thing that he saith or all the Papistes in the world it is not necessarie that Christs body should be eaten with our mouth after a corporall manner that we may haue coniunction with his body For then infants which eate not the sacrament should want a necessarie manner of the coniunction of their bodies with the body of Christe and so be out of hope of resurrection The places of Cyrill that hee citeth in 6. Ioan. Cap. 14. be cited before the one Lib. 2. Cap. 17. the other Lib. 2. Cap. 34. where they are answered Then followeth a discourse to proue that communion or fellowship ought not to be had with heretiques which is very true and therefore not to bee had with Papistes the greatest heretiques that are After the saying of Haimo rehearsed hee is angrie with vs that we will reiect his authoritie being as he saith neare a thousand yeares of age but surely in some Chronicles that I haue read he is an English man generall or prouinciall of Friers preachers and I am sure there was neuer a Dominike Frier in the world one thousand yeares after Christe and they that make him oldest make him to be 840. yeares since christ The parcell of Chrysostome in 1. Cor. 10. Hom. 24. wherevnto he would compare his Haimo is rehearsed more at large Lib. 1. Cap. 18. and that of Cyrill Cap. 15. in 6. Ioan. The sixe and twentieth Chapter proceedeth vpon the same text by S. Cyrill and S. Thomas Cyrill whom vnfitly he matcheth with Thomas of Aquine is cited in 17. Ioan. Cum trinitas vnum natura sit c. For as much as the Trinitie in nature is one let vs consider how we our selues also among our selues corporally and with God spiritually are one The only begotten sonne comming out of the substance of God his father and possessing in his nature the whole father was made flesh according to the scriptures and hath vnspeakably ioyned and vnited himselfe to our nature For he that is God by nature is made man in deede not Theophorus that is hauing God in him by grace as they that are ignorant of the mysterie do contend but he is both very God and very man So he hath ioyned together in him selfe that is one those things which according to nature differ very much among them selues and hath made vs partakers of the diuine nature For the communication of the spirite and as I may say the dwelling was first in Christ and from him hath perced into vs when being made man he him selfe annoynted and sanctified his temple with his owne spirite The beginning therefore and the way by which we are made partakers of the holy spirite and are vnited to God is the mysterie of christ For we are all sanctified in him Therfore that he might vnite euery one beetwene our selues God although we be asunder both in body and soul yet he hath found out ae meane agreeable to the counsel of his father his own wisdom For blessing the beleuers by the mystical communion by his body he hath made vs one body both with himself and also among our selues For who shall thinke them straunge from this naturall vnion which by the vnion of one holy body are vnited in one Christe For if we all eate one bread we are all made one body For Christe suffereth vs not to be diuided and disioyned Therefore all the Church is made the body of Christ and euery one of vs the members of Christe after S. Paule for being conioyned to one Christ by his body bicause wee haue receiued him in vs which is indiuisible our members be rather appropriated to him then to vs. Concerning the vnitie of God the father with the sonne of the two natures of God and man in Christ and of the vnitie of the members of Christ with their head which M. Hesk. noteth out of this place of Cyril it shall be no neede to speake seeing there is no controuersie betweene vs but that these three vnities be there Only of the maner how we be vnited is the difference We are vnited to the body of Christ but whether by eating the same with our mouthes or by faith through the vnspeakable working of Gods spirite is all the question All the holde he catcheth of this place is that Cyrill calleth it a naturall vnion as he doth also in the same place a corporall vnion by which he meaneth not that we are vnited after a naturall manner or after a bodily manner but that we are vnited vnto the very humane nature and body of Christ but after an heauenly and diuine manner For thus it followeth in the same place I meane in Lib. 11. Cap. 26. of Cyrill vpon the 17. of Iohn which M. Hesk. note booke belike did not serue him to set downe Quod autem corporalis haec vnio ad Christum participatione carnis eius acquiritur ipse rursus Paulus de mysterio pietatis differens testatur quod alijs inquit generationibus non est agnitum filijs hominum sicut nunc reuelatum est sanctis apostolis eius prophetis in spiritu esse gentes cohaeredes concorpores comparticipes promissionis in Christo. Si autem omnes inter nos in Christo vnum sumus corpus nec inter nos solùm verùum etiam cum eo qui per carnem suam ad nos transiuit quomodo vniuersi inter nos in Christ vnum non erimus And that this corporall vnion vnto Christ is obtained by participation of his flesh Paule him selfe againe doth testifie disputing of the mysterie of godlinesse which in other ages saith he was not knowen to the sonnes of men as it is nowe reuealed to his holy Apostles and Prophetes in the spirite that the Gentiles should be coheires and of the same body and compartners of the promise in Christe If then we be all one body among our selues in Christe and not among our selues only but also with him which by his flesh is come vnto vs howe shall we not be all one both among our selues and in Christe This place of Paule by which the faithfull of the Gentiles are saide to be made one body with the faithfull of the Iewes speaketh nothing of eating of the body of Christe in the sacrament but of the spirituall incorporation by faith in the promises of the Gospell nowe made common vnto the Gentiles with the Iewes whereof the sacrament is not a bare signe but a liuely and effectuall seale and confirmation Moreouer the same Cyrill in the same booke Cap. 22. in 17. IoaÌ„ writeth thus Nihil ergo mali accidere vobis potest aiâ— si carne alfueâ—o cum deitatis incae potestas quÄ™e vos huc vsque seruauit in posterum etiam seruatura fit HÄ™c non ideo dicimus quia Domini corpuâ— non magni aestimemus sed quia mirabiles hos effectus gloriae denoâ—is attribuendos pat amus Nam ipsum etiam Domini corpus coniuâ—cti virtue
sacrifice of Christes passion to be a sacrifice after the order of Melchizedech contrarie to the expresse worde of God affirmeth that it was after the order of Aaron saying that The sacrifice after the order of Melchizedech was onely as the Supper Here note that he maketh the sacrament more excellent then the sacrifice of Christes death by so muche as the Priesthoode and sacrifice of Melchisedech is more excellent then the sacrifice and priesthoode of Aaron But Augustine hath more yet if it will helpe vpon the same Psalme Con. 3. Before the kingdome of his father he chaunged his 〈◊〉 and left him and went his way because there was the sacrifice according to the order of Aaron And afterwarde he himselfe by his body and bloud instituted a sacrifice after the order of Melchizedech Therefore he chaunged his countenance in the priesthoode and left the nation of the Iewes and came to the Gentiles By this we must needes vnderstand that Christe did institute a sacrifice of his body and bloud after the order of Melchizedech Yea verily But howe doe wee vnderstand that this was in the sacrament Therefore for any thing that is here shewed it is no slaunder that the Pope hath turned the holy sacrament into a sacrifice to obscure the glorie of Christe and his onely sacrifice once offered on the crosse For although the Fathers did sometimes call the sacrament a sacrifice yet they meant nothing but a memoriall or sacrifice of thankesgiuing for that one sacrifice offered once on the crosse for the redemption of the whole worlde Whereof none other shal be a better witnesse then Augustine himselfe and in his exposition of this selfe same Psalme Saginantur ergo illo Angeli sed semel ipsum exinaninit vt manducaret panem angelorum home formam serui accipiens in similitudinem hominum factus habitu inuentus vt homo The Angels therefore are fead with that bread meaning the diuinitie of Christe But he emptied himselfe that man might eate the bread of Angels taking the shape of a seruant beeing made like vnto men and in his habite was found as a man Humilianit se factus obediens vsque ad mortem mortem autem crucis vt iam de cruce commendarâ—tur nobis carâ— sanguis Domini 〈◊〉 sacrificium quia mutauit vultum suum coram Abimelech id est eoram regno patris He humbled himselfe and was made obedient to the death euen the death of the crosse that now the body and bloud of our Lorde might be commended to vs from the Crosse beeing the new sacrifice because he chaunged his countenaunce before Abimelech that is before the kingdome of his Father By this it is manifest that Augustine referred the sacrifice after the order of Melchisedech vnto the crosse of Christ whereof we are made partakers in the holy mysteries of his blessed supper So that as well the body and bloud of our Lorde as the newe sacrifice in those mysteries are commended to vs to be participated from the crosse where they were truely and essentially offered vnto God by the eternall spirite of our sauiour Christ wherby he procured euerlasting redemption The same Augustine in his Ep. 23. to Bonifacius Nonne semel immolatus est Christus in se ipso tamen in suet 〈◊〉 non sobèrâ— per omnes paschÄ™ solennitates sed omni die populiâ— immolatur nec vbique mentitur qui interrogatus eum respondarit immolari Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem â—arum rerum quaruÌ„ sacramenta suÌ„t non habereÌ„t omnino sacramenta non essent Ex haec autem similitudine plerunque etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum sacramentum corporis Christi corpus Christi est sacramentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est ita sacramentum fidei fides est Was not Christe once onely offered vppe by himselfe And yet in a sacrament â–ª not onely at euery solemnitie of Easter but euerie day he is offered for the people neither doeth he lye which being asked the question answereth that he is offered For if sacraments had not a certeine similitude of those thinges whereof they are sacramentes they should not be sacramentes at all And of this similitude oftentimes they take the names euen of the very thinges themselues Therfore as after a certeine maner the sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ the sacrament of the bloud of Christ is the bloud of Christ so the sacrament of faith is faith What can be vttered more plainely either against the Popishe sacrifice or against their carnal presence This one place may expound whatsoeuer in Augustine or any other olde writer is spoken of the sacrifice of the Lordes supper and of the presence of Christes body and bloud therein After Augustine M. Heskins citeth Chrysostome in Mat. 26. to proue that the sacrament is now of the same force that it was when it was first ordeined by Christe at his last supper These workes are not of mans power what thinges he did then in that supper he himselfe doth nowe worke he himselfe doeth make perfect We holde the order of Ministers but it is he himselfe that doeth sanctifie and chaunge these thinges With my disciples saith he doe I keepe my Passeouer For this is the same table and none other This is in nothing lesser then that For Christ maketh not that table and some other man this but he himselfe maketh both Hieronyme followeth a vaine discourse against I wote not what Petrobrusians and Henricians that denied the body of CHRISTE to be consecrated and giuen by the priestes as it was by Christe him selfe Whome peraduenture Petrus Cluniacensis Maister Heskins Author doeth slaunder when they saide none otherwise then Chrysostome saide before and that which Maister Heskins himselfe affirmeth That Christ and not man doth consecrate But by this place also are confuted the Oecolampadians and Caluinistes if we will beleeue Maister Heskins who first rauing against Cranmer vrgeth the worde of sanctification of the bread and wine that Chrysostome vseth charging Cranmer to haue saide that the creatures of bread and wine cannot be sanctified Which no doubt that holy Martyr spake of the substance and not of the vse in the sacrament Then he snatcheth vppe Chrysostomes wordes Transmutat he doeth transmute and change them This is easily aunswered He chaungeth the vse but not the substance But for more confirmation Origen is called to witnesse Lib. 8. Cont. Celsum We obeying the creator of all thingâ—s after we haue giuen thankes for his benefites which he hath bestowed vpon vs doe eate the bread which is offered which by prayer and supplication is made into a certeine holier bodie which truly maketh them more holie which with a more sound minde do vse the same Here by Origens playne wordes the vse doth sanctifie the worthie receiuers And though you adde to Ambrose his phrase De pane fit corpus Christi of the bread is
in one very substantiall flesh therefore the manner of participation of his flesh in the sacrament is also spirituall and not carnall Maister Heskins reiecteth this participation to bee the fruition of the benefites of his body and bloud crucified bycause that saith hee is common to all the sacraments and not proper to this But that the substaunce of all sacramentes is one and the difference is in the manner of dispensation of them wee haue shewed sufficiently in the first booke which were tedious nowe to repeate Wherefore we must now set downe what Chrysostome speaketh of the bloud of Christe This bloud maketh that the kinges image doth flourish in vs This bloud doth neuer suffer the beautie and nobilitie of the soule which it doth alwayes water and nourish to fade or waxe faint For bloud is not made of meate soudenly but first it is a certaine other thing But this bloud at the first doth water the soule and indue it with a certaine great strength This mysticall bloud driueth diuelles farre off and allureth Angels and the Lorde of Angels vnto vs For when the diuelles see the Lordes bloud in vs they are turned to flight but the Angels runne foorth vnto vs This bloud being shed did wash the whole world whereof Paule to the Hebrues doth make a long proces This bloud did purge the secrete places and the most holy place of all If then the figure of it had so great power in the temple of the Hebrues and in Aegypt beeing sprinkled vpon the vpper postes of the doores much more the veritie This bloud did signifie the golden altar Without this bloud the chiefe priest durst not goe into the inward secret places This bloud made the priestes This bloud in the figure purged sinnes in which if it had so great force if death so feared the shadowe how much I pray thee will it feare the truth it selfe This bloud is the health of our soules with this bloud our soule is washed with it she is decked with it she is kindled This bloud maketh our minde cleerer then the fire more shining then golde The effusion of this bloud made heauen open Truely the mysteries of the Church are woonderfull the holy treasure house is woonderfull From Paradise a spring did runne from thence sensible waters did flowe from this table commeth out a spring which powreth foorth spirituall flouds Chrysostome in these wordes doth extoll the excellencie of the bloud of Christe shed vpon the crosse the mysterie whereof is celebrated and giuen to vs in the sacrament and therefore hee saith it is Mysticus sanguis mysticall bloud which wee receiue in the sacrament which word Mysticall M. Heskins a common falsarie hath left out in his translation to deceiue the vnlearned reader Hee laboureth much to proue that Chrysostome spake in this long sentence of that sacrament which is needlesse for as he spake of the sacrament so spake he of the passion of Christe and of the sacrifices and ceremonies of the olde lawe and all vnder one name of bloud By which it is more then manifest that hee vseth the name of bloud figuratiuely and ambiguously therefore nothing can bee gathered thereout to fortifie M. Heskins bill of the naturall bloud of Christ to be in the challice The honourable titles of the sacrament proue no transubstantiation nor carnal presence in this sacramēt more then in the other The same Chrysostome vpon Cap. 9. ad Heb. Hom. 16. sheweth howe the bloud of Christ that purged the old sacrifices is the same which is giuen vs in the sacrament of the new testament Non enim corporalis erat mundatio sed spiritualis sanguis spiritualis Quomodo hoc Noune ex corpore manauis Ex corpore quidem sed a spiritu sancto Hoc vos sanguine non Moses sed Christus aspersit per verbum quod dictum est Hic est sanguis noui testamenti in remissionem peccarorum For that was no corporall cleansing but spirituall and it was spirituall bloud Howe so Did it not flowe out of his body It did in deede flowe out of his body but from the holy spirit Not Moses but Christe did sprinkle you with this bloud by that worde which was spoken This is the bloud of the newe testament for the remission of sinnes Thus let Chrysostome expound him selfe touching the mysticall or spirituall bloud of Christe which both was offered in the old sacrifices and nowe feedeth vs in the sacrament if it were in the olde sacrifices naturally present then is it so nowe if the vertue onely was effectuall so is it also to vs and no neede of transubstantiation or carnall presence The sixt Chapter proceedeth in the opening of the vnderstāding of the same text of S. Iohn by Beda and Cyrillus Although Beda our countriman were far out of the compasse of 600. yeres and so vnfitly matched with Cyrillus a Lord of the higher house yet speaketh he nothing for the corporal presence of Christes body in the sacrament but directly against it His words vpon this text of Saint Iohn are these Hunc panem Dominus dedit c. This bread our Lord gaue when he deliuered the ministerie of his body and bloud vnto his disciples when he offered him selfe to his father on the altar of the crosse And where he saith for the life of the world we may not vnderstand it for the elementes but for men that are signified by the name of the worlde In these wordes Beda according to the custome of the olde writers and the doctrine of the Church of Englande in his time and long after calleth the sacrament the mysterie of the body bloud of Christ and not otherwise Yet M. Heskins pythely doth gather that as he calleth the flesh of Christ on the crosse breade and yet it is verie flesh so the fleshe of Christ in the sacrament is called bread yet it is verie flesh Alas this is such a poore begginge of that in question videlicet that the fleshe of Christ is in the sacrament according to his grosse meaning that I am ashamed to heare it Why might he not rather reason thus the fleshe of Christe on the crosse is called bread and yet it is not naturally bread euen so the bread of the sacrament is called flesh yet it is not naturall fleshe It is plaine that breade in that texte of Iohn is taken figuratiuely for spirituall foode and so the flesh and bloud of Christ on the crosse is our food and the same is communicated to our faith in the sacrament Cyrillus in 6. Ioan. by M. Heskins alledged speaketh neuer a worde either of the sacrament or of Christes corporall presence therein Antiquus ille panis c. The old bread was onely a figure an image and a shadowe neither did it giue to the corruptible bodie any thing but a corruptible nutriment for a little time But I am that liuing and quickening breade for euer And the breade which I will giue
