wils you be deceiued not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God which maketh those willing at last which were vnwilling at first Did the Niniuites repent against their willes because they did it at the compulsion of their king What needed the kings expresse commandement that all men should humbly submit themselues to God but that there were some amongst them which neither would haue regarded nor beleeued Gods message had they not bene terrified by the kings edict This Princely power and authoritie giueth many mē occasion to be saued which though they were violently brought to the feast of the great housholder yet being once cōpelled to come in they find there good cause to reioyce that they did enter against their willes When Petilian obiected that no man must be forced by lawes to doe well or to beleeue S. Austen replieth To faith in deed may no man vnwilling bee forced but yet by Gods iustice or rather mercy The breath of faith is chastened with the rod of affliction Because the best thinges are freely chosen with good lyking must not therefore ill deedes be punished by syncere Lawes You be not forced to doe well by these lawes that are made against you but forbidden to doe euill Preposterous were discipline to reuenge your ill liuing but when you first contemne the doctrine that teacheth you to liue well And euen they which make lawes to bridle your headynes are they not those which beare the sworde as Paul speaketh not without cause being Gods ministers and executors of wrath on him that doth ill Who list to be farther satisfied that Christian Princes may compel their subiects to the true worship of God prescribed in his word and punish the refusers let him read at large the places aboue cited or shortly consider that the spirit of God cōmendeth king Iosiah for making all Ierusalem and Beniamin to stand to the couenant which he renewed with God and COMPELLING ALL THAT WERE FOVND IN ISRAEL TO SERVE THE LORD THEIR GOD. So that you might haue well spared your wanton complaint to God and kept in your Crocodiles teares Your Soueraigne doeth nothing against you but what is agreeable to Gods and mans lawe consonant to the doctrine of our Churhes much easier than that which your selues practised on others neither is this our question what rites you consented vnto but what fayth Christ deliuered his Church in the writings of his Apostles and Euangelists for to that euery man which is baptised may bee lawfully forced by the Princes authoritie let him and his forefathers assent to what they list except you can proue that baptisme serueth no longer for a sacrament of Christian religion but goeth now for a Romish recognisance Phi. Our griefe of heart is much encreased either when we looke into other States and Countries as Germania Suitzerland Suecia Boemia and the like where though there haue bene great alterations in religion these late yeeres yet lightly none bee forced so but if they can not haue the exercise of their profession in one torritorie Canton towne Church or Parish yet they may haue it neere them in an other as also in all the Prouinces and Kingdomes subiect either to the Persians or the Turke at this day The old Christians be permitted to vse freely their deuotions or when we looke backe to the like distresses of Catholikes in old time when certaine Emperours were chiefe fautors of Arianisme and other Sectes who yet were often enduced of their naturall benignitie to yeeld certaine Churches or at lest Oratories in Churchyards and other places adioyning for the Catholique seruice in their dominions So did Constantius the Arian Emperour Valens graunt to S. Athanasius and his followers in Alexandria which Valens God plagued afterward because he would not suffer the same at Antioche Valentinian also the yonger profered the like to S. Ambrose in Millan Theo. Are you well in your wits to lament the lacke of that in this Realme which God in plaine words detesteth and with sore plagues reuengeth Haue you forgotten how sharply king Achab and the commons of Israel were reproued of Elias for that error He did not say why permit you not those that will to the Lord those that list to Baal but how long halt you betweene two sides or opiniōs If the Lord be God follow him forsaking al other if Baal be God get you after him Since then it is confessed on both partes yours and ours that there can bee no God saue the Lord and hee neuer ment to surrender any piece of his glorie but is so ielous of it that hee wil be serued and onely serued with all our heart mind and strength these things I say being out of question I recken it can not stande with a Princes duetie to reuerse this heauenly decree THOV SHALT VVORSHIP THE LORD THY GOD AND HIM ONLY SHALT THOV SERVE with establishing two religions in one Realme the first authorized by Christ bequeathed in his testament to the Church the next inuented of Antichrist and flatly repugnant to the propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures For if God be trueth they which presume to worship him with lies as in contrarie faith must needes come to passe serue nowe not God but the deuill a lyer himselfe and the father of lyes whose seruice no Christian Prince may so much as tolerate What are saith Vincentius strange Gods but strange errors which the scriptures so cal figuratiuely for that heretiques reuerence their opinions no lesse than the Gentiles their Gods By the which wee learne that the first precept forbidding moe Gods than one barreth all other seruices of the same God saue that which himselfe hath appointed for himselfe It is the vilest basest kinde of idolatrie when men worship their owne fansies obseruing that for a religion which their deceiued and swelling minds imagine Then may not Princes winke at corrupt vitious religion which is an inward ghostly worship of Idoles seeing no man therefore no Prince can serue two masters the seruice that Princes yeelde Christ in respect of their royall vocation consisteth in making lawes for Christ which if they doe likewise for Antichrist it can not be salued but that they serue God and Mammon or rather cease to bee the seruaunts of Christ in that they renounce their master by seruing his aduersarie Nowe what accompt God will exact for his name blasphemed his sonne refused his sacraments prophaned his word exiled and what answere must be made for the ruine of faith haruest of sinne murder of soules consequent alwaies to the publique freedome of heresies I leaue to bee fully considered and wisely preuented by Christian Magistrates who must thinke that silence prouoketh sufferance boldeneth their subiectes to forsake God and his Church euen as in ciuill affaires the slacking of iustice doth maintaine disorder So that in this point your defender betrayeth his vnsetled humor which
skirmish and arming your selues with three scriptures and seuen fathers you thinke to vanquish and ouerrunne the Princes power in causes ecclesiasticall but soft Sirs you mistake your weapons their force is not great The nation and kingdome sayth God to Sion that wil not serue thee shal perish The kingdome he sayth not the king but graunt it were directly spoken of kings what seruice that is which God requireth of kings if you doe not knowe S. Austen will tel you In this sayth he Kings serue God if their kingdomes they command that which is good and forbid that which is euill not in temporall affayres onely but in matters of religion also And againe Yee Kings serue Christ in making lawes for Christ. So that the cōmanding their people to reuerence the word and obey the will of God and the making of strait lawes to keepe men in the faith and Church of Christ that is I say the seruice which Princes owe to God and his Sion and which you deny lawful for them to medle with By the two next places of S. Paul you prone that Pastors Bishops be rulers of the Church That worde Rulers you catch hold of as if the wordes in S. Paul did not also signifie feeders and leaders which be the two signes and dueties of good shepheards and yet we neuer denied but the messengers and disposers of Gods mysteries by preaching the woord administring the sacraments and well vsing the keyes haue their internall and spirituall regiment ouer the soules and consciences as wel of Princes as others which is the true meaning of the place that you bring out of Nazianzene Athanasius Osius Leontius Hilarie and Ambrose sharply reproue Constantius Valentinian for taking vpon them to chaunge the faith abolish the godhead of Christ plainely told those Princes they were no iudges of faith nor arbiters of doctrine which was true which false neither might they so much as interpose their iudgement or authoritie whiles such cases were debated That very lesson haue wee from the beginning taught with our lippes sealed with our blood more stedfastly than you We neuer gaue prince nor Pope right to controle the trueth or reuerse the worde which God hath established in his Church and the constant auouching thereof against earthly States powers hath cost vs as you can not choose but knowe many thousande mens liues Yet this is no let but Princes as well as other priuate persons may trie spirits and beware false Prophets And this I trust you dare not impugne that Princes may doe that for Christ which you defend they must do for Antichrist graunt vs that we require no more Chrysostome is the last of the seuen Christ sayth he when he willed Peter to feede his sheepe cōmitted the charge of them to Peter Peters successors Meaning by Peters successors not onely the bishops of Rome but him selfe and all other Bishops as appeareth by his owne words in the same place This was Christes purpose at that time when he sayd feede my sheepe to teach Peter and the rest of vs howe well he loued his Church that therefore we also should take the charge and care of the same Church with al our hearts Ambrose extendeth the wordes of Christ in like manner to al Bishops preachers It was thrise repeated by the Lord feed my sheepe Which sheepe which flocke not onely Peter receiued then in charge but he with vs and wee all with him receiued them in cure And so doth Austen When it is said to Peter it is said to all Louest thou me Feede my sheepe That women may not vndertake this charge to feede Christs sheepe it was needelesse to cite Chrysostome S. Paul sayde it before in other wordes and wee bee farre from any such follie These bee the maine and mightie proofes wherewith you thought to shake the Princes seate which conclude vtterly nothing against that we defende nor against that her Maiestie claymeth or vseth The rest of your authorities which be sixe touch not vs at all nor any thing in question betwixt you and vs saue the last where S. Hierom writeth to Damasus He that gathereth not with thee scattereth Which words we graunt were very true when S. Hierom spake them for that Damasus rightly professed the Christian fayth which the Bishop of Rome now doeth not and by gathering with him is ment no subiection to him but a felowship with him in teaching the same trueth and keeping the bande of peace which is common to all Christians Your fift chapter which should cleere you from false doctrine and proue you to be good Catholiques hath in all but one Section of twentie sixe lines to that purpose the rest is a desperate discourse of your owne full of your bolde assertions vayne presumptions without scripture or father that helpeth you or hindereth vs. For prayer for the dead you alledge S. Augustine for honouring of Kelikes and Pilgrimage S Hierom for vocation of Saints worshipping the crosse and memories of Martyrs S. Cyril for the sacrifice of the Masse Saint Chrysostome for the corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament the Lateran Councell for Images the second Councel of Nice Gregorie to Serenus and Damascene for the power of Priesthood to remit sinnes S. Ambrose A weake foundation to beare so great a frame Cyril Chrysostome and Ambrose in the places which you quote teache nothing lesse than those errors and abuses which you mayntaine The seconde Councell of Nice was very neere 800 the Lateran Councell aboue a thousand yeres after Christ both too yong to make any doctrine Catholique Gregorie liketh that stories should be painted in the Church but adoration of thē he detesteth which yet that wicked Councell of Nice did after establish Damascene you may take backe againe his credite is so smale that we neede not answere him S. Hierom is hoat against Vigilantius and so hoat that Erasmus is faine to say Conuiciis debacchatur Hieronimus Hierom rayleth without measure Yet the most honour that he gaue to the bodies or ashes of Martyrs by whom God after their deaths wrought great miracles was to be fairely wrapt and honestly kept in their Chappels The tending of tapers and setting vp of waxe candles before them he denieth to be vsed in the Church in other places if any such thing were he imputeth it to the vnskilfulnesse and simplicitie of some Lay men and deuout women that had zeale but not according to knowledge What is this for your defence You make newe Relikes you set foorth vnshamefast Legends and deuise false miracles to deceiue the people you giue them Pardons for manie thowsande thowsande yeeres you promise them helpe in all their needes and effect in all their desires you make a very marte of the graces and gyftes of God to cause men to runne from place to place from Saint to Saint
Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equall priuileges with elder Rome and in causes ecclesiastical to be aduanced as far forth as Rome Against the Councell of Chalcedon if you oppose the Legates or letters of Leo you make but a slender match In this Councell were sixe hundred thirtie Bishops double the number of the Nicene Synode and Leo was led with priuate respects to crosse this Canon as loth to see the Bishoppe of Constantinople rise too fast for feare least at length he should offer to pricke before the Bishop of Rome which in deede came to passe not long after in the dayes of Gregorie the first and therefore the fathers lightly reiected all that his Legates could say when the matter came the second time to voyces as appeareth in the sixteenth Action of the sayd Councell where the Iudges after either side had proposed what they could resolued on this wise By these things that haue bin done and alleaged we perceaue the first and chiefest honor according to the Canons is reserued to the Archbishop of ancient Rome and moreouer that the Archbishop of the Royal Citie of Constantinople which is new Rome must enioy the selfesame prerogatiues and priuileges c. Thus we conceiue you Nowe let the sacred and oecumenical Councels speake their mindes The reuerend Bishoppes answered This is a right iudgement wee all say the same euery one of vs is well contented therewith this is a good decree let this determination stande in force all this is orderly concluded wee pray you demisse vs wee al continue in the â—ame mind Lucentius Vicegerent to the Bishop of Rome replied The See Apostolike which gaue vs this in charge must not be abased by this decree And therefore whatsoeuer was yesterday concluded in our absence to the preiudice of the Canons we pray your excellencies to commaund that it may be put againe to voices Yf not that our protestation against it may be set downe in record that wee may knowe what to informe the Pope of the Vniuersal Church The Iudges answered That which we pronounced the whole Councel hath approued Phi. The Synode approued it but the Bishop of Rome resisted it Theo. You confesse that which I would inferre Phi. What doe I confesse Theo. That the Councell made this Canon the Legates of Leo gainsaying it Phi. The more to blame they that did it Theo. So you reuerence generall Councels when you be disposed yet this is apparant that the councel of Chalcedon ouer ruled the Bishop of Rome and mauger his Legats that were present earnest against it they concluded without them that which they most misliked Neither could Leo for al his eger sharpe resistance preuaile with them or against them the Christian Emperours still fauouring and the sixt generall Councell againe confirming that which their fathers before them had enacted at Chalcedon Renewing the decrees of the 150. fathers that met in this royall Citie of Constantinople of the 630. Bishops which assembled at Chalcedon we likewise determine that the See of Constantinople shall haue equall priuileges and honors with the Seate of elder Rome and in ecclesiasticall matters be aduanced as farre forth as it being next vnto it Which wordes are falsely reported or rather lewdly corrupted in your Canon lawe by putting a negatiue to the later part of them that draweth the whole to a contrarie sense Non tamen in ecclesiasticis rebus magnificetur vt illa sed secunda post illam existens And yet for all that shall not the See of Constantinople be aduanced in ecclesiasticall affaires as high as Rome but be the second after her And so where the Councell decreed that Constantinople shoulde bee aduanced in ecclesiasticall matters as farre forth as Rome you falsifie the words and conclude that Constantinople shall not bee aduanced as farre foorth as Rome which is no forgerie Phi. Let him answere for it that did it Theo. Bee your decrees no more worth nowe than to bee thus shaken off to shift for themselues Not long since they were the fairest flower in your garland but if you renounce your Canon law we will presse you no farther with it Phi. Not so neither Theo. Then howe can you salue this shamefull corruption Phi. Perhaps it was mistaken Theo. And neuer after perceiued Phi. I do not say so Theo. Why then not amended but openly suffered Phi. An error it might be wilfull it was not I dare sweare Theo. Is your Canon law so free from wilful corruptioÌ„ that you dare sweare for it Phi. As I thinke Theo. How doeth it handle the wordes of the Mileuitane and Africane Councell which I last alleaged Ad transmarina qui putauerint appellanduÌ„ a nullo intra Africam in comunione suscipiatur They that offer to appeale ouer the seas let them be receiued of no man within Africa to the communion That is true saith your lawe nisi fortè Romanam sedem appellauerint vnlesse perhaps they appeale to Rome And so where the councel purposely decreed this to keepe all men from Rome your lawe wittingly peruerteth their words and addeth except they appeale to Rome Which is both a ridiculous and malicious corruption The like prancke you play for authorizing your decretals out of S. Augustine and making them equall in credite with the canonicall Scriptures In which wordes you not only commit grosse forgerie but also runne into haynous blasphemie For where S. Augustine sayth In canonicis autem scripturis ecclesiarum Catholicarum quam plurium autoritatem sequatur inter quas sane illae sint quae Apostolicas sedes habere epistolas accipere meruerunt In esteeming the Canonicall scriptures let a Christian man follow the authoritie of the greater number of catholike churches amongst whom those Churches are which deserued to haue both the seates of the Apostles and to receiue their letters Your canon law turneth and altereth his words thus Inter quas scripturas Canonicas sane illae sint quas Apostolica sedes habere ab ea alij meruerunt accipere epistolas In the number of which Canonical scriptures let those epistles bee which the Apostolike See meaning Rome hath and others haue receiued from her And least you should thinke any other Epistles are ment than such as the Bishops of Rome themselues wrate in fayre red letters before the text these wordes are placed Inter Canonicas scripturas Decretales epistolae connumerantur The Decretall epistles of Popes are counted by S. Austen for Canonicall scriptures What greater blasphemie can be deuised or vttered against Christ his spirit than that the Popes Epistles should bee canonicall scriptures that is of equall authoritie with the worde of God And how farre S. Augustine was from any such thought the very place which your law so wickedly peruerteth doth best witnes First you grossely mistake the antecedent to the relatiue Inter quas scripturas for Inter quas ecclesias Next you chaunge the
Father or Councell for 800. yeares that proueth the Pope superiour to the Prince Bring somwhat to that end or else say you can not and I am answered Phi. I proue the church superior to the Prince which is enough to confute the supreme power that you giue to Princes Theo. And what for the Pope Shall he be superiour to Princes or no Phi. We wil talke of that an other time we be now reasoning of the church which I trust you will grant to be superiour to Princes God saide to the Church The nation and kingdom that will not serue thee shall perish And kinges shall serue thee Theo. This is right the trade of your Apologie to pretende the church and meane the Pope You sawe you were neuer able to proue the Popes vsurped power ouer Princes and therefore you thought it best to put a visarde of the Church vppon the Popes face and to bring him in that sort disguised to the stage to deceiue the simple with the sounde and shewe of the Church And for that cause your fourth chapter neuer nameth the Pope but stil vrgeth The regiment of the church The iudgement of the church The churches tribunall conuerted kingdomes must serue the church and euerie where the church the church and when the Church is confessed to bee superiour to Princes you set vppe the Pope as heade of the Church to take from her all the superioritie power and authoritie which before you claymed for her and so you make the Church but a cloke-bagge to carrie the Popes titles after him but staie your wisedomes the Church may bee superiour and yet the Pope subiect to Princes Kinges may serue the Church and yet commaund your holie father and his gymmoes the parish Priestes of Rome for their turning winding euery way iustly called Cardinals Phi. Can Princes bee supreme and the church their superiour Theo. Why not Phi. If any thing bee superiour Princes bee not supreme Theo. That I denie The Scriptures bee superiour to Princes and yet they supreme the Sacramentes bee likewise aboue them and yet that hindereth not their supremacie Truth Grace Faith Prayer and other Ghostlie vertues bee higher than all earthly states and all this notwithstanding Princes may bee supreme gouernours of their kingdomes and Countries Phi. You cauill nowe you shoulde compare persons with persons and not thinges with persons there may bee thinges aboue Princes and yet they supreme but if anie persons bee superiour then can they not bee supreme Theo. No The Sainctes in heauen and Angels of God bee persons superiour to Princes and yet may Princes bee supreme Phi. Why Theophilus these bee wrangling quiddities for shame leaue them The Sainctes bee superiour in perfection and dignitie but not in externall vocation and authoritie Theo. I like that you saie but if you looke backe you shall see Philander that you giue iudgement against your selfe Phi. Against my selfe Why so Theo. The Church is superiour to Princes for those very respectes which I nowe repeated First because the Saincts in heauen which are part of the church in happines perfection and dignitie bee many degrees aboue worldely states Secondly though the members of the Church bee subiect and obedient to Princes yet the thinges contayned in the Church and bestowed on the Church by God him-selfe I meane the light of his worde the working of his Sacramentes the giftes of his grace and fruites of his spirite bee farre superiour to all Princes Nowe view your consequent The Church in respect of her members in heauen and graces on earth is aboue the Prince ergo the Prince is not supreme but subiect to the Pope This is worse than wrangling You confound things and persons heauen and earth God and man to beare out the Popes pride Phi. You stretch the name of the church whither you list Theo. I may better stretch it to these thinges which I specifie than you restraine it to one onelie man as you doe But why doe I stretch the church farther than I should The Sainctes in heauen bee they not members of the church Phi. They bee membees of the church which is in heauen Theo. And the church in heauen is it an other church from this on earth or the same with it Phi. I thinke it bee the same Theo. You must not goe by thoughtes Sainct Paul saith You are of the same citie with the Sainctes and Ierusalem which is aboue is no straunger to vs but the mother of vs all Cum ipsis Angelis sumus vna ciuitas Dei cuius pars in nobis peregrinatur pars in illis opitulatur Wee saith Austen are one and the same citie of God with the Angels whereof part wandereth on earth in vs part in them assisteth vs. And againe The true Sion and true Ierusalem is euerlasting in heauen which is the mother of vs all She hath begotten vs shee hath nurced vs in part a stranger on earth in a greater part remaining in heauen For the soules of the godly that be dead be not seuered from the church which euen now is the kingdome of Christ. Certaynely Christ hath but one bodie which is his church and of that body since the Sainctes be the greater and worthier part they must bee counted of the same Church with vs. Phi. I stick not at that so much as at the next where you make the word and Sacramentes togither with their effectes and fruites to be parts of the church Theo. I do not say they be members of the Church but thinges required in the church without the which we can neither become nor continue the members of Christ. In a naturall bodie the spirits and faculties be no members yet without them the members haue neither life motion sense nor action So in the mysticall bodie of Christ the members be men but the meanes and helpes to make vs and keepe vs the members of Christ are the word and Sacraments without the which we can neither be planted quickned nor nourished in Christ. For the members be dead if they liue not by faith if they grow not by grace if they cleaue not by loue to their heade and moue at his will by obedience And therefore these thinges though they bee not members yet they bee ioyntes and sinewes vaines and vessels that giue life groeth strength and state to the bodie of Christ which is his church and may iustly bee called the principall powers or partes of his bodie Phi. Powers if you will but not partes Theo. As though the powers of the soule were not partes of the soule Phi. Not properly partes but powers and faculties Theo. What call you partes Phi. Whereof the whole consisteth Theo. And since without these there can be no Church ergo these be partes of the church Phi. You take partes very largely Theo. No larger than I should The foundation of the house is it not a part of the house Phi. Yes a chiefe
part Theo. Faith is the foundation of the church why then should not faith be a part of the church Phi. The Church consisteth of persons not of thinges Men are the church saith S. Augustine Againe The church that is the people of God throughout all nations Theo. I doe not deny the church to bee many times taken for the faithfull on earth but I adde that the graces mysteries and word of God bee contained in the Church and without them the Persons are no Church Our bodies and soules doe not make vs members of Christ but our faith and obedience By Baptisme not by birth doe we Put on Christ and grace not meates establish our heartes They bee the sonnes of God that he led by the spirit of God And if any man haue not the spirit of Christ the same is no member of his Phi. All this is true Theo. The church then consisteth not of men but of faithfull men and they bee the Church not in respect of flesh and blood which came from earth but of trueth and grace which came from heauen Phi. I graunt Theo. Ergo the perfection of Gods giftes the communion of his graces and direction of his word are the verie life and soule of his Church so within the compasse of the church are comprised not onely the persons that bee earthly but also the things that be heauenly whereby God gathereth preserueth and sanctifieth his Church Phi. What doth this helpe you Theo. That when wee saie with S. Ambrose Imperator bonus intra Ecclesiam non supra Ecclesiam est A good Emperour is within the Church not aboue the Church you can conclude nothing out of these words against vs. Phi. Can we not If good Princes bee not aboue the church ergo they be not aboue the prelats pillours of the church Theo. That is no consequent Phi. Why not Theo. By the Church are ment sometimes the places somtimes the persons sometime the things that be cheefely required in the Church Of the place S. Austen saith We cal the Church the temple where the people which are trewly called the Church are conteined that by the name of the Church I meane the people which is conteined we may signifie the place which conteyneth And againe The Church is the place where the Church is assembled for men are the Church The Church as it is taken for persons hath a triple distinction First the Church of glorious and elect Angels and men Ecclesia deorsum ecclesia sursum Ecclesia deorsum in omnibus fidelibus ecclesia sursum in omnibus Angelis There is a Church beneath there is a Church aboue The Church beneath in all the faithfull the Church aboue in all the Angels And againe The right order of confession required that in our creed next to the three persons in Trinity should stand the Church as next to the owner his howse to God his tēple to the builder his citie which must here be taken for the whole not only that part which is a pilgrime on earth but also for that part which abiding in heauen hath euer since it was created cleauen vnto God This part in the holy Angels persisteth in blessednes and helpeth as it ought her other part wandring in earth The temple of God therfore is the holy Church I mean the vniuersall in heauen and earth Secondly the Church is the people of God through out all nations ioyning reckning al the Saints which before his cōming liued in this world The whole Church euerie where diffused is the bodie of Christ and he is the head of it Not only the faithful which are now but also they that were before vs and they that shall be after vs to the end of the world they al pertaine to his bodie The Church is the body of Christ not the church which is here or there but that which is here and euery where throughout the world neither that Church which is at this time but from Abel vnto those which shall hereafter bee borne and beleeue in Christ euen till the end the whole companie of saintes belonging to one Citie which is the bodie of Christ and whereof he is the head Thirdly the Church may bee limited by time and place as the particular Churches of Rome Corinth Ephesus and such like Behold saith Austen in the Church there be Churches which be members of that one Church dispersed throughout the world There be many Churches yet one Church and in that sort many that there is but one Somtimes the church importeth besides the persons y◠things in which those persons must communicate before they can be members of the Church as when the church is called the kingdome citie and howse of God whereby wee learne that it is furnished not onely with persons but with all thinges needefull for the seruants citizens and people of God to the conuerting and sauing of their soules In that sense saith S. Paul The kingdome of God is righteousnes peace and ioy in the holy Ghost meaning these be fruits and effects of Gods kingdome which our Sauiour threatned to take from the Iewes The kingdome of God shall bee taken from you and giuen to a nation that shall bring forth the fruites thereof shewing that when the woorde of trueth and seales of grace are taken from vs wee cease to bee the people and Church of God Christ raigneth in his Church by his word and spirit without these men are not the Church An earthly citie must haue vnitie societie regiment sufficiencie for an earthly state the number of men doeth not make a citie if these thinges want Howe much more must the citie of God haue abundance of al thinges profiting to eternall life S. Austen sayth of the house of God which is the Church It is founded by beleeuing erected by hoping perfected by louing noting these three to bee the maine partes in the building of Gods house It is playner than that longer proofe shall neede If wee woulde define the Church wee must comprehend not onely men but other thinges also which may seuer the Church from those that are not the Church and those thinges that are required to the explication are wee say contained in the appellation of the Church The Church is not simply a number of men for Infidels heretikes and hypocrites are not the Church but of men regenerate by the woord and Sacraments truely seruing God according to the Gospell of his sonne and sealed by the spirite of grace against the day of redemption Men thus qualified are the Church and the giftes and graces of GOD that so qualifie them bee not onely the iewels and ornaments wherewith the spouse of Christ is decked but euen the seede and milke whereby like a mother shee conceyueth and nourceth her children The church our mother saith Austen conceiued vs of Christ nourished yea nourisheth vs with the milke of faith Shee conceiueth by the Sacraments
