had much paines to discover the falsity of many places and false Workes which are in so great number that if they were taken away the Fathers Workes would bee found diminished of a third part Those among our Adversaries that are well read in the Fathers acknowledge the same with us and passe condemnation in this point Reade Sixtus Senensis about the end of his fourth Booke and the Booke of Cardinall Bellarmin Of Ecclesiasticall Writers where he hath put the Catalogue of the Fathers Works There shall ye wonder to see the multitude of Bookes which he saith to be doubtfull or manifestly counterfeit Which causes men to doubt of the other Workes whose falsitie is not easilie found out For the discovering of these falsities we have beene helped by the Catalogue of the Workes of Ancient Writers which Photius Patriarch of Constantinople who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 878. hath put into his Librarie And by Gennadius a Priest of Marseilles that wrote a Booke of the Illustrious men about the yeare of our Lord 492. Item by the diversity of stile Item by certaine places of the Fathers which are alleadged by Ivo Gratian Burchardus Lombard Thomas and others quite otherwise than they bee found in the editions printed in this last age Item by other places of the same Fathers which say the contrary so that one and the same Father is oftentimes found to contrarie himselfe Even as the ninth Age was the Age wherein the Decretals of the ancient Bishops of Rome were forged under the name of one Isidorus Mercator which was falsely framed for the grounding of the Papall Monarchy which with might and maine was a building in that Age So the eleventh Age in which Berengarius Archdeacon of Angiers withstood and impugned stoutly and vigorously the opinion of the reall presence and Transubstantiation was the Age wherein were forged sundry works in the behalf of that error and divers clauses were chopt into the Books of the ancient Fathers Of this false coyne is the Book attributed to * Bellar. lib. de Script Eccles Sixtus Senensis sub sinem libriquart Cyprian of the Lords Supper which all the learned of the Roman Church acknowledge not to be of his making And the Cathecheses Mystagogicall of Cyril of Jerusalem The Catecheses of Gregory of Nysse are indeed his but horribly corrupted and full of errors which the Roman Church approves not There is mention made there of one Severus an Heretick who is posterior to this Gregory above 150. yeares Of these falsifications and divers others we have entreated more at large in the Book against Cardinal du Perron He that should take away from the works of Cyprian Ambrose Hierome Austin and Athanasius the counterfeit Books should diminish the writings of these Fathers more than of a third part Wherefore after so many falsities discovered when our adversaries object us some place of a Father we might very justly desire them to proveunto us that that place was not added or depraved by some falsifier aswell as so many others By all manner of reasons if in an writing brought in justice there be found but one falsification the whole instrument loseth all its force and is rejected There is another difficulty that deceiveth such men as are not wel seen in antiquity to wit that the words used in old time have now changed their signification In the Fathers are found these words of Pope of Sacrifice of Oblation of Purging fire of Indulgence of Station of Species of Monke of Penance but quite in another sense than these words are taken at this day Notwithstanding these difficulties and disadvantages whereby our adversaries strive to prevaile against us we refuse not for all that to buckle with theÌ„ For what falsifications soever were made in the Books of Ancient writers yet in them remaines still so many expresse and formall places against Transubstantiation that of the collection of them a man might make a great volume Wee have produced above 500 in the Book of the Novelty of Popery and Mr le Faucheur and Mr Aubertin have laboured lately and taken paines about this subject with a â—ost exact diligence and full of great learning Here wee will content our selves to produce some few places for a taste yet with this protestation that I do not alleadge the Fathers for to be a stay to our cause which is sufficiently propped and established upon the Word of God Goâ— doth not beg the testimonies of men Hâ—â— word is as strong alone as being aâ—companied with humane testimonâ— To goe about to defend it with thâ— testimonies of men subject to errouâ— is as if a man would lighten the Sunâ—â— with a Candle But wee doe alleadgâ— the Fathers for to defend their honour because that against their â—â—tent our Adversaries make them Advocates of a bad cause And for 〈◊〉 condescend and yeeld some thing to the disease of this froward age wherein the holy Scripture hath lost its power and efficacy and which armeth it selfe with human testimonies against the Word of God CHAP. XXVI Places of the Fathers contrary to Transubstantiation and to the manducation of the body of Christ by the corporall mouth TErtullian in his fourth Booke against Marcion chapter 40. disputing aâ—ainst the Marcionites that denyed Christ â—o have a true humane body speaketh â—hus a Acceptum panem distributum discipulis corpus suuÌ„ illum fecit dicendo Hoc est corpus meum id est figura corporis mei Figura autem non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus Christ when he had taken the bread â—nd distributed it to his disciples made it â—o be his body saying This is my body â—hat is to say the figure of my body But it were not a figure unlesse it were a true body His reason is because men represent not by figure the things that are not And in the third Booke chapter 19. b Panem suum