flesh in so much that the flesh is heere called the soule Such a man when the church casteth from her shee keepeth the spirit safe to wit the holie spirite of God which is the guider of the church For if they suffer any such one to bee amongest them hee defileth all and the holie spirite departeth Phi. S. Hierom taketh it otherwise To deliuer him vnto Satan for the destruction of the flesh saith he vt arripiendi illum corporaliter habeat potestatem that the diuell may haue power corporally to possesse him so Saint Chrysostom For the destruction of the flesh that the diuell may strike him with some grieuous sore or other disease Theo. This I told you before was a doubtfull speech and therefore woulde yeelde you no certaine conclusion For besides Sainct Augustine and Sainct Ambrose Sainct Hierom in those bookes which are assuredly his vseth these wordes To deliuer vnto Satan to the destruction of the fleshe for a perpetuall consequent to excommunication in all ages and not for corporall vexation permitted onely to the Apostles Illi si peccauero licet tradere me Satanae in interitum carnis vt spiritus saluus sit A clergie man sayth hee may deliuer mee to Satan if I sinne for the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe And inueighing against Vigilantius I maruaile sayth hee the Bishop vnder whome hee is doeth not crush this vnprofitable vessell with the Apostolike rodde euen a rodde of yron and deliuer him into the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe Noting by these wordes the right force of excommunication which doeth and shall indure to the ende not any corporall punishment or plague wherewith God sometimes touched such as would not otherwise be reformed A thirde interpretation of these wordes you shall finde in Sainct Augustine writing against Parmenian What did the Apostle sayth hee but prouide for the health of the soule by the destruction of the fleshe whether it were by some corporall punishment or death as in Ananias and his wife which fell down at Peters feete or else that the partie by repentance because he was giuen ouer vnto Satan should kil in himself the wicked concupiscence of the fleshe This later exposition cutteth off cleane your bodilie punishmentes and sheweth the ende of Apostolike excommunication to be this that the offendour by repentaunce should destroy the lustes of his flesh and not that an euill spirit should corporally correct and molest him which you conclude out of these wordes with as great confidence as if it were some maine principle of faith Phi. S. Augustine repeateth both expositions disliketh neither Theo. His accepting of both dischargeth your illation which is wholy grounded on the first But admit that also which Chrysostom seemeth to follow what shall your conclusion be Phi. That the Apostles punished the bodies of such as were christians Theo. Did they lay violent handes on them or vse any externall meanes Phi. They needed not the diuell did it at their word Theo. And because the diuell will not doe the like for you you will supplie the diuels roome and intermedle with his office Are you not wise Diuines that to chalenge the correction of other mens bodies make your selues the Diuels substitutes Phi. Wee make our selues the Apostles substitutes Theo. Then deliuer them to the Diuell as they did and offer them no farther violence nor torment with your owne handes and see what power you haue to chastise the bodies of such as you reiect from the church for so did the Apostles Mary if you content not your selues with speaking the word as they did but because the Diuell fayleth you you take helpe of your handes to punish the bodies of men beware least you be now not Pauls associats in deliuering but Satans in tormenting the carkasses of offendors Phi. Is euerie one that punisheth the bodie Satans associate Theo. They that beare the sworde with lawfull power from God to represse the wicked if cause require to kill the bodie they bee Gods ministers seruing for that intent but they that without this sworde claime to bee the correctors and punishers of mens bodies by violent meanes are the Diuels vicegerentes and not Gods For they bee murderers and the right members of Satan Phi. But wee appoint the Magistrate to doe it Theo. Doe you appoint Magistrates to lay violent handes on themselues Phi. No but on others Theo. And we be disputing of Princes whether they may bee defeated of their crowns and chastised in their bodies vpon your excommunications Phi. Excommunicate persons may bee corporally chastised whosoeuer bee the deede doer and that S. Chrysostoms exposition fully proueth For if it were lawfull then whiles the Apostles did excommunicate why not as well after and in other ages Theo. But if you relent from this that your selues may bee the deed doers then you misse the marke which you shot at The Magistrate wee knowe may corporally punish these and all other offendours but what is that to your position which hold that spirituall Pastors may punish the bodies of the faithful And therfore look to your footing least you faile in your leaping and backe with this legge that a meere spirituall officer may touch the liues and take the goods of heretiks and other excommunicate persons It is a wicked intrusion of Antichrist seeking indirectly and as you call it by accident that is by hooke or by crooke to bring the world and worldly things in subiection to his appetite The Apostles did nothing but separate sinners from the church and house of God because in those dayes there were no christian Princes with ordinarie power to reuenge the disorders committed in and against the church of Christ it pleased God that whom the Apostles and their after-commers for a season cast out of the church as intangled with great and haynous offences the Diuell shoulde afflict them vnto death or otherwise with some grieuous disease as the fault deserued that the rest might feare and not bee bolde to sinne because there was no magistrate to punish them yea many times God visited the sinnes of hypocrites and such as remained in the church in like maner as Paul himselfe testifieth to those of Corinth For this cause many amongest you are stroken with infirmities and diseases and many are dead For if we would iudge our selues we should not bee iudged but when wee are iudged we are chastened of the Lord that wee should not bee condemned with the world And Chrysostom alleadging this place Many such things fall out in the church at this day Because the priest knoweth them not that loden with sinne receiue the reuerend mysteries vnworthily therefore God himselfe often times culleth them out and deliuereth them to Satan And that the Apostles did nothing but cast them out of the church when they deliuered anie to Satan the same Father will teach
your owne fellowes haue reported lamented in no worse than the fountaines of your faith and heads of your Church I wil not say the refues of England but euen the Priests of Baal and Bacchus were Saints in comparison of so lewd and intolerable monsters Stephanus the sixt and Sergius the third pulled Formosus their predecessor out of his graue the one cutting off his fingers the other his head and cast his carkas into Tybris Iohn the twelfth gaue orders in a stable amongst his horses abused his fathers concubine made his pallace a stues put out his Ghostly fathers eyes gelded one of his Cardinals ranne about in armes to set howses on fiar drank to the diuel and at dise called for help of Iupiter and Venus Boniface the seuenth getting the Popedom by il meanes robbed Saint Peters church of al the Iewels pretious things he could find ranne his waies returning not long after caught one of his Cardinals put out his eies Syluester the seconde leauing his Monasterie betooke himselfe wholly to the diuel by whose help he gate to be Pope on this condition that after his death he should be the diuels both bodie and soule Benedict the ninth sold his Popedome to Gregorie the sixt and was therefore worthily blamed of all men and by Gods iudgement condemned For it is certaine that after his death he appeared in an ougly shape with the head and taile of an asse the body of a beare and being asked what that horrible sight ment because saith he whiles I was Pope I liued like a beast without law without reason defiling the Chaire of Peter with al kind of lewdnes Of Gregorie the seuenth and his adherents Beno the cardinal writeth thus Let these hypocrites hold their peace that haue disgraced almost drouned the name of blessed Peter by cloking the flames of their malice vnder a colour of Catholicisme pretēce of iustice Let these false prophets be astonished that are curteous in shew scorpiōs in sting wolues vnder lambs skinnes killing the bodies deuouring the soules of men with the sword of their mouth whose religion sauoureth nothing but of traiterousnes and couetousnes entring the houses of widowes they lead women captiues that bee loden with sinnes and by reason of our troublesome times giue eare to spirits of error and doctrines of diuels which Hildebrand their captain learned of