what evidence can the Church of Rome now give us or what assurance can she have besides the bare name That she is still a Christian Church Onely Vega helps it aswell as he can That in reason and Charity men are not to thinke that the Priest should be so carelesse at the Consecration as not to look to his Intention upon which the Salvation of all menâ— soules dependeth Fourthly for the Sacrament of the Eucharist or of the Altar as they call it First this is in the same Predicament with Baptisme for the Priests intention which if not present at the Consecration of the Host as they call it there is no Transubstantiation no body of Christ and so they worship a wafer instead of Christ and so by their owne Confession in that case they commit materiall Idolatry as a Jesuite confessed in Dispute with Dr Featly But Secondly by the very name of Sacrament of the Altar they destroy the Sacrament that Christ ordained in his last Supper called therfore the Supper of the Lord. For they have turned it from a Supper to a sacrifice yea and that from an Eucharisticall sacrifice as the Fathers called it to a Propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of quick and dead as is noted before And so this Sacrament they have Non sacramented and made of it a whole burnt sacrifice Secondly they have utterly destroyed the materialls or Element in this their Sacrament the bread and wine that no maâ— should so much as dreame or once take it for the Lords Supper For a Supper cannot be without bread and drinke and heâ—e is neither And so it is neither Supper nor Sacrament And thus they have taken away noâ— onely the cup from the people but the bread also altogether So as there is nothing in their Sacrament but a meere lye meere imaginations Phantasmes of Accidents without subject as we said before And so enough of this And lastly the Church of Rome having disanulled the Sacraments of Grace it hath withall disabled them from being seales of Grace For it is the property of a seale to give a sure and certain Impression and thereby a Confirmation of the Covenant But in Popish Sacraments all certainty is taken away as is shewed and so having lost the seales consequently the Covenant of Grace it selfe is of no force unto them And thus in denying the two Testaments to be the onely rule of Faith and overthrowing the two Sacraments the seales of Faith yea having lost and disclaimed the true Saving Faith it selfe what evidence hath Rome left her to shew and prove that she is now a true Church of Christ or hath the Essence of a true Church Let her shew her evidence As he said Let Baal if he be a god plead for himselfe Yet all this is of no Force to your Lordship but that like Ixion imbracing a cloud for Iuno as it is in that Fable so you imbrace but a cloud or rather the shadow of a cloud instead of the once faire Virgin Rome you must needs have her a true Church still She onely say you misuses the two Sacraments A small triviall trifle to speake of Misusing then is nothing with you What say you then to those wicked Princes and Priests of Israel that misused the Lords Prophets Was this nothing They so misused them that they stoned them to death And so the Church of Rome hath so misused the two Sacraments that they have stoned them them to death and left not one alive But they have made amends for it For say you they have added more even no lesse then five which are as the five wounds wherewith the Lord was crucified to death For those five have eaten out the other two of Christs own ordaining both expressing his death the one for ingrafting us into it the other for growth and strength by it as our spirituall food And these five Sacraments fo humane invention they must have their vertue of conferring Grace ex opere operato being all as they use them a meere evacuating of Christs me it s But time permits not a longer discourse of them Enough is said for Answer And for Conclusion the Church of Rome having taken away the Authority of Scripture and added her own Traditions and having taken away and misused the Lords Sacraments and added their own Sacraments what remaines to that Church but that which the Divine Iohn Concludeth the whole Bible withall I testifie unto every man that heareth the words of the Prophecie of this Book If any man shall adde unto these things God shall adde unto him the plagues that are written in this Book And if any man shall take away from the Book of this Prophecie God shall take away his part out of the Booke of life and out of the Holy City and from the things which are written in this Booke Out of the Holy City which is the Church of Christ. Here then in this holy City is no place for the Church of Rome L. p. 131.132 The Church of Rome both was and was not a right or Orthodox Church before Luther made a breach from it For in the Primitive times of it it was a most right and Orthodox Church but upon the immediate times before Luther or some Ages before that Rome was a corrupt and tainted Church farre from being right And yet both these times before Luther made his breach P. The Conclusion then of your speech here is this That Luther made his breach from the Church of Rome not onely as it was Corrupt and tainted immediately or in some Ages before but also as it was right and Orthodox in her Primitive Times For you say And yet both these times before Luther as well those wherein the Church of Rome was most right and Orthodox as those wherein after before Luther it was corrupt and tainted made his breach