if he had wel weighed the wordes of the Gospell and of the Apostles he should haue found that Iesus Christ tooke bread and brake it But the Church of Rome saith that the Priest doth not breake bread 2 Hee should haue found that Iesus Christ tooke bread and gaue it to his Disciples But the Church of Rome holdeth that the Priest doth not giue bread 3 He should haue found that Iesus Christ giuing this bread said that that which hee gaue was his body But the Church of Rome doth not beleeue that the bread is the body of Christ but doth thus expound these wordes This is my body that is that which is vnder these formes shall be transubstantiated into my body For it is certaine that when Iesus Christ said This is my body by the word This he vnderstood that which he gaue Now the Gospell doth witnesse that he gaue bread therefore these wordes This is my body doe signifie as much as This bread is my body And so all the auncients doe expound them Now in that the bread cannot be the body of our Lord in substance it remaineth therefore that it be such by way of Sacrament and in the same sense as in the line following the Cup is called the new Couenant or the new Testament 4 He should also haue found that this Sacrament is a commemoration of Iesus Christ It is not then Iesus Christ himselfe For the remembrance of a thing and that wherof it is the memoriall are diuers things 5 He should haue found that S. Matthew and S. Marke say that Iesus dranke with his Disciples of the fruite of the Vine that is of wine it was then yet wine whilst he dranke of it For albeit there were two Cups as appeareth by S. Luke notwithstanding S. Matthew and S. Marke cannot call the wine of a Cup of which they doe not speake at all Fruit of the Vine 6 Hee should further haue seene that Iesus Christ maketh no eleuation of the Host neyther doe the Apostles adore it but continue sitting at the Table 7 Hee might haue seene that 1. Cor. 10. S. Paul doth giue vs a Paraphrase of the wordes This is my body In these words the bread which we breake is the Communion of the body of Christ But the Church of Rome waxing wroth and angrie against the Apostle bites and snarles at euery word of this clause First the Apostle saith that it is bread The Church of Rome denieth that it is bread Secondly he saith that we breake bread on the other side the Church of Rome saith that there is no bread broken Thirdly our aduersaries being demaunded what that bread is that is broken they say it is the body of Christ and yet the body of Christ cannot bee broken Fourthly S. Paul saith that this bread which wee breake is the Communion of the body of Christ whence it followeth against the Church of Rome that the bread which is broken is not the body of Christ for the participation or communicating of meate is not the meate it selfe Fiftly it by this word Bread we must vnderstand the body of Christ as our aduersaries will haue it it will follow not onely that the body of Christ is broken in the Sacrament but also that S. Paul shold haue mocked vs in saying that the bodie of Christ is the Communion of the body of Christ words very ridiculous and which our aduersaries beleeue not Sixty The worst is that the Church of Rome holdeth that there is nothing broken in the Sacrament but the accidents that is the roundnesse colour taste and length of the bread and so shee blaspemeth horribly making the Apostle to say that the breaking of colours roundnesse and taste of the bread is the Communion of the body of Christ 8 He should haue found also 1. Cor. 11. that the Apostle saith thrice that we eate bread and in the second and the twentieth of the Acts the Apostles came together to breake bread where our aduersaries are enforced to haue recourse to strange figures and to make which is contrary to the Order of time S. Iohn interpreter of S Paul Shifts and euasions which we haue refuted in another place and haue boulted this Dispute to the very branne I suppose also that if Coeffeteau had any good opinion of Iesus Christ he would haue presumed of him that being souerainly good he wold not haue taken pleasure to deliuer the Institution of this Sacrament in ambiguous terms who wil beleeue that he that is the light of the world should be the cause of darkenes whence commeth it then that our aduersaries bring in a kind of Mascarado into this holy banquet when they introduce a douzen of figures perplexed termes in the words of this Institution Figures which we haue handled and discussed in his place In my Apology for the Lords Supper ch 12. And they who cannot endure that the bread should be called the body of Christ because it is the Sacrament of the body of Christ Epist ad Bonifacium 3. according as S. Austin saith that the Sacraments take ordinarily the name of that which they signifie yet themselues in the wordes following which is broken for you admit a like figure saying that it is not the body that is broken but the accidents and outward signes and that that which agreeth to the signe is attributed to the thing signified VVhosoeuer shall weigh these things without passion will not suffer himselfe to be infolded in this grosse error which doth greatly abase the glory of our Sauiour which maketh him to be swallowed vp of his enemies which maketh Iesus Christ to haue drunken his owne flesh and bones which saith that he may bee eaten of Mice and other vermine which incloseth him in filthy vomitings which maketh the Priest sometimes to complaine that they haue robbed him of his God which giueth to a Priest be hee neuer so vitious more power then to the Virgine Mary and all the Saints and Angels who being all put together in one cannot make Iesus Christ seeing that he is already made and cannot be produced a new much lesse in murmuring certaine words ouer the bread VVhich doth ouerthrow and abolish the humanity of our Sauiour and by consequent all our faith giuing him a body without length a body which being in diuers places farre a part is by consequent farre separated from it selfe A body without position or situation of partes seeing that they are all together vnder one onely point and in euery little crumme of the Host Yea many contrary bodies of which one is at the Table with his Disciples the other in the stomackes of his Disciples For the one body is infirme and weake the other without infirmity the one spreading his handes the other not able to stirre them the one speaking and breathing the other not able to speake or to breath the one sweating in the Garden drops of blood the other newly receiued into the stomacks of the Apostles
runnes into the disputation of the Sacrifice of the Masse We may let him runne seeing he betakes himselfe to his heeles yet let vs giue him this aboue his bargaine Of the Sacrifice of the Masse AS all errours goe hand in hand and are linked together so the opinion of the Sacrifice of the Masse hath drawne priuate Masses after it for after it began to be beleeued that in the Masse the Priest doth really sacrifice Christ Iesus for the price and ransome of our soules mans reason witty to deceiue it selfe hath presumed that this payment cannot but be good though made in a corner and that payment may be made for vs without our assistance for to celebrate the Sacrament of the Communion which we haue together with Iesus Christ a communion of many is necessarily required but to offer a payment vnto God retchlesse ignorance hath held it lesse requisite for many to be assistants this is the reason why this wound must be searched to the quicke and this abuse carefully discouered besides this point troubles vs the more because to goe to Masse and be a Romane Catholicke are taken in one signification The Councell of Trent in the two and twentieth Session declareth that in the Masse Christ is really sacrificed as a true propitiatory sacrifice for the sinnes of the liuing and the dead by reason whereof when the Bishop ordereth a Priest after he hath annointed him in sundry places of his bodie he laieth his handes vpon him and saith Accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium Deo Missasque celebrandi tam pro viuis quam pro defunctis Receiue power to offer Sacrifice vnto God and to celebrate Masse both for the liuing and the dead So hee confirmes him a Sacrificer to sacrifice Christ Iesus really for a propitiatory sacrifice And this sacrifiice is called the Masse which is celebrated by a Priest clad with aenigmaticall and allegoricall robes with a thousand feates and gesticulations by tale and in wordes not intelligible therefore the people vse to say Let vs goe heare a Masse but if one should phrase it thus as the Apostles doe Act. 2. 