altereth the Catholickes question and is farre from our first meaning For we hold with Christs trueth Ioh. 20.31 that vnlesse the written word of God first warrant it we are not bound in conscience to beleeue it though all the Doctors and Prelates in the world should sweare it And this was demaunded of you not as the demaunders doubted that the canonicall Scriptures were insufficient to prooue any article of faith but onelie that all men might see and so be resolved whether the Protestants or the now Romane Catholicques ioyne neerest to Christs trueth and the faith of the first primitiue Fathers For that faith which can bee prooved to bee taught in Christs time and so receiued and continued in the primitiue Church for the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention must needs be the true auncient Apostolicall and Catholicque faith And that other faith that cannot be so proved is but base bastardly and counterfeit and I trust in Christ that the Reader easily shall perceiue before the ende of this small Treatise that this your opinion touching Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament and so in the rest of the other Positions was never taught by Christ nor once dreamed on by the auncient Fathers but invented and deviled a thousand yeares after Christ by the late Church of Rome grounding their proofes onelie of an emptie sound of syllables without Apostolicall or Catholicque sence enforcing both Scriptures and Fathers to speake what they and you pleased not what the holie Ghost and the Fathers purposed But first heere you wrong your selfe much your cause more but the simple people most of all in altering the state of the question for our controversie is of the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament whether he be there corporallie or spirituallie The Catholicque Priests subtilly alter the state of the question And you no doubt in your conscience knowing it vnpossible to prooue your carnall presence alter the question verie deceiptfully from the manner to the matter That Christ is really in the blessed Sacrament A thing never denied by vs nor ever in question betwixt Protestant and Papist for both you and we hold Christs reall presence in the Sacrament but you carnallie and locallie we misticallie and spiritually you by Transubstantiation we in the commanded and lawfull administration But here you forget your grounds of divinitie and rules of Logicke in making an opposition betwixt spirituall receiving and reall receiving opposing them as contraries whereas the opposition is not betwixt spirituall and reall but betwixt corporall and spirituall for spirituall receiving by faith is reall receiving and corporall receiving by the mouth is also reall receiving So that the Scriptures and Fathers that here you alleadge bee altogither impertinent to prooue your carnall presence of Christ and his new conception of bread not of the blessed Virgin by a sinfull Priest not by the holy Ghost For Christ willing I will make it plaine vnto you that you haue shewed little divinitie and concealed much learning in this onely hudled vp a number of texts of Scriptures and Testimonies of Fathers out of Eckius Common-places and other like Enchiridions and neuer read the fathers themselues which at first was requested And thus trusting other mens reports and not your owne eyes you haue wrongd your self weakned your cause and abused the simple For if you had diligently read throughly weighed these Scriptures and Fathers you might haue seene and knowne that these confute your erronious opinions and confirme them not But this you should haue here prooved for the Catholicques satisfaction in which you haue altogither failed That after the Priest hath spoken over and to the Bread and Wine Rhem. test 1. Cor. 11. Sect. 9. Hoc est corpus meum and vsed powrefull words over it and theÌ„ which you call your consecration that presentlie the substances of Bread and Wine are gon not one crumme or drop remaining but wholly transubstantiated transnatured and chaunged into the verie reall naturall and substantiall bodie and bloud of Christ which was borne of the Virgin Marie Rhe. Test â—â—th 26. Sect. 4. and nailed on the crosse is now in heaven and yet in the Sacrament whole aliue and immortall and that this bodie of Christ must bee received with our corporall mouth and locally descend into our corporall stomackes Which bodie so made by the Priest is offered by the Priest to God the father as a propitiatorie mercifull and redeeming sacrifice by which the Priest applieth as hee saith the generall vertues of Christs passion to every particular mans necessitie either quicke or dead for mâ—tters temporall or graces spirituall for whom and when he listeth and for what hee pleaseth Your carnall presence shall bee first handled The second point which is your propitiatorie sacrifice shall bee handled in the title of the Masse This is your Romane â—â—e learning which you should haue prooved but how your owne proofes being duely examined disprooue you let the learned iudge But now to your first proofe out of the sixth of Iohn to prooue your opinion touching the first position Ioh. 6. vers 51. The bread vvhich I vvill giue is my flesh c. Catho Priests Ioh. 6. vers 53. Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Son of man and drinke his bloud you shal haue no life in you Ioh. 6. vers 55. My flesh is meat truly my bloudes c. GEntlemeÌ„ you mistake vtterly Christs meaning Rider wresting Christs wordes from the spirituall sence in which he spake to the litterall sence which he never meant ancient Fathers never taught Primitiue Church of Christ for one thousand yeares at least after Christs ascentioÌ„ never knew or received For the words and phrases be figuratiue and allegorical therefore the sence must be spirituall not carnal For this is a generall rule in Gods booke ancient Fathers yea and in your Popes Canons and glosses that everie figuratiue speech or phrase of Scripture must be expounded spirituallie not carnally or litterallie as anone more plainlie you shall heare But that the simple be no longer seduced by your Romane doctrine expounding this 6. of Iohn grammaticallie and carnally contrarie to Christs meaning constraining these places to prooue your carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament when there was no Sacrament then ordained J will set downe GOD willing Christs meaning truelie and plainlie which you shall nor be able either by Scriptures or auncient Fathers to contradict 1 First I will plainelie deliver the occasion why Christ vsed the Metaphor of Bread calling himselfe Bread 2 Secondlie according to which of Christs nature he is our living bread whether as hee is man onely or God onely or as he is compleate God and man 3 Thirdly how this bread must be taken and eaten whether by the mouth of the bodie or the mouth of the soule 4 Fourthly the fruit that comes to the true eaters thereof 5 Lastly the reasons shall bee alleadged out of
