of Christ whence he might have omitted his duplicate ralleries and scoffs and have attributed all those miracles to the power of God and not played the buffoon in attributing them to the power of Roman Priests his scoffs and scorns and Jeers will never bear any argument with understanding men much lesse with Catholicks who have learned of S. Augustine Epist 49. ad Deograt quaest 6. If Christian faith did fear the scorns of pagans we should not believe in Christ himself CHAP. XI The Doctours Chief ground of his raillery I Am so weary with the Doctours vain raillery that I am willing to go no further but that I reflected on two main grounds of his rallying and scoffing spirit the one is the insisting so much on humane reason and sense and the great bugbear Transubstantiation Of the first I shall treat in the two following Chapters and after of the second In the first place it is a general Doctrine in Gods Church that faith has for its Object God revealing It s formal object is the divine revelation the material only those things which are revealed so that we know nothing by faith but by revelation not by reason much lesse by sense true it is that humane reason and sense concurr to the receiving of faith but not to the procuring a divine and saving faith nevertheless reason and sense may engender a humane faith by hearing or reading things revealed but never come to the certainty of them but relying only on revelation Whence the holy Fathers do commonly teach that if reason or sense do comprehend any thing it is no more an object of faith S. Augustine tract 27. and 40. in Johanem Faith is to believe what thou seest not whose verity and reward is to see that thou doest believe Again tract 39. This is the praise of faith if that which is believed be not seen for what great thing is it if that be believed which is seen S. Gregory hom 26. in Evangelium Faith has not merit where humane reason gives experience Great S. Basil ser de fid confess tels us that Faith is an assenting approbation without any hesitation without any parswasion of the minde as in the truth of those things which by Gods gift are preached and declared in the Church And in Psal 113. let faith be thy guide in the holy words which are from God and not demonstration Faith I say inviting thy soul yea and perswading above all rational methods for faith relies not on grammatical proofs but insinnuats it self unto our minds by the efficacious operation of the holy Ghost S. Athanasius tract de advent affirms that faith conceived of an evident matter cannot be called Faith But let us hear what the holy Fathers in those primitive times did teach and believe concerning our present subject of the Eucharist I shall begin with S. Cyril of Alexandria lib. 4. in Joan. cap. 17 This thing is hard and is to be received rather by faith then by any other means S. Hilary l. 3. de Trin. We are not to speak of divine things in a humane or worldly sence neither are we to extort or wrest by violent and imprudent report the celestial words to our wit or impious understanding it is perversity let us read what is written and understand what we read then we shall perform the office of faith for what we say of the natural body of Christ in us we speak foolishly and impiously unless we learn of him Great S. Leo ser 6. de Jejunio 7. mens Doubt ye not at all of the verity of Christs body and bloud for that which is taken by the mouth is believed by faith S. Cyril of Hierusalem Since Christ himself so affirms and says of the bread This is my body who henceforward dares to deny it and the same confirming This is my bloud who can doubt and say that it is not his bloud he changed water into wine which is near bloud in Cana Gallilen only by his will and is not he worthy that we should believe him that he transmutates or changes wine into bloud Beneath let us with all certitude take the body and bloud of Christ for under the species of bread the body is given thee and under the species of wine bloud is given thee A little after Do not therefore consider it as bare bread or bare wine for according to the words of our Lord it is the body and bloud of our Lord for although sense suggest it otherwise yet faith confirms thee do not judge the thing from the taste but take it from faith for most certain so that no doubt may take place but that the body and bloud of Christ are given thee And a little after knowing and most certainly holding this bread which is seen by us not to be bread although the taste take it for bread but is the body of Christ and the wine that we see although to the sense or taste it seems to be wine yet it is not wine but the bloud of Christ S. Crysostome hom 60. ad pop Antioch and 83. in Mat. Let us alwais believe in God and not resist him although what he says may seem absurd or against reason to our senses and Imaginations his word exceeds our sense and reason this we ought to do in things and especially in mysteries not only beholding those things which are before us but also holding his words for we cannot be deceived by his words but our senses are most easily deceived those 〈…〉 be false but this is deceived very oftentimes since therefore he said This is my body let us not be detained with any ambiguity but believe and perceive it by the eyes of our understanding S. Cyprian ser de coena Dominica on the word of our Saviour John 6. The flesh profiteth nothing gives the reason because our Master himself expounds these words are spirit and life carnal sense does not penetrate to the understanding of so great profundity unlesse faith be joyned The Doctors great Master Calvin lib. 4. Instit cap. 17. ser 10. will teach him this lesson In his supper he commanded me to take eat and drink under the symbols of bread and wine his body and bloud for although it may seem incredible that in so great a distance of places as heaven and earth the flesh of Christ should penetrate to us that it may be meat for us we must yet remember how much above all our senses the secret power of the holy Ghost can shew it self that which our mindes comprehends our faith conceives the Spirit doth truly joyn together things locally separated whence he says sect 7. Nothing remains but that I should burst forth into admiration in this Mystery to which neither the minde in thinking or tongue in speaking can be equal and apud Hospin in hist Sacram. part 2. he says We therefore acknowledge a Miracle in the holy Supper which exceeds or goes beyond both the grounds of nature and the measure
as partly will be more manifest in the next Chapter CHAP. XIII Transubstantiation proved in all the ages of the Church THis terrible word Transubstantiation is much baited at by this learned Doctor even as the word homousion declared and determined by two General Councils was impugned by the Arians because it was new and not found in the Scripture even so this word approved by two general Councils was rayled at by hereticks when they could not disprove what was specified thereby I will not contend for the word but for what is signified thereby the Councils of Trent indeed approves the word sess 13. cap. 4. and explicates it to be the Conversion of the whole substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the body and bloud of Christ so also defines it can 2. In this sence I shall produce Fathers and Doctors of all ages and times since Christ and so confirm what the Doctor jeeringly yet most ignorantly affirms when he says that the Masse began with Transubstantiation as indeed it did for the Mass was never without it when the conversion of bread and wine is the essential part of the Masse as it has been fully declared I let passe his plain contradiction when forgetful of what he had said before admitting the Masse to have been in the Roman Church for near 1200. years past he now says that it began with Transubstantiation which he will have to have been begun from the Lateran Council held in the year 1215. where this matter was declared to be of Faith not as if it was then newly invented but as the common Faith of the Church wherein the whole Christian world agreed for there were present besides the Pope Innocent the 3d 412 Bishops the two Patriarchs of Constantinople and Jerusalem the Legates of Antioch and Alexandria Archbishops Primates and Metropolitans 75. Abbots and Priors 