his maisters Benedict the ninth and Gregorie the sixt Gregorie the ninth as Vrspergensis cōplaineth taking occasion by the Emperours absence that was fighting against the Turke sent a great armie into Apulia and inuaded subdued the Emperours dominions being thē in the seruice of Christ a fact most hainous and did his best both in Apulia and Lumbardie to hinder such as were going that viage from passing the Sea seeking thereby to betray the Christian Emperour his armie to the Turke Yea the men of Verona Millan would suffer none to passe by their coasts spoyling the very souldiers that were sent to fight against the Turke and that by the cōmandement of the Pope as they affirmed which alas is horrible to be spoken Who rightly considering wil not lament and detest these things as portending and foreshewing the ruine of the Church Mathewe Paris giueth Innocentius the 3. this commendation King Iohn saith he knew and by often experience had tried that the Pope aboue al mortal men was ambitious and proude an vnsatiable thirster after money and easie to be drawen and induced to all wickednes by gifts or promises Sixtus the fourth made his playfelow Cardinal who was wont to weare cloth of gold at home in his house to ease nature in stooles of siluer and to deck his harlot Tiresia with shoes couered with pearle as Agrippa reporteth he built a sumpteous stewes in Rome appointing it to be both masculine and feminine and making a gaine of that beastly trade As Vuesselus Gronnigensis sayth he gaue the whole familie of the Cardinal of S. Luce free leaue in Iune Iulie August to vse that which nature abhorreth God in Sodome reuenged with fire and brimstone One of your owne side perceiuing the lothsomnes of his life maketh the diuel giue him this entertaynment in hell At tu implume caput cui tanta licentia quondam Femineos fuit in coitus tua furta putabas Hic quoque praetextu mitrae impunita relinqui Sic meruit tua faeda venus sic prodigia in omnem Nequitiam ad virtutis opus tua auara libido But thou thou bauld pate which hast so licentiously defiled thy self with women didst thou thinke thy secrete sinnes by reason of thy myter shoulde here goe vnpunished Receiue the rewarde of thy filthie pastimes so hath thine outragious lust to all lewdnes and voyde of all goodnes deserued It is too shameful that Iohannes Iouianus Pontanus writeth of Lucretia the daughter of Alexander the sixt Hoc tumulo dormit Lucretia nomine sedre Thais Alexandri filia sponsa nurus Here lyeth Lucretia in name in deede a shamelesse whore the daughter of Pope Alexander her fathers brothers harlot The fact so horrible that it were not credible if others did not confirme the same I will trouble chast eares no longer with this vnsauory repetition These disorders of Popes if you weigh them well be more than scandalous giue you smal cause to vaunt of your vertues Phi. These be the things that we told you were more false than Esops fables Theo. It were reason you shoulde proue them false before you reiect them as fables men of your owne sect and side laying thē down for truths in their writings you may not now take vpō you to pronounce them fables lest your credite be called in question your selues reputed to bee worse than lyars These things be they true bee they false wee report them as we find them in your owne stories not your aduersaries but your welwillers were the first autors of them And vnlesse wee see some surer ground than your bare deniall we may better charge you with open flatterie than you may them with wilful forgerie Phi. The number is not great though y◠matters were true Theo. The rest of their outrages if I would recken namely their schismes cōtentions tumults for the Popedom their ambition presumption oppression briberie periurie tyrannie pride craft hypocrisie to conclude their garboyles battailes and bloodshed an whole volume would not suffice And where you make your Clergie so free from scandals heare what men of former times and of your owne side haue spoken and written of your Bishops Priests Monkes and others Bernard of his age Behold saith he these times very much defiled with the worke that walketh in darknes Wo bee to this generation because of the leauen of Pharisees which is hypocrisie If it may be called hypocrisie which is now so rife that it can not and so shamelesse that
such as be worthie Phi. No. Theo. Then do you giue the same power to the Pope which God claimeth to him-selfe to displace the wicked from their thrones Phi. But vnder God Theo. If your holy father do this without a particular and precise warrant from God hee doth it not vnder God but as well as God that which is in this case done without God is against God But on with your example of Samuel Saul was deposed of his kingdome by Gods appointment and sentence which Samuel pronounced vnto Saul from the mouth of God Ergo what Phi. Ergo king Saul was deposed Theo. Grant he were by whom was it done by God or by Samuel Phi. God prescribed the sentence but Samuel pronounced it Theo. In whose name did Samuel speake in Gods or his own Phi. In Gods Theo. Said he more than God commaunded him Phi. I thinke not Theo. Then God spake the worde and God gaue the iudgement against Saul only Samuel was sent to tell Saul so much that was sore against Samuels will as appeareth by his mourning for Saul which God reproued in him And now to turn your own exāple on your own head I trust God hath as much right to depose Princes as the Pope Phi. What then The. Did all Israel Iudah sinne in obeying Saul so many yeares after hee was deposed by God and an other annointed in his place Phi. They did it for feare because Saul kept the kingdom by tyrannical force notwithstanding his deposition Theo. Did Dauid sinne in seruing Saul long after himselfe was annointed Phi. He durst not doe otherwise Theo. When Dauid had Saul alone in the caue and might haue slain him did he well to spare him Phi. He might lawfully haue killed him as S. Augustine deduceth but he would not Theo. Of that anon in the meane time was it a lie in Dauid to call him his master and the Lords annointed after his deposition Phi. He called him so in respect he had bin so though presently he were not so Theo. Nay Dauid affirmed y◠at that present he was so The Lord saith Dauid keepe me from laying mine hand on him For he is the Lords annointed And after shewing that this was his dutie and not his curtesie when he founde him asleepe one of his Captaines would haue slain him he said Destroy him not for who can lay his hand on the Lords annointed be giltles Where Dauid maketh it no fauor to spare him but a sin to touch him And to the messenger that brought him news of Sauls death How wast thou not afraide saith Dauid to put foorth thine hand to destroy the annointed of the Lord And commaunding the fellow to bee thrust through Thy blood saith hee bee vpon thine owne head for thine own mouth hath witnessed against thee saying I haue slaine the Lords annointed If all Israel obeyed Saul notwithstanding the sentence of God pronounced against him if Dauid himselfe after his annointing serued honored Saul as his master called counted him the Lords annointed to the houre of his death abhorring it as a sinne in himselfe to lay hands on him seuerely punishing it in an other that did it How can you warrant rebellion against Princes or make it a meritorious act to murder them whom the Pope without all authoritie frō God presumeth to displace Phi. Dauid might lawfully haue killed Saul as S. Austen sheweth against Adamātius but he would not The. The words of Dauid are plain to the cōtrary speaking of Saul himselfe Who can lay his hand saith he on the Lordes annointed be guiltles He could not be guilty but of a sinne it had bin therfore no lawful but a sinful deed for any man Dauid himselfe not excepted to haue killed Saul in respect he then was so continued till he died The Lordes annointed Phi. S. Augustine saith Dauid might haue killed Saul without feare His words be Dauid had his enemie persecutour king Saul in his power to do with him what hee woulde and hee chose rather to spare him than to kill him Hee was not commaunded to kill him neither was hee prohibited Imo etiam diuinitus audierat se impunè facere quicquid vellet inimico Yea rather hee had hearde at Gods mouth that hee might freelie handle an enemie how he would and yet so great authoritie hee conuerted to curtesie Theo. Adimantus helde opinion that the olde Testament was contrarie to the newe because the Lawe as hee thought permitted reuenge and allowed men to kill their enimies where the Gospell commaundeth vs to praie for our enimies and to loue them as the wordes of our Sauiour doe witnesse This obiection Sainct Augustine refelleth by shewing that the killing of the Nations which God commaunded proceeded of loue not of hatred and that the iust of the olde Testament loued and fauoured their enimies when it was expedient for them so to do as namely Dauid that spared king Saul his enimie and persecutour though he might easilie haue slaine him Philand Sainct Augustines worde is impunè hee might freely haue