them And for conclusiō they haue no other foundation of their saying then their owne coniectures and imaginations and the false interpretations which they giue to the writings of the Fathers To the faith wherof they would gladly constraine subiect the Church to the end that hauing laid that foundation they might afterwards build therevpon all the absurdities and errors they shall delight in touching the same And where they presuppose when Christ entered the shut doores walked vpon the waters and went out of the Sepulchre that such myracles were done rather in the person then in the other things Iustine writeth the contrarie saying that without any change happened either in his body or in that of S. Peter he made by his diuine power the Sea against nature to serue him to walke As also S. Hillary to the same purpose saith That by his power hee made all things passeable Wherevnto likewise agreeth S. Iohn Chrisostome attributing all that to diuine power and freely confessing that hee knew not the maner and the fashion thereof By meanes whereof the Ministers are much abashed that the Doctors are so presumptuous to determine a thing which by the scripture and Fathers hath bene left vndecided and wherein as S. Hillary saith wisely sence and words do faile the truth of the deed exceedeth the capacitie of humane reason How dare then the Doctors so boldly say that the body of Iesus Christ passed through the doores that there was penitration of dimensions that two bodies were in one selfe-same place Seeing that of all that neither in the scripture nor in the auncient Fathers there is not one onely sillable and that as is said the Fathers do confesse that their vnderstanding and sence were too feeble to comprehend or declare the reason of such a my sterie As touching the birth of Iesus Christ the Ministers repose themselues vpon the scripture which saith clearly that the Virgin was with childe that she brought forth that shee gaue sucke and that Apertaest vulua the wombe is opened in the child-birth They adde that the same doth nought derogate nor preiudice her virginitie and purenesse which consisteth in this point onely that shee knew not not was knowne of any man Moreouer they say that in beleeuing the same they follow the scripture and consequently they cannot erre nor bee heretikes nor they likewise which subiect and subdue their sence to the word of God as in this haue done the Fathers which are by them alledged In the following article proposed by the Doctors touching the manner of the resurrection of Iesus Christ there is nothing but coniectures slaunders repetitions troublesome and superfluous which the Ministers by their former answeres haue largely satisfied All that which afterwards followeth in the writings of the Doctors are but iniuries and scoffes in stead of reasons and arguments which is the last recourse of contentious spirits who seeing themselues destitute of reason and vnable to giue place to the truth defend themselues by clamours and slaunders Some reason should the Doctors haue for that which they say concerning the word Aphantos if there followed Autois but that which the Euangelist saith Ap'auton sheweth clearely that the interpretation of the said place and vnderstanding of S. Ambrose where vnto the Ministers agree is better then that of the Doctors As touching the opening of the heauens the Ministers answere that vsing the language of the scripture which saith clearely that in the baptisme of Iesus Christ the heauens were clouen asunder and then opned when S. Stephen was stoned they cannot faile And to apply to the ayre the signification of heauen is a humane imagination This also seemeth should diminish the Maiestie of God and of Iesus Christ who is lifted vp aboue all the heauens to establish so lowe as the ayre the Throne of his Maiestie And there is no likelyhood in that which the Doctors say touching the being of two bodies in one selfe-same place and that which the Ministers say of the sight of Stephen which extended euen to the heauens for as much as the one is a myracle of the power of God in nature and the other a wonder against nature and the will of God The Doctors in the article following do falsly impute to the Ministers that they affirmed it was a thing impossible for God to make a Camell to passe through the eye of a needle for they neuer touched this point in theyr former answeres but that part of the sentence onely where it is spoken of rich men Now to answere too and resolue their obiections the Ministers say that euen as God can saue a rich man by chaunging him and emptying his heart of so much vaine trust and presumption as is therein and whereof beeing grosse and filled hee is vncapeable to enter into the Kingdome of heauen so to him it is also easie to make a Camell passe through the eye of a needle hauing circumcised and pared off the grossenesse thereof and other things which might hinder the same to passe ****** First that the Supper which is celebrated in the reformed Church is the true institution and ordinance of the sonne of God Afterwards that the end for which it was instituted is to assure the faithfull of the true participation which they haue in the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified for their saluation and in his bloud shead for the remission of their sinnes and for the confirmation of the new couenant which God hath made with his people Thirdly they say that it is necessarie that the bread and wine abide in their proper substance and that after consecration otherwise they cannot be Sacraments of the body and bloud of Christ Lastly the Ministers say that the vnbeleeuers presenting themselues at the Supper by meanes of their vnbeliefe can there no other thing receiue then the outward signes of bread and wine and that to their iudgement and condemnation The Ministers on the other side propose vnto them touching the Masse that such as it is and now celebrated in the Romance Church it is nothing but a humane inuention and tradition Also that it is a corruption and prophanation as well of the holy Supper of our Lord Iesus Christ as of the true and lawfull vse thereof Also that it is an abuse of the Priesthood of Popish Priests and that there is no other Priesthood in the new Testament ordained to get and obtaine remission of sinnes nor also to make intercession and by prayers and merits to obtaine the fauour of God then the onely Priesthood of Iesus Christ They say moreouer that it is a blasphemie and sacriledge but of the sacrifice of the Romish Priests and that there is no other oblation then that which Iesus Christ once made with his body vpon the Crosse by which the wrath of God could be appeased his iustice satisfied sinners reconciled to God sinnes pardoned and the hand-writing of eternall death cancelled and abolished Also they say that the seperation of
against his Maiestie and that with the sorrow and displeasure he hath for the same he cast himselfe betweene the armes of his sonne stretched out vpon the Crosse to haue thereof a generall and full abolition And that euen so with such a faith and repentance hee be prepared to present himselfe worthily at the table of the Lord and to receiue the good things which are there administred The Sermon ended the Minister recyteth with an high and audible voyce and his face turned towards the people the words of the institution and ordinance of the Supper together with a briefe and short declaration of the same That done he denounceth to all those not fully instructed and Catechised that they depart and to all them which are excommunicated or attainted with some sinnes or scandalous crimes whereof they haue made no satisfaction to the Church that they abstaine therefrom and pollute not the table of the Lord. After that the Minister goeth to the table where hauing taken the bread and giuen thankes to God he breaketh it and giueth it to the people there assembled And also presently the Cup to all them that communicate which being ended he giueth thankes to God and dismisseth the people The Ministers following in all these things the example and rule which Iesus Christ hath giuen them cannot imagine wherevpon the Doctors haue grounded that their saying of the Supper calling it a prophane and polluted banquet And they cannot perceiue what they could or would reproue in all theyr action vnlesse peraduenture they will taxe them for not hauing Aulbes stoles fanets Crosses holy water banners Chisibles tunicles lights Incense belles singing in a straunge and vnknowne language Musicke and Organes holy napkins Aultars Clearkes to answere Et cum spiritu tuo nor words addressed to the bread and wine which haue no eares after the maner of Inchanters nor the Crosse signes nor any eleuation of the bread and wine to cause them to be adored nor other like aperies of mans inuentioÌ„ and drawne part from Iudaisme and part from Paganisme The obseruation of which things the Ministers would make great conscience of because they be but Idolatries and superstitions whereby the puritie integritie of Christian Religion is wholly wasted and corrupted Answeres to the questions proposed by the Doctors touching the Supper FOr answere to the first question the Ministers say that the Sacrament in perfection considered consisteth in three things One whereof is the Element which Ireneus calleth a thing earthy the other the thing signified called by the same author a thing heauenly And the third is the word by which the earthy thing is deputed to signifie the heauenly and assureth them of the exhibition thereof that with faith do present themselues to receiue it For answere to the second question the Ministers say that the ordinance of God contained in his word and declared by his Minister according to his commandement is this word word necessary with the Eâ—ment to constitute the Sacrament and not the onely lowe and secret pronunciation of certaine vnkowne words addressed to the elements nor any vertue which is hidden in the same For answere to the third question the Ministers say that by the word aforesaid the signes bee chaunged not as touching the nature or as touching the substance but as touching the vse onely and that only during the action whervnto they serue For answere to the fourth question the Ministers say that the bread and wine which before the action of the Supper were common are consecrated in the Supper that is to say deputed by the said word and ordinance of God declared by the Ministers to a holy and sacred vse which is to represent and exhibit the things by them signified The answere to the fourth question sufficeth for the fift For answere to the sixt question the Ministers say that the faithfull receiue not onely in the Supper the gifts and graces of Iesus Christ as his tighteousnesse life and the other fruites of his sacrifice but that they also receiue and possesse himselfe and are made one with him no lesse truly and straightly then the members are conioyned to the head And they say moreouer that this coniunction is the spring and meane of all the benefites which flowe from the grace of God by him into vs but they adde that this reception must bee wholly attributed to the free operation of the holy Ghost which maketh vs fit and capable to knowe our Lord Iesus Christ with all his vertues and properties and in knowing him to trust in him and in reposing our trust in him to possesse and wholly enioy him For answere to the seuenth question the Ministers say that they reiect and reproue the word Concomitance and more also the thing thereby signified for as much as that hath beene the cause for which the common people hath bene depriued and excluded from one of the essentiall parts of the Sacrament namely from the participation of the Cuppe And they say that it is an attempt against the diuine Maiestie to seperate what the sonne of God hath ioyned together and to deny to some of his members that which he hath willed and commaunded to be common to all Ioyned that the reason of the Sacrament requireth it which was instituted for our spirituall nourishment The which as doth the corporall consisteth in drinke meate To the ende then that there be some correspondency betweene them two it behoueth that as we are fed with the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified So be we also watered with his blood shead for the remission of sinnes To be short seeing that the Supper was chiefly instituted to shewe foorth the Lords death and that in his death his blood was seperated from his bodie Meete it is that the bread and wine be there administred to represent the one and the other and more clearly to propose vnto vs all the mistery of the death of Iesus Christ For answere to the eight question the Ministers do acknowledge no other cause nor meane of remission of sinnes then the grace of God the blood of Iesus Christ and faith whereby the effect of Gods grace and the fruit of the death of Iesus Christ are applied vnto vs. For answere to the ninth question the Ministers do say that the faithfull comming to the Supper do not come thither to receiue there a new Iesus Christ with whom they had not bene formerly conioyned nor a new righteousnes which had not bene communicated vnto them And they adde that if some one did present himselfe there without faith for want whereof he should not be vnited incorporated and engraffed into Iesus Christ to bee partaker of his righteousnes life and all other his gifts and blessings that the holy Supper in that case should be as vnprofitable to him as is meate vnptofitable to a dead man But if liuing by the meanes aforesayd namely the grace of God the blood of Iesus Christ and faith he present himselfe
consecrate vse not the blessing and pronuntiation of certaine words ouer the bread and wine withstanding that which Iesus Christ first did and then ordained to his Apostles and their successors so to doo they cannot take any consecration of the bread and wine and that in them any chaunge happeneth Whereof it followeth that they differ not from common bread and wine and that such a feast and banquet is but common And that it is blasphemy to attribute vnto it the name of Christs Supper Behold why partly the Doctors haue said that the Supper of the Ministers is a prophane and polluted banquet The Doctors admonish the Ministers to answere to purpose and plainely to the demaunds by them proposed which they haue not done which is the cause that the Doctors least they should trauell in vaine haue not yet willed to impugne their answere summoning them eftsoones to answere what is proposed to them without drawing backe from the Conference which they say they affect so greatly The first demaunde was generall for all the Sacraments to wit whether the Ministers did beleeue that two things were essentiall and necessary to the confection of the Sacrament namely the matter or element and the word The Ministers answere that the Sacrament in it perfection considered consisteth in three things c. They speake indeterminately so that one cannot iudge whether they vnderstand theyr saying of the Sacrament which they call the Supper onely or generally of all as they were demaunded Although because they alledge Ireneus one may coniecture that they meant but of the Sament of the Supper Moreouer it behoueth to note that which they adde in it perfection considered to haue alwaies a starting hole when speech shall be made of the essence of the Sacrament The Doctors require that the Ministers answere to the question proposed generally of all the Sacraments For there is lyke reason as touching the essence of the Sacraments in generall And that they openly declare what things be essentiall and necessary to a Sacrament to be made a Sacrament without speaking for the present of the perfection of a Sacrament containing the essence and spirituall fruites which be not of the essence of the Sacracrament To the second demaund the Ministers answere no more pertinently then to the first And namely where the Doctors haue demaunded whether it behooued to vse certaine words for the confection of a Sacrament and what word was necessary for the Sacrament of the Supper The Ministers haue sayd that the lowe and secret speaking of certaine words addressed to the elements was not the word necessary to the confection of a Sacrament But they demaunded not whether it behooued to pronounce that word with a lowe or high voyce but the Interrogatory was whether there be any words necessary to make the Sacrament that one ought to pronounce ouer the matter or in administring the matter and that they might be such words for the Supper And it is not sufficient to say that the word by which the ordinance of Iesus Christ is declared is the word of the Sacrament but it behoueth to answere in what words consisteth that word and when it must be pronounced As touching the sixt and principall demaund the Ministers answere not clearly and to purpose but make a captious answere by which one may conceiue what is their opinion of the presence participatioÌ„ of the body of Iesus Christ in the Supper And so temper they their saying that there is no Zuinglian nor Almanists which confesseth not thereof as much or more then they To wit that they are conioyned to our Lord Iesus Christ that they possesse him in the power of their faith and by the operation of his holy spirite to be made flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones c. But this is farre off from the demaund to wit whether the faithfull in the Supper receiue into theyr soules besides all the graces spirituall among which is the communication with our Lord Iesus Christ his true bodie and blood really truly and substantially And whether the Ministers in the Supper make not distinction of the substance contained and perceiued in the Sacrament with the fruites thereof proceeding And for more breuitie the Doctors demaund whether the Ministers do receiue and approoue that which Caluin hath written of the Supper and of that they receiue thereof in his Catechisme Institution and other bookes As touching the seauenth demaund the Ministers haue not vnderstood what hath beene proposed to them touching the Concomitance For they haue taken it as if one demaunded whether it were lawfull to receiue the Sacrament vnder one onely kinde or no. Whiche was not as then put in question But suche a difficultie was proposed to them namely whether in theyr Supper when one hath receiued the bread before hee receiue the wine he do participate of the true body of Iesus Christ without hee be partaker of his bloud vntill hee haue taken the wine or hauing eaten the bread whether he hath receiued the body and bloud before he take the Cup To which demaunds to auoyd vaine blotting of paper the Doctors admonish the Ministers to answere without wandering and to render open confession of their faith And that the Doctors may knowe what doctrine they ought to impugne or approue As touching the articles of the Masse the Doctors reserue them to their proper place which is of the sacrifice of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ After it shal be knowne and proued that they be present in the Supper and holy Sacrament The fourth of August the yeare aboue said The Ministers answere to the writing of the Doctors sent vnto them by my Lord the Duke de Niuernois the morning being 7. of August 1566. THe Ministers leauing aside whatsoeuer is superfluous and from the purpose in the writing of the Doctors as be theyr repetitions and reheaâ—salls dissembling also their iniuries and accustomed scoffings by which they much more proue the hate they beare to the truth and the Ministers then the questions by them propounded will onely stay on the points which seeme to require some answere The Ministers first say that they taxed not the Doctors to haue restrained the Church in a certaine place but to a certaine company and to the traditions giuen followed and by the same approued And they magnifie God that the Doctors doo now acknowledge the Catholique Church to stretch through the world and that it is not inclosed in the boundes and limits of the authoritie and traditions of the Romane Church which the Ministers confesse to haue beene then much esteemed of the auncient Fathers when errours abuses and vices did not as yet there abounde as since they doo But now that all things almost are there corrupted as well in manners as in doctrine and that nothing is there more odious then the word the light the trueth and the power of God The Ministers do say that as the state of the same Church hath