800. Legats and Procurators of Bishops and others without number The Embassadours of both the Emperours Roman and Grecian of the King of France England Hungary Jerusalem Cyprus Aragon and many other Princes who all consented to this declaration in opposition to some heresies of those times Now that such was the doctrine of the Roman Church before that Council is manifest by the opposition that was made against Berengarius who for the contrary opinion was condemned in three several provincial Councils several learned men of those times did write against him as Lanfransus Archbishop of Canterbury I. de sacram Eucharist The Church spread in the whole world acknowledges bread and wine set on the Altar to be consecrated and in the consecration to be changed incomprehensibly and ineffably into the substance of the flesh and bloud of Christ In like manner Algerus Guitmans and Petrus Cluniacen who lib. 1. Epist 2. Let them see what foolish incredulity what blinde doubting it is either not to see or doubt that bread is changed into the flesh of Christ and wine into his bloud by divine power when by the same many things are changed into another even in the nature of things which he proves by many examples and concludes It is far more as the holy Fathers of the Church say to create things that have no being than to form other and other things of those things which have a being all these above a 100. years before that Council But nothing more clearly convinces it then the Recantation which Berengarius made in a Roman synod held anno 1079. above a 130. years before the same Council in this form I Berengarius do from my heart believe and by mouth professe the bread and wine placed on the Altar by the Mystery of prayers and words of our Redeemer to be substantially converted into the true and proper and life-giving flesh and bloud of Jesus Christ our Lord and to be the true Body which was born of the Virgin which offered for the worlds salvation did hang on the Crosse which sits at the right hand of the Father and Christs true bloud which did flow from his side not only by signe and vertue of the sacrament but in propriety of Nature and verity of substance In this faith and belief he died A little before this time lived Theophilact Archbishop of Bulgary a Grecian in Joan. 6. Bread by the sacred words and Mystical benediction with the comming of the holy Ghost is transformed into our Lords flesh He has the same in Marc. 14. adding Our merciful God condescending to our infirmity did keep the species of bread and wine but trans-elementated it into the vertue of flesh and bloud And in cap. 26. Mat. He said not This is a figure but This is my body for it is by an ineffable operation transformed as bread in appearance but in very deed flesh Of the Latins about the year 730. Venerable Bede in 6. Joan. Christ dayly washes us from our sins in his bloud when the memory of his Passion is represented on the Altar when the Creatures of bread and wine are by the sanctification of the ineffable spirit transformed into the sacred Meat of his flesh and bloud and about the same time the famous Grecian Father S. John Damascene l. 4. de fide Orthod c. 24. As the holy Ghost working all things whatsoever were made so what then shall hinder but that of bread he may make his body and of wine and water his bloud and even as whatsoever God did make that he did by the work of the holy Ghost in the same manner now also the operation of the holy Ghost does that which exceeds nature and which tannot be taken or understood unless it be by faith only And a little after Verily the body is truly united to the divinity that body which came from the holy Virgin not that the body assumed descends from heaven but because the bread and wine it self is changed into Christs body and bloud If thou ask how is this done it is enough for thee to hear that it is done by the holy Ghost even as from the holy Mother of God our Lord by the holy Ghost did make to himself and in himself flesh there is nothing more manifest or perceptible to us then that the word of God is truly efficacious and omnipotent for the manner of it is such that it cannot be searched or found out by any reason A little after Bread and wine are not figures of Christs body far be it but the very body of our Lord joyned to the Divinity for sith our Lord himself said this is not a signe of body but body nor the sign of bloud but bloud And again If some have called the bread and wine the figure of our Lords body and bloud they did not say it after the Consecration but usurped this word before the oblation was consecrated to be brief In that place the Saint uses these phrases Christ made his body of bread and wine he made these things his body and bloud the bread and wine are changed into
contemplate the works of God and confider every particular in one Miracle we may finde many Miracles which exceed all created power For the satisfaction of the Reader I shall illustrate it by examples Exodus the 4. God converted Moses his rod into a serpent which without all doubt was a great Miracle which also carries with it many Miracles included therein 1. the Rod was reduced to nothing and 2. To the serpent then created God gave motion proportion figure and other qualities of a serpent and in like manner turning this new created serpent into a rod the serpent was reduced to nothing and the serpent was converted into a rod which received a new being not by any created power but by God himself who also gave it colour proportion figure and dimension with other properties agreeable to the nature of a rod so that there was a double transubstantiation or conversion from one substance to another substance and transmutations or conversions of accidents to other accidents independently of any natural cause or action and here we may note that our wonderful God afterward gave to Moses power to do the same not by his humane vertue or power but by the power and gift of God whereby alone Moses as Gods Ministers and instrument did the same In like manner God did miraculously give to the Children of Israel Manna Exod. 16. and in it are contained many Miracles 1. That it was in such plenty that every day it was sufficient for three Millions 2. That every one how much or how little they gathered had as much and no more then theother 3. Every one received nourishment thereby equally to their condition savour and appetite The holy text sayes according to that which they were able to eat 4. The Manna putrified the next day excepting only the sabbaoth day when it did not putrify 5. On the sixth day the Manna was doubled and was not to be found on the sabaoth day 6. Solomon sap 16. tells us that God gave bread from heaven without labour having in it all delectation and the sweetness of all tasts serving every mans will and was turned to what every one would 7. God continued this Manna for 40. years and no more 8. God preserved this Manna in the Tabernacle for many ages If this Manna which as our Saviour himself John 6. teaches was but a figure or sign of the bread which he was to give to wit his body and bloud has so many maricles accompanyed it why should any reasonable man wonder that so many Miracles should accompany the celestial and divine Manna especially if they be necessarily annexed to the nature of so great and so miraculous a Sacrament wherein the body and bloud of our Saviour Christ is contained The royal Peophet Psal 110. cries out God hath made a memory of his miraculous works a merciful and pittiful Lord he hath given meat to them that fear him which according to all Catholick Interpreters is as much as to say God hath left one most special and most beneficial memory of all other benefits to wit his body and bloud in a miraculous manner as a memory of his Passion and our Redemption as the spiritual food and substance of all souls who rightly fear him The greatest Miracle is the Transubstantiation or conversion of the bread and wine into the body and bloud of Christ of which I shall speak in place convenient which with it carries necessarily many other Miracles as in the next Chapter I shall fully declare There remain two difficulties which manifest the Doctors Ignorance or malice the first is that the Doctor attributes all these Miracles to the Priests as if it all were done by their power