doone what hee woulde to him Theoph. Whether that were Sainct Augustines perswasion or an aduauntage taken vppon Adimantus assertion the place it selfe doeth not expresse of the twaine I thinke the later to bee the truer For this was Adimantus erronious position that the Lawe licenced the Iewes to kill their enimies and you may not well charge Sainct Augustine there-with least you bring him againe within the compasse of the Manichees errour Sure it is Sainct Augustine doeth not grounde his speech on this that Saul was deposed and therefore might haue iustly beene destroyed which is our case but on the permission of reuenge which the Lawe of Moses seemed to graunt Dauid towarde his enimie as well as all others towardes their enimies marie that was no right exposition but a misconstruction of the Lawe sufficient to refute Adimantus because it was his owne but not rashly to bee fathered on Sainct Augustine in respect of his learning and credit otherwise in the church of God For the lawe of God gaue no man leaue to kill his enimie but that precept was to bee referred to the Magistrate to whome God gaue the sworde lawfully to kill such as were by his Lawe adiudged to die which our Sauiour doth not prohibite in the new Testament but reproueth the Iewes for hauing this false conceit of Gods lawe that euery priuate person might hate his enimies and loue his neighbours they corruptly expounding neighbours for friendes and acquaintance and assureth them that to loue their enimies and pray for their persecutors which hee then prescribed them was no new addition but the ancient and true intention of Gods law These wordes then Dauid had heard by the Lawe of God for speciall reuelation from God to Dauid Sainct Augustine knewe none that hee might doe freely what hee would to an enimie are assumed
his successours woulde not leaue as being the onely meane to make them Lordes of al. And therefore when Rodolf was slaine HermaÌ„nus was speedily erected against Henrie and had his rewarde as speedily at a womans hande which with a mightie stone as hee was comming in sport to trie the force of his souldiers beat out his braines from the toppe of a castle in earnest Ecbertus was the thirde that ascended to his masters seate and hee not long after was caught in a windmill and paid his life for his ransome Subiectes hauing so euill successe against their Prince the Pope and his confederates thought to trie what the sonne woulde doe against the father and first they perswade Conradus the eldest sonne of Henrie whom his father left in Italie to represse the force of Mathilda to ioyne with her against his owne father and to with-drawe the whole kingdome of Italie from obedience to the Emperour Which vnnaturall dealing of Conradus forced the father to disherite him and to make choise of his yonger sonne Henrie the fift to succeed him in the Empire taking an oth of him least hee shoulde runne his brothers course that during his owne life the sonne shoulde not medle with the fathers kingdom or countries but by the fathers consent The elder brother not long after departed this life which occasioned the Pope and his adherentes to temper with Henrie the fift though by nature and oth bounde to the contrarie that hee shoulde take the Scepter in hande and rather beare him-selfe as king than suffer a straunger to rise vppe and put both the father and the sonne in hazarde to haue the kingdome from them This feare ioyned with a youthly desire to raigne brought the sonne to take armes against the father and to meete him in open field with a periured and wicked purpose to defeate him of his crowne The matter had come to dint of sword but that the chiefe on both sides abhorring those vnnaturall warres pretended to parle as if they would compose the strife without blood in which conference of theirs the father found the Nobles that were with him incline rather to the sonne rising than setting and to faynt from the possessour of the Crowne for dreade of him that shoulde bee successour and for that cause secretely conueyed him-selfe from the campe and fledde to the Duke of Bohemia and to the Saxons who before were his mortall enimies and the first attempters of his deposition but nowe seeing that vngratefull and parricidiall attempt of his bowelles against him honoured and assisted the father to the vttermost of their power The Popes Legates and the rest of that faction fearing the friendes and doubting the valour and former successe of Henrie the fourth turned them-selues to their Romish artes and perswaded the sonne to faine a kinde of submission and reconciliation to his father vppon this condition if hee woulde but retaine peace with the See of Rome To that the father accorded referring him-selfe and his cause to the indifferent iudgement of his Nobles and Princes and receiuing of his sonne for the safetie of his life and honour promises teares and othes all which notwithstanding hee was with a faire pretence ledde to a castle by the waie as they trauelled and being receiued in as an Emperour he was kept there as a prisoner and this offer made him either to loose his heade or to resigne his Empire By these detestable periuries practises the son gat the father to relinquish the Crowne and this if you thinke to bee good successe you may say that Iudas had as good in betraying his master as Henrie the fift in displacing his father Phi. The same Gregorie the seuenth did the like commendable iustice vppon the king of Pole Bolislaus the 2. as wel excommunicating as depriuing him for murdering of his Bishop S. Stanislaie at the verie altar Against which sentence though hee stood by force and contempt for a time yet at length hee was forsaken and resisted wholy by his subiects fled and in fine slue himselfe Theoph. The iustice doone vppon Henrie the fourth was not verie commendable One of your owne friendes confesseth the Prince was condemned Absens inauditus both in his absence and not so much as hearde whaâ— he could say for himselfe The Bishops of Italie Germany thought it not verie commendable when they deposed the Pope Quod Regem nullo exemplo anathemate praeter omnem causam perculisset for that hee had accursed depriued the king which was neuer seen before that without al iust cause And surely to restore the Prince to the communion as Gregorie did at Canusium and yet to defeate him of his Crown and to set vp his seruaunt to rebell against him this had no shewe of iustice And if you commende it you haue your consciences seared with an hoat Iron and will speake nothing that may displease the Pope be it neuer so iust or true The murdering of Bishop Stanislay by Boleslaus the second king of Polonia we mislike as well as you but the depriuing him of his Crowne and allowing his subiectes to conspire his death that was to requite sinne with sinne and to reuenge murther with a more hainous and impious murder It was not lawfull for the king to kill a Bishop that admonished him of his viciâ—us life much lesse was it lawfull for subiectes to conspire the death of their Prince Neither act was good but of the twaine the Popes was the leuder For in steede of reducing the king to repentance which should haue beene his only purpose he interdicted the whole Realme from the seruice of God which is rather the subuerting of innocents than the punishing of offendâ—urs vsed the kings sinne as a pretence to incite the subiects to greater sinne and to settle his vsurped power ouer the Princes of Polonia that should succeede by charging the Bishoppes to annoynt or crowne no king after that without his consent Your own author confesseth no lesse When these thinges saith he which Boleslaus had done were reported at Rome Gregorie the seuenth then Bishop moued with the haynousnesse of the fact interdicted the whole Realme from diuine seruice accursed Boleslaus to the deepe pit of hell and in solemne manner depriued him of his kingdome and commanded the bishops that they should annoint crwone no king after that without his licence Notwithstanding this depriuation Boleslaus raigned a yeare and more after that but hated of all at home and contemned abroade in so much that the Nobles of Ruscia which he had coÌ„quered refused their subiection and certaine of his Nobles and states at home conspired his death which conspiracie being detected he fearing lest moe were of their counsell fled to Ladislaus king of Hungarie who receiued him very curteously and honorably He fled fearing his owne subiectes whom he had tyrannously oppressed not long before with shamefull crueltie as the same
