Iesuiticall superciliousnesse to contemne them as Barbarous in an example of praying in a knowne tongue the contrarie whereunto as namely praying in an unknowne tongue the Apostle condemneth as * 1. Cor. 14. 11. Barbarousnesse it selfe With the same modestie might you scoffe at and reproach other more ancient Nations and Christians commended by primitive Fathers for celebrating their Oblations Prayers and Psalmes in their Nationall tongues so that one repeating the words first the whole people with joynt voyce and heart accorded in singing Among whom are recorded the converted Å¿ De ludaeis conversis Authors in 1. Cor. 14 Aliquando Syrâ Lingrâ plerunque Hâ—â—braeâ in oblationibus utebantur Iewes the Syrians and All aswell Greekes as Romanes praying in their owne tongue and with harmonicall consent singing of Psalmes in the publicke worship as also the t Hier. ad Eustoch Epitaph Paulae Hebraeo Graeco Latino Syroque Sermone Psalmi in ordine personabant Ad finem Grecians Egyptians Thebaeans Palestinians Arabians Phoenicians and Syrians This from the Testimonies of holy Fathers Whether therefore the tongue wee pray in bee barbarous or learned it is not respected of God but whether it be knowne or unknowne is the point In which respect we may usurpe the Similitude which S. Augustine hath What availeth a golden Key if it cannot open that which should bee opened or what hurteth a wooden Key u Orig. con Celsum lib. 8. Graeci Graecè Romani Romanà singulique precentur linguâ suâ Non enim est Deus maximus unus corum qui certam aliquam linguam soâ—titi caeterarum iguari sunt if it be able to open seeing that wee desire nothing but that the thing shut may be opened By this time you see your Noveltie in your Romish Practice Behold in the next place the Iniquitie and prophannesse thereof and how after the death of Pope Gregorie the first which was about 608 years after Christ your Roman Church degenerated as much from the then Romane truth x Basâ— ad Cler. Eccles Caesarien Quidam Psalmos causatitur et modos Psalmodiae Vnum hoc numeris datur ut quod canendum sit prius ordiatur reliqui succinunt elucescente die pariter omnes veluti uno ore et corde confessionis Psalmum Deo offerunt Horum gratia si nos fugitis fugietis simul AEgyptios Thebraeos Palaestinos Arabes Phoenicas Syros ut semel dicam omnes apud quos vigiliae precesque communesque Psalmodiae in preâ—â—o sunt For the Sclavanians See hereafter 6. Chalenge at d in this point as she did from her Romane tongue and Language it selfe Wee are here constrained to plead the whole cause for the defence of a necessitie of a knowne worship in respect of God of Man y Aug. de doctr Christ l. 4. c. 11. Quid prodest c. and of Both. A SECOND CHALLENGE Shewing the Iniquitie of Service in an Vnknowne tongue and first of the Injury done by the foresaid Romane Decree unto the soules of Men. THe former Decree of your Councell for unknowne Service how injurious it is unto man we may learne by the Confessions of Iesuites and others z Apostolus praecipit ut Preces ad aedificationem fiant quemadmodùm probatur Rom. 15. Plus lucratur quoad intellectum et affectum qui non ignorat quae orat Qui non intelligit non aedificatur in quantum non intelligit in speciali licet in generali intelligat Ad fructum devotionis conducibilius intelligendo orare Aquinas in 1. Cor. 14. Iubet Apostolus ut ad aedificationem abundent melius est orare mente distinctè intelligente ea quae orat quà m confusè Et ex hac doctrina habetur melius esse ut publicae preces Ecclesiae nostrae audiente populos in lingua Clericis populo communi dicantur quà m Latinè Cajeran Cardin. in eum locum 1. Cor. 14. Paulus vult òmnes homines orare etiam mente Faber Stapulens in eundem locum Quid proficit populus non intelligendo ea quae orat Lyran in 1. Cor. 14. Ne benedicons Sacerdos diceret Ego quidem intelligo gratias ago peregrinâ lînguâ respondet Apostolus Sed alter non aedificatur Id est Indè nulla aedificatio Ecclesiae cujus imprimis ratio habenda erat ità ut nolit ullas preces publicas in Ecclesia celebrari ignoâ—o prorsus Sermone qui non sit Graecis Graecus Hebraeis Hebraeus Latinus Latinis nam magna ex parte haec idiomata ab ijs qui sunt ejusdem linguae intelliguntur Salmeron Ies Com. sup eum locum 1. Cor. 14. which he confesseth of the Apostles times granting that The Apostles in their times required a knowne Language Greeke in the Greeke Churches and Latine in the Latine Churches because first that this made for the Edidification and consolation of Christians Secondly that Mangaineth more both in mind and affection who knoweth what he prayeth As for him that is Ignorant you say He is not edified inasmuch as he knoweth not in particular although in generall he doth understand Thirdly that the Apostle commandeth that all things be done to edification Fourthly that the knowne Service is sitter for Devotion and thereupon some of you have furthermore Concluded that It were better that the Service were used in a Language knowne both to the Clergie and People And againe that People profit no whit by praying in a strange language So your owne Writers as you may observe in the Marginals Now what more extreame and intolerable Injury could you do to the soules of Gods people than by imposing a strange language upon them thereby according to your own Confessions to deprive them and that wittingly of Edification Consolation and Devotion the three chiefe Benefits that mans soule is capable off in the service of God Thus in respect of your Injurie against Man A THIRD CHALLENGE Touching the Injurie done by the same Decree against God himselfe YEt all this notwithstanding you are bent to cozen Christian people with palpable Sophistry by your a Bellarm. lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 16. De Canticis Spiritualibus tempore Primitivae Ecclesiae Tert §. Porro consuevisse Quoniam igitur ista Cantica fiunt ad Populi consolationem vult Apostolus ut siant linguâ quae intelligatur ut Idiota c. Ibid. §. Quoniam Praeterea tunc quia Christiani erant pauci omnes simul psallebant in Ecclesiâ respondebant â—â—nis officijs at posteà crescente populo divisa sunt magis officia solis Clericis relictum est ut communes preces laudes in Ecclesiâ peragant Ibid §. Respondeo negando Demque finis praecipuus illorum Canticorum erat instructio consolatio populi nisi linguâ nota facta fuissent perijsset praecipuus fructus ipsorum At Divinorum officiorum nec est finis praecipuus instructio vel consolatio populâ— sed cultus Dei Ibid. §.
Dei cap. 16. Schoolemen but especially the Apostle his direct saying Verse 23. If the whole Congregation meete together c. What more publique that the Assembly of the whole Congregation And to suppose that they were extraordinarie Prayers what is more Consectarie and Consequent than that if the Apostle note if for an Abuse to practise such Extraordinarie Exercises of Preaching and Praying in a tongue unknowne even because the Hearers are not thereby Edified Doubtlesse the same Abuse practised in publike and ordinarie Service being more notorious and Common must needs bee so much the more condemnable as witnesse both * See the sixt Challenge following Ancient Fathers and your owne * See the former Challenges Brethren who have taught the use of a knowne Tongue in all publique and ordinary service of God from this Text of Scripture which as you say speaketh of Prayers extraordinarie Which is a full Confutation of your former Objection Yea but It is sufficient saith he that the vulgar people know in generall although they understand not the Prayers in particular Which againe Contradicteth the Apostle who in the sixteenth Verse will have the Private or Vulgarman to bee able to give consent to the publique Prayer in saying Amen And therefore requireth the Minister Verse 7. as the Harper to yeeld in particular a Distinction of tunes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Verse 8. as a Trumpeter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give a certaine knowne sound that which your owne Doctors have also confessed A third Instance is taken out of Bellarmine who saith that The p Non reprehenditur oratio non intellect sed ei anteponitur oratio quae intelligitur ut peter Vers 17 Tu quidem benè gratias agis sed alter non aedisicatur Bellar quo supra Apostle reprehendeth not an unknowne Prayer but preferreth a knowne Prayer before the other saying Verse 7. Thou indeed prayest well but another is not edified Flatly contradictorie to the whole scope of the Apostle throughout the Chapter as your owne * Salmerâ— in les See above Challenge 2. at the let z Iesuite is forced to proclaime The Apostle saith hee would have the people to be edified because then all things ought to have beene done to the Edification and Consolation of the Assembly and therefore hee would not have any Publike Prayer used among the Hebrewes but in the Hebrew-language nor among the Grecians but in Greeke nor yet among the Latines but in the Latine tongue The meaning then is Thou indeed namely who art the Minister and knowest the prayer so far dost well but in respect of others which cannot understand Not well because They are not edified His fourth Objection hee wresteth out of the fourth Verse If I pray with my tongue my spirit prayeth but my understanding is without fruit So hee As though that strange Tongue here spoken off were not understood by him that prayed Which contradicteth the Apostle Verse 4. Hee that speaketh with the tongue doth edifie himselfe for never did any denyâ—t at hee who had the miraculous gift of Speech in a strange tongue did understand himselfe although sometimes he wanted the gift of Interpreting it for the understanding of all others Therefore saith the Apostle Verse 13. Hee that speaketh with the tongue let him pray that hee may interprete it Fiftly by the word Spirit q Id est si orem dono linguae nimitùm quam non intelligam Spiritus id est Affectus meus orat sed mens est fine fructu Ergo dicit Apostolus non Orationem sed mentem esse sine fructu Bellar quo sup And this answere Master Brerely borrowed from Bellar. Tract upon the Masse p. 452. your Cardinall would have understood the Affection as if Affection without understanding did profit him that prayeth which is fully contrary to the Apostles doctrine as witnesseth your r Vox Spiritus à principioÌ„ usque ad finem Donum Spiritus peculiare significat quo impellebaÌ„tur lingus loqui Si Apostolus in hac voce admitteret Homonymiam aliquam Graeci Patres nos de eo admonuissent Salmeron Ies in eund locum Salmeron in plaine termes shewing that the word Spirit thorow-out this whole Chapter signfieth not the Affection but the miraculous Spirituall gift of speaking in Strange tongues as also the * Vpon the same place both Ambrose Spiritu id est linguâ ignotâ âšœ And Chrysstome also upon Saint Pauls words My Spirit prayeth but my mind is without fruit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calleth his Not knowing the Prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hier. in 1. Cor. 14. Omnis sermo qui non intelligitur Barbarus est Spiritus meus orat sed alter non aedificatur Id est Non est legenti instructuosus sermo sed audienti quià ignorat Sic igitur legendum ut intelligant alij Quomodò dicet Amen i. e. quomodò praebebit consensum Basil in Reg. Contract Reg. 278. de prece audienti incognitâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And of their translation of Scriptures into their nationall tongues Chrysost Hom. 1. in Ioh. Syri Indi AEgyptij Persae AEthiopes innumerae aliae gentes in suam transferentes linguam homines barbari philosophari didicerunt Aug. l. 2. de doctr Christ cap. 5. Ex quo â—actum est ut Scriptura divina ab una lingua profecta per varias interpretum linguas longè lateque diffusa innotescere gentibus ad salutem Fathers expound it In the next place the aforesaid Anonymus contendeth by Reason but such as others reached unto him Fathers say saith hee the words of Consecration should be kept secret True to them that were not capable of this Sacrament but * See this proved Booke 7. Chap. 3. âšœ never to the licensed Communicants because that Christ and his Apostles yea and the Vniversall Church primitive consecrated in an audible voice and knowne language as hath beene confessed Yet furthermore The Church saith hee used the said Hebrew word Allelujah unknowne to the people What then know you not that in all Churches of whatsoever language is used also the Hebrew word Amen and if people doe not learne one or two words of a strange tongue it is not for that they are witlesse but because they are wilfull and carelesse Their last Reason Some languages as for example that in Italie were Romane and corrupted by invasion of Enemies of divers languages and in the end became Italian c. yet the publike Service was not altered but continued Romane as before This Argument is à facto ad jus all one with that Reasoning à Baculo ad angulum Like as if some should conclude that because Stewes are allowed at Rome they are therefore justly licensed But wee demand are men made for languages or rather languages for men if the latter then is that language to be used which is knowne to serve best for the Edification and Consolation of
Gods people in his worship A SIXT CHALLENGE Out of the Doctrine of Antiquitie ALthough it were preposterous to exact of us a proofe from Antiquity of condemning the Service in a strange tongue seeing as hath beene confessed the Primitive practioe is wholly for us and therefore no Abuse in those times could occasion any such Reproofe yet shall wee for your better illumination offer unto you some more expresse Suffrages of the ancient Fathers after that wee shall have satisfied your Objections pretended to make for your Defence Saint Augustine saith of the People that their Safetie consisteth not in the vigour of their understanding but in their simplicitie of believing So indeed doth s Aug. de Bap. l. 6. c. 24. Multi irruunt in preces etiam ab Haereticis compositas per ignorantiae simplicitatem non valentes decernere utuntur eis plerunque precis vitium superat precantis affectus Non quià ista corrigenda non sint ut populus ad id quod plauè intelligat dicat Amen Idem de Catechizand rudibus c. 9. Teste Cassandro in Liturg. pag. 102. Augustine forewarne the people who although they knew the single words of the prayers of Heretikes yet might possibly be deluded with the obscuritie of their Hereticall Senses The Difference is extreme For Saint Angustines people understood the language of those prayers in the obscure and involved Sense whereof they were unwillingly ignorant But your Popish people are wilfully ignorant both of the Words and Sense The oddes therefore is no lesse than this they were simply yours are sottishly ignorant and Augustine wisheth that their Simplicitie were corrected you hold your peoples blindnesse worthy to be commended Secondly Origen saith that when Christians are exercised in reading of holy Scripture albeit some words be not understood yet is that reading profitable This Sentence also is alleged for countenancing of t Origen Hom. 20. in Ios Quae nos profermus â—aepe non intelligimus sed virtutes intelligunt Ergo licet preces non intellectis usurpare Oâ— Bellar. l. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 16. Prayer in an unknowne tongue notwithstanding that in a mans Reading of Scripture God is said to speake unto man but in Praying man is said to speake unto God So that it may be both lawfull and profitable to the Reader to finde some particular Scriptures which God would have to excell the Capacitie of the most learned to humble them to the admiration of his excellent wisedome as the Fathers teach Whereas contrarily an unknowne Prayer wittingly used is both unprofitable and unlawfull as hath beene copiously confessed by your owne Divines from the Doctrine of the Apostle More objections out of the Fathers you have not Wee will try whether wee can recompence your Nominalities that wee may so call your impertinent Objections with Realties and solid Proofes Cast but your eyes upon the Marginals consisting partly of the Relation of your owne u Iohannes Billet in summa de divinis officijs In primitiva Ecclesia inquit prohibitum erat ne quis loqueretur linguis nisi intelligerentur At nostris temporibus ubi nullus aut rarus inventur legens vel audienâ— qui intelligat completum est quod à Propheta dicitur Erit Sacerdos ut populus Videtur potius elle racendum quam psallendum Innocent 3. in Conc gen in lib. Decret de offic Iud. Ordinar Quoniam in plerisque partibus permixti sunt populi diversarum linguarum Pontifices civitatum provideant viros idoneos qui secundùm diversitatem linguarum divina illis officia delebrent AEn Syl. Hist Bohem. c. 13. Cyrillo Romae Episcopo supplicante ut lingua Sclavonicâ res divina fieret essentque non pauci qui contradicerent andita est vox tanquam è caelo in haec verba missa Omnis Spiritus laudet Dominum omnis lingua confiteatur ei indeque indultum Cyrillo Hujusq ex Cassand Lit. fol. 101 102. Cassander and partly of our x Cons. Aquisgranens cap. 131. Psallentium in Ecclesia Domino mens concordare debet cum voce ut impleatur illud Apostoli Psalmam Spiritu psalmam mente Collections and you shall finde among the Fathers y Ambros in 1. Cor. 14. Qui supplet locum Idiotae quomodò dicet Amen ad benedictionem tuam quià nescit quid dicis Imperitus enim nesciens quid dicitur nescit finem orationis non respondet Amen Verum ut confirmetur benedictio per hos enim qui respondent Amen impletur confirmatio precis ut omnia dicti veri testimonio confirmentur in mentibus Audientum ' Sed alius non aedificatur Si igitur ad aedificandam Ecclesiam convenitis as debent dici quâ— intelligant Audientes nam quid prodest ut quis lingua loquatur quam solus scit ideò tacere debet in Ecclesia us ij loquantur qui prosunt Audientibus Ambrose denying that Hee who is the person ignorant of the Prayer can give consent unto it by saying Amen and thereupon inferreth that onely Such things should be spoken in the publike Congregation which the Hebrewes understand z Chrysost in 1. Cor. 14. Barbarus Et ille mihi ego illi non utique ob naturam vocis sed ob imperitiam Et qui non intelligit quid loquatur sibi est Barbarus Qui locum tenet indocti Indoctum promiscuam plebem intelligit monstratque non leve impedimentum esse si non intelligat Omnia ad aedificationem AEdifieare enim Archirecti est opus per omnia proximum juvare Si enim aedificandi gratiâ non venis quid necesse est omninò venisse Chrysostome noting a Man Ignorant of the Prayer to be no better than a Barbarian to himselfe not in respect of the nature of the voice but of his owne Ignorance and declaring Prayers in an unknowen tongue to be contrary to the Apostles Doctrine who requireth that All things be done to edification a Ifidor de Eccles offic lib. x. cap. 10. Oportet quando oratur ut ab omnibus oretur Isidore peremptorily affirming an Oportet and duety that All may be able to pray in publike places of prayer Theoplylact noting that b Theophylact. in 1. Corint 14. Tu gratias benè agis sed alius non aedificatur Proximi utilitate rejecta inutiles erant hujusmodi gratiae The giving of thankes to God is unprofitable where the edification of the people is neglected Augustine in his Comment upon the Psalmes often exhorting all sorts of men to sing them and thereupon the c In the Preface of an unknowne Author before the Prologue of Saint Augustine upon the Psalmes Quo modo debite potest Deo psallere qui ignorant quid psallat Authour of the Preface before his Comment as it were tuning his note to Angustines doth deny that any can sing Psalmes as hee ought to God who knoweth not what hee singeth âšœ