according to our belief wherein he grievously errs as hereafter I shall declare for with S. Augustine l. 10. de civit Dei cap. 12. All Catholicks believe all Miracles done by Angels or men truly to be done by Gods power working in them If then there be any Miracles as no Christian can deny in the Eucharist it is God alone who works them by the Ministery of the Priests even as I said before he did work miracles by his servant Moses so S. Peter Act. 3. cured the lame man at the doors of the temple but advises the people that they should not think that he did it by his own power or holiness but in the name or power of Jesus so the priests do not any of those miraculous things in the sacrifice of the Mass by any humane power but by his ministerial power received in his Ordination Christ himself doth effect them so that the Doctors babling so often of Miracles wrought by the Romish priests is but meer raillery or most base ignorance The other as ignorant folly is his canting with reiteration touching the Roman priest bringing down Christs body from heaven at his pleasure as though Christ in coming to the Eucharist did leave the right hand of his Father in heaven which is a grosse errour for Christ is no less in heaven after the Consecration then he was before the Consecration he is sitting still at the right hand of his Father according to the Article of our Creed yet nevertheless he is in the Sacrament this indeed is a Miracle wrought only by Gods omnipotent power this made S. Chrysostome l. 3. de sacerdot to exclame O Miracle O benignity of God he who sitts above with the Father in the same article of time is often handled in the hands of all and he delivers himself to those who are desirous to receive and embrace him hom 3. ad Ephesios and hom 61. ad populum Antioch Also he says As many of us who communicate of the body of Christ and taste his bloud let us consider that we taste the body and taste the bloud of him who sits in the celestials and is adored by the Angels Their great Master Calvin lib. 4. Instit cap. 17. says In his supper he commands me to take eat and drink under the symbols of bread and wine his body and bloud for although it may seem incredible that in so great a distance of places as heaven and earth the flesh of Christ should penetrate to us that it may be meat for us we must yet remember how much above our senses the secret power of the holy Ghost can shew it self that which our minde comprehendeth not our faith conceives the spirit truly joyns together things locally separated sect 24. Nothing mooe incredible that things so far distant and remote within the whole space of heaven and earth in the whole distances of places are not only conjoyned but also united CHAP. X. Concerning the Miracles which follow in the hody Sacrament of the Eucharist THe Doctor much troubles himself about the Miracles which occur in the Eucharist whereas any one who believes the real presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament must needs know that those Miracles do necessarily follow thereto If he could disprove
in the manner or forme of Mass or in their opinions but in the substance of a Sacrifice according to the Evangelical law they all agree deriving their form rites and ceremonies from the primitive times that is from the Patriarchal Churches founded by the Apostles and their immediate successours In sine all the patriarchal Sees of Rome Antioch Alexandria and Hierusalem together with that that of Constantinople have used maintained and approved the sacrifice of the Mass It would be little less then Blasphemy to make them all Mistresses and fomenters of Idolatry and consequently that the Church which Christ and his Apostles had erected founded and established was Idolatrous and the true Christian Church never appeared in any Nation of the Vniverse But what do I insist in this manner when I speak to learned and understanding men who well know the truth of what I say and to whose judgments I humbly remit what I write trusting they will not condemn my boldness but attribute it to the Zeal I have of the honour of that reverend Vniversity which I so much reverence and esteem and for whose true glory and happy progress I offer up my continual prayers remaining alwaies Your hearty well-wisher and Beads-man R.F. Missale Romanum Vindicatum CHAP. 1. Mass proved out of the Sacred Scripture THe ancient and most learned Interpreter of the sacred text S. Hierom teaches us that the Gospel is not in the word but in the sence not in the bark but in the sapp not in the leaves of the words but in the root of the meaning whence the 6. Councel of Constantinople can 19. tells us If any Controversy pertaining to the Scripture be raised let not the preachers otherwise interpret it then as the lights and Doctors of the Church in their writings have expounded it Conformable to this is that Decree of the Meldelsen Councel In the expounding or preaching of holy Scriptures let every one follow the sence of the holy Catholick and most approved Fathers in whom as S. Hierom says verity of faith never fails or wavers I shall not therfore follow humane sence judgment or opinion neither will I for the present make use of Schoolmen nor of the Doctors or learned men for almost twelve hundred years which without doubt may counterpoise whatsoever exposition our pretended Reformers can any way claim in a 150. years at the most let us now wave all these and search out the truth from the first five hundred years It was a bold saying of this Doctor in his 12. Chapter that Roman Priests nor Roman sacrifice have not so much as any probable ground in Scripture this he has in the text of his Chapter but in the body of the proof is most weak for he confesses that Catholicks do alledge Scripture for both the question then is which side does best understand the true sence of the sacred text I might alledge innumerable places which the holy Fathers of that time did understand or apply to the sacrifice of the Mass in particular that of Dan. 12. of the continual sacrifice which S. Irenaeus S. Hierom and Theodoretus affirm to be no other then the sacrifice of the Mass which shall cease to be publickly celebrated as also S. Hippolitus teaches in the time of Antichrist but I shall only insist on those places which the Doctor impugns to wit on the figures of it as that of Melchisedech of the prophesy of Malachy and of the Institution of it made by Christ himself which I shall divide into three Paragraphs §. 1. Mass proved to be a Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech THe holy Council of Trent Sess 22. c. 1. first grounds it self on the figure of Melchisedech Gen. 14. God by the mouth of the Prophet David Psal 109. did declare that Christ was a priest for ever according to the Order of Melchisedech which also S. Paul alleages Heb. 7. and thence proves a translation of the Law from the translation of the Priesthood let us now hear what the holy Fathers of those primitive times do understand by this I might well produce Cassiodorus Remigius and Euthemius in Psal 109. who were not long after the fifth century and expound it of the sacrifice of the Mass but let us make a step higher within that time and begin with Theodoret 430. on the same Psalm who affirms that Christ began his priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech in his last supper when the consecrated bread and wine 420. S. Augustin Epist 95. ad samos Melchisedech did prefigurate the Sacrament of our Lord's supper with bread and wine that is the sacrifice of Melchisedech being brought forth did know to prefigurate his eternal priesthood and lib. 16. de civit Dei cap. 22. alledging Melchisedech out of S. Paul to the Hebrews he says There the sacrifice which the whole Church offers now unto God did first appear and that prefigured which was long after fulfilled in Christ of whom the prophet said before he came to the flesh Thou art a priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedech lib. 17. c. 17. he repeats the same giving the reason because Aarons Priesthood and Sacrifice are abolished and now in all the world under Christ the Priest we offer that which Melchisedech brought forth when he blessed Abraham and cap. 20. God has prepared the table with bread and wine that is the Sacrifice of Melchisedech a little