the 25. and 26 verses which all that you left out and cut off doth first deliuer Christs institutiō secondly expounds his owne meaning in euerie particuler point that is in controuersie betwixt vs and thirdlie ouerthrowes your opinions Now what mooued you thus to mangle cut off disioynt and dismember this place of Paul as you did with the text before let the Reader after my examination of your errors iudge But first I must deliuer you this generall rule obserued of allsound Diuines that al the Euangelists and Aposteles doctrine being pend by one spirit doe agree in the matter of the Sacrament one expounding another as partlie you heard a little before So that the three Euangelists must not be expounded to contradict Paul not Paul expounded to contradict them but all dulie and trulie in the spirit of humilitie being examined according to the Canon and rule of the word of God you shall finde neither darknesse in speech nor difficultie in sence but that the simplest may know Christs meaning Fitzsimon 80. What I haue aunswered in the 43. number against his accusations of any curtayling cutting by the wast and subtracting may abundantly serue for the lyke of my māgling cutting off disioynting dismembring this place All are but practises of the lapwing to crye a farr of most noysomly that you may thinke the nest of hir yongons to be ther wher it is least Which as it is there manifested so here it wil be approued Remember only his saying in this place that what I omitted expowndeth Christs meaning in euery particular point that is in controwersie betwixt vs and ouerthroweth our opinions And that for playn dealing I should haue begon at the 23. verse and so to the ende of the 29. verse Yf you aske him wherfor is he not contented with what I haue produced considering that he had the lesse to confute and was not bownd to aunswer to what was omitted he can aunswer nothing els but talk of omissions cuttings and curtaylings that others might not discerne but that he had aunswered pertinently Rider 81. You should haue begunne at the 23. verse and so to the end of the 20 verse and that had been plaine dealing Christs institution penned by Paul deliuers vs foure obseruations First Christ his action Secōndlie Christes precept Thirdlie Christs promise Fourthlie Christes caution 1. Christes action He gaue thankes brake bread tooke the cup c. 1. Take yee eate yee 2. Christes precept 2. This do as often as yee drinke it and both in rememberance of me 3. The minister must shewe and preach the Lords death till he come 3. Christes promise 1. This is my body which is broken for you 2. This is the new Testament in my bloud 4. Christes caution or caueat VVhosoeuor shall eate this bread or drinke this cup vnworthelie shall bee guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. Thus you see plainlie without anie dismembring or curtalling Christs action precept promise and caution deliuered out of the text Out of which place I obserue for the Catholickes better instruction and your confutation two things against you in this your skipping and curtalling of the text First the comforts you conceale from them by this mangling of the text A Discouerie of more puritantcie in M. Rider And of Puritan protestations how they are performed 81. FIrst he is conuicted by his owne woords Fitzsimon that he dealeth not playnly considering he nether begynneth at the 23. verse nor endeth at the 29. But will yow vnderstand the reason therof because S. Paul sayeth that him selfe had learned this institution from our Lord to witt by tradition and not in Scripture and that he had deliuered it formerly to the Corinthians by tradition and not by Scripture For I haue receaued of our Lord saith he which also I haue deliuered vnto you that our Lord in the night he was betrayed tooke bread and giuing thanks brake and sayd This is the 23. 1. Cor. 11. v. 23. verse Next M. Rider addeth to the woord brake the woord bread which is not in the text Thirdly by his diuision into an action a precept a promise a caution nothing toward any edification or proffit or learning is affoorded but a pranke discouered vnder the coulour of method to distract the mynd while he doth seperat the circumstances asondre which confirme Christs institution of the Sacrament to certifye his true body being present Fowerthly 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. this being the 24. verse take yee and eate yee this is my body which shal be deliuered for yow do this in my remembrance M. Rider vseth these sleights toward it First when he repeateth Christs precept he omitteth cleane do this in remembrance of me toward the bread and as was sayd in the 77. number of their care of the liquoure conioyned it to the drinke Fifthly he maketh Christs woords this is my body to be but a promise let euery vnderstanding determine whether not vnreasonably and vnlearnedly The 25. verse is lykewyse and the chalice after he had supped saying 1. Cor. 11. v. 25. this chalice is the new testament in my blood do this as often as yow shall drinke in my remembrance Of this verse he hathe wholy omitted the first halfe as also of the next halfe the name of chalice After drinke he addeth the sillable it Which being once doone by me in the 51. number thus he controwled my addition this sillable it altereth the sence and peruerteth Christs meaning c. Then he placeth according his former skill such woords among promises The 26. verse is For as often as yee shall eate this bread and drinke this chalice you shall annownce the death of our Lord till he come 2. Cor. 11. v. 26. All this verse is intierly ouer-slipped as nether action precept promise nor caueat So that his deuision is ether defectiue as not comprehending all parts or his dissimulation notorious in omitting what might be comprehended as well vnder the precept as any thing els and better vnder the caution or caueat then what is by him contayned Marie I fynde the speeche of a Minister his preaching substituted in place of the forsayd verse which vpon my credit is nether in greeke or latin text nor euer dreamed of by Apostle Euangelist Concil Doctor Father But it is only the pure Puritancie of Thomas Cartwright l. 1. pag. 158. to affirme it a necessarie and essential part of the Communion yet therof thus sayth the aunswer of Oxford to the Puritans Petition pag. 11. But that it should be ministred with a sermon is absurd and hath bred in many a vayne and false opinion as yf not the woord of Christs institution but rather the woord of a Ministers exposition were a necessarie and essential part of Communion O how impossible it is for M. Rider but to be knowen a puritan Now let him take what he can get therby The 27. verse Therfor whosoeuer shll eate this
bread or drinke this chalice of our Lord vnworthely 1. Cor. 11. v. 27. shal be guiltie of the body and blood of our Lord. All this verse he maketh to be a caution or caueat I should thinke it rather to be a threatning prediction Secondly he would not call it the cupp of our Lord but only the bare cupp What is the reason thinke you because it cowld not be called the cupp of our Lord vnles it be allowed to contayne the blood of our Lord or for haueing bene sanctifyed to our Lord. The 28. verse But let a man proue him selfe and so let him eate of that bread and drinke of that chalice 1. Cor. 11. v. 28. This verse in his conceit belonged not to the institution of Christ which S. Paul had penned because it is not inserted nether as action nor precept nor promise nor caution which according to his skill are all the membres comprehended in Christs institutioÌ„ The 29. verse For he that eateth or drinketh vnworthely doth eate to him selfe iudgement 1. Cor. 11. v. 29. not decerning the body of our Lord. These verses so omitted so transposed so corrupted by him yet giue audience to his woords as if he had so cunningly deceaued all readers that they did not behould his industrie thus you see plainly without any dismembring or curtayling c. First I inquyer in all these verses what is contrary or repugnant to my profession Secondly what part or sillable of them do the fauoure his perswasion or the only figuratiue presence of Christ Thirdly how he blushed not to attaynt me with fraudulent omission cutting wasting c. I professing only to deliuer my choise proofs of Scripture for the real presence without binding my selfe to take more or lesse then I deemed sufficient whether they were consequent together or in seueral places and he vndertaking to vse playne dealing and to haue deliuered Christs whole institution as it is penned by S. Paul yet to misdemeane him selfe in this maner I vse not accusations of deprauations of falsifications and other lyke that it maâ— better by all be vnderstood trueth to be against him and noe tryfling 82. Secondlie the errours you still hold them in Rider in concealing the most part of the text first by following your Latten translation and neglecting the holie tongue the Greke wherein the holie Ghost pend this institution You translate Which shall be deliuered for you for which is broken for you Out of which I note first you change the tense that is in the Greeke that is the present tense for so wee haue it and you follow the Lâ—tten translation which is the future tense and therefore not so comfortable Christ vseth a sweete figure of the time present for the time to come Enallage to assure our soules and consciences that whatsoeuer Christ promiseth is as surelie to bee performed in his appointed time â—s if it were alreadie done And this tense Christ vsed to take all doubts from his disciples who in respect of their vnworthinesse might iustlie haue doubted that Christ would not haue died shed his pretious bloud for them they being such vnprofitable seruants and miserable sinners But to take away that doubt from them and the Church now hee assures both that whatsoeuer is promised by him is as sure to be done as if it were alreadie done And this staied Christs Church and euerie perticular member of the same from distrusts doubts grudgings c. in and vnder their seuerall crosses because they know there is a ioyfull Iâ—bile and freedome for them purchased and prepared and shall as surelie be accomplished as if now it were performed Now your altring of this particle is depriveth vs of all this comfort Againe you following still your corrupt Latten translation say delâ—uered for you wheras you should say as the Greeke is and as Christ saith Broken for you for this word broken is more Emphatical and piercing then deliuered for it is one thing for a man to be deliuered for to be betraied for me another thing to be broken in peeces for me Out of this I obserue first the greatnesse of my sinne secondlie the kindnes and exceeding loue of my Sauiour VVhether the vulgar Latin translation of the Bible be to be preferred to all other translations Fitzsimon 82. I Haue three causes not to iustifie our latin translation compared with the greeke against M. Rider One because I am priuie that he hath no more good greeke as I sayd befor then a blynd man hath sight Secondly because I fynde that woorke so learnedly and sufficiently performed by M. Gregorie Martyn in his discouerie and by the preface and annotations of the Rhemish testament that nether can I nor will I add or deminishe any thing therin Beza in pref noui test 1556. Molin pa. 30. Erasm c. 6. Math. Humfr. de rat interpretandi p. 74. Lastly because by their most learned pillers Beza Molin Erasme Laur Humfred c. the latin is confessed farr more pure then the greeke VVe haue obserued sayth Beza that the reading of the Latin text of the owld interpreter thowgh it agree not some tyme with our greeke copies yet is it much more conuenient for that it seemeth some truer and better copie This one testimonie of such an one so great as D. VVhytaker saith VVhytak pag. 12. con Martin he is able to close vp all our learned men in a sack and to ding out their brayns shall suffise to controwle and correct M. Riders ignorant medling in these maters ther being not a more naked linguist in a contry or more vnfitt proctor for the greeke tong as shall be shortly testified It was his chance during my being in prison in the presence of Alderman Iians the Constable and others to haue presented a trial of his skill in greeke abowt the words of the angel to our B. Ladie I confesse that my studie was much more in other maters then in the greeke tong yet as they aboue named are witneses I fownd M. Rider not only tripping in greeke but mute from euer after mentioning greeke in my presence Of the woord broken and the being therof in the present tence I haue so infallibly assured it to confirme vs and to infirme him in the 76. number that to repeat it agayne here would nether be expedient nor conformable to my breuitie carefully followed by me as much as the mater will allow And this man standing vpon the forsayd woord rather then vpon deliuered forgetteth him selfe a litle befor saying that the Euangelists and S. Paul must not be expownded to contradict one another consequently the Euangelist saying deliuered and S. Paul saying broken ther is no diuersitie whether be vsed especialy the Scripture vsing them as hauing but one signification breake thy bread to the hongrie Isa 58.7 Thren 4.4 Exod. 12. Num. 9. litle ones haue craued bread ther was none to breake to them which breaking is all one
absurdly confesse that not onelie the wine is transubstantiated changed into Christs last Testament but that the challice or cup is transubstantiated into his last testament is his testament substantiallie properlie and realie the accidents of the challice onlie remaining that is to say the height depth weight colours c. Of his cruel threat against the Masse Fitzsimon 88. I Trust M. Rider you will not be so ill as your woord Will you shew in all the masse from the first woord to the last ther is nothing but magical superstition heresie and idolatrie Is the Psalme of Dauid Iudica me Deus the song of the Angels glory be to God on high all the Epistles and Gospells being parcels of scripture the creed of the first Concil of Nice the institution of Christ our Lords prayer which are all included betwixt the first and last woords of the masse but ether superstition or heresie or idolatrie What sparke of Christianitie could be in his brest what hands could wryt that Dauid the Angels the Euangelists and our deere Lord and Saluiour Iesus Christ had committed superstition or heresie or idolatrie For it is impossible to proue all from Introibâ— to Ite missa est to be such vnlesse also this other sauage blasphemie against Prophets Angels And the Lord of all Saincts be infallibly proued But soft M. Rider your tyme is not yet come to abolishe iuge sacrificium Dan. 8. v. 12. c. 12. v. 11. S. Iren. con her l. 4. c 32. S. Chrysost ho. 49. in Math S. Hippolyt orat de consum saeculi Isa 16.6 the dayly sacrifice which is reserued as the Scripturs and Fathers affirme to Antichrist and yet not to abolish it but that the frequent vse therof shal cease in his tyme. Of M. Rider and euery other petty aduersarie of the Masse may be applyed the saying of the Prophet Isaie Superbia eius arrogantia eius indignatio eius plus quam fortitudo eius his pryde his arrogancie and his indignation is more against this inuincible sacrifice then his strengthe For hell gates can not preuayle against the faith whose principal act and obligation is this sacrifice of the Masse I trust in Gods mercie befor I dye to iustifie the least sillable and parcel therof against the sayd gates and all therto belonging which is a contradiction of what M. Rider threatneth Rider 89. Now if you cannot denie a figure in the challice how dare you for the like or worse inconuenience denie it in the bread This you thought to omit hoping thereby to couer this your error But it was ill done to deceiue the Catholicks who so liberallie relieue you and so dearely haue loued you And wheras you translate challice for cup telling the people that the challice consecrated by you is holier then other vsual cups and that Christ vsed in the institution a challice and no vsuall drinking cup. 89. Here is an argument that ther is a figure concerning the cupp Fitzsimon ergo also concerning the bread I aunswer owt of S. Augustin S. August c. 31. Super Genes ad lit l. 11. For the translation of one woord the whole sentence owght not to be taken figuratiuely As for example of the new disciples going to Emaus is sayd their eyes were opened which is to be vnderstood figuratiuely for they were nether blynd wynking nor a sleepe befor but the residue Luc. 24. that they knew Christ c. is to be vnderstood properly and literaly In this point of M. Rider Besa in c. 26. Mat. v. 26. because the cupp standeth for what is in the cupp as Beza confesseth vulgata trita omnibus linguis consuetudine loquendi in the common meaning of all tongs litle or nothing differing from a propre speeche Math. 26. Mar. 14. as also because by two Euangelists Mathew and Marke it is specified expresly in a literal and propre sence by thes woords This is my blood of the new testament no such mater being obserued of bread but all circumstances precedent concomitant subsequent manifesting the literal and propre signification therof ther is no sequel or censequence in the world in the forsayd argument For the liberalitie of Catholicks toward vs it being sayd of exorbitant enuie I leaue to the prophet Ezechiel in his 24. chap. 18. and 19. verse to replye vnto it 90. I say in saying thus you shew your self ignorant in the Greek tongue Rider wherin Christ spake it the Euangelists writ it Poterâ—on for they all so hath Paul but one vsuall word which signifieth a vsual drinking cup and no charmed Challice as you ydlie vainly informe the Catholickes And now to your 27. verse which you would couple to your 24. verse which thus you recite very corruptlie who so doth eate vnworthelie c. shall be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord but if you had meant plainlie and trulie you should haue recited all the Apostles words in this manner whosoeuer shall eate this bread and drinke this cup of the Lord vnworthelie shall be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. VVhether Chalices were aunciently consecrated and of what matter they were made 90. I Tould you often Fitzsimon you would carry your emptie cruse so oft to the greeke streame that it would come home broken What did Christ euer speake greeke In what greeking will all scholers thinke your head to haue bene that will reade this Certainly Christ Sonne of the B. Virgin borne in Bethelem liuing in Palestim or Iewrie suffring by Hierusalem was neuer yet sayd by any of reading or reason or wanting reading and reason to haue spoken greeke Without further hissing at it so many other no lesse The 82. vntuth yea farr greater occasions presented to do the lyke let it stand for the 82. vntrueth and so remayne Yet this appeale to the greke is not so to be dismissed First our aduantages in the greke are specified and assuredly proued in the preff of the Remish testament So that they are superfluous to be repeated by him who followeth greatest breuitie and escheweth borrowed ornaments Secondly who are not the Adders mentioned in the psalmist may vnderstand that nether greke nor latin but willfull corruption is the cause of sectarists excepting against the sacred Scripture now in this laÌ„guage now in that As for exaÌ„ple in their Bibles of the yeares 1579. 1580. nether greke nor latin obtayned of them to putt S. Pauls name befor the Epistle to the Hebrues Some time againste Greeke and Latin they demaund to what purpose should the holy Ghost or Luke add this Some time against Greeke and Latin Beza Act. 8. v. 26. they confesse wilfull deprauation as Beza Mat. 10. v. 2. anno 1556. against the primacie of S. Peter And Luke 22 v. 20. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 14. n. 26. l. c 3. n. 10. in Ps 58. against the real presence as also Acts 3.21 and