20. Let vs goe breake bread or Let vs goe to the Lords Supper he should be thought eyther to be out of his wits or to deserue the Inquisition for in this admirable age the language of the Holy Ghost is become eyther ridiculous or prodigious or vnseasonable Being then armed with the word of God let vs gently sift out the falshood that here offers it selfe more then halfe vnmasked for the errours are palpable 1 First we demaund of our Masters who hath authorised the Bishops to establish Sacrificers in the Church of Christ Here they are silent and can neuer answere to the purpose and so the Priests are conuinced to haue no calling but an imaginary charge brought into the Church without the commandement of God as if one should bring in Fidlers or Fencers among the Counsellors of State to make them sit in the Kings Courts and place Sacrificers in equall ranke with faithfull Pastors and Bishops of the flocke 2 Againe we aske of them who hath instituted this propitiatory sacrifice of the Masse where Iesus Christ is really sacrificed They answere that Christ hath instituted it Enquire farther where and in what wordes of the Institution of the Eucharist they alleadge these words Do this in remembrance of me An admirable proofe Doe this that is to say Sacrifice me really vnder the forms of the bread and wine is a Sacrifice propitiatory for the liuing and the dead O fruitfull words in consequences which like ringing bels may be made speake answerably to euery mans imagination 3 But let vs take them according to their own words for they themselues confesse that by these words do this Christ hath commanded to do that which himselfe did then must they shew vs that Christ in this Sacrament offered his body for a sacrifice and there are they grauelled and put to silence it is easie to finde what Christ offered to his Disciples when he said Take eate but it appeares not that he offered any thing vnto God 4 Neyther did Christ vse any eleuation a Ceremony vsed in Sacrifices which the Priest obserueth also in the Masse 5 Also the Apostles performe no adoration against the nature of euery Sacrifice which doth necessarily require adoration in those that offer 6 Besides whosoeuer doth offer vnto God addresseth himselfe by speech and otherwise vnto God but Christ in the whole forme of the institution of the Eucharist neyther addresseth himselfe vnto God nor speakes to any but his Apostles 7 Yea these wordes Do this in remembrance of me doe call our aduersaries to a triall for if Doe this signifie Sacrifice me it then followes that Doe this in remembrance of me signifies Sacrifice me in memory of me which is a sense absurd and incompatible for the memoriall of a thing cannot be the thing it selfe no man offers a present in remembrance of the present not would sacrifice a Lambe in memory of the Lambe so doth he not sacrifice Iesus Christ in remembrance of Christ 8 But will we haue these wordes Doe this expounded Let vs then learne them of the Apostle 1. Cor. 11.25.26 Iesus tooke the cup saying This cup is the new Testament in my blood doe this as oft as yee drinke it in remembrance of me for as often as ye shal eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shew the Lords death till that he come Then to doe this in remembrance of Iesus Christ is to eate the bread and drinke the cup to shew or celebrate his death 9 Some thinking here to shew their wits argue thus Euery powring out of blood for the remission of sinnes is a sacrifice but Christ saith that in the Eucharist his blood is shed for the remission of sinnes therefore the Eucharist is a sacrifice Whereunto I answere that both the propositions of this Argumunt are false yea the second is contrary to the Church of Rome It is false that the shedding of blood for the remission of sinnes is a sacrifice vnlesse this blood be offered vnto God for an Oblation and with the death of the Sacrifice the blood whereof is shed Now here you see not that Iesus Christ did offer any thing vnto God nor that he suffered death in the Eucharist The second proposition is also false for it is true that Christ saith in this Sacrament that his blood is shed but saith not that it is shed in this Sacrament He speaks of the effusion of his blood vpon the Crosse which he was to doe immediately after for Christ doth often speake of his death approaching as if it were at hand as in the tenth of Iohn ver 17. I lay downe my life that I may take it vp againe And a little before I giue downe my life for my sheepe S. Paul saith in like manner 2. Tim 4 6. For I am now offered because he should be sacrificed soone
that in a manner the whole earth was filled with it The second place is out of the booke de caena Domini falsly ascribed 10 S. Cyprian as are also all the Treatises De Cardinalib operibus whereof this is one to which there is prefixed a Prologue wherein the Author saith that he hath suppressed his name by which it appeareth that the Authour of this Treatise is vnknowne yet might this booke bee purposely alleadged had it beene written by any auncient Authour that had liued within the first foure or fiue hundred yeares but the stile testifies that it is newly forged witnesse these wordes Distributê° non demembratur incorporatus non iniuriatur This is the worke of some prentice Frier that meant to wrong Priscian The third place is out of S. Ambrose in the ninth Chapter concerning those that are newly instructed in the Mysteries where Ambrose sayth that the benediction chaungeth the nature of the Sacrament and that it is not that which nature hath made but what the blessing hath consecrated And to shew that in this action there is a supernaturall worke he brings the example of Airons rod turned into a Serpent so farre doth Coeffeteau alleadge S. Ambrose but hee doth malitiously omit many examples following by which it appeareth that S. Ambrose did not thinke that that which was to be admired in this Sacrament was the Transubstantiation of the bread For he addeth also these examples that Moses deuided the redde Sea that the Riuer Iordan turned his course that water issued out of the Rocke that the bitter waters of Mara were made sweete that Elizeus made Iron to swimme vpon the water which were all workes of God whrein there was no transubstantiation which declare that he beleeued not that the bread became the body of Christ so as it was no more bread in substance which did plainly appeare for that in the words following comparing these miracles of the Prophets wherein God changed the nature of things Non minus est nouas res rebus dare quam mutare naturas with the change that is wrought in the Sacrament he saith That it is no lesse to adde some new things vnto things then to change the nature of things Auerring plainely thereby that the bread hath receiued some new thing without losing the nature of bread And we may not thinke it strange if he say that the bread remaining bread hath changed it nature For so a bit of Waxe becomming the Kings seale changeth it nature without Transubstantiation and is not any more commonly called Waxe euen as the common bread becommeth holy in the Sacrament Vera vtique caro Christi quae crucifixa quae sepulta est Verè ergo carnis illius Sacramentum est Ipse clamat Dominus Iesus Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ Ante benedictionem verborum caelâ—stium alia species nominatur post consecrationem corpê° Christi significatur and by this consecration is often called the body of Christ Therefore he further addeth It was the true flesh of Christ which hath beene crucified and buried This then is as truely the holy signe of the flesh The Lord himselfe crieth aloud this is my body before the blessing of the heauenly wordes another kinde is named after the blessing the body of Christ is signified The last place is out of S. Chrysostome in his Sermon of the Dedication where in his flourishing Discourse after his manner he heapes vp Hyperbolies to enflame his Auditory You which come saith he thinke not to receiue