one hath drawn them to ydolatrie the other inciteth whom he can to treacherie And if Spaine might haue his will of this kingdome but he is liker to loose Spaine then conquer Ireland the subiects should be vsed as the Dukedome of Millain the kingdome of Naples are by the Spaniards hādled Poperie seeketh to bring Ireland to Spanish slaverie from English libertie al the Nobilitie Gentlemē vpō pain of death are forbidden to dwel in Castles the cittizens in high streets but back-laines no man to wear a weapō but a knife of three inches lōg yet tipt with a French posie No poynt This should be the miserable state of the Irish vnder bloudie Spaines government Now for conclusion let me intreat you as August did his Readers Noli meas literas ex tua opinione vel contentione In his Preface before the third booke de Trinitate c. neither reprooue nor correct these labors according to your own private opinion or contentions humors but correct confute thē lectione divina by Gods word then you shal haue my good leaue loue my best furtherance to the State that after you haue replied to this it may be printed as also your persons for further conference protected the like I desire of you that whē you find the text truth against you you seek not any lying glosse or Romish shift to help you rather contending for victory then veritie The Lord open your eies that you may see the truth that you we ioyntlie ioyfully may preach onely Christ crucified without mans inventions c Your louing friend so far at you are Christs the Queene Iob. Rider A FRIENDLY CAVEAT TO IRELANDS CATHOLICQVES CONCERning the Daungerous Dreame of Christs corporal◠presence in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper grounded vpon a letter sent from the Catholicques c. To the reverend Fathers the holy Iesuits Seminaries and all other Priests that fauour the holy Romane religion within the kingdome of Ireland HVmbly praieth your Fatherly charities F. W. and P. D. with many other professed Catholicques of the holie Romane religion that whereas of late they haue heard some Protestant Preachers confidently affirme and as it seems vnto our shallow capacities plainly do prooue that these positions here vnder-written cannot be proued by anie of you to be either Apostolicall or Catholicque by canonicall Scripture or the auncient Fathers of the Church which liued and writ within the compasse of the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention which assertion of theirs hath bred in your suppliants great doubts touching the trueth of the same vnlesse your fatherly accustomed charities be extended presently to satisfie our consciences in the same by the holy vvritten word of God such Fathers of the Church as aforesaid which being so directly and plainely prooued by you as aforesaid may be a speedie meanes to convert many Protestants to our profession Otherwise if these points cannot be so proued by you vpon whose learned resolutions we greatly relie then not onely we but many thousands more in this kingdome of Ireland can hold these points to be neither Apostolicall or Catholicque And thus hauing shewed some of our doubts wee desire your fatherly resolutions as you tender the credit of our religion the convincing of the Protestants and the satisfying of our poore consciences And thus craving your speedie learned and fatherly answeres in writing at or before the first of Februarie next with a perfect quotation of both Scripture and Fathers themselues not recited or repeated by others for our better instruction and the aduersaries speedier stronger confutation we cōmend your persons and studies to Gods blessed direction and protection Positions 1 That Transubstantiation or the corporall presence of Christ◠bodie and bloud in the Sacrament was neuer taught by the auncient fathers that euer writ in the first fiue hundred years after Christs ascention but a spirituall presence onely to the faithfull beleeuers 2 That the Church of God had not their service in an vnknowne tongue but in such language as euery perticuler Church vnderstood 3 Thirdly that Purgatorie and praiers for the dead were not then knowne in Gods Church 4 Fourthly that images praying to Saints vvere then neither taught by those Fathers nor receiued of the Catholicque Church 5 Fiftly that the Masse vvhich novv the Church of Rome vseth vvas not then knovvne to the Church 6 Sixtly that there ought not to bee one supreame Bishop ouer all the vvorld and that Bishop to be the Pope of Rome and that the said Pope hath not vniversall iurisdiction ouer all Princes and their subiects in all causes Temporall and Ecclesiasticall The Protestant Preachers affirme vnles you prooue the premisses by canonicall Scripture they cannot be Apostolicall and therefore bind not the conscience of anie And if they cannot bee proued by the said Fathers then they be neither auncient nor Catholike And therefore to be reiected as mens inventions PRouoked to prooue either by Scriptures or Fathers Catho Priests vvhich liued vvithin the compasse of fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention that the Primitiue Church and Catholicques of this time are of consent touching these Articles 1 That Christ is really in the blessed Sacrament 2 That Scriptures should not be perused by the vulgar 3 That praier for the dead Purgatorie vvas beleeved 4 That images vvere vvorshipped and praiers made to Saints 5 That Masse vvas allovved 6 That the supremacie of the Pope vvas acknovvledged GEntlemen Rider the cause of this your provokement was a quiet and milde conference vpon these positions maister W. N. with an honorable Gentlemā and a speciall good friend of yours concerning religion wherein he confidently assumed that the Iesuits and Romane Priests of this kingdome were able to prooue by Scriptures and Fathers these Positions to be Apostolicall Catholicque And that the Church of Rome and the Romane Catholicques in Ireland now hold nothing touching the same but what the holy Scriptures and primitiue Fathers held within the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention Now if you in this conference for your part haue made such proofe by the holy canonicall Scriptures and such Doctors of the Church as aforesaid I haue promised to become a Roman Catholicque if you haue failed in your proofe which I am assured you haue done he likewise before worshipfull witnesses hath giuen his hand to renounce this your new doctrine of the church of Rome become a professor of the gospel of Christ This was the occasion and maner of your prouokement which J hope the best minded will not mistake not you misconster being onelie prouoked by your friend 1. Pet. 3.15 yea faith if you refuse not Saint Peters counsell to be readie alwaes to giue an answere to anie man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you In your first line you chaunge a woord and for or which greatly