lower The participation of that table is the beginning of life for in Ecclesiastes where he saith It is good for man to eat and drink we cannot understand it better than of the participation of that table which our Melchisedechian Prlest instituted for us in the New testament the text in lattin is quam Sacerdos ipse mediator novi testamenti exhibit secundum ordinem Melchisedech de corpore sanguine suo for that Sacrifice succeeded all the old testament Sacrifices which were but shadows of the future for his body is offered and sacrificed now instead of all other offering and Sacrifice and in Psal 32. he says Christ of his body and bloud instituted a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech the same he has in Psal 32. in psal 100. and in Psal 109. and in many other places 390. S. Hierom. Epist 17. ad Marcell Have recourse to Genesis and thou shalt find Melchisedech King of Salem and prince of that City who even then in the type of Christ offered bread and wine and dedicated the Christian Mysterie in the bloud and body of our Saviour The same Father Epist 126. ad Evagrium so Melchisedech for that he was not a Cananite nor of the race of the Jews did goe before us as a Type of the Priest the Son of God of whom it is said psal 109. Thou art a priest c. and a little after he tells us what sacrifice he dedicated to wit the Sacrament of Christ in bread and wine in a sincere and pure Sacrifice Again in Gen. 14. Our mysterie
word of the Father see him cap. 32. above cited 220. S. Hyppolitus Bishop and Martyr Orat de cansummatione Mundi brings in Christ speaking thus Come ye Bishops and Priests who have dayly offered my precious body and bloud and speaking of the time of antichrist he sayes The holy houses of the Churches shall be like Cottages and the precious body and bloud of Christ shall not be extant in those dayes the liturgie or Mass shall be abolished the singing of psalms shall not be heard that is publickly With him agrees S. Chrisostome hom 49. operis imperfecti according to that of Dan. cap. 9. 12. 203. Tertulliam lib. de Oratione cap. 14. speaking of the stations very many do think that they are not to be present at the prayers of the sacrifices because the station is to end by taking the body of our Lord therefore the Eucharist doth finish the devout service to God were not thy station more solemn if thou did also stand at Gods Altar the Body of our Lord being taken and reserved both are safe both participation of the sacrifice and execution of Offices And l. ad scapulum We sacrifice for the health of the Emperour but to our God and his but by pure prayer as God has commanded S. Martialis Epist ad Burdegal cap. 3. Sacrifice is offered to God the Creatour on the Altar not to men nor to Angels not only on a sanctified Altar but every where a clean ablation is offered to God as he has testified whose body and bloud we offer unto life everlasting saying Joan. 4. God is a spirit and they that adore him must adore in veritie for he having been both immaculate aend without sin because he was conceived of the holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary permitted himself to be immolated on the Altar of the Cross but what the Jews through malice did immolate thinking themselves to abolish his name from the earth we propound in a sanctified Altar for the cause of our salvation knowing by this only remedy life to be given us and death avoided for our Lord himself hath commanded us to do it in Commemoration of him 171. S. Ignatius Martyr Epist ad Smirnenses It is not lawfull to baptize nor offer nor immolate sacrifice or celebrate Masses without the Bishop And Epist ad Ephesios he condemns those who separate themselves and come not to the the Congregation of sacrifices Thus we see that the Roman Masse used for almost twelve hundred years did not there take its beginning but was alwaies observed in Christs Church even from the beginning from Christ himself and his Apostles CHAP. V. Sacrifice necessary to the being of a Church THere can be no visible Church without visible Religion nor no visible Religion without a visible Sacrifice for as the Church is nothing but a visible congregation of all the faithful so it is necessary that in this Assembly or Congregation there be something that may manifest the ir murual desire and concord to worship God Now it is certain that there never could be any agreement to any internal action neither could there be any publick act of Communion in the worship of God unless they assembled did agree or follow some external sign voice or action such as Sacraments and sacrifices are S. Chrysostome well notes hom 60. ad Pop. Antioch If we had been incorporeal God would have given us plain and incorporeal gifts but because the soul is conjoyned to the body he has given us intelligible things in sensible and this conformable to humane nature which depends of the senses in her operations even in the worship of God whereto the vertue of Religion conduces us Now Religion includes four Acts The first is a consideration of Gods infinite Majesty on whom all things depend 2. A reflexion on our nothing for of our selves we are nothing have nothing and can do nothing but whatsoever we have or can do comes all from God These two acts are not elicited by the vertue of Religion but as supposed grounds or motives to the worship of God the other two proper acts of Religion are interiour or exteriour the first as pure is proper only to the Angells and Blessed souls now separated from their bodies or elevated by some supernatural grace but as it is found in Men of this world has dependence on the senses but may be purified in its operation and is a profound submission of heart or internal Inclination of the mind to serve and worship God The external act of Religion is an external profession of that interiour will made by voice gesture or external sign such are publick prayer adorations and such like but none like to the sacrifice which carries with it that true worship which S. Augustin l 10. de civitate Dci cap. 1 calls Latria or honour due to God A little after Religion signifies nothing so distinctly as the worship of God by which cap. 4. we owe sacrifioe to God and thence inferrs There is none dare say a sacrifice is due but to God alone and who ever sacrificed but to him whom he knew or imagined or feigned to be God whence I infer That since from the first creation of Man God had a Church wherein there was true Religion it necessarily follows that according to our humane constitution in the same Church there was and is an external sacrifice wherein God was and is worshipped with Latria which is the perfect act of Religion and worship of God Moreover sacrifices seem to follow the instinct of Nature for as Plutark adversus Colos sayes A man may find Cities without walls houses Kings Laws Coynes schools and Theatres but a Town without Temples and Gods to whom sacrifices are offered you shall never finde Plato before him de leg Dial. We can never finde any Nation so barbarous any people at all so rude and savage who with vows victins and outward sacrifices have not acknowledged the Soveraeignty of some God or other All Hysteries do testify that from the beginning of the world sacrifices were in use amongst all Nations and Religion whence S. Augustine Epist 49. ad Deograt 9.34 That it is not to be blamed in the rites of Pagans that they builded Temples ordained Priests offered sacrifices for he supposed these to be according to the law of nature but that these were exhibited to Idols and devills that was to be condemned for that they gave which was only due to God to false Gods But what makes more to our purpose is the continual practise of Gods Church even from the beginning of using sacrifices which S. Augustine lib. 10. de civit Dei cap. 4. How ancient apart of Gods worship a sacrifice is Cain and Abel do shew full proof and all along in the law of Nature the Examples of Noe Abraham Melchisedech and Jacob now the written Law had sacrifices ordained by God himself which continued to our Saviour to say then that the law of Grace should have no
