covenant and promise aside are not worthy of eternal life Gods mercy and promise is then his best stake howsoeuer sometimes he would pul it vp To make our workes truely and properly meritorious and fully worthy of euerlasting life What they say of good works Rhem. 2. Tim. 4 v 8. Ieam c. 2 v. 22. What they say of good works and more principal causes in the matter of iustification then faith to make them the cause of heauen as ill deeds are the cause of hel To say that we may trust vnto them that they are true righteousnesse and that they are able to abide the iudgment of God And yet to say that it is of his free mercie and liberality that either he promised any such reward to our works and that the works of themselues are his none of ours and that when he crowneth our works he crowneth his owne gifts that he rewardeth them aboue our desert and al this in respect of his free promise and graunt are the words of men that are disposed to play their parts on a stage and when they are out of their parts to imagin some God to come downe amongst them to keepe their credit with the people for their tenor and breefe of all their talke is we haue truely and properlie deserued heauen because of his free bountie mercie he first promised and then gaue it vs. Stapleton after much debating of this questiòn De vniuets iustif doct lib. 10 c. 7. fol. 361. God is to himself not not to vs. commeth in the end to this That debter whensoeuer we doe read in the ancient fathers that god is debter vnto vs in the great gift of eternal life It must be vnderstood as debter to himselfe and in respect of his owne promises and that hee is not debter vnto vs to himselfe not to vs for his own promises not for the worthines of vs or our woorks If this suffice them wee will stand to it God is iust saiâ— we in that he keepeth promise and doth not deceaue his of that reward Whitak cont Gul. Reynold fol. 58. which they hope for but the promise is free for freely he promised and freely hee giueth yet in that hee bound himself vnto vs by his free promise it was iust that he should performe the same not that wee haue iustly and worthilie deserued any part of that reward but because it is meete that God be alwaies faithfull in his words And so make him if debter to any theÌ„ to himselfe as Stapleton speaketh The Crowne is the reward which God hath promised to the worke not because the worke is vvorthie of it but because it pleased him so graciously and liberaly to bestowe such excellent rewards vpoÌ„ vs that haue deserued so little and so keep in with the promise and couenant and exact nothing of him because al are his as Bellarmine a voucheth Cui redderet coronam iustus iudex si noÌ„ donasset gratiaÌ„ misericors pater quomodo eslet ista corona iustitiae nisi pra cessisset gratia quae iustificat impium Augde gra lib. arb c. 6. â—nnot 2. Tim. 4. v. 8. And when he crowneth vs he crowneth his owne gifts not our workes giuing before what he repaieth after For how should hee repay as a iust iudge vnlesse he had first giuen as a merciful father how should this be a crowne of iustice if grace had not gon before which iustifieth the vngodly man as saie the Rhemists Of these notes and the rest in this whole booke following I would haue you that are seduced to demand of your teachers what they thinke praying them to reveiwe reexamine them and for your parts to marke how they answere defend their opinioÌ„s but see with your own eies trust not theirs Thinke that the verie debating of these questions vvhich they cannot chuse but handle hath drawen such confessioÌ„s from them settle your selues but once to compare their reasons First with the holie scripture then with the ancient fathers of the primitiue time and lastly by the protestant writers of this age in the Church of England and then iudge where the truth is you wil then sone perceiue I wil speake of one for all that noe man can more fully contradict Bellarmine then Bellarmine doth himselfe Nec enim poterit ab vilo Cicero quam Cicerohe vehemen ius resutari l 2. c. 9. fol. 148 Cicer pro domo sua post medium Staplet in the fortresse f. 5. b as Lactantius said of Tully If he or anie of them or al of them bee growen in your opinious great it is but the elemeÌ„ts of your sloth that wil not giue you leaue to looke on him Calamitas huius temporiss lan dem viri propagauit The miserie of this time wherin pusillanimity so much reigneth in your mindes hath gotten him the praise he hath and not the cause he handleth for looke into that and you vvill bee ashamed both of it and him Wee all iumpe in this As noe building