And thus you make the rent on the Protestant party to be not onely from the corrupt and tainted Church of Rome but from the most Right and Orthodox Church of Christ. A pestilent speech bewraying the speaker to be in the very gall of bitternesse and in the bond of iniquity and worhty to be abhorred and abandoned of all that beare the name of Protestants But this agreeth with that which we noted before how you exclude all the Protestant Reformed Churches beyond the Seas where your Prelacie and Hierarchy is not erected nor my Lord Bishops Chaire allowed from being any Churches of Christ or members of the true Catholick Church For here also in Luthers rent from the Church of Rome not onely as corrupt and tainted but as once Right and Orthodox you include all those Reformed present Churches and to exclude them out of the true Church of Christ. But as before we have shewed and proved and shall yet more upon fit occasion ministred upon the same cause for which you exclude all Reformed Protestant Churches beyond the Seas from being Churches of Christ
as you imposed upon me So as No Right that is No Orthodox Church at Rome And yet no newes it is that I granted the Roman Church to be a true Church For so much very learned Protestants have acknowledged before me and the Truth cannot deny it For that Church which receives the Scripture as the Rule of Faith though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule and both the Sacraments as instrumentall Causes and seales of Grace though they adde more and infuse these yet cannot but be a True Church in Essence How it is in manners and Doctrine I would you would loâ—ke to it with a single eye P. Not Right then not Orthodox you hold the Church of Rome to be That 's somthing yet Yet True you ever have and will hold her to be unlesse she absolutely fall away from the Faith Well And yet I wot well you give absolutely falling away from the Faith So large bounds as it is to be feared you will never come to give her for absolutely gone and fallen away from the Faith so long as she can have but one bare thread or ragge of the profession of the Faith of the Creed nay if she can but say over her Creed though as you Confesse elsewhere she hath quite overthrown the sense of it And if the sense of it be destroyed surely the Faith of it also This will more fully appeare as we goe along We come to your Reasons why you hold Rome a True Church 1. For very learned Protestants which hold with you in this First we can set both as learned and double the number of of Protestants who will weigh down the Scale against those that seem to be of your opinion Secondly we could out of those very Protestant Authors whom you mean though I suppose you seldome read such Authors and in other things scarce name them Honoris causa collect more against this opinion That the Church of Rome is a true Church then you can for it As out of Iunius himselfe for Instance I mentioned before a laâ—e Book intituled Babel no Bethel never yet answered by any Jesuite or other Priest Romish or English where the Author hath cleared all or most of those Protestants which his Adversaries alledged and I suppose you meane from this opinion of yours And then also the Author proves by many concluding Arguments and in my opinion unanswerable that the Church of Rome is no true visible Church of Christ as having lost the very Essence of a true Church To which Booke I referre your Lordship could your patience but brook the Authors name or your Conscience not tremble at the mention of him To your Second Reason First I deny that the Church of Rome receives the Scriptures as A Rule of Faith For first The Rule of Faith must be in it selfe simply Divine and Infallible But such to the Church of Rome the Scripture is not For she makes the Infallibility and Divine Authority of the Scripture to depend upon the Church as you do upon Church Tradition which you confesse to be not simply Divine and Infallible Ergo Rome receives not the Scripture as A Rule of Faith Secondly Rome receives not holds not The Rule of Faith Ergo she is not a true Church As the late Dr Carleton of Chichester in his Book of the Church hath well and learnedly proved For not to hold the Rule of Faith is to deny and destroy the Faith and to fall absolutely away from the Foundation of Faith and to set up a new and false Faith upon a new and false Foundation Nor dare or doe you say that Rome receives the Scripture as The Rule of Faith but onely as A Rule of Faith to wit a partiall Rule as Bellarmine calls it But if the Scripture be as it is The onely Rule of Faith and ever hath been in all ages so held till Rome in the Councel of Trent changed this Rule then not to hold it so for The Rule that is the onely Rule but onely as a partiall Rule joyned with other Rules equall to it as her Traditions which Bellarmine in his Book de verbo Dei non scripto calls the word of God unwritten is to reject the onely Rule and so to fall absolutely away from the Faith And you confesse that the Church of Rome holds the Scripture but as a partiall and imperfect Rule And is this nothing with you What is this but to evacuate and utterly make voyd the Rule when for a perfect intire and absolute onely Rule it is made but a partiall imperfect and joynt Rule And when humane Authority is equalled with Divine Humane Traditions with Divine Scriptures as an equall Rule of Faith Nay and those her Traditions which she calls her word of God unwritten are such as teach things directly contrary