est nam ipse quoque homo vinum benedixit cum dixit accipite bibite hoc est sanguis meus sanguis viâ—â—s c. For our Lord Christ red wine blessed wine when he said take drinke that my bloud the bloud of the vine the word which is â—â—ed for manie for the remission of sinnes doth signifie allegorie allie the holy river of gladnesse Out of which I note First it is sarguis vitis the bloud of the grope properlie and that is wine It is called Christs bloud â—acromontallie and by way of signification Secondlie it appeares to be figuraâ—ne in this word shed for the bloud of the grape which is â—â—â—e was not shed for manie but the bloud of Ch i st But you will save it is true before conseceâ—tion but after consecration it is Christs verie naturall bloud No saith Clement immediatlie following Qued autem vâ—num esset quod benedictum est c. And that it was wine which was blessed hee sheweth againe when he saith to his disciples I will not drinke of the fruit of the vine c. Read Clem nt follow Clem. Out of which premisâ—es I note three things First that that which you call consecration this learned Father calls it benediction Second he that after consecration the nature of wine remaineth still and it is not changed as you imagine Thirdly that the phrase is figuratiue and not proper Peda â—u Inc. 22. page 476 And veâ—â—rable Beda one countrie man tells you that in England in his time the text was taken figuratiuely The solemnities of the old Passover saith he being ended Christ commeth to the newe which the Church is desâ—ous to continue in remembrance of her redemption that in stead of the flesh and bloud of a LAMBE hee substituting the Sacrament of his flesh and bloud in the figure of bread and wine might shew himselfe to bee the same to whom the Lord sware and will not repent c. Beds calleth it not the naturall bodie of Christ that worketh our redemption but a rememberance of our redemption a figure of it Thus the indifferent Reader may see that Augustine Ambrose Origin Tertullian Hiorome Clemens Alexandrinus Beda and manie others which I omit for brevities sake all of them being auncient approoved wâ—iters and all of them of your owne Prints doe hold with vs against you that your propositions be not proper but Sacramentall improper significatiue representatiue allegoricall figuratiue which greatlie wounds the bodie of your cause and will weaken your credits with the Catholickes But you will say these testimonies of these Fathers though of your owne Prints yet they prooue nothing against you vnlesse the Church of Rome should receiue and allow that exposition of the fathers to be Catholicke If you should so replie surely it were a weake replication and subiect to manie exceptions and you would wring I cannot say wrong the church of Rome that she should hold a doctrine against all the old Doctors But if you will thus replie to bleate the eies of the simple yet will I frustrate your expectation for now I will shew you that the auncient Popes and the auncient Church of Rome held at these Fathers did that the proposition Hoc est corpus meum to be significatiue and improper and therefore figuratiue against your opinion You shall heare the Church of Rome deliver her owne minde with her owne mouth Dist 2. do consecratione canon which you cannot denie her wordes be these Ipsa immolatio carnis quae sacerdotis manibus fit Châ—â—â—ti pâ—ssio more crucifixio dicitur non rei veritate sed significante misterio That offering of the f esh which is done by the hand of the Priest Hecost pag. 434. You cannot denie but this Pope was a Protestant And if this canon be Catholicke then it your carnall presence antichristian is called the passion death and crucifying of Christ but not in exactnesse of truth but in misterie of that which was s gnified and the glosse there maketh most plaine against you Dicitur corpus Christi sed improprie vt sit sensus vocatur corpus Christi id est significat corpus Christi It is called the bodie of Christ but improperly that is figuratiuely that this be the â—enceâ—t is called the bodie of Christ that is it signifieth the bodie of Christ J will alleadge in this case other Popes and the saith of the Church of Rome in another age whereby the Reader may plainelie see that the auncient Pâ—pes and auncient Rome had the true succession in doctrine which we stand now on not that false succession of the place and a rotten worme-eaten chaire that you brag of the glosse speaketh thus against your litterall sence of Hec est corpus meum De consecratione dist â— Panis est in altare Glossa ibid page 43â— Not possible by their owne confession that bread should bee the bodie of Christ. Hoc taâ—â—â— est impossible quod panis sit corpus Christi yet this is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ Now gentle Reader see the wrong the late Popes and Priests offer to the Catholicks of this kingdome they would haue them imbrace that fot faith which the old Church of Rome held for heresie that for poss b litie which she saith is impossible Why would you haue vs to beleeue that which you your selues say is impossible This all the Iesuits and Priests in Christendome cannot aunswere If you say these two Popes and the Church of Rome then taught the truth why doe you now dissent from the olde Romane faith If you saye the Popes and Church of Rome then cited you will be counted an hereticke and therefore in Gods feare confesse the trueth with vs and the olde Church of Rome and deceiue the Catholickes of this kingdome no more with this litterall sence of Hoc est corpus meum which you borrow from the late Popes and late Church of Rome and is a new error dissenting from the old Catholicke faith dist 2. can Corpus Christi pag. 4. 8. col 4. You cannot dâ—nie this Pope to be a protestanâ— in 〈◊〉 point And I will adde one other Popes Canon Corpus Christi quod fuexitur de Altari figura est dum panis â—inum videntur extra veritas autem dum corpus saâ—guâ—s Christi in veritate interins creditur The bodie of Christ which is taken from the Altar is a figure so long as the bread and wine are seene vnreceived but the truâ—â—â— of the figure is seene when the bodie and bloud are received trulâ—â— inwardly and by faith into the heart Now the glosse in that place expondeth the teâ—t and saith Corpus Christs est sacrificium corporis Christi alias falsum est quod dicit the bodie of Christ in the text signifieth the sacrifice of the bodie of Christ otherwise it is false Out of which I note that the Church of Rome calls the outward Elements