examples here alledged A sacrifice sayes he though offered by a man is a divine thing whereupon a man consecrated wholly to Gods name to live to him and die to the world is a sacrifice 2. when we chastise our bodie by abstinence it is a sacrifice 3. works of mercy being referred to God are true sacrifices We Catholicks do confesse and acknowledge those and such to be metaphorical improperly in a general sence true sacrifices but Protestants will not only deny them to be proper sacrifices but also will not believe them to be sacrifices at all for they will not allow the two first to be acts of vertue and the best word they will give them is that they are effects and fruits of Popery Moreover the Saint in the same place insinnuates another sacrifice by which the whole and holy society of the redeemed and sanctified City is offered to God by that great Priest who gave up his life for us to become members of so great a head in so mean a form this form he offered and herein he was offered in this he is our Priest our Mediatour and our sacrifice all in this and after concludes This is the Christians sacrifice we are one body with Christ as the Church celebrateth in the Sacrament of the Altar so well known to the faithful This alone is the proper and peculiar sacrifice which Christ has instituted and left in his Church as formerly hath been declared But our Doctour to prove his conceit cap. 11. towards the end cites Durandus l. 2. de sacerd fol. 29. which is cap. 10. In fine The Doctours words are Durand himself is full of this that is to prove the only sacrifices of the Cross for Christ sayes he performed excellently the office of a priest when he offered himself on the Cross for the sins of Mankind and performs it yet more gloriously now when sitting at the right hand of his Father he intercedes continually for us We acknowledge this as Catholick doctrine for this is true but no way excluding the sacrifice of the Mass but with the same Durandus in the precedent words this Office to wit of priest Christ did exercise when after supper he converted the bread and wine into his body and bloud saying to the Apostles Take ye and eat this is my body The Doctor omitted this either ignorantly or maliciously It hardly can be believed but that he did read the place except he took it from others notes and so little cared for the truth if he did little credit is to be given to what he says God defend us from such Doctors It is strange how the Doctor in the beginning of his 3. chapter should acknowledg that the Mass according to the primary Notion as it was anciently taken for that part of divine worship where the elements of bread and wine were by the priest both consecrated to God and distributed to the People which is the supper of our Lord in S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.20 for this he cites Ordo Romanus made by Gelasius and reprinted in Rome 1591. or thereabouts whereby is manifest the Conformity of the Present Romans with the Church in those primitive times for this sacrifice for which we contend to wit that we take it even in this Notion he assignes and accordingly imitating the primitive Church not inventing any new Mass but continuing still the same I could not but smile when for this he alledges Durandus for legitima Missa lib. 4. cap. 1. n. 39. and interprets it the only due and lawful administration of the holy Sacrament in the old latin Church whereas Durand interpreteth that to be a legitimate Mass in which are Priest and respondent offerer and communicant as the composition of the prayers demonstrates this by evident reason perhaps he means the order and manner of celebrating the Mass which Durand doth learnedly and solidly declare in every particular particle of the Mass which if the Doctour beleives as he does his legitima Missa he labours in vain against the Roman Church The Question in that place propounded was whether a Priest might celebrate Mass when less then two were present and after disputing pro and con he concludes That is a lawful Mass which hath one present besides the Priest at Mass O how much is this to the Doctours purpose Now the Doctour will solve all by putting instead of the sucrifice of the Mass Christian duties as evidently true Evangelical Oblations and sacrifices which in order to publick worship were made before Communion and which the holy Fathers commend as the general Christian sacrifice that succeeded Jewish offerings which he confirms by a prayer which he finds in the Roman Missal Dom. 5. post Pentecosten It cannot be denied but that such Oblations were made in the time of Mass at the offertory as is declared in the Liturgical discourse p. 2. sect 2. cap. 2. which also is declared in the 4. Canon of the Apostles in these words It it not lawful to offer at the Altar besides new corn and grapes and oyle for the lamps and perfumes that is Incense in the time wherein the holy oblation is celebrated many ancient Canons have been made concerning these oblations in all which we may see that these oblations were of things which belonged to the Sacrifice or to the things which belonged to the Altar or to the poor and sometimes to the Priests by way of Alms the present Church of England takes it in the fence of Alms and only prayes for the givers but never thought it as an essential point of Communion which may be distributed without alms as alms may be given without Communion Add to this that such Oblations are common to the old law and yet were never reckoned amongst the sacrifices Deut. 16. a law is made There shall not appear before our Lord any empty but every one shall offer according to that he hath but this was not by way of sacrificing which only did belong to Priests In the new law S. Paul 1 Cor. 16. calls them Collections S. Clement l. 4. constit Apostol cap. 7. supposes this when he advises the Priest to refuse at the Altar the Oblations which come from an ill conscience Pope Fabian an 239. Decreed that on Sundays men and women should make offerings of bread and wine S. Cyprian blames the rich misers of his time who brought nothing to this offering saying Dost thou who art wealthy and rich think to have part of the Mass without vouchsafing to put any thing into the bason Tertullian calls such Oblations pledges of piety Moreover taking the prayer of the Missal in that sence which the Doctor takes it the most that can be gathered thence is that such oblations were made in the time of Mass for that prayer immediatly follows the offertory but it may be better expounded of the oblations which the people do make of the sacrifice of the Mass together with the Priest as it is said in the first
of our senses From what hath been said we plainly gather that in matters of faith we stand not to humane reason much lesse to our senses we may adde No sense or humane reason could tell us that Christ on earth was God The wise men who came from the East according to their senses imagination yea or humane understanding could conceive nothing but a little Child yet inspired by the holy Ghost in Faith only they adored the little Childe not as such but as being God and man which no sense or humane reason could dictate to them The Disciples Mat. 24. did not adore Christ by the rule of their senses or humane reason but when by faith they believed him to be the Son of God even after the Resurrection they did see Christ some believed others did not many who lived conversed and were in his company both simple and wise could never be convinced by their sense or reason that he was the Son of God and those who were of the simple sort sooner believed and were we not assured by divine revelation and testimony we could not believe either this or any other mystery of our Faith Where even according to reason it follows that we have a more sure ground to believe Gods word then our senses who perceive not the substance of the bread which is not perceptible by any of our senses whose objects are only accidents or sensible qualities which they have as well in the consecrated host or unconsecrated without any reflexion on the substance as being out of the sphere of their objects so that they discern not any thing of the substance or whether they be without any substance it is only the understanding which gathers by such or such accidents such or such a substance or subject and by natures ordinary course judgeth it to be bread but enlightned by faith and believing that nothing is impossible to God and that God in most express terms declared his body and bloud to be