the Diuine body of a man but that you receiue the very Seraphins of fire with their tongues And a little after the spirituall fire streameth downe from the table Transported with the same zeale he saith there that the mysteries are consumed by the substance of the body And so in the fiue and fortieth Homily vpon S. Iohn We are mingled and knead with him we fasten our teeth in his flesh All which are hyperbolicall phrases and such as being hardly taken were absurd in the very iudgement of our aduersaries which make the helpes of deuotion to couer Idolatry for to know what is a Doctors opinion we must not take his Oratorious Amplifications nor Hyperbolical extasies Acceptum paneÌ„ distributum discipulis corpus suum fecit dicendo hoc est corpus meum id est figura corporis me i. Panem suum corpus appellans vt hinc iam eum intelligas corporis sui siguram pani dedisse I I le cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Dei perque obsecrationem iuxta id quod habet materiale in ventrem abit in secessum emittitur but out of the places in which they aduisedly and expresly treate of this matter of which you shall haue here some passages Tertullian in his fourth booke against Marcion cap. 40. Iesus Christ hauing taken bread and distributed it to his Disciples he made it to be his body saying This is my body that is the figure of my body The same in his third booke against Marcion cap. 19. God hath so reuealed it in the Gospell calling the bread his body to the end that thereby thou mayest vnderstand that he hath giuen to the bread to be a figure of his body Origen vpon the fifteenth of Matthew That meate which is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer as touching the matter it goeth downe into the belly and is cast out into the draught and doth not sanctifie of its owne nature Cyprian in his third Epistle of the second booke Vinum fuit quod sanguinem suum dixit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Non dubitauit dicere Hoc est corpus mâ—um cum daret signum corporis sui Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum Sacramentum corporis Christi orpus Christi est Sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est Ita Sacramentum fidei fides est Spiritualiter intelligitur quod locutus sum non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis bibituri illum sanguinem quem fuâ—uri sunt qui me crucifigent Sacramentum a liquod vobis commendaui Spiritualiter intellectum viuificabit vos We find that the Cup which the Lord offered was mingled and THAT WHICH HE CALLED HIS BLOVD WAS WINE Eusebius in the eighth booke of the Demonstration of the Gospell chap. 1. towards the end Iesus Christ gaue to his Disciples the signes of the diuine dispensation commaunding them to celebrate the figure of his owne body For seeing that he did now no longer receiue the sacrifices of bloud nor the slaughter of diuers beasts ordained by Moses he hath taught vs to vse the bread for a signe of his body S. Austin against Adimantus chap. 12. The Lord made no difficulty to say This is my body when he gaue the signe of his body Where we see that he expoundeth this word Body by signe of my body In his three and twentieth Epistle to Boniface The holy signe of Christs
he celebrated the Eucharist and that his body was already dead Lactantius in his fourth booke and fourteenth Chapter dooth formally denie the Diuinity of Iesus Christ and in his seuenth booke and one and twenty chapter he saith that the soules of men as well good as bad In vna communique custodia detinentur are detained in one common prison Saint Gregory Nazianzen in his Sermon of Baptisme willeth that vnlesse it be in case of vrgent necessity the Baptisme of young children be deferred vntill such time as they may be capable to aunswere and to yeeld account of their faith Himselfe in his Epitaph vpon Basill doth preferre him before Enoch Contemninus n. Phegor omnem ignominiam eius scientes quod qui in carne sunt non possunt placere Deo and compareth him to Abraham Saint Ierome in his first booke against Iouinian often calleth marriage an vnchast state of life and an ignominy and that the fruite of it is death and that a woman that doth marry the second time ought not to participate of the Almes no nor of the body of the Lord. The Church of Rome doth no longer beleeue the Purgatorie of Gregory the first which hee placeth sometimes in Bathes sometimes in the winde sometime in the water Nor the opinion of Honorius Bishop of Rome who was a Monothelite the Epistles whereof are inserted in the fift and sixt generall Councels For all these good seruants of God were subiect to mistaking and had their faults and vices like warts in a faire face to the end that in reading them a man should haue alwayes in his hand the Compasse of the holy Scripture and the rule of the word of God And that a man should beleeue that which they haue well said not because they haue said it but because it is found in the word of God if they erre in any thing Antiquity cannot authorize an errour There can be no prescription against the truth And a time there was when these Fathers were no Fathers and before they wrote the Christians were ruled by the word of God As touching that which the King of great Britaine saith that they doe contradict one another the verification of it is easie For euery man knoweth the contentions betweene Chrysostome and Epiphanius the Disputes betweene Cyrill and Theodoret the sharpe Epistles and full of gall of Saint Ierome to Saint Austin And S. Austin speaketh farre otherwise of Free-wil of Predestination and of the gift of Perseuerance then all the Greeke Fathers of his age He that will haue a cleare mirrour of this their discord let him compare the Commentaries of S. Austin vpon the Psalmes with those of Saint Ierome and he shall scarcely finde them to agree in two verses together It is then with very iust reason that Coeffeteau doth graunt this to the King of great Britaine and doth acknowledge the faults and contradictions of the auncients whom notwithstanding we ought to loue and honour as great lights in their times and worthy seruants of God who hauing combatted Heresies in their life time doe yet beat downe Popery after their deaths For we maintaine against whosoeuer he be that in the foure first ages and yet wee might discend much lower there shall not be found out any one man who hath had a Religion not so much as approaching to that of the Romish Church now-a-dayes And in this challenge I will lay downe my Ministers cloake ready to be frocked and cladde in a Monks-coule if I shall finde a man that will satisfie me in this point And to the end to expresse my selfe more clearly I say that betweene vs and our aduersaries there be two kindes of Controuersies for some there be vpon which they are wont to produce some passages for proofes But eyther they be quotations altogether false or maimed and curtalled or of no vse to proue the point in question or else places taken contrary to the authours meaning Yet being a thing ordinary with these Messieus to put the ancient Fathers vpon the racke to make them speake in fauour of an vntruth Such is the question of transubstantiation of praying for the dead or Purgatory and of the Sacrifice of the Masse But there are other Controuersies no lesse important and more in number In which they are cleane destitute of all authority of the auncient Church and vpon which being interrogated they answere besides the matter For changing the question they endeauour to proue that which is not demaunded of them See here some examples 1. They cannot shew that any auncient Church did celebrate the eucharist without communicants as it is done ordinarily in the Church of Rome yea and sometimes also without any assistants 2. They cannot shew that any ancient Church hath excluded that people from the communion of the cuppe or chalice 3. Or that in any ancient Church the publike seruice was done in a language not vnderstood of the people 4 Or that any ancient Church hath hindered the people from reading the holy Scripture As it is no way permitted in those Countries where the Pope is absolutely obeyed without speciall priuilege 5. Or that in any ancient Church they haue made Images of God and representations of the Trinity in stone or in picture 6. Also they cannot proue