A Profitable Dialogue for a peruerted Papist OR A little Labour of a Lay man tending to the profit of a peruerted Papist namely by laying open vnto him his owne errour in beleeuing that the Church of Rome cannot erre Composed in Dialogue maner as it were betweene a simple Lay man and certayne graue Diuines and published onely for the benefit of the Lay Papist Written by R. M. Gent. and Student in Diuinity Brethren be not children in vnderstanding 1. Cor. 14. 20. If God be on our side who can be against vs Rom. 8. 31. Seeke and ye shall finde Math. 7. 7. LONDON Printed by Simon Stafford dwelling in the Cloth-fayre neere the signe of the red Lion 1609. The Contents of this Booke THis small Treatise is diuided into two parts 1 THe first part contaynes certayne proofs froÌ„ Antiquity that it is onely the society of the faithfull the holy Catholike Church that can not finally erre and that the visible Church of Rome or where else soeuer may erre And therefore not lawfull for any one Bishop on earth to be admitted vniuersall Bishop or supreme head of the vniuersall Church 2 THe second part confirmes the former proofes by manifest proofes also from Antiquity that the visible Church of Rome doth erre in a principall poynt of Christian doctrine as namely touching the Sacrament of the blessed Body and Blood of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ The Authour to the learned Reader GOod Reader my selfe being a Lay man and altogether vnskilfull in Artes I am therefore to entreat of thee being a scholer that thou wilt not so much regard the maner and forme of this my weake worke as the matter and substance it selfe which is no other thing in effect but certaine manifest proofes from Antiquity that the Church of Rome doth erre proued by such ancient witnesses as the Papists themselues allow for lawfull and so forcible are those witnesses against those Romish aduersaries that if hereafter any of them shall go about to reply against this Treatise ensuing they shall but thereby the more lay open their owne follies and shame in striuing against the inuincible streame for great is the Trueth and it will preuayle yea what can more confound the learned aduersary or as S. Paul sayth * Tit. â— 10. 11. condemne him to erre in his owne iudgement then to find himselfe altogether vnable without absurd cauelling and vndirect dealing to resist the weakenesse of a simple Lay man fighting in Trueths behalfe for notwithstanding my Sixe demaunds to the learned Papists be the simplest booke that euer hitherto hath bene brought foorth against them yet are they not able to reply directly against it without absurdity WhereupoÌ„ I doubt they will seeme to skorne to vouchsafe it an answere But here by the way I acknowledge and that sincerely that it is vnmeete for any Lay man although neuer so great a scholer to take to himselfe the office of ministery in the Church or to clime vp to the Pulpit before he be lawfully called to that holy and reuerend function But for Lay men decently to instruct and admonish one another it is no nouelty but a thing allowable in the Church many yeeres since as witnesseth S. Hierome who sayth playnely * Vpon the Epâ—stle to the Colo. Chap. 3. that the Apostle Paul doth teach that Lay men ought to haue the Scriptures abundantly and to instruct and admonish one another c. But if it be tolerable for Lay men to admonish one another it followes then because all are not scholers that some of them may be also tolerated to write simply and playnely and according to that maner of speach which the common vulgar sort do vsually speake who neuer speake more eloquently then when they speake trueth sincerely and playnely and then they thinke they speake very well if they be vnderstood very well But perhaps some learned Aduersary will obiect according to his vsuall maner against these proofes which I haue here cited from some of the ancient Fathers liuing in the Church aboue a thousand yeeres since that they haue bene brought forth already by diuers learned men long since answered by learned men also therfore in vaine for me being a Lay man vnlearned to cite them againe thinking that I haue but gathered them here and there out of other mens workes where they haue bene collected before and for that cause likewise from me the lesse to be regarded These things being obiected I answere True it is that the same proofes haue long since bene brought forth against the Aduersaries by theÌ„ also answered but how well or how ill they haue bin answered let that be tryed by those Christians which are of souÌ„d iudgement for this I daâ—e auouch that a lawfull witnesse being brought against any maÌ„ it is no lesse then an absurd answer in that man whosoeuer to reply that the same witnesse in speaking of one thing doth thereby meane another But into the same strayte are all Heretiks brought by resisting the apparaÌ„t truth And this is a principall marke to be aymed at in this our corrupt age in which there is so much dissension and controuersie among professed Christians For if our aduersaries might be permitted to answere so absurdly and to passe from one poynt to another before some one poynt onely be throughly decided all the labour wee take to cleanse them from their infectious spots of errour would proue but labour in vayne but God be thanked the faithfull know well how to preuent the silly shiftes of Heretikes and so with little labour eyther to conuert them or confound them for commonly the Heretike may be condemned by his owne mouth his doctrine contradicting some trueth in Scripture which himselfe professeth to beleeue for where traditions and customes of men are regarded before holy Scripture there ignorance doth soone beget errour especially if diuers things called by one name be not so perfectly distinguished but that the one may be taken for the other But let the ignorant learne first touching faith A true faith which worketh by loue is one thing and a verball or vaine faith another Secondly touching iustification A iustification before God is one thing and a iustification before men another for God iustifieth according to the inward heart by the good tree true faith but man iustifieth according to the outward declaration by the fruits proceeding froÌ„ that tree * Luke 6. 