Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	daughter_n	marry_v	son_n	44,819	5	5.8094	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00919	A Catholike confutation of M. Iohn Riders clayme of antiquitie and a caulming comfort against his caueat. In which is demonstrated, by assurances, euen of protestants, that al antiquitie, for al pointes of religion in controuersie, is repugnant to protestancie. Secondly, that protestancie is repugnant particularlie to al articles of beleefe. Thirdly, that puritan plots are pernitious to religion, and state. And lastly, a replye to M. Riders Rescript; with a discouerie of puritan partialitie in his behalfe. By Henry Fitzimon of Dublin in Irland, of the Societie of Iesus, priest.; Catholike confutation of M. John Riders clayme of antiquitie.	Fitzsimon, Henry, b. 1566.; Rider, John, 1562-1632. Rescript.; Rider, John, 1562-1632. Friendly caveat to Irelands Catholicks.	1608 (1608)	STC 11025; ESTC S102272	591,774	580

to haue bene the general practise of all Christians so to be contented with the B. Sacrament vnder the forme of bread as not to haue coueted the vse of it vnder the forme of wyne This appeareth by Serapion who being neere his departure Euseb l. 6. hist c. 36. and crauing the B. Communion the Priest as Eusebius sayth sent him only a part of the Eucharist without any consecrated blood Secondly by the vse of Christians in first tymes when they had litle commoditie of Priests or Churches they tooke home to their houses the B. Sacrament vnder the forme of bread without the other forme as appeareth by Tertullian Cyprian Hierom and Augustin In Suarez loc cit Thirdly by the vse of Pixes as I lately sayd proued and confessed from the Apostles tymes made for the conseruation of the B. Sacrament vnder the forme of bread Vide Durant lib. 1. c. 16. ther being no such for the forme of wyne Yet as I forwarned the vse of the chalice was indifferently allowed to lay people as partly appeareth by the request of Maria Aegiptiaca numb 115. according to the seueral commodities of places vntil by reason of danger as I fortould of sowring and shedding and of errours increasing the Church restrayned it from the lay people Also because the Preest doth offre a sacrifice in remembrance of the death Passion of our Saluioure Iesus Christ whose blood at that tyme of his passion was shedd and separated from his body he ought to consecrat and receaue vnder both formes for the better explicatiō of such effusion of Christs blood which is not needfull by the people rcceauing it rather as a Sacrament then Sacrifice This doctrin so godly and religious is impugned by hereticks as appeereth Brent in cōfess VVittemberg art de euchar Kemnitius in fine disputationis de vtraque specie only to thwart the Pope Brentius and Kemnitius accord to that part therof that Christ is wholy vnder ether of both formes Wherby I take no confirmation but to shew they haue no conformation in their being against vs. Also in K. Edwards tymes when Protestantrie was most free from the dreggs of Puritantrie the communion vnder both kynds or formes was not thought so absolutly requisit Statut. An. 1. Edward 6. cap. 1. Luth. ser de Eucharistia Vide conc Constant. sess 13. Rodolph Ab. de S. Communione but yf necessitie did otherwyse requyre it might sayth K. Edwards statute be allowed in one kinde Also Luther in his sobre mood could teache Satis esse populo alteram desiderare sumere speciem quantum ordinat dat Catholica Ecclesia To be sufficient to the people to desyre and receaue one kinde as much as the Catholick Church ordaineth and giueth To be breefe such to haue bene the receaued custome of Gods church these verses of Rodolph Abbot of S. Trudon 450. yeares past do confirme Hic ibi cautela fuit ne presbyter egris aut sanis tribuat laicis de sanguine Christi Nam fundi posset leuiter simplexque putaret Quod non sub specie sit Iesus totus vtraue Be it a Caueat that Preists to sicke or sownd Of laye folke giue not Christs most sacred blood For it might shed and seely thoughts would simply grownd In ether forme a lyke Christ not t' haue stood 3. Article 3 The third That priests by the law of God may not marrie Rider 131. 132. I May not here make anie stay onelie touch a point or two and so away This Article is contrarie to holie Scriptures auncient Fathers the practise of the primitiue Church and the Canons of the Popes In the old Testament the marriage of the Priests is recorded and commended Ierem. 