standeth without a sure and substantial foundation so noe life no saluation is to be hoped for vvithout a right and true faith Let vs therfore look whom vve trust and what vve beleue Sireligio tollitur vulla nobis ratio cum coelo est Lactant l 3 〈◊〉 10. away religion fol. 224. Take and we haue noe societie with heauen Non hic nobis labor Invtilis ad pernitiem sed vtili ad salutem Aug ep 111. The Iewes could tel that the golden calfe which they worshiped was not God yet were they idolaters and the heathen did not thinke did not thinke that those thinges which they made with their hands to be Gods c. and yet were they grosse Idolaters A quibus si persuasionis eius rationem requiras nuilam possint reddere sed ad maio rum iudicia coÌ„fugiant quod alli sapientes fuerint illi pro bauerint illi scierint quid esset optimum seque ipsos seÌ„sibus spoliant ratione abdicant dum alienis erroribus jeredunt Lact 5. c. 20. the labour therof is not vnprofitable leading vs to destruction but profitable bringing to salvation Beleiue not them that woulde drawe you from knowledge Knowe that they abuse you that saie the scriptures are not for you to read and al to keepe you in ignorance because you shal not see what they say or doe Take you heed of them that teach you worshiping of Images praying to Saints that plead their pardons their purgatorie noe one sillable in Gods booke sounding anie waie to either of them I knowe they haue excuses that you doe it not to the image but to the thinge represented which excuse besides that it is the same that the Iewes and all Idolaters that vvere heathen could make for themselues it is a moÌ„strous vntruth in it selfe They know there be amongst them who haue written in defence of the vvorshiping of the imag of the Crosse and trinitie
matter of faith as other men do if in examination it happen to be an error yet shal it be none in the Pope but must be one in al men else For trial of this let any man read the 1. 2. chapt de sanct beat where he proueth it an error vpon whom soeuer shall thinke that the soules of the blessed doe not see God vntill the last day Bellar. de Sanctor beatit l. 1 c. 1. 2 This error is put vpon Iohn 22. Bellarmine confesseth as much Ioannem hunc reverâ sensisse animas non visuras Deum nisi post resurrectionem That Iohn 22. did verily beleeue Bell. de Rom. pont l. 4. c. 14. fol 549. c. 12. fol. 531. he saueth Pope Nicholas by the like that the soules see not God vntil the last day But this he thought saith he when he might so thinke without danger of heresie nulla enim adhuc praecesserat Ecclesiae definitio for there had no determinatioÌ„ of the church gone before Why The determinatioÌ„ of himselfe is the determination of the church aswel as you said before his telling of a thing to himselfe was the telling of it to the church And why excuseth he the Pope by the not determination of the Church When hee telleth vs himselfe De conc auth l. 2. c. 2 5. That neither generall counsels nor particular which otherwise are subiect to erre can erre if the Pope confirme them And yet see the man be telleth vs De Rom. pont l. 4. c. 14 f. 551 that Iohn need not to reuoke the error cum in errorem nullum incidisset for he fel into no error If hee fel into no error neither did they fal into any error on whoÌ„ Bellarmine laieth the same error nor must he cal it an error to say The soules of the righteous see not God vntil the last day seeing he himselfe saith that Iohn so held and yet held no error FroÌ„ absurd and grosse coÌ„clusions they fal to flat blasphemies Rom. 6.23 Rhem annot on that Text. Blasphemies ContradictioÌ„s The reward of sin is death but everlasting life is the gift of God saith S. Paul the Rhemists say in their annotations that The sequele of the speech required that as he said deathor damnation is the stipend of sin so life everlasting is the stipend of iustice so it is What indignity is this to the holy Ghost to crosse him so manifestly S. Paule maketh opposition betweene eternal life eternal death touching the cause of either The proper working cause of death is sin so saith the Apostie The reward wages or stipend of sin is death but everlasting life is what the stipende of good workes as the Rhemists say no but the free gift of God The Apostle might as easilie haue said so as they if it had bin so Annot 2. Cor. 5. vers 10. Wil Reinolds cont Whiâ—…k fol. 105â— Why did S. Paule invert and turne the sentence if as the one had deserued hel so the other had deserued heaven but only to exclude what the Rhemists bring in They iterate this in an other place where they say Heaven is as well the reward of good works as hell is the stipend of ill workes This is also seconded by one from Rhemes who saith that the Apostle Saint Paule laieth in indifferent ballance good works and euil maketh the one the cause of heauen as the other is the cause of hel But if it be so that good works be the cause purchase merit of eternall life as these men tell vs as trulie as euill works are the purchase and merit of hel what saie they to their owne note Rhem. Annot. Rom c 9. v. 11. 