most forcible of all the rest those wherewith the simpler sort are coÌ„monly most deluded might carry some shew of proofe that Christs flesh blood should be turned into bread wine but have no maner of colour to prove that bread and wine are turned into the flesh and blood of Christ. The truth of the second appeareth by the fourâ—h verse in which we finde that this fell out not long before the Passeover and consequently a yeare at least before that last Passeover wherein our Saviour instituted the Sacrament of his Supper Wee willingly indeed do acknowledge that that which is inwardly presented in the Lords Supper and spiritually received by the soule of the faithfull is that verie thing which is treated of in the sixth of Iohn but wee denie that it was our Saviours intention in this place to speake of that which is externally delivered in the Sacrament and orally received by the Communicant And for our warrant herein wee need looke no further then to that earnest asseveration of our Saviour in the 53. verse Verily verily I say unto you Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye have no life in you Wherin there is not onely an obligation laid upon them for doing of this which in no likelyhood could be intended of the externall eating of the Sacrament that was not as yet in being but also an absolute necessitie imposed non praecepti solùm ratione sed etiaÌ„ medij Now to hold that all they are excluded from life which have not had the meanes to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is as untrue as it is uncharitable And therefore manie of the Papists themselves as Biel Cusanus Cajelan Tapper Hessels Iansenius and others confesse that our Saviour in the sixth of Iohn did not properly treat of the Sacrament The third of the points proposed may be collected out of the first part of Christs speech in the 35. and 36. verses I am the bread of life hee that commeth to mee shall never hunger and he that beleeveth on me shall never thirst But I said unto you that yee also have seene me and beleeve not But especially out of the last from the 61. verse forward When Iesus knew in himselfe that his Disciples murmured at it hee said unto them Doeth this offend you What then if you should see the Sonne of man ascend up where hee was before It is the spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speake unto you are spirit and life But there are some of you that beleeve not Which words Athanasius or whosoever was the author of the Tractate upon that place Quicunque dixerit verbum in filium homiâ—is noteth our Saviour to have used that his hearers might learne that those things which hee spake were not carnall but spirituall For how many could his bodie have sufficed for meat that it should be made the food of the whole world But therefore it was that he made mention of the Sonne of mans ascension into heaven that he might draw them from this corporall conceit and that hereafter they might learne that the flesh which he spake of was celestiall meat from above and spirituall nourishment to be given by him For the words which I have spoken unto you saith he are spirit and life So likewise Tertullian Although he saith that the flesh profiteth nothing the meaning of the speech must be directed according to the intent of the matter in hand For because they thought it to be a hard and an intolerable speech as if he had determined that his flesh should be truly eaten by them that hee might dispose the state of salvation by the spirit hee premised It is the spirit that quÃckneth and so subjoyned The flesh profiteth nothing namely to quicken c. And because the Word was made flesh it therefore was to be desired for causing of life and to be devoured by hearing and to be chewed by understanding and to be digested by faith For a little before he had also affirmed that his flesh was heavenly bread urging still by the Allegory of necessary food the remembrance of the fathers who preferred the bread and the flesh of the Egyptians before Gods calling Adde hereunto the sentence of Origen There is in the New Testament also a letter which killeth him that doth not spiritually conceive the things that be spoken For if according to the letter you do follow this same which is said Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood this letter killeth And those sayings which everie where occurre in S. Augustines Tractates upon Iohn How shall I send up my hand unto heaven to take hold on Christ sitting there Send thy faith and thou hast hold of him Why preparest thou thy teeth and thy belly Beleâ—ve and thou hast eaten For this is to eate the living bread to beleeve in him He that beleeveth in him eateth He is invisibly fedd because he is invisibly regenerated He is inwardly a bâ—be inwardly renewed where he is renewed there is he nourished The fourth proposition doth necessarily follow upon the third For if the eating and drinking here spoken of be not an externall eating and drinking but an inward participation of Christ by the communion of his quickning spirit it is evident that this blessing is to be found in the soule not onely in the use of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper but at other times also It is no wayes to be doubted by anie one saith S. Augustine that every one of the faithfull is made partaker of the body and bloud of our Lord when he is made a member of Christ in Baptisme and that hee is not estranged from the communion of that bread and cup although before he eate that bread and drinke that cup hee depart out of this world being setled in the unitie of the body of Christ. For he is not deprived of the participation and the benefite of that Sacrament when hee hath found that which this Sacrament doth signifie And hereupon wee see that diverse of the Fathers doe apply the sixth of Iohn to the hearing of the Word also as Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Eusebius Caesareensis and others We are said to drinke the blood of Christ saith Origen not onely by way of the Sacraments but also when we receive his word wherein consisteth life even as hee himselfe saith· The words which I have spoken are spirit and life Vpon which words of Christ Eusebius paraphraseth after this maner Doe not thinke that I speake of that flesh wherewith I am compassed as if you must eate of that neither imagine that I command you to drinke my sensible and bodily blood but understand well that the vvords which I have spoken unto you are spirit and life So that those very words and speeches of his are his flesh and blood whereof who
in his Epistle to Bonifacius If Sacraments did not some maner of vvay resemble the things wherof they are Sacraments they should not be Sacraments at all And for this resemblance they doe of oftentimes also beare the names of the things themselves As therefore the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ is after a certaine maner the bodie of Christ and the sacrament of Christs blood is the blood of Christ so likewise the sacrament of faith is faith By the sacrament of faith hee understandeth Baptisme of which he afterward alledgeth that saying of the Apostle Rom. 6.4 Wee are buried with Christ by baptisme into death and then addeth He saith not We signifie his buriall but hee plainly saith Wee are buried Therefore the sacrament of so great a thing hee would not otherwise call but by the name of the thing it selfe And in his Questions upon Leviticus The thing that signifieth saith he useth to be called by the name of that thing which it signifieth as it is written The seven eares of corne are seven yeares for hee said not they signifie seven yeares and the seven Kine are seven yeares and many such like Hence was that saying The Rocke was Christ. For he said not The Rock did signifie Christ but as if it had beene that very thing which doubtlesse by substance it was not but by signification So also the blood because for a certaine vitall corpulencie which it hath it signifieth the soule after the maner of Sacraments it is called the soule Our argument therefore out of the words of the institution standeth thus If it be true that Christ called Bread his bodie and Wine his blood then must it be true also that the things which bee honoured with those names cannot be really his bodie blood but figuratively and sacramentally But the former is true Therefore also the latter The first proposition hath bene proved by the undoubted principles of right reason and the cleare confession of the adverse part the second by the circumstances of the Text of the Evangelists by the exposition of S. Paul and by the received grounds of the Romanists themselves The conclusion therefore resteth firme and so wee have made it cleare that the wordes of the Institution do not only not uphold but directly also overthow the whole frame of that which the Church of Rome teacheth touching the corporall presence of Christ under the formes of Bread and Wine If I should now lay downe here all the sentences of the Fathers which teach that that which Christ called his Body is Bread in substance and the Body of the Lord in signification and sacramentall relation I should never make an end Iustin Martyr in his second Apologie to Antoninus the Emperour telleth us that the bread and the wine even that sanctified food wherewith our blood and flesh by conversion are nourished is that w ch we are taught to be the flesh and blood of Iesus incarnate Irenaeus in his 4 th book against heresies saith that our Lord taking bread of that condition which is usuall among us confessed it to be his body the cup likewise contayning that creature which is usuall among us his blood And in his fift book he addeth That cup which is a creature he confirmed to be his blood which was shedde wherby he increaseth our blood and that bread which is of the creature to be his body wherby he increaseth our bodies Therefore when the mixed cup and the broken bread doth receive the word of God it is made the Eucharist of the blood and body of Christ whereby the substance of our flesh is increased and doth consist Our Lord saith Clemens Alexandrinus did blesse vvine vvhen hee said Take drinke This is my blood the blood of the Vine Tertullian Christ taking bread and distributing it to his Disciples made it his body saying This is my body that is the figure of my body Origen That meate which is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer as touching the materiall part thereof goeth into the belly and is voyded into the draught but as touching the prayer which is added according to the portion of faith it is made profitable enlightning the minde and making it to behold that which is profitable Neyther is it the matter of bread but the