for the opinion of the Romish Church For they signifie that Christs blood is to bee drunk but vnder the forme of bread not vnder the forme of wine As for Haymo hee answers him with a short come-off saying He spake of the vnity of the Chalice and that his meaningis that they that receiue the blood of the Lord receiue out of one Cup. Refutation The threefold answer of Bellarmine to Paschasius is not like a threefold cable that cannot be broken but rather like a rustie twisted wyer-string that breakes with the least strayne First he beareth vs in hand that the place in Paschasius seemes to be corrupted Corrupted By whom by Papists Surely they would neuer haue corrupted this text to make against themselues by Protestants That cannot be for no Protestants haue set forth Paschasius for ought we find or haue had any thing to doe in that Edition of Paschasius which we cite Besides in all the ancient impressions of Paschasius and the Manu-scripts that haue come to our sight the words are found as we cite them Yea but Iohn of Louane suspects that the copies are faulty and that bibite is put for edite Drinke yee for eat ye why so because the words going before are he distributeth the bread by the hands of his ministers to the beleeuers saying Take yee and drinke yee all of this This reason like a rope of sand hath no coherence at all For though Pascasius spake of bread yet to proue that Christ is he who alone by his Ministers distributeth the sacrament he rehearseth the words of the institution both concerning the Bread and the Cup neither can bibite or drink you in Paschasius be put for edite eate ye but must stand as it doth drinke yee For the words immediately following in Paschasius are for this is the new and eternall Testament Now what a ridiculous inference were it if we read the words as Iohn of Louane would haue vs take eate this for this is the Cup of the blood of the new and euerlasting testament Bellarmine his second answer is as absurd as his first For Paschasius his words make more strongly for vs and against himself if Paschasius expound the words Drinke ye all of this as they seeme to bee spoken by Christ not at the first Institution but afterwards whensoeuer the sacrament is administred in the Church If now also whensoeuer the sacrament is administred in the Church Christ commandeth drink ye all of this that is with Paschasius glosse all Ministers other beleeuers it followeth that all other beleeuers as well as Ministers ought now by Christs command to drinke of the cup. Thirdly as Bellarmine his first answer is against the text of Paschasius and his second against himselfe so his third is against common sence How can blood bee drunke vnder the forme of bread if we speake of drinking siguratiuely by faith this kind of drinking the Romanists explode If he speake of drinking properly with the mouth euery suckling is able to confute the Cardinall who know by meere sense that nothing cā be drunk but that which is moist and of liquid substance Nay the Cardinal discourseth like a man that had drank too deep of the wine forgetting in this page what he said in the former There he saith that the fathers doe not say that Christs blood is to be drunke of the people by the mouth of the body but here he saith that other beleeuers as well as Ministers by Christs command ought to drinke it but after a manner neuer heard of before to drinke it vnder the forme of bread Now for his answer to Haymo pari facilitate reijcitur quâ profertur t is as easy to be reiected as vrged For first the Cardinal corrupteth the text of Haymo hee saith not the Cup is the Communion because all drinke of that one Cup the word one is not in Haymo Admit it were this no way disapointeth our allegation out of Haymo For still this word omnes or al remaines And be it out of one Cup or more Haymo saith expresly that all did partake of it and receiued of the blood of Christ contained in it If all then the people as well as the Priests SECT X. The testimonies of the practise of the Church from 900. to 1000. ARistole rightly obserueth that it so falleth out in the descent of families as it doth in diuers grounds in which sometimes wee haue great plentie sometime as great scarsitie so saith he some families haue afforded store of noble personages at other times scarse any of note or eminence So it fareth here with vs in the last Age wee had plentifull store of testimonies for the truth but in this we are like to haue Penury Although if wee consider aright this scarsity may be imputed rather vnto the iniury of the time and want of Records of History which happily being extant might haue afforded vs no lesse plentie of Testimonies then the former Ages as well in this as in other points in question The Poet wisely obserued Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona Multi sed omnes vrgentur ignoti longâ Nocte carent quia vate sacro Dan. Chamier after much inquiry can bring notice but of one witnesse and him hee dares scarse avow Bellarmine brandeth with a note this ninth Age as being the most obscure and darke that the Sunne euer cast his beames vpon yet euen in this Age wee haue somewhat to shew for the right of Gods people to the holy Chalice of the Lords Table Anno 910. Rodolphus Tongrensis testifieth that the people in his time tooke the sacred body of Christ and drank a blessed draught of his blood Anno 920. The Abbot of Prumes Regino teacheth vs that what Rodolphus witnesseth of the practise of the people in his age was not an abuse or disorder in the people but done in obedience to the sacred discipline of the Church whose Canon he mentioneth Let the soules of the weake be refreshed and strengthned with the body and blood of our Lord. Anno 950. Stephanus Edvensis saith These gifts or benefits are dayly performed vnto vs when the body and blood of Christ is taken at the Altar Anno 990. Vincentius writes of Elgifa an old Matrone in this age who being ready to giue vp the ghost tooke the body and blood of our Lord. Anno 995. Aelfricus first Abbot of Saint Albons and after Archbishop of Canterbury in his epistle to Woulfinus and in his sermon translated of late out of the Saxon in die S. Paschae is as ful for the entire Communion as hee is against Transubstantiation the Howsell or Hoste saith he is Christs body not bodily but Ghostly not the body which he suffered in but the body of which he spoke when hee blessed bread and wine to Howsel ep ad Wolfin and in his sermon Without they be seene bread and wine both in figure and in taste and they