And so againe of that and such like Many thinges are not founde in the Apostles writinges nor in the Councels of those that came after them and yet because they be obserued of the vniuersall Church Non nisi ab ipsis tradita commendata creduntur they are thought to haue bin deliuered and commended by none but by them Phi. This sense is not amisse if the words would beare it but the text is Esset as we translate it Theo. The sense which you vrge is first against your selues next against S. Austen himselfe in other places and lastly which is it that you shoote at it ouerthroweth not our assertion Phi. It requireth some paines to proue all this Theo. Not so much perhappes as you thinke For will you confesse that no custome of the church must be receiued or beleeued except it be Apostolike Admit this and see whether we will not presently cast off the most part of the preceptes and customes of your Church as not descending from the Apostles and therefore not at all to bee beleeued by your owne verdict And as for Sainct Augustine if you thinke hee woulde saie that The custome of the vniuersall Church is not at all to be beleeued except it bee Apostolik reade this resolution better you wil leaue that misconstruction of his wordes Those things which we keep saith he not written but deliuered by traditioÌ„ the which the whole world obserueth must be conceiued to haue bin commended ordained vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenarijs concilijs quorum est in ecclesia saluberrima authoritas either by the Apostles themselues or else by general councels whose autority in the church is most wholsom The custom of the church he saith must be retained though it be not Apostolike but decreed by others of later age meanâ—r credit than the Apostles if their assemblies synods were general And againe In hijs rebus de quibus nihil certi statuit scriptura diuina mos populi Dei vel instituta Maiorum pro lege tenenda sunt In those things where the diuine scripture appointeth no certainty the custome of the people of God ordinances of forefathers must bee helde for a law If the custome of Gods people the ordinaÌ„ces of elders must be kept for a law then the custom of the church in baptizing her infants might not be reiected though it were not Apostolike so S. Austen with your esset cleane crosseth himselfe Lastly where you thinke to giue vs the foile with pressing this place we easily grant you that The custom of the church in baptizing her infantes were not to be beleeued if it were not in Apostolike tradition You haue your own reading what are you the better Phi. Ergo some points of faith are beleeued without the scriptures besides the scriptures The. Sir I deny your argument Phi. This is beleeued by tradition ergo not by scripture Theo. A tradition it may be yet written in the scriptures S. Paul calleth the Lords supper a traditioÌ„ yet it is written Ego accepi à Domino quod tradidi vobis I receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto you The death and resurrection of Christ he likewise caled a tradition confirmed by the Scriptures Tradidi vobis inprimis quod accepi I deliuered vnto you first of all which I also receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures and was buried and rose the thirde daie according to the Scriptures And in plainer words to the Thessalonians Holde fast sayeth hee the traditions which you haue learned either by speeche or Epistle of ours calling those thinges that be written in his epistles his traditions Phi. But the fathers vse the word otherwise for that which is not written Theo. Sometimes they do somtimes they do not S. Cyprian sayth Whence is this tradition Whether doeth it descend from the Lordes authority and the Gospell or commeth it from the precepts and epistles of the Apostles If it be commaunded in the Gospell or contained in the Epistles or Actes of the Apostles let this holy tradition be obserued And so S. Basill Our baptisme is according to the tradition of the Lord in the name of the father the Sonne and the holy Ghost Ireneus Tertullian Hierom Augustine and others call the short rehearsal of the christian faith which is our common Creede an old Apostolik traditioÌ„ yet no part of the creede is without or besides the warrant of the Scriptures Phi. I know it may be a tradition and yet reuokeable to the Scriptures and proueable by the Scriptures but the baptisme of infantes Sainct Augustine saith hath no witnes in the scriptures Theo. Where saith he so Phi. In many places Theo. Name but one Phi. There be many things which the vniuersal Church obserueth and for that cause they be well thought to haue beene commaunded by the Apostles though they be not found written Theo. How proue you this to be one of those many Phi. Because wee finde it not written but only deliuered by tradition Theo. You say so but where doth S. Augustine say so Phi. In the wordes which we first alleaged It were not to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolike tradition If it were written it must be beleeued though it were no Tradition Theo. You deale with the fathers as you doe with the scriptures S. Austen doth not say the baptisme of infants were not to be beleeued but The custome of the Church in a matter of so great weight as the baptizing of infants were not to be trusted if the tradition were not Apostolike The church might not haue presumed to baptize infants if the Apostles had not begunne it what gaine you by that Thereby you may proue that the Apostles did it and that the Church of her selfe and her own authoritie might not doe it more you cannot proue Phi. But doth S. Austen any where say that the baptisme of Children is contained in the scriptures Theo. What if he went not so farre in wordes because the matter was not in question whiles he liued is that any ground for you to conclude that it is not allowed by the Scriptures Phi. If he keepe silence it is a shrewde signe that it is not Theo. So long as no man did impugne it there was no need he should defend it the question in his time was not whether it were lawful for infants to be baptized but whether it were needfull for theÌ„ or no. The Pelagians held it to be superfluous for yâ— infantes were void of original sinne which was their error That he mightily reproueth by manifest Scriptures and sheweth that infants as well as others bee excluded from the kingdome of God if they be not baptized Farther hee waded not as being not farther vrged and troubled enough besides with refuting other heresies and yet as occasion serued hee brought
in them all others to do what he did taught them that his actions were essentiall to his Supper as well as words He did not wil them to say this but to doe this in remembrance of him Phi. Do you not thinke the repeating and vsing of his words to be necessarie in the celebration of the Sacrament Theo. Yeas but I adde that his actions are as necessary Phi. There is difference betweene the making of a medicine or the substance and ingredience of it and the taking of it Theo. There is but wheÌ„ the medicine is neuer so well made if it be not ministred to the patient the making of it is vtterly vaine Phi. Yet the making of it is not the ministring of it Theo. The one is the end of the other and therfore without the ministring the making is superfluous Phi. Then taking and eating is not the substance or being or making of the sacrament or sacrifice of Christs body and blood but it is the vse application to the receiuer of the things that were made offered to God before Theo. Neither did I say that eating and drinking were the substantial partes of the sacrament but of the Lords institution Phi. As though the sacrament were not our Lords institution Theo. Christes institution containeth as well the vse as the matter or forme that must be vsed A supper is not only the meate prouided but also the act of eating that which is prouided so the Lords institution or Supper imploieth the vse and action as well as the word and elements Phi. The vse of it is to be a sacrifice as well as a sacrament and in a sacrifice offering is rather required than eating Theo. That is the way to correct the son of God who saide not take this and offer it but take this and eate it Eating which Chrâ—st commaunded you neglect offering which â—e did not commaunde you esteeme and yet you would bee followers of Christ. Phi. Did not Christ say to his Disciples Do this Theo. You knowe we presse you with that saying of his Phâ— Doe this that is offer this Theo. So you say but where saith Christ so Phi. Doubt you whether this bee a sacrifice Theo. We talke not what names the Lordes supper may be called by but what wordes Christ vsed Phi. Hâ— sâ—ide Doe this Theo. To wit that which he did before for so the demonstratiue bindetâ— the sense Phi. And what if Christ sacrificed himselfe as he sate at table Theo. 