Sommoned as it seémeth by Iohn Damascen who was the first founder of this doing deuise and afterwardes agayne vnder Lanfranck yet was this heresie neuer stablished nor were they taken for heretiques who did celebrate the Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord vnder naturall bread and naturall wine before that Councell of Laterane before mentioned vnder Pope Innocent in the yeare of our Lord 1215. or vnder Nicholas in the yeare 1062. Neither shall Osorius be euer able to finde it out when he hath throughly perused all the Libraries of his Antiquitye that he can Not long after came the worshipping of the bread lyfted vpp hoisted vpp aloft to the gaze of all the people by that meanes of Honorius 3. next Successor of Innocent aforesayd Which matter was of all other most neédefull For whereas the nature of bread had once banished it selfe cleane away and nothing now remayned vnder the outward formes of bread wyne els but the true naturall substaunce of fleshe which should exhibite it selfe to the mindes and sences of the worshippers corporally It could not possible be but a worshipping must neédes ensue hereupon These erroneous foundations beyng thus layd as one errour doth commonly engender an other there vpstart an other Whelpe of the same litter as notorious a mistery of iniquitie as the other To witte of this Sacrament first TransubstaÌ„tiated then worshipped at the last sprang vppe a Sacrifice of this Sacrament offred And no maruell at all in neéde For after that the simple people were once throughly persuaded to beleue that Christ him selfe was wholy present with all his whole true body and the true Passion of his body they could not now stay here with onely lookyng vpon and worshippyng their Sauiour so lifted vppe and blazed abroad to their viewe but would also craue helpe of him not for them selues onely but for their parentes and frendes also that were dead And hereupon grew this Sacrifice of the Masse so named of the people plausible for the people in deéde and as profitable for the Priestes purses Which subtile deuise of blynd errour though was the most pestilent botche that euer could haue infected the Church and most deuilishly repugnaunt to Gods sacred Testament yet these crafty counterfaites could coyne couÌ„cell coloâ—able enough notwithstandyng to make this peltyug puppet gaynefull for their purses For where no shift could be imagined to frame the Apostles and Euangelistes to be Proctours in this cause they ranne by and by to Doctours and wheresoeuer they could pyke out any mention made of a Sacrifice either of the Altar or of the Priest the same by crooked conueyaunce they would wrest and wryng to be good Testimony for their doctrine Wherein how honestly they behaued them selues shal be seéne hereafter by Gods grace Next coosin germaine to this began to challenge a right in the Church Eare CoÌ„fession Which beyng an egge as it were of the same broode was hatcht vp and fully plumed at the very same Laterane Councell as appeareth sufficiently by the very wordes of the same Councell the true report whereof ensueth Let euery faythfull person of what estate degree or sexe soeuer he be after he commeth once to yeares of discretion confesse all his Sinnes alone faythfully to his owne Curate once in the heare at the least Behold here the very first Institution of priuate and Eare Confession which is in vre at this day or els if it had bene instituted before or decreéd vpon from aboue to what end neéded so carefull a Prouiso to be made by men whereby the people should be forced to a generall necessitie of reckonyng all their Sinnes to the Priest Now therfore if this were an ordinaunce and tradition of the Romish Church where is that bragge of Antiquity whereby the Papistes would proue that this priuate Confession came from the Apostles where is their glorius boastyng of the continuaunce and deliuery therof from thence euen to this present age Surely Chrisostome others do tell vs an other tale for this writeth Chrisostome I constraine thee not to come to the middes of a Stage and to call many witnesses Tell thy sinnes to me alone c. And agayne the same Chrisostome If thou be ashamed sayth he to tell to any man thy Sinnes that thou hast done tell them dayly in thy soule I do not say Confesse them to thy fellow SeruauÌ„t who may reproche thee tell them to God that taketh care for them c. Moreouer the same Chrisostome in an other place I do not say vnto thee come forth into a Stage nor disclose thy Sinnes to others but I will haue thee to obey the Prophet saying Disclose thy Sinnes vnto the Lord In the sight of GOD therfore confesse thy Sinnes before the true Iudge vtter thy sinnes with prayer not with toung but with the testimonie of thine owne conscience and so trust to obteine mercy at the length c. Certes if Nectarius Byshop of Constantinople had euer suspected that this Eare Confession had bene authorized by any expresse word of the Scriptures he would neuer haue abrogated the same for the defilyng of a certaine matrone by a certeine Deacon in the Churche vnder colour of Confession what shall we say to that where Erasmus but of late yeares writyng of Confession durst not ascribe the institution therof to Christ as vnto the authour therof but yeldyng him selfe willyng to learne if any man could make proofe by sufficient Arguments that CoÌ„fession had his begynnyng at the Scripture how happened that amongest such a multitude of Monckes and Deuines not one would steppe forth to withstand this challenge of Eare Confession as then To passe ouer in the meane space that which the same Erasmus in an other place expressing his meanyng playnly It appeareth sayth he that in the tyme of Ierome priuate Confession of Sinnes was not as yet receaued in the Church which afterwardes was profitably instituted by the Church so that the Priestes and lay people vse the same accordingly But herein some scarse skilfull Deuines are not alitle deceaued bycause where the auncient Fathers wrate touching publique and generall Confession all that doe they straine to this secret whispering a quite contrary kinde of Confession c. To passe ouer also many other thynges for breuities sake whereof if there should be generall collection made there is no dought but this vysour of Antiquitie would be easily pluckt of The same be sayd also of the Sacramentes of Orders Annoylynges and Matrimony The vse of which thynges albeit grew by litle and litle euen with the first age of the Church are also reteigned vntill this day amoÌ„gest vs yet do we vtterly deny that they were Registred amongest the noumber of Sacramentes afore a very few yeares sithence And Osorius shall neuer be able to prooue the contrary There hath bene a solemne custome of long tyme in the Church of Rome that such as
herein Let euery man that list compare examples with examples new with old present with tymes past what doth all this whatsoeuer you doe resemble els then like a certein skippyng and trippyng gesture of some Stagelike Comedy rather thē a Supper of the Lord wherein first you chaunged the Sacrament into a Sacrifice you haue altered the Table into an Altar transposed mysteries into Masses and translated eatyng into Adoration participation into Religion banquetyng into gazing tootyng The substaunce of bread you haue with a playne Poeticall Metamorphosis trāsubstanciated into the substaūce of flesh finally you haue brought the matter to this passe that there is no fourme of a Supper no nor so much as the name of a Supper remainyng For what is he that will euer name that to be a Supper where neither bread nor drincke nor any kynde of meate besides mās flesh and bloud onely is sett before the guestes to feéde vpō which is horrible for any mā to eate that will either follow the rule of nature or the prescript commaundement of the Scriptures What then will you abandone Christ say you from vs out of the Eucharist altogether and will you leaue no more but bare Signes onely in this most holy Sacrament For such is the question that Hosius maketh in a certein place the selfe same now doth Osorius thrust out agaynst the Lutheranes Whose accusation bycause I purpose to refute behold ye good Catholick mē that which I must speake both truly and necessaryly First this quarrell toucheth the Lutheranes very litle For others I doe aunswere on this wise That this doth not exclude Christ out of the Eucharist but you do banish Christ out of heauē altogether whiles by the same rule you force the nature and substaunce of his body into so narrow streightes as it were thruchte into a Geometricall chynker wherein what do you els then hale him out of heauen For one and the selfe same bodely nature in one the selfe same body can not be here and there at one tyme. In deede you confesse it can not be by nature but it may be be say you by miracle But cursed be that miracle whereby the true humanitie of our Christ is denyed and whereby our cōioyning together with him is broken a sunder For what partakyng shal be of our natures with his body or what agreable proportion of body betwixt vs If we be seuered ech frō other in the whole propertie substaunce of nature But Augustine a reasonable Catholicke Deuine enough I suppose will not consent vnto this that the Diuinitie of Christ ought so to be affirmed is that his humanitie shall by any meanes be defaced Therfore that rayling of Osorius agaynt vs as though we did dispoyle the holy banquet of Christes Diuinitie is some drowsie dreame of some dronckard for who did euer seclude the Diuinitie of Christ from this mysticall Supper So is also the cauilation of Hosius in eche respect as slaunderous where he chargeth vs that we sequester the body of Christ wholy from the Eucharist Which is also as vntrue For albeit we do affirme that the body of Christ is naturally in his owne propertie in heauē we do not so exclude him from the holy mysteries as that we would not haue him present therein at all but consideration must be had in what maner he is present He that doth acknowledge a true presence of Christ after a Sacramentall maner and vnder a mysticall coueryng doth not abanddon Christ out of the Sacrament but he that reiectyng the mystery doth acknowledge no presence but such as must be beleéued to be present naturally and in deéde the same if he abyde by his wordes must neédes ouerthrow all the substaūce of a Sacrament of very necessitie For whereas they do assigne the whole materiall part of the Sacrament to consiste in this that the flesh of Christ included within those mysteries must appeare discernable to the beholders not in his proper and naturall forme but in an other shape it is a friuolous deuise boulted out of the forgeshoppe of Lumbarde Which by this euident demonstration of Augustine is easily ouerthrowen All Sacramentes do represent a necessary likenesse of the same thinges whereof they be Sacramentes The outward formes of bread and wyne doe by no maner of likenesse represent any agreablenesse with the body of Christ. Ergo No materiall part of a Sacrament can be applyable to those outward formes of bread and wyne And yet this notwithstandyng we do confesse that Christ is present neuerthelesse in his mysteries But it is one thyng for Christ to be present in a mystery an other thyng to be present naturally enclosed as it were within a certein place It is one thyng to beare the name of a thyng whereof it is a remēbraūce an other thyng to be the very same thyng wherof it taketh denommatiō It is one thyng to haue a likenesse an other thyng to be in the very same substaunce Neither is it a good Argument that is fetcht from the word or letter to the substaunce Where in the one the very matter of a Sacrament is to be seéne in the other the truth of the substaunce is discerned Wherein is concluded a fallax A secundum quid ad simpliciter In a Comedy or Enterlude he that cōmeth forth vpon the Stage cladd in Kingly Roabes crowned with the Diademe of a King the same is not by and by the Kyng in deéd whose persō he doth represēt And yet is there no cause to the cōtrary but duryng the time of the Enterlude he may be after a certein sort called a Kyng to witt after the same maner as Signes similitudes of thyngs do many tymes obteine to be called by the name and title of the very thynges whereof they be representations Therefore for as much as the action of this sacred Cōmunion is of this nature as the which doth no lesse minister the body of Christ to be receaued by fayth then the bread to be eaten by the mouth these men therfore do not seclude Christ from this sacred banquet as you seé but you and your Catholickes rather whiles you do sequester the Allegory from the wordes of Christ refusing all maner Type of resemblaunce and likenesse whiles you do rende a sunder the spirite which doth quickē from the letter that doth kill whiles you banishe quite away all bread out of the Sacrament whiles you teare abroad the subiect from the accidentes Whiles ye make a miserable myngle mangle and hochepott of the thynges that are seuered by nature and agayne dissolue the thynges that are naturally ioyned together Whiles with most abhominable Idollworshyp you doe most filthyly defile the most pure and chaste Church of Christ to the intollerable discomfort and sorrow of all godly hartes you haue brought this to passe by your crafty cōueyaūce that the people now can neither partake of any bread
