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
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
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.
illic speciâ—s cernuntur quarum res vel substantia ibi non esse creduntur â—ic res veraciter substantialiter creditur cuius species non cernitur The host â—hat thou dost behould is not now bread but my fleash lykewyse the liquoure â—hich thou viewest is not wyne but my blood Euen as the lyknes are seene â—hose things or substances are beleeued not to be there so the thing is truly and â—ubstantialy beleeued whose shape is not perceaued Will all theses testimonies wherof euery one alone had bene â—ufficient to the most partial or least indifferent protestant being â—o pregnant so precise to the mater so godly and from so godly as euery one of them hath bene accompted at least these 400. Bullinger decad 5. de caena fol. 370. yeares a Sainct reclayme our aduersaries Bullinger a great protestant aunswereth negatiuely saying Zuinglianos non posse credere Christum esse in coena praesentem vero suo corpore licet omnia mundi concilia omnes angeli diui id iubeant credere The Zuinglians not to be able to beleeue Christ to be present in the supper in his true bodie although all the Councils of the worlde all Angels and Saincts did command it to be beleeued Yet I trust in the mercie of God that diuers reading this manifestation of errour and iustification of trueth will instantly open their harts to let shaddowes and figurs departe and to imbrace Christ and veritie Let me dye a badd death yf I would otherwyse then to purchase that good to deceaued soules spend only to incountre M. Rider such pretious time in displaying or disprouing that infidelitie which is incident to him for his profession which of it selfe is notorious and euery day vanishing and consuming without our laboure And for your learning M. Rider you may peruse Zuares in tertiam partem tomo tertio quaestione 75. disputatione 47. sectione 2 and be instructed by him particularly in what Predicament is Transubstantiation and so haue resolution in conceit so impossible I am truly wearie in summing vp vntruethes they are so manifould Only I will certifie some especial The 68. that we know not what Transubstantiation is The 69. that we might to as good purpose proue transaccidentation The 70. that Transubstantiation is a Friers fable The 71. that the Fathers neuer intended a substantial Change The 68 69. 70. 71. 72. 72 73. 74. vntruth The 72. and 73. that the master of the sentences or Tonstal doubt of the conuersion of bread into the fleash of Christ they only disputing how it is wrought which is noe more to deny the mather in question then yf one should confesse you to haue the riche deanrie of S. Patricks and muse by what means whether by assured Simonie or vnknowen desert or blind choise you came therto The 74. that we see Transubstantiation to be a iarring noueltie and a fable without trueth These are but glossing imputations of M. Rider to dazel the mynds of his Readers that they doe not conceaue when trueth is represented to their eyes by vs or when falshood is inculcated by him denials without shame affirmations with remorce and torture of conscience exprobrations without regard of fidelitie protestations repugnant to all trueth and sinceritie Rider 71. This fable of transubstansiation ouerthroweth sundrie articles of our faith and therefore it is abhominable It teacheth a new conception of Christ to bee made of bread by a sinfull priest and euery day in euery place where it pleaseth the priest contrarie to the Article of our faith which is that Christ was conceaued by the holie Ghost and borne of the blessed virgin and but once for such Christ as you tender to the poore ignorant Catholickes is not a true Christ neither can be for manie respects whiche are before in the beginning alleadged Secondlie if Christ be in the Sacrament he is not then ascended and so there is another article of our faith destroyed by this damnable fable And thirdlie if hee be couchant or dormant in the pixe then the Scriptures deceiue vs in telling vs hee shall come from heauen to iudge boâ—h quicke and dead and so another article of our faith is ouerthrowne And if your doctrine were true Christ should haue eaten himselfe corporally but you confesse he did eat himselfe (a) Iosephus Angles pag. c. 110. 4 conclusione secunda spiritually If your doctrine of transubstantiation were true then the Lords supper were no Sacrament and the reason is this for euery Sacrament consisteth of the outward signe and the inward thing signified and they must both still remaine during the outward action of the Sacrament Now if bread which is the visible outward part of the Sacrament be changed into Christs bodie then there is no Sacrament because there remaines but one part of the Sacrament which is the thing signified and then you vtterlie deceiue the people which tell them it is the Sacrament of the Altar when it is no Sacrament at all Againe another absurditie followes vppon it for if the substance of bread be changed then there is no proportion or analogie betwixt the signe and the thing signified because accidents cannot nourish For the likenesse or resemblance betwixt bread and Christ consisteth chieflie in this that as bread nourisheth the bodie so Christs body crucified nourisheth the soule but if the substance of bread be changed into another substance then the proportion and propertie is so changed that it must cease to be the thing for which it was first ordained and so the best you would make of the Sacrament is but a shaddow without a substance Another vnreasonable absurditie will follow that Christ hath two bodies one of bread made by the Priest another of the blessed virgin conceiued by the holie Ghost Againe if his owne bodie shall be in manie places at once that is contrarie to a naturall bodie and is as voyd of learning as the other of religion and by this your new thirtheenth Article of your new faith you would maintaine the being of qualities without a subiect and the being of quantities without a substance which both are impossible But Because the opinion is false and forged without Scripture or testimonie of auncient Father I will alleadge no more absurdities at this time till I be vrged VVhether the article of Christs Ascension be not rather a proofe then disproofe of the Real presence 71. SAint Augustin euer according to his wonte Fitzimon August 22. de ciu c. 11. pertinently aunswereth sectarists now in these woords aunswereth to M. Rider Ecce qualibus argumentis omnipotentia Dei humana contradicit infirmitas quam possidet vanitas Behould with what arguments humain infirmitie possessed by vanitie contradicteth Gods omnipotencie Now to the first It teacheth no new conception of Christ according to S. Ambros being Non alia planè caro S. Ambros. loc infra cit quam quae nata est de Maria passa in cruce
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
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
that the simple be no longer seduced by your Romane doctrine expounding this 6. of Iohn grammaticallie and carnally contrarie to Christs meaning constraining these places to prooue your carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament when there was no Sacrament then ordained I will set downe GOD willing Christs meaning truelie and plainlie which you shall not be able either by Scriptures or auncient Fathers to contradict 1 First I will plainelie deliuer the occasion why Christ vsed the Metaphor of Bread calling himselfe Bread 2 Secondlie according to which of Christs natures he is our liuing bread whether as hee is man onelye or God onely or as he is compleat God and man 3 Thirdly how this bread must be taken and eaten whether by the mouth of the bodie or the mouth of the soule 4 Fourthly the fruit that comes to the true eaters thereof 5 Lastly the reasons shall bee alleadged out of Christs owne words to prooue that your round Wafer-cakes vpon your supposed hallowed Altars are not that true bread Christs flesh which Christ heere speakes of The first proofe of Catholicks for the Real presence owt of the 6. of S. Ihon. 36. THe 11. the 12. and 13. vntrueth Fitzimon The 11. 12. and 13. vntruth are here suddenly obtruded to all mens eyes That Christ neuer ment the literal sense that Christs Church for a 1000. yeeres neuer tawght it That euery figuratiue speeche must be expounded not litteraly I might haue added his saying that the phrases in this mysterie be figuratiue and allegorical That we are not able to contradict his expositions That he will expound such things as he promiseth But that the bulke be not to great I promise to dissemble the greatest part of his vntruethes Nether will I proceed but by good proofs against the former few vntruethes calculated The first that Christ intended not the literal sense is contradicted by Christ him selfe saying when he did giue at his last supper what here he promised that it was his body which was to be deliuered Mat. 26.1 Cor. 11.24 Mar. 14.24 and 〈◊〉 â—lood which was to be shedd therfor as not a figure nor any body figuratiuely but literaly and naturaly was giuen for our sinns so no figuratiue sense but literal must haue bene intended by Christ The second is to be testifyed in all our controuersie The third is very absurd Galat. 4.22.23 Genes 16.15.21 For S. Paul certifyed that Abraham had two sonns one by the handmayd and one by the free woman but he by the handmayd was borne according to the fleash and he by the free wooman by repromission Which saith he are figuratiuely spoken Now yf M. Riders words were not vntrue these woords being spoken figuratiuely could not be true literaly Which is knowen to be contrary to Genesis wherin the literal historie is related Lykewyse wheras he saith that what soeuer Christ promised is to be receaued by faithe and wheras S. Paul here affirmeth the sonne of the free woman to haue bene by repromission it should acording to his wysdom follow that such a sonn was neuer borne but only by faith Yea yf to his former saying you conioyne his saying à litle befor that receauing by faith is real receauing and make one saying of bothe that Christs promises are receaued by faithe and being so receaued are really receaued it must ensue first that Abraham had his sonne Isaak really yea and all his posteritie really as soone as he beleued faithfully the promises of our Lord secondly that our bodyes already haue immortalitie really and heauenly glorie and all that we may expect at Gods hands yf we haue faith therof as I sayd already really Yea the punishments of hell being promised to the wicked by M. Riders saying must be receaued by faith and consequently contrary to all protestantcy but not trueth the wicked may haue faith and contrary to protestantcie Esa 29.13 Mat. 15.8 Mar. 7.6 and also trueth the damned them selues must haue faith lykewyse seing they receaue the punishments promised to them by Christ Is not this learned doctrin would any ould woman knowing hir prayers but in latin transgresse so much against faith and religion 1. Occasion The question was mooued by some Belli-gods that tasted of Christs banquet bountie in feeding fiue thousand men with fiue loaues two fishes whether Moises or Christ were the more excellent and liberall in feeding men Rider 37. FIrst they commend Moises from the greatnesse of his place and person being Gods Lieutenant to conduct Israel out of Egypt 2. Secondly they commend their Manna from the place whence it came which was the heauens as they supposed 3 Thirdly they commend the bread from the Vertue of it which was it fed their Fathers in the drie sandie and barren wildernesse and saued them from famine and therfore they thought that no man was greater then Moises no bread to be coÌ„pared with Manna Now Christ by way of opposition and comparison confutes them opposing God to Moises and himselfe to Manna 1. First denieth that Moises was the giuer of that Manna but that God was the authour Moises onely the Minister 2 Secondlie that it came not from the eternall kingdome of God which is properlie called heauen but from the visible clouds improperly called heauen 3 Thirdlie Christ denieth Manna to bee the true bread because it onelie preserued life temporall but could not giue it but this bread Christ doeth not onelie giue life corporall but also life spirituall in the kingdome of grace and life eternall in the kingdome of glorie 4 Fourthlie this bread Manna ceased when they came into Canaan and could no more bee found Iosua 5.12 but this bread Christ doth feed vs heere in this earthlie wildernesse and raignes for euer with his triumphant Church in our euerlasting and glorious Canaan the kingdome of heauen 5 This bread Manna and so all corporall meates when they haue fed the bodie they haue performed their office they perish without yeelding profit to the soule Ioh. 6.54 but this bread of life Christ is the true btead which once beeing receiued into the soule doth not onelie assure and giue vnto it eternall life but also to the bodie like assurance of resurrection and saluation so that the soule must first feed on Christ before the body can haue any benefit by Christ contrarie to your doctrine which is that the bodie must first feed on Christ carnally then the soule shal be thereby fed spiritually And because they were so addicted in Moises time to Manna in Christs time to his miraculous loaues respecting the feeding of their bodies not the feeding of their soules Therefore Christ dehorted them from food corporall to food spirituall Labor not saith he for the meat that perisheth Ioh. 6.27 but for the meat that endureth to euerlasting life which the sonne of man shall giue vnto you c. And thus much touching the occasion why Christ is saide to bee the
true bread of life which as farre excelled Manna as the soule the bodie life death eternitie time and heauen earth NOw let vs see according to which of Christs natures 3. Point he is called our liuing Bread whether according to his manhood or godhead or both Christ calls this bread his flesh and Christ and his flesh are al one and therefore Christ and his flesh are all one and the same bread and as our bodies are fed with materiel bread so are our soules fed with the flesh of Christ and this flesh hee will giue for the life of the world which flesh is not Christs bodie separated from his soule as some of you imagine and vntruelie teach nor Christs bodie and soule separated from his diuinitie but euen his quickninge flesh which being personally vnited to his eternall spirit was by the same giuen for the life of the world not corporallie and really in the Sacrament as you vntruly teach But in the sacrifice of his bodie and bloud once on the crosse as the Scriptures record for the flesh of Christ profiteth not but as it is made quickning by the spirit Neither do we participate the life of his spirit but as it is communicated vnto vs by his flesh by which we are made flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone as hath bin shewed before Which holie misterie is represented vnto vs in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and the trueth thereof assured and sealed in the due administration and receiuing of the same So this true bread spoken of in the sixt of Iohn which hath this spirituall quickning and nourâ—shing power is compleate Christ God and man with all his soule sauing merits And neither Manna in the wildernesse nor your round Wafer cakes vppon your supposed hallowed Altars Manna it could not be for it ceased manie hundred years before Your imagined and transnatured bread it could not bee because the Sacrament was not then instituted And so to the third point The manner how this true bread Christ must be eaten 3. Point THe meat is spirituall and therefore the manner of eating must not bee corporall for such as is the meat such must be the mouth but the meat is spirituall therefore the mouth must be spirituall as before you haue heard Fide non dente In the epistle to the Reader c. which thing being there handled befor out of holy Scripture Fathers and your Popes Canons I wille onelie referre you thither where you may vnlesse you bee malecontents be fully satisfied toucheing the true manner of eating Christ where you may find proued out of Gods booke that comming to Christ beleeuing in Christ abiding in Christ dwelling in Christ and to be clad with Christ and to eate Christ are all one so that out of everie one you might frame this or the like vnaunswerable argument How sacred Scriptures are exorbitantly depraued Fitzimon 37. ALas what miserie and impietie is euery lyne fraught with all in this his exposition Considre but how many falsifications of the text are here vsed First that some belly-gods had moued question whether Moises or Christ were more liberal in feeding men Ther is no such mater Nether also their commending of Moises greatnes For only Christ lightly mentioned him the residue not thinking of him by owght appearing in Scripture Nether do they coÌ„mend the bread from the vertue of it but only tell that their Forfathers had eaten thereof without any further relation Nether doth Christ deny Manna to be true bread for ther is no such woord The fowrtenth vntrueth The 14. vntruth besyd others wincked at shal be registred by M. Rider against him selfe Here he saith that our doctrine is that the body must first feed on Christ corporaly so it should be to approach to trueth then the sowle shal be therby fedd spiritualy How is this saying sutable to these words in his preface You teache the communicants to receaue Christ with their mowthes corporaly not with their faith spiritualy You make your selfe ridiculous by such palpable contradiction that we teache and that we do not teache Christ to be receaued spiritualy that we teache only corporaly and yet that we teache first corporaly after spiritualy Would not any other display all the figurs of rhetorick against this figure of a learned man He telleth after that Christ and his fleash are all one and all one bread yet will he tell you presently that nether of bothe are any bread at al. Next that some of vs teache Christs fleash to be Christs body separated from his sowle A fowle vntrueth and the fowler that vntestifyed after so many promises to haue all our dealings published by our owne prints books leaues lynes c. Then that the fleash of Christ proffiteth nowght but as it is quickned by the Spirit This he him selfe shall testifye to be the fifteenth vntrueth in these woords The 15. vntruth Christ would receaue a bloody speare into his syde before mans synne could be satisfyed This speare to haue pearced Christ after his death and not when his fleash was quickned by his Spirit is testifyed by S. Ihon saying that he had then deliuered vp his Spirit Ioan. 19. a v. 31. ad 35. the Iewes had informed Pilat of his death the Sowldiours Vt viderunt eum iam mortuum non fregerunt eius crura Sed vnus militum lancea latus eius aperuit when they beheld him dead they did not breake his thighes But one of the Sowldiours with a lance opened his syde Now make vp these two together that Christs fleash withowt his Spirit proffiteth nothing and yet that mans synne cowld not be satisfyed but after Christs fleashe was separated from his Spirit and then pearced I neuer in my lyfe nor I thinke any other noted such implications before in any booke hitherto printed But yet ther followeth more That we do not coÌ„municat the life of Christs Spirit but by his flesh Is not this to coÌ„tradict all benifit fullfilled to the Patriarches by Christs discension of Spirit without his fleashe Then saith he what is spiritual can not be receaued by a corporal maner Was ther euer any thing more contrarie to Diuinitie philosophie or reason First faith is spiritual yet it is by hearing Rom. 10.17 which is a corporal maner Regeneration is spiritual yet it is by maner of a corporal washing Yea God is a most spiritual Spirit yet the Apostle coÌ„mandeth vs to beare him in our bodyes 1. Cor. 6. Contrarywyse Christs birth his body made inuisible his issueing out of his sepulchre his entring among his shut disciples walking on the sea his ascension were verlye corporal yet the maner was not corporal but spiritual So that nether spiritual gifts are continualy conioyned with spiritual maners but often with corporal and corporal gifts often conioiyned with spiritual maners The sowle of man is a spiritual forme and not material and yet it is receaued
