Neuers made request that after their Obiections and Aunsweres they would procéede to Resolution on both sides touching the conference the day before According to which motion the Doctors say that to iudge of a Booke whether it be written of the holy scripture or not and likewise to discerne a Canonicall Booke from an Apocriphal or Ecclesiastical we must not rest vpon a priuate or particulare inspiration because a singulare persone can not haue any ordinarie certaintie that it is a true Reuelation of the holy spirite but stay vpon the common consent and accorde of the vniuersal churche And also that God notwithstanding he might haue reuealed to euery one the true knowledge necessary to saluation yet he hathe ordained a certaine meane to attaine to faithe which is a truthe reuealed meaning by the hearing of Gods woord preached by lawfull ministers sent by the pastors of the true churche as appeareth by the â—exte of S. Paule to the Romaines .10 and Ephes 4. So that if they meane to haue faithe and inwarde Reuelation of the knowledge of saluation come by the hearing of Gods woorde lawfully preached by the ministers of the same according to the ordinarie meane of assurance that we haue the inwarde Reuelation it must necessarily be assured that the woorde by which faithe is gotten hath bene preached by the lawfull ministers of the true church so by consequence be assured of the church afore the inward Reuelation obseruing the meane which Iesus Christe folowed They say further that the true and certaine marke of a true inwarde Reuelation is when it is referred to the common consente of the church And that of the contrary euery preteÌ„ded inward inspiration particulare or priuate is a false persuasion if it differ from the common accorde of the churche for Gods spirite is not particulare but common They say also that to take a false Doctrine we must examine it to know whether it be priuate or common like as our Lord in S. Iohn 8. hathe giuen a true marke saying Qui de se loquitur mendatium loquitur he that saith any thing of himselfe and his proper inspiration is a lier In like sorte it is written in Ezechiel Sonne of man Prophecie against the Prophetes of Israel which Prophecie say to suche as Prophecie in their heart heare the woorde of the Lorde So saithe the Lord cursse be vpon the false Prophets who follow their spirite and haue seene nothing And a little after they sée vaine things and a Diuination ful of dreames saying the Lord saythe and the Lord sent them not and yet they haue giuen assuraunce to confirme the woorde of their Prophesie which false Prophets said they had 〈◊〉 inwarde Reuelation and the woorde of God. They woulde also that it be well wayed and considered that the stay of religion grounded and assured vppon an inwarde inspiration is the foundation of many sectes of our time as Anabaptistes and Swinfeldiens who lay their Doctrines vpon priuate â—â—â—elations alleaging proper places to serue them as a grounde of their Doctrine which the ministers inferred yesterday as Ieremie in the .3 Chap. Ioel. 2. and S. Paule 1. Cor. 2. The which being considered by Brentius and Bucer they haue confessed that by the only tradition of the church we were ascertained of the Bookes of the holy scripture according to the Doctrine of the auncientes as S. Ierome who confesseth to haue receiued by tradition of the churche and by the same to haue knowne that there be foure gospels Origen also saithe asmuch who reciting the Canonical Bookes of the newe Testament saith I haue learned by tradition that there be foure gospels neither is there fouÌ„d any auncient catholike that hath stayed his faith to discerne and iudge of Bookes vpon his only priuate and particulare inspiration And S. August lib. confess ca. 25 â—seth these woordes Veritas tua Domine non mea nec illius aut illius sed omnium nostrum quos ad communionem aduocas terribiliter admouensne priuatam veritatem habeamus ne priuemur ca. And touching the Bookes of the olde Testament whiche the Ministers will not receiue as Canonical by the iudgement of their inwarde Reuelation the Doctors auouche that before S. Augustines time or at the least in his time in the vniuersall churche all the Bookes contained in the holy Bible without distinction were holden and receiued as Canonicall according to the testimonie of the Councel of Carthage where S Augustine was present and also the Councell Laodicene the Doctors also saie that if by inwarde inspiration we must iudge of Bookes the Fathers that assisted those Councels had it or at leaste might persuade them selues to haue it with more assurance than many others But where the Ministers saie that by theire inwarde Reuelation they iudge that they are not Canonicall 〈◊〉 Doctors referre to iudgemente who oughte soonest to bâ—â—â—â—eued either the inspiration of the Auncientes receiued by the Churche by so many hundred yeres vntil this time or the priuate and particulare inspiration of the newe Ministers They saie further that they offer to proue that the Aunciente Fathers euen suche as wâ—â—e neare the Apostles time as Irenaeus S. Cyprian Origen S. Ierome S. Augustine and others vse testimonies of Bookes reiected by the Ministers euen in the proofe of the Doctrine against Heretikes yea S. Augustine him selfe in the seconde Booke of Christian Doctrine Chap. 2. puttes all those Bookes amongeste the Canonicalles as also Damascene in the fourthe Booke De Orthodoxa Fide Chap. 18. So that to knowe if a man haue the spirite of God to discerne and iudge of the Bookes of the Scripture it behooues to reste vpon the common consente and accorde of the Churche as being the ordinarie meane of God lefte for that effecte experience also whiche maie be made is a sufficiente Argumente to conuince that the Faithfull by the inwarde inspiration cannot discerne the Canonicall Bookes from the pretended Apocryphall which mighte be easily verefied if there were here at this presente euen somme of the Religion pretended reformed to whom not hauing bene as yet instructed in the diuision of Bookes if those Bookes were presented whiche the Ministers holde for Apocryphal they would not distinguish them in any sort from the other Bookes of the holy Bible And vpon all they conclude that if a man haue Goddes sprite c. vt supra Aunswere Touching the firste Article the Ministers were neuer of opinion as appeares in their former aunsweres that their Religion was grounded vppon theire particulare Reuelations but vpon the woorde of God according as it is sette foorthe in the Writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles the truthe of whiche they saide was moste principally assured by the testimonie and Reuelation of the holy Sprite They saie also that Faithe is not the Truthe in proper speache but the persuasion of the Truthe whiche is taughte vs in the Scripture Like as also this Faithe is not of our owne getting but a pure
made and contained amongst Christians in Baptisme afore there were any Apostolicall wryting and in Baptisme it was proposed to beléeue the saide Créede afore there was entrie into the wrytings or speache therof in the primitiue Churche wrytings were examined whether they were to be receiued or not and the vnderstanding of the same together if a Doctrine were true or false by this Simboll and rule of Faithe and to imitate or confront it with it as Irenaeus Tertullian and others affirme And though it should happen that a man neuer heard but the Simboll without knowing whether there were holy Scriptures or not yet he might beleeue the said Créede and be a true Christian so that he were not infected with other particulare false opinions And of the contrarie if the beleefe of the Créede depended vppon the knoweledge of the Propheticall or Apostolicall wrytings as to vnderstand and be assured of the conformitie that therein is afore wée beleue it onely wise men and such as were wel studied in writinges who woulde assure them selues of the saide conformitie should be bounde to beleue the Symboll or at the leaste assured of the truthe of the same and so there shoulde be fewe Christians Therefore the beléefe of the Créede dependes not vpon the knowledge of the Scriptures By meane whereof the Doctoures holde by tradition of the Churche gouerned by the holy sprite that the Creede is of the Apostles and that there is no doubte thereof In like sorte by the same tradition we muste geue Faithe to it as a Doctrine of the Apostles not written and yet of equall authoritie with that whiche is in their writings notwithstanding we had no knowledge of other Scriptures The Doctoures are very sory that the other parte hath so muche declined to aunswere pertinently and absolutely to these twoo pointes why they proponed onely to shewe what Faithe and authoritie men oughte to attribute to this Symbol and all other Doctrine receiued by Tradition of the Apostles without Canonical writing whiche might haue bene lefte by them by the same meane and reason that is shewed that the Symboll was geuen to the Christians by the said Apostles without that they put it in writing For ende the Doctours persuade suche as shal reade this conference not to amaze or maruel at so many perplexities declining from the true ende of the said two pointes proponed with request to remember the conferences of S. Augustine with the Donatistes and Pelagians whose