father and his Cardinals were eighteene yeres prouoking working the Princes States adherent to them to spill christian blood to make hauocke of al places persons that were not â—â—â—dient to the Bishop of Rome yet you count it some great absurditie for vs to reiect this Councell as not generall Phi. You acknowledge no subiection to Councels or Tribunals abroad all other Bishops Patriarkes Apostles Christ all because they were be forrainers not hauing iurisdiction or sufficieÌ„t authoritie to define against English Sectaries or Errors And this when a Realme or Prince is in error taketh away all meanes of reducing theÌ„ to the truth againe Theo. To Christ his Apostles we acknowledge more subiection than you doe We honor adore him as the true son of God equall with his father in authority maiesty We make him no forrainer to this Realm as you do but professe him to be the only master redeemer ruler of his church as wel in this as in all other Nations To whom Princes Preachers are but seruaÌ„ts the preachers to propose the Princes to execute his will commandements whom all that wil be saued must beleeue obey aboue against all Councels Tribunals be they regall or papall if they dissent from his word The preachings writings of the Apostles we receiue with greater reuereÌ„ce exacter obedience than you do We giue no man leaue to dispence against theÌ„ which your law witnesseth of the Pope Papa coÌ„tra ApostoluÌ„ dispensat The Pope dispeÌ„seth against the Apostle We neuer said as Pigghius saith The Apostles wrote certaine things not that their writinges should bee aboue our faith and religion but rather vnder Wee confesse The Apostles were men allowed of God to whom the Gospel should be committed therefore we receiue the word from theÌ„ not as the word of man but as it is in deed the word of God assuring our selues it is the power of God to saue all that beleeue detesting your erronious and heynous presumptions that take vppon you to adde alter diminish and dispence with that which the spirite of Christ spake as well by the pennes as mouthes of the Apostles To Councels such as the Church of Christ was wont by the helpe of her religious Princes to call we owe communion and brotherly concord so long as they make no breach in faith nor in christian charitie subiection and seruitude wee owe them none the blessed Angels professe themselues to bee fellowe seruantes with the Sainctes on earth what are you then that with your Tribunals and iurisdictions woulde bee Lordes and Rulers ouer Christes inheritance Peter saith Cyprian whom the Lord made first choice of on whom he built his church when Paul after stroue with him for Circumcision did not take vpon him nor chalenge any thing insolentlie or arrogantly nor aduaunce him-selfe as Primate and one to whom the nouices and puinees shoulde bee subiect And as it were in open defiance of your Tribunals and iurisdictions which Stephen the Bishoppe of Rome began then to exercise he directeth the Bishops assembled in a Councell at Carthage on this wise It resteth that of this matter wee speake euerie one of vs what we thinke iudging no man nor remouing any man from the communion though he be not of our minde For none of vs maketh himselfe Bishop of Bishops or by terrour like a tyrant forceth his collegues to yeeld him obedience whether they will or no considering euerie Bishop by reason of his Episcopal power and freedom hath the rule of his owne iudgement as one that can not bee iudged of an other nor hee him-selfe iudge an other but let vs al expect the tribunal or iudgement of our Lord Iesus Christ which only solely hath power to set vs in the gouernment of his Church and to iudge of our actes And because you be so earnest with vs for subiection to Tribunals abroade to bee plaine with you it is boyes plaie before you name them or proue that wee owe them any subiection to skore it vppe as an absurditie that wee acknowledge none vnto them and yet least you shoulde thinke vs the first that refused Tribunals abroade you shall see that ancient and worthy fathers haue done the like before vs. What Tribunals abroade did Cyprian and the 80. Bishoppes at Carthage with him acknowledge when hee saide as you hearde Christus vnus solus habet potestatem de actu nostro iudicandi Christ only and none else hath authoritie to iudge of our act And agaiâ—e Episcopus ab alâ—o iudicari non potest cum non ipse nec alterum iudicare A Bishop may not be iudged of others nor iudge others Expectemus vniuersi iudicium Christi Let vs all both abroad and at home expect the iudgement of Christ. What Tribunals abroade did Polycrates and the Bishops of Asia with him acknowledge when hee replied to the Bishoppe of Rome threatning to excommunicate him and the rest Non turbaborijs quae terrendi gratia obijciuntur I passe not for these threats that are offered to terrifie me What Tribunals abroad did S. Aug. the 216. African Bishops acknowledge when they decreed that none Appealing ouer the Sea to Tribunals abroad should be receiued to the communion within Africa And when they repelled the Bishop of Rome laboring to place his Legates a latere within their Prouince willed him nâ—t to bring Fumosum seculi Typhum That smoky pride of the world into the Church of Christ What Tribunals abroad did the Bishop of the Britons acknowledge when they proued to August the Moncke that was sent from Rome that they ought him no subiection Nay what Tribunal abroad did Greg. the Bishop of Rome chalenge when he wrote thus to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria Vestra beatitudo mihi loquitur diceÌ„s sicut iussistis quod verbuÌ„ iussionis peto à meo auditu remouete quia scio quis sum qui estis Loco enim mihi fratres estis moribus patres NoÌ„ ergo iussi sed quae vtilia visa sunt iudicare curauâ— Your blessednes in your letters saith to me as you coÌ„maÌ„ded which word of coÌ„maÌ„ding I beseech you remoue froÌ„ mine eares because I know who I am what you are In calling you are brethreÌ„ to me in behauior fathers I did not theÌ„ coÌ„mand you but aduertise you what semed best to me The same Greg. teacheth you what it is for any one man to require vniuersall subiection of the whole church as your holie father now doth If Paul saith he would not haue the meÌ„bers of the Lords body to be subiect to any heads but to Christ no not to the Apostles themselues what wilt thou answere to Christ the head of the vniuersall church in the last daie of iudgement which goest about to haue all his members in subiection to thee by the
and therefore the power which Princes haue is not spirituall Theo. Wee neuer sayde that Princes had any spirituall power it is a false collection of yours it is no part of our confession and the sworde which they beare wee neuer called but externall and temporall For the true spiritual and eternall sworde is the woorde of God The sworde of the spirite sayth S. Paul which is the word of God and S. Iohn describing the sonne of God sayth Out of his mouth went a sharp two edged sword The word of GOD as S. Paul writeth is more percing than any two edged sword and entereth through euen to the parting in sunder of the soul and spirit And as for both these causes it is spirituall so it indureth for euer and is eternall The magistrats sword compared with this is but corporall and temporall Corporall in respect it toucheth the body but not the soule Our sauiour for warning his Disciples that they should be brought before Gouernours and Kings for his sake addeth to encourage theÌ„ Feare not those which kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Temporal it is in respect either of Gods ordinance which lasteth no longer than the time of this worlde or of mans vengeance which ceaseth by death and rageth no farther or if you will for that it ordereth the things of this life and praiseth or punisheth the senssible and external actions of the body which be temporall The things which bee seene are temporal saith S. Paul but the things which are not seene are eternal Phi. You take temporal for that which dureth for a season and is not eternall and we take temporal as it is opposite to spirituall And in that sense because the sword hath to doe with temporal men and matters only we call it the temporall sworde and haue good reason to defend that temporall Princes should not meddle with spirituall Persons or causes Theo. The distinction of spirituall and temporal Persons things and causes as you limite them sprang first from your selues without all authoritie or rather in deed against the authoritie of the holy scriptures and was nothing els but a mere deuise of yours to encrease your Courts and to wind the sword by litle and litle out of other mens fingers hang it at your owne girdles For when you saw that the things which be truly spiritual as faith hope charitie with other vertues and fruites of the spirit belonged only to GOD and not to man and therefore by the resolution of our Sauiour must bee giuen to God and not to Cesar first you would needs be termed spirituall men taking the name which is common to all the sonnes of GOD as proper to your selues and your seruants and by that colour exempt not onely Priests but also doore keepers torche bearers bell ringers Church sweepers and all your retinue from subiection to temporall magistrates But S. Paul calleth them spirituall men which haue the spirit of GOD as all his children haue and the rest carnal or natural men I could not speak to you brethren as vnto spiritual men but as vnto carnal euen as vnto babes in Christ. For where as there is yet among you enuieng strife dissention are you not carnal And againe The naturall man sauoureth not the thinges of the spirit of God but the spiritual man discerneth al things And so BrethreÌ„ if a maÌ„ be fallen into any fault you that be spiritual restore such a one with the spirit of meeknesse As also S. Iude These be fleshly men hauing no spirit And likewise Saint Peter Bee you made as liuely stones a spirituall house What wrong then you doe the faythfull when you name them temporall as if the hope of their calling reached no farther than this life let the wise and Godly iudge That reproche of temporall and pride of spirituall men no learned nor auncient father euer vsed Secular S. Hierom calleth them Laymen Clerkes that were not Monkes Temporall no man euer called the people of God besides your selues Next that your landes and liuings might speede no worse than your selues for gaine was the mother of your earely and dayly deuotion you tooke order to haue them goe for spirituall thinges also notwithstanding Saint Paul expressely called them carnal If wee haue sowen vnto you spirituall things is it a great matter if wee reape your carnall thinges And speaking of the poore Saintes at Ierusalem If the Gentiles bee made partakers of their spirituall thinges their duetie is also to minister vnto them in carnal things And where the Lorde himselfe willed the Scribes and high Priestes to giue vnto Caesar the thinges that were Caesars and vnto God the things that were Gods you as if that graunt had beene too liberall thought it expedient vppon some wiser consideration belike to set the image and superscription of God and his Church vpon your corruptible and earthly Mammon and by that cunning to keepe it from Caesar. Farre better S. Ambrose If the Emperour aske for tribute we deny it not The lands of the Church pay tribute If he affect the lands themselues he hath power to take them no man amoÌ„gst vs is any let vnto him The almes of the people is enough for the poore Let them neuer procure vs enuie for our Landes let them take them if they please I doe not giue them to the Emperour but I doe not denie them Thirdly to enlarge your kingdome and stretch your winges ouer all men and matters as farre as you needed or listed you tooke the punishment of incest adulterie fornication drunkennes vsurie periurie simonie sorcerie blasphemie witchcraft Apostacie and such like grosse and fleshly vices out of the Magistrates handes vnder the colour of spirituall thinges and fastened them to your consistories And not therewith content you caught holde of tithes testaments legacies intestates patronages mariages diuorces dowries espousals funerals affinitie consanguinitie bastardie bondage as of spirituall causes and questions and if the matter concerned the goods and Landes of Churches or Church men you made no bones to venter on giftes sales exchaunges possession alienation restitution conuentions conditions exactions sureties pledges payments dammages iniuries forgeries hyring lending farming and a thousand such as if all actions causes and contracts that any way touched your gayne or ease must by and by goe for spirituall and the magistrate by that poore shift bee secluded from ordering and entermedling with those things which were wont to bee wholy guided by the Princes Lawes Phi. Mislike you that Priestes shoulde punish sinne or that Bishoppes should deale in those cases which bee incident to the Lawes of GOD and Canons of the Church Theo. I doe not mislike that malefactours of all kindes not onely drunkards raylers periurers adulterers vsurers and such like but also theeues robbers rauishers murderers plagiaries incendiaries trâ—ytours and all other haynous offendours when their liues bee
Canons be not incident to the Princes vocation and therefore no maruell if Princes be raw in those thinges wherewith they be not acquainted And since the danger is great if they command for error their skil not so great but that they may soone misse the truth why should you bee loth that others of deeper iudgement exacter knowledge whom God hath placed to teach both priuate men Princes their duties in those cases should direct moderate the swordes of Princes for feare least they should be missed to the ruine of themselues and many thowsandes with them Theo. We be not loth they should be directed but rather exhort all Princes to take great care and spare no paines to come by faithfull and true direction in those thinges that pertaine to God For if in temporall matters where the losses are but temporal they do nothing without the mature and sound aduise of their graue trustie Counsellours how inexcusable is their negligence if in heauenly things where the bodies soules of them-selues their subiectes may be lost for euer they serue their affectiōs seek not his wil that set them in place gaue them power to maintain his truth safegard his Church Phi. We then agree on both sides that Princes must be directed Theo. We do Phi. If they must be directed ergo by Bishops Theo. Bishops for their calling and learning are the likeliest men to direct them right but yet your ergo doth not hold It is not enough for them to be Bishops they must also be teachers of truth before they may claime to be directours of Princes Phi. Who be more likely to teach truth than Bishops Theo. I said before they were likelie but your conclusion inforceth a necessitie which you can not proue Many Bishops haue taught lies and seduced Princes in the church of God and therefore not their dignitie but their doctrine is it that Princes must regarde for neither Prince nor people stand bound to the persons of men but vnto the truth of God and vnto their teachers so long as they swarue not from truth Phi. And who shall be iudge of truth Theo. Absolute iudge of truth neither Prince nor Priest may chalenge to bee Phi. Why so Theo. God is truth of God I trust no man may be iudge The son of God saith of himself I am truth S. Iohn giueth this record of the spirit of God The spirit is truth Ye can therfore be no iudges of truth vnles ye will be iudges of God Phi. Who shal then be iudge of truth The. Who but Christ Phi. He shal be iudge at the last daie Theo. Hee shall then giue generall and finall iudgement of all men but in the meane time hee onely is the soueraine and supreme iudge of truth The Father hath committed all iudgement to the sonne and my iudgement saith Christ is iust This strife saith Augustine requireth a iudge Iudicet ergo Christus Let Christ be therefore iudge In earth saith Optatus of this matter there can be no iudgement we must seeke for a iudge from heauen But why knocke wee at heauen when as we haue his will here in the Gospell Phi. They mean that Christ speaketh in his church at this day by his word so iudgeth Theo. And we meane that his word is truth and therefore your Bishops can not be iudges of the word of Christ but they must be iudges of Christ himselfe that speaketh by his word which is no small presumption Phi. Shall not the Church be iudge of the Scriptures Theo. My sheepe saith Christ heare my voice they be no iudges of his voice A iudge of the lawe is no obseruer of the law as S. Iames auoucheth and since the whole church is bound to obey the law of God they be no iudges of the law Inferius est nobis quicquid iudicamus It is inferior to vs whatsoeuer we be iudges of Eternam igitur legem mundis animis fas est cognoscere iudicare non fas est The eternall law of God therefore it is lawfull for cleane harts to know it is not lawfull for them to iudge Wee must not saith Augustine to God iudge of so high authoritie neither of the booke which is thine because we submit our vnderstanding to it And againe To the canons of the Scriptures pertaine certaine bookes of the Prophetes and Apostles quos omnino iudicare non audeamus the which in any case wee may not dare to iudge And this is the reason there may be no iudge of truth where no daunger of error is And of the Scriptures S. Austine saith Quod omni errore careant dubitare nefarium est It is a wickednes to make a doubt whether there be any error in them or no therefore there may be no iudges of them but the whole church must be subiect to them and with all humilitie beleeue them Phi. The Bishops be no iudges of the Scriptures whether they bee true or no that as you proue is no doubt and therefore needeth no iudge But in this they be iudges whether the Scriptures be mistaken of others or no. Theo. Then bee they no iudges of truth which is the thing that I first affirmed but of them selues and others which be subiect to errour and ignoraunce Phi. Yet they be iudges of errour though not of trueth Theo. If you take iudging for discerning as the worde doeth often signifie they can not bee teachers of trueth vnlesse they can discerne trueth from errour But onelie God is to limit and appoint by his word what shall stand for truth what for errour With that Bishops haue nothing to do they must heare and beleeue the voice of the great Sheepeheard Christ Iesus as well as the meanest sheepe in his fould Phi. Wee grant you that so you grant vs this that only Bishops bee discerners of truth Theo. A liberall offer You will graunt vs a knowen truth vpon condition that we shall grant you a manifest vntruth Make earth and ashes if you dare to bee iudges of their Lord and maister which is in heauen or deny Bishops when they be at the highest to be the seruants of Christ yea happie be they if they be so much In these things we neither stande at your almes nor aske your consents we be right sure and dare not deny them therefore our assertion is without contradiction yours is vtterly false that only Bishops be discerners of truth For as Bishops ought to discern which is truth before they teach so must the people discern who teacheth right before they beleeue Phi. Shal the people iudge their Pastors you be so new fangled that you say you know not what Theo. We haue the words and warrant of the holy Ghost for that which we say Beleeue not euery Spirit but trie the Spirits whether they be of god for many false prophets are
of Rome coulde not erre which your selues dare not saie and yet you woulde wring it out of Cyprians wordes But God be thanked Sainct Paul hath preuented your wicked interprise Writing to the whole church of Rome and giuing them their due praise for their deuotion and zeale and entering at last into the reiection of the Iewes for their vnbeliefe hee warneth expresly the Romanes in these wordes Boast not thy selfe against the braunches and if thou boast thy selfe thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee Thou wilt say the braunches are broken off that I might bee graft in Well through infidelitie they are broken off thou standest by faith Be not high minded but feare For if God spared not the naturall braunches take heed lest he spare not thee Behold therefore the goodnes and seuerity of God toward them which haue fallen seueritie but towards thee goodnes if thou continue in his goodnes otherwise thou also shalt be cut off Whether the Apostle spake generally to the Gentiles and inclusiuely to the Romanes or namely to the Romanes and proportionablie to the rest it is all one to vs one of the twaine hee must needes Origen saith vppon these wordes of Paul I say to you Gentiles Now he plainely turneth his speech to the Gentiles but chiefly to those of the citie of Rome that beleeued S. Paul speaking to the Romanes no man may except the Romanes and they being included his admonition to them feare and beware least was vtterly superfluous if there coulde bee no daunger in them of swaruing from the faith and the condition implied otherwise if thou continue not and the commination annexed thou also shalt be cut off were both ridiculous and odious if it were not possible for them to fal or to be cut off Fight not therefore against the holy Ghost with broken reedes caught here and there out of the Fathers works Looke rather in time to this watchword which the apostle giueth you feare and take heede otherwise thou also shalt be cut off And marke his reason If the naturall braunches may be broken off much more the wild which were planted but in their steedes Phi. If that had beene the Apostles meaning doe you thinke the Fathers would haue gainesaide it Theo. I thinke they would not and I see they doe not and that maketh mee to interprete Cyprian in such sort as hee may agree with himselfe and not confront S. Paul Phi. His wordes do surely leane on our side Theo. They fit your humor and in that respect you be eger on them Otherwise I haue cleared Cyprian both of that speech of that intent And were you not vnshamefast wranglers you would perceiue that the ordinary vse of the phrase both in diuine and humane writinges doth acquite him of that opinion which you inforce vpon him But such is your profession you must go on as you haue begun Phi. If one alone had saide it we would not vrge it so often but S. Hierom hath likewise testified the same Know you that the Romane faith commended by the Apostles mouth will receiue no such deceites nor can be possibly changed though an Angell from heauen taught otherwise being fensed by S. Pauls authority Tom. 2. Apolog. aduers. Ruff. lib. 3. cap. 4. Theo. If S. Hierom say the same that Cyprian did he must be taken and vnderstood as Cyprian was and so you ease me of that labour Phi. He saith the same in effect but his words are more forcible Theo. That is your wilfulnesse in peruerting and racking the words of S. Hierom is more sensible For S. Hierom speaketh not one word of the persons that they shall neuer fall from the faith but auoucheth only that the doctrine which was first preached at Rome and then continued was so exact and perfect that an Angell from heauen might not bee heard against it And to this ende hee saide Scito Romanam fidem Apostolica voce laudatam istiusmodi praestigias non recipere etiamsi Angelus de coelo aâ—â—ter annunciet quam semel praedicatum est Pauli authoritate munitaÌ„ noÌ„ posse mutari Know you that the Romane faith commeÌ„ded by the Apostles voice receiueth no such delusions and that being armed with Pauls authority it may not bee changed if an Angell from hauen doe preach otherwise than once was preached Phi. You run againe to your former interpretation Non posse mutari it may not be changed in steede of it can not be changed Theo. Use which you will so you grant which I fully proued before that non posse doth vsually signifie as well that which is vnlawfull as that which is vnpossible Phi. I know non possum is vsed diuersely but how doth that answere S. Hierom Theo. You take hâ—lde of a word in Hierom which in all mens speech and writinges hath diuerse and sundrie significations by your owne confession and then you maruell why we doe not receiue the vntruest and vnlikeliest of them all for your pleasures without any farther proofe Non possum doth import that which is either vnpossible vnlawfull inconuenient or any waie impugnant to the ful persuasion and determination of our mindes as the places before alleadged doe manfestly declare and in all those accidentes our common speech is may be non possum I can not You would now by a text of Hieroms where he saith Romanam fidem non posse mutari etiam si Angelus de caelo c. The Romane faith may not or can not be charged though an Angel came from heauen infer that the Romanes vntill the worldes end can not possibly choose but abide in the same faith which was first deliuered them and that doe what they will to the contrarie they must be preserued in Christes trueth This is wee say a shamefull violence offered to Hieroms wordes against all learning against his meaning and against the spirit of God speaking in S. Paul First the wordes non posse mutari receiue both constructions a like that is either a change of the faith can neuer happen in the Romanes which is your sense or else their faith can not possibly bee changed without incurring infidelitie which is ours For it ceaseth to bee faith when once it is changed Next S. Hierom speaketh not of the persons but of the thing hee doth not say the Romanes can not change their mindes but the faith which was deliuered them in no wise may be chaunged And why Because it is the truth of God which neuer changeth Againe the authoritie of Paul writing to the Galathians which Hierom citeth doth not warrant that the Romanes shal not fall but onely that the faith once preached may not be changed though an Angell from heauen should attempt it especially since the Apostle commended the doctrine which they reserued to be the true christian faith What reason then haue you besides your parcial affectioÌ„ to the See of Rome to draw these words from their natiue sense
greater part of those which professe christianitie or some speciall places or persons must for euer be directed vnto all truth and preserued from all error this can not be concluded by these wordes Phi. To teach all truth and preserue in truth and from errour the holy Ghost is promised and perfourmed onely to the church and the chiefe gouernour and generall councels thereof Theo. In deede you take vpon you like Gouernors to appoint what the son of God shal meane who must haue the holy Ghost as if the matter were in your hands not in his Phi. Do we take vpon vs to limit the holy Ghost Theo. What else do you when of your owne heades you restraine the words of our Sauior as you liâ—t Phi. As we list Theo. Our Sauiours words are When that spirit of truth commeth he shal teach you al truth This say you is promised perfourmed only to the church the chiefe Gouernor the Pope and generall Councels thereof As if You in S. Iohns Gospel did signifie none but the Pope the chiefe Gouernor and such Bishops as the Pope will admit to his conferences which you call the generall councels of the church and what is this else but to diuide the holy Ghost as you thinke good Phi. The rulers of the church must needs haue the holy Ghost Theo. Meane you all or some Phi. The most part of them Theo. How proue you that to be Christes meaning that the most part of them which can procure themselues miters or rather catch vp Bishoprickes shall be sure of the holy Ghost in such measure that they shall neuer mistake the saith nor any parte thereof Phi. If they should erre the church should erre Theo. You run from bad to worse Your own law wil shew you the falsenes peruersnes of your Rhemish obseruations and expositions Quaero de qua Ecclesia intelligas quod hic dicitur quod non possit errare Side ipso Papa certum est quod Papa errare potest Respondeo Ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia talis Ecclesia non potest non esse I demaund of what church it is ment when it is saide as here that the church can not erre If of the Pope himselfe it is certaine that the Pope may erre I answere the congregatioÌ„ of the faithfull is here called the church and that church can not chose but continue The spirit of truth is not promised to the Pope nor to his councels but to the faithfull whether they be seuered or assembled and they shall not erre that is they shall not perish in errour as the wicked do but shall either be recouered from their errour or find mercy for their ignorance Phi. May the whole church erre Theo. If wee shoulde graunt you that the whole church can not erre to wit that all the faithfull on the earth at one time can not bee deceiued in any necessarie point of faith but that Christ for his promise sake will preserue truth amongest them what is this to the Pope or his Cardinals or Conuenticles to whom you conuey the holy Ghost by inheritance Phi. Neuer delude vs with ifs but tell vs whether you think the whole church may erre or no. Theo. In matters of faith wee thinke it can not Phi. If the church can not er the Gouernors of the church can not The. Leaue trifling and fall to reasoning The whole church can not erre ergo what Phi. Ergo the Pastors Preachers can not erre Theo. Conclude you all or none Phi. To say no Pastour can erre were apparent madnesse Theo. And the next which is all Pastours can not erre doeth you no pleasure For the Bishop of Rome may erre so may the rest of his mitred and twiforked creatures yet many good Pastours and Preachers keepe fast to the faith Howbeit this conclusion doth not follow vpon my confession The whole church I graunt can not er that is all and euery the faithful can not er therefore all Pastours can not er this is no kind of consequeÌ„t For some of the faithful may be directed vnto truth they no pastors nor preachers many preachers may be preserued from errour they no Bishops many Bishops may be kept in the faith and they not assembled a great number of those that be assembled may bee rightly affected and yet not the most part of them and the greater side may be wel disposed and yet not the Bishop of Rome whom you make to be the moderator and guider of all councels And therefore your argument is very childish The whole church can not erre ergo generall councels can not erre and specially the Pope which later part your best friendes haue not onely refuted as false but also detested for incredible and shamefull flatterie Phi. So say you Theo. So say they Alfonsus that wrote bitterly against Luther when he came to this point dealt plainely in these wordes Non credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae assentatorem vt ei tribuere hoâ— velit vt nec errare possit I can not thinke any man to be so impudent a flatterer of the Pope as to attribute this vnto him that he can not er Phi. Alfonsus hath no such words Theo. You say truth Alfonsus now hath not but Alfonsus had those wordes in his former editions And this commendeth your cunning that you can curtaile the writinges of your fellowes leaue out what you list when you new print them Phi. It was his owne correcting in his seconde edition Theo. Whether it was his doing or yours we care not the wordes remaine in the olde Printes to the manifest condemnation of your follie and flatterie in this behalfe And in his new copies though he qualifie his termes hee holdeth flatly the same opinion Omnis homo errare potest in fide etiam sipapa sit Euerie man may erre in faith euen the Pope himselfe And so you heard your owne gloze before affirme It is certaine the Pope may erre The same is confessed by the best of your side both canonistes and diuines Panormitane saith Concilium potest condemnare Papam de haeresi vt in cap. Si Papa Distinct. 40. vbi dicitur quod Papa potest esse haereticus de haeresi iudicari A councell may condemne the Pope of heresie as appeareth in the 40. Distinct. cap. Si Papa Where it is saide that the Pope may be an heretik iudged of heresie Lyra saith Multi summi Pontifices inuenti sunt apostatasse à side Many Popes haue proued apostataes Augustinus de Ancona Papa est deponendus pro haeresi ad CoÌ„ciliuÌ„ spectat PapaÌ„ in haeresi deprehensum condeÌ„nare vel deponere The Pope may be deposed for heresie A couÌ„cel may condemn or depose the Pope deprehended in heresie Antonius Archbishop of Florence Pro haeresi Papa congruè ipso facto