43. good workes S. Paul treating of the first iustification denyes not the second for he sayth If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God c. γ Rom. 4. S. Iames treating of the second denyes not the first for he graunts Abraham beleeuing God it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse c γ Iames. 2. Thirdly touching the Church The society of the faithfull which liue by true faith and therefore hell gates not possible to preuayle against them is one thing and a
and in his 96 Treatis By this occasion of the Euangelicall sentence where our Lord sayth I haue yet many things to say to you c. all the most foolish heretickes that would be called Christians go about to colour the boldnesse of their owne inuentions c. But who dares to auouch that such and such are those things which Christ had to say to his Disciples and if they do auouch it how do they proue it c Lay. To this thou hast answered very playne for by this thy playne speach we well perceyue thy meaning in an other place u Against the Epistle of Fundament Chap. 5. where thou sayest that Thou shouldest not haue beleeued the Gospell vnlesse the Authority of the Church had moued thee thereunto c. Wée also in these our dayes may iustly auouch the same thing because first the authority of the Church is the meanes for the most part to moue the outward man both to know and beléeue and also to reuerence the holy Scriptures But tell vs yet reuerend Father is that authority still absolutely to be obeyed albeit it teach vncertayne things which the Scripture doth not allow or may we then lawfully forsake it although by the same meanes we first beléeued Aug. My sonne x Against the same Epistle Chap 14. What haue we to do but to forsake them that inuite vs to know things certayne and afterwards commaund vs to beleeue things vncertayne and to follow them which inuite vs first to beleeue that which we are not yet able to behold that being made stronger by faith it selfe we may attayne to vnderstand that which we beleeue now not men but GOD himselfe confirming and lightening our mindes inwardly c. None can be ignorant y In his â— Booke of Baptisme against the â—onatisâ—s Chap. â— that the holy Canonicall Scripture as well of the old as of the new Testament is contayned within her certayne limits and that it is so preferred before all later writings of Bishops that whatsoeuer is certaine to be written in it can not in any wise be doubted or disputed whether it be true or right ☞ But the writings of Bishops which haue By this distinction betweene the certayney of holy Scripture and the vncertaynty of all other writings he proues by good consequence that the visible Church may erre bene written or which are now written after the Canon is confirmed may be lawfully reprehended both by a more wise speach of some man which perhaps is more skilfull in that matter and also by a more graue authority and more learned prudence of other Bishops and by Councels if perhaps any thing in them haue strayed from the trueth And euen Councels themselues which are gathered in any Region or Prouince must without all doubt giue place to the authority of generall Councels which are gathered out of the vniuersall Christian world And oftentimes the former generall Councels themselues may be corrected by the later when in any try all of matters that is opened which was shut and that knowne which was hidden z Nothing is hid from the holy Ghost therfore the holy Ghost is not assistant to those general Councels which may be corrected without any swelling of sacrilegious pride without any stiffe-necke of puffing arrogancy without any contention of cankred enuy with holy humility with Catholike peace with Christian charity c. But for this matter I haue written at large in my booke of the vnity of the Church Lay. Vndoubtedly these things from thée are most effectuall to proue the Church of Rome to erre in affirming that she cannot erre But yet for more confirmation thereof we pray thée to deliuer vnto vs thy iudgement also touching a principall matter of the Christian faith now in controuersy betwéene vs to wit concerning the presence of Christ in the blessed Sacrament of his Body and Blood But before we procéede in that matter we will craue a few words from Gregory the great sometime Bishop of Rome touching the vniuersall supremacy of the Pope of Rome for we take his vniuersall authority to be the onely cause that Romes errours haue bene so much scattered and dispersed abroad into euery Christian nation And because they hold now in Rome that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre we thinke the best proofe against them therein is to bring the Bishop of Rome against the Bishop of Rome Speake diuine Gregory what sayest thou to him that is called by the name of Vniuersall Bishop Gregory My sonne If any one in the Church snatch to himselfe that name a In his Register the 4. Booke Epistle 32. then by the iudgement of all good men when he falls which is called Vniuersall the vniuersall Church falleth froÌ„ her state which God forbid But farre be that name of Blasphemy from