fashion resembles the presente manner of the Ministers with whom they conferre laying them selues notwithstanding vpon the iudgemente of suche as shal reade the matter of this disputation Resolution of the Ministers WHo affirme according to the former propositions alwaies mētioned by them also the better to confirme the faithe of the Duches that as S. Cyprian writeth it is incertaine whether the Symbol which beares the name of the Apostles was made composed suche one by them or els drawne and gathered of their Doctrine and also why it is called Symbolum whether it be by reason that euery one of them broughte his parte and portion to it or that it is a marke or certaine signe of Christian Religion as touching whiche Regardes it is a thing indifferente for Saluation as hauing alwayes one equall weighte and authoritie whether the Apostles write it or whether it was faithfully gathered of their writings as were also the Symbols aswel of Niceus as of Athanasius of whom the Church neuer doubted that they conteined not a pure Apostolicall Doctrine as shée hathe well and euidently declared in ordeining that the saide Symboll of Nyceus shoulde be openlye published to the people when they assembled for the Communion the same being in obseruation at this day in the Churche of Rome where this Symboll is readde and sunge euery Sonday in the Temples whiche if it conteined not Apostolicall Doctrine it shoulde impugne the 59. Articles of the Councell of Laodicene by whiche it is forbidden to reade in the Churche any thing of Priuate inuention but onely the Doctrine comprehended in the Canonicall Bookes of the Olde and Newe Testament whose number is there made The Ministers doo further affirme that the reason and principall cause of the Faithe which Christians adde to this Créed is the knowledge they haue that it is the pure woord of God and he that teacheth it mainteines also that it is Gods woorde the same appearing by the testimony and writing of S. Paule who after he hath proponed to the Corinthians the Deathe Buriall and Resurrection of Iesus Christe whiche be the principall Articles of the Créede as vpon whiche also our iustification is chiefely founded Addeth this speache that he hathe geuen them that whiche he hathe receiued whiche is that Christe is deade for our sinnes according to the Scriptures and after that he was buried and is risen againe the thirde daye according to the Scriptures Christe him selfe also proposing in like sorte his Deathe and Resurrection to his twoo Disciples alleageth to them the Scriptures for their more assurance saying Oh fonde weake of hart to beleue all things that the Prophets haue pronounced was it not méete the Christ suffred these things and that he entred into his glorie then beginning at Moyses and the other Prophetes he declared to them in all the scriptures the things that were of him selfe In the same chapter appearing to them after his Resurrectiō yea afore the créede was made speaking to them of his death and resurrection for their better assuraunce he laies vnto them the scriptures saying It is so written and it was méete that Christ suffred and rise from death the third day by which wée maie inferre that for the grounde of Faithe and assurance of the Articles of the same there is no better meane than to propone the Scriptures And albeit in the tyme of the Natiuitie of the Churche the Créede was proponed to suche as were Catechised afore the Apostles or Euangelistes had sette downe any thing in writing yet it foloweth not for all that that there were not other scriptures vppon which mighte be founded euery Article of Faithe Whiche to decypher by péecemeale the Article of Creation hathe his fundation vppon the beginning of Genesis The Article of the Almightinesse of God hathe his grounde vppon the 40. of Esaie and many other places of scripture The Article of the Conception of Iesus Christe vppon the vij of Esay For the place of his Natiuitie vppon the v. of Micheas and for the Regarde of the Time vppon the xlix of Genesis and ix of Daniel The Article of his death the Crosse vpon the xxij Psalme xxxv of Esay and ix of Daniel The Article of Resurrection vppon the xvj Psalme the Article of Ascension vppon the xcviij Psalme the Article of the Iudgemente in Daniel xij the Article of his sending the holy ghost in Ioel ij the Article of the Church in Esay 2. and Micheas 4. the Article of Remission of
touching their escapes they are to be conuinced by the simple reading of the bookes Touching the residue of the Ministers resolution containing many iniuries slaunders and wronges against vs we aunswer nothing hauing regarde to the maner of theyr doinges Like as also we consider it should be but paine lost to teache the Ministers who for their instruction esteeme more their particular reuelation than all the doctrine of the vniuersall church and all the Christians together And lastly we pardon them with all our heartes at the wrongs they haue done vs as beyng people estraunged from their full sense and without iudgement which they well declare by the maner of their doing The Doctors obiection touching the Supper against the Aunswer of the Ministers IT appeares sufficiently in the actes of the first dayes arguing why in the beginning of the conferences we touched not the articles of the supper wherein the Ministers do maliciously slaūder vs in saying we refused to enter into the matter of the same as is truly proued as well by our sundry offers made to them to conferre thereof verbally to the ende to aduaunce it with more spéede and so at leysure to set it downe in writing which the Ministers refused as also by our former obiections touching the article of the almightynesse By these we touched the groundes wherupon are builded the errours of the religion pretended reformed against the reall presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the holy Sacrament The same being to be iustified further in that wée obiect to them certayne argumentes agaynst their Supper the rather to make them enter into it To the whiche eyther they haue aunswered nothing at all or at least so impertinentlye that euen the woordes of their aunswer discouer their disposition to flée the combat As yet they continue by their last writings hiding so farre as they can that which they thinke of the supper notwithstanding they haue bene required to aunswer both to purpose and truth But whether they or wée refused the effect standes to iudge For though they wyll not aunswer yet we wyll not forbeare to aduise them and reueale to the whole world the intollerable errours aswell in the Supper as in all the doctrine of the Ministers Who being asked yet dare not confesse and iustifie what hath bene written by the inuenters of their supper But now to begyn to speake of the supper the Ministers mayntaine it celebrated according to the ordinaunce of Iesus Christ and maner with the Apostels vsed in all the primitiue Churche when she floorished and whylest she remained in her purenesse Whereunto we aunswer with this question howe manye worldes they thinke that the doctrine hath remayned in her purenesse touching the Supper and whether as then the Church stood not as pure in the doctrine of al the other Articles as in this Besides whether since that tyme there was not found any place through the whole worlde where the true doctrine of the supper and the other Articles was retayned and preserued As also in what place and by whom from world to world it was preached and aduaunced In these we desire to be satisfied by the Ministers as importing muche bicause that afore Caluin preferred hys Catechisme there was no memorye in any Region of suche doctrine as he taught neither was the supper celebrated in the maner it is now in the reformed Church And we woulde gladlye relieue the Ministers who in their writinges séeme straungelye passioned that we haue sayde that their Supper differs not from a common Banquet sauing that it is woorse as beyng prophane and polluted But to encounter this they make a great speake of all the action of their sayde Supper and by goodlye accessories carying a forme of all pietie they labour to make it highlye commended couering a goodly nothing betwene two platters And of the contrarye to treade downe and deface the most precious sacrifice of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the Masse by tearing in péeces some accessorye of the same as though wée vsed it without reason and signification whiche the Ministers eyther vnderstande not or dissemble not to vnderstande But as thynges ought not to be taken and estéemed by their accessories but according to their value nature and truth so the Ministers haue to foresee that all the sectes standing at this day in all the worlde against the catholike Churche for the matter of the Sacrament vse at least thys brauerie that they do Who if they were asked there is not one of them which would not enforce to proue that their sect approcheth nearer Iesus Christ hys Apostels and the primitiue Churche than the Religion pretended reformed Touching all which we referre our selues to the writinges of the Lutherians Zwinglians Anabaptistes Trinitaries Maister Alasco with other lyke Therefore it is not reasonable by these faire voyces and speeches to preferre the supper of the Ministers afore other sectes with iudgement that it is good