And Origin saith Not the matter of bread but the words recited ouer it doth profit the worthy receiuer this I speake saith he of the typicall and figuratiue bodie which is in deede the Sacramentall bread Vpon the 15. of Mathew Augustine confuting Adimantus the Hereticke that held that the bloud in man was the onely soule of man aunswered it was so figuratiuely not otherwise and to prooue it he vseth this proposition of Christ Hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie saying Possum etiam interpretari illud praeceptum in signo positum esse non enim dubitauit Dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum cùm signum daret corporis sui I maye saith Augustine expound the precept of Christ figuratiuelie for the Lord doubted not to say this is my bodie when he gaue the figure of his bodie Augustine saith Hoc est corpus meum is a phrase figuratiue you say no but it is litterall Now let the Catholicks take this Friendlie Caueat to heart for they haue no reason to follow you that forsake the Fathers and heere may you see that our exposition is auncient Catholicke and Apostolicall yours new priuate and hereticall Tertullian an ancient Father saith Acceptum panem distributum discipulis Tertull. lib. 4. contra Marcion pag. 133. line 26. c. The bread which was taken and giuen to his disciples Christ made his bodie by saying this is my bodie that is the figure of my bodie what could be more spoken of them for vs against you Hierome super 26. Math. Ambrose in 1. Cor. 11. And Hierome calls it a representation of the truth of Christs bodie and bloud and not the body and bloud And Ambrose seconds his former sayings in these words In edendo c. In eating and drinking the bread and wine we doe signifie the flesh and bloud which was offered for vs so that they doe but signifie the flesh and bloud they are not the flesh and bloud And Chrisostome saith Chris in hom 17 in Hebr. super 1. Cor. 11. Offerimus quidem sed ad recordationem and afterward Hoc autem sacrificium exemplar est illius c. We offer indeed but in rememberance of his death this sacrifice is a token or figure of that sacrifice the thing that we do is done in remēberance of the thing that was done by Christ before c. Here is a manifest place against you Chrisost in hom 11. Math. which you shall neuer aunswere And elsewhere he saith in the same sanctified vessels there is not the bodie of Christ indeed but a misterie of the bodie is contained Clemens Alex. in padago lib. 1. cap. 6. pag. 18. line vlt. pag. 19. line 1. And Clemens Alexandrinus who liued 1300. yeares agoe saith Comedite carnes meas bibite sanguinem meum c. Eate yee my flesh and drincke my bloud meaning heereby vnder an allegorie or figure the meat drincke that is of faith of promise And the same reuerend Father in his second booke and second chapter of his Padagogi and 5. pag. and line 21 22 23. hath these words Ipse quoque vino vsus est nam ipse quoque homo vinum benedixit cùm dixit accipite bibite hoc est sanguis meus sanguis vitis c. For our Lord Christ vsed wine and blessed wine when he said take drincke this my bloud the bloud of the vine the word which is shed for manie for the remissiō of sinnes doth signifie allegorically the holy riuer of gladnesse Out of which I note First it is sanguis vitis the bloud of the grape properlie and that is wine It is called Christs bloud Sacramentallie and by way of signification Secōdlie it appeares to be figuratiue in this word shed for the bloud of the grape which is wine was not shed for manie but the bloud of Christ But you wil saye it is true before consecration but after consecration it is Christs verie naturall bloud No saith Clement immediatlie following Quod autem vinum esset quod benedictum est c. And that it was wine which was blessed hee sheweth againe when he saith to his disciples I will not drincke of the fruit of the vine c. Out of which premisses I note three things Read Clement follow Clem. First that that which you call cōsecration this learned Father calls it benediction Secondlie that after consecration the nature of wine remaineth still and it is not changed as you imagine Thirdly that the phrase is figuratiue and not proper Beda in Luc. 22. page 476. And venerable Beda our countrieman tells you that in England in his time the text was taken figuratiuely The solemnities of the old Passouer saith he being ended Christ commeth to the newe which the Church is desirous to continue in remembrance of her redemption that in stead of the flesh and bloud of a LAMBE hee substituting the Sacrament of his flesh and bloud in the figure of bread and wine might shew himselfe to be the same to whom the Lord sware and will not repent c. Beda called it not the naturall bodie of Christ that worketh out redemption but a remembrance of our redemption and a figure of it Thus the indifferent Reader may see that Augustine Ambrose Origin Tertullian Hierome Clemens Alexandrinus Beda and manie others which I omit for breuities sake all of them being auncient approoued writers and all of them of your owne Prints doe hold with vs against you that your propositions be not proper but Sacramentall improper significatiue representatiue allegoricall figuratiue which greatlie wounds the bodie of your cause and will weaken your credits with the Catholickes How the Fathers graunting a figure yet deny à figure as it is taken by protestants 56. I Graunt with S. Augustin the B. Sacrament to be a figure of Christ but requyre that you shew him to approue it Fitzimon a figure only I graunt with Origen it is Christs typical body grant you the rest of his opiniō in his owne woords deliuered The law of God sayth he now not in figurs or images as befor but in the very forme of trueth is acknowledged Origen hom 7. in lib. Num. And what befor were in an obscuritie shaddowed are now acclomplished in their forme and trueth It followeth Befor was baptisme in a figure in the clowd and in the sea but now regeneration is in forme in water and the holy Ghost Then was Manna in a figure meat now in forme is the fleash of the woord of God true meat according as he sayd my fleash is meat truely and my blood is drinke truely I craue no more then Tertullian affoordeth Tertull. l. 4. con Marcion as appeareth in the numbers cited in the 54. That Christ made the bread which was giuen to his disciples his body by saying this is my body that is the figure of his body in owtward apparence as in the forsayd numbers is
Luke 1.6 against iustification c. So that Greeke againste Latin is a bare pretense and corruption only is by them intended For the blessinge consecratinge fie vpon this prophane tearme of charminge of Chalices S. August l 3. con Cresen c. 29. in Psal 113. S. August who by Caluins testimonie is fidelissimus atque optimus testis antiquitatis the most faithful principal witnesse of antiquitie corypheus theologoruÌ„ the ring-leader of Diuines as they can not denie thus writeth Sed et nos pleraque instrumenta vasa ex auro et argento habemus in vsum celebrandoruÌ„ Sacramentorum quae ipso ministerio consecrata sancta dicuntur But we haue the most part of our instrumeÌ„tes and vessels belonging to the administringe of the Sacraments of gould and siluer which by theire verye application are caled holye They were so rich in time of grace and charitie Theodoret l. 3. cap. 11. Vidâ— Prudent de S. Lauren. as that pagan Emperours and theire Secritaries in admiration cryed out Ecce quam sumptuosis vasis filio Mariae ministratur Behould in what sumptuous vessels they honour the sonne of Marie But one woorde more of this matter out of Theophilact Theophil in cap 14. Marci saying Qui igitur abstulerit discum pretiosum et cogit vt corpus Christi in vili ponatur pretexens scilicet pauperes intelligat cuius partis sit He that wil take away the pretious plate and force that the body of Christ be placed on a more abiect pretending forsooth the poore let him knowe of whose faction he is namelye of Iudas as he sayeth who found fault with coste bestowed for lyke pretense on Christ But are the sanctified iustified and elected reformers culpable in this poynt Let one of them selues and he of the cheefest informe the trueth Clebitius in sua victoria veritatu ruma papatus saxonici argum 14. Clebitius therfor cheefe Zuinglian minister of Heidelberg writeth this of Heshusius VVhen the siluer pixes were moulten and made away he caused others to be made of woodd and reserued his eucharistical bread in a wodden one and the same so sluttish as was not good inowgh for a cowheard to putt his butter in it For the antiquitie of pixes Calu. l. 4. Instit. c. 17. n. 39. Caluin assureth first Church and first Christianitie to haue allowed and beloued them Behould how contrarious to all christianitie yet how couragious is M. Rider how coÌ„formable in him selfe and his brethren to Iudas his pretenses yet how aduenturous to seeme a reformer of abuses 91. Out of which I obserue that you would couer Rider Bread remaines after Consecration and therefore no carnall presence likewise the Cup therefore noe Transubstantiation in either and conceale that which ouerthrowes your carnall presence for if bread remaine after consecration then there is no carnal presence but breade remaineth after consecration therfore ther is no carnal presence And because this verse shweth to the worlde that there is bread after consecration therfore you cutt off that part of the verse which is verie deceitfully donne And leaue this woorde breade out after consecration to blinde the eyes of the simple And also you cut off the next wordes to couer other two errors the wordes be these Or drinke the Chalice of the Lorde vnvvorthely 91. When I make a Puritan treatise Fitzsimon representing as I sayd in the 76. number the frogg-galyard rebownding vp and downe from one point to another without euer following ether one tune or tenoure I will not cowche or comprise that which is precisely pertinent but followe and alleage testimonies of all coulours But being of other determination and hauing a particular controuersie to examin as now only of the real and substantial presence of Christs body and not of communion vnder both forms or the lyke I thought good as men when they make a nosegay doe not collect all hearbes therin but such as are sufficient for sent and varietie to that present vse to dwell in my text and only to cumble or gather what belonged properly to that one point in question without rangeing prolixitie or tergiuersation Is this a fault Yf it be there was neuer allowable writer but both omitted it and commended it Well what stuffe is now obiected against vs. Mary S. Paul speaking of the Sacrament nameth it still bread therfor it is not Christs natural body I am fully perswaded this obiection to be so aunswered in the 56. number and in the 62. that the repetition of Riders obiection in this place Vide num 118. is rather to blott paper to fill emptie place to cauil and delude then for any difficultie remayning therin For there I shewed by seueral Scripturs things to beare the name of what they are representations Tob. 2. Exod. 7. Gen. 19. Ioan. 2. Gen. 2. or from what they were changed as Raphael is called a yong man a Serpent is called a rodde a piller of salt is called Lotts wyfe wyne is called water Eua is called a bone of Adam and fleash of his fleash So here Christs body is called bread both for the representation and for being made of bread or succeeding the substance of bread yet cleerly in this place is it expressed not with standing such name to be the body of Christ by saying 1. Cor. 11. that by eating this bread and drinking this cupp vnworthely they are guiltie of the body and blood of Christ himselfe because they did not discerne the body of our Lord his body which was to be deliuered to death c. All which significations vttered by S. Paul in the same place to certifie the name of bread not to specifie bread but Christs body this obiection may be thought out of date and as a crackt grot not lawfull or currant any longer Because not to any desert of M. Riders trauails but to Iesus Christ I deuote my tyme imployed in this aunswer I will now beyond sufficiencie in this cause tender these woords of S. Cyrill of Hierusalem in Catechesi mystagogica 4. Non sic attendas haec velim tanquam sint nudi simplex panis nudum simplex vinum corpus enim sunt sanguis Christi Nam etsi sensus aliud tibi renuntiat fides tamen te confirmet I would not haue you conceaue that it is bare and simple bread bare and simple wyne for although thy sense conceaue otherwyse yet let thy fayth confirme thee So that how soeuer bread be named or appeare bread to the sences yet the thing so called is assured to be Christs sacred bodie But it is expedient to haue M. Rider him selfe brought to disable his owne obiection He then in the 62. number thus speaketh It is the vsual maner of the holy Ghost in all Sacraments both of the ould testament Caâ—eat numb 62. and new to tearme the visible signe by the name of the thing signifyed as Circumscision
there is no carnal presence Here is an absolute conclusion vpon a conditional proposition yf bread remayne c. which yet in Luthers opinion of companation would be false The other proposition is deceytfully supposed true beyond all controuersie that bread remayneth c. A second Yf you be autheurs of their synns you must be partakers of their punishment but as he deceytfully supposeth or rather as I thinke in my conscience dissembleth to suppose we are autheurs of their synns which being in controuersie one only proofe had bene requisit in forme of argument but that at his hands were to seeke woolle at the goats howse therfor c. Yf Mennon Darius lieutenant against Alexander were among such compagnions how often should he be occasioned to cudgell or bastonad them as he did one of his sowldiours reuiling and reprehending the Macedonians saying I keepe thee to fight and not to scould For yf Memnon lyke you bereaue them of their rayling reasoning that you keepe people in ignorance that you will tast as recusants of Christs gospell vengeance in flaming fyre other such fanatical naked reproaches Other fighting of their learning you nede as litle feare as hurt from a serpent whose sting and teeth are taken away 94. Thus you record to the worlds wonder Rider Rhem Test 1. Cor. 11. Sect. 16. Rome Rhemes shame against God Christ Scriptures and Fathers that ill liuers and Infidels eate the bodie and drinke the bloud of Christ in the Sacrament and your reason there followeth that they could not bee guiltie of that they receiued not and that it could not bee so hainous an offence for anie man to receiue a peece of bread or a cup of wine though they were a true Sacrament First old father Origen shall answere you who saith Est verus cibus quem nemo malus potest edere Origen super Math. 15. page 27. It is true meat which no wicked man can eate Heere Origen condemneth the Rhemists Romanists and all late Priests and Iesuites for holding this opinion iniurious to Christs death and all true Catholikes faith But you may obiect against Origen and say the Rhemists laid downe their opinion and gaue reasons to confirme it But where is Origens reason by which he prooues this former position that no wicked man can eate Christs bodie Super Math. 26. forsooth it is in his Comentarie vpon your text brought forth of mathew in these words Panis quem filius Dei corpus suum esse dicis verbum est nutritorium animarum the bread which the Sonn of God said to be his bodie is the nourishing word of our soules Out of which this we gather that seeing this bread or meate is the nourishment of our soules not of our bodies he spake of the heauenlie part of the sacrament For we know in common sence that bread and wine cannot nourish the soule but the bodie I haue proued by scriptures and Fathers before that the hand and mouth of the soule is a liuelie iustifying faith which you all your side cannot denie but the wicked want Now if the wicked haue no mouth nor stomacke to receiue this spirituall food and digest it as the foresaid Fathers haue affirmed why doe you say that the wicked and Infidels can eate the bodie of Christ wanting both hands mouth and stomacke And the scriptures call wicked men dead men Now you know dead men cannot eate meate corporall Chrysost Hom. 60. ad pop Antioch no more can the wicked which are dead spirituallie eate meat celestial And Chrysostome sayth Let no Iudas stand to no couetous person if anie be a disciple let him be present for this Table receiues no such as Iudas or Magus for Christ saith I keepe my Passouer with my disciples And to conclude with Augustine Tract 26. super Ioh. pag. 175. Qui non manet in Christo in quo non manet Christus proâ—ul dubio c. Hee that abides not in Christ and in whom Christ abides not out of doubt eateth not spirituallie his flesh nor drinketh his bloud although carnallie and visiblie he presse with his teeth the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ but rather eateth and drinketh the Sacrament of so great a thing to his iudgement and the reason followeth Quia immundus c. because hee is vncleane in heart and presumes to come to the Sacrament of Christ which no man can worthilie receiue vnlesse he be pure and cleane in heart as Christ saith Mat. 5. Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God Out of Augustine I obserue against both your opinions these thinges First hee makes a difference of Christes flesh and the Sacrament of Christes flesh for they bee two things and to be distinguished with their seueral substances and properties and not to bee confounded or transubstantiated one into the other and so the nature of bread perish as you vntruelie imagine and teach Secondly that the wicked receiue and grinde with their teeth and swallow with throat the outward Sacrament that is the outward visible creatures of bread and wine Acts. 15.9 to their iudgement or condemnation because they presume to come without a cleane heart and conscience purified by faith But the godly eat the heauenlie part of the Sacrament which is Christ with his benefits because they dwel in Christ by faith and Christ in them by his spirit as hath been plainlie handled before Part. 3. distinct 2. cap. 65. And now I will be bolde to vrge your owne Popes decrees against you Qui discordat à Christo c. whosoeuer dissenteth from Christ doeth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud but the wicked dissent from Christ therfore they neither eat Christs flesh nor drinke his bloud And cap. 69. following quicunque panem c. Whosoeuer eateth this bread the Lord shall liue foreuer but the wicked liue not for euer therfor the wicked eate not this bread the Lord. Now Gentlemen I would faine see how you can dissprooue these Fathers and old Popes and satisfie the Catholicks in this case but I shall haue a fit place to speak of the vnreasonablenesse of this opinion in the title of the Masse where I must shewe to the Catholickes the Popes Priests and Iesuits shamefull opinions that you thinke it no incouenience not onelie for the wicked but also for all such bruit beasts as cats or dogs rats or mice hogs or swine to eate the blessed bodie and drinke the precious bloud of Iesus Christ VVhether the wicked may receaue Christ or noe Fitzsimon The 85. vntruth 94. WHat a ful-mouthe worde worlds wonder is the 85. vntruth thrust out withal that the wicked receaue not the body of Christ Could euer honest or other countenance a true complaint better then Putifars wife or the false harlot before Salomon or the wicked Iudges their false accusations Blame me if M. Rider be not here and euery wher found