Thus S. Cyril largely sheweth In the proposition of Caiphas there is contained a double sense one which Caiphas himselfe ment that it was expedient Christ should die by the hands of the Iewes lest the whole Nation should bee destroyed by the Romanes This was a false and wicked meaning comming from the lewd intention of Caiphas An other sense of the same proposition was intended by the holy Ghost that it was needfull that only Christ should die for the saluation of the whole world This Caiphas neither vnderstood nor ment yet his wordes were such as might fitly serue this sense of the holy Ghost For Caiphas himself as crueller readier to wickednes and bloodier than the rest encourageth others staggering at it by saying you perceaue nothing neither vnderstād you that it is expediēt the life of one man should be neglected for the whole coūtrie Phi. He spake this by the holy Ghost Theo. The diuell possessed his hart but the power of God restrained and ordered his speach Phi. Had he not the Spirit of Prophesie Theo. No more than Saul the bloudsucker had when he praied for Dauid whom hee sought to kill than Iudas the traytor had when he iustified his master and hanged himselfe yea than the Dyuell had when hee confessed and intreated the Sonne of God not to torment him before his time Phi. Why then doth S. Iohn giue this note of him that he was hie Priest for that yere Theo. S. Iohn noteth this that it pleased God so to temper the hie Priests wordes that where hee spake to hasten the death of our Sauiour his wordes sounded that the people should vtterly perish without the death of Christ which was most true but not his meaning Phi. His tongue spake trueth though his hart did erre Theo. Satan poisoned his hart but GOD bridled his mouth Phi. Can not God doe the like to the Bishop of Rome Theo. No doubt he can but you must proue that he will Phi. If he did so to Caiphas much more will hee do it to the head of his Church Theo. How hangeth this geare together Hee did once so to Caiphas ergo hee will always doe the like where you list to haue it Phi. Not where we list but where he will Theo. That helpeth you litle God can do the like where whē he wil. What is that to the Bishop of Rome We doubt not of Gods power but smile at your folly which conclude this to be ordinarie in the Pope which was extraordinarie in Caiphas Phi. It was ordinarie in Caiphas by reason of his office and so saith S. Iohn The. S. Iohn doth not say it was ordinarie either in al hie priests or in Caiphas for Caiphas himself the very same yere as S. Matt. witnesseth iudicially pronounced our Sauiour to be a blasphemer which I hope you will not say came from the direction of the holy Ghost The hie Priest therefore did erre and that most hainously in iudgement and if this be al your hold the Pope may doe the like Phi. What may be is hard to determine But this we know the Pope did neuer yet erre sitting in his Tribunal to giue iudgement Theo. As though the place and not the Pope had assurance of trueth annexed vnto it What holines hath the Consistorie to safegard the iudge from error The promise of Christ was made to the person and not to the place Phi. To the person but sitting in iudgement Theo. Did Peter sitte in iudgement at that time when he denied his master Phi. Wee say not so Theo But that night was the promise made vnto him and that night performed in him when Peter poore man stoode warming himselfe amongst the manye and durst not answer the first interrogatorie that a silly wenche proposed to him And therefore Christ neuer spake of your Courtes nor Consistories but promised Peter to pardon his fault and to strengthen his faith lest hee should perseuere in that his Apostasie Phi. Had we no warrant for the Bishop of Rome that his faith shall not faile yet experience proueth this which we say to be true that he neuer erred iudicially that is sitting in his Consistorie Theo. What need we care where he sate so long as we bee sure he did erre What wrangling is this to aske for the place where and the time when the Pope spake the wordes Hee that may erre at home may likewise erre abroade If the Pope bee an heretike in his chamber hee can be no Catholike in his Consistorie Phi. Definitiue sentence he neuer gaue any against the faith Theo. What are his decretals but definitiue sentences And in those he hath erred Phi. Neuer Theo. The Decretal of Clemens which I before alleaged is altogether erronious They were two Decretall Epistles for the which Honorius was condemned The decretal of Vigilius which Liberatus remembreth is expresly against the faith Celestinus erred iudicially as your owne friendes confesse but you haue pared that Decretall as you haue done many others and left out the later part lest we should spie the fault Phi. Who told you so Theo. They that had no cause to belie you Alfonsus a great Patrone of your side sayth It is a thing manifest to al men that Pope Celestinus erred touching the mariage of the faithful when either part falleth into heresie Neither was this error of Celestinus such as ought to be imputed only to negligence so that we may say he erred as a priuate person and not as Pope because this decision of Celestinus was in the auncient Decratals which I my selfe haue seene and read Innocentius the third when he decided the case confessed that one of his predecessours had decreed otherwise which saith the gloze was Celestinus whose resolution was in the olde Decretals and it was euil that Celestinus sayd Alexander the 3. in a matter of great importance said Quamuis aliter a quibusdam praedecessoribus nostris sit aliquando iudicatum though some of our predecessours haue heretofore otherwise giuen iudgement Phi. These were matters of mariage and not of faith Theo. As though the seuering of those whom God hath ioyned did not touch the faith and so did some of these Popes and that iudicially by their contrarie Decrees Againe Nicolas the fourth sayth in his Decretal that To renounce the proprietie of all thinges not in special only but in common also is meritorious and holy which Christ taught by word and confirmed by example and the first foūders of the militant church deriued to others by the paterne of their doctrine life Iohn the 22. sayth it is hereticall to affirme that Christ his Apostles had nothing in speciall nor in common Phi. The next extrauagant reconcileth them both Theo. The Pope laboureth for life to shift off the matter at last commeth with a very iest De sola abdicatione proprietatis non iuris alterius in praefata declaratione
mentio habetur In the said declaration of Pope Nicolas there is mention made of renouncing the proprietie only but none other right And so Ius aliud a proprietate habuisse potuerunt they might haue some other right besides the proprietie Phi. So they might Theo. As if Christ and his Apostles had been cunning in the ciuill Lawes to renounce the proprietie for a fashion and yet to reserue an interest in those thinges which they seemed to renounce so that they might both keepe and vse them at their willes This exposition that Christ taught men to renounce the proprietie of their goods and reserue the vse is as false and hereticall as the former assertion of Pope Nicolas that Christ and his Apostles renounced their right in al earthly things both in special and common and taught others to do the like Your gloze tumbleth a long while in the myre after he hath confessed the one to be expresly contrarie to the other at length submitteth himselfe to the Church of Rome though hee see not howe to loose the knot Nicolaus the second in a Councel of 114. Bishoppes appointed Berengarius to confesse that The very body of Christ is in trueth and sensually broken and brused in pieces with the teeth of the faithful this confession the Pope receiued allowed and sent to the Bishoppes of Italie Germanie and Fraunce as catholike which your owne gloze saith is a greater heresie than euer Berengarius held Phi. Hee saith it is vnlesse you vnderstand it soberly Lheo And that sober vnderstanding hee graunteth must bee cleane against the text For where the text affirmeth this of y◠very body of Christ excludeth the outward sacrament as the words declare your gloze sayth that vnlesse you vnderstand this of the outward formes of bread and wine and not of the bodie of Christ it is a greater heresie than that of Berengarius and so is it in deede a very palpable a brutish error and can no way bee salued except you take the woords cleane contrarie to themselues which conuinceth the Pope and his whole Councell of a monsterous error Phi. This was Berengarius fault in his confession but not the Popes iudgement or resolution Theo. You would faine wind out if the text it selfe did not hold you fast but there it is sayde that Pope Nicolas and the Synode deliuered this faith and assured it to be Apostolike and Euangelike And therefore if Berengarius erred in subscribing this fourme of confession the Pope his Councell erred in prescribing the same Phi. You take nice aduantages of words which men may soone misse Theo. The heresie of Arius differed but one letter from the truth and yet his doctrine wa◠very blasphemous One word may containe a whole kingdome of impietie Phi. The best is you find not many such ouersightes in the Popes decrees Theo. You print and publish none but such as you thinke your selues able to defend suppressing the rest that might bee chalenged and then you aske vs howe wee prooue that euer the Bishoppe of Rome gaue definitiue sentence against the fayth in open Court or Councel which refuge of yours is very ridiculous For what hath Christes prayer for Peter to doe with definitiue sentences and open Consistories If the Pope may beleeue defende and preach an error what neede wee care whether his sentence bee conclusiue or perswasiue definitiue or interlocutorie And so for the place what skilleth it where and in whose presence the words be written or spoken if they be certainely his And where you thinke it maketh much for the Bishoppe of Rome that wee can not proue these errors of Popes to haue beene definitiuely pronounced in their publike Consistories if that were true as it is not you shew your selues to be but wranglers For wee can name an infinite number of Bishoppes and Churches that neuer erred in this speciall precise maner which you propose Howe prooue you that euer the Bishops of Yorke or Durham in England of Poycters or Lions in Fraunce of Valeria or Carduba in Spaine of Rauennas or Rhegium in Italie of Corinth or Athens in Greece of Miletus or Sardis in Asia gaue definitiue sentence against the faith in their publike consistories A thousande others I coulde obiect on whom that thing shall neuer bee fastened which you crake can not be proued by the Bishop of Rome Heretikes haue been euer conuinced by their confessions writings not by their definitiue sentences or iudiciall proceedings And therefore if Popes haue erred in writing and teaching they were as right heretikes as euer were Arius Sabellius Nestorius Eutiches and such like which neuer gaue definitiue sentēce against the faith in Courts and Consistories but onely taught or wrate against the truth Phi. Though one or two Bishops of Rome were deceiued they erred not so often there as in other places Theo. Set Constantinople aside and in no one See did the bishops erre oftener than in Rome but this is not our marke If one or two haue erred why may not others Yea though none of them had erred heretofore yet that which is possible may happen hereafter and so long they can be no absolute iudges of trueth Phi. If they might erre they were no fit iudges of faith but because their Tribunall is the highest that is in the Church they must therfore be free from error Theo. You euer proue that which we doubt of by y◠which is more doubtful We denie the Popes Tribunal to bee the highest that is in the church Prouinciall and generall Councels by the Canons are aboue him And in matters of faith the highest Court that is in earth may misse therfore no man is bound to Pastor Prelate or councel farther than their decrees be coherēt agreeable with the faith For against God we owe neither audience nor obedience vnto the perswasions or precepts of any men Phi. No question we must as well in faith as in manners obey rather God than man and therefore if the iudgements of bishops and conclusions of Councels might be repugnant to the word of God duetie bindeth vs to preferre the preceptes of God before the pleasures of men but it is not possible that God should leaue his Church without direction and directed shee can not bee but by iudgement and in giuing iudgement the head must be highest and so the soundest left that peruert the rest and endanger the whole bodie Theo. The church of Christ neuer was nor euer shall bee without direction but that direction proceedeth from the word and spirit of Christ not from the courts and Consistories of Popes Assemblees of learned Bishoppes voyd of pride and strife are good helpes to trie the faith and moderate the discipline of the Church and the greater the better yet the direction of Gods holy Spirite and infallible determination of trueth is not annexed to any certaine places Persons or numbers
depriue Princes of their Crownes and take their Scepters from them because the Apostle willed the christians to be tried rather by their brethreÌ„ than by their enemies which were Infidels Phi. In all which there is no difference betwixt kinges that bee faithfull and other Christian men who all in that they haue submitted themselues and their Scepters to the sweete yoke of Christ are subiect to discipline and to their Pastors authority no lesse than other sheepe of his fold Theo. In beleeuing the word receiuing the Sacraments and obeying the Lawes of God there is no difference betweene the Ruler and the Subiect but the temporall states and possessions of priuate men you may not meddle with by no color of ecclesiastical power or discipline much lesse may you touch the bodies or take the Crownes of Princes into your handes by your accidentall indirect authoritie which is nothing else but a sillie shift of yours to crosse the commaundements of God Phi. Though the state regiment policie and power temporall be in it selfe alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall common wealth called the church or bodie mysticall of Christ and the Magistrate spirituall and ciuill diuerse and distinct and sometimes so farre that the one hath no dependance of the other nor subalteration to the other in respect of themselues as it is in the Churches of God residing in heathen kingdoms and was in the Apostles times vnder the Pagan Emperours yet now where the lawes of Christ are receiued and the bodies politike and mysticall the Church and ciuill state the Mâ—gistrate Ecclesiasticall and Temporall concurre in their kinds togither though euer of distinct regimentes natures and endes there is such a concurrence and subalternation betwixt both that the inferiour of the two which is the ciuill state must needs in matters pertayning any way either directly or indirectly to the honor of God and benefit of the soule be subiect to the spirituall and take direction from the same Theo. This is tossing of termes as men doe tenez-balles to make pastime with The state regiment policie and power temporall is in it selfe you saie alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall Common-wealth called the Church or bodie mysticall of Christ. You seeke to confound that which you would seeme to distinguish and when you haue spent much breath to no ende you conclude that though the church and the Common-wealth be distinct states as you can not denie yet you will rule both by reason the Common-wealth as the inferiour of the two dependeth on the Church and hath subalternation to the church as to the superiour But Sir in plaine termes and more trueth to the Sonne of God ruling in his Church by the might of his worde and spirite all kingdomes and Princes must be subiect their swordes Scepters soules and bodies mary to the Pope attyring himselfe with the spoiles of Christ and his church no such thing is due The watch-men and sheepeheardes that serue Christ in his church haue their kinde of regiment distinct from the temporall power and state but that regiment of theirs is by counsell and perswasion not by terrour or compulsion and reacheth neither to the goods nor to the bodies of any men much lesse to the crownes and liues of Princes and therefore your shifting of wordes and shrinking from the Popes Consistorie to the Church the spirituall Common wealth the mysticall bodie of Christ and such like houering and vncertaine speaches is but a trade that you haue gotten to make the Reader beleeue wee derogate from Christ and would haue Princes superiours to the worde and Sacramentes which Christ hath left to gather and gouerne the church withall Howbeit this course is so common with you that now it doth but shame you A christian king must take direction not from the Popes person or pleasure but from the Lawes and commaundementes of Christ to whome alone hee oweth subiection And as for the Bishoppes and Pastours of his Realme whome you falsly call the spirituall Common-wealth and the mysticall bodie of Christ because they bee but partes thereof and not so much except withall they bee teachers of truth those he must and should consult in respect they be Gods messengers sent to him and his people but with great care to trie them and free libertie to refuse them if they be found not faithfull And when the Prince learning by their instruction what is acceptable to God in doctrine and discipline shall receiue and publish the same the Bishoppes themselues are bounde to obey and if they will not the Magistrate may lawfully see the rigour of his lawes executed vpon them On the other side if the Prince wil not submit himselfe to the rules and preceptes of Christ but wilfully maintaine heresie and open impietie the Bishops are without flatterie to reproue and admonish the Prince of the daunger that is imminent from God and if he persist they must cease to communicate with him in diuine prayers and mysteries but still they must serue him honour him and pray for him teaching the people to doe the like and with meekenesse induring what the wrath of the Prince shal lay on them without annoying his person resisting his power discharging his subiectes or remouing him from his throne which is your maner of censuring Princes Phi. The ciuill Gouernour is SVBIECT to the spirituall amongest christians Theo. I haue often tolde you howe The ciuill Gouernour must heare beleeue and obey the meanest seruaunt that God sendeth if hee speake no more than his Masters will That subiection Princes owe to the sender and not to the speaker But were they simplie subiect to the messengers of God as they are not will you reason thus Princes should obey the Preachers of God ergo if they doe not they may bee deposed This is the argument which wee so often haue denied why then labour you so much about the antecedent when we denie the consequent That Princes shoulde obey God and his worde is a clearer case than that they shoulde obey the Pope For of that no man doubteth and this wee not onely doubt but denie Take therefore that which is confessed on both sides and set your conclusion to it that the force of your reason may the better appeare Princes without all question are bounde to obey God ergo if they doe not their dueties to God they may be deposed by Priestes This is the sequele which we alwaies denied and this is the point which you first assumed to proue Phi. The condition of these two powers as S. Gregorie Nazianzen most excellently resâ—mbleth it is like vnto the distinct state of the same spirit and body or flesh in a man where either of them hauing their proper and peculiar operations endes and obiectes which in other natures may be seuered as in Brutes where flesh is not spirit in Angels
where spirit is but not flesh are yet in man conioyned in person and neuerthelesse so distinct in faculties and operations that the flesh hath her actions peculiar and the soule hers but not without all subalteration or dependaunce Where we see euidently that in case the operations of the bodie be contrarie to the ende weale and iust desires of the soule the spirite may and must commaunde ouerrule and chastice the bodie and as superiour appointeth fasting and other aâ—flictions though with some detriment to the flesh commaunding the eyes not to see the tongue not to speake and so foorth So likewise the power politicall hath her Princes Lawes Tribunalles and the spiritual her Prelats Canons Councels iudgements and these when the Princes are Pagans wholy separate but in christian Common-wealthes ioyned though not confounded nor yet the spirituall turned into the temporall or subiect by peruerse order as it is now in England to the same but the ciuil which in deede is the inferiour subordinate and in some cases subiect to the ecclesiasticall though so long as the temporall State is no hinderaunce to eternall felicitie and the glorie of Christs kingdome the other intermedleth not with her actions but alloweth defendeth honoureth and in particular Common-wealthes obeyeth the same Theo. For you to flie soaring about with comparisons and applications of your owne making is to small purpose Similitudes haue no force farther than the Author that first vsed them doth direct them and vrge them S. Gregorie Bishop of Nazianzun hauing occasion in a Sermon that hee made before the Emperour to intreate the Prince to pardon a fault committed by the people after hee had taught the subiectes their duetie to the Magistrate turned his speech to the Prince with these wordes amongest other Will you admit then my free speech The law of Christ hath committed or subiected you to my power and to my pulpit for we rule also and that which is a more excellent and perfect regiment Or should the spirit in perfection and excellencie giue place to the flesh and heauenly thinges to earthly You will I know take my freedom of speech in good part You are a sheepe of my fould a lambe or weanling of the great sheepheardes Nazianzene maketh not your comparison that the Priest hath the same power ouer the prince which the soule hath ouer the body It is your owne it is not his hee calleth the things which are committed to the Preachers charge spirituall and heauenly and consequently more excellent and perfect than the bodilie earthly things which Princes haue in their power farther he vrgeth not this comparison and this we confesse to be most true Phi. But S. Gregorie sayth to the Emperour The law of Christ hath subiected you to my power and to my Tribunall Theo. I might refuse that translation the wordes are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie not onely to subiect but also to commit as a pledge to bee kept by an other man and in that respect I might well defende this to bee the right interpretation of S. Gregories wordes The lawe of Christ hath committed you to my charge but because the worde hath both significations I receiue either and affirme neither to make for your corporall correcting of Princes Sainct Gregorie doeth plainely lay foorth his owne meaning first by the finall intent for the which hee vsed all this preface next by the rest of the wordes which he addeth to expounde and expresse his minde His requeste to the Emperour was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to beare with the bouldnesse of his speeche in making requeste for his brethren And to shewe the Emperour that heerein hee didde no more than Christ hadde licenced euerie Preacher to doe hee bringeth this reason The Lawe of Christ hath bounde Princes bee they neuer so great to heare the Preacher and to submit them-selues to this place where I stand which was the pulpitte and not the Consistorie For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Church did precisely signifie the place where the Preacher stoode when he taught And to that ende hee addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You are a sheepe of my flocke that is sacred and so are you and a weanling of the great sheepheards and therefore bound to heare my voyce whom the great shepheard hath charged with the feeding of his flocke And so he proceedeth very fatherly and pithily not to commaund or require but to perswade and intreat the Prince to be gratious to his subiects and to imitate the example of God the greatest and mightiest Prince that is These be Christian directions and lawfull meanes to put Princes in minde of their dueties which we allow and receiue Your deposing them and arming their subiects vnder a colour of your Episcopall authoritie to rebel against theÌ„ and to take their scepters from them was farre from Nazianzenes mynde and mouth you doe but abuse his eloquent similitudes to beautifie your pestilent conspiracies and that you may see by the very wordes following where he saith to the Emperour Thou raignest together with Christ thou rulest together with him thy sword is from him thou art the image of God Hee that confessed the Prince to hold his sworde from Christ and with Christ neuer craked as you conceiue that hee had power to take the Princes sword from him yea rather hee acknowledged himselfe amongst the rest to bee subiect to the Prince though he were a Bishoppe Let vs sayth he submit our selues to God to eche other and to the Rulers of the earth To God in all thinges eche to other in brotherly loue to Princes for the conseruation of good order For this is one of the Lawes amongs vs that be Christians and the same prayse worthie and most excellently ordered by the holy Ghost that as seruaunts obey their masters and women their husbands and the Church Christ and the Disciples their Pastors and Teachers so wee should bee subiect to all superiour Powers not onely for feare of wrath but also for conscience sake Phi. You will not denie but S. Gregorie sayth Wee haue a greater and perfecter regiment than yours speaking euen to the Prince himselfe Theo. So Preachers haue They gouerne the soules of men and dispence the mysteries of God where as Princes are set to rule the bodies of their subiects and to dispose the things of this life And therefore if the fruites and effects of their callings be compared the Preachers passeth the Princes by many degrees of perfection and excellencie God giuing earthly foode and peace by the prince but heauenly grace and life by the woorde and sacraments which wee receiue from the mouthes and handes of his messengers Mary if you compare their persons or powers to commaunde and compell by corporall punishments of which wee dispute Preachers are seruants to their brethren Princes are Lordes ouer them Preachers may reprooue and threaten Princes may sease the goods
the Princes or nayle vp cloth of Tissue where the Prince is not and say it is a chayre of state would you bee so foolish as to regard either of them or shoulde you not dishonour the king if you did reuerence them since they bee not such thinges as the Prince accepteth or vseth for his but other mens counterfaites Phi. I speake of that Chaire where the Prince did sit and of that Seale which the Prince did send Theo. I knowe you did and therefore I refused your similitude as vnlike the matter in question betwixt vs because images are neither places of Christes presence nor witnesses of his will as Seates and seales are vnto Princes no nor ordayned allowed or admitted by Christ to haue any credite or vse about his heauenly person or pleasure but only proposed by men of a naturall and kind affection as they thought towards Christ though cleane without warrant and so without thankes from him For hee of purpose tooke his bodily presence from the eyes of men that hee might dwell in their heartes by fayth and to teach vs to honour him not by that proportion of face which the painter would drawe but by that abundance of loue grace and mercie which hee hath extended on vs and layde in stoare for vs and which no corporall eyes can behold nor colours expresse but onely the hearing of his woorde and woorking of his spirite can lighten and perswade the heart of man to conceiue and beleeue Phi. Is it not thankes woorthie with God to haue alwayes the shape of his sonne before our eyes that wee may honour him with our hearts Theo. To honour him with your heartes and to haue him at all times in your mindes is religious and requisite but to make light of those meanes which hee hath prescribed to nourish your fayth and continue the memorie of him-selfe to seeke out others of your owne fit to please your senses not to resemble his greatnes or goodnes this is neither acceptable vnto God nor profitable for your selues Phi. To remember Christ cannot bee euill Theo. Not to remember him till you looke on a picture can not bee good Your heartes ought alwayes to bee lifted vp vnto him that whether you eate or drinke wake or sleepe or whatsoeuer you doe in woorde or deede you may doe all in the name of the Lord Iesu giuing thankes alwayes for all thinges vnto God the father in the name of our Lorde Iesus Christ. You must not tary for the execution of this precept till you see an Image But all your actions woordes and thoughtes must bee directed to the prayse of his glory and honour of his name This if you put in bre you shall neede no painted nor carued Image to bring you in mynde of his mercies The benefites and blessings within you without you and on euery side of you which GOD for Christes sake bestoweth on you are so many that you can hardly forget him vnlesse you also forget the earth that beareth you the heauen that couereth you the day that guydeth your feete the night that giueth you rest the meates that you feede on and the breath that you liue by yea your owne bodies which hee woonderfully made and soules which hee preciously bought All these thinges and all other thinges in heauen and earth you must drowne in vtter obliuion before you can inferre that Images bee needefull to put vs in mynde of our dueties to GOD. And since without Images you can and must remember the Father that created and the Holy Ghost that â—anctified you why shoulde you forget the sonne that redeemed you more than the other except you haue Images at your elbowes to kindle you appetites But this is nothing to the worshipping of Images which you should proue to bee Catholike Though there were an historicall vse in painting the shape of our Sauiour yet is it no pietie to worshippe the picture Graunt it might be vsed for remembrance for religion it may not and therefore you are all this while besides the marke Philand You denie both the hauing and woorshipping of Images to bee Catholique Wee prooue the hauing of them to bee necessarie by the fruite and profite that commeth from them namely the instruction of the ignorant in the storie of their saluation the putting vs in often remembraunce of our Sauiour and the stirring vp our deuotion with more feruencie The worshipping of them wee proue with more facilitie for if hee that honoureth the Image honour the person himselfe thereby represented as S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose doe affirme then the worship which is done to the Image of Christ passeth vnto Christ himselfe and by consequent if it bee lawfull to adore and honour Christ it is not vnlawfull to doe the like to his Image Besides wee can prooue that adoration of Images is a tradition deliuered from the Apostles and obserued in all Churches and that the Scripture it selfe supporteth vs in this point as the learned epistle of Adrian the Bishoppe of Rome to Constantine and Irene doeth largely shewe and for the credite of the cause wee haue a general Councell eight hundreth yeres old to say as much in euery point as I affirme and more Theo. Wee maruell not to see you so deepely deceiued and strongly deluded as you bee such is the iust iudgement of God on all that admit not the loue of the trueth but haue pleasure in vnrighteousnes You rest on the vanities forgeries of such as were enclined to the same error before you not examining their proofes nor considering their reportes but presuming their euident follies to bee pregnant authorities for you whith is euer the next way to seduce others and to bee seduced your selues As touching the shew which you make of Scriptures Apostolike Tradition Churches Fathers Councels it is a childish and friuolous vaunt The fathers which you quote are abused the Apostles and their Churches belied the Scriptures depraued and wrested the Councell which you call generall reiected as wicked and diligently refuted in the same age by the West Bishoppes Of these emptie and vnluckie Maskes the more you bring the lesse you wynne Phi. Wee loose nothing so long as you lode vs onely with words Theo. If your proofes bee vaine my woordes be true Looke you therefore to the soundnesse of that which you alleage otherwise your owne burden will ouerpresse you Philand The collection which I made out of Saint Basill and others is very sure Saint Basill sayth Honos Imaginis in ipsum prototypum redit The honour doone to the Image redoundeth to the principall that is thereby represented S. Athanasius Qui Imaginem adorat in ipsa Imperatorem adorat He that reuerenceth the Image honoureth therein the Emperour And S. Chrysostome Knowest thou not that hee which hurteth the Emperours Image defaceth the Imperiall dignitie it selfe And so S. Ambrose Hee that