ignorance which knoweth not the vertue and dignitie thereof which knoweth not that this bodie and bloud is according to the trueth but receiueth the mysteries and knoweth not the vertue of the mysteries Vnto whome Salomon sayth or rather the spirite which is in him When thou sittest to eat with a Prince attende diligently what things are set before thee He also compelling openly and constraining him that is ignorant to adde a fifth parte For this fifth parte being added maketh vs to vnderstande the diuine mysteries intelligibly Nowe what the fifth parte is the wordes of the Law giuer may teache thee For he sayth he shall add a fifth parte with that he hath eaten And howe can a man adde a fifth parte of that which he hath alreadie eaten and consumed For he biddeth not another thing or from any other where But a fifth parte to be added of it or with it or as the 70. interprete vpon it Then the fifth parte of it vpon it is the worde which was vttered by Christ him selfe vpon the Lordes mysterie For that being added deliuereth and remoueth vs from ignorance as to thinke any thing carnall or earthly of those holie things but decreeth that those thinges shoulde bee taken diuinely spiritually which is properly called the fifth part for the diuine spirite which is in vs and the worde which he deliuered doth sett in order the senses that are in vs and doth not onely bring foorth our taste vnto mysterie but also our hearing sight and touching smelling so that of these things which are verie high we do suspect nothing that is neare to lesse reason or weake vnderstanding This place M. Hesk. noteth that the mysteries are called a most holy thing and a sacrifice We confesse it is a most holy thing a sacrifice of thanksgiuing for so the fathers meant and not a propitiatorie sacrifice Moreouer he noteth that it is called the verie bodie and bloud in verie deede Although the wordes of the author sounde not so roundly yet let that be graunted also what is then the conclusion Marie then haue ye a plaine place for the proclaimer issue ioyned thereupon that no one writer of like auncientie sayth it is not the verie bodie For thè plainesse of the place I wish always that the author may be his own expositor First where he sayth that the fifth part added maketh vs to vnderstand the mysteries intelligibly that is as he vseth the terme spiritually mystically although M. Hesk. translate intelligibiliter easily Secondly where he sayth wee must thinke nothing carnally or earthly of the holy things and that the worde of God decreeth that they should be taken diuinely and spiritually As for the issue it was ioyned tryed in the one and twentieth Chapter of the first booke But wee must heare what Hesychius sayth further Quicunque ergo sanctificata c. Whosoeuer therfore shal eat of the things sanctified by ignorance not knowing their vertue at we haue saide shall adde a fifth parte of it vpon it and giue it to the Priest into the sanctuarie For it behoueth the sanctification of the mysticall sacrifice and the translation or commutation from thinges sensible to things intelligible to be giuen to Christ which is the true Priest that is to graunt and impute to him the miracle of them because that by his power and the worde vttered by him those things that are seene are as surely sanctified as they exceede all sense of the flesh Out of these words M. Hesk. would proue transubstantiation because he saith there is a translation or cōmutation from things sensible to intelligible that is from bread which is perceiued by the senses to the body of Christ which in this manner is not perceiued by senses But M. Hesk. must proue the bodie of Christe to bee no sensible thing but a thing which may be perceiued by vnderstanding only or else his exposition wil not stand for here is a diuision exposition of things sensible intelligible which is a plaine ouerthrow of popish transubstantiatiō carnall presence for that wherunto the things sensible are changed is not a sensible thing as the naturall bodie of Christ is but they are changed into things intelligible ▪ that is which may only by vnderstanding be conceiued so is the spiritual feeding of our soules by faith with the verie body bloud of christ Next Augustin is cited in Ps. 33 a place which hath ben cited answered more then once alreadie Et ferebatur c. And he was carried in his own bāds Brethren how could this be true in a man c. I will remit the reader to the 10. Chap. of this second book where it is answered by Aug. him self in the same exposition Christ caried himself saith Aug. in his hands quodam modo after a certaine manner but not simply Maister Hesk. iangling of an onely figure hath bene often reproued wee make not the sacrament such an onely figure as Dauid might carrie in his handes of him selfe for Dauid could make no sacrament of him selfe but such a figure as is a diuine and heauenly worke to giue in deede that it representeth in signe An other place of Augustine is cyted De Trin. lib. 3. cap. 4. but truncately as he termeth it for he neither alledgeth the heade nor the feete by which the scope of Augustines wordes might be perceiued But the whole sentence is this Si ergo Apostolus Paulus c. If therefore the Apostle Paule although hee did yet carrie the burthen of his body which is corrupted and presseth downe the soule although he did as yet see but in part and in a darke speach desiring to be dissolued and to bee with Christ groning in himself for the adoption wayting for the redēption of his body Could neuerthelesse preach our Lord Iesus Christ by signifying otherwise by his tong otherwise by his Epistle otherwise by the sacrament of his body bloud for neither his tong nor the parchments nor the ynke nor the signifying sounds vttered with his tong nor the signes of the letters written in skinnes do we call the body and bloud of Christ but only that which being taken of the fruits of the earth being consecrated with mysticall prayer we do rightly receiue vnto spiritual health in remembrance of our Lords suffring for vs which when it is brought by the hands of mē to that visible forme it is not sanctified that it shuld be so great a sacramēt but by the spirit of god working inuisibly whē God worketh al these things which in that work are done by corporall motions mouing first the inuisible parts of his ministers either the soules of men or of secret spirits that are subiectes seruing him what maruel is it if also in the creature of heauen earth the sea al the ayre God maketh what he wil both sensible and inuisible things to set forth him selfe in them as he him selfe knoweth it shuld
Ambrose following Vide c. See all those be the Euangelists words vnto these words Take either the bodie or the bloud from thence they be the wordes of christ Note euery thing Who saith he the day before he suffered tooke breade in his holie hands Before it be consecrated it is bread but after the wordes of Christe be come vnto it it is the bodie of christ Finally heare him saying Take ye eat ye all of it this is my bodie And before the wordes of Christ the cuppe is full of wine water after the wordes of Christ haue wrought there is made the bloud which redeemed the people To the like effect be the words taken out of his treatise de oration Dom. Memini c. I remember my saying when I entreated of the sacraments â–ª I told you that before the wordes of Christ that which is offered is called bread when the wordes of Christ are brought forth nowe it is not called bread but it is called his bodie Here M. Hesk. triumpheth in his consecration of the vertue therof But he must remember what Ambrose saith De ijs qui myster initiant Ipse clamat Dominus Iesus c. Our Lord Iesus him selfe doth speake alowde This is my bodie before the blessing of the heauenly wordes it is named another kinde but after the consecration the bodie of Christ is signified And lib. de Sac. 4. Cap. 2. Ergo didicisti c. Then hast thou learned that of the bread is made the bodie of Christ that the wine water is put into the cup but by consecration of the heauenly word it is made his bloud But peraduenture thou sayest I see not the shew of bloud But it hath a similitude For as thou hast receiued the similitude of his death so also thou drinkest the similitude of his precious bloud that there may bee no horror of bloud yet it may worke the price of redemption Here M. Hesk. for all his swelling brags hath not gained one patch of his popish Masse out of the auncient writers for none of them vnderstoode consecration to cause a transsubstantiation of the elements into the naturall bodie of Christe but only a separation of them from the common vse to become the sacraments of the bodie bloud of christ As for the foolish cauil he vseth against protestants refusing to follow the primitiue church for loue liking of innouation is not worthie of any reputation for in al things which thei followed Christ most willingly we folow theÌ„ but where the steps of Christs doctrin are not seene there dare we not follow them although otherwise we like neuer so well of them The sixe thirtieth Chapter declareth what was the intention of the Apostles fathers in about the consecratioÌ„ in the Mass. M. Hesk. will proue that their intention was to transsubstantiate the bread wine into the bodie bloud of christ And first the idol of S. Iames is brought forth on procession in his Liturgie which M. Hesk. had rather call his Masse Miserere c. Haue mercie vpon vs God almightie haue mercie vpoÌ„ vs God our Sauiour haue mercie vpon vs ô God according to thy great mercie send down vpon vs vpoÌ„ these gifts set forth thy most holy spirit the Lord of life which sitteth together with thee god the father the only begotteÌ„ sonne raigning together being consubstantiall coeternall which spake in the law the prophets in thy newe testament which discended in the likenesse of a doue vpon our lord Iesus Christ in the riuer of Iordan abode vpon him which descended vpon thy Apostles in the likenesse of fierie tongue in the parler of the holy glorious Sion in the day of Pentecost send down that thy most holy spirite now also ô lord vpon vs vpon these holie giftes set forth that comming vpoÌ„ theÌ„ with his holie good glorious presence he may saÌ„ctifie make this bread the holy body of thy Christe and this cup the precious bloud of thy Christ that it may be to all that receiue of it vnto forgiuenesse of sinnes and life euerlasting M. Heskins saith he would not haue prayed so earnestly that the holy Ghost might haue sanctified the bread and wine to be onely figures and tokens which they might be without the speciall sanctification of Gods spirite as many things were in the lawe As for only figures and tokens it is a slaunder confuted and denyed a hundreth times alreadie But what a shamelesse beast is he to affirme that the sacraments of the olde lawe which were figures of Christe had no speciall sanctification of the holy Ghost or that baptisme which is a figure of the bloud of Christ washing our souls may be a sacrament without the speciall sanctification of Gods spirite you see howe impudently he wresteth and wringeth the wordes of this Liturgie which if it were graunted vnto them to be authenticall yet hitherto maketh it nothing in the world for him But let vs heare how S. Clement came to the altar Rogamus vt mittere digneris c. We pray thee that thou wouldest vouchsafe to send thy holy spirite vpon this sacrifice a witnesse of the passions of our Lord Iesus Christ that he may make this breade the body of thy Christ and this cup the bloud of thy Christ. Here saith M. Heskins his intent was that the bread and wine should be made the body bloude of christ And so they be to them that receiue worthily But M. Heskins will not see that he calleth the bread and wine a sacrifice before it is made the body and bloud of Christ by which it is plaine that this Clemens intended not to offer Christes body in sacrifice as the Papistes pretend to do S. Basil in his Liturgie hath the same intention in consecration Te postulamus c. We pray and besech thee ô most holy of al holies that by thy wel pleasing goodness thy holy spirit may come vpon vs and vpon these proposed gifts to blesse and sanctifie them to shew this bread to be the very honourable body of our Lorde God Sauiour Iesus Christ and that which is in the cup to be the very bloud of our Lord god sauiour Iesus Christ which was shed for the life of the world Of this praier M. Hes. inferreth that Basil by the sanctification of the holy ghost beleeued the bread and wine to be made Christes body bloud he meaneth corporally traÌ„substantially But that is most false for this praier is vsed in that liturgie after the words of consecration when by the Popish doctrine the body and bloud of Christe must needes be present imediatly after the last sillable vm in hoc est corpuâ— meâ—um pronounced Wherefore seeing the Author of this Liturgie after the words of coÌ„secration pronounced praieth that God will sanctifie the breade and wine by his spirite and make it the body and bloud of
to doe that which Christ commanded to be done and to receiue that which he deliuered vs to be receiued if the particular explication of our faith will not satisfie M. Hes. at least let him after his owne Popish Diuinitie holde vs excused for our implicite faith or if his own principles can hold him no longer then he listeth let him giue vs leaue to esteeme none otherwise of them then he giueth vs example to do The seuen and thirtieth Chapter treateth of the oblation and sacrifice of the Masse as it was vsed of the Apostles and Fathers When not one of the Apostles or Euangelistes make one word mention either of Masse or sacrifice therein M. Heskins taketh vpon him much more then al the Papistes in the world can proue Concerning the Fathers as they vse the terme of sacrifice so I haue often shewed that they meane a sacrifice of thankesgiuing and not of propitiation or else they vse the name of sacrifice vnproperly for a memorial of the onely sacrifice of Christ which he once offered neuer to be repeated Neither do any of these Liturgies which M. Heskins calleth Masses though they be falsly ascribed to Saint Iames Saint Clement Saint Basil Saint Chrysostome c. shewe any other thing but manifestly the same that I haue saide First that which is falsly ascribed to Saint Iames in these wordes Memores c. Therefore we sinners being mindfull of his quickening passions of his healthfull crosse and death his buriall and resurrection from death the third day of his ascension into heauen and sitting at the right hand of thee ô God the father and of his second glorious and fearefull comming when he shall come with glory to iudge the quicke and the dead when he shall render to euery one according to his workes we offer vnto thee ô Lord this reuerend vnbloudie sacrifice praying that thou wilt not deale with vs according to our sinnes No reasonable man can vnderstand here any other but a sacrifice of thankesgiuing or prayer or a memoriall of the sacrifice of christ For he saith not we offer the body and bloud of Christe but being mindfull of his sufferings c. we offer this reuerend and vnbloudy sacrifice for such is the sacrifice of prayer and thankesgiuing The like and more plaine is that which is ascribed to Clemens by Nicholas Methon Memores igitur Therefore being mindfull of his passion death and resurrection returning into heauen and his second comming in which he shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead and to render to euery man according to his workes we offer vnto thee our king and God according to his institution this bread and this cup giuing thankes vnto thee by him that thou hast vouchsafed vs to stand before thee and to sacrifice vnto thee This is so plaine against M. Heskins for the oblation of Christes body and bloud c. that he is enforced to flee to shamefull petitions of principles the end of which is that this bread is no bread this cup is no cup but as Christe called bread in the 6. of Iohn and S. Paule in the 1. Cor. 10. 11. in exposition whereof lyeth all the controuersie That Liturgie which is intituled to S. Basil is yet more plaine for a spirituall oblation of thankesgiuing Memores ergo c. Therefore being mindfull ô Lord of his healthsome passions of his quickening crosse three dayes buriall resurrection from death ascension into heauen sitting at thy right hand ô God the father and of his glorious and terrible second presence we offer vnto thee tua ex tuis thy giftes of thy creatures M. Heskins saith he abhorreth not from the name of sacrifice as we do but he falsly belyeth vs for if he will looke in our Liturgie or communion booke he shall finde that we also offer a sacrifice of thankesgiuing euen our selues our soules and bodies as the Apostle exhorteth vs to be a holy liuely and acceptable sacrifice to god But he will not remember that the sacrifice he speaketh of is not the body and bloud of Christe but tua ex tuis thy creatures of thy giftes or thy gifts of thy creatures namely the bread and wine which also after consecration he prayeth to be sanctified by Gods holy spirite but the body of Christe hath no neede of such sanctification Secondly he noteth not that his Basil maketh but two presences of Christe in the worlde the first when hee liued in humilitie in the the world the second which shall be terrible and glorious by which he doth manifestly exclude the third imagined presence of Christ in the sacrament To the same effect prayeth the Priest in the other Liturgie ascribed to Chrysostome Memores c. Therefore being mindfull of this wholesome commaundement and of all those things which are done for vs of his crosse buriall resurrection ascension into heauen sitting at the right hand of his second and glorious comming againe we offer vnto thee tua ex tuis thy giftes of thy creatures Maister Heskins saith he will not seeke the deapth of this matter but only declare that al these fathers did offer sacrifice In which words he mocketh his readers egregiously whereas he should proue that they offered the body and bloud of Christe to be a propitiatorie sacrifice and that he proueth neuer a whit Nowe that the meaning of that Liturgie was not to offer Christ in sacrifice this prayer therein vsed before the words of coÌ„secration as they terme it doth sufficieÌ„tly declare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Lord receiue this sacrifice vnto thine heauenly altar So that it is manifest they called the bread wine a sacrifice not the body bloud of christ The like is that of Ambrose The Priest saith Therefore being mindfull of his most glorious passion resurrection from death and ascension into heauen we offer vnto thee this vndefiled sacrifice this reasonable sacrifice this vnbloudy sacrifice this holy bread and cup of eternall life This vndefiled sacrifice saith M. Heskins must needes be the body and bloud of Christe for else there is nothing vndefiled that a man can offer But why may it not be as Ambrose calleth it here the holy bread and cup of the communion or as he calleth it a little before in the same place the figure of the body bloud of Christ For the bread and the wine which vnproperly he calleth a sacrifice in steede of a memoriall of a sacrifice in that they be the holy sacraments of Christes body and bloud are holy vndefiled and the foode of eternal life The same Ambrose called the soule of his brother an innocent sacrifice and offered the same to God in his prayer De obiâ—â— fratris c. To conclude not one of all these Liturgies no not the Canon of the Masse it selfe saith that the body of Christe is the sacrifice that they do offer or that they offer a propitiatorie sacrifice or that they offer any other but a
our Lord vnworthily shal be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of our Lorde For when the Apostle saide this he spake it of them which receiued the bodie of our Lord vndiscreetly and negligently as they wold do any other meat Whersoeuer he borowed these words they are not to be found in that treatise of Aug. which he citeth But if they be August in any place they haue none other sense then before is expressed that such men are said to eate the bodie of Christ which eate the sacrament therof whiche in some manner of speache is called the body of christ The words that I find in Augustine sounding any thing like are these Et sancta possunt obesse in bonis enim sancta ad salutem insunt in malis ad iudicium Certè enim fratres nouimus quid accipiamus vtique sanctum est quod accipimus nemo dicit non esse sanctum Et quid ait Apostolus Qui autem manducat bibit indignè iudicium sibi manducat bibit Non ait quia illa res mala est sed quod ille malus malè accipiendo ad iudicium accipit bonum quod accipit Non enim mala buccella erat quae tradita est Iudae à Domino Absit medicus non daret venenum Salutem medicus dedit sed indignè accipiendo ad perniciem accepit Euen holy things may hurte For in good men holy things are vnto saluation in euill men vnto condemnation For surely brethren we know what we receiue and no man sayeth that it is not holy And what sayeth the Apostle He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh his owne condemnation He sayeth it not because that thing is euill but because that euill man by euill receiuing receiueth vnto condemnation that good thing which he receiueth For the morsell was not euill which was deliuered by our Lorde to Iudas God forbidde the Phisition woulde not giue poyson the Phisition gaue health but hee by receiuing vnwoorthily receiued to his destruction To this iudgement of Augustine wee doe subscribe that wicked men receiue a holye thing namely the sacrament for prophaning whereof they heape vp damnation to them selues besides their other sinnes But that the naturall bodie of Christe voyde of his quickening spirite entreth into the mouth of any man wee doe vtterly denye and of the same iudgement is Augustine as we haue shewed in this Chapter in many other places The nine and fourtieth Chapter continueth the same exposition by Isychius and Sedulius In the beginning of this Chapter by a saying of Augustine hee exhorteth vs to heare the doctoures of the Catholike church affirming that he hath alreadie brought sixe plainely expounding this texte of the bodie of Christ and more will bring hereafter whereas the proclaimer required but onely one But what trueth is in his affirmation the reader I doubt not will be able to discerne that is not blinded with affection Isichyus is cited in Leuit. Cap. 26. Propter quod c. Wherefore let vs feare his holie place that we neither defile our bodie nor rashly come to the bodie of Christe in the which is all sanctification For in him abydeth the fullnesse of the godhead without diligent examination of our selues but rather let vs examine our selues remembring him that sayde Whosoeuer shall eate the breade or drinke the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthily shal be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lorde Because Maister Heskins knoweth not what to gather out of these wordes with any shewe of likelyhood to mainteine his cause he runneth into another matter altogether impertinent and needelesse to shewe out of Theophylact how the fullnesse of the Godhead doth dwell in Christe At length he commeth to ridiculous questions why should he dehort wicked men from eating the bodie of Christ if they cannot eat it at all As though their presumption may not bee condemned which cannot attaine their purpose Why shoulde wicked men bee dehorted from seeking the ouerthrowe of Christe and his church seeing it is impossible for them to preuayle either against the one or the other yet Maister Heskins thinketh him selfe wittie when he sayeth It were strange to persuade a man not to pull downe heauen or to eat the starres because it is vaine to moue men not to doe that which is impossible to be done But because Maister Heskins is so angrie with a peece of breade in the sacrament let him heare what the same Hesychius or as he calleth him Isichius writeth in Leuitic lib. 2. Cap. ◠Propterea carnes cum panibus comedi praecipient vt nos intelligeremus illud ab eo mysterium dici quod simul panis est caro Therefore commaunding the flesh to bee eaten with the breade that wee might vnderstande that he spake of that mysterie which is both bread and fleshe together You see that Hesychius acknowledged breade to bee in the mysterie naturallye as the fleshe of Christe is spiritually Nowe let vs heare Sedulius Accipite c. Take ye this is my body As though Paule had sayed take heede ye eate not that bodie vnworthily seeing it is the bodie of Christe You shall eate this vnworthily if you shame the poore and if you eate any meate before the spirituall meate and the supper of the Lorde Here againe he noteth that the bodie of Christ may be receiued of vnworthie persons hee meaneth wicked persons for otherwise all men are vnworthie of it but no such thing can followe of the wordes of Sedulius both because hee speaketh of receiuing the sacrament which after a certeine manner is the bodie of Christe also because he speaketh not of wicked persons and reprobates but of faithfull persones offenders and that not in greate matters namely in shaming the poore with their plentifull feastes and eating bodily meate before they receiue the Lordes supper This place is cited before lib. 2. Cap. 55. The argument that wee bring of the inseparable coniunction of Christe with his spirite he sayeth is vaine for though Christe bee neuer disioyned from his spirite yet his spirite is not alwayes effectuall which is as absurde as the other to saye that the quickening spirite of Christe together with his bodye is in the wicked and worketh not life But hee weeneth Cyprian shall stande with him whose wordes he citeth In Sermone de Coena Sacramenta quidem quantum in se est c. The sacraments truely as concerning them selues cannot be without their proper vertue Neither doeth the Diuine maiestie by any meanes absent it selfe from the mysteries But although the sacraments doe suffer them selues to bee taken or touched by vnworthie persons yet cannot those be partakers of the spirite whose infidelitie or vnworthinesse gaynsayeth so great holinesse And therefore those giftes are to some the sauour of life vnto life vnto some the sauour of death vnto death For it is altogether meete that the contemners of grace should be depriued of so great a benefite