that only will you affirme that any can more dwell in Christ then his Father yet dare you not mantayne that his Father communicateth the body and blood of Christ Recant therfor and that with shame and say that they that dwell in Christ and Christ in them do not only eate his fleash and drinke his blood The minor also is false that the true beleeuers only dwell in Christ Wh takerus in controuer de Sacra Scriptura pag. 666. 1. Cor. 13.12 and Christ in them For in heauen euen by the confession of VVhitaker beleefe entreth not but all are blissed by seeing face to face Christ dwelleth in all and all in him and also God the Father and holy Ghost do dwell in him who may not be sayd to haue beleefe in him The conclusion is lykewyse false by haueing a fowerth tearme Only which should not haue bene in the premisses I leaue to thy equitable censure indifferent protestant whether I might not lawfully lawnche into all rhethorical tropes against such vnanswerable arguments of such a disputer Truely my deuotion would serue me not to spare at least such impietie toward Gods woord but I refrayne that by moderat style the trueth may shyne to thy mynde the brighter as the sonne doth more playnly appeare in calme then troubled water Besyd all that is produced consider how in the opinion of M. Rider the sixt chapter of S. Ihon not treating of the B. Sacrament his maior proposition should by him selfe be acknowledged impertinēt But what careth or knoweth he what is pertinent or not The fruit and profit that redoundes to the true eaters of this bread of life which is Christ 39. MAnie rich benefits we haue by eating Christ in the manner aforesaid Rider that is by apprehending applying 4. Point Ioh. 6.44.54.50.51 and appropriating vnto vs whole Christ with his benefits I will onelie name one or two and referre you for the rest to sixth of Ihon. He that eateth this bread I will raise him vp at the last day to life concerning his bodie and hee shall neuer die but liue for euer concerning his soule VVhat the benefits are of the protestant communion And how they frustrat all Sacraments 39. ALl benefits to be receaued by protestant communion Fitzimon are here drawen to two The first resurrection of the body the second euerlasting lyfe of the soule He nether telleth you whether this shall happen by vertue of your receauing or not by vertue therof or only by gratefull gift and reward of God Concerning the resurrection of the body I craue delay to reueale what Protestants professe and beleeue therof till I treate in the examination of the Creede the article of the resurrection of the dead in the 20. number of the forsayd examination But here let al Christians Catholicks and Protestāts note that when by pretence of reformations fiue sacraments were abolished two only of Communion and Baptisme retayned the next degree to haue bene to deny any fruict belonging to ether of these two So that they allow them only to be bare external signes in them selues without any power to sanctifie Of many proofs I will produce but these apparent It was sayth Zuinglius the author of Englands perswasion Zuingl tom 2. de bapt fol. 70. a great errour of the owld Doctors that they supposed the external water of Baptisme to he of any valew toward the purgeing of synne And Luther affirmeth it to be Luth. de Capti Babil Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 4. n. 17. 23. Beza 1. Cor. c. 10. n. 3. Calu. Beza in 1 Cor. 10. v. 2.3 Musscul in locis c. 373. Calu. Instit l. 4. c. 18. n. 12. Zuing. to 2. fol. 563. 564. Sloidan lib. 10. fol. 152. Buchan hist Scot. l. 15. pag. 523. Benedict Aretius 2. part problem fol. 319. Bernard Lutzenburg in Catal. her l. 1. c. 29. Fox Act. pag. 70. Zuing. tom 2. resp ad Luth. conf fol. 477. Idem fol. 43. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 14 n. 14. In Ioa. 6. v. 54. Beza epist Theol. 65. fol. 285. Mart. in defens cōtra Gardin par 2. reg 5. pag. 618. par 3. pag. 683. but an external signe to make vs remembre Gods promises Caluin and Beza consent to the same And the Anabaptists ipso facto do omitt Baptisme toward children as vnproffitable Lykewyse for Communion they agree commonly that it is no more esteemable then the Manna of the Iewes and should be receaued without any reuerēce sitting at a table in good fellowship which is practised not only by Zuinglians and Anabaptists but imitated in Scotland as Buchananus relateth And in other places they stand without all regarde or reuerence to receaue their communion As to testifie they should not adore that which they acknowledg to be but an image figure or representation least they should breake the commaundement forbidding to adore as they translate images And Barlowe in the summe of the conference befor the K. Maiestie pag. 95. confesseth the vicar of Ratisdal to haue dealt the bread owt of a basket euery man putting in his hand and taking owt a peece c. vide num 68. This disabling of this sacrament began first from Almaricus whom Fox calleth a worthy learned man who saith that the body of Christ is no otherwyse in the sacrament then in any other bread Zuinglius saith it to be only as the Emperour is in his banner He againe Caluin Beza P. Martyr Iewell and now most protestants of their followers affirme it to be no otherwyse in the sacrament then in a sermon saying Nihilo magis habetur ex sacramentis quà m verbis It is no more had by sacraments then by woords Neque vereor dicere multo etiam c. I feare not sayth P. Martyr to affirme that we come to the receauing of Christs body much more by woords then by sacraments Calu. in 1. Cor. c. 11. v. 24. So that sayth Caluin yf otherwyse we were myndfull of Christs death this healp were superfluous And this is common to all sacraments for they are healpes of our infirmitie What Protestants hearing their preachers magnifie in woords the benifits of these two Sacraments especialy of communion and saying that therby with the teethe and mowthe of the sowle and armes of fayth and imbracement of hart we eate deuoure inioy Christ with all his sowle-sauing merits with all benifits of his passion sealing all his promises vnto vs and giuing vs interest title and right by an effectual and infallible calling to eternal blisse and such other seducing benedictions frequented in sermons that would euer imagin by such dilusions he were a leading to esteeme as basely of this Sacrament as of the voyd ceremonies of Iewes as of any other bread as of a needles memorial of a bare representation as of a sermon c. or that it should be as fruictles as the sacraments of the owld testament Galat. 4.9 which S. Paul tearmeth Infirma
egena elementa weake and poore elements Or as the English bibles translate weake and beggerly ordonances Against which disordre and deformation of Reformers Hebr. 10.28 the sayd Apostle worthely disputeth saying A man making frustrat the law of Moises is therfor adiudged to death by the verdict of 2. or 3. witnesses How much more deserueth he more extreame punishments which thus treadeth the Sonne of God vnder foote To conclude Christian reader thow perceauest by these confessions that in their owne opinion ther is no more benifit contayned in their sacramēt then by remembring Christ by any other means ether of sermons or representations in the owld or new testament Vide Petr. Mart. in 1. Cor. c. 10. u. 1 2. What then should hinder me to graunt all this to be true of their sacrament considering that I finde the Manna of the Iewes much more liuely expressing and representing Christ by raining downe from heauen in a miraculous maner so as it was wondred at by the Iewes which had all sweetnes of delitesomnes was very whyte wheras the communion bread retayning stil his nature came from the earth without all miraculous maner to be wondred at hath only the tast of bread sometymes also mowldie and is not of the whytest and consequently not so conuenient to represent the descending of the Messias our Saluioure among mankinde his wonderfull incarnation and lyfe his delytesome feeding our sowles his innocencie as the former representation Manna yea I reporte me to all indifferent wysdomes whether it be not rather farr inferiour in way of signification which by protestants is called the cheefe lyfe of Sacraments therunto Now then do not meruayle good reader that M. Rider dilated not vnto thee how by communion thow art to haue resurrection of the fleash and euerlasting lyfe of the sowle for it is sufficient in his mynde to giue the great promises paynted woords sweet benedictions to captiuat thy sowle and in effect to bestow only on thee a peece of bread extolled against truthe to make thee leaue the true bread of lyfe dispraysed as a sacrament instituted by Christ to euacuat the new testament praysed as a bigg shaddow to make thee forsake and misbeleeue the substance of Christs body and dispraysed as a substantial healpe to frustrat thy saluation Whervpon I remitt you to the 63. number to haue a pertinent relation of S. Epiphanius Rider 40. But an opposition being made betwixt this true bread Christ and this Sacramentall bread as was betwixt Christ and Manna it will bee cleere nay impossible that your consecrated bread should bee the bread of life which is spoken of in the sixth of Ihon 1 Your consecrated bread neuer came from the heauen of heauens therefore it is not the true bread of life spoken of in this place 2 All that eate of this true bread Christ are saued but manie that eate of your Sacramentall bread are damned therefore it is not that bread spoken of in the sixth of Iohn 3 Your bread onelie enters the bodilie mouth and is receiued into the stomacke of the bodie and so passeth the way of all excrements and therefore is not the true bread 4 Your bread cannot for euer preserue temporall life much lesse giue it but not at all life eternal and therefore it is not the true bread of life spoken of in this sixth of Iohn VVhether there be any opposition betwixt our Sacrament and Christ And whether by entring our stomaches Christ be payned or hurt 40. OVr consecrated bread after consecration is Christ and therfor is the true bread spoken of in this place Fitzimon And saluation is gotten only by him whom we eate and by no other deuotion so much as by eating him Wherby it is sayd they that eate him shall haue lyfe euerlasting viz. as by a most principal meane to come therto Yet diuers eate him vnworthely to their damnation other after eating depriue them selues from the benifit of him by new wickednes to whom may be sayd Ozec 13.9 their saluation is by him their damnation by them selues I pray let vs as well examin these sayd oppositions and your holy supper Came your supper from heauen Are all that eate of it saued Are all receauers therof immortal I pray you good Sir tell vs of one only that is assuredly saued of your sorte or immortal by your Lords supper Nay how can you affirme conformably to your sayings in the next precedent number that any haue help or benifit therby vnles they were forgetfull of their fayth But you will say neuer thelesse where is any answear to that obiection your bread entreth the mouthe passeth the stomack departeth with other excrements and therfor not Christ I answere therto that it is not very Christian to thinke that Christ after his resurrection hath a mortal body and that it is a conceit altogether Capharnaical to suppose he is eaten in so grosse a maner as by you is specified Our Sacrament therfor which is Christ remayneth realy in vs during the remayning of the forme of bread intierly which formes by the heate of our stomacks being digested Christ after powring his grace into our soule ceaseth realy to be in vs. And this aunswear may suffice any Christian mynde I will here also wynke at seueral vntruethes for breuites sake and axamin further Nether let any one maruayle that I am very succinct in treating the forsayd point Origen hom 9. 13. in Leuitic Hebr. cap. 5. S. August serm 46. de verbis De Ciu l. 10. c. 6. In Ps 39 lib. 50. hom 42. Tra. 11. in Ioan. how long Christ remayneth in the receauers because I imitate the primatiue Fathers saying Non immoremur in his quae scientibus nota sunt ignorantibus patere non possunt Let vs not be prolix in such things as are knowen to the beleeuers and can be notifyed to the ignorāt This made S. Paul mentioning the sacrifice of Melchisedech to haue streight abrupted it as not to be diuulgated to faithles conceyts This made S. Augustin sildome to name otherwyse this mysterie then the Sacrament knowen to the faithfull 41. Rider Ioh. 6.54.50 Now seeing that Christ had not all this time when he made this sermon in the sixth of Iohn ordained his last Super and therefore not the bread in the Supper And seeing this bread can neither assure the bodie of the receiuers of resurrection nor their soules of saluation it cannot be that this bread in the Sacrament was the same that Christ spake of in Iohn And therefore your proofes brought to prooue your carnall presence of Christ by these texts be impertinent sauouring by your leaue of smale reading in the Fathers and lesse vnderstanding in the Scriptures But that all men that read this may see your errours and so beware of your new daungerous doctrine I will bring Augustine and other Fathers to disprooue you in plaine termes for misalleadging these texts Augustine bringeth forth
his wonte towards the greatest mysteries of his passion ascension comming of the holy Ghost c. and not by institution It being cleere among Catholicks I will auerr it by protestaÌ„ts Martyr in defens Eucha Con. Gardin par 3. pag. 644. 547. Bucer in c. 6. Ioan. in cap 26. Math. Ecpenceus in Apolog. That saith Peter Martyr which Christ promised in the sixt of Ihon that he performed in the last supper Martin Bucer vpon the very sixt of Ihon and else where craueth pardon of God that euer he had bewitched any with your opinion that Christ handled not his true real and corporal being by way of premonition in this Chapter Lyke repentance had also Peter Martyr for some tyme being of your imagination As also had Oecolampadius by his ovvne testimonie Oecolamp ad Land Hess 1529. Feuard in pref com in Ruth Vide in examine symboli n. 7. Calu. con Heshusium Beza in Creophagia Tygurenses con test Brency Micomius in S. Marc. pag. 150. Cureus in Spongia Daneus con Selneccerum Cautier pag. 186. c. Caueat a litle befor saying Vtinam priâ—ceps illustrissime abscissa fuisset mihi haec dextera cùm primum inciperem de negotio Coenae Dominicae quicquam scribere I would most excellent prince that this right hand of myne had bene chopped off when I began first to wryte owght of the Lords supper Feuardent reporteth that Caluin misbeleeued S. Ihon to haue bene authour of this sixt chapter because it was to cleere against his imagination Yet Caluin him selfe in his booke against Heshusius approueth it to treat of the Sacrament So dothe Beza The ministers of Zurick Miconius Cureus Daneus Cautier c. So lastly doth most cleerly M. Rider not long befor against him selfe saying who soeuer dwel in Christ and Christ in them only eate Christs fleash and drinck Christs blood Which saith he being Christs woords in the sixt of Ihon verse 56. it were damnable to doubt of them Then suerly it can not be but damnable to doubt of Christs mentioning the Sacrament in the sixt of Ihon wherby he is eaten of vs dwelleth in vs and we in him I trust you will not deny now to haue bene aunswered to your full expectation and smal consolation For both S. August and Lyra contradicteth your information your brethren confute it and your selfe disproue it then which what fowler disgrace could happen to a wryter But I will make it yet fowler by ingadgeing your pretious Iuels credit Iwels replie against Harding art 5. Diuisione 3. pag. 323. whether Christ did not meÌ„tion the eating of his flesh in the 6. of S. Ihon or not he coÌ„fidently saying That Christ in the sixt of S. Ihon speaketh of the spiritual eating by fayth by which his very fleash and very blood indeed and verily is eaten and drunken Notwithstanding we say that Christ afterward in his last supper vnto the same spiritual eating added also an owtward sacrament or figure Behould his assuraÌ„ce that Christ did here treat of eating Christ and that his speache here belongeth to that he after ordayned Rider You are not onely taxed by Aug. to bee ignorant in the circuÌ„stance of the text but also in the sence of the text which is a grose thing in diuines 42. Now you shall heare Augustine tell you that this sixt of Iohn is to be taken figuratiuelie and allegoricallie and therefore spirituallie meaning that the speeches and phrases which Christ vsed be borrowed and translated from the bodie to the mind from eating and drinking to beleeving from chamming with the teeth to the beleeuing with the heart So that what eating and drinking is to the bodie that beleeuing is to the soule And as bread and flesh be meat corporall for the bodie so Christ our bread is made spirituall for the soule And as corporall meats are taken with the corporall mouth so are spirituall meates Christ crucified with all his benefits receiued with faith the mouth of the soule And therefore to teach all posterities how to expound these words of Christ hee giues a generall rule perpetually to be obserued in GODS church Saying (a) De doct Christ. lib. 3. cap. 16. Si praeceptiua locutio est c. If the Scriptures seeme to commaund an horrible or vile fact the speech is figuratiue The secoÌ„d proofe out of the sixt of Iohn and then alleadgeth your second proofe that you bring out of the sixt of Iohn for example Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his bloud yee shall haue no life in you Facinus flagitium videtur iubere Christ in this place seemes to commaund a wicked and horrible act Figura est ergo It is therefore a figuratiue speech commaunding vs to keepe in mind that his flesh was crucified tormented for vs. Now examine Augustines exposition To eate corporallie reallie and substantiallie Christs flesh with our material mouths and to drinke his precious substantiall reall bloud with our bodilie lips is a horrible thing Therefore Christs words bee figuratiue So that by Augustines owne words your litterall sence carnall presence is wicked and horrible howsoeuer you cloake it with fained titles to blinde the eies and deceiue the hearts of simple Catholiques And if you would but read the fifth chapter of the foresaid booke you should see his Christian caueat he giues to Gods Church touching this point In principio cauenduÌ„ est ne figurataÌ„ locutioneÌ„ ad litteraÌ„ accipias c. First of all you must beware that you take not a figuratiue speech according to the letter his reason followes for the letter that is the litterall sence killeth But the spirit that is the spirituall sence giueth life For when we take the figuratiue speech for a proper speech we make the sence carnall neither is there anie thing more fitlie calld the death of the soule Thus you see Aug. teacheth if you would learne that if the speech be proper the sence must bee litterall and carnall but if it be figuratiue it must bee misticall and spirituall and alleadgeth this your own text for the same So I would wish you either follow Augustines doctrine or else cease to vse Augustines and the rest of the Fathers names for in vsurping their names and peruerting their doctrine you abuse the Fathers and deceiue the Catholiques Your Bernard also in later times condemnes your absurd vnchristianlike exposition of this your owne text Ber. Serm. 33. inps Qui habitat Fol. 68. Col. 2. Vnlesse you eate the flesh of Christ c. He asketh the question Quid auteÌ„ est manducare eius carnem bibere sanguinem nisi communicare passionibus eius eam conuersationem imitari quam gessit in carne What is to eate Christs flesh and drinke his bloud but to communicate with his passions and to imitate his holie conuersation in the flesh And then followeth Vnde hoc designat illibatum illud Altaris Sacramentum vbi
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
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
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.