likenes of his owne face and sent to king Abagarus as Damascene and Nicephorus witnesse Theoph. You may well sweare I will neither beleeue you nor Damascene Damascene sayth Fertur quaedam historia there is such a storie spread abroad but hee neither telleth by whom it was made nor of what credite it is and Eusebius that first tooke this storie of Abagarus and that at large out of the monuments of the Citie Edessa reporteth no such thing yea the Church of Rome her selfe some hundreths before Damascene repelled that Epistle of Christ to Abagarus then extant by name as Apocryphall And therfore you bolster an error and abuse the people of God with forgeries long before condemned though since receiued by Nicephorus and other fablers among the Grecians who wrate all they found without iudgement or without all shame fayned that they neuer found except it were in some wicked and witlesse legend such as your Church of late dayes had good stoare Philand And so the image of our Ladie made by Saint Luke you will say is a fable and yet Simeon Methaphrastes doeth confirme it Theoph. Leaue these late and obscure Lyars and bring some-what woorth the answering Philand Saint Basil sayth the painting and adoring of Images is a tradition of the Apostles and so doeth Damascene The woordes of S. Basil are Quam ob causam historias Imaginum illorum honoro palam adoro Hoc enim nobis traditum a sanctis Apostolis non est prohibendum sed in omnibus eccleâ—ijs nostris eorum historias erigimus For which cause I honour and openly adore the stories of their Images And this being deliuered vs from the Apostles is not prohibited but in all our Churches wee erect their histories Theoph. Can you turne vs to the place in Saint Basill Phi. The epistle is not extant but Adrian the Bishoppe of Rome whose credite is sufficient for a greater matter than this doeth alleage iâ—â—ut of his writings against Iulian the Apostata Theo. Adrian and you bâ—th shall pardon vs for beleeuing you when wee find no such woordes in all S. Basill Phi. They might be then in Saint Basil though they be not now Theo. If the woordes did agree with the spirit of Saint Basil or with the sâ—aâ—e of those tymes or with the rest of the fathers and auncient teachers in Christes Church wee woulde not so much dislike them though they were not found in Saint Basils woorkes but nowe seeing the woordes to be sensibly false if not vtterly wicked and to haue no conuenience with the doctrine of those that taught in the same time or neere about his age and knowing in the contention of the Grecians for images somewhat before Adrian what framing and â—â—ling of fathers there was to beare out either side wee thinke it easier for the Bishoppe of Rome to bee deceiued in a Greeke writer that liued 450. yeeres before him by some false reporter lewd translator or cunning forgeâ—er than for Basil to bee so great a straunger in the Church of Christ and so manifest a despiser of Gods precepts that hee would openly defend and himselfe vse adoration of Saintes Images without any scruple as deliuered from the Apostles who were farre from hauing farther from teaching the godly to worship the Images of Prophetes Apostles or Martyrs as this deluder dreameth And therefore either shewe vs the Epistle where this is written or else leaue loding the learned fathers names with such vnlearned corruptions Philand Were there not many thinges written by the Catholique Fathers that nowe are perished Theoph. And as many thinges forged in their names that were neuer written by them as appeareth in all their woorkes to this day by the iudgement of your very friendes Phil. This is the next way to call all their writinges and so the whole Christian sayth in question Theoph. You woulde faine haue vs swallowe your monkish impieties vnder the colour of their authorities but the wisedome of God hath better prouided for his church than so The rule of our fayth is the voyce of our Shepheard By that we iudge of the writings of all others be they fâ—ithâ—â—ll or Infidels If this were written in Basil wee would not receiue it vntill wee had tried it by that touchstone finding no such thing in all his woorkes why should wee regard it Philand There it was though nowe it bee not Theophi There it is not wheresoeuer it was and your alleager hath no suâ—h credite with vs that wee should trust him Philand Trust no man I praie you that is against you Theo. Wee trust not you to be your owne caruers Phi. This authoritie was alleaged and allowed to be S. Basils in a general Councell 800. yeres agoe Theo. That Councell was neuer receiued nor confessed to be general by the west Churches but reiected and condemned as a wicked coniuration against the faith and the letter there framed in Adrians name besides that it sauoreth altogether of your late forge at Rome is a pestilent and shamelesse depriuation both of fathers and Scriptures Phi. You bee very choice that can like nothing except it be exquisite The. You be worse than grosse if you take such palpable lies to be the fortresses of your faith Omit that fond and false report of Constantines leprosie purposing to bee washed in a bath of infants blood and dehorted from it in the night as hee slept by some that appeared to him whome hee afterwarde knewe to bee Peter and Paul by their Images which Siluester Bishoppe of Rome shewed him and that thereupon Constantine being first a persecuter of the Christians was conuerted and baptized by Syluester and beganne to buylde Churches and decked them with Images in euery place lewder and viler fables than which your legend hath none the rest of Adrians allegations out of the scriptures and Fathers what are they but open iniuries and mockeries of GOD and man The Scriptures which hee bringeth to proue the making and adoring of Images bee these God made man of the slime of the earth after his owne Image Adam of his owne free will called all the beastes of the fielde and foules of the ayre by their proper names Abel of his owne accord presented a sacrifice vnto God of the firstlings of his flocke Noe after the flood of his owne head buylt an altar vnto the Lorde and offered thereon So Abraham of himselfe erected an altar in the honour and glorie of God Iacob also when hee had in his sleepe seene the Angels of GOD ascending descending by the ladder after hee rose of his owne motion set vp a stone on the ground where his head lay and powred oyle on it and named the place Bethel and wee doe not reade that God for this cause was angrie with him Againe the same Iacob worshipped in the toppe of his staffe
more than Tradition for the baptizing of children If any man sayth he seâ—ke for diuine authoritie in this matter we may truely coniecture by circuÌ„cision what effect the Sacrament of baptisme hath in infants vsing a very forcible argumeÌ„t in this case that if children might receiue the seale of the former couenant vnder Moses why not of the later established in the blood of Christ Phi. He saith we may coniecture it but he doth not say we may proue it Theo. He repeateth the reason with Veraciter conijcere possumus We may very truly coniecture and a true coniecture is no vntrue persuasion but as I said it was not then in doubt and therefore no maruaile if that Learned father laboured not that question to the depth Had it beene denyed as in our dayes it is he woulde haue founde the same scriptures to confirme it that we doe And to say the trueth his euident illations out of the Scriptures that baptisme is needfull for Infants make sufficient demonstration that baptisme is lawfull for Infants els it would follow that no child might be saued which is an hainous and monsterous error directly fighting with the manifest scriptures For where without baptisme they cannot be saued by reason original sin is not remitted but in baptisme as S. Austen concludeth out of the wordes of our Sauiour Except a man be borne of water and of the spirite he cannot enter the kingdome of God If children be excluded from baptism they be consequently excluded from the kingdome of God which is flatly repugnant to the word of God Phi. It is no meaning of ours to exclude children from baptisme but to let you vnderstand that you cannot shew by the Scriptures that children were baptized Theo. I graunt we cannot and adde we neede not The Scriptures we say containe al matters of faith not of fact That children were baptized we proue by the practise of Christes Church and not by the scriptures That children may bee baptized we proue not only by the Tradition of the Apostles but also by the sequele of the Scriptures themselues Our Sauiour saith of Children It is not the will of your father which is in heauen that one of these litle ones should perishe Now choose you whether they shall be saued without baptisme or perishe for lacke of baptisme Againe the Lord saith Suffer the litle children and forbid them not to come vnto me for the kingdome of heauen belongeth vnto such They must enter the kingdome of God before they can possesse it and enter it they cannot vntill they be new borne of water and the holy Ghost Now say wil you exclude them from that which God hath prouided for them or will admitte them to be heires with Christ before they bee engraffed into Christ by Baptisme The Apostle saith to the great comforte of all Christian Parents The vnbeleeuing husband is sanctified by the wife that beleeueth and the vnbeleeuing wife is sanctified by the husband that beleeueth els were your children vncleane but nowe are they holy This is spoken not of the secret election of the faithfull which is neither common to all nor knowen to any but of their Christian profession whereby they be called to be Sainctes that is an holy peculiar people vnto God For al things be holy that be dedicated to his vse this kinde of holines S. Paul deriueth from the roote to the branches If the roote be holy so are the branches If then Infants be partakers of the same vocation holynes with their parents without baptisme which is the seale of Gods couenaÌ„t with vs in the blood of his sonne neither we nor our children can be holy surely the children of Sainctes if they be excluded from baptisme are as vnholy and vncleane as the children of Infidels which vtterly subuerteth sainct Pauls Doctrine If to auoide this place you suppose holinesse to bee meant of the inward satisfaction of Gods spirite besides that children drawe inward corruption not holinesse from their Christian Parents yet this way wee also conclude that Children must bee Baptized for where the spirite of God is precedent the seruice of man must bee consequent as sainct Peter teacheth Can any man forbid water that these shoulde not bee baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost So that take which you will and say what you can our conclusion is vnmoueable And since children bee defiled by Adam if they may not bee washed by Christ the disobedience of man shal bee mightier vnto condemnation than the grace of God and obedience of Christ vnto iustification which the Scriptures reiect as a wicked absurditie Wherefore the church absolutely and flatly may not assure saluation to children vnbaptized lest they seeme naturally innocent or generally sanctified without baptisme albeit their Parents desiring and seeking it if they bee preuented by mortall necessitie wee must leaue them to the goodnes and secret election of God not without hope because in their Parents there wanted no wil but an extremitie disappointed them and in the children the let was weaknes of age not wickednes of heart and so the sacrameÌ„t omitted not for any contempt of religion but by strictnes of time in which cases S. Augustine confesseth the want of baptisme may be supplied if it so please God mary they may not chalenge it nor we promise it Much more might bee sayde but I content my selfe with the former reasons till you refute them And hauing the certaine practise of the Apostles in baptizing Infants witnessed by the Church of Châ—ist and deliuered vnto the Church for the confirmation of those thinges which we alleage wee count them irrefutable Philand Neither doe I mislike the thing but I muse why Saint Augustine claymed wholy by Tradition if so much Scripture might bee brought for the matter Theoph. Expresse precept to baptize infantes or plaine example where they were baptized the scripture hath none and therefore Saint Augustine did well to reuerence the Tradition which hee sawe was Apostolike and if any man vrge vs to prooue that children were baptized wee must flee to the same Tradition with him But if it bee impugned as a thing vnlawfull and dissonant from the Scriptures we must then lift the ground of that Tradition by the scriptures because it toucheth the saluation or condemnation of Christian Infants And so would S. Austen haue exactly and learnedly doone wee doubt not if that point had beene controuersed in his time Philand Hee woulde you say but hee did not wee knowe and that causeth vs to take it for an vnwritten Tradition Theoph. A tradition we grant but agreeable to the Scriptures And though Saint Austen doe not say so that is no reason for you to conclude it is not so silence is no proofe Nay if hee had called it an vnwritten Tradition as hee doeth not that were no let but it might be confirmed by the scriptures
Father and the Sonne to proceede both from the Father and the Sonne For the Sonne saith when the spirit of trueth coÌ„meth which proceedeth from the father Where he teacheth vs the spirit to be his also because himselfe is trueth And that the holy ghost proceedeth likewise from the sonne the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles doeth deliuer vnto vs. For Esay sayth of the sonne Hee shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth and with the spirit of his lippes he shal slea the wicked Of whom the Apostle also sayth Whom the Lord Iesus shall slea with the spirit of his mouth Whome the onely Sonne of God declaring to bee the Spirite of his mouth breathing on his Disciples after his resurrection sayth receiue ye the holy Ghost And Iohn in his Reuelation sayth that out of the mouth of the Lorde Iesu him-selfe there proceeded a sharpe two edged swoorde Hee therefore is the Spirit of his mouth hee is the sword which proceedeth out of his mouth And againe By many testimonies of the diuine Scriptures it is prooued that he is the spirite of the father and the sonne which is properly called in the Trinitie the holy ghost And that he proceedeth from both it is thus proued because the sonne himselfe saith the spirit of trueth proceedeth from the father And when he was risen from death and appeared to his disciples he breathed on them and sayd Receiue ye the holy ghost to shewe that the spirit proceeded from him also And that spirit is the vertue which came from him as we read in the gospel and healed all men What you thinke of these places we know not but sure we are S. Augustine himselfe sayth of these the like Cum per Scripturarum sanctarum testimonia docuissem de vtroque procedere Spiritum sanctum When I had shewed by the testimonies of the Holy scriptures that the holy ghost proceedeth froÌ„ both the father the sonne And if it bee the naturall and distinct proprietie of the Spirite to proceede as it is of the sonne to bee begotten which I winne you will not denie then is it as euident by the Scriptures that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the sonne as it is that the sonne was begotten of the father For as the second person in Trinitie was begotten of him whose sonne hee is so the thirde Person proceeded from them whose spirite hee is but hee is the Spirite of them both as the Scriptures expressely witnes Ergo hee proceeded from them both Phi. The doctrine is true but the scripture is not expresse Theo. What meane you by your expresse scripture Phi. Those very woordes He proceedeth from them both are not found in the scriptures Theo. Alas good Sirs is that your quarrell Doe the scriptures I pray you consist in spelling or in vnderstanding Neuer read you what S. Hierom sayth Nec putemus in verbis ScripturaruÌ„ Euangelium esse sed in sensu non in superficie sed in medulla non in sermonum folijs sed in radice rationis Let vs not thinke the Gospell to lie in the words of the scriptures but in the sense not in the rind but in the pith not in the leaues of speech but in the ground of reason truth If by expresse scripture you meane the plaine 〈◊〉 sense of the word of God we haue euident infallible proofes thence for the proceeding of the holy ghost from the father the sonne But if you sticke on the syllables letters which we speake you doe but wrangle with vs as the Arias did with the Nicene fathers Expostulating why the Bishops that met at Nice vsed these words substance consubstaÌ„tial which were nowhere found in the Scriptures our answere to you shal be the same that theirs was to them These words though they be not found in the Scriptures yet haue they the same meaning and sense which the Scriptures containe And that we count to be expresse scripture For otherwise as Hilarie saith Al heretiks speake Scriptures without sense the diuell himself as Hierom noâ—eth hath spoken some things out of the scriptures but that as they both witnes in the very next words The scriptures coÌ„sist not in reading but in vnderstanding And yet I see no cause why this point should be denied to be expresse Scripture for so much as S. Iohn describing the son of God with a sharpe two edged â—word proceeding out of his mouth which is the rod of his mouth wherewith he shal smite the earth the spirit of his lips wherewith hee shall slea the wicked as Esay prophesied hee should and Paul declareth hee would vseth the very same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twise which our Sauior before spake of his father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit which proceedeth froÌ„ the father So that you were fouly ouerseene when you obiected this point of our christian faith as wanting expresse scripture Phi. If you take not only the words but also the sense â—or scripture we will not greatly gainesay but all points of faith may be deriued out of these words or out of the sense of that which is written The. Deriued as you do pardoÌ„s pilgrimages penaÌ„ces purgatory But we say that al points of faith must be plainly concluded or necessarily collected by that which is writteÌ„ And for our so saying we haue not only the scriptures fathers but also your selues which being so often required vrged to shewe what one point of faith the primatiue church of Christ beleeued wtout the scriptures could neuer shew any Phi. We could shew many if that needed we wer disposed The. I know not what accoÌ„pt you make of it but to our simple conceiuing it is the groundwork of al religioÌ„ crazeth the very heart of your vnwritten verities And if to satisfie the people of God disburden your selues of an errour you be not all this while disposed to doe what you can we must leaue you for curious and daintie men and thinke you can not Phi. Tertullian was of that minde that we are when he willed the christians not to appeale to the scriptures for the triall of their faith His words are Ergo non est ad scripturas prouocandum nec in ijs constituendum certamen in quibus aut nulla aut incerta victoria est We must therefore not appeale to the Scriptures nor place the trial of our cause in those writings in which the victorie is either none or not sure Theo. You do both the truth and Tertullian wrong TertulliaÌ„ doth not say that in matters of faith some things should be beleeued wtout the Scriptures no man is flatter against that than Tertullian in this very booke which you bring but he would not haue the heretikes of his time chalenged nor brought to the Scriptures because they receiued not the books as
and exercises were handled and perfited either wholy or chiefely by the Grecians the Romanes affecting rather the inlarging of their Empire with armes and triumphes than the furnishing of their citie with scholasticall academicall ornamentes The Latine tongue came in last and though in the West partes betweene this and Rome it some-what preuailed by reason of the Empire and no better tongue neerer yet in the East it was little regarded and seldome vsed yea the Grecians in comparison of their tongue neglected it as barbarous Phi. Barbarous who euer called the Romanes Barbarians or the Latine tongue barbarous Theo. The Grecians disdained the Romane tongue as barbarous in respect of their own and did not sticke to number the Romanes amongst the barbarians Plautus the father of the latine toung translating a Comedie out of the Greeke into Latine sayeth Marcus vertit barbare Plautus translated it into the barbarous tongue of the Romanes Strabo confesseth that many diuiding the whole world into Greekes and Barbarians put the Romanes in the second rancke amongest the Barbarians which partition dured to the Apostles time and is inserted in the first beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes I am debter to the Greekes and to the Barbarians and therefore am readie to preach the Gospell to you also that are at Rome He is a debter to both and by that meanes to the Romanes the Romanes therefore by S. Pauls own mouth since they were not Grecians are numbred amongst the Barbarians Mary this is not materiall to our purpose the Grecians in their proud conceit thought euery Nation barbarous that wanted any thing of the daâ—â—tinesse of their speech delicatenes of their life where in deede no Nation may iustly be counted barbarous except it bee voide of all humane ciuilitie and societie which the Romanes then were not and infinite Nations nowe are not But S. Paul in this place which we reason of vseth barbarous for that which is not vnderstood of the hearer though the tongue in it selfe be neuer so learned or eloqueÌ„t Those are his very words in this chapter vttered for the better declaration of his meaning and the word beareth this sense euen among prophane writers as when the Poete that was a Romane and vanished into Pontus saide Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor vlli I am here a barbarian because no man vnderstandeth what I speake Euen so the Grecians and Hebricians by Sainct Pauls resolution are barbariaÌ„s to him that knoweth not what they say Phi. You shall neuer induce mee to thinke that S. Paul spake of any of those three tongues which were after a sort sanctifâ—â—d in our Sauiours crosse Theo. What you will bee ledde to wee greatly passe not the Scriptures depend not on your dreames wee search for the sense of Sainct Paules wordes which being generall may not be restrained to what you list without some surer authoritie than your owne There are saith the Apostle for example sake so many kindes of tongues in the world and none of them is without sounde or signification Yet if I know not the vertue of the voice I shal bee barbarous to him that speaketh in any of them and he that speaketh shall be barbarous to me There are so many kinds of voices in the world That is saith Chrysostom so many tongues languages to wit the Scythian Thracian Romane Persian Mauritanian Indian Egyptian and of thowsand other nations besides these Therefore if I know not the power of the voice I shall be barbarous to him that speaketh Neither would I haue you thinke it to come to passe in vs onely you may see the like in all And concluding him that praied in latine if he vnderstood not his owne speech to bee barbarous to himselfe by this very rule of the Scripture he saith If a man should presently speake in the Persian tongue or in any other strange tongue and not vnderstand what he speaketh he shall be barbarous euen to himselfe not only to an other that knew not the power of the language There were at the first many that praied and gaue a sound with the voice vsing the Persian or Romane tongue which vnderstood not what they said The Apostle therefore hence teacheth that our tongue ought to speake and our minde withal vnderstand the wordes Which except we do there must of necessity follow a confusion S. Ambrose exemplifieth the Apostles discourse in none other tongues but in the Greeke and Hebrew If I pray with the tongue my spirite praieth but mine vnderstanding is without fruite It is manifest that the mind of man is ignorant when he speaketh with a toung which he vnderstandeth not as latine men vse to sing Greeke delighted with the sound of the wordes but not knowing what they say And shewing who they were that the Apostle reproueth in this whole chapter he saith Hij ex Hebraeis erant qui aliquando Syra lingua plerumque Hebraea intractatibus aut oblationibus vtebantur ad commendationeÌ„ They were Hebrewes who to commend theÌ„selues vsed somtimes the Syrike most times the Hebrew tongue in their Sermons and prayers at the oblation Haymo likewise bringeth the Greeke Hebrew tongues to declare the Apostles meaning If I know not the power or vnderstaÌ„ding of the voice which I heare I shal be barbarous to him that speaketh he that speaketh shal be barbarous to me For example I am a Grecian thou an Hebrew if I speak to thee in Greeke I shall seeme barbarous Likewise if thou speake to mee in Hebrew thou shalt seeme barbarous And that as well in praying as preaching An idiot is hee that knoweth that onely tongue wherein he was borne and bred If such an one therefore stand by thee whiles thou dost solemnly celebrate the mysterie of the Masse or make a sermon or giue a blessing how shall he say Amen at thy blessing wheÌ„ he knoweth not what thou sayest for so much as he vnderstanding none but his mother tongue can not tell what thou speakest in that strange and barbarous tongue barbarous not in it selfe but in respect of him that vnderstandeth it not You say the Apostle by strange tongues meaneth not the latin Greeke or Hebrue S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose do verifie the Apostles words of those toungs namelie and chiefly yea S. Ambrose saith the occasion of all this offence were certain Iewes that in their prayers at the Lords table and exhortations to the people to shewe them selues vsed for the most part the Hebrew tongue They affirme that which you denie and they deny that which you affirme Surely you or they must needs be fouly deceiued Phi. That S. Paul speaketh not of the Church seruice is prooued by inuincible arguments It is euident that the Corinthians had their seruice in Greeke at this same time and it was not done in these miraculous tongues Nothing is meant then of the Church