prelates in their lyfe yet in this accompt of Master Heskins they are burgesses of the lower house and liued much about a time To fill vp the chapter he citeth certaine miracles reported by Sainte Cyprian Sermone 5. De lapsis to shewe howe God punisheth the vnworthie receiuing of the sacrament although they doe not all shewe it for the first example is of an infante that coulde not brooke the sacramentall wyne after it had tasted of breade and wine offred to Idolles where the negligence of the parentes was rather punished then the vnworthinesse of the child The whole story is at large set downe in the last chapiter of the second booke The seconde example is of a woman who receiuinge vnworthily was striken with sodaine death The third of a woman who kept the sacrament in her coffer and when she woulde with vnworthie handes open the coffer in which was the holy thing of the Lorde there sprange out a fire by which she was so terryfied that she durst not touche it A iust punishment for her reseruing of that which should haue bene receiued The fourth miracle is of a man who presuming to receiue the sacrament vnworthily coulde neuer eate the holy thing of God nor handle it For when he had opened his hand he sawe nothing in it but ashes This is a marueilous thing saith Master Heskins Whereby is declared that God is not willing that his holy sacrament shoulde be receiued of a filthie sinner for so muche as sodeinly it pleaseth him to chaunge it into ashes he himselfe departinge from it In deede this is a straunge and miraculous transubstantiation But if I might be so bolde to aske M. Heskins what is that which is chaunged if there be no bread in the sacrament God he saieth is departed from it there remaineth the aceidentes onely of breade and wine and so belike the accidentes are chaunged into ashes O monstrous mutation But why doeth not M. Hes. gather by this miracle that if the sacrament could not be receiued of a wicked man much lesse the body of Christ and so doeth Cyprian gather of it Documento vnius ostensum est Dominum recedere cum negatur nec immerentibus prodesse ad salutem quod sumitur cum gratia salutaris in cinerem sanctitate fugiente mutetur By example of this one it is shewed that the Lorde doeth depart when he is denyed neither doeth that which is receiued profit to saluation the vnworthie persons seeinge the wholsome giftes the holinesse departing from it is chaunged into ashes Cyprian gathereth by the chaunge of the outwarde sacramente before it was receyued that Christ departeth from them that denye him and is not receyued at all But M. Hes. would learne forsoth what one thing is in the sacrament receiued that profiteth hurteth he aunswereth it cānot be the bread wine for they profit alike to al men therfore it must needes be the body of Christ a wholsome conlusion by whiche the bodye of Christe is made a hurtefull thing but if it please him to vnderstand our aunswere we deny that there is any thing included in the bread or wine that either profiteth or hurteth to saluation It is the grace and spirite of God which worketh as well by this sacrament our spirituall nourishing as by baptisme our spirituall regeneration And that which hurteth the wicked man is in him selfe and not in the sacrament euen his owne wickednesse and detestable presumption to defile the holy sacraments of god Wherefore it is diuelish and blasphemous that M. Heskins affirmeth the body of Christ to be hurtful to any bicause the vnworthy receiuing of the sacrament hurteth him that receiueth by his owne acte and not by any thing that is receiued The nine and fiftieth Chapter treateth of these wordes of Saint Paul. We are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones by Irenaeus and Hilarius Irenaeus is cited Lib. 5. Quomodo carnem negant esse capacem c. Howe doe they deny that the flesh is able to receiue the gift of God that is eternall life which is nourished with the bloud and body of Christ and is made a member of him euen as the Apostle saith in that Epistle which is to the Ephesians Bicause we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones speaking this not of any spirituall and inuisible man for a spirite hath neither flesh nor bones but of that disposition which is after the nature of man which consisteth of flesh and sinewes and bones which is nourished of the cup which is his bloud and is increased of the bread which is his body That both our bodies and soules are nourished vnto eternall life by eating and drinking the body and bloud of Christe we doe most willingly confesse and acknowledge But withall we affirme that as our bodyes are not naturally nourished and increased with the body of Christ but spiritually after a diuine manner so onely spiritually and after a diuine manner we doe eate and drinke the body and bloud of Christ and not after a carnall naturall or papisticall manner And this is the plaine sense and meaning of Irenaeus his wordes As our bodyes are naturally nourished and increased with the bread and wine of the sacrament so are our bodyes and soules spiritually nourished and increased vnto eternall life For M. Heskins him selfe denyeth that our bodyes are naturally nourished and increased with the body and bloud of Christ when he saith The flesh of Christ is not turned into our flesh which must needes be if we vnderstand that Irenaeus saith our flesh is nourished and increased of the body of Christ but he saith of the bread which is his body and of the cup which is his bloud our flesh is nourished and increased Therefore there is naturall and very bread in the sacrament for our flesh can not be nourished and increased by accidentes euen as certainely as there is the body and bloud of Christe after a spirituall manner dispensed vnto the faithfull which are the members of Christ flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone Therefore also the wicked receiue not the body and bloud of Christe bicause they are no members of his body That I haue not in this interpretation varied from the mynde of Irenaeus his plaine words shall testifie Lib. 4. Cap. 34. Quemadmodum enim qui est à terra panis percipiens vocationem Dei iam non communis est sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena coelesti sic corpora nostra percipientia Eucharistiam iam non sunt corruptibilia spem resurrectionis habentia Euen as that bread which is of the earth receiuing the calling of God is not now comon bread but the Eucharistie or sacrament of thankesgiuing consisting of two thinges an earthly thing and an heauenly thing so also our bodyes receiuing the Eucharistie are not nowe corruptible hauing the hope of resurrection The place that Maister Heskins citeth out
Sander perhaps would insinuate And the hystorie of the Church is described by Eusebius Socrates Theodore c. by the doctrine vttered in preaching writings and consent in councels and doings and sufferings of the Elders of the Churches and not altogether or cheefely by their knowen gouernement as Maister Sander affirmeth As for example Eusebius sheweth the doctrine of Clement out of his writing for the allowance of marriage who affirmeth that the Apostles were married begot children Lib. 3. Cap. 30. Socrates sheweth that Spiridion a Bishop of Cypres in time of his Bishopricke of great humilitie kept sheepe Lib. 4. Cap. 12. Sozomenus saith he had a wife and children and sheweth his iudgement for eating flesh on a fasting day accounting him no Christian that would refuse it Lib. 1. Cap 11. Finally although some Churches haue ben known by their Pastors and Bishops yet haue there bene infinite Churches known to be in the worlde whose Bishops Pastours are altogether vnknowen And although some heretical and Schismatical companies haue bene knowen by their heades yet not all for the Acephali were so called because they had no head the Anthropomorphites also were rustical Monkes or Eremites in Aegypt vnder no head of their owne but the Bishop of Alexandria which was a Catholike Niceph. Lib. 13. Cap 10. 8 Although the Churche of Christ ceassed not at the end of the first fiue or sixe hundreth yeares nor the glory of Christes kingdome was euer darkened yet a greate number of the Bishops and pastors of the visible Church began then to be dimme and some altogether darke because they lighted not their candels at the word of God the onely true light shyning in the darke but declined to the inuentions of men and doctrine of diuels according to the prophesie of Saint Paule 2. Thess. 2. of the apostasie and departing from the faith 1. Tim. 4. towarde the comming reuelation of Antichrist Neither is it true that M. Sander saith that after the first 600. yeares the Church was spread into mo countries then it was before but the contrarie For Mahomet soone after peruerted the greatest parte of the worlde whereas Affrica long before was ouerrunne and Christianitie spoyled by the Vandales which were either Heathens or Arrians Notwithstanding some small countries haue beene since that time turned to the Christian profession And as it is true that Pastors and Doctors must still be to the end of the worlde in the Church and Christ neuer forsaketh the same so is it false that Popish Bishops Priestes which either were ignorant or altogether negligent in feeding and teaching the Churche with the foode and doctrine of Gods worde whereof Saint Paule spake Ephesi 4. or taught the doctrine of Diuels in steede thereof be those Pastours and Doctours by whome the preaching of the Gospell is continued though they sitte in the same places where sometime the true teachers satt euen as Antichrist their head sitteth in the Temple of GOD which is the proper place of Christe Neither is the credite of such late writers as account them for successors of the Apostles and godly pastours and teachers sufficient to authorise them for such in deed when their whole life and doctrine is contrarie to the writings of the Apostles and those auncient godly Pastors Doctors 9 We say not that the Church of Christ was knowen for the first â—00 yeres after Christ only or chiefely by the Bishops Pastors therof but by their doctrine agreable to the word of god And therefore it is sufficient ground for vs to deny the later rout that professeth not the same doctrine to be the church of christ The succession of persons or places without the continuance of the same true doctrine can no more defende the Pope poperie then it could defend Caiphas Sadduceisme For Caiphas a Sadducei which denyed the resurrection coulde more certeinly declare his personall and locall successioÌ„ from Aaron then the Pope can from Peter 10 I haue proued before that it is false which Master Sander againe sayeth to be true that Eusebius and other writers point foorth the church of 500. yeres onely or chiefely by Bishops which ruled in Rome Antioche Alexandria c. The doctrine actes of those Bishops agreeable to the scriptures is their description not their personall or locall succession as it was accompted in the latter times when they had nothing else to commende their counterfet Bishops being in life and doctrine contrarie to the worde of God the testimonie of the primitiue church And where he sayeth noting in the margent August Ep. 165. that in olde time they were knowen to be heretikes which departed from the knowen companie of Bishops Pastors agreeing in one faith c. it is verie true but then this faith was proued to be true not onely by successions of Bishops but by the holye scriptures as the same Augustine sayeth in the same place Quanquam nos non tam de istis documentis praesumamus quà m de scripturis sanctis Although wee do not presume so much of those documentes as of the holie scriptures To conclude all practises and councels that are contrary to the holie Scriptures were then refused euen as they be nowe Cyprian refused the practise of ministring the communion with water because it was contrarie to the scripture Augustine refused the practise of Cyprian and the Councell of Carthage â–ª for rebaptizing them that were baptized by heretikes and for the same cause our church refuseth the Masse the Laterane and the Tridentin councels without daunger of schisme or heresie 11 The vniuersall church is a spiritual collection of many members into one bodie whereof Christe is the onely head both in heauen and earth as the Apostle sayeth Eph. 3. Cor. 15. The vnitie hereof is mainteyned by following the direction of his worde and his holye spirite The order of particuler churches is mainteined by the seuerall gouernement of them But their whole church although it be like an armie of men well sett in arraye yet can it haue no one chiefe Capteine in earth to direct it but hee that is omnipotent and fitteth in heauen not onely to ouerlooke it but to rule and order it For no mortall man can looke into all places knowe all cases prouide against all mischiefes nor giue ayde in all dangers 12 Therefore Peter was none such and although Pascere be both to feede and rule yet it is to rule like a Shepeheard and not like an Emperour Neither were the sheepe by Christe committed to Peter more then to the other because hee loued more then the other but Peter was charged as hee woulde by his forwardnesse shewe more zeale and loue then the rest so to employe the same to the feeding of Christes flocke And whereas Maister Sanders quoteth Chrysostome in Ioan Hom. 87. I knowe not wherefore except it were to shewe the prerogatiue of Peter aboue the rest You shall heare what his iudgement was
might not be ioyned really But M. Heskins a spirite is not contrarie to a thing except you will say it is nothing but to a body and therefore spiritually and bodily are opposite not spiritually and really For we are ioyned to Christe spiritually and yet really so that Christ dwelleth in vs by his spirite through faith but not bodily so in the sacrament we eate the body of Christ really that is in deede vnfeignedly but yet in a spirituall kinde of eating and not carnally or corporally But M. Heskins proceeding affirmeth that We are spiritually ioyned to Christ by charitie and faith and therefore incorporated into his mysticall body but really or substantially we are ioyned to him when by eating his very substantiall flesh in the sacrament THE SVBSTANCE OF OVR FLESH IS TVRNED INTO THE SVBSTAVNCE OF HIS FLESH and thereby so ioyned to him as we are made one flesh with him c. Note here good reader for thy learning that these wordes printed by M. Heskins in another letter that they might be seene as a speciall paradoxe ▪ teach thee a newe kinde of transubstantiation For he is not content to haue the breade turned into the body of Christe without all type or figure really substantially corporally c. but as really corporally and substantially he affirmeth that the substance of our flesh is turned into the substance of the flesh of Christ. O monstruous paradox as euer any was heard since the beginning of the world After this he noteth that Christes flesh is not digested in vs as other meates are which is needlesse to note if our fleshe be digested or turned into his adding this reason that As it is a celestiall meate beeing now a glorified bodie so it draweth vs vp to it conuerting and turning vs into it according to the nature of a celestiall thing Howe vayne this reason is by whiche hee would auoyde the digestion and proue his new transubstantiation and conuersion appeareth by this that the body of Christe in the Sacrament was as effectuall while hee liued in his passible bodie on earth in which he instituted this sacrament as it is nowe beeing a glorified bodie in heauen And whereas hee chargeth I knowe not what Stercoranites of our time to affirme that the fleshe of Christ passeth through the bodie as other meates I thinke verilie he lyeth most impudently For I neuer heard or read of any that so affirmed Although I woulde wishe men to speake reuerently of so high mysteries yet the importunitie of the Papistes with their matter of transubstantiation enforceth them not to affirme of them selues but to report what they reade in the fathers concerning the breade beeing the terrestriall or outwarde parte of the Sacrament that it is digested passeth through as all other naturall meates do whereof Origen writeth in Math. Chap. 15. Quod si quicquid ingreditur in os in ventrem abit in sesession eijcitur ille cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Deipérque obsecrationem iuxta id quod habet materiale abit in sesessū eijcitur If what soeuer entereth into the mouth goeth into the bellie and is cast foorth into the draught euen that meate also which is sanctified by the worde of God and by prayer after that which it hath materiall goeth and is cast foorth into the draught This douteth not Origen to speake of the materiall parte of the Sacrament by which it is manifest that he knew no transubstantiation The cheefe thing that M. Heskins vrgeth vs to marke is that Whereas the Sacramentes woulde haue onely a spirituall receiuing this holy father teacheth that we are framed to Christ not onely spiritually by loue which may bee without receiuing of meate but re ipsa in deede by receyuing of meate But I praye you M. Heskins where saith Chrisostom that our coniunction vnto Christ is not onely spirituall In deede he saide not onely by loue but in deede but he opposeth not spiritually and really as you doe And where you vrge that this coniunction is by meate and this meate is his bodie and therevppon conclude that it is a corporall coniunction and Christ is ioyned corporally I aunswere that if Chrysostom may expound himselfe this meate and this body is a spirituall meate therefore a spirituall coniunction and Christ is eaten spiritually De prod Iud. Nemo sit Iudas in mensa hoc sacrificium cibus spiritualis est Nam sicut corporalis cibus c. Let no man be Iudas in this table this sacrifice is a spirituall meate For as corporall meat when it findeth a bellie possessed with humors contrarie to it it hurteth and offendeth more and helpeth nothing at all euen so this spirituall meate if it finde any man polluted with wickednes it destroyeth him the more not of it owne nature ▪ but through the fault of him that receiueth it Thus far Chrysostome for the meate to bee spirituall Finally the last obseruation that Christ doth giue vs in the sacrament is the same fleshe by which he was ioyned vnto vs therefore his verie substantiall body and bloude auayleth him nothing For wee contende not of the substance of the thing that is giuen but of the manner of the giuing the thing is the verie body and bloude of Christ but not after a corporall or naturall manner but after a spirituall and diuine maner or as the olde writers haue saide Modo ineffabili after an vnspeakeable manner as so many figuratiue speaches that are spoken therof do declare whiche to expound literally or grāmatically were little better then extreme madnesse The other place which you adde out of Ho. 24. in 10.1 Cor. helpe them nothing at all that Christ hath giuen vs his flesh c. That this body the wisemen did reuerence in the māger You might haue added out of the same place Quod est in calice id est quod a latere fluxit that which is in the cuppe is the same that flowed out of his side and thereof we are partakers But that all these are figuratiue speaches it is manifest by this interrogation that followeth in the same homilie Quid enim appello inquit communicationem id ipsum corpus sumus Quid significat panis corpus Christi Quid autem fiunt qui accipiunt corpus Christs non multa sed vnum corpus For what do I cal it saith he a participation We are the selfe same bodie What signifieth the bread The bodie of christ And what are they made which receiue the bodie of Christ Not many bodies but one body And in the same homilie Sed quare Addit quem frangimus hoc in Eucharistia videre licet in cruce autem minimè sed omnino contra Os enim eius non conteretur Sed quod in cruce passus nō est id in oblatione patitur propter te frangi permittit But why doth he adde speaking of the breade which wee breake that you may see in the sacrament of thankesgiuing but not on the
