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
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
easie of all men to be vnderstanded and neede none interpreter for that we be all taught of God and of his spirite c. Of which minde he imagineth his aduersarie to be In that he would the scriptures to be common to all men How false slanderous this his report is of Luther may sufficiently appeare by that one worde Theodidacti taught of God by which it is most manifest that Luther affirmeth the scriptures to be easie to be vnderstood not of all men in generall but onely of all them that are taught of God and of his spirite by which they were indighted But nowe our Burgesse will make plaine by discussion that the scriptures be obscure darke and hard to be vnderstanded and for that cause not of all men indifferently to be read and that by seuen arguments Although it followeth not that the scriptures are not to be read bicause they are hard but the contrarie yet let vs weigh these seuen arguments The first There be many controuersies of the blessed sacrament therefore there be difficulties in the scriptures If controuersies raysed by froward maintainers of falshoode be a proofe of difficultie there shall nothing be plaine not only in the scriptures of God neither in any other writings or sayings of men no not in such matters as are subiect to our senses but we shall be brought into an Academicall doubtfulnesse of all things But what say you M. Heskins are not the scriptures plaine for the reall presence of Christes body in the Sacrament which you maintaine Is Hoc est corpus meum nowe a matter of difficâ—ltie Let all Papistes that haue witte beware of your proceding you haue euen now by your first argumeÌ„t cut asunder the synnes strength of al your cause The second The very disciples of Christ besides the Iewes vnderstoode not Christes owne words before they were written Ioh. 6. Much lesse we the same written To passe ouer the vngodly difference you make betweene Christes wordes proceeding out of his owne mouth and the same writteÌ„ by inspiration of his owne holy spirit call you them the very disciples of Christ which offended with that speach departed from him or them that abid the interpretation of them and tarried still with him Such disciples as the former were be you and your sect which when the scripture serueth not your purpose accuse it of difficultie and vncertaintie as the olde Heretiques the Valentinians did as witnesseth Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 2. But Chrysostome I suppose helpeth you much where hee saith Quid ergo est durus difficilis intellectu quem capere non posset eorum imbecillitas plenus formidinis What then is this word hard difficult to be vnderstoode and such as their weaknesse could not receiue full of fearefulnes Here is the name of the words of Chrysostome but to what purpose when no doctor more often or more earnestly exhorteth all Lay men that are Christians to read the scriptures of God affirming theÌ„ also to be easie to be vnderstood for the most part and not onely without daunger but also verie profitable euen where they be hard to be vnderstoode I wil rehearse one or two places of a great number In Luc. cap. 16. Idque hortor hortari non desinam c. And this I exhort you and will not cease to exhort you that you would not only in this place meaning in the Church giue heede to those things that are said but also when you shall be at home you would euery day giue your selues to the reading of the holy scriptures And there followeth a reason Neque nunc fieri potest Neither can it nowe be I say it can not be that any man should obtaine saluation except hee bee continually conuersant in spirituall reading And not long after Etiamsi non intelligas illic recondita c. yea although thou vnderstand not the misteries that are therein hidden yet of the very reading of them great holinesse groweth Finally In genesim Hom. 9. In diuinis autem scripturis c. but in the holy scriptures in those spirituall and precious stories neither is it lawfull to suspect any danger neither is there any great labour but vnspeakable gaine onely let vs bring with chearefulnesse that which lyeth in vs. The third If the scriptures be plaine and easie for euery maÌ„ to vnderstand it was no great benefit that Christ did open his Apostles witts that they might vnderstand the scriptures nor that he did interpret Moses and the Prophetes to the disciples that went to Emaus wherefore we conclude with S. Peter that as he witnessing the Epistles of S. Paule be hard so be the rest of the scriptures hard O blundering Burgesse Who did euer affirme that the scriptures were easie to be vnderstaÌ„d without the spirit of Christ Or what asse of Acarnania wold brave out suche a reason The Apostles could not vnderstand the scriptures sufficieÌ„tly to teach all the world without a singular gift of interpretation therefore no Christian man may learne by reading the scriptures howe to knowe God to his eternall saluation without the same extraordinarie gift But by your leaue maister speaker for the office you take vpon you I know not howe you came vnto it you misreport S Peter being a Lord of the higher house as you count him for he saith not that the Epistles of S. Paule be hard but that among those things which he wrote of the second comming of Christ some things are hard to be vnderstoode Wherefore neither his authoritie nor your reason will be sufficient to conclude your cause The fourth The Chamberlen could not vnderstand the prophet Esay without an interpreter therefore the scriptures are not plaine and easie of all men to be vnderstanded A proper conclusion There is some difficultie in some scriptures therefore they are all hard and can not be vnderstoode We neither affirme that all things in the scriptures are easie to be vnderstanded nor that they are easie to be vnderstood of all men But that the children of God by his spirite are instructed to vnderstand so much in them as is profitable for their saluation and that nothing necessarie for vs to knowe is so obscurely set foorth in one scripture but it is as plainly set down in an other Neither do we reiect interpreters bicause we read the scriptures but as Chrysostom teacheth by reading the scripturs we are made more apt to vnderstaÌ„d the interpreters In Euan. Ioan. Hom. 10. The exaÌ„ple of Philip sent vnto the Chamberlen doth also declare howe God wil blesse the reading of the scriptures wheÌ„ he is sought in them The fift The Apostles them selues vnderstoode not Christe speaking of his passion and resurrection Iohn 16. After a while c. therfore if the liuely voyce of Christ was dark much more is the same now written in dead letters dark hard to be vnderstanded The Apostles by speciall dispensation not yet so wel lightned that they vnderstood their master not
only at this time but at many other times also bewrayed their naturall ignorance that the grace of God in their illuminatioÌ„ in due time afterward might appeare more glorious But doth it therefore followe that the sayings of Christe were hard or their vnderstanding darke A blinde man can not see the Sunne is it therefore a good conclusion that the Sunne is darke and not easie to be seene Howbeit it is well to be marked that once againe hee putteth difference betweene the liuely voyce of Christ and his word written in dead letters making opposition betweene The liuely voyce in the eare and the deade letter in the eye As though the vnderstanding of the scripture consisted either in the eare or in the eye when neither the eye hath seene nor the eare hath heard neither haue they ascended into the heart of man such things as God hath prepared for them that loue him 1. Cor. 2. Es. 64. But God hath reuealed them vnto vs by his spirit which spirit searcheth out al things euen the depthes or greatest secretes of god Neuerthelesse here is brought in Hieronyme ad Paulinum Habet nescio quid latentis energiae viua vox c. The liuely voyce hath I knowe not what hidden vertue and being vttered froÌ„ the mouth of the author into the eare of the disciple soundeth more strongly Wherfore Aeschynes when he was banished at Rhodes and that Oration of Demosthenes was read which he made against him when all men