much as in vs lyeth all his cauillations Sophisticall subtelties For thus would I wish theé to be persuaded frendly Reader that besides naturall scoldyng and meére cauteles of wordes voyde of all substaunce of truth there is els nothyng of all whatsoeuer he doth brabble in all this discourse yea that also stroakyng him selfe rather with vayne conceipt of his own opinion then of any grounded knowledge or Iudgement at all And first as touchyng Freewill In steéde of a proofe testimonie of Luthers owne workes and yet the same also neither doth he alledge whole as they be nor fully nor doth hee couple the first with the last nor directeth to any certeine place of the Authour But goe to What maner of haynous crime is this a Gods name wherewith this Portingall Inquisitour doth charge Luther so greéuously cruelly Forsooth it is this That he did dare mutter against Freewill Saying that it was a thing in tittle onely and whiles it followeth his owne nature it doth nothyng but sinne deadly And where is this written In the volumes of Luther I suppose or els in Sybilles leaues Seéke there Reader or els where if thou wilt For as our Reuerēd Maister Inquisitour assigneth no place to the Reader so I thinke he neuer did read in Luther the thyng whereat he cauilleth nor thinketh that it concerneth his credite at all to vtter whatsoeuer him listeth in what sense with what phrase of speache by what authoritie or with what testimonies it bee bolstered so that somewhat bee suggested whereat hee may frame some quarell But proceéde on and what followeth Then afterwardes the same Luther correctyng him selfe what sayth he farther I haue erred sayd hee I spake vntruely that Freewill is a thyng in name onely before the tyme of grace but I should haue sayd simply That Freewill is a fayned deuise or a tittle without all substaunce Luther in his Assertions written to Leo the tenth the 36. Article Well and what is it at last that this Maister Inquisitour will frame vnto vs out of this Ergo Luther is an heretique who dispoyleth man of all his Freewill and traueileth chiefly to this end to affirme that mans mynde is alwayes holden captiue his will fast bound all power of workyng taken away in so much that we can do neither good nor euill nor cā thinke a thought so much by any meanes And this doth not Luther teach onely but Melancthon also aboundauntly yea much more plentyfully Caluine doth debate the same I not heare you Osorius do aunswere not I for Luther but Luther shall aunswere fully for him selfe And first touchyng that whiche we terme mans choyse whether ye conster it to be reason or will surely Luther did neuer deny The same dare I boldly affirme in the behalfe of Melancthon and Caluine also Certes these men were neuer so reasonably madde as to despoyle man whom they define to be endued with reason of reason and of will For by no reason cā the operation of will be sequested from that part where the vse of reason resteth Howsoeuer nature was corrupted through the first originall of Sinne yet remaineth neuerthelesse that thyng after a certeine sort within vs still which we receaued of the treé of knowledge of good and euill but thus must be noted chiefly in what wise it remayneth not that it can auayle any way to saluation but that it hurteth rather thereunto And therfore as concernyng those naturall properties of will Luther was neuer so foolishe nor any of all the Lutheranes as to exclude that will from nature by any meanes which nature it selfe had engraffed into men Let this therfore remayne vnshaken in this cōtrouersie as touchyng the substaūce of Freewill that the essenciall substaūce therof vnited together with sensible reason doth alwayes cleaue inseparably to nature which neither Luther deny nor any of all the Lutheranes did euer deny What is it then will you say that Luther did deny in Freewill I will tell you so that your vnderstandyng be able to conceaue it It is out of all controuersie that Adam in his first creation was endued with wonderfull and absolute freédome of will to the vpholdyng of which freédome of will the grace of God was not wantyng at that tyme without the which he could not stand fast in that good will wherein he was created though he would now to haue a will to stand fast was not geuen him but was left in the power of his Freewill and so left that if hee would haue stoode fast hee had neuer bene euill if he would not bene euill And yet neither could he bee good through the force of his owne Freewill without Gods speciall grace But what did he Beyng thus left in the power of his owne Freewill when he neither would stand fast nor could fall without sinne By Sinnyng abusing his owne freédome he brought to passe that he both lost and cast away him selfe and his freédome withall and yet not in such wise as that there remained in him neither sense nor feélyng nor vse of will but he so lost it that whereas he was before immortall and freé now hath he both lost his freédome and also his immortalitie and righteousnesse withall Whereby it came to passe that the wretched man by losing that pure freédome of good will which he receaued in his first creation purchased to him selfe and all his posteritie most miserable and lamentable bondage Now therfore beyng clogged and fastened to this state of bondage as it were cloyed in claye albeit after a certeine sorte we reteine still that power of vnderstandyng and appetite whereby the mynde of her freé motiō is able to discerne betwixt sensible obiectes yet can we neuer of our selues aspire agayne to that vprightenesse and immortalitie which we haue lost for beyng now fast yoaked and sold vnder this yoake of seruitude we doe serue such a seruile thraldome in this fleshe that we can turne our selues to no one side through any force of freédome but we shall alwayes be the bondslaues of sinne death vnlesse the grace of Christ do helpe vs and set vs at libertie Whereby you may easily perceaue Osorius what is the state and condition of Freewill to witte that in one sense it may be taken not altogether freé and agayne in an other sense not otherwise but freé For if ye call backe the nature of mankynd to her first creation and then will demaunde generally whether there be no freé will in nature I doe aunswere That nature it selfe was created vpright at the first that God the good Creatour endued it with Freewill but that man him selfe became enemy to that freédome destroyed the same in nature vtterly But if you will proceéde make a further question demaūde what kynde of will after sinne entred once was in man towardes naturall euill thyngs and towardes deceitfull good thynges I do aunswere that mās will which they call
of God do loue do wish and earnestly desire to be saued But yet we do call these the effectes not the causes of mercy who beyng now made the Uessells of mercy could neuerthelesse not haue bene able of thēselues to bryng to passe that they should haue attayned the first primitiue Election of God August sayth that men are worthely cast away for sinne Ergo On the contrary if men are reiected for their sinnes why should they not aswell be predestinate for their good workes Augustine doth not meane here that reprobation that is cōtrary to predestination but vnder this reprobation he doth vnderstand the last end effect of Reprobation namely damnatiō And in this sence it is true that men are dāned for their sinnes not forsaken as they are neyther predestinate for their good works Luther and Caluine doth deny that it is in mans power before grace receaued to seeke and desire it But Augustine affirmeth the contrary Nay rather what is more common in Augustines mouth then these speaches Couldest thou be conuerted vnlesse thou were called Did not he that called thee back agayne bring to passe that thou shouldest be cōuerted And agayn do not presume vpō thy cōuersion for vnlesse he had called the back agayne thou couldest not haue bene conuerted And in an other place God doth not onely make willing of the vnwilling but maketh also obedient of such as are stifnecked and stubborne The doctours of the popish faction although deny not that nature is very much corrupted in originall sinne yet yeald they not thys much that man can do nothyng els but sinne Neyther that any thing els is taken away from Nature besides the supernaturall gift onely whereby Nature might haue bene made more perfect if it had not fallen And therefore that Nature was beautified with those supernaturall giftes of the which she is now spoiled the naturall power and abilitie of will remayning in her force notwithstanding This is most vntrue whereas Nature and will it selfe not by alteration of Substaunce but by accesse of sinne and disposition is so depraued and reuolted from God so weakened and spoyled through it own operation as that it may be not conuerted but by the onely grace of God hauing of her self no part in thys work but as farre forth as it is preuented by God Whereupon Augustine doth witnes That will doth not goe before but is handmayd to well doyng Wherefore the same Nature and substaunce of will remayneth still not chaunged into a new shape by Gods creation but defiled with the corruption and filthe of Nature The same affections also do remayne that were before in respect of their substaūce but in respect of their disposition they be so putrified and stincking that nothing can be found in them now that bringeth not with it some matter of filthines Who soeuer is holpen he doth worke somewhat together with hym that helpeth hym and suffereth not him self to be applyed meerely passiuely Will beyng not renued is holpen of Grace Ergo Freewill euen sithence the first creation seemeth to bring much to passe and not to be altogether applyed passiuely In the Maior proposition should haue bene added perse by it selfe For what soeuer worketh by it selfe hauing the help of an other is not altogether plyed passiuely but with this exception the Minor must be denyed for freedome of choyse when as it selfe neuer preuenteth grace following her but is altogether holpen of Grace