corpus appellans ut bâ—â—c jam euâ— intelligâ—â— corporis sui figuram paâ—i dedisse Christ called the bread his body that thereby thou mightest understand that he gave to the bread to be the figure of his body Origen upon the fifteenth Chapter of Saint Matthew speaking of that which the Faithfull receive by the corporall mouth in the Eucharist * Quod si quicquid ingreditur in os in veâ—â—e abit in sâ—cessum â—jicitur ille cibus qui sanctificatur per verbit Dei perque obsecratâ—oneÌ„ juxta id quod habet materialein ventrem aâ—â—â— in secessuÌ„ emitâ—itur c. â—â—t haecquidem deâ—ypico symboluoqueâ—orpore If every thing that entereth into the mouth goes into the belly and is sent into the prity this food which is sanctified by the Word of God and by the Prayer as it is materiall gâ—â— into the belly and is sent into the privy And a little after And thus much be said touching the typicall and symbolicall body of Christ Vpon this place
Cup his blood These things Bethren are called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another is understood What is seene hath a corporall forme What is meant hath a spirituall fruite If then thou wilt understand what the body of Christ is heare the Apostle saying to the Faithfull Ye are Christs body and his members If ye bee therefore Christs body and members your mysterie is set on the table of the Lord c. He giveth the same exposition in the 26 Treatise upon Saint John By this mâ—ate and by this drinke the Lord will have to bee understood the society and fellowship of his body and of his members to wit the holy Church of the Predestinate And in the Roman Canon in the a Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Hoc est a Coelestis anis qui â—hristi caro 〈◊〉 suo modo â—ocatur â—rpus â—hristi cum 〈◊〉 vera sit â—cramentii â—rporis â—hristi illiâ—s videliâ—t quod â—alpabile â—ortale in â—uce posiâ—m est tâ—b Glos â—oeleste Saâ—amentum â—uod vere â—praesenâ—t Christi â—rnemdiciâ—r corpus â—hristi sed â—aproprie crum diciâ—r suo moâ—â—sed non â—iveritate sed significante mysterio Vt sit sensus vocatur Chriâ—â— corpus id est significatur The heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ although to speake truely it be the sacred signe of Christs body to wit of that which being visible palpable mortall was put upon the Crosse And thereupon the Glosse of the Doctors hath these words which truely are excellent The heavenly Sacrament that representeth truely the flesh of Christ is called the body of Christ but improperly for it is thus called after its manner but not according to the truth of the thing but by a significant mystery So that the sense is that it is called the body of Christ that is to say that it is signified S. Cyprian in his 63 Epistle will have in the sacred Cup water to be mingled with the wine His reason is because that as the wine is the blood of Christ so the water is the People and that the People ought not to bee divided from Christ b §. 9. Quando in Calice vino aqua â—iscetur Christo populus adunatur c. Sivinum tantum quis â—crat sanguis Christi inc pit esse sine nobis si veroaqua sit sola â—ebs incipit esse sinc Christo If saith he any one offereth nothing but wine Christs blood beginneth to bee without us but if the water be alone the people begins to be without Christ Whereby it followeth that as Cyprian did not beleeve that the water was transubstantiated into the people so did he not beleeve that the wine was transubstantiated into the body of Christ And in the same Epistle c Vinum fuit quod sanguiuem suii dixit That which Christ called his blood was wine And in the 76 Epistle d Dominus corpus suii paneÌ„ vocat de multorii granorum adunationâ— congestum The Lord called his body the bread compounded with the gathering together of many graines We have a Treatise of the two natures of Christ against Nestorius and Eutyches made by Pope Gelasius who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 495. There is this sentence to be found which vexeth and grieves mightily our Adversaries e Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per eadeÌ„ divinae effiscimur consortes naturae tameÌ„ esse non desinit substaÌ„tia panis vini Et certe image similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebraÌ„tur Certainely the Sacraments that we take of the body blood of Christ are a divine thing for which cause also by them we are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceaseth not to be And verily the Image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries Note that hee disputed against the Eutychians who held that the substance of the body of Christ was passed and changed into the substance of the divine nature The controversy was not about the conversion of the accidents but of the Substance which Gelasius maintaineth to remaine in the body of the Lord as the substance of the bread remaineth in the Sacrament Now no man can doubt but that this Book be of Gelasius Bishop of Rome Hoc etiam eatae meâ—orie Papa Gelasius c. in co â—bro quem â—emoratus â—â—ntistes â—onscripsit â—dversus eâ—â— qui in 〈◊〉 omino Ieâ— duarum at urarum â—olunt indiâ—â—aÌ„ credere â—ritatem Quomodo â—cend t in â—â—lum nisi â—â—ia localis verus est â—mo aut â—omodo aâ—st fidelâ—â—s suiâ—â—nisi â—â—a idem â—mensus 〈◊〉 â—rus dâ—us seeing that Fulgentius who lived in Gelasius time alleadgeth it * in his Book to Feâ—randus the Deacon in the 2 proposition and attributeth it to the Pope Gelasius Fulgentius Disciple to S. Austin in his second Book to Trasimondus chap. 17. a How is Christ ascended into Heaven but because he is in a place and a man indeed Or how is he present to his Faithfull ones but because he is infinit and a God indeed Again in his Book of the Faith to Peter the Deacon chap. 19. b