committeth high treason against Christ though in deed in substance they receiue but bred and wine And as a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defacing or clipping the kings picture seale or coine though the king be not locallie in place so the wicked in the Sacraments which are Christ seales which being abused by them they are guiltie of Gods iudgements though Christ be not inclosed locallie in the bread and wine And what Chrysostome speaketh here of the Lords Supper the same hee doth of Baptisme and saith a man may be as well guiltie of the Lords bodie and bloud in cōtemning Baptisme which is but a seale of his washing in the bloud of Christ though hee neuer washed but in water and alleadgeth Paul Heb. 10 29 saing Of how much sorer punishment suppose yee shal be be worthy which treadeth vnder foot the sonne of God counteth the bloud of the testament as an vnholie thing c. These Fathers haue aunswered you and I hope will satisfie fullie the indifferent Reader Now three sorts of men are guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. The first are plaine Atheists that are without God or godlinesse in this present world and such eate this bread vnworthelie and therefore are guiltie of Christes bodie and bloud 2. The second sort haue a historicall faith and a generall knowledge Thre sorts of mē guilty of the Lords bodie and beleeue that whatsoeuer is taught in Gods booke is true but they lacke apprehension and application to make a particular and holy vse of the same and therefore if such come and eate of this bread they are guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. 3. The third sort haue a liuelie apprehending and applying faith yet in their life they slippe and fall yea sometimes verie grieuouslie yet they awake and weep with Peter and repent for the same All these are said to eate vnworthelie but the first two sorts vnto their condemnation The third sort for their faults frailties negligences and vndue preparation are in this life of the Lord corrected least with the world they should be damned The two first sorts eateth onelie the outward elemēts the last sort eateth the bodie of Christ and drinketh the bloud of Christ And now to your second proofe out of Saint Paul VVhether it be treason to breake Images Fitzsimon 96. YF as he in this place affirmeth a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defaceing or clipping the kings picture seale or coyne though the king be not localy in place then consequently and necessarilie they must be guiltie of treason toward God who rent deface or clipp his pictures seales or coyne The necessitie of such sequel or inference is apparent considering that any abuse or contempt in the resemblance of a prince is not more iniurious to a prince then the lyke in a representation of God is to God Nether was there other cause why God did punish Oza 2. Reg. 6. 13. but prophaning resemblances of him contayned in the arke and all others that sacrilegiously misbehaued them selues not only toward his figures yea shadowes but also toward vesselles and ornaments belonging to them Now then tell plainly M. Rider will you stand to your words or recant them what say you Neuer thinke sayth S. Cyprian ep 73. because you haue once fayled that you should therfor blush to reuoke What say you shall his discourse be starling or noe Me thinke I behould you frowning fretting at me for seeming to thinke that you would euer reclayme Your conclusion therfor is that treason is cōmitted by iniurie to the pictures persons alyke Then woe and well away to all your brethren image-breakers Then woe and well away to VValer the murtherer vnder-minister of Swoords who hanged on a gibbet the picture of Christ crucifyed anno 1603. Then woe and well away to M. Rider who only to haue stones to build an ouen to bake bread to impouerish bakers of the citie not hauing idely or without price seuenten hondred barrells of corne yearly as he hath pull'd downe the fayre crosse in S. Patricks which all others his predecessors of that profession had permitted vnuiolated and to the same vse to haue fyer pull'd downe all the trees therin This sentence of his giuen against him selfe brethren made his owne sonn mense Maio 1604. when he attempted to pull downe ane image to be by Gods iudgment precipitated from a height and altogether crushed and at the same tyme his seruant to be stricken with the plague c. This sheweth that it is noe greater treason against a king to abuse and despise his picture then against Christ to prophane and distroye his images What needed this moth to intermedle with the candle of learning wherby his wyngs are so often scortched What needed him to implie that abusers of the communion according to his surmise being but a bare representation of Christ shal be punished with equal torments with such as nayled him on the Crosse Where then will the final Rende vous of Protestants be who haue abused other his representations images appellations as well expressing his death as the Protestant Sacrament I can not choose but say with the Poet. Ingratum genus vestrum quicunque forenses Admiramini plausus Euripides Hecuba ex versione Gasparis Stiblini vtinam non essetis mihi cogniti Qui nihil pensi habetis amicos laedere Modo dicatis grata multitudini O hatefull race of Mercenarie mates Searching applauds ô that I knew you not Not waying how you harme your frends throwgh hates So you the peoples itching eares befott But by the waye what meaneth this often tearming of Sacraments to be but seals and especialy by them who by their profession are bound to beleeue that they nether seale the body nor soule that they nether bring fayth nor confirme it that they are nether fruictfull nor needfull Yf otherwyse we be myndfull of Christ Ochinus apud Andream Iurgiewicium in bello quinti Euangelij pag. 102. Ochinus resolueth Spiritu Dei non Sacramentis fidem confirmari By the spirit of God and not by Sacraments fayth to be confirmed Yf seales be accepted in stidd of Sacrament because this woord is not in Scripture as your brethren before determine tell vs so playnly and we will not inforce you to grawnt that your Supper of the Lord which your great Doctor P. Martyr sayth in respect of the tyme it is receaued P. Martyr in 1. Cor. c. 11. pag 293. 294. and of your emptie stomacks should with greater reason be called a breakfast or dyner is a Sacrament Now as I tould you befor such hate is conceaued alredy among the Reformers against this woord Sacrament as it is conuenient you abstayne from it For they say Bruces sermons pag. 4. 126. VVestphal in apol pag. 5. Pag. 126. about the ambiguitie of this word are rysen many tragedies which will not cease whyle the world lasts that
his third Tom. pag 142. Rider There was a learned and godlie woman proposed twelue questions of diuinitie to Hierome wherin of which she desired resolution For in those daies it was lawfull for women and all men to aske doubts touching religion and for their further instruction consolation might read Gods word freelie conferre touching matters that concerned their saluation And this greatly blemisheth your Roman doctrine that will haue neither men nor women to read diuinitie the reason is this least they should see your errors and forsake your profession For this is your strongest tenure Marke this yee Catholickes to keepe them in blindnesse with ydle ceremonies dumb shewes Latten seruice But I trust in Christ shortlie to see most of their eies opened that wil discouer your priuie plots discourage your haughtie stomacks and generallie forsake your new religion being in deed but mans inuention This is the second question of the twelfth but you omit some words cut off some which obscures the matter But if a little charitable chiding would make you more painfull in your bookes and lesse carefull to please mens humors I could finde in my heart to bestow it vpon you but praemoniti praemuniti you are now forewarned I hope you will bee here after better armed or better minded which I wish with all my soule as to my selfe But your proofe is thus in Latten Si ergo panis qui de caelo descendit corpus est Domini vinum quod discipulis dedit sanguis illius est noui Testamenti qui pro multis effusus est in remissionem peccatorum Iudaicas fabulas repellamus c. If therefore the bread that descended from heauen bee the bodie of the Lord and the wine which he gaue his disciples be his bloud of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes then let vs cast away all Iewish fables Here you omit Si ergo and noui Testamenti qui pro multis effusus est in remissionem peccatorum If therefore and of the new Testament which is shed for manie for the remission of sinnes All this you haue left out which was ill done What now can you gather out of this to prooue that Christes bodie is made of bread and his bloud of wine no substance of either creature remaining but onelie Christs carnall presence as he was on the crosse Surelie here is not one word silable or letter to prooue it but the contrarie You wronged the father so to mangle him yet as you deliuer him it proueth nothing of the manner of Christs presence that is in question but the matter neuer in controuersie for saith shee to this learned â—â—ther if therefore the bread which came downe from heauen bee the bodie of Christ so she speakes of Christs diuinitie that came downe from heauen for his humanitie did not and our question is of his humanitie by transubstansiation in the Sacrament so that this proofe nothing sorteth your purpose And the bloud here spoken of is his bloud of the new Testament shed on the crosse not in the Sacrament once for all not for anie that pleased the Priest And therefore as she said Iudaicas fabulas repellamus let vs cast away Iewish fables So in Gods name for the loue of Gods trueth and of the peoples saluation cast yee from you all Munkish fables and forged legends that haue misled the people into this blinde superstition and ioyne with vs to teach Christs precious flocke the old Apostolicall and Catholicke religion commaunded in Gods word practised in the primitiue Church that you with vs and we wiâ—h you and all in the Lord may now in this plentifull vintage so labour in the Lords vinyard his Church according to our talents receiued that euery one of vs may deliuer his talent with aduantage of manie soules and then we shall be patakers of that sweet saying Wel done thâ—u good and faithfull seruant enter into thy maisters ioy Which God graunt to vs both And so to the next as followeth The 11. parte of the Second proofe concerning S. Hierome VVherein is discussed whom and how we allowe and disalowe to reade Scriptures and heretical bookes and whether Protestants or we doe most Symbolize with Iewishnes Fitzsimon Cart. lib. 1 pag. 103. lib. 2. pag. 303. 502. lib. 3. pag. 89. 90. Caus â—ial 8. 11. Fulk against D. Bristow pag. 15. 54. 115. CArtwright saith there is not such synceritie to be looked for at Hieroms hand as from others that went befor him That he is a cownterfeit that he often strayneth the text and for milke some tyme draweth blood Causeus saith that he is no lesse damned then Lucifer Fulke that he was but a rayler Sainct Hierome in this allegation teacheth the wyne giuen to the Disciples to haue bene Christs blood In the selfe same resolution to Hedibia he saith the bread quem fregit Dominus deditque discipulis esse corpus Domini Saluatoris which our Lord broke and gaue to his disciples to be the body of our Saluiour Els where he saith ipse Saluator est S. Hieron ad Damas de Filio prodigo cuius quotidie carne vescimur cruore potamur it is our very Saluiour whose fleash we are fedd withall and whose blood we drinke Come foorthe M. Rider and play your wonted parte Come tell vs what you oppose against this First you ronne halfe way in your tale befor you stumble at this block in one only woord At leinthe hemm and speake out your mynde suerly say you here is not one woord sillable or leter to proue that Christs body is made of bread and his blood of wyne Not one woord leter or sillable man Let other mens witts and eyes be iudge how couragiously the 134. vntruth The 134. vntruth is deliuered But suerly the baker and the pillorie once againe must not be suffred to parte so sleightly but that we may examine his cause by parcels and yet not in prolixe or tedious maner That women might aske doubts touching religion is as lawfull now as in those dayes That they might vulgarly read Gods woord or the Scripture seemeth an vntruth at least it is not proued but only affirmed by M. Riders woord the valew whereof is knowen That is was not thought conuenient S. Hieron 103. I gesse by these woords of S. Hierome of whom now we treate Only the arte of Scripture saith he is that which euery one challengeth This the chatting ould wyfe this the doting ould man this the babling Sophister this on euery hand men presume to teache before they learne it Nay more anciently sayd Tertullian Tertul. de praescripe Omnes tument omnes scientiam pollicentur Ipsae mulieres haereticae quam procaces quae audeant docere contendere c. All are puffd vpp all do professe knowledg The very hereticall women how malapert how audacious to teach to dispute c. of which
the lawfull preest hath vsualy pronounced the sacred woords ouer the bread that vnder the forme of bread is the true body of Christ. Thirdly Ihon Hufs professeth that Christus verbi sui ineffabili virtute panem vinum transubstantiat in propriam carnem sanguinem Christ by the vnspeakable vertue of his woord dothe transubstantiat bread and wyne into his fleash and bloode What a learned Reader and Dictionarie maker we haue of M. Rider that in this piller of Reformation omitted to fynd the woord of transubstantiation is to be obserued Fowerthly Hierome Prage sayth Ante consecrationem panem in consecratione postea Prag apud Pognium epist ad Leon. Aretinum verum Christi Corpus Befor Consecration bread in consecration and after the true body of Christ. Of these three the first Wickleph is by Fox acknowledged a chosen man raysed by God to lighten the world The other two Fox Acts and Mon. pag. 390. seq Oecolampadius in conscione de presentia Corporis Christs in eucharistia are Capital Calendarie Saincts with Fox Fiftly Oecolampad saythe Simpliciter absque hesitatione credamus adesse contineri sub hoc pane verum corpus sub vino autem sanguinem Non dicofiguram tantum absit id blasphemiae c. Simply and without stamering let vs beleeue to be present and to be contayned vnder this bread the true bodye and vnder the wyne the bloode I do not say a figure only fye vpon that blasphemie Agayne Vtinam princeps illustrissime abscissa mihi fuisset haec dextera cum primum inciperem de negotio Cenae Dominicae Idem epist. ad Lantgrau Hess an 1529. quicquam scribere I would most renowmed Prince this right hande of myne had bene chopped of when I began to wryte of the affayre of the supper Sixtly Bucer saythe Ex actis Concil Luther VVittemberg in adibus Lutheri Cum pane vino verè substantialiter adest exhibetur sumitur Corpus Châ—â—â— Sanguis VVith bread and wyne is the body and blood of Christ prefer and is receaued truely and substantialy He also wryting vpon Sainct Ihon Bucer in cap 6. Ioan cap. 26. Math. Calu. in haerm evaÌ„g l. 4. Instit c. 17. n. 11. de cena Domini inter opuscula craueth pardon of God that euer he bewitched any with the contrary opinion of the Sacramentarians Seuently Caluin saythe In vayne would God command his to eate bread and affirming it to be his body vnlesse the effect did accoÌ„pagnie the figure Therfor not only in signe is he shewed but in substance c. This was Caluins opinion during Luthers lyfe to be by him fauoured And when after his death he had changed it as now it is by Caluinians professed yet was he soe doubtfull and distrustfull of his propre opinion as to haue it depending vpon on mans good or badd lyking Calu. Defens 2. con VVesâ—phal Si Philippus verbulo declaret me a sua mente deslectere protinus desistam Yf Philipp Melancthon declare in the least woord that I swarue from his iudgement I will suddenly surcease Is not this a pitifull counterpoint to M. Riders opinion yet will he shake all off as lightly as a breath of wynde Nothing of all this wil be against him nothing of all this wil be for our purpose all wil be sayd to be impertinent fictions and wreasted mangled dismembred and corrupted allegations Other answer nether will he nether can he giue for there is no lyfe nor doubt remayning in the mater I confort my selfe with the saying of Cicero Cicero Latere nullus nugator potest diu No iugler especialy in this industrius age cany remayne long vnknowen And against his slanders and reproaches which are the sacred ancre and greatest confidence of his cause I haue this defense out of Sainct Bernard S. Bernard super Cantica Sufficit aduersum os loquentium iniqua opinio bonorum cum testimonio Conscientiae The opinion or knowledge the good haue of me together with the testimonie of my conscience is sufficient against the mouth of them that speake wickednes The second parte of the third proofe How English Protestant Martyrs confessed the real presence Fitzsimon Tacitus li. 19. 123. COnsidering how M. Rider is imployed in this answer I must with Tacitus accompt him Acerrimum militem in extrema obstinatum A most eager sowldiour and obstinat against all extremities First he trotteth to his ould wandring declaration of the occasion of such allegations as yf any occasion could make any affirme false doctrin or yf true doctrin deliuered by indirect occasions should therfore be accounted vntrue But that the good man mistaketh the occasion and altogether mis-informeth his reader in this mater may be gathered by these short demonstrations following The first is that yf as he sayth they had intended not to medle with the mater of the presence why would they condemne the opinion of them who did not beleeue such real presence An sint facienda mala vt inde eueniant bona could ill be done that good as that lyfe or liuings might be preserued therby might come therof The Apostle flatly teacheth the contrary Nether is the authoritie of Beza or Cartwright who granted as is declared such allowance to cownterfet for helping the woord Christian or religious Now the principal Protestants renounced the figuratiue imaginarie presence as heretical and professed to beleeue the real and substantial presence For as much sayd Sr. Ihon Ould Castle as I am falsely accused of a misbeleefe in the Sacrament of the altar I signifie here to all men that this is my fayth concerning that I beleeue in that Sacrament to be contayned very Christs body and blood vnder the similituds of wyne and bread yea the same body that was conceaued of the holy Ghost borne of the Virgin Marie Ouer this confession is by Fox written the Christian beleefe of the Lord Cobham If it was Christian Fox Acts and Mon. pag. 512. how is not the contrary therto vnchristian Yf it was vnlawfull how was it professed at tyme of deathe Can all the witt of man excogitat any quircke or chincke to declyne this contradiction but that in a tearmed Christian confession of a Protestant principal Martyre the puritan profession against the B. Sacrament was condemned Such and in lyke tearmes euen by Foxes owne relation was the Protestation of the L. Cromwell That he dyed in the Catholick fayth of the whole Church not doubting of any Sacrament therof Wherunto also Fox giueth the lyke tytle of a true confession of the L. Cromwell And for Rob. Barnes he was a most resolute Lutheran and therfore must haue bene as opposit as his master to the sacramental supposition Yet I come neerer and omitting Ridley Hooper Rogers Latimer the Duke of Northumberland and others great Saincts with Fox I craue in curtesie of M. Rider to giue satisfaction yf Crammer was