to the Doctrines of Scripture as of Purgatory Invocation of Saints and the like Is not this a'kurosai as Christ saith to make voyd and of no Authority the Commandements of God by mens Tradition Yet this Camel you can easily swallow you slight this over as a matter of nothing as if it were all one thing in a manner to hold the Scripture The Rule of Faith and A Rule of Faith namely a part or piece of the Rule The whole Rule and a partiall Rule The onely perfect Rule and An imperfect Rule All this breakes no squares with you but that Rome for all this holds the Rule of Faith and therfore you hold her for a true Church of Christ. But yet in so saying you plainly imply That if Rome held not the Rule of Faith she is no true Church of Christ but is absolutely fallen away from Christ the Foundation For you give this for a Reason that Rome is a true Church because she holds the Rule of Faith Ergo If she hold not the Rule of Faith she is no true Church of Christ but is absolutely fallen away from the Faith Whereupon I argue thus That Church which denyeth the Scripture to be the onely Intire Absolute perfect Rule of Faith is fallen absolutely away from Christ and so ceaseth to be a true Church that is to have the very Essence and beeing of a true Church of Christ But the Church of Rome denyeth the Scripture to be the onely Intire Absolute Perfect Rule of Faith Ergo the Church of Rome is absoluely fallen away from Christ and so ceaseth to be a true Church that is to have the very Essence and beeing of a true Church of Christ. The Minor Proposition is confessed by your Lordship For you say The Church of Rome holds the Scripture but as A Rule a Partiall Rule an Imperfect Rule Thus she denyeth the Scripture to be the onely Intire Absolute Perfect Rule of Faith And for the Major Proposition you doe by necessary Consequence confesse it also to be true For you set it down as a Reason why you hold the Church of Rome to be a true Church because she holds the
tâ—e Rule and Foundation of our Faith but what we find written in the holy Scriptures This is that word of God which is authenticall of Authority to his Church and therefore Authority to us because written So as your unwritten word whereiâ— you agree with Bellarmine and your Apostolicke Traditions wherin you come home to your A. C. the Jesuite we receive none of them all as authentick or to have any thing to doe to expound the Scripture in any doubt about the Faith But if you can shew us any Traditions Apostolick we will by your leave examine them by the Scriptures and not the Scriptures by them You name baptizing of Infants for a Tradition Apostolicke We doubt not but the Apostles baptized the Infants of beleeving Parents For the Infants or Children of such are holy as the Apostle sheweth And so they belonged to the Covenant And as the Children of the Jewes in the old Testament were circumcised as pertaining to the Covenant and promise made to Abraham and to his Seed So Baptisme succeding in place of Circumcision as a Seale of the Same Covenant belongs to all Children of beleeving Christian Parents As the Apostle saith Therefore it is of Faith that it might come by Grace and the Promise might be sure to all the Seed not to that onely which is of the Law but to that also which is of the Faith of Abrahâ—m who is the Father of us all So as beleeving Christians have the same interest in the Covenant with Abraham and their Children or Infants have the like priviledge of Baptisme as the Infants of the ancient Israelites had for Circumcision Therefore the Baptizing of Infants was certainly practised by the Apostles as well as the baptising of beleeving Parents So as we doe not baptize Infants because you tell us it is a Tradition Apostolicke but because it is as clearely and firmely grounded in the Scripture as the baptizing of beleeving Parents We exclude therefore whatsoever Word unwritten or Traditions Apostolicke as you call them as being either partiall or equall Rules of Faith with the Scriptures as Bellarmine calls them or as Interpreters and Iudges of the Scripture in doubts about Faith as you are bold to affirme We have no word of God but the Scripture we acknowledge no Traditions Apostolicke but what we find they delivered in Scripture The Prophets in the old Testament sent Gods people to the Scripture for information instruction resolution in all matters of Faith and Cases of Conscience To the Law and to the Testimony Saith Isaiah if they Speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them He Saith not To the Traditions of our Fathers but To the Law and to the Testimony Gods word written Els there is no light in men they are blind guides that in matters of Faith lead us any where but to and by the Scriptures And the Prophet Ieremiah They have rejected the word of the Lord and what wisedome is in them All wisdome without this word of God is foolishnesse all knowledge without this is ignorance and blindnesse So our Saviour Christ Search the Scriptures for in them ye thinke to find eternall life and they are they which testifie of me So as Christ allowes us no other Testimony of him and of Faith in him but the Scriptures We must erunan Search them not the Archives or Sacraries of blind Traditions though guilded over never so faire with the name of Apostolick nor of any pretended word of God unwritten And Christ answereth the Lawyer when he asked what he should doe to inherit Eternall life What is written in the Law How readest thou And the Apostle That