protecti The wodd on which the holy body of Christ was placed and Crucified why do all the world so striue to haue it as they that can purchase any parcell therof they inclose it in gould men and women and hang it on their necks being therby thought honoured and riche defended and protected What say yow was that gowlden mouthed Father and Reuerend Chrysostom a Papist or a Protestant was our deuotion in his opinion but simple foolishnes trash c I could long swymme in this plentifull mater of the reuerence and deuotion toward Crosses from the Apostles tyme vpward hauing all godly Fathers and doctors to beare vp my chynn yf this one testimonie of S. Chrysostom by M. Rider commended did not seeme bastant and powerfull to disproue his bare wyse accusation and had I not to treat agayne therof in the article of Images but because he is in Irlād and that it may be knowen of what religion owld Irish men were I will giue one testimonie beyond my woord out of Coelius Sedulius by his owne inscription knowen to be Scotus Ibernensis a Scot of Irland saying in Carm. Paschal Neue quis ignoret speciem Crucis esse colendam That none mistrust the forme of the Crosse to be adored As for Agnus Deis it is to be considered that the Gentils or Infidels vsing to hang at their necks certayne stamps or cownters with filthie dishonest shapes to defend them against charms and incantations as appeareth in Varro him selfe Varro de lingua latina lib. 6. it seemed good to Gods Church since that such as were conuerted would not easilie quyte this forsayd follie to change superstition into religion as by lyke occasion was done for candles on candlemass day Vide Baron tom 1. pag. 606. and certain feasts conuerted to Gods honour that they might not be retayned against his honour Therfor in remembrance that we were redeemed by the lamb of God that taketh away the synns of the world who liued a virginal and innocent lyfe for our example and by his death sanctifyed our sowles by the spiritual vnction of the holy Ghost Vide Petrum Maffeū in 7. decretalium was by Christs sacred Spowse framed in resemblance of all these an image of a lambe in whyt virgin wax tempered with holy oyle Such image is called an Agnus Dei. Of which sort when to Charles the great was presented one by Leo the third he receaued it as was his dutie no otherwyse then a pretious treasure With no lesse pietie and deuotion also did the Emperor of Constantinople receaue one from Vrbanus the fift proceeding against it in a Solemne Procession of the Clergie and Laitie and carying it in a triumphant godly honour into the Citie These Emperours although very ancient were simple foolish Papists accompting such trashe in Protestant estimation and such sacred ressemblances in Catholick opinion worthie of all regard and reputation Should God almightie be so changeable as in the owld testament notwithstanding his forbidding to honour idols yet so to allow deuotion toward remembrances of his benefits as to honour Dauid for his pietie toward them and to punish 5070. Bethsamits only for curious viewing of them Oza for presumption to touche the case of them and now may not abyde remembrances of farr greater benifits performed by his deerly beloued Sonne but that they should be in his sight simple foolish trashe He that aduiseth nothing more then to haue vs remembre him and to place him as a memorial vpon our armes and harts therby to be euer in our eyes and vnderstandings he that for all greatest benifits fulfilled toward the Israelites admonished to erect monuments and holy dayes to retayne them in the minds of posteritie is he now lesse louing toward him selfe hath he now repented his courses and is become opposit to them that by external signes retayne his gifts in gratefull representations how farr against reason hath synn and heresie blinded and transported reasonable men to suspect God to be changeable in his proceedings because them selues are inconstantly variable So they that are borne against the streame do esteeme them selues stidfast and both the shore and townes and towers to moue by the mutabilitie of them selues Of holy Bread S. Paulinus and S. Hierome S. Paulinus in epist. 8. Hieron in v. S. Hilar Osbernus in v. S. Elphegi Conrad in in v S. VVolphelmi Theodoric in v. S. Hildegard lib. 3. c. 9. Metaphrast in Decembri in v. S. Marcelli Vide tom 3. Conc. l. pag. 569. and of later tymes S. Elphegus Archbishop of Canterburie S. Marcellus Abbot S. Hildegardis and many others haue affoorded so ample testimonie of the vertue and estimation of it that a thowsand Riders can not impayre the dignitie therof Nether can there be any thing more authentical then the forme of benediction therof vsed in Concilio Nannetensi Can. 9. in these woords O Lord our holy Father omnipotent eternal God vouchsafe to blesse this bread with thy sacred benediction that it may be to all health of body and sowle and a defense or protection against all diseases of sowle and bodye I would willingly haue all Catholick to hould it for a principal rule that were there no other authoritie to iustifie these holy hallowed things yet that they should esteeme them very gratefull to God by being impugned by such as M. Rider is For yf they did not displease and often displace Sathan he would not be so importunat in his followers to deride and disgrace them This rule haue I followed my selfe to my exceeding benifit to be more deuout toward such deuotions at which they are most discontented withall Catho Priests Lib. 8. cap. 5. Sozomen recounteth how a woman not beleeuing that Christ had transformed bread into his bodie was in danger by transformation of bread into a stone Rider 153. SOme such thing there is but you misse Sozomons words sentences and purpose and applie it still to your Host The priest told Sozomen that in giuing the Sacramentall bread to a woman shee tooke it in her hand and priuilie gaue it her maide behinde her which the maid no sooner toucht with her tooth but it turned into a stone Beleeue it that list and the print of the tooth is this day to be seene in Constantinople I pray you Gentlemen is this your Oste Christs bodie if it be as you teach but fie it is a false lie then were Christs bodie turned into a stone and to be seene at Constantinople vnder the formes of a stone as wel as at Rome vnder the formes of bread VVhether M. Rider or I Doe misreport the relation of Sozomen Fitzsimon 153. YOu haue gotten M. Rider the habit or facilitie and perfection of falsifying that now it is ingrafted in you as a second natural inclination It shal appeare now both toward Sozomen and the very sacred Scripture it selfe being both most shamefully corrupted The historie of Sozomen is thus
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
as it were vpon a stage the three Euangelists Mathew Mark and Luke deliuering the doctrine of the Sacrament Aug. Tomo quart de consensu Euangelistarum lib. 3. Cap. 1. Math. 26. Mark 14. Luk. 22. Ioh. 6. These three Euang. handled as it were the bodie of Christ Iohn the soule and diuinitie of Christ Lyra in psal 110. but when he came to Iohn he saith Iohannes autem de corpore sanguine Domini hoc in loco nihil dixit Iohn in the 6. of his gospel spake nothing of the Lords body bloud I wonder with what face you can brag to follow the fathers and no men nor sect more opposit to their faith and facts then you There Aug. hath cract your credit salue it how you can And your own Doctour Lyra condemnes your erronious opinion which will applie these as spoken of the Sacrament his words be these Nihil directe pertinet ad Sacramentalem vel corporalem manducationem hoc verbum Nisi manducaueritis c. Nam hoc verbum fuit dictum diu antequam Sacramentum Eucharistiae fuerit institutum This saying of Christ vnlesse you eat the flesh of the sonne of man drinke his bloud doth nothing directly appertaine to the Sacramentall or corporall eating of Christ in the Sacrament For Christ spake this long before he ordained this Sacrament Therefore no sound argument saith he can be grounded vpon that litteral exposition of the Sacramentall communion and he giues a reason vnaunswereable Nam primo debet existere in rerum natura For first the Sacrament must be ordained before it can be a Sacrament But you here would haue Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament before it bee a Sacrament And then Lyra concludes De Eucharistia Sacramentali quâ— nondum fuit tam alta sententia proferri non potuit quae dicitur Nisi manducaueritis c. Therefore of this place there can bee made no good sufficient argument touching the sacramentall communion vnlesse saith he some curious Hereticquâ—â— wil take these words spoken by Christ to be spoken propheticallie Quod nondum est noÌ„ datur priuilegium Now saith your owne Doctour if you take this chapter of the sixt of Iohn litterallie as you do then it is impossible and absurd because you wil haue a carnall presence in the Sacrament before there be a Sacrament if prophetically then your owne champion calls you curious Heretiques Lyra. eodem loco Luc. 23.41 And to prooue your litterall exposition grosse false and absurd he produceth against you two famous examples the first of the Theefe on the crosse who by his liuely faith performed the tenor of this text yet neuer communicated Sacramentallie And Iudas who communicated vnder both kinds and yet failed in the meaning of this precept Lib. 4. dist 9. And then shuts vp the mouths of all Litteralists and Heretiques that hold this spoken of the Sacrament alleadging Thomas Aquinas his draught out of Augustine Non manducans manducat manducans non manducat Hee that eateth not Sacramentally may yet eate Christ spiritually by faith and so did the Theefe on the Crosse and was saued Some eate the Sacramentall bread but not Christ which is the inward grace of the Sacrament as Iudas did and was damned Manie moe Fathers shall you haue to secod these against you if these satisfie you not Thus you are condemned by two learned Fathers that you ignorantlie or maliciously or both mistake and misapplie the sixth of Iohn to speake of the Sacrament before the Sacrament was instituted VVhether Christ treated of the Eucharist in the 6. chap. of S. Ihon. Fitzimon In his Rescript 41. I Am threatned by M. Rider that vnlesse I answeare this mater well I am ouerthrowen horse and foote I wil therfor begynn thus saying that S. Augustin and Lyra are vntruely alleaged Indeede S. Augustin speaking of the time immediatly before Christs passion August tom 4. de Consen Euan. l. 3. c. 1. sayth Ioannes autem de corpore sanguine Domini hoc loco nihil dixit But Ihon in this place sayth nothing of the body and blood of our Lord. These woords added by M. Rider sixt of his gospell are the text of a cunning misreporter not of S. Augustin He giueth a reason why S. Ihon treated not of the body and blood of our Lord in this place because saith he amply he treated therof before Is this Augustin to deny or affirme that S. Ihon treated of the body and blood of Christ in the sixt chapter For vnless he treated in the sixt chapter only S. Augustins woords that he had treated therof amply befor in no other place they being specified can not be verifyed Now to Lyra. Tell posteritie I request you in your next wryting that you had mistaken Lyra for one Mathias Dornick who carpeth by replyes at the additioÌ„s of Paul Burgensis annected to Lyra. Your owne cited booke will informe you therof befor the prologue to the psalmes and els wheare The swoord of Goliath agayne shal cutt his owne head I meane that the authors by you alleaged shall testifie against you Lyra then saith euen vpon the 6. of S. Ihon Postquam egit de pane spirituali qui est verbum Lyra in Cap. 6. Ioan. hic consequenter agit de pane spirituali qui est sacramentum After that he had discoursed of the spiritual bread which is the woord here he handleth the spiritual bread which is the Sacrament Againe Ne crederent quod caro eius contineretur in sacramento Eucharistiae sicut in signo ideo hoc remouet dicens caro mea vere est cibus c. Least they should beleeue that his fleash were conteined in the Eucharist as in a signe therfor he preuenteth that saying my fleash is meat indeede Againe quia hic sumitur realiter non figuratiue here it is taken realy sayth he and not figuratiuely After he telleth you that they are hereticks who affirme it to be tantummodo sicut in signo only as in a signe Let this suffise to know to whom might by another be sayd De mendacio ineruditionis tuae confundere Eccli 7. be ashamed at the falshood of your ignorance For forgerie is opprobrium nequam in homine a badd reproache to any man but is incident principaly to the vnlearned Eccli 34. in ore indisciplinatorum assidue erit As here it is manifest three great vntruths are heaped together First by vnlearned mistaking S. Augustins woords being of what was deliuered belonging only to the immediat action of Christ befor his passion Secondly by addition of woords to S. Augustins speeche Thirdly by vnlearned mistaking Lyra for another Notwithstanding I will score vp but the 17. vntrueth which was by badd intention and only to misinforme inserted For the point all catholicks and most principal protestants acknowledg that Christ in S. Ihon chapter 6. treated of the Sacrament But by way of premonition anticipation or instruction as was
neuer in question and that the maner is not proued I say then the boy in Grammer or the Sophist that would not conceaue the state of the question propounded and expounded vnto him by Christ him selfe not obscurely or doubtfully but euidently yet affirmeth that instruction hath not bene giuen him is to haue many strypes according to Gods woord Prouerb 10. v. 10. Ose 4.14 Populus non intelligens vapulabit the not vnderstanding people shal be beaten c. Of the rest whether the faythfull only dwel in Christ and only dwellers in him eate him and that it is all one to heare the woord and to communicat as here is affirmed appeareth in the 33. 34. 35. and 43. numbres 46. For you take this flesh of Christ which is our true meat Rider to be the flesh which was borne of the virgin and suffered on the Crosse but the Popes Church of Rome say contrarie for these be the wordes of the Canon Dist. 2. de consec pag. 434. canon dupliciter Col. 4. Read the glosse and you may see your errour as in a glasse Dupliciter intelligitur caro sanguis Christi vel spiritualis illa atque diuina de qua ipse ait Caro mea vere est cibus sanguis meus vere est potus nisi meam carnem c. Vel caro mea ea quae crucifixa est c. The flesh and bloud of Christ saith your owne Church of Rome must be considered two manner of waies either for the spirituall and diuine flesh spoken of by Christ my flesh is meat in deed c. and except you drinke his bloud c. or else for that his flesh which was crucified and that his bloud shed by the sharp launce of a cruell souldiour so that heere you forsake your Romane Catholique faith and become Apostates from the Church of Rome Thus you abuse the Catholiques in making them beleeue you teach as the Pope teacheth and you doe not therefore either the Pope or you must erre grosly teaching contraries But that all men may see that not onely this Pope but also other Popes haue held the contrarie opinion to your new broched heresie I will alleadge him that you dare not contradict Innocentius tertius lib. 4. cap. 14. de Sacramento Altaris pag. 179. that is Innocentius tertius that first begat your abortiue Transubstantiation De spirituali commestione Dominus ait Nisi manducaueritis c. The Lord Christ when hee spake of the spirituall eating said Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man c. Loe heere is another Pope against you For you late Iesuites Semynaries Rhemists and Priests take this as spoken of Christs flesh in the sacrament and they take it for that spirituall and diuine flesh of Christ whereon all the faithfull fed by faith as well before Christs incarnation as since his ascention The Pope your Father Rome your mother witnesse against you Priestes and the rest of their degenerat children I would bring more witnesses against your vntrue expositions and allegations but that I thinke it sufficient that the Parentes Testimonie is the strongest euidence against their degenerat children And after the Pope alleadgeth Augustine and the Canon Quid paras dentem ventrem crede manducasti and then concludes against your carnall eating of Christes flesh most strongly Qui credit in Deum comedit ipsum Caro Christi nisi spiritualiter comedatur non ad salutem sed ad iudicium manducatur Why saieth your Pope preparest thou thy teeth to eate and thy bellie to be filled beleeue and thou hast eaten hee that beleeues eates For the flesh of Christ is not eaten to saluation but to destruction vnlesse it be eaten spirituallie And there in the next chapter Pap. 180. the Pope giues this marginall note Christus est spiritualis Eucharistia Christ is our spiritual Eucharist not our carnall food in the Sacrament And in the same page he saith Cibus est non corporis sed animae this is not meat for the bodie but for the soule And if it bee meate for the soule then it must bee receiued by faith not the mouth spirituallie not carnallie You see now the Scriptures Fathers Popes olde and new the Text and glosse of your deare mother the Church of Rome against you And least you should cauil I haue alleadged the Bookes Chapters Distinctions and Pages And if you will still tell the Catholiques that these places by mee alleadged be not true then I tell you all your owne Authors and print be false for I alleadge Father Pope and Canons of your owne print and if you doubt looke vnto your owne bookes and prints Printed Anno. 1599. Impensis Lazari Zetzneri and you shall find them so verbatim vnlesse your late Indâ—â— expurgatorius hath blotted out the trueth as in manie things it hath VVhether the Popes and Church of Rome doe in their Decretals denye Christ in the Sacrament to be the same that was borne of the Virgin Marie Fitzimon 46. THe Decretal and glosse telling only that Christ may be considered ether Spiritually as he is in the Sacrament or as he was on the Crosse with his sensible quantitie and Innocentius instructing that we may receaue verum corpus quod traxit de Virgine in cruce pependit his true body receaued from the virgin and which hanged on the Crosse sacramentaly that is saythe he vnder the forme or Spiritualy by faythe only such testimonies confirming apparently our doctrin and being opposit to our aduersaries without reason or ryme our Spiritual M. Rider for the only mention made of Spiritualitie certifyeth to make for his purpose thinking he hath as good right to all testimonies contayning Spiritualitie although otherwyse they be most repugnant to him as to all tyethes and fruicts of his Deanry bequeathed for vses altogether opposit to his wonted offices of spiritualitie as yf he fullfilled them In the meane tyme by seueral titles is here made vp the 20. vntrueth that our Canons teache contrary to vs ether generaly The 20. vntruth or particularly in this point For do we say that Christ is present realy corporaly and substantialy so do they Dist. 2. de consecr cap. Christus panis est secundum carnem assumptam pro mundi vita according to his fleashe assumpted for the lyfe of the world Do we say that it is the same body which was borne of the virgin and crucified So do they Dist. 2. de consecr cap. Reuera mirabile hoc quod conficimus corpus ex virgine est verè vtique caro Christi que crucifixa est que sepulta est This which is by vs doone is the body taken from the virgin For it is truely the fleash of Christ which was crucifyed which was buryed Do we say that good and badd do receaue Christ corporaly the good to their saluation the badd to their damnation so do they Ibidem cap. sieut
Christ wil be also in the same maner profitable Wherof see afterwards in treating of the Masse As also it is palpably demonstrated that the sacred body of Christ supplying the place of bread by his saying that bread was his bodie the substance of bread was no lōger extāt for being bread it could not be his body personaly vnited to his deitie vnles he had bene impanated as he was incarnated Rider 51 And heere I am sorie I must tell you so plainelie that you wrong greatly and grieuously Gods truth and the Queenes subiects in thus misalleadging this text 1 First by Addition of a word 2 Secondly by misunderstanding and misapplication of another word 3 Thirdly by omission nay plaine subtraction of a whole verse Addition For the first which is Addition you adde this particle it which is neither in the Greeke nor in your Romane Lattine Bible no nor in your Rhemish Testament nor euer seen in anie Doctor of antiquitie and this fillable altereth the sence and peruerteth Christs meaning and is added by you to maintaine that which the Text otherwise could not haue anie shew to beare Fitzimon 51. This sorrow of yours is as true as the rest For your toyle-some wreasting your brayns to aggrauat euery least shaddow of a fault and to runne after your simple imagination as a catt ronneth after hir owne tayle as if you had espyed a fault dothe shew you would be inwardly gladd to obserue any true fault But from my wil I assure you right and synceritie shall only proceed I trust also my skill in this mater will not be behynde Concerning the addition of it that it should alter the sence and peruert Christs meaning it maketh vp apparently the 23. vntrueth The 23. vntruth For what Christ tooke it he did blesse it he did breake it he did giue No more nor no lesse is signified with it then without it And for my part that it be omitted so it be conceaued I leaue to your choyse That it should be conceaued appeareth to all capacities Nether in so small a slipp will I want the defense and example of M. Rider him selfe in his actiue and passiue discourse following vpon the woord fregit which he construeth he brake it wheras but for the sense it should be said only he brake yf you may add it for better vnderstanding lawfully why would you reprehend me and that so heynously to haue inserted it 52. Secondlie you misunderstand and misapplie this word Blesse Rider Misapplication Rhe. Test. 1. Cor. 11. Sect. 9. for we say it signifieth to giue thanks with the mouth and you say to make crosses with the fingers wee say it was spoken by Christ to his Father you say it was spoken to ouer or vpon the bread and challice and that hee vsed power and actiue words vpon them we contrarie will shew out of the word it selfe that it hath no such signification VVhen M. Rider citeth or omitteth our Authors 52. YOu in your Dedicatory epistle Fitzimon and els where did vaunt that you would confound vs by our owne Fathers quoting our owne books our owne print c. This indeed is performed only when what is affirmed being truely vnderstood maketh nothing for you or against vs. But we complayne on you to your selfe that in true accusations which would make heynously against vs you cite no authour no bookes no points but as I sayd befor vpon your owne bare woord hauing misinformed you pursue your owne relation therby as it was behoofull for your cause eschueing your controuersie For examples sake who of vs tould you that Christs fleash giuen for the lyfe of the world is Christs only body seperated as you affirme from his soule Which of our books record that Christ with all his merits is receaued by infidels dogs catts and other beasts as you informe in the 43. numbre When did any of vs teache a carnal real presence of Christ in the sacrament before consecration as you affirme in the 47. numbre And when or were did any of vs certifie you as you here and a litle after reporte that to blesse is not to giue thanks or to pray but only as we vaynly and foolishly teache say you to Crosse with two fingers and a thumbe with mumbling woords and charming Crosses wherby we forgiue synns past and preserue that day from future dangers Why in these and the lyke are not our authours books pages and prints alleaged The true aunswear is qui enim mal◠agit odit lucem Ioan. 3. n. 19. for he that doth wickedly hateth light that his woorks may not be reprehended But good Lord yf you had intended as you lately pretended that you would proue your opinion true that Christ is not properly and litteraly but only sacramentaly improperly figuratiuely and misticaly in the sacrament why would you seeke digressios and by-maters of blessings charmings and mumblings and gallopp after them in so long discourse But since we must haue patience perforce without reason or remedie let vs wayte vpon our wandring knight who may aboue all writers of him selfe affirme out of Ouid Ouid. Nunc huc nunc illuc vtròque sine ordine curro Now here now there and both vnorderly I runne Rider 53. One part of the originall woord in Greeke signifieth in English Speech vttered with the mouth not a magicall crossing of or with fingers And the other Greeke word which must be iudge betwixt vs doth signifie to laude to praise and to blesse and blessing praising and thanksgiuing are all one as anone you shall heare Christ himselfe so to expound it and all the Euangelists and Paul agree in one congruence touching this matter against you How blesse blessing are vsed in Scriptures But first I will shew the simple how diuersly this word Blesse is vsed in the Scriptures To blesse God is to praise him and giue him thankes for all his mercies as you haue in Luke Luke 24.53 and the disciples continued in the Temple lauding and blessing God I hope you will not say they crost God with their fingers or consecrated him to make him more holie but praised him with their mouths For if you take blessing of God in that fingered sence then see the absurdities you fall into Ioh. 1.18 Ioh 4.24 Anthropomorphitae First against Scriptures you must hold that God the Father it not a Spirit but hath a bodielie shape that may bee touched and crost with our corporall fingers if this you hold ioyne with those auncient Heretickes of Egypt who held that God had a bodie and members as man had What it is for one mā to blesse another Gen. 27. Gen 48 Nū 6.23 Let your High priests of Rome and you low Priestes of Ireland learne of Aaron Gods High Priest how to blesse Gods people so cease to deceiue them anie more And the second absurditie nay blasphemie is this that you should make GOD who 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