as it were vpon a stage the three Euangelists Mathew Mark and Luke deliuering the doctrine of the Sacrament Aug. Tomo quart de consensu Euangelistarum lib. 3. Cap. 1. Math. 26. Mark 14. Luk. 22. Ioh. 6. These three Euang. handled as it were the bodie of Christ Iohn the soule and diuinitie of Christ Lyra in psal 110. but when he came to Iohn he saith Iohannes autem de corpore sanguine Domini hoc in loco nihil dixit Iohn in the 6. of his gospel spake nothing of the Lords body bloud I wonder with what face you can brag to follow the fathers and no men nor sect more opposit to their faith and facts then you There Aug. hath cract your credit salue it how you can And your own Doctour Lyra condemnes your erronious opinion which will applie these as spoken of the Sacrament his words be these Nihil directe pertinet ad Sacramentalem vel corporalem manducationem hoc verbum Nisi manducaueritis c. Nam hoc verbum fuit dictum diu antequam Sacramentum Eucharistiae fuerit institutum This saying of Christ vnlesse you eat the flesh of the sonne of man drinke his bloud doth nothing directly appertaine to the Sacramentall or corporall eating of Christ in the Sacrament For Christ spake this long before he ordained this Sacrament Therefore no sound argument saith he can be grounded vpon that litteral exposition of the Sacramentall communion and he giues a reason vnaunswereable Nam primo debet existere in rerum natura For first the Sacrament must be ordained before it can be a Sacrament But you here would haue Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament before it bee a Sacrament And then Lyra concludes De Eucharistia Sacramentali quâ— nondum fuit tam alta sententia proferri non potuit quae dicitur Nisi manducaueritis c. Therefore of this place there can bee made no good sufficient argument touching the sacramentall communion vnlesse saith he some curious Hereticquâ—â— wil take these words spoken by Christ to be spoken propheticallie Quod nondum est noÌ„ datur priuilegium Now saith your owne Doctour if you take this chapter of the sixt of Iohn litterallie as you do then it is impossible and absurd because you wil haue a carnall presence in the Sacrament before there be a Sacrament if prophetically then your owne champion calls you curious Heretiques Lyra. eodem loco Luc. 23.41 And to prooue your litterall exposition grosse false and absurd he produceth against you two famous examples the first of the Theefe on the crosse who by his liuely faith performed the tenor of this text yet neuer communicated Sacramentallie And Iudas who communicated vnder both kinds and yet failed in the meaning of this precept Lib. 4. dist 9. And then shuts vp the mouths of all Litteralists and Heretiques that hold this spoken of the Sacrament alleadging Thomas Aquinas his draught out of Augustine Non manducans manducat manducans non manducat Hee that eateth not Sacramentally may yet eate Christ spiritually by faith and so did the Theefe on the Crosse and was saued Some eate the Sacramentall bread but not Christ which is the inward grace of the Sacrament as Iudas did and was damned Manie moe Fathers shall you haue to secod these against you if these satisfie you not Thus you are condemned by two learned Fathers that you ignorantlie or maliciously or both mistake and misapplie the sixth of Iohn to speake of the Sacrament before the Sacrament was instituted VVhether Christ treated of the Eucharist in the 6. chap. of S. Ihon. Fitzimon In his Rescript 41. I Am threatned by M. Rider that vnlesse I answeare this mater well I am ouerthrowen horse and foote I wil therfor begynn thus saying that S. Augustin and Lyra are vntruely alleaged Indeede S. Augustin speaking of the time immediatly before Christs passion August tom 4. de Consen Euan. l. 3. c. 1. sayth Ioannes autem de corpore sanguine Domini hoc loco nihil dixit But Ihon in this place sayth nothing of the body and blood of our Lord. These woords added by M. Rider sixt of his gospell are the text of a cunning misreporter not of S. Augustin He giueth a reason why S. Ihon treated not of the body and blood of our Lord in this place because saith he amply he treated therof before Is this Augustin to deny or affirme that S. Ihon treated of the body and blood of Christ in the sixt chapter For vnless he treated in the sixt chapter only S. Augustins woords that he had treated therof amply befor in no other place they being specified can not be verifyed Now to Lyra. Tell posteritie I request you in your next wryting that you had mistaken Lyra for one Mathias Dornick who carpeth by replyes at the additioÌ„s of Paul Burgensis annected to Lyra. Your owne cited booke will informe you therof befor the prologue to the psalmes and els wheare The swoord of Goliath agayne shal cutt his owne head I meane that the authors by you alleaged shall testifie against you Lyra then saith euen vpon the 6. of S. Ihon Postquam egit de pane spirituali qui est verbum Lyra in Cap. 6. Ioan. hic consequenter agit de pane spirituali qui est sacramentum After that he had discoursed of the spiritual bread which is the woord here he handleth the spiritual bread which is the Sacrament Againe Ne crederent quod caro eius contineretur in sacramento Eucharistiae sicut in signo ideo hoc remouet dicens caro mea vere est cibus c. Least they should beleeue that his fleash were conteined in the Eucharist as in a signe therfor he preuenteth that saying my fleash is meat indeede Againe quia hic sumitur realiter non figuratiue here it is taken realy sayth he and not figuratiuely After he telleth you that they are hereticks who affirme it to be tantummodo sicut in signo only as in a signe Let this suffise to know to whom might by another be sayd De mendacio ineruditionis tuae confundere Eccli 7. be ashamed at the falshood of your ignorance For forgerie is opprobrium nequam in homine a badd reproache to any man but is incident principaly to the vnlearned Eccli 34. in ore indisciplinatorum assidue erit As here it is manifest three great vntruths are heaped together First by vnlearned mistaking S. Augustins woords being of what was deliuered belonging only to the immediat action of Christ befor his passion Secondly by addition of woords to S. Augustins speeche Thirdly by vnlearned mistaking Lyra for another Notwithstanding I will score vp but the 17. vntrueth which was by badd intention and only to misinforme inserted For the point all catholicks and most principal protestants acknowledg that Christ in S. Ihon chapter 6. treated of the Sacrament But by way of premonition anticipation or instruction as was
some perticuler persons quick or dead as the Priest pleaseth VVhether Christs woords teach Christs fleash to haue bene only giuen on the Crosse Fitzimon 44. THis argument auerreth effectualy the precedent attestations as being out of all the 19. moods and three figures allowed in philosophie For by haueing the medium or meane twyse in the predicato or later part of the propositions it should be in the second figure and being deformed in that figure it is excluded out of all the rest The deformation appeareth that the second proposition should haue bene and is not in this maner but the fleash of Christ in the Sacrament was not only giuen on the Crosse from which it varyeth by omitting all the former parte and exchangeing the being giuen on the Crosse into the being of a material Crosse The conclusion also is misshapen as which ought only to haue bene therfor the fleash of Christ in the Sacrament was not promised in the sixt of Ihon. Because I am Rom. 1.14 Debitor factus sapientibus insipientibus made a debtour to the learned and vnlearned I haue borrowed licence of the vnskillfull in Philosophie to haue in a start followed this mater in his kinde Now to the capacitie of all I aunswer to the first proposition The 19. vntruth that it is euidently the 19. vntrueth and against Christs expresse promise in the 6. of S. Ihon promising that besyd his giuing his flesh to be crucifyed he would also giue him selfe to be eateÌ„ of vs saying vnlesse you eate c. I aunswear to the next that it is true that Christs fleash in the Sacrament was not only giuen on the Crosse as being also giuen to be eaten in the Sacrament The conclusion is contayned in the premisses and so denyed or affirmed as the premisses All the residue is ether specified and reuersed in the 40. or 43. numbres or els being voyd speeches at randome need noe further resolution Behould beloued reader Ioan. 6. v. 51.53.55 to these woords of Christ this bread which I will giue is my flesh for the life of the worlde no woord of worthe or witt is replied but time Ioan. 14.6 cap. 7.17 and wynde wasted in most idle diuagations Is Christ the trueth are his woords as the Euangelist affirmeth the veritie why then the bread he gaue was his fleash not his figure then his fleash was not only crucified but also eaten then his fleash is meat truely and not figuratiuely To aunsweare therfor to these pregnant and infallible woords of Christ him selfe only that we mistake not shewing how the Fathers denye when and what they affirme apparently that Christs woords are spiritual and therfor not litteral and for other aunswer to digresse into reproaches to multiply woords to beat the wynde not shewing any defense or warrant of Scripture or Father for your figure only without veritie appellation only without substance representation only without commoditie such aunswearing I say is breefly Psal 4. v. 3. Diligere vanitatem querere mendacium to loue vanitie and to seeke lyes The third proofe of the Catholique Priests out of the sixth of Iohn to prooue Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament Catholicque Priests Vers 55. My flesh is meate truelie and my bloud is drinke trulie Rider 45. YF you should aske your boy in his Grammer rules a question if he aunswered not in the same case or by the same tense of a verbe that theâ— question is asked by you will count him a silie Grammatist But if you aske your Sophister a question in quid and hee aunswere in quale you will taâ—â— him for an improper and impertinent aunswere But most of all if a great Diuine be asked a question to prooue the manner of a thing and he neglecting or omitting that as too hard or impossible for him prooues the matter that was neuer demaunded or doubted of what will the Reader thinke of this matter this man and this proofe Surelie he must say either he vnderstandeth not the state of the question or else he is not able to prooue the question and so vseth this shameful shift iâ— steed of a sufficient proofe All the Catholiques in this kingdome expected to be satisfied by your aunswer touching the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament whether it be carnal or spirituall and whether he must be eaten by faith spirituallie or the teeth carnally And your aunswere is as improper and impertinent as either Grammatist or Sophister for you leaue the maner of Christs presence which you should prooue and bring the matter of his presence which was neuer in question saying My flesh is meat truly c. How this your aunswere doeth relish of learning let the learned iudge When aâ— the Catholiques in the kingdome hang their soules on your saying Are these you contentments you giue them If they aske you how they must eate Christs fleâ— drinke Christs bloud then you tell them my flesh is meate in deed and my bloud 〈◊〉 drinke in deed Doe you aunswere their question or satisfie their conscience or resolue their doubts alasse no. Thus you haue dealt dallied and deceiued a long time Christs people with these your improper impertineÌ„t vnprofitable nay vntrue aunsweres and yet you will be called Fathers Doctours and what not But I pray you tell me why you added not the next words of Christ you thought they were against you But if you had dealt as men hauing Gods feaâ— before your eies you would not haue staied there for the next verse plainely discouers your bad dealing with the simple people for that aunswereth their question and that would satisfie all good Catholiques in this point For if you aske there the holy Ghost this question how must Gods children eate Christes flesh and drinke Christs bloud he will aunswere you that whosoeuer dwels in Christ and Christ in him eates Christs flesh and drinkes Christs bloude but the faithfull onely dwell in Christ and Christ in them therefore the faithfull onely eate Christs flesh and drinke Christs bloud whether it be in hearing the word in baptisme or in the Lords Supper as you haue heard before If you had added this verse it hâ—â— ouerthrown your carnall presence in the Sacrament and your orall eating of Chrisâ— with your mouth teeth c. But as you wrong the Catholiques with an impertitiâ—â— answere and as you abuse them by keeping backe the next words of Christ which expounds his owne meaning So heere you abuse your holie Father the Pope and your deare mother the Church of Rome in expounding this text contrarie to the Romane sence The second parte of the Catholicks first proofe by Scriptures 45. HEere in the woords of Christ is assured Fitzimon for the matter that it is fleashe and consequently not his appellation only for the manner that it is truely and consequently not figuratiuely only yet doth this proctor of the protestant profession only to cauill tell that the mater was
2. epist 50. ad Bonifac. in fine Tom. 5. de Ciu. l. 2. c. 25. But would you know what is to be against charities kingdome S. Augustin aunswereth Non est autem particeps diuinae charitatis qui hostis est vnitatis he is not partaker of diuine charitie who is an enemie of vnitie No catholick saythe he no fruitfull communion Therfor good M. Rider Aug. To. 10. de verb. Apo. ser 22. circa fineÌ„ let this goulden exhortation of S. Augustin take place after so many mis-informations of his perswasion VVould God saith he they would not feare them to whom long time they haue sould erroure for they respect them they are ashamed toward humane infirmitie and not toward inuincible veritie And they feare to be expostulated with all in this maner VVhy therfor haue you deceaued vs why haue you seduced vs why haue you affirmed so much ill and falshood They should aunswer yf they feared God it was humane to erre but diabolical through animositie to remayne in erroure And a litle after Let them say to their beleeuers we haue fayled together let vs retire from errour together VVe haue bene guydes to you and you followed to your fall will you not follow vs when we conduct you to the Church I pray God this exhortation may take effect according to the intention and worthe therof In the meane tyme it is the 33. vntrueth that we ouer-rule Scripturs and Fathers The 33. 34. 35. 35. 37. vntruth The 34. that we confesse to be figuratiue that is as you vnderstand only figuratiue these woords of Christ this is my blood of the new testament The 35. that Augustin reasoneth against Capharnaits who would not beleeue the woords of Christ no more them protestants in these tymes The 36. that by our literal exposition we forsake Augustins rule charities kingdome Apostolical and Catholick exposition The 37. that we be Caphernaits and Canibals I wil not requite his Theons style and bad demeanure knowing that it is for want of mater because Eccli 21. non est sensus vbi est amaritudo ther is no sense wher there is bitternes Yf vaunting were victorie reproaches reproofe dispising disconfiting M. Rider had bene as victorious as Cesar or Alexander as subtile and solid a disprouer as a second prophet Daniel as great a vanquisher as the faire king Arthure Rider Amb. lib. 4. de Sacrament to cap. 5. 55. Ambrose is of the same opinion with vs against you saying Fac nobis inquit oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi make vnto vs saith the Priest this oblation that it may bee allowable reasonable and acceptable which is a figure of the bodie and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ And Ambrose presentlie after saith the new Testament is confirmed by bloud in a figure of which bloud wee receiue the misticall bloud By these words the Reader may see that Ambrose and the Church in his dayes tooke it not for the naturall bodie of Christ but for a figure of his bodie and therefore cease to bragge heere to the simple of Ambrose and Augustine for they are not of your opinion Innocent Papae lib. tertius ca. 12. Fol. 148. and there shal you see the foolish and phantastical reasons the Pope giues for those said crosses And in the Canon of the Masse you haue these words of Ambrose in that part which begins Quam oblationem but you deale deceitfully with Gods people for you leaue out these words quod est forma corporis and there dash in fiue red crosses and still teach the people it is Catholicke doctrine and the old religion but these iuglings with the Fathers must be left or else good men that follow those Fathers will doubt that Gods spirit hath left you How dishonestly S. Ambrose is treated by M. Rider Fitzimon Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 5. 55. S. Ambrose is as fowly or rather worse vsed then S. Augustin Compare M. Riders woords and these together in the very same chapter In sanctis manibus suis accepit panem Antequam consecretur panis est vbi autem verba Christi accesserint corpus est Christi Deinde audi dicentem accipite edite ex eo omnes hoc est enim corpus meum Et ante verba Christi Calix est vini aquae plenus Vbi verba Christi operata fuerint ibi sanguis efficitur qui plebem redemit Paulo post Ipse Dominus Iesus testificatur nobis quod corpus suum accipiamus sanguinem Numquid debemus de eius fide testificatione dubitare In his sacred hands sayth S. Ambrose he tooke bread Befor it be consecrated it is bread but when the words of Christ come it is the body of Christ then heare him saying take and eate of this all for this is my bodie And befor the woords of Christ the chalice is full of water und wyne VVhen the woords of Christ haue operated the blood is made which redeemed the people A litle after Our Lord Iesus him selfe testifieth vnto vs that we receaue his body and blood should we doubt of his trueth and testimonie Could you M. Rider Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 5. in ether godly or honest disposition conceaue S. Ambrose thus speaking to thinke that in the sacrament was not the natural body of Christ but only a figure therof because he mentioned as we professe a figure to be therin Could you mistake without deepe hypochrisie these woords of his but when the woords of Christ come it which befor consecration was but bread is the body of Christ the blood is made which hathe redeemed the people Is not this a shamelesse resolution in making denials affirmations an act of such a carelesse man as is mentioned in Horace who had forfetted his credit abroad among all men freends and foes yet fayned to them of his priuat howshould that all went well and nothing against him saying Horacius lib. 1. Satyra 1. Populus me sibilat at mihi plaudo ipse domi The world doth hiss at me but yet I applaud to my selfe at home For opposition of S. Ambrose to protestantcy Causeus sayd he was bewitched by the deuil And truly in this point as after in treating of him in particular shal God willing be notifyed none was euer more opposit to them then he How lowde therfor The 38. vntruth hath M. Rider made his 38. vntrueth that Ambrose and the churche in his dayes thowght with him against vs But a mercenary minde to please man selleth it selfe rather then it would seeme disproueable S. Aug. late exhortation I feare will not benifit one of this humor 56. And Augustine else where saith Rider Aug. in â—narratione Psal 3. pag. 7. col 1. Printed at Paris anno 1566. August tom 6. contra Adimant cap. 12. Christ commended and deliuered to his disciples the figure of his body and bloud
