testament did all eate drinke Christs body bloud which they could not do but by faith because Christ was not then incarnate and euen so do we eate Christ spiritually by faith not corporally with our teeth To which effect grauely said S. Austen vt quid paras ventrem dentem crede manducasti Credere enim in eum hoc est panem vinum manducare qui credit in eum manducat eum Wherefore preparest thou a belly and a tooth beleeue thou hast eaten for to beleeue in him is to eate bread wine he that beleeueth in him eateth him Thus saith S Austen euen as their owne Gratian hath alledged him Sixtly S. Paule saith that so often as we eate and drinke of Christs cup so often do we shew his death till he come but doubtles if he be corporally present vnder the accidents of bread and wine then is he already come nay more truely is it said that he was neuer gone For as S. Austen saith donec seculum finiatur sursum est dominus sed tamen etiam hic nobiscuÌ„ est veritas domini corpus enim in quo resurrexit in vno loco esse oportet veritas autem eius vbique diffâ—sa est Our Lord is aboue vntill the worlds end but yet his truth is with vs heere for the body of our Lord wherein he rose againe must needes be in one place but his truth is diffused euery where Againe the same S. Austen writing against Faustus the Manichee hath these expresse words Secundum praesentiam quippe spiritualem nullo modo illa pati posset secundum praesentiam vero corporalem simul in sole in luna in cruce esse non posset For his flesh could no way suffer according to his spirituall presence and according to his corporall presence it was not possible for him to be both in the sunne and in the moone and on the crosse at one and the same time Againe he saith in another place after this manner Videte ascendentem credite in absentem sperate venientem sed tamen per misericordiam occultam etiam sentite praesentem Ille enim qui ascendit in coelum vt tolleretur ab oculis vestris promisit vobis dicens ecce ego vovestris promisit vobis dicens ecce ego vobiscum sum vsque in consummationem seculi Beholde Christ ascending beleeue in him absent trust in him that is comming and for all that feele him also present by his secret mercie Thus ye see the flat opinion of this graue writer of this ancient father of this holy learned doctour his resolution is so euident and so free from all obscuritie as none can pretend ignorance that once read his words For first he telleth vs that Christs naturall body must needes be in one onely place at one time Secondly hee telleth vs that Christs naturall body can not bee at one and the same time both in the Sunne and in the Moone and on the crosse Thirdly he maketh the same assertion plain by comparing his corporall presence with his spirituall For he saith that the one may be in many places but the other cannot as if he had saide Christs body may be spiritually in the sacrament but corporally it cannot be there Fourthly he proueth Christs corporal absence by the veritie of his ascension exhorting vs to beleeue in him that is corporally absent and withal to feele
like worthie for that communion not as it was in the olde lawe where the priest ate one part and the people another neither coulde the people be permitted to take part of that that the priest ate For nowe it is not so but to all is proposed one bodie and one cuppe Out of these golden words I note first that the difference in communion is a Iudaicall ceremonie from which Christs death deliuered vs. I note secondly that in the christian communion the common people ought to be as free as the minister I note thirdly that it was so in Saint Chrysostomes time when the people receiued vnder both kinds I note fourthly that the pope hath brought vs into greater bondage then euer were the Iewes S. Ignatius hath these wordes Vna est caro domini Iesu vnus eius sanguis qui pro nobis effusus est vnus etiam panis pro omnibus confractus vnus calix totius ecclesiae There is one flesh of our Lord Iesus one blood which was shed for vs one bread also broken for all and one cuppe of the whole church Saint Iustine hath these wordes Praesidens vero postquam gratiarum actionem perfecit populus vniuersus apprecatione laeta eum comprobauit qui apud nos vocantur diaconi atquo ministri distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt panem vinum aquam After the chiefe pastour hath finished the giuing of thankes and all the people haue with ioyfull prayer approoued the same they that we cal Deacons and Ministers do distribute to euery one that is present the sanctified bread wine and water to be partaker thereof Yea the said Iustinus a little after addeth these important wordes Nam apostoli in commentarijs à se scriptis quae euangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Iesum For the apostles in their commentaries that is in the gospelles haue taught vs that Iesus so commaunded them to minister the holie communion Where note by the way that Christ did not onelie ordaine both kindes but he also gaue commaundement to retaine the same in the church For which cause saint Paul teaching the Corinthians to communicate vnder both kinds said that he receiued that form maner from the Lord. S. Austen hath these words Cum Dom. dicat nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis meum sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis quid sibi vult quod à sanguine sacrificiorum quae pro peccatis offerebantur tantopere populus prohibetur si illis