therefore figuratiue against your opinion You shall heare the Church of Rome deliuer her owne minde with her owne mouth which you cannot denie her wordes be these Ipsa immolatio carnis quae sacerdotis manibus fit Christi passio mors crucifixio dicitur non rei veritate sed significante misterio That offering of the flesh which is done by the hand of the Priest is called the passion death Dist. 2. de consecratione canon Hoc est pag 434 You cannot denâ—â— but this Popâ— was a Protestant and if this canon be Catholicke then is your carnall presence antichristian and crucifying of Christ but not in exactnesse of trueth but in misterie of that which was signified and the glosse there maketh most plaine against you Dicitur corpus Christi sed improprie vt sit sensus vocatur corpus Christi id est significat corpus Christi It is called the bodie of Christ but improperly that is figuratiuely that this be the sence it is called the bodie of Christ that is it signifieth the bodie of Christ Fitzimon 57. How M. Rider abused the decretals and how by them he receaued vtter destruction to his cause is demonstrated in the 46. number Yet now agayne he kicketh against the prick wel then doth the text and glosse say that the immolation of the preist is called improprely the passion and death of Christ Truly and so will all Catholicks say the same For who euer heard the masse of the preist to be proprely the cruental acte of the Iewes against Christ or called the cruental sacrifice on the Crosse This is as much against vs as when we graunt it to be true we loose no more therby then a candle doth in giuing light to another candle reseruing as much light in it selfe as if it had lighted none So although we affirme all that is now produced M. Riders sute is graunted and our light nothing deminished Rider 58. I will alleadge in this case other Popes and the faith of the Church of Rome in another age whereby the Reader may plainelie see that the auncient Popes and auncient Rome had the true succession in doctrine which we stand now on not that false succession of the place and a rotten worme-eaten chaire that you brag of De consecratione dist 2 Panis est in altare Glossa ibid. page 435. the glosse speaketh thus against your litteral sence of Hoc est corpus meum Hoc tamen est impossibile quod panis sit corpus Christi yet this is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ Not possible by their owne confession that bread should bee the bodie of Christ. Now gentle Reader see the wrong the late Popes and Priests offer to the Catholicks of this kingdome they would haue them imbrace that for faith which the old Church of Rome held for heresie that for possibilitie which she saith is impossible Why would you haue vs to beleeue that which you your selues say is impossible This all the Iesuits and Priests in Christendome cannot aunswere If you say these two Popes and the Church of Rome then taught the truth why doe you now dissent from the olde Romane faith If you saye the Popes and Church of Rome then erred you will be counted an hereticke and therefore in Gods feare confesse the trueth with vs and the olde Church of Rome and deceiue the Catholickes of this kingdome no more with this litteral sence of Hoc est corpus meum which you borrow from the late Popes and late Church of Rome and is a new error dissenting from the old Catholicke faith Fitzimon 58. Here is great want of integritie In the glosse alleaged is affirmed that the saying it is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ should be takeÌ„ according to a sound maner to witt during the being therof bread For the saying that of bread is made the body of Christ Ita vt post consecrationem non sit iam ibi panis sed verum corpus Christi So that after consecration bread is ther no longer but the true body of Christ is towld to be the sound maner and meaning intended in the very same text and glosse Whether then can he seeme to any men Catholicks or others which had the face and conscience to misreport this glosse and to informe the decretals thus distroying protestantcie to stand for protestantcie woorthy to be houlden a lawfull Preacher or a faithfull witnes or conscionable informer or as being a godly spiritual honest preacher when so many others his betters are in great extremitie to haue yearly aboue 1500. raziers or cowmbs of corne besyds other commodities in such a choise deanry I know not how many vntruethes besyd all other faultines any other would skore vp in these woords which I calculat but for the 43 vntrueth only The 43. vntruth Let others imagin what discontentment and tediousnes any religious mynde might conceaue to incountre so contrarious a spirit or such a spirit of contradiction against knowen trueth 59. And I will adde one other Popes Canon Rider Corpus Christi quod sumitur de Altari figura est dum panis vinum videntur extra Dist 2. can Corpus Christi pag. 438. col 4. You cannot denie this Pope to be a protestant in this point veritas autem dum corpus sanguis Christi in veritate interius creditur The bodie of Christ which is taken from the Altar is a figure so long as the bread and wine are seene vnreceiued but the truth of the figure is seene when the bodie and bloud are receiued trulie inwardly and by faith into the heart Now the glosse in that place expoundeth the text and saith Corpus Christi est sacrificium corporis Christi alias falsum est quod dicit The bodie of Christ in the text signifieth the sacrifice of the bodie of Christ otherwise it is false Out of which I note the Church of Rome cals the outward Elements Christs bodie that is a figure of his bodie being not receiued though consecrated Secondly that the bodie of Christ wherof the Sacrament must be a figure The Popes glosse against the Popes text must be receiued by faith into the soule not by the mouth into the stomacke Now the glosse saieth the text is false vnlesse c. But I leaue the iarre to be reconciled by you who be the Popes friends yet this I say And Gelasius another Pope more auncient then those against Eut. is of this opinion Maledicta glossa quae corrumpit textum These three Popes and the Church of Rome in those dayes it was before the birth of your Transubstantiation and your carnall presence jumpt with all the old Fathers and the Primitiue Church that liued the first sixe hundred yeares after Christ and say it is called the bodie of Christ the flesh of Christ the passion and death of Christ but not rei veritate not indeed and
trueth but mistically significatiuelie improperly figuratiuely and by way of representation and that it is impossible otherwise to bee the bodie of Christ Yet when we speake of figures in the Sacrament you mocke vs. When we say the phrase is figuratiue therefore the sence must be spirituall You deride vs as mis-interpreters of Scriptures and Fathers But if your leisure and learning would affoord you but fauour to read with a holie deuotion the canonicall Scriptures the ancient doctors of Christs Primitiue Church that left vs these lessons for our learning you should see that we learne what they taught and doe what they said you follow not what they commanded because you knowe not what they haue recorded Fitzimon 59. As he goeth forward according to the Apostles saying Proficit in peius he increaseth in ill This same text is cited in the 46. number according to the expresse sense therof and title prefixed to this chapter to signifie our beleeuing Christs body bothe substantialy and also figuratiuely in the Sacrament Yf any learned man conferr this sayd text and as it is interpreted by M. Rider I request him not to spyte or spitt at his memorie but to pittie it For to haue thus construed it is a figure as bread and wyne are scene extra owtwardly he translateth as they are seene vnreceaued Secondly for what he should interprett but it is the veritie as the body and blood of Christ in trueth is beleeued inwardly he inserteth a parenthesis making the trueth to be of the veritie of the figure and not of the body of Christ I protest befor God and his Angels that greefe and shame of his misdemeanure do auert my mynde from being imployed to vnfould and refute him and procure me to ouerslipp much filthe deseruing to be sharply and in the most heynouse maner reproued But I pray you considre notwithstanding these faults apparent to all eyes in these woords of his in the text and margent This all the Iesuits priests in Christendom can not aunswer you can not deny this pope to be a protestant in this point confesse the trueth with vs and the owld Church of Rome He that tould you befor him selfe that S. Bernard liuing in the yeare 1190 was in the palpeblest tyme of grossest supersttion meaning therby papistrie here forgetting him selfe informeth that the decretals and popes therin alleaged collected by Gratian at the same tyme of S. Bernard by his saying most superstitiouse doe stand for protestantcy He that would not be tryed but by the Fathers of the first fiue hondred yeares professing the world soone after to haue apostated into papistrie is now come to clayme the decretals compyled after a thowsand yeares He that in clayming the same Fathers as appeareth in the 46. number the number precedent and in this present number is beyond all cōtrouersie vtterly foyled and forsaken of them and therfore iustly doth multiply the 44. and 45. vntrueth that the least be spoaken in the forsayd bowld assured and reiterated protestation The 44 45. vntruth Lactant. l. 5. c. 3. Anaxagoras is generaly reprehended by all men that contrary to sense and vnderstanding only to be singular he would cōfidetly shamlesly and contentiously affirme snow to be as black as inke Haue we not found an heyer to him who can face out black to be whyte that is reproofs to be approbations denials affirmations owld to be yong falshod to be trueth darknes to be light substance to be figurs preaching to be communion the owld testament to be as fruictfull as the new the primatiue Church and Fathers to haue bene late sectaries Catholick to be heretical c. I bequeath then as in my testament to ensuing posteritie that hereafter when men desyer to specifie any readers of such resolution as had Anaxagoras and his forsayd successour they bestow on them for a perpetual memorial of such ancestours not that they are impudent contentiouse frantick deprauers desperat falsifiers corrupters against all pregnant and palpable trueth but only without all iniurie that they ryde or are Ryders As for his annotations that the church calleth the outward elemēts according to their apparence a figure and that the body of Christ must be receaued into the soule vnlesse he doted he would not thinke any preiudice therby to our cause For we graunt both to be true but without being only a figure or foode of the only soule His opposing the glosse and text as contrarie they being euidently most cōcordant and the glosse only telling the text to be intended of Christs bodie not in extensiue maner but as it is a sacrifice also his addition that because it entreth the soule it can not not entre the body what stupiditie doth it not contayne 60. Rider Now briefly I will acquaint the Reader onely with the times when these Doctors liued and the places where they taught this doctrine and then wee shall see whether this your litterall exposition of Hoc est corpus meum be Catholicke or not Clemens Alexandrinus was diuinitie Reader in the famous cittie of Alexandria in Egypt In the yeare of our Lord. If you will read aduisedly these Fathers you shal see plainlie your owne errors 107 Origen was his scholler and succeeded Lectures in the same place 204 Tertullian Diuinitie Reader in Carthage in Affrick 206 Ambrose Bishop of Millaine in Italie 370 Hierome Diuinitie Reader in Stridona in Hungaria and sometime in Slauonia 387 Chrisostome Bishop of Constantinople in Gracia 406 Augustine Bishop of Hippo in Affricke 426 Venerable Beda a famous learned man in England 570 And thus you may see that neither Alexandria Carthage Milano Stridona Constantinople Hippo nor Rome which are famous Citties Nay which is more neither Egypt Italie Hungaria and Slauonia nor England which are famous kingdomes Nay which is most of all the three parts of the world Asia Affricke and Europe neuer heard or had such a litteral exposition of Hoc est corpus meum for at least eight hundred yeares after Christ and yet your Iesuits and priestes will haue their doctrine to be Catholicke Vincentius aduersus Hereticos That is truly catholicke saith he Quod semper vbique ab omnibus est creditum which cannot be vnlesse it were at all times and in all places and of all persons receiued for so your Vincentius defineth Catholicke doctrine And heere you see that for the three parts of the world and for many hundred yeares after Christ it was not knowne And therfore it is neither Apostolicall nor Catholicke Fitzimon 60. One that fayleth to be a physition might perchaunce not be an ignorant musition or not being a gardener might yet be a hors-corser So in degrees of learning he that can not wryte well might yet perhapp indyte wel he that is no rethorician might yet be a grammarian he that is no poet migt yet be a linguist he that is noe diuyne might yet be an antiquarist or chronicler But to
wit of qualities of times of places of habits and such other like things according to their natures and to the predicaments vnder the which they are compreheÌ„ded These Logicall rudiments I hope you haue not forgotten Our regeneration is a change not substantiall but accidentall that is VVe confes a change of name of vse but onelie during the actioÌ„ not after to be a sacrament no more then water in the font after that baptisme is finished by the minister it is not a change of the substance of our bodies and soules into anie other substance but the change is in qualitie which is from vice to vertue from sinne to righteousnesse c. and this our change now in question is sacramentall not substantiall of the vse of the creatures not of the substance But if you will needes haue a change of substances speake like schollers and tell me for my learning in what predicament I shall seeke it and yet I thinke I shall neuer finde it But I will not bee tedious in transubstantiation seeing the great Rabbynes of Rome can no more agree vpon this then they could about consecration as also because we haue confuted it in such places where we prooue bread to remaine after consecration for so manie Fathers as prooue bread to remaine after consecration confute transubstantiation I will onelie giue the best minded Catholickes a taste of the rest of your late School-doctors by alleadging one Grand captain instead of the rest Whose words be these Magister Sent. lib. 4. diâ—t 11. pag. 58. Si tandem queritur qualis sit illa conuersio an formalis an substantialis vel alterius generis diffinire non sufficio But if it be asked mee saith this your great Moderator what kinde of change is made in the Sacrament whether it be formall or substantiall or of anie other kinde I am not able to define it vnto you Will you heare your owne friend Cuthb Tounstall Bishop of Dirrhum deliuer his opinion de modo De Eucharistia lib. 1. pag. 46. quomodo id fieret fortasse satius erat curâ—osum quemque suae relinquere coniecturae sicut liberum fuit ante concilium Lateranum Of the maner of this change or conuersion how it might be done perhaps it had been better to leaue euery man that would be curious to his own opinion or coniecture as iâ— was before the Councell of Laterane left at libertie Is this your antiquitie vniuersalitie and consent you see it is a jarring noueltie voide of veritie Why then will you take vpon you to teach that which you neuer learned and perswade the Catholickes to beleeue that which the chiefest on youâ— side maketh a doubt of nay all of your side cannot prooue nay which is in deed but a fable without trueth Absurdities follow the granting of Transubstantiation for one thousand two hundred yeares after Christ neuer heard of And therefore seeing it is neither Apostolicall nor Catholicke no mans consience is bounde to beleeue it Now I will onelie showe some grosse absurdities that followe the graunting of it and so proceed to the rest VVhat the sense is of Transubstantiation and how ould it is Fitzimon 70. TRansubstantiation in our purpose is a conuersion of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord Conc. Trid. loc cit and of the whole substance of wyne into the substance of his blood So that yf the Fathers euer taught the whole bread in substantial mater and forme to be conuerted in to the fleash of Christ and the wyne into his blood without any substantial part or parcel of them remayning they can not be denyed to haue taught Transubstantiation Vide Zuar 3. par q. 75. dâ—sp 50. sect 1. The name creation is added owt of S. Augustin de conseca d. 2. c. vtrum sub figura wherby is only intended what here in other woords others haue For the euidence wherof first let vs learne what names they vsed to expresse this conuersion For breuities sake I will only relate such as in the proofs of their opinions in Zuares are specifyed to witt A transmutation a making a creation a mutation a conuersion a translation a transelementation transformation a transmigration transfusion of bread and wyne into the body and blood of Christ. Euery one vsing the most forcible woord he bethought to testifie the same which the Concil of Trent doth say conueniently and properly to be called Transubstantiation Secondly note these few proofs of the primatiue Fathers and other Doctors perswasions Cyprian de caena Domini Firste S. Cyprian Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro The bread which Christ deliuered his disciples not in resemblance but in substance and nature changed by the omnipotencie of the woord is made fleash O confortable and Catholick testimonie of fourtene hondred yeares antiquitie Cyril Hierosolimit anus catechist 4. mystagogua S. Cyrill of Ierusalem Hoc sciens ac procertissimo habens panem hunc non esse panem qui videtur etiamsi gustâ—â— panem esse sentiat This knowing and howlding for most certayne this bread not to be bread which seemeth Ambros. de sacram l. 4. c 14. lib. 6. c. 1. althowgh the tast do the iudge it bread S. Ambros Panis iste panis est ante verba sacramentorum Vbi accesserit consecratio de pane 〈◊〉 caro Christi This bread is bread befor consecration but when it is consecraâ—â—d of bread it is made the fleash of Christ S. Augustin August dist 2. cap. hoc est de Consecr Caro eius est quam â—â—ma panis opertam in sacramento accipimus sanguis eius quem sub vini â—ecie sapore potamus It is his fleash which vnder the lyknes of bread couered â—e receaue in the Sacrament and his blood which vnder the shew and tast of â—yne we drinke S. Cyrill of Alexandria Cyril Alex. in Ioan. l. 4. c. 13. Qui videtur panis non est panis â—â—iamsi gustu ita appareat sed corpus Christi That which seemeth bread is not â—read although in tast it so appeare but the body of Christ Beda Beda lib. de mysterio mâ—sse Remigius in psal 21. Ibi sorma â—anis videtur vbi substantia panis non est There the forme of bread appeareth â—here the substance of bread is not S. Remigius Panis vinum à Chriâ—â—iana veritate dicuntur non quod naturam panis vini post consecrationem â—etineant sed quod nutriant Bread and wyne are sayd in Christian veritie â—ot that they retayne the nature of bread and wyne after consecration but that â—hey nourish S. Bernard Hostia quam vides iam non est panis Bernard de caena Domini sed caro â—â—ea similiter liquor iste quem vides iam non vinum sed sanguis meus Quemâ—dmodum