1.1 Exod. 18. The holie Prophet Ieremie was the sonne of a priest Zippora was the priest of Midians daughter married to Moises the Lords Maiestrate Luke 1.8.9 Againe in the new Testament Iohn Baptist was the sonne of Zacharie a priest And the Scriptures touching marriage giue rules without exception or limitation To auoide fornication let euerie man haue his wife and euerie woman her husband 1. Cor. 7.2 And to the Hebrews hee saith Marriage is honourable amongst all men and the bed vndefiled but whoremongers and adulterers God will iudge VVhether Continencie of the Clergie was anciently cōmanded 131. THe too the that M. Rider Fitzsimon as a Puritan hath against acts of Parlament transporteth him from all patience and purpose which should be betwixt vs. For I only alleaged the forsayd acts to testifie that the real presence was euen since Protestantrie commanded to be beleeued which being the first article of the six and the residue being sutable and conformable therto against suche late Protestants as are degenerated from first planters of Protestantrie I recorded them together only by their conformitie to ratifie the article in question without any intent or expectation that I should be occasioned to defend acts of Protestant Parlaments by me obiected against Protestants But as I was before by him inforced to defend Kemnitius my aduersarie so now I am to defend opposit parlaments Well then in the name of Christ let vs not forsake him in all his vagaries he being now not farr from home First he confesseth the sayd articles an act inacted by all the nobles and learned of the Lande Yet that the first is refuted the second is abhominable the third is contrary to holy Scriptures ancient Fathers the practise of the primatiue Church and the canons of the Popes and the other three as repugnant to Christs trueth as the rest Secondly he telleth he will make no stay but touch a point or two and so away wherof and of the next that in the ould testament the mariadge of preests is commended there being no such mater therin amounteth the 183. The 183. vntruth vntrueth In deed in the ould testamēt as being not so perfect a state as the new preests wrere marryed Yet although they were imployed only about figurs and shaddowes of the substance and trueth deliuered in the new testament they were neuerthelesse bownd to continencie during such their imployment and not only they but also the people when they would partake of such figuratiue mysteries As for example Achimelech refused to giue Dauid the proposition bread vnlesse he had vnderstood that they were 1. Reg. 21. mundi pueri maximè a mulieribus vndefyled people especialy from women And when the preests of the ould testament were occupyed about their function 1. Paralip 24. Luc. 1. Caluin l. 4. Instit. c. 12. n. 25. they were remote from habitation and wiues At which consideration Caluin could confesse the preests of the ould law iussos fuisse vltra humanum morem se purificare to haue bene commanded to purifie them selues beyond the custome of men Yet can he not fynde it allowable in the preests of the new law Notwithstanding any would thinke S. Pauls woords

neuer in question and that the maner is not proued I say then the boy in Grammer or the Sophist that would not conceaue the state of the question propounded and expounded vnto him by Christ him selfe not obscurely or doubtfully but euidently yet affirmeth that instruction hath not bene giuen him is to haue many strypes according to Gods woord Prouerb 10. v. 10. Ose 4.14 Populus non intelligens vapulabit the not vnderstanding people shal be beaten c. Of the rest whether the faythfull only dwel in Christ and only dwellers in him eate him and that it is all one to heare the woord and to communicat as here is affirmed appeareth in the 33. 34. 35. and 43. numbres 46. For you take this flesh of Christ which is our true meat Rider to be the flesh which was borne of the virgin and suffered on the Crosse but the Popes Church of Rome say contrarie for these be the wordes of the Canon Dist. 2. de consec pag. 434. canon dupliciter Col. 4. Read the glosse and you may see your errour as in a glasse Dupliciter intelligitur caro sanguis Christi vel spiritualis illa atque diuina de qua ipse ait Caro mea vere est cibus sanguis meus vere est potus nisi meam carnem c. Vel caro mea ea quae crucifixa est c. The flesh and bloud of Christ saith your owne Church of Rome must be considered two manner of waies either for the spirituall and diuine flesh spoken of by Christ my flesh is meat in deed c. and except you drinke his bloud c. or else for that his flesh which was crucified and that his bloud shed by the sharp launce of a cruell souldiour so that heere you forsake your Romane Catholique faith and become Apostates from the Church of Rome Thus you abuse the Catholiques in making them beleeue you teach as the Pope teacheth and you doe not therefore either the Pope or you must erre grosly teaching contraries But that all men may see that not onely this Pope but also other Popes haue held the contrarie opinion to your new broched heresie I will alleadge him that you dare not contradict Innocentius tertius lib. 4. cap. 14. de Sacramento Altaris pag. 179. that is Innocentius tertius that first begat your abortiue Transubstantiation De spirituali commestione Dominus ait Nisi manducaueritis c. The Lord Christ when hee spake of the spirituall eating said Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man c. Loe heere is another Pope against you For you late Iesuites Semynaries Rhemists and Priests take this as spoken of Christs flesh in the sacrament and they take it for that spirituall and diuine flesh of Christ whereon all the faithfull fed by faith as well before Christs