holye impoluted and according to gods word but rather to repute it infected and defiled with impietie as couering a dreame in place of truth and giues the accessaries of pietie to impietye and falshoode Neither haue we dispraysed their Supper for the thankes they giue to God or in respect of their confession of sinnes or their preaching if it containe matter of truth or for any other preparatiue But in this haue we named it to be detestable as not containing but common bread and wyne contrary to the ordinaunce of Iesus Christ and yet they attribute vnto it some spirituall effect with other goodly accessaries of pietie the same being a matter of more abominatiō and inuented by Sathan who séekes by suche maner of supper to quenche and abolish the true supper according to the institution of Iesus Christ and rob the faythfull of the fruite and truth of the said true supper in making them giue onely common bread in place of the body and bloud of our sauiour Iesus Christ Here we could recite the wicked accessories as well as they speake of the goodly which are in their supper as the secrete and newe enterprises which are practised vnder colour and shaddowe of the assemblies drawne together at their sayd supper but least the Ministers reproche vs that the Clerke speake of weapons of contributions c. we wyll altogether hold our peace and referre our selues to that which is contenting our selues to deduce certayne causes by the which we maintaine that there is no truth in the sayd Supper according to the institution of Iesus Christ First that in the supper of the Ministers and their lykes there cannot be made any consecration of the matter of the bread wyne which are there proposed and therfore there is not made in the sayd matter anye mutation either before the vse or in the vse or after and by consequence that the bread and wine in that Supper cannot be but common That there is no consecration made in their Supper it
Booke of the Holye Ghoste Chapter 22. whose opinion is that the Aungell whiche appeared to Cornelius was not in the selfe place where Philip was and he whiche of the Aultare spake to Zacharie did not furnishe at the same time he spake to him his Seate and place in Heauen But the Holy Ghoste is in Abacuc and Daniell in Babylon and in Ezechiell vppon the Floudde of Chobar for the Sprite of God replenisheth the Earthe wherein the Prophete crying saithe Whither shall I goe to hide me from thy Sprite where shall I flée to decline from thy face And Dydimus confirming this in his Booke whiche he hathe written of the Holy Ghoste makes this question If saithe he the Sprite of God were a Creature he shoulde haue his substaunce circumscripte and limited as haue all other Creatures whiche are made and created So that as it is that Goddes Sprite replenishes the worlde and is not circumscripte in any place nor lymited so it followeth thereupon that he is God. Vigilius in his Disputation whiche he wrote betwéene Sabellius Photius Arius and Athanasius vnder the personne of Athanasius writes in this sorte By this it maye chiefely appeare that the Sprite of God is God that he is euery where and not conteined in any place as the Prophete writes whither maye I withdrawe my selfe to hide me from thy Sprite By these places wée maye conclude that if a Bodye be not circumscripte termined and closed within certaine lymittes he coulde not be a Creature whiche oughte not only to be vnderstande by other Bodyes but also euen by Iesus Christe as appeareth by Theodorete in his seconde Dialogue saying then the Body of the Lorde is risen againe exempte from all corruption impassible and immortal decked with Diuine glorie adored woorshipped with the Celestial powers And yet albeit he be in this sort qualified he leaues not for all that to be circumscript as he was afore he was glorified whereof it foloweth that being true Body Creature he cannot at one instante be in sundry places Touching their allegations that the examples aforesaide apperteine nothing to the questiō proponed bicause it stretcheth not but to know if God may change the qualities into a Substance the substance remaining The Ministers deny it bicause in the Question there is mention of a Bodye whiche cannot be without his Measures And the measures and Dimensions be not as Qualities and Accidentes which may come to a Body and departe from it without that it be corrupted which is the nature condition of Accidents but they are of their proper Essence so that it is impossible that a Body be a Body but that he be measured circumscripte The first example they produce to confirme their saying is that it may happē that a weighty thing which naturally in respect of his heauinesse enclines downward may be raised on high wherunto the Ministers answere that the same may be in déede by a violēt mouing but this example is nothing pertinent to reuerse that which they haue said bicause such things conteine no contradiction in themselues neither are they contrary to the essence of the thing where they happen for a stone which a man throwes on highe leaues not for al that to be a stone like as also by the same mouing it is not depriued of his weightinesse Touching the Example of the Fire they aunswere that there is one selfe reason bothe of lighte and heauie things and that without any corruption of their Essence their naturall mouings maie be chaunged by force and violence donne to them Touching their allegation of the fire which contrary to his nature that is to skorche and burne refreshed the three Iewes in the Furnace of Babylon they aunswere that the fire for all that was in nothing altered neither touching his Essence nor in respecte of his qualities Whereof the proofe fell oute in that it sparing the sayde thrée Children burnte and consumed the Tormentoures or suche as had office to dresse it By whiche maye be well alleaged that why it did not offende them procéeded not for that his nature or qualitie were in any thing chaunged but onely bicause his action was suspended And where they alleage that two Bodies may be at once in one place prouing the same by that whiche is written in S. Iohn that Christe entred where his Disciples were the doores being shutte The Ministers aunswere that it is not so in the Texte but that the Disciples being assembled in one place Iesus Christe stoode and appeared in the middest of them By which it cannot be inferred that he entred the place where they were without opening the doores nor that he did pearce or penetrate them to make his entrie And it is no lesse likely true that they were open and shutte againe than the doores whiche the Aungell opened shutte againe when he was sente to deliuer S. Peter out of Prison and when he was likewise sente for the deliuery of the Apostles And where they bring in a grosse Body passing throughe a straite place alleaging the example of a Cable throughe the hole of a Néedle the Ministers finde it alleaged to euill pourpose as an argumente founded vppon a thing impossible and saye further that the Doctours haue euill vnderstande the tearme of Camelos whiche is vsurped in the Scripture not for a Cable but for a Camell As is manifeste inoughe to those that are but slenderly exercised in the antiquities of the Hebrewes and as appeareth by the opinion of Angelius Caninius vppon the ende of his Chaldey Grammer Touching the conclusion whiche the Doctors drawe of the former examples it is to euil pourpose and grounded vppon the Antecedentes and premisses which they bring in presupposed and neither as yet confessed by vs nor wil not be in the sense wherein they alleage them for the reasons héere afore declared Touching that which they say against the opinion of the Ministers that one body at one instante can not be in two places yea were it the body of Iesus Christ and that it was neuer written by any the Auncientes nor proponed afore the comming of Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza the Ministers mainteine it was aduouched afore their time as S. Augustine in his Epistle written to Dardanus vsing these termes According to this fourme saith he meaning the corporall fourme of Iesus Christ we must not thinke that it is euery where as also we must vse good héede that in establishing to him his Diuinitie we take not from him the truthe of his bodie And in an other place he saith that by reason of the nature and measure of his body he is in one place of heauen Theodoretus vsing the selfe same spéeche or Phrase in his seconde Dialogue as hathe béene alleaged heere before Like as also Vigilius in his fourthe Booke against Eutiches vseth this Question if it be but a Nature of the Worde and the Fleshe howe comes it that the Fleshe is not in euery place