none presume above that which is written And Whatsoever things were written afore time were written for our learning that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope And Peter We have a more sure word of Prophecy to wit the Scriptures of the old Testament whereunto ye doe well that ye take heed In all which places and many more the Scripture is still commended to us as the onely absolute sufficient perfect and compleat Rule of our Faith in all matters or doubts of Faith touching our Salvation So as it hath no other interpreter but it selfe not any Tradition not any word unwritten But of this you will give us occasion to speak more at after L. p. 72 73. Faith is the gift of God of God alone and an Infused habit in respect whereof the soule is meerely recipient The Sole Infuser is the Holy Ghost Till the Spirit of God move the heart of man he cannot beleeve P. I confesse when first I read these words I began to muse with my selfe and to argue thus What is my Lord of Canterbury turn'd Orthodox no Arminian in the Doctrine of Grace But looking a little further and observing both the Authors you alledge as Stapleton a great man with you and other Popish Authors as is usuall with you throughout your Book and also considering of what Faith you here Speak I changed my conceit and found that you were no Changeling For wheras I thought that all this faire â—â—ourish of Faith is the gift of God of God alone A habit infused The Holy Ghost the Sole Infuser The soule meerely recipient Till Gods Spirit move mans heart he cannot beleeve had been meant of that Grace of Saving and Iustifying Faith which the Scripture teacheth and particularly the Apostle Ephes. 2.8 By Grace ye are saved through Faith and not of your selves it is the Gift of God c. I imagined I say that as you used the Apostles very words and the Language of Scripture so you had done it in the sense and mind of the Apostle and of the Scripture which Speaks so of the Saving and Iustifying Faith But when I found the contrary I confesse I blushed at my folly in having such a conceit of you having had so much experience both of your usuall perverting of Scriptures and your corrupt sense throughout your Book and considering that light and darknesse cannot stand together and how you hâ—ve altogether suppressed the Preaching of the Doctrines of Grace and finding that all this Faith you Speake of is nothing els but that historicall Faith in beleeving the Scriptures to be the word of God which beliefe is common to the very Reprobates and Devils themselves who beleeve and tremble Phristouâ—i they quiver and Shake as when mens teeth Chatter in their head in extreme cold And yet how doe you abuse the Scripture and your Reader in giving to this Faith those peculiar Attributes which are proper and peculiar to the onely Saving Grace of Saving Faith the Sole Infuser Giver and worker whereof is the Holy Ghost Tell me how come the Devils to that historicall faith whereby they beleeve the Scripture to be the very word of God and all things therein to be most certainly true and so all
they renounce all such lords Aske them againe why they subject their Consciences soules and bodies to the will and lust of man in will-worship forbidden by the Apostle ô they answere they never knew that before and now that they know it they repent of it and from henceforth they renounce it and resolve to loose rather life and all then they will doe so any longer Thus even a good Christian through ignorance may for a time in a dangerous errour but so soon as he is convinced of it he will not for all the world continue in it So he that hath true saving faith in Christ resting on Christs merits alone for his justification he neither will nor can be brought to beleeve that he must be justified by his works For this is against the very nature of saving faith which rests onely on Christ renouncing all other respects So that 't is impossible that any true member of Christ should by any errour be so seduced as to be seperated from Christ for he is preserved by the spirit of Grace by the power of God through faith unto salvation So that as the whole body of the Church of Christ so every particular member of this body hath the certaine and infallible seale of the Spirit of Truth given him of Christ according to his promise purpose and intention for all truth absolutely necessary to salvation having both his Spirit and word to guide them into all truth Finally 't is very true being taken in a true sence that Christ never intended to leave an infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie either contentious or curious or presumptuous spirits And if not presumptuous spirits certainly not such spirits as usurpe a Prelaticall and Lordly Authority and to sit as visible Iudges of Scripture in Generall Councels imposing upon all men a servile yoake of obedience to their Decrees whether right or wrong true or false Nay to such presumptuous spirits God hath given eyes not to see and hath made their hearts fat not to understand the truth not to see the light that shineth in his word and therfore they say it is darke and speake disgracefully of it So as the presumptuous is properly yours As for the contentious and curious these are they that contend for the truth against your undermining and oppugning of it and are curious â—o search and sound the bottome of that Mystery of Iniquity which is cunningly yet grosly enough folded up in the voluminous leaves of this your Booke So as for these