Pastours and prophetes of the primatiue church in their publike praiers and exhortations and called it a confusion and resembled it to our babling in the church at this day which you thinke to be very disordered Phi. I see no proofe that the Pastours of the Church in the Apostles time made their publike prayers as you say by miraculous instinct of the spirite Theoph. Doe but open your eyes when you reade this chapter and you can not choose but see it Both this and the twelfth chapter treate wholy of the gifts of the spirite Where you finde that to one was giuen by the spirit the word of wisedome to an other the word of knowledge to an other fayth to an other giftes of healing by the same spirite to an other operation of wonders to an other prophesie to an other discerning of spirites to an other diuersities of toungs to an other interpretation of toungs Phi. Here is not the gift of praier numbred amongest them Theo. But in the fourteenth it is where shewing them how they should behaue themselues in the Church when the congregation was assembled he laieth this downe as a rule for them to follow I will pray with thee spirite but I will pray with the vnderstanding also I will sing with the spirite but I will sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the spirite how shal he that occupieth the room of the simple or common person say Amen at the giuing of thanks seeing he knoweth not what thou saiest To pray sing and blesse with the spirite in this place can bee nothing else but to be guided and led by the spirit in their praiers Psalmes thanks as they were in their doctrines interpretations exhortations which was by miracle on the suddain not by learning or study This was done in the church whē al the faithful were present to these praiers psalms thāksgiuings the people were to say Amen as the Apostle sheweth which is the ende signe and proofe of publike prayer among christians What is church seruice if this be not or what other Seruice could the Church haue besides hearing the word and offering their common supplications vnto God by the mouth of one man the rest vnderstanding what he said and confirming his praier with saying Amen Phi. The Apostle speaketh of one man supplying the place of the vulgar and you stretch it to the whole people Theo. If the praiers of the Church concerned some of the people and not all you might make that obiection with some shew but now it hath no color when S. Paul asketh How shal the simple man say Amen he meaneth not this or that man but any or euery And so the indefinite signifieth generally throughout the Scripture Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne that is Blessed is euery man to whom the Lord imputeth no sin Cursed be the man that obserueth not all the workes of the Law to doe them that is by S. Pauls owne exposition Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the Lawe to doe them The whole Scripture is full of the like And therefore Chrysostome noteth Indoctum promiscuam plebem vocat monstratque non leue incommodum esse si Amen dicere non possit The vnlearned he calleth the vulgar people and declareth it to be no smale inconuenience if they cannot say Amen Phi. I see they did praie sing and blesse with the spirite and that the people said Amen but had they no speciall nor vsuall praiers reserued for the ministration of the Sacrament which might not be varied Theo. You think belike they had your Introite Grail Tract Sequēce Offertorie Secrets Postcommunion Pax and Ite missa est Phi. Sure they had some precise forme of seruice though we know it not Theo. And since you knowe it not why should you make it the anker hold of all your exposition vpon S. Paul Phi. Had they no order for their seruice Theo. What a stirre here is for that which the Apostles neuer did Had they set an order for the seruice of the Church durst any man after haue broken it Phi. S. Iames masse is yet extant Theo. And so are a number of other foolish forgeries as wel as that Phi. Do you think it forged Theo. Which of S. Iames masses do you meane Phi. There are not so many that you should aske which Theo. Two there are vnder his name the one nothing like the other yet both fathered vpō him Phi. We haue but one and that set in order of church seruice with mutual praiers and answers for Priest and People very perfectly Theo. And the other you shall find in the eight booke of Clemens Apostolike constitutions where the fourteene Apostles for so you haue increased their number as well as their constitutions take precise order what praiers answers and actions shal be vsed at the mysticall sacrifice their first prescription being this that Two Deacons shal be on both sides of the altar with tuffs of pecocks tails in their hands to driue away gnats left they light in the Chalice a graue consideration for Christs Apostles to meete together to make flappes to catch flies Phi. That I graunt is a matter of smal respect but yet not enough to refute the booke Theo. It is sufficiently refuted in that neither the Church of Christ nor your selues euer esteemed it Had this book beene Authentik it must needs haue beene taken into the canon of the Scriptures For if that which any one Apostle wrate be Canonical much more that which al the Apostles with common consent decreed and ordered Againe had the Apostles prescribed an exact fourme of diuine seruice for the Lords table what man would haue altered it or what Church refused it How would either Basill or Chrysostome haue presumed to make newe formes of Church seruice if those liturgies be theirs not rather forced on thē as this is on the first chiefe Apostles of Christ Why did the Latine Church and the Church of Rome her selfe neglect that seruice if it were Apostolike and preferre the praiers of one Scholasticus as worthier to be said ouer the deuine mysteries the maker being so obscure a man that his name is not knowen in the church of god why were the Bishops of Rome 600. yeares vpward patching piecing the masse before they brought it to any setled forme as your own fellowes confesse and yet then Rome had one forme of seruice Millan an other which they keepe at this day Fraunce a thirde Why did Gregorie when he was consulted by Augustine the monke what forme of diuine seruice he should commēd to the Saxons wil him to bind himselfe neither to Rome nor to any church els but to take from euery place that which he liked best and deliuer that vnto the English To
one must keepe silence in the church and let them speake that may profite the hearers Idlely is that spoken which is not vnderstoode saith Cassiodorus Non solum cantantes sed etiam intelligentes Psallere debemus Nemo enim Sapienter quicquam facit quod non intelligit We ought to sing the psalms not only with tune of voice but also with vnderstanding of heart For no man doth any thing wifely which he vnderstandeth not The Bishops of Fraunce and Germanie assembled in Councel at Aquisgraine 816 yeres after Christ vnder Ludouike the Godly confesse the wordes of S. Paul bind vs to vnderstand the Psalmes which we sing in the Church Those that sing to the Lorde in his Church ought to haue their vnderstanding goe with their voice that the words of the Apostle may be verified I will sing with the spirit but I will also sing with vnderstanding And Let such be appointed in the Church to read sing that with the sweetnes of their reading and singing can affect the learned and instruct the vnlearned and let them seeke rather the edification of the people than the popular and vaine ostentation of their voices These Catholike fathers affirme the people ought to vnderstand the psalms and praiers of the church you say they need not Betweene these two doctrines there is asmuch difference as betweene daylight and darknes and yet you will be Catholiks whosoeuer say nay yea God himselfe commaundeth that neither exhortation nor supplication be made in the church but such as may edifie the hearers and bee vnderstood of the people you both doe and teach the contrary and yet you would be christians Phi. The simple sort can not vnderstand all Psalmes nor scarce the learned no though they be translated or read in knowen tongues men must not cease to vse them for all that when they are knowen to containe Gods holy praises Theo. Are you hired to betray your own follie or is the force of trueth so great that minding to conuince vs you confute your selues The simple vnderstand not all Psalmes nor scarce the learned wee thinke you speake right yet must not men cease to vse theÌ„ since they containe the prayses of God as true as the Gospell but now Sirs if the learned must vse them wheÌ„ they scarce vnderstand them why may not the simple heare them though they conceiue not al the mysteries of them Phi. As good not heare them as not vnderstand them Theo. All parts of the Psalmes they doe not vnderstand yet some they doe Why then doe you barre them from all since you dare not â—uouch them to bee ignorant of all Againe by continuall hearing them read alleaged and expounded in the Church they that are willing may easily increase their knowledge why then doe you cut the people not onely from that they knowe but also from that they might knowe from the meanes whereby to learne which is the high way to keepe them in ignorance the mother of all errors Phi. They will learne but litle God knoweth Theo. Graunt they would learne nothing yet are you bound to follow that meanes which God hath left to instruct them if their dulnes and peruersenes of heart be such that they will not learne the fault is theirs not yours their blood shal be on their own heads you are discharged where nowe by taking the comfort and instruction of their prayers from them you force them to neglect al as neuer likely to come by the knowledge of any one word and confirme them in their blindnes to your owne destruction and their imminent daunger if God bee not the more graâ—ious to them Phi. Prayers are not made to teache or increase knowledge but their speciall vse is to offer our heartes desires and wants to God and this euery catholike doeth for his condition whether hee vnderstande the woordes of his prayers or no. Theoph. Who tolde you that praiers are not made to teach or increase our knowledge The Psalmes of Dauid what are they but prayers and prayses offered vnto God and yet what Christian was euer so voyde of sense as to say they doe not teach nor increase knowledge or that they were not left vs to this ende and purpose that they shoulde teach and instruct vs in thinges pertaining to our saluation The prayers of the Godly throughout the scriptures though they were vttered in their wants and necessities yet were they written for our instruction And if you were not as destitute of grace as you be of truth you woulde soone perceiue that religious and Godly prayers doe mightily teach both learned vnlearned their dueties to God and his mercies to them Phi. In our prayers wee speake to God and not to men and that leadeth vs to â—ay they were not made to teach or increase knowledge Theo. The end of prayer in him that maketh it is to aske at Gods handes that he lacketh and to render thankes vnto God for that hee hath receiued but that the publike prayers of the Church do not first teach vs howe to pray and next instruct vs in many and most points of truth what to beleeue and confesse vnto God were meeter for Turkes and Infidels to defend than for such as you would seeme to be I meane both learned and Christian men Howbeit the pitch of our question is this whether they may be called prayers which wee make with our mouthes and not with our heartes and if they may not whether our heartes can pray without vnderstanding These be the matters that here we striue for and of these the first is prooued by the whole course of the Scriptures the seconde as well by the nature of man as by the word of God That God reiecteth the mouth without the heart as hypocrisie and no pietie our Sauiour telleth you when he saith O hypocrites Esay prophesied well of you in saying this people draweth neere to me with their mouth and honoureth me with the lippes but their heart is farre from me That our heart ioyneth not with our mouth when our vnderstanding wanteth is euident not onely by the scriptures which take the heart of man for his vnderstanding but by the education of our nature Dauid resembling those meÌ„ that haue not vnderstanding what they say or doe to the horse and Mule and â—usten allowing them when they pray they knowe not what no better place than among parrets and pies which is no place for men much lesse for those that would seeme to serue and honour God And what can be plainer than that vnderstanding is the proper action and first motion of mans heart which wanting in any thing that he doeth or sayeth his heart is also wanting since not an heart but an vnderstanding heart doeth make the difference betwixt man and beast Philand That is if they vnderstande not their owne woordes when they pray but they may bee ignorant of the
maners for that is his maine restriction and not euery custome which in time to come might or should happily bee newly deuised by some partes or members of the church but such as the whole church far neere without contradiction retained then when he spake as descending from the Apostles or Apostolike men And so the word hodie doth import though your Monkes haue left out the first syllable written die for hodie as the course of the sentence doth plainly declare If then to dispute whether the ancient custome of the vniuersall church may be altered be madnes yea most insolent madnes what degree of phrensie wil fal to your lot that erect desend a particular late growen custome against the plaine precept of God himselfe against the Apostles prescription against the generall ancient vsage of Christs church yea against the nature of man true intent of your own seruice which you would seeme to make most account of Phi. All this is vntrue Theo. Bethinke your selfe better and you shall finde it truer than you would wish Phi. Had euer any Nation their church-seruice in a barbarous tongue before our time Theo. Make you that such a wonder which your own friends confesse was so common in the primatiue church Lyra saith In primatiua ecclesia benedictiones caetera coīa or else leauing out the c which seemeth to be added by the negligence of the Printer oīa siebant in vulgari In the primatiue church blessings and al other or other common praiers were made in the vulgar toung which the people vnderstood Eckius saith Non negamus tamen Indis Australibus permissum vt in lingua sua rem diuinam facerent quod clerus eorum hodie obseruat We deny not but the south Indians were suffered in the primatiue church to haue their diuine seruice in their mother toung which is neither Greeke Hebrew nor Latine which also their clergy at this day obserueth An other of your friends saith of the Moscouits Totū sacrū seu Missa Gētili ac vernacula lingua apudillos peragi solet The whole seruice or masse is said with thē in their natiue mother toūg The epi. also the Gospel of the daie are read to the people with a loud voice out of the chācel for their better vnderstāding Pet. Belloni saith As many as are presēt with the priest singing masse Armenia answere him in the Armenian tongue For all that stand by vnderstand the Armenian tongue which the Priest vseth in his seruice Phi. These bee schismaticall and disordered Churches Theo. In deede they know no part of your holy Fathers religion nor dominion Yet are they Christians and neerer the truth by many degrees than the church of Rome It is no schisme to bee free from him to whom they were neuer subiect and some obseruances though they haue which are both superstitious and erronious yet that is no reason to dispraise them in that wherein they followe the example of the true and sincere church of Christ and retaine that custome which they receiued from the beginning Phi. Wee may dislike them for this aswell as you may for other thinges Theo. Whether you like them or no so they doe and so haue they doone euer since they were planted in Christ euen to this our age And this their constancie you can not dislike but you must also dislike the Apostle that first taught it the primatiue church that continued it and adiudged it to bee necessary yea your holy Father himselfe that not onely would permit it when he was requested but strictly commaunde it when it was not asked Cyrillus that conuerted the people of Russia and Morauia made request to the Bishop of Rome as Pope Pius the second reporteth that hee might vse the Sclauon tongue in saying diuine Seruice to them whom hee had baptized And when the matter came to bee handled in the sacred Senate or councell chamber a number contradicting it he saith there was heard a voice as it were from heauen speaking these wordes Let euerie spirite praise the Lord and euerie tongue confesse him and that vpon the hearing thereof Cyrillus had his petition The blindnes of your holy father and his Cardinals was reproued by a voice from heauen for hauing their Seruice in an vnknowen tongue and yet you beare men in hand to dislike the late custome of your Romish Synagogue or so much as to dispute thereof as if it were not to be done is insolent madnesse Innocentius though hee were the first that brought Transubstantiation Auricular confession and deposition of Princes to bee confirmed in open councell 1215. yeares after Christ yet durst he not binde the West church to the Latine seruice throughout as you doe but gaue streit charge rather to the contrary that such as were of diuerse languages shoulde haue the praiers and sacramentes of the church in their seuerall and sundry rites and tongues as appeareth in the councell of Lateran assembled vnder Innocentius the thirde of that name Because in many places within the same citie Diocese there be mingled people of diuerse toungs hauing vnder one faith sundry rites customes we straitly commaund that the Bishops of such cities Dioceses prouide fit men which may celebrate diuine seruice and minister the church Sacramēts vnto them according to the diuersities of their rites lāguages Phi. In diuerse toūgs he saith they shal haue their seruice but not in any barbarous tongue Theo. And he that saith they shal haue their seruice in diuerse tongues confesseth there were more tongues vsed in the West church than one and taking order that seruice should be said vnto them according to the diuersities of their tongues he saw some cause why the people should vnderstand what was said in the church and if that be needfull or expedient for one nation why not for other in like manner And yet I see no restraint in the wordes but that the Moscouites Morauians others were prouided for by this Canon to haue the church seruice in their proper and natiue tongue as well as the Grecians Phi. If it were so we account it lawful for that the church of Rome did permit it Theo. Then do we account our seruice in the English tongue much more lawful chiefly for that it is warrāted by the word of God as I haue shewed and secondly for that it wanteth not the generall vse and order of Christes church in her sincerest and purest state to confirme the same Phi. Haue you the generall and ancient custom of Christes church to insure your seruice in the english tongue Theo. Wee haue for that tongue which the people vnderstand be it English Scottish or what other speech you will Phi. That any Nation praied in a barbarous tongue you haue no president in the Primatiue church Theo. This is not the first time that your teeth could not rule your tongue The
specifie For Christ said take ye eate ye which in their priuate Masses your Priestes doe not and for that cause euerie such Masse is a manifest contempt of Christes wordes and deedes confessed and rehearsed by your owne mouthes at the altar as partes of his institution Phi. The Catholike church onely by Christes spirit can tell which thinges are imitable which not in al his actions The. When himself hath appointed what actions of his he will haue to be followed the church is bound to obey not licenced to make her choise But in this case the church of christ hath faithfully done her duty For she alwayes obserued these actions of Christ her Lord and master and verified his wordes till Antichrist with pride and power came to take vp his seat in the middest of her and to proportion all religion to his vnsounde and deceiued affection Phi. Is the catholike church in this point with you Theo. Yea and against you mightily The canons as you terme them Apostolicall prohibit your priuat Masse Whosoeuer of the faithfull enter the church heare the scriptures read if they stay not out praiers receiue the sacred communion let them as peruerters of ecclesiasticall order bee put from the communion Which words the councell of Antioch repeateth and confirmeth as agreeable to Christian discipline in their dayes Reade the church seruice which as you tell vs Iames Basill and Chrysostom coâ—posed you shall finde them publike communions not priuate masses read what Dionysius S. Pauls schâ—ler as you beare men in hand and Iustinus the martyr report of the â—â—â—â—tration of the Lords Sâ—pper in their daies This is the generall and catholike description and order of the diuine mysteries saith Dionysius that first the minister himself receiueth then imparteth the same to others Towards the end of our praiers â—aith Iustinus we salute one an other with a kisse after that bread and a cup of wine delaied with water are brought to him that hath charge ouer his brethren which he taketh and giueth thankes to the father of all through the sonne and holy Ghost his praier and thankes all the people standing by confirme with answering Amen then those which are called with vs Deacons giue euery man that is present of the bread and wine tempered with water and carie the same to such as are absent This I trowe resembleth our communion not your priuat masse this without controuersie was the catholike and Apostelike maner of solemnizing the Lordes Supper in the Primatiue church Yea the church of Rome which you woulde seeme so much to reuerence withstood this your profanation of the Lordes supper a long time with maruelous zeale Consecration ended saith Pope Calixtus let all communicate that will not stand excommunicated for so the Apostles determined and the holy Romane church obserueth The maner of the whole church in Pope Gregories time 600. yeares after Christ was for a Deacon to crie to the people Si quis non communicet det locum he that mindeth not to communicate let him auoide Pope Martine willed him to be cast out of the catholike church which entered the church of God and with held himselfe from the communion of the Sacrament Charles the Emperour 800. yeares after Christ gaue commaundement vt omnes fideles communicent ad Missas perexpectent sine alâ—a depraedicatione that all the faithfull should communicate and looke at masse so to do without other warning What need we farther proofe in a case so manifest your owne fellowes confesse no lesse In the primatiue church saith Durandus all that were present at the celebration of the Masse did euery day coÌ„municate Their oblation was a great loafe sufficient for al which the Grecians are said to continue to this day So that both the wordes of Christs institution the traditioÌ„ of the primatiue church directly refute your priuate Masses and proue the communion now vsed in the church of England to be good and catholike The Lordes supper saith Chrysostom ought to bee common For such thinges as are the Lords belong not to this or to that seruant but are commoÌ„ to all If then it be the Lords as in deed it is thou shouldst not take it as thine owne to thy selfe but propose it to all in common as being the Lordes Thou doest not suffer it to be the Lords wheÌ„ thou doest not suffer it to be coÌ„moÌ„ but eatest it thy selfe Paul calleth it the Lords supper which is receiued in common with one consent of all assembled together for vntill all communicate be partakers of that spiritual food the mysteries once set foorth are not taken away but the priests standing still stay for all yea for the poorest of all So Theodoret The Lords table is equally proposed vnto al meÌ„ of that supper all are partakers alike And Haymo The Sacrament of christs body is called a supper by reason of the communion because it ought to be common to all the faithfull and iust If this doctrine be true as there can be no question of it then are your priuat Masses far from Christs institution as far from the catholike order of Christs church which suffered no man to bee present at the time of the diuine mysteries but such as would did participate sending the rest away that could not be partakers of the Lords table And this the very name of your Masse as I haue proued doth shew signifieng the demising of all such as might not communicate which if you should do in your priuat Masses you should leaue an empty church yea the priests must take paines to serue answere himselfe since no man besides the priest hath any part of that banquet which Christ prouided for all and bequeathed vnto all to bee the monument of his passion and pleadge of their saluation With like rashnes you take from the people when you do admit them once a yeare to their rightes as you call it the cup which should be to them the communion of the Lordes blood Drinke ye all of this sayth our Sauiour and diuide it mongst you These words you repeate for a shew but you falsifie them in sense For you suffer no lay-man to tast of the Lords cup as if one part of this mystery were sufficient the rest superfluous or you might dispence with christs institution at your pleasure Phi. Christ spake that to such as were Priests not vnto the lay people The. Doth your conscience serue you Philander to play the wanton in so great and deepe mysteries of christian religion To whom then were these words spoken take ye eate ye not to the selfesame parties to whom it was said Drinke ye If none may drinke but priests because the disciples which dranke were Priests then by the same logike none should eate but priests because neither time place nor persons were chaunged betweene these two
precepts eate ye drinke ye but in al respects the cup was deliuered at the same time to the same persons when the bread was So that you must either exclude the people from both which I trust you dare not or admit them to both which is the very point that we presse you with Heare what a man of your side thinketh as well of this consequent as of your halfe communion There be some false catholikes that feare not to stop the reformation of the church what they can These spare no blasphemies least that other part of the Sacrament shoulde bee restoared to the lay people For say they Christ spake drinke ye all of this onely to the Apostles but the words of the Masse be these take and eate ye al of this Here I would know of them whether this were spoken only to the Apostles then must laymen abstaine likewise from the element of bread which to say is an heresie yea a pestilent and detestable blasphemie It is therefore consequēt that both these words eate ye drinke ye were spoken to the whole Church I will not take this aduantage that your owne fellow doth proclaime you for false Catholikes heretikes and horrible blasphemers God giue you grace to see whither you be fallen and whence This for your liues you cannot shifte but these two precepts eate ye drinke ye by the tenor of Christs institution must be referred to the same persons and so both or neither pertaine to the people Surely the wordes which our Sauiour vsed in deliuering the cup are more generall and effectiue than when he gaue the bread Drinke ye all of this and they all dranke of it take it diuide it among you This cup is the newe Testament in my blood which shall be shed for you Now the Lord shed not his blood for the Priest onely but also for the people neither was the new Testament established in the blood of Christ for the Priestes sake but as well for the redemption of the people Then as the fruites and effects of the blood of Christ are common to the people with the Priest so should the cup also which is the communion of his blood shed for the remission of the peoples sins be diuided indifferently betweene the Preist and people There is saieth Chrysostome where the Priest differeth nothing from the people as when wee must receiue the dreadfull mysteries For it is not here as it was in the olde Lawe where the Priest eate one part and the pleople an other neither was it lawfull for the people to be partaker of those thinges which the Priest was but now it is not so but rather one bodie is proposed to all and one cup. Phil. The church then might like that the people shoulde haue the cup as the church after did mislike it for many and weightie causes but how proue you that Christes precept extendeth vnto the people Theo. Wee can haue no better interpreter of Christes speech than his Apostle that was best acquainted with the true meaning of our Sauiour Wee haue sayth he the minde of Christ and that which I deliuered you I receiued of the Lorde So that hee did not correct but onely report the Lordes ordinaunce and in deliuering both kindes to the whole church of Corinth priest and people without exceptiō the teacher of the gentiles did neither swarue frō the first institutiō nor right intentiō of Christ his master The cup of thāksgiuing which we blesse is it not the communion of Christes blood The bread which we breake is it not the communion of Christs body Ye can not drink the cup of the Lord the cup of diuels Ye can not be partakers of the Lordes table and of the table of diuels Can you frame vs a reason out of these wordes of Sainct Paul to dissuade the Corinthians from eating and drinking such things as the Gentile there sacrificed to Idols not confesse that they dranke of the Lords cup It is not possible For this is Sainct Paules argument You can not drinke both the Lordes cuppe and the cuppe of diuels the cuppe of thankes giuing which wee blesse and you all drinke of is the communion of the Lordes blood therefore you maie not drinke of the cup of diuels YOV CANNOT DRINKE BOTH inferreth they did and should drinke one which was the Lordes cup not the cup of diuels els Paul should haue said you maie drinke neither not the cup of diuels for they might haue no fellowship with diuels neither the Lordes cup for that is reserued for the Priest by your doctrine but both saith Paul you cannot drinke ergo they must drinke one which was not the cup of diuels Againe the cup which they dranke not could to them be no Communion For nature teacheth vs that to be partaker of a cup is to drinke but the Lordes cup was to them the communion of his blood ergo they dranke of the Lordes cup. My collection is so cleare that the vulgar translation which you are tied to by the Councell of Trent putteth these verie woordes in the text Omnes de vno pane de vno calice participamus we all are partakers of one bread AND OF ONE CVP. Ambrose Hierom Bede Haymo and others found it so consequent to S. Pauls former woords and coherent with his maine reason that they sticke not to keepe this addition de vno calice in their verie terts on which they comment So that out of question Paul taught the Church of Corinth to distribute the Lordes supper to the Christians in both kindes and that as he saith he receiued of the Lorde And who◠that hath anie shame or sense left reading the next Chapter that followeth where Christes institution is fullie proposed and largelie debated by S. Paul will or can doubt but the Lorde at his last Supper ordained both kindes for all the faithfull As often saith Paul to the whole Congregation as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shewe the Lordes death till he come Whosoeuer shall eate this bread drinke the cup of the Lord vnworthilie shall be guiltie of the bodie and blood of the Lorde Let a man therefore not speaking of this or that man but of euerie man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread and drinke of this cup. And least you should want a generall affirmatiue to iustifie this our exposition take these woordes of S. Paul and quiet your selfe By one spirit are we all Baptized into one bodie whether we be Iewes or Grecians bond or free and WE ALL HAVE DRVNKE into one spirit Can you looke for directer or plainer woordes All Iewes and Gentiles bond and free not onelie dranke but by drinking were made partakers of one and the same spirite uen as by baptisme they were grafted into one bodie Then if Christ himselfe deliuered both kindes at his last Supper