incarnation as since his ascention The Pope your Father Rome your mother witnesse against you Priestes and the rest of their degenerat children I would bring more witnesses against your vntrue expositions and allegations but that I thinke it sufficient that the Parentes Testimonie is the strongest euidence against their degenerat children And after the Pope alleadgeth Augustine and the Canon Quid paras dentem ventrem crede manducasti and then concludes against your carnall eating of Christes flesh most strongly Qui credit in Deum comedit ipsum Caro Christi nisi spiritualiter comedatur non ad salutem sed ad iudicium manducatur Why saieth your Pope preparest thou thy teeth to eate and thy bellie to be filled beleeue and thou hast eaten hee that beleeues eates For the flesh of Christ is not eaten to saluation but to destruction vnlesse it be eaten spirituallie And there in the next chapter Pap. 180. the Pope giues this marginall note Christus est spiritualis Eucharistia Christ is our spiritual Eucharist not our carnall food in the Sacrament And in the same page he saith Cibus est non corporis sed animae this is not meat for the bodie but for the soule And if it bee meate for the soule then it must bee receiued by faith not the mouth spirituallie not carnallie You see now the Scriptures Fathers Popes olde and new the Text and glosse of your deare mother the Church of Rome against you And least you should cauil I haue alleadged the Bookes Chapters Distinctions and Pages And if you will still tell the Catholiques that these places by mee alleadged be not true then I tell you all your owne Authors and print be false for I alleadge Father Pope and Canons of your owne print and if you doubt looke vnto your owne bookes and prints Printed Anno. 1599. Impensis Lazari Zetzneri and you shall find them so verbatim vnlesse your late Ind●● expurgatorius hath blotted out the trueth as in manie things it hath VVhether the Popes and Church of Rome doe in their Decretals denye Christ in the Sacrament to be the same that was borne of the Virgin Marie Fitzimon 46. THe Decretal and glosse telling only that Christ may be considered ether Spiritually as he is in the Sacrament or as he was on the Crosse with his sensible quantitie and Innocentius instructing that we may receaue verum corpus quod traxit de Virgine in cruce pependit his true body receaued from the virgin and which hanged on the Crosse sacramentaly that is saythe he vnder the forme or Spiritualy by faythe only such testimonies confirming apparently our doctrin and being opposit to our aduersaries without reason or ryme our Spiritual M. Rider for the only mention made of Spiritualitie certifyeth to make for his purpose thinking he hath as good right to all testimonies contayning Spiritualitie although otherwyse they be most repugnant to him as to all tyethes and fruicts of his Deanry bequeathed for vses altogether opposit to his wonted offices of spiritualitie as yf he fullfilled them In the meane tyme by seueral titles is here made vp the 20. vntrueth that our Canons teache contrary to vs ether generaly The 20. vntruth or particularly in this point For do we say that Christ is present realy corporaly and substantialy so do they Dist. 2. de consecr cap. Christus panis est secundum carnem assumptam pro mundi vita according to his fleashe assumpted for the lyfe of the world Do we say that it is the same body which was borne of the virgin and crucified So do they Dist. 2. de consecr cap. Reuera mirabile hoc quod conficimus corpus ex virgine est verè vtique caro Christi que crucifixa est que sepulta est This which is by vs doone is the body taken from the virgin For it is truely the fleash of Christ which was crucifyed which was buryed Do we say that good and badd do receaue Christ corporaly the good to their saluation the badd to their damnation so do they Ibidem cap. sieut

holinesse it selfe the holier by your crossing but I hope you will not take blessing in this sence but ioyne with the Disciples and vs that blessing of GOD signifieth praising of GOD or praying to GOD for one man to blesse another is nothing else but to praye for them and to beseech God that he would blesse them that is defend them protect them and be mercifull vnto them So Isaack blessed Iacob and Iacob the sonnes of Ioseph And so the LORD commaunded Moises to speake to Aaron and to his Sonnes saying Thus shall yee blesse the children of Israel and say vnto them The Lord blesse thee and keepe thee the Lord make his face to shine vpon thee and be mercifull vnto thee c. A Christian patterne not onelie for Priests but also for Pastours and Parents dailie to practise the one for his flocke the other for his familie yet both in the Lord from the Lord. Which blessings are deriued from Gods mercies hang not on the ends of Priests fingers Again you see blessing is praying with the mouth not crossing with the fingers as you vainlie foolishlie make your Ghostlie childrē beleeue that if you crosse them with your two fingers and a thumbe they are pardoned for their sinnes past and preserued that day from future daungers and