resolution of all the Conference determine by Gods grace to couch briefly by writing and in the clearest manner they can all what God hath taught them concerning the same and what they haue learned thereof by his word as well to satisfie the debt and bond which they haue to God and his honour to obey my Lord of Neuers and Madame de Buillon as lastly for the contentment and edification of the whole Church The Conclusion and resolution of the points as well of the Supper as of the Masse containing a declaration of that which the Ministers beleeue concerning the same and teache thereof in their Church by the word of God THe end and chiefe felicitie of men is to be conioyned with God and to abide in him For as much as it is the only meane by which all their desires can be contented and satisfied and by the which also their mindes and hearts can be plainly freed and deliuered from the hard and cruel bondage of sinne and of all the passions greedie desires feares distrusts which do assaile them Which was the cause why S. Paul placeth perfect beatitude and entire repose of the blessed in this that God is all in all in them But for as much as men be naturally corrupt and wicked and contrariwise God in all perfection is pure and holy the difficultie is to knowe and choose the meane by which they may approach vnto him Seeing that there is no societie betweene light and darknesse nor any communion betweene righteousnesse and vnrighteousnesse In them cannot this meane bee found by reason that of themselues they are wholly vnable and vncaple to relieue themselues from the miserie and curse into which they be cast headlong So that beeing blinde of vnderstanding they cannot know their owne good nor seeke it being rebels and heart-hardened and therefore of necessitie must they goe out of themselues and seeke the aboue said meane in Iesus Christ who was giuen them of the Father to bee their righteousnesse wisedome sanctification redemption way life and truth Then resteth it now to knowe how they may bee vnited and conioyned with him The Apostle dooth teach vs that the same is done by faith by which Iesus Christ dwelleth in our hearts and abideth in vs so that hee and wee are made one and hee and his Father are one Now there are two principall causes of this faith the one outward and the other inward The inward is the holy Ghost who is called the spirit of faith for as much as he is the Author thereof and createth and bringeth it forth in the harts of men mollifying and disposing them to receiue with all obedience the word and promise of God which is preached vnto them by the faithfull stewards and Ministers of the same Which word is the outward cause of faith And as the same faith groweth and riseth by degrees euen so doth the vnion which we haue with Iesus Christ and by his meanes with God vntill as saith S. Paul wee all meete together in the vnitie of faith and knowledge of the sonne of God vnto a perfect man and vnto the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ The increase of faith is wrought by the working and power of the holy spirite who was the first beginning and author thereof and afterwards by the continuance of the word purely preached and denounced and finally by the lawfull vse of the Sacraments ordained as seales for the certaintie and confirmation of faith and assurance wee haue of the foresaid coniunction with God through Iesus Christ and of the participation of all the good things grauntes gifts graces and blessings which by his fauour are purchased and gotten for vs. As of the remission of sinne of our regeneration of the mortification of the flesh and the lusts thereof To signifie which things and more amply assure vs of the exhibition and enioying of the same Baptisme was ordained of God to the end that in the water which is powred vpon our bodies and in the promise of God which is therevnto added we may behold as it were with our eies the inuisible grace which God vouchsafeth vs to wash and cleanse vs from our spirituall filthinesse and to fanctifie vs and make vs new creatures As also to further assure vs alwayes of life eternall and make vs growe in the hope wee haue thereof by the participation of the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified for our redemption and of his bloud shead for remission of our sinnes the bread and the wine are distributed vnto vs in the Supper by the ordinance of Iesus Christ But as the Ministers acknowledge that there is a vnion and sacramentall coniunction betweene the outward signe and thing thereby signified so say they on the other side that betweene them two there is such a distinction that the one ought neuer to be confounded with the other nor the spirituall thing in such sort fastened to the corporall which representeth the same that the one without the other cannot be receiued or that the two by necessitie bee alwayes inseperably conioyned together Whereof it followeth that they erre which will haue the bread in the Supper to bee chaunged into the substance of the bodie of Christ Iesus And they likewise which will haue him to be conioyned and corporally vnited therevnto So that whosoeuer receiueth and taketh the signes bee hee faithfull or vnfaithfull taketh and receiueth forthwith the thing by them signified Which error with the most part of others happening in this matter proceedeth of not well comprehending nor conceiuing what it is to eate the body and drinke the bloud of Iesus Christ Which thing ought not to bee vnderstood in sort as corporall meates are taken and eaten but after a spirituall manner onely as is declared in the sixt of Saint Iohn which in this consisteth that Iesus Christ dwelleth in vs and we in him and is done by the faith we haue in him as teacheth S. Augustine in the 25. tract vpon S. Iohn saying Why preparest thou the belly and the tooth beleeue and thou hast eaten And in the third booke and 16. Chapter de Doctrina Christiana where he saith as followeth When Iesus Christ saith except yee eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud ye haue no life in you It seemeth that hee commaundeth to commit some great offence It is therefore a figure wherby we ought to vnderstand no other thing but that it behoueth to communicate with the passion of the Lord and to retaine in our memorie that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. The eating then of the flesh and body of Iesus Christ is no other thing then a straight coniunction and vnion wee haue with him which is made by the faith wee adde to his promises Euen as by the mutuall promises made and receiued betweene man and woman the marriage is concluded and setled betweene them And although being so
Supper and as the seale by which the said couenant is sealed and the faith thereof confirmed By such and like manner this sentence This is my body which is as much to say as this is the new Testament in my body which is giuen for you must bevnderstood and expounded For as by the effusion of his bloud the new Testament was confirmed so was it also by the death of his body And a better Interpreter of the words of Iesus Christ then Iesus Christ himselfe must not bee sought for For certaine it is that what he hath said of the Cup is as it were a glasse cleare and familiar exposition of that he had more briefly and obscurely said of the bread This also is proued by that which S. Paul saith The bread which we breake is it not the Communion of the body of Christ which is a manner of figuratiue speech For as much as to speake and vnderstand properly the bread which is a corporeall and materiall thing is not the Communion which we haue in the body of Iesus Christ which is a spirituall and inuisible thing And neuerthelesse it is so called because it is the signe thereof to represent it vnto vs and to assure vs of the same As commonly we cal the signed and sealed Letter which containeth the declaration of the last will of a man his Testament although it be not his Testament but is properly the declaration which he hath verbally made of his said will But it is so called because it is the instrument and testimonie thereof Now as the scripture and auncient Fathers as well to recommend and aduance the dignitie of the signes and to hinder therby the contempt of them as for the agreement and likenesse which is betweene the signes the thing signified haue sometimes attributed the name of the same things signified to the signes which represent them and speaking of signes haue vsed figuratiue speeches At some other times also haue they spoken of them properly to take away all occasion of abuse thereof and to hinder that in taking the signes without any distinction for the things by them signified men should attribute to them the effects which appertaine not but to the things onely which they signifie Of these two diuers reasons maners of speaking examples there are as well in the scriptures as in the auncient Fathers Of the first we haue an example in Circumcision when it is called by figure a Couenant Gen. 17. 13. And of the secōd is there likewise an example in the 11. verse of the same Chapter where Circumcision is properly called a signe of the Couenant Another example there is of the first maner of speaking which is figuratiue in Exodus 12. 11. where the Lambe is called the Passeo-uer of the Lord. And of th◠second maner of speaking which is proper the example i◠in the same Chapter 3. verse where the blood of the lambe is named a signe In like manner and sort when in the scripture mention is made of the Supper sometimes is it there spoken of bread by figure As when it is called the bodie of Iesus Christ or the Communion of the bodie as before hath bene sayd and sometimes is it also taken properly as when it sayd Whosoeuer shall eate of this bread Also Let euery man then prooue himselfe and so eate of this bread The like diuersitie in two manners of speaking is oftentimes founde among the auncient Fathers in the matter of the Supper For sometimes they speake of bread by figure calling it the bodie of Iesus Christ As Saint Ciprian when hee saith that the bodie of the Lorde is taken with filthie hands and his blood drunke with a prophane and polluted mouth And when hee saith elsewhere that we sucke his blood and fasten our tongues in the woundes of our Redeemer And S. Ierome when he saith that Euxuperius Bishop of Tholoze bare the bodie of our Lord in a little Oziar Pannyer and his blood in a Glasse Saint Chrisostome also when he writeth that Iesus Christ doth not only suffer himselfe to be seene but also to be touched and eaten and that the toothe be fastened in his fleshe and touched with the tongue And Saint Augustine With what care take we heede when the body of Iesus Christ is administred vnto vs that nothing thereof fall from our hands to the earth All which with theyr semblable Sentences are figuratiue and there is no doubt but to well and fitly interpret them they that read them ought to bee taught that in the same the name of the thing signified is applyed to the signes which doo signifie the same which thing may easily bee gathered out of other sentences and passages of the said Auncients where speaking properly of the bread and wine distributed in the Supper they call them signes and figures As Tertullian Iesus Christ saith hee tooke bread gaue it to his Disciples and made his body when hee saith This is my body that is to say a figure of my body And Ciprian by the wine is shewed the bloud of Christ Also in the Sermon which hee made of the Supper of the Lord As often as we do this wee whet not the teeth to byte but wee breake and distribute the holy bread in true faith By the which wee distinguish the diuine and humane matter Also in the Sermon hee made de Chrismate The Lord hath giuen with his owne hands bread and wine vpon the table on which hee made his last meale with his Disciples but vpon the Crosse hee gaue vnto the souldiers his body to be wounded to the ende hee might so much the more deepely imprint the truth in his Disciples and that they should expound to the people how the bread and wine were his body and bloud and how the Sacrament agreeeth with the thing for the which it was instituted And also how a Sacrament is made of two things and therefore is named with two names and one selfe-same name is giuen to that which signifieth and to that which is signified And Saint Basile Wee propose the figures and patternes of the sacred body and bloud of Iesus Christ And Saint Augustine The Lord feared not to say This is my body when hee gaue the signe of his body Also the Lord receiued Iudas to his Supper wherein hee commended and gaue to his Disciples the figure of his bodie And Saint Ierome After hee had eaten the Pascall Lambe with his Disciples he tooke bread which strengtheneth the heart of man and passed to the true Sacrament of the Passeouer To the ende that as Melchisedecke had done before in his figure he should also represent there his true body S. Ambrose This Sacrament is a figure of the true body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ Chrisostome He hath prepared this table to the ende he might shewe vs daily the bread and wine in mysterie and similitude of the bodie and bloud of
Christ And sometimes it happeneth that one Doctor in this matter expoundeth an other As one may perceiue it in the conference of two passages the one of S. Augustine alreadie alledged and the other of Tertullian in the booke De Corona militis where hee saith Wee very hardly suffer any thing of our bread and wine to fall vpon the ground And in stead of that which S. Augustine saith to the same purpose he saith as hath before bene recyted we carefully regard that nothing of the body of our Lord fall vpon the ground Now as in diuers passages the auncient Fathers as hath bin declared haue vsed the two foresaid maners speaking of the Supper now by figure now simply and properly so it is sometimes found that in one selfe-same place these two manners of speaking haue beene vsurped in their writings As in a Canon of the Councell of Niece where it is said It was thus concluded of the table of the Lord and of the mysterie which is therevpon that is to say of the worthy body and bloud of Iesus Christ. At the table of the Lord we ought not to abide tyed here below to the bread and wine which bee there proposed but to lift vp our hearts on high by faith and meditate that on this holy table is proposed vnto vs the Lambe of God which taketh vpon him the sinnes of the world which is sacrificed of the Priests and not slaine And in communicating truly with his precious body and bloud we ought to beleeue that these things be signes of our resurrection Whence we may see how the Fathers in one selfe-same place haue spoken properly calling bread and wine the signes and Elements which be presented in the Supper and also by figure naming the same signes the Lambe of God which taketh vppon him the sinnes of the world By that which is said touching the said two manners of speaking they which read the scripture and auncient Authors ought to be admonished carefully to regard that for default of well distinguishing the places where the said speeches are vsurped they do not confound them taking that which ought to be vnderstood by figure as if it were spoken properly and that which is said properly as if it were vnderstood by figure And it behoueth them alwayes to remember in the reading as well of the scripture as of the auncient Fathers what S. Augustine hath written in his booke De doctrina Christiana We must beware saith hee that we take not a figuratiue speech according to the letter For herevnto must that bee referred which the Apostle saieth The letter killeth and the spirit giueth life So that to vnderstand that which is spoken by figure as if it were spoken properly is fleshly wisedome And in the end of the Chapter he hath one memorable sentence namely that it is a miserable bondage of the soule to take the signes for the things signified and not to be able to lift vp the eye of the spirit aboue the corporall creature to draw eternall life To come to the third part of the Supper which is the spirituall and heauenly thing represented proposed there vnto vs as well in the Elements as in the whole action the Ministers say that it is Iesus Christ crucified and offered on the Crosse to God his Father for the whole and perfect expiation and satisfaction of all the sinnes of the world And that to make vs enioy the fruite of this sacrifice and to apply vnto our selues the righteousnesse forgiuenesse of sinnes life the grace of God and all other fauours and blessings which by the same sacrifice haue bene purchased and obtained for vs the word and Sacraments haue bene left and ordained for vs chiefly that of the Supper wherein as in a picture we behold Iesus Christ suffering for vs the paines and sorrowes of death paying our debts cancelling and adnulling the hand-writing which was contrarie to vs bearing vpon him our malediction to free vs from the same and by his obedience reconciling vs to God his Father and appeasing his wrath towards vs. All which things are represented and assured vnto vs in the Supper when with a true faith we present our selues there to celebrate the same The Supper then was not ordained to be a propitiatorie sacrifice as the Doctors do teach and as they falsly beleeue in the Romane Church but to be a Sacrament to the ende to renue and alwayes conserue the memorie which wee ought constantly to retaine of the death and sacrifice of Iesus Christe Now betweene a sacrifice and a Sacrament there is great difference For as much as in a sacrifice we present our oblations vnto God and in a Sacrament God contrariwise offereth and communicateth vnto vs his graces and gifts Also in a sacrifice for sinne there is the death and effusion of the bloud of the Host and sacrifice and not in a Sacrament but the onely perception and applycation of the fruite and effects of the sacrifice In the Supper then Iesus Christe is not againe sacrificed but the fruites of his obedience and merite of his sacrifice are there distributed and receiued by the faithfull Of the reasons aforesaid do the Ministers conclude that it is blasphemy and sacriledge to call the bread of the Masse of a Romish Priest a wholsome host And if for proofe therof they wold alledge the Fathers in whose writings is found that they call sometimes the Supper an oblation and sacrifice The Ministers answere that first it nought appertaineth to the Masse of the Priests between which the Supper there is no agreement And afterwards that what the Fathers haue said they neuer vnderstood it of the propitiatory sacrifice by which remission of sinnes is gotten and obtained And they haue neuer beleeued nor thought that there was any other sacrifice to appease the wrath of God and obtaine reconciliation and agreement betweene him and men then the onely sacrifice of Iesus Christ made by him alone one onely time vpon the Crosse Three things then in briefe doo the Ministers say first that there neither is nor can be other sacrificer of the new Testament then Christ Iesus The reasons are because there is none but he of whom it hath bene said Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedeck Also there is none but he to whom may agree and be fitly applyed the conditions and essentiall qualities of a sacrificer and the sacrifice Which are that the Priest be holy innocent without spot seperated from sinners and made higher then the heauens which needed not to offer daily sacrifices first for his owne sinnes and then for the sinnes of the people Also there is none but he which is nor could bee Mediator betweene God and men which could satisfie the diuine iustice which is capable to beare and sustaine the wrath of God which could tame and conquer death which by his death and proper bloud could worke the confirmation of the new Testament and which to
shuld make a long and vnprofitable aboad at Paris not hauing wherewithall to imploy theyr time Considering they were not there but by accident to wit that de Spina was come thither to passe further and make a voyage into Aniou and the other who was Minister of the Church of Orleance was lately come forth of prison where he had beene brought in the Moneth of Iune next precedent vpon a false accusation suborned against him by the enemies of Gods Church which charged him to be author of a pernicious and wicked booke written against the obedience due to Kings and Princes Therefore was it very hurtfull for him to soâ—ournâ— so long a time in a Citie whither hee came against his lyking For these causes they purposed to returne towards my Lord of Neuers to shew vnto him the things aforesaid and tell him that De Sainctes who might haue stayed and ioyned some other with him in the stead of Vigor was departed thence without making it knowne when his returne would be that it was not reason they should stay there being incertaine of that which they had to doo and considering that their Churches had need of them to execute therin their charges and that they desired the same Notwithstanding in the end they found it better to suffer an inconuenience and to abide there vntill my Lord of Neuers departed from Paris as in the end of the Moneth of August he should goe to his owne land called Coâ—lomiers For seeing the Doctors were then absent the Lord of Neuers being departed the Ministers could doo nothing not hauing whom to write vnto nor with whom to conferre These remonstances being liked by the said Lord hee gaue them leaue to depart by writing signed Lodouico de Gonzague and below Varin Secretarie Dated 26. of August wherein were declared the occasions here before touched and remoÌ„strance of the Ministers with promise made by the said Lord to cause the answeres which the Doctors would make to be brought vnto them And that by the meane of Monsieur de Buci S. George who was charged with this businesse Also the Ministers promised to be readie were it to returne to Paris or else to answere from the place where they should be as often as the Doctors should write These things thus done and passed the Ministers returned presently after supposing to haue some speedie newes from the Doctors But they haue attended and yet do attend without that there hath bene any appearance thereof And they vnderstood nothing of that matter sauing that many seuerall writings were afterwardes cryed and solde through the Citie of Paris In the tytles whereof some found meane to enterlace the word Conference to make shewe vnto the world that it was something touching the former disputations And such a subtiltie indeed was not without great profit to the Printers So great desire had men to know the truth of the thing For contentation of whom we haue thought meet to bring to light what was done concerning the same reseruing to another time to publish what the Doctors when they shall do it shall write against it and what the Ministers also will there vnto answere if they can recouer the same In the meane time shall each one be admonished to make profit of that which is here contained And to pray the Father of lights to shead more more the brightnesse of his spirit vpon his Church to the true vnderstanding of his holy word for the restauration and aduancement of the spirituall kingdome of Iesus Christ his sonne our Lord. So be it the 8. of Nouember 1566. FINIS A briefe Table of the titles of the Acts of the Disputation THe Preface containing the occasions of the Dispute following The first day of the Disputation which was Tuesday the 9. of Iuly 1566. touching the assurance one ought to haue of the word of God and of the meane to knowe what is the word of God and to discerne betweene the bookes of the Bible to call the one Canonicall and the other Apocripha The second day being Wednesday the 10. of Iuly touching the same matter with the resolution of the Doctors concluding that it is by the authoritie of the Church that the holy scripture is knowne to be the word of God And the resolution of the Ministers to the contrary That it is the spirite of God which sealeth and imprinteth the assurance thereof in the harts of the elect The third day being Thursday the 11. of Iuly containing the demaunds and answeres vpon the Creede of the Apostles and why it is so called The fourth day being Friday the 12. of Iuly comprehending the resolution of the Doctors concluding that it is by the tradition of the Church that one is assured of the Creed of the Apostles And that of the Ministers tending to this that it is knowne by the conformitie which it hath with the holy scriptures The fift day being Mâ—nday the 15. of Iuly where is the beginning of the disputation of Gods Omnipotencie vnder the couert whereof the Doctors do ground foure points contained in the 63. Page On this Omnipotencie and the points aboue said the disputes following as well by word as by writing were continued The sixt day of the Dispute Tuesday the 16. of Iuly The Ministers answere to the obiections of the Doctors 〈◊〉 Tuesday the 16. of Iuly The reply or obiection of the Doctors against the answere of the Ministers touching the article of Gods omnipotencie on Satterday the 20. of Iuly The answere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctors sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 22. of Iuly about fiue of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. The reply of the Doctors to the writing of the Ministers sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 25. day of Iuly about 8 of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. The Resolution of the Doctors touching the article of the Almightinesse of God in respect of the foure questions proposed by them to the Ministers Which serue to the vnderstanding of the reall presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the holy Sacrament The articles proposed by the Doctors for the next and other conferences following according to the order of the said articles The answere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctors sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 28. of Iuly about seuen of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. A briefe resolution of all the answeres and discourses which the Ministers haue made vpon the matter of Gods omnipotencie in the conference which they haue had with the Doctors The answeres to the preface of the Doctors questions The answeres to the questions proposed by the Doctors touching the Supper A briefe reply of the Doctors against the last answere of the Ministers sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Niuernois the first of August at 7. of the clocke in the euening Anno.