Who so desireth more let him cast his eye upon the 10 Mr. Mâ—iric Casuubon Praehend Cantuar. Transcript Notarum Marginal M. S. Patris sui Isaaci in Bellar. now extant in the Kings Ma. Dibrary at S. Iames. Ab Bellar. Edit Paris 1608. pag. 111. C. D. Adversus implissimam hujus Capitis doctrinam memineris-veterem Ecclesiam â—â— Romana è diametro est hîc opposita nihil studiosiùs fecisse quà m ut in vernaculas linguas verterentur Biblia Gotthieae versionis menuo apud Sozom. p. 90. Dalmaticae Hier To 4. p. 79. Armenae Pachym in vita Chrysost De illa Armena lingua satis constat eam fuisse usurpatam in Ecclesia Vide locum Bellar. Tom. 6. p. 613. Scripturam sacram statim initio versam esse in omnes linguas testatur Euseb Demonst p. 88. De Liturgia in vernacula lingua in Mesopot locus Basil 277. Syr. AEgypt Indica Persica AEthiopiâ—â— Chrysost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ioh. Earudem Scythicae Sauromaticae Theodor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 81. ubi nota verba 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem clamat verbis penè eisdem Aug. lib. 2. deâ—dect Christ cap. 5. Adde in Iure oriental Bonifid p. 243. tractatur haec quaestio pronunciatur oporteâ—o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 linquaÌ„ Arab. inter Saâ—arenos Vide Iuris orient Leuncla p. 365. Vellem doctiss Bellar statum Quaestiones rectè concepisset initio hujus Cap. non enim quaeritur An lingua latina fuerit olim sub Imp. Rom in usuâ—â— sacris sed illud quaeritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrae administrari populo proponi debeant eâ linguâ quâ—â—vel sit populo vernacula vel certò à populo intelligatur Probate possumus veteris Eccles opinionem fuisse 〈◊〉 populum intelligero mysteria Christianae religionis omnia impedimenta esse amovenda quâ de re exstat locus in Constit Iustini p. 1365 insignis p. 366 ex Paulo id ipsum probat Imperator Loquitur autem ibide sacra Eâ—â—aristia Baptismo Eodem referri potest quod Const 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 372. conceditur Iudaeis ut sacram Scrip 〈◊〉 Graecam 〈◊〉 guam vertant quamcunque aliam voluerint habuerint sibi notam aut etiam 〈…〉 Vult enim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Refer eodem locum aureum Chrysost 〈…〉 falsco Scripture obscuritatem legi non deberi quia scripta non Rom hon Heb. linguâ oliâ Casu Clem 〈…〉 same words of the Apostle Hee is a Barbarian aeprooveth 〈◊〉 philoso 〈◊〉 lib 〈◊〉 Marginals where hee may see the Transcript of a Patrizing Son of a most admirable Treasure of learning M r. Isaac Casaubon relating his Notes out of Antiquity to prove the generall Consent of Fathers both for the Translating of Scriptures into the Mother-tongues of most Nations as also the Liturgie or Church-service universally used in the vulgar languages of severall Countries âšœ And lest that this might not suffice wee have added the * See above in the beginning of the 6. Sect. letter 〈…〉 Edict of the Emperour Iustinian commanding a lowd voice in the Minister that the people may understand his words Next a Canon of a Councell requiring a * 〈…〉 Concordance both of voice and understanding in the singing of Psalmes as that which ought to be by that Doctrine of Scripture I will pray with my spirit and I will pray with my understanding Then a Decree of one Pope in his Councell that provision be made where people of divers Languages dwell in the same cities that their * Ibid at of the letter 〈◊〉 Servioe may be done according to their Different tongues After the Resolution of another Pope to grant unto the * Ibid. Sclavonians at their conversion to the Faith that Divine Service might be used in their owne tongue moved thereunto as by a voice from heaven sounding out that Scripture Let every tongue praise the Lord. And lastly a * Ibid Prohibition in the Primitive Church that None should speake in languages unknowne to the people âšœ And lest you may hereafter according to your maner scorne our zeale in requiring the joynt prayers and thankesgivings publikely in the Church by the voice of Men Women and Children know yee that 11 Basil Hixam Hom. 4. Immediately before the end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Quomodo non songe pulchliis est cùm in Ecclesia par 〈◊〉 sonitus qua 〈◊〉 jusdam littus percellentis undae virorum mulierum infantium ex orationibers ad Deum nostium refusat And in Reg. Contract Qu. 278. Linguâ ignorâ nihil utilitatis redit ad precantem Saint Basil delivering the judgement of Gods Church in his time held this an order decent and beautifull censuring an Vnknowne prayer to be unprofitable to them that pray âšœ When you have digested all these Premises concerning the Equity and Necessitie of knowne Prayers in the publike and Divine Service both in consideration of Gods worship and Mans manifold profit so amply confirmed by so many and uncontrolable testimonies then guesse if you can of what dye the face of your Doctor Stapleton was when hee shamed not to call this our Practice of knowne prayers d Quod autem omnia vernaculè siunt in Ecclesia planè profanum est Stapleton spec pravit Hae ret p. 580. Profanenesse and to number it among Hereticall pravities As for your owne People who preferre an unknowne worship what can wee say lesse than that all such Ignorants are but dumbe worshippers and because of their ignorance in praying they know not what they are to be sent to accompany Popinjayes and Iack-dawes accordingly as S. * See above Sect. 7. in the Challenge 3. Augustine formerly hath resembled them âšœ A SEAVENTH CHALLENGE For Vindication against Francis de Sancta Clara a late Reconciler of our English Articles with the Doctrine of the Romish Church A Romish professor at Doway published a Treatise this very yeare of our Lord 1634. VVhich hee calleth a Paraphrasticall Exposition of the Articles of the Church of England whose ayme is not to draw the Romish professors to the English but the English to the Romish and by his seeming Reconciliation to put upon our Church as wee use to say the Gull albeit his whole Paraphrase be indeed nothing but a Farrago of his selfe-fictions and Opinations whereof his Paraphrasis or Exposition upon this Article will give you a shrewd guesse if you shall have the patience to examine such stuffe Our English Article 12 Franciscus de S. Clara Professor Disac Exposit Artic. Confess Angl. Art 24 Linguâ populo non intellectâ preces peragere Sacramenta administrare verbo Dei primitivae Ecclesiae consuetudini planè repugnat saith that To pray or administer the Sacrament in an unknowne tongue is plainely repugnant to the Word of God and the Custome of the Primitive Church
The Article of the Church of Rome Contrarily 13 Concil Trid. Sess 22. Can. 9. Si quis dixerit tantùm linguâ vulgari Missam celebrari debere Anathema sit Hee that shall say that the Masse ought to be Celebrated onely in the vulgar tongue let him be Anathema that is Accursed The English Article hath two points 1. That Prayer in a tongue unknowne to the People that pray is Repugnant to the Word of God 2. That it is also plainely Repugnant to the Custome of Primitive Antiquity First of the Repugnance to the word of God The Romish Expositor Paraphrasing upon these words Repugnant to the word of God supposeth in the first place that thereby is meant the Doctrine of the Apostle 1. Cor. 14. concerning Prayer in a Tongue not understood of him that prayeth and then for answere thereunto repeateth onely their old Crambe to wit that by Prayers there spoken off are not meant the publike prayers in the set and solemne service of the Church of Corinth but other their 14 Paraph Crediderim Sanctum Paulum vel de privatis conventibus vel de privatis colloquiis post omnia officia habitis ibi agree Private Convents and Colloquies And whereas the Apostle requireth of the Idiote that is Private or Lay-man as wee call him that hee understand his Prayer so as to be able to give consent thereunto in publike saying Amen he 15 Paraph. Idiota apud Apostolum i. e. Ille cui incumbit respondere expoundeth this as understood of Him who by office answereth Amen for the rest of the People whom wee name the Parish-Clerke Both which have beene * See the Challenges above thorowout Confuted by your owne Schoolemen and the Latter more especially by Bellarmine himselfe in our former Sections as you have seene A second devise of qualifying these words of our Article Repugnant to the word of God is his owne but thus 16 Paraph. Decrevit igitur Articulus esse Repugnans Scripturis id est non Doctrinae Scripturae sed Scriptioni seu Traditioni Scripturae quae fuit Corinthijs in Lingua communi The Article decreeth it to be repugnant to the Scriptures that is saith hee not to the Doctrine of Scripture but to the Scription or tradition of Scripture which among these Corinthians was in praying in a common tongue Here you have a dainty Distinction betweene the word Scripture and Scription the word Scripture to signifie the Doctrine of Scripture and the word Scription to betoken Tradition of Scripture So hee by an elegant Figure which wee forbeare to name but wish there were some sense in it For was it ever heard off that there was a Scripture without Scription that is to say a Writ without writing or when as all Divines ever distinguished of Traditions into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Written which are the Scriptures themselves and Vnwritten which are without the same written word of God Was it possible for them to conceive of a Tradition in Scripture which was not Scripture or word of God If so then whereas all Creatures are distinguished into Sensible and Insensible it shall be possible to point out a Sensible Creature void of Sense His third Crotchet 17 Idem Dum. dicit esse Repugnans verbo Dei intelligi deberent Institutioni D. Pauli non Christi cujus scripta sub nomine verbi Dei comprehenduntur omnia tamen ab Apostolis demandata non sunt mandata Christi ut ab omnibus concessum est When the Article saith Repugnant to the word of God It is to be understood as meaning Repugnant to the Institution and Ordinance of Saint Paul not of Christ Saint Pauls writings being comprehended under the name of Gods word although all that are commanded by the Apostles are not therefore the commands of Christ as all do confesse So hee That there are in Scripture Apostolicall Constitutions namely such as are fitted to the Churches according to the Conveniences of the times distinguished from Divine Constitutions which are enjoyned the Church as necessary for all times it is true But that both which this Paraphrase affirmeth either S t. Paul in requiring a Knowno Prayer delivered not therein the Doctrine of Christ necessary for all times or that our English Composers of this their Article in affirming the Institution of Vnknowne Prayers to be Repugnant to the word of God did not thereby understand the word and Commandement of Christ in his Authenticall Scripture are two as strange exorbitancies as your Glosser could make For the Apostle to shew that hee taught a Doctrine which concerned all the Churches of Christ and at all times useth Similitudes to Illustrate his meaning universally fitting all ages and Congregations of Christians in their solemne prayers If a Trumpet saith hee or a Pipe give an uncertaine sound who shall prepare himselfe either to the Battell or to the daunce applying those Similitudes as well to praying as to preaching in an Vnknowne tongue But every one of you will grant that the same Scripture for necessitie of preaching in a knowne tongue is the Divine Institution of Christ and not onely an Apostolique Constitution Therefore except you will separate that which Christ by his Apostle hath joyned together you must confesse the same necessitie of the Command of Christ for knowne Prayer Besides his Conclusion How shall hee that understandeth not say Amen being as true of all Prayers in all subsequent ages of the World as it could be to the Church of Corinth it prooveth the truth of the Divine Ordinance of Christ therein Thus farre of the meaning of S. Paul now to returne to our Article Whereas you and all that ever read Protestant Bookes know that whensoever they affirme any thing to be Repugnant to the word of God they meane to the Scripture as it is the expresse Command and Ordinance of God and of Christ and that notwithstanding your Glosser should dare to tell us that the meaning of our Articling An unknowne Prayer to be Repugnant to the Word of God must signifie not Repugnant to Scripture or to the Institution of Christ but to Scription and Apostolicall Tradition must needs argue in your Professor some ecclipse of judgement by the which also hee venteth out his Inference following A fourth straine he hath in his Inference from our English Article as followeth 18 Idem Vi hujus verbi probabiliter inferri potest debere Ecclesiae officia apud nos hodiè celebrari in lingua Latina quià per se loquendo est lingua communis communites intellecta solùm autem asseritur in Articulo Preces publicae fiant linguâ à populo intellectâ quod sine dubio debet intelligi de lingua per se communi non per Accidens loquendo The Article affirmeth saith hee that Prayers ought to be used in a tongue knowne to the people therefore wee properly inferre that Prayers in our Church may be in
Latine because it is a language commonly knowne So hee speaking of your Romish Latine prayers not knowne of your owne people As if one should argue saying Because the kingdome of England holdeth it necessary that the pleading of her lawes be used in English in a tongue knowne and understood of her Subjects therefore may it be thence Concluded that the Pleas of other kingdomes may be exercised in Latine a common language although not understood of the people of any Nation Who seeth not in his Inference an extreme want of Logicke A more full Confutation of the Glossers Qualification of the words of our English Article viz. Prayer unknowne is Repugnant to the words of God by his interpreting it as not meant strictly of the doctrine of Christ but of the Tradition of the Apostle himselfe It is most notoriously knowne to you all that The same Article against Vnknowne Prayers is common to all the Churches of Protestants in a full Accordance to condemne the contrary Profession and practice of the Romane Church which justifieth her Custome of praying in a Language unknowne to the people as not Repugnant to the Law of God And reciprocally you are not ignorant that your Councell of Trent in her Anathema and Curse cast upon all that should say That the Masse ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue intended thereby to accuse all Protestants for condemning the Custome of the Church of Rome as a transgression of the word and Commandement of God in holy Scripture Now this your Paraphrazer by his Moderation and qualification indeavouring to reconcile these Two Contradictorie Intentions namely of your Romish in condemning our English Article and of our English Article in condemning your Romish Canon What it is but to affirme that one Church hath opposed against the other for Causes they know not what Of the second part of the English Article The Article Prayer in an unknowne tongue is likewise Repugnant to the Custome of the Primitive Church The Glosser opposeth against this HIS FIRST INSTANCE 19 Paraph. Graeci apud omnes Iurisdictioni Patriarchae Constantinopolitani subditos licèt Graeci non sint officia Idiomate Graeco celebrant SOme whose vulgar language is not Greeke yet being under the Greeke Patriarch of Constantinople pray in the Greeke Idiome So hee for proofe of the lawfulnesse of the peoples praying in a language unknowne But the Instance is lame of the right legge it sheweth indeed and wee confesse that many whose native language is not Greeke pray notwithstanding in the Greeke Idiome but that they understand and not these Greeke prayers which is the onely point in question it prooveth no more than Tenterton-steeple proveth Goodwin-sands For we have * See above Sect. 7 thorow-out manifested the contrary in a full Section namely that all such People who being not Greekes and prayed in the Greeke Idiome did notwithstanding understand that Greeke language wherein they prayed Was your Paraphrazer in good tune thinke you when hee would not see this his marke that he might speake to the purpose and matter in question Next he being destitute of any other Instance in the Greeke Church seeketh some other advantage in the Latine Church in the dayes of Antiquity from Saint Cyprian and S. Augustine 20 Paraph. In Africa ut testatur Cyprianus in orat Domin Et Augustinus de bono perseverant cap. 13. Missas reliqua faciebant Latinè licèt lingua vulgaris erat Punica Latina ab inferiori plebe non intellecta They both witnesse saith he that their people in Africke said their Masse and other services in Latine albeit their owne language was the Punicke and that the meaner people were ignorant of the Latine tongue So hee joyning his witnesse together but wee will take them apart to avoid Confusion for the better confuting of your Paraphraser if hee will yet thinke himselfe confuted Cyprian is alleged to have said as is premised in his Exposition upon the Lords prayer where there is not one syllable of mention of the people of Africke saying of Masse or of their vulgar Punicke Language or of their Ignorance of the Latine tongue If this be not foule dealing to produce a dumbe witnesse and to father Sayings upon him which hee never uttered then will you thinke it farre more ougly if the witnesse being heard to speake himselfe shall avouch the Contrary Hearken then unto Cyprian in the same Exposition of the Lords Prayer instructing his Punicks and Africans as followeth 21 Cypr. Sect. 22. Expos in Orat. Dom. Quandò stamus ad orationem Fratres dilectissimi vigilare incumbere ad preces toto corde debemus nè quicquam tunc animus quà m id solum cogiter quod precatur Dearely beloved Brethren when wee pray wee ought to be watchfull and attend our Prayers with our hearts lest our mindes in praying thinke of any other thing than on that which is prayed So hee Ergo say Wee The Africans albeit their vulgar Idiome was Punicke yet did they understand those Latine Prayers which you your selves must likewise confesse except any of your Priests could accordingly instruct your rude people ignorant of the Latine tongue wherein they pray by saying unto them Beloved Brethren We that is you and I ought to attend to our prayers and not thinke of any thing but that which is prayed If any of you should so exhort your seely people to attend to that they understand not might they not interpret that his Exhortation to be no better than meere Mockerie and as plaine an exprobration as if hee should entreate a bald man to combe his head or a blind man to thred a needle Wee adde furthermore that this Latine Exposition of the Lords Prayer was one of the Sermons of Saint Cyprian and so stiled in the same place Sermo sextus his sixt Sermon preached promiscuously to all his people of Africke then assembled Which is a demonstrable Argument that this people of Africke understood the Latine tongue you your selves professing that Preaching ought alwaies to be used in a Language which the people do understand Saint Augustine is his second Witnesse but for what namely that The Africans albeit their Nationall Language was the Punick yet did they pray in the Latine tongue whereof they were ignorant So he And Wee answer that in the place alleged which is his Booke de Bono perseverantiae cap. 13. there is no more mention of Punick tongue or Latine Language than there is of Welsh or Irish It may be that Saint Augustine hath something hereof in some other place and so indeed he hath for in a Sermon of his unto the Africans he speaketh hereof as plainely as if in direct termes hee had given this your Paraphraser the word of disgrace 22 Aug. de Verbis Apostoli Serm. 24. Proverbium notum est Punicum quod quidem Latinè vobis dicam quia Punicè non omnes nôstis Nummum quaerit pestilentia There is saith