word spoken over it which profiteth him that doth not unworthily eate thereof And these things I speake of the typicall and symbolicall bodie saith Origen In the Dialogues against the Marcionites collected for the most part out of the writings of Maximus who lived in the time of the Emperors Commodus and Severus Origen who is made the chiefe speaker therein is brought in thus disputing against the Heretickes If Christ as these men say were without bodie and blood of what kinde of flesh or of what body or of what kinde of blood did hee give the bread and the cup to be Images of when he commanded his Disciples by them to make a commemoration of him S. Cyprian also noteth that it was Wine even the fruit of the Vine which the Lord said was his blood and that floure alone or water alone cannot bee the bodie of our Lord unlesse both be united and coupled together and kneaded into the lumpe of one bread And againe that the Lord calleth bread his body which is made up by the uniting of many cornes and wine his blood which is pressed out of many clusters of grapes and gathered into one liquor Which I finde also word for word in a maner transcribed in the Commentaries upon the Gospels attributed unto Theophilus Bishop of Antioch Wherby it appeareth that in those elder times the words of the institution were no otherwise conceived then as if Christ had plainly said This bread is my body and This wine is my blood which is the maine thing that wee strive for with our Adversaries and for which the words themselves are plaine enough the substance whereof we finde thus laid downe in the Harmonie of the Gospels gathered as some say by Tatianus as others by Ammonius within the second or the third age after Christ. Having taken the bread then afterward the cup of wine and testified it to be his body and blood hee commanded them to eate and drinke thereof forasmuch as it was the memoriall of his future passion and death To the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares we will now adjoyne the testimonies of those that flourished in the ages following The first whereof shall be Eusebius who saith that our Saviour delivered to his Disciples the symboles of his divine dispensation commanding them to make the Image of his owne body and appointing them to use Bread for the symbole of his Body and that we still celebrate upon the Lords table the memory of his sacrifice by the symboles of his body and blood according to the ordinances of the New Testament Acacius
more unlearned and unhappy If I bee not able to discover what feates the Divell wrought in that time of darkenesse wherin men were not so vigilant in marking his conveyances and such as might see somewhat were not so forward in writing bookes of their Observations must the infelicitie of that age wherein there was little learning and lesse writing yea which for want of Writers as Cardinal Baronius acknowledgeth hath been usually named the Obscure age must this I say inforce me to yeeld that the Divell brought in no tares all that while but let slip the opportunitie of so darke a night and slept himselfe for company There are other meanes left unto us whereby we may discerne the Tares brought in by the instruments of Satan from the good seed which was sowen by the Apostles of Christ beside this observation of times and seasons which will often faile vs. Ipsa doctrina eorum saith Tertullian cum Apostolicâ comparata ex diversitate contrarietate suâ pronuntiabit neque Apostoti alicujus auctoris esse neque Apostolici Their very doctrine it selfe being compared with the Apostolick by the diversitie and contrariety thereof will pronounce that it had for author neyther any Apostle nor any man Apostolicall For there cannot be a better prescription against Hereticall novelties then that which our Saviour Christ useth against the Pharisees From the beginning it vvas not so nor a better preservative against the infection of seducers that are crept in unawares then that which is prescribed by the Apostle Iude earnestly to contend for the faith vvhich vvas once delivered unto the Saints Now to the end we might know the certaintie of those things wherein the Saints were at the first instructed God hath provided that the memoriall thereof should be recorded in his owne Booke that it might remaine for the time to come for ever and ever He then who out of that Booke is able to demonstrate that the doctrine or practice now prevailing swarveth from that which was at first established in the Church by the Apostles of Christ doth as strongly prove that a change hath beene made in the middle times as if hee were able to nominate the place where the time when and the person by whom any such corruption was first brought in In the Apostles dayes when a man had examined himselfe hee was admitted unto the Lords Table there to eate of that bread and drinke of that cup as appeareth plainly 1. Cor. 11.28 In the Church of Rome at this day the people are indeed permitted to eate of the bread if bread they may call it but not allowed to drinke of the cup. Must all of us now shut our eyes and sing Sicut erat in principio nunc unlesse we be able to tell by whom and when this first institution was altered By S. Pauls order who would have all things done to edification Christians should pray with understanding and not in an unknowne language as may be seene in the fourteenth chapter of the same Epistle to the Corinthians The case is now so altered that the bringing in of a tongue not understood which hindred the edifying of Babel it selfe and scattered the builders thereof is accounted a good meanes to further the edifying of your Babel and to hold her followers together Is not this then a good ground to resolve a mans judgement that things are not now kept in that order wherin they were set at first by the Apostles although he be not able to point unto the first author of the disorder And as wee may thus discover innovations by having recourse unto the first and best times so may wee doe the like by comparing the state of things present with the middle times of the Church Thus I finde by the constant and approved practice of the auncient Church that all sorts of people men women and children had free libertic to reade the holy Scriptures I finde now the contrary among the Papists and shall I say for all this that they have not removed the bounds which were set by the Fathers because perhaps I cannot name the Pope that ventured to make the first inclosure of these commons of Gods people I heare S. Hierâ—me say Iudith Tobiae Macchabaeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia sed eos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit The Church doth reade indeed the books of Iudith and Toby and the Macchabees but doth not receive them for Canonicall Scripture I see that at this day the Church of Rome receiveth them for such May not I then conclude that betwixt S. Hieromes time and ours there hath beene a change and that the Church of Rome now is not of the same judgement with the Church of God theâ— howsoever I cannot precisely lay downe the time wherein shee first thought her selfe to be wiser herein then her Forefathers But here our Adversary closeth with us and layeth downe a number of points held by them and denied by us which he undertaketh to make good as well by the expresse testimonies of the Fathers of the Primitive Church of Rome as also by good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures if the Fathers authoritie will not suffice Where if hee would change his order and give the sacred Scriptures the precedency hee should therein do more right to God the author of them who well deserveth to have audience in the first place and withall ease both himselfe and us of a needlesse labour in seeking any further authority to compose our differences For if he can produce as he beareth us in hand he can good and certaine grounds oâ—t of the sacred Scriptures for the points in controversie the matter is at an end he that will not rest satisfied with such evidences as these may if he please travaile further and speed worse Therefore as S. Augustine heretofore provoked the Donatists so provoke I him Auferantur chartae humanae sonent voces divinae ede mihi unam Scripturae vocem pro parte Donati Let humane vvritings be removed let Gods voyce sound bring mee onâ—e voyce of the Scripture for the part of Donatus Produce but one cleere testimony of the sacred Scripture for the Popes part and it shall suffice alledge what authority you list without Scripture and it cannot suffice Wee reverence indeed the ancient Fathers as it is fit we should and hold it our duety to rise up before the hoare head and to honour the person of the aged but still with reservation of the respect we owe to their Father and ours that Ancient of dayes the hayre of vvhose head is like the pure vvooll We may not forget the lesson which our great Master hath taught us Call no man your Father upon the earth for one is your Father which is in heaven Him therefore alone doe wee acknowledge for the Father of our Faith no other Father doe we know upon whose bare credite
