Of the principall pointes which are at this day in controuersie concerning the holy Supper of Iesus Christ and the Masse of the Romaine Church and of the resolution of them ¶ The first Booke Chapter 1. Of the principal reasons whereupō they ground them selues which mainteine the Masse and of the waight of them IT is no maruell if they which haue bene nourished vnder the Masse euē from their childhode are greatly offended when they heare the same blamed and condemned as a false seruice by the which God is dishonoured and blasphemed seing that the same hath bene accompted heretofore for the most holy thing that euer was in the worlde since the first creation thereof And in deede they should haue iust cause to be offended in that behalfe if the reasons which cause them to haue such opinion of the holines thereof were so certaine true as they thinke them to be and cause them selues to beleue for so much as they haue bene so instructed For first they haue bene taught that it was instituted and celebrated by Iesus Christe him selfe and afterward continued by his Apostles consequently by al their successours from age to age euen from the first institution of the same euen vntil our time And then they do consider the matter whereof al the pieces of the same are composed the which they doe thinke to be all taken out of the holy Scripture because that some of those pieces are taken from thence And therefore they say Haue you not in it the Epistle the Gospell and the Pater noster and the Credo Are not these good things Beholde then three reasons of very great apparauntes which they doe alledge for them selues of the which the first is taken of the institution of the Masse and of the authour of the same and the second of his long continuance which is as they thinke euen from the death and passion of Iesus Christe vntill our age the third is taken of the matter of the good and holy wordes things whereof it is cōposed If all these reasons were true and well grounded vpon trueth they were worthy of great accompt For for the first how great a crime is it to reiect and condemne the ordinaunces of the Sonne of God And afterward what a pride were it to make so small accompt of the common consent of the whole Church of God and of so many holy men and of so long a time And on the other side shoulde they bee accompted for Christians which do reiect the expressed word of God Chapter .ii. Of the examination of the reasons before alleadged and whether the Sacrament of the holy Supper of the Lord and the Sacramēt of the Altar and the Masse of the Romaine Church be one verie thing or els be things different and contrary SEeing then that they alleadge such reasons that they giue them so goodly a shewe it resteth nowe to consider whether they bee true or false For if they be true they haue then wonne their processe But if they be false they may not finde it straunge at all if that a man doe discouer the falshod which hindereth the knowledge of the truth of this matter And therefore so farre forth as it toucheth the institution of the Masse and the authour of the same we doe first aske them what it is that they do vnderstand by this word Masse for if they vnderstand by the same the Sacramēt of the holy supper of the Lorde we will easely graunt them that Iesus Christ him selfe did institute and administer the same holy Sacrament and gaue commaundement to his Apostles and to all their true successours to do the like euen as he did in the institution and administration of the same and that they haue done it according to the cōmandement which was giuen vnto thē But if they vnderstand by this worde Masse such a seruice as is that which at this day is so called in the Church that is called Catholike Romaine wee do not onely then not graunt that Iesus Christe did euer institute that Masse nor that euer the Apostles or their true successours did euer celebrate such an one but that which more is we say that so farre of it is that such a Masse may be the holy sacramēt of the supper instituted by Iesus Christ that on the contrary the ordinance of the Lorde is there wholy ouerthrowē with the whole forme of the holy supper and of the diuine seruice which hath alwayes bene obserued in the true ancient Church by meane of the reasons which I will anon yeelde Chapter .iii. VVhether Iesus Christ or his Apostles did euer ordeine saye or celebrate the Masse and of the ancientie of the same and of the workmen which layed their handes to the framing thereof and of the pieces which haue bene added vnto it by succession of time THus much touching the foundation of their first reason which is the strongest the most apparant that they haue For if they cannot shew that their Masse is of the institution of Iesus Christ and of the ordinance of God it must then necessarily be placed amongst the inuentions and traditions of men by the which God him selfe doth witnes not onely by the mouth of the Prophet Isai but also by that of his own sonne Iesus Christ that he is serued in vaine Wherefore if this first foundation be already ouerthrowen the second which is founded vpon the same will also be forthwith ouerthrowen For if Iesus Christ did not institute such a Masse nor his Apostles their true successors did euer celebrate or knowe such an one at the least for the time of six hundreth yeres after the ascension of our Lord Iesus Christ where is that whereupon they will builde the auncientie thereof and the long and cōtinual succession and the common and publique consent of all the Church for so long a time wherewith they make them selues so great a buckler It is here then needefull to enquire and to consider what difference there is betweene the Sacrament of the supper ordeined by Iesus Christe and that which is called the sacrament of the Altar in the Romish Church and how long time the holy supper of the Lorde did remaine whole and perfect and when it began to be changed corrupted ouerthrowen and conuerted into the same fashion that it nowe is in the Masse of the Romaine Church For their owne doctours can not deny but that since the time of Iesus Christ and of his Apostles and of the first and most auncient Christian Church they haue chaunged and added much to the first institution of the Lord and in the forme of the administration of this holy Sacrament the which the Apostles did vse For this cause no one but the most shamelesse amōgst thē dare saye openly that Iesus Christ did ordeine make the Masse but they saye that he gaue onely the matter and that afterward the Church gaue it the fashion by the successours of
is ioyned vnto it not somuch because it is spokē but because it is beleued He doth not deny but that the element is made a sacrament by the word because it is spokē pronounced but it is chiefly because that men do beleue the same word For men could not beleue it if it were not declared vnto thē which should ought to beleue it But his only meaning is that it is not enough to speake pronounce it but that it must also be receyued by faith From whēce it foloweth also that it must needes be that it be declared vnderstood For otherwise men could not beleue cōsidering that faith can not be faith without the vnderstanding the knowledge of the things which are set forth vnto men by the worde of God. Note And thereby it is easie to iudge that the word is not of effect in the sacraments that they cannot be made sacramentes by the same if it be not declared to those which are capable of it For the signes cānot beleeue the word wherefore it is not for their cause that the word is ioyned vnto them but in respect of those vnto whō they are administred to the end that they may know what the vse of them is to what ende they are administred vnto them For hee that should pronounce the wordes only ouer the signes in steade of declaring them to the people to whom the sacramentes doe belong it should be to conuert the sacramentes into a maner of sorcerie of charmes and of enchantments against the expressed word of God ▪ Chapter xxi Whether the Sacraments and their vertue do depend as well of the persons which doe administer them as of those to whom they are administred BVt they may replie that if it were so as I say according to the testimonie of Saint Augustine the sacraments and the vertue and the efficacie of them should depend more vpon the faith of thē to whom thei should be administred then vpon the ordinance and the word of God whereupon they are builded Whereunto I answer that so farre it is of from me so to cōclude that I say yet further that they doe not onely not depend at all vpon those vnto whom they are administred neither yet vpon the very ministers which do administer them For albeit the minister were as vnfaithfull as Iudas was yea thorowly an Atheist and of the worst conscience of the world that notwithstanding the sacraments which they should administer should be no lesse sacraments then if a very Apostle of Christ or some other very holy personage should administer them prouided that such a minister should be called by lawful vocation according to the order which the Lorde hath ordained in his Church and that he should administer the sacramentes in the very true maner that they haue bene ordeined by the Lorde without adding or diminishing changing disguising and counterfaiting in any thing which belongeth to their proper nature and substance Note For if their vertue and efficacie should depend of him that doth administer them in what case should the Churche be For what assurāce might she haue whether the sacraments which are administred vnto her be true sacraments or no if it were so that their assurance were builded in such matter vpon the faith of her ministers For shee is not God which only knoweth the hearts whereby to discerne them Wherefore if her assurance be not better grounded then vpon the faith of the ministers it must nedes be that she should remaine alway in doubt for so much as she can not iudge of the hearts of men nor consequently of the faith or vnfaithfulnesse which may be in them From whence it should folowe that she should alway remaine in doubt consequētly that she should not receiue any sacrament in assured faith for so much as faith is so contrary to doubt as is trust and assurance Wherefore they may in no wyse agree together And therefore in such a case the Churche needeth not but to haue a regarde to three pointes The first is whether the Lord did ordeine the Sacramentes which are set foorth vnto her in his name The seconde whether hee that doeth administer them bee called by lawfull vocation to that charge to administer them The thirde whether hee doeth administer them according to the ordinaunce of the Lorde or no or whether hee doe disguise and peruerte them or whether hee doe administer others in the steade of them For as there ought nothing to be attempted in the Churche without lawfull vocation euen so the onely vocation is not sufficient if the charge by her committed be not executed according to the Lordes ordinance For albeit that a man shal be called by lawfull vocation hee may very well straye afterwarde and may passe the limittes thereof and doe cleane contrary to his duetie but hee shall not bee allowed therein And therefore it behoueth euery man herein to take good heed that hee be not deceiued For if the Minister doe deliuer any other woorde then that which God hath reuealed vnto vs in his holy scriptures and any other Sacramentes then those which the Lorde hath ordained and in any other sorte hee may well boaste of his calling for that shall not at all let but that hee is a false minister and a seducer in that behalfe and that those vnto whome hee shall administer be not seduced and deceiued by him For his vocation may not exempt him but so farre forth as hee followeth the same and not at all in that wherein he doeth contrary thereunto On the contrarie if he doe administer the woorde and the Sacramentes which hee ought to doe and in such sorte as the Lorde hath commaunded his infidelitie and wicked life shall not let but that which is of God shall bee alwaye of God and shall alwayes haue his vertue and his efficacie in those which are made capable by him because that that which the Lorde hath ordayned taketh his vertue and force of him and not at all of the Minister which is but the instrument which of him selfe can doe nothing but so farre foorth as the Lorde shall worke by him And therefore the Gospell which Iudas preached was no lesse the Gospell then that which was preached by the other Apostles his fellowes for so much as hee was called to the same ministerie with them This notwithstanding Iesus Christe yet in those dayes sayde that Iudas was a Deuill Hee was then a Deuill and an Apostle both together An Apostle by meane of his vocation and for so much as hee dyd execute it according to the charge that was committed vnto him and a Deuill in respect of his hypocrisie and of his infidelitie couetousnesse and malice If then during the time that he was yet an Apostle hee should haue administred the supper in such sort as Iesus Christ did ordeine and administer the same it shoulde haue bene no less◠the Lordes supper then if Saint Peter or some other of the Apostles had administred the same ▪ On the other side if Saint Peter him self or any other of the Apostles yea a very Angel should administer it in that sort as it is at this day administred