Christian hearts by which the honour of al Priests is taken away while it is foolishly arrogated by one to himselfe c. b In his 6. Booke and 〈◊〉 Epistle I speake it boldly whosoeuer cals himselfe vniuersall Priest or desires to be so called by the same pride of his he forerunneth Antichrist for by pride hee preferreth himselfe before others and by the same pride he is led into errour c. Lay. Verily hadst not thou thy selfe bene Bishop of Rome the Church of Rome could hardly brooke these words of thine for here thou doest not onely call this name A name of Blasphemy but contrary to their opinion touching the immutable doctrine of the visible Church thou doest also affirme that by the iudgement of all good men when he which is called Vniuersall falls into errour then the vniuersall Church falls from her state also But yet thou séemest here to speake somewhat doubtfull in discommending him onely that doeth arrogate to himselfe this vniuersall authority It may be that thou doost allow the Bishop of Rome to consent vnto it and so to take it being offered by others Gregory My sonne c In his 4. Booke and 36. Epistle This name of Vniuersal was by the Calcedon Councell offered to one Bishop of the Apostolike seat in which I serue God disposing but none of my predecessours consented at any time to vse this so prophane a name Lay. Why would they not consent to it Greg. Truely because if one be called d In his 39. Epistle the vniuersal Patriark the name of Patriarks is taken froÌ„ the rest But away with that c. To consent to that wicked name is nothing else but to destroy faith c. e In his â— Booke and 69. Epistle One to be Vniuersal Bishop is to the iniury renting of the whole Church and as we haue sayd to the contempt of all Bishops for if one be vniuersal as he thinketh it remayneth that the rest are not Bishops c. Lay. But if the Church of Rome permit this matter to be lawfull which thou doost so much gainesay doth any euill then come thereby Our Lord
prayed for the faith of S. Peter and so consequently for the faith of all his sucessours according to the opinion of the aduersary * In their Rhemish notes vpon the 28 of S. Luke verse 31. that it should neuer fayle But if any Bishop of Rome may proue a false Christian and liue so lewdly that he may dye a Reprobate then vndoubtedly euery Bishop of Rome is not the true successour of S. Peter vnlesse a true faith may contradict in maners the things which it professeth in words for it was a true faith in S. Peter which our Lord prayed for to continue in his Church and not a vaine fayth And if it be true that the Bishop of Rome may erre as he is man but not possible as he is Pope that is to say although in person he may erre in his priuate doctrine and maners yet not possible to erre iudicially or definitiuely then could it not be preiudiciall to the Church although Antichrist himselfe were Bishop of Rome * See S. Chrisost vpon the â— to the Thâ—ssa and S. Barnaâ—d in hâ—s 123. Epistle and Vniuersall Bishop But according to diuine reason this séemes not agréeable to trueth Gregory My sonne If this be permitted to be lawfully spoken f In his 4. Booke and 36. Epistle the honor of all Patriarchies is denied and perhaps when he peâ—isheth in errour which is called vniuersâ—ll then no Bishop is found to haue remayned in the state of trueth c. I say therefore the vniuersall Church g In his 6. Booke and Epiâ—tle 24. falleth to ruine if one Vniuersall fall But farre be this vanity and foolishnessâ— from my eares c. * A true faith doth not contradict in maners the things which it professeth in words * for which Hom. 29 in Euâ—ng Tit. 1. cause it was sayd of certayn false ChristiaÌ„s by S. Paul * that they confessed God in words but denied him in deeds by S. Iohn * that whosoeuer sayth he knoweth â— Iohn 2. God and keepeth not his coÌ„maundements is a Lyar Which being so we must examine the trueth of our faith by consideration of our life for then not otherwise are we true Christians if we fulfill in works that whereof we haue made promise in words c. Lay. Would to God thy successours had bene of the same mind herein as thou and thy predecessours were for then the Church vniuersally could neuer haue bene so much diuided as it hath bene for most true it is according to thy speach that within lesse time then this 200. yéeres past hardly was there a Bishop to be fouÌ„d remayning in that sincere and pure doctrine taught in the Primitiue Church but being reuolted and departed from that sound doctrine they all from the highest to the lowest taught lyes in hypocrisie euen as Saint Paul prophested of them forbidding to marry h 1. Tim. 4 1 2 3. and commaunding to abstayne from meates lawfully to be eaten with other such like errours and deceyueable doctrines But the principall cause of such vniuersall euils thou hast playnely declared to procéede from the pride of him called vniuersall Bishop which man wée take to be no better then Antichrist himselfe for according to S. Paul i 2. Thesse 2. 