of Monasticall discipline in the East S. Antony I meane who taught his Schollers that the Scriptures were sufficient for doctrine and S. Basil who unto the question Whether it were expedient that novices should presently learne those things that are in the Scripture returneth this answere It is fit and necessarie that every one should learne out of the holy Scripture that which is for his use both for his full settlement in godlinesse and that hee may not be accustomed unto humane traditions Marke here the difference betwixt the Monkes of Saint Basil and Pope Hildebrands breeding The Novices of the former were trayned in the Scriptures to the end they might not be accustomed unto humane traditions those of the latter to the cleane contrarie intent were kept back from the studie of the Scriptures that they might be accustomed unto humane traditions For this by the foresaid author is expressely noted of those Hildebrandine Monkes that they permitted not yong men in their Monasteries to studie this saving knowledge to the end that their rude wit might be nourished with the huskes of divels which are the customes of humane traditions that being accustomed to such filth they might not taste how sweet the Lord was And even thus in the times following from Monkes to Friars and from them to secular Priests and Prelates as it were by tradition from hand to hand the like ungodly policie was continued of keeping the common people from the knowledge of the Scriptures as for other reasons so likewise that by this meanes they might be drawne to humane traditions Which was not onely observed by Erasmus before ever Luther stirred against the Pope but openly in a maner confessed afterwards by a bitter adversarie of his Petrus Sutor a Carthusian Monke who among other inconveniences for which he would have the people debarred from reading the Scripture alledgeth this also for one Whereas manie things are openly taught to be observed which are not to be expressely had in the holy Scriptures will not the simple people observing these things quickly murmure and complaine that so great burdens should be imposed upon them whereby the libertie of the Gospell is so greatly impaired Will not they also easily be drawne away from the observation of the ordinances of the Church when they shall observe that they are not contained in the Law of Christ Having thus therefore discovered unto these Deuterotae for so S. Hierome useth to style such Tradition-mongers both their grandfathers and their more immediat progenitors I passe now forward unto the second point OF THE REAL PRESENCE HOw farre the real presence of the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament is allowed or disallowed by us I have at large declared in an other place The summe is this That in the receiving of the blessed Sacrament we are to distinguish betweene the outward and the inward action of the Communicant In the outward with our bodily mouth wee receive really the visible elements of Bread and Wine in the inward wee doe by faith really receive the bodie and bloud of our Lord that is to say wee are truely and indeed made partakers of Christ crucified to the spirituall strengthning of our inward man They of the adverse part have made such a confusion of these things that for the first they do utterly denie that after the words of consecration there remaineth anie Bread or Wine at all to be received and for the second do affirme that the bodie and bloud of Christ is in such a maner present under the outward shewes of bread and wine that whosoever receiveth the one be he good or bad beleever or unbeleever doth therewith really receive the other We are therfore here put to prove that Bread is bread and Wine is wine a matter one would thinke that easily might be determined by common sense That which you see saith S. Augustine is the Bread and the Cup which your very eyes doe declare unto you But because we have to deale with men that will needs herein be senselesse wee will for this time referre them to Tertullians discourse of the five senses wishing they may be restored to the use of their five witts againe and ponder the testimonies of our Saviour Christ in the sixt of Iohn and in the words of the Institution which they oppose against all sense but in the end shall finde to be as opposit to this phantasticall conceit of theirs as anie thing can be Touching our Saviours speech of the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his bloud in the sixth of Iohn these five things specially may be observed First that the question betwixt our Adversaries us being not Whether Christs bodie be turned into bread but whether bread be turned into Christs bodie the words in S. Iohn if they be pressed literally serve more strongly to prove the former then the latter Secondly that this Sermon was uttered by our Saviour above a yeare before the celebration of his last Supper wherein the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud was instituted at which time none of his hearers could possibly have understood him to have spoken of the externall eating of him in the Sacrament Thirdly that by the eating of the flesh of Christ and the drinking of his bloud there is not here meant an externall eating or drinking with the mouth and throate of the bodie as the Iewes then and the Romanists farre more grossely then they have since imagined but an internall and a spirituall effected by a lively faith and the quickning spirit of Christ in the soule of the beleever For there is a spirituall mouth of the inner man as S. Basil noteth wherewith hee is nourished that is made partaker of the Word of life which is the bread that commeth downe from heaven Fourthly that this spirituall feeding upon the bodie and blood of Christ is not to be found in the Sacrament onely but also out of the Sacrament Fiftly that the eating of the flesh and the drinking of the bâ—ood here mentioned is of such excellent vertue that the receiver is thereby made to remaine in Christ and Christ in him and by that meanes certainly freed from dâ—ath and assured of everlasting life Which seeing it cannot be verified of the eating of the Sacrament whereof both the godly the wicked are partakers it proveth not onely that our Saviour did not here speake of the Sacramentall eating but further also that the thing which is delivered in the externall part of the Sacrament cannot be conceived to be really but sacramentally onely the flesh and blood of Christ. The first of these may be plainly seene in the Text where our Saviour doth not onely say I am the bread of life vers 48. and I am the living bread that came downe from heaven vers 51. but addeth also in the 55. verse For my flesh is meate indeed and my bloud is drinke indeed Which words being the
who succeeded him in his Bishopricke saith that the bread and wine sanctifieth them that feed upon that matter acknowledging thereby that the materiall part of those outward elements do still remaine In the Church saith Macarius is offered bread wine the type of his flesh and blood and they which are partakers of the visible bread doe spiritually eate the flesh of the Lord. Christ saith S. Hierome did not offer water but wine for the type of his blood S. Augustine bringeth in our Saviour thus speaking of this matter You shall not eate this bodie which you see nor drinke that blood which they shall shed that will crucifie mee I have commended a certaine Sacrament unto you that being spiritually understood vvill quicken you The same Father in another place writeth that Christ admitted Iudas to that banquet wherein he commended and delivered unto his Disciples the figure of his body and blood but as he elsewhere addeth they did eate that bread which was the Lord himselfe hee the bread of the Lord against the Lord. Lastly the Lord saith he did not doubt to say This is my body when he gave the signe of his body So the Author of the Homily upon the 22. Psalme among the workes of Chrysostome This table hee hath prepared for his servants and hand-maydes in their sight that he might every day for a similitude of the body and blood of Christ shew unto us in a sacrament bread and wine after the order of Melchisedec And S. Chrysostome himselfe in his Epistle written to Caesarius against the heresie of Apolinarius As before the bread be sanctified we call it bread but when Gods grace hath sanctified it by the meanes of the Priest it is delivered from the name of bread and is reputed worthy the name of the Lords body although the nature of the bread remain still in it and it is not called two bodies but one body of Gods sonne so likewise here the divine nature residing in the body of Christ these two make one sonne and one person In the selfe same maner also doe Theodoret Gelasius and Ephraemius proceed against the Eutychian heretickes Theodoret for his part layeth downe these grounds That our Saviour in the deliverie of the mysteries called bread his body and that which was mixt in the cupp his blood That hee changed the names and gave to the body the name of the symbol or signe and to the symbol the name of the body That hee honoured the visible symboles with the name of his bodie and blood not changing the nature but adding grace to nature And that this most holy food is a symbol type of those things whose names it beareth to wit of the body and blood of Christ. Gelasius writeth thus The sacraments which we receive of the body and blood of Christ are a divine thing by meanes whereof wee are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of bread and wine doth not cease to be And indeed the image and the similitude of the bodie and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries It appeareth therefore evidently enough unto us that wee are to hold the same opinion of the Lord Christ himselfe which we professe celebrate and are in his Image that as those Sacraments by the operation of the holy Spirit passe into this that is into the divine substance and yet remaine in the propriety of their owne nature so that principall mysterie it selfe whose force and vertue they truely represent should be conceived to be namely to consist of two natures divine and humane the one not abolishing the truth of the other Lastly Ephraemius the Patriarch of Antioch having spoken of the distinction of these two natures in Christ and said that no man having understanding could say that there was the same nature of that which could be handled and of that which could not be handled of that which was visible and of that which was invisible addeth And even thus the body of Christ which is received by the faithfull the Sacrament he meaneth doth neither depart from his sensible substance and yet remayneth undivided from intelligible grace and Baptisme being wholly made spirituall and remayning one doth both retaine the propertie of his sensible substance of water I meane and yet looseth not that which it is made Thus have wee produced evidences of all sorts for confirmation of the doctrine by us professed touching the blessed Sacrament which cannot but give sufficient satisfaction to all that with anie indifferencie will take the matter into their consideration But the men with whom wee have to deale are so farre fallen out with the truth that neither sense nor reason neither authoritie of Scriptures or of Fathers can perswade them to be friends againe with it unlesse we shew unto them in what Popes dayes the contrarie falshood was first devised If nothing else will give them content we must put them in minde that about the time wherein Soter was Bishop of Rome there lived a cousening companion called Marcus whose qualities are thus set out by an ancient Christian who was famous in those dayes though now his name be unknowne unto us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where first hee chargeth him to have beene an Idolmakeâ— then hee objecteth unto him his skill in Astrologie and Magicke by meanes whereof and by the assistance of Satan hee laboured with a shewe of miracles to winne credite unto his false doctrines amongst his seduced disciples and lastly hee concludeth that his father the Divel had imployed him as a forerunner of his antithean craft or his antichristian deceiveablenesse of unrighteousnesse if you will have it in the Apostles language For he was indeed the Divels forerunner both for the idolatries and sorceries which afterward were brought into the East and for those Romish fornications and inchantments wherewith the whole West was corrupted by that man of sinne whose comming was foretold to be after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders And that we may keep our selves within the compasse of that particular which now wee have in hand wee finde in Irenaeus that this Arch-heretick made speciall use of his juggling feates to breed a perswasion in the mindes of those whom hee had perverted that in the cup of his pretended Eucharist he really delivered them blood to drinke For fayning himselfe to consecrate the cups filled with wine and extending the words of Invocation to a great length he made them to appeare of a purple and redd colour to the end it might be thought that the Grace which is above all things did distill the blood thereof into that cup by his Invoâ—ation And