Romaine masse the which albeit that it be not of the proper substance of the Supper yet for all that I thought good to set forth the same because that the auncient Church was not without these Collects namely when they did celebrate the supper of that which they did also leuy the bread the wine that they did distribute to the faithfull in the fame the which were there dedicated coÌ„secrated in such sort as I haue here tofore already declared to be there signes of the body of the bloud of the Lorde Chapter xxi A briefe gathering of the matters handled in this booke I Do omit very many other points forsomuch as I wold only bring forth such as were most principal most intolerable the which we may in no wise allowe without reiecting of Iesus Christ ouerthrowing wholy al the sacrament of the holy supper obseruation therem of the true auncieÌ„t Church No more haue I also determined to make many proofs the more to confirme that which I haue set forth against the points that which we do condemne aswel because that the arguments which I haue brought forth to the same purpose may suffice such as wil be satiffied with reason and will not fight against all manyfest trueth as for that also that I haue handled these matters very largely in diuers other bookes in the which men shal finde arguments testimonies sufficient to confirme more largely that which I haue here handled more briefely And forsomuch as the Romaine doctors and catholikes doe make their chiefe buckler of the sacrifice and of the order of Melchisedec for the defence of their masse and of the sacrifice of the same I haue made an other booke of purpose vpon that matter in the which I doe shewe by apparant testimonies arguments taken out of the holy scriptures howe that the foundation which they lay vpon that order of Melchisedec doeth more shake downe the building which they do build thereupon theÌ„ it doth sustaine it how contrary it is to the Sacrifices that they would build thereupon Wherefore I will nowe end this treatise Note wherein I haue first set foorth the principal reasons which mought leade the Romaine catholikes to maintaine their masse as they do maintaine it to the which I haue made answere And then I haue set forth the points which doe leade the catholikes of the reformed Church to reiect the same being such as it is at this present in the Romaine Church For as I haue already declared wee are not at all in controuersie concerning the institution and obseruation of the Sacrament of the Supper the which we doe all confesse but the different is whether the masse such as it is at this day in vse in the Romaine Church be this Sacrament of the holy Supper or no whether it be the true supper or else if they wil cal it the masse of the true auncieÌ„t Church or else an other bastard masse into the 〈…〉 the supper of the Lorde â—â—d the forme 〈◊〉 diuine seruice of the true auncient Châ—â—◠〈◊〉 bene conuerted and transformed 〈…〉 I haue reduced these principal 〈…〉 â—â—ereof we are in controuersie with 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—raine catholikes and the which I haue hanâ—â—ed here before first into fiue of the which I haue also deuided some into diuers articles in sort that in the whole I make to the nomber of xii by that order that they are set downe in the table placed in the be ginning of this booke after the Aduertisement FINIS Isai 29. Mat. 15 Mark. 7 â—â—maunde â—â—ndry â—â—â—nes of 〈◊〉 supper Of goâ—◠〈◊〉 Instruâ—â—tion Similitude â—ee â—â—e 1. 〈◊〉 1. â—ee 5. pointâ— Deut. 4 1â— Apoc. 22. Jos 1. Eze. 10. 1. Cor. 11. â—or 12. â—oc 22. â—â—te well 〈◊〉 â—onclusioÌ„ â— Cor. 11. High masâ—â—s Iustiniaâ— new Const 123. In excelleÌ„t Instrucâ—â—on Note well â—his Matt. 28. Note wel â—his Mat. 26. Mark. 14. Luk. 22.1 Cor. 11. Note Iere. 23. â—ote well â—â—is The fauâ—â— of the pâ—â—ple Note well Demand Note the well Note well Note wel Example An othâ—â— Exod. 3. Aug. in Ioh. Hoâ—â— 13. â—â—ene 17 â—â—â—t 13. Note welâ— this â—ote â—egeneraâ—â—on Conuâ—â—â— this weâ—â— Note wâ—â— Way welâ— this Note thâ— â—say 29 â—â—g in â—oh Hom. 〈◊〉 â—eplie â—swere CoÌ„sider very welthreâ— poynts Consyder this ExcelleÌ„t instruction Example A good instruction Example Consydâ—â— this well CoÌ„municantes A good lesson â—ote August de ciuit dei lib. 21. c. 25. In 10. Tra. 26. c. 6. 3. things in a true sacrament Example Conclusion â—pinion of â—he Romanâ—istes ConclusioÌ„ Note this â—mande â—ote this Conâ—â—oâ— this â—at â—â—gs are â—â—mon â—â—per to â—se sacraâ—uts 〈◊〉 good inâ—uction â—ohâ— 18.11 Note this ansplanâ—tion â—n 15. â—â—gnificaâ—â—â—n of bapâ—â—â—me â—â—m 6. â—â—l 3. Note these propofitions â—acrameÌ„â— speches â—â—d their â—â—â—â—e vse Note 〈◊〉 â—â—te well â—â—s Signes â—â—gniftyng thing sigâ—ifted Note this Note thâ— argumeâ— An otheâ— argumenâ— other â—ument Note well his argument Miracâ—â— Workes naturall supernatâ—rall â—nfider â—s absurâ—â—e â—gument Note thiâ— great abâ—ditie â—ngnlar struction â—â—ample Note 〈◊〉 distinctâ— Instructâ— Or vain imaginatâ—ons or phantasies â—ote Note wel Acticleâ— our faiâ—â— cleane oâ—â— thrownâ— Note thâ— Conâ—â—â— well 〈◊〉 chapteâ—â— Take tâ—â— worde of God in hâ— true sense â—onsider â—ell this â—â—atter Exposition in matter of sacraments Note this Note thâ— matter Note this well â—e first â—our â—icer de â—at deo li. 3. Affirmation Note tâ—â— idolatrie Luk. 22. â— 1. Cor. 11. Consider this well Abuse of the Persians â—ote well Where the â—se of the â—crameÌ„t is Doctriâ— of the aâ— uersarie Note tâ— argume Rom. 14 〈◊〉 ordiâ—e of the â—de vioâ—ed and â—ane ouerâ—owne â—surditie Demande Consydeâ— this â—ote â—onsides â—is â—ur God â—s inuisible An iâ—â—iâ—ble world He must 〈◊〉 worshippâ—â— in spirit trueth Iohn 4. The very words of the Lord â—ranssubâ—antiation â—â—onght inâ—â— the church â—bout the â—â—ert 1060. Nicholas â—he second Gregorie â—e seueÌ„th Honorius the third 1226. Urban the fourth Note we this Romaine Apostles â— point Note this cunning Consideâ— well this point concerning sacrifice Demande Note this cunning Note this combat Note the â—stitution 〈◊〉 the Lord 〈◊〉 matter â—f great â—aight Iesus Christ the priest sacrificer sacrifice temple and altar Blouddy 〈◊〉 not bloudâ— Note this Demande â—om 5 â—undry saâ—â—fices Rom. 12. Psal. 50. Hebru 13. Auncient celebration of the supper Not sacrifices propiciatories The whole life of christ was a perpetual sacrifice Iohn 19. Actes 4. things in singular recoÌ„mendacioÌ„ The first deceite Sacrificâ— not blouâ— An argument of great waight Confider his well 〈◊〉 coÌ„maundement Luke 22. 1. Cor. 11. One Lord gaue him selfe for vs vpon the crosse Note thâ— Ebrew nâ—ner of speach The latin translator â—â—te Consider this 2. Deceâ— â—ante of â—â—fts men Replcâ— â—weâ—◠〈◊〉 â—ry 53 â—hu 1 â—et 2 â—or 5 â—hu 19. â—â—od 12.13 A doublâ— regarde the passeo Our delâ—uerauce Sacrificâ— with saâ—â—ment â—or 5. â—â—â—â—deâ—â—his â—ge Note thâ— Exod. 12. Mat. 26. Mar. 14. Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. The wordâ— of Moiseâ— words â—ar lord â—fferent Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Falsaries of the testament â—om 6 â—eb 9. The vertue if this sarifice Propiciatorie sacrifice by whâ—â— Intent of Christ â—â—se â—ote well â—â—s 〈◊〉 most sinâ—â—lar note â—bedience â—etter then â—â—crifice Who is a â—ufficient â—ostie to God. Consydâ— well thiâ— Way well this coÌ„clusioÌ„ througâ—out â—â—hu 14. â—traunge â—â—nsequenâ—â—s â—he vertue â—f these coÌ„â—â—quences Vertue â—â—finite This sacrâ—fice may not be reiâ—terated Sacrifice coÌ„memoratiue â—niuty â—â—one by the â—omaine â—â—iests â—illain â—â—affique â—emande Stella cleâ—â—corum Matt. 21. Mar. 11. Luk. 19. Iohn 2. Eze. 1â— A notable argument â—o sell one thing for an other Now the supper inâ—â— be the supper â—emande 1. Cor. 11. Note these two thingâ— â—oce wel â—onc â—onst â—es 13. Consider â—ell this Replie Demaund An other demaund Demaund Vicars ExcoÌ„munication Note thiâ— instructiâ—â— Excommunication Consider well this The excoâ—municateâ— of the auncient Church â—otable â—â—lts 1. Cor. 1â— Note thâ— abuse of 〈◊〉 Supper Example â—acrameÌ„t 〈◊〉 vnion Cor. 10. Iohn 11. Note this â—â—struction â—blessed â—nion Note thiâ— diuision â—ote this â—fference Note thâ— inequalitâ— â—e gods the â—estes â—hat gods 〈◊〉 offered 〈◊〉 sacrifice Mat. 26. Mar. 14. Luke 22. Actes 2.1 Cor. 10.11 Esai 58. â—ote Horrible deceite Note this Note thâ— instructiâ—â— Note the names â—ote this â—â—â—truction Note these â—archaunâ—ises Note 〈◊〉 these caâ—ses foloâ—ing â—â—nclusioÌ„ â—emande A worthy sentence â—â—n 10. â—onsyder â—â—ll this â—om 10. â—hat faith 〈◊〉 â—xample â—â—a 2. â—om 2. Note wel this chapter Aug. in Ioaâ— Ho. 80. coÌ„tra Faust li. 16. de doctr Chri. li. 11. â—â—â—uctioÌ„ meane â—he sacraâ—â—nts â—ote this â—imparisoÌ„ 〈◊〉 good inâ—â—ruction God distâ—â—buteth hâ— graces as pleaseth him Example â—â—ample â—onsider â—â—ll this â—tructioÌ„ Note Ephe. 5. Rom. 6. 1. Cor. 10 Note weâ— this instruction Iohn 6. An horriâ—le sacriâ—edge 〈◊〉 true sayâ—ng Note this De Condist 2. C. qum â—omne Oriestes Iubaistes Note Duran 〈◊〉 lib. 4. Ruâ—â— de fract 〈◊〉 Bonau iâ— Sed dist 〈◊〉 Hilper iâ— Ele. de Eâ—cha Note theâ— faultes â—â—â—ment â—â—te â—â—tâ— 14 â—â—b 11. 〈◊〉 other â—â—ofe â—om 10. â—ote â—onsyber â—â—ll this Esai 2â— Mat. 1â— Mat. 7. Note 〈◊〉 coucluâ—â—â—â—â— Noâ—â— â—â—aund â—â—â—at â—â—quence â—â—â—der 〈◊〉 â—â—â—e Note this Demanâ—â— â—â—hee â—â—und â—â—swer â—ote Hebrâ— 1. Coâ— Epheâ— 1. IoÌ„hâ— Apo. 〈◊〉 Iohnâ— Acteâ— 1. Tâ—â— 1. Peâ—â—â— Hortâ— treasâ—â— gainâ—â— sus 〈◊〉 â—â—ndacioÌ„ maine infallicensure â—ote very â—ell this 2 poiâ—◠〈◊〉 3.8 â—â—n 2. 〈◊〉 9.10 â—â—hn 2. â—istinctioÌ„ aduoâ—tes â—emaund Coâ—â— demeâ—â— promiâ— 2. Coâ—â— Conâ—â— â—mes â—â—tes 2.4 Cor. 16. Cor. 8 9. â—al 1.8 6. Tim. 3. â—ote this â—der Thes 3. Tim. 5. Note here that th autor speaketh of these offices as they are in the corruption of the Romaine Church not of those that in good reformed Churches are diligent preaching Arch deacons Deacons c. for such be not vaine titles but necessary offices Actes 6.1 Tim. 3. Dery gresacriledgâ— Consider his wel Sacriâ—â—â— of Melâ—â—â—sedec ⧠Imprinted at London by Christopher Barker Printer to the Queenes Maiestie 1579.