the 58. verse he concludeth and sayeth plainly that it is the same breade that came downe from heauen and that who so eateth of this breade shall liue eternally Secondly that the promise of giuing his flesh is not to be restrayned to the giuing of the sacrament his wordes are plaine that he will giue his fleshe for the life of the worlde which all true Christians will acknowledge to haue beene perfourmed in the sacrifice of his death and not at his last supper Finally that his flesh must not bee separated from his spirit nor his spirit from his flesh he doth as plainly teach vs when he affirmeth that it is the spirite that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing that except we eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud we haue no life in vs For neither the flesh profiteth but as it is made quickening by the spirite neither do we participate the life of his spirite but as it is communicated vnto vs by his fleshe by which we are made fleshe of his fleshe and bone of his bone which holie mysterie is liuely represented vnto vs in the blessed sacrament And this your aduersaries confesse Maister Heskins not denying as you charge them that any one worde of that Chapter perteineth to the sacrament but affirming the sacrament to bee a seale of the doctrine which is deliuered in that Chapter and not otherwise The iudgement of the olde writers consonant to this vnderstanding shall followe afterwarde in confutation of M. Heskins vngodly and hereticall distinction not of the two natures in Christ but of participation of the one without the other which hee maketh by his two last breades The thirde Chapter proueth by the doctours that the sixt of S. Iohn speaketh as well of the bread Christes fleshe in the sacrament as of the bread his godhead Chrysostom is alledged in Ioan 6. Hom. 44. Iam in mysteriorum c. Nowe will he come to the setting forth of the mysteryes and first of his godhead he sayeth thus I am the breade of life this was not spoken of his bodie of which about the ende he sayeth The breade which I will giue is my flesh but as yet of his godhead for that is bread because of God the worde euen as this bread because of the spirite comming to it is made heauenly breade Maister Heskins asketh if we do not here plainely see a distinction of breades I answere no forsooth but a distinction of two natures in one breade Againe he asketh Doth not nowe the sixt of S. Iohn speake of the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament I aunswere that no such thing appeareth by these wordes of Chrysostome otherwise then as the sacrament is a liuely representation of that his bodie which he gaue for the life of the world And that Chrysostome meaneth not to diuide Christe into two breades as M. Heskins doth he teacheth speaking of the same mysterie of his coniunction with vs by his fleshe Hom. 45. Vester ego frater esse volui communicaui carnem propter vos sanguinem per quae vobis coniunctus sum ea rursus vobis exhibui I would be your brother and so I tooke parte of fleshe and bloud for you and the same things I haue giuen you againe by which I was ioyned vnto you So that not the godhead of Christ alone nor his flesh alone is giuen vs as two breades but Christ by his flesh is ioyned vnto vs as one bread of life Let vs nowe see what S. Augustine sayeth who expounding the same text writeth thus Our Lorde determineth consequently howe he calleth him selfe bread not onely after his godhead which feedeth all things but also after his humaine nature which is assumpted of the worde of God when he sayeth afterwarde And the bread which I will giue is my flesh c. Once againe M. Heskins asketh whether Augustine teach not a plaine difference of the bread of the Godhead of Christe and the bread of his manhood And once againe I aunswer not so but he teacheth directly the contratie namely Christe God and man to be one breade and not two breades And that the doctrine of this Chapter is not to be restrained vnto the sacrament the same Augustine in the same place teacheth abundantly while hee maketh no mention of the Lordes supper vntill he come to the ende and then sheweth that the mysterie of this fleshe and bloud is represented in the supper when it is celebrated of the Church in remembrance of his death passiō Huius rei sacramentum id est vnitatis corporis sanguinis Christi alicubi quotidie alicubi certis interuallis dierum in Dominica mensa praeparatur de mensa Dominica sumitur quibusdam ad vitam quibusdam ad exitium Res verò ipsa cuius sacramentum est omni homini ad vitam nulli ad exitium quicunque eius particeps fuerit The sacrament of this thing that is of the vnitie of the bodie and bloud of Christ in some places euery day in other some at certeine space of dayes betweene is prepared in the Lordes table and is taken at the Lordes table of some vnto life of some vnto to destruction But the thing it selfe whose sacrament it is to all men is to life and to no man for destruction whosoeuer shal be partaker thereof Note here also the distinction betweene the sacrament and the thing wherof it is a sacrament and that the sacrament may be receiued to destruction but not the thing or matter of the sacrament which is the bodie and bloud of Christ. To these Barones he wil ioyne two Burgesses and the first shal be Theophylact one of them which he sayeth is well towarde a thousand yeare olde Hee woulde fayne get him credite by his antiquitie but he ouer reacheth too farre to make him so auncient which cometh nerer to fiue hundred then to a thousande yeares But let vs consider his speache in 6 Ioan. he writeth thus Manifestè c. He speaketh manifestly in this place of the communion of his bodie For the bread sayeth he which I will giue is my flesh which I wil giue for the life of the world And shewing his power that not as a seruant nor as one lesse them his father he should be crucified but voluntarily he sayeth I will giue my flesh for the life of the world Note sayth M. Hesk. that Christ spake manifestly of the communion of his bodie Who doubteth or denyeth that but that he spake not of the communion of his bodie which we receiue in the sacramēt Note saye I that Theophylact speaketh manifestly of his crucifying and nor of the communion in the sacrament After this he interlaceth a fond excourse of the authoritie of the later writers whome he affirmeth and wee confesse to haue written plainly of his side whereas hee sayeth the olde writers did write obscurely and then he taxeth Bullinger for alledging Zwinglius whome he slaundereth to haue
afterward falsely ascribed to Ambrose haue the same interpretation The other place vpon the 38. Psalme differeth not in sense That Christ is offered on earth when his bodie is offered For he speaketh but of a remembrance or commemoration of the sacrifice of Christe euen as Chrysostome and as he him selfe teacheth lib. 4. Chap. 5. de Sacram The wordes of the Priest in the celebration Fac nobis inquit haenc oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi Make sayeth he this oblation vnto vs ascribed reasonable acceptable which thing is the figure of the bodie and bloud of our Lorde Iesus Christ. This was the Priest wont to say in the celebration of the supper in Saint Ambrose time And againe Chap. 6. Ergo memores gloriosissimae eius passionis ab inferis resurrectionis in Caelum ascensionis offerimus tibi hanc immaculatam hostiam rationabilem hostiam incruentam hostiam hunc panem sanctum calicem vitae aeternae c. Therefore being mindfull of his most glorious passion and resurrection from hell and ascention into heauen we offer vnto thee this vndefiled sacrifice this reasonable sacrifice this vnbloudie sacrifice this holie bread and cup of aeternall life Wee see therefore that the sacrifice was a remembrance and thanksgiuing for the onely true sacrifice of Christ once offered by him selfe for all To conclude because I will omitt Bernard a late writer not to be heard in this controuersie Chrysostome in his booke de Sacerdotio lib. 3. speaketh not contrarie to him selfe in other places saying O miracle O the goodnesse of God he that sitteth aboue with his father in the same point of time is handled with the handes of all and deliuereth himselfe to them that will receiue him and imbrace him Wherefore this hyperbolical exclamation proueth no more that Christes bodie is both in heauen on earth then these words of his proue that our bodies are both in heauen earth ad Pop. Antioch Hom. 55. Morduca me dixi bibe me te sarsum habeo deorsum tibi connector I sayde eate me drinke mee I haue thee both aboue and am knitt to thee also beneath Hitherto therefore nothing is brought to proue that Christes bodie may be in more places then one The eleuenth Chapter proueth that as two bodies may be in one place so the bodie of Christ being one may be in diuerse places M. Heskins in this Chapter like a monsterous Gyant cryeth open battel against naturall Philosophie reason and thinketh he hath a sure shield to fight vnder the omnipotencie of god But for as much as the lawe of nature is the lawe and ordinance of God he doeth nothing else but set the power of God against his will and decree in making whereof did concurre his power wisdome and goodnesse God hath decreede that one body can be but in one place at one time and that two bodies cannot occupie one proper place at once nor one body without comixtion of partes be in another bodye And therefore both Cranmer and Oecolampadius haue truely sayed that it is vnpossible those thinges should be otherwise then God hath decreed them Now riseth vp this Gargantua and will proue by scripture that one bodie may be in another and two bodies in one place alledgeth the text Ioan 20. that Iesus came the dores being shutt and stoode in the middest of them and saide peace be with you and this being testifyed for a miraculous comming in of Christ proueth that he so comming in passed through dore or wall as his pleasure was to do Although the wordes of the texte 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the dores were shutt doth not inforce vs to acknowledge any miracle but that he might be let in of the porter at euen after the dores were shutt vp for feare of the Iewes soudein breaking in vppon the Disciples that were gathered together in that place yet I will willingly acknowledge a miraculous comming in of Christe but no passing through the bordes of the dore or stones of the wall but that by his diuine power he did either open the dore and shutt it immediatly after he was passed through or else at the vttermost that the substance of the dore or wall gaue place to his diuine presence and immediatly returned to his naturall state and place And whereas M. Heskins no lesse impudently then vnlearnedly doth charge Cranmer with falsifying the Scripture where he affirmeth that Christ might as well come into the house when the dore was shutt as the Apostles coulde go out of prison the dore being shutt Act. 5. he doth nothing else but bewray his great folly ioyned with no lesse malice against the trueth Cranmer was not ignorant that the Angell opened the dore to the Apostles and yet shutt it againe so close that it could not be perceiued that it had beene opened euen â—o might the Angell doe at the passage of our Sauiour Christe What absurditie or repugnance is here but in such an absurde persons eare as Heskins is that ouerthroweth all lawe order of nature to establish his brutish and monstrous errour But nowe we shall heare these monsters brought forth of the doctours which Scripture hath not and nature abhorreth And firste shal be Chrysostome Hom. de Ioan. Bapt. Sancta Maria beata Maria c. Holy Maria blessed Marie both a mother and a virgine Shee was a virgine before birth a virgine after birth I marueile at this howe of a virgine a virgine should be borne and after the birth of a virgine â–ª the mother should be a virgine Will you knowe howe he was borne of a virgine and after the birth how shee was both a mother and a virgine The dores were shutt and Iesus entred in No man doubteth but that the dores were shutt he that entred by the dores that were shutt was no phantasie he was no spirite he was verily a body For what sayd he looke and see that a spirite hath no flesh and bones as ye see mee haue He had flesh he had bones and the dores were shutt How did fleshe and bones enter when the dores were shutt The dores are shutt and hee doth enter whome wee sawe not goe in How did he go in all things are close there is no place by the which he might go in and yet he is within which entered in Thou knowest in howe it was done and doest referre it to the omnipotencie of god Giue this also to the omnipotencie of God that he was borne of a virgine In these wordes Chrysostome saith that Christe might as well bee borne of a Virgine as hee entered into the house after the doores was shut this was not without a miracle and no more was that But for two bodies in one place at one instant hee speaketh nothing as yet No more doth Hieronyme In Apol. cont Iouin Respondeant mihi c. Let them aunswere me howe
Iesus entered in the doores being shut when he shewed his handes to bee felt and his side to be considered and shewed both flesh and bones least the trueth of his body should be thought to be a fantasie And I will aunswere howe Saint Marie is both mother and a Virgine a Virgine before birth a mother before she was knowne of man. Vpon these places Maister Heskins doth inferre that if the doores did open as the going in of Christ which hee saith is a shaddowing of the miracle and a falsifying of the scriptures as though it were not miraculous ynough except it tooke away the trueth of Christes body and ouerthrewe the immutable decree of GOD then his entering In could not proue that the clausures of the virginitie I vse his owne wordes of the mother of Christ notwithstanding his birth remained alwayes closed which the Doctours intended to proue I would not for shamefastnesse enter into discourse of the secrets of virginitie last of all the high mysteries of the incarnation and natiuitie of our sauiour Christe of the immaculate Virgine Marie in any such Physicall questions but that I am driuen vnto it by this shamelesse aduersarie And yet will I onely alledge the authoritie of the scripture referring the collection to the reuerent shamefast consideration of the honest reader Saint Luke writeth of his presentation at Hierusalem As it is written in the lawe of the Lorde euery manchilde that first openeth the matrice shall bee called holy to the Lorde Luke 2. According to this text the miracle of his natiuitie preseruing her virginitie and of his entering in the doores beeing shut are verie like in deede and agreeable to the Doctours meaning But hee proceedeth with Chrysostomes authoritie Hom. 86. in Ioan. Dignum autem dubitatione est c. It is woorthie of doubt howe the incorruptible body did receiue the fourme of the nayles and could be touched with mortall hande But let not this trouble thee For this was of permission For that body being so subtile and light that it might enter in the doores being shut was voyde of all grossenesse or thicknesse but that his resurrection might be beleeued he shewed him selfe such a one And that thou mightest vnderstand that it was euen he that was crucified that none other did rise for him therefore he roase againe with the tokens of the crosse Except wee vnderstand Chrysostome fauourably in this place where hee denyeth the glorified body of Christe to haue any thicknesse but that it might pearce through all thinges as a spirite wee shall make him author of a great heresie both concerning the body of Christe and concerning our bodyes which after the resurrection must bee made conformable to his glorious body Philip. 3. But in an other place as wee shall heare afterwarde hee doeth eyther expound or correct him selfe in this matter And yet this that hee saith here helpeth not Maister Heskins one whit and that for two causes one for that hee speaketh heere of the glorified bodye of Christe who instituted his sacrament before his bodye was glorified An other cause for that hee doeth not heere make two bodyes in one place or one bodye in an other but to auoyde that absurditie doeth transfourme the bodye of Christe into the subtiltie and thinnesse of a spirite But in an other sentence De resurrect Hom. 9. he is of an other minde concerning the bodye of Christe Non est meum ludificare phantasmate vanam imaginem visus si timet veritatem corporis manus digitus exploret Potest fortassis aliqua oculos caligo decipere palpatio corporalis verum corpus agnoscat Spiritus inquit carnem ossa non habet sicut me videtis habere Quod Ostia clausa a penetrani sola est virtus Diuini spiritus non sola carnis substantia It is not my propertie to delude my disciples with a fantasie if your sight feare a vaine image let your hand and fingers trie out the trueth of my body Some myste peraduenture may deceiue the eyes let bodily handling acknowledge a true body A spirite saith he hath neither flesh nor bones as you see mee to haue That I pearced through the doores beeing shut it is the onely power of the diuine spirite not the onely substaunce of the flesh In these wordes hee ascribeth it to the onely power of his diuine spirite that he passed through when the doores were shut and not to the subtiltie of his glorified body as in the former sentence Likewise in Ioan. Hom. 90. Qui intrauit per ostia clausa non erat phantasma non erat spiritus verè corpus erat Hee that entered in by the doores beeing shut was no fantasie hee was no spirite hee was a body truely and in deede But wee must passe ouer vnto Saint Ambrose in Luc. lib. 10. cap. 4. Habuit admirandi causam Thomas c. Thomas had a cause to maruell when hee sawe all thinges being shut vp and closed the body of Christe by clausures without all wayes for body to enter the ioyntes beeing vnbroken to bee entered in amongest them And therefore it was a woonder howe the corporall nature passed through the impenetrable body with an inuisible comming but with inuisible beholding easie to be touched hard to bee iudged In these woordes of Saint Ambrose nothing can bee certainely gathered bycause hee doth not him selfe determine after what manner the body of Christe came in but onely sheweth what cause Thomas had to doubt and maruell sauing that in an other place I finde him write suspitiously of the trueth of the body of Christe and of the true properties thereof For in his booke De mysterijs initiandis Cap. 9. hee hath these woordes speaking of the body of Christ Corpus enim Dei corpus est spirituale Corpus Christi corpus est diuini spiritus The body of GOD is a spirituall body The body of Christe is the body of a diuine spirite These sayinges for reuerence of the Authours may haue a gentle construction but otherwise they are not directly consonant to the Catholique confession of the trueth of Christes body and the properties thereof remayning euen after his Assention as hath bene discussed by the scriptures especially after the Church was troubled with the heresies of the Eutychians and Monotholites Nowe followeth Saint Augustine De agone Christiano Cap. 24. Nec eos audiamus c. Neither let vs giue eare to them that denye that the body of Christe is risen againe of such qualitie as it was put into the graue Neither let is moue vs that it is written that hee appeared soudenly to his disciples after the doores were shut that therefore we should denye it to bee an humane body bicause wee see that contrarie to the nature of this body it entered by the doores that were shut for all thinges are possible to god For if hee could before his passion make it as cleare as the brightnesse of the Sunne wherefore could he not after his
Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his bloud you shall haue no life in you They thought this impossible but he shewed that it was altogether possible and not that only but also necessarie which also he did vnto Nicodemus He addeth also of his bloud signifying the cup which as is saide already he would giue to his disciples in the last supper Here Euthymius a late writer and out of the compasse of the challenge vnderstandeth this text of the sacrament yet speaketh hee nothing of the carnall manner of eating As for the other place he braggeth of in Matth. 26. which he cyteth in the 58. Chapter of this booke how little it maketh for him I wish the reader before he go any further to turne to the Chapter and consider The sixteenth Chapter endeth the exposition of this text in hand by the Ephesine Counsell The woordes of the Epistle of the Ephesine Counsell vnto Nestorius be these Necessario hoc c. This also we do adde necessarily for shewing foorth the death of the onely begotten sonne of God after the flesh that is of Iesus Christe and confessing together his resurrection and ascention into heauen we celebrate it in our Churches the vnbloudie seruice of his sacrifice so also doe we come to the mysticall blessings and are sanctified being made partakers of the holy body and precious bloud of Christ the redeemer of vs all Not taking it as common flesh which God forbid nor at the flesh of a sanctified man and ioyned to the word according to the vnitie of dignitie or as possessing a diuine habitation but truely quickening and made proper vnto the word it selfe For he being naturally life as God bicause he was vnited to his owne flesh professed the sonne to haue power to giue life And therefore although he say vnto vs Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you yet we ought not to esteeme it as of a man that is one of vs For howe can the flesh of a man after his owne nature be a quickening flesh But as verily made his owne flesh which for vs was both made and called the sonne of man. The Fathers of this Counsell do not as M. Heskins saith expound this text of the sacrament or declare what they receiue in the sacrament but rather shew what they iudged of that flesh whereof they receiued the sacrament namely that it was not the flesh of a pure man as Nestorius affirmed but the flesh of the son of God therfore had power to giue life being eateÌ„ by faith either in the participation of the sacrament or without it And whereas he noteth a plaine place for M. Iewel when they say They were made partakers of the body and bloud of Christ there is no more plainenesse then M. Iewell will confesse But where he addeth Receiuing it not as coÌ„mon flesh but as the flesh truely giuing life he corrupteth the sense of the Counsel referring that to the receiuing of the sacrament which they vnderstand of their iudgement of the flesh whereof they receiued the sacrament Finally where he would helpe the matter with the opinion of Cyril of our corporall coniunction with Christ howe little it auayleth we shewed before in aunswere to that place Cap. 14. But least he shuld lacke sufficient proofe of this matter he confirmeth his exposition by the erronious practise of the Church of Aphrica from Saint Cyprians time vnto Saint Augustines time at the least which imagined such a necessitie of thaâ— sacrament by this place Except ye eate c that they ministred the Communion to infants he might haue added that some did minister it to dead folkes But this absurditie which followeth of the exposition will rather driue al wisemen from that exposition then moue them to receiue it And although the Bohemians vsed this text to proue the communion in both kindes yet doth it not followe that it is properly to be expounded of the sacrament The seuenteenth Chapter expoundeth the next following by S. Augustine and Cyrill The text he will expound is He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath life in him That this text is not to be expounded of the sacrament it is manifest by this reason that many doe eate the sacrament that haue not life in them as Augustine whom he alledgeth most plainly affirmeth But let vs see his profes for his exposition First Augustine Tr. 26. in IoaÌ„ Hanc non habet c. He hath not this life that eateth not this bread nor drinketh this bloud For without is men may haue temporall life but eternall they can not He therefore which eateth not his flesh nor drinketh his bloud hath no life in him and he that eateth his flesh and drinketh his bloud hath life eternall He hath answered to both in that he saith life euerlasting It is not so in this meate which we take to sustaine the life of this body For he that shall not take it shall not liue Nor yet he that shall take it shall liue For it may be that by age or sicknesse or any other cause many which haue taken it may dye but in this meat and drinke that is the body and bloud of our Lord it is not so For both he that taketh it not hath not life he that taketh it hath life and that eternall Although there be not one word spoken here of the sacrament and M. Heskins him selfe alledgeth the words following in which he confesseth that Augustine expoundeth this meate and drinke of the societie of Christ and his members which is his Church yet either so blinde or obstinate he is that with vaine gloses he will go about to drawe Augustine to his side First he saith though this meate signifie the mysticall body of Christe yet it signifieth not that alone but his naturall body in the sacrament whereof he hath neuer a worde in this treatise of S. Augustine secondly Augustine did not go about to instruct the people what they should receiue but how wel they shuld receiue it Which is vtterly false for hee doth both and there is no better way to instruct men howe well they should receiue the sacrament then to teach them to consider what they do receiue And therfore the conclusion of this treatise which he cyteth is altogether against him Hoc ergo totum c. Let all this therfore auayle to this end most welbeloued that we eaâ—e not the flesh and bloud of Christ onely in a sacrament which many euill men doe but that we eate and drinke euen to the participation of the spirit that we may remaine in the body of our Lorde as his mâ—mbers that we may be quickened by his spirite and not be offended although many do nowe with vs eate and drinke the sacraments temporally which in the end shal haue eternal torments Oâ—t of these wordes M. Hes doth
