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 thē 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 cōmunion 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
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 Aarō 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 Salomō 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 cōmaund 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 à 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
flesh in so much that the flesh is heere called the soule Such a man when the church casteth from her shee keepeth the spirit safe to wit the holie spirite of God which is the guider of the church For if they suffer any such one to bee amongest them hee defileth all and the holie spirite departeth Phi. S. Hierom taketh it otherwise To deliuer him vnto Satan for the destruction of the flesh saith he vt arripiendi illum corporaliter habeat potestatem that the diuell may haue power corporally to possesse him so Saint Chrysostom For the destruction of the flesh that the diuell may strike him with some grieuous sore or other disease Theo. This I told you before was a doubtfull speech and therefore woulde yeelde you no certaine conclusion For besides Sainct Augustine and Sainct Ambrose Sainct Hierom in those bookes which are assuredly his vseth these wordes To deliuer vnto Satan to the destruction of the fleshe for a perpetuall consequent to excommunication in all ages and not for corporall vexation permitted onely to the Apostles Illi si peccauero licet tradere me Satanae in interitum carnis vt spiritus saluus sit A clergie man sayth hee may deliuer mee to Satan if I sinne for the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe And inueighing against Vigilantius I maruaile sayth hee the Bishop vnder whome hee is doeth not crush this vnprofitable vessell with the Apostolike rodde euen a rodde of yron and deliuer him into the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe Noting by these wordes the right force of excommunication which doeth and shall indure to the ende not any corporall punishment or plague wherewith God sometimes touched such as would not otherwise be reformed A thirde interpretation of these wordes you shall finde in Sainct Augustine writing against Parmenian What did the Apostle sayth hee but prouide for the health of the soule by the destruction of the fleshe whether it were by some corporall punishment or death as in Ananias and his wife which fell down at Peters feete or else that the partie by repentance because he was giuen ouer vnto Satan should kil in himself the wicked concupiscence of the fleshe This later exposition cutteth off cleane your bodilie punishmentes and sheweth the ende of Apostolike excommunication to be this that the offendour by repentaunce should destroy the lustes of his flesh and not that an euill spirit should corporally correct and molest him which you conclude out of these wordes with as great confidence as if it were some maine principle of faith Phi. S. Augustine repeateth both expositions disliketh neither Theo. His accepting of both dischargeth your illation which is wholy grounded on the first But admit that also which Chrysostom seemeth to follow what shall your conclusion be Phi. That the Apostles punished the bodies of such as were christians Theo. Did they lay violent handes on them or vse any externall meanes Phi. They needed not the diuell did it at their word Theo. And because the diuell will not doe the like for you you will supplie the diuels roome and intermedle with his office Are you not wise Diuines that to chalenge the correction of other mens bodies make your selues the Diuels substitutes Phi. Wee make our selues the Apostles substitutes Theo. Then deliuer them to the Diuell as they did and offer them no farther violence nor torment with your owne handes and see what power you haue to chastise the bodies of such as you reiect from the church for so did the Apostles Mary if you content not your selues with speaking the word as they did but because the Diuell fayleth you you take helpe of your handes to punish the bodies of men beware least you be now not Pauls associats in deliuering but Satans in tormenting the carkasses of offendors Phi. Is euerie one that punisheth the bodie Satans associate Theo. They that beare the sworde with lawfull power from God to represse the wicked if cause require to kill the bodie they bee Gods ministers seruing for that intent but they that without this sworde claime to bee the correctors and punishers of mens bodies by violent meanes are the Diuels vicegerentes and not Gods For they bee murderers and the right members of Satan Phi. But wee appoint the Magistrate to doe it Theo. Doe you appoint Magistrates to lay violent handes on themselues Phi. No but on others Theo. And we be disputing of Princes whether they may bee defeated of their crowns and chastised in their bodies vpon your excommunications Phi. Excommunicate persons may bee corporally chastised whosoeuer bee the deede doer and that S. Chrysostoms exposition fully proueth For if it were lawfull then whiles the Apostles did excommunicate why not as well after and in other ages Theo. But if you relent from this that your selues may bee the deed doers then you misse the marke which you shot at The Magistrate wee knowe may corporally punish these and all other offendours but what is that to your position which hold that spirituall Pastors may punish the bodies of the faithful And therfore look to your footing least you faile in your leaping and backe with this legge that a meere spirituall officer may touch the liues and take the goods of heretiks and other excommunicate persons It is a wicked intrusion of Antichrist seeking indirectly and as you call it by accident that is by hooke or by crooke to bring the world and worldly things in subiection to his appetite The Apostles did nothing but separate sinners from the church and house of God because in those dayes there were no christian Princes with ordinarie power to reuenge the disorders committed in and against the church of Christ it pleased God that whom the Apostles and their after-commers for a season cast out of the church as intangled with great and haynous offences the Diuell shoulde afflict them vnto death or otherwise with some grieuous disease as the fault deserued that the rest might feare and not bee bolde to sinne because there was no magistrate to punish them yea many times God visited the sinnes of hypocrites and such as remained in the church in like maner as Paul himselfe testifieth to those of Corinth For this cause many amongest you are stroken with infirmities and diseases and many are dead For if we would iudge our selues we should not bee iudged but when wee are iudged we are chastened of the Lord that wee should not bee condemned with the world And Chrysostom alleadging this place Many such things fall out in the church at this day Because the priest knoweth them not that loden with sinne receiue the reuerend mysteries vnworthily therefore God himselfe often times culleth them out and deliuereth them to Satan And that the Apostles did nothing but cast them out of the church when they deliuered anie to Satan the same Father will teach
inter se habuerunt were this notwithstanding ioyned in communion pacem in vniuersa Ecclesia tum seruantes tum non seruantes retinuerunt and both sides kept the band of peace in the Catholike Church For the discrepant obseruation of fasting before Easter he saith the like Alij vnum sibi diem ieiunandum esse putant alij duos alij plures alij quadraginta horas Nihilo minus tamen omnes illi pacem inter se retinuerunt retinemus etiamnuÌ„ dissonantia ieiunij fidei concordiam commendat Some fast one daie some two dayes some more some fourtie houres and yet all these continued in peace among themselues and to this day we continue the same and our difference in fasâ—â—â—g commendeth our concord in faith Socrates hath a whole chapter purposely made to shew what diuersitie there was in the Church of Christ about Lent the Lordes Supper marying baptizing praying fasting and such like Ecclesiasticall obseruances and yet all those places and countries parts of the Catholik Church and communicant one with an other in Christian peace and vnitie Operosum molestum fuerit imò impossibile omnes ecclesiarum quae per ciuitates regiones sunt ritus conscribere It were an hard and laborious thing saith he yea an impossible to write al the different customes and manners of the Churches in euerie citie and countrie Qui eiusdem sunt fidei de ritibus inter se dissentiunt They that are of the same faith differ in their rites So that this is no breach of the Christian and Catholike communion which all the faithfull ought to keepe among themselues with their head the author and finisher of their faith Phi. It openeth the gappe to all kinde of diuisions schismes sectes and disorders Theo. Why so Because your holy father can not marchandize the soules empt the purses of men as he was wont to do What Sectes Schismes disorders or heresies can there arise if we defend it lawfull for Princes to commaÌ„d for truth within their own Realmes Nay rather hath not the subiecting of Princes to the Popes pride wrought the vtter ruine and decaie of the West Church Where Rulers be many it is easie to finde some good and they wil resist that which is euill and reforme that which is amisse where one ruleth al if he fal as he quickly may he draweth the whole Church into the same danger and error with him Phi. But the successour of Peter can not erre and therefore the Church is safest when it is ruled by him for whose faith Christ praied that it might not faile Theo. Proue that the Pope can not erre and we will graunt not onely this but all your religion besides to be true Phi. What you wil not Theo. The word is spoken accept the condition when you list Till you do we prefer Cyprians iudgement before yours Therefore deare brother saith he writing to Stephanus Bishop of Rome is there a plentifull number of Priestes in the church ioyned togither with the knot of mutuall concorde and bande of peace that if any of our companie make a breach and rent and wast the the flocke of Christ the rest should helpe and as profitable and pitifull Pastours reduce the Lordes sheepe to the flocke againe The number of Rulers in his opinon is no cause of sectes and dissentions but rather a remedie prouided in the Church against disorder and heresie Phi. It maketh all Christian Bishops Priestes and whatsoeuer borne out of the Realme forrainers and vsurpers in all iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall towardes vs that there can be no iurisdiction ouer English-mens soules but proceeding and depending of her soueraigne right therein Theo. Your force is almost spent when you come to these frozen and woodden obiections Wee call those that were borne and liue out of the Realme forrainers What else should wee call them And such as pretend Peters keies to dispose crownes and remoue Princes from their seates ioyning rebellion with remission of sinnes we thinke them vsurpers and abusers of Ecclesiastical iurisdiction A maruelous ouersight in deed We might haue spared you some sharper and quicker termes but by these wee thought good to manifest to the world your iniurious and irreligious drift to be masters of earthly kingdomes by winding and turning Peters keies at your