Cuâ— nunc id est tempore nov Testamenti cum Paâ—e et Sp Sancto cum quibs illi est una diviniâ—as sacrificium â—ais et â—â—niâ—n side et charitâ—te sancta Ecclesia Catholica per uversum orâ—â—â—â—eâ—rae offerre non cessat etc. The holy Catholick Church which is over all the world now that is to say under the New Testament ceaseth not to offer unto Christ Jesus with the Father and the holy Ghost with whom he is one and the same Godhead a Sacrifice of bread and wine in Faith and Charity For in those caâ—n ill oblations of the Old Tetestament there was a figure of Christs flesh which he was to offer for our sins being without sin But in the sacrifice of the Eucharist is made an action of thankesgiving and a remembrance of the flesh of Christ which he offered for us and of the blood that himselfe who is God hath shed for us Besides this that he calleth the Holy Supper a remembrance and a Sacrifice of bread and wine it is very remarkable that he saith that this Sacrifice of bread and wine is offered unto Christ Jesus Whereby it appeareth that this Sacrifice is not Christ himselfe for Christ is not Sacrificed unto Christ Facundus an Affrican Bishop who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 550 in the defence of three heads or points of the Councell of Chalcedon * Potest Sacramentum adoptionis adoptio nuÌ„cupari sanguâ—neÌ„ dicimus noÌ„ quod proprie corpuâ— ejus sit panis poculum sanguis sed quod in se mysterium
corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant c. The Sacrament of Adoption to wit Baptisme may be called the Adoption even as we call the Sacrament of his body and blood which is in the bread and in the consecrated Cup his body and blood Not that to speake properly the bread is his body and the Cup his blood But because they containe in them the mystery of his body and blood This Book of Facundus drawn out of the Vatiean Library was published by Jacobus Sirmoudus a Jesuite who for this cause was suspected And I heare he hath been in trouble about it a Turrian li. 1. de Eucharist c. 18. §. Ad illud Vasq in 3. part Thomae Tomo 3. Dis 180. c. 9 pag. 107. Greg de Val. lib. de Trans c. 7. Sicut enim antequam sactificetur panis paneÌ„ nominamus divina auteÌ„ illum sanclificante gratia incdiante Sacerdote liberatus quideÌ„ est ab appellatione panis â—lignus habiâ—us est Dominici corporis appellatione etiamsi natura panis in co remansit Turrianus and Vasquez and Gregory of Valentia Jesuites object unto themselves a place of Chrysostome in his Epistle to Caesarius which Epistle also is in Biblioth Patr. Printed at Colen anno 1618 in the 8 Tome That place is such Afore the bread be sanctified we coll is bread But the divine grace sanctifying it by the meanes of the Priest it is freed indeed from the appellation of bread and is honored with the name of the body of the Lord though the nature of bread remaine in it These Iesuites answer that this place is not of John Chrysostome but of another John of Constantinople Which they say without proofe Yet it matters not for it sufficeth they acknowledge that place to bee of an ancient Author The 8 Books of Apostolicall Constitutions attributed to Clement the first Bishop of Rome are not of him Neverthelesse these Books are ancient and there is much good to be learned in them In the 5 Book chap. 16. it is said that b Cum verâ— anttypa mysteria pretiosi Corporis sanguinis sui nobis tradidisset Christ having given the figurative mysteries of his body and blood went to the mount of Olives And in the 7 Book chap. 26. c Etiam agimus gratias tibi Pater pro pretioso sanguine Iesu Christi qui effusuâ— est pro nobis et pro pretioso corpore cujus haec Antitypa perficimus We give thee thankes for the precious blood of Christ which was shed for us and for the precious body whereof we performe the signes by his command for to shew forth his death There would never be an end if wee should gather up all the places of the ancient Fathers wherein they say that that which we receive in the Eucharist is bread and that the bread and wine are Signes Symboles Figures and Antitypes of the body and blood of the Lord I will adde but two Canons of a Councell which are very formall The 24 Canon of the III Councell of Carthage is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let nothing be offered in the sacred service but the body and blood of the Lord as also the Lord hath ordained it that is to say nothing but bread and wine mingled with water The same Canon is found repeated in the very same words in the Councell of Trull in the Canon 32 aswell in the Greeck as in the Latin Copies Upon which Canon Baâ—samon maketh this Commentary The two and thirtieth Canon of the Councell of Trull hath ordained very at large a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the nonbloody Sacrifice was made with bread and wine mingled with water because that the bread is the figure of the body of the Lord and the wine the figure of his blood Here is then above two hundred Bishops gathered in a Councell that interpret these words the body and blood of Christ by the bread and wine mingled with water The same Councell in the 23 Canon ordaineth that when a man officiates at the Altar the Prayer must always be directed to the Father Whence appeareth manifestly that then they worshipped not the Sacrament seeing that the Councel forbiddeth when men assist at the Altar to addresse their Prayers to Christ If this hoste be Christ it must be worshipped and by consequent invocated And that it may appeare how lately this opinion of Transubstantiation was received in the Tome de Divinis officiis which is in Biblioth P atr we have an Epistle of that Great Emperor Carolus Magnus where he saith b Cum adaltare assistitur semper ad Patrem d rigatur oratio