Body of Christ in the Eucharist p. 283. His saying Gustamus Carnem Christi Corruply alleged for Gestamus p. 343. He is Objected for Corporall Vnion of Christs Bodily nourishing our Bodies pag. 356. And that hee spake of a Permanent Vnion pag. 365. His saying By Baptisme the Regenerate is made the Body of Christ crucifyed pag. 357. Hee is also Objected to proove the Paschall Lambe to have prefigured Christ in the Masse and therein egregiously abused pag. 425. POPE NICHOLAS his Decree and Romish Doctrine of Eating Christs flesh Corporally by Tearing it with Teeth the Occasion of Averroes his imputing to Christians the Devouring of their God p. 381. PO. PIVS the Fourth forbad the Eucharist to be carried to the Sicke only for Adoration-sake p. 50. POPE ZePHERINUS Ordayned that the Chalices should be Glasses pag. 514. PRAYER in an Vnknown Tongue Condemned by Antiquity pag. 24 25 26 c. The Practice of Vnknowne Prayer in Divine Service in the Romish Masse is Sacrilegiously derogatory to the Dignity of Christ pag. 558 559 c. Their Praying for Propitiousnesse towards Christ as towards a Sheep p. 560 561 c. PRECEPT Words of Precept may be Figurative p. 133. PRESENCE How Christs Body may be sayd to be present in the Eucharist of Protestants in a foure-fold Truth pag. 212 213. That the Presence of Christs Body Corporally is the Romish maner p. 217. PRETENCE of Reverence is often cause of Disobedience pag 80 81. See Reverence PRIESTS bring present at the Communion ought to Communicate pag. 57 58 c. A Priest hath no more Privilege for the use of the Cup by the Iudgement of Antiquity than any other Faithfull Communicant Ibid. The word Priest as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not used of the Apostle as is Confessed pag. 461. And that Priest as from Presbyter cannot relate to a Proper Sacrifice Ibid. And that Sacerdos is more proper to the Old Testament Ibid. PRIESTHOOD of Melchisedech is agreeable to the Priesthood of Christ pag. 409. And as Disagreeable to the Romish Priesthood pag. 410 411 c. It is denyed to be now exercised in Heaven which is Confuted by Scripture pag. 412 413. Bellarmine his Sacrilegious detracting from it Ibid. Proved by Ancient Fathers pag. 415. The Priesthood of Christ for ever Confessed by a learned Iesuite out of the Fathers pag. 418. See Melchisedech PRIMASIVS by terming the Eucharist a Pledge held a Continuance of Bread therein pag. 180. Hee is fondly Objected for calling the Eucharist a Pledge pag. 369. Hee saith that Christ as Melchisedech offered Bread and Wine that is his Body and Blood pag. 404. His expounding of 1. Cor. 10. 18 Partakers of Devills pag. 401. Hee nameth the Eucharist The same Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse with this Correction or rather Remembrance thereof pag. 442. And that which was borne of the Virgin not now great and now lesse Ibid. PRIVATE MASSE is a Transgression of Christs Command pag. 17 18. And repugnant to Antiquity p. 19 c. PROCESSION with the Sacrament for Adoration is Contrary to Antiquity pag. 48 49 c. And defended by Pamelius out of Tertullian pag. 50. PRODVCTION pretended to be the sole maner of Transubstantiation by divers Romanists and Confuted as Absurd by some others of them pag. 153 154 155 c. PROPITIATORY Sacrifice cannot be properly Attributedâ— to the Eucharistâ— pag. 474 475 c. Our Distinction Ibid. The Romish Sacrifice hath no foundation in Christs Institution pag. 475. Divers Acts unproperly called Propitiatory pag. 476. That it is Propitiatory because of the Remembrance of the bloody Sacrifice and by Application of that Confessed pag. 480. Not Propitiatorie without Relation unto the Crosse pag. 481. That onely Bloody is Propitiatory Ibid. The Romanists Propitiatory of Finite Virtue Ibid. 482. The Church of Rome not yet resolved of the value of their Propitiatory Sacrifice pag. 483. The Romish Application for lucre-sake pag. 486. The Priests Portion therein Ibid. Protestants Application for a Propitiatory Sacrifice more true pag. 487. And absolute pag. 488. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word not justly objected for Divine Adoration of the Eucharist pag. 507. 508. c. PROTESTANTS doe all agree with the Augustane Confession in the point of Vnion of Christs Flesh with the Bodies of the Receivers pag. 310. Their Security from the Romish Perplexities in Adoration of the Eucharist pag. 550. PROVIDENCE of God admired by two Cardinals in these words Quotiescunque Biberitis p. 56. 57. c. Their three Evasions which are by Gods Providence confounded by the contrariety of their owne tongues Ibid. PSALMES vulgarly sung in the publicke worship of God Primitively p. 28. 29. c. PVNICK Tongue not so well knowne to Punicks as the Latine p 42. PVRGATORIE The place of Romish Purgatorie lest it should be evacuated they devised the Sacrifice of Christ to be but of a finite virtue in the Masse p. 486. Q QVANTITIE can be no Similitude for resembling the Being of God in Place but Quantity p. 255. QVOMODO There is a double Quomodo the one Prudentiae the other Infidelitatis pag. 211. 250. R RABBINS of the Iewes wrongfully urged for proofe of a proper Sacrifice in the Masse from the Act of Melchisedech p. 404. REASON Romish Objections against our Naturall Reasons in Confutation of the Romish Corporall Presence of Christs Body Answered pag. 263. REASONABLE Service in the Liturgies what it signifieth p. 451. Reasonable Sacrifice attributed to the Eucharist objected for a proper Sacrifice although ascribed by other Fathers to unproper Sacrifices by Chrysostome of Prayses by Athanasius to Baptisme p. 452. RELATIONS Contrary Relations fondly attributed to the same body of Christ as to be above and below it selfe 245. although denied by others Ibid. REMAINDERS of the Eucharist were anciently burnt p. 514. Confessed REMEMBRANCE and Discretion required in the Communicant p. 51. REPRESENTATIVE Sacrifice of the old Law how p. 442. The Eucharist onely Representative Ibid. The Romish after a manner of a Stage-play p. 445. See Commemorative RESERVATION of the Eucharist for Romish Procession contradicted by Antiquity p. 48. With whom the end of Reservation was still to be eaten Ibid. REVERENCE most due to Christ is our Obedience p. 81. c. That it is no sufficieÌ„t Reason to with-hold the Cup from the Laity Ibid. What Reverence is lawfull in receiving the Eucharist pag. 551. The reverence of Kneeling justifiable Ibid. ROMISH Doctors divided about the word Masse p. 3 And about Consecration that it was by Prayer p. 9. In the ancient Romane Church Consecration was by Prayer Ibid. And did Brâ—ake Bread Ibid. They gaine-said Private Masse pag. 17. 18. c. And the uttering of Christs words in an unaudible voice pag. 22. 23. c. That a knowne Tongue was used in Gods Service pag. 24. Their Objections for the Communion but in one kind from Antiquity Answered pag. 68. That there is a more spirituall grace and refection
hee preaching unto his Africans a knowne Proverbe in the Punick tongue which I will render unto you in Latine because all of you do not understand Punick The Proverbe is this The Pestilence seeketh money So hee shewing that the Africans understood Latine better than Punick although this were their Nationall Language Farre otherwise your Glosser that the Latine was unknowne to the Africans because their native language was Panick Whereby hee bewrayeth a Proverbially so called Punick Faith Flatly contradicting S. Augustine 23 August lib. 1. Confess cap. 14. Latina didici inter etiam blandimenta Nurricum who furthermore confesseth of himselfe saying I learnt the Latine tongue from the fawning and flattering Speeches of my Nourses Our Conclusion by way of Censure of this mans Exposition of the Articles of the Church of England and of the Romish Authorizers of the same Treatise This one Point being the first of his Paraphrase that fell in our way concerning any doctrine appertaining to the Romish Masse wee have beene the more Copious in Confutation thereof that our Reader might take a just scantling of the judgement of this Paraphrazer in the rest and of those who were the Censurers Approvers and Authorizers of the same more principally Thomas Blacklous 24 Censura Thomae Blacklouse de Libellis de Articulis Confessionis Angl. Catholico animo conscriptis ut Errantes ad Christi caulam reditum inveniant who shewes to what end this Tractate was writ and approoved as he saith To bring those that wander out of the way unto the fold of Christ Meaning the Church of Rome So then wee perceive it was not as he seemeth to pretend in the behalfe of Protestants to free them from any of the former Censures and Anathema's or from the curses and cruelties of the Romish Church against them but onely to ensnare them if it may be in the same Babylonish thraldome of Superstition and Idolatry from whence by the marvailous and gracious providence of God they have beene delivered Therefore from these our Premises VVee Conclude Blacklous and his fellow Privilegers of this Booke to be guilty of all the above-manifested strange dealings in perverting of the senses of the Articles and Authors by him alleged Besides that which surmounteth the rest is the hainous Crime of wilfull Perjurie if they have taken the oath enjoyeth unto all Romish Priests by Pope Pius after the Councell of Trent swearing To expound no Text of Scripture without the unanimous consent of ancient Fathers yet now have allowed such an Exposition of the text of the Apostle concerning Prayer in an unknowne tongue which they were never able to justifie by any one Father of Primitive times for the space of 600 that wee say not a thousand yeares after Christ as hath beene sufficiently proved Before Wee end Wee should aske your Censurers what Church of Rome it is whose doctrine they would reduce Protestants unto Is it the old and primitive Religion of Rome Why this is that which Wee so constantly professe But meane they the Religion of the new Church of Rome in her new Creede of new Articles conformable to the Councel of Trent Wee must say then of your Doctrine as Christ said of Wine No man drinking the Old desireth the New for hee will say the Old is better Luc. 5. 39. The sixt Transgression of the Canon of Christ his Masse contradicting the Sense of the next words of Christs Institution TAKE YEE SECT VIII THus said Christ to his Disciples by which words what is meant your Iesuite will expresse to wit that c Quia Apostoli non acciperent nisi quod ipse dabat verbum Dandi Translationem de manibus Christi in manus Discipalorum significat Sabneron les Tom. 9. Tractat. 18. pag. 126. Videtur quod Christus aut singulis in manus dederit partem à se sumendam aut patinam tradider it propinquioribus c. Iansen Episc Concord cap. 131. Because the Apostles tooke that which Christ gave the word GAVE doth signifie a Delivery out of Christ his hands into the hands of them that did take Here you see is Taking with hands especially seeing that Christ in giving the Cup said Drinke you all Matth. 26. one delivering it to another as it is said of the Paschall Cup Luc. 22. 17. as it is f Iansen Concord in eued locum Fracto pane in duodecim buccellas singulis in manus dederit Calicem propinquiores sequentibus tradiderunt sic enim dixit Accipite dividite inter vos confessed The contrary Canon in your now Romane Masse Concerning this It is to be noted say g Notandum est quòd laudabiliter Ecclesia prospexit ut ab isto modo olim licito nempè accipiendi proprijs manibus Sacramentum pro reverentia Eucharistiae abstineant Et rursus Olim ex patina suis quisque manibus sumpsit suam particulam ut moris fuit ad Sextam usque Synodum nempè Caesar-augustanam verum ob sacram hujus Mysterij singularem reverentiam Ecclesia instituit nè Laici nudâ manu Eucharistiam attingerent sed à Sacerdote in os sumentis mitteretur Salmeron quo supra Tract 12. pag. 78. 79. you that the Church of Rome hath judged it laudable that Lay-people abstaine from taking the Sacrament with their owne hands but that it be put into their mouthes by the Priest which is so ordained for a singular reverence So you CHALLENGE VVHat we may note of this your Notandum the h Apostoli primùm manibus suis panem sanctum acceperunt hujus ritus meminerunt veteres Patres Nam Tert. lib. ad uxorem inquit Eucharistiae Sacramentum nec de aliorum manibus quam praesidentium sumimus Et ex Cyprian Serm. de lapsis ob nonnulla exempla quae producit constat Eucharistiam in manibus Cōmunicantum Laicorum dari Vt constat ex Concil Teletano cap. 14. ex sexta Synodo in Trullo 101. ubi prohibentur fideles offerre vascula aurea argentea in quibus accipiant Eucharistiam ut per ea communicent sed proprijs manibus Idem colligitur ex Epistol Cornel. Papae quam refert Euseb lib. 6. Hist c. 35. ex Dionys Alex. ut refert Nicephor cap. 9. ex verbis Ambrosij Suarez les Tom. 3. In Tho. Disp 49. Sect. 6. initio Hoc intelligi potest ex Greg. Nazian Morom fuisse ut Christiani Eucharistiam quam accepissent ad os admoverent unde relictam esse credo Consuetudinem in multis locis quando non communicant dùm Eucharistia ostenditur manus tendant quasi gestientes manibus sumere Maldon Ies de Euch. §. Nova creatura pag. 283. Confessions of your owne Iesuites will shew first that the Practice of the Apostles and Primitive Church for above 500 yeares was according to Christs Institution to deliver the Bread into the hands of the Communicants Secondly that the same Order was observed at Rome as appeareth by the
Sacrilegiousnesse it selfe as you have seene in a former ſ See above in this Booke Chap. 1. Sect. 2. Synopsis BOOKE VII This containeth a Discoverie of your Masse-Idolatry not onely as being equall with the Doctrine of some Heretikes but in one respect exceeding the infatuation of the very t Booke 7. Ch. 8. Sect. 2. Pagans besides the Generall Doctrine of the power of your Priests u Cha. 5. Sect. 3. Intention in consecrating hath beene yoaked by your owne Jesuite with the Heresies of the * Cha. 9. Sect. 5. Donatists When you have beheld your owne faces in these divers Synopses as it were in so many glasses wee pray to God that the sight of so many and so prodigious Abominations in your Romish Masse may draw you to a just Detestation of it and bring you to that true worship of God which is to be performed in Spirit and in Truth and to the saving of every one of your soules through his Grace in Christ Iesus AMEN * ⎠* ALL GLORY BE ONELY TO GOD. AN INDEX Of the Matters contained in the Eight precedent Bookes against the ROMISH MASSE A ABSTEMIOVSNES No sufficient reason for Altering Christs Ordinance in the use of the Cup. pag. 79. ABSVRD to hold with many Romish Doctors Production to be the means of Transubstantiation p. 153. Absurdities expostulated by Master Brerely p. 286. Absurdities of the Romish Doctrine concerning Transubstantiation and the Bodily Being of Christ in the Eucharist with the palpable Absurdities of the Iesuites defence thereof p. 291. unto p. 301. ACCIDENTS No Substance ingendred out of meere Accidents Confessed p. 174. Not Accidents but Aire maketh drunke pag. 175. Accidents newly happening to the Sacrament cannot be without their Subjects p. 178. 179. This Figment never dreamed off by Ancient Fathers Book 3. chap. 3. throughout Accidents nourishing Substance absurdly confirmed by the Iesuite Fisher from Substances nourishing Substances p. 296. num 6. ADDVCTION pretended to be the sole maner of Transubstantiation by some Iesuites and confuted as false by others pag. 153. unto p. 156. ADORATION Divine Adoration of the Sacrament is the Romish Profession pag. 504. Not proved by Christs Institution p. 505. Nor by Antiquity either in their objected Verball speeches p. 506. unto p. 511 Nor in their Reall Objected Practices Ibid. c 3. throughout p. 511. unto pag. 524. Nay it is repugnant to Antiquity pag 524. unto pag. 528. Proved by their owne Principles to be Materially Idolatrous pag. 528. unto p. 533. Because of the many hundred defects in their Consecration in sixe Sections that it is Formally Idolatrous pag. 533. 534. Notwithstanding their Three Pretences p. 534. unto 539. The Impious Iesuiticall Evasion and Delusion to make the Romish worship seeme tollerable p. 539. Which is as ill as any Heathen p. 540. In one respect worse p. 541. Divine Adoration ought toprocede from an Infallible Faith in the God-head of him whom wee Invocate contrary to the Romish Adoration of Christ in the Eucharist Ibid. AELFRICK King his Faith objected for Transubstantiation untruly pag. 160. AETERNITIE What it is p. 263. ALTAR called Table by the Councell of Nice p. 303. Altar Priest Sacrifice and Temple properly so called on Earth all dissolved by Ancient Fathers pag. 415. unto pag. 418. Our Altar in Heaven pag. 418. The word Altar in the Masse not used with the Apostles p 461. 462. confessed Ibid. Allusions of Fathers in their termes Pascha c. Ibid. It is properly a Table Ibid. throughout the Sections AMBROSE Against Prayer in an unknowne Tongue p. 35. He teacheth that Hoc in Christs speech demonstrateth Bread p. 103. and a Figurative sense therein 125. Corruptly objected by Bellarmine for proofe of a proper sense therein Ibid. His sayings Ob. Of Bread is made Christs Body p. 202. Item They are the same that they were p. 178. Ob. Worke of Omnipotencie pag. 188. Ob. Nature is Changed pag. 190. Ambrose corrupted in some Romish Editions Ibid. Hee granteth something to bee Impossible to God even to the advancement of Gods Omnipotencie pag. 229. Proveth the Holy Ghost to be God by its being in divers places at once 239. 262 Holds that Christ at his Birth opened the Coll of the Blessed Virgin p. 278. And that Angels have their definite place and space 262. Hee is objected for penetration of the doores by Christs Body 275. Apparitions of some in two places at once Objected and Answered p. 262. Of Christs Bodily Presence onely in Heaven p. 306. That the Eucharist is nourishment for the soule 310. 385. Holdeth that the Godly onely are Partakers of Christs Body p. 321. See Guilty Hee is wrongfully urged for proofe of a proper Sacrifice in the Masse pag. 404. He granteth Christs exercising of his Priesthood now in heaven 415. He disclaimeth all properly called Altars Priesthood and Sacrifice here on earth p. 417. The Sacrifice on the Crosse our Iuge Sacrificium pag. 419. That Christ is only offered in an Image here but in Heaven in Truth p 441. Hee nameth the Eucharist a Sacrifice of Christ or rather a Remembrance thereof p. 443. Hee called the Bread before Consecration an Vnbloody Sacrifice 453. and calleth Baptisme a Sacrifice p. 457. His words Here Christ offereth himself Objected 479. And Wee adore in these mysteries the flesh of Christ as the footstoole of his Deity p. 508. To reverence him whose Body wee come to eate Objected Ibid. His Liturgie for praying God propitiously to receive the Gift 563. Calumniously objected 494. See Guilty ANGELS cannot possibly be in divers places at once by the Iudgement of Antiquity pag. 261. 262. Their objected Association at the receiving the Eucharist is no Argument of Divine Adoration thereof 506. 507. Angels present also at Baptisme Nazian Ibid. p. 507. ANNIHILATION of Bread is a necessary Consequence of the Romish manner of Transubstantiation pag. 156. ANSELME his saying Iewes ate the same spirituall meate with Christians p. 314. ANCIENT Fathers their wisedome contemned professedly by Romish Disputers in respect of their owne pag. 85. 86. ANTITYPE used of the Greeke Fathers concerning the Eucharist proveth Christs speech to be Figurative pag. 115 The use of this word Antitype pag 454. 455 APOSTLES not made Priests by those words of Christ Hoc Facite p. 57 Apostolicall authority contemned in respect of the now Papall by Romish Doctors pag 86 87 They are rudely called Rude pag. 135. APPARITIONS of Christ unto Peter out of Egesippus and other Fathers Objected and Answered by your Iesuite Vasquez p 240 241. Apparitions of the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist manifoldly objected by the Romish Disputers for proofe of a Corporal Presence therein p. 218 219 220. Acknowledged by their owne Schoole-men to be no True flesh or Blood but feigned p. 221. 222. The Suggesters thereof of what disposition they were p. 223 224. APPLICATION of the Sacrifice of Christ in the Romish Partiall p. 483.