pleasure Phi. Your words exclude Christ his Apostles in as much as they were and be forrainers from hauing any iurisdiction ouer England Theo. It is pitie you can not cauil We striue for iudicial authoritie to depriue Princes you vrge vs with Apostolike power to preach the Gospell and remit sinnes Wee speake of that which is at this present you tell vs what was fifteene hundred yeares since We reason of States in earth you run to Saints in heauen We reiect the Bishop of Rome you wrangle with vs as though wee refused the sonne of God Doth not matter faile you when you flie for helpe to such vnsauory toies Phi. Your oth is so absurdly conceiued that though you ment not to exclude Christ and his Apostles yet in wordes you doe For if No forraine person Prelat State nor Potentate hath nor ought to haue any iurisdiction power superiority preeminence or authority ecclesiasticall or spiritual within this Realme of England surely neither Christ nor his Apostles because they were be forrainers haue or ought to haue any Theo. Not our speaking but your wresting and wrenching of our wordes is far fet most absurd For first where you auouch Christ himself to be a forrainer whoÌ„ we acknowledge to be the right inheritor owner of the whole worlde yea the mighty Lord king of heauen earth in gibing at vs you iest on his birth as if Christ were a forrainer to the Gentiles because he tooke flesh among the Iewes And though you might haue takâ—n some aduantage at his cradle yet you should haue remembred that the Creator is no forrainer to the worke of his handes as likewise the heade is not to the members nor God incarnate to the sonnes of men As for his Apostles in deede whiles they liued on earth they were forrainers but that their spirits now present with God raigning in blisse with Christ bee forrainers is a mad speech of yours no meaning of ours You must send vs word from Rhemes how soules can be French Spanish Scottish or English These with vs be distinctions of couÌ„tries not of souls after death til your new doctrine came wee tooke them to cease With a little helpe I thinke you will make vs some men soules and some women soules you be so skilfull in these conceites Againe might the soules in heauen be called or counted forrainers you must tell vs what ecclesiasticall power authoritie they now exercise on earth We do not affirme that forrainers neuer had any such power in England the Apostles had their commission from
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 vnderstād you that it is expediēt the life of one man should be neglected for the whole coūtrie 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 whē 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 foūders 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
neither can you of a promise which is common to all establish a priuate Tribunall for one man from the which the spirit of trueth shal not depart as you professe of the Popes Consistorie Phi. If he may erre how can he be iudge of al others Theo. You say wel since by the consent and confession of your own church foureteene hundred yeres after Christ he may erre we conclude he can not bee supreme iudge of faith nor Soueraigne directer of Princes in those cases Phi. Was our whole Church of that opinion so lately Theo. Shew euer any learned man of your side that sayde or helde otherwise Phi. Nay shewe you they held so Theo. I haue already shewed so much Phi. You haue named some priuate men that wrate so Theo. The strongest pillours of your Church Phi. But you say this opinion was generall Theo. If you consider how earnestly and openly this was asserted by the best and neuer contradicted by any no not by those that tooke vpon them to bee the chiefe Proctours and Patrones for the Pope your selfe will say it was generall and confessed on all sides Your owne Decrees that will not haue the Pope reprooued for any fault adde this exception Nisi deprehendatur a fide deuius vnlesse hee bee founde to swarue from the fayth The Bishoppes of Fraunce and Germanie gathered at Brixia and Mogunce against Gregorie the seuenth condemned him as The auncient disciple of the heretike Berengarius a vera fide exorbitantem and swaruing from the true fayth His owne Cardinals and Bishoppes that were at Rome made this profession against him Ad destruendas haereses nouiter ab Hildebrando inuentas consedimus We assembled to destroy the heresies lately deuised by Pope Hildebrand And in special wordes Hoc est decretum Hildebrandi in quo a Doctrina fide Catholica aberrauit This is Hildebrands decree in which hee erred from the Catholike doctrine and fayth Robert Grosseteste Bishoppe of Lincolne reuerenced of your Church for a Saint lying on his death proued the Pope not onely might bee but was an heretike by sundry reasons and by the very definition of heresie and for the possibilitie of the matter alleageth the Popes owne testimonie Item dicit Decretalis quod super tali vitio videlicet haeresi potest debet Papa accusari The Decretall sayth that for heresie the Pope may and ought to be accused But what speake I of one Bishop Six hundred Prelates an hundred foure and twentie Diuines and almost three hundred Lawyers with the whole Colledge of Cardinals in your generall Councell of Pisa deposed two Popes Gregorie the twelfth and Benedict the thirteenth as schismatikes and heretikes Your Councell of Constance where as you say were 4. Patriarkes 29. Cardinals 47. Archbishoppes 270. Bishops 564. Abbats and Doctours in all aboue nine hundred deposed the same Benedict persisting in his Popedom notwithstanding the former sentence as being schismaticum haereticum ac a fide deuium articuli fidei Vnam sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam violatorem pertinacem notorium manifestum a schismatike and an heretike swaruing from the faith and a wilfull notorious manifest subuerter of the Article of our faith one holy Catholike Church And in the same Councel it was obiected to Iohn the 23. Quod dictus Iohannes Papa 23. saepe saepius coram diuersis Prelatis alijs honestis probis viris pertinaciter Diabolo suadente dixit asseruit dogmatizauit astruxit vitam eternam non esse quin imo dixit pertinaciter credidit animam hominis cum corpore humano mori extingui ad instar animalium brutorum dixÃt que mortuum semel esse in nouissimo die minimè resurrecturum contra articulum de resurrectione mortuorum That often and very often before diuers Prelates and other honest and approoued men hee sayd auouched vttered as his iudgement egerly defended that there is no life euerlasting yea moreouer hee sayde and resolutely beleeued that the soule of man dieth and perisheth with the bodie after the maner of other beasts and that hee which was once dead should not rise in the last day contrarie to the article of the resurrection of the dead Your generall councell of Basil which Germanie Fraunce Englande the Dukedome of Millan and many other Countries so greatly esteemed gaue the like iudgement not yet seuen skore seuen yeres agoe against Eugenius the 4. and iudicially pronounced him to bee schismaticum a fide deuium pertinacem haereticum a schismatike erring from the fayth and a stubburne heretike Lastly your diuines of Paris but last day resolued that Peter erred in faith when Paul reprooued him and if Peter did there can bee no question but his successours may since they claime from him and not before him If this bee not the generall consent of your owne Church I knowe not what is If it bee then by the full and cleare confession of your selues for 1400. yeeres the Pope might stray from the faith and become an heretike Phi. There is not one of your examples but may be replied to Theo. Graunt they might yet this is most sure which I conclude that they were al of this opinion the Pope coulde erre Phi. What if that opinion were not true Theo. That must you proue It is enough for mee to shewe that not onely the church of Christ in former ages but your owne Church euen vntil our age held this opinion of Popes that they could erre What reason you haue or can haue to impugne their opinion let the world iudge We thinke you within the compasse of Alfonsus censure if ye be not worse Phi. What if wee should graunt the Pope may erre as al men may That doeth not diminish his power Theo. A iudge must haue two thinges before hee bee competent namely skill to discerne that hee misse not the trueth and power to commaund that his iudgement may take place If he want either hee is no fit iudge Phi. You say right and both these the Pope hath in most ample maner Theo. He hath neither Erre he may and therefore no man is bound to his iudgement farther than it standeth with the word of truth and so farre the greatest Princes in the world are bound to the meanest man that God doth send For God is truth they that resist the truth resist God and the end of them al that resist is damnation which Princes shal not auoyde vnlesse they submit themselues to the hearing embracing and obeying of the truth And as hee may erre so hath hee no power to commaund Princes or others but only to propose the commandements of God vnto them as euery Bishop must may by vertue of his vocation Farther authority by violence to compel or by corporal and external meanes to punish no Prelate nor Pope hath by the lawe of God since that belongeth to the
against Adimantus as part of his owne confession and former obiection and conclude that either Adimantus mistooke the meaning of the law as in deede hee did or that Dauid perfourming the precept of Christ when hee spared his enimie gaue example that others vnder the Lawe shoulde doe the like and so the Law neither waie repugnant to the Gospell as his conclusion imported And if any thinke it much Sainct Augustine should pitch himselfe on other mens wordes as they were apparant truethes hee must remember hee dealt with the Manichees that receiued no Scriptures but such as they listed and therefore to presse them with their owne position was a neerer waie to confounde them than to loade them with Scriptures which they regarded not and that maketh Sainct Augustine giue sometimes not the soundest solution hee coulde but the readiest to stoppe their mouthes with their owne assertions Otherwise Sainct Augustine was plainely resolued that Dauid so much esteemed in Saul the holinesse of his regall inunction euen vnto his death that hee trembled at heart for cutting the lappe of Sauls garment Quaero si non habebat Saul sacramenti sanctitatem quid in eo Dauid venerabatur nam eum propter sacrosanctam vnctionem honorauit viuum vindicauit occisum Et quia vel panniculum ex eius veste praescidit percusso corde trepidauit Ecce Saul non habebat innocentiam tamen habebat sanctitatem non vitae sed vnctionis If Saul had not the holinesse of the sacrament I demand what it was that Dauid reuerenced in him For the sacred and holy vnction of a king hee honoured Saul liuing and reuenged his death on him that saide hee slue him And because himselfe had cut but the lap of Saules coate hee was strooken and trembled at heart for the fact Behold Saul was not innocent yet had hee the holinesse not of life but of his annointing Phi. If Dauid might not lawfully haue slaine Saul Dauid might not beare armes against Saul for the putting himselfe in armes proueth hee was either lawfull king or a manifest rebel against the king which I thinke you will not affirme Theo. Dauid was neither king as yet when hee did this nor