his Father should not be one with his Father He being sayd to be in shape found as man should not be man By the secōd note he inferreth that because S. Augustin sayth bread wyne are the bodie and blood of Christ after a certaine maner meaning in resemblance of feeding therfor they should not be such truely Which yf it also were true when Christ was inuisiblie among the Iewes he might be sayd not to haue bene truely among them because he was only in a certayne maner among them Lykewyse yf Tertullian say truely lib. de praescrip c. 51. Non possunt dici penitus ipsa quae sunt in aliqua sui parte vitiata they can not altogether be sayd to be the same that are blemished in any part it would follow that any that is blinded or mayned would not be him selfe being but in a certayn maner the same In the same note is inferred that faith is called a Sacrament yet not by any change therfor the Sacrament of Christs bodie is not changed but only in qualitie By as wyse a therfore might it be inferred Gods woord which is more powerfull then S. Augustins woords tearmeth Christ a Lion the Apostls salt and light therfor because by such calling they were not changed in substance nether-was ther any other thing wyne riuers rodds or any thing els changed by Gods woord in substance and so Scriptures would be denyed creation distrusted and all beleefe peruerted It is also no merueil that Thodoret or Gelase whom all others cupple in this obiection affirme the mystical signes after sanctification not to depart from their nature figure or substance to witt by outward apparence and sensible imaginations and effects wheras the gospell doth signifie the water substantialy turned into wyne to haue bene water saying VVhen the master of the feast or ceremonies had tasted water turned into wyne it being then no more water but wyne Also M. Rider a litle befor sayd the outward signes by the holy Ghost to be graced with the names of the things they represent And consequently bread appearing in outward signe may be called bread in substance by M. Riders rule against him selfe But a more worthye though not a more weightie aduersarie shal impugne him S. Lanfrancus Bishop of Canterburie who liued long befor Innocent the thirds tyme the hatcher and patcher yf M. Rider forge not of all our opinions S. Lanfrancus in suo lib. con Berengar Corpus Christi vocatur panis vel quia ex pane conficitur vel quia intuentium oculis cùm caro sit panis videtur The bodie of Christ is called bread ether because it is made of bread or because it being fleash appeareth to mens eyes to be but bread Whether consecration be a new name in the 64. number will apareare By the waye in a woord M. Rider Doth S. Chrysostom say that the nature of bread doth continue still You bidd preists and Iesuits in the margent to marke which is the common phrase of Faulconers They marke and behould you to be the Faulconer Prouerb 10. of whom the scripture saith Qui nititur mendacijs hic pascit ventos idem autem ipse sequitur aues volantes He that groundeth on vntruethes he leadeth wyndes to pasture and he the very same followeth birds flying They may marcke you often at such your game and your wynds and birds skipping and straying from your reach but no such mater as in the 113. number wil be manifested was euer dreamed by S. Chrysostom that any yet could euer marke This then the 53. The 53. vntruth vntrueth Rider 63. But you here will obtrude your oulde slanderous obiection that we accept of the Sacraments no better then bare figures No we acknowledge a change and an alteration but not of the substance but of the vse Is not this a maruelous change wrought by the holy Ghost in the due administration of the Lords supper according to Christs institution that of commen bread wine such as daily we feede our bodies with is made the dreadefull and reuerend misteries of Christ crucified where by we neither looke vppon the bare naked elements as common creatures but as sanctified food And in such sort that euen as the bread doth nourish our bodies and the wine doth comfort our spirits so trulie reallie and vnfainedlie doth the heauenlie food of his bodie crucified and his bloud shed for our sinnes by faith in the time of the holie Supper feede and nourish our soules into euerlasting life and so is made and sealed our reall coniunction with Christ not by his bodilie and locall discention into our stomackes but by our spirituall ascention to him by faith This is our doctrine touching these figuratiue propositions warranted by Scriptures and witnessed by the auncientest Fathers Clem. Alex Theod August with many moe neuer heard of cōsecration but of santification benediction Hitherto hath beene plainly and directlie prooued that your two propositions bee figuratiue not proper Secondlie that the substances of bread and wine remain after consecration and therfore there can be no such carnall presence of Christ by Transubstantiation vnder the formes of bread and wine as you deeme Now I am come to your two maine pillers that support and vnderprop your carnall presence which if they faile you then your foundation is sandie and your buylding will not be able to abide the least blast of Christs breath The first is consecration the second transubstantiation for vnles there be consecration there can be no transubstantiation and then no carnal presence of Christ in the Sacrament And then neither your masse nor matiens worth two pence And so the soules then in your imagined purgatorie may crie and yell for lacke of a dirge and a masse of Requiem How M. Rider doth auoyd our obiection that they accept of the Sacraments no better then of bare figures 63. WHat I haue sayd in the 39. number doth testifie Fitzimon whether they can thinke any better of Sacraments then as bare figures Vide nu 78. Listen to heare it a litle befor lowdly affirmed by M. Rider him selfe So Baptisme is called the fountain of regeneration and bread Christs bodie and yet in dede they are but outward Signes In this place he saith it is a slanderous obiection But by your leaue you are made to obiect so slanderously to your face as slanderous shame followeth Do not you affirme them to be outward signes and figures are they not all one in this article Why then do you not confesse that you are your owne slanderer But we part not so Then he saith No we acknowledge a change and alteratiō but not of the substāce but of the vse First of this chāge I pray you obserue this annotatiō of Fox saying Here is to be noted that Peter Martyr in his aunswer at Oxford Fox Acts and Men. pag. 1255. did graunt a change in the substance and not only in the vse of
are your oft promised citations of autheurs books chapters leaues lynes Will you neuer ryde otherwyse then lyke your selfe Could the Church of Rome called by S. Cyprian no very partial frend to the Popes supremacie S. Cyprian epist. ad Cornel. 45. epist. 55. Ecclesia matrix radix Ecclesiae Catholicae Cathedra Petri Ecclesia principalis the mother Church and roote of the Catholick Church the cheyre of Peter the principall Church Could Anaclet before S. Cyprian and both long before the Nicen concil Magdeburg centur 2. c. 7. col 139. Ibid. col 781. 782. attribut to the Romain Church primacie and excellencie of power ouer all Churches and the whole flock of Christ euen by testimonie of Protestants Could it sommon general Concils beare preheminencie in them confirme or desanull them could the Nicen Concil seeme to Beza Beza in trac triplicis Episcoporum generis ad Scotos circa annuÌ„ 1579. to make a way for the horrible papacie of Rome slyding on and vnderlay the seat of the harlot an ould marke of an heretick to speake thus of the Romain sea as appeareth in our first number that sitteth vpon seuen hills and yet possesse but the fouerth place in dignitie in the Nicen Concil Saye and wryte what you list M. Rider you neede no longer a visour your face is of proofe For gathering vntruths I may be thought forgetfull but in truth although I would fayne forgett them as I do often dissemble them yet I can not remoue them out of ether my mynde or eyes as long as I reade his booke so exorbitantly repleanished with them In the precedet number Regula in 6. Decretalium he attaynteth vs with a threefould errour wherof we being free for vnusquisque praesumitur esse bonus dones probetur malus euery one is to be accounted in the right vntill he be proued in the wrong Which is not done against vs that may well stande for the 96. The 96. vntruth vntruth Soone after he informeth as yf it were also proued that the B. Sacrament and Christs body do differr as much as outward seale and inwarde grace The 97. and 98. vntruth which maketh the 97. vntruth The 98. is in this number wherin he sayth the Concill calleth the B. Sacrament a mystical benediction no miraculous transubstantiation For it expresly affirmeth such Sacrament to be Carnem viuificatricem ipsius verbi propriam factam to be made a liuely fleashe and the very propre fleashe of the VVorde What is a miraculous transubstantiation yf this be not The 99. that the Scriptures and ancient Fathers The 99 vntruth and ould Church of Rome do specifie the receauing of the B. Sacrament to be only by the hands mouth and stomack of the sowle and not of the body The 100. that these two euidences are our owne disproofs The 100. vntruth The 101. that the Pope was not president in general concils The 101. vntruth ether by him selfe or his legate but other Bishops chosen by the Emperoure The 102. that the Popes legat The 102. vntruth had but the fouerth seat in the Nicen Concil The 103. that then the Pope of Rome was not Pope The 103. vntruth but only Archcbishop of which we are to dispute in the testimonye of S. Leo following not long after These strange exorbitant absurd treatises considered may not I worthely say Tom. 2. operum S. Athan fol. 262. as he in S. Athanasius Qui contentionis studio feruntur eorum insanum furorem nulla credo potest oratio cohibere sed vt mille quis eaue inuicta argumenta proferat veritatem quidem ille demonstrauerit at operarijs mendacij de ea minime persuaserit I beleeue noe eloquence can restrain there madde furie who are caried away by errour But although you alleadge a thowsand and those inuincible proofs you shall in deed demonstrat trueth but you will not reclayme the forgers of falshood Is not this verifyed in M. Rider What wonderfull exceptions supposeth he betwixt him and the cleere light striuing against him most forcible What arguments and proofs doth he struggle against and by what delusions and deceits One sayd truely Ioan. Maxen resp ep ad possess Quamuis verò semper inuicta manet veritas nunquam tamen aduersus eam se attollere desinit falsitas Although trueth alwayes remayneth vnuanquished â—et falshood neuer leaueth to assault it The flesh is fed by the bodie and bloud of Christ Catholick Priests Tertullian de resurrectione carnis floruit 200. that the soule might be sat in God 105 OVt of this thus you frame an argument as sometimes old Romane friend of yours did to maintaine your carnall presence Rider The soule is fed by that which the bodie eateth but the soule is fed by the flesh of Christ therefore the bodie eateth the flesh of Christ in the Sacrament I might as fitlie inuert this argument vpon you as a learned man of our side once inuerted it saying As the soule feeds vpon Christ so doth the bodie but the soule is fed by faith therefore the bodie is fed by faith which is verie absurd and improper yet as partinent and as proper as yours And heere you should remember the olde distinction of the fathers spoken of before The Sacrament is one thing and the matter of the sacrament is another thing Outwardlie the bodie eateth the Sacrament and inwardly the soule by faith feeds on the body of Christ As in Baptisme the flesh is washed by water as that old father saith in that place that the soule may be purged spirituallie so our bodies eate the outward Sacrament that the soule may be fed of God Againe it is not generallie true that whatsoeuer the bodie eateth the soule is fed by the same And if you would propound but particularlie this instance of eating onelie in the Sacrament then the argument proueth nothing standing vpon meere perticulers Moreouer the bodie and soule are fed by the same meat in the sacrament but not after the same manner For the bodie is nourished by the naturall properties of the Elements which they haue to nourish But the soule by the sacramentall and supernaturall power as they are signes and feales of heauenlie graces And we graunt that the soule is fed by the precious bodie bloud of Christ but not after a carnall maner as you say but spirituallie by faith Againe a mean Scholler in Gods booke may see this phrase is figuratiue and therefore the sence spirituall For how can a soule be fat in God will yee say it is a corporall fatnesse such as is proper to bodies I thinke yee will not I know you should not then this place is impertinentlie brought neither sauoring of sence nor suteable to that you alleadge it For if you would haue read the same Father in the same booke following page 47. printed at Paris 1580. he would haue told you so for saith he the