Chrysostome vpon S. Iohn proueth by such ane ntrie that Iesus Christ was so borne of the Virgin that she remained a Virgin in her child-birth and after without any manner of fraction And concludeth that the one and the other deed proceedeth from the omnipotencie of God The said Chrysostome in his second Homily vpon the Apostles Creed saith these words How is it that Iesus Christ entred the closed doores c. because such things are aboue our reach and we cannot render a reason of that myracle we hold it by faith S. Ierome in his first booke against Iouinian and in the Epistle to Pamachiuns against the errors of Iohn of Ierusalem who said that Iesus after his resurrection had not a true body because it was impossible that a true body should passe through the doores and that it should be in one self-same place with an other body answereth It hindereth not but that the nature of the body remaineth for as much as this act proceedeth from the omnipotencie of God And thus saith Tell me thou subtill disputer which is greater to hang the huge greatnesse of the earth vpon nothing and to ballance it aboue the bricklenesse of the waters or for God to passe through a shut doore a creature to obey his Creator To that which is the greater thou easily agreest and slaunderest that which is lesser S. Augustine in his 13. Epistle for an example of the omnipotencie of God reciteth also this deed to shewe that our Lord was borne of the Virgin without any rupture of her body and to declare that the omnipotencie of God is greater then we can comprehend Againct the Valentinians and others which denied the true substance of the body of Iesus Christ for that contrary to the nature of a body he so passed S. Augustine in his booke called De agone Christiano alledgeth the same deed Amphilochius and Theodoret in the 2. Dialogue disputing of this deed against Eutiches who said also that after the resurrection the humanitie of Iesus Christ was changed into his diuinitie because contrary to the nature of a body he so passed through the shut doores do answere as the others That such an effect importeth not contradiction to the nature of a body for as much as it proceeded of the omnipotencie of God and not of the nature of the body Cirell in his 12. booke vpon S. Iohn reprehendeth those also which will measure the myracles and works of God according to their owne iudgement and the proprietie of creatures and very sharply speaketh against them S. Augustine in his first booke against Iulian cap. 2. recyteth That Iouinian was an heretike because he said that there was fraction in the virgin in her childbirth And so said he for feare of falling into the heresie of the Manachees who thought that Iesus Christ had not a true body because he was borne without fraction of his mother To auoyd then this heresie hee rather denied that the â—rgin remained a Virgin The like heresie is imputed to Origen and some also alledge that the Fathers as Tertullian had such an opinion By these testimonies do the Doctors conclude that two bodies to pierce themselues and be in one self-same place by diuine power doth not imply any contradiction Which places were they wel considered they would not receiue a new interpretation against the very expresse word of God seeing the text without contradiction doth beare that Iesus Christ came to his Disciples the doores being shut How Caluin in his Institution hath deptaued the sence of that place of S. Iohn with other like may plainly appeare where he saith thus That which they eftsoones alledge that Iesus Christ came out of the Sepulchre without opening the same and that hee entred in to his Disciples the doores of the chamber beeing shut is of no value further to maintaine their error For as the water serued Iesus Christ for a firme pauement to walke vpon the lake so also ought it not seeme straunge if the hardnesse of the stone were softned to giue him passage And Beza in his second Dialogue against Heshusius saith that the stone was vanished to the end that our Lord might passe in his resurrection and God did afterwards reforme it It followeth in the text of Caluin As also to enter into a chamber the doores shut is not to say that hee pierced the wood but onely that he made an opening by his diuine power so that by a myraculous fashion he was found in the middest of his Disciples although the doores were were shut Moreouer he saith That which they bring of S. Luke to wit that hee vanished suddenly from his Disciples which went to Emaus serueth nought for them and maketh for our aduantage For he was not made inuisible by taking away the sight of his body but he onely vanished As also witnesseth the same Euangelist In walking he was not transfigured nor disguised to be made inuisible but their eyes were holden Such ridiculous and friuolous expositions are brought by Caluin and his like to auoyd confessing that God can make one body to be in diuers places And neuerthelesse the proper text of the scripture doth witnesse that two bodies may be by the power of God in one selfesame place As also it witnesseth that a body hauing colour and before visible by the power of God was made inuisible without any let to their sight that could see As S. Luke doth confirme saying Aphantos Egeneto Ap'auton Inuisibilis factus est ab ipsis Although there was no defect on the behalfe of the Disciples For it is said before that their eyes were opened that they might know him and herevpon agreeth all antiquitie An other act do the Doctors adde for confirmation of the penitration of dimensions Which is that our Lord ascended into the heauens which he neither diuided nor claue asunder Therefore of necessitie did hee pierce them as the scripture it selfe in proper termes importeth The Doctors shewe also to the said Ministers that they cannot produce one only renowned Father hauing expounded these places from whom they might learne their so diuers interpretations And that which they bring of the Acts of the Apostles where mention is made that S. Peter came forth of prison nought serueth to colour their exposition In which text there is nothing spoken of the opening of the prison doores And it is not said as in S. Iohn that the doores of the prison being shut S. Peter came forth but that the Angell came thither when the keepers before the doore kept the prison Where if they say that the doores were opened to S. Peter that agreeth not with the saying of Saint Iohn that the doores were shut when as our Lord entered The like reason brought by the Ministers out of the fift of the Acts of the Apostles and for the same cause is as vnprofitable for this purpose as the former And to shewe clearely and euidently that God contrary to the
there is diuersitie betweene the creatures and Creator and that the Creator by nature is euery where and naturally the creatures be not in diuers places the Doctors reuerently imbrace the authoritie of the holy Fathers But to produce the said places for coÌ„firmation of a thing so well knowne and not doubted of their trauell was now needlesse But the Doctors yet attend one sole place of the scripture or one sole testimony of the auncient Fathers which saith That God cannot make one body to be in diuers places The Doctors pray the Ministers that with like reuerence they receiue the auncient Fathers chiefly touching the interpretation of holy scriptures whose exposition as are the places aboue cyted shal be agreed vpon betweene them and the Ministers Vpon request made to the Lord Neuers on the behalfe of the Ministers that hee would please to assigne a day for answere particularly to all and euery article and slaunders here aboue proposed by the Doctors in their obiection The said Lord ordained that the Ministers should carry with them that euening one of the Copies of the Doctors obiections against them to be ready the next morrow by noone to answer thervnto which the Doctors agreed vnto And made likewise request to the said Lord of Neuers to haue leaue if it so seemed them good to reply to the answers that the Ministers should make And therwith to deliuer their resolution touching this article of the omnipotency of God To th' end to proceed and examine the reall truth of the bodie of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Aultar Whervnto the Ministers added that they also for their parts would deliuer a briefe resolution of all that which shall be deduced by them The company assembled on the morrow beeing Wednesday the 17. of Iuly My Lord of Neuers considering that the Doctors the day before had imployed all the time without any left for the Ministers to make present answere to them supposed no lesse time would be needfull for the Ministers to answerefully which had bene a thing tedious and irksome For this cause and others by him declared he ordained they should thenceforth speake by writing And that the Ministers should carry with them the Copie which was giuen them to make answere therevnto and to send it vnto him signed by them and two Notaries Of which he would cause a Copie to be written by his Secretary to giue it to the Doctors reseruing the Originall to himselfe And in like sort would he keepe for the Ministers the Copie of that which the Doctors should send him Wherevnto both parts submitting themselues they disputed afterwards by writing as followeth The Answere of the Ministers to the Obiections of the Doctors giuen on Tuesday the 16. of Iuly 1566. THe Ministers deny that the consequence proposed by the Doctors to wit God cannot make one body to be in two places at one selfe-same instant Therfore â—e is not omnipotent is necessary For as much as the omnipotency of God ought not to be measured but by the things only which be agreeable to his will and are not derogate either to his nature or to his wisdome or to his truth or to the order he established in the world Vnto which that directly repugneth which the Doctors set forth that one selfe same body at one selfe-same instant may be in diuers places For it would follow that a body should be a body without being limitted And by consequence that it should be and not be altogither For the measures as to be long large thicke and to be bounded limitted with certaine bounds are so essentiall to a body that without that it is no more a body And so farre of is it that the Ministers in so saying do diminish the omnipotency of God that contrariwise they establish the same and will not attribute to him any mutabilitie and chaunge in his counsaile nor any contradiction in his will for feare to make him lye which by the scripture is impossible to him And where the Doctors alledge froÌ„ the Fathers that they haue not denied the omnipotency of God The Ministers haue heretofore shewed that they haue and in what case it may happen Tertullian in his booke written against Praxeas speaking of this matter saith as followeth Surely nothing is hard vnto God But if without iudgemeÌ„t we wil vse this sentence and interpret it according to our foolish fantasie we may faine all things to be of God and say that he hath done them because he can do them Now must it not be beleeued because he can do all things that therfore he hath done what he hath not done but enquired whether he hath done it And finally concludeth that the power of God is his wil and his inhabilitie likewise his vnwillingnesse The Doctors then to shew that he can do it should declare that God hath willed to make a body which at one selfe-same instant hath bin in diuers places And a maruellous thing it is that they impute to the Ministers that they derogate from the omnipotency of God when as they do except froÌ„ the same what is contrary to his wil seeing they themselues do confesse it and except the same things And that there is no other difference between theÌ„ the Ministers but that they say that God maketh one body to be in diuers places at one selfe instaÌ„t because he can do it And the Ministers say that he doth it not and cannot do it because he wil not do it For as much as is said according to Tertullian the power of god is his wil. Touching the reason that the Doctors do alledge in Phisosophie to proue that a bodie for being a bodie doth not therfore leaue to be in diuers places The Ministers say they suppose a falshood To wit that quantitie is accidentall and not essentiall to a body For that to wit that a body is measured bounded and circumscript is in such sort of it essence that without that it is no more a bodie As S. Augustine him selfe speaking of the glorified body of Iesus Christ saith That if space be taken away from a body there is no more place where it might be and by consequence being no part is no more at all The reaso of Philosophie they propose touching the first heauen as that it is not in any place The Ministers do denie it for to speake according to the language of the scripture it must be confessed that there is place eâ—en aboue the heauens As Iesus Christ said vnto his Disciples I go to prepare a place for you And in the same place In my Fathers house there are many mansions And else where Where I am taking the present time for the future there shal my seruants be In the which sentence must be obserued that there be aduerbes of place And S. Augustine writing to Dardanus expresly saith That it behoueth that the body of Iesus Christ be in some place in heaueÌ„ because it is a true
body Moreouer in numbring of the errors sometimes coÌ„demned by the facultie of Paris it is expresly said That the heauen by them called Empyreum is the place of Angels of blessed spirits and glorified humane bodies Where the Doctors pretend that of the doctrine which the Ministers maintaine that a body cannot be without place nor in many places at one instant may be inferred that they blaspheme the omnipotencie of God The Ministers contrariwise say that the Doctors blaspheme his Maiestie and diminish the same in attributing to the creature that which appertaineth to him alone to wit to be vncircumscript As it appeareth by that which Didimus saith in his booke of the holy Ghost where he proueth that the holy Ghost is God not a creature because he is incircumscript and that al creatures necessarily be circumscript and limited As much thereof also say S. Basil and Vigilius and the Mr. of the sentences in his first booke Where they confesse that the Angels and blessed spirits be circumscript although they be not corporall This reason is against themselues and proper to proue what the Ministers haue here aboue maintained of bodies to wit that it cannot be but that they be circumscript in some place For by an argument froÌ„ the lesse to the more If the Angels which want dimension and measure by their own confession in as much as they be creatures be necessarily circumscript by a more strong reason the bodies of men which be creatures and measured shall be so likewise And where they adde that the auncient Fathers haue not said that one body by the power of God could not be in diuers places That is contrary to the saying of S. Augustine in his 30. tract vpon S. Iohn which is recited De consec distinct 2. C. Prima quideÌ„ Where speaking of the body of Iesus Christ he saith namely It behooueth that the body of our Lord wherin he rose again be in one place teaching therby that at one selfe-same time it cannot be in diuers places And touching the reason they adde taken froÌ„ the Sacrament to proue their assertioÌ„ the Ministers say that the fathers neuer vnderstood nor said that the body of Iesus Christ was in heauen and in the Sacrament in one selfe same sort maner nor do they teach that he was otherwise then Sacramentally in the Sacrament And wheras in their resolutioÌ„ they pretend to proue that the Angels may at one self instant be in diuers places when the Ministers shall haue vnderstood their reasons then they wil answere therevnto That which they say of a body it being dispoiled of it dimensions ceaseth not to be a body notwithstanding is a very absurd thing For did it happen that a corporal substance were wholly dispoiled of it dimensions it should no more be a body but an incorporeall substance of like nature as the Angels spirits And although God by his power can seperate the dimensioÌ„s of a substance without corrupting it yet can it not be that they be seperated froÌ„ a body without the corruptioÌ„ of the same Because the quantitie dimensions are accidents of the substance but not of the body which cannot subsist without them in as much as they be of it proper essence Whereas the Doctors say afterwards in their obiection that the waight in a body is a thing essentiall The Ministers do deny it And the reason is that were it of the essence of a bodie and the same wanting the bodie should cease to bee Neuerthelesse we see that the glorified bodie of Iesus Christ wherevnto the bodies of all the elect shall be like after the resurrection doth not leaue to be subsist although it be now exempted from all waight And as touching their alledged very strong and mightie argument That if two bodies may be in one selfe place togither one body at one instant may be also in diuers places The Ministers not graunting the antecedent vnder correction say that the consequence is not good and that the argument is very weake Adding therto that the Doctors haue nor prooued and neuer can prooue by the scriptures nor by any authoritie of the auncient Fathers nor by any sufficient reason that which they propose in their antecedent or the consequent which they inferre thereof to be true Wheras the Doctors to proue that two bodies may be together in one selfe place alledge out of the scripture that Iesus Christ entred into the house where his Disciples were the doores being shut The Ministers do answere that it is not written that he entred through the closed doores but only the doores being shut which the auncient Interpreter hath well giuen to vnderstand expounding in one of the places of S. Iohn where mention is made of that aboue said Cuum fores essent clausae Then when the doores were shut Iesus came c. Neuertheles the Ministers say they verily belieue and are assured of that which the scripture doth clearly say to wit that the doores being shut he came and stood in the midst of his Disciples But they cannot certainly define nor determine which way he entered whether it were through the walles or doores of wood which Hillary himselfe maketh doubt of in that place of his writings alledged by the Doctors Howsoeuer it be the Ministers do say that in entering he miraculously made way And that a body be it the wood or wall did yeeld and giue place to the body of Iesus Christ entering or that an opening was made vnto him by the Angell which opened and afterward shut againe the doores in a moment as before hath bâ—ne said And that howsoeuer it was done two bodies were neuer found in one selfe same place together Touching that they alledge out of S. Augustine in his booke de agone Christiano that Iesus Christ entered through the doores The Ministers deny not that he entred through the doores but that two bodies onely were neuer in one selfe same place together But if Iesus Christ entered through the doores that the doores at his entire gaue him place as is said For that which the Doctors alledge touching the Apostles suspition that it was a vaine vision it nought appertaineth to the present matter nor that also that they maruelled at the maner of his entry which was miraculous as they euer confessed And touching that which they adde afterwards in the opinion held by the olde heretiques of the bodie of Iesus Christ that it was not a true bodie because it did things aboue nature The Ministers doo shewe them that they litle think what occasion and foundation of their errour the auncient Fathers had presented vnto them had they confessed what the Doctors haue set foorth and doo obstinately defend of the bodie of Iesus Christ that it doth things not only aboue nature but also contrary to nature yea euen contrary to the will and ordinance of God And there is no doubt but such an opinion should be a great proofe for Marcion and other heretiques which
Primitiue Church And the Doctors haue attributed them to him in whose name they are intituled And so much there is that the said Iustine in the place alledged layeth the myracle to haue bene done in the bodie of Iesus Christ which being grosse and thick entered through the closed doores by the power of God contrary to the nature of a bodie And therefore the Apostles supposed it a vision by reason of the entrie made without opening as spirites doo wontedly enter Let the text be seene S. Hillary saith not only that he there entered in what sort soeuer it were by the omnipotencie of God as the Ministers will wrest his authoritie but as if he had now to deale with the said Ministers hee repulseth mocketh at all their euasions and subtilties which vpon this act they imagined Nothing saith he gaue place to open to such a bodie and that it lost nothing of it substance nor by it entry was ought diminished He addeth That the doores and clefts were shut and fast barred And in this neuerthelesse lyeth the myracle that the true naturall bodie of Iesus Christ contrary to nature by the omnipotencie of God entered into a house close and couert without any opening wherein hee plainly sheweth that the myracle consisteth in the bodie of Iesus Christ And for this let the text be viewed which the Doctors wish to be well examined by the Ministers S. Ambrose in the place cyted saith That S. Thomas was abashed seeing the bodie of Iesus Christ to enter Per in via septa corporibus Et quod natura corporea per impenitrabile corpus sese infuderit inuisibili aditu Through closures impassable for bodies And that the corporeall nature powred it selfe by an inuisible meane through an impenitrable bodie S. Chrisostome in the Homely of S. Iohn Baptist and in his Cōmentaries vpon the Gospell of S. Iohn expresly saith Qui intrauit per ostia clausa non erat phantasma non erat spiritus vere corpus erat Quid enim dicit Respicite videte quia spiritus carnem ossa non habet quae me habere videtis Habebat carnes habebat ossa clausa erant omnia Quomodo clausis octijs intrauerunt ossa caro Clausa sunt omnia intrat quē intrantem non vidimus Nescis quomodo factum sit das hoc potentiae Dei He that entred through the closed doores was not a vain vision was not a spirit it was truly a bodie For what saith he Behold and see For a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me haue Hee had flesh hee had also bones and all thinges were shut How entered bones and flesh the doores being shut All thinges are shut and hee entereth whome wee see not entering How it is done thou knowest not and attributeth this to the power of God Where S. Chrisostome without difficultie as doth also S. Ambrose acknowledgeth the myracle to haue bin wrought in the body of Iesus Christ in that hee passed through the shut doores by the omnipotencie of God S. Ierome in the places quoted by the Doctors manifestly writeth that the body pierced the closed doores euen as the Poets recount that the fight of Linceus pierced the walls to see through without opening S. Ierome then reasoned of the nature of a bodie which the Bishop of Ierusalem infected with the heresie of Origen held not to bee truly in Iesus Christ after his resurrection because contrary to the nature of a bodie he had passed through the closed doores wherein Saint Ierome as the other Auncients declareth that it nothing derogateth from the nature of the bodie because it proceeded from a supernaturall power And in the first Booke against Iouinian hee saieth as much where he vseth these words Iesus entered through the closed doores Quod humanorum corporum natura non patitur Which thing the nature of humane bodies admitteth not So that with others he placeth the myracle in the body of Iesus Christ There is no doubt but S. Augustine in three places at the least maketh expresse mention that this body passed through the shut doores and that this was done by the power of God aboue the nature of bodies and that therefore heretikes ought not to denie the true bodie of Iesus Christ besides the passages De agone Christiano and of the Epistle Ad volusianum alreadie alledged in the booke De Ciuitate Dei he saith so also Epiphanius in the first booke vpon the 20. Heresie and in the 2. booke vpon the 64. Heresie against the Origenists declareth that it is but a spirituall body to wit which looseth nothing of it corporall substance but changeth getteth new qualities and spirituall perfections and meete for spirites as to passe through the walles without opening And giueth example of the body of Iesus Christ which pierced and passed through the closed doores after his resurrection And euen so iudgeth as others do the myracle to haue bene wrought in the body of Iesus Christ and that because he pierced the shut doores as a spirit albeit hee were a true body Cirillus Alexandrinus determineth also as the others this myracle to haue hapned in the body of our Lord which by the like myracle walked vpon the waters against the nature of a body by the power of God and reproueth all them which ought suspected by this deed that the body of Iesus Christ was not naturall By all these authorities the foure grounds proposed are true And therefore to corrupt the intention and faith of so many Auncientes and learned Christians to bring in a confusion of new Interpretations is ouer-great impudencie For besides the diuersitie of Caluin and Beza the Ministers to that ende produce two others to wit that the Angell opened the doore as though Iesus had not power himselfe to open it or else had need of opening And the other is that the opening was made which way he pleased And by such diuersities the Ministers sufficiently declare that they know not where to rest And which is worse they could not alledge one only auncient Father for author of their fictions or that is contrary to all the others from the Primitiue Church And to alledge that the Iron gate in the Acts of the Apostles opened to S. Peter of it own accord serueth nothing to the purpose For the Doctors neuer denied the same but haue well saide that the scripture spake not of the gates of the prison and if at the entry of Iesus Christ the doores had beene so opened the Euangelist had as easily said it as he said they were shut and as S. Luke saith that the Iron gate was opened of it selfe There is no doubt but peruerse spirits which doubted of the truth of the bodie of Iesus Christ in this world were not of opinion touching the passage of the doores with other Christians And although they thought to helpe and aide themselues herewith to support their heresies as of all the other myracles hapned