Ea demum est miserabilis animae seruitus signa pro rebus accipere nec supra creaturam corpoream oculum mentis ad â—auriendum aeternum lumen leuare non posse That is a miserable bondage of the soule to take the signes or Sacramentes as you doe for the thinges themselues and not to be able to lift vp the eye of the mind aboue the corporal creature to perceiue the eternall brightnesse Of adoration he saith Rectè scribitur hominem ab angelo prohibitum ne se aedoraret sed vnum Deum sub quo esset ei ille conseruus It is very wel recorded in the Scriptures that a man was prohibited by an angel to adore him but only God vnder whom he himself was a fellow seruant vnto God And therefore he saith Ecce vnum Deum colo Behold I worship adore none but God and thence he deriueth the name of religion Quod ei vni religet animas nostras Because it relieth our soules on him alone So that veneration you may giue to sacramentes adoration you may not and yet you finely conuey the one into S. Augustines text iointly with the other as if they were both fouÌ„d in his words which they are not Phi. He saith singular veneration Theo. You say so but he sayeth not so His words are Veneratione singulariter debita with that veneration which is due onely or singularly to this Sacrament Phi. And what is that but adoration Theo. If you might be iudges it should be nothing else but S. Augustine sayth Not to be contemned is the veneration due vnto it Contemptum solum non vult cibus ille that meate misliketh onele contempt that is either to bee dayly receiued without regard or to be still refused vpon pretence of vnworthynesse And that being the case of which S. Augustine disputeth your cunning serueth you in steede of examining theÌ„selues before they receiue it which S. Augustine meaneth to set the people not at all to receiue it but to fall downe and adore it with diuine honour in Christes place which is as wilfull a contempt of his ordinaunce and as shamefull an abuse of his sacramentes as can be committed Phi. The same father in an other place saieth of the Sacrament No man eateth it before he adore it Theo. Are you not desperatly set thâ—t to defile your selues with open idolatrie will force the Fathers to fit your â—umours against their owne speeches S. Augustine saith of Christes fleshe which hee tooke of the virgine Marie Nemo illam carnem manducat nisi prius adorauerit No man eateth that fleshe of Christ vnlesse hee first adore it you make no more bones at the matter but strike THE FLESH of Christ out of Sainct Augustines wordes and referre adoration to the corporall creature which the Priest holdeth in his fingers Is not this trowe you sounde dealing in the greatest mysteries of our saluation and imminent peril of your damnation purposely to shut your eyes least you shoulde see the truth or agnise the rashnesse of your newe founde adoration What haue Sainct Augustines wordes to doe with your adoring the mysticall signes when hee directly nameth the flesh of Christ which is both eaten with the spirite and adored in the spirite yea the very eating of it is the adoring of it since it is not eaten but by beleeuing hoping and reioycing in it which are the chiefe branches of Gods diuine honor Phi. As though the fleshe of Christ were not really closed in the forme of bread and corporally eaten with the mouth of man Theo. One errour must needes drawe on an other or rather your reall and carnall presence is the groundworke of all your errors and abuses in the Masse Phi. The deniall of it is the high way to all your heresies and blasphemies against the doctrine of the church and for our partes till you leaue that wee looke for no better at your hands Theo. Looke to your own feete least whiles you watch our hands your legges slip into the pit of destruction Phi. Wee bee past all feare of that Theo. And so be those that are past all recouery but yet for the sauing of other mens soules if not of yours we will first weigh the proofes of your adoration after not sticke to suruay the partes of your Transubstantiation Go on therefore with your former authorities Phi. S. Ambrose saieth We adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries Theo. Uerily and so doe wee but the mysteries and sacramentes themselues wee doe not adore neither did Sainct Ambrose euer teach any man to adore them Phi. I see you mistake vs. You thinke we adore the formes of bread and wine where in deede we doe not but rather we adore Christ the sonne of the lyuing God and second person in Trinitie in those mysteries as Saint Ambrose sayeth or as wee speake more vsually vnder those formes of breade and wine Theo. I mistake you not I knowe you adore that which is locally and really inclosed within the compasse of your host and chalice supposing it in matter and substance to bee the glorious body of Christ apparelled with accidents of bread and wine as whitenesse roundnesse sweetenesse moystnesse and such like proprieties of bread and wine but your foundation wee say is false and therefore your building must needes bee ruinous Christ is present in the mysteries not by the materiall substaunce of his body closed within the formes of bread and wine but by a diuine and spirituall vertue and efficience not mixing 〈…〉 but entering the hâ—rtâ— of the faithâ—ull and nourishing them with his spirit and grace to eternall life the elementes abiding in their proper and former essence and substance And therefore when you adore them as if they were Christ in nature and substaunce which in trueth they are not you worship not Christ but giue his honour to creatures and in steede of washing your sins away by the death and blood of Christ you kindle the wrath of God against you by mystaking his sonne and adoring the elementes with diuine honor in lue of Christ. Phi. Tush we regard not these wordes of yours we haue assurance from Christ himselfe that it is his body and so long wee passe not for any thing that you can alleadge or obiect against vs. Theophil But if you misconster his wordes to make a deade and corruptible creature to bee the seconde person in Trinitie and giue it that honour which is due to the glorious and immortall God what assuraunce can you haue that Christ Iesus will put vp this reproach at your handes and not auenge himselfe on you as on proud idolateâ—s Phi. Are you well in your wits to vrge vs so often with open Idolatrie where as wee shewe you so plaine proofes of our defence Theo. Plaine quoth you In good faith they bee such as no meane Scholer woulde stumble at Christ you proue
name than the body and blood of Christ not that in earthly matter or essence they be really conuerted into those diuine things as you falsely gather but for that remaining in their former vsual both nature and substance they haue in them cary with them the fruite effect and force of Christs flesh wounded blood shed for the remission of our sinnes And because the people shoulde regarde not the creatures which they see but the graces which they beleeue therefore the Fathers euery where without exception call the elements by the names of the inwarde and heauenly vertues that are annexed to them and conferred with them by the trueth of his word power of his spirit This is the first rule which you should haue obserued The next is that whensoeuer they teach and propose the dignitie proprietie or efficacie of the Sacrament they meane not the creatures which our eies and tasts doe better iudge of than their tongues or wittes can teach vs but that other diuine lyfe-giuing and soule-sauing part of the sacrament which our heartes by fayth take holde on and possesse more really and effectually than if it were chammed in our mouthes or buried in our stomackes as you grossely conceiue of those thinges which bee most high and heauenly These two Rules remembred a very meane scholer may soone discharge the burden of all your allegations For either you mistake the one part for the other supposing that to bee corporall which in deede is spirituall or else you vrge the name which the signe beareth for similitude as â—arnâ—stily to all intents as 〈◊〉 were were the thing it selfe which causeth you to 〈◊〉 so many texâ—es and to straie so farre from trueth that no sound can recall you Phi. Away with your new found obseruations The catholike church hath the spirit of trueth promised for her direction and therefore the wil none of your wise inuentions to qualifie the fathers speeches Learne you rather at her handes to beleeue the wordes of Christ who first appointed this Sacrament and pronounced it to be himselfe without signe or figure when he saide this is my body and this is my blood not spirituall or metaphoricall but the same body which was broken and the same blood which was shed for remissioâ— of sinnes and that I trust you will confesse was his naturall and locall hath body and blood Theo. The question is not whether that were his naturall body which suffered on the crosse but when hee saide of the bread this is my bodie whether he substantially changed the dead element into himselfe made the creature become the creator or whether he annexed his trueth to the signe and grace to the Sacrament which required both the word of Christ to make the promise and his power to perfourme the speech And therefore we beleeue and acknowledge the wordes of our Sauiour to bee very needeful in ordaining this Sacrament euen in such manner and order as they were spoken that the signes might haue the fruites and effectes of his body and blood But that hee chaunged substances with the bread and wine or deified the creatures that his speech doth not inferre and that as yet we doe not beleeue except you can shewe vs howe the fleshe of Christ which was first made of a woman is nowe become to be made of bread and a dead and senslesse creature exalted to bee the son of God Phi. We do not say the bread is substantially conuerted into Christ or made the sonne of God but the bread is abolished in the place thereof commeth the glorious flesh of our Lord and Sauiour who is the Sonne of God And in that sense we hold the creator is now where the creature was but the dead element is not made the Sonne of God you woulde faine catch vs at such an aduantage Theo. How you can auoide it I yet perceiue not for if the bread bee nowe Christ which before it was not ergo the bread is made Christ and by consequent a dead element is nowe become or made the Sonne of God which I thinke will hardly stand with the very first groundes of Christian religion Phi. You presse the letter against both reason and trueth For the one is sayd to be conuerted or chaunged into the other because the one displaceth and succeedeth the other so is it a chaunge rather of the one for the other than a conuersion of the one into the other if you take conuersion properly as the Philosophers do Theo. Christ dâ—eth not say where the bread was there is nowe my body but this bread is my body And since before consecration it was not his body and now by repeating the wordes is become his body the conclusion is euident that by your opinion the bread is made Christ and so become the sonne of God Phi. You thinke to snare vs with schoole-trickes but setting your sophismes aside we plainly beleeue the Sacrament is Christ. Theo. You must beleeue the bread is Christ which as yet the Articles of our Creede will not suffer vs to doe I meane not to thinke that a dead and dumbe creature may bee God Phi. Do we say the bread is God Theo. You must auerre it if you stick to the letter of Christs words for he said of the bread as you inforce it this is my selfe now he was God Phi. I thought I should be euen with you at Landes end Christ did not say this bread is my bodie but this is my bodie where now is the force of your argument Theo. Euen where it was Phi. Why Christ sayd this is not meaning bread or any other creature Theo. That this must be somwhat else nothing was the body of Christ so you loose not only the bread but also the body Phi. Nay he said this is and that must needs be somwhat it can not be nothing Theo. It is well you haue found it I said so before you Then this is my body What this Was it bread that he spake of or somthing else Phi. He spake of that which he had in his hands Theo. You meane not long before Phi. In deede you say he had at that present when he spake the wordes nothing in his handes and so you would haue nothing to be his body Theo. Hinder not our course with matter impertinent to this place The demonstratiue THIS noteth that which Christ then gaue to his Disciples as wel as that which you thinke he then held in his hands Choose whether you wil of force the thing must be all one For that which hee helde that he gaue and of that which he first helde and after gaue hee saide this is my body Phi. He did so Theo. What was it Phi. Somwhat it was whatsoeuer it was Theo. What somwhat do you say it was Phi. What if I cannot tell Theo. Then must you seeke farther for your chaunging of substances The words of
doubt arise not touching the creatures of breade and wine but touching the fleshe and blood of Christ which are the Principall partes of this mystery the solution and explication of euery such doubt must be fet from the place where the Lord first reuealed this secret rebuked the Capernites for the misconstruction of his words and taught his Disciples how they should be both fruitfull partakers of his flesh rightful interpreters of his speech Phi. You woulde faine haue it so but wee meane to barre you that chaâ—ce Theo. You cannot bar vs but you must bar Chrysostom Cyprian Cyrill Austen and others that confesse the same trueth before vs. How chanced saieth Chrysostome the Disciples were not troubled when they heard this take eate this is my body Because their master had debated the same matter largely and profoundly before For at first when he spake of these thinges many were offended at the very words So Cyprian To the sonnes of Abraham doing the workes of Abraham the high Priest bringeth foorth bread and wine saying this is my body There arose before this as we reade in the Gospell of Iohn a question touching the nouelty of this speech and at the doctrine of this mysterie the hearers were amazed So Cyrill The Capernites before they beleeue question busily with him Therefore the Lord did not tell them how that might be but exhorteth them to seeke for it with faith mary to the beleeuing disciples he gaue peeces of breade saying take yee eate ye this is my body Likewise the cuppe hee deliuered round saying drinke yee all of this Thou seest that to those which asked without faith hee did not open the maner of this mysterie but to those which beleeued yea when they did not aske hee declared the same And Augustine When Christ spake of the Sacrament of his body and bloode they saide this speech is hard Who can heare it You see by the constant opinion of these Fathers that our Sauiour in the sixt of Iohn taught his Disciples what manner of eating his flesh and drinking his blood they should expect at his last Supper and that they therefore started not at these words this is my body because they learned of him before what to looke for and well remembred his interpretation of himselfe when the Capernites staggered at the like speech Then perforce what sense the wordes of Christ in the sixt of Iohn doe beare the same must the wordes of the supper retaine but there Christ teacheth the spirituall eating of his fleshe by faith his wordes bee figuratiue ergo the Lordes supper doeth not import any corporal eating of his flesh nor literall exposition of his wordes And why The performance may no way differ from the promise The promise made by Christ in the sixt of Iohn the bread which I will giue is my flesh was figuratiue The wordes then of the Supper THIS which I now giue is my body perfourming the same must likewise be figuratiue For Seales doe not alter or infringe but strengthen and confirme that which was promised The creatures of bread and wine Christ ordained at his last Supper to bee Sacramentes and Seales of his former promises vttered in the sixth of Iohn ergo they change not his meaning expressed before That was spiritual figuratiue therefore the wordes of the Supper can not be corporall nor literall And the wordes of Origen expounding the sixt of Iohn are a iust proofe that if in the wordes of the Supper you follow the letter that letter killeth Phi. This can not be Christ in the sixth of Iohn you say teacheth a spirituall and figuratiue kinde of eating his fleshe and in deliuering the Sacrament we be sure he spake of a corporall not of a spirituall eating his body For when our Lord saide take eate this is my body did hee not meane they should take it with their handes and eate it with their mouthes And therefore either the one place doth not serue to expound the other or else in both places is prescribed a reall and corporall eating the flesh of Christ drinking his blood which we rather imbrace as the likeliest Theo. In those wordes take and eate spoken at the last Supper hee ment no doubt the corporall taking and eating of that creature which hee gaue them and when hee added this is my body which hee tolde them before they must eate if they would haue any life in them he recalled to their mindes as Chrysostom noteth the doctrine hee had taught them of eating his flesh and drinking his blood in which because they were wel instructed by the Capernites error and their masters declaration of himselfe that the wordes which he spake were spirite and life they neither started nor stumbled at his speech but presently perceiued the Lord was ordayning a Sacrament to confirme their faith and not hiding his fleshe vnder accidentes or any other couerts to enter their mouthes for which grossenes the Capernits were before reproued Christes exposition therefore in the sixt of Iohn was purposely made to confute the carnal Iewes who when they heard of eating mans flesh and drinking blood dreampt of no kind of eating and drinking but with their bodily iawes lips and for that cause murmured as if they had beene inuited to some barbarous brutish act next to teach the disciples that indured his words in what sort they should looke for a diuiner purer kind of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blood by beleeuing hoping and reioycing in his fleshe that was wounded and blood that was shed for their sinnes This he assured and ratified vnto them by ordaining afterward a Sacrament which they shoulde visibly see but inuisibly vnderstand corporally receiue but spiritually interprete in beleeuing the same by the power of his worde and spirit to haue in it cary with it the fulnes of his trueth mercy openly sealed with those pledges of his promises instruments of his grace lest their faith should faint by reason of his departure absence from theÌ„ or their harts faile them as if they were destitute of his protection fauor amidst so many troubles as should inclose them Phi. If you will needes haue the sixt of S. Iohn to pertaine to the Sacrament then is there say we a reall corporall kind of eating established in that chapter For Christ in plaine speech saith my flesh is meate in deede and my blood is drinke in deede Theo. It is well that you bethinke your selfe at last you were about to dissent both froÌ„ the fathers from your own felowes For the fathers as I haue shewed you confesse that the Disciples were by the words of Christ in this place instructed how they should eate his flesh drinke his blood euen in the sacrament that made theÌ„ vnderstand him when he said take eate this is my body drink ye al
of this this is my blood and as for the men of your side they run all to this issue that the sixt of Iohn not only treateth of the sacrament but also strongly concludeth your reall presence and externall eating of Christs flesh with bodily partes as with teeth throte and such like in so much that if you goe that way which you were about you goe alone Your friende Master Harding with a present courage as his manner is saith We can not finde where our Lord perfourmed the promise which he made in the first chapter of Iohn the breade which I will giue is my fleshe which I will giue for the life of the world but only in his last supper Steuen Gardiner his Master vttered euen the very same wordes before him Promisit Dominus se daturum nobis in pane carnem suam dicens panis quâ—m ego dabo caro mea est quam ego dabo pro mundi vita Sed quod promisit Christus noÌ„ legimus cum praestitisse nisi in coena The Lord promised that he would giue vs his flesh in bread when he said the bread that I will giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the world But that which Christ promised wee doe not read that he perfourmed except it were in the Supper And though they both ouerlash when they say he performed it only in the supper yet in this you may not vary froÌ„ them that he performed that promise of his verified that doctrine of his in the supper For so the fathers said before them as I haue proued and so your late Testament vpon the sixt of S. Iohn saith of al their side The catholikes teach these wordes to be spoken of the sacrament Phi. We do so The. Then what exposition the learned ancient fathers made of Christs words in the 6. of Iohn the same they inteÌ„ded referred to the words of the supper But the words of christ teaching vs in the 6. of Iohn that we must eate his flesh drinke his blood before we can haue my life in vs are by the coÌ„mon consent of all the fathers Allegoricall mysticall figuratiue ergo the figuratiue interpretatioÌ„ of Christs words in the supper is catholike Phi. Think you we are so foolish as to beleeu that the fathers were the autors of your figures Th. Chuse whether you wil beleeue vs or no we speak no more thaÌ„ we mean to proue Clemens Alexan. The Lord in the gospel of Iohn when he said eate ye my flesh drink ye my blood he called that by an alegory meat drink which is euideÌ„tly meÌ„t of our faith his promise Tertul. He pronounced his flesh to be that heaueÌ„ly bread vrging theÌ„ al along that dicourse with an allegory of needefull foodes to remember their fathers that preferred the bread and flesh of Egypt before the diuine vocation Origen Our Lord and Sauiour saith except you eate my flesh and drinke my blood you shall not haue life in you My flesh is truely meate my blood is truly drinke He that can no skill of these things may perhaps turn his eare from them as they did which said how can he giue vs his flesh to eat who can heare it they departed froÌ„ him But you if you be the children of the church if you acquainted with mysteries Sacraments of the Gospell acknowledge the thinges that wee say they be the Lords Acknowlege that there be figures in the diuine books therefore examine theÌ„ as spirituall men not as carnall vnderstand what is said If you conster these thinges as carnall men they hurt you they doe not nourish you Chrysostom The words that I speak to you are spirite that is spirituall hauing nothing that is carnall in them If a man should carnally take them he should gaine nothing What is carnally to vnderstand theÌ„ Simply as they be spoken neither to seek any farther For the things that we see must not so be iudged of but all mysteries Sacraments must be considered with the inward eyes that is spiritually Phi. Spiritually we grant we must vnderstand them but not figuratiuely Theo. What is spiritually but figuratiuely Eating and drinking are corporall actions not spirituall and properly perfourmed with the partes of our bodies not with the powers of our soules Since then by the constant confession of all the fathers the Lord throughout this chapter did not refer eating drinking to the bodies of his Disciples but vnto their soules and ment their faith not their teeth it is apparant that the wordes of our Sauiour are allegoricall and figuratiue I meane translated and deriued by an allegorie from the body to the mind from chamming to beleeuing from swallowing to remembring to be short from the flesh of his Disciples to their spirites and in that respect called spirituall The manner of eating there specified is spirituall the wordes there vsed are mysticall to wit not literall but allegoricall and so the Fathers mainly teach Basil Tast see how sweete the Lord is We haue often marked that the powers of the soul are called by the same names by which the members of the body are Because then our Lord is the true bread his flesh is meate indeede it must be that the sweetnes of that delicious bread be felt of vs by meanes of spirituall tast There is a certaine mouth of the minde and â—oule within man which is nourished by the word of life the bread I mean which came from heauen Origen To euery part or power of the soule Christ becommeth euerything Therefore he is called the true light that the eyes of the soule may haue wherewith to be lightned therfore the word that the eares of the soule may haue what to heare therefore the bread of life that the tast of the soule may haue what to relesse Tertullian The wordes that I haue spoken to you be spirit and life Making his word to quicken by reason his word is spirite and life hee called the same word his flesh because the word was made flesh and so for the procuring of life was to bee desired yea TO BE DEVOVRED WITH HEARING CHEWED WITH VNDERSTANDING AND DIGESTED WITH BELEEVING Cyprian The master of this ordinance and feast saide that except we did eate his flesh and drinke his blood we should haue no life in vs directing vs with a spirituall instruction and opening our wittes for the conceiuing of so great a matter thereby to let vs vnderstaÌ„d that our abiding in him is eating our drinking is as it were an incorporating with him in that mutual seruices are yeelded wils ioyned and affections vnited The eating therefore of this flesh is a certaine coueting and desiring to abide in him Athanasius Therefore doth he mention his ascending into heauen to pull from them their corporall cogitations and thinking
on his flesh and that they might thenceforth learne that the flesh of which he spake was celestiall foode from heauen and spirituall nourishment which hee giueth Augustine Why preparest thou thy teeth and thy bellie BELEEVE AND THOV HAST EATEN To beleeue in him this is to eat the liuing bread HE THAT BELEEVETH EATETH He is inuisibly fedde because hee is inuisibly regenerated He is inwardly a babe inwardly new In what part he is renewed in that part is he nourished Bernard that in respect of antiquitie liued but yesterday can teach you the meaning of this place When they heard him say except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his bloud they saide this is an hard speach and departed from him And what is to eate his flesh and drinke his bloud but to communicate with his passions and imitate that conuersation which he ledde here in flesh The text it selfe doth in sight conuince so much The Lord often times expoundeth his owne wordes purposly to this effect Worke not for the meate which perisheth but for the meate which dureth to eternall life and this is the worke of God that you beleeue in him whom he hath sent I am that bread of life he that commeth to me not by walking but by beleeuing shal not hunger he that beleeueth in me shal neuer thirst Hunger and thirst are no way quenched but with eating and drinking Then how can the beleeuer but still hunger and still thirst except we graunt that he which beleeueth both eateth and drinketh Verily verily I say vnto you except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you haue no life in you He then which hath life per consequence eateth the flesh of christ and drinketh his bloud but he that beleeueth hath eternall life as our Sauiour affirmeth in the same place with no lesse vehemencie Verily verily I say vnto you he that beleeueth in me hath euerlasting life ergo he that beleeueth eateth the flesh and drinketh the bloud of Christ. For if eating and drinking in this place were referred to the mouth and teeth how could Iudas or any other of the wicked that is once partaker of the Lordes table perish The wordes of Christ be plaine Your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernes and are dead If any man eate of this bread he shal liue for euer whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life But the wicked notwithstanding the corporal chamming of this Sacrament die the death of sinners ergo they neither eat the â—lesh of Christ nor drink his bloud not because their teeth or iawes faile them but by reason they want faith which is the right and proper instrument of spiritual eating Since then man beleeueth with his heart vnto righteousnes as Paul teacheth not with his iawes nor lippes ergo the soul of man which only beleeueth only doth eate the flesh of Christ and our bodies which haue no meanes to beleeue can neither eate nor drinke in that sort and sense that our Sauiour there speaketh of You cannot with honestie steppe from so manifest both Scriptures and Fathers as these bee that I haue brought or if you can dally with so good and graue witnesses in so weightie matters I trust the Godly will bee fully resolued that the manner of eating Christs flesh and drinking his bloud which the Lord himselfe first proposed in the sixt of Iohn was not LITERALL NOR CORPORALL as the Capernites vnderstand him and were deceiued but ALLEGORICALL AND SPIRITVALL ALLEGORICALL in respect of the words which be not there precisely taken in their vsuall signification for grinding with the teeth and straining downe the throate but figuratiuely spoken and import as much as confessing imbracing with hart and inward affectioÌ„ SPIRITVAL because not our mouths but our minds not our bellies but our spirites are nourished with the flesh and bloud of Christ and that not by chewing or swallowing but by remembring and beleeuing that his bodie was wounded and his bloud shedde for our perfect and eternall redemption Now the Lords Supper is correspondent not contrarie to the first of Iohn as we saw before by the verdit of the fathers confession of your selues therefore the Lords table teacheth no literall nor carnal but a spirituall mysticall eating of the â—lesh of Christ and drinking of his bloud which you cannot obserue so long as you presse the letter of these wordes Take eat this is my body For taking and eating in the Supper bee corporall actions euen as breaking the bread and deliuering the cup are Then if the wordes this is my bodie bee literall the consequent is ineuitable that the flesh of Christ is really taken with hands actually brused with teeth corporally lodged in the belly But this error the Lorde in his own person confuted and the Catholike fathers refell as impious irreligious and haynous ergo the wordes of the Supper this is my body bee not literall but rather aunswerable to the doctrine proposed in the sixt of Iohn which is nothing lesse than literal Phi. You make but a double manner of eating Christes flesh where you should make a triple A carnal spirituall and Sacramentall A carnal which the capernites dreampt of when they supposed they should haue eaten raw flesh to sight and tast as they did other meates A spirituall by faith and vnderstanding in which sort euery good man may eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud at any time without the mysteries A Sacramentall as when wee eate the flesh of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine though we neither see nor â—ast flesh or blood Of these three sortes the sixt of S. Iohns Gospell refelleth onely the carnall which the Capernites grossely fell to when they heard our Sauiour speake of the Sacrament Theo. I blame you not if you bee loath to be counted Capernites They were reproued by our Sauiour as grosse mistakers of his speach and lewde forsakers of his fellowship but would God you were as willing to leaue their error as you be to refuse their name Phi. Wee be farder than you from their opinion And you be rather Capernites that aske how can he giue vs his flesh to eate and will not beleeue any eating of Christes bodie with the mouth except your eyes and tongues maie first discerne and tast the same Theo. We aske not him how he can doe anie thing that he will but wee aske you how you know that both his will and his worde are changed since he rebuked the Capernites for their grossenes Phi. We doe not say that either his will or his word are chaunged Theo. Then the doctrine of eating his flesh and drinking his blood which he delâ—uered in the sixt of Iohn remaineth in the same force and strength that it did at first when he reuealed it to his disciples Philand It doth