euil spirits Which fingered blessing of yours is as powerfull to pardon sinne and feare away spirits as three sups of the Challice is to cure the chinne-cough This blessing was commaunded by God to be practised by Aaron the High-Priest and the rest of the Priests vpon Gods children but how far your blessing differs from this the simplest may iudge For first God commaunded this blessing the Pope your blessings This was by mouth onely yours with some mumbling wordes and charming crosses with your fingers This blessing was a prayer to desire God to blesse and you teach that in your breath and fingers there is a power a certain working or impression of some blessing vpon them by meanes of your said mumbling and crossing But your Priests agree with Gods Priests and your blessing with fingers with Gods Priests blessings with prayer of the heart and mouth euen as well as trueth and falsehood light and darknesse superstition and religion Christ and Belial And if the Catholiques will but diligently read this commandement of GOD giuen to the High-Priest and Priests in this place touching the manner how they should blesse Gods people I am resolued that few Catholiques in this kingdome heereafter will kneele at your feet or beg at your hand any finger benediction or crossing because is hath no warrant from Gods word and therefore ten thousand of them not worth a farthing How the Priests blesse the Sacrament You crosse the cup or Challice with a set number of crosses and gestures sometimes blowing ouer the Chalice sometimes crossing it sometimes hiding it that none must see it then ioyning and disioyning of your thumbe and two fingers with manie moe such Apish toies childish trickes and charming prankes which haue neither foundation nor relation to Christs actions and institution How the Preachers of the gospell blesse the bread the cup. But we in administring this holy Sacrament confesse the greatnesse and grieuousnesse of our sinnes that can no otherwise bee pardoned but in Christes bloudie and bitter passion and wee giue thankes to God for Christs blessed obedience to the shamefull death of the cursed crosse by which he hath satisfied Gods wrath and wrought our reconciliation in the bloud of the same and continue this Sacrament as he instituted and commaunded in reuerence and rememberance thereof without addition alteration or subtraction And pray that our vnworthinesse and want of faith hinder not our spirituall vnion reall presence with Christ which is offered in the word of institution and sealed in the right receiuing of the Sacrament This is the force and effect of this word Blesse the true vse wherof Christ by his practize deliuered the Primitiue Church Fathers and we imitate Now whether your blessing in the Sacrament and your blessing by crossing the people or ours come neerer to Gods word and Christs practize let the best minded to Gods truth iudge and then with GODS trueth ioyne Thus much for your Addition misunderstanding and misapplication Now to your Omission or Subtraction of a whole verse Omission or Subtraction You bring for proofe of your carnall presence the 26. verse and the 28. verse Caluin procedeth further Caluin 1. Cor. 10.16 Iewell cō Hard. art 1. diuis 9. pa. 23. confuting Erasmus and all others who indeuoure to confound as all one blessing and giuing thanks Iewell telleth that the meaning of Christs woords Hoc facite is take ye bread blesse it breake it and giue it in my remembrance Now to my thinking reason would haue aduised our aduersaries to haue made a clean contrary inference that yf the greeke vsual woord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to giue thanks be some time and especialy in our controuersie taken to blesse that the propre woord to blesse especialy to so solemne a ceremonie ought not to be taken only to giue thancks Somewhat also must be said of the blessing by making Crosses least M. Rider applaud to him selfe for not haueing disaduantage in any thing he hath propounded First then euen by Scripturs is it manifest that when the angels were commanded to marke Gods especial elected Ezech. 9.4 Niceph. l. 2. c. 42. Basil l. de Spiritu sancto c. 27. Tertull. l. de corona militis Athanas l. de incarnat verbi Hieron ep ad Demetriadē epist 128. August tra 18. in Ioan. Cyrill 4. Catech. Illuminat Chrysost hom 21. 27. 36. ad pop Antioch Ambros. Serm. 45. August serm 19. de Sanctis Idem trac 118. in Ioā vide Gretserū de Cruce l. 3. c. 6. Hieron ad Pam. ad Rustic in vita Hilarion Antonij August epist. 59. lib. 22. de ciu c. 8. Beda in hist Augl l. 3. c. 26. the marke or character to haue bene the leter thau or our leter T. in their forheads which is a perfect Crosse to all mens eyes Also by relation of Nicephorus of S. Ihon Euangelist Vbi se signo crucis muniuisset in monumentum descendit When he had fortified him selfe with the signe of the Crosse he discended into the monument S. Basil and Tertullian affirme to make the signe of the Crosse to be an Apostolical tradition Tertullian Athanase Hierome Augustin Cyrill of Hierusalem Chrysostom Ambrose and all Fathers without exception doe exhort and aduise all Christians at rising appareilling washing sitting eating at euery action and tyme to arme them selues with the signe of the Crosse as propre to Christians Wherof saith S. Augustin Hoc ad victoriam prouehit hoc veneficia destruit omnia daemonum machinamenta ad nihilum redigit this aduaunceth our victorie this distroyeth witchcraft and frustrateth all attempts of the deuil Without which saithe

