Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	wit_n	witness_n	word_n	23	3	3.1839	3	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16152	The true difference betweene Christian subiection and unchristian rebellion wherein the princes lawfull power to commaund for trueth, and indepriuable right to beare the sword are defended against the Popes censures and the Iesuits sophismes vttered in their apologie and defence of English Catholikes: with a demonstration that the thinges refourmed in the Church of England by the lawes of this realme are truely Catholike, notwithstanding the vaine shew made to the contrary in their late Rhemish Testament: by Thomas Bilson warden of Winchester. Perused and allowed publike authoritie.	Bilson, Thomas, 1546 or 7-1616.	1585 (1585)	STC 3071; ESTC S102066	1,136,326	864

We may do better to learne obedience than sawcely to check the magistrate for allotting such penalties as we do not like yet this I wil say there is no conspiracie so pernicious and dangerous to the State as that which is secretly crept into the hart vpon a sense of deuotion and outwardly couered with a shew of religion If therfore the Prince seuerely reuenge both your pretences in opinion practises in execution absurdly grounded on Peters keyes and wickedly deriued thence for the remouing of her crowne defacing of her person and diminishing of her right that rigor may wel be defended as comming from iust and lawfull authoritie not without sufficient and euideâ—t necessitie neither can you bring ought against it but onely that you professe it as a point of your Catholique religion not of any sinister or direct intention to hurt her maiestie or any other Christian Prince which is most friuolous false For the Popes authoritie iurisdiction and power lately claymed by him and vsurped within this Realme and since maintained extolled and defended by you and such your adherents as haue suffered death to prescribe Lawes as hee list to commaund Princes and interdict their Realmes yea to depriue them of their crownes absolue their subiects licence rebellions and dispence with the murdering of heretikes as you call them euen of Princes themselues This authoritie iurisdiction and power we deny to bee any doctrine or doubt of Christian religion or to bee so much as once spoken or thought of I say not by the Scriptures which put no difference betweene the Pope and an other Bishoppe but by any father or Councell for a thousande yeeres in the Church of God It was the meere deuise and drift of Antichrist to make himselfe mightie when it was first attempted by Hildebrand and it is nowe coloured by you with the name of religion because you would poyson the people the sooner with that perswasion haue somewhat to say for your selues when you be charged with rebellion and disobedience to the temporall magistrate Phi. Your owne masters and leaders whom I trust you will not condemne for Traytours haue detested the title of Supreme head of the Church in princes as well as wee the Lutherans flatly controling it in generall and Caluin himselfe with all the Puritants much misliking and reprehending the first grant therof to king Henry Why then put you poore men to death for that which your owne side abhorreth Theo. Your brethren were not put to death for denying her maiestie to bee supreme head of Christes Church in Englande in causes ecclesiasticall though one of them for want of trueth or wit did so report at his end and you for lacke of better proofe haue brought his owne woordes spoken in fauour and excuse of himselfe as some worthie witnes No man is compelled by the lawes of this Realme to confesse any such title in the Prince much lesse punishable by death for denying it and therefore your martyr was a Lyer at the houre of his death and either of malice inuerted or of ignorance misdeemed the cause for which he dyed Phi. It is all one to bee head of the Church and to bee chiefe Gouernour in causes ecclesiasticall Theo. They suffered neither for the one nor for the other but for maintaining and defending the iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome heretofore claymed and vsurped in this Realme which generall includeth all your erroneous and trayterous assertions of the Popes power tending no way to religion but only sauouring of the Popes pride to be ruler and displacer of Princes And therfore either proue that claime to pertaine to faith or leaue your vayne presuming and fond discoursing that a number of your brethren haue beene condemned and executed for meere matter of religion Though you list to take that for spirituall which is temporall and cal it religion which in deede is sedition yet your idle multiplying of words and changing of names doeth not conuince your quarrel to bee righteous or the Lawes of this Land to bee tyrannous Shewe that power iurisdiction and authoritâ—e which your holy father hath heretofore claymed and vsed in this realme to bee consonant to the lawes of God or church of Christ for a thousand yeres and wee will yeeld your friends and familiars haue dyed for religion otherwise you do but face out the matter with fierie words to keepe deceiued and simple sâ—ules from suspecting the secrets of your profession As for supreme head of the church it is certaine that title was first transferred from the Pope to king Henry the eight by the Bishops of yoâ—r side not of ours though the pastors in King Edwards time might not wel dislike much lesse disswade the stile of the crowne by reason the king was vnder yeres and so remained vntil he died yet as soone as it pleased God to place her maiestie in her fathers throne the Nobles preachers perceiuing the words head of the church which is Christs proper and peculiar honour to be offensiue to many that had vehemently refelled the same in the Pope besought her highnesse the meaning of that word which her father had vsed might be expressed in some apter plainer termes and so was the Prince called Supreme gouernour of her Realme that is ruler and bearer of the sworde with lawfull authoritie to command and punish answerably to the word of God in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall thinges and causes as well as in temporall And no forraine Prince or prelate to haue any iurisdiction superiority preeminence or authority to establish prohibite correct and chastice with publike lawes or temporall paynes any crimes or causes ecclesiasticall or spirituall within her Realme This Caluin and they of Magdeburge neuer misliked howsoeuer you would seeme to take aduantage of their words Phi. Caluin sayth it is sacrilege and blasphemie Looke you therefore with what consciences you take that othe which your owne master so mightily detesteth Theo. Nay looke you with what faces you alleage Caluin who maketh that stile to be sacrilegious and blasphemous as well in the Pope as in the Prince Reason therefore you receiue or refuse his iudgement in both If it derogate from Christ in the Prince so doeth it in the Pope if it doe not in the Pope as you defend no more doeth it in the Prince Yet we graunt the sense of the word supreme as Caluin conceiued it by Steuen Gardiners answere and behauiour is very blasphemous and iniurious to Christ and his word whether it bee Prince or Pope that so shall vse it For by supreme Caluin vnderstoode a power to do what the Prince woulde in all matters of religion without respect to the will or precepts of God which is a thing most impious Phi. His woordes are They were blasphemers in calling him supreme head of the Church vnder Christ. Theo. They are so but that which goeth before

The Scriptures commend Iosiah for compelling the people to serue God the seruant is charged to compell the guestes that were loth to come God hath ordained the sword which neuer entreateth or perswadeth but onlie commaundeth and compelleth to punish falshood and assist truth Now men that bee willing neede no forcing ergo Princes may compell their subiectes that is constraine them against their wils to keepe the faith and communion of Christs Church notwithstanding they pretend or in deede haue neuer so resolute and strong an opinion to the contrarie The Donatistes rather than they would bee forced from their fansies slew themselues yet this did nothing fraie the Church of God froÌ„ compelling them by the rigour of Princes lawes without any respect to their wilful desperation We graunt he that woundeth a weake conscience sinneth against Christ mary to be grieued with that which is good is no weakenesse but wickednesse and he that tendereth or regardeth a wicked conscience by your leaue is a fauorer and confirmer of his euill works To such saith Paul I gaue no place no not an hour for if I should so please meÌ„ I were not the seruant of Christ. We may not for thinges indifferent trouble the weake mindes of our brethren yet this rule bindeth no Magistrate to remit the punishment of error and infidelitie because God hath charged them to suffer no kinde of euill vnreuenged and this is the greatest whose voice they must heare whose will they must obeie though they were sure thereby to scandalize neuer so many both aliens subiectes Phi. Wo to that man by whom offences come Theo. True Sir but an offence fondly taken not iustly giuen entangleth no man besides the taker Blessed is he saith Christ that is not offended at me Where cursed is he that taketh an offence the giuer is blessed for euer We preach Christ crucified a stumbling blocke to the Iewes and wo to me saith Paul if I preach not the Gospell yet doth it bring the wicked to their destruction and is the sauour of death vnto death in them that perish Then as the minister must dispense the worde of truth be therewith offended and greiued who list so the Magistrate may drawe the sworde of iustice to compell and punish such as bee blindly led or maliciouslie bent to resist sound doctrine without any respect what afterward befalleth such ouerthwart creatures If vpon compulsion desperation ensue wo not to the compeller vsing those meanes which God hath appointed and discharging that duetie which God hath commaunded but wo rather and double wo to the despayrer who first framed his conscience to forsake truth and beleeue lies and nowe receiuing the iust reward of his error hath his heart hardened that when good discipline which healeth others is applied as a wholesome medicine to recouer him it causeth or sheweth him to be past cure without any sinister action or ill intention of the Magistrate Thus much for the making and exacting of that oth The contents whereof shall be fully discussed when we come to the place which I named We stand too long I feare about these foolish and impertinent quarels I will passe to your second Chapter as finding nothing left in your first but an action of vnkindnesse against such as call you Fugitiues which name you well deserue though you be loth to beare Phi. That is but your saying which wee little regard Theo. Much lesse neede wee regard your slaunderous and false reports published of purpose to deface this Realme they bee but your sayinges which no good man esteemeth Phi. You fall now to wordes Theo. What else haue you done since we began We be now come to the shutting vp of your first Chapter reuiew the same what one line what one letter haue you proued that hurteth vs or helpeth you Phi. You were not here to looke for many Scriptures or Fathers we giue you the reasons of our departure which bee matters of fact and admit no proofes Theo. If you can not proue them wee neede not disproue them and so let vs end with this and proceede to the next Phi. You answere not halfe that which we haue obiected Theo. You obiect much proue litle which forceth me to neglect the most part of that you haue obiected For when you heape vp idle words that are but winde and raigne ouer your aduersaries with Lordlike vauntes which are better despised than answered why should I follow your vaine humor or bring the cause of Christ to a meere brable or wordes as your Apologie doth Phi. Say your pleasure Theo. Your first Chapter we haue seene what doth your seconde containe Phi. The causes of our repairing sometime to the Citie and Court of Rome Theo. If this be all I will neuer open my mouth for the matter Your priuate actions and secret purposes we can not see wee neede not search Therein you may pretende what you please without any truth and wee beleeue what we list without any wrong Phi. In faith and truth they were none other but to make humble sâ—te for the establishment and perpetuall foundation of the College or Seminarie which his Holinesse had long before instituted in place of the hospitall of our nation there this was one thing Another was that the Gouernours of that College in Rome aboue and of this other now resident in Rhemes beneath might giue and take mutuall direction for correspondence in regiment discipline and education most agreeable to our Countrie mens natures and for preuention of all disorders that youth and companies of Scholers namely in banishment are subiect vnto Theo. It may be this you did but did you nothing else Phi. It was strongly surmised we know that our going to Rome was to procure some matter against the Prince but God is our witnesse it was no part of our meaning Theo. That intelligence was giuen by such as were daily conuersant with you and those articles of confederacie betweene the Pope and others to inuade this Realme were rife in your Seminaries there and closely sent to your friendes here but whether interprised followed by coÌ„mon consent amongst you or only deuised scattered by some of you to strike a feare in the peoples harts to make them the readier for your perswasions we can not exactly say this wee be sure such practises in subiects be lewd seditious Phi. If that informatioÌ„ were true Theo. What reasons haue you to proue it false Phi. Enow The second chapter of our Apologie doth refell it at large Theo. You refell it in deed as your maner is that is you say that you wil without any further proofe or paines Certain yong fellowes say you Fugitiues from their Masters depreheÌ„ded in diuerse cosinages counterfaiting of letters plaine thefts haue of malice hope of impunity and lucre traiterously slaundered you Thus as if you sate supreme Iudges ouer al the world you bring nothing to quite

blood and bowels against them And therefore no maruaile if king Henrie relented somewhat of his former stoutnesse when the king of Fraunce the Earle of Flaunders the king of Scots the yong king his sonne and two other of his children the Duke of Aquitane and Earle of Britaine coÌ„spired against him but it is euident that froÌ„ the conquest till the time these lawes and liberties stood in their full force and were publikely receiued and vsed in this Realme Phi. Did the Pope procure him these enemies Theo. What packing there was betweene the French king and the Pope though the stories in this place do not confesse yet we may soone coniecture by the generall drift of your holy Father his blessed adherents in those daies specially by the exaÌ„ple of king Iohn the sonne of the said king Henrie whom for refusing the disordered election of Stephen Langton to the church of Canterbury Innocentius the 3. so terrified with open inuasion of enemies secret defection of subiects that for safegard of himselfe he was driuen to resigne his kingdome take it againe at the Popes hands in fee farme vnder the yearly rent of a thowsand marks binding himself his heires for euer to do the like homage fealtie to the Bishops of Rome for the crowne of England Which shamefull seruitude of the Prince vtter ruine of the Realme so much displeased the baroÌ„s bishops that before toke the Popes part against the king that in plaine contempt of the Popes keies curses they chose them an other king chased king Iohn the Popes farmour from place to place in despite of al y his new Landlord could do or deuise But this I omit because the quarel touched the right title to the crown I medle only with those resistances which the kings of England made for men and matters ecclesiastical Phi. I trust they were not many Theo. For the first hundred yeares next the coÌ„quest it is clear the kings of this Realm would neuer allow their subiects to run to Rome nor suffer appeals to be made to the Pope without their expresse consent now shall you see what they which came after did When king Edw. the 3. reuiued the statute of Premunire made by king Edw. the 1. in the 35. year of his raign against such as sought to Rome to prouide theÌ„ of benefices other ecclesiastical promotions wtin this realm enacting the same penalty for those that by processe froÌ„ thence impugned any iudgement giuen in the kings courts or brought from Rome any Bul writing or instrumeÌ„t to those other like effects Gregory the 11. then Bishop of Rome vnderstanding therof was very earnest against it protesting this was nothing else but to make a schism in the church of Christ to abolish religion to subuert right reason infringe al couÌ„cels speedily dealt with king Edw. to abrogate this law A schisme rising not long after in the church of Rome there was not a Pope that had any care of this til at leÌ„gth Martin the 5. wrote more vehemeÌ„t letters to K. H. the 6. But these two bishops of Rome receiued one the same answer which was that an act of Parliament could not be repealed without the autority of a ParliameÌ„t that shortly one should be called to that end which neuer after was performed Yea the king that came after did not only cause that law to be kept put in vre but increased the terror of it with a rigorous punishmeÌ„t which is that the party so offending shal forfeit his goods himself be condemned to perpetual imprisonmeÌ„t This writer an Italian born a man wedded to the See of Rome confesseth the Popes authority was abated restrained by the lawes of this Realm in the time of king Edward the 3. and so continued euer after that not only the Popes letters were twise refused but the sharpnesse of the punishment increased to strengthen the Statute that pared their power and limited his iurisdiction within this Realme Phi. Perhaps they wtstood him for teÌ„poral matters Theo. The matters were such as your own church accouÌ„teth spiritual to wit electioÌ„s of Bishops gifts of benefices procedings in other causes tending as the coÌ„mplaint of Gregory teacheth you to the diuision of the church extirpation of religion subuersion of al councels which you may not thinke to be temporall matters And this resistance which the Bishop of Rome so much repined at in the daies of king Edward the 3. neuer ceased till king Henry the 8. of famous memory banished the Popes vsurped power cleane out of this Land Phi. So did none of his progenitors before him Theo. It may be they weÌ„t not so far as he did but as Polydor writeth R. Rich. the 2. weÌ„t fairly towards it In a Parliament held the 14. yeare of his raigne the king his princes were of opinion that it would be very good for the realme of England if some part of the Popes dominion were determined with the Sea that is excluded out of this laÌ„d for that many wer daily vexed for causes which they thought could not so easily be ended at Rome Wherefore they made a law that no maÌ„ euer after should deal with the Bishops of Rome that any person in EnglaÌ„d should by his autority for any cause be excoÌ„municated that none should execute any such precept if it were sent him If any maÌ„ brake this law the pain apointed was he should lose al he had ly in prison during his life And where the pope trauailed by al means to ouerthrow the statute of prouisioÌ„ premunire the parliameÌ„t held in the 13. year of Rich. the 2. for the better establishing surer executing of the law made it death for any maÌ„ to bring or send Bul or other proces froÌ„ Rome to impugn the same These be the words IteÌ„ it is ordained established that if any maÌ„ bring or send within this realm or the kings power any suÌ„moÌ„s senteÌ„ce or excoÌ„municatioÌ„ against any persoÌ„ of what coÌ„ditioÌ„ that he be for the cause of making motioÌ„ assent or executioÌ„ of the said statute of Prouisors or premunire he shal be takeÌ„ arested put in prison forfeit al his lands tenements goods catle for euer moreouer incur the pain of life meÌ„ber So the kingdoms coÌ„monwelths as wel as councels of al others FraÌ„ce England haue from time to time resisted your holy father in the midst of his terror tyrany P. You shew they did it but you do not shew they did wel in it Th. I need not you must shew they did il The prince by gods ordinaÌ„ce beareth the sword not the pope therfore the presumption lieth for the prince against the pope til you proue the coÌ„trary besids if bishops in a synod may lawfully resist him why may not princes in their parliameÌ„ts