the administration of the Cupp didst not thow command thy collegue or compartner that in the face of the congregation he showld take the cupp from me by force And for that cause did not I howld it fast and with bothe my hands I know that others will lawgh at this disordre but I had rather haue them lament that in all this dissolut or disioynted glosse M. Rider the woords of Christs institution Hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis tradetur c. this is my body which shal be deliuered for you c. can not be perceaued but in lieu therof our Lord and Saluiour is made to tripp from mater to mater without any one sillable to our purpose in question Wher is here shewed that bread after consecration remayneth still bread Wher is the satisfaction by the Euangelists and S. Paul that we must relye vnto in spyte of Pope and poperie What marrow or substance is in thes woords for any other then for a single Sintaxian to know that dedit and Fregit be actiue verbs and Datur and Frangitur be passiue c. For breuities sake I will not repeat the dismal hate of thes reformers against the woords of Christs institution which I haue alredy amply prosecuted in the 68. numbre yet will I not omitt Luthers verdict against his brethren saying they feare Luther tom 7. defen verb. caena fol. 383. least they should stumble and breake their necks at euery sillable which Christ pronownced And this maketh them range abowt through all the parts of learning and not to come to any issue in the mayne point of his sacred institution truely fullfilling the saying of the royal Prophet Psal 11. impij in circuitu ambulant the wicked wander in a circuit and lyke serpents troden on the heads or henns whose neckes are newly crackt they wreath and wrest vp and downe in manifould skippings spending wasting their small tyme to liue which by being quiet might some what longer continue Rider 78. Thus you see how distinctlie Christ disioynes them sundring them with their seuerall properties Bread and wine remain after consecration by Christ his testimony therefore transubstansiation is a forged and false fable inuēted by new Rome to support your new heresies of Christs carnall presence the signe from the thing signified not confounding them as you vntrulie teach yea after that Christ vttered hoc est corpus meum which you call your consecration Now let vs compare the phrase and words that the holie Ghost vseth in both the new Testament the old and then you will say they are so like that they are rather borrowed of the old testament then instituted in the new and of necessitie seeing they are both Sacraments of like words ordained by one Author to one end they must needs haue one sence so that the one will best expound the other the one being Sacramentall and relatiue the other cannot be Grammaticall and proper As it is said in the old (a) Gen. 17.10 Testament of the sacrament of circumcition hoc est pactum meū this is my couenant So it is said in the new (b) Math. 26.26 Testament by the same spirit hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie but as by those words like to these in sillables sound and sence there was no transubstansiation of the peece of flesh of the foreskin that was cut off into Gods couenant made with his Church so there is no naturall nor miraculous chaunge made of anie part of the bread or wine into Christs bodie and bloud Exod. 12. 1. Cor. 11.24 Exod. 24 8. And as it was said of the Paschall Lambe hoc erit vobis in memoriam this shall be to you a rememberance so it is said of the Lords Supper Doe this in rememberance of me And as it was said in the olde Testament hic est sanguis faederis This is the bloud of the couenant yet was not the couenant but à signe of the couenant Luc. 22.20 So is it said by Christ himselfe This cup is the new Testament in my bloud yet the cup was neither the Testament nor the bloud but a signe representation and rememberance of Christs bloud And the new Testament is an obligation or bond wherein God for his part binds himselfe with most sure couenaunts and seales it with word oath and Sacraments that hee will receiue into his protection and fauor the beleeuer and penitent And the beleeuer repentant of their parts binde themselues by like indented couenants to performe vnto his sacred Maiestie Rom. 1.5 a liuelie steadfaste faith with holy obedience Now the cup or the wine in the cup is a representation or commemoration vnto vs of this couenant of grace made in the newe Testament as the Paschall Lambe and the bloud of beasts were signes of Gods couenaunt in the old Testament This may suffice for the plaine and true vnderstanding of these words this is my bodie and this is my bloud beeing expounded according to the holie scriptures Now to your first proofe out of saint Paul Fitzsimon 78. It is an easie mater vpon all the premisses to tell vs You see you see when nothing is giuen to be seene but gross impietie futilitie I admonished you deere Readers that Reformers conceaued a Vatinian hatred against Christs institution Wil you now behowld a liuely demonstration therof First he saythe that the phrase and woords vsed therin is no new institution but borrowed owt of the owld testament Secondly that the Sacraments of the owld testament and new are so lyke as they must haue one ende and sence and the one not to be literal more then the other It is to be remembred which is mentioned in the 36. and 63. numbers that by Reformers opinion ther is noe more benifit by Christs Sacrament of the Altar then by the Iewish ceremonies which according to their translation Sainct Paul saith to haue bene only bare Galat. 4.9 and beggerly ordonances I request all curteouse readers to spare me the payne to relate the substance of such numbers in this place and that they will not proceed further vntill they haue perused what ther is fownd First then I aunswer that yf by similitud of speeche vsed in the figure and the thing figured should be gathered that they bothe were of equal sence ende and literalitie it would followe that all figurs of Christ in the owld testament were equal with Christ himselfe that the owld testament is as behooful as the new Note because they haue one authour one sence one ende one phrase and one literalitie accordinge to M. Rider Wherefore since Ioseph in the owld testament was called Saluator mundi the Saluioure of the world Genes 41.45 Ioan. 4.42 and Christ in the same Phrase by S. Ihon is called Saluator mundi they must haue on ende one sence one literalitie And therfor as Ioseph was noe
law Prou. 3.1 Galat. 2.10 therfor the law can not be among vs. S. Paul was admonished not to forgett the poore therfor the poore must haue bene absent from him Are thes consequences Are thes our ouerthrowes Yes truly the greatest that can be giuen vs. 87. And these words doe this in rememberance of mee condemneth all your Masses Rider that be said in rememberance of He-Saints and Shee-Saints and no Saints Mâ—ssale Printed at Venice 1404. as your Popes Bishoppes and in rememberance of Pilgrims Marriners women in trauaill and murren of beasts So that all the foresaid Masses said or sung in rememberance of Saints persons or diseases be abhominable vnlesse you will say which were damnable to thinke that those Saintes Popes Bishopes Pilgrims c. died for you But I will cease to speake of those abhominable abuses vntill I come to the controuersie of the Masse and yet then nothing but what shall be found in your owne bookes whose chapters leaues pages if not lines shall be quoted trulie without fraud or affection Another errour you would couer in leaping ouer the 26. verse in these wordes you doe shew the Lords death till he come Chrisostome Tom. 4. Hom. 27. vpon these words Facietis commemorationem salutis vestra beneficij mei This shewing of the Lords death consiste h in preaching and expounding some scripture wherein the communicants must be instructed of the horrour of their sinne the greatnesse of Gods loue the price of the precious merits of Christs blessed passion which is the remission of sinnes and our reconciliation to Gods fauoure through his bitter and bloudie passion VVhether Masses be sayd to Saincts And whether it be dangerous now a dayes to honor Saincts Fitzsimon 87. DId not you often tell vs that you had your Doctrin from the primatiue Fathers Yf it be so that you euer knew what S. Augustin sayd in this mater S. August 20. con Faust c. 21. how might you thinke thes your arguments vnchildish these are his woords Sacrificamus non martyribus sed Deo martyrum illo dumtaxat ritu quo sibi sacrificari noui testamenti manifestatione praecepit VVe sacrifice not to martyrs but to the God of martyrs in that only ceremonie which he commanded to sacrifice to himselfe in the manifestation of the new tstament I can not blame you to haue wincked at these woords as being litle fauorable to your imaginations and contayning all that I sayd befor of Christs instituting a sacrifice authorising preists to do the same ordaining the new testament at his Supper c. By our especial prayers to Saincts conioyned with this sacrifice we may not be sayd to offre the sacrifice it selfe to them When Caluin had abolished to his power other images of Christ and his Saincts he allowed his owne and to some repyning therat he aunswered Si quis hoc spectaculo offendatur Vita Caluini cap. 12. vt ne deinceps aspiciat oculos sibi eruat vel abeat cito suspendat se Yf any be offended with this sight that he may noe more behould it let him put owt his eyes or goe spediely and hang him selfe This man also when he had obserued diuers Protestants Hamsted Fox c. to canonize the fownders of protestantcie putting them in Calendars in redd leters c. he thought it tyme to mollifye his hatred against inuocation of Saincts intending that his and his fellowes glorie might not be finished by their death saying Etsi solus Deus inuocandus sit licet tamen homines ad opem nobis ferendam implorare Although God be only to be inuoked Calu. in Cateches cap. de oratione Luther lib. 2. colloq fol. 129. yet is it lawful to implore that men would also send vs helpe Luther thinking that where â—â—ch Saincts were honoured Sathan also might be comprised in the same Calendar and Lytanies he deuoutly inuoketh him saying Sancte Sathan ora pro nobis minime tamen contra te peccauimus Clememissime Diabole holy Sathan pray for vs For in noe wyse haue we offended thee most clement deuil c. Verily for my owne parte I intend not to exchange my deuotion from the ould Saincts toward thes new nor thinke it fitt to be done by others But by the premisses appeareth it is not so heynouse a mater to pray to Saincts as in the begyning of reformation was conceaued When you begyn M. Rider to speake of our abhominable abuses as you say and will alleage our books chapters leaues pages yf not lynes which hetherto was neuer performed as oft as any inconueniencie was imputed to vs as is often shewed let it be done with greater fidelitie then S. Chrysostome is produced in this place For vpon my credit nether hathe he any such Homilie vpon such woords nor any such doctrin in all his woorks as you adioyne to this citation Will the other threatned citations be in this sorte Tyme will discouer I proceed It had bene conuenient M. Rider that yow did shew some authoritie for your saying the shewing of the Lords death to consist in preaching and expownding some Scripture For Christ and his Apostles and the primatiue church practised the administration of this Sacrament befor any of the new testament was written And yf as you say Abraham communicated the ould testament also then wanted So that ether your Scripture here mentioned must not be any parte of the bible or els you ouerthrow your saying in the 46. number that Abraham in whos tyme ther was no Scripture communicated by fayth as also all other faythfull and that Christ his Apostles and primatiue Church were not of your persuasion in whose tyme nothing of the new testament was vulgarly exstant 88. Riders And this condemneth your shewing of Christ his death by such ydle gestures and dumbe shewes without anie glorification of GODS name or edification of Christ his people that I dare boldlie say and so God willing will plainlie prooue that from your first Introibo ad Altare Dei which is the beginning of your Masse vntill you come to the last line Ite missa est there is nothing but magicall superstition heresie idolatrie without veritie or antiquitie Now let the Catholickes iudge what wrong is done them when in stead of a confortable declaration of the Lords death they haue a histrionicall dumbe shew without true signification or sence warranted from Christs trueth And wheras you exclaime against vs for allowing tropes and Sacramentall phrases in the handling of this controuersie if you had not concealed this phrase This cup is the new Testament in my bloud the Catholiks might haue seene your error and that we in so doing onelie immitate Christ whom you should rather follow then the precepts doctrine of men whose precepts are no warrants for you nor me to build our faith vpon nor for the Catholikes to imitate And you with vs must either say that Christ vsed a double figure or else most
accessorie in like eloquence to witt in moste deceitful vehemencie iustifyinge a falshoode which is by him selfe and al others for such accompted For to be truly acquainted with the truth herein whether the wicked receaue the whole Sacrament vnderstand the doctrin of Gods Church to be expressed in this controuersie aboue a thousand yeares paste although M. Rider immediatelye before saith S. Gregorius S. August l. coÌ„ Fulg. Donat. c. 6. Idem l. 2 con Lit. Petil. c. 40. In Psal 10. Theodoret. 1. Cor. c. 11. S. Chrysost ho. 8. in Math. in cap. 11. 1. Cor. Ser. 3. in c. 1. ad Ephes. c. S. Hieron in Psal 54. that it is an inuention of late writers by S. Gregorie saing Est quidem in peccatoribus et indignè sumentibus vera Christi caro verus sanguis sed essentia non salubri efficientia The true fleash of Christ and true blood is certainely in sinners and vnworthy receauers but in essence and not in healthful efficacie S. Augustine more ancient said Iudas the traitoure receaued the bodye of Christ and Simon Magus the good Baptisme but because they vsed not wel the good by vsing it ill they perished The same doctrine he els where manifouldly inculcateth Theodoret Bishope about the same time said Iesus Christ did not only giue his pretious body and blood to eleauen Apostles but also to Iudas the traitour By S. Chrisostom is said The traitour was made partaker of diuine presents He also of this matter hath written certaine expresse homilies plentifully containing Iudas to haue receaued the B. Sacrament By S. Hierom Cibus dulcis est corpus Christi quod ipse accipit indignus Sweete meate is the body of Christ which he Iudas receaued vnworthely What need I any witnesse to conuict the 86. The 86. vntruth vntruth in this matter then M. Rider againste him selfe Who so often is made to ouerthrow him selfe that he confirmeth the saying of Gods holy word Micheae l. 7.6 Math. 10.25 Inimici hominis domestici eius The enimyes of a man are his owne domesticalles He then repeating soone after S. Augustins woordes that the wicked presse with their teeth the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ thereby eateing them to their iudgment because they are vncleane in hart What doe wee craue more then that the wicked eate the Sacrament of Christs bodie and blood and consequently not of his figure only to their iudgment What heapes of Doctors and Fathers might I produce to auerre this doctrin 1. Cor. 11. if in this so cleere a case S. Paul so manifestlye auouching those to be guiltie of the bodye and bloode of our Lorde and to eate their owne iudgment not who did not beleeue in Christ or who did abuse a figure of Christ but they who did eate and drinke his bodye and blood vnworthely not discerning the body of Christ the few testimonies here alleaged and M. Riders owne interpretation of S. Augustin did not commaunde me to forbeare superfluitie Origen produced by M. Rider Origen in Psal 37. telleth the 87 The 87. vntruth Origen in Psal 37. vntruth to be that he denieth the wicked to coÌ„municate the B. Sacrament he saying to the wicked Doste thou not feare to communicate the body of Christ approaching to the Eucharist as if thou werst pure and cleane and as if there were nothing in the vnworthy c. Doste thou thinke that in all this thou wilt auoyde the indignation of God Doste thou not remember what is written that for this cause many are become sick and feeble yea and stroken to death Continually you behoulde that M. Riders sayinges are true like dreames rather by being true contrariously then as they were by him related The 88. vntruth S. Chrisostom also craueth to haue numbered the 88. vntruth that he denieth the wicked in that homilie to communicate Christs true body he only exhorting that they who should receaue would omitt to be wicked and to that end heaping most goulden sentences to perswade them thereto Is shame and fidelitie vanished out of the worlde Can such Fathers by any honest hart be wreasted to denye when they affirme to affirme when they denye Aurifaber a Protestant Aurifaber apud Ministro machiâ— pag. 7. affirmeth that Luther on a time complained that Post reuelatum euangelium virtus est occisa iustitia oppressa temperantia ligata veritaâ—a canibus lacerata fides clauda nequitia quotidiana deuotio pulsa heresis relicta After the gospel of pretended reformation reuealed vertu is slaine iustice oppressed temperance tyed truth torne by dogges faith lame wickednesse continuall deuotion fled heresie remaining If Luther had knowne M. Riders dealing among the rest thinke you would he not applaud to him selfe that he was become a prophet S. Augustin whom he by ignorance maketh a Pope claymeth to haue the 89. The 89. vntruth vntruth marked because in saying he that dissenteth from Christ eateth him to his perdition for as the glosse contayneth mali accipiunt corpus de virgine natum the wicked receaue the body borne of a virgin he is made by M. Rider absolutly to affirm In cap. citatum à Ridero that the wicked doth nether eathe his fleashe nor drinke his blood The 90. The 90. vntruth vntruth is that in the third chapter following any such mater as he informeth is ether contayned or mentioned I leaue and report all arbitrement of such proceeding not only to all others but euen to my good Reformer him selfe especialy yf he be not in his furious but in his merry moode wherin diuers tymes he acknowledgeth many trueths wherof otherwyse he had not bene so liberal But I must confesse by the way that he affoordeth once a varietie yet not in true learning but deceytfull sophistry saying That the wicked haue not a liuely and iustifying faythe as nether we nor all our syde can denye This caption or fallacie is called Captio plurimum interrogationum vt vnius of sundrie demandes as beinge all one As if one woulde require 1. Elench 4. Note wel is Peter a man and a woman If you answere affirmatiuely the Sophist therupon inferreth that Peter is a woman if you answere negatiuely he inferreth that Peter is not a man So M. Rider knoweth that we will not say that the wicked haue a liuely iustifying faythe for how can they be iustifyed yf they be wicked and he is not ignorant but we would and should say that wicked people may haue fayth or that they become not infidels or hereticks by euery act of wickednes and therupon as yf these two were all one he inferreth that we and all our syde can not deny but that they are without faythe and dead men not able to eate spiritual meat c. How they are able to eate such meat namely not to their benefit but to their perdition is often towld and contayned in S. Gregories woords before alleaged This sophistrie of