did woonder at it and praise it sighing he said What if ye had heard the beast himself sounding out his owne words This writeth Hieronyme to persuade Paulinê° not only to satisfie him self with his writings but also to trauel that he might so him heare him whom he had known before only by his writing that by the example not only of heathen Philosophers but also of holy men of the Church as the next wordes following immediatly do plainely testifie Haec non dico quod sit in me aliquid tale c. I say not these things for that there is in me any such matter whiche either thou mayest or art desierous to learne but bicause thy feruent heate and desire of learning ought to be commended euen without vs Thy wit is pregnant and commendable without a teacher 3. So farre is it off that Hieronyme meant to compare the word of Christ spoken with that which is writen whose force is as great by his spirite in the scriptures which this dogge calleth the deade letters as it was in his voyce when it was vttered But howe impudently the name of Hieronyme is abused against his plain iudgment wherby he not only alloweth lay men to read the scripturs but also confesseth that they receiue great fruit therby may appeare by this one place amoÌ„g many written in Esaiam libro 4. cap. 11. Frequenter euenit vt homines soeculi It commeth to passe verie often that lay men being ignorant of the mysticall sense are yet fedde with the plaine and simple reading of the scriptures 33. And in his epistle vpoÌ„ the same CoÌ„mentarie he affirmeth that Ignoratio scripturarum ignoratio Christi est Ignorance of scriptures is the ignorance of christ Shortnes will not suffer me to point the places only to the confusioÌ„ of the aduersary if any dout or would see more let them reade the places at the full The sixt All men haue not the gift of knowledge of prophesie nor of interpretation of tongues therefore euerie man hath not the vnderstaÌ„ding of the scripturs neither be they easie to be vnderstanded of euerie man. First I pray you note that he maketh interpretatioÌ„ of the scriptures and the interpretatioÌ„ of tongs al one secondly what force is in this reason all men haue not extraordinarie gifts of tongs of healing of knowledge of prophesie of interpretation of tongues c. Therefore the scriptures are so harde as they cannot be vnderstood by the ordinarie gifte of prophesie which is promised to all the seruaunts of God young olde men and women vpon whom his holy spirit is powred 10.2 Act. 2. I am ashamed to troble the readers with any more words in answer vnto such a grosse consequence The seuenth God hath ordeined first Apostles â–ª secondly Prophetes thirdly teachers c. Now if the scriptures be easie for euerie mans vnderstanding then either these states be superfluous or else euerie man is a teacher and prophete but this were a great absurditie therfore the scriptures are hard full of difficulties If a yong Sophister had D. Heskins in the scholes at Cambridge where somtime he hath been a Sophister he would with one common warde which is Nego consequentiam auoyde the pikes of all these seuen arguments Alas poore man is there no vnderstaÌ„ding of the scriptures but such as may make a man a teacher an extraordinarie prophete are there no degrees of knowledge but either the highest perfection or the depest ignorance Will this reason follow Men may profite in knowledge by reading therefore teaching is superfluous or this teaching is necessarie therfore reading is vnprofitable What shall I say to these reasons but that they are giuen ouer into a reprobate minde which are so furiously bent to withstand the trueth that they set not foorth so much as any shadowe of reason The second Chapter to proue that the scriptures be not easie reciteth certaine harde and obscure places of the olde Testamente The purpose of this Chapter as of the next also is al together foolishe and vnreasonable for who is so mad to denie but that ther are diuerse places both in the old and newe Testament which bee obscure and hard to be vnderstode not onely of the ignorant but euen of the best learned yet doeth it not therefore followe because something is harde therefore all is so or because some places in the scripture are harde therefore there is no profite in reading of all the rest But let vs see these places recited First he nameth all the prophetes the books of Iob the book of Psalmes the Preacher the song of Salomon Al which books in his iudgement are so hard as they cannot be vnderstoode without an interpreter Wel let vs graunt great difficultie to be in these books as in diuers other is all time lost therfore that is spent in reading of them The harder they be the more diligently they are to be red that they may be vnderstood The difficultie to good scholers will not dull but wheâ— â—heiâ— desire to learne â–ª to 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 to conferre to seâ—â—e 〈…〉 to find CoÌ„cerâ—ing Genesis he alledgeth out of Hieronyme the tradition of the vnbelâ—uing Iewes that they might not read it before they were 30 yeres olde But Hieronyme him self wold haue yong childrens tender tongs seasoned with sweet Psalmes â–ª and exercised in studie of the scriptures and Prophets which you M. Heskins professe to be so difficult For he instructing Laeta 〈◊〉 she should bring â—p her
be shed for you vnto remission of sinnes This place is falsly truncatly cited by M. Hesk. thus Quem paneÌ„ etsi fractum coÌ„minutumque vidimus integer tamen cum ipso suo patre manet in coelis De quo pane dicit panis quem ego dabo caro mea est pro mundi vita Which he Englisheth thus which bread although we haue seen brokeÌ„ brused on the crosse yet it abideth with that his father whole in heauen of the which bread he saith c. Wheras the very wordes are quem panem etsi fractum comminunumque vidimus in passione integer tamen mansit in illa sua indiuidua vnitate De isto pane de isto calice dicebat ipse Dominus Panis quem ego dedero caro 〈◊〉 est pro saeculi vita c. Although this writer as it is manifest to any man that will reade his treatise speaketh onely of the vnitie of the Godhead of Christ with his Father and the holy Ghoste notwithstanding the breaking of his body in his passion which is represented in the sacrament yet M. Heskins vpon his owne falsification inferreth that the body of Christ was and is in three sundrie places on the Table or Altar on the Crosse and in heauen with his father Yea he appealeth to the grammarian for the nature of a Relatiue That the same bread is on the table which was broken on the crosse and that which was broken on the crosse is it which is whole sitting in heauen Which how vaine a reason it is when it is vrged of that thing which hath two natures vnited in one person as our Sauiour Christ hath I appeale from all grammarians to al Catholike diuines as in the saying of Christ no man hath ascended into heauen but he that came downe from heauen euen the sonne of man which is in heauen Ioan 9. Let M. Hesk. with the graÌ„marian vrge the relatiue in this place he shal proue him selfe both an Anabaptist a Marcionist For Christ coÌ„cerning his humanitie came not down out of heauen neither was he in heauen according to his humanity when he was on the earth But what stand we trifling about this testimonie Seeing Augustine both in the interpetation of this whole chapter is so copious vpon the Psal. 98. in exposition of this text is so plain direct against the carnal presens of Christs body in the sacrament Nisi quis c. acceperunt illud stulte carnâ—liter illud cogitauerunt putaâ—eruÌ„t quòd praecifurus esset Dominus particulas quas daÌ„ de corpore suo daturus illis c. I lle auteÌ„ instruxit eos ait illic spiritus est qui vinificat caro auteÌ„ nihil predest Verba quae loquatuâ— suÌ„ vobis spiritus est vita Spiritualiter intelligite quae loquatus sum Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis bibituri illum sanguinem quem fusuri sunt qui me crucifigent sacramentum aliquod vobis commendati spiritualiter intellectum viuificabit vos â–ª â—t si necesse est illud visibiliter celebrari oportet tamen inuisibiliter intelligi Except a man eate the flesh c. They tooke it folishly they imagined it carnally and thought that our Lorde would haue cut off certaine peeces