muscer no men till your captaine bee readie least you loose your labour as the Rebels of the North did Is this the faith and allegeance your Soueraigne Ladie shall looke for at your handes when strangers inuade then to resolue which side you will take Go to masters if this be subiection I maruaile what is rebellioÌ„ Phi. His holinesse doth the like things for almost euery other Nation in distresse none so ill so suspitious or so vngrateful as to mistrust his benefites to be their destruction not the Germanes not the Hungarians not the Greekes not any other Prouinces for al which his holines hath erected Colleges euen as for our Countrie of which though all take not so much good as they might doe yet none feare hurt nor make lawes against his holy and charitable actions but we Theo. Offer that wrong to other Princes euen of your owne religion which your hâ—â—ly father hath done to her maiestie and see which of them will doubt to make sharper and sorer lawes against you than her highnes hath yet made Pronounce them no Princes inuade their lands conuert hostilities abroade and at â—â—â—ne to thrust them from their thrones and then tell vs howe they will reward you These wicked and diuelish attempts against your Soueraigne you cal holy and charitable actions and such is your madnesse that you blame the State for preuenting and repressing this haynous iniurie with wholsom lawes Phi. Call you that preuenting of iniurie to put innoceÌ„ts to death Theo. You refuse to confesse that her Highnesse is rightfull Queene of this Realme and yet would be counted innocentes Phi. You say not well We confesse her Maiestie to be true Queene of this Realm Theo. And ought to be so taken of al her Subiectes though the Pope depose her Phi. Why doe you pose vs with the Popes authoritie That which wee spake was plaine enough Theo. Not so You be licenced from Rome to agnise her Grace for true Queene of Englande for a time vntill the Bull of Pius the 5. may be put in publike execution that is vntill shee may by force of armes be violently driuen from the Crowne Phi. Is it not strange that you report these thinges of vs and can not proue them Theo. Is it not stranger that you know these thinges to be true and yet denie them Phi. I protest for my part I know them not Theo. Wee will reason farther thereof in an other place I hasten now to your fourth chapter Phi. Will you leaue S. Hierom vnanswered Theo. This whole chapter hath neither Scripture nor Father with you nor against vs but onely one poore allegation and therefore we may not skip that in any case but what saith S. Hierom Phi. This one thing I thinke good of charitable pietie and affection to forewarn thee that thou hold fast the faith of holie Innocentius who is successour and sonne of the Apostolike chaire and of the forenamed Anastasius that thou receiue not a strange doctrine though thou seeme to thy selfe neuer so wise and subtile Theo. This proueth that Innocentius and Anastasius in the dayes of S. Hierom held the true Christian faith that the Romanes for Demetriades to whom S. Hierom gaue this counsell dwelt in Rome should rather follow the Bishop of their owne Citie teaching sound and Apostolike doctrine than embrace strange errors vpon presumptioÌ„ of wit What doth this helpe you Phi. Gregory the 13. that lately liued was their successor sonne in Seat beliefe Theo. Doth S. Hierom say so Phi. Nay we say so Theo. Proue that and set vp your Masse Phi. In Seat you graunt Theo. Skant enough Phi. What not in Seat Theo. No not in Seat Phi. Why so Theo. First Atheists heretikes sorcerers and women haue been Popes and that interrupteth your succession Next the plentie of Popes during the two and twentie schismes in the Church of Rome whereof the last dured 40. yeares and was so doubtfull that the best learned and most religious of your side could not tell which to cleaue to I say this pluralitie of Popes at one time confoundeth your reckoning Thirdly discontinuance shaketh your seat in peeces as when Peters chaire was emptie threeskore and fourteene yeares sixe Popes sitting one after an other not at Rome but in Auinion in Fraunce Last of all the most part of your Popes for these 600. yeares entred not by lawfull and Canonicall election neither expected the consent of the Romane Prince and people as they should and were wont to do but by violence seditioÌ„ corruption and bribery inuaded the Seat of Peter Which fault was so commoÌ„ that your best friendes coulde not choose but finde it The Popedome sayth Platina was come to that passe 500. yeares agoe that he which could do most with ambition and briberie he only obtained the Papal dignitie good men oppressed and reiected which manner would God our times had not kept but this is nothing we shall see worse if God preuent it not In the daies of Damasus the 2. hee saith This fashion was nowe so riâ—e that euery ambitious Marchant might catch vppe Peters seat And an hundred yeares before that in the time of Benedict the fourth As soone as the Church saith he was indued with riches and waxed lasciuious the worshippers of God turning from seueritie to wantonnesse the great impunity of sinne no Prince then repressing the lewdnesse of men bred vs these monsters and mischiefs who by corruption ambition rather inuaded than possessed the most holy Seat of Peter And for a conclusion he saith The Popes were cleane departed from Peters steps Phi. These be trifles they barre not succession Theo. They be iust and true exceptions but for this present I say with S. Hierom They bee not the sonnes of the Saints that occupie their places but that exercise their works If Gregorie the 13. taught Peters faith let him be Peters successor if he did set forth any other doctrine he succeeded S. Peter at Rome no more than the Turke doth S. Iames at Ierusalem or the Scribes Pharisees did Moses in whose chaire they sate when they crucified the Sonne of God But we spend time which might bee better imployed Phi. Then goe to the fourth chapter which I looked for all this while that the sight of our proofes and sound of our places which here we bring against the Princes supremacie might euen discredite and confounde your newe doctrine Theo. The impertinent vagaries and plausible colours of your Apologie doe but hinder the seriousnesse of the matter fulnesse of the proofe that in this case were requisite since therfore we be come to the maine foundation of al your doinges omit your florishing and fall to a stricter and exacter kinde of reasoning Phil. Agreed THE SECOND PART PROVETH THE PRINCES SVPREME POWER TO command for truth within her Realme and the Pope to haue been a duetifull Subiect to the Romane Emperours

thou make of the Church Onely dogges returne to their vomit and thou compellest the Priestes of Christ to sup vp those thinges which they had spitte foorth and doest thou commaund them in their confessions to allow that which before they condemned What Bishops hand hast thou left innocent whose tongue hast thou not forced to falsehood whose heart hast thou not brought to the condemning of his former opinion Substrauisti voluntati tuae sed violentiae Thou hast subiected all to thy will nay to thy violence His violent oppressing of Bishops in their Synodes wresting from them what he would is witnessed by theÌ„ both Synodos contrahis conclusos vrbe vna minis terres fame debilitas hyeme conâ—icis dissimulatione deprauas Thou gatherest Synods saith Hilarie to him when they be closed in one citie thou terrifiest them with threates thou pynest them with hunger thou lamest them with cold thou deprauest them with dissembling He pretendeth saith Athanasius a iudgement or Synode of Bishops for a shewe but in the meane tyme hee doeth whatsoeuer hee list himselfe What libertie of perswasion what place for aduise is there when hee that contradicteth shall for his labour loose his life or his Countrie By that meanes hath the Emperour gathered so great a number of Bishoppes partly terrified with threates partly enticed with promises to graunt they woulde no longer communicate with Athanasius The order of such tyrannicall Synodes the Bishoppes of Aegypt Libia Pentapolis and Thebais doe liuely report in defence of Athanasius whereby wee shall see howe farre they bee from the moderation and regiment of Godly Princes With what face dare they call this conuent a Synode where the Lieutenant was president where the tormentour stoode ready where the Iaylour in steede of the Deacons of the Church brought in those that were called for where the Lieutenant spake the rest that were present kept silence or rather yeelded their seruice to him where that which the Bishoppes by common consent liked was reiected by the Lieutenant Hee sate and commaunded wee were led by souldiers yea the Lieutenant him selfe did whatsoeuer the Eusebians our aduersaries bid him To bee short what shewe of a Synode was there where death or banishment if Cesar sayd the word was decreed This violence Liberius toucheth in his answere to Constantius messenger If the Emperour seeke in deede to interpose his care for the peace of the Church or if he commaund those thinges which wee haue decreed for Athanasius to be reuersed let those things also that are decreed against him be reuersed and after let an ecclesiasticall Synod be called farre from the Palace where the Emperour is not preseÌ„t nor the Lieutenant intermedleth nor the iudge threatneth as Constantius doth in his Synodes but only the feare of God and institution of the Apostles suffice for all things And this dissimulation the Bishops were brought to by the Emperours meanes as your own author confesseth that Constantines sitting presideÌ„t among the Bishops and prescribing rules for their churches the most part of theÌ„ receiued with applause admiratioÌ„ whatsoeuer he said affirming it to be diuinely spokeÌ„ What maruaile then if Athanasius reproued Constantius for sitting among the bishops in their Synods as president of their iudgements ringleader or ruler of the bishops in their determinations when as hee oppressed the freedome of their voyces with terror corrupted the secrets of their harts with promises hindered the vprightnes of their proceedings with his presence Or if Leontius brake out into these words I woonder that hauing charge of other things thou enterest into these matters and that being gouernour of the campe and common welth thou prescribest those things to Bishops which pertaine only to Bishops Touching accusations of Bishops his tyrannie was greater He made his Palace the Consistorie for such causes and himselfe iudge of them where if any Arrian accused an other Bishop were the complaint neuer so false the proofe neuer so slender the man neuer so giltlesse the partie accused should not cleare himselfe no not so much as speake for himself but was sure though he were absent and innocent to die the death or suffer banishment Phi. You imagine this of your own head to make Constantius seeme a very tyrant Theo. The words which you brought do fully proue so much but that you cut them off from the rest to make them sound for your purpose Put the wordes that follow to theÌ„ and see whether they do not import that which I saide Now againe in steed of Ecclesiasticall cognition that is the triall of Bishops by their Synodes when they are accused he hath appointed his palace the iudgement seate of those causes and himselfe the chiefe iudge and arbitrer of those contentions or accusations and that which you would wonder at if at anie time hee perceiue the accusers to stagger or faile in their proofes hee himselfe plaieth the accuser so as the partie conuented is suffered to replie nothing by reason of his violence Which he plainly shewed in Athanasius cause For in that matter hearing the free speach of Paulinus Lucifer Eusebius and Dionysius all foure Bishops prouing by the recantation of Vrsacius and Valens that the crimes obiected to Athanasius were false and the sayings of Vrsacius and Valens which they themselues had reuoked ought not to be credited Constantius straightway rising vp said I am Athanasius accuser on my word beleeue those thinges that are obiected to him Here the Bishops answering againe howe can you accuse Athanasius in his absence Graunt you would accuse him the absence of the partie accused is a let that you can not proceed to iudgement The iudgement is not of any common-wealth matter that you should bee beleeued as Emperour but a Bishop is accused and in this case he that wil accuse and hee that is accused must be delt withall in like condition How can you accuse him that could not be present for the distance of place If you haue those thinges which you obiect by hearesay reason is you also beleeue that which Athanasius shall bring in defence of himselfe For if you beleeue these his accusers and beleeue not him it may be thought they say these thinges and accuse Athanasius to content and please you This when the Emperour heard expounding their honest allegations for his reproches he banished them and waxing the sharper against Athanasius gaue foorth a terrible edict that he should be punished and his churches deliuered to the Arrians and his aduersaries haue leaue to do what they would Hereby the Arians waxed so confident that they spared no man Whom haue they not touched saith Athanasius with their false accusations Whom haue they not intrapped Whom hath not Constantius banished that was accused by them When did he not giue them both audience and allowance Whom euer did he admit to saie any thing against them Or what did he

you not answere Amen and saying so with a loud voice do you not signe your selues in the holie solemnitie at the kinges edict What Moses Iosua Dauid Salomon Asa Iehosaphat Ezechias Manasses Iosias Nehemias did for the planting preseruing and purging of true religion and how they commaunded reproued and punished as well Priestes as others for spirituall crimes and causes the places are infinite and witnessed in no worse recordes than the Scriptures themselues I will not touch them all but onely shew that euery one of these in their times raignes medled with Ecclesiasticall men and matters which is the point that you would impugne by your allegations Moses the ciuill Magistrate reproued Aaron the high Priest for making the golden calfe and stamping it to powder cast it into the water that Israell might drinke it and in one daie put three thowsand of them for that idolatrie to the sworde And after the rebellion of Corah when the residue were plagued for murmuring against Moses and Aaron Moses commaunded AaroÌ„ to take the censer and stand betweene the liuing and the dead to make attonement for the people And as during life Moses guided ruled them in al things both spiritual and temporal so readie to depart he carefully warned and finally blessed the twelue tribes of Israell Iosua that succeeded him a Prince not a Priest was charged by God to meditate in the booke of the law day night that thou maiest obserue saith God and do according to all that is written therein and the people receiued him with this submission As we obeied Moses in all things so will we obey thee Whosoeuer shall rebell against thy commaundement and will not obey thy wordes in all that thou commandest him let him be put to death And least you should thinke that he commaunded in nothing but temporall matters he circumcised the sonnes of Israell erected an Altar of stone for their offerings read the whole law to them there was not a word of all that Moses commaunded which Iosua read not before all the congregation searched and punished the concealer of thinges dedicated to idols not long before he died in his owne person renewed the couenant betweene God and the people caused them to put away the strange Gods that were among them insomuch that by his diligent care and good regiment Israell serued the Lord all the dayes of Iosua How far king Dauid medled with matters of religion if the Psalmes which he made for Asaph and his brethren to sing in assemblies and order which hee set for the whole seruice of the Temple appointing the Priestes Leuites Singers and other Seruitours of the church their dignities courses and offices did not declare the charge which he gaue to king Salomon his sonne and the praise which he gate at Gods handes for the faithfull execution and religious obseruation of his law giuen by Moses in all thinges and causes both spirituall and temporall are sufficient euidence Take heede to the charge of the Lord thy God saith Dauid to Salomon to walke in his waies and keepe his statutes his commaundementes and his iudgementes and his testimonies as it is written in the law of Moses This God himselfe repeated to SalomoÌ„ proposing Dauid his father for a paterne vnto him If thou wilt walke before me as Dauid thy father walked in purenesse of heart and vprightnes to doe according to all that I haue commaunded thee and keepe my statutes and my iudgementes I will establish the throne of thy kingdom vpon Israell for euer Phi. Do these wordes proue that Dauid did or Salomon might medle with Ecclesiasticall matters Theo. These places and such like doe fully proue that the Kinges and Gouernours of Israell and Iudah were appointed by God himselfe to haue the custodie charge and ouersight of all thinges mentioned and expressed in Moses law Here you see the wordes are to do according to all that I haue commaunded thee and keepe my statutes and iudgementes To Iosua God saide that thou maiest obserue and doe according to all that is written in the booke of the Law and likewise of the king in generall The booke of the Law shall be with him and he shal read therein all the daies of his life that he may learne to keepe all the wordes of this Law and these ordinances to fulfill them The king was charged with all the wordes and ordinances of Moses Law the law of Moses contained al thinges which God required of Priestes or people both spirituall and temporall ergo the king was charged by God himselfe as well with all Ecclesiasticall thinges and causes as with Temporall And consequently Dauid and all other kinges that discharged their duties to God in such sort as hee inioyned them medled with all thinges and causes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall Phi. Frame your argument shorter Theo. They were charged with all ergo they should medle with all and some discharged their dueties to God for example such as were commended and fauored by God whom I before named ergo some did medle with al the preceptes of God both Ecclesiastical and Temporall Phi. They were charged to obserue the whole Law as all other men were Theo. They were charged for their owne persons as all priuate men were but as kinges they were charged for others in such manner as no subiect coulde be charged namely to see the lawe of God to be publikely receiued fully obserued within their Realmes and all other sortes of Religion and policie to bee cleane forbidden and banished Phi. This is your surmise Theo. It is S. Augustines maine collection in sundrie places fet from the verie Principles of reason and nature and confirmed by the warrant of the sacred Scriptures The king serueth God saith Saint Augustine As a man one waie as a king an other way As a man by liuing faithfully as a king by makeing Lawes with conuenient vigor to commaund that which is right forbid the contrarie And againe Kinges euen in that they be kinges haue to serue the Lord in such sort as none can do which are not kinges For kings in respect as they be kinges serue the Lord if in their kingdomes they coÌ„maund that which is good and forbid that which is euill How then saith he do kinges serue the Lord but by forbidding and punishing with a religious seueritie those thinges that are done against the commaundementes of the Lord And thus much the verie deriuation of the name doth inferre Rex Ã regendo dicitur a king is he that ruleth others and the relation of the worde doth teach vs there can be no king but in respect of his subiectes and his duetie towardes them is to direct and correct that is to commaund and punish in all thinges needefull Phi. What conclude you of all this Theo. That where God chargeth the king to keepe and obserue

the Recordes that lay at Rome in your own keeping and the thing not spied Phi. A name is soone thrust in Theo. But whole sentences and whole leaues can not bee thrust in without stealing away the original laying a counterfeit in place thereof which was easie to be discerned Honorius cause is mentioned discussed in 26 seueral places of the councell two of his epistles repeated at large one of 9. skore 12. lines the other of threeskore and sixteene lynes which argue the whole councel to be forged or these branches concerning Honorius to be as sincere as the rest Phi. One Councell is soone corrupted Theo. But may you reiect your owne Recordes as forged and bring neither reason suspition nor probabilitie when by whom or how this was or could bee done Giue vs leaue to doe the like to the rest of your Romish Records where good cause leadeth vs and see what wil become of your Religion Phi. In deede this one we thinke to be forged Theo. A generall Councell repeating the matter which you sticke at more than twentie times and lying safe in your owne custodie you suspect to bee forged and vpon no ground but onely because it condemneth a Bishoppe of Rome for an heretike and yet you can not denie that but you must denie more Leo the second accursed Honorius his predecessour for the same heresie The seconde Councell of Nice which you greatly reuerence and call the seuenth generall Councell confesseth Honorius was condemned in the sixt generall Councell and themselues reiect him by name for an heretike whereto the Legates of Adrian then Bishoppe of Rome there present consented and subscribed Adrian the seconde in a Councell at Rome confessed that Honorius once Bishoppe of Rome was accused of heresie and condemned after his death by the consent of the Romane See and this his confession was read and allowed in the eight generall Councell of Constantinople If al these be forged that at Rome where your selues were the keepers how good cause haue we to suspect the rest of your euideÌ„ce which tend chiefly to vphold the Popes pride to encrease his gaine agree neither with theÌ„selues nor with the state of those times wherein they should be written nor with the best and approued stories of the Church Phi. Synce three generall Councels recken Honorius as condemned of heresie and specially the Decretall of Leo the second which the Bishoppes of Rome woulde soone haue disclaimed if it had beene suspected I dare not say that all these are forged for feare lest I ouerthrowe the credite of all Romane Recordes and therefore I thinke rather the Councell that first condemned him mistooke his meaning or that the letters which they sawe were written in his name by some euill willers of his both which cases are possible Theo. You mend this gappe and make a bigger You saue the Romane Libraries from corrupt Recordes and vpbrayde a generall councel with rash iudgement and lacke of vnderstanding for if they condemned Honorius not onely their brother but also their better as you take him and the head of the Church for an heretike and that after his death and either conceiued not the sense of his woordes or tooke not heede to the seale and subscription of his letters that those were Authentike they deseruâ—d not to bee counted Christians much lesse to goe for a lawfull and generall Councell And the Bishoppes of Rome that came after and confirmed the same when they might and should haue reprooued the Councell of indiscretion or malice and defended the innocencie of Honorius were not successours to him but conspiratours against him and so none of your shiftes are either sound or likely Howsoeuer you wrangle with the fact yet this is euident and without contradiction that three generall Councels eche after other were of opinion the Pope might liue and die an heritike and Agatho Leo Adrian the first and second all Bishoppes of Rome confessed thus much by their Decretals and yeelded thereto by their subscriptions Which if you graunt condemne or acquite Honorius of heresie at your pleasures Wee haue the full consent of the East and West Churches that the Bishoppe of Rome may erre which you at this present so stifly deny Phi. If one did erre the number is not so great Theo. If one did others may yet I haue named three that were condemned for heresie and Apostasie Marcellinus Liberius Honorius and moe I might that erred in like manner as Vigilius Anastatius Celestinus and others but I see you are determined to beleeue none that make against you in this point and therefore I were as good saue my labour as spend longer time with one that is past all sense Phi. If you prooue they erred I will not defende them Theo. But in reporting their sayings and doings you giue credite to none bee they neuer so indifferent and auncient Phi. Wee credite them if a greater number of writers doe not contradict them Theo. If certaine late fauourers of the Pope without trueth or shame doe gainesay the Stories that went before them thinke you the partiall and corrupt writinges of such men woorthie to bee taken against others that bee both elder and syncerer Phi. I euer goe with antiquitie and vniuersalitie Theo. But when you come to the push you care neither for fathers nor Councels Prouinciall nor generall if they crosse your affections or touch the Popes ambition There ancient writers liuing in the same time with Liberius affirme that he subscribed to the Arrians and Sozomene that wrate within 40. yeres of the deed doing saith no lesse you beleeue neither them nor your owne stories which with one consent followed that report till some in our age to make the Popes Tribunal infallible began not only to doubt but also to deny Liberius fact Two general Councels condemne Honorius for an heretike and the third auouâ—heth him to haue been condemned not without the knowledge of his successours the bishops of Rome that came after him You regard neither Popes nor Synods where they say that Honorius erred in other things where you thinke they make with you they shall be sacred and auncient fathers Councels as though you were not bound to yeeld vnto trueth but that onely were trueth which liked you Phi. Liberius was forced and Honorius deceiued with a likelyhood of trueth this is all you can get of these sacred and ancient fathers and Councels Theo. We need no more No man falleth from the faith but he is either forced or deceiued and yet this wee get besides which we most esteeme that these fathers and Councels were of opinion and saw by experience the Bishop of Rome did and might erre Yeeld to this and wee remit you the rest Phi. Not till I see what else you will bring You talke of Vigilius and Anastasius but I thinke more than you can proue Theo. Of Vigillius