of both we agree â—ith late Reformers For althowgh they inculcat a faythfull â—â—ceauing a faythfull coniunction a faythfull vnion c. betwixt â—eir sowles and Christ Yet is there noe participation betwixt â—e maner of fayth by vs intended and by them We instruct in â—e woords of S. Chrysostom Cum fide enim accedere S. Chrysost ho. 24. in 1. Cor. non est vt propoâ—um Corpus tantummodo recipias verum multo magis vt mundo corde tangas 〈◊〉 sic adeas quemadmodum ipsum Christum To approache by fayth is not â—t thow showldest only receaue the body propownded but muche more that â—w shouldest touch him with a pure hart and so approache as to Christ him â—fe Also in the woords of S. Augustin S. Aug. Ser. 2. de verb. Apost 17.26 27. in Ioan. Corpus sanguis Christi erit â—ta cuicunque si quod visibiter accipitur in Sacramento spiritualiter comedaâ—r in veritate ipsa The body and blood of Christ wil be lyfe to euery one yf what is visibly taken in the Sacrament be spiritualy eaten in the true veritie So that according our approaching by fayth we come with a clensed hart as to Christ him selfe according to veritie and not as to a figure appellation or representation All this is taught after by M. Rider himselfe They teache the contrarie that the Sacrament only serueth as an external signe that Christ feedeth at that tyme their sowls as bread feedeth their bodies Christ operating no effect by the Sacrament in their sowls and being no neerer vnto them then in heauen nor the Sacrament effecting any thing in their bodyes because it is a Sacrament say they only during the vse and the vse consisting only in the similitude of his feeding the sowle as the bread feedeth the body Yet at that tyme of receauing they hould that bread as yet nourisheth not the body which is to none vnknowen for foode must abyde many alterations yea and mutations in substance before it nourishe so that I can not conceaue nor any other that euer I could incounter how at the tyme of receauing there can be any such signification of duble nourishing in body and sowle there being none possible at that tyme in body the bread not deing digested and consequently how there can be any Sacrament in tyme of receauing which wanteth the lyfe of the Sacrament which is say they only signification Zuingl to 2. resp ad Luth. Confession fol. 477. For this is the office of euery Sacrament sayth Zuinglius that it signifie only Yf they them selues conceaue better therof I do not maligne them Concerning our former doctrin by means of the same obiections often reiterated it must be often also expressed num 34. 39. 46. 94. VVhether any ancient wryter alloweth or mentioneth Corporal receauing 15. Although this belongeth to our second proofe for the real presence by suffrages of Councels and Fathers yet this fowle fift vntruth Thâ— 5. vntruth is breefly to be disproued in this place Because I am after in the 120. number by Gods grace to deliuer a verdict of Luthers that they are hereticks who denye God ore carnali with the fleashly mouth to be receaued I here omitt it First therfore S. Augustin sayth S. August l. con Aduers legâ— Proph. Tertull. l. de resurrect Carnis S. Châ—â—â—â—t l. om 45. in Câ—p. 6. Ioan. Fideli corde atque ore suscipimus VVe receaue with faythfull hart and mouthe Secondly Tertullian Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur The fleash is sedd with the body and blood of Christ Thirdly S. Chrysostom Permittens se tangi maÌ„ducari dentes carni suo infigi Permitting him selfe to be tutched and eaten and teeth to be printed in his fleashe â—f in the mouth of two or three witneses euery woord be to staÌ„d â—en here is it made vndoubtfull that the denial of any ancient â—riter to haue beleeued the corporal receauing is the fift vntruth â—â—r the receauing by mouth the feeding the fleashe the touching 〈◊〉 teeth are euidentlly corporal receauing and consequently this 〈◊〉 truth is inexcusable But I will in forme and propre tearmes â—â—d not by construction only shew the falshod of M. Riders negaâ—on in this point Cyrill l. 10. in c. 13. Ioan. per communionem corporis Christi habitat in nobis Christus csrporaliter By the communion of the bodie of â—hrist Christ dwellesh in vs corporaly Looke M. Rider the very woord 〈◊〉 self Corporaly Blush and beleue contradict no more the apâ—areÌ„t truth An aunswer to this place is in Fox pag. 1325. but such 〈◊〉 one as should shame all Foxian brethren that there could no other be giuen For he coÌ„fesseth that corporaly is to be taken heere â—n the same sense that S. Paul sayth the fullnes of Diuinitie to dwell corporaly in Christ that is not lighly nor accideÌ„taly but perfectly and substantialy Then which aunswer what might we requyre more to condemne M. Rider 16. But you will say it is shame for me to belie the holie Sea The third booke cap. 3. de interpretandis scripturis pag. 102. Colen print 1588. Then it seemeth some grosse falts remain stil whose doctrine is Apostolicall and their life Angelicall My prooffes shall be your owne friends Lindanus speaketh of an ancient complaint of Agobertus Bishop of Lions who said Antiphonarium magna ex parte correximus amputatis quae superflua leuia falsa blasphema phantastica multa videbantur We haue the most part corrected the Antiphonarie cutting off those which seemed superfluous light false blasphemous and manie phantasticall things Behold now the puritie of the doctrine of the Church of Rome who dare venture his soule vpon such sandie superstition nay wicked and damnable heresie and irreligion And for the life of your Cleargy in Rome heare some of your own friends speak their knowledge Read Concilium delectorum Cardinalium Concil Tom 3. pag. 823. there thus you shall find it speaking of Rome In hac etiam vrbe meretrices vt matronae inceduÌ„t per Vrbem seu mula vehuntur quas affectantur de media die nobiles CardinaliuÌ„ familiares Clericique Nulla in vrbe vidimus hanc corruptionem praeterquam in hac omnium exemplari That is to say in this cittie of Rome the curtisans or common whoores passe through the streets or ride on their mules like honest matrones And in the middest of the day the Noblemen the Cardinals deare friends and Priestes attend vppon those whoores We never saw such corruption but onelie in this cittie of Rome which is an example to all other cities The Popes owne Cardinals beeing appointed by Pope Paul the third anno Dom. 1538. to visit the cleargie and the stewes returne this shamefull commission But perchance you will tell the Queenes subiects that these whoores dwel in some blind Alley but the Popes court pallace are a most holie sanctuarie of saints No saith Luitprandus your own
corporaly and into a corporal body And the damned spirits being spiritual creaturs yet they are tormented not with a spiritual but with a corporal fyer 1. Corinth 6. Lastly S. Paul saith You are bowght with a great price glorify and beare God in your bodyes So that God him selfe which is the most spiritual of all spirits may be borne in our bodyes and not only in our sowls And when is he to be sayd borne in our bodyes so much as when we receue the B. Sacrament of his fleash and blood to which he is vnited by his diuinitie personaly Caueat in the preface Now saith he the meat is spiritual and therfor the mowth owght also to be spiritual as befor is heard and handled that we may haue satisfaction vnlesse we may be malecontents Good Iesus what expectation might this man haue that his owne fauourers would euer tolerat such dissimulation In the place wher vnto he referreth vs for this satisfaction this is all the proofe out of holy Scripture Fathers and Canons that is ther found Augustin shewing the maner how Christ is to be eaten in the Sacramēt sower tymes together saith spiritualiter spiritualie spiritualie One woord more ther is not ether of Scripture Father or Canon to proue that the mowth to receaue euery spiritual gift ought only to be spiritual First hereby how dothe he ouerthrow his former speeches that we teach the communicants not to receaue with their faith spiritualy and that we put opposition betwixt real and spiritual as contraries For yf our owne canons teache spiritual receauing as here is euidently affirmed how would he be beleeued that we do not teache it Are not these discourses resembling bucketts in wells of which the drawing vp of the one is a letting downe of the other Secondly I haue shewed and not slenderly yf resolutions of protestant martyrs be not slender that the profession of reformers can not brooke the woord Spiritual Thirdly I haue very lately shewed that Scripturs reason and diuinitie do demonstrat many spiritual gifts to be receaued corporaly and many corporal gifts to be receaued spiritualy Fowerthly I haue and do resolue that Christs presence is not only spiritual nor only receaued spiritualy but also corporal and to be receaued corporaly In the 12. and 14. number plentifully may be found to that effect S. August c. 9. contra aduersarium legis prophet Whervnto I add owt of S. Augustin that we should receaue fideli corde ore with faithfull hart and mowthe Behould in playne and literal maner declared that as to the hart so to the mowth doth belong to receaue Christ. Secondly owt of S. Leo Hoc enim ore sumitur quod fide creditur this is receaued by mowth S. Leo Sermone 6. de Ieiunio Tertull. l. de resurrectione Carnis which is beleeued by hart Thirdly by Tertullian Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur the fleash is fedd by the body and blood of Christ that the sowle might be fatned by God Is not here declared without requirie that we exclud not spiritual receauing by affirming corporal receauing Are not bothe affirmed requisit and nether to be omitted Good M. Rider spare your owne reputation so much ingaged in this discourse that vnlesse the residue supply defects and enormities here escaped it is not possible but the State will thinke it belonging to their wysdoms to testifie that they dislyke your defense of their opinion Defence wherin so many strange doctrins are affirmed to be in S. Ihons gospel which neuer any had yet perceaued Defense wherin M. Rider is made euery foote to disproue and refell him selfe Defense wherin wonderfull promises are made of confuting vs when in trueth it confirmeth all our doctrin For you shall not lykely mistake any one earnest point of his replye but when you fynd him vehemently seeming to ouerthrow vs then you shall discouer him to be as a Senacharib 4. Reg. 19. Iudith 6. 2. Machab. 8. Holosernes and Nicanor promising to ruyne vs and inuiting peoples considerations to buye our doctrin at the rate of nynty for one talent when we are most safe from inconuenience and he neerest to his distruction as Nicanor inuited merchants to buy Israelits by nyntie for one talent when they were most secure from his sale and rather to recouer their mony who intended to buye them and he by them spedely to be discumfited and confounded How many such promises doth he make saying I will shew and discouer that you haue forsaken the veritie of Christs gospel the reader shall easely perceaue befor the ende of this treatise that this your opinion was neuer tawght by Christ I will shew that you wrong your selues forgett your grounds of learning that your proofe is your disproofe that you neuer read but Enchiridions and neuer read the Fathers them selues that here you change that there you dismember c. When God knoweth he sheweth nothing but the turpitude and confusion of his profession Genes 9.21 as Noe when he was dronken shewed the dishonestie of his bodye wherby one of his owne children although wickedly derided him How aptly doth S. Augustin admonishe such a promiser saying Ostende promissa S. Augustin l. 3. con Max. c. 26. quid pergis in vacuo quid deludis expectationem nostram nec exhibes pollicitationem tuam multiplicas verba non necessaria vt necessaria occupes spatia Shew your promises why proceed you in vacuitie why delude you our expectation why effect you not your protestation you multiply needlesse woordes to wast needfull time Rider Ioh. 6.56.35 38. Whosoeuer dwels in Christ and Christ in them onelye eates Christs flesh drinkes Christs bloud But the true beleeuers onelie dwel in Christ and Christ in them therefore the true beleuers onelie eate Christs flesh and drinke Christs bloud Ioh. 6.56 Ephe. 3.17 The proposition is Christs owne words of which it were damnable to doubt The assumption is Pauls Let Christ dwell in your hearts by faith therefore the conclusion cannot be denied And so to the fourth VVhether M. Riders vnanswerable argument be not answerable euen by a childe to M. Riders infamie Fitzimon 38. TO manifest that this argument is easie to produce M. Riders infamie I denye your maior as being the 16. vntrueth The 16. vntruth Ioan. 6.56 Ioan. 14.11 by expresse addition and alteration of the text the woords are He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood remayneth in me and I in him Why then haue you added the woord only why had you noe terrour by the woords of the Apocalips Apoc. vlt. so to violat Gods sacred trueth and that to auowche a palpable and manifest erroure For Christ saith Do not you beleeue that I am in my Father and my Father is in me And who is so erroneous as to say that God the Father doth eate the fleash and drinke the blood of Christ and
And Origin saith Not the matter of bread but the words recited ouer it doth profit the worthy receiuer this I speake saith he of the typicall and figuratiue bodie which is in deede the Sacramentall bread Vpon the 15. of Mathew Augustine confuting Adimantus the Hereticke that held that the bloud in man was the onely soule of man aunswered it was so figuratiuely not otherwise and to prooue it he vseth this proposition of Christ Hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie saying Possum etiam interpretari illud praeceptum in signo positum esse non enim dubitauit Dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum cùm signum daret corporis sui I maye saith Augustine expound the precept of Christ figuratiuelie for the Lord doubted not to say this is my bodie when he gaue the figure of his bodie Augustine saith Hoc est corpus meum is a phrase figuratiue you say no but it is litterall Now let the Catholicks take this Friendlie Caueat to heart for they haue no reason to follow you that forsake the Fathers and heere may you see that our exposition is auncient Catholicke and Apostolicall yours new priuate and hereticall Tertullian an ancient Father saith Acceptum panem distributum discipulis Tertull. lib. 4. contra Marcion pag. 133. line 26. c. The bread which was taken and giuen to his disciples Christ made his bodie by saying this is my bodie that is the figure of my bodie what could be more spoken of them for vs against you Hierome super 26. Math. Ambrose in 1. Cor. 11. And Hierome calls it a representation of the truth of Christs bodie and bloud and not the body and bloud And Ambrose seconds his former sayings in these words In edendo c. In eating and drinking the bread and wine we doe signifie the flesh and bloud which was offered for vs so that they doe but signifie the flesh and bloud they are not the flesh and bloud And Chrisostome saith Chris in hom 17 in Hebr. super 1. Cor. 11. Offerimus quidem sed ad recordationem and afterward Hoc autem sacrificium exemplar est illius c. We offer indeed but in rememberance of his death this sacrifice is a token or figure of that sacrifice the thing that we do is done in remēberance of the thing that was done by Christ before c. Here is a manifest place against you Chrisost in hom 11. Math. which you shall neuer aunswere And elsewhere he saith in the same sanctified vessels there is not the bodie of Christ indeed but a misterie of the bodie is contained Clemens Alex. in padago lib. 1. cap. 6. pag. 18. line vlt. pag. 19. line 1. And Clemens Alexandrinus who liued 1300. yeares