Christ supping with his Disciples brake bread and gave them likewise the Cup in figure of his body and blood This Epistle happily might bee written about the yeare of our Lord 800. Walefridus Strabo who wrote about the yeare 850 in his Book of Ecclesiasticall things chap. 16. c Christus coenando cii discipulis panem fregit calicem pariter cis dedit in figuram corporis sanguinis sui In coena quam ante traditioneÌ„ suaÌ„ ultimaÌ„ cum discipulis habu t post Paschae veteris solemnia corporis et saÌ„guinis sui SacrameÌ„ta in panis et vini substaeÌ„tia cisdeÌ„ discipulis suis tradidit et ea in coÌ„memorationeÌ„ sanctissimae suae passionis celebrare perdocuit The Lord at the last Supper he made with his Disciples afore he was betrayed after he had made an end of the solemnity of the ancient Passeover gave to his Disciples the sacred signes of his body and blood in the SVBSTANCE of the bread and wine and taught them to celebrate them in remembrance of his most holy Passion Rupertus Abbot of Deutsch neare Colen who lived in the yeare 1112. and whose works are yet extant hath condemned Transubstantiation and taught that the Substance of bread remaineth after the Consecration Here are his words upon the 12 chap. of Exodus d Rup Tuitiensis in Exo. 12. Sicut Christus humâ—na naturam nec mutavâ—â— nec destruâ—â—â— sed assumpsit ita in SacrameÌ„to nec destruit nec mutat substantiaÌ„ panis vini sed assumit in unitatem cororis et sanguinis sui Even as Christ neither changed nor destroyed the humane nature but joyned himselfe to it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe to it in the unity of his body and blood This place of Rupertus is alleadged by Salmeron in the 16 Treatise of the IX Tome § Ruit and Bellarmin in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers alleadgâ—s out of him many such like places and blameth him for it To so many places that say that the substance of the bread remaineth after the Consecration our Adversaries do reply that by the word of Substance the Fathers understand the Accidents As it is a great absurdity by the word of Accidents to understand the Substance So
of man is to his Soule Which was the opinion and beleife of Plato of Cicero of Virgil and of all the Platonick Schoole that bore the sway in Ireneus his time Such was the beleife of the Author of the Booke of the Lords supper attributed to Saint Cyprian That Author speaketh thus f Panâ—s ste communis in carnem sangumem mutatus procurat vitam incrementum corporibus ideoque ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adjutamsirmit as sensibil argumento edocta est visibilibus Sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum The common bread being changed into flesh and into blood bringeth â—ife and growth unto the body And therefore the infirmity of our flesh being helped by the accustomed effect is taught by a sensible proofe that in the visible Sacraments there is an effect of eternall life When he saith that the common bread is turned into flesh and into blood he doth not meane that it is turned into the flesh and blood of Christ but into our flesh and blood by disgestion for hee addeth that this bread nourisheth our bodyes and maketh them to grow and all the currant of the speech sheweth that But a little after hee addeth some wordes whereupon our Adversaries doe triumph and glory for lack of understanding what this Authors beleefe was * Panis queÌ„ Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro Et sicut in persona Christi humanitas videbatur et latebat d vinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter divina se infudit essentia The bread saith hee that the Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shew but in nature is made flesh by the omnipotency of the Word But in the words following he sheweth that this conversion of the bread into the flesh of Christ is made not by Transubstantiation but by an union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread like unto the union of Christs divine nature with his humane nature For he added immediatly after And even as in â—he person of Christ his humanity was â—eene but his divinity was hidden so the * Panis itaque hic azymus cibus verus sincerus per speciem Sacramentum nos tactu sanctificat divine essence is infused in the visible Sacrament by an unspeakable manner There is nothing more expresse nor more contrary unto Transubstantiation For according to this Authors beleefe even as Christs divine nature did not transubstantiate his Manhood but made it to be the flesh of the Son of God So the divine Essence which he saith to be infused in the bread of the Sacrament maketh it to become Christs body without being Transubstantiated Wherefore a litlte after he saith that that which we receive in the Sacrament * Caro quae VerbuÌ„ Dei Patris assuÌ„psit in utero virginali n un tate suae personae et panis qui consecratur in Ecclesia unum corpus sunt Divinit atisenim plenitudo quae fuit in illa replet et istum paâ—em is unleavened bread which sanctifieth us by touching it acknowledging that it is bread still Bellarmin in the 15 chap. of his third Book of the Eucharist alleadgeth Saint Remigius that wrote about the yeare of our Lord 520 in these words a The flesh which the Word of God the Father tooke in the Virgins wombe in unity of person and the bread that is consecrated in the Church are one and the selfe-same body For the plenitude of the divinity which was in that flesh filleth also this bread Bellarmin addeth that Haimo held the same language and that Gelasius and Theodorets words that we have alleadged above may be fitted to this opinion The Author our Adversaries alleadge with more ostentation is Damascene whom they rank among the Saints This man may be tearmed the Lombard of the