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 correspondent types or figures before they were consecrated but after the consecration saith hee they are called and are and beleeved to be the body and blood of Christ properly where the Popes owne followers who of late published the Acts of the generall Councells at Rome were so farre ashamed of the ignorance of this blind Bayard that they correct his boldnesse with this marginall note The holy gifts are oftentimes found to be called antitypes or figures correspondent after they be consecrated as by Gregory Nazianz. in the funerall Oration upon his sister and in his Apologie by Cyrill of Ierusalem in his fifth Cateches Mystagogic and by others And wee have alreadie heard how the author of the Dialogues against the Marcionites and after him Eusebius and Gelasius expressely call the Sacrament an image of Christs bodie howsoever this peremptorie Clerke denieth that ever anie did so By all which it may easily appeare that not the oppugners but the defenders of Images were the men who first went about herein to alter the language used by their fore-fathers Now as in the daies of Gregory the third this matter was set afoot by Damascen in the East so about a hundred yeares after in the Papacie of Gregory the fourth the same began to be propounded in the West by meanes of one Amalarius who was Bishop not as hee is commonly taken to be of Triers but of Mets first and afterwards of Lyons This man writing doubtfully of this point otherwhiles followeth the doctrine of S. Augustine that Sacraments were oftentimes called by the names of the things themselves and so the Sacrament of Christs bodie was secundùm quendam modum after a certaine maner the bodie of Christ otherwhiles maketh it a part of his beleefe that the simple nature of the bread and wine mixed is turned into a reasonable nature to wit of the body and blood of Christ. But what should become of this bodie after the eating therof was a matter that went beyond his little witt and therefore said he when the bodie of Christ is taken with a good intention it is not for me to dispute whether it be invisibly taken up into heaven or kept in our body untill the day of our buriall or exhaled into the ayre or whether it go out of the body with the blood at the opening of a veyne or be sent out by the mouth our Lord saying that every thing which entreth into the mouth goeth into the belly and is sent forth into the draught For this and another like foolerie de triformi tripartito corpore Christi of the three parts or kindes of Christs body which seeme to be those ineptiae de tripartito Christi corpore that Paschasius in the end of his Epistle intreateth Frudegardus not to follow he was censured in a Synod held at Carisiacum wherein it was declared by the Bishops of France that the bread and wine are spiritually made the body of Christ which being a meat of the mind and not of the belly is not corrupted but remayneth unto everlasting life These dotages of Amalarius did not only give occasion to that question propounded by Heribaldus to Rabanus wherof we have spoken heretofore but also to that other of far greater consequence Whether that which was externally delivered received in the sacrament were the verie same body which was borne of the Virgin Mary suffered upon the Crâ—sse rose again from the Grave Paschasius Radbertus a Deacon of those times but somewhat of a better and more modest temper then the Greek Deacon shewed himselfe to be of held that it was the veâ—ie same and to that purpose wrote his book to Placidus of the Body Blood of our Lord wherein saith a Iesuite he was the first that did so explicate the true sense of the Cà tholick Church his owne Romane he meaneth that he opened the way to those manie others who wrote afterwards of the same argument Rabanus on the other side in a writing directed to Abbot Egilo maintayned the contrarie doctrine as hath before beene noted Then one Frudegardus reading the third book of S. Augustin de doctrinâ Christianâ and finding there that the eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood of Christ was a figurative maner of speech began somewhat to doubt of the truth of that which formerly he had read in that foresaid Treatise of Paschasius which moved Paschasius to write againe of the same argument as of a question wherein he confesseth many were then doubtfull But neither by his first nor by his second writing was hee able to take these doubts out of mens mindes and therefore Carolus Calvus the Emperour being desirous to compose these differences and to have unitie setled among his subjects required Ratrannus a learned man of that time who lived in the Monasterie of Corbey whereof Paschasius was Abbat to deliver his judgement touching these points Whether the body and blood of Christ which in the Church is received by the mouth of the faithfull be celebrated in a mysterie or in the truth and whether it be the same body which was born of Mary which did suffer was dead and buried which rising againe and ascending into heaven sitteth at the right hand of the Father Whereunto he returneth this answer that the bread and the wine are the body and blood of Christ figuratively that for the substance of the creatures that which they were before consecration the same are they also afterward that they are called the Lords bodie and the Lords blood because they take the name of that thing of which they are a sacrament that there is a great difference betwixt the mysterie of the blood and body of Christ which is taken now by the faithfull in the Church and that which was borne of the Virgin Mary which suffered which was buried which rose again which sitteth at the right hand of the Father All which hee proveth at large both by testimonies of the holy Scriptures and by the sayings of the ancient Fathers Wherupon Turrian the Iesuite is driven for pure need to shift off the matter with this silly interrogation To cite Bertram so Ratrannus is more usually named what is it else but to say that the heresie of Calvin is not new As if these things were alledged by us for anie other end then to shew that this way which they call heresie is not new but hath been troden in long since by such as in their times were accounted good and Catholick teachers in the Church That since they have been esteemed otherwise is an argument of the alteration of the times and of the conversion of the state of things which is the matter that now we are inquiring of and which our Adversaries in an evill houre to them doe so earnestly presse us to discover The Emperour Charles unto whom this
answer of Ratrannus was directed had then in his Court a famous countrey-man of ours called Iohannes Scotus who wrote a booke of the same argument and to the same effect that the other had done This man for his extraordinarie learning was in England where hee lived in great account with King Alfred surnamed Iohn the wise and had verie lately a roome in the Martyrologe of the Church of Rome though now he be ejected thence Wee finde him indeed censured by the Church of Lyons and others in that time for certaine opinions which he delivered touching Gods foreknowledge and predestination before the beginning of the world Mans freewill and the concurrence thereof with Grace in this present world and the maner of the punishment of reprobate Men Angels in the world to come but we finde not anie where that his book of the Sacrament was condemned before the dayes of x Lanfranc who was the first that leavened that Church of England afterward with this corrupt doctrine of the carnall presence Till then this question of the reall presence continued still in debate and it was as free for anie man to follow the doctrine of Ratrannus or Iohannes Scotus therein as that of Paschasius Radbertus which since the time of Satans loosing obtayned the upper hand Men have often searched and doe yet often search how bread that is gathered of corne and through fires heate baked may be turned to Christs bodie or how wine that is pressed out of manie grapes is turned through one blessing to the Lords blood saith Aelfrick Abbat of Malmesburie in his Saxon Homily written about 650. yeares agoe His resolution is not onely the same with that of Ratrannus but also in manie places directly translated out of him as may appeare by these passages following compared with his Latin layd downe in the margent The bread and the wine which by the Priests ministery is hallowed shew one thing without to mens senses and another thing they call within to beleeving mindes Without they be seene bread wine both in figure and in taste and they be truely after their hallowing Christs body and his blood by spirituall mysterie So the holy font water that is called the well-spring of life is like in shape to other waters and is subject to corruption but the holy Ghosts might commeth to the corruptible water through the Priests blessing and it may after wash the body and soule from all sinne by spirituall vertue Behold now we see two things in this one creature in true nature that water is corruptible moisture and in spirituall mysterie hath healing vertue So also if we behold that holy housel after bodily sense then see wee that it is a creature corruptible and mutable If we acknowledge therein spirituall vertue then understand we that life is therein and that it giveth immortalitie to them that eate it with beleefe Much is betwixt the bodie Christ suffered in and the body that is hallowed to housel The body truely that Christ suffered in was borne of the flesh of Mary with blood and with bone with skin and with sinewes in humane limbs with a reasonable soule living and his spirituall body which we call the housel is gathered of many cornes without