continued vntill the middle of this age gaue a full testimony vnto the truth But those who liued after spake partely in the language of Canaan and partly in the language of Ashdod Halensis saith that the lay people for the most part communicated in both kinds Lynwood that in greater Churches they did so Aquinas that in some Churches they did and in some they did not For by this time according to the Greeke prouerbe Serpens genuit serpentem vt fieret Draco One Serpent hath begot another that from them both a Dragon might issue The error of transubstantiation had begotten the error of concomitancie and from both these at length issued out their hereticall sacrilege or sacrilegious heresie in defending the practise of their halfe Communion SECT XIIII The testimonies of the practise of the Church from 1300. to 1400. IN this Age when this sacrilegious error like a Gangreene had spred ouer a great part of the Latine Churches God stirred vp many learned Chirons and Machaeons knowne by the nick-names of Walldenses Lollards Wickliffests to applie a soueraigne remedie vnto it And they Deo secundante wrought great cures vpon this Cancer in England France and Bohemia In other parts of Europe the people were so intoxicated with the golden Cup of the whore of Babylon that they willingly suffered the Priests to keepe away from them the Lords Cup. Yet in this Centurie if wee adde to the sounder Diuines or Doctors in the Latine Church the iudgement and practise of the whole Greeke Church the entire Communion wil carry it away from the halfe by more then halfe the voyces of Christendome Anno 1301. The custome of communicating in both kinds was not abolished in the beginning of this age but was retained in certaine places especially in Monasteries vntill the yeere of our Lord 1300. and more Thus writeth Cassander Anno 1320. Petrus de Palude saith that in his time the custome was in many Churches that the faithfull communicated in both kinds and hee backeth this his testimonie with a solid reason There ought saith he to be a double matter in this sacrament to wit meat and drink because the effect of this Sacrament ought to be represented perfectly by the matter thereof in a manner agreeable to the things naturall For sacraments effect that which they signifie but the effect of this sacrament is a perfect refection or repast of the soule therfore the matter representing it ought to bee a perfect refection of the body which is not but by meate and drinke This argument of Peter of the F◅n hath so farre sunke our aduersaries that to this day they cannot by all their sophistry get out of the boggs Anno 1341. Clemens 6. in his Bull to the King of England granteth him the vse of the Cup ad gratiae augmentum to the increase of grace Anno 1360. Richard Archbishop of Armach thus wardeth off a blow of the Armenians when the Armenian heretique obiected against him vnlesse you eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his blood you haue no life in yon Hee answereth that this speech of our Sauiour if it bee taken as spoken of sacramentall drinking ought to be vnderstood with this qualification to wit That it is necessarie to obtaine spirituall life that a man receiue both at sometime or bee willing to receiue and be ready so farre as it is in his power Anno 1372. Besides these written testimonies wee haue engrauen I meane the inscriptions of Chalices or Communion Cups called Ministerales because they serued for the people Vadianus writeth of a cup in the Abbie of Sangall that weighed 70. markes in siluer without doubt saith he for the vse of the people at the publique C◅mmunion Gretser censureth the writings of Pelichdorfius against the poore men of Lyons in this manner This author saith he doth refute in the first part of this work the poore men of Lyons but with some such arguments as ring not well in the purified eares of Catholiques I am sure this argument drawne from great siluer chalices some of them with pipes for the Laiety to sucke out the consecrated wine ring not well in the purified eares of Romane Catholiques For not onely Rhenanus out of Conradus Pellicanus relateth a constitution amongst the Carthusians whereby they are forbid to haue any pretious vessels or plate besides a siluer chalice and a pipe wherewith the Laietie may suck the blood of our Lord but also Caietan maketh mention of them and their vse to this purpose and Cassander very much taxeth Eccius for that he writeth that he neuer read of the Laieties Communion in both kinds in the Roman Church saue only in the story of S. Laurence his life It is strange saith he that a man of so excellent a memorie as Eccius should forget the ministeriall Chalices whereof there is euer and anon mention made in the Romane Pontificall which were so called because the blood of Christ was out of thē ministred to the people In most places for feare of shedding the blood of Christ in deliuering it to the people there were siluer pipes put into the Chalices that in the peoples drinking or rather sucking the blood of Christ not so much as a droppe might be spilt These Chalices were not onely in vse in this Age but a 1000. yeeres before in Saint Cyprians time if we may beleeue Cardinall Caietan who ingeniously confesseth that they were so called from their vse in the Church which was to serue the people Thus he commenteth vpon Thomas This custome saith hee continued not onely in the time of that Martyr whom Cyprian thought fit to bee forearmed with the Lords Cup but also in the time of the peace of the Church For we reade not onely of basons but also of ministeriall Chalices made for this vse a For why were they called ministeriall but because they serued not to offer the blood of Christ but to minister it to the people Anno 1390. The custome was in France to administer the whole Supper not in the middle of the Church but in Chappels This saith Francis the first I heard of old men who affirmed that this had been the manner in France for 120. yeeres before SECT XV. The testimonies of the practice of the Church from 1400. to 1500. IOhn Hus and Hiero. of Prage by the books of Wickliffe were brought vnto the knowledge of the truth And as in other points they concluded for that holyfaith which we at this day professe against the errors and corruptions of the Church of Rome so in this they were most earnest and so preuailed in the Kingdome of Bohemia that from the time of the effusion of their blood for the testimonie of the Gospell vntill this day the Cup of the new Testament in Christs blood hath beene deliuered to the people in these parts and the entire Communion preserued Anno 1410.
Petrus Dresensis taught publikely that the Laietie might not communicate vnder one kind as is confessed by Didacus de Tapia in sent lib. 4. Anno 1412. Iacobellus Misnensis a Preacher of Prage being admonished by Petrus Dresensis after hee had searched into the writings of the ancient doctours and by name Dionysius and Saint Cyprian and finding in them the communicating of the Cup to the Laiety commanded he from thence forth exhorted the people by no means to neglect or omit the receiuing the Communion of the Cup. Anno 1414. In the Councell of Constance in which the entire Communion is professedly oppugned yet the Truth extorted frō her bloody aduersaries a remarkeable confession of the practise of the Primitiue Church and of the continuance of it in diuers parts euen vntil the time of the calling of that Assembly In the petition of those that procured this Synod it is expressed that one cause for which the procurers desired that the Church should take order for the establishing of a law touching the laieties cōmunicating in one kind is declared to be because in some parts of the world the Priests did not forbeare to administer the communiō to the laiety in both kinds against the custome of the Romish Church Here we haue the continuance of this practise the antiquity whereof they likewise acknowledged in the preface to their sacrilegious decree against it Although Christ instituted and gaue the sacrament after supper in both kinds to his disciples and in the primitiue Church it was in like wise administred yet the Councell for certaine reasons commands that the sacrament be otherwise administred As the tree f gaines more branches by being lopped with the axe so the Truth gaineth much lustre and authority from the very Canon of the Councell of