Psalm 98. to proue that he denieth the giuing of his bodie by lumpes or peeces But the place is altogether against him if he had alledged the whole and not cut it off in the waste Tunc autem c. Then when our Lorde setting foorth this had spoken of his flesh and had saide except a man eate my flesh he shall not haue in him life euerlasting Some of the seuentie were offended and saide This is an harde saying who can vnderstand it And they departed from him and walked no more with him It seemed a harde thing to them which he saide Except a man eate my flesh he shall not haue eternall life They tooke it foolishly they thought of it carnally and they thought that our LORDE would cut certeine peeces of his bodie and giue them and they saide this is an harde saying Here stayeth Maister Heskins but it followeth in Augustine Ille aâ—tem instruxit eos c. But he instructed them and saith vnto them it is the spirite that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing The wordes which I haue spoken to you are spirite and life Vnderstand you spiritually that which I haue spoken You shal not eate this bodie which you see drinke that bloud which they shal shed which shall crucifie me I haue commended vnto you a certeine sacrament or mysterie which beeing vnderstoode spiritually shall giue you life Although it be needefull that it be celebrated visibly yet it must be vnderstoode inuisibly In these wordes Augustine denieth not onely the giuing of his bodie in peeces but all maner of corporall eating of his naturall and visible bodie and aduoucheth onely a spirituall vnderstanding of this text that we haue beene so long in expounding But M. Heskins willeth vs not to triumph before the victorie for Augustine In sermo ad Neophy hath a plaine place for M. Iewel Hoc accipite in pane c. Take ye this in the bread that did hang on the crosse Take ye this in the challice that was shed out of the side of christ He shall haue death not life that thinketh Christe a lyar If M. Heskins had expressed in what booke or â—ome I should haue sought for this sermon Ad Norphil he might haue spared me a great deale of labour which I haue lost in searching for it and yet cannot finde it There are many homilies and sermons of Augustine Ad Neophyl and yet in none of them can I reade that whiche he aduouched out of him It seemeth therefore that this place is taken out of some later writer that without iudgement ascribeth it to Augustine which is not to be found in his workes And yet the saying is not such but that it may haue a reasonable interpretatioÌ„ for the bread after a certein maner as Augustine speaketh is that which did hang on the crosse the wine is that which was shed out of his side that is sacrameÌ„tally but not naturally or after a bodily maner S. Cyril followeth ca. 22. sup 6. Ioan. Ex imperitia multi c. Many that folowed Christ for lack of knowledge not vnderstanding his wordes were troubled For when they had hearde Verily verily I say vnto you Except you shall eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you they thought they had bene called by Christ to the cruell manners of wilde beastes and prouoked that they would eate the rawe flesh of a man and drinke bloud which are euen horrible to be heard for they had not yet knowen the fourme and most goodly dispensation of this mysterie This also moreouer they did thinke howe shall the flesh of this man giue vs eternall life Or how can he bring vs to immortalitie Which things when he vnderstod to whose eyes all things are bare and open he driueth them to the faith by an other maruelous thing Without cause saith he O syre are ye troubled for my words And if you will not beleeue that life is giuen by my bodie vnto you what will you do when you see me flie vp into heauen I doe not onely say that I will ascend least you should aske againe how that should be but you shall see it with your eyes so to be done Therfore what will you say when you see this Shall not this be a great argument of your madnesse For if you thinke that my fleshe can not bring life vnto you how shall it ascend into heauen like a birde How shall it flye into the ayre For this is a like impossible to mankinde And if my fleshe beside nature shall ascende into heauen what letteth but it may likewise beside nature giue life Cyrill noteth as M. Heskins saith two vaine thoughtes of the Capernaites one of eating raw the flesh of Christ the other how that flesh shuld giue life the latter he answereth at large the other breefely they vnderstoode not the fourme and dispensation of the mysterie by which he meaneth the spirituall mysticall maner of receiuing his bodie cleane contrarie to their grosse imagination for otherwise the ascention of Christe would not answere that doubt but increase it Maister Heskins citeth another text to shewe the power of Christes fleshe whiche is needelesse for it is confessed of vs to be such as he himselfe hath declared it to be Non verbo soliù c. He did not onely with his worde raise dead men but also with his touching to shewe that his bodie also doth giue life If then with his onely touching corrupted thinges are made sound how shall we not liue which doe both tast and eate that fleshe it will without all doubt refourme againe to immortalitie the partakers thereof Neither doe thou inquire after the Iewish manner how But remember that although water by nature be colde yeâ— by comming of fire to it forgetting her coldeneâ— it boyleth with heate Here M. Heskins will not allowe vs our glosse that Cyril speaketh of the spirituall receiuing of Christes flesh because he teacheth more then once that we are ioyned to Christ not onely spiritually but also after the flesh and that by eating the same flesh as though we could not truely be partakers of the fleshe of Christe â–ª by a spirituall receiuing of him not onely in the sacracrament but also by faith without the sacrament And Cyril saith we doe both taste and eate his flesh whiche of necessitie imployeth a spirituall manner of receiuing for other tast we haue not of Christes flesh but spirituall and by faith In the ende of the Chapter to deliuer himselfe his fellowes from the grosse errour of the Capernaites he scoffeth finely at our spirituall sifting of the sacrament so fine that we leaue nothing but the bare bran of the signifying signe in our owne hand whiche is the grosse bread we feede on If we taught a bare signe or bare bread in the sacrament there were some place for Maister Heskins ieaste But when we teache that presence and receiuing which
Maister Heskins so often confesseth to be onely profitable and which we finde in the scriptures and auncient doctors we haue the sacrament so perfectly boulted and fined to our hand that we acknowledge no branne or drosse at al to be in the bread neither yet any dregges at all in the cuppe whatsoeuer there is in the Popish challice which the priest hath sucked and licked so drie that there is not one droppe of the bloud of Christe in it to quench the thirst of the poore people The fiâ—e and thirtieth Chapter proceedeth in the exposition of the same text and endeth it by Euthymius and Petrus Cluniacensis Euthymius is cited In 6. Ioan. following the exposition of Cyrillus as he doth often of the olde Greeke writers Si ergo videritis c. If therfore ye shal see the sonne of man ascending where he was before what will you say He speaketh of the assumption of him selfe into heauen ascending according to his humanitie where he was before according to his Diuinitie For he that can make this fleshe heauenly can also make it meate of men Maister Heskins inferreth vpon this saying that the argument of the ascention vsed by Christ is vaine to proue the spirituall eating but good to proue the reall eating of his fleshe Note here first that he counteth the argument of his ascention expounded and vsed by Augustine in the Chapter next before to be vaine Secondly although Cyrillus vseth the argument of Christes ascention to prooue that Christes flesh being eaten may as well giue life as it could ascend into heauen doth it therefore proue a reall corporal or carnal presence eating of Christes bodie which is taken away by his ascention But he saith The flesh of Christ was spiritually the meate of the holie fathers in the olde lawe therefore that needed not to be proued possible which was knowen so long before A wise reason as though Christ had to doe with faithfull Iewes and not with Infidels that neither knew nor beleeued any such matter or if hee had spoken to the Patriarches them selues as though they had knowne and vnderstoode the mysteries of Christ so distinctly and plainly that Christes instruction had bene needelesse to them But Maister Heskins in all his arguments and expositions almost setteth downe that as certeine and granted which is the whole matter in controuersie His meate is flesh in deede his flesh is not eaten spiritually c. He must haue an easie aduersarie or else he shall gaine litle by such petition of principles The saying of Petrus of Clunie though he be but a late writer conteineth more against him then for him for he denieth the mangling of Christs flesh after the Capernaites imaginations and teacheth that it is Diuided without paine parted without diminution and eaten without consumption because it is the spirite that quickeneth and because his fleshe beeing so receiued and vnderstoode giueth eternall life What can we here vnderstand but a spirituall receiuing The sixe and thirtieth Chapter createth of the next text by Augustine Chrysostome This text is this it is the spirite that quickeneth the fleshe profiteth nothing This text is made so familiar he saith that boyes and girles can blatter it against Christes presence in the sacrament as though they denied the vertue of his fleshe that denie your carnal presence in the sacrament But we must heare Saint Augustine Tract 27. In Ioan. Quid est quod adiâ—ngit c. What is that he ioyneth It is the spirite that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing Let vs say vnto him for he suffreth vs not gainsaying but desirous to know O Lord good Maister how doeth not the flesh profite any thing when then hast said except a man eate my flesh drink my bloud he shal not haue life in him Doth not life profite any thing And wherfore are we that that we are but that we may haue eternal life which thou doest promise by thy flesh What then is it it profiteth not any thing The flesh profiteth nothing but as they vnderstoode it For they vnderstoode fleshe so as it is rent in peeces in a dead bodie or solde in the shambles not as it is quickened by the spirit It is therfore so saide the flesh profiteth nothing as it is saide knowledge puffeth vp a man Shall we nowe then hate knowledge God forbid And what it is then Knowledge pâ—ffeth vp beeing alone without charitie Therefore he added But charitie doth edifie Therefore adde charitie to knowledge and knowledge shal be profitable not by it selfe but by charitie So now likewise the fleshe profiteth nothing that is the fleshe alone But let the spirite come to the flesh as charitie commeth to knowledge and it profiteth verie much For if the flesh had profiâ—ed nothing the worde should not haue beene made flesh that it might dwell in vs If Christ haue profited vs much by his flesh how doeth the flesh profite nothing at all But the spirite by the flesh hath done some thing for our health The fleshe was that vessel marke what it had in it not what it was The Apostles were sent did their flesh profite nothing If the flesh of the Apostles profited vs not could our Lordes flesh not profite vs For how came the sound of the word vnto vs but by the voyce of the flesh From whence the stile From whence the writing All these workes be of the flesh but the spirite mouing it as his instrument Therefore it is the spirite which quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing As they vnderstoode flesh so do I not giue my flesh to be eaten Maister Heskins doth glorie that he bringeth not this sentence truncately as the heretiques do but wholy that the reader should not be defrauded of S. Augustines right meaning vpoÌ„ this scripture And here again he repeateth his rotten distinction that Christ giueth not his flesh by lumpes peeces yet giueth it corporally that S. Augustine meaneth none otherwise But as long a sentence as he rehearsed he hath omitted the very interpretation of his text in hand Which Augustine maketh in these wordes Quid est spiritus vita Spiritualiter intelligenda sunt What is spirite and life spiritually to be vnderstanded neither is there one worde in all that treatise for the corporall presence or receiuing And yet we coÌ„fesse that Christ truly giueth vs his fleshe we are truely fed therewith but not after a corporall maner but after a spiritual vnspeakable maner Chrysostome is cited hom 46. In Ioan. Quid igitur caro c. What then Doth the fleshe profite nothing He speaketh not of the very flesh God forbid but of them that carnally take those things that are spoken And what is it to vnderstand carnally Simply as the thinges are spoken and not to thinke any other thing of them For thâ—se thinges that are seene are not so to be iudged but all mysteries are to be considered with inwarde eyes that is spiritually
and life He sheweth that his whole bodie is full of quickening vertue of the spirite For here he called his very fleshe spirite not because it lost the nature of flesh is changed into the spirite but because beeing perfectly ioyned with it it hath receiued the whole power to quicken Neither let any man think this to be spoken vndecently for he that is surely ioyned to the Lorde is one spirite with him How then shal not his flesh be called one with him It is after this manner therefore which is saide you thinke I said this earthly and mortall bodie of his owne nature to be quickening or giuing life but I spake of the spirit life For the nature of the flesh of it self caÌ„not quicken but the power of the spirite hath made the fleshe quickening Therefore the words which I haue spokeÌ„ that is those things which I spoke vnto you are spirite and life by which my fleshe also liueth and is quickening Cyrill hauing his minde still bent against the Nestorians earnestly auoucheth the trueth of Christes flesh vnited to his Diuinitie but for M. Hesk. purpose he saith nothing at all I meane for the carnal maner of receiuing Christes fleshe in the sacrament The name of Capernaites M. Hesk. so much misliketh that he would turne it ouer to vs if he could inuent any balde reason to proue it agreeing to our doctrine The sacramentaries he saith are carnal and grosse because they say that Papistes receiue nothing but bare flesh and not the flesh of Christe which is vnited to the Deitie and giueth life But indeed the Papistes say as much when they say that the flesh of Christ is receiued where it giueth no life As for those whome he calleth sacramentaries they wil not graunt that the Papistes although they prate so grossely of flesh bloud yet receiue any thing but a wafer cake a draught of wine The fortieth Chapter endeth the exposition of this text and so of the processe of the sixt of S. Iohn by Euthymius and Lyra. Euthymius to end this long and tedious processe is cited as before In. 6. Ioan. Verba quae c. The wordes which I speake vnto you are spirite and life they are spirituall and quickening For we must not looke vpon them simply that is vnderstand them carnally But imagine a certeine other thing and to beholde them with inward eyes as mysteries for this is spiritually to vnderstand Euthymius affirmeth the same that Chrysostome doeth Hom. 46. In Ioan. and almoste in the same wordes neither can M. Hesk. drawe any thing out of theÌ„ to serue his humor but that the sacramentes are mysteries and therefore some other thing must be present then is seene with the outward eye which is true so it be such a thing as may be seene onely with the eyes of the mind of which the authour speaketh But the bodie of Christ as Aug. saith euen immortall and glorified is stil visible Ep. 85. Consentio To wrangle about the sentence of Lyra it were losse of time who although he wil haue a real presence yet he wil haue The flesh of Christ to be eaten in the sacrament after a spirituall maner because the spirite by the power of God vnited to the flesh is refreshed Wherevpon M. Hesk. reiecting the true spirituall manner of eating Christes fleshe in the sacrament by faith as hereticall which he hath so often before allowed as onely profitable setteth vp three other spirituall manners of Christes presence in the sacrament for three causes First because it is wrought by the spirite of god Secondly because although it be verily present it is not knowen by corporall sence but by spirituall knowledge of faith Thirdly because our spirite by the power of God is vnited to the fleshe of these deuises he maketh Lyra the author and he may bee well ynough For such blinde teachers while they wrangled about words they became altogether vaine in their imaginations and lost the true sence and meaning both of the worde of God and of the sacraments The rayling stuffe wherewith he concludeth this Chapter and this worthie expositioÌ„ continued in 36. Chapters I passe ouer as vnworthie of any answere The one and fortieth Chapter beginneth the exposition of these wordes of Christ this is my bodie after the minde of the aduersaries The first part of this Chapter conteyneth a fonde and lewde comparison of the doctrine of the Sacramentaries with the temptation of the diuell vsed to our firste parents â–ª which because it sheweth nothing but M. Hesk. witt and stomake I omitt It hath more colour of reason that he bringeth in afterward namely that there are two things which ought to moue men to resist the temtation of the sacramentaries their contrarietie to the worde of God and their contrarietie among them selues Their contrarietie to the worde of God he sayeth to bee where Christ sayde This is my bodie Sathan sayth it is not his bodie In verie deede if after Christe hath sayde the bread and wine are his bodie bloude any man shuld rise vp saye they are not his bodie bloud at al we might well iudge that he spake by the spirite of Sathan as when Christe sayeth drinke ye all of this the Pope sayth to the people there shall none of you all drink of this we may easely acknowlege the spirit of Antichrist But we whome he calleth sacramentaries doe with all reuerence humilitie confesse that the bread the wine ministred according to Christes institution are the body bloud of Christ in such sence as he saide they were And we say with S. Augustine Per similitudinem Christus multa est quae per proprietatem non est Per similitudinem petrae est Christus ostium est Christus lapis angularis est Christus c. By similitude Christ is manie things which he is not by propertie By similitude the rocke is Christ the dore is Christ the corner stone is Christ c. Wherfore we affirme nothing contrarie to the words of Christ but altogether agreeable to his meaning For contrarietie of Sacramentaries among them selues he citeth a saying of Luther written in his frowardnesse that there shoulde be eyght seuerall disagreeing spirites among the Sacramentaries from which if you take away Carolostadius Swenkfeldius Campanus and the eight without name which is belike H. N. opinion that euery man may think of it what he list whose opinions the godly whome hee calleth sacramentaries did euer more detest as wicked vngodly there remaineth the interpretation of Zwinglius of the wordes of Christ This signifieth my bodie of Oecolampadius This is a token of my bodâ—e two other Receiue the benefits of my passion and Take this as a monument or remembrance of my bodie crucified for you which differ in forme of wordes and are all one in deede and meaning So is the iudgement of Melancthon this is the participation of my bodie