rebell against the king Hee put him-selfe in armes not to seeke the kingdome nor to subdue the vsurper as you vainly suppose hee fledde to saue his life as euery subiect may by your doctrine doinges yea though life be not sought Phi. Howe coulde Dauid bee annointed if Saul were not first deposed Theoph. You misconster Samuels wordes For by them the Scepter was not taken out of Saules handes but his seede reiected from inheriting the kingdome Philand Nay Samuel sayde vnto him God hath cast thee awaie from being king And againe The Lord hath rent the kingdome of Israel from thee this day hath giuen it to thy neighbor What can this import but he was personallie deposed from the gouernment Theophi The present possession of the kingdome was not denyed him but the inheritaunce of it to him and his issue By a king Samuel ment not one that shoulde gouerne during his life for so did the Iudges of Israel before Saul that were no kinges but one that should haue the kingdome to him and his after him by waye of inheritaunce For that was it which the children of Israel respected when they required a King which was not a Gouernour for the time but a setled succession in the regiment as other Nations had This was it that Samuell saide vnto Saul when he first reproued him Thou hast doone foolishly thou hast not kept the commaundement of the Lord for haddest thou kept it the Lord had now established thy kingdom vpon Israell for euer But now thy kingdom shal not continue This was it that Samuel ment the seconde time when he more sharpely rebuked Sauls disobedience Because thou hast cast awaye the worde of the Lord therefore hath he cast away thee from being king And againe The Lord hath rent the kingdome of Israel from thee this daie and hath giuen it to thy neighbour not meaning his person shoulde bee degraded but the kingdom remoued both from his line and from his tribe Phi. This is your priuate sense for the wordes sound that he should not bee king ouer Israell Theo. Sainct Augustine him-selfe expoundeth these verie wordes as I do Iste cui dicitur spernit te Dominus ne sis Rex super Israel dirupit Dominus Regnum ab Israel de manu tua hodie quadraginta annos regnauit super Israell tanto scilicet spacio temporis quanto ipse Dauid audiuit hoc primo tempore regni sui vt intelligamus ideo dictum quia nullus de stirpe eius fuerat regnaturus Saul to whome it was sayde the Lorde will cast thee away that thou shalt not bee king ouer Israell and the Lorde hath rent the kingdome from Israell out of thine hand this daie euen hee raigned fourtie yeares as long as Dauid him-selfe and this hee hearde in the verie beginning of his raigne that wee shoulde vnderstand it therefore to be spoken because none of his stocke should raigne after him And hadde not Sainct Augustine goone cleare with vs the circumstaunces of the Scriptures doe thus lymitte the wordes of Samuel For Dauid was then a verie young boie or as the text sayeth a little one keeping sheepe when hee was annointed hauing neither age experience nor strength fit for the present vndertaking of the kingdome Next Dauid neither claymed nor pretended any right to the Crowne during Saules life but serued and obeyed Saul as his liege Lorde and Master whiles hee lyued and so confessed him to bee Thirdly Saul him-selfe neuer obiected this vnto Dauid that he sought the kingdome from him but from his sonnes for so he said to Ionathan As long as the sonne of Ishai liueth vpon the earth thou shalt not be established nor thy kingdō And the priests that were charged with treason for helping Dauid did not answere as you do that Saul was an vsurper Dauid the right king but Who is so faithful among all thy seruants as Dauid goeth at thy commandement witnessing for Dauid that he behaued himselfe as a faithfull subiect vnto Saul not as a claimer of the crown from Saul Thus al the Tribes of Israel conceiued constred the wordes of Samuel For when they came to make Dauid king after Sauls death they said In time past when Saul was our king thou leddest Israel in out the Lorde saide vnto thee thou shalt feed my people Israel and thou shalt be captaine ouer my people Israel So came all the elders of Israel and annoynted Dauid king ouer Israel according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Samuel The text it self alleadgeth Gods own words Samuels act not for the present possession but for the rightfull succession of the crowne that after Sauls death
the Prophetes of Baal were conuicted to bee but false deceiuers and the whole assemblie fell on their faces and gaue the glorie to GOD and submitted themselues to followe his trueth Elias willed them to take Baals Prophetes and giue them the rewarde that deceiuers by Gods Lawe shoulde haue which was death Phi. This is your enlarging of the text Theo. The bookes of kinges are but short gatherings out of the larger Chronicles that were extant among the Iewes and the manner of the holy Ghost is briefly to touche the chiefest thinges and yet is there none of these partes but may bee plainely prooued by the circumstaunces of the text Phi. Howe prooue you the King consented Theo. The particular speach of no one is reported but the generall consent of the whole companie Where also the king was present is expressed and yet before the multitude was assembled the Kinges consent to Elias offer appeareth in that the king sent vnto all the children of Israel and gathered the Prophetes together for that purpose who woulde otherwise haue despised the message and woorde of Elias Againe the Prophetes of Baal woulde neuer haue ventered their liues vpon a needlesse miracle at Elias pleasure but the King and the whole Realme tied them to that condition vppon daunger else to reiect both them and their profession And lastly howe was it possible for one poore Prophet to catch and kill foure hundred and fiftie so that not a man of them escaped the king and the whole State standing with them Or howe was it lawfull for Elias to spill their bloud in the kinges presence without the kings consent Elias therefore made the motion which the king and the whole Realme there assembled did accept and ratifie with this answere It is well spoken and as hee should haue lost his life if hee had failed so when they fayled hee required iustice to bee done by the king and the Realme on them for that they were clearly conuicted to bee teachers of strange and false Gods Phi. Achab when he came home told Iezabel his wife how Elias had slaine all the Prophets with the sword Theo. Achab wee doubt not excused him selfe and cast the fault as much as hee coulde on Elias that Iezabels Prophets were slaine but this doth not shew that Achab did not consent His woords import that Elias was the procurer causer of their destruction but not the iudge nor officer that put them to death Phi. The Scripture sayth hee slew them Theo. So the Scripture sayth that Solomon buylt GOD an house thinke you therefore that Solomon was a Mason or Carpenter And Ioshua smote the fiue kinges of the Amorites and hanged them on fiue trees did Ioshua therefore play the hangman And king Roboam made shildes of brasse was Roboam therefore a brasse-smith Phi. No they commaunded or caused these thinges to bee done Theo. And so did Elias procure or cause them to bee slaine for in the Scripture the causer procurer and director are sayd to doe the deede though they bee but meanes and helpes to haue it done But what is this to the deposing of Princes Will you reason thus False Prophets may bee put to death my magistrates ergo Princes may bee deposed by priests I thinke you will not for very shame make such childish conclusions Phi. He himselfe slue king Ochasias his Captaines and messengers wasting them and an hundreth of their trayne by fire from heauen Theo. Elias was the speaker of the woorde but God was the doer of the deede and in that case God himselfe slue them and not Elias Phi. Hee called for fire from heauen Theo. Fire from heauen was not in Elias power but in Gods will Neither might Elias had he not been guyded by the speciall instinct of Gods Spirit haue presumed to call for that or any other kinde of reuenge from heauen for that is the manifest tempting of God as our Sauiour warned his Apostles when hee rebuked them for offering to imitate Elias and to call for fire from heauen as he did And sure it is as these thinges were not ordinarie so can you driue them to no conclusion for your purpose nor lay them forth for imitation to any no more than you may warrant men to steale because Israel robbed Egypt by Gods appointment or to perswade any to murder themselues because Samson did the like or teach them to curse kil children because Elizeus handled two and fourtie so that mocked him at Bethel And yet all this while you shew not that Elias so much as touched the king much lesse deposed him which you professe to proue Phi. Elias had commission to annoynt Hazael king of Syria and Iehu king of Israel and so to put downe the sonne and whole house of Achab which thereby lost all the tytle and right to the kingdome for euer Theo. Neither of them was annointed by Elias neither Hazael nor Iehu Elizeus only foretold Hazael that he should be king in Benhadads place His wordes were The Lord hath shewed me that thou shalt be king of Aram This Elizeus spake the day before Benhadad died and other annointing Hazael had none Iehu was indeed annointed by one of the Children of the Prophets whom Elizeus sent and charged by message from God to smite destroy the whole house of Achab his master and so he did For hee slew Ioram the King trod Iesabel vnder his horse feete and caused the seuentie sonnes of Achab that were nourced in Samaria to be slaine and slew all that remained of the house of Achab in Izrael and all that were great with him and his familiars and his Priests so that he let none of his remaine Phi. Then yet here was one king deposed Theo. Here was no king deposed by any Prophet but one slaine by Iehu to whom God gaue the Kingdome of Achab for this intent that he should roote out the whole house and offspring of Achab. Phi. Did Iehu well to kill his master and to take the kingdome from him and his heires Theo. Being expresly commanded thereto by God himselfe he did but his dutie For God may take and giue Kingdomes as hee will though man may not Phi. Authoritie so to doe Iehu receaued from Eliseus Theo. Unsay that for feare least you fal into a malicious and wicked vntruth The Prophet that annointed Iehu beganne his message with Thus saith the Lord God of Israel and not thus saith Elizeus Phi. But Elizeus sent him and gaue him instructions what to doe and what to say Theo. Let that bee so Then Elizeus taught him to doe this errand in Gods name and not in his own and consequently Iehu receiued authoritie from God and not from man Now view your argument God may giue kingdomes to whom he will and appoint the subiect to be the reuenger of his masters sinne ergo the Pope may do the like Be you not
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