Grecians because he is the first among the Grecians that handled divinity in Philosophicall tearmes And is the first that wrote for the adoration of Images Now he did write about the yeare of our Lord 740. This man in his 4 Book of the Orthodox Faith chap. 14. extendeth himselfe upon this matter and will have the bread b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be changed into the body of the Lord not by transubstantiation but by c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assumption and union with the divinity like unto the union of Christs divinity with his humanity Because saith hee d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is the custome to eate bread and to drink wine and water the Lord hath conjoyned his divinity to these things and hath made them to be his body and blood And a little after e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If thou inquirest in what manner that is done let it suffice thee to understand that it is done by the holy Spirit after the same manner as the Lord hath made himselfe to himselfe and in himselfe a flesh taken of the holy Mother of God by the holy Ghost And a little after he saith that the bread and wine c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the body of Christ Deified Chiefly he is very expresse in that he addeth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The bread of the Communion is not meere bread but it is conjoyned to the Divinity But still he acknowledgeth that it is bread saying the bread is the body of Christ and calling it the bread of the Communion And a little after The loaves of proposition did figurate this bread Item The broad is the first fruits of the future bread And a little after We partake all of one bread Only he hath this of particular to himselfe that he will not have the bread to bee called the figure of Christs body rejecting that kind of speech usuall and ordinary in the Fathers that have written afore him It appeareth likewise in that he will have the Sacrament to bee honored but not to be worshipped d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us saith he honor it with purity corporall and spiritual and will have it to be received with the hands set in forme of a Crosse For then it was not as yet the custom to chop it into the mouths of Communicants Rupertus was imbrued with the same opinion e Rupertus Tuitiensis in Exod. c. 12. Sicut Christus humanam naturaÌ„ nec mutavit nee destruxitysed assumpsit it a in Sacrameto nec destruit nec mutat sub stantiam panis et vini sèd assumit in unitatemcorporis et sâ—ngumis sui Even as Christ saith he did neither change nor destroy the humane nature but joyned himselfe unto it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe unto it in the unity of his body and blood For which cause also Bellarmin placeth him among the Impanators This doctrine doth no whit agree with the ubiquity For they did put this union of
some giving him three stripes and some five With the like effeminatnesse that King yeelded up to the Pope the Investures of Benefices which the Kings his predecessors had possessed till that time That King being dead in the yeare 1189. had for Successor Richard his son and after him John a King brutish and furious who made some attempts to recover the Investures which his Father had yeelded up to the Pope But being hated and contemned of his subjects Pope Innocent the third had a faire way to handle him ill He did declare him to have lost the right of his Kingdome dispensed his subjects from their Oath of allegiance a thing never seene nor heard of before in England caused Divine Service to cease throughout all the Kingdom and Churches and Church yards to be shut up Which continued by the space of six yeares and a halfe He also excommunicated the King and gave the Kingdome of England to Philip Augustus King of France upon condition to Conquer the same at his owne perill and fortune and that for the remission of his owne sinnes That constrained King John to yeeld up his Kingdome to the Pope and to binde himselfe to doe homage unto him for his crowne So hee made himselfe the Popes vassall and England became Saint Peters patrimonie And a Patent with a golden seale was made and framed by which the King did oblige himselfe and his successors for ever to pay yearely unto the Pope a thousand marks in gold in signe of subjection besides Saint Peters moneys that were paid by polle Unto which that poore King was forced to adde an Oath whereby hee swore that hee was induced so to doe without constraint and of his owne accord and by the motion of the holy Spirit and that for the remission of his sinnes Vnder this slaverie died this King in the yeare of our Lord 1216. to whom succeeded Henrie the third who did put his Crowne at the Legats feete one knee upon the ground doing homage unto him for his Kingdome Then did the Pope beginne to send his Legats who skimmed England of money by a thousand kindes of devices The Orders of the Franciscans and Jacobins were newly instituted The same Friers preached the Croisado whereby the Pope promised the remission of all sinnes and a degree of glorie in heaven above the common sort to all those which being arm'd would make the vâ—w to goe to the holy I and fâ—r the recovering of Christs Sepulcher possessed by the Sarrasâ—ons At these Predications every one câ—ossed himselfe with a crosse upon the shoulder and a great multitude of Gentry and people sold and moâ—gaged their Lands and estates for the charges of that Journey But as they were armed and furnished for the journey another Legate would come that dispensed the English from their vow and gave them the same graces and Indulgences without bâ—dgeing from their owne houses provided they would give to the