The Fathers Doctrine herein Ibid. Repugnant to the Romish p. 484 485. And that this is for false Gaine p. 486. AQVARII Heretikes what they were p. 62. 81. ARMY Consisting of one man pag. 268. ARNOBIVS That Melchisedech as Christ offered Bread and Wine pag. 406. ATHANASIVS against the Hereticall Manichees for the Certitude of the Sense of Touching p. 170. That Angels are but in one place p. 262. So the Holy Ghost is in all places Ibid. He is against the Apparitions of souls departed in diverse places at once because that this is proper to God Ibid. The Body of Christ is to rise in all Perfection pag. 283. Apparitions of some in two places at once objected out of Athanasius and Answered pag. 261 262 c. His Saying that Christ mentioned his Ascension to prevent the Capernaiticall sense of Eating his flesh pag. 340. And Wee by the Incarnation of Christ are Deifyed p. 361. And By Baptisme are made alive with Christ and our flesh no more Earthly but made the same word which was made flesh Ibid. His Saying That Christ transmitteth not his Priesthood to any Successor p. 411. And that Bread and Wine of Melchisedech were a signe of an unbloody Sacrifice p. 453. â—ine And that Wee adore the Trinity before we be baptized in their names p. 509 ATTALAS the Martyr denyeth the Devouring of Christ p. 375 382. AVERROES his Imputing unto Christians the Devouring of their God because of the Romish false Profession p. 381. AVGVSTINE against Prayer in a Language Vnknowne p. 29. Vnconscionably objected to the Contrary p. 34. Hee is for Consecration by Prayer p. 11. And is against the Communion but in one kinde p. 77. He teacheth Hoc in Christs words to demonstrate Bread p. 103. Corruptly and Vnconscionably alleged by many Romanists for making Christ in the Eucharist a Figure of himselfe as he was on the Crosse p. 118 119. He dignifyeth the Bread as it is Sacramentall with the arme of Heavenly Bread p. 127. And teacheth a Figurative sense in Christs words This is my Body Eat my flesh p. 127. 136. His Saying That which you see is Bread pag. 169. That on the Altar not borne of the Virgin Mary p. 158 233. Hee expoundeth the Fruite of the Vine Math. 26 29. to signifie the Eucharisticall Wine pag. 164. His Saying Of the Sacramentall part one consisteth of many Graines p. 170. His Saying That which is distributed on the Lords Table is to be diminished p. 179. I. He is against the Being of a Body in two places at once p. 245. II That Christs Body removing cannot be in the place from whence it is removed Ibid. III. He is not alwayes with men here on earth because ascended Ibid. IV. Christs Body cannot be both in Sun and Moone p. 246. V. The Divine abideth still on Earth the Humane is in one place in Heaven Ibid. He is objected for Christs carrying himselfe in his owne hands p 249 His Saying that The Soule of Christ could not be in Heaven and Hell both at once p. 262 Ob. For Penetration of the Doores by Christs Body Answered p. 275. He is against the Romish Article of any Bodies Being in every part of the space of its Existence pag. 274. Hee saith that Christâ—s Bodily Presence is to be sought after onely in Heaven pag. 306. That Iewes ate the same Spirituall meate with Christians 314. That only the Godly participate of Christs Body p. 315. The wicked saith hee receive the Sacrament but not the virtue thereof by Virtue signifying The Body of Christ 324 325 326. He saith that The â—apernaits understood not Christs meaning p. 330. And that Christ confuted them by mentioning his Ascension Ibid. He is against the Manichees their belching Christ out p. 351. And against them that impâ—ted to Christians a worship of Ceres and Bacchus Ibid. His Testimony Fit Panis mysticus Corrupted by adding Corpus Christi p. 352. His Saying You eat not the Body which you see 340. Wee receive with mouth and heart fondly Objected p. 343. And Christs Blood is powred out into our mouths Ibid. His Saying By Baptisme wee are incorporated into Christ pag. 357. Hee is for onely the Soule-eating of Christs Body p. 385. Hee is wrongfully urged for a Proper Sacrifice from the Act of Melchisedech pag. 404. Hee is for Christs exercising his Priesthood now in Heaven pag. 415. How Presbyteri are Priests Ibid. Sacrifice is called as Easter day is called Christs Passion p. 442. The Death of Christ the onely True Sacrifice Ibid. Hee and other Doctors before him held Baptisme to be a Sacrifice of Christs Passion p. 459. But Metaphorically Ibid. Every Good worke is a True Sacrifice p. 471. The Blood of Christ reveiled herein that is Objectively pag. 478. Baptized are brought thither by feare p. 507. To reverence Baptisme wheresoever it is pag. 508. None Eateth Christs â—â—esh before hee adore it Ibid. Wee are to Reverence the Sacrament of Baptisme and Celebration of the Eucharist without carnall sense p. 509. He is for Prostrating of the Body lifting up of the mind to Heaven p. 526 AVGVSTANA CONFESSIO or the Confession of Auspurge consented unto by all Protestants p. 310. See LVTHERANS B BAPTISME is called a Buriall as Bread is called Christs Body p. 125 As Baptisme the Sacrament of Adoption is called Adoption so Bread is Christs Body p. 128. Euphramius his comparison of Water of Baptisme with Bread in the Eucharist p. 129 It is paralleld with the Eucharist almost in all the Sayings of the Ancient Fathers which the Romish Disputers allege for proof of either a Literall Exposition of Christs words This is my Body or for Transubstantiation or Corporall Presence or Bodily Vnion or Proper Sacrifice or Divine Adoration to the Confutation of the Objectors in each one p. 568 569 570 571 572 573. in a Generall Synopsis BASIL against Prayer in an Vnknowne Tongue p. 36. He is for Consecration by Prayer p. 10. Hee is for an Audible voice in the Priest p. 23. Hee calls the Eucharist a Viand p. 366. and Baptisme the Pledge and earnest of Blessing to come p. 367. Hee calleth the Eucharist an Vnbloody Sacrifice p. 451. His Liturgie for offering a Reasonable Service Objected and Answered Ibid. pag. 452 c. Hee saith that the Mysteries of Baptisme were kept secret p. 512. His saying that No Father left in writing the words of Invocation 519. Bellarmine absurdly mistaken in the word Invocation 518. proved 520. Basil's Liturgie in praying to God propitiously to receive the Gift doth confute the Romish Doctrine of a Corporall Presence and Sacrificatory Presence of Christ in the Eucharist p. 562. BEASTS to Eat and Swallow the Body of Christ is the Beastly and Capernaiticall Romish Doctrine p 348. A Beast adoring the Host absurdly objected by Bellarmine p. 516. BEDA expoundeth the Fruite of the Vine to signifie the Eucharisticall Wine p. 163. BERENGARIVS his forme of
Recantation p. 335. BERTRAM his saying The Body of Christ in Heaven differeth from that on the Altar as much as that which was borne of the Virgin Mary and that which was not pag 159. His saying Bread remaineth in the Eucharist after Consecration pag. 186. The Romish Profession is to delude the Testimonies of Antiquity Ibid. pag. 187. His saying Iewes ate the same Spirituall meat with Christians p. 314. Bâ—ZA unjustly charged with denying Gods Omnipotencie p 231. BLASPHEMIE of a Romish Iesuite Teaching the Pope to dispence with the expresse Command of Christ pag. 87 BLESSED IT was Christs Consecration p. 9. BLOOD A Discourse of Fr. Collius a Romish Doctor of the miraculous Issuings of Christs Blood in the Eucharist p. 225 c. Blood of the Testament Exo. 24. objected for the Sacrifice of the Masse and Confuted by their owne Iesuite 424. Not infused in the Eucharist pag. 469. How the Fathers call the Eucharist both a Bloody and Vâ—bloody Sacrifice p. 455 456 457 c. BODY of Christ changed into whatsoever the Receiver desireth vainely Objected out of Greg. Nyssen pag. 202. Hee saith So doth Christs Body change our Bodies into it self Ibid. And Chrysost Christ hath made us his owne Body not by Faith but in deed also Ibid. An Objected Possibility of a Bodies being in diverse places at once from the like existence of Voice and Colour and of the soule of a man in the parts of his Body p. 259 260 261. Romish Objections against our using of Naturall reason to disprove the Corporall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist p. 263. A Body cannot take the right hand and left hand of it selfe pag. 254. The entrance of Christs Body miraculously through the doores p. 275 c. The Body of Christ opened the Cell of the Blessed Virgin p. 2777punc 278. In the Body of Christ by Popish Doctrine his head is not distant from his feet pag. 272. Body of Christ is held by the Romish Sect to be voyd of all sense and understanding as hee is in this Sacrament p 282. Christs Body is the Spirituall and Supersubstantiall food of the Soule p. 310. Eaten in vow and desire Ibid. Christs Body united to the Bodies of the Communicants See VNION See EATE Christs Body not suffering Destruction 467. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. BREAD Sacramentall albeit Bread is dignifyed by Saint Augustine with the name of Celestiall p 127. That Bread remaineth after CoÌ„secration is proved by Scripture p. 162. Consisting of Graines p. 163. Proved by Antiquity p. 163 164. By Sense 169. By the Analogie of Bread consisting of multitudes of Graines of Corne. Ibid. 165. Bread remaineth the same in Substance by the Iudgemen of Antiquity p. 169 Proved by the Councel of Nice p. 303. Bread and Wine called a Sacrifice by Ancient Fathers but Improperly p. 404 405 c. BREAKING of Bread used by Antiquity Contrary to the now Romish Practice pag 15. Breaking in Christs speech is Tropicall Ibid. Broken in the Present tense for proof of a Sacrifice and yet confessed by the Romish to betâ—ken the future pag. 397. C CABASILAS Gr Archb for the forme of Romish Consecration calumniously Objected 493. CAKE upon the Mountaines Objected out of the Psalmes and confuted by Popish Doctors pag. 433. CALVIN unjustly charged with denying Gods Omnipotencie pag. 231. CANON of the Masse Dominus vobiscum contradicteth the Private Masse p. 19. CANONIZATION of Saints fallibly is the ground of Superstitiousnesse p. 542. 543. CAPERNAITICAL Eating of Christs flesh 329. c. The Romish Eating of Christs Body is Capernaiticall p. 335. 336. c. See Vnion See Eating See Swallowing Mr. CASAVBON his large discourse teaching the universall practise of Antiquity to understand the tongue wherein they prayed p. 36. His Satisfaction to the Objected Testimonies of Antiquitie for Transubstantiation and Corporall Presence p. 207. His Iudgement upon the Fathers in the point of Fragments p 179. And upon the Objected Testimonie of Cyrill of Ierusalem pag. 177. His Answere to the Obcted Testimonie of â—ustine concerning the Sacrifice to Mithra among the Heathen pag. 379. His Exposition upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 400. CASSIODORE wrongfully urged for proofe of a proper Sacrifice in the Masse from the act of Melchisedech p. 406. That Melchisedech as Christ offered Bread and Wine Ibid. CATECHISME of TRENT saying All Baptized are Sacerdotes and so August p. 314. CAVTION of Antiquity in not suffering any part of the Eucharist in solid or liquid to fall to the ground Objected and Answered pag. 514. CHâ—VVING the Continuall maner of Eating of the Sacrament p. 339. CHRIST'S Acts of Excellency not to be imitated of any such as was his not compleat Sacramentall communicating in Emmaus pag. 63. 64. c. CHRYSOSTOME against Prayer in an unknowne tongue pag. 35. Hee is vainely objected for the Private Masse of the alone Communicating Priest pag. 21. Hee is for Consecration by Prayer p. 14. Hee is vehement against the Romish Custome of Gazers on the Celebration of the Eucharist pag. 47. Reverence to Christ is our Obedience pag. 81. Hee is against the Communicating but in one kind p. 77. Hee is for the Figurative sense in Christs words This is my Body and for the Continuance of Bread after Consecration p. 116. 117. c. His Question What is Bread The Body of Christ as the faithfull Communicants are the Body of Christ pag. 117. Hee expoundeth the fruit of the Vine Matth. 26. 29. to signifie the Eucharisticall Wine pag. 163. 164. Hee saith If Christ had given onely an Image of his Body at his Resurrection hee had deluded his Disciples p. 169. And that in things sensible the Substance remaineth p. 198. And that Christ hath made us his owne Body not onely in faith but in deed also p. 202. Ob Thinke not that it is the Priest that reacheth it but God Sol. Not the Priest but God holdeth the head of the Baptized p. 200. Bread unworthy of the name of Christ's Body albeit the Nature of Bread remaineth still pag. 186. His Testimony blotted out by the Parisian Doctors p. 186 Changed by Divine power 189. Our senses may be deceived wee are altogether to believe it 198. His Hyperbolicall maner of speech confessed 199. Hee saith Something is Impossible to God even to the advancement of Gods Omnipotencie p. 229. Hee is objected for Christs Corporall Presence both in Heaven and in Earth unconscionably pag. 247. Answered Ibid. His Hyperbolicall speeches Ibid. Ob. Hee left his flesh as Elias his Mantle Ibid. Hee holdeth that Angels have allotted unto them a prescript place or space p. 261. Hee is objected for the Romish Penetration of the Doores by Christ's Body Vnconscionably 275. Hee is against the Impalpability of Christs Body p. 276. and against the Passing of Christ's Body into the Seege p. 287. Hee is objected that Godlesse Communicants partake of Christs Body pag. 313. Yet saith that
the Godly onely are partakers of Christs Body p. 320 321. that Our Tongues are made red with his Blood pag. 342. and Wee teare him with our teeth Ibid. His frequent Hyperbolicall speeches confessed Ibid. Hee is objected for Christs bodily nourishing of our bodies pag. 356. 357. And for Corporall union by Mixture with the bodies of the Communicants Ibid. By Baptisme wee are made Bone of his Bone Ibid. And Christ received first himselfe of the Passeover to induce others to take it with a quiet mind pag. 367. His saying To understand Christs words carnally is to understand them literally p. 368. Hee is urged for proofe of a Proper Sacrifice in the Masse from the act of Melchisedeth pag 404. That Christ transmitted not his Priesthood to any Successor 411. But exerciseth it now in Heaven 417. Not to play the Iay. Ibid. That all the Lambs sacrificed under the Law prefigured the death of Christ p. 426. The Passeover was a signe of Christs Passion p. 424. Hee is objected for the Romish Exposition of the word Sacrifice in Malachie 5. pag. 431. Confuteth their Objections pag. 433. Hee nameth the Eucharist the same Sacrifice with this Correction or rather a Remembrance thereof pag. 443. Ob. Hee saith of the Eucharist a Terrible Sacrifice Sol. So of Baptisme Terrible Baptisme pag 448. Hee cals it an unbloody Sacrifice p. 452. Ob. That Christ's Body is an unbloody Sacrifice yet slaine on the Crosse pag. 455. Sol. Baptisme is is Christ's Passion p. 457. His saying Wee see Christ lying on the Altar Objected and Answered pag. 506. And his calling of the Sacrament Dreadfull Ibid. His 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Objected p. 512. Answered by the like saying of Baptisme Ibid. His saying that The Priest did take a little piece and held it up a little p. 513. His saying of the Priests inclining towards the Eucharist p. 515. His Liturgie to receive propitiously the Guift 562. 563. c. CHVRCH of Rome long time in an errour of Administring the Eucharist to Infants p. 51. Her Authority contradicted by the now Romish Ibid. CIRCVMSCRIPTION and Vncircumscription the distinct differences of the God-head and Man-hood of Christ 243 244. c. CLEMENS ALEX. Against Prayer in an unknowne tongue p. 36. He expoundeth the fruit of the Vine Matth. 26. 29. to signifie the Eucharisticall Wine p. 164. c. CLARKE of the Parish was no office in the Apostles times p. 30. CLOVD in the Sea compared with Baptisme p. 427. CO-ADORATION is Idolatrous p. 541. 542 p. 543. 544. COLOVR The Nature hereof to be perceived in divers places at once Objected by the Romish and confuted by themselves 258. COMMEMORATIVE Sacrifice used by Protestants how p 440. 441. c. COMMVNICANTS onely were anciently admitted to the Eucharist and Gazers on excluded p. 45. 