Why then shoulde the loose life or false doctrine of some Bishops preiudice others either in the same office with them or in the same place before and after them since the things bee needefull though the men be sinâ—ull The chaire is not the worse though the Bishoppe may erre But you stande in contention with vs that the Bishoppe of Rome can not erre and nowe you say hee may erre without preiudice to his office and Seate which wee graunt For his charge to teach and power to bind common to him with all Bishoppes is not abolished nor abated though some did or hereafter should abuse it In the meane time this shaketh the Popes Tribunall which you giue him ouer the whole Church For if he may erre in fayth which you confesse then can he not be supreme iudge of all others in matters of fayth lest the whole church should bee bound to forsake her faith which shee may not vppon one erroneous iudgement of his which is possible and easte to happen Phi. Not possible Popes may erre personally but not iudicially that is they may erre in person vnderstanding priuate doctrine or writings but they neither can nor euer shall iudicially conclude or giue definitiue sentence for falshoode or heresie against the Catholike faith in their Consistories Courts Councels Decrees Deliberations or consultations kept for decision and determination of such controuersies douts or questions of fayth as shall bee proposed vnto them because Christes prayer and promise protecteth them therein for confirmation of their brethren Theo. What prayer or promise of Christ is it that you speake of Phi. I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not Theo. Are you in your fiue wittes to make such constructions of Christes wordes Phi. Why so Theo. Where lyeth faith in a mans heart mouth or hands Phi. What a wise question that is aske it not for very shame Theo. Nay answere it with shame enough Or if you will not S. Paul will Corde creditur we beleeue with the heart sayth he and confesse with the mouth So that if faith be not in our lippes much lesse in our fingers Phi. Who euer doubted of that Theo. Then is there no doubt but your deprauing the prayer and promise of Christ will soone bee perceiued of al men For if Christ prayed for Peter and as you racke it for his successours that their fayth shoulde not fayle Ergo the true faith of Christ must alwayes be kept in their hearts though their mouthes faile as Peters did when hee denyed his master with his lippes whom in hart he knewe to bee the sonne of the liuing God Now you turne it cleane contrarie You graunt the Popes heart may fall from faith to infidelitie and heresie but his mouth you defend shal be kept from pronouncing it as if Christ had prayed not for Peters hart where his faith remained but for Peters mouth which failed thrise before the cocke crewe notwithstanding his masters prayer and promise that very night This is absurd enough and yet the rest is more absurd when you graunt the Pope may erre in person that is both with heart and mouth but if hee once get on his robes and ascend his Tribunall he can not erre As if Christ had prayed not for the men but for the walles neither for the Persons but for the Places which is direct against the words of our sauiour For he sayth not I haue prayed for thy Tribunals Courtes and Consistories that they shall not erre but I haue prayed for thee noting his person that thy faith that is the perswasion of thine heart beleeuing and trusting in me shall not vtterly faile but the sparkles of my grace remaining in thee shall renue thee by repentance Christ prayed for the person not for the place How then can you say that the Person may erre but not the place Phi. The Person shall bee stroken with feare as was Vigilius or preuented by death as was Anastasius that hee shall not be able to accomplish his wicked intent in open place Theo. Call you that the prayer of Christ for the Popes fayth or the plague of God vpon him for his infidelitie Phi. Cal it what you will God will not suffer him to giue definitiue sentence for heresie against the faith Theo. Shew vs the warrant that God will not suffer it and wee are answered Phi. The promise of our sauiour that Peters faith should not faâ—le Theo. Then this you make to be the effect of Christes woordes I haue prayed for thee that thy fayth shall not fayle that is notwithstanding my prayer for thee thy successours may be heretikes idolaters Apostataes and ruÌ„negates from me but I wil strike them with feare or peruert them with death that they shall not in open Court by definitiue sentence iniect â—y Church Are you not religious interpreters of the Scriptures when you delude them and interlace them with such commentaries Phi. Caiphas by priuilege of his office prophesied right of Christ though according to his own knowledge and faith he knew not Christ. And why may not the Pope haue the like priuilege Theo. Balaams Asse reproued the madnes of his master Why should not the Popes Asse haue the like priuilege Phi. You scoffe at our reasons you refell them not Theo. They neede no better refutation For out of a particular fact that is rare and vncertaine you conclude a generall and constant Rule God vsed the mouth of Caiphas the high Priest without his meaning to declare the necessitie and vtilitie of Christes death Hence you would inferre that no high Priest could erre in iudgement and consequently not the Pope as being belike successour to Caiphas that put Christ to death By the same cuÌ„ning you may conclude God vsed Balaams mouth against Balaams will to blesse Israel therefore no false Prophet can haue a lying spirit in his mouth Or God stirred vp the spirit of Daniel when he was a very child to coÌ„uince the two iudges of their vnrighteous proceeding against Susanna therefore children cannot want the spirit of direction in iudgement Or Pilats wife perceaued by her dreames that Christ was innocent therefore weomens dreames are alwayes true Phi. These illations be very foolish Theo. Yours is scant so good For in your example God ouerruled the hie-Priests mouth in such sort that in giuing the Iewes wicked and haynous counsel to kill the sonne of God his words receaued a double sense One cruel bloudie perswading them to murder the author of that new doctrine for feare least the Romanes should take it as an occasion to destroy the whole nation which was Caiphas mind and purpose The other confessing that his death should saue the people from destruction which declareth the vertue and force of his Passion Which he neither ment nor knew but God so tempered his tongue that in writing his furious malice against Christ his wordes stood indifferent for both constructions

Thus S. Cyril largely sheweth In the proposition of Caiphas there is contained a double sense one which Caiphas himselfe ment that it was expedient Christ should die by the hands of the Iewes lest the whole Nation should bee destroyed by the Romanes This was a false and wicked meaning comming from the lewd intention of Caiphas An other sense of the same proposition was intended by the holy Ghost that it was needfull that only Christ should die for the saluation of the whole world This Caiphas neither vnderstood nor ment yet his wordes were such as might fitly serue this sense of the holy Ghost For Caiphas himself as crueller readier to wickednes and bloodier than the rest encourageth others staggering at it by saying you perceaue nothing neither vnderstaÌ„d you that it is expedieÌ„t the life of one man should be neglected for the whole couÌ„trie Phi. He spake this by the holy Ghost Theo. The diuell possessed his hart but the power of God restrained and ordered his speach Phi. Had he not the Spirit of Prophesie Theo. No more than Saul the bloudsucker had when he praied for Dauid whom hee sought to kill than Iudas the traytor had when he iustified his master and hanged himselfe yea than the Dyuell had when hee confessed and intreated the Sonne of God not to torment him before his time Phi. Why then doth S. Iohn giue this note of him that he was hie Priest for that yere Theo. S. Iohn noteth this that it pleased God so to temper the hie Priests wordes that where hee spake to hasten the death of our Sauiour his wordes sounded that the people should vtterly perish without the death of Christ which was most true but not his meaning Phi. His tongue spake trueth though his hart did erre Theo. Satan poisoned his hart but GOD bridled his mouth Phi. Can not God doe the like to the Bishop of Rome Theo. No doubt he can but you must proue that he will Phi. If he did so to Caiphas much more will hee do it to the head of his Church Theo. How hangeth this geare together Hee did once so to Caiphas ergo hee will always doe the like where you list to haue it Phi. Not where we list but where he will Theo. That helpeth you litle God can do the like where wheÌ„ he wil. What is that to the Bishop of Rome We doubt not of Gods power but smile at your folly which conclude this to be ordinarie in the Pope which was extraordinarie in Caiphas Phi. It was ordinarie in Caiphas by reason of his office and so saith S. Iohn The. S. Iohn doth not say it was ordinarie either in al hie priests or in Caiphas for Caiphas himself the very same yere as S. Matt. witnesseth iudicially pronounced our Sauiour to be a blasphemer which I hope you will not say came from the direction of the holy Ghost The hie Priest therefore did erre and that most hainously in iudgement and if this be al your hold the Pope may doe the like Phi. What may be is hard to determine But this we know the Pope did neuer yet erre sitting in his Tribunal to giue iudgement Theo. As though the place and not the Pope had assurance of trueth annexed vnto it What holines hath the Consistorie to safegard the iudge from error The promise of Christ was made to the person and not to the place Phi. To the person but sitting in iudgement Theo. Did Peter sitte in iudgement at that time when he denied his master Phi. Wee say not so Theo But that night was the promise made vnto him and that night performed in him when Peter poore man stoode warming himselfe amongst the manye and durst not answer the first interrogatorie that a silly wenche proposed to him And therefore Christ neuer spake of your Courtes nor Consistories but promised Peter to pardon his fault and to strengthen his faith lest hee should perseuere in that his Apostasie Phi. Had we no warrant for the Bishop of Rome that his faith shall not faile yet experience proueth this which we say to be true that he neuer erred iudicially that is sitting in his Consistorie Theo. What need we care where he sate so long as we bee sure he did erre What wrangling is this to aske for the place where and the time when the Pope spake the wordes Hee that may erre at home may likewise erre abroade If the Pope bee an heretike in his chamber hee can be no Catholike in his Consistorie Phi. Definitiue sentence he neuer gaue any against the faith Theo. What are his decretals but definitiue sentences And in those he hath erred Phi. Neuer Theo. The Decretal of Clemens which I before alleaged is altogether erronious They were two Decretall Epistles for the which Honorius was condemned The decretal of Vigilius which Liberatus remembreth is expresly against the faith Celestinus erred iudicially as your owne friendes confesse but you haue pared that Decretall as you haue done many others and left out the later part lest we should spie the fault Phi. Who told you so Theo. They that had no cause to belie you Alfonsus a great Patrone of your side sayth It is a thing manifest to al men that Pope Celestinus erred touching the mariage of the faithful when either part falleth into heresie Neither was this error of Celestinus such as ought to be imputed only to negligence so that we may say he erred as a priuate person and not as Pope because this decision of Celestinus was in the auncient Decratals which I my selfe haue seene and read Innocentius the third when he decided the case confessed that one of his predecessours had decreed otherwise which saith the gloze was Celestinus whose resolution was in the olde Decretals and it was euil that Celestinus sayd Alexander the 3. in a matter of great importance said Quamuis aliter a quibusdam praedecessoribus nostris sit aliquando iudicatum though some of our predecessours haue heretofore otherwise giuen iudgement Phi. These were matters of mariage and not of faith Theo. As though the seuering of those whom God hath ioyned did not touch the faith and so did some of these Popes and that iudicially by their contrarie Decrees Againe Nicolas the fourth sayth in his Decretal that To renounce the proprietie of all thinges not in special only but in common also is meritorious and holy which Christ taught by word and confirmed by example and the first fouÌ„ders of the militant church deriued to others by the paterne of their doctrine life Iohn the 22. sayth it is hereticall to affirme that Christ his Apostles had nothing in speciall nor in common Phi. The next extrauagant reconcileth them both Theo. The Pope laboureth for life to shift off the matter at last commeth with a very iest De sola abdicatione proprietatis non iuris alterius in praefata declaratione

opinion is common but not currant with vs If you meane to proue it you shall haue the longer and stiller audieÌ„ce Phi. S. Peter being but a meere spiritual officer and Pastor of mens soules yet for sacrilege and simulation stroke dead both man and wife S. Paul stroke blind Elymas the Magician So did he threaten to come to his contemners in rod of discipline So did be excoÌ„municate a Principal person in Corinth for incest not only by spiritual punishment but also by bodily vexation giuing him vp to Satans chastisement As he corporally also corrected and molested with an euill spirit Himeneus and Alexander for blasphemie and heresie Finally he boldly auoucheth that his power in God is to reuenge al disobedience and to bring vnder all loftie hearts to the loialtie of christ and of the Apostles and Sainctes in this life Nescitis quoth he quoniam Angelos iudicabimus quanto magis secularia knowe you not that wee shall iudge Angels how much more secular matters Theo. Such dissolute mariners were neuer like but to make such desperate aduentures You shoulde proue that spirituall Pastours haue power to sease the goods and possessions and chastise the bodies of such as they excommunicate and you shewe where God afflicted those for their sinnes which the Apostles cast out of the Church either with euill spirites or some corporall plague or death as hee sawe cause which is not pertinent to your purpose Can you not distinguish the finger of God from the factes of men Or see you no difference between miraculous vengeance from heauen and iudicial processe on earth God strake Ananias dead for tempting him in Peter and Elymas for resisting him in Paul May Preachers therefore putte out mens eyes and murther such as beleeue them not In deede you practise this new kinde of preaching but not by warrant from Christ or his Apostles Philand Did not Peter kill Ananias and Sapphira with his worde Theo. And since you can not do the like with your words you will take helpe of your handes Phi. With wordes or handes so they bee slaine all is one Theo. Not so The one is a miracle wrought by God the other is a murder committed by man which God prohibiteth and of all other thinges ought to bee farthest from the Preachers of peace Phi. Peter did so Theo. Peter reproued them for tempting the holie Ghost but the hande of God and not of Peter inflicted the punishment Reade the place Then saide Peter Ananias why hath Satan filled thine heart that thou shouldest he vnto the holie Ghost Thou hast not lied vnto men but vnto God Nowe when Ananias hearde these words saith the Scrâ—pture hee fell downe and gaue vppe the Ghost I aske not what faâ—t of Peters you finde that shoulde hasten the death of Ananias but what one worde purporting any such thing can you shewe vs in all that Peter saide to Ananias Phi. In his wordes to Sapphira wee can For hee saide to her The feete of them that haue buried thine husband are at the doore and shall carrie thee out Theo. Did Peter by these words kill her or foretell her that God would doe to her as hee had doone to her husbande Phi. Which say you Theo. Peter we say neither desired nor inflicted that iudgement on them but onely signified what God would doe The like we saie for Paul when Elymas was stroken blind He warned that Sorcerer what should befall him from God but himselfe did neither enuie nor iniurie the Sorcerers eyes His wordes were Wilt thou not cease to peruert the streight waies of the Lord Now therefore behold the hand of the Lord is vpon thee and thou shalt be blind not seeing the Sunne for a time Paul denounced Paul imposed not that corporall chastisement on him The deede was Gods who may iustly take from his enemies not onely their eies but their breathes and spirits when he wil and in what sort it pleaseth best his righteous and sacred wisedome Phi. But Paul himselfe corporallie corrected and molested with an euill spirite Himineus and Alexander for blasphemie and heresie So did he excommunicate a Principal Person in Corinth for incest not onely by spiritual punishment but also by bodilie vexation giuing him vp to Satans chastisement Theo. You drawe the word of God to your fansies by turning doubtes into certaineties antecedentes into consequentes mans actions into Gods iudgementes That the Apostle deliuered Himineus and Alexander vnto Satan and so the incestuous Corinthian whom you of your owne head without any witnesse call a Principal Person in Corinth because the slide you saw was easie from Principall to Princes is a matter out of question but that he corporally corrected and molested them with euil spirites these be your additamentes wherewith you thought to lengthen the text to your own liking Phi. S. Paul gaue iudgement of the Corinthian that he should bee deliuered vnto Satan for the destruction of the flesh And how could the flesh be destroied without bodily vexation affliction The. This phrase for the destruction of the flesh hath diuerse expositions therefore vpon a doubtful kinde of speech you can not build an vndouted conclusion S. Ambrose expoundeth the place thus The Apostle decreed that by the consent in the presence of all men he should be cast out of the Church Cum eijcitur traditur Satanae in interitum carnis Et anima enim corpus intereunt His casting him out of the Church is the deliuering of him to Satan to the destruction of the whole man which is nothing but flesh For both soule and bodie perish And lest you shoulâ— thinke it much that the soule is called fleshe he giueth this reason Victa anima libidine carnis fit caro the soule once ouercome by the lustes of the flesh becommeth flesh and is in the Scripture so commonly called the lusts of the flesh deliuereth the soule defiled with it and also the body to hell Phi. But S. Paul addeth that the spirite may bee saued in the day of our Lord Iesus Christ which can not stand with this exposition that both fleshe spirit were deliuered vnto perdition Theo. The same father will tell you that the spirit may be referred not to him that was excluded but to the rest that remained in the church as if S. Paul should haue saide I haue decreed to cast this vncleane person out from among you to his iust condemnation that the grace of Gods spirit may be preserued in the rest of you to the day of iudgement The same Sainct Augustine followeth What spirite doeth the Apostle affirme shoulde bee preserued when he saieth I haue deliuered that man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh c. The destruction of the flesh ment in this place is a man addicted to pleasures and fleshly delightes purchaseth hell to himselfe For by such sinnes the whole man becommeth