16. vpon another text where they tel vs that by the example of the two two twinns Iacoh Esaw it is euident that nether nations nor particular persons bee elected eternallie or called temporallie or preferred to Gods fauour before other by their owne merits but of theÌ„ two vvhere iustlie hee might haue reprobated both hee saued of mercie one What is this as S Paul said before eternal life is the gift of God excluding merits Yet they stand not alwaie to this last For they saie againe Man hath free will to make himselfe a vessell of saluation or damnation Rhem. Annot 2. Tim. 2. v. 21. though saluation be attributed to gods mercy principally the other to his iust iudgment Hâ—w hath man free wil to make himselfe a vessel of saluation or damnation wheÌ„ saluation is principallie of Gods mercie and the other of his iudgment Whie explaine they not that darke speech that wee maie vnderstand it Interpres eget interprete They neede more Interpreters then the text They told vs before that Gods meere mercie is seene in the elect and iustice in the reprobat And that they that are saued Annot. Rhem. Rom 9. v. 6.11 14. 16. must hold of gods eternal purpose mercy and election And this election and mercy dependeth on his owne purpose will determination that all are worthie of damnation before they bee first called to mercie Make good this doctrine which they haue last set downe and agreed vpon the former will proue blasphemous and deregatorie to the mâ—iestie of God That good workes are the cause of beauen as evill are the cause of hell Or that man hath free will to make himself a vessell of saluation or damnation I doubt not if the Rhemists be followed but that a man might take vp moe contradictions then those before which they haue heaped amongst their notes in that testament 2. Tim 2.25 God giueth repentance Where S. Paul writing to Tymothy willeth him to instruct with meeknesse those that resist or vvithstand the truth prouing if at anie time God will giue them repentance that they maie acknowledge the truth they note That conversion from sin and heresie is the gift of god and of his special grace Annot. vppon that place in the margent pag. 589. I might aske them first how this agreeth with their owne note one the other side of their owne leafe so oft mentioned before Man hath free wil to make him selfe a vessel of saluation or damnation But I wil leaue that now and demand of them howe it agreeth with this The grace of god woorketh not in man against his will nor forceth anie thing without his acceptation and consent Annot. 2. cor 6. v. 1. Annot. Ioh. 6. v. 44. Annot Luc. 14. v. 23. Conuersion from sin heresie is the gift of God For whosoeuer are lead by the spirit of God Rhem. Rom. 8. v 14. in marg Hee meaneth not that the children of god be violently compelled against their wills but that they bee sweetly dâ—awn moued or induced to doe good ex Aug. Ench c. 64. de verbis domin Serm. 43. c 7 deverb Apost ser 13. c. 11 1â— Acts â— and therfore it lieth in a mans will to
say Peter is named in speciall as often elswhere for prerogatiue It is said of Midas that he wished every thinge he did touch might be gold I thinke they are as so manie Midasses every thing they deale in maketh for Peters prerogatiue a simple prerogatiue I thinke it is for him to bee named after all the Disciples Tub. Here bee shrewd accusations indeed they accuse you and you accuse them on whom shal I such other that stand in doubt betweene you relie They are very famous for their learning and paines taken in defence iustification of their cause their volumes and bookes are many and it maie be your replies answers are as large but here is the doubt who saith true Rom. Iuell to the reader in the def of the Apologie Indeed it cannot chuse but pitty everie good maÌ„ in behalfe of his vnlearned brother to see his conscience thus assalted this daie with so contrarie doctrines of religion especially when there is a zeale to followe and men knowe not what and would faine please God and cannot tell how or if they finde not themselues armed with Gods holie spirit not are able to