in the Romaine Churche and should saye masse as the Romaine priestes at this dayâ— there doe yet could it not be the supper of thâ— Lorde nor acceptable or pleasaunt vnto God â–ª for so much as his ordinance is there vtterly â—â—uerthrowen and in that respect could be no betâ—ter then if Iudas had saide it We must theâ— consider not only the vocation of the ministers but also the execution of their charge And wheâ—ther they doe both agree together the rest whicâ— may be in their person bee it neuer so vitious may not hinder the vertue of the Lordes miâ—â—sterie But if these thinges be there wanting 〈◊〉 namely the second Note the case is altered For if thâ— Treasorer or receiuour of a Prince doe deliâ—â— foorth false money in steade of good the offiâ—â— whereunto he is called can not make it othâ— then false money because he doeth not execuâ— the office faithfully and doth chaunge the goâ— money which he receiueth to distribute by thâ— commaundement of his Lorde into that which is not the same that he receiued to bee distributed And by this meane they which shall haue receiued the same shal be deceiued and spoiled On the other side although he were wicked and vniust if he did distribute it good such as he was commanded the same coulde not let at all but that it should be good that they which should receiue it should very well make their profite thereof So much concerning ministers that which their ministerie may receiue of them Let vs now speake of those to whom they are sent If they doe administer that which they ought to doe their ministery hath his vertue as wel in the respect of God as in the respect of them selues And as concerning those to whom they do administer them they may in no wise make their profite of it if they doe not receiue in faith that which is administred vnto them For they can not coÌ„municate with Iesus Christe nor be partakers of his graces the which he communicateth to his church by the meanes of the ministerie which he hath ordained in the same without hauing faith in him and his promises Then if they haue true faith they doe receiue with the signes the things signified by theÌ„ but if there be no faith in them they shall receiue nothing but that which they may receiue without the same but not at all that which without the same they may not receiue Nowe they may well receiue the signes of the sacramentes without faith because that they haue in their bodies and in their members the instrumentes whereby to receiue theÌ„ But they may in no wise receiue the thing which they signifie because that it is spirituall and that they want the spirituall instrumentes without the which no maÌ„ may receiue them the which no man may haue but by the meane of faith And for that cause Saint Augustine saith that they doe in deede receiue the sacrament by the which he vnderstandeth the signes but not the thing of the sacrament which is to saye that which is signified by them For he doth euen in that sort take the name of Sacrament when he so speaketh as it appeareth by that that he doth distinguish froÌ„ the thing signified by the same For the sacrament is not a true sacrament if it haue not alway these three things to witte the word of God and the signes ordained by him the thing which they signifie All these things neuer faile in the respect of God but they which do abuse them are the cause that it is not a sacrament vnto them in as much as they doe reiect through their vnbeliefe the grace which is offered vnto them by him Wherefore the like happeneth vnto those to whom the sacramentes are administred as to meÌ„ in respect of the SuÌ„ne the which shineth well for all but not to all For there are none but those which haue eies that do receiue his light the which he presenteth to all but in the meane time such as are blinde do not receiue it For they haue not the instrumeÌ„t without the which they cannot receiue it So standeth it betweene the faithfull and the vnfaithful in respect of the ministery of the Churche for it presenteth vnto all the benefites of god And albeit that the faithlesse do not receiue them at al that not withstanding the same letteth not but that the ministery hath alway in it selfe his vertue But in the meane while it is not ordeined but to be exercised towardes those for whome it was ordeined or otherwise it should not be a ministerie and by consequence should not haue his vertue Chapter xxii That the signes of the Supper may no more be Sacramentes out of the vsage thereof theÌ„ that of Baptisme out of the time of Baptisime TO returne againe then to the point whereupon I was I coÌ„clude that as the water of baptisme cannot be the Sacrament nor the signe of baptisme but onely in the administration of the same euen so is it of the bread and of the wyne in the Supper For the sacramentall wordes both of the one and of the other sacrament haue no more respect to the matter of the signes nor lesse to the persons which are capable in the baptisme then in the supper as S. Augustine hath very well vnderstoode it For if he had saide of the supper onely that the element is made a Sacrament when the worde is ioyned vnto it the Romaine doctors might more iustly serue them selues with his testimonies to proue the difference which they make betweene the baptisme and the supper saying that the sacramentall wordes of baptisme haue regarde and doe belong to the persons which men doe baptize and not at all to the matter of the sacrament which is the water and the signe thereof and that those of the supper haue regarde and do belong to the matter of the same to witte to the bread and to the wine and not to the persons as they do in baptisme Whereupon they do conclude that the bread consecrated by them is no lesse a sacrament beeing kept in a boxe pixte or hutch then when they doe administer it in their supper And therefore they do alway cal it the sacrament of the altar and the body of the Lorde and the bodie of God as well in their pixtes and hutches as in the administration of their supper And we on the contrary doe saye and prone forth with by the very wordes of Iesus Christe that if it were so in deede that the bread and the wine should be transsubstantiated into the bodie and into the bloud of him as the transsubstanciatours do
things which might bee offered and sacrificed according to the Lawe to the ende that the people which came from farre should be eased and that they shoulde not take the payne to leade with them or to carry so farre that which they would offer and sacrifice But for so much as those marchauntes did it not for that cause nor to the ende that God might be the more honoured but tooke onely that colour to make it to serue to their gayne and to couer their auarice therewith Iesus Christe did dryue them out as Theeues Sacrilegious and Robbers which did villainously abuse the name of God by a false title home woulde hee then at this day endure the sellers of Sacramentes and of Masses For if their doctrine of transsubstantiation were true they coulde not sell any Masse without selling foorthwith Iesus Christe iâ— flesh bones the which they do make of the bread and of the wine of the same according to their owne very doctrine And if it bee not true so much the more false and vntrue is the marchandize This notwithstanding he that should suppresse all the faires markets traffiques which they do make should forthwith see very fewâ— Priests at the Altar For it is for such stuffe that they doe so fight against the preaching of the Gospell to mainteine their masse and the sacrifice of the same and consequently their transsubstantiation which is the foundation thereof and of all that which it draweth with it Note And iâ— they do confesse that their masse is no propiciatorie sacrifice but only Eucharistique and commemoratiue of the sacrifice propiciatorie of Iesus Christ as some of them are constrained to confesse seing that they may not otherwise saue nor giue colour to their doctrine they may not yet for all that escape cleare but are yet the more to be coÌ„demned For they sell to their marchaÌ„ts one marchandize for an other to witte a sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing in steade of a sacrifice propiciatorie for the remission of sinnes and the redemption of soules as they doe boast that they do in their masse And if it be neither the one nor the other as I haue already proued yet are the marchants which do buie such marchandizes the more deceiued Wherefore I leaue theÌ„ to thinke in what estimation they ought to haue their marchantes For if they committed none other faulte this here should be sufficieÌ„t to cause them to leaue abandon them cleane For who is so euill a marchant as taketh pleasure to bee deceiued and to buye euill marchandizes Thus much concerning the sacrifice of the masse I will now come to the ninth point which is yet in controuersie the which is concerning the coÌ„munion as wel of the Supper as of the Masse The thirde Booke Chapter 1. Of the CommunioÌ„ which may be in the Romaine Masse and Supper and how there is not at all any true Communion and how that it may in no wise be the true Supper of Iesus Christ I Haue already here before declared howe that the Supper may not be the Supper without the Communion of the things which do belong thereunto and which ought to bee therein coÌ„municated according to the ordinaÌ„ce of Iesus Christ Now there is no such communion in the Romaine Masse From whence it foloweth that it is not the supper of the Lord consequently also that it is not the Sacrament thereof but is a new sacrameÌ„t inuented by meÌ„ and wholy contrary to that of the Lorde from the which they woulde giue vnto it his foundation and his countenance For what communion is there ordinarily either in priuate or particular masses either in those which are publike the which they do cal parochial for there is both in the one in the other but the priest only which is at the altar who doth participate of the bread of the wine that which he doth consecrate in the same For he eateth and drinketh al alone at his altar without offering or presenting any thing of that which he eateth and drinketh not only to the people which doe assist at his masse but also to his owne fellowes which are of the same occupation that he is of and which helpe him to saye and doe the same and are the nerest to his table and altar This notwithstanding he calleth this litle banquet which hee maketh in his masse Communion and the praier which followeth it shortly after PostcommunioÌ„ CoÌ„munion is taken of common but what is it that is there common where one taketh all The only name which they do vse doth conuince them of their errour and of the wrong that they do to all Christian people And if they do replie that they â—o call this litle banquet Communion Repl. not in respect of the distribution which is there made of the bread of the wine which is there made to those which doe assist at their masse for so much as there is there none at all made according as the Lord hath ordeined in his supper but in respect of the communication that the priest hath with Iesus Christ whereunto I answere Answere that that answere solution is not sufficieÌ„t enough For Iesus Christ hath not instituted a Supper wherein one onely minister shoulde communicate and should distribute the Supper vnto him self alone but hath ordained it for al those which are capable thereof in his Churche which is the communioÌ„ of Saincts to the which this sacrament belongeth in generall and not to certain particulars only And therfore S. Paul hath written The bread which we breake is it not the communioÌ„ of the body of Christ the cup of blessing the which we blesse is it not the coÌ„munion of the blood of Christ For we which are many are one bread one body in asmuch as we are al partakers of one very bread S. Paul doth here set forth vnto vs 2. things The first that the supper is not for one alone but for many for the whol church the other that it ought not to be dismeÌ„bred but to be fully administred aswel to the ChristiaÌ„ people as to the ministers of the same without cutting froÌ„ theÌ„ that one half or any thing whatsoeuer as the Romain priestes doe in their Supper which they doe administer to the people in cutting the cup cleane from them For it sufficed them not to cut them off from all the Communion of their masses which they do saye and doe dayly and likewise from that of the parrochial masses which they do say euery sunday but that they must needes cut from them the full one halfe of that Supper which they do minister vnto theÌ„ once twise â–ª or thrise in the yere vpon certaine of their most solemne feastes The which thing is yet an other newe inuention cleane contrarie both to the supper of the Lord and to all the true ancieÌ„t Church For before the Councel of Constance holden in the yere
1415. there was neuer any ordinance made in the Church whereby it was forbidden to administer the cuppe to al the people as the Romaine doctours them selues are enforced to confesse This notwithstanding the corrupted and abastardised Romaine church which hath made this ordinance cleane contrary to the expresse coÌ„mandement of Iesus Christ and to the obseruatioÌ„ of the true ancieÌ„t church as well the Romaine as of all the true vniuersall churche is that true ancient Romaine Church and the true catholique Churche which did immediatly succeede the Apostles if we will beleeue the Romaine doctors albeit that shee be apparantly cleane contrary to it Chapter ii Whether the Supper of the Lord may be a true supper if any of the signes of the same be cut off and whether Iesus Christ did ordayne any thing superfluous in the same whether he did ordeine one sort of supper for one sort of men and an other for the others BVt they will yet replie that as the bloud is contayned vnder the body and that the lay people in receiuing the body receiue also the bloud albeit that they doe receiue but the signe of the body and not that of the bloud euen so when the priest communicateth alone in the masse he communicateth for al the rest and all the rest do communicate also in the person of him Behold a very faire starting hole and a reason very wel grounded Whereupon I aske them for the first whether Iesus Christ did ordaine any thing superfluous and in vaine in his holy supper and that was not very necessary I do not thinke at all that they dare gainesay this If there be theÌ„ nothing superfluous neyther that is ordayned in vayne and without great and necessary cause in this sacrameÌ„t and mysteries which it containeth wherefore is it that they dare to cut off any thing froÌ„ thence And if there be any thing superfluous and not necessary Note wherefore doe they not as wel cut off in their masse that whiâ—â— they do cut off in the supper of the people forse much as it must needes be that there be equaltie among al in the supper of the Lorde For hâ— ordained none other for the ministers then hâ— did for the people nor for the pastours then fâ—â— the sheepe nor for the clerkes then for the layâ— And what reason haue they to cut off rather thâ— wine Demaund then the bread They wil answere that 〈◊〉 is because that there is greater daunger in