the shut doores by the Omnipotencie of God. S. Ierome in the place noted by the Doctors writes manifestly that the body pierced the shut doores euen as the Poetes persuade that the sight of Lynceus pierced the wals without opening to sée through The said S. Ierome at that time did argue vpon the nature of the body which the Bishop of Ierusalem infected with the Heresie of Origen helde was not true in Iesus Christ after his Resurrection bicause he had passed through the shut doores coÌ„trary to the nature of a body to whoÌ„ S. Ierome as also other ancients persuades that that actâ— nothing derogates the nature of the body as procéeding of a supernaturall vertue affirming no lesse in his first Booke against Iouinian in this phrase Iesus entred the doores being shut quod humanoruÌ„ corporum natura non patitur And so with others he puttes the myracle in the body of Iesus Christ It is moste true that S. Augustine in thrée Bookes at the leaste vseth expresse opinion that this bodye passed throughe the shut doores and that as the same was wrought by Gods power aboue the nature of Bodyes so the Heretikes for all that ought not to denie the true Body of Iesus Christe this he speakes in his Booke de Câ—uitate Dei besides his place de Agone Christiano and the Epistle ad Volusianum already alleaged Epiphanius in his first Booke in the Heresie 20. and in the second Booke 64. againste the Origenistes declares that it is but a spirituall bodye meaning that he loseth nothing of his corporall substance but changeth and draweth to him newe qualities and spiritual perfections conuenient to Sprites as to passe throughe the walles without opening giuing example of the bodye of Iesus Christe after his Resurrection who pearced and passed throughe the doores being shutte And so iudgeth with others that the myracle was done in the body of Iesus Christe as pearcing the shutte doores as a Sprite albeit he was a true Body Cyrillus Alexandrinus determines also with others that this myracle happened in the body of our Lorde who by the same woonder marched aboue the waters contrary to the nature of a body by the power of God reprehending al such as stoode in any ielous suspition that Christes body was not Naturall By al these authorities the foure fundations afore proponed are true and therefore it is too greate an impudencie to séeke to corrupt the intente and faithe of so many Aunciente and Learned Christians to introduce a confusion of new interpretations For besides the diuersitie of Caluin and Beza the Ministers auouche twoo others as firste that the Angell opened the doore as if Iesus had not had the power to open it himselfe or had needed other opening The other is that he made his opening where he woulde by which diuersities the Ministers giue open declaration that they knowe not whereupon to reste And whiche woorse is they coulde not alleage one onely Aunciente as Authoure of their fiction or that is contrary to all the other since the Primitiue Church it serues them to nothing to alleage that the iron doore in the Actes of the Apostles opened to S. Peter of himselfe for the Doctors did neuer denie it only we said that the Scripture spake not of the doore of the prisone And if at the entrie of Iesus Christe the doores had bene so opened the Euangelist had as easily graunted it as he said they were shutte and as S. Luke said that this doore of iron opened of himselfe There is no difficultie that the firste that doubted of the body of Iesus Christ in this world did not agrée of the place touching the doores with the other Christians And all be it they thoughte to serue and aide themselues with it in the mainteining of their heristes as with all the other miracles hapned in the body of Christe aboue nature yet the Auncients neuer denied this facte nor the other like to it for feare to giue occasion of erroure to the Heretikes but they declared and distinguished what was the nature of the said body and that which hapned to him by the omnipotencie of God The Christians for any herisie did neuer abandon truthe albeit the Heritikes haue sometimes abused it But now seeing Christes body passed thorowe the doores without opening it is certaine that two bodies haue bene in one place and that they may be so by which we haue well proued our proposition which without either scripture or auncient testimonie the Ministers denie Touching the birth of Iesus Christe without breaking of the Virgine we say that a great part of the Auncientes produced for the place of the doores holde that this miracle also was done in the body of our Lord and not in the body of the Virgine sauing in that shée remained in hir integritie without breaking or opening And for their reason the Auncients haue alleaged the scripture Ecce virgo concipiet pariet and Ezechiel porta haec clausa erit as also S. Ambrose recites in his Epistle .80 wherin is contained a councel which S. Ambrose did assist determining againste Iouinian and other heritikes that virginitie and integritie remained in the mother of God in hir deliuerie S. Augustine repeating the same in the place alleaged by the Doctoures in his first Booke against Iulian Chap. 2. And where the ministers say that the virgin should not haue loste hir virginitie though our Lord had issued out as other men doe in this they are condemned of heresie by the Auncients who note Iouinian to derogate the virginitie as holding opinion with the ministers to whom the Doctors make this question what miracle they would acknowledge in the birthe of our Lord as touching his body and the virginitie of his mother if he came from hir as other men do from their mothers as the Ministers write And touching that which they alleage of Tertullian Origen S. Ambrose S. Ierome the Doctors say that Tertullian and Origen held suche heresie and many others which were reproued afore Iouinian of this they haue bin coÌ„demned with him his consorts But for the respecte of S. Ambrose it is apparant that he beléeued the contrary as wel by the Councel which he assisted as by that which he writes in his Booke de institutione Virginis wherin we haue to interprete his woordes that Christus vuluam aperuerit not that it was by breaking but by effecte of generation and production of his true body out of the bellie of his mother by miracle and vertue supernaturall in suche sorte that euen as his Conception was miraculous so also was his birthe And aperire vuluam is a phrase and manner of spéeche in the Scripture as to say and name the firste borne in what sort he might haue bene borne And touching S. Ierome he saithe nothing of the breaking but only that the body came out bloudie as he was in the wombe of his mother to be bloudy is not required breaking of the mother
thing which is séene Neither is it lesse harde that suche a thing be done than that two bodyes be penetrate We must not forgette that oftentimes the scripture in the appearings and spirituall visions vseth this language that the Heauens were open and yet in suche cases there was but spirituall vision and likewise but spirituall appearing And as the Ministers séeke to take the rigoure of the woorde opening of the Heauens euen so they must not note it straunge if we wrest in like rigoure the penetration of the Heauens specially in the Article of the Ascention where is Question of the body of Iesus Christe which had already pierced bodyes more impenetrable than the Heauen which pointe of penetration of the Heauen we referre to be more amplie handled an other time as nowe to auoide tediousnesse Touching the eight and twentieth Article where the ministers againste expresse scripture defend obstinately that God of his power can not bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eye of a néedle we can not a little maruell bothe at their blindnesse séeming to sée nothing in the midde day and at their frowarde obstinacie By which as we can not iudge that they vnderstand not wel their fault but sinne euen against their conscience oppugning the truthe by them well knowne so it séemes God suffereth this to happen to them in this text and place of the scripture so manifest to the ende that by this Article the world may vnderstande howe farre more hardie they are to giue false vnderstandings of scriptures more obscure than this yea in the matter of the Auncient Christians which are against them But to the ende the world vnderstand their great wrong to denie that our Lorde can bring to passe that a Camel or cable passe thorowe the hole of a néedle we obiecte that it were impossible to God to saue a riche man vsing this Argument taken of the texts of the Gospell it is more impossible or harde that God saue a riche man than to bring to passe that a Camel or cable passe thorow the hole of an Néedle God can not bring to passe of his omnipotencie as the Ministers say that a Camell enter the hole of a néedle then he can not of his almightinesse make that a riche man be saued and enter into the kingdome of Heauen The Maior is of the Scripture the Minor is confessed by the Ministers and the consequence is necessary and according to all Philosophie he that can not doe the moste easiest can not doe the moste hardest The Auncientes also haue expounded withoute gaine saying the present Scripture as Origen in his Homilie vppon this place saying it is possible that a Camell enter the eie of a néedle not for all that that it be possible as in respecte of men but to God like as the manner by which suche things may be done is knowne to God and his Sonne Iesus Christe and to him to whome it is reuealed S. Augustine likewise in his Booke de spiritu littera Cap. 1. and 5. writes in this sorte to Marcellinus it séemes to thée an absurde thing when I tell thée that a man may be withoute sinne albeit there is none suche founde except Iesus Christe thoughte it to seeme absurde to thée that a thyng may be done whereof no Example can be shewed séeing as I beléeue thou doubtest not at all that it was neuer done that a Camell entred the eye of a néedle