vnto vs that in any ancient Church the people hath beene instructed to pray without vnderstanding that which they say speaking in a tongue not vnderstood of himselfe that prayeth 7. Or that any ancient Church did yeeld worship or religious seruice to the Images of creatures kissing them decking them with robes kneeling before them and presenting them gifts and offerings c. 8. Or that the ancient Church hath beleeued that the Virgin Mary is crowned Queene of the heauens and Lady of the world as this is painted throughout all their Churches 9. Or that the ancient Church hath giuen to the Saints diuers charges as to one the commaund euer such a country to another the cure ouer such a maladie to a third to be Patron ouer such a trade and mysterie 10. Or that the ancient Church hath beleeued that the Pope can giue and take away Kingdomes And dispense with subiects for the oath of their alleageance Can canonize Saints and dispense with Vowes and promises solemnly made to God c. 11. Or that in the ancient Church the Pope by his pardons did distribute supererogatory satisfactions of the Saints for the remission of paine and punishment of other mens sinnes 12. Or that the Pope did then place his pardons in one Church and not in another In one Towne and not in another and that sometimes for an hundred and two hundred thousand yeares of pardon 13. Or that the auncient Church hath beleeued the Limbe of little children 14. Or that the auncient Church hath adored the host which the Priest holdeth vp with the worship of Latria which is done to God alone And to this end the Priest hath caused the Eleuation of
the Article which followeth ARTICLE VIII Touching prayers to Saints and the seruice that is due vnto them The KINGS Confession T S for prayer to Saints Christ I am sure hath commaunded vs to Come all to him that are loaden with sinne and he will relieue vs and S. Paul hath forbidden vs to worshippe Angels or to vse any such voluntary worship Math. 11 28. Col 28.28 that hath a shew of humility in that it spareth not the flesh But what warrant we haue to haue recourse vnto these Dâ—j Penates or Tutelares these Courtiers of God I know not I remit that to these philosophicall neotericke Diuines It satisfieth me to pray to God through Christ as I am commaunded which I am sure must be the safest way and I am sure the Safest way is the best way in points of saluation Hereupon Coeffeteau confounding the Kings whole discouery he beginneth by a complaint that his Maiesty calleth Tutelary and familiar Gods those lesser Saints to whom many of the people do vow themselues in particular and of whom they set the Images vpon their Cupboords or ouer their Chimneyes But his Maiesty doth not intend to call the Saints familiars nor Tutelarie Gods neyther doth he say that in the Church of Rome they call them so onely he meaneth that the Church of Rome hath substituted them in place of the Tutelarie and domesticall gods and that hee doth entertaine them after the same fashion For the Paynims had their tutelarie gods ouer euery town and ouer euery Countrey Iuno was Lady-gardian of Carthage Venus of Cyprus and of Paphos Pallace of the Countrey of Attica Mars and Quirinus of Rome c. so the Church of Rome hath Saints that are Patrons of Cities and Countries Saint Marke of Venice S. Geneuiefue of Paris S. Iames of Spain S. Dennis of France c. and as the Paynims did distribute charges amongst their gods so in the Church of Rome euery Saint hath his charge apart The hunters did inuocate Diana now adaies they haue recourse to S. Eustace S. Nicholas who now is called vpon by the Pilots and Sea-faring men hath taken the place of Castor and Pollux The good Goddesse Lucina who was assisting to women that trauelled in childe-birth hath now giuen place to S. Margaret for so her Legend saith that the Dragon hauing swallowed her downe she made the signe of the Crosse in his belly wherewith he burst asunder and she came forth through the breach which was a kinde of lying in S. Christopher with his huge body hath succeeded Hercules for so they make him also to carry a clubbe There wanted yet a Queene of heauen in the place of Iuno and this holy and glorious Virgin hath beene dishonoured with so prophane a title yea the very habites and furniture of the gods haue beene transported to the Saints The Genij or Penates household gods had a dogge by their side and so hath S. Roche The Image of Iames carried a Key so doth that of S. Peter Iupiter a man had hornes on his head such doe they giue to Moses Isis carried a Timbrell and S. Gennasius a Violin Those circles which you see about the head of the Saints in picture are those Arches and shaddowes wherewith they couered their gods to fence them from the dust In like manner are the Officers distributed in Paradise in a goodly order and with diuersity of furniture and prouision For his Holines and the Church of Rome haue taken order for it We are ashamed to produce these things whiles they are not ashamed to doe them and we blush at that of which they haue no shame at all If we would prolong this Discourse we would easily shew that a good part of these Patrons and Tutelary Saints are Saints which neuer were they liue without hauing euer beene borne and are entred into the Church without euer entring into the world the painters are wonted to make characters pictures in a manner speaking as when they paint Iustice with a paire of ballances Time like an olde man winged The Fryer like a lame god because the wood doth susteyne him so the auncients did figure the faith of a beleeuing man by a woman swollowed vp of Sathan but who did get forth againe victoriously and trample the Diuell vnder her feet And of this Image they haue made their Saint Margaret so the Christian was painted as passing ouer a violent land-flood but hauing Iesus Christ with him Praesertim cum sit manifestum in omnem Italiam Galliam Hispaniam Africam nullum instituisse Ecclesias nisi eos quos Apostolus Petrus aut successores eius constitueruÌ„t Legant autem si in his prouincijs alius Apostolus inuenitur aut legitur docuisse c. who did burden him indeede but yet did conduct him This Image hath produced a new Saint whom they call S. Christopher Of the launce which pierced the body of our Lord they haue made S. Longis because that Lonchi in the vulgar pronunciation of the Greeke tongue signifieth a Launce Men runne with incredible zeale to S. Iames of Compostella in Spaine where they say that hee preached and that his bones remaine there and yet in the meane time it is well knowne that S. Iames was neuer in Spaine Pope Innocent in the twelfth distinction in the Canon Quis nesciat doth stoutly and stiffely maintaine that there was neuer any Apostle in Spaine and that neyther in Fraunce nor in Affrica nor in Spaine any planted Church saue they whom S. Peter and his successors sent thither The Story also of his life recyted by Iohn Beleth and Iacobus de Voragine great personages saith that he came into Spaine before he was put to death by Herod Act. 12. It must needes bee then that he came into Spaine almost about the time that Iesus Christ suffered for S. Iames suruiued Christ but a while after his death His body being put on Ship-boord went of it selfe without Pilot or any guidance into Spaine Queene Lupa raigning then in Spaine Now it is well knowne that at that time there was neyther King nor Queene in Spaine and that it was wholly subiect to the Romane Empire The same is to be said of S. Denis the Areopagite whom men say to haue planted the Gospell in Fraunce and hauing suffered Martyrdome vnder the Emperour Domitian as saith Methodius he carried his head betweene his hands from Mont-Martre as farre as S. Denis where he lyeth interred The reuiuing of learning and good letters hath discouered the falshood of such inuentions For the most auncient Christian Historian that euer was in Fraunce Sub Aurelio Antonini filio persecutio quinta agitata ac tunc primum inter Gallias martyria visa serius trans alpes religione transgressa is Sulpitius Seuerus who in the second booke of his story sheweth that there were no Martyrdomes in Fraunce vnder Domitian nor a long time after and that the first Martyrdomes which were seene in