Theo. And the same exposition of his woordes which he then annexed to them abideth good for euer Phi. What else Theo. And he that deuisethâ— or teacheth any other manner of eating his flesh or drinking his bloode at his last Suppper than is there declared and confirmed by himselfe is either a Capernite or worse Phi. He is Theo. But that eating which he there taught was by faith and vnderstanding and they that murmured at him and departed from him thought he had ment eating with the mouth and teeth What lâ—ck you then of the Capernites error when you affirme that the naturall and substantiall bodie of christ is really eaten with teeth and locally discendeth into the stomacke which is the waie that all other meates doe passe when they nourish the bodie Phi. We defie both you and them we doe not incline to their error We eat christ in a mysterie by faith and though we tast see nothing but bread wine yet doe we preferre the trueth of his promise before the iudgemeÌ„t of our senses which you doe not And therefore you falsely slaunder vs when you charge vs with the carnall opinion of the capernites Theoph. I can yeeld you no freer choice than if you like not their companie to leaue their error You must not looke to misconster the wordes of christ as they did and take skorne to be called as they were Phil. I tell you wee doe not teare the flesh of christ with our teeth as they thought they should Theo. You holde that the flesh of christ entereth your mouthes and is really bruised though somewhat fauourablie with your teeth and locallie discendeth downe your throates into the closet of your bellies What differ you now from the capernites what kinde of eating were they rebuked for if not for this Moe kindes of eating than by minde or by mouth with faith or with teeth that is corporall or spirituall you cannot imagine Man hath no mo partes but a soule and a bodie therefore he can vse no kinde of eating but either with his soule or with his body You must new frame men which is past your reach before you can chalenge this diuision as vnsufficient ech part hath his kinde and sort of eating Now which of these twaine did the Capernites fasten on the spirituall or the corporall kinde of eating the flesh of Christ Not the spirituall for they beleeued not as the Scripture saith of them and they which lack faith lack the right and true meanes of spirituall eating Besides our Sauiour went about to teach them the spirituall eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood for so doth himselfe expound his owne woordes and his whole Church after him did testifie that his meaning If then the Capernites lighted on the same manner of eating which christ proposed to them they deserued rather praise than blame but they mistooke the wordes of christ and were rebuked of him ergo they thought on the corporall eating of christs flesh with teeth and iawes which is the selfe same point that you affirme in your doctrine Phi. We neither see nor tast the flesh of christ which they dreampt they should and therefore we be most free from their madnes Theo. You cham the flesh of christ actuallie with your teeth and swallowe the same dâ—wne your throates and these be the proper actions and right instrumentes of externall and caperniticall eating your eyes and your tast be not els blind men and such as by reason of sicknes can tast nothing by your diuinitie can eate nothing and meates so deuised and handled by art that we can neither by sight nor tast discerne them if your Rule be good be neither corporallie taken nor eaten which is so false that wee neede not refute you cookes and Pastlers will laugh you to scorne Grinding with teeth and swallowing downe the throat that it may descend to the stomack is the verie definition of carnall eating and since you concurre with the capernites in those two pointes notwithstanding you vary from them in sight and tast yet your opinion establisheth a corporall eating of christes flesh and a literall peruerting of his wordes no lesse than theirs did And which of the learned fathers I pray you did euer put this difference betweene the words of christ the capernites error that where they thought they should haue both eaten seene his flesh the Lord ment that indeed they should as they thought eate the same with their teeth and iawes marie they should not see nor tast it Was this the meaning of our Sauiour when he saide The wordes that I speake to you be spirite and life Did his Church after him so conster his wordes The thinges that he spake were not carnall but spirituall saith Athanasius They were spirituall hauing nothing in them that was carnall as Chrysostome and Theophilact witnes Examine them as spirituall men saith Origen not as carnall The letter doeth kill hâ—m that doth not spirituallie weigh the things that are spoken Christ giueth vs a spirituall instruction saith Cyprian and Austen Vnderstand you spiritually that which I haue spoken Christ here calleth the spirit the spirituall vnderstanding of those things that he spake saith Oecumenius What is spirit and life saith Bede They must be vnderstood spiritually What is now left for you and your fellowes but either to be coupled with the Capernits for your literall pressing the wordes of Christ and corporall eating of his flesh or els to proue which you can hardly doe that your teeth and iawes be not carnall as the Capernits were but spirituall Your mouthes and bellies I trow be flesh and not spirite members of the bodie no parts of the mind in them consisteth neither faith nor deuotion and therefore vnlesse you can transubstantiate your soules into your iawes and your harts into your throates your receiuing of Christ in at mouth and chamming his flesh with teeth that it may passe to your stomackes is neither spirituall nor mysticall but a carnall and right Caperniticall kind of eating Phi. Why doe you twite vs with the Capernites whom we so often haue disclaimed They feared lest they should eate raw flesh we haue no such feare Theo. The flesh of Christ which you eate can not be reall if it be not raw and therefore your stomackes may be stronger to digest it than theirs were but you eate the flesh of a liue man with your mouthes which they feared they should and were deceiued Phi. They thought they should haue eaten Christ by peece meale Theo. And is your opinion any whit the better because you eate him whole at one morsel Phi. This is profane scoffing Theo. Take heede that yours bee not worse than prophane eating of that which is diuine holy Phi. We eate his flesh in a mysterie Theo. What mysterie lyeth in your mouthes and bellies Phi. Is it not a greate
of a corporal substaÌ„ce for your shewes without substance were not yet known but by secret efficiencie prouing the presence of the diuine vertue This common bread chaunged into flesh and blood procureth life and groweth to our bodies so by the vsuall course of these things the weakenes of our faith is succoured and â—aught by a sensible argument that the effects of eternal life is in the visible SacrameÌ„ts that we be vnitâ—â— to Christ noâ— so much by a corporal as by a spiritual transitioÌ„ Ambrose Perhaps tâ—ou wilt say I â—ee the likenes I see not the truth of blood But it hath a resemblaÌ„ce For as thou tookest a resemblance of his death so doest thou drink a resemblance of his precious blood to this end that there should be no horror of blood and yet it might worke the price of our saluation and the grace of our redemption might remaine Therfore for a similitude thou receauest the Sacrament sed ver ae naturae gratiaÌ„ virtuteÌ„que consequeris but thou obtainest therby the grace vertue of the true nature Gelasius By the sacraments which we receiue wee be made partakers of the diuine nature they truely represent to vs the vertues and effects of that Principal mysterie Hilarius These things tasted taken bring this to passe that Christ remaineth in vs this is The vertue of that table to quicken the receiuers Leo In that mystical distribution of the spirituall nourishment that is giuen this is taken that receiuing the vertue of the heauenly meate we may be chaunged into his flesh who was made flesh for vs. Chrysostom Let vs come to the spirituall dugge of this chalice and suck thence the grace of the spirit Austen The Sacrament is one thing the vertue of the Sacrament is an other thing Euery man receiueth his part whereby grace itselfe is called parts and where the Sacraments were common to all grace was not common to all which is the vertue of the Sacraments And againe The Capernites thought he would haue giuen them his body but he told them hee would ascend to heauen no doubt hee ment whole When you shall see the sonne of man ascendingâ— where hee was before surely then shal you see that he doth not giue his body that way which you imagine surely then shal you perceiue that his grace is not consumed with biting Euthymius He doth change these things vnspeakably into his very body that quickneth and into his very precious blood and into the grace of them bothâ— We must therfore not looke to the nature of the things proposed at the Lords table but vnto the vertue of them Wherefore Theodoretes wordes are most true The signes which are seene Christ did honor with the names of his body and blood not chaunging the nature or substance of them but casting grace vnto nature And so did Ambrose meane when hee sayde If there bee so great strength in the word of the Lord Iesu that all thinges beganne to bee when they were not howe much more shall it bee of force that the mysticall elementes should be the same they were before and yet bee chaunged into an other thing The same in earthly matter and substaunce which they were before chaunged in vertue power and working whereby wee see they beare not onely the names but also the fruites and effectes of those thinges whose Sacraments they bee This is their doctrine touching the visible part of this Sacrament which is seene with eyes felt with handes and â—rused with teeth of that there is no doubt but it entereth our mouthes and resteth in our bowels and that for the causes which I before rehearsed aâ—â—er consecration is euâ—ry where called by thâ—m the Lordes body but that the naturall fleshe of Christ which is thâ— other and inwarde part of the Sacrament entereth the mouth or abideth the teeth or passeth downe the throate or loâ—geth in the stomack this is a position wholy repugnant both to Fathers and Scriptures Doe you not know sayth Christ that whatsoeuer thing from without entereth into a man can not defile him because it entereth not into his heart but into the beâ—lie Then by the iudgement of our Sauiour nothing can enter â—oth the hâ—aâ—t the bâ—lly but the flesh of Chrisâ— entereth into the hâ—art ergo 〈…〉 The bellie saieth Paul is for meates meates for the bellie and God will destroy both it and them the bodie of Chrâ—st Gâ—d wâ—ll not destroy it is therefore no meate for the bellie If not for the â—â—lliâ— then not for the mouth because eueâ—ie thing that entereth the mouth goeth into the bellie and so foorth to the â—raught But so basely to thâ—nk of the flâ—sh of Christ is apparent and 〈◊〉 wickednesse eâ—go the fleshe of Christ neither fillâ—th our bellies nor â—ntâ—râ—th ouâ— moâ—â—â—â— For nothing that entereth the mouth can either defile or sanctifie Meatâ—s saith Paul whiâ—h passe by the mouth doe not commend vs vnto â—od neither doeth the kingâ—om of God which is our sanctificationâ— conâ—â—â— of mâ—ats and drinkes but Christ with his blood doeth sanctifie the people and hee that â—atâ—th my flâ—sh drinketh my blood saith â—e remaineth in mee and I in him and hath eternall life ergo neâ—ther his fleshe nor â—â—s blood enter ouâ— mâ—utheâ— To be short Christ dwelleth not in bellies by locall comprehension but in our hearts by faith his flâ—he seedeth not â—ur bodies for a tiâ—e but our soules for euer his wordes were spoken not of our mouthes which beâ—leâ—ue not â—ut of our spirites which haue no fleshe nor boanes and consequently neither teeth to grinde nor iawes to swallow but onely â—aith and vnderstanding Lette all this bee â—â—â—de if the learned and auncient Fathers doe not conclude the same Chrysostome Care not for the nourishment of the bodie but of the spirit Christ is the bread which â—eeâ—â—th not the bodie but the soule and filleth not the belly but the minde Ambrose Christ is in that sacrament because it is the bodie of Christ. It is therefore no bodily but Ghostly meate NOT THIS BREAD which entereth into the bodie but the bread of eternall life is it that vpholdeth the substaunce of our soule Cyprian As often as we doe this wee wheâ— not our teeth to bite but we breake the sanctified bread with a sincere faith Cyril Let vs therefore as our Sauiour saith labour not for the meate which goeth into the bellie but for the spirituall foode which confirmeth our harts and leadeth vs to eternall life Austen It is not lawfull to deuoure Christ with teeth Prepare not your iawes but your harts We take but a morsel our hart is replenished Therfore not that which is seen but that which is beleued doth feed Why prouidest thou thy teeth thy belly Beleeue thou hast eaten Beâ—traÌ„ At
the thinges themselues whose signes those are Philand It were Theophil Why then since corporall eating serueth only for corporall nourishing and hath a continuall and naturall coherence with it doe you confesse the trueth in the later and not as well in the former part of that action why doe you not expound them both alike Philand To say the immortall fleshe of Christ is conuerted and turned into the quantitie and substaunce of our mortall flesh is an horrible heresie Theophil And so say that his fleshe is eaten with our mouthes and â—awes lâ—â—th in our stomacks is the verie pathway right introduction to that heresie or at least to as brutish and grosse an erour as that is Philand The Fathers affirme that his body is eaten with our mouthes Theophil And so they affirme that his bodie and blood doe increase and augment the substaunce of our mortall and sinnefull bodies Philand But that can not bee Theophil No more can the other Philand Howe shall our bodies rise at the last day if Christes body bee not in them Theophil Our resurrection dependeth not on the act of eating his flesh but of nourishing our fleshe with his as Ireneus telleth vs and the thinges which wee eate are not the causes but as the great Nicene councell admonisheth the pledges of our resurrection Their words be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must beleeue these to bee the signes or pledges of our resurrection Philand S. Chrysostom earnestly inforceth the eating of Christs flesh And sayth wee doe not onely eate it but euen * fasten our teeth in his fleshe Theo. In deede hee saith so but if you did not auert both your eyes and eares from the trueth you would perceiue by that verie sentence both the maner of his other Fathers speeches of that Sacrament and the right intent of their Doctrine in those cases His wordes are Non se tantum videri permittens desiderantibus sed tangi manducari dentes carni suae infigi desiderio sui omnes impleri Christ suffering himselfe not only to bee seene of those that are desirous but to bee touched and eaten and our teeth to bee fastned in his flesh and all to be satisfied of their longing after him Phi. Lord me thinketh these words be verie plain words He suffereth our teeth to bee fastned in his fleshe Theo. Uerie plaine they bee but very false also vnlesse you either take the flesh of Christ for the signe called by that name or else referre teeth and biting to the soule and faith of the â—â—ward man aâ— wel as you do the eyes hands wherewith we see him touch him Phi. Look what an â—â—â—sion you haue since gotten Theo. Nay looke what a subuersion of all truth and saith you be since fallen to Phi. Doth not this Father say wee fasten our teeth in his flesh Theo. Doeth hee not also say We see him with our eyes touch him with our handes Phi. That is referred to our faith as S. Ambrose teacheth Fide Christus videtur side Christus tangitur By faith Christ is seene by fayth Christ is touched Theoph. And why shall not the next which is more vnlikely to bee true bee referred to faith as well as the former Sainct Ambrose likewise saying Comedat te cor meuÌ„ panis sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee O holy bread O liuing bread O pure-bread come into my heart enter into my soule and Cyprian calling it the proper norishment of the spirite besides infinite others that for a thowsande yeares taught that doctrine in the church of God not your gutturall eating of Christ with teeth and iawes Phi. Was your maner of eating Christes fleshe which you defende in the sacrament taught in the church for a thowsande yeares Theop. Euen ours was and when yours came first to be proposed your schoolemen ran euery man his way fighting and scratching one an other â—ho should fal fastest and farthest from the truth Philand Blush you not to auouch two such monsterous lies Theop. A lyar will easily suspect any man as knowing him-selfe to delight in lies but GOD bee thanked that lyes with you bee truethes with vs and with all that haue any knowlegde of GOD or care of his truth The things which I affirmed be manifest truethes and such as you will blush at for verie shame if you be not sworne to your holie Father against Christ as well as you bee against your Prince Origen commenting vppon these wordes of the Supper this is my bodie this is my blood this breade sayeth hee which Christ confesseth to bee his bodie is the worde that nourisheth our soules and this drinke which hee confesseth to bee his blood is the worde that moysteneth and passinglie cheereth the heartes of such as drinke it Thou which art come vnto Christ sticke not in the blood of his fleshe but rather learne the blood of his worde and heare him saying to thee this is my blood which shall bee shedde for the remission of your sinnes Hee that is partaker of the mysteries knoweth the flesh and blood of the worde of God For the bread is the word of righteousnesse which our soules eating are nourished with and the drink is the worde of the knowledge of Christ according to the mysterie of his birth and death The blood of the Testament is poured into our heartes for the remission of our sinnes Athanasius Howe fewe men woulde his bodie haue sufficed that this shoulde bee the foode of the whole worlde Yea therefore doeth bee warne them of his ascension into heauen that he might drawe him from thinking on his bodie and they thereby learne that the flesh which he spake of was celestiall meate from aboue and spirituall nourishment to bee giuen by him The wordes which I spake to you are spirite and life which is as much as if hee had sayde this bodie which is in your sight and delyuered to death for the worlde shall bee giuen you for meate that it may bee spiritually distributed in euery one of you and be an assuraunce and preseruatiue to raise you to eternall life Cyprian writing of the Lordes Supper Eating and drinking saieth hee bee referred to the one and same end with the which as the substance of our bodies is increased and preserued so the life of the spirite is maintained with his proper nourishment What foode is to the fleshe that faith is to the soule what meate is to the body that the worde is to the spirite working euerlastingly with a more excellent vertue that which bodily meates doe for a time and vntill a season Ambrose approaching to the sacred communion which you intitle a prayer preparing to Masse amongest other thinges speaketh thus to Christ himselfe Thou Lord saydst with thine holy and blessed mouth the bread
of Christ inwardly Tast therefore and see howe sweete the meate is but learne before what manner of tast it hath It beareth the tast of Angels foode hauing in it a mysticall and pleasaunt relesse which thou canst not discerne with thy mouth but mayest vnderstande with thine inwarde affection Holde readie the mouth of thy fayth open the iawes of hope stretch out the bowels of loue and take the breade of life which is the nourishment of the inwarde man Tast I saie the sweetenesse of this heauenly banquette but lothe the smatche of the earthlie fruites For from the faith of the inwarde man commeth the tasting of the diuine iuyce whiles by the taking of the healthful Eucharist CHRIST FLOWETH INTO THE BOWELS OF THE SOVLE OF THE RECEAVER AND THE RELIGIOVS MINDE ADMITTETH HIM INTO HER CHAST AND INNERMOST ROOMES There shall neede no long discourse to proue that these Catholike Fathers teach in the Lordes Supper a spirituall kinde of eating the fleshe of Christ by faith and vnderstanding as wee doe not a corporall with teeth and iawes as you doe The places bee manie the wordes plaine you can not shift them vnlesse you will desperatly take fleshe for spirite bodie for soule chamming for beleeuing earth for heauen yea a dumme and dead creature for the liuing and euerlasting sonne of God which were not onely sensible blindnesse but in excusable madnes Phi. The spiritual eating wee doe not deny but we adde to that a corporall because the soul may bee partaker of Christ by faith notwithstanding the mouth receiue the very flesh of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine Theo. This is your onely refuge that is left and this will not helpe you For examine this answere a while and you shall soone see the weakenesse of it My flesh is truely meate saith Christ and my blood is truely drinke Hee that doubteth of this we holde him accursed you doe the like thus farre we agree Mary for what part of man soule or bodie this meate was prouided in this we dissent You say for the body no lesse than for the soule wee say for the soule and not for the body So saide Chrysostome before vs. This meate feedeth not the body but the soule So saide Ambrose It is no bodilie but Ghostlie meate So said Augustine Prepare not your iawes but your harts thence is this super commended so saide Cyprian This is the proper nourishment of the spirit and not common to the flesh Now that which is eaten is meate And therefore if Christ bee no meate for the bodie but onely for the soule assuredly Christ is not eaten of our bodies but of soules only Next you confesse that the mortall and sinnefull bodies of men may not bee substantially nourished with the glorious and immortall flesh of Christ and eating is altogither in vaine euen of the flesh of Christ it selfe without norishing al the fathers with one consent teach this to be the end of caring the fleshe of Christ that we should be thereby norished to life eternal Why then striue you for a corporal eating where your selues dare not defend any corporal norishing Why distract you eating frō norishing by referring them one to the body the other to the soule which the Fathers alwayes ioyned applied to one the self same part of man Many mothers saith Chrysost. deliuered their infants whē they are born to other norces which he would not do but norisheth vs with his own body And in the same place where he saith Ipsum vides ipsum tangis ipsum comedis thou seest him thou touchest him thou eatest him addeth Ea namque re nos alimur quam Angeli videntes tremunt For we are nourished with that thing which the Angels tremble when they behold And so the rest of the Fathers call it not onely meate to eate but nutrimentum alimoniam norishment food to keepe the receiuer in plight and good liking So that that part of man doth not eat the fleshe of Christ which is not norished with it And since you dare not auouch that our bodies are really nourished with the flesh of Christ why shoulde you hold that our mouthes do reallie eate him Lastly with what one meate can you fit both the bodies and soules of men That which entereth the body must bee locall and corporall That which feedeth the soule must bee spirituall and intellectuall The soule hath no locall receites nor corporall instrumentes for her kinde of eating but onely faith and vnderstanding So that if the fleshe of Christ in this mysterie bee materiall and locall how canne it feede the soule If it bee spirituall and intellectuall howe can it bee chammed with teeth or closed in the streites of the stomack Local not local corporal not corporal be plaine contradictions and by no meanes incident to the naturall flesh of Christ. One it must needs be both it cannot be though you would sweate out your hearts with wrangling And that Christ is not eaten with teeth or mouth the Ghospell in plaine wordes auoucheth with vs. Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life my flesh is meat indeed my bloud is drinke in deed hee that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him saith our Sauiour The wicked liue not by Christ neither abide in Christ and therefore by the verie determination of the Lorde him-self they neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloude Runne nowe to your distinction of corporall and spirituall eating when you will but so long as these wordes stand written in the Ghospell he that eateth me euen he shall liue by me the Godly will soone conclude that SVCH AS LIVE NOT BY CHRIST DOE NOT EATE CHRIST and so that corporall eating of Christes flesh which you would erect common to the faithfull and faithlesse to be no kind of eating at al notwithstanding they receiue the materiall and external elementes of this mysterie Phi. In spite of all your places and proofes there is a Sacramentall eateing of Christs flesh with mouth and iawes besides your spirituall eating it with faith and spirite which you could not doe vnlesse it were really present therefore you doe not well to beguile the simple in this sort with refuting one trueth by an other whereas the fathers confessed both Theo. In spite of all your late deuises euasions the flesh of Christ is not truely eaten with Capernites teeth or Iesuits iawes neither do the fathers auouch any such thing saue in that sense which I last declared that the signes so called are eaten of the wicked with their mouthes and throates but of the flesh it selfe and bloud of Christ they plainly affirme the contrarie S. Augustine expounding the wordes of our sauiour hee that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud remaineth in me and I in him saith
dipped his hands in his brothers bloode nor take the wages of Balaam to curse and reuile the people of God nor perish in the contradiction of Corah for resisting both God and the Magistrate but rather that wee may be sanctified and saued by the might of his word and store of his mercy laid vp in Christ his sonne for all that beleeue him and call vpon him Phi. God send vs such part as our fathers had Theo. You be so displeased with God for punishing the sinnes of your fathers with blindnes and error in these later ages that now you will none of his light nor grace though he offer it freely to saue your soules but if you will needes perish your owne bloode be on your owne heades yet haue vs excused if we thinke our sinnes heauie enough though wee adde not thereto the neglect of his worde and contempt of his trueth as you doe In the knowledge of God and reuerence of his iudgements there is a path way to repentaunce and hope of mercy in the proude dislike of his seueritie towards others and sâ—ubberne refusall of his goodnes towards our selues there is nothing but an heaping of extreme vengeaunce which shall consume the wicked and impenitent resisters of his word and spirit Phi. We be not of that number Theo. Were you not you would be more carefull to search and willing to embrace the trueth of Christ once vnderstoode with all readines and lowlines of minde knowing that God resisteth the proud and giueth grace to the humble and not with an high-looking and self-pleasing perswasion that all is yours neglect your duty to God and man Phi. We obserue both Theo. You obserue neither Subiection to your lawfull Prince you haue forsaken and not onely fledde the Realme and incited others to doe the like but the Christian alleageance which the Prince requireth of her subiects you impugne with shifts and slaunders in fauoâ—r of him who wickedly and iniuriously taketh vpon him to be the supreme Moderator of earthly kingdomes chiefe disposer of princes Crowns and so fast are you lincked in confederacie with him that in open view of all men you will allow no Prince to beare the sword longer than shall like him but proclaime rebellions of subiects against their Soueraignes to be iust honorable warres if he authorize them by his Censures And where to cloake your wicked and enormous attempts you boldely surmised that you did whatsoeuer you did for that Religion which was ancient Catholike we haue presently taken you so tardie short of your reckoning that for sixe of the greatest and cheefest points now in question betwixt the Church of England and the Church of Rome and reformed in this Realme by publike authoritie you cannot bring vs so much as one ancient euident testimony that your faith and Doctrine was euer taught or receiued in the primatiue church of christ and yet you please your selues in your owm conceits and compasse the earth to get prosilites fit for such teachers whom you may traine vp in error and vse as instruments to catch vnstable soules and fier vnquiet heades that you by them may disturbe realmes and fishe for Princes thrones and liues in troubled waters Phi. All this is as false as God is true Theo. God himselfe shall skant be trueth if you may be the iudges except hee take your parts But facing and craking laid aside you must referre the iudgement of your doings and sayings to others and not to your selues Phi. To Catholikes I am content The. They must be then of your instructing that is such as will trust neither fathers nor Scriptures against your Canons otherwise in that you haue saide they shall find no great cause to like your impugning the Princes power right to establish Lawes within her owne lande without the Popes leaue and to hold her Crowne against his censures and as litle shall they find to cal you or count you Catholikes Phi. Men of your own pitch will soone assent to any thing Theo. Let them be but indifferent and weigh what you haue brought Phi. More we can bring when we see our times The It skilleth not how much but how sound that is which you can bring Phi. Of that hereafter and yet in the meane time there be many other thinges besides these that you haue handled that must be discussed before we can be pronounced no Catholikes And as in these you seeeme with wresting and wrenching to haue some aduantage so in those we could forthwith confound you The. Euen as you haue doone in these Phi. A great deale more readily if I had time to stay the triall of them but this holy tide I must spend in other matters of more importance Theo. What In spredding newes that the king of Spain doth stay but for the next summer Phi. We meddle not with forraine affaires Theo. A number of you be better seene in policie than in diuinitie you were borne belike to be rulers though it be but of Rebels as Sanders was that thought it a praise to take the field in person against his Prince Phi. My trauell is not to that end Theo. You leaue that for others and trauel to sound the harts of your adherents whether they be in number welth and zeale likely and readie to giue assistance if any should inuade Phi. What vnchristian coniectures you haue of vs Theo. None but such as your owne deedes and wordes occasion Phi What cause haue we giuen you to speake this of vs Theo. What greater cause can you giue than openly to auouch as you haue done in your Defence of Catholiks as you call them yâ— rebellions against such Princes as the Pope deposeth are godly iust honourable wars Phi. If hee may depose them they are Theo. You haue in print affirmed both and sought to proue them with all your might and therefore what shal we thinke your secret whispering and reconâ—ling to the Church of Rome is but a craftie bayte of Malcontentes to make rebels Phi. The parties themselues can witnesse we neuer mention any such thing in our absolution To them we appeale for record Theo. For my part I thinke you doe not It were too grosse conspiracie treason to take vowes and oths of subiects against their Prince by name and therefore if you should take that open course you were worthie to ride to Tyburne not only for traytors but also for disards But when you reconcile them you take assurance of them by vow oth or other adiuration that they shall embrace the Catholike faith and hold Communion vnitie with the Church of Rome for euer after Phi. Why should we not Theo. Then when it pleaseth my Lord the Pope to depriue the Prince and to excommunicate al that assist or agnise her for a lawfull magistrate what must your reconciled sort doe Is it not against their oth faith giuen to you at their restitution to