repect of the wine Answere by meane of the shedding thaâ— may happen and consequently of the bloud intâ— that which it is conuerted by meane of their transsubstanciation Wherfore is it then that the auncâ—ent Church did not aswel feare this daunger before the time of the Councel of Constaunce a did that Church which hath bin since There 〈◊〉 no doubt at al but that the errour of transsubstanciation hath brought foorth this also For thâ— Church which hath counterfaited it hath haâ— since greater feare to shed the bloud into thâ— which the wine is conuerted according to theâ—â— doctrine then the true auncient Church haâ—â— which did not know any such transsubstanciatâ—on Wherefore she did not also feare any suâ—shedding of the bloud of Iesus Christ Note And fâ—â— that also that she did not vse to keepe the breâ—â— and the wine to make them to be worshippeâ— as they do at this day in the Romaine Church in like sort she did not feare that the body and the bloud of the Lord should corrupt in the vessels wherein they were kept Beholde then one reason that the most moderne Romaine Church hath had more then the true auncient Church concerning this point And on the other side euen as the priestes of the same haue magnified their dignitie by meane of their transsubstanciation not onely aboue all other men but also aboue the virgine Mary and the Angels euen so haue they done in the communion of their masse and of their Supper For it is no small dignitie to be able to cause Iesus Christe to come and to be betwene their handes euery day and when it pleaseth them to make gods and to be the creatours of the creatour as they haue named them selues heretofore in their owne very bookes Therefore it is very reasonable also that they haue their communion apart separated from others which are not of such dignitie and that it be different from that which is common to al persons Chapter iii. Whether the Priestes may receiue the Supper for the people and what communion and excommunication is FUrther I aske them if they would be conteÌ„ted that an other man should dine for them or else that he should receyue the reuenewes of their benefices and that he should keepe the same for him selfe and in the meane time should say that he had receyued it for them I do beleeue that they would not haue such vicars nor such receiuers for them neither at the table nor iâ— their recepts but would doe both the one and y other in their owne person This notwithstanding they will needes be vicars of their Parochians in such matters in receyuing alone for them al that which belongeth generally to euery of them And the Parochians are very weâ— contented to haue such vicars and receiuers which do ordinarily receiue the Supper for theÌ„ because that they knowe not what the Supper of the Lorde is nor what profit or hurt they maâ— receiué by the administration or priuation of same wherefore they cannot knowe nor consâ—der the wrong which they do to them in so dâ—priuing them be it in all or in parte For who 〈◊〉 shal wel consider the communion which is inâ— masse and shall iudge thereof according to thâ— truth may of right call it no communion at all but excommunication For as communicatiâ—â— signifieth the partaking of many in one thing which is common to them al so on the contraâ— excommunication signifieth the depriuation 〈◊〉 such a partaking and communication as also to excommunicate signifieth asmuch as to be put out of the communion comminalty Now it is so that the Church as I haue already declared is the communion of Saints the comminalty of the faithfull And forsomuch as the sacraments being administred according to the pure ordinance of the Lorde are of the principal outward markes of the true Church and of the communion comminaltie she is also signified and represented by them For that cause they do receiue those the which they do esteeme for true members of that whole body and of all that coÌ„minaltie which we doe call the Church and the communion of Saints acknowledging theÌ„ as true Burgesses and Citizens of the kingdome of heauen and of the holy Citie of god And by that meane they do communicate vnto them the Sacraments which are vnto them as markes and tokens which Princes Lordes and Captames doe giue to their seruants and souldiours the which they doe aduow
the Apostles chiefly by the Romaine Popes wherein they doe greatly honour the sonne of god For if it be so he did but rough hewe the worke whereof he left the matter confused and euill polished as a first purtraiture rude and not polished leauing the thing to be better polished adorned and brought to perfection by those which should come after him the which worke was not made perfect by one or twoo workmen only but by a great number as they them selues do witnesse For they are not so shamelesse that they dare affirme that it was made or perfected neither by one workman onely but by many nor at one instant nor at one onely time but in sundry ages Chapter iiii Of the principall authours of the Masse alleadged by the Romaine doctors and of the diuersitie of Masses as well Greekes as Latins and of those Masses which were celebrated by the Apostles THose which dare not make Iesus Christ the authour do attribute the fashion of it some to Saint Iames others to Basile the great and some other to Gregorie the first And in deede they doe set forth diuerse formes of Masses the one sorte Greeke the other Latin masses which are greatly different amoÌ„g theÌ„ selues As touching the Greeke Masses they do againe set forth diuerse formes the one of Basile the other of Chrysostome And as touching that of Chrysostome they do not set forth onely one forme but two at the least And as touching the Latin masse the principall honour whereof they giue to Gregory the first how many craftes men haue there bene which haue laid their handes vnto it euer adding something the one to the others inuentions according as their owne doctours the historians of the Romaine Church do witnesse And after the time of Gregory the first how many pieces haue bene added vnto it and how long a time was it before it was such an one as it is at this present How theÌ„ is Iesus Christ the author or Saint Iames or any other of the Apostles And how did the Apostles sing and celebrate the masse the one in one countrey and the others in others as many of the Romaine doctors doe boldely and assuredly affirme without any shame at all cleane contrary to the euideÌ„t testimonies as wel of the holy scriptures as of their owne doctors historians which giue testimonie of all the peeces that euery one of the said craftes men which haue wrought in the same worke haue added thereunto Whether their testimonies be true or no I will not now enter into disputation of it It suffiseth that those which do vpholde the Masse do vouch them and that by their own testimony the which they doe receiue they are conuinced that there was no such masse as there is at this day in the Romaine Churche not onely in the Apostles time neither also in a long time after their daies How then commeth it to passe that the Apostles could sing and celebrate the masse before that it was made or borne If they take the masse for the supper I will willingly graunt that all the Apostles and their true successors haue often celebrated the same But it was in the same maner that Iesus Christ did institute and administer it not in the same maner that it hath bene since disguised and conuerted into masse and such as nowe it is celebrated in the Romaine Churche wherefore it is a great filthines or too great a malice so to disguise things to make the poore ignoraunt people to beleeue that the masse is of the institution of Iesus Christ and of his Apostles and that they them selues haâ—e celebrated the same and that euen from their time it hath alwayes bene obserued in the Church such as it is at this daie in the Romaine For it is an ouer filthy and shameles lye Chapter v. Of the names of the Supper and of the Masse and whether the differeÌ„ce that is at this day because of the same betweene the reformed Church and the Romaine is onely for the names and titles or els for the matter and substance and whether the Masse be in substance the Supper of the Lord. IT must then be that the Romaine doctors confesse that the Masse which they do now call the Masse is farre different from that which they affirme to haue bene said and celebrated by the Apostles and their true successours And if they do replie that it is the same in substance and that there is no difference but in respect of the ceremonies and ornamentes wherewith it hath bene adorned and enriched since that time by the successours of the Apostles we must yet see whether it be so or no. Behold then one point which standeth yet in question whereupon it must be considered whether the Masse such as it is at this day be in substaÌ„ce the holy supper of Iesus Christ or no such as he him self did institute administer his Apostles and his true Church did receiue from him and did celebrate according to his ordinance and coÌ„maundement For our chiefe controuersie is not for the wordes or for the names but for the thing it selfe the very substance thereof for the which we are at controuersie Wherefore when we shal agree vpon the substance we shall then easely agree vpon the accidentes names so farre forth as the thing which they do signifie be conteined in the holy scriptures and in the Lords ordinaÌ„ce as we do it in the name of the trinitie and of Sacrament and such like For albeit that the very same wordes are not founde either in the olde testament or in the newe yet for all that we doe receiue them for so much as the things signified by them are therein conteined Wherefore it would be vncomely and of small edification to debate vpon names and wordes when men are agreed vpon the things that they would signifie by these same It resteth now that we vnderstand the one the other and that we do agree vpon the sense according to the which we shall take the wordes which we shall vse As touching the Sacrament whereof we do nowe speake it is called by Saint Paul sometime the table an other time the supper of the Lord and also the Communion and communication of the body and of the blood of the lord Seeing then that the holy Ghost hath giueÌ„ vnto it such names titles by this holy Apostle it is then the surest and the best to vse the same This notwithstanding if the Romaine Catholiques will call it both Masse and Sacrament of the Altar we will not greatly striue for it prouided that we do agree in the principal point of our different Chapter vi Of the chiefe different that is betweene the reformed Church and the Romaine touching the Supper and the Masse and of the meane to agree it IF then they be able to shewe that their Masse is in substance the very supper of the Lorde and their sacrament of the Altar his
some monster Albeit that it should be alwayes one selfe matter very good and very excellent yet for all that the workemāship should be greatly different and the matter very euill applied in as much as by applying thereof they should destroy a good very faire piece of work to make one both euil and filthy And by the same meane a man should do great wrong to the king in so counterfaiting his image It is not enough then to take the matter whereof the Prophetes the Apostles haue made the worke of the Lord if it be not euenly laide squared and wrought as they them selues haue done it For if any man make an other worke contrary to theirs and by the which theirs should be destroyed the stuffe which men haue taken of thē is not well applied Wherefore so farre of is it that the worke is the better because of the same that on the contrary it is more worthy of blame Thus much for the shuting vp of the mouthes of those which doe alleadge the good woordes and the good things which are in the Masse if they cannot otherwise shew the goodnes thereof and that there be nothing at all in it that is good and applied as it ought to be Chapter ix Of the diuision of the matters which shal be handled hereafter and of the principall pointes which are at this day in controuersie concerning the Supper and the Masse I Wil now come to the principal points which do moue vs by good reason not in any wise to allowe the masse being of the same forme and qualitie that at this day it is set forth vnto vs of the which pointes I will firs make a generall diuision and afterward a more special and then I will propone and expounde them all the one after the other euery one of them in his place The first diuision which is the most generall shall conteine fiue pointes of the which fiue pointes I will after ward make more special diuisions The first is touching the matter and all the pieces and inuentions and humaine tradicions in generall whereof it is compounded The second is of the wordes of the same in speciall And the third is of the signes and of the things signified by them The fourth of the prayers The fift of the collectes As touching the second point which concerneth in special the wordes of the masse I deuide it againe into three points The first is touching the language of them The second concerning the pronunciation The thirde concerning the application of them And for the third point which is concerning the signes and the things signified I do deuide them againe into six other pointes The first is the transubstantiation of the signes The second the adoration of them The third the reseruation and application which vsed beside the vse of the supper The fourth is of the sacrifice The fift is of the cōmunion The sixt of the application aswell of the sacrifice as of the communion both for the dead and for the liuing Now concerning the first the fourth and the fifth Of the fiue pointes which I did in the first place set forth in generall I doe not at all make any other more speciall diuision of them Now all these pointes ioyned and comprehended together do amount to the number of 12. the which I am not determined here to handle all at large but onely summarily to the ende that men may vnderstand which be the principall differences to agree vpon between the reformed Church and the Romaine Church concerning the Sacrament of the supper and that of the Masse Chapter x. Of the first general point which is of the whole matter of the Masse and of the additions vvhich men haue giuen to the supper of the Lorde in the same by the vvhich they haue cleane ouerthrovven his institution THe first point then that we doe condemne in the Masse is that ingeneral there are so many inuentions traditions and humane additiōs to the Lordes institution so many chaunges and disguisings of the same and so many ceremonies and foolish and doultishe superstions and insufferable Idolatries that there remaineth in the same no kinde of forme of the pure ordinance of the Lord but that it is there wholy ouerthrowen And by the same meane the expressed word of God is there openly violated in as much as it is so often and so expressedly forhidden by the same in the holy scriptures to adde or to diminish any thing to or from the lawe statutes and ordinances of the Lorde or to go out either on the right hand or els on the left For the which cause Saint Paul meaning to correct the abuses which were already in his time committed in the supper among the Corinthes said plainely setting foorth the institution of Iesus Christ I haue receiued of the Lord that which also I haue deliuered vnto you And after ward he expoundeth it point by poynt in what sorte Iesus Christe did institute and administer this holy Sacrament and ordeined it to be administred afterward in his Church wherein he ment to giue plainely to vnderstand not onley to the Corinthes but also to the whole Churche of God as well for that present time as for all the time to come that the institution of the Lord is pure whole and perfect what rule there was and is to be obserued in such matter without adding any thing to it or diminishing chāging and disguising any thing from it or in it For if Saint Paul which was plucked vp euen to the third heauen and who sawe there secrets incomprehensible to man and hath so faire and excellent a testimonie of his vocatiō by Iesus Christ him selfe neither would nor durst take in hande such a matter but did content him selfe with the simple ordinance of the Lord and tied him selfe to the fame rule and did drawe thereunto the whole Church what pride is this in those which dare vndertake more then he yea more then the very sonne of God him selfe did These which are so audacious ds they not feare at all the curses which are denounced by Saint Iohn in the Apocalypse to all those which either adde or diminish any thing to or from the doctrine reuealed by the Lord for that which he saith in his Apocalypse doth no lesse agree to all the rest of the body of the holy scriptures then to it selfe for so much as there is no canonicall booke which is of lesse authoritie And if Saint Paul did assubiecte the very Angels to the Gospell which he had preached Note who dare set him selfe vp aboue them Chapter xi Of the second generall point which is of the wordes of the Masse and of the diuision of the same into his members and first of the language of the Masse AS concerning the second point which is touching the wordes of the Masse we haue to note first that albeit that it were so that there were not one onely worde in the