to the body of our Lorde aboue nature the Fathers neuerthelesse haue not denied this nor others semblable acts for feare to giue heretikes occasion of error But haue declared and distinguished what was of the nature of the said bodie and what came vnto it by the omnipotencie of God And the Christians for heresies neuer abandoned the truth albeit heretikes thereby haue sometimes abused the same Sith then the bodie of Iesus Christ passed through the doores without opening sure it is that two bodies haue bene and may be in one selfe same place And hereby haue the Doctors well proued their proposition which without scripture or testimony of any Father the Ministers deny Concerning the Birth of Iesus Christ without fraction of the virgin the Doctors say that many of the Auncients produced for the passage of the doores haue also held that myracle to haue bene wrought in the bodie of our Lord and not in the bodie of the virgin but in as much as she remained in her purenesse without fracture or opening And for their reason the Fathers haue alledged the scripture Exce virgo concipiet pariet Behold a virgin shall conceaue and bring forth And out of Ezechiel Porta haec clausa erit This gate shall be shut As reciceth S. Ambrose in the 80. Epistle where a Councell is conteined wherein S. Ambrose was present which determined against Iouinian and other heretikes that the virginitie and puritie remained in her child birth to the mother of God Which thing S. Augustine in the place alledged by the Doctors in the first booke and 2. Chapter against Iulian repeateth And where the Ministers say that the virgin had not lost her virginitie when our Lorde was borne as other men in that they are condemned of heresie by the Fathers which declare Iouinian to derogate her virginitie for the like opinion as the Ministers do hold Of whom the Doctors would willingly demaund what myracle they acknowledge in the birth of our Lord touching his bodie and the virginitie of his mother if he departed from her as other childrē from their mothers as the Ministers do write And as touching that which they alledge of Tertullian Origen S. Ambrose and S. Ierome the Doctors say that Tertullian Origen held such an heresie and many others which were reproued before Iouinian And for this were condemned with him and his consorts And for S. Ambrose it is euident that he beleeued the contrary as well by the Councell where he was present as by that which he wrote in the booke De Institutione Virginis And therefore where hee saith that Christus vuluam aperuerit it must be interpreted not that it was by rupture or fraction but by effect of generation and production of his true bodie out of the wombe of the virgin by myracle and supernaturall power So that as the conception was myraculous so was his birth Et aperire vuluam is a phrase and maner of speaking in the scripture to call and nominate the first borne howsoeuer he had power to be borne And as touching S. Ierome he speaketh nothing of the fracture but only that the bodie islued out bloodie as it was in the wombe of his mother and to bee bloodie there is no necessitie of fracture of the mother The Doctors for conclusion of this article would willingly demaund of the Ministers whether they hold for an article of faith the virginitie of the mother after the child-birth whether they could proue the same by the expresse and vnreproueable word of God written For as much as Beza when hee pleaseth maketh doubt of these two points and that the pretended reformed religion among the articles of faith of his diuers imprinted confessions recyteth sometimes the virginitie of the mother of God after her child-birth and sometimes omitteth the same And in some confessions inserteth not that Iesus was borne of the Virgin Marie but onely that hee issued of the seede of Danid The Doctors employ for the resurrection and issuing out of the body of Iesus Christ through the stone of the Sepulchre the most part of the authorities alledged by them vpon the closed doores as the whole lecture of the foresaid authorities with Gregorie Nazianzene in his tragedie of the passion of our Lord will witnesse which conioyneth as do many other Auncients these three myracles happened into the body of our Sauiour aboue nature namely the birth without fracture of the Virgin the resurrection through the stone and the entrance by the closed doores The Doctors adde that Caluin and Beza make conscience to say as doo the Ministers that our Lord arose not the Sepulchre beeing shut and closed and rather had the said Caluin and Beza fall into friuolous abfurdities and ridicclous expositions here afore alledged then yeeld to the opinion of the Ministers Because there is more appearance in the text of the Gospell that Iesus Christ was risen before the stone was rowled away by the Angell as therein agree the most part of auncient Christians And by this meane also is there occasion giuen more easily to beleeue the resurrection of our Sauiour then if the stone had beene taken away before the resurrection For one might more easily say that the body had bene transported and not risen againe And the text saith not that the Angell rowled away the stone before the resurrection or when Iesus arose but rather afterwards as there is great apparance in the scripture in reason and all antiquitie Pope Leo is euilly alledged by the Ministers which well knowe to conceale what is written in the Epistle by them cyted touching the closed doores And they euilly alledge that of the resurrection For it is not said that our Lord arose after the stone was rowled from the Sepulchre But well is it said against the Fantasmatiques that the substance put vpon the Crosse and that which rested in the Sepulchre and that which arose the third day the stone of the graue beeing rowled away is the true flesh of Iesus Christ By which words Pope Leo meaneth not to say that our Lord was not risen before the stone was remoued but onely sheweth that the body of Iesus Christ risen againe was a true and not a phantastike body of whose resurrection it appeared by the opening of the graue And such is the common interpretation of old Authors touching the remouing of the stone For conclusion of all these auncient testimonies the Doctors are abashed that the Ministers seeing them so manifest and themselues conuinced that God cannot only cause two bodies to bee in one selfe-same place but that hee hath also done the same dare slaunderouslye depraue the vnderstanding of them which euerie man of good and sound iudgement can by the onely reading finde out Notwithstanding the Ministers say that the reasons taken from such and so euident testimonies be impertinent So that wiah like libertie common to heretikes they feare not without any text of scripture or any place of auncient Fathers to
that a Camell passed through the eye of a needle And yet is it saide that with God such thing is possible By the Ministers answere vnto the 29. article may easily bee seene that they deceiue and abuse their Disciples making them beleeue by faire words and writings that they really receiue in the Supper the true body of Iesus Christ the same which issued from the belly of the Virgin and was fastned vpon the Crosse for the restauration of mankind And wil make them to vnderstand that they who place not with the bread and wine in the Sacrament as they call it of the Supper but some spirituall effect onely as are the redemption righteousnesse sanctification life eternall and other gifts and benefites which Iesus Christ bringeth to his elect diminish the excellencie and dignitie of the same Sacrament and that they be Zuinglians But that besides such spirituall effects one must beleeue that hee receiueth truly the body of Iesus Christ in the Supper They hold neuerthelesse an other opinion For when they are pressed with arguments and cannot defend such an imaginarie and phantastike presence they confesse by their writings they are become Zuinglians and returne to the spirituall presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper which is as much to say as besides the bread and wine they receiue a certaine spirituall effect and not really the body as the Ministers do in the present answere which thing they make manifest by that they cyte of the Apostle S. Paul by which citation may bee gathered what is their opinion concerning the Supper to wit that the body of our Lord Iesus Christ is not really but by spirituall effect onely in the hearts of the faithfull For the Galathians by the hearing of S. Pauls preaching receiued not really the body of Christ crucified but had onely an imagination of the Crosse and passion of Iesus Christ and receiued onely the fruite of their faith that is to say by this meanes they were iustified and sanctified before God also the allegation which the Ministers make of S. Ciprian tendeth to this ende to shewe that in the Supper are receiued some spirituall effects onely which neuerthelesse by these words to embrace the Crosse of Iesus Christ to sucke his bloud c. be allegorically signified Wherein they denie against the intent of S. Ciprian in the Sermon of the Supper the reall prefence of the body of Iesus Christ The Doctors confesse that the argument they haue made is addressed to Caluinists and not to Zuinglians And they supposed that the Ministers would not otherwise haue thought of this Sacrament then Caluin Beza and the other Ministers renowmed to be Ministers of the Caluinist Church which they call reformed An other maner of speech vsed they which exhibited the confession touching that Sacrament to the Bishops at Poissy who freely confessed the body of Iesus Christ to bee really present in that Sacrament which the Ministers in conference with the Doctors do now denie And hereby the Ministers in the iudgement of the Doctors of Caluenists become Almanists Wherewithall they that maintaine the doctrine of the Church which they call reformed will not be greatly pleased seeing their principall pillars for not being able to answere an argument obiected by the Doctors do leaue them in the businesse considering that in the answer they say themselues to be so much enlightned with the holy spirit which maketh them vnderstand know all things Concerninig the article following they doo openly declare what their present opinion is touching the presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament by saying that the faithfull receiue no more in this time of the Gospell then did the Fathers before and vnder the lawe But certaine it is that the Fathers receiued not really the body of Iesus Christ which as then was not made Therefore the conclusion must follow that vnder the Gospell the body of Iesus Christ is not really receiued in the Sacrament which the Ministers call the Sacrament of the Supper To the 31. article they answere not as also they neuer could answere the same and they must necessarily confesse that in the power of their faith they do that which implyeth contradiction For they maintaine one thing to be present and not present at one selfe-same time and place And their spirituall or rather phantasticke presence maketh nothing to the purpose For according to their doctrine the body cannot be present but with it measures locally difinitiuely and corporally otherwise the body should be wholly abrogate and corrupted And the maner of it beeing there spiritually would not make that the body is not there or otherwise they falsly say it is present in the Supper and abuse the world Wherefore it is necessarie if the body be there yea spiritually and their doctrine of the nature of a body be true that the body of Iesus Christ be corporally difinitiuely and locally in the Supper Moreouer for as much as it is absent according to their confession it followeth that it is not there present And to conclude the Ministers say that it is there and not there And for the full solution without entering into the principall of the Argument they suppose to escape by obiecting to the Doctors some words of the breuiarie which the Doctors haue not yet seene The Ministers they thinke haue found them in some breuiarie of Monkes and remember when they were in the Couent that they were so accustomed to sing and say But although such things were found in the breuiaries vsed in the Romane Church such maner of speech might be defended in the sence which the Fathers haue giuen whē they said that the Apostles Conficiūt corpus Christi do make the body of Christ as the scripture it selfe saith that they baptise forgiue sinnes and saue those whom they conuerted which is meant as the Ministers of God Who of his owne authoritie and as Maister baptiseth forgiueth sinnes and iustifieth the faithfull persons Where the Ministers do maruell that the Doctors call faith a humane vertue the great and maruellous effects it worketh considered the Doctors say that the Ministers haue no great cause to maruell thereat seeing that euerie worke in as much as it is in man and that he therein worketh together with God is iudged and reputed humane Also the scripture calleth the faith of man the worke of man The Doctors shewe vnto the Ministers that after their wonted maner they dwell alwaies on small things and leaue that which is principall in the matter being ignorant or dissembling ignorance where lyeth the difficultie of that is handled As they do in their answere vpon the argument proposed by the Doctors whereby they obiect that the Ministers by their faith call they it diuine or humane may doo more then God can do wherevnto the Ministers without touching the point do answere with songs In the 32. article the Ministers lightly passe ouer many obiectious made them by the Doctors Whether there bee
all power without exception ouer the creatures and by written examples and straunge my racles wrought vpon their bodies against the nature of them Tertullian in his booke of the Resurrection saith To the end wee may beleeue that our God is more mightie then all lawe and nature of all bodies And addeth that they knowe God amisse who thinke that is not in his power which they in their braine cannot comprehend From whence it commeth as saith S. Cyrill that such wicked spirits doo reiect and condemne all things as impossible because they themselues do not vnderstand them Moreouer the Doctors suppose they haue sufficiently shewed as well by expresse scripture as by the expositions thereof taken from auncient Christians that it was not onely in the power of God to make two bodies in one place and one body without place equall to it greatnesse but that alreadie it was truly done in the birth of the body of our Lord Iesus Christ in his resurrection in the entrie through the closed doores and in the ascention aboue all the heauens And the Doctors haue shewed that there was like and semblable repugnancie in these deeds as in the other that is of one body in two places which is not exempted by the scripture from the power nor will of God more then the others to iudge it impossible to bee done and that there was neuer Christian before our time which dared to affirme that thing to be impossible â—nd out of the power of God although occasion was often offered to say it had they any way thought it impossible as the Ministers of the pretended reformed Religion do pretend Contrariwife the most part of the auncient authors of the Primitiue Church haue held it expresly to be in Gods power to place one creature in many places as held Saint Ierome against the heretike Vigillantius that the soules of the Saints might be present in many places with the immaculate Lambe our Lord Iesus Christ And the question was whether the said soules and spirits of the Saints were sometimes present in the Churches where their Sepulchres and monuments were And so much thereof holdeth S. Augustine in the 16 Chap. of the booke which he wrote of the due care of the dead where he writeth that soules by the power of their owne nature cannot be here belowe and in heauen or in many places but that it may be done by the power of God and will not resolue whether they vnderstand our affaires by such a presence in many places or by the reuelation of Angels or other meanes by the power and grace of God Also it is certain that in the matter of the holy Sacrament the auncient Fathers of the Church haue acknowledged and maintained that the bodie of Iesus Christ was in many places by the almightie power of God As doth S. Ambrose vpon the tenth of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and Saint Chrisostome in his 17. Homily vpon the same Epistle Where both two as it were in like words do write that although in many places there are many actions and oblations of the body of Iesus Christ neuerthelesse hauing regard to the thing which is offered to wit the true lambe and body of Christ Iesus that this sacrifice in many places offered is but one for so much as it is but one selfe-same thing to wit the true lambe and the true body of Iesus Christ which is but one and abideth whole in all places where it is offered They adde also that the oblations of him in diuers places is not an iteration of the sacrifice of the Crosse but in commemoration of him So that in the sacrifice of the Masse they acknowledge and distinguish two points The one which concerneth the realtie of the thing offered and they say that this is the true lambe and true body of Iesus Christ which then remaining intierly one is neuerthelesse in many places And the other concerneth the action and oblation of such thing by the Priest which is no iteration nor like action or oblation as that of the Crosse but diuerse in remembrance notwithstanding of that was made vpon the Crosse S. Chrisostome in the third booke of Priesthood cryeth out saying Oh myracle and power of God! He which sitteth on high at the right hand of his Father is held betweene the hands of each one in the Sacrament S. Augustine vpon the 33. Psalme sheweth that the body of Iesus Christ in the Supper was in two places that is to say in it visible place among his Apostles and neuerthelesse betweene his owne hands So that he himselfe did beare himselfe And before he concludeth the same Saint Augustine debateth how it was possible that one person should beare his body betweene his hands And after he had shewed that it was impossible for Dauid and cuerie creature he descended at last to the diuine power which was in Iesus Christ by the which to him alone among all men such myracle was possible And to the ende that men should not depraue nor wrest the meaning of S. Augustine because there is something which after a sort is carried as though it diminished the truth let them note that the purpose of S. Augustine is to shewe that Iesus by his almightinesse did carrie himselfe which to any creature was impossible Now had he onely in the Supper borne betweene his hands the figure of the Sacrament and signe of his body and not his true and reall body hee should haue done nothing but what the least man might do For each man can carrie betwixt his hands the figure Image signe or Sacrament of his body or sticke it in his hat without myracle or supernaturall power It be houeth then that the certaine maner which S. Augustine vseth doth nothing diminish the truth and this it is that betweene his hands he was inuisible and in a supernaturall maner of being reall neuerthelesse and true S. Basil in his Liturgie with the others auoucheth the body of Iesus Christ to be in heauen and by his almightinesse notwithstanding to bee present in the Sacrament although the Ministers to proue it impossible for one body or one other creature to be in many places do chiefly build vpon S. Basil but the said S. Basil in the place by the Ministers alledged doth expresly protest not to speake but according to the naturall proprietie And in his Liturgie he declareth that it is not onely in the power of God to cause the body of Iesus Christ to be in heauen and vpon the Aultar but that it is so truly done The Doctors to end this question of one body in many places say that such matter is not onely in the power of God but that it must so be beleeued to bee done in the holy Sacrament that God be not found a lyar and deceiuer in his word whereby Iesus affirmed to his Apostles that that which he gaue with his hands was his true body deliuered for vs. This is an argument which
in his deeds there should be imperfection And they further say that it should not be onely against the disposition and ordinary course of nature as the Doctors faigne to haue thought and vnderstood but also against the eternall and vnchangeable will of our God And as touching that which the Doctors to proue that God can do something against order do propose that he can chaunge and alter the order established in the world The Ministers confesse the same but they denie that in so dooing he should do any thing which were disordered As for example all faithfull and Christian men doo beleeue beleeue that God will renew at the last the estate of the whole world wherein there is nothing in the meane time which is not well ordained perfect and in all points accomplished The Doctors in the following article confound the distinction proposed by the Ministers in their answere betweene the will of God manifested and that he hath hidden in himselfe and is equall to his power as the Ministers before haue at large declared And the Doctors do falsly presuppose touching the reuealed will of God taking that generally which the Ministers haue graunted in some particulars onely to wit that God can doo more in ceraine things then he hath declared to will which none doubteth As saith S. Augustine in the booke of perfect Iustice that he cannot make a man to be perfect in this world and sanctifie him in such sort that there remaine no more in him any infirmitie or imperfection although hee hath neuer declared vnto vs by his word that hee would do it but contrariwise that the flesh in all the regenerate will alwaies refist the spirit so that all the time of their liues they shall be in many points imperfect But albeit in that and some other like cases God can do more then his will declareth which he hath manifested to vs in his word yet neuerthelesse can it not be said but that there be other cases wherein God hath reuealed his will vnto vs against which he can do or ordaine nothing As for example hee hath declared vnto vs that hee is one that he is immutable incomprehensible wholly good wholly iust wholly perfect and wholly true Against all which things which to vs are manifested and clearly proposed in his word impossible it is for him euer to thinke say do or ordaine Now the thing proposed and debated by the Doctors touching the being of one body at one instant in diuers places is comprised in that ranke beeing as is said contrarie to the truth of God Which shall serue for answere to the Doctors slaunders and to all that they haue proposed in this article Likewise in an other following article where they say that God not onely can but will also cause that one body occupie diuers places at one selfe-same time That shall be yet more impossible for them to proue then the power aforesaid for which they haue hitherto so much trauelled in vaine In their definition of one bodye in the Article following they contradict themselues when they say that the measures are essentiall vnto it and that it may neuerthelesse bee incircumscript for if it bee needfull that the dimensions whereof it is composed bee finite of necessitie it followeth therevpon that then it is finite limited and circumscript To that which they afterwards say that the reason which the Ministers haue taken of the Creed and alledged to proue that the body of Iesus Christ is in heauen in a place certaine is friuolous The Ministers say that the Doctors shewe therein what reuerence they beare to the word of GOD and his spirite who hath reuealed the same vnto vs and to the Apostles which declare them vnto vs. To iustifie Gracian and the Canon which the Ministers alledge of S. Augustine by which they proue that the bodie of Christ must necessarily be in a place certaine the Ministers bring yet for more ample confirmation the 4. booke and 10. distinction of the Maister of the Sentences who recyting the selfe-same passage of S. Augustine vseth the verbe Oportet and not Potest As touching that of Iustine which the Doctors alledge to proue the myracles which were then done that Iesus Christ appeared in the middest of his Disciples the gates being shut and that hee walked vpon the waters were done in his person The Ministers are amazed how the Doctors doo yet repeate the same For as much as the said Iustine as they haue before beene answered expresly saith that when the said myracles were done there was no chaunge of the body of Iesus Christ which thing had the myracles bene done in his person had bene necessarie In the meane time the Ministers confesse as they haue done often that the cause of the said myracles and the diuine power whence they proceeded abode in Iesus Christ As when hee healed the diseased which touched him and did the other myracles recyted in the Euangelicall Histories the which were done by him but not in him but in the person of them that weâ—â— healed And there is great difference betweene such myracles and those of his transfiguration and resurrection which were wrought by his onely power and in his proper person Vpon the importunate repetition which the Doctors make as well of the meanes of the birth of our Lord Iesus Christ as of the word Aphantos The Ministers for sparing of time and not troubling the readers send them back to their former answeres The Ministers much maruel that the Doctors to proue their pretended penetration of two bodies and of their measures wil ground their proofe and principal argument vpon the proper signification of the terme Penetrer For be it so that they will by this French word interpret the Greeke word Dierchestas or the Latine word Penetrare It shall bee euer impossible to proue their pretence And as it is also in the Acts of the Apostles Chap. 12. 10. It is said of the Angell and S. Peter that they passed the first and second watch And in S. Luke 4. 30. But they passed through the middest of them and departed And in S. Io. 4. 4. Now it behoued him to passe by Samaria In all which passages the Doctors shall not find that the word Dierchestai in the said passages alledged can bee any way applied to the penetration of dimensions And no more shall they proue that the word Penetrare which the old Translator hath vsed in the 2. Tymo 3. can be reduced to their said penetration The Ministers do adde that the Doctors ought not to hold it more straunge that Iesus Christ ascending into heauen in his finite and limited body an opening were made for his entrance therin then when he descendeth betweene the hands of the Priests singing their Masses For then as saith S. Gregorie the heauens do open to giue him passage Although after their imagination his body is then seperated from it measures and dimensions The Doctors should haue contented