Priestes that we might he nourished by that by vvhich vve haue been redâ—emed A Blinde man may see that you never read this in Cyprian your selfe Cyprian de Duplici Marts floruit 249. Rider or else that you vnderstand them not For Cyprian saith not God hath left in his flesh but Reliquit nobis edendam carnem suam â—ubquis bibendum sanguinem c. he hath left vs his flesh meate and his bloud to drinke I pray you pardon me to aske you which is the nominatiue case to the tube is Deus no but if you had begunne seven lines sooner as you ought in deed to haue done at Nemo maâ—em charitatem habet c. you should haue found the right nominatiue case that there might haue been not onelie a grammatticall concord but also a Theologicall harmonie and then the sence had bene plaine For it was hee that died for his enemies that left vs his flesh c. And that was Christ not God the father But you begunne after your accustomed manner in the middest of a sentence mistaking the nominatiue case to the verbe and so lay downe heresie for divinities for God the father hath neither flesh nor blould But if I should helpe you with a charitable construction by attributing that to Christes Deitie which is proper to his humanitie yet you still haue wrested the father and abused the Reader But thus Cyprian is to be readâ— Christ truth left vs his flesh to eate and his bloud to drinke so we confesse it we beleeue is and we teach it but to be eaten and drunke spirituallie by saith not corporallie nor â—â—turallie as you imagine For this is the inward invisible Grace of the Sacramente that you propound Now how this flesh and bloud of Christ is to be eâ—ten or how Christs flesh and bloud are naturalliâ— substantiallie reallie vnder the formes of bread anâ— wine which is our question you cannot prooue bâ— Cyprian and so still you propound the matter to vâ— when you should prooue the maner to vs and here 〈◊〉 your error in the third kinde if not in moe beforâ— specified Cyprian de Cana Domini nu 9. And heere you bring a testimonie out of Cyprian where hee speaketh not properlie of the sacrament but of the threefold Martyrdome which hee gathereâ— out of the death of Christ and therefore you shew 〈◊〉 great weaknesse in running to that Tractate whereaâ— you might haue spedde better if you had list neereâ— home For if you had reade or woulde reade thaâ— Father vpon his Treatise of the Lords Supper hee would haue either changed your minde or hardned your heart but howsoever discoverd your errors And that the eating of Christs flesh and drinking of Christs bloud is not a grosse corporall swallowing of his blessed flesh and precious bloud What it is to eate Christes flesh and drinke Christs bloud as you deeme but that Esus carnis Christs est quaedam aeuiditas quoddam desyderium manendi in ipso c. The eating of Christs flesh is a certaine egernesse and a certaine desire to abide in Christ c. And three lines before this he saith Our abiding in him is our cating of him and the drinke is a certaine incorporation into him And in the latter end of the Treatise you shall finde that Father touch the point in question betwix vs Hovv Christ must bee eaten haec quotiens agimus non dentes ad mordendum acuimus sed fidâ— synâ—ora panem sanctum frangimus partimus c. As often as we receiue these holie mysteries we whet not our teeth to bite or chew but breake and divide this holie bread by a sincere faith c. And foure lines before that saith he Edulium carnis Christs de facatis animis c. The food of Christs flesh must be eaten with purified minds saith not with washed mouthes Impij nec se iudicant nec sacramenta diiudicant ibid. n. 13. And â—ttle before that hee saith the wicked lambunt peâ—â— c. licke the rocke but neither sucke honie nor â—â—e c. that is to say they eate the Sacrament but 〈◊〉 the inward grace of the Sacrament Thus I hope â—e indifferent Reader is satisfied that your proofe is 〈◊〉 pertinent to the matter in question and therefore â—â—eweth the weaknesse of your cause Transubstansiation is but in deede a fable and the wilfulâ—esse of your mindes that will seeke so stiflie to mainâ—â—ine fables with wresting fathers for Cyprians place â—â—at you bring handleth the invisible grace of the Saâ—rament And in this place which I bring he toucheth 〈◊〉 manner how that grace is to be received that is â—ith faith as we say not â—eeth as you teach c. And 〈◊〉 Cyprian agrees with himselfe and we with Cyprian â—â—yne against your carnall opinion And thus having â—â—nswered Cyprian with Cyprian and shewed you your â—â—â—e sight and mistaking of Cyprian I will come to â—â—e examination of your next proofe There is no doubt left of the veritie of the flesh and bloud of Christ for novv by the assurance of our Lord Caththoâ— Priests and certaintie of our faith Hyllarius de Trinitate lib 4. 8. floruit 370. it is his true flesh and his true bloud GEntlemen now we must needs commend you for you giue testimonie with the truth and vs against the late church of Rome your selues â—ow you come neere the quicke in deed Rider and therefore â—peake both the trueth and trulie This is the manner â—w Christ must be eaten by faith but you should 〈◊〉 added the next line following Et haec accepta atâ—â— exhausta id efficiunt c. and these that is sanctiâ—â—â—d bread and veine being thus by faith taken thus â—â—ple bring this to passe that Christ is in vs and we â— Christ so now you say with Hyllarie that Christ dwelleth in all them that receiue him by faith Your owne proofe is one our side Anâ— so by this your owne warrant you witnesse to the world that there is no place for the corporall receiving of Christ by the wicked as Rome teacheth it because Christ dwelleth not in them nor they in him And so because this your proofe prooues our part of the matter in question against your selues that Christ iâ— to bee eaten or received by our faith not by our mouth or teeth I will addresse my selfe to the examination of your next proofe Catholicks Priestes Nothing remaineth in the vvorld of the bodie and bloud of Christ Athan lib. de Passione Imaginis Christs cap. 7. florniâ— 375. but that vvhich daylie is made by the Priest on the Altar GEntlemen I perceiue you are soone wearie of well doing in your last proofe you confessed a trueth with vs even against your selues But now you leaue fathers and bring fables and so produce one fable to prooue another fable Rider that is you produce one fable of the crucifying of the image of Christ