goyng before according to the testimony of Augustine what can it bryng to passe at all of it selfe Or if it can do any thing at all by it selfe that whiche it is able to doe it doth in morall good thinges externall and ciuill exercises certes to deserue eternall lyfe to purchase the fauour of God Saluation Iustification and the euerlasting kingdome Freéwill is altogether vneffectuall but is a meere sufferer onely nor hath any thing but that which it hath receaued and is altogether vnprofitable yea when it hath done all that it can possibly do And this is it that Luther seemeth to stand vpon Let hym be accursed that will say that God commaundeth thynges impossible Melancton doth aunswere what soeuer were the occasion of this saying surely those wh vouch the same so busily vrge it seéme voyde of vnderstanding in the causes why the law of God was geuen worldly wisedome supposeth that lawes are published onely because they should be obserued But the Lawe of the Lord was ordayned for this cause chiefly that the Iudgement and wrath of God should be layd open agaynst sinne that it should conuince vs of wickednes and increase the horror therof that wickednes might be restrayned from to much licensiousnes that putting vs in remēbraunce of our own weakenes frayltie it should in steed of a schoole master enstruct vs to Christ as it is declared before And there was no lye found in their mouthes Apoc. 14. to this August maketh aunswere aduertising vs how man may be in this sorte sayd to be true of hys worde through the grace and truth of God who otherwise of hym selfe without all doubt is a lyer As is that saying You were sometymes darcknesse but now are ye light in the Lord when he spake of darcknesse he added not in the Lord but when he spake of light he annexed by and by in the Lord. But Osorius will vrge agaynst vs here Ergo Nature beyng holpen through grace sayth he may eschew all lying and sinning To aunswere hereunto agayne out of Augustine he that will speake so let hym be well aduised how he deale with the Lords prayer where we say Lord forgeue vs our Trespasses which we needed not to say except I be not deceaued If our consents neuer yelded to false speaking nor to the lust of the flesh Neyther would the Apostle Iames haue sayd We are trespassers all in many thinges for that man doth not offend but he whom flattering lust hath allured to consent contrary to the rule of righteousnes Thus much Augustine Out of the wordes of Ieremy If I speake of any Nation that I may destroy them and they do repent them c. And if I say the word that I may plant them and they tourn away from me c. vpon this the Romanistes do build as followeth Euen as men behaue themselues such shall the potters vessels be afterwardes Ergo it is false that the Lutheranes teach that the regard of worke doth fight agaynst Freedome and the power of God in chusing or refusing The Prophet doth treate here properly of the punishment rewardes which do follow mens workes at the last Iudgemēt and not of the maner of eternall Electiō which doth preceéde all our workes either goyng before as August reporteth which were none at all or comming after which were not as yet If the aduersaries of Luther shall wrest these words of the Prophet to the cause of Electiō as though
haue taught They acknowledge him to be heauenly you make him earthly Theyr doctrine doth rayse vs from the earth vppe on high where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Your doctrine what doth it whereunto tendeth it whether doth it call the mindes of Christians but from aboue downeward out of heauen into the earth withdrawing the senses from the Spirite to the flesh So that we must seéke for Christ there not where he is but where you imagine him to be present The Apostle Paule when he preacheth vnto vs the liuely feature of this Christ who taking vpon him the shape of a Seruaunt suffered death in the same shape once for our sinnes vnder Pontius Pilate and afterwardes accomplishing the mistery of our redemption rose agayne for our iustification doth teach vs playnly that he ascended into heauen not leauing his body wherein he suffered behinde him here on earth but taking vpp the same body into heauen was with the same receiued into glory whom also he affirmeth he knew no more now according to his fleshlye presence that is to say according to the capacity of his carnall senses And that besides this Christ onely he knew none other Christ nor this Christ otherwise then according to the new creature onely namely visible in spirite with the eyes of fayth and not with fleshlye eies Let vs make now a comparison betwixt this Christ of our Gospell with that your Christ of the Pope in the same manner as you do fashion him and make a gaze of him to the eies and eares of the people after the order of your Gospel which seémeth to me to be after this manner not as hauing taken vpon him the shape of a seruaunt but the forme of bread is in the same forme of bread and vnder the accidents of bread made of wheat set out to the gaze of the people to be tooted vpon and is of Christians worshipped and offered to God the Father and this not once but dayly not vnder Pontius Pilate but vnder the Pope of Rome not a Sacrifice onely for the quicke but for the soules in Purgatory also to the washing away of theyr synnes Which Sacrifice being ended he is buried in deéd but buryed or rather drowned in the paunch of a priest from whence he neither riseth agayne nor ascendeth afterwardes but descendeth rather nor is euer looked for to come agayne from thence And this is that same Christ not the Euangelicall Christ but the Papisticall and poeticall Christ whom thought the Apostles or Euangelistes neuer knew yet must we be enforced will we nyll we to honor and worshippe neuerthelesse as the very Sauiour of the world forsooth Whom may not suffice to lift vppe hartes and mindes on high to him onely which dwelleth in heauen vnlesse we also lift vppe our fleshly eyes to this visible Christ and kneéle and crootche vnto him with great reuerence yea although the eyes themselues do behold nothing but bread and wine yet the eyes must lye and all the sences must be deceiued neither may in any wise be reputed other then verye herityques but in despyght of eyes and senses all we must of infallible persuasion of fayth firmely beleue that it is now no more bread and wine that is seéne But the bread and wine being thrust cleane on t of dores Chryst onely yea whole Christ doth possesse euery part of that place who though be not present in his owne naturall shape nor in the same proportion of body which he tooke of the Uirgine Mary yet in the selfe same nature trueth substaunce Identity notwithstanding vnder other formes forsooth and yet not figuratiuely but truely most absolutely perfectly and fully must in the same whole body and the same naturall blood be contayned felt seene and without all contradition worshipped These be the misteries of your diuinity as I suppose by the which you haue begotten vnto the world a new Christ I knowe not whom altogether an other Christ neuer borne of the Uirgine Mary doubtles whom the Gospell neuer knew nor the Apostles euer taught nor the Euangelystes euer saw I adde also whom neuer any of you hath seéne hetherto yet nor shall euer seé hereafter And yet these so wittelesse so dotish and monstruous deuises of drowsy dreames then which nothing can be spoken or imagyned more false and more monstruous you shame not at all to vaunt to be most auntient and most true as the Gabyonites of olde time did theyr shooes And for the same your Popish Christ made of bread you stick not to aduēture limm life more earnestly then for the true Glory of that Christ whom we do most certaynely know to be in heauen where also we do worshippe him And euen this doth your horrible butchery of an infinite number of our Martyres declare to be true by most plain and euident demonstration With the blood of whom because your holy mother the church seémeth so beastly dronken long sithence this one thing would I fayne learne of you what special cause was it that enforced you to vtter such outrage in the shedding of so much blood of your naturall brethren was it because they defrauded Christ the Sonne of God which was borne for our sakes crucified rose agayne ascended vp into heauē sitting now a Lord in heauē of one dramm so much of his due honor nothing lesse Was it because they abused or defiled the Gospel I thinke not so Was it because they brake the auntient ordinaūces and approued doctrine of the holy Apostles and Prophettes in any one thing or because they went beyond the bondes prescribed by the auntient fathers none of all these But the cause was for that they refused to allow of that newfangled and vpstart Idoll of the Popish Masse and that lately sprōg vppe Breadworshippe contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles yea contrary to Christ himselfe and because they would not in this behalfe be as furiously franticke as the Papistes themselues In the meane time we speake not this as though we were of opiniō that Sacramentes should be defrauded of theyr dewe honor For it is one thing to reuerence the Sacramentes accordyngly and an other thyng to conuert the Sacramente of Christ into Christ him selfe and to worshippe earthly Sygnes for the heauenly Christ in the one whereof is a kynde of Religion in the other manifest Idolatry To the whiche wanteth nothyng now but that they chaunt lustely together with Ieroboam These be thy Gods O Israell But we shall be vrged perhappes with the wordes of Christ in the Gospell This is my body c. As though in the wordes of Christ which be Spirite and life it be so rare vnaccustomed phrase of speaking to vse Tropes and figures now and then seing there is no kinde of doctrine that more vsually delighteth in figures Tropes parables Similitudes metaphors allegoryes mysteryes thē the mystycall speéch of the sacred
our hartes after his death And therefore gaue vs in commaundement that we should celebrate the same perpetually receaue those elemētes for an euerlastyng memoriall of that Sacrifice and not to be sacrificed for the expiation of Sinnes Take sayth he Eate ye all of this In which wordes he doth call vpon not the Priests onely but inuiteth all the faythfull ingenerall without exceptiō as it were to a generall banquett alluryng all men to follow his example herein Which thyng we do diligently and carefully obserue at this present accordyng to his prescript commaundement and our dutyfull obedience not in corners mumblyng vpp priuate Masses but in our publique Congregatiōs assemblyes We do eate we do not Sacrifice we do drinke we do not purge by Sacrifice Moreouer we do not eate with our teéth onely but much more effectually with our harts not the body but with the body that so we be nourished both wayes With our bodies we do receaue the outwarde elementes in deéde in a thankefull memoriall of the Lordes body offred But with our fayth harts we do receaue and embrace not the visible signes and elements onely but the truth of the body and bloud of Christ the whole vertue and efficacy of the same Sacrament And this is the order of our Communions Osorius In the which we do neither eate the Sacramētall bread without Christ nor Christ wtout the Sacramentall bread For we do not rende these in peéces after your guise but we do ioyne both together the one with the other though we receaue them not both after one maner That which the soule doth feéde vpon is not bread but Christ That which is receaued into the mouth and passeth downe into the bowels is not the naturall reall body of Christ but bread And yet in respect of the signifieng mysterie it is not bread nor do we eate it for bread but for the body of Christ And therefore this mystery doth reteigne in deéde the name of the body but in substaunce the nature of bread and not of the body For what man hath bene euer of so Sauadge a nature as could not perceaue that mans flesh is no conuenient foode for mans body what Nation hath bene euer so cruell barbarous as to be serued at his table with mans bloud were it neuer so delicately roasted and spiced And what shall we say that Scripture it selfe doth not permitt this by any meanes that men shall feede vpon mens flesh and bloud Gene. 9. And in an other place you shall not feede vpon the flesh of all beastes as well foule as foure footed cattell Leuit. 