blood and bone without lim without soule and therefore nothing is to be understood therein bodily but spiriâ—ually Whatsoever is in that housel which giveth substance of life that is spirituall vertue and invisible doing Certainly Christs body which suffered death and rose from death shall never dye henceforth but is eternall and unpassible That housel is temporall not eternall corruptible dealed into sundry parts chewed betweene teeth and sent into the belly This mysterie is a pledge and a figure Christs bodie is truth it selfe This pledge wee doe keepe mystically untill that we be come to the truth it selfe and then is this pledge ended Christ hallowed bread and wine to housel before his suffering and said This is my body my blood Yet he had not then suffered but so notwithstanding hee turned through invisible vertue the bread to his owne body and that wine to his blood as he before did in the wildernesse before that he was borne to men when he turned that heavenly meate to his flesh and the flowing water from that stone to his owne blood Moses and Aaron and manie other of that people which pleased God did eate that heavenly bread and they died not the everlasting death though they dyed the common They saw that the heavenly meate was visible and corruptible and they spiritually understood by that visible thing and spiritually received it This Homily was appointed publikely to be read to the people in England on Easter day before they did receive the communion The like matter also was delivered to the Clergie by the Bishops at their Synods out of two other writings of the same Aelfrick in the one wherof directed to Wulfsine Bishop of Shyrburne we reade thus That housel is Christs bodie not bodily but spiritually Not the body which he suffered in but the bodie of which he spake when he blessed bread and wine to housel the night before his suffering and said by the blessed bread This is my body and againe by the holy wine This is my blood which is shed for many in forgivenesse of sinnes In the other written to Wulfstane Archbishop of Yorke thus The Lord which hallowed housel before his suffering and saith that the bread was his owne bodie and that the wine vvas truely his blood halloweth daily by the hands of the Priest bread to his body and wine to his blood in spirituall mysterie as wee reade in bookes And yet notwithstanding that lively bread is not bodily so nor the selfe same body that Christ suffered in nor that holy vvine is the Saviours blood which was shed for us in bodily thing but in spirituall understanding Both be truely that bread his body and that wine also his blood as was the heavenly bread which vve call Manna that fedde fortie yeares Gods people and the cleare water which did then runne from the stone in the vvildernesse vvas truely his blood as Paul wrote in one of his Epistles Thus was Priest and people taught to beleeve in the Church of England toward the end of the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh age after the Incarnation of our Saviour Christ. And therefore it is not to be wondered that when Berengarius shortly after stood to maintaine this doctrine manie both by word and writing disputed for him and not onely the English but also all the French almost the Italians as Matthew of Westminster reporteth were so readie to entertaine that which hee delivered Who though they were so borne downe by the power of the Pope who now was growne to his height that they durst not make open profession of that which they beleeved yet manie continued even
mysterium corporis ejus continetur quanto magis vasa corporis nostri quae sibi Deus ad habitaculum praeparavit non debemus locum dare Diabolo agendi in eis quod vult If therefore it be so dangerous a matter to transferre unto private uses those holy vessels in which the true body of Christ is not but the mysterie of his body is contained how much more for the vessels of our body which God hath prepared for himselfe to dwell in ought not wee to give way unto the Divell to doe in them what he pleaseth Those words in quibus non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis ejus continetur in which the true body of Christ is not but the mysterie of his body is contained did threaten to cut the very throat of the Papists real presence and therefore in good policie they thought it fit to cut their throat first for doing any further hurt Whereupon in the Editions of this Worke printed at Antwerpe apud Ioannem Steelsium anno 1537 at Paris apud Ioannem Roigny anno 1543 and at Paris again apud Audoenum Parvum anno 1557. not one syllable of them is to be seene though extant in the ancienter editions one whereof is as olde as the yere 1487. And to the same purpose in the 19 Homily in stead of Sacrificium panis vini the sacrifice of bread and vvine which we find in the old impressions these latter editions have chopt in Sacrificium corporis sanguinis Christi the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ. In the yeare 1608. there were published at Paris certaine workes of Fulbertus Bishop of Chartres pertayning as well to the refuting of the heresies of this time for so saith the inscription as to the cleering of the History of the French Among those things that appertaine to the confutation of the Heresies of this time there is one especially fol. 168. laid downe in these words Nisi manducaveritis inquit carnem filij hominis sanguinem biberitis non habebitis vitam in vobis Facinus vel flagitium videtur jubere Figura ergo est dicet haereticus praecipiens Passioni Domini esse coÌ„municandum tantùm suaviter atque utiliter recondendum in memoria quòd pro nobis caro ejus crucifixa vulnerata sit Vnlesse saith Christ ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee shall not haue life in you He seemeth to command an outrage or wickednesse It is therefore a figure will the hereticke say requiring us only to communicate with the Lords Passion and sweetly and profitably to lay up in our memory that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us He that put in those words dicet haereticus thought hee had notably met with the heretickes of this time but was not aware that thereby he made S. Augustine an Hereticke for company For the Hereticke that speaketh thus is even S. Augustine himselfe whose very words these are in his third booke de Doctrinâ Christianâ the 16. chapter Which some belike having put the publisher in minde of he was glad to put this among his Errata and to confesse that these two words were not to be found in the Manuscript copie which hee had from Petavius but telleth us not what we are to thinke of him that for the countenancing of the Popish cause ventured so shamefully to abuse S. Augustine In the yeare 1616. a Tome of ancient Writers that never saw the light before was set forth at Ingolstad by Petrus Steuartius where among other Tractates a certaine Penitentiall written by Rabanus that famous Archbishop of Mentz is to be seene In rhe 33. chapter of that booke Rabanus making answer unto an idle question moved by Bishop Heribaldus concerning the Eucharist what should become of it after it was consumed and sent into the draught after the maner of other meats hath these words initio pag. 669. Nam quidam nuper de ipso sacramento corporÃs sanguinis Domini non ritè sentientes dixerunt hoc ipsum corpus sanguinem Domini quod de Mariâ Virgine natum est in quo ipse Dominus passus est in cruce resurrexit de sepulcro* cui errori quantum potuimus ad Egilum Abbatem scribentes de corpore ipso quid veré credendum sit aperuimus For some of late not holding rightly of the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord have said that the very body and blood of our Lord which was borne of the Virgin Mary and in which our Lord himselfe suffered on the Crosse and rose againe from the grave * Against which error writing unto Abbot Egilus according to our ability we have declared what is truly to be beleeved coÌ„cerning Christs body You see Rabanus tongue is clipt here for telling tales but how this came to passe were worth the learning Steuartius freeth himselfe from the fact telling us in his margent that here there was a blanke in the manuscript copy and we doe easily beleeve him for Possevine the Iesuite hath given us to understand that Manuscript bookes also are to be purged as well as printed But whence was this Manuscript fetcht thinke you Out of the famous Monastery of Weingart saith Steuartius The Monkes of Weingart then belike must answer the matter and they I dare say upon examination will take their oathes that it was no part of their intention to give any furtherance unto the cause of the Protestants hereby If hereunto we adde that Heribaldus and Rabanus both are ranked among heretickes by Thomas Walden for holding the Eucharist to be subject to digestion and voidance like other meates the suspition will be more vehement whereunto yet I will adjoine one evidence more that shall leave the matter past suspition In the Libraries of my worthy friends S r. Rob. Cotton that noble Baronett so renowmed for his great care in collecting preserving all antiquities D r. Ward the learned Mast r of Sidney Colledge in Cambridge I met with an ancient Treatise of the Sacrament beginning thus Sicut ante nos quidam sapiens dixit cujus sententiam probamus licèt nomen ignoremus which is the same with that in the Iesuites Colledge at Lovaine blindely fathered upon Berengarius The author of this Treatise having first twited Heribaldus for propounding Rabanus for resolving this question of the voidance of the Eucharist layeth downe afterward the opinion of Paschasius Ratbertus whose writing is yet extant quòd non alia plané sit caro quae sumitur de altari quà m quae nata est de Mariâ Virgine passa in cruce quae resurrexit de sepulcro quaeqúe pro mundi vitâ adhuc hodie offeratur That the flesh which is received at the altar is no other then that which was borne of the Virgin Mary suffered on the Crosse rose again from the grave and as