there in such an estate that then the graces of God be multiplied increased and more and more confirmed in him So that Circumcision brought not vnto Abraham a new righteousnesse but sealed and ratified that which by the promise was communicated before vnto him Which the faithfull knowing in what degree of vertue they bee yet ought they not to contemne the holy Supper nor any way to abstaine from it when occasion and meanes serue them to be there Considering that they cannot be so promoted nor aduaunced in the knowledge and feare of God and in the faith of his promises that they may not yet growe and profit in what estate soeuer they be by the meanes which God hath therefore left and ordained in his Church And impossible it is for a man hauing true faith in his heart to do otherwise seeing hee hath the commoditie thereof For as much as the nature of faith is not to apprehend the promises of God onely but also to engender and bring forth in the heart of the faithfull a will to obey him and keep his commaundements and ordinances For answere to the first Article which the Doctors propose touching their Masse the Ministers say that the Doctors do openly blaspheme Iesus Christ to authorise with his name and by his example such an abhomination And that they also mocke the Church the world in preaching and writing such Impieties For answere to the second Article of the Masse the Ministers say that there is in the Church no other sacrifice by which men are reconciled to God and which maketh him mercifull and fauourable towards them by appeasing his wrath then that onely and alone which Iesus Christ hath once offered vpō the Crosse to his Father The vertue wherof being eternall to sanctifie all beleeuers and to obtain vnto them for euer remission and abolishment of sinnes there is no need of any other nor that which he hath once offered be euer reiterate For answere to the third Article the Ministers say that they which approue the Masse and other Priesthood then that of Iesus Christ and wil establish for remission of sinnes an other sacrifice then that he himselfe with his body vpon the Crosse offered are Antichrists and abolish as much as in them lyeth all the vertue and fruite of the death sacrifice of the sonne of God For answere to the fourth Article the Ministers do alledge what S. Paul writeth to wit That where remission is there is no more offering for sinne Now so it is that by the death of Iesus Christ remission hath bene obtained for vs as by infinit passages of scripture appeareth It followeth then that there is no more oblation for sin neither in the Masse nor out of the Masse And if there be none for the liuing lesse is there for the dead For answere to the fift the Ministers maintaine that the Communion is of the essence of the Supper as S. Paul sheweth in the first of the Corinthians 10. and 11. Chapters And as it is carried by the Cannon it selfe and other things about the Masse For answere to the sixt the Ministers say three things First that the Popish Masse is no Sacrament then that the body of Iesus Christ is not there And therof conclude that then the bread and wine there remaining ought not to be adored which being creatures cannot be adored but that they which adore them be Idolators For answere to the seuenth and last Article the Ministers say contrary to the Doctors that there is not any thing in the Masse which is not either directly or indirectly contrary to the word of God The Ministers for conclusion admonish the Doctors entreat them not to depart as they haue formerly done out of the bounds of the matter now proposed for disputation To the end that these two points which are now in debate betweene them may be wholly and perfectly decyded to the content and edification of them that shall reade the Acts of this conference Tuesday the 30. of Iuly in the yeare aforesaid A briefe Reply of the Doctors against the last Answer of the Ministers to them sent by my Lord the Duke de Niuernois the first of August about seuen or eight of the clocke in the euening 1566. THe Doctors after their resolution giuen vpon the Artice of Gods Omnipotency were not determined to returne any more therevnto as hauing sufficiently handled that matter But the horrour they haue of the new blasphemies contained in the last writing of the Ministers hath incyted them contrary to their purpose although not to reply at the least to admonish the Ministers and the reader of this present Conference of the said execrable blasphemies which they are constrained to confesse that will not acknowledge the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Aultar but dare therby deny the power of God himself The consideration wherof as the Doctors hope wil not only cōfirme the Catholikes in the faith of the said article but also by Gods assistance wil bring back many which are strayed separating themselues from the Church Catholike whē they shall vnderstand the detestable errors blasphemies which do follow the contradiction of the reall presence of the body and bloud of our Lord in the Sacrament Which also should serue for the conuersion of the Ministers themselues would they without passiō examine the reasons acts which haue bene proposed vnto them touching the power of God and sincerely iudge therof as resisting the holy spirit in stead of acknowledging their errors they are turned to all maner of reproach and iniury against them which of good will would admonish them and haue taxed them that they tended not but to roote them out Which thing the Doctors neuer minded and desire not but the saluation of the Ministers of all those that are seperated from the true Catholike Church Of which their preachings shall beare witnesse wherein they ordinarily exhort the people to pray vnto God for them True it is that they require the extirpatiō of the kingdome of Sathan and the rooting out of all heresies and peruerse doctrine rather by the preaching of Gods word then by all other meanes And they wonder why the Ministers are so pricked against them in their two last answeres seeing they haue giuen them no occasion thereof but haue taken it lightly for no other reason but because the Doctors haue written that many propositions set forth by the Ministers contained blasphemies which they should content themselues to denie or to proue that there are none and leaue the iudgement thereof to the readers without entering into such hotte coller seeing they professe to bee so much mortified patient and modest that albeit one should reproach them they would not reproach againe They should also well remember the faire tytles with which they honour the Catholique doctrine as with the name of superstition Idolatrie impietie abhomination and many other like yea not sparing
Acts of the Dispute and Conference holden at Paris in the Moneths of Iuly and August 1566. Betweene two Doctors of Sorbon and two Ministers of the Reformed Church A most excellent Tract wherein the learned may take pleasure and the ignorant reape knowledge Translated out of French by Iohn Golburne and diuided according to the daies Magna est veritas praeualet Ecclesiasticus 33. 16. Behold how I haue not laboured only for my selfe but for all them also that seeke knowledge LONDON Printed by Thomas Creede 1602. TO THE RIGHT Honorable Sir Thomas Egerton Knight Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England Chamberlaine of the Countie Palatine of Chester and of her Maiesties most Honorable priuie Counsaile I. G. wisheth all health honour and euerlasting happinesse RIght Honourable my good Lorde If affectionate dutie shall be held presumption or any taxe me of rashnesse for still troubling your Lordship with my rude labors I plead mine excuse with the Poet Affranius who blamed for guilt of like crime to Traian yet dared to present him with homely Poems excusing himselfe still with the curtesie of the Emperour which as Princely accepted as the other poorely offered And so shrowded with the shelter of your honorable curtesie I shall be shielded from the stormes of idle imputations stop as did Affranius the mouthes of my Taxors and aduenture once more to present vnto your Lordship my prison-night-watches as a simple token of my thankfulnesse and pledge of further dutie then deeming my selfe happie when I may acknowledge your honourable goodnesse with any performance of dutie or acceptable seruice to your Lordship to whom both my self and poore endeuours are wholy deuoted The worthy and necessary vse of this Treatise I leaue to the graue iudgment of learned Censors and in all dutie and zeale do offer it to your Lordships Patronage assure me of your like good as former acceptance For a good vine yeeldes grapes still answerable to it nature and an honourable mind the fruits of an honorable disposition Long liue and prosper ho. Lord Pater sis Patriae Ecclesiae Reipublicae charus So in all humilitie I take leaue Fleete this 25. of March 1602. Your Lordships most bounden in all dutifull affection Iohn Golburne The Translator to the Christian Reader AMongst all the meanes prescribed by wisedome to attaine the perfection of true knowledge there is none good Reader in my poore conceit more necessarie for the ignorant next to the fountaine of life the word of God then the reading of Controuersies wherein the truth is debated the reasons on both sides deduced and laid open to the view and Readers iudgement For as by striking together of the steele flint the fire is out forced euen so by disputation and conference the truth is boulted out and decyded But because it is hard for a blinde man to iudge of colours and we being all blinde by nature and ignorant of God and goodnesse are of our selues vncapable of right iudgement in matters of faith for flesh and bloud cannot attaine vnto it neither can the naturall man discerne the things of God we must therefore vse the appointed meanes of our saluation namely hearing reading and meditating of Gods sacred word which is onely able to make vs wise vnto saluation and to enlighten the eyes of the simple So that by this touchstone and faithfull inuocation of God in the name and sole mediation of Christ Iesus for the direction of his holy spirit wee shal be enabled to know all things and to trye the true and pure Gold from the false and counterfeit and then comparing the sayings and assertions of both sides with the sincere vndeceiueable milke of Gods word we shal be likewise able to discerne the spirit of God from the spirit of Error and discerning shall perceiue the incomparable beautie of the one and the vgly deformitie of the other Which thing waighing with my selfe and finding in this Treatise both the deepnesse of Sathan and the inuincible force of truth which is the power of God vnto saluation of all true beleeuers I resolued at the speciall instance of a religious friend who had begun the Translation to attempt effect and finish the same which by diuine assistance I haue faithfully performed and here present it to thy view Read it with consideration consider thereof with iudgement and iudge with discretion so shalt thou finde not onely pleasure but much profit in matters discussed of greatest moment For which and all things else giue God the glory make vse for thine instruction and accept my poore endeuour whose desire was to do thee good Farewell Thine in the Lord I. G. The Preface containing the occasions of the Dispute following FOr that I doubt not but many persons filled with the commō brute of the conference should bee made at the house of my Lord the Duke de Montpensier betweene the Doctors of the one part and the Ministers of the other appointed for that purpose desire to know the truth and that others speake thereof diuersly according to the reports thereof made vnto them or their conceiued imaginations concerning the same Me seemeth that to satisfie the one and take from the other all occasion of lying or giuing credit to lies it should bee good to put briefly in writing all the matter as it passed and likewise to declare what was the motiue first occasion of the same My Lord the Duke of Montpensier who as each one knoweth is very zealous of his Religion and dearely loueth his children seeing that his daughter the Duchesse of Buillon was departed from the Komish Religion thenceforth to follow that of Iesus Christ and that without chilling shee still perseuered and more and more increased in the knowledge and feare of God in zeale godlinesse and all other good and commendable vertues his speech he had in the beginning with her and other meanes he had since assaied to reduce and call her backe from the way wherein shee was nought preuailing willed for a last remedie to attempt if he could to winne her by the meanes and remonstrance of a Doctor named Vigor whom he much esteemed And to the end that the said Lady should remaine more satisfied hauing called my Lord of Buillon her husband hee declared vnto him his minde and said hee was contented that the said remonstrance should bee made to his daughter in the presence of some Ministers as namely of Spina such others as she should please to choose to the ende that had they any thing to say against the doctrine of the saide Vigor they should alleadge it And if after they had conferred together they were not confuted by him and wholly vanquished that his daughter should then abide in her opinion without that hee or some others of his side would euer assay ought to diuert her My Lord de Buillon promised to accomplish his commaund therein and to shewe his obedience to him Shortly after hee imparted the
may brag and vsurpe to haue this spirit particularly promised vnto him And as touching the particular inspiration of Esay it was not founded on his onely fancie and presumption but on the assurance that God gaue him by a worke supernaturall as is said in the 6. Chapter And further it was not yet sufficiently founded to bee beleeued as hauing inspiration had he not shewed the same by other effects and by other Prophesies already come to passe As it behooueth euery Prophet should doo before he were beleeued But leauing all those things as farre fetched and from the first proposition I referre the iudgement as before Answere There is not one of the Church if he be a ture member therof vnto whom the spirit of God is not communicated As S. Paul and S. Iohn in his first Catholique Epistle teacheth And as touching the pretended presumption there is great difference betweene the presumption and imaginations of the spirit of man which is but darkenesse and of it selfe knoweth nothing of the thing of God and the reuelations of the holy Ghost which are certaine and assured And where it is said that the answeres are farre off from the first proposition if it be so the demaâ—nds are so also Obiection The conclusion is if each one ought to be beleeued in saying hee hath a particular reuelation of the holy Ghost without otherwise shewing that they are holy Scriptures and that there is difference amongst them let euery one iudge if the demands and answeres be pertinent to this difficultie or no. And forasmuch as some of the newe doctrine doo shew no proofe more then others of their particular inspirations whether the one ought to be more beleeued then the other concerning the same Answere By the former answeres it hath beene declared how the reuelations pretended by particular persons ought to be examined by the meanes by which men may iudge whether they be of the spirit of God or no. Then spake Doctor Vigor saying that in the discourse aforesaid he had vnderstood many sayings contained in the answers of the Minister which were against the word of God as when he said that it behooueth first to honour the Sonne before the father Which the said Vigor reproouing the said Spyna maintained that thing to bee true affirming such proposition to be grounded and contained in the holy Scripture as in the Gospel and first Catholique Epistle of S. Iohn Vnto which Vigor replyed that in the said places the word First is not found Neuertheles least he fall on that which hath beene put forth and proposed in the beginning of the conference he wil not now enter into the confutation of that saying reseruing it to the end of all the conferences Answere The said Spyna required that Vigor should quote the places of the Scripture which hee pretended to bee contrarie to that was contained in his answere And where it is said that it first behoueth to glorifie the Sonne before the Father according as it is written in the places aboue noted for confirmation of his saying hee proposeth this reason founded on the Scripture We cannot know the Father if we haue not knowne the Sonne Wee cannot glorifie the Father if we haue not knowne him Therefore it followeth that the knowledge and glory of the Sonne is a degree to come to the knowledge and glory of the father which being referred by the said Vigor to be more amply handled in the end and conclusion of all the conference the said Spyna is so contented Obiection The sayd Vigor without wading further in this dispute obiecteth that by the same reason alledged by the said De Spyna It followeth that it first behooueth to honour the Father before the Sonne for by the Father wee come to the knowledge of the Sonne as it appeareth by that which our Lord sayd to Saint Peter Caro sanguis non reuelauit tibi sed pater meus qui in Coelis est Flesh and blood hath not reuealed this vnto thee but my Father which is in the heauens Where it is manifest that the heanenly Father did reueale to Saint Peter that our Lord was the Sonne of the liuing God Whereupon the sayd Vigor doeth thus argue If the reason of the sayd De Spyna bee good by the Father wee know the Sonne it behooueth then to honour the Father before the Sonne Answere To follow the order of the knowledge we may haue of Iesus Christ and of his Father proposed vnto vs in S. Iohn It behooueth to beginne by the Sonne and from the Sonne to come to the Father For Saint Phillip hauing once required that hee would shew vnto him and his other companions his Father hee said vnto him Phillip hee that hath seene me he hath seene my Father To teach them that the meane to come to the knowledge of the Father is the precedent knowledge of the Sonne which may bee also confirmed by that which is else where written where Iesus Christ saieth That no man knoweth the Father but the Sonne onely and hee to whom the Sonne will reueale him And to answere the authoritie of Saint Matthew alledged by the sayd Vigor the sayd De Spyna sayeth that in the text by him produced there is no mention made of the knowledge of the Father nor of the meane to come vnto it But onely of the reuelation made by the grace of GOD and his holy Spirite vnto Saint Peter and his other fellowes to know IESVS CHRIST and the Father in him Whereupon Vigor sayde hee referred himselfe to the hearer and reader that his obiection is not answere dreseruing for another Conference to treat more amply of that point if hee will maintaine it least hee should fall vpon that which hath beene formerly proposed whereunto the sayd De Spyna answered that hee so agreed The sayde Vigor vpon an answere made by the sayde De Spina where hee putteth difference betweene the certaine reuelation made by the Lord to a particular person and the holy Scripture addeth that hee is abashed of the same answere considering that men beleeue not the holy Scripture But in that they are acertained that the Lord is authour thereof who cannot lye Then likewise that if a particular man haue assurance that the reuelation is made vnto him by the Lorde or else that one is assured of the reuelation made to another as much is hee bound to giue faith to the reuelation as to the Scripture The which saying also hee will not as hee may handle and declare at large but come presently to the first question which is not yet resolued And prayeth the sayd De Spina to set forward the same Answere Where the sayde Vigor is abashed that the sayde De Spina should say in one of his answeres That the reuelation of the Lord and the word were things different the same is befalne him for not well conceiuing the sence of the saying For De Spina will not put difference touching the certainty
seeing the Supper was to be handled against theÌ„ in the chamber of the Prior of Poissy in the preâ—â—ce of the Queen of the Prinoes of bloud of the Lords of the Councell they often requested to leaue that point vndecided hand to enter into some other which should be more euident against the Catholikes as of Images and other things And contrariwise the Ministers to auoyd now the great 〈◊〉 which be in their interpretation of the Creed would set forth the point of the Supper The Doctors beseech as they haue 〈◊〉 that there be no confusion in their doing and 〈◊〉 their religioâ—e examined by order and that it be noâ— thought that the Doctors doo refuse â—o enter into the Conference of the Masse and the Supper as they haue alwaies determined and neuer said vnder correction of all persons that they would not conferre theerof for my Ladies briefe instruction they are readie to dispute thereof by word of mouth and plainly to shewe by the expresse word of God that Iesus Christ instituted and said Masse and his Apostles also They do also offer that whatsoeuer shall be said by word of mouth vpon this matter be put in writing the next day after to be placed in it order as the instruction of my Lady doth require And do referre them for the day to the said Ladies opportunitie The Ministers do answere that all these answeres are superfluous and vnprofitable for as much as all such Conferences are nothing but debates and alâ—rications which doâ— offend and scandalize more then they edifie The Resolution of the Doctors THe Doctors ensuing the order alreadie begun and their charge which is to conferre with the Ministers and afterwards to giue a resolution for the instruction of my Lady of Buillon vpon the two points proposed yesterday to wit whether the Apostles were authors of the Creed And why we ought to beleeue it They say that to know whether the Apostles did make and erect the Creed ought no more to be esteemed a thing indifferent then to know whether the Apostles be authors of their owne writings For much more is the authoritie of them when a man is assured that they are certainly proceeded from the Apostles And contrariwise it should be far lesse if men did doubt therof or esteem it a thing indifferent Moreouer they say that it is no sufficient reason to call this Creed Apostolike and to intitle it the Creed of the Apostles in regard of the conformitie it hath with their writings For by this reason the other Creeds as that of Nice of Athâ—nâ—sius and all other the like writings may as well be named the Creed of the Apostles because they containe a doctrine agreeable to the Apostles writings Therefore say the Doctors it must be beleeued that the Apostles did make it and gaue the same Creed vnto Christians and that it must be beleeued as being a writing composed by the Apostles And their proofe thereof is that they alwayes finde since the Apostles time vntil now that this Creed hath bene proposed in Baptisme and Catechisme as it appeareth by the authors which haue beene from the Apostles vnto vs. And also that no man can name or note any Author or Councell but euen before that Author or Councell immediately to the Apostles time that Creed hath beene proposed in Baptisme and Cat chisme and called among Christians the rule of faith And the like argument S. Augustine in many places against the Donatists doth esteeme to be firme and inâ—incible to proue and shew that something is from the Apostles They willingly omit to auoyd â—ediousnesse the auncient writers as S. Ambrose S. Ierome others who acknowledge this Creed to haue bene made and receiued namely of the Apostles For the second point the Doctors do affirme that the bond and necessitie to beleeue this Creed doth not depend oâ— the knowledge of the Apostolike or Propheticaâ—â— scriptures nor on the knowledge of the conformitie with them For it was made and coâ—â—ained among the Christians in Baptisme before there was any Apostolike writing And in Baptisme they proposed the said Creed to be beleeued before they entâ—ed into the scripture or to speake thereof And in the Primatiue Church they examined the scriptures whether they were to be receiued or nor and the vndeâ—standing of them and whether a doctrine were true or false by this Creed and rule of faith and by it likenesse or conformitie with the same Ireneus Tertullian and others do teach it And although it should so happen that a man had neuer heard but the Creed without knowing whether there be holy scriptures or not hee might beleeue the said Creed and be a true Christian so that hee were voyd of other particular false opinion And contrariwise if the beliefe of the Creed did depend vpon the knowledge of the Propheticall oâ— Apostolike scriptures to vnderstand and to be assured of the conformitie that is therein as 〈◊〉 as to beleeue it 〈◊〉 none but the learned and well exercised in the scriptures who should bee assured of the said conformitie should be bound to beleeue the Creed or should at least be assured of the truth thereof And so should there he very fewe Christians Therfore the belleâ—ing of the Creed doth not depend vpon the knowledge of the scriptures By meanes whereof the Doctors do hold by tradition of the Church 〈◊〉 by the holy Ghost that the Creed is the Apostle and that none ought to doubt therof And by the same tradition it must be beleeued as 〈…〉 of the Apostles of like authoritie with that in their writings although they had no knowledge of the other scriptures And the Doctors are sory that they haue so much declined from answering pertinently and absolutely to these two points which they haue onely proposed to shew what faith and authoritie men ought to giue to this Creed and to all other doctrine receiued by tradition of the Apostles without Canonicall scripture which they will proue to haue bene left by them by the same meane and reason by which is shewed the Creed to haue bin deliuered to the Christians by the Apostles without that they put the same in writing Finally the Doctors do admonish such as read this Conference not to be astonished nor maâ—uell at so many perplexed declinings from the true end of the said points proposed And do pray them to remember the conferences made by S. Augustine with the Donatists and Pellagians wherin they shall finde like maner of dealing as that of the Ministers with whom they do conferre And for the present Conference referre themselues to the readers iudgement The Resolution of the Ministers THe Ministers following that which before hath bene proposed and alwaies by them maintained and for the confirmation also of the faith of the Lady of Buillon say that it is vncertaine as S. Ciprien hath written whether the Creed called the Apostles was made composed by them or else drawne or gathered out of their