of substance where there is chaunge Wherefore there is as great difference betwene chaunge transsubstanciation as is betwene the general the speciall For chaunge is the generall which comprehendeth vnder it transsubstanciation but transsubstanciation doth not comprehend in it chaunge forsomuch as his signifiration is more ample as that of chaunge of transmutation and of conuersion then that of transsubstanciation For all these names do cōprehend other kindes of chaunge and of conuersion then of one substance into an other For as there is chaunge of substances so is there also chaunge of accidents to witte of qualities of time of places of habits and such other like thinges according to their natures and to the predicaments vnder that which they are comprehended as the Logicians distinguish them Our regeneration is not without chaunge which is wrought in our own persōs But it is not at all by conuersion of the substance of our bodies nor of our soules into others or into any other substance but it is in qualitie which is from vice into vertue by the chaunge renewing of the olde Adam of the olde man into the new And therfore if there be any chaūge in the supper touching the matter of the signes thereof it must then be considered of what kind this chaunge is and in what predicament it must be sought if we will speake as becōmeth Logicians and if there be chaunges either of substance or of qualitie in asmuch as the matter of the signes thereof is otherwise qualified when it is applied to that vse then it was before I haue alreadie declared proued that there can be no more chaunge of one substance into an other then there is in all other sacraments because of the reasons that I haue alreadie alleadged taken aswell of the nature of them as of the testimonies of the word of God whereupon they are grounded And if there were such a chaunge it must needes be that it should be in 2. sortes to witte the one by the which the bread and the wine should be appointed to be the signes of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ and the other to conuert the substance of the bread and of the wine into his body and bloud after that they should haue bene made the signes thereof by the first consecration and by the first chaunge which should haue bene made by the same And by this meane it would come to passe that there should be 2. consecratiōs and 2. sorts of sacramental words The first to consecrat cause the bread the wine to be the signes and then the second to conuert them afterward into the bodie and into the bloud of Iesus Christ or else it must be that the same very woordes should do both at one instant And if the same myght be done in the supper there is no reason why it should not be done also in the other sacraments for the reasons which I haue alreadie declared and chiefely in those in the which the holy Ghost hath vsed like maners of speach as in the supper Note We say thē that there is no more chaunge of the substance of the signes thereof then there is in those of the other sacramēts that there is none other at al but in the vse which cōsisteth in this that the matter which is taken for the signes of the sacraments is applied and serueth to another vse and an other end then his did before that time And if there be none other chaunge in the supper of the Lord there can then be none other in the masse if it be his true supper And if it be not his true supper it is not then a sacramēt of the Lord but is rather a kind of magike and of sorcerie Chapter xx Of the ground of the errour of transsubstanciation of the absurdities which followe the same and of the application of the sacramental words to those persons which are capablc and what faith there is there required BUt the Romaine doctors hauing not wel vnderstood the meaning nor the maners of speach of the auncient doctors haue taken them for a chaunge of one substance into an other in stead of taking them for the chaunge which is in the vse thereof It is no maruaile at all if they be fallē into that errour seing that they haue so il vnderstood the nature of the sacrament of the supper that not only they haue conuerted it into a sacrifice in their masse but also they haue made it a sacrament of the altar the which they accompt for a sacrament yea when it is out of the vse therof Wherfore seing they know not what the true vse of the supper is no more haue they well vnderstood what was the chaunge of the signes in the same in respect of their proper vse For that cause euen as they haue chaūged their vse into an other wholly newe and straunge by their doctrine and inuention euen so haue they found out an other newe sort of chaunge of the substance of the signes of the supper into the substance of the thing signified by them against the doctrine and the vsage of al the auncient Church This ignorance and newe inuention hath beene the cause of great and filthie errours and abuses of the transsubstanciation and of the infinite absurdities that the same draweth after it We must then first note Note in what sort the word is adioyned to the matter of the signes to know in what sort the same is dedicated and consecrated to that vse by the same word according to that which I haue lately alleadged of Saint Augustine saying The word is ioyned to the element and it is made a sacrament And then we must goe on further to consider howe the same worde is applied to the persons to whom the sacraments are administred and for whose cause the matter of the signes and of the sacraments is dedicated and consecrated to that vse whereunto it serueth For if the word were not ioyned and applied but onely to the matter of the signes the which Saint Augustine calleth element because it is taken of these earthly elements it should not be conuerted into a sacramēt by the conuersion of the vse whereunto it is conuerted but should alway remaine in his first qualitie should not be qualified as it is when that it is applied to the vse of the sacraments For God hath not giuē the word to man to declare the same to insensible creatures Note to pronounce it ouer thē For that belōgeth to magiciās forcerers charmers and enchaunters which doe abuse it cōtrary to the true vse therof For it is their custome so to applie their charmes enchantmēts to pronounce thē secretly with a whispering voice to babble mumble thē without vnderstanding as also Esay doth witnesse And therefore Saint Augustine sayeth yet very well that the element is made a sacrament by the word which
affirme yet for all that they can not make the same by their transsubstātiation if that forth w they do not distribute it that they be not communicated as Iesus Christ hath done and commaunded For they can not do that which he hath done and hath commaunded to be done in that matter doing the cleane contrary to that which hee hath done and commanded For the minister can not haue the vertue which the Lord hath giuen to the ministerie of his Apostles and of their true successours if it be not the very same ministery Nowe it appeareth plainly that it is not the very same ministerie for so much as the ordinance purpose of Iesus Christe is there manifestly and wholy violated and ouerthrowen For Iesus Christe declareth openly by the same that hee hath not ordeined the bread and the wine to be signes of the holy sacrament but to the ende that they should be administred distributed and communicated in the same according as he hath expresly commaunded saying Take ye and eate ye Likewise Take ye drinke ye Who may then beleeue that Iesus Chrisse did giue such power as the Romane priestes doe there attribute to these which do cleane contrary to his so expressed ordinance and commandemēt Note For there is not here question onely of their vocation but also of the execution of their charge and office For albeit that it were so that the vocatiō were in all things els very lawfull yet for all that doing cleane contrary to the same that which they do may in no wise be alowed by god And therfore I demande of them whether they be ordeined called to the ministery whereof they do so glorye either to preach the word of God and to administer the supper the other sacramēts according to the same as the Apostles and their true successours haue done before them or els to say masse and to ouerthrowe in the same the whole institution of the lord If it be but to say masse and to do onely that which they do in the same I can not in that respect graunt that their vocation nor the worke which they doe according to the same may be of god Wherefore I do againe conclude that albeit that the doctrine of their transsubstantiatiō were in the rest true yet notwithstāding it could not haue place out of the vse of the supper their bread and wine could be but bread and wine and not at all the body and the bloud of Christe except they were distributed and communicated accordingly as he hath expressedly commaunded And therefore I saye againe that so farre of is it that the testimonie which I haue alledged of S. Augustine may establishe the distinction which the transsubstantiatours doe make betweene Baptisme and the Supper whereof I haue euen nowe made mention that on the contrary it doeth cleane ouerthrowe it For he sayd those wordes speaking not at all of the Supper but of Baptisme by the which hee doeth plainely-declare that the sacramentall woorde thereof haue no lesse regarde to the signe which is appoynted vnto it then those of the Supper haue to the bread and to the wyne From whence it followeth that if for that cause there bee transsubstantiation in the one it is also in the other for the sacramentall woordes are no lesse spoken of the one then of the other to the persons which are capable of these Sacramentes Chapter xxiii Of the true distinction and difference which ought to be had betweene Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord. SEeing that I haue declared the abuse and the errour which is in the distinction and difference that the transsubstantiatours do make betweene the sacramēts of baptisme the supper touching their signes and the application of the same I will touch briefly the true distinction and difference which must bee put betweene them taking the same of their proper nature and vse And for the better vnderstanding of it we ought first to consider what it is that is cōmon to them both and then what it is that euery of them hath proper and speciall to it selfe They both haue this common and generall that they send vs to the death and to the sacrifice of Iesus Christe and that they are ordained to the end that by the meane of them we may communicate with Iesus Christe and may be made partakers of his benefites But because that God doth offer vnto vs diuers graces by him of the which he would make vs partakers he hath ordained two sacramentes the better to represent vnto vs his principall graces the which do comprehende all the rest For seeing that by sinne we are dead of spiritual death we must first receiue that life which is contrary to that death as though we should rise from spirituall death to spirituall life the which we receiue of the benefit of Iesus Christ who bringeth vs that life because he hath it in him selfe as he him selfe doth witnesse saying I am the way the truth and the life Likewise I am the resurrection and the life For we cannot attaine to the blessed resurrection and to eternal life which wee waite for but wee must first bee made partakers of this spirituall life which Iesus Christ by his death resurrectiō doth bring vnto vs. And we can not be made partakers thereof if we be not planted and graffed into him which is the new Adam and the new man and the newe stocke of mankinde in the which we must be renewed euen as we haue bene plāted and graffed into the olde Adam and into the olde man which is the olde stocke of mankinde the which is altogether corrupted through sinne wherefore we must needes be transported from this stocke into the other if we wil be transported from death to life And to bring this transportation to passe we must die to our olde man and must rise againe to our newe and we must spoyle our selues of the first and clothe vs with the second And because that we can not finde this vertue in our selues we must therefore take it of the death and resurrectiō of Iesus Christ to the ende that we may be throughly renewed and made newe creatures This grace and this benefit of Iesus Christe is called in the holy scripture Regeneration because that we are regenerated and borne againe as of newe by him not bodily but spiritually For we haue already bodily life by our first natiuitie the which wee hold of the stock of Adam Wherefore we haue no neede of a second natiuitie the which we do call new birth regeneration in respect of this life the which we haue already but in respect of the spirituall life the which we receiue of the stock of the new Adam of the new man as the stippes and braunches which are graffed into a good tree and as the vine braunches which receiue their life and nouriture of their stocke For that cause Iesus Christe