bodie c Wherupon the question is asked to whom the Priest speakes when he saith Brethren pray for me Pope Innocent the third doth answere finely in the second booke of the mysteries of the Masse chap. 25. It must saith he be religiously beleeued that the Angels doe beare them companie that pray according to the saying of the Prophet I will sing vnto thee in the presence of the Angels Which will also serue to resolue other doubts presuming that when the Priest saith Take eate he doth invite the Angels to eate for they come with good stomackes And so of the rest At length the place of Austin is brought which is the onely passage of antiquity that Coeffeteau can finde This Father lib. 22. De ciuit Dei speaking of a place haunted with euill spirits saith that one of his Priests went and offered a Sacrifice there wherupon Coeffeteau saith that this could not be done but priuately and without solemnity but he dares not to affirme that he had no assistants or communicants which is that which he should or else the place makes not to the purpose And indeede we may presume the contrary forasmuch as S Austin speakes of a great house and of some great person of quality that sent not for a Minister of the Church of Carthage to celebrate the holy Sacrament Nusquam expresse legimus a veter ibus oblatum sacrificium sine communione alâ—cuius ve aliquorum to leaue him alone without assistants or communicants and indeede Bellarmine confesseth the impertinency of this place lib. 2. de Missa cap. 9. where he acknowledgeth That there is no expresse place sound where the auncrents haue offered the Sacrifice without some Communicants The common excuse and the same which the Councel of Trent vseth in the seuenth Session is that it comes to passe through the indeuotion of the people which speech doth both confes and yet approue the abuse for the same Councell addeth The holy Councell doth not forbid those Masses wherein the Priest alone doth communicate sacramentally as priuate and vnlawfull but doth approue and commend them which their practise doth proue for if it be through the want of deuotion in the people why doe they not endeauour the remedie for if there be any question of casting into the boxe if any busines fall out concerning tithes and offerings they easily finde the meanes to holde the people in the humor of contribution neither do I finde that the Cardinalls and Bishops doe communicate ofâ—ener then the people For the Priests hinder the people from assisting them because they say an infinite number of Masses in priuate and vpon the sudden of which they giue no warning For three sundry persons will one Priest dispatch three Masses to euery one his own that each of them may pay for a whole Masse And they that will haue yearely Masses doe found yearely Pensions for neuer was any priuate Masse said for him that gaue nothing they vse not to make God for nothing Masses are sold for more or lesse according to the prouision that is made if one pay for one Masse is it any reason that another should equally share with him Yea they buy Masses for the soules of young children dying soone after baptisme which they hold must needes be in Paradice for if Masses doe no good to them that are dead yet they profite those that are aliue Doubtlesse it is couereousnesse that hath hatched this abuse and superstition hath fomented it These men do againe reply although but weakly for say they if no Communicants offer themselues must the Sacrifice be therefore discontinued Let them heare S. Chrysostome thundring thereupon in the third Homily vpon the Ephesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O custome O presumption in vaine is Sacrifice daily offered in vaine doe we stand at the Altar and none communicate And a little after Whosoeuer doth not communicate in these mysteries is impudent and rash in standing by And further adde that they do falsly presume that the holy supper is a Sacrifice in that sense which they take the word Sacrifice as we shal presently see Now let vs heare the testimonies of the Auncients Peracta consecratione omnes communic ent qui noluerint Ecclesiasticis carere liminibus Sic enim Apostoli sta tuerunt Sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia Tanta in altario holocausta offerantur quanta populo sufficere debeant c. The auncient rule of the Church of the Citie of Rome which is found in the second Distinction of the consecration vnder the name of Anaclet in the Canon Peracta is this The consecration being ended let all those communicate that will not be excluded out of the bounds of the Church for so haue the Apostles ordained and the Church of Rome obserueth And in the Canon Tribus gradibus of the same Distinction Let as many offerings be laid vpon the Table as will serue for all the people to communicate and if any doe remaine let them not be kept vntill the morrow And in the first Distinction of the Consecration in the Canon Hoc quoque the Pope speakes thus It is ordained that no Priest presume to celebrate the solemnities of the Masse if he haue not two others that may answere him and that the Priest be the third because when he saith in the plurall number The Lord be with you and that which he saith in secret pray for me it is apparantly requisite that answere be made to his salutation Iustin Martyr in the second of his Apologie The Deacons doe disiribute the bread to euery one that is present Ignatius in the Epistle to the Philadelphians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dominica Coena omnibus debet esse communis One loafe hath beene broken to all S. Ierome vpon the first to the Corinth cap. II. The supper of the Lord ought to be common vnto all The Reader may compare this word the common Supper with the priuate Masse The Authour of the Constitutions ascribed vnto Clement lib. 2. cap. 61. Let euery one receiue the bodie of the Lord. And so haue all the auncient Liturgies Accipiant singuli per se Dominicum corpus although they be much falsified yea and some traces thereof are to be seene in the Masse where the Priest though he be alone doth alwaies speake as vnto many communicants Cum ex more Diaconus clamaret Si quis non communi at det locum Gregory the first Bishop of Rome in the second booke of his Dialogues chap. 13. saith that the Deacon according to the custome crieth if there be any that doth not communicate let him depart And this was sixe hundred yeares after Christ and we could disscend lower But this sufficeth against a man that feares the triall who being not able to alleadge against the King of great Britaine any syllable of Scripture no nor any of the Auncients that speake of priuate Masses doth flie from the matter and desperately
signified He there alleadgeth also S. Ambrose who saith 2. de Consecrat Can. In Christo ex Ambrosio in Epist ad Hebr. We continually offer this is done in remembrance of his death this is one selfe Sacrifice and not many how is it onely one and not many Because Iesus Christ hath beene sacrificed onely once but this sacrifice is done for example of that other Thom as Aquinas hath followed Lombard and decided this question tertia parte Summae Quaest 83. art 1. where he saith that the celebration of the Sacrament is called a Sacrifice for two reasons first because according to S. Austin the signes are called by the name of the things signified secondly because by the Sacrament we are made partakers of the death of Christ He forgot the reason which now they say is the principall to wit that it is because that Iesus Christ is really sacrificed vnder the formes of bread for a sacrifice truely propitiatory ARTICLE X. Of the Communion vnder one kinde The KINGS Confession ANd such are the Amputation of the one halfe of the Sacrament from the people Hereunto Mr. Coeffeteau opposeth the second of the Acts where saith he the Apostles administred this Sacrament vnder one kinde onely for there it is said that the faithfull continued in the doctrine of the Apostles and in fellowship and breaking of bread That our chiefe Doctors confesse that this place must be vnderstood of the Sacrament and yet there is no mention but of one kinde of bread vnlesse his Maiesty saith he who adoreth the sufficiency of the Scripture will make a supplement of something to be added thereunto He addeth that Christ is wholly and entier vnder euery kinde and that the people receiue him neuerthelesse That the Church by