he should find him readie Had you beene there you would not onely haue set the people against the Prince but encouraged the subiect to pul the yong boy by the eares and to teach him better manner against an other time to meddle with Bishoppes and it grieueth you to see Ambrose so faint hearted as you take it that when so fit opportunitie serued him and the rest they would giue no president to rebel against Princes which is the thing you seeke to proue and long to doe Phi. Not the people only which may doe things of headynes without counsel or consultation but the bishops of Countries so persecuted by heretical Princes haue iustly required helpe of other Christian kings Theo. If the multitude of Christians in the primatiue Church for all their rashnes and headynes were afraid in respect of the Apostles doctrine to rebell against Powers whom shall you perswade that their religious and godly Pastours were firebrands of sedition If they taught others to obey with what conscience could they themselues resist Or rather with what face do you slaunder them with that they neuer did Phi. Holy Athanasius who knewe his duetie to his soueraigne wel enough in what case he might resist him asked ayde against Constantius the Arrian the first heretical Emperour whom Pope Felix declared to be an heretike of his owne brother Constance Catholike Emperour of the West For feare of whose armes the said Arrian restored Athanasius and other Catholike Bishops to their Churches and honours againe though after this Catholike Emperours death the other more furiously persecuted Athanasius than before Theo. Hee that neuer sounded the fidelitie and honestie of Iesuites afore this time may take hence his light howe to trust them in other cases Did Athanasius aske ayde of armes against Constantius the Arrian Phi. For feare of armes the saide Arrian restored Athanasius and other Catholike Bishoppes to their Churches and honours againe Theo. But did Athanasius moue Constans so to doe Phi. Hee asked ayde of Constans against his brother Constantius Theo. But did hee aske that ayde to bee restored by armes For of that ayde we now dispute that aide must you meane if you wil say ought to the purpose Phi. He accepted it and therfore it is likely he requested it Theo. You would proue by this example that Athanasius who knew his dutie to his soueraigne well enough and in what case he might resist him not only vsed but asked forciâ—le ayde against Constantius of his owne brother Phi. So he did Theo. Be you well in your wittes to auouch it with such confidence Phi. Why should wee not Theo. Why should you not Athanasius himselfe when that very point was obiected to him not only abiured it as false but detested it vnto Constantius as a wicked and vngodly part for himselfe to haue stirred brother against brother What extreme boldnes was it then for you to fasten that on him which hee defieth and forsweareth Phi. Where doth he so Theo. Where you might soone haue found it but that you thought to haue brought the matter froÌ„ words to blowes before this tyme. It was layd in his dish by Constantius amongst other things after the death of Constans that he prouoked and incited his brother against him and that hee resisted the Princes precepts To this Athanasius answereth in his Apologie to Constantius I am not mad I am not besides my selfe O Emperour that thou shouldest suspect I had euer any such thought And that made mee say nothing to it when others questioned with me about it lest whiles I laboured to cleare my selfe some perhaps would make a doubt of it But to your highnesse I answere with a loude and plaine voyce and with my hand held out as I learned of the Apostle I cal God to witnes against my soule as it is written in the book of kings I sweare the Lord can beare me record and his annointed your brother suffer me I beseech you so to say I neuer made mention of you for any euill before your brother of blessed memorie I meane that religions Emperour Constans neither did I euer stirre him vp against you as these Arrians do slaunder me but contrariwise whensoeuer I had accesse vnto him he himselfe recounted your gratious inclination and God knoweth what mention I made of your godly disposition Suffer me and pardon me most curteous Prince That seruant of God Constans your brother was not so open nor so lent his eares to any man neither was I in such credite with him that I durst speake a woorde of any such matter or derogate from one brother before an other or finde fault with a Prince in the hearing of a Prince I am not so mad neither haue I forgotten the voyce of God which sayth Curse not the king in thine heart nor backbite the mightie in the secretes of thy chamber For the birdes of the aire shall tell it and the fowles which flie shall betraie thee If the thinges which be spoken in secrete touching you Princes can not bee hid what likelyhoode that I in the presence of a Prince and so many standing by would say any thing of you otherwise than well And shewing how ofteÌ„ he spake with the Emperor CoÌ„stans in whose preseÌ„ce to what effect which were to loÌ„g to repeat he concludeth I beseech your highnes for I know well the force of your memorie call to mind my behauiour when it pleased you to admit me to your presence first at Vimimachum then at Caesarea and thirdly at Antioch whether I did so much as offer an euil word of Eusebius my bitter enimie or gaue a displeasaunt speach of any my pursuers If then I refrained my tongue when I was to plead against them in mine own defence what madnes had that beene for me to traduce an Emperor before an Emperour and to stirre vp one brother against an other What thinke you Doth not Athanasius reiect that which you would father on him as a manifest vntrueth nay as a villanous and frantike attempt to set brethren together by the eares and to stirre warres betweene Princes Why then doe you burthen a godly Bishop with that which he neuer thought and which he was farthest from Why make you Athanasius your rest for rebellion against Princes whereas hee thought it vnlawfull in hart to curse a cruel hereticall Prince How farre he did said he was bound to obay Constantius his owne wordes wil testifie and therefore no reason we beleeue your vaunting and facing that he procured warre against Constantius when he himselfe affirmeth the contrarie They lay to my charge saith he to the same Prince that I obayed not your precepts by the which it was enioyned me that I should depart from Alexandria I neuer resisted the commandements of your highnesse no no God forbid I should I am not he that will withstand the Gouernour of any Citie
Their owne words testifie they were christians for when Iouinian the next day after Iulians death was chosen Emperour by them refused the place because he thought the most part of the souldiers to be Gentiles they cried al with one common voyce and confessed themselues to be christians Against Valens the church of Christ had forces abundant if shee would haue sounded or vsed them For all the tyme of his raigne not onely the West Emperours were Catholikes first Valentinian and after him Gratian but Procopius at Constantinople taking armes against Valens and the Gothes detayning all Thracia from him gaue the Christians great aduantage to haue shaken him cleane out of the East Empire if their willes had beene answerable vnto their strength Valentinian the yonger infected with Arianisme Maximus a rebell of this land thrust quite from the West Empire made him flie into the East partes and had not Theodosius a Catholike Prince conquered that Tyrant and restoared the yong Prince to his Scepter againe he had lost his Crowne for euer Where you see not only what forces the Catholikes had but howe farre they were from deposing hereticall gouernours that woulde hazard their liues to restoare them And what thinke you was the force of all the christians in the worlde when the people of one Citie falling into a sedition for matter of Religion so preuayled and passed all the power of resisting that Anastasius the Emperour was faine to come to an open place without his Crowne and by heraults to signifie to the people that he was readie with a very good will to resigne the Empire into their handes At the sight of whom the people moued with that spectacle chaunged their mindes and besought Anastasius to keep the Crowne and promised for their partes to be quiet Yet was Anastasius both an heretike and an excommunicate person if your owne words before or stories otherwise may be trusted Not therefore disabilitie but dutie not lacke of competent forces but a reuerent regarde of the Apostles Doctrine kept the Primatiue Church of Christ from resisting her Princes Shee neuer determined shee neuer attempted any such thing shee might often tymes haue repelled them from their Seates and woulde not but taught all men to submitte themselues and rather to bee crowned as martyrs for enduring than to bee punished as rebels for inuading their Princes For they that resist shall receiue iudgement which not onely the auncient Christians but the very Barbarians did confesse Athanaricus king of the Gothes when hee came to visite Theodosius Sine dubio inquit Deus terrenus est Imperator contra quem quicunque manus leuare nisus fuerit ipse suâ— sanguinis reus existit No doubt sayth hee the Emperour is the God of the earth against whom whosoeuer will offer to lift vp his hand is guiltie of his owne blood Phi. Yea the quarel of Religion and defence of innocencie is so iust that heathen Princes not at all subiect to the Churches Lawes and discipline may in that case by the Christians armes bee resisted and â—ight lawfully haue beene repressed in tymes of the Pagans and first great persecutions when they vexed and oppressed the faithful but not otherwise as most men thinke if they would not annoy the Christians nor violently hinder or seeke to extirpate the true fayth and course of the Gospel Though S. Thomas seemeth also to say that any heathen king may be lawfully depriued of his superioritie ouer Christians Theo. What S. Thomas seemeth to say wee care not so long as we know what S. Paul sayth and that is You must bee subiect not onely for feare of wrath or lacke of force when you can not choose but euen for conscience sake though you were able to resist If your schooles haue gotten any other doctrine than this looke you to that wee bee the disciples of Christ and not of Occam Scotus or Thomas men may by this perceiue what your schoolemen would aduenture in other pointes of Religion that in so cleare a case of conscience and obedience they woulde flatly contradict the holy Ghost Heathen Princes may not bee resisted by their Christian subiects of them Saint Paul wrate when hee sayde Whosoeuer resisteth power resisteth the ordinance of God and of them Christ spake when hee charged vs to giue vnto Caesar the things which are Caesars They might not therefore lawfully haue beene repressed in the tymes of the Pagans and first great persecutions when they vexed and oppressed the faithfull because sufferance made their subiects martyrs before God whome resistance would haue doubbed for rebels against God and man If your meaning bee that by Christian Princes had there been any such in those dayes they might lawfully haue beene repressed and pursued with armes you alter the question and touch not our case Wee reason not what Christian Princes may doe to heathen Tyrants but what duetie Christian subiects must yeelde to their Princes bee they Pagans or others that beare the swoorde And for that wee haue the manifest voyce of Gods spirite which I haue often repeated and against the which wee giue eare to no creature man nor Angel That voyce the church of Christ diligently remembred and constantly followed as Tertullian witnesseth Wee are disfamed sayth hee concerning the Emperours maiestie but neuer yet Albinians Nigrians nor Cassians Albinus Niger and Cassius being rebels in his tyme could bee found to be Christians A Christian is enemie to no man much lesse to the Prince whom he knoweth to be appointed of God so of necessitie must loue reuerence and honour him and wish him safe with the whole Romane Empire Therefore wee sacrifice for the health of the Emperour but vnto our God and his God and with chast prayer as GOD hath commaunded So that wee pray for the Emperours health more than you asking it of him that is able to giue it And God forbid we should take those thinges which we suffer in euill part since wee desire to suffer them or imagine any reuenge against you which wee waite for at Gods leasure Yet needefull it is wee lament your case since not a citie of yours shall escape at Gods hande for the shedding of our blood And againe in his Apologie for all Christians Thou that thinkest we haue no care of the welfare of our Princes looke vppon the woordes of GOD I meane our bookes which neither wee suppresse and many chaunces bring to your eyes Knowe that there wee are commaunded for the plentifull encrease of our charitie to pray to God for our enemies and to wish wel to our persecutours Yea namely and plainely he sayth Pray for kings for Princes and powers that all things may bee peaceable vnto them For the Empire can not bee shaken but wee also must bee partakers of the fall And after some woordes But what speake I more of the religion and pietie of Christians towardes