The faith of our fathers is not alwaies trueth 537 God forbiddeth vs to follow the steppes of our fathers 538 The godly confessed their fathers did erre 539 All humane lawes barres giue place to God 540 The prince might make lawes for trueth maugre the Pope 541 Princes haue setled religion without Councels 542 Christian religion receiued vpon the direction of a lay man 543 Trueth authorised the Apostles against Priests Princes 544 Railing on Princes is a capitall crime 545 The contents of the fourth part No point of Poperie Catholike 546. What is truely CATHOLIKE 547 The worshipping of Images is not Catholike 547 The west Church against the worshipping of Images 548 Corruption to help the credite of the second Nicen councell 549 The worshipping of Images detested in the Church of Christ as Heresie 550 The â—mage of God made with hands may not be worshipped 552 The Iewes Gentiles did erect their Images vnto God 553 The heathen adored their stocks as the Images of God 554 The Image of man set vp vnto God is an Idoll 556 The wodden Image of Christ may not be worshipped 557 The honour done to a wodden Image is not done to Christ. 559 Adoration of Images no Apostolick tradition 562 S. Basill forged to make for adoration of Images 563 The shamefull forgeries and falsities of the second Nicene councell 564 Both Scriptures and fathers wickedly abused by the second Nicene Councâ—l 565 The second Nicene Councel conuincing it selfe of forgerie 566 What an Idole is 567 A wrong seruice of God is Idolatrie 568 The Church of Rome giueth diuine honour vnto Images 569 Christs honour may not be giuen to Images 570 The hauing of Images is not Catholike 572 Athanasius palpablie forged in the second Nicene Councell 574 The Church next to the Apostles reiected Images 574 Images came first from Heathens vnto Christians 575 Images reiected by godly Bishops 576. No corporall submission may be giuen to Images 577 The Nicene Bishops play the sophists in decreeing adoration vnto Images 577 The wodden crosse of Christ may not be adored 578 Not one word in scripture for adoration of Images 580 No point of faith may be built on traditions 581 No point of faith beleeued without Scripture 582 Baptizing of Infants is a consequent of the Scriptures 583 It may be a tradition yet grounded on the Scriptures 584 Baptisme of InfaÌ„ts prooued needfull by the Scriptures 585 Rebaptization repugnant to the Scriptures by S. Augustines iudgement 588 The perpetuall virginitie of Marie the Mother of Christ. 589 The Godhead of the holy ghost expressed in the Scriptures 590 His proceeding from the father and the sonne confirmed by the Scriptures 592 Expresse scripture is the sense and not the syllables 593 Fathers wrested to speake against the scriptures 594 The Popish faith is their owne traditioÌ„ against the scriptures 597 Their adoration of images is a late and wicked inuenâ—ion of their schooles 598 Images adored in the Church of Rome with diuine honour 600 Images reiected by Catholike Bishops 601 S. Austen condemneth Images as vnprofitable signes 602 Custome without trueth is but the antiquitie of error 603 Praier in an vnknowen toung prohibited by Saint Paul in Gods name 604 S. Paul speaketh of vnknoweÌ„ touÌ„gs 606 An vnknowen toung cannot edifie 607 Diuine seruice in a knowen toung cannot choose but edifie 608 S. Paul speaketh of three learned toungs as wel as of others 610 S. Paul speaketh of the Hebrew Greeke and Latine as well as of other tongues 611 S. Pauls wordes comprise both Church seruice sermons 612 Saint Paul 1. Cor. 14. speaketh of Church seruice 613 The Church vnder the Apostles had no set order of diuine seruice 614 The Church vnder the Apostles did sing blesse and pray by the gyft of the spirite 615 The Apostle had no certaine praiers or seruice 616 The Iesuits halting reasons that S. Paul did not speak of the church Seruice 616 S. Paul to the Corinthians speaketh of Church seruice 620 No man may say AMEN to that he vnderstandeth not 624 Necessary to vnderstand our praiers 625 The primatiue Church had neuer her praiers and seruice in an vnknowen tongue 627 The latine seruice was vnderstood in the Countries where it was 629 Alleluia is vsed in all tongues aswell barbarous as others 630 The Britans had no latine seruice 632 Alleluia soung at the plough 632 The Iesuits manner of alleaging impertiment authorities 633 Bede doth not say that the people of this Realme had the latine seruice in his time 634 The prayers of the primatiue Church were common to all the people 636 The Masse book proueth that the people should vnderstand the Priest 639 The Priest needeth no speach in his praiers but to edifie the hearers 640 Praier is as acceptable to God in a barbarous as in a learned touÌ„g 642 Seruice in an vnknowen tongue is no custome of the vniuersall Church 643 The primatiue church had her seruice in such tongues as the people vnderstood 644 The primatiue church allowed praiers in barbarous tounges Whether side commeth nearest to christs institution 650 S. Paul by the Lords supper meaneth the sacrament 651 The name Masse whence it first came 655 We doe not swarue from christes institution 657 Christ did blesse with the mouth and not with the finger 658 Blessing in the scriptures applied to diuerse and sundrie thinges 659 To doe any thing vpon or ouer the bread is not needefull 660 The rehearsall of christs wordes maketh a sacrament 661 We shew our purpose at the Lords table by our words and deedes 662 The worde beleeued maketh the Sacrament 664 Vnlâ—uened bread is not of the substance of the Sacrament 664 Water is no part of Christs institution 663. 670 Water is not necessarie in the Lordes cup euen by the confession of their own schooles 668 No water mingled whiles the Apostles liued 672 The Masse an open profanation of Christs institution 673 Priuate Masse euerieth all that christ did or said at his last Supper 674 Christ did not sacrifice himselfe at his last supper 676 The Primatiue church had no priuate Masse 678 The Lords supper ought to be coÌ„mon 679 The Lords cup was deliuered to the people as well as the bread 679 Christs precept for the cup extendeth as well to the people as to the Priest 680 In the primatiue church the lords cup was common to all 682 The causes for which the church of Rome changed christs institution 683 The auncient church of Rome very vehement against half communions 684 Forbearing the Lords cuppe condemned in laymen as sacrilege 685 Sacrilege in the Priest can be no religion in the people 686 The Iesuits proofes for their sacrifice 687 How the fathers call the Lordes supper a sacrifice 688 Their own Masse booke contradicteth their sacrifice 690 The Lords death is the sacrfice of the Lords supper 691 A memoriall of christs passion is our daily sacrifice 692 The elder sort of Schoolemen knew not their
resisted the Popes power in whole or in part euer since the conquest This Land subiect to him neither as Christs vicar nor as Patriarke of the west Apol Cap. 4. sect 25. Bishoppes may preach wihout Cesars leaue if they submit themselues to Cesars sword as the Apostles did The Iesuites cunning in playeng with the worde Supreme as they doe What the Iesuits imagine of the word Supreme The wordes of the oth be sound eâ—ough if they cease peruerting them Ruler and Prince be as doubtfull as gouernour if men be disposed to cauill Bishops be called Rulers Princes Kings Queenes Heb. 13. Act. 20. In. 1. Cap. epist. ad Titum Idem in 3. Ca. 1. ad Tim. Lib. 4. Cap. 33. Morali in Iob. In 49. ca. Esaiae Euerie of the faithfull is a King and a Priest Reuelat. 1. 1. Peter 2. Lib. Cap. 37. Idem lib. 4. Cap. 24. Ibidem Princes are Bishops and Priests Euagrie tom epist. 2. Idem Oceano eodem tom Exod. 24. Iosua 24. Iudges 8. Iudâ—th 6. The ground of al their absurdities is the cauilling at 〈◊〉 words The gouernment of Princes Prâ—ests are distinct Gouernours of this realme none is but only the Prince This is the profound Logike of Rhemes A right Frier that will neuer be answered though the Sophisme be neuer so grosse Only Princes beare the sworde within their owne dominions If only Princes beare the sword they beare it in al things as well spiritual as teÌ„porall where the sword is required The sworde must be vsed in spirituall things and causes as wel as temporall Princes caÌ„not be defenders of the faith officers of the Church but by means of the sword 1. Tim. 2. The sword ordeined chiefly to preserue godlinesse and honesty among men The sword of Princes is supreme in that it is not subiect to the Pope must be obeyed of al in things that be good These bee right Iesuiticall conceits The true supremacie of Princes The Papists in euery stile which they giue the Pope make him supreme Caus. 25. quaest 1. § Nulli fas Acclamationes in fine Concil Triden Sess. 25. Supreme gouernour doth not touch Christ so nere as Supreme Bishop doth which is the Popes vsuall stile 1. Pet. 5. 1. Pet. 2. My Kingdom is not of this world Ioh. 18. Who made me Iudge ouer you Luke 12. Princes must be indured whatsoeuer they coÌ„mand but not obeyed agaynst the faith or canoÌ„s of the church In temporall things Princes may not frustrate the lawes of their progenitors nor the liberties of the people Lib. 4. cap. 27. Constit. 131. de Eccle. Canon Al godly princes haue admitted the Canons of the Church Constit. 6. Athanas. ad solitar vitaÌ„ agentes Gregor lib. 9. epist. 41. The Pope obeyed the Princes lawes not against the Canons The Popes name put in steed of the Princes Caus. 7. quaest 1. Scripsit Nouel coÌ„st 83. Item const 6. To be tyed to the saith and canons of the Church doth not diminish their supremacie The Princes sword is not spirituall Ephes. 6. Reuelat. 1. Hebr. 4. The word of god is the spirituall sword The magistrats sword is corporall Mat. 10. Mat. 10. And temporall 2. Cor. 4. How the Papists abuse the word spirituall in extending it to men and matters that they should not They be spirituall which haue the spirit of God 1. Cor. 3. 1. Cor. 2. Gal. 6. Iude epist. 1. Pet. 2. Hieron ad Iulian. tomo epist. 1. Their lands liuings must be spirituall though Saint Paul call theÌ„ carnall 1. Cor. 9. Rom. 15. Mat. 22. Ambros. epist. lib. 5. orat coÌ„tra Auxent The Romish kalender of spirituall things See the tytles of their Decretals Malefactours of al sortes should opeÌ„ly repent before they be receiued to the Sacraments Rom. 13. The goods lands and liuings of Clergie men be Cesars right What things ChristiaÌ„ Princes first committed to Bishops for their learning and integritie the Pope afterward toke theÌ„ vp as his own Bishops the fittest men to deale in these causes but by the Princes power and lawes Bishops by their function may deny the sacraments to such as will not repent but they may not compel or punish any man without commission from the Prince Compulsion correction in all things is the Princes right The sword ordayned chiefly for things spirituall Rom. 7. Ibidem Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2. Mark 10. Worldly thinges be neither good nor euil for which two causes Princes beare the word The spiritual things which the Pope claimeth are teÌ„porall 1. Cor. 13. 1. Cor. 14. Princes were not ordained to cloaâ—â— the backe feede the belâ—â— â— Tim. 6. Mat. 6. 1. Tim. 2. Godlines and honestie the chiefest causes why Princes were ordained The Prince hath the same charge in the coÌ„monwealth that euerie priuate man hath in his familie Ephes. 6. The parentes charge towardes their children Psalm 34. Deut. 4. Deut. 4. Genes 18. Psalm 101. Dauids charge in his kingdome Religion the Princes chiefest charge Nouel Consti 6. Legum Theod. Nouel tit 2. de Iudaeis Samaritanis Aug. epist. 162. The sifting examining of a Bishop did most pertaine to the princes charge by S. Aug. iudgemeÌ„t Epist. ad LuciuÌ„ inter leges Edward cap. 17. Eleutherius opinion of the Princes charge Inter leges Edward Reg. cap. 17. Pope Iohns opinion of the Princes charge Beda hist. gentis Anglor cap. 32. Gregories coÌ„fession of the Princes charge The king of Englands oth expressing his charge Inter leges Edward cap. 17. de Regis offâ—cio Ibidem The very heathen were of the same opinion Politic. lib. 3. cap. 11. Ibidem cap. 5. In all kingdomes and common-wealthes since the foundation of the earth religion hath been setled defended by the Magistrates sword Their authoritie must stretch as far as their dutie God hath giuen Princes the sword in those thinges which himself commandeth The Priest in no cause may beare the sword The confirming of Rites and Ceremonies needeth the sword The abuse or contempt of excommunication reuenged by the sword The sworde committed to the Prince Rom. 13. His Apostles forbidden the sword Mat. 26. Mat. 20. Bernard de considerat lib. 2. Dominion interdicted the Pope himself Caus. 33. quaest 2. ¶ Inter haec Caâ—s 33. quaest 8. ¶ De Episc. No clergimen may vse the sword no not by the Popes authoritie 2. Cor. 10. Ad solitar vitaÌ„ agentes Ambros. lib. 5. Epist. 33. The seruants of Christ may haue no earthly kingdome since their master had none Iohn 8. Matth. 10. 2. Tim. 2. Distinct. 96. ¶ Cum. ad verum A Bishop may not vsurp an Emperours name much lesse his sword Distinct. 10. ¶ Quoniam ideÌ„ Cyprian writeth to Iulian an 100. yeares before Iulian was borne The Disciples of Christ straitly charged not to medle with Princely swords The sworde hath beene may be and should be vsed for that which is good in al spirituall things and causes The oth cleared Their absurdities returned on their owne heades
Alfon. lib. 1. ca. 2. Theosoph lib. 4. cap. 32. Then surely masters you do but flatter when you make the Pope free froÌ„ errour Erasmus annot in 1. Cor. ex cap. 7. And yet the Iesuites make it an high point of their faith The Iesuites reâ—use Councels and Fathers because they will not acknowledge the Pope hath erred Clements erronious decree Caus. 12. quaest 1. § lectissimus Plato dialog 4. de Repub. That althings ought to be common among christians is a grosse error The Bishop of Rome a Montanist Tertul. aduer Praxeam The Bishop of Rome an Idolater Marcellini Papae condemnatio tomo concil 1. The Bishop of Rome an Arrian Ruff. li. 1. ca. 27. Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 37. Theodoret. lib. 2 cap. 17. Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 17. Athanas. epist. ad solitar vitaÌ„ agentes Ex pontificali Damasi in vita Liberij Hieron de ecclesiast script in Fortunatiano The Iesuites neglect al this to saue the Pope froÌ„ error Hieron ad chronicon Euse. adiectio Omission in one writer is no disproofe in an other Martin Polon in Liberiâ— Vincentius specul histor lib. 15. Cap. 11. 12. IdeÌ„ in Damaso Beleeue none but your selfe then you may be sure the Pope shall not erre Honorius died an heretike 6. Synod actio tiâ— 12.13.16.17.18 * Actio 12. * Actio 13. And for no cause but â—or that it condeÌ„neth the pope as an heretike * 6. Synod actio 18. habet haec epist. Leon. 2. ad Constant. Augustum * Nicen. Synod 2. Actio 3. * Nice Synod 2. actio 7. 8. Synod acti 7. If you would forge against your selues how much more for your selues Though Honorius were innocent yet three general Councels confesse the Pope might erre If one did er others may What reason we should beleeue late Papists speaking in fauour of the Pope against the ancient stories How Papists esteeme antiquitie and vniuersalitie wheÌ„ the Pope is touched Vigilius an heretike Liberati breuiarium cap. 22. Ex libro Pontificali in viâ—â— Vigilij Vigilius a lewd Pope Epist. Syluerij Papae ad vigil â—omo Concil 2. Pontificale in vita Vigilij Vigilius drawen by the neck round about Constantinople Distinct. 19. § Anastasius Ibidem glossa ¶ abegerunt Dist. 19. § Anastasius Ibidem glossa ¶ diuino The See was not free from error when the men did erre that sate in the See The Rhemish Testament 22. Luke The office iâ— not the worse though the maÌ„ be naught He that may erre cannot be supreme iudge ouer the whole Church The Rhemish Testament vpon the 22. of S. Luke Rom. 10. Faith faileth where the hart erreth The Pope may erre with hart mouth but his Court the Iesuits say can not erre Luke 22. Oraui pro te what place doth te signifie This is rather a plague vpon Peter his successours than a praier for them How the Iesuites constâ—r Christs wordes The Rhemish Testament vpon the 22. of S. Luke Of a particular extraordinarie fact no generall rule can be gathered God ruled Caiphas mouth against his hart Cyril in Iohan. lib. 8. cap. 3. IbideÌ„ li. 8. ca. 2. The diuel possessed Caiphas hart but God ordered his wordes 1. Kings 24. Mat. 27. Luke 8. â— Iohn 11. God can doe the like when he will Caiphas condemned our Sauiour for a blasphemer Matth. 26. Christs promise was not made to peter sitting in â—udgement Erronious Decretals The decretals of Celestinus lately pared and his error left out Alfons aduers. haereses li. â— cap. 4. Decretal lib. 4. de diuortiis § quanto Ibidem ¶ praedecessor Decretal lib. 4. de sponsa duoruÌ„ § licet praeter To decide of marriage against the truth is an error in faith Sixti Decretae lib. 5. tit 12. § exijt Extrauag Ioh. 22. tit 14. § cuÌ„ inter noÌ„nullos Ibidem He should haue told vs what right they might haue besides the propriety Christ and his Apostles renounced the proprietie and reserued the vse Is not this good diuinitieâ— Extra § cum inter nonnullos gloss ¶ declaramus * Expressè contrarium inâ—uit De consec dist 2. § Ego Beren Ibidem ¶ dentibus A sober vnderstaÌ„ding to expound the wordes clean contrarie to the text IbideÌ„ ¶ quaÌ„ Dominus Nicolaus haec sexta Synodus teneÌ„daÌ„ tradidit mihique firmauit They print no more than they list and mind to defend then they aske vs what errors we find in the Popes decres You might as well say the Pope may er in his shoes but not in his slippers or in the shade but not in the sun-shine We caÌ„ propose theÌ„ a thousaÌ„d Sees which they shal neuer proue to haue erred in open Consistories by definitiue senteÌ„ce Heretiks euer condemned for their writings preachings not for their definitiue senteÌ„ces Though no Pope had erred yet they may erre and so long they can be no iudges of faith The highest court in earth may misse the trueth The Church is directed by the word and spirit of christ not by the Popes consistorie Their owne Church 1400. yeres after Christ stoutly auoucheth the Pope might erre Distinct. 40. § Si Papa Abbaâ— VrspergeÌ„s anno 1080. Fasciculus reruÌ„ sciendarum in vita gestis Hildebrandi Ibidem Matth. Paris in Henrico 3. sub anno 1253. Massei Chronic. in anno 1409. * Naucler Chronograph generatio 47. anno 1409. * Genâ—brard li. 2 Chronograph anno 1414. * Concil CoÌ„stan sessio 37. Concil Constan. sessio 11. Concil Basil. sessio 34. anno 1439. Articuli Parisienses A Iudge must haue skill to discerne and power to coÌ„maund The Pope hath neither Erre he may Power to coÌ„maund or compel he hath none He that wil be iudge of truth must proue his claime All that we giue vnto princes is either to be obeyed or indured 2. Timoth. 3. Ierem. 26. Preachers may reproue Princes 1. Kings 15. 3. Kings 14. 3. Kings 21. 4. Kings 3. Mark 6. 2. Kings 12. 2. Chron. 19. 4. Kings 20. The Prophets reproued as well good kings as euill Preachers must not admit Princes to the Sacraments but on those conditions which god requirâ—th If Princes will be partakers of Gods graces they must receiue them as he doeth propose them Chryso in Mat. hom 83. Ibidem ad populum Antioch hom 60. This is newe Romish diuinitie which in deed is meere impietie D. ALLENS DEFENCE OF ENGLISH CATHOLIKES cap. 4. LATELY SET FOORTH AGAINST THE EXECVTION OF IVSTICE The defence of the English Catholikes cap. 4. S. Thomas Thomas Aquine a late corrupt writer a great factor for the Pope The defence of English Catholikes Cap. 4. Toledoes opinion of a Prince excommunicate The case of K. Henrie the 8. What care we for Tholedoes opinion Preachers must not admit Princes to the Sacraments but on those conditions which God requireth Tell vs what warrant and not what fellowes they haue to resist the ordinance oâ— God THE DEFENCE OF ENGLISH CATHOLIKES The sentence and definition of
wordes are Saint Austens Theophil Your assurance is not currant Shewe vs where that wee may finde them Phi. What if I haue not the booke in a readmeâ— Theo. Name the place and it shâ—ll suffice Phi. Perhaps it is not printed Theo. By whome then is it reported Phi. By such as would not lye Theoph. By Walden the frier that wrate against Wicleff Phil. What if he were the reporter Theophil Where had he it Phi. In an old copie written with an auncient and set hand Theo. Which neuer no man sawe besides himselfe Philand That you cannot tell Theoph. Nor you but where is that copy now Philan. Why aske you me out of S. Augustine he had it Theo. Shew vs the booke and beare the bell Philan. He saith it Theo. As though your frierly practises and manifolde forgeries vnder the fathers names were not too wel knowen to trust a Romish Coruester vpon his bare worde in a matter of such importance Phi. In my conscience hee woulde not wilfullie belye S. Augustine Theophil Your conscience is no good consequence In my knoweledge there was no such doctrine taught in the Church as these woordes import whiles S. Augustine liued nor fiue hundreth yeares after his death but the contrary was earnestly maintained and auouched as I haue prooued by Gelasius Theodoret and others And therefore either Walden must make it of his owne heade or ignorantly light on a patch of Anselmus or some such late writer vnder the name of Saint Augustine which was common in your Abbayes and is at this day confessed by your owne fellowes Philand If you thinke Saint Augustine were mistaken you shall haue in venerable Bede as plaine woordes for this point as in Saint Augustine Theophil And as plainely forged as Saint Augustine was Philand Heare what he saieth before you iudge Theophil I am as ready to heare as you to speake Philand His woordes are Ibi forma panis videtur vbi substantia panis non est There the forme of bread appeareth where the substance of bread is not Theophil These places hit your handes as patte as if your selues had framed them Philand You were best saie this is forged Theophil I neede not It saith so much of it selfe creept you can shewe where it is written Philand In his booke de mysteriis missae Theophil There be extaâ—t eight tomes of his workes is it in any of them Philand It maie be it is not Theophil Did he euer write any such booke as de mysteriis missae Philand What else Theo. Who saith so Phi. This is alledged out of that booke Theo. But is he neuer wrate anie such booke how can thiâ— be allâ—dged out of him Phi. If he did not you saie something but how prooue you that he wrate no such booke Theo. Nâ—y you must prooue he did We hauing the Catalogue of his labours witnessed by Triâ—â—emius and others of your owne friends and eight tâ—mes of his writinges at this day extant find no such booke named as Walden mentioneth Philand All this notwithstanding he might write such a booke Theo. He might is not enough you must prooue he did before we acquite you of corruption Phi. Walden repeateth those wordes as out of his booke Theo. We had too late experience of Walden in S. Austen to beleeue either him or you Phi. You will deny all things Theo. You yet bring nothing but that which is no where found in the fathers workes if it be not lewdly forged in their names Thinke you with such trumperie to trie your selues Catholikes Phi. We haue found and good records Theo. Bring out those for these be worse than rotten A frier fourteene hundreth and thirtie yeares after Christ to come with new places out of Austen and Bede cleane contrarie to the rest of their writings and such as neuer any man alledged before him and neuer any man saw them after him who but seducers would bleare the world and blinde themselues with such authorities Phi. Wee did but alledge them to sound what you would say Theo. Then leaue them with shame since you see what they are and get you to other if you haue anie Phi. You would haue them auncient Theo. Would you prooue your selues Catholikes by men of your owne faction Phi. If you count that a faction all the fathers were of our faction Theo. You may soone make them to any faction if you follow frier Waldens fashion but bring vs their workes that we may iudge of their woordes or els you striue in vaine Phi. Hereafter I will Theo. Then haue you a cold sute of this question For of accidentes without subiect or abolishing the substance of bread neuer father spake one word Phi. Yeas S. Chrysostome â—aith Doest thou see bread doest thou see wine Doe these thinges goe to the draught as other meates doe Not so Thinke not so For as when waxe is put to the fire nothing of the substance remaineth nothing redoundeth so here also thinke thou the mysteries consumed with the substance of the diuine bodie Heare you this Theophilus Nothing of the former substance remaineth but the same is consumed with the presence or substance of Christes bodie Theo. I heare it well Philander if you would take it right When you put waxe into the fire nothing neither shew nor substance remaineth this is so true that it will doe you small good Phi. Will it not So it is in the mysteries saith this father Theoph. You would haue it so But Chrysostome saith so thinke when thou commest to the mysteries Phi. And should wee thinke a falshood when wee approch to the mysteries Theo. No but pull both your hartes and eyes from the materiall elements as not regarding them and fixe your cogitations on the celestial grace and vertue that preuaileth and worketh in the mysteries Phi. He would haue vs thinke the mysteries to be consumed Theo. If any reall mutation were to be concluded by this place your holie formes and accidents of breade and wine must be packing as well as the substance For when waxe is throwen into the fire what accidences can you â—et vs remaining doe they not perish togither with the substance If you consult the Schooles they will tell you the accidentes onely perish the matter doeth not So that Chrysostomes similitude maketh litle for your conuersion of substances without accidences his illation certainly maketh lesse Thinke saieth he that the mysteries in like â—ort be consumed The substance of bread which you say is not can no way be taken with you for the mysteries but the shewes and formes of bread and wine by your opinion must be counted in this and all other places the sacred mysteries and therefore if any mysteries be consumed your accidences can neuer scape the brunt of these wordes Howbeit Chrysostomes true meaning was not to turne the bread and wine from their former qualities or substances but the communicantes from all vnworthy and
earthly cogitations of the mysticall elements and to stir them rather to marke in this Sacrament the wonderfull power and effects of Gods spirit and grace than the base condition and naturall digestion of bread and wine Phi. Would S. Chrysostom haue vs thinke the mysteries to bee consumed vnlesse in deede they were consumed Theo. His directing our cogitations for religion and reuerence rather to the inward force than outward appearance of the mysteries doeth not chaunge the sensible qualities of bread and wine whereof hee spake much lesse the substance alone whereof he spake not but draweth the receiuers from that which their eyes behold to that which by faith they beleeue to the secreter and diuiner part of the Sacrament not abolishing the one but preferring the other as more worthy to be considered and desired by the commers to the Lordes table And in this sense he willeth the people not to thinke that the Priest is a man in the verie next wordes that followe without line or letter betwixt Wherefore approaching to the Lordes table doe not thinke that you receiue the diuine body at the handes of a man but that you take a fierie coale by the Seraphims tongues which Esay sawe in his vision Can this be Chrysostoms meaning that in act and verie deede the Priest is changed into a Seraphim his hand into a paire of tongs the body of Christ into a coale of fire Except you be past your fiue wits you wil say no yet Chrysostom in the same place perswadeth the cōmunicants so to think as he did before that the mysteries were consumed by the substance or presence of Christs body Then if the latter wordes inferre no such chaunge why should the former If you be not so foolish as to mistake the second part of this sentence why be you so wilfull as to peruert the first vttered at the same time to the same purpose with the verie same phrase of speach Chrysostomes intent is no more to transsubstantiate the bread than the priest or the bodie of Christ but with vehement amplifications as his manner is he perswadeth the people to come to the Lordes table with no lesse reuerence than if they were to receiue a fierie coale as Esay did in his vision from one of the glorious Seraphims And to this end also doth he kendle them what he can not to be basely minded and affected toward the mysteries as if they were onely bread and wine in that sort to passe through the bellie with other meates but to prepare their hartes and to lift them vp to God as they promised to doe when the Priest saide lift vp your minds and harts they made answere we lift them vp vnto the Lord. These wordes therefore force no reall mutation in the thinges receiued but leade the receiuers from thinking on the weake creatures which they see to the mighty power of Gods graces which they see not and this is done with a religious cōsideration not with any monsterous transubstantiation or annihilation of the sacred mysteries Phi. S. Cyrill of Ierusalem saith Know you for a suerty that this bread which is seene of vs is not bread though the tast find it to be bread but the body of Christ. And so Theophilact It appeareth to bee bread but it is fleshe Theo. The first authors of this speach were late writers as Theophilact or lately set foorth by your fellowes not without great suspition as Cyrill of Ierusalem and the speech it selfe doth somwhat vary from the stile both of the Scriptures and fathers which acknowledge this mysterie to be bread wine The bread which we breake saith Paul is it not the communion of Christes body We all are partakers of one bread As often as you eate of this bread drink of this cup you shew the Lords death til he come Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread and drink of this cup. And our Sauiour in the Gospell speaking of the cup I will not drinke hencefoorth of this fruit of the vine Tertul. Christ hath not euen at this day reiected the water of the creator by which he doth wash his nor the bread by the which hee doth represent his verie body Clemens Alexandrinus This is my blood euē the blood of the grape Cyprian We find it was wine which the Lord called his blood The Lord called his body bread kneaded togither of many cornes and his blood wine pressed out of many clusters of grapes Origen The Lords bread according to the materiall partes thereof goeth into the belly and so foorth by the draught Austen As the men of God before vs did expound this the Lord commended his body blood in those things which are made one of many For the first is kneaded of many cornes into one lumpe the other is pressed of many clusters into one liquour That then which you saw is bread which also your eyes can tell you Cyrill of Alexandria To the beleeuing Disciples Christ gaue peeces of breade saying take eate this is my body Hesychius Hee meaneth that mystery which is both breade and fleshe The phrase it selfe therefore It is not bread sauoreth of later ages and writers and crosseth that course of speeche which both Scriptures and Fathers obserued and yet if you suffer them to declare their owne mindes they may soone be reconciled to the rest Theophilact expressing the same point in other wordes saieth Speciem quidem panis vini seruat in virtutem autem carnis sanguinis transelementat Christ keepeth the shape or kind of bread and wine but changeth thē into the vertue of his body and blood Cyrill openeth his owne saying more at large The bread of the Eucharist after the inuocation of the holy Ghost is nowe no more common bread but the bodie of Christ. In the new Law the heauenly bread and cup of saluation sanctifie both soule and bodie As the bread serueth for the bodie so doth the word for the soule Thinke not therefore of the Sacrament as of bare bread and bare wine it is the body and blood of Christ according to the Lordes owne wordes And although sense tell thee this that is bare bread and wine yet let faith confirme thee neither iudge them by tast but rather by faith assure thy selfe without all doubt that the body and blood of Christ are giuen vnto thee This assertion we grant is right and good and this intent had hee when hee said the bread which is seene is no bread meaning no common no bare bread In which assertion other ancient Fathers concurre with him Iustinus Wee receiue not these thinges as a common vsual bread or accustomed drink but we be taught that the food blessed by praier of the worde receiued from him is the fleshe and blood of that Iesus which tooke fleshe for our sakes Ireneus