Constance by which her aduersaries doe seeke to oppresse her For who will not rather follow Christs institution then their ordinance and the ancient acknowledged practise of the Primitiue Church rather then a late custome of the present Romish Church Anno 1420. Martin the fifth after the Councel of Constance vpon Easter day after hee had deliuered the body of our Lord with his owne hands to the Laiety suffered them to receiue the blood of Christ at the hands of the Deacon The like Henry Kalteysin reportes of other Popes and withall acquaints vs with the cause why the Pope left off this custome It fell out saith he that a certaine Bohemian came amongst the rest to the Popes chappel and receiued the Communion at his hands and hee wonderfully bragged of it whereof Pope Martin being aduertised and much inraged that such a trick was put vpon him from that time tooke away the Cup from the Laiety Anno 1430. Thomas Waldensis who tooke vpon him to refute Wickliffes bookes howsoeuer he maintained the decree of the Councell of Constance touching Communion in one kind yet hee witnesseth that greater personages amongst the people and men of note or place as Kings and doctors and others that were thought worthie so great a mystery were admitted to the Communion in both kinds Anno 1413. In the Councell held at Basil as Nauclerus writeth tom 2. generat 48. a kinde of hope was offered to the Bohemians that vpon certaine conditions the vse of the Cup might be restored vnto them The order of the Councell is conceiued in these words If the Bohemians continue in the desire of the Communion in both kinds and send an Embassage to the Councell to that purpose the holy assembly shall giue libertie to the Priests of Bohemia and Morauia to administer the Communion in both kinds to such persons as being in yeeres of discretion shall reuerently desire it Anno 1438. The Bohemians put the faith and honesty of the Fathers of Basil to the Test they send comissioners Iohn Belouar of Prage Iohn Rokyzana Peter Panie Procopius and others to treat about the concession of the Cup and to expresse their earnest and vnfained desire thereof To whom the Councell returneth this answer That the request should be granted them so that they will really effectually keep vnitie with the Church and conforme themselues in all other things saue the communion in both kinds to the faith and rites of the vniuersall Church SECT XVI Testimonies of the practise of the Church from 1500. to 1600. IN this Age I might produce many Testimonies of such learned Doctors and Professors of the Gospell as haue beene by Gods prouidence raised vp in the Reformed Churches in former and latter yeeres who by their writings learnedly soundly haue mainteined the cause we haue in hand as also doe the ioynt and vnanimous Confessions of the Churches of England France Scotland Germany Polonia Sweueland Morauia Howbeit because the Romanists doe except against all the foresaid witnesses as insufficient and of no authority because they haue departed from their Synagogue therefore I will alleage some prime Doctors of this Age also and men of eminency among themselues maintaining the same truth with vs against whom I see not what iust exception may be taken by them Anno 1541. Gerardus Lorichuis zealously oppugning the sacrilegious practise of the Church of Rome There be false Catholicks saith he that are not ashamed by all meanes to hinder the reformation of the Church They to the intent that the other kind of the sacrament may not be restored to the Lay people spare no kind of blasphemie For they say Christ said onely to his Apostles Drinke yee all of this but the words of the Canon of the Masse be these Take and eate yee all of this Here I beseech them let them ◅ell me whither they wil haue this word all onely to pertaine vnto the Apostles then must the Lay people abstaine from the other kind of the bread also Which thing to say is an heresie and a pestilent and detestable blasphemie Wherefore it followeth that each of these words were spoken to the whole Church Anno 1545. The Ambassadours for the Emperour and for the French King were earnest sutors to the Fathers in the Councell of Trent for the restitution of the Cup to the Layety Anno 1562. The obseruation of Seneca That a lye is of a thin and transparent nature a diligent eye may see through it was verified in the Diuines and Bishops present at the Councell of Trent Whereof some saw obscurely others clearely through this grand lye of the Romish Church which vnder colour of concomitancy subtracteth the vse of the Cup from the Layety For Antonius Mandulfe◅sis had a glympse but Card. Madrutius Gaspar de casa and the Bishop of Quinque Ecclesi◅ and also Amans Seruito a Friar had a full sight of the truth in this point Antonius Mandulfensis Chaplain to the Bishop of Prage professedly impugned the distinction of the Eucharist as a Sacrament and as a sacrifice which distinction the Papists at this day hold before them
Ignatius onely to prooue the practise of the Primitiue Church and thus much Bellarmine confesseth whereupon I adde that this confessed practise of the Primitiue Church was grounded on our Lords precept drinke you all of this for the Church so neere Christ cannot bee supposed to haue swarued any way from his institution by adding any thing vnto it or taking away from it certainely Ignatius and the Churches wherein he bore sway obserued the order and practise of Saint Iohn his master and if Saint Iohn administred the Cup in all Churches to the people so did the rest of the Apostles for they varied not from Christ or among themselues in celebrating the Lords Supper And what the Apostles did ioyntly no Christian doubteth but they did by the direction of the holy Ghost according to our Lords will and commandement And thus wee see this example amounteth to a precept and the practise in Ignatius his time ought to bee a president for all future times SECT II. Testimonies of the Practise of the Christian Churches in the second Age. From 100. to 200. Anno Dom. 150. IVstin Martyr in his second apologie thus writeth They which are called Deacons among vs giue to euery one that is present of the consecrated Bread and Wine And when he hath related the whole manner of the celebration of the Eucharist as it were to preuent a cauill that might be made and is now made by Papists the Martyr heere sheweth the practise of the Church but maketh no mention of the precept of our Sauiour as that they did so in deed but were not bound so to doe he further addeth for the close as they report that Iesus commanded them or as they haue deliuered vnto vs Iesus his command giuen vnto them Bellarmine his answere Bellarmine repineth at this so expresse a testimony of so ancient a Father and so renowned a Martyr and therefore laboureth to disparage it some way or other Si non aliqu â nocuisset mortuus esset Yet all that he saith to it is but this that those last words of the Martyr which mentioneth Christs precept belong not to the Communion but to the Consecration The Refutation This solution will no way beare water First it is euident to any that reads the whole place that Iustin Martyrs words wherein he mentioneth Christs precept belongeth both to the Consecration and to the Communion For after he had spoken of the Communion he subioyneth these words And therefore they cannot bee seuered from the Communion The series or method of the passage in Iustin is thus hauing rehearsed the words of