and the Catholickes but these necessarie question drawne out of this your owne opinion 1. First by what scripture do you prooue that you are Apostles 2. Secondlie by what scripture doe you prooue that you are Priests 3. Thirdlie by what scripture doe you prooue your commission to consecrate Challices 4. Fourthly by what scripture doe you prooue that the holie bloud of Christ is an effect of your benediction of the cup. 5. Lastlie by what scripture prooue you that this blessing or thanksgiuing is referred to the Challice and not to God Apostles ye are not Gall 1. 1. Cor. 9.1 2. Acts. 9.15 Rom. 1.2 Vnlesse you prooue these points by canonicall scriptures to be true which you shall neuer doe they bind no mans conscience to beleeue them or you Against the first I thus obiect that you are no Apostles thus I prooue it A true Apostle must be called by Christ immediatlie and that you are not He must see the Lord Iesus in the flesh which you haue not He must haue his immediat commission from Christ to preach euerie where which neither Priest Semynarie Iesuit Cardinall not Pope can haue Gall. 2. Ephes. 8. as your owne consciences full well doth know and therefore you are not Christs Apostles The true Apostles were equall in authoritie you disdaine it nay more you haue made against this a new article of the Popes supremacie and whole volumes of Cardinals Primacies Iesuits Excellencies and Priests Soueraignties Tertulian contra Marcion But I will say to you as Tertullian saide to Marcion the hereticke If you bee Prophets foretel vs some things to come if that you be Apostles preach euery where and agree with the Apostles in doctrine For whosoeuer preach not the same doctrin the Apostles did haue not the same commission the Apostles had But you late Priests and Iesuits preach not the same doctrine the Apostles did Iesuits and Priests be no Apostles Priests ye are not First Because yee will not offer the flesh of beasts therefore you haue not the same commission the Apostles had The maior hath not difficultie the minor is so plaine it needs no proofe the conclusion is ineuitable We read of foure kinds of Priests in Gods Booke three of them in the old Testament and one in the new The first after the order of Aaron and one other after the order of Melchisedech and the third after the order of Baall After Aarons order you wil not be And after Melchisedechs you can not be And concerning the third order I would you were as free from the ydolatrie of that false order as you would be free of the imputation of their heresies The last parte of the Catholicks proofe by scripturs for the real Presence Fitzsimon 97. A Serpent that is crushed in the head wresteth and wryeth him selfe vp and downe infoulding his whole body into many vaine circles and turnings withall his strugling purchasing nothing els but that others may coÌ„ceaue the extremitie of his payns M. Rider being wholy suppressed with this powerfull testimonie of Scripture S. Chrysost hom 24. in 1. Cor. that the chalice of benediction as S. Chrysostom also calleth it is the coÌ„munion of the blood of Christ and the bread a participation of his fleashe with manyfowld wreathings tumbleth vp and downe to talke of all by-maters wishing vs to proue that we are Apostles that we are preists that chalices may be consecrated that the holy blood of Christ is an effect of our benediction c. But especialy he is trubled that a woord by vs was miswritten blesse for breake exclayming at it as at the most wicked infidelitie in the world This is he who sayd in the 51. number that he was sorie that he must tell vs our fault and yet here so carpeth at a fault of no importance This is he who in telling it committeth tenne tymes a greater errour then it For first euen in this point and all his printed bookes where he should haue sayd the communication of the blood of Christ he deliuereth the communication not of the blood but of the body of Christ and next the very woord blesse which he was now to reprehend he deliuereth as yf he were thinking vpon some sister in the Lord of that name Besse I say nothing els therto but that your Fidd for so I thinke you are wont to name Fideworth your wyfe might inioye your mynde alone from all Besses and busines that your bonds and bragnes can not brooke and consequently contayne your homelines in homely maters without ingageing them in schole points wherin euen by your phisnomie you are denyed to haue any interest Such as is this confusion he sustayned abowt the sillable it as appeareth in the 51. and 76. number by aggrauating small and harmlesse tripps of the penne and in that selfe same reprehension through Gods prouidence toward dissemblers he not only tripping but stumbling and tumbling into greuous inconueniencies him selfe Concerning the perfection of the latin translation and the excellencie therof aboue any greeke now extant to much is sayd for any satisfaction due to M. Rider as also for the woord Blesse and blessing of creaturs and consecration of chalices n. 90. in which mater S. Cyprian speaketh cleerly saying Calix solemni benedictione sacratus S. Cyprian de cana Domini Vide n. 101. the chalice consecrated by solemne benediction and other extrauagant controuersies both sufficiently and abundantly is already propounded both for resolution concerning them and for manifesting that as weake and bedred people neuer consist quyet but turne from syde to syde seeking repose so M. Rider diuerteth from matter to matter to depestre and quyet his diseased or crased cause and conscience neuer remayning on the point incontrouersie I would confute his saying in the margent that only Christ was a preist according Melchisedeches Ordre yf any one proofe were brought to make it seeme probable Against his bare saying let it now suffice that as long as ether Sacrifice or Sacrament of bread and wyne remayne by vertu of Christs woords do this in remembrance of me so long must others besyd Christ be preists accordinge the ordre of Melchisedech Rider Secondly none after Mâ—lchisedechs order but Christ onely 98. Now (a) 1. Pet 29. Exod. 19.6 Saint Peter in the new Testament setteth downe a fourth order of Priests which is a kinglie or royall Priesthood but that is spirituall not carnall inward not outward common to all beleeuers not proper as you imagine to anie naturall order or ecclesiasticall function For this is sound diuinitie which you shall neuer disprooue that the office of sacrificets and sacrificing is either singular to Christ in respect of his sacrifice propitiatorie onelie vppon the crosse or else common to all true Christians in respect of their spirituall sacrifices of praise and thanksgiuing neither shall you euer finde this word Sacerdos euer applied in the new Testament to any Ecclesiasticall order and function
faithfully to iustifie my speeche in the most sparing interpretation which any aduersarie might affoorde Panis iste queâ— Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro The bread saith S. Cyprian which our Lord gaue to his disciples not in apparence but in nature or substance changed by the omnipotencie of the woord was made fleash You M. Rider saye there is noe proofe in Cyprian that the natural substantial and real body of Christ is vnder the forme of breade The 105. vntruth That now by S. Cyprian is assured the 105. vntruth he in expresse tearms saying the bread remayning only in apparence bread and by Christs omnipotent woord in nature changed was made his fleashe The 106. The 106. vntruth vntruth is also by S. Cyprian almost in euery sillable of the forsayd allegation certifyed when you affirme that he with you and you with him agree in this point For there could not be greater opposition against you The 107. vntruth contayned in fewer woords The 107. is by S. Cyprian certifyed when you informe that according his opinion the wicked eate not the body of Christ he manifestly saying that S. Cypr. ser 5. de lapsis exhalantibus etiam scelus suum â—aucibus Domini Corpus inuaduÌ„t with gaping iawes breathing their wickednes they inuade the body of Christ. And this to haue hapned because ante exomologesin factam criminis ante purgatam conscientiam sacrificio manu saâ—erdotis c. befor fullfilling pennance for their fault befor purgeing their consciences by the sacrifice and hands of the Preests c. they aduentured to approache This tymes papistrie and it of those times are found will yee nil yee coÌ„formable This made Causeus to tearme Cyprian blockish Causeus dial 8. 11. and reprobate He is in dede a block in their way and a reprouer of their impietie therby so grauelling their cause that their greauing and groning myndes must haue vamped out such reproaches There is no doubt left of the veritie of the flesh and bloud of Christ Catholicke Priestes for now by the assurance of our Lord and certaintie of our faith Hyllarius de Trinitate lib. 4. 8. floruit 370. it is his true flesh and his true bloud 107. GEntlemen now we must needs commend you Rider for you giue testimonie with the truth and vs against the late church of Rome your selues now you come neere the quicke in deed and therefore speake both the trueth and trulie This is the manner how Christ must be eaten by faith but you should haue added the next line following Et haec accepta atque exhausta id efficiunt c. and these that is sanctified bread and wine being thus by faith taken and thus drunke bring this to passe that Christ is in vs and we in Christ so now you say with Hyllarie that Christ dwelleth in all them that receiue him by faith Your owne proofe is one our side And so by this your owne warrant you witnesse to the world that there is no place for the corporall receiuing of Christ by the wicked as Rome teacheth it because Christ dwelleth not in them nor they in him And so because this your proofe prooues one part of the matter in question against your selues that Christ is to bee eaten or receiued by our faith not by our mouth or teeth I will addresse my selfe to the examination of your next proofe The fift parte of the second proofe of S. Hilarie Fitzsimon 107. WHen I perceaued some saying of myne to haue contented M. Rider Laert. l. 6. I mistrusted as Antisthenes that I had vttered some foolishnes considering that obsequium amicos veritas odium parit flattrie and falshood doth content and gratifie the multitude and truth breedeth rather their dislyke But all is well For it is but à fayned pretext of contentment Let vs in the name of God ioyne issue vpon S. Hilaries suffrage All that M. Rider hath therin to applaude vnto him selfe is that there is mention of faithe therin That such faithe assureth the veritie of Christs true fleash and his true blood to be in the sacrament was no impediment for M. Rider to haue sayd all to be for his purpose and so to gallopp gallantly away from examining the matter any longer But as the prouerb is the baker you may know him to haue imitated Melancton by leauing his preaching and applying his baking and publickly selling bread to the exceeding detriment of the free bakers a whole yeare together in Dublin must not so parte from the pillorie For S. Hilarie nayleth his eares fast in saying Verè Verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus Verily we receaue the VVoord made fleash in our Lords foode quomodo non naturaliter in nobis manere existimanâ—â— est how is he not to be thought naturaly to remayne in vs si vere homo ille qui ex Maria natus est Christus S. Hilarius lib. 8. de Trinitate nos vere sub mysterio carnem corporis sui suminâ—â— yf he who was borne of Marie be truely Christ then we vnder this mysterie 〈◊〉 truely receaue the fleash of his bodye Yf M. Rider can pull out these nayles without tearing his eares that we truely and therfor not only figuratiuely receaue the fleash of his bodie yf he be Christ and that â—e naturaly remayneth in vs and therfor not only by conceit especialy S. Hilarie saying Ibidem Non per concordiam voluntatis non vnitatem voluntatis intelligi voluit Christ would not it should be vnderstood by concord of our affectione or vnitie of our wills but naturaliter naturaly which he repeateth fouer 〈◊〉 fiue tymes and per naturalem proprietatem by natural proprietie Yf I say M. Rider can declyne or remoue from these tormenting nayles then to incountre him in one of his owne Lilian sentences for others he knew none magnus mihi erit Apollo he shal be our wysest Deane whose euery woord shal be a Delphian oracle I had rather S. Hilarie confute him thus alone then by other amplificatioÌ„s to confound him The 108. vntrueth appeareth saying The 108. vntruth that we witnes to the world that there is noe place for the corporal receauing of Christ by the wicked As yf forsooth none can be wicked that haue faith nor any able to receaue Christ but by faith Wherby first all protestants are made free from wickednes and it is next giuen for a Riderian sound sequel S. Hilarie saith that by our Lords testimonie and assurance of our faith Christs true fleash and blood are receaued therfor who soeuer is not faithfull doth not receaue Christs true fleash and blood Which sequel yf it be currant why also not this by faith and hospitalitie Marie Magdalen and Martha receaued Christ into their house therfor Anna Cayphas Pilat could not receaue him otherwyse then by faith and hospitalitie The
bloud of the Lord. But of this we haue sufficientlie spoken before And thus now the Reader may be sufficientlie satisfied that the change is not naturall but misticall not of substance but of accidents and qualities And so bread remaineth in substance but is changed in misterie And so is bread made the flesh of Christ not by your miraculous transubstantiation but by mistical Apostolicall benediction or sanctification not in changing the nature of it but adding grace to it as beforesaid And thus Ambrose hath aunswered Ambrose And if you would read him without partiall affection hee would withdraw you from this your imagined opinion But now to that which followeth The 8. parte of the second proofe of S. Ambrose 112. FIrst he affirmeth that all we produce out of S. Ambrose is true yet that we want in woords our purpose of Transubstantiation He might be ashamed to disable the right honorable Deputie and Concile to whom he dedicated his booke in exhibiting before their eyes the most manifest the most palpable and the most forcible allegation that could be imagined for transubstantiation and such one as possibly can not be true but transubstantiation must be acknowleged yet to dazel their eyes and delude their iudgements as yf he would perswade them they did noe wyse see in those woords what all iudgements must needs conceaue vnlesse they were bewitched For what is transubstantiation but a conuersion of one substance into another noe thing of the former substance remayning And in these woords of S. Ambrose is not it sayd that bread was before consecration and not remayning after it but contrarywyse that it is made the fleash of Christ and consequently transubstantiated Are not the woords following selected out of S. Ambrose to testifie by example a conuersion of one substance into another therby to perswade our beleefe of such conuersion of bread into Christs body This is to vse the L. Deputie and Concil as the Iewes vsed Christ in buffeting their profession with mayne stroakes in the meane tyme as yf they had bene buffmen blynde demanding them that they should tell what had smitten them or bene against them Or rather inforceing them to beleeue by such stroakes they had not bene harmed but rather greatly pleasured and much aduantaged For S. Ambrose the easier to proue such conuersion of bread and wyne he exemplifyeth by many other conuersions of Moises rodde into a Serpent the riuers of Egipt into blood of the read sees into that firme soliditie that they stood of them selues diuided of Iordan returning against nature backward c. after which he bringeth the creation of heauen and earthe made of nothing by the puissant woords of God Wherupon he inferreth If Gods woord could make things to be which were not how much more can he make of things that were things to be And by consequent how vnchristian is it to thinke but his woords this is my body this is my blood do not conuert bread and wyne into his body and into his blood And then he concludeth Ergo tibi vt respondeam non erat corpus Christi ante consecrationem S. Ambros l. 4. de sacram c. 4 5. lib. 6. c. 1. sed post consecrationem dico tibi quod iam Corpus est Christi Therfor that I may resolue the it was not the body of Christ before consecration but after consecration I say vnto thee that now it is the body of Christ. 2. Cor. 6.15 What societie is there betwixt light and darknes what agreement betwixt Christ and Belial what participation betwixt the faythfull and the Infidel that is betwixt S. Ambrose and M. Rider S. Ambros telling by so many proofes and examples a true conuersion in so significant woords of bread into Christs body by consecration M. Rider denying such conuersion and such consecration Nay beleeue him and Ambrose hath not a woord against him but yf he were redd saythe he without partial affection he would withdraw vs from our opinion and make vs thinke no otherwyse then as good Protestants With what affection then did Causeus and the Centuriasts Causeus dial 8. 11. centur 3. c. 4. pag. 54. 81. Calu. in libello de caena de vera reformat Zuingl to 1. Epichir de Canone missae fol. 183. Cartwr l. 2. pag. 513. lib. 1. pag. 94. S. Hilar. l. 1. de Trinit read him when they sayd he was be witched by the deuil With what affection did Caluin and Zuinglius read him when they professed he stood for Papists in establishing this incruental Sacrifice With what affection did Cartwright read him when he sayd the bringing in of his authoritie was a mouing and sommouing of Hell and that he held diuers things corruptly But because all may know who is a good reader without partial affection I will defyne him in the woords of S. Hilarie Optimus ille lector est qui non cogit illud dictis contineri quod ante lectionem praesumserit ad intelligendum sed qui doctorum intelligentiam expectat He is the best reader who doth not wreast that to be contayned in euidences which he before presumed to be vnderstood but he who expecteth the exposition of Doctours Now S. Ambrose by Catholick and Protestant Doctours is allotted and assigned to me against Protestantcie whether then of vs haue read him without partial affection This saying therfore against such authoritie maketh the 115. vntruth The 116. The 115. vntruth The 116. vntruth The 117. vntruth S. Ambros lib 4. c 4. 5. lib 6. de Sacram c. 1. The 118. vntruth The 119. vntruth that we haue not shewed whether Christs fleash be made of bread The 117. that the instances of such conuersions mentioned by S. Ambrose should be dislyked by vs. The 118. that he bringeth our spiritual change from an ould creature to a new to impugne the corporall change of bread into Christ The 119. that S. Ambros proueth the change in this mater to be only in qualitie For in the same place he saith that wyne Sanguis efficitur qui plebem redemit The 120. vntruth is made the blood which deliuered the people The 120. that after consecration Christs body being signified present 〈◊〉 12â— vntruth should therfore not be present The 121. that because there is a figure mentioned therfore there is not a substaÌ„ce as appeareth in 31. 39. 42. 46. nuÌ„bers â—he 122. vntruth The 122. that it may be collected that bread still remaineth it being expresly said by S. Ambros Vbi accesserit consecratio Loco citato de pane fit caro Christi VVhen consecration is pronounced of bread is made the fleash of Christ And in hauing by such assignation obtayned S. Ambrose giue eare to know how great a treasure I haue purchased and that by an ould and great reformer euen Pelagius him selfe S. Aug. li 4. de Nupt. concup c. 3. Pelagius sic laudat Ambrosium vt