Caluin affirme yf any Christum opponere velit iudicio Dei Calu. l. 2. Instit. c. 17. n. 1. non sore merito locum quia non reperietur in homine dignitas quae possit Deum promereri would oppose Christ to the iudgement of God there would noe place remayne to any Merit because there is not in man that dignitie to deserue any thing of God Holinshead in the yeare 1579. pap 1195 Behould and be amazed that Christs merit euen of death is impugned and he affirmed to be only man and not God Sixtly they euacuat the passion of Christ who in playne and expresse tearms say For Acts. pag. 468. 487. 1335. Stows in Elizabeth pag. 1195. Calu. con Heshu◠pag. 39. Beza in colloq Mompel 1. p. 522. Bucer super Ioan. pag. 34. Muscul in loc theol fol. 363. 367. Zanchius in Miscellan p. 3. 200. 206. Aret. apud Schlusselb l. 1. a. 6. 25. 26. l. 2. fol. 42. theol Cal. Eius sanguinem mortem passionem nihil contulisse ad redemptionem generis humani His blood death and passion to haue nothing auayled to the redemption of mankinde Christus omnibus suis operibus caelum non est promeritus Christ by all his works deserued not heauen Suche were some of Foxes most famous martyrs such are Familists and many English ministers by confession of your Chroniclers Lastly they euacuat Christs passion who affirme his death and passion proffitable only for the predestinat so that other might haue noe benifit therby Such is Caluin Beza Bucer Musculus Zanchius Aretius Wherby followeth that he is not redeemer of all or mediator for all offenders not intending their saluation Sixt Article of S. Thomas He descended into hell the third day he rose againe from the dead 25. First this article is impugned in saying with Carlile it to be a pernitiouse heresie that Christ descended by Beza saying per oscitantiam irrepsisse Carlile in his booke that Christ discended not into hell printed at Lond. 1582. Beza Apol. 2. ad Zantes pag. 385. Vide Caluino Turc p. 567. Zuingl tom 2. fol. 458. Luthapse De Couc PP p. 276. it to haue entred into the creed by inaduertismēt Secondly by making his descension only to haue bene his pangs vpon the cross wher not only his humanitie but ô execrable blasphemie his diuinitie indured payns yea death So saith Luther Christum suum saluatorem se nolle agnoscere si sola humanitas ipsius passa suisset Did cleerly and manifestly professe that he would not acknowledge Christ to be his Sauioure yf only his humanitie had suffred And Caluin secondeth faythfully all such impietie of Luther saying Hie est eius ad inferos descensus quod eam mortem pertulit quae sceleratis ab irato Deo instigitur This is his descēsion to hell that he suffred that death which God in his angre inflicteth vpon the wicked Omnes inquit in anima luisse paenas Caelu in catheches c. de fide Calu. l 2. Instit c. 16. n. 10. in cap. 26.27 Mat. Item ibid. Beza quae Deo vindice a damnatis in inferno expetuntur He suffred all the payns in his soule which by God in reuengement are exacted of the damned Agayne Nihil actum erat si corporea tantum morte fuisset defunctus It had bene of no accompt yf he had dyed only a corporal deathe In which doctrin is contayned besyd Christs death of body a death of his soule yea of his diuinitie and after enduring such death him to haue suffred all punishments of the damned Thirdly this article is impugned by making this descension nothing els but Christs burial in his sepulchre Vide Feuardent in sua Entremanger c. 27. So Zuinglius Oecolampadius Bucer Caluin Musculus Tremel Marot Beza Carlile c. affirme because the common name for hell in hebrue doth signifie some tyme a graue or fosse But elswher Caluin confesseth Vide Caluino Turc pag. 567. that the sayd name more vsualy and proprely doth signifye hell Act. In cap. 32. Deut. c. 16. num Calu. in Annot. in cap. 2. In 1. Reg. c. 2. In num c. 16. In Deut. c. 32. In Psal 6. In Iob. 2.26 In Amos. c. 9. the place and estate of the damned And diuers or the residue as Bucer Oecolampadius and other principal protestants as Peter Vermil otherwyse misnamed Martyr Paul Fage Sebastian Munster Castalio and Flaccus Illyricus do oppose them selues against Beza being most ernest in the former opiniō shewingby manifould texts of scripture the hebrue woord Scheol the greeke woord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the latin woord infernus to signifie an infernal propre place of damned or at least of included by their right vsual and natural signification as much as panis Beza in c. 2. act in c. 11. Math. in c 10. 16. Luc. In Apoc. c. 20. in latin signifyeth bread Yea Beza him selfe confesseth that the greeke and latin woord contayne no lesse but the hebreu woord some tyme signifyeth graue And therfor to auoyd Christs discending to hell therby to maintayne former blasphemies of his suffring the payns of damned on the crosse and to euacuat the deliuerance of the Fathers out of their Limbo wherby also is implyed the doctrin of purgatorie yf it once be graunted ther euer had bene a third place of inclusion for sowls to auoyd I say these blocks in his way he translateth by his owne confession as aforsayd contrary to greeke Beza in c. 2. Act. and latin interpreters and Fathers And in his confession of the faythe printed anno 1564. to frustrat all disputation about the mater he thought cōuenient to omitt wholy this part of this Article And although he be driuen consequently to translat Christi anima not Christs sowle but his carcas not his victorie ouer hell but his victorie ouer the graue which the Englishe bibles of an 1562. 1577. eschued but it an 1579. approued and many other such deprauations cōtrary to sacred scripture yet would he not desist Beza in c. 16. Luc. vntill he had occasion to refute Brencius supposing there is no hell or infernal tormēts but only metaphoricaly And then forgetting him selfe proueth by scripturs and fathers vpon the 16. of Luc. that Christ descended into the earth into the receptacle of those who were long restrayned For euidence of whiche third place of souls besyd heauen and eternal hell In their 2. reply against D. Whitg pag. 7. and in ther. 2. admonition to the parlament pag. 43. out of whiche ther is no redemption the Puritans ernestly reprehended the creed of the Apostles made in english meeter among the psalms wherin is sayd his spirit did after this descend into the lower parts to them that long in darknes were the true loue of ther harts and also egerly inueyed against one of their cheefe martyrs for professing the same beleefe And so forwardly pressed into their angre against this article that
in all late bibles as Carlile him selfe confesseth Carlile in his booke against Christ discension fol. 144. 116. Humfrye l. 2. de rat interpret pag. 219. 220 they haue corrupted and depraued the sense obscured the trueth deceaued the ignorant and supplanted the simple following darknes more then light and falshod more then trueth To which accordeth D. Humfrey of Oxford behould the verdict of bothe your vniuersities saying the forsayd hebrue woord should not be translated graue but hell yf the authoritie of the holy ghost be obserued and consequently late Englishe translations in this point fall and fayle from the holy ghost by doing the contrary But most ernestly I craue the curteouse reader Beza in Act. c. 10.46 edit an 1556. Iuuenal satyra 2. to peruse what Beza him selfe wryteth against such late translators as follow new fangled and doubtfull interpretations in Scripturs refusing familiar and accustomed woords yf he will obserue a Verres condemning others of theft a Clodius dispraysing others for leacherie a Catelin disprouing others for prodigalitie a Gracchus reprehending others for sedition Fowerthly this article is impugned by Bullinger saying Bullinger in 1. Pet. c. 4. that Christ discended noe otherwyse to hell then as he dayly discended to vs Spiritu virtute only by spirit and vertu interim vt nemo putet corpus vel animam eius discendisse in suche sorte as none surmise his body or soule to haue discended To whiche anneareth Brentius Beza ad alteram partem libri Brientij Aug. lib. 3. de Doctr. c. 10. affirming ther is no other but a figuratiue imaginatiue and spirituall hell without other torments then metaphorical How deseruedly did S. Augustin fortell when the mynds of any are preoccupated by erroure all that scripture hathe to the contrary they affirme to be but figuratiue Iosias Simlerus in vita Bullingeri fol. 35. Vide Alan Cop. dial 5. c. 18. They began first to make sacraments but figurs they followed next to affirme all promises by Christ made for good woorks to be but hyperbolical diuers mysteryes of his lyfe to be ineffectual all in his passion fullfilled to be but figuratiue and histrionical and lastly heauen and hell to be only tropical or fantastical Pause Christian considerations at this yf patience will permitt Fiftly this article is impugned for th' other parte of Christs resurrection Calu. in sua harm in c. 24. Luca v. 38. Beza in 1. Cor. c. 15.23 Hollinshead an 1579. pag. 1195. by Caluin saying that Christ wanted some perfection of a glorious resurrection and by diuers reformers affirming as Beza confesseth Christum nunquam resurrexisse sed adhuc iacere mortuum Christ neuer to haue risen but yet to remayne dead By others also yf laufull inferences be admitted who affirmed befor besyd his bodily death a death of his soule and diuinitie By others who ernestly except against the feast of easter in remembrance of such resurrection especialy as it is a Christian solemnitie desyring it be abolished or restored according to the Iewes ceremonies Luth. l. de concilijs Bale l. 3. c. 25. de Scrip. Zuingl to 2. respon ad Lutheri librum de sacram fol. 465. Such are Luther Bale the Puritans as appeareth in D. VVhitgift Sixtly this article is impugned by Zuinglius saying Crassus Lutheri Praetor rubris indutus caligis eo modo quo Christus monumento exiuit egredi potuerit the gross Pretor of Luther appareiled in his read hose in lyke maner as Christ went owt of his sepulchre might also haue issued Which is most impiously blaphemed wheras Christ after his death issued by his owne force as all Doctors and Fathers affirme without remouing the stone placed vpon the monument To which accordeth against the forsayd blasphemie the late Protestant conference at Malbrun alleaging many scripturs and Fathers in approbation of such miraculous resurrection The same is also fulfilled by Marlorat Thalman and at lengthe vpon better aduise by Caluin and Beza The seuenth Article of S. Bartholome He ascended into heauen sitteth at the right hand of God the Father almightie 16. This article is first contradicted by Lutherans affirming Vide admonitionem Caluinist ad librum CoÌ„cordiae Daneum con Osiandrum Calu. l. 2. Instit. c. 14. n. 8. Beza in cap. 3. Act. v. 21. Cal. Instit. l. 2. c. 14. n. 3. Vide Intermangerie pag. 157. Vide Neuerium in bello 5. euang pag. 72. Apud Iosiam SymleruÌ„ in vita Bullingeri fol. 35. 55. Apudque Luther to 7. Witteb fol. 408. 409. heauen to be below in the bowels of the earthe and hell in the highest parts of the world Next by Caluin saying that Christs sitting at the right hand of God will continue no longer then till the day of iudgement Thirdly by those who affirme his being at the right hand of his Father to hinder his true being in the Sacrament as is befor declared number 68. Fowerthly by them who deny that by his power he could surpass the qualities of a natural body and consequently not ascend as also is ther manifested Fiftly by those who affirme his being at the the right hand to argue an inferioritie or inequalitie with God the Father or that God the Father had a spiritual kinde of bodye haueing hands c. Sixtly by Caluin saying that it is not to be imagined ther is any place in heauen whervnto is ascended or accepted the humanitie of Christ. Seuenthly by many principal protestaÌ„ts as Brentius Illyricus Musculus c. Christs ascension is made nothing but a disapeering without any motion vpward wher he was before The eight article of S. Mathew From thence shall he come to iudge the quick and the dead 17. This article is impugned Generaly all protestants first by suche as by graunting one iudgement in general at the daye of dome affirme Christ neuer iudgeth euery one in particular Luther vt suprá Secondly by them who affirme only infidelitie to be subiect to iudgement wheras Christ doth promise to call into accompt euery idle woord and omission of charitie Thirdly by such as say God will iudge vniustly as Luther saying that as illic gratiam misericordiam spargit in indignos Luther to 2. fol. 461. de serue arbitrio hic iram seuetitatem spargit in immeritos ther in this lyffe he pouâ—red grace and mercie vpon the vnwoorthy so here in iudgement he powreth angre and seueritie vpon the vndeserued Whiche Gods iniustice in iudgement and condemnation of the wicked is implyed by the common doctrin that God is the authour of euil not only by prouocation but by impulsion and inforcement For being sayd to be the inforcer to euil how can he punish iustly them that obey him And such doctrin is vniuersal as is demoÌ„strated among the greatest protestants Luther Caluin Zuinglius and Beza as appeareth in the first article Lastly they misbeleeue this Article who affirme that Christ who should come to iudge is dead according
the sowls to be but dead shaddowes in ps 130. them of the wicked to be adnihilated so that they are not in hell Instit l. 3. c. 25. n 12. and the residue to be shaddowes imaginations fantasies idols dead Also from others who would not subscrib their names was published anno 1568. certain theses or positions wherof this was the tenthe Negamus aliquam animam post mortem manere we denye any sowle to remayne after death To be breefe at Geneua in a solemne disputation when they had long consulted how to auoyd purgatorie they determined dicamus animam cum corpore extingui statim sublatum erit purgatorium let vs affirme the sowle to be extinguished together with the body and so purgatorie wil be spedely abolished This doctrin of purgatory seemeth to thes reformers so vrgent that they are perswaded it can not be well denyed vntill the resurrection of the dead and immortalitie of the sowle also be denyed And certainly Vrbanus Regius whom most learned Protestants intitule Ducatus Luneburgensis Euangelestam Episcopum primarium the Euangelist and principal Bishop of the Dutchie of Luneburg Saythe that Vrban Regius prima parte operum in formula cauta loquendi fol. 86. nemo pias preces pro defunctis reijcit nisi Epicurei Saducei none reiecteth deuowt prayers for the sowles departed and restrayned in purgatorie but Epicures and Saduceit not beleeuing the immortalitie of the sowle But why is purgatorie so annected to this article that thes reformers are driuen to this extremitie because they obserued that God oft forgiueth offences yet reserueth a chastisement for satisfaction as in Adam in Moises in Dauid c. whose offences being forgiuen yet Adams remayned subiect to death and all other miseries indured Moyses neuer entred the land of promise Dauids Child begotten in synn must haue dyed So lykewyse because God is euer one and like him selfe suche as repent late or slackly might be forgiuen at their death yet for satisfaction remayne in purgatory therfor the most expedient way seemed to make short woorke and to denye this article to be able to deny the other The 12. Article of S. Mathias The lyfe euerlasting 21. Contrary to this article are all those who denye God who deny heauen who deny resurrection of the dead immortalitie of the sowle our redemption by Christ c. of whom sufficiently is spoken in the former articles to discouer them to be our late reformers qui in caecitate quam tolerant quasi in claritate hominus exultant who in the blindnes and night of darknes wherin they are wrapped do as S. Gregorie sayth vawnt S. Greg. l. 1. mor. cap. 26. and glorifie as in the clearnes of light Wherof ther neuer was a more perspicuouse demonstration then in these woords of Beza whose blasphemies are among the most exorbitant saying of him selfe This my exposition yf a man compare with suche things as not only Origines but also sondrie other of the anciēt fathers albeit for godlines and learning most famouse haue written vpon this place Beza ad Rom. c. 4. v. 11. he shall dowbtles fynd what great abundant light of trueth the Lord in this tyme hath powred owt vpon vs. Light in dede of the transforming angel light of owles light of pirats to trayne to shipp wrack light extinguishing all Christianitie and beleefe in the Sonn of God as amply appeareth The conclusion 22. Haue not I had a flinty and brasen harte thinke yow to goe throwgh this examination without faynting or sownding at euery so detestable blasphemie in euery article so often reiterated Certainly I neuer hitherto experienced a greater torment or corrasiue then to haue so muche indured in this discourse whiche for the importance cowld not be shorter and for the heynousnes seemed most prolix Twenty times my mynd loathed my hand trembled my intentions relented to proceed in vnfowlding them and often for many dayes I refrayned the sight and thoughts of them yet at last for thy benefit Christian I haue powred and shutt them away to thy consideration rather then by due amplifications and aggrauations or the heft and hate they imported deliuered them Euseb l. 7. c. 6. citat Dion 3. c◠de baptismate ad Philem. Presb Romanum Let it be licenced to applye to me in this case what Eusebius related of S. Dionysius of Alexandria that diuers did admonish him how by reading heretical bookes his mynde would be greatly tormented and also probablie defyled and that he did acknowledge him self they wrought no lesse in him yet for a voice incouradging him forward and saying haec causa erat cur abinitio ad fidem Christi vocatus fueris this was the cause why from the begining thow wast called to the fayth of Christ he willingly yelded to the paines incident to such studie Such in veritie was my often adminition and cheefe impulsion It is to Iesus Christ the Sonn of God that I offre and present the tyme imployed in this replication whos image I acknowledg and honor in the sowls bowght by his sacred blood by heresies beguiled For to tell the trueth it is not the scope of my trauailes to awnswer my aduersarie who hath no other wysedome then of the spirit of contradiction and no other regard then to delud by most disdainfull imposturs the simple Christians vnderstanding according as is after sayd in the numbers 116. 119. c. and to wynn tyme of falling into discredit and infamie S. August l. 6. de tiu To whom seemeth spoken what S. Augustin sayth Ea putatur gloria vanitatis nullis cedere viribus veritatis it is the glorie of vanitie not to yeeld to any power of veritie So that I accompt Quintinians graue sentence pertinently belonging to me against him persequi quos quisque vnquam contemptissimorum hominum dixerit aut nimiae miseriae aut inanis iactantiae est detinet atque obruit ingenia melius alijs vacatura to examin all that euery most contemptible fellow sayth Quintil. l. 1. c. 13. were quoth Quintilian a great miserie and needles search of glorie which wowld hinder and cloye vnderstandings that might be better imployed Truely few cowld be better imployed then I few lesse desyrous to be fruictlesly imployed then I. What parte or parcell of beleefe to repeat in grosse sleightly abruptly of diuyne or humain of owld or new testament of faythe Sanderus l. 1 de schis Anglicano Caluino Turcis l. 3. p. 480. hope or charitie but is distrusted abiured blasphemed by these Reformers that by their principal pillers Many autheurs recompt of a consultation in Irland when S. Thomas of Canterburie was by sentence of K. Henry the eight degraded The owld Iustice Plunkett of Donsoghlye was present at this consultation and forbidd to be honoured as a Sainct how the inhabitants neere a chappell which had bene formerly dedicated to the sayd S. Thomas being at the kings appointment to elect
true Saluioure of our sowls so also was not Christ And as Saul is called by Dauid Christus Domini the anoynted of our Lord 1. Reg. 24.7 Luc. 2.26 euen as our Saluiour is tearmed by S. Luke they must haue one ende one sence one literalitie and by M. Riders consequence th' one be no better the th' other But you may craue what meaneth this late coequaling the owld testament and new That I may rightly awnswer to this demand I must first breefly shew that it is the drift of late reformations to bring in this equalitie as appeareth by thes woords of Ochinus Ochin lib. 2 dial 21. Pag. 154 155. 156. 157. 288. 289. Cum sit vna Ecclesia vna fides proinde non debemus plura credere quam crediderunt sancti federis antiqui Perfectam quoque eandem suisse Ecclesiam vt Christi ita Moisis c. wheras ther is but one Church one faythe therfor we owght not to beleeue more then the Saincts of the owld testament beleeued as perfect and the same is the Church of Christ and of Moises This being the fundation Zuinglius frameth this pyle thervpon Yf in the owld testament Zuingl to 2. vbi de baptismo fol. 59. sayth he the carnal and external Sacraments cowld not bring any puritie or cleanes to sinfull and defyled consciences how much less can such Sacraments do vs any profit in Christ in the new testament wher only the Spirit giueth lyfe What frame dothe Ochinus him selfe build vpon his owne fundation Ochin loc cit pag. 157. Illos autem non credidisse Trinitatem non personas coequales consubstantiales aeternas c but they of the owld testament did not beleeue the trinitie coequalitie of persons consubstantialitie eternitie c. Ergo by the first inference adieu all Sacraments of Christ for any profit and bringing any puritie to sinfull persons By the second inference we are not bownd to beleeue any substance of the new testament of Christs birthe his miracles his and the holie Ghosts diuinitie Trinitie c. because forsooth Ochin loc cit pag. 154. 155. 156. 157. alioqui essemus deteriori quam ipsi conditione qui ad plura quam illi credenda obstringeremur we should be of inferior condition to them of the owld testament being bownd to beleeue more then they Here is the scope here is the centre declared of thes instructions to equal bothe testaments and after to condemne the new by the inutilitie of the owld and that by many testimonies of Scripture as when S. Paul sayth Hebr. 7. the former commandement to be reprobated propter infirmitatem eius inutilitatem for the infirmitie therof and inutilitie Now say they the new commandement is no better the Sacraments therof noe more proffitable the sence ende and literalitie of bothe is from one authoure and of equal estimation therfor let vs renownce Christianitie and all owld and new testament and become Atheists and Mahumetists Galat. 4. the owld law being but infirma egena elementa weake and as they translat beggerly ordonances consequently the new which is equal therto no better I lament some tymes to behowld great and iudiciouse witts imployed now confuting one point of sectarie impietie now another wheras yf they had principaly saue other mens iudgment reuealed the drift of thes reformations to be a stidiouse imployment to deforme by degrees all vertue and religion ther would many more reclamations although they be dayly reuoked in commendable numbers insue Now as S. Ireneus Iren. l. 1. c. 35. Hieron ep ad Cresiphontem and S. Hierome learnedly obserued Aduersus eos victoria est sententiae eorum manifestatio sententias eorum prodidisse superasse est Patet prima fronte blasphemia c. Victorie against them is the manifestation of their professions to produce their sentences is to confute them Blasphemie is discouered at first view Their sentences euen against the roote and piller of religion and Christianitie being detected ther will many noble witts and mynds of our contry I dowbt not disdaine longer all consociation with such blasphemers Lastly was it not a ricidulouse comparison of Christs woords in this institution with the woords of circumcision circumcision not being so much as a figure of this Sacrament Gen. 17. v. 11. but only of baptisme the next woords euidently and expressly declaring Vide num 78. Ioan. 6. 1. Cor. 11. vt sit in signum faederis inter me vos that it be a signe of the couenant betwixt me and you wheras contrary wyse the woords of this institution befor after do auerr it not to be any signe but the fleashe to be meat indeed the body to be that which was to be deliuered for mankyng Was it not as ridiculouse to meruaile ther was no transubstantiation of the forskynn into Gods couenant God declaring it as I sayd to be only a signe and a couenant not being a substance into which any thing cowld be transubstantiated was it not as ridiculous to leape from circumcision to the paschal lambe succeding many hondred yeares after and from thence to halfe the blood of twelue calues wherwith Moyses sprinckled the Israelits and hauing cluttred them together as one mater for their bare consonance or resemblance in sownd with the woords of Christs institution to make them equiualent in sence ende and proprietie with this B. Sacrament But as I haue shewed in the 68. 77. 78. numbers this debasing and disgraceing therof prooceedeth from their hate of Christs express woords this is my bodie which as their owne brethren obserue Ioan. Schut l. 50. causarum cap. 13. they do so hate that they can not abyde ether to see or heare them at least according their true signification Wherto belongeth thes speeches of Luther willing to haue impugâ—â—â—d the sayd puissant woords Luther tom 7. VVittem fol. 502. which sayth he in examining and deâ—â—â—ing I tooke merueylous payns and strayned euery vayne of body and sowle to haue auoyded For probe perspiciebam hac repapatui cum primis me valde incommodare posse I did well obserue therby I cowld notably haue interested Papacie But I fynde my selfe taken fast and that ther is no way to escape For textus euangelij nimium apertus est potens the text of the gospel is too to cleere and violent By this is demonstrated that good will wanted not in Luther to haue conceaued with the Sacramentaries but sayth he thes woords this is my body cannot easely be shaken much lesse ouerthrowen by woords and glosses deuysed by giddy brayns Luther ibid. I suppose this gall and confusion to be such to M. Rider that I will not here also collect any vntruethes further to netle him althowgh euery one may iudge by the premisses whether ther be not plenty affoorded It sufficeth in general and particular to haue discouered that the sence ende and literalitie or dignitie of