naturall proprietie of a body can make a great and thicke body to passe in a space and place vnequall to it greatnesse largenesse and thicknesse The Doctors cyted what our Lord saith in the 19. of S. Mathew It is easier for a Cable to goe through the eye of a needle then for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen Two things haue the Ministers answered vnto the one that in the translation wee must not vse Cable but rather Camel although neuertheles their own French Bible of Anthony Rebulls impression which they haue brought containeth the translation of this word Cable And Caluin himself likewise in his Hermony of the foure Euangelists saith that to bee better But here in appeareth to be truth what Tertullian against the Valentinians and before him Ireneus in his first booke and 14. Chapter against the Valentinians doo say That they which seperate themselues from vs to go to an other schoole do alwaies inuent some new thing that the disciples may bee found more cunning then their Maisters But well this word Camell beeing yeelded vnto them as the Doctors doubt not to haue bene expounded by Saint Hillary S. Ierom and others the reason thereof is yet more strong For it is yet more repugnant that a crooked grosse and great Camell then a Cable should enter through the eye of a needle The other reason giuen by the Ministers is that God cannot make a Camel or Cable to enter throgh the eye of a needle which is notwithstanding against the pure word of Iesus Christ who saith not it is is impossible to God but rather easie to do that and by comparison more easie vnto God then to make a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen which neuerthelesse is said by our Lord to be possible not vnto men but vnto God to whom there is nothing vnpossible Whervpō the Doctors say thus If God can do that which is more difficult he can doo that which is more easie Now by the text of the scripture it is said that God can make a rich man enter into the kingdome of heauen which is the more difficult he can therfore make a Camell or Cable to enter through the eye of a needle which is more easie The answeres of the Ministers here aboue confuted tend to such absurdities and blasphemies that Iesus Christ by his almightinesse could not enter through the closed doores that hee could not come forth of the belly of his mother through her body without fraction that he could not make a visible body to be inuisible that a grosse and great body might be in a place vnequall to it that hee could not by his diuine power make penetration of dimensions and that he could not make by the same diuine power one body to bee in two places for it is like reason of the last article and of the others albeit such things are declared in the scriptures not onely to be possible but euen the most part of them to haue bene done And the Doctors do wonder how the Ministers dare denie such things seeing themselues must necessarily confesse if their doctrine of the Supper be true that the body of Iesus Christ is in diuers places which they proue thus The faithfull really receiue in their soules the substance of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ by the working of the holy Ghost and not the bread and the wine onely or else as saith Caluin in the 4 booke 17. Chapter and 11. section of his Institution the effect and vertue of the same Sacrament Now the Doctors conclude thus It is impossible for a man to receiue into him the substance of the body of Iesus Christ but the body of Iesus Christ is in him But all the faithfull in the Supper do receiue the same into their soules therefore must the body of Iesus Christ be in them and by consequent in diuers places to wit in all places where their Supper is made and likewise in heauen They say further that Caluin in his Institution the fourtth booke 17. Chapter and 24. sect saith That in the Supper the power of God is required to the ende that the flesh of Iesus Christ may pierce euen vnto vs and that humane nature cannot comprehend the same But it behoueth that the power of God doo worke therein And by this meane Caluin doth admit by the power of God the flesh of Iesus Christ in many places to wit in heauen and in vs into whom it must pierce by the power of God And in the tenth number he saith That the truth signified and represented by the signes must bee represented and exhibited in the same place where the signes be Which hee proueth by reason in many places to wit that the signes must no more bee voyd then the Doue was voyd of the holy Ghost But as the essence and substance of the holy Ghost was conioyned and present with the Doue so the flesh and bloud of our Lord before there be a true Sacrament must be conioyned and vnited with the signes The passages are against Heshusius and in his booke of the Supper and vpon the first of the 11. Chapter to the Corinthians And although the Ministers will answere the Doctors beseech them well to weigh and consider the text of Caluin and of the reason he giueth of the holy Ghost They doo obiect further that the Ministers in their Supper doo attribute more to the humane power then to the omnipotencie of God yea they do more then God can do which is that they brag to do a thing by their faith which implyeth contradiction saying in their confession of faith exhibited to the Bishops in the congregatiō at Poissy That faith maketh things absent to be present in one selfe-same instant and place That is to say in the soules of the faithfull when they celebrate their Supper which is as much to say as faith maketh things not present present at one selfe-same instant and place So that to euery faithfull in the Supper comming worthily therevnto is the body of Iesus Christ there present by the power of faith And neuerthelesse it is not there present for they say so and that it is onely in heauen Wherein appeareth that there is implication of contradiction to wit present not really present And the small starting hole they told vs of that the body is aboue corporally and spiritually in the Supper in the harts of the faithfull can serue for nothing For the spiritualtie cannot take away the substance of the thing and their faith cannot make a body not to be a body and that a body haue not it dimensions as heretofore they haue said Therefore howsoeuer they confesse that the faithfull in the Supper receiue into their soules the substance of the body of Iesus Christ will they or nill they must they necessarily confesse that either their faith is more mightie then the infinite vertue and power of God or else that God can make
haue denied the true humanitie of Iesus Christ if they should confesse by the Doctors example that the body of Iesus Christ coÌ„trary to the truth nature and essence of a body may be at one self-same time in diuers places or in one selfe same place with an other body To that they alledge of Iustin Martir The Ministers do answer that the booke by them alledged is falsly attributed to him For it there maketh mention of Origen to wit in the the 82. question althogh that Origen was more then 100. yeares after him And touching the opening of the Sepulchre whereof there is mentioÌ„ made in the place by them produced They answer that the Euangelist reciteth clearly that there was a great Earthquake when Iesus Christ rose again and that the Angel did rowle away the stone which closed the Sepulchre Whervnto agreeth the saying of Leo the first Bishop of Rome writing to the Bishops of Palestine where he saith That Iesus Christ rose againe the stone which couered the Sepulchre being rowled away Touching the place alledged by the Doctors out of the writings of S. Hillary one word there is shall serue them for an answer To wit that this holy Doctor expresly saith that Iesus Christ to whoÌ„ all things are open as the Doctors haue expounded the said sentence or as the Ministers expound it that he maketh way euery where by his diuine power entred the doores being shut For thereby also he giueth to vnderstand that to enter into the house where his Disciples were he made himselfe way opening And by his writing can nought else be coÌ„cluded but that his entry was myraculous Concerning that which the Doctors alledge of S. Ambrose vpon S. Luke No more can they inferre thereof then S. Hillary hath said And they cannot conclude neither of the one nor the other but that Iesus Christ entered within the house by a diuine and miraculous power For that which they alledge of S. Iohn Chrisostome touching the virgin that Iesus Christ came forth of her wombe her virginitie integritie no way thereby corrupted nor defiled yea that she did remain a virgin before after her child birth The Ministers do beleeue confesse and teach the same And yeeld a reason thereof by the scripture for as much as she neuer had knowne man But if thence they will infer that in the birth of Iesus Christ Nula intercesserit apertio vteri The wombe was not opened The Ministers do say that such a conclusioÌ„ should be against the expresse text of the scripture and of that said in S. Luke to that purpose Omne masculinum ad aperiens vuluam c. Euery male that first openeth the wombe c. Ioyned therevnto that many auncient authors haue written approued it as Origen vpoÌ„ S. Luke Tertullian de carne Christi S. Ierom in his first Tome Ad EustochiuÌ„ Where in expresse termes he saith that Iesus Christ came bloody forth of the virgins belly S. Ambrose vpon S. Luke Wherby it may appeare that the virgin was truly a virgin and truly a mother To the authoritie which they bring of S. Ierome The Ministers alledge no other thing for answere then that which himselfe hath said To wit That when Iesus Christ came where his Disciples were the creature obeyed his Creator What the Doctors alledge of S. Cyril serueth nothing to the confirmation of their purpose Touching the heresie in Iouinian iustly reproued by Saint Augustine who to auoyd the error of the Manichees fel into an other namely that the virgin in her child-birth remained not a virgin The Ministers say that it was not necessary that Iouinian to auoid the error of the Manichees should cal in doubt the virginitie of Mary forasmuch as the foundioÌ„ of the same virginitie is vpon this that she was neuer knowne of man Touching the conclusion that the Doctors would draw from the authorities aboue said and apply them to their purpose which was that one body may be in two places at one self-same instaÌ„t or that two bodies may be in one self-same place togither The Ministers say that it is altogither impertineÌ„t And that neither by the places they alledged nor any others that they can gather can they any way inferre the same Adding further that it shall neuer be found in any good Author By meanes wherof they coÌ„clude against the Doctors that their foundatioÌ„ is nothing And that they wil falsly authorise their error by the name title of the auncient Fathers for fault of good vnderstanding and taking the terme piercing which some of the auncient Fathers haue vsed and signifieth not a a confusion and mingling togither of diuers bodies occupying one selfe same place but only the yeelding that the one made to giue the other passage As we see and haue experience that the aire giueth place to a man that walketh and birds that flye And the Ministers for conclusion say that that which they maintaine and propose by their answere doth not derogate nor any way diminish the greatnes glory and power of God but doth establish the same and much more aduance it then such prodigious absurdities as those are which the Doctors set foorth and will perswade without any reason or probable meanes woulde doo For they confesse that all whatsoeuer happened both in the entry of Iesus Christ into the house where his disciples were and in his going out as wel of the virgins wombe as of the Sepulchre there was the myraculous diuine power of God But they denie that thereby nothing happened which was impossible and contained any contradiction What they alledge of Caluin Beza are friuolous things and proposed more to slaunder and contradict then to search out and make manifest the truth Where as they say that all antiquitie with one consent do vnderstand by the terme Aphantos ap'autâ—n That Iesus Christ made himselfe invisible to his Disciples abiding in their presence The Ministers for their answer are content to alledge vnto them one onely authoritie of S. Ambrose vpon S. Luke who expounding these words saith That hee retired from them And an other of Nicholas de Lyra which saith vpon this place that it was done by the agilitie of his glorious body which can suddenly vanish away To that they alledge of the piercing the heauens when Iesus Christ ascended thither the Ministers do answer that it is very like they claue a sunder and were opened a when at the Baptisme of our Lord Iesus Christ the Doue descended vpon him And when as also S. Stephen was stoned Touching that which they reproue in the first answere of the Ministers saying that in the 12 chap. of the Acts there is made no mention of the opening of the prison The Ministers do admonish them to read diligently the text of the said place And there they shal find that wheÌ„ they had passed the first 2. watch the vtter gate of the prisoÌ„ which was of IroÌ„ did opeÌ„ of it own accord to
make the Angel Peter passage Whereas the Doctors reply vpon the answer of the Ministers to the argument of the Camell formerly proposed by them in their first answer the Ministers say that there is nothing in their said answer against the word of God But that they deceiue themselues referring to the Camell whereof hee had formerly made mention that which ought to bee vnderstood but of the sauing and conuersion of the rich man only For our Lord Iesus Christ saying that that which is impossible to men is possible with God nought else pretendeth but to answere the question which the Disciples had propounded To wit who could be saued Answering wherevnto hee said that it was indeed impossible to men who of themselues are inclined to trust in their riches But to God it was possible which could pull backe or withdraw their hearts from that vaine confidence As touching the argument which they will build vpon the presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper whereof they wil inferre that it is in diuers places the Ministers confesse the antecedent denie the consequence For there is no doubt but by faith our Lord Iesus Christ is spiritually present to all the faithfull in the Supper Whence neuerthelesse must not be inferred that he is there locally definitiuely noâ— corporally And wheras they say that it is not imaginable the Ministers do avow the same in regard of these which are not taught and enlightned by the spirit of God and haue no other imagination then that which their natural facultie doth furnish them withall But they that beeing illuminate by the grace of God haue a true and liuely faith in their hearts it is no more impossible to represent vnto them Iesus Christ crucified in the Supper then it was to the Galathians to represent and propose him vnto them as present and visible at the preaching of S. Paul and to those likewise of whom Saint Ciprian maketh mention in his Sermon of the Supper That in celebrating the same they embrace the Crosse of Iesus Christ sucke his bloud and fasten their tongues within his wounds All which things are done by a liuely contemplation and apprehension of faith which is no other thing then the ground of things hoped for and an euidence of those things which are not seene as S. Paul doth define it Touching the truth of the thing conioyned with the signes and Sacraments the Ministers confesse that the outward signes are neuer without their effect toward the faithfull who cannot be partakers of the bread and wine distributed in the Supper but that they participate therwithall of the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified for their sinnes and of his bloud shead to ratifie the new couenant which God made with his people But if the Doctors will inferre thereof a corporall presence in the Supper the Ministers will denie it And their reason is because such a presence was not required among the auncient Fathers who left not for all that to eate one selfe-same spirituall foode with all the faithfull at this day as it shal be by the grace of God more amply declared when the Lord of Neuers shall please to command conference of this matter To that which the Doctors slaundering the Ministers do say that they attribute more to themselues and to humane power then they do attribute to the power of God when they say that by faith they make present the things which be absent seeing that God according to the doctrine of the Ministers cannot make one selfe-same body to bee in diuers places at one instant The Ministers doo answere that such antitheses be foolish and vnfit for the purpose and that there is much more great apparance that the Doctors do presume more of their power and that of the other Priests of the Romane Church then of the power of God for God created not by his word but the heauens the earth and the other creatures therein contained And they in their consecration doo attribute vnto themselues the power to create their Creator as is contained in their breuiarie where the Priest saith Qui creauit me creatur mediante me He that created me is created my meanes of mee And the Ministers much maruell that the Doctors call the vertue of faith a humane power seeing the great and admirable effects thereof proposed vnto vs in so many examples of the scripture chiefly in the eleuenth Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes where Saint Paul saith That the Saints by faith haue subdued kingdomes c. All which things surmount not onely the vertue but also the capacitie of humane vnderstanding In that immediately following this article there is but repetitions in the reply of the Doctors and many vnprofitable and superfluous wordes and little or nothing of that should be necessary to the purpose And as they haue answered them particularly to euery point which they repeate they send them now backe to the former answeres and pray them henceforth not to serue them twise with one messe Concerning the Sacrament of the Aultar as they call it The Ministers neither receiue nor any way approue that their Masse which they pretend to bee a Sacrament is a Sacrament and much lesse a sacrifice by which remission of finnes may bee any way obtained Yea they say that both their Priest and pretended sacrifice with all the things thereof depending are blasphemies and impieties by which GOD is dishonoured all the benefite of Iesus Christ buried and nought esteemed and the Church of Iesus Christ seduced and abused as by the pursuite of the Conference shall plainely appeare And also that the Ministers do no way corrupt either the sence or the words which Iesus Christ vsed in the institution of his holy Supper Thursday the 18. of Iuly in the yeare aboue said The reply or obiection of the Doctors against the answere of the Ministers touching the Article of the Omnipotencie of God on Satterday the 20. of Iuly THe Doctors say that this cosequence God cannot by his omnipotencie make one body to be in two places at one instant he is not therefore omnipotent is so good and strong that the Ministers without wrapping and more and more drowning themselues in execrable blasphemies to the great griefe and horror of the Doctors can no way denie the same And besides the two blasphemies maintained by the Ministers in their former answers that is to say that it was impossible for God to make one body to bee in two places and that it was impossible for him to will the same in the first article of theyr last answere they adde foure or fiue other blasphemies out of which doo flow yet many others besides the absurdities falshoods and impostures they vse to the said Doctors And first they set forth that God cannot do a thing which derogateth the order which he hath established in the world Secondly that it should bee to establish mutabilitie and change in the Councell of God did they confesse that hee