the Institution This is my body doe this in remembrance of me and this Cup is the new Testament drinke you all of this he addeth and he commanded that they onely should participate as had been before washed in the lauer of Regeneration and lead such a life as Christ prescribed them These words that they onely should participate clearely conuince the Cardinall and demonstrate that Iustin Martyr extendeth Christs command both to the Consecration and to the Commumunion it selfe which in Christs precept cannot be deuided both being enioyned in this one precept doe this in remembrance of me that is Consecrate and Communicate Secondly howsoeuer the Cardinall by any tricke of sophistrie shall dismember the whole sentence and pull these words As Christ commanded from the rest and refer them to which part of the sentence he pleaseth yet he can neuer smoother the light of truth shining in these words The Deacons deliuer or minister to euery one of the consecrated bread and wine The practice then of those times maketh for vs against the Church of Rome The Deacons then as the Ministers now deliuered the Sacrament to the people in both kindes Anno. 152. Laurence Deacon to Pope Sixtus cryed out to him as hee was led to his Martyrdome Whether goest thou father without thy sonne whether hastest thou Priest without thy Leuite try whether thou hast chosen a fit minister to whom thou hast committed the dispensation of our Lords blood Wilt thou denie me to bee a copartner with thee in the effusion of thy blood who hast made me a copartner with thee in the celebration of our Lords blood This giueth such light to Iustin Martyrs words and so fully accordeth with them that Tiletanus the defender of the councell of Trent confesseth that it is manifest that in this age the vse of both kinds was common to all Anno 180. Saint Irenaeus Bishop of Lions and Martyr in the fourth booke against heresies and 34. cha proueth the resurrection of the flesh and eternall life by an argument drawne from the faithfulls eating Christs flesh in the Eucharist and he presseth his argument in this manner How doe they viz. the heretiques say that the flesh should be vtterly corrupted and neuer rise againe which is nourished with the body and blood of Christ and a little after Our bodies by participating the Eucharist or Sacrament of our Lords supper are not now corruptible or shall not vtterly be corrupted and come to nothing because they haue the hope of theresurrection Irenaeus speaketh of all Christians people as well as Priests for all faithfull Christians haue hope of a blessed resurrection and he saith that they are nourished with the bodie and blood of Christ by participating of the Sacrament of his supper Papists answer The Romanists seeke to auoyde these and the like passages by their doctrine of concomitancie auerring that the blood of Christ is not seuered from his body and consequently that the Laietie take the blood in the body and are nourished therewith to eternall life and this say they is all that can bee gathered from Irenaeus his words They are nourished with the blood of Christ which they receiue together with his body not with the blood of Christ which they take by it selfe in the Cup. The Refutation This answer of theirs is weake and insufficient First because it is built on a weake and ruinous foundation viz. the reall and carnall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament vnder the accidents of bread and wine which I haue else where by Scriptures and Fathers refelled See the fisher caught in his owne net part 2. That the doctrine of concomitancie is builded vpon the reall and carnall presence is not denied by the Romanists for they make the one the ground of the other Secondly albeit wee should grant that the Laiety in some sence receiue the blood of Christ in the bread yet they receiue it not so as Christ commandeth for they receiue it not by drinking No man drinketh in eating or eateth in Drinking Thirdly the blood of Christ which wee receiue in the Sacrament we receiue not as subsisting in his veines or as being a part of or ioyned vnto his body but as shed for vs In which quality and manner it is impossible to receiue the blood of Christ together with and in the body by naturall
hand to the true Relation thereof long agoe sent you Nihil veritas erubescit nisi solumodo abscondi Truth neuer blusheth but when she is hid She feareth nothing but not to bee brought to her tryall Hee who knoweth his coyne is pure gold will neuer refuse to offer it to the Goldsmiths Test because he can loose nothing by it but shal haue allowance for it Besides your friends boasting at the Conference your owne promise in the Conference deepely ingageth you to assoyle the arguments then vrged against your halfe Communion whereunto at the present you returned not so much as half an answer pleading for your selfe the short scantling of time which gaue you not space to wield yonr Catholike buckler Scitum est enim culpam conijcere intempus cum vltra addere si maximèvelis non possis The Romane Oratour told you it is a handsome put-off to lay the blame vpon the time when an aduocate hath neuer a word more to say for his Clyent But veritas temporis filia Truth is Times Daughter she will iustifie her Mother If in so long a tract of time as hath run since our meeting in Noble-street you had fully and punctually satisfied those arguments then left vntouched you had salued your cause and credit and made it appeare you were not wanting to time but time then to you But now sith you haue broken so often day after day and moneth after moneth and by this time yeere after yeere being fo oft challenged of your promise yea vpbraided also by S. P. L. and the Lord T. and others and in fine your resolution is to giue no resolution of those doubts I will be bold to tell you that time will now no more beare your blame but you and your cause must beare it off with head and shoulders You cannot now goe backe Lis contestata est praelium condictum The field is pitched the weapons are chosen The question agreed vpon is the Communion in one kind the proofes must bee Scripture and the perpetuall custome of the Church If by both your Romish practise be conuinced to be sacrilege in the highest degree then write hereafter your braggs in redinke and let your lines blush for shame and do you your selfe ingeniously confesse concerning sacrilege as Papinian did concerning fatricide that it is as difficult and dangerous a matter to defend the murder of a brother as to commit it But on the contrarie if by the euidence of Scripture and coustant practise of the Catholike Christian Church you can iustifie your Romish dry communions you shal not only gaine your pretended Catholicke cause but me also your Proselyte D. F. THE PARTICVLAR CONTENTS OF THE SEVERALL Chapters of this Booke Chap. 1. THe state of the question concerning the Communion in both kinds is set downe out of the Harmony of Protestant Confessions on the one sida and out of the Canons of the Councels of Constance Basil and Trent on the otherside Chap. 2. The first Argument for the Tenent of the Reformed Churches drawne from Christs Precept and example in the celebration of the Sacrament confirmed by the testimony of Pope Iulius the first Chap. 3. The second Argument for the Communion in both kinds drawne from the essence and perfection of this Sacrament confirmed by Vasquez the Iesuite Chap 4. The third argument drawne from the Analogie of the