and yet it is said that suche a thing is possible to God. By their Aunswere to the nine and twentie Article it may easily be knowne that they beguile and abuse their Disiples making them beléeue by faire woordes and writings that Really in the Supper they receiue the bodie of Iesus Christe euen he that issued out of the wombe of the virgine and was putte vppon the Crosse for the restauration of mankinde And they séeke to make to vnderstande that these which put not to the Sacrament which they call of the Supper wyth the Breade and Wine but some Spirituall effecte onely as redemption iustice sanctification eternall life and other giftes and benefites which Iesus Christe brings to hys chosen diminish the excellencie dignitie of the same Sacrament and that they be Zuinglians yea and that ouer and aboue suche spirituall effectes it muste be beléeued that the body of Iesus Christe is truely receiued in the Supper and yet they feede an other opinion in their braine For when they are pressed to Argue not being able to sustaine that fantasticall presence confessed in their writings they make themselues Zuinglians and returne to the spirituall presence of Iesus Christe in the Supper the same being as muche to say that bisides the Breade and Wine they receiue some spirituall effecte and not Really the body as the Ministers holde in the presente Aunswere which as they make manifest by that they recite of the Apostle S. Paule so by the same may be gathered what is their opinion touching the supper which is that the body of our Lord Iesus Christ is not Really but onely by spirituall effecte in the heartes of the Faithfull For the Galathians by the hearing of the preaching of S. Paule did not receiue Really the body of Iesus Christe crucified but onely had an imagination of the Crosse and Passion of Iesus Christe and receiued onely the frute of their Faithe That is by that meanes they were iustified and sanctified before God. The Allegation also which the Ministers make of S. Cyprian tendes to this ende to shewe that in the Supper is receiued onely certaine effectes spirituall which notwithstanding Allegorically are signified by these woordes to embrace the Crosse of Iesus Christe to sucke his bloude c. wherein they denie albeit againste the intente of S. Cyprian in his Sermon of the Supper the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christe The Doctoures confesse that the Argumente which they haue made tendes to the Caluinistes and not to the Zuinglians neither did they thinke that the ministers woulde otherwayes iudge of this Sacrament than Caluine Beza and the other ministers who vaunte them selues to be ministers of the churche of the Caluinistes which they call reformed But those which exhibited to the Bishops being at Poissi the Cōfession touching this Sacrament vsed an other maner of spéech They without difficultie confessed Really the Bodye of Iesus Christ to be present in the Supper which at this daie the Ministers denie with the Doctoures conferentes And as farre as the Doctoures can iudge the Ministers be come of Caluinistes Allemanistes which suche wil not wel disgest as mainteine the Doctrine of the Churche whiche they call Reformed séeing their principal supposts faile them at néed as vnable to aunswere one Argumente obiected by the Doctours as affirming in their aunswere to be so farre illumined with the Holy Sprite which makes them vnderstande and knowe al things Touching the Article folowing they reueale openly their present opinion touching
the presence of Christes Body in the Sacramente bicause they saie that the faitheful receiue no more in the time of the Gospel than the Ancientes before the Lawe and vnder the Lawe And it is certaine the Ancients receiued not Really the body of Iesus Christ which was not then formed so that we muste conclude that vnder the Gospell is not receiued Really the Body of Iesus Christe in the Sacrament which the Ministers cal the Sacrament of the Supper To the 31. Article they aunswere not as in déede they coulde neuer answere And necessarily they must confesse that in vertue of theire Faithe they doo that whiche implies contradiction for they mainteine a thing in one instant one place to be present and not present neither doth their spirituall or rather fantasticall presence any thing seeing according to their Doctrine the body cannot be present but with his dimensions Locally Diffinitiuely and Corporally otherwayes it were to take cleane away or corrupte the body And the manner to be there spiritually cannot make that the body be not there otherwayes they saye falsely that it is present in the Supper and abuse the worlde wherefore it is necessary that if the body be there yea spiritually if their Doctrine be true of the nature of a body that the body of Iesus Christe be Corporally Diffinitiuely and Locally in the Supper Besides séeing he is absent according to their confession it folowes that he is not there present And as to conclude the Ministers saie he is there and that he is not there so for an absolute solution without entring into the principall of the argument they thinke to escape with obiecting to vs certaine woordes of briefe which wee haue not yet seene which wée thinke they haue found in certaine Breuiaries of Monkes as that thei remember wheÌ„ they were in the Couent they vsed so to chaunt and say But albeit such things were found in the Breuiaries vsed in the Romish Church yet such manner of speach might be defended in the sense which the Auncients haue giuen when they said the Apostles Conficiunt Corpus Christi Like as also the scripture saith that they baptize they forgiue sinnes saue those whom thei conuert which is vnderstand as Ministers of God who of his authority and as Maister baptiseth forgiueth sinnes and iustifieth the faithful persons Where the Ministers maruel that the Doctors cal faith humaine vertue considering the great woonderfull effects it woorketh the Doctours replie that they haue no great occasion of woonder séeing that all woorke so long as it is in man that it woorkes there with God is reputed humaine as also the scripture cals the Faith of man the woorke of man The Doctours delare to the Ministers that according to their custome resting alwayes vpon smal things they folow not that which is the principal in the mater not vnderstanding or faining not to vnderstand where lies the difficultie of that which is handled as they doo in their aunswer vppon the Argument proponed by the Doctours by which they obiect that the Ministers by their faith whether it may be called Diuine or Humaine may doo more than God can to whiche Obiection the Ministers without entring to the pointe aunswere with songs In the 32 Article thei passe ouer very lightly many obiections made by the doctors wherin whether ther be superfluity or repetition or whether they be impertineÌ„t the iudgment remaines to the Reader notwithstaÌ„ding al the the doctors wil not forbeare once againe to require theÌ„ to bring foorth some place of scripture to ground that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places séeing this coÌ„sequence is too foolish vaine God cannot lye he cannot then bring to passe that a body be in twoo places for so must thei subsume Wel God hath said ordeined that one body cannot be in two places then he cannot make that it be so but they shall neuer teach the truth of the assumption or Mâ—nor propositioÌ„ the contrary wherof hath bene verified sufficiently by many testimonies of the Scripture We demaund also that the Ministers produce some Ancient yea a man euer reputed Catholike that durst pronouÌ„ce that God could not bring to passe that one body be in twoo places But in all their answeres they coulde not bring foorthe any of that opinion excepte S. Augustine albeit falsely alleaged bothe in respecte of the Letter and for the sense of the Letter neither will wée cease to vrge aswell the Ministers as al others that there is founde neither place of Scripture nor Booke of any Auncient that God cannot bring to passe that one body be in twoo places Touching the laste Article wée are fully determined to shewe by the pure and expresse Woorde of God interpreted by the common consent of all Antiquitie that our Lord hath instituted the Sacramente and Sacrifice of the Aultare And wée wil teache the effecte and vertue of the Masse according to the Institution and Ordinaunce of Iesus Christe making also to vnderstande that the Ministers haue polluted and defiled the Sacramentes instituted by Iesus Christe And lastely that the Supper mainteined by the Ministers is no Sacramente in any sorte but a prophanation of Holy things conteining execrable Blasphemies which al the worlde ought to abhorre Sondaye the xxij of Iuly the yeere aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the writing of the Doctours sente to them by the Duke de Neuers xxij of Iuly aboute fiue of the clocke in the Euening 1566. THe Ministers afore they enter into particulare Answere to the Obiections and Reproches of the Doctours séeing in all their speaches withoute any occasion they laie vppon them imputation of blasphemie thinke good in their beginning to tel them that albeit thei haue heaped iniuries vpon them yet they holde themselues neuer the more wronged and muche lesse to be guiltie in blasphemie bicause they repute them for such no more than our Lorde Iesus Christe in the iudgemente and opinion of Caiphas the soueraigne Sacrificator and S. Stephen vppon whom the saide crime was vrged by the enimies of truthe and also Naboth notwithstanding he was innocent for it is a custome common to suche as hate the truthe and the light to blaspheme that which they vnderstande not and so yeelde to their proper and naturall furie as S. Peter Iude write that impudently they denie things moste apparante without shame confesse others that are straunge and obscure the same being offered of the Doctoures to the Ministers of whom they will heare nothing with iudgemente nor iudge their Doctrine vprightly but séeme in all the course of this Disputation either to confront them generally without respecte or at least to giue sentence without examination that what so euer they produce is either lyes or matter of blasphemie And albeit the Ministers handling the Omnipotencie of God according as they haue learned by the consent and contentes of the Scriptures agrée alwayes that he is