agoe saith Comedite carnes meas bibite sanguinem meum c. Eate yee my flesh and drincke my bloud meaning heereby vnder an allegorie or figure the meat drincke that is of faith of promise And the same reuerend Father in his second booke and second chapter of his Padagogi and 5. pag. and line 21 22 23. hath these words Ipse quoque vino vsus est nam ipse quoque homo vinum benedixit cùm dixit accipite bibite hoc est sanguis meus sanguis vitis c. For our Lord Christ vsed wine and blessed wine when he said take drincke this my bloud the bloud of the vine the word which is shed for manie for the remissiō of sinnes doth signifie allegorically the holy riuer of gladnesse Out of which I note First it is sanguis vitis the bloud of the grape properlie and that is wine It is called Christs bloud Sacramentallie and by way of signification Secōdlie it appeares to be figuratiue in this word shed for the bloud of the grape which is wine was not shed for manie but the bloud of Christ But you wil saye it is true before consecration but after consecration it is Christs verie naturall bloud No saith Clement immediatlie following Quod autem vinum esset quod benedictum est c. And that it was wine which was blessed hee sheweth againe when he saith to his disciples I will not drincke of the fruit of the vine c. Out of which premisses I note three things Read Clement follow Clem. First that that which you call cōsecration this learned Father calls it benediction Secondlie that after consecration the nature of wine remaineth still and it is not changed as you imagine Thirdly that the phrase is figuratiue and not proper Beda in Luc. 22. page 476. And venerable Beda our countrieman tells you that in England in his time the text was taken figuratiuely The solemnities of the old Passouer saith he being ended Christ commeth to the newe which the Church is desirous to continue in remembrance of her redemption that in stead of the flesh and bloud of a LAMBE hee substituting the Sacrament of his flesh and bloud in the figure of bread and wine might shew himselfe to be the same to whom the Lord sware and will not repent c. Beda called it not the naturall bodie of Christ that worketh out redemption but a remembrance of our redemption and a figure of it Thus the indifferent Reader may see that Augustine Ambrose Origin Tertullian Hierome Clemens Alexandrinus Beda and manie others which I omit for breuities sake all of them being auncient approoued writers and all of them of your owne Prints doe hold with vs against you that your propositions be not proper but Sacramentall improper significatiue representatiue allegoricall figuratiue which greatlie wounds the bodie of your cause and will weaken your credits with the Catholickes How the Fathers graunting a figure yet deny à figure as it is taken by protestants 56. I Graunt with S. Augustin the B. Sacrament to be a figure of Christ but requyre that you shew him to approue it Fitzimon a figure only I graunt with Origen it is Christs typical body grant you the rest of his opiniō in his owne woords deliuered The law of God sayth he now not in figurs or images as befor but in the very forme of trueth is acknowledged Origen hom 7. in lib. Num. And what befor were in an obscuritie shaddowed are now acclomplished in their forme and trueth It followeth Befor was baptisme in a figure in the clowd and in the sea but now regeneration is in forme in water and the holy Ghost Then was Manna in a figure meat now in forme is the fleash of the woord of God true meat according as he sayd my fleash is meat truely and my blood is drinke truely I craue no more then Tertullian affoordeth Tertull. l. 4. con Marcion as appeareth in the numbers cited in the 54. That Christ made the bread which was giuen to his disciples his body by saying this is my body that is the figure of his body in owtward apparence as in the forsayd numbers is
auowched Tertullian l. de resurrect Carnis Graunt you also with Tertullian that Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur the fleash not only the sowle is fedd with the body and blood of Christ that the sowle may be fatt in God Hieron ad Damasum de prodigo filio Wit hs Hierom I consent that the Sacrament is a representation do not you also impugne him saying Ipse Saluator est cuius quotidie carne vescimur cruore potamur It is our Saluiour him selfe Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 14. with whose fleash we are dayly feed whose blood we drinke I subscribe to S. Ambros that it is a signification do you no lesse that after consecration it is the fleash of Christ I allow with S. Chrysostom it is a remembrance Chrysost hom 60. ad pop Antioch and exemplar of Christs sacrifice vpon the Crosse for of that he speaketh do you no lesse when he saythe that in the Sacrament Christ is with vs non fide tantum sed ipsa re not in faythe only Clemens Alexandrin loco citato a Ridero but in very realitie I professe with Clement Alexandrinus to receaue Christ as he speaketh which is nothing to M. Riders intention and all other wayes it may be interpreted vnder an allegorie or figure as meat of faith c I coÌ„fesse also Ipsum Saluatorem intra pectus suscipi that our Saluiour him selfe is receaued into the breast I graunt all Beda in Luc. 22. that you alleage owt of Beda do you also not contradict your owne pretended witnesses but professe in the figure of bread and wyne is the Sacrament of Christs fleashe and blood Behould M. Rider you haue purchased that all which you haue here produced excepting vntruethes is freely and liberaly permitted but farr from your purpose or proffit Is it because a figure or allegorie is witnesed and that not only or without contradicting the substance that you and your only figure should seeme benefited I say with Gods woord and marke it well that Christ is a figure Sap. 7. 2. Cor. 4. Hebr. 1. Coloss 1. Ephes. 5. Luc. c. 12 c. 22. and image of his Fathers substance will you inferr that therfor he is not the selfe same substance with the Father I say Christ is spiritualy and figuratiuely the head of his Churche will you inferr that therfor he hathe not a material head I say that his baptisme and Crosse are taken some tyme spiritualy or figuratiuely will you inferr that therfor his material baptisme and sensible suffring should be excluded I say that he was habitu inuentus vt homo Philip 2. in shape found as a man wil you say that therfor he was no man It is no lesse against Scriptures and Fathers to doe the one then the other to exclude substance in the Sacrament for being together a figure and to doe it in the instances alleaged Therfor as I graunt and shew figure and veritie spirit and letter shaddow and substance by euery autheure by your selfe produced so reciprocally do not misinforme any longer but say although they affirme figure spirit and shaddow so they do not contradict veritie letter and substance Otherwyse euery Reader will condemne your honestie woords and learning as but a figure without veritie a spirit without letter and shaddow without substance Isichius in leuit l. 6. c. 22. So certifyeth saying He receaueth by ignoraÌ„ce who knoweth not this to be the body and bloud according to the trueth Which is as much to say as who by faythles fayth receaueth a figure without trueth of the thing figured he hath receaued according to ignorance and infidelitie But to your 4. Notes 1. grownded vpon Christs blood called wyne 2. consecration called benediction 3. wyne not changed because still called wyne 4. figuratiue phrase therfor not propre I aunsweare to the first and third that it is a custome in Gods woord and not only in holy Fathers to call thinges altered by their former names or according to the outward lyknes they represent Exod. c. 7. Toâ— 2. Gen. 18. As for example Aarons rodd deuowred their rodds wheras they were now no rodds but Serpents Raphael is called a yong man three angels three yong men according to their only outward resemblance I aunswer to the second and last that the name benediction doth rather approue the consecration then disanull it and the name figure not exclude propietie as aforsayd The premisses considered no man will deny the 39. vntrueth The 39. vntruth to be that his exposition is ancient Catholick and Apostolical ours new priuat and heretical Pardon him being of their fellow shipp whose spirit consisteth as Vincent Lirinensis cap. 26. sayth in contrarietie vt ignorantia scientiae caligo serenitatis tenebrae luminis appellatione fucentur that ignorance with them masketh vnder the name of knowledge clowds of cleernes and darkenes of light So that as Luther him selfe confesseth the dayes are come in quibus omnia libentissime docemus audimus praeter ea que sunt anâ—iquae solidae veritatis Luth. l. cont Catharin VVherin he and his compagnie do most willingly heare and teach all things els besyd things that are of ancient and solide veritie Therfor as I sayd pardon him in following his trade and their trayne which is now described when he claymeth his profession to be owld and ours new Let vs only be his Referendaries for escapes or vntruethes not to be omitted in his confession when God of his infinit clemencie will grawnt him grace for which I pray perhapp as much as him selfe to repent The 40. The 40. 41 42. vntruthe vntrueth that we might neuer aunswer his obiection owt of Chrisostom as also that in the 11. hom vpon Mathew he hath any woord of what is by M. Rider alleadged The 41. that Beda telleth in England in his tyme the text was taken figuratiuely The 42. That these Fathers do howld against vs wheras we professe in euery place as much as from them can lawfully be challenged Let fouer or fiue small vntruethes passe among the rest that it be knowen I keepe the bulke as small as is possible 57. But you will say these testimonies of these Fathers Rider though of your owne Prints yet they prooue nothing against you vnlesse the Church of Rome should receiue and allow that exposition of the Fathers to be Catholicke If you should so replie surely it were a weake replication and subiect to manie exceptions and you would wring I cannot say wrong the church of Rome that she should hold a doctrine against all the old Doctors But if you will thus replie to bleare the eies of the simple yet will I frustrate your expectation for now I will shew you that the auncient Popes and the auncient Church of Rome held as these Fathers did that the proposition Hoc est corpus meum to be significatiue and improper
there is no carnal presence Here is an absolute conclusion vpon a conditional proposition yf bread remayne c. which yet in Luthers opinion of companation would be false The other proposition is deceytfully supposed true beyond all controuersie that bread remayneth c. A second Yf you be autheurs of their synns you must be partakers of their punishment but as he deceytfully supposeth or rather as I thinke in my conscience dissembleth to suppose we are autheurs of their synns which being in controuersie one only proofe had bene requisit in forme of argument but that at his hands were to seeke woolle at the goats howse therfor c. Yf Mennon Darius lieutenant against Alexander were among such compagnions how often should he be occasioned to cudgell or bastonad them as he did one of his sowldiours reuiling and reprehending the Macedonians saying I keepe thee to fight and not to scould For yf Memnon lyke you bereaue them of their rayling reasoning that you keepe people in ignorance that you will tast as recusants of Christs gospell vengeance in flaming fyre other such fanatical naked reproaches Other fighting of their learning you nede as litle feare as hurt from a serpent whose sting and teeth are taken away 94. Thus you record to the worlds wonder Rider Rhem Test 1. Cor. 11. Sect. 16. Rome Rhemes shame against God Christ Scriptures and Fathers that ill liuers and Infidels eate the bodie and drinke the bloud of Christ in the Sacrament and your reason there followeth that they could not bee guiltie of that they receiued not and that it could not bee so hainous an offence for anie man to receiue a peece of bread or a cup of wine though they were a true Sacrament First old father Origen shall answere you who saith Est verus cibus quem nemo malus potest edere Origen super Math. 15. page 27. It is true meat which no wicked man can eate Heere Origen condemneth the Rhemists Romanists and all late Priests and Iesuites for holding this opinion iniurious to Christs death and all true Catholikes faith But you may obiect against Origen and say the Rhemists laid downe their opinion and gaue reasons to confirme it But where is Origens reason by which he prooues this former position that no wicked man can eate Christs bodie Super Math. 26. forsooth it is in his Comentarie vpon your text brought forth of mathew in these words Panis quem filius Dei corpus suum esse dicis verbum est nutritorium animarum the bread which the Sonn of God said to be his bodie is the nourishing word of our soules Out of which this we gather that seeing this bread or meate is the nourishment of our soules not of our bodies he spake of the heauenlie part of the sacrament For we know in common sence that bread and wine cannot nourish the soule but the bodie I haue proued by scriptures and Fathers before that the hand and mouth of the soule is a liuelie iustifying faith which you all your side cannot denie but the wicked want Now if the wicked haue no mouth nor stomacke to receiue this spirituall food and digest it as the foresaid Fathers haue affirmed why doe you say that the wicked and Infidels can eate the bodie of Christ wanting both hands mouth and stomacke And the scriptures call wicked men dead men Now you know dead men cannot eate meate corporall Chrysost Hom. 60. ad pop Antioch no more can the wicked which are dead spirituallie eate meat celestial And Chrysostome sayth Let no Iudas stand to no couetous person if anie be a disciple let him be present for this Table receiues no such as Iudas or Magus for Christ saith I keepe my Passouer with my disciples And to conclude with Augustine Tract 26. super Ioh. pag. 175. Qui non manet in Christo in quo non manet Christus proâ—ul dubio c. Hee that abides not in Christ and in whom Christ abides not out of doubt eateth not spirituallie his flesh nor drinketh his bloud although carnallie and visiblie he presse with his teeth the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ but rather eateth and drinketh the Sacrament of so great a thing to his iudgement and the reason followeth Quia immundus c. because hee is vncleane in heart and presumes to come to the Sacrament of Christ which no man can worthilie receiue vnlesse he be pure and cleane in heart as Christ saith Mat. 5. Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God Out of Augustine I obserue against both your opinions these thinges First hee makes a difference of Christes flesh and the Sacrament of Christes flesh for they bee two things and to be distinguished with their seueral substances and properties and not to bee confounded or transubstantiated one into the other and so the nature of bread perish as you vntruelie imagine and teach Secondly that the wicked receiue and grinde with their teeth and swallow with throat the outward Sacrament that is the outward visible creatures of bread and wine Acts. 15.9 to their iudgement or condemnation because they presume to come without a cleane heart and conscience purified by faith But the godly eat the heauenlie part of the Sacrament which is Christ with his benefits because they dwel in Christ by faith and Christ in them by his spirit as hath been plainlie handled before Part. 3. distinct 2. cap. 65. And now I will be bolde to vrge your owne Popes decrees against you Qui discordat à Christo c. whosoeuer dissenteth from Christ doeth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud but the wicked dissent from Christ therfore they neither eat Christs flesh nor drinke his bloud And cap. 69. following quicunque panem c. Whosoeuer eateth this bread the Lord shall liue foreuer but the wicked liue not for euer therfor the wicked eate not this bread the Lord. Now Gentlemen I would faine see how you can dissprooue these Fathers and old Popes and satisfie the Catholicks in this case but I shall haue a fit place to speak of the vnreasonablenesse of this opinion in the title of the Masse where I must shewe to the Catholickes the Popes Priests and Iesuits shamefull opinions that you thinke it no incouenience not onelie for the wicked but also for all such bruit beasts as cats or dogs rats or mice hogs or swine to eate the blessed bodie and drinke the precious bloud of Iesus Christ VVhether the wicked may receaue Christ or noe Fitzsimon The 85. vntruth 94. WHat a ful-mouthe worde worlds wonder is the 85. vntruth thrust out withal that the wicked receaue not the body of Christ Could euer honest or other countenance a true complaint better then Putifars wife or the false harlot before Salomon or the wicked Iudges their false accusations Blame me if M. Rider be not here and euery wher found
haue bene a notable and famous Concil Cartwr l. 1. pag. 93. And in the same place taxeth it for errours in discipline This aduertisement sheweth in general this Concil to haue displeased them Now to the particular application to our coutrouersie We say this testimonie sheweth on our syde First that priests offer a sacrifice which deacons could not and consequently that it could not be only a thanksgiuing bothe because such Sacrifice of thanksgiuing belonged to all alyke as soone to a Deacon as a priest as also because it could not be exhibited into the mouthe of another Secondly that this Sacrifice is the very body of Christ But all this saith M. Rider is nothing because the Concil maketh mention of a Sacrament and Eucharistial Euery twiggs shaddow is a gratefull shelter to a Ionas in extremitie But this small consolation wythereth by these woords of S. Gregorie recorded in the decretals Ob id Sacramenta dicuntur quia sub tegmento corporalium rerum diuina virtus secretius salutem eorundem sacramentorum operatur Vnde à secretis virtutibus Decret 1. pars causa 1. quest 1. c. Multi Secularium vel sacris Sacramenta dicuntur Quae ideo fructuosè penes Ecclesiam fiunt quia sanctus in ea manens Spiritus eorundem Sacramentorum latemer operatur effectum Cuius panis calicis Sacramentum graecè Eucharistia dicitur Latinè bona gratia interpretatur Et quid melius Corpore Sanguine Christi For that are they tearmed Sacraments because vnder the couerture of corporal things diuine veritie more secreatly doth operat the health of the sayd Sacraments VVhich therfor are fruictfully made in the Church because the holy Ghost their remayneing doth woorke the effect secretly of the sayd Sacraments of which the Sacrament of bread and the chalice is in greeke called the Eucharist which in latin is interpreted good grace And what is better then the Body and Blood of Christ By which sweete and sownde testimonie M. Rider as a conye is ferreted out of all his euasions For the being Eucharistial and the being a Sacrament and the names of bread and wyne are fownde to consist with the body and blood of Christ and rather to atestifie it then to exclude it because Sacraments haue their names from sacred and secret good included vnder the couerture of corporal things Which is verefyed in our Sacrament included vnder the forme or couerture of bread and wyne S. Chrysostom 1. Cor. ho. 24. both elder then S. Gregorie and also a naturall Grecian signifyeth the sence of Eucharistical to be all one and hallowed or blessed saying Cum benedictionem dico Eucharistiam dico VVhen I say benediction I say the Eucharist Your Supper indureth no benediction therfor it can not be signifyed by the word Eucharist nor the word Eucharist belong therto so that by degrees all words belonging to this Sacrament as Sacrament it selfe signe spiritual Eucharistical mystical are as ernestly abandowing your profession as by it the substance of Sacraments is abandoned In the meane tyme the forsayd testimonie confirmeth also that thanksgiuing in this Sacrament is rather to be taken for benediction then benediction for thanksgiuing Concilium Ephesinum in Epist. ad Nestorium Catholick Priests And this had 20◠Fathers VVe approach to the misticall benedictions and we are sanctified being partakers of the holie bodie and precious bloud of Christ 104. THis your proofe is trulie quoted pag. 535. the Epistle beginneth thus Rider Religioso Deo amabili consacerdoti Nestorio Cyrillus c. The Councell calleth it a mistical benediction no miraculous transubstantiation And this neither prooues your opinon nor disprooues ours for you say yee are made partakers of the holie bodie and precious bloud of Christ and so say we but you say with the late church of Rome that you are made partakers of that holie bodie and precious bloud by your mouth teeth throat and stomacke And we sey with Scriptures Fathers and the old Church of Rome that we are made partakers of Christs bodie and bloud by the hand mouth and stomack of our soules which is a liuelie faith in Christ crucified as you haue heard before And thus you referre that to the visible parts of the bodie as your mouth teeth and stomacke which the scriptures and fathers meant of the inuisible powers of the soule as our liuelie faith being the spirituall hand mouth and stomacke thereof And heere is your errour of the second kinde And so your two testimonies out of these two Councels are proofes neither proper nor pertinent brought onelie to dazell the eies of the simple and to amase the minds of the weake But I referre the badnesse of your cause and the weaknesse of your proofes nay your disproofes to the censure of the indifferent Reader Onelie giuing the Reader this note by the way that these Councels were called by the Emperour not by the Pope nay the Pope was not president in these Councels but other Bishops chosen by the Emperour And in the Councell of Nice the Popes Legat had but the fourth roome no better account was made of him For in deed he then was no Pope but an Archbishop Thus the Reader may see that these Councels be against you And now to your testimonies out of the fathers The second parte of the second proofe of the Concil Ephesin 104. THe force of this testimonie appertayning to proue Fitzsimon that by the mystical benedictions we are made partakers of the very holy body blood of Christ and consequently that there should be benedictions vsed in this mysterie and that we should not thinke what is here sanctifyed Isa 3. c. v. 3. contayneth only a bare figure and only a bare appellation of such body and blood All this he auoydeth without any difficultie because forsooth the woord mystical is founde together with the residue Certainly it is a rare exception as yf one would say in the third chapter of Esaias third verse there is mention Eloquij mystici of mystical speeche therfor in such chapter and verse there is noe literal veritie For what hindrance to our controuersie is the woord mystical I finde in the last euidence of S. Gregorie that the Eucharist by whom soeuer good or badd it be dispensed yet is a Sacrament quia Spiritus sanctus mysticè illud viuificat because the holy Ghost doth quicken it mysticaly By which is demonstrated that the woord mystical doth rather helpe then hinder our pourpose and rather hinder then helpe their imaginatiō who denye any thinge to be mysticaly quickned by the holy Ghost in this mysterie What other string hath M. Rider to his bowe to trott forsoothe to the Popes supremacie and to fayle as filthelye in that as in the rest Of which supremacie there followeth a peculiar article wherin it is to be amply discussed First who tould you M. Rider that the Popes legat had but the fowerth seat in the Concil of Nice Where
word which was made flesh which is Christ Deuorandus est auditu ruminandus intellectu fide dagerandus This word Christ must be swallowed whole by hearing must be meditated vpon or remembred by vnderstinding digested by faith Now you see Tertullian of your owne Paris print aunweres you expounds himselfe And seeing no man can better expound Tertullian his meaning then Tertullian himselfe therefore haue I brought him from your owne Catholicke Presse of Paris to condemne all Iesuits and Priests that shall set a litterall sence vppon an allegoricall phrase onelie to deceiue the simple plaine Catholicks and to abuse the godlie learned Fathers by an ignorant and sottish construction And now to the rest of your profes that follow The third parte of the second proofe Of Tertullian Fitzsimon 105. THe 104. vntruth that we frame any argument vpon Tertullians woord The 104. vntruth and especialy such one But since we are inuited by example thus we argue The Maior shal be your owne woords The faythe of the first fiue hondred yeares is the ancient true and Catholick faythe but that the fleashe and not only the soule was fedd with the body and blood of Christ was the fayth of the first fiue hondred yea two hondred within which Tertullian attayned the tyme of Christ yeares Ergo that not only the sowle but the fleash was fedd with the body and blood of Christ is the true and Catholick faythe The minor are the woords of Tertullian which herein are so playne that wofull and vayne is M. Riders witt and payne to strugle against them He telleth of an ould distinction that the Sacrament is one thing and the mater of the Sacrament is another Be it true or false are not the woords cleere that the very fleashe is fedd by the body of Christ and such distinction nothing pertinent to affirme or denye them Secondly yf the body outwardly eate the Sacrament and that as after in him followeth the body and soule are fedde by the same meat in the Sacrament and that he graunt the soule is fedd by the pretious body and blood of Christ How can it possibly be denyed but that the bodye also eateth the body and blood of Christ To affirme that we hould the soule to feede carnaly on Christ is in maner declared to ryde that is to forge and shamlesly to slaundre For we only teach that the soule feedeth on Christs corporal body not carnaly but realy and truely and yet spiritualy but not only spiritualy So that without any wrong it is to be accompted the 105. vntruth to say that we teach otherwyse The 105. vntruth Should not such an imputatiō haue two or three or at least one quotation of some one ould or yong noble or obscure sacred or prophane of our writers it being so oft promised so oft threatned But M. Rider will performe these promises in his printed books when he performeth other promises the frustration wherof in London was otherwyse incountred then in Dublin in Merchands written books When these be made Catholick that is not puritanicaly canceled without a benediction but Christianly marked with a fayre crosse then all other promises will also be more christian lyke accomplished and many a merchand reioyced and many a long expectation satisfyed But sayth he Christ recording to Tertullian is to be heard to be meditated remembred and beleeued and so Tertullian fayth he hath aunswered him selfe and his former saying that the fleash is fedde by the body of Christ All this he quoteth yet I doubt not very faythfully For I finde Tertullian printed at Paris to haue the booke of resurrection out of which my testimonie is brought so farr beyond the 47. yea and 407. page euen in follio that I can not make vnto my selfe any conceit how these last woords are sayd to be in the same booke following and yet but in the 47. page At this I stand not Only I craue all curteous witts and wysedoms to obserue how and whether at all Tertullian is made to aunswer him selfe and vs by this late allegation vnlesse he would suppose that euery thing aunswereth euery thing For yf what may be heard meditated remembred beleued could not be receaued corporaly then the Messias Christ our Saluiour could neuer be receaued in the blessed virgins womb nor into the howse or habitation of any other Yet our beleefe assureth the contrary and consequently the saying of Tertullian that our fleash is fedd by the body of Christ remayneth in his full vigor although those other words be true Nay rather they are more therby verifyed For yf Christ be heard or beleued his saying the bread to be his body should not be distrusted Could you be content to heare the former testimonyes auoyded by euery by and impertinent woord that they were mystical Sacraments Eucharistical and therefore not true and can you not accept lyke maner of aunswering in this place I referre you to Luthers opinion of lyke their wonted answering mentioned in the 47. number Although the former woords of Tertullian are insupportable to M. Riders clayme and that he strugleth in vayne against them yet I will second them with this conclusion out of the sayd Tertullian Acceptum panem distributum discipulis Corpus suum illum secit Hoc est Corpus meum dicendo Tertull orat de Antichristo The bread taken and distributed to his disciples he made it his body saying This is my body I would fayne behould M. Riders skill in wreasting these woords from our purpose with any shew of probabilitie His wonted maner of wreasting without probabilitie which posteritie will I suppose by his remembrance name ryding is as I thinke loathsome to his most louing frends to fynde in him and lewed to be followed by him Catholicke Priestes God hath left vs his flesh to eate and his bloud to drinke that we might be nourished by that Cyprian de Duplici Mart floruit 249. by which we haue been redeemed Rider 106. A Blinde man may see that you neuer read this in Cyprian your selfe or else that you vnderstand them not For Cyprian saith not God hath left vs his flesh but Reliquit nobis edendam carnem suam reliquit bibendum sanguinem c. he hath left vs his flesh to eate and his bloud to drinke I pray you pardon me to aske you which is the nominatiue case to the verbe is Deus no but if you had begunne seuen lines sooner as you ought in deed to haue done at Nemo maiorem charitatem habet c. you shold haue found the right nominatiue case that there might haue been not onelie a gramaticall concord but also a Theologicall harmonie and then the sence had bene plaine For it was hee that died for his enemies that left vs his flesh c. And that was Christ not God the father But you begunne after your accustomed manner in the middest of a sentence mistaking the nominatiue case to