this meanes hath prouided against vnreuerent behauiours and preuented the heresie of those that beleeued not that the bloud was together with the body vnder the kinde of bread He affirmeth that heretofore it was free to receiue the communion vnder one or both kindes because the faithfull sometimes carried the Eucharist home to their houses and toooke it not but when they might commodiously doe it and they did it say they for the most part vnder the kinde of bread only and that Athanasius witnesseth that the Communion Cup was not vsed out of the Church that they communicated among themselues vnder one kinde that they might also doe it in publique For thus saith S. Ierome Hierom in Apol. ad Pammachiū Is Christ another in publique then in a priuate house that which is not to be tolerated in the Church is not the rather permitted in a house that the Ministers complayning of the mutilation of one kinde haue in the meane time destroyed the essence of the Sacrament remouing the body of the Lord as farre from the Sacrament as heauen from the earth which is to belye the Sonne of God who saith This is my body c. Before we make answere to the place of the second of the Acts the Reader shall obserue The Answere that this is the first place of Scripture which this Doctor hath alleadged wherein his wisedome hath fayled him for had hee continued not to alleadge any scripture at all an ignorant Reader would haue thought it had not beene necessary but seeing him beginne here to speake of the word of God doubtlesse he will wonder that in so many Controuersies handled heretofore hee hath heard nothing alleadged out of Gods word And indeede the doctrine of saluation was neuer so prophanely handled for GOD is become suspected and his bookes of faith haue now no credite in controuersies This is a great grace which they doe vnto the word of God if after a Legend of reasons and humane allegations at length some short sentence is casually produced and not without cause for why then is it not more fauorable to his Holinesse Empire But let vs heare this place In the second of the Acts ver 42. it is said that the Disciples continued together in the Doctrine of the Apostles and in the Communion and breaking of bread It is not there said that the people participated in the Cup therefore they communicated onely vnder one kinde of bread 1 This coniecture is too light by a great many graines and which is more it makes against the Church of Rome which beleeueth that the Pastors ought necessarily to take it in both kindes Now in this passage it is not said that the Pastors did participate in the Cup and they are no more mentioned then are the people therefore should it follow that the Pastors also did not participate in the cup. 2 This also is a weake kinde of Argumentation to say that in the second of the Acts there is nothing mentioned beside breaking of bread that therfore the Cup was not vsed If I should say that being inuited by such a one I haue eaten with him doth it follow that I haue not drunke although I spake not of it This errour proceedeth from ignorance of the scripture phrase which by the breaking of bread and by eating of bread doth vsually vnderstand the whole banquet and all kinde of sustenance So Gen. 31.54 Iacob inuiteth his brethren to eate breade See Genes 37.25 Matth. 15.2 and sundry other places We cannot be accused by this manner of speakking to adde vnto the Scripture the sufficiencie whereof we defend against our aduersaries For if in this place there be no mention of the Cup it sufficeth that it is spoken of in other places And to ioyne diuers places together which speake of the same thing is not to adde vnto the Scripture Besides it is not credible that the Apostles hauing so expresly receiued this commaundement to drinke all of the Cup would infringe the same Againe when we speake of the sufficiency of the Scriptures our meaning is not that the Scripture recyting a story vnto vs doth specifie all the particularities of that which happened Onely we say that in things which it commandeth vs to beleeue and doe it doth sufficiently instruct vs vnto saluation Now to know what is to be beleeued and done in this sacrament we must learne it out of the institution of the same and out of the expresse commandements of Christ and his Apostles 1 For Iesus Christ instituting this sacrament among his Disciples said vnto them Drinke ye all of this That is Lib. 1. de corpore Christi cap. 15. as saith Paschasius aswell the Ministers as the other beleeuers They answere that all those to whom our Sauior spake were Pastors and therfore this commaundement was giuen onely vnto the Pastors Which if it be so by the same reason also the Pastors onely must eate of the bread for if in these wordes Drinke ye all of this Christ spake to none but to the Pastors then certainly in these words Take eate he speaks also vnto the Pastors if this be so let them tel me where is the commandement which bindeth the
which did neyther sweat nor suffer Which of these two was our Sauiour If hee bee but one how is he contrary to himselfe For we haue shewed else where that the Distinction of diuers respects cannot be but when onething is compared to diuers things at one time as when one and the same man is poore and rich little and great in comparison of diuers persons But here they apply these diuers respects to the body of Iesus Christ without comparing him to any other body nay they oppose him to himselfe That I may not further say that this doctrine doth annihilate the body of our Lord by being receiued into the stomacke for when the formes are altered in the stomacke by the digestion they say that the body of the Lord is no longer there neyther yet is it come forth it must follow then that eyther it is reduced to nothing or changed into something else Both the one and the other are alike blasphemous ARTICLE XII Touching the Adoration of the Host THe Confession of the Kings Booke doth place among the new inuentions of the Church of Rome The Adoration of the Host and the Eleuation which is made to haue it adored This poynt is important and which doth surprise our spirits with a heauinesse mixt with horrour when at the sound of a little Bell the Priest lifteth vp the breade and euery man prostrateth himselfe to adore it Or when the people doth not let to kneele in the dyrt to adore their God which passeth along the street inclosed in a Pixe or Boxe It had beene greatly therefore to haue beene wished that Coeffeteau could haue produced some commandement of God for the same or some example of the Apostles but that could he not doe neyther hath any man done it hithervnto He commeth therefore to the Fathers and produceth for the same three passages the one of Chrysostome in his foure and twentieth Homily vpon the first to the Corinth the other of S. Ambrose in his third booke of the Sacraments chap. 12. And the last of S. Austin vpon the foure-score and eighteene Psalme All three exhort the faithful to adore the flesh of Iesus Christ and that which is more to adore him in the Eucharist Neuer did man more abuse his Reader and he seemeth to thinke that we are beside our selues for is there any thing in all this which we doe not willingly graunt him Is there any amongst vs who hath euer denied that wee ought not to adore the flesh of Iesus Christ Yea who hath euer doubted that we ought not to adore him in the Eucharist Ought not God the Father also to be adored And what is this to the purpose to inclose Iesus Christ vnder formes He that doth adore Iesus Christ in the Eucharist doth not for al that adore that which the Priest holdeth in his hand but he adoreth Iesus Christ which is in heauen Of these three places that which our aduersaries doe most presse is the place of S. Austin vpon the foure-score and eyghteene Psalme where hee saith that no man doth eate this flesh vnlesse hee haue first adored it Nemo carnem illam manducat nisi prius adorauerit An excellent passage For doth not S. Austin speake of the true and serious adoration Iudas then did not eate this flesh for he did not adore it According to this rule the Hypocrites who partake of the Sacrament doe not eate the flesh of the Lord for they doe not adore it Now what it is to eate the flesh of the Lord himselfe hath tolde vs as hath beene before alleadged Lib. 3. de