of his 〈◊〉 and haue giuen them c. But he instructed them and 〈◊〉 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 shall not eate this body which you see and drinke this bloud which they shall shed which shall crucifie me I haue commended vnto you a certaine sacrament or mysterie which beeing spiritually vnderstoode shall quicken you Although it is necessarie that the same be celebrated visibly yet must it be vnderstood inuisibly Likewise In 6. Ioan. Tr. 27. Illi enim putabant eum erogaturum corpus suum ille autem dixit se ascensurum in Coelum vtique integrum Cum videatis filium hominis ascendentem vbi erat priùs certè vel tunc videbitis quia non eo modo quo putatis erogat corpus suum certè vel tunc intelligetis quia gratia eius non consumitur morsibus He speaketh plainely if they will vnderstand him For they thought that he would giue his body but he said that he wold ascend whole into heauen WheÌ„ you shal see the sonne of man ascend vp where he was before surely then at the least you shall see that hee giueth not his body after that maner that you think surely then at the length you shall vnderstand that his grace is not coÌ„sumed with bitings If these places were not most manifest euen to the first eye that looketh vpon them I might spend time in obseruing and noting out of them We come nowe to Chrysostome who in his 45. Hom. in Ioan. vpon those wordes The bread which I will giue is my flesh saith The Iewes that time tooke no profite of those sayings but we haue taken the profite of the benefite Wherefore it is necessarily to be saide howe woonderfull the mysteries be and wherefore they were giuen and what profite there is of them And immediatly after We are one body and members of his flesh and of his bones and yet more plainely And that we might be conuerted into that flesh not onely by loue but also in deede it is brought to passe by the meat which he hath graunted vnto vs. He addeth also an other cause of the giuing of this mysterie When hee would shewe foorth his loue toward vs hee ioyned him selfe 〈…〉 his body and brought him selfe into one with vs that the 〈◊〉 might be vnited with the head Finally he adioyneth a plaine place for the proclamer I would be your brother and for your sakes I tooke flesh and bloud with you and by what things I was conioyned vnto you those things againe I haue giuen vnto you Here he triumpheth as though the game were his when in deede there is nothing for his purpose but much against it For no one word of all these sentences proueth that the sixt of Iohn must be vnderstoode of the supper otherwise then as it is a sacrament of that feeding and coniunction of vs with Christ which is therein described And wheras he argueth vpoÌ„ the last sentence Christ gaue vs that flesh by which he was ioined to vs but he was ioyned to vs by very substantiall flesh therfore he gaue vs his very substantiall flesh I confesse it to bee most true for he gaue his very substantiall flesh to be crucified for vs If he vrge that he gaue his flesh in that sacrament although Chrysostome saith not so in this place directly yet the manner of the participation of his flesh must be such as is the maner of his coniunction with vs but that is spiritual by which he is the head and we the members and yet vnited
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
Saint Augustine in the same place expoundeth what this meate and drinke was saying Hunc itaque eâ—bum potum societatem vult intelligi corporis membrorum suorum quod est sancta Ecclesia in praedestinatis vocatis iustificatis glorificatis sanctis fidelibus eius â–ª He woulde haue this meate and drinke to be vnderstoode the fellowship of his bodie and his members which is the holy Church in them that are praedestinated and called and glorified euen his sayntes and faithfull ones And afterwarde he sayeth Huius rei sacramentum id est vnitatis corporis sanguinis Christi alicubi quotidie alicubi certis interuallis dieruÌ„ in Dominica mensa prÄ™paratur 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 bloude of Christe in some places euerie daye in some places at certeine dayes betweene is prepared in the Lordes table and from the Lordes table is receiued vnto some to life to other some to destruction But the thing it selfe whereof it is a sacrament is to life vnto euery man and to destruction of none that shal be partaker of it These places declare that the text in hande is by Augustine expounded not of the sacrament but of the societie of the members of Christe in his bodie whereof the communion is a sacrament So that Master Heskins alledgeth Augustine directly against his playne meaning The seconde place he citeth out of Augustine is in Psalm 98. Nisi quis c. Except a man eate my flesh he shall haue no life They tooke it foolishly carnally they thought and they thought that our Lorde woulde cutt certeine peeces from his bodie and giue them They vnderstood not sayeth Maister Heskins that he woulde giue them his fleshe to be eaten verily in the sacrament But howe verily let Saint Augustine tell his owne tale in the same place Ille autem instruxit eos ait eis Spiritus est qui viuificat caro autem nihil prodest Verba que loquntus sum vobis spiritus est vita Spiritualiter intelligite quod loquntus sum Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis â–ª bibituri illum sanguinem quem fusuri sunt qui me cruâ—ifigent Sacramentum aliquod vobis commendâ—â—i spiritualiter intellectum viuificabit vot Et sinecesse est illud visibiliter celebrari oportet tamen inuisibiliter intelligi But he instructed them and sayeth vnto them It is the Spirite that quickeneth the fleshe profiteth nothing The wordes that I haue spoken to you are spirite and life Vnderstande ye spiritually that whiche I speake You shall not eate this bodie which you see and drinke that bloude which they shall shead that shall crucifie mee I haue commended vnto you a certeine sacrament which being spiritually vnderstoode shall quicken you Although it be necessarie that the same should be celebrated visibly yet it must be vnderstoode inuisibly This saying of Augustine being so plaine I shall not neede to gather any more of it then euery simple man at the first reading will conceiue The thirde place he citeth is de Doct. Christ. lib. 3. Capitul 16. which he citeth corruptly and truncately although I see not what frawde lyeth in his corruption saue onely he declareth that he hath not redd the place in Augustine him selfe but taketh it out of some collectour or gatherer The woordes of Augustine are these Si praeceptiua locutio est aut flagitium aut facinus vetans aut vtilitatem aut beneficentiam iubens non est figurata Si autem flagitium aut facinus videtur iubere aut vtilitatem aut beneficentiam vetare figura est Nisi manducaueritis inquit carnâ—m filij hominis sanguinem biberitis non habebitis vitam in vobis facinur vel flagitium videtur iubere figura est ergo praecipiens passioni Domini esse communicandum suauiter atque vtiliter recondendum in memoria quod pro nobis caro eius crucifixa vulnerata sit If it be a speache of commaundement forbidding any wickednesse or heynous offence or commaunding any profite or well doing it is no figuratiue speache But if it seeme to commaunde a wicked deede or an heynous offence or to forbidd any profit or well doing it is a figure Except you shall eat sayth he the flesh of the sonne of man drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you He feâ—â—eth to commaund a heynous offence or a wicked deede therefore it is a figure commaunding vs to communicate with the pasâ—ion of our Lorde and swetely and profitably to keepe in a memorie that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. Although this place be directly against his purpose and the purpose of al the Papistes yet by a fonde glose of one Buitmundus that wrote against Berengarius he would seeme to make it serue his turne and wring it out of our hands And this forsooth is the shift The sacrament is not a figure of the bodie of Christe but of his death But Augustine in this place calleth not the sacrament a figure but sayeth that the text in hande is a figuratiue speach and sheweth howe it must be vnderstood The fourth place he rehearseth out of Augustine is Contra aduers. legis Proph. Cap. 