4. he sits hypocritically in the Temple of God in word The seruant of seruants but in déede extolling himselfe aboue all power on earth for by vsurped authority he séekes not onely to be supreme head ouer all Bishops but ouer all Chrâ—stian Kings also which loftynesse was neyâ—her in thée nor in thy predecessours and that thou doost make most manifest not onely by these playne speaches here vttered but elsewhere also k In hiâ— 38. Epistle Chap. 82. with which we restfully satisfied herein And so we will conclude this first part with a few words taken froÌ„ our late Minister but now an Aposâ—ata Theophilus Higgons * Written since hiâ— reâ—oâ—t in his first Motiue Page 64. because they coÌ„taine a truth touching this poynt contrary to himself as thus It was a tyranny in Mezentius sayth he to bynd liuing men vnto dead carkeyses But the wisdome of God doth assure me and me also that he will not tye the lyuing body of his Church vnto the dead and putrified members thereof The end of the first part The second part treating of the Sacrament of the Blessed Body and Blood of our LORD and Sauiour Iesus Christ NOw diuine Augustine let vs go forward in that principall poynt touching the holy Sacrament let vs certaynely know thy mind whether Christ be there after a spirituall maner onely for the faithfull to eate and drinke or after a corporal and carnall maner as foode both for the worthy and vnworthy receyuer We find in holy Scripture that our Sauiour called l Iohn 6. 35. and 10. 7. and 15. 1. himselfe Bread called himselfe a Doore called himselfe a Vine These things in a spiritual sence we know to be truely and properly spoken yet according to the letter we take them figuratiuely to be spoken But wée would gladly vnderstand from thée what our Sauiour meant when he called Bread his body m Mat. 26. 26. and also what he meant when he sayd Exceptye eate n Iohn 〈…〉 the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye haue no life in you c. Whether these speaches according to the letter were figuratiue or proper Aug. My sonne Our Lord doubted not to say This is my body o Against Adamantus Chap. 12 when he gaue the signe of his Body c. p Vpon the 3. Psal Christ admitted Iudas to that Banket in which he did deliuer to his disciples the figure of his Body c. Note this also If it be a speach of commaundement eyther forbidding a mischieuous deed or a hainous fact q In his â— Booke of Christian doctrine Chap. 16. or commaunding a profitable thing or a good deed it is not figuratiue But if it seeme to coÌ„maund a wicked deed and a naughty fact or to forbid a profitable thing or a good deed it is figuratiue Vnlesse ye shall eate sayth he the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall not haue life in you c. He doth seeme to commaund a hainous or wicked deed It is a figure therefore commaunding vs to communicate with the passion of our Lord and sweetely and profitably to lay vp in memory that his flesh was crucifyed and wounded for vs c. r Vpon the 98. Psalm The words which I haue spoken vnto you sayth Christ is spirit and life s Iohn 6. 63. Vnderstand spiritually that which I haue spoken vnto you Ye shall not eate this Body which ye see neyther shall ye drinke that blood which they shall sheade that crucify me I haue commended vnto you a certayne Sacrament which being spiritually vnderstood shall giue you life c. t â—n his 2â— â—reatiâ— vpon
S. Iohn He himselfe doth expound how that may be done which he spake of what it is to eate his Body and drinke his blood He which eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood sayth he dwelleth in me u Iohn 6. 56. Iâ—n him This it is then to eate that meate and drinke that blood to dwell in Christ and to haue Christ dwelling in him And by this he that dwelleth not in Christ and in whom Christ doth not dwell without doubt hee neither eates his flesh nor drinkes his blood spiritually although carnally and visibly hee presse with his teeth the Sacrament of his body and blood but rather hee doth eate and drinke the Sacrament of so great a thing to his owne Iudgement because hee presumes to come vncleane to the Sacraments of Christ which no man receyues worthily but hee which is cleane of whom it is sayd x Mat. â— 8. Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God c. Lay. Then it séemes by thée contrary to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that the presence of Christ in the Sacrament is in such a spirituall maner that although the wicked may eate and drinke the same Sacrament vnworthily according to S. Paul y 1. Cor. 11. 27. yet they cannot by any meanes eate and drinke Christ himselfe the matter and substance thereof Whereby thou doost declare this thing to be an vnspeakeable mystery onely for the faithfull to vnderstand for it séemes here also by thée that none can receiue the Body of Christ but onely the liuely members of Christ that dwell in him so that as they dwell in Christ Christ dwelleth in them but this is not according to Transsubstantiation Therefore to satisfie our weake brethren speake yet more playne if thou canst reuerend Father and tell vs by some familiar example whether any can haue true life not eating and drinking that holy substance and also whether there bée any cause or spiritual sicknesse in man eating and drinking the Body and Blood of Christ to exclude him from that eternall life Aug. My sonne r In his â—6 Treatis vpon S. Iohn He hath not that life which doth not eate that Bread and drinke that Blood Indeed men may haue a temporall life without that but not at all the eternall He therefore which doth not eate his flesh nor drinke his blood hath not life in himselfe and he which eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood hath life He answereth to both because he sayd eternall It is not so in that meate which we receyue for the sustayning of this temporall life for he which shal not receyue it shall not liue yet for all that he shall not liue alwayes which doth receyue it for it may come to passe that many which haue taken that meate may dye by old age or by a disease or by some other cause But in this meate and drinke that is to say the Body and Blood of our Lord it is not so for both he which doth not receiue it hath not life and he which doth receyue it hath life and this likewise eternall Therefore he would haue this bread and drinke to be vnderstood the society of the body and his members a Iohn 14. 