misbeleeue the Father who exclude the Sonn holy Ghost from infinit diuinitie and coequalitie with the Father as doth Melancthon Caluin Beza c. For suche as is the Father suche is the Sonn suche is the holy Ghost Yf he infinit they also must be infinit è contrà Wherof after at the holy Ghost Almightie 10. Of this parcell I haue in the 68. Vide num 68. numbre manifested manyfould principal Protestants resolutly denying the omnipotencie of God Besyd citations out of Caluin in the sayd number seel 2. Instit c. 7. n. 5. 24. lib. 4. c. 17. n. 24. in ps 37. v. 4. Therfor for auoyding superfluitie I referr the reader therto And for more abundant proofe yf Caluin be also perused in the citations of this margent you shal finde him flouting at our doctrin that God is almightie and tearming it blasphemous Here is a pittifull spectacle exhibited toward the first and principal article of our beleefe and euery woord therof Farr hath it bene from my intention or wonte in which protestation I refuse not my greatest enemyes verdict to falsifie or peruert any testimonies alleaged Let it therfor be euery carefull Christians resolution not to slumber in the mayne chaunces of religions purloyning by fayre benedictions out of his hart considering these authours so much offended with this beleefe are the principal founders of protestantcy And consequently that they fayling in the very foundation must lykewyse haue litle soundnes in the rest and deserue wholy to be suspected 2. Article of S. Ihon. Maker of heauen and earthe 11. First it is necessarie for the right beleefe of this Article to confesse that the Sonne and holy Ghost created as much as God the Father they not being distinguished one from another as they are God and consequently their doings are and must be all one in external operations such as is the creation of the world Calu. con Valentin Gentil l. 2. Instit. c. 14. n. 3. Contrary to this Article is Caluin first in saying the name of God peculiarly to belong only to God the Father Secondly in saying that Christ considered according to his person may not be called creator of heauen and earthe Which impiouse paradox being allowed to be true besyd all other absurdities Christ according to his person should not be God or at least-their should not equalitie or God head be beleeued Thirdly in saying in c. r 4. Genes v. 18. Et in c. 6. Ioan. v. 57. Christ our Lord to be but a second king next to God and a second cause of lyfe Yf he had any regard to S. Paul affirming Philip. 2. Christ not to haue thought it any robberie to be equal to God would he haue aduentured to disinherit him in this maner of his coequal Godhead But why should he haue regarded S. Paul when the very deitie of our Sauiour Iesus Christ could not retaine him from this abhominable blasphemie Fourthly in saying that God in heauen is not dutyfully and sincerly serued without synne euen by the angels them selues Calu. in cap. 1. Colos v. 20. Wherby is insinuated contrary to Scripture Apoc. 21. that in the heauenly citie ther is some thing defyled When therfor all belonging to power and gouernement to the Father of wysdom knowledge and doctrin to the Sonne of benignity liberality plentie and sanctification to the holy Ghost is imputed and appropriated the meaning is only to ascribe all good among the three persons not to exclude any good from any one of them as being all three equaly God and consequently not vnequaly fountains of all good as well in particular as in general But more touching this article will follow in treating of Christs ascension to heauen 3. Article of S. Iames. And in Iesus Christ his only Sonne our Lord. Vide num 24. 12. Most Protestants to be against this article appeareth besyd what is sayd in the precedēt article in our 24. n. For some affirme that Christ is not the Messias some that the name of Christ is a filthy name some that he was a deceauer of the world some that he was not God some that he had but a meane measure of Godhead Edward Rogers against the sect of the familie of loue London 1579. some that he was ignorant his discourses absurd him selfe no more God then Socrates Trismegistus c. The same blasphemies are extant in the first and second article of the Famile of loue The same also are implyed by the Proto-Puritan Cartwright saying that he could not be perswaded the Israelits to be so madde Cartwr 2. replic pag. 191. as to beleeue him to be the liuing God whom with their eyes they did behould to be a miserable and simple man These I say demonstrat that Christ for taking our infirmites is distrusted by these compagnions to be the liueing God and our Lord. Secondly those are against this Article who equal them selues in Gods