as deliuer bread to the hongry or to litle ones and the literal signification of deliuering is verifyed in Christs passion but not of breaking For he was deliuered for our synnes but I being able to say that he was also broken for vs in the B. Sacrifice of his body vnder the forme of bread and M. Rider denying such his sacrifice and not being able possibly to shew any other his breaking do you thinke that leauing to talke of deliuerie for breaking he knoweth what is with him or against him The amplifying of Christs promise in the present tence there being no promise in these woords this is my body which is broken for you sheweth such mates when they can gett a woord to wander against the trueth for Christ vsed then a present tence to testifye the efficacie of his institution of the B. Sacrament in which his body was presently deliuered inuisibly which was the next day to be deliuered visiblye therevpon they amplifie and descant at full wheras vpon the true and literal institution of Christ arcording the propre signification therof they walke so nicely Luth. tom 7. defen verb. caenae fol 383. as yf they were treading vpon egges Fearing sayth Luther to stumble and breake their necks at euery woord which Christ pronownced 83. In the first that Christs Rider birth and life though both innocent was not sufficient to cleanse my sinne In the second Christ would vndergoe shamefull buffets on the face pricking of thornes vpon his head piercing nailes into his hands and feete a bloudie speare into his blessed side before mans sinne could bee satisfied Gods wrath appeased Sathan death and hell conquered this our liuing Christ would haue his bodie broken for vs he would not leaue one sighein his soule for our sakes nor one drop of bloud in his bodie vnshed for our sinnes These comforts are expressed by this word broken which are not nor can be gathered by this word deliuered 83. In my Examination of the Creed in the 14. numbre Pitzsimon I haue shewed that euery meritt of Christ being of infinit valew had bene sufficient to redeeme a thowsand worlds and that his death and passion were suffred vpon his excessiue abundance of loue which was not content with what had bene sufficient but also powred owt it selfe beyond all respect and measure to the last drop of blood in his bodye for greater manifestation of his bountifull charitie toward mankinde How cometh my Warr-man and sayth that Christs death it selfe was not only not of superabundant affection but that beyond his death the very pearcing of his syde with a speare was necessary to clense his synne Which is blasphemie against all Scripture and Christianitie referring always our redemption to Christs holye passion I knowe not whence it coulde come to him but only to fulfill the saying of S. Nazianzen Inter se certant perinde atque non id metuant ne impijs erroribus sese constringant sed ne in hac re leuius tolerabiliusque peccent quà m alij They stryue among them selues as yf they had no feare to intangle them selues in impious errours but that euery of them be not behinde his compagnions in lesse offendinge Other aunswer is in the forsayd 14. number Rider 84. Another comfort is concealed from the Catholickes in omitting the 25. verse in these words Math. 25.40 Heb. 2.12.13.17 Ioh. 10.27 The newe Testament in my bloud Out of which euerie man may gather these comforts to himselfe by particular application First that I am not a straunger to Christ but one of his younger brethren and not onelie well knowne vnto him but also as well beloued of him which appeareth in this that hee did not onelie remember me in his last will but also most freelie and liberallie bequeathed vnto my soule and bodie most precious Legacies where wee may finde them registred most safelie kept in Gods booke and daylie pronounced in our Creed as remission of sinnes of both guilt punishment peace of conscience in this life at the latter day rising of my bodie from death and dust af erwards life eternall both to soule and bodie These Legacies be bequeathed and contained in this Testament which be hath not onely sealed outwardlie with Sacraments but also inwardlie with his bloud by faith to assure vs of the performance of his promise and therefore he addeth in my bloud so that all other Testaments Wils Buls or Pardons which are not sealed with Christs bloud but with lead or war are but counterfeit labels stitcht to Christs testament by some false forgeries of periured Notaries wherin they doe falselie promise remission of sinnes and the kingdome of heauen Fitzsimon 84. M. Rider shall pull off with his owne hands his maske of consolation by these woords the new testament in my blood and acknowledge to all Readers his contentment to be but forged and his cause and coÌ„science to be full of desolation by means of them First then he sayd in his 78 number that thes woords of Christ ordayned by one authoure haue one sense one sounde one ende with these woords of the ould testament this is the blood of the Couenant Exod. 24.8 But the sense of thes woords of Moises is that the ould testament was ratified by true and real blood substantialy sprinkled vpon the Israelits therfor the sense of Christs woords must lykewyse be yf as he saith they haue one sense that his new testament was made at his last supper and his true and real blood was substantialy powred into the mowthes of his Apostles which blood deliuered them after as S. Luke saith Lâ—c. 22.20 was to be shedd for them Now Sir what consolation haue you about yourt hart Are not you made your selfe to disguise your fayned countenance That Christ made his testament at his last supper it is first the confession of Musculus saying In the same supper being then nighe his death he made his testament How did Musculus ground his opinion because saith he Musculus in locis coÌ„ Cap. de cana n. 2. pag. 332. that a testament be made auaylably is requyred first that the maker therof be at his owne libertie for a slaue a seruant a sonn in his Fathers gouernement can make no testament This libertie had Christ at his supper and not at his death Also he must make executours so did Christ make his Apostles by this institution appointing them to dispense the grace of this testameÌ„t c. wheras ther was no such mater at his death I add that lawfull testaments are made by men befor their death when they are in good memorie and not at the instant of their death Which according to good protestantcie had great occasion in Christ our Saluiour whom at the tyme of his death they affirme to haue bene in desperation in torments of conscience c. as is assured in the 14. and 15. numbers of the Examination Is not this a good
committeth high treason against Christ though in deed in substance they receiue but bred and wine And as a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defacing or clipping the kings picture seale or coine though the king be not locallie in place so the wicked in the Sacraments which are Christ seales which being abused by them they are guiltie of Gods iudgements though Christ be not inclosed locallie in the bread and wine And what Chrysostome speaketh here of the Lords Supper the same hee doth of Baptisme and saith a man may be as well guiltie of the Lords bodie and bloud in cōtemning Baptisme which is but a seale of his washing in the bloud of Christ though hee neuer washed but in water and alleadgeth Paul Heb. 10 29 saing Of how much sorer punishment suppose yee shal be be worthy which treadeth vnder foot the sonne of God counteth the bloud of the testament as an vnholie thing c. These Fathers haue aunswered you and I hope will satisfie fullie the indifferent Reader Now three sorts of men are guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. The first are plaine Atheists that are without God or godlinesse in this present world and such eate this bread vnworthelie and therefore are guiltie of Christes bodie and bloud 2. The second sort haue a historicall faith and a generall knowledge Thre sorts of mē guilty of the Lords bodie and beleeue that whatsoeuer is taught in Gods booke is true but they lacke apprehension and application to make a particular and holy vse of the same and therefore if such come and eate of this bread they are guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lord. 3. The third sort haue a liuelie apprehending and applying faith yet in their life they slippe and fall yea sometimes verie grieuouslie yet they awake and weep with Peter and repent for the same All these are said to eate vnworthelie but the first two sorts vnto their condemnation The third sort for their faults frailties negligences and vndue preparation are in this life of the Lord corrected least with the world they should be damned The two first sorts eateth onelie the outward elemēts the last sort eateth the bodie of Christ and drinketh the bloud of Christ And now to your second proofe out of Saint Paul VVhether it be treason to breake Images Fitzsimon 96. YF as he in this place affirmeth a man may be guiltie of treason in renting defaceing or clipping the kings picture seale or coyne though the king be not localy in place then consequently and necessarilie they must be guiltie of treason toward God who rent deface or clipp his pictures seales or coyne The necessitie of such sequel or inference is apparent considering that any abuse or contempt in the resemblance of a prince is not more iniurious to a prince then the lyke in a representation of God is to God Nether was there other cause why God did punish Oza 2. Reg. 6. 13. but prophaning resemblances of him contayned in the arke and all others that sacrilegiously misbehaued them selues not only toward his figures yea shadowes but also toward vesselles and ornaments belonging to them Now then tell plainly M. Rider will you stand to your words or recant them what say you Neuer thinke sayth S. Cyprian ep 73. because you haue once fayled that you should therfor blush to reuoke What say you shall his discourse be starling or noe Me thinke I behould you frowning fretting at me for seeming to thinke that you would euer reclayme Your conclusion therfor is that treason is cōmitted by iniurie to the pictures persons alyke Then woe and well away to all your brethren image-breakers Then woe and well away to VValer the murtherer vnder-minister of Swoords who hanged on a gibbet the picture of Christ crucifyed anno 1603. Then woe and well away to M. Rider who only to haue stones to build an ouen to bake bread to impouerish bakers of the citie not hauing idely or without price seuenten hondred barrells of corne yearly as he hath pull'd downe the fayre crosse in S. Patricks which all others his predecessors of that profession had permitted vnuiolated and to the same vse to haue fyer pull'd downe all the trees therin This sentence of his giuen against him selfe brethren made his owne sonn mense Maio 1604. when he attempted to pull downe ane image to be by Gods iudgment precipitated from a height and altogether crushed and at the same tyme his seruant to be stricken with the plague c. This sheweth that it is noe greater treason against a king to abuse and despise his picture then against Christ to prophane and distroye his images What needed this moth to intermedle with the candle of learning wherby his wyngs are so often scortched What needed him to implie that abusers of the communion according to his surmise being but a bare representation of Christ shal be punished with equal torments with such as nayled him on the Crosse Where then will the final Rende vous of Protestants be who haue abused other his representations images appellations as well expressing his death as the Protestant Sacrament I can not choose but say with the Poet. Ingratum genus vestrum quicunque forenses Admiramini plausus Euripides Hecuba ex versione Gasparis Stiblini vtinam non essetis mihi cogniti Qui nihil pensi habetis amicos laedere Modo dicatis grata multitudini O hatefull race of Mercenarie mates Searching applauds ô that I knew you not Not waying how you harme your frends throwgh hates So you the peoples itching eares befott But by the waye what meaneth this often tearming of Sacraments to be but seals and especialy by them who by their profession are bound to beleeue that they nether seale the body nor soule that they nether bring fayth nor confirme it that they are nether fruictfull nor needfull Yf otherwyse we be myndfull of Christ Ochinus apud Andream Iurgiewicium in bello quinti Euangelij pag. 102. Ochinus resolueth Spiritu Dei non Sacramentis fidem confirmari By the spirit of God and not by Sacraments fayth to be confirmed Yf seales be accepted in stidd of Sacrament because this woord is not in Scripture as your brethren before determine tell vs so playnly and we will not inforce you to grawnt that your Supper of the Lord which your great Doctor P. Martyr sayth in respect of the tyme it is receaued P. Martyr in 1. Cor. c. 11. pag 293. 294. and of your emptie stomacks should with greater reason be called a breakfast or dyner is a Sacrament Now as I tould you befor such hate is conceaued alredy among the Reformers against this woord Sacrament as it is conuenient you abstayne from it For they say Bruces sermons pag. 4. 126. VVestphal in apol pag. 5. Pag. 126. about the ambiguitie of this word are rysen many tragedies which will not cease whyle the world lasts that
bloud be things inward the one sensible the other spiritual and intellectuall as much difference is betwixt them as there is betwixt outward and inward sensible and intellectuall so much difference there is betwixt the outward seales of Christs body and bloud his bodie and bloud And if the seales cannot be changed into the communion of Christs bodie bloud but remaine still in their seuerall natures and substances euerie one performing his seuerall distnct office much lesse can they be reallie and substantiallie changed into Christs bodie and bloud which are things more remote but most impossible And if you had added the next verse the Apostle had made it plaine in shewing you a double communion sealed in this Sacrament The first our communion with Christ and his benefits The second our communion amongst our selues 1. Soli. 2. Omni. 3. Sâ—per which both are proper onely to gods church to euery one of gods church and allwaies to gods Church Now let the learned iudge whether you or we misconster scripture wrest fathers deceaue Christs flocke and the Queenes subiects peruert the true meaning of this Text. And now to the next 102. Is not this a worthy proctor for protestancie Fitzsimon He bringeth an allegation of three Fathers and therupon he inferreth saying First he sayth Which he of the three can you conceaue by these woords His meaning is of S. Chrysostom But he hath no such mater but cleane contrary as appeareth in his affirming in the precedent number that vessells are sanctifyed and separated from prophane or common vses which sanctification is that we call blessing Secondly he telleth the text among other conforts offereth vs Christs body crucified and Christs blood shedd Which he will neuer be able to expounde but by saying as we say that it is giuen vs by the breaking of bread and the benediction of the chalice or wyne contayned in the chalice Of his talking of seales he hath nether writt nor scale for it toward this or any other sacrament of Christ in all the new testament For the communion betwixt him and his brethren I haue spoken in the examination of the creed To say that Chrysostom affirmeth benediction in this place to be referred to him that shed his bloud for vs that this text offereth Christs bodie and bloud with all his purchased merits that the bread and cupp vz. it in the cupp are not our communication with Christ c. these I say are beyond vntruethes and in propre name Riderian discourses S. Cyril sayth The mystical benediction maketh Christ corporaly to dwel in vs by communication of his fleash Li. 10. in Ioan. c. 13. Such coÌ„munication M. Rider not only vnderstandeth not but also denyeth May not then the wicked laugh at his follie and the godlypitie his ignorance The second Proofe by Councills and Fathers Catholicke Priests This councell consists of 318. Fathers Concilium Nicen cap 14. Anno 363. No rule or custome doth permitte thâ— they which haue not the authority to offer the sacrifice should giue it to then that offer the bodie of Christ. Rider 103. GEntelmen you are posessed with a threfold error which is the cause wheâ— you read the scriptures Councells fathers you misunderstand them Your first error is when you vnderstand that spoken of the outward Elements which a meant of the inward inuisible grace Your second error is when you referre that to the visible partes of the bodie which they intended to the inuisible powers of the minde and soule VVith these three Sephâ—ticall points you peruert all the fathâ— you bring for this purâ—ose deceaue the Catholickes Thirdlie your former two errors beget a third error which is your mistaking the state of our question And so wheras you should proue the maner of Christs presence in the Sacraments You offer to proue the matter but of that we haue spoken before Thus if you will reade the scripturs fathers and Councells with these 3. cautions or derections you shall easily see how farre thus longe you are gone from the truth and misled the Queenes subiects Now with Gods permission wee will proceed to the due examination of your proofe as it is alledged out of your owne Colen print Ex officina Iohannis Quintell Typographi Anno Domini 1561. which you cannot denie it is in the first Tome and the fourteenth Chapter and the two hundreth fiftie fiue page of the first edition and the Chapter beginneth thus Peruenit ad sanctum Concilium quod in locis quibusdâ—m ciuitatibus presbyteris Sacramenta Diaconi porrigant Then followes your fraction verie abruptlie in the midst of a sentence Hoc neque regula neque confuetudo c. The sacred Councell is aduertized that in certaine places and Citties the Deacons doe reach and giue the sacrameÌ„ts to the Priest al this you leaue out and then followes your weake warrant Noe rule or custome doth permite c. I praie you what one word of this prooues your Carnall presence Let me knowe it for my learning and the Catholickes better Instruction if you would gather out of this word Sacrifice then you are deceued for that Councell in another place calles it Sacrificium Eucharisticum a Sacrifice of praise thanksgiuing not propitiatorie And if out of these wordes The bodie of Christ the councell expounds their meaning in that which you omitte and purposely conceale when they call that Sacrifice and the bodie of Christ by the name of Sacraments giuen by the Deacons to the priests for the Deacons deliuered them after Consecration to priestes ad still were SacrameÌ„ta Sacraments not the bodie or bloud of Christ made of bread wine by the Priest for the Sacrament and Christs bodie differ as much as the lambe the Passouer circumcision the couenant the washing of new birth and regeneration for the one is the outward seal the other the inward grace and here is another error of yours of the second and third kinde in referring that to the mouth which is proper to our faith and still mistaking the matter for the manner The second proofe of Catholicks for the real presence By Councils and Fathers The first parte of the second proofe Of the Concil of Nice 103. I Craue remembrance be retayned Fitzsimon how Protestants accompted this first general Concil of the world contayning 318. most famous Fathers Beza epist thecl 81. but a congregation of Sophisters as before is declared in our examination of the Creed Cartwright so famous a Puritan as none of that crew but reuerence his remembraÌ„ce as may appeare in the Suruay of pretended discipline wherin one calleth him the most reuerent another made a sermon Cap. 29. pag. 379. and sang psalmes for his releasment another saith the gouernement by him set downe is commanded by God another thanked God to haue seene him another expected to trauaile 50. myles to see him by way of derision saith such concil to
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