20. and 17. 21 22 23. which is the holy Church his Saints and faythfull c. The Sacrament of this thing that is to say of the vnity of the Body Blood of Christ is prepared on the Lords Table in some place dayly in some place at certayne times and is receyued from the Lords Table vnto some to life vnto some to destruction But the thing it selfe to which the Sacrament doth belong is to euery man to life to no man to destruction whosoeuer shall be partaker of it c. Lay. Here thou art most playne indéed that the wicked cannot eate and drinke Christ Iesus the Bread of life And by this also we finde that thou doost acknowledge according to S. Paul b 1. Cor. 10. 3 4 that the faithful Iewes did eate and drinke the same spirituall substance which we do but in their SacrameÌ„ts Christ to come in ours Christ is come the same spirituall vertue in both otherwise as thou doost affirme they could not haue entred into eternall life Aug. True my sonne c In his Booke of the profit of repentance Chap. 1. Whosoeuer in Manna vnderstood Christ did eate the same spirituall food which we do c. To the beleeuer it was neyther this nor that meate and drinke which belongs to the hungry and thirsty but to the beleeuer the same which is now for then Christ to come now Christ is come to come and is come are diuers words yet the same Christ c. Lay. What other difference is there betwéene their Sacramenâ—s and ours besides Christ to come and Christ is come Aug. d In his 26. Tâ—eatis vpon S. Iohn In signes they are diuers but in the thing signifyed they are alike c. They did all drinke the same spirituall drinke but in the visible appearance they one thing we another but the same in spirituall vertue which that signifyed c. Hold firmely my sonne and make no doubt thereof e In his Booke to Peter the Deacon Chap. 18. 19. the same onely begotten Sonne the word made flesh to haue offered himselfe for vs a sweete smelling sauour to God f Ephe. 5. 2 A sacrifice and Hoste to whom with the Father and the holy Ghost beasts were sacrificed in the time of the old Testament by the Patriarks Prophets Priests and to whom now that is in the time of the new Testament with the Father and the holy Ghost with whom he is equall in diuinity the holy Catholike Church through the vniuersall world ceaseth not in fayth and loue to offer the sacrifice of Bread and wyne for in those carnall oblations there was a figuration of the flesh of Christ which for our sinnes he without sinne was to offer and of the Blood which he was to sheade for the remission of our sinnes But in this sacrifice there is a thankes-giuing and also a remembrance of the flesh of Christ which he did offer for vs and of the blood which the same God did shead for vs c. g In his 20 Booke against 〈◊〉 Chap. 2â— Before the comming of Christ the flesh and blood of this Sacrifice was promised by oblations of similitudes in the Passion of Christ it was deliuered in the trueth it selfe After the Ascension of Christ it is celebrated by a Sacrament of remembrance c. Lay. We note here from thée one thing well worth the nothing against our aduersaries that is if Christ be really contayned in the Sacrifice of their Masse then Christ the second person in Trinity is offered to himselfe the second person in Trinity But we assure our selues that it cannot stand with thy grauity to allow of such absurdity Thou doost here call this 〈◊〉 The sacrifice of Bread
Wine as it is indéed for we find in holy Scripture that the heauen must receyue or contayne Christ vntill his second comming h Acts. â— 21. and therefore we hold him not to be in diuers places at one time as in heauen aboue and in the bread and wine beneath but as thou hast fully resolued vs that the reprobate can neyther eate nor drinke Christ and also that the faithfull Iewes did both eate and drinke the same spirituall foode which we do euen Christ himselfe the spirituall Rocke that followed them i 1. Cor. 10. 4. so we pray thée to resolue vs also if Christ as he is man may be in diuers places at once if not then how we may hold him here on earth he being onely in heauen Aug. My sonne k In his 30 Treatis vp on S Iohn Christ being absent is also present vnlesse he were present we could not hold him but because it is true which he sayd l Math. 28. 20. Behold I am with you to the end of the world both he went away and is here also he returned and did not forsake vs. Lay. But how did he both go away and also remayne Is he present here both according to his Maiesty as he is God and also according to that substance which he tooke of the blessed Virgin his mother did not he carry his Body into heauen and there sits at the right hand of God Aug. He carried his Body into heauen but he took not his Maiesty away from the world c. The poore ye shall alwayes haue with you sayth he m Iohn 1â— 8. but me ye shall not haue alwayes c. He spake of the presence of his Body for according to his Maiesty according to his prouidence according to his infallible and inuisible grace it is fulfilled which he sayd Behold I am with you to the worlds end But according to the flesh which the word did take according to that which was borne of the Virgin according to that which was apprehended by the Iewes which was nayled vpon the Tree and taken downe from the Crosse lapped in linnen clothes and put in the Sepulchre which was manifested in the resurrection Ye shall not haue me alwayes with you Why because according to the presence of his Body being coÌ„uersant with his Disciples fourty dayes in their sight he ascended into heauen and is not here for there he sits at the right hand of his Father and is here for the presence of his