is partaker being alwayes therewith nourished as it were with heavenly bread shall likewise be made partaker of heavenly life Therefore let not that offend you saith he which I have spoken of the eating of my flesh and of the drinking of my blood neither let the superficiall hearing of those things which were said by me of flesh and blood trouble you For these things sensibly heard profite nothing but the spirit is it which quickneth them that are able to heare spiritually Thus farre Eusebius whose words I have layd down the more largely because they are not vulgar There remaineth the fift and last point which is oftentimes repeated by our Saviour in this Sermon as in the 50. verse This is the bread which commeth downe from heaven that a man may eate thereof and not dye and in the 51 If any man eate of this bread hee shall live for ever and in the 54 Who so eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life and in the 56 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in mee and I in him and in the 58 This is that bread which came downe from heaven not as your fathers did eate Manna and are dead hee that eateth of this bread shall live for ever Whereupon Origen rightly observeth the difference that is betwixt the eating of the typicall or symbolicall for so he calleth the Sacrament and the true bodie of Christ. Of the former thus he writeth That which is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer doth not of it ownâ— nature sanctifie him that useth it For if that were so it would sanctifie him also which doth eate unworthy of the Lord neither should any one for this eating be weake or sicke or dead For such a thing doth Paul shew when he saith For this cause many are weake and sickly among you and many sleepe Of the latter thus Many things may be spoken of the Word it selfe which was made flesh and true meate which whosoever eateth shall certainly live for ever which no evill person can eate For if it could be that he who continueth evill might eate the Word made flesh seeing hee is the word and the bread of life it should not have beene written Whosoever eateth this bread shall live for ever The like difference doth S. Augustine also upon the same ground make betwixt the eating of Christs bodie sacramentally and really For having affirmed that wicked men may not be said to eate the body of Christ because they are not to be counted among the members of Christ hee afterward addeth Christ himselfe saying He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud remaineth in mee and I in him sheweth what it is not sacramentally but indeed to eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud for this is to remaine in Christ that Christ likewise may remaine in him For hee said this as if he should have said He that remayneth not in me and in whom I do not remaine let not him say or thinke that he eateth my flesh or drinketh my bloud And in another place expounding those words of Christ here alledged hee thereupon inferreth thus This is therefore to eate that meate and drinke that drinke to remaine in Christ and to have Christ remayning in him And by this he that remaineth not in Christ and in whom Christ abideth not without doubt doth neither spiritually eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud although he do carnally and visibly presse with his teeth the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ and so rather eateth and drinketh the Sacrament of so great a thing for judgement to himselfe because that being uncleane hee did presume to come unto the Sacraments of Christ. Hence it is that we finde so often in him and in other of the Fathers that the bodie and bloud of Christ is communicated only unto those that shall live and not unto those that shall dye for ever He is the bread of life He therefore that eateth life cannot dye For how should he dye whose meat is life how should he fayle who hath a vitall substance saith S. Ambrose And it is a good note of Macarius that as men use to give one kinde of meate to their servants and another to their children so Christ who created all things nourisheth indeed evill and ungratefull persons but the sonnes which he begat of his owne seed and whom he made partakers of his grace in whom the Lord is formed he nourisheth with a peculiar refection and food and meat and drinke beyond other men giving himselfe unto them that have their conversation with his Father as the Lord himselfe saith He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud remayneth in me and I in him and shall not see death Among the sentences collected by Prosper out of S. Augustine this also is one He receiveth the meat of life and drinketh the cup of eternitie who remaineth in Christ and whose inhabiter is Christ. For he that is at discord with Christ doth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud although to the judgement of his presumption he indifferently doth receive everie day the sacrament of so great a thing Which distinction betweene the Sacrament and the thing whereof it is a sacrament and consequently betweene the sacramentall and the reall eating of the bodie of Christ is thus briefely and most excellently expressed by S. Augustine himselfe in his exposition upon the sixt of Iohn The sacrament of this thing is taken from the Lords Table by some unto life by some unto destruction but the thing it selfe whereof it is a sacrament is received by every man unto life and by none unto destruction that is made partaker therof Our conclusion therfore is this The bodie and bloud of Christ is received by all unto life and by none unto condemnation But that substance which is outwardly delivered in the Sacrament is not received by all unto life but by manie unto condemnation Therefore that substance which is outwardly delivered in the Sacrament is not really the bodie and bloud of Christ. The first proposition is plainly proved by the Texts which have been alledged out of the sixth of Iohn The second is manifest both by common experience and by the testimonie of the Apostle 1. Cor. 11. vers 17 27 29. We may therefore well conclude that the sixth of Iohn is so farre from giving anie furtherance to the doctrine of the Romanists in this point that it utterly overthroweth their fond opinion who imagine the bodie and bloud of Christ to be in such a sort present under the visible formes of bread and wine that whosoever receiveth the one must of force also really be made partaker of the other The like are we now to shew in the words of the Institution For the better clearing whereof the Reader may be pleased to consider first that the words are not This shall be my body nor This is
made or shall be changed into my body but This Is my body Secondly that the word THIS can have relation to no other substance but that which was then present when our Saviour spake that word which as wee shall make it plainly appeare was Bread Thirdly that it being proved that the word This doth demonstrate the Bread it must of necessitie follow that Christ affirming that to be his BODY cannot be conceived to have meant it so to be properly but relatively and sacramentally The first of these is by both sides yeelded unto so likewise is the third For this is impossible saith the Glosse upon Gratian that bread should be the bodie of Christ. And it cannot be saith Cardinall Bellarmine that that proposition should be true the former part whereof designeth Bread the latter the Body of Christ for asmuch as Bread and the Lords Body be things most adverse And therefore hee confidently affirmeth that if the words This is my body did make this sense This bread is my body this sentence must either be taken tropically that bread may be the body of Christ significatively or else it is plainly absurd impossible for it cannot be saith he that bread should be the body of Christ. Doctor Kellison also in like maner doeth freely acknowledge that If Christ had said This bread is my body wee must have understood him figuratively and metaphorically So that the whole matter of difference resteth now upon the second point whether our Saviour when hee said This is my body meant anie thing to be his Bodie but that Bread which was before him A matter which easily might be determined in anie indifferent mans judgement by the words immediaâ—ly going before Hee tooke bread and gave thankes and brake and gave it unto them saying This is my bodie which is given for you this do in remembrance of mee Luk. 22.19 For what did hee demonstrate here and said was his Body but that which he gave unto his Disciples What did hee give unto them but what he brake What brake hee but what he tooke and doth not the Text expressely say that he tooke bread Was it not therefore of the Bread he said This is my Body And could Bread possibly bee otherwise understood to have beene his Bodie but as a Sacrament and as hee himselfe with the same breath declared his owne meaning a memoriall thereof If these words be not of themselves cleare enough but have need of further exposition can we looke for a better then that which S. Paul giveth of them 1. Cor. 10.16 The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the bodie of Christ Did not S. Paul therefore so understand Christ as if he had said This bread is my body And if Christ had said so doth not Kellison confesse and right reason evince that hee must have beene understood figuratively considering that it is simply impossible that Bread should really be the Bodie of Christ. If it be said that S. Paul by Bread doth not here understand that which is properly Bread but that which lately was bread but now is become the bodie of Christ we must remember that S. Paul doth not onely say The bread but The bread which vvee breake which breaking being an accident properly belonging to the bread it selfe and not to the bodie of Christ which being in glorie cannot be subject to anie more breaking doth evidently shew that the Apostle by Bread understandeth Bread indeed Neither can the Romanists well denie this unlesse they wil denie themselves and confesse that they did but dreame all this while they have imagined that the change of the bread into the bodie of Christ is made by vertue of the sacramentall words alone which have not their effect untill they have all beene fully uttered For the Pronoune THIS which is the first of these words doth point to somthing w ch was then present But no substance was then present but bread seeing by their owne grounds the bodie of Christ commeth not in untill the last word of that sentence yea and the last syllable of that word be completely pronounced What other substance therefore can they make this to signifie but this bread only In the institution of the other part of the Sacrament the words are yet more plaine Matth. 