〈◊〉 must come to that issue or else your sacrificing is cleane without Christs commaunding Phi. Christ himselâ—e seemeth to mention some such thing when hee sayeth This is my body which is not which shal be broken for you And this is my blood which is shed not which shall be shed for many for remission of sinnes If this were not a sacrifice wâ—at was it Theo. It was the foreteâ—ling of that which was then at hand presently to ensue Phi. Christ vsed the present and not the future tense Theo. And yet the suffering which hee specified by the breaking of his body and shedding of his blood was not present but the next day on the crosse If you teach that Christs blood was really shed at the table for remâ—ssion of sinnes you must put him twise to death make the later death which was on the crosse to be vtterly idle For where remission of sin is there needeth no more sacrifice for sin If theÌ„ remissioÌ„ of sins were obtained by the actual shedding of Christs blood at his last supper his death crosse the next day were superfluous If forgiuenes were not obtained ouer night but that the Lord the next day was to shed his blood for our sinnes then spake he before hand of that which the next day should follow his speech in the present tense noteth nothing but that hee had euen then giuen him-selfe ouer to death for our sakes which immâ—dâ—atly they should beheld No act of Christes therefore at his last supper importeth any reall sacrifice that he then made but he did institute a Sacrament of thankesgiuing and coâ—maunded vs by eating and drinking to bee partakers of his bodie that was wounded and bloode that was shedde the next daie for the remitting and pardoning of our sinnes So that you must either retayne eating and drinking at the Lordes table or else renounce both the beneâ—it of his passion and memoriall of his death with an open neglect of his last Will and Testament Phi. Wee do retaine it and as you know by our canons we bind all priests that consecrate to communicate in both kindes Theo. Let the decrees of men alone do you bind them to it by the words of Christ Phi. We do though the punishment bee expressed in the canons and not in the Scriptures Theo. It in punishment enough to bee guiltie of the body and bloode of Christ a greater you can not impose make your canons as seuere as you will Phil. Yet you see we binde them to communicate Theophil You should breake Christes institution if you shoulde doe otherwise Philand And therefore wee doe that which I tell you Theophil Then eating and drinking are necessary partes of Christes institution Philand Of his action they are partes but not of the Sacrament Theophil Neither doe I say that they are partes of his bodie blood but of his example and ordinance Philand Wee graunt Theo. And the neglecting of those actions which Christ in his person perfourmed before vs is a breach of his institution as well as the changing or omitting of his wordes Philand In the Priest it is Theo. Of the Priest wee speake for Christ charged him and not women or lay-men to doe as he did Phi. Then wee agree to your last position that if the Priest do not obserue Christes actions as well as Christes wordes he transgresseth Christes institution Theoph. Then your Priestes are all guiltie of violating Christes institution Phi. Doe they not eate and drinke at the Altar as hee did Phi. That Christ himselfe did eate and drinke at the ministration of the Sacrament is not expressed in any part of his institution though some wordes that followe after declare he dranke of the same fruite of the vyne which the rest did but the whole course of his actions speeches stood in deliuering the mysteries vnto others He tooke bread that hee might breake it hee brake it that hee might giue it he gaue it that they should eate and so his wordes declare which are both plurall and spoken to others take ye eate ye not singular or to himselfe Though therefore your Priest take and eate for his part yet since Christ brake the bread that it might bee diuided among others bid them take and eate it is certaine your Priestes neither doe as Christ did nor as hee commaunded his Apostles to do nor as the very wordes of Christ which he repeateth do
neither denying auoyding defeating nor answering What if not one of these fathers whose works you cite as thick as hops euer spake or heard of your external and real sacrificing the sonne of God afresh for the sinnes of the worlde but they vsing the wordes Sacrifice and oblation to an other purpose you force a priuate and peculiar sense of yours vpon their speaches against their meanings Phi. This is euer your wont when the woordes bee so plaine that you can not deny them to flie to the meaning Theo. In deede this hath beene not the least of Satans sleights in conueying your Religion from steppe to step point by point to keepe the speach and chaunge the sense of the learned and auncient fathers that what with the phrases which were theirs and the forgeries which were not theirs and yet caried their names hee might make the way for Antichrist to set vp his visible Monarchie of error and hypocrisie Phi. This is the way to rid your selues of all obiections Theoph. And the other is the way to drowne your selues in the deapth of all corruption but so long as wee holde their fayth and doctrine which were the lights and lampes of Christes church we can spare you their phrases here and there skattered in their writings you no whit the neerer the trueth of their beliefe Phi. You hold not their fayth in this or any other point of your Religion Theo. The greatest boasters bee not alwaies the greatest conquerours Let it therefore first appeare what they teache touching the Sacrifice of the Lords table and what wee admit and then it will soone bee seene which of vs twaine hath departed from them The fathers with one consent call not your priuate Masse that they neuer knew but the Lordes Supper a Sacrifice which wee both willingly graunt and openly teach so their text not your gloze may preuayle For there besides the sacrifice of praier and thankesgiuing which we must then offer to God for our redemption other his graces bestowed on vs in Christ his sonne besides the dedication of our soules and bodies to be a reasonable quicke and holy sacrifice to serue and please him besides the contribution and almes then giuen in the primatiue Church for the reliefe of the poore and other good vses a Sacrifice no doubt very acceptable to God I say besides these three sundry sortes of offerings incident to the Lordes table the very Supper itselfe is a publike memorial of that great dreadful sacrifice I meane of the death bloodshedding of our sauiour and a most assured application of the merites of his passion for the remission of our sinnes not to the gazers on or standers by but to those that with faith and repentance come to the due receiuing of those mysteries The visible sacrifice of bread and wyne representing the Lords death S. Austen enforceth in these words Hold most firmly neither doubt of this in any case that the only begotten sonne of God taking our flesh offered himselfe a sweet smelling sacrifice to god to whom with the father the holy ghost the Patriarks Prophets Priests vnder the old law sacrificed brute beasts to whoÌ„ now in the time of the new Testament with the same father holy spirite the holy Catholike Church throughout the world doth not cease to ofâ—er the sacrifice of breade and wine in faith charitie In those carnal Sacrifices there was a figuration of the flesh of Christ which he should offer bloud which he should shed for the remissioÌ„ of our sins In this sacrifice there is a thankesgiuing remembrance of the flesh which he hath offered and bloud which the same god hath shed for vs. With him agreeth Ireneus Christ willing his Disciples to offer vnto God the first fruites of his creatures not that god needed them but lest they should be found vnfruiteful or vnthankful toke the creature of bread and gaue thanks saying this is my body And likewise he confessed the cup which is a creature amongst vs to be his bloud teaching the new oblation of the new Testament which the Church receiuing from the Apostles offereth to God throughout the world We must theÌ„ offer to god in al things yeeld thanks to god the maker with a pure mind vnfaigned faith stedfast hope and feruent loue offering the first fruits of his Creatures and this oblation the Church only sacrificeth in purity to the creator offering to God of his creatures with thanksgiuing And this we offer to him not as if he stoode in neede of these presents but rendring him thanks for these his gifts and sanctifieng the creature This oblation of bread wyne for a thankesgiuing to God a memoriall of his sonnes death was so confessed vndoubted a trueth in the church of Christ till your Schoolemen beganne to wrest both Scriptures and Fathers to serue their quiddities that not onely the Liturgies vnder the names of Clemens Basil and Chrysostome do mention it We offer to thee our king and God this bread this cup according to thy sonnes institutioÌ„ tua ex tuis offerimus tibi domine we offer thee O Lord these thy gifts of thine own creatures Which sense Irineus vrgeth against valentine but also the very Missals vsed in your own Churches at this day do confirme the same These be the woordes of your own Offertorie Receiue holy Father God euerlasting this vndefiled host which I thine vnworthy seruant offer to thee my king and true God for my sinnes negligences and offences innumerable for al standers by yea for all faithful christians as wel liuing as departed this life that it may helpe me theÌ„ to attaine eternal life We offer to thee O Lord this cup of saluation intreating thy goodnes that it may be taken vp into thy sight as a sweet smell for the sauing of vs the whole world Receiue blessed Trinitie this oblatioÌ„ which we offer to thee in remeÌ„brance of the passion resurrection asceÌ„tion of Christ Iesus our Lord. We humbly beseech thee most merciful father through Iesus Christ thy son our Lord that thou accept blesse these gifts these preseÌ„ts these holy vndefiled sacrifices which we offer to thee first for thy Church holy and catholike c. For al true belieuers c. For al here present c. For the redemption of their soules and hope of saluation Certainely you speake these words long before you repeate Christs institution your Masse-booke doth apparently prooue that which I report if I mistake the secretes of your masse let the shame bee mine What then offer you in this place Christ or the creatures of bread wine By your own doctrine Christ is not present neither any change made til these wordes This is my body this is my blood be pronounced ergo before consecration the creatures of bread wyne keepe their