persons excoÌ„municate and consequently your applying of scriptures that wee may not salute them nor keepe companie with them is a violent deprauing of these textes and refuted by the manifest practise of Christes Church And because wee bee come so farre I will adde somewhat touching the rest of your wise pretences Constantius Valens Valentinian the younger Anastasius Iustinian Heraclius Constantine the 4. and others were hereticall Princes Iulian an open Apostata and yet the Church of Christ endured serued and obeyed them not in temporall things only but in ecclesiasticall also so farre as their Lawes did not impugne the faith or corrupt good manners Phi. You inferre vpon our examples which we can auoyde when wee wil but you answere them not Theo. Our illation which you shall neuer auoyd proueth your examples to conclude for vs and not against vs. You shewe that Princes were remoued from the Sacraments which we graunt but that they were remoued from their kingdomes which we denie that you shewe not and so by your silence you confesse that to bee most true which wee affirme that hereticall and excommunicate Princes must haue their due subiection honour and tribute as they had before they fell to such impieties because they bee perils to their soules not forfeytures of their Crownes Other answere we neede not make you since this will suffice And yet if wee would examine your examples by the pole I coulde take many of them tardie A booke written in Chrysostomes name witnesseth that Babylas Bishoppe of Antioche excluded a Christian Emperour out of the Church for murdering a young Prince committed to him for an hostage and was martyred by the same tyrant for his constancie but this can not stand with the stories of the Church nor with your owne Author whom you alleage for the repentance and submission that you say this Emperour was after brought to by Fabian the generall sheephearde of Christendome Eusebius who wrate an hundreth yeeres before Chrysostome sayth that Babylas Bishoppe of Antioche died in prison vnder Decius an heathen Tyrant After Philip succeeded Decius who for hatred of Philip persecuted the Church in the which persecution Fabianus Bishoppe of Rome was martyred and Babylas Bishoppe of Antioche died in prison after the constant confession of his fayth With him agreeth Nicephorus Babylas sub Decio post confessionem fortiter obitam in vinculis discessit Babylas after hee had made a stout confession of his fayth dyed in Prison vnder Decius If hee died vnder Decius howe coulde hee bee slaine by Philippus or Numerius that were before Decius If hee deceased in Prison how can your Chrysostome say that hee was caried out of Prison to his death and slaine Can you reconcile these thinges and not giue one of your Authors the lie If that declamation were Chrysostomes hee wrate it when he came fresh from the Philosophers schooles as both the stile matter argue and before he was Bishoppe as his owne woordes declare For speaking of the place where Babylas was Bishoppe he sayth Nostri huius gregis curam gerebat he was Pastor of this our flocke and Chrysostome was Bishop of Constantinople not of Antioche Who pursued the saide Emperour by like excommunication for killing his Pastor since the Pastor was aliue after the Emperour was dead and died in prison without any violence neither can you tell neither neede wee care Of Philip Nicephorus sayth no such thing in the place which you quote hee repeateth only that which Eusebius long before reported in these words Of Philip the fame is that fauouring Christ and willing the night before Easter to ioyne with the multitude of Christians in their prayers hee was not suffered so to doe by the Bishoppe that then was vnlesse hee would first acknowledge his sinnes and keepe his place with the repentants Otherwise he could not be admitted because his sinnes were many And they say that hee gladly hearkened to the Bishop and shewed his syncere and religious mynde to God-ward by his deedes The ground of the whole in him that first wrate it is but hearesay the principall matter whether the Prince were remooued from the communion or neuer before admitted to the Lordes table very doubtfull The thing required at his handes was no more but to humble himselfe in the sight of God to whome all Princes must stoope with as great deuotion and submission as the poorest woormes that are on earth The conclusion may bee that Princes then were trayned to Godlinesse but that they were depriued of their kingdomes is a wicked and vngodly suggestion of yours Wee may with as good reason say a Frier many tymes doeth shriue the Pope Ergo a Frier may depose the Pope which I thinke your holy Father will not like of Saint Ambrose is the onely example in all antiquitie which fully proueth that a Bishoppe did prohibite a Prince to enter the Church and to bee partaker of the Lordes table which wee neither deny nor dispraise considering the cause and the manner of the fact The Prince for a tumult raysed by some of the inhabitants of Thessalonica caused his souldiers without finding or searching the doers to murder the people were they straungers or Citizens faultlesse or faultie to the number of seuen thousand After this execution at his next comming to the Church S. Ambrose stepped to the Church dore and sayd Thou seemest O Prince not to vnderstand what a monsterous slaughter of people is committed by thee neither doth rage suffer thee to weigh with thy selfe what thou hast done yet must thou know that from dust we came to dust we shal Let not therfore the brightnes of thy robes hide froÌ„ thee the weaknes of flesh that is vnder them Thy subiects are of the same metall which thou art serue the same Lord that thou doest With what eyes therefore wilt thou behold the house of this coÌ„mon Lord with what feete wilt thou tread on his holy pauements Wilt thou reach these haÌ„ds dropping yet with the blood of innocents to receiue the most sacred bodie of the Lorde Wilt thou put that precious blood of his to thy mouth which in a rage hast spilt so much Christian blood Depart rather and heape not one sinne on an other neither refuse this bond which the Lord of all doeth ratifie in heauen It is not much and it will restoare thee the health of thy soule This strake the Christian Prince to the heart and turning about hee went home with teares and all the tyme that hee was kept out of the Church as a man in mourning hee woulde not put on his Imperiall robes but that Ambrose commaunded him to put off his kingly robes and to leaue his Imperiall throne in the Chauncel this is your venemous admixtion the storie sayth no such thing You falsely father it on S. Ambrose to make men beleeue that the Bishoppe might as well haue taken the princes scepter and sworde from

a matter of more dependence than may bee ouer-ruled with a fewe piked and well couched tearmes You must therefore exactly and directly prooue the Popes authoritie to depose Princes which you shall neuer bee able to doe or else hee for attempting it is the man of sinne exalting him-selfe in the Church of GOD and you for defending and executing the same lacke not many degrees of high and haynous treason The carying of this in your owne heartes and reconciling of others within the realme that they might bee readie to receiue this impression at your mouthes when tyme should serue were the very causes why some of your fellowes tasted of her maiesties iust and prouoked indignation and if it be tyrannie for the Prince to put them to death that lay plottes to haue her crowne and her life and write bookes to auouch it lawful for themselues and all others so to doe when the Pope sayth the word then her highnes hath done you some wrong but if by diuine and humane recordes it bee damnable in the subiect to attempt or abet any such thing and most laudable in the Prince to reuenge the consenter and encourager as well as the doer then for religion hath none of your side beene martyred in England as your shamelesse eloquence would enforce onely some were executed for affirming publishing and furdering the Popes Antichristian power to rule realmes and depriue Princes which you call religion because you would plant it in the peoples hearts with lesse labour and more liking though in deede it be pestilent pride in him and a plaine contempt of God and the Prince in you that should obey Phi. M. Iohn Slade and M. Iohn Body two famous confessours were they not condemned to death in publike iudgement for confessing their fayth of the Popes spiritual soueraigntie and for denying the Queene to bee head of the Church of England or to haue any spirituall regiment and that twise at two diuers sessions a rare case in our countrie the later sentence being to refourme the former as we may gesse in such strange proceedings which they perceiued to bee erroneous and vnsufficient in their owne Lawes Theo. Promotions are rife at Rome you would not else so soone aduance two frowarde and rude companions for masters martyrs Their iudgement was twise giuen not as you peruersly yet after your manner interprete the later to reforme the former as erroneous and vnsufficient but for that they complayned they were drawen afore they were ware and against their wils to vtter speaches against the Princes sworde for which they were condemned the grace mercie of the Prince was such that her highnesse was content they should bee tried the seconde tyme to see whether those words were vnaduisedly and vnwillingly spoken as they pretended or of set mischiefe malice and warned by the Iudge to take good heede and looke wel about theÌ„ before they rashly offered themselues to the danger of the Lawes Where if they fell againe openly and lustily to auouch that the Pope was supreme head of the Church of England and consequently the Queene had no right to make lawes as shee had doone but was subiect to the Popes Decrees and censures which is the maine ground of all your rebellion and his presumption who besides you that are yoked in the same cause with them will say they died for religion and not rather for their wilful charging the Prince with vsurpation yeelding the Pope that dominion which hee claimeth ouer kingdomes and you would faine establish with your vntrue surmises Phi. The question of Peters keyes is it not a matter of meere religion Theo. If you draw Princes crownes and swordes within the limits of Peters keyes you leaue religion and hatch rebellion Phi. Yet is it a question whereof diuines do doubt Theo. You may doubt what you list to flatter the Pope but your doubting may not stoppe Princes from defending that which is their owne against the Popes vniust claime and vnlawfull force The Prince striueth not with the Pope neither for the dignitie which hee taketh aboue all Bishoppes nor for the power which hee seeketh to bind and loose sinnes in heauen though therein hee doeth the Church of Christ great wrong and oppresseth his brethren but onely for her right to commaund and punish within her own Realme in ecclesiasticall causes and crimes as well as in temporall which I haue largely prooued euery Prince may within his owne Dominion and for the wrong that her maiestie receiued when shee was depriued of her crowne by him that had no warrant from Christ to disquiet her state or dispose her crown These bee the pointes comprised in her highnes Lawes Against these if your rash and ill aduised brethren woulde runne headlong to their owne perdition when they were admonished by the magistrate to haue better regarde to their wordes they haue the iust rewarde of their vnfaythfull and disloyall heartes and my assertion is true that these two ignorant yet obstinate persons with some others which came not to any particular mention of the Popes bull against the Prince but generally stoode in defence of that power to be good and lawfull from whence the bull proceeded died in the same quarell with the rest that purposely promoted defended and assisted the bull and so can bee no witnesses of Christes trueth and glory which woulde needes cast away their liues for the Popes pride and tyrannie Phi. It is hard dealing to make such trifles treasons Theo. Call you those trifles when Princes shall lose their kingdomes and their people freely rebell and you defende the warres of their owne subiects against them to be iust and honourable by vertue of that power which you attribute to the Pope when you make him head of the Church Had you liued in Saint Augustines dayes you would haue sayde it had beene harder dealing that one word against the Christian Emperours although they were dead shoulde be counted treason Thou doest promise sayth Augustine to Petilian that thou wilt reckon many of our Emperours and iudges WHICH BY PERSECVTING YOV PERISHED and concealing the Emperours thou meanest two Iudges or Deputies Why didst thou not name the Emperours of our coÌ„munion were thou afraid to bee accused as guiltie OF TREASON where is your courage which feare not to kill your selues To say that Emperours PERISHED FOR PERSECVTING was Treason in his tyme In our age you thinke it much that reproching of Princes as tyrants and heretikes ayding the Pope with your perswasions absolutions rebellions to take their crownes from them should be punished or adiudged Treason Phi. There is no law so rigorous but your diuinitie wil serue you to defend it Theo. What is against your duetie to God and your Prince in that I am a diuine I may iustly debate what punishment the Prince will appoint for such offences as be committed against her neither you nor I haue to doe with it

Not that hee woorshipped the staffe but him that helde it in a signe of loue Then alleaging the brasen Serpent and the Cherubins made by Moses Salomon hee descendeth to other testimonâ—es of Esay and Dauid as sitte for his purpose as salt for sore eyes Esai sayth In those dayes there shal be an altar vnto the Lorde in the mydst of the Lande of Egypt and a pillour touching the ends therof and it shall be for a signe and a testimonie to the Lord in the land of Egypt And Dauid the tuner of Psalmes sayth confession and beautie before him And againe Lord I haue loued the comlynes of thine house And againe Thy face Lord wil I seeke And againe the rich among the people shall bowe themselues before thy face And againe the light of thy countenance is signed vpon vs. These bee the best proofes which Adrian or hee that framed this letter in Adrians name could finde in all the Scriptures for the making and adoring of images and these you see bee very miserable For what fellowship hath Adams act Abels sacrifice Noahs or Abrahams altar Iacobs stone and staffe Esaies title or pillour with images or when Dauid spake of the face and countenance of God did he so much as dreame of the grauen and woodden figures which you would erect vnto God against his heauenly will and trueth Phi. In deed these places be not altogether so pertinent as we could wish theÌ„ but the brasen serpent the two Cherubins which Moses set vp directly make for Images Theo. They doe not warrant your erecting of Images and your adoring of Images they vtterly ouerthrow For the Brasen serpent was a figure of Christ as we find confirmed by his owne wordes in the gospell of S. Iohn and yet though God commaunded Moses to make it and healed the dreadfull plague of the people by it and the Iewes had kept it aboue 700. yeres as a monument of Gods mercie toward them in the desert when they beganne but to burne incense to it Ezechiah the religious King of Iudah brake it in peeces and is commanded by the holie Ghost namely for that act This example wee would haue you aduisedly to marke A figure of Christ erected by Gods owne commaundement and seruing to put al Israels posteritie in minde of the wonders which their fathers saw in the wildernesse when it was abused was defaced and the fact allowed by Gods owne mouth Hence we conclude that the painted and carued Images of Christ himselfe may not be adored and if they be they may be remoued though they were deliuered euen by the Apostles as yours were not The Cherubines were made by Gods appointment but not set in any place for the people to adore them or so much as to see them nay the Priests themselues were kept from the sight of them only the high-Priest once euery yere went into the second Tabernacle where they stoode the vaile being closely drawen betweene that and the first Tabernacle where the rest of the Priests serued And since Gods care was so great that they should not be seene wee inferre his will was as cleare that they should not be worshipped for so much as they could not be worshipped vnlesse they were seene Phi. Yet this sheweth that God would haue them made Theo. But not seen much lesse worshipped And as for the making of them Gods act aboue his Law is no warrant for you to breake his Law By his Law he restraineth you not himselfe from the making of any such similitudes And therefore though he might for causes to him knowen goe against his Law you may not This rule Tertullian will teach you It is no hurt that the same God by his Law forbade a similitude to be made and by an extraordinary precept commaunded the similitude of the brasen serpent to be made If thou wilt obay God thou hast his law make thee no similitude If thou looke to the precept that was giuen after for making a similitude then see thou imitate Moses Make no Image against the law vnlesse God bid thee as he did Moses Phi. The fathers who knew the Scriptures as well as you were of an other minde as you may see by Adrians letters auouching many and good authorities out of them Theo. Adrian dealeth with the fathers as hee did with the Scriptures Eight of them he alleageth and abuseth euerie one of them Augustine saith The Image of God what is it but the face of God in which the people of God are signed And Ambrose when we worship in Christ the diuine Image and Crosse do we part him in sunder The diuine Image and countenance which these fathers speake of is the brightnes of Christes diuine nature and glorie his crosse is his death and humilitie those Adrian grossely supposeth to be such as grauers caruers doe make with their hands And where Cyril saith Faith painteth or liuely describeth vnto vs the worde which was in the forme of God that euidence clearenes of the Gospell setting the sonne of God in his diuine maiestie before our eyes your holy father lewdly misconstereth for painting with pencils and coulours Athanasius Chrysostome and Basil drawing similitudes from the painters art and Emperours Image to other purposes are violently wrested to make for that they neuer ment nor thought Gregory Nissene confesseth he had often seen the storie of the passion pictured but he neither saith in Churches nor alloweth it any worshippe Hierom is brought in last and made to say that which not only no learned father euer vttered but no sober nor Christian man euer imagined As God gaue leaue to the Gentils to worshippe things made with hands and to the Iewes to worshippe the carued workes and two golden cherubins which Moses made so hath hee giuen to vs Christians the Crosse and to paint and reuerence the Images of good workes and so to get him to like of our labour The two first pointes that God gaue leaue to the Gentils to worshippe things made with hands and licenced the Iewes to adore the woorkes and shapes of Cherubins which Moses made are so directly against the trueth of the Scriptures and rule of our faith that nothing can be more the last may well bee written by him that wrate the first and as soone true as the rest And were it found in Hieroms workes as it is not it would but argue that other mens hands had beene in Hieroms bookes as well as his which is no newes in the most of the Fathers Greeke and Latine that you haue left vs at this day But of that paines Adrian himselfe hath eased vs by alleaging that which is not in all S. Hieromes volumes Amidst the route of these follies and forgeries commeth in that Bastard place of Basil no where found in all his writings which besides the apparant slander there

Art Phi. You vnderstand vs not When wee giue diuine honour to the image in respect of Christ we giue it to Christ and not to the image Theo. God graunt you vnderstand your selues You first dishonour the Sonne of God by exhibiting the heauenly seruice that is due to him to an Image made with handes and then with a shift of wordes you thinke to delude him in telling that hee may not choose but like of your doinges because you ment it vnto him when you did it to a dumbe creature for his sake But awake out of your frensie God will not thus be mocked by your relations or intentions Hee is zealous of his honour he will not resigne it to any other and namely not to grauen or carued images If against his worde against his will against his truth and glorie you impart it to anie other or take vpon you to conueie it to him by creatures or images as if hee were not present in all places with might and maiesty to receiue the seruice that is done vnto him you not onely make new Gods but you reiect him as no GOD who alone is the true GOD and will be serued without mate or meane of your deuising Phi. Our Lord shewing what account he maketh of such as represent his person sayth In as much as you haue doone it to one of the least of these you haue doone it vnto me Theo. Did Christ speake that of images Phi. Noâ— but thereby you see it passeth â—â—to Christ whatsoeuer is done in his name or for his sake to others Theo. If you meane such charitable reliefe as Christ hath commaunded vs to yeeld to our brethren in respect of his will their neede and our dutie you say well wee haue for that the manifest precept and promise of our Sauiour accepting it as done to himselfe whatsoeuer is done to any of his brethren or seruauntes but if you leape from men to images from humane comfort to diuine honour you leape too farre to haue the sequele good Philand If diuine adoration may not bee giuen to Images yet humane reuerence may with-out anie daunger Theo. Religious honour may not and as for externall and ciuill reuerence whether that may bee giuen to images can bee no doubt of Doctrine nor point of fayth The one is impious to bee defended the other superfluous to bee discussed Philand So you giue them either wee care not Theophil If you flie from adoration to saluation and stande not on pietie but on ciuilitie then is it a question for Philosophers and not for Diuines and to bee decided rather in the Schooles than in the Churche neyther can any manne bee praysed or preiudiced for vsing or omitting that kinde of curtesie which neyther the Gospell nor good manners conuince to bee necessary Philand Shoulde wee not honour Christ and his Sainctes by all the meanes wee can Theophil Christ you must honour with all power and all your strength as being the Sonne of the liuing GOD but you may not fasten his honour to any Image or creature since hee is alwayes present to beholde and willing to receiue as well the religions submission of knees handes and eyes as the inwarde sighes and grones of the heart neither can you bestowe the least of these gestures on an image in your prayers without open and euident wrong to him to whome you shoulde yeeld them Phi. For adoring of images I am not so earnest as for hauing them in the Church that they may put vs in remembraunce of the bitter paines and death which it peased our Lord to suffer for our sakes and that I am sure is catholike though adoration be not Theo. We doe not gainesay the remembring or honouring the death and bloodshedding of our Sauiour hee is not onely dull but wicked that intermitteth either but this is the doubt betwixt vs whether wee shoulde content our selues with such meanes as hee hath deuised for vs and commended vnto vs thereby dayly to renue the memorie of our redemption or else inuent others of our owne heades fitte perhappes to prouoke vs to a naturall and humane affection but not fitte to instruct our fayth The hearing of his worde and partaking of his mysteries were appointed by him to leade vs and vse vs to the continuall meditation of his death and passion a crucifixe was not hee knowing that images though they did intertaine the eies with some delight yet might they snare the soules of many simple and sillie persons and preferring the least seede of sounde faith beholding and adoring him in spirit and truth before all the dumbe shewes and imagery that mans wit could furnish to winne the eye and moue the heart with a carrâ—all kind of commiseration and pitie such as wee finde in our selues when wee beholde the tormentes and pangues of any miscreant or malefactour punished amongest vs. Phi. All meanes are good that bring vs in minde of his death Theo. By sight you may learn the maner of his death but neither the cause nor the fruits which are the chiefest thinges that the sonne of god would haue vs remember in his death and you very peruersely and wickedly keeping the people from those meanes which Christ ordained as the hearing of the word and right vse of the sacraments which you drowned in a strange tongue that the people vnderstood not set them to gaze on a Roode taught them to giue all possible honour both bodily and ghostly to that which they sawe with their eyes bearing them in hand it passed from the image to the originall that is from a dead and senselesse stocke to the glorious and euerlyuing Sonne of God which in effect was nothing else but to worship and serue the creature before the Creator which is blessed for euer Phi. You are now besides the matter We speake of hauing images for remeÌ„braunce not of adoring them for religion and that is catholike if this be not Theo. Since the hauing of images being neither deliuered nor allowed by Christ nor his Apostles is superfluous and the abusing of them is so daungerous and yet so frequent and often that in all ages and places it hath intrapped many Gentiles Iewes and Christians I see no reason why for a curious delight of the eyes which the Apostles neglected and the primatiue Church of Christ wanted we shoulde scandalize the ignorant and exercise the learned as for a necessarie point of catholike doctrine Phi. Had the Apostles and their scholers no images Theo. Had they thinke you Phi. Remember you not the image which Nicodemus that came to Christ by night made with his owne handes and left to Gamaliel S. Pauls master he to Iames and Iames to Simeon and Zacheus This report you shall finde written by Athanasius 1300. yeares since and besides that it is amongest his workes at this day it was repeated 800. yeares agoe in the second Nicene councell as