discerne their meat from poison nor to wind theÌ„selues out of the snares for Sathan transformeth himselfe into an Angel of light 2. Cor. 11. the wicked are more watchful vehement then the Godly and falshood is oftentimes pointed beautified shineth more glorious then the truth These be the things which as S. Paule saith worketh the subversion of the hearers and by meane wherof 2. Tim. 2. Mat 24 as Christ saith if it were possible the very elect of God shoulde bee deceaued Notwithstanding God in these daies hath so amazed the adversaries of his Gospel and hath caused them so openly and so grossly to laie abroad their follies to the sight and face of all the world that noe man now bee hee neuer so ignorant can thinke he may be iustly excused it is but tolle lego take vp read read and vnderstand by Gods assistance But the indiscretion of manie in the world that doe stand doubtful of the truth betweene them vs is equivalent and semblable to that answere which I once hard a Master giue to on that had bin his Factor or rather indeed his fractor in a case not vnlike to this about some difference between them of accouÌ„ts the Factor pleaded his innocencie and truth by the plainenesse of his proceedings in deliuering his bills and reckonings to his Master from time to time to be examined his M. replied you haue so done indeed but you knowe that I neither did nor would looke on them It is noe basenesse for the greatest to de scend looke into their own estate Bacon sE of expeÌ„ce nor examine theÌ„ I fouÌ„d by that answere that the reason whie the Master would not nor had anie liking to veiw them was because hee woulde haue libertie at anie time as occasion serued to say he could not tell whether his man deceaued him or not Wheras if hee had but taken the paines to haue examined his mans dealings hee might haue bin assured to haue found how he had behaued himselfe towards him whether true or false so fareth it in these daies with vs painfull workes there are enough some of great volume some slighter al concerning the truth of our cause which all men maie see and read but that which galeth vs and most tieth our adversaries to themselues and their errors is that they who condemne vs knowe vs not whether we be white or black they neuer obserue Albi an atri simus nesciunt who say we are heretickes dispisers of the Church and yet neuer read what we hold nor examine vs in any thinge that we doe as publikely complaineth a great scholler of our side D. Doue of Recusancy c. 2 and I my selfe haue oft had experieÌ„ce And therfore in few words between them and vs I can saie as the ancient father Arnobius said against the Gentiles wheÌ„ they accused the christians of those things wherof themselues were guiltie even in the verie entrance of his conference he testifieth roundly to the world Arnob. contra Gentes lib. 1. in princip in these words Efficietur enim profecto rationum consequentium copulatu vt non impij nos magis sed illi ipsi reperiantur criminis estius rei qui renuminum profitentur esse cultores atque inveteratis religionibus deditos It shal be proued saith he by the ioining of our reasons to gether that we are not so wicked as they lay to our charge but that themselues are founde guiltie of that wherof they accuse vs who doe professe themselues worship pers of the Gods and only retainers of the ancieÌ„t religions But if you or any other wil be amated with anie streame of words to beleiue that part without looking into the matter reasons proofes drifts and arguments of al sides wherby you maie rightly iudge indeed the same Father telleth you againe Quid est enim quod humana ingenia tabefactare studio contradictionis non audeant Arnob. Ibid. l. â— fol. 102. what is it saith he that the witts of some meÌ„ dare not ruinate with the studie of coÌ„tradictioÌ„ yea although that which they studie to ouerthrowe be pure and clear and hedged with truth on everie side and who cannot saith hee dispute with arguments of great liklihood yea although he defend a manifest vntruth lye The roote of this error vaine consequeÌ„ce he toucheth in the next words following Cum enim sibipersuaserit quis esse quid aut non esse amat quod opinatur asserere When a man hath perswaided himselfe that anie thing is so or not so he then loueth what he apprehendeth and desireth to excell others in sharpnesse of wit especialliy if the matter which is dealt in be remote hid or darke But God be thanked those learned diuines reuerend prelats before mentioned and a number other in this age with their infinite toile and paine haue threshed and winnowed for vs the