so contentious and curious Christ did intend to leave an Infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie them and to assure them of the Truth so as not all the opposition and contradiction in the world can beate them from it To the Tenth you make no matter of it if Generall Câ—uncels erre in one or a second or a third so it be not in things necessary In other cases it makes no matter if they erre And what matter is it then if there be none of your Generall Councel at all For you confesse that they may possibly though not easily erre in things necessary and in fundamentall points of Faith and yet obedience must be given If then it be no matter if in other things they erre onâ—e twice thrice yea or if you will in a hundred things take all these together and the world should be free from many dangers if it were rid of Generall Councels altogether But in the meane time you make no matter of it if in so erring they load the world with an intollerable burthen of errours which all men must bow their necks under till another Generall Councel doe free them and perhaps in stead of freeing them may lay as much more load upon them Truly my Lord if you had not a liberty to talk with your pen what you please and a strong opinion also that whatsoever you write or speake must needs be of every body highly applauded as if all you write were Oracles you would never have suffered such foule blots to have dropped from your pen. But 't is no matter If you erre in this and that and another c. aswell as your Generall Councels so as we knowing them may not in obeying or assenting erre with you To the Eleventh you say for necessary faith to salvation we have the Scriptures Creeds 4 first Generall Councels So then being furnisht of necessaries what need we any more I think the Apostles rule for temporall things may hold well in spirituall he saith having food and rayment let us therewith be content So Having all things necessary for faith to salvation let us use these well and bâ— content not affecting to be loaden with a multitudo of humane devises which Prelaticall Councels Courts and Canons put upon us And are Generall Councels so Cheape as that you should keep such a doe having no Necessaries to trouble them withall But it seems you have some other necessaries besides those of faith that will require a Generall Councel For you tell us pag 211. The setling of the Divisions of Christendome as the reconciling of England with Rome the making of Canons which must bind aâ—l particular Christians and Churches cannot be concluded 〈…〉 but there to wit in a Generall Councel Why but there For the Church of England you may doe what you please onely you desire perhaps a Generall Councel to conclude for Altars and other utensils and so ease your shoulders of the envy and crime of Innovation but for that also you have a sufficient put off as is shewed before But the reconciliation and setling of the Divisions of Christendome will conclude all But still the Scripture with you is not alone sufficient for necessary faith to salvation without the Creed and at least the 4 first Generall Councels Why was the Scripture before there were any either Creeds or Councels And was not the Scripture then alone sufficient for all things necessary to salvation The Creeds and Councels are not to be added to the Scripture as if without them it were not an absolute and compleat Rule As for the Creeds they were for the summe and substance of them extracted from Scripture and must still be reduced to Scripture for their true sense and interpretation as before And for the Decrees of the 4 Generall Councels we approve of them no further then the Scripture warrants them And therfore though Twelfthly you humbly submit to the Scripture as it is interpreted by the Primitive Church and Generall Councels and not els yet we submit our faith onely to the Scripture as it is interpreted by it selfe and by the spirit of Christ speaking and breathing in it which by the Scripture interprets the Scripture unto us as Augustine doth well observe in his Second Book de Doctrina Christiana And herein you shew your faith not to be Divine but humane as which you submit not meerly to the Scripture but unto the Iudgment of men as
But Thirdly you say These are a great scandall of Christianity No more Why sure they are the very badges and proper markes of the whore of Babylon and the Doctrines of Antichristianity For they are spirituall whoredome And as for true Christianity it so abhorres them and that whore that uses them that it is not easily scandalized with them as you are that would so faine be â—econciâ—ed to Rome For what communion hath the Temple of God with Idolls Or Christ with Beliall Or true Christianity with Antichristianity L. p ibid. Transubstantiation taken properly cannot stand with the ground of Christan Religion P. Why is there some other taking of Transustantiation then properly Is there a Transubstantiation improperly taken shew it us I pray you Is not Transubstantiation Transubstantiation To 〈◊〉 a Câ—anging of one substance into another As the changing of the substance of water into the substance of wine which Christ truly did miraculously As the changing of waters into blood which Moses did miraculousâ—y As the changing of the breaâ— into Christs body and of the wine into Christs blood which the Papists falsly teach and beleeve as if done miraculously when no Miracle at all doth appeare Or they say it is done by verture of pronouncing the words of