place Touching the fourth and fifth Articles to know whether the Ministers haue imposed any vntruth vpon the Doctors they send the Readers to the actes of the former conference as also to learne in what sense and to what ende the Ministers haue alleaged the Ancients which they may more easily perceiue by the reading and diligent obseruation of theire places and sentences there inferred Touching the sixth Article wherin the Doctours had rather confesse their Canons to be false than in deferring the authoritie of the same to auowe the body of Iesus Christ to be true and being true that it is necessary that it be in one certaine place the Ministers answere that by the obseruation of S. Augustines place from whence is taken the saide Canon it is easie to iudge that the terme Oportet is muche more conuenient there than this woorde Potest To the eighth Article the Ministers answere that a substance without quantitie neither is or can be any waie a body whilest it is and remaines so and the reason is bicause they are twoo diuers predicaments that of the substance that of the quantitie vnder the which one selfe thing for one selfe respecte cannot be in any sorte comprehended Besides Christe alleageth no other reason to declare his body was not a sprite but that he had members and partes which bicause of their measures mighte be handled and touched Wherupon it foloweth that without that a substance can not be a body And touching the difference that shuld rest according to the opinion of the Doctors betwéene our soules and bodies exempt from quātitie if the same were possible we say that albeit they were substaunces different bothe in number and species yet they shuld be like touching genus and that bothe the one and other should be contained vnder the kinde of substance not corpored The ministers passe ouer the ninthe Article as a matter but of repeticion of woordes and sufficiently aunswered alreadie Touching the tenth Article we say in the first place that the consequence whereof there is Question can not otherwayes be defended by the Doctoures than by the rule that saithe of one absurditie may be inferred all things we complaine bisides of the time which the Doctoures make vs lose in the reading of so many matters already aunswered and which seeme so often repeated by them for none other ende than to fill paper and persuade the world that they do something For in the first place the Euangelist saithe not as the Doctoures pretend that Christe entred not by the shutte doores but only that he came the doores being shutte so that he speakes not there in any sort of the manner of his entrie nor how the doores were opened nor yet of any other parte of the house by the which he entred And as al the sayings of the doctors cannot be founded neither on the scripture nor any authoritie of the Auncients by them alleaged who stand rather againste than with them So for conclusion they haue no other ground of their opinion than their singulare coniectures and imaginations wyth sinister interpreting the wrytings of the Auncients to whose Faith they would constraine and assubiect the Church to the ende that hauing laid this foundation they may builde afterwardes thereupon all their absurdities and erroures which they meane to deduce And where they presupposed that when Iesus entred the doores shut when he walked vpon the waters and came out of his graue those miracles were done rather in his person than in other things Iustine wrytes the contrary that without any mutation happening in his body nor in the body of S. Peter he brought to passe by his diuine vertue that the Sea againste his nature serued him as a way As also S. Hillarie saith to the same respecte that by his power he did all things passible with whom S. Iohn Chrysostome consents as attributing all that to a power Diuine and confessing frankely that he was ignorant of the manner and fashion thereof By meane wherof the Ministers maruell much of the presumption of the Doctors to offer to determine a thing left indecided by the scripture the Auncients and touching the which according to the wise opinion of S. Hillarie bothe the sense and the woorde do faile and the truthe of the facte excéedes the capacitie of humaine reason How then dare the Doctors say so impudently that Christes body passed thorowe the doores that there was penetration of Dimensions and that two bodies were in one place séeing that of all this there is not one only sillable either in the scripture or witnessed by the Auncientes who confesse as is saide that their vnderstandinge and senses were to weake to comprehend or declare the reason of suche a Misterie Touching the birthe of Iesus Christe the ministers stand vpō the scripture whose cleare opinion is that the virgin was bigge bellied shée broughte foorthe and was deliuered shée gaue sucke and that in the deliuery aperta est vulua And yet dothe none of all this derogate or preiudice the state of hir Virginitie or integritie the same consisting in thys one pointe that shée neither knewe nor was knowne of any man. Wée say moreouer that in beléeuing this we folowe the scripture and by consequence can not erre nor be Heretikes neither likewise any other that assubiecte their sense to Gods woorde as the Auncientes by vs alleaged haue done in this In the Article folowing proponed by the Doctoures touching the manner of Christes Resurrection it containes nothing but coniectures and reproches with superfluous and weary repeticions which we haue already satisfied at the full by our former Aunsweres And what so euer folowes after in the writings of the Doctoures are but wrongs and iniuries in place of reasons and argumentes the same being the laste shifte of contencious wittes who being destitute of reason and not able to yelde to truthe defende themselues with clamoures and sinister impositions The Doctoures had some reason in their interpretation of the woorde Aphantos if there folowed autois but the Euangeliste saithe apantoin shewing clearely that the interpretation of the said place and vnderstanding of S. Ambrose in which the ministers do settle is better than the exposition of the Doctoures Touching the opening of the Heauens we Aunswer that they coulde not faile vsing the phrase of the Scripture who saithe clearely that at the Baptisme of Iesus Christe the Heauens were deuided and open when S. Stephen was stoned And as we take it for an imagination of man to applie to the aire the signification of the Heauen So we thinke it should be to diminishe the maiestie of God and Iesus Christ raised aboue all the Heauens to establishe the throne of his Maiestie so lowe as in the aire Neither is there any resemblaunce or likelihoode in the saying of the Doctoures touching the being of two bodyes in one place and the persuasion of the Ministers of the sighte of S. Stephen which stretched euen to the Heauens
one Body to be in diuerse places the Ministers vsed no other reason to withstande it than that al this was contrary to the Order established in the worlde touching the nature of the Bodye which as it cannot be vnderstande but of the common order wée sée in nature so the Doctoures haue therefore broughte in againste them that God cannot doo a myracle contrary to the order established in the worlde taking it as the Ministers haue declared in their former answeres against the order of nature as knowing for our partes that the Ancients obserued not this difference aboue nature or contrary to nature which appeareth by Tertullian heretofore alleaged where is saide that God can bring to passe contrary to nature that a man flée aswell as a byrde But wee wil not stay vppon rigour of woordes but apply to the Ministers with whom wée conferre who cal a woorke against the order established in the world a body to be in diuers places bicause it impugnes the common disposition and property of bodyes by which reason the Doctours holde that al other myracles ought also to be accompted contrary to the order established in the worlde bicause they are against the common disposition and property of nature And folowing stil the vnderstanding which the Ministers now giue of the order established in the world for the estate and disposition which God hath appointed conserues enterteines al things by his eternal prouidence and immoueable wil to