the verbe and so lay downe heresie for diuinitie for God the Father hath neither flesh nor blould But if I should helpe you with a charitable construction by attributing that to Christes Deitie which is proper to his humanitie yet you still haue wrested the father and abused the Reader But thus Cyprian is to be read Christ hath left vs his flesh to eate and his bloud to drinke so we confesse it we beleeue it and we teach it but to be eaten and drunke spirituallie by faith not corporallie not gutturallie as you imagine For this is the inward inuisible Grace of the Sacramente that you propound Now how this flesh and bloud of Christ is to be eaten or how Christs flesh and bloud are naturallie substantiallie reallie vnder the formes of bread and wine which is our question you cannot prooue by Cyprian and so still you propound the matter to vs when you should prooue the maner to vs and here is your error in the third kinde if not in moe before specified And heere you bring a testimonie out of Cyprian CypriaÌ„ de Caena Domini nu 9. where he speaketh not properlie of the sacrament but of the threefold Martyrdome which hee gathered out of the death of Christ and therefore you shew a great weaknesse in running to that Tractate whereas you might haue spedde better if you had list neerer home For if you had reade or woulde reade that Father vpon his Treatise of the Lords Supper hee would haue either changed your minde or hardned your heart but howsoeuer discouerd your errors And that the eating of Christs flesh and drinking of Christs bloud is not a grosse corporall swallowing of his blessed flesh and precious bloud as you deeme but that Esus carnis Christi est quaedam auiditas quoddam desiderium manendi in ipso c. What it is to eate Christes flesh and drinke Christs bloud The eating of Christs flesh is a certaine egernesse and a certaine desire to abide in Christ c. And three lines before this he saith Our abiding in him is our eating of him and the drinke is a certaine incorporation into him And in the latter end of the Treatise you shall finde that Father touch the point in question betwixt vs haec quotiens agimus non dentes ad mordendum acâ—â—mus How Christ must bee eaten sed fide syncera panem sanctum frangimus partimus c. As often as we receiue these holie mysteries we whet not our teeth to bite or chew but breake and diuide this holie bread by a sincere faith c. And foure lines before that saith he Edulium carnis Christi defaecatis animis c. The food of Christs flesh must be eaten with purified minds saith not with washed mouthes And a litle before that hee saith Impij nec se iudicant nec sacramenta diiudicant Ibid. nu 13. the wicked lambunt petram c. licke the rocke but neither sucke honic nor oyle c. that is to say they eate the Sacrament but not the inward grace of the Sacrament Thus I hope the indifferent Reader is satisfied that your proofe is not pertinent to the matter in question and therefore sheweth the weaknesse of your cause and the wilfulnesse of your mindes that will seeke so stiflie to maintaine fables with wresting Fathers Transubstantiation is but in deede a fable for Cyprians place that you bring handleth the visible grace of the Sacrament And in this place which I bring he toucheth the manner how that grace is to be receiued that is with fayth as we say not teeth as you teach c. And so Cyprian agrees with himselfe and we with Cyprian ioyne against your carnall opinion And thus hauing aunswered Cyprian with Cyprian and shewed you your ouersight and mistaking of Cyprian I will come to the examination of your next proofe The fowerth parte of the second proofe of S. Cyprian 106. FIrst I am blamed that when I should haue sayd Christ Fitzsimon I sayd God Wherby euery one may conceaue that I am not of their opinion who deny the godhead of Christ related in our examinatioÌ„ of the Creed I thanke Christ my God and Lord that I am reprehended but for sucht faults as consist with trueth and pietie Christ then hath left vs his fleash to eate and his blood to drinke saith S. Cyprian which M. Rider saith he confesseth he beleeueth he teacheth Then to the next clause that are should be nourished by that by which we haue bene redeemed To which M. Rider is mute or dumb and consequently offending in one he is made guiltie of all So that to beleeue part and not the whole is vnproffitable In the meane tyme S. Cyprians testimonie can not be auoyded For yf by Christs body we were redeemed then by Christs body saith S. Cyprian we must be nourished A figure a representatioÌ„ an appellatioÌ„ redeemed vs not therfor a figure appellatioÌ„ representation in this sacrament nourished vs not Not only through faithe and the stomack of the soule were our soules redeemed but our bodyes also to resurrection and glorie by the true suffring of Christs real and corporal bodye therfore not only in faith or only according to the stomack of the soule are we nourished but by the true participation of Christs real and natural bodye into our bodyes to nourish them and to sanctifie together the soule Yet saith he Cyprian telleth that the eating of Christ is a greedy desyre to remayne with him that with our teethe we teare him not but with a sincere faythe we kreake and diuyde him which we euer before and now professe and auerr For who thinketh Christs true and real receauing to exclude his spiritual and incorruptible receauing Let our 34. 40. 42. 46. 54. numbers beare recorde that we teach not otherwyse then as S. Cyprian here doth to witt the corporal receauing not to be a Capharnaical tearing renting or byting of Christ but a true real participation of his body into ours vnder the forms of bread and wyne to the sanctification therby of our soules Yf any requyre what is a Capharnaical tearing by the Capharnaits conceaued and by Sectarists imagined S. Cyril l. 4. c. 22. in Ioan. certifieth saying Ad immanes serarum mores vocari se à Christo arbitrabantur incitarique vt vellent crudas hominum carnes manducare sanguinem bibere They supposed Christ to induce them to the sauage maners of wild beasts and to haue incited them to eate the raw fleash of men and to drinke their bloud Yf you would kill sectarists you can not weane nor winne them from lyke grosse and carnal constructions of Christs words But to the former purpose that I may not play a protestants parts saying you see this taught and that taught this here and that there when it is nether soe nor soe I will alleage S. Cyprians woords breefe but playne S. Cypr. de cana Domiâ—i
be their TransubstaÌ„tiated reall presence But because you say Luther helde a reall presence therefore you conclude against vs with his testimonie because you call him a chiefe Protestant perswading the Catholikes that either some chiefe Protestants be of your opinion touching your real presence or else that there is a iarre amongst our selues touching the same And because few of you haue read Luther as appeareth by your omissions transpositions and your imperfect translation and therefore in this point know not exactlie the difference betwixt your selues Luther and vs I will plainlie and trulie set downe the three seuerall opinions touching this question that the Reader may see wherin the difference one from another or agreement one with another consisteth The manner Christ willing shall bee by question and aunswere as followeth 1. Questi 1. Question VVHat is giuen in the Lords Supper besides bread and wine 1. Aunsw 1. Aunswere First you say the bodie and bloud of Christ Secondlie Luther saith the bodie and bloud of Christ Thirdlie we say the bodie and bloud giuen in the sacrament 2. Quest 2 Quest How is Christs bodie and bloud giuen in the sacrament 2. Aunsw 2 Auns You say corporallie Luther saith corporallie We say with scriptures and fathers spirituallie 3. Questi 3 Quest In what thing is Christs bodie and bloud giuen 3. Aunsw 3 Aunsw You say vnder the formes or accidents of bread the substance being quite chaunged the accidents onelie remainning Luther saith in with or vnder the bread neither substance nor accidents changed but both remaining We with scriptures and fathers say Christs bodie and bloud are giuen in his merciful promise which tendereth whole Christ with all his benefites vnto the soule of man sealed and assured vnto vs in the worthie receiuing of the sacraments 4. Questi 4 Quest. How must Christs bodie and Bloud bee receiued 4. Aunsw 4 Auns You say with the mouth Luther saith with the mouth and faith Wee say according to the holie scriptures that Christ must be receiued by faith and there lodge and dwell in our hearts for whatsoeuer Christ giues by promise mâ—st of man be receiued by faith 5. Questi 5. Quest. To what part of man is Christes bodie and bloud giuen 5. Aunsw 5. Auns You say to your bodies which is absurd Luther saith both to bodie and soule which is impossible We say to our soules for the promise is spiritual the things promised spirituall the names to receiue them spirituall so the place into which it must bee receiued must needs be spirituall not corporall not that the substance of Christs bodie is vained to our spirits but that those precious benefits purchased for vs in the crucified bodie of Christ must be vnited to our spirits by faith This doctrine is Apostolicall souÌ„d Catholick vppon which wee boldlie may venture our soules and saluations â— Quest To whom is Christs bodie and bloud giuen 6. Questi â— Auns You say to the godlie or godlesse beleeuers infidels as hath ben aboue said 6. Aunsw Luther saith both to the godlye and godlesse We say onelie to the godlie beleeuers as heeretofore hath been prooued â— Quest What doe the wicked eate in the Lords supper â— Auns You say accidents of bread and Christs bodie 7. Questi Luther saith the wicked eat bread both substance and accidents 7. Aunsw and the bodie of Christ also We say the wicked eate nothing in the Lords supper but bare bread and drinke nothing but meere wine being the outward elements of the sacrament As for the inward grace of the Sacrament which is Christ crucified with all his merits they eate not they receiue not because they haue neither a liuelie faith to receiue him nor a purified heart by faith to intertaine him And therefore they onelie eate as Iudas did and as Augustine said Illi manducabaÌ„t panem Dominum Tract 59. super Iohn page 205. illi panem Domini coÌ„tra Dominum The godlie eate bread the Lord the wicked onelie the Lord against bread of the the Lord. 8 Quest What is it to eate Christs bodie 8. Questi 8. Auns You say carnallie to eate Christs flesh with your bodilie mouth c. 8. Aunsw Luther saith carnallie to eate Christs flesh and spirituallie to beleeue in him Wee say with the Scriptures that to beleeue that all Christs merits are ours and purchased for vs in his passion This is to eate Christs bodie as hath been alreadie prooued 9 Quest. What is it to drinke Christs bloud 9. Questi 9 Auns You say carnallie to drinke his bloud 9. Aunsw Luther saith carnallie and spirituallie We say with the scriptures it is to beleeue that Christs bloud was shed on the crosse for our sinnes 10 Quest. How is bread made Christs bodie 10. Questi 10 Auns You say by Transubstantiation 10. Aunsw Luther saith by Consubstansiation We say by appellation signification or representation as aforesaid 11 Quest Where is Christs bodie 11. Questi 11 Auns You say euerie where Both of you erre 11. Aunsw for then Christ should not haue a true bodie Luther saith euery where Both of you erre for then Christ should not haue a true bodie We say according to Scripture and Creed onelie in heauen 12 Quest How is Christ euery where 12. Questi 12 Auns You say according to both natures 12. Aunsw But both of you speak Monkerie Poperie Luther saith according to both natures But both of you speak Monkerie Poperie We say with Scriptures and Fathers as hath been proued onely according to his Godhead Now gentle Reader you see the agrement difference that is betwixt the Papists Lutherans and Protestants And how impertinentlie I will not say vnschollerlike this is brought against vs which neither helpeth their carnall presence nor hurteth our faith touching Christs spirituall presence And now to the rest that followeth The third Proofe That the cheefe protestants did beleeue the real presence and alleaged all the Fathers for the maintenance therof Fitzsimon 120. THIS proofe being soe important by how much it is greueous and extraordinarie to be ouerthrowen by his owne brotherhood it lay M. Rider vpon to strayne all his senses and imploy all his power to frustrat so many assaults and especialy when his owne domesticals or rather his patriarcks had conspired against him First therfor he saythe that Luther was a Monck therfor by Luthers request all errours and among the rest this of the real presence ought to be imputed to his being a Monck And so all is thought well defended To which for answer I reuoke first into memorie what is deliuered out of Luther in the 117. number of the maner of answering of these people how euery thing to them seemeth a full and bastant resolution to all obiections Luth. Defens verb. cenae fol. 381. 382. 394. 405. 406.