you change the singular number for the plurall sacrament for sacraments 6 Sixtlie you quite leaue out two wordes of great consequence communis and 〈◊〉 7 Seuenthlie you adde this word Blessed which is not in the Author 8 Eighthlie you point it not right considering the Authour spake it onelie by way of interrogation Which premisses are faultes great and grosse which sheweth plainlie that you neâ—â—â— reade the Author himself but borrowed them forth of some other mans papers therfore you sin grieuously in perswading mens consciences to take there things at your hands for truth faith when indeed you tender them nothing but things â—â—â—sled from all faith and trueth Now Gentlemen doe you deale plainlie with the world in bringing this plaâ—â— against vs did euer anie of vs denie that Christ was borne of the virgin Marie and conceiued by the holie Ghost you cannot charge vs with it Did euer anie of 〈◊〉 teach that Christs bodie was phantasticall neither did you euer heare it Then in this as in the rest you wrong vs deceiue the Catholickes and abuse Leo sometime Pope But I will shew you plainlie that this Bishoppe of Rome and this your proofe confutes and confounds your owne opinion and confirmes ours Reade page 7. 8. in the same Epist where he bringes in the Sacraments of Redemption of Regeneration First Leo saith the truth of Christs bodie and bloud is in both the two sacrament as well in Baptisme as in the Lords Supper and as he is reallie in the other and what presence of Christ is in the one sacrament there is the like presence in the other as hath been prooued before But least this would maâ—â— the fashion of your transubstantiasion and carnall presence therefore you transâ—â—â— it sacramentum in the singuler number not sacramenta in the plurall Secondlie you haue left out two words communis fidei of common faith becâ—â—â—â— no man should see it was then as Catholick opinion to beleeue that the truth of Chriâ—â— bodie and bloud was as reallie in Baptisme as in the Lord Supper yet in both spirituallie in neither corporallie But you will say I abuse the Reader because Leo neuer spake of this word spiritual or spirituallie and therfore I wrong both the Author and Reader I answere as 〈◊〉 the prophet answered Achab the king when he told Eliah that he troubled Israel 〈◊〉 saith the Prophet it is thou and thy Fathers house that haue troubled Israell in that you haue forsaken the commandement of the Lord 1. Kâ—nge 18.17.18 and followed Balaam So Gentlemen it is not I that wrong the Author that is dead or the people that yet liue but it is you and your confederates that followe Balaam of Rome God keep you free from folowing Balack of Spaine and that the Reader shall see I will prooue that Leo ioyneth with vs and we with him and both of vs with Christs truth against your trash I will make him speake in his owne defence and vtter that which you concealed It followeth immediatlie after your profe in the next immediat words after this maner In the same page quia in illa mystica distributione spiritualis alimoniae hoc impartitur vt accipientes caelestis tibi in carnem ipsius qui caro nostra factus est transcamus Because that in the mysticall distribution of that spirituall food this is giuen and receiued that we which receiue the vertue of the heauenlie meat wee passe into his flesh which was made our flesh Gentlemen this you should haue added to your former for the Authour ioyned them togither the one to accompanie the other in Gods seruice and in deed the latter to expresse the former But now let vs out of this but compare the old doctrine of the old Bishoppes of Rome and the doctrine of the moderne Popes and his Chaplens 1 The old Bishops of Rome said the food in the sacrament was spirituall and heauenlie the late Popes Iesuits and Priests say that it is carnall and materiall 2. The old Popes said the distribution of that spirituall food was misticall you say presbiteriall 4 They said in ould times that the worthie receiuers of this spirituall meat were transformed into Christ his flesh The late Popes and you his Ecchoes say no But the sacramentall bread and wine are transsubstantiated and transnatured into Christs flesh and bloud The Bishop of Rome brought in this to prooue Christs humanitie conceiued by the holie Ghost and borne of the virgin Marie against heretickes who taught the Christs bodie wa phantasticall And you alleadge the same place to prooue Christs humanitie to be made by a sinfull ignorant Priest that of bread and so contrarie to Scripture and Creed will recreate Christ of a new matter which is as blasphemous and hereticall The olde Bishoppes and Church of Rome held So Tertull. contrâ— Marcion lib. 4. that the Sacraments could not be true signes of Christs bodie vnlesse he had a true bodie and because thy were true signes therfore Christ had a true bodie And the late Popes and Popelings teach that Christs bodie is made a new of the signes and so confoundeth the signes with Christs bodie and in deed maintaineth heresie as grosse as the Manicheans For they held that either he had no bodie or a phantasticall bodie And you hold that there be no signes in the Sacraments but that they are transubstantiated into Christs bodie and bloud And so Christs bodie is dailie made of a peece of bread Iohn 6. which must needs be a bodie phantasticall not a true bodie as our Creed witnesseth And as in the manner of eating Christs bodie you disagree not much from the Capernaits so in the case you differ not much from the Manicheis Now will I say as the painfull owner of the vineyard said Isaie 5. 3â— Now therefore oh you inhabitants of Ierusalem and men of Iudah iudge I pray you between me and my vineyard So oh you Inhabitants of this worshipfull Cittie of Dublin and you loyall subiects of Ireland and all the learned and well minded of both England and Ireland iudge I pray you charitablie yet trulie betwixt me and these my aduersaries And if you refuse to censure vs and this our conference according to the truth then I say as Dauid said to Saul The Lord bee iudge between thee and me 1. Sam. 24.13 so the Lord be iudge betwixt vs whether of vs haue more trulie and with greater sinceritie of truth and conscience behaued our selues in this matter for his glorie discharge of our owne consciences instruction and saluation of the Catholickes The last parte of the Second proofe Concerning S. Leo. Fiâ—zsimon 117. MAister Rider as the hare is wonte befor he seate him selfe in his forme had a great desyre to strayne him selfe to greater leaps and girds toward the ende Yet all will not serue As farr as my remembrance serueth me Sidneis Arcadia I reade in Sr. Phillip Sidneis
Now M. Rider are you a Protestant Yf you consent with the Augustan confession and so be a protestant for otherwyse you can not then you must recant all your opinion against the real presence and consent with Luther But you perhapps will distinguish English Protestants with Thomas Digges your brother Puritan Thomas Digges in his humble motiues anno 1601. from all others by calling them state Protestants and so intrude incroache among them But you can not For you haue impugned the blessing of the Crosse as a magical charminge which they allowe Numb 53. NuÌ„b. 62. You haue impugned Baptisme to be a true lauer of regeneration making it only an externall signe or seale that only to the faithfull which they disproue as they may the scripture instructing theÌ„ therto saying Mat. 3.11 Mar. 1.8.16.16 Luc. 3.16 Ioan. 1.32 Acts 2.37.38 c. 22.17 Tit. 3.5 1. Pet. 3.21 to be coÌ„tayned therin the holy Ghost remission of sinns eternal lyfe it being the holy Ghosts lauer or font of regeneration and renouation wherby and by the woord of lyfe we are clensed from synne and saued c. To which the doctrin of the communion booke accordeth in these woords This infant The communion booke printed at London by Tho. Vawtroller anno 1574. in the tra of priuat baptisme Com. booke in â—he forme of publick baptisme who being borne in originall synne and in the wrathe of God now by the lauer of regeneration in baptisme is ascribed into the number of Gods children and made heyre of eternall lyfe Againe that by that sacrament Children be regenerated and graffed into the body of Christs congregation and made partakers of the death of our Saluiour So then baptisme is more then an external signe and not only of the elect among true state Protestants from whom M. Rider hauing sequestred him selfe in no maner or way the name of Protestant is belonging to him Also he hath impugned out of ministring the Communion Number 68. the woords of Christs institution which by state Protestants are allowed and vsed in all their communion books Fowerthly he impugneth inequalitie among the clergie Fiftly the name of prieste Sixtly that in the new testament by imposition of hands or otherwyse there is any function more belonging to some then others whether they be men Numb 98.99 or women which is altogether ranck puritancie and the very quintessence of the holy reforming consistorial discipline And yet this man so playne a puritan will take to him selfe the name of a protestant imitating the nature of Polypus a fishe which borroweth the coloure of whatsoeuer it sticketh vnto wherby not being mistrusted it deceaueth and receaueth all preye passing by So my Puritan being omnium horarum homo a man for all tymes and professions will loose nothing within his reache although he should change his shape and name from Puritan into a state Protestant Vide Paulo ante num 100. and back agayne Wherunto he hath his warrant dispensation as I sayd from Beza and Cartwright Now as I beleeue M. Rider is fallen into deepe confusion of him who haueing mounted at the mariadge afterward cum rubore Luc. 14. nouissimum locum tenuit with shame was contented with the lowest place for separating him selfe from Catholicks and intruding among Protestants from whom he is as the new phrase of souldiours beareth reformed among puritans by whom I thinke in my conscience but that they care more for number then participation in their compagnie he showld be cast off 123. Is not thinke you this a great alchimie to change and conuert euery thing Fitzsimon to his purpose Let vs bring Scriptures Fathers and all testimonies to warrant our doctrin they are sayd not to be for our purpose but against it Let vs bring Scriptures Fathers and his owne brethren disprouing his imaginations they are sayd not to be against them but for him But that it may be knowen The 171. vntruth this to be the 171. vntrueth First here is declared that by factions of opinions the real presence is denyed a thing saith M. Rider in the 28. number neuer denyed by vs nor euer in question betwixt Protestant and Papist Now at least these protestants here alleaged writing to the late Queene of England in this allegation shew two vntruethes contayned in M. Riders denial One that it was neuer denyed th' other that it was neuer in question Yea in the same place they request hir maiestie to beware of the Pharisaical leauen of them so denying it as by them the woords of Christ most playne most euident most puissant be ouerthrowen If I were at leasure I would worthely persecute such denials according to their desert But in trueth I am not at leasure being often imployed from morning to twelue of the clock in hearing confessions in exhorting and catechising in performing offices of charitie in not omitting the domestical employments incident to one in his third yeare of probation In so much as when I affoord any paynes to resolue M. Riders articles it is only at vacant and vnperceaued tyme by others This proofe that protestants approue the real presence shall be duely fortifyed by all cheefe Protestants and most approued of all contryes in the world First Berengarius the master author of the contrary opinion sayth Ego Berengarius corde credo ore confiteor Floruit an 1579. De consecrat dist 2. cap. Ego Beren Fox Acts. pag. 146. panem vinum que ponuntur in altari per mysterium sacrae orationis verba nostri Redemptoris substantialiter conuerti in veram propriam viuisicatricem carnem sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi non tantum per signum virtutem Sacramenti sed etiam in proprietate naturae I Berengarius in hart do beleeue and confesse by mouthe the bread and wyne which are placed vpon the altar Theuet vies des hommes illustres lib. 3. fol. 128. Gal Malmsbur lib. 3. de gestis Anglorum Papyrius Masson in Anal. Francorum lib. 3. in Philip. â—ege Gerson con Romant Vixit an 1369. VVicklephus epist. ad Ioan. episcopum Lincoln Huss apud Ioan Pezibranium lib. de non remaneÌ„tia panis con VVicklephistas by the mysterie of sacred prayer and woords of our Redemptor to be substantialy conuerted into the true propre and liuely fleash and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ Not only by signe and vertu of a Sacrament but also in the proprietie of nature And in this beleefe he dyed as diuers relate So that here is the head of M. Riders opinion fallen from him Secondly Wickleph thus sayth agaâ—nst them who slandred him to be of a contrary opinion At ego credo vsque ad mortem meam volo desendere quod postquam legitimus Sacerdos rite protulit sacra verba super panem quod sub forma panis sit verum corpus Christi but I beleeue and will desend to my deathe that after
what they teache and pretend That Ministers may excommunicate the greatest Prince pag. 113. That he that is excoÌ„municated is not woorthie to enioy life vpon earth ibid. That it were good that rewardes were appointed by the people for such as kill Tyrants as commonly there are for such as haue killed VVolues or Beares ibid. Doctor VVhitegift saith of them that they seeke to transfer the authoritie of Pope Prince and Bishop to thâ—m selues and to bringe Prince and Nobilitie into a verie seruitude pag. 159. That Puritans seeke by degrees to be ridd of all lawes of all authoritie and to haue all thinges subiect to their Consistorian Discipline pag. 200. The definition of a Puritan by one Butler of Cambridge pag. 221. A notable Description of the deepe Dissimulations and Hipocriticall proceedinges first practized by Puritans to gett them selues into the fauour and good liking of the people pag. 221. 222. How Puritans dispense with them selues to dissemble cheate and counterfett to take all Ecclesiasticall degrees and to practize all Ceremonies of Cappe Tippet c. to remayne in their offices and places of promotion pag. 231. Of the Puritans hiperbolicall commendations and setting foorth of their Discipline pag. 223. Reneâ—her saieth that the polliticall Empyre is but a lower and inferior benche to the Consistorian Discipline ibid. The Puritans appeache Kinge Iames of periurie because he dissaloweth their Discipline pag. 224. Puritans Caueat thâ—t no names be vsed which sounde ether of Paganisme or Papistrie pag. 228. The holie Consistorian Discipline of Puritans borrowed from a Iew named Cornelius Bertram pag. 272. Caluin teacheth that as soone as a man is illuminated with the knowledge of the truth instantly he is freed from all obligations of obeyinge ether Church or Prince Replye pag. 112. PVRITANS What the Kinges Maiestie doth censure of Puritans and what sundrie of the Reformers them selues doe say of them Barrowes saith thâ—y are pernicious Impostors presumptuous Pastors Iewish Rabbins Balaam t s dissembling Hipocrits Smel-feastes Apostats and souldiers of Antechrist pag. 161. Others thâ—y are pernicious Dreamers glosing Hipocrits with God fasting Pharisaicall preachers counterfett Prophets pestilent Seducers sworne waged and marked Disciples of Antechrist c. pag. 222. And againe they are perfidious and Apostat Reformers precise Dissemblers giddie and presumptuous Intermedlers in all matters publique and priuat watchmen ouer all actions pag. 222. The Kinges Maiestie speaking of them saith that the Puritanicall spirit is periured treacherous inhuman c. Replye pag. 16. 17. They are very pestes in the Church and commonwelth Reply pag. 70. No deserts can oblige them no oathes or promises binde them c. ibid. Againe saith he Yee shall neuer finde in no border theeues greater ingratitude and more lyes and vild periuries then with these frantick spirits Replye pag. 170. And Knox him selfe saith that nether can oath nor promise binde any such people subiect to the Euangile to obey and maintaine Tyrants ibid. pag. 70. 71. REALL Proofes for the Reall Presence both by Catholiques by Heretiques them selues Corporall and Spirituall presence not opposite pag. 37. 38. The remorce of Bucer Peter Martyr and Oecolampadius for hauing euer writen or bewitched any with the Protestants opinion against the Reall presence pag. 53. 54. Christ receiued with the fleshly mouth according to Luther pag. 10. VVith hart and mouth according to S. Aug. ibid. Our flesh is fed with the bodie and blood of Christ according to Tertul. ibid. He permitteth our teeth to be printed in his fleshe accrrding to S. Chrisost ibid. He dwelleth in vs corporallie according to Cyrillus pag. 11. By naturall partaking according to Ciril Alexandrinus pag. 9. The bodie and blood which the Apostles did behould and the Iewes did shed according to S. Aug. pag. 9. Reallie not Figuratiuelie according to Lyra. pag. 53. VVe receiue not only a Figure but the bodie of Christ according to Theophilact pag. 53. Not significatiuelie but substantially according to S. Anselme ibid. The true bodie taken from the Virgin and which hunge on the Crosse according to Innocentius pag. 66. The flesh assumpted for the life of the world according to the holie Caenons pag. 67. That which was crucified and which was buried ibid. That which tooke flesh of Marie according to S. Aug. ibid. That although it seeme horible to eate the flesh of man c. Yet that notwithstanding such seeming we both eate drinke the flesh and blood of Christ. S. Aug. pag. 84. That it is a fearfull thing for a man to deuoure his Lorde which neuertheles we doe in receiuing S. Aug. pag. 85. In forme is the fleshe of the woord of God true meate saieth Origen pag. 89. Him selfe is receiued into the breast saith Clemens Alex. ibid. The same is proued by Caietan pag. 100. By Lanfrancus pag. 106. By S. Ambrose pag. 131. By Bucer pag. 132. By S. Chrisost pag. 174. By S. Cyril pag. 136. By S. Leo. pag. 286. By S. Martial pag. 289. By Anacletus pag. 289. The Reall presence fortified and confirmed by the Confessions of all chiefe Protestants and those the most approued of all the worlde pag. 303. By Berengarius ibid. By VVickliffe ibid. By Iohn Husse ibid. By Hierom of Prage ibid. By Oecolampadius ibid. By Bucer pag. 304. By Caluin ibid. By Sir Iohn olde Castle pag. 305. REBELLION Of the Insurrections Rebellions of Puritans against their Princes of the infinit deale of blood which hath beene shed thorough this occasion Muntzer taken and executed and aboue a hundred thousand of his followers slaine in Rebellion against their Princes pag. 218. In ciuil warres in France in the space of three yeares not so few as a hundred thousand men weere ouerthrowne pag. 218. Of Puritans incensing the people against the ciuil Magistrate and of the answere of two Puritan Preachers in Stamford to the L. Superintendent of Lincolne opposing him selfe against their publique Puritanicall fast pag. 223. The Rebellious intentions of Puritans openly certified by suÌ„drie of their owne bookes intituled Martin Mar-plelat Mar-Martin VVoork for the Cooper The Counter-cuffe An epistle to Huffe Ruffe and Snuffe Hay any woorke Myles Monop c. pag. 224. A Description of the bloodie spirit of Lutheran and Caluinian Ministers Sturmius sayeth they condemne banishe and nayle to the Crosse whom they please Replye pag. 81. That if the Magistrate would but for three dayes lend them the swoord would ensue c. ibid. Lanoy incensed the men of Rochell to iterate their Rebellion against the Kinge Replye pag. 112. RESVRRECTION Luther saith of Caluinists that it is certaine they tend to manifest Apostacie concerning this Article pag. 16. Villagaignon of the Caluinists the hope of life not to belonge to the bodies but to the soules ibid. Almaricus one of Foxes Martyrs held that there was no Resurrection of bodies pag. 161. Others that no soule doth remaine after death pag. 162. At Geneua to destroie Purgatorie they would haue decreed the soule