46 c. COMMVNION in both kinds commanded by Christ both to all Priests and People that are present at the Communion p. 56. Evasion Romish against the perpetuall custome of the Greeke Church p. 57. Against the precept of Christ p. 56. Against the Example of Christ pag. 62. Against Apostolicall Practice p 65 Against Primitive Custome p. 68. Against Theologicall Reasons p. 70 71 c. Against the ancient Fathers pag. 76. Ob. from Christ at Emmaus Answered p. 65. Romish Pretence of Alteration answered pag. 78 79. A Comparison betweene the Alterations and Observations and betweene the Alterers and Observers p. 83. More Perfection more Spirituall Grace and Refection is obtayned by Receiving in both Kinds p. 75. CONCEALEMENT of the words of Christs Institution by the Fathers from the Catechumenists and Pagans Objected for Corporall Presence pag. 511. And Fideles norunt the same sayd they of Baptisme 512 c. COVNCEL OF AQVISGR Against Prayer in an Vnknowne Tongue p. 35. of BRACARA Against any Alteration of the Institution of Christ in the Eucharist p. 63. of CARTHAGE Against Administring the Eucharist to Infants pag. 53. Which expoundeth the words of Christ in the Eucharist to be taken Tropically 130. The words of the same Councel corruptly translated by Binius Ibid. of COLON saith that Contempt in not Receiving of this Sacrament offereth violence to Christ p. 316. of CONSTANCE Against Communion in both kindes p. 55. of EPHESVS The Body which Christ united to his Godhead as palpable and unpalpable pag. 276. Holds that we have expiation in the Eucharist by the Blood of Christ as remembred herein that is Objectively p. 478. of LATERAN The first that invented the word Transubstantiation p. 149. As also the Article it selfe as is Confessed p. 151. It taught only a Transubstantiation in Matter and not Forme The Councel of Trent both p. 153. of NANATENS Against Private Masse p. 18. of NICE Baptisme is not to be beholden with the eyes of our Body p. 207. This Councel is objected by both Protestants and Papists for the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist p. 301. Calling the thing Eaten Bread after Consecration pag. 302. and the Place a Table Ibid. Much of the Sacrament would satiate and presse downe An Argument that the Substance of Bread remaineth after Consecration pag. 304. It useth Lift up your hearts aloft pag. 202. Romish Objections Answered p. 203 204 c. It calleth the Eucharist Viand pag. 366 c. of PAPIENS Against Private Masse pag. 18. of TOLEDO is for the Receiving of the Eucharist with Hands pag. 44. Forbiddeth Innovations in receiving of the Eucharist which are repugnant to the Institution of Christ. p. 89. Take a little not much les t the Belly be overcharged that it may be food for thy Soule p. 305 of TRENT Against Christ his Institution of the Eucharist in Forme of Consecration p. 9. And in Private Masse p. 17. And in muttering the words of Christ. pag. 22. And in prescribing of a strange Tongue p. 24. And in Inviting Non-Communicants to gaze vpon the Eucharist p. 45. And in reserving the Eucharist for Procession p. 48. And in Administring the Eucharist to Infants p. 51. And in with-drawing the cup from the Communicants p. 55 c. It defineth a Proper Sense of Christs words This is my Body p. 95. Falsly imposed Transubstantiation as collected out of these words This is my Body pag. 147. Transubstantiation compleat was not defined before the Councel of Trent p. 152. And that the same Councel of Trent held Transubstantiation contrary to the Councel of Laterane Ibid. It Defined the whole Body of Christ to be in every least part of the Hoast p. 270. Which is confuted by Romish Doctors p. 271 272. And by Saint Angustine p. 274. Eucharist is food for the Soule p. 310. In Expounding 1. Cor. 10. 18. turneth a Table into an Altar p. 402. of TRVLLO is for receiving the Eucharist with Hands pag. 44. It interpreteth Christs words This is my Body Tropically pag. 122. CONCOMITANCIE The pretence hereof no just cause to with-hold the Cup from the Laity pag. 81. 82. This Romish Conceit spoyleth
Materiall Idolatry p. 533. 534. c. IDOLATRIE what it is p. 528. Romish Adoration of the Eucharist is Materially Idolatrous as is confessed by many hundred maner of wayes because of so many defects of due Consecration Ibid. pag. 533. That it is Formall Idolatry pag. 534. c. notwithstanding any Pretence p. 553. either of Morall Certainety pag. 534. As ill as the heathen p 547. In one respect worse p. 549. The same is formally idolatrous p. 540. this is proved by Romish Principles p. 541. By Co-adoration Ibid. By Canonization of Saints p. 542. By Consecration of Popes pag. 544. The false Scales which a Romish Seducer maketh for weighing the difference betweene Protestants Not-Adoring and Papists Adoring of Christ in the Sacrament pag. 545 c. The Idolatrousnesse of the Romish Masse Epitomized in a Generall Synopsis p. 568 569 c. IEALOVSY of God ought to deterre us from Adoring the Eucharist pag. 534 c. IEWES ate the same Spirituall meat with Christians pag. 314. Iewish Rabbins Objected concerning the Sacrifice of Melchisedech pag. 404. Iewish Sacrifices how proper in themselves and yet Representative which nothing advantageth the Romish p. 440 441 c. IMPOSSIBLE Somthing so called even to the Advancement of Gods Omnipotencie by the Iudgement of Antiquity pag. 229. Pretence of Omnipotencie was the Sanctuary of Heretikes as of the Arians Ibid. Acknowledgement of the same Impossibility by the Romish Doctors upon the same Reason because of Contradiction p. 230. Impossibility of Christs Body to be in diverse places at once Confessed by Aquinas Vasquez and other Schoole-men pag. 240 241. Impossibilities by reason of Contradiction as for the same Body to be hot and cold and the like at once p. 255 256 c. IMMOLATION of the Priest is called by S. Augustine Christs Passion as Bread his Body that is Improperly saith the Romish Glosse p. 127. INDIGNITIES most vile attributed by the Romish faith to the supposed Body of Christ in the Eucharist p. 286. Contrary to Antiquity p. 287. Romish Answers to this pag. 288. Master Fishers most absurd Answer for Defense of all seeming Absurdities and Indignities of Romish Doctrine concerning the Body of Christ in the Eucharist pag. 291 292 293 294 c. INDIVIDUUM VAGUM Romishly taught Confessed to be a sense full of Absurdities pag. 96 97 c. INFANTS made Partakers of the Eucharist in the dayes of Pope Innocent erroneously p. 51. Their flesh eaten of Heretikes occasioned the slander thereof by the Heathen upon the whole Christian Church pag. 375 c. INNOVATIONS Ten in the Church of Rome against the Cōmand of Christ DOE THIS repugnant to both the Apostolicall and Primitive Traditions concerning Christs Institution of the Eucharist p. 9. 10 11 c. Novelty preferred before sage Antiquity by the Church of Rome in her Alienation of the Cup from the the Laicks pag. 68. The Innovation of the Church of Rome in Altering Christs Ordinance is maintained by her Advocates with an Odious Vncharitablenesse in preferring a meanes of Lesse Grace before a meanes of More with Arrogancie in attributing more Wisedome to the now present than to the then Ancient Church of Rome By Perjury in swearing to maintaine the Apostolicall Traditions and protesting to disclame them By Blasphemy in teaching the Pope to dispense with the expresse Command of Christ p. 85 86 87 c. INSTITUTION of the Eucharist where it beginneth p. 4. What Circumstances excepted p. 5. It is violated by Ten Romish Transgressions pag. 9. 10 c. It Containeth neither Precept nor Practice of any Divine Adoration of the Eucharist p. 504 505. See TRANSGRESSION INTENT Defects of this in the Priest is cause of Romish Idolatry p. 530. Intent though good cannot free the Romish Adoration of the Eucharist from Formall Idolatry pag. 536 c. INVOCATION used by Gorgonia perversly Objected for Divine Adoration of the Eucharist pag. 516 517 c. IOANE MARTLESSE A miraculous wench Discerning by her Smell one Consecrated Hoast out of a thousand Vnconsecrated p. 173. IRENAEVS teacheth that Hoc in in Christ's Speech demonstrateth Bread p. 103. His Saying It Consisteth of an Earthly part and an Heavenly p. 177. And It is no Common Bread p. 104. Calumniously Objected p. 493. That the Godly are onely Partakers of Christs Body pag. 321. Objected Vnconscionably for Vnion with Christs Body by a Bodily Commixture and nourishing the Bodies of the Communicants p. 365. Confessed p. 356. That they spake of a Permanent Vnion Confessed p. 365. That speaking of the Nourishment of mens Bodies by the Sacrament he meant not any Substantiall Change thereby as is Confessed p. 362. Hee is Objected for the Romish Exposition of the word Sacrifice Malach. 5. Which place Confuteth the Objector pag. 432. Hee is Vnconscionably Objected by Bellarmine for Proofe of a Proper Sacrifice in the Masse p. 439. His Saying The Altar in Heaven pag. 419. ISYCHIVS His Saying Wee perceive the truth of his Blood pag. 343. And that Christs Body is a Bloody Sacrifice and slaine in the Eucharist p. 455. Meant of the Passion of the Crosse Confessed p. 479. ISIDORE HISP Against Prayer in an Vnknowne Tongue p. 35. Hee teacheth Hoc in Christs words Hoc est Corpus to demonstrate Bread p. 103. Hee teacheth a Figurative Sense of Christs words This is my Body p. 128. He saith Bread is called Christs Body because it strengtheneth mans soule p. 165. He saith also It is Changed into the Sacrament of Christs Body Ibid. And that Melchisedech offered the Sacrament of Christs Body and Blood p. 404. ISIDORE PE LUSIOTA is for the Blessed Virgins opening her Cell at the birth of Christ against Heretiks that denyed the truth of his Body p. 278. IVDGEMENT of God upon Contemners of Holy things p. 318 319 c. IVLIAN the APOSTATE Objecting the No-Altar and Sacrifice among Christians as a note of Atheisme p. 464. IVSTINIAN the Emperour against Prayer in a Tongue Vnknowne p. 36. and against an Vnaudible Voice p. 23 c. IVSTINE is for Consecration by Prayer pag. 13. His calling the Eucharist a Type and Antytipe doth yield a Figurative sense in Christs words This is my Body p. 116. And is against Individuum vagum 118. He is Objected in saying It is no Common Bread p. 194. Hee is against the Romish maner of Christs Bodily Penetrations of the Doores p. 276. as is there Confessed His saying Wee are made one by Baptisme not only in affection but also in nature pag. 356. His Apologie to the Heathen Emperour concerning a slander against Christians for Eating the flesh of an Infant p. 374. Where a meere Slander is vehemently and unconscionably Objected by the Romish for proofe of the Orall-Eating of Christs flesh in the Eucharist Ibid. Bellarmines Dilemma thereupon p. 377. And a Dilemma against him pag. 378. Two Testimonies out of Iustine against the Romish Corporall Presence pag. 380 381. Hee saith that Giving of thankes and Praise is
unconscionably Objected for our Corporall Vnion with Christ in the Sacrament pag. 367. ORALL-EATING is Capernaiticall p. 399 340 c. ORDINATION Want of this in the Priest is cause of Romish Idolatry pag. 531. Much more in respect of the same want in the Ordainers by many hundred Possible Defects pag. 532. Protestants Securitie in their Beliefe in respect of this pag. 554. ORGANIZATION of Christs Body Denyed by the Romish pag. 269 270 c. See Body of Christ ORIGEN Objected untruly for an Vnknowne Prayer pag. 35 Hee is against Reservation of the Eucharist to any other end but Eating pag 49. Hee Teacheth Hoc in Christs words to demonstrate Bread pag. 103. Hee expoundeth the Fruite of the Vine Matth. 26. 29. to Signifie the Eucharisticall VVine pag. 163. His Saying The Materiall goeth into the Draught pag. 177 187. Hee holdeth it as a Doctrine of Faith that Every Angell hath allotted unto him a prescript place or space pag. 261. Hee standeth for the Blessed Virgins opening her Cell at Christs Birth pag. 277. Hee saith that Onely the Godly are Partakers of Christs Body pag. 321. Hee calleth the Sacrament after Consecration Bread and materiall meat pag 349 350. And No wicked man can eate Christs flesh else hee should live for ever pag. 350. Hee is against the Literall Eating of Christs flesh pag. 339. His Saying Christ entreth under the roofe of his mouth Vnconscionably Objected pag. 342. His Saying Wee Drinke Christs Blood by Receiving his Word pag. 345. The Naturall Sanctifyed and Symbolicall Body meat eaten may goe into the Draught pag. 349. Hee saith Christ is the onely true Passeover pag. 423. And Christ our Priest not to be sought here at all but in Heaven pag. 417. And that The Passeover was onely Signe of Christs Passion p. 443. Hee saith The onely Commemoration is a Proper Sacrifice pag. 477. His Saying I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter into my mouth Objected fondly for Adoration of the Eucharist pag. 521. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Properly taken for Substance in Theodoret. pag. 180 181 182 c. And among the Grecians as well Catholikes as Heretikes Substance falsely interpreted Accidents Ibid. P PACHYMERES upon the words of Dionysius O Divine Sacrament pag. 518. His 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Which is vindicated againe against a late Calumnious Seducer p. 521. PAMELIVS his Abuse of the Testimony of Tertullian for Procession with the Eucharist p. 50. PAPAL Authority equalled with the Apostolicall and opposed unto it pag. 65 66 c. PARALLâ—LS Answering by Parallels and equivalent termes and phrases of the Fathers is justifyable and necessary pag. 366. PASCHATIVS saith that Christs Body is a Bloody Sacrifice and slaine in the Eucharist p. 455. That he meant it of the Passion of the Crosse is Confessed p. 456. PASSE-OVER a Figure of the Old Law Objected as a Type of the Masse which was a Type of Christ upon the Crosse p. 422 423 c. Proved out of the Fathers Ibid. PASTOPHORIVM was wherein the Sacrament was reserved in a Chamber not in a Boxe p. 49. PENETRATION of Dimensions denyed by Damascen p. 275. PERIVRâ—â—S of the Romish Disputers and Instances thereof pag. 574 575 c. In Translations and Expositions of Scripture pag. 576 577 c. In affirming Consent of Antiquity and in their supposed necessity of their Doctrines pag. 580 581 c. PERPLEXITIES of Romish Worship in the Adoration of the Eucharist in respect of their Pronunciation of Christs words pag. 552. Of Morall Certainty pag. 553. Priestly Intention Ibid. Of Ordination Ibid. p. 554. from Habituall Condition p. 555. PHILO IVDAEVS Against Prayer in a Language Vnknowne pag. 29. PLACE A Body in two Places at once See Body See Angels And see Circumscription PLEDGE So was the Eucharist called pag. 366. Objected and Answered Ibid. POPE A Pope of Rome against Prayer in an Vnknowne Tongue pag. 35. Popes farre from being Priests after the Order of Melchisedech pag. 410 411. c. PO. ALEXANDER saith that Christs Body is a Bloody Sacrifice and slaine in the Eucharist pag. 455. meant of the Passion of the Crosse Confessed p. 479. PO. GALIXTVS against the Romish Custome of Gazers on the Celebration of the Eucharist in the Masse pag. 46. POPE CLEMENT by his Calling the Encharist Type and Antitype yeildeth to a Figurative sense of Christs Words This is my Body pag. 116. Hee saith also Wee divide it into Fragments pag. 179. And nameth Haec Antityppa speaking of the Body and Blood of Christ shed pag. 454. PO. CORNELIVS standeth for the Receiving of the Eucharist with Hands p. 44. POPE GALASIVS is against the Communion but in one kinde pag. 71 c. Speaking also of Bread and Wine Consecrated saith They cease not to be in substance the same pag. 148. That the same Gelasius was indeed Pope Ibid. Hee is Objected for calling the Eucharist Divine but as did Gregory Nyssen call Water of Baptisme Divine and Dionysius other sacred things pag. 185. POPE GREGORY is against the Romish Private Masse of the Priests Communicating alone pag. 20. And against the Romish Custome of Gazers on the Celebration of the Eucharist in the Masse pag. 46. He saith that the Infidelity of Thomas was Convinced by Touch. pag. 68. And affirmeth that Angells are Circumscribed in place pag. 262. Hee writeth against the Heretikes who taught the Body of Christ to be brought into an airy substance pag. 274. Against the Eunomians who held the Body of Christ to be Impalpable His Saying Christs Blood is sprinckled on our Posts Vnconscionably Objected pag. 343. And taught that Christ exercised his Priesthood in Heaven p. 419. POPE INNOCENT the Third is against Prayer in a Tongue Vnknowne pag. 35. And against the Romish Private Masse pag. 21. His Errour of Administring the Eucharist to Infants pag. 51 52. Pope Innocent and Pope Iulius Repugnant in the point of Transubstantiation pag. 155. And Expoundeth the fruite of the Vine Matth. 26. 29. to signifie the Eucharisticall Wine pag. 164. Hee held Transubstantiation onely in matter and the Councell of Trent both in matter and in forme pag. 155. His Similitude of a Bodies being in diverse places at once from Voice pag. 258. Hee saith that Christs Body should be Mortall and Immortall it is Incredible pag. 256. And of Vasquez his Blacks and Whites Ibid. Hee saith that Agility is one of the Indowments of a Glorifyed Body pag. 285. POPE IVLIVS is against the Alteration of the Institution of Christ in the Eucharist pag. 62. And in reproving Innovations concerning the Eucharist hee challengeth all to follow Christs Institution who allowed the use of both Bread and Cup. pag. 88. Hee held Transubstantiation to be both in matter and forme p. 155. POPE LEO sayd of the Baptised He is not the same hee was but made the flesh of Christ 202. And the Regenerate is made the Body of Christ crucifyed Ib. He is against the abominable Romish Doctrine of an Imperfect