Maiesty did not depart After another sort according to the presence of his Maiesty we haue Christ alwayes according to the presence of his flesh it is truely sayd to his Disciples But me ye shall not haue alwayes for according to the presence of the flesh the Church had him but a few dayes but now she holds him by fayth c. Lay. Notwithstanding all this playne speach of thine yet some do absurdly affirme that thou doost here but deny a Visible presence onely and that thou doost great according to Transsubstantion a corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament after an inuisible maner how shall we from thée answere to that absurd cauelling Aug. My sonne His diuinity truely is alwayes with vs n In his 60 Sermon vpon S. Iohn but vnlesse he were absent corporally we should alwayes carnally see his body c. o In his 2. Sermon vpon the birth of our â—ord The Word being made flesh it is euident God and man two to be in one flesh sometime man speaketh to the Father sometime God sometime visible from his mother sometime inuisible from his Father c. Lay. But God is omnipotent and therefore by his omnipotent power he may as some thinke be both in heauen and also corporally inuisible in the Sacrament and occupy no place for he may say they take away spaces of places from Bodyes and yet the Bodyes may remayne still and so he himselfe both God and man to be both here and there at one time Aug. My sonne God is in such wise omnipotent p In his 284. sâ—ntence that he neuer pulls in sunder the institutions of his owne order c. q In his â—â— Booke against Faustus Chap. 1â— According to a corporall presence Christ could not be at one time both in the Sunne and Moone and vpon the Crosse c. r In his 57. 〈◊〉 to Daâ—danus We must take heede that we do not so build vp the diuinity of the man that we take away the trueth of the Body c. Take away the spaces of places from Bodyes and they are no where and because they be no where they are not at all Take away Bodyes from the qualities of Bodyes and there shall not be any place where they may be and therefore of necessity it must be that they haue no being c. If the substance of a body how little or great soeuer it be be vtterly taken away there shal be no place where his qualityes may be c. Lay. Thou hast now fully resolued vs in this last poynt touching Christ to be onely in heauen and it doth euidently appeare also by these few wordes from thée that the formes and accidents of Bread and wine cannot remayne without their substances as some do vainly imagine but that it is truely Bread which we sée in the blessed Sacrament euen as our eyes do declare vnto vs. Aug. Verily my sonne Å¿ In his Sermon to the children cited by Bede vpon the 1. and 10. to the Cor. That which ye see is Bread and the cup which also the eyes do declare vnto vs But as touching that which your fayth requireth to be instructed in the bread is the Body of Christ and the Cup is the blood Lay. But Christ being now in heauen onely as thou doost affirme how is that Bread his Body or the cup or that which is in the cup how is it his blood Aug. These things my sonne are therefore called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene another thing is vnderstood That which is seene hath a corporall forme That which is vnderstood hath a spirituall profit Therefore if thou wilt vnderstand the Body of Christ heare the Apostle saying t 1. Cor. 1â— 27. Ye are the body of Christ c. Lay. We do so diuine Augustine for this matter we both heare him and note him not in that place onely but in diuers other places also u Rom. 1â— 5. 1. Cor. 6 15. 10. 16 17. Ephe. 1. 22 23 â—nd â— 4. c. to 17. 5. 2â— c. to the end and therefore the faithfull cannot mistake thée herein thou agréeing so well with holy Scripture But wherefore doost thou write in some place that Christ did carry himselfe in his owne hands when he did deliuer to his disciples the Sacrament of his Body and Blood And againe though Iudas receyued it vnworthily yet thou sayest also that the same Sacrament was
to him likewise the Body and Blood of Christ Thou séemest thereby to contradict thy former speaches here vttered touching the same thing declare vnto vs therefore the cause why thou diddest write after that maner Aug. My sonne If Sacraments x In his 23. Epistle to Boniface had not some similitude oâ— likenesse of these things whereof they be Sacraments they should not be Sacraments at all and from this similitude most commonly they receyue the names also of the same things so that after a certayne maner the Sacrament of the Body of Christ is the Body of Christ The Sacrament of the Blood of Christ is the Blood of Christ c. And therefore as I sayd before * Pagâ— 18. at the letter â—o Our Lord doubted not to say This is my Body when he gaue the signe or Sacrament of his Body c. Lay. Undoubtedly thou hast layd open this matter also very playne for indéed after a certayne maner both Christ carryed himselfe in his owne hands and also Iudas did eate and drinke the Body and Blood of our Lord. But doost thou allow it lawfull for any man to follow the literall sence in a contrary respect that is with a carnall seruitude to take the signes for the things signified by them and so to reuerence the Sacrament as the thing it selfe Aug. My sonne The Lord himselfe y In his â— Booke of Christian doctrine Chap. 9. and the Apostolical discipline hath deliuered some few signes for many and the same most easie to be done and most reuerend to be vnderstood and most pure in obseruation as is the Sacrament of Baptisme and the Celebration of the Body Blood of our Lord which things euery one being instructed when he receyueth acknowledgeth to what they are