Phi. If we may not bow to holy images as vnto thinges that be superiour and better than man yet we may imbrace and loue them as thinges which we like and that both by the vse of the Greeke tongue and speech of the scripture is called adoration as Tharasius the Patriarke of Constantinople in his epistle to Irene the Empresse and her sonne doth largely confirme Theo. You put me in minde what cunning was vsed in the second Nicene councell to saue your poppets vpright and to set a colour on their vngodly decree that images should be worshipped When they saw themselues not able to proue by Scripture or father that images should be reuerenced and adored and they had pronounced him accursed that doubted of the adoration of images your wise worthy Bishops thought it safest to shroude their wicked resolution vnder the doubtfull equiuocate sense of the word adoration because ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ in greeke did signifie not onely to bowe for deuotion and religion but also to imbrace for loue and affection as friendes and familyars when they happen to meete So Tharasius and the whole Synod defend the conclusion which they made in that councel For shewing whose images they would haue to be receiued they adde Sunt hae adorandae etiam id est exosculandae amandae Idem enim haec significant iuxta antiquam Graeciae dialecton Nam ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ significat quod quis ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ id etiam ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ quod ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ id omnino ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ These images of Christ and his Sainctes are also to bee adored that is to kissed and loued These wordes are all of one force To adore doth signifie both to imbrace to loue For that which a man loueth that he adoreth that which he adoreth that he earnestly loueth The naturall affection and loue which wee beare toward our friendes doe witnes this For so two friendes when they meete embrace salute ech other And â—â—ing some places of the scripture where adoration is taken for a reuerent and louely salutation as when Iacob bowed himselfe before Esau and Abraham before the people of Heth Dauid before Ionathan and the Pharisees were noted by our Sauiour for * louing such magistrall obeisance they inferre Has quoque adorandas salutandas putamus We thinke images are in like maner to be adored and saluted pretending it to be a matter of faith christian pietie to adore images and when they come to the vpshot concluding nothing but an externall and ciuill kinde of imbracing or kissing such as a man may giue to the coate which he weareth to the meat which he eateth to euery thing that he loueth without respect of religion or thought of deuotion Phi. Then you should the sooner graunt that images may be adored since they mean that kind of adoration which is without al danger of idolatry Theo. Then you be wise diuines to make adoration of images a point of catholike doctrine since the Bishops of Nice whose actes you would seeme to follow interprete adoration to be but a familiar and friendly kissing or saluting such as men might yeeld to the manger where Christ laye swathed to the howsen which he entered to the waters on which hee walked to the hilles deserts highwayes and cities where he prayed preached iournied or suffered the adoration of which things and places I trust you will not make a part of the Catholike faith Phi. Compare you an image with a manger Theo. It is the comparison of your owne councell in the very same epistle alleadging these words of Gregory the diuine iustifie their adoration of images Worshippe Bethleem adore the manger If the stable manger where Christ lay must haue the same adoration that images haue yea that the crosse hath whereon Christ died howe shamefully is your church fallen not onely from God but euen from her owne councels in allowing the very same honor to images that is due to Christ himselfe Phi. The crosse they did flatly adore as their own words witnes which presently insue Crucem tuam adoramus Domine We adore thy crosse O Lord. And that as it should seeme was a part of the church seruice For they say CuÌ„vinificam crucem salutamus conuenienter canimus when we salute the crosse that procured vs life we doe well to sing thy crosse Lord do we adore Theo. So did they the speare which pearced his side The next wordes are The speare which opened thy sacred and lifegiuing side wee adore But what they ment by that adoratioÌ„ they straightway expound which adoration is nothing else but a salutation or an imbracing if you so rather like to cal it as is hereby declared for that we touch those things with our lips Phi. Yet this is a kinde of adoration Theo. But not such as your church and schooles afterward defended and yeelded vnto material images crosses For you in plaine words require ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ that is diuine honor for the wodden crosse and image of Christ whereas the second Nicene councel in this epistle doth wholy renounce that as a manifest and wicked errour And therfore you do nothing lesse than accord with that Councell which is so much in your mouthes they decreeing but a reuerent salutation and you giuing diuine adoration to the image crosse of Christ which be doctrines mightily repugning ech to other if you note them well though the word adoration be vsed in both And did you consent with theÌ„ as you do not neither their resolution nor yours is catholike they ventering farther than either scriptures or fathers before did lead them and that vpon the doubtfull accepcion of the word adoring and blind presumption that external reuerence which they ment therby might be giuen for loue feare fauor or curtesie without impairing the honour due to God and you being deceiued by the heat of their speech and taking adoration for a religious and deuoute submission of body and soule such as belonged to the person himselfe represented by the image and that in our Sauiour is diuine and heauenly honor Phi. Should not the crosse of Christ haue diuine honour Theo. The crosse being taken for his death and passion as the scriptures vse the word must bee adored as the true and onely meane of our redemption and saluation but the wood on which hee hung may not much lesse the signe of it as you nowe abuse it You hearde Sainct Ambrose say that to adore the wood on which the Lorde died was an heathenish errour and vanitie of the wicked And before him Arnobius made this answere for all Christians Cruces nec columus nec optamus vos plane qui ligneos Deos consecratis cruces ligneas

reuerent estimation regard of them that they be not despised or abused although they be but signes So that water in baptism and the creatures of breade and wine in the Lordes supper which are the two examples here mentioned are to be reuerenced as things that be sacred by the word and ordinaÌ„ce of God but not to be adored and honored for the things themselues whose signes they are that were a miserable seruitude or rather the right death of the soule as Austen noteth And that the first teachers of truth remoued al Images as vnprofitable signes to serue God with the words before do plainly shew For speaking of the difference between the Iewes and the Gentils when they should be conuerted vnto Christ he saith ChristiaÌ„ liberty finding the Iewes vnder profitable signes to wit the rites Ceremonies of the Lawe did interprete the meaning of them and so by directing the people to the things themselues deliuered them from the seruitude of the signes but finding the Gentiles vnder vnprofitable signes for that they worshipped Images either as Gods or as the signes and resemblaunces of Gods ipsa signa fruâ—trauit remouitque omnia shee wholy remoued and frustrated the signes themselues that is shee would not suffer them to serue the true God with any such signes as bodily shapes and Images were Your honouring of Images is reproued as you see and not releeued by S. Augustines Rule And since the Lawe of God expressely and â—treitly chargeth you not so much as to bowe your bodies or knees to the likenesse of any thing in heauen or earth which is made with handes consult your owne consciences whether you may with your respects frustrate or with your routes ouerbeare the distinct and direct voice of God himselfe in his own Church And if you be not giuen ouer into a reprobate sense you wil say no. Now that which is against the Law of God can neither be Christian nor Catholike Your Doctrine therefore of bowing and kneeling to Images is repugnant both to the precepts of God and to the generall auncient resolution of Christs church your adoring them with diuine honour is a sacrilegious and flagitious as well noueltie as impietie Phi. You must not looke that we should defend the sayings doings of all that haue takeÌ„ part with the church of Rome If Thomas waded too far in worshipping Images if Gerson mistooke S. Augustine if the later Councell of Nice denied or strained some of the ancient Fathers you must not chalenge vs for their ouerâ—ightes The. We chalenge you for vaunting your selues to be Catholikes when in deede you doe nothing but smooth and sleike the corruptions and inuentions of later ages against the right ancient faith of Christs church The discent of Images with their adoration how late it began how often it varied how far at length it swarued froÌ„ the Primatiue original profession of the christiaÌ„ catholik faith we haue spent somtime to examine Let vs now approch to your praiers in a straÌ„ge toung which haue a great deal lesse shew of catholicism thaÌ„ images had yet are as egerly defended by you as images were Phi. In the Latine toung we haue praiers in a strange toung we haue none you rather that haue turned scriptures church seruice secretes for your pleasures into the English tongue make your praiers in a strange and vnwonted speach to catholik earesâ— The. To English meÌ„ the English toung is not strange Phi. I know they vnderstand it but I call it strange because they were not woont to haue the publike praiers of the Church in their mother toung Theo. In cases of religion we must respect not what men haue but what they should haue beene vsed to Cyprian saith well Consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est Custome without trueth is but the long continuance of error so Tertullian Quodcunque aduersus veritatem sapit hoc erit haeresis etiam vetus consuetudo Whatsoeuer is against the trueth it must bee counted heresie though it be an old Custom The Councell of Carthage where Cyprian was resolued thuâ— The Lord saith in the Gospel I am trueth he said not I am custom Trueth therefore appearing let custom yeeld to truth Phi. That councel erred in neglecting the old custom which the church obserued Theo. But yet their generall assertion which I alleage was so strong that S. Augustine saith to those very wordes Plane respondeo quis dubitet veritatis manifestae debere consuetudinem cedere I plainly answere who doubteth but that custom must yeeld to the trueth appearing Phi. Neither doe we doubt of that but how proue you this to be a manifest trueth that the people of this Land must haue their diuine seruice in the English tongue Theo. It is the manifest precept of him that said I am trueth and witnessed in the Scripture which is the worde of trueth Philan. In what place there Theo. Make not your selfe so great a stranger in the Scriptures as if you knew not the place Phi. You meane the 14. Chapter of the first epistle which S Paul wrote to the Church of Corinth Theo. I doe what say you to it Phi. Mary this we say The reader may take a tast in this one point of your deceitfull dealing abusing the simplicitie of the popular by peruerse application of Gods holy word vpon some smale similitude equiuocatioÌ„ of certaine termes against the approued godly vse and trueth of the vniuersall Church for the seruice in the Latine or Greeke tongue which you ignorantly or rather wilfully pretend to be against this discourse of S. Paul touching strange tongues Theo. And hee that marketh your shifting and facing in this one point shall need no farther tast of your dealing Phi. If you like not that which we say refel it Theo. Can your selues tell what you say Phi. You shall well find that when we come to the matter Theo. First then heare what the Apostle saith and after you shal haue leaue to say what you will Instructing the Church of Corinth thus he saith And now brethren if I come to you speaking with strange tongues what shall I profite you If a truÌ„pet giue an vncertaine sound who wil prepare himself to the battel So likewise you by the tongue except you vtter words of easie vnderstanding how shal it be knoweÌ„ what is spoken For you shal speake in the aire There are for example so many kindes of tongues in the worlde and none of them is without sound Except I know the power and signification of the speach I shall be to him that speaketh barbarous and he that speaketh shall be barbarous to me Wherefore let him that speaketh a strange tongue pray thâ—t he may interpret For if I pray in a tongue not vnderstood my spirite praieth but mine vnderstanding is without fruit What is it then I wil pray with the

which you doe not Theo. What you list to do is no care of ours if you can shew vs any thing in Christs institution which we haue not we wil giue you the hearing otherwise to ad your ceremonies to his commandements we mind it not We knowe you crosse the creatures at benedixit and hold your noses â—o nÃ©ere the bread when you say hoc est corpus meum that the breath of your mouthes euen warmeth the host but our beliefe is that his mightie word not your vnpausing spÃ©ech or intentiue lookes performeth the Sacrament And therfore your blowing Christs words vpon the bread is rather a magicall incantation than any effectuall application of them to the elements and if you hold that his word is too weake to endue the visible signe with inuisible grace except it be backed by your blowing and crossing we say you be proud disciples no right appliers of his heauenly word and power Phil. We do not help his words as if they were of themselues weake but we apply them to the elements in this present and actiue maner which you do not for when you recite the words a man cannot tell whether you speake them to trie your memories or to coÌ„secrate the mysteries you be so far from vsing any gestures or action that should import application Theop. The purpose of our hearts wel knowen vnto God and made open vnto men wheÌ„ we call them to the Lords table the praiers which we make before we come to the words of Christ directly and plainely tending to that end the placing of the bread and the cup in our and their sight the mentioning of Christes institution and commandement that we should follow his example and continue that remembrance of him the duetifull and reuerent rehearsing the words which he spake as the holy Ghost did penne them this demonstration and supplication that we receiuing THESE THY creatures of bread and wine according to thy Sonne our Sauiour Iesus Christes institution in remembrance of his death and passion may be partakers of his most blessed bodie and blood vsed immediatly before we repeate the words of Christ the breaking and giuing of the bread and so likewise the cup immediatly after they be sanctified and offering them to each communicant in remembrance of Christes bodie that was broken and blood that was shed to purchase the remission of their sinnes thereby to preserue them body and soule to euerlasting life the praiers I say precedent the preparation euident the direction adherent the distribution consequent are signes enough to hym that hath but eares or eyes that we presently purposely publikely execute Christes institution and other hooking and haling of Christes words to the elements by crossing crouching gaping and blowing on them as your manner is we acknowledge none to be required or expressed in the Lords Supper Philand It is no Sacrament but as Saint Augustine saith when the words come that is to say actiuely and presently be applied to the elements Theoph. We know that to be most true which S. Augustine saith Accedit verbum ad elementum fit Sacramentum when the word commeth to the element the Sacrament is perfite but what haue your termes actiuely and presently to do with Saint Austens speach yea what place could you choose more repugnant to your fansies than this which you bring The element without the word is a weake and corruptible creature put the word to it and then it becommeth a Sacrament Philand You marke not the force of the verbe Accedit which signifieth the word must come so nÃ©ere that it must euen touch the element Theoph. Can you tell vs how words may touch elements Philand What else By actiue and present application Theoph. This is your old song which we would haue you turne to some plainer note What kind of application meane you with the breath of your mouths motion of your hands or cogitation of your hearts You may blowe vppon the bread and wyne but there is some difference betwÃ©ene the sounde of your voyce and the breath of your loongs if you looke a little but to Aristotles Predicamentes and therefore your breath may touche the elements your woords can not Much lesse can your fingers apply your speach either actiuely or presently to the elements you must runne to the inward intention of the mynd and that may direct your purpose in speaking as it dooth ours but not actiuely apply your spÃ©ech to come nÃ©erer the elements in your masse than in our communion And so the comming of the word to the element in Saint Austen to perfite a Sacrament helpeth you to prooue your reall and manuall application of Christs words in your Masse as much as chaulke doth to make chÃ©ese when curds are wanting Yea rather if you reade on but foure lines you shall find your follies flatly refuted by Saint Augustine and a cleare resolution for vs that not vttering but beleeuing the words of Christ giueth force to the Sacraments In the water of Baptisme saith he it is the word that clenseth Take away the word and what is water but water Then commeth that which you cite Accedit verbum ad elementum fit Sacramentum Put the word to the element and then is it a Sacrament Vnde ista tanta virtus aquae vt corpus tangat cor abluat nisi faciente verbo non quia dicitur sed quia creditur Nam in ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens aliud virtus manens Whence hath the water this vertue to touch the body and wash the soule but by the power of the word not in that it is spoken but in that it is beleeued for in the word it selfe the sound passing is one thing and that little woorth the vertue remaining is another thing If the word of Christ do not worke in that it is spoken much lesse in that it is actiuely or exquisitely spoken with square conueiance and nimble gestures the lacke of which is the greatest fault you can find with our Sacraments Philand This is no small fault but yet not the greatest Theoph. You should haue laid foorth in writing what circumstances are required to your actiue application of Christes words and then you might haue bÃ©ene answered with more perspicuitie Wheras now your obiecting vnto vs the breach of Christes institution in certaine metaphysicall and supermysticall termes neither opened by your selues nor vnderstood of others is but a Iesuiticall deuise to make a brable about words and to get the simple in the meane time to mistrust some-what in our doctrine and doings though they nor you sÃ©e no iust cause to mislike But to be short with you if the repelling of your actiue and slipper gestures and hauiours that we might embrace the will and commandement of the high and mightie God be a fault we haue committed many foule faults in this and all other parts of our profession otherwise in pride and presumption you

your pelting quarelles in the eyes of all men that euer reade the wordes of Christ if your owne Schooles in eyther or any of these thinges which you oppose goe not cleare with vs that they bee no partes of Christes institution wee will yeelde to the fault and correct that ouersight If they doe then let your friends conceiue what truth there is in your mâ—uthes and what credit is to bee giuen to your wrangling obseruations sent vs lately from Rhemes wherein without all shame and care you refute not vs but your selues and your owne conclusions that you might say somewhat against vs before the simple and vnlearned were it otherwise neuer so false or foolish and euen contrary to your own Principles But you did well to beginne first you sawe howe plainely you were to bee taken tardie with many wilfull and ineâ—cusable breaches of Christes institution and therefore you thought it safest to make the salie first on vs that whiles we were occupied in defending our own we should desist from impugning your Masse which is nowe nothing else but an heape of sinnefull deuises and abuses inuented by Satan and broached by Antichrist to deface and frustrate the Lordes supper Phi. Who can abide your blasphemies against the blessed Masse Theo. Call you that blâ—ssed where besides your fruitlesse prayers and superstitious ceremonies your prinâ—â—e halfe commâ—nion subuerteâ—h â—he Lords instâ—tution your sacrifice derogateth from his death and bloodshedding your adoration of bread wine conuinceth you of hainous open Idolatrie Phi. Thâ—se words declare your fury Theo. Those deedes shew foorth your pieâ—â—e Phi. You can not proue so much as one of these things which you obiect Theo. If we moue not euery one of them we will acquite you from them all Phi. That shall you neuer do Theo. So must you say though it bee neuer so plaine but to the point Where learned you thaâ—â—he Priest might celebrate the Lordes Supper openly in the church witâ—â—â—â— any man to communicate with him the people standing by and gasing on hâ—m The Gospell is against you for Christ took bread and when hee had giuen thankes hee brake it and gaue it to the Disciples you breake the bread in your priuate Masse for fashions sake but to whom doe you giue it Giuing is a part of the Lordes supper as wel as breaking If it bee needefull to breake the bread because Christ did so wee conclude it as needfull to giue thâ— bread because he did both and the bread is broken as Augustine affirmeth to be diuided In vaine then is it broken if it be not giuen This the wordes that next insue confirme Accipite edite take ye eate ye The wordes bee plurall ergo they bee neither truly repeated nor dulie followed except others receiue with the Priest For his person and action is wholy singular and so perforce you must either chaunge the wordes of Christs institution which is no way lawfull or increase the number of communicants which euerteth your priuate Masse We are all partakers of one bread saith Paul describing thereby the Lordes Supper and with you no man is partaker besides the Priest When you come togither to eate the Lords supper tarie one for an other that ye come not together vnto condemnation which the Apostle spake of this Sacrament as you hearde out of Augustine To liâ—le purpose stay you for them which shall eate nothing when they come The Lordes supper ought to be common to all because he gaue the Sacramentes equally to all his Disciples that were present and your Masse is priuate to the Priest alone Call you this an imitation of the Lordes Supper or a perfourmance of his will when you frustrate the very wordes which hee spake and neglect the chiefest thing which himselfe did at his table Doe this sayth Christ in remembraunce of mee that is neither omit nor alter you this institution but in all pointes doe that which I did before you which you doe not therefore as yet we see not how you can excuse your selues from a plaine contempt of Christ and his ordinance Phi. Is this all you can say Theo. This is more than you yet haue answered or as I think can for all your crakes Phi. It is answered with a word The. Such a word it may be that it will worke miracles but in the meane time how keepe you Christs institution Phi. All the circumstances of time person and place which in Christes action are noted neede not to bee mitated As that the Sacrament shoulde bee ministred at night to men onely to only twelue after supper and such like because as S. Cyprian epist. 63. nu 7. S. Aug. epist. 118. nu 6 note there were causes of those accidentes in Christ that are not nowe to bee alleadged for vs. Theo. That which you say is true but it serueth not your turn The circumstances of time as whether at night or in the morning of place as whether in church or in chamber of person as whether men or women twelue or any other number these things we grant be wholy in different The reason is The Lord neither in his speech nor in his actions which he commaunded vs to imitate did comprise any of these particulars He tooke bread he gaue thanks he brake it and eate it saieng this is my body The cup likewise he tooke and when he had giuen thanks he gaue it them drinke ye all of this this is my blood of the new Testament Do this in remembraunce of me These things be essential parts of the Lords supper commaunded by him to be followed of vs. These if you neglect you neither obey his precept nor celebrate his supper but prophanely and wickedly thrust his ordinance out at doores that your owne deuises may take place Phi. His words this is my body this is my blood of the new TestameÌ„t c. are essentiall parts of this mystery and so are the elements for in these two consist the matter and forme of the sacrament The. And what are his acâ—ions be not they likewise essential parts of his supper Phi. What actions meane you Theo. Giuing thaÌ„ks breaking giuing eating drinking wtout which it is not the Lords supper Phi. These be certain accidents which our Sauior then vsed they be not of the essence of the sacrament Theo. With what words did he command vs to continue this memoriall of him Phi. Do this for a commemoratioÌ„ of me Theo. Let it be in remeÌ„brance of me or for a coÌ„memoration of mee whether you wil so you take not commemoration for Dirges which Christ needeth not since he liueth raigneth in the glory of God his â—ather the Greeke is ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ For the remembrance of me but the first part of the sentence is ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ Do ye this Phi. It is so what then Theo. He that charged his Apostles