they 〈◊〉 hitherto that they would neither learne by hearing nor acknowledge by reading that which in the Church of God in the mouth of all men is so agreeably spoken That not as much as of the tongues of infantes the veritie of the bodie and bloud of Christ is vnspoken of among the sacraments of the common faith for in that mystical distribution of that spirituall foode this thing is giuen foorth this thing is receiued that receiuing the vertue of that heauenly meate we may goe into his fleshe which was made our fleshe First M. Heskins as his fashion is to make the matter more cleare on his side falsely translateth Hoc impertitur hoc sumitur this bodie is giuen forth this bodie is receiued Where as Hoc is either taken absolutely for this thing or else at the least must haue relation to Sacramentum which is the next substantiue of the neuter gender in any reasonable construction Secondly it is manifest that Leo speaking against the heretiques Eutycheâ— and Dioscorus setteth forth the truth of Christs bodie bloud as one of the common knowen sacraments or mysteries of Christian faith saith neuer a word of his carnall presence in the mysterie of his supper but contrariwise teacheth that it is a mystical distributioÌ„ a spiritual food an heaueÌ„ly meat which words import not a carnal maner but a spiritual maner of preseÌ„ce eating Thus real presence as he termeth it being not yet proued the adoration cannot follow as he pretendeth The seuen and fortieth Chapter proceedeth in the proofe of the adoration of the Sacrament by doctors The first doctor named is Dionysius Areopagita disciple of S. Paule as he sayeth Eccles. Hierarch 3. parte Cap. 3. who maketh this prayer to the sacrament O verie godly holie mysterie opening fauourably the couerings of signifying signes wherewith thou art couered shine openly and apertly vnto vs fill our spiritual eyes with the singuler open brightnesse of thy light That this Dionyse although of some antiquitie yet is not that Dionyse that was conuerted by S. Paule nor any that liued 600. yeres after at the least it is plaine by this reason that neither Eusebius nor Hieronyme nor Gennadius which wrote the Catologs of all ecclesiasticall writers that were before them or were famous in the church in their time nor yet any other writer within the compasse of 600. yeres after Christe maketh any mention of any such Dionyse to be a writer of those bookes which are saide to be written by him Now touching his supposed prayer it is but an exclamatioÌ„ rethoricall named apostrophe not vnto the bread wine but to him that in that mysterie is represented which is Christ that he would vouchsafe to open him self shine in the hearts of the faithfull as the outward signes are seene with the outwarde eyes And that he allowed no transubstantiation it is manifest by that he saith in the same place that the Bishop doth after consecration cut in peeces the vndiuided bread speaking of the sacrament doth often affirme that by those symboles or signes wee are changed into God Christ meaning we are renewed by his spirite but neuer affirmeth the bread wine to bee turned into the bodie bloud of christ Howbeit what I iudge of his authorite antiquitie I haue declared before The next is Gregorie Nazianzen in Epitaph Gorgoniae sororis Quid igitur c. What then did the soule both great worthie of greatest things and what remedie had shee against her infirmitie For nowe the secreat is disclosed when shee had dispaired of all other shee flyeth to the Phisition of all men and taking the solitarinesse of the night when the disease had giuen her a little respite shee fell downe with faith before the altare and with a lowde voice and all her might shee called vppon him which is worshipped at is and vnto him shee rehearsed all the myracles that he had done of olde time M. Heskins immagineth that it was such an altare as they haue in the popish Churches which is vntrue for it was a table men stoode round about it as is to be proued by many testimonies of antiquitie Secondly he immagineth that the sacrament was hanged ouer the altare to be worshipped as it is among them but that is vtterly false for it was receiued at such time as it was consecrated except some remanents that were kept to be eaten Therfore though shee made her prayer at the altare shee made no prayer to any thing vppon the altare but to God whome shee did worship and reuerence and whose mysteries shee vsed to receiue at the same altare Therefore M. Heskins falsifieth Gregories words which are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. but thus they are turned by him into latine ante altare cum fide procubuit illum quem super altare venerabatur c. Shee prostrated her selfe with faith before the altar and called vpon him whome shee worshipped vpon the altare But Gregorie sayeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in it or at it meaning the altare where shee prayed And to put all out of doubt that shee worshipped not the sacrament vppon the altare it followeth afterwarde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if her hand had layde vp any where any parte of the figures of the precious bodie or of the bloud that shee mingled with teares O marueilous thing and immediatly departed feeling health By these wordes it appeareth that shee brought this remanent of the sacrament with her which Gregorie calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the signes or tokens or figures of the bodie and bloud of Christ and not the verie naturall bodie of Christe and those shee worshipped not but wett them with teares whether superstitiously let the Papistes iudge for they them selues will allowe no such fashions nor yet reseruation for such purposes but as for adoration of the sacrament which is the matter intended here is none spoken of in this place After this he toucheth the facte of Satyrus the brother of S. Ambrose which is aunswered before lib. 1. Cap. 24. whose hope was in God and not in the sacrament Although Satyrus as a young nouice not throughly instructed in Christian religion cannot simply be defended though he may be excused howsoeuer by his brother Ambrose he is highly commended Then followed Eusebius Emisserâ—us Hom. Pascal Because he woulde take away his assumpted bodie from our eyes and carrie it into heauen it was needefull that this day he should consecrate vnto vs the sacrament of his bodie and bloud vs coleretur iugiter per mysterium quod semel offerebatur in precium that it might be continually worshipped or exercised by a mysterie for colere signifieth both whiche was once offered for our price M. Heskins gathereth hereof that the same bodie should be honoured by mysterie whose visible presence not his bodie was taken away from the earth But Eusebius sayeth not onely that he would take his bodie
be all of one body which is true so wee vnderstand a spirituall kinde of coniunction by which wee are not only ioyned to Christ as Chrysostome saith but also one to an other in one body Secondly that it is the body of Christ by the eating whereof we are made one body and this also is true for we contend not for the eating of Christes body but for the manner of eating The third note I thinke hee maketh that by Chrysostomes iudgement Saint Paule meant not materiall breade but the body of Christe which is proued to bee false and absurde by these two reasons First if Saint Chrysostome by breade meant not the sacramentall breade but the body of Christe then his question is nothing else in effect but what is the body of Christe And then he answereth the body of Christe which is very absurde and ridiculous Secondly that he meaneth materiall breade vsed in the sacrament it is manifest in that hee saith it is made of many graines but the body of Christe it not made of graines therefore hee can not meane the body of Christe but the sacramentall breade which signifieth the body of Christe But here Maister Heskins as though hee were the first that espied the matter insulteth vpon him that translateth this part of Chrysostome which was Franciscus Aretinus whom either of ignoraÌ„ce or of malice he chargeth to haue falsified Chrysostome and in steede of his wordes which according to the Greeke are What is the bread to haue turned it What doth the bread signifie For my part although the Greeke copies coÌ„monly extant in print are not as he hath translated it yet I suppose that he followed either some other copy that I haue not seene peraduenture printed peraduenturâ— written For vndoutedly although he were ignorantly or willfully deceiued yet the sense of Chrysostomes words must needes be what doth the bread signifie which M. Heskins can not altogether dissemble but then he will haue it not materiall bread but the word bread But how friuolous that is I haue shewed before for this worde Breade is not made of cornes but the materiall bread giuen in the sacrament Neither doth the other worde hee citeth any thing helpe him Non enim simpliciter c. For hee hath not simplie giuen his body but when the former nature of the flesh formed out of the earth by sinne being made mortall was forsaken of life he brought in an other as I might so say lumpe or leauen that is his flesh in nature truely the same but free from sinne and ful of life which he giueth to all that they might be made partakers of it that being nourished with it and the first that was dead being cast away we might be ioyned together by this liuing immortall table Loe saith M. Heskins this is not a peece of dead breade but a liuing and immortall meate hee dare not say table as Chrysostome doth for feare of a figure But is he so blinde that he seeth not the partaking and nourishing of the newe flesh to be such as the casting away of the olde is which no man doubteth to be spirituall But seeing he braggeth so much of Chrysostome and is such an enimie to signes and figures let him heare what he writeth in Math. Hom. 83. Sed ficut in veteri eodem hâ—c modo in beneficio reliquit memoriam mysteriorum colligendo hinc haereticorum ora frenando Nam quando dicunt vnde patet immolatum Christum fuisse alia multa mysteriae Haec enim adferentes eorum ora consuimus Si enim mortuus Iesus non est cuius symbolum ac signum hoc sacrificium est Vides quancum ei studium fuerit vt semper memoria tentamus pro nobis ipsum mortuum fuisse But as in the olde Paschal â–ª euen likewise here in this benefite hee hath left the memorie of the mysteries by gathering and hereof bridling the mouthes of heretikes For when they say howe is it knowne that Christ was sacrificed and many other mysteries For when we bring foorth those things we soe vp their mouthes For if Iesus be not dead of whom is this sacrifice a token and signe Thou seest howe great care he had that we might alwayes keepe in remembrance that he dyed for vs. There can nothing be spoken more plainly to declare either what the sacrament is or for what end it was ordained or finally what manner of sacrifice it is accounted of Chrysostome and the auncient Fathers But nowe followeth S. Augustine Ser. 2. Pasc. Quia Christus passus est c. Bicause Christ hath suffered for vs he hath commended vnto vs his body and his bloud in this sacrament which also he hath made our owne selues For we also are made his body and by his mercy we are that which we receiue I like this saying very well it maketh altogether for the truth on our side Yet M. Heskins noteth that he saith not he hath commended a figure or memoriall but his body and his bloud I agree well but hee saith that hee hath commended his body and bloud in a sacrament hee doth not say the sacrament is his naturall body present vnder the formes of bread and wine corporally that I may followe M. Heskins negatiue argument But especially let vs note what he saith and not what hee saith not He saith we are the same that we receiue but we are not his naturall body after a corporall manner therfore wee receiue not his naturall body after a corporall manner The rest that followeth to moue vs to abide in this body of Christ confirmeth the same Dic mihi quid est c. Tell me what is it whereof thou liuest Doth thy spirite liue by thy body or thy body by thy spirite Euery one that liueth aunswereth I liue by my spirite And he that can not answere this I knowe not whether he liueth What answereth euery one that liueth My body truely liueth by my spirite Wilt thou therefore liue by the spirite of Christ Be thou in the body of christ For whether doth my body liue of thy spirite Mine liueth of my spirit and thine liueth of thy spirit The bodie of Christ can not liue but by the spirit of christ Hereof it is that the Apostle Paul expounding this bread One bread saith he we are one body All men see that this writer speaketh of our mysticall and spirituall coniunction with Christe neither can M. Heskins him selfe make any other thing of it The fiue and twentieth Chapter proceedeth vpon the same text by Damascene and Haimo Maister Heskins store is farre spent and therefore he maketh much of the remnants Damascene and Haimo we haue before diuers times excepted against as vnlawful witnesses and therefore we will spend no time in examining their sayings But whereas Maister Heskins maketh great ado in this Chapter of our coniunction with Christ both in soule and body we knowe it and doe reioyce in it but for any
more certeintie and better credite then the Papists can bring any shewed by God since the restitution of the Gospell yet because our doctrine is the same that was confirmed by all the miracles of Christ and his Apostles we seeke no confirmation thereof by later miracles but onely by the scriptures And herein we followe the example of S. Augustine who vrgeth the Donatistes to proue themselues to be the Church of God only by Canonicall scriptures not by miracles whereof they boasted more then the Catholikes Lib de vnitate Ecclesiae Cap. 16. Et sic ostendat vt non dicat verum est quia ego hoc dico aut quia hoc dixit ille collega meut 〈◊〉 illi collegae mei aut illi Episcopi vel clerici vel laici nostâ—i aut ideo verum est quia illa illa mirabilia fecit Donatus vel Pontius vel quilibet alius aut quia homines ad memorias mortuorum nostrorum orant exaudiuntur aut quia illa illa ibi contingunt aut quiae ille fraeter noster aut illa soror nostra tale visum vigilans vidit vel tale visum dormiens somnianis Remoueantur ista vel figmenta mendacium hominum vel portenta fallacium spirituun ut eniâ—â— non sunt vera quÄ™ dicuntur aut sihÄ™reticoruÌ„ aliqua mira facta sunt magis canere debemus And so let him shewe the Churche that he do not say this is true because I say it or because such a one my fellowe saide it or those my fellowes or those our bishops or clearkes or laymen or it is therfore true because Donatus or Pontius or any other hath done those and those miracles or because men pray at the memories of our dead men and are heard or because those thinges those things happen there or because this our brother or that our sister sawe such a vision waking or dreamed such a vision sleeping Let these thinges be set aside which are either the counterfetting of lying men or els the wonders of deceiuing spirits for either those things are not true that are told or else if any miracles are done of heretiques we ought the more to beware of them And after a litle he saith in the same Chapter Sed verum ipsi Ecclesiam teneant non nisi diuinarum scripturarum canonicis libria ostendant quia nec nos propterea dicimus nobis credere oportere quòd in Ecclesia sumus quia ipsam quam tenemus commendauit Mileuitanus Optatus vel Mediolanensis Ambrosius vel alij innumerabiles nostre coÌ„munionis episcopi aut quia nostrorum CollegaruÌ„ concilijs ipsa praedicata est aut quia per totum orbem in locis sanctis quae frequentat communio nostra tanta mirabilia vel exauditionuÌ„ vel sanitatum fiant ita vt latentia per tot annos corpora Martyrum quod possunt a muâ—tis interrogaÌ„tes audire Ambrosio fuerint reuelata ad ipsa corpora caecus multorum annorum ciuitati Mediolanensi notissimus oculos luménque reciperet aut quia ille somnium vidit ille spiritu assumptus audiuit siue ne iniret in partem Donati siue vt recederet à parte Donati QuÄ™cunque talia in Catholica fiunt ideo sunt approbanda quia in Catholica fiunt non ìdeo ipsa manifestatur Catholica quia haec in ea fiunt But whether they holde the Churche or no let them shew none otherwise but by the Canonicall Bookes of the holie scriptures for neither do we say that men ought therfore to beleeue vs that we are in the Church because Optatus of Mileuitum or Ambrose of Millain or innumerable other Bishops of our fellowship haue commended this Church whiche we holde or because it is set foorth and praysed in the councels of our fellowships or because that in holy places thorough the world which our fellowship doth frequent so great miracles are done either of hearing mens prayers or of restoring to health so that the bodies of Martyrs which haue been hidden so many yeres which thing if they wil ask they may heare of many were reuealed to Ambrose at the same bodies one that had ben blind many yeres very well knowen to the citie of Millain receiued his eyes and sight or because this man saw a dreame or that man was taken vp in spirit and heard either that he shold not go into the faction of Donatus or that he should depart from it Whatsoeuer such things are done in the Catholike Church they are therefore to be allowed because they are done in the Catholike Church but the Church it selfe is not therby proued Catholike because these things are done in it And thus much concerning miracles The issue that M. Hesk. ioyneth is tried by all Catholike ancient Doctors that the Masse is idolatrie because it is a worshipping of creatures in steed of the creator although none of the olde writers call the Masse Idolatrie whiche had neither name nor being in their dayes The three and fortieth Chapter maketh recapitulation of the conference of the Masses of the Apostles and Fathers of the primitiue Church and of the Catholike Church that now is with a breefâ— confutation of the conference made by the proclamer betweene thâ— Masse of Saint Iames and that is now vsed The recapitulation conteining nothing but that which is confuted in the discourse at large I will omitte it and come to the conference that the Bishop made betweene the liturgie falsely ascribed to S. Iames and the Popishe Masse beeing content for the time to call it Saint Iames Masse as Maister Heskins doth although neither it is a Masse nor such as it is was it writteÌ„ by S. Iames the Apostle but by some of much later time as appeareth by the prayer therein conteined for such as liue in Monasteries and other thinges fauouring of the errours of that time in which it was written The first point of the conference is that S. Iames saide Masse in the common tong vnderstoode of the people the Papistes say Masse in a straunge tonge M. Heskins answereth that this point toucheth not the substance for the Masse may be good though it be not vnderstood but he himselfe maketh the doctrine of the Masse to be of the substance of it wherefore seeing there lacketh doctrine in the Masse there lacketh one of the foure substantiall partes But he would make the reading of the epistle and Gospel in Latine Doctrine and good doctrine What doctrine that is by which the people are not taught let reasonable men iudge for although all the Masse were nothing but scripture yet it were not good to be read in the Church in a straunge tong 1. Cor. 14. because it were not profitable for edifying His childish sophismes of Plato his substance and his accidents I disdaine to rehearse the trueth is manifest The second comparison S. Iames spake out of the words of consecration They in their Masse suppresse them and keepe them