doctrine and differences of the Church of Rome and this of England they haue performed the first part of the Apostles speech which willeth to trie all things 1. Thess 5. â—1 the latter part resteth vpon vs to followe that that which is good bee kept nether can there be a keeping of that which is good without a triall of all things doe goe before so that I dare pronounce there is none who maie not if he will see on which side the truth is Epist 105. M. to this purpose I doe remember a sentence of the Godly and learned father S. Augustine which is Ignorantia in cis qui intelligere noluernut sine dubitatione peccatum est Ignorance in them which are notwillng to learne without doubt it is sinne in them which cannot learne a punishment of sin in both there is noe iust excuse but iust damnation Tub. It
that sacrifice which the ancient Church of God 1400. yeares before those of Trent spake of was not so caled properly according to the rigor of the word with them the celebration of the Lordes supper is called an oblation for that it is a representatioÌ„ of Christs death sacraments haue names of the things which they signifie because the merits fruits of Christs passion are by the power of his spirit devided bestowed on the faithful receauers of these mysteries Thomas of Aquine was in his time of greater credit with them then the Master of the sentences Acutè diuus Thomas vt omnia Camâ— rat 9. argutissime Canus l. 12 to 408. Melius diuus Thomas vt omnia dixit Allen fol. 419. p. 3. q 83. art I resp dicendum ex Aug. ad sim pl. quest 3. If Thom. had thought that Christ had bin killed sacrificed to God his father as D. Allen disputeth l. 2. c 11 he needed not to haue hand led it as here he doth Camp rat 5. Duraeus eaâ—… fol. 265. Art 17 cont luel fol 206. b. 207. a. though in time later the Master is not euer allowed by them but Thomas they saie hath done all things acutly well yet hee saith as we say in this In two respects saith hee celebratio butus sacraements dicitur immolatio Christi the celebratioÌ„ of this sacrameÌ„t may be called the sacraficing of Christ First because as S. Augustine saith resemblances are wont to be called by the name of those things wherof they are resemblances therfore the celebration of this sacrament is a certaine representatiue Image of the passion of Christ which is his true sacrificing Secondly touching the effect of Christs passion quia scilicet per hoc sacramentum participes efficimur fructus dominicae passionis because by this sacrament wee are made partakers of the fruite of the Lords passioÌ„ This of Thomas were ceaue against their reall external corporal kinde of offering the liue flesh of Christ to God the Father by the Preists handes vnder the formes of bread wine as now they teach they doe With what facilitie of language D. Harding D. Stephan Gardiner proceeded in this question I will now also shew you and the rather because Campian Durâ—us both doe highly commeÌ„d D. Harding his worke he hauing spoken something of the sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse done with shedding of blood in his owne person as the scripture witnesseth commeth to shew how he is handled in their Masse saith Sacramentally or in a mysterie Christ is offered vp to his Father in the daily sacrifice of the Church vnder the forme of bread and wine truly indead not in respect of the maner of offering but in respect of his very body blood really present And after recitinge the words of the Evangelists Luc. 22 how that Christ at his last supper took bread gaue thankes brake it said take eate this is my body which is giuen for you and this is my blood which is shed for you in remission of sinnes out of which he would proue his sacrifice saith they are wordes of sacrificing offering they shew and set forth an oblation in act deed though the tearme it selfe of oblatioÌ„ or sacrifice be not expressed therfore belike seeing nether any tearmes nor words to make for it there afterwards vpon more deliberation he peeceth out the Euangelists S Paul for Christ said Doe yes this in my remembrance he readeth doe yee or make yee this in my remembrance Reioynder f. 283. 