They haue their faythe so inspyred as they will iudge therby all angels and men and be iudged by none And euery one of them is in the right althowgh by their owne confessions they be all fownd in Fide sua miserabiliter rotari sine fine modoque variare confessiones suas in their faythe most miserably to be rowled Colloq Altemburg fol. 462. Centuriatores Centur 9. in prefatione and without end or measur to varie their professions Iam veram doctrinam probantes mox eandem damnantes iam appellantes heresim quod antea pro veritate inuicta praedicabant now approuing for sownd doctrin and suddenly condemning the same now calling it heresie whiche befor was preached for inuincible trueth Nether is there any so meanely a conceited artificer that dyneth or suppeth withowt discoursing on this discord of the holy Reformed crue Let therfor our disputations alone and salue your owne vnreconciliable vprors whiche hitherto all your Cowncils or Synods as is shewed in the 19. numb cowld not so muche as mitigat Take owt this beame owt of your owne eye leauing to accuse vs among whom discords are as impossible as concords among yow And it being irrefragably discouered in all other points of the mater in hand take now this decretal demonstration therof and ineuitable assurance to Protestants whiche your Father of trueth your Elias and besyd what is sayd in the 17. Fox Acts and Mon. pag. 404. edit an 1563. Luther in Confess breui to 2. Germ. fol. 357. number alter Phaebus clarissimè fulgens your second Sonn most brightly shyning deliuereth saying Carolostad wresteth miserably the pronowne this Zuinglius maketh leane the verbe is Oecolampad tormenteth this woord body others do butcher the whole text and some do crucifie but halfe therof c. So manifestly doth the deuil howld yow by the noses Let me therfor replye in M. Riders woords against him selfe Orthodox confess Tygur fol. 105. 106. 107. VVill yow follow a foolishe Fryer ane ignorant Abbot a late vpstart Pope of Saxonie as the Tygurins intuled Luther or Preist as Zuinglius Carolostad Oecolampad c. that writ and wreasted within thes sower hondred nay one hondred yeares and forsake Scripturs and the ancient Doctors of the Churche Now let the indifferent mynded Catholicks be iudges yea and Protestants also whether yow or we haue antiquitie consent and veritie on our syds And who differr from Scripturs and Fathers from and among them selues not only in one point of religion but also in euery point and particle of Doctrin Behowld how good frends M. Rider and I are become bothe agreeing vpon one tale meeting in the same forme of woords Whiche speach of his I accompt so fauorable on my syde as for it I will omitt to calculat any vntrueth in all this discourse how many soeuer whiche suer are aboue 20. haue bene offoorded least I showld seeme offended with any parcell of the residue wherwith so true so vndowbted and sincer declaration is annected for all men to know the protestants to follow Luther a foolish Fryer and as M. Rider sayth an heretical Moncke who vsurped the power of Pope and liued within one hondred yeares forsaking for his sake Scripture and Fathers and cleauing to a ragged rablement of dissentious teachers Is not this to condemne to hell it selfe his owne doctrin so assuredly knowen and confessed to be from Luther a Frier from ignorant and Apostat priests who writt within a hondred yeares and is so pugnant and repugnant so madd and mutable that by them selues it is not denyed saying Non sunt vtique parua certamina inter nos neque minutis rebus sed de sublimibus articulis christianae doctrinae de lege euangelio de iustificatione bonis operibus de Sacramentis ceremoniarum vs◠quae nullo pacto componi vel reticeri aut dissimulari possunt Sunt enim merae contradictiones quae concordiam non ferunt Nicolaus Gallus sup◠intendens Ratisbonae in thesibus ac hypothesibus Certainly they are not small cōtentions that are amōg vs nor of trifles but of the highest articles of christian religion of the law gospell of iustification good woorks of Sacraments vse of ceremonies which by no means can be appeased hidden or dissembled For they are playne contradictions whiche may not be accorded Is not this by open and playne confession without racking or torturing to haue theeues fall owt and true men to come by their goods to haue falshood vnhooded and trueth reuealed to haue disagreement conuicted and the kingdome therby knowen Sathanical 75. Now to conclude this matter I will shew plainlie by scriptures that hoc est corpus meum can haue no such sence as you teach Rider Hoc est corpus meum expounded by scripture which is that bread is not by this or anie other words transubstantiated or chaunged into Christs bodie and bloud but that bread remaineth after sanctification or as you say consecration and that the scriptures speaking of Christs bodie and of the bread speake distinctlie not confusedlie that is they doe diuide them not confound them giuing to either of them their seuerall nature and propertie yea after consecration And whereas we haue now heard too much of the jarres of your late Popes and writers voide of vnitie and veritie Now let vs heare the holie scriptures expound hoc est corpus meum plainlie and truelie by the Euangelists and Paul who knew best Christs meaning vpon whose exposition all Christians may and must onelie rest satisfied in spite of Pope and poperie 75. The first promise here made is that he will shew playnly by Scripturs that bread is not transubstantiated Fitzsimon but that after consecration it retayneth still his nature The second promise is that he will bring suche exposition from the euangelists and Paul that in spyte of Pope and poperie we may and must rest satisfyed therby Rider Dedit Math. 26.26 Datur Luc. 22.19 Fregit Luc. 21.19 Frāgitur 1. Cor. 11.24 Eis Marke 14.22 76. ANd first we will prooue it from the difference of the signe and the thing signified The scriptures whē they speak of bread they speak actiuely He gaue But when they speake of Christs naturall bodie they speake passiuelie Is giuen When they speake of bread they speake actiuelie He brake it But when they speake of Christs body they speake passiuelie VVhich is broken When they speake of bread they say To you But when they speake of Christs naturall bodie they say For you Pro vobis 1. Cor. 11.24 Dedit Marke 14.23 Effunditur Luc. 22.20 Eis Math. 26.27 Pro multis pro vobis Luc. 22. ac Math. 26.26 Lykewise when they speake of wine they speake actiuely He gaue But when they speake of Christ his bloud they speake passiuelie Is shed When they speake of the wine they say To them But when they speake of Christs bloud they speake For you or for
manie 76. Here is a discourse pertaining to the single Accidence in Grammar not contayning any witt or woorth not so much as to suche as would know what is a verb actiue and what passiue in the woords of Christ Now for our Lords sake let vs examin it The scripturs saith he speake actiuely of bread Yea Sir it that is taken broaken and according your wysdom eaten by record of scripture is it actiue or passiue Since therfore it is too to euident to be rather passiue as it concerneth bread it maketh the 79. vntrueth Secondly saith he The 79. vntruth the woords is giuen belong not to bread but to Christs body By which is implyed that what Christ gaue it was not giuen what was giuen by him he did not giue Yf it was bread whiche he gaue and not bread which was giuen Yf our late Queene industrious in giuing names tearmed a daunce abruptly iumping from point to point by the name of a Frogg-galliard how would she haue named this treatise reboūding vnreasonably frō point to point whē Christ said he did giue what was to be giuen he is interpreted to giue that which was not to be giuen This is the 80. vntrueth The 80. vntruth Schlusselburb l. 2. art 13. Tigurini in praef Apologetica Orthodoxi consensus Iezlerus de diuturnitate belli Euchar. pag. 77. deseruing to be called a blasphemie by which Christ is made vntrue Wherfor worthely do the Lutherans exclaime against yow saying quaenam quaeso per Deum immortalem potest iniriconcordia cum Caluinistis qui ipsum filium Dei mendacij arguunt c. VVhat concord I pray yow in Gods name may be taken with Caluinists giueing the lye to the Sonn of god But let vs discusse the rest Fregit he interpreteth he brake it I grawnt such interpretation to be true in sence althowgh the woord Fregit precisely signifieth he brake withowt the sillable it In the 51. number But when I had vsed the same interpretation in the 51. number he thus reprehendeth this sillable it altereth the sence and peruerteth Christs meaning and is added by yow to maintayne that which the texte otherwyse cowld not haue any shew to beare Tell me gentle Readers whether this writer be not extraordinarie who is made euery foote to disproue him selfe shewed to offend in that whiche he wowld seeme most ernestly to amend Further the Scripturs when they speake of Christs bodye sayth he they speake passiuely Frangitur which is broken You haue seely sir broken your cause by your good glosing For by saying Christs body was broken you say truely but so as it must be vnderstood only in the forme of bread For Christs body was not els wher or other wyse broken but pearced And it was fortowld by the prophet they should not breake his body S. Chrysost in 1. Cor. hom 24. nor no one bone of him on the Crosse Wherevpon sayth S. Chrysostom Christum in Sacramento pati fractione quam in Cruce pati noluit Christ in the Sacrament to indure breaking which he would not indure on the Crosse So also is the same assured by Frangitur is broken in the present tence declaring in the oblation at supper tyme his true body to haue bene then presently broken or giuen to the disciples and not to haue specifyed it as in his passion it was to be giuen in a cruental maner or otherwyse it had not bene sayd in the present tence and that of the greeke text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Frangitur is broken So also yf it had not bene the same body which then was giuen in an vnbloody maner with it which was to be giuen the next day in a cruental or bloody maner by other euangelists it had not bene interpreted or sayd tradetur shal be deliuered in the future tence so that vnfortunatly is this actiue and passiue glosse produced by M. Rider against him selfe clayming to haue him by all Protestants carefull of their honour sued to be a Deponent For by saying Christs body was broken in the present tence it can no otherwyse be vnderstood by all the wreasting of mans witt then by the being truely therof vnder the forme of bread considering as it was on the Crosse it nether was broken and that being at that tyme it was spoken to come it could not be specifyed in the present tence Also as I sayd other euangelists mentioning the same body in the future tence tradetur shal be deliuered they ascertayne vs what Christ gaue and brake the same was deliuered and consequently no figure only or only appellation but his true real substantial corporal bodye Yet let vs examin further Eis he interpreteth to you A half penny scholer would neuer haue so construed but say Eis to signifye to them so also it is construed by him selfe in few woords after Other riff raff in all cōfused maner is intermedled iuggled together to insinuat that Christ gaue not that which he gaue but something els that in his woords he played at pass-pass howlding bread breaking bread blessing bread giuing bread and all as Oecolampadius saythe to no other purpose then to tell them Vide Zuingl to 2. in ep ad Math. Rutlin de cana fol. 155. that to be his body which was sitting at the table which should be giuen the next day as he gaue them bread How much is the patience of Readers and Writers abused by such futilitie 77. When they speak of the cup they speak In rememberance of me In meam commemorationem 8. Cor. 11.14 In remissionem peccatorū Mat. 26.28 But when they speake of Christs naturall bloud they speake For the remission of sinns So when Christ speaketh actiuelie as he gaue hee brake it is alwaies spoken of the sacrament But when he speaketh passiuelie which is giuen which is broken which is shed and for you not to you then he speakes of his naturall bodie giuen and broken on the crosse And this rule is à plaine and sure rule to direct vs in and to the true vnderstanding of hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie In which plaine pathes of the holie Scriptures if you would walke you might be preserued from wandring 77. VVhen the Scripturs speake of the Cupp saith he they speake in remembrance of me Not only of the cupp good M. Rider but also of the bread For so telleth S. Paul yf you wil allow him S. Luke c. 22. v. 19. in the next verse befor And S. Luke conioyned suche clause for remembrance to the bread only omitting to conioyne it to the chalice Thes good compagnions accept willingly all remembrāce of their lyquour and cupp Clebitius in victoria veritatis c. parte 4. argum 5. and some tymes in the Church they stryue abowt it Clebitius one of the principal of them selues shal be my witnes thus expostulating with Heshusius VVhen as in the congregation I would not willingly permitt to thee
deuout maner contayned in the testimonie or allegation which I first propounded These letts nay these montayns interposed in M. Riders way by Damascen yet his flying Pegasus or hors namely his deceitfulnes found no difficultie to transporte him beyond all and to cause him to affirme that the passage was playne and fauourable But many dreame they are farr voyaged when they are found farr deceaued In the meane tyme as you a little befor haue obserued his great simpathie and vnion with Puritans so now I craue your attendance to perceaue lyke concourse with infidels and such hereticks as make Christs diuinitie to haue suffred Luther tom 7. serm de Eucharist fol. 335. Auerroes that wicked Infidel sayth Luther loaden with synne accuseth vs Christians as the most wicked of the world for eating and deuouring of our Cod. What say you is not the same reproached to vs by M. Rider Is not this a perfect agreement with impious infidels But I would fayne haue his resolution yf as he sayd befor n. 96. it is lyke treason to offende against the picture of the Prince as it is against his person Why it is a greauouser imputation to eate Christ him selfe then to eate him according to the Protestant imagination in his representation figure or picture Let him escape the brunt of this obiection without fayling in what he sayd befor or what he sayth here and his wysdome shal be accompted greater then accustomed For thus I make it in forme of argument He that receaueth Christs seales vnworthily sayth M. Rider n. 96. committeth high treason against Christ therfore it is as greuous an offense to deuoure his seales vnworthilie as to deuoure his bodye Because sayth he it is lyke offense to disgrace his garments as his person And consequently in eating their supper as the seale of Christ they offend according his discourse no lesse then in eating Christ Also yf they may eate the seales without offense so as lawfully may they eate his fleash he assuring them that vnles they would eate not his seale but his fleash they should haue no lyfe in them Secondly yf as he saith what is done to Christs humanitie the same must be done to his diuinitie How can he auoyde wheras that Christ according to his humanitie was whipped Vide num 37. pearced put to death but the same must be thought fullfilled against his diuinitie O glorious and godly frend of Christs diuinitie How we and our doctrin determine that Christ both according humanitie and diuinitie is eaten and receaued without detriment and corruption already is so often related as it needeth not to be here repeated The residue of such blasphemies against the death of Christs Diuinitie as is here inferred against the woords of Christ his institution that we should eate him that is religiously receaue him into our stomacks may be found plentifully in the examinatiō of Protestantcie The 114. vntruth toward the Articles of our creed The 114. vntruth can not be denyed in saying Damascen is against vs. This bread is bread before the consecration but when it is consecrated Catholicke Priestes Ambr. de sacramēti◠lib. 4. cap. 4. floruit 400. of bread it is made the flesh of Christ. 112. AL this we graunt to be true but you come not to the point Rider whether Christs flesh be made of bread by way of transubstantiation that is by the changing of one nature or substance into another by hoc est corpus meum this is our question but you dare not touch it because you cannot prooue it But seeing you recite fathers by peeces and patches taking that you thinke will fit your purpose and leauing that which would crosse your course or weaken your cause I will for the trueth sake and the Catholikes good adde that out of Ambrose which I am sure some of you would wish out of Ambrose If you had read a few lines moe you should haue heard him tell you another tale and haue expounded himselfe in this place In the same chapter his words be these Si ergo tanta vis est in sermone Domini Iesu vt inciperent esse qua non erant quanto magis operatorius est vt sint quae erant in aliud commutentur If there be such a force in the word of the Lord Iesus that the things which were not began to bee how much more can it worke this that they shall be the same they were and yet bee changed into another thing And then bringeth in an example how a thing may be that that it was and yet be chaunged Tu ipse eras sed eras vetus creatura c. Thou thy selfe waste but thou wast an olde creature after when thou wast baptised thou begannest to be a new creature wilt thou know how a new creature every one saith the Apostle that is in Christ is a new creature Learne then how the word of God is accustomed to change euerie creature and when he will he altereth the course of nature If you had read or knowne this you would neuer haue alleadged the other for his example is this as he that is baptised suffereth no materiall substancial or corporall change rhough he be borne a new spirituallie and put on Christ Vide dist 2. de cōsecr cap. quia corpus page 432. But he his changed not loosing or altring the bodie or soule which hee had but in attaining the grace which hee had not And so the change is accidentall not substantiall as from vice to vertue So in substance the bread and wine are the same they were before but in accident or qualitie they are turned into another thing of common bread made a Sacrament So Chrisostome amplifying the change of bread in the Euchariste Chrisost in Matth. hom 83. he addeth immediatlie withall Sic etiam in baptismo euen so there is the like change of water in baptisme as of bread in the Lords Supper but that is not of substance but in qualitie respect or vse and so in this And this change is not in casting away the substance of bread or wine Dialog 1. cap. 6. but in casting grace vnto them As Theodoret saith Non naturam ipsam transmutans sed naturae adijciens gratiam not changing nature but adding grace to nature Ambrose de ijs qui initiantur cap. 9. But who can better expound Ambrose his meaning then Ambrose himselfe who saith Ante benedictionem c. before the blessing of the heauenlie words it is called another kind after the words of consecration the bodie of Christ is signified doth not say is the bodie of Christ but signifieth the bodie of Christ And else where Ambr. 1. Cor. 11. In comedendo potando c. In eating drinking we signifie the bodie bloud that were offered for vs. And againe he saith Quod est figura Ambr. de Sacramētis lib. 4. cap. 4. c. which is a figure of the bodie