bloud of our Christ and Sauiour it is no charitie Nay saith Augustine it is plaine impietie and a wicked and a most damnable fact And so to prooue the action lawfull Augustine would haue you Catholicks but you wil hee Caphernaiâ—â— Canibals the kingdome of charitie hath euer taken these and the like propositions to bee figuratiue and the sence to be spirituall Therefore if you will bee loyall subiects of charities kingdome shewe your subiection to her charitable and Catholicke exposition otherwise you will stand indited of spirituall and vncharitable rebellion That protestants by their owne principles can not affirme Christ our Saluiour not to be spiritualy it selfe in the Sacrament Also that S. Augustin disproueth them 54. HIs late saying that he hath my hand Fitzimon to the great errours which most safely he keepeth with him I graunt to be true yet not to but against the errours which to his perdition most safely as he saythe he keepeth with him which as a candle by fingers snuffed leaueth blacknes and burning to the snuffers hands remayning by their detraction more cleere and in it selfe mor delytsome As in all our processe by Gods grace it hath and shall more and more appeare It is first the 32. vntrueth The 32. vntruth that yf these woords of Christ be figuratiue and Sacramental This is my bodye this is my blood of the new testament they will plainly disproue our transubstantiation For it hath bene oft professed that we allow but not only as you doe spiritual and figuratiue sence of these woords not excluding real substantial and literal It appeareth in the numbers 14. 15. 31. 34. 40. 42. 46. 49. c. You haue bownd your selfe in your first position for which you replye as it is ingrossed by your selfe to stand vpon a spiritual presence only to the faythfull beleeuers Therfor no testimonie or allegation will auayle you wher in only spiritual or only figuratiue is not coÌ„prised Nay yf it coÌ„tayne the woord spiritual it must be also impertineÌ„t to your purpose vnlesse you recant your agreemeÌ„t with the protestaÌ„t martyrs who sealed with their blood as Fox deliuereth Fox Acts Monum pag. 1529. that the difference of doctrin betweene the faithfull and papists coÌ„cerning the Sacrament is that the Papists say that Christ is corporaly vnder or in the forme of bread and wyne but the faythfull say that Christ is not there nether corporaly nor spiritualy Behould how you are ingaged that nether can you hould corporal or the so much spoken of spiritual Caueat in aunswer to our allegation of Tindal c. 1 vnlesse you degenerat from your protomartyrs primatiue protestantcie to whom and which you haue bound your selfe in expresse woords to agree in vnitie and veritie of doctrine Now to our mater and S. Augustins woords First he doth not say that they be figuratiue only coÌ„sequently are not against vs as appeareth in the numbers lately specified nor for yow Secondly he disputeth not against our beleefe but against the Capharnaits August tom 9. trac 27. in Ioan. of whom he saith Sicut illi intellexerunt carnem non sic egâ— do ad manducandum carnem meam as they vnderstood fleash not so do I giue my fleash to eate But how saith he did they vnderstand fleash Quomodo incadauere laniatur aut in macello venditur As it is torne from a carcas or sould in a shambles In such sense only and to such conceits would S. Augustin haue Christs woords to be esteemed figuratiue to witt in regard of them who as S. Cyrill l. 4. in Ioan. c. 22. saith Ad immanes ferarum mores vocari se à Christo arbitrabantur incitarique vt vellent crudas hominum carnes manducare sanguinem bibere They surmised that they were prouoked after the sauage maners of beasts to eate mans raw fleash and drinke his gore bloud Wheras Christ did farr otherwyse intend it as that he would be eaten in the lykenes of bread and wyne which were figures of his operations in our soules But to say that for the seeming of Christs woords to be horrible or to be taken figuratiuely his substantial and real presence should be excluded August tom 6. con aduer leg prophet l. 2. c. 9. is most remote from S. Augustins inteÌ„tion and all his writings Behould here but one yet infallible and palpable proofe therof Mediatorem Dei hominum hominem Christum Iesum carnem suam nobis manducandum bibendumque sanguinem dantem fideli corde ore suscipimus quamuis horribilius videatur humanam carnem manducare quam perimere humanum sanguinem potare quam fundere VVe receaue with faythfull hart and mowthe Iesus Christ man Mediatour betwixt God and man giuing his fleash to eate and his blood to drincke although it seemeth more horrible to eate the fleash of man then to kill and to drincke the blood of man then to shedd it Doth is seeme horrible to eate Christs fleash according to S. Augustin and to drincke his blood yea more horrible then to kill yet he assureth vs that not withstanding such seeming we should eate and drinke not his figure but his fleash and blood not in faithfull hart only but also by mowthe Alas let S. Augustin alone in lyfe a Catholick Frier or Monke in his books a Catholick doctor in bothe an enemye and triumpher against hereticks Hitherto you haue neuer brought S. Augustins testimonies â— Reg. 11. but as Vrias tooke infortunat leters to his owne distruction Aug. l. 3. de Ciu. c. 16. Further S. Augustin would haue these figuratiue speeches so long to be accompted figuratiue till charitie consist with their meaning Out of which you inferr that Christ can not be eaten corporalye it being say you farr against charitie But this consequence is farr against Charitie Ex Serm. de verbis Euan. Citatur a Beda 1. Cor. 10. and veritie Witnes the same S. Augustin saying Quis inuitauit quos inuitauit Et quid preparauit Inuitauit Dominuâ— seruos preparauit eis cibum seipsum Quis audeat manducare Dominum suum tamen ait qui manducat me viuit propter me Quando Christus manducatur vita manducatur Nec occiditur vt manducetur sed mortuos viuificat Quando manducatur reficit sed non deficit VVho hathe inuited whom hathe he inuited and what hath he prepared our Lord hath inuited his seruants and prepared him selfe meat to them VVho dareth deuoure his Lord yet neuer the lesse he sayth who eateth me liueth because of me VVher Christ is eaten lyfe is eaten Nether is he killed that he should be eaten but he quickneth the dead VVhen he is eaten he feedeth but is not impaired Loe whether S. Augustin thinketh it inconuenient or against charitie for any to eate his Lorde himselfe being the inuiter himselfe the preparer himselfe the foode Loe whether the eating of Christ be a tearing digesting or consuming of Christ Tom.
Trismegistus see in our 24. numbre As litle do I know what he may cauill at in the next opinion of the master of Sentences reporting it truely without his owne commixtions as but only telling for compleat and prefect consecration not only for the essential but also for the ceremonial and historical part all that is prescribed by the Church to be obserued By all which accusations examined they being so idle so confused and intricat as wanting all method and mater and so remote from disproueing cōsecration as they all are confessed being disputations not whether ther be any consecration but such presupposed to be vndoubtfull in what sorte ther is any to approue it and withal so vntruely reported all men frends and foes to our profession may perceaue that nether late or owld true or false setled beleefe or opiniatiue disputations do contradict our persuasion and that diuersitie can not or hath not bene among vs in any other sorte then by their impudent reporte who with squinted eyes and dazeled brayns behould vs therby thinking like gogle-eyed dronkards euery candle to be twentie Now must we out of the whole heape intimat only some choise vntruethes The 56. is that he would shew many opinions of popes contrary one to another The 57. The 56 57. 58 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64 65. 66. vntruth that Guido numbreth fower diuers opinions that he or M. Rider haue quoted any of the six opinions by him sayd to be repugnant one to another that we know the Canon of the masse to be in patching many hondred yeares that any fabulouse opinion is related or mentioned by Guido that Guido is of different opinion to any other by him related in allowing consecration that our religion is hellish The 58. that Christ and his Churche for the first eight hondred yeares wanted intention in institution and vse of the B. Sacrament The 59. that ther is any suche mater in the antididagmate as he informeth The 60. that Bonauentur so iudged The 61. that S. Augustin or S. Eusebius were popes The 62. that transubstantiation was founded by Innocentius the third The 63. 64. 65. false allegations additions and alterations of negatiues to affirmatiues in repetition of Innocents discourse The 66. that M. Rider hathe discouered hondreds of heresies in our wryters c. Vpon my creditt I liberaly ouerpasse for breuities sake ten tymes as many more impious vntruethes easie to be viewed by euery Christian obseruer only because I loath to reueale a sinke out of which vamped so odiouse a stench The best rule toward such a reporter is to haue all that he saith in suspition vntil his allegations be viewed which to him and he to them are euer found contrary 68. Rider And when the lawful minister hath taught the prepared communicants the grieuousnes of their sinnes the greatnes of Gods wrath VVhat true consecration is which the Gospellers teach the sufficiencie of Christs merits fully to appease the same the nature of the Sacrament which is a commemoration of that passion the office of faith to apprehend and applie Christs merits promissed in the word and tendred in the due administration of the Sacraments then is there I say aright consecration of the Sacrament Now whether this consecration of yours is warranted by Christ his words let the indifferent Reader iudge and with the truest auncient opinion ioyne Thus much concerning your imagined newstamped consecration Now to your second piller which is transsubstansiation First I must tel you in this Transubstantiation as in the former that the terme is new lately inuented compounded by your selues And as your consecration was neuer found in the new Testament VVhat the true consecration is which the gospellers teache and whether it be according to Christs institution 68. I Had thought to haue kept back my selfe at this point Fitzimon of the protestāt cōsecration by occasion of the wordes lately spoken by M. Rider in the 66. number to witt Oh damnable heresie that renounceth Christs institutiō and followeth mās inuētion But this clause of his now is my text wherupon I intēd to reuye as the phrase of players is or replie yf it dislyke any haueing hitherto sene al his layes exceptions First in this his discourse borrowed out of Iuels reply against Harding art 1. diuis 8. pag. 19. to which Bullinger decad 5. ser 6. Caluin Instit l. 4. c. 17. n. 15. and others of that sort accorde I can not perceaue Christs woords of institution of the Sacrament nether contayned nor mentioned ether as it is vsed by vs or propounded in the Communion booke What more puritantrie Is not this Christs institution to be renounced and mans inuention followed The sequel therupon is in my forsaid text by conceit for breuitie sake here reiterated But we wil not so departe The substance of bread and wyne when it is saith he sett a part from the common vse and applyed to a holy vse according to Gods woord The commmon vse of bread and wyne is to nourishe I aske how you separat them from nourishing especialy when you often sayd befor that as they nourish the body so Christ the soule not by his discending but by your ascending in faithe Yf then the substance of bread and wyne be sett a part from their common vse which is to nourishe what relation haue they to Christs feeding our soules 1. Timo. 4. I pray you for our vnderstandings sake make this playne 2. In deed I fynd in S. Paul all meat is lawfull that is sanctified by the woord and by prayer So hath Musculus in locis com cap. de caena pag. 336. Bullinger decad 5. ser 6. Do you therfor intend by application to a holy vse that such sanctification of meat had operated any mutation in your bread and wyne Fye say you noe For blessings charms or woords of sanctification and operation we abhorre Then I requyre both how you interpret your intricat conceits and also what warrant for this whole discourse is any wher els in scripture Yf you bring none as I ame sure ther is none yet knowen to your purpose remembre my text being your owne woords how vnfortunatly it tumbleth vpon you According breefly to my promise in the begynning I wil not ouercrow ouer him so abiectly prostrat in superfluous discourses I let you therfor vnderstand that the Current of protestantcie declineth as from a serpent from the woords of Christs institution and clowds and shaddowes of words mists and obscuritie of sentences sauoring fained pietie being made by them his institution and not his owne woords Decad. 5. ser 6. Witnes Bullinger pronowncing in playne tearmes ther is noe vertue at all in rehearsing the woords of the Lord in the Supper Zuingl to 2. resp ad confess Luth. sol 431. And he confirmeth it by authoritie of Plinie a pagan Witnes Zuinglius Saying that none can euer giue any sound reason or authoritie Ioan.
brotherly helpe to M. Riders consolation by thes woords of Christ the new testament in my blood Math. 25.40 For a testament is not a testament till the partie dye And Christ at his supper dyed not otherwyse but mysticaly as in sacrifice therfor yf ther was a testament made such sacrifice is to be confessed Will you haue Christ him selfe manifest his making the new testament at his supper Why then at it he sayd mandatum nouum do vobis Ioan. 13.34 a new law I giue you Marke this sequel vpon this planted foundation Christ by confession of greatest protestants made his testament at his last supper and M. Rider accordeth therto confessing him in this present place and numbre to haue made his last will bequeathed legacies c. Well then I inferr both that he shedd or deliuered his blood at this table and also that he sacrificed him selfe which in effect is all one For by M. Riders confession among his legacies Ad Hebr. 9.22 at his supper one principal is the remission of our synnes But S. Paul saith Sine fanguinis effusione non fit remissio withowt shedding of blood ther is no remission Ergo or therfor Christ in his supper shed his blood by which he bequeathed such legacie of remission of synns Now yf Christ as M. Rider sayd in the precedent number could not clense his synn without death and yet that at his supper he bequeathed vnto him by his last wil remission of synns of both guilt and punishment as is saith he pronounced in the Creed wherof others may be iudges whether he vnderstand his Creede or noe considering that to this day all mortal men do feele the punishment at least of Adams guilt to be vnforgiuen as to one not only well knowen by him but also well beloued of him as his yonger brother they are his owne woords It must followe that Christ was sacrificed I mean incruentally to his heuenly Father at his last supper Ad Hebr. 9.16 both for his making then his testament vbi enim testamentum est mors necesse est intercedat authoris for wher a testament is it is necessarie the deathe of the testator happen as also for shedding his blood and fullfilling all figuratiue sacrifices of the owld law in which the blood was not only shedd but also the things sacrificed were first putt to deathe yet this shedding of blood is not to be vnderstood in any other then in a mysticall and impossible maner No body hathe ingaged M. Rider to confesse this trueth but him selfe Wherfor yf his pew-fellowes exclaime at him and say that he hath confessed the true shedding of Christs blood substantialy although not in propre forme but only vnder the forme of wyne vnderstanding by shedding only the powring therof into the mouthe of the Apostles at his Supper and also the Sacrifice of Christ therby which is the Masse without which his blood could not then be shedd nor his testament had bene auaylable for nondum valet dum viuit qui testatus est Ad Hebr. 9.17 it is not of force while the testator without all death mystical or corporal liueth and therby ratifyed all papistry and confownded all protestantcy and which might seeme most absurd allowed a duble death of Christ one at his Supper another