Readers good I wil repeat they be these If the scripture seem to coÌ„mand any vile or ill fact the speech is figuratiue as Except yee eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you Facinus vel flagitium videtur tubere â—â—ther can use S. â—â—â—â—d or confess your erroâ— the â—â—â—st â—â—possâ—le the second were commendable Christ seemeth to commaund a wicked act that is carnallie and grosly to eate Christs flesh c. it is therefore a figuratiue speech So that Augustine thus reasons against you To eate Christs flesh and drinke Christs bloud corporallie is a hainous thing therefore Christs wordes be figuratiue so that if to eate Christes flesh with our mouths and teare his flesh with our teeth as also actually drinking of his bloud bee hainous and wicked why doe you so eagerly presse the litterall sence of theâ—e your two propositions against trueth against faith and the auncient Father â—ead it it coâ—taines but 6. or 7 lineâ— The marginall note there coâ—demes your litterall sence Agustine in that short 19. chap. of the same booke immediatly going before wisheth alwaies the interpretation of these and all other figuratiue speeches to be brought ad regnum charitatie to the kingdome of charitie to haue their true exposition Now if you expounde this litterallie and properlie you forsake Agustines rule charities kingdome and the Apostolicall and Catholike exposition It is but small charitie to devoure the food of a friend but to eate and devoure corporallie and gutâ—urallie the precious bodie and bloud of our Christ and Saviour Augustine would haue you catholicks but you wil bee Capernatis and Canibals it is no charitie Nay saith Augustine it is plaine impietie and a wicked and a most damnable fact And so to prooue the action lawfull the kingdome of charitie hath ever taken these and the like propositions to bee figuratiue and the sence to be spirituall Therefore if you will bee loyall subiects of charities kingdome shewe your subiection to her charitable and Catholicke exposition otherwise you will stand indited of spirituall and vncharitable rebellion Ambr. lib. 4 de Sacramentis cap. 5. Ambrose is of the same opinion with vs against you saying Fac nobit inquit oblationem ascriptam nationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura corporis sangaâ—â—is Domine nostri Iesu Christi make vnto vs saith the Priest this oblation that it may bee allowable reasonable and acceptable which is a figure of the bodie bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ And Ambrose presentlie after saith the new Testament is confirmed by bloud in a figure of which bloud wee receiue the misticall bloud By these words the Reader may see that Ambrose and the Church in his daies tooke it not for the naturall bodie of Christ but for a figure of his bodie and therefore cease to bragge heereafter to the simple of Ambrose and Augustine set they are not of your opinion (a) â—â—noâ— Papae lib. tartius cap 12. Fol 148 there shal you see the foolish and phantasticall reasons the Pope giues for those said crosses Aug. in enarratione Psal â— pag. 7. col 1. Printed at Paris anno 1586 And in the Canon of the Masse you haue these â—â—â—ds of Ambrose in that part which begins Quam oblationem but you deale deceitfully with Gods people for you leaue out these words quod est figura corporis and there dash in fine red crosses and still teach the people it is Catholicke doctrine and the old religion but these iuglings with the Fathers must be left or else good men that follow those Fathers will doubt that Gods spirit hath left you And Augustine elsewhere saith Christ commended â—â—d delivered to his disciples the figure of his body â—â—d bloud And Origin saith not the matter of bread but the words recited over it doth profit the worthy receiver this I speake saith he of the typicall figuratiue bodie which is in deede the Sacramentall bread Vpon the 15. of mathew Augustine confuting Adimautus the Hereticke that hold that the bloud in man was the onelie soule of man aunswered it was so figuratiuely August tom 6 contra Adâ—â— cap. 12. not otherwise and to prooue it he vseth this proposition of Christ Hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie saying Possum etiam interpretari illud praeceptum in signo posiâ—â—â— esse non enim dubitauit Dominus dicere hoc est corpuâ— meum cum singnum daret corporis sui I maye 〈◊〉 Augustine expound the precept of Christ figuratiuelie â—or the Lord doubted not to say this is my â—oâ—â—e when he gaâ—e the figure of his bodie Augustine saith Hoâ—â—â—st corpus meum is a phrase figuratiue you say no but it is litterall Now let the Catholicks take this Friendlie Caueat to heâ—â—â— for they haue no reason to follow you that forsake the Fathers and heâ—re may you see that our expositiâ—n is auncient Catholicke and Apostolicall yours new private and 〈◊〉 all Tertaâ—â— lib 4. contraâ— Mâ—recon pag. â—23 line 26. Tertullâ—â— an ancient Father saith Acceptum panem dâ—stributum discipâ—lis c. The bread which was taken and given to his disciples Christ made his bodie by saying this is my bodie that is the figure of my bodie what could be more spoken of them for vs against you And Hierome calls it a representation of the truth of Christs bodie bloud Hierome super 26. math Ambrose on Cor. 11. not the body and bloud And Ambrose seconds his former sayings in these words In edâ—â—do c. in eating drinking the bread wine we doe signifie the flesh bloud which was offered for vs so that they doe but signifie the flesh and bloud they are not the flesh and bloud And Chrisostome saith Chrisâ— in hâ—â—a vpâ—n Hebr. sâ—per Cor. 11. Offermus quidâ—â— sed ad recerdaâ—â—â—nem and afterwards Hoc autem sacrificium exemplâ—â— est ellius c. We offer in deed but in rememberance of his death this sacrifice is a token or figure of that sacrifice the thing that we do is done in ten emberance of the thing that was done by Christ before c. Here is a manifest â—â—ace against you which you shall never aunswere Chris in hâ—n 11 â—â—rk â—â—â—ent Alâ—â— on paâ—â—go lib. 1. cap. 6 pag 18. line vlt. pag 19. lâ—ne 1. And elsewhere be saith in the soâ—e sanctified vessels there is not the bodie of Christ in deed bâ—â— a masterie of the bodie is contained And Clemens Alexandrinus who lived 1300. yeares agoe saith Comedite cornes meas bibite sanguinem â—eum c. Eâ—t ye my flesh and drinke my bloud meaning hereby vnder an allegorie or figure the meat drinke that is of faith and promise And the same reverend Father in his second booke and second chapter of his Pedagogs and 51. pag and line 21 22 23. hath these words Ipse quoque vine vsus