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. ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ 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

proper earthly substance when notwithstanding your selues offer theÌ„ to God in your masses for the remissioÌ„ of your sins redeÌ„ption of your soules to profit the quick the dead by that oblation You teach the people that nothing is offred by the priest to god the father for remission of sins but Christ his son Your masse where this should be done conuinceth that you sacrifice not Christ but the creatures of bread wine Be you not more thaÌ„ blind which see not that the praiers which you daily frequent refute the sacrifice which you falsly pretend Phi. As though the ancient fathers did not also say that Christ himself is daily offred in the church Theo. Not in the substance which is your error but in signification which is their doctrine ours Take their interpretation with their words they make nothing for your local external offring of christ Was not Christ saith Austen once sacrificed in himselfe and yet in a sacrament is he offered for the benefite of the people not euery Paschal feast only but euery day Neither doth he lie that wheÌ„ the questioÌ„ is asked him answereth Christ is offred daily For if Sacraments had not a certain similitude of the things wherof they be sacraments they should be no Sacraments at al. And by reason of this similitude they vsually take the names of the things them-selues Christ is offred daily this is true saith Austen but how The communion is a sacrament of the Lords death sacraments haue the names of the things them selues from a certaine resemblance that is betwene them This doctrine differeth much from yours and yet must Austen stand for a christian and Catholike father when you by your patience shall goe for vpstarts Phi. S. Augustine spake this not of the liuely flesh blood of Christ which we sacrifice to god the father by the priests hands for the sins necessities of meÌ„ but of his death passioÌ„ represented at our masse by the holy mysteries The. In deed S. Augustin spake of that he knew as for your coÌ„ceit of sacrificing the liuely flesh blood of Christ in substance vnder the formes of bread wine by the priests hands neither he nor any good author was euer acquainted with it And to say the truth the very spring roote of your error is this that you seek for a sacrifice in the Lords supper besides the Lords death Marke wel the words of Cyprian The passion of the Lord is the sacrifice which we offer Of Ambrose Our high priest is he that offred on the crosse a sacrifice to clense vs the very same we offer now which being then offred cannot be consumed this Sacrifice is a saÌ„plar of that we offer that very sacrifice for euer Of Eusebius Christ after al things ended offred a woÌ„derful oblation most excellent sacrifice on the crosse for the saluation of vs al gaue vs a memorie therof in stead of a sacrifice we therfore offer the remeÌ„brance of that great sacrifice in the mysteries which he deliuered vs. Of Chrysost. Bringing these mysteries we stop the mouthes of those that aske how we proue that Christ was sacrificed on the crosse For if Iesus were not slaine whose signe and token is this sacrifice Of Austen We sacrifice to God in that only manner in which he commanded we should offer to him at the reuealing of the new Testament the flesh and blood of this sacrifice was yeelded in verie trueth when Christ was put to death after his ascention it is now solemnized by a SacrameÌ„t of memorie The verie elements and actions of the Lordes Supper conuince no lesse The bread which we breake what else doth it represent but the Lordes bodie that was broken for vs The cup which we drinke what els doth it resemble saue the Lordes blood that was shed for our sakes When the host is broken and the blood poured out of the cup into the mouthes of the faithfull what other thing saith Prosper is thereby designed than the offering of the Lordes bodie on the crosse and the shedding of his blood from his side As often as you shall eate this bread and drinke of this cup you shewe forth the Lordes death till he come saith Paul There can be no question of this the spirit of god hath spoken it Then if the death of Christ be the sacrifice which the church offreth it is euident that christ is not only sacrificed at this table but also crucified crucified in that selfe same sort sense that he is sacrificed but no man is so mad as to defeÌ„d that christ is really put to death in these mysteries ergo neither is he really sacrificed vnder the formes of bread wine which thing your selues haue lately ventered rashly presumed without al antiquity The catholik fathers I can assure you say christ is offered christ is crucified in the Lords supper indifferently So Ierom Christ is euery day crucified to vs. So Chrysostom The death of christ is here performed So Gregory Christ dieth againe in this mysterie his flesh suffreth for the saluation of the people so to conclude Austen The geÌ„tiles now through the whole world tast lick the passion of Christ in the sacraments of his body blood If you can expound this you shall not neede to stagger at the rest The church hath no Sacrifice propiciatorie besides the death of her Sauiour and therefore as she doth kill him so she doth offer him in her mysteries If you can not learne by the direction of your own decrees what doctrin was taught in the primatiue church and euen in your own church for 1300. yeres touching this matter The offering of the Lords flesh by the Priests hands is called the passion death and crucifying of Christ Non rei veritate sed significante mysterio Not in precise truth but in a mystical signification or it your gloze delight you rather In this mysterie Christ dieth that is his death is represented his flesh suffereth that is his passion is represented In this very sense Christ is offred daily Chrysostom Do we not offer euery day we do but a memorial of his death We do not offer an other sacrifice but euer the same or rather we continue the remembrance of that sacrifice Ambrose Because we were deliuered by the Lords death we bearing that in mynd do signifie with eating and drinking the flesh and blood that were offred for vs It is a memorial of our redemption Eusebius Christ offered a wonderful sacrifice for the saluatioÌ„ of vs al we haue receiued a memorial of that most sacred oblation to be performed at the Lordes table according to the rule of the new testament Augustin Christ is our high priest after the order of Melchisedec which yeelded himself a slain sacrifice for our sinnes and gaue vs a

similitude image of that oblation to be celebrated for a remeÌ„brance of his passioÌ„ 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 doeâ— 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 sufficieÌ„t 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 oblatioÌ„ because it is a memorie representation of the true sacrifice holy oblatioÌ„ 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 sacrameÌ„t we need no fairer interpretation thaÌ„ that which your own gloze ofteÌ„ 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

peoples heartes and voyces Philand Those be your shyftes Theoph. Goe to you shifters is it not enough for you to beguile the simple with emptie soundes shewes and names but you will resist a manifest trueth when you are sure to haue it prooued to your faces Cyprian in his 63. epistle meddleth not with Malachies wordes but if you woulde in deede learne what hee thought or wrate of that prophesie and what hee counted to bee the Sacrifice that Malachie foretolde turne to his instructions giuen to Quirinus against the Iewest he first booke and 16. chapter where he proueth that the old sacrifice should bee abolished and a newe succeede and there you shal find him expound it to bee Sacrificium laudis iustitiae the Sacrifice of praise and righteousnes and that by no worse mans authoritie than Dauids Iustinus I grant alleadgeth the wordes and saith God in that speech doth witnes that all the sacrifices which Christ Iesus appointed to be done in his name at the Eucharist of bread and wine are acceptable to him But what Sacrifices they were which Christ deliuered and prescribed in the Eucharist for his to do the wordes of Iustinus that presently follow do perfectly open Preces quidem gratiaruÌ„ actiones bonorum perfectas solas esse Deo gratas hostias ego quoque concedo Haec enim sola facienda acceperunt Christiani in aridi humidique sui cibi commemoratione in quo mortis quam per se perpessusâ— est Deus Dei filius memoria re colitur That the prayers and thankes of the good are the only perfect sacrifices and pleasant to God I confesse For these onely sacrifices haue the christians receiued to be done in the celebration of that their Eucharistical food liquor in which the memory of the death of the son of God who himselfe was God is renewed You should haue spared the very quoting of this place by mine aduise for if all the Preachers in England would haue laide their heades together in wordes to crosse your actuall corporall sacryficing the flesh of Christ they could not haue done it in quicker and smarter speech Ireneus maketh euen as much for you as Iustinus did for he not onely subuerteth your reall sacrificing of Christ when hee teacheth that the church offereth the creatures of bread and wine in token of her thankefulnesse vnto God but the very wordes of Malachie he expoundeth by S. Iohns authority for the praiers of the Sainctes BenÃ¨ ait in omni loco incensum offertur nomini meo sacrificium purum Incensa autem Iohan. in Apocalypsi orationes ait esse Sanctorum Et ideo nos quoque offerre vult munus ad altare frequenter sine intermissione Est ergo altare in coelis Illuc enim preces nostrae oblationes nostrae diriguntur Well saith God by Malachie In euery place incense is offered to my name and a pure sacrifice Now incense Iohn in his Apocalypse calleth the prayers of the Sainctes And therefore God will haue vs offer a gift at his altar coÌ„tinually without intermission The altar is in heauen Thither are our praiers and oblations directed Phi. Yet S. Irenens applyeth the wordes of Malachie to the Eucharist Theo. He doth but that sacrifice he saith is the offering vnto God the first fruits of his creatures for a thankesgiuing and with that restriction hee limiteth the word offerimus which he often vseth Offerre igitur oportet Deo primitias eius creaturae Offerimus einon quasi indigenti sed gratias agentes donationi eius sanctificantes creaturam Wee must offer to God but the first fruites of his creatures Wee offer to him not that he wanteth but giuing him thankes for his bountifulnesse and sanctifieng the creature Here is a sacrifice of thanksgiuing for his mercies not Christ but the creatures of bread and wine offered vnto God with prayer and other christian duties which hee nameth as cleane thoughtes faith without hypocrisie firme hope feruent dilection these are the sacrifices of the new Testament of the Lords table not proper to the priest but common to the people nor finished with the haÌ„ds but perfourmed with the spirite of man which is the true seruice of the second couenant Phi. You turne and winde the Scriptures as you please but sure the Prophet Malachie directly toucheth our Sacrifice Theo. You dreame so earnestly of it that all the Fathers in Christes church can not pull you from it What Cyprian Iustine and Ireneus write of this prophesie you do or may vnderstand by that which is saide if the number bee too smal you may haue moe to assure you that the Prophet neuer thought of your reall and corporall sacrificing of Christes fleshe to God the Father by the Priestes fingers Tertullian alleadging the very wordes Et in omni loco offerentur munda Sacrificia nomini meo In euery place shall there bee brought cleane Sacrifices vnto my name addeth IndubitatÃ¨ quod in omni terra exire habebat praedicatio Apostolorum Vndoubtedly the Prophet Malachie meaneth that the preaching of the Apostles was to bee spredde ouer all the earth Against Marcion hee sayeth Et in omni loco Sacrificium nomine meo offeretur sacrificium mundum scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura In euerie place shall there bee offered in my name a sacrifice and that a cleane sacrifice to witte sincere praier from a pure conscience So Eusebius Where Malachie doeth say that incense and sacrifice are offered to God in euerie place what else meaneth hee but that it is done in euery Countrie and in all Nations which in deede were to offer to the most high God the incense of prayer and sacrifice which is called cleane no longer by blood but by godly workes Nowe what those workes were Cyrill will teach you Wee vse sacrifices but of the spirite and minde For wee haue a precept that leauing the grosse seruice of the Iewes wee shoulde yeelde a subtile fine and spirituall sacrifice And therefore wee offer vnto God for a sweete smell all sortes of vertues faith hope charitie iustice continence obedience mildnesse perpetuall prayses and other such vertues So Hierom. Incense is offered to the name of the Lord in euerie place and a cleane sacrifice not in the oblations of the olde Testament but in the holynesse of Euangelicall puritie of which incense wee reade in other places as when Dauid sayeth Let my praier bee directed as incense in thy sight and the lifting vppe of mine handes as an Euening sacrifice So Augustine Heare yee Donatistes the Lorde saying thus by his Prophet In euerie place shall incense bee yeelded to my name and a pure sacrifice With this sacrifice of your brethren which God most respecteth you shew your selues by your cauilling to bee grieued and if at any time you heare the name of the Lord to bee praysed from East to West which

is the liuely sacrifice whereof it is written Offer to God the sacrifice of praise your couÌ„tinances 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 theÌ„ 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

Ea demum est miserabilis animae seruitus signa pro rebus accipere nec supra creaturam corpoream oculum mentis ad â—auriendum aeternum lumen leuare non posse That is a miserable bondage of the soule to take the signes or Sacramentes as you doe for the thinges themselues and not to be able to lift vp the eye of the mind aboue the corporal creature to perceiue the eternall brightnesse Of adoration he saith RectÃ¨ scribitur hominem ab angelo prohibitum ne se aedoraret sed vnum Deum sub quo esset ei ille conseruus It is very wel recorded in the Scriptures that a man was prohibited by an angel to adore him but only God vnder whom he himself was a fellow seruant vnto God And therefore he saith Ecce vnum Deum colo Behold I worship adore none but God and thence he deriueth the name of religion Quod ei vni religet animas nostras Because it relieth our soules on him alone So that veneration you may giue to sacramentes adoration you may not and yet you finely conuey the one into S. Augustines text iointly with the other as if they were both fouÌ„d in his words which they are not Phi. He saith singular veneration Theo. You say so but he sayeth not so His words are Veneratione singulariter debita with that veneration which is due onely or singularly to this Sacrament Phi. And what is that but adoration Theo. If you might be iudges it should be nothing else but S. Augustine sayth Not to be contemned is the veneration due vnto it Contemptum solum non vult cibus ille that meate misliketh onele contempt that is either to bee dayly receiued without regard or to be still refused vpon pretence of vnworthynesse And that being the case of which S. Augustine disputeth your cunning serueth you in steede of examining theÌ„selues before they receiue it which S. Augustine meaneth to set the people not at all to receiue it but to fall downe and adore it with diuine honour in Christes place which is as wilfull a contempt of his ordinaunce and as shamefull an abuse of his sacramentes as can be committed Phi. The same father in an other place saieth of the Sacrament No man eateth it before he adore it Theo. Are you not desperatly set thâ—t to defile your selues with open idolatrie will force the Fathers to fit your â—umours against their owne speeches S. Augustine saith of Christes fleshe which hee tooke of the virgine Marie Nemo illam carnem manducat nisi prius adorauerit No man eateth that fleshe of Christ vnlesse hee first adore it you make no more bones at the matter but strike THE FLESH of Christ out of Sainct Augustines wordes and referre adoration to the corporall creature which the Priest holdeth in his fingers Is not this trowe you sounde dealing in the greatest mysteries of our saluation and imminent peril of your damnation purposely to shut your eyes least you shoulde see the truth or agnise the rashnesse of your newe founde adoration What haue Sainct Augustines wordes to doe with your adoring the mysticall signes when hee directly nameth the flesh of Christ which is both eaten with the spirite and adored in the spirite yea the very eating of it is the adoring of it since it is not eaten but by beleeuing hoping and reioycing in it which are the chiefe branches of Gods diuine honor Phi. As though the fleshe of Christ were not really closed in the forme of bread and corporally eaten with the mouth of man Theo. One errour must needes drawe on an other or rather your reall and carnall presence is the groundworke of all your errors and abuses in the Masse Phi. The deniall of it is the high way to all your heresies and blasphemies against the doctrine of the church and for our partes till you leaue that wee looke for no better at your hands Theo. Looke to your own feete least whiles you watch our hands your legges slip into the pit of destruction Phi. Wee bee past all feare of that Theo. And so be those that are past all recouery but yet for the sauing of other mens soules if not of yours we will first weigh the proofes of your adoration after not sticke to suruay the partes of your Transubstantiation Go on therefore with your former authorities Phi. S. Ambrose saieth We adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries Theo. Uerily and so doe wee but the mysteries and sacramentes themselues wee doe not adore neither did Sainct Ambrose euer teach any man to adore them Phi. I see you mistake vs. You thinke we adore the formes of bread and wine where in deede we doe not but rather we adore Christ the sonne of the lyuing God and second person in Trinitie in those mysteries as Saint Ambrose sayeth or as wee speake more vsually vnder those formes of breade and wine Theo. I mistake you not I knowe you adore that which is locally and really inclosed within the compasse of your host and chalice supposing it in matter and substance to bee the glorious body of Christ apparelled with accidents of bread and wine as whitenesse roundnesse sweetenesse moystnesse and such like proprieties of bread and wine but your foundation wee say is false and therefore your building must needes bee ruinous Christ is present in the mysteries not by the materiall substaunce of his body closed within the formes of bread and wine but by a diuine and spirituall vertue and efficience not mixing ã€ˆâ€¦ã€‰ but entering the hâ—rtâ— of the faithâ—ull and nourishing them with his spirit and grace to eternall life the elementes abiding in their proper and former essence and substance And therefore when you adore them as if they were Christ in nature and substaunce which in trueth they are not you worship not Christ but giue his honour to creatures and in steede of washing your sins away by the death and blood of Christ you kindle the wrath of God against you by mystaking his sonne and adoring the elementes with diuine honor in lue of Christ. Phi. Tush we regard not these wordes of yours we haue assurance from Christ himselfe that it is his body and so long wee passe not for any thing that you can alleadge or obiect against vs. Theophil But if you misconster his wordes to make a deade and corruptible creature to bee the seconde person in Trinitie and giue it that honour which is due to the glorious and immortall God what assuraunce can you haue that Christ Iesus will put vp this reproach at your handes and not auenge himselfe on you as on proud idolateâ—s Phi. Are you well in your wits to vrge vs so often with open Idolatrie where as wee shewe you so plaine proofes of our defence Theo. Plaine quoth you In good faith they bee such as no meane Scholer woulde stumble at Christ you proue