305. Tully de natur deotum l. 1. feâ—e fine Elephanto belluarum nullaprudentior at figuraÌ„ quae vastior Of beasts saith Tully none is more wiser then the Elephant in shape none more deformed M. Harding was thought for that time to haue dealt substantially against his aduersary in substance of matter none more weake Who can explaine how Christ is offered really in their Masse yet not in respect of the manner of offering what manner what respect is this Or what words of sacrificing and offering did Christ vse at his last supper without any tearme of oblatioÌ„ sacrificing Hoc non est considerare sed quasi sortiri quid loquare Tull. ibid. This is not to speake with discretion but as it were by lot hap-hazard But the truth is Christ vsed noe word tearme or act of sacrificing at his last supper we maruaile not then though M. Harding say hee expressed it not by any tearme Yet the farthest of from al truth is Hard. Ibid. fol 209. A necessary point of Christian doctrine yet without al manner of Religion that which in the prosecution of this article he deliuereth which is that Christ at the very same instant of time that he offered himselfe on the Crosse with shedding of blood we must vnderstaÌ„d for a necessary point of Christian doctrine that he offered himselfe invisibly as concerning man in the sight of his heauenly father bearing the markes of his woundes and there appeareth before the face of God with that thorne prickt naile boared speare perced other wounded rent torne body for vs. Here are 4 sacrifices made of one The same Christ sacrificed at his last supper the same Christ on the Crosse the same Christ at the same time sacrificed in heauen the same Christ sacrificed in the Masse How M. Harding can bring Christs sacrificed into heaueÌ„ without his tormentors is hard to conceaue Aâ—…as Caiphas Iudas Pilate the rest of that damned crew indeed for without those wretches Christs blood was not shed and without shedding of blood there is noe remission of sinne Where M. Harding shold euer findany such doctrine deliuered before him I cannot iudge Heb. 9. l. 12. fol. 421. a incruentam oblationem Christus in cae lis fecit In his explication assertion of the true catholike faith l. 5. fol. 144 b. Noe iteration of Christs sacrifice except he did allight vpon it in Melchior Canus who amongst other idle vaine discourses of their Masse insinuateth such a thinge speaking of an vnbloody sacrifice in heauen offered there by Christ Stephan Gardiner sometime Bishop of Winchester a sure card to the posters at Rome writing purposly of the sacrifice of the Masse beginneth wel saith it is agreed by the scriptures plainly taught that the oblation sacrifice of our sauiour Christ was is a perfect worke once consummate in perfectioÌ„ without necessity of iteratioÌ„ as it was neuer taught to be iterate but a meere blasphemy to presuppose it This is sound Catholike if he would abide by it but within two leaues after hee saith wee must beleiue the very presence of Christs body and blood on Gods board and that the Priests doe their sacrifice and bee therfore called sacrificers If the Preists doe there sacrifice Ibid. fol. 146. b verie sacrificers theÌ„ doe they either iterate Christs sacrifice or
of bread as also the natural property of nourishing feeding the body which is proper to bread Is it called bread because it hath the shew of bread by what figure Hath it the naturall properties of bread yet is it not bread say againe say truly it is called bread therfore it is bread It hath the naturall properties of bread feeding nourishing as also the accidents sauor waight tast colour and al and therfore it hath the name is indeed very bread They are so farre remoued from the center of trueth in these points that rather then they wil leaue their wils shut vp the streame of their owne affections they will leaue all hope of a sound beleefe What eateth the mouse if she or he I know not whether chance to catch of the cōsecrated host Lumb l. 4. dis◠13. a fine Aske the schoolman it becommeth their grauities to treate such questions It cannot bee said saith Lumbard that the body of Christ is eaten of bruite beastes although it seemeth so to bee when the mouse eateth then what eateth hee Deus nouit God knoweth that and hee that saith otherwise God knoweth that is adiudged an hereticke How then escapeth the Angelicall Doctor Quidam autem dixerunt 3. p. 80. q. art 3 ad 3. Some haue saide faith hee that as astone as the sacrament is touched by a Mouse or a Dogge the body of Christ ceaseth to be there But this derogateth from the truth of this sacrament neither must we say that a bruit beast doth eat the body of Christ sacramentally but it must bee saide that the Mouse eateth by chance Ibid. fol. 24. 