guide al things directly and prouide that no confusion happen in his woorkes Here the Ministers committe eftsoones a new blasphemy against Gods Omnipotency for he may wholy chaunge alter destroy such order as he hath established in the world albeit he wil neuer doo it and raise a new world more perfecte than this And if it were so that he could doo nothing contrary to this order his power were terminable and limited for he coulde not doo but certaine effectes according to the order which he had established in the worlde which should happen not by the repugnancy of the Creatures but bicause God shoulde binde euen his owne handes And so contrary to the Scripture his hande should be shortened and his power restrained and lymited from which blasphemy flowe infinite others as shal be well declared by vs vpon occasion and due oportunitie Touching the seconde and thirde Blasphemies noted by the Doctours the Ministers say they haue satisfied in one woorde by a newe interpretation of the order of the world whiche fals oute nothing to pourpose to dissolue the Arguments produced by the Doctours And the Ministers passe ouer the places of Scripture alleaged which open the Blasphemy and dissemble the contradiction of the Doctrine with Caluines opnion touching Gods prouidence in the order established in the world like as also they spare to answere our obiection that from the third Blasphemy many others doo flowe fearing least in confessing them they heape not blasphemy vpon blasphemy by that meane make their Doctrine hateful to al the world To aunswere the fourth Blasphemy the Ministers vse a distinction of the Will of God whiche may be considered in twoo sortes the first is called Wil knowne by signes and the other a will of his good pleasure According to the firste they confesse that God can doo more than he wil and not according to the seconde which is as they say equall with the power of God and hid and vnknowne to men which distinction if it ought to haue place we say that the fundation vpon which they fixe the truth pretended of this proposition God cannot bring to passe that one body be in diuerse places is wholy reuersed For they will haue Goddes power measured according to his wil not according to the seconde which is hid from men so that it must néedes be according to the firste by which they confesse that God can doo more than he wil. By whiche it foloweth that their Rule which they haue giuen to measure the power of God is false for it cannot be measured by his wil séeing he can doo more than he will. The Doctours saye further that the Ministers ought not require them to proue that God would that one body were in twoo places to shewe that he could doo it for the Doctours would obiecte to them that to teache that God can doo any thing we muste not proue that afore he woulde doo it séeing that according to their confession God can doo more than he wil. Wée say further that séeing the wil of God appeares not to vs but by signes woords effectes and that the order established of God in the worlde according to his prouidence which the Ministers agrée withall is hid to men that the Ministers cannot affirme and shewe that God hath established such an order in the world that one body cannot be in diuers places for it behoued them to teache and instructe of such ordinaunce of God and declaration of his will. Many times they haue bene required to preferre onely one place of Scripture where such wil of God is manifest or where it is saide that he cannot bring to passe that one body be in diuerse places Touching the place of Tertullian wee leaue to euery directe iudgemente the vnderstanding of the same And as for Theodorete we finde him euil alleaged by the Ministers as woorking more against them than he aides them For wher he writes that we muste not say indeterminately that God can doo al things comprehending therein both good and euil in this he makes no restraint of Goddes Almightinesse but of the contrary he amplyfieth it bicause that not to be able to doo euil things is a vertue power as hath bene heretofore amply recited Where the Ministers require vs to shewe that God would that one Bodye be in diuerse places wée aunswere that they are twoo different questions if God can doo it and if he would doo it And séeing it maye be confessed of all Christians as in déede it ought to be that the power is in God it may be easie to proue the Will by the woorde of the Supper and the Ascension which they of the Religion pretended refourmed haue in custome to depraue and wreste by the impossibilitie which they faine to be in God to put one body in twoo places The Doctors leaue also to the iudgement of the Readers whether the ministers haue alleaged S. Augustine to pourpose or not like as concerning the quantitie whether it is essentiall to be a bodye or not wée neuer called it in doubte that it was not essentiall speaking of a bodye as the Philosophers doo In predicamento quantitati◠〈…〉 is to knowe if it be 〈…〉 certaine place 〈…〉 it is not 〈…〉 â—dy w◠〈…〉 d◠〈…〉 as that which they alleage to confirme that our Lorde is in a place aboue the Heauens is too friuolous séeing that by the same reason they might conclude that the Diuinitie shoulde be circumscripte And there be Aduerbes signifying place when
only he could do it but also he would do it and so consequently are determined to refute all the blasphemies heresies of the supposed reformed side which are contained in the supper to the ende also we be not thought to eschue the combate of the supper the Masse as the ministers haue reproched to vs protesting notwithstanding to kéepe in meaning that after we haue concluded resolued vpon this matter to returne to the examination of the moÌ„strous errors of the ministers which containe great numbers against the other Articles of the Créede which the ministers feare by all likelihoode in that they are not willing we pursue the order begon as foreseeing that in the next conference we wold open vnto them an other blasphemie maintained by the reformed church against the bountie of God according to Caluines doctrine which is that God works in the reprobate the euill sinne which they coÌ„mit which is an execrable atheisme no lesse than the denial of gods omnipoteÌ„cie and in like sort as such as shal read these coÌ„ferences if they continue to the end discussing of the ministers errors their religion against al the articles of the Créede shall maruel to vnderstand the absurdities blasphemies discending from them so yet there is an other point the drawes the ministers to demaund the disputation of the supper which is that they haue al their matter redily prepared by many of their sect which haue written therof as especially they will not want the great Booke of Peter Martir by which they are furnished with sundrie infamous obiections certaine texts of the Ancients either cut of depraued or euil applied to impugne in shew the truth of the body in the sacrament but to the defense of all their other errors they are very slenderly prouided wherin their coÌ„science is a sufficient witnesse that by the scripture iudgmeÌ„t of general councels coÌ„mon consent of the authorities of the ancients they are coÌ„uinced condeÌ„ned of their errors against the said Créede But to enter into the supper of the ministers we say it is a prophane eating drinking not differing from the coÌ„mon eating drinking sauing that it is so much the worse as they abuse the holy institution of the supper of Iesus and pollute and defile such their banket withal impietie blasphemie we maintaine also that they do great wrong to the sacrament of Iesus Christe to attribute falsly to suche their banker so prophane and defiled the name of sacrament And to the ende to proue it more cleare we aske them if they receiue a common doctrine allowed not only in the catholike church but also of all the sects which are separated froÌ„ it the same is that in the confection of sacramentes there be two things essentiall and necessary the matter or the element and the woorde Secondly what word is necessary with the element to coÌ„stitute a sacrament namely that which they cal the sacrament of the supper and whether they must vse certain woords or not Thirdly if the woorde haue any vertue or efficacie in this sacrament and what And if it worke any thing in the matter of bread and wine Fourthly whether by the same woord the consecration be made of the matter of the sacrament or not In the fifth place if by the woord there be not made consecration of the matter that is howe the same consecration is made and by what vertue the sacrament is made For the sixth if bisides the bread wine and the spirituall graces benefites of Iesus Christ is receiued in the supper really the true body bloud of Iesus Christe in his propre substance not only in spirituall effect vpon this Article we require of the ministers an open confession of faithe We ask further if in receiuing the bread afore they take the wine they receiue by the eating of the bred the body bluâ— of Iesus Christ or only the body to beâ—â—â—rt if they admit that which the diuines cal a concomitance of the body bloud of Iesus Christ We aske also if the supper bisides the assurance it giues them of participation in the flesh of Iesus Christ in their redemption do woorke in them reâ—ission of sinne We aske lastly if by the supper there