sacrificijs vnum hoc sacrificium significabatur in quo vera sit remissio peccatorum à cuius tamen sacrificij sanguine in alimentum sumendo noÌ„ solum nemo prohibetur sed ad bibendum potius omnes exhortaÌ„tur qui volunt habere vitam When our Lord saith vnles ye shal eate my flesh and drinke my blood ye shal haue no life in you what meaneth it that the people is so greatly forbidden the blood of sacrifices which was offered for sins if in those sacrifices this onely sacrifice was signified in which there is true remission of sins From y e blood of which sacrifice for al that to be takeÌ„ for nourishment not only none is prohibited but al rather are exhorted to drinke it that desire to haue life S. Ambrose at such time as the emperour Theodosius after his great slaughter of men at Thessalonica desired to enter into the church at Millan and there to be partaker of the holie eucharist spoke these words vnto him Quî quaeso manus iniusta caede sanguine respersas extendere audes eisdem sacrosanctum corpus domini accipere aut quomodo venerandum eius sanguinem ori admouebis qui furore irae iubente tantum sanguinis tam iniquè effudisti How I pray thee darest thou stretch out thy hands sprinckled with vniust slaughter and blood and to take the holie bodie of our Lord in the same Or how wilt thou touch thy mouth with his venerable blood who to satisfy thy fury hast shed so much bloud so vnworthily Gregorius magnus their owne bishop of Rome confirmeth this veritie in these words Eius quippe ibi corpus sumitur eius caro in populi salutem partitur eius sanguis non iam in manus infidelium sed in ora fidelium funditur For his bodie is there receiued his flesh is diuided for the saluation of the people his bloud is now powred not into the handes of infidels but into the mouthes of the faithfull What need many words Their owne Gelasius in their owne canon law condemneth their fact as flat sacrilege These be his words Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceaÌ„tur quia diuisio vnius eiusdeÌ„que mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire Either let them participate the whole sacraments or els let them abstain from the whole bicause the diuision of one and the same sacrament cannot be done without great sacrilege The first obiection The commaundement to receiue in both kinds was onelie giuen to the twelue apostles and in them to all priestes for they onely were present when Christ spâ—ke these wordes Drinke ye all of this The answer I say first that if the commaundement pertained onelie to the apostles then are priests aswell as clarkes free from the same I say secondly that the commandement was giuen of both kindes in one and the selfe same maner and therefore the lay people are as free from the one as the from the other I say thirdly that by the common opinion of the papists they were lay people that receiued the communion at Christs handes in his supper For the apostles were vnpriested vntil after his resurrection when hee saide Receiue ye the holy ghost I say fourthly with S. Bernard that the participation of both kinds was commaunded by Christ in the first institution thereof for thus doth he write Nam de sacramento quidem corporis sanguinis sui nemo est qui nesciat hanc quoque tantam tam singularem alimoniam eâ primùm die exhibitam eâ die commendatam mandatam deinceps frequentari For concerning the sacrament of his body and bloud euery one knoweth that this such and so singular nourishment was exhibited that day the first that day commended and commaunded afterward to be frequented This commandement S. Cyprian and saint Iustine vrge for both kindes their words already are set downe I say fiftly that S. Paul who knew Christs minde aswell as any papist did communicate the vnpriested Corinthians vnder both kinds and told them that Christ had so appointed The replie S. Paul only recited Christs institution saith our Iesuite Bellarmine but gaue no commaundement for both kindes but left it as he found it indifferent and in the free choise of the Corinthians to communicate in both or in one only kind The answere I say
Anno mundi 3197 32 Kings 36 Tantens Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 40 Kings 36 Thineus Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 30 Kings 36 Dercilus Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 40 Kings 36 Eupales Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 38 Kings 36 Laosthenes Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 45 Kings 36 Piriciades Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 30 Kings 36 Ophrateus Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 20 Kings 36 Ophratanes Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 50 Kings 36 Ocrazapes Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 41 Kings 36 Sardanapalê° Anno mundi 1948 reigned yeres Anno mundi 3197 20 Kings 36 Sardanapalus was the last king of the Assyrians that possessed the whole monarchie he was a man of very bad behauiour and being â—â—ercome in battell by Arbaces hee burnt himselfe to death by fire This monarchie indured 1240. yeeres after Eusebius but see the fourth section following and marke it attentiuely After that Sardanapalus the vicious and effeminate monarke had burnt himselfe together with his riches Phul Belochus the president of Babylon and Arbaces ruler of the Medes diuided the monarchie betweene them Phul Belochus had Babylon and Assyria Arbaces enioyed Media and Persia. The kings