7. And agayne No soule emōgest you nor of the Straūgers that doe soiourne emongest you shall eate bloud If the will of God were such that it might not be lawfull for his people to feéde vpon the bloud of beastes how much rather do ye suppose that we are restrayned by the same cōmaundement frō eating of mās flesh Moreouer whereas Christ him selfe doth confesse that he was sent downe into the earth for that end that he should dissolue no ioate of all that the law commaunded but should accomplish euery title thereof to the vttermost by what reason could he geue an oblation of his body and bloud at his Supper for a Sacrifice to be eaten and dronken without breache of the commaūdement of that law which is expressed in the 6. Chap. of Leuit. in these wordes The oblation that is geuen for sinne sayth he the bloud whereof is brought into the Tabernacle of wittnesse to make satisfaction in the Sanctuarye shall not be eaten but be burnt and consumed with fryer c. But here I suppose myne opposed aduersary will seeke after a knott in a Bullrush as the Prouerbe is Whereas Christ was able to doe all thinges by the assent and word of his omnipotency And whereas the same Christ also did affirme the same to be his body and bloud then must one of these two be graūnted of very necessitye that either we must discreditt Christ his wordes and abase the omnipotency of God or els we must needes establishe a true oblation of the body and bloud of Christ in the Supper If all the sayings of Christ howsoeuer vttered and spoken by the Lord must be done and performed in the selfe same order and effectualnesse that he spake them and if all thinges must be drawen to the killing letter you haue then woonn the Spurres But then what shall become of that spirite and lyfe of the Letter where vnto the commaundement of the Gospel doth require vs to apply Iohn 6 whereunto shall Augustines rule serue which willing vs to leaue the Letter doth force vs to a deeper consideration as often as an absurditie can not auoyded without a necessary Allegory if you be of this mynde that we ought to be driuen from such lyke Allegoricall and figuratiue speéches of lyke significatiōs But what is this els then to noozell vpp a Grammarian not a Deuine And by this meanes withall into how many senslesse absurdityes shall you force vs horrible and abhominable to be spoken with toungue We doe in a certein place heare the Lord speakyng playnely and sensibly enough I haue sayd you are Gods and are all the Sonnes of the highest If you regard the wordes onely what can be spoken more playnely I haue sayd sayth he If the outward sence of the Letter doe force such an inuiolable creditt what remaineth but that we say the men must forthw t degēder frō naturall mē into Gods Agayne where we heare Peter in an other place called by the name of Sathan Math. 16. which wordes of Christ if we will interpret after this maner we must neédes conclude hereupon that the Pope of Rome is not the Successor of Peter but of Sathan Wherby I suppose your Diuinitye is well enough certified how much it skilleth to attend and geue eare vnto not onely what is read in the bare letter of the holy scriptures but also to marke diligently the sence and meaning of the Scripture In Gene. We heare the Lord speaking as is before mencioned Let vs make light and light was made If after the same maner Christ had spoken ouer the bread the matter had bene out of all question Now whoso affirmeth that some one thing is an other thing doth not forthwith commaund the same thing to be made that other thing which he noteth It is one thing to make and an other thing to speake and pronounce Whereof th one is a chaunge of substaunces thother is a chaunge of names onely But Christ now taking here the bread the cupp in his handes doth not commaund that they shonld be made his body bloud but doth dignify the bread and cupp which he tooke in his hāds by the name of his body onely not chaunging the nature as Theodoret reporteth nor casting away the substaunce of bread and wine as Gelasius affirmeth
or two and I in the meane tyme appointed the Queenes highnes Agent in Flaunders was lydgear in Bruges At what tyme one Emanuell Dalmada a Portingall borne Byshop of Angrence sodenly sprang vp in Bruxelles This worshypfull Prelate vndertaking the defēce of his frend Ierome Osorius did stuffe a great Uolume full of wounders brabbles in the ende of his booke caused certein ougly pictures to be portrayde thereby to deface my personage as much as he might I perused this Apologie for to be entituled that cōfused llipe I neuer saw so foolish vnsauery a writing full ofskoffes absurdities which two beyng taken away there remained els nothyng besides Whereupon I debated with my selfe a whiles whether I might aunswere the doltish Asse But at the last I determined to despise the scely wretched dottarde as one not onely altogether vnlettered but also so dull and blockysh by nature many tymes so voyde of common sence that he became a iestyng stocke among the wiser sorte of his owne fraternitie About two yeares sithence my familiar frend Thomas Wilson returnyng from Portingall into Englād brought ouer from thence at the request of Osorius certein Volumes of Osorius framed into three bookes wherof one he deliuered seuerally vnto me I receiued it gladly and perused the same ouer once or twise trustyng that Osorius beyng now enstalled a Byshop would be much more modest thē before But the matter fell quite contrary For in steede of a Liuill and sober person I finde him a most friuolous Sophister for a graue Diuine nine a childish counterfaite and for a discrete byshop a most impudent rayler Hereunto was added such store of vanitie and proude hawtynes that in respect of him Thraso might be well adiudged a very discret person I sorrow to speake so much for it had bene more acceptable to me and more honesty for him according to the ordinary course of commō conference to haue debated our matters frendly and quietly rather then to cōbat together with such tauntyng and snatchyng But sithence Osorius disputeth not as a Byshop neither will I argue to him as to a Byshop Neither is it requisite that I should be myndefull of Osorius estate sithence he forgetteth his owne myne also And it standeth with good reason that if he haue takē any pleasure in euill speakyng he loase the same in euill hearyng Here of gentle Reader I thought good to premonishe the partly that thou mayest perceaue the course and processe of our writyng partly that if I shall seeme sometymes somewhat to sharpe in myne aunswere thou mayest impute it to the enforcement of myne aduersarie rather then to the bitternesse of my nature Now I will request two thynges of thee The first is that as I shall haue briefly and throughly confuted the most foolish and spitefull braules of Osorius so thou wilt be cōtēt therewith not requiring many woordes in matters of so small substaunce For albeit Osorius can lunite to him selfe no measure nor ende of pratlyng yet will I so temper my talke that I neither abuse thy leysure nor myne owne Not bycause it is a hard thyng but a matter rather of no difficultie to fill whole Uolumes with scribling and toyes But that it is odious to be accused of that selfe same faulte wherof a man doth condemne an other My last request is That thou yeld thyne attentiue mynde voyde of parcialitie in opinions which two if thou graūt vnto me It shall easely appeare I trust both that I haue no lesse godly then necessarily entred into the honest defence of my countrey And thou also as playnely perceaue how maliciously and wickedly England hath bene accused and depraued by her cursed enemy Osorius Farewell ¶ An Aunswere of Walter Haddon to the rayling Inuectiues of Ierome Osorius IN the entrey of this Tragedie this prattling brawler hath framed a long discourse to shew how my booke certeine yeares after the publicatiō therof came to his hādes wherein he supposed to finde some mysticall matter As though to know when hee receaued my booke were any iote to that purpose whereof we doe entreate or as though any man may doubt whether a writyng sold in euery shoppe might in foure yeares space be transported into Portingall Or that myne aunswere publiquely Imprinted could by no meanes els be brought to Osorius vnlesse that worshipfull Prelate of Angrence had come ouer into Flaūders Nay surely For as this maketh litle to the matter to know when or at what tyme my booke came to your sight so is it not credible that you wanted him foure yeares after the Imprinting And there is no doubt but that there were messēgers enough that would haue conueyed the same vnto you though this Byshop of Angrence had neuer sene Bruxels yea though he had neuer bene borne And therefore this friuolous painted Preface of yours might haue bene spared altogether if it had not bene accompanyed with two iolly mates The one that ye might vp this meanes yeld your honorable testimonie of your frende Emanuell whō you aduaūce for his excellency aboue the skyes But you come to late Osorius for this your carrion Emanuell departyng frō Flaunders hath left behynd him a most euident monument of his folly bewrayng his blockyshnesse wherein alone hee hath vttered so many proofes of his ignoraunce and impudencie that no man will beleue you though you extoll his worthynes with an othe Wherfore if you haue any delight in his felowshyp vse the same rather in couert in your owne countrey at home for els where Osorius shall neuer get honor or honesty by praysing Emanuell The secōd part of your narration declareth the laudable custome of your countrey where bookes of corrupt Religion may not be admitted and therfore that Emanuell durst not commit myne aunswere vnto you vnlesse he had first obteined licence thereunto What do I heare Are our bookes so dayly infamed with the slaunderous accusations of your fraternitie and yet so curiously deteined frō you whom the world doth acknowledge the most sturdy champions of the Romish Sea By what exāple with what reason with what learnyng doe you iustifie this For where as our writers do publikely inueighe agaynst your Ierarchy wholy cōuince your superstitions it is enacted by your Canon Law and reason yeldeth no lesse that the writinges of your aduersaries should bee deliuered vnto your Doctours and Pillers of the Churche pardye that you may burne them and broyle the Authours of them if they come in your clawes Reason doth require this custome hath this farre forth preuailed with you This is also established by your doctrine And yet onely Portingall is so squeymish at our writynges that Osorius beyng himselfe the most couragious champion of the Romishe facultie may not handle any leafe therof no nor Emanuell a Bishop of Angrence may not dare to send any title therof to his familiar and felow Osorius though otherwise Emanuell be a most pestilēt enemie of