Body of Christ taught in the Church of Rome is Capernaitically Hereticall pag 347. 348. c. Proved by the Doctrine of Ancient Fathers Ibid. See Devouring T TABLE turned into an Altar by the Councell of Trent expounding the 1. Cor. 10. 18. pag. 401. It was Anciently placed so as to stand round about it pag. 462. See Altar TERTVLLIAN fondly objected by Pamelius for the Romish carrying of the Eucharist in Procession pag. 50. Hee interpreteth Hoc est corpus with Id est figura Corporis p. 124. And Calumniously objected afresh pag. 492. And Bellarmines grosse errour confuted by Pamelius Ibid. Hee in confutaâ—ion of the Accademicks and Hereticks pleadeth for the faithfulnesse of each sense urging that Christ had the same taste of Wine after Resurrection which hee had in the Wine which hee had consecrated pag. 171. And saith Wee make Bits of it pag. 179. Hee holdeth it as a Doctrine of Faith that every Angell hath alotted unto him a prescript place or space pag. 261. Against the Ebionitâ—â— Christ is God because hee is in all places where hee is invocated upon pag. 262. Hee standeth for the blessed Virgins opening her Cell at Christs Birth pag. 277. Hee standeth also for onely the Soule-Eating of Christs Body pag. 385. Hee is objected for the Romish Exposition of the word Sacrifice Malachie 5. And confuteth the Objector pag. 432. Hee calleth Blessings and Himnes Pure Sacrifices pag. 448. His speech of a Womans Act of Offering egregiously perverted by Pamelius to prove a Sacrifice in the Masse pag. 460. His speech of No common Bread and Wine perverted and objected for Adoration of the Eucharist pag. 514. TESTAMENT in Christs speech of Institution taken Figuratively pag. 129. Testamentarie words may be Figurative against Bellarmine pag. 132. THEODORET is against the Communion but in one kind pag. 77. And teacheth that Hoc in Christs speech Hoc est Corpus demonstrateth Bread pag. 103. By his calling the Eucharist Type and Antitype yeildeth a figurative sense of Christs words This is my Body pag. 116. Hee saith Bread remaineth the same in Substance after Consecration pag. 169 Hee noteth something to be Impossible even to the advancement of Gods Omnipotenciâ— pag. 229. And defendeth Circumscription in one place to distinguish Christs Man-hood from his God-head pag. 242. Hee is objected that the wicked are Partakers of Christs Body unconscionably pag. 220. Hee saith that Christ transmitted not his Priest-hood to any Successor pag. 411. and that hee exerciseth it now in Heaven pag. 415. Hee is against the Romish Iuge Sacrificium pag. 436. Hee names the Eucharist the same Sacrifice with this Correction or rather a Remembrance thereof pag. 443. Hee is objected also for Adoning the Symbols pag. 510. THEOPHYLACT is against Prayer in an unknowne Tongue pag. 35. And against the Communion but in one kind pag. 77. Hee expoundeth the fruit of the Vine Matth. 26. 29 to signifie the Eucharisticall Wine pag. 163. His saying Bread is trans-elementated into Christs Body vainely Objected pag. 204. Hee taught the blessed Virgins opening of her Cell at Christs Birth against Heretikes that denyed the truth of his Body pag. 277. His saying Wee are not Devourers of Christs Body pag. 349. Hee is wrongfully urged for proofe of a Proper Sacrifice in the Masse from the Act of Melchisedech pag. 404. Hee nameth the Eucharist the same Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse with this Correction or rather a Remembrance thereof p 443. THIS and MINE See Hoc Meum THOMAS his Touch is a perfect Evidence of Christs Resurrection pag. 168. THOVGHT is objected for the proofe of the Being of a Body in divers places at once pag. 300. TONGVE unknowne in Gods Service is against Antiquity in Generall pag. 34. A knowne Tongue was used of all Ancient Churches both Greeke and Latine pag. 25. And in after-Churches of remote Nations Ibid. The Iniquity of an unknowne Language against men pag. 27. Against God pag 28. And against God and Man pag. 29. And against Antiquity pag. 34. TOVCH Corporall cannot happen to the Body of Christ in the Eucharist pag. 333. See Thomas and see Sense TRANS-ELEMENTATION Transmutation and the like doe not necessarily imply Transubstantiation pag. 149. TRANSGRESSIONS of Christs Institution of the Sacrament by the Romish Church are ten pag. 7. c. The first in the word Blessed it pag. 9 The second in Breaking pag. 15. The third against the word Them pag. 17. Fourth against the word Said pag. 22. Fift against the same word Said pag. 24. Sixt against the word Take pag. 43. The seventh against the word Eate yee p. 45. Eight against the word Eate pag. 48. Ninth against the word In Remembrance pag. 51. The Tenth is against the words Drinke you All of this by depriving the people of the Cup pag. 54. TRANSLATION of Scripture in all Nationall tongues Anciently pag. 37. See Vulgar TRANSMVTATION Trans-elementation and such like words used Figuratively of the Fathers pag. 20. TRANSSVBSTANTIATION What it is in the Romish Doctrine pag. 146. That it is not proved sufficiently by that Scripture This is my Body p. 147 Confessed not to be necessarily collected from the words of Christs Institution Ibid. The Noveltie of the Name p. 149. That it was not before the Councell of Lateâ—ane pag. 151. Nor thorrowly before the Councell of Trent pag. 152. It is proved to be a false Article by the Romish maner of Defence because neither by Production nor by Adduction which by their owne Confessions are the two onely meanes of Transubstantiation pag. 153. Confuted by the Remayning of the Substance of Bread contrary to the Change thereof into Christs Body pag. 157. It contradicteth our faith of Christs Body Borne of the Virgin Mary Ibid. An Argument why Bread ceasing altogether to be it can be but Succession onely and no Transubstantiation pag. 163. Objections out of the Fathers pag. 188. Yea against their owne Romish Principles pag. 27. Termes objected out of the Fathers unconscionably are these It is Christs Body Made Christs Body Translated Trans-elementated into Christs Body which all are Figurative pag. 199. 200. c. TYPE used of the Greeke Fathers concerning the Eucharist proveth Christs speech to be Figurative pag. 115. See Antitype Types of the old Testament how they are said to be Inferiour to the Signes in the New pag. 426. 427. c. V VIATICVM that is Viands is applyed by the Fathers to the Eucharist ineptly Objected pag. 366. Baptisme and Absolution imparted to men dying are Viatica Viands also for the soule Ibid. VIGILIVS defendeth Circumscription in one place to distinguish Christs Man-hood from his God-head pag. 242. Hee proveth the Holy Ghost to be God because hee is in divers places at once pag. 265. VINDICATION Whereof are many already set downe in the Contents before the beginning of this Treatise VIRGIL's Cum faciam Vitâ—lâ foolishly Objected for proofe of a Proper Sacrifice p. 392. Bl. VIRGIN The Closure of her sacred Cell
reboantem Amen Bellar. lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 16. §. Sed. Tempore Apostolorum cùm celebraretur Sacrificium hoc Sacerdos dixit Hoc est corpus meum populus respondebat Amen Et hic usus manavit in totam Ecclesiam usquè ad â—â—lle amplius annos Maldon les Disp de Sacram. Tom. 1. de Euch Conâ—ect 1. §. Vbi Scribit Iesuits and others acknowledging that In the dayes of the Apostles and a long time after even for a thousand yeares and more the whole Church and in it the People of Rome had knowledge of this part of Service concerning the Sacrament and used to say AMEN So you And this is as much as wee need to require concerning the judgement and practice of the true Antiquitie of this Custome You will rather doubt wee suppose of the Vniversalitie thereof because you usually goe no farther then your Dictates which teach that because there were generally but three generall and knowne tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latine therefore the divine Service was celebrated thorowout the Church in one of these three And because these could not be the vulgar language of every Christian Nation it must follow say k Bellar. lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 15 16. and so Others also they that the People of most Nations understood not the publike Prayers used in their severall Churches And with this perswasion doe your Doctors locke up your consciences in a false beliefe of an universall Custome of an unknowne service of God Which you may as easily unlocke againe if you shall but use as a key this one Observation viz. That the three common tongues namely Hebrew Greeke and Latine although they were not alwayes the vulgar Languages yet were they knowne Languages commonly to those people that used them in Divine Service Which one onely Animadversion will fully demonstrate unto us the truth of our Cause It is not denied but that the three Languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine were in primitive ages most m Tres hae hunguae universalissimae ità ut Hebraica per totum feâ—e Orientem Omnes enim Châ—ldâ—â—câ aut Syriacâ 1. Hebraiâ—â sed corruptè loqueb intur Graeca per totam Graeciam Asiam minorem â—lim ac varias provincias latè patebat Latinâ— autem per magnaâ—â— Eu opae puteâ—â— vagabatur Ledesina les in defens Bellar. universall insomuch that the Hebrew was spoken albeit corruptly thorowout almost the whole Easterne Church The Greeke was currant thorow the whole Greeke Church also and in the lesser Asia And the Latine was dispersed over a great part of Europe It will now be fullie sufficient to know that the most of these Languages were certainly knowne in publicke worship unto all them of whom they were used in publicke Sermons and preachings For your owne Church howsoever shee decreed of Praying yet doth she forbid Preaching in an unknowne tongue Now therefore joyne wee beseech you the eyes of your bodies and minde together in beholding and pondering our Marginals and you shall finde first if wee speake of the n Concionatus est Gracè Chrysostomus apud Antiochenos apud Caesarienset Basilius apud Alexandrinos Athanasius apud Hierosolymitanos Ciryllus Thus froÌ„ Conslantinople to Antioch throughout Asia was the Greeke Language universally knowne Greeke Language that there was a generall knowledge thereof even among the vulgar people of the Churches of Antioch Caesarea Alexandria and thorowout Asia Secondly if of the Latine you may behold anciently the familiar knowledge therof in the Church of Rome whereof Saint * See above at the letter 1 Hierome hath testified that The people were heard in the Churches of Rome resounding and thundring out their Amen This in Churches unmixt Thirdly in mixt Congregations of Greeke and Latine that the o Cum Ecclesiâ Rom. de Latinis Graecis esset permixta singulae lectiones de utraque lingua recitabantur nam ab una lingua recitantes ab utriusque linguae populis intelligi non poterant Rupertus de Divinis of ficijs lib 3. cap. 8. Service was said both in Greeke and Latine Fourthly your owne generall Confession yielding a common knowledge of the Latine tongue to the people of a great part of Europe and wee say also of Africke insomuch that Augustine doth openly teach that the p Augustini sunt plurimi Tractatus Sermones ad Hipponeâ—scs suos With whom be rather chose to speake ossum then os to the end they should understand him Liv. Retract ca 20. Psalmum qui ijs caneretur per Lattnas literas feci propter vulgi Idâ—otarum notitiam Idem Sermon 25. de verb. Apost Punicum proverbium est antiquum quod quidem Latinè vobis dicam quià Punicè non omnes nôstis So well was the latine knowen unto them Item Tert. ad uxorem scripsit Latinè Ad muliâ—res de Habitu ad Foeminas de cultu ad Virgines de velo directing the same writings to them thus Dei Servae Conservae et Sorori meae c. Cyprianus saepe ad Martyres plebem Latinè Latine tongue was better knowne to his Africans than was the Punicke although this were their native Language And also of q Curabant Romani ut in provincijs plurimi loquerentur Latinè ita ut Hispanias Gallias Latinas prorsus fecerint veteribus illarum gentium linguis abolitis Vives in Aug. de Ci. Dei lib. 19. c. 7. Nostri per totum ferè occidentem per Septentrionis per Africae non exiguam partem brevi spatio linguam Romanam celebrem quasi Regiam fecerunt Nostra est Italia nostra Gallia nostra Hispania Germania Panonia Dalmatia Illyricum multae aliae nationes Valla praesat in â— Elegant Certè testimonium ex Hilario dictum videtur omninò cogere ut credamus in Gallia fuisse consuetudinem ut populus et Ecclesia caneret etiam antè Ambrosij tempora Bellar. l. 1. de bonis operibus c. 16. §. Fortasse France Spaine Italy Germany Pannonia Dalmatia and many other Nations in the North and West particularly manifested by the Latine Homelies that is Sermons and writings made to the people of Africke by Tertullian Cyprian and Augustine and in France and Germany by the people praying and joyntly saying AMEN Not to tell you of the now-Custome of the remote Christian Churches such as are the Egyptians Russians Ethiopians Armenians and others all which exercise their publike Service in the vulgar and mother-tongues of their owne so distinct and different Nations For the which cause they can finde no better entertainment with your Iesuites than to admonish you that r Certum est inquiunt Protestantes Ruthenos AEgyptios AEthiopes Armenos quosdâ—m alios celerbare divina Officia in Lingua vulgari Respondemus nos non moveri Barbarorum moribus Salomeron Ies Com. in 1. Cor. 16. Disp 30. §. Septimò You are not to be moved with the example of such barbarous people O
Denique finis Cardinall who confesseth that the Psalmes in the daies of the Primitive Church were sung joyntly of the people Because they were ordained for instruction and consolation of the people as the chiefe end But as for the Divine Service The Principall end of it saith hee is not the instruction and consolation of the people but the worship of God So he Whom when wee aske why the people then did all joyne together both in Singing of Psalmes and Answering the Minister in Divine Service and Prayer He saith it was because of the Paucitie of the people and rarenesse of the Assembly Whereby it seemeth hee meant to maintaine Your Degenerate Romish Worship with Paradoxes First As if Psalmes publikely sung in the Church to Gods glory were not Divine duties and Service Secondly As if the Primitive Church using both Psalmes and other Prayers in a knowne tongue as hee confesseth did not hold a necessitie of the common knowledge of both for Instruction and Consolation Thirdly As if the Assemblies of Christians were of such a Paucitie in the dayes of Tertullian when those Psalmes ordained for Instruction and Consolation were in use And fourthly as if People now adayes had not as much need of Instruction and Consolation as they that lived in Primitive times yea and more especially such People who being led blind-fold by an Implicite Faith have reason to crave Instruction and having their Consciences tortured and perplexed with multiplicities of Ceremoniall Lawes have as just cause also to desire Consolation As for your objecting the Worship of God by unknowne prayers that may be sufficient which your owne Catechisme authorized by the Councel of Trent teacheth you where answering to that question why God although he know our wants before we pray yet will be sollicited by our prayers it b Cur Deus cùm sciat quibus indigemus vult oratione nostrâ sollicitari Vult nâ—s â—â—è pe tendo petere fidentiùs ut magis ad amorem incendantur ac at saepiùs majori affecti laetitiâ ad cum amandum atque colendum incitemuâ— ardentiùs Catech. Tâ—id vel Rom. part 4. c. 2. pug 386. saith that he doth this to the end that Praying more confidently we may bee more inflamed with love towards God and so being possessed with more joy may be exercised to a fervent worship of God So your publike and generall Romane Catechisme The case then is plaine From more Edification there ariseth more Consolation from more Consolation there issueth more Devotion from all these proceeds more siliall Love and dutifull Worship of God Which was long since shadowed as c Exod. 15. Cantemus Domino Cantabat Moses Miriam hempè Moses â—d est pars intellectus Miraiam id est sensus purificatus justum enim est intelligibiliter sensibiliter Deo hymnoâ— dici utrumque instrumentum concinnè pulsari tà m intellectum quà m sensum in solus Dei salvatoris laudem actionem Gratiarum Hactenùs Philo Iudeaus Pulcherrimus hic Tractatus moralis Pererius Ies in Exod. 15. Disp 2. §. Exercitus porrò Philo Iudaeus allegorizeth witnessing your Iesuite by Moses and Miriam singing unto the Lord Moses signifying the understanding part and Miriam betokening the Affection both notifying that wee are to sing Hymnes both affectionately and understandingly unto God Therefore if you be men of Conscience recant that your now objected Barbarous Paradoxe Which contrary to all anciently professed Divinity and expresse Scripture saying * 1 Cor. 14. 15. I will pray with my spirit I will pray with my understanding also doth thrust mans Vnderstanding out of Gods worship to the utter abolishing of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is his Reasonable worshipping of God by making man as Saint d August Expos 2. in Psal 18. Merulae Psittaci Corvi Picae hujusmodi volucres saepè docentur ab hominibus sonare quod nesciunt scenter verò caâ—tare non avi sed homini Divinâ voluntate concessum est Augustine noteth no better than Ouzells Parrots Ravens and Mag-pies all which learne to prate they know not what THE FOVRTH CHALLENGE Against the said Romish Decree as joyntly injurious both to God and Man from the Text of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. IN the fourth place Wee are to speake of the Iniquity of your unknowne language in Prayer joyntly against both God and Man because that without the understanding of the Prayer it is impossible for a man being of discretion to pray unto or to praise God as hee ought and consequently to obtaine any blessing by prayer from God according to that Apostolicall Doctrine â— Cor. 14. where hee saith of the man ignorant of the language of prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How shall hee say Amen at thy giving of thankes seeing hee knoweth not what thou sayest To which Argument of the Apostles taken from the Impossibility your e Dicit Apostolus ut instruam Expende vocem hanc Instruam quòd sit de praedicatione non de Missae celebratione Eckius Enchirid. Qu 〈…〉 Missa Latinè § Quod ad Bellar. Aliqui respondent non agi hîc de precibus Lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 16. §. Ad hanc Eckius and some Others answer that the Apostle speaketh of Preaching and not of Praying What not of Praying Eckius May it not be said of this your great Doctor and Antagonist to Luther that this man could not see the River for water for as your f Imò sequitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quibus verbis Apostolus significat precari c. Bellar. ibid. Cardinall confesseth in the text it selfe the Apostle useth these three words Pray sing and give thankes Will you now seeke an Evasion from Master g Master Brerely in his Liturgie of the Masse Tract 5. Sect. 4 ad finem Brerely Pr. collecting as he saith the Contrary in the Apostle as affirming that not the whole vulgar but some one was especially appointed to supply the place of the Vnlearned to say Amen Which reason hee may seeme to have borrowed from your h Providet sapienter Ecclesia ut Minister vice totius populi respondeat imò hoc est quod Apostolus ait cùm subdit Qui super locum Idiotae Sixt. Senens Biblio lib. 6. Annot. 263. Hinc manifestè coÌ„vincitur fuisse tempore Apostoli Pauli unum qui suppleret locum populi Ledeâ—sima Ies de Scriptur non legend cap. 26. 27. §. Praeteà ex Sa. Ies Comment in hunc locum Senensis who saith that The Apostle by him That occupieth the place of the unlearned meant the Clarke of the Parish and not the vulgar people But this is thought of your Bellarmine and others to be but an unlearned answer because that In the dayes of the Apostle saith i Tempore Apostolorum nullum fuisse pro Laicis constitutum ex Iustino constat Et Graeca vox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non significat secundùm usum Graecae linguae