2. as a man that shoulde eate the consecrated host vnknowne vnto him Now Gardiner saith contrary that no creature can eate the body and bloud of Christ but only man I let passe the rest of Aquinas prodigious base discourses touching some other cautels belonging to this sacramēt Ib. q. 83. art 6 ad 3. as if a spider should fall into the consecrated wine or poison should therewith be mingled which although with warrant good enough I might lay thē before you Tuberius because I am by al honest direct courses to warne you to beware you drinke not at that fountaine The maine scope of this treatise discourse whose fairest Streames are so filthy and loth some yet I will omit him now returne to some hand somer discourse and shew you that as they are found to faulter touching the particular drift of every word in the institution of the Lordes supper as the blessing breaking This is my body so if those were granted vnto them to bee as they would lay thē downe themselues that we should agree and say with them that the reall and substantiall body of Christ is present in the Eucharist yet can they not tel you neither the manner of the presence Art 5. cont Iuell fol. 127. b. Christ gaue his diciples the same body which suffered on the crosse the same body is there corporally carnally and naturally but not after a corporal carnall or natural wise but in visibly spiritually diuinly by way to him onlie knowen The maner of his presence is not locall or natural but such as God only knoweth Art 6. fol. 136. Corporally yet spiritually Carnally yet diuinely Naturally and yet supernaturally and by al these waies yet by none of these God only knoweth the way nor according to what body that presence is as whether according to that wherein hee lived heere in earth or whether as it is now qualisfied and glorious in heaven Whether with parts or without parts neither are they agreed how hee is eaten D. Harding saith it is cleare by many places of holy scripture that Christ at his last supper gaue to his disciples his very body even the same which the day following suffered death on the crosse which haue ministred iust cause to the godly learned fathers of the Church to say that Christs body is present in the sacrament really substantially corporally carnally and naturally by vse of which adverbes they haue ment only a truth of being so that we may say that in the sacrament his very body is present really that is to say indeed substantially that is in substance and corporally carnally naturally by which words is meant that his very body his very flesh and his very humane nature is there not after corporall carnall or naturall wise But invisibly vnspeakeably miraculously supernaturally spiritually divinely and by waie to him onlie knowne Againe Concerning the māner of the presence saith he being of that bodie bloud in the sacrament they that is the fathers we acknowledge and confesse that it is not locall circumscriptine definitiue or subiectiue or naturall but such as is knowen to God only In the next article The body of Christ saith he is made present in the blessed sacrament of the Altar vnder the forme of bread wine not after a grosse carnal maner but spiritually supernaturally yet substantially not by locall but by substantiall presence not by maner of quātitie or filling of a place or by chāging of place or by leaving his sitting on the right hand of God but in such a manner as God only knoweth and yet doth vs to vnderstand by faith the truth of his very presence far passing all mens capacities to comprehend the manner how Historia maxima nascitur do nihilo If M. Hardinge knowe not how it was in him an idle diligence to bee so copious in striuing to expresle the manner how Hath not he told vs He hath expressed our beleefe his owne two which is more then the manner how Corporally Carnally naturally saith he spiritually dininely say wee And yet he saith all confounding substantially spiritually God doth vs to vnderstand saith he by faith the truth of the presence What need faith sale I It is taken into the hād from the hād conferred to the mouth there they fasten their teeth Bellar. de sac euch l. 1. c. 2. f. 28. 29. and from thence to the stomacke The senses of sight feeling haue their offices here faith hath none nether is it hard to comprehend all this and more two Here is also one the same Christ with proportion of body members distinct each from other also without distinction of mēbers parts which ouerthroweth the truth of a naturall body and yet so they make him at one and the lame time at the table and vnder the shew of bread not by local but by substantiall presence not by maner of quantity or filling of a place and yet the same mā did saie before Art 5. fol. 130. b. Put laid Fide intelligamus situm in sacra illa mēsa agnum illū dei sunt verba magni Niceni Synodi ex Cut Tonstall lib. 1. de euchar fol. 40. Bellarm. de sacra