is this to make guiltie of the body and bloud of Christ your naturall brother that hath not offended you as though he had written that which he neuer wrate as though he had done that which heé neuer did as though you haue affirmed that which you do not proue nor can euer iustifie nay rather which you haue not endeuoured to proue for what haue you alledged of myne what wordes what sentences haue you noted out of my writyngs lastly what one thing haue you explaned whereby you may not bee adiudged of all men a most shamelesse slaunderour and notorious rayler Your processe that ensueth is stuffed full with demaundes wherein albeit I dyd pittie your singular amazednesse very much yet could I scarse hold my laughter in them they were so cold so friuolous so variable and to speake my mynde at a word so altogether like Osorius him selfe Your first question is That though myne eyes are so dazeled in matters of Diuinitie that I can not cōceaue that wonderfull chaunge of earthly bread into the nature of heauenly bread yet why I would notwithstādyng with quarelling peruert so wonderfull a benefite of God Truely I doe confesse right reuerend Prelate that myne eye sight hath bene alwayes so dymme that I could neuer discerne this your counterfait Trāsubstantiation But I ought to haue beén pardoned herein bycause it hath beén a generall disease and blindnes of all tymes of all ages and of all Nations The Apostles neuer saw so foolishe a thyng The auncient Fathers could neuer discerne so cloudy a forgerie at the last Sathan opened the eyes of your Schoolemen made them so sharpe sighted that in Distinctions eccyties and quiddities they could many time easely seé that thing which was no where at all This kinde of people enlumined by the Prince of darkenes furnished with the authoritie of the Laterane Coūcell and Innocentius Pope of Rome not much aboue 300. yeares past did rayse out of hell this newfangled monster of Trāsubstantiation Euen then when that Councell had sitte abrood Transubstantiation began first to peépe out of the shell beyng neuer heard of before any where nor knowē so much as by any name Why then do ye vpbrayde me with blindnes so sharpely sith your selfe I say your selfe do know that all the world was as blind as I before that Laterane Coūcell But do you as ye list I for my part will continue blind still with Christ with the Apostles with the aūcient Fathers with all the commendable company of godly Deuines in this Laberinthe of Transubstātiation rather then I will acquaynte my selfe with so monstruous a frameshapen new start vp puppet with your Schooleianglers confessours and lousie Friers But you begyn here to waxe very whote and teastie and spurre questions at me on all sides What is it you say that you do vnderstand what do you conceaue in your mynde and reasons Lastly what is it that your vnderstandyng doth feele and know I will tell you my good father and without any cholor I promise you if you will heare me patiently First I do seé that you doe childishly wander in this bitter talke that demaunde one and the selfe same thyng in threé seuerall distinct questions Then I do also playnly seé that you are so doltishe and blockishe a patrone of Transubstātiation that ye can not with any honesty open your packe amongest your owne pedlers But you neuer cease demaundyng You aske of me what doth trouble me in the mysterie of the Sacrament Truly nothyng at all graue Prelate troubleth me there but your vnmeasurable vnskilfulnes in so great a mysterie which is no small reproch to your profession and dignitie yea to your gray heares also But ye will know more yet Whether I doe mistrust the power or the clemencie of God Neither of both finewitted Gentleman no more doe I trust your selfe nor yet your Transubstantiation bycause ye goe about to throw it vpon vs contrary to the meanyng of the holy Scriptures in the which God the Father hath most fully declared vnto vs his power and will by his Sonne our Lord and Sauiour Iesu Christ. Lastly ye demaūde What the cause should be why I should thinke wherefore you should beleue that the body and bloud of Christ is cōteined in the Sacrament in a wonderfull meane and that I my selfe can not beleue the same whereunto you annexe this that in witte and learnyng ye doe farre surmonte me It is a very hard matter holy father to descry any peculiar cause whiche moueth you to beleue and defende Transubstantiation but I will gesse somewhat nearer the chiefest Forsooth you are addicted wholy to your Schooletriflers and Confessours but very litle to the Scriptures by meanes wherof it is come to passe that ye skyppe ouer the open Oracles of truth and are entangled in the weuett of errour peraduenture also ye are become an apprētice to the Romish Seé and ye meane to procure with the prety Marchaūdize of your pedlers pilfe some Cardinals Hatte It may likewise be that for countenaunce sake ye will face out your false packe with a carde often bycause ye thinke it will empaire the credite of your gray heares to be ouersene in any thyng Besides all these custome perhappes of many yeares had made your iudgement rotten before it was ripe as men vse to say of common lyers which redouble a lye so often that by their often rehearsall beleue it to be true at the length euen so may you thinke to establishe the countenaunce of your imagined Transubstantiation by alledgyng in defence therof a continuall allowaunce of long tyme. If none of all these haue moued you I thinke surely ouermuch pride hath blinded you wherewith ye swell in such sort that you dare boldly without blushyng make vaunt of your selfe more like vnto a bragging Thraso or if any thing cā be more vayne thē Thraso then like a Deuine For you doe not exceede me in witte say you nor excell me in learnyng Truely I will not compare my selfe with you nor with any other person Neither do I professe my selfe to know any thyng at all but Iesus Christ and him also Crucified As for you if one droppe of Christian humilitie or ciuill modestie were in you so hautie a bragge of your braue witte and learnyng would neuer haue escaped you Consider with your selfe in good earnest my holy father this your foolish communication and learne somewhat of Christian humilitie lest almightie God besides this your most vnsauory errour of Transubstantiation adde a more heauie plague vpon you for your vnmeasurable arrogancie You accuse me that I doe trust to much to my naturall senses but that you doe direct all the course of your life to the fayth of the Churche and that I doe shake of from my shoulders the yoke of Christ but you take it vpon you and that I doe forsake the benefites of God but that you doe leane stedfastly to fayth All which are cleane contrary
atchieue those spirituall good things vnlesse it be holpen For as much therefore as reason and will doe in their owne right exercize their actiuitie dominiō in naturall thyngs onely as I said before as it were in their lawfull prouinces hereof springeth the thyrd question Whether there be any such freédome in will as to be able of it selfe to embrace or eschewe those thyngs which are gouerned by the externall senses and by reason Whereunto the aunswere is very easie for it is not to bee doubted but that the mynde and the wil out of which two Free-will is deriued do yet still reteine some certein sparckes of freédome such as they be euen in the forlorne nature for the mynde after a certeine sorte is able to thinke to purpose to take counsell to Iudge to allow or disallow in like maner also will doth enioy her certeine freédome in those thynges whereunto Sense and Reason do direct For it as able to wil or not to will to chuse or not to chuse to desire or to forsake to stay his purpose or to chaunge it to moue hether and thether and after a certein maner to exercize it selfe in her kynde to externall discipline that is to say to worke externall honest actions agreable with the law of God to eschew the cōtrary Which thyng besides that many other thynges doe approue to be true as well the sundry examples of Ethnicke people as also the whole politicall estate doth verifie So is it true also that the same is not performed without Gods guidyng which thyng Nazienzen did notably aduertize and expresse in his Oratiō I know sayth hee that the Goale is not attained by the quyuernes of the person nor successe of battell by prowesse nor conquest atchieued by fighting nor yet safe and sure Roade alwayes at skilfull saylers commaundement but it is the onely worke of God to geue victorie and to cōduct the Shippe safety vnto the happie hauen c. But for as much as these actiōs are referred more properly to politique reason then to Diuinitie nor concerne Luthers discourse very much it shal be neédelesse to bestow any great labour herein Fourthly to approche somewhat neare to those thynges which are peculiar and belong chiefly to the doctrine of Deuines and first of all if question be moued whether mans Freewill do beare any stroake in actions meérely euil and corrupt the doyng whereof doth defile man in the sight of God our aunswere herein will forthwith be supplyed with the wordes of Augustine God doth not helpe vs to committe Sinne sayth he but in that we fall from God commeth of our owne corruptiō And this is our corrupt will And agayne where he reciteth the Obiectiō of Iulian writyng agaynst the two Epistles of the Pelagianes Did the Free-will of the first man perishe therefore sayth Iulian to the ende it should compell all his posteritie to Sinne in their flesh of very necessitie To whom Augustine maketh this aunswere Which of vs dare say that mankinde was vtterly spoyled of Freewill by the sinne of the first man freedome perished in deede through Sinne but it was that freedome wherewith man was created in Paradise free to enioy full righteousnes with immortalitie for the which the nature of man standeth in neede of Gods grace according as the Lord him selfe doth testifie saying If the Sonne do deliuer you thē shall you be free in deede Free I meane to liue well and vprightly for so farre is it of that Freewill did so altogether perishe in Sinners that by the same Freewill men do offende especially they that take pleasure in Sinne and which being delighted with the loue of Sinne do with pleasure greedely folow their owne lust And in the 3. Chap. We do not say as they report that we say that all men are constrained to fall into Sinne through the necessitie of their flesh and as it were against their willes But after they be growen to that rypenes of yeares that they may discerne the inclinatiō of their own minde and finde them selues fast holden in Sinne through their owne consent and so suffer them selues to be carried headlong from Sinne to Sinne wilfully and wittingly This will now whiche is free to euill thinges wherein it taketh pleasure is therefore not free to good things bycause it is not made free c. Adde hereunto the wordes of the same Augustine to the same effect discoursing vpon the wordes of the Apostle To doe euill thou hast Freewill without the helpe of GOD albeit that will is not free For of whom soeuer a man is holden bounde to him is hee a bondslane And agayne in an other place To fall sayth hee commeth of our selues and of our sluggishenesse Moreouer writyng agaynst the same Pelagians That person hath Freewill to do euill sayth he either whom Sathan allureth to take pleasure therein by couert or open suggestion or who that persuadeth him selfe thereunto Finally if a mā might tarry still in alledgyng the testimony of Augustine what cā be clearer thē these wordes Freewill being captiued hath no power to worke any thing but sinne and is altogether vnable to worke righteousnesse vnlesse God geue it free passage Whereby you may perceaue how mās will is at one tyme both freé and captiue to witte freé to doe euill in as much as pursuyng lust with voluntary delight neédeth not any forreine coactiō to worke euill whiche also Luther doth not deny but in no respect freé to do good vnlesse it be set at libertie by Gods grace to speake Augustines words vnlesse it be guided to euery good actiō of doyng speakyng thinkyng And where be these iolly fellowes now which do so stoutely yeld to mans will equall freédome to do good or euill in this corruptiō of nature and yet this might be graunted also after a sort so that it be interpreted accordingly for if they meane of will regenerated it is tollerable enough neither will Luther be agaynst it all whose discourse of Freewill tendeth not to any other will then to that wherof mention hath bene made out of Augustine whiche beyng without grace is altogether vneffectuall of her owne nature to doe any thyng but to Sinne. And hereof springeth at the length the whole substaunce of the fift questiō Wherein the chief and speciall state of Luthers discourse consisteth to witte touchyng spirituall motions and actions touchyng heauenly thynges and workes apperteinyng vnto God touchyng spirituall righteousnesse inward worshyppyngs fayth repentaunce conuersion loue new obediēce c. As if the question were demaunded now not of the substaunce of reasonable will whether after the fall there remayne in man a power of vnderstanding appetite to those thynges which nature hath made subiect to mans witte and capacitie or whether man haue any freédome of will to corrupt affections but rather that the question be after this maner whether mās will after