referred that he reuerence them not with a carnall seruitude but rather with a spirituall liberty c. But as to follow the letter and to take the signes for the things which are signified by them comes of seruile infirmity so likewise to interpret the signes vnprofitable proceedes from the euill of wandring errour c. Lay. These last words of thine most reuerend Father are inuincible against the doctrine herein of our Romish aduersaryes for if hereafter they shall boast that thou doost agrée with their Transsubstantiation carnall aderation in the Masse we will then demaund of them what other thing it is to follow the letter to take the signes for the things signified and so to reuerence them with a carnall seruitude but the selfe-same carnall doctrine of Transsubstantiation And therefore we will now rest fully satisfied with these thy former speaches as being from thee a sufficient witnesse herein against them And the better to approue this thy doctrine to be the doctrine of the Church aboue a thousand yeeres since we will ioyne here with thee a witnesse or two more from Antiquity that by the mouth of two or three witnesses z 2. Cor. 13. 1. the Trueth may be confirmed Speake diuine Hierome what is thy true opinion touching this matter now in controuersie about the mystery or Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord. Speake briefly learned Father yet let it be so effectuall that thy words may playnely declare thy meaning Hierome My sonne a Vpon the 147. Psalm I thinke the Gospell the Body of Iesus c. And where he sayth He which shall not eate my flesh and drinke my blood c. b Iohn 6. 5â— although it may be vnderstood in the mystery yet more truely the word of the Scripture is the Body and Blood of Christ The doctrine is diuine c Looke the 26. Homily of S. Aug. and against Maximil Chap. 22. and note how he doth agree with this of â— Hierom If at any time we go to the mystery he which is faithfull vnderstandeth it If he fall into a spot he is in danger If at any time we heare the word of GOD both the word of God and the flesh of Christ and his blood is powred into our eares and we think an other thing to what great danger we runne into c. Lay. Verily thou hast here according to our desire briefly spoken to the purpose indéed and it may well suffice for a testimony from thée against that strange doctrine of Transsubstantiation for according thereunto we know not how the holy Scripture can be so truely the Body and Blood of Christ as the holy mystery and therefore because yea or nay is a sufficient answere we will content our selues onely with this thy briefe affirmation herein and so procéede to the third witnesse Speake diuine Theodoret what sayest thou touching the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Lord Theodoret. My sonne d All this from Theo. is to be found in his 1. and 2. Dialogue Thou knowest that God called his Body Bread e Iohn 6. 51. Lay. I know it Theodoret. Moreouer in another place he named wheate flesh f Math. 〈…〉 Lay. I know this to be true also Theo. In the tradition of mysteries he called bread his Body and that which powred and commixed in the cup Blood Lay. So he did call these things indéed but did he rightly call them so as being his naturall Body and Blood or did he but change the names Theo. My sonne That which is a body according to nature shall rightly be called a body and likewise blood c. But our Sauiour changed the names verily and imposed to the body that name which rightly belonged to the signe and Symbole but to the signe he imposed that name which belonged to the body so when he had named himselfe a Vyne he called that Blood which was the signe Lay. But the nature of the Bread and wine still remayning what is the cause of the alteration of the names Theo. To those that are admitted to the diuine mysteryes the institution is manifest for he would not haue them which are partakers of the diuine mysteries to regard the nature of those things which are seene but by the changing of the names to beleeue the alteration which is made by grace for he which named that Wheat and Bread which by nature is a body and againe named himselfe a Vine he hath honored the Symboles and signes which are seene with the name of the Body and Blood not verily changing nature but adding grace to nature c. Lay. What sayst thou then to those Heretiks which hold that as those signes of the Body and Blood of our Lord were one kind of things before the inuecation of the Priest or minister and after are changed and made other things euen so the Body of our Lord also after the resurrection is changed into the diuine substance Theo. My sonne g In his â—… Dialoges They are taken in their owne snares for neyther do the misticall signes depart from their owne nature after sanctificatioÌ„ but they remayne in the former substance and figure and