26. vers 27.28 He took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them saying Drinke yee all of it For this is my blood of the new Testament or as S. Paul and S. Luke relate it This cup is the new Testament in my blood That which hee bidd them all drinke of is that which hee said was his blood But our Saviour could meane nothing but the Wine when he said Drinke ye all of it because this sentence was uttered by him before the words of consecration at which time our Adversaries themselves doe confesse that there was nothing in the cup but wine or wine and water at the most It was wine therefore which he said was his blood even the fruite of the Vine as he himselfe termeth it For as in the deliverie of the other cup before the institution of the Sacrament S. Luke who alone maketh mention of that part of the historie telleth us that hee said unto his Disciples I will not drinke of the fruit of the Vine untill the kingdome of God shall come so doth S Matthew and S. Marke likewise testifie that at the deliverie of the Sacramentall cup when he had said This is my blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes hee also added But I say unto you I will not drinke henceforth of this fruit of the Vine untill that day that I drinke it new with you in my Fathers kingdome Now seeing it is contrary both to sense and saith that Wine or the fruite of the Vine should really be the blood of Christ there being that formall difference in the nature of the things that there is an utter impossibilitie that in true proprietie of speech the one should be the other nothing in this world is more plain than when our Saviour said it was his blood he could not meane it to be so substantially but sacramentally And what other interpretation can the Romanists themselves give of those words of the institution in S. Paul This cup is the new Testament in my blood How is the cup or the thing contayned in the cup the new Testament otherwise then as a Sacrament of it Marke how in the like case the Lord himselfe at the institution of the first Sacrament of the old Testament useth the same maner of speech Genes 17.10 This is my Covenant or Testament for the Greeke word in both places is the same and in the words presently following thus expoundeth his owne meaning It shall be a SIGNE of the Covenant betwixt me and you And generally for all Sacraments the rule is thus laid downe by S. Augustine
answer Surely this we may say and thinke that God alone doth forgive and retayne sinnes and yet hath given power of binding and loosing unto the Church but He bindeth and looseth one way and the Church another For he only by himselfe forgiveth sinne who both cleanseth the soule from inward blot and looseth it from the debt of everlasting death But this hath he not granted unto Priests to whom notwithstanding he hath given the power of binding and loosing that is to say of declaring men to be bound or loosed Wherupon the Lord did first by himselfe restore health unto the leper and then sent him unto the Priests by whose judgement he might be declared to be cleansed so also he offered Lazarus to his disciples to be loosed having first quickned him In like maner Hugo Cardinalis sheweth that it is onely God that forgiveth sinnes and that the Priest cannot binde or loose the sinner with or from the bond of the fault and the punishment due thereunto but onely declare him to be bound or loosed as the Leviticall Priest did not make nor cleanse the leper but onely declared him to be infected or cleane And a great number of the Schoolemen afterward shewed themselves to be of the same judgement that to pardon the fault and the eternall punishment due unto the same was the proper worke of God that the Priests absolution hath no reall operation that way but presupposeth the partie to be first justified and absolved by God Of this minde were Guilielmus Altissiodorensis Alexander of Hales Bonaventure Ockam Thomas de Argentinâ Michael de Bononiâ Gabriel Biel Henricus de Huecta Iohannes Major and others To lay downe all their words at large would be too tedious In generall Hadrian the sixth one of their owne Popes acknowledgeth that the most apprâ—ved Divines were of this minde that the keyes of the Priesthood doe not extend themselves to the remission of the fault and Major affirmeth that this is the common Tenet of the Doctors So likewise is it avouched by Gabriel Biel that the old Doctors commonly follow the opinion of the Master of the Sentences that Priests do forgive or retaine sinnes while they iudge and declare that they are forgiven by God or retained But all this notwithstanding Suarez is bold to tell us that this opinion of the Master is false and now at this time erroneous It was not held so the other day when Ferus preached at Mentz that man did not properly remit sinne but did declare and certifie that it was remitted by God so that the Absolution received from man is nothing else then if he should say Behold my sonne I certifie thee that thy sinnes are forgiven thee I pronounce unto thee that thou hast God favourable unto thee and vvhatsoever Christ in Baptisme and in his Gospell hath promised unto us he doth now declare and promise unto thee by me Of this shalt thou have me to be a witnesse goe in peace and in quiet of conscience But jam hoc tempore the case is altered these things must be purged out of Ferus as erroneous the opinion of the old Doctors must give place to the sentence of the new Fathers of Trent And so we are come at length to the end of this long question in the handling whereof I have spent more time th◠〈◊〉 aniâ— of thâ— râ—st by reason our Priests doe make this facultie of pardoning mens sinnes to be one of the most principall parts of their occupation and the particular discoverie thereof is not ordinarily by the writers of our side so much insisted upon The performance therefore of my promise of brevitie is to be expected in the briefer treating upon those articles that remaine the fift whereof we are now to take into our consideration which is OF PVRGATORIE FOr extinguishing the imaginarie flames of Popish Purgatory wee need not goe farre to fetch water seeing the whole current of Gods word runneth mainly upon this that the blood of Iesus Christ cleanseth us from all sinne that all Gods children dye in Christ and that such as dye in him doe rest from their labours that as they be absent from the Lord while they are in the bodie so when they be absent from the bodie they are present with the Lord and in a word that they come not into judgement but passe from death unto life And if wee need the assistance of the ancient Fathers in this businesse behold they be here readie with full buckets in their hands Tertullian to begin withall counteth it iniurious unto Christ to hold that such as be called from hence by him are in a state that should be pittied whereas they have obtayned their desire of being with Christ according to that of the Apostle Philip. 1.23 I desire to depart and to be with Chrest What pitie was it that the poore soules in Purgatorie should finde no 〈◊〉 in those dayes to informe men better of their ruefull condition nor no Secretarie to draw up such another supplication for them as this which of late years Sir Thomas Moore presented in their name To all good Christen people In most piteous wise continually calleth and cryeth upon your devoute charitie and most tender pitie for helpe comfort and reliefe your late acquaintance kindred spouses companions playfellowes and friends and now your humble and unacquainted and halfe forgotten suppliants poore prisoners of God the sely soules in Purgatorie here abiding and enduring the grievous paynes and hote clensing fire c. If S. Cyprian had understood but halfe thus much doubtlesse he would have strucken out the best part of that famous treatise which hee wrote of Mortalitie to comfort men against death in the time of a great plague especially such passages as these are which by no meanes can be reconciled with Purgatorie It is for him to feare death that is not willing to goe unto Christ it is for him to bee unwilling to goe unto Christ who doth not beleeve that hee beginneth to raigne with Christ. For it is written that the just doth live by faith If thou be just and livest by faith if thou dost truly beleeve in God why being to be with Christ and being secure of the Lords promise doest not thou embrace the message whereby thou art called unto Christ and rejoycest that thou shalt be ridd of the Divell Simeon said Lord now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace according to thy word for mine eyes have seene thy salvation proving thereby and witnessing that the servants of God then have peace then injoy free and quiet rest when being drawen from these stormes of the world vvee arrive at the haven of our everlasting habitation and securitie vvhen this death being ended wee enter into immortalitie The righteous are called to a refreshing the unrighteous are haled to torment safety is quickly
labouâ—ed in vaine 1. Thessal 2.19 For what is our hope or joy or crowne of rejoycing are not even yee in the presence of our Lord Iesus Christ at his comming 1. Pet. 1. â— Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation readie to be revealed in the last time 1. Corinth 5.5 That the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Iâ—sus Ephes. 4.30 Grieve not the holy spirit of God whereby yee are sealed unto the day of redemption Luk. 21.28 When these things beginne to come to passe then looke up and lift up your heads for your redemption draweth nigh 2. Timoth. 4.8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righâ—eousnesse which the Lord the righteous judge shall give me at that day and Luk. 14.14 Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just And that the Church in her Offices for the dead had speciall respect unto this time of the Resurrection appeareth plainly both by the portions of Scripture appointed to be read therein and by diverse particulars in the prayers themselves that manifestly discover this intention For there the ministers as the writer of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy reporteth read those undoubted promises vvhich are recorded in the divine Scriptures of our holy ResurrectioÌ„ and then devoutly sang such of the sacred Psalmes as were of the same subject and argument And so accordingly in the Romane Missall the lessons ordained to be read for that time are taken from 1. Corinth 15. Behold I tell you a mysterie Wee shall all rise againe c. Ioh. 5. The houre commeth wherein all that are in the graves shall heare his voyce and they that have done good shall come forth unto the resurrection of life c. 1. Thessal 4. Brethren we would not have you ignorant concerning them that sleepe that yee sorrow not as others which have no hope Ioh. 11. I am the resurrection and the life he that beleeveth in me although he were dead shall live 2. Maccab. 12. Iudas caused a sacrifice to be offered for the sinnes of the dead justly and religiously thinking of the Resurrection Ioh. 6. This is the will of my Father that sent me that every one that seeth the Sonne and beleeveth in him may have life everlasting and I will raise him up at the last day and He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life everlasting and I will raise him up at the last day and lastly Apocal. 