Doctr. Christ cap 16. That to eate his flesh is a figure which signifieth to communicate of his passion and to meditate thereof in our memories And as he speaketh in his twenty sixe Tract vpon S. Iohn To beleeue in him is to eate the bread of life Credere in eum hoc est manducare panem vivumâ—qui credit in eum manducat eum he that doth beleeue in him doth eate him We hoped then that Coeffeteau would here haue produced the publique customes to shewe that it was then the custome to adore the Host which the Priest doth holde vp with diuine worship called Latria but he hath not beene able to finde any Dionysius who in his Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy discribeth very exactly the forme of the publique seruice which was some foure hundred yeares after Iesus Christ and the Apostolical constitutions of Clement where all the Ceremony of that time is depainted and the auncient Liturgies howsoeuer fouly falsified doe in no wise speake of this adoration of the Host Theodoret saith indeede that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the signes are reuerenced This word Signes sheweth sufficiently that he doth not speake of diuine adoration which they call Cultus Latriae For that should be impiety ARTICLE XIII Touching the Eleuation of the Host to haue it to be Adored THe King of great Britaine demaunded proofes out of the fiue first ages or first fiue hundred yeares after Christ that is to say aswell Scripture as the auncient Doctors by which it might appeare that Iesus Christ or his Apostles made eleuation of the host Hereat Coeffeteau holdeth his peace Fol. 50. pag. 2. and in stead thereof saith that the auncient Church did shew the mysteries or sacraments to the people by drawing a Vaile or Curtaine from before the Table which is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and he hath learned that out of my booke of the Apology of the Lords Supper Chrysostome in his third Homily vpon the Epistle to the Ephesians When thou shalt see the double Curtaines to be drawne then thinke that heauen doth open and inlarge it selfe And Dionysius in his Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy The Bishop discouereth and setteth out to open view the thing celebrated by the signes holily proposed And Basil in like manner in his booke of the holy Ghost Who is it of the Saints who hath left in writing the wordes of the prayer when they shew abroad the bread of the Eucharist and the Cup of blessing This vncouering of the Sacrament was done saith Coeffeteau to cause it to be adored and as he speaketh this without all proofe so doth he it most falsely and was not able to alleadge any one authority where mention is made eyther of the eleuation or of the Adoration of the host but in stead thereof he bringeth certaine passages which speake of the vncouering of the bread and of the drawing of a Curtaine ARTICLE XIIII Touching the carrying of God in the Procession The KINGS Confession Pope Vrbane the fourth instituted this feast in the yeare 1264. THe God-feast or Corpus Christi day and the walking or Circumportation of the Sacrament in procession is of this ranck and the King of great Britaine doth place it among the Nouelties Hereupon Coeffeteau fearing the touch and triall maketh an honest retreat without standing vpon his defence for he onely saith Fol 51
We rancke among the holy customes of the Church this fashion of carrying the body of our Lord in the most solemne supplications and Processions he tels vs his opinion and we knew it well enough before We expected that he should haue taught vs not what himselfe beleeueth but why he beleeueth it when this custome began who was the authour of it if it haue any ground in the word of God or in the Fathers Of all this not a word a Turke or a Iew might defend himselfe in like manner we beleeue we affirme And should he then set vpon a King by saying so little to the purpose ARTICLE XV. Touching workes of Supererogation and of Superabounding satisfactions and of the treasure of the Church The KINGS Confession SVch are the workes of Supererogation which are rightly called the treasure of the Church The Doctor Coeffeteau answereth We know no such matter For we call workes of Supererogation those which haue for their obiect the Euangelicall Counsels to the which all Christians are not bound as for a man to sell all his goods and to giue them to the poore c. And of these sayth he we doe not make any treasure but that which is gathered and layd vp in heauen But as touching the treasure of Indulgences Coeffeteau saith that it is composed of the Superaboundance of the merites of Iesus Christ and of the Satisfactions of the Saints who haue suffered more then they deserued as of the holy Virgin and other Saints God not permitting that any thing of their sorrowes or sufferings should perish it being a thing iust and reasonable that they should serue to the communion of the Saints as members of the same body In all this not a word of scripture no authority of the Auncients The Answere no example of Antiquity Coeffeteau onely telleth vs his opinion I might satisfiè him with like reason by opposing our opinion but he shall not so lightly goe away with the matter For this is one of the Cankers of the body of the Church of Rome one of the principal pieces of the mystery of iniquity The opinion of the Church of Rome according as Bellarmine doth represent it in the seuenth and eight Chapters of his booke of Monkes is that there are certaine excellent workes which are called Counsels of perfection which God doth not command but doth only counsell workes which as they are more cumbersome and vneasie to be done so also being performed they are more perfect and more excellent then all that GOD hath commanded in his Law more then to loue God with all his heart and his neighbour as himselfe Workes to which a man is not bound and if he do them not he is not punishable but in obseruing them he getteth a degree of glory aboue the common sort Such are perpetuall Virginity Martyrdome and the distribution of all his goods to the poore But especially the vowes of Obedience of Pouerty and Chastitie which are the three vowes of the Monkes whose expresse profession it is to doe workes of Supererogation by the merite of which they shall gaine in Paradise an eminent degree of glory aboue the popular Saints and the Communalty of soules All this being but a swolne Blister of pride we will pricke it and abate it with the worde of God And indeede a man had need read this often ouer before he shall finde any thing relishing of the spirite of God 1 It is a thing almost incredible that there are any men to be found which thinke themselues to be more perfect then God hath commanded Seeing that Iesus Christ Matth. 5. dooth giue vs this commandement Be you perfect as your father which is in heauen is perfect Is there any man that can be more perfect then God For although no man can euer approach to his perfection yet will he haue vs to conforme our selues to his example So that amongst men he shall be the most perfect who shall most frame himselfe thereunto Now that this is an expresse commandement and a perfection necessarily required Bellarmine himselfe dooth acknowledge it chap. 13. of Monks where notwithstanding he doth malitiously loppe off these last wordes § Tertio As my father which is in heauen is perfect 2 With like pride these people will be more perfect then Iesus Christ whose righteousnesse in regard of his humanity consisted in nothing else then in doing the will of his Father And therefore he saith Heb. 10. Here I am O Lord to doe thy will And Galat. 