similitude image of that oblation to be celebrated for a remēbrance of his passiō in so much that we may see that which Melchisedec offred to God now sacrificed in the church of Christ throughout the world Emissenus Considering that Christ was to take his body from our eyes place the same in the heauens it was requisite he should institute the sacrament of his body and blood for vs at his last supper that it might alwaies be continued in a mysterie which was once offred for a ransom because the work of our redemption did neuer faile the sacrifice of our redemption might be perpetual and that euerlasting oblation of Christ on the crosse might remaine fresh in memorie and present for euer in grace Theodorete If Christ by his owne sacrifice on the crosse brought to passe that other sacrifices should be superfluous why doe the Priests of the new Testament execute the mysticall Lyturgie or Sacrifice It is cleare to them that are instructed in our mysteries that we doe not offer an other sacrifice but continue the memorie of that one and healthful Sacrifice For so the Lord himself commanded vs doe this in my remembrance that in beholding the figures we should remember the paines which he suffered for vs beare a louing heart towards him that did vs so much fauour and expect the receiuing of good things to come which he promised Theophilact Do we then offer vnbloody sacrifices No doubt wee doe◠mary by being a remembrance of the Lords death He was once offred and yet we offer him alwaies or rather we celebrate the memorial of that oblation when he sacrificed himselfe on the crosse Receiue this addition which they make and wee graunt you that oblation which they teach Christ is offered or rather a memorial of his death and oblation is celebrated This later correction doeth expound and interprete their former assertion You can require no plainer nor sounder doctrine They piese not Christ with their handes they shroud him not in accidences they pray not for him that God will vouchsafe to respect and accept him as hee did the giftes and external sacrifices of Abel Abraham and Melchisedec as you do in your Masses they neuer tolde vs the very fact and intention of the Priest were meritorious these bee your absurdities and blasphemies They did offer an vnbloody sacrifice not of flesh but of Spirite and mynd the selfe-same which Melchisedec did two thousande yeeres before Christ tooke flesh and therefore not the flesh of Christ a figuratiue sacrifice to witte Signes Samplars Similitudes and Memorials of his death and bloodshedding So that Christ is offered dayly but Mystically not couered with qualities and quantities of bread and wyne for those be neither mysteries nor resemblances to the death of Christ but by the breade which is broken by the wyne which is drunke in substance creatures in signification Sacraments the Lordes death is figured proposed to the communicants and they for their parts no lesse people than Priest do present Christ hanging on the crosse to God the father with a liuely faith inward deuotion and humble prayer as a most sufficiēt and euerlasting Sacrifice for the full remission of their sinnes and assured fruition of his mercies Other actual and propitiatorie sacrifice than this the church of Christ neuer had neuer taught You beleeue not mee Well what if your owne fellowes and friends teach the same What if the master of your Sentences what if the Glozer of your decrees what if the Ringleader of your Schoolemen make with vs in this question and euince that for twelue hundred yeres after Christ your Sacrifice was not knowen to the woorlde will you giue the people leaue to bethinke themselues better before they call you or account you catholikes Then heare what they say Peter Lombard in his 4. booke and 12. distinction I demaund whether that which the Priest doeth bee properly called a Sacrifice or an oblation and whether Christ be daily offered or els were offered only once To this our answere is briefe that which is offred and consecrated by the priest is called a sacrifice and oblatiō because it is a memorie representation of the true sacrifice holy oblatiō made on the altar of the crosse Also Christ died once on the crosse and there was he offred himself but he is offred daily in a sacrament because in the Sacrament there is a remembrance of that which was once done Now what this meaneth Christ is offred in a sacramēt we need no fairer interpretation thā that which your own gloze oftē repeateth Christ is offred in a sacrament that is his offring is represented a memorie of his passion celebrated It is the same oblation which he made * that is a representation of the same passion Christ is offered euery day mystically * that is the oblation which Christ made for vs is represented in the sacrament of his body blood With these concurreth Thomas of Aquine Because the celebration of this Sacrament is a certaine Image of Christs passion it maie conuenientlie be called the sacrificing of Christ. The celebration of this Sacrament is termed the immolating of Christ in two respects First for that as Austen saith resemblances are woont to be called by the names of those thinges whose resemblances they are next for that by this sacrament wee be made partakers of the fruite of the Lordes passion Here find you no reall locall nor externall offering of Christ to God his father by the Priest for the sinnes of the people which is your opinion at this daie you finde that the celebration of the Lordes supper maie be called an oblation first for that it is a representation of Christs death and sacraments haue the names of the things which they signifie next because the merits and fruits of Christs passion are by the power of his spirite diuided and bestowed on the faithfull receiuers of these mysteries Nowe boast of your Catholike doctrine that your pratling Sophists and wandering Friers inuented but yesterday now call for your souereigne Sacrifice not onelie repugnant to the sacred Scriptures and auncient fathers but reiected by the Mint-master of your sentences refuted by the conclusions of your Seraphicall Doctor shunned by your rude Gloze-maker and cleane thwart to the Canon of your ordinarie Masse If you speede no better in the rest of your causes a worse name than fugitiues will become you and your companions well enough without perill of slaunder or breach of charitie These foundations lying sure to wit that the creatures of bread and wine are offered to God for a thanksgiuing when they be sanctified and receiued according to his sonnes institution and that Christ himselfe is daylie offered and crucified in a mysterie because the breaking of his bodie and shedding of his blood on the crosse are proposed and renewed by the bread
is the liuely sacrifice whereof it is written Offer to God the sacrifice of praise your coūtinances hang as did that homicides which slue his brother Phi. This nothing infringeth our assertion Theo. But this declareth the meaning of Malachie Phi. Our oblation is a sacrifice of praise thanksgiuing Theo. Had you kept your selues there and not runne farther to fansies of your owne framing and Uictimes as you call them of your own presuming you might haue offered that cleane sacrifice foretolde by Malachie which nowe you doe not Phi. You will not haue his wordes pertaine to the Eucharist Theo. You will neuer speake trueth so long as you may shift with facing Phi. Confesse you thē that Malachie spake of the Eucharist The. With all our hearts Phi. You bee nowe ouer the shooes in your owne cestern The. But it doeth me no hurt for I feele no wet Phi. You graunt the Eucharist to be a sacrifice which your fellowes will be angrie with you for Theo. Neither they nor I euer denied the Eucharist to be a sacrifice The verie name inforceth it to be the sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing which is the true and liuely sacrifice of the new Testament Phi. I thought you woulde backe againe Theo. I am nowe as farfoorth as euer I was or as any of these ancient fathers are which haue expounded the wordes of Malachie Phi. Then you must affirme it to be a sacrifice Theo. Leaue this foolish repeating and often