9. he omitteth to quote the booke but it is in the second booke and thus he citeth it Quamuis horribilius videatur humanam carnem manducare quà m perimere humanum sanguineÌ„ potare quà m fundere nos tamen mediatorem Dei hominum Iesum Christum carnem suam nobis manducandam bibendumque sanguinem dantem fideli corde ore suscipimus Although it may seeme to be more horrible to eate the flesh of man then to kill a man and to drinke the bloud of man then to shed it yet wee for all that doe receiue the mediatour of God and man Iesus Christ giuing vs his flesh to be eaten with a faithfull heart and mouth and his bloude to be drunken Thus Augustine But rather thus Heskins the impudent falsifier truncator gelder peruerter and lewd interpreter of Augustine and all other doctours that come in his hande But Augustine him selfe writeth thus Sicut duos in carne vna Christum ecclesiam istis nolentibus fine vlla obscoenitate cognoscimus sicut mediatorem Dei homimum hominem Christum Iesum carnem suam nobis manducandam bibendumque sanguinem dantem fideli corde ore suscipimus quamuis horribilius videatur humanam carnem manducare quà m perimere humanum sanguinem potare qà um fundere Atque in omnibus sanctis scripturis secundùm sanae fidei regulam figuratè dictum vel factum si quid exponitur de quibuslibet rebus verbis quae sacris paginis continentur expositio illa ducatur
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
He that eateth not my flesh and drinketh not my bloud hath no life in him selfe How doeth the fleshe profite nothing without the which no man can liue See that this particle The flesh profiteth not any thing is not spoken of the fleshe it selfe but of the carnall hearing M. Hesk. saith that Chrysostome needeth no expositor to open his exposition And I am of that same iudgment For he is so plaine against al grosse and carnal imagination about these mysteries that nothing can be plainer He saith to vnderstand these thinges in the sixt of Iohn simply as they are spoken is to vnderstād them carnally which ought not to be for all mysteries must be vnderstood spiritually the receiuing of Christ in the sacrament is a mysterie therfore it must be vnderstāded spiritually The seuen and thirtieth Chapter proceedeth vpon the same text by Theophylact S. Bernarde Theophylacte following Chrysostome as he doth very much whē he is not carried from him by the corruption of his time saith That the wordes of Christ must be vnderstood◠spiritually Whervpon M. Hesk. maketh an obiection how those words may be vnderstood spiritually yet the carnal presence receiuing retained He answereth that the Papists also confesse the words of Christ must be vnderstode spiritually and first alledgeth Theophylacte to proue that he allowed the carnal presence which though they do not vndoutedly proue it yet considering the time in which he liued it may be granted that he did allow it What then Marie spiritual vnderstāding letteth not the carnal presence But I haue shewed before that while Theophylact wold followe Chrysost. yet mainteine the errour of his time no maruel though he were contrarie to himself But spiritual vnderstanding by M. Hesk. definition is to vnderstand that these thinges are not done by any naturall meane but by the spirit of God namely transubstantiation such like But Chrysostom as we sawe in the Chapter before determined otherwise of spirituall vnderstanding of this scripture namely that the sayings must not be taken simply as they are spokē but as mysteries be considered with the inward eyes But M. Heskins hath a plaine place for the proclaymer out of S. Aug. serm Ad Infant Quod videtis in altari panis est c. That which you see on the altar is bread and the cuppe which also your eyes do shew you But that faith requireth to be instructed the bread is the bodie the cup is the bloud In the mind of some man such a thought may arise Our Lorde Iesus Christ we know whence he receiued flesh namely of the virgin Marie he was nourished grewe vp was buried rose again ascended into heauen thither he lifted vp his bodie from whence he shall come to iudge both the quick the dead There he is now siting at the right hand of the father how is therfore bread his bodies or that which is in the cuppe how is it his bloud Brethren therefore those things are called sacraments because one thing is seene in them another thing is vnderstanded That which is seene hath a corporall forme that which is vnderstoode hath a spirituall fruite What plainnes is in this place except it be against transubstantiation and the reall presence let the readers iudge And withal I must admonish them that M. Hesk. citeth it farre otherwise then it is in Augustine beside that he leaueth out that which followeth maketh all the matter as plain as a pack staffe which are these words Corpus ergo Christi c. Therfore if thou wilt vnderstand the body of Christ heare the Apostle saying to the faithful you are the bodie of Christ his mēbers If you therefore be the bodie of Christ his members your mysterie is set on the table you receiue the Lords mysterie you answer Amen to that which you are in answering you consent Thou hearest therefore the body of Christ thou answerest Amen Be thou a mēber of the bodie of Christ that thy Amen may be true Why then in bread Let vs here bring nothing of our owne Let vs also heare the Apostle Therfore when he spake of this sacrament he saith One bread we being many are one bodie Vnderstand this and reioyce By these wordes it is moste manifest that Augustine excludeth the carnall presence affirming the elementes to be the bodie and bloude of Christ euen as we are the bodie and members of Christ and that is spiritually mystically as we are the bread namely by significatiō not by transubstantiation The testimonies of Algerus and Bernard I leaue to M. Hesk. for that they are without the compasse of the challenge The eight and thirtieth Chapter endeth the exposition of this text by Euthymius and Lyra. Euthymius is cited In 6. Ioan. in these words Spiritus est qui viuificat c. It is the spirite that quickeneth Now he calleth the spirit the spiritual vnderstanding of those things which are said likewise the flesh to vnderstand them fleshly For the speech is not now of his flesh which quickeneth Therefore he saith to vnderstand these thinges spiritually giueth that life which I spake of before but to vnderstand them carnally it profiteth nothing Maister Hesk. wold fain make Euthymius to speak for him if he could tell how to wring him in but it wil not be Spiritual vnderstanding is as Chrysost. before in the 36. Chap. hath declared not as M. Heskins would racke it to make it stand with his grosse and carnal vnderstanding From the iudgement of Lyra as no compotent Iudge I appeale although in this place he speake nothing for M. Heskins but rather against him for he agreeth with the rest that the wordes must be spiritually vnderstanded The nine and thirtieth Chapter beginneth the exposition of the next text by S. Augustine and Cyrill The text is this the wordes that I speake vnto you are spirite and life of which Augustine writeth thus Tra. 27. In Ioan. Quid est c. What is it they are spirite and life They are spiritually to be vnderstoode Hast thou vnderstoode them spiritually they are spirite and life Hast thou vnderstoode them carnally Euen so also they are spirite and life but not to thee M. Heskins hauing once made a blind determination of spirituall vnderstanding taketh spirituall vnderstanding wheresoeuer he findeth it for carnal vnderstanding carnall vnderstanding for spirituall vnderstanding without all ryme or reason But still Chrysostome lyeth in his way to vnderstand carnally is to vnderstand things simply as they are spoken for all mysteries must be vnderstood with inward eyes that is spiritually When the inward eyes see the bread they passe ouer the creatures neither do they thinke of that bread which is baked of the baker but of him which called himselfe the bread of eternal life Cyril is cited Cap. 24. In 6. Ioan. Verba quae c. The wordes which I haue spoken to you are spirit
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