either with the other maners of sacramentall speache of the scriptures and with their liuely signification and exposition or els with the nature as well of the sacramentes as of the true bodie of Iesus Christe or of all those articles of the faith whereof I haue now made mention For the exposition which in matter of sacramētes can not agree with all those points may not be true On the contrary that which disagreeth not at all but doth very well agree with all these pointes may in no wyse be reiected as false Now we saye that the same of ours doth agree with them very well in as much as it agreeth with all other the like passages of the scriptures and like maners of sacramentall and figuratiue speaches and with the natures of the sacramentes and of the signes of them and with that of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christ and with the articles of our faith For we are not at all in controuersie with the transsubstantiatours nor with the consubstantiators touching the wordes of the Supper whether they be of Iesus Christe and whether they bee true or no and whether hee be present in the Supper or absent and whether his body and his blood be there present and distributed and communicated or no for wee all agree in all these poyntes But the different is onely in the maner of the presence and communication to witte whether it bee bodily or spiritually and whether the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ be there distributed and eaten and drunken bodily and naturally or els spiritually and suppernaturally We saye that it is spiritually and supernaturally by meane of the reasons which I haue already alleadged the other saye that it is bodily and naturally which thing wee can not graunt them if wee will not foorthwith graunt them al the absurdities whereof I haue made mencion and a great nomber of other which folowe their doctrine Chapter vii Of the adoration of the bread and of the wine as well in the Masse as in their pixtes and boxes and of the idolatric that therein is SO much touching the errour of transsubstantiation from whence there followeth yet an other very great very vnsufferable the which I set downe for the seconde concerning the matter of transsubstantiation and for the seuenth of the twelue into which nomber I bring all the poyntes This same is concerning the worshipping of the bread and of the wine in stead of Iesus Christ the very sonne of God This is an errour which yet draweth after it many other The first is that where the bread the wine should be distributed in the masse to those which be there present as the Lorde hath commaunded that it should be done in the supper they doe onely set them out to shewe lifting them vp on high and causing them to bee worshipped of euery one as idols through great superstition and idolatrie whose like neuer was since the beginning of the world howe great soeuer the blindnesse haue bene For as Cicero himselfe witnesseth there were neuer men that did beleeue or thinke that that which they did eate was god And there was neuer any people so beastly which did thinke that the idols the visible things which they did honour and worship were really and essentially gods but onely that they were remembrances and representations But the idolatrie whereof I now speake passeth on much further For it contenteth not it self to cause the bread and the wine to be worshipped and honoured as holy sacred signes ordeined to be remembrances and representations of the very body blood of Iesus Christ but as Iesus Christ him selfe in fleshe and bone and man and God together For they affirme that there is no more bread nor wine but that that which was bread and wine before the consecration is really and in deede Iesus Christe him selfe which thing may not be by meane of the reasons which I haue already alleadged From whence it followeth that the bread and the wine are there worshipped for gods that that same worshipping is a very idolatrie and cleane contrary to the holy ordinaunce of the Lorde and to that which he hath sayd and done and commaunded in the institution and administration of the same For he commandeth expresly to doe that which he did in the remembrance of him and not otherwise Nowe hauing taken the bread the wine hee did not lift them vp on high nor caused them to be worshipped by his disciples before he did distribute them but did distribute them to euery of thē with expresse commandement that they should take both the one and the other euen at the same very time that they shoulde eate the bread and drinke the wine euen as they did in deede And if this can not be proued to be done neither in their masse nor in the very supper which they do administer to the people there is thē lesser reason to reserue the bread in pixtes caskets cupbordes and such like not onely to cause it to bee worshipped as God or to beare it about in procession in great pompe and solemnitie to that very ende as the Persians did beare in time past their sacred fire but also to coniure the time the tempestes and the Deuils and to vse them in such like superstitions according as it falleth in their fantasie For as I haue already heretofore shewed albeit that it were so that according to their doctrine of transsubstantiation the bread were chaunged into the bodie of Iesus Christe yet for all that it coulde not haue place out of the vse of the Sacrament by meane of the reasons that I haue already yelded Nowe it is very true that there is no vse there where the Sacrament is not administred and that it is not administred there where it is not distributed with the woorde to those which are capable of it And if they doe applie the signes thereof to any other vse then to the same for the which they are ordeyned that vse is not lawfull wherefore it may not bee taken for an vse but shoulde bee reiected as an abuse manifestly contrary to the woorde and ordinaunce of the Lorde And on the other syde if this abuse were not so great yet so is it for all that that this worshipping of the bread and of the wyne and of their holy hostie can not bee without putting them alwaye which doe worshippe them in great daunger of Idolatrie At the least it can not bee done in fayth Note for so much as it must needes bee that the worshippers remayne alwaye in doubt touching the consecration of the priestes for so much as according to their doctrine there is no transsubstantiation if the intent to consecrate be not ioyned with the pronunciation of the woordes and that there is no man that can iudge and bee assured of the purpose of the priestes
such sorte as the Romaine Church hath holdeÌ„ it euer since to witte from the time of the Pope Nicholas the secoÌ„d and afterward of Gregorie the seuenth about the yeere 1074. But this was not done at all without contradiction of many which coulde not profit at al forsomuch as they were oppressed by the authoritie of the Romaine Popes and of the multitude of their adherentes The custome for all that was not in the same church to keepe the bread in cupbordes boxes and pixtes before the time of Honorius the third who ordeined it about the yeere 1226. that hee was in the Romaine Chaire nor also to beare it in solemne procession and to dedicate a speciall feast to it vnto the time of Pope Vrbane the fourth who ordained that feast which commonly is called the feast of God or of the holy body of god Beholde then the antiquitie of the religion which followeth such doctrine and such maner of doings and as touching the principall authours vnto the which it may be ascribed And thereby euery man may knowe what faith they ought to giue to the traÌ„ssubstantiatours and Romaine doctours which affirme that the Romaine religion which they at this daye doe followe is the religion of the true auncient Churche and that they haue receiued it of Iesus Christ and of his Apostles and is come euen to them from hande to hand by a continuall succession Men may also iudge by the very same which were the Apostles from whom they receiued such doctrine such ceremonies superstitions and idolatries and what iniurie they do to Iesus Christ and to his Apostles and to all the auncient Church in abusing as they doe the name and authoritie of them to giue a more faire shewe to the inuentions of men and the more to coÌ„firme the poore ignorant in their errours and abuses For as I haue already declared the whole ancient church and the true doctors of the same did not knowe any such transsubstantiation as that of the Romaine Church which is at this daye nor any other conuersion of the signes of the sacrameÌ„ts into the thing which they signified but onely in respect of the vse of them as I haue already declared And therefore it had also no such worshipping and keeping of the bread and of their hostie as is that whereof I haue now spoken Chapter x. Of the sacrifice of the Romaine Masse and of the building of the same vpon the transsubstantiation and of the onely sacrifice of Iesus Christ and of the contrarietie that is betweene the same and that of the Masse I Will not nowe bryng foorth anye more proofes wherewith the better to coÌ„firme that which I haue already sayde of all these things because that I haue sufficiently written of it in diuerse other bookes and that I did not determine for this present but onely to touche and handle them briefly and summarily And therefore I will now come to the eight point which is concerning the sacrifice of the Romane priests in their masse the which dependeth also of the transsubstantiatioÌ„ and hath his foundation vpoÌ„ the same For if they did confesse that the bread and the wine did remaine alway bread and wine in the same they durst not affirme nor saye that they do offer vnto God bread and wine in sacrifice for the remission of sinnes the redemptioÌ„ of soules as well the liuing as the dead as they boaste them selues to doe daily in their masses For for the first seeing that according to the testimonie of the Epistle to the Hebrewes there is no sacrifice offered for the remission of sinnes without shedding of blood they can in no waies make sacrifice of bread and of wine for so much as it shoulde bee without sheading of bloud And then what reason should they haue to offer to God bread wine for the redeÌ„ption of soules and for the saluation of man and of what vertue and efficacie might such a sacrifice be And therefore seeing that they woulde conuert the Sacrament of the Supper into a sacrifice and transforme it into a Masse they must in deede foorthwith transsubstantiate the bread and the wyne into the bodie and into the blood of Iesus Christe to the ende that by that meane they might afterwarde offer them in saerifice for the remission of sinnes and for the redemption of soules and not onely for the lyuing but also for the dead Wee may not then greatly marueile if that they doe fight strongly and assuredly to mainteine their transsubstantiation without the which they are neuer able to mainteine their sacrifice without the which also their purgatorie would yelde them a very barren reuenue with all their other inuentions But what foundation haue they for this sacrifice I do not say in the institution of the supper of the Lorde onely but also in all the holy scriptures For for the first we do not reade at all that when Iesus Christ did institute and administer the supper he did in any wise offer in sacrifice either the bread or the wine which hee ordeined to be signes of the same nor in like sort his bodie nor his bloud For it is not in the supper that he did offer theÌ„ really in sacrifice to God for man but vpoÌ„ the crosse For the whole scripture maketh no mention of two sacrifices of Iesus Christ for the redemption of man but of one onely which is so perfect that he needed not to make it but one time onely and it could not bee offered by any other then by Iesus Christe him selfe the very sonne of God which onely is the priest the sacrificer the Sacrifice the Temple and the Altar and the same may in no wise be reiterated by any creature seeing that it is of vertue eternall and of deserte infinite For this cause the sacrifice of the masse can not stande with this but it must necessarily be that the one or the other be abholished to giue place to one onely seeing that there is but one which is full and perfect and there may none other be had seeing then that the same of Iesus is such an one it abolisheth all the others Chapter .xi. Of the difference that the Romaine doctors do put betwene the bloudy sacrifice the not bloudy of Iesus Christ in what sense the auncieÌ„t doctors of the Church did take both the one and the other and did cal the supper by the name of sacrifice And of the things which were obserued in the assemblies of the auncient Church IT may not be then that the Romayne sacrificers doe lay before vs 2. sortes of sacrifices of Iesus Christ for the remission of sinnes to wit the one not blouddy that is to say without shedding of bloud the which he offred in the supper and the other blouddy to wit with shedding of â—loud the which he offered vpon the crosse For by what testimonie of the Scripture