fauoure and right to heauen vnto Iesus Christ Gods only first begotten consubstantial sonne our Lord. Wherof in this examin in the 5. numbre and after somewhat is to be found Thirdly they beleeue not in Iesus Christ our Lord who distrust any part of his doctrin whether it be of the B. Sacrament or otherwyse because they can not conceaue it in their vnderstanding Caluin in cap. 6. cap. 7. Ioannis Caluinists generaly to be such is confessed by Caluin saying VVhen the reason of any thing doth not appeare vnto vs such is our great pryde that we esteeme it nothing Fowerthly contrary to this Article is Caluin saying Vide num 9. pr●●ce● It is foolishnes to thinke that God the Father doth continualy begett his sonne For therby God the Father is made sometyme not to vnderstand which is his begetting and the Sonne is abolished who is not otherwyse actualy Sonne of the Father but by determinating actualy the relation of the Father to him selfe Besyd all other demonstrations of their blasphemies that euery one may know that I charge them not vndeseruedly and hatred against Iesus Christ the Sonne of God mentioned in the forsayd 24. number harden your harts to heare Luther saying Nihil mirum si Arius Iudaeus Mahumetes Luther disp de ●e● thes 18. Tom. 2. Wittemb latin● totus Mundus negent Christum esse Deum It is no merueil yf Arius yf a Iew yf Mahumet and all the world denye Christ to be the Sonn of God It is no meruell in deed that besyd Arius Iewes and Turkes the Lutherans be so perswaded considering Luther thus teaching among them is so principal an Euangelist 4. Article of S. Andrew VVho was conceaued of the holy Ghost borne of the Virgin Mary 13. First they are contrary to this Article Vide Maldonat in cap. 1. Math. who blasphemously affirmed the holy Ghost to haue bene Father to Christ in maner of other Fathers toward their children as appeareth in Maldonat Vide Caluino Turc

committeth high treason against Christ though in deed in substance they receiue but bred and wine And as a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defacing or clipping the kings picture seale or coine though the king be not locallie in place so the wicked in the Sacraments which are Christ seales which being abused by them they are guiltie of Gods iudgements though Christ be not inclosed locallie in the bread and wine And what Chrysostome speaketh here of the Lords Supper the same hee doth of Baptisme and saith a man may be as well guiltie of the Lords bodie and bloud in cōtemning Baptisme which is but a seale of his washing in the bloud of Christ though hee neuer washed but in water and alleadgeth Paul Heb. 10 29 saing Of how much sorer punishment suppose yee shal be be worthy which treadeth vnder foot the sonne of God counteth the bloud of the testament as an vnholie thing c. These Fathers haue aunswered you and I hope will satisfie fullie the indifferent Reader Now three sorts of men are guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. The first are plaine Atheists that are without God or godlinesse in this present world and such eate this bread vnworthelie and therefore are guiltie of Christes bodie and bloud 2. The second sort haue a historicall faith and a generall knowledge Thre sorts of mē guilty of the Lords bodie and beleeue that whatsoeuer is taught in Gods booke is true but they lacke apprehension and application to make a particular and holy vse of the same and therefore if such come and eate of this bread they are guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. 3. The third sort haue a liuelie apprehending and applying faith yet in their life they slippe and fall yea sometimes verie grieuouslie yet they awake and weep with Peter and repent for the same All these are said to eate vnworthelie but the first two sorts vnto their condemnation The third sort for their faults frailties negligences and vndue preparation are in this life of the Lord corrected least with the world they should be damned The two first sorts eateth onelie the outward elemēts the last sort eateth the bodie of Christ and drinketh the bloud of Christ And now to your second proofe out of Saint Paul VVhether it be treason to breake Images Fitzsimon 96. YF as he in this place affirmeth a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defaceing or clipping the kings picture seale or coyne though the king be not localy in place then consequently and necessarilie they must be guiltie of treason toward God who rent deface or clipp his pictures seales or coyne The necessitie of such sequel or inference is apparent considering that any abuse or contempt in the resemblance of a prince is not more iniurious to a prince then the lyke in a representation of God is to God Nether was there other cause why God did punish Oza 2. Reg. 6. 