in the Eucharist the words are so clear that without wresting the terms none so simple but they may understand them as clearly as Peter is a man and those who contradict it on the ground of their senses are as the Apostle says 1 Cor. 2. sensual men not perceiving those things of the spirit of God it is foolishness to them and they cannot or rather will not understand for they are sensual measuring these heavenly mysteries by natural reason humane prudence and external senses which destroy Faith I know some object that of S. John 1. Epist cap. 1. where he attributes much to hearing seeing and touching matters of faith but they do not consider that the Apostles did hear and see many things which we believe from their testimonies but if we had only what they saw by their senses or humane wisdome our faith had been vain and of no importance for no visible thing or sensible as such can be the object of our faith what therefore they saw heard or touched was not believed as by faith but by experience see Scotus in 3. quaest 23. the Prophets and Apostles had a science which was not faith Faith taught them that the word was incarnate and that Christ who died rose again and ascended into heaven was the true Son of God now to us who have not seen them they are objects of faith as being only revealed unto us whereof we have testimony from Scripture and Tradition S. Thomas indeed believed because he had seen Christ after his resurrection Joan. 20. but as S. Augustine says tract 121. in Joan. He did see and touch man and confessed God whom he did not see nor touch but by this which he did see and touch that he believed now all doubt being removed and therefore he cryed out My Lord and my God and Jesus said unto him because thou hast seen me by sight and touch and certain knowledg that I am risen and believed that I am true God but blessed are those that have not touched me and have beleived Moreover S. John in this place opposes two diverse heresies to wit those who denied Christs divinity and those who denied his humanity and therefore begins his Epistle That which was from the beginning which he had declared in the beginning of his Gospel and for the other which we have heard by a voice from heaven which we have seen with our eyes which we have looked upon and our hands have handled we testifie unto you weereby he manifestly testifies that Christ in humane nature had true flesh and bloud God and man now because he was inspired by the holy Ghost one of Christs Apostles according to the testimony of the Scriptures we believe what he saw and heard to be true and receive it as a matter of faith CHAP. XII An addition to the former Chapter of the same Subject out of S. Augustine OUr adversaries who stand so much in matters of faith on their senses and private judgments should do well to consider that they imitate the heathens and Infidells who had no stronger arguments against the true Catholick doctrine then their senses and humane reason as we finde in all the holy Fathers who have laboured to convince them and in particular this is to be seen in blessed S. Augustine especially in his books de civitate Dei from whence I shall make choice of two articles of our Faith which are holy repugnant to humane sense and reason to wit the everlasting torments of Hell fire and the Resurrection of the flesh Of the first he treats in the first 8. Chapters of his 21. Book and thus he begins the second Chapter What then shall I say unto the unbeleevers to prove that a body Carnal and living may endure undissolved both against death and the force of eternal fire they will not allow us to ascribe this unto the power of God but urge us to prove it to them by some example saying There is no body that can suffer eternally but he must perish at length no flesh can suffer always and never die The Saint replys Cap. 3. What is this but to ground an assertion upon meer sense and apparence which he esteems absurd in matters of Faith for saith he These men know no flesh but mortal and what they have not known and seen they hold impossible A little after Through our flesh as now be such that it can not suffer all pain without dying yet then shall it become of another nature Whence in Cap. 4. he says That God who endowed nature with so many several and admirable qualities shall as then give the flesh a quality whereby it shall endure pains and burning for ever Cap. 5. But the infidells hearing of Miracles and such things as we cannot make apparent to their senses do ask the reason of them which because it surpasses our humane powers to give they deride them as false and ridiculous but let them give us reason for all the wondrous things that
same S. Augustine l. 22. de civitate Dei cap. 11. Disputing with the Infidels who according to the laws of Nature did argue that there could not be any Resurrection of the body because it is earthly and so could not be contained in heaven every Element having his particular poise and tending naturally to its proper place his answer besides perswasive reason is Cannot God almighty give the body of Man such a form likewise that it may ascend and support it self in heaven Cannot then the Almighty maker of the whole world take away the Ponderosity of earth and give the quickned body and hability to dwell in the same place that the quickned spirit shall elect why then may we not believe that the nature of a corruptible body may be made incorruptible and fit for heaven so that arguments drawn from the scituation and qualities of the clements can no way diminish the power that God Almighty hath to make mans body of a quality fit and able to inhabit the heavens Cap. 25. If they would shew me a thing which God cannot do I will tell them he cannot lye let us therefore believe only what he can do and not believe what he cannot I If they do not thus believe that he can lye let them beleeve that he will do what he promised and let them believe as the world beleeves which he promisea should beleeve and whose belief he both produced and praised Cap. 26. Why do they now cry out that this is impossible which God hath promised which the world hath believed and which was promised it should beleeve seeing that Plato himself is of our minde and saith that God can work Impossibilities that is such things which we conceive to be impossible If any one would ponder and seriously examine the arguments and reasons which our pretended Reformers do oppose against the Reall Presence of Christs Body in the Eucharist he shall easily perceive that they ground themselves on such humane Inventions proceeding more on their senses in opposition to Gods Omnipotency for the Hereticks of our times with their vain weak and weightless arguments do contradict the Catholick Church in the wonderfull effects which God hath wrought in the Eucharist principally because we cannot make them apparent to their senses nor give them a natural reason for them which we freely confess we cannot yet we know that God doth do nothing without reason in putting moral men by them past reason we know not his will in many things yet we know that what he will is no way impossible and we believe what he hath declared to be his will in this subject far be it from us to deny or question it which were no less then to impute falshood or imperfection unto him God can and will do according to his promise no apparent difficulty whatsoever no law of nature can any way impede it Plato as S. Augustine notes lib. 13. de civit Dei said well Gods will is beyond all other assurance God is not bound or limited to any condition in alotting of any particular being to any thing as though he could not make an absolute alteration thereof into an unknown quality of Essence God then as he can create what he will so can he change or alter the nature he hath created at his good pleasure for his wonderful power exceeds all wonders his wisdome permits and effects all and every particular or marvelous things and can make the most wonderful use of all the parts of the world which he only created Cannot the power of God exceed them in working such things as are incredible to Infidells or hereticks but easy to his Omnipotency God being the Author of Nature why do they ask a stronger reason of us when in proving what they hold to be impossible we affirm that it is thus by the