of many that worshipped Christe yet had they no commaundement of him so to doe A great number worshipped him not as God but as the Prophete of God for which they had commandement in the lawe and they that worshipped him as God most especially But M. Heskins will make the like argument Christ gaue the sacrament of his body to the Apostles onely and gaue no commaundement that all people should receiue it indifferently wherefore it ought not to be done Reuerend M. Doctour I denye your antecedent for ye can not proue that he gaue it only to his Apostles nor that he gaue no commaundement for he gaue an expresse commaundement to continue the same ceremonie vntil his comming againe as S. Paule doth testifie Therefore your argument is as like as an apple is like an oyster But to passe ouer the rest of his babbling against the proclamers learning too well knowne to bee defaced by such an obscure Doctours censure I come to his second argument S. Paule that tooke the sacrament at Christes hand and as he had taken it deliuered it to the Corinthians neuer willed adoration or godly honour to be giuen to it This argument he will not vouchsafe to aunswere as concluding nothing but he denyeth the antecedent saying It is false that S. Paul deliuered no more to the Corinthians then Christ did First he will make Paule a lyar when he saide that which I receiued I deliuered c. But howe will he proue that he deliuered more then Christ did If you can spare laughter in reading I could not in writing Forsooth S. Paule deliuered to the Corinthians that the vnwoorthie receiuer shall be guiltie of the body and bloud of Christ whereas Christ when he instituted the sacrament gaue no such lawe O noble Diuine as though that if Christ at his supper had vsed no longer discourse of this sacrament then those fewe words which the Euangelistes doe rehearse as a summe thereof yet it was not necessarily to be gathered that the vnworthie receiuer contemning the body bloud of Christ which is offered to him is guiltie of haynous iniurie against the same and therefore it is necessarie that euery one that receiueth it should examine him selfe that hee receiue it worthily Whether Christ receiued Iudas or no which is not agreed vpon but if he did knowing him by his diuine knowledge to be a reprobate though not yet discouered to the knowledge of man hee gaue vs none example to receiue notorious wicked persons whome wee as men knowe to be vnwoorthie without repentance But to make the matter out of doubt Saint Paul though not by the terme of adoration yet willed honour to be giuen to the sacrament When he saith let a man examine him selfe and so let him eate of this bread and drinke of this cup. For a man cannot examine him self without great honor giuē vnto the sacrament And for more manifest proofe Saint Paule referreth the honour or dishonour that is done by woorthie or vnwoorthie receiuing not to the grace of GOD or merite of Christes passion but to the sacrament Who so eateth this breade and drinketh this cuppe of the Lorde vnworthily shall be guiltie of the bodie and bloud of Christ. Nay rather hee referreth the honour or contempt of the sacrament to the body and bloud of Christe whose sacrament this is as the wordes are plaine But who would thinke that Maister Heskins would play the foole so egregiously to abuse his reader with ambiguities and aequiuocations as though there were no difference betweene adoration and honouring that is giuing of due reuerence vnto the sacraments and worshipping them as Gods. But S. Augustine I trowe helpeth him Ep. 118. ad Ian. Placuit c. It hath pleased the holy Ghost that in honour of so great a sacrament the body of Christ should enter into the mouth of a Christian man before other meates I holde him as blinde as a beetle that seeth not honour in this place to signifie reuerence which is giuen to holy things and not adoration which pertayneth onely to god His last reason to proue that Saint Paul taught the adoration of the sacrament is that which is the whole controuersie that Saint Paule taught the carnall presence but that remaineth to bee proued afterward The fiue and fortieth Chapter proueth by the same Doctours that the proclamer nameth that the sacrament is to be honoured This is a meere mockerie the Bishop speaketh against adoration of the sacrament as God M. Heskins proueth that it is to bee honoured that is to say reuerenced as a holy ceremonie And none otherwise then the sacrament of baptisme as wee shall see by his proofes First Chrysostom being one that is named by the Bishop maketh so cleere mention thereof as M. Heskins thinkes the reader will maruell hee was not ashamed to name him And what saith he De sacerdotio lib. 6. thus he writeth Quum autem ille c. But when he meaning the Prieste hath called vpon the holy Ghost and hath finished that sacrifice most full of horrour and reuerence when the common Lord of all men is daily handled in his handes I aske of thee in what order shall wee place him Howe great integritie shall we require of him How great religion For consider what handes those ought to be which doe minister what manner of tong that speaketh those words Finally then what soule that soule ought not to be purer and holier which hath receiued that so great and so worthie a spirit At that time euē the Angels do set by the Priest and all the order of heauenly powers lifteth vp cryes and the place neere to the altar in honour of him which is offered is full of the companies of Angels Which thing a man may fully beleeue euen for the greate sacrifice which is there finished And I truly did heare a certain man reporting that a certaine wonderfull olde man and one to whome many mysteries of reuelations are opened by God did tell him that God did once vouchsafe to shewe him such a vision and that for that time he sawe as farre as the sight of man could beare soudenly a multitude of Angels clothed in shining garments compassing the altar finally so bowing the heade as if a man should see the souldiers stand when the king is present which thing I do easily beleeue In these words Chrysostom doth hyperbolically amplifie the excellencie of the Ministers office vnto which no man is sufficient But notwithstanding he rehearseth a vision by hearesay of angels reuerencing the presence of God to aduance the dignitie of the ministerie yet speaketh he not one worde that the sacrament is to be worshipped adored as god And therefore M. Heskins maketh a poore consequence the ministration of the sacrament is honourable ergo much more a man ought to honour the sacrament The ministration of baptisme is honourable doth it therefore followe that the water of baptisme is to be worshipped as God An
Christ it is euident that he neither beleeued transubstantiation nor the carnall presence nor consecration nor intention after the manner of the Papistes as also by this that hee calleth the bread and wine after consecration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplaries or figures You see therefore howe with patches and peeces rent off here and there he goeth about to deceiue the simple readers which either haue no leasure or no boookes or no skill to trie out his falsifications and malicious corruptions The like sinceritie hee vseth in citing Chrysostomes Masse for so he calleth his Liturgie in which is a prayer for Pope Nicholas and the Emperour Alexius which was seuen hundreth yeres after Chrysostomes death and therfore could not possibly be written by him Besides this there be diuers copies in the Greeke tong one that Erasmus translated which is very vnlike that copie which is printed in Greeke since that time as the learned sort doe knowe The wordes he citeth be in a manner the same that were in Basils Liturgie sauing that in the end he addeth Permutans ea sancto spiritu tuo changing them by the spirt This change may well be without transubstantiation as hath bene often shewed before The saying of Ambrose is more at large in the Chapter next before As for the praier of the Popish Masse that the oblation may be made the body and bloud of Christ as it is vnderstoode of them is nothing like the prayers of the elder Liturgies although in sound of some words it seeme to agree And as foolishly as vniustly he findeth fault with our praier in the communion that wee receiuing the creatures of breade and wine in remembrance of Christes