same out of Gratian. And that men may knowe there is no great trust to be giuen to the fragments of Gratian without recourse to the copies of Saint Augustine in the tytle of Canon these words are there extracted out of the exposition of S. Augustine vpon the 54 Psalme From whence hee draweth the onely beginning of his Canon and yet doth he not truly cyte it The â—est of the said Canon is taken from diuers passages of S. Augustine And although there should bee Oportat S. Augustine speaketh after his wonted manner according to the proprietie of a body opposing the diuinitie to the humanitie without touching the operation of Gods omnipotencie Whereof when he maketh mention and that he speaketh of the Sacrament he plainly affirmeth the body of Iesus Christ to be in diuers places by the omnipotencie of God As the Doctors hope in their resolution to deduce as well out of him as other auncients also The 8. artide containeth many errors against Philosophie and truth First because the Ministers make no distinction betweene the body they cab Mathematicall to wit hauing dimension of breadth length and height and the Phisicall or naturall body to wit which is composed of a substantiall forme and matter by the vnion whereof it is made a naturall substantiall body Secondly although the body should bee without quantitie yet should it differ from our soules seperated which bee not materiall substances and consequently should it also differ from the Angells and spirits Thirdly the Ministers by the conclusion of this article doo manifestly declare that they acknowledge not any substantiall body And where they say that although God might seperate the dimensioÌ„s from a substance without corrupting the same that such substance should remaine spiritually as the Angels they are deceiued For such substance should not remaine immateriall as are our soules and the Angels which be not capable of dimensions and therefore should it yet bee different from Angels and our soules Concerning the ninth article the Ministers answere nothing to the purpose For the Doctors say not that the massinesse and waight bee essentiall in a body but to presse downeward is essentiall to the sadnesse and waight of a body And by their obiection they demaunded to knowe whether an earthly and massy body abiding in it substance and natural waight might not by the omnipotencie of God be hanged in the ayre without falling downward albeit it were against it nature and inclination Moreouer for answere to many articles which concerne the act of two bodies in one place and the passages of holy scripture and auncient Authors produced by the Doctors to proue that it was in Gods power to cause two bodies to bee in one onely place and contrariwise that by the same reason it was in the same power to cause one body to bee in two places First the Doctors say that the Ministers doo wrong to denie this consequence Two bodies by the power of God may be in one selfe-same place Then on the contrarie part one body may be in two places by the selfe-same power For as great repugnancie there is to Gods established order in the one as in the other and as great contradiction in nature founded vppon one selfe-same cause and reason to wit in the limitation and circumscription of a body Which as it is naturall to be in place so is it naturall for it to bee in place proportioned and answerable to it measures And if for the number of diuers places where a body should bee one may inferre that it should no more bee a body as implying contradiction by the same reason according to one onely place where many bodies should bee may also bee inferred that they should no more be many bodies or that many bodies should be one Which would imply the contradiction as the former And where the Ministers denie the antecedent which is that two bodies may bee in one place the Doctors to proue it haue produced the passages of scripture of the closed doores the birth of the body of our Lord of the Virgin the going out of the Sepulchre the passage of a Camell through the eye of a needle and the piercing of the heauens made by Christ in his ascention And for as much as the Ministers denie these actes contained expresly in holy scripture and expounded by the auncient Christians and depraue the same at their pleasure The Doctors estsoones vpoÌ„ the texts of scripture do say as followeth First as touching the closed doores Saint Iohn saith That Iesus came meaning into the place where his Disciples were But hee came not there without entering thereinto For to bee found in the middest of them without entring there should bee a much greater myracle then that hee entred there simply Secondly it is said Cum fores essent clausa or Ianuis clausis To wit that hee there entered the doores beeing shut And there is no apparance that the scripture maketh mention of doores rather then an other place were it not to shewe the place by which hee entred Thirdly it is added not in vaine that the doores were shut without saying that any opening was myraculously made For it is alwaies said Quod venit Ianuis clausis That hee came the doores beeing shut And were it true that the doores had bin opened by diuine power this should be false that our Lord entred Ianuis clausis for hee should haue entered Ianuis apertis howsoeuer they had bene opened And to shewe that the common consent of all the Auncientes haue bene that Iesus entered therein by the closed doores the Doctors set forth foure foundations drawne from the auncient Fathers The first is that all expresly confesse the myracle of such an entrie to haue bene wrought in the body of Iesus Christ The second is that such myracle was there wrought by the power of God aboue the nature of a body The third is that the Fathers especially iudge that herein consisteth the myracle that the body pasâ—ed through the closed doores and that so it was with an other body And for the fourth ground they adde that the Apostles by reason of such entring supposed that the body of Iesus Christ was not a true body but a spirit or vaine vision which the Ministers lightly passe ouer without any answere Now so it is that if by the power of God as the Ministers will haue it an opening was made of the doores or any other part of the house to giue entrie to the bodie of Iesus Christ then the myracle did not consist in the said body but in the doores or other part of the house which was open and nothing had beene there against the nature of the bodie of our Lorde for it is not repugnant to any bodie whatsoeuer to enter by an opening made by myracle or otherwise Bee it that Iustine was not Author of the questions against the Gentiles yet can they not deny but they are of some auncient Christian of the
superfluitie or repetition in them or whether they be impertinent let the reader iudge But for this cause the Doctors will not cease to require eftsoones the Ministers that they bring some passage of the scripture to ground that God cannot make one body to be in two places seeing that this consequence is ouerfoolish and ridiculous God cannot lye Therefore can he not make one bodie to be in two places For so should they make their assumption Now God hath said and ordained that one body cannot be in two places therefore can he not make it so to be But neuer will they instruct by the truth of the Assumption or Minor Proposition the contrarie whereof hath bene sufficiently verified by many testimonies of the scripture The Doctors also require the Ministers to produce some Father yea some man euer reputed Catholique which hath dared to pronounce that God could not make one body to be in two places For full answere the said Ministers can bring forth none which euer hath vsed such a speech except S. Augustine but by them falsly alledged both touching the letter the sence of the letter The Doctors will not cease to beate both into the Ministers and also all persons that there is no place of scripture found nor booke of any auncient Father that God cannot make one body to be in diuers places Concerning the last article the Doctors haue resolued to shewe by the pure and expresse word of God expounded by common consent of all antiquitie that our Lord did institute the Sacrament and sacrifice of the Aultar and will teach the effect and vertue of the Masse according to the institution and ordinance of Iesus Christ And will make it also to be vnderstood that the Ministers haue polluted and defiled the Sacrament by Iesus Christ instiruted And that the Supper which the Ministers maintaine is no way the Sacrament but a prophanation of holy things containing execrable blasphemie whereof the whole world ought to haue horror Sunday the 12. of Iuly in the yeare aforesaid The answere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctors sent to them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 22. day of Iuly about fiue of the Clocke in the enening Anno. 1560. THe Ministers before they answere particularly to the obiections and slaunders of the Doctors seeing that each way and causelesse they taxe them for blasphemers haue aduised to tell them in the beginning of theyr answere that to bee wronged by them they hold it not so great an iniurie nor themselues the more blasphemers for being so holden and reputed by them no more then our Lord Iesus Christ because he was so pronounced by Caiphas the high Priest and S. Stâ—phen to whom the like crime was imputed by the enemies of truth And Naboth who was likewise accused to haue blasphemed God and the king albeit he was innocent For it is the manner of all them which hate the truth and the light to blaspheme that which they vnderstand not as thereof write S. Peter and S. Iude and to giue the raines sometimes to their furie so that they shamelesly denie things most apparant and confesse others concerning the same which bee straunge and absurd Which thing is seene to haue befallen the Doctors about the Ministers whom they neither can heare attentiuely nor iudge of rightly And the full end of their purpose it seemeth is to contradict them indifferently in all things and to say without any examination or iudgement that whatsoeuer they produce is blasphemy and lies For the Ministers speaking of the omnipotencie of God according to that they haue learned thereof and is contained in the scriptures haue euer said that God is almightie in as much as he can do without any exception whatsoeuer he will and that there is no power in heauen nor in earth which is able to let alter or in any maner or wise hinder the full effect and perfect execution of his eternall vnchangeable counsailes But neuerthelesse that his omnipotencie must not be stretched without any discretion or distinction to all the things generally which men can conceiue or in their foolish phantasies imagine but to those onely which neither are nor can be contrarie to his iustice to his goodnesse to his wisedome nor consequently to his holy and eternall will wisedome and truth which is and euer shal be to doo all things well and wisely with number waight and measure and without that there is any inequitie disorder or contradiction in whatsoeuer he doth All which things being well vnderstood and considered will discharge the Ministers among all good and iust people from the sâ—aunders which the Doctors impose vpon them and falâ—ly published to make them odious to all the world and stirre vp publike hate against them Wherefore to make their slaunders more like to truth by adding and diminishing they change and alter almost the whole meaning of the Ministers well knowing that otherwise they could neuer haue meane to ground their slaunders nor to giue any colour or likelihood therevnto which thing shall now appeare by the deduction and particular confutation of the pretended blasphemies obiected to the Ministers by the said Doctors First the Doctors accuse the Ministers in that they haue said that the omnipotencie of God ought not to be measured but by the things onely which bee agreeable to his will and are not derogate either to his wisedome his truth his nature nor to the order which hee hath established in the world And to verifie their accusation and slaunder they breake in two this whole sentence and take thereof but the last part onely the which they haue seperated from those going before wherewith it was conioyned expresly by the Ministers the more clearely to expound and shewe how the omnipotencie of God ought to be knowne beleeued and adored of all the world Moreouer they haue not taken nor vnderstood the word Order as doo the Ministers Whereby the Ministers haue willed to signifie the estate and disposition which God by his prouidence and eternall and vnchangeable will hath established conserueth and entertaineth in all things rightly to gouerne and let that no confusion happen in his workes euen as S. Augustine hath defined it in his bookes De Ordine and hee himselfe hath vsed the same in the fift booke of his confessions Which the Doctors not vnderstanding haue reduced that which the Ministers thereof said to the ordinarie and wonted course of nature and to the mouing of creatures which bee in the world And to giue exception to the doctrine aforesaid they obiect the myracles which God doth aboue nature and thereof inferre that God doth and can doo many things against the order by him established and decreed Whervnto the Ministers answer that myracles albeit they be done beyond aboue the ordinary course of nature yet are they not done against the order aforesaid For as much as all things reduced to the prouidence and ordinance of God
the Priest in the Masse from the rest of the people is an abolishment of the Communion of the Supper and consequently damnable before God And to be briefe the adoration of bread and wine be it in the Masse or out of the Masse is an intollerable Idolatrie Two points yet remaine in the writing of the Doctors whereof the Ministers will admonish them The one is that the said Ministers haue neuer found in the scriptures that faith is a humane worke but that it is the worke of God and a gift which hee bestoweth vpon his elect The other point is that they confesse they cannot bring forth one auncient Author which hath said in expresse termes that one body could not be in diuers places at one instant for so much as the contrarie thereof seemed so absurd and straunge vnto them and so much against the reason and faith which all faithfull people ought to haue that they neuer thought such an opinion had found place in the heart of any man that was called a Christian The Ministers to ende this answere say that it will much more please them to handle the questions aforesaid then to dispute of the opening of doores of the Sepulchre or of the heauens as to their great griefe they haue done these dayes passed and that for two reasons The one because that the decyding and resolution of such questions cannot bee drawne nor gathered out of the scripture And the second because it cannot much serue either to the aduancement of the honour and glorie of God or the edification and instruction of his Church Thursday the 25. day of Iuly in the yeare aforesaid The Doctors reply to the writing of the Ministers sent vnto them by my Lord the Duke of Neuers the 25. day of Iuly about 8. of the clocke in the euening the yeare 1566. WHere the Ministers say that they doo great wrong to call them blasphemers seeing thereof they are innocent as Iesus Christ S. Stephen and Naboth to whome men falsly imputed such like crime The Doctors say that the Ministers therein doo imitate the good personages the Donatists who still complained of the great iniuries and slaunders which they endured said they of the Catholikes and yet men know by the histories how it was and how much they were like to Christ S. Stephen and Naboth as may also be knowne the conformitie of the said Ministers to such holy examples As much might the Anabaptists say to them of the Church called reformed when they call them heretikes And as much might and did Seruetus say who for his blasphemies was burned at Geneua reputing himselfe happie to be iudged by Caluin a blasphemer and to suffer for his doctrine the paines of death We must not therfore beleeue that the Ministers are not blasphemers because more boldly then all other heretikes they reiect the name of blasphemer but meet it is to examine whether their doctrine importeth blasphemie or not Now the Doctors say that there is no blasphemie worthy of more great execration then to denie the omnipotencie of God and no lesse it is then simply to denie that there is a God So that such deniall importes an Atheisme For to take from God that which is proper to his nature is as much to say as there is no God As it well pleaseth S. Basil writing in one of his Homilies intituled That God is not the Author of euill That it is no lesse blasphemie to say that God is author of euill then to say that God is not God In so much as to take away from God his goodnesse which to him is naturall is wholy to take away his diuinitie The like also may be said of the omnipotencie that whosoeuer denieth or diminisheth the same he denieth also his diuinitie The question then is to knowe whether the Ministers will abolish the omnipotencie of God not in proper termes for they seeme to confesse it but in affirming that the power of God is measured according to his will so that he cannot but that which he will and other like propositions contained in the precedent answere of the Ministers Whether the Doctors haue proued such propositions to containe blasphemies or no they refer them therin to euery man of sound iudgement who shal be any thing conuersant in holy scriptures and the bookes of auncient Christians which shall also be knowne by the Ministers friuolous answeres in their last writing to the Doctors obiections Who nothing maruel that the Ministers are deceiued in the nature of the omnipotencie seeing they erre in the foundation and know not wherein it lyeth and why God is called almightie For they haue learned of the scripture say they that God is almightie because hee can doo whatsoeuer he will doo and that nothing can resist him which is rather as a signe of the power of God But it is not that vnder correction wherein it consisteth for knowledge whereof it must be considered according to it obiect that is to say according to the things possible to be done so that there is nothing possible which God cannot do Now all without any exception is esteemed possible wherein is found no contradiction to be and not to be and that commeth not by default of the power of God which can do all things but of the repugnancie of the thing which cannot be Which the Ministers from the beginning had well said in euery answere but for that they had answered vpon some Interrogatories that the omnipotencie of God must bee measured by his will supposing to salue that error they are plunged in many other errors out of which for not consessing to haue erred they cannot rid themselues without falling into an infinite number of absurdities Moreouer the Ministers deceiue themselues when they will limit the power of God and not extend it to all things generally that humane spirit can conceiue or imagine For contrariwise it is doubtlesse that the power of God is great aboue all conceit and imagination of the humane spirit that it is infinite and incomprehensible as saith S. Paul God can do more then we demaund or vnderstand And where the Ministers say that God onely can doo all things which are not contrarie to his iustice wisedome goodnesse and truth and therefore cannot doo generally all things It hath alreadie beene shewed them that to bee able to doo things contrarie to the iustice wisedome goodnesse and truth of God was not power but weakenesse And by the selfe-same reason as saith Saint Augustine in the place by the Doctors in theyr former obiection alledged that he cannot do such things it is an argument of his omnipotencie and not of restraint thereof And where the Ministers inferre that because God cannot do such things he can by consequence do nothing which is contrarie to his wisedome and eternall will which is and euer shall be to doo all things well and wisely with number waight and measure and without that there is any iniustice or
Doctors haue noted the Ministers say by the new interpretation of the order of the world in one word they haue fully answered Which to dissolue the argumēts produced by the Doctors commeth nothing to the purpose And the Ministers passe ouer the alledged places of scriptures which declare the blasphemie and dissemble the contradiction of their doctrine and of that of Caluin touching the prouidence of God in respect of the order established in the world And the Ministers answere not to the Doctors obiectiō that from the third blasphemie flow many others least in confessing the same they might heape blasphemie vpon blasphemie and make their doctrine by this meane odious toall the world For answere to the fourth blasphemie vse the Ministers a distinction of the will of God which may two wayes bee considered The first is called the will knowne by signes and the other the will of good pleasure The Ministers confesse that according to the first God can doo more then he will and not according to the second which is as they say equall to the power of God is hidden and vnknowne to men The which distinction if it ought to haue place the Doctors obiect that the foundation of the Ministers wherevpon they stay the pretended truth of this proposition God cannot make one body to bee in diuers places is wholly destroyed For the Ministers will haue the power of God to be measured according to his will not according to the second which is hidden vnto men It behoueth then that this be taken according to the first by the which they confesse that God can do more then he will do Whereof it followeth that the rule by them giuen to measure Gods power is false For it cannot be measured by his will seeing he can do more then he will Moreouer the Doctors say that the Ministers should not require thē to proue that God hath willed that one body should be in two places to declare that he could do it For the Doctors might obiect that to teach that God may doo something it needeth not to proue that he hath formerly willed it For according to the Ministers confession God can do more then he will The Doctors adde for as much as the will of God appeareth not to vs but by signes words and effects and that the order established in the world according to his prouidence as the Ministers agree is hidden vnto men that the Ministers cannot affirme and shewe that God hath established such order in the world that one body may not bee in diuers places For meete it were they should teach such an ordinance of God and declaration of his will Oft times haue the Ministers bene required to bring one onely place of scripture where such a will of God is manifest and where it is said that hee cannot make one body to bee in diuers places As touching the place of Tertullian the Doctors for vnderstanding thereof refer themselues to euery man of sound iudgement and say that the Ministers haue ill to the purpose alledged Theodoret and it maketh more against them then with them For when he writeth that it must not be indeterminately said that God can do all things comprehending therein good and euill in that he maketh no restraint of the omnipotencie of God but contrariwise doth amplifie the same in so much that not to be able to do euil things is both a vertue and power as before hath beene largely declared Where the Ministers do instant the Doctors to shewe that God hath willed one body to bee in two places the Doctors answere that these are two different questions whether God can do it or whether he hath willed it And when it shall be confessed as it ought to bee of all Christians that the power is in God very easie shall it be to shewe the will by the word of the Supper and of the Ascention which they of the pretended reformed religion haue accustomed to depraue and disswade men from by the impossibilitie which they faigne to bee in God to put one body in two places Also the Doctors leaue it to the readers iudgement whether S. Augustine haue bene cyted by the Ministers to the purpose or no. And to that which concerneth whether ihe quantitie be essentiall to a body or not the Doctors speaking of a body as doth Philosophers namely In predicamento quantitatis haue neuer doubted but it is essentiall But the difficultie is to know whether to be circumscript in a place certaine be essentiall to a body And the Doctors suppose they haue sufficiently proued that it is not essentiall but that it is an accident naturall to a body And they verifie their saying by the definition of a body wherein all essentiall reason is comprised and such it is that a body is a kinde of firme quantitie of three dimensions length breadth and deepenesse where no mention is made of the circumscription of place in the saide definition What pertaineth to the question concerning places aboue the heauen the Ministers as they are wont do lightly passe ouer And for want of good answere they wrong the Doctors calling them Sophisters And that which they bring to confirme that our Lord is in one place aboue the heauen is ouer friuolous For by the same reason might one conclude that the diuinitie is circumscript And Aduerbes signifying place shall be found in the scripture when it speaketh of the diuinitie as well as when it speaketh of the humanitie of Iesus Christ Where the Ministers impute to the Doctors that they confesse their Canons to be false it is a manifest slaunder For the Doctors acknoweldge not any Canons but in as much as they are taken out of the Councels other bookes authenticke and not according as they are extracted of any particular person as is the polinge of Gratian wherevnto they giue no credit but as much as that which hee cyteth deserueth For resolution of the 8. article the Doctors send the Ministers to the schoole of Philosophers to vnderstand that in a predicament of substance there is a body which is a kind of substance and in a predicament of quantitie an other body which is a kinde of quantitie And to learne them also that the body which is of quantitie is accidentall and not essentiall to a body of predicament of substance Moreouer the Ministers do erre against all Philosophie calling a materiall substance incorporall But the Doctors will not rest vppon such things and are much grieued that they haue not to do with people better grounded in Ppilosophie For that being such they could better touch the reason then the Ministers do The Doctors doo maintaine the consequence of two bodies in one placle to infer it for necessarie that one body may be in two places for there is like reason and like inconuenience in the one as in the other And therefore if the one be to be done the other is possible and so they referre it to the readers