phrase addeth a dignitie to the sacrament but changeth not the nature of the sacrament to terme the visible signe by the name of the thing signified as circumscision is called the couenaunt the Lambe is called the Pasâ—ouer In Baptisme iâ— called the fountaine of â—egeneration and bread Christs bodie and yet in deed th y are but outward signes and to the faithfull onely seales graâ—â—d by the holie Ghost with the names of the things they represent and confirme the more to 〈◊〉 me and stiâ—â—e vp oâ—r affections and to edge our zeale with a religious preparation to receiue the same and to life vp our hearts and soules by faith to behold consider and feed vpon Christ crucified the thing signified Yet for your further satisfaction I will intreat Augustine to aunswere you doubt who saith (a) Aug. epistol 22. ad bonifatium Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem â—arum rerum quarum sacramenta sunt non haberent omnino sacramenta non essent ex hac autem similitudine plerunque etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum sacramentum corporis Christs corpus Christs est sacramentum sanguinis Christs sanguis Chriâ—ti est ita sacramentum fides fides est In English thus If the Sacrament had not some certaine similitude and likenesse of the things whereof they be Sacraments they should be no Sacraments at all And of this similitude manie times they haue the names of those things themselues as the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ is after a certaine manner the bodie of Christ and the sacrament of his bloud is after a certaine maner his bloud So the Sacrament of faith or Baptisme is faith Out of which wee may note first they are but Sacraments or similitudes of the thing signified not the things themselues secondlie that bread wine are the bodie bloud of Christ bâ—â— secundum quendam modum after a certaine maner and shewes how by an example as the Sacrament of faith is faith so the Sacrament of Christs body is Christs bodie but the Sacrament of faith is not faith naturallie substantiallie by a chaunge of substance for by chaunge of qualitie or vse therefore the Saâ—â—â—t of Christs bodie is not chaunged into the â—â—â—tance of Christs bodie but onely in qualitie and â—â—se is Theodores saith in his first dialogue Theodoret dialog 2. cap. 24 pag 113. dialog 1. cap. 8. pag. 54. read them I pray you not changing nature but adding grace vnto nature And the â—â—â—e Father in his second dialogue explaines this more plainly saying the misticall signes after sanctifâ—cation Non recedunt a sua natura manere enim in pure substantia figura c. they depart not from theâ— nature but remaine in their former substance 〈◊〉 figure may be seene touched as before Out of which auncient learned Father I obserue these necessarie points for the Catholickes instruction and your confutation First he saith Post sanctificationem Consecration vnknovvn to Theodor. therefo e it is a new terme The change is in the name honour and vse not in the nature Father ansvvere this fâ—str or confesse the truth after sanctification then your new comed terme of consecration was not known in the Church of God but sanctification and benediction Secondly I note cut of this father that though the Sacraments haue gotten a new diuine qualitie yet they haue not lost their nature they had before as you vntrulie teach Thâ—rdlie I obserue that he confuted by the example of bread and wine in the Sacrament certaine Heretickes who held that Christs bodie was changed into his deitie after his ascention for this is the Fathers proofe against those heretickes That as bread and wine are trulie bread and wine after sanctification as they were before sanctification euen so is Christs bodie as trulie a bodie now after his ascention as it was before his ascention So now the Priests of new Rome cannot say that the bread and wine haue lost their true natures and properties in the Lords supper after sanctification vnlesse then will also say with the Heretickes that Christ hath lost the nature of a true bodie now after his ascention And Chrisostomâ— seconds Theodores saying Ante Sanctificationem 〈◊〉 â—sost ad Caesarium Monach Mark this well yet Preists Iesuets c. Before it he sanctified we cal it bread buâ— the deuine gracâ— once sanctifying it by the ministrie of the Priest it â— deliuered from the name of bread and counted worthy to be called the Lords body though the nature oâ— bread continue there still Out of which I note 〈◊〉 the father calles it sanctification not consecration Secondly it is called bred before sanctification is breaâ— in nature after sanctification Aâ—d lâ—rdly after sanctificatioÌ„ it is called the Lords body yet it is not the â—ord body in deede because the nature of bread remaine And therefore in that it is calld the Lords body it muâ—â— be so Sacramentally figuraâ—â—uâ—ly improperly And Gelasius your owne Pope whom you dare not contradict such plainely Noâ— defiant esse substantia panis 〈◊〉 natura vini What can you saie to thâ—se pregnaâ—te proofes to satisfie the doubtfull catholiques There scaceth not to be the substance oâ— bread and the nature of wine But you here will obtrude your oulde slanderous obiection that we accepâ— of the Sacraments no better then bare figures No we acknowledge a change and an alteration but not oâ— the substance but of the vse Is not this a maruelous change wrought by the holy Ghost in the due administration of the Lords supper according to Christ Institution that of commen bread and wine such as daily we feede our bâ—â—ches with is made the dreadefull and reuerend misteries of Christ crucified where by we neither looke vppon the bare naked elements as common creatures but as sanctified food And in such sort that even as the bâ—ead doth nourish our bodies and the wine doth comfort our spirits so trulie reallie and vnfainedlie doth the heavenlie food of his bodie crucified and his bloud shed for our sinnes by faith in the time of the holie Supper feede and nourish our soules into everlasting life and so is made and sealed our reall coniunction with Christ not by his bodilie and locall discention into our stomackes but by 〈◊〉 spirituall ascention to him by faith This is our â—â—nne touching these figuratiue propositions warâ—ed by Scriptures Clem. Alex Theod August with many not neuer heard of consecration but of santification Benedection and witnessed by the auncientest â—thers Hitherto hath beene plainly and directlie â—ooved that your two propositions bee figuratiue 〈◊〉 proper Secondlie that the substances of bread 〈◊〉 â—ime remain after coÌ„secration therfore there can 〈◊〉 no such carnall presence of Christ by Transubstantation vnder the formes of bread and wine as 〈◊〉 deeme Now I am come to your two maine pilâ— that support vnderprop your carnall