Consecration Hoc est corpus meum This is my body whereas the Text plainly sheweth that these were not the words of Consecration as also some Schoolmen confesse for Christ had Consecrated before in his blessing or giving of thanks after which and after he had broken the bread giving it to his Disciples he uttered these words This is my body But what is your Transubstantiation improperly taken Indeed some of the Ancient Fathers speaking of the Sacramentall Elements after Consecration being then set apart from common use called it a Mutation saying that the Elements were changed into another Nature but withall they expresse their meaning to be not the changing of their substance but of their use from being common bread and wine to become Sacramentall or Sacred But for Transubstantiation they never so much as dreamed of any such kind of Metamorphosis or MetousÃosis or monstrous Paradox as Transubstantiation But this your Distinction of properly and improperly may perhaps prove usefull for to make a Reconciliation with Româ— in this matter and so to remove this mégakásma so as both you and the Church of Rome may hold Transubstantiation onely with this difference or rather verball distinction Rome holding it properly and you improperly L. ibid. As for communion in one kind Christs Institution to cleare against that P. And is not Christs institution as cleare against Trâ—nsubstantiation upon which you immediately adde this And first even naturall Reason or the blind light of Nature is against it For the Heathen man can tell you who is so madde or vaine as to beleeve or imagine that to be God which he eateth Although saith he we call Bread by the name of the Goddesse Ceres and Winâ— by the name of Bacchus c. Againe to beleeve Transubstantiation is against those very words of institution This is my body For these words are an usuall Sacramentall Phrase or manner of speech which the Scripture useth in all the Sacraments both of the old Testament and of the new As in all of them to call the outword visible signes by the name of the thing signified As Circumsition was called the Covenant Gen. 17.10 though but a signe of it vers 11. And a seale of it also Rom. 4.11 so the eating of the Paschall Lambe it was a memoriall or commemorative signe and sacrifice of the Passover and yet it is called the Passover So Baptisme succeeding Circumcision though it be a visible signe and Sacrament of the washing of Christs bloud to remission of sinnes And so as Circumcision a signe and seale of the Covenant yet it is called râ—generation beâ—ng but a signe of it And so also the Lords supper the Elements theâ—ein bread and wine Consecrated being signes to remember and seales by Faith to apply Christs death the one is called his body the other his blood And thus Christs institution is as cleare against Transubstantiation as it is against communion in one kind Thirdly Transubstantiation is against the Article of our Faith of Christs incarnation of the Virgin and of his sitting at Gods right hand whom the heavens must receive till his coming againe And so against our Faith of his coming againe as before seeing Transubstantiation makes him Corporally present every day And as for communion in one kind though it be commonly so called yet both improperly and untruly For it is not communion so much as in one kind Transubstantiation being admitted as Papists beleeve it for they destroy the very substance of the Element of bread by their Transubstantiation and how then is it a communion in one kind They have left nothing of the bread but the bare Accidents And Accidents we know do not constituere speciem do not constitute any species or kind of things Nay according to the Rule of Philosophy the Papists have by taking away the substance of bread not left so much as the Accidents of Bread but in a meeer Phantasme or Apparition For Philosophy and Logicke teacheth that Accidentis Esse est messe The Beeing of an Accident iâ— its immediate In-beeing in its proper subject Now the substance of bread is the proper subject of the Accidents of bread which are no longer the Accidents of Bread then they inhere in the bread so as the Bread being destroyed the Accidents are destroyed And if as they say the substance of Bread is vanished in Transubstantiation then certainly the Accidents And lesse proper is it that accidents proper to bread should have their inherence in humane flesh as they say Christs flesh is under the accidents of bread as if it were coloured over with the accidents of bread which yet cannot subsist but in some body yea and in their naturall and proper body which is bread Againe wheras you say Transubstantiation was never heard of till the Councel of Lateran 't is true that â—s was never decreed to be beleeved and publiâ—kly received as a Doctrine of the Church of Rome till in the Councel of Lateran under Innocent 3 as before is touched But it was hatched before and was privately crope into the bosome of many mens beliefe and there fostered as a tender Chicke before it came to get spurres and so to be made a Cocke of the Game in that Councel So also Communion under one Kind as you call it secundum Apparentiam grew into use in sundry places through â—egligence of the Priest or otherwise before it came to be Decreed in the Councel of Constance to be of necessity universally received L. p. 277. For Adoration of Images the modern Church of Rome is too likâ— to Paganisme in the Practise of it P. The Moderne say you Nay the Church of Rome