will of Almighty God who is therefore called Almighty because he can do whatsoever he will Our Adversaries will not give credence to the Church affirming teaching and believing in all times the verity of such miracles with a proud supposition as if God Almighty could do nothing that exceeds their capacities to conceive we know no better or stronger Reason can be given for any thing then to say God Almighty can or will do this which he hath promised in the sacred Text wherein he hath declared as strange things as these which also he has performed surely he will do these because he has said he will as he hath made the incredulous Heathens to believe things which they held to be impossible Let not the faithful hoodwink themselves in the knowledge of Nature as though Gods power could not alter the nature of any thing from what it was before unto mans knowledge let them not think these things to be contrary to nature since they are effected by the will of God the Lord and maker of Nature they are not in themselves against Nature but at most against the common Order of Nature These words of S. Augustin in regard of other such wonderful things may be applyed as properly to our present subject for Catholicks do confess that they cannot give any humane or naturally known reason for the Mysteries which follow the Eucharist the most that we can ever pretend to is to shew that there is nothing in them against the essence of natures being our whole belief in these Mysteries depends on Gods word wherein he has manifested his will which carries with it an omnipotent power whereto all created things are in obedientiall subjection aswell in their essential as accidental being all mutable and alterable according to the will of God especially in all accidental qualities or dispositions which also he may add to natures being yea and also give another nature So he made Iron swim Fire not burn water to mount and become passible solid things to walk upon it Humane bodies to ascend to be also not consumed by perpetual fire Things of no weight at all as Angells called spirits to descend even within the bowels of the earth God by his will so disposing yea to be burnt with fire I might alledg many more examples of this kinde but these may suffice to manifest that Gods power is not to be limited to mans humane reason much less to his senses yea not to any created Intelligence what he can do is known only and solely to himself what he has done according to the ordinary course of Nature is latent to all humane understanding for there are many things whose natures and qualities the wisest men are ignorant of what he has done beyond the ordinary course of nature we know by his revelation which moves us to believe not know we trust in Gods word no way doubting of his omnipotency and therefore we little esteem of what the wit of man can think imagine or conceive to the contrary The Church grounded on Gods word and Tradition attested by the holy Fathers and Doctors has always so taught us
the words This is my Body by the word Body which they believe in another sense do not consecrate Matrimony with the same words and matter If by the word Wife they both or either of them understand Concubine is no Matrimony When then the Bishop intends not to ordain as a sacrificing priest but intends the the contrary his act is ineffectual for according to the Doctrine of Christs Church the power of consecrating and offering the true Body and Bloud of Christ and the remitting and retaining of sins is so annexed to the order of Priesthood that Priesthood cannot be without it and therefore he that intends to give Priesthood without gives nothing at all To conclude the Church of England has excluded Ordination out of the number of Sacraments and withall rejected the Papall power one may question then what power or authority they have to give Orders but principally from whence they have any authority or power to give them power to execute any offices belonging to Priesthood It cannot be said to be from the words which are not Sacramental and consequently being no Sacrament have no Institution from Christ for that end Moreover it cannot be said to be from the Church for the Church can give no such authority but by the Sacraments and the Reformed Ministers have no authority from the visible Catholick Church or Pope or Metropolitan which they professedly reject and disclaim for Ordination is a spiritual power which tends to spiritual effects Doctor Heylin Eccles Restit in his Preface Queen Elizabeth looked upon her self as the sole sountain of both Jurisdictions and the Act. 1. Eliz. 1. declares the Kings supremacy to use and exercise all such Jurisdictions spiritual and ecclesinstical as by any spiritual and ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been or may lawfully be used over the Ecclesiastical state of this Realm yet as Doctor Bramhall well says pag. 63. The power of the Keys was evidently given by Christ in Scripture to his Apostles and their Successors not to Soveraign Princes Many of our Protestant Divines and learned Doctours did well consider this Difficulty and therefore most of them do admit that Ordination is a Sacrament and consequently they ground their Ordination on the authority of the former Catholick Bishops who in a Sacramental power did ordain them who according to Dr Brevent were all Idolaters and unlawful Ministers of the Sacraments except only Baptism in extreme necessity so that they have no right to any Ordination but by vertue of the Sacrament which cannot take effect unless it be dnely administred by lawful power and in due form From which I inferr that our Reformers in taking away and rejecting the sacrifice of the Mass have also rejected the Priesthood whose principal office is to offer sacrifice and consequently they have no true Ordination In fine no Sacrifice no Priest no Priest no Sacrifice wherefore call the Ministers Priests or what you will if they have not the office and power to consecrate and offer sacrifice they are no Priests properly taking the word priest or according to the common sense and use of the Catholick Church in all ages and times yea among Heathens and Infidels whence it follows that as our Reformers have framed a new Religion so they have invented a new priesthood never heard of before giving no other power then to preach and dispense the Sacraments which may be committed or done by Deacons or Lay-men as all Ecclesiasticall histories do testifie on this ground and other defects in their Ordination the present Catholick Church makes no scriple notwithstanding their pretanded Ordination to ordain or give Orders to those who being converted and reconciled to the said Catholick Church shall humbly defire it I know some will say that this cannot be done without Sacriledge for even in the Doctrine of the Universal Church Re-ordinations as also Re-baptizations are esteemed sacrilegious whence frequently those who were baptized or ordained by heretical priests or Bishops were not rebaptized nor re-ordained In consideration hereof the now Church of England does not re-baptize nor re-ordain priests coming to their communion but permits them to remain in the Order received and approves of them in all their function and power as if they had been ordained by Protestant Bishops This Subject would require a longer Discourse then my brevity will permit I will therefore briefly conclude this Chapter The Catholick Church hath always detested both Rebaptization and Reordination but never made difficulty to Baptize or Ordain some who falsly pretended to have been Baptized or Ordained when really they were not We have a plain Declaration of this in the Councel of Nice Can. 19. where those who were baptized by the Paulianists were absolutely to be Baptized because they were not Baptized in the right Form of Baptism to wit by the Invocation of the holy Trinity The Decree of the Apostles Can. 68. declares that baptized or ordained by Hereticks were neither Baptized nor ordained which as Caranzen notes is to be understood of such Hereticks who did not observe the right Form in ministring the Sacraments The Church whensoever it was manifest that the Ordainers had not lawful power or did corrupt or alter the form of Ordination judged that what they had done was Null and of no force and did simply and plainly ordain them But if upon due examination it were found that the heretical Bishops were formerly ordained by Catholick Bishops who observed the true form of the sacrament those who received orders from them and were otherwise fitting for it were received without any new Ordination only new power was given unto them for the execution of such and such Orers for as the learned Doctour Morinus de sacris Ordinat par 3. Eccercit 5. 