is adored in the mysteries and on the Altar Why shoulde hee not bee adored in all places and in all his giftes and for all the monumentes of his grace and mercie bequeathed vs in this life that he may prepare vs for the next And if this rule bee generall howe great cause haue wee to adâ—re him in the water where hee clenseth vs from our sinnes and at the table where hee feedeth and strengthneth our soules and spirites with their proper nourishment which is the precious ransome that was paide to recouer vs from death and hell and to bring vs to his immortall light and blisse What Christian heart recounting his aboundant goodnesse and fatherly readynesse with his owne stripes to heale vs with his owne bloode to washe vs with his owne death to quicken vs will not bee resolued into prayers and teares to yeelde all honour and adoration to him that doeth offer vs these treasures at and on his table Phi. These bee goodly words to bleare mens eyes where in deede you denie him to bee present eyther at or on the Altar Theo. Wee confesse him to bee there present with all his giftes and blessinges to him that will beholde him with the eye of faith and reach out the hand of his soule to apprehende him in greater might and maiestie than you doe when you shroude him with your formes of breade and wine and pale him rounde with a pixe as it were with a sepulchre Mary locall dimension or inclusion within the compasse of the host or chalice wee appoint him none His trueth is annexed to the Sacramentes and his power vnited to the creatures after a wonderfull and inspeakeable manner by the mighty working of the holy ghost but yet wee must not direct his diuine honour and seruice to anie part of the Altar or circumference of the visible creatures wee must rather Lyft vp our hearts as the faithfull were alwayes admonished in this sacrament and take heede that wee doe not basely bende our eyes on the bread or wine to seeke Christ in them and vnderneath them much lesse worshippe them in steede of him which is the next way to dishonor him and deifie them against the very rules and Principles of our faith Phi. But S. Chrysostom saith We adore him on the altar as the Sages did in the manger and S. Nazianzene saith of his sister Gorgonia she called on him which is worshipped on the Altar Theo. What wordes soeuer Chrysostom and Nazianzene vse to expresse the place where Christ is serued and adored yet this is euident that they attribute adoration not to the visible element or sacrament but vnto Christ who may well be saide to be worshipped on the Table or altar for so much as there is the fruite force and eâ—fect of his heauenly grace and trueth proposed vnto all and from thence the prayers and thankes of all are offered vnto him by the religious heart and voice of the Pastor that standeth at the Lordes table to bee the mouth of al and yet you deale vntruely with both those fathers as you do almost with al the rest of the writers that passe your pen. Chrysostomes wordes are Tu non in praecepe id sed in Altarivides Thou seest his bodie not in a manger but on the Altar Now betweene seeing adoring there is good difference if you bee not so blinde that you can see nothing Phi. He speaketh it to that ende that we should adore it as the Sages did when they found him in a manger Theo. He hath some wordes tending to this ende that we should adore the body of Christ since the wicked and barbarous Magi did yeelde him that honour but he ioyneth no such wordes togither as you cite he saith not we adore him on the altar but let vs that be citizens of heauen at least imitate those Barbarians Phi. That is in adoring Christ. Theo. As if we doubted of that But where is on the altar which you haue added of your owne without your authors consent Phi. He sayeth thou seest him on the Altar Theo. But neither with corporall eyes nor vnder the formes of bread and wine And that well appeareth in the very same place when he saith Ascende igitur ad coeli portas tunc quod dicimus intueberis Climbe vp to the gates of heauen and then thou shalt see that which we now say To which end he told them before that becomming Eagles in this life they must fly vppe to heauen it selfe or rather aboue the heauens For where the carcas is saith Christ there wil the Eagles be The Lordes body is the carkas in respect of the death which hee suffered Eagles Christ calleth vs to shew vs that he must flie on high which will come to this body euer mount vpward haue the eye of his mind most bright to behold the sonne of righteousnes He that teacheth you to ascend to the highest heauens there to adore Christ neuer ment you should adore the hâ—st in the Priestes handes in steede of Christ and as hee neuer ment it so he neuer spake it though you haue plaied some ligier de main to make his wordes sound to that sense Phi. Nazianzenes sister called on him that is worshipped vpon the altar Theo. She did so but when she made her prayers to Christ there was neither Priest by nor pixe there that you should dreame shee made her prayers to the host Nazianzene saith shee went to the Church ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ in the dark of the night kneeling close to yâ— altar she did inuocate ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ him that is honoured thereon not meaning the host which at that instant was not on the Altar but Christ who is truly said to be honoured on the altar or Table because his mercies are there layde foorth in the mysteries and the prayers and supplications of all the faythfull offered chiefely from that place vnto him though hee sit in heauen according to the materiall substance of his humane bodie Phi. He is honored on the Altar that is say you the Altar is the place whence honour is giuen vnto him what sleights you haue to auoyd the fathers Theo. Haue you no worse to enforce them and you shal do them lesse wrong than you doe When the woman of Samaria sayd to Christ Our fathers worshipped God in this hill did she meane that God was in the hill or that the worshippe was there dâ—ne vnto him When it was said to Moses Ye shal serue God vpon this mountaine was that mountaine before hand allotted to God or to his seruice So Christ is honoured on earth though hee bee in heauen because the earth is the place where hee is honored and serued And yet wee doubt not but Christ himselfe is also present euen in the mysteries and on the Altar or Table of the Lorde albeit not in that corporall and carnall manner which you conceiue

name than the body and blood of Christ not that in earthly matter or essence they be really conuerted into those diuine things as you falsely gather but for that remaining in their former vsual both nature and substance they haue in them cary with them the fruite effect and force of Christs flesh wounded blood shed for the remission of our sinnes And because the people shoulde regarde not the creatures which they see but the graces which they beleeue therefore the Fathers euery where without exception call the elements by the names of the inwarde and heauenly vertues that are annexed to them and conferred with them by the trueth of his word power of his spirit This is the first rule which you should haue obserued The next is that whensoeuer they teach and propose the dignitie proprietie or efficacie of the Sacrament they meane not the creatures which our eies and tasts doe better iudge of than their tongues or wittes can teach vs but that other diuine lyfe-giuing and soule-sauing part of the sacrament which our heartes by fayth take holde on and possesse more really and effectually than if it were chammed in our mouthes or buried in our stomackes as you grossely conceiue of those thinges which bee most high and heauenly These two Rules remembred a very meane scholer may soone discharge the burden of all your allegations For either you mistake the one part for the other supposing that to bee corporall which in deede is spirituall or else you vrge the name which the signe beareth for similitude as â—arnâ—stily to all intents as ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ were were the thing it selfe which causeth you to ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ so many texâ—es and to straie so farre from trueth that no sound can recall you Phi. Away with your new found obseruations The catholike church hath the spirit of trueth promised for her direction and therefore the wil none of your wise inuentions to qualifie the fathers speeches Learne you rather at her handes to beleeue the wordes of Christ who first appointed this Sacrament and pronounced it to be himselfe without signe or figure when he saide this is my body and this is my blood not spirituall or metaphoricall but the same body which was broken and the same blood which was shed for remissioâ— of sinnes and that I trust you will confesse was his naturall and locall hath body and blood Theo. The question is not whether that were his naturall body which suffered on the crosse but when hee saide of the bread this is my bodie whether he substantially changed the dead element into himselfe made the creature become the creator or whether he annexed his trueth to the signe and grace to the Sacrament which required both the word of Christ to make the promise and his power to perfourme the speech And therefore we beleeue and acknowledge the wordes of our Sauiour to bee very needeful in ordaining this Sacrament euen in such manner and order as they were spoken that the signes might haue the fruites and effectes of his body and blood But that hee chaunged substances with the bread and wine or deified the creatures that his speech doth not inferre and that as yet we doe not beleeue except you can shewe vs howe the fleshe of Christ which was first made of a woman is nowe become to be made of bread and a dead and senslesse creature exalted to bee the son of God Phi. We do not say the bread is substantially conuerted into Christ or made the sonne of God but the bread is abolished in the place thereof commeth the glorious flesh of our Lord and Sauiour who is the Sonne of God And in that sense we hold the creator is now where the creature was but the dead element is not made the Sonne of God you woulde faine catch vs at such an aduantage Theo. How you can auoide it I yet perceiue not for if the bread bee nowe Christ which before it was not ergo the bread is made Christ and by consequent a dead element is nowe become or made the Sonne of God which I thinke will hardly stand with the very first groundes of Christian religion Phi. You presse the letter against both reason and trueth For the one is sayd to be conuerted or chaunged into the other because the one displaceth and succeedeth the other so is it a chaunge rather of the one for the other than a conuersion of the one into the other if you take conuersion properly as the Philosophers do Theo. Christ dâ—eth not say where the bread was there is nowe my body but this bread is my body And since before consecration it was not his body and now by repeating the wordes is become his body the conclusion is euident that by your opinion the bread is made Christ and so become the sonne of God Phi. You thinke to snare vs with schoole-trickes but setting your sophismes aside we plainly beleeue the Sacrament is Christ. Theo. You must beleeue the bread is Christ which as yet the Articles of our Creede will not suffer vs to doe I meane not to thinke that a dead and dumbe creature may bee God Phi. Do we say the bread is God Theo. You must auerre it if you stick to the letter of Christs words for he said of the bread as you inforce it this is my selfe now he was God Phi. I thought I should be euen with you at Landes end Christ did not say this bread is my bodie but this is my bodie where now is the force of your argument Theo. Euen where it was Phi. Why Christ sayd this is not meaning bread or any other creature Theo. That this must be somwhat else nothing was the body of Christ so you loose not only the bread but also the body Phi. Nay he said this is and that must needs be somwhat it can not be nothing Theo. It is well you haue found it I said so before you Then this is my body What this Was it bread that he spake of or somthing else Phi. He spake of that which he had in his hands Theo. You meane not long before Phi. In deede you say he had at that present when he spake the wordes nothing in his handes and so you would haue nothing to be his body Theo. Hinder not our course with matter impertinent to this place The demonstratiue THIS noteth that which Christ then gaue to his Disciples as wel as that which you thinke he then held in his hands Choose whether you wil of force the thing must be all one For that which hee helde that he gaue and of that which he first helde and after gaue hee saide this is my body Phi. He did so Theo. What was it Phi. Somwhat it was whatsoeuer it was Theo. What somwhat do you say it was Phi. What if I cannot tell Theo. Then must you seeke farther for your chaunging of substances The words of

Christ if you know not whereof he spake proue no conuersion of the bread into his body For vnlesse THIS be taken to import the bread the bread by those wordes can not be changed and if not by these then surely by none Phi. I see your drift you fet about to force me to confesse that by the strict coherence of our Sauiours wordes the bread is Christ since that propositioÌ„ in precise speech is vntrue you would come in with your figures Theo. And your drift is as open that hauing deuised a reall and carnall presence to your selues by colour of Christes wordes and perceiuing the same to bee no way consequent to the letter which you pretend least you shoulde bee disproued to your faces you will not admit the perfect and plaine context of Christes wordes but stand houering about other sophisticall illusions which will not helpe you For we haue the ful confession of scriptures fathers against you that the pronoune THIS in Christes words must bee restrained to the bread and to nothing else The Lord tooke breade and when hee had giuen thankes he brake no doubt the bread that he tooke and gaue to the Disciples the selfesame that he brake saying take ye eate ye this that I giue you This is my bodie What THIS could our Sauiour mean but THIS that he gaue THIS that he brake THIS that he tooke which by the witnesse of the Scripture it selfe was bread If you suppose that he tooke bread but brake it not or brake it but gaue it not or gaue it his Disciples to eate but told them not this which he gaue them but some other thing besides that was his body you make the Lords supper a merry iest where the later end starteth from the beginning and the middle from the both The pronoune THIS of it selfe inferreth nothing and therefore except you name the bread which Christ pointed vnto when he spake these wordes you coÌ„firme not the faithes but amase the wits of your followers S. Paul proposing the Lordes Supper to the church of Corinth expresseth that very word which we say the circumstances of the Gospel import As often as ye shall eate saith he This bread and drinke this cuppe you shew foorth the Lords death till he come The bread which he brake is it not the communion of Christs body Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of that bread and drinke of that cup for whosoeuer shall eat this breade and drinke the cup of the Lord vnworthily shal be guilty of the body blood of the Lord. So that as wel by the cohereÌ„ce of the former words in the description of the Lords supper as by the manifest adiectioÌ„ which S. Paul putteth to the demoÌ„stratiue we conclude our sauior pronouÌ„ced of the bread that it was his body The referring of THIS to the bread all the catholik fathers that euer wrate with pen in the church of God acknowledge with one consent Iustinus Wee be taught that the sanctified foode which nourisheth our fleshe and our blood is the fleshe and blood of that Iesu. Tertullian So Christ taught vs calling bread his bodie and discussing the wordes of the supper Why saith he doth Christ there call bread his bodie Austen That which your faith requireth to be taught the bread is the body of Christ and the cup his blood Cyprian Our Lord at his table gaue to the Disciples with his own handes bread and wine on the crosse hee yeelded his body to the souldiers handes to be wounded that his Apostles might teach all Nations how bread and wine were his flesh and blood Ireneus How shall it appeare to them that the bread on which they giue thankes is the body of their Lord and the cup his blood if they graunt not Christ to be the sonne of the creator of the world How did the Lord rightly if an other were his father taking bread of this condition that is vsuall amongst vs confesse it to bee his body Hierom Let vs learn that the bread which the Lord brake gaue to his disciples is the Lords body himself saying to theÌ„ take ye eate ye this is my body Athan. or at lest the coÌ„mentary that is extaÌ„t in his name What is the bread the body of Christ. Epiphan Of that which is round in figure sensles in power the Lord would say by grace this is my body Cyrill Christ thus auoucheth and saith of the bread this is my body Theodorete In the verie giuing of the misteries he called bread his body And of all others your selues may not shrink from this resolution of Christs wordes the surest holde of your reall presence though it bee not much standeth onely on this settle For what wordes haue you besides thâ—se to proue that the breade is chaunged from his former substaunce Uerily none Then if in these wordes which should worke the change there be no mention at all of bread how can that which is no way comprised in them bee chaunged by them So miraculous a change can not be wrought by silence but rather if any such be by the power of Christes words and in those words must the thing at least be named that shall be changed Againe the demonstratiue THIS must needes note that which was there present on the Lordes table before the words of consecration were wholy repeated and the flesh of Christ coulde not be present vnder the likenesse of bread without or before Consecration ergo the pronoune inferreth not Christ but the bread which by your owne positions is not abolished but in vltimo instanti prolationis verboruÌ„ in the very last end instant of vttering these wordes And therefore remaine in his owne nature wheÌ„ the first word was pronounced Which some not the meanest men of your side foresaw very well howsoeuer you since haue taken other counsel and therefore they say Dicendum est quod hoc demonstrat substantiam panis We must behold saith Gerson that the pronoune THIS doeth demonstrate the substaunce of bread and Steuen Gardiner Christus ait euidenter hoc est corpus meum demonstrans panem Christ sayeth plainly this is my body pointing to the bread Notwithstanding afterward he changed his minde in this as in many other thinges came to Indiuiduum vagum as if Christ had saide THIS what is it I can not tell but it must needes be somwhat is my body Occam and other profound fellowes of your side bethinking themselues how your opinion might best agree with the wordes of Christ say the pronoune THIS must be referred to the bodie of Christ as if our Sauiour had said this my body is my body To make all cocksure the coronell of your scholmen I meane the gloze resolueth the doubt on this wife Solet quaeri quid demonstretur per pronomen

peruert the meaning of Leo and if you did but vnderstand the right course of his reason you would suppresse both his voice and your vaunt for verie shame Phi. He that will trust your sayings shall haue manie false fiers when he should not Theo. And he that will credit your doings shall feele manie quick flames when he would not Phi. You be better at quipping than at answering Theo. You are lothe we should encroch on your common But returne to Leo. Can you tell against whome he wrote Phi. Against such as you are that denied the trueth of Christes bodie and blood in the Sacrament Theo. Were they men without names or names without men Phi. Mock not they were your auncetours Theo. They say it is a wise childe that knoweth his owne father Doe you But in sadnes whome did Leo traduce in that sermon Phil. Mary Eutiches and such like heretikes Theoph. You saie well for Leo nameth him but a litle before in that sermon and against his opinion he reasoneth Philand I am content with that Theoph. What was his error Phi. He denied the trueth of Christes bodie and blood in the Sacrament Theo. Who told you so Phi. I gather it by those that refute him Theo. By them you shall learne his error but this it was not Philan. What was it say you Theo. Eutiches affirmed that Christes humane nature and substance was not onely glorified by his ascension but consumed and turned into the nature immensitie of his Godhead Against him wrate Theodorete Gelasius and others and one of the cheefest argumentes which they bring against him is that which Leo here toucheth in a woorde or two Phi. That argument cleane confoundeth your sacramentarie Sect. Theo. Yours or ours it must needes confound for this it is As the bread and wine after consecration are changed and altered into the bodie and bloud of Christ so is the humane nature of Christ conuerted into his diuine after his resurrection ascension but the bread and wine are not changed neither in substance nor forme nor figure nor naturall proprieties but only in grace and working ergo Christs humane nature is not changed into his diuine EITHER IN SVBSTANCE circumscription or forme but only endewed with glory and immortalitie Phi. This is no Catholike reason but sauoreth altogether of your hereticall poison Theo. They which first framed and vrged this reason against Eutiches in your opinion were they heretikes Phi. No father euer vsed it Theo. If they did must not they be doubbed for heretikes as the first proposers of that reason or at least you for affirming now the quite contrarie For you reiect both their assumption conclusion against Eutiches as starke false and whose ancetour then is Eutiches but yours Phi. They do not vse it as you report it Theo. Looke you offspring of Eutiches whether Gelasius Theodoret and Augustine do not vrge it in those verie pointes and wordes which I repeate Thus Gelasius framed his reason against Eutiches An image or similitude of the bodie and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries It is therefore apparant and euident enough that we must holde the same opinion of Christ the Lord which we professe celebrate and receiue in his image That as those signes by the working of the holy Ghost passe into the diuine substance and yet remaine in the proprietie of their owne nature Euen so that verie principall mysterie it selfe whose force truth that Image assuredly representeth doth demonstrate one whole and true Christ to continue the two natures of which he consisteth properlie remaining And lest you should not vnderstand what he ment by this The signes still abide in the proprietie of their owne nature he expoundeth himselfe an saith Non desinit esse substantia vel natura panis vini The substance or nature of bread and wine ceaseth not or perisheth not When Theodoret had made an entrance to the very same reason by laying this foundation Oportet archetypum Imaginis esse exemplar the Originall must be answerable to the Image the heretike caught the words out of his mouth and said It hapned in good time that you did mention the diuine mysteries for euen thereby will I prooue the Lordes bodie to be chaunged into an other nature As then the signes of the Lordes bodie and blood are other thinges before the inuocation of the Priest but after they are chaunged and become other than that they were so the Lords bodie after his assumption is chaunged into his diuine substance The maior being good such as Gelasius and Theoderet did both auouch that as the signes were changed after consecration so was Christes humanitie after his assumption if your opinion had then beene taught in the church that the substance of bread and wine were changed by consecration the conclusion had beene infallible for Eutiches error that the substance of Christes humanitie had beene changed by his ascention into his diuinitie and not only both these Fathers had had their mouthes stopped but Eutiches error had beene inâ—olâ—ble as beeing grounded on a Maior that was a confessed and famous trueth and on a Minor that was as you thinke the vndoubted saith of the Church Mary the Minor in deed was apparantly false though you now defend it for Catholike Doctrine and with the plaine deniall of that as a manifest vntrueth Theodoret inferreth the contrarye that because neither the Substance nor naturall proprieties of the bread and wine are chaunged by consecration as the whole Church then beleeued and confessed therefore neither the substance nor shape nor circumscription of Chrisâ—es humane nature were changed by his ascention but his body remaineth in the â—ame substance quantitie and forme that he rose from death and ascended vp withall and with the very same forme and substance of flesh shall come to iudge the worlde These are his wordes Thou art caught saith Theodoret to the heretike with the same nets that thou laiedst for others The mysticall signes after sanctification doe not depart from their own nature For they remanie in their former substance and figure and forme c. Conferre then the Image with the originall and thou shalt see the likenes betweene them For the figure must be like to the trueth That body therefore of christ in heauen hath his former shape and figure circumscription to speake al at once his former substance Lay all your heades together aâ—d graunting the Maior which the whole Church held auoide the conclusion of Eutiches withâ—ut the denying the Minor as Theodoret did which yet is your faith and beleefe at this day and we wil grant you to be Catholiks and our selues heretikes If you cannot see how far you be falleÌ„ from the doctrine of Christs church and that in no lesse point than the greatest and chieâ—esâ— Sacrament on which you haue wickedly founded your adoration oblation halfe communion priuate masse and barbarous prayers without