13. but prophaning resemblances of him contayned in the arke and all others that sacrilegiously misbehaued them selues not only toward his figures yea shadowes but also toward vesselles and ornaments belonging to them Now then tell plainly M. Rider will you stand to your words or recant them what say you Neuer thinke sayth S. Cyprian ep 73. because you haue once fayled that you should therfor blush to reuoke What say you shall his discourse be starling or noe Me thinke I behould you frowning fretting at me for seeming to thinke that you would euer reclayme Your conclusion therfor is that treason is cōmitted by iniurie to the pictures persons alyke Then woe and well away to all your brethren image-breakers Then woe and well away to VValer the murtherer vnder-minister of Swoords who hanged on a gibbet the picture of Christ crucifyed anno 1603. Then woe and well away to M. Rider who only to haue stones to build an ouen to bake bread to impouerish bakers of the citie not hauing idely or without price seuenten hondred barrells of corne yearly as he hath pull'd downe the fayre crosse in S. Patricks which all others his predecessors of that profession had permitted vnuiolated and to the same vse to haue fyer pull'd downe all the trees therin This sentence of his giuen against him selfe brethren made his owne sonn mense Maio 1604. when he attempted to pull downe ane image to be by Gods iudgment precipitated from a height and altogether crushed and at the same tyme his seruant to be stricken with the plague c. This sheweth that it is noe greater treason against a king to abuse and despise his picture then against Christ to prophane and distroye his images What needed this moth to intermedle with the candle of learning wherby his wyngs are so often scortched What needed him to implie that abusers of the communion according to his surmise being but a bare representation of Christ shal be punished with equal torments with such as nayled him on the Crosse Where then will the final Rende vous of Protestants be who haue abused other his representations images appellations as well expressing his death as the Protestant Sacrament I can not choose but say with the Poet. Ingratum genus vestrum quicunque forenses Admiramini plausus Euripides Hecuba ex versione Gasparis Stiblini vtinam non essetis mihi cogniti Qui nihil pensi habetis amicos laedere Modo dicatis grata multitudini O hatefull race of Mercenarie mates Searching applauds ô that I knew you not Not waying how you harme your frends throwgh hates So you the peoples itching eares befott But by the waye what meaneth this often tearming of Sacraments to be but seals and especialy by them who by their profession are bound to beleeue that they nether seale the body nor soule that they nether bring fayth nor confirme it that they are nether fruictfull nor needfull Yf otherwyse we be myndfull of Christ Ochinus apud Andream Iurgiewicium in bello quinti Euangelij pag. 102. Ochinus resolueth Spiritu Dei non Sacramentis fidem confirmari By the spirit of God and not by Sacraments fayth to be confirmed Yf seales be accepted in stidd of Sacrament because this woord is not in Scripture as your brethren before determine tell vs so playnly and we will not inforce you to grawnt that your Supper of the Lord which your great Doctor P. Martyr sayth in respect of the tyme it is receaued P. Martyr in 1. Cor. c. 11. pag 293. 294. and of your emptie stomacks should with greater reason be called a breakfast or dyner is a Sacrament Now as I tould you befor such hate is conceaued alredy among the Reformers against this woord Sacrament as it is conuenient you abstayne from it For they say Bruces sermons pag. 4. 126. VVestphal in apol pag. 5. Pag. 126. about the ambiguitie of this word are rysen many tragedies which will not cease whyle the world lasts that

est solam diem dominicam seruandam esse It is concluded the only sonday should be kept Apud Cornel. Schulting l. 9. hierarchie Anacriseos A second Synod of theirs alloweth only aboue sondayes the feast of the natiuitie Another at Midleburg Synod Midleb an 1581. decret 51. in the 51. decree permitteth the Natiuitie and the Ascension Another in the Electoral Palatinat addeth the two mondayes next Easter and whitsontyde And in the forsayd supplication of puritans to his Maiestie Supplication to his Maiestie an 1603. they againe disalow all others excepting fondayes For they craue that the lords daye be not prophaned and the rest not so strictly vrged Wher vpon the answer of Oxford inquireth The avvnsvver of Oxford pag. 13. would they haue men vpon holy dayes goe to plough or ●art as some of their humor haue caused their seruants to doe on the very feast of Christs Natiuitie Suruey of the booke of common prayer Pag. 65. And this is the determinat Doctrin of their late suruey Wherin first they declare that Ministers proclaming any other holy dayes then the dayes of the lord do communicat the especial honor of the lord to another secondly that therto they haue no warrant of the woord Pag. 66. Thirdly in the 52. Quere or demand they inquyre whether any holy day on fixed tyme though only and immediatly vnto the lord may be sanctified so as at noe tyme therof any worke may be done Fowerthly Pag. 67. they conclud that it is all one to make any holy day without Gods expresse appointment as to violat any day holy by his appointement yea that it is as great idolatrie as it was in the