signe to the thing signified confirmed by Gratian the Canonist Chap. 5. The fourth argument drawne from the nature of a banket or supper confirmed by Aquinas and Vasquez Chap. 6. The fift argument drawne from the expresse precept of drinking at the Lords Table confirmed by the testimonie of Pope Innocen the 3. Chap. 7. The sixt argument drawne à Pari confirmed by Bonauenture the Schoole Diuine and others Chap. 8. The seuenth argument drawne from the condition and propriety of a Will or Legacie confirmed by Iansonius c. Chap. 9. The eight argument drawne from the end of the Sacrament confirmed by Iac. Rehing being then a Iesuite Chap. 10. The ninth argument drawne from the example of Saint Paul and the Corinthians confirmed by Becanus the Iesuite Chap. 11. The tenth argument drawne from the vniforme and constant practice of the Christian Catholicke Church in all Ages Sect. 1. The testimonies of the practice of the Church from Christs assention to 100. yeeres Sect. 2. Testimonies in the second Age from 100. to 200. Sect. 3. Testimonies in the third age from 200. to 300. Sect. 4. Testimonies in the fourth Age from 300. to 400. Sect. 5. Testimonies in the fifth Age from 400. to 500. Sect. 6. Testimonies in the sixth Age from 500. to 600. Sect. 7. Testimonies in the seuenth Age from 600. to 700. Sect. 8. Testimonies in the eighth Age from 700. to 800. Sect. 9. Testimonies in the ninth Age from 800. to 900. Sect. 10. Testimonies in the tenth Age from 900. to 1000. Sect. 11. Testimonies in the eleuenth Age from 1000. to 1100. Sect. 12. Testimonies in the tewelfth Age from 1100. to 1200. Sect. 13. Testimonies in the thirteenth Age from 1200. to 1300. Sect. 14. Testimonies in the fourteenth Age from 1300. to 1400. Sect. 15. Testimonies in the fifteenth Age from 1400. to 1500. Sect. 16. Testimonies in the sixteenth Age from 1500. to 1600. Sect. vltima The confirmation of this argument by the confession of Papists of eminent learning and worth Thom. Aquin. Dionysius Carthousianus Ioh. Eccius Cassander Soto Ioh. Arborius Ruardus Tapperus Alsonsus a Castro Slotanus Salmeron Gregorie de Valentia and Suarez Chap. 12. Papists obiections for their halfe communion from Scripture answered and retorted Chap. 13. Papists obiections from Councels answered and retorted Chap. 14. Papists obiections from sundry pretended rites and customes of the Church answered and retorted Chap. 15. Papists obiections from reason answered and retorted Chap. 16. The Contradictions of Papists in this question noted and the whole truth for vs deliuered out of their owne mouthes The Contens of the Conference Of the necessitie of Episcopall gouernment Of ordination by Presbyters or Priests in case of necessitie Of the distinction of Bishops and Priests iure diuino Of differences amongst Papists in matter of faith Of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Marie Of the authoritie of Generall Councels aboue the Pope ècont Of prayer for the dead Of the authoritie of originall Scripture Of the Communion in both kinds Of the Popes Supremacy Of mingling water with wine in the Sacrament Of the perfection of Scripture AN ADVERTISEMENT to the Reader IT falleth out often with Students in controuersies as with people in the market who taking money with them at their going from home and espying in the fayre some Merchandize they like when they haue driuen the Price and are drawing out their purse they find it either pickt or the strings cut In like maner these Students meeting with some pregnāt testimonies alleaged out of the ancient Fathers or later Writers in Apologies for
the Truth and laying them vp in their memory or treasurie of writen notes when they are to draw them out and make vse of them against an aduersarie turning to the Authors themselues out of which those testimonies are quoted they find either the whole booke or chapter cut away or at least that passage they most spake for rased out by a tricke of the Romish Inquisitors Leger de maine That thou mightest not be so serued or haue any tricke put vpon thee in the perusall of this booke I haue here in a Tablet set before thee all the Authors of note with the Editions which I follow where thou shalt vndoubtedly find the parcell of truth thou seekest for and not the emptie shells onely wherewith thou mayst be abused in other Editions castrated by the Romanists A TABLE OF THE AVTHORS CITED IN THIS BOOKE WITH THE Editions of their Works and the time when they are accounted to haue flourished The first figure noteth the Age the second the Names of the Authors the third the Edition A. An. Dom. 920. ABbas Prumiensis vide Regino 1215. Abbas Vrspergensis Basil. 1569. 1590. Aegidius de Coninck Antwerp 1615. 995. Aelfricus Arch. Episcop Cantuariens Lond. 1580. 1241. Albertus magnus Basil. 1507. 1530. Albertus Pighius Colon. 1598. 780. Alcuinus Lutetiae 1618. 1240. Alexander de Hales Venetijs 1575. 1543. Alfonsus à Castro Antw. 1556. 1135. Algerus Scholasticus In bib pat tom 12. Col. 1618. 370. Ambros. Mediolanens Frob. Basil. 1555. 830. Amalarius Fortunatus Bib. pat tom 9. Col. 1618. 1600. Andrews Episc. Winton Lond. 1610. 1080. Anselmus Cantuariens Col. 1533. 340. Athanas. Alexandrinus Ex officina Comelin 1601. 410. August Hipponens Episc. Paris 1586. B. 1180. BAlsamon annot in Concil Lutet 1620. 1600. Baronius Card. Col. 1621. 370. Basilius Mag. Paris 1618. 1610. Becanus Mogunt 1610. 720. Beda Presbyter Basil. 1563. 1580. Bellarminus Card. Ingolstad ex offici Sartorij 1590. 1130. Bernard Clareual Basil. 1566. 1014. Berno Abbas Augrinsis Bib. pat tom 11. Col. 1618. 875. Bertram Presbyt Lond. 1623. 1580. Bilson Lond. 1586. 1260. Bonauentura Mogunt 1609. C. 1520. CAietanus Card. Antwerp 1612. 1530. Caluinus Geneuae 1595. 1564. Cassander Lugduni 1608. 80â—… Carolus Magnus Edit 1549. 92. Clemens Roman Antwerp 1578. 190. Clemens Alexand. Lugdu BatauoruÌ„ 161â—… 400. Chrysost. Gr. Etonae 1613. 1530. Cochlaeus Mogunt 1596. 1430. Concil Basilien Editio Binij Col. Agrip. 1618. 314. C. Ancyranum Editio Binnij Col. Agrip. 1618. 675. C. Bracharens 3. 691 Caesar-Augustanum 398. Carthaginens 813. Cabilonense 2. 450. Chalcedonens 1414. Constantiense 524. Iâ—…erdense 588. Matiscon 2. 325. Nicenum primum 829. Parisiense 589. Tolet. 2. 599. Tolet. 3. 633. Tolet. 4. 675. Tolet. 11. 1563. Trident. 868. Wormatiens 1530. Confess August Gene. apud Petr. S. Andr. 1591. 1562. Anglica 1579. Belgica 1559. Gallica 1536. Heluetica 1551. Saxonica 1580. Cornel. Iansen Lugd. 1606. 1450. Cusanus Card. Basil. 1565. 250. Cyprianus Edit Pamel Ant. 1589. 400. Cyrill Alex. Antw. 1618. 365. Cyrill Hierosol Bib. pat tom 4. Col. 1616. D. 1600. DAniel Chamierus Gen. 1626. 1580. Didacus Nugnus Venetijs 1592. 1580. Didacus de Tapia Salmant 1589. 70. Dionysius Areopagit Ludg. 1570. 1480. Dionys. Carthus Paris 1539. 1563. Dom. Soto Lugd. 1569. 1564. Dudith Quinq eccles Lond. edit cum concil Trid. 1620. 1236. Durand Lugd. 1595. E 1520. Eckius Ingolstad 1535. 1580. Edmund Camp Edit cum Whitak respon Gen. 1610. 1530. Erasmus Antw. 1540. 1532. Estius Duaci 1616. 453. Eucherius Lugdun Bibl. Patr. tom 5. Col. 1618. 420. Euseb. Emise Bib. pat tom 5. Col. 1618. 328. Eusebius Cesariensis Colon. Allobrogum 1612. 1080. Euthynius Pans 1560. F 1600. FErdinand Quir. de Sal. Complut 1618. 1600. Field Lond. 1606. 1618. Fisher Ies. Lond. 1624. 1570. Fox martyr log Lond. 1580. 1002. Fulbert Carnotens Bib. pat to Col. 11. 1618. 1590. Fulk Lond. 1617. G 1530. GEorg Cassand Paris 1616. 