inculcating that which neither benefiteth you nor annoyeth vs. The Lordes table in respect of his graces mercies there proposed to vs is an heauenly banquet which we must eate not sacrifice but the duties which he requireth at our handes when wee approch to his table are sacrifices not sacramentes as namely to offer him thankes and praise faith and obedience yea our bodies and soules to bee liuing holy and acceptable sacrifices vnto him which is our reasonable seruing of him Phi. This must bee doone when wee receiue the sacrament but this is no part of the Sacrament Theoph. These bee the conditions without which God will not haue vs come to his Table and for these respects the Eucharist hath his name thereby to put vs in minde of our duties Phi. Wee do not deny these sacrifices to bee good and holy and then most requisite when wee drawe neerest vnto God as at his table but we adde that the very sacrament it selfe is a sacrifice and the celebration thereof is a continuance of that oblation which Christ made in his owne person on the Altar of the crosse Theo. This wee graunt to bee most true in that sense which Sainct Augustine and other auncient and Catholike Fathers doe auouch it that is because Sacramentes haue the names of those thinges whose Sacramentes they are And since this is the Sacrament of the Lords death and a passion we do not sticke to say that Christ is dayly crucified and sacrificed for the sinnes of the world mary not really or corporally but by way of a mysterie that is his crosse and bloodshedding are proclaymed and confirmed in the eyes of all the faithfull by these signes of his death and seales of his truth by which hee first witnessed that his bodie should bee broken and his blood shed for the remission of our sinnes Philand Why then refuse you the fathers expressing their opinion of this sacrifice Theo. Nay why doe you abuse their wordes to support your errors and wheresoeuer you find the names of sacrifice and oblation in them referred to the Lordes supper why alleadge you the places with such confidence as if the fathers were at your commaundement to meane nothing but your reall sacrificing the sonne of God vnder the formes of bread and wine Phi. What other meaning could they haue Theo. I haue already shewed you by their owne writinges what other meaning they had Phi. You say they call it a sacrifice because it is a signe and memoriall of his death on the crosse Theo. That is sufficient to shew their meaning Phi. But their words are so weightie that a cold and naked signification doth not answere the force of them The Lambe of God laide vpon the table conc Nice The quickning holy sacrifice the vnbloody host and victime Cyril Alex. in conc Ephes. Anath 11. The onely inconsumptible victime without which there is no religion Cypr. de caen Dom. nu 2. Chrys. hom 17 ad Heb. The sacrifice of our price Aug. confess lib. 9. cap. 13. Theo. What a patching you keepe to no purpose Phi. Dare you attribute these speeches to the creatures of bread and wine Theo. Dare you attribute them to the Priestes externall gestures Is his act the lambe of God or the price of our ransome or the holy and quickning sacrifice Phi. No but the fleshe and blood of Christ are which the Priest offereth as wee say to God for the sinnes of the people Theo. To what ende then alleadge you these places for the Priests act which shewe the worthinesse of Christes sacrifice and the power of his death Phil. Our sacrifice worketh those effectes Theo. And so doth ours Phi. Then you bee of our opinion Theo. As though we did resist you touching the thing that is offered and not touching the manner of offering That Christ is the lamb of God laid on the Lordes table before the eyes of our mindes that his flesh wounded and bloud shed for our sinnes are an holy quickning and euer during sacrifice and the most sufficient price of our redemption we vrge this against you you neede not vrge it against vs wee fully and faithfully teach it The question betweene vs is howe this sacrifice once made on the Crosse is daily renued in our mysteries You will haue a reall corporall and local profering of Christs fleshe to God the father vnder the formes of bread and wine made by the Priestes externall actions and gestures for the sinnes of such as he lift this is we say a wicked and blasphemous mockerie His passion is the true oblation of the church his flesh wounded and blood shedde are the only sacrifices for sinne which oblation that it might be alwayes in our hearts and sights he hath commaunded vs to continue in his church by a memoriall of his owne erecting and to applie the same to our selues by a stedfast hope in his mercies humble prayer vnto his holynes as often as wee approach to his table to bee partakes of his death merites And therefore the Priestes act can no way bee auailable for those that stand by looke on and neither communicate with him in praier or in the participation of the mysteries And your alleadging four and twentie places of the fathers for this kinde of sacrifice of which they neuer thought sheweth what fidelitie and sinceritie you haue vsed in the rest of your Rhemish obseruations which you sent ouer but to occupy mens
the thinges themselues whose signes those are Philand It were Theophil Why then since corporall eating serueth only for corporall nourishing and hath a continuall and naturall coherence with it doe you confesse the trueth in the later and not as well in the former part of that action why doe you not expound them both alike Philand To say the immortall fleshe of Christ is conuerted and turned into the quantitie and substaunce of our mortall flesh is an horrible heresie Theophil And so say that his fleshe is eaten with our mouthes and â—awes lâ—â—th in our stomacks is the verie pathway right introduction to that heresie or at least to as brutish and grosse an erour as that is Philand The Fathers affirme that his body is eaten with our mouthes Theophil And so they affirme that his bodie and blood doe increase and augment the substaunce of our mortall and sinnefull bodies Philand But that can not bee Theophil No more can the other Philand Howe shall our bodies rise at the last day if Christes body bee not in them Theophil Our resurrection dependeth not on the act of eating his flesh but of nourishing our fleshe with his as Ireneus telleth vs and the thinges which wee eate are not the causes but as the great Nicene councell admonisheth the pledges of our resurrection Their words be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must beleeue these to bee the signes or pledges of our resurrection Philand S. Chrysostom earnestly inforceth the eating of Christs flesh And sayth wee doe not onely eate it but euen * fasten our teeth in his fleshe Theo. In deede hee saith so but if you did not auert both your eyes and eares from the trueth you would perceiue by that verie sentence both the maner of his other Fathers speeches of that Sacrament and the right intent of their Doctrine in those cases His wordes are Non se tantum videri permittens desiderantibus sed tangi manducari dentes carni suae infigi desiderio sui omnes impleri Christ suffering himselfe not only to bee seene of those that are desirous but to bee touched and eaten and our teeth to bee fastned in his flesh and all to be satisfied of their longing after him Phi. Lord me thinketh these words be verie plain words He suffereth our teeth to bee fastned in his fleshe Theo. Uerie plaine they bee but very false also vnlesse you either take the flesh of Christ for the signe called by that name or else referre teeth and biting to the soule and faith of the â—â—ward man aâ— wel as you do the eyes hands wherewith we see him touch him Phi. Look what an â—â—â—sion you haue since gotten Theo. Nay looke what a subuersion of all truth and saith you be since fallen to Phi. Doth not this Father say wee fasten our teeth in his flesh Theo. Doeth hee not also say We see him with our eyes touch him with our handes Phi. That is referred to our faith as S. Ambrose teacheth Fide Christus videtur side Christus tangitur By faith Christ is seene by fayth Christ is touched Theoph. And why shall not the next which is more vnlikely to bee true bee referred to faith as well as the former Sainct Ambrose likewise saying Comedat te cor meuÌ„ panis sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee O holy bread O liuing bread O pure-bread come into my heart enter into my soule and Cyprian calling it the proper norishment of the spirite besides infinite others that for a thowsande yeares taught that doctrine in the church of God not your gutturall eating of Christ with teeth and iawes Phi. Was your maner of eating Christes fleshe which you defende in the sacrament taught in the church for a thowsande yeares Theop. Euen ours was and when yours came first to be proposed your schoolemen ran euery man his way fighting and scratching one an other â—ho should fal fastest and farthest from the truth Philand Blush you not to auouch two such monsterous lies Theop. A lyar will easily suspect any man as knowing