will replie that Iesus Christ and his Apostles and the auncient dnctors of the Primitiue Church haue done both in the Supper to wit that they offered vnto God in Sacrifice the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ and thē haue also forthwith communicated them to the Christian people that in so doing there is no inconuenience but that the supper may be both sacrament and sacrifice together I answere it is not enough that they do affirme except they doe proue it foorthwith I wil graunt them that the sacrifices of the lawe were also as a kind of sacramēts and that there were some in the which there was oblation to God of one part of the beast which was sacrificed and in like sort communion of an other part among the people and that there was ioyned to the sacrifice a banket the which signified the communion of the people in the same But that cannot agree with the supper For for the first as there was dayly newe banket in these sacrifices so was there newe hostie For they mought not sacrifice one very thing oftener then once nor by consequent communicate the same more often to the people but they must needes take dayly new But the like is not of the sacrifice of Iesus Christe For there is but one onely hostie of the same which is very Iesus Christ the which is the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde figured chiefly by the paschall lambe which among the rest was chiefly sacrifice and sacrament both together because that the Lord had two regards in the institution of the same For first he instituted it to be in the Church of Israel for a memoriall and remembrance of the passage which the Angell of the Lorde did make in Egypt striking the first borne of the Egyptians and of the deliuerance of the Israelites from the captiuitie of them as Moyses doeth plainly witnesse For the which cause it was called by him and consequently by the other Hebrues Pesah which is to say Passage by the name of the thing that it did signifie of the which the Greekes and the Latines haue made their worde Pascha the which they haue vsed and which since haue bene cōuerted into our speach by the name of Easter Beholde then howe this sacrament had regard vnto that which was already done and to that benefit of God the which the Israelites had already receyued touching their deliuerance out of Egypt And by that meane it was a memorial and a sacrament cōmemoratiue and a sacrifice of praise of thanks giuing in respect of the things which were already passed But beside that the Lorde had yet regard to the deliuerāce of mankind the which should be wrought by Iesus Christ whereof that of Egypt was a figure And forsomuch as he should worke this deliuerance by the passage of his death and by the sacrifice of his body and of his bloud the sacrifice was ioyned to the sacrament in the Paschal lambe to the end that i◠should the better represent that which was yet to be done and accomplished Beholde wherein it was ordeyned for the thinges which were yet to come and of the which men did yet looke for the accomplishment For that cause there was there a sacrifice which did represent that of Iesus Christ to come And also there was ioyned vnto a banket which did signifie the communiō of him as it ought to be in euery sacramēt And therefore Saint Paul hath ioyned the one with the other expounding the veritie of that figure For after that he hath sayde that Christe our passeouer was sacrificed he exhorteth the faithfull to the spiritual banket of this sacrifice and to the continuall feast which wee should make and celebrate alwaies Seeing then that the thing to come figured by this sacrifice sacrament was accomplished the one and the other are ceassed For we haue nowe the Sacrifice offered by Iesus Christ whereof the other was but a shadowe and figure Wherfore seing that wee haue the body and the trueth the shadowe and the figure doth clerely cease And therefore euen as our Lorde Iesus Christ did chaunge the Circumcision of the Church of Israel into the baptisme of the Christian Church euen so hath he chaunged the Sacrament of the Paschall lambe into that of the Supper the which hath that in common with the sacrament of the Paschall lambe that as it had regard to the passage which was made in Egypt and to the deliueraunce of the children of Israel which were thinges that were alreadie done in like sorte the Supper hath regarde to the passage which Iesus Christ hath made by his death and for the deliuerance which he hath brought to mankind by the sacrifice which he hath offred in the same which are also things that are alreadie done and passed They haue in like sort both of thē this in common that euen as the sacrament of the Paschall lambe was ordeined and celebrated according to the commandement which the Lord did giue to Moses in the same very night in the same very time that the passage should be made in Egypt the people deliuered from the same euen so Iesus Christ did intitute and celebrate his Supper in the very fame night and euen before the very time that he was taken to be brought to be sacrificed and to woorke the deliuerance of mankind For that cause he vsed the very same maners of speach in the institutiō in the administration of this sacrament as Moyses did in that of the Paschall lambe For euen as Moyses did fay of the lambe It is the passeouer of the Lord which is to say the passage the which he did represent giuing to the signe the name of the thing signified euē so Iesus Christ did say of the bread of the Supper This is my body and of the wine This is my bloud of the newe testament or This cup is the new testament in my bloud Wherefore it is not also to be doubted that euen as he did folowe the maner of speach of Moyses which was much frequented in the holy Scriptures in the vse of the sacraments euen so did he also vse them in the like sense and signification without disguising any thing at al the accustomed language of the holy Ghost by sense newe and straunge to such maners of speach Thus much concerning that which the sacraments of the Paschall lambe of the supper may haue common together touching these points But the Supper hath this different from the same that it was not instituted to be a figure of any sacrifice to come nor of any other thing which mought be yet to accōplish but only to be a sacrament cōmemoratiue of the sacrifice already offered by Iesus Christ and for the communication of the same And therefore there is no propiciatorie sacrifice for the remission of sinnes in this
sacrament offered to God by the ministers which do administer it but onely the banket which witnesseth vnto vs the communication which wee haue in the sacrifice which is already offered For seeing that it endureth for euer because of his eternall and infinite vertue it needeth not at all to be offered againe wherefore there resteth no more to doe in respect of the same but onely the application and communication which is done ordinarily in the Churche by the ministerie of the woorde of God and of the sacraments and chiefly of the supper And therefore Iesus Christe did commande none other thing to be done in the same when he coÌ„manded the distribution of the bread and of the wine which are the signes but onely to celebrate the remembrance and commemoration of him in awayting his comming from heauen as Saint Paul declareth it vnto vs saying As often as ye shall eate this bread brinke this cup you shall shewe foorth the death of the Lorde vntill the time that he come Seing then that Iesus Christ hath ioyned none other propiciatorie sacrifice to his supper but onely that which he him selfe hath offered vpon the crosse it followeth then that they which doe ioyne any other vnto it are very falsaries and counterfaitors of his testament for so much as the supper is as his testament and the sacrament and witnesse of the benefit which hee offereth and communicateth vnto vs by the same Wherefore if men accounte them falsaries Note which do falsifie the testament of a mortall man howe great a fault is this to falsifie the testament of the eternall sonne of God adding an other sacrifice to his for the remission of sinnes seeing that it may not in any wyse bee reiterated For seeing that there is but this onely hostie euen so may the same dye but only one and his blood may bee shead but onely once From whence it followeth also that it can not bee offered nor sacrificed to God but onely one tyme for the remission of sinnes Wherefore seeing that Iesus Christe hath already offered the sacrifice which is of eternall and infinite vertue there resteth no more but the partaking and the communication of the same which is represented vnto vs by the table of the Lorde in the Supper and in the visible banquet of the same as it is done in very deede inuisibly and spiritually towardes the faythfull by the vertue of the holy Ghost and of faith And by that meane the Supper is not ordeined therein to offer a newe sacrifice of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christe nor to reiterate that which hee him selfe hath already offered but onely to be a Sacrament testimonie and commemoration of the sacrifice once offered and to communicate in the same by the meane of this Sacrament for so much as the sacrifice can not at all profite vs to saluation but so farre forth as we are made partakers thereof as it is needefull for vs to be continually Chapter .xv. That the Masse may be neither sacrifice nor Supper of Iesus Christe if in deede there were there no other addicion then that of the sacrifice and that Iesus Christe may not be offered in sacrifice but once nor by any other then by him selfe ANd therefore when the Romaine priests do make of the sacrament of the supper a propiciatorie sacrifice of Iesus Christe to God the Father in steade of administring this Sacrament to the faithfull as Iesus Christe him selfe did and commaunded and as the Apostles and their true successours and all the true auncient Churche did obserue and practise it appeareth euidently that they doe wholy ouerthrowe the ordinaunce of the Lorde in what sorte soeuer they colour their Masse For for the first seeing that there is no true communion for the whole Churche therein beholde there alreadie the principall intent of Iesus Christe oueâ—â—rowen in respect of the institution of the Supper and of the chiefe point of the same But there is yet more For albeit that they did indeede administer the Supper to the whole Churche as often as they shoulde saye and sing their Masse yet shoulde they for all that ouerthrowe the ordinance of the Lorde in adding a sacrifice the which hee hath not ordained to the sacrament by him ordained For first he hath not commanded to offer and to sacrifice to God his father either the bread or the wine in the supper neither yet his body and his blood signified by the same and theÌ„ to offer present and communicate the same to his Church but did coÌ„maunde to do that only which he hath done in the supper to witte to distribute and administer the things which hee did administer in the same But in steade of doing that the Romaine priestes doe nothing in their masse of all that which Iesus Christ hath done and commaÌ„ded in the supper but on the contrary they wil do that which he hath not done coÌ„maunded neither may they in any wise doe nor yet any other creature whatsoeuer no not the very Angels them selues For euen as there is no other hostie which may be sacrificed to God for the remissioÌ„ of sinnes sufficient to satisfie his iudgement but very Iesus Christ euen so the same can not be offered any oftener then onely once the which endureth alway for so much as it 〈◊〉 â—erfect and eternall nor yet by any other theâ—â—by him selfe onely for so much as there is no sacrificer meet to offer such a sacrifice nor that may be allowed of the Father as is very plainely and euidently set forth in the whole Epistle to the Hebrues From whence it followeth that the sacrameÌ„t of the supper can not be the sacrifice of Iesus Christ for the remission of sinnes and then much lesse the masse for so much as it is not the supper of the Lorde and that in deede it can not be such a sacrifice albeit it were the very true supper of the Lorde For being the supper of the Lorde it could bee no more the same then that of Iesus Christ and of the Apostles and of the true auncient Church For the supper can not be the sacrifice which Iesus Christe did offer vpon the crosse by meane of the reasons which I haue already yelded Now there is none other which is propiciatorie for the remission of sinnes and the redemption of soules be it bloodie or not bloodie as it shall please them to call it but euen so as I haue already declared Chapter .xvi. Of the straunge consequence which followe the sacrifice of the Masse and howe the Masse may not be either sacrifice propiciatorie or Eucharistique and the cause why FRom wheÌ„ce I conclude either that the masse may in no wise be a sacrifice either for the liuing or for the dead or els that Iesus Christ is not the true perfect and eternall sacrificer and the onely sauiour and redeemer and that his sacrifice is not
esteme thē worthy because of their faithfulnes On the contrary they doe reiect from the communion of the sacramēts those whom they cannot acknowledge for true members of the Church but onely for notten members or such as are cut off from the same The which thing they do declare vnto them when they doe shut them from the administration Note of them to signifie vnto them that they are cut off and shut out not onely from the company of the faithfull but also of Iesus Christ which is the head and of al his heauenly court And by that meane Note when they do deny them the markes of the true faithful and do depriue them thereof the same is as a maner of degradation as if a man should take from them the tokens which do belong but only to true Christians as a man should take from souldiours the liuery of their Prince and Captaine as from Traitors or from cowardly and vntrue seruants such as are vnworthy to be any more receyued into the company of others which are faithfull and true For that cause we doe call such personages excommunicated Chapter iiii Of the difference which is betwenc the assistants at the masse be thei priests or no the penitents and excommunicated of the auncient Church of the faults which are to be blamed in particular excommunications THen when the priest which is at the altar receiueth his sacrament alone and communicateth nothing to any one of all those which doe assiste at his masse is not this as a kinde of excommunication whereby he shuteth them all out from the Supper which he receiueth all alone for doth he not as though there were none but he alone which were worthy capable therof that all the rest were vnworthy mought be reiected as persons excommunicated For there is no great difference betwene that which they do at this day in the masse in respect of those which do assiste at the same and that which they did in time passed in the auncient Church in the administration of the Supper towarde excommunicated persons which were in the place of the penitents For albeit that they did assiste in the Temple yet for al that they were separated from those which did communicate at the supper and were shut forth from the communication of the same vntil such time as they were reconciled to the Church But yet they had that more then those haue which do assiste at the masse that they did vnderstand both the praiers and the doctrine which were set forth in the assemblie mought make their profit thereof But the greatest part of those which doe assiste at the masse may carry away with them no such profit forsomuch as they vnderstād there nothing at al. And then when the excommunicated were reconciled to the Church they mought goe to the supper as often as the same should be administred For they then made no particular Supper for any but made it onely generall for all wheras euery priest maketh his particular for him selfe and shutteth out all the rest Wherein they do commit three notable faults The first is in that as I haue already touched that the cōmon people those whō they call lay are depriued of the Supper in maner al the whole yere albeit that the priestes doe euery day make theirs euery of them in particular The second is that in the same very time that they do administer the supper generally to al yet doe not the priestes administer theirs with the rest of the body of the Church but doe it all aparte as though they were of an other Church and members of an other body The third is that being already so separated from the rest yet doe they separate them selues among them selues the one from the other For euery of them maketh his Supper aparte vpon his altar without communicating any thing to any of his felowes Chapter v. Of the particular masses and Suppers of the Romaine Church and howe much they are repugnant to the institution nature of the Supper of the Lord. THey do very il agree in euery respect in this with the ordinance of the lord For men may not say at al of any of their Suppers made in this maner that which Saint Paul hath written of the communion of the true Supper saying Wee which