defile my name what so euer they sanctifie to me I am the Lorde Say to them and to their families Euery man that is of your seede and commeth to the holy things what so euer the children of Israel shall sanctifie vnto the Lord and his vncleannesse be vpon him that soule shall be rooted out of my presence I am the lord Such threatnings are set foorth against them that only come to those thinges that are sanctified by men But what shall a man say against him which dare be bolde against so greate and such a mysterie For looke howe much greater a thing then the temple is here according to the Lords saying by so much the more greeuous and fearefull it is in the filthinesse of his soule to touch the body of Christ then to touch Rammes or Bulles for so the Apostle hath saide wherefore he that eateth the bread and drinketh the cup of the Lorde vnworthily shall be guiltie of the body and bloud of the Lorde But more vehemently and also more horribly he doth set foorth and declare the condemnation by repetition when hee saith Let euery man examine him selfe and so let him eat of this bread and drinke of this cup. For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh his condemnation not discerning the Lordes body If then he that is onely in vncleannesse and the propertie of vncleannesse we learne figured in the lawe hath so horrible a iudgement howe much more he that is in sinne and presumeth against the body of Christ shall draw vnto him selfe horrible iudgement First I will note M. Heskins falsifications which are two the one as it seemeth partly of ignoraunce of the Greeke tong partly of greedinesse to drawe Basils wordes to his vnderstanding for where the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heere is a thing or one greater then the temple he turneth it looke howe much greater this is then the temple as though hic which is an Aduerbe were a Pronoune The other is altogether of malitious corruption for he translateth his Latine Contra corpus Christi audet which is He dareth presume against the body of Christe hee translateth it Hee dareth to presume vpon the body of Christ as though he receiued the body of Christe Nowe he noteth two differences in these wordes of Basil the one of the sacrifices of the olde lawe which were Bulles and Rammes the other of the newe lawe which is the body of Christ. But in the wordes of Basil there is no mention of any sacrifice of the newe lawe onely he compareth the ceremonies of the olde lawe with the heauenly part of the sacrament of the newe Testament which we confesse to be the body and bloud of Christ. The second difference is the vncleannesse of the lawe made vnworthie partakers of the sacrifices but deadly sin maketh men vnworthie receiuers of the body of Christe Yet hath Basil no such wordes of receiuing the body of Christ by wicked men Onely he denounceth their grieuous punishment that presume against the body of Christ when with vnreuerence and vnrepentance they presume against such and so high a mysterie as the blessed sacrament is and this is the plaine sense of his wordes without any cauilling If M. Heskins will vrge their touching of the body of Christ it is a very nice point and must either be referred to a figuratiue speach or else it will breede infinite absurdities Basils mind is plaine the wicked ought not to presume to touch the blessed sacrament which after a certaine manner of speaking is the body of Christe But he annexeth an other place of Basil Dominê° dicens c. The Lorde saying Here is one greater then the temple teacheth vs that he is so much more vngodly that dare handle the body of our Lorde which hath giuen him selfe for vs to be an oblation and offering of sweete sauour by howe much the body of the onely begotten sonne of God exceedeth Rammes and Bulles not in reason of comparison for the excellencie is incomparable This place saith Maister Heskins proueth well that the receiuer of the sacrament receiueth the body of the onely begotten sonne of God and not a bare figure for else howe should hee sinne incomparably by receiuing vnworthily I aunswere hee sinneth incomparably not bicause he receiueth the body of Christe vnworthily but bicause the body of Christe being offered vnto him to be receiued he doth contemne it refuse it most vnthankfully and iniuriously Againe Basil doth here compare the outward signes or elements of the old sacrifices with the thing represented and offered by our sacrament the like speaches he hath of Baptisme But that you may heare him saith Maister Heskins by most plaine wordes teach that the body of Christe is receiued of euill men hearken what he saith de baptism lib 1. cap. 3. Si verò is qui c. If he that for meate offendeth his brother falleth from charitie without the which both the workes of great giftes and iustification do nothing auayle What shall a man say of him which idly and vnprofitably dare eate the body and drinke the bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ But M. Heskins to make it seeme more plaine on his side hath cut off those wordes which doe plainly declare that Basil speaketh not of wicked men that are voyde of the spirite of God but of such as be not zealous and earnest ynough to practise mortification reuocation therefore it followeth immediatly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And thereby much more greeuing the holy spirite which wordes being added to the former doe plainely testifie that Basill speaketh not of wicked and vngodly persons but of the faithful in whom the spirite of God was and yet they had not so great care of profiting in newnesse of life as they ought to haue For against the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 idly and vnprofitably he opposeth afterwarde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 earnestly and effectually so that those Aduerbes idly and vnprofitably are spoken in comparison and not simply as if he saide they take nothing such paines in mortification as they should they profite nothing in comparison that they might by the Lordes body which labour not to be renewed according to his spirite and as he saith they grieue the spirit of God whereby they are sealed to eternall life when they doe not with more earnestnesse and profite come to the Lordes table The second Authour Hierome is cited in Psal. 77. Haec de his c. These wordes are spoken of them which forsooke GOD after they had receiued Manna For nowe in the Church if any man be fed with the flesh and bloud of Christ and doth decline to vices let him knowe that the iudgement of God doth hang ouer him as Paule the Apostle saith He that shall take the body and bloud of our Lorde vnworthily shall be guiltie of the body and bloud of our Lorde I maruell what Maister Heskins meaneth to alter the wordes of Hierome for he
diuel contemned the body of Christ that he entred immediatly after the bodie of Christ receiued but he saith he contemned not the body of Christ for Iudas was so full of wickednes that the bodie of Christ entred not into him but the diuel before had possessed him And that this is more agreable to the mind of Chryso his wordes in the Hom. 45. In Ioan. doe declare Daemones cum Dominicum sanguinem in nobis vident in fugam vertuntur When the diuels doe see the bloud of our Lorde in vs they are put to flight This proueth that Iudas receiued not the bloud of Christ seeing immediately after the receipt of the sacrament as he sayeth the Diuel entred into him Therefore the other place which Maister Heskins alledgeth out of Chrysost. Ho. 83. In Mat. is likewise answered Caenantibus c. When they were a◠Supper Iesus tooke bread blessed it and brake it and gaue it to his disciples O the blindnesse of that traitor which when he had bene partaker of the vnspeakable mysteries he remained the same man and being admitted to Gods table would not be changed into better which Luke signified saying that after this Satan entred into him not because he despised the Lordes bodie but because he laughed to scorne the folly of the traytor These vnspeakeable mysteries M. Hesk. saith can not be a bare piece of bread and a cup of wine but must needes be the bodie and bloud of Christ. But sauing his authoritie is not the baptisme wherewith wicked men are baptised an vnspekable mysterie and yet no wicked man in baptisme receiueth the spirite of regeneration But Chrysostome proceedeth in the sentence before alledged Maius enim peccatum vtraque ratione fiebat quia tali animo mysterijs susceptis nec timore nec beneficio nec honore melior factus est For his offence was made greater both wayes because that hauing receiued the mysteries with such a minde neither with feare nor with the benefite nor with the honour he was made better Chrysostome saith he receiued the mysteries he doth not say he receiued the bodie of christ Now iudge whether Chrysostome doth plainely affirme that Iudas receiued the bodie of Christ with the other Apostles or whether M. Heskins doth lye that so affirmeth of Chrysostome and can no better proue it then you haue heard Now followeth S. Aug. In Ep. contra Donatist post Collat. Quisquis autem c. Who so euer shall liue wel in this church other mens sinnes do nothing hinder him for in it euerie one shall beare his owne burthen as the Apostle saith and whosoeuer shall eate the bodie of Christ vnworthily eateth and drinketh iudgement to himselfe for the Apostle him selfe hath written this In these wordes Augustine calleth the sacrament of the bodie of Christe the bodie of Christ as it followeth immediately after Cum autem dicit iudicium sibi manducat satis oftendit quia non alteri iudicium manducat sed sibi Hoc nos egimus ostendimus obtinuimus quia communio malorum non maculat aliquem participatione sacramentorum sed consensione factorum And when he saith he eateth iudgement to himselfe he sheweth sufficiently that he eateth not iudgement to another but to himselfe This haue we treated shewed and proued that the fellowship of euill men doth not defile any man by participation of the sacramentes with them but by consent of their deedes Likewise he tearmeth the sacrament by the name of the bodie of Christ. Cont. Donat. Lib. 5. Cap. 8. Sicut enim c. As Iudas to whom our Lord gaue the morsel gaue place himselfe to the diuell not by receiuing an euill thing but by receiuing is amisse so any man receiuing vnworthily the Lordes sacrament causeth not because he himselfe is euill that it should be euil or because he receiueth it not to saluation that he receiueth nothing For it was neuerthelesse the bodie and bloud of our Lord euen to them whom the Apostle saide He that eateth drinketh vnworthily eateth drinketh iudgement to himselfe In these wordes he reasoneth against the Donatistes that saide that baptisme ministred by heretikes was no sacrament which he confuteth by example of the other sacrament of Christes bodie bloud which Iudas and other wicked men receiued So that in these wordes the bodie and bloud of the Lorde are to be taken for the sacrament of the bodie bloud of christ Which sacrament as Augu. saith Tract 26. in Ioan. is receyued of some to destruction Res verò ipsa cuius sacramentum est omni homini ad vitam nulli ad exitium quicunque eius particeps fuerit But the thing it selfe whereof it is sacrament is vnto life to euerie man to destruction to no man whosoeuer shall be partaker therof But M. Heskins flyeth to his distinction of receiuing spiritually and corporally as though Augustine euer saide that the bodie of Christe was receiued corporally of any man. But let vs heare his owne wordes whiche M. Heskins hath cited in the same treatise Quantum pertinet ad illam mortem c. As touching that death of which the Lorde saide that their fathers be dead Moses also did eate Manna Aaron did eate Manna Phinees did eate Manna many did eate which pleased the Lord died not Wherfore Because they vnderstoode the visible meate spiritually they hūgred spiritually they tasted spiritually that they might be filled spiritually For we also at this day haue receiued a visible meate But the sacrament is one thing the vertue of the sacrament another thing which many do receiue of the altar doe die in receiuing doe die Wherefore the Apostle saith he eateth drinketh his owne iudgement In these words Augustine teacheth that the visible meate which is the sacrament may be eaten to condēnation which is the thing we affirme as for eating the body of Christe otherwise then spiritually he speaketh not one worde But M. Heskins would learne of the aduersarie what Augustine meaneth by this word Vertue which many do dye in receiuing it and therefore it cannot be the vertue of his passion so it must needs be his very bodie So that by this conclusion Christs bodie may be receiued without the vertue of his passion But if it please him to learne what Aug. meaneth by this word Vertue in that place I answere he meaneth force or efficacie which is either to life or to death as the receiuer is affected that taketh the sacrament for immediatly after he saith Nam bucella Dominica venenum suit Iudae tamen accepit For the Lords morsel was poyson to Iudas yet he receiued it You see therefore a double vertue in the sacramēt one to saluation another to condemnation no bodily presence necessarie for either of them Another place he citeth In Ioan. Tr. 6. Recordamini vnde sit scriptū Remember frō whence it is written Whoso euer shal eat the bread and drinke the cup of
and that the puritie of so greate grace shoulde not make a dwelling for it selfe in vnworthie persons I am verie wel content that this place shal determine the controuersie betweene vs Cyprian sayeth the maiestie of GOD doth neuer absent it selfe from the sacramentes but either hee worketh saluation or damnation by them as well in baptisme as in the Lords supper for hee speaketh of both in the plurall number And seeing infidels and wicked persons cannot bee partakers of the spirite of Christe it followeth they cannot bee partakers of the bodie of Christe for Christ his bodie is neuer separate from his spirite But Augustine contra Crescen is alledged the place is not quoted but it is lib. 1. Cap. 25. Quid de ipso corpore c. What shall wee saye euen of the bodie and bloude of our Lorde the onely sacrifice for our health Although the Lorde him selfe doeth saye Except a man doe eate my fleshe and drinke my bloud he shall haue no life in him doeth not the Apostle teache that the same is made hurtfull to them that vse it amisse For he sayeth whosoeuer shall eate the breade and drinke the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthily shal bee guiltie of the bodie and bloud of the Lorde But it followeth imediately Ecce quemadmodum obsint diuina sancta malè vtentibus Cur non eodem modo baptismus Behold how diuine and holy things do hurte them that vse them amisse why not baptisme after the same manner By which woordes it appeareth that Augustine speaketh of the sacrament and not of the thing signifyed by the sacrament For he compareth baptisme ministred by heretikes with the Lordes supper vnworthily receiued which comparison cannot stande except you vnderstande the outwarde parte of the sacrament in bothe Baptisme is ministred by heretikes that is to say the outwarde sacrament of baptisme the bodie of Christe is receiued vnworthily to destruction that is the outwarde sacrament of the bodie of Christe for as wee heard in the last Chapter Res ipsa sacramenti the thing it selfe of the sacrament is receiued of euery man to life of no man to destruction whosoeuer doth receiue it The fiftieth Chapter sheweth the vnderstanding of the same â—ext by Effrem Primasius Effrem is cited in tract de die Iudicij Si procul a nobis est Siloe c. If Siloe whither the blinde man was sent be farre from vs yet the precious cuppe of thy bloude full of light and life is neere vs beeing so much neerer as hee is purer that commeth vnto it This then remayneth vnto vs O mercifull Christ that being full of grace and the illumination of thy knowledge with faith and holinesse wee come to thy cuppe that it may profite vs vnto forgiuenesse of sinnes not to confusion in the day of iudgement For whosoeuer being vnworthie shall come to thy mysteries hee condemneth his owne soule not cleansing himselfe that hee might receiue the heauenly king and the immortall brydegrome into the moste pure chamber of his brest For our soule is the spouse of the immortall bridegrome and the heauenly sacramentes are the couple of the marriage For when wee eate his bodie and drinke his bloude both hee is in vs and wee in him Therefore take heede to thy selfe brother make speede to garnish continually the chamber of thine heart with vertues that hee may make his dwelling with thee with his blessed father And then thou shalt haue praise glorie and boasting before the Angels and Archangels with great ioy and gladnesse thou shalt enter into Paradise This saying being directly contrarie both to the corporall manner of eating and drinking the body and bloud of Christe and also to that absurde opinion that the wicked receiue the body of Christe Maister Heskins is not ashamed not onely to alledge it as making for him but also tryfleth off the nearnesse of the bloud of Christe which hee sayeth wee denye when wee affirme Christe to bee alwayes in heauen As though the bloude of Christe cannot purge and clense vs except it come downe from heauen and bee powred in at our mouthes As though faith cannot make Christ him selfe to dwell in vs. But where Effrem sayeth his bloud is so much the neerer as hee is purer that commeth vnto it why cannot M. Hesk. vnderstand that the more vnpurer the receiuer of the cup is the further off the bloud of Christ is and so farthest of all from them that be most vnpure that is the wicked and the reprobate But hee woulde haue the bloud of Christ to be as neere the wicked as the godly Againe when Ephrem saith when wee eate and drinke his body and bloude hee is in vs and wee in him with what face can Maister Heskins or any papist in the worlde saye that the wicked receiue the bodye and bloud of Christe in whom Christe is not nor they in him The like syncerity hee vseth in racking the wordes of Primasius Hee that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud abideth in mee and I in him As though he should saye they that so eaâ—â— as it is to bee eaten and so drinke as my bloud is to be dronken For many when they seeme to receiue this thing abide not in God nor God in them because thei are affirmed to eate their own damnation M. Hesk. hath so corrupted this place in translation that you may see hee ment nothing but falshood trechery The latine text he citeth thus Qui edit meane carneus bibit meum sanguinem in me manet ego in eo pro eo ac si diceret qui sic edent vs edenda est sic bibent vs bibendus est sanguis meus Multi enim cùm hoc videantur acciperâ— in Deo non manent nec Deus in ipsis quia sibi iudicium manducare perhibentur He translateth in English thus He that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in mee and I in him As if he should say they that so shal eate my flesh as it is to be eaten and shall so drinke my bloud as it is to be dronken For many when they are seene to receiue this sacrament neither dwell they in God nor God in them because they are witnessed to eate and drinke their owne damnation Now let the reader though hee bee but a meane Latinist iudge whether he haue not corrupted Primasius in translation especially where hee sayeth Multi cùm hoc videantur accipere whiche is manye when they seeme to receiue this thing namely the body and bloud of Christe of whiche hee spake Maister Heskins turneth it into manye when they are seene to receiue this sacrament Many seeme to bee Christians that are not many seeme to bee baptized with the holy Ghoste which are not so many seeme to eate and drinke the bodie and bloud of Christe which doe not because God dwelleth not in them nor they in god Therefore take awaye Maister Heskins false translation and this saying of Primasius
no wicked men Nowe let vs heare Chrysostome whom hee citeth in foure places but the two first are one compt In 1. Cor. 11. Probet seipsum c. Let a man examine himselfe whiche thing also he sayeth in the second Epistle proue your selues whether you be in the faith examine your owne selues not as we doe nowâ— comming rather for the times sake then of any earnest desire of the minde Neither doe we come as full of compunction prepared to purge out our vices but we consider that wee may bee at the solemnities when all men are presente But Paule doeth not so commaunde but he knewe one time in whiche we should come to the purenesse of communication and conscience For if we would neuer communicate at a sensible table if wee be sicke of an ague and doe abounde with humours least we should be caste away muche more wickednesse it is to touche this table being intangled with noysome lustes which are more greeuous then feuers And when I speake of noysome lustes I speake of lustes of the bodie and of money and of anger and of wrath and plainely all lustes that be naught All which he that commeth to receiue must auoide and so touche that pure sacrifice not to be slouthfully disposed nor miserably to be compelled for the solemnities sake to come Neither againe beeing penitent and prepared to be hindered because there is no solemnitie For solemnitie is an euident declaration of good workes purenesse of soule certeintie of life whiche thinges if thou hast thou mayest alwayes celebrate a solemnitie and alwayes come therefore sayth he let a man examine him selfe and so let him eate It followeth immediately Non iubet vt alter alteri probetur sed ipse sibi non publicum faciens iudicium sine teste argutum He doth not commaunde that one should be examined of an other but eache man of him selfe making the iudgement not publike and the accusation without witnesse Maister Heskins alledged the place to proue the necessitie of preparation which no man denieth but these last words of Chrysostome doe clearly ouerthrow auricular confession which Maister Heskins compteth for a necessarie parte of repentance He noteth further that the sacrament is called of him a pure sacrifice and the bodie of christ How it is called either a sacrifice or the body of Christ we haue often shewed before yet he will presse vs with an other place out of his Hom. Oporteâ— haereses c. Deinde vbi multum c. Then when he had disputed much of those which vnworthily are partakers of the mysteries and had greâ—uously rebuked them and shewed that they should suffer the same punishment that they did which had slaine Christe if they receiue his bloud and body without examination rashly he turneth againe his communication vnto the matter in hande Of these wordes M. Heskins will needes gather both his carnall presence and the presence of Christ vnto the wicked receiuer but seeing Chrysostome expressely nameth the partaking of the mysteries it is plaine in what sense the bodie of Christ is said to be receiued vnworthily namely wheÌ„ the mysteries that is his sacrament are receiued vnworthily But our doctrine he saith is without all ground of scriptures that only faith maketh Christe present in the sacrament in deed meaning either such a presence as he fantasieth included in the sacrament or suche an only faith as he slandereth vs withal neither do we affirme it neither is it in the scriptures to be found but that Christ dwelleth in our heartes by faith both in the receiuing of the sacramentes and in receiuing of the word of God the Apostle teacheth vs Eph. 3. and our sauiour Christ testifieth Ioan. 6. that whosoeuer eateth his flesh and drinketh his bloud hath life euerlasting euen as he saide before he that beleeueth in him hath life euerlasting whervpon Augustine In Ioan. Tract 26. doeth rightly gather Credere in eum hoc est manducare panem viuum To beleeue in him that is to eate the bread of life and Tra. 25. Vt quid paras dentes ventrem crede manducasti Why doest thou prepare thy teeth and thy bellie beleeue and thou hast eaten it Yet another place of Chrysostome M. Heskins heapeth vpon vs Hom. 3. in Ep. ad Eph. Considera nunc c. Consider now what great sobrietie of life those partakers of the olde sacrifice did vse For what did they not They were purified euerie time And doest thou comming to this wholsome sacrifice which the Angels them selues doe receiue with trembling measure so great a thing with the compasse of times With what face wilt thou appeare before the iudgement seate of Christ which hast beene so bolde with vncleane handes and lippes so impudently to touch his bodie Thou wouldst not choose to kisse the King if thou hast a stinking mouth doest thou shamelesse man kisse the King of heauen with thy soule so stinking of vices Surely this maner of thing is a cruell reproche Tell me wouldest thou take vpon thee to come to so honorable a sacrifice with vnwashed handes I thinke not but as I coniecture thou haddest rather altogether to refraine from comming then to come with foule hands And whylest thou art so religious in so small a thing thou commest hauing thy soule defiled with the myre of vices and darest thou touch it thou impudent man Although a man for the vncleanenesse of his handes doe withholde himselfe for a time yet to cleanse his soule from the filthie puddle of all vices let him returne altogether Maister Heskins noteth in this figuratiue speeche three thinges first the corporal presence of Christes bodie that it may be touched with handes or lipps And he is not ashamed to cite the saying of Christ handle me and see that a spirite hath no fleshe and bones as you see we haue as though any man either by sight or feeling could discerne Christe corporally present in the sacrament But what a shamelesse man is this to vrge the kissing of Christ with a foule mouth which is a figuratiue and vnproper speech when it followeth that he is kissed of the wicked with a foule soule Like impudencie is in the second note that the bodie of Christe may be touched and receiued of him that hath a filthie soule which Chrysostome saith not but inueyeth vehemently against their presumption that hauing a filthie soule would presume to receiue the sacrament The thirde that it is an wholsome sacrifice which the Angels do honour doth no more proue the corporall presence of Christ on earth then the same Authors wordes soone after do proue the corporal presence of the receiuers in heauen Dic quaeso si rex quispiam praecepisset ac dixisset si quis istud vel istud fecerit mensa mea abstineat an non huius gratia omnia fecissetis In coelot nos vocauit Deus ad mensam magni admirandi Regis recusamus moras nectimus ad rem tantam