heretiks from the beginning of the world to this day haue beene hampered So that your eye sight was not vp when you tooke a prayer for a iudgement a fourme of imprecation for a sentence of depriuation a curse precedent for an execution that should be subsequent Phi. This was the right and power of S. Gregorie and this hath been the fayth of christian men euer sith our Countrie was conuerted and neuer subiect called in question much lesse accused of treason for it til this time and lest of al made or found treason by the old lawes in K. Edward the thirds raigne as is pretended howsoeuer by their new Lawes they may and do make what they list a crime capitall Theo. Gregorie cursed them and prayed against them that should disorder or alter his grant made at the Princes motion with the consent of al the prelates in Italie with the good will of the Romane Senate and the fauourable iudgement of al the Bishops of France This is not it that is called in question You beare armes against your naturall prince and encourage her subiects that by Gods law should obey her to take her crowne from her when the Pope willeth them This Gregorie neuer spake of neither did England at any time frō the first receiuing of the faith to this day euer acknowledge any such right or power in the Pope to depose princes Much lesse then was this the faith of christian men euer sith our Countrie was conuerted as you brauely but falsely boast Phi. In K. Iohns time the Prince realme were of this opinion which wee are now Theo. They were not Some bishops Monks offended with the King for the losse of their goods fled the realm tooke part with the Pope against the King the Barons for other causes loued not their King as appeared by their departure frō him in Normandie before this trouble began by their general rebellion against him when the Pope had not only released him but also did vphold him to the vttermost of his power And though he had lost the hearts of his Nobilitie before now of his Clergie by turning them out of al their liuings yet was there no conspiring against him in those fiue yeres in which hee stoode excommunicate And to him for defence of himself his land came threeskore thousand able men of his own subiects wel furnished besides an infinite number that were sent home againe for want of armour and a fleete greater than that which the King of Fraunce had against him Phi. If his armie were so great and his people so sure why would he not trie the field with the king of France Theo. He saw the strife was but for the admittance of a bishop better to slip his right in so small an iniurie than to put his owne state and welfare to the doubtful successe of battaile Phi. The storie saith he was afraid lest he should bee left alone in the field bee forsaken of his own nation nobles Theo. So Pandulfus told him to afreight him make him yeelde the sooner but the Pope himself cōplaineth of the contrarie that the Barons of Englād by a peruerse order did rise in armes against their king after hee was conuerted and had satisfied the Church who assisted him when hee did offend the Church And yet I am of opinion they would easily haue forsaken him not for respect of your Romish censures but for their extreme detestation of his odious and tyrannous gouernement which they shewed after his reconciliation to the See of Rome more than they did before and obeyed neither King nor Pope so long as he liued and enioyed the Crowne This realme therfore in the time of King Iohn assisted their Prince against the Pope and when the king had submitted himselfe and rented his Crowne at the Popes handes they resisted both Prince and Pope and elected an other Afore that and since that this realm neuer confessed or beleeued any right or power in the pope to depose Princes Phi. They neuer made it treason to be of that beliefe til this miserable time in which wee lyue Theo. Richard the second very neere two hundreth yeres agoe made it death for any man to bring or sende within this realme any summons sentence or excommunication from Rome against any person for the cause of making motion assent or execution of the statute of prouisours which barred the bishoppe of Rome from giuing reseruing or disposing Bishopricks and benefices in this land To impeach the Kings lawes or to defeate him of his smaller inheritances as aduousons Patronages by censures from Rome was death in those dayes what thinke you would they haue sayd to him that shoulde haue brought a bull to depriue the Prince of his crowne or a warrant to rebel against him to take his life from him as you doe in our dayes And because you stand so much on the word treason why should not the statute of Edward the thirde recensing Treasons extend directly to your doings It is there numbred among treasons to compasse or imagine the death of the King to leuy warre against him in his Realme or to bee adherent to the Kinges enemies in his Realme or to giue them ayde and comfort within the realme or else where If al wars waged against y◠prince within the Realme that is by subiects are treasonable howe shoulde your warres for religion against your soueraigne be iust and honourable If to ayde or comfort the kinges enemies within the realme or else where be trayterous conspiracie how can you stirre vp forraine power to assault the realme perswade the people of this land with armes to displace the prince and not incurre that crime Phi. Doe wee set straungers to inuade or subiects to rebell Theo. You be adherents and instruments to him that doth Phi. You meane wee bee of the same faith with the Church of Rome If that bee treason then wee are traytours Theo. We talke not of your fayth but of your woorkes Beleeue what you list so you meddle not with ayding nor comforting inuasion nor rebellion Phi. We doe not Theo. You commend them and allowe them that wil doe either yourselfe in this place defende their enterprise to be godly iust and honorable Your fellowes before you in their printed bookes openly did celebrate them as Martyrs that lost their liues in the North for bearing armes against the Queene What greater comfort can you giue to rebels and enemies than to animate and encourage them with praises promises defences and honors both in this worlde and the next It is more pernicious to fire the heart than to warme the hand to minister courage than to giue drinke to them that shal fight against the Prince In all actions the perswaders and enducers are equal with the doers and executours Why then should you not bee within the
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
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
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 néere 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 spéech 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 néere 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 betwéene 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 spéech to come néerer 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 chéese 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 béene 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 sée 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
proper earthly substance when notwithstanding your selues offer thē to God in your masses for the remissiō of your sins redēption 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 thā 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 whē the questiō 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 mē but of his death passiō represented at our masse by the holy mysteries The. In deed S. Augustin spake of that he knew as for your cōceit 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 sāplar of that we offer that very sacrifice for euer Of Eusebius Christ after al things ended offred a wōderful 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 remēbrance 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 Sacramēt 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 defēd 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 gētiles 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 saluatiō 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
And therefore though the wordes cary a double sense yet we admit them both so you adore Chriâ—t and not the creatures of bread and wyne in his steed which Nazianzene was farre from allowing and his sister from doing For speaking in the same place of the mysticall elements which you woulde haue the people to adore as Christ he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any where about her she found part of the figures of the sacred body and blood which her hande had layd vp in stoare watering that with teares not adoring it with diuine worshippe shee departed presently cured of her disease That which you affirme to bee the real and natural flesh and blood of Christ shee had about her as many men and weomen vsed in the primatiue church to carie the same about them and yet shee did not adore that which she had in her hand but him that is serued and honored on the Altar or table of the Lord. Phil. You pare these places with certaine circumstances I know not how But S. Denys the Apostles scholer made a solemne inuocation of the Sacrament after Consecration in these woordes But thou O diuine and most holy Sacrament shewe thy selfe plainely to vs and brighten the eyes of our mynde with thy singular light that can not bee couered You aske proofe for adoration of the Sacrament wee shewe you where the Apostles scholer prayed to the blessed Sacrament in expresse woordes and higher adoration than prayer there can bee none What woulde you more Theo. Wee woulde haue you regard if not your consciences before God yet your credites before men Phi. Doe wee not so thinke you when wee ioyne with Saint Pauls scholer and teach the people to doe as hee did Theo. O wicked and wilfull corruption Phi. Corruption Why What Wherein Theo. The prayer which hee maketh to the sonne of God you wrest to the corporall and externall creatures Phi. No sir that shift will not serue His woordes bee But thou O diuine and most holy Sacrament which hee spake after consecration and yet you will not acknowledge them you bee so furiously bent against the blessed Sacrament Theo. After consecration what 's that Was hee at masse when hee made this prayer Phi. Hee made this inuocation of the Sacrament after Consecration Theo. Did ye euer read the woordes Phi. Twenty times Theo. Where was the host when hee made this prayer Phi. What can I tell To the host he made it Theo. Was he praying at the Altar or writing in his studie when he vttered these wordes Phi. What is that to vs Theo. You say hee prayed to the host and that after Consecration where hee good man was busie at his booke and beseeching God to lighten his vnderstanding that hee might write the trueth Phi. Wheresoeuer hee was hee sayth O thou diuine and most holy Sacrament Theo. Did hee write in Latin or in Greeke Phi. In Greeke What then Theo. The woorde Sacrament is not Greeke Phi. No. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Greeke woorde but that in Latin is the Sacrament Theo. Graunt the Greeke woorde were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are there no mysteries besides the Sacrament Philand Yeas There are mysteries that are not the Sacrament Theoph. You shall otherwise not only enlarge the limits of your masse to containe your seuen Sacramentes but also multiplie the number of your seuen sacramentes to seuen thousand times seuen For al secrets and wonders in heauen earth and hel which passe the reach or knowledge of the naturall or regenerate man bee mysteries Phi. In deede a mysterie is a secrete as well as a Sacrament Theo. And that in euil things as well as in good As the mysterie of iniquitie the mysterie of the woman and beast on which the whore of Babylon sate Phi. All this is true Theo. And as in euill so in good thinges Saint Paul sayth often The mysterie of God and of Christ. As when hee signifieth to the Colossians his care for them to know the mysterie of God euen the father and of Christ and so the mysterie of fayth of the Gospel of Godlynes and such like Phi. Uery wel Theo. As these be mysteries because they be secrets aboue our natural capacitie though reueiled vnto vs by God in his word so is the nature of God a most incomprehensible mysterie namely the mysterie of the blessed trinitie which is neither expresseable in our words nor conceiueable with our heartes Phi. This we doubt not of Theo. So is there the mysterie of Christes incarnation of his death and passion of his resurrection and ascension and of a thousand such which Christ calleth the mysteries of the kingdome of God and Paul meaneth when he saith Let a man so esteeme vs as the Ministers of Christ and disposers of Gods mysteries And for that cause the whole Gospel is called a mysterie hid since the world began and from all ages but nowe made manifest to his Saints Phi. This is not to our purpose Theo. I thinke it bee not you haue vtterly peruerted the wordes of Dionysius if that bee his worke and those were his wordes which you alleage and nowe you are loth to see it Phi. Conuince vs before you condemne vs. Theo. What other conuiction neede wee than your own conclusioÌ„ Dionysius speaking to Christ saith at lest as you suppose Thou diuine and most holy mysterie replenish the eyes of our soules with thy singular and vnextinguished light You because the word mysterie when it is applied to corporall and externall creatures doeth sometymes signifie a sacrament haue robbed Christ of his honor and giuen it to the element of bread and slaundered that writer whatsoeuer hee was for an open Idolater like to your selues Are not the people well holpe vp to trust such gamsters as you bee that leade them to so daungerous impietie with such manifest impudencie Phi. Your railing vayne is come vpon you Theo. And what vaine is come on you that will rather make a shipwracke of your owne and other mens saluations than you will seeme to relent from your errors Phi. It is no error The. It is an impious and haynous error and you bolster it vp with as euill wicked meanes that is by corrupting and forcing other mens writings to beare out your doings Phi. Dionysius in that whole chapter treateth of nothing but of the Sacrament Theo. And the Sacrament consisting of two partes an earthly and an heauenly the heauenly part of the sacrament is Christ. Why might hee not therefore make his prayer vnto Christ to direct his pen before hee assayed to treat of those mysteries Phi. So hee did but yet intending to pray to Christ hee speaketh to him in the Sacrament Theoph. It is one thing to pray to the sacrament as you though falsely say S. Denys did and an other thing to pray to him that is euery where present in that hee
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
hoc It is a common question what is ment by the pronoune THIS whether bread or the body of Christ Not bread for that is not the body of Christ nor yet the body of Christ for it appeareth not that there is any transubstantiation till the wordes be all pronounced To this demaund I say that by the word THIS nothing is ment but it is there put materially without anie signification at all Thus you turned and tossed the wordes of Christ so long till you brought all that the Lord did and saide at his last supper to plaine NOTHING With such vnchristian toyes were your scholes fraughted and the worlde deceiued such monsters you hatched when once you left the direction of the Scriptures and Fathers and fell to broaching your owne gesses But you must either admit our explication this breade is my body for the right ordering and perfitting of Christes wordes or else dissent from the manifest Scriptures from al the catholike Fathers and with shame enough from your owne fellowes and fansies Phi. Wee sticke not so much at the filling vp of the wordes which Christ spake as at the constering and expounding of them You delude them with tropes and significations as if Christ had beene speaking parables and not ordaining sacramentes Wee say there must be a reall truth and actiue force in them to perfourme the letter as it lieth For in Scripture so long as the letter may possibly be true we may not fly to figures Theo. In that you say right We must imbrace the sense which is occurant in the letter before all others if it agree with faith and good maners but if it crosse either of them we must beware the letter lest it kill and seeke for an other and deeper sense which must needes be figuratiue That direction S. Augustine giueth to al men when they read the Scriptures Iste omnino modus est locutionis inueniendae propriáne an figurata sit vt quicquid in sermone diuino neque ad morum honestatem nec ad fidei veritatem proprie referri potest figuratum esse cognoscas This is the perfect way to discerne whether a speech be proper or figuratiue that whatsoeuer in the word of God can not be properly referred either to integritie of maners or verity of faith thou resolue thy selfe it is figuratiue Phi. That prescription is very sound but it furthereth not your figuratiue sense For the letter of these wordes which we stand for is neither against faith nor good manners Theo. The literall acception of these words as they lie this bread is my body is first impossible by your owne confession next blasphemous by the plaine leuell of our Creede and lastly barbarous by the verie touch and instinct of mans nature Phi. Charge you Christ with so manie foule ouersightes in speaking the wordes Theo. The wordes which Christ spake be gratious and religious we know but where there may be brought a double construction of them a carnall or a spirituall a literall or a SacrameÌ„tall the literall construction which you will needes defend to deface the other is we say reproued as no part of our Sauiours meaning by those three barres which we proposed Phi. You propose much but you proue litle Theo. I should proue euen as much as you do if I should proue nothing but that which I proposed shall not want proofe The first your owne friendes will helpe me to proue Your Lawe saieth Hoc tamen est impossible quod panis sit corpus Christi Yet this is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ. Why striue you then for that which your selues grant is not possible to be true Why forsake you the mysticall interpretation which is possible what greater vanitie can you shewe than to cleaue to that sense which you see can not stande If it be bread how can it be Christ If it be Christ how can it be bread The second is as cleare For if breade in proper and precise speech bee the flesh of Christ ergo bread is also the feede of Dauid ergo breade was fastned to the crosse for our sinnes ergo bread was buried rose the third day from death and now sitteth in heauen at the right hand of God the Father nay no questioÌ„ if bread be Christ then is bread the Sonne of God and second person in the sacred Trinitie which how wel your stomaks can digest we know not in truth our harts tremble to heare an earthly dead and corruptible creature by your literall carnall deuotion aduaunced to the Lord of life grace the maker of heauen and earth yea the liuing and euerlasting God and yet if bread be truely and properly Christ these monsterous impieties you can not auoide Thirdly what could you deuise more iniurious and odious to christian mildnesse maners than the letter of these words eate you this is my flesh drinke you this is my blood Had you bin willed in as plain termes to cruciâ—ie Christ as you bee willed to eate his fleshe you woulde not I trust haue presently banded your selues with the Iewes to put him to death but rather haue staggered at the letter and sought for some farther and other meaning Yee be now willed to eate his flesh drinke his blood which is a precept far more hainous horrible in christian behauiour and religion if you follow the letter as AusteÌ„ affirmeth It appeareth more horrible to eate mans flesh than to kill it to drinke mans blood than to shed it And againe The Capernites were more excusable that coulde not abide the wordes of Christ which they vnderstood not being in deede horrible in that they were spoken as a blessing not as a cursing They thought saith Cyrill Christ had inuited them to eate the raw flesh of a man and drinke blood which thinges be horrible to the verie eares Why then presse you the letter which is hainous forget that the speech can not be religious except it be figuratiue Uerily S. Austen concludeth the speech to be figuratiue for this only reason If the scripture seeme to coÌ„mand any vile or ill fact the speech is figuratiue Except ye eate the fleshe of the son of man and drinke his blood you shall haue no life in you facinus velflagitium videtur iubere Christ seemeth to command a wicked sinfull act figura est ergo It is therefore a figuratiue speech commanding vs to be partakers of the Lords passion sweetly profitably to keep in mind that his flesh was crucified wouÌ„ded for vs. If then the real eating of Christs flesh with our mouthes and actuall drinking of his blood with our lips be wicked and hainous why presse you the letter of these wordes eate you this is my body drinke you this is my blood against truth against faith against nature neither possibility nor christianity nor coÌ„mon honestie suffering your exposition to be good S.