neuer receaued grace as men who through their own Freewill haue made frustrate the Grace of God once receaued by their owne wickednesse But if they be not regenerate yet is that damnable originall sinne worthely punished that will through anguish of punishment may conceaue desire to be regenerate if at least the man that is so chastized be the child of promise That God by outward vsing this meane of scourge vexation and chastizement may by secret inspiration fashion and frame the will to obedience c. And thus much hetherto coÌ„cernyng lawes and ordinauÌ„ces for rewardyng vertue and punishyng vyce in Ciuill gouernement There followeth now an other absurditie to witte where he sayth that by Luthers doctrine man is altogether dispoyled of vnderstandyng depriued of Iudgement bereft of reason and driueÌ„ to that extremitie as to be no better then a naturall stoane throwen out of a mans hand Osorius Argument Whosoeuer do attribute the orderyng of all thynges to absolute Necessitie exemptyng freedome from will doe spoyle men of their vnderstandyng depriue them of Iudgement and bereue them of reason and do traÌ„fforme them into brute beastes and stoanes Luthers doctrine doth bynde mens actions and willes to Necessitie Ergo Luthers doctrine doth dispoyle meÌ„ of their senses and turneth them into stoanes I deny the Maior of this Argument In the Minor I distinguish this word Necessitie Lastly the Argument is altogether vicious and that for two causes Either bycause Osorius thinketh That no Necessitie at all byndeth thynges to be directed by the eternall prouidence and ordinaunce of God or els he supposeth this Necessitie to he such as must neédes exclude all freédome of will Both which are false And first touchyng Necessitie Luther other auÌ„cient writers do learnedly affirme That the actions of mans lyfe are not subiect to fortune but herein they do acknowledge the prouidence of God which they assigne to be the onely and principall gouernesse and guide of maÌ„s lyfe as which directeth maÌ„s purposes boweth and bendeth his will and ordereth all the enterprises thereof Moreouer they teach the same prouidence to be such as whiche is not whirled about through blynd and sudden motions wherein no place is left to the happenynges of fortune nor such a prouidence as must neédes depend vpon inferiour causes or vpon a necessary couplyng together of causes wherein destiny is excluded nor such a prouidence as is vnaduisedly vncerteinly tossed to fro accordyng to the wandryng chaunces of fortune wherein fortune chaunce is taken away but such a prouidence as consisteth in a certeine assured stedfast permanent order workyng so in the meane whiles by inferiour and mixte causes neuerthelesse not as though it were tyed to those causes with any such necessary bonde of couplyng that it may not possibly doe otherwise by her owne absolute and most freé motione neither as though those causes could not possibly doe otherwise but must of Necessitie follow the direction of the same prouidence whereunto they be subiect Whereby it commeth to passe that Freewill beyng occupyed in these meane causes neither ceaseth to be altogether freé as being forced by no forreine constraint but guided by her owne accord nor yet remayneth so absolutely freé but that it is constrayned whether she wil or no to yeld to the direction of Gods prouidence voluntaryly notwithstandyng not coactly Wherupon amongest the learned this Necessitie is called Necessitas immutabilitatis aut certitudâ—nis whiche though doe not vrge thynges with violent coaction yet for as much as nothyng is in al the creation of nature of so small substance as can be without the coÌ„passe of Gods knowledge therfore albeit many things seéme accordyng to our capacities to be done by chaunce yet in respect of Gods prouidence if wee duely consider the originall and principall cause of thynges that are done wee shall finde nothing done but which could not but be done of very Necessitie I make hast to the other absurdities to witte to Osorius his most friuolous brabblynges For in this sorte he crawleth from mans lawes and ciuill gouernement to Gods lawes arguyng as it were in this sort If will be nothing auayleable to good lyfe nor of it selfe can do nothyng but Sinne then are Gods lawes commaunded in vayne in vayne also are exhortatioÌ„s and aduertisementes ministred in vayne are blessinges and cursinges set downe in the Scriptures But no man wil say that these are coÌ„mauÌ„ded in the Scriptures in vayne Ergo this doctrine of Luther is false execrable whereby he leaueth none other habilitie to Freewill but onely to sinne whereby he bindeth all things to necessity This Maior must bee denyed beyng nothyng els but a most manifest cauillation to witte tendyng to this effect as though God commaunded vs to doe nothyng but that we might of our owne selues performe whereunto Augustine aunswereth in this wise O man in the commaundemeÌ„t learne what thou oughtest to doe in the punishment learne thy weakenesse through thyne owne default In the prayer learne from whence thou mayest obteyne c. By the law of commaundyng and forebyddyng therefore accordyng to Augustine we come to the knowledge of our Sinne and infirmitie not of our owne strength power yet is not the law therfore coÌ„maunded in vayne For to vs that aske in the Sonnes name and acknowledge our infirmitie is Grace promised which worketh in vs both to will and to doe accordyng as the same Augustine doth recorde in the same place Let vs remember that hee doth say make vnto your selues a new hart and nâ—w Spirite who hath sayd I will geue you a new hart and I will geue you a new Spirite How is it then that he that sayth make vnto your selues a new hart fayth also I will geue you a new hart Why doth he commaunde if him selfe will geue Why doth he geue if maÌ„ be the worker but bycause he geueth the thyng that he commaundeth and helpeth him whom hee hath commaunded that hee may do it For through grace it commeth to passe that man is endued with a good will which was before of an euill will c. Therfore by this Argument of Augustine appeareth that this word of admonition exhortation or of rebukyng vsed in the Scriptures is as it were a certeine meane or instrument which the holy Ghost doth vse in conuertyng the will of such as are not yet regenerate and in beautifying the first issues of his good giftes in such as are regenerate that they may grow to a more rypenesse through Repentaunce through Fayth and through Prayer And by what wrest of Logicke doth Osorius gather habilitie of Freewill out of the holy ordinauÌ„ces seyng Augustine doth in so many places so directly gayne say him but especially in his 2. booke agaynst the two Epistles of Pelagius writyng in this wise I can see nothyng in the whole Scriptures geuen by God in commauÌ„dement to man to proue that
scripture especially when mētion is made of Christ hymselfe or when Chryst hymself would vouchsafe to expresse hys great and inestimable benefittes towardes vs and the euerlasting efficacy of hys death and passion I know not how it had rather vnder certayne shadowes and mystycall resemblaunces as vnder Allegoricall cloudes to speake as Ierome doth signyfye the same more modestly rather then to proclayme it openly in wordes By meanes whereof we ought many tymes to consider That in the Propheticall Scriptures Christ our Lord Sauiour is called by sondry and seuerall names accordyng to the diuers seuerall operation and effectuall power and workyng of his Diuine Maiestie and pleasure towardes vs. For in that he doth enlighten the Darckenes of our mindes he is called the light of the worlde In respect of his wonderfull might and power surmounting all power whatsoeuer he is called the Lyon of the Tribe of Iuda In respect that he guideth vs he is called the way In respect that he leadeth in he is called the dore In respect that we are none otherwise engraffed then in him he is called the Vine and we the Braunches And so according to the nature of his Innocency and our deliueraunce he is called the Lambe of God in respect that he loueth his Church with more thē an husbandly loue doth cherish it endow it cloath it beutyfy it he is called an husband he is called also the Rock sometime a grayne of Corne dead in the earth many times a Serpent set vppe vpon a Crosse sometymes a wellspring gushing out into life euerlasting And so in diuers and seuerall respectes he is called by diuers seuerall names In like maner bycause he feédeth and defendeth vs he is called A good Shepherd and bycause he feédeth vs with none other thyng thē with the death of his owne body shedding of his bloud He is also called our meate our bread and our drinke Moreouer bycause this bread and this drinke is of the Lordes owne mouth cōmaunded to be receaued to renew the remēbraunce of him for this cause those elementes do put on the nature of a Sacramēt and so vnder this very couer and mystery of a Sacrament are called his owne body and bloud Whiche least I shall seéme to iustifie of myne owne proper knowledge Let vs heare the testimony and agreable consent of Augustine Who reasonyng of Sacramentes and of the likenesse of thyngs wherof they be Sacramentes doth vtterly deny the Sacramentes can be in any respect Sacramentes at all vnlesse they haue a likenesse of some things and for that cause in respect of the likenesse of the thyngs them selues he affirmeth that they are many tymes called by the name of the thynges them selues So an Argumēt may be framed out of August on this wise The Sacrament of the last Supper hath a likenesse of the body of the Lord. No likenesse is the thing it selfe wherof it is the likenesse Ergo The Sacramēt of the Eucharist is not the body of Christ. But if Osorius be of opinion that Christes wordes ought to be taken simply accordyng to the bare letter of the flesh let him harken agayne to the same Augustine This is a Mystery sayth he that I tell you which if it be vnderstoode spiritually will quicken and geue life And the same Augustine in an other place opening playnly the figure of the same wordes doth witnesse directly on this wise The lord doughted not to say This is my body when he gaue the signe of his body I could vouche many other graue and