is receiued any thing which can not be receiued oute of the Supper or if withoute taking of breade to goe to the Supper or to assist it may be receiued as muche of the body and graces of Iesus Christ as if they did assist the supper We will debate afterwards the other Articles contained in the laste pamphelet of the ministers bicause the former demaundes are to be first examined as grounds of the other Articles proponed by the ministers For the rest after the supper of the ministers is confuted and the Real presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the sacrament confirmed we will procéede by order and withoute confusion to teache clearely by the pure and moste expresse woorde of God that the Masse was instituted said by Iesus Christe and that also he commaunded his Apostles to say it which they did according to the ordinaunce of their Maister That the Masse is a true sacrifice of the Euangelical law That suche as reiecte the Masse and admit no outwarde sacrifice in the Church nor priesthoode are without true law and without true Religion and therefore worse than Idolatrers That the Masse is of value to obtaine remission of sinnes fauoure and grace of God and that it is of value bothe for the quicke and the dead That it is no abuse in the Church if the Priest communicate alone in the Masse when the assistantes will not communicate with him That suche commit horrible blasphemie which call the woorshipping of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament the worshipping of breade and wine and falsly doe they call such veneration of the body of Iesus Christ idolatrie To be short there is nothing in the masse as it is celebrated in the Church at this day which is not good and holy in it selfe and conformable to the woorde of God. We require the ministers to Aunswere to the demaunds héere before written pertinently clearly and by order Sunday .28 of Iulie the years aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the vvryting of the Doctors sent to them by the Duke of Nyuernois the .28 of Julie .1566 about .7 of the clocke in the Euening THe Doctors in the beginning of their writing reproche vs as that in our complainte against them we imitate the Donatistes wherin they iustifie oure former iudgement and opinion of them that the moste parte of their wrytings swarmed more with matters of repeticion iniuries scoffes and inuectiues than with argumentes and good reasons like as also the example of the Donatistes becomes them farre better than vs bicause the Donatistes soughte to restraine the name of the Churche who comprehendes vniuersally all the chosen and Faithfull that eyther
caÌ„ change the order which he hath established in nature then he caÌ„ also bring to passe that one bodie at one time be in many places we denie the consequence and by this reason suche a case would not only chaunge the order but also woulde intangle contradiction which euen by the Confession of the Doctors is out of the omnipotencie of God. In the Article folowing they doe the same which they reproche in vs as darkening that which we clearely proponed in our last wryting by meane whereof if they will that we Answere them at large let them vnfolde it better Where the Doctors accuse vs to haue malitiously concealed this woord place in the matter of circumscription of a body measured we say it was not néedeful to vse that woord expresly there bicause there is no man so ignorant who vnderstanding that a body is circumscripte inferreth not immediatly that then he is comprehended in a certaine place Touching the Camell if they suffice not with that hathe bene already saide let him read againe S. Ieromes opinion in his firste Booke againste the Pelagians who expounding the woords of Iesus Christe saithe as foloweth in this the Lord hath not saide that which might be done but hath compared one impossibilitie with an other for as a Camel caÌ„ not enter the hole of a needle so a rich man shal not enter into the kingdome of heauen or if thou shewe me that a rich man entreth there it shall folowe also that a Camell may passe thorowe the hole of a needle doe not alleage to me Abraham and others whom we reade in the olde Testament to be riche and being suche did enter into the kingdome of heauen bicause they vsing their riches well and employing them to good woorkes did cease by that meane to be riche thus it is written in S Ierome So that as it is necessary by his opinion that for the saluation of the riche man there be a chaunge in his heart and that he forbeare to be riche to the ende to enter into the kingdome of heauen so there muste be mutation in the Camell and he to chaunge his proportion to make him passe thorowe the eie of a néedle Touching the Article folowing we say that with gods grace we can discerne the light froÌ„ darknesse dreames froÌ„ mater of truth the same being the occasion that we cannot approue either the argumentes or the conclusions of the Doctours touching one body to be in many places at one instant being most assured by good and certaine testimonies of the Scripture that all that they go about to proue proceedes not from other where than of the spirite of errour and lyes Who by this meanes labours to retayne the impietie and idolatrye which heretofore he hath established in the world to the destruction almost of all Christendome Touching the Verbe Diâ—rchestaâ— the Doctors finde them selues somewhat troubled to saue their penetracion whych they cannot any way ground vpon the proper signification of that tearme neither yet vpon any authority of the scripture as hath bene to them by the places heretofore produced To proue that faith comes partlie of our selues and not wholy of God the Doctors alledge that no man beleues nisi volens which is that no man beleues but willingly we answer that vnder correction of our Maisters that is to euyll purpose bicause suche wyll and consent are of God who workes in the faithfull the wyll and well doyng the same being very well taught by S. Augustine in one of hys Epistels where he saith that when God cals the faithfull to saluation he findes in them no good wil at al but that he makes and creates it in their heartes if he meane to finde it there That which the Doctors alledge of S. Paule that we worke with God serues no way to their purpose For the Apostle speaketh therof the Minister not meaning there other thing than that which he writes more clearely to the Corâ—â—â—â—â—â—s in these wordes we are Embassadours of Christ as if God exhorted by vs And that which they adde that none of the auncient Doctors haue taught that a body cannot bée in diuers places at one time we saye they haue As our former writinges haue proued as being alledged in the textes of S. Augustine ad Dardanum and in the .30 treatise of S. Iohn We aunswer onely to two pointes of the aduertisement of the Doctors The first is that our sermons our writings the discipline obserued in our Churches the censures wee make of the slaunders there committed the care we haue to discouer reprehende and correct them the payne we take to reforme what is there disordered the publike prayers we make in all places to that ende defende vs towardes all honest men and iustifie vs agaynst the slaunders of the Doctors The seconde is that the Doctors abuse their aduertisement in saying that Abraham doubted of the promise the same beyng all together contrarye to the opinion of the Apostle in the fourth to the Romaines where he sayth in proper tearmes he made no doubt of the promise of God by distrust but was strengthened by faith giuing glory to God. To aunswer the last obiection of the Doctors made as they say against our aunswere giuen to their former question vpon the matter of the supper how soeuer they fayne not to haue delayed the conference and disputation of the Supper and the Masse yet they are not able to persuade any of any iudgemeÌ„t that hetherunto they haue not alwaies and yet do not shift off to enter into it For what requestes so euer came from the Lady of Buyllon or at any time made by vs yea notwithstanding the desire wyl many meanes made by the Duke of Nyuernois to drawe them to it yet they haue stand alwaies vnwylling yea and as it were impossible to enter vpon these two pointes The which when wée well perceiued contayning notwithstanding our desire not to depart from them tyll wée had first conferred therein We often protested not to dispute further with them if those two articles were not first decided and resolued To which ende we proponed certaine argumentes as well of the one as the other by order and good Methode to the end they might aduise what they wold oppugne and gaynsay in the sayd argumentes But the doctors dissimuling herein in place to pursue theÌ„ propone other friuolous and vnprofitable questions drawne out of theyr schoole diuinitie And notwithstanding our iust occasion of greefe in that our arguments were omitted by the Doctors yet to cut of all further pretence or colour to defer we haue answered their last questions And now in place to followe our answers reuerse them if thei had meane they propone eftsoones other new questioÌ„s no lesse friuolous than the first the same reuealing sufficiently their fansies dissimulation with discouery to euery man that they disguise their wyl to conferre vpon the sayd pointes seing they do what they can to alter the