1541. Gerard Lorich auctoris impensis edit 1536. 130. Gratian. Paris 1507. 600. Greg. mag Papa Froben bas 1564. 726. Greg 2. Papa Tom. Concil Bin. Col. 1618. 731. Greg. 3. Tom. Concil 3. Bin. Col. 1618. 580. Greg. Turonens bib pat tom 6. Col. 1618. 1590. Greg. Valent. Lutetiae 1614. 1060. Guitmund Bib. pat tom 11. Col. 1618. H. 1591. HArmonia Confessionum Geneu apud Pet. S. Andr. 1591. 1564. Harding Impress cum Iuello Lond. 1611. 840. Haymo Halbarstad Argent 1519. 1590. Hesselius Louan 8. 1564. 390. Hieronymus Stridon Antw. 1579. 1090. Hildebert Cenomanens Bib. pat tom 12. Col. 1618. 355. Hilarius Pictauiens Paris 1605. 1554. Hosius Stanis Col. 1584. 1262. Hugo Card. Bas. 1600. 1136. Hugo de Sanct. Vict. Mogunt 1617. 1054. Humbert de Sylua Card. Bib. pat tom 11. Col. 1618. I. 1410. IAcobellus Misno Citat à Dd. de Tap. Salmant 1589. 100. Ignatius Graecolat Geneuae 1623. 1580. Illyricus vide M. 1216. Innocent 3. Pontifex Louan 1566. 1540. Ioh. Benedict Paris 1552. 1530. Ioh. Arboreus Paris 1540. 1530. Ioh. Caluin vid. C. 1411. Ioh. Gerson Paris 1514. 1414. Ioh. Hus. Noremberg 1584. 1596. Ioh. Maldonat Mogunt 1602. 1560. Ioh. Iuellus Lond. 1611. 1604. Ioh. Munster in Wecleg Francofurt 1621. 180. Irenaeus Lugd. Epis. Col. Agrip. 1596. 630. Isodorus Hispal Paris 1601. 150. Iustin Martyr Graecolat Lutetiae 1615. Iustinian Ies. Lugd. 1612. L. 1580. LAurent Humf. Lond. 1582. 1061. Lanfranc de Euch. Bib. Pat. tom 11. Col. 1618. 450. Leo Mag. Bib. pat tom 5. Col. 1618. 1600. Lorinus Iesuit Col. Agrip. 1617. 1570. Lucas Brugens Antw. 1612. 1520. Lutherus Basil. 1540. 1320. Lyranus Venetijs 1604. M. 370. MAcarius Egypt Bib. pat tom 4. Col. 1618. 80. Martialis Lemou Lug. 1572. 1540. Marcus Flac. Illyric Ex offici Iacob Stoer 1608. M. T. Cicero Colon. Allobr 1616. 1520. Mart. Luther vide L. 1565. Mart. Chemnis Francof ad Moen 1574. 1077. Micrologus Bib. pat tom 11. Col. 1618. 1600. Morton Lond. 1606. 1610. Mockettus Lond. 1617. N. 375. NAzianzenus Gr. Lat. Lutet 1609. Nugnus vid. D. O. 1110. ODo Cameracens Bib. pat tom 12. Col. 1618. 1080. Occumenius Gr. Veronae 1532. 230. Origenes Adamant Basil. 1570. 1530. Orthuinus Gratius Dauen 1535. P. 820. PAscasius Rudbertus Bib. pat tom 9. Col. Agrip. 1618. 1150. Petrus Cluniacens Bib. pat tom 12. part 2. Col. 1618. 1320. Petrus de Palude Paris 1530. 1140. Petrus Lombard Sub praelo Ascensiano 1535. 1610. Pet. Molinaeus Lond. 1620. 1590. Pet. Suâ—… Polanus Author Hist. Conc. Trid. August Trinob 1620. 100. Plinius Maior Franco ad Maenum 1599. 1530. Philippus Melancthon Wittebergae 1623. Q. 90. QVintilianus Lugd. 1560. Quinque Eccles. vide Dudith R. 835. RAbanus Maurus Lutet 1534. 620. Rehing Iacob Tubingae 1621. 869. Regino Abb. Prumiens Argent 1609. 560. Rhemigius Rhemens Bib. pat tom 10. Col. 1618. 1280. Ricard de Med. vil Brixiae 1591. 1360. Ricard Armacanus 1600. Riuetus Andr. Saumur 1616. 910. Rodulphus Flauiacens Bib. pat tom 10. Col. 1618. 1530. Ruardus Tapperus Louan 1555. 1119. Rupertus Abbas Tuitie Col. 1528. S.
the sacrament must be made compleat before the Priest vse it Durand his conclusion falls short vpon the Priest but his reason stretcheth to all people as well as Priests For all ought to receiue the entire Sacrament sacramentally and if one kind onely be an imperfect Sacrament to the Priest in regard of the signe it must needs bee imperfect also vnto the people vnlesse they will say that the sacrament presents lesse to the Priests then to the people or that the Priests aprehend lesse in it then the people surely that which is but halfe a Cup to one cannot be a whole one to an other that which is empty or incompleat to one cannot bee compleat and full to another Anno 1240. Halensis howsoeuer he some way inclines to that opinion that it is sufficient to receiue the sacrament in one kind yet he confe◅eth that there is more merit and deuotion and compleatnesse and efficacie in receiuing in both Albertus Magnus in 4. Sent. dist 8. deliuers this generall rule sacramentum Ecclesiae nihil in gratia causa◅ quod non ex similitudine significat The sacrament of the Church causeth nothing in grace which it signifieth not by similitude that is it produceth nothing which it presenteth not And from thence inferres that the vnity of Christs mysticall body is not perfectly caused and signified but by a double signe and therefore by vertue or in regard of the sacramēt we ought to haue both Let the Reader note that Albertus saith not according to the new euasion of the Iesuites virtute sacrificij oportet habere vtramque but virtute sacramenti not that both kinds are requisite to the sacrifice but to the sacrament The sacrament by the doctrine of Albertus wants so much of his efficacie as it doth want of its significancie but the receiuing vnder the forme of bread onely beareth no similitude nor hath any signification of the spiritual drink of Christs blood The Romanists therefore in taking away one of the signes from the Laiety consequently depriue asmuch as in them lieth the Laiety of the grace represented by that signe and conferred with it And yet Aegidius Coninck a moderne Iesuite and professor of Diuinity at Louaine maketh this audacious assertion out of the Chaire of his Schoole Diuinity Although more grace may be conferred by receiuing in both kinds notwithstanding the Church vpon good reason careth not for that and doth more respect the reuerence of the Sacrament then the profit of the receiuers c. Anno 1260. Aquinas yeeldeth three reasons of the institution of this sacrament vnder a double forme the first is For the perfection of it because sith it is a spirituall meale or refection it ought to haue spirituall meat and spirituall drinke secondly for the signification of it for it is a memoriall of the Lords passion whereby his blood was seuered from his body and therefore in this sacrament the blood is offered by it selfe Thirdly for the healthfull effect of it for the body is offered to shew that it is of force to saue the body and the blood is offered to shew that it is of force to saue the soule The halfe Communion therefore in Aquinas his learning wants perfection significancie and efficacie Bonauenture thus indeuoreth to cleere the matter In the sacrament there are two things efficacy and significancy concerning efficacie neither kinde is of the integritie of the Sacrament but either is the whole concerning signification so the two signes are of the integritie of the Sacrament or integrall parts of the Sacrament because the matter of the Sacrament is expressed in neither kinde by it selfe but in both together and a little after To make it represent perfect redemption and thereby a perfect refection the body ought to be signified in the bread and the soule in the wine the seate whereof is in the blood Anno 1280. Richardus de Mediauilla and Petrus de Tarantasia who afterwards was aduanced to the Popedome and changed his name into Innocentius the fourth testifieth that the Sacrament was administred in both kinds to the better sort of the Laietie howsoeuer they entertained the vulgar and meaner sort with a drie Communion thus Cassander relates their words The Sacrament may lawfully bee giuen in both kinds to greater personages or men of qualitie where there is no feare of error of spilling the blood because such men know how to obserue due reuerence and caution The Papists answer I finde no answere in particular made by any to the passages aboue alleaged but in generall their answere is that the