so then this Pope will haue this sence hoc eâ—â— corpus meum that is nothing is my bodie But in thâ— three of the last lines of that chapter his wisedomâ— changed his minde said this is my bodie that is whaâ— soever is vnder the formes of bread is my bodie Iâ— not this thinke you deepe divinitie for a Pope You may see herein how the Pope vseth shamefull shifts tâ— cover his sensible errors and to deceiue Christs littâ— flocke In his Marc. Anton Con. Stephen Gardner living buâ— latelie seeing every man opinion expounding what hoc should be heed slikes 〈◊〉 them all and saith it signifieth iudiuiduum vagum as iâ— Christ had said This but what it is I cannot tell but iâ— must of necessitie be somewhat is my bodie De consec dist 2. can P morem Glossa ibi dem But I will conclude with your owne Popes Canoâ— and Glosse which you hold for Canonicall though in deed hereticall solet quari quid demonstratur per pronâ—â—â— men hoc It is a common question what is meant by â—hiâ— pronounce this whether bread or the bodie of Christ not bread for that is not the bodie of Christ nor yet thoâ— bodie of Christ for it appereath not that there is anie transubstansiation till the words hoc all pronounced yea the last sillable â—m To this question this must be aunswered That by the word this nothing is meanâ— but it is there put materially without anie signifi aâ—ion at all See now whither you are brought or rather whither haue you brought Gods people from â—â—deth to falsehood if hoc signifieth nothing where then is your transubstanstation For if in 〈◊〉 word which should first worke in the change there bee no mention of bread how câ—n that which is no waâ— comprised in them be chaunged by them so you spâ—ake against your selues Againe as you are rent in sunâ—â— opinions touching hoc so also are you touching â—â—er when you saw that est would not serue in his propet Evangelicall and Apostolicall signification What est signifieth there is great variance amongst the Romish Prelats Est i. Fit Est est verbum anuntiativum non constetutium Est 1. erit Iosephus Angles iâ— loco praedicto pag. 115. then you gaue him a new exposition For Bonaventure seeing that est as Christ and Paul meant it would not fit their purpose then hee of purpose expounded it by fit vt fit sensus panis fit corpus meum that it might be thus in sence The bread is made my bodie Yet Occham hee likes not Bonaventures Fit because hee thinkes it is too grosse and too false and therefore he will expound est by erit that it may carrie with it this sence this shall be my bodie but saith he it is a verie rash and brainsicke opinion and alleadgeth as brainsicke a reason as there you may see Yet Caietanus the Cardinall de Encharistia cap. 7. pag. 104. col 2. C. D. denieth est to haue anie such signification vnlesse it be in metaphors and parables But lest that I shuld be too offensiue vnto you I could del ver so many several opinions of yours touching the praedicat corpus one saith it must bee meant of Christes bodie glorified no saith another that is false but it must be vnderstood of his bodie as it was before his passion And a third opinion obiects certaine doubts against both the former Magister Sententiarum lib 4. distinct 12. page 60. delivers foure severall opinions de fractione partibus Now Gentlemen I appeale to your consciences if they be not cauteriated whether you haue dealt well with the ignorant Catholickes of this land in perswading them that in all your doctrine there is consent without jarres antiquitie without innovation and vniversalitie without limittation whereas there is nothing but iarres discords dissentions in your coÌ„secration in your transubstantiatioÌ„ in every word almost nay perticle as hoc and est be so wrested by your construction that you haue brought both their propeâ— significations to plaine destruction Is this exposition Catholicke what auncient fatheâ— ever expounded it so let the Catholickes know oâ— else they with vs will iudge neither you nor you doctrine Catholicke Will you follow a foolish Frier an ignorant Abbot a late vpstart Pope or Priest thaâ— writ and wrested within these foure hundred yeares and forsake Scriptures and the auncient Doctours oâ— the Church Now let the indifferent minded Catholikes be iudges whether you or wee haue antiquiâ—â— consent and veritie on our sides And who differs from Scriptures fathers from amongst themselues not onelie in one point of religion but almost in â—verie point and particle of doctrine Thus much coâ—cerning your discords amongst your selues and â—l â—gainst the auncient Apostolicall and Catholick truth Now to conclude this matter I will shewe plainlâ—â— by scriptures Hoc est corpus meum expouâ— bâ— scripente that hoc est corpus meum can haue no such sence as you teach which is that bread is not by this or anie other words transubstantiated or chauâ—ged into Christs bodie and bloud but that bread remaineth after sanctification or as you say consecratâ—on and that the scriptures speaking of Christs bodie and of the bread speake distinctlie not confusedlie that is they doe divide them not confound them giving to eâ—ther of them their severall nature and propertie yea after consecration And whereas we haue now heard too much of the jarres of your late Popes and writers voide of vnitie and veritie Now let vs heare the holie scriptures expound hoc est corpus meum plainlie and truelie by the Evangelists and Paul who knew best Christs meaning Vpon whose exposition all Christians may and must onelie rest satisfied inspite of Pope and poperie Debt math 26 26. ANd first we will prooue it from the difference of the signe and the thing signified The scriptures when they speak of bread they speak actiuely He gaue Dâ—tur Luc 22.19 But when they speake of Christs naturall bodâ—e they speake passiuelie Is given â—regit Luc. 21.19 When they speake of bread they speake actiuelie He brake it â—â—ngitur 1. Cor. 11.24 But when they speake of Christs body they speake passiuelie Which is broken â—â—s marke 14.22 When they speake of bread they say To you Pro vobis 1 Cor. 11.14 But when they speake of Christs naturall bodie they say For you Dedit marke 14 12 Likewise when they speake of wine they speake actiuely He gaue â—â—â—nditur Luc. 11.20 But when they speake of Christ his bloud they speake passiuelie Is shed â—it math 26.27 When they speake of the wine they say To them Pro multis prâ—rebis Luc. 22 â—0 math 26.26 But when they speake of Christs bloud they speake For you or for manie Iâ— meaÌ„ commemotationem 1. Cor. 11.24 When they speak of the cup they speak In rememberance of me Iâ— remissìonem peccatorum