the thinges themselues whose signes those are Philand It were Theophil Why then since corporall eating serueth only for corporall nourishing and hath a continuall and naturall coherence with it doe you confesse the trueth in the later and not as well in the former part of that action why doe you not expound them both alike Philand To say the immortall fleshe of Christ is conuerted and turned into the quantitie and substaunce of our mortall flesh is an horrible heresie Theophil And so say that his fleshe is eaten with our mouthes and â—awes lâ—â—th in our stomacks is the verie pathway right introduction to that heresie or at least to as brutish and grosse an erour as that is Philand The Fathers affirme that his body is eaten with our mouthes Theophil And so they affirme that his bodie and blood doe increase and augment the substaunce of our mortall and sinnefull bodies Philand But that can not bee Theophil No more can the other Philand Howe shall our bodies rise at the last day if Christes body bee not in them Theophil Our resurrection dependeth not on the act of eating his flesh but of nourishing our fleshe with his as Ireneus telleth vs and the thinges which wee eate are not the causes but as the great Nicene councell admonisheth the pledges of our resurrection Their words be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must beleeue these to bee the signes or pledges of our resurrection Philand S. Chrysostom earnestly inforceth the eating of Christs flesh And sayth wee doe not onely eate it but euen * fasten our teeth in his fleshe Theo. In deede hee saith so but if you did not auert both your eyes and eares from the trueth you would perceiue by that verie sentence both the maner of his other Fathers speeches of that Sacrament and the right intent of their Doctrine in those cases His wordes are Non se tantum videri permittens desiderantibus sed tangi manducari dentes carni suae infigi desiderio sui omnes impleri Christ suffering himselfe not only to bee seene of those that are desirous but to bee touched and eaten and our teeth to bee fastned in his flesh and all to be satisfied of their longing after him Phi. Lord me thinketh these words be verie plain words He suffereth our teeth to bee fastned in his fleshe Theo. Uerie plaine they bee but very false also vnlesse you either take the flesh of Christ for the signe called by that name or else referre teeth and biting to the soule and faith of the â—â—ward man aâ— wel as you do the eyes hands wherewith we see him touch him Phi. Look what an â—â—â—sion you haue since gotten Theo. Nay looke what a subuersion of all truth and saith you be since fallen to Phi. Doth not this Father say wee fasten our teeth in his flesh Theo. Doeth hee not also say We see him with our eyes touch him with our handes Phi. That is referred to our faith as S. Ambrose teacheth Fide Christus videtur side Christus tangitur By faith Christ is seene by fayth Christ is touched Theoph. And why shall not the next which is more vnlikely to bee true bee referred to faith as well as the former Sainct Ambrose likewise saying Comedat te cor meuÌ„ panis sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee O holy bread O liuing bread O pure-bread come into my heart enter into my soule and Cyprian calling it the proper norishment of the spirite besides infinite others that for a thowsande yeares taught that doctrine in the church of God not your gutturall eating of Christ with teeth and iawes Phi. Was your maner of eating Christes fleshe which you defende in the sacrament taught in the church for a thowsande yeares Theop. Euen ours was and when yours came first to be proposed your schoolemen ran euery man his way fighting and scratching one an other â—ho should fal fastest and farthest from the truth Philand Blush you not to auouch two such monsterous lies Theop. A lyar will easily suspect any man as knowing him-selfe to delight in lies but GOD bee thanked that lyes with you bee truethes with vs and with all that haue any knowlegde of GOD or care of his truth The things which I affirmed be manifest truethes and such as you will blush at for verie shame if you be not sworne to your holie Father against Christ as well as you bee against your Prince Origen commenting vppon these wordes of the Supper this is my bodie this is my blood this breade sayeth hee which Christ confesseth to bee his bodie is the worde that nourisheth our soules and this drinke which hee confesseth to bee his blood is the worde that moysteneth and passinglie cheereth the heartes of such as drinke it Thou which art come vnto Christ sticke not in the blood of his fleshe but rather learne the blood of his worde and heare him saying to thee this is my blood which shall bee shedde for the remission of your sinnes Hee that is partaker of the mysteries knoweth the flesh and blood of the worde of God For the bread is the word of righteousnesse which our soules eating are nourished with and the drink is the worde of the knowledge of Christ according to the mysterie of his birth and death The blood of the Testament is poured into our heartes for the remission of our sinnes Athanasius Howe fewe men woulde his bodie haue sufficed that this shoulde bee the foode of the whole worlde Yea therefore doeth bee warne them of his ascension into heauen that he might drawe him from thinking on his bodie and they thereby learne that the flesh which he spake of was celestiall meate from aboue and spirituall nourishment to bee giuen by him The wordes which I spake to you are spirite and life which is as much as if hee had sayde this bodie which is in your sight and delyuered to death for the worlde shall bee giuen you for meate that it may bee spiritually distributed in euery one of you and be an assuraunce and preseruatiue to raise you to eternall life Cyprian writing of the Lordes Supper Eating and drinking saieth hee bee referred to the one and same end with the which as the substance of our bodies is increased and preserued so the life of the spirite is maintained with his proper nourishment What foode is to the fleshe that faith is to the soule what meate is to the body that the worde is to the spirite working euerlastingly with a more excellent vertue that which bodily meates doe for a time and vntill a season Ambrose approaching to the sacred communion which you intitle a prayer preparing to Masse amongest other thinges speaketh thus to Christ himselfe Thou Lord saydst with thine holy and blessed mouth the bread
wordes are Saint Austens Theophil Your assurance is not currant Shewe vs where that wee may finde them Phi. What if I haue not the booke in a readmeâ— Theo. Name the place and it shâ—ll suffice Phi. Perhaps it is not printed Theo. By whome then is it reported Phi. By such as would not lye Theoph. By Walden the frier that wrate against Wicleff Phil. What if he were the reporter Theophil Where had he it Phi. In an old copie written with an auncient and set hand Theo. Which neuer no man sawe besides himselfe Philand That you cannot tell Theoph. Nor you but where is that copy now Philan. Why aske you me out of S. Augustine he had it Theo. Shew vs the booke and beare the bell Philan. He saith it Theo. As though your frierly practises and manifolde forgeries vnder the fathers names were not too wel knowen to trust a Romish Coruester vpon his bare worde in a matter of such importance Phi. In my conscience hee woulde not wilfullie belye S. Augustine Theophil Your conscience is no good consequence In my knoweledge there was no such doctrine taught in the Church as these woordes import whiles S. Augustine liued nor fiue hundreth yeares after his death but the contrary was earnestly maintained and auouched as I haue prooued by Gelasius Theodoret and others And therefore either Walden must make it of his owne heade or ignorantly light on a patch of Anselmus or some such late writer vnder the name of Saint Augustine which was common in your Abbayes and is at this day confessed by your owne fellowes Philand If you thinke Saint Augustine were mistaken you shall haue in venerable Bede as plaine woordes for this point as in Saint Augustine Theophil And as plainely forged as Saint Augustine was Philand Heare what he saieth before you iudge Theophil I am as ready to heare as you to speake Philand His woordes are Ibi forma panis videtur vbi substantia panis non est There the forme of bread appeareth where the substance of bread is not Theophil These places hit your handes as patte as if your selues had framed them Philand You were best saie this is forged Theophil I neede not It saith so much of it selfe creept you can shewe where it is written Philand In his booke de mysteriis missae Theophil There be extaâ—t eight tomes of his workes is it in any of them Philand It maie be it is not Theophil Did he euer write any such booke as de mysteriis missae Philand What else Theo. Who saith so Phi. This is alledged out of that booke Theo. But is he neuer wrate anie such booke how can thiâ— be allâ—dged out of him Phi. If he did not you saie something but how prooue you that he wrate no such booke Theo. Nâ—y you must prooue he did We hauing the Catalogue of his labours witnessed by Triâ—â—emius and others of your owne friends and eight tâ—mes of his writinges at this day extant find no such booke named as Walden mentioneth Philand All this notwithstanding he might write such a booke Theo. He might is not enough you must prooue he did before we acquite you of corruption Phi. Walden repeateth those wordes as out of his booke Theo. We had too late experience of Walden in S. Austen to beleeue either him or you Phi. You will deny all things Theo. You yet bring nothing but that which is no where found in the fathers workes if it be not lewdly forged in their names Thinke you with