Schoole-men might write more freely before the Councell of Constance had decreed the contrary And they adde that some if not all of these Schoole-men approoue of the administring of the Communion vnder one kinde to the Laietie The Replie The Councell of Constance by their decree could not make that which was before false to be then the truth or that which was in Gelasius his time sacrilege to be then pietie What Androcles spake sometimes of the Athenian lawes The lawes had need of a law to mend them may truely be said of this Canon in the Councell of Constance that it needs a Canon to rectifie it for it depraues Christs institution it checks the Primitiue Church it controules the practice of the whole Christian world for 1200. yeeres and more euen till the middle of this age wherein Sacrilege stole in by degrees A curious eye may tracke these fellons of the holy Chalice First vnder colour of preuenting abuses in spilling the Cup they take it away from the vulgar and meaner sort of people not daring to offer this indignitie to the better sort to them as we heare out of Mediauilla they deliuered the Sacrament in both kinds afterwards vpon this pretext that the blood was in the body and the whole Sacrament in either kind they nimmed the Cup from the lesser Churches as Linwood informes vs It it granted saith he onely to Priests that celebrate in such small Churches to receiue the blood vnder the forme of wine Going cleere away with this their Sacrilege in lesser Churches they aduenture vpon the greater And by Aquinas his confession the Sacrament was administred in one kind but in some Churches in his daies For in diuers Churches saith hee it is prouidently obserued that the blood should not be giuen to the people but that it should be receiued only by the Priest In the end when they had as farre as their authoritie stretched robbed all assemblies of the Laietie in depriuing them of the Cup they after inacted a generall law in the yeere of our Lord 1414. to warrant this their publike Sacrilege This thirtenth age resembleth the riuer Iordane which is sweet at the spring but bitter and brackish in the fall of it and in the end runneth into the dead Sea Abbas Vrspergensis Matthew Paris and Vincentius who flourished in the beginning and
as a buckler to beare off our arguments drawne from the necessity of representing Christs death in the Lords Supper by receiuing his blood apart as seuered from his body He also infringeth their common argument for their halfe Communion drawne from the example of the Disciples at Emaus and Saint Paul his breaking bread in the ship For he truly and acutely noted that if these Texts are to be expounded of communicating in one kind only that it would from thence follow that it were not onely lawfull for the people to communicate in one kind only but for Priests such as the Apostle S. Paul and the Disciples were to consecrate in one kind onely Thus he saw light as it were by a chinke but Amans servito Brixianus as a man in the open aire felt the light of truth to come so full into his eyes that it dazeled them For following the doctrine of Caietan who holdeth that blood is not a part of mans nature but the first nourishment thereof and adding that it cannot be said that the body necessarily draweth the nourishment into concomitancy with it from thence he inferred that it was not altogether the same substance vnder the forme of bread and vnder the forme of wine Withall hee added that the blood in the Lords Supper was blood shed out of the veines in which as long as it was contained it could not be drinke and therefore could not bee drawne with the veine into concomitancy Moreouer that the Lords Supper was instituted to celebrate his Passion which could not â—…ee represented but by effusion of blood and seuering it from the body It is true this Amans had a check in the Counfor his paines but his reasons were not answered himselfe for feare shuffled and fumbled about some answer vnto them but gaue no satisfaction either to himselfe or to others Welfare Cardinall Madrusius who being asked his opinion answered directly That hee thought fit the Cup should be restored to the Layety without all exception Gaspar de Casa Bishop of Lerye a man of eminent learning concurred with the Cardinall in iudgement adding that he thought that God would neuer send the spirit of delusion into the minde of the Emperour in so weighty a point especially considering that Charles the French King and the Duke of Bauaria ioyned with the Emperour in this request that the Cup should be granted to the Layety This speech of so learned a Bishop not only confirmed those who were of the same mind with him but also made most of the opposite faction to startle Anno 1563. Dudithius Bish. of Quinque-Ecclesiae as in the Councell of Trent hee had stoutly maintained the entire Communion and refelled all obiections to the contrary so after the breaking vp of the Councell in an Epistle which he wrote to Maximilian the Emperour he bitterly complaineth of the miscarriage of this businesse in the Councell What good could be done saith he in that Councell wherein voyces were numbred but not weighed If the merits of the cause or reason might haue preuailed or if but a few had ioyned with vs we had wonne the day but when the number only did beare the sway in which we came farre short though our cause was exceeding good yet wee were faine to sit downe by the losse Anno 1564. Georgius Cassander being set a worke by Ferdinand the Emperour to aduise about a meanes of composing differences in Religion declares himselfe fully for vs in this point of the Cup It is not saith hee without cause that the best learned Catholikes most earnestly desire and contend that they may receiue the Sacrament of Christs blood together with his body according to the antient custome in the vniuersall Church continued for many Ages or at least that the liberty which was granted two hundred yeeres agoe of communicating in one kind or both may be restored Wherefore I hold it not onely nothing contrary to the authoritie of the Church but rather very agreeable to the peace and vnitie of the Church and in a manner necessary that either those in whose hands lyes the gouernment of the Church restore the antient custome of communicating or which may be done without great trouble that the Churches themselues by little and little returne to their antient vse SECT XVII The confirmation of this Argument from the custome of the Church by the testimonies of our learned Aduersaries THis Argument as all the former may bee confirmed by the testimonies of our aduersaries themselues who giue sufficient euidence to condemne their owne Church of innouation and manifest defection from the Primitiue in this their halfing the holy Sacrament The Law saith that custome is the best interpreter of law And of all customes the antient especially if they be generall and haue lasted out diuers Ages ought to beare most sway with those that maintaine the truth of antiquitie or antiquitie of truth An argument drawne from an antient general and long continuing custome for more then one thousand yeeres is like a threefold cable that cannot be broken If we may beleeue the Councels held at Constance and Basill such a custome ought to be held for a law and inâ—…iolably obserued But I inferre The Lay-Communion in both kinds is a custome commended by antiquitie generalitie and duration as hath been proued before by the testimonies of