51 As it is true that the Bishops of Rome in the first 300. yeares were greatly persecuted by tyrants so is it false that all heretiques agreed to resist that See. For diuers Bishops were heretiques Liberius was an Arrian peruerted by Fortunatianus Hierom. in Catalog Vigilius was priuily an Eutychian as appeareth by an Epistle of his written to those heretiques at the procurement of the Empresse Liberatus Cap. 22. Honorius was a Monothelite condemned in the sixt generall Councell at Constantinople Act. 13. Anastasius was a fauourer of Nestorians as many Ecclesiastical histories do confesse Garanza in Anast. 52 That the Church of Rome hath continued although diuers Christian Princes haue opposed them selues against it with the citizens of Rome and the Cardinalls and that neither the wicked life of the Popes nor the schismes of many Popes at once haue subuerted it doeth not proue it to be the rocke against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile For when Antichristian heresie and diuelish wickednesse hath ouerflowed all the Church of Rome it is manifest the gates of hell haue mightily preuailed against that See although the finall ouerthrowe of that Antichristian head with the body be reserued vnto the almightie power of our Sauiour Christe toward the end of the world 2. Thessa. 2. And it is false that Christian Princes the Romane Citizens the Cardinals or the factions of Diuers Popes haue assaulted the See of Rome but rather the ambition and tyrannie of some persons occupying the same 53 It is false that all countries which forsooke the obedience of the Bishop of Rome were shortly after possessed by Infidels for Affrica was none otherwise possessed by the Vandales then Italy by the Gothes other barbarous nations The Graecians immediately before their oppression by the Turkes were reconciled to the Church of Rome in the councell of Ferrar and Florens â–ª Before which time the Bohemians forsooke the Romish See and yet remaine a nation at this day howe many mightie nations haue forsaken the the Pope which by Gods grace shall be kept as long from oppression of Infidels as they keep in obedience of the Gospel the contempt whereof and not of the Pope was punished in the Asians Africans and Graecians And the prophecie of Esaie 60. That nation and kingdome which shall not serue thee shall perish is to be vnderstoode of finall and eternall perdition and not of oppression by Infidels For the nation of the Persians Turkes Saracens and other which submit not themselues to the Church of Christ shal perish although they triumph in the worlde neuer so long 54 Diuerse councels without the bishop of Rome did with as great and greater credite determine of the Canonicall Bookes of holie scripture as Gelasius did with his 70. Bishops Cap. 59. Carth. 3. Cap. 74. and others 55 The Popes liberalitie toward forrein nations was neuer so great by the hundreth parte as his couetous extortions and Antichristian exactions haue beene witnesse Matth. Paris Matth. West Anno Reg. 1244. and in a manner all Popish Historiographers of late times As for his liberalitie in these times is but to his owne bondslaues whom he hyreth with a litle exhibition to blase his charitie least hee should bee forsaken of all men 56 The greatest archheretike that euer was is the Pope of Rome so farre passing the archheretikes that haue bene in the other patriarchall Sees as Antichrist the head of all heresies passeth the members of that bodie For other heretikes take away but some part of Christes person or his office but the Pope vnder pretence of honoring him putteth him quite out of place by his vsurped supremacie false doctrine blasphemous sacrifice of the Masse and all other his abhominations And that our Sauiour CHRISTE prayed for Peter that his faith might not fayle it perteined onely to his person and to the temptation that immediately followed For otherwise Peter erred when he was reproued of God in vision Act. 10. and of Paule Gallath 2. And that Bishops of Rome haue erred and beene heretiques I haue proued in the 51. article to which you may adde Iohn the 23. that was condemned in the councell of Constance for that he denied the immortalitie of the soule the resurrection of the bodie and the life euerlasting Sess. 11. 57 That the See of Rome hath made so many wicked decrees so vniuersally obserued with such consent of many nations it came not of the spirite of godly vnitie but of the efficacie of errour whiche God sent into the worlde for a iust plague of the contempt of the trueth 2. Thessalonians 2. And this consent of so many nations vnto her abhominable decrees proueth Rome to be Babilon the mother of all abhominations that hath made all nations dronke with the wine of the furie of her fornications Apoc. 18. verse 3. The degrees of marriage prohibited are of the Lawe of God and not of the Pope the celebration of Easter although it be an indifferent ceremonie yet it is elder then the Antichristian authoritie of the Pope Albeit the mysterie of iniquitie beganne to worke in Victor about it That many Bishops and priuate men haue written to suche Bishops of Rome as were learned namely Leo and Gregorie for their resolution in diuerse questions it proueth no supremacie for as many haue written in like cases to Augustine a poore Bishop of Hippo and to Hieronyme but a Prieste of Rome yea Damasus Bishop of Rome himselfe hath written to Hieronyme for his iudgement Pope Sergius did write to Ceolfride Abbot of Woremouth in England to be resolued of certeine questions of Beda one of his Monkes Math. West Ant. 734. 59 That this resorte to Rome for councell was not onely of deuotion but of duetie because the Pope had reserued the hardest cases to his owne iudgement as Moses did hee bringeth no proofe but the Popes owne decrees whiche are of small credite in his owne case and the corrupt practise of the later times when men had submitted themselues vnto the beast 60 That not onely the Bishoppes of Italie but also of Sicilia whiche is not farre off did come in person to Rome at certeine times it prooueth not that all Bishoppes in the worlde were obedient to the Bishop of Rome or were bound so to visite him or that they did so visite him 61 The primacie of the Bishoppe of Rome in olde times was but of order not of power his presidence in councels was but honour not of authoritie and that by graunt or permission at the pleasure of the councell Ioan. Patr. Ant. in con Basil. The councell of Nice made him equall with other Patriarches The councell of Constantinople made the see of Constantinople equall with Rome Sozomen Lib. 7. Cap. 7. 9 â–ª so did the councell of Chalcedon leauing Rome no prerogatiue but of Senioritie and referring all causes of difficultie to the iudgement of the see of Constantinople whiche was new Rome Con. 9. Con. 16. 62 That Iustinian was
had made an idoll in a groue and destroyed her idolles and burned them by the brooke Elledron 1. Reg. 15. verse 13. But Maister Sander will defend her title of succession bicause she was elder then her sonne and to bee honoured of him O cunning Lawyer that will make the wife inheritour to her husband and that in the Empire before her sonne begotten by her husband which had the Empire by discent Concerning the diuorcement of Constantinus from his first wife Marie and marrying of an other as I knowe not the cause so I will not take vpon me the defence The Bishop saide the Bishops and Doctours of that Councell manifestly corrupted the Scriptures Maister Sander sayth it is not so as hee hath proued in parte what he hath proued you may reade in the twefth Chapter but bicause he is so impudent to defend those corruptions and deprauations I will set downe some of them Theodosius Amorij citeth this text for images What thinges so eueer are written they are written for our learning Ioannes Legate of the East citeth this Shew me thy face for it is beautifull Theodorus alledgeth this saying God is maruellous in his Saintes An other to proue that images must be set on the altar vseth this text No man lighteth a candle and putteth it vnder a bushell c. An other this text to proue images necessarie to knowe God by them As wee haue heard so wee haue seene in the citie of our god These are not the one halfe of those beastly applications of the scripture vsed in that blasphemous Councel but these are sufficient to shewe what learned bewclearks they were in the holy word of God and the interpretation thereof The B. saide They falsified the holy Fathers without shame Maister Sander saith nothing but that hee doeth belye them What shall we say of the falsifying of Basil in Oratione 40. Martyres for the worshipping of images which Oration is extant and no such matter found in it Shall we beleeue the forged Oration in the name of Athanasius of the image of Christe in Beritus which being stricken by a Iewe bloud issued out of the side of it Howe impudently doe they deny the authoritie and writings of Epiphanius Amphilochius Theodotus Eusebius which were brought against the irreligious vse and honouring of images by the Councels of Constantinople and Ephesus slaundering also Eusebius of Arrianisme The B. saide They sayde Imago melior est quà m oratio An image is better then a prayer Here are three faultes found in citing fiue wordes Great faultes I warrant you The first he writeth they saide which one onely Bishop did say but in the end of that fourth action all the Bishops and Legates subscribed and allowed all that had bene saide in defence of images and no man reclamed therefore hee might well write they saide The second fault is he said not melior est imago but maior est imago greater i◠an image for a thing may bee greater which is not better This is no great fault but an ouersight and the sense is not altered for in this case he meaneth by greater better The thirde fault that he translateth Oratio for prayer which signifieth an oration or speech Yet doeth it signifie a prayer also But if the circumstance of this place would haue it to be taken for speeche or an oration or sermon the absurditie is nothing lesse to say there is greater force to teache in an image then in a sermon oration or speeche But seeing you finde so many faultes in the citing of that saying to excuse it from absurditie I pray you see if you can finde as many in this which I cite spoken by Ioannes the Monke Priest and deputie or vicar of the East to defend it from blasphemie Nisi fuissent necessariae imagines eas propter stabilitionem factorum non fuissent osculati vt etiam meo iuditio cum sanctis Euangelijs veneranda cruce aequivaleant Except images had bene necessarie he would not haue kissed them for the establishing of deeds so that in my iudgement they are of equall worthines with the holie Gospels and the reuerend crosse Act. 4. The B. said And againe whosoeuer wil not adore the godly images accursed be he This M. Sander confesseth to be written in deed and to be true sauing that he cauilleth at the translation of Diuinas imagines into godly images which he saith should be diuine images But how liketh he the saying of Constantine Bishop of Constantia in Cypres which affirmeth that he will worship images with that honour which is due to the blessed Trinitie accurseth him that refuseth with the Manichees and Marcionites vnto which sentence al the rest agree Where is nowe the distinction of Doulia and Latria when they will worship the image of Christ with the same honour that is due to the Trinitie What saith he to the zeale of Ihon the deputie of the East which affirmeth that it is better to admitte all stewes of whores and brothels into the citie then to deny the worshipping of images If these be not beastly and blasphemous absurdities worse then childish sayinges whiche he can not abide the Bishop to tearme them let the world iudge Hitherto M. Sander hath made no defence for this idolatrous rablement which he calleth the seuenth generall councell But he will answere all the Bishops arguments against it with these 4. reasons First he saith there is no impietie or falshoode approued or decreed in that councel A substantial reason which concludeth vpon that whiche is in controuersie But yet to lay open his shamelesse impudencie I will proue that to haue beene decreed and approued in that councell which he him selfe will not denie to be impietie and falshood Action 5. We read thus out of the booke of one Ihon Bishop of Thessalonica De Angelis Archangelis eorum potestatibus quibus nostras animas adiungo ipsa Catholica Ecclesia sic sentis esse quidem intelligibiles sed non omnino corporis expertes inuisibiles vt vos gentiles dicitis verum tenui corpore preditos aereo siue igneo vt scriptum est Qui facit Angelos suos spiritus ministros eius ignem vrentem c. Of Angels Archangels and of their powers vnto which also I adioyne our soules the Catholike Churche doth so thinke that they are in deede intelligible but not altogether voide of body and inuisible as you Gentiles say but that they haue a thinne body that either of ayer or of fire as it is writen which maketh his Agels spirites and his ministers a burning fire c. Herevpon Thorasius the Patriarke saide Ostendit autem pater quod Angelos pingere oporteat quādo circumscribi possunt vt homines apparnerunt Sacra synodus dixit etiā Domine This father hath shewed that we ought to paint the Angels also seing they may be circūscribed haue appeared as men The holie synode said Yea
the first that had it in estimation although afterward it grew to be esteemed of good Christians by a corrupt emulation To the 3. that visiting of Saints tombes and kissing their reliques after the Popish manner was thought to be a superstitious vanitie is proued by the Epistle of the Smyrnenses to the Phylomilienses Euseb. Lib. 4. Cap. 16. Wherein they shew that the Gentiles and Iewes thought best to burne the bodie of Policarpus least the Christians should leaue Christ and begin to worship him and therefore they watched the Christians least they should take his bodie out of the fire Ignorantes nos nec vnquam c. beeing ignorant say they that we can neuer forsake Christ which suffered for all them that shall be saued of the worlde nor worship any other For him truly we adore as the sonne of God but the Martyrs we loue worthily as the Disciples and followers of our Lord for their inuincible loue towardes their King and Maister of whoÌ„ we wish our selfes to be made companions and Disciples Therefore when the Centurian saw the contention of the Iewes they burned his bodie as their maner is being laid in the midst and so at the length we got his bones more precious then precious stones better tried then gold buried theÌ„ where it was meet where also as neere as may be being assembled the Lorde shall graunt vs with ioye and gladdenesse to celebrate his Martyrs byrth day â–ª both to the remembraunce of them that haue fought alreadie and for the exercise and preparation of them that shall fight hereafter Such reuerent burning therfore of their dead corpses laying vp of their reliques as is of loue not of superstition we condeÌ„ne not But such as the papists vsed of their reliques they learned of the heretikes Osseni which as Epiphanius writeth tooke the spittle and other fylthines of the bodies of Marthys and Marthana whom they took for saintes and vsed them for helpe of diseases as the papists did with the snottie napkins of Thomas Becket such a saint as they were And that they should not obiect that some haue done as they doe S. Augustine De moribus eccles Cath. lib. 1. cap 34. Thus writeth Nolite mihi colligere professores nominis Christiani neque professionis suae vim aut scientet aut exhibentes Nolite consectari turbas imperitorum qui vel in ipsa vera religione superstitiosi sunt vel ita libidinibus dediti et obliti sint quid promiserint Deo. Noui multos esse sepulchrorum vt picturarum adoratores Gather not vnto me such professors of the name of Christ for example as neither know nor shewe forth the vertue of their profession Seeke not vp the multitudes of vnskilfull persons which ether in true religion it selfe are superstitious or else so giuen to their lustes that they haue forgotten what they haue promised to god I know there be many worshippers of tombes and pictures c. To the 4. that miracles worked at their chappelles or memorie among the heretikes as the papists be were attributed at the firste tydinges of them vnto the diuilles subtiltie is proued by S. Augustine who speaking of miracles wrought at such places saith De vnitate ecclesiae cap. 1â— Remoueantur ista vel figmenta mendacium hominum vel portenta faâ—lacium spirituum aut enim non sunt vera quae dicuntur aut si 〈◊〉 atiqua mirafacta sunt magis cauere debemus Away with these miracles which are either the forgeries of lying men or the wonders of deceiuing spirites for either chose things that are reported be not true or if any miracles of the heretike are wrought we ought so muche the more to take heede of you The fourth part conteineth 3. articles To the first that to praye for the soules departed was thought repugnaÌ„t to the scriptures is proued by this reason for that although it be an ancient errour yet was it not vsed of the Churche almost for 200. yeares after Christ and the first that we reade of in any authenticall writer that maketh mention of prayer for the deade was Tertulian when he was an heretike whiche learned it of Martianus who laide the firste foundation of purgatorie as appeareth in his booke De anima cap de infeâ—is To the seconde that to offer sacrifice and giue almes for their soules health was accompted impietie I aunswere as to the first vppon which it dependeth Origenes in Iob. lib. 3. sayeth that the Christians did celebrate the day of death Vtpote omnium dolorum depositionem as the layinge aside of all paine Likewise that they did keepe the memorie of their friendes departed as well reioysinge in their rest as prayinge for the lyke godly endinge in faith Also they called together the people with the Cleargie and especially the poore to their buriall feastes vt fiat festiuitas nostra in memoriam requiei defunctis animabus quarum memoriam celebramus nobis autem efficiatur in odorem suauitatis in conspectu aeterni Dei that our feastiuitie may bee made in remembraunce of the reste whiche is vnto the soules of them that are departed whose memorie we celebrate and to our selues into a sauoure of sweete smellinge in the sight of the eternall god This was the iudgement of the Greeke Churche in his time of suche assemblies prayers and almes as was vsed at the buryall of the deade or in remembraunce of them To the thirde that the last willes of founders of almes houses Colledges and monasteries were broken concerning their temporall goodes and legacies and that no part thereof did come to their owne blood and familie concerning almes houses and Colledges of learninge it neede not bee prooued for they are maintained by our doctrine Concerninge Monasteries there were none then but of suche as liued with their owne labours Neuerthelesse if anye legacie of anye founder were to mainetayne Idolatrie and false religion as there were manye of the Paganes whiche were founders of Idolatrous temples and Colledges lyke to the popishe monasteries it is certeine that either they were destroyed or else conuerted to better vses Now if Master Rastell thinke it to bee necessarie that their legacies shoulde be restored to their owne blood and familie vppon the dissolution of such houses hee might doe well to perswade a nomber of popishe gentlemen in Englande that enioye abbeies and their lands to make such restitution and when hee hath brought to passe that all which they haue is so restored wee will beginne likewise to exhort godly gentlemen to doe the like or rather to applye some part of them to the maintenance of learning and religion and to the sustentation of the poore After Maister Rastell hath earnestlye required the aunswere of these questions whiche haue bene so often aunswered in speciall treatises I meane so manye of them as wee maintaine with promise of submission if they be proued he desireth licence to rehearse the saying of Tertulian in his booke De