deuout maner contayned in the testimonie or allegation which I first propounded These letts nay these montayns interposed in M. Riders way by Damascen yet his flying Pegasus or hors namely his deceitfulnes found no difficultie to transporte him beyond all and to cause him to affirme that the passage was playne and fauourable But many dreame they are farr voyaged when they are found farr deceaued In the meane tyme as you a little befor haue obserued his great simpathie and vnion with Puritans so now I craue your attendance to perceaue lyke concourse with infidels and such hereticks as make Christs diuinitie to haue suffred Luther tom 7. serm de Eucharist fol. 335. Auerroes that wicked Infidel sayth Luther loaden with synne accuseth vs Christians as the most wicked of the world for eating and deuouring of our Cod. What say you is not the same reproached to vs by M. Rider Is not this a perfect agreement with impious infidels But I would fayne haue his resolution yf as he sayd befor n. 96. it is lyke treason to offende against the picture of the Prince as it is against his person Why it is a greauouser imputation to eate Christ him selfe then to eate him according to the Protestant imagination in his representation figure or picture Let him escape the brunt of this obiection without fayling in what he sayd befor or what he sayth here and his wysdome shal be accompted greater then accustomed For thus I make it in forme of argument He that receaueth Christs seales vnworthily sayth M. Rider n. 96. committeth high treason against Christ therfore it is as greuous an offense to deuoure his seales vnworthilie as to deuoure his bodye Because sayth he it is lyke offense to disgrace his garments as his person And consequently in eating their supper as the seale of Christ they offend according his discourse no lesse then in eating Christ Also yf they may eate the seales without offense so as lawfully may they eate his fleash he assuring them that vnles they would eate not his seale but his fleash they should haue no lyfe in them Secondly yf as he saith what is done to Christs humanitie the same must be done to his diuinitie How can he auoyde wheras that Christ according to his humanitie was whipped Vide num 37. pearced put to death but the same must be thought fullfilled against his diuinitie O glorious and godly frend of Christs diuinitie How we and our doctrin determine that Christ both according humanitie and diuinitie is eaten and receaued without detriment and corruption already is so often related as it needeth not to be here repeated The residue of such blasphemies against the death of Christs Diuinitie as is here inferred against the woords of Christ his institution that we should eate him that is religiously receaue him into our stomacks may be found plentifully in the examinatiō of Protestantcie The 114. vntruth toward the Articles of our creed The 114. vntruth can not be denyed in saying Damascen is against vs. This bread is bread before the consecration but when it is consecrated Catholicke Priestes Ambr. de sacramēti◠lib. 4. cap. 4. floruit 400. of bread it is made the flesh of Christ. 112. AL this we graunt to be true but you come not to the point Rider whether Christs flesh be made of bread by way of transubstantiation that is by the changing of one nature or substance into another by hoc est corpus meum this is our question but you dare not touch it because you cannot prooue it But seeing you recite fathers by peeces and patches taking that you thinke will fit your purpose and leauing that which would crosse your course or weaken your cause I will for the trueth sake and the Catholikes good adde that out of Ambrose which I am sure some of you would wish out of Ambrose If you had read a few lines moe you should haue heard him tell you another tale and haue expounded himselfe in this place In the same chapter his words be these Si ergo tanta vis est in sermone Domini Iesu vt inciperent esse qua non erant quanto magis operatorius est vt sint quae erant in aliud commutentur If there be such a force in the word of the Lord Iesus that the things which were not began to bee how much more can it worke this that they shall be the same they were and yet bee changed into another thing And then bringeth in an example how a thing may be that that it was and yet be chaunged Tu ipse eras sed eras vetus creatura c. Thou thy selfe waste but thou wast an olde creature after when thou wast baptised thou begannest to be a new creature wilt thou know how a new creature every one saith the Apostle that is in Christ is a new creature Learne then how the word of God is accustomed to change euerie creature and when he will he altereth the course of nature If you had read or knowne this you would neuer haue alleadged the other for his example is this as he that is baptised suffereth no materiall substancial or corporall change rhough he be borne a new spirituallie and put on Christ Vide dist 2. de cōsecr cap. quia corpus page 432. But he his changed not loosing or altring the bodie or soule which hee had but in attaining the grace which hee had not And so the change is accidentall not substantiall as from vice to vertue So in substance the bread and wine are the same they were before but in accident or qualitie they are turned into another thing of common bread made a Sacrament So Chrisostome amplifying the change of bread in the Euchariste Chrisost in Matth. hom 83. he addeth immediatlie withall Sic etiam in baptismo euen so there is the like change of water in baptisme as of bread in the Lords Supper but that is not of substance but in qualitie respect or vse and so in this And this change is not in casting away the substance of bread or wine Dialog 1. cap. 6. but in casting grace vnto them As Theodoret saith Non naturam ipsam transmutans sed naturae adijciens gratiam not changing nature but adding grace to nature Ambrose de ijs qui initiantur cap. 9. But who can better expound Ambrose his meaning then Ambrose himselfe who saith Ante benedictionem c. before the blessing of the heauenlie words it is called another kind after the words of consecration the bodie of Christ is signified doth not say is the bodie of Christ but signifieth the bodie of Christ And else where Ambr. 1. Cor. 11. In comedendo potando c. In eating drinking we signifie the bodie bloud that were offered for vs. And againe he saith Quod est figura Ambr. de Sacramētis lib. 4. cap. 4. c. which is a figure of the bodie
is open to bring in all Poperie This is one great stepp to attayne S. Augustin to our syde â— Augst ser 2. de verbis Apost tr 26. 27. in Ioan. Idem de coÌ„sen EuaÌ„g l. 3. c. 1. tem 4. Idem in psal 33. Idem in cap. Vtrum sub de consecr dist 2. S. Aug. in ps 98. Idem ser de verb. euang citatur à Beda 1. Cor. 10. Idem l. 3. de Trin. c. 4. Idem cap. Nes autem de Consecr dist 2. Idem ibidem cap. Hoc est What need any longer delay in this mater when neuer any child of the Catholick Romain Church cryed more loudly then S. Augustin to Pope and poperie in the woords of the prophet VVe thy people and the flock of thy pasture-grounds will confesse our selues thine euerlastingly In the First 14. number he is found teaching to receaue the true bodye of Christ not only spiritualy 〈◊〉 in a visible Sacrament in veritate ipsa in truth it selfe In the 38. numb he is found teaching that Christ in the 6. chap. of S. Ihon amply treated of the B. Sacrament contrary to M. Riders denial therof In the 32. 〈◊〉 he is found teaching that Christ according to the letter was in diuers places at once In the 46. number he is found teaching that the body of Christ is not only a figure but also the veritie and that the same body which was borne of the B. Virgin Marie is giuen to be eaten In the 54. number he is found teaching that we eate our Lord yet in such maner as we harme him 〈…〉 our eating but rather arme and helpe our soules by such diuine participation In the 63. number he is found teaching that to preache Christ and to eate him are very different contrary to M. Rider affirming both to be all one In the 64. number he is found teaching that we should confesse faithfully what was before consecration but bread and wyne after consecration is the fleâ—â— and blood of Christ In the 70. number he is found teaching that it 〈◊〉 Christs fleash and blood which is receaued vnder the forme or lyknes of bread and wyne What more might be sayd or more effectualy and more oppositely to Protestantcy by any Pope or Papist in the world Now let vs giue eare to M. Rider First he fetcheth a long carrier of halfe his chapter before he euer stoupeth at this allegation out of S. Augustin Next leauing what I haue sayd he telleth what I should haue sayd When I play the puritan as I sayd before his direction would be more conuenient to leaue the mater and to dallye rownd about vp and downe off and on Thirdly that it is a similitud therfor no sillogisme I tould you before in the 43. number what logitian he is Aâ—â—ust 1. Topic. 14. Read Aristotle good sir and he will tell you that similituds may well be arguments Nay read the new testament and finde Christs arguments to haue bene vsualy but similituds At last he affirmeth playnly that Augustin telleth we should eate Christ with faythfull hart and mouth Why I aske no more but that it be graunted not only by harte but also by mouth Christ may be eaten But like a badd cow he stryketh downe with his heele all this milke euen in the very next woord which maketh the 135. vntruth that S. Augustin is contrary to vs. The 135. vntruth But I pray you what is the reason Forsooth saith he because he vttred thes woords as a similitude to another intention Yet againe let it be graunted him to haue vttred the woords and for the intention whatsoeuer it was it is knowen that he would not and could not lawfully for any purpose ratifie or insert false doctrin So that yf the woords be founde his mynde is notoriously expressed When no footing could be founded on these seely yf euer hetherto any reasons haue bene seely shifts and no answer framed or forged to this forcible allegation then bursteth out the 136. vntruth The 136. vntruth that we had alleaged many places vnfitly and vntruely yet shewed in none of them lesse learning and true meaning then in this But I â—ay as often before that I take no greater assurance of your being â—rampled by these allegations then by your pretending that I shewed small learning and not good meaning in them For what â—edlam beldame but might in impudent resolution saye as much â—f she had no other euasion And who behouldeth not but in this â—aying and in such maner is the very depth of infamie detected The 137. vntruth followeth close by The 137. vntruth that we had neuer read the â—lace in S. Augustin but snatcht it out of some ignorant Monkish Enchiridion What may be sayd to this facer of a bould cownteâ—ance in a cold cauterized conscience Nothing fitter and shorter â—hen out of the Poet Non tibi plus cordis sed minus oris adest No couradge new but lesse thy shame is fownd Yea the very derision of the name of Moncks is not only a demonâ—tration of his being abandoned by S. Augustin but a testimonie of â—is combination with ould hereticks S. Aug. tom 8. in psal 132. against whom S. Augustin manifouldly defendeth the profession of Moncks yea and suche â—heir very name wherof let these few proofs be witnesses Merito Elis displicet nomen Monachorum quia illi nolunt habitare in vnum cum fratribus VVorthely doth the name of Moncks displease them because they will not dwell in â—onsent with theire brethren Deinde perrexit Petilianus ore maledico in viâ—uperationem monasteriorum monachorum arguens etiam me quod hoc genus â—itae fuerit a me institutum Then Petilianus proceeded with a malitious mouth â—o disprayse monasteries and moncks reprouing me also that I had instituted that â—ynde of lyfe All his whole woorks are replenished with mention Idem tom 6. Cont. lit petil lib. 3. c. 40. commendation direction and defence of such profession All was one for my Caualiero he had a resolution to trample all truth vnâ—â—â— foote Vide Remiâ—d Rufum in duplicatione con Patronum Molinai fol. 76. Such was a lyke protestant not long since who being adâ—â—nished of his vnmeasurable lyes he answered Quam diu potero 〈◊〉 adferam Latebunt quam diupoterunt Valebunt apud vulgus ista mendacia 〈◊〉 long as I can I will indomadge let it remayne hidd as long as it may These lyes will auayle among the people O wofull yet generall o true yea shamefull Protestant intention What other could be his intention that saith by the 138. The 138. vntruth vntruth S. Augustin to affirme it which was sayd of our Sacrament to be figuratiuely spoken he only so saying of S. Pauls woords of mariage they shal be two in one fleash or where S. Augustin calleth in the woords of the Apostle mariage magâ—â—â— Sacramentum in Christo Ecclesia Ephes 5. The 139. vntruth a great sacrament
promise Thirdly the 156. vntrueth that Christ by any promise assureth all his benifits to the worthy receauer for there is noe such mater In the 4. question The 157. 158. vntruth and first aunswer is the 157. vntrueth that we say Christ to be receaued alone with the mowth as manifowldly is testifyed In the 4. aunswer is the 158. vntrueth that whatsoeuer Christ giueth by promise must be receaued by faythe For he giueth damnation to the wicked infidels which he had often promised yet they haue no faythe He giueth resurrection to our bodyes in his promises yet bodyes haue no faythe He giueth health foode attyre by many promises to his seruants which can not be receaued or vsed but only by their bodyes He giueth baptisme and grace to children yet they haue no actual fayth he giueth by promise foode to the fowles of the ayre to the fish of the sea and to the beasts of the earth can these be sayd to haue fayth yet I confesse they may haue as much as puritans haue none at all O rich Deanry of S. Patricks how wouldest thou groane if thou couldst feele the heft of the diuinitie of thy deane wherin such falshood standeth for infallible principles and such impietie is tearmed the woord of the Lord How many vntruethes therfor are implyed in these woords none of meanest capacitie but must perceaue In the fift question and first aunswer is the 159. vntrueth The 159. vntruth that it is absurd by our bodyes to receaue Christ as also that we exclude the receauing by our sowles In the third aunswer to the 5. question is the 160. vntrueth The 160. vntruth that ether such institution as I sayd was a promise or a thing spiritual alone and not also corporal The residue is disproued in the premisses And consequently The 161. vntruth that it is the 161. vntrueth that any may venture their sowles vpon such doctrin Toward the next question let it be vnderstood what we say to be sayd according the saluation of the godly and damnation of the vngodly or els it wil be a further vntrueth That it hath bene proued by you that the only godly beleeuers receaue Christ is the 162. vntrueth The 162. 163. vntruth To the 7. question and third answer it is the 163. vntrueth that Christ crucifyed is the inward grace of the Sacrament both because Christ truely gaue his disciples his body vncrucifyed as also because Christ being a substance can not be grace which is an accident Although he is and well may be called the giuer of grace And fayne would I know two things mentioned in this aunswer of yours to the 7. question First why you say Christ crucifyed with all his merits to be the mater or inward grace of the Sacrament considering Christ ordained it befor his being crucifyed Secondly why you allowe any other his merits besyd his passion considering that in the 83. number 14. examen you affirme only his passion or rather the wownd of his syde to haue bene fruictfull for your redemption To the 8. question and first aunswer it is the 164. vntrueth The 164. vntruth For we say no such mater of carnal eating but of corporal true real and substantial eating and that not only by mowth but also by charitie and faythe The 165. vntrueth is The 165. vntruth that you say with scriptures in so saying bothe because there is no such scripture in owld or new testament as also because it is false that all Christs merits are yours or that all were purchased only by his Passion For many yea infinit The 166. 167. 168. 169. and 170. vntruth were purchased befor his passion In the 9. question is the 166. vntrueth that we say carnally and the 167. vntrueth that you say with scriptures In the 11. question is the 168. vntrueth that we say Christs body is euery where and the 169. that Scriptures or Creed say he is only in heauen In the 12. question is the 170. vntrueth that we say Christ according to bothe natures to be euery where The summe of this aunswer to Luthers authoritie is that Luther hath fayled lyke a monck that the Father of protestant trueth as them selues tearme him is but a Father of error A good verdict For the name of Protestants here taken from the Lutherans we will examine how rightly it is done VVho are in deede Protestants and wherfor so called Fitzsimon Luc. 8. 122. ARe you gott in from puritans among protestants you haue not obserued the conseile of our Saluioure when you are inuited to a mariadge to keepe the lower place I must therfor dismount you into your rancke First the name of Protestant sprong vpon this following occasion When the Reforming profession had purchased many followers as it is no more meruaile to behould numbers to follow a doctrin of libertie then waters to fall from a height when a gappe is opened and the Emperoure Charles the fift would fayne vnderstād the grownds of their perswasions Sleidan lib. 6. fol. 101. 102. 109. Lauather in sua historia pag. 19. they ioyned their heads together and made a collection of opinions to which they protested to stand to Which booke being deliuered to the Emperoure at Augusta otherwyse called Auspurg anno 1530. some thirteene yeeres after Luther had apostated and the greater parte by manifowld protestants wherby the name begon promising to auow the said booke the booke to this day is called the Confession of Augusta and the only defenders therof are called protestants Nether do the Zuinglians in Heluetia clayme this name but are knowen by the title of Sacramentarians nether the Geneuians or French reformers but are knowen by the title of Hugenots nor the Flemish rebells but are knowen by the title of Ghewes Secondly concerning this name of protestants they to whom it doth belong haue duble cause to applawd greatly to them selues Such only as I forshewed are the Lutherans and they only that are consenting to the forsayd confession of Augusta The first cause is that the Zuinglians the Englishe the Frenche c. haue sought Brentius in appendice and that as by their owne report is testifyed with teares to be admitted into theire concord yet that they neuer would admitt or tolerat them as appeareth vpon the Article of the creed in the communion of Saints And when they blazed abroad that they had the good lyking of them the protestants tooke it most iniuriously and as a great slaundre sharply refuted it Exam. nu 19. The second cause is that their very name of Protestants is so much affected euen by them who are opposit vnto their profession as appeareth in England as that they couet it and striue for it In deed the cause why that name had first accesse into England was because the first reformers who resorted therto Tindal Frith Barns Cranmer c. were of the Lutheran stampe with a peculiar small diuersitie
insolencie sundrie Hereriques doe praise and extoll them selues and their owne Doctrin Zuinglius saith I knowe for certaine my Doctrin to be no other then the most sacred and true gospell by the testimonie of this doctrin I will iudge both men and Angells pag. 151. Luther saith I am assured Christ him selfe to name me an Euangelist and to approue me his Preacher pag. 151. Caluin saith the matter it selfe crieth out not Martin Luther in the beginning but God him selfe to haue thundred out of his mouth ibid. Luther that they only and first vnderstand the Scriptures and that all others haue bene deceiued pag. 384. A woorthie saying of S. Athanasius touching the obstinacie of Heretiques pag. 241. Luther Latimer Frithe Barnes Cranmer Iuell Bale Ridley and Horne all censured by Rider for Heretiques Replye pag. 39. HERETIQVES How Heretiques condemne the studie of all learning science and Diuinitie Luther burned the Canon lawes pag. 4. Zuinglians condemne all degrees of Diuinitie ibid. VVicliffe that Vniuersities Studies Colleges and Degrees are Ethnicall superstitions and Diabolicall ibid. Luther in his sermon De Studijs saith that Studere hath Stultū in the supin ibid. pag. 271. Luther and Melancthon condemne all Sciences as sinfull and erroneus pag. 16. 271. Richard Hunne damned as Fox testifieth vniuersities with all degrees and faculties pag. 271. A Prudent demand of the Emperor Theodosius to certaine Heretiques newly sprung vp Ep. Ded. par 40. IESVS All honor denied by Reformers to be due to the name of Iesus pag. 308. Item that the people should not be taught to bowe at the name of Iesus Replye pag. 66. IESVITS Of the malice and rage of Heretiques against the Iesuits pag. 62. 63. Of the continuall indeuours and labours of the Iesuits for the sauing of soules ibid. A Princelie and most honorable testimonie of Henrie the 4. the French Kinge of the integritie of the Iesuits pag. 72. IMAGES Caluin abolishing the Images of Christ his Saints yet allowed his owne pag. 194. Caluins answere to some repining thereat If any quoth he be offended with this sight let him ether put out his eies or presently goe hange him selfe ibid. VValer a Murtherer and Minister hanged on a gibbet the picture of Christ Crucified pag. 210. Riders conclusion that treason is committed by iniurie to the pictures and persons alike ibid. Riders owne Sonne attempting to pull downe an Image was by Gods Iudgment precipitated from a height and all to crushed ibid. VVorship of Images proued out of Nicephorus pag. 253. INSTITVTION How Protestants flye and abhorre the woordes of Christs Institution Bullinger saith that there is no vertue at all in rehearching them pag. 122. Zuinglius that they ought not to be read in ministring the Supper pag. 123. Iohn Scut that Caluinists doe so hate them that they can not abide to see or heare them pag. 169. Iohn Lassels that they should not be spoken in the Institution ibid. A Scotish Minister ministred the Communion without them pag. 179. Item they are auoyded out of the Scottish Communion booke ibid. Swenkfilde flouteth at them ibid. Peter Martyr tearmeth the woordes of Christs Institution Hoc est corpus meum but a fiue woorded proofe ibid. Luther saith Carolostadius wresteth miserably the pronowne This. That Zuinglius maketh leane the Verbe Is. O colampad tormenteth the woord Bodie Others butcher the whole Text. Some crucifie the half thereof so manifestly doth the Diuel hould them by the noses pag. 171. Thus he Luther againe saith they feare lest they should stumble and breake their neckes at euery sillable which Christ pronounced pag. 175. Riders ridiculous comparing the woordes of Christs Institution with the woordes of Circumcision pag. 178. Luthers confession that he strayned euerie vaine of his bodie and soule to auoide these woordes ibid. Persons Testwood both Foxes Martyrs and others say the woordes This is my body which is broken for you to meane the breaking of Gods woord amonge the people pag. 308. IRELAND Diuers opinions of Authors concerning the first Conuersion of Ireland Ep. Ded. par 4. The vniuersall Conuersion of Ireland attributed to S. Patricke ibid. par 4. Of the fame of Ireland for learning Discipline and Deuotion Ep. Ded. par 7. 9. 11. 14. The testimonie of S. Bede ibid. par 14. 16. 17. The testimonie of S. Bernard ibid. By what meanes learning and deuotion came first to decaye in Ireland ibid. par 12. 13. The testimonie of Marianus Surius Molanus and Theodoricus ibid. pag. 19. 21. Irish of Royall and Princelie race Religious persons and Saints Ep. Ded. par 20. The Vniuersitie of Paris and Pauia errected by Irishe men ibid. par 21. Ireland a 1000. yeares after Christ retained the name of Scotland ibid. par 26. 36. Ireland in times past the only knowen Scotland assured by two kinde of Proofes ibid. par 26. 27. 28. 29. IVSTICE Origen submitted his proceedinges to an Infidels arbitrement and preuailed against fiue aduersaries Reply pag. 7. The same did Archilaus Bishop in Mesopotamia and others ibid. The memorable Iustice of Kinge Cambises against a corrupt Iudge Replye pag. 20. A Counseller vnder Fredrick the 2. for abusing his authoritie had his eies pluckt out of his head Reply pag. 103. Another vnder S. Lewes was hanged ibid. Lewes of Luxenburge Earle of S. Paul lost his head Replye pag. 104. Item 12. or 13. noble men of England and else where brought to vtter ruine and miserable death for the like ibid. LADIE The Beggars answere to Mistris Kirie who said she was as good as our Ladie pag. 154. LINCOLNESHIRE A true prediction of the Lincolnshire men about the alteration of Religion pag. 343. GOOD LIFE How Heretiques generallie accuse one another for lack of good Life since they fell from the Catholique faith and of sundrie other enormities Caluin that they haue plunged them selues into all riot and laciuiousnes pag. 17. Smidlin That the worlde may knowe they are no Papists nor to haue trust in their good woorkes not one good will they practize pag. 17. Insteed of Fasting they vse Feasting ibid. For almes to the poore they vnfleece and fley them ibid. Prayers they turne to oathes c. ibid. Spangberg that they are become so wylde that they acknowledg not God ibid. Luther saith They speake of the gospell as if they were Angells but if you regard their woorkes they are meere Diuells pag. 115. They beleeue as hoggs and as hoggs they die ibid. Againe he After the Reformed gospell reuealed vertu to be slaine iustice oppressed temperance tyed truth torne by doggs faith lame wickednes continuall deuotion fled heresie remayning pag. 206. LVTHER How intollerably Luther is extolled by some Reformers Luther set for a Saint in Foxes Calendar pag. 14. Luther begot truth ibid. Iewel calleth him the most excellent man sent of God to lighten the world pag. 15. Mathesius the supreme father of the Church ibid. Amsdorfe Luthers like in spirit and faith in wisdome and profounditie of holie