14. I heard a voyce from heaven saying unto me Write Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth now saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours for their workes follow them Wherewith the Sequence also doth agree beginning Dies irae dies illa Solvet saeclum in favillâ Teste David cum Sibyllâ and ending Lacrymosa dies illa Quâ resurget ex favillâ Iudicandus homo reus Huic ergo parce Deus Pie Iesu Domine Dona eis requiem Tertullian in his booke de Monogamiâ which hee wrote after hee had beene infected with the heresie of the Montanists speaking of the prayer of a widow for the soule of her deceased husband saith that she requesteth refreshing for him and a portion in the first resurrection Which seemeth to have some tang of the error of the Millenaries whereunto not Tertullian onely with his Prophet Montanus but Nepos also and Lactantius and diverse other Doctors of the Church did fall who misunderstanding the prophecie in the 20. of the Revelation imagined that there should be a first resurrection of the just that should raigne here a thousand yeares upon earth and after that a second resurrection of the wicked at the day of the general judgement Yet in a certaine Gotthicke Missall I meet with two severall exhortations made unto the people to pray after the selfe same forme the one that God would vouchsafe to place in the bosome of Abraham the soules of those that be at rest and admit them unto the part of the first resurrectioÌ„ the other which I find elsewhere also repeated in particular that he would place in rest the spirits of their friends which were gone before them in the Lords peace and rayse them up in the part of the first resurrection Which how it may be excused otherwise then by saying that at the generall resurrection the dead in Christ shall rise fiâ—st and then the wicked shall be raysed after them and by referring the first resurrection unto the resurrection of the just which shall be at that day I cannot well resolve For certaine it is that the first râ—surrection spoken of in the 20. chapter of the Revelation of S. Iohn is the resuâ—rection of the soule from the death of sinne and error in this world as the second is the resurrection of the bodie out of the dust of the earth in the world to come both whiâ—h be distinctly layd down by our Saviour in the fift chapter of the Gospell of S. Iohn the first in the 25. verse The houre is comming and now is when the dead shall heare the voyce of the Sonne of God and they that heare shall live the second in the 28. and 29. Marveile not at this for the houre is comming in which all that are in the graves shall heare his voyce and shall come forth they that have done good unto the resurrection of life and they that have done evill unto the resurrection of damnation And to this generall resurrection and to the judgement of the last day had the Church relation in her prayers some patternes whereof it will not be amisse to exhibit here in these examples following Although the condition of death brought in upon mankinde doth make our hearts and mindes heavy yet by the gift of thy clemencie we are raised up with the hope of future immortalitie and being mindfull of eternall salvation are not afraid to sustaine the losse of this light For by the benefite of thy grace life is not taken away to the faithful but changed and the soules being freed from the prison of the body abhorre things mortall when they attaine unto things eternall Wherefore we beseech thee that thy servant N. being placed in the tabernacles of the blessed may rejoyce that he hath escaped the straytes of the flesh and in the desire of glorification expect with confidence the day of Iudgement Through Iesus Christ our Lord. whose holy passion we celebrate without doubt for immortall and well resting soules for them especially upon whom thou hast bestowed the grace of the second birth who by the example of the same Iesus Christ our Lord have begunne to be secure of the resurrection For thou vvho hast made the things that were not art able to repaire the things that were and hast given unto us evidences of the resurrection to come not onely by the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles but also by the
I can hardly be perswaded saith Origen that there can be any worke which may require the reward of God by way of debt seeing this very thing it selfe that we can doe or thinke or speake any thing we doe it by his gift and largesse Wages indeed saith Saint Hilary there is none of gift because it is due by worke but God hath given the same free to all men by the justification of faith Whence should I have so great merit seeing mercy is my Crowne saith S. Ambrose and againe Which of us can subsist without the mercy of God What can we doe worthy of the heavenly rewards Which of us doth so rise up in this bodie that he doth elevate his minde in such sort as he may continually adhere unto Christ By what merit of man is it granted that this corruptible flesh should put on incorruption and this mortall should put on immortality By what labours or by what enduring of injuries can we abate our sinnes The sufferings of this time are unworthy for the glory that is to come Therefore the forme of heavenly decrees doth proceed with men not according to our merits but according to Gods mercy S. Basil expounding those words of the Psalmist Behold the eye of the Lord is upon them that feare him upon them that hope in his mercy Psalm 33.18 saith that he doth hope in his mercy who not trusting in his owne good deeds nor looking to be iustified by workes hath the hope of his salvation only in the mercies of God and in his explication of those other words Psalm 116.7 Returne unto thy rest O my soule for the Lord hath dealt bountifully with thee Everlasting rest saith he is laid up for them that strive lawfully in this life not to be rendred according to the debt of workes but exhibited by the grace of the bountifull God to them that trust in him If we consider our owne merits we must despaire saith S. Hierome and When the day of judgement or death shall come all hands will faile because no worke shall be found worthy of the justice of God Macarius the Aegyptian Eremite in his 15. homily writeth thus Touching the gift which Christians shall inherit this a man may rightly say that if any one from the time wherein Adam was created unto the very end of the world did fight against Satan and undergoe afflictions he should doe no great matter in respect of the glory that he shall inherit for he shall reigne together with Christ world without end His 37. homily is in the Paris edition of the workes of Marcus the Eremite set out as the Prooeme of his booke of Paradise and the spirituall law There Macarius exhorteth us that beleeving in almighty God we should with a simple heart and void of scrupulositie come unto him who bestoweth the communion of the spirit according to faith and not according to the proportion of the workes of faith Where Ioannes Picus the Popish interpreter of Marcus giveth us warning in his margent that this clause is to be understood of a lively faith but concealeth his owne faithlesnesse in corrupting of the text by turning the workes of faith into the workes of nature for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by his Latine translation which is to be seene in Bibliothecâ Patrum as much to say as Non ex proportione operum naturae There is a treatise extant of the said Marcus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 touching those who thinke to be justified by their workes where he maketh two sorts of men that misse both of them the kingdome of heaven the one such as doe not keepe the commandements and yet imagine that they beleeve aright the other such as keeping the commandements doe expect the kingdome as a wages due â—nto them For the Lord saith he willing to shew that all the commâ—ndements are of dutie to be performed and that the adoption of children is freely given to men by his bloud saith When you have done aâ—l things that are commanded you then say We are unprofitable servants and we have done that which was our dutie to doe Therefore the kingdome of heaven is not the hire of works but the grace of the Lord prepared for his faithfull servants This sentence is repeated in the very selfe same words by Hesychius in his booke of Sentences written to Thalassius The like sayings also hath S. Chrysostome No man sheweth such a conversation of life that he may be worthy of the kingdome but this is wholly of the gift of God Therefore he saith When yee have done all say We are unprofitable servants for what we ought to doe we have done Although we did die a thousand deaths although we did performe all vertuous actions yet should we come short by farre of rendring any thing worthy of those honours which are conferred upon us by God Although we should doe innumerable good deeds it is of Gods pitie and benignitie that we are heard although we should come unto the very top of vertue it is of mercy that we are saved for although we did innumerable workes of mercy yet would it be of the benignitie of grace that for such small and meane matters should be given so great a heaven and a kingdome and such an honour whereunto nothing we doe can have equall correspondence Let the merit of men be excellent let him observe the rights of nature let him be obedient to the commandements of the Lawes let him fulfill his faith keepe justice exercise vertues condemne vice repell sinnes shew himselfe an example for others to imitate if he have performed any thing it is little whatsoever he hath done is small for all merit is short Number Gods benefits if thou canst and then consider what thou dost merit Weigh thine owne deeds with the heavenly benefits ponder thine owne acts with the divine gifts and thou wilt not judge thy selfe worthy of that which thou art if thou understandest what thou dost merit Whereunto we may adde the exhortation made by S. Antony to his Monkes in Aegypt The life of man is most short being measured with the world to come so that all our time is even nothing in comparison of everlasting life And every thing in this world is sold for that which it is worth and one giveth equall in exchange of equall but the promise of everlasting life is bought for a very little matter Wherefore my sonnes let us not wax weary nor thinke that we stay long or performe some great thing for the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed on us Neither when we looke upon the world let us thinke that we have forsaken any great matters For all this earth is but a very little thing in comparison of the whole heaven Therefore although we had beene lords of the whole