wrest scriptures falsifie fathers that haue neither with you consent antiquitie nor veritie yet will be Catholickes And thus if a man should haue hired you to haue brought a place out of Augustine against your selues you could no better haue fitted yourselfe or your setter on then in this who verie plainlie delivereth the manner how Christs bodie and bloud is to bee eaten and drunke that is with a faithfull heart and mouth not with our materiall mouth teeth and stomacke as is you vntrulie teach And thus hoping the Catholicks will lesse trust you in the rest that haue so groslie deceived them in this I will proceed by Christes assistance to the examination of your next proofe Catho Priests In vvhat darknesse of ignorance in vvhat sluggish carelesnesse haue they been Leo epist 22. ad Clerum plebem Constantinopolitanae vrbis floruit Anno. 466. as not to haue heard by beare-say nor by reading to haue found vvhich in the Church of God is so plaine as that the mouthes of children do tell the bodie and bloud of Christ to be trulie in the blessed sacrament GEntlemen you mistake the Epistle it is in the 23. Epistle pag. 74. beginning in the 12 line printed at Lovaine 1575. and seeing it is both your owne proofe and your own print Rider if vpon due examination it make against you This Leo was the 13. Archb. of Romes twentie more succeeded him before any vsurped the name of Pope you must thinke God dealeth with you as he did with Balaam who when he made account for gaine to haue cursed Gods people then God put into his heart and vttered by his mouth a blessing to his people You made account to haue here overthrowne the trueth established errour and strengthned your credit and God hath put into your heart and you haue subscribed with your hand to confirme the trueth confute your owne error and discredit your selues and more to the worlds wonder the soile of your Romane faith even by a Bishop of Rome against whom you can take no exceptions So that now the Catholicks shall see that your carnall presence was not known to the first bishops of Rome for the first fiue hundred yeares and therefore it is not Catholicke Nomb. 23.8 And you shall see how vntrulie you not onelie quot him but alleadge him nay wrest and infore him to speake that after his death which hee never meant during his lif So that from the first to the last you deale neither trulie with the booke of God not the works of men Mathew 15.6 And as Christ saide to the Scribes and Pharesees You haue made the commaundement of God of no Authoritie by your Tradition So you Iesuites and Priests haue made neither Scripture Auncient father Councell or Pope of anie Authoritie by your new and false constructions addicions and subtractions c. But now to the examination of your proofe But I will first showe to the Catholicks the occasion why Leo writt this and there they shall see how greatly you are deceaued in mistaking Leo and much al use their simplicitie and the credite they repose in you The occasion whie Leo writte this Epistle was this That whereas the errour of the Manichees had greatlie infected the Church of God throughout all Christendome They denied Christs manhood taught that his bodie was not a true bodie but a phantasticall bodie he in a charitable manner sent Epiphanius and Dionisius two publike Notaries of the Church of Rome to the Cleargie and people of Constantinople requesting them that such as professed these damnable heresies might not onelie bee excommunicated from sermons sacraments but also be banished from their Citties for feare of further infection For saith hee such as beleeue not that Christ hath taken our nature and flesh vpon him beleeue neither the veritie nor vertue of Christs passion and resurrection And then commeth in your proofe which properlie must be applied to such hereticks as denie Christ his manhood to bee borne of the blessed virgin and hold that his bodie is not a true bodie but a phantasticall bodie and not to vs that beleeue both Againe you haue not truelie translated this place for thus it stands in the Author In quibus isti ignorantiae tenebris in quo hactenus desidiae torpore â—acucre vt nec auditu discerent and afterwards Vt nec ab infantium linguiâ— veritas corporis sanguinis Christi inter communis sacramenta fidei tentatur In what darknes of ignorance in what sluggish carelesnes haue they remained as not to haue learned by hearesay not â—eard by hearesay as you translate that the trueth of the bodie and bloud of Christ among the sacraments of our common faith is not kept backe even of the tongues of infants It seemeth you had this out of some mans note-booke by hearesay not by your proper and diligent reading of the Authour himselfe and my reasons why I thinke so be there because you mistake so much and translate so vntrue Yet will not I take exceptions to everie particular fault 1 First you say it is in the two and twentieth Epistle it is not so but in the three and twentieth and therefore I thinke you never read the Author 2 Secondlie you say heard by hearesay the Author saith Learned by hearesay 3 Thirdly you translate lenguis for mouths it should be tongues Yet if the rest had been true J would not haue excepted against this 4 Fourthlie you chaunge a Nowne into an Adverb vere for veritas trulie for trueth and transpose it also ouâ— of that proper place to alter the sence of Leo the Bishop of Rome which is great wrong to the dead Author and living Reader 5 Fiftlie you change the singular number for the plurall sacrament for sacraments Sixtlie you quite leaue out two wordes of great consequence communis and fidei 7 Seventhlie you adde this word Blessed which is not in the Author 8 Eighthlie you point it not right considering the Authour spake it onelie by way of interrogation Which premisses are faultes great and grosse which sheweth plainlie that you never reade the Author himself but borrowed them forth of some other mans papâ— s therfore you sin grievously in perswading mens consciences to take these things at your hands for truth faith when in deed you tender them nothing but things wrested from all faith and trueth Now Gentlemen doe you deale plainlie with thâ— world in bringing this place against vs did ever anie of vs denie that Christ was borne of the virgin Marie and and conceived by the holie Ghost you cannot charge vs with it Did ever anie of vs teach that Christs bodie was phantasticall neither did you ever heare it Then in this as in the rest you wrong vs deceiue the Catholickes and abuse Leo sometime Pope But I will shew you plainlie that this Bishoppe of Rome and this your proofe confutes and confounds your owne opinion and