4. He was made subiect to the law to the end that he might redeeme them which were vnder the law 3 All the perfection and righteousnesse likewise of the Angels consisteth onely in executing the commaundements of God Psal 103. You mightie Angels that excell in vertue you that doe his commaundement in obeying the voyce of his wordes ye his seruants that doe his pleasure It is not found that they do any works of supererogation And by that reason the Angelical perfection should be inferior to the Monasticall Me thinks that the Capuchins by calling themselues Angels Arch Angels Spirits Cherubin or Seraphin Friars illuminated Fathers c. haue done wrong to their worth and dignity by taking names too base for them and inferiour to their Capuchine perfection 4 I adde that this word of Counsell of Perfection is iniurious against the law of God and accuseth it of imperfection for it is as much to say that the law is not a perfect rule of Righteousnesse seeing that man a weake and sinfull creature can surpasse it and doe workes much better then it commaundeth That wealth is not great which is surmounted by pouerty It is but a weake and feeble righteousnesse which can be exceeded by sinners If besides the law there haue beene counsels of perfection what doth thence follow but that the law of God is a rule of imperfection 5 But let vs heare a little what are the commaundements of God Iesus Christ Ioh. 13. speaketh thus A new commaundement giue I you that you loue one another as I haue loued you Where is the man so much puffed vp with his owne merites that can surpasse this loue Or loue his neighbour more then Iesus Christ hath loued vs He being righteous hauing giuen his life for sinners The authour of life for mortall men The Sonne of God for the slaues of the Diuell to make them his seruants yea his friendes yea his brethren yea his Spouse yea his body yea one with him These be depths that cannot be fathomed but depths of his loue and grace All the feruor of our charity is but coldnesse in comparison of it how farre then from doing any thing ouer and aboue it 6 God commaundeth in his law that we should loue him with all our heart and with all our strength He commaundeth all that we can doe we cannot then doe more then he commaundeth to say that a man can loue God more then he can is to
Confession TOuching the Reliques of Saints if I had any such that I were assured were members of their bodies I would honourably burie them and not giue them the reward of condemned mens members which are only ordained to be depriued of buriall But for worshipping eyther them or Images I must account it damnable Idolatry Vnto this doth Doctor Coeffeteau oppose foure passages of the Fathers alleadging S. Ierome dissputing against Vigilantius for the Reliques of Saint Ambrose in his Sermon of S. Nazarius and S. Celsus saying in many places that he honoureth the bodies of Saints S. Chrysostome who in his Homily of S. Iuuentius and Maximus saith that men doe visite and adorue their Tombes and touch their Reliques with faith to the end they may receiue some blessing thereby S. Augustine in the two and twentieth booke of the City of God speaking of three persons that were cured with the touch of certaine Reliques He alleadgeth no one testimony of holy Scripture it hath no voyce in the Chapter and yet hee skips at once ouer the first foure hundred yeares after Christ for the auncientest of these foure wrote about the end of the fouth age 1 To begin then with the word of God Wee read in the olde Testament that the bodies of the holy Patriarches haue beene enterred Gen. 50.25 and buried in the Sepulchres of their Fathers Ioseph when he died gaue order that his bones should be kept till their departure out of Egypt for he desired that the keeping of his bones should be an instruction to continue the hope of their deliuerance but of any worship done vnto his bones there is no mention at all 2 When Moses died vpon the mountaine of Nebo Deut. 34.6 God would not suffer the Israelites to know the place of his buriall the reason being doubtlesse a feare that they would haue Idolatrously abused his bodie 3 In the first booke of Kings chap. 13. God raised a dead man by the vertue of Elizeus his touching of the dead body the Lord intending by this Miracle to authorize the doctrine of his faithfull seruant But we finde not at all that the body of Elizeus was for this taken out of his graue neyther that the people did kneele to his bones that they brought any offerings vnto it or that they kissed or carried it in procession Ver. 17 4 In the second booke of Kings cap. 23 King Iosias forbids the digging vp of the bones of a deceased Prophet but will haue them left in the Sepulchre He doth not then commaund any transportation of his bones or to yeelde any veneration or worship or oblation or adoration Ver 12 5 In the ninteenth of the Acts there are cures wrought by touching of the Kerchiefes brought from S. Paul yet is not the linnen put apart for a relique nor is there any ceremony done vntoit For the Miracles were not wrought by any vertue of the linnen but by the power of God who by these Miracles confirmed the preaching of his holy Apostle 6 Therefore Esay 8.19.20 the Prophet hauing reproued those that went from the liuing to the dead sends vs to the law and the testimony if wee will haue the light of heauen to shine vpon vs. 7 To be short our aduersaries finde not one sillable in the word of God nor any example of any religious seruice or adoration of Reliques For it is vntruely affirmed by Bellarmine that the Scripture alloweth the religious worship performed to our * Lib. de reliquijs sanctorum cap. 4 §. Ad tertium Seriptura approbat cultum Sepulchri fimbrie Christa Item vmbrae Petri sudariorum semicinctâ—orum Pauli Sauiors Sepulchre and to the hemme of his garment and to Peters shadow and Pauls Kercheifes How should it approue that whereof it makes no mention at all Why doth he not alleadge some passage of Scripture wherein the worship or veneration of the linnen or shadowes or Sepulchres is mentioned who will be perswaded that a learned man affirming a matter so full of vntruth should haue any conscience in him So in the beginning of the third Chapter hee falsely alleadgeth these wordes out of the eleuenth of Esay ver 10. His Sepulchre shall be glorious for it is in the Hebrew his rest shall be glorious whereunto let this be added that there is no word in that place of any worship performed to this Sepulchre Now that the point in difference betweene vs may be vnderstood wee dispute not whether the bodies of Saints and Martyrs may be reserued respectiuely or in case their Sepulchres were vndecently placed or ridiculously exposed to prophane insolencies whether it be lawfull to remoue their bodies to some other place for thus farre we agree And his Maiesty of England protesteth that if hee certainely knew any Reliques which were indeede the body of any Saint he would honourably burie them and keepe them with respect for if men doe curiously affect the sight of the monuments of auncient Kings or pagan Emperours who should be so prophane as not to desire the sight of the Tombs of the Apostles and of those sacred lights whose glory shineth euen after their death Or who in this regard would not be touched with a louing respect to them and their memory But the question is whether wee must performe any seruice to these Reliques or must adore them or speake to things without life or offer vnto bones or clothes or whether God haue commaunded to lay them vpon Altars or carry them in procession For the Conuenticle held at Nice Pag 104 of the Colen Edition Ossa cineres pannos sanguinem sepulera denique martyrum adoremus about the yeare 789. which the Church of Rome reckoneth for a generall Councell in the fourth Act willeth that the bones ashes and the ragges be adored And Bellarmine in the fourth chapter * §. Quod autem Chrysostemê° Sermone in Sanctos Iuuentium Maximum dicit Tumulos Martyrum adoremus of his booke of Reliques proueth the adoration of Reliques by these wordes of Chrysostome in his Sermon of Iuuentius and Maximus Tumulos Martyrum adoremus Let vs adore the Monuments of Martyrs but the words in Chrysostome are Tumulos Martyrum adornemus Let vs adorne the monuments of Martyrs which is a horrible falsification but this is ordinary with the Cardinall whereof Coeffeteau himselfe is euen ashamed for alleadging the same passage he translates it faithfully Fol. 55. pag. 2. Let vs adorne their monuments The same Cardinall about the end of the second chapter sayth We adore not Reliques as God then by his owne confession he worshippeth Reliques but it is with an inferiour adoration Now wee require our aduersaries to shew vs some commaundement of God or some example out of the holy Historie for this adoration and religious worship for whatsoeuer distinction of worship they may produce is alwaies such a seruice and religious worship as God hath not commaunded and is consequently comprised vnder that