sacrifice 693 The Iesuits heape vp fathers for a shew though they make nothing for them 694 The Sacrifices of the new Testament be spirituall 695 What sacrifice it is that Malachie speaketh of 696 The Lords Supper is a sacrifice for diâ—ers respects 699 The Priests act can not applie the death of Christ 700 The Iesuits sacrifice 701 The word Sacrifice is not vsed by the holy Ghost 702 S. Paul maketh nothing for the sacrifiâ—e of the Masse 703 Adoration of the sacrament 705 The Sacrament must not bee adored 706 The Iesuits proofes for adoration of the Sacrament 707 No Father teacheth the adoratioÌ„ of the sacrament 708 S. Austen was far froÌ„ adoring the sacrament 709 Christ adored in the misteries 710 Chrysostome did not adore the sacrament 712 Nazianzene doth not say that his sister adored the sacrament 713 Dionysius made no inuocation of the Sacrament 714 Dionys. corrupted by the Ies. 715 The whole church slaundered by the Iesuites 716 Origen Chrysâ—st lengthned by the Iesuits to serue the adoratioÌ„ of the Sacrament 718 Origens words ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ 719 Christ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ our roote 719 Christ dwelleth in vs more truely than in the Sacrament 719 The Church directed her prayers to Christ in heauen 722 The Sacrament is a corruptible creature 722 We must not basely beÌ„d our minds on the visible creatures 723 The mystical signes must be reuerenced but not adored with Godlike honour 724 The signes remaine in their former Substance 725 The Real presence 726 Why the Iesuites mistake the fathers in this matter 728 The bread is made God by the Iesuites constructions of Christs wordes 729 Christ said of the bread this is my bodie 730 The Papistes say THIS in the words of Christ is taken for nothing 732 The causes why the wordes of Christ at his last Supper were not literal 733 For what cause S. Austen concludeth the wordes of Christ to be figuratiue 734 The Iesuits caÌ„not tel how to make the letter agree with ther opinion 735 The figuratiue sense of Christes words auouched by the fathers 736 The signe in the Sacrament caÌ„not be the trueth 739 The 6. of S. Iohn expoundeth the words of the supper 740 The fathers refer the 6. of Iohn to the Lordes supper 741 The fathers themselues refer the 6. of Iohn to the sacrament 742 The words in the 6. of Iohn are figuratiue because the actioÌ„s are spirituall 744 To eate christ is to beleeue and abide in Christ. 745 In S. Iohn the manner of eating is spiritual the manner of speaking is allegorical 746 What the Capernits error was 746 How the Ies. differ from the Capernites 748 What fathers the Iesuits haue for their literall sense corporall eating 750 What the late Grecians ment by pressing the letter 751 The Sacrament is a signe of christ on the crosse 753 In sacraments the signes haue the names of the thinges theÌ„selues 754 The signes remain in their former substance 756 The power and operation of tâ—â— signe is changed 75â— The substance of christs flesh doth not enter our mouthes 759 Christ is not eaten with teeth 759 The Iesuites narrowly driuen wheÌ„ they must take substance for accidents 761 Christ is not eaten with teeth or iawes 762 The refutation of Eutiches error ouerthroweth traÌ„substantiatioÌ„ 764. Eutiches error is not refuted but confirmed by the real presence 766. Leoes words do not import the reall presence 767 The iesuits make the fathers contradict themselues 769 That body which entereth our mouths increaseth the substaÌ„ce of our flesh 770 What manner of eating Christ in the Sacrament the Church taught for a 1000. yeares 772 The spirituall eating of Christ in the Sacrament excludeth the corporall 776 What the Sacramentall eating of Christ is 778 The wicked do not eat Christ. 779 The Church of Rome is not yet resolued of her corporal eating of Christs flesh 780 The first Authors of their corporal eating condemne ech others opinion for heresie 680 The grossenes of Papistes worse than carnal oâ— capernitical 782 The ElemeÌ„ts may putrify the flesh of Christ cannot 783 Their sluttish diuinity is a necessiry sequele to their real preseÌ„ce 783 We must ascend to heauen where Christ sitteth in his glorie 384 Our harts must be lifted vp to heauen not â—o the heâ—â— 785 The true flesh of Christ is in heaueÌ„ and absent from the earth 786 The manhoodâ— of Christ is not in many places at once 788 The substaunce of Christes bodie must be coÌ„tained in one place 790. Christes manhoode is not euery where by the verie principles of our faith 792 How one the same christ is euerywhere present 792 The power of God doth neuer crosse his will 793 Contradictions bee as impossible as falshoods be 796 The Iesuites haue not one father for their transubstantiatioÌ„ 797 S. Austen horribly forged by frier walden 798 Bede vsed in the same sort by the same frier 799 In what sense Chrysostome saide the mysteries are coÌ„sumed 800 How the Sacrament may be saide to be no bread 801 Species doth not signifie shewes without substaunce 803 The Persons of men cannot preiudice the truth of God 817 The happines of our times is gods goodnes not our worthines 818 The Iesuites religion is like their subiection 819 The Iesuites positions bee both trayterous and hereticall 820. Faultes escaped The first number noteth the page the second the line m. margent c. correction Page 9. line 18. safely read falsly p. 20. l. 25. mercy The breath r. mercy the breach p. 25. l. 30. Anastasius r. Athanasius p. 37. l. 38. Tiberius r Liberius p. 63. l. 33 cunning r. cumming p. 64. l. 30. you can r. Phi. You can p. 66. l. 14. Seneca r. Semeca p. 72. l. 9. Athanasius r. Anastasius p. 82. m. 4000. r. 1000. p. 93. l. 12. Burdeaus r. Burges p. 97. l. 24. cattels r. chattels p. 120 l 41. coÌ„uert r. coÌ„triue p. 128. l. 32. and if r Theo. And if p. 149. l. 34. Maximus r. Mariaus p. 173. l. 23. do you not r Phil Do you not p. 180. l. 38. whâ—ch spoken r. which is spokeÌ„ p. 201. l. 1. adiudge to haue r. theÌ„ to haue p. 204. l 41. they do r. they may do p. 228. m. whether the Pope r. while the Pope p. 229. l. 38. nec ipse nec alteruÌ„ r. nec ipse possit alteruÌ„ p. 240. l. 13. goodline r godlines p. 259. l. 8 dare r you dare p. 270. l. 23 Protopius r Procopius 276 12. sound r. found 280. l. 3. resist r. sist. 26 r. Theo. Sure p. 301. l 3. there r. three 303. 3 your r our 35. l. 28. writing r. vttering 318. l. 2. reasonable r. treasonable 333. l. 31. perceiue r. â— perceiue 32. ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ r. ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ 39 shaken r. not shakeÌ„ p. 337. l. 1. you do r. you not do p. 339. l. 28. the defence r. you defend 350. l. 19. maintaining r. maiming p 364. l. 42. christian princes r. christians

must his owne prouince shoulde take stitch against him But howe can you proue that he alone was spoken to Phi. The words be plaine Obsecro vt scribas I beseech you to write in the singular nuÌ„ber Theo. What if a man should distrust the print or the Copie woulde it not tempt your patience Phi. Haue we not good cause if you beginne to discredite euery thing that maketh against you Theo. Whether I suspect the place vppon iust occasion or no your selfe shall bee Iudge Chrysostome in this Epistle hauing reported at large the violent and enormous rage of his enemies against him and his adherents commeth at last to make his petition not to Ionnocentius alone as you conceiue but generally to the West Bishoppes Igitur Domini maxime venerandi pij cum haec ita se habere didiceritis studium vestrum magnam diligentiam adhibite quo retundatur haec quae in ecclesias irrupit iniquitas Therefore most reuerent and religious Lordes since you see what is done put to your endeuours and diligence that this wickednes which is broken into the Church may be beaten back Quippe si mos hic inualuerit scitote quod breui transibunt omnia Quapropter ne confusio haec omnem quae sub celo est natione minuadat obsecro vt scribatis quod haec tam iniquÃ¨ facta robur non habeant nobis verÃ² literis vestris charitate vestra frui concedite For if this grow to a custome knowe you that al things wil shortly come to nought therfore least this confusion attempt euery nation vnder heauen I beseeche not one of you but al you to write that these things so vniustly doone may be taken as voide and you all graunt that we may enioy your letters your fauours And so goeth he on to the very end with verbes of the plural number leauing off with these words Haec omnia cum ita se habere intellexeritis a dominis meis pientissimis fratribus nostris Episcopis obsecro vt praestetis id quod petent officij Al these things when you shall perceaue to be true by these my Lordes and most godly brethren the Bishops whom I haue sent I beseeche you giue them that assistance which they shall aske The whole petition from the first word to the last is made to them al without exception the selfe same sentence where hee prayeth them to write hath these woordes nobis verÃ² literis vestris frui concedite you all graunt vs your letters Now whether obsecro vt scribas can stand with these wordes literis vestris frui concedite or rather obsecro vt scribatis I referre it to your selfe this you can not denie but hee requireth ayde of them all and prayeth their common letters which is enough to shew that Chrysostome ment Innocentius shoulde take with him the generall consent of the West Bishops And so he did For this wrongful and vnrighteous dealing against Chrysostome sayth Theodorete the Bishops of Europe did greatly detest and therefore seuered themselues from the communion of those that were the doers thereof Phi. I graunt they did but Innocentius alone did excommunicate the chiefe doers euen Arcadius the Emperour Eudoxia the Empresse Arsacius Theophilus the Patriarkes of Constantinople and Alexandria Theo. Who told you so Phi. The bull is extant to this day Theo. A bull of that antiquitie were newes in deede Phi. You may soone finde him Theo. Where Phi. In the 13. booke and 34. Chapter of Nicephorus ecclesiasticall historie Theo. I was afraide you would haue quoted Socrates or Sozomene Phi. Nicephorus is as good Theo. Not by ten parts of twelue Phi. Why not Theo. Besides that he loadeth the whole historie of the Church with many fables and visions he liued thirteene hundred yeres after Christ as your owne frinds confesse which in comparison of the rest is but yesterday Therefore if Socrates Theodorete and Sozomene which wrote at that very time when these thinges were done report no such matter I would faine know which way Nicephorus that came a thousand yeere after them could light on a true constat of this ecclesiasticall censure Phi. Perhaps he found it in some auncient Librarie Theo. As though the Patriarks and Princes of Greece would suffer such a president against themselues to lie quiet in their Libraries a thousand yeres Phi. That reason of yours is but coniecturall Theo. Then heare that which is effectual and you shal see the framer of this bull proue himselfe a calfe The twentieth day of Iune Honorius and Aristinetus being Consuls Chrysostome was caried from his Church into banishment by the Emperours Edict as Socrates witnesseth The thirtieth of September the same yere a mightie hayle fell in Constantinople and the suburbes thereabout and the fourth day after the hayle Eudoxia the Empresse died The next yere the eleuenth day of Nouember when Stelichon the second time Anthemius were Consuls Arsacius died The next yere after that which was the sixt of Arcadius and the first of Probus a very religious man named Atticus was chosen Bishop of Constantinople The next yeere which was the seuenth of Honorius and the second time of Theodosius Consulship the fourtenth day of Nouember Iohn Chrysostome died in banishment You doubt not of this accompt I trust Phi. As yet I see no cause to doubt it Socrates was then aliue when these things were in action Theo. The same order of their deaths you shall finde in Sozomene a writer of that age also when these troubles were hottest Phi. What then after all this Theo. Your solemne Bull auoucheth Chrysostome to be dead and Eudoxia to be liuing after him which died three whole yeres before him Phi. What It doeth not I hope Theo. Marke the wordes Tamet si enim beatus IohaÌ„nis vitam reliquit in eterna tamen secula immortalis vitae haereditatem est consecutus VerÃ¹m illa excipiet presentem hic paenam futurum sempiternum supplicium post non multos hosce dies ei adueniens Itaque ego minimus peccator cui thronus magni Apostoli Petri creditus est segrego reijcio te illam a perceptione immaculatoruÌ„ mysteriorum Christi For although blessed Iohn Chrysostomde parted this life yet hath he gotteÌ„ the inheritance of an immortal life for euer but Eudoxia shall receaue a present punishment in this world and eternal paines that shall befall her afore many dayes be past Therfore I though the least and a sinner to whom the throne of Peter the great Apostle is committed do segregate and cut off thee O Emperour her from receauing the vndefiled mysteries of Christ c. How think you was the contriuer of this Bull wel in his wits to threaten that the Empresse should shortly die which was dead long before to put her from receauing the Communion after she had beene three yeres buried Phi. Perhaps Innocentius knew not

of her death Theo. Then suerly was Innocentius all that while a sleepe for the continuall entercourse betweene the two Cities both for temporall and ecclesiasticall affaires was so great the person so famous the time so long that no meane man in Rome could bee ignorant of her death Besides that Innocentius Legats were at Constantinople to intreate Arcadius for a Councell a litle before Chrysostome died and there vnlesse they wanted both eyes and eares they could not choose but learne that the Empresse was dead Phi. She was then liuing as Nicephorus saith Theo. The more he fableth the lesse credite he deserueth Eudoxia died before Arsacius and after his death was Atticus chosen then how could she bee liuing when Atticus was Bishop in whose time the Legats of Innocentius came to intreat for Chrysostome Phi. Let Nicephorus answere for himselfe I layde before you what I finde in him Theo. If this be all you can say for his defence giue vs leaue to tell you that this Bull bearing Innocentius name is some foolish and late forgerie deuised to perswade men that Popes in those dayes coulde quaile Emperours which God knoweth is nothing so Next for Chrysostomes cause as it helpeth you litle so doeth it hinder you much For first Chrysostome when himselfe and his Clergie were called to appeare before the Synode where Theophilus the Patriarke of Alexandria his mortall enemie was the chiefe man appealed from them not to the Bishoppe of Rome but to a generall Councell So sayth Socrates Iohannes eos a quibus vocabatur tanquam inimicos exceptione recusabat vniuersalem Synodum appellabat Chrysostome refused those that called him vppon this exception that they were his enemies and appealed to a generall Councell So sayth Chrysostome himselfe Though wee were absent and appealed to a Synode and sought for iudgement and refused not audience but manifest enimitie yet Theophilus receiued accusors against mee excommunicated such as helde with mee and tooke libels at all their hands which had not yet purged themselues of such crimes as were layde to their charge al which things are contrarie to the lawes and Canons Next when Innocentius saw the matter could not be ended but in a general Councel by reason the three Patriarks of Constantinople Antioche Alexandria were against him he sent Legats to Honorius and Arcadius to beseech them that a Synode might be had and the time and place appointed Wherin his supplication was so litle regarded that his Legats were sent away with reproch as disturbers of the west Empire and Chrysostome caried farther off in banishment than before Lastly when such as fauoured Chrysostome in the East parts would not coÌ„municate with his enemies but ioyned themselues in communion with the Bishop of Rome who likewise seuered himselfe from those that were the beginners of this garboyle Arcadius made this Law If any Bishop refuse to communicate with Theophilus Atticus and Porphyrius hee shall loose both his Church and his goods If any that beare office they shall forfeite their dignitie If any Souldier hee shall lose his seruice If any of the common people let them bee fyned and exiled Phi. Will you nowe trust Nicephorus Theo. Sozomene in effect sayth the same For the communion of Arsacius Porphyrius and Theophilus at the suite of the Nobles there was a lawe made that no Christians should meete at prayers out of their Churches and those that woulde not communicate with these three Patriarkes should bee expelled So smally was Innocentius communion at that time respected that the followers of it were sharply punished Phi. You know what manner of men they were that did it Theo. Such as you may not easily despise Entending to write the wrong done to Chrysostome sayth Theodorete I am forced to shrinke at the doers thereof for their other vertues Atticus as Socrates confesseth was a very learned religious and wise man Porphyrius sayth Theodorete left many monuments of his benignitie being a man endewed with excellent wisedome Arcadius besides that Chrysostome calleth him after his banishment Christianissimum pientissimum Regem a most Christian and Godly prince a litle before his death wan estimation of holynes not without the admiration of a great multitude saued from destruction by his prayers Theophilus Epiphanius and others that held tooth and nayle against him were no babes in the Church of Christ. Cyrillus a famous father was after long time with much adoe drawen to yeeld thus much that Chrysostomes name should be rehearsed in the Catalogue of those that had bene Bishops Arsacius if Cyrillus may bee trusted was a blessed man and most worthie of commendation Phi. You goe about to deface Chrysostome by commending his enemies Theo. It is the least part of my thought and yet Socrates doth not altogether excuse him in saying hee was a man Iracundiae magis quÃ m reuerentiae indulgens more addicted to serue his passions than to reuerence any person And surely the wordes that he spake of the Empresse in his sermon openly before all the people Againe Herodias is madde againe she rageth againe shee daunceth againe she wil haue Iohns head in a dish were very bitter but my meaning is to shewe they were great and good men in the Church that about Chrysostoms quarrell were it right were it wrong neglected the communion of the Bishop of Rome Phi. Though they made light of it in this tumult and faction yet Augustine Hierom and others did highly esteeme it Theo. The communion and felowship of Christian loue and peace may not rashly be broken with any Church especially not with the chiefe and principall Churches vnlesse the cause be weightie and vrgent but looke wheÌ„ the Bishop of Rome attempted any thing against the faith or the Canons tel me then what accompt they made of him Phi. That you must looke out I know no such thing Theo. So will I when my course commeth but yours as yet is not ended Phi. Myne shall not bee long Theo. As short as you will I thinke the best be spent Phi. Augustine and the fathers assembled in the Mileuitan Councell aske helpe of Innocentius for the condemnation of Pelagius and his heresie Theo. The Bishops of Africa themselues in this and an other Councell helde at Carthage condemned the error of Pelagius as repugnant to the Scriptures and iniurious to the grace of God And because it was a matter of faith that indifferently concerned all they thought it necessarie to aduertise the Bishop of Rome what they had done and to pray him also to condemne the same that as the infection was farre spred and found many defenders so the condemnation thereof might be generall and ratified by the publique liking of the Bishops in euery prouince What can you gather by this but that it was then the manner of the Church as in trueth it was by their letters sent too and fro both to aske and to giue

Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Text snippets containing the quad