auncient Testimonies witnessing the same namely Tertullian Origene Ierome Chrisostome Theodorete Gelasius and others But of this matter I do not meane to make any curious discourse as now There shal be hereafter more fitte place for the same more at large by Gods grace In the meane space for my learnyng I would fayne learne one Questiō of Osorius who albeit hath not bene ouer much studied in Augustine yet hath at the least bene busied amongest the Rhetoriciās Let vs therefore consider the matter by the circumstaunces of Rhetoricke And to graunt this much first that Christ is omnipotent which accordyng to the power of his Diuine omnipotency can and is able to do all thyngs in heauē and in earth what matter should moue him now both to take away his owne body from hence which was but one onely body from vs yet withall should leaue the selfe same body behynde him with vs which though could not be done accordyng to the nature of humanitie yet to graunt that it might be done miraculously what profit then or what necessitie was there to worke a miracle herein You will say bycause the spouse the Churche could not lacke the presence of her owne husband Christ. And wherfore I pray you For this is the thyng wherein I desire to be taught of you chiefly Osorius sithence it is not credible that miracles which are wrought agaynst nature should be wrought rashly without some singuler or especiall consideration I am now therfore desirous to know what cause you will alledge To feede vs with his body you will say What to feéde our bellyes or our soules Surely our soules he hath fed already sufficiently enough long sithence in that very day wherein he washt away the Sinnes of the whole world and pacified all thynges both in heauen and in earth once for all What to feéde our bellyes then But he doth aboundauntly feéde vs with other foode dayly Moreouer neither cā Augustine nor yet the Scripture it selfe disgest this that man shal be fed with mans flesh and drinke mans bloud Do not prepare your teeth sayth he but your hart And agayne in an other place as many tymes els also inuityng vs to a spirituall eating of Christ Why doest thou make ready thy teeth and thy belly sayth he beleeue and thou hast eaten Agayne to beleeue in him sayth he is to eate that liuely bread Moreouer annexe hereunto That whenas Christ hath accomplished all the partes and duties of his holy office which neéded the vse of his flesh to performe the worke of our redemption In the which flesh he satisfied all the partes of the law pacified the wrath of his Father ouercame Sinne and death and the Deuill him selfe beyng the authour of death hath troden vnder foote for euer euer In which flesh he rose agayne and ascended into heauen like a most triumphaunt Conquerour Frō whence he doth euen now also miraculously nourish preserue and comfort his Church here on earth through the vnspeakeable power of his excellent omnipotency so that now to the full accomplishment of our Saluation seémeth no one thyng at all to remaine vnperformed but that onely last day of Iudgement These matters therfore beyng vndoughted true what thyng may that be now Osorius wherein his fleshly presence may seéme in any respect necessary from hence forth and not rather his absence in the flesh
To witt if there be not a Purgatory Osorius doth lye if he be a lyar Ergo he is not sent froÌ„ God but from the Deuill the father of lyes Which counterbuffe is so much the more probably applyable agaynst Osorius then agaynst Luther by how much he persisteth more obstinately in the maintenaunce of that filthy quauemyre of Purgatory For as much as although Luther did erre somewhat in that matter at the first yet afterwardes knowing the trueth did reduce himselfe to a more sound iudgement so that now he neither maketh for the Papistes in affirming Purgatory neither by that his former vntrueth error sinneth agaynst God at all Therefore as touching his forked and double horned argumeÌ„t wherein the first part of Osorius his Position If there be no Purgatory Luther doth lye If Osorius here doe vnderstand of a lye Formaliter Luther doth not lye but Osorius doth lye But if Luther be adiudged according to that which he once thought and taught once why should he be more reproched with a lye in affirming Purgatory then commended in the trueth in denying Purgatory afterwardes Moreouer if a lye be such a kinde of thing as you doe affirme in your other Position wh doth separate vs from God surely he is to be accoumpted a lyar not that reuoketh the error which he maintayned before but he that still persisteth obstinately in his ouerthwart opinion manifestly agaynst the trueth But the Scholemen that in their Schooles dispute somewhat more subtilly of the nature of a lye do ioyne together to the full proportion or making of a lye the will also of him that doth make the lye to speake the schole tearmes with the part of the false surmise In the one whereof they ground the matter or substaunce in the other the forme or qualitye Therefore for asmuch as there is no sinne but that which is voluntary if we will speake after the proprietye of speéch he that in teaching or disputing doth mainteyne a falshoode thinking that he doth maintayne a trueth he is to be sayd that he erreth and is deceaued in opinion but doth not make a lye properly but per accidens as the schoole men speake and materialiter And therfore touching the one horne of your sophisme If there be not a Purgatorye Luther doth lye If you meane it formaliter as I sayd it is vntrue and a deuise of Osorius Now remayneth thother horne whereof we must be well aduised how wee doe aunswere it If he did lye say you Ergo He was not sent from God If this be true that neuer any man was sent from God that did make any kinde of lye at any tyme Lett Osorius looke well to the matter how he may be able to crack me these two nuttes that I will lykewise geue vnto him as euidently in ech respect agaynst him If Sara were not Abraham his sister then did Abraham lye If Abraham did lye then was he not sent from God Yea further also to adde hereunto an intent of deceauing Here is yet an other matter If Iacob were not the first begotten sonne of Isaack by Rebecca his wyfe both Iacob lyed and the Mother also If the Myddwyues did not drowne the young sucklings of the Hebrues then did they make a lye vnto Pharao If king Saul gaue vnto Dauid no commaundement by worde of mouth commiâ—g to Achimelech then did Dauid make a lye 1. Kinges Chap. 21. If all these of whom I haue spoken Iacob Rebecca the Middwiues Dauid did lye Ergo they were not sent from God which if Osor. will not deny to be a most arrogant vntrueth what remaineth but that this cruell Sauadge two horned beast together with Luther goare the holy Patriarches also with his hornes or casting away his hornes acquite Luther and the Patriarches also both together Now I put Osorius to his choyse to take which he will Howbeit I speake not this to acquite Luther cleare from all spott of error NotwithstaÌ„ding it is not all one to hold an error and to maintayne a lye It is one thing to be vnskilfull and ignoraunt and an other thing to reuoke in season assoone as a man doth know his error The first whereof is a speciall poynt of humaine infirmitye thother a singuler benefite of Gods mercy Both which we haue seéne to haue chaunced euen in the most holy ones of all We reade of the most holy messenger and forerunner of the Lord speaking on this wise And I sayth he knew him not Neuerthelesse in an other place we heare the same speaking on this wise Behold the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world And what maruell was it if Luther were ignoraunt in some thinges a whiles which were discouered vnto him afterwardes And where hath euer bene so quicksighted a Spinx that was able to seé all things at once which prerogatiue the Barnardines dare not geue vnto Barnard himselfe But Osorius will not leaue of his handfast And would gladly know as he sayth Whether senteÌ„ce of Luther Haddon will determine vpoÌ„ to be true seing Luther is Author of both Of the first wherein he affirmeth a Purgatory to be or the last wherein he denyeth the same thing agayne That I may passe ouer in the meane space whose Cartloades full of Tauntes Mockes and Mountaynes of lyes which he vomiteth out in the bosome of the good man most brutishly euen to the ridding of his gorge almost I will aunswere to the matter and the reprochfull Taunt it selfe briefly without Tauntes As concerning the very trueth and naturall substaunce of Doctrine howsoeuer mens opinions and Iudgements be carryed hither and thither in wauering vncerteynty yet trueth is neuer vnlyke it selfe but remayneth alwayes one and the same also vnchaungeable which suffreth not it selfe to be toste to and fro after the whirling variablenes of mens imaginations but standeth alwayes sound and vnshaken builded vpon the vnpenetrable Rocke of the Scriptures of God Now if Luthers rule be agreably apporcioned accordyng to the infallible squarier of that holy staÌ„dard whether it be first or whether it be last why should it not be worthely embraced not because it is the last but because it is the truest On the other side if in all his doctrine be any assertion that deserueth to be reprehended as repugnauÌ„t or varying from the true touchestone of Christian profession there be extant the holy Scriptures of God manifest and layd open there be auÌ„cient ordinauÌ„ces of the Primitiue Church There be approued Testimonies of learned men There be groundes and principles of doctrine wherewith ye may lawfully conuince him Yet orderly notwithstanding and courteously that the Readers may finde you to be a learned Deuine or skilfull Logician not a rayling Slaunderer and fryuolous brabbler Now to what purpose serueth so much cursed rayling no lesse vnseasonable then vnreasonable so many Tauntes so many slaunders so many subtiltyes and so many bitter skoffes what neéded
doe aunswere and confesse that this Iustice and Clemēcy of God wherof you speake haue their place and time But you haue not yet proued that the time and place of executing this Iustice and Clemency doth belong to any Purgatory vnder the ground neither is it concluded by that your manner of arguing through any necessitye of consequence There is a Fier that shall torment in euerlasting paynes the Persecutors and Enemies of Christ. Ergo There is also a Fyer els where that maye be putt out If this argument should be examined by the exact Rules of Logick the Logicians would surely say that there is no forme at all in your Consequence howebeit in respect of the materiall poyntes both propositions be true For as it is certayne and assured by the authoritie of the Scriptures that the fier of hell shall neuer be extinguished so hath this life also his fier and tēporall paynes wherewith Gods elect are now and then tryed purged both which we do read in the history of the Rich man and Lazarus whereof the one feéling no greéuaunces in this life was throwen into the Tormentes of Hell The other contrarywise after many greéuous stormes and dayly miseries of this life was receiued into the Bosome of euerlasting ioy In which Similitude euery man may behold his owne estate and condition For such as with barbarous cruelty do outragiously rage agaynst the Gospell of Christ and triumph in this world in carelesse security shall tast of bitter wormewood in an other world on the contrary part such as are afflicted with wretchednes and purging calamities in this life their passadge frō hence is not to Purgatory but to glory But the troublous turmoyles and paynefull afflictions wherewith the godly are ouerwhelmed in this life are not sufficient after the opinion of Osorius for besides