vagum of the Herbe which a man holdeth in his hand saying This hearbe groweth in my Garden how can you say it is true in the proper sense for if you take it determinately the same Hearb numero is not in the man's garden because it is in his hand and so it is yet Hoc Individuum determinatum And if you speake of it in a confused Notion no Abstract Notion can be held in a man's hand it being the function of the braine and not of the hand to apprehend mentall Notions or Generalls and so it is not Individuum at all But the Text saith of Christ his hand He tooke bread c. THIS which Christ in so saying pointed out with his finger saith your a Hoâ— est corpus meum Hoc quod Christus digito demonstrabat cùm illa verba protulit Sand. de visibil Monarch lib. 7. ad Ann. 1547. Sanders but a man will have much adoe to point out an Individuum vagum such as is an invisible or a confused Notion with a visible finger Wee would now conclude in the words of a Parisian Doctor b Petrus Picherellus de Missâ cap 3. Individui vagi commentum Authori Scoto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relinquo but that something els is to bee added Another may be your Cardinall his owne Assertion which he once made as a snare to catch himselfe in for in your c Cùm ante Consecrationem dicimus in Liturgiâ suscipe sancte Pater hanc immaculatam hostiam certè Pronomen Hanc demonstrat ad sensus id quod tunc manibus â—enemus id autem est panis Bellar. lib. 1. de Missâ c. 27. §. Prima proposito Romish Masse the Priest having the Hoast in his hand prayeth thus Receive holy father this immaculate Hoast If you shall aske him what in this prayer the Pronoune This doth demonstrate hee telleth you readily and asseverantly saying Certainly it demonstrateth unto sense that which the Priest hath in his hand which is Bread So he Now why there should not bee the like certainty of Relation of the Pronounce This to Bread in the speech of Christ as it hath in the prayer of the Priest none of you wee thinke shall ever be able to shew Lastly wee challenge you to shew within the space of a Thousand three hundreth yeeres after Christ out of all the Ancient Fathers any one Testimony that ever affirmed the Pronoune Hoc This to betoken any Individuum vagum or Common Substance orels to confesse that this your doctrine is new extravagant and Adulterate Nor yet can the Defenders therof say that this is all one as to say This that is that which is contained under the forme of Bread because this is like as when one shewing his purse shall say This is money meaning that which is in his purse which is a knowne figure Metonymia Yet were it granted that Hoc betokened an Individuum vagum as to use your owne Similitude when one saith of an herb in his hand This herb groweth in my garden so Christ should have sayd of bread in his hand This that is the like kind of bread is my Body yet would not this make the Speech of Christ proper or not figurative because Christ's Body could no more be properly predicated of the kind of wheat Bread than it could bee of that bread of wheate then in his hand as Christ himselfe hath taught us and as we are to prove unto you For speaking of his Body he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grane of wheat Iohn 12. 24. not This grane yet Christ's flesh is equally called improperly The grane as This grane of wheate whereof the ancient Father Theodoret will reade you all a Lesson in the sixt Section following And now this so open and extreme civill warre among your selves in confuting your owne Expositions will further and confirme peace among us in that one Exposition which we are in the next place to defend as followeth The third Proposition which is according to the judgement of Protestants that there is a Tropicall and unproper sense in the Pronoune THIS WEe reason first Hypothetically If the Pronoune This demonstrate Bread then the words of Christ are necessarily to bee taken improperly and figuratively But the Pronoune This doth demonstrate Bread Our Conclusion will be Therefore the words of Christ necessarily are to be taken figuratively All this will be proved confirmed and avouched by Reasons Authorities and Confessions which will admit no Contradiction We begin at our proofe of the Consequence of the Proposition That it is impossible for Bread to be called the Body of Christ or Wine his Blood without a Figure SECT IV. THe common Dictate of naturall Reason imprinted by God in man's heart is a Maxime and hath in it an universall Verity which neither man nor Divell can gain-say and is Confessed by your selves viz. Disparatum de disparato non propriè praedicatur That is nothing can be properly and literally affirmed joyntly of another thing which is of a different nature viz. It is impossible to say properly that an Egge is a Stone or to take your owne d Disparatum de disparato non pâ—aedicatur valet igitur argumentum Si â—oc est lac non est terrum ita etiam valebit Si hoc est corpus non est panis cum repugnet uâ—am nâ—turam de altâ—râ diversâ dici ut hominem eise equum citra tropum vel Metaphoram Salm Ies Tom 9. Tract 16. §. Primum igitur p. 109. examples wee cannot call A man an horse without a Trope or figure because their natures are repugnant So Salmeron And this he holdeth necessary Or thus e Ne ipse quidem Deus qui est summa veritas unquam efficiet ut hae propositiones uxor Lot est Sal aqua est vinum asinus est homo in sensu composito sint verae Archiep Caesar defens fid de Real Praes cap 58. God who is perfect Truth will never make those Propositions to bee true at the same time viz that the Wife of Lot is Salt or Water is Wine or an Asse a man So your Archbishop Yea to come nearer to the point f Observandum cum dicitur vinum est sanguis docetur esse sanguinem per similitudinem reipsâ autem propriè est vinum Et cum dicitur sanguis est vinum intelligitur vinum eâ—se pâ—r similitudinem nec enim reipsâ aut propriè esse potest aut vinum sanguis aut sanguis vinum cum res sunt ipsae diversae inter se termini ut vocant disparati Beld. 2. de Euch. c. 9. §. Observand Wee cannot say that this wine is blood or that this blood is wine but by a Similitude or Representation because they differ in nature So Bellarmine adding furthermore that it is g Non potest fieri ut vera sit Propositio in qua subjectum supponitur pro pane praedicatum pro
Counterfeiting of the Seale of Christ II. By making this Sacrifice in her pretence Christian but indeed c Booke 6. Cha. 5. Sect. 1. Earthly and Iewish III. By dignifying it with a Divine property of d Ibid. Chap. 10. Meritorious and Satisfactorie Propitiation IV. By professing another properly Satisfactory and c Ibid. and after c. Propitiatory Sacrifice for Remission of Sins besides that which Christ offered upon the Crosse As if after one hath paid the Debts of many at once upon condition that such of those Debters should be discharged whosoever submissively acknowledging those Debts to be due should also professe the favour of their Redeemer It cannot but be extreme folly for any to thinke that the money once paid should be tendred and offered againe as often as One or Other of the Debters should make such an acknowledgment the Surety having once sufficiently satisfied for all So Christ having once for all satisfied the justice of God by the price of his Blood in the behalfe of all penitent Sinners who in Contrition of heart and a living Faith apprehend the Truth of that his Redemption it cannot but be both injurious to the justice of God and to the merit of Christ that the same satisfactory Sacrifice as it were a new payment ought againe by way of Satisfaction be personally performed and tendred unto God V. By detracting from the absolute Function of Christ his f B. â—â— Chap. 3. Sect. 7. Priesthood now eminent and permanent before God in Heaven and thereupon stupifying the mindes of Communicants and as it were pinioning their thoughts by teaching them so to gaze and meditate on the matter in the hands of the Priest that they cannot as becometh Spirituall Eagles soare aloft and contemplate upon the Body of Christ where it 's infallible Residence is in that his heavenly Kingdome VI. By transforming as much as they can the Sacrament ordained for Christians to eat with their owne mouthes into a g Ibid. Theatricall Sacrifice wherein to be fed with the mouth of the Priest VII By abasing the true value of Christ his Blood infinitely exceeding all valuation in making it but h Ibid. Chap. 10. Sect. 4. finite whereas Christ being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God and Man in one person every propitiatory worke of his must needs be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore of a infinite price and power VIII By denying the Effect of his * Ibid. Chap. 11. Propitiation for sinne to be plenary in the Application thereof IX There hath beene noted by the way the Portion appropriated to the Priest out of your Sacrifice and to be applyed to some particular Soule for money being an Invention as hath beene confessed void of all i Ibid. Chap. 11. Sect. 4. Warrant either by Scripture or by Ancient Tradition To say nothing of your fine Art of cheating mens Soules by Priestly Fraud whereof as also of the Rest wee have discoursed at k Booke 6. thorowout large A New Instance for proofe of Romish Sacrilegiousnesse in the Prayer set downe in the Liturgie of their Masse SECT III. IN your Missall after Consecration it is prayed thus a Missal Rom. Offerimus Majestati tuae Domine immaculatam Hostiam sanctum panem vitae aeternae Calicem salutis perpetuae supra quae propitio vultu respicere digneris sicut dignatus es munera justi pueri tui Abel And in the next place Iube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli in sublime Altare tuum coeleste Wee offer unto thy Majestie O Lord this immaculate Host this holy Bread of eternall life this Cup of everlasting salvation upon which vouchsafe to looke with a propitious and favourable Countenance as thou didst accept the gifts of thy holy servant Abel and command these to be carried up into thy celestiall Altar c. So the Canon of your Masse Some Protestants in their zeale to the glory of Christ impute unto you hereupon a Sacrilegious Profanenesse whilest you beleeving That Host and That Cup to be the very Body and Blood of Christ and a Propitiatory Sacrifice in it selfe yet do so pray God to be propitious unto it and to accept it as hee did the Sacrifice of Abel yeelding thereby no more estimation to Christ than to a vile sheepe which was offered by Abel At the hearing of this your Cardinall See the b Bellarm. lib. 2. de Missa cap. 24. Facilis est responsio Non petimus pro Christi reconciliatione apud Patrem sed pro nostra infirmitate etsi enim oblatio consecrata ex parte rei quae offertur ex parte Christi principalis offerentis semper Deo placebat tamen ex parte Ministri populi astantis qui simul etiam offerunt fieri potest ut non place at Paulò post Comparatio non est inter Sacrificium nostrum Sacrificium Abelis sed tantùm ratione fidei devotionis offerentium ut nimirùm tantâ fide offerant quantâ Abel quod Sacrificium Abelis non haberet in se quod Deo placere eumque placare possit quaâ—e dicitur Heb. 11. per fidem obtulit Abel Deo Sacrificium melius Ratio Gen 4. Respexit Deus ad Abel Sacrificium post §. Porrò Deferii Sacrificium per manus Angeli nihil aliud est quà m intercessione Angeli commendari Deo nostrum obsequium cultum So also Suarez Tom. 3. Disp 83. Art 4. Iube haec id est Vota nostra Et Salmeron Ies Tom. 9. Tract 32. sub finem Margin 1. Prefaceth 2. Answereth 3. Illustrateth 4. Reasoneth First of his Preface The Answer saith hee is easie As if that Objection which seemeth to us a huge logg in your way were so little an obstacle that any might skip over it But have you never seene men in trusting too much to their nimblenesse to over-reach themselves in their leape stumble fall and breake their limbes Semblably hee in his Answer which is the second point The meaning of our Church saith hee is not to pray for Christs reconciliation who was alwayes well pleasing to God but in respect of the infirmity of the Priest and people that the offering may be accepted from them So hee But whatsoever the meaning of the Priest in his praying is sure wee are this cannot be the meaning of the Prayer for the matter prayed for is set downe to be Holy Bread of life and Cup of Salvation which you interpret to be Substantially the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament and the tenour of prayer expressely is Vpon which Lord looke propitiously wee say upon which not upon whom which point is confirmed in that which followeth Thirdly therefore hee illustrateth The Comparison saith hee is not absolutely betweene the Sacrifice of Abel and of Christ but in respect of the faitb and devotion of the Priest and people that they with like faith may offer as Abel did But this piece of Answer is