are many are one bread and one body forsomuch as we are all partakers of one very bread For euery one doth not partake here of one very bread nor at one very table for euery one hath his bread and his table apart Saint Paul in his time did rebuke the Corinthians for that they did not tary the one for the others when they did celebrate the Supper but did separate the one from the others and chiefly the rich from the poore as well for the contempt of them as for the bankets which yet at that time they did adde to the Supper And for that cause he wrote vnto them When then ye doe assemble your selues together it is not to eate the Supper of the Lorde for euery man taketh his owne particular supper c. Men mought by greater reason say the like of this particularitie of masses and of Suppers which are made in the Romaine Church It is true that the table of the people is more common So is it notwithstanding that the same is yet greatly deuided and separated without any necessity For as euery priest hath his apart vpon his altar in his Chapell euen so do they administer the Supper after their maner to those which will haue it apart and in particular in all their Chappels and altars the which will separate them selues from the common table of others The which thing doth very euill agree with the nature of this holy Sacrament which is vnto vs a Sacrament aswel of the vnion that the faithful haue with Iesus Christe their head as his mēbers as of that which they haue euery of them with the other among them by his spirite Wherefore the more that wee may represent this vnion being all vnited together in the communion of the Supper so much the better doe wee accomplish that which the same Supper doth represent vnto vs For that cause doe wee eate all of one very bread and drinke all of one very wine the which notwithstanding that they be both made of sundry graines gathered together yet for all that they make but one very lofe and one very wine And thereby the Lord would giue vs to vnderstand that wee which were scattered abroad are brought together by his death as Saint Iohn witnesseth and are reunited with him and the one with the other By meane whereof as we eat al of one bread drinke al of one wine at one very table euen so albeit that we be many yet ought we alwaies to be altogether one gathered together in one body as many graines in one
be not in superstion and idolatrie Wherefore if at that very time that they haue good pastors which doe set foorth purely vnto them the doctrine of the Lorde and doe solicite them thereby to do their dutie they are yet very colde and slowe we may not maruell then if when they want that doctrine they haue litle care both for the Supper and Communiō and for all other diuine seruice The third is that albeit that they were the best affected of the world to the religion yet for all that they could not furnished and accomplishe so many Suppers and so often and in so many diuers times and places as the priestes doe ordinarily saye Masses Wherefore it must needes be either that they do saye fewer and to better purpose or els that they doe administer their supper and communion all alone as they daily do Behold then how the true vse of the true supper of the Lorde was lost by the meane of masses and was conuerted into the particular priuate cōmuniō and suppers of the priests which are neither suppers nor communions as I haue already sufficiently proued heretofore Chapter .x. Whether men may cōmunicate spiritually at the Supper by the meane of those which doe there communicate bodily without communicating there with thē and whether the one may receiue the Sacraments better for the other then he may heare the preaching and beleeue and be saued the one for the other THere resteth yet to aunswere nowe to that which they saye that albeit that those which assist at the masse doe not communicate at all bodily at the communion which the priest receiueth in the same yet for all that the same letteth not but that they may cōmunicate spiritually But I aske them if the meanes which the Lord hath ordeined for to communicate vnto vs his giftes and graces doe serue for nothing to that for the which he hath ordeined them and whether it be all one either to vse them or not to vse them at all For if they be there of no value they are ordeined in vaine the which thing shoulde very euill agree with the wisdome and prouidence of the almighty which doth make and ordaine nothing without very good iust cause And if it be so they which doe contemne these meanes do tempt God are rebels vnto him in as much as they do not obey his ordinance in so doing they make them selues vnworthy depriue them selues of the benefites which God would cōmunicate vnto them by those meanes For albeit that he is able to communicate them without those meanes Note and tha he is not thereunto subiect at all yet for all that seeing that he will cōmunicate thē in that sort vnto vs he hath made vs subiect to that order Wherefore if we do contemn and violate them we do make our selues vnworthy incapable of the good things which hee would bestow vpon vs by the same the fruite whereof we can not receiue if we our our selues do not enioy possesse the same in our own very persons not by vicars lieutenāts For there is no mā that may possesse thē nor enioy and receiue the fruite of thē for others but euery man for him selfe onely For the which cause it must also be that whosoeuer wil be made partaker must vse in his own person those meanes by the which the Lord doth communicate them and not an other for him as wee may well iudge by the preaching of the Gospel and by the doctrine set forth vnto vs in the same For seeing that faith is giuen by the hearing of the woorde of God I must if I will receiue this gift of faith heare the worde by hearing whereof the holy Ghost will worke in me and make me partaker for seeing that the Lorde hath so ordeined it if I reiect the preaching of the woorde I depriue my selfe of the faith which I shoulde receiue by the same And therefore Saint Paul saith How shall they belleeue in him whom they haue not heard and how shall they heare without a preacher euen then as an other may not beleeue for me and as I can not be saued by the faith of an other whatsoeuer he be if I my self doe not beleeue in proper person euē so none other may heare the Gospell for me in such sorte that it may profite me if I my selfe doe not heare it in mine own person For faith is in respect of the soule and of the spirituall life as the soule is in respect of the body and of the corporall life wherefore euen as no man may liue a corporall life by meane of the soule of an other man but onely by his own euen so no man may liue a spirituall life by the faith of an other but by his owne faith according to that which is written The iust man shal liue by faith And euen as no man may entertain and conserue the life which hee receiued by meane of his soule by the nouriture which an other doth take nor by that which he eateth and drinketh but onely by that which he him selfe doth take and by the meates and drinkes which he receiueth by his owne preson euen so is it of the nouriture of the faith of euery man by the word of God for the entertainement and conseruatiō of the spirituall life Chapter .xi. Of the agreemēt which is between the signes of the Sacraments and the woorde of the same concerning the instruction of man and of the spirituall communion of them without the bodily in case of necessitie ANd that which I say of preaching and of the worde must be also vnderstoode of the Sacramentes and of the administration of them for so much as they do depend of the same and that they are as Saint Augustine hath very wel said as it were a kinde of worde which is visible and to be felt and is sensible the which teacheth men by their eyes by the meane of the sight and by the other senses by the meane of their feelings as doth the woorde and the voice by the eares by the meane of the hearing From whēce it commeth to passe that by the meane of the sacramentes man is instructed by all his senses as well exteriour as interiour and as well bodily as spirituall because that they haue such as agreement together that the exteriour and bodily senses are as the messengers and the aduertisers of the inward and spiritual senses Wherfore seeing that God would that by the meane of his sacraments that one should helpe to instruct the others euery one in their order and degree none may then contemne and ouerthrowe that order Whereupon I do conclude that the Romaine priests may as wel receiue the supper for others as for them selues as they may heare the word of God beleeue be saued for others for so much as it must needes be that euery man haue all this
in his owne person Wherefore it is as possible that the Christiā people should be fedde spiritually with the body blood of Iesus Christ by the communion which the priest alone maketh in his masse as it is possible that he may be fed bodily with that which the priest dineth with and eateth drinketh all alone Wherefore if the people wil be partakers of the things signified by the signes of the supper they must also be partakers of the worde of the signes of the same which are the meanes whereby God will cōmunicate those things which they doe signifie For as he hath ordeined the meane whereby he will giue entertaine conserue the bodily life euē so hath he done for the conseruation of the spiritual life And therefore seeing that he hath ordeined the ministerie of the word of the sacramēts in respect of the spirituall life he that would haue conserue it without this meane should do as much as if he would liue a bodily life without eating or drinking vsing the meane ordeined of God for the nouriture entertainemēt of the same if there be no such necessitie and let that they both cannot be had For God hath not so tied his graces to external things that he cannot distribute the same without them by his diuine vertue and without externall meanes if it please him prouided that there bee no contempt or rebellion of our part for albeit that he hath made vs subiect thereunto so farre foorth as hee giueth vs the meanes yet for all that he is not subiect as wee are but so farre foorth as it pleaseth him to vse them of his owne free will. And therefore euen as he did nourish extraordinarily supernaturally by his diuine vertue Moyses Elie and Iesus Christ the space of fortie dayes they not receiuing in that time any bodily meate or drinke according to the order of nature euen so may hee nourishe spiritually and communicate his gifts and graces without the ministerie of man ordeined in his Churche if it please him to those which by necessitie are depriued of them notwithstanding that they haue great desire to vse the meanes which he hath ordeined and that they do all their indeuour that they may to haue the true and right vse thereof as if a faithfull man were so holden by necessitie of sicknesse or by captiuitie and prison of tyrantes or by some other like necessitie which hindreth him that he may not participate outwardly For if there were there of his fault and that hee would forbeare for his pleasure and that he would not do his duetie in that behalfe the reason shoulde bee otherwise Chapter .xii. How greatly and how much the more inexcusable the Romaine priestes should be for depriuing the Christian people from the communion of the body and of the blood of the Lorde in their Masses and of his blood in their common Suppers if the doctrine of their transsubstātiation were true ANd if the doctrine of transsubstantiation were true that which I say would fight yet more sharpely against the Romaine priests For seeing that they doe affirme that the bread and the wine which are the signes of the supper are conuerted into the very body and blood of Iesus Christ the which they signifie they must also confesse will they or will they not that in depriuing priuing the people of these two signes in their masse they doe also depriue them of the bodie of the blood of Iesus Christe and that in their commō supper they depriue them of the blood deliuering to them but they body according to their doctrine for seeing that we must be made flesh of the flesh bones of the bones of Iesus Christ by the communiō which we should haue with him and which is represented vnto vs as well by baptisme as by the supper an other can not be that for vs And by that meane the priests may no more receiue the supper for vs in our name then they may be baptized in our name for vs And therefore Iesus Christ said not that he which should eate his flesh and drinke his blood by vicar lieutenant should haue life in him should be in Iesus Christ and Iesus Christ in him but said openly He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me I in him hath eternall life and I will rayse him vp at the latter day Let the Romaine Catholiques then consider whether their priestes may eate this meate and drinke this drinke rise for all their parochians and for all those which heare and see their masses and whether they will be contented to be so nourished with the flesh and with the blood of Iesus Christe and so to rise at the latter daye in the person of their priestes Chapter .xiii. Of the Sacrifice and of the Communion that the priestes doe administer in their masses as well for the dead as for the liuing THus much concerning the cōmunion which is in the masse and concerning the ninth errour which wee doe blame in the same I will now come to the tenth which is cōcerning that that the priests doe not doaste that they do sacrifice and cōmunicate in their masse only for the liuing but also for the dead affirming that by that meane they doe applie the sacrifice of Iesus Christe and the vertue and the merite of the same as well to the one as to the others For the which cause they saye that they doe deuide their hosties into three partes in their communion of the which they dippe the one into the wine in their challice against the expresse ordinaunce of the Lorde yea and against the very auncient canons For the Lorde did not temper the bread with the wine neither did hee make a soppe in the wine in the institution of the supper neither did he also commaunde to do it And therefore it is written in the auncient canons which forbidde the same that Iesus Christe did distribute the bread apart and the wine apart and that he gaue not the bread nor the morcell tempered to any other then to Iudas which betrayed him and he gaue it not vnto him yet in the Supper but out of the Supper Nowe of these three partes that the priestes make of their hostie in their masse they assigne the one to the liuing and the two others to the dead because that they doe make two sortes to witte the one which are already happy and doe raigne in Paradise and the other which are yet holden in the paines of purgatorie and haue not yet fulfilled their penance nor haue fully satisfied vnto God and by that meane they doe sacrifice and communicate both for the liuing and for the dead all at one tyme as though Iesus Christe had not fully satisfied for all by his sacrifice and as though the ministerie of the woorde and of the Sacramentes were