all these temporall miseries punishmentes and plagues a certayne meane place yet is sought out which they call by the name of Purgatory Where greeuous tormentes doe abide for the clensing the remnaunt and dregges of sinne which doe deserue vengeaunce through a certayne vnauoydable necessity of iustice And how so Forsooth because the iustice of God must needes be satisfied And because this satisfaction once purchased by the merites of Iesu Christ is not so absolute and sound but hath certayne degreés as that it may be made more absolute and perfect therefore are our passions and afflictions required of necessity which if be not superadded and coupled together with the merites of Christ it can not by any other possible meanes be brought to passe that the cryme which is inordinate may be reduced to the order of Iustice. O sacred Fayth O new tradition not procured out of Portingall I trowe but coyned euē in the very forgeshop of Purgatory it self If Caluine or Luther were aliue present whose doctrine you affirme to haue proceéded from the most detestable deuill of hell and did heare this communication of yours how lowdly how extreamely how forcibly how vehemētly would they exclayme and cry out with full mouth agaynst you in this place surely as fiercely as they might agaynst an open enemy of Christ. For what shall we say if this be not a notorious reproche and blasphemy vnto Christ Many hundred yeares agoe did S. Paule teach that we were all made perfect in Christ Iesu and your worship now like a fresh vpstart Gospeller creépyng out of the crooked crowdes and ragged skrappes of the Thomystes dare take vpon you to pyke out certayne degrees I know not what in this most excellent clensing purchased by the great boūty and liberality of Christ which neither Paule nor any one of all the Apostles could euer descry Go to let vs heare then I beseech you from out that Syluane Pulpet what steppes be these of amplifieng this clensing and purifieng Without salt say you no sacrifice was accustomed to be offered in the olde Law Therfore in this salt and in this fier that is to say in the punishement appoynted for purging sinnes all this amplification of purifieng doth consist that so the sacrifice may be more pure and more holy I do heare it and doe aunswere to this most vnsauerye argument of Salte if he will vouchsafe first with all the seasonable Salte of hys wisedome to declare what was signified by these Priestly sacrifices moreouer what the wisedome of God dyd meane to expresse by this Salte Fier for it is not to be doughted but that vnder these carnall shadowes lay hidden some more darcke couert misteries whether will he say that this mistery did represent the body of Christ or our bodyes If he meane the body of Christ that was wasted with the fier of Gods iudgement being seasoned and besprinckled with a certayne heauenly Salte of most sweéte smelling sauour But this payne of fier and Salte can signify none other kinde of Purgatory but that onely Purgatory that was finished and accomplished vpon the Crosse If he meane our bodyes which are filthy by nature but this cann in no wise be true for that the ceremoniall law it selfe would not admitte any vncleane flesh to be sacrificed Furthermore whereas that Frye and Salt also of Gods iudgement did cōsume not the spottes and filth onely of those Sacrifices but the holy substaunce of the Sacrifices also for the clensing of Sinnes It remayneth therefore that either there is no Purgatory after thys life that may encrease the degreés of purifiyng with Fire and Salte or els that the Sacrifices themselues that is to say the Soules of the faythfull must of necessity be swallowed vpp and consumed wholy in this Purgatory For not the Bodies but the Soules be tormented there I suppose Which way will our Portingale wend himselfe now to the example of Dauid in whom although the condemnation of the trespasse committed was forgeuen yet was he not clearely deliuered from punishment notwithstanding It is true but this Punishement good Osorius was exequuted vpon him in this worlde and not reserued for an other worlde How thē can you square vs out a new plattforme of Purgatory myddway betwixt heauen and earth for them that are departed out of this lyfe by this example of Dauid Because a recompence must be made say you for the trespasse committed according to the dew and iust rule of Gods Iustice. But this Iustice of God being prouoked to displeasure by infinite and vnmeasurable wayes and meanes cann not be duely recompenced without endlesse punishment or perhappes it will not be satisfied without his owne vicar the Pope and his propiciatorye Masses Not so but he will exequute his punishment vpon vs for our sinnes nothwithstanding And why so because the sacrifice say you may be more pure more holy and more acceptable vnto God May we be so bold by your patience Osorius to take a taste how this assertion of yours will agreé with the rule of the Apostles Doctrine And first I would
conuey ouer by tradicion to the Posteritye afterwardes neither is any question made here whether Christ after he had taken bread and the cupp did say that it was his body and his bloud but whether the bread which the Priest doth offer in his Masse be really and substantially and in trueth of nature the body of Christ which himselfe hath appoynted and ordeyned to be offred in his Church by thapostles and their successors as Priestes of the new Testament for a dayly expiation of sinnes This foule absurdity whereas we and the whole consent of the Scripture doe vtterly deny you ought to haue deliuered cleare from inconuenience which as yet you haue not done out of Irene Although he doe make mention of a new oblation of a new Testament yet this doth not argue notwithstanding that either Christ should be supposed to offer him selfe at his last supper or that the Priest should be imagined to make a dayly Sacrifice in his Masse for sinnes w̄t the selfe same body wherein he suffered his Passion once vpon the Crosse for the sinnes of the world In deéde Irene doth tearme it by the name of an oblation And it is true so is it also many tymes called of many of the auncient Fathers Neither doe we mislyke the word nor yet doe abbridge the ecclesiasticall writers from libertye to frequent their Metaphors and hyperbolicall speéches as lyketh them best Howbeit the Scripture doth not acknowledge any such wordes Neuerthelesse sith it pleaseth them to accustome themselues with such speéches lett them vse this name of oblation a gods name and call this an oblation which we doe call the Eucharist we contend not about words it is the matter it selfe that we stand vpon The auncient Fathers because they seé a Communion instituted in rembraunce of the Lordes Sacrifice doe call it by the name of a Sacrifice by the same reason wherby they doe vsually ascribe vnto signes the names and effectes of the thinges signified These Catholickes on the contrary side doe cry out and exclame that he is an Heretique that will dare to say that the Sacrifice of the Masse is a bare memoriall of the Sacrifice of Christ accomplished vpon the Crosse. Neither thinke this to be sufficient that it be reputed as a memoriall but besides this bare memoriall they proceéde yet to his outrage that they endowe it also with the very power and effectuallnesse of the Lords Sacrifice so that whereas the passion of Christ is the onely meritorious cause of our redemption yet will they shamefully attribute the whole efficacye and operatiō of that inestimable benefitt to the Masse and in that respect they dare presumptuously commaund it to be called a sacrifice not a Sacramentall or a memoriall sacrifice but an Expiatory Propietatory sacrifice that I may be so bold to speake their owne tearmes And allthough they doe not deny that all our whole perfection doth proceéde frō the onely oblatiō of Christ Yet because this perfection is not made so absolutely perfect by the vertue and grace of Baptisme but that after our regeneration by grace we slippe and fail many tymes into many offensiue bypathes in this transitorye lyfe they doe affirme that this Sacrifice of the Church was prouided for a medicine to solue all those soares amperinges out of the fleshe as a restoratiue not onely to them that receaue it but very medictable for the quick for the dead also as though forsooth the merites of Christes bloud could not heale our woūdes without this minglemangle of these Satisfactory druggs How trymly this iugglyng doctrine doth agreé with the naturall proportioned squarier of the Scriptures let others Iudge as they liste I for my part that do now then exercise my tyme in the conference readyng of Scriptures auncient writers do verily iudge that these notorious Maximes can not by any meanes be of any importaunce except we plucke vppe our fayth by the rootes and banish cleane away the very sinowes and marrow of the sacred Scriptures For whereas the whole doctrine of Christes Gospell hath established all the treasure and riches of Gods promises yea Christ him selfe wholy withall his deseruyngs in fayth onely what shall remayne thē for this Sacrifice but that it represent vnto vs a memory remembraunce of the Lordes death onely and for this cause taketh the denomination of an oblation by the testimony of Irene and others The holy and sacred monumentes of aunciēt Doctours be full of Testimonies which do playnly declare that the Euchariste is not an oblation properly but is called an Oblation in respect that it is a memoriall of Christes oblation performed once vpon the Crosse. Furthermore as concernyng the application that it is ministred not by any other outward Instrument them by the preachyng of the Gospell of Christ and the dispensation of his Sacramentes and that the benefitt thereof is receaued by none other meane then by force of fayth onely Now therefore let vs first heare Irene as it were expoūdyng him selfe We doe offer vnto God sayth he the first fruites of his creatures with thankesgeuing He declareth that out of those first fruites of Gods creatures the substaūce therof was taken which was cōsecrated into the body bloud of Christ. And in this respect he doth call the whole action of the Minister an oblation And agayne emongest other thynges treatyng of the oblation of the new Testament he willeth vs also to offer a gift at the Altar cōtinually and dayly Therfore sayth he there is an Altar in heauen and thither must our prayers and oblations be directed c. First if the Church doe offer vnto God a gift of his owne creature I suppose now that ye Catholicke children will not affirme that the Chruch doth offer the Sonne of God then Moreouer if our Altar be in heauē as Irene did truly say to what purpose shall these Altares stand in the Church whenas we are taught to direct the Sacrifices of our supplicatiōs to the Altar not these stony Altares in the Churches but to that heauenly Altar that is in heauen Moreouer what shall we say to Ambrose who treatyng of Uirginitie was not afrayed to call the Uirgines hartes by the name of Altares in the which Christ was dayly offred And hereunto accordeth the Iudgemēt of Chrisostome The gift of the Gospell sayth he doth ascend on high without bloud without smoake without an Altar and without other the like c. So also Ierome Euery faythfull person hath an Altar within him selfe which is fayth Augustine likewise The Sacrifice of the new Testament is when we do offer cleane and pure Altares of our hartes in the presence of Gods maiestie And the second Councell of Nyce We Christians do scarsely know what is an Altar and what is an oblation Agreable to the Testimonies before recited is the notable and playne Testimonie of Eusebius We do sacrifice sayth he and do