forme c. Compare the signe with the trueth thou shalt vnderstand the similitude for the figure ought to be like the trueth for truely that body hath the first forme and figure and circumscription and that I may say at once the substance of a body but it was made immortall after the resurrection c. Lay. Most true it is graue Father Christ hath still the true substance of a Body and therefore the signe and the thing signified being alike those Heretickes whosoeuer they be that séeme to proue the forme of Bread in the Sacrament to be there without the substance of Bread do thereby séeme to proue also Christ to a haue a fantasticall Body that is a Body in shew without the substance of a body But thou doost here most playnely confute that palpable absurdity therein thou art agréeable to the true doctrine of the Primitiue Church for what Christian liuing a thousand yeres since or vpwards did euer affirme such a reall presence in the Sacrament that thereby Christ God and man is to be swallowed into the bodyes of many damned creatures We find many proofes from Antiquity to the contrary as partly hath bene noted already and yet for more witnesse thereof we note S. Ambrose also who sayth playnely touching this sacred Bread euen Christ himselfe that it is not bread which goeth into the body h In his â— Booke of Sacraments Chap. 4. but the Bread of eternall life which strengthneth the substance of our soules c. He sayth not as some peruersly misconster him Non transiâ—e in corpus per nutritionem i Bellarm. vpon the Eucharist the 2. Booke 14. Chap. it passeth not through the body by nourishment but Non vadit in corpus it goeth not into the body c. Who then can mistake him here but he that wilfully makes himselfe ignorant euen he which by such vndirect dealing peruerts thy words also saying k Bellarm. in the same Booke Chap. 27. Where thou doost affirme the Bread and wine to remayne after sanctification both in substance nature figure and forme as they were before thou doost thereby meane onely the sensible accidents and visible formes do so remayne but the substance to be changed But if such weake defending of errours be allowed for good and lawfull in vayne then it is to bring any testimony from antiquity against Heretikes But we hope that such peruerse answeres from the peruerter may proue in good time a good motiue for the peruerted to looke about him betimes and not both to liue and dye a childe in vnderstanding for ignorance cannot excuse those that wilfully refuse to walke by the light of holy Scripture The word of God is a lanterne vnto my feete and a light vnto my paths saith the Prophet Dauid * Psalm 119. It is as a light shining in a dark place sayth S. Peter * 2. Pet. 1. By which we are giuen to vnderstand that as the Sunne giues light to the corporall eye so doth the holy Scripture giue light to the spirituall eye Whereupon it followes that if neyther our aduersaryes nor our selues would wilfully become blind and then trust to the leading of others we should soone all agrée in one outward profession for who is he that can beleeue contrary to that which he séeeth or where is that spirituall man so contentious as not to allow those Traditions and customes of the Church which are not contrary to the expresse word of God We grant from the Sacrament according to that trueth which we finde in holy Scripture * Iohn 6. 63. the true eating drinking of the flesh and blood of Christ spiritually we say word for word as Saint Basil said aboue a thousand yeeres since l In his 141. Epistle We eate his flesh and drinke his blood being made partakers of him by incarnation and sensible life of the word and wisdome for he called all his mysticall conuersation in the flesh flesh and blood and made manifest that doctrine which depends of his life actuall naturall and diuine by which the soule is nourished exercised and trayned vp to the contemplation of heauenly things c. but we deny such a grosse eating and drinking therein that thereby both the righteous and the vnrighteous are made partakers of Christ which doctrine is most manifest against the sacred Scripture m 1. Cor. 10. 21. we deny also such a grosse eating drinking therein that thereby Lay people must not communicate with the blessed cup of our Lord fearing lest they should shead his prectous blood vpon their garments or lest by the weakenesse of their stomackes they should bring vp againe their Creator by belchings and vomitings which absurdity the Church hath long since confuted as witnesseth S. Aug. n Against Faustus the 20 Booke and Chap. 13. for indéed according to the doctrine of her head Christ Iesus so doth the true Church teach alwayes But neuer did the true Church teach that our Sauiour Christ hath any reall being in the body of a wicked creature for Christ himselfe is most playne against that vayne doctrine And briefly to proue that to be true we will now set aside all other witnesses and proofes whatsoeuer and humbly beséech the author of this blessed Sacrament euen Iesus Christ himselfe to resolue vs herein Speake holy Lambe of God thou that art the onely Sauiour of the world speake so we most humbly beséech thée that thy words herein may proue a swéete sauour of life to the small remnant of thy holy Church in this corrupt age Teach vs swéete Lord whether any can haue true life without eating and drinking that blessed flesh and blood of thine and also whether any can misse of that true life eating and drinking the same blessed foode Christ My sonne o Iohn 6. 48. to 36. I am that Bread of life your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernesse and are dead This is that bread which came downe from heauen that he which eateth of it should not dye I am that liuing bread which came downe from heauen If any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer and the bread that I will giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the world c. Verily verily I say vnto you except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye haue no life in you Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life and I will rayse him vp at the last day for my flesh is meate indeed and my blood is drinke indeed Lay. My Lord and God these words of thine are profound and to the spirituall man spirit and life although to the carnall man farre otherwise for notwithstanding thou hast commaunded vs all not to adde any thing to thy sacred word p Deut. 〈◊〉 2 and 12. 32. 〈◊〉 22. 18. yet these carnall-minded men can not vnderstand these thy comfortable speeches