what they teache and pretend That Ministers may excommunicate the greatest Prince pag. 113. That he that is excoÌ„municated is not woorthie to enioy life vpon earth ibid. That it were good that rewardes were appointed by the people for such as kill Tyrants as commonly there are for such as haue killed VVolues or Beares ibid. Doctor VVhitegift saith of them that they seeke to transfer the authoritie of Pope Prince and Bishop to thâ—m selues and to bringe Prince and Nobilitie into a verie seruitude pag. 159. That Puritans seeke by degrees to be ridd of all lawes of all authoritie and to haue all thinges subiect to their Consistorian Discipline pag. 200. The definition of a Puritan by one Butler of Cambridge pag. 221. A notable Description of the deepe Dissimulations and Hipocriticall proceedinges first practized by Puritans to gett them selues into the fauour and good liking of the people pag. 221. 222. How Puritans dispense with them selues to dissemble cheate and counterfett to take all Ecclesiasticall degrees and to practize all Ceremonies of Cappe Tippet c. to remayne in their offices and places of promotion pag. 231. Of the Puritans hiperbolicall commendations and setting foorth of their Discipline pag. 223. Reneâ—her saieth that the polliticall Empyre is but a lower and inferior benche to the Consistorian Discipline ibid. The Puritans appeache Kinge Iames of periurie because he dissaloweth their Discipline pag. 224. Puritans Caueat thâ—t no names be vsed which sounde ether of Paganisme or Papistrie pag. 228. The holie Consistorian Discipline of Puritans borrowed from a Iew named Cornelius Bertram pag. 272. Caluin teacheth that as soone as a man is illuminated with the knowledge of the truth instantly he is freed from all obligations of obeyinge ether Church or Prince Replye pag. 112. PVRITANS What the Kinges Maiestie doth censure of Puritans and what sundrie of the Reformers them selues doe say of them Barrowes saith thâ—y are pernicious Impostors presumptuous Pastors Iewish Rabbins Balaam t s dissembling Hipocrits Smel-feastes Apostats and souldiers of Antechrist pag. 161. Others thâ—y are pernicious Dreamers glosing Hipocrits with God fasting Pharisaicall preachers counterfett Prophets pestilent Seducers sworne waged and marked Disciples of Antechrist c. pag. 222. And againe they are perfidious and Apostat Reformers precise Dissemblers giddie and presumptuous Intermedlers in all matters publique and priuat watchmen ouer all actions pag. 222. The Kinges Maiestie speaking of them saith that the Puritanicall spirit is periured treacherous inhuman c. Replye pag. 16. 17. They are very pestes in the Church and commonwelth Reply pag. 70. No deserts can oblige them no oathes or promises binde them c. ibid. Againe saith he Yee shall neuer finde in no border theeues greater ingratitude and more lyes and vild periuries then with these frantick spirits Replye pag. 170. And Knox him selfe saith that nether can oath nor promise binde any such people subiect to the Euangile to obey and maintaine Tyrants ibid. pag. 70. 71. REALL Proofes for the Reall Presence both by Catholiques by Heretiques them selues Corporall and Spirituall presence not opposite pag. 37. 38. The remorce of Bucer Peter Martyr and Oecolampadius for hauing euer writen or bewitched any with the Protestants opinion against the Reall presence pag. 53. 54. Christ receiued with the fleshly mouth according to Luther pag. 10. VVith hart and mouth according to S. Aug. ibid. Our flesh is fed with the bodie and blood of Christ according to Tertul. ibid. He permitteth our teeth to be printed in his fleshe accrrding to S. Chrisost ibid. He dwelleth in vs corporallie according to Cyrillus pag. 11. By naturall partaking according to Ciril Alexandrinus pag. 9. The bodie and blood which the Apostles did behould and the Iewes did shed according to S. Aug. pag. 9. Reallie not Figuratiuelie according to Lyra. pag. 53. VVe receiue not only a Figure but the bodie of Christ according to Theophilact pag. 53. Not significatiuelie but substantially according to S. Anselme ibid. The true bodie taken from the Virgin and which hunge on the Crosse according to Innocentius pag. 66. The flesh assumpted for the life of the world according to the holie Caenons pag. 67. That which was crucified and which was buried ibid. That which tooke flesh of Marie according to S. Aug. ibid. That although it seeme horible to eate the flesh of man c. Yet that notwithstanding such seeming we both eate drinke the flesh and blood of Christ. S. Aug. pag. 84. That it is a fearfull thing for a man to deuoure his Lorde which neuertheles we doe in receiuing S. Aug. pag. 85. In forme is the fleshe of the woord of God true meate saieth Origen pag. 89. Him selfe is receiued into the breast saith Clemens Alex. ibid. The same is proued by Caietan pag. 100. By Lanfrancus pag. 106. By S. Ambrose pag. 131. By Bucer pag. 132. By S. Chrisost pag. 174. By S. Cyril pag. 136. By S. Leo. pag. 286. By S. Martial pag. 289. By Anacletus pag. 289. The Reall presence fortified and confirmed by the Confessions of all chiefe Protestants and those the most approued of all the worlde pag. 303. By Berengarius ibid. By VVickliffe ibid. By Iohn Husse ibid. By Hierom of Prage ibid. By Oecolampadius ibid. By Bucer pag. 304. By Caluin ibid. By Sir Iohn olde Castle pag. 305. REBELLION Of the Insurrections Rebellions of Puritans against their Princes of the infinit deale of blood which hath beene shed thorough this occasion Muntzer taken and executed and aboue a hundred thousand of his followers slaine in Rebellion against their Princes pag. 218. In ciuil warres in France in the space of three yeares not so few as a hundred thousand men weere ouerthrowne pag. 218. Of Puritans incensing the people against the ciuil Magistrate and of the answere of two Puritan Preachers in Stamford to the L. Superintendent of Lincolne opposing him selfe against their publique Puritanicall fast pag. 223. The Rebellious intentions of Puritans openly certified by suÌ„drie of their owne bookes intituled Martin Mar-plelat Mar-Martin VVoork for the Cooper The Counter-cuffe An epistle to Huffe Ruffe and Snuffe Hay any woorke Myles Monop c. pag. 224. A Description of the bloodie spirit of Lutheran and Caluinian Ministers Sturmius sayeth they condemne banishe and nayle to the Crosse whom they please Replye pag. 81. That if the Magistrate would but for three dayes lend them the swoord would ensue c. ibid. Lanoy incensed the men of Rochell to iterate their Rebellion against the Kinge Replye pag. 112. RESVRRECTION Luther saith of Caluinists that it is certaine they tend to manifest Apostacie concerning this Article pag. 16. Villagaignon of the Caluinists the hope of life not to belonge to the bodies but to the soules ibid. Almaricus one of Foxes Martyrs held that there was no Resurrection of bodies pag. 161. Others that no soule doth remaine after death pag. 162. At Geneua to destroie Purgatorie they would haue decreed the soule
euangelium apud nos pessum iturum loco euangelij meros eosdemque egregios errores nos habituros All things demonstrat nothing more then that the gospell is perishing among vs and that in place of the gospell will remaine mere and enorme errors To the same effect it is to be vnderstoode that when the Puritans began to multiplie and dangerously to impugne parlament protestants so called because they frame their profession according to parlamētal statuts the sayd Parlament Protestants to make them odious reuealed principaly by two bookes all Puritan dissignes as well displaying what their consistorial discipline was as to what distructiō of all religiō it aymed One of these bookes was intituled the Suruey of the pretēded holy discipline the other dangerous positions By vertue of which booke and of others of lyke subiect as A treatise of Ecclesiastical discipline The Remōstrāce Quaerimonia Ecclesiae The 5. bookes of the lawes of Eccl. polit The aunswer to the abstract c. the cause of Puritans seemed so detestable to the state that euer since more and more they in their wysdomes thought good to suppresse them Now in the last yeare 1606. the vnquiet Puritans collecting all abuses that might be obiected in the profession of Parlament Protestants they haue dedicated their sayd booke to his Maiestie appealing to his oath by the great name of the Lord In praefatione pag. 23. that he would defend according his power all the dayes of his lyfe vnder the paine contained in the law and danger both of bodie and sowle in the day of Gods fearfull iudgment the altogether Puritanical liturgie of Scotland This booke in requital of the former Seruey against them they haue also named A Suruey of the booke of common prayer Now to our former purpose that Protestancie and Puritancie are together decaying is auerred in this new Suruey First Pag. 160. they relate that the late Archbishop of Canturburie vpon remorse vttered these woords Good Lord when shall we know what to trust to And that suddenly he was surprised with a palsie was caried from the cowrt and died shortly after A plaine demonstration that all their profession hetherto inuented wanteth all assurance and fadeth awaye lyke a smoake Breefely in the sayd Suruey the Puritans acknowledg their owne delusions also to be at a non plus saying The tymes decline fast to Poperie these tymes be declining to Poperie Pag. 52. Pag. 105. Wheras therfor their threats of our decaie are but lyke the dying candle which befor quenching casteth out greatest flamms in the name of God I. Ioan. 2.24 Galat. 1.9 that which you haue heard from the begining as S. Iohn aduiseth let it remaine in you To which S. Paul accordeth Yf any preach otherwyse then you haue alredie receaued be be accursed For yf you be wyse you will not for any threats exchange the suer fundation and rock against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuayle for the sandie foolish mans choise which for rayne falling theron for wynde blowing Mat. 16.16 Mat. 7.27 and fludds coming is ruined and surmounted Such as is this new inuisible profession by the rayne of mans will lyke a figure formed in sand defaced and by wynds of opposition and fludds of obliuion vppon the point to be vtterly ouerwhelmed So that their Church which they sayd first was inuisible because they could produce noe predecessors among Christians that euer had beleeued as they did being now againe by their owne confession vanishing out of sight this epigramme should be allowed to be after a short tyme true You hould your church inuisible til Luthers tyme with Luther also hath it lost all bewties prime And now inuisible it growes with Luther dead so inuisible the membres and the head Inuisible in dede they are as deepe in hell for vtter darknes darkneth all that there do dwell So first it was obscure as fetcht from lightles pitt t is so againe as drownd where Lucifer doth sitt 5. Reg. 1. 5. 9. 19. Yf your Ministers and Promotors lyke Adonias befor their tyme haue furnished them selues insolently they are not therfor greatly to be maligned For that sinners by impietie come often to welth Psal 72.12 the Prophet Dauid fortould saying Ecce ipsi peccatores abundantes in seculo obtinuerunt diuitias Behowld the very sinners and abownding in the world haue obtained riches Vpon which place sayth S. Augustin S. Aug. in Psal 72. Quot sunt quila sciuijs vt boues vaccae ad iugulum tendunt canentes saltantes parant iter ad infernum How many are they that by riot as oxen and cowes do march to their destruction and singing Prou. 1.33 and dawnsing do dispose their voiage to hell Prosperitie of fooles will destroie them sayth the prouerb For as followeth in the wyseman Sap. 14. 28. ether while they reioyce they are madd or truely they fortell lies In their madnes they blaspheme God and his saincts and calumniat his people In their predictions of lies among others may be numbred yf they tell that you will apostat from religion honor them as true pastors defie papistrie and that so doing you will doe according to the gospell They occasion me to remembre one Selius in Martial who inferred there was no God because forsooth that he often blaspheming him yet therby liued in greater prosperitie Nullos esse Deos inane coelum Martial li. 4. epig◠affirmat Selius probatque quod se Factum dum negat haec videt beatum No God heauen vayne affirmed Selius and proud it for that he was prosperous denying them and alwayes glorious Cicero was able to say of such men Cic. l. 1. offic Adducuntur plerique vt eos iustitia capiat obliuio cum in imperiorum honorum gloriaeve cupiditatem inciderint The most of such are forgetfull of equitie when they fall into the aspiring desyre of rule honors and glorie So that they doe but according to the wont of arrogant people when they insult vpon vayne expectations I wish for their creditours sake that it be neuer heard what Caluin well experienced in the lyke of him selfe and his brethren writeth of his felowe Ministers I will faythfully translat part of his plaine declaration omitting the latin this tyme for breuities sake Alij ad captandum miri artifices nudatos relinquunt c. Caluin lib. de scandalis pag. 65. 66. Some of thē sayth he writing as I sayd of Ministers wonderfullie cunning to snatch leaue them forlorne in nakednes to whom they promised montains of gould Some what almes they receaued ether they spend it in whooring or play or other riot Some what they borrowed they consume lauishlye in idlenes And in these crimes they haue often assistance of their wiues Some vncleanlines insueth wherwith this awnswer shall not be defyled Only as I sayd I craue that our Ministers and Catchpowls defraud not their creditors Afflicted Catholicks 4.
Puritans it is suppressed is made a mater of the starre chamber These fynes are vnmeasurable to our qualities Yet yf we consent not suddenly to satisfie them first they clapp vs vpp into prisons and then they them selues in all tulmutuous maner resort to our howses take notice of all our substance valueing euery thing at a ridiculous rate to all but to them that are intituled in the goods and of all together gould marchandise corne howsowld stuff euidences appareil they make vp their fyne yf it exceede not all the means of the partie conueying away as much as serueth their owne turnes and intending to returne by some pretext or other yf their remaine any thing to their aduantage The Author A Lamentable declaration Wherin the commissioners Martials searches synes violēce oppressiō and impouerishmēt of innocent subiects do altogether make vp a noble persecution comparable to some of them of primatiue Christians I reade a relation of Dyonisius Bishop of Alexandrie recorded bv Eusebius in his historie and altogether lyke but that it cōtaineth farr greater calamitie sustained by primatiue Christians information deseruing for your consolation to behould the fayth then persecuted yet to florish and in vayne to be impugned to be imparted to you Euseb lib. 6. hist c. 34. Befor any Edict or proclamation of the Emperor for the space of a whole yeare began our persecutiō Wherin it seemed the greatest sacrifice that they could offre to their idols to imbrue thē selues with the bloud and slaughter of Christiās They crushed the bodie and picked out the eyes of ould Metra and in the end stoned him because he would not recant They drue the vertuous Quincta to their temples and whē she detested their sacrilege they trayled hir by the heeles through the streets brusing hir against the stones after they tore hir with scourges and in the ende they also stoned hir to death Then with one consent without all commission or warrant they rushed into the howses of Godly Christiās euery one betraying his neighbour and extruding him out of doores ransaking and spoiling all his wealth and howsehowld stuff purloining what soeuer was to his purpose or all that was pretious and throuing into the street or fiar the residue so that euery corner seemed a place giuen vp to the pillage of rauenous enemies c. This was in dede a merciles martial law not subiect to the lawes of all nations nor to it of the twelue tables among the Romans Deut. cap. 13.6 c. 19.15 nor to it in Gods law that nemo indēnatus c. none withowt lawfull witnes should be condemned To thinke that you were so vsed in a Christian commō wealth wherin euery one was foorthcoming vpon all citations and warnings and wherin iustice without all impediment might hould hir natural course pardon me it cānot for the enormitie sinke into my mynde nether will it enter into the conceit of any Christiā imagination that the rigor of iustice should not be thought sufficiently seuer against innocent Catholicks without extending against them the martial iniquitie or lawlesnes which is no wher followed but where effusion of blood or probable destruction of a whole armie is preuented by a hastned priuat execution without ordinarie processe And yf it be true Suruey of the booke an common prayer pag. 123. which I reade in the puritan suruey that parlement Acts may not be explaned but by authoritie of parlamēt and consequently lawes made by parlament as all true lawes yf I he not deceaued should be can not be infringed but by contrary acts of parlament then haue I greater cause to distrust this informatiō by how much Puritās the bloudie trompetors to all crueltie against Catholicks do repute by this testimonie such violence to be vnlawfull because it is not warranted by any acts of parlament I take hould in this place obiter of part of a speach had at Norwich 4. of August befor the Assises to testifie what their owne opinion is of promotors printed at London this very yeare 1607. vnder the title of the L. Coke his speech and charge Tovvard the ende Wherin is sayd The promoter is both a begger and a knaue A litle after their office I confesse is necessarie and yet it seldome hapeneth that an honest man is imployed in it A good verdict or rather A good sentence being from that sage iudge But cōcerning your heauie disasters Yf such course as you speake of was followed it was most pertinent to dismaie dastard mynds I say dastard mynds For the iust Christian is cōfident as a lion Prou. 28.1 sayth the woord of God adding after Prou. 30.30 which as the strongest of beast is neuer terrified at any incowntre Therefor in the busines of God or professiō of our beleefe sayth Christ Feare yee not them that kill the bodie Mat. 10.28 and are not able to kill the sowle Againe see that you be not trubled for these things must be done Mat. 24.6 Brother shall deliuer brother vnto death and the father his sonne and the children shall rise against their parents and shall woorke their death And you shal be odious to all men for my name But be that shall indure to the ende shal be saued A most happie conclusion of the former sorrow and fare greater good then in comparison wherof the greatest greefe might not be thowght the cheefest gaine Rom. 8.18 So esteemed S. Paul saying For I thinke that the passions of this tyme are not condigne to the glorie to come that shal be reuealed in vs. So that all that euer you haue or might loose by such aduersitie accompt it more gaynefull then had you putt it to greatest vsurie Christ Iesus is our assurance therof Mat. 19.29 affirming Euerie one that hath left howse or brethren or sisters or father or mother or wyfe or children or lands for my names sake shall receaue a hondred fowld and shall possesse lyfe euerlasting Which S. Paul as euery true Christian is bound did beleeue when he sayd Philip. 3.7.8 The things that were gaynefull to me those haue I esteemed detriments Yea but I esteeme all things disproffitable for the passing knowledge of Iesus my lord for whom I haue made all things as detriment and do esteeme them as dung that I may gayne Christ So did the Hebrues beleeue them to whom the same Apostle gratulateth The spoile of your owne goods Hebr. 10.34.35 you tooke with ioye knowing that you haue a better and permanent substance Do not therfor leese your confidence which hath a great remuneration Which being soe true as being affirmed by the trueth it selfe what merchants aduenturing all their stock what husband man spending all his seede what vsurer exposing all his welth what gamester hazurding all his thrift vpon vncertainties but may exclame at vs yf we thinke that stock lost which is layd out for so excessiue gayne that seede perished which is spent in so