Israelits Pag. 68. to haue sett vp a Calfe Fiftly that yf the translation of the sabbaoth into sonday be not iustified by scriptures it is not lawfull for Christians to sanctifie it For the iustifying wherof these only to their seeming are the principal fundations Ioan. 20.19.26 First that Christ appeared to his disciples the doores being shutt and sayd peace be vnto them Secondly they cite the first chapter of the Acts and 13. verse wherin I fynd noe mention of sonday or reason of sanctifying it For therin is only related how the Apostles went vp to a chamber 1. Cor. 16.2 and did abyde therin Thirdly because S. Paul wished collections of almes for the necessitie of the poore to be collected on the first day which is our sonday of or after the sabbaoth Behowld these feoble reasons are by them exhibited that way be made to take euen the sondayes away noe impedimēt therto being specified in any of these reasons And so as appeareth in the examination of the crede they behaued them selues toward the diuine mysterie of the Trinitie and Vnitie founding it on the weakest proofes it had of scripture as yf there were no others and in the end Stancar lib. de Trinit Mediatore Schlusselb de Theologia Cal. shewing those proofes to be noe proofes of any force and inferring thervpon that Christ and the Holy Ghost were not coequal to the father Which sacrilegious impietie is with all heynousces charged on Caluin by his owne brethren Stancharus and Schlusselburg And for their proofe they cite Genes 3.15.22 Genes 18.2.3 Gen. 19.24 Num. 24.17 Isa 4.2 Isa 43.24 Isa 50.4.6 Isa 53.8 Isa 63.1 Ierem. 11.19 Ierem. 31.22 Dan. 2.34 Osc 13.14 Ioan. 10.30 Ioan. 14.1.28 In all which places and many more what soeuer proofe is by the ancient fathers brought for Christs eternitie or diuinitie he deflecteth into a contrarie sense or disgraceth them for manifould insufficiencie Contrariwyse he seeming to fynd Vide Synephim P. Hadriani ●ang● l. 3. c. 6. pag. 306. but one only argument for Christs eternitie which is that God by his people wowld be tearmed father and consequently must haue a sonne wherby not withstanding no eternitie of Christ is gathered at least befor Gods people were created this a gument being left to the decision of the first that would ponder it Caluin therby insinuated that the eternitie of Christ had noe better proofe And so as I sayd is it the intention of Puritans to found the sanctification of any holy daye whatsoeuer vpon arguments of noe worth that in the ende they may be thought to be without all lawfull allowance By the premisses you may behould that your puritan Ministers such as almost only are among you thinking in all their Synods and other resolutions noe such holy dayes to be yet for 12. pens of each parishioner their mercenarian consciences to be able to fynde all their Synods and resolutions false which sheweth them in the meane tyme to haue perfect libertie of such conscience as may striue with the rayne bow for varietie Therfor they are sufficiently knowen to blow could and heate from one mouth Which is so notorious in all the reformed broode that them selues wryte aliquos religionem flectere fingere ac refingere ad nutum cupiditates Dominorum vel caetuum quorum gratiam pluris faciunt quam gloriam Dei Eberus prafat in Comment Philippi super Epist. ad Cor. Some of their preachers to inflect turn and returne their religion to the will and wantones of their lords and congregations whose contentment they search more then the glorie of God This Eberus next successor to Philipp Melancthon expounding his commentaries vpon S. Paul writeth of the brotherhod Whom Peucer sonne in law to the sayd Melancthon testifieth Poucer contra Paulā Crelliū in Articulis Torgensibas an 1574 to haue bene himselfe and Maior so mutable as vno momento mutati repudiato eo quod pro●certo vero habuerunt amplexarentur contrarium that in an instant quyte changed reiecting that which euen now they helde for certaine they would auerr the contrarie So that from first to last their variable doctrine according to euerie tyme and commoditie being detected you may haue consolation that these are your infesters to whose profession it can not but be a credit to be repugnant Afflicted Catholicks 8. Of the few that haue shronken in this trial ether by Gods iudgment or by some other secret cause they are litle respected and lesse aduanced by the aduerse partie And in them selues so great a remorse is obserued that nether in contenance nor in hart can they be confortable VVherby very many haue taken occasion to remaine more setledly in their profession The Author IT argueth a greate wysdome in his Maiestie and the state not to esteeme our Cameleon compagnions when they become false to their religion Theod. l. 5. c. 38. For as the glorious Hormisda sayd to the K of Persia Tripart l. 10. c. 30. Sir your Maiestie deceaueth him selfe in affecting our renouncing Christian religion For yf we become treacherous toward God we shall neuer be loial toward man Niceph. l. 14. c. 20. So euer will it be experienced in all other Apostats and Gnatonical sycophants of Kings