vpon the cross S. August tom 8. in Psal 61. Let him aunswer first for the residue out of S Augustin Occultari potest ad tempus veritas vinci non potest Florere potest ad tempus iniquitas permanere non potest Veritie for a tyme may be hydd but it can not be vanquished Iniquitie may florishe for a space but can not continue And to that heynouse doctrin of Christs duble death let him denye it hardely and say that at his Supper was only anticipated in an incruental and incomprehensible maner and mysticaly not in his propre forme but of bread and wine and without violence the same death which succeeded in a cruental violent maner as it was one the same lambe of God sacrificed in bothe maners first incruentaly after cruentaly In teaching this doctrin first he hathe it assured to him by the connection of Scripturs here produced Secondly by Musculus an arche Protestant Calu. in libell de caena de vera Eccles refor Zuing. to 1. de canone misse fol 183 â—iblia de Trinit l. 2. pag. 89. Thirdly by the ancient Fathers vniuersaly whom Caluin and Zuinglius testifye to establishe this incruental sacrifice And Bibliander certifyeth it was the vndowbted beleefe of the ancient Israelits that Christ would institute such a sacrifice in bread and wyne Therfor Gentle M. Rider reioyce at those sugred woords of Christ this is my blood in the new testament not faynedly or by dissembling those remote causes alleaged but for the riche treasure left perpetualy to Gods Church of so pretious a sacrifice wherby force is giuen to all bulls and pardons necessarie for remission of our synns In truth I had forgotten to calculate incident vntruthes in a long tyme yet now am constrayned to score vp at least the 81. grosse vntruth The 81. vntruth that we teache other remission of synns then by Christs testament My good Sir affoord vs some citation of such our doctrin according to your promise to alleadge booke leafe c. or elss we will thinke that we may lawfully say yow ryde c. 85. These deceiuers must be told as Peter told Ananias Rider why hath Sathan fild thy heart that thou shouldest lie not onelie vnto men but also vnto the holie Gost Acts. 5.3 In Ananias heart there was a wicked conceit in his practises a wicked deceit and for his reward a suddaine death You Chaplens of the Pope doe tell the poore people many waies to haue remission of their sinnes besides Christes Testament Christes blood which I will deliuer particularlie if I be vrged but you are deceiued and so you deceiue them and because you would keepe them still blinde that they should neither see your deceit nor theyr owne daunger therefore you kept this comfortable clause from them The new Testament in my bloud whithout which there is neither remission of sinns nor sauing of soules Another comfort you conceale from the deuout meditation of euerie good Christian which is In rememberance of me We read in histories after Iulius Caesar was slaine Suetonius Plutarch Marcus Anthonius made an Oration to the people of Rome in which he shewed Caesars loue and painted out verie Rhetoricallie Caesars bountie to them while he liued but in the heat of his speech he made a pause shewed them Caesars robes sprinkled with his princelie bloud shed by the bloudie hand of his cruell and malicious enemies which when the Cittizens sawe remembring his loue presentlie they ranne vpon the murtherers and slew them Did the Cittizens of Rome being Pagans reuenge Caesars death vppon his enemies onelie remembring his loue and liberalitie Then
illegittimat English Puritan into Scotland But why do I so aduise as yf by dispensation you can not be licensed to be of all fashions and to say with English now and by and by with Scots and backward forward I pray you all not to be ignorant that they can dispense one with another to dissemble as to take degrees with all ceremonies most odious to their doctrin so as they can remayne in their offices yea weare capp tippett c. and yet be neuer the more reformed to protestantcie I will giue two infallible instances therof one of Thomas Cartwright the other of Beza two pillers of puritancie I had D. Cartwright lib. 2. in the Epistle sayth Cartwright the aduise of more then a dozen learned Ministers all were puritans who considering yf I had the office of a Doctor in the vniuersitie were of opinion for the good might be done therby I might swallow the fond and idle ceremonies which accompanie it To which I yeelded Snape in his Letter to Barbon To which agreeth Snape after his examination befor the commissioners an 1590. saying I heare some whispering allready yet among them who fauoure the cause that T. Cartwright hath counseled the brethren rather to vse those corruptions then to leaue their charges Beza Feuardent con Brouault en ses entremangeries cap. 14. pag. 327. Colloq Montpel p. 150. 268. 388. when he induced the Duke of witeberg to inuade France to prouoke him the rather he publickly made profession of the Lutheran beleefe wherof the forsayd Duke was a member and fauourer And in departing without effecting his pretense he sayd that he had singularly deceaued Ein Tronkens Bolts the dronken nobles of Almaine Of which dissimulation being challenged by them of Zurick he aunswered them that it was lawfull so to cogge lye dissemble and deceaue to establishe their religion So that the protestants as I sayd haue noe cause to applaude to them selues when any Puritans become conformable to their iniunctions for by these presidents they are allowed to counterfet delude cheat and dissemble as they list and therfor not to stand in danger by being of any fashion or cutt of puritantrie Englishe Scotish or wholye Anabaptistical to shift their roomes or rancks so that only they temporize and applaud in countenance to the predominant humor then in prime and preeminence Yet you shal neuer fynde any more bitterly inueyghe then these dispensers against the Popes dispensations which nether can be nor euer were graunted to do any thing vnlawfull Wherby we alwayes accompt all our dissembling hypocritical Catholicks as remote from God and godlines how soeuer we be belyed to dispense with them when they conforme them selues to protestants for their temporal commodities as euer were any hereticks or infidels To conclude their former hatred against the name of preist hath made them denye euen that Christ him selfe was euer a preist in this world Socinus in lib. de Christi natura con Volan pag. 81. Christus sacerdos planè inauguratus non fuit nisi post mortem suam imo post suum in coelum ascensum Christ playnly was not install'd a preist till after his death yea after his ascension Wherby that euer he offred sacrifice for vs that euer he was our redeemer that the scriptures manifoldly auerring his preisthood are true is blasphemously denyed Rider 100. Thirdlie in what place of scripture did Christ giue you commission to consecrate challices or to make anie challice more holie by your charmed consecration then Christs cup was in his blessed institution which had none of your consecration for this the Catholicks must know by the premisses formerly handled that your consecration is not like to Christs coÌ„secration for either Christs blessing or thanksgiuing with the whole action of Christ in the institution was sufficient to consecrate or insufficieÌ„t if you will affoord Christ that fauor that it was sufficient then yours is friuolous And whereas we vse the same sanctification Christ did how dare you say ours iâ— defectiue without blasphemie to Christes institution But this your vsurped title of sanctitie which yee attribute to your selues in making the people beleeue that you can make one cup water salte or season more holie then an other by your fingred blessing is vntrue and a pharisaicall brag This maintaineth your Priesthoode in glorie pompe worldlie estimation but hath brought many of seelie Catholickes to beggerie ignorance and grosse superstition Fourthlie by what scripture can you prooue that Christs holie bloud is but an effect of your consecration or benediction of the cup If Christs bloud be an effect of your cup benediction then your cup benedicton is the cause of Christs holie bloud O helliâ—â— and damnable diuinitie as if a sinfull ignorant Priest could by his magicall consecration make the holie bloud of Christ my Sauiour which was shed on the crosse for my sinnes Now Catholicks looke to your selues I mean to your soules for this is the doctrine of Rome and Rhemes fitter to be taught in hell by fiendes then maintained in earth by Priests You can not prooue it either by scripture or Fathers Fifthlie and lastlie by what scripture do you prooue nay by what auncient Father that this blessing or thanksgiuing is referred to the cup or challice and not vnto God scriptures you haue none and fathers of the first sixe hundred yeares neuer heard of it And that the Catholickes mey see the antiquitie and veritie of this our doctrine and the noueltie and heresie of yours I will onelie produce but two learned Fathers with vs against you forbeare to alleadge the reâ—â— till you giue mee further occasion Fitzsimon 100. We are noe protestants to vse charmings or other such Sathanical vnlawfulnes Yf we had bene first informed in our beleefe by the Deuil as all chefe protestants are declared to haue bene nuÌ„b 4. exam Yf we bought and sould deuils as Conrad Riss otherwyse Zuinglius as appeareth by Schlusselburg lib. 2. de theol Caluin a. 7. Conrad Riss lib. German contra Ioem Hessum de caena B. 2. where as is discouered this counterfet Conrad so is shewed a huge rablement of Reformers vsing vnder false names to publish venemous pamphlets telleth how Luther bought a familiar Deuil of Carolostad for a Florin Arch. Hamilton Cal. confus lib. 2. c. 48. pag. 308. Yf we had bene as the Scotishe Ministers are by Hamelton sayd to be wholy addicted to Nigrommancie an ould proprietie of hereticks sayth Tertullian in the 53. numb then these charming phrases might haue some hould against vs Wheras now they are reflected to the ineuitable disgrace of your cause Further aunswer for our consecratcd chalices is to be inquired in the 90. number And other mater I fynde not in all this discourse requyring ether resolution or regarde In deed I fynde him say he vseth the same sanctification vsed by Christ that we vsurpe sanctitie to our selues and our consecrated
with Agar brake the Law therefore either the Law was not good or else the vniuersal promise made to God by Abraham was of none effect confuting him by scriptures and reasons telleth him that the promise was made in Isaack not in Ismaell and disprooueth him for disliking such figures similitudes and comparisons as it hath pleased the holie Ghost to vse for the plaine expressing of the neere vnion and coniunction that is betwixt Christ and his Church And saith what will this pestilent aduersarie say when hee heareth Paul speake they shall be two in one flesh he will scorne and deride it Ephes 5. But it is a great misterie spoken of Christ and his Church For saith Augustine we vnderstand by the two sonnes of Abraham and the two mothers two Testaments though in respect of times and ceremonies diuers but in respect of the substance all one and the same And also by the neere vnion and coniunction betwixt man and wife we vnderstand our naturall vnion with Christ and that without anie obscenitie or absurditie maugre the beards of the aduersarie Then followes you proofe euen in the middest of a sentence verie vntowardlie I will not say negligentlie And yet you omit one word Sicut which though it be small in shew yet it is in this place of great consequence For as you alleadge Augustine it is nothing material to confute the aduersarie of Gods grace Thus Augustine speaketh and so you should haue said Sicut mediatorem Dei hominum as the mediator betwixt God and man c. And thus after your wonted manner you leaue out the point materiall begin in the middle of a sentence leauing out beginning and ending neither respecting what went before whereof wherefore he spake the thing nor what followeth after to prooue disprooue the thing so spoken of And this your neglecting the coherence makes you faile in the sence and inference For this word Sicut which you leaue out sheweth plainlie that it is a similitude and I hope you knowe that similitudes be no Sillogismes And as there was no obscenitie or absurditie in the similitude of marriage they trulie shall be one flesh so in like case here is no absurditie or inhumaine Caniballisme in this similitude of the Sacrament vsed to expresse our vnion with Christ for though it seem more horrible to eate rhe flesh of man then to kill man and to drinke his bloud then to shed it yet we without horror or absurditie eat the flesh and drinke the bloud of the Mediator betwixt God man Iesus Christ And if the aduersarie in Augustines time or you Romanists now would know how this may bee so done without slaughter of Christ sinne to our soules or offence to the world Augustine tells you in that place fideli corde ore with a faithfull heart and mouth So that now you see Augustines scope and your drift cleane contrarie the one to the other for Augustine brings it as a similitude to expresse our spirituall vnion with Christ by faith you wrest it as spoken of the corporall and gutturall eating and drinking of Christs bodie and bloud in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine with our mouths and stomackes Manie places you haue vnfitlie in deed vntrulie alleadged yet shewed in none of them lesse learning and true meaning then in this For this is your great fault that wheresoeuer you see or heare in Scripture Father Councell or historie Corpus sanguinem Domini or such like words or phrases presentlie you inferre and so persuade the Catholicks that there is Christs carnal presence in the Sacrament neuer examining the circumstance of the place or the end wherefore they be alleadged And thus you erre not knowing or wilfullie contemning the state of the question the sence of the holie writ and iudgement of the auncient Fathers I am sure you neuer read this place of Augustine your selfe but snatcht it out of some late ignorant and foolish ydle Munkish or Franciscan Enchiridion And my reason why I thinke so of you is drawen out of Augustine himselfe For a few lines before this your proofe he calleth the Sacraments Sacra signa holie signes not the things themselues as you doe and so distinguisheth that which you confounde And within three lines after your proofe if you would haue read him you should haue heard him record to your great discredit in this case that this your proofe is as other former examples are figurate dictum secundum sacra fidei regulam that it is spoken figuratiuelie according to the rule of sound faith and religion Now let the Reader iudge betwixt you and mee whether of vs is in the right August in this place as in the places formerly alledged is against you still Augustine saith the Sacraments be sacra signa holie signes and so say wee But you Iesuiets and Priests say no they be the things themselues Augustine saith it is spoken figuratiuelie and so say we you say no but properlie Augustine saith that this opinion is squared out for patterne to Christs Church by the straight rule of sound faith and so say we and as you alleadge your proofe you say no make a flat opposition betwixt Augustines faith and your faith And yet you will brag of Fathers and that they all speake on your side and you all follow their sayings when they neither speake for you nor you imitate them And so though we follow scripture fathers primitiue Church yet you cal vs heretiks And you that wrest scriptures falsifie fathers that haue neither with you consent antiquitie nor veritie yet will be Catholickes And thus if a man should haue hired you to haue brought a place out of Augustine against your selues you could no better haue fitted your selfe or your setter on then in this who verie plainlie deliuereth the manner how Christs bodie and bloud is to bee eaten and drunke that is with a faithfull heart and mouth not with our materiall mouth teeth and stomacke as you vntrulie teach And thus hoping the Catholicks will lesse trust you in the rest that haue so groslie deceiued them in this I will proceed by Christes asistance to the examination of your next proofe The 12. parte of the second proofe concerning S. Augustin 116. FIrst it is allowed by Caluin that S. Augustin is Fitzsimon Calu. lib. 3. Instit. c. 3. n. 10. l. 4. Instat c. 14. n. 25. 26. in psal 58 v. 2. Beza in c. 3. Rom. v. 12. Fidelissimus testis antiquitatis the most faithfull witnes of antiquitie Omnium veterum theologorum tum Graecorum tum Latinorum Princeps the Prince saith Beza of all ancient Diuines no lesse of Greeks then Latins So that it is an importan point to knowe whose part S. Augustin taketh â—artw lib. 1 pag 98. lib. 2. pag. 513. Psal 78. v. 13. Secondly the Arch piller of Puritan Cartwright saith that Augustins sentence is approued vnaduisedly for theâ—â— a window