Pope as much money as was necessary to have beene spent in their journey By these meanes this Legate gathered huge summes of money And that money was employed by the Pope for to conquer the Cities and Provinces which the Emperour had in Italy Thus did the Pope inlarge his limits Never a yeare came over head but hungry Italians came over into England with new Commissions to raise moneyes with power to excommunicate all such as would refuse and put the Churches into interdict What good horses soever there were or curious houshold stuffe or fine wares in shops were conveyed away without paying for and carried into Italy The Exactors tooke up the tithes of the corne yet unsowen The Italians possessed in England the best Benefices The Pope called England his garden of pleasure and his bottomlesse treasure Whereupon great clamours arose among the People The Nobles said Matth. Paris pag. 267. Marxidiribaldi These are the successors of Constantine and not of Peter O shamefull thing rascally ruffians that know not what armes and honour is will domineere over all the World by their excommunications Matth Paris pag. 423. The Monkes in the Countrey did say The Daughter of Sion is become a brasen faced Whore and without shame at all through the just judgement of him who because of the sins of the People makes an Hypocrite to raigne and a Tyrant to governe and rule But all these clamours were unprofitable and without effect because the holie Scripture was a Booke then altogether unknowne amongst the English people They spake of nothing but of Miracles and of Images and of Pilgrimages and of Reliques Vntill such time as an English Doctor and Preacher named John Wicklef fell to preaching and writing openly against the Pope and against the Masse about the yeare of our Lord 1370. Hee was listened unto with great applause and was able to have caused a great alteration in England if the King would have given way to it Of this oppression in England Matthew Paris and Westmonasteriensis English Monks that lived in those dayes wrote strange and prodigious things Now as John Wicklef was a teaching Aencae Sylvii Hist Bohem. it fell out that a Bohemian Gentleman who was a student of Oxford did taste and rellish wicklefs Doctrine and coppied out his Bookes which he carryed over into his owne Countrey and imparted them to John Huz a famous Preacher to whom Wenceslans King of Bohemia brother to Sigismond Emperour had committed the government of the Schoole of Prague renowned at that time This John Huz overcome by the evidence of Wickless reasons fell a preaching his doctrine and being a vehement and perswasive man he drew after him a great number of People To whom Hierome of Prague did adjoyne himselfe who surpassed John Huz in eloquence and learning There came also out of Germanie one Petrus Dresdensis and one Jacobellus that spake with vehemencie against Transubstantiation and against the Communion under the onely species of the bread For to appease these stirres and commotions the Arch-Bishop of Prague called Subinco Cepus caused Wicklefs Bookes publickly to bee burned and drove out John Huz from Prague But seeing the number of those that he called hereticks did encrease dayly he himselfe fled into Hongaria towards Sigismond and John Huz returned back to Prague Then Benedict the thirteenth Gregory the twelfth excommunicated one another the one having his seat at Auignon the other at Rome A Councell was kept at Pisa in the yeare 1409. in which they created a third Pope to wit Alexander the fifth who dying shortly after John XXIII succeeded him So there was then three Popes all at once and there was no body in all the Church of Rome but was excommunicated by some one of these Popes This John had warre against Ladislaus King of Naples and for to strengthen and fortifie himselfe against him he sent Preachers abroad over all the Countries of his obedience to preach the Croisadoe whereby hee promised the forgivenesse of all sinnes to all
the pronouncing of the words of Consecration For by these words This is my body the Priest offâ—reth nothing to God But every Sacrifice is an offering made unto God Furthermore in every Sacrifice he that sacrificeth addresseth himselfe to God but these words are addressed to the broad Which is more we have seene hereabove the Confession of our Adversaries acknowledging that in all this action Christ offered nothing to God Therefore he made no Sacrifice 11. It is to be noted that in the Roman Church the Order of Priesthood is a Sacrament whose it stitution they wil have to be found in the Institution of the Eucharist when the Lord said Doe this as if Christ by one and the same words had instituted two Sacraments With as much absurditie as if one would needs finde the Institution of Marriage or of Extreame Vnction in the institution of Baptisme That if these words Doe this in remembrance of mee bee the formall and expresse words whereby Christ conferred the Order of Priesthood how comes it to passe that the Bishops when they dâ—e conserre that Order in the Ember weeks make no mention of these words at all 12. Our Adversaries put two sorts of Sacrifice The one bloody the other unbloody which they call the Sacrifice of Melchisedek and which they say to be farre more excellent that the blooddy sacrifice and will have the Masse to be the Sacrifice after the Order of Melchisedek Whence followeth that the Masse is more excellent than Christs death which is a bloody Sacrifice It is great wonder then that the Apostle to the Hebrewes speaking so at large of the Priesthood of Melchisedek maketh not any mention at all of Masse nor of Eucharist 13. But how is it thay by these words Doe this in remembrance of mee Christ should command men to sacrifice him in the Masse since it