Gods Almightinesse came after to maintaine second that which he had of the promise One may see by these examples what daunger there is to depart and draw backe although neuer so litle from the word of God by which we are guided to the knowledge of his will And by the knowledge of his will conducted to the consideration and iudgement which we ought to make and haue of his Almightinesse For want whereof the Doctors are fallen into errors and raylings which they propose to the Ministers by their writing and conclusion of their resolution That is to say that the body of Iesus Christ may be in diuers places at one selfe-same instant which is against the faith we ought to haue and constantly retaine of the wisedome prouidence and euerlasting truth of our God and against that likewise which wee ought to haue and keepe of our Lords true humanitie And that which they first alledge of S. Ierome against Vigilantius nought serueth for the proofe and confirmation of their error Where no other thing he saith but that the soules of the Saints are not inclosed in a certaine prison as dreamed Vigilantius but do follow the Lambe whithersoeuer he goeth Nor that which they alledge of Saint Augustine in the booke which he made of the pure care of the dead For in that booke hee himselfe confesseth that he is incertaine of that which the Doctors doo propose and are assured And nomore doo the three authorities they alledge of Saint Iohn Chrisostome Saint Ambrose and Saint Augustine whose sentences ought to be taken and vnder stood of the Sacrament and not of the thing signified by the Sacrament As in the next conference the Ministers well hope to shew The Ministers do much maruel that the Doctors so draw backe and will not but vnwillingly enter into conference for defence of their Masse and to gainsay the Supper celebrated in the reformed Churches For seeing they hold it for the principall foundation of theyr Religion and propose the same for a meane of saluation to the whole world That they be not seene seducers nor ouer credulous to beleeue or teach an incertaine and vnassured thing they should alwayes be prouided and furnished with reasons to the end they might approue and readily defend that which they beleeue and say and might conuince them also that would deny the same But in this it appeareth to proceed of of an euill conscience which being timerous and fearefull flyeth alwaies the combat and the light It is long time since the Ministers haue importuned them to enter into the deciding and conference of these two points and to bring them thervnto they haue proposed vnto them that it was the end for which the conference was appointed which Madame de Buillon in whose fauour it was made once or twise hath publikely required and that they also had often protested that they were not for other ende assembled with the Doctors then to satisfie therein the said Lady of Buillon and not to be examined by them as they do falsly pretend For the Ministers haue no desire to be examined of such Doctors being Priests Ioyned that to be taught in the points of religion and to know the truth they would not choose such Maisters nor repaire vnto them and frequent theyr schooles for that purpose And yet notwithstanding all the foresayd remonstrances often made and repeated by the Ministers the Doctors haue alwayes vntill now deferred to conferre of the foresaid points awayting as it is likely that some occasion should be offered to breake off and determine the sayd conference before they had begunne to speak thereof Albeit had they any zeale to thâ— honour of God and to the edification of his Church they should by all meanes haue procured that the sayd two points should haue beene fully cleared and resolued be it that they would confirme and strengthen them of their part or withdraw as they pretend those of our side from their errors For it is not much needfull hereafter to dispute of the Saints of Purgatory Pilgrigrimages and other like points In regard of which the most part of the world is at this day cleared By meanes whereof as well the Doctors as the Ministers ought chiefly to insist vpon these two points and to endeuour with them to make them cleare and to be vnderstood of each one and not to vse Sophistries and cauils to make them obscure and retaine thereby the simple in their ignorance as the Doctors endeuour to do Who hauing left of set purpose the Theses Articles proposed to them by the Ministers with order good methode in their last answeres do confusedly propose certaine questions culled out of their schoole diuinitie euer more and more to fold vp this matter And in so doing they withstand as euer hitherto they haue done what so and so often they haue protested to wit that they would examine the confession of the reformed Churches whereof notwithstanding they haue not handled one only point in all the conference Wherein they haue shewed and yet plainly do shewe the distrust they haue to be able to withstand so cleare and apparant trueth as that which is proposed in the saide confession Answeres to the Preface of the Doctors Questions THe Doctors before they propose their Questions in their Preface do call the Supper celebrated in the refor-Churches a prophane and polluted banquet And in so saying they neither shame nor feare first to blaspheme Iesus Christ who instituted the same and is the authour therof and then to condemne the Apostles of Impietie which so haue celebrated and taught it together with all the auncient Churches which followed and obserued whiles it reremained in it puritie the forme and maner which the Euangelists and Apostles had taught and left by their writings But the Ministers would willingly demaund of the Lordes our Maisters that they particularly note vnto them wherein they can violate the institution ordinance of Iesus Christ and leaue his example and that of his Apostles in the celebration of the Supper For when they will celebrate the same they first assemble the whole Church together as Iesus Christ did his Apostles and Disciples where after their publike confession of sinnes and vnderstandingly made in the name of all they make a Sermon to the people wherein according to the grace and power which God hath giuen them they declare the causes and occasions the end the vse the points and effects of the holy Supper to lift vp the hearts of the people to the consideration of the incomprehensible loue which the Father hath shewed towards his Church when in fauour thereof and for the saluation of the same he hath not spared his owne sonne but exposed him to a cruell and cursed death to the end that each one calling to minde so great a grace and mercie be kindled and inflamed in the loue of God and tremble at the ingratitudes and rebellious offences and sinnes which he hath committed
the Doctors wel reason of the rigor of Penetrare as the Ministers did of the rigour of Aperire which more often is found in the scripture without signification of the reall opening of the heauens then Penetrare is found in the scripture to signifie a diuision and actuall cutting of the heauens For Aperire Caelos is often found for imaginary and spirituall opening and hardly is Penetrare Caelos euer found for actuall diuision of the heauens And therefore had the Doctors better reason to conclude by the rigour of the verbe Dierchesthai or Penetrare to pierce without actuall diuision of the heauens then the Ministers had to inferre the opening of them by the verbe Aperire The Ministers in the last article obiect to the Doctors that they haue passed ouer some places of scripture by which it appeareth that faith is the worke of God whervnto say the Doctors that in some one of their writings they haue expresly confessed that faith in as much as it is a gift of God it is a worke of God but in as much as he that beleeueth worketh together with God in beleeuing for Nemo credit nisivolēs no man beleeueth vnlesse he be willing it is a humane work And it is not repugnāt one self-same work for diuers causes to be a worke of God and a worke of man And where they say that the auncient Fathers haue said if not in proper yet in equiualent termes that God could not cause one body to be in diuers places that is false And the Ministers neuer haue nor can shewe the same and contradict their last writing For bringing the reason why the Fathers haue not expresly said it It was said they because they neuer thought that such an absurditie would euer fall into the braine of man Which reason ought to haue place for the saying in termes equiualent as in expresse termes sith one selfe-same thing is signified as well by the one as by the other As touching the rest the Ministers neuer answer to the principall point whereof they haue bene so often admonished and they efsoones admonish them should they a thousand times call this saying a repetition to wit that they are required to bring scripture to proue that it repugneth the order established in the world the truth the wisedome omnipotencie and vnchangeable will of God that one body may be in two places which thing they cannot do but they will answere as they are accustomed that is to say nothing Wherein appeareth that their doctrine is not founded vpon Gods word but vpon their owne opinion or particular inspiration which cannot be but of Sathan For it cannot be of the holy Ghost which is against the common consent of the Church vniuersall And vpon the same are also founded the other articles of their religion albeit they disguise them and promise Gods word to euery purpose A short Aduertisement of the Doctors vpon the Ministers Resolution touching the omnipotencie of God THe Doctors are astonied at the fashiō of the Ministers in their words and writings For they themselues from the beginning of the Conference haue neuer had patience to prosecute conclude one onely point without mingling other things therewithall impertinent to the matter in question as shal appeare by the reading of the acts And before their resolution made of the omnipotencie of God they haue heaped vp all the articles which they could remember and throwne one vpon an other without cause or reason Although the Doctors at their request had proposed the Articles of the Supper And after dispute of the omnipotencie of God to make present the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the holy Sacrament to come orderly to shewe and proue that the will of God hath bene such and that there it is But the Doctors well vnderstand the good custome of all them of the pretended reformed religion which is to spet in the eyes of Christians all the articles of the Religion and theyr inuented filthinesse all on one threed to the end that nought bee determined that all abide in confusion and that the Serpent glide awaye hauing cast his venome Moreouer by obseruation of the Ministers answeres it shall bee seene and knowne that they neuer stay vpon any certaine and the same answere but rather of an act alledged out of the scripture where of euery question they haue giuen therevnto diuers impertinent and sometimes vnsufferable answeres Of which the Doctors do admonish them that can read these Conferences and pray them to haue regard to the same and thereof referre them to their iudgement Furthermore the Doctors admonish the Ministers that they may or ought to knowe that all Sects of our times doo cast before the eyes of those whom they will abuse the same beadroll of Articles which the Ministers in theyr Resolution haue gathered together to get audience against the Church Catholique and to bring in theyr heresies and errors vnder the name of the glorie of GOD. Whereof they boaste to bee defenders as well as the Ministers And therefore are they not so acceptable in theyr opinions and conclusions that the Ministers can pretend any right to exalt the power and glorie of God by such mingling and confounding of all matters together Moreouer the Doctors shewe that they may with better reason retort against the Ministers the conclusiō which they pretend to inferre of the subtiltie and craft of Sathan which is as they write that Sathan vnder faire shewe of pietie glideth like a Serpent into the Church of GOD to put therein disorder and confusion and in the end to assaile God himselfe The Doctors do pray each one to consider in himselfe whether the Ministers purpose be not such by their deductions and generally by the principall points of theyr doctrine For vnder faire pretext to roote out some abuses and errors against the word of the Lord which they falsly studie to perswade the world to bee in the Church Catholique And vnder the shadow to preach that they seeke the aduancement of the name of the same Lord they goe about to spoile God of all his proprieties and perfection albeit they no more declare it then Sathan told his meaning to the first man Furthermore the Ministers abase the merit and efficacie of the bloud of Iesus Christ and open a doore by their doctrine to all vices and sinnes Be it so the Doctors will not repeate what the Ministers haue held concerning the omnipotencie of God because they shall fill their writings therewithall But so it is that in their goodly resolution although they suite it with seemely words that God cannot after them but so much as they please to receiue of his wisdome and will which they disguise after their owne sence when it is found declared in the scripture Against the goodnesse of God they hold that he is the author and worker of euill and of sinne Against his mercie they teach that he neuer pardoneth nor will pardon a man which shall
conioyned they be sometimes by some occasion seperated and remoued the one from the other as touching their bodies yet for all that do they not leaue to be one flesh and one body by meanes of the societie and matrimoniall familiaritie which is betweene them In like case albeit that Iesus Christ with whom wee are conioyned and vnited by the faith and trust which wee haue in him and his promises bee as touching his bodie resident in heauen wee yet abiding vppon the earth and that by meanes thereof there is great distance and space betweene him and vs as touching his bodie that neuerthelesse hindereth vs not to bee flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones that hee is not our head and wee his members that hee is not our husband and wee his spowse that wee bee not of one selfe same body that wee bee not engrafted into him that wee be not cloathed with him that wee abide not in him as the boughes and buddes in the Vine And there is neither distance of times nor places whatsoeuer it be there is no difference of times which can hinder such a coniunction and that the faithfull eate truly his flesh and his bloud For as the auncient Fathers albeit they were two or three thousand yeares before Iesus Christ dyed yet left they not to communicate in his flesh crucified and to eate the same spirituall meate which we eate and to drinke the same spirituall drinke which wee drinke The faithfull also which are come twelue or fifteene hundred yeares after leaue not what place soeuer they be in to participate as did the Fathers in the same meate and in the same drinke which they haue done And no other difference there is betweene the eating of the Fathers which were before the comming of Iesus Christ and of them that haue followed him but the reason of more or lesse that is to say that there is in the one more ample and expresse declaration of the good will of God towards vs then in the other Whence must be concluded that from the beginning of the world vnto the end there neuer was nor shall be other coniunction betweene our Lord Iesus Christ and his Church then spirituall that is to fay wrought by the spirit of God For euen as there is but one faith in the Fathers and in vs which respecteth alwayes on the one part and the other our Lord Iesus Christ so are we not also otherwise conioyned with him then they haue bene As then it is so that the Fathers haue had no other societie nor communion then spirituall It followeth thereof that we also are not nor can be otherwise then spiritually cōioyned with him Neuerthelesse it is not said that wee and the Fathers are not flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones and that all together doo not partake as well in his humanitie as in his diuinitie But that which wee say is that all this participation which wee haue in him is by the operation vertue of the holy Ghost which thing Christ Iesus in S. Iohn speaking of the meane of this coniunction teacheth clearly when he saith The things which I speake vnto you are spirit and life And S. Paul also when hee saith Our fathers did eate the same spirituall meate and dranke the same spirituall drinke Now when wee speake of this spirituall eating common to vs and to the Fathers it must not therfore be thought that we reiect the holy Supper of the Lord or any way thinke that the same vse of bread and wine is superfluous no more then the vse of the water in Baptisme For our Lord knowing the blockishnesse of our vnderstandings and the infirmitie and weakenesse of our hearts and through the pittie he hath of vs willing to helpe and remedie the same hath not contented to haue left vs the ministerie of his word to assure vs of the participation which we haue in his flesh in his bloud and in all the good things thereon depending but hath also willed to adde therevnto the signes of bread and wine which he hath as seales to his word to seale in our hearts by the vse of the same the faith we haue of the foresaid coniunction by his word So that it sufficed him not to haue contracted a couenant with Abraham by the word and promise which he made vnto him but added moreouer therevnto the signe of Circumcision as a seale for more ample confirmation and assurance of the said couenant To the end then that each one may vnderstand what is the Supper of the Lord and what the Ministers do thereof beleeue and teach it is meete to consider and acknowledge in the same three things First the ordinance of the Lord contained in his word and declared by his Ministerie according to his commaundement by which this holy cerimony hath bene ordained and established in the Church for the edification and entertaining of the members thereof which thing must bee diligently obserued to haue it in that honour and reuerence as appertaineth and not to place it in the ranke of other cerimonies which haue no foundation nor reason to authorise them but the onely will and tradition of men Neuerthelesse heed must be taken that by the institution and ordinance whereof we make mention we vnderstand not a certaine pronuntiation of words or any vertue which is hidden in the same as do the Priests of the Romane Church who by ignorance and superstitious opinion which they haue thinke to haue consecrated and transubstantiated the bread and wine in the Masse by the vertue of fiue words Hoc est enim Corpus meum For this is my body breathed and pronounced ouer the Elements Wherein they are greatly deceiued and abused for as much as the word which is the formall cause of the Sacrament is not a word simply said and vttered but a declaration of the institution and ordinance of God made by the Minister according to his commaundement and a preaching of the death of Iesus Christ and of the fruite thereof by which the hearts of the hearers are lifted vp vnto the contemplation and meditation of his benefite and their faith stirred vp and inflamed in his loue and where the same shall not thus be done it must not be thought that the Elements be Sacraments As S. Augustine in the 80. Tract vpon Saint Iohn in these termes teacheth Whence commeth this vertue to the water that in touching the body it washeth the heart sauing that it is done by the word not because it is pronounced but because it is beleeued This word is the word of the faith which wee preach This saith the Apostle to wit If we confesse with our mouth that Iesus is the Lord and beleeue in our heart that God raised him from the dead wee shall be saued And continuing his speech hee addeth in the end these proper words to wit This word of faith which wee preach is that doubtlesse by which baptisme is consecrated
to the ende it might wash vs. Of this as before do the Ministers inferre two things The one is that the word of consecration is not as is said a simple pronuntiation but a publike and manifest declaration of the institution and ordinance and of the whole mysterie of the death of Iesus Christ The other that the signes and Elements consecrated are not chaunged as touching their nature and substance but onely as touching the vse and signification and that onely during the action wherein they doo serue For to consecrate the signes as the water in Baptisme and the bread and wine in the Supper is no other thing then to depute and make them serue to an holy and sacred vse by the publike declaration of the ordinance of God made to this ende and not to chaunge them as touching theyr nature and substance The which vanishing away and beeing abolished there should remaine no more of the signe nor consequently of the Sacrament Euen so then as the water in baptisme after consecration abideth water without that the nature or substance thereof in ought chaungeth or altereth So also the bread and wine in the Supper remaine as touching theyr substance such after consecration as they were before else should there not bee Analogie nor mutuall agreement betweene the signe and the thing signified For what comparison or conformitie is there betweene the accidents of bread and the truth of the body of Iesus Christ Seeing that the accidents of bread as the whitenesse and roundnesse destitute of theyr substance as the Sophisters doo falsly imagine could not nourish nor sustaine the bodie and by that meane should not be proper to signifie that the flesh and bloud of Iesus Christ doo nourish and sustaine our soules This then must bee holden for a thing resolued that the bread and the wine abide in their substance which thing is clearely prooued by that which Iesus Christ speaking of that hee giuen his Disciples to drinke in the Supper calleth it namely fruite of the Vine Which cannot bee applyed to accidents but ought necessarily to bee vnderstood of wine in it proper substance Also by that which Saint Paul saith calling the Elements of the Supper three seuerall times bread and wine yea after they haue beene consecrated Also by that which hee sayeth else-where Wee which are many are one bread and one body for as much as wee are all partakers of one selfe-same bread For there hee will teach vs by the comparison of bread and wine hee proposeth vnto vs that as it is composed of many graines so pasted and mingled together that one cannot distinguish nor seperate one from an other So also ought all the faithfull in the Church to be so conioyned and vnited together in one selfe-same body that it seemeth and appeareth they are members one of an other Now very foolish and from the purpose should this comparison be if the bread which we eate in the Supper and vpon which this comparison is founded were not true bread Also by that which Gelacius Bishop of Rome writing against Eutiches saith The Sacraments saith he which we take is a thing diuine and neuerthelesse doth it not cease to bee substance and nature of bread and wine Also by that which writeth Theodoret in his first Dialogue and in these proper termes The Lord hath honoured with the name of his body and of his bloud the visible signes which doo represent them neuerthelesse without changing the nature of them but onely adding grace to nature The same Author in the second Dialogue speaking likewise of the bread and wine which are distributed in the Supper saith as followeth After sanctification these misticall signes depart not from their nature for they abide in their proper substance forme and figure By meanes whereof one seeth and handleth them after consecration nor more nor lesse then he did before Also by that which saith S. Iohn Chrisostome writing to the Monke Cesarius whose words are such In the Supper we call that which is presented bread before it be sanctified and after sanctification thereof by the diuine grace and meane of the Minister it hath no more the name bread but of the body of the Lord neuerthelesse the nature of the bread is there still remaining By the passages aforesaid as well of the holy scripture as of the auntient Doctors and others which might be yet alledged for this purpose it appeareth that the bread and wine in the Supper abide alwayes as hath bene said in their proper nature and substance as well after consecration as before And it must not be doubted that the faith of the auncient Church hath not euer bene such and that transubstantiation was not setled nor holden in the Romane Church for an Article of faith vntill the time of Innocent the third To gainesay and reiect whatsoeuer hath bene said touching the nature and substance of signes which remaine after consecration the aduersaries of this doctrine do ordinarily alledge that which Iesus Christ saith speaking of the bread in the institution of the Supper Take eate this is my body And resting vpon the naturall and proper signification of the words they obstinately defend that the substance of bread vanisheth in the consecratiō and that there remaineth no other substance but that of the body of Iesus Christ The reason thereof is because they obserue not the figures and maner of speaking which be ordinarie and vsuall in the holy scripture alwayes and as often as the matter of the Saments is questionable For then the name of the things signified is ordinarily attributed to the signes which do signifie and represent them as the name of a couenant is attributed to Circumcision because it was deputed to signifie and confirme the same The Lambe for like reason is called the Passeouer and Baptisme the washing of regeneration not because they bee like and semblable things as the signes and mysteries signified by them but for the conformitie that is betweene them the signes as saith Saint Augustine take oftentimes the name of the things which they represent The error then commeth because they take and vnderstand the fashions and maners of figuratiue speeches as if they were proper and naturall Now that this kinde of speaking Take yee and eate yee This is my body is figuratiue it appeareth by that which our Lord Iesus Christ addeth after the Cup saying This Cup is the new Testament in my bloud which is shead for you Where he calleth the Cup Testament and new Couenant in his bloud Wherein it behoueth necessarily to confesse that there is a figure and that without the same they cannot well vnderstand nor fitly interpret the said passages For it is a thing manifest that a couenant which is a contract and bargaine betweene parties made and conceiued vnder a certaine promise and word is not wine And neuerthelesse it is so called by figure for as much as the wine which is distributed in the