maiore religione ad periurium quam ad mendacium perduci consueuit He that belyeth his conscience consenteth as lightly to periurie I had rather thinke them greaued by wanting such pretext to impouerish you then more confident of your loialtie after receauing your oath Who then shall separat vs from the charitie of Christ tribulation Rom. 8.35 or distresse or famin or nakednes or danger or persecution or the sword A litle after is a speech rather beseeming a celestial spirit then a mortal weakeling and such as wherby euery mynde of any Christian generositie should learne what to thinke and doe in Christs quarell I am suer that nether death nor lyfe nor angels 38. nor principalities nor powers nether things present nor things to come 39. nether might nor height nor depth nor other creature shal be able to seperat vs from the charite of God which is in Christ Iesus our Lord. These are the thoughts and woords beseeming as I sayd all worthie champions of Christ Which not only by men of strong resolution but also by women and children were most constantly fullfilled when Barbara Agatha Agnes Cecilia Catharina Lucia Dorothea Apollonia Margarita Christina and innumerable other virgins for the most parte of eminent degree and when Vitus and Mammes of seuen and Flocellus of ten yeares owld and such others dispised the terror of rageing lions the stings of serpents and teeth of tigres when they the scorned the stripes of riueted scourges the tearing of burning rakes and hookes when they contemned the burning fornaces the boiling lead the drownings precipitations butcherings quarterings of mans whole malice And should not we then thinke very abiectly of our selues yf in Gods cause any losse of temporal goods any affronts any suspitions any oppressions may moue vs to repine Therfor that which might seeme to you most heynous that being putt to death or torments they do taint you with the odiouse name of treasons and not with the title of martyr S. Ambros in Ps 118. sâ—r 21. that impaireth nothing your merit Gratis igitur persecutionem patitur qui impugnatur sine crimine impugnatur vt noxius cum sit in tali confessione laudabilis impugnatur quasi veneficus qui in nomine Dei gloriatur For in vaine sayth S. Ambros is he persecuted who is impugned without offense is he afflicted as a malefactor wheras he is laudable in that trial is he tormented as an inchanter who glorifieth in the name of God the name not making nor marring the martyr but the cause Yf then you aspire to their crowne who befor are commended to your imitation S. Aug. ser 47. de sanctis I say with S. Augustin Imitari non pigeat quos celebrare delectat let it not greeue yow to imitat whom in mynd you do consecrat Thinke happie to be the effusion of your teares and bloud wheras theternal fiar of hell is therby extinguished and wheras the robes of your sowles are therby blanched According to which is sayd in the Apocalips Apoc. 7.14 These are they that are come owt of great tribulation and haue washed their robes and haue made then whyte in the bloud of the lamb Thinke that in the fornace of aduersitie for godlines yf you were earth you are streinthned yf you were yron you are vnrusted and yf you were gowld yow are purifyed â—say 58.2 Lastly yf you be they of whom the Prophet sayth They day by day do seeke me and they would knowe my wayes as a people that hath done Iustice and hath not forsaken the iudgments of their God thinke whether you do not wrong to God that withowt amendment of your faults you would haue the freedome of innocents Psal 38.12 Hast 14. 6. Are you ignorant that for iniquitie God hath chastised Man and that therfor we are deliuered vp into the hands of our enemies because we haue offended in his sight Tobias then resolueth you Tob. 3. 4. because we haue not obeyed thy preceps therfor we are ahandoned to the spoile to captiuitie to death to a speach and to a reproach in all nations So doth Achior in informing Holofernes As oft as besyd their owne God they worshipped any other God Iudith 5. 18. they haue bene forlorne to a praye to the sword and to reproach So lastly doth Baruch VVhat is it Israel that thow art in the land of thy enemies Baruch 3. 10. 11. 1â— that thow becomest ancient in a strange land that thou art polluted with the dead that thou art reputed with them that discend into hell Thou hast forsaken the fontaine of wysdome For yf thou hadst walked in the way of God thou hadst without dowbt dwelled in peace vpon the land So that yf you would know the wayes of God you must do iustice and not forsake his iudgments Yf you lament to be a spoile c. obey his precepts worshipp God alone and walke in his wayes and as the psalmist sayth apprehend discipline least God be angrie and that you perish from the iust way Psal 2.12 Which because you seeme more willingly to fullfill of late then formerly as appeareth by your godly resolutions mentioned in your leters and by your constant standing for trueth you may I warrant you auayleably exclame in the woords of Dauid Synners haue vnsheathed their swoord they haue bent their bow that they might beguile the poore and needie and vpon Psalm 36.14 these woords receaue from aboue answer the enemies of our lord suddenly as they shal be honored and exalted fading they shall vanish away as smooke that is 20. as another Prophet expowndeth they shal be as yf they were not and the men shall perish that contradict the. Not that it is alwayes inteÌ„ded they should perish in persoÌ„ which we neuer ought absolutly to desyer but only in profession And not only because of your amendment may we presume of such diuine bountie but also least they should sayth God become prowd and say Our high hand and not the lord hath done all these things Deut. 22.27 By which their becoming insolent the spirit of God instructeth is in the person of Dauid to implore of God to auert his wrath and their opposition saying Do not ô lord abandon me from my desier to the synner They haue consulted against me forsake me not least by chance they be exalted Psalm 137.9 Finaly wheras you fynde them selues to professe their shame that they haue departed froÌ„ the mother Church of Rome as they tearme it in thes publick and plaine woords D. Couel in exam p. 185. we are sorie that their weaknes he speaketh against Puritans taketh offense at that which we bowld as an honor and vertue in the Church of England namely that we haue sparingly and as it were vnwillingly dissented from the Church of Rome c. In all ioye of mynde for a soueraigne consolation not with standing all extremities specified you may applaud to your selues that you abstained to depart at all from that Church which as Christ assureth nether in more nor lesse shal be euer ouercome ether by one error or many or by any other power of hell gates or which is all one which neuer is to haue spott or wrinkle how litle soeuer and is in nothing to fayle but to confirme all others it being assured that had you offended in one you had bene made guiltie of all â—ac 2. 10. although such one dissention from that Church had bene neuer so sparingly or vnwillingly followed And vpon this confession I say first to Doctor Couel it is in dede neere to honor and vertue sparingly and vnwillingly to dissent froÌ„ that Church but a true honor and vertue had it bene not to dissent at all And as by dissenting in one point the selfe same guiltines is incurred as by dissenting in all so there remayneth noe other maner to be free from all guiltines but to consent againe with that same Church in all Christ made it not a piller of trueth without being altogether sownd and free from euery crack He made not that Church his spowse withowt exempting it from euery spott and wrinkle He builded not that howse vpon a rock not to be permaneÌ„t in some but in all trials of sease wynds and rayne He assured it not against the infernal gates but that noe error or force or fraud of hell Iac. 2. 10. could preuaile ether first or last against it Therfor a primo ad vltimum he that offeÌ„deth in one toward it is made guiltie of all because it is altogether priuileged from defect Secondly I say to you Puritans Bel. in the dovvnfall of poperie pag. 134. that in the depth of all error and follie you exagitat the rytes and traditions of this Church For wheras you coÌ„fesse as to denie it had bene profouÌ„d impudeÌ„cie that you know not your bible to be the word of God but because you receaue it for such by a tradition of Papists for froÌ„ whom els could you haue receaued it you being as you affirme but in the infancie of your gospell I require thervpon whether you hould such authoritie or certificatioÌ„ in auowing the sayd bible to be infallible or noe What soeuer you answer you remayne ingaged For yf it be infallible in that point such infallibilitie must come from the former promises of Christ which being general do assure infallibilitie in all other points as well as in that And then cursed you for departing from that infallible fundation Yf you affirme that such allowance or traditioÌ„ is fallible then haue you noe infallible certaintie whether your Bible be authentical or noe The Survey vvith 177. queres as inioying it only from authoritie in your opinion but fallible Answer me only this one quere which is your owne new fangled tearme for a demand and I protest befor God and his angels and the world that I will consent with you The God of mercie and trueth be with vs all Amen 26. Sept. 1607. Yours to command in Christ HENRY FITZSIMON
2. epist 50. ad Bonifac. in fine Tom. 5. de Ciu. l. 2. c. 25. But would you know what is to be against charities kingdome S. Augustin aunswereth Non est autem particeps diuinae charitatis qui hostis est vnitatis he is not partaker of diuine charitie who is an enemie of vnitie No catholick saythe he no fruitfull communion Therfor good M. Rider Aug. To. 10. de verb. Apo. ser 22. circa fineÌ„ let this goulden exhortation of S. Augustin take place after so many mis-informations of his perswasion VVould God saith he they would not feare them to whom long time they haue sould erroure for they respect them they are ashamed toward humane infirmitie and not toward inuincible veritie And they feare to be expostulated with all in this maner VVhy therfor haue you deceaued vs why haue you seduced vs why haue you affirmed so much ill and falshood They should aunswer yf they feared God it was humane to erre but diabolical through animositie to remayne in erroure And a litle after Let them say to their beleeuers we haue fayled together let vs retire from errour together VVe haue bene guydes to you and you followed to your fall will you not follow vs when we conduct you to the Church I pray God this exhortation may take effect according to the intention and worthe therof In the meane tyme it is the 33. vntrueth that we ouer-rule Scripturs and Fathers The 33. 34. 35. 35. 37. vntruth The 34. that we confesse to be figuratiue that is as you vnderstand only figuratiue these woords of Christ this is my blood of the new testament The 35. that Augustin reasoneth against Capharnaits who would not beleeue the woords of Christ no more them protestants in these tymes The 36. that by our literal exposition we forsake Augustins rule charities kingdome Apostolical and Catholick exposition The 37. that we be Caphernaits and Canibals I wil not requite his Theons style and bad demeanure knowing that it is for want of mater because Eccli 21. non est sensus vbi est amaritudo ther is no sense wher there is bitternes Yf vaunting were victorie reproaches reproofe dispising disconfiting M. Rider had bene as victorious as Cesar or Alexander as subtile and solid a disprouer as a second prophet Daniel as great a vanquisher as the faire king Arthure Rider Amb. lib. 4. de Sacrament to cap. 5. 55. Ambrose is of the same opinion with vs against you saying Fac nobis inquit oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi make vnto vs saith the Priest this oblation that it may bee allowable reasonable and acceptable which is a figure of the bodie and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ And Ambrose presentlie after saith the new Testament is confirmed by bloud in a figure of which bloud wee receiue the misticall bloud By these words the Reader may see that Ambrose and the Church in his dayes tooke it not for the naturall bodie of Christ but for a figure of his bodie and therefore cease to bragge heere to the simple of Ambrose and Augustine for they are not of your opinion Innocent Papae lib. tertius ca. 12. Fol. 148. and there shal you see the foolish and phantastical reasons the Pope giues for those said crosses And in the Canon of the Masse you haue these words of Ambrose in that part which begins Quam oblationem but you deale deceitfully with Gods people for you leaue out these words quod est forma corporis and there dash in fiue red crosses and still teach the people it is Catholicke doctrine and the old religion but these iuglings with the Fathers must be left or else good men that follow those Fathers will doubt that Gods spirit hath left you How dishonestly S. Ambrose is treated by M. Rider Fitzimon Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 5. 55. S. Ambrose is as fowly or rather worse vsed then S. Augustin Compare M. Riders woords and these together in the very same chapter In sanctis manibus suis accepit panem Antequam consecretur panis est vbi autem verba Christi accesserint corpus est Christi Deinde audi dicentem accipite edite ex eo omnes hoc est enim corpus meum Et ante verba Christi Calix est vini aquae plenus Vbi verba Christi operata fuerint ibi sanguis efficitur qui plebem redemit Paulo post Ipse Dominus Iesus testificatur nobis quod corpus suum accipiamus sanguinem Numquid debemus de eius fide testificatione dubitare In his sacred hands sayth S. Ambrose he tooke bread Befor it be consecrated it is bread but when the words of Christ come it is the body of Christ then heare him saying take and eate of this all for this is my bodie And befor the woords of Christ the chalice is full of water und wyne VVhen the woords of Christ haue operated the blood is made which redeemed the people A litle after Our Lord Iesus him selfe testifieth vnto vs that we receaue his body and blood should we doubt of his trueth and testimonie Could you M. Rider Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram c. 5. in ether godly or honest disposition conceaue S. Ambrose thus speaking to thinke that in the sacrament was not the natural body of Christ but only a figure therof because he mentioned as we professe a figure to be therin Could you mistake without deepe hypochrisie these woords of his but when the woords of Christ come it which befor consecration was but bread is the body of Christ the blood is made which hathe redeemed the people Is not this a shamelesse resolution in making denials affirmations an act of such a carelesse man as is mentioned in Horace who had forfetted his credit abroad among all men freends and foes yet fayned to them of his priuat howshould that all went well and nothing against him saying Horacius lib. 1. Satyra 1. Populus me sibilat at mihi plaudo ipse domi The world doth hiss at me but yet I applaud to my selfe at home For opposition of S. Ambrose to protestantcy Causeus sayd he was bewitched by the deuil And truly in this point as after in treating of him in particular shal God willing be notifyed none was euer more opposit to them then he How lowde therfor The 38. vntruth hath M. Rider made his 38. vntrueth that Ambrose and the churche in his dayes thowght with him against vs But a mercenary minde to please man selleth it selfe rather then it would seeme disproueable S. Aug. late exhortation I feare will not benifit one of this humor 56. And Augustine else where saith Rider Aug. in â—narratione Psal 3. pag. 7. col 1. Printed at Paris anno 1566. August tom 6. contra Adimant cap. 12. Christ commended and deliuered to his disciples the figure of his body and bloud