that which is called in Musicke Discantas contra punctum for the prayer is directly Looke downe propitiously upon these as thou didst upon the gifts of Abel The Comparison then is distinctly betweene the Gifts and not betweene the Givers Yea but not absolutely so meant saith hee be it so yet if it be so meant but in part that Christ who is Propitiation it selfe shall be prayed for to be propitiously and favourably looked upon by God the prayer is Sacrilegious in an high degree Fourthly his Reason It is knowne saith hee that the Sacrifices of Sheepe and Oxen had nothing in themselves whereby to pacifie or please God the Scripture saying that Abel offered a better Sacrifice than Cain And againe God had respect to Abel and to his Gifts So hee Which is the very Reason that perswadeth Protestants to call that your Prayer most Sacrilegious because whereas the Gifts of Abel were but Sheepe c. you notwithstanding compare them with the offering up of Christ saying As thou didst the Gifts of Abel For although it be true that the Gift of Abel was accepted for the Faith of the Giver and not the Giver for his Gift yet if you shall apply this to the point in Question then your Gift in your Opinion being Christ and your Givers but simply men whom you have called Priest and People it must follow that Christ is accepted for the Faith of the Priest and People and not the Priest and People for Christ which maketh your Prayer farre more abominably Sacrilegious And not much lesse is that which followeth praying God to command his Angel to carry if the Gift be Hee Christ into heaven contrary to the Article of our Catholike Faith which teacheth us to believe his perpetuall Residence in heaven at the right hand of the Father Hee answereth c Bellarm. sup And so Doctor Heskins out of Hugo de sancto victore in his Parliament of Christ Booke 3. Chap. 395. It is not meant that God would command his Angel to carry Christ's Body but our prayers and desires by the intercession of the Angel unto God for us So hee Which is as truly a false Glosse as the former for in the Tenour of your Masse the Subject of your prayer is Holy Bread of life and Cup of salvation The prayer is plainly thus Vpon which O Lord looke propitiously and immediately after Command These to be carried by thy Angel Marke These viz. That Bread of life and Cup of salvation even that which you call The Body and Blood of Christ as Corporally Present which maketh your prayer to be Sacrilegious still and your Expositors that wee may so say miserably Radiculous That the former Romish Prayer as it was Ancient doth in the then true meaning thereof condemne the now Romish Church of the former Sacrilegious Innovation SECT IV. FOr to thinke that it should be prayed that God would be propitious to Christ were an Execrable opinion even in the Iudgement of our Adversaries themselves who for avoydance thereof have obtruded an Exposition as farre differing from the Text as doth This from That or Christ from the Priest as you have heard But whither will hee now Your Cardinall telleth you that the words of your Romish Canon are ancient such as are found in the a Bellarm. l. 2. de Missa cap. 24. Super quae propitio c. habentur apud Ambrosium post consecrationem Lib 4. de Sacram. cap. 6. Rursus Bellar. ibid. Haec verba posita sunt post consecrationem apud Ambrosium lib. 4. de Sacram. cap. 6. in Liturgijs Iacobi Clementis Basilij Chrysostomi Missals of Saint Iames of Clement Pope of Rome of Basil of Chrysostome and of Ambrose You will hold it requisite that wee consult with these Liturgies set out by your selves for the better understanding of the Tenour of your Romish Masse The Principall Quaere will be whether Antiquity in her Liturgies by praying to God for a propitious Acceptation and admittance into his Celestiall Altar meant as your Cardinall answered Propitiousnesse towards Priest and People in respect of their Faith and devotion and not towards the Things offered distinctly in themselves In the pretended Liturgie of b Liturgia Iacobi antè Conjecrationem Diaconus Oremus pro sanctificatis tremendis donis ut Dominus acceptis eis in super-coeleste spirituale Altare suum in odorem suavitatis mittat nobis divinam gratiam Tum Sacerdos Deus ac Pater Domini Dei Servatoris qui tibi oblata munera frugum oblationes accepisti in odorem suavitatis sanctifica animas nostras Post Sacerdos censecrans verba Consecrationis adhibet Sancte qui in sanctis requiescis suscipe hymnum incorruptum in sanctis incruentis Sacrificijs tuis Saint Iames before Consecration the prayer to God is To accept the Gifts unto his celestiall Altar even the Gifts which hee called The fruits of the earth And then after for the Parties aswell Priest as People To sanctifie their soules In the Liturgie of c Liturgia Bafilij ante Consecrationem Pontifex Suscipe nos ut simus digni offerre rationabile illud absque sanguine Sacrificium vide super servitutem nostram ut suscepisti munera Abel sic ex manibus nostris suscipe ista ex benignitate tuâ Et rursus Diac. Pro oblatis sanctificatis honorificentissimis muneribus Deum postulemus ut qui accepit ea in sancto supercoelesti Altari suo in odorem suavitatis emittat gratiam spiritum nobis c. Post sequitur Consecratio Pontifex Respice Domine Iesu Et post Consecrationem Gratias agimus Basil before Consecration it is prayed to God that hee Receiving the Gifts into his celestiall Altar would also concerning the Parties send his Grace and Spirit upon them And no lesse plainly Pope d Clement Constitut lib. 8. cap. 16. called Constitutio Iacobi apud Binium Tu qui Abelis Sacrificium suscepisti And after Pro omnibus tibi gloria c. cap. 17. Benignè aspicere digneris super haec dona proposita in conspectu tuo complaceas tibi in eis in honorem Christi mittas spiritum super hoc Sacrificium testem passionum ejus ut ostendas hunc panem corpus ejus c. Post Consecrationem cap. 19. Etiam rogemus Deum per Christum suum pro munere oblato Domino ut Deus qui bonus est suscipiat illud per Mediatorem Christum in coeleste Altare suum in odorem suavitatis pro hâc Ecclesiâ c. Clemens teaching before Consecration to pray God who received the Gifts of Abel graciously to behold these Gifts propounded to the honour of his Son Christ expresly differencing this Sacrifice done in honour of Christ from Christ himselfe who is honoured thereby And after Consecration to Beseech God through Christ to accept the Gift offered to him and to take it into his Celestiall Altar where the prayer to God is not to
Sacerdos consecrans ex intentione Ecclesiae unâ vice possit conficere tot hostias quae sufficerent toti mundo si necessitas esset Ecclesiae Summa Angelica speaketh more largely concerning the bread namely if it were done conformably to the Intention of the Church two of your 1 âšœ 1 Vasquez qu. 74. Art 3. Disp 171. cap. 3. Veruntamen Sententia vera communis est Sacerdotem verè habere potestatem consecrandi quamcunque magnam quantitatem sine termino spectatâ solùm ipsà magnitudine secundùm rationem quantitatis Egidius Coninck les de Sacramentis Si mille ingentes panes integrum vas vini consecraret talis consecratio non est invalida qu. 74. Art 1. 2. âšœ Iesuits concerning both kindes CHALLENGE BVt Christopherus your own Archbishop of Caesarea in his Booke dedicated to Pope Sixtus Quintus and written professedly upon this Subject commeth in compassed about with a clowd of witnesses and Reasons to prove g Christoph de capite fontium Archiepisc Caesarien Tract var. ad Sixtum Quint. Pont. Paris 1586 Cap 1. Non solùm Thomas sed omnes ante Cajetan Theologi fatentur Christum cùm benedixit consecrasse Nec ullum verbum ut ait Alphons à Castro est apud Evangelistas quo Consecratio significetur praeter verbum Benedixit vel per verbum Gratias egit quod ibi pro eodem sumitur Cap. 5. Ad formam à Christo institutam observandum urget praeceptum imitationis nempè Hoc facite D. Iacobus in Missâ sua post recitationem verborum viz. Hoc est corpus meum accedit ad benedictionem quod est argumentum firmiss non credidisse cum in sola verborum illorum prolatione Consecrationem fieri Eodem modo Clemens in Missa suâ Dionys cap. 7. Hierarch dicit Preces esse effectrices Consecrationis Ergo non solùm verborum istorum prolatio Lindanus probat ex Iustino sine precibus Consecrationem nullam esse A malcharius praef in lib. de offic Apostolos solâ benedictione consecrare consuevisse Idem habet Rabanus Cap. 6. Certum est Graecos sustinere non istis verbis sed Sacerdotis benedictione seu precatione Consecrationem fieri Nullus ex antiquioribus Ecclesiae Doctoribus per sola quatuor verba Christi Consecrationem fieri dixit Irridet eos Scotus qui supernaturalem virtutem de novo creatam verbis istis inesse putant Scotum sequuntur Scholasticorum turba Landolfus Pelbertus Mart. Brotinus Nic. Dorbellis Pet. Tartaretus Catharinus Lindanus de Iustino aâ—t quòd negat Apostolos istis verbis usos ad consecrandam Eucharistam De Basilio asserit quod Priscos Patres dicit non fuisse contentos solis istis verbis Greg. l. 7. Ep. 63. Morem fuisse Apostolis ad solam Dominicam orationem oblationem consecrare Hier. in Sophon 3. Solennem orationem Sacerdotis precantis Eucharistiam facere D. Ambros Consecrationem incipere ait ex eo loco Canonis viz. Quam oblationem tu Deus Benedictam c. Vis scire inquit quibus verbis coelestibus consecratur accipe quae sint Fac nobis hanc oblationem c. Idem tenet Odo Camerac etiam Bern. Audi quid Sacerdos in consecratione corporis Christi dicat Rogamus inquit hanc oblationem benedictam fieri c. And lest that any should object that the Apostles did not observe in their narration the right order of Christs Acts He addeth Omnes nunc provoco Lectores ad Legendos Missales libros Liturg. Iacobi Clementis Basilij Chrysost Ecclesiae Latinae videbunt nisi sibi occulos eruere velint quà m constanter omnes uno ore asserant testentur Christum dando Eucharistiam Apostolis dixisse Hoc est corpus meum post verba Accipite manducate Hier. Epist ad Hebdid q. 2. Panem quem fregit Christus deditque Discipulis esse corpus Domini Salvatoris dicens Accipite comedite Hoc est corpus meum Haec ille Nota quod ait Christum dixisse ad Apostolos non ad panem Hoc est corpus Ergò non per ista verba panem consecravit Si mihi opponant authoritatem Pij Quinti in Catechis qui post Conc. Trid. factus est ego opponam illi non minoris authoritatis sanctitatis eruditionis autem nomine majoris Innocentij tettiâ— sententiam oppositum sententis Et dico librum illum Catechismi non definiendo sed magistraliter docendo factum esse Hactenus ex Archiep. Caesarien that the Consecration used by our Saviour was performed by that his Blessing by Prayer which preceded the pronouncing of those words HOC EST CORPVS MEVM This is my Body c. To this purpose hec is bold to averre that Thomas Aquinas and all Catholike before Cajetane have confessed that Christ did consecrate in that his BENEDIXIT that is Heâ—h essed it And that Saint Iames and Dionyse the Areopagitâ— did not Consecrate onely in the other words but by Prayer Then he assureth us that the Greeke Churches maintained that Consecration consisteth in Benediction by Prayer and not in the onely repetition of the words aforesaid After this hee produceth your subtilest Schooleman Scotus accompanied with divers others who Derided those that attributed such a supernaturall virtue to the other forme of words After steppeth in your Lindan who avoucheth Iustin one of the ancientest of Fathers as Denying that the Apostles consecrated the Eucharist in those words HOC EST c. and affirming that Consecration could not be without Prayer Be you but pleased to peruse the Marginals and you shall further find alleadged the Testimonies of Pope Gregory Hierome Ambrose Bernard and to ascend higher The Liturgies of Clement Basil Chrysostome and of the Romane Church it selfe in gain-saying of the Consecration by the onely words of Institution as you pretend And in the end hee draweth in two Popes one contradicting the other in this point and hath no other meanes to stint their jarre but whereas the authority of both is equall to thinke it just to yeeld rather to the better learned of them both Whosoever requireth more may be satisfied by reading of the Booke it selfe âšœ And yet wee would be loath to pretermit the confessed Testimonie of your Iesuite Gordon out of Saint Augustine attesting that in this Sacrament 2 Iac. Gordon Scotus lib. Contr. 6. cap. 2. num 6. Sacramentum hoc sit non per sumptionem sed per consecrationem quam alibi S. Aug. Tom. 3. lib 3. de Trin. cap. 4 vocat precem mysticam His wordes Illud quod ex fructibus terrae acceptum prece mysticâ consecratum ritè sumimus c. âšœ The fruit of the earth is consecrated by Mysticall Prayer âšœ It will not suffice to say That you also use Prayer in the Romish Liturgie for the question is not meerely of Praying but where in the forme of Benediction and Consecration more properly doth consist Now none can say that
he consecrateth by that Prayer which he beleeveth is not ordained for Consecration We may furthermore take hold by the way of the Testification of Mâ— h Traâ—tat of the Mâ—sse pag. 105. Brerely a Romish Priest who out of Basil and Chrysostome calling one part Calix benedictione sacratus alloweth Benediction to have beene the Consecration thereof All this Armie of Witnesses were no better then Meteors or imaginary figures of battailes in the aire if that the Answer of Bellarmine may goe for warrant to wit that the only Pronuntiation of these words Hoc est corpus meum imply in them as hee i Verbâ— haec Hoc est corpus meum pronunciata à Sacerdote cùm intentione con cerâ—ndi Sacramentum continent implicâ—è Invocationem Bellarm. lib 4 de Euch. c 1◠§. Qunt arg saith in Invocation or Prayer Which words as any man may perceive Christ spake not supplicatorily unto God but declaratively unto his Apostles accordingly as the Text speaketh He said unto them as is also well * See the former testimony letter g observed by your fore-said Arch-bishop of Caesarea out of Saint Hierome But none of you wee presume will dare to say that Christ did Invocate his Disciples âšœ This might Bellarmine have learned from Antiquity if he had not rather affected to have been a Doctor over all others than a Scholler to Primitive Fathers who teach that Christ reveiled not unto any his words of * See 〈…〉 B. 7. Ch. 3 at the letters i. k. Invocation by Prayer wherwith he consecrated which they would not have said if they had judged these words THIS IS MY BODY to imply in them an Invocation âšœ These words therfore are of Declaration and not of Invocation Which now Romish Doctrine of Consecrating by reciting these words This is my Body c. your Divines of Colen k Vehemens prorsus insania est quòd nunc arbitrantur se consecrare hoc Sacramentum sine prece quam Canonem appellamus absque invocatione super dona sed tantùm recitatione verborum c. Talis recitatio non est Consecratio Aliter profectò erat in Ecclesia orientali occidentali Hactenùs in Ecclesia doctuâ—â— fuit in prece quâ Sacerdos sic invocat Hanc Oblationem quaesumus Domine acceptabâ—le facere digneris c Antididag de Cath. Relig per Canon Eccles Coloniens Tractâ—t de Missa pag. 100. §. An sine prece have judged to bee a Fierce madnesse as being repugnant both to the Easterne and Westerne Churches But wee have heard divers Westerne Authors speake give leave to an Easterne Archbishop to deliver his mind l Quod autem ille sermo Domini sufficiat ad sanctificationem nullus neque Apostolus nec Doctor dixisse cernitur Nic. Cabosil Explicat Euch. cap 29. Latini obijciunt Chrysostomum dicentem Quemadmodùm opifex sermo dicens crescite multiplicamini semel à Deo dictus perpetuò operatur c. Resp An ergò post illud dictum Dei Crescite nullo adhuc opus habemus adjumento nullâ prece nullo matrimonio Ibid. No Apostle or Doctor is knowne to affirme saith he those sole words of Christ to have beene sufficient for Consecration So he three hundred yeares since satisfying also the Testimonie of Chrysostome objected to the contrary âšœ This Archbishop you 3 âšœ Possevin les Apparat. Tit. Nicolaus Cabassilas Archiepiscopus Thessalonicensis vir clarus fuit grant was Famous in his time living about the yeare 1300. to whom as you know the Bishop of Ephesus and the Patriarch of Constantinople did accord saying that 4 Suarez in 3. Thom. Disp 58. Sect. 3. Nicolaus Cabassilas Marcus Episcopus Ephesinus de Consecratione Hieremias Patriarcha Constantinopolitanus dicunt non consici hoc Sacramentum statim ac illa verba proferuntur sed post quasdam orationes Ecclesiae âšœ This Sacrament is not made assoone as these words are uttered but afterwards by certaine prayers of the Church And why these Greeke Fathers should not rather resolve us of the ancient Greeke tenor of Consecration than any of your late Italian or Latine Doctors who will make question As for your other Greeke Patriarch Bessarion who was made Cardinall by your Church on purpose that he might make some opposition unto his fellowes We make no other account of him than of an Hireling In briefe None of the great multitude of Fathers who have required the use of Prayer besides these words This is my body did thereby testifie that they held these to be words of Invocation âšœ As miserable and more intolerable is the Answer of Others who * See the Testimony before at the letter g towards the end said that the Evangelists have not observed the right order of Christ his actions as if he had first said This is my body by way of Consecration and after commanded them to Take and eat Which Answere your owne m Alij dixerunt Christum his verbis semel dictis consecrà sse sed Evangelistas non servâ le ordinem in reâ— gestae narratione Sed cùm omnes Evangelistae conveniunt in hoc ut dicant primùm Christum accepisse panem deindè benedixisse terriò fregisse tùm dedisse dicendo Hoc est corpus meum videntur non casu sed consilio Evangelistae rem marrâsse ut gesta est Maldâ—n les Disp de Euch. q. 7. p. 133. And among them that do invert the order is Alan lib. 1. de Euch. c. 15. p. 295. Alij docuerunt Châ—stum haec verba Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ c. his reperivisse quae sententia est falsa quia nullâ conjectuâ—à probari potest Id. ibid. Iesuite hath branded with the note of Falsity yea so false it is that as is further * See above lit g. avouched all ancient Liturgies aswell Greeke as Latine constantly held that in the order of the tenour of Christ his Institution it was first said Take yee before that he said This is my Body Lastly your other lurking-hole is as shamefull as the former where when the judgement of Antiquitie is objected against you requiring that Consecration be done directly by Prayer unto God n lustin Apol. 2. docet Oratione confici Eucharistiam Iren lib. 4. c. 5. Invocatione nominis Dei Cyril Hier. Catech. mystag 3. 4. Invocatione Spiritus Sancti Hieron Epistol ad Evag. Sacerdotum precibus August semper ferè piece mysticâ ut lib. 3. c. 4. de Trin. Sacramentum fieri asserit Respondetur Primò quòd veteres non curabant passim exactè declarate precisè quibus verbis conceptis consecraretur licet Ministris secretore institutione ea tradidisse constat Alan l. 1. de Euch. c. 17. p 310. To whom might bee added Cyprian de coena Domini Calix benedictione sacratus you answere that some Fathers did use such speeches in their Sermons to the people but in their secret instruction of Priests did teach otherwise