that took part with Arbaces were termed the Kings of the Medes Such as followed Belochus the Kings of the Assyrians Chaldeans or Babylonians The court lay first at Niniueh after at Babylon Arbaces the Mede subdued the Assyrians and translated the Empire to the Medes From hencefoorth many alterations chanced in the monarkie After Herodotus the Assyrians held the monarchie 500. yeeres from which time now the Assyrians now the Medes now the Chaldeans had the vpper hand At the length the Medes being more mightie then the rest subdued Babylon and quietly enioyed the whole empire The kings of y e Medes Arbaces Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 28 Sosarnus Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 30 Medidus Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 40 Cardiceas Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 15 Diôcles Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 54 Phaortes Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 24 Cyaraxes or Cyaxares Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 32 Astyages Anno mundi 3195 raigned yeres Anno mundi 3456 38 The monarkie of the Assyrians which is also called the monarkie of the Chaldeans and of the Babylonians because they sometime inioyed it though with small felicitie beganne about the age of the world 2008. and continued about 1470. yeeres at what time Darius king of the Medes with Cyrus his sonne in law wanne Babylon and killed Balthazar Dan. 5. verses 30 31. The third section of Balthazar Balthazar king of Babylon when hee was drinking wine commanded the golden vesselâ—es which his father had brough from the temple in Hierusalem to be set before him that hee his princes his wiues and his concubines might drinke therein they drunke wine and praised the gods of gold siluer brassâ— and stone But what followed al this idololatricall ioy in the very same houre there appeared fingers of a mans hand writing vpon the wall of the kings pallace so that the kings countenance changed and his thoughts troubled him The ioynts of his loynes were loosed his knees smote one against the other and he cried mightily Dan. 5. verse 2 3 5 6 7. Behold here the end of idolatrie and superstition Balthazar foorthwith after he had adored his false gods was tormented as is said the same night he was staine and Darius the Mede inioyed the kingdome verse 30 31. A wonderful example for al kings and monarkes euer to serue the liuing God and to set foorth his pure religion The fourth section of the diuersitie in computation Eusebius and some others reckon the monarchie of the Assyrians from Ninus and so it continued 1240. yeeres as is saide in the second section Yet others who seeme to followe Philo and Metasthenes beginne the monarchie in the 8. yeere of Nabuchodonosors reigne and then it indured onely seuentie yeeres for Nabuchodonosor raigned 45. yeeres Euil-merodach his sonne 30. yeres and Balthazar his sonne 3. yeres Such as will in this maner make their supputation must reckon the first monarchie to be of the Babylonians not of the Assyrians Genebrardus reckoneth the monarchie to haue continued 78. yeares that is eight yeares before the captiuitie because the first yeare of Nabuchodnosor fell in the end of the third yeare of Ioachim Dan. 1. and was the fourth of Ioachim Iere. 25. but so the veritie of the historie be granted it skilleth not much to varie the name CHAP. II. Of the kings of the Assyrians and Babilonians after the death of Sardanapalus and the diuision of the monarchie PHul Belochus was the first king of the Assyrians after the diuision of the Empire and death of Sardanapalus hee was a magnificall and fortunate Prince and Niniue was his pallace he was president of Babilon in the time of Sardanapalus after whose miserable death he enioyed halfe of the monarchie as I haue shewed in the first chapter and second section he ruled 48. yeares in all Phull Assar surnamed Tiglath was the second king of the Assyrians he was a verie bad king he destroyed Galile and led some of the tribes into captiuitie he raigned 23. yeares Salmanasar was the third king of the Assyrians hee was a tyrannicall and cruell king this Salmanasar destroyed the kingdome of Israel besieged Samaria tooke it battered it downe slew the king and led away into Media the people that remained after the slaughter for hee was ruler in that countrey and he raigned eleuen yeares Sennacherib the fourth king of the Assyrians was an arrogant wicked godlesse man he bent himself against god with sacrilegious and blasphemous speeches he sent a great host against Hierusalem but Gods Angell smote in his armie an hundred foure score and fiue thousand insomuch that he was enforced to retire and to dwell againe in Niniue For his blasphemie against god an horrible death befel vpon him for as he was in the temple worshipping his God Nisroch Adramelech and Saresar his owne sonnes smat him with the sword and they escaped when they had slaine him into the land of Armenia 4. King 18 19 chap. so was he murdered euen before the idoll whom he adored for God and by them by whom he ought by nature to haue bin defended he raigned 15. yeares That the wickednes of this Senacherib might be noted of all posterities his image was set vp in Egypt with this inscription ouer it as writeth Herodotus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is to say Whosoeuer shall behold mee with his corporall eies let him learne by my calamitie to honour