is impossible to sacrifice Christ in remembrance of Christ seeing also that Saint Paul immediately after these words addeth the explication of them saying For as often as yee cate this bread and drink this cup ye doe shew the Lords death 1. Cor. 11. He teacheth us that to Doe this is to eate bread and drink the cup in remembrance of the Lords death Here therefore every man that seareâ— God and loves the Lord Jesus shal consider what a crime it is for moratal men and sinners to intrude and take upon themselves to Sacrifice the Eternall Sonne of God to his Father and to bee Priests after the Order of Melchisedek without charge and without commission CHAP. XXXIIII In what sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice Of Melchisedeks Sacrifice And of the Oblation whereof Malachy speaketh THe holy Scripture calleth our Almes our Prayers our Praises and Thankesgivings and generally what worship soever wee render unto God Sacrifices In this sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice For the question betweene us and our Adversaries is not whether the Eucharist may be calâ—ed a Sacrifiee But whether it be truly and properly a Sacrifice of redemption and whether the Priests in the Masse sacrifice the body of Christ really and truely for the sins of the quick and of the dead Touching that our Adversaries bring no manner of proofe out of the new Testament wherein neverthelesse the institution of this Sacrifice should appeare Only they all eadge out of the Old Testament the example of Melchisedek who as they say sacrificed bread and wine Gen. 14.18 Which they produce falsly for that place saith no such thing Melchisedek brought out bread and wine to Abraham for to refresh his wearieâ— troopes but offered not bread and wine to Abraham in Sacrifice The very Biblâ— of the Roman Church hath proferens and not offerens Neverthelesse we wil suppose that place to be faithfully alleadged For if the Masse be the Sacrifice oâ— Melchisedek it will follow that the Masse is a Sacrifice of bread and wine and not of slesh and bones and blood From thence it followeth also that the Masse is not a Sacrifice of redemption For bread and wine offered up in Sacrified cannot bee the price of our redemption It were an abuse to think that Melchisedek hath sacrificed bread for the redemption of any one The propitiatory sacrifices under the Old Testament were made by the death of the victime and no propitiation was made without shedding of blood saith the Apostle Heb. 9. â—2 In summe it is to speak against the commâ—n sence to argue thus Melchisedek offered bread and wins Therefore the Priest sacrificeth the Lords body and blood They object likewise a place of Malachy chap. 1. wherein God promiseth that in every place Incense shall be offered unto his Name and a pure offering Which is a Prophesie of the calling of the Gentiles whereby God foretels that among the â—â—tions and acceptable service shall bee offered unto him Of the Sacrifice of the Lords body he speaketh nothing of it The novelty of this service is that it shall be made among all Nations whereas in Malachies time â—it was but made in the Jewish Nation They say also that the Passeover of the Old Testament was a Sacrifice and by consequent that the Lords Supper that succeeded thereunto must be Sacrifice They speake with as much reason as if I should say that the night must be cleare because it succeedeth to the day which is bright and cleere and that old Age is strong and lusty seeing it succeedeth to yong Age which is strong and lusty The succession of one thing unto another bringeth commonly great alterations Adde to this that our Adversaries will not have the Masse to be such a Sacrifice as that Passeover was For the Passeover was not offered by the Priests and was not made upon the Altar of the Temple it was a domesticall sacrifice which particular men made at home in their own houses As it appeareth by the Passeover which Christ did celebrate among his Disciples in which no Priest was employed And even though by this example our Adversaries had prooved that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice yet there would remaine for them to prove that in this Sacrifice Christs body is really sacrificed CHAP. XXXV In what sense the Fathers have called the Eucharist a Sacrifice THe ancient Fathers indeavouring to draw the Heathen unto the Christian Faith who esteemed there is no Religion without sacrifice and the Jewes whose Religion under the Old Testament did chiefly consist in Sacrifices have called the holy Supper a Sacrifice and the Sacred Table an Altar and those that serve at it Levites But they shew sufficiently how they call the holy Supper a Sacrifice since they call it Eucharist that is to say Thankesgiving and not a Sacrifice of Propitiation Saint Austin calleth it indeed the Sacrifice of our price in the ninth Book of Confessions chapter 12. But wee have produced a multitude of places out of the same Father that say that in matter of Sacraments the signes are wont to take the name of