such trumperie to trie your selues Catholikes Phi. We haue found and good records Theo. Bring out those for these be worse than rotten A frier fourteene hundreth and thirtie yeares after Christ to come with new places out of Austen and Bede cleane contrarie to the rest of their writings and such as neuer any man alledged before him and neuer any man saw them after him who but seducers would bleare the world and blinde themselues with such authorities Phi. Wee did but alledge them to sound what you would say Theo. Then leaue them with shame since you see what they are and get you to other if you haue anie Phi. You would haue them auncient Theo. Would you prooue your selues Catholikes by men of your owne faction Phi. If you count that a faction all the fathers were of our faction Theo. You may soone make them to any faction if you follow frier Waldens fashion but bring vs their workes that we may iudge of their woordes or els you striue in vaine Phi. Hereafter I will Theo. Then haue you a cold sute of this question For of accidentes without subiect or abolishing the substance of bread neuer father spake one word Phi. Yeas S. Chrysostome â—aith Doest thou see bread doest thou see wine Doe these thinges goe to the draught as other meates doe Not so Thinke not so For as when waxe is put to the fire nothing of the substance remaineth nothing redoundeth so here also thinke thou the mysteries consumed with the substance of the diuine bodie Heare you this Theophilus Nothing of the former substance remaineth but the same is consumed with the presence or substance of Christes bodie Theo. I heare it well Philander if you would take it right When you put waxe into the fire nothing neither shew nor substance remaineth this is so true that it will doe you small good Phi. Will it not So it is in the mysteries saith this father Theoph. You would haue it so But Chrysostome saith so thinke when thou commest to the mysteries Phi. And should wee thinke a falshood when wee approch to the mysteries Theo. No but pull both your hartes and eyes from the materiall elements as not regarding them and fixe your cogitations on the celestial grace and vertue that preuaileth and worketh in the mysteries Phi. He would haue vs thinke the mysteries to be consumed Theo. If any reall mutation were to be concluded by this place your holie formes and accidents of breade and wine must be packing as well as the substance For when waxe is throwen into the fire what accidences can you â—et vs remaining doe they not perish togither with the substance If you consult the Schooles they will tell you the accidentes onely perish the matter doeth not So that Chrysostomes similitude maketh litle for your conuersion of substances without accidences his illation certainly maketh lesse Thinke saieth he that the mysteries in like â—ort be consumed The substance of bread which you say is not can no way be taken with you for the mysteries but the shewes and formes of bread and wine by your opinion must be counted in this and all other places the sacred mysteries and therefore if any mysteries be consumed your accidences can neuer scape the brunt of these wordes Howbeit Chrysostomes true meaning was not to turne the bread and wine from their former qualities or substances but the communicantes from all vnworthy and
of them is the popish Sacrifice August de side ad Peâ—â— cap. 19. The Catholike Church offeâ—eth bread and wine to God for a thankesgiuing in remembrance of his sonnes death Our Sacrifice is the giuing of thankes and remembring of his death b Irineus lib. 4. cap. 32. c Ibidem cap. 34. The Church offereth to God of his creatures with thanksgiuing sanctifying that which the faithfull receiue at the Lords table d Clemens Apost constitutio lib. 8. cap. 17. e Liturg. Chrys. Basil. f Lib. 4. cap. 34. g Offertorium Missae Their owne Masse-booke is against the sacrifice which they defend to be in their masse h Ibidem i Ibidem k Ibidem By their owne bookes it is euident that they doe not sacrifice Christ but the creatuâ—es of bread and wine Marke this contradiction in their masse-booke to the sacrifice which the Iesuits pretend l Aug. ad Bonif. epist. 23. Christ is offered not in substance but in a Sacrament or representation of his death Christ slaine for our sinnes is the true sacrifice of the Lords table a Cypr. li. 2. ep 3. b Ambros. in 10. ca. epist. ad Heb. c Euseb. de demonst Euang. lib. 1. cap. 10. d Chrys. in Mat. hom 83. e Aug. contra Faust. l. 20. c. 21. The actions and elements of the supper resemble his death f De cons. dist 2. § cum frangitur g 1. Cor. cap. 11. As Christ is crucified in the mysticall supper euen so is he offered h Hier. in ps 95. i Chrysost. in acta Apost hom 21. k De cons. dist 2. § quid sit sanguis l Aug. Euang. quaest l. 2. ca. 38. m De cons. dist 2. § hoc est quod alâ—imus n Glossa de cons. dist 2. § quid sit sanguis o Chrysost. in 10. cap. episâ—â—d Hebr. p Ambr. in 11. ca. epist. 1. ad Cor. q Eusebale demonstra Euangelic lib. 1. ca. 10. r August 83. quaest cap 61. Christ is offered at the table that is a sacrament similitude of his death is celebrated s De cons dist 2. § quia corpus This is Christian comfortable doctrine Theod. in cap. 8. ad Hebr. Theoph. in 10. cap. ad Hebrâ—os What sacrifice the fathers taught and offered * Canon Missae supra § propitio ac sereno vultu a Liturgia Basilij b Cypr. li. 2. epist. 3. August 83. quaest ca. 3. c Dionys. eccles hierach cap. 3. d Paschal de cons. dist 2. § iteratur The true exposition of the Sacrifice at the Lordes table How long the Church was without their kind of sacrifice Sententiarum lib. dist 12. The master of the sentences is against the Iesuits in the sacrifice of their Masse f Glossa de cons. dist 2. ¶ semel g § in Christo. h § Iteratur Thom. part 3. quâ—est 83. art 1. * The latter schoolemen since Thomas mistaking the former turned these words to opus operatum and taught the Priests act to be the right meane to applie Christes death to the quick and the dead Can their doctrine be Catholike that so latelie was vnknowen to their own fellowes 24. places cited by the Iesuits in their testament to no purpose and so 14. by the maker of their Apologie Their reall actuall sacrifice must needes be made with handes and so the gestures of the Priests hands is all the sacrifice the Iesuites haue What Sacrifice it is that God regardeth The Rhemish Test. fol. 447. Malac. 1. The prophesy of Malachie discussed 1. Pet. 2. What sacrifices the newe testament teacheth vs to offer vnto God a Hebr. 13. The Sacrifice of praise Of mercie b Phil. 4. c Rom. 12. Of our selues d Psal. 115. Eccles. 35. Psal. 50. These be the sacrifices of the new testament which God requireth at our handes and of which Malachie speaketh The Iesuites in alledging the fathers vse such cunning that a man caÌ„ hardlie perceiue to what end they name them Three fathers abused by the Iesuits to peruert the words of Malachie Cyprian in that place which they cite doth not so much as speake of Malachie Cyp. ad QuirinuÌ„ lib. 1. cap. 16. Iustinâ—â—n Dial. cum Tryphone aduers. Iudaeos Iustinus restraineth the words of Malachie to praiers and thankes other sacrifice he acknowledgeth none in the Lords supper Irenae li. 4. ca. 33 * Ibidem cap. 34 Ireneus expoundeth Malachies wordes of praier obedience and thankesgiuing as we doe Iren. lib. 4. ca. 34 Ireneus teacheth not the offering of Christ to his father but of creatures for a signe of thaÌ„kfulnes Iren. lib. 4. cap. 34 The rest of the fathers interprete Malachies wordes after the same manner a Tertul. aduer lud eos b Tertul. aduer Marc. lib. 4. c Euseb. de demonst Euang. lib. 1. cap. 6. d Cyril contra Iuliaâ—â—m â—i 10. e Hie. in Zachariam lib. 2. ca. 8. f August contr liter Petilia li 2. cap. 86. We striue not for the worde sacrifice which the Iesuites verie diligentlie prooue but for their kinde of sacrifice which they cannot proue by the testimonie of any one father In what sense the Lords supper is both a Sacrament a Sacrifice Our duties to God are our sacrifices FroÌ„ these sacrifices the Eucharist hath his name This sacrameÌ„t hath the similitude and therefore the name of Christs death and passion The Iesuits are verie plentifull in heaping impertinent allegations The Rhe. Test pag. 447. All these fathers speake of Christs bodie broken and blood shed on the cross which are resembled in this sacrament The power of Christs death the Iesuits attribute to the Priests act The Iesuites sacrifice How the death of Christ is both offered and applied Your feate was to prepare the peoplâ— against a daie A man maie soone peâ—uerâ— the fathers by skores as the Iesuits haue done in their Testament What sacrifice it is the Iesuits woulde establish They produce the name of sacrifice vsed by the fathers and vnderstand thereby their owne fansies The reason whie we doe not vse the worde sacrifice so often as the fathers doe The fathers phrases beguiled the Iesuits whiles they were too eger on them The name of sacrifice hath no warrant in the Scripture The Rhe. Test fol. 447. Heb. 7. A man shall finde manie thinges in the Rhemish obseruations which are not the text of the Scripture The Rhe. Test. fol. 447. The Iesuites would prooue if they could tell how that S. Paul calleth the lords Supper a Sacrifice * This point by point is not worth a blew point Their misconstering of S. Paul examined The faulte which the Apostle reprooueth in the Corinthians This was partaking with Idols and dishonoring of God S. Pauls reason against it by waie of comparison or opposition Though Saint Pauls reason be â—ramed by waie of comparâ—son yet the Iesuits illation is not necessary Eating of thinges consecrated vnto Idols is fellowship with diuâ—lâ— though they be not sole â—â—elie sacrificed vnto them The Iesuites prooue by the