him-selfe to delight in lies but GOD bee thanked that lyes with you bee truethes with vs and with all that haue any knowlegde of GOD or care of his truth The things which I affirmed be manifest truethes and such as you will blush at for verie shame if you be not sworne to your holie Father against Christ as well as you bee against your Prince Origen commenting vppon these wordes of the Supper this is my bodie this is my blood this breade sayeth hee which Christ confesseth to bee his bodie is the worde that nourisheth our soules and this drinke which hee confesseth to bee his blood is the worde that moysteneth and passinglie cheereth the heartes of such as drinke it Thou which art come vnto Christ sticke not in the blood of his fleshe but rather learne the blood of his worde and heare him saying to thee this is my blood which shall bee shedde for the remission of your sinnes Hee that is partaker of the mysteries knoweth the flesh and blood of the worde of God For the bread is the word of righteousnesse which our soules eating are nourished with and the drink is the worde of the knowledge of Christ according to the mysterie of his birth and death The blood of the Testament is poured into our heartes for the remission of our sinnes Athanasius Howe fewe men woulde his bodie haue sufficed that this shoulde bee the foode of the whole worlde Yea therefore doeth bee warne them of his ascension into heauen that he might drawe him from thinking on his bodie and they thereby learne that the flesh which he spake of was celestiall meate from aboue and spirituall nourishment to bee giuen by him The wordes which I spake to you are spirite and life which is as much as if hee had sayde this bodie which is in your sight and delyuered to death for the worlde shall bee giuen you for meate that it may bee spiritually distributed in euery one of you and be an assuraunce and preseruatiue to raise you to eternall life Cyprian writing of the Lordes Supper Eating and drinking saieth hee bee referred to the one and same end with the which as the substance of our bodies is increased and preserued so the life of the spirite is maintained with his proper nourishment What foode is to the fleshe that faith is to the soule what meate is to the body that the worde is to the spirite working euerlastingly with a more excellent vertue that which bodily meates doe for a time and vntill a season Ambrose approaching to the sacred communion which you intitle a prayer preparing to Masse amongest other thinges speaketh thus to Christ himselfe Thou Lord saydst with thine holy and blessed mouth the bread
of them is the popish Sacrifice August de side ad Peâ—â— cap. 19. The Catholike Church offeâ—eth bread and wine to God for a thankesgiuing in remembrance of his sonnes death Our Sacrifice is the giuing of thankes and remembring of his death b Irineus lib. 4. cap. 32. c Ibidem cap. 34. The Church offereth to God of his creatures with thanksgiuing sanctifying that which the faithfull receiue at the Lords table d Clemens Apost constitutio lib. 8. cap. 17. e Liturg. Chrys. Basil. f Lib. 4. cap. 34. g Offertorium Missae Their owne Masse-booke is against the sacrifice which they defend to be in their masse h Ibidem i Ibidem k Ibidem By their owne bookes it is euident that they doe not sacrifice Christ but the creatuâ—es of bread and wine Marke this contradiction in their masse-booke to the sacrifice which the Iesuits pretend l Aug. ad Bonif. epist. 23. Christ is offered not in substance but in a Sacrament or representation of his death Christ slaine for our sinnes is the true sacrifice of the Lords table a Cypr. li. 2. ep 3. b Ambros. in 10. ca. epist. ad Heb. c Euseb. de demonst Euang. lib. 1. cap. 10. d Chrys. in Mat. hom 83. e Aug. contra Faust. l. 20. c. 21. The actions and elements of the supper resemble his death f De cons. dist 2. § cum frangitur g 1. Cor. cap. 11. As Christ is crucified in the mysticall supper euen so is he offered h Hier. in ps 95. i Chrysost. in acta Apost hom 21. k De cons. dist 2. § quid sit sanguis l Aug. Euang. quaest l. 2. ca. 38. m De cons. dist 2. § hoc est quod alâ—imus n Glossa de cons. dist 2. § quid sit sanguis o Chrysost. in 10. cap. episâ—â—d Hebr. p Ambr. in 11. ca. epist. 1. ad Cor. q Eusebale demonstra Euangelic lib. 1. ca. 10. r August 83. quaest cap 61. Christ is offered at the table that is a sacrament similitude of his death is celebrated s De cons dist 2. § quia corpus This is Christian comfortable doctrine Theod. in cap. 8. ad Hebr. Theoph. in 10. cap. ad Hebrâ—os What sacrifice the fathers taught and offered * Canon Missae supra § propitio ac sereno vultu a Liturgia Basilij b Cypr. li. 2. epist. 3. August 83. quaest ca. 3. c Dionys. eccles hierach cap. 3. d Paschal de cons. dist 2. § iteratur The true exposition of the Sacrifice at the Lordes table How long the Church was without their kind of sacrifice Sententiarum lib. dist 12. The master of the sentences is against the Iesuits in the sacrifice of their Masse f Glossa de cons. dist 2. ¶ semel g § in Christo. h § Iteratur Thom. part 3. quâ—est 83. art 1. * The latter schoolemen since Thomas mistaking the former turned these words to opus operatum and taught the Priests act to be the right meane to applie Christes death to the quick and the dead Can their doctrine be Catholike that so latelie was vnknowen to their own fellowes 24. places cited by the Iesuits in their testament to no purpose and so 14. by the maker of their Apologie Their reall actuall sacrifice must needes be made with handes and so the gestures of the Priests hands is all the sacrifice the Iesuites haue What Sacrifice it is that God regardeth The Rhemish Test. fol. 447. Malac. 1. The prophesy of Malachie discussed 1. Pet. 2. What sacrifices the newe testament teacheth vs to offer vnto God a Hebr. 13. The Sacrifice of praise Of mercie b Phil. 4. c Rom. 12. Of our selues d Psal. 115. Eccles. 35. Psal. 50. These be the sacrifices of the new testament which God requireth at our handes and of which Malachie speaketh The Iesuites in alledging the fathers vse such cunning that a man caÌ„ hardlie perceiue to what end they name them Three fathers abused by the Iesuits to peruert the words of Malachie Cyprian in that place which they cite doth not so much as speake of Malachie Cyp. ad QuirinuÌ„ lib. 1. cap. 16. Iustinâ—â—n Dial. cum Tryphone aduers. Iudaeos Iustinus restraineth the words of Malachie to praiers and thankes other sacrifice he acknowledgeth none in the Lords supper Irenae li. 4. ca. 33 * Ibidem cap. 34 Ireneus expoundeth Malachies wordes of praier obedience and thankesgiuing as we doe Iren. lib. 4. ca. 34 Ireneus teacheth not the offering of Christ to his father but of creatures for a signe of thaÌ„kfulnes Iren. lib. 4. cap. 34 The rest of the fathers interprete Malachies wordes after the same manner a Tertul. aduer lud eos b Tertul. aduer Marc. lib. 4. c Euseb. de demonst Euang. lib. 1. cap. 6. d Cyril contra Iuliaâ—â—m â—i 10. e Hie. in Zachariam lib. 2. ca. 8. f August contr liter Petilia li 2. cap. 86. We striue not for the worde sacrifice which the Iesuites verie diligentlie prooue but for their kinde of sacrifice which they cannot proue by the testimonie of any one father In what sense the Lords supper is both a Sacrament a Sacrifice Our duties to God are our sacrifices FroÌ„ these sacrifices the Eucharist hath his name This sacrameÌ„t hath the similitude and therefore the name of Christs death and passion The Iesuits are verie plentifull in heaping impertinent allegations The Rhe. Test pag. 447. All these fathers speake of Christs bodie broken and blood shed on the cross which are resembled in this sacrament The power of Christs death the Iesuits attribute to the Priests act The Iesuites sacrifice How the death of Christ is both offered and applied Your feate was to prepare the peoplâ— against a daie A man maie soone peâ—uerâ— the fathers by skores as the Iesuits haue done in their Testament What sacrifice it is the Iesuits woulde establish They produce the name of sacrifice vsed by the fathers and vnderstand thereby their owne fansies The reason whie we doe not vse the worde sacrifice so often as the fathers doe The fathers phrases beguiled the Iesuits whiles they were too eger on them The name of sacrifice hath no warrant in the Scripture The Rhe. Test fol. 447. Heb. 7. A man shall finde manie thinges in the Rhemish obseruations which are not the text of the Scripture The Rhe. Test. fol. 447. The Iesuites would prooue if they could tell how that S. Paul calleth the lords Supper a Sacrifice * This point by point is not worth a blew point Their misconstering of S. Paul examined The faulte which the Apostle reprooueth in the Corinthians This was partaking with Idols and dishonoring of God S. Pauls reason against it by waie of comparison or opposition Though Saint Pauls reason be â—ramed by waie of comparâ—son yet the Iesuits illation is not necessary Eating of thinges consecrated vnto Idols is fellowship with diuâ—lâ— though they be not sole â—â—elie sacrificed vnto them The Iesuites prooue by the