before is to be understood of the spirituall manducation As when Christ saith in the 33 35 50 verses that he is the bread come down from heaven And that hee is the bread of Life And that whosoever beleeveth on him shall never thirst And that he is the bread come down from heaven whereof whosoever eateth hee shall not die In all these places they grant that it is spoken of a manner of eating and drinking that is spirituall and will have nothing there to be spoken of the bread of the Encharist but do take all these words figuratively A doctrine truly full of absurdity and which destroyes and overthroweth it selfe For what boldnesse is it to forge in the sequell or prosecution of one and the same discourse two kinds of manducation and by a Master-like authority to will that one part of the chapter be understood figuratively and the other simply since they all be the same kind of speeches and that the same exposition may bee brought both to the one and to the other The Councell of Trente was mightily pestered about that for after this matter had been tossed a long time and disputed upon at the Councell the Prelats seeing the new Doctors were contrary unto the old yea even to the Popes and that the new ones besides did not agree among themselves would determine nothing therein and lest the thing undecided as Salmeron the Jesuite who was present at that Councell doth testifie The Synode * Salmer Tom. 8. Tract 23. Etsi notuerit Synodus nininatius illo tempore decernere quis esset maxime proprius germanus verborum illorum Christi sensus apud Iohannem propter varias sanctorum Patrum et Doctorum interpretationes in utramque partem allatas c. saith he would not then determine namely which is the properest and naturall sense of these words of Christ in S. Iohn because of the variety of Interpretations of the holy Fathers and Doctors that were brought on both sides Yet it was there principally that the infallible perfection of the Pope and of the Councell should have been displayed being a matter of so great importance And yet to this very day the Popes have determined nothing upon that nor condemned those that are of a contrary mind to the Jesuits CHAP. V. Reasons of our Adversaries for to prove that in the sixth chap. of Saint Iohn it is spoken of the manducation by the mouth of the Body BUt let us see how the Doctors of this Age dispute against their Popes Cardinals and Prelates and goe about to prove that in the 6 of S. Iohn is spoken of the manducation by the mouth of the body in the Eucharist 1. They say that Christ sp aketh in the future saying The bread that I will give as speaking of a manducation that was not yet I answer that he speaketh also in the present saying I am the bread come down from Heaven And hee that eateth thereof shall not die They themselves would laugh if from that the Lord saith in the future Whosoever shall beleeve and shall be Baptised shall be saved I should inferre that before Christ spake these words none beleeved none were Baptised none were saved Moreover when Christ speaketh in the future saying The bread that I will give he hath regard to his future death which is the true food of our Soules 2. They say also that if this sixth chapter of S. John were not taken and understood of the manducation by the mouth of the body it would follow that S. Iohn did not speake at all of the Eucharist Stapleton one of the most furious Adversaries answers for us S. Iohn saith he * Stapl. Promptuar Cathol Serm. 1. Hebdom Sanctae Iohannes de tertia Euchar stica coena nihil quidem scribit eo quod caeteri tres Evangelistae ante cum eam plene descripsissent writes nothing of the Eucharisticall Supper because the other three Evangelists had fully written of it before S. John wrote long after the other Evangelists and did only insist upō such things as the others had omitted He did not put in his Gospel the history of the Lords Conception and Birth nor of his Temptation in the Wildernesse nor of his Baptisme nor of his Transfiguration in the Mount 3. They adde that Christ doth distinguish the eating from drinking for to designe the two species of the Eucharist To that I answer that Christ speakes of eating and drinking for to give us to understand that wee have in him and in his death a full and entire spirituall nourishment In the 55 chap. of Isaiah 1. v. God inviteth the hungry and the thirsty to cate and to drink And in the 22 of S. Luke 30 ver Christ saith I appoint unto you a Kingdome as my Father hath appointed unto me that yee may eate and drink at my table in my Kingdom In these places our Adversaries do acknowledge that to eate and to drink signifies one and the same thing and that they are taken in a spirituall sense 4. But say they it is neither fitting nor convenient that Christ should have used so many figures and spoken in such dark tearmes when he might have spoken plainely Wee have already shewed that Christs ordinary use was to speake unto the Jews by figures and similitudes and that the Capernaites objecting unto him the bread of Heaven given by Moses gave him occasion to speak so That if our adversaries do so much dislike figures Why do they say that from the 27 verse this chap. to the 51. the Lord speaks of the spirituall manducation and useth figurative words Why will they have that when Christ said Except ye drink my blood by drinking he understādeth eating That if the question be touching the difficulty is there any thing in the World harder to conceive and to beleeve than this doctrine whereby they will have Christ to have eaten his own flesh and that an human body be whole and entire in every crum of the host and be remote and divided from it selfe and that a Priest should make a God with a few words and that this god must run the risque and be subject to be eaten by Rats and Mice and carried away by the wind 5. Yet say they Christ said My flesh is me at indeed Now this word truly or indeed excludes all figure For they esteem that figurative words are not true If it be so why do they themselves put in so many figures Why will they have this word bread to be taken figuratively and the word drinking to signifie eating They must then say that when Christ in the 15 of S. Iohn 1 ver said I am the true Vine he spake falsly or else they must needs grant that this word true excluds not the figure So in the 8 to the Heb. 2. v. the Apostle calleth Paradise the true Tabernacle It is a common thing to say that God is the true Sun of the Soule and that evill examples