6. well notes It may be admitted that such do receive a Character even those who are ordained against the Canons but so that the vertue of the Character is dulled or blunted not capable or not fit for action the Ancients did esteem Ordination Canonically given could never be blotted out but that its force or vertue by deposition might be repressed or dulled that it could not produce any other Ordination which may be confirmed by the common Doctrine of the Church which teaches that a Priest notwithstanding his Character received in some causes cannot give either lawfully or validly absolution As for that which is added concerning the use of the now English Church whch re-ordains not priests coming to it all men know that according to their Opinion it would be very Sacrilegious for no true Protestant will deny but that Catholick Ordination is valid and of Real force giving all power and vertue belonging to a Priest which to deny would be destructive to their pretended Hierarchy which has no other Foundation for its succession then that their Priests and Biships were so ordained The true state of the Case is the Catholick Church in such case Ordains those who were never truly
cap. 1. As often as we celebrate the Eucharist so often we offer Christ in mystery and do immolate or slay him in sacrificing by way of commemoration or representation if this be so I pray let him tell me who doth do this but the Priest for none but such even amongst them have authority or power to do it yet this is not included either in dispensing the word or the Sacraments for to offer Christ in Mystery or immolate him requires other authority and that from his Ordination or not at all In the same book cap. 3. If by an unbloudy manner you mean a mysticall and Sacramentall manner I am not against it because the shedding of Christs bloud on the Cross was reall in the last supper only mysticall and Sacrament all And again cap. 5. The holy supper may be called a sacrifice Eucharisticall or mysticall in which the sacrifice of the Cross is both represented and offered in a mystery that is Sacramentally who does this but a Priest who offers this sacrifice Sacramentally or by whom is the sheding of Christs bloud in a mysticall and Sacramentall manner most of your learned men as is said already attribute to Ordination or the power given to consecrate which is more then M. Mason allows to his Priesthood I know not how M. Mason will reconcile himself lib. 4. cap. 14. where he in the name of the Protestant Church declares We acknowledg no proper external sacrifice of the new Testament besides that which Christ himself in his own person once Immolated on the Cross Insomuch saith he that if a Romish Priest become a Protestant he must renounce the power of sacrificing redeuntes sacerdotes sacrificandi potestatem nostra opinione impiam sacrilegam deponere repudiare debere decernimus We judge or hold that such Priests as return from the Roman to the English Church ought to depose and repudiate the power of sacrificing in our opinion impious and sacrilegious What Sr is it impious or sacrilegious to celebrate the Lords supper to offer or immolate in sacrifice this if you may be believed you often say if the holy supper be a sacrifice sure it is external if Christs bloud be shed in a sacramental way sure it is externally for all sacraments are external signs if all this be impious and sacrilegious all your Ministers are impious and sacrilegious for that they without power do attempt to consecrate and offer and immolate Christ Doctour Sparrow worthily bearing the title of Bishop of Exeter in his Rationale pag. 309. admits this saying According to the usuall acception of the word Priest it signifies him that offers up a Sacrifice and proves it because the Ministers of the Gospel have a sacrifice to offer viz the unbloudy sacrifice as it was anciently called the Commemorative sacrifice of the Death of Christ which does as really and truely shew forth the death of Christ as those sacrifices under the law did foreshew it and in respect of the sacrifice of the Eucharist the Ancients have usually called those that did offer it up Priests who as he says afterward are to offer that holy Bread and Wine the Body and Bloud of Christ he confirms this by the Prophesies of Esay cap. 66. v. 21. I will take of them to be Priests and Levites saith our Lord that is of the Gentills and Jeremie cap. 33. v. 18. And of Priests and Levites there shall not fail from before my face a man to offer Holocausts where sayes the Doctour they prophesy of the times of the Gospel as will appear by the context and ancient exposition to wit of the Interpreters on those places From what has been said it is manifest from the Texts of the whole Fathers above-alledged that the proper office of a Priest is to offer sacrifice the present Church of England hath put in the name Priest in their form of Ordination and consequently must admit a sacrifice which he is to offer otherwise they should take the word Priest equivocally not properly in its right signification or sense of the Catholick Church and consequently it follows that they have no true Prie thood amongst them for it is manifest that neither he that ordains nor he that is ordained do intend to consecrate or to be consecrated a sacrificing Priest for their Intentions are directly contrary insomuch as Mr Mason as is said before tels us that such priests as return from the Roman to the English Church ought to depose and repudiate the power of sacrificing whereas the Councel of Trent Sess 23. Can. 1. puts an Anathema on any one who should say that in the new Testament there is no visible or extern Priesthood or not some power of consecrating and offering the true Body and bloud of our Lord and of remitting and retaining sins but only an office and bare Ministery of the Gospel or those who do not preach not to be Priests at all And Cap. 1. of the same session sacrifice and Priesthood are so conjoyned by Gods ordination that both have been in every law when therefore the Catholick Church hath received from the first Institution in the new Testament the holy visible sacrifice of the Eucharist we must acknowledge to be in it a new visible and extern priesthood into which the old Priesthood is translated which the sacred letter doth also shew and the Tradition of the Catholick Church hath always taught this to have been instituted by the same Lord our Saviour and to the Apostles and their successors in Priesthood power given to consecrate offer and minister his Body and bloud and also of remitting and retaining fins The same Councel Sess 7. Can. 11. If any shall say that in the Ministers when they make or confer the Sacraments Intention is not required at least of doing what the Church does be he Anathema The Councel of Florence Decreto Eugenij says Sacraments are performed by three things to wit by some thing as matter by words as form and by the person of a Minister conferring the Sacrament with intention of doing what the Church doth if any of these be wanting the Sacrament is not perfect Even natural reason teaching this for as S. Thomas 3. quaest 64. Artic. 8. ad 1. The Minister because he is a living Instrument ought to apply himself by Intention whereby he intends to do what Christ and his Church doth It is also certain that an ill intention vitiates a good work and a perverse Intention alters the nature of humane actions which also is true in Sacramentall actions for example he that pretends to Baptize If his intention be not to baptize or takes the word baptize only as it signifies a lotion or washing from corporal filth does not rightly baptize nor do 〈◊〉 Church doth In like manner he that says the words absolvo te a peccatis If he intends not to absolve him or for sins understands temporal debts absolves not The Protestants who intend not to consecrate Christs Body by