approued Writers in all Ages and is confessed by the Romanists themselues First for the antiquity of this custome I appeale to the Councell of Constance Arboreus Aquinas Lyra Carthusianus and Ruardus Tapperus The Councell of Constance admits vnder a licèt that Christ instituted the venerable Sacrament vnder both kinds and that in the Primitiue Church it was so receiued by the faithfull yet with a non obstante countermands Christs Institution and the practice of the Primitiue Church which gaue Luther iust occasion to nick-name this Councell and for Constantiense to call it Non obstantiense Concilium Iohannes Arboreus in plaine termes confesseth that anciently the Lay people did communicate vnder both kinds Thomas Aquinas is a contest to Arboreus auerring that according to the ancient custome of the Church all those that were partakers of the communion of Christs body were partakers also of the communion of his blood Dionys. Carthusianus speakes Aquinas his words after him It was so done indeed in the Primitiue Church but now the Church hath ordered otherwise Lyra harpes vpon the same string Here is mention of both kinds for so the Sacrament was rereceiued of the faithfull in the Primitiue Church Aestius that famous Sorbonist vpon the Sentences lib. 4. handling this question professedly saith that it is manifest out of antient histories and the writing of almost all the ancient Fathers qui testantur fideles bibere sanguinem Christi that the Eucharist was communicated to the people in both kinds Ruardus Tapperus speakes rather like a Protestant then a Papist in
quantum ad primas sessiones reprobatum est in Concil Florent Lateranensi In Hierarchiâ—… k k Huius Concilij nihil est ratum probatum nisi quaedam dispositiones circa beneficia Cor. cil verò ipsum reprobatur in Concil Lateran sess 11. l Vasq. in 3. part Thom. quest 80. art 12. disp 215 cap. 3. Basiliense Concil nullius est auctoritatis in hac re m m Bellar. de sacram Euchar. lib. 4. c. 24. Answ. I. n n Omni hebdomada offerendum est si non quotidie perigrinis incolis tamen velbis in bebdomada o o Iob. Munster à vertleg discurs ea nobilis p p Anno 404. Annal. tom 4. Hic lector considera quà m procul abborreant à patrum traditione vsuque Catholicae Ecclesiae qui nostro tempore negant osseruandam esse sacratissimam Eucharistiam quam videmus non sub specie panis tantùm sed etiam sub specie vini olim consueuisse recondi q q Bellar. de sa Euch. lib. 4. cap. 24. Stromatum 1. p Hard. diuis 19. art 2. Answ. 1. q q Aust. contra Parm. l. 3. Pensandae sunt doctrinae non in statera dolosa consuetudinum suarum sed in statera aequa diuinarum scripturarum r r Concil Caesar Aug. â—…an 3. Eucharistiae gratiam si quis probatur acceptam non consumpsisse in Ecclesia anathema fit imperpetuum 2 t t Iust. in apol 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 u u Nazia in fune Gorgoniae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. x x Hier. epist. ad Rust. Nihil illo ditius qui corpus domini in canistro sanguinem portabat in vitro * * Bellar. desacr Eucha lib. 4. c. 24. Answ. I. x x Nec derelicto cibo poculo Domini y y Quando carnem Christi man ducauerunt vel non manducauerunt quando biberunt vel non biberunt sanguinem c 8. z z Gen. lib. de Eccles. dogmat cap. 52. Si paruuli sunt vel hebetes respondeant pro illis qui illos afferunt ita Eucharistiae mysterijs admittantur * * Bellar. loc supr citato Answ. 1. a a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b b Euseb. Eccles. hist. l. 6. c. 36. c c Bed hist. lib. 4. d d Bellar. loc sup cit Answ. 1. e e Concil Tolotan 4. Can. 17. In Choro Clerus communicet extra chorum populus f f Sola species panis dabatur in manus ex calice autem bibebant qui volebant in Ecclesia sed non licebat laicis calicem tangere g g Annal. tom 1. an Christi 57. Fideles sacrificij tempore olim in Ecclesia sacratissimam Eucharistiam sub vtraque specie panis vini sumebant h h Bellar. loc sup cit Answ. 1. 2 i i Lyturg. praesanctif 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answer to certaine questions Sect. 5. l l Sozomen Eccles hist. lib. 1. m m Fisher in his answer to certaine questions propounded by King Iames his Maiestie Point 7. Answ. 1. n n Alexand. Hal. 3. paâ—…t q. 11. membr 2. art 4. Corpus non est sacramentaliter sub specie viâ—…i nec sanguis sacramentaliter sub specie panis Ergo vt sacramentaliter sumatur totus Christus necesse est vt sumatur sub duabus speciebus Vid. supra Arg. 2. o o Bell. de sacra Euch. lib. 4. c. 24. Answ. 1. 2 p p Bel. loco supracitat species panis vini non tam essentiales quam integrales partes huiuâ—… sacramenti videntur Answ. 1. q q Ambr. in 1. ad Corinth cap. 11. Indignus est Domino qui aliter mysterium celebrat quà m ab eo traditum est r r Halensis part 3. qu. 11. membro artic 4. sumptio sub vtraque specie minoris est efficaciae complementi Vasquez in 3. Tho. q. 80. art 12. probabilior sententia mihi semper visa est maiorem fructum gratiae ex vtraque specie huius sacramenti quà m ex altera tantùm percipi Ita docet Halensis Gasper Consaluus quam sententiam absolutè secutus est Clemens sextus in Bulla ad Regem Angliae Anno 1346. quâ illi concessit vt ad gratiae augmentum in vtraque specie communicaret Aegidius de Coninck Iesuita Etsi plus gratiae conferat sumptio vtriusque speciei dicimus tamen meritò hoc Ecclesiam non curare quaest 10. art 12. in lib. 4. sent r r De leg Senat consult t t Hier. in Catal. Viror illust Answ. 1. 2 3 4 * * Art 2. diuis 5. x x In Luc. 24. vers 30. 31. y y Gers. defens decret con Constant. z z Confess Polonica * * Tom. 9. tract 35 * * Bell. de sacra Eucha l. 4. c. 24. Melanth Orat. a a Sess. 13. b b In Can. Missae tract 7. c c Quest. 74. part 3. art 2 d d De Cons. dis e e in 1. Cor. c. 11. f f Consil. de Commu sub vtraque specis g g Delegit vsu Eucha cap. 10. h h Disp. 216. c. 4. i i Hist. Bohe. k k Lit. mis Hist. Concil Trid. l l Loâ—… sup cit m m Tap. Consonum est institutioni sacramenti integritati imò exemplo Christi patruÌ„ primitiu Eccles. vt populus communicaret sub vtraque specie citat Cassand tract de commu sub vtraque specie n n 4. part quest 53. memb 1. k Gen 44. 12. l l Psal. 16. 13. a a Hieron aduersus Lucifer Ecclesia non est quae sacerdotem non habet I meane a compleate Church For in some sense that of Tertullian is true Where two or three are there is a Church although they be Laicks Tertul. exhort ad cast b See P. Moul. Bucklet of faith P. Mart. epist. ad Iuel episcop Salisb Zanch ad Grind. Archiep. Bucer Gualterum Item Bezam Suadael ad Epis. copos quosdam Angliae b b Lib. 4. de bapt contra Don. c. 1. 18. tract in Ioh. 124 Ecclesia claues ab â—…oregni coeloruÌ„ accepit in Petro. c c D. Field of the Church lib. 3. c. 239. pag. 156. Presbyters as they may doe all other acts whatsoeuer speciall challenge Bishops in ordinary course make vnto them so they may doe this also Who dare condemne all those worthy Ministers of God that were ordained by Presbyters in sundry Churches of the world at such time as Bishops in those places where they liued opposed themselues against the truth of God He citeth there Armacanus and Alex of Hales affirming that many learned men of their time were of this opinion that Presbyters in case of necessity may ordaine e Quid est enim episcopus nisi primus presbyter denique non aliter quà m cum presbyteros consacerdotes vocat nunquid ministros condiaconos suos dicit episcopus non vtique quia multò inferiores sunt â—…rpe est ludicem dicere Primicerium nam