death according to his institution may be made partakers of his most blessed body bloud S. Iames S. Clement and the rest saith he prayed not that they might receiue bread and wine No more doe we thou foolish sophister But that receiuing bread and wine we might be partakers of Christes body and bloud and this did all the Apostolike and Primitiue Church pray as we pray in baptisme not that we may receiue water but that receiuing water we may be borne a newe Neither did they euer pray that the breade and wine might be transubstantiated into the body bloud of Christ but that they might be made the body bloud of Christ to theÌ„ after a spirtual sacrameÌ„tal maner But I am much to blame to vouchsafe these childish sophismes of any answere Next to this he would knowe what authoritie the Protestants can shewe that the eating and drinking of bread wine is of Christes institution That it is a part of his institution the Euangelists S. Paul do shewe most euidently But though he tooke breade and wine in his hands saith M. Heskins he changed it before he gaue them so that it was no more bread and wine but his body and bloud and therefore we charge Christ with an vntrueth to say that receiuing of bread and wine is of Christes institution O Maister of impietie and follie Christ made no such change in his handes but that which was in the cup was still the fruit of the vine as he himself testified saying I wil no more drinke of this fruit of the vine vntill the day come when I shall drinke it a newe with you in the kingdome of my father Math. 26. As for the praier of those Liturgies of Iames and Basil That God would make them worthie to receiue the body and bloud of Christe without condemnation proueth not that they meant to receiue the body of Christ after a corporall maner nor that the very body of Christe may be receiued to damnation The thirde Liturgie of Chrysostome which Erasmus expoundeth hath it otherwise Dignos nos redde potenti manu â—ua vt participes simuâ— immaculati tui corporis preciosi tui sanguinis per nos omnis populus Make vs worthy by thy mightie hand that we may be partakers of thy vndefiled body and of thy precious bloud and so may al the people by vs This prayer is godly sound and so are the other being rightly vnderstoode namely that they which eate of that bread drinke of that cup of the Lord vnworthily as S. Paule saith do eat and drinke their owne damnation not considering the Lords body But M. Heskins vrgeth that the spiritual body of Christ or Christ spiritually cannot be deliuered by the Priestes to the people but the real body may Yes verily much rather then the body of Christ corporally euen as the holy Ghost may be deliuered in baptisme and as eternal life and forgiuesse of sinnes may be giuen in preaching the Gospell and none of these feinedly but truly yet otherwise are they giuen by God otherwise by this Ministers But in this distinction of M. Hes â–ª it is good to note that he maketh Christ to haue a reall body which is not spirituall a spirituall body which is not reall Christ hath in deede a mysticall body which is his Church and that is not his natural body but by spiritual coniunction vnited to his only true naturall body But of this mystical body M. Hes. speaketh not Further he taketh exceptions to our prayer affirmeth that It is not the institution of Christe to receiue the creatures of breade and wine in the remembrance of his death But notwithstanding all his childish blockish quarels our prayer is waranted by the Apostles words 1. Cor. 11. As often as ye eat of this bread drinke of this cup ye shewe the Lords death till he come In the last part of this Chap. he will determine of the intention of the ministers of the new Church And that is that Desiring to receiue the creatures of bread wine they exclude the body and bloud of Christ. Who euer heard a more shamelesse lye or a more inconsequent argument But seing there be two sorts of ministers in this new founded Church he wil speake of them both one sort were made Popish Priestes so haue authoritie to consecrate but they lacke intention now they be fallen to heresie there is a second sort which thought they could not haue intention to consecrate yet being none of the greasie and blasphemous order they lack authoritie But I wold there were not a third sort of whom I spake in the last chap. that wer made popish Priestes and so continue but in outward dissimulation ioyne with vs if these intend to consecrate when they minister the coÌ„munion how can M. Hes. dissuade the Papists from receiuing of them or count their sacrameÌ„t nothing but bare bread And wheras M. He. seemeth in the end to inueigh against such I will willingly confesse that they are worse then he is or such as professe what they are but not worse then hee hath beene in King Henries King Edwards dayes when he dissembled and swaâ—e as deepely as any of them all As for our intention seeing it is
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
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
comprehendeth it not Ioan. 1. and the natural man vnderstandeth not those things that be of the spirite of God. 1. Cor. 2. ver 14. and where shal we finde the practise of all nations according to the lawe of nature when they haue all declined and gone astray there is not one that doth good no not one Ro. 3. Psal. 13. Wherefore there are other two most certeine infallible rules wherby the law of nature in any case may be found out and knowen namely the word of God and the spirite of God whiche giue mutuall testimonie one to the other the worde and spirite of God beeing contrarie to the worshipping of Images The Lord saying in the first table of religion Thou shalt not fall downe to them nor worship them it is manifest that worshipping of images is contrarie to the Lawe of nature So that you see the foundation of this building already subuerted by which you may coniecture how long it is possible for the house to stande after it For what soeuer he iangleth of the internall conceptions of the minde vnproperly and metaphorically called images and comparing artificiall images vnto them it is nothing els but vain deceiptfulnesse to be contemned and hissed out not onely of all Christian Churches of euery faithfull man but also out of all schooles of Diuinitie by all them that are learned as well in the scriptures of God as in humaine phylosophie But that you may see what soundnesse there is in his doctrine thus he weaueth his copwebbe One telleth him that Christ died onely to saue man from euerlastinge paines he hearing and beleeuing this straight conceiueth Christ dying for him and is mooued to loue him Secondly he is much delighted with the Image which he conceiued in his minde of Christ dying for him and loueth that also Thirdly he loueth and honoureth him that tolde him this matter as a bringer of good tydinges So here bee three kindes of honour the cheefe to Christe the thinge it selfe the second to the inward conception or Image of him in his minde the last is to the reporter And here you haue a paterne of popishe prophane diuinitie for here is no loue nor honour due to the spirite of God who onely must open his heart to receiue suche tydings profitably nor to the worde of God which must be the warrant of this tydinges to be true nor to fayth which applying these tydinges to his owne saluation is the roote of all vertuous obedience loue honour and thankefulnesse in him But euen as he considereth of any prophane report so doeth he consider of this glad tydings of the gospell and not otherwise But to proceede of this wise distribution of three fold honour hee inferreth seuen causes of honouring artificiall Images The first is that it beareth the office of a reporter and therefore it must needes haue a rewarde of honour A slowe messenger a dumbe reporter which can neither go of this errande nor tell his tale But what skilleth it saieth Master Sander whether I learne by hearing or by seeing For Basill sayeth that both eloquent orators and cunninge paynters the one with their tongue the other with theiâ— pensil haue set forth valiant acts done in warre and stirred vp many to fortitude Hom. in 40. martyr But it skilleth vs to learne by hearing of Gods word because faith coÌ„meth by hearing Rom. 10. vers 17. and they are blessed which beleeue without seeing Ioh. 20. vers 29. Howsoeuer it skilleth papists howsoeuer all other things except religioÌ„ faith may be learned As for the reporter of the glad tydings of the gospel he is in deed worthy of honor if he do his message truly willingly diligeÌ„tly but it is honor of the second table not of the first that perteineth to him And except there be in him loue to God his neighbor he is worthy of no honor althogh he do the message Therefore if the Image were as a reporter â–ª he could haue but honor of the second table which is of charity not of religion But seeing there is in an image neither loue will diligence truth for which causes a reporter is loued cherished neither is an image cause of anye thinge there is no loue honour or worshippe due â—nto it The second cause of honoring artificial images is for that it doth speedily and most coÌ„ueniently informe our inward imagination and therefore is more to be honored theÌ„ any orator For the eye being the principal sense is most ready to instruct the minde and therfore a painted image is a more easie and liuely way to enstruct vs then any orator In deed if faith were a register of visible things as it is of inuisible thinges Heb. 11. vers 1.7 the sense of seing were a more easie speedy coÌ„uenient way of instructing then by hearing but yet images were no more to be honored then the sound of words is nowe to be worshipped when we heare the gospell preached But God saith he hath ioyned visible signes to his worde as in the proclaiming of the lawe yea sir but God shewed not there the image of any thing to teach them thereby but expressely forbad the vse of them in his religion and seruice But if God gaue visible wordes as he doeth his sacramentes it is not therefore lawfull for men to make images as visible teachers which God hath forefended There is therefore hitherto no naturall cause of the honouring of images The thirde cause of honouring of Images is because they be naturally knit and ioyned to the trueth concerning their shape and representation as the reporter if he be an Ethnike or Iewe he is ioyned to Christ in morall honestie and naturall loue of trueth if he be baptized much more as a member of Christ if he be a bishop c. as a minister of Gods worde if he be a Prophete by a more special grace if an Apostle as one nerest to Christ if it be Christ himselfe as the chiefe and God himselfe So Images as they be neerer to Christ they are more to be honoured and Christs Image most of all which speaketh alwayes and yet saith neuer a worde to them that haue spirituall eares of vnderstanding Nay carnall eyes of blinded and hardened heartes But this difference he maketh the former reporters deserue honour beeing reasonable creatures freely and voluntarily reportinge the trueth but letters and Images deserue no honour and yet it is due to them whiche is a straunge matter a due without desert yea necessarily due to them in respect of that whose image it beareth But admitte that the image were a true reporter as he is nothing but a false dumb stocke without any action yet seeinge he compareth an image to the written letters of the gospell which be figures of that trueth which is represented and learned by them I pray you what honour is due to the written letters of the Byble more then to the written letters of any other
is so truely honourable as those who continued to the end of their life according to that image of GOD wherevnto they were first made such are all the Saintes Setting the question of images aside see howe he honoureth the Saintes with the dishonour of the redemption of Christ which was needlesse to them if they continued in the image of God in which they were first made The Apostle witnesseth that by Christe we are restored vnto the image of God from whom by sinne we are fallen Coll. 3. ver 10. For to say that any man hath cōtinued according to the image of God to his liues end is to say that he neuer sinned Furthermore he saith their images are made in the faith of Gods church A wholsome faith which is cōtrarie to Gods word yea he concludeth there is no doubt but by the force of Gods word we are bound to honour Saints images bicause thei are made according to the shape of them in that behalfe as they were most like vnto god First where is that worde of God M. San by whose force we are bound You seeme to be an anthropomorphite when you say that Saintes images are made according to the shape of them in that behalfe as they were most like vnto god For the images of Saints when they are best made are made but according to the shape of their bodies And were the Saints most like to God in the shape of their bodies O brutish heretique But let vs see an other conclusion in this Popish proportion Our Ladies image approcheth neerer to hir in nature then she doth approch to God therefore her image must be more honored for her sake then she her selfe for Gods sake By the former proposition we must learne that the man which made our Ladies image is able to make a truer image thē God who made our Ladie to his image For to compare the substances of the images is nothing to the purpose to shew the excellencie of the images as you your selfe M. San. in your Metaphysicall abstractions haue taught vs For an image of stone being like to a man is a better image then one of golde being not like to him I say a better image not a better matter And will you now compare the matter of our Ladies image for so you cal her as liker in nature to her substance then her substance is to God to proue her image in it more to be honoured then the image of God in her Truly if you be so insensible that you see not that grosnesse of this falshod I am ashamed in respect of that Vniuersitie which gaue you the title of a Doctour not worthie with these arguments to step out of the schooles of the sophisters Last of al you reason thus the image of God in vs may be dimned darkned insomuch that men haue ben worshipped as Gods but our Ladies artificial image being onely knowne or called by the name of her shape and image can neuer be principally worshipped as our Lady her selfe You play the sophister too foolishly for no more can a man so long as hee is knowne and called by the name of the image similitude of God b◠principally worshipped as God him selfe But that name forgotten man hath bene worshipped as God so hath the image of our Ladie bearing the name of our Ladie bene worshipped as her selfe or rather as GOd him selfe neither hath the insensiblenesse of images defended them from daunger of being worshipped as God. An other testimonie of scripture that Pope Adrian citeth is Gen. 28. of the stone which Iacob set vp right for a monument or standing image saith M. San. and powred oyle vpon it and called the name of the place Bethel that is the house of god Therefore we may set vp images and honour them a substantial reason For make as mysticall interpretations as you can of the stone to signifie Christe the oyle the spirituall vnction of the holy Ghost yet was it no image but a signe or monument erected in remembrance of the vision by a speciall instinct of Gods spirite which when the Israelites would drawe into an example of wilworship erecting a temple there and setting vp an image thereon the place was called of the Prophetes Bethauen that is the house of vanitie and not Bethel the house of god O see the 4.5 10. Chapter And whereas Augustine noteth that although he called the stone Gods house yet hee worshipped not the stone neither sacrificed to the stone nor called it God You thinke to escape by aunswering that no more doe you adore images of stone with godly honour or with any honour for the stones sake But Augustine denyeth that he resorted afterward to it that he adored the stone with any honor at al or in any respect or that he did any thing like to idolatrie but you adore the image of Christ cal it Christe and goe a pilgrimage to it therefore Iacobs example can not shrowd you from idolatrie For although the annoynting of the stone were a consecration of it to be a holy monument by a speciall direction of Gods spirite yet it followeth not that it was any adoration of the stone or that euery man may set vp and annoynt stones after that manner which hath no such warrant of Gods worde or his spirite And that God chose one place aboue another for his honour it proueth not that men may choose one stocke aboue another to make an idoll thereof or an image to worship as you had rather call it The thirde text of scripture is that Iacob adored the toppe of Iosephs rodde or scepter Heb. 11. Which Sedulius saith did mystically betoken the kingdome of Christ to be honoured in the end of the worlde as he adored the rodde or scepter of his sonne Yet is there here no image honoured Nay here is not the toppe of Iosephe◠scepter honoured out of the scripture For the Hebrue text is He worshipped toward the bedshead Gene. 47. vers 31. And the Greeke text Heb. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he worshipped toward the end of his staffe or leaning vppon the end of his staffe So that neither in the Hebrue nor Greeke there is any worshipping of the staffe or scepter of Ioseph The 4. text of scripture God appearing to Moses bad him pull off his shooes for the place where he stoode was holy ground The presence of God made the ground-holie What then Therefore an image appointed to bring vs to the remembraunce of holie thinges may be holy honoured I denie the argument where is the presence of God in the image to make it holie The 5. Dauid honoured the Arke and daunced before it The Arke was a holie sacrament ordeined by God therefore hath he nothing to do with images forbidden of God. The 6. God cōmandeth the brasen serpent to be made Nu. 21. Shewe the like speciall commaundement to dispense with the general lawe Thou shalt not make
except they denied the institution of the sacrament patterne of reformation to be conteyned in the scriptures But if it be granted saith M. Rast. whiche is to farre absurde that S. Paule did reduce the Corinthians to the first originall and institution Why doe not rich men now bring meate to the Church and receiue the sacrament after they haue filled their bellies Forsooth because Christe instituted no such maner of suppers And why saith he do you not washe one anothers feete hauing a commandement so to do But if this commandement be litterally to be vnderstanded why doe you Papistes breake it If it be not why do you require that of vs which you confesse is not required to be done of any Humilitie is commaunded whereof our Sauiour Christe gaue vs example in that fact that God graunt we may obserue the outwarde ceremonie he commanded not to be obserued of any but that which was signified thereby ▪ And whereas Maister Rastell compareth the receiuing of both kindes by the lay people with that ceremonie of washing of feete to make it seeme that the iustitution of Christ might be altered in the one aswell as in the other he declareth what reuerence or estimation he hath of the institution of Christe For as that ceremonie of washing of feete is and may be altogether omitted as he fantasieth by the authoritie of the Church so not only one kind of the sacrament but both kindes also may be likewise taken away both from the people the priest if it please the Churche of Rome If he denie the conclusion what hath he gayned by the argument of that example Or what hath he proued against this our assertion that nothing is to beleeued without the expresse worde of God conteined in the scriptures SECTIO 3. From the first face of the 19. leafe to the second of the 23. leafe Of the disagreement of the Gospellers Whereas the Bishop had saide that the light of the Gospell is now so mightily and so farre spread abroade that it was to be hoped no man would lightly misse his way as before in time of darkenesse and perish wilfully it offendeth M. Rastel that he should boast of this glorious light of the Gospel which he a most obstinate blinde man will not vouchsafe to see Likewise that he calleth the heresie of Papistrie the darkenesse of the time afore And he would knowe where this glorious light of the Gospell is to be seene Concerning the light of Poperie because the Kingdome of the beaste by Gods iudgement is darkened in these partes of the worlde where he is knowen to sitte which maketh M. Rastel and his complices to gnaw the tonges for anger he is faine to demonstrate the light a farre off beyond the reache of any mans eyes sight among the newe found landes and the wilde Indians conuerted as he saith not by the Protestants but by Popish monkes and Friers Although it were easie to proue that protestantes also haue planted some Churches in those newe founde landes as in Gallia Antartica but what follie were it to boast of that How far and wide the Gospel is spread in Europe he that is so blind that he will not see who can make him acknowledge it Euen Italy Spaine haue yeelded great numbers of Martyrs confessors Al other regions of Europe in a maner at this day haue either vtterly banished Papistry or at lest by publik authoritie giuen libertie to the Gospel as England Ireland Scotland Flanders Holland France Germanie Denmark Bohemia Polonia Hungaria Suetia Gothia c. But M. R. seeing he cannot shewe his Popishe light abroade he wil shewe it in corners of mens harts because as he supposeth there is neuer a citie in which there is not some Papistes and therefore he wil conclude that the Gospel is not mightily and farre spread abroade By which reason he may proue that it neuer was nor shall be mightily spread abroade for euer there haue beene and shal be enimies that will not imbrace it Another reason he would seeme to bring of sixe diuers kindes of Gospellers wheras therere is but one Gospel which is a fond malicious cauill for I can bring more then 16. kinds of Papists which differ in some opinions and ceremonies wheras al the difference he can assigne amongst them that be truly accounted professors of the Gospell is either in one article of the sacrament or else in outward rites and ceremonies which cannot exclude any of them from the possession of the Gospel so long as they al agree in the doctrine of eternal saluation He vrgeth vs as Tertullian did the Marcionistes heretikes of his time to shew the beginnings of our Churches which wee do daily when we approue our doctrine to be grounded vpō the foundation of the Prophets Apostles bringing in no new Gospel as those heretikes did whereof they could not deduce the beginning from the Apostles Euangelistes of christ And whereas he saith we haue no one vndouted true iudge teacher or faith because we read Luther the Doctors old new with iudgement that is because we builde not our faith vppon any one man as they do vpon their proude Pope but vpon Christ his eternall word I answer we haue a most certein faith groūded vpon the teaching of a most holie maister euen the spirite of Christ in his word who is a most vndouted iudge both for wisdome authoritie to determine all controuersies Wheras the Papists building altogether vpō men haue no vndouted iudge teacher or faith not only because al men are liers vnconstant by corrupt nature but also because they cannot agree among themselues whether the Pope or the councel is the superior iudge teacher or rule of faith But M. Ra. as the rest of the Papists do gloryeth much that we haue receiued the gospel frō the Pope whose iudgment in expositiō therof we shold as well receiue as we acknowledge his fidelitie in keeping it without corruption But we vtterly denie that we haue receiued the Gospell from the Pope but rather from the Greeke Churche neither doe we acknowledge any fidelitie of the Pope in keeping of the Gospel whome we accuse of shamefull corrupting the Latine text therof and as for burning of the Books either he could not the same being dispersed into so many copies or he needed not when he persuaded al men that the Gospell had none other sence but that it pleased him to frame vnto it Finally when Pope Leo the tenth accounted the Gospel nothing else but a fable of Christe whiche brought them so great honor and wealth as who seeth not either how reuerently the Pope preserued